*l!il!!ilB 
 
 Ir 
 
 ».,;' » 
 

 PRESENTED 
 
 BY 
 
 i^fee Itiwrpjrat^b Counril oi f ato l^jortiiig for €nglanb anb Wales 
 
 TO 
 
 THE SUBSCRIBERS TO THE ENTIRE SERIES 
 OF THE LAW REPORTS FOR 1886. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, Limited, 
 
 PEINTEUS AND PUBLISHERS TO THE COUNCIL, 
 
 27 FLEET STREET, E.C. 
 
 188 6. ' 
 
, Cornell University Library 
 KD 28^881 
 
 The law reports 1881 to 1885.Under the s 
 
 3 1924 017 175 864 
 
 * 
 
 ^ 
 
 -^— ^'-a^-i-jj;^ "'*--^^ ^ C (_^« 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924017175864 
 
THE LAW EEPOETS. 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, STATUTES, AND OEDBRS 
 IN THE LONDON GAZETTE 
 
 1881 to 1885. 
 
 l^N.B. TJie Statutes and Orders of minor importance are not 
 here digested.^ 
 
THE 
 
 IXCORPOKATED COUNCIL OF LAW REPORTING 
 
 FOB 
 
 ENGLAND AND WALES. 
 
 MtrabtvS of ti^e Counnl. 
 Chairman — Joseph Beown, Esq., Q.C. 
 
 EX-OFFICIO MEMBEBS. 
 SiE Chaeles Kussell, Knt., M.P. . . Attobnet-Geneeal. 
 SiE Horace Davey, Knt SoLiciTOE-GENEEAii. 
 
 ELECTED MEMBEBS. 
 Me. Serjeant Pulling Serjeants' Inn. 
 
 Arthur Kekewich, Esq., Q.C. 
 
 John Eigby, Esq., Q.O., M.P. ( Lincoln's Inn. 
 
 SiE John Blossett Maule, Knt., Q.C. ) t i 
 
 Arthur Charles, Esq., Q.C. | ^ 
 
 Joseph Brown, Esq., Q.C. ) 
 
 F. A. PiiiLBEiCK, Esq. Q.C. J ^'^^^^ ^^'^P*^- 
 
 John A. Eussell, Esq., Q.O. ] , 
 
 William Ceaceoft Fooks, Esq., Q.C. j ^^^ ^ ^"^ 
 
 William Williams, Esq. (Firm — Messrs. Currie, ( 
 
 Williams, & Williams), Lincoln's Inn Fields J Incorporated 
 
 John Hollams, Esq. (Firm— Messrs. HoUams, Son, J Law Society. 
 
 & Coward), Mincing Lane, E.C. (_ 
 
 Sseretary^ J A^ES Thomas Hopwood, Esq., 10 Old Square, 
 Jjincoln's Inn. 
 
THE 
 
 LAW REPORTS. 
 
 1881 TO 1885. 
 
 TTnder the Superintendence and Control of the 
 INCOfiPOEATED COUNCIL OF LAW EEPORTING FOR ENGLAND AND WALES. 
 
 BigfSt of Cases 
 
 DECIDED BY . 
 
 THE HOUSE OF LOEDS AND PEIVY COUNCIL, 
 
 AND BY 
 
 THE COUET OF APPEAL, THE SEVERAL DIVISIOITS OF THE 
 
 HIGH COUET OF JUSTICE, 
 
 AND THE CHIEF JUDGE IS BANKEUPTCY; 
 
 REPORTED IN THE LAW REPORTS FROM THE COMMENCEMENT OF 1881 TO THE 
 V END OF 1885. 
 
 TOGETHER WITH A DIGEST OF THE PRINCIPAL ORDERS PUBLISHED IN THE 
 LONDON GAZETTE DURING THE SAME PERIOD, 
 
 AND OF 
 
 Ci)e Important 5'tatutes. 
 
 COMPILED BY 
 
 MAETIN WAEE, 
 
 OP liitcoln's inn, 
 
 PETEE BUEEOWES HUTCHINS, 
 
 OF THE INNER TEMPLE, 
 AND 
 
 SIE G. SHEESTON BAKEE, Baet., 
 
 OF Lincoln's inn, 
 
 EAKKISTEBS-AT-LAW. 
 
 LONDON: 
 fritttfJ) anb Ptthlishcb for lk« Cctrndl of ^ato Jlfpoftinij^ 
 
 BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, Limitbd, 
 
 DUKE STBEET, STAMFOED STBEET; AND 14, CHARIKG CROSS. 
 
 PUBLISHING OFFICE, 27, FLEET STEEET, E.G. 
 
 1886. 
 
LOSDON : 
 
 PRINTED BY WLLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, 
 
 STAXrOED STttl ET AND ClIARIKG CBOSS. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAOB 
 
 NAMES OF EDITORS AND REPORTERS .... vii 
 
 NAMES OF JUDGES, ATTORNETS-GENBRAL, AND 
 SOLICITORS-GENERAL ^ 
 
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xi 
 
 TABLE SHEWING THE VOLUMES OF THE LAW | 
 REPORTS BELONGING TO EACH COURT IN BACH I xiii 
 
 TEAR FROM 1881 TQ 1885 INCLUSIVE . . . . ) 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST xv 
 
 OASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OR SPECIALLY 
 
 > CXIX 
 
 CONSIDERED 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OR SPECIALLY REFERRED 
 TO ^ "^^ 
 
 TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CROSS-REFER- 
 ENCES .,.,.. ^ "^^^ 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, STATUTES, AND ORDERS IN THE f 
 LONDON GAZETTE j Columns 1 to 1722. 
 
( vii ) 
 
 NAMES OF EDITOES AND EEPORTEES. 
 
 EDITOES. 
 CHANCERY DIVISION . . . G. W. Hemming, Queen's Counsel. 
 COMMON LAW DIVISIONS . . J. R. Bulweb, Queen's Comsel. 
 
 EBPOETEES. 
 
 HOUSE OE LORDS— ENGLISH AND i Charles Clark, Queen's Counsel. 
 
 IRISH APPEALS J J. M. Mooesom, Queen's Gomisel. 
 
 HOUSE OF LORDS. — SCOTCH AND 
 DIVORCE APPEALS . 
 
 PRIVY COUNCIL APPEALS . 
 
 w 
 
 Gerald J. Wheeler, Barrister -at-Law, 
 
 Herbert Cowell, Barrisier-at-Law. 
 
 COURT OF APPEAL 
 
 MASTER OF THE ROLLS 
 
 V.-C. MALINS 
 
 H. Cadman Jones, \ 
 Martin Ware, 
 Wm. Llotd Cabell, 
 Henry Holrotd, 
 John Edward Hall, 
 William Paterson, 
 W. Worslet Knox, 
 G. I. Foster Cooke, 
 Aexhtje p. Stone, 
 Edmund Lttmley, 
 IB. S. RoscoE, 
 
 Barristers-at-Law. 
 
 J. H. Foedham, "j 
 
 G. I. F. Cooke, ^ Barristers-cd-Law. 
 
 George Mitre at, ) 
 
 T. W. Gunning, 
 
 . Chaklbs Maeett 
 
 . I 
 
 Barristers-at-Law. 
 
 I J. B. Davidson, 
 F. G. A. WiLLLiMS, 
 G. I. Foster Cooke,, 
 
 Barristers-at-Law, 
 
NAMES OF KDITOES AND BEPOKTEBS. 
 T. F. MoESE, 
 
 V.-O. HALL 
 
 MR. JUSTICE rHY 
 
 MR. JUSTICE KA.T 
 
 MB. JUSTICE CHITTT 
 
 MR. JUSTICE NORTH 
 
 MR. JUSTICE PEARSON 
 
 J 
 
 Barriders-at-Law. 
 
 W. "WoESLBT Knox, 
 
 .W. Lloyd Cabell, \ Sarriders-at-Lav,. 
 \ ChalonbeW.Chute, ) 
 
 IT. W. Gunning, \ 
 Chaelbs Maeett, I Sarriders-at.Law. 
 T. F. MoESE, I 
 
 "W. WoESLET Knox, 
 
 iG. I. FosTBE Cooke, j 
 Geoege Mueeat, \ Barriders-at-Law. 
 E. G. A. "Williams, ' 
 
 (Chaeles Maeett, l 
 Chalonee W. Chute, [ Bairid;ers-at-Law. 
 
 I H. L. Eeasee, 
 
 
 (t. W. Gunning, 
 Chaeles Maeett, (_ Barriders-at-Law. 
 J W. Lloyd Cabell, 
 
 rD. PiTCAIEN, 
 
 QUEEN'S BENCH DIYISION 
 
 CROWN CASES RESERVED 
 PROBATE AND DIYORCE . 
 
 ADMIRALTY AND ECCLESIASTICAL 
 
 Ajbthue p. Stone, \ 
 Edmund Lumlby, 
 John Scott, 
 
 ' John Rose, 
 James M. Mooesom, 
 Alex. Moetimee, 
 
 [ William Appleton, , 
 
 Barristers-at-Lavo. 
 
 Cyeil Dodd, Barrister-at-Lavj. 
 
 R. A. Peitchaed, 
 
 Sb 
 
 C.L. 
 
 Advocate. 
 
 ,j Gainsfoed Beuce, 
 \ E. S. RoscoE, 
 
 I Bar; 
 
 risiers-at-Law. 
 
 j J. B. Davidson, 1 
 
 BANKRUPTCY | F. G. A. Willlsjvis, [ BarrisUrs-ai-Law. 
 
 \ H. L. Feazee, ) 
 
 APPEALS FROM COUNTY COURTS ( Alex. Moetimee, i 
 
 . 1 William Appleton.P'*'"™^'-«*-^««'- 
 
 IN BANKRUPTCY CASES . 
 
( ix ) 
 
 NAMES OF JUDGES, 
 
 ATTOENEYS-GENERAL AND SOLIOITOES-GENEEAL. 
 
 The Right Hon. The Eael of Selborne, 
 The Right Hon. Loed Halsbtjet, 
 
 The Right Hon. Loed Biackbtjen, 
 The Right Hon. Lokd Watson, 
 The Right Hon. Loed FitzGbeald, 
 
 > Lord Ghancellors. 
 Lords of Appeal in Ordinary. 
 
 The Right Hon. The Loed Chancelloe (Pbe- 
 
 sident), 
 The Right Hon. The Loed Chief Justice op 
 
 England, 
 The Right Hon. The Mastbb op the Rolls, 
 The Right Hon. The Peesidbnt op the Peobate, 
 
 DiTOECE, AND AdMIEALTT DIVISION, 
 
 >■ Hx-Offieio Judges of the Cowrt 
 of Appeal. 
 
 The Right Hon. SiE Geoege Jessel, 
 The Right Hon. Loed Eshee, 
 
 I Masters of the Bolls. 
 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 
 Beamwell, 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 The Right Hon. 
 
 BOWEN, 
 
 The Right Hon. 
 
 SiE William Milboubne Jambs, 
 
 SlE RiCHAED BAGGALLAT, 
 
 SiE Geoege William Wilsheee 
 
 SiE William Baliol Beett, 
 
 SiE Hbnet Cotton, 
 
 SiE Robeet Lush, 
 
 SiE Nathaniel Lindlet, 
 
 SiE John Holkee, 
 
 SiE Chaelbs Stnge Oheistophee 
 
 SiE Edwaed Fet, 
 
 Lords Justices of the Court 
 of Appeal. 
 
 The Right Hon. The Eael op Selboenb, Loed 
 
 Chancelloe (Peesident), 
 The Right Hon. Sie Geoege Jessel, Mastee op 
 
 THE Rolls, 
 Sie Richaed Malins, Ticb-Ohancellob, 
 Sie James Bacon, Vicb-Ghancelloe, 
 Sie Chables Hall, Vice-Chancbllob, 
 Sib Edwaed Pet, 
 Sie E. Ebenezee Kat, 
 Sie Joseph William Chittt, 
 Sie Poed Noeth, 
 Sie John Peaeson, 
 
 Judges of the Chancery Divi- 
 >■ sion of the Sigh Court of 
 Justice. 
 
NAMES OF JUDGES. 
 
 The Riglit Hon. Sib Alexander James Edmund 
 OocKBUEN, Bart., Loed Chief Justice of Eng- 
 land (Peesident) 
 
 The Right Hon. John Duke, Loed Coleeidge, 
 Lord Chief Justice of England (President), 
 
 Sir William Robert Grove, 
 
 The Hon. George Denman, 
 
 Sir Charles Edwaed Pollock, 
 
 SiE Nathaniel Lindlet, 
 
 Sir William Ventris Field, 
 
 Sir John Walter Huddleston, 
 
 Sir Henry Manistt, 
 
 Sir Henry Hawkins, 
 
 Sir Henry Charles Lopes, 
 
 Sir James Pitzjames Stephen, 
 
 Sir Charles Synge Christopher Bowen, 
 
 Sir Charles James Watkin Williams, 
 
 Sib James Charles Mathew, 
 
 Sib Lewis William Cave, 
 
 Sir Ford North, 
 
 Sir John Charles Day, 
 
 Sir Archibald Levin Smith, 
 
 Sir Alfred Wills, 
 
 Judges of the Queen's Bench 
 Division of the High Court 
 of Justice. 
 
 The Right Hon. Sir James Hannen (President), 
 The Right Hon. Sib Robert Phillimoee, 
 Sir Charles Parker Butt, 
 
 Judges of the Probate, Divorce, 
 and Admiralty Division. 
 
 The Right. Hon. Lord Penzance, 
 
 Sir James Bacon, 
 
 Sib Henry James, 
 
 Sir Richard E. Webster, 
 
 Sir Paeeee Herschbll. 
 Sir John Bldon Gorst, 
 
 Dean of Arclies. 
 
 Chief Judge in Bankruptcy. 
 
 > Attorneys-General. 
 
 > Solicitors-General. 
 
( Ki ) 
 
 In this Digest of Oases the following abbreviations are used: — 
 
 H. L. indicates House op Loeds — English and Irish Appeals. 
 
 H. L., So., „ House of Lords — Scotch and Divorce Appeals. 
 
 P- C. „ Privy Council. 
 
 Ci. „ Chancbet Appeal Cases. 
 
 Eq. „ Equity Cases. 
 
 Q. B. „ Queen's Bench. 
 
 C. P. „ Common Pleas. 
 
 Ex. , Exchequer. 
 
 C. C. „ Crown Cases Ebserved. 
 
 P- & M. „ Probate, Divorce, and Matrimonial Causes. 
 
 A. & E. „ Admiralty and Ecclesiastical Courts, 
 
 App. Cas. „ House of Lords (English, Irish, Scotch and Divoece 
 Appeals), and Privy Council. 
 
 Ci' D, „ Chancery Division, 
 
 ft- B. D. „ Queen's Bench Division. 
 
 C. P. D. „ Common Pleas Division. 
 
 Ex. D. „ Exchequer Division. 
 
 P- D. „ Pbobate, Divorce and Admiralty Division. 
 
 !"• G. London Gazette. 
 
( xiii ) 
 
 TABLE SHEWING THE VOLUMES OP THE LAW EEPORTS BELONGING 
 
 TO BACH Court in each Year, feom 1881 to 1885 inclusive. 
 
 Year. 
 
 House of Lords 
 
 (English, Irish, 
 
 Scotch, and Divorce 
 
 Appeals) and Privy 
 
 Council. 
 
 Chancery Division, 
 
 Bankruptcy and 
 
 Appeals therefrom. 
 
 Queen's Bench 
 Division, Bankruptcy 
 and Appeals there- 
 from and Crown 
 Cases Beserved. 
 
 Probate Division — 
 
 Probate, Divorce, 
 
 Admiralty, and 
 
 Ecclesiastical Courts 
 
 and Appeals 
 
 therefrom. 
 
 1881 
 1882 
 1883 
 1884 
 1885 
 
 6 App. Cas. 
 
 9 
 10 
 
 16, 17 & 18 Ch. D. 
 19, 20 & 21 , , 
 22, 23 & 24 , , 
 25, 26 & 27 , , 
 28, 29 & 30 , , 
 
 6 & 7 Q. B. D. 
 
 8&9 ,, 
 lO&ll ,, 
 12&13 ,, 
 14&15 ,, 
 
 6P. D. 
 
 7 ,, 
 
 8 ,, 
 
 9 ,, 
 10 ,, 
 
( XV ) 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 A. 
 
 A. V. M. 
 
 Abbiss V. Burney. In re Finch 
 Abbott v. Andrews 
 
 , Kniglit ■u. 
 
 , MoG-ibbon V. .. 
 
 Abercrombie v. Jordan 
 Abergavenny (Guardians of), Eeg. v. 
 Abouloff V. Oppenheimer .. .. ... 
 
 Abrath v. North. Eastern Eailway Company 
 Accident Insurance Gompany, Winspear v. ... 
 
 Accidental Insurance Company, Lawrence v. 
 Acton V. Crawley. In re Crawley . . 
 Acton Local Board, Attorney-General v. 
 
 w. Batten .. 
 
 Adair's Patentj In re . .. 
 
 Adam «. Townend 
 
 Adams, Ex parte. Dallow v. Garrold 
 
 Adams -v. Bostock 
 
 , Clove);,i). 
 
 ' — V. Clutterbuck . . . . ■ . . . , 
 
 and Kensington Vestry, In re 
 
 , Mudge V. 
 
 Adam's Policy Trusts,. In re . . 
 Addy man, Beckett i;. ... ... 
 
 Agar-EUis, In re. Agar-ElHs v..Lascelles .. 
 
 V. Lascelles. In re Agar-Ellis . ., . 
 
 Ager V. Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation 
 
 Company .. .. .i 
 
 Agg-Gardner, In re 
 Agnew v. Mm'ray 
 
 — '■ V. Usher . . . . 
 
 Ahier v. Abler . . 
 
 Ahrens, Whyte I). 
 
 "Aid," The .. 
 
 Ainslie, In re. . Swinbum v. Ainslie 
 
 , Swinbum v. .In re Ainslie 
 
 Ailesbury, (Marquess. of) w. Attorney 
 Aitken, Andrew w. .. .. . 
 
 . ■" 
 
 Akerblom v. Price 
 
 Albion Life As^urancQ Society, In re . 
 
 General 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 10 P. D. 178 
 17.Ch. r)..211 
 8 Q. B. D. 648 
 10 Q. B. D. H 
 10 App. Cas. 653 
 8Q. B. D. 187 
 6 Q. B. D. 31 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 295 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 79, 4A0 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 42 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 216 
 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 22 Ch. D. 221 
 28 Ch. D. 283 
 6 App. Cas. 176 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 543 ; 14 Q. B. D, 
 5,43 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 259 
 6 Q. B. D. 622 
 10 Q. B. D. 403 
 24 Ch. D. 199 ; 27 Ch. D. 394 
 
 6 P, D. 54 .. 
 
 23 Ch. U. 525 
 9Q. B. D.,783 
 
 24 .Ch. D. 317 
 
 24 Oh. D. 317 
 
 26 Ch. D. 337 
 
 25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 9 Ap.p. Cas, 519 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 78 
 
 10 P. D. 110 
 
 26 Ch. D. 717 
 6P. D. 84 .. 
 28Ch. D. 89; 30Ch.D. 485 
 28 Oh- D. 89 ; 30 Ch. D. 485 
 14 Q. B. D. 895 
 
 21 Ch. D. 175 
 
 22 Ch. D. 218 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 129 
 16 Ch. D. 83 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1113 
 1689 
 1229 
 
 443 
 
 305 
 1543 
 1066 
 
 596 
 
 855 
 
 689 
 
 689 
 1707 
 
 961 
 
 828 
 
 1046 
 
 (1140, 
 
 |1196 
 
 1539 
 
 1006 
 1539 
 
 399 
 
 768, 1691 
 
 1273 
 
 638 
 1263 
 
 667 
 
 667 
 
 421 
 
 1644 
 
 271 
 1133 
 1112 
 1174 
 
 444 
 1568 
 1568 
 1333 
 1150 
 
 455 
 1516 
 
 389 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 i 
 
 Albion Life Assurance Society, In re. Brown's Case 
 
 , In re. Sander's Case 
 
 Alcock, In re. Prescott v. Phipps .. 
 
 , Backhouse «. .. 
 
 Alderson V. Elgey 
 
 — Maddison V. .. .. .. .. ,.■! 
 
 Alderton i>. Archer 
 
 Aldred's Estate, In re .. 
 
 Aldridge's Case. Green way «. Bachelor 
 
 Alexander V. Calder. In re Wilson .. 
 
 i;. Cross. In re Cousins .. 
 
 , Lee V. 
 
 Alexandra Palace Company, In re 
 
 , In re 
 
 , In re 
 
 Alexandria Water Company «. Musgrave 
 
 Alford, Puller i>. 
 
 "Alhambra,"The 
 
 Allam, Ex parte. In re Munday 
 
 AUan, In re. Havelock v. Havelock . . 
 
 Allard, Ex parte. In re Simons 
 
 Allcock i;. Moorhouse .. 
 
 Allen, Ex parte. In re Pussell 
 
 V. Allen . . 
 
 , Boyd u. 
 
 V. Coltart 
 
 , Croggan v. 
 
 V. Garhutt 
 
 D. Humphrys 
 
 w. Meera PuUay 
 
 i;. Norris. In re Norris 
 
 V. Southampton (Lord). In re Southampton's 
 
 (Lord) Estate. Banfathei's Claim.. 
 
 1). Taylor 
 
 1). Taylor In re Gyhon 
 
 Allhusen v. Brooking .. 
 
 Alliance Society, In re 
 
 AUnutt, In re. Pott ii. Brassey 
 
 Alloway v. Steere 
 
 Alltree, Wilson V. In re Wilson 
 
 AUum i;. Dickinson .. 
 
 Alma Spinning Company, In re. Bottomley's Case 
 
 " Alpine " Trade-mark, In re 
 
 Alresford Bural Sanitary Authority v. Scott 
 
 "Alston, B.L.," The 
 
 Altrincham Union v. Cheshire Lines Committee 
 Alven, In re. Ex parte Hall.. 
 Amazon Tug and Lighterage Company, Eohertson v. 
 Ames, In re. Ames u. Taylor 
 
 I). Taylor. In re Ames 
 
 Amesbury (Guardians of) v. Justices of Wilts 
 
 Amor, Ex parte. In re Amor 
 
 Ancketill «. Baylis 
 
 Anderson, Ex parte., In re ToUemache 
 
 , Atkinson v. 
 
 V. Butler's Wharf Company. In re But-] 
 
 ler's Wharf Company ., .. .. .. j 
 
 , Lenders v. ,. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 18Ch. D. 639 
 
 20 Ch. D. 403 
 
 23Ch. D. 372 
 
 28Ch. D. 669 
 
 26 Ch. D. 567 
 
 7Q.,B.D. 174; 8App. Cas 
 467 
 
 14 Q. B.D.I 
 
 21Ch. D. 228 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 381 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 457 
 
 30 Ch. D. 203 
 
 8 App. Cas. 853 .. 
 
 16Ch. D. 58 
 
 21Ch. D. 149 
 23Ch. D. 297 
 IIQ. B.D. 174 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 418 .. 
 6P. D. 68 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 43 
 17Ch. D. 807 
 16 Ch. D. 505 
 9Q. B.D. 366 
 20Ch. D. 341 
 lOP. D. 187 
 24Ch. D. 622 
 IIQ. B. D. 782 .. 
 22Ch. D. 101 
 6Q. B.D. 165 
 8 P. D. 16 .. 
 7 App. Cas. 172 
 
 27 Ch. D. 333 
 
 16Ch. D. 178 
 
 16 Ch. D. 355 
 29 Ch. D. 834 
 
 26 Ch. D. 559 
 
 28 Ch. D. 559 
 22 Ch. D. 275 
 10 Q. B. D. 22 
 
 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 632 
 leCh. D. 681 
 
 29 Ch. D. 877 
 7 Q. B. D. 210 
 7 P. D. 49 ; 8 P. D. 5 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 597 .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 501 
 7 Q. B. D. 698 
 25 Ch. D. 72 
 25 Ch. D. 72 
 10Q.B. D. 480 .. 
 21 Ch. D. 594 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 577 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 606 .. 
 21 Ch. D. 100 
 
 21 Ch. D. 131 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 50 
 
 as.) 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 389 
 389 
 919 
 1189 
 920 
 
 412 
 
 453 
 
 788 
 
 941 
 1214 
 1671 
 1375 
 
 391 
 
 360 
 
 373 
 1327 
 
 522 
 
 1484 
 
 247, 253 
 
 669 
 
 147 
 
 741 
 
 173 
 1118 
 1014 
 1478 
 
 553 
 442 
 
 12 
 
 316 
 
 1467 
 
 895 
 
 804 
 1183 
 
 748 
 
 380 
 1461 
 
 154 
 
 1185 
 
 765, 1237 
 
 358 
 1580 
 
 625 
 1511 
 1074 
 
 187 
 
 410 
 1530 
 1530 
 
 622 
 
 194 
 1006 
 
 152 
 1341 
 
 1238 
 
 1134 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Yolume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 te) 
 
 Anderson, Ocean Steamship Company v. 
 
 , Bead w. .. .. .. .. ..J 
 
 Anderson's Case. In. re Scottish Petroleum Company 
 
 Trade-mark, In re 
 
 Andrew ■«. Aitken 
 
 V. — : 
 
 Andrews, Ex parte. In re Wilcoxon 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Andrews.. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Barrow .. 
 
 , In re. Edwards u. Dewar.. 
 
 , Abbott V. .. 
 
 , Clapham iJ. .. .. .. ., 
 
 , Cox V. 
 
 ^ — , Toke u. 
 
 Andros, In re. Andros «. Andros .. 
 
 «. Andros. In re Andros 
 
 Angell, In re. Ex parte Shoolbred 
 
 Anglo-French Co-operative Society, In re. Ex parte 
 
 parte PeUy .. 
 Angus, Dalton i;. 
 
 V. McLachlan . . 
 
 Anon. .. 
 
 Antrobus, Dawkins «... 
 
 Apap V. Strickland 
 
 , Strioklind «. 
 
 Apollo Candle. Company, Powell v. 
 Appleton, In re. Barber v. Tebbit 
 Appleyard, Ex parte. In re Great Australian Gold) 
 
 Mining Company .. .. ., „ ,. J 
 
 Arbuthnot, Norfolk (Duke of) V. 
 Arcedeckne, In re. .Atkins v. Arcedeckne .. 
 
 , Atkins V. In re Arcedeckne .. 
 
 Archer, Alderton u. 
 
 ^, Langrish i>. . .. 
 
 Arden, Ex parte. In re Arden 
 
 «. Ardfen ".. .. ,. ,, , 
 
 " Arklow," The. Emery v. Ciohero 
 
 Arkwright v..Newbold 
 
 Armitage, Ex parte. In re Learoyd, Wilton & Co. 
 
 , Henry v. 
 
 -, Smith V. 
 
 Armour v. Walker 
 Armstrong, Henry v. 
 
 , Pawsey v. 
 
 Amal, Ex parte. In re Witton 
 
 Arnold, Limpus w. 
 
 Artistic Colour Printing Company, In re. 
 
 Pourdrinier .. 
 
 Ashberry, Harlock t;. 
 
 , i> 
 
 Ashbury «. Watson .. 
 
 Ashford, Landowners West of England and South^ 
 
 Wales Land Drainage and Inclosure Company v. 
 Ash worth, Skiers v.- Jn re Jackson .. ., 
 
 Askew I). Lewis 
 Aslatt V. Southampton (Corporation of) -. 
 
 Ex parte) 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 651 ; 10 App.l 
 Cas. 107 J 
 
 lOQ. B.D.100; ISQ.B.D.] 
 779 1 
 
 17 0h. D. 373 
 26Ch. D.409 
 21Ch. D. 175 
 
 22 Ch. D. 218 
 25 0h. D. 505 
 15Q. B. D. 335 .. 
 18Ch. D. 464 
 30Ch. D. 159 
 
 8Q. B. D. 648 
 27 Ch. D. 679 
 12Q. B. D. 126 .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 428 
 24 Oh. D. 637 
 24 Oh. D. 637 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 298 .. 
 
 21 Oh. D. 492 
 
 6App. Cas. 740 .. 
 
 23 Oh. D. 330 
 
 18 0h. D. 26 
 17 Oh. D. 615 
 
 7 App. Cas. 156 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 106 .. 
 10 App. Cas. 282 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 893 
 
 18Ch. D.-587 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 279 
 24Ch. D..709 
 24.Ch. D..709 
 14 Q. B.D.I 
 lOQ. B. D. 44 
 14Q. B. D. 121 .. 
 29 -Ch. D..702 
 9App. Cas. 138 .. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 301 
 17Ch. D. 13 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 257 .. 
 
 24 Oh. D. 727 
 25Ch. D. 673 
 18Ch. D. 668 
 18Ch. D. 698 
 24Ch. D. 26 
 
 13.Q. B.D.246;.15Q.B.D.l 
 300 
 
 21 Oh. D. 510 
 
 18 Ch. D. 229 ; 19 Ch. D. 539 
 19Ch. D. 84 
 
 28Ch. D.56; 3aCh.D. 376 
 
 16Ch. D. 411 .. .. 
 
 25 Oh D..162 
 lOQ. B. D. 477 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 143 
 
 1486 
 
 607, 1258 
 
 324 
 1584 
 1150 
 
 455 
 
 152 
 
 183 
 
 197 
 
 642 
 1229 
 
 900 
 
 610 
 1150 
 1707 
 1707 
 
 188 
 
 359 
 
 1557 
 680 
 845 
 296 
 311 
 312 
 314 
 
 1678 
 
 333 
 
 1224 
 
 1262 
 
 1262 
 
 453 
 
 1618 
 
 lad' 
 
 ISIO- 
 
 1504 
 
 325 
 
 18a 
 
 939 
 
 1185 
 
 1192 
 
 1649- 
 
 1018 
 
 175 
 
 1695 
 
 258, 370 
 
 810 
 
 1182 
 
 328 
 
 337 
 
 1668 
 259 
 942^ 
 
TABLE OF. CASES IS THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Asplialtio Wood Pavement Company, In re. Lee) 
 and Chapman's Case .. .. .. ..J 
 
 Association of Land Financiers, Li re 
 
 Aste ■y. Stumore ... 
 
 Aston, In re 
 
 , In the Goods of 
 
 Atherton, Hardy v. ,, 
 
 Athill V. AthiU. In re AthiU 
 
 Atkins V. Arcedeokne. In re Aroedeokne .. 
 
 Atkinson, In the Goods of .. 
 
 1^. Anderson .. 
 
 , In re. Atkinson v. Bruce 
 
 ■y. Bruce. In re Atkinson . . 
 
 Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company v. Huth 
 
 Attenborough's Case. In re Cunningham & Co, 
 Limited 
 
 Attorney-General i". Acton Local Board 
 
 V. Ailesbury (Marquess of) 
 
 V. Bermondsey (Vestry of) 
 
 u. Birkbeck 
 
 V. Birmingham, Tame and 
 
 Drainage Board 
 
 ea) 
 
 Union of) 
 
 ■ V. Bradlaugh 
 
 ■ V. Dean and Canons of Manchester 
 
 ■ V, Dardier . . . , . . 
 
 ■ V. Dorking (Guardians of Poor ofi 
 
 ■ V. 
 
 London 
 
 Dowling ,. 
 
 Edison Telephone Company ofl 
 
 ■ V. Emerson 
 • V. Gaskill .. 
 
 ■ V. .. 
 
 ■ V. Homer ,, 
 
 •V. Hubbuck 
 
 - V. London and North 
 
 Railway Company .. 
 ' V. Mitchell . 
 
 Westerni 
 
 Company 
 
 ■i;.,Noyes 
 
 ■ V. Shrewsbury (Kingsland) Bridge 
 
 11 
 
 bridge 
 
 Sidney Sussex College, Cam-] 
 
 — , Stone n.. In re Sutton .. 
 Attorney-General for British Honduras v. Bristowe 
 Attorney General of Duchy of Lancaster v. Devon 
 
 shire (Duke of) 
 Attorney-General for Jersey, Bsnouf v. 
 Attorney-General of Ontario v. Mercer 
 Attorney-General of Quebec, Colonial Building and 
 
 Investment Association v. .. 
 
 •!;. Eeed 
 
 Attwood, Beckett t;. .. 
 Augustinus v. Nerinckx 
 Austerberry v. Oldham (Corporation of) 
 Austin, Farrow t". 
 
 , Hunt w. .. .. .. ., 
 
 "Avenir,"The 
 
 26Ch.D.624;30Ch.D.2ie 
 
 16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 326 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 217 
 
 6 P. D. 203 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 264 
 16 Ch. D. 211 
 
 24 Ch. D. 709 
 8P. D.165.. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 100 
 30 Ch. D. 605 
 30Ch. D..605 
 16 Ch. D. 474 
 
 28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 22 Ch. D. 221 
 14Q. B. D.895 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 60 
 12 Q. B. D. 605 .. 
 
 17Ch. D.685 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 667 .. 
 18 Ch. D. 596 
 11 Q. B. D. 16 
 
 20 Ch. D. 595 
 
 6Q.B.D. 177 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 244 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 191 .. 
 22 Ch. D. 537 
 
 20 Ch. D. 519 
 14 Q. B. D. 245 .. 
 lOQ. B.D.488; 13Q.B.D 
 
 275 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 216 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 548 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 125 
 
 21 Ch. D. 752 
 
 21 Ch. D. 514, n. .. 
 
 28 Ch. D.'"464 
 6App. Cas. 143 .. 
 
 14Q. B. D. 195 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 304 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 767 .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 157 .. 
 
 10, App. Cas. 141 .. 
 18 Ch. D. 54 
 16 Ch. D. 13 
 
 29 Ch. D. 750 
 18 Ch. D. 58 
 9 Q. B. D. 598 
 9P. D. 84 .. 
 
 331 
 
 374 
 1182 
 1608 
 1693 
 203 
 894 
 1262 
 1272 
 1341 
 1442 
 1442 
 1489 
 
 258 
 
 961 
 1333 
 
 883 
 54 
 
 821 
 
 997 
 
 284 
 
 1330 
 
 962 
 
 1342 
 
 1563 
 
 1177 
 817 
 
 1165 
 859 
 
 1333 
 
 1286 
 
 1340 
 1342 
 
 1206 
 
 284 
 
 286 
 309 
 
 45 
 
 310 
 802 
 
 299 
 
 304 
 1236 
 1155 
 456, 619 
 1239 
 1214 
 1096 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 xix 
 
 Ifame of Case. 
 
 Aylesford (Earl of),.Fearon «. .; .4 
 
 Aynsley, Grainger 1). Bromley, v. Tarns 
 Ayr Harbour Trustees v. Oswald 
 Ayres, In tlie Goods of .. ' .. 
 
 Ayscough, Goodhand v. ,. 
 
 B. 
 
 B., S. V. 
 
 Babbage i>. Coulboum .. 
 
 Bachelor, Gteenway u. Aldridge's Case 
 
 , -V. Jacob's Case 
 
 Baokbouse u. Alcock .. 
 Bacon, Ex parte. In re Bond 
 
 «. Ford. In re Kensington (Lord) ■• 
 
 Badart, Dick i;. .. ■ 
 
 Badcock, In re. Kingdqn t;. Tagert . . 
 
 Badham, Bailey 1;. 
 
 Badische Anilin und Soda Pabrik v. Levinstein 
 
 Bagge, Great Western Railway Comjiany v... 
 
 Ba^ster, Ex parte. In re Bagster 
 
 Baildon Local Board, Maude V. 
 
 Bailey, «. Badham .. 
 
 ■■— — v. Bailey ' .. .'. .. .. 
 
 , Belper School Attendance Committee v. 
 
 , Pinnock v. .. .... 
 
 , Prehnu. The"Ettrick" 
 
 Baillib i;. Treharne 
 Bainbrigge 1". Browne .. 
 Baines t). Bromley 
 
 ^^. Wright 
 
 Baker, In re. Collins u. Rhodes 
 
 — '■ , In re; Connell v. Baker 
 
 W.Baker.. 
 
 , Birmingham (Corporation of) V. 
 
 , Connell v. In re Baker 
 
 , Joliffe i;. 
 
 Bala and Festiniog Railway Company, Ex parte. Ex 
 
 parte Maidstone and Ashford Eailway Company .. 
 Baldwin & Co. v. London, Chatham, and Dover Eail-j 
 
 way Company .. .... .. ..J 
 
 Balfour v. Cooper 
 
 Ball, Ex parte: In re Darnell .. ; ., 
 
 , Chadwick 1;. ■ 
 
 , Shipway 1). • .. ,. .. • ., 
 
 Ballard u. Tomlinson .. 
 
 Banbliry Sanitary Authority v. Page 
 
 BanfatherV Claim. In re Southampton's (Loid)) 
 
 Estate. Allen v: Southampton: (Lord) 
 Banfield V. Pickard ... .'. • 
 
 Bank of Bolton, Seddon I! 
 
 Bani of England, Hyde (Corporation of) v. 
 
 ^ , Suflfellw. .1 
 
 Banner, Ex parte. • In re'Blythe ., 
 
 :"{ 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 ^1 
 
 12Q.B.D.539; 14Q. B. D 
 
 792 
 6 Q. B. D. 182 
 8 App. Cas. 623 .. 
 8 P. D. 168 
 10 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 9 P. D. 80 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 235 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 381 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 376 .. 
 28Ch. D.669 
 
 17 Ch. D. 447 
 2&Ch. D. 527 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 387 .. 
 17Ch.D. 361 
 30Ch.D. 84 
 
 24Ch.D.156;29Ch.D.366 
 
 15Q. B.D. 625 .. 
 24Ch. D.477 
 10 Q. B. D. 394 .. 
 30Ch. D. 84 
 13Q. B. D. 855 .. 
 &Q. B.D. 259 
 23Ch. D. 497 
 6P. D. 127 
 17Ch. D. 388 
 
 18 Ch. D. 188 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 197, 601 
 
 16 Q. B. D. 102 .. 
 20Ch. D. 230 
 
 29 Ch. D. 711 
 
 6P. D. 12 
 
 17 Ch. D: 782 
 29Ch.D. 711 
 11Q.B. D. 255 .. 
 
 25 Ch. p. 162 
 
 9Q.B. D. 582 
 
 23Ch. D.472 
 20Ch. D. 670 
 14Q. B. D. 855 .. 
 16Ch. D.376 
 
 26 0h.D.194;29Ch.D.115 
 8Q. B. D. 97 .. .. 
 
 1« Ch. D. 178 
 
 6P.D. 33 
 
 19 Ch. D. 462 ' .. 
 2iCh. D. 176 
 
 7Q. B.D. 270; 9 Q. B. D.) 
 555 .. .. ..f 
 
 17 Ch. D. 480 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 647 
 
 868 
 
 1378 
 
 11 
 
 1224 
 
 1H2 
 
 396 
 
 941 
 
 . 1007 
 
 1189 
 
 148 
 
 707 
 
 513 
 
 1451 
 
 1569 
 
 fl042 
 
 {1045 
 
 1 1049 
 
 279 
 
 193 
 
 829 
 
 1569 
 
 6 
 
 530 
 
 1205 
 
 1099 
 
 703 
 
 1615 
 
 1219 
 
 122 
 
 1546 
 
 1190 
 
 1106 
 
 832 
 
 1190 
 
 1621 
 
 1215 
 
 279 
 
 1468 
 197 
 1277 
 1456 
 1653 
 823 
 
 895 
 
 1130 
 
 802 
 820 
 
 232 
 
 152 
 
TABLE OP OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Columir 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Bauner v. Berridge 
 
 Bannerman v. Toimg. In re Bannerman's Estate , 
 Bannerman's Estate, In re. Bannerman v. Young 
 Bannister, Ex parte. In re Vale 
 
 , Wilks i;. 
 
 Barber ■;;. Blaiberg 
 
 , Lenham w. 
 
 , Willmott i; 
 
 ■«. Tebbit. In re Appleton .. 
 
 Barber's Settled Estates, In re 
 
 Barclay, Beg. v. .. .. .. „ 
 
 Bareham, In re.. 
 Barker, In re .. 
 
 V. Barker. In re Parker 
 
 V. Lavery 
 
 V. Palmer 
 
 V. Perowne. In re Clarke 
 
 Barksbire D. Grubb 
 
 Barlow V. Kensington Vestry . . 
 
 , Reeves i;. 
 
 1). Teal 
 
 Barnes v. Soutbsea Eailway Company 
 
 17. Toye.. 
 
 Bamett, In re. Ex parte Eeynolds .. 
 
 , Perry u. 
 
 Barney v. United Telephone Company 
 
 Barningham, Hankinson i). 
 
 Baroness von ]5useck, In tbe Goods of 
 
 Barrow, Ex parte. In re Andrews .. 
 
 , Broadbent v. In re Ovey. Robertson 
 
 Broad bent 
 
 . Dyster 
 
 V. In re 
 
 !•! 
 
 Barry, Pickering Lytbe East Higbway Board v. 
 
 Barstow, Powler v. 
 
 Barter, Ex parte. Ex parte Black. In re Walker . 
 
 «. Dubeux 
 
 Bartlelt, In re. Newman v. Hook .. 
 
 Barton (Local Board for), Robinson v. 
 
 Bassett, Nadin v. 
 
 Bartrum, Couldery 1J. .. 
 
 Basbam, In re. Hannay v. Basbam .. 
 
 , Hannay w. In re Basbam .. 
 
 Basker, Eaton V. 
 
 Bastin j;. Bid well 
 Batohelor u. Fortesoue .. 
 Bateman u. Service 
 
 Bates, Duck v. .. 
 
 Batey, In re. Ex parte Emmanuel .. 
 Bath, Ex parte. In re Phillips 
 
 ■ , Ex parte. In re 
 
 Batt, Schneider ■w. 
 
 Batten, Acton Local Board v. .. 
 
 , Praanell v. In re Hardiman 
 
 "{ 
 
 18 Ch. D. 254 
 21 Ch. D. 105 
 21 Ch. D. 105 
 18Ch. D. 137 
 30Ch. D. 512 
 
 19 Ch. D. 473 
 lOQ. B. D. 293 .. 
 17Cb. D. 772 
 29Ch. D. 893 
 18Ch. D. 624 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 306, 486 
 17 Ch. D. 329 
 
 17 Ch. D. 241 
 16 Ch. D. 44 
 14Q. B.D. 769 .. 
 8Q. B. D. 9 
 18Ch. D. 160 
 18Ch. D. 616 
 
 27 Ch. D. 362 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 610 ; 12 Q. B. D. 
 
 436 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 403, 501 
 
 27Ch. D. 536 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 410 .. 
 
 15Q. B. D. 169 .. 
 
 14Q. B. D. 467;15Q.B.D. 
 
 388 
 
 28 Ch. D. 394 
 
 9 P. D. 62 
 
 6 P. D. 211 
 
 18Ch. D. 464 
 
 20 Ch. D. 676 ; 8 App. Cas. 
 812 
 
 29 Ch. D. 560 ." '.'. 
 13 Q. B. D. 635 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 59 
 20 Ch. D. 240 
 
 510 
 413 
 
 561 
 
 621 
 
 8 App. Cas.l 
 
 D. 21 
 D. 394 
 D. 195 
 r>. 195 
 
 201 ; 7 Q. B. D.] 
 
 26 Ch. D. 
 7 Q. B. D, 
 16 Ch. D. 
 
 21 Oh. D. 
 798 
 
 25 Ch, 
 19 Ch. 
 23 Ch. 
 Z3 0h. 
 6 Q. B. D, 
 
 529 
 18 0h. D. 238 
 11 Q. B. D. 474 .. 
 6 App. Cas. 386 .. 
 12Q.B. D. 79; 13 Q. B.D 
 
 843 .. ./ 
 17Ch. D. 35 
 
 22 Ch. D. 450 
 
 27 Ch. D. 509 
 8Q. B.D. 701 
 
 28 Ch. D. 283 
 16Ch. D. 360 
 
 812 
 1703 
 1703 
 
 169 
 1704 
 1140 
 
 93? 
 1221 
 1678 
 
 795 
 
 82& 
 
 784- 
 
 851 
 1701 
 1160^ 
 
 44S 
 
 32 
 
 1661 
 
 87r 
 
 257 
 
 775 
 783 
 666 
 181 
 
 1259 
 
 1043 
 
 1129 
 
 1271 
 
 198 
 
 1697 
 
 28S 
 1256 
 
 625 
 1133 
 
 411 
 1145 
 1212 
 
 831, 1197 
 
 1193 
 
 124 
 
 1592 
 
 1592 
 
 817 
 
 766 
 948 
 318 
 
 428 
 
 134 
 
 151 
 
 152 
 1142 
 
 828 
 1015 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Naiiie of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Coliimu 
 of 
 
 "Batten v. Wedgwood Coal and Iron Obmpany 
 
 Batty, Dayv. .. 
 
 Bayley v. Great Western Kailway Company . 
 
 , Reg. 1). .. .. .. .. 
 
 Baylis, Ancketill V. 
 
 , Bradley v. 
 
 , Partridge 17. 
 
 Baynton •». Collins 
 
 Beale, Phillips w. 
 
 Bealey, Pletclier v. 
 
 -Beall, Quartz Hill Consolidated Gold Mining Co.u .. 
 
 Bean, Hennann Loog v. 
 
 Bearblook, Fox v. 
 
 Beatty u. Gillbanks 
 
 Beauohamp (Earl), Martin w. .. 
 
 Eeaumont, Lumb v. .. 
 
 Beavan V. Beavan 
 
 , Webb V. 
 
 Beazley w. Scares .. .. 
 
 Bebington Local Board, Lightljound v. 
 Beck, In re. In re Cartington Estate 
 ■Beckett r. Addyman .. .. 
 
 •!>. Attwood 
 
 • — ' V. Sutton 
 
 ffleddall w. Maitland .. 
 Bedson's Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Beer «. Foakes .. 
 
 JBeeson, Dawson u. 
 
 "'Beeswing," The 
 
 "Belfort," The 
 
 BeU W.Bell 
 
 V. Love 
 
 17. Stooker .. .. .. ,. 
 
 u. Sunderland Building Society ., 
 
 Bellairs i;. Tucker .. .. ., 
 
 Bellamy, In re. Elder «. Pearson .. 
 Bellamy and Metropolitan Board of Works, In re 
 
 "Bellcaim,"The 
 
 Belleau, Beg. v. 
 
 Beloe, Sergenson Vt In re Watmough 
 Belper School Attendance Comrnittee v. Bailey 
 Belt 17. Lawes ... 
 
 Belton, London and Yorkshire Bank v. 
 "' Benares," The .. ., .. 
 
 Behbow V. Low 
 Benn, In re. Benn v. Benn ., 
 
 -^ «. Benn. InreBenn ..■ 
 
 Bennett, Ex parte.- In re Ward 
 In re Bowen 
 
 V. Bowen, • 
 , Catton V. 
 , Coney v, ■ 
 , Donnell «. 
 
 Rigby V. ^ 
 
 In re Coney 
 
 Benson, Shaw v, 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 21 Ch. D. 830 
 
 26 Ch. D. 434 
 8 Q. B. D. 411 
 
 10 Q. B, D. 577 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 195, 210 
 17 Ch. D. 835 
 
 27 Ch. D. 604 
 26 Ch. D. 621 
 
 28 Ch. D. 688 
 20 Ch. D. 501 
 26 Ch. D. 306 
 
 17 Ch. D. 429 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 308 
 
 26 Ch. D. 12 
 
 27 Ch. D. 356 
 24 Ch. D. 649, n 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 609 
 
 22 Ch. D. 660 
 14 Q. B. D. 849 
 
 24 Ch. D. 608 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 783 
 
 18 Ch. D. 54 
 
 19 Ch. D. 646 
 17 Ch. D. 174 
 
 25 Ch. D. 458; 28 Oh. D. 523 
 11Q.B.D. 221;9App. Cas, 
 
 605 
 
 22 Ch. D. 504 
 
 10 P. D. 18 
 9P. D. 215.. 
 8 P. D. 217 .. 
 10Q.B.D.547; 
 
 286 
 10 Q. B. D. 129 
 24 Ch. D. 618 
 13 Q. B. D. 562 
 
 26 Oh. D. 620 
 24 Oh. D. 387 
 10 P. D. 161 
 7 App. Cas. 473 
 2fCh. D. 280 
 9Q. B.D. 259 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 356 
 15Q.B.D. 457 
 9P.D.16 .. 
 16 Oh. D. 93 
 
 29 Ch. D. 839 
 29 Ch. D. 839 
 16 Ch. D. 541 
 
 20 Oh. D. 538 
 26 Ch. D. 161 
 29 Ch. D. 993 
 22 Oh. D. 835 
 
 21 Ch. D. 559 
 1.1 Q. B, D. 563 
 
 9 App, Cas. 
 
 ;■} 
 
 336 
 1227 
 1541 
 1226 
 1662 
 
 443 
 1006 
 1005 
 1702 
 
 638 
 1187 
 
 960 
 1207 
 
 501 
 
 543 
 
 473 
 1159 
 1206 
 
 660 
 
 500 
 1585 
 
 832 
 1631 
 1263 
 1236 
 1610 
 1149 
 1669 
 
 J 1019 
 
 11212 
 
 1098 
 
 1338 
 
 1106 
 
 660 
 
 637 
 
 912 
 
 326 
 
 653 
 
 1632 
 
 538 
 
 306 
 
 452 
 
 530 
 
 1195 
 
 746 
 
 1611 
 
 1169 
 
 1699 
 
 1699 
 
 191 
 
 652 
 
 1143 
 
 1211 
 
 1548 
 
 1556 
 
 384 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Benthal v. Kilmorey (Earl of) 
 Beatham v. Wilson. In re Parker 
 Benton, In re. Smith v. Smith 
 Benwell, Ex parte. In re Huttpn 
 
 , Mordaunt v. .. 
 
 Berdan v. Grreenwood .. 
 Bergmann v. Macpiillali 
 
 Berkley r. Thompson .. 
 
 Berks (Justices of), Coomber v. 
 
 Bennondsey (Vestry of), Attomey-Greneral v. 
 Berridge, Banner u. .. 
 
 , Marshall «). .. 
 
 Berry, In re. Ex parte "Wilkinson .. .. 
 
 Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mayor of), Sanderson v. 
 
 "Beryl," The .... .. 
 
 Best, Ex parte. In re Best .. 
 Bestwick, Thorpe 1). .. .. , 
 
 Beswick i;. Orpen. InreOrpen 
 
 "Beta," The .. .. 
 
 Bfethell, Shelley v 
 
 Bethlehem .and Bridewell Hospitals, In re .. 
 
 Betteley, Hamlyn v. .. .. 
 
 Betts, In re. Ex parte Harrison 
 
 Bewicke «. Graham .. .. !.. 
 
 Bexley Local Board v. West Kent Sewerage Board .. 
 
 Beyfus v. Burstall .. .. .. 
 
 "Bianca,"The 
 
 Bidder v. Bridges . 
 
 V. 
 
 V. McLeafl' .. .. .. '• .. 
 
 Volunie and Page. 
 
 "I 
 
 Bidwell, Bastin v. .. .. .. . . 
 
 Biffen, Kirby v. 
 Biggs, Chapman v. 
 
 V. Peacock .. .. .. , . 
 
 — r— , McEllister y. .. .. ...... 
 
 Bignold, China Merchants Steam Navigation Com-) 
 
 panyu. .The " Hochung." The "Lapwing '\ .. ) 
 Biller, Stevens v. .. .. .. ...... ... 
 
 Bingham, SheflSeld, Waterworks Company v. ... 
 
 (J. E.) Sheffield Waterworks Company, v. 
 
 Bingley, Waite V. . . .. .. .. .... , .. 
 
 Birch, Ih re. Eoe v. Birch .. .. ... . .. 
 
 V. Birch .. .. .. .. 
 
 u. Mather .... 
 
 , Eoe /v. In re Birch .. .. ... ... 
 
 , Sharpe V. .. .. , .. .. .... 
 
 Bhchall, In.re. Wilson ■». Bircball ., .. ., 
 
 , Wilson V. In re Birohall .. 
 
 Bird, In re. Ex parte Hill .. .. .. ... 
 
 V. Eggleton .. .. .. ' . .. 
 
 ■!;. Gihb. The "De Bay" , .. .... 
 
 , Lydney and Wigpool Iron Ore Coinpany v. ., 
 
 Birkbeck, Attorney-General v. . ., , ., 
 Birkbeck Freehold Land Society, In re ... ... 
 
 Birkenhead (Mayor of) v. London and Norfji Western) 
 
 Bailway Company .. .. .. „ .... J 
 
 25 Ch. D. 39 
 17 Ch. D. 263 
 19Ch.D. 277 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 301 .. 
 19Ch. D. 302 .. 
 20 Ch. D. 764, n. .. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 423 
 12Q.B.D.26I;10App.( 
 
 45 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 17; 10 Q. B. 
 
 267; 9 App. Cas. 61 
 23 Ch. D. 60 
 
 18 Ch. D. 254 
 
 19 Ch. D. 233 
 22 Ch. B. 788 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 547 .. 
 
 9P.D. 4; 9P. D. 137 
 
 18 Oh. D. 488 
 
 6Q. B. D. 311 .. 
 
 1'6 Ch. D. 202 
 
 9P. D. 134.. .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 30 Ch. D; 541 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 63 
 
 18 Ch. B. 127 
 
 7Q. B.B. 400' .. 
 
 9' Q. B. B. 51g 
 
 26 Oh. B. 35 
 8 P. B. 91 .. 
 26Ch. B. 1.. 
 29 Oh. D. 29 
 20Ch. B. 512- 
 18 Oh. B. 238 
 8 Q. B. B. 201 
 
 ".:) 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest, 
 
 J.l Q. B. B. 27 
 
 20 Ch. B. 200; 22 Ch. 
 ■• 284 ■■ .. ■ ,. ■ 
 a App. Cas. 314 ... 
 
 7 App. Cas. 512 .. 
 
 25 Oh. B. 31 
 
 25 Oh. B. 443 
 
 25 Ch. B. 446, n. .. 
 
 21 Ch. B. 674 
 27 Ch. B. 622 
 8P. B. 163.. 
 
 !■} 
 
 22 Ch. B. 629 
 27 Oh. B. 622 
 8 Q. B. B. Ill 
 16 Oh. B. 41 
 16 Ch. B. 41 
 
 23 Ch. B. 695 
 29 Oh. B. 1012 
 8 Anp. Cas. 559 
 
 23 Ch. B. 358 
 12 Q. 3. B. 605 
 
 24 Oh. p. 119 
 
 15Q.B.B. 572 
 
 285 
 1704 
 644 
 141 
 1016. 
 1191 
 1041 
 
 204 
 
 1326 
 
 883 
 
 812 
 
 739 
 
 111 
 
 763 
 
 1509 
 
 195 
 
 1664 
 
 565 
 
 1508 
 
 1566 
 
 1217 
 
 1230 
 
 893- 
 
 117T 
 
 36 
 
 1141 
 
 1096 
 
 1194 
 
 1168 
 
 1153 
 
 766 
 
 1005 
 
 642 
 
 1015 
 
 316 
 
 1100 
 
 574 
 
 1656 
 
 1656 
 
 543, 1015 
 
 561 
 1118 
 1045 
 
 561 
 
 243 
 
 665 
 
 665 
 
 167 
 
 790 
 
 1517 
 
 1180 
 
 54 
 
 1340 
 
 778 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Birmingham and. Lichfield Junction' Railway Com-) 
 pany, In re ,. .. ,. „. „ ..) 
 
 , 1 , In re 
 
 Birmingham- (Corporation of) u. Baker 
 
 , Smith v.] 
 
 and Shaw, In re 
 
 ■ (Mayor of), Wilkins v. 
 
 ■ Dairy Company, Parsons v. 
 
 ■ (Overseers of), Coleman v.- 
 
 Birmingham, Tame, and Eeai Drainage Board,, At-) 
 tomey-General i>. .. .. .. .. •• ) 
 
 Biron, Keg. v. .. .i 
 
 Birrell v. Dryer .. .. .. .. ., 
 
 Birt, In re. Birt v. Burt .. 
 
 v.'Bwct. In re Birt .* ;. 
 
 BischofF, Inman Steamship Company V. .. ..< 
 
 Bishop Auckland Iron Company, Bishop Auckland! 
 
 Local Board v. .. ' .. .. .. ..( 
 
 — ■ ; Local Board v. Bishop Auckland! 
 
 Ii'on Company .. .. .. ,. ,, j 
 
 Bitton, Solomon V. .. .. .. .. 
 
 "Bjom,!'The a. m •;.' 
 
 Blaehford, In re. Blachford u. Worsley 
 
 ■^ — i -u. Wqrsley. In re Blaphford 
 
 Black, Ex parte. ' Ex parte Barter. Ex parte Walker 
 
 - — ■; — , Coltness Iron Qompany v. 
 
 Blackburn ^>. Plavelle .. ... .. .. 
 
 Blackburn and District Benefit Building Society, In re| 
 
 r — ■ — f ■ V. 
 
 Cunliffe, Brooks, & Co. w. .. 
 
 Blackburn Building Society v. Cunliflfe, Brooks & Co. 
 Blackmore v. Vestry of Mile End Old Town 
 Blackwood u. Eeg. .. ... .. .. .. 
 
 Blagden, Vallance w. In reVallance- ' ., 
 Blaiberg, Ex parte. In re Toomer .. .. .. 
 
 , Barber v. .... .. .. .. 
 
 -w. Parke 
 
 Blake w, Blake. In the Goods of Gunstan ., 
 
 ^, In re. Jones w. Blake 
 
 V. Gale. In re Gale .. 
 
 -, Griffith V. 
 - V. Harvey 
 
 -, Jones V. In re Blake 
 -, Sly w. Inre Johnston . 
 
 Blackie v. Osmaston 
 
 Blaisley's' Trusts, In re .. .. .. 
 
 Bland v. Dawes 
 
 ^, Fuggle V. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Blaadford v. Blandford 
 
 Blaney, Kilford w.' ., 
 
 Blankenstein, Gabriel v. .. 
 
 Blantyre (Lord) v. Clyde Navigatipn Trustees 
 
 Blashill v. Chambers ., .. .. " .. 
 
 18Ch. D. 155 
 
 28Ch. D. 652 
 17 Ch. D. 782 
 11 Q. B. D. 195 .. 
 27 Ch. D. 614 
 25 Ch. D. 78 
 9 Q. B. D. 172 
 6Q. B, D. 615 
 
 17 Ch. D. 685 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 474 .. 
 9App. Cas. 345 .. 
 22 Ch. D. 604 
 22 Ch. D. 604 
 6 Q. B. D. 648 ; 7 App. Cas.) 
 670 .. i. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 138 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 138 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. ],76 
 9P. D.36, n. 
 27 Ch. D. 676 
 27 Ch. D. 676 
 S6 Ch. D. 510 . ., 
 6 App. Cas. 315 .. 
 
 6 App. Cas. 628 ., 
 
 24 Cb. D. 421 ; 10 App..Cas.\ 
 33 / 
 
 29 Ch. D. 902 
 
 22Ch.D.61;9App.Cas.857 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 451 
 8App. Cas. 82 
 26Ch.D. 353 
 23 Ch; D. 254 
 laCh. D.473 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 90 
 
 7 P. D. 102 
 
 29Ch. D. 913 
 
 22 Ch. D. 820 
 27 Ch. D. 474 
 
 S9Ch. D. 827 
 
 29 Ch. D. 913 
 
 29 Ch. D. 964 
 28Ch.D.119 
 23 Ch. D. 549 
 17 Ch. D. 794 
 11 Q. B. D. 711 
 8P. D.19 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 145 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 684 
 6 App. Cas. 273 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 479 
 
 1281 
 
 1283 
 
 832 
 1658 
 
 737 
 
 737 
 
 15 
 
 -1061 
 
 821 
 
 735 
 696 
 564 
 564 
 
 694 
 822 
 
 822 
 
 1195 
 1097 
 811 
 811 
 411 
 1402 
 313 
 
 274, 379 
 
 270 
 
 270 
 
 878 
 
 317 
 
 262 
 
 259 
 
 1149 
 
 .244 
 
 1270 
 
 (1215 
 
 11603 
 
 806 
 
 1209 
 
 f 899 
 
 hl83 
 
 (1197 
 
 (1215 
 
 11603 
 
 805 
 
 1154 
 
 1207 
 
 1696 
 
 1212 
 
 1110 
 
 . 1678' 
 
 177 
 
 1402 
 
 874 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Blease, Ex parte. In re Blinkliorn .. 
 Bleckley, fn tlie droods of 
 
 "Blenheim," The 
 
 Blethen, Exchange Bank of Yarmouth w. .. ■ .. 
 Bllck, Worcester City and County Banking Com-i 
 pany u. In re Pumfrey .. .. ■ .^ .. | 
 
 Blight ^j. Hartnoll 
 
 Blinkhom, In re. Ex parte Blease .. 
 
 Blookley, In re. Bleckley v. Blockley 
 
 r. Blockley. In re Block ley 
 
 Bloomfield, Colverson 1). .. .. ■ ,. 
 
 Bloxam v. Favre 
 
 Blyth and Fanshawe, In re .. .. • .. 
 
 Blythe, Ex parte. In re Blythe 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Banner 
 
 Board of Trade, Ex parte. In re Chudley ,. 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Parker 
 
 ; , Ex parte. In re Strand 
 
 Bobhett V. South Eastern Railway Company 
 
 Bockwoldt, Peruvian Guano Company ■?;. ■ ., 
 
 Boddington, In re. Boddington v. Clairat .. 
 
 «. Clairat. In re Boddington .. 
 
 , Halfen II. 
 
 Boehm, Mouson & Co. u. 
 
 Bolckow «. Fisher 
 
 , Vaughan, & Co., Marshall u. 
 
 Bolingbroke V. Hinde .. 
 
 BoUand, Ex parte. In re Eoper ,. 
 
 Bollen u. Southall 
 
 Bolton, Snow v. 
 
 Bond, In re. Ex parte Bacon 
 
 , Mackellar J). .. .. .. • ., 
 
 Bone, Heawood V. .. .. .. ., ■ ., 
 
 Bonham, Ex parte. In re ToUemache • ., 
 
 Bonner, In re. Tucker v. Good .. ' .. 
 
 V. Great Western EaUway Company 
 
 Boosey, Chappell f . 
 
 Booth 11. Smith.. 
 
 V. Trail 
 
 Borneman V. Wilson .. 
 
 Borthwiok v. Eansford . . 
 
 Berwick, Wells v: In re Hardy 
 
 Bostock, Adams i>. 
 
 Boston Marine Insurance Company, Uzieli v. .. 
 
 Boswell V. Coaks ' . . 
 
 Bottom ley, Burgejs v. In re Burgess ... 
 
 , Lloyd V. In re Lloyd and Sons' Trade- 
 mark ,. .. .. .. .. ' .. 
 
 Bottomley's Case. In re Alma Spinning Company 
 Bouch, In re. Sproule v. Bouch .. .. • .. 
 
 , Sproule i». In re Bouch 
 
 Boughton, In re. Bough ton v. Boughton .. 
 
 V. Boughton. In re Boughton 
 
 Boulanger, Martin V. .. .. .. ' .. 
 
 Boult, Crowther v. 
 
 Boulton, Keay v. 
 
 Bournemouth Commissioners v. Watts 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 ^ 
 
 Digest. 
 
 14Q. B. D. 123 .. 
 
 187 
 
 8 P. D. 169 
 
 1693 
 
 10 P. D. 167 
 
 1505 
 
 10 App. Cas. 293 -.. 
 
 497. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 255 
 
 1595 
 
 19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 (1664, 
 (1688 
 
 23 Ch. D. 218 
 
 1685 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 123 .. 
 
 187 
 
 29Ch.D. 250 
 
 16 
 
 29Ch. D. 250• 
 
 16 
 
 29Ch. D. 341 
 
 40 
 
 8P. D.lOl; 9P. D. 130.. 
 
 1271 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 207 .. 
 
 1529 
 
 16Ch. D.620 
 
 152 
 
 17 Ch. D. 480 
 
 152 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 402 .. 
 
 136 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 196 .. 
 
 129 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 492 .. 
 
 189 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 424 
 
 1287 
 
 23 Ch. D. 225 
 
 1158 
 
 22Ch.D.597;25Ch.D.e85 
 
 1673 
 
 22Ch.D.597;25Ch.D.685 
 
 1673 
 
 6P. D. 13 
 
 1112 
 
 26 Ch. D. 398 
 
 1583 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 161 .. 
 
 1167 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 231 
 
 1483 
 
 25 Ch. D. 795 
 
 900 
 
 21 Ch. D. 543 
 
 251 
 
 15 Q B. D. 461 .. 
 
 1006 
 
 17 0h. D. 433 
 
 1198 
 
 17 Ch. D. 447 
 
 148 
 
 9 App. Cas. 715 .. 
 
 313 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 179 .. 
 
 769 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 604 ., 
 
 151 
 
 19 Ch. D. 201 
 
 1704 
 
 24 Ch. D. 1 
 
 802 
 
 21 Ch. D. 232 
 
 428 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 318 .. 
 
 1314 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 8 
 
 1204 
 
 28 Cb. D. 53 
 
 1146 
 
 28Ch. D. 79 
 
 1214 
 
 17Ch. D. 798■ 
 
 1691 
 
 8Q. B.D.259 
 
 1006 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 693 
 
 23 Ch. D. 302 ; 27 Ch.D. 424 
 
 582, 1537 
 
 25 Ch. D. 243 
 
 1141 
 
 27 Ch. D. 646 
 
 1578 
 
 16 Ch. D. 681 
 
 358 
 
 29 Ch. D. 635 
 
 338 
 
 29 Ch. D. 635 
 
 338 
 
 23 Ch. D. 169 
 
 1540 
 
 23 Ch. D. 169 
 
 1540 
 
 8 App. Cas. 296 .. 
 
 312 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 680 .. 
 
 735 
 
 25 Ch. D. 212 
 
 1706 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 87 
 
 819 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Calse. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Bousfield i;. Dove,. In re Dqve 
 Boustead, In re Ex parte Eogers 
 
 — -^ , Hale t>. ■ 
 
 Bowden v.- Layland. Gribbs v. 
 
 Marsden 
 Bowen, In re. Bennett v. Bowen 
 
 , Bennett v. In re Bowen 
 
 «. Hall 
 
 ■ V. Lewis 
 
 Layland 
 
 Bowers, Knight «. 
 
 Bowie, In re. Ex parte Breull 
 
 Bowker u. Evans 
 
 Bowles V. Drake .. 
 
 Bown, Inre. O'Halloran «. King .. 
 
 Bowring, Standing v. .. ., 
 
 Bowyear «. Pawson 
 
 Boycott, In re .. 
 
 Boyd «. Allen .. 
 
 -, Chamberlain v. ., 
 
 Boyes, In re. Boyes v. Carritt 
 
 «. Carritt. In re Boyes 
 
 Boyse, In re. Crofton v. Crofton 
 
 Boxall I). Boxall 
 
 Braby (P.) & Co.'s Applications, In re. 
 
 shire Iron Company's Trade Marks 
 Bradbury I). Cooper .. 
 
 Bradford, In re .. 
 
 In 
 
 re Shrop- 
 
 ■ V. Symondson 
 • V. Young. 
 
 V. . In re Palconar's Trusts 
 
 Bradford Banking Company v. Briggs & Co. 
 Bradford Old Bank, Walker v. 
 Bradlaugh, Attorney-General v. 
 , Clarke v. .. 
 
 «. Clarke .. 
 
 r. Gossett .. 
 
 •«. Newdegate 
 
 Bradley, In the Qijods of 
 
 V. Baylis 
 
 V. Bradley 
 
 Braithwaite, In re. Braithwaite v. Wallis 
 
 V. Wallis. In re Braithwaite 
 
 Brake, In the Goods of 
 
 Brand, Hall v. ., 
 
 Brandon, Ex parte. In re. Trench .. 
 
 Brandon's Patent, In re. Ex parte Doty 
 
 Brandram, In re 
 
 Brasch, Millen v. 
 
 Brassey, Pott>. In re Allhutt 
 
 Bray v. Tofleld. In re Greaves, deceased 
 
 ■"Breadalbane,"The 
 
 Bi'ear, Hawke I), ■ ,, ,. ,. 
 
 In re 
 
 27 Ch. D. 687 
 16 Ch. D. 665 • 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 453 
 
 26 Ch. D. 783 
 
 20 Ch. D. 538 
 20 Ch. D. 538 
 6 Q. B. D. 333 
 
 9 App. Cas. 890 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 845 
 16 Oh. D. 484 
 
 15 Q. B: D. 565 
 8 Q. B. D. 325 
 
 27 Ch. D. 411 
 
 27 Ch. D. 341 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 540 
 29 Ch. D. 571 
 
 24 Ch. D. 622 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 407 
 26 Ch. D. 531 
 26 Oh. D. 531 
 
 20 Ch. D. 760 
 27Ch.D. 220 
 
 21 Ch. D. 223 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 94 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 373 ; 15 
 635 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 456 
 
 26 Ch. D. 656 
 
 29 Oh. D. 617 
 
 28 Ch. D. 18 
 
 29 Oh. D. 149 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 511 
 14 Q. B. D. 667 
 7 Q. B. D. 38 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 151 ; 8 
 63 
 
 7Q. B. D. 38; 8 
 
 354 
 12 Q. B. D. 271 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 8 P. D. 215 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 195, 210 
 7P. D. 237.. 
 
 21 Oh. D. 121 
 
 21 Oh. D. 121 
 6P. D. 217.. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 39 
 
 25 Ch. D. 500 
 
 9 App. Cas. 589 
 25 Ch. D. 366 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 35 ; 10 
 142 
 
 22 Ch. D. 275 
 18 Ch. D. 551 
 7 P. D. 186 .. 
 14 Q. B. D. 841 
 
 Q.B.D, 
 
 Q.B.D. 
 
 App. Cas. 
 
 B. D 
 
 143 J 
 
 181 
 
 134 
 
 806 
 
 552 
 
 552 
 
 867 
 
 1676 
 
 15 
 
 114 
 1146 
 1234 
 
 644 
 
 17 
 
 1414 
 
 1526 
 
 1014 
 
 501 
 
 1700 
 
 1700 
 
 1191 
 
 10, 1456 
 
 1581 
 
 1154 
 
 1241 
 
 696 
 
 1245 
 
 1271 
 
 514 
 
 1160 
 
 347, 914 
 
 42 
 
 997 
 
 996, 1235 
 
 • 996, 1132 
 
 1052 
 
 1009 
 
 282 
 
 1271 
 
 1005 
 
 1111 
 
 551 
 
 551 
 
 1664 
 
 544 
 
 118 
 
 1046 
 
 1216 
 
 278 
 
 1461 
 
 806 
 
 1507 
 
 1227 
 
TABLE QF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Brecon and Merthyr Tydfil Junction Bailway Com-] 
 pany, Woodruff i;. .. .. ., .. ,. j 
 
 Bree v. Marescaux 
 
 Brenner, In re. Ex parte Safiery ... 
 
 Brentford and Isleworth Tramways Company, In re 
 
 Bretnall, Warwicker V. 
 
 Breton v. Woollven. In re Breton's Estate .. 
 
 Breton's Estate, In re. Breton v. Woollven .. 
 
 Brett's Case. Hewitt's Case. In. re Columbia) 
 Chemical Pactdry Manure anci Phosphate Works j 
 
 Breuell, Ex parte. In re Bowie 
 
 Brewer «. Broad wood .. 
 
 ?;. Brown 
 
 V. Torke. Yorke v. Brewer .. 
 
 Bridewell and Bethlehem Hospitals, In re 
 
 Bridge v. Seymour 
 
 Bridgerw. Savage 
 
 Bridges, In re. HiU v. Bridges 
 
 , Bidder v. 
 
 , Hill V. In re Bridges 
 
 Bridgett, Turner v. 
 
 Bridgnorth (Guardians of), Reg. v. 
 Brier, In re. Brier v. Evison .. 
 
 , Evison. In re Brier . 
 
 Brierly Hill Local Board, Pearsall v. 
 Briggs, Laird ■«. 
 
 V. 
 
 . Swanwiok 
 
 Briggs & Co., Bradford Banking Company v. 
 Brightmore, In re. Ex parte May .. 
 Brighton Sewers Act, The 
 Brimelow v. Murray .. 
 Brisco, Williams V. 
 
 Bristol (Mayor and Corporation of) v. Cox ' 
 Bristol Bteam Navigation, Speller t;. .. 
 Bristol Waterworks Company v. Uren 
 Bristowe, Attorney-General for British Honduras v, 
 Britain V. Rossiter 
 "British Commerce," The 
 British India Steam Navigation Company v. Commis- 
 sioners of Inland Revenue . . 
 British Linen Company, McKenzie v. 
 British Seamless Paper Box Company, In re 
 British SS. " Spearman," Russian SS. " Yourri " v. 
 Brittain «. Overton 
 Brittleton, Reg. v. .. .. .. [ 
 
 Broad, In re. Ex parte, Neck 
 
 and Broad,' In re 
 
 , In re 
 
 Broadbent «. Barrow. In re Ovey 
 
 w. Groves. In re Cockoroft 
 
 Robertson v. In re Ovey. Broadbent v. 
 
 
 Barrow 
 Broadwood, Brewer v. .. 
 Brocklebank, New London and Brazilian Bank v. 
 
 :1 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 "•! 
 
 28 Ch. D. 190 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 434 
 
 16 Ch. D. 668 
 26 Ch. D. 527 
 23 Oh. D. 188 
 
 17 Ch. D. 416 
 17 Ch. D. 416 
 
 25 Ch. D. 283v. .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 484 
 22 Ch. D. 105 
 28Ch. D.309 
 20Ch.D. 669 
 30Ch.D. 541 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 460 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 363 ., 
 
 17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 26 Ch. D. 1 
 
 29 Ch. D. 29 
 17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 392 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 55 
 9Q. B.D. 765; 11 Q. B. D. 
 
 314 
 26 Ch. D. 238 
 26Ch.D. 238 
 11 Q. B. D. 735 ; 9 App. Cas.) 
 
 595 .. .. .. f 
 
 16 Ch. D. 440 ; 19 Ch. D. 22 
 leCh.D. 663 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 510 ., 
 29Ch. D. 149 
 14Q. B.D. 37 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 723 
 9 App. Cas. 519 ., 
 22 Ch. D. 441 
 26Ch.D. 678 
 13 Q. Bv D. 96 
 15Q. B. D. 637 .. 
 
 6 App.. Cas. 143 .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 123 .. 
 
 9 P. D. 128 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 165 
 
 6 App. Cas. 82 
 
 17 Ch. D. 467 
 
 10 App. Cas. 276 .. 
 25Ch. D. 41,n 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 266 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 740 .. 
 15 Q. B. D. 252 .. 
 15 Q. B. D. 420 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 560 
 ■24Ch. D. 94 
 
 20 Ch. D. 676 ; 8 App. Cas, 
 
 812 „ .: .. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 105 
 21Ch.D. 302 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1293 
 
 1135 
 
 242 
 
 387 
 
 687 
 1647 
 1647 
 
 363 
 
 114 
 1638 
 1626 
 1160 
 1217 
 1258 
 1260 
 
 556 
 
 1194r 
 
 lies 
 
 55& 
 
 138 
 
 1230 
 
 1063 
 
 1596 
 1596 
 
 815 
 
 520, 1164 
 
 1245 
 
 594 
 
 347, 914: 
 
 128 
 
 443 
 
 271 
 
 740 
 
 1179 
 
 1145 
 
 1660 
 
 309 
 
 600 
 
 485, 1101 
 
 1339 
 
 536, 1372 
 359 
 
 1505 
 284 
 473 
 234 
 
 1530 
 
 1530 
 286 
 
 1679 
 
 169T 
 
 1638 
 356 
 
TABLE OP GASES J^ THE DIGEST. 
 
 XXYII 
 
 Nam? of Case, 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Bfo^ie, Maim v. 
 
 Byoers, Letterstedi w. .. 
 
 Bromley, Baines v. 
 
 -^ 7 V. Tarns. Grainger v. Aynsley 
 
 In re Edwards 
 
 Brooke v. Brooke 
 
 — V. Edwards. 
 
 , Miisgrave v. 
 
 Brooking, AUhusen «... 
 
 Broqks, Ex parte. In re Fowler 
 
 jHdggv. ■ .. ' •. ; ■ .. 
 
 , - ,: V. SheflSeld Waterworks Company .. 
 Brotherliood, Halsey i>. .. , .. .. 
 
 Brougham,, Melbourne Bankjng Corporatidh v. ' .. 
 
 BVdugliton Coal Company^". Kirkpatrick 
 
 — t^-^ r— (Overseers of), Ldwoook v. 
 
 Brown (Ethel), In re .. ' .. .. .. ' .. 
 
 , jn re. Brown ■!(. Brown 
 
 : — , In re. Ward i>. Morse 
 
 fw.iBrowD. In re Brown 
 
 ^, Brewer f. 
 
 ■u.iBurdett .. ^ ,.. .. .. .. 
 
 , Chancellor i;. In re Chancellor ' 
 
 t;. Cdllins ' - ..■ -, , .. . .. ' 
 
 1). Great Western Railway Company .. 
 
 -7 Manchester, Sheffield, -and Lincolnshire Eail- 
 
 way Company ■«. „ ., 
 
 V. North 
 
 v. Pearson 
 
 , Reg.' v. .. 
 
 w. Sewell .. .. .. .. ■• .. 
 
 , Upton V. .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 , — ~v. 
 
 I Vyse V. 
 -, !^ayley, and Dixon, In re. 
 
 Ex parte Eoberts) 
 
 and Wright 
 Brown, Shipley & Co. v. Kough 
 , Watt:er and Son and. In re ail Arbitration) 
 
 between .. .... .. .. ..J 
 
 Brown's Case. In re Albion Life Assurance Society 
 
 '■■ — Settlement, In re. In re Brown's Will 
 
 Will, In re; ■ In re Brown's Settlement 
 
 ' , In re 
 
 Browne, Ex parte. In re Maltby 
 
 — , Bainbrigge v. 
 
 Brpwnliet ij. Russell 
 Brovfnrigg «. Pike 
 Bruce, Eis parte 
 , Atkinson v. 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 In re Atkinson .. 
 Bruere, In re 
 
 Brunsden v.- Humphrey .. .. 
 
 Brunswick Permanent Building Society, Ohapleo ■«. 
 
 It- ^^ -— , Haywood ,f . 
 
 Bruton, ^arleton w. In re Eoberts .. ... 
 
 ^,r\ V. In re .. 
 
 Bryant, Burstall t». .. .. .. .. ,. -. 
 
 Bryon, In re. Drummond ?J. Leigjii.. .. .. 
 
 Bryson 1^. Russell .. .. . ,, .. .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 378 , 
 
 9 App. Cas. 371 . 
 6 Q. B. D. 197, 691 
 
 6 Q; B. D. 182 
 17 Ch. D. 833 
 21Ch. D. 230 . 
 26Ch. D. 792- . 
 26 Ch. D. 559 . 
 23Ch. D. 261' . 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 475 . 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 256 . 
 8 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 19 Ch. D. 386 
 
 7 App. Cas. 307 . 
 14 Q. B. D. 491 . 
 12.Q. B. D. 369 . 
 13 Q. B. D. 614 . 
 29 Ch. D. 889 
 23Ch. D. 377 
 
 29 CH. D. 889 
 
 D. 309' . 
 
 28 Ch, 
 21 Ch, 
 26 Ch, 
 25 Ch 
 9 Q. B..D, 
 9Q.B. D. 
 
 , D. 
 , D. 
 , D. 
 
 667 ■ 
 
 42 , 
 
 56 
 
 744 
 
 230; lOQ.B. D, 
 
 250; 8 App. Cas. 703 
 g Q. B. D. 52 
 21 Ch.'r). 716 
 10 Q. B. D. 381 
 16 Ch. D. 517 
 20 Ch. D. 731 
 26Ch. D.588' 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 199 
 
 18 Ch. D. 649 
 
 29 Ch. D. 848 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 434 
 
 18 Oh. D. 639 
 18 Ch. D. 61 
 18 Ch. D. 61 
 27 Ch. ©. 179- ■ 
 
 16 Ch. D. 497 
 18 Ch. D. 188 
 8 App. Cas. 235 
 7P. D. 61 .. 
 6P. D.16 .. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 605 
 
 17 Chi D. 775 
 11Q.B. D.712;14Q.B.D. 
 
 141 
 6Q. B. B. 696 . 
 8,Q.B. D. 403. , 
 27 Ch. D. 346 
 30 Ch. D. 234 
 12Q. B. D. 103 . 
 30 Ch. D. 110 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 720 , 
 
 1385 
 
 307 
 1219 
 
 868 
 
 543 
 1199 
 1670 
 
 748 
 
 160 
 
 774 
 
 774 
 1656 
 1043 
 
 317 
 1327 
 1008 
 
 666 
 1598 
 1219 
 1598 
 1626 
 1685 
 
 559 
 
 675 
 1298 
 
 1297 
 
 1180 
 1196 
 
 469 
 1226 
 1213 
 1563 
 1203 
 
 378 
 
 238 
 35 
 
 389 
 1672 
 1671 
 1446 
 
 127 
 27, 1615 
 
 274 
 1273 
 1106 
 1442 
 
 839 
 
 540, 70T 
 
 272 
 
 455 
 1685 
 1685 
 1230 
 1666 
 
 401 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case, 
 
 ••! 
 
 Buclianan, Trott d; 
 
 " Buokhurst," The 
 
 Buckley, Ex parte. In re Buckley .. 
 
 Buckley's Trusts, In re 
 
 BuUers v. Dickinson .. 
 
 Bullmore «. Wynter .. 
 
 Bulmer i;. Bulmer ' 
 
 Bunkell, Walker v. 
 
 Bunn, In re. Isaacson «. Webster .. 
 
 Bunyard, In re. Ex parte Newton. Ex parte Griffin 
 
 Burden, Ex parte. In re Neill 
 
 Burdett, Brown t>. 
 
 — V. Burdett 
 
 Btirdick, Sewell V. . .. ,. .. 
 
 Burgess, In re. Burgess v. Bottomley .. 
 
 ■«. Bottomley. In re Burgess 
 
 — ■ ■■U.Clark 
 
 V. North wick Local Board .. 
 
 BurgoinC'!). Moordaff .. 
 
 Burgoyne v. Collins 
 
 BurlinsoD, Hall v. 
 
 Burnaby v. Equitable Eeversionary Interest Society 
 
 Bumand V. Bodocanachi .. .. .. .A 
 
 Burnett v. Great North of Scotland Bailway Company 
 
 , Leigh V. 
 
 Burney, Abbiss u. In re Pinch 
 
 Burnley Union, Heap w. ., .. .. .. 
 
 Burr, Cory u. ... .. .. .. .. ..■? 
 
 Burrard v. Calisher .. .. .. .. 
 
 Burrow 1^. Scammell .. 
 
 Burrowes v. Borrest. Forrest v. Burrowes. In rel 
 Forrest .. .. .. .. •. .. ) 
 
 Bursill i;. Tanner 
 Burstall, Deyfus_^v.- 
 
 «. Bryant, 
 
 «. Fearon 
 
 Burt, Birt V. In re Birt 
 Burton w. Corporation of Salford 
 
 , Davis w. .. .. .. .. ..\ 
 
 ■ V. English , 
 -, Galland v.- 
 
 In re Fawsitt 
 
 Busby & Son, Eoyle 1^. 
 
 Bushel], In re. Ex parte Great Western Railwayl 
 
 Company .. .. .. .. .. .. J 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Izard (No. 1) 
 
 , In re. (No. 2) , .. 
 
 Butcher, Eeith V. 
 
 — ' V. Pooler • 
 
 Bute (Marquess of), In re. 
 
 Eider .. 
 V. Eider, 
 
 Bute 
 Butler V. 
 
 Bute (Marquess of) v.\ 
 In re Marquess of] 
 
 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 
 of 
 
 
 
 
 Digest 
 
 28 Ch. D. 446 
 
 
 
 561 
 
 6 P. D. 152 .. 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1507 
 
 16 Oh. D. 513 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 194 
 
 22 Ch. D. 583 
 
 
 
 670 
 
 29 Ch. D. 155 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 802 
 
 22 Ch. D. 619 
 
 
 
 1706 
 
 25 Ch. D. 409 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 484 
 
 22 Ch. D. 722 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1188 
 
 16 Ch. D. 47 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1702 
 
 16 Ch. D. 330 
 
 ,. 
 
 
 149 
 
 16 Ch. D. 675 
 
 
 
 117 
 
 21 Ch. D. 667 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1685 
 
 21 Oh. D. 667 
 
 ., 
 
 
 1685 
 
 10Q.B.D.363; 
 
 13 Q. B. 
 
 ^•1 
 
 1476 
 
 159 ; 10 App. 
 
 Cas. 74 
 
 
 25 Ch. D. 243 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1141 
 
 25 Ch. D. 243 
 
 
 
 1141 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 735 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 818 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 264 
 
 ^, 
 
 
 816 
 
 8 P. D. 205 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1130 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 450 
 
 ^, 
 
 
 939 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 43 
 
 28 Ch. D. 416 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 703 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 633 ; 
 333 
 
 7 App. Cas. 
 
 697 
 
 10 App. Oas. 174 .. 
 
 
 1399 
 
 29 Ch. D. 231 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 796 
 
 17 Ch. D. 211 
 
 ^, 
 
 ,. 
 
 1689 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 617 
 
 ,. 
 
 
 814 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 313 
 
 9Q.B. 
 
 ".l 
 
 694 
 
 463 ; 8 App. 
 
 Cas. 393 
 
 
 19 Ch. D. 644 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1189 
 
 19Ch. D. 175 
 
 •• 
 
 •• 
 
 740 
 
 Butler 
 
 19 Ch. D. 57, n. 
 
 .. 
 
 36 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 691 
 
 
 1136 
 
 26 Oh. D. 35 
 
 .. 
 
 1141 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 .. 
 
 1230 
 
 24 Ch. D. 126 
 
 .. 
 
 1147 
 
 22 Ch. D. 604 
 
 
 564 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 286 
 
 
 824 
 
 10Q.B.D.414; 
 537 
 
 11Q.B.D.| 
 
 246 
 
 lOQ. B. D.426; 
 
 218 
 
 12Q.B.D.J 
 
 1485 
 
 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 .. 
 
 1238 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 171 
 
 .. 
 
 1473 
 
 22 Ch. D. 470 
 
 .« •• 
 
 180 
 
 23 Ch. D. 75 
 
 
 127 
 
 23 Ch. D. 115 
 
 
 175 
 
 25 Ch. D. 750 
 
 
 1163 
 
 24 Oh. D. 273 
 
 .. 
 
 1241 
 
 27 Oh. D. 196 
 
 
 1466 
 1680 
 
 27 Ch. D. 196 
 
 .. ..{ 
 
 1466 
 1680 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 831 
 
 
 638 
 
 28 Ch. D. 66 
 
 
 1707 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Butler, Nottingham Patent Brick and Tile Com- 
 pany V. ,. ., .. ., ... ... 
 
 Butler's Wharf Company, In re. Anderson v. But- 
 ler's Wharf Company 
 
 , Anderson v. In re But- 
 ler's Wharf Company 
 
 Butter worth, In re. Ex parte Russell 
 
 Button, River Lee Navigation (Conservators of) v. .. 
 
 Buxton, Nottage v. In re Knowles .. 
 
 Byron's Charity, In re .. 
 
 By water. In re. By water v. Clarke .. 
 
 ——, •U.Clarke. In re By water ., 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 261 
 21 Ch. D. 131 
 
 21 Ch. D. 131 
 
 19 Oh. D. 588 
 6 App. Oas. 685 
 21 Oh. D. 806 
 23 Ch. n. 171 
 18 Ch. n. 17 
 18 Oh. D. 17 
 
 C. 
 
 " Cachapool," The 
 
 Cadogan, In re. Cadogan i;. Palagi .. 
 
 I). Palagi. In re Cadogan ., 
 
 Oahill ?). Cahill 
 
 Caine, Re 
 
 Caithness Flagstone Quarrying Company, Sinclair v, 
 
 Calder, Alexander «. In re Wilson .. 
 
 Caldicott, Ex parte. In re Hart 
 
 Caldwell i;. McLaren .. ,. .. .. 
 
 Caledonian Fire and Life Insurance Co., Curtius v. .. 
 
 Caledonian Railway Company v. North British Rail-\ 
 
 way Company .. .. ../ 
 
 ; V. Walker's Trustees .. 
 
 Calisher, Burrard i;. .. .. ., 
 
 Callaghan, In re. Elliott v. Lambert 
 
 Calton's Will, In re 
 
 Cambrian Mining Company, In re 
 Camden (Marquis) u. Murray .. 
 
 "Camellia "The 
 
 Cameron, In re. Nixon v. Cameron ,. 
 
 , Nixon r. In re Cameron .. 
 
 Cammell Company, Munster V. 
 Camoys (Lord), Tempest r. .. 
 
 , V 
 
 Campbell, In re. Ex parte Wolyerhampton Banking) 
 
 Company .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Wallace .. 
 
 ■U.Campbell. Ex parte Campbell .. 
 
 ,'LunAv. 
 
 u. Wardlaw .. 
 
 Campden Charities, In re 
 
 ■ , (No. 2), In re .. 
 
 Canada Central Railway Company v. Murray 
 Canada Southern Railway Company v. International) 
 
 Bridge Company .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Cann, In re 
 
 Oannell, Dyke u. .. .. .. 
 
 Cannock and Rugeley Colliery Company, In re. Ex^ 
 
 parte Harrison .. .. .. ... ../ 
 
 Cannon, Ex parte. lu re Leicester Club and Countyl 
 
 Racecourse Company .. .. .. .../ 
 
 V. Smalley otherwise Cannon 
 
 Cape Breton Company, In re .. 
 
 7P. D. 217.. . 
 25.Ch. D. 154 
 25 Ch. D. 154 
 
 8 App. Cas. 420 
 10 Q. B. D. 284 
 6 App. Cas. 340 
 28 Oh. D. 457 
 25 Ch. D. 716 
 
 9 App. Cas. 392 
 19. Ch. D. 534 
 
 6 App. Cas. 114 
 
 7 App. 
 
 19 Oh. 
 28 Oh. 
 
 25 Ch. 
 
 20 Ch. 
 16 Oh. 
 9P.D, 
 
 26 Oh. 
 26 Oh. 
 
 21 Ch. 
 21 Oh. 
 21 Ch. 
 
 Cas. 259 
 D. 644 
 D. 186 
 D. 240 
 D. 376 
 D. 161 
 .27 .. 
 D. 19 
 D. 19 
 D. 183 
 D. 571 
 n. 576, n. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 32 
 
 15Q. B..D. 213 
 
 16 Ch. D. 198 
 
 14 Q. B.D. 821 .. 
 
 8.App. Cas. 641 .. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 310 
 24 Ch. D. 213 
 
 8 App. Cas. 574 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 723 .. 
 
 13Q. B. D. 36 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 180 .. 
 
 26Ch.D.522;28Ch.D,363 
 
 30 Ob. D.- 629 
 
 lOP. D. 96 
 
 19 Ch. D. 77 
 
 1627 
 1238 
 
 1238 
 
 165 
 1346 
 1668 
 1445 
 1692 
 1692: 
 
 1506 
 1693 
 1693 
 
 650 
 
 650 
 1393 
 1214 
 
 155 
 
 302 
 688, 1137 
 
 1398 
 
 1401 
 1189 
 
 676 
 1215 
 
 392 
 
 674 
 1&1& 
 
 558 
 
 558 
 
 35& 
 1603 
 1603 
 
 140 
 
 131 
 
 563 
 
 1220 
 
 1381 
 
 288, 293 
 
 294 
 1128 
 
 299 
 
 249 
 1188 
 
 348 
 
 373 
 
 1113 
 37 
 
TABLE OF CASlg IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 faaaiii I I 'iiMi ■■III 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Cape BrQton Company, In re .. .. ., 
 '-'- V. Fenn 
 
 Capell V. Great Western Bail way Company .. 
 
 Capeyron, Obasteauneuf ■!>. 
 
 Capital and Counties Bank •;;. Henty .. 
 
 Capital Fire Insurance Association, In re 
 
 -. , In re 
 
 Capper, Niger Merchants Copipany v. 
 Cardigan v. C.urzonrHowe 
 Cardinal 1 v. Cardinal! .. 
 
 Cardwell, Hornby V. 
 
 Carew's Claim. In re Eomford Canal Company 
 Carlisle Banking Company v. Thompson 
 Carpenter i;. Queen's Proctor .. 
 Carr, Ferus u. .. 
 
 , Goutaird iJ. .... 
 
 , Reg. r 
 
 Carriage Co-operative Supply Association, In re 
 
 -. : ► , In re. 
 
 parte Clemence ... 
 Carritt, Boyes ■«. In re Boyes 
 
 Carron Company, Cayzer, Irvine & Co. v. 
 
 Carshore v. North Eastern Eailway Company 
 Carson iJ. Pickersgill .. 
 Carta Para Mining Company, In re .. 
 Carte, Emden «. 
 
 -, V 
 
 Carters Drysdale 
 
 , Holmes v. 
 
 r. Molson 
 
 V. 
 
 , Reg. V. .. 
 
 , Sheffield Waterworks Company v. .. 
 
 V. Stubhs 
 
 ■W.White 
 
 Carthew, In.re. In re Paull ,. 
 Cartington Estate, In re. In re Beck 
 Case, flipgrave v. 
 
 Cassaboglou V. Gibhs .. .. .. 
 
 Cassels v. Stewart 
 
 Castellain ■!). Preston .. 
 
 Castle, Fear v. .. 
 Castro V. Reg .. .. .. 
 
 " Catalonia," The. . The « Helenslea " 
 Cato 1). Thompson .... 
 
 Cattley, Mason i;. In re Mason 
 
 Catton «. Bennett " .. .. .. .. 
 
 Caunt, Hopkinson v. .. 
 Cavander's Trusts, In re 
 Cave V. Hastings 
 
 , Watson u. (No. 1) 
 
 -y. (No. 2) 
 
 Cavendish v. Cavendish 
 
 Cayzer, Irvine & Ccs; ■;;. Oarrpn Company 
 
 ■•{ 
 
 Bxl 
 
 -I 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 .'} 
 
 26Ch.D.221; 29Ch.D.795 
 17Ch. D. 198 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 459 ; 11 Q. B. D.) 
 345 S 
 
 7 App. Cas. 127 .. 
 
 7 App. Cas. 741 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 209 
 
 24 Ch. D. 408 
 
 18 Ch. D. 557, n. .. 
 30 Ch. D. 531 
 
 25 Ch. D. 772 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 329 
 24Ch. D. 85 
 
 28 Ch. D. 398 
 
 7 P. D. 235 
 28Ch. D. 409 
 13Q. B. D. 598, n... 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 76 
 27 Ch. D. 322 
 
 23Ch. D. 154 
 
 26 Ch. D. 531 
 
 8 P. D. 126; 9 P. D. 47 
 . 9 App. Cas. 873 
 
 29 Ch. D. 344 
 14 Q. B. D. 859 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 457 
 
 17 Ch. D. 169, 7«8 
 
 19Ch. D.311 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 91 
 
 10 App. Cas. 664 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 530 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 664 .. 
 
 12Q. B.D. 522 .. 
 
 8Q. B. D. 632 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 20Ch.D.225;25Ch.D.666 
 
 27 Ch. D. 485 
 24 Ch. D. 608 
 28Ch. D. 356 
 
 9Q. B. D. 220; 11 Q. B. D.) 
 797 f 
 
 6 App. Cas. 64 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 613 ; 11 Q. B. D.) 
 
 380 f 
 
 8Q. B. D. 380 .. 
 6App. Cas. 229 .. 
 
 7 P. D. 57 
 
 9Q. B.D. 616 
 
 22 Ch. D. 609 
 26 Ch. U. 161 
 14Q. B.D. 592 .. 
 16Ch. D. 270 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 125 
 17Ch. D. 19 
 17 Ch. D. 23 
 24Ch.D;685;30Ch.D.227 
 
 8 P. D. 126 ; 9 P. D. 47 ;) 
 S App. Cas. 873 . \ 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1254 
 332 
 
 784 
 
 1497 
 
 498 
 
 363 
 
 1541 
 
 366 
 
 1446 
 
 1186 
 
 1229 
 
 334 
 
 272 
 
 11 
 
 1523 
 
 1152 
 
 727 
 
 363 
 
 376 
 
 1700 
 
 1512- 
 
 1144 
 1223 
 
 367 
 
 145, 1136 
 
 1538 
 
 865 
 
 304 
 303, 1128 
 
 304 
 
 375 
 1656 
 1162 
 231, 1263 
 1527 
 1531 
 1548 
 
 1255 
 
 1396 
 
 688 
 
 637 
 
 476 
 1095 
 1633 
 1179 
 1143 
 
 887 
 1235 
 
 601 
 1236 
 1238 
 1708 
 
 1512 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 H4me of Cas&. 
 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Pige. 
 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 28Ch. D. 1 ' ,. 
 
 
 1467 
 
 IIQ. B. D.479 ,. 
 
 
 452 
 
 lOQ. B.D.231 .. 
 
 
 1296 
 
 18 Ch. D. 655 
 
 
 366 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 855 .. 
 
 
 1275 
 
 20 Ch. D. 27 ; 9 App. Cas. 187 | 
 
 324 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 467 .. 
 
 ,, 
 
 1534 
 
 7Q. B.D.I, 319 .. 
 
 ^, 
 
 248 
 
 16 Ch. D. 260 
 
 ,. 
 
 248 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 407 ,. 
 
 ]. 
 
 501 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 31 
 
 '1 ., 
 
 517 
 
 16 Ch. D. 176 ;. 
 
 
 1566 
 
 14Q.B. D.479 .. 
 
 „ 
 
 874 
 
 20Ch. D.365 
 
 „ 
 
 1186 
 
 26 Oh. D. 42 
 
 
 559 
 
 26 Oh; D. 42 
 
 ., 
 
 559 
 
 16Ch. D.648 
 
 
 1086 
 
 26 Oh. D. 58 
 
 .. 
 
 669 
 
 24Ch, D. 259 
 
 
 368 
 
 e Q. B. D. 696 
 
 ,. 
 
 272 
 
 26Ch. D.319 
 
 „ 
 
 110 
 
 9Q.B. D.254; 10 Q. 
 
 54 
 
 B. D.| 
 
 1221 
 
 laQ. B. D. 747 .. 
 
 - '/ 
 
 139,1255 
 
 26Ch. D..338 
 
 
 112 
 
 29 Chi D; 1007 .. 
 
 ■ ' _^ ' 
 
 794 
 
 IIQ.B. D. 27 .. 
 
 '. 
 
 642 
 
 27 Ch. D. 584 .. 
 
 
 1530 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 136 
 
 
 1323 
 
 21 Ch. D. 232 
 
 __ 
 
 428 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 58 
 
 ., 
 
 1195 
 
 23Ch. D.409 
 
 
 160 
 
 27 Ch. D. 584 
 
 
 1530 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 178 
 
 ,, 
 
 40 
 
 16 Oh. D. 35 
 
 ,, 
 
 250 
 
 7 App. Cas. 463 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 533 
 
 23Ch. D. 767 
 
 
 962 - 
 
 16 Ch. D. 273 
 
 \\ 
 
 1217 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 516 .. 
 
 „ 
 
 1135 
 
 28 Ch. D. 237 
 
 _, 
 
 785 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 •. 
 
 33 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 89 
 
 
 1061 
 
 9Q.B. D. 118; 10 Q. 
 521 
 
 B. i). 
 
 1475 
 
 7 App. Cas. 127 ., 
 
 '\ 
 
 1497 
 
 18 Ch. D. 218 
 
 ._ 
 
 1675 
 
 18Ch. D.218 
 
 
 1675 
 
 20Ch. D. 493 
 
 
 1233 
 
 16Ch.D.378;17Ch.D.259 
 
 1204 
 
 25 Ch. D. 651 
 
 
 1444, 
 1447 
 
 27 Oh. D. 631 
 
 
 516 
 
 19 Ch. D. 432 
 
 
 1697 
 
 14Q. B.D. 289; 15 Q. B.D.I 
 
 1065 
 
 ' 76 
 
 •■5 
 
 1234 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 597 .. 
 
 
 1074 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 407 .. 
 
 ,, 
 
 522 
 
 Cecil u. Langdon .. .. .. » 
 
 Central Criminal Court (Justice's of), Beg. Vi 
 
 Central Wales Railway Company,- Great -Western) 
 
 Eailway Company V. .. ., .. ..} 
 
 Cercle Eestaiwant Castiglione Company v. Lavery 
 Chadwick v. Ball 
 
 ; Smith V. .. .. .. » 
 
 Chaffers, In re .. 
 Ghaine, Hamilton «... 
 ChalliDpr, Ex parte. In re Kogers .. 
 Chamberlain w. Boyd' .. 
 
 , Meeki). .. .. .. >> 
 
 Ghamberlin, Clarke i>. .. .. .. -.. 
 
 Chambers, Blashill «. .. 
 
 , Hunt ■«. In re Martin .. 
 
 Chancellor, In re. Chancellor «. Brown 
 
 «. Brown. In re Chancellor 
 
 Chandler «. Pocock .. 
 
 Channell, Welch v. In re Evans 
 
 Ohapel House Colliery Company, In re 
 
 Ghapleo v. Brunswick Permanent Buildilig Society 
 
 Chaplin, Ek parte. In re Sinclair .. .. 
 
 Chapman, In re 
 
 — , In re. Ex parte Edwards 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Johnson .. 
 
 ' — and. Hobbs, In re .. 
 
 «. Biggs 
 
 , Newton v. In re Chappie 
 
 V. Eoyal Bank of Scotland 
 
 ■Ohappell V. Boosey 
 
 , Shapcott V. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Chappie, In re. Ex parte Izard 
 
 , In re. Newton v. Chapman 
 
 Chard V. Jervis .. 
 
 Charing Cross Advance and Deposit Bank, Ex parte.) 
 
 In re Parker .. .. .. .. .. ..J 
 
 Charity Commissioners, Boss v. 
 Charles v. Pinchley Local Board 
 Charlton u. Charlton .. 
 
 , Fawcusv.. .. 
 
 1'. Kolleston .. 
 
 , Eoyoe v. 
 
 A 
 
 Charman, CuUey u. ■ . .. 
 
 Chartered Mercantile Bank of India v. 
 
 India Steam Navigation Company.. 
 Chasteauneuf /w. Capeyron 
 Chaston, In re. Chasten «. Seagb .. 
 In re Chaston ., 
 
 Netherlands) 
 
 Chatterton, JaiTaain v, 
 ^ u. Watney ..; 
 
 Chay tor's Settled Estates Act, In re .. 
 
 Cheesman, Clement «. .. .. .< 
 
 Chell, Russell v. In re Russell 
 
 Cherisey* (Gu?irdians of), Holborn (Guardians of) v. .. j 
 
 Cheshire Lines Committee, Altrincham tTnion v. ., 
 Chester (Bishop of), Lowe v. .. ., .. 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 643 
 
 560 
 
 19 Ch. D. 516 
 
 1237 
 
 10 P. D. 186 
 
 1105 
 
 20 Ch. D. 126 
 
 189 
 
 28 Ch. D. 712 
 
 1628 
 
 16 Ch. D. 151 
 
 562 
 
 29Ch. D. 159 
 
 352, 369 
 
 7App. Cas. 512 .. 
 
 11 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 142 
 
 1176 
 
 12 Q. B. r>. 342 „ 
 
 112 
 
 17 Ch. D. 839 
 
 169 
 
 9Q. B. D. 35 
 
 453 
 
 8 App. Cas. 751 .. 
 
 315 
 
 25 Ch. D. 723 
 
 1212 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 452, 872 
 
 1228 
 
 12Q. B. D. 365 .. 
 
 1008 
 
 10 P. D. 141 
 
 1101 
 
 30Ch. D. 544 
 
 289 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 402 .. 
 
 136 
 
 26 Ch. D. 173 
 
 286 
 
 9App. Cas. 136 .. 
 
 1504 
 
 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 302 
 
 7P. D. 5 
 
 1485 
 
 9P. D. 182 
 
 1518 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 609 
 
 1105 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 115 .. 
 
 442 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 818, 905 
 
 865 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 882 .. 
 
 348 
 
 6P. D. 106 
 
 596 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 504 „ 
 
 453 
 
 26 Ch. D. 529 
 
 1144 
 
 9 Q B. D. 276 
 
 396, 1164 
 
 20 Ch. D. 134 
 
 1245 
 
 20 Ch. D. 637 
 
 686 
 
 20 Ch. D. 134 
 
 1245 
 
 20 Ch. D. 637 
 
 686 
 
 22Ch.D.597;25Ch.D.685 
 
 1673 
 
 7P. D. 190.. 
 
 1514 
 
 8P. D. 178 
 
 1495 
 
 27 Ch. D. 679 
 
 900 
 
 17 Ch. D. 787 
 
 1190 
 
 21 Ch. D. 865 
 
 1591 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 516 
 
 242, 243 
 
 13Q.B. D. 426 .. 
 
 131 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 735 .. 
 
 818 
 
 9 App. Cas. 733 .. 
 
 562, 1633 
 
 10 P. D. 188 
 
 1115 
 
 9Q. B. D. 355 
 
 11140 
 Ul96 
 
 2&Ch. D. 134 
 
 J 602 
 
 6 App. Cas. 164 .".' 
 
 308 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 139 
 
 (1072 
 
 tl074 
 
 344 
 
 22Ch.D.830;26Ch.D.257 
 
 15Q. B. D. 82 
 
 884 
 1617 
 
 U.Q. B. D. 92 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 '::} 
 
 Chesterfield's (Earl of) Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Cheston, HoUoway w. .. 
 
 Chichester «. Chichester 
 
 Child, Ex parte. In re Ottaway 
 
 ' , Hardman d. _ , , 
 
 & Co. V. Thorley 
 
 Chillington Iron Company, In re 
 
 China Merchants Steam Navigation Company 
 Bignold. The " Hochimg." The " Lapwing " 
 
 China Steamship Company v. Commercial Assurancej 
 Company .. .. .. .. ,. 
 
 Chinery, Bx parte .. .. .. ,. 
 
 Chinn, In re. Bx parte Sulger 
 
 Chittick, Mears v. .. 
 
 Chitty V. Sultan Allie . . 
 
 Choat, Searle v. 
 
 Chorley, London Scottish Benefit Society v. .. 
 
 Christchiirch (Overseers of), Druitt v. ,. 
 
 " Christiansbbrg," The .. 
 
 Christmas, In re. Martin w. Lacon .. 
 
 Chudley, In re. Ex parte Board of Trade , . 
 
 Church, Parish of Sutton to .. .. ,. 
 
 Cichero, Emery «. The"Arklow" .. 
 
 Citizens Insurance Company of Canada v. Parsons 
 
 "Cito,"The 
 
 " City of Chester," The 
 
 City of London Court (Judge of), Beg. v. 
 
 ■ , Eeg. V. .. 
 
 ■ , Beg. V. .. 
 
 City of London Marine Insurance Corporation, Skin- 
 ner ■!;. 
 
 " City of Mecca," The 
 
 City Offices Company, Pryor v. 
 
 Civil Service Supply Association, Coles v. „ 
 
 Clack V. Wood .. 
 
 Clagett, In re. Pordham v. Clagett .. 
 
 , In re. ■ ■;;. .. 
 
 r! 
 
 Pordham v. 
 
 In re Clagett .. 
 
 In re .. 
 
 In re Boddington 
 
 Clairat, Boddington v. 
 " Clan Gordon," The 
 « Clan Macdonald," The 
 Clapham v. Andrews .. 
 Clarbrough v. Toothill.. 
 Clave V. Clare . . 
 Claridge, Seal v. 
 Clark, Ex parte. In re Clark 
 
 , Burgess v. 
 
 V. Clark .. 
 
 V. Clark .. 
 
 V. CuUen 
 
 , Eastwood V. In re Gadd 
 
 ■». Blphinstone .. 
 
 V. Fisherton-Angar 
 
 , Prance u. 
 
 , Moggu 
 
 V. Eeg. .. 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Clarke, In re 
 
 ^ — , lu re. 
 
 , In re. 
 
 CbSapany 
 — , Bradlangh v. 
 
 Barker «;. Perowne .. 
 
 Ex parte East and West India Dock) 
 
 , Bywater v. In re By water 
 
 V. Chamberlin ., 
 
 , Knight i;. 
 
 v. Palmer .. 
 
 — V. Skipper 
 
 Clarke's (J.) Estate, In re 
 
 Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Clarkson v. Musgrave .. 
 
 Clay and Tetley, In re 
 
 Clayton, Pountney v. .. 
 
 , Torksliire Fire and Life Insurance Com- 
 pany V. .. 
 
 Cleather v. Twisden , 
 
 Cleaver-y. Cleaver ' 
 
 Clemence, Ex parte. 
 Supply Association . 
 
 Clements ■D.'Cheesrhan 
 
 In re Carriage 
 
 Co-operative) 
 
 , Ffeme v. 
 ■ v.- Matthews 
 
 Clerke u. Gierke .. 
 
 Clew, In re . 
 
 Clifford V. Clifford 
 
 —, , IV^orley i) 
 
 Clifton School Board, Scott v. 
 
 Clippens Oil Company v. Henderson .. 
 
 Clitheroe Estate, In re 
 
 Close, Ex parte. In re Hall .. 
 
 Clover u. Adams 
 
 Clowes, Martinson v. .. 
 
 Cluff, Groodes v. 
 
 Clutterbnck, Adams f. 
 
 Clyde Navigation Trustees, Blantyre (Lord) v. 
 
 : ■ V. Laird ■ .. ' 
 
 Clydesdale Banking Company, M'Lean v. ... 
 
 Coaks, Boswell v. 
 
 Cobb, Powell v. 
 
 Cobeldick, Ex parte .. 
 
 Cochrane, Sangster -M. .. 
 
 Cockburn v. Edwards .. 
 
 Cockcroft, In re. Broadbent v. Groves 
 
 Cockerell v. Essex (Earl of), In re Johnston 
 
 Cocks, Ex parte. In re Poole 
 
 CofBn, Murphy v. 
 
 Cohen, Ex parte .. .. •• ' 
 
 Colam «. Pagett 
 
 Colchester (Corporation of), Prestney v. 
 
 — '— (Mayor of), Prestney v. 
 
 Coleman v. Birmingham (Overseers of) 
 
 V. West Middlesex Waterworks Company 
 
 21 Ch. D. 817 
 18 Ch. D. 160 
 
 17 Ch. D. 759 
 
 7Q,B.D.38;8App.Oas.354: 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 38 
 
 7Q.B.D.151; 8Q. B.D.63 
 18Ch. D. 17 
 
 16Ch. D. 176 .. .: 
 
 15Q. B. D. 294 .. 
 21Ch. D. 124 
 21Ch. D. 134 
 21Ch. D. 776 
 21Ch. D. 748 
 
 9Q. B. D. 386 
 
 16Ch. D. 3 
 11Q.B. D. 820 .. 
 6Q. B. D. 557; 8 Q. B. D.( 
 421.. .. .. ..j 
 
 24 Ch. D. 731 ; 28 Ch. D. 340 
 9 App. Cas. 631 .. 
 
 23Ch. D. 154 
 
 27 0h. D. 631 
 
 18Ch. D. 499 
 
 IIQ. B. b. 808 .. 
 
 6P. D. 103 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 511 
 
 9 V. D. 76 .. 
 
 20 Oh. D. 753 
 14Q. B. D. 500 .. 
 8 App. Cas. 873 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 878 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 386 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 622 
 21Ch. D. 857 
 13Q. B.D. 694 .. 
 lOQ. B. b. 403 .. 
 6App. Cas. 273 .. 
 8 App. Cas. 658 .. 
 
 9App. Cas. 95 
 
 23Ch.D.302;27Ch.D.424 
 29Ch. D. 486 
 
 12 Q. B. b. 149 .. 
 28Ch. D. 298 
 16Ch. D. 393 
 18Ch. b. 449 ■ .. 
 
 24 0h. D. 94 .. .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 21 Ch. D. 397 
 12Q. B. D. 87 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 56 
 12Q. B. D. 66 
 24Ch. D. 376 
 21 Ch. D. Ill 
 6Q. B.D. 615 
 14Q. B. D. 529 .. 
 
 Colamn 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 668 
 32 
 
 173 
 
 996, 1052 
 
 996, 1235 
 
 1132 
 
 1692 
 
 1566 
 
 771 
 
 915 
 
 1187 
 
 784 
 
 644 
 
 440, 866 
 
 13, 1245 
 
 1292 
 
 1324 
 
 1020 
 1112 
 
 376 
 
 516 
 (1082 
 11684 
 
 254 
 1273 
 
 683 
 1118 
 
 419 
 
 432 
 1396 
 1442 
 
 256 
 1539- 
 
 910 
 
 440. 
 
 399 
 1402: 
 1379 
 52, 1371- 
 582, 1537 
 1187 
 1541 
 
 272 
 1537 
 
 912 
 
 1679 
 
 /1681 
 
 \1707 
 
 134 
 1482 
 
 142 
 
 479 
 1175 
 :942 
 1061 
 1659 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Coles V. Civil Service Supply Association 
 
 , Hughes V. 
 
 Colgan (lufants), In re 
 
 CoUie, In re. Ex parte Findlay 
 
 " OoUiQgrove," The. The " Numida " 
 
 Collins, Baynton t;. 
 
 , Brown «. 
 
 , Burgoyne u, .. 
 
 v. Collins 
 
 ■ V. ■ 
 
 ^, Lane w. 
 
 V. Ehodes. In re Baker 
 
 — i;. Stimson 
 
 CoUyer, Holt & Co. v 
 
 V.Isaacs 
 
 , Sayers u. 
 
 — — , WiMnson V. .. 
 Colman, Barter u. 
 
 , WooUey v.- 
 
 Colombia Chemical Factory Manure and Phosphate! 
 
 Works, In re. Hewitt's Case. Brett's Case .. f 
 Colonial Bank v. Whinney 
 Colonial Building and Investment Association vX 
 
 Attorney-General of Quebec .. .. .. j 
 
 Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society, In re 
 
 Colquhoun, Forsdike f . 
 
 Coltart, Allen u. 
 
 Coltman, In re. Coltman v. Coltman 
 
 v. Coltman. In re Coltman 
 
 Coltiiess Iron'Company v. Black 
 Colverson ■!). Bloomfield 
 Combe v. De La Bere .. 
 
 V. .. 
 
 Comber, Phelps, Stokes & Co. V. 
 
 Combley, Sweet v. 
 
 Comedy Opera Company, Gilbert w. .. 
 
 Commercial Assurance Company, China Steamshi23l 
 
 Company V. .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 Commercial Bank of Scotland, Royal Bank of Scot-( 
 
 land V. .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 Commercial Bank of Sydney, Tarn v. 
 ■Commissioner for Eailways v. Toohey 
 "Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Ireland 
 
 Grant 
 ■Commissioners of French Hoek v. Hugo 
 Commissioners of Sewers of the City of London, 
 
 Gard v. 
 ■Commissioners of Supply of the County of Aberdeen^ 
 
 V. Morice .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 €ompagnie Finauciere du Paoifique v. Peruvian Guano) 
 
 Company .. .. .. .. .. __ f 
 
 Coinpagnie Franfaise de Navigation eI Vapeur, Mao-) 
 
 laren v. .. .. .. .. .. __ r 
 
 Compton, In re. Norton v. Compton 
 , In re. v. 
 
 Norton v. 
 
 '■ — V. Preston 
 
 Concha, De Mora v. 
 
 In re 
 In re 
 
 
 Coiunm 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 529 
 
 1144 
 
 27 Ch. D. 231 
 
 809 
 
 19Ch. D. 305 
 
 670 
 
 17 Ch. D. 334 
 
 151 
 
 10 P. D. 158 
 
 1101 
 
 27Ch. D. 604 
 
 638 
 
 25 Ch. D. 56 
 
 675 
 
 8Q.B.D. 450 
 
 939 
 
 9 P. D. 231 
 
 1110 
 
 9 App. Cas.-205 .. 
 
 1386 
 
 14Q.B. D. 193 .. 
 
 15 
 
 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 1546 
 
 IIQ. B.D. 142 .. 
 
 1633 
 
 16 Ch. D. 718 
 
 765 
 
 19Ch.D. 342 
 
 254 
 
 24 Ch. D. 180 ; 28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 454, 484 
 
 13Q. B. D. 1 
 
 765 
 
 19Ch. D. 630 
 
 897 
 
 21 Ch. D. 169 
 
 920 
 
 25 Ch. D. 283 
 
 363 
 
 30 Ch. D. 261 
 
 164 
 
 9 App. Gas. 157 .. 
 
 299 
 
 21 Ch. D. 837 
 
 387 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 685 
 
 IIQ. B.D. 782 .. 
 
 1478 
 
 19 Ch. D. 64 
 
 604 
 
 19 Ch. D. 64 
 
 604 
 
 6App. Cas. 315 .. 
 
 1402 
 
 29 Ch. D. 341 
 
 40 
 
 6P. D. 157 
 
 1119 
 
 22 Ch. D. 316 
 
 1127 
 
 26 Oh. D. 755; 29Ch.D.813 
 
 237, 1365 
 
 25Ch. D. 463,n 
 
 901 
 
 16 Ch. D. 594 
 
 1190 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 142 .. 
 
 1176 
 
 7 App. Cas. 366 .. 
 
 1374 
 
 12Q. B. D. 294 .. 
 
 1157 
 
 9 App. Cas. 720 .. 
 
 314 
 
 10 App. Cas. 14 .. 
 
 811 
 
 10 App. Cas. 336 .. 
 
 308 
 
 28 Ch. D. 486 
 
 837 
 
 6 App. Cas. 881 ., 
 
 1385 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 65 
 
 1174 
 
 9App. Cas. 640 .. 
 
 1510 
 
 27 Ch. D. 392 
 
 1236 
 
 30 Ch. D. 15 
 
 566 
 
 27 Ch. D. 392 
 
 1236 
 
 30 Ch. D. 15 
 
 566 
 
 21 Ch. D. 138 .. ;; 
 
 1149 
 
 29 Ch. D. 268 
 
 539 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name ofCasfe. 
 
 Conelly V. Steer 
 
 Coney, In re. Coney u. Bennett 
 
 — v. Bennett. In re Conev 
 
 ,S.eg.v ' .". 
 
 Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company of Hert-) 
 ford «. Moore .. .. .. .. ..J 
 
 Connell ■«. Baker. In re Baker 
 Conolan 1/. Leyland 
 Cook, Beg. r. .. 
 
 • , Rosenberg v. 
 
 • , Studdv. .. 
 
 Cooke V. Newcastle and Gateshead Water Company 
 
 u. Wilby 
 
 Cookhiam Union, Reg. v. 
 Cookson V. Swire 
 
 Coomber v. Berks (Justices of) 
 
 Cooper, Ex parte. In re Morris 
 
 -, In the Goods of 
 
 ■ ^, In re. Cooper v. Slight 
 
 ■ ^-, In re. Cooper ■;;. Vesey 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Hall 
 
 • -, Balfour v. 
 
 , Bradbury v. 
 
 V. Crabtree 
 
 «. Laroohe 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 ; London and Yorkshire Bank v. 
 
 ■ V. Metropolitan Board of Works 
 
 • V. Prichard 
 -, Salt V. .. 
 
 ■ V. Slight. In re Cooper 
 -, Titterton v. .. 
 
 ■ V. Vesey. In re Cooper 
 
 •■i 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Cooper Hall.& Co., Eraser v. 
 
 Waddell v. Eraser 
 
 Coote w. Judd .. 
 
 Cope, In re. Cope w. Cope 
 
 Copp, In re 
 
 Copping Sj'ke (Overseers of), Eeg. t/. .. 
 
 Coquetdale (Justices of). White V. .. 
 
 Corbett v. Plowden 
 
 Corfield, Wilkinson v. .. 
 
 CornfOrd r. Elliott. . In re Watts 
 
 Cornwall Minerals Railway Company, Harrison v.] 
 EentoQ t;. Harrison .. ., .. I 
 
 Corry V. Great Western Railway Company .. ..J 
 
 Cory •!;. Burr .. .. .. .. .. ..j 
 
 "Cosmopolitiin,"The 
 
 Costa Rica (Republic of) f. Strousberg 
 Cottam i;. Guest ' .. -. ..I .. 
 
 Cotterell, Shardlow v ■ 
 
 Cotton, Ex parte .. .. ..> 
 
 Cotton's Trustees and School Board for London, In re 
 CottreiriJ. Cottrell 
 
 ".1 
 
 % 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 520 
 29Ch. D. 993 
 29 Ch. D. 993 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 534 
 
 6 App. Gas. 644 .. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 711 
 27Ch. D. 632 
 13 Q. B. D. 377 .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 162 
 
 8 App. Cas. 577 .. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 332 .. 
 25Ch. D.769 
 9Q. B. D. 522.. .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 653. .. 
 9 Q. B. D. 17 ; 10 Q. B. D 
 
 267; 9 App. Cas. 61 
 
 26 Ch. D. 693 
 6P. D. 34 
 
 27 Ch. D. 565 
 20 Ch. D. 611 
 19Ch. D. 580 
 
 23 Ch. D. 472 
 
 12Q. B.D. 94 
 19Ch.D.193;20Ch.D.589 
 17Ch. D. 368 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 71 ; 5 Q. B, 
 473 
 
 25 Ch. D. 472 
 
 11 Q- B. D. 361 .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 544 
 27 Ch. D. 565 
 9 Q. B. D. 473 
 
 20 Oh. D. 611 
 
 21 Oh. D. 718 
 23 Ch. D. 685 
 23 Ch. D. 727 
 16 Ch. D. 49 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 607 
 
 14Q. B..D. 83 
 7Q. B.D. 238. .. 
 
 25Ch. D. 678 
 
 6P.D. 27 
 
 27 Ch. D. 318 ; 29 Ch, D. 947 
 
 16Ch.D.66;18Ch.D.334; 
 8 App. Cas. 780 .. 
 
 6Q. B.D. 237;. 7 Q. B. D. 
 
 322 
 8Q. B.D. 3r3;'9 Q. B. D. 
 
 463; 8 App. Cas. 393 ., 
 9 P. D. 35, n. .. " . 
 16 Oh. D. 8 
 6 Q. B. D. 70 
 
 18Ch. D. 280;..20Ch.D.90 
 IIQ. B.D. 301. .. 
 19Ch. D. 624 
 28Cb. D. 628 
 
 1 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 258 
 1211 
 1211 
 
 471 
 
 300 
 
 1190 
 
 640 
 
 610 
 1632 
 1383 
 1188 
 1191 
 1064 
 
 243 
 
 1326 
 
 157 
 1272 
 1089 
 1637 
 167, 190 
 1468 
 1154 
 
 960 
 1690 
 
 1172 
 
 /543,613, 
 
 777 
 
 144 
 1210 
 1089 
 
 135 
 1637 
 1138 
 1149 
 
 421 
 11 
 
 441 ■ 
 1074 
 
 681 
 
 904 
 1131 
 
 290 
 
 833 
 1184 
 1218 
 
 1290 
 
 694 
 
 1097 
 1203 
 1586 
 1620 
 257 
 1469 
 1444 
 
 c 2 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Couohman, James ■?;. .. .. 
 
 Coulburn, Babbage 1). .. 
 
 Couldery i;. Bartrum .. .. 
 
 Coulman, In re. Munby v. Eoss 
 County Hotel Company, Strauss u. .. 
 Cousins, In re. Alexander v. Cross . . 
 
 Coutts & Co., Danby v. .. 
 
 Coventry, Sheppard & Co. v. Great Eastern Bailw 
 Company .. .. .. 
 
 Coverdale v. Grant . . - 
 
 Cowbum, In re. Ex parte Firth 
 Cowell, Smith i>. 
 Cowlard, Essery u. 
 Cox -y. Andrews 
 
 , Bristol (Mayor and Corporation of) v. . . 
 
 V. Great Western Railway Company •.. 
 
 V. James 
 
 , Johnstone t;. 
 
 , Munster v. 
 
 and Eailton, Reg. •!;. 
 
 , Eoxburghe v. 
 
 Coxwell, Wilson ■w. 
 Crabtree, Cooper i). 
 
 V. Robinson . . 
 
 Craig, Scottish Widows Fund v. 
 
 Cramer v. Matthews .. 
 
 Crawcour 1). Salter 
 
 Crawford, Saunders'v. .. 
 
 Crawley, In re. Aoton ^;. Crawley .. 
 
 , Acton i;. , , In re Crawley 
 
 Credit Company, Ex parte. In re McHenry 
 
 ; ■!;. Pott 
 
 Credit Lyonnais, Jacobs u. 
 Credits Gerundeuse v. Van Weede 
 Oreery v. Lingwood. In re Hay ward 
 Cresswell, In re. Parkin v. Cresswell 
 
 , Parkin v. In re Cresswell 
 
 Creyke, Dawes ■!). 
 Crick v. Hewlett 
 Cripps V. Judge ., .. .. .. ., 
 
 Critchfield, Smith u. .. 
 
 Croft V. London and County Banking Company 
 
 Crofton V. Crofton. In re Boyse 
 
 Croggan r. Allen 
 
 Crombie, McEwan v. .. 
 
 Crompton v. Jarratt , , 
 Cropper i;. Smith 
 
 ay) 
 
 ••{ 
 
 V. (No. 2) 
 
 Cross, In re. Harston v. Tenison 
 
 , Alexander v. In re Cousins 
 
 — —-, Say wood -y. 
 
 , Percival v. 
 
 Crossfield v. Shurmur. 
 
 •f 
 
 Crossthwaite, Ex parte. 
 
 Shurmur v. Sedgwick 
 In re Pearce 
 
 29 Ch. D. 212 , 
 9 Q. B. D. 235 
 19 Ch. D. 394 
 
 30 Ch. D. 186 
 12 Q. B. D. 27 
 30 Ch. D. 203 
 29 Ch. D. 500 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 776 
 
 1648 
 396 
 124 
 
 1078 
 679 
 
 1671 
 
 1094 
 
 537 
 
 8Q. B. D. 600; 
 
 11 Q. B. D.) 
 
 1481 
 
 543; 9 App. Cas. 470 ..J 
 
 19 Ch. D. 419 
 
 
 249 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 75 
 
 
 1210 
 
 26 Ch. D. 191 
 
 
 1469 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 126 
 
 
 610 
 
 26 Ch. D. 678 
 
 
 1179 
 
 9Q. B. D. 106 
 
 
 867 
 
 19 Ch. D. 55 
 
 
 1136 
 
 16Ch.D. 571;19Ch. D. 17 
 
 918, 124C 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 475 
 
 11Q.B.D.\ 
 Cas. 680 ../ 
 
 1138 
 
 435; 10 App. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 153 
 
 .. 
 
 475 
 
 17Ch. D. 520 ., 
 
 .. 
 
 141S 
 
 23 Ch. D. 764 
 
 -. 
 
 566 
 
 19Ch.D.193;20Ch.D.589 
 
 960 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 312 
 
 .. 
 
 746 
 
 20 Ch. D. 208 
 
 
 521 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 425 
 
 .. 
 
 444 
 
 18 Ch. r>. 30 
 
 
 161, 545 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 612 
 
 .. 
 
 528 
 
 28 Ch. D, 431 , 
 
 
 1707 
 
 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 
 1707 
 
 24 Ch. D. 353 
 
 •■ .. 
 
 191 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 295 
 
 
 248 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 589 
 
 a. 
 
 398 
 
 12 Q; B. D. 171 
 
 .. 
 
 1134 
 
 19 Ch. D. 470 
 
 
 1675 
 
 24 Ch. D. 102 
 
 
 1679 
 
 24 Ch. D. 102 
 
 
 1679 
 
 30 Ch. D. 500 
 
 
 1459 
 
 27 Ch. D. 354 
 
 
 1163 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 583 
 
 .. 
 
 803 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 873 
 
 
 1232 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 
 773 
 
 20 Ch. D. 760 
 
 
 1191 
 
 22 Ch. D. 101 
 
 • . 
 
 553 
 
 25 Ch. D. 175 
 
 .. 
 
 /1414 
 U592 
 
 30 Oh. D. 298 
 
 
 17 
 
 24 Ch. D. 305 
 
 
 1161 
 
 26Ch. D.700; 10 App. Cas.) 
 249 .. .. \ 
 
 1047 
 
 28Ch.D.148 
 
 " ; 
 
 1041 
 
 20 Ch. D. 109 
 
 
 1600 
 
 30 Ch. D. 203 
 
 
 1671 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 53 
 
 
 1222 
 
 7 P. D. 234.. 
 
 
 1129 
 
 24 Ch. D. 597 
 
 
 1648 
 
 UQ. B..I). 96G 
 
 
 138 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Pa^e. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Crowder «. Stewart .. .. .. -.. 
 
 Grown, The,' Ex parte. In re Oriental Bank Cor- 
 poration .. .. ., 
 
 Crowther u. Boult 
 
 Croydon County Court (Judge, of), The Queen v. .. 
 
 Croydon Union Rural Sanitary Aulihority, Harvey- v. 
 
 Crum, Oakbank Oil Company v. 
 
 Crump, Street v. 
 
 Cullen, Clark v. 
 
 OuUeme, Richards u. .. 
 
 CuUey V. Charman . . ... 
 
 Cumberland (Justices of), Reg. v. ., 
 
 Cundy w. Le Cocq 
 
 Cualiffe, Brooks & Co., Blackburn Building So-) 
 
 ciety V. '■ .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 — Blackburn- and District) 
 
 Benefit Building Society u. . . .. .. .. j 
 
 Cunningham, Ex parte. In re Mitchell 
 
 • '& Co., Limited, In re. Attenborough's 
 
 Curling, Jones v. 
 Currey, Robinson v. 
 Curteis, Elton v. 
 Curtis V. Sheffield 
 
 Curtius V. Caledonian Eire and Life Insurance Co. 
 Curtqys, In re. Ex parte PiEers 
 Cutlibertson,' Frazer V. .. 
 Curzon and Thompson, In re .. 
 Cui;zbn-Howe; Cardigan v. 
 
 D. 
 
 D. ?;. D. otherwise M. .. 
 
 Daggi). Dagg .. 
 
 Dahl V. Nelson, Donkin & Co. . . 
 
 Dale, In re. • Ex parte Leicestershire Banking Co. 
 
 , Smith -y.,. 
 
 , Trehemew. 
 
 , United Telephone Company i». .. 
 
 Dale's Case. ■ Enragbt's Case .. 
 Dalrymple «. HaU 
 
 DaUow-y. Qarrold. Ex parte Adams 
 
 Dalrymple v. Leslie 
 Dalton v. Angus 
 Dames and Wood, In re 
 Danby, an alleged lunatic. In re 
 ■ ■!>. Coutts & Go. 
 
 Danford «. McAnulty .. 
 
 Daniel I). Wlitfield .. ; 
 
 Daniell, In the Goods of 
 
 1". Sinclair 
 
 Dann, Ex parte. In re Parker 
 
 Dardier, Attorney-General v. 
 
 16 Oh. D. 368 
 
 28Ch. D. 643 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 680 ..' 
 13Q. B. D. 96a. .. 
 26.Ch.D. 249 
 
 8 App. Cas. 65 . . . 
 25Ch. D. 68 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 355 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 623 .. ., 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 89 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 369 
 13Q. B. D.207 .. 
 22 Oh. D. 61 ; 9 App. Cas.) 
 
 857 ) 
 
 29 Ch. D. 902 
 13Q. B. D. 418 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 13Q. B. D. 262 .. 
 6Q.B.D. 21;7Q.B.D.465 
 19Ch.D. 49 
 20 Oh. D. 398 
 21Ch. D. 1 
 19Ch. D. 534 
 
 17 Ch. D. 653 
 6Q. B. D. 93 
 
 29 Ch. D. 177 
 
 30 Ch. D. 531 ... 
 
 567 
 
 478 
 
 735 
 179 
 
 1233 
 339 
 
 1161 
 
 /1140 
 
 \1196 
 
 442 
 
 1061 
 681 
 084 
 
 270 
 
 270 
 120 
 
 258 
 
 1229 
 1051 
 
 901 
 
 1147 
 
 1242 
 
 688, 1137 
 
 168 
 1513 
 
 638 
 1446 
 
 lOP. D. 75.. 
 
 ,, 
 
 1112 
 
 7P.D.17 
 
 
 1109 
 
 6 App. Cas. 38 
 
 ,, 
 
 1479 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 ,, 
 
 188 
 
 18 Oh. D. 516 
 
 ,, 
 
 553 
 
 27 Ch. D. 66 
 
 ,, 
 
 1200 
 
 25 0h. D. 778 
 
 .. 
 
 /1043 
 \1201 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 376 
 
 ,, 
 
 1122 
 
 16 Ch. D. 715 
 
 .. 
 
 1708 
 
 13Q.B.D. 543;14Q.B. 
 
 543 
 
 D.l 
 
 1539 
 
 8Q. B. D. 5 
 
 
 1169 
 
 6 App. Cas. 740 .. 
 
 ,, 
 
 1557 
 
 27 Oh. D. 172; 29 Oh. D. 626 
 
 1629 
 
 30Ch. D. 320 
 
 , , 
 
 845 
 
 29 Ch. D. 500 ... 
 
 ,, 
 
 1094 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 645 ; 8 App. Gas.) 
 456 ) 
 
 1148 
 
 15Q. B. D. 408.. .. 
 
 
 51 
 
 8 P. D. 14 .. 
 
 
 1682 
 
 6 App. Cas. 181, .. 
 
 
 896 
 
 17 Ch. D. 26 
 
 
 111 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 16 
 
 
 1330 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Darley Main Colliery Company, Mitcliell v. 
 
 — — ■ — — , V. 
 
 Darlow, Hickson r. 
 
 , Smith V. 
 
 Dart & Son, Smith v 
 
 Dashwood, Tompson v, 
 
 Daubuz u. Lavington .. 
 
 Dauvillier j;. Myers 
 
 Davey v. London and South Western Railway Co. 
 
 V. 
 
 , Whetham v. 
 
 David i;. Howe .. 
 
 Davidson, Emley u. In re Eobson .. 
 
 ?;. Illidge. In re lUidge .. 
 
 u. Kimpton .. 
 
 Davies, Ex parte. In re Sadler 
 
 ■W.Evans 
 
 , Harris «. 
 
 to Jones and Evans .. 
 
 ». Makuna 
 
 , Smith w. 
 
 , Swansea Co-operative Building Society v. 
 
 , Williams "w. 
 
 • V. Wise 
 
 D'Avigdor, Eoope v. .. 
 
 Davis V. Burton 
 
 , Forster v. Norden v. MoEae. In re McEae . 
 
 f. Harford 
 
 -w. James 
 
 , Lemaitre I). 
 
 u. Morris 
 
 V. Pembrokeshire (Justices of) 
 
 u. Trehame 
 
 , Sanders v. 
 
 ■«. Usher 
 
 Davison, In re .. 
 
 U.Donaldson.. 
 
 , Fergusson w. . . 
 
 V. Gillies 
 
 Dawdy, In re .. 
 Da we V. Vergara 
 Dawes, Bland ?;. 
 
 V. Creyke 
 
 ■!;. Tredwell 
 
 Dawkins v. Antrobus .. 
 
 Dawson D. Beeson 
 
 '■ — D. Pox 
 
 , Howell u. 
 
 Day V. Batty 
 - — , Smith V. .. 
 
 , V 
 
 w. Turnell. In re Higgins 
 
 , Wilkins «. 
 
 Deakin v. Lakin. In re Shakespear .. 
 Dean, In re. Dean v. Wright 
 
 v. Green .. 
 
 V. Wright. In re Dean .. 
 
 3. D. 
 
 :•! 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 457 ..' 
 14Q. B. D. 125 .. 
 23Ch. D. 690 
 26 Ch. D. 605 
 14 Q. B. D. 105 .. 
 11 Q. B. D. 43 
 13Q. B. D. 347 .. 
 17Ch. D. 346 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 213 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 70 
 
 30 Ch. D. 574 
 
 27Ch. D. 533 
 
 19Ch. D. 156 
 
 24Ch.D.654;27Ch.D.478 
 
 18Ch. D. 213 
 
 19Ch. D. 86 
 
 9Q. B. D. 238 
 
 10 App. Cas. 279 .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 190 
 
 29 Ch. D. 596 
 
 28 Cb. D. 650 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 21 
 11Q.B. D. 74 
 7 Q. B. D. 425 
 10 Q. B. D. 412 
 
 ilOQ.B.D. 414; 11 Q. B, 
 
 I 537 
 
 25 Oh. D. 16 
 22 Ch. D. 128 
 
 26 Ch. D. 778 
 19 Ch. D. 281 
 10 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 513 
 6 App. Cas. 460 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 490 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 50 
 9 Q. B. D. 623 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 470 
 
 16 Cb. D. 347, n. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 426 
 
 II Q. B. D. 241 
 
 17 Cb. D. 794 
 
 30 Ch. D. 500 
 
 18 Ch. D. 354 
 17 Ch. D. 615 
 
 22 Ch. D. 504 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 377 
 13 Q. B. D. 67 
 21 Ch. D. 830 
 
 16 Oh. D. 726 
 21 Ch. D. 421 
 
 29 Ch. D. 697 
 12 Q. B. D. 110 
 
 30 Ch. D. 169 
 21 Oh. D. 581 
 8P. D. 79 .. 
 21 Cb. D. 581 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1240 
 
 805 
 
 259, 911 
 
 1232 
 
 1483 
 499 
 
 1136 
 
 1174 
 948 
 948 
 901 
 
 1246 
 289 
 
 1314 
 
 544 
 
 50 
 
 203 
 
 314 
 
 1676 
 
 872 
 
 899, 1183 
 
 1194 
 
 203 
 
 444 
 
 6 
 
 246 
 
 1148 
 1463 
 1156 
 1557 
 1140 
 
 731 
 
 887 
 
 748 
 
 253 
 
 149 
 1257 
 1226 
 
 339 
 37 
 
 138 
 1696 
 1459 
 1461 
 
 296 
 /1019 
 \1212 
 1231 
 1231 
 1226 
 1218 
 1209 
 1452 
 
 961 
 
 639 I 
 
 552 
 1126 
 
 552 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Deane, McBean v. 
 
 Dearie, Ex parte. In re Hastings .. 
 
 Dearsley, Elliott i>, 
 
 ' •». Middleweek 
 
 Death, Roberts v. .. .. .. 
 
 De Banks, Beg. v. 
 
 De Bathe, Weldon v. .. 
 
 "De Bay," The. Bird «. Gibb - .. 
 
 Debenham v. Mellon .. 
 
 — — ; V. Metropolitan Board ofWorks 
 
 De Ooulon, Wilson «. .. 
 Defries, Nordon w. 
 De Geer u. Stone 
 D'Hprmusgee v. Grey .. 
 De la Bere, Combe D 
 
 De la Pole (Lady) v. Dick 
 De la Warr (Earl) v. Miles 
 
 De la Warr's (Earl) Estates, In re .. 
 
 Delta Syndicate, Limited, In re. Ex parte Porde 
 
 De Mahoha, De Pereda u. 
 
 De Mora i;. Concha .. ., 
 
 Denaby Main Colliery Company, Manchester and) 
 
 Sheffield Eailway Company w. .. .. .. J 
 
 Denbighshire (Justices of), Eeg, v. .. 
 
 Denham & Co., In re .. .! 
 
 Dennis, Edwards v. In re Edwards' Trade-mark 
 
 Dening, Sotheran ^;. .. 
 
 Dent V. London Tramways Company 
 
 De Pereda f. De Mancha 
 
 D'Epineuil (Count), In re (1). Tadman v. D'Bpine- 
 
 uil 
 
 (2). V. 
 
 D'Epineuil, Tadman v. In re Count D'Epineuil (1) 
 
 (2) 
 
 i 
 
 re) 
 
 Derby Union (Guardians of) v. Sharratt. In 
 
 Wejister 
 De Eosaz, In re. Eymer «. De Eosaz 
 
 — — ' ^, Eymer w. In re De Eosa2 
 
 Desilva, Ellis r. 
 
 Devala Provident G^ld Mining Company, In re 
 
 Dever, Ex parte. In re Suse (No. 1) . , 
 
 — , Ex parte. In re (No. 2) .. 
 
 Devonshire (Duke of), Attorney-General of Duchy) 
 
 of Lancaster i;. .. .. .. .. ..{ 
 
 -^ ' — , Neill ■!;. 
 
 Dewar, Edwards V. In re Andrews .. 
 Diaroond Rock Boring Company, Truscott v. 
 
 DibbinjEeg. i;, .. .. .. .. .. ..| 
 
 Dick, De la Pole (Lady) u 
 
 u. Badart.. 
 
 , Mackayu. 
 
 Dicker, Lucas w. .. 
 
 Dickeson, Leigh «;. 
 
 Dickinson, In re. Ex parte Eosenthal 
 
 ■{ 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 30 Cli. D. 520 
 
 893 
 
 14Q. B.D. 184 .. 
 
 122 
 
 leCh.D. 322 
 
 1678 
 
 18 Ch. D. 236 
 
 1220 
 
 8Q. B. D. 319 
 
 1204 
 
 13Q.B. D. 29 
 
 464 
 
 14Q. B. D. 339 .. 
 
 639 
 
 8 App. Cas. 559 ,. 
 
 1517 
 
 6 App. Cas 24 
 
 629 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 112 .. 
 
 873 
 
 22Ch. D. 841 
 
 1192 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 508 
 
 1179 
 
 22Ch. D. 243 
 
 22 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 13 
 
 1181 
 
 6P. D. 157 
 
 1119 
 
 22Ch. D. 316 .. 
 
 1127 
 
 29Ch. D. 351 
 
 1153 
 
 17Ch. D. 535 
 
 321 
 
 19 Ch. D. 80 
 
 1228 
 
 16 0h. D. 587 
 
 1612 
 
 30Ch.D. 153 
 
 344 
 
 19Ch. D. 451 
 
 675 
 
 29Ch. D. 268 
 
 539 
 
 13Q.B.D.674; 14 Q. B. D.) 
 209 .. .. ' ..J 
 
 1289 
 
 15Q. B. D. 451 .. 
 
 1072' 
 
 25Ch. D. 752 
 
 362 ' 
 
 30 Ch. D. 454 
 
 1582 
 
 20Ch. D. 99 
 
 1084 
 
 16Ch. D. 344 
 
 339 
 
 19Ch.D. 451 
 
 675 
 
 20 Ch. D. 217 
 
 555 
 
 20Ch. D. 758 
 
 254 
 
 20Ch. D. 217 
 
 555 
 
 20Ch. D. 758 
 
 254 
 
 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 84S 
 
 24Ch.D. 684 
 
 1226 
 
 24Ch. D. 684 
 
 1226 
 
 6Q. B. D. 521 
 
 1227 
 
 22Ch. D. 593 
 
 542 
 
 13Q. B. D. 766 .. 
 
 235 
 
 14Q. B.D.611 .. 
 
 236 
 
 14Q. B. D. 195 .. 
 
 45 
 
 8App. Cas. 135 .. 
 
 585 
 
 30Ch. D. 159 
 
 642 
 
 20Ch. D. 251 
 
 1463 
 
 14Q.B.D.325; 15Q.B.D. 
 382 
 
 ' 1067 , 
 
 29 Ch. D. 351 
 
 1153 
 
 lOQ. B.D. 387 .. 
 
 513 
 
 6App. Gas. 251 .. 
 
 fl402 ' 
 \1405 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 84 
 
 169 ' 
 
 12Q.B. D.194; 15 Q. B.D. 
 60 
 
 1565 , 
 
 20Ch. D. 315 
 
 186 
 
xlii 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Earley v. Earley. Williams v. Earley 
 
 , Williams v. Earley v. Barley 
 
 East and West India Dock Company, Ex parte. In re' 
 
 Clarke 
 , Glyn, Mills &' 
 
 Co. V.' .. 
 
 "} 
 
 ■ V. Hill 
 -, Eeg. 
 
 V. 
 
 East London Waterworks Company, Hayward v. 
 
 Easton, Grant u. 
 
 Eastwood ?;. Clark. In re Gadd 
 
 Eaton i;. Basker 
 
 ■•{ 
 
 , Hutcheson j;. .. 
 
 , Reg. i; 
 
 V. Storer 
 
 iJ. Western 
 
 Ebrard v. Gassier 
 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners, Durrant v. 
 
 Eden ??. Weardale Iron and Coal Company .. 
 
 Edge, Walton i;. .. .. .. ,. ../ 
 
 Edgehill, Great Northern Steamship Pishing Com- 
 pany « 
 
 Edgington u. Fitzmaurice 
 
 Edison Telephone Company v. India Rubber Company 
 
 of London, Attorney-i 
 
 General v. ., • 
 Edmonds u, Robinson .. 
 Edmunds v. Wallingford 
 Bdney otherwise Hunter, Hunter v. .. 
 Edwards, Ex parte 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Chapman 
 
 ——, Ex parte, In re ToUemaohe 
 
 ~, In re. Brooke u. Edwards 
 
 -, Brooke ■«.' In re Edwards . . 
 
 — , Cockbum i;. .. 
 
 In re Edwards' Trade-mark 
 In re Andrews .. 
 
 V. Dennis. 
 
 V. Dewar. 
 
 V. Hope 
 
 V. Midland Railway Company 
 
 , Reg. v. 
 
 Edwards' Trade-mark, In re. Edwards v. Dennis 
 
 Eggleton, Bird v. 
 
 Edwick w. Hawkes 
 
 Ehrensperger, Eraser v. 
 
 Elder v. Pearson. In re Bellamy 
 
 Elderton, In re .. 
 
 Elgey, Alderson v. 
 
 V. Alderson 
 
 "Elin,"The 
 
 EUigott, Westropp ?;. .. 
 Elliott, Comford i;. In re Watts 
 
 — ■«. Dearsley 
 
 ~'u. HaU " " 
 
 V. Lambert. . In re Callaghan 
 
 V. Rokeby (Lord) 
 
 16 Ch. D. 214, n. .. 
 16 Ch. D. 214, n. .. 
 
 17Ch. D. 759 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 475 ; 7 App. Cas.) 
 591 J 
 
 22 Ch. D. 14 ; 9 App. Cas. 448 
 11 Q. B. D. 721 ; 13 Q. B. D.) 
 
 567 J 
 
 28 Ch. D. 138 
 13Q. B. D. 302 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 134 
 6Q. B. D. 201; 7 Q. B. D.) 
 
 529 .: .. ..) 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 861 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 158 
 22 Ch. D. 91 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 636 
 28Ch. D. 232 
 6 Q. B. D. 234 
 
 28 Ch. D. 333 
 
 24 Ch. D. 421 ; 10 App. Cas.\ 
 33 / 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 225 ., 
 
 29 Ch. D. 459 
 
 17 Ch. D. 137 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 244 
 
 29 Ch. D. 170 
 14Q. B. D.811 .. 
 
 10 P. D. 93 
 
 7Q.B.D.155;8Q.B.D.262 
 13Q. B.D. 747 .. 
 14Q. B.D. 415 .. 
 21Ch. D. 230 
 21 Oh. D. 230 
 16 0h. D. 393 
 
 18 Ch. D. 449 
 
 30 Ch. D. 454 
 30 Ch. D. 159 
 14Q. B. D. 922 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 287 
 13. Q. B. D. 586 .. 
 30Ch. D. 454 
 29. Ch. D. 1012 
 18.0h. D. 199 
 12Q. B. D. 310 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 620 
 
 25 Ch. D. 220 
 
 26 Ch. D. 567 
 26Ch. D. 590 
 8P.D. 39,129 .. 
 9 App. Cas. 815 .. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 318 ; 29 Ch. D. 947 
 16 Ch. D. 322 
 15Q. B. D. 315 ... 
 28Ch. D. 186 
 
 7 App. Cas. 43 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 893 
 893 
 
 173 
 
 1589 
 177 
 
 885 
 
 1655 
 1135 
 1602 
 
 817 
 
 1254 
 529 
 
 1151 
 34 
 
 1181 
 891 
 
 1150 
 
 274, 379 
 
 1520 
 
 327 
 
 1044 
 
 1563 
 
 1019 
 
 663 
 
 1113 
 
 1538 
 
 139, 1255 
 
 150 
 1199 
 1199 
 1537 
 
 912 
 1582 
 
 642 
 1227 
 
 431 
 
 778 
 1582 
 
 790 
 
 765 
 36 
 
 653 
 
 667 
 
 920 
 
 920 
 1487 
 
 702 
 
 290 
 1678 
 
 950 
 
 676 
 
 888 
 
TABLE OP OASES IN THE DIGEST; 
 
 xliii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 ■i 
 
 Elliott V. Smith 
 
 «j. Turquand .. .. .. „ 
 
 Ellis t;. Desilva.. 
 
 ■«. Ellis 
 
 ,'Beg.v. 
 
 1». Rogers .. 
 
 , Tenant 17. 
 
 Blphinstone, Clark «. .. 
 Blsey, Grage 17. .. 
 
 Elsley, Poster i;. 
 
 Elton V. Curteis 
 Eltringham, Laws v. .. 
 Emanuel & Co., In re .. 
 Emden 17. Carte 
 
 ■y. 
 
 Bmeny w. Sandes 
 Emerson, Attorney-General 17. 
 Emley v. Davidson. In re Robson .. 
 Emery i;. Cichero. The "Arklpw" .. 
 Emma Silver Mining Company v. Grant 
 Emmanuel, Ex parte. In re Batey .. 
 Enamet v. Emmet. In re Bmnaet's Estate .. 
 Emmet's Estate, In re. Emmet v. Emmet .. 
 
 "Emmy Haase," The .'. 
 
 Empress Engineering Company, In re 
 Bngelhardt, Ex parte. In re Engelhardt .. 
 
 English, Burton v. 
 
 English Channel Steamship Company v. Rolt 
 Equitable Reversionary Interest Society, Bumaby v. 
 Enraght, Harris u. (Perkins i7. Eniaght) .. 
 
 -y. Penzance (Lord) .. 
 
 Enraght's Case. Dale's Case .. 
 
 Brichsen 17. Last 
 
 Errington v. Metropolitan District Railway Company 
 
 ,Riddella7. .. " ... 
 
 EscaUier v. Escallier .. .. •.. 
 
 Bsnouf V. Attorney-General for Jersey 
 Essery v. Cowlard .. 
 
 Essex (Earl of), Cockerel! v. In re Johnston 
 
 , Eeg. V 
 
 (Justices of), Reg. w. .. 
 
 Etheridge v. Womersley. In re Womersley 
 " Ettrick," The. Prehn i7. Ba,iiey .. 
 
 " European," The 
 
 Euston t7. Smith 
 Evans, In re 
 
 , In re. Welch v. Channell 
 
 , Bowkeri7. 
 
 , Davies v. 
 
 , Graff 17. .. 
 
 7— V. Williamson. In re Roose . . 
 
 Evens, Nichols v. 
 Bvison, Brier v. In re Brier .. 
 Ewing, In the Goods of 
 17. Ewing 
 
 A 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 236 
 
 1684 
 
 7App. Cas. 79' .. 
 
 155 
 
 6Q.B. D. 521 .. ,.. 
 
 1227 
 
 8 P. D. 188.. .. 
 
 1108 
 
 8Q. B. D.466, .. , •■ 
 
 624 
 
 29Ch. D. 661 .. .. 
 
 1637 
 
 6<i.B.D. 46 
 
 1222 
 
 6.App. Cas. 164 .. 
 10Q.B.D. 518 .. 
 
 308 
 
 16 
 
 l9Ch. D.518 .. 
 
 1700 
 
 l9Ch. D.49 
 
 901 
 
 8Q. B. D. 283 
 
 467 
 
 9Q. B.D. 408 
 
 441 
 
 17 Ch. D. 169, 768 
 
 145, 1136 
 
 19 Ch. D. 311 
 
 1538 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 6 
 
 1222 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 191 .. 
 
 1177 
 
 19Ch. D. 156 
 
 289 
 
 9App. Cas. 136 .. 
 
 1504 
 
 17Ch. D. 122 
 
 154 
 
 17 Ch. D. 35 
 
 134 
 
 17Ch. D. 142 
 
 1599 
 
 17Ch. D. 142 
 
 1599 
 
 9P. D. 81 
 
 1510 
 
 16Ch. D. 125 
 
 336 
 
 23 Ch. D. 706 .. .. 
 
 ,' 198 
 
 lOQ. B.D.426;12Q.B.D.} 
 218 J 
 
 1485 
 
 
 17Ch.D. 715 
 
 357 
 
 28 Ch. D. 416 
 
 703 
 
 7P.D. 31, 161 ^ .. 
 
 1123 
 
 
 J1122 
 11123 
 
 7App. Cas. 240 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 376 
 
 1122 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 12; 8 Q. B. D.) 
 414 .. 
 
 1329 
 
 
 19'Ch.D.559 .. .. ; 
 
 1291 
 
 26Ch. D. 220 
 
 1416 
 
 10 App. Cas. 312 .. 
 
 317 
 
 8 App. Cas. 304 .. 
 
 310 
 
 26Ch.D. 191 
 
 1469 
 
 
 11681 ; 
 11707 
 
 26Ch.D. 538 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 753 .. 
 
 777 
 
 li Q. B. D. 704 .. 
 
 618 
 
 29 Ch. D. 557 
 
 706 
 
 6P. D. 127 
 
 1099 
 
 lOP. D. 99 
 
 1505 
 
 9 P. D. 57, 
 
 1113 
 
 21 Ch. D. 297 
 
 849 
 
 26Ch. D. 58 
 
 669 
 
 15 Q. B.D. 565 .. 
 
 1146 
 
 9Q. B. D. 238 
 
 203 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 373 
 
 684, 
 
 17 Ch. D. 696 
 
 1705 
 
 22 0h. D. 611 
 
 1151 
 
 26Ch. D. 238 
 
 1596 
 
 6P. D. 19 
 
 9 
 
 8App. Cas. 822 .. 
 
 1017 
 
xliv 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Bwing V. Orr Ewing 
 • V. • 
 
 Exchange Bank of Yarmouth v. Blethen 
 
 Exchange Banking Company, In re. Plitoroft's Case 
 
 Exeter (Mayor &o. of ), Eeg. i;. 
 
 Exmouth (Viscount), In re Viscount Exmouth v. 
 Praed.. 
 
 ■ V. Praed. In re Viscount Ex- 
 mouth 
 
 Eynde v. Gould 
 
 Eyre, Quartz Hill Gold Mining Company v... 
 
 Eyton i;. Mold (Overseers of ). . 
 
 Faoey, Meredith v. 
 " Fairport," The 
 
 In re Meredith 
 
 Faith, Doowra ?;. In re Docwra 
 Faithful!, In re. Ex parte Moore 
 Falconar's Trusts, In re Bradford v. Young 
 Falk, Kemp v. .. 
 Falle, VaUance v. 
 
 " Famenoth," The 
 
 Farmer «. Farmer 
 
 Farnie, Harvey v. 
 
 FarquharsoD, Plating Company 1). .. .. 
 
 Farrer v. Lacy Hartland & Co. 
 
 ■ V. Nelson 
 
 ■ V. Thompson 
 
 Farrow v. Austin 
 
 Faulkner, Godfrey v. In re Godfrey 
 
 , Hicks V. 
 
 Favre, Bloxam w. 
 
 Fawous (Henry), In the Goods of 
 
 W.Charlton 
 
 Fawsitt, In re. Galland v. Burton . 
 Fear v. Castle .. 
 Feamside V. Flint 
 
 Pearon v. Aylesford (Earl of) .. 
 
 -, BurstaU v. 
 
 Featherstone's Trusts, In re .. 
 Pelgate, Parker u. 
 FeUows r;. Thornton 
 
 Fendall u. O'Connell 
 
 Fenn, Cape Breton Company v. 
 Fennell, Eeg. v. 
 Fanning, NiooU ^?. 
 Pensham, Hunt i;. 
 Penton 1). Harrison 
 Parens ■u. O'Brien 
 Fergusson II. Davison .. 
 
 , Gilbertson v. 
 
 Ferns ij. Carr .. 
 Fern, Paynes. .. 
 " Ferret," The. Phillips v. Highland EaUway Co. 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 22Ch.D.456;9App.Cas.34 
 
 10 App. Cas. 453 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 293 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 519 .. •• .. 
 
 6Q. B. D. 135 
 
 555 
 1393 
 497 
 361 
 943 
 
 23 Ch. D. 158 .. .. 1 
 
 1682 
 
 23Ch. D. 158 .. ..| 
 
 1682 
 
 9Q. B. D. 335 
 IIQ. B. D. 674 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 1212 
 
 854 
 1074 
 
 29 Ch. D. 745 
 
 459 
 
 8P. D. 48 
 
 1488 
 
 lOP. D. 13 
 
 1489 
 
 29 Ch. D. 693 
 
 1631 
 
 14Q. B.D. 627 .. 
 
 113 
 
 28Ch. D. 18 
 
 1160 
 
 7App. Cas. 573 
 
 1364 
 
 13Q. B. D. 109 .. 
 
 1497 
 
 7 P. D. 207 
 
 1495 
 
 9P. D. 245 
 
 1109 
 
 6 P. D. 35 ; 8 App. Cas. 43 
 
 399, 628 
 
 17Ch. D.49 
 
 406 
 
 25Ch. D. 636 
 
 899 
 
 28Ch.D.482 
 
 1182 
 
 15Q. B. D. 258 .. 
 
 607 
 
 9Q. B.D. 372 
 
 1495 
 
 18Ch.D:58 
 
 1239 
 
 23 Ch. D. 483 
 
 1597 
 
 8Q. B.D. 167 
 
 855 
 
 8 P. D. 101 ; 9 P. D. 130 .. 
 
 1271 
 
 9P. D. 241.. .. ■ .. 
 
 541 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 516-- .. 
 
 1135 
 
 30Ch. D. 231 
 
 1238 
 
 8Q. B.D. 380 
 
 637 
 
 22Ch. D. 579 
 
 807 
 
 12Q. B.D.539;14Q.B.D.) 
 792 f 
 
 647 
 
 24Ch. D. 126 
 
 1147 
 
 22 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 1667 
 
 8P. D. 171 
 
 1272 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 335 .. 
 
 1203 
 
 29Ch. D. 899 
 
 1173 
 
 17Ch. D.198 
 
 332 
 
 7Q. B.D. 147 
 
 473 
 
 19Ch. D. 258 
 
 455 
 
 12Q. B. D. 162 
 
 125 
 
 8App. Oas. 780 .. 
 
 333 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 21 
 
 465 
 
 8Q. B.D. 470 
 
 1226 
 
 7Q. B.D. 562 
 
 1328 
 
 28Ch. D. 409 
 
 1523 
 
 6Q. B.D. 620 
 
 256 
 
 8App. Cas. 329 .. 
 
 1105 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 xlv 
 
 Name of Case' 
 
 Festing, Montagu . v. 
 Wroughton 
 
 In re Montagu. In. re] 
 
 Fewings, Ex parte.' In re Sneyd , .. 
 
 Field, In re 
 
 , Kayu 
 
 , London and Suburban, Land and. 
 
 Company u. .. 
 
 , McMahon'M:' 
 
 V. White. In re Bownson 
 
 Building 
 
 Finch, In re. Abbfes v. Bumey 
 
 , In re. Finch v. Finch 
 
 V. Finch. In re Finch : , 
 
 Finchley Local Board, Charles v. 
 Findlay, Ex parte. In re Colley, 
 Finnis and "Zoung to Forbes and Pochin (No 
 
 :-. ^ (No, 
 
 Firbank, Doughty ■«. .. 
 
 First Avenue Hotel Company, Parker v. 
 
 Firth, Ex parte. In re Cowburn. 
 
 Fisher, Bolokow v. 
 
 , Lees V. .. .. ' :, 
 
 Fisherton-Angav, Clark v. 
 
 Pitzgibbon, Martin v. Pike • 
 
 Fitzgibbon 
 
 , Pike V. Martin v. ■ 
 
 1) 
 2) 
 
 Fitzmaurice, Edgington v. 
 
 Flavell, In re. Murray v. Flavell . . . 
 
 , Murray t). In re — '■ 
 
 — ■ , Keg,?;. .. . 
 
 Flavelle, Blackburn V. . . ... .. 
 
 Fleming v. J^ewport Eailway Company 
 
 ■». Teaman 
 
 Fletcher v. Bealey 
 
 u. Hudson . .. 
 
 Flint, In re 
 
 , Fearnside v. 
 
 Flitcroft's Case. In re Exchange Banking Company 
 
 Flood, Dunn v. . . 
 
 Florence Land and. Public Works Company, In re 
 
 Nicol's Case. Tufnell and Ponsonby's Case 
 Flower (C) and Metropolitan Board of Works, In.re, 
 
 In re Flower (M) and Same 
 
 V. Sadler 
 
 Foakes, Beer i;. . . 
 
 V. Webb ... 
 
 Foat V. Mayor of Margate 
 
 Fobbing (Commissioners of Sewers for) Beg. 
 
 Follett V. Pettman 
 
 Foord, Pontifex v. 
 
 Foote, Beg. V. •■ 
 
 Footitt, Drake v. 
 
 Forbes v. Jackson . . 
 
 and Pochin, Finnis and Young to (No. 1) 
 
 ,• _ (No. 2) 
 
 Ford, Bacon v. In.re Kensington' (Lord) 
 
 28 Ch. D-. 82 
 
 25 Ch.D. 338 
 
 29 Ch. D. 608 
 8Q. B. D. 594; lOQ. B. D, 
 
 241 
 
 16 Ch. D: 645 
 
 7Q. B. D. 591 
 29Ch. D. 358 
 
 17 0h. D. 211 
 23 Oh. D. 267 
 23Ch. D. 267 
 
 23 Ch. D..767 
 17Ch. D, 334 
 
 24 Ch. D. 587 
 
 24 Ch. D. 591 
 lOQ. B. D. 358 .. 
 24Ch. D. 282 
 19 Ch. D. 419 
 lOQ. B. D. 161 .. 
 22Ch. D. 283 
 
 6Q. B. D. 139' .. 
 
 17Ch. D. 454 ■ .. 
 17Ch. D. 454 ., .. 
 29 Ch. D. 459 
 
 25 Ch. D. 89 
 25 Ch. D. 89 
 14Q. B..D. 364 .. 
 
 6 App. Cas. 628 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 265 .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 966 .. 
 28Ch. D. 688 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 611 
 15 Q. B. D. 488 .. 
 22Ch. D. 579 
 21 Ch. D. 519 . .. 
 25 Ch. D. 629 ; 28 Ch. D. 586 
 
 29Ch. D. 421 
 
 :1 
 
 27 Ch.D: 592 
 
 9Q. B. D. 83;-10Q. B. D, 
 
 572 
 
 UQ. B.D.221;9App.Cas 
 
 605 
 
 28 Ch. D. 287 
 UQ. B. D. 299 .. 
 14 Q. B. D. 561 .. 
 2SCh. D:337 - .. 
 12 Q. B. D. 152 .. 
 10Q.B.D. 378 .. 
 7Q. B. D. 201 
 19Ch. D. 615 .. .. 
 24Gh.D. 587 
 24Ch. D. 591 , .. 
 2flCh. D, 527 .. .. 
 
 :-| 
 
 Column 
 of 
 
 668 
 
 il94j707 
 I 894 
 1534 
 
 1480 
 
 764 
 
 ■ 485 
 567 
 
 1689 
 554 
 554 
 962 
 151 
 286 
 286 
 867 
 800 
 249 
 
 1167 
 900 
 J1072 
 (1074 
 641 
 641 
 327 
 
 1017 
 
 1017 
 204 
 313 
 
 1401 
 
 1371 
 960 
 819 
 38 
 807 
 361 
 
 1624 
 
 342 
 
 1632 
 
 233 
 
 1171 
 
 825 
 
 1408 
 
 1694 
 
 1144 
 
 1235 
 
 1345 
 
 1265 
 
 286 
 
 286 
 
 707 
 
xlvi 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Ford J). Hoar 
 
 V. Kettle . . 
 
 Porde, Ex parte. In re Delta Syndicate, Limited 
 Pordham v. Clagett. In re Clagett . . 
 
 V. . In re .. 
 
 Fore Street Warehouse Company v. Dnrrant 
 
 Foreman, Ex parte. In re Price 
 
 Forester, Upmann I). .. 
 
 Forrest, In re. Burrowes v. Forrest. Forrest va 
 
 Bnrrowes .. .. .. .. .. .. f 
 
 V. Burrowes. Burrowes v. Forrest. In re 
 
 Forrest 
 Forman, Tumtull v. .. 
 Forsdike u. Colquhoun 
 Forster v. Davis. Norden v. McBae. In re McEae 
 
 , Gow V. 
 
 V. Patterson 
 
 Fortescue, Batclielor 2;. 
 
 Fortnmn,- Hance v. Winyard v. Toogood .. 
 Forwood V. North Wales Insurance Company 
 Foster, Ex parte. In re Foster 
 
 ■ -y. Blsley 
 
 ■ V. Great Western Railway Company . . 
 
 , Greene v. 
 
 , Hartmont ?;. 
 
 , Pearce -y. 
 
 , Spackman v. 
 
 Fourdrinier, Ex parte. 
 
 ing Company 
 Fowke V. Draycott 
 Powle, Sharp v. 
 Fowler, In re. Ex parte Brooks 
 
 , In re. Fowler v. Odell 
 
 V. Barstow 
 
 V. Odell. In re Fowler 
 
 Fox V. Bearblock 
 
 -, Dawson v. 
 
 , Lowe V. .. 
 
 Foxwell V. Lewis. In re Lewis 
 Foyer, Eyhope Coal Company v. 
 Frampton v. Stephens .. 
 France v. Clark 
 
 Francis v. Hay ward 
 
 Frank Mills Mining Compfiny, In re 
 Eraser, lure. Teates u. Fraser 
 
 ■v. Cooper, Hall, & Co. .. .. \ 
 
 ■ •"• . Waddell v. Praser .' 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 In re Artistic Colour Print- 
 
 ■.1 
 
 "i 
 
 - V. Ehrensperger 
 
 - V. Mason 
 ■ V. Murdoch 
 
 "i 
 
 , Waddell v. Fraser v. Cooper, Hall,"& Co. 
 
 , Teates v. In re Fraser 
 
 Frazer ■!;. Cuthbertson .. 
 
 Frechette v. La Compagnie ManufacturiJre de St 
 
 Hyacinthe .. 
 Freegard v. Freegard 
 
 ''■\ 
 
 14Q.B. D. 507 .. 
 9Q. B.D. 139 
 30Ch. D. 153 
 20 Ch. D. 134 
 
 20 Ch. D. 637 
 lOQ. B. D. 471 .. 
 13Q.B. D. 466 .. 
 24Cb. D. 231 
 
 19 Ch. D. 57, n 
 
 19 Ch. D. 57, n 
 
 15 Q. B D. 234 .. 
 11 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 25 Ch. D. 16 
 
 26 Ch. D. 672 
 17 Ch. D. 132 
 IIQ. B. D. 474 .. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 218 .. 
 9Q. B.D. 732 
 
 22 Ch. D. 797 
 
 19 Ch. D. 518 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 25, 515 .. 
 22Ch. D. 566 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 15:Q. B. D. 114 .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 99 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 510 
 
 29Ch. D. 996 
 12Q.B. D. 385 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 261 
 
 16 Ch. D. 723 
 20Ch. D. 240 
 leCh. D. 723 
 17Ch. D. 429 
 14Q. B. D. 377 .. 
 15 Q. B. D. 667 .. 
 oOCh. D. 654 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 485 
 
 21 Ch. D. 164 
 22Ch.D.830;26Ch.D.2.57 
 
 20 Ch. D. 733 ; 22 Ch. D ) 
 177 .. .. \ 
 
 23Ch. D. 52 . ■ I 
 
 22Ch. D. 827 
 
 21Ch. D. 718 
 
 23Ch. D. 685 .. " I 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 310 
 10 Q. B. D. 398 ; 
 
 574 
 6 App. Cas. 855 
 23 Ch. D. 685 
 
 22 Ch. D. 827 
 6 Q. B. D. 93 
 
 9 App. Cas. 170 
 
 8 P. D. 186 .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D 
 
 "1 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1008 
 243 
 344 
 
 1245 
 686 
 
 1133 
 179 
 
 1573 
 
 36 
 
 36 
 
 639 
 685 
 
 1148 
 557 
 810 
 948 
 528 
 695 
 114 
 
 1700 
 
 1294 
 
 899 
 
 )1214 
 
 )1230 
 
 1178 
 806 
 
 258, 370 
 
 652 
 
 769 
 
 160 
 
 1600 
 
 1133 
 
 1600 
 
 543 
 
 1231 
 
 637, 844 
 
 525 
 
 1327 
 
 516 
 
 344 
 
 519 
 
 382 
 
 287 
 
 1138 
 
 1149 
 
 36 
 
 419 
 
 1404 
 1149 
 
 287 
 1513 
 
 306 
 
 1111 
 
TABLE QFj CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 xlvii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Yolume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Freeman, Midland Eailway Company v. 
 
 '■ u; Newman .. 
 
 Freer, In re. Freer v. Freer .. 
 u. Freer. In re Freer ., 
 
 Freme «. Clement .. 
 
 French, Leslie v. In re Leslie 
 FrestOB, In re .. 
 
 « Friedeberg," The 
 
 Friedlander, In re. Ex parte Oastler 
 
 Friend i>. Towers 
 
 Fry V. Tapson ., 
 
 Fuggle ■w. Bland 
 
 Fultam/OTeTseers of) Glen v. 
 
 Fulh,am (Gruardians of), v. Thanet (Guardians of) 
 
 Fuller, Ex parte. In re Long 
 
 ^v. Alford .. ,. 
 
 Furber, Ex parte. In re King 
 Fumess Eailway Company, Dormont u. 
 Furnivall, Eager ?;. 
 Fussell, In re. Ex parte Allen 
 ■!;. Dowding 
 
 G. 
 
 G. w.M. 
 
 Gabriel V. Blankenstein 
 
 Gadd, In re. Eastwood 1;. Clark 
 
 " Gaetano and Maria," The 
 
 Gage i;. Elsey .. 
 
 Gagnon, Prince v. 
 
 Gale, In re. Blake «. Gale .. 
 
 ^, Blake u. In re Gale 
 
 Galland ■«. Bmton. In re Fawsitt 
 Gallard 1). Hawkins 
 Galiaway «. Maries 
 Gandy f. Gandy .. 
 
 V. 
 
 Gang, Eeg. i;. .. 
 
 GaF^Bttt, Allen V. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Gard V. Commissioriers of Sewers of the City of Lon- 
 don .. .. .. .. 
 
 Gardiner (H. B. S.), In the Goods of .. ,. 
 
 Gardner «. Jay 
 
 '■ — ^, Knight «. In re Knight .. 
 
 1;. Trechmann 
 
 Gire's Patent, In re .. .. .. ,. 
 
 Garaett, Orme and Hargrep.Te's Contract, In re 
 
 — , Holroyde w. .. .; 
 
 Gamh^m -u. Skipper .. .. 
 
 Garrard f. Lewis .. .. 
 
 Garrett v. Middlesex (Justices of) 
 
 Garrold, Dallow v. Ex parte Adams 
 
 Garru,(J, In re. Ex parte Newitt 
 
 Gartpfde v. Silkstone and Dodworth Coal and Iron Co. 
 
 rl 
 
 ••{ 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 629 .. 
 12 Q. B. D. 373 .. 
 22Ch. D. 622 
 22 Ch. D. 622 
 
 18 Ch. D. 499 
 
 23Ch. D. 552 ..' .. 
 IIQ. B. D. 545j .. 
 
 10 P. D. 112 
 
 13Q. B. D, 471 .. 
 lOQ. B. D. 87 
 28 0h. D. 268 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 711 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 328 .. 
 6Q.B.D.610;7Q.B.D.539 
 16Ch. D.617 
 
 lOQ. B. b. 418 .. 
 17 Ch. D. 191 
 IIQ. B.D. 496 .. 
 17Ch. b. 115 " .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 341 
 
 27 Ch. D. 237 
 
 10 App. Cas. 171 ., 
 
 (1391 
 (1405 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 684 .. 
 
 177 
 
 23 Ch. D. 134 
 
 1602 
 
 7 P. D. 1, 137 
 
 399 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 518 .. 
 
 16 
 
 8 App. Cas. 103 .. 
 
 1128 
 
 22Ch.D.820 
 
 806 
 
 22 Ch. D. 820 
 
 806 
 
 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 1238 
 
 27 Ch. D. 298 
 
 420 
 
 8Q. B. D. 275 
 
 611 
 
 7 P. D. 77, 168 .. 
 
 1115 
 
 30 Ch. D. 57 
 
 647 
 
 9Q. B. D. 93 
 
 571 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 165 
 
 442 
 
 28 Ch. D. 486 
 
 837 
 
 9 P. D. 66 
 
 13 
 
 29 Ch. D. 50 
 
 1186 
 
 24Ch.D,606;25Cb.D.297 
 
 1190 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 154 .. 
 
 1477 
 
 26Ch. D. 105 
 
 1041 
 
 25.Ch. D. 595 
 
 1450 
 
 20 Ch. ri. 532 
 
 1198 
 
 29Ch. D. 506 
 
 1183 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 30 
 
 231 
 
 12.QB. D. 620 .. ..J 
 13Q.B.D.548; 14Q. B. D. 
 543 
 
 682 
 
 1539 
 
 16Ch. D. 522 .. ■ .. 
 
 266 
 
 21 Ch. D. 762 
 
 496 
 
 405 
 
 1008 
 
 1664 
 
 1664 
 
 (1082 
 
 11684 
 
 688 
 1536 
 1103 
 
 118 
 1005 
 1597 
 1212 
 
 880 
 1066 
 1541 
 
 522 
 
 115 
 
 513 
 1696 
 
 173 
 1244 
 
xlviii 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Gas Light and Coal Company v. Vestry of St. Mary) 
 Abbott's, Kensington .. .. .. ..} 
 
 Gaskill, Attorney-General v. 
 
 -, — ' V. 
 
 Gassier, Ebrard v. 
 Gathercole v. Smith 
 
 V. 
 
 Gaunt, Speight ■;;. In re Speight 
 
 ;'l 
 
 "■■{ 
 
 Geen, Soci^t^ G&^rale de Paris u. 
 
 Geisel, Ex parte. In re Stanger 
 
 Geiselbreoht, Kannreuther w. In re Elcebe- . . 
 
 General Credit and Discount Company v. Glegg 
 
 Geiieral Financial Bank, In re 
 
 General Share and Trust Company v. Wetley Brick) 
 
 and Pottery Company .. .. .. ..) 
 
 V. 
 
 General Steam Navigation Company, Shaffers v. 
 
 Genese v. Lascelles 
 
 George, Kees v. In re Eees 
 
 , "Wolverhampton and Staffordshire 
 
 Company u. .. 
 " George Gordon," The 
 " George Eoper," The 
 German Date Coffee Company, In re 
 Gerussi, Eivaz v. 
 Gibb, Bird o. The " De Bay " 
 Gibbon, Beg. v. 
 Gibbons v. Gibbons 
 
 Gibbs, Cassaboglou v. 
 
 V. Great Western Eailway Company 
 
 V. Guild .. 
 
 V. Layland. Bowden v. Layland 
 
 Marsden 
 Gibbings i;. Strong 
 Gilbert, In re. Gilbert v. Hudlestone 
 
 ■!;. Comedy Opera Company .. 
 
 V. Hudlestone. In re Gilbert 
 
 , "Waterhouse v. 
 
 Gilbertson v. Fergusson 
 
 Gilbey v. Jeflries 
 
 Giles, Glover '■!). 
 
 Gill «. Woodfin 
 
 Gillam, Golden v. In re Johnson 
 
 Gillbanks, Beatty «. .. 
 
 Gillespie, In re. Ex parte Morrison 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Eeid 
 
 Gillies, Davison u. 
 
 Gilpin, McOollin v. 
 
 Gilzean and Monckton, 
 
 Gingell, Marshall v. 
 
 Gladstone, Syer ^). 
 
 Glamorganshire Banking Company, In re. 
 
 In re 
 
 Gleadow u. Leetham .. 
 Glegg, Ex parte. In re Latham 
 
 In re) 
 
 Morgan's 
 
 '1 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 15 Q. B.D.I 
 
 611 
 
 20 Ch. D. 519 
 
 1165 
 
 22Ch. D. 537 
 
 817 
 
 28 Ch. D. 232 
 
 1181 
 
 7Q.B. D. 626' .. 
 
 1150 
 
 ITCh. D. 1 
 
 523. 
 
 22Ch. D. 727 •■ .. 
 
 1596 
 
 9 App. Gas. 1 
 
 1596 
 
 8App. Cas. 606 .. 
 
 124 
 
 22Ch. D.-436 ■- .. 
 
 117, 146 
 
 28Ch. D. 175 
 
 561 
 
 22 Ch. D. 549 
 
 896 
 
 20Ch. D. 276 
 
 365, 371 
 
 20Ch. D. 130 
 
 1197 
 
 20Ch. D. 260 •■ .. 
 
 774 
 
 lOQ. B. D.356 .. 
 
 862 
 
 13Q. B. D. 901 .. 
 
 187 
 
 17 Ch. D. 701 
 
 1695 
 
 24Ch. D.707 .. 
 
 900 
 
 9P.D.46 
 
 1102 
 
 8P. D. 119 
 
 1506 
 
 20 Ch. D. 169 
 
 365 
 
 6Q. B. D. 222 
 
 690 
 
 8App. Cas. 559 .. 
 
 1517 
 
 6Q. B. D. 168 
 
 731 
 
 6 App. Cas. 471 ■ .. 
 
 1677 
 
 9 Q. B.D. 220; 11 Q. B. D.) 
 797 f 
 
 1255 
 
 IIQ. B.D. 22; 12 Q. B.D.) 
 208 ■ .. .. •- ..f 
 
 867 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 296 ; 9 Q. B. D.) 
 59 ■ \ 
 
 807 
 
 26 Ch. D. 783 
 
 806 
 
 '26Ch. D. 66 
 
 1162 
 
 28Ch. D. 549 
 
 1241 
 
 16 Ch. D. 594 
 
 1190 
 
 28Ch. D.549 
 
 1241 
 
 15Q. B.D. 569 .. 
 
 1231 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 562 
 
 1328 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 559 .. 
 
 148 
 
 18Ch. D.173 
 
 272 
 
 25 Ch. D. 707 
 
 1162 
 
 20 Ch. D. 389 
 
 602 
 
 9Q.B. D. 308 
 
 473 
 
 14Q. B. D. 385 .. 
 
 187 
 
 14Q. B. D. 963 .. 
 
 154 
 
 16 Ch. D. 347, n. .. 
 
 339 
 
 6Q. B.D. 516 
 
 329 
 
 27Ch. D. 555 
 
 1629 
 
 21 Ch. D. 790 
 
 1700 
 
 30Ch.D. 614 
 
 1676 
 
 28 Ch. D. 620 
 
 381 
 
 22 Ch. D. 269 
 
 1704 
 
 19 Ch. D. 7 
 
 172 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 xli« 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Glegg, General Credit and Discount Company v. .. 
 Glen V. Fiilham (Overseers of) 
 
 ?;. Gregg .. .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 " Glenfruin," The 
 
 Glenister u. Harding. In re Turner .. .. 
 
 Glenny and Hartley, In re ' .. 
 
 Gloag and Miller's Contract, In re 
 
 Gloucestershire Banking Company v. Phillips 
 
 Gloucester Waggon Company, Saxby V. ,. 
 
 Glover v. Giles .. 
 
 Glyn Mills & Co. v. East and West India Dock Com-) 
 
 pany .. •; S 
 
 Goddaid v. O'Brien 
 
 Godfray, Dyson v. 
 
 Godfrey, In re. Godfrey v. Faulkner 
 
 V. Faulkner. In re Godfrey 
 
 Godfrey's Trust, In re .. 
 
 Goffin V. Donnelly 
 
 (jold Hill Mines, In re.. 
 
 Golden «. Gillam. In re Johnson 
 
 " Golden Sea," The 
 
 ••I 
 
 Goldsmid v. Great Eastern Railway Company 
 
 Gomm, London and South Western Railway Co. v. 
 Good, Ex parte. In re Salkeld 
 ——, Ex parte. In re West.. 
 
 , Tucker V. In re Bonner 
 
 Goodes u. Cluff . . 
 Goodhand «. Aysoough 
 Goodhart v. Hyett 
 Goodier u. Johnson . 
 
 Goodman, Saltash (Corporation of) v. 
 
 Goodman's Trusts, In re 
 Gordon !;. James 
 
 V. Grordon 
 
 V. Great Western Railway Company 
 
 V. Jennings 
 
 «. Mar wood 
 
 Gosling, In re. Ex parte Pitt 
 Gosmau, In re .. 
 Gossett, Bradlaugh u. .. 
 
 Gough's Trusts, In re. Ex parte Great Western) 
 Railway Company .. .. .. .. .. J 
 
 Gould, Ex parte. In re Walker 
 
 , Eynde v, 
 
 «. Lakes.. 
 
 (loutard «. Carr 
 Gounod, Weldon v. 
 Gow ti. Forster .. 
 
 Gowan, In re, Gowan u. Gowan 
 
 Graff v. Evans .. 
 Graham, Bewicke v. .. 
 
 V. Massey. In re Hawthorne 
 
 , Newport Urban Sanitary Authority v. 
 
 , Pomfret v. In re Homer's Estate , . 
 
 Grahame v. Swan 
 Grainger v. Aynsley. 
 
 Bromley v. Tarns 
 
 .] 
 
 22 Ch. D. 549 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 328 .. 
 21 Ch. D. 513 
 10 P. D. 103 
 
 29 Ch. D. 985 
 25 Ch. D. 611 
 
 23 Ch. D. 320 
 12Q. B. D. 533 .. 
 7 Q. B. D. 305 
 
 18 Ch. D. 173 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 475 ; 7 App. Cas, 
 591 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 37 '.'. '.'. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 726 .. 
 23Ch. D. 483 
 23Ch. D. 483 
 
 23 Ch. D. 205 
 6Q. B. D. 307 
 23 Ch. D. 210 
 20 Ch. D. 389 
 
 7P. D. 194 
 
 25 Ch. D. 511; 9 App. Cas.) 
 927 
 
 20 Oh. D. 562 
 13 Q. B. D. 731 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 868 
 
 19 Ch. D. 201 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 694 .. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 25 Ch. D. 182 
 
 18 Ch. D. 441 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 106 ; 7 App. Cas, 
 633 
 
 17 Oh. D. 266 
 
 30 Ch. D. 249 
 7App. Oas. 713 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 44 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 45 
 
 7P. D. 62 
 
 20 Oh. D. 308 
 17 Oh. D. 771 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 271 .. 
 
 24 Oh. D. 569 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 454 .. 
 9 Q. B. D. 335 
 
 6 P. D. 1 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 598, n 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 622 .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 672 
 
 17 Ch. D. 778 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 373 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 400 
 23 Ch. D. 743 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 183 
 
 19 Ch. D. 186 
 
 7 App. Oas. 547 
 6 Q. B. D. 182 
 
 896 
 
 880 
 
 284^ 
 
 1520 
 
 542 
 
 1466 
 
 1644 
 
 1143 
 
 1048 
 
 272 
 
 1589 
 
 3 
 
 310 
 
 1597 
 
 1597 
 
 1609 
 
 500 
 
 366 
 
 602 
 
 1497 
 
 858 
 
 790 
 
 174 
 
 142 
 
 1704 
 
 440 
 
 1224 
 
 1654 
 
 1689 
 
 585 
 
 511 
 
 1524 
 
 1377 
 
 1285 
 
 869 
 
 1485 
 
 144 
 
 698 
 
 1009 
 
 784' 
 
 121, 772 
 
 1212 
 
 1130 
 
 1152 
 
 1133 
 
 557 
 
 (1339 
 
 |1456 
 
 684 
 
 1177 
 
 727 
 
 832 
 
 1698 
 
 1397 
 
 868 
 
 d 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Grand Junction Waterworks Company, Dobts v. .. ■ 
 
 Grange v. White 
 
 Grant, Commissioners of Church , Temporalities in 
 Ireland v, .. 
 
 , Coverdale w. 
 
 «. Baston 
 
 , Emma Silver Mining Company v. 
 
 , Hill w. In re Dickson 
 
 :°1 
 
 Granville (Earl) and Marsh, In re 
 Graveis, Ex parte. In re Harris 
 
 V. Terry 
 
 Gray u. Stait .. 
 
 V. Webb .. 
 
 Great Australian Gold Mining Company, In re. Ex' 
 
 parte Appleyard 
 Great Berlin Steamboat Company, In re 
 Great Britain Mutual Life Assurance Company, In re 
 
 Society, In re 
 
 — , , Eu- 
 
 1 
 
 dow V. 
 Great Eastern Eailway Company, Board of Works! 
 
 for Hackney v. 
 , Coventry, Shep-^ 
 
 pard & Co. v. 
 
 -, Goldsmid v. 
 
 -, Kensit v. 
 — and iManor 
 
 Lowestoft, In re. Ex parte Eeeve 
 
 , Pulling V. 
 
 -, Sheehan v. 
 
 .i 
 ••i 
 •■{ 
 
 1 
 
 Great North of Scotland Railway Co., Burnett v. .. 
 Great Northern Kailway Company, North London 
 Eailway v. 
 
 and Sanderson, 
 
 In re 
 
 ■ V. Tahourdin 
 ■-, Vicary v. 
 
 Great Northern Steamship Pishing Co. v. Edgehill 
 Great Western (Forest of Dean) Coal Consumers) 
 
 Company, In re .. .. .. .. .. f 
 
 Great Western Eailway Company, Ex parte. In re) 
 
 Bushell ..I 
 
 , Ex parte. In rej 
 
 Gough's Tmsts 
 
 Railway Company 
 
 -, Bayley v. 
 -, Bonner v. 
 -, Brown v. 
 
 -, Capell V. 
 
 - V. Central Wales] 
 
 -, Corry v. .. 
 -, Cox V. .. 
 -, Poster V. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 151 ; 10 Q. B. D.I 
 337 ; 9 App. Cas. 49 ..[ 
 
 18Ch. D. 612 
 
 10 App. Gas. 14 .. 
 
 8Q. B. D. 600; 11 Q. B. D.) 
 543; 9 App. Cas. 470 .. j 
 13 Q. B. D. 302 .. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 122 
 
 28 Ch. D. 291 ; 29 Ch. D. 331 
 24Ch. D. 11 
 
 19Ch. D.l 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 170 
 
 ii Q. B. D. 668 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 802 
 
 18 Ch. D. 587 
 
 26 Ch. D. 616 
 
 16 Ch. D. 246 
 
 19 Ch. D. 39 ; 20 Ch. D. 351 
 
 17 Ch. D. 600 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 412 ; 8 App. Cas.) 
 687 \ 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 776 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 511 ; 9 App. Cas.\ 
 927 1 
 
 23 Ch. D. 566 ; 27 Ch. D 
 122 
 
 24Ch. D. 253 
 
 9Q. B. D. 110 
 16 Ch. D. 59 
 
 10 App. Cas. 147 .. 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 30 
 
 25 Ch. D. 788 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 320 .. 
 9Q. B. D. 168 
 
 11 Q. B: D. 225 .. 
 
 21Ch. D. 769 
 22Ch. D. 470 
 
 24Ch. D. 569 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 625 .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 434 
 
 24Ch. D. 1.. .. ;; 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 744 
 9 Q. B. D. 459 ; 11 Q. B. D.) 
 345 1 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 231 .. 
 
 6Q.B.D.237;7Q.B.D.322 
 9 Q. B. D. 106 
 
 8Q. BVD. 25, 515 .. 
 
 "1 
 
 Columa 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1659 
 
 1016 
 
 811 
 
 1481 
 
 1135 
 
 154 
 
 671 
 1625 
 
 113 
 1151 
 
 747 
 1149 
 
 333 
 
 330 
 388 
 389 
 
 386, 1220 
 
 881 
 
 537 
 
 858 
 
 165S 
 
 786 
 
 550 
 1138 
 1399 
 
 35 
 
 1626 
 
 1287 
 1225 
 1520 
 
 368 
 
 180 
 
 784 
 
 279 
 1662 
 
 862 
 1298 
 
 784 
 
 1296 
 
 1290 
 
 867 
 1294 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Great Western Bail way Company, Gibbs v. 
 
 ■ — ■■ , Gtordon v. 
 
 : ■■ , Pigott and. In re 
 
 V. JJailway Com-) 
 
 missionieTS .. .. .. .. .. .. | 
 
 • " and Stuirge 
 
 • V. Swindon and) 
 
 CheltenKam Extension Kail way Company .. \ 
 
 V. Waterford and] 
 
 Limerick Bailway Company 
 
 ■ . , Watson V. 
 
 Great Yarmouth (Justices of), Reg. v. 
 Greaves, deceased, In re. Bray v. Tofield .. 
 
 — ' Settlement Trusts, In re 
 
 Grebert-Borgnis e. Nugent 
 Green, In re. Green i;. Green 
 
 , Deanw. .. 
 
 «. Duckett 
 
 D.Green. In re Green 
 
 , Humphreys v. .. 
 
 ■ U.Humphreys .. 
 
 V. Penzance (Lord). Ex parte Green 
 
 -, M'llwraith v. .. 
 
 ■ V. Smith. In re Smith 
 
 V. — In re ■ 
 
 Greene v. Poster 
 Greenway v. Bachelor. 
 
 V. 
 
 Aldridge's Case 
 Jacob's Case 
 
 ":} 
 
 Greenwich County Court (Eegistrar of). Beg. v. 
 Greenwood, Berdan v. .. 
 
 , Wallace v. 
 
 Greenwood's Trusts, In re 
 Greer v. Young 
 
 Greetland Local Board, Dyson v. 
 Gtegg, Glen V. .. 
 Grey, D'Hormusgee v... 
 Grey's Brewery Company, In re 
 Griffin, Ex parte. Ex parte Newton. In re Bun- 
 yard .. 
 Griffith, Ex parte. In re WUcoxon .. 
 
 (Edward), In the Goods of .. 
 
 V. Blake 
 
 Griffith-Boscawen v. Scott 
 Griffiths (an Infant), In re 
 
 , In re. Griffiths u. Lewis .. 
 
 i;. The Earl of Dudley 
 
 U.Lewis. In re Griffiths .. 
 
 V. London and St. Katharine Docks Co, .. • 
 
 , Morris i;. In re Eaw 
 
 Grimwade v. Mutual Society. In re Mutual Society 
 Groome, Hetherington v. 
 
 — , London and County Banking Company v. .. 
 
 Groves, Broadbent u. In re Cockorolt 
 Grubb, Barkshire ti. 
 Grundy, Stanley v. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 22 ; 12 Q. B. D. 
 
 208 
 8 Q. B. D. 44 
 
 18 Ch. D. 146 
 
 7Q. B. D. 182 
 
 19 Ch. D. 444 
 
 22 Ch. D. 677 ; 9 App. Cas. 
 787 
 
 17 Ch. D. 493 
 
 6Q. B. D. 163 ., 
 8 Q. B. D. 525 
 
 18 Ch. D. 551 
 
 23 Ch. D. 313 
 15 Q. B. D. 85 
 26 Ch. D. 16 
 8 P. D. 79 .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 275 .. 
 26 Ch. D. 16 
 10 Q. B. D. 148 .. 
 23Ch.D.207;26Ch.D.474 
 7Q. B. D. 273; 6 App. Cas.) 
 
 657 .. .. ..( 
 
 13Q. B.D.897;14Q.B.D, 
 
 766 
 22 Ch. D. 586 
 
 24 Ch. D. 672 
 22 Oh. D. 566 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 381 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 376 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 54 
 
 20 Ch. D. 764, n. .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 362 
 27Ch. D. 359 
 24Ch. D. 545 
 13Q. B. D. 946 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 513 
 leQ. B. D. 13 
 
 25 Ch. D. 400 
 
 16 Ch. D. 330 
 
 23 Ch. D. 69 
 9 P. D. 63 .. 
 27 Ch. D. 474 
 26Ch. D. 358 
 29 Ch. D. 248 
 26Ch. D. 465 
 9 Q. B. D. 357 
 26Ch. D. 465 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 493 ; 13 Q. B. 
 259 
 
 26 0h. D. 601 
 18Ch. D. 530 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 789 .. 
 8Q. B. D. 288 
 
 24 Ch. D. 94 
 18 Ch. D. 616 
 22 Ch. D. 478 
 
 D, 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 867 
 
 1285 
 
 782 
 
 1294 
 1667 
 781' 
 
 1294 
 
 1228' 
 
 731 
 
 806 
 1084 
 
 484 
 1540 
 1126. 
 
 611 
 1540 
 
 601 
 
 805, 
 
 1125 
 
 1152 
 
 145, 555 
 
 145 
 
 899 
 
 941 
 1007 
 
 130 
 1191 
 1016. 
 1609 
 1539, 
 
 82?: 
 
 284' 
 1181. 
 
 392: 
 
 149r 
 
 167- 
 
 9<. 
 
 1209 
 
 526, 1083- . 
 
 674 
 
 1223. 
 
 864, 
 
 1223 
 
 950 ■ 
 
 1673 
 391 
 
 245. 
 
 51- 
 
 1679i- 
 
 1661 
 
 90a 
 
 d 2 
 
w 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page, 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Grunrly, Kershaw & Co., In re 
 
 Guardian Permanent Benefit Building Society, 
 
 GKuerrier, In re. Ex parte Leslie 
 Guest, Cottam V. 
 
 Gruild, Gibbs ?;. .. 
 
 Guillemin, Ex parte. In re Oriental Bank 
 poration .. .. .. .. 
 
 Guinness v. Land Corporation of Ireland 
 
 G iiUischen ■u. Stewart .. 
 
 Gully «. Smith.. 
 
 Gunn (Ann), In the Goods of 
 
 Grunstan, In the Goods of. Blake v. Blake .. 
 
 Guthrie, Haines v. 
 
 v-Wahoai 
 
 In re 
 
 9 App. Cas.) 
 
 Cor-) 
 
 17 Ch. D. 108 
 2.3 Ch. D. 440 
 
 .519 
 20 Ch. D. 1.31 
 6 Q. B. D. 70 
 8 Q. B.D. 296; 9Q.3. D.) 
 
 59- f 
 
 28 Ch. D. 6-34 
 
 22Ch. D. .349 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 186 ; 13 Q. B. D. 
 
 .317 
 
 :i 
 
 15.31 
 
 271 
 
 150 
 1586 
 
 807 
 
 .374 
 
 .329 
 
 1480 
 
 "Guy Mannering," The 
 Gyhon, In re. Alien v. Taylor 
 Gyte V. Gyte .. 
 
 H. 
 
 °.1 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 121 .. 
 
 620 
 
 9 P. D. 242 
 
 1271 
 
 7P. D. 102 
 
 1270 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 818 .. 
 
 54.3 
 
 
 fl675 
 
 a682 
 
 22 Ch. D. 573 
 
 ,. 
 
 1705 
 
 7 P. D. 52, 1,32 .. 
 
 1515 
 
 29 Ch. D. 8.34 
 
 1183 
 
 10 P. D. 185 
 
 1111 
 
 H. P. Horse Xail Company, House Property and In- 
 
 Testment Company v. 
 Hack V. London Provident Building Society . 
 Hackney Board of Works v. Great Eastern Bail way 1 1 
 
 Company ,. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 Hacon, Eames v. 
 
 Haddeo, Sea Insurance Company v. .. 
 
 Hadley, Joy «. .. 
 
 Haines «. Guthrie 
 
 Halberstamm, In re. Ex parte Lister 
 
 Hale «;. Boustead 
 
 Halfen v. Boddington .. 
 
 Hall, Ex parte. InreAlven.. 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Cooper 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Wood.. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Oose .. 
 
 , Bowen v. 
 
 z;. Brand .. 
 
 , Burlinsont;. 
 
 ^, Dalrymple 17. 
 
 , Elliott t7. 
 
 , Kouchf. .. 
 
 •». Truman, Hanbury & Co. 
 
 , Wake V. .. 
 
 & Co. V. London, Brighton, and South Coast | 
 
 BaUway Company .. .. .. .. ., ( 
 
 Hall-Dare t>. Hall-Dare 
 
 's Contract, In re .. .... .. 
 
 ■t 
 
 Hallas V. Bobinson 
 Hallett, Symonds v. 
 to Martin 
 
 29 Ch. D. 190 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 ll.-iT 
 
 23 Ch. D. 103 
 
 
 
 26f; 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 412 ; 8 
 687 
 
 App. 
 
 Cai'.t 
 .347 
 
 881 
 
 16Ch,D.407;18Ch.D 
 
 11 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 706 
 
 
 
 695 
 
 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 
 ■ ■ 
 
 1176 
 
 L3 Q. B. D. 818 
 
 
 
 54.3 
 
 17 Ch. U 518 
 
 
 ,. 
 
 135 
 
 8 0. B. D. 453 
 
 
 «. 
 
 1.34 
 
 6P. D.13 .. 
 
 
 
 1112 
 
 16 Ch. D. 501 
 
 
 
 187 
 
 19 Ch. D. 580 
 
 
 
 167. 190 
 
 23 Ch. D. 644 
 
 
 
 126 
 
 14 Q. B. D. .386 
 
 
 
 25f; 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 333 
 
 
 
 8<i7 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 39 
 
 
 
 •544 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 
 
 4.3 
 
 If; Ch. D. 715 
 
 
 
 1708 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 315 
 
 
 
 950 
 
 B Q. B. D. 17 
 
 
 
 15 
 
 29 Ch. D. .;07 
 
 
 
 1173 
 
 7Q. B.D. 295: 8 
 195 
 
 App. 
 
 Cas.) 
 
 888 
 
 15 Q. B. D. .yj5 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1295 
 
 29 Ch. D. 133 
 
 
 
 1565 
 
 21 Ch. D. 41 
 
 
 
 iUlo 
 1641 
 
 255 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 28 S 
 
 
 
 24 Ch. D. 346 
 
 
 
 f-A') 
 
 2i Ch. D. €-'4. 
 
 ,. 
 
 
 1464 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Uii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volnme and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 :•( 
 
 Halliwell, In the Goods of 
 Halsey v. Brotherhood 
 Hamilton v. Chaiae 
 Hamilton (Duke of) v. Dunlop 
 Hamlyn w. Betteley 
 Hammond, In the Groods of 
 
 V. Hocking .. 
 
 , Jennings v. 
 
 Hampden v. Wallis 
 
 Hampson, Imperial Hydropathic Hotel Company, 
 
 Blackpool i). .. 
 Hampstead. (Vestry of) v. Hoopel 
 Hance v. Portnum. Winyard v. Toogood 
 Hancock, Turner V. 
 Handsley, Reg. v. 
 
 Handsworth' Local Board, Simcox w. .. 
 Hankin, Di;ake v. 
 Hankinson v. Barmingham 
 Hannah v. J)uke. Jn re Duke 
 Hannay w. Basham. In re Basham .. 
 Hansen v. Maddox 
 Hanson, Hilliard v. 
 
 , Scarlett v. 
 
 Harben v. Phillips 
 
 Harcourt, May v. 
 
 Hardaker v. Moorhouse 
 
 Hardbottle v. Terry 
 
 Hardiman, In re. Pra^ell v. Batten 
 
 Harding, Glenist«r v. In re Turner .. 
 
 «. Preece 
 
 Hardinge, Smalley v. .. 
 Hardman 1). Child 
 
 " Hardwick," The 
 
 Hardwick, In re 
 
 Hardy, In re. Wells i). Berwick 
 
 w. Atherton 
 
 Hare v. Putney (Qyerseers of) 
 
 Harford, Davis ■». 
 
 Harland, Patman V. 
 
 Harle, National Provincial Bank of England v. 
 
 Harlock u. Ashbeny .. .. .. ■.. 
 
 Harman and Uxbridge an,d Kickmansworth EailTyay) 
 Company, In re ,. .. .. .. ,••) 
 
 Harmanis, gillery v. .. 
 Harmon u. Park 
 
 . In re Pooley 
 In re Tait 
 
 Harper, Ex parte. 
 
 , Ex parte. 
 
 , Lloyd's V. . 
 
 , Beg. V. 
 
 Harpham V. Shacklock 
 
 Harris, Ex parte. In re Richardson .. 
 
 , Inre. Ex parte Graves 
 
 w. Davies 
 
 V. Enraght. Perkins v. Enraght 
 
 V. Japobs ... 
 
 10 P. D. 198 
 
 19 Ch. D. 386 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 1, 319 
 10 App. Cas. 813 
 6 Q. B. D. 63 
 
 6 P. D. 104 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 291 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 225 
 
 26 Ch. D. 746 
 
 27 Ch. D. 251 
 
 23 Ch. D. 1 
 
 15Q. B.D. 652 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 20 Ch. D. 303 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 398 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 383 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 39 
 7 Q. B. D. 201 
 
 9 P. D. 62 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 112 
 23 Ch. D. 195 
 12 Q. B. D. 100 
 
 21 Ch. D. 69 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 213 
 
 23 Ch. D. 14 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 688 
 26 Ch. D. 417 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 131 
 
 16 Ch. D. 360 
 29 Ch. D. 985 
 9 Q. B. D, 281 
 6Q.B.D.371;7Q 
 
 28 Ch. D. 712 
 
 9 P. D. 82 .. 
 12 Q. B. D. 148 
 
 17 Ch. D. 798 
 7 Q. B. D. 264 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 223 
 
 22 Ch. D. 128 
 17Ch. D. 353 
 6 Q. B. D. 626 
 
 18 Ch. D. 229 ; 19 
 
 19 Ch. D. 84 
 
 24 Ch. D. 720 
 
 8 App. Cas. 99 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 323 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 369 
 
 20 Ch. D. 685 
 
 21 Ch. D. 537 
 16 Ch. D. 290 
 7 Q. B. D. 78 
 19 Ch. D. 207 
 16 Ch. D. 613 
 19 Ch. D. 1 
 
 10 App. Cas. 279 
 7 P. D. 31, 161 
 15 Q. B, D. 247 
 
 Ch, 
 
 D. 524 
 
 D.539 
 
 9 
 
 1043 
 
 248 
 
 1394 . 
 
 1230 
 
 10 
 
 245 
 
 384 
 
 1201 
 
 1151 
 
 356 
 
 882 
 
 528 
 
 1239 
 
 1073 
 
 732 
 
 831 
 
 1345 
 
 1129 
 
 1703 
 
 1592 
 
 1231 
 
 1474 
 
 1473 
 
 353 
 
 34 
 
 1089 
 
 593 
 
 1015 
 
 542 
 
 175 
 
 177 
 
 1628 
 
 1101 
 
 1542 
 
 1691 
 
 203 
 
 1069 
 
 1463 
 
 1640 
 
 43 
 
 810 
 
 1182 
 
 1641 
 
 308 
 938 
 939 
 188 
 148 
 
 1262 
 463 
 
 1536 
 176 
 113 
 314 
 
 1123 
 
 1477 
 
liv 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Harris V. Jenkins ., .. .. .. 
 
 , London Land Company -y. 
 
 , Mander V. In re March 
 
 V. Maj .. 
 
 .Thompsons. In re Middleton 
 
 J). Truman .. .. .. .. 
 
 Harris & Dixon v. Marcus, Jacobs & Co. 
 Harris' Settled Estates, In re . . 
 Harrison, Bx parte. In re Betts 
 
 — , Ex parte. In re Cannock and Bugeley Col- 
 
 liery Company 
 
 , Bx parte. In re Jordan 
 
 , Bx parte. In re Peake 
 
 , In re. Turner v. Hellard 
 
 ':! 
 
 -■ V. Cornwall Minerals Eailway Company. 1 
 
 Fenton ■«. Harrison .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 ■ V. Harrison. 
 ■, Jacques v. 
 
 ■ V. Leutner 
 
 ■ V. 
 
 In re Harrison's Trusts 
 
 , Sheffield and South Yorkshire Permanent) 
 
 Benefit Building Society «. .. .. .. .. ( 
 
 Cox, Walker, & Co., United Telephone) 
 
 Company v. 
 Harrison's Trusts, In re. Harrison v. Harrison 
 Harrop's Trusts, In re .. .. .. ., 
 
 Harston and Young's Contract, In re .. 
 
 u. Tenison. In re Cross 
 
 Hart, In re. Ex parte Caldicott 
 
 V. Hart 
 
 , Lybbe .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 , Somerset v. .. .. .. ,. 
 
 , Tippett V. 
 
 Hart-Davis, Hill v. 
 
 -, V 
 
 Harter u. Colman 
 
 Hartley, Glenny & Co., In re .. 
 
 Hartmont v. Poster 
 Hartnoll, Blight i;. 
 
 "Harton,"The ,. 
 Hartopp, Drage v. 
 Harvey, Ex parte. 
 
 In re Player 
 
 In re. Wright v. Woods 
 
 , Blake v. 
 
 V. Croydon Union Rural Sanitary Authority 
 
 v. Farnie .. ,. .. 
 
 1;. Harvey 
 
 -w. Lovekin .. .. .. .. ■ .. 
 
 V. Municipal Permanent Investment Building) 
 
 Society .. .. .. .. .. ., | 
 
 Harvey's Settled Estate, In I'e 
 Harwood, In re .. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 481 
 13 Q. B. D. 540 
 24Ch.D.222;27Ch. D. 166 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 97 
 19 Ch. D. 552 
 7Q. B. D. 340; 9 Q. B. D 
 
 264 
 15 Q. B. D. 247 
 28 Oh. D. 171 
 18 Ch. D. 12r 
 
 26Ch.D.522;28Ch.D.363 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 228 
 13 Q. B. D. 753 
 30 Uh. D. 390 
 
 66 ; 18 Ch, 
 , Cas. 780 
 
 16Ch.D. 
 8 App, 
 
 28 Ch. D. 220 
 12Q.B. D. 136, 165 
 16 Ch. D. 559 
 24 Ch. D. 594 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 358 
 21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 28 Ch. 
 24 Ch. 
 
 D. 220 
 D. 717 
 
 ,691 
 109 
 716 
 
 ,670 
 
 8 
 
 29 Ch. D. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 
 29 Ch. D. 
 32Q. B. D. 360 
 10 Q. B. D. 483 
 
 21 Ch. D. 798 
 
 26 Ch. D. 470 
 
 19 Ch. D. 630 
 
 25 Ch. D. 611 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 23 Ch. D. 218 
 9P. D. 44 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 414 
 15 Q. B. D. 682 
 
 26 Ch. D. 179 
 
 29 Ch. D. 827 
 
 26 Ch. D. 249 
 6 P. D. 35 : 8 App, 
 26 Ch. D. 644 
 10 P. D. 122 
 
 26 Ch. D. 273 
 
 21 Ch. D. 123 
 
 20 Ch. D. 536 
 
 D.334 
 
 ,1 
 
 Cas. 43 
 
 348 
 
 VIW 
 157 
 
 1686 
 ( 333 
 \ 1184 
 1 1218 
 
 1567 
 
 1197 
 
 1217 
 
 1225 
 
 .594 
 
 1048 
 
 1567 
 
 1448 
 
 1624 
 
 1600 
 
 155 
 
 645 
 
 176 
 
 684 
 
 1322 
 
 1207 
 
 1156 
 
 897 
 
 1466 
 
 (1214 
 
 1 1230 
 
 11664 
 
 11688 
 
 1685 
 
 1511 
 
 1137 
 
 166 
 
 .554 
 
 f 899 
 
 hl83 
 
 (1197 
 
 1233 
 
 399, 628 
 
 1200 
 
 1113 
 
 268 
 
 MKi 
 1610 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Hasker, Ex parte 
 
 Haslehiurst, Reg. ■;;. 
 
 Hastings, In re. Ex parte Dearie 
 
 , Cave V. 
 
 I). Hurley 
 
 (Mayor of), South Eastern Railway Com 
 
 pany «. 
 
 , Smetlaurst v. 
 
 Hatton, In the Goods of 
 
 Haunchwood Brick and Tile Company, Midland 
 
 Railway Company v. 
 HsiuXwell, Ex parte. In re Hemingway 
 Havelock v. Havelock. In re Allan .. 
 Haven Gold Minjng Company, In re ., 
 Hawes, Inre. Ex parte Sadler 
 
 V. Draeger 
 
 , International Marine Hydropathic Company 
 
 In re Hubback 
 
 , Wye Valley Railway Company v. .. 
 
 Hawke v. Brear 
 Hawkes, Edwiok v. 
 Hawkins, Gallard v. 
 
 V. Hawkins 
 
 , Tozier v. 
 
 Hawthorne, In re. Graham v. Massey 
 Hawtin, Dowd «. In re Hopkins 
 Haygarth's Trusts, In re 
 Hayman, In re. Ex parte Pratt 
 Hay ward. In re. Creery v. Lingwood 
 
 V. East London Waterworks Company 
 
 , Francis v. .. .. .. • ., 
 
 Haywood v. Brunswick Building Society 
 V. Silber 
 
 flazle's Settled Estates, In re .. 
 Headington Union (Guardians of) 
 
 Union (Guardians of) 
 Heap V. Burnley Union 
 
 Heath v. Pugh .. 
 
 V. Roberts 
 
 Heathcote, In the Goods of 
 Heatley v. Newton 
 
 , Quilter v. .. ., 
 
 Heaton's Trade-mark, In re ., 
 
 Heaven ■!;. Pender 
 
 Heawood v. Bone ,. .. 
 
 "Hector," The 
 
 Hedges, Ivay «. 
 "HeinrichBjom,"The 
 
 , The 
 
 Helder, Ex part«. In re Lewis 
 
 " Helenslea," The. The " Catalonia " 
 
 Hellard and Home, In re 
 
 — '■ -, Turner v. In re Harrison 
 
 Hellier v. Hellier 
 Helm, Hyman v. 
 Hemingway, In re. 
 
 V. St. Olave' 
 
 Ex parte Hauxwell 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 13 y. B. D. 253 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 184 .. 
 7Q. B.D. 125 
 
 16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 6 Q. B D. 586 
 
 30 Ch. D. 490 
 6 P. D. 204 
 
 20 Ch. D. 552 
 
 23 Ch. D. 626 
 
 17 Ch. D. 807 
 
 20 Ch. D. 151 
 19 Ch. D. 122 
 23 Ch. D. 173 
 
 29 Ch. D. 934 
 
 16 Ch. D. 489 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 841 .. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 199 
 
 27 Ch. D. 298 
 lOP. D. 177 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 650, 680 
 23 Oh. D. 743 
 
 19 Ch. D. 61 
 
 22 Ch. D. 545 
 
 21 Ch. D. 439 
 19 Ch. D. 470 
 
 28 Ch. D. 138 
 20Ch.D.773;22Ch.D.177 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 403 
 
 30 Ch. D. 404 
 26Ch. D. 428;29Ch.D.78 
 
 13Q. B. D.293 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 617 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 345 ; 7 App. Cas, 
 235 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 137 '.'. 
 
 6P. D. 30 .. 
 19 Ch. D. 326 
 
 23 Ch. D. 42 
 27 Ch. D. 570 
 9 Q. B. D. 302 ; 11 Q. B. D 
 
 503 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 179 .. 
 
 8P. D.218.. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 80 
 8P. D.151.. 
 lOP. D.44.. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 339 
 7P. D. 57 .. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 736 
 
 30 Ch. D. 390 
 9 P. D. 237.. 
 24 Ch. D. 531 
 23 Ch. D. 626 
 
 1223 
 1067 
 
 122 
 
 601 
 1132 
 
 1296 
 
 1598 
 1270 
 
 1291 
 
 111, 257 
 669 ■ 
 365 
 173 
 541 
 
 566 
 
 1143 
 
 1227 
 
 765 
 
 420 
 1110 
 1134 
 
 727 
 1147 
 1341 
 
 190 
 1675 
 1655 
 
 519 
 
 455 
 
 764 
 1441 
 
 1062 
 
 814 
 
 810 
 
 243 
 
 1682 
 
 46, 1214 
 
 1175 
 
 1580 
 
 769 
 
 (1102 
 
 1 1514 
 
 950 
 
 1487 
 
 1487 
 
 139 
 
 1095 
 
 335 
 
 1686 
 
 1694 
 
 1159 
 
 111, 257 
 
Ivi 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest, 
 
 Hemingway, Lee and, In re 
 Henderson, Clippen's Oil Company v. 
 
 , Shepherd v. 
 
 , ThoU 
 
 Hendrilfs iJ. Montagu .. 
 Henry v. Armitage 
 
 U.Armstrong 
 
 Hensler, In le. Jones t;. Hensler 
 
 , Jones i;. In re Hensler 
 
 Henty, Capital and Counties Bank v. 
 
 V. Wrey 
 
 Hepburn, In re. Ex parte Smith 
 
 Herbertson, Mackie v. .. 
 
 Herman v. Jeuchner 
 
 Hermann Loog ti. Bean 
 
 Hernando, In re. Hernando v. Sawtell 
 
 V. Sawtell. In re Hernando 
 
 Heske v. Samuelson 
 Hetherington i;. Groome 
 
 V. North Eastern Eailway Company 
 
 Hettihewage Siman Appu v. Queen's Advocate 
 
 Hewer, In re. Ex parte Kahen 
 
 Hewitt, In re 
 
 Hewitt's Case. Brett's Case. In re Colombia Che^ 
 
 mical Factory, Manure and Phosphate Works 
 Hewlett, Crick v. 
 Heys, Pearson v. 
 Heywood v. Bishop of Manchester 
 
 i;. Mallalieu .. 
 
 Heyworth, Ex parte. In re Ehodes .. 
 
 , Wavburton 1). 
 
 Hickie, Sailing-ship " Garston " Company v. 
 
 Hickman, In re. Ex parte Strawbridge 
 
 Hicks w. Faulkner 
 
 Hickson v. Darlow 
 
 Higgins, In re. Day v. Turnell 
 
 and Hitchman's Contract, In re 
 
 Higgs, Sibley v. 
 
 «. Weaver. In re Weaver 
 
 Highland Eailway Company, Phillips v. The 
 
 "Ferret" 
 
 Hilbers D. Parkinson .. 
 
 Hill, Ex parte. In re Bird .. 
 
 V. Bridges. In re Bridges 
 
 , East and West India Dock Company v. 
 
 W.Grant. In re Dickson 
 
 i;. Hart-Davies 
 
 1>. Hart-Davis 
 
 , Jackson v. .. .. .. •• .. 
 
 , Metropolitan.Asylum District v. 
 
 V. Midland Eailway Company ,. 
 
 , Pointon u. 
 
 , Snow V. .. .. .. .. . , , . 
 
 , Sparrow v. .. .. .. ' .. 
 
 ■!;. Spurgeon. In re Love 
 
 Hilliard v. Hanson 
 
 Hill's Trusts, In re 
 
 Hind, Vinter v. 
 
 Hinde, Bolingbroke t). .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 669 
 8 App. Gas. 873 
 
 7 App. Cas. 49 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 457 
 
 17 Ch. D. 638 
 12 Q. B. D. 257 
 
 18 Ch. D. 668 
 
 19 Ch. D. 612 
 19 Ch. D. 612 
 
 7 App. Cas. 741 
 19Ch.D.492;21Ch 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 394 
 
 9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 561 
 
 26 Ch. D. 306 
 
 27 Ch. D. 284 
 27 Ch. D. 284 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 30 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 789 
 9 Q. B. D. 160 
 
 9 App. Cas. 571 
 21 Ch. D. 871 
 15 Q. B. D. 159 
 
 25 Ch. D. 283 
 
 27 Ch. D. 354 
 7Q.B. D. 260 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 404 
 25 Ch. D. 357 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 49 
 6 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 580 
 25 Ch. D. 266 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 167 
 23 Ch. D. 690 
 29 Ch. D. 697 
 21 Cb. D. 95 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 619 
 29 Ch. D. 236 
 
 8 App. Cas. 329 
 
 25 Ch. D. 200 
 23 Ch. D. 695 
 17 Ch. D. 342 
 22Ch.D.14;9App, 
 28Ch. D.291; 29 Ch 
 21 Ch. D. 798 
 
 26 Ch. D. 470 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 618 
 6 App. Cas. 193 
 21 Ch. D. 143 
 12 Q. B. D. 306 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 588 
 7Q.B.D.362;8Q, 
 29 Ch. D. 348 
 
 21 Ch. D. 69 
 
 16 Ch. D. 173 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 63 
 25 Ch. D. 795 
 
 D.332 
 
 D, 
 
 448 
 331 
 
 D.479 
 
 1223 
 1396 
 1406 
 
 485 
 
 38T 
 
 939 
 1649 
 1684 
 1684 
 
 498. 
 1080 
 
 153 
 1390 
 
 411 
 
 501 
 1087 
 1087 
 
 S63 
 
 245 
 
 484 
 
 309 
 160, 244 
 
 183 
 
 363 
 1163 
 
 2oa 
 
 521 
 1626 
 
 120 
 
 870 
 1478 
 
 147 
 
 855 
 259, 911 
 
 1452 
 790, 1641 
 
 245 
 
 183 
 
 1105 
 
 1457 
 
 167 
 
 556 
 
 177 
 
 671 
 
 1207 
 
 1156 
 
 868 
 
 959 
 
 780 
 
 1618 
 
 610 
 
 1219 
 
 1593 
 
 1474 
 
 288 
 
 823 
 
 900 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ivii 
 
 Kame of Case, 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 17Ch. D. 151 
 
 1082 
 
 28 Ch. D. 356 
 
 154a 
 
 27 Ch. D,. 460 
 
 1018 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 360 .. 
 
 665 
 
 6App. Cas. 560 .. 
 
 1376 
 
 7App. Cas. 427 .. 
 
 1381 
 
 21 Ch. n. 95 
 
 790, 1641 
 
 14Q. B. D. 507 ■.. 
 
 1008 
 
 26Ch. D.363 
 
 1452 
 
 29 Ch. D. 1007 .. 
 
 794 
 
 20Ch. D. 418 
 
 789 
 
 30 Ch. n. 396 
 
 895 
 
 12Q. B.D. 291 
 
 245 
 
 7 App. Cas 512 .. 
 
 1100* 
 
 7P. D. 239 
 
 1131 
 
 9 App. Cas. 117 
 
 301 
 
 20 Ch. D. 749 
 
 643 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 105 .. 
 
 884: 
 
 9Q. B.D. 188 
 
 115T 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 228 .. 
 
 1287 
 
 14Q. b!d. 475 ,. 
 
 774 
 
 15Q. B.D. 256 .. 
 
 774 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 432 .. 
 
 694 
 
 14 Q. B.D. 289; 15Q. B.D.\ 
 
 76 ..; 
 
 11065 
 1234 
 
 27 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 267 
 
 28 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 1213 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 575 
 
 997, 1236 
 
 16Ch. D. 672 
 
 1610 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 48 .. 
 
 170 
 
 26Ch. D. 578 , .. 
 
 801 
 
 20 Ch. D. 780 
 
 149 
 
 6Q. B. D. 580 
 
 1062 
 
 IIQ. B.D. 715;13Q.B.D.\ 
 304 / 
 
 1251 
 
 12Q. B.,D. 25 
 
 465 
 
 19Ch. D. 516.. .. 
 
 1237 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 286 ,. 
 
 1220 
 
 29 Ch. D. 786 
 
 917 
 
 10 App. Cas. 664 .. 
 
 304 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 23 
 
 476 
 
 20Ch. D. 532 
 
 1198 
 
 16 Ch. D. 115 
 
 666 
 
 16 Ch. D. 718 
 
 765 
 
 26Ch.D.266 
 
 1684 
 
 22 Ch. D. 238 
 
 1084 
 
 9.P. D.61 
 
 13 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 477 
 
 1003 
 
 6Q. B. D. 51 
 
 695 
 
 27 Ch. D. 81, n 
 
 764 
 
 19 Ch. D. 224 
 
 1193 
 
 8.Q. B.D. 587 
 
 613 
 
 24Ch.D. 439 
 
 551, 158T 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 92 
 
 1367 
 
 22Ch. D. 663,, .. 
 
 1685 
 
 Hinsley v. Ickermgill. In re Ickeringill's Estate 
 Hipgrave D. Case ■• .. .. .. ... 
 
 Hirsch, Walker u. 
 
 Hiscocks V. Jermonsoa . , 
 
 Hislop «. Leckie .. .. 
 
 , Zetland (Earl of) «. 
 
 Hitchman and Higgins' Contract, In re 
 
 Hoar, Ford D. .. ., .. 
 
 Hoare, Eeid v. .. 
 Hobbs & Chapman, In re 
 
 V. Midland Eailway Company 
 
 Hobson, Shllito v. In re Richardson 
 
 Hocking, Hammond u. 
 
 "Hochung," The. The "Lapwing." China Mer- 
 
 :} 
 
 chants Steam Navigation Company v. Bignold 
 Hockley I). Wyatt 
 Hodge V. Heg. .. 
 
 Hodges ■«. Hodges .. .. .. 
 
 v. London Trams Company .. 
 
 Hodgson V. Railway Passengers' Assurance Company 
 Hodkinson v. London and North-Western Railway) 
 
 Company ., .. .. . . 
 
 Hogg i;. Brooks 
 
 V. .. .. 
 
 ^, Johnston i;. 
 
 Holbom (Guardians of) v. Chertsey (Guardians of) . 
 
 Holgate V. Shutt 
 
 Holl, Reg. w. 
 
 Holland, In re. In re Howarth's Trusts 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Warren .. 
 
 — ■M.Worley- .. .. ., 
 
 Holliday, Watson f. .. 
 
 Hollingbomn (Guardians of) v. West Ham (Guai-)) 
 dians of) ... .. .. .. .... ... i 
 
 Hollins «. Vemey .. .. ,, .. " ••{ 
 
 HoUis, Reg.-w. ., 
 
 HoUoway u. Cheston ., ., .. ... . .. 
 
 Holme, Lowe v. 
 
 Holmes, In re .. .. .. .. .. ,. 
 
 ■U.Carter .. ,, .. .. 
 
 -, Reg. V. 
 
 Holroyde u. Garnett .. 
 
 Holt, In re .. .. .. • • 
 
 Holt & Co. «. CoUyer 
 
 Holyland v. Lewin 
 
 Holyoake, Willoughby Osborne v. .. 
 
 Homan, In the Goods of .. .. .... 
 
 Home, McLaren t>. 
 
 Home and Colonial Marine Insurance Company, West) 
 
 India and Panama Telegraph Company v. 
 Home Hospital Association, Portmau v. 
 Homfray, Llanover v. Phillips v. Llanover 
 
 .r 
 
 J Mitchell, t). 
 
 , Phillips V. 
 
 Honck V. MuUer 
 Hone's Trusts, In re 
 
Iviii 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Hood i;. Newby 
 
 Hook, Newman v. In re Bartlett 
 
 Hoole V. Smith.. 
 
 Hoopel, Hampstead Vestry v. .. 
 
 Hooper v. Smith. In re Smith. 
 
 "Hope," The 
 
 Hope, Edwards v. 
 
 Hoplcins, In re. Dowd v. Hawtin 
 
 , In re. Williams v. Hopkins 
 
 , Williams v. In re Hopkins „ 
 
 liopkinson v. Gaunt .. .. .. .. 
 
 ^ ■«. Lovering . . 
 
 ■" Horace," The 
 
 Hornby v. Card well 
 Home and Hellard, In re 
 
 1;. Hughes 
 
 Horner, Attorney-General v. .. 
 
 Horner's Estate, In re. Pomfret v. Graham.. 
 
 Horrocks, Ex parte. In re Wood 
 
 Horsley v. Price 
 
 Horton, In re .. 
 
 Hoskins, Wallington v. 
 
 Hough v. Windus . .. .. 
 
 Houghton Estate, In re 
 
 and Hallmark's Trade-mark, In re. 
 
 In, 
 
 Mitchell and Co.'s Trade-mark 
 House Property and Investment. Company v. H. 
 
 Horse Nail Company 
 
 ■■ Society, Sear v. 
 
 Household, In re. . Household i;. Household.. 
 
 V. Household. In re Household 
 
 Houstoiin V. Sligo (Marq^uis of) 
 Howard v. Maitland 
 
 , Scott V. 
 
 , Southend Waterworks v. 
 
 Howarth v. Howarth .. 
 
 Howarth's Trusts, In re. In re Holland 
 
 Howe, David v, 
 
 V. Smith .. .. .. ., 
 
 , Walter ■V. .. ., .. ., 
 
 Howell V. Dawson 
 
 V. Metropolitan District Eailway Company 
 
 Howitt V. Nottingham Tramways Company 
 Hubbuck, In re. International Marine Hydropath: 
 
 Company v. Hawes .. 
 
 , Attorney-General v. 
 
 Huddersfield (Mayor of), Milnesv. ., 
 
 Huddlestone, Miller v. .. 
 Hudlestone, Gilbert v. In re Gilbert 
 Hudson, Ex parte. In re Walton ., 
 
 , In re. Hudson v, Hudson ., 
 
 , Fletcher v. .. 
 
 V. Hudson. In re Hudson ., 
 
 Hudspith, Vint v. 
 
 Huggins, Ex parte. 
 Hughes V, Coles 
 
 21 Ch. D. 605 
 
 16 Ch. D. 561 
 
 17 Ch. D. 434 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 652 .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 614 
 8P. D. 144 
 
 14Q. B. D. 922 .. 
 19 Ch. D. 61 
 
 18 Ch. D. 370 
 
 18 Ch. D. 370 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 592 .. 
 11 Q. B. D. 92 
 9 P. D. 86 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 329 
 
 29 Ch. D. 736 
 6 Q. B. D. 676 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 245 ., 
 
 19 Ch. D. 186 
 19 Ch. D. 367 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 244 .. 
 8Q. B. D.434 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 206 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 224 .. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 102 
 
 28 Ch. D. 666 
 
 29 Ch. D. 190 
 
 16 Ch. D. 387 
 
 27 Ch. D. 553 
 27 Ch. D. 553 
 29 Ch. D. 448 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 695 .. 
 6 App. Cas. 295 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 215 .. 
 
 9 P. D. 218 .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 672 
 27 Ch. D. 533 
 
 27 Ch. D. 89 
 
 17 Ch. D. 708 
 13 Q. B. D. 67 
 
 19 Ch. D. 508 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 16 
 
 29 Ch. D. 934 
 
 lOQ. B.D.488; 13 ( 
 
 275 
 lOQ. B.D.124;12( 
 
 443 
 
 22 Ch. D. 233 
 
 28 Ch. D. 549 
 22 Ch. D. 773 
 
 20 Ch. D. 406 
 7Q.B. D. 611 
 
 20 Ch. D. 406 
 
 29 Ch. D. 322 
 
 30 Ch. D. 24 
 
 21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 27 Ch. D. 231 . .. 
 
 .B.D.I 
 . B. D.l 
 
 168 
 
 1212 
 
 910 
 
 882 
 
 1245 
 
 1103 
 
 1227 
 
 1147 
 
 556 
 
 556 
 
 887 
 
 171 
 
 1103 
 
 1229 
 
 335 
 
 259 
 
 869 
 
 1698 
 
 194 
 
 1483 
 
 1643 
 
 624 
 
 126 
 
 1443 
 
 1581 
 
 1137 
 
 763 
 1465 
 1465 
 
 537 
 1631 
 1382 
 
 828 
 1107 
 1610 
 1246 
 1633 
 
 430 
 1231 
 1202 
 1586 
 
 565 
 1333 
 
 1657 
 
 1198 
 1241 
 
 196 
 1674' 
 
 819 
 1674 
 1161 
 1225 
 
 141 
 
 809 
 
TABLE OP GASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 lis 
 
 Name of Casi, 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Hughes, Home v. 
 
 , Percival v. 
 
 , Eigg V. 
 
 ■ V. Sutherland 
 
 Hughes V. Percival 
 
 Hughes-Hallett v. Indian Mammoth Gold Mines Co. 
 Hugo, Commissioners of French Hoek v. 
 Hull, In re 
 
 Hull Hallway and Dock Act, In re. Ex parte Hector'! 
 of Kirksmeaton .. .. .. .. ../ 
 
 Hull Eailway and Dock Company, Wilkinson v, 
 
 Hulme, Slade u. InreSlade.. 
 
 " Humher," The 
 
 Humphrey, Brunsden v. 
 
 Humphreys ■!). Green .. .. .. .. 
 
 , Green v. 
 
 Humphries, In re. Smith t). Millidge 
 Humphrys, Allen v. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Hunnings v. Williamson 
 
 V. .. .. .. ' . 
 
 Hunt ?). Austin.. .. .. .... 
 
 w. Chambers.. In re Martin 
 
 V. Pensham 
 
 V. Hunt .. 
 
 V. ■ ., 
 
 Hunter v. Edney, otherwise Hunter ., 
 
 V. Johnson .. .. ., .. 
 
 V. Myatt 
 
 Hurd, Eedgrave t) .. .. 
 
 Hurley, Hastings v. .. 
 
 Hurst V. Hiirst .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 «. Taylor 
 
 Hutcheson v. Eaton .. ., ., .. 
 
 Hutchings, Eeg. v. ,. .. ., w. 
 
 Hutchinson, Palmer v. .. .. .. ., 
 
 — ■ 's Trusts, In re .. ., 
 
 Huth, Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company v. 
 
 Hutton, In re. Ex parte Benwell 
 
 V. Lippert .. .. ,. 
 
 V. West Cork Eailway Company 
 
 Hyatt's Trusts, In re ., .. .. ... 
 
 Hyde, Eolfe V. .. 
 
 , Stone ■!;. .. ,. .. ., .. 
 
 (Corporation of) v. Bank of England .. 
 
 Hyett, Goodhart ^J. 
 
 V. Mekin .. .. ,, .. 
 
 Hyman v. Helm .. ., .. .. 
 
 V. Nye .. ,. .. ... .. 
 
 Hyslop, Tate -v 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 676 , . 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 441 ; 8 App. Cas.) 
 443 j 
 
 9P. D. 68 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 160 
 22 Ch. D. 561 
 
 10 App. Cas. 336 . 
 9 Q. B. D. 689 
 
 20 Ch. D. 203 
 
 20 Ch. D. 323 
 18 Ch. D. 653 
 9P. D. 12 .. 
 
 •^j 
 
 Ickeringill, Hinsley v. In re Ickeringill's Estate . 
 Idkeringill's Estate, In re. Hinsley v. Ickeringill 
 
 lies V. West Ham 'Assessment Committee .. 
 
 IIQ. B.D.712; 14Q.B. 
 
 141 
 10 Q. B. D. 148 . 
 23Ch.D.20T;26Ch.D.474 
 
 24 Ch. D. 691 
 8P. D. 16 .. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 459 .. 
 11Q.B. D. 533 .. 
 9Q. B.D.598 
 
 20 Ch. D. 365 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 162 ,. 
 
 8P. D. 161 
 
 28 Ch. D. 606 
 
 lOP. D. 93 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 225 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 181 
 
 20Ch. D. 1 
 
 16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 21 Ch. D. 278 
 28 Ch. D. 159 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 918 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 861 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 300 
 
 6 App. Cas. 619 .. 
 21 Ch. D. 811 
 16 Ch. D. 474 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 301 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 309 ., 
 
 23 Ch. D. 654 
 21 Ch. D. 846 
 6 Q. B. D. 673 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 76 
 21 Oh. D. 176 
 
 25 Ch. D. 182 
 25 Ch. D. 735 
 
 24 Ch. D. 531 
 6 Q. B. D. 685 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 368 ., 
 
 17 Ch. D. 151 
 
 17 Ch. D. 151 
 
 8 Q. B.D. 69 ; 8 App. Cas.) 
 
 . 386 ... ) 
 
 259 
 
 1257 
 
 1129 
 1496 
 1595 
 
 308 
 
 431 
 
 788 
 
 1288 
 1198 
 1098 
 
 540, 707 
 
 601 
 
 805 
 
 1666 
 
 12 
 
 1164 
 
 883 
 1214 
 1186 
 
 125 
 1118 
 
 648 
 1113 
 
 531 
 
 902 
 
 581 
 1132 
 1668 
 
 553 
 
 960 
 1254 
 
 829 
 
 313 
 1667 
 1489 
 
 141 
 
 307 
 
 352 
 1611 
 1324 
 
 865 
 
 820 
 
 654 
 
 551 
 1159 
 
 95b 
 
 691 
 
 1082 
 1082 
 
 1075 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 lies-) 
 
 ■{ 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Illidge, In re. Davidson i>. Illidge .. ,^. ,,. 
 
 , Davidson v. In re Illidge 
 
 " Immacolata CoDcezione,".The 
 
 Imperial Hydropatliic Hotel Company, Blackpool v.\ 
 
 Hampson .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Inoe HaU Boiling Mills Company, In re 
 V. Douglas Forge) 
 
 Company .. .. .. .. .. .. f 
 
 Incorporated Law Society, Ex parte. In re Chaffers 
 Inderwick, In re , 
 
 India Eubber Company, Edison Telephone Company v, 
 Indian, Kingston and Sandhm'st Mining .Company,) 
 
 In re .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Indian, Mammoth Gold Mines Company, Hughes-' 
 
 Hallett v.. 
 Indian Zoedone Company, In re 
 Ingle V. McCutchan 
 Inglis, Shotts Iron Company «. 
 
 , Stock «. .. 
 
 Ingram v. Little 
 
 , Union Bank of London V. .. 
 
 , — r-. ■;;. .. 
 
 Inland Revenue (Commissioners of) Paddington) 
 
 Burial Board w. .. .. .. .. ..( 
 
 Inland Revenue, Commissioners of British India) 
 
 Steam Navigation Company I). 
 
 Inman Steamship Company v. Bisohoff 
 
 International Bridge Company, Canada. . SouthemV 
 Railway Company u. .. .. / 
 
 International Marine Hydropathic Company, In re . 
 
 : , V. Hawes. 1 
 
 In re Hubhack .. .. .. .. ...J 
 
 Isaac, In re. Jacob v. Isaac .. 
 
 , Jacob i;. In re Isaac .. 
 
 Isaacs, In re. Ex parte Miles 
 
 , CoUyer V. 
 
 , Rolls 1). .. .. 
 
 Isaacson V. Webster. In re Buun 
 
 Isherwood, Ex parte. In re Knight .. 
 
 "Isis,"The 
 
 Isle of Wight Railway Company v. Tahourdin 
 
 Ivayu. Hedges .. .. .. 
 
 Izard, Ex parte. In re Bushell (No. 1) 
 
 , Ex parte. In re (No. 2) 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Chappie 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Moir .. 
 
 •i 
 
 27 Ch. D. 478 
 
 24Ch.D. 654;27Ch.D. 478 
 
 8P. D. 34 
 
 9P.D. 37 .... .. 
 
 23 Oh. D. 1 
 
 23Ch. D. 545, n 
 
 8Q. B. D. 179 
 
 15Q. B..D.467 .. 
 27 Ch. D. 279 
 17 Ch. D, 137 
 
 23 Ch. D. 83 
 
 22 Ch. D. 561 
 
 26 Ch. D. 70 
 12Q. B. D. 518 .. 
 7 App. Gas. 518 .. 
 9Q. B. D. 708; 12 Q. B. D.\ 
 564; 10 App. Cas. 263../ 
 11 Q. B. D. 251 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 53 
 20 Ch. D. 463 . 
 
 13 Q. B.D. 9 
 
 J. 
 
 Jack V. Kippiag 
 
 Jackson, In re. Jackson v. Talbot . 
 
 , In. re. Shiers v. Asnworth. 
 
 , Forbes v. 
 
 «. Hill 
 
 7Q.B. D. 165 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 648 ; 6 App. 
 ..670 
 
 8 App. Cas. 723 .. 
 
 28Ch.D.470 .. .. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 934 
 
 30Ch. D. 418' .. 
 30Ch. D.418 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 39 
 19 Oh. D. 342 
 
 19 Oh. D. 268 
 
 16 Ch. D. 47 
 
 22 Ch. D. 384 
 8P. D.227.. 
 25Ch. D.320 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 80 
 
 23 Ch. D. 75 
 23 Ch. D. 115 
 23 Ch. D. 409 
 
 20 Oh. D. 703 
 
 las.) 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 113 
 
 156 
 
 21 Oh. D. 786 
 
 674 
 
 25 Ch. D. 162 
 
 1668 
 
 19 Ch. D. 615 
 
 1265 
 
 13 Q. B.D. 618 .. 
 
 868 
 
 1319 
 1319 
 1104 
 1488 
 
 356 
 
 344 
 
 375 
 
 1534 
 1533 
 1044 
 
 1182 
 
 1595 
 
 369 
 1527 
 1395 
 
 691 
 
 1166 
 904 
 903 
 
 1326 
 
 1339 
 
 694 
 
 299 
 
 378 
 
 565 
 
 1180 
 1180 
 1366 
 
 254 
 1049 
 1702 
 
 174 
 109ft 
 
 353 
 
 950 
 
 127 
 
 175 
 
 160 
 185, 193 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixi 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Jackson v. Litchfield 
 , Nottage v. 
 
 , Osborne li. ., 
 
 , Rous V. ■ 
 
 , School Board for London v. .. 
 
 V. Talbot. In re Jackson .. 
 
 . Wallis V. 
 
 Jacob «. Isaac. In re Isaac .. 
 , Warner « 
 
 Jacobs ^;. Credit Lyonnias 
 
 — ■ — , Harris V 
 
 Jacob's Case. Greenway v. Bachelor 
 Jacobson, Ex parte. In re Pincoffs .. 
 Jacques (Leonard), In re ... 
 
 i;. Harrison .. .. . 
 
 Jagger u. Jagger 
 Jakeman's Trusts,' In re 
 James, In re .. -• 
 
 V. Couchman 
 
 , Cox t> 
 
 , Davis w. .. 
 
 , Gordons. ■ 
 
 , Neikoni;. 
 
 U.Young •• 
 
 Jardine «. Jardine 
 
 — '■ , Scarf «. 
 
 Jarmain v. ■ Chatterton . . 
 Jarratt, Crompton v. .. 
 Jams, Miles «. .. 
 Jay, Gardner v. 
 JeJEfrey, Matthews i;. .. 
 Jeffries, Gilbey w. ■ 
 Jenkins, Horris v. 
 
 — ■ f. Jones 
 
 , Moylew. .. 
 
 Jenkinson,- In re. Ex parte Nottingham and 
 
 hamshire Bank 
 Jinks V. Turpin 
 Jenner ^). Turner 
 Jennings, Gordon v. .. 
 
 ^ «. Hammond.. 
 
 ■ — i)-.-Jordan 
 
 Jermonson,- Hiscocks u. 
 Jervis, Chard u. ■ 
 
 ■ u. Lawrence 
 
 Jeuchner, Herman V. .. 
 
 Jewell, Rule u. .. ■ 
 
 " John Molntyre," The 
 
 Johnson, Ex parte. In re Chapman , 
 
 ■ — — , Ex parte. In re Johnson , 
 
 , In re. Golden v. Gillara , 
 
 , In re. Sly v. Blake 
 
 & Tustin, In re 
 
 , In re 
 
 , Goodier V. 
 
 , Hunter «». 
 
 Netting-) 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 §.Q. B.;p. 474 . 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 627 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 619 
 29 Oh. D. 521 
 7 Q. B. D. 502 
 2i Ch. i). 786 
 23 Ch. i). 204 
 30Cb. I).418 
 20 Ch. i). 220 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 589 
 15 Q. B. D. 247 
 12 Q. B. D. 376 
 
 22 Ch. D. 312 
 
 18 Ch. D. 392 
 12 Q. B. D. 136, 165 
 
 25 Ch. D. 729 
 
 23 Oh. D. 344 
 
 12 Q. B, D. 332 
 
 29 Ch. D. 212 
 
 19 Ch. D. 55 
 
 26 Ch. D. 778 
 
 30 Ch. D. 249 
 9.Q. B..D. 546 
 
 27 Ch. D. 652 
 
 6 P. D. 213 
 
 7 App. Oas. 345 
 20Ch. D. 493 . 
 30 Ch. D. 298 
 
 24 Ch. D. 633 . 
 29 Ch.I>. 50 , 
 6. Q. B.D. 290 
 UQ. B,.D. 559 
 22 Ch. D. 481 . 
 9 Q. B. D. 128 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 441 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 505 
 
 16 Ch. D. 188 
 
 9 Q. B.D. 45. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 225 
 6 App.. Cas. 698 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 360 
 9Q. B.D.I 78 
 22Ch. D. 202. 
 15 Q. B. D. 561 
 18 Oh. D. 660 
 6 P. D. 200.. 
 9 P. D. 135 
 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 25 Ch. D. 112 
 
 20 Oh. D.' 389 
 
 29 Ch. D. 964 
 
 28 Ch. D. 84 
 
 30 Ch. D. 42 
 18 Ch. D. 441 
 13 Q. B. D. 225 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 (1140 
 11196 
 j 431 
 11218 
 
 862 
 1084 
 
 529 
 
 674 
 1195 
 1180 
 
 911 
 
 398 
 1477 
 1007 
 
 116 
 
 1242 
 
 1197 
 
 5 
 
 652 
 121, 839 
 1648 
 1136 
 1156 
 1524 
 1552 
 
 886 
 1109 
 1019 
 1233 
 17 
 1673 
 1186 
 
 275 
 
 148 
 1163 
 1344 
 
 866 
 
 164 
 
 609 
 1672 
 
 869 
 
 384 
 
 897 
 
 665 
 40 
 
 289 
 
 411 
 
 381 
 1099 
 1510 
 
 112 
 
 116 
 
 602 
 
 805 
 1639 
 1639 
 1689 
 
 531 
 
Ixii 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Johnson, Palmer v 
 
 V. Eaylton 
 
 Johnston, In re, Cockerell v. Essex (Earl of) 
 
 v. Hogg 
 
 V. Orr Ewing .. „ ,', 
 
 , Taylor i;. 
 
 Johnstone v. Cox 
 
 f. 
 
 , Eager v. In re Eager 
 
 , Norton ij. .. 
 
 v. Spencer (Earl) .. 
 
 Joliffe t;. Baker., .. .. .. __ ' 
 
 Jones, Ex parte. In re Jones 
 
 , In re .. .. .. .. _, [ 
 
 , Inre. Ex parte Nichols .. ,, ', 
 
 U.Blake. In re Blake 
 
 1). Curling 
 
 and Evans, Davis to 
 
 1". Hensler. In re Hensler .. .. [ 
 
 , Jenkins «. .. .. .. ,_ [ 
 
 V.Jones .. 
 
 , Litchfield ■!;. .. .. .. .. [ 
 
 ■v. Liverpool (Corporation of) .. 
 
 , Lloyd's Banking Company v. .. 
 
 , Macleod If. .. 
 
 V. Parcell .. .. ,. ., \ 
 
 , Peat w. .. .. .. .. ,, ' 
 
 , Eeg. V. [\ ■ 
 
 u. Eichards 
 
 , Shepard f . .. .. .. _. ' 
 
 V. Stohwasser 
 
 1;. Wedgwood .. .. ' 
 
 , Scott, & Co., Nobel's Explosives Company v. 
 
 Jonmenjoy Coondoo v. Watson 
 
 Jordan, In re .. .. ., 
 
 Jordan, In re. Ex parte Harrison .. .. ' 
 
 , Abercrombie «. 
 
 , Jennings i;. .... 
 
 Joseph ■«. Lyons 
 
 Joy V. Hadley .. .. .. .. " ]' 
 
 Judd, Ooote i". .. .. .. .. " |' 
 
 Judge, Cripps v. .. .. .. ,, [' 
 
 Judkiti's Tnists, In re . . .. .. " *] 
 
 Jump u. Jump . . 
 
 Junior Army and Navy Stores, Maple & Co.'v. .', 
 
 K, 
 
 Kahen, Ex parte. In re Hewer 
 
 Kaltenbaoh v. Lewis .. 
 
 Kane v. Kane .. 
 
 Kannreuther v. Geiselbrecht, In re Kloebe '. 
 
 Volume and Page, 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 / 12Q. B. D. 32; 13 Q. B. D. 
 t '351 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 438 
 
 26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 lOQ. B.D. 432 .. 
 
 7 App, Gas. 219 „ 
 
 19 Ch. D. 603 
 
 16 Ch. D. 571 ; 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 19Ch. D. 17 
 
 22 Ch. D. 86 
 
 30 Ch. D. 649 
 
 30Ch.D. 581 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 255 „ 
 
 18 Ch. D. 109 
 
 24 Ch. D. 583 ; 26 Ch. D. 736 
 22Ch. D. 782 
 
 29 Ch. D. 913 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 262 „ 
 
 24 Ch. D. 190 
 
 19 Ch. D. 612 
 9 Q. B. D. 128 
 
 7 P. D. 66 
 
 25 Ch. D. 64 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 890 „ 
 
 29 Ch. D. 221 
 
 24 Ch. D. 289 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 430 .. 
 aQ. B.D. 147 
 11Q.B. D. 118 .. 
 15Q. B..D. 439 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 469 
 16 Ch. D. 577 
 19Ch. D. 56 
 
 17Ch. D.721;8App.Cas.'5 
 9App.Cas. 561 „ 
 13 Q. B. D. 238 .. 
 13 Q. B. D. 228 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 187 „ ;; 
 
 6 App. Cas. 698 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 280 .. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 23 Ch. D. 727 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 583 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 743 
 8 P. D. 159 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 369 ;. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 871 
 
 24 Oh. D. 54; 10 App. Cas. 
 
 617 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 207 
 28 Ch. D. 175 
 
 1621 
 
 1363 
 (1681 
 11707 
 694 
 1573 
 665 
 918 
 1240 
 1134 
 4 
 419 
 1621 
 119 
 1441 
 139 
 (1215 
 11603 
 1229 
 1676 
 1684 
 1344 
 1129 
 1200 
 861 
 (652,917 
 \ 1637 
 911 
 137 
 156 
 460 
 1167 
 905 
 13 
 36 
 1043 
 1093 
 123 
 123 
 1543 
 897 
 255 
 1176 
 421 
 863 
 671, 1683 
 1116 
 420 
 
 160, 244 
 
 573 
 
 1461 
 561 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixiii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Kay V. Field .. 
 
 , Eeg. V. 
 
 Keal, Smith v. . . 
 Kearsley v. Phillips 
 
 -i 
 
 Keate v. Phillips 
 
 Keay v. Boulton 
 
 Keen v. Millwall Dock Company 
 
 Keep's Trade-mark, In re 
 
 Keith v. Butcher .. .. , 
 
 Kelk, London Financial Association ■ 
 
 Kemp V. Falk .. 
 
 , Wray v. 
 
 Kemp's Settled Estates, la re 
 Kendal u. Marshall, Stevens, & Co. . 
 " Kenmure Castle," The 
 Kennard, Moore v. 
 
 Kennedy, Lyell v. 
 
 V. Lyell 
 
 , Lyell V. 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 S 
 
 v. Lyell 
 
 Kensington (Lord), In re. Bacon v. Ford, .. 
 Kensingtoa Vestry, Adams and. In re 
 
 , Barlow v. .. 
 
 Kensit v. Great Eastern Bailway Company .. 
 Kent, Municipal Permanent Investment Building 
 
 Society v. 
 -^ — u. Worthing Xocal Board 
 Kershaw, In ve.. 
 
 " Kestrel," The 
 
 Kettle, Ford i; 
 
 Kettlewell v. Watson .. 
 Kilford V. Blancy 
 
 "Killeena," The 
 
 Kilmorey (Earl of), Benthall v. 
 Kimher «.. Paravioini .. 
 Kimpton, Pavidson u. . . 
 King, In the Goods of . . 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Furher 
 
 1). Lucas .. 
 
 , O'Halloran V. In re Bown 
 
 «?. Spurr ... 
 
 Kingdon v, Tagert. In re Badcock .. 
 
 Kingsman V. Kingsraan 
 
 Kingswood Collieries Company, Little v. 
 
 Kinioch v. Secretary of State for India in Council 
 
 Kinsman v, Eouse, 
 
 Kipping, Jack u. 
 
 Kirhy 1) Biffen .. 
 
 ",Kirby Hall," The 
 
 Kirk, In re. Kirk w. Kirk 
 
 u. Kirk. In re Kirk 
 
 - — ■«. Todd 
 
 Kirkcaldy and Dysart Waterwork Commissioners, 
 
 Bothes (Countess of) v. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 ".} 
 
 8Q.B. D. 594; 10 Q. B. D. 
 
 241 
 10 Q. B. D. 213 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 340 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 36, 465 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 621 .. 
 18Ch. D. 560 
 
 25 Ch. D. 212 
 8 Q. B. D. 482 
 
 26 Ch. D. 187 
 25Ch. D.750 
 26 Ch. D. 107 
 7 App. Cas. 573 .. 
 26 Ch. D. 169 
 24Ch. D.485 
 11 Q. B. D. 356 .. 
 7 P. D. 47 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 290 .. 
 20 Ch. D. 484 ; 8 App. Cas. 
 
 387 ;. 9 App. Cas, 
 
 '■■■} 
 
 •:\ 
 
 217 
 
 23 Ch. D. 
 
 81.. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 1 . 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 491 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 527 
 
 24 Ch. D. 199 ; 27 Ch. D. 394 
 27 Ch. D. 362 
 
 23Ch.D. 566;27Ch.D.122 
 
 9 App. Cas. 260 .. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 118 .. 
 21 Ch. D. 613 
 
 6 P. D. 182 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 139 
 
 21 Ch. D. 685 ; 26 Ch. D. 501 
 
 29 Ch. D. 145 
 
 eP. D. 193 
 
 25 Ch. D. 39 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 222 .. 
 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 8P. D. 162 
 
 17 Ch. D. 191 
 23 Ch. D. 712 
 27 Ch. D. 411 
 8 Q. B. D. 104 
 17 Ch. B. 361 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 122 
 20Ch. D. 733 
 
 7 App. Cas. 619 „ 
 17 Ch. D. 104 
 
 9Q. B.D.113 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 201 
 
 8 P. D. 71 
 
 21 Ch. D. 431 
 21 Ch. D. 431 
 21 Ch. D. 484 
 
 7 App. Cas. 694 .. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1480 
 
 683 
 1473 
 1173 
 
 893 
 
 915 
 1706 
 
 866 
 1581 
 1163 
 
 329 
 1364 
 1543 
 1448 
 1365 
 1101 
 1003 
 
 1169 
 
 1171 
 
 (1170 
 
 )1178 
 
 1344 
 
 707 
 
 768, 1691 
 
 877 
 
 1653 
 
 267 
 
 620 
 
 847 
 
 1498 
 
 243 
 
 1635 
 
 1678 
 
 1102 
 
 285 
 
 523 
 
 544 
 
 10 
 
 115 
 
 642 
 
 644 
 
 949 
 
 1451 
 
 fe51 
 
 1535 
 
 263 
 
 811 
 
 156 
 
 1005 
 
 1508 
 
 1671 
 
 1671 
 
 551 
 
 1404 
 
Ixiv 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 ■I 
 
 Kii-kpatrick, Brougliton Coal Company «. .. .. 
 
 Kirksmeaton (Rector of), Ex parte. In re Hull Rail-} 
 way and Dock Act .. .. .. ■.. -•.. ( 
 
 Kirwan's Trusts, In re 
 Kit Hill Tunnel, In re. Ex parte Williams 
 Kitohin, In re. Bx parte Punnett ' .. 
 , In re. Bx parte Young 
 
 KitsoD, West London Commercial Bank v. ., 
 
 Kloebe, In re. Kannreuther v. Geiselbrecht 
 Knapman, In re. Knapman v. Wreford 
 
 V. Wreford. In re Knapman 
 
 Knapp i;. Knapp .. .. ., . .. 
 KnatchbuU's Settled Estates, In re .. 
 Knight, In re. Ex parte Isherwood.. 
 , In re. Bx parte Voisey 
 
 , In re. Knight v. Gardner ,, 
 
 V. Abbott 
 
 f. Bowers 
 
 -V. Clarke 
 
 - V. Gardner. In re Knight 
 
 In re ■ 
 
 Knight's Will, In re 
 
 Knowles, In re. Nottage v. Buxton .. 
 
 Knowles' Settled Estates, In re .1 
 
 Knutsford Estates Company, Pierson v. 
 Koster, Ex parte. In re Park 
 Kough, Brown, Shipley & Co. v. 
 
 L. V. L. .. 
 
 Labouohere, Reg. u. 
 
 Lacey, Ex parte. In re Laoey 
 
 , In re 
 
 La Compagnie de Fives-Lille, Prevost u. 
 
 La Compagnie Manufacturifere de St. Hyacinthe,) 
 Frechettes. .. .. .. .. .. ..j 
 
 Lacon, Martin v. In re Christmas .. 
 
 Lacy & Son, In re 
 
 , Hartland, & Co., Farrer v. 
 
 '■ ■ , V. 
 
 Ladbury, Ex parte. J n re Turner .. 
 
 La Fontaine, Pitts v. .. 
 
 Laird V. Briggs . . 
 
 V- ■ • 
 
 , Clyde Navigation (Trustees of) «). 
 
 Lake and .Taylor's Mortgage, In re. Spain v. Mowatt. ) 
 Milford. Haven Railway and Estate Company v. I 
 Mowatt ' 
 
 Lakes, Gould v. 
 
 Lakin, Deakin v. In re Shakespear . . 
 
 Lamb, Ex parte. In re Southam 
 
 & Porta], In re .. 
 
 
 14Q. B. D. 491 .. .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 203 
 
 25 Ch. D. 373 
 16 Ch. D. 590 
 
 16 Ch. D. 226 
 
 17 Ch. D. 668 
 12Q.B.D.157;13Q. B. D. 
 
 360 
 
 28Ch. D.175 
 
 18 Ch. D. 300 
 18Ch. D. 300 
 
 6 P. D. 10 
 
 27 Oh. D. 349 ; 29 Ch. D. 588 
 22 Ch. D. 384 
 
 21 Ch. D. 442 
 
 24Ch.D.606;25Ch.D.297 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 845 .. 
 
 15Q. B. D. 294 .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 606 
 
 25 Ch. D. 297 
 
 26Ch. D. 82 
 21 Ch. D. 806 
 
 27 Ch. D. 707 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 666 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 597 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 848 
 
 7 P. D. 16 .. 
 12 Q. B. D. 320 
 
 16 Ch. D. 131 
 6 Q. B. D. 154 
 10 App. Cas. 643 
 
 9 App. Cas. 170 
 
 30 Ch. D. 
 25 Ch. D. 
 25 Ch. D. 
 28 Ch. D. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 
 
 544 
 
 301 
 
 636 
 
 482 
 
 532 
 
 6 App. Cas. 482 
 16 Ch. D. 440 ; 19 Ch. D. 22 
 16 Ch. D. 663 
 8 App, Cas. 658 .. .'. 
 
 28Ch. D. 402 
 
 6 P. D. 1 .. 
 30 Ch. D. 169 
 19 Ch. D. 169 
 27Ch. D.600; 30Ch.D. 50 
 
 1327 
 
 788 
 
 1080 
 376 
 158 
 
 1266 
 
 358 
 
 561 
 
 565 
 
 565 
 
 1106 
 
 1445 
 
 174 
 
 159 
 
 (1190 
 
 (1222 
 
 443 
 
 15 
 
 771 
 
 (1190 
 
 1 1222 
 
 (1190 
 
 11222 
 
 1594 
 
 1668 
 
 (1443 
 
 ]1448 
 
 1540 
 
 40 
 
 238 
 
 1112 
 466 
 198 
 649 
 303 
 
 306 
 
 289 
 
 1532 
 
 899 
 
 1182 
 
 174 
 
 136, 1127 
 
 520, 1164 
 
 1245 
 
 1379 
 
 1631 
 
 1130 
 
 639 
 
 186 
 1697 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixv 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Lamb v. Munster 
 
 ■I 
 
 Lambert, Elliott v. In re Callaghan 
 
 Lambeth Assessment Oomtnittee, Smith v. .. 
 
 LamVs Trusts, la re .. 
 
 Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Co., Marsden v. 
 
 ^. ., Whalley v. 
 
 Lancashire (Justices of), JJochdale (Corporation of) vX 
 
 Lancashire Telephone Company v. Manchester (Over-i[ 
 seers of) .. .. .. .. .. ..) 
 
 " Lancaster," The 
 
 La.ncaster, Ex parte. In re Marsden 
 
 Lancaster (Justices of), Improvement Commissioners) 
 of Newton in Makerfield ... .. .. .. j 
 
 Lancaster, Mostyn V. Taylor i;. Mostyn 
 
 Lancaster (Justices of), Newton Improvement Com-1 
 missioners V. . . .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 , Over Darwen (Mayor of) v. | 
 
 Land and Finance Corporation, Tomlinson v. 
 Land and House Property Corporation, Smith v. 
 Land Corporation of Ireland, Gruinness v. 
 Landowners West of England and South Wales Land) 
 
 IJrainage and Inclosure Company v. Ashford .. ) 
 Lane w. CpUins.. 
 — ■■ — v.lf&ne. In re Llewellyn 
 
 u. Bhoades. In re Ehoades 
 
 Langdon, Cecil v. 
 
 Langen u. Tate . . 
 
 Langley, Mutual Life Assurance Society v. .. 
 
 Langrish v. Archer .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Langriville (Overseers of), Reg. v. 
 
 "Lapwing," 'J he. The "Hochung." China Mer-) 
 
 chants Steam Navigation Company v. Bignold ,. ) 
 Laroche, Cooper v. 
 Lascelles, Agar-Ellis u. In re Agar-Ellis .. 
 
 — —, , Geuese ■«. 
 
 Last, Erichsen ». .. ,.» 
 
 — — V. London Assurance Coi^poration 
 
 Latham, In re. Ex parte Glegg 
 
 Lauderdale Peerage, The 
 
 Laverj', Barker u. .. .. .., . 
 
 , Cercle Restaurant Castiglione Company v. 
 
 Layingtim, Daubnz v. .. 
 L:iw Society v. Skinner 
 
 ■ t>. Waterlow 
 
 Lawes, In re. Lawes v. Lawes 
 
 ■ , Belt?; 
 
 «. Lawes. In re Lawes 
 
 Lawless v. Sullivan 
 
 Lawrence v. Accidental Insurance Company 
 
 , Jervis u. 
 
 ?). Lawrence . . 
 
 Lawrie v. Lees .. 
 
 ••{ 
 
 ::! 
 
 Volume and Pas;e. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Dio;est. 
 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 110 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 588 
 
 28 Ch. D. 186 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 585 ; 10 Q. B. D, 
 327 
 
 28Ch. D. 77* '.'. 
 
 7Q. B. D.641 
 13Q. B. D.131 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 525 ; 8 Q. B. 
 12 ; 8 App. Cas. 494 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 700 ; 14 Q. B. 
 
 2«7 
 8 P. D. 65 ; 9 P. D. 14 
 25 Ch. D. 311 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 25 
 
 23 Ch. D. 583 
 13 Q. B. D. 623 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 497 ; 15 Q. B. I) 
 20.. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 539 
 28Ch. U. 7.. 
 22 Ch. D. 349 
 
 16 Ch. D. 411 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 193 
 
 25 Ch. D. 66 
 
 29 Ch. D. 142 
 28Ch. D. 1.. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 522 
 
 26 Ch. D. 686 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 44 
 14 Q. B. D. 83 
 
 7 App. Cas. 512 
 
 17 Ch. D. 368 
 24 Ch. D. 317 
 13 Q. B. D. 901 
 7Q.B.D. 12,-8Q.B.D.414 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 389 ; 14 Q. B. D. 
 239; 10 App. Cas. 438 .. 
 
 19Ch. D. 7 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 769 
 18 Ch. D 555 
 13 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 9Q. B.D.I; 8App 
 
 20 Ch. B. 81 
 12 Q. B. D. 356 
 20 Ch. D. 81 
 
 6 App. Cas. 373 
 7Q.B. D. 216 
 22 Ch. D. 202 
 26 Ch. D. 795 
 
 7 App. Cas. 19 
 
 Cas. 407 
 
 1171 
 
 499 
 676 
 
 1068 
 
 1008 
 1244 
 1652 
 
 622 
 
 1071 
 
 1518 
 168 
 
 623 
 
 1463 
 
 -62 
 
 621 
 
 1180 
 
 1634 
 
 328 
 
 337 
 
 • 15 
 1214 
 1693 
 1467 
 1192 
 902, 918 
 1618 
 1072 
 
 1100 
 
 ■ 1690 
 
 667 
 
 187 
 
 1329 
 
 338, 1329 
 
 172 
 
 f 515 
 
 1388 
 
 (l39S 
 
 1160 
 
 366 
 
 1136 
 
 1544 
 
 1470 
 
 li95 
 
 1470 
 
 ■ 299 
 
 689 
 
 289 
 
 32 
 
 39, 1625 
 
 e 
 
Ixvi 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IX THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Cas«. 
 
 Laws V. Eltringham 
 V. Smith. The ' 
 
 Eio Tinto ' 
 
 In re Marsden 
 In re Marsden 
 
 ■! 
 
 1 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Lawson, Seear v. 
 
 V. Vacuum Brake Company 
 
 V. Wallasey Local Board 
 
 Layland, Bowden v. Gribbs v. Layland. 
 
 , Gihbs v^ Bowden v. Layland. 
 
 Lea V. Parker . . 
 Leaker, Symons v. 
 
 Leamington (Covporartion of), Young ;;. 
 
 Learoyd, Wilton,, & Co., In re. Ex parte Armitage 
 Lechmere and Lloyd, In re .. ...' 
 
 Leckie, Hislop i;. , 
 
 Le Cooq, Cundy II. .. .... 
 
 Lee (a Person of unsound Miud), In re 
 Lee & Chapman's. Case. Jn re Asphaltic Wood Pave- 
 ment 'Company 
 
 V. Alexander ' 
 
 -^, Reg. v.. : .. 
 
 , Webber v. 
 
 Lee and Hemingway, In re 
 Leeds and County Bank v. Walker 
 Lees, In're 
 
 a Fisher ., 
 
 , Lawrie v. 
 
 Leethanii, Gleadow v. . 
 
 Leggott V. Western 
 
 Leicester Club apd Couiity Kacecouibe Companj-, In; 
 
 re. Ex parte Cannon . . 
 
 Leicestershire B9,nking Company, Ex parte. In rei 
 
 . Dale \ 
 
 Leigh V, Burnett. .. ... 
 
 1). Dickeson ... ., .. .. „ | 
 
 . , Drummond v. In re Bryon 
 
 w. Wrigley.. Looker u. Wriglc}' 
 
 Leightoin t). Price. Iij re Price .. 
 
 Lemaitre t!. Davis 
 
 Lemann's Trusts, In re 
 
 Le Marchatiit, Wheeler y. .. .. .. ■ .. 
 
 Le,May v. Welch. In re Le May', 
 Lo May's Begistered Design, In re. 
 Lenders v. Anderson ,. 
 Jjeney, iSandgate Local Board u. 
 LephaiA v. Barber .. i .. 
 
 "Leon," The .'.' 
 
 '.■,L?on;XIIL,"the T. 
 
 Leonard & Ellis v. Wells. In re Leonard and Ellis 
 ' Trade-mark .. 
 
 ■ & Ellis's Trade-mark. 
 
 lillis 1). Wells 
 
 iis.) 
 
 Lesingham's Trusts, In re 
 Leslie, Ex parte. In re Guerrier 
 
 . , In re. Leslie i; Fiencli 
 
 ; , Dalrymple f . .. 
 
 — v. French. In ro Leslie 
 
 Letterstcdt v. Broei's ... 
 
 Begistered Design 
 Le May i;. Welch 
 
 ".'.I 
 
 In re Leonard &\ 
 
 SQ.B.D. 283 
 .9 App. Cas. 356 . 
 16 Ch. D. 121 
 27 Ch. D. 137 
 11 Q. B. D. 229 . 
 .26 Ch. D. 783 
 26 Ch. D. 783 
 13 Q. B. D. 835 . 
 15 Q. B. D. 629 . 
 8 Q. B. D. 579 ; 8 App Gi 
 517 
 
 .17 Ch, D. 13 
 
 .18 Ch. D. 524 
 
 6 App. Cas. 560 .. 
 13Q. B. D. 207 .. 
 23Ch.D. 216 
 
 26Ch.D.624;30Ch.D. 216 
 
 5 App.- Cas. 853 , 
 
 9Q. B. D. 394 
 9Q. B. D. 315 
 24Ch. D. 669 
 11 Q. B. D. 84: 
 
 26 Oh D. 496 
 2'2Ch. D. 283 
 
 7 App. Cas. 19 
 22 Ch. D. 269 
 .10Q.B. D. 236 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 287 .. 
 
 30Ch. D. 629 
 
 14Q. B. D. 48 
 
 29Ch.D. 231 
 
 12Q. B, D. 194; 15 Q. B. D. 
 
 60.. 
 30 Ch. D. 110 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 397 
 
 27 Ch. D. 552 
 19 Ch, D. 281 
 22 Ch. D. 633 
 17 Ch. D. 675 
 
 28 Ch. D. 24 
 28 Ch. D. 24 
 
 ■ 12 Q. B. D. 50 
 
 25 Ch. D. 183 n. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 293 
 6 P. D. 148 .. 
 8 P. D. 121 
 
 26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 24 Ch. 0.703 
 20 Ch, D. 131 
 23 Ch. D. 552 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 5 
 23 Ch. D. 552 
 
 9 App. Cas. a71 
 
 :■} 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 467 
 1488 
 1137 
 1192 
 
 409 
 
 806 
 
 806 
 
 445 
 1251 
 
 817 
 
 180 
 1673' 
 1376 
 
 684 
 
 839 
 
 331 
 
 1375 
 823 
 601 
 
 1223 
 
 232 
 
 860 
 
 900 
 
 839, 1625 
 
 1704 
 874 
 
 1205 
 
 373 
 
 188 
 
 796 
 
 1565 
 
 1666 
 
 269 
 
 1443 
 
 1557 
 
 1607 
 
 1179 
 
 428 
 
 428 
 
 1134 
 
 1654 
 
 938 
 
 399 
 
 727 
 
 1579 
 
 1579 
 
 1696 
 150 
 688 
 
 1169 
 688 
 307 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixyii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Leutner, Harrison v. 
 
 Levinstein, Badisclie Anilin und Soda Fabrik r. 
 
 Levy, In re. Ex parte Walton .. ; .. 
 
 Levy's Trusts, In re ... 
 
 Lewes and Bast GrinsteadEailway Co., Peters v. 
 
 Lewiri, Holyland u. 
 
 Lewis, In re. Ex parte Held er .. .. 
 
 , In re. Foxwell i'. Lewisi 
 
 , Askew V. 
 
 -, Bowen V. 
 
 — ' , Poxwell V. In re Lewis 
 
 , Garrard V. 
 
 , Griffiths V. In re Griffiths . . 
 
 , Kaltenbach v. .. 
 
 , London and County Banking Company v. 
 
 , McHenry V. 
 
 , Eicketts V. 
 
 ■V. Trask.. 
 
 ••{ 
 
 In re Val- 
 
 In re Power 
 
 In re Hay ward 
 
 Leyland, Conolan V. 
 
 "libra," The .. 
 
 Lightbound v. Bebington Local Board 
 LiJley V. Doubleday . . 
 Limehouse Board of Works,' Ex parte, 
 lance .. . 
 
 . Limpfus V. Arnold 
 
 Lindfprd, Otto v. 
 L'indsell v. Phillips. 
 Line v. Warren 
 
 Linger, Tucker v. 
 
 LiiiigWood, Oreeryj v. 
 Ljianey, Moorhouse v. 
 
 , Thorpe u. 
 
 Linton V. Linton 
 
 Lion 'Insurance Association V. Tucker 
 
 Lippert, Hutton ■!;. 
 
 Liskeard Union v. Liskeard Waterworks Company.. 
 
 Liskeard Waterworks Company, Liskeard Union v. ., 
 
 Lister, Ex parte. In re Halberstamm 
 
 Lister's Petition. In re Milford Docks Company .. 
 
 I^itchfield, Jackson v. .. 
 
 -^— ; V. Jones 
 
 Lithgow, Eandali V. .. 
 Little, Ingram ■!;. 
 
 «.' Kingswopd Collieries Company .. 
 
 , Vivian w. ..; 
 
 Liverpool (Corporation pf), Jones V. .. 
 
 '' . '' • (Guardians of) v. Overseers of Portsea 
 
 ■ '- (.Instices of). Beg. v. . -.: .. . . 
 
 "Livietta,".The ' ■ 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 ■■! 
 
 °;} 
 
 Livingstone^ Price ; 
 
 16Ch. D. 559 
 24Ch. D. 594 
 
 24Ch.D,156;29Ch. D.366 
 
 17 Ch. D. 746 
 30Ch..D. 119 .. 
 16Ch.D.703;18Ch,D.429 
 26Ch. D. 266 .. .. 
 24Ch. D. 339 
 
 30Ch. D. 654 
 
 10Q.B. D.47T .. .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 890 .. 
 
 30Ch. D. 654 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 30 
 
 26Ch. D. 465- .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 54; 10 App. Cas.V 
 
 617 / 
 
 21 Ch. D. 490 
 
 21 Ch. D. 202 ; 22 Ch. D. 
 
 397 
 20Ch. D. 745- .. 
 21Ch. D. 862' 
 27 Ch. D. 632 
 
 6 P. D. 139 .. 
 14 Q. B. D. 849 ., 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 510 
 
 24 Ch. D. 177 
 
 .13Q.B. D. 246;15Q. B.D, 
 300 
 
 18 Ch. i). 394 
 30 Ch. D. 291 
 
 14 q. B: D. 73, 548 
 21 Ch. D. 18; 8 App. Cas.-l 
 
 508.. ..... 
 
 19Ch. b. 47() 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 273 .. 
 15Q. B.D. 273 .. 
 15Q. B. D. 239 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 176 .. 
 
 8 App. Gas. 309 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 505 
 7Q. B.D. 506 
 17 Ch. D. 518 
 23 Ch. D. 292 
 
 8Q. B.D. 474 ... 
 
 25Ch. D. 64 
 
 12Q. B.'D. 525 .. ■ 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 251 .. 
 20 Ch. D. 733 
 IIQ. B. D.,370 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 890 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 303 . , 
 llQ. B;D. 636 ..'■ 
 
 8 P. D. 24 :. 
 8P. D. 209 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 679 
 
 :■) 
 
 1217 
 
 1225 
 
 fl042 
 
 h045 
 
 11049 
 
 176 
 
 1454 
 
 783 
 
 ' 1684 
 
 139 
 
 525 
 
 ■ 259 
 
 167r, 
 
 525 
 
 233 
 
 1223 
 
 573 
 
 1208 
 
 1158 
 
 13 
 1591 
 640, 
 1512 
 
 832- 
 485 
 
 1153' 
 
 1695 
 
 1160 
 808 
 941 
 
 743 
 
 16,75 
 
 939 
 
 939 
 
 148 
 
 355 
 
 307 
 
 1657 
 
 1657 
 
 135 
 
 367 
 
 J1140 
 
 U196 
 
 1200 
 
 1202 
 
 1166 
 
 1535 
 
 1176 
 
 861 
 
 1063 
 
 682 
 
 1517 
 
 1519 
 
 1478 
 
 2 
 
Ixviii 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Llaneilian (Overseers of) Mersey Docks and Harbour) 
 Board v. . .. .. ,, . . . . j 
 
 Llanover v. Homfray. Phillips v. Llanover . . 
 
 , Phillips V. Llanover v. Homfray . . 
 
 Llewellyn, In re. Lane d. Lane 
 
 , Eeg. V. 
 
 Lloyd (Mary Prances), In the Goods of 
 
 V. Bottomley. In re Lloyd & Sons' Trade-) 
 
 mark .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 , Lechmere and, In re .. 
 
 W.Lloyd.. 
 
 & Sons Trade-mark, In re. Lloyd ■;;. Bot-) 
 
 Volume and Pa^e. 
 
 Columa 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 tomley 
 
 Lloyd Generale Italiano, In re 
 Lloyd's V. Harper 
 
 Lloyd's Banking Company v. Jones 
 
 Local Government Board, Eej:. v. 
 
 , V. 
 
 Loch, Waller v. 
 Locke, Palxer r. 
 Lockhart, Mott v. 
 Lofthouse, an Infant, In re .. 
 
 Lomer, Scotney v. 
 
 London and County Banking Company, Croft v. 
 
 V. Groome . . 
 
 ■». Lewis 
 
 V. Eatcliffe .. 
 
 V. Terry. In) 
 
 re Sherry .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 London and Globe Telephone and Maintenance Com-j 
 
 pany, United Telephone Company u. .. .. ) 
 
 London and North Western Bail way Company,) 
 
 Attorney-General f. .. .. .. .. .. ( 
 
 Mayor of Birkenhead V. 
 
 Dyson v. 
 
 Hodkinson i>. 
 
 Metropolitan Board of Works v. .. 
 
 Price .. 
 London and St. Katharine Docks Company, Grif-) 
 
 fiths V. .. .. .. .. .. .. J 
 
 London and South Western Railway Co., Davey v. 
 
 , V. 
 
 • V. Gomm .. 
 
 London and Staffordshire Fire Insurance Co., In re .. 
 London and Suburban Land and Building Company i;.) 
 
 Field [ 
 
 London and Yorkshire Bank V. Bel ton 
 V. Cooper 
 
 London Assurance Corporation, Last v. 
 
 ••{ 
 
 U Q. B. D. 770 .. 
 
 19Ch. D. 224 
 19Ch. D. 224 
 25Ch. D. 66 
 13Q. B. D. 681 .. 
 9 P. D. 65 .. 
 
 27Ch. D. 646 
 
 18 Ch. D. 524 
 14Q. B. D. 725 .. 
 
 27Ch. D. 646 
 
 29Ch. D. 219 
 16Ch. D. 290 
 
 29Ch. D. 221 
 
 9Q. B. D. 600; 10 Q. B. 
 
 309 
 15Q. B. D. 70 
 7Q. B. D. 619 
 18 Ch. D. 381 
 8App. Cas. 568 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 921 
 
 29 Ch. D. 535 
 
 14Q. B. D. 347 .. 
 8 Q. B. D, 288 
 21 Ch. D. 490 
 6 App. Cas. 722 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 692 
 
 26 Ch. D. 766 
 6 Q. B. D. 216 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 572 .. 
 7Q. B. D. 32 
 14Q. B. D. 228 .. 
 17 Ch. D. 246 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 485 .. 
 
 12Q. B.D.493; 13Q.B 
 259 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 213 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 70 
 20 Ch. D. 562 
 24 Ch. D. 149 
 
 16 Ch. D. 645 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 457 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 7, 473 .. 
 
 12Q. B.D. 389;14Q.B. 
 
 239 ; 10 App. Cas. 438 
 
 ^! 
 
 "} 
 
 D.l 
 
 1074 
 
 1193 
 
 1195 
 
 1214 
 
 820 
 
 10. 
 
 1578 
 
 167a 
 607 
 
 1578 
 
 364 
 1262 
 (652, 917 
 t 1637 
 
 832 
 
 624 
 
 499 
 
 142 
 
 299 
 
 671 
 (1079 
 {1601 
 (1702 
 
 77a 
 51 
 1208 
 53, 915 
 
 1266 
 1014 
 1286 
 
 778 
 12S3 
 1287 
 
 880 
 1297 
 
 950 
 
 948 
 948 
 790 
 327 
 
 761: 
 
 746 
 1172 
 
 338, 1329 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixix 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volnme and Page. 
 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 581 
 
 
 372 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 505 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1295 
 
 25Ch.D.413; 29 Oh. 
 
 D.89 
 
 959, 1284 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 582 
 
 ,, 
 
 279 
 
 6App. Cas. 393 .. 
 
 
 452 
 
 26 Ch. D. 107 
 
 .. 
 
 329 
 
 12Q. B.D.201;13Q.B.D.) 
 832 j 
 
 864 
 
 6App. Cas. 393 .. 
 
 
 452 
 
 13Q. B.D. 540 .. 
 
 
 1206 
 
 25 Ch. D. 384 
 
 
 1217 
 
 23 Ch. D. 103 
 
 
 266 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 176 .. 
 
 
 629 
 
 15Q. B. D. 415 .. 
 
 
 530 
 
 12Q. B. D. 578 .. 
 
 
 531 
 
 12Q. B.D.452;13Q.B.D.\ 
 872 / 
 
 1228 
 
 16Ch. D. 344 
 
 
 339 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 105 .. 
 
 ,. 
 
 884 
 
 16 Ch. D. 617 
 
 
 1541 
 
 16 Ch. D. 691 
 
 .. 
 
 1085 
 
 6P. D. 60 .. 
 
 
 1101 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 145 
 
 .. 
 
 1658 
 
 21 Ch. D. 9 
 
 
 741 
 
 18 Ch. D. 395 ; 8 App. 
 15 ,. 
 
 Cas. 
 
 1585 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 397 
 
 269 
 
 17Ch. D. 10 
 
 
 1339 
 
 22 Oh. D. 25 ; 9 App. Cas. 480 
 
 781 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 190 
 
 
 1155 
 
 7P. D. 199 
 
 .. 
 
 1102 
 
 10 App. Cas. 763 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 J1389 ] 
 ■ 1396 
 
 29Ch. D. 348 
 
 ,. 
 
 1593 
 
 lOQ. B.D.547;9App. 
 286 
 
 Cas.) 
 
 660 
 
 6P. D. 80 .. 
 
 1508 
 
 10 P. D. 122 
 
 
 1113 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 185 
 
 .. 
 
 464 
 
 25 Ch. D. 76 
 
 
 1144 
 
 24 Ch. D. 31 
 
 
 163 
 
 11 Q. B. D, 92 
 
 \\ 
 
 171 
 
 16 0h. D. 93 
 
 _. 
 
 1169 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 369 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1008 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 407 .. 
 
 
 522 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 667 . 
 
 
 837, 844 
 
 lOQ.B. D. 286 .. 
 
 _. 
 
 1220 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 238 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 179 
 
 24Ch. D. 253 
 
 ,. 
 
 786 
 
 6Q. B. D. 84 
 
 
 169 
 
 23 Ch. D. 712 
 
 
 642 
 
 8 App. Cas. 891 .. 
 
 ., 
 
 1328 
 
 18 Ch. D. 531 
 
 
 1458 
 
 17Ch. D. 788 
 
 
 1698 
 
 27 Ch. D. 497 
 
 ,, 
 
 407 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 London, Bombay, and Mediterranean Bank, In re 
 
 London, Brighton, and South Coast Eaihvay Company,) 
 
 Hall & Co. v ] 
 
 Truman v. 
 London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Co., Baldwin) 
 
 & Co. V. .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 London (Corporation of) v. London Joint Stock Bank 
 London Financial Association r. Kelk 
 
 London General Omnibus Company, Morgan v. ,. ] 
 
 London Joint Stock Bank v. London (Corporation of) 
 
 London Land Company u. Harris 
 
 London (Mayor of), Ex parte .. 
 
 London Provident Building Society, Hack v. 
 
 London School Board «. Dugjan 
 
 V. Wood 
 
 V. Wright 
 
 London Scottish Benefit Society v. Chorley ., 
 
 London Tramways Company, Dent v. 
 London Trams Company, Hodges u. .. 
 Long, In re. Ex parte Fuller 
 
 ■= v. Ovenden 
 
 " Longford," The 
 
 Longshaw, Warrington Waterworks Company v. 
 Lonsdale, Walsh V. 
 
 Loog, Singer Manufacturing Company «;. .. ..< 
 
 Looker i;. Wrigley. Leigh v. Wrigley 
 
 Loomes, Whiting to .. 
 
 Loosemore v. Tiverton and North Devon Eailway Co. 
 
 Loring, Millington u. .. 
 
 "Lotus," The 
 
 Lovat Peerage, The 
 
 Love, In re. Hill j;. Spurgeon 
 
 , Bellu J 
 
 "Love Bird," The 
 
 Lovekin, Harvey v. 
 
 Lovell, Eeg. v. .. 
 
 Loveridge, Towse u. 
 
 Levering, Ex parte. In re Murrell .. 
 
 , Hopkinson V. 
 
 Low, Benbow w. 
 
 Lowcock u. Overseers of Broughton .. 
 
 Lowe f. Chester (Bishop of) .. 
 
 v. Fox 
 
 'V. Holme.. 
 
 Lowenthal, In re. Beesty, Ex parte.. 
 Lowestoft (Manor of) and Great Eastern Eailway) 
 Company, In re. Ex parte Eeeve . . . . . . j 
 
 Lucas V. Dicker 
 — — — , King u. .. 
 
 — , Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. .. 
 
 , Smith t;. 
 
 Lucas's Will, In re 
 Luck, Preston w. 
 
Ixx 
 
 TABLE- OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Luddy, In re. Peard v. Morton 
 
 Ludmore, In re . . 
 
 Luke V. Tpnkin. In re Symons 
 
 Lumb i;. Beaumont 
 
 Lumsden v. Winter 
 
 Lund ■!;. Campbell 
 
 Luxon, Ex parte. In re Pidsley 
 
 Lybbe «. Hkrt .. 
 
 Lydney and Wigpool Iron Ore Company v. Bird 
 
 Ly ell t". Kennedy 
 
 , Kennedy v. 
 
 V. Kennedy . . : = 
 
 ,' Kennedy v. 
 
 v. Kennedy (No. 2) 
 
 Lyncb v. Lynch 
 
 '- V. Wheatley 
 
 Lyon V. Tweddell 
 
 Lyonf , Joseph v. ■ .. ■ 
 
 , Manchester (Mayor of) w. 
 
 II. Tucker 
 
 , Walcott V. 
 
 M. 
 
 M. 
 
 , A. V. 
 v.D... 
 
 V. i 
 
 — , Gr. t/. 
 
 "Mac," The 
 
 McAlj)in6 V. Moore. In re Moore 
 
 McAiiulty, Danford u. . . .. .. .. ..■! 
 
 M'Bain tj. ■Wallace & Co. 
 
 McBdan ■«. Deane 
 
 McBride, Biohards ti. .. 
 
 McCarthy, Real and Personal Advance Company c. 
 
 McClellan, In re. McClellan v. McClellan . . 
 
 r V. McClellan. In re McClellan . . 
 
 McColla, In re. Ex parte McLaren . . 
 
 McCoUin i;. Gilpin 
 
 MeConnell, In re. Saunders v. McConnell . . 
 
 , Saunders i;. In re McConnell ,.. 
 
 McCutchan, Ingle V. .. 
 
 McDonald, Peg. i;. 
 
 Macdonald v. Tacquah Gold Mining Company 
 
 V. Whitfield 
 
 McEllister ti. Biggs 
 McEvoy, Duffett v.- .. 
 
 McBwan ■y.Crombie .. 
 
 Macfarlane's Claim. In re Northern Counties of| 
 England Fire Insurance Company .. .. ..I 
 
 McGeorge, Ex parte. In re Stevens .. 
 McGibbon v. Abbott . . 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 394 
 13Q. B. D. 415 .. 
 2lCh. D. 757 
 27 Cb. D. 356 
 8 Q. B. D. 650 
 14Q. B. D. 821 .. 
 20Ch. D. 701 
 29 Ch. D. 8 
 23 Ch. D. 358 .: 
 20 Ch. D. 484; 8 App. 
 217 
 23Ch. D. 387 
 
 27Ch. D. 1.. 
 
 15Q. B.D. 491 .. 
 9App. Gas. 81 
 10 P. D. 183 
 14 Q. B. D. 504 .. 
 17 Ch. D. 529 
 loQ. B. D. 280 .. 
 22 Ch. D. 287 
 6 Q, B. D. 660 ; 7 Q. B. 
 523 
 29 Ch. D. 584 
 
 lOP. D. 178 
 10 P. U. 75 .. 
 lOP. D. 175 
 
 10 App. Cas. 171 .. 
 
 7 P. D. 38, 126 
 21Ch. D. 778 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 645 ; 8 App. 
 
 456 
 6 App. Cas. 588 .. 
 30 Ch. D. 520 
 8Q. B.D. 119 
 18Gh. D. 362 
 29Ch. D. 495 
 29Ch. D. 495 
 
 16 Ch. D. 534 
 6Q. B.D. 516 
 29Ch. D. 76 
 29Ch. D. 76 
 
 12Q. B. D. 518 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 323 .. 
 
 13Q. C. D. 535 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 733 
 8App. Cas. 314 .. 
 10 App. Cas. .300 .. 
 
 25Ch. D. 175 
 
 17 CI). D. 337 
 
 20 Ch. D. 697 
 
 10 App. Cas. 653 .. 
 
 Cas, 
 
 ";! 
 
 "1 
 
 Cas. 
 
 "1 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1675 
 
 189 
 
 552 
 
 1206 
 
 1163 
 
 1219 
 
 , 186 
 
 176 
 
 1180 
 
 1169 
 
 1171 
 
 11170 
 
 U178 
 
 1344 
 
 1171 
 
 39 
 
 1007 
 
 1019 
 
 255 
 
 857 
 
 258 
 
 1137 
 
 1113 
 1112 
 1112 
 (1391 
 ■|1405 
 1518 
 1608 
 
 1148 
 
 1401 
 
 893 
 
 684 
 
 1223 
 
 1239 
 
 ■ 1239 
 
 '• 195 
 
 329 
 
 1218 
 
 1218 
 
 1527 
 
 464 
 
 1202 
 
 233 
 
 316 
 
 318 
 
 (1414 
 
 |l592 
 
 373 
 
 119 
 
 305 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxi [ 
 
 ' Name of Case. 
 
 McGifBn v. Palmer's Shipbuilding, Company , 
 McGo wan, In the Goods of ,. 
 
 '■ t). Middleton 
 
 M'Gregor, Gow, & Co., Mogul Steamship Company v. 
 MoHenry, Ex parte. In re McHenry 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Credit Companj' 
 
 , In re. Ex parte, Walker .. 
 
 ■W.Lewis. .. .. 
 
 Maohu, Inre .. 
 M'll wraith a. Green 
 
 : V. 
 
 , Miles •«. 
 
 "Melfttyre, John," The .. .. .'. 
 
 Macljay, Ex parte. In re Page 
 
 V. Dick 
 
 Maipkellar w. Bond 
 
 M'Kenzie v. British Linen Companj' . . 
 
 Mackenzie's Trusts, In re 
 
 Mackie v. Herbertson . . 
 
 Mackintosh, In re 
 
 Mapkonochie, Martin v. .. ,.. . 
 
 ^ --, V 
 
 Volume aad l'a2;e. 
 
 '■ T-i;. Penzance (Lord) 
 
 McLaohlan, Angus v. .. .. .. 
 
 McLaren, Ex parte. In re McOolla .. 
 
 , Caldwell V. 
 
 Maclaren «. Compagnie Francaise de Navigation al 
 Vapeur .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 McLaren v. Home . . 
 
 McLean, Bidder V. 
 
 M'Lean v. Clydesdale Banking Company 
 
 Maclean, Sanders ■;;... 
 
 Macleod j;. Jones 
 
 Maclure, Marshall -u, .. 
 
 '■ , Yorkshire Eailway W^gon Company v. . . i 
 
 McMahon ■;;. Field 
 
 Macmillan, Bergmann u. .. .. .. 
 
 McEae, In re. Porster v. Davis. Norden v. McEae 
 — r^^, Norden v. Forster v. Davis. In re McEae 
 Maoreight, In re. Paxton v. Macreight 
 
 , Paxton t;. In re Macreight, 
 
 Maddever, In re. Three Towns Banking Company) 
 
 V. Maddever 
 Maddever, Three Towns Banking Company y. 
 
 M^ddlson V. Alderson .. 
 
 Maddox, Hansen V. 
 
 Madge, Spiller v. In re Spiller 
 
 Madgwicki, In re 
 
 Madras Irrigation and Canal Company, In re 
 
 — rt : — , In re. 
 
 V. Madras Irrigation and Canal Company .. 
 ■ '■ — , Wood 
 
 re Madras Irrigation and Canal Company .. 
 Mafiet, Wakefield V. .. 
 Magee, In re. Ex parte Magee 
 Maggi, In re, Wiaehouse f . Winehouse ,. 
 
 
 Wood) 
 V. in 
 
 ?} 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 5 
 lOP. D. 197 " .. 
 IIQ. B. D. 464 .. 
 15Q. B. D. 476 .. 
 24Ch. D. 35 
 
 24Ch. D. 353 
 
 22Ch. 1X813 
 
 21Ch.D.202;23Ch. D. 397 
 21Ch. D. 838 
 13Q. B. D. 897 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 766 .. 
 8App. Cas. 120 .. 
 
 6P. D. 200 
 
 14Q. B. D. 401., .. 
 
 G App. Cas. 251 
 
 9App. Cas. 715 .. 
 
 6App. Cas. 82 
 
 23Ch. D. 750 
 
 9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 13Q. B. D. 235 .. 
 
 6P. D. 87; 7P. D. 94 .. 
 
 8P. D. 191 
 
 6App. Cas. 424 
 
 23Ch. D. 330 
 
 16Ch. D. 534 
 
 9App. Cas. 392 .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 640 .. 
 
 7.Q. B. D. 477 
 26Ch. D. 512 
 
 9 App. Cas. 95 
 IIQ. B. i). 327 .. 
 24Ch. D. 289 
 
 10 App. Cas. 325 .. 
 19 Ch. D. 478 ■ ■ 21 Ch. 
 
 309 
 7Q. B. D. 591 
 17Ch. D. 423 
 25Ch. D. 16 
 25 Ch. D. 16 
 30Ch. D. 165 
 30Ch. D. 165 
 
 27 Ch. D. 523 
 
 27Ch. D. 523 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 174; 8 App. 
 
 467 
 12 Q. B. i). 100 .. 
 ISCh. D. 614 
 25 Ch. D. 371 
 leCh. D. 702 .. .. 
 
 23Ch. D. 248 ■■ .. 
 
 23Ch. D. 248 
 
 10 App. Cas. 422 .. 
 15Q. B. D. 332 .. 
 20Ch. D. 545 
 
 ":} 
 
 Cas. 
 
 IS. I 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 863 
 
 1) 
 
 1156 
 
 401 
 
 192 
 
 191 
 
 190 
 115$ 
 166? 
 1152 
 115? • 
 
 316 
 109^ 
 
 179 
 (140^ • 
 (1405 
 
 313 
 536, 1372 
 
 1445 
 • 1390 
 
 181 
 1124 
 11^6 
 1124 
 
 680 
 
 195 
 
 302 
 
 1510 
 
 1003 
 
 1153 
 52, 13p'l 
 
 1364, 
 911 
 890 
 
 1284 
 
 485- 
 1041 
 114» 
 
 1148 
 514 
 514 
 
 603 
 
 G03 
 
 412 
 
 1231 
 1684 
 1216 
 1206 ' 
 
 ']244 
 
 1244 
 
 1456 
 190 
 566 
 
Ixxli 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 " Maid of I\eiif," The 
 
 Maidenhead (Corporation of), Eeg. v. .. .A 
 
 Maidstone and Ashford Eailway Company, Ex parte,' 
 
 Ex parte Bala and Festiniog Railway Company .. 
 Main, Patience ■!;. In re Patience 
 
 Maitland, Beddall v 
 
 — , Howard v. ,. 
 
 Maltby, 
 
 In re 
 In re. 
 
 Ex parte Browne 
 
 Makuna, Davies v. 
 Malcolm, Von Brockdorffj;. .. 
 Mallalieu, Hey wood t;. 
 Mallory, Ees. v. 
 
 " Mammoth," The 
 
 Manchester (Bishop of), Hey wood v. .. 
 
 — — (Corporation of) v. Peverley 
 
 ■ (Dean and Canons of), Attorney-Gene- 
 
 ral V. 
 
 ■ (Duke of), Smith v. 
 
 .1 
 
 Company v. 
 
 — Economic Building Society, In re 
 
 — (Mayor of) 11. Lyons 
 (Overseers of), Lancashire Telephone 
 
 , Eeg. V. .. 
 
 , Salford (Guardians of) v. 
 
 Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Eailway Corn- 
 pan}', Brown «j. 
 
 •1 
 
 Denaby Main Colliery Company 
 
 Teebay t'. 
 Mander v. Harris. In re March 
 Manley, Doble v. 
 Mann v. Brodie 
 Manners i;. Mew 
 Manning, In re . . 
 
 , Eeg. V. 
 
 Mansel, In re. Ex parte Newitt 
 
 -.1 
 
 ■ V. Norton 
 
 Mansfield (Guardians of) v, Wright .. 
 
 Manton v. Tabois 
 
 Mauzoni V. Douglas 
 
 Maple & Co. v. Junior Army and Navy Stores 
 
 Mapleson, Quilter v. .. 
 
 March, In re. Mander v. Harris 
 
 Marescaux, Bi'ee v. 
 
 "Margaret," The 
 
 Margate (Maj'or of ), Foat u. .. 
 
 "Marie," The 
 
 Maries, Gallaway v. .. 
 
 "Marion," The 
 
 Marjoribanks, Marlboroush (Duke of) v. In re Duke) 
 
 of Marlborough's Settlement .. .. .. j 
 
 Markham I'. Markham. In re Markham 
 Marlborough (Duke of) v. Marjoribanks. In re Duke) 
 
 of Marlborough's Settlement ., .. .. j| 
 
 Volume and Pas:e. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 6P. D. 178 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 339 ; 9 Q. B. D.' 
 494 
 
 25 Ch. D. 168 
 
 29 Ch. D. 976 
 17Ch. D. 174 
 IIQ. B. D. 695 .. 
 7Q. B. D. 18 
 16Ch. D. 497 
 29Ch. D. 596 
 30Ch. D. 172 
 25 Ch. D. 357 
 13 Q. B. D. 33 
 
 9P. D. 126 
 
 12Q. B. D.404 .. 
 22Ch. D. 294, n 
 
 ISCh. D. 596 
 
 24Ch. D. 611 
 24Ch. D. 488 
 22 0h. D. 287 
 13 Q. B. D. 700 ; 14 Q. B. D 
 
 267 
 8Q. B. D. 50 
 10 Q. B. D. 172 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 230 ; 10 Q. B. D. 
 250; 8 App. Cas. 703 .. 
 
 13Q.B.D. 674; 14Q. B.D. 
 209 
 
 24Ch. D. 572 
 
 °-} 
 
 24Ch.D.222; 27Ch.D. 
 
 28Ch. D. 664 
 
 10 App. Cas. 378 .. 
 
 29Ch. D. 725 
 
 30Ch. D. 480 
 
 12Q. B. D. 241 .. 
 
 14Q. B. D. 177 .. 
 
 22Ch. D. 769 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 683 
 
 30Ch. D. 92 
 
 6Q. B.D. 145 
 
 21Ch. D. 369 
 
 9Q. B.D. 672 
 
 24Ch. D.222;27Ch.D. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 434 
 
 6 P. D. 76 .. 
 
 8 P. D. 126 ; 9 P. D. 
 9 App. Cas. 873 .. 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 299 ., 
 
 7 P. D. 203 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 275 
 lOP. D. 4 .. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 127 
 
 16Ch. D. ].. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 127 
 
 166 
 
 166 
 
 47' 
 
 ;■} 
 
 1098 
 938 
 
 1215 
 
 515 
 
 1149 
 
 1631 
 
 476 
 
 127 
 
 872 
 
 1088 
 
 1626 
 
 474 
 
 1103 
 
 521 
 
 857 
 
 284 
 
 357 
 
 1243 
 
 857 
 
 1071 
 
 1066 
 1065 
 
 1299 
 1289 
 
 1620 
 
 1683 
 
 902 
 
 1385 
 
 917 
 
 129 
 
 460 
 
 136 
 
 768 
 
 1265 
 
 1705 
 
 948 
 
 420 
 
 773 
 
 1683 
 
 1135 
 
 1511 
 
 1512 
 
 825 
 1102 
 
 611 
 1513 
 
 1444 
 
 1236 
 
 1444 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxiii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Marlborough's (Duke of) Settlement, In re. Duke ofi 
 Marlborough u. Marjoribanks .. .. .. ] 
 
 Marriott, Peareth v. .. 
 
 Marsden, In re. Ex parte Lancaster 
 
 , In re. Bowden v. Layland; Gibbs v. Lay- 
 
 '■] 
 
 laud . , 
 
 V. Meadows 
 
 Marsden and Wife v. Lancashire and Yorkshire Eail- 
 
 way Company 
 Marseilles Extension Railway and Land Company, 4 
 
 In re. Small page's and Brandon's Cases .. ..J 
 
 Marsh, In re. Ex parte Marsh 
 
 , Post u. .. 
 
 Marsh and Earl Granville, In re 
 Marshall and Wright's Tmstees, In re 
 
 1). Berridge 
 
 V. Bolckow, Vaughan, & Co. 
 
 u. Gingell 
 
 V. Maclure 
 
 , Paget V. 
 
 Marshall, Stevens, & Co., Kendal v. .. 
 Martin, In re. Hunt v. Chambers 
 
 ?;. Beauchamp (Earl) .. 
 
 i". Boulanger .. 
 
 V. Fitzgibbon. Pike v. Fitzgibbon 
 
 , Hallett to 
 
 V. Lacon. In re Christmas . . 
 
 V. Mackonoohie 
 
 V. 
 
 . Keg. V. 
 
 , WalU 
 
 V. West Derby (Assessment Committee of) . 
 
 Martinson 1). Clowes 
 
 Martyn (a Lunatic), In re. In re Toutt's Will 
 
 Marwood, Gordon v. 
 
 Marwood «. Wright 
 
 "Mary," The 
 
 Marylebone (Guardians of ), Beg. i!. .. 
 Mason, In re. Mason v. Cattley 
 V. Cattley. In re Mason 
 
 , Fraser i;. 
 
 1;. Mason 
 
 Maspons, Mildred v. 
 
 Massey & Carey, In re . . 
 
 , Graham v. In re Hawthorne 
 
 Mather, Birch v. 
 
 Matheson Brothers, Limited, In re .. 
 Matlock Bath Local Board, Sellers v. 
 Matthew, Ex parte 
 
 Matthewes, Ex parte. In re Sharpe .. 
 Matthews, Clements v. 
 
 , Cramer ?;. ,. 
 
 V.Jeffrey 
 
 ■!;. Ovey 
 
 , Walker V. .. 
 
 , Wolfe r. 
 
 
 30Ch. D. 127 
 
 22 Ch. D. 182 
 
 25 Ch. D. 311 
 
 26 Ch. D. 783 
 7 Q. B. D. 80 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 641 
 
 30Ch. D. 598 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 340 .. 
 
 16 Oh. D. 395 
 24Ch. D. 11 
 28 Ch. D. 93 
 19Ch. D. 233 
 6 Q. B. D. 231 
 21Ch. D. 790 
 
 10 App. Cas. 325 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 255 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 856 ,. 
 20Ch. D. 365 
 
 25 Ch. D. 12 
 
 8 App. Cas. 296 .. 
 17Ch. D. 454 
 24Ch. D. 624 
 
 30 Ch. D. 544 
 
 6 P. D. 87 ; 7 P. D. 94 
 8P. D. 191.. 
 
 8Q. B. D. 54 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 727; 11 Q. B. 
 102 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 145 .. 
 21Ch. D. 857 
 
 26 Ch. D. 745 
 
 7 P. D. 62 .. 
 7Q. B. D. 62 
 7 P. D. 201 .. 
 13Q. B. D. 15 
 22Ch. D. 609 
 
 22 Ch. D. 609 
 lOQ.B. D. 398; U-Q. B. 
 
 574 
 7 P. D. 233 ; 8 P. D. 21 
 9 Q. B. D. 530 ; 8 App. C 
 
 874 
 26Ch. D. 459 
 
 23 Ch. D. 743 
 22Ch. D. 629 
 27Ch. D. 225 
 14Q.B. D. 928 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 506 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 655 
 IIQ. B.D. 808 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 425 
 6Q. B.D. 290 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 403 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 109 
 21 Ch. D. 194 
 
 "■} 
 
 ^1 
 
 1444 
 
 539, 1703 
 168 
 
 806 
 
 258 
 
 1244 
 
 233 
 
 188 
 1547 
 1625 
 1469 
 
 739 
 1483 
 1700 
 
 890 
 
 890 
 1365 
 1186 
 1159 
 
 312 
 
 641 
 1464 
 
 289 
 1124 
 1126 
 
 468 
 
 427 
 
 1069 
 910 
 1610 
 1485 
 1485 
 1102 
 1063 
 1179 
 1179 
 
 419 
 
 1110 
 
 574, 1259 
 
 1529 
 
 727 
 
 1045 
 
 364 
 
 815 
 
 112 
 
 193 
 
 254 
 
 444 
 
 275 
 
 1234 
 
 1363 
 
 1585 
 
Jxxiv 
 
 TABLE OF, OASES M. THE DiaBST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 In re Brightmore 
 In re May .. 
 
 Maude v. Baildon Local Board 
 
 , Outram V. 
 
 Maughan, In.re. Ex parte Monkhouse 
 Maurer, Eeg..i;. 
 May, Ex parte 
 
 , Ex parte. 
 
 , Ex parte. 
 
 , Inre 
 
 r. Harodurt 
 
 , Harris 11. .. 
 
 ■ ^, Ricliarde «;. 
 
 ■W.Thomson .. .. ... 
 
 Mayd, In the Goods of 
 Meadows, Marsden v. .. 
 Meager v. Pel-lew 
 Meabin r. Morris 
 Mears v. Ohittick 
 Medley i;. Medley 
 Meek v. Chamberlain .. 
 Meera PuUay, Allen t>. 
 Mekin, Hyett i;. 
 
 Melbourne Banking Coi-poration v. Brougham 
 
 Melbourne Harbour Trust Commissioners, Union) 
 
 Steamship Company of New Zealand v. .. . . . j 
 
 MeDiss V. Shirley Local Board . ; 
 
 Mello, Widgen v. In re Webster's Estate 
 Mellon, Debenham «. .. 
 Mellor, In the Goods of 
 
 II. Porter ..■■.. 
 
 V. I Swire. In re Swire 
 
 ■ — V. . In re 
 
 Melville Vi Strioger .. .. .. ' .. 
 
 Mendel, Piatt ■!;. 
 
 Mercantile Mutual Marine Insurance Association, 
 
 In re . .. . . . . , . 
 
 Mercantile Steamship Company v. Tyser 
 Mercer, Attorney-General of Ontario v.. , . 
 Merchant Banking Company of London, Es parte. 
 
 In re Dm-ham 
 
 "Merchant Prince," The 
 
 Mer9hant Taylors' Company, In.re .. 
 Merchants Marine Insurauce Company, Stewart v, 
 Meroifel: 11. Pepperell .. ... ... 
 
 — ', ."Williams i;. .. .. ... 
 
 "Meredith," The .. .. ' .. 
 
 Meredith, In.re. Meredith t). Facey .. 
 
 V. Eacey. In re Meredith .. 
 
 ■ — — , Westbury-on-Severn Bural Sanitary Au- 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 rS 
 
 thority v. 
 
 Merrill i). Morton 
 
 Merriman, Ex parte. In re Stenson ... .. 
 
 — '■ V.Williams 
 
 Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Llaneilian (Over- 
 seers of) ... ... ... 
 
 — 7^ V. Lucas 
 
 Mersey Steamship Company v. Shuttleworth :.\ 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 394 .. 
 17. Ch. D. 391 
 
 14.Q. B. D. 956 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 613 
 
 i2Q. B. D. 497 .. 
 
 14.Q. B.D. 37 
 
 13.Q. B. D. 552 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 231 ; 28 Ch. D. 516 
 
 13Q. B. D. 688 .. 
 
 12Q..B. D. 97 
 
 iOQ. B. D.400 .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 705 
 
 6P. D. 17 
 
 7Q. B. D. 80 
 14Q. B. D.973 .. 
 
 12Q. B. D. 352 
 
 9Q. B..D. 35 ... .; 
 
 7P. D. 122.. .. 
 
 8Q. B. D. 3] 
 
 7 App. Cas. 172 
 
 25Ch. D. 735 
 
 7App. Cas. 307 .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 365 .. 
 
 14Q. B. D. 911 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 737 
 
 6 App. Cas. 24 .1. 
 
 8P. D. 108 
 
 25Ch, D. 158 
 21.Ch. D. 647 
 30 Ch. D. 239 
 12 Q. B.D.132; 
 ; 392- 
 27 Ch. D. 246 
 
 45 Ch. D. 413 
 
 7Q. B. D. 73 '.'. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 767 
 
 16 Ch. D. 623 
 
 13 Q, B. D. 
 
 °:] 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 10 p. D. 139 
 
 
 .. 
 
 1507 
 
 29Ch.D. 209; 30 Ch. 
 
 D. 23 
 
 1533 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 555- 
 
 
 
 696 
 
 19 Ch. D. 58 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 337 
 Cas. 1' .. ■ 
 
 ; 10 
 
 App.j 
 
 641, 1460 
 
 10 P. D. 69 .. 
 
 
 
 1484 
 
 29 Oh. D. 745 
 
 
 
 459 
 
 29 Ch. D. 745 
 
 
 
 459 
 
 30 Ch. D. 387 
 
 
 
 1245 
 
 17 Ch. D. 382 
 
 
 
 1706 
 
 25Ch.D. 144 
 
 
 
 148 
 
 7 App. Cas. 484 
 
 .. 
 
 
 307 
 
 14Q. B. D.770 
 
 .. 
 
 ,. 
 
 1074 
 
 8 App. Cas. 891 
 
 
 
 1328 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 468 ; 
 531 
 
 IIQ. B.D.) 
 
 1195 
 
 829 
 
 1654' 
 
 178 
 
 572 
 
 133 
 
 . 128 
 
 184 
 
 947 
 
 34 
 
 14 
 
 265 
 
 3548 
 
 1271 
 
 258 
 
 643 
 
 665 
 
 453 
 
 1108 
 
 517 
 
 316 
 
 551 
 
 317 
 
 318 
 
 818 
 1698 
 
 629 
 10 
 
 900 
 1148 
 1198 
 
 247 
 
 902 
 
 373 
 
 693 
 302 
 
 146 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST.l 
 
 IxxtJ 
 
 Name of Case: ■ 
 
 Mersey Sf eel and Iron Company u.l Nay lor .. ..< 
 
 Mertena V. Walley. In re Sergeaijt • . , ' 
 
 Merthyr Tydvil (Justices of), Reg.! 1). ' ■ ... 
 Methuen and Biore's Contract, In i|e ' . . . . 
 
 Metropolitan and District Railways Act,^ In. re. Ex) 
 
 parte St. John Baptist College, 5}^ford ' .. .. j 
 
 Metropolitan Asylum District fi Bill • | 
 
 — — ■■ (Managers- of), Wes-( 
 
 torn;. .. .. .. .. .. .. ,. ( 
 
 Metropolitan Bank «. Pooley .. i .. ' .. 
 Metropolitan Board of Works and Pellaniy, In re ... 
 
 In re Same and M. Flower .. 
 
 -, Cooper V. [ 
 
 -, Debenhaml v,^. 
 -, Dixon v.- ; ,. 
 - and- b. Mdiwer, In re.] 
 
 Western Rail-way Company - 
 
 ■V. L 
 
 in i and North- 
 
 -, Spencer v. 
 ■ V. Steed ' ; 
 
 Metropolitan District Railway Corripany, Errington v. 
 
 ' ' '■ — ', Howell V. .. 
 
 1 
 
 — — — ■■ — ^ \ , Stevens v. 
 
 Mew, Manners ij. .. .. ' .. 
 
 — , Reg. ;;. .. .. ... ..' .. ..- 
 
 Mifcliell, Woodley i; ''''■■: ■■■■ 
 
 Mi^dlesbqrougli (Overseers of) v. iftistices ■ of North) 
 
 Riding .. .. .. .. .. ... j 
 
 Middlesex (Clerk of the Peace for), Prison Commis-j 
 
 isioiiers v. .. .. .. ] .; ■-.. -..J 
 
 Middlesex (Justices of), Garrett v. 
 , lleg. V. 
 
 -{ 
 
 Middleton, In re. Thompson v. Harris 
 
 , McGowan ^). , .. ! .. 
 
 Middleweek, Dearsley v. ., . ..' 
 
 Midland Insurance Company v: Sniith 
 Midland RaEway Company, ISdwarcls v. 
 
 — : V. Eieejnan 
 
 ■ : V. -Haiuiichwood Brick and) 
 
 Tile Cottipany .. .. ' .. .. .. j 
 
 , Hm?;.| .. 
 
 , Hobbsit". 
 
 ■ V. Miles i . . 
 
 : , MiHwird -y. 
 
 : • , Slack ii. 
 
 ' — ; : V. .Withington (Local) 
 
 Board for) .. .. .. ' ..j 
 
 Midland Waggon Co. v. Potteries Railway Company 
 Milan Tramways Company, In re. j Ex parte Theys 
 Miibum, Swinburne, u. . . .-. ■ ... 
 
 Mildred ?;. Maspons . .. .. ' .. 
 
 Volume and B&ge. 
 
 -1 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 648"; 9 App. Cas.\ 
 434 ..' .. ../ 
 
 26Ch. D. 575 
 14.Q. B. D. 584 .. 
 16Ch. D. 696 
 
 22Ch. D. 93 
 
 6 App. Cas. 193 .: 
 8 Q. B. D. 387; 9 Q. B. D. 
 404 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 210 .. 
 24Ch. D. 387 
 
 25 Ch. D. 472 
 
 ':} 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 112 
 7Q. B. D. 418 
 
 27Ch. D. 592 
 
 17 Ch. D. 246 
 
 22 Oh. D; 142 ... 
 8Q. B. D. 445 
 19Ch. D. 559 
 19Ch. D. 508 
 
 29Ch. D. 60 
 
 29Ch. D. 725 .. . 
 6Q. B. D. 47; 8 App. Cas.) 
 
 339 j 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 47 - .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 490 ; 12 Q. B. D. 
 
 239 , 
 
 9Q. B. D. 506 .. 
 
 12Q. B.D. 620 
 
 9Q. B. D. 41 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 656 ; 9 App. Cas."! 
 
 757 J 
 
 19Ch. D. 552 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 464 .. 
 laCh. D. 236 
 6.Q.B. D. 561 .. .. 
 6Q. B.D. 287 
 12Q. B. D. 629 .. 
 
 20Ch. D. 552 
 
 21 Ch. D. 143 
 
 20Ch. D. 418 
 30Ch. D. 634 
 14Q. BD. 68 
 laCh. D. 81 
 
 UQ. B.D. 788 .. 
 
 6Q. B. D. 36 
 
 22Ch.D.122; 25.Ch.D.587 
 9. App. Cas. 844 .. 
 9Q. B.D. 530; 8 App. Cas.) 
 .874 f 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1367 
 
 1708 
 
 683 
 
 1692 
 
 787, 1152 
 
 959 
 
 772 
 
 282 
 
 1632 
 
 f 543 
 
 \ 613 
 
 { 777 
 873 
 878 
 
 1632 
 
 880 
 
 780 
 
 881 
 
 1291 
 
 1202 
 
 (1240 
 
 |l285 
 
 917 
 
 844 
 1476 
 
 621 
 
 1268 
 
 682 
 876 
 
 1268 
 
 553 
 1156 
 1220 
 
 687 
 
 431 
 
 405 
 
 1291 
 
 780 
 
 789 
 1292 
 
 862 
 1225 
 
 825 
 
 .1287 
 375, 1150 
 767 
 
 574, 1259 
 
Ixsvi 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Mile End Old Town (Vestry of), Blackmore v. 
 Miles, Ex parte. In re Isaacs 
 , De la Warr (Earl) ?;. .. 
 
 . " 
 
 J;. Jarvis .. 
 
 «. Mcllwraith .. 
 
 , Midland Eailway Company u. .. 
 
 , Tweedie, and. In re 
 
 Milford Docks Company, In re. Lister's Petition . . 
 Milford Haven Railway and Estate Company v. 
 
 Mowatt. In re Lake and Taylor's Mortgage. Spain 
 
 V. Mowatt 
 MUlarw. Millar.. 
 
 Millen v. Brasch 
 
 Miller (Lucy C), In the Goods of 
 
 w. Huddlestone .. 
 
 , Mullens v. 
 
 ■ u. Pilling 
 
 , Eeece v. 
 
 , Polls V J 
 
 Millidge, Smith v. In re Humphries 
 Millington i;. Loring .. 
 MillwaU Dock Company, Keen v. 
 Millward v. Midland Bail way Company 
 
 Milne, Stottu 
 
 Milner, Ex parte. In re Milner 
 
 Milnes r. Huddersfield (Mayor of) .. 
 
 Mil ward. Ex parte. In re Stanley .. 
 Minors, Poyser v. 
 
 " Miranda," The ',\ 
 
 Mitchell, In re " 
 
 . Ex parte Cunningham 
 
 , Attorney-General V. . . 
 
 «. Darley Main Colliery Company .. 
 
 "• .. 
 
 ti. Homfray .. 
 
 , Simmons v. .. 
 
 Mitchell and Co.'s Trade Mark, In re. In re Hough- 
 ton and Hallmark's Trade Mark .. 
 Mitford, Nioholls u. 
 Moat, Vivian «. 
 Moate's Trusts, In re .. 
 Mogg v. Clark .. 
 
 • V. Yatton (Overseeis of) 
 
 Mogul Steamship Company v. M'Gregor, Gow, & Co. 
 Moir, Ex parte. In re Moir .. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Izard .. 
 
 , In re. Warner u. Moir . . 
 
 , Warner u. In re Moir .. 
 
 Mold (Overseers of), Ey ton V. . . 
 Molson, Carter ^;. 
 
 Monkhouse, Ex parte. 
 Monckton and Gilzean, 
 Montagu, In re. In 
 Fasting 
 
 In re Maughan 
 In re .. 
 re Wroughton. 
 
 Montagu 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 451 
 15 Q. B. D. 39 
 17 Ch. D. 535 
 
 19 Ch. D. 
 24 Ch. D. 
 8 App. Oa 
 30 Ch. D. 
 27 Ch. D. 
 23 Ch. D. 
 
 80 
 
 633 
 
 s. 120 
 
 634 
 
 315 
 
 292 
 
 :1 
 
 28 Ch. D. 402 
 
 8P. D. 187.. 
 8 Q. B. D. 35 ; 10 Q. B. 
 142 
 
 8 P. D. 167 .. 
 22 Ch. D. 233 
 22Ch. D. 194 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 736 
 8 Q. B. D. 626 
 
 25 Ch. D. 206; 27 Ch. 
 
 71 
 24Ch. D. 691 
 6 Q. B. D. 190 
 8Q. B.D. 482 
 14Q. B. D. 68 
 25 Ch. D. 710 
 15Q. B. D. 605 .. 
 lOQ. B. D. 124;12Q.B. 
 
 443 
 
 16 Ch. D. 256 
 7Q. B. D. 329 
 7P. D. 185.. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 515 
 13Q. B. D. 418 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 548 
 lOQ. B. D. 457 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 125 .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 587 
 
 6 App. Cas. 156 
 
 28Ch. D. 666 
 
 20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 16Ch. D. 730 
 
 22Ch. D. 635 
 
 15Q. B. D. 82 
 
 6Q. B. D. 10 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 476 .. 
 
 21Ch. D. 61 
 
 20Ch.D. 703 
 
 25 Ch. D. 605 
 
 25 Ch. D. 605 
 
 6Q.B. D. 13 
 
 8 App. Cas. 530 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 664 .. 
 
 14Q. B. D. 956 .. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 555 
 
 28Ch. D. 82 
 
 ^:\ 
 
 "} 
 
 "■) 
 
 878 
 1366 
 
 321 
 1228 
 1673 
 
 316 
 1292 
 1469 
 
 367 
 
 1631 
 
 1109 
 
 278 
 
 1272 
 1198 
 1253 
 1187 
 732 
 
 764 
 
 1666 
 
 1155 
 
 866 
 
 862 
 
 1593 
 
 166 
 
 1657 
 
 191 
 
 445 
 
 1094 
 
 850 
 
 120 
 
 1340 
 
 1240 
 
 805 
 
 613 
 
 500 
 
 1581 
 
 661 
 
 771 
 1611 
 
 884 
 1070 
 
 401 
 
 130 
 
 185, 193 
 
 1670 
 
 1670 
 
 1074 
 
 303, 1128 
 
 304 
 
 178 
 1629 
 
 668 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxvii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 lu re MoDtascu. In re 
 
 1 
 
 Montagu v. Festing. 
 Wroughton .. 
 
 — , Hendriks v... 
 
 Moody and Yates' Contract, In re 
 
 Moordaff, Burgoine v. .. 
 
 Moore, Ex parte. In re Faithful! 
 
 , In re. McAlpine v. Moore 
 
 -, Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company) 
 
 of Hartford v. 
 
 V. Kennard 
 
 , McAlpine v. 
 
 , Reg. V. .. 
 
 ■ V. Shelley 
 
 In re Moore 
 
 Meorhouse, AUcock «. .. 
 
 , Hardakeru. 
 
 w. Linney .. 
 
 = .Summers'!;. 
 
 Mbrby, Keg. 1!. .. 
 
 Mordaunt 17. Benwell .. 
 
 Morfee t). Novis 
 
 Morgan, In re .. 
 
 , In re. PiUgrem v. Pillgrem 
 
 V. London General Omnibus Company 
 
 Volume and Page, 
 
 , Page v. 
 
 V. Bees 
 
 — : -w. Thomas 
 
 Morgan's Case. In re Glamorganshire Banking Co, 
 
 Morice v. Aberdeen (Commissioners of Supply of the) 
 
 County of) .. .. .. .. .. •• ) 
 
 Morley I'. Clifford 
 Morrall v. Morrall 
 Morrell u. Morrell 
 Morris, In re. Ex parte Cooper 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Streeter 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Webster 
 
 , Davis V. 
 
 V. Griffiths. In re Raw 
 
 — '■ — , Meakin v. 
 
 Morrish, In re. Ex parte Dyke (Sir W. H.) 
 
 Morrison, Ex parte. In re Gillespie 
 Morse, Ward ■«. In re Brown 
 Mort, Liddell & Co., PameU w. 
 Morton, Merrill v. 
 
 «. Palmer 
 
 — , Peard v. In re Luddy 
 
 M'oser, In re 
 
 Moss, Ex parte. In re Toward 
 , Warner r. 
 
 Most, Beg. V. 
 
 Mostyn v. Lancaster. Taylor v. Mostyn 
 
 , v. Taylor «. .. 
 
 1;. Stock 
 
 , Taylor v. Mostyn v, Lancaster 
 
 Mott u. Lockhart .. .. .. 
 
 Mottram, Walker v. ., 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 13 Q. B. D.j 
 
 ':\ 
 
 28'Ch. D. 82 
 
 17Ch. D. 638 
 
 28 Ch. D. 661 ; 30 Ch. D. 344 
 
 8 P. D. 205 
 
 14Q. B. D. 627 .. 
 21 Ch. D. 778 
 
 6 App. Cas. 644 .. 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 290 ,, 
 21 Ch. D. 778 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 542 
 
 8 App. Cas. 285 .. 
 9Q. B. D. 366 
 26Ch. D. 417 
 15Q. B. D. 273 .. 
 13 Q. B. D. 388 .. 
 8Q. B. D. 571 
 19Ch. D. 302 
 
 aQ. B. D. 200 
 24Ch. D. 114 
 18 Ch. D. 93 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 201 ; 
 832 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 228 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 89, 508 .. 
 8Q. B. D. 575; 9 Q. B. 
 
 643 
 28Ch. D. 620 
 
 6App. Cas. 881 .. 
 
 20Ch. D. 753 
 6P. D. 98 .. 
 7P. D. 68 .. 
 26Ch. D. 693 
 19Ch. D. 216 
 22Ch. D. 136 
 lOQ. B. D. 436 .. 
 26 Ch. D. 601 
 12Q.B. D. 352 .. 
 
 22Ch. D. 410 
 
 14Q. B. D. 385 .. 
 23 Ch. D. 377 
 29 Ch. D. 325 . .. 
 17 Ch. D. 382 
 9Q. B. D. 89 
 25 Ch. D. 394 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 738 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 310 .. 
 16Ch. D. 100 
 19Ch..D. 72, 
 7Q. B.D. 244 
 23Ch. D. 583 
 25Ch. D. 48 
 9 Q. B. D. 432 
 23Ch. D. 583 
 8App. Cas. 568 .. 
 19Ch.D. 355 
 
 668 
 
 387 
 1640 
 1130 
 
 113 
 1608 
 
 300 
 
 1003 
 1608 
 
 680 
 
 905 
 
 741 
 1089 
 
 939 
 
 941 
 
 469 
 1016 
 1005 
 1440 
 
 559 
 
 864 
 
 1364 
 440 
 
 1676 
 
 381 
 
 1385 
 
 419 
 
 1115 
 
 1687 
 
 157 
 
 184 
 
 244 
 
 1140 
 
 1763 
 
 - 665 
 
 159,-172 
 
 771 
 
 187 
 
 1219 
 
 1045 
 
 1706 
 
 1156 
 
 1675 
 
 178 
 
 140 
 
 1189 
 
 1221 
 
 470 
 
 1463 
 
 899 
 
 138 
 
 1463 
 
 299' 
 
 614 
 
Ixxvili 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IX THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Mouson & Co. i;. Boelim 
 
 Mowatt, Milford Haven Eailway and Estate Com- 
 pany V. In re Lake and Taylor's Mortgage. Spain v. 
 'Mowatt 
 
 , Spain V. Milford Haven Eailway and Estate] 
 
 Company v. Mowatt. Iq re Lake and Taylor's | 
 Mortgage .. .. .. .. .. ..J 
 
 Moyle V. Jenkins 
 
 Mudge V. Adams 
 
 Mullens v. Miller 
 
 Muller, Honck v. 
 
 MuUins V. Treasm-er of the County of Surrey 
 
 Munby v. Boss. In re Coulman. 
 
 Munday, In re. Ex parte AUam 
 
 ■ v. Thames Ironworks Company 
 
 Mundy, In re. Ex parte Shead 
 
 V. Rutland (Duke of) 
 
 , Walmsley v. 
 
 Municipal Permanent Investment Building 
 Harvey u. 
 
 Kent 
 
 Munster v. Cammell Company 
 
 V. Cox 
 
 , Lamb v. 
 
 V. Lamb . 
 
 V. Eailtoa 
 
 Society,) 
 
 -1 
 
 Murch, "West of England and South Wales District I 
 Bank v. .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 Murdoch, Eraser v ' . . 
 
 Murguia (Donna Maria Yea) In the Goods of 
 Murphy ■!;. Coffin 
 Murray, Agnew V. 
 
 , Brimelow v. .. 
 
 '■ — , Canada Central Eailway Company v. 
 
 , Camden (Marquis) I!. 
 
 V. Plavell. In re Flavell .;. 
 
 «. Scott 
 
 Murrell, In re. Ex parte Loveruig .. 
 
 , "Williams «. InreDumWe.. 
 
 Musgrave, Alexandria Water Company i'. .. 
 
 i;. Brooke 
 
 , CI ark son v. .. 
 
 Mussoorie Bank ?;. Eay nor 
 
 Mutual Aid Permapent Benefit Building Society, In re 
 
 • : , In re 
 
 Mutual Life Assurance Society v. Langley . . 
 Mutual Society, In re .. 
 
 , In re .. 
 
 : •, In re. Grimwade v. Mutual Society 
 
 , Grimwade v. In re r^ — 
 
 Muzeen, Wormald t'. .. 
 Myatt, Hunter v. 
 Myer, Webster v. 
 Myers, Dan villier i;. 
 
 "1 
 
 26 Ch. D. 398 
 
 28 Ch. D. 402 ' .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 402 
 
 8Q. B. D. 116 
 
 6P. D. 54 
 
 32 Ch. D. 194 
 
 7Q. B. D. 92 
 
 6 Q.B.D.156; 7 App,Cas.l 
 
 30Ch. D. 186 
 
 14Q. B. D. 43 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 59 
 
 15Q.B. D. 338 .. 
 
 23Ch. D. 81 
 
 13Q. B. D. 807 .. 
 
 26Ch. D. 273 
 
 9 App. Cas. 260 .. 
 
 21Ch. D. 183 
 
 10 App. Cas. 680 .. 
 
 loaa. D. 110 .. 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 588 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 475 ; 11 Q. B. D. 
 435 
 
 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 6 App. .Cas. 85.5 
 9P. D. 236.. , 
 12 Q. B. D. 87 
 9 App. Cas. 519 
 9 App. Cas. 519 
 
 8 App. Cas. 574 
 
 16 Ch. D. 161 
 
 25 Ch. D. 89 . 
 
 9 App. Cas. 519 
 
 24 Ch. D. 31 
 23 Ch. D. 360 
 11 Q. B. D. 174 
 
 26 Ch. D. 792 
 9Q. B..D. 386. 
 
 7 App. Cas. 321 
 
 29 Ch. D. 182 
 
 30 Ch. D. 434 
 26 Ch. D. 686. 
 22Ch.D. 714.. 
 24Ch..D. 425,.n. 
 18 Ch. D. 530 
 18Ch..D. 530., 
 nCh..D. 167. 
 28 Ch. D. 181 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 231 
 
 17 Ch..D. 346. 
 
 1583 
 1631 
 
 1631 
 
 '866 
 1273 
 1253 - 
 1367 
 1268 
 1078 
 24f7, 253 
 
 864 
 
 187 
 
 . -887 
 
 1211 
 
 268 
 
 267 
 
 356 
 
 1138 
 
 1171 
 
 . 499 
 
 1138 
 
 563 
 1468 
 1602 
 1642 
 1404 
 11 
 1482 
 
 271 
 
 271 
 1128 
 
 674 
 1017 
 
 271 
 
 163 
 1683 
 1827 
 ,1670 
 440, 866 
 1128 
 1691 
 
 268 
 
 268 
 902, 918 
 
 371 
 
 379 
 
 391 
 
 391 
 1664 
 
 902 
 1196 
 1174 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxis 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Ifacupai Gold Mining Company, la re „ 
 
 iSTadin «. Bassett 
 
 Napier's Patent, In re .. .. ' .. 
 
 Nash, Tn ro .. .. .. 
 
 , Reg. ». .. .. ... .. ., .. 
 
 "Nasmyth,"The :, ... 
 
 Nathan, In re .. ..: .... ■ ... .. .. 
 
 National Arms and Ammtmition Ooiupany, In re 
 National Bank of New Zealand,. Ward if. . .. 
 
 National Coflfee Palace Company, In re. . . Ex parte) 
 . Panmure .. .. .. . ' .. .. .. j 
 
 National Mercantile Bank, Eiparte. In re Phillips 
 National Provincial Bank of England, Ex parte. In 
 
 Harle 
 
 1 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 National Steamship Company, Tattersall v, 
 
 Naylor, Benzon & Co., Mersey Steel and Iron Co. v. < 
 
 Neal, Weldon v. 
 
 Neck, Ex parte. In re Broad: - .. ' 
 
 Neil, In re. Ex parte Burden 
 
 Neil! V. Devonshire (Duke of) 
 
 Neilson i;. James 
 
 Nelson, Donkin & Co., v. Dabl 
 
 , FaErer v. 
 
 Nelson, Son, & Hastings, In re 
 Nerinckx, Augustinus u. .. 
 
 , Van Grheluive v. 
 
 Ness y. Stephenson 
 Netherlands India Steam 'Navigation. Company,) 
 Chartered Mercantile Bank of India v. .. .. j 
 
 "Never Despair," The.. ... , .. 
 
 "Newhattle,"The 
 
 Ne^bold, Ark Wright t;. 
 
 Newhould V. Smith 
 
 Newhy, Hood i". 
 
 New Callao, In re .. .. .. 
 
 New, Zealand and Australian Lan^ Co. V- Watson .. 
 
 Newcastle and Gateshead Water Company, Cooke v. 
 
 Newcastle's (Duke of) Estates,. In re .. 
 
 Newdeg'ate, Bradlaugh % .. 
 
 Newhaven Local Board v. Newhaven School Board ... 
 
 Newhaven School Board,, Newhaven Local Board v. 
 
 Newitt, Ex parte. In re.Garrud ... ... .. 
 
 , Exparte. In re Maiisel .. 
 
 New London and Brazilian Bank v. Brocklebank . . 
 
 Newman v. Hook. In re Bartlett . . 
 
 -: , Ereeman i\ .. .. .. , ..' 
 
 V. Newman . . . . . . 
 
 ,v.B,eg.v. .. , ... 
 
 Newport Eailv\ay Company; Fleming u 
 
 Newport Urban Sanitary Authority v. Graham 
 
 NeWBon v. Pender .. ' .. .• 
 
 Newton, Ex parte. Ex parte. GriffinJ .In ro Bun-1 
 yard .. .. .. .. •• •■ •• ! 
 
 — ■ V. Chapman. In re Chappie .... 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 28Ch. D. 65 
 
 365 
 
 25 Oh. .D. 21 
 
 1193 
 
 6 App.Cas. 174 .. 
 
 1046 
 
 leCh.D. 503 
 
 1610 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 454 .. 
 
 607 
 
 lOP. D. 41 
 
 1101 
 
 12Q. B. D. 461 .. 
 
 856 
 
 28Ch. D. 474 
 
 379 
 
 8 App. Gas. 755 
 
 1263 
 
 24Ch. D. 367 
 
 1253 
 
 16Ch. D. 104. 
 
 257 
 
 17Ch. D. 98 
 
 151 
 
 6Q.B. D. 626 
 
 43- 
 
 12Q. B. D. 297 .. '.. 
 
 1476 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 648 ; 9 App. Gas.) 
 434 j 
 
 1367 
 
 15Q.B. D. 471 .. 
 
 617 
 
 13Q.B. D. 740 .. 
 
 234 
 
 .16Ch. D. 675 
 
 117 
 
 8App. Gas. 135 
 
 585 
 
 .9Q. B.D. 546 ... 
 
 1552 
 
 6App. Cas. 38 
 
 1479 
 
 15Q. B. D. 258 
 
 607 
 
 30Ch.D. 1 
 
 1526 
 
 16Gh. D. 13 
 
 1156- 
 
 21 Ch. D. 189 
 
 552 
 
 .9Q. B.D. 245 
 
 768 
 
 9 Q. B.D. 118; lOQ. B. D.V 
 521 / 
 
 1475 
 
 9 P. D. 34 .. 
 
 1097 
 
 10 P. D. 33 
 
 1096 
 
 17Ch. D. 301 
 
 325 
 
 29Ch. D. 882 
 
 808 
 
 21Ch.D. 605 
 
 168 
 
 22Ch..D. 484. ... ,■ 
 
 1242 
 
 7Q. B.D. 374 .. - .. 
 
 1256 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 332 ... .. 
 
 -1188 
 
 240h. D. 129 ':.. i .. 
 
 1449 
 
 11 Q. B.D.I 
 
 282 
 
 30 Oh. D. 350 
 
 822, 830 
 
 30Ch. D. 350 
 
 822, 830 
 
 16Ch. D. 522 
 
 266 
 
 .14 Q. B.D. 177 .. 
 
 136 
 
 21 Oh. D. 302 
 
 356 
 
 16Gh. D. 561 
 
 1212 
 
 12 0. B. D. 373 ... .. 
 
 1008 
 
 .28Ch. D. 674 
 
 . 918 
 
 8Q. B. D. 706 
 
 467 
 
 .8 App. .Gas. 265 
 
 .: 1401 
 
 .9Q. B.D. 183 .. !.ij 
 
 :. 832 
 
 27Ch. D;43 ' .< 
 
 .801 
 
 16Ch. D. 33b' .V , ... 
 
 ; 149 
 
 .27Gh..D. 584 .. . .1' 
 
 , 1530 
 
Ixxx 
 
 TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 In re] 
 
 Newton, Heatley v. 
 
 Newton Improvement Commissioners v. Lancaster) 
 
 (Justices of) .. .. .. ., .. .. ( 
 
 Newton in Makerfield (fmpvovement Commissiooers) 
 
 of) V. Justices of Lancaster .. .. .. .. ( 
 
 Newton's Patents, In le 
 
 Trusts, In re 
 
 New Windsor (Mayor of) u. Stovell .. 
 
 Nioholls -v. Mitford 
 
 Nichols, I2x parte. In re Jones 
 
 V. Evens 
 
 to Nixey 
 
 Nicholson j;. Smith 
 
 NickoU, Ex parte. In re Walker 
 
 Nicoll ■!;. Penning 
 
 Nicol V. Nicol . . 
 
 Nicols V. Pitman 
 
 Nicol's Case. Tufnell and Ponsonby's Case. 
 
 Florence Land and Public Works Company 
 Nielsen v. Wait 
 
 Niger Merchants Company v. Capper 
 Nixey, Nichols to 
 Nixon t;. Cameron. In re Cameron .. 
 
 , Tillettu 
 
 v.Yeny.. 
 
 , Withaili) 
 
 Noaki s, Yewens i». 
 
 Nobel's Explosives Company v. Jones Scott & Co. .. 
 
 Noel v. Noel 
 
 , Serrao v. .. 
 
 Norden v. McEae. Forster v. Davis. In re McRae 
 
 Nordon v. Defries 
 
 Norfolk (Duke of) i». Arbuthnot 
 
 Norman V. Strains 
 
 Norris, In re. Allen v. Norris 
 
 , Allen u. In re Norris 
 
 North, Brown v. 
 
 North and South Wales Bank, Duncan, Fox, & Co. v. 
 North British Railway Company, Caledonian Kail- 
 way Company v. .. .. .. 
 
 V. Perth (Lordj 
 
 Provost of) .. .. .. ../ 
 
 North Eastern Railway Company, Abrath.v. 
 
 -, Carshore v. 
 
 , Hetherington v. .. 
 
 ■ — , Wadham v. 
 
 North London Railway Company v. Great Northern) 
 
 Railway Company .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 North Wales Insurance Company, Foxwood v. 
 
 Northen's Estate, In re. Salt v. Pym 
 
 Northern Counties of England Fire Insurance Com-I 
 
 pany. In re. Macfarlane's Claim .. .. ../ 
 
 • ■■ ■»■] 
 
 Whipp / 
 
 North wich Local Board, Burgess u. .. 
 Norton V. Com pton. In re Compton 
 
 V. . In re .. 
 
 V.Johnstone .. 
 
 , Mansel o. 
 
 .1 
 
 19Ch. D. 326 
 13Q. B. D. 623 .. 
 
 15Q. B. D. 25 
 
 9App. Cas. 592 .. 
 23Ch. D. 181 
 27Ch. D. 665 
 20 Oh. D. 380 
 22Ch. D. 782 
 22Ch. D. 611 
 29Ch. D. 1005 
 22Cb. D. 640 
 13Q. B. D. 469 .. 
 19Ch. D. 258 
 30Ch. D. 143 
 26Ch. D. 374 
 
 29Ch. D. 421 
 
 14Q. B. D. 516 .. 
 
 18Ch. D. 557, n 
 
 29 Ch. D. 1005 
 
 26 Ch. D. 19 
 25Ch. D. 238 
 29Ch. D. 196 
 28Ch. D. 413 
 6Q. B. D. 530 
 
 17 Ch. D. 721; 8App. Cas. 5 
 
 lOP. D. 179 
 
 15Q. B. D. 549 .. 
 
 25Ch. D. 16 
 
 8Q. B. D. 508 
 
 6Q. B. D. 279 
 
 6P. D. 219.. 
 
 27Ch. D. .333 
 
 27 Ch. D. 333 
 9Q. B. D. 52 
 6 App. Cas. 1 
 
 6 App. Cds. 114 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 579 .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 79, 440 
 
 29 Ch. D. 344 
 9Q. B. D. 160 
 
 14Q. B. D. 747 .. '.[ 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 30 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 732 
 
 28 Ch. D. 153 .. !! 
 
 17Ch. D. 337 
 
 26Ch. D. 482 
 
 6Q. B. D. 264 
 27 Ch. D. 392 
 
 30 Ch. D. 15 
 30Ch. D. 649 
 22 Cb. D. 769 
 
 46, 1214 
 62 
 
 623 
 
 1046 
 
 651 
 
 821 
 
 661 
 
 139 
 1151 
 
 136 
 
 767 
 
 118 
 
 455' 
 
 648 
 
 421 
 
 342 
 
 1482 
 
 366 
 
 136 
 
 558 
 
 903 
 1453 
 
 902 
 1324 
 1043 
 1117 
 
 540 
 1148 
 1179 
 1224- 
 1130 
 1467 
 1467 
 1180 
 1264 
 
 'l398 
 
 1398 
 
 855 
 
 1144 
 
 484 
 
 777 
 
 35 
 
 695 
 
 1687 
 
 373 
 
 916 
 
 816 
 
 1236 
 
 566 
 
 4 
 
 768 
 
TABLE OP CASES m THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxxi 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Norwich (Corporation of), Shepherd V. 
 
 Norwich Equitable Fire Insurance Corripany, In re . 
 
 Nottage V. Buxton. In re Knowles .. 
 
 — w. Jackson 
 
 « Netting Hill," The 
 
 Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Bank, Ex parte.) 
 In re Jenkinson .. ;. .. .. .. j 
 
 Nottingham Patent Brick and Tile Company v. Butler 
 
 Nugent, Gr^bert-Borgnis 1). 
 
 Nottingham Tramways Company, Hewitt v. 
 
 Novis, Morfee v. 
 
 Noyes, Attorney-General v. .. 
 
 ^ u. Pollock 
 
 Nugent, Lord Salisbury v. 
 
 "Numida,"The 
 
 Nuth V. Tamplin 
 
 Nye, Hyman u 
 
 0. 
 
 Oak Pits Colliery Company, In re 
 Oakbank Oil Company -v. Crum 
 Oastler, Ex parte. In re Friedlander 
 O'Brien, Ferens i>. 
 
 , Goddard •!;. 
 
 , I). Tyssen 
 
 Ocean iSteamship Company u. Anderson .. .A 
 
 Oceanic Steam Navigation Company v. Sutherberry 
 
 O'Connell, Fendall i> 
 
 Odell, Fowler u. In re Fowler 
 
 Oificial Eeceiver, The, Ex parte. In re Ryley 
 
 O'Halloran u. King. In re Bown 
 
 Olathe Silver Mining Company, In re 
 
 Olderiburg (Prince), In the Goods of 
 
 Oldham (Corporation of), Austerberry v. 
 
 Oldiiig, Smith u. 
 
 Ommanney, Robinson t>. 
 
 Oppenheim «. Oppenheim 
 
 , Roberts v. 
 
 , Wittmann «. 
 
 Oppenheimer, Abouloff u. .. .. 
 
 Oram,; Ex parte. In re Watson 
 Orde, In re ■..•■.... 
 Oriental Bank Corporation, In re. Ex parte The) 
 
 Grown .. .. .. .. f 
 
 '■ — , In re. Ex parte Guille-) 
 
 mia .. .. .. .. .. '.. .. ) 
 
 ■ V. Richer & Co. 
 
 Ormerod v. Todmorden Mill Company 
 
 V. 
 
 Orpen, In re. Beswick u. Orpen 
 , Beswick ■;;. In re Orpen 
 
 Orr Ewing, In re. Orr Ewing v. Orr Ewing 
 
 — ,. Ewing V. .. 
 — , Johnston v. 
 ~ V, Orr Ewing 
 
 ••{ 
 
 30 Ch. D. 553 
 27 Ch D. 515 
 21 Ch. D. 806 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 627 
 9.P. D. 105.. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 441 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 261 
 15 Q. B. D. 85 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 16 
 8 Q. B. D. 200 
 8 Q. B. D. 125 
 30 Ch. D. 336 
 9P. D. 23 .. 
 10 P. D. 158 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 247 
 6 Q. B. D. 685 
 
 782 
 
 393 
 
 1668 
 
 431, 1218 
 
 485 
 
 164 
 
 1627 
 484 
 
 1586 
 
 1005 
 
 1342 
 904 
 
 1129 
 
 1101 
 
 1006 
 950 
 
 21 Ch. D. 322 
 
 378 ' 
 
 8 App. Cas. 65 
 
 339 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 471 .. 
 
 118 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 21 
 
 465 
 
 9Q. B. D. 37 
 
 3 
 
 28 Ch. D. 372 
 
 290, 1153 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 651; 10 App.\ 
 Cas. 107 / 
 
 , 1486 
 
 16 Ch. D. 236 
 
 12 
 
 29 Ch. D. 899 
 
 1173 
 
 16 Ch. D. 723 
 
 1600 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 329 .. 
 
 39 
 
 27Ch. D.411 
 
 644 
 
 27 Ch. D. 278 
 
 367 
 
 9 P. D. 234 
 
 1272 
 
 29 Ch. D. 750 
 
 456, 619 
 
 25 Ch. D. 462 
 
 901 
 
 21 Ch. D. 780 ; 23 Ch. D. 285 
 
 149, 45G 
 
 9.P. D. 60 
 
 ,1117 
 
 26 Ch. D. 724 
 
 1177 
 
 2TCh. D. 260 
 
 426 
 
 lOQ. B..D. 295 .. 
 
 546 
 
 15Q.B.D.399 .. 
 
 129 
 
 24Ch. D-.271 
 
 1607 
 
 28 Ch. D. 643 
 
 478 
 
 28 Ch. D. 634 
 
 374 
 
 9 App. Cas. 413 .. 
 
 312 
 
 8Q.. B.D.664 
 
 1187 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 155 .. 
 
 1653- 
 
 16Ch. D. 202 
 
 565 
 
 16 Ch. D. 202 
 
 565 
 
 22 Ch. D. 456 ; 9 App. Cas.) 
 
 34 ..f 
 
 10 App. Cas. 453 .. 
 
 .555 
 
 1393 
 
 7 App. Cas. 219 .. 
 
 1573 
 
 8 App. Cas. 822 .. 
 
 1017 
 
 / 
 
ixxxii 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Orr Swing v. Orr Ewing. In re Orr Ewing 
 Osborne v. Jackson .. .. .. ., 
 
 Osmaston, Blackie v. .. 
 
 Oswald, Ayr Harbour Trustees u. 
 
 Ottaway, In re. Ex parte Child 
 
 Ottley, Bishop of Salisbury v... 
 
 Otto V. Lindford ' 
 
 Outram v. Maude 
 
 Ovenden, Long v. .. ., 
 
 Over Darwen (Mayor of) v. Lancaster (Justices 
 
 Overton, Britain u. 
 
 Ovey, In re. Broadbent v. Barrow .. 
 
 , In re. v, . Eobertson 
 
 Broadbent 
 
 , Matthews v. 
 
 Owen, Ex parte .. 
 
 of) { 
 
 "Pacific," The 
 
 Pa;ddington Burial Board v. Gomniissioners of Inland) 
 Eevenue .. .. .. .. .. .. J 
 
 Padstow Total Loss and Collieries Assurance Assooia-' 
 tion. In re 
 
 Page, In re. Ex parte Mackay 
 
 , Banbury Sanitary Authority v. 
 
 V. Morgan 
 
 Paget V. Marshall 
 
 , Rea;. 1). .. 
 
 Paget's Settled Estates, In re .. 
 
 Pagett, Colam u. 
 
 Paine i;. Slater .. 
 
 Paine's Trusts, In re .. .. 
 
 Palagi, Cadogan v. In re Cadogan .. 
 
 " Palermo," The 
 
 Palin, Thomas «. 
 
 Palmer, Jn re. Ex parte Eichdale 
 
 , Barker v. 
 
 , Clarke v. 
 
 — V, Hutchinson .. 
 
 V. Johnson 
 
 V. Locke 
 
 , Morton i;. 
 
 •■{ 
 
 Palmer's (J. B.) Trade-mark, In re 
 , In re. 
 
 Trade - marks) 
 
 Registration Act 
 Palmer's Shipbuilding Company, McGiffin v, 
 
 " Palomares," The 
 
 Panmure, Ex parte. In re National Coffee Palace Co. 
 
 Pannell, Swift V. 
 
 Paravicini, Kimber ■!;. .. 
 
 Parcell, Jones u. 
 
 Paris and New York Telegraph Company v. Penzance) 
 
 Union .. .. ., .. .. .. J 
 
 22 Ch. D. 456 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 619 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 119 
 
 8 App. Cas. 623 .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 126 
 
 10 P. D. 20 .. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 394 
 
 17 Oh. D. 391 
 
 16 Ch. D. 691 
 
 13Q. B. D.497; 15 Q. 
 
 20 
 25 Oh. D. 41, n. .. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 560 
 
 20 Ch. D. 676 ; 8 App. 
 
 812 
 13 Q. B. D. 403 .".' 
 13 Q. B. D. 113 ,. 
 
 B.D.j 
 
 Cas. 
 
 9 P. D. 124 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 20 Ch. D. 137 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 401 .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 97 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 228 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 255 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 151 
 30 Ch. D. 161 
 12 Q. B. D. 66 
 IIQ. B. D. 120 .. 
 28ChD. 725 
 25 Ch. D. 154 
 
 9 P. D. 6 .. 
 lOP. D. 21.. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 360 
 19 Ch. D. 409 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 9 
 21 Ch. D. 124 
 6 App. Cas. 619 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 32; 13 Q. B. D.) 
 
 351 \ 
 
 18 Ch. D. 381 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 89 
 
 21 Ch. D. 47; 24 Ch. D.» 
 504 ] 
 
 22 Ch. D. 88 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 5 
 10 P. D. 36 
 24Ch. D. 367 
 24 Ch. D. 210 
 15Q. B. D. 222 .. 
 IIQ. B. D. 430 .. 
 
 12Q. B. D. 552 .. 
 
 555 
 862 
 1154 
 1378 
 189 
 1119 
 1160 
 1654 
 1085 
 
 621 
 
 284 
 286 
 
 1697 
 
 1234 
 128 
 
 1508 
 1326 
 
 382 
 
 179 
 
 823 
 
 1364 
 
 890 
 
 736 
 
 1440 
 
 479 
 
 453 
 
 1608 
 
 1693 
 
 1097 
 
 1099 
 
 1199 
 
 171 
 
 446 
 
 915 
 
 313 
 
 1621 
 
 142 
 1156 
 
 1577 
 
 1161 
 
 863 
 1095 
 1253 
 160 
 523 
 137 
 
 1071 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxxiii 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Park, In re. Ex parte Koster ' 
 
 -, Harmon ti. . ..'•'.'. ■ .. 
 
 Park Gate, Waggon Works Company, In re 
 Parke, Blaiberg v. . 
 Parker, In re .. 
 
 (B.A.), Inre .. 
 
 ■ — , In re. Ex parte' Board of Trade 
 
 — -r^-, In re. Ex parte Charing Cross Advance and) 
 Deposit Bank .... .. ... .. j 
 
 — ^— , In re. Ex parte Dann .... 
 
 — , In re. Bxparte Turquand .. 
 
 -, In re. Barker ■«. Barker .,. ' .. 
 
 ^, In re. Ben tham i;. Wilson .. 
 
 and Parker, In re (1). Ex parte Turquand .. 
 
 ■ ■ ■ — -^j In re (2).. Ex parte -~ .. 
 
 — v. Felgate .. . 
 
 '■ — V. First Avenue Hotel Company 
 
 , Lea V. .. .. .,., 
 
 — '■ V. '^Vells 
 
 '■ — , Winder v. 
 
 Parkin v. CressweU, 
 Parkinson, Hilbersi'. .. 
 Parkside Mining Company, Smith u 
 Parley ns u. Priest .. ., 
 
 Pamell, In re. Ex parte Ball 
 
 ■ V. Mort Liddell & Company ... 
 
 In re Wilson , . 
 In re CressweU 
 
 1 
 
 Parsons v. Birmingham Dairy Company 
 
 , Citizens Insurance Coinpany of Canada v, 
 
 ■ — , Queen Insurance Company v. 
 
 Partridge v. Bay lis .. 
 
 Patent Lionite Company, Thomas «, .. 
 
 Paterson v. Poe 
 
 V. St. Andrews (Provost, &c., of) .. 
 
 Patience, In re. Patience «. Main .. 
 
 V. Main. In re Patience 
 
 Patman v. Harland .. .. .. .. 
 
 Patterson, Forster I;. .. 
 
 , Washburn and Moen Manufacturing Com- 
 pany ■!;. 
 Patteson, Webster w. .. 
 
 Patton, Eanson v. . 
 
 Paul V. Paul 
 
 Paull, In re. In re Carthew .. 
 
 Pawley, Saunders v. .. 
 
 Pa wsey i;. Armstrong .. 
 
 Pawson, Bowyear ■!). 
 
 Paxton V. Macreight. In re Macreight 
 
 Payne, Ex parte. In re Sinclair 
 
 , In re. Handle v. Payne 
 
 , Handle v. In re Payne 
 
 V. Fei'n .. 
 
 Peace and Waller, In re 
 
 Peacock, Biggs ■!;. 
 
 Peake, In re. Ex parte Harrison 
 
 Pearce, Ex parte. In re Williams .. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Crossthwaite 
 
 V. Foster ,. .. •• 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volame and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 597 .. 
 
 40 
 
 eQ. B. D. 323 
 
 938 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 369 
 
 939 
 
 17 Ch. D. 234 
 
 371 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 90 
 
 244 
 
 21Ch.D.408 
 
 995 
 
 29 Ch. D. 199 
 
 1532 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 196 .. 
 
 129 
 
 16 Ch. D. 35 
 
 250 
 
 17 Ch. D. 26 
 
 111 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 636 .. 
 
 162 
 
 16Ch. D. 44 
 
 1701 
 
 17Ch.D. 262 
 
 1704 
 
 14Q. B. D. 405 .. 
 
 178 
 
 14Q. B. U. 407 .. 
 
 129 
 
 8P. D. 171 
 
 1272 
 
 24Ch. D.282 
 
 800 
 
 13Q.B. D. 835 .. 
 
 445 
 
 18Ch. D. 477 
 
 1166 
 
 24Ch. D;664 
 
 1666 
 
 ,24 Ch. D. 102 
 
 1679 
 
 25 Ch. D. 200 
 
 1457 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 67 
 
 35 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 313 
 
 619' 
 
 2D Ch. D. 670 
 
 197" 
 
 29 Ch. D. 325 
 
 1045.- 
 
 9Q. B. D. 172 
 
 15- 
 
 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 302 
 
 7App. Gas. 96 
 
 302 
 
 17 Ch. D. 835 
 
 1702 
 
 17 Ch. D. 250 
 
 367, 377 
 
 8App. Cas. 678 .. 
 
 1390 
 
 6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 1384 
 
 29 Ch. D. 967 
 
 515 
 
 29Ch. D.976 
 
 515 
 
 17 Ch. D. 353 
 
 1640' 
 
 17Ch. D. 132 
 
 810- 
 
 29 Ch. D. 48 
 
 1182: 
 
 25Ch. D.626 
 
 901 
 
 17 Ch. D. 767 
 
 (1146 
 tl235 
 
 19 Ch. D. 47 ; 20 Ch. D. 742 
 
 1470 
 
 27Ch. D. 485 
 
 1527 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 234 .. 
 
 1185 
 
 18 Ch. D. 698 
 
 1018 
 
 6Q. B. D. 540 
 
 1414 
 
 30 Ch. D. 165 
 
 514 
 
 15Q. B. D. 616 .. 
 
 139 
 
 23Ch. D. 288 
 
 1159 
 
 23 Ch. b. 288 
 
 1159 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 620 
 
 256 
 
 24Ch.D. 405 
 
 1529 
 
 20 Ch.(D. 200; 22 Ch. D. 284 
 
 1015 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 753 .. 
 
 157 
 
 25Ch. D. 656 
 
 247 
 
 14Q. B. D. 966 .. 
 
 138 
 
 15Q.B. D. 114 .. 
 
 1178 
 
 /2 
 
Ixxxiv 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 ••{ 
 
 Pearce w. Scotclier 
 
 Peard «. Morton. In re Luddy 
 
 Peareth v. Marriott 
 
 Pearsall v. Brierley Hill Local Board .. 
 
 Pearson, Brown v. 
 
 , Elder v. In re Bellamy 
 
 ■ v. Heys 
 
 1;. Pearson 
 
 Peat V. Jones . . 
 Peek ti. Trower.. 
 Pellew, Meager i;. 
 Pelley, Ex parte. In re Anglo-French Co-operative) 
 Society .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 Pembrokeshire (Justices of), Davis v. 
 
 Pender, Heaven t;. 
 
 , Newson v. 
 
 Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company,) 
 Ager V. .. .. .. .. . . . . ( 
 
 Stoomvaart Maatsohappy Nederland v. 
 Penrice v. Williams 
 Penty v. Penty . . 
 Penwarden v. Eoberts. Heath v. Eoberts. Wilson) 
 
 V. Eoberts .. .. .. .. .. .. ( 
 
 Penzance (Lord), Enraght v. .. 
 
 , Green v. Ex parte Green 
 
 -, Mackonochie v. 
 
 •■) 
 
 Penzance Union, Paris and New York Telegraph) 
 Company t). .. .. .. .. .. .. j 
 
 Pepperell, Mercier v. .. 
 Percival v. Cross 
 V.Dunn 
 
 V. Hughes. Hughes v. Percival 
 
 Percy, In re. Percy ti. Percy . . 
 
 U.Percy. In re Percy .. 
 
 Perkins I). Enraght. Harris ?;. Enraght 
 Perowne, Barker v. In re Clarke 
 
 Perry v. Barnett 
 
 Perth (Lord Provost of). North British Eaihvay Com- 
 pany V. 
 
 Peruvian Guano Company w. Bockwoldt 
 
 , Compagnie Financiere du) 
 
 Pacifique ■!). .. .. .. .. .. f 
 
 " Peshawur," The „ 
 
 Peter v. Thomas-Peter . . 
 
 Peterborough (Bishop of), Welch ij. .. 
 
 (Corporation of) v. Overseei-s of Thurlby 
 
 V. Wilsthorpe (Over-' 
 
 seers of) 
 
 Peters v. Lewes and East Grinstead Eaihvay Co. 
 
 Petgrave, Workman u. In re Waij; .. 
 Pettman, FoUett i; 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 
 of 
 
 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 162 
 
 
 
 585 
 
 25 Ch. D. 394 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1675 
 
 22 Ch. D. 182 
 
 ,, 
 
 ,, 
 
 539-1703 
 
 11Q.B.D.735; 
 595 
 
 9 App. 
 
 Cas.' 
 
 815 
 
 21 Ch. D. 716 
 
 ., 
 
 
 1196 
 
 25 Ch. D. 620 
 
 „ 
 
 .. 
 
 653 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 260 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 203 
 
 27 Ch. D. 145 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 614 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 147 
 
 ,, 
 
 .. 
 
 156 
 
 7P. D. 21 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 522 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 973 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 643 
 
 21 Ch. D. 492 
 
 ,, 
 
 ,, 
 
 359 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 513 
 
 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 731 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 302 ; 
 503 
 
 11 Q. B. D.) 
 
 949 
 
 27 Oh. D. 43 
 
 .. 
 
 
 801 
 
 26 Ch. D. 637 
 
 ■ • 
 
 
 421 
 
 7 App. Cas. 795 
 
 _, 
 
 1098 
 
 23 Ch. D. 353 
 
 
 
 1172 
 
 7P. D. 19 .. 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1106 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 137 
 
 •• 
 
 
 243 
 
 (1122 
 U123 
 
 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 .. 
 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 273 ; 
 657 
 
 6 App. Cas.) 
 
 1125 
 
 6 App. Cas. 424 
 
 ,, 
 
 •• ! 
 
 1124 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 552 
 
 ,, 
 
 ::* 
 
 1071 
 
 19 Ch. D. 58 
 
 
 34 
 
 7 P. D. 234 .. 
 
 
 
 1129 
 
 29 Ch. D. 128 
 
 
 
 43, 1154 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 441 ; 
 443 
 
 8 App. 
 
 Cas.) 
 
 1257 
 
 24 Oh. D. 616 
 
 
 1663 
 
 24 Ch. D. 616 
 
 
 
 1663 
 
 7 P. D. 31, 161 
 
 
 
 1123 
 
 18 Ch. D. 160 
 
 
 
 32 
 
 14Q.B.D.467; 
 388 
 
 15Q.B.D.\ 
 ..f 
 
 1259 
 
 10 App. Cas. 57£ 
 
 .. 
 
 
 1398 
 
 23 Ch. D. 225 
 
 .. 
 
 
 1158 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 55 
 
 .. 
 
 
 1174 
 
 8P. D. 32 .. 
 
 
 
 1100 
 
 26 Ch. D. 181 
 
 
 
 1146 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 586 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 1412 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 .. 
 
 
 1234 
 
 16 Ch. D. 703; 
 429 
 
 18 Ch 
 
 D.) 
 
 783 
 
 30 Ch. D. 617 
 
 
 1088 
 
 23 Ch. D, 337 
 
 .. 
 
 
 1694 
 
TABLE OF C4.SES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxxv 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Peverley, Manchester (Corporation of) u. 
 
 Phelpsi Stokes & Co. u. Comber 
 
 Phillimove and Pilling, Peg. v. 
 
 Phillips, In re. Ex parte Bath ,. .. „ 
 
 , In re. Ex parte 
 
 , In re. Ex parte National Mercantile Bank 
 
 Insurance, In re 
 
 1;. Beale 
 
 , Gloucestershire Banking Company v. 
 
 , Harbent;. .. ' .. 
 
 V. Highland Bail way Co. The " Ferrett " . . 
 
 ^;. Homfray 
 
 Kearsley v. 
 
 Llanover v. Homfray 
 In re Powers .. 
 
 In re United Stock Bx- 
 
 , Keate v. 
 
 V. Llanover. 
 
 , Lindsell v. 
 
 V. Phillips 
 
 , Williams v. . . 
 
 Philp & Kidd, Ex parte. 
 
 change, Limited 
 Phipps, Prescott V. In re Alcock 
 Photographic Artists Co-operative Supply Association,! 
 
 In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j 
 
 Pickard, Banfield w. 
 
 Pickering, In re. Pickeiing t). Pickering 
 
 •W.Pickering. In re Pickering 
 
 , Robinson v. 
 
 Pickering Ly the East Highway Board v. Barry 
 
 Pickersgill, Carson u. .. 
 
 Pidsley, In re. Ex parte Luxon 
 
 Pierson v. Knutsford Estates Company .. 
 
 Pigott and the Great Western Railway Company, In re 
 
 , Wilder «. 
 
 Pike, Brownrigg v. 
 
 V. Pitzgibbon 
 
 Piller w. Roberts 
 
 Pillers, Ex parte. In re Curtoys 
 Pillgrem 1). Pillgrem. In re Morgan.. 
 Pilling, Miller i;. 
 Pilling's Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Pilsen Joel and General Electric Light Company,) 
 Taylor v. .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Pincoffs, In re. Ex parte Jacobson .. 
 
 Pink, In re 
 
 Pi nnock ■«. Bailey 
 
 Pirehill (Justices of). Beg. v. .. 
 
 Pitman, Nicols 1). 
 
 Pitman v. Universal Marine Insurance Company 
 
 Pitt, Ex parte. In re Gosling 
 
 , Swinburne v. In re Swinburne 
 
 Pitts 1). La Fontaine .. .. _ .. 
 
 Plaskynastoh Tube Company, In re .. 
 Plating Company D. Farquharson 
 Piatt V. Mendel 
 
 Player, In re. Ex parte Harvey 
 Pledge, Sandgate Local Board u. 
 Plimmer v. Wellington (Mayor of) .. 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 22Ch. D 294, n 
 
 857 
 
 26Ch.D.755;29Ch.D.813 
 
 237, 1365 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 474, n. 
 
 735 
 
 22 Ch. D. 450 
 
 151 
 
 27 Ch. D. 509 
 
 152 
 
 16 Cb. P. 104 
 
 257 
 
 23 Ch. D. 235 
 
 481 
 
 26 Ch. D. 621 
 
 1187 
 
 12Q. B. D. 533 .. 
 
 1143 
 
 23 Ch. D. 14 
 
 353 
 
 8 App. Cas. 329 .. 
 
 1105 
 
 24Ch. D. 439 
 
 551, 1587 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 36, 465 
 
 1173 
 
 IIQ.B. D. 621 .. 
 
 893 
 
 ISCh. D. 560 
 
 915 
 
 19Ch. D. 224 
 
 1193 
 
 30 Ch. D. 291 
 
 808 
 
 29 Ch. D. 673 
 
 795 
 
 8Q. B. D. 437 
 
 661 
 
 28 Ch. D. 183 
 
 365 
 
 23 Ch. D. 372 
 
 919 
 
 23Ch. D. 370 
 
 389 
 
 6 P. D. 33 
 
 1130 
 
 25 Ch. D. 247 
 
 1176 
 
 25 Ch. D. 247 
 
 1176 
 
 16 Ch. D. 371, 660 
 
 1208 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 59 
 
 625 
 
 14Q. B. D. 859 .. 
 
 1223 
 
 20Ch. 1). 701 
 
 186 
 
 13Q. B. D. 666 .. 
 
 1540 
 
 18Ch. D. 146 
 
 782 
 
 22 Ch. D. 263 
 
 847, 1459 
 
 7P. D. 61 
 
 1273 
 
 17Ch. D. 454 
 
 641 
 
 21 Ch. D. 198 
 
 1142' 
 
 17 Ch. D. 653 
 
 168 
 
 18 Ch. V). 93 
 
 559 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 736 
 
 1187 
 
 26:Ch. D. 432 
 
 1608 
 
 27Ch. D. 268 
 
 341 
 
 22Ch. D. 312 
 
 116 
 
 23 Ch. D. 577 
 
 848 
 
 23Ch. D. 497 
 
 1205 
 
 13Q. B. D. 696;14Q.B.D.\ 
 13 / 
 
 856 
 
 26Ch. D. 374 
 
 421 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 192 
 
 692 
 
 20Ch. D. 308 
 
 144 
 
 27Ch. D. 696 
 
 525 
 
 6App. Cas. 482 .. 
 
 136, 1127 
 
 23Ch. D. 542 
 
 341, 344 
 
 17 Ch. D. 49 
 
 406 
 
 27Ch. D. 246 
 
 902 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 682 .. 
 
 166 
 
 14Q. B.D. 730 .. 
 
 735 
 
 9App. Cas. 699 .. 
 
 315 
 
Ixxxvi 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IS THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 of) V. West Ham (Gual:- 
 
 Plomesgate (Guardians 
 
 dians of) 
 Plowden, CorlDett u. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Plumstead Board of Works v. Spackman 
 
 Pooock, Chandler i). 
 
 Pooock's Claim. In re Bomford Canal Company 
 Poe, Paterson v. 
 
 Pogose, In re. Ex parte Vanderlinden 
 Pointon ■«. Hill .. 
 
 Pollock, In re. Pollock v. Worrall .. 
 Noyes v. 
 
 ■ V. Babbits 
 
 V. Worrall. In re Pollock 
 
 PoUok, Whyte i; 
 
 Pomero I). Pomero 
 
 Pomfret v. Graham. In re Horner's Estate 
 
 Ponoia, Taylor t;. 
 
 Ponsonby v. Ponsonby 
 
 " Pontida," The 
 
 Pontifex v. Foord 
 Pookes Boyle, Be 
 Poole, In re. Ex parte Cocks 
 
 , Walker v. 
 
 Pooler, Butcher v. 
 
 Pooley, In re. Ex parte Harper 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Sheard (No. 1^ 
 
 , In re. Ex parte (No. 2' 
 
 , Metropolitan Bank v, 
 
 Pooley's Trustee iu Bankruptcy v. Whetham 
 
 Poplar Union Assessment Committee, Eeg. v. 
 
 Popple v. Sylvester 
 
 Poppleton, Ex parte. In re Thomas.. 
 
 Popplevvell, Ex parte. In re Storey .. 
 
 Port Philip Gold Mining Company, Shaw v. 
 
 Portal and Lamb, In re 
 
 Porter, Mellor v. 
 
 Portman v. Home Hospital Association 
 
 Portsea (Overseers of), Liverpool (Gtiardians of) v. 
 
 Union (Guardians of), Eeg. v. 
 
 Portsmouth (Corporation of) v. Smith 
 
 Posnanski, Salm Kyrburg v. ,. 
 
 Post V. Marsh .. 
 
 Pott V. Brassey. In re AUnutt 
 
 , Credit Company u. 
 
 Potteries, Shrewsbury, and North Wales Eailway 
 
 Company, In re 
 Potteries Bailway Co., Midland Waggon Co; v. 
 Pountney I). Clayton .. 
 Powell V. Apollo Candle Company .. 
 
 w. Cobb 
 
 Powers, In re. Lindsell v. Phillips .. 
 Poyser w. Minors .. .. 
 
 Praed, Exmouth (Viscount) v. In re Viscount Ex- 
 mouth .. .... 
 
 Pragnell ■;;. Batten. In re Hardiman 
 Pratt, Ex parte .. .. 
 
 6Q. B. D. 576 
 
 25Ch. D. 678 
 
 13Q. B. D. 878 ; 10 App. Oas.) 
 
 229 .. .. ..) 
 
 16 Ch. D. 648 
 24 Ch. D. 85 
 
 8 App. Cas. 678 .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 306 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 552 
 30Ch. D. 336 
 2ICh. D. 466 
 2&Ch. D. 552 
 7 App. Cas. 400 .. 
 
 10 P. D. 174 
 
 19 Ch. D. 186 
 25Ch. D. 646 
 
 9 P. D. 58, 122 .. 
 9P. D.102, 177 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 152 .. 
 7 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 21 Ch. D. 397 
 
 21 Ch. D. 835 
 
 24 Ch. D. 273 
 
 20 Ch. D. 685 
 16 Ch. D. 107 
 16 Ch. D. 110 
 
 10 App. Cas. 210 .. 
 
 28 On. D. 38 
 
 11 Q. B.D.721;13Q.B. D, 
 364 
 
 22 Ch. D. 98 
 14 Q. B. D. 379 .. 
 
 21 Ch. r>. 73 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 103 .. 
 27Ch. D. 600; 30Ch.D.50 
 
 25 Oh. D. 158 
 27 Ch. D. 81, n. ,. 
 12Q. B. D. 303 .. 
 7 Q. B. D. 384 
 l3Q.B.D.l84;lOApp.Cas.1 
 
 364 .. .. „\ 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 218 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 395 ... 
 
 22 Ch. D. 275 
 6 Q. B. D. 295 
 
 25 Oh. D. 251 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 36 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 820 .. 
 10 App. Cas. 282 .. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 486 
 
 30 Ch. D. 291 
 7Q. B. D. 329 
 
 23 Ch. D. 158 
 
 16 Ch. D. 360 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 334 ,. 
 
 1065 
 
 904 
 
 877 
 
 1086 
 
 334 
 
 1390 
 
 123 
 
 1618 
 
 1695 
 
 904 
 
 1630 
 
 1695 
 
 1405 
 
 1110 
 
 1698 
 
 1451 
 
 1117 
 
 1487 
 
 1144 
 
 134 
 
 134 
 
 1171 
 
 1241 
 
 188 
 
 136 
 
 184 
 
 282 
 
 1181 
 
 885 
 
 706 
 
 385 
 
 251 
 
 536 
 
 1697 
 
 900 
 
 764 
 
 1063 
 
 1063 
 
 833 
 
 1200 
 1547 
 1461 
 
 248 
 
 1282 
 
 1287 
 
 1292 
 
 314 
 
 1187 
 
 808 
 
 445 
 
 1682 
 
 1015 
 127 
 
TABLE OP OASES IN THE DIOBST. 
 
 Ixxxvii 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Pratt, Ex parte. In re Hay man 
 
 Preece, Harding v. . .. .. ., 
 
 Prehn v. Bailey. The " Ettrick " .. 
 Preist, Parkyns v. 
 
 Prescott V. Phipps. In re Alcook .. 
 Prestney v. Colchester (Mayor of) .. 
 V. (Corporation of) 
 
 Preston, Castellain v. .. 
 
 , Compton V, .. .. ., 
 
 V. Luck 
 
 , Eayner u. 
 
 , Tone u. 
 
 -, Williams v. .. 
 
 Preston Corporation, Kawstone v. 
 
 (Guardians of). Beg. v. 
 
 Provost i;. La Compagnie de Fives-Lille 
 Price, Ex parte. In re Boherts 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Foreman 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Sear .. 
 
 , In re. Leighton v. Price 
 
 , In re. Stafford w. Stafford 
 
 , Akerblom v. 
 
 , Horsleyu. 
 
 , Leighton v. In re Price 
 
 V.Livingstone .. 
 
 ■ , London and North Western Bailway Co. v. 
 
 , Reg- v 
 
 Price's Patent Candle Company, In re 
 
 Prichard, Cooper i;. 
 
 Priestman w. Thomas .. 
 
 Prince ■». Gagnon 
 
 Piingle, In re. Walker v. Stewart ., 
 
 Prison Cominissioriers v. Clerk of the Peace 
 
 Middlesex ' .. 
 Pritchard v.'Pi'itchard .. 
 Piyor y. City Offices Company 
 
 Pugh, Heath v. 
 
 Pulling V. GtesA Eastern Eailwa,y Company., 
 
 , Snelling v. ., ., ., ., 
 
 Punjfrey, Jn re. Worcester City and County Bank- 
 ing Company V. Blick 
 Punnett, Ex parte. In re Kitchin .. 
 Punshon, Stockil v. 
 Putney (Overseers of), Hare v. 
 Pya^tt, Inre. Ex parte Eogers 
 Pym, Salti). In re Northen's Estate 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 for^ 
 
 ?:( 
 
 21 Ch. D. 439 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 281 
 6P. D. 127.. 
 7Q. B.D. 313 
 
 23 Ch. D. 372 
 21 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 24 Ch. D. 376 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 613; 11 Q. B. 
 
 380 
 21 Ch. D. 138 
 27 Ch. D. 497 
 18Ch. D. 1.. 
 24Cb. D.739 
 
 20 Ch. D. 672 .. ■ 
 30 Ch. D. 116 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 113 ., 
 
 10 App. Cas. 643 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 553 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 466 .. 
 17 Ch. D. 74 .. • 
 
 27 Oh. D. 552 
 
 28 Ch. D. 709 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 129 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 244 .. 
 27 Ch. D. 552 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 679 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 485 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 247 „ 
 27 Ch. D. 681 
 
 11 Q. B. D, 351 .. 
 9 P. D. 70, 210 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 103 .. 
 17 Ch. D. 819 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 506 
 
 14Q. B. D. 55 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 504 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 345 ; 7 App. 
 
 235 
 9 Q. B. D. li'o 
 
 29 Ch. D. 85 
 
 ?•} 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Cas.) 
 
 Q. 
 
 Quartz Hill' ■ Consolidated Gold Mining Company,)' 
 In re. Ex parte Young .. .. ^. ;.J 
 
 ' • — — • '■ — r— - V. Beall 
 
 — : — 7 -— — ■ — V. Byre 
 
 Queen Insurance Company v. Parsons ,. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 255 
 
 16 Ch. D. 226 
 
 6 P. D. 9 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. B. 223 
 26 Ch. D. 31 
 28 Ch. D. 153 
 
 21 Ch. D. 642 
 
 20Ch. D. 501 
 11 Q. B. D. 674 
 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 190 
 175 
 
 1099 
 619 
 919 
 942 
 
 1175 
 
 1149 
 
 407 
 
 687 
 
 1557 
 
 1164 
 
 1178 
 
 1064 
 
 303 
 
 180 
 
 179 
 
 122 
 
 1443 
 
 639 
 
 1516. 
 
 1483 
 
 1443 
 
 1478 
 
 1297 
 
 467 
 
 1679 
 
 144 
 
 537 
 
 1128 
 
 1693 
 
 1268 
 
 1195 
 453 
 
 810 
 
 550 
 (1223 
 |l240 
 
 1595 
 
 158 
 1682 
 1069 
 1571 
 1687 
 
 1190 
 
 1207 
 854 
 302 
 
Ixxxviii 
 
 TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Queen's Advocate, Hettihewage Siman Appu v. 
 Queen's Benefit Building Society, Ex parte. In re] 
 
 Tlirelfall 
 
 Queen's Proctor, Carpenter «... 
 Quilter v. Heatly 
 u. Mapleson 
 
 E. 
 
 Rabbits, Pollock v. 
 
 Raffalovich, Wilson «. .. 
 
 Raggett, In re. Ex parte Williams . . 
 
 Eailton, Mnnster I;. 
 
 ■{ 
 
 Railway Commissioners, Great Western Railway Co. v. 
 
 , Soutli Eastern Railway Co. v. 
 
 Railway Passengers' Assurance Company, Hodgson v. 
 Railway Sleepers Supply Company, In re 
 
 "Raisby," The.- 
 
 Raleigh, Vine j;. 
 
 Ralph V. Taylor. In re Ralph's Trade-mark 
 
 Ralph's Trade-mark, In re. Ralph v. Taylor 
 
 Ramsden v. Yeates 
 
 Ri n lall i;. Lithgow 
 
 Handle v. Payne. In re Payne 
 
 Eanelagh's (Lord) Will, In re 
 
 Ransford, Borthwick ?;. 
 
 Ranson v. Patton 
 
 Rasbotham v. Shropshire Union Railways and Canal) 
 Company .. .. .. „ ;. .. f 
 
 Ratcliffe, London and Comity Banking Company v. . . 
 
 ,'B.eg.v 
 
 Raw, In re. Morris v. Griffiths 
 Rawlins, Reg. v. 
 
 , v 
 
 Rawstoue v. Preston Corporation 
 Raylton, Johnson v. ,, 
 Raymond t). Tapson .. 
 Eayner 1). Preston 
 
 Ray nor, Mussoorie Bank i;. .. .. .. ;_ 
 
 Bay's Settled Estates, In re .. 
 
 Read V. Anderson 
 
 Real and Personal Advance Company v. McCarthy 
 Redgrave t;. Hurd 
 
 , Truman & Co. i;. .. 
 
 Reece V. Miller .. 
 
 Reed, Attorney-General for Quebec v. 
 
 Rees, In re. Ex parte National Provincial Bank ofl 
 
 England J 
 
 , In re. Rees v. George .. 
 
 ■V.George. In re Rees .. 
 
 , Morgan V. .. .. .. ,_ [[ 
 
 Reeve, Ex parte. In re Manor of Lowestoft and Great) 
 
 Eastern Railway , „ ,. ,, „ \ 
 
 .( 
 
 9 App. Cas. 571 
 
 16 Ch. D. 274 
 
 7P. D. 235.. 
 23 Ch. D. 42 
 9 Q. B. D. 672 
 
 21 Ch. D. 466 
 7Q. B. D. 553 
 
 16 Ch. D. 117 
 
 10Q.B. D. 475; IIQ.B.D.: 
 
 435 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 182 
 6 Q. B. D. 586 
 9Q. B. D. 188 
 
 29 Ch. D. 204 
 lOP. D. 114 
 24Ch. D. 238 
 
 25 Ch. D. 194 
 25Ch. D. 194 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 583 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 525 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 288 
 26Ch. D. 590 
 28 Ch. D. 79 
 
 17 Ch. D. 767 
 
 24 Ch. D. 110 
 
 6App. Cas. 722 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 74 
 
 26 Ch. D. 601 
 14Q. B. D. 325 .. 
 15Q.B. D. 382 .. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 116 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 438 
 22 Cb. D. 430 
 
 18Ch. D. 1 
 
 7 App. Cas. 321 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 464 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 100; 13Q.B.D. 
 
 779 
 18Ch. D. 362 
 20Ch. D. 1.. 
 18Ch. D. 547 .. ;■ 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 626 
 
 10 App. Cas. 141 .. 
 
 17 Oh. D. 98 
 
 17 Ch. D. 701 .. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 701 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 89, 508 .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 253 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 309 
 
 158 
 
 11 
 
 1175 
 
 773; 
 
 1630 
 1175 
 
 896 
 
 1138 
 
 1294 
 1296 
 1157 
 
 342 
 1516 
 1416 
 1584 
 1584 
 
 625 
 1202 
 1159 
 
 794 
 
 1214 
 
 (1146 
 
 11235 
 
 1167 
 
 53, 915 
 
 473 
 
 1673 
 
 1067 
 
 1067 
 
 1178 
 
 1363 
 
 1191 
 
 687 
 
 (1128 
 
 (1691 
 
 11443 
 
 |l449 
 
 607, 1258 
 
 1223 
 
 581 
 1211 
 
 732 
 
 304 
 
 151 
 
 1695 
 
 1695 
 
 440 
 
 786 
 
TABLE OP OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Ixxz^s 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 •i 
 
 Reeves v. Barlow 
 
 Beg. V. Abergavenny (Guardians of) .. 
 
 ». Barclay.. 
 
 v. Bayley.. 
 
 v. Belleau.. 
 
 V. Biron . . 
 
 , Blackwood v. 
 
 V. Bridgnorth (Guardians of) ., 
 
 1». Brittleton 
 
 ■V.Brown.. 
 
 V. Carr 
 
 «. Garter .. 
 
 , Castro v.. . 
 
 V. Central Criminal Court (Justices of) 
 
 V. City. of London (Judge of) .. 
 
 V. : 
 
 V. City of London Court (Judge of) 
 
 , Clark V. .. 
 
 ■!;. Coney .. 
 
 V. Cook .. 
 
 V. Cookham Union 
 
 V. Copping Syke (Overseers of) .. 
 
 j;. Cox. and Eailton 
 
 V. Croydon Coiinty Court (Judge of) .. 
 
 1;. Cumberland (Justices of) 
 
 V. De Banks 
 
 ■ V. Denbighsbire (Justices of) .. 
 
 1;. Bibbin .. 
 
 «. Doutre.. 
 
 V. Dudley and Stephens.. 
 
 ■U.Duncan 
 
 v.Bjott .. 
 
 V. East and West India Dock Company and 
 
 Poplar Union 
 
 V.Eaton .. 
 
 W.Edwards 
 
 1;. Ellis 
 
 ■». Essex (Justices of) 
 
 1". Essex .. 
 
 ■». Exeter (Mayor, &c., of) 
 
 ■«. Pennell 
 
 — — ■«. Plavell 
 
 ■;;. Fobbing (Commissioners of Sewers of) 
 
 1?. Poote .. 
 
 u. Ganz .. 
 
 ■£;. Gibbon.. 
 
 — ^ — ■!). Great Yarmouth (Justices of) 
 
 V. Greenwich County Court (Registrar of) 
 
 ■«. Handsley 
 
 V. : 
 
 W.Harper.. , ,. 
 
 ■«. Haslehurst 
 
 , Hodge ■u. .. 
 
 ■!;. Holl 
 
 ■!;. HoUis .. 
 
 W.Holmes , „ .. .. .. 
 
 •i 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 UQ. B. D. 610;12Q.B, 
 436 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 31 
 8 Q. B. D. 306, 486 
 8 Q. B. D. 411 
 
 7 App. Cas. 473 . 
 14 Q. B. D. 474 . 
 
 8 App. Cas. 82 
 9Q. B. D. 765rilQ. B. 
 
 314 
 12 Q. B. D. 266 
 10 Q. B. D. 381 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 76 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 522 
 6 App. Cas. 229 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 479 
 8 Q. B. D. 609 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 115 
 14 Q. B. D. 818, 905 
 14 Q. B. D. 92 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 963 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 534 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 377 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 522 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 83 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 963 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 369 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 29 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 451 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 325 ; 
 382 
 
 9 App. Cas. 745 
 14 Q. B. D. 273, 560 
 7.Q. B. D. 198 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 47 
 11 Q. B. D. 721 ; 
 
 364 
 8 Q. B. D. 158 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 586 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 466 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 704 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 753 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 135 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 147 
 14 Q. B. D. 364 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 56 L 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 378 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 93 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 168 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 525 
 
 15 Q. B..D. 54 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 398 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 383 
 7 Q. B. D. 78 
 13 Q. B. D. 253 
 
 9 App. Cas. 117 
 7 Q. B. D. 575 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 25 
 12 Q. B. D. 23 
 
 il5 
 
 13 
 
 "•} 
 
 D.i 
 
 Q. B. D.) 
 
 Q.B.D.- 
 
 257 
 
 1066 
 828 
 443 
 306 
 ,735 
 317 
 
 1063 
 
 473 
 
 469 
 
 727 
 
 475 
 
 476 
 
 452 
 1105 
 
 442. 
 
 865 
 1617 
 
 471 
 
 610 
 1064 
 1074 
 
 473 
 
 179 
 
 681 
 
 464 
 1072 
 
 1067 
 
 305 
 
 470 
 
 476 
 
 1073 
 
 885 
 
 529 
 
 778 
 
 624 
 
 618 
 
 777 
 
 943 
 
 473 
 
 204 
 1408 
 1235 
 
 571 
 
 731 
 
 731 
 
 130 
 1073 
 
 732 
 
 463 
 1067 
 
 301 
 997, 1235 
 
 465 
 
 476 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Eeg. V. Hutclimgs 
 
 V. Jones . . 
 
 V. Kay .. 
 
 ■«. Laboucliere 
 
 V. Langriville (Overseers of) 
 
 ■ — — V. Lee 
 
 • • V. Liverpool (Justices of) 
 
 -y. Llewellyn 
 
 V. Local Government Board 
 
 -V. Lovell .. 
 - V. McDonald 
 
 V. Maidenhead (Corporation of) . 
 
 V. Mallory 
 
 V. Manchester (Overseers of) 
 
 V. Manning 
 
 V. Martin .. 
 
 V. Marylebone (Guardians of) . 
 
 ■!;. Maurer.. 
 
 V. Merthyr Tydvil (Justices of) 
 
 ' V. Mews .. 
 
 i;. Middlesex (Justices of) 
 
 - V. Moore .. 
 
 - V. Morby .. 
 
 - V. Most .. 
 
 - V. Nash ,, 
 
 - V. Newman 
 ■ V. Paget .. 
 
 - V. Phillimore and Pilling 
 
 V. Pirehill (Justices of) .. ,. .. 
 
 V. Poplar Union Assessment Committee 
 
 V. Portsea Union (Guardians of) 
 
 V. Preston (Guardians of) 
 
 V. Price .. 
 
 V. Ratcliffe 
 
 V. Eawlins 
 
 ••{ 
 
 , Rielu 
 
 V. Rowlands 
 
 , Eussell 1). 
 
 V. St. Albans (Bishop of) 
 
 — — V. St. Mary Bermondsey (Overseers of) 
 
 'y. St. Mary, Islington (Guardians of) .. 
 
 «. Salmon.. 
 
 • u Savin .. 
 
 1). Schneider 
 
 «>. Sheward 
 
 V. Shropshire (Justices of) 
 
 1). Slator .. 
 
 V. Smith. In re Westfield and Metropolitan! 
 
 Railway Companies .. .. .. .. .. ( 
 
 V. Southampton County Court (Judge of) .. 
 
 V. Southend County Court (Judge oQ .. 
 
 ^1 
 
 ^■1 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 300 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 118 ., 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 213 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 320 .. 
 14Q. B. D. 83 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 394 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 638 .. 
 13Q. B. D. 681 .. 
 9Q. B. D. 600; 10 Q. B. D. 
 
 309 
 15 Q. B. D. 70 
 8 Q. B. D. 185 
 15 Q. B. D. 323 .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 339 ; 9 Q. B. 
 
 494 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 33 
 8 Q. B. r>. 50 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 241 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 54 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 15 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 513 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 584 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 47 ; 8 App. Cas.l 
 339 / 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 41 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 656 ; 9 App. Cas 
 
 757 
 
 7Q.B. D. 542 
 8 Q. B. D. 571 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 244 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 454 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 706 
 8 Q. B. D. 151 
 14Q. B. D. 474,n... 
 13 Q. B. D. 696 ; 14 Q. B. D, 
 
 13 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 364 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 384 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 113 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 247 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 74 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 325 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 382 .. 
 10 App. Cas. 675 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 530 
 
 7 App. Cas. 829 .. 
 9Q. B. D. 454 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 351 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 95, 339 
 6 Q. B. D. 79 
 6 Q. B. D. 309 
 IIQ. B. D. 66 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 741 
 6 Q. B. D. 669 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 267 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 481 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 142 ,. 
 13 Q. B. D. 142 „ 
 
 '.1 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Eeg. v. Stepbenson ■ ■ .... ,. 
 
 V. Surrey (Judge of the County Court of) 
 
 V. (Justices of) .. 
 
 V.Thomas 
 
 V. Thompson .. .. .. .. 
 
 u. Tonhridge (Overseers of) 
 
 w. Weil .. 
 
 ■». Wellard 
 
 V. West Eiding of Yorkshire (Justices of) 
 
 , ■ " -v. 
 
 V. Whitchurch 
 
 V. White .. .. ,. 
 
 u. Whitfield .. 
 
 t). Wigan (Corporation of) 
 
 1). Williams 
 
 ■«. Willshire .. ,. .. ; ; .. 
 
 V. Wimbledon Local Board .. ' ' .. 
 
 V. Yates .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Beid, Ex parte. In re Gillespie 
 
 V. Hoare .. 
 
 Reliance Permanent Building Society, West London| 
 Commercial Bank v... .. ., ,. 
 
 "Eenpor,"The 
 
 Eepington v. Eoberts-Gawen. In re Eoberts 
 Eepublic of Costa Eica v. Strousberg .. 
 Eevell, Ex parte. In re ToUemache (No. 1) 
 
 ■ ■ (No. 2) 
 
 Eevett, Doggett V. In re Youngs 
 
 • — , Vollum V. In re 
 
 Eeynolds, Ex parte. In re Bariiett .. 
 
 , Ex partCi InreEeynolds i. 
 
 — ^, Ex parte; In re — '■ 
 
 Ehoades, In re. Lane v. Ehoades ., ■., 
 
 , Lane u. In re 
 
 Ehodes, In re. Ex parte Hey worth .. .. 
 , Collins w. In re Baker .. 
 
 s;. Ehodes 
 
 V. Sugden. In re Wads worth 
 
 — ■V. Wish. In re Seaman .. „ , 
 
 " Ehondda," ITie. Soicluna v. Stevenson .. 
 
 "Ehosina,»The 
 
 .The 
 
 Eichards «. Cullerne ,. ..' .. .. 
 
 , Jones V. ., .. ., ., 
 
 ^v. McBride .. .. ., „ 
 
 J/. May .. .. ., ,, ., 
 
 V. West Middlesex Waterworks Company,, 
 
 Eichardson, In re. Ex parte Harris . . 
 
 -, In re. Shillito! «. Hobson .. 
 
 , Eobertson u. 
 
 V. Saunders. Saunders v. Eichardson 
 
 Eichdale, Ex parte. In re Paliner .. 
 Eicher & Co., Oriental Bank Coi'poration v. ,. 
 
 ••'{ 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 331 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 963 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 100 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 282 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 261 ; 10 App. Cas.) 
 45 :f 
 
 11Q.B.D.134:;13Q.B.D. ) 
 
 339 f 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 701 
 14:Q.B. D. 63 
 11 Q. B. D. 417 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 781 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 534 
 
 IIQ. B.D,309;14Q,B. D.l 
 
 358 ( 
 
 15Q.B.D. 122 .. 
 
 14 Q, B. D. 908 .. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 418 ., 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 366 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 459 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 750;14Q.B.D.l 
 648 \ 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 963 .. 
 26 Ch. D. 363 
 
 27Ch.D.187;29Ch.D.954 
 
 8P. D. 115.. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 520 
 16 Ch. D. 8 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 720 ., 
 13Q. B. D. 727 .. 
 30 Ch. D. 421 
 
 30 Ch. D. 421 
 15Q. B.D. 169 .. 
 20Ch. D.294 
 21 Ch. D. 601 
 29 Ch. D. 142 
 29 Ch. D. 142 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 49 ,. 
 20Ch.D. 230 
 
 7 App. Cas. 192 ., 
 
 29 Ch. D. 517 
 
 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 8 App. Cas. 549 .. 
 lOP. D. 24 • .. 
 
 10 P. D. 131 
 7Q. B.D. 623 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 439 ., 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 119 
 lOQ. B. D. 400 ... 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 660 .. 
 16Ch. D.613 
 
 30 Ch. D. 396 
 30Ch. D.623 
 6 Q. B. D. 313 ; 
 
 388 
 19 Ch. D. 409 
 
 9 App. Cas. 413 
 
 7 Q. B. 
 
 ':] 
 
 467 
 
 179 
 
 1073 
 
 626 
 
 204 
 
 275 
 
 570 
 468 
 681 
 623 
 1235 
 
 1061 
 
 847 
 943 
 314 
 459 
 1278 
 
 467 
 
 154 
 1452 
 
 920 
 
 1516 
 
 1690 
 
 1203 
 
 150 
 
 170 
 
 1237 
 
 1237 
 
 181 
 
 545 
 
 189 
 
 1693 
 
 1693 
 
 120 
 
 1546 
 
 (1272 
 
 11701 
 
 1540 
 
 1546 
 
 1511 
 
 951 
 
 952 
 
 442 
 
 1167 
 
 684 
 
 265 
 
 1661 
 
 176 
 
 895 
 
 1454 
 
 531 
 
 171 
 312 
 
xou 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Eicketts, Durrant v. 
 
 V. Lewis 
 
 Eiddell v. Errington 
 
 Riddeough, In re. Ex parte Vaughan 
 
 Eidgway v. Ward 
 
 Eidgway, In re. Ex parte Eidgway 
 
 Eidler, In re. Eidler v. Eidler 
 
 V. Eidler. In ve Eidler 
 
 Eiel V. Reg. 
 
 " Bigborgs Minde," The 
 
 Eigby V. Bennett 
 
 Eigg V, Hughes 
 
 Eiley, Westhead u. 
 
 " Eio Tinto," The. Laws v. Smith 
 
 "Eipon," The 
 
 Eitso, Ex parte. InreEitso .. 
 
 " Eisoluto," The 
 
 Eivaz V. Grerussi 
 
 Eiver Dee Company, Wenlocic (Baroness) v. 
 
 Eiver Lee Navigation (Conservators of) v. Button 
 
 Eiver's (Lord) Estate. In re . . 
 
 Eivett-Oarnac's (Sir J.) Will, In re 
 
 Eiviere's Trade-mark, In re .. 
 
 " Eobert Dickinson," The 
 
 Eoberts, In re. Ex parte Price 
 
 , In re. Eepington v. Eoberts- 
 
 , In re. Tarleton v. Bruton 
 
 and Wright, Ex parte. In re 
 
 & Dixon 
 
 V. Death 
 
 , Heath V. 
 
 V. Oppenheim 
 
 , Penwarden v. 
 
 , Piller V. 
 
 V. Eoberts 
 
 , Stanford ■;;. 
 
 Wilson V. 
 
 -Gawen 
 Brown, 
 
 Bayley: 
 
 Eoberts-Gawen, Eepington v. In re Eoberts 
 Eobertson v. Amazon Tug and Lighterage Company 
 V. Broadbent. In re Ovey. Broadbent v, 
 
 Barrow 
 
 ■ V. Eobertson 
 
 ■ ^ v. Eichardson 
 
 , South Western Loan. Company v, 
 
 , Woolwich (Overseers of) v. 
 
 Kobins, In re. Ex parte Eussell 
 Eobinson, Ex parte. In re Eobinson 
 ■ , In re 
 
 V. Barton (Local Board for) 
 
 , Crabtree v. .. 
 
 V. Currey 
 
 1;. Drakes 
 
 , Edmonds v. 
 
 , Hallas u. 
 
 V. Ommaney 
 
 V. Pickering .. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 177 
 
 20 Ch. D; 745 
 26 Ch. D. 220 
 14 Q. B. D. 25 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 110 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 447 
 22 Ch. D. 74 
 22 Ch. D. 74 
 10 App. Cas. 675 
 
 8 P. D. 132 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 559 
 9P. D. 68 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 413 
 
 9 App. Cas. 356 
 
 10 P. D. 65 .. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 529 
 
 8 P. D. 109 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 222 
 10 App. Cas. 354 
 
 6 App. Cas. 685 
 16-Ch. D. 588, n. 
 30 Ch. D. 136 
 
 26 Ch. D. 48 
 lOP. D. 15.. 
 21 Ch. D. 553 
 19 Ch. D. 520 
 
 27 Ch. D. 346 ; 30 Ch. D. 234 
 
 18 Ch. D. 649 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 319 
 
 9 0. B. D. 137 
 26 Ch. D. 724 
 9 Q. B. D. 137 
 
 21 Ch. D. 198 
 13 Q. B. D. 794 
 
 26 Ch. D. 155 
 9 Q. B. D. 137 
 
 19 Ch. D. 520 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 598 
 
 20 Ch. D. 676 ; 8 App. Cas, 
 812 
 
 6 P. D. 119 .. 
 
 8 P. D. 94 .. 
 30 Ch. D. 623 
 8 Q. B. D. 17 
 6 Q. B. D. 654 
 
 22 Ch. D. 778 
 
 22 Ch. D. 816 
 
 27 Ch. D. 160 
 
 21 Ch. D. 621 ; 8 App. Cas, 
 798 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 312 
 
 6Q. B. D.21;7Q.B.D.465 
 
 23 Ch. D. 98 
 29 Ch. D. 170 
 15 Q. B. D. 288 
 21 Ch. D. 780 ; 23 Ch. D. 285 
 16Ch. D. 371, 660.. 
 
 1135 
 
 13 
 
 1416 
 
 134 
 50 
 
 142 
 
 602 
 
 602 
 1128 
 1514 
 1556 
 1129 
 1211 
 1488 
 1506 
 (117,132 
 \. 185 
 1504 
 
 690 
 
 432 
 1346 
 1612 
 1446 
 1584 
 1096 
 
 180 , 
 1690 
 1685 
 
 378 
 
 1204 
 
 243 
 1177 
 
 243 
 1142 
 
 253 
 1532 
 
 243 
 1690 
 
 410 
 
 1697 
 
 1119 
 1108 
 1454 
 1205 
 
 275 
 
 196 
 
 132 
 849, 1108 
 
 831, 1197 
 
 746 
 1051 
 1218 
 1019 
 
 255 
 
 149, 456 
 
 1208 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and 
 
 Page. 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 530 
 
 
 1052 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 739 
 
 
 819 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 423 
 
 
 913 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 371 
 
 
 1230 
 
 19 Ch. D. 1.56 
 
 
 289 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 525 ; 
 
 8 0. B. i).| 
 
 622 
 
 12; 8 App. Gas. 494 ..f 
 
 16 Ch. D. 18 
 
 .. 
 
 1081 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 633 ; 
 333 
 
 7 App. Cas.) 
 
 697 
 
 27 CL D. 622 
 
 
 561 
 
 16 Ch. D. 665 
 
 
 181 
 
 26 Ch. D. 31 
 
 
 1571 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 438 
 
 
 131 
 
 16 Ch. D. 260 
 
 
 248 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 438 
 
 
 131 
 
 29 Ch. D. 661 
 
 
 1637 
 
 7 App. Cas. 43 
 
 
 889 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 673 
 
 
 1324 
 
 28 Cb. D. 237 
 
 
 785 
 
 19 Ch. D. 268 
 
 
 1049 ' 
 
 25 Ch. D. 206 ; 27 Ch. D. 71 
 
 764 
 
 27 Ch. D. 639 
 
 
 531 
 
 19 Ch. D. 98 
 
 
 250 
 
 17 Ch. D. 715 
 
 ■ * 
 
 357 
 
 24 Ch. D. 85 
 
 •■ .. 
 
 334 
 
 7 P. D. 247 
 
 
 442 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 631 
 
 .. 
 
 1204 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 412 
 
 .. 
 
 6 
 
 17 Ch. D. 696 
 
 .. 
 
 1705 
 
 21 Ch. D. 543 
 
 .. 
 
 251 
 
 7 P. D. 117 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1109 
 
 7P. D. 225; 8 P 
 
 .D. 98 .. 
 
 1095 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 162 
 
 .. 
 
 1632 
 
 20 Ch. D. 315 
 
 .. 
 
 186 
 
 26 Ch. D. 801 
 
 
 1669 
 
 26 Ch. D. 801 
 
 .. 
 
 1669 
 
 7 App. Cas. 463 
 
 .. 
 
 533 
 
 30 Ch. D. 186 
 
 .. 
 
 1078 
 
 7P. D. 20 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1116 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 123 
 
 .. 
 
 600 
 
 27 Ch. D. 703 
 
 
 560 
 
 25 Ch. D. 103 
 
 .. 
 
 323 
 
 7 App. Cas. 694 
 
 
 1404 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 17 
 
 
 15 
 
 29 Ch. U. 521 
 
 .. 
 
 1084 
 
 17 Ch. D. 104 
 
 .. 
 
 811 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 530 
 
 .. 
 
 464 
 
 29 Ch. D. 358 
 
 .. 
 
 567 
 
 17 Ch. D. 520 
 
 .. 
 
 1413 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 136 
 
 .. 
 
 1323 
 
 7 App. Cas. 366 
 
 
 1374 
 
 17 Ch. D. 407 
 
 
 285 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 . . . . 
 
 33 
 
 6 Q. B. U. 171 
 
 .. 
 
 1473 
 
 17 Ch. D. 600 
 
 
 387, 1220 
 
 Eobinson, Todd v. 
 
 v. Trevor 
 
 17. Tucker 
 
 Eobson, In re. Bmley v. Davidson 
 
 Rochdale (Corporation of) v. Lancashire (Justices of) \ 
 
 Eoobfort, Sperling v. In re Van Hagan 
 
 Eodocanachi, Burnand v. 
 
 Eoe u. Birch. In re Birch 
 
 Eogers, Ex parte. InreBoustead 
 
 , Kx parte. In re Pyatt 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Eogers 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Challinor . . 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Eogers 
 
 , Ellis V. 
 
 Eokeby (Lord), Elliot v. 
 
 Eolfe V. Hyde .. 
 
 EollestoD, Charlton v. 
 
 EoHs V. Isaacs .. 
 
 — — V. Miller . . 
 
 V. School Board for London 
 
 Eolpb, Ex parte. In re Spindler 
 
 Bolt, English Channel Steamship Company v. 
 
 Eomford Canal Company, In re. Pocock's Claim 
 Trickett's Claim. Carew's Claim .. 
 
 "Bona," The 
 
 Ebokef, Walker i;. 
 
 Eoope u. D'Avigdor .. .. .. 
 
 Eobse, In re. Evans w. Williamson .. 
 
 Eoper, In re. Ex parte BoUand 
 
 "Eory,"The 
 
 Eose V. Eose 
 
 Eosenberg v. Cook 
 
 Eoseiithal, Ex parte. In re Dickinson 
 
 Eosher, In re. Eosher v. Eosher 
 
 V. Eosher. In re Eosher 
 
 Eoss i;. Charity Commissioners 
 
 , Munbyti. In re Coulman 
 
 V. Eoss 
 
 Eossiter, Britain v, .. .. .. .. 
 
 Eotherham, Wilkins v. In re Wilkins 
 
 Eotberham Alum and Chemical Company, In re 
 
 Eoliies (Coimtess of), v. Kirkcaldy and Dysart Water- 
 works Commissioners 
 
 Eouch V. Hall .. 
 
 Ecus V. Jackson 
 
 Eouse', Kinsman v. 
 
 Eowlands, Beg. v. 
 
 Eo-wnson, In re. Eield v. White 
 
 Eoxbiirghe v. Cox 
 
 Eoyal Bank of Scotland, Chapman v. 
 
 V. Commercial Bank of Scot 
 
 '.1 
 
 i 
 
 land 
 
 '!:} 
 
 Eoyal Society of London and Thompson 
 
 Eoyce v. Charlton 
 
 Eoyle V. Busby & Son .. 
 
 Endow V. Great Britain Mutual Life Assurance Society 
 
SCJV 
 
 TABLE OF CASES, IN, THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Tolnnje and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Rule V. Jewell .. 
 
 Eumball V. Schmidt .. 
 
 Russell, Ex parte. In re Butterworth 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Robins 
 
 , In re. Russc41 v. Chell 
 
 , In re. Russell v. Shoolbred 
 
 , Brownlie v. .. 
 
 , Bryson 1). 
 
 v. Chell. in re Russell 
 
 V. Reg. . . 
 
 v. Shoolbred, In re Russell .. 
 
 1). Watts 
 
 ■■ — , Son, & Scott, In re .. 
 
 Russian SS. "Yourri" v. British SS. "Spearman" 
 Rutland (Duke of), Mundy v. .. 
 Ryder, In re 
 
 ••{ 
 
 , Bute (Marquess of)-w. In re Marquess of Bute 
 
 Eyhope Coal Company v. Foyer 
 Ryley, In re. Ex parte The Official Receiver 
 Eymer V. De Rosaz. In re De Rosaz 
 Rymill, Watkins v. 
 
 S. 
 
 S. «. B 
 
 Sacerdoti, Sykes v. 
 
 Sadler, Ex parte. In re Hawes 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Davies 
 
 , Flower ■!;. 
 
 Saffery, Ex parte. In re Brenner 
 
 Sailing-ship " Garston " Company v. Hiokie .. 
 
 St. Albans (Bishop of), Reg. v. 
 
 St. Andrews (Provost, &c,, of), Paterson v. .. 
 
 St. Giles, Camberwell (Vestry of), Stannard v. 
 
 St. James, Westminster (Vestry of), Vernon v. 
 
 St. John Baptist College, Oxford, Ex parte. In rei 
 
 Metropolitan and District Railways Act .. .. i 
 
 St. Katherine (Hospital of), Ex parte 
 St. Leonard, Shoredjtch, Parochial Schools, In re. 
 St. Mary Abbott's, Kensington (Vestry of). Gas) 
 
 Light and Coal Company 1^. .. .. f 
 
 — — , Teu-) 
 
 here v. .. .. .. .. ,. __ f 
 
 St. Mary Bermondsey (Overseers of), Reg. v. 
 
 St. Mary Islington (Guardians of), Reg. v. .. .', 
 
 St. Mary, Wigton (Vicar of), Ex parte 
 
 St. Olave's Union (Guardians of), Headington Union) 
 (Guardians of) w. .. .. .. .. ,_ f 
 
 Salaman, Ex parte. In re Salaman .. 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Taylor 
 
 Salford (Corporation of). Burton i;. 
 
 (Guardians of) v. Overseers of Manchester 
 
 Salisbury ^Bishop of) 1). Ottley .. .. \ 
 
 (Lord) w. Nugent .. 
 
 Salkeld, In re. Ex parte Good .. .. \ 
 
 18Ch. D. 660 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 603 
 
 19 Ch. D. 588 
 
 22 Ch. D. 778 
 19 Cb. D. 432 
 29 Ch. D. 254 
 
 8 App. Gas. 235 ■ .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 720 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 432 
 
 7 App. Cas. 829 .. 
 
 29Ch. D. 254 
 
 25 Ch. D. 559 ; 10 App. Cas.) 
 
 590 f 
 
 30Ch. D. 114 
 
 10 App., Cas. 276 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 81 
 
 20 Ch. D. 514 
 
 27 Ch. D. 196 
 
 7Q. B. D. 485 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 329 .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 684 
 lOQ. B.D. 178 .. 
 
 9 P. D. 80 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 423 „ 
 
 19 Ch. D. 122 
 19Ch. D. 86 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 83 ; 10 Q. B. D, 
 572 
 
 16 Ch. 1). 668 .'. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 580 .. 
 9Q. B.D. 454' .. 
 6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 20 Ch. D. 190 
 
 16 Ch. D. 449 
 
 22 Ch. D. 93 
 
 17 Ch. D. 378 
 
 10 App. Cas. 304 .. 
 
 15Q. B. D. 1 
 
 30 CL D. 642 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 351 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 95, 339 
 
 18 Oh. D. 646 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 293 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 936 
 
 21 Ch. D. 394 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 286 
 10 Q. B. D. 172 
 10 P. D. 20.. 
 9 P. D. 23 .. 
 13 Q. B. D. 731 ! 
 
 '■] 
 
 381 
 822 
 165 
 196 
 
 1697 
 742 
 274 
 401 
 
 1697 
 298 
 742 
 
 803 
 
 1529 
 
 1505 
 
 887 
 
 849 
 
 J1466 
 
 (1680 
 
 1327 
 
 39 
 
 1226 
 
 408 
 
 1112 
 
 1180 
 
 173 
 
 50 
 
 233 
 
 ■ 242, 
 1478 
 1122 
 1384 
 1208 
 879 
 
 787, 1152 
 
 1226 
 533 
 
 611 
 
 881 
 
 1071 
 1062 
 
 787 
 
 1062 
 
 144 
 
 119 
 
 824 
 1065 
 1119 
 1129 
 
 174 
 
TABLE OF OASES' IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Salm Kjrrburg v. Posnanski .. 
 
 Sallmon, Eeg. v. 
 
 Salt -u. Cooper .. 
 
 V. Pypi. In re Northen's Estate 
 
 SaltasK (Corporation of) v. Gpodma,n., 
 
 Salter, Orawcour v. 
 
 Salting, Ex parte. In re Stratton .. ., 
 
 Sampson, Scott «. 
 
 Sampson and Wall, In re 
 
 Samuelson, Heske ■!). .. 
 
 Sandeman v. Scottish Property and Building Society 
 
 Sanders, In re. Ex parte Whinney .. 
 
 V. Davis 
 
 V.Sanders 
 
 W.Maclean .. .... 
 
 ' Case. Ill re Albion Life Assurance Society 
 
 Sanderson ■»,, Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mayor of) 
 
 Great Northern Railway Company and, 
 
 In re 
 
 , Wright V. 
 
 Sandes, Emeny v. 
 
 Sandgate Local Board «. Pledge 
 
 ■_ — I;. Leney 
 
 Sands to Thompson 
 
 Sand well, In re. Ex parte Zerfass .. 
 
 Sangster I). Cochrane .. ,. 
 
 Sastry Velaider Aronegary v. Sembecutty Vaigalie 
 
 Saunders, Ex parte ... 
 
 u. Crawford .. » 
 
 v. McConnell. In re McConnell .. 
 
 V. Pawley . . . . 
 
 , Richardson v. Richardson v. Saunders 
 
 ■■ , Warder «. 
 
 Sayage, Bridger u. .. .. 
 
 Savill, Whitecross Wire Company v. .. 
 Savin, Reg. -u. .. .. .. ' .. 
 
 Sawtell, Hernando u. In re Hernando 
 
 Sawyer u. Sawyer 
 
 Saxby v. Gloucester Waggon Company 
 
 Sayers t». Collyer 
 
 Saywood u. Cross 
 
 Scammellj Burrow v. .. 
 
 Scarf u. Jardine 
 
 Scarlett V. Hanson .. .. .• 
 
 Schjott ?;. Schjott 
 
 Schmidt, Rumball v. ., 
 
 Schmitz, Ex parte 
 
 Schneider «. Batt .. .. .. .. 
 
 ■- , Reg. V. 
 
 Scholfield i;. Spooner .. .. ... 
 
 School Board for London, Cotton's Trusl/Ces and. In re 
 
 V. Jackson .. 
 
 ■ , Rolls «. 
 
 School for Indigent Blind, WigseU v. 
 Schnler, Young u. .. .. <■ 
 
 Scioluna v. Stevenson. The " Rhondda " 
 Scotoher, Pearce V. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 218 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 79 
 16 Ch. D. 544 
 28 Ch. D. 153 
 
 7Q.B.D. 106; 7 App. Gas,] 
 633 
 
 18 Oh. D. 30 
 25Ch. D. 148 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 491 
 25 Ch. D. 482 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 30 
 
 10 App. Cas. 553 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 476 ,. 
 15Q.. B. D.218 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 373 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 327 .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 403 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 547 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 783 
 
 9 P. D. 149 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 6 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 730 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 183, n 
 
 22 Ch. D. 614 
 
 14Q. B. D. 960, 
 
 28 Ch. D. 298 
 6App, Cas. 364 .. 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 191 .. 
 9 Q. B. D. 612 
 
 29 Ch. D. 7(i 
 
 14Q. B. D. 234 .. 
 
 6 Q. B. r>. 313 ; 7 Q. B. D.) 
 
 388 J 
 
 lOQ. B.D. 114 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 363 .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 653 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 309 
 27Ch. D. 284 
 28 Ch. D. 595 
 7Q. B. D. 305 
 
 24Ch.D. 180;28Ch.D.103 
 14Q. B.D. 53 
 19 Ch. D. 175 
 
 7 App. Cas. 345 .. 
 12Q. B. D. 213 .. 
 19 0h. D. 94 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 603 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 509 .. 
 8Q. B.D. 701 
 11Q.B. D. 66 
 26Ch. D. 94 
 
 19 Ch. D. 624 
 7Q. B.D. 502 
 27 Ch. D. 639 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 357 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 651 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 549 ... 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 162 
 
 C!oluraa 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 1200 
 
 469 
 
 1210 
 
 1687 
 
 585 
 
 161, 545 
 ' 124 
 
 499 
 
 674 
 
 863 
 1384 
 
 112 
 
 748 
 
 809 
 1364 
 
 389 
 
 763 
 
 1626 
 
 1270 
 1222 
 
 735 
 1654 
 
 812 
 
 178 
 
 272 
 
 308 
 
 820 
 
 528 
 1218 
 1185 
 
 531 
 
 1156 
 1260 
 1486 
 1234 
 1087 
 1594 
 1048 
 454, 484 
 1222 
 
 740 
 1019 
 1473 
 1142 
 
 822 
 
 113 
 1U2 
 
 683 
 1460 
 1469 
 
 529 
 
 532 
 , 483 
 
 542 
 ,1511 
 
 585 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIUEST. 
 
 Name of Casa 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Sootney V. Lomer ■■ .. 
 
 Scott, In re 
 
 , Alresford Eural Sanitary Authority v. 
 
 v. Clifton School Board .. 
 
 , Griffith-Boscawen v. 
 
 V. Howard 
 
 ■ • V. Legg .. 
 
 • , Murray v. 
 
 V. Sampson 
 
 , Sotheron v. 
 
 Scottish Petroleum Company, In re 
 
 , In re. Anderson's Case 
 
 Scottish Property and Building Society, Sandeman v. 
 
 Scottish Widows Fund v. Craig 
 
 Sea Insurance Company v. Hadden .. 
 
 Seago, Chaston v. In re Chaston 
 
 Seagram i;. Tuck 
 
 Seal w. Claridge 
 
 Seaman, In re. Ehodes v. Wish 
 
 Sear,' Ex parte. In re Price .. 
 
 V. House Property and Investment Society 
 
 Searle n. Choat .. 
 
 "Seaton," The 
 
 Secretary of State for India in Council, Kinloch v. 
 Seddon v. Bank of Bolton 
 Sedgwick, Shurmur v. Crossfield v. Shurmur 
 Seear v. Lawson 
 
 V. Webb .. 
 
 Sellors V. Matlock Bath Local Board .. 
 SembeCutty Vaigalie, Sastry Velaider Aronegary v. 
 
 " Seraglio," The 
 
 Sergeant, In re. Mertens v. Walley .. 
 
 Sergenson v. Beloe. In re Watmough 
 
 Serrao v. Noel .. 
 
 Service, Bateman v. 
 
 Seward v. " Vera Craz." The " Vera Cruz '' 
 
 Sewell, Brown v. 
 
 V. Burdick 
 
 Seymour v. Bridge 
 
 Shaoklook, Harpham «. 
 
 Shaffers v. Greneral Steam Navigation Company 
 
 Shafto's Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Shakespear, In re. Deakin v. Lakin . . 
 
 Shapcott V. Chappell .. 
 
 Phardlow -y. Cotterell .. 
 
 Sharp V. Fowle . . 
 
 Sharpe, In re. Ex parte Mathewes .. 
 
 V. Birch 
 
 Sharpies, United Telephone Company v. 
 Sharratt, Derby Union (Guardians of) v. In 
 
 Webster 
 Shaw, Benson V. 
 Shaw and Corporation of Birmingham, In re 
 
 , Law Society of the United Kingdom v. 
 
 V. Port Phillip Gold Mining Company 
 
 V.Simmons 
 
 29 Ch. D. 535 
 
 27 Ch. D. 116 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 210 
 14 Q. B. D. 500 
 26 Ch. D. 358 
 6 App. Cas. 295 
 lOQ. B.D. 236 
 
 9 App. Cas. 519 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 518 
 
 23 Oh. D. 413 
 
 17 Ch. D. 373 
 
 10 App. Cas. 553 
 20 Ch. D. 208 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 706 
 
 18 Ch. D. 218 
 
 18 Ch. D. 296 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 516 
 20 Ch. D. 230 
 17 Ch. D. 74 
 16 Ch. D. 387 
 25 Ch. D. 723 
 
 9 P. D. 1 .. 
 
 7 App. Cas. 619 
 
 19 Ch. D. 462 
 
 24 Ch. D. 597 
 16 Ch. D. 121 
 
 25 Ch. D. 84 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 928 
 6 App. Cas. 364 
 
 10 P. D. 120 
 
 26 Ch. D. 575 
 24 CI). D. 280 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 549 
 6 App. Cas. 386 
 
 9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App. Cas. 59 
 
 16 Ch. D. 517 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 363 ; 13 Q. B. D, 
 159 ; 10 App. Cas. 74 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 460 
 19 Ch. D. 207 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 356 
 
 29 Ch. D. 247 
 
 30 Ch. D. 169 
 12 Q. B. D. 58 
 18Ch.D. 280;20Ch. D. 90 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 385 
 16 Ch. D. 655 
 
 8 Q. B. D. Ill 
 29 Ch. D. 164 
 
 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 563 
 27 Ch. D. 614 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 117 
 
 :1 
 
 1079 
 1601 
 1702 
 
 845 
 
 625 
 
 432 
 
 526, 1083 
 
 1382 
 
 874 
 
 271 
 
 499 
 
 203 
 
 344 
 
 324 
 1384 
 
 521 
 
 695 
 1675 
 
 808 
 
 242 
 1546 
 
 122 
 
 763 
 1212 
 1509 
 
 263 
 
 802 
 1648 
 1137 
 1163 
 
 815 
 
 308 
 1097 
 1708 
 
 452 
 
 540 
 
 318 
 1104 
 1226 
 
 1476 
 
 1258 
 
 1536 
 862 
 
 1467 
 639 
 
 1195 
 
 1620 
 769 
 193 
 243 
 
 1044 
 
 848 
 
 384 
 737 
 
 536 
 386 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Shead, Ex parte. 
 Sheard, Ex parte. 
 -, Ex parte. 
 
 •In re Mundy 
 In re Pooley (No. 1) 
 ■ [u re (No. 2) 
 
 Sheehan v. Great Eastern Railway Company 
 Sheffield, Curtis i». .. .. 
 
 Sheffield and South Yorkshire Permanent Benefit) 
 
 Building- Societyw. Harrison .. ... 
 Sheffield (Mayor of) Wake u. .. .. - .. 
 Sheffield Waterworks Company v. Bingham . . 
 V. (J. E.) . 
 
 , Brooks V. 
 V. Carter 
 
 Shelley v. Bethell 
 
 , Moore V. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Shepard V. Jones 
 Shepherd v. Hendprson 
 
 V. Norwich (Corporation of) .... 
 
 , Spanish Telegraph Company v ., 
 
 Sherry, In re. London and County Banking Com-) 
 
 pany V. T-erry .. .. .. • .. .. ) 
 
 Sherwood, Thomas v. .. 
 
 Sheward, Reg. i;. ■■ 
 
 Shiers V. Ashworth. In re Jackson . 
 
 Shillito V. Hobson. In re Richardson 
 
 Shipway t). Ball 
 
 Shirley Local Board, Melliss v. 
 
 Shoqlbred, Ex parte. In re Angell . 
 
 , Russell V. In- re Russell . 
 
 Shotts Iron Company v. Inglis 
 
 Shrewsbury (Kingsland) Bridge Company, Attorney-) 
 
 General w. .. .. .. .. .. ■•■} 
 
 Shropshire Iron Company's Trade-marks, Ta re. In re 
 
 P. Braby-& Co.'s Applications 
 Shropshire (.Justices of), Reg. u. .. .. 
 
 Shrop-shire ■ Union Railways and Canal Company,) 
 
 Rasbotham «. 
 Shubrook v. Tufnell .. 
 Shurmur, Crossfield v. Shurmur v. Sedgwick 
 
 V. -Sedgwick. Crossfield v. Shurmur 
 
 Shutt, Holgate V. 
 
 Inrej 
 
 ■I 
 
 Shuttleworth, Mersey Steam-ship Company v. 
 
 Sibeth, Ex parte. In re Sibeth 
 
 , In re. Ex parte 
 
 Sibley w. Higgs . . • 
 
 Siddall (a person of unsound mind). In re .... 
 
 Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge^ Attorney-General v. 
 Silber, Haywood ?;. 
 
 Silkstone and Dodworth Coal and Iron -Company,) 
 In re .. .. .. .. .. .. ■• J 
 
 ■^. , In I 
 
 re. Whitworth's Case 
 
 Gart- 
 
 Silkstone and Haigh Moor Coat Company, Wheatley v. 
 
 Sillery v.. Harmanis .. .. 
 
 Silver Valley Mines, In re 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 338 .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 107 
 leCh.D. 110 
 16 Ch. D. 59 
 
 20 Ch. r. 398 
 21Ch. D. 1.. 
 
 15Q. B. D. 358 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 142 .. 
 25 Ch. D. 443 
 25 Ch. D. 446, n. .. 
 8 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 632 
 12 Q. B. D. 11 
 BApp. Cas. 285 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 469 
 TApp.Cas. 49 
 30 Ch. D. 553 
 13Q. B. D.202 .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 692 
 
 9,App. Cas. 142 .. 
 9.Q. B..D. 741 
 25 Ch. D. 162 
 30 Ch. D. 396 
 16 Ch. D. 376 
 14Q. EL.D. 911 .. 
 14 Q. B. D. 298 .. 
 29Ch. D. 254-- .. 
 7 A pp. Cas. 518 .. 
 
 21Ch. D. 752 
 
 21 Ch. D. 223 
 6 Q. B. D. 669 
 24Ch. D. 110 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 621 
 24 Ch. D. 597 
 24Ch. D. 597 
 27Ch. D. Ill 
 28Ch. D. Ill 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 468 ; 11 Q. 
 .531 
 
 14Q. B.D. 417 .. 
 MQ. B.D. 417. .. 
 15Q. B.D. 619 .. 
 
 29Ch. D. 1 , 
 
 21 Ch. D. 514, n. .. 
 30Ch. D. 404 ■ .. 
 
 17Ch. D. 158 
 19 Ch. D. 118 
 
 21 Ch. D. 762 
 
 29 Ch. D.. 715 
 
 8App. Cas. 99, 
 
 18 Ch. .D. 472 , .. 
 
 B.D. 
 
 !■! 
 
 187 
 
 136 
 
 184 
 
 1138 
 
 1147 
 
 1242 
 
 594 
 
 824 
 
 1656 
 
 1656 
 
 1656 
 
 1656 
 
 1566 
 
 905 
 
 905 
 
 1406 
 
 782 
 
 766 
 
 1266 
 
 318 
 778 
 
 1668 
 895 
 
 1456 
 818 
 188 
 742 
 
 1395 
 
 1206 
 
 1581 
 
 74a 
 
 1167 
 
 1233 
 164a 
 164a 
 267 
 12ia 
 
 1195 
 
 165 
 165 
 245 
 385 
 284 
 764 
 
 378 
 392 
 
 496 
 
 335 
 308 
 381 
 
XOTUl 
 
 TABLE OF cases: IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Silver Valley Mines, In re 
 
 Simoox V. Handsworth Local Board . . 
 
 Simmons, In re . . 
 
 u. Mitehell 
 
 '; Shaw V. 
 
 Simon v. Yernon 
 
 Simons, In re. Ex parte Allard 
 
 Sinclair, In re. Ex parte Chaplin 
 
 , Inre. Ex parte Payne 
 
 V. Caithness Flagstone Quarrying Company 
 
 ■ —f Daniell v. 
 
 Singer Manufacturing Company u. Loog .. ..] 
 
 Skinner ■;;. City of London Marine Insui-anoe Corpora- 
 tion .. 
 
 — , Law Society v. Law Society v. Waterlow . . 
 
 Skipper, Clarke v. 
 
 Skipper, Garnham •!). .. 
 
 Slack ?;. Midland Railway Company ,. 
 
 Slade, Ih re. Slade v. Hulme] .. 
 
 t;. Hiilme. In re Slade 
 
 Slator, Paine «.. . 
 
 , Eeg. V. .. 
 
 Sligo (Marquis of), Houstoun u. 
 Slight, Cooper ■«. In re Cooper 
 Sly U.Blake. In re Johnson .. 
 Small V. Smith 
 
 "{ 
 
 :Smalley v. Hardinge .. 
 
 otherwise Cannon, Cannon v. 
 
 ;Smallpage's and Brandon's Oases. In re Marseilles^ 
 
 Extension Railway and Land Company 
 ; Smart (W. G.), In the Goods of 
 
 , In ie. Smart v. Smart 
 
 , Tinnuchi v. .. 
 
 ;Smethurst u. Hastings 
 Smetten, Taylor v. 
 iSmith, Ex parte. In re Hepburn 
 
 , In re. Green v. Smith 
 
 , In re. v. 
 
 , la re. Hooper v. Smith 
 
 - V. Armitage 
 
 - V. Birmingham (Corporation of) 
 -, Booth V. 
 
 - V. Chad wick .. 
 
 - V. Cowell .. .., .. 
 
 - V. Critohfield .. .. .. 
 
 -, Cropper v. 
 
 -, Cropper v. 
 
 -, Cropper V. (No. 2) 
 
 - IF. Dale .. 
 -V. Darlow 
 
 - i;. Dart & Soil 
 
 - V. Davies 
 
 - V. Day .. 
 
 -.Elliott v. 
 
 -, Euston V. 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 381 
 
 390 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 39 
 
 831 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 348 .. 
 
 1643 
 
 6 App. Cas. 156 .. 
 
 500 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 117 .. 
 
 386 
 
 8 App. .Cas. 542 .. 
 
 310 
 
 16 Ch. D. 505 
 
 147 
 
 26 Ch. D. 319 
 
 110 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 616 .. 
 
 139 
 
 6 App. Cas. 340 .. 
 
 1393 
 
 6 App. Cas. 181 .. 
 
 896 
 
 18 Ch. D. 395 ; 8 App. Cas.\ 
 15 / 
 
 1585 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 882 .. 
 
 348 
 
 9Q.B.D. l;8App.Cas. 407 
 
 1544 
 
 21 Ch. D. 134 
 
 1187 
 
 29Ch. D. 566 
 
 1183 
 
 16Ch. D. 81 
 
 1225 
 
 ISCh. D. 653 
 
 1198 
 
 18 Ch. D. 653 
 
 1198 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 120 .. 
 
 453 
 
 8Q. B. D. 267 
 
 474. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 448 
 
 537 
 
 27 Ch. D. 565 
 
 1089 
 
 29 Ch. D. 964 
 
 805 
 
 10 App. Cas. 119 .. 
 
 1374 
 
 6Q. B. D. 371; 7 Q. B. D.) 
 524 J 
 
 177 
 
 10 P. D. 96 
 
 1113 
 
 30 Ch. D. 598 
 
 233 
 
 9P. D. 64 
 
 1272 
 
 18 Ch. D. 165 
 
 419 
 
 10 P. B. 184 
 
 39 
 
 30Ch. D. 490 
 
 1598 
 
 IIQ.B.D. 207 .. 
 
 610 
 
 14Q. B. D. 394 .. 
 
 153 
 
 22Ch. D.586 
 
 145,655 
 
 24Cb. D. 672 
 
 145 
 
 26 Ch. D. 614 
 
 1245 
 
 24:Ch. D. 727 
 
 1185 
 
 IIQ.B.D. 195 .. 
 
 1658 
 
 14Q. B. D. 318 .. 
 
 1314 
 
 20 Ch.D. 27; 9 App. Cas. 187 
 
 324 
 
 6Q. B.D. 75 .. .. 
 
 1210 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 873 .. 
 
 1232 
 
 24 Ch. D. 305 
 
 1161 
 
 26Ch. D. 700; 10 App. Cas.) 
 249 .. \ 
 28 Ch. D. 148 
 
 1047 
 
 1041 
 
 18 Ch. D. 516 
 
 553 
 
 26 Ch. D. 605 
 
 1232 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 105 .. 
 
 1483 
 
 28 Ch. D. 650 
 
 899, 1183 
 
 16 Ch. D. 726 
 
 1218 
 
 21 Ch. D. 421 
 
 1200 
 
 22 Ch. D. 236 
 
 1684 
 
 9 P. D. 57 .. 
 
 1113 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THK DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 ■I 
 
 Smith, Grathercole ■;;. .. .. .. .. 
 
 , V 
 
 ^, Green u. In re Smith .. ... 
 
 , Gully V. .. .. .. ' 
 
 , Hoole «. 
 
 , Hooper w. In re Smith .. .. 
 
 , Howe V. .. .. .. .. 
 
 w. Keal .. .. .. :. 
 
 V. Lambeth Assessment Committee .. 
 
 V. Land and House Property Corporation 
 
 , Lawsv. The"BioTinto" ..•■ : .. 
 
 ■«. LucaS' 
 
 u. Manchester (Duke of) 
 
 , Midland Insurance Company v. 
 
 u. Millidge. In re Himiphries 
 
 -, Newbould w. .. - .'. ' .', 
 
 , Nicholson u. 
 
 II. Olding 
 
 «. Parkside Mining Company .. 
 
 , Portsmouth (Corporation of) v. , , .. ..< 
 
 , Beg'.' V. In re Westfield and Metropolitan) 
 
 Railway Companies 
 
 , Small V. 
 
 V. Smith.. 
 
 V. . . . . . . 
 
 V. — •■ — In re Benton 
 
 V. Spence. In re Wheatley 
 
 • and Stott, In re . 
 , Teevan v. 
 
 I Wallis V. 
 
 V. Watts. In re Watts 
 
 : — , Webb v. 
 
 Smith's Charity (Hartlepool), In re .. 
 Smyth (a Lunatic), In re 
 
 Snelling «. Pulling ... 
 
 Sneyd, In re. Ex parte Fewings ., 
 
 Snow i;. Bolton .. .. .'. ' .. 
 
 D. HiU 
 
 V. Whitehead .. .. .. .. . 
 
 Snowdon, Ex parte. In re Snowdon.. 
 Soanes, Ex parte. In re Walker .. 
 Scares, Beazley v. 
 Soci^tg Anonyme des Manufactures de Glaces v.] 
 Tilghman's Patent Sandblast Conlpany .. .. ) 
 
 Soci^te Gen&ale d'Eleetricit^,, TiVerdertnann v. 
 
 Society Gen^rale de Paris v. Dftyfns Brothers 
 
 ?;. Geen 
 
 V. Tramways Union Co. . 
 
 "Solis,"The .. . 
 Solclmon, Ex parte, 
 
 — -^ V. Bitton 
 
 " Solway," The 
 Somerset v. Hart • 
 
 In re Tilley- 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 626 
 
 1150 
 
 17 Ch. D. 1 
 
 523 
 
 22 Ch. D. 586 
 
 145,555 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 121 .. 
 
 • 620 
 
 17 Ch. D. 434 
 
 910 
 
 26 Ch. D. 614 
 
 1246 
 
 27 Ch. D. 89 
 
 1633 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 340 
 
 1473 
 
 9Q.B. D. 585; 10 Q. B. D.) 
 327 ( 
 
 1068 
 
 28.Ch. D..7.. 
 
 1634 
 
 9 App. Cas.356 .. .. 
 
 1488 
 
 18 0h. D. 531 
 
 1458 
 
 24Ch.D. 611 
 
 357 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 561 
 
 687 
 
 24 Ch. D. 691 
 
 1666 
 
 29 Ch.D..882 
 
 808 
 
 22 Oh. D. 640 
 
 767 
 
 25Ch.D.462 
 
 901 
 
 6Q. B.D.67 .., , .. 
 
 35 
 
 13 Q. B. D.,184;,10 App.\ 
 Cas. 364 ,./ 
 
 83? 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 481 ., 
 
 786 
 
 10 App. Cas. 119 .. . , ., 
 
 1374 
 
 7 P. D. 84 .. „ , ... 
 
 1118 
 
 7P. D. 227 
 
 1118 
 
 19 Ch, D. 277 
 
 644 
 
 27Ch.D:606 
 
 526 
 
 29 Ch. 1009, n 
 
 794 
 
 20 Oh.. D. 724 1 i.. 
 
 919 
 
 2lCh.D. 243 
 
 /1053 
 \1634 
 
 22 Ch. D. 5 
 
 895 
 
 30 Ch. D. 192 
 
 46 
 
 20 0h. D. 516 
 
 287 
 
 16 Oh. D. 673 
 
 845 
 
 29 Ch, D. 85 
 
 /1223, 
 -U240 
 
 25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 / 194, 
 1707,894 
 
 17 0h. D. 433 
 
 1198 
 
 14Q:B. D. 588 ., 
 
 610 
 
 27 Ob. D, 588 
 
 1652 
 
 170h. D. 44 ., .; 
 
 1262 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 484 .. 
 
 182 
 
 22 Oh. D. 660 
 
 1585 
 
 25 Ch. D. 1 
 
 1042 
 
 19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 /1042 
 11153 
 
 29 Ch. D. 239 .. .:■ 
 
 1133 
 
 8App. Cas. 606 .. 
 
 124 
 
 14Q. B. D. 424 .. .. 
 
 347 
 
 lOP. D. 62.. .. .. 
 
 1095 
 
 20 Ch. D. 281 
 
 196 
 
 8Q. B. D. 176. 
 
 1195 
 
 10 P. D. 137 
 
 1097 
 
 12Q. B.D,360 .. 
 
 684 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Somemlle, Ex parte. In re South Eastern Railway |^ 
 Company- .. ■ .. 
 
 Sotheran t). Dening 
 
 Sotherori ?;. Scott •. .. 
 
 Soutar's Policy Trust, In re .. 
 
 South Eastern Bailway Company, In re. Ex parte 
 SomerviUe .. ■■ 
 
 , Bobbett v. 
 
 V. Bailway Com- 
 missioners and Mayor, Sec, of Hastings 
 
 -, Thomson v. 
 
 irtel 
 
 ••{ 
 
 South Kensington Co-operative Stores, In re 
 
 South Shields Union, Dinning v. 
 
 South Western Loan Company v. Robertson 
 
 Southall, Bollen i; 
 
 Southam, In re. Ex parte Lamb 
 Southampton (Corporation of), Aslatt v. 
 
 , Judge of the County Court of, Reg. 
 
 (Lord), Allen v. In re Southampton's 
 
 (Lord) Estate. Banfather's Claim .. 
 Southampton's ('Lord) Estate. In re. Allen 
 
 Southampton (Lord). Banfather's Claim 
 Southend Coimty Court (Judge of), Reg. v. .. 
 Southend Waterworks Company v. Howard .. 
 Southsea Railway Company, Barnes v. 
 Spackman v. Foster 
 
 , Tlumstead Board of Works v. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 :\ 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 Spaight V. Tedcastle ., .. 
 
 Spain V. Mowatt. MiKord Haven Railway and Estate) 
 
 Co. V. Mowatt. In re Lake and Taylor's Mortgage ( 
 
 Spanish Telegraph Company v. Shepherd 
 
 Sparrow, In Te - .. 
 
 ■!;. Hill 
 
 Speight, In re .. 
 
 , In re. Speight v. Gaimt 
 
 V. Gaunt. ' In re Speight 
 
 Speller v. Bristol Steam Navigation Company 
 Spence, Smith i>. In re Wheatley 
 Spencer, In re. Thomas «. Spencer .. 
 
 V. Duckworth. In re Wilkins 
 
 (Earl), Johnstone t>. .. 
 
 , Thomas i;. In re Spencer .. 
 
 V. Metropolitan Board of Works 
 
 Sperling v. Rochfort- In re Van Hagan 
 SpiUer, In re. Spiller v. Madge 
 In re SpiUer 
 
 Spindler, In re. Ex parte Rolph 
 Spooner, Scholfield v. .. 
 Sproule V. Bouch. Jn re Bouch 
 Spurgeon, Hill v. In re Love 
 
 Spurr, King v. 
 
 Stafford v. Stafford. In re Price 
 
 Stait, Gray v. .. 
 
 Standing v. Bowring .. 
 
 Stanford «. Roberts 
 
 Stanger, In re- Ex. parte Geisel 
 
 23Ch. D. 167- .. 
 
 20 Oh. D. 99 
 
 6.Q. B. D. 518 .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 236 
 
 23Ch. D. 167 
 9 Q. B. D. 424 
 6 Q. B. D. 586 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 320 
 
 17 Ch. D. 161 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 61; 13 Q. B. D) 
 25 j 
 
 8Q. B. D 17 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 461 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 169 
 
 16 Ch. D. 143 . .. 
 13Q. B. D. 142 
 
 16 Ch. D. 178 
 
 16 Ch. D. 178 
 
 13Q. B.D. 142 .. 
 13Q. B. D. 215 .. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 536 
 IIQ. B.D. 99 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 878; 10 App.\ 
 Cas. 229 .. .. :./ 
 
 6 App. Cas. 217 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 402 
 
 13Q. B.D. 202 .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 320 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 362 ; 8 Q. B, 
 479 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 42 
 
 22 Ch. D. 727 ; 9 App. Cas. 1 
 
 22 Ch. D. 727 ; 9 App. Cas. 1 
 
 13Q. B. D. 96 
 
 27 Ch. D. 606 
 
 30 Ch. D. 183 
 
 18 Ch. D. 634 
 30Ch. D. 581 
 30 Ch. D. 183 
 
 22 Ch. D. 142 .. ;; 
 ]6Ch. D. 18 
 
 18 Ch. D. 614 
 18Ch. D. 614 
 
 19 Ch. D. 98 
 
 26 Ch. D. 94 
 
 29 Ch. D. 635 
 29 Ch. D. 348 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 104 
 28Ch. D. 709 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 668 .. 
 
 27 Ch. D, 341 
 26 Ch. D. 155 
 22 Ch. D, 436 
 
 ':} 
 
 187 
 
 1596 
 
 1596 
 
 1145 
 
 526 
 
 642 
 
 1674 
 
 419 
 
 642 
 
 780 
 
 1081 
 
 1684 
 
 1684 
 
 250 
 
 1460 
 
 338 
 
 1593 
 
 949 
 
 639 
 
 747 
 
 17 
 
 1532 
 
 117, 146 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page, 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Stanley, In r«. Ex parte Milward .. 
 
 v. Grrundy ■ .. 
 
 Stanmore, The .. 
 
 Stannard v. St. Giles, CamlDerwell (Vestry of) 
 
 Stedham, In the Goods of .. .. .. 
 
 Steed, Metropolitan Board of Works V. 
 Steel u. Dixon .. 
 
 -, Warner to. In re Warner's Settled Estates .. 
 
 u. Sutton Gas Company .. 
 
 Steer, Conelly v. . .. .. .. 
 
 Steere, Allow-ay J). ... 
 
 Stenson, In re. Ex.parte Merriman.. 
 
 Stenton, Webb u 
 
 Stephens, Dyke f 
 
 , Prampton, t;. 
 
 Stephenson, -Ness v.. .. 
 
 , Eeg. » 
 
 Stevens, In re. Ex parte M'George .. 
 ^ V. Biller .. .. .. ... 
 
 V. Metropolitan District Bail way Company 
 
 1;. Woodward .. 
 
 Stevenson, Scicluna i;. The"Rhondda" ... 
 Stewart, Cassels v. 
 ■ — — — , Crowder v. 
 
 ■ — , Gullischen w. .. 
 
 .-■•{ 
 
 -{ 
 
 ■ V. Merchants Marine Insurance Company.-. 
 
 , Walker v. In re Pringle .. 
 
 Brothers, Gullischen v. 
 
 Stigand v. Stlgand ' .. 
 Stimson, Collins v. 
 
 Stock u. Inglis .. 
 
 , Mostyn «». 
 
 Stocker, BelLi;. .. 
 _ Stocldl ■!;. Punshon. . .. .. .. , ., 
 
 Stogi;, In re 
 
 Stohwasser, Jones if. .. 
 
 Stone V. Attorney-General. In re Sutton . 
 
 ^,.De Geer i;. .. .. 
 
 ■!;. Hyde .. .^ .. .. ,.. 
 
 Stoner, Durrant and. In re 
 Stonor's Trusts, In re .. 
 Stoomvaart Maatschappy Nederland v, Peninsular"! 
 and Oriental Steam Navigation Company .. .. / 
 
 Storer, In re 
 
 , Eaton -y 
 
 Storey, In re. Ex par^e Popple well 
 
 "Stott V. Milne .. 
 
 and Smith, In re . . 
 
 Stovell V. New Windsor (Mayor of) .. 
 
 Strains, Norman v. 
 
 Strand, In re. Ex parte Board of Trade 
 
 Stratton, In re. Ex parte Salting 
 
 Strauss •y. County Hotel Company .. 
 
 Strawbridge, Ex parte. In re Hickman 
 
 Street '■«. Crump 
 
 V. Union Bank of Spain and England., 
 
 :■} 
 
 16Ch. D. 256 
 22.Gh. D. 478 , .. 
 10,P. D.a34 
 20Ch. D:190 , .. 
 
 6 P. D. 205 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 445 
 17 Ch. D. 825 
 
 17 0h. D. 711 
 12.Q. B. D. 68. .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 520 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 22 
 25 Ch. D. 144 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 518 .. 
 30 Oh. D. 189 
 
 21 Ch. D. 164 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 245 
 13. Q. B..D. 331 .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 697 
 
 25 Ch. D. 31 
 
 29 Oh. D. 60 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 318 
 S.App. Oas. 549 .. 
 e.App. Gas. 64 . .. 
 16 Ch. D. 368 
 11 Q. B. D. 186 ; 13 Q. B. D. 
 
 317 
 
 14Q. B. D. 555 .. 
 
 17. Ch. D. 819 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 317 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 460 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 142 .. 
 9Q. B. D. 708; 12 Q. B. D.) 
 ...546; 10 App. Cas. 263 .. ) 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 129 .. 
 6P. D. 9 .. 
 9P. D. 120.. 
 16 Ch. D. 577 
 
 28 Ch. D. 464 
 
 22 Oh. D. 243 
 9 Q. B. D. 76 
 
 18 Ch. D. 106 
 
 24 Oh. D. 195 
 
 7 App. Cas. 795 .. 
 
 26 Oh. D. 189 
 22 Oh. D. 91 
 
 21 Ch. D. 73 
 
 25 Oh. D. 710 
 
 29 Ch. D. 1009, n. .. 
 
 27 Oh. D. 665 
 6P. D. 219.. 
 13Q. B.D. 492 .. 
 25 0h. D. 148 .. .. 
 12Q. B..D. 27 
 25 Ch. D. 266 
 25 Oh. D. 68 
 ao Oh. D. 156 
 
 191 
 
 903 
 
 1510 
 
 1208 
 
 1687 
 
 ,881, 
 
 1262 
 
 1342 
 
 351 
 
 258 
 
 .154 
 
 148 
 
 . 1203 
 
 1173 
 
 516 
 
 768 
 
 467 
 
 119 
 
 574 
 
 /1240 
 
 U285 
 
 952 
 
 1511 
 
 1396 
 
 567 
 
 1480 
 
 696 
 1693 
 1480 
 1134 
 1633 
 
 691 
 
 138 
 
 637 
 
 1682 
 
 1107 
 
 13 
 
 286 
 
 22 
 
 865 
 
 653 
 
 1461 
 
 1098 
 
 1528 
 
 1151 
 
 251 
 
 1592 
 
 794 
 
 821 
 
 1130 
 
 189 
 
 124 
 
 679 
 
 147 
 
 1161 
 
 1584 
 
TABLE or CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Streeter, Ex parte. In re Morris 
 Strickland, Apap «... 
 
 ■;;. Apap .. „ 
 
 1). Symons .. 
 
 ■y. Weldon .. 
 
 Stringer, Ex parte 
 
 —, Melville v. .. 
 
 Strong, Giblings t;. 
 
 Strousberg, Kepublic of Costa Eica V. 
 
 Strugnell 1). Strugnell .. 
 
 , Wilson v. 
 
 Stuart V. Wrey. In re Wrey 
 
 Stubbins, Ex parte. In re Wilkinson 
 
 Stubbs, Carter D. 
 
 Studd -u. Cook .. 
 
 Studds u. Watson 
 
 Stumore, Aste v. .. .. ;. 
 
 Sturge and Great Western Railway Company ,. 
 
 Suffell V. Bank of England 
 
 Sugden, Bhodes v. In re Wads worth 
 
 Sulger, Ex parte. In re Chinn 
 
 Sullivan, Lawless u. .. 
 
 — , Trye v. In re Young 
 
 Sully, Ex. parte. In re Wallis 
 
 Sultan AUie, CHtty u... .. .. .. 
 
 Summers D. Moorhouse 
 
 Sunderland Building Society, Bell u. .. 
 
 (Guardians of) v. Sussex (Clerk of the) 
 
 Peace for) .. .. .. .. .. ..J 
 
 " Sunniside," The 
 
 Surrey County Court (Judge of), Eeg. v. 
 
 (Justices of), Eeg. v. .. 
 
 — ■ (Treasurer of), Mullins ■«.■ 
 
 Suse» In re. Ex parte Dever (No. 1) 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Dever (No. 2) 
 
 Sussex (Clerk of the Peace for), Sunderland (Guar- 
 dians of) V, .. 
 
 Sutherberry, Oceanic Steam Navigation Company v. 
 
 Sutherland, Hughes u. .. 
 
 Sutton, In re .. 
 
 , In re .. 
 
 , In re. Stone v. Attorney-General .. 
 
 ■ , Beckett «. 
 
 1). Sutton 
 
 Sutton Coldfield Grammer School, In re 
 
 Sutton Gas Company, Steele «. 
 
 — • (Parish of) to Church .. 
 
 Svensden v. Wallace .. .. II' 
 
 Swan, Grahame «. . 
 
 Swansea Co-operative Building Society v. Davies 
 
 (Mayor of) v. Thomas 
 
 Swanwick, Briggs v. .. .. .. . .. 
 
 Sweet ■!;. Comblej'- .. .. 
 
 Swift u. Pannell 
 
 Swinburn v. Ainslie. In re Ainslie .. 
 
 • V. ■ In re — .. .. .. 
 
 ':} 
 
 ".J 
 
 19 Oh. D. 216 
 
 7 App. Cas. 156 .. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 106 ., 
 
 22 Ch. D. 666 ; 26 Ch. D. 245 
 28 Ch. D. 426 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 132 ; 13 Q. B. D. 
 392 
 
 26 Ch. D. 66' 
 
 16 Ch. J). 8 
 
 27 Ch. D. 258 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 548 
 30 Ch. D. 507 
 
 17 Ch. D. 58 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 8 App. Cas. 577 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 305 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 326 .. 
 19 Ch. D. 444 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 270 ; 9 Q. B 
 555 
 
 29 Ch. D. 517 
 17 Ch. D. 839 
 
 6 App. Cas. 373 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 705 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 950 ,. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 751 .. 
 13 Q. B. D. 388 .. 
 24Ch. D.618 
 
 8Q. B. D. 99 
 
 8P. D. 137 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 963 .. 
 6Q. B. D. 100 
 6Q.B.D.156;7App. Cas. 1 
 13 Q. B. D. 766 .. 
 14Q. B.D. 611 .. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 99 
 
 16 Ch. D. 236 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 160 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 377 .. 
 21 Oh. D. 855 
 
 28 Ch. D. 464 
 19 Ch. D. 646 
 22Ch. D. 511 
 7 App. Cas. 91 
 12Q. B. D. 68 ., 
 26 Ch. D. 173 
 11Q.B.D. 616;. 13Q.B. 
 69 ; 10 App. Cas. 404 
 7 App. Cas. 547 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 21 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 48 
 10 Q. B. D. 510 .. 
 25 Ch. .D. 463, n. .. 
 24Ch.D. 210 
 28 Ch. D. 89 
 
 30 Ch. D. 485 
 
 !} 
 
 184 
 
 312 
 
 312 
 
 1602 
 
 288 
 347 
 
 247 
 
 1162 
 1203 
 1016 
 
 410 
 1701 
 
 166 
 1162 
 1383 
 1621 
 1182 
 1667 
 
 232 
 
 1540 
 169 
 299 
 641 
 163 
 316 
 941 
 912 
 
 1065 
 
 1518 
 
 179 
 1073 
 1268 
 
 235 
 
 236 
 
 1065 
 
 12 
 
 1496 
 
 1525 
 
 1611 
 286 
 
 1610 
 
 807, 1550 
 
 533 
 
 351 
 
 286 
 
 1486 
 
 1397 
 
 1194 
 
 742 
 
 594 
 
 901 
 
 160 
 
 1568 
 
 1568 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page, 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Swinburne, In re. Swinburne v. Pitt 
 V. Pitt. In re Swinburne .. 
 
 • V. MilbuYn .. 
 
 Swindon and Cbeltenbam Extension Hallway Com-J 
 pany, Great Western Railway Company v. ..) 
 Swire, In re. Mellor v. Swire 
 , In re. 
 
 -, Cooksdn v. < .. . ■ . 
 -, Mellor V. In re Swire 
 -, V. In re 
 
 Syer -w. Gladstone .. 
 Sykes v. Sacerdoti 
 Sylvester, Popple «. .. .. 
 
 Symonds •». Hallett. 
 Symondson, Bradford v. ■ 
 Symons, In re. Luke v. Tonkin 
 
 '■ ■«. Leaker ' ., 
 
 , Strickland ■■«... i 
 
 T. 
 
 Tabois, Manton V. .. .. •• i 
 
 Tacquah Gold Mining Company, Maodonald v. 
 Tadman v. D'Epineuil. In re Count D'Epineuil) 
 
 (No. 1) ,. .,: I 
 
 V. . In r? 1 
 
 (No. 2) , .. ...j 
 
 Tagert, Kingdon V. In re Badcook .. ... 
 TaSourdin, Great Northern Bail way Company ■;;.. .. 
 
 '■ , Isle of Wight Bail way Company, v. 
 
 Talt, In re. Ex parte Harper .. . .. 
 
 Talbot, In re ,. 
 
 , Jackson u. In re Jackson .. .. .. 
 
 Tambracherry Estates Company, In re .. .. 
 
 Tamplin, Nnth 1). ... .. .. , 
 
 Tarns, Bromley V. Grainger «. Aynsley 
 
 Tanner, Bursill V. ., .. '.. .. .. 
 
 Tanqueray-Willaume and Landau, In re .. .. 
 
 Tapson, Pry v. .. .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 , Eaymond -y. .. .. .. ..• 
 
 Tarleton v. Bruton. In re Roberts .. .. .. 
 
 Tarn v. Commercial Bank of Sydney .. 
 Tate, In re .. • .. 
 
 •!;. Hyslop .. 
 
 7, Langen v. 
 
 Tattersall I;. National Steamship Company . 
 Tatton, Ex parte. In re Thorp 
 Taurine Company, In re ., .. 
 
 Taylor, Ex parte • .. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Salaman .. 
 
 , Allen V. 
 
 ■ V. In re Gyhon 
 
 -, Ames V. In re Ames 
 -, Hurst V. 
 ^ V. Johnston 
 
 27Ch. D..696 
 
 27Ch. D. 696 
 
 9 App. Cas. 844, . .. , 
 22.Ch. D,.677; 9 App. i 
 787 
 
 21 Ch. D. 647 
 30Ch. D.239 
 
 9 App. Gas. 653 
 21Ch. D. 647 
 30 Ch. D. 239 
 30Ch. D. 614 
 15 Q. B. D. 423 .. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 98 • .. 
 24. Chi D. 346 
 
 7Q. B. D. 456 
 
 21 Ch. D. 757 .. . 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 629 . ., 
 
 22Ch.D..666;26Ch.D. 
 
 245 
 
 524,1087 
 
 ■/ 524 
 .■\1087 
 ^ 767 
 
 781 
 
 1148 
 
 1198 
 243 
 
 1148 
 
 1198 
 
 1676 
 
 1180 
 706 
 ,640 
 696 
 552 
 
 1251 
 
 1602 
 
 30Ch. D. 92 
 
 1705 
 
 13,Q. B. D. 535 
 
 1202 
 
 20Ch. D.217 
 
 555 
 
 20 Ch. D. 758 ' .. 
 
 254 
 
 17.Ch. D. 361 
 
 1451 
 
 13Q. B.D. 320 ... 
 
 1287 
 
 25Ch. n. 320 
 
 353 
 
 21 Ch. D. 537 
 
 148 
 
 20Ch. D.269 
 
 846, 
 
 21 Ch. D. 786 
 
 674 
 
 29 Oh. D. 683 
 
 342 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 247 
 
 1006 
 
 6.Q. B.D. 182 
 
 868 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 691 
 
 1136 
 
 20Ch. D. 465 
 
 /1643 
 1666 
 
 28 Ch. D. 268 
 
 1597 
 
 22Ch. D. 430 
 
 1191 
 
 27Ch.D. 346;30Ch.D.234 
 
 1665 
 
 12Q. B. D. 294 .. 
 
 1157 
 
 20 Ch. D. 135 
 
 847,1612 
 
 15Q. B. D. 368 .. 
 
 691 
 
 24Ch. D. 522 ... 
 
 1192 
 
 12 Q. B.D. 297 ., 
 
 1476 
 
 17 Ch. D. 512 
 
 190 
 
 25 Ch. D. 118 
 
 349 
 
 13Q. B.D. 128 .. 
 
 126 
 
 21 Ch. D. 394 
 
 ,119 
 
 16 Ch. D. 355 
 
 804 
 
 2aCh. D. 834 
 
 1183 
 
 25Ch. D. 72 
 
 1530 
 
 14Q. B.D. 918 .. 
 
 950 
 
 19 Ch. D. 603 
 
 665 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Taylor v. Mostyn .. ., .. .,. ^ 
 
 V. Mostyn. Mostyn v. Lancaster 
 
 V. Pilsen Joel and General Electric Li^t) 
 
 Company 
 
 V. Ponoia 
 
 , Ealph V. In re Ralph's Trade-mark 
 
 1/. Smetten 
 
 K.Taylor 
 
 , Wallv. Wall i;. Martin 
 
 i 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Tomlin v. Underlay 
 
 Taylor's Estate, In re. 
 
 Teal, Barlow v. 
 
 Tebbit, Barber v. In re Ap^leton 
 
 Tedcastle, Spaight v. .. 
 
 Teebay v. Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire) 
 
 Railway Company .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Teevan v. Smith .. .. .. 
 
 Tempest 11. Camoys (Lord) 
 
 V. 
 
 Templeman v. Trafibrd 
 Temporahties Board, Dobie v. 
 Tenant i;. Ellis ,, 
 
 Tenison, Harston v. . In re Cross .. 
 
 Terrell, In re .. 
 Terry, Graves v. 
 
 , Harbottle V. 
 
 , London and County Banking Company v.] 
 
 In re Sherry .. " .. .. .. ... ... i 
 
 Tetley, Clay and, In re .. 
 
 Teuliere v. St. Mary Abbotts, Kensington (Yestry of) 
 Thames Ironworks Company, Munday j;. 
 Thatcher's Trusts, In re 
 
 Thanet (Guardians of) v. Pulham (Guardians of) ... 
 
 Theys, Ex parte. In re Milan Tramways Company | 
 
 Thol v. Henderson 
 
 Thomas, In re. Ex parte Poppleton .. 
 
 , Mayor of Swansea ?;. 
 
 , Morgan V. .. .. .. .. ..) 
 
 ?). Palin 
 
 V. Patent Lionite Company .. 
 
 , Priestman i;. .. 
 
 . — V ,. 
 
 ,"S,eg.v. ,. 
 
 ■«. Sherwood .. 
 
 V.Spencer., In re Spencer .. 
 
 v. Williams .. 
 
 Thomas-Peter, Peter V. .. ,. 
 
 Thompson, Ip re .. .. .. .,. 
 
 , Berkley ■y. .. .. .. • .. ■„/ 
 
 -, Carlisle Banking Company v. 
 
 -, Cato i;. 
 
 - and Curzon, In re .. 
 
 -, Button V. .. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 48 
 23 Cb. D. 583 
 
 27 Ch. D. 268 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 25 Ch. 
 
 D. 646 
 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 1451 
 
 25 Ch. 
 
 D. 194 
 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 1584 
 
 11 ,Q. 
 
 3. D. 207 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 610 
 
 6P. D 
 
 .29 .. 
 
 , , 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 1130 
 
 9Q. B 
 .102 
 
 . D. 727 ; 
 
 11Q.B 
 
 ^1 
 
 427 
 
 22 Ch. 
 
 D. 495 
 
 ■ • 
 
 
 
 /1184 
 tl686 
 
 15Q. B. D.403;. 
 501' 
 
 15 Q. B. D.\ 
 
 775 
 
 29 .Ch. 
 
 D. 893 
 
 
 
 
 1678 
 
 6 App. 
 
 Cas. 217 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 1515 
 
 24 Ch. 
 
 D. 572 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 1620 
 
 20.Ch. D. 724 
 
 •• 
 
 
 
 919 
 
 21 Ch. 
 
 D. 571 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 1603 
 
 21 Ch. 
 
 D. 576, n 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 1603 
 
 8Q. B 
 
 D. 397 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 1057 
 
 7 App. 
 
 Cas. 136 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 304 
 
 6Q. B 
 
 D. 46 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 1222 
 
 20. Cb. 
 
 D. 109 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 1600 
 
 22 Ch. 
 
 D. 473 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 1224 
 
 9Q. B 
 
 D. 170 
 
 
 
 
 1151 
 
 lO.Q. B..D. 131 
 
 
 
 
 593 
 
 25 Cb. 
 
 D. 692 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 1266 
 
 16 Ch. 
 
 D.3 .. 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 30 Cb. 
 
 D. 642 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 881 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 59 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 864 
 
 26 Cb. 
 
 D. 426 
 
 
 
 
 671 
 
 6,Q. B 
 539 
 
 . P. 610.; 
 
 7Q. 
 
 B. 
 
 "} 
 
 1066 
 
 22 Ch 
 
 D. 122; 
 
 25 Ch. 
 
 D. 
 
 j 375 
 
 11150 
 
 485 
 
 587 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 457 
 
 
 
 
 14. Q. B. D. 379 
 
 
 
 
 385 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 
 
 
 742 
 
 8Q. B 
 
 . D. 575; 
 
 9Q,. 
 
 B. 
 
 D.| 
 
 1676 
 
 643 
 
 
 
 
 
 21 Ch. 
 
 D. 360 
 
 
 
 1199 
 
 17. Cb. 
 
 D. 250 
 
 ,. 
 
 
 
 367, 377 
 
 9.P. D 
 
 70 .. 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 537 
 
 9.P. D 
 
 210 
 
 
 
 
 537 
 
 11 Q. B..D. 283 
 
 .. 
 
 
 
 626 
 
 9. App. 
 
 Cas. 142 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 318 
 
 30 Ch. 
 
 D. 183 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 642 
 
 24 Ch. 
 
 D. 558 
 
 ,, 
 
 
 
 1469 
 
 26 Ch. 
 
 D. 181 
 
 
 
 
 1146 
 
 30 Ch. 
 
 D. 441 
 
 
 
 
 1528 
 
 10 Q, 
 
 Cas. 
 
 B. D. 261 
 
 45 .. 
 
 -; 10 
 
 App.j 
 
 204 
 
 28 Ch. 
 
 D. 398 
 
 
 
 
 272 
 
 9,Q. B 
 
 I). 616 
 
 
 
 
 1633 
 
 2a Ch. 
 
 D. 177 
 
 ., 
 
 
 
 638 
 
 23 Ch. D, 278 
 
 
 
 ,, 
 
 1649 
 
 899 
 1463 
 
 341 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 ?! 
 
 Thompson u.-Parrer- .. 
 
 ■!». Harris.- In re Middleton 
 
 , Eeg. i;. 
 
 , Eoyal Society of London and ... 
 
 , Sands to- .. .. 
 
 , WajeVi .. .. 
 
 v. Wright .. 
 
 Thomson, May w. 
 
 ^;.- South Eastern Eailway Company 
 
 u. Weems- .. .. .. ^. 
 
 Thorley, Child & Co. u 
 
 Thornton, Fellows V. .. 
 Thorp, In re.- Ex parte Tatton 
 Thorpe i;. Bestwick 
 
 ■«. Linney .. .. .. -.. -.. 
 
 Three Towns- Banking Company v. Maddever. In-rej 
 
 Maddever 
 Threlfall, In re. Ex parte Queen's Benefit Building 
 
 Society 
 
 V.' Wilson 
 
 Thurlby (Overseers ef). Corporation of Peterborough v. 
 Thwailes V. Wilding .. .. .. i. 
 
 " Thyatira," The .. ..' 
 
 T'ilgbman's • Patent Sandblast Company, Societal 
 
 Anonyme- des Manufactures de Grlaoes v. ■:. 
 
 Tillett 17. Nixon 
 
 i;. Ward .. - 
 
 Tilley, In re.- Ex parte Solomon 
 
 Tinhuohi 1). Smart • - 
 
 Tippett u. Hart.. .. 
 
 Titterton V. Cooper 
 
 Tiverton and; North- Devon Eailway Company, Loo'se- i 
 
 more «. 
 
 Todd, Kirk ». 
 
 V. Eobinson •- 
 
 V. - 
 
 Todmorden Mill Company, Oi-merod i;. 
 
 , V. 
 
 TJjfield, Bray v. In re Greaves, deceased 
 Toke r. Andrews •• .. .. ' 
 
 Tollemacbe,- In re. ■ Ex parte Anderson 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Bonham 
 
 •,■ In re.- - Ex parte Edwards 
 
 , In re.- • Ex parte Eevell ( No. 1) 
 
 , In re. Ex parte (No. 2) 
 
 Tomlin V. tTnderhay. In re Taylor's Estate 
 
 Tomlinson, -In the Goods of .. 
 
 , Ballard 4;. .. .. .. _.. 
 
 - IK Land^ind Finance Corporaticm 
 
 Tompsoh V. Dashwood 
 
 Tonbridge (Overseers of), Reg. v, 
 
 Tone r. Preston.. - .. 
 Tonkin, Luke i;. In re Sy mens .. -.. 
 
 Toogood, Winyard v. Hance v. Fortnum .. 
 Toohey, Commissioners for Eailways v. ■•.. 
 Tottenham -Local Board, United Land Company «■■ 
 
 ■■■{ 
 
 9.Q. B. D. 372 
 
 19 Ch. D. 552 
 
 12Q. B. D. 261 .. • 
 17 Ch. D. 407 
 22Ch. D. 614 
 15.Q. B. D. 342 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 632 .. 
 20- Ch. D:705 ■■ .. 
 9 Q. B. D. 320 
 
 9 App. Cas. 671 .. 
 16.Ch. D.151 .. .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 335 .. 
 17Ch. D;512 • .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 311 
 15.Q. B..D. 273 .. 
 
 27Ch. D. 523 
 
 16 Ch. D. 274 
 
 8P. D.18 
 
 8.Q.B. D. 586 
 11Q.B.D.421;12Q.B.D, 
 8P. D.155 
 
 25Ch.D.l .. 
 
 25 Ch. D.' 238 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 17 
 
 20 Ch. D. 281 
 10 P. D. 184 . .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 483. .. 
 9Q. B. D. 473 
 22 Ch. D. 25;- 9 App. Cas 
 
 4t0 
 21Ch. D. 484 
 
 IIQ. B,D. 530 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 739 .. 
 8Q. B. D. 664 
 
 IIQ.B. D.155 .. 
 
 18Ch. D. 551 - .. 
 SB. B.D. 428 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 606 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 604 .. 
 
 14Q. B.D. 415' .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 720 .. 
 
 13Q. B.D. 727 .. 
 
 22 Ch, D. 495 
 
 6P. D.209 .. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 194; 29 Ch. D. 
 115 
 
 14Q. B.D. 539 .. 
 IIQ. B. D. 4.3 
 11 Q. B.D. 134';" 13 Q. B. D. 
 --339 
 24Ch. D. 739 
 
 21 Ch. D. 757 
 lOQ. B. D. 218 .. 
 9 App.. Cas. 720 .. 
 13Q.B. D. 640 .. 
 
 . 1495 
 
 553 
 
 204 
 
 285 
 
 812 
 
 823 
 
 1231 
 
 1548 
 
 1158 
 
 689 
 
 562 
 
 1203 
 
 190 
 
 1664 
 
 939 
 
 603 
 
 158 
 
 1131 
 
 1412 
 
 769 
 
 1485 
 
 1042 
 
 903 
 1587 
 
 196 
 
 39 
 
 1322 
 
 135 
 
 781 
 
 551 
 
 1052 
 
 810 
 
 1187 
 
 1653 
 
 806 
 
 1150 
 
 152 
 
 151 
 
 150 
 
 150 
 
 170 
 
 (1184 
 
 ^1686 
 
 1273 
 
 1653 
 
 1180 
 
 275 
 
 1557 
 552 
 528 
 314 
 625 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 ■;! 
 
 Toomer, In re. Ex parte Blaiberg ,. 
 
 Tootal's Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Toothill, Clarbrougli 1). 
 
 Toutt's Will, Iq re. In re Martyn (a Lunatic) 
 
 Toward, Iq re. Ex parte Moss 
 
 Towers, Friend v. 
 
 Townend, Adam v. ,. .. .. .. 
 
 Townsend ■». Townsend 
 
 Towse u. Loveridge 
 
 Toye, Barnes t;. .. .. .. .. ,. 
 
 Tozier v. Hawkins 
 
 Trade-marks Eegistration Acts, 1875. In re J. B. 
 
 Palmer's Application 
 Trafford, Templeman v. 
 Trail, Booth v. .. 
 Tramways Union Company, Soci^t^ G&^rale 
 
 Paris V, 
 Trask, Lewisi). .. 
 Trechinann, Gardner v. 
 Tred well, Dawes u. 
 Treharne, Baillie v.. 
 
 , Davis V. ., .. .. .. .. 
 
 Treherne w. Dale 
 
 TVench, In re. Ex parte Brandon ., 
 
 Trevor, Eobinson u. 
 
 Trickett's Claim. In re Romford Canal Company .. 
 
 Trott V. Buchanan .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Trower, Peek V. 
 
 Truman, Harris v. .. .. .. .. .. ■ 
 
 ■ V. London, Brighton, and South Coast Rail-) 
 
 ?l 
 
 de 
 
 way Company 
 
 & Co. V. Redgrave 
 
 -, Hanbury & Co., Hall v. 
 
 Truscott V. Diamond Rock Boring Company .. ., 
 
 Tryei;. Sullivan. In re Young 
 
 Tuck, Seagram v. 
 
 Tucker, Bellairs v. 
 
 ■ V. Good. In re Bonner 
 
 «. Linger .. .. .. .. ..•! 
 
 , Lion Assurance Association v. 
 
 , Lyons V. .. .. ., .. .. ) 
 
 , Robinson v. .. .. .. ,. ,. 
 
 Tufnell, Shubrook v. .. 
 
 TufneU and Ponsonby's Case. Kicol's Case. In re) 
 Florence Land and Public Works Company ,. j 
 Tugwell, In re .. 
 
 Tuke, Dodds v. ., .. „ „ „ 
 
 Turnbull v. Forman .. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Tnmell, Day v. In re Higgins .. .. ., 
 
 Turner, In re. Ex parte Ladbury .. 
 
 — , In re. Ex parte West Riding Union Bank- 
 
 ing Company 
 , In re. Glenisler v. Harding . 
 
 '.1 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 °:] 
 
 23 Ch. D. 254 
 23 Ch. D. 532 
 17 Ch. D. 787 
 
 26 Ch. D. 745 
 14 Q. B. D. 310 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 87 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 103 .. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 100 
 25 Ch. D. 76 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 410 .. 
 15Q. B.D.650; 15Q. B.D. 
 
 680 
 
 22 Ch. D. 88 
 
 8 Q. B.D. 397 
 12 Q. B. D. 8 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 424 „ 
 
 21 Ch. D. 862 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 154 ,. 
 18Ch. D. 354 
 
 17 Ch. D. 388 
 
 6 App. Cas. 460 .. 
 27Ch.D. 66 
 25Ch.D. 500 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 423 .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 85 
 
 28 Ch. D. 446 
 
 7P. D. 21 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 340; 9 Q.B. D, 
 264 
 
 25 Ch. D. 423 ; 29 Ch. D. i 
 
 18 Ch. D. 547 
 
 29 Ch. D. 307 
 
 20 Ch. D. 251 
 
 28 Ch. D. 705 
 
 18 Ch. D. 296 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 562 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 201 
 
 21 Ch. D. 18; 8 App. Cas.| 
 508 } 
 
 12Q. B. D. 176 .. 
 6 Q. B. D. 660 ; 7 Q. B. D, 
 523 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 371 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 621 
 
 29 Ch. D. 421 
 
 27 Ch. D. 309 
 25 Ch. D. 617 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 234 .. 
 29 Ch. D. 697 
 
 17 Ch. D. 532 
 
 19 Ch. D. 105 
 29 Ch. D. 985 
 
 ?! 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 259 
 
 515 
 1190 
 1610 
 
 140 
 1005 
 (IMO 
 (1196 
 1148 
 1144 
 
 666 
 
 1134 
 
 1161 
 
 1057 
 1204 
 
 347 
 
 1501 
 
 1477 
 
 1461 
 
 703 
 
 887 
 
 1200 
 
 118 
 
 913 
 
 334 
 
 561 
 
 522 
 
 163 
 
 j 959 
 
 )1284 
 
 1211 
 
 1173 
 
 1463 
 
 .641 
 
 808 
 
 326' 
 
 1704 
 
 743 
 
 355 
 
 258 
 
 1230 
 1233 
 
 342 
 
 850. 
 J1217 
 11592 
 
 639 
 1452 
 
 174 
 
 125 
 
 542 
 
TABLE OF OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case./ 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Tumei- V. Bridaett 
 
 (No. 1) 
 (No. 2) 
 
 17. Hancock 
 
 V. Hellard. In re Harrison .. 
 
 , Jenner ■«. 
 
 ■ ■U.Walsh 
 
 , Wilson «. 
 
 Turner's Settled Estates, In re 
 
 Turpi n, Jenks v. 
 
 Turquand, Es parte. In re Parker .. 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Parker and Parker 
 
 , Ex parte. In re 
 
 .Elliotts. 
 
 Tustin and Johnson, In re 
 
 , In re 
 
 Tweddell, Lyon r. 
 
 Tweedie and Miles, In re 
 
 Tweedy, In re .. 
 
 Twisden, Cleather v, .. 
 
 Tyser, Mercantile Steamship Company v. 
 
 Tyssen, O'Brien i;. 
 
 u. 
 
 Underhay, TOmlin v. In re Taylor's Estate 
 'Union Bank of London •!;. Ingram 
 
 ■ ^ r V. ■ — .. , ,, 
 
 Union Bank of Spain and England, Street v. 
 
 Union Steamship Company of New Zealand v. Mel-] 
 
 bourne Harbour Trust Commissioners .. .. J 
 
 United Land Company v. Tottenham Local Board . 
 
 "United Service," The 
 
 Onited Stock Exchange, Limited, In re. Ex parte) 
 
 Philp&Kidd , .. ... .. .. ..J 
 
 United Telephone Company, Barney v. 
 
 ' '■ — '■ ■ ■ V. Dale .. 
 
 — V. Harrison, Cox, Walker, ) 
 
 : : V. London and Globej 
 
 Telephone and Maintenance Company .. ,. ) 
 
 «. Sharpies .. .. 
 
 , Wandsworth Board of) 
 
 &Co. 
 
 Works V. 
 
 -, Wheeler v. 
 
 Universal Marine Insurance Company, Pitman v, . 
 Unwin, Wilkinson & Co. v. .. 
 Upmann v. Forester 
 Upton r. Brown ... 
 
 ■■ — V. — - — .. .. ... - • 
 
 Uren, Bristol Waterworks Company v. 
 Usher, Agnew v. 
 
 , Davis v.. . .. ..' : '. 
 
 Uxbridge and Eiekmansworthi Eailway Company) 
 
 and Harman, In re .. 
 UzieUi V. Boston Marine Insurance Company 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 392 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 55 
 20 Ch. D. 303 
 30 Ch. D. 390 
 
 16 Ch. D. 188 
 6App. Cas. 636 .. 
 22Ch. D. 521 
 
 28 Ch. D. 205 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 505 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 636 .. 
 14 Q. B. D. 405 ., 
 14Q. B. D. 407 .. 
 7 App. Cas. 79 
 
 28 Ch. D. 84 
 30 Ch. D. 42 
 
 17 Ch. D. 529 
 
 27 Ch. D. 315 
 
 28 0h. D. 529 ..: , .. 
 24 Ch. D. 731 ; 28 Ch. D. 340 
 7 Q. B. D. 73 
 
 28 Ch. D. 372 
 
 22 Oh. D. 495 
 
 20 Ch. D. 463 
 16 Ch. D. 53 
 30 Chi D. 156 
 
 9 App. Cas. 365 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 640 .. 
 
 8 P. D. 56 ; 9 P. D. 3 
 
 28 Ch. D. 183 
 28 Ch. D. 394 
 
 25 Ch. D. 778 
 
 21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 26 Ch. D. 776 
 29Ch. D. 164 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 904 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 597 .. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 192 
 7Q. B. D.636 
 24 Ch. D. 231 
 20 Ch. D. 731 
 26 Ch. D. 588 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 637 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 78 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 490 .. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 720 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 138 
 1230 
 1239 
 1686 
 1672 
 
 313 
 1465 
 1081 
 
 609 
 129, 162 
 
 178 
 
 129 
 
 155 
 1639 
 1639 
 1019 
 1469 
 1609 
 1020 
 
 693 
 290, 1153 
 
 (1184 
 
 ]1686 
 
 903 
 
 904 
 
 . 1584 
 
 318 
 
 625 
 1512 
 
 365 
 
 1043 
 (1043 
 11201 
 
 1048 
 
 1044 
 
 1044 
 
 879 
 
 1152 
 
 692 
 
 238 
 
 1573, 
 
 1213 
 
 1563 
 
 1660, 
 
 1133 
 
 , 253. 
 
 1641 
 
 693 
 
CTJii 
 
 TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 of 
 
 V. 
 
 Vacuum Brake Company, Lawson v... 
 Vale, Ex parte. In re Bannister 
 Valiance, In re. Ex parte Limehouse Board 
 Works .. 
 
 , In re. Valiance v. Blagden 
 
 V. Blagden. In re Valiance .. 
 
 ■J). Palle 
 
 Vanderlinden, Ex parte. In re Pogose 
 
 " Vandyck," The 
 
 Van Gheluive v. Neiinckx .. .. -,. 
 
 Van Hagen, In re. Sperling •«. Eoclifort 
 Van Werde, Credits Gerundeuse V. .. 
 Vardon's Trusts, In re .. 
 Vaughan, Ex parte. • In re Eiddeough 
 Vavasour (a Lunatic), In re .. 
 
 " Vera Cruz," The (No. 1) 
 
 , The (No. 2) Seward v. " Vera Cruz ' 
 
 • ; The (No. 2) 
 
 Vergara, Dawe ■!;. 
 
 Verney, Hollins v. 
 
 Vernon v. St. James, Westminster (Vestry of) 
 
 , Simon v. 
 
 Verry, Nixon ?;. 
 
 Vesey, Cooper u. In re Cooper 
 
 "Vesta," The 
 
 Vicary v. Great Northern Eailway Company 
 
 " Victor Covaceviob," The 
 
 A'ine v. Raleigh 
 Vint V. Hudspith 
 
 Vinter v. Hind .. 
 Viret V. Viret . . 
 Vivian v. Little 
 V. Moat .. 
 
 1 
 
 ■•{ 
 
 Voisey, Ex parte. 
 VoUum V. Eevett. 
 
 In re Knight 
 In re Youngs 
 
 Von Brockdorff v. Malcolm 
 
 Von Buseck (Baroness), In the Goods of 
 
 Vron Colliery Company, In re 
 
 Vyse V. Brown .. 
 
 w. 
 
 Wacher, In re .. 
 
 Waddell v. Eraser. Eraser v. Cooper, Hall,& Co. 
 
 Wade & Thomas, In re 
 
 11. Wilson 
 
 Wadham v. North Eastern Eailway Company 
 Wadsworth, In re. Hhodes v. Sugden 
 Wainwright, Ex parte. In re Walnwright .. 
 
 Wait, In re.- Workman «;. Petgrave 
 
 — —j, Nielsen v. .. .. .. • .. 
 
 Waite w Bin'gley 
 
 Wake, Ex parte .. .. \ 
 
 27 Ch. D. 137 
 
 1192 
 
 18 Ch. D. 137 
 
 169 
 
 24 Ch. D. 177 
 
 1153 
 
 26 Ch. D. 353 
 
 262 
 
 26.Ch. D. 353 
 
 262 
 
 18.Q. B. D. 109 .. 
 
 1497 
 
 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 123 
 
 7 P. D. 42 
 
 1519 
 
 21 Cb. D. 189 
 
 552 
 
 16 Cb. D. 18 
 
 1081 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 171 .. 
 
 1134 
 
 28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 527 
 
 14Q. B. D. 25 
 
 134 
 
 29 Ch. D. 306 
 
 850 
 
 9 P. D. 88 
 
 1104 
 
 9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App. Cas. 59 
 
 llOi 
 
 9P. D. 96 
 
 1104 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 241 .. 
 
 138 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 715 ; 13 Q. B. D.\ 
 304 / 
 
 1251 
 
 16 Cb. D. 449 
 
 879 
 
 8App. Cas. 542 .. 
 
 310 
 
 29Ch. D. 196 
 
 1453 
 
 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 1637 
 
 7P. D. 240 
 
 1515 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 168 
 
 1225 
 
 lOP. D. 40 
 
 1097 
 
 24 Ch. D. 238 
 
 1416 
 
 29Ch. D. 322 
 
 1161 
 
 30 Ch. D. 24 
 
 1225 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 63 
 
 823 
 
 17Ch. D. 365,n 
 
 1452 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 370 .. 
 
 1176 
 
 16 Ch. D. 730 
 
 771 
 
 21 Ch. D. 442 
 
 159 
 
 30 Ch. D. 421 
 
 1237 
 
 30 Ch. D. 172 
 
 1088 
 
 6P. D. 211.. - .. 
 
 . 1271 
 
 20Ch. D. 442 
 
 370 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 199 .. 
 
 1203 
 
 22 Ch. D. 535 
 
 23 Ch. D. 685 
 17 Ch. D. 348 
 22 Cb. D. 235 
 14 Q. B. D. 747 
 
 29 Cb. D. 517 
 19 Cb. IX 140 
 
 30 Cb. D. 617 
 14 Q. B. D. 516 
 21 Ch. B. 674 
 11 Q. B. D. 291 
 
 1611 
 
 1149 
 
 921 
 
 903 
 
 777 
 
 1540 
 
 192 
 
 1088 
 
 1482 
 
 543, 1015 
 
 824 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 ....{ 
 
 Wake v. Hall 
 
 V. Mayor, &o., of Sheffield 
 
 Wakefield -y. Maffet .. .. .. • .. 
 
 Wakeham, In re 
 
 Wala Wynaad Indiaa Gold Mining Company, In re 
 
 Walcott i;. Lyons .. .. .. 
 
 Walhampton Estate, In re .. .. 
 
 Walker, Ex. parte. In re McHenry . . • ., 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Barter. Ex parte Black.. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Gt)uld .. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte NickoU 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Soanes 
 
 , Amiour w. .. .. .. .. 
 
 V. Bradford Old Bank . . 
 
 V. Bunkell 
 
 1). Hirsch 
 
 and Hughes' Contract, In re .. 
 
 , Leeds and County Bank u. .. 
 
 ~ V. Matthews .. 
 
 u. Mottram 
 
 «. Poole .. .. 
 
 ». Rooke 
 
 & Son, and Brown, In re an Arbitration be-) 
 
 tween .. .. •• .. ■• .. ) 
 
 V. Stewart. In re Pringle 
 
 , Wheelwright v. 
 
 — , Williams «. .. 
 
 Walker's Trustees, Caledonian Bail way Company. «. 
 
 Wall V. Martin. Wall v. Taylor 
 
 Wallace, Ex parte. In re Wallace 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Campbell 
 ■V. Greenwood .. 
 
 , Svensden v. .. 
 
 & Co., M'Bain v 
 
 Wallasey Local Board, Lawson v. 
 
 Waller t;. Loch .. 
 
 Walley, Mertens v. In re Sergeant .. 
 
 Wallingford, Edmunds v. 
 
 Wallington i;. Hoskins 
 
 Wallis, In re. Ex parte Sully 
 
 — , Braithwaite v. In re Braithwaite 
 
 , Hampden v. 
 
 . •" 
 
 U.Jackson 
 
 -■ — V. Smith 
 
 Walmsley v. Mundy .. 
 
 Walrond, Guthrie v, 
 
 Walsh V. Lonsdale 
 
 , Turners. ... 
 
 Walter ?;. Howe 
 
 Walters «. Walters 
 
 Walton, Ex parte. In re Levy 
 
 ^, In re. Ex. parte Hudson 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 295 ; f 
 195 ■ 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 142 
 
 10 App. Gas. 422 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 43 
 
 21 Cb. D. 849 
 29 Oh. D. 584 
 26 Ch. D. 391 
 
 22 Ch. D. 813 
 
 26 Ch. D. 510 
 13 Q. B. D. 454 
 13 Q. B. D. 469 
 13 Q. B. D. 484 
 25 Ch. D. 673 
 12 Q. B. D. 511 
 22 Ch. D. 722 
 
 27 Ch. D. 460 
 24 Ch. D. 698 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 84. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 109 
 19 Ch. D. 355 
 21 Ch. D. 835 
 6 Q. B. D. 631 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 434 
 
 App. Cas.l 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 D. 819 
 . D.752 
 , D. 576 
 
 Cas. 259 
 , D. 727 ; 11 Q. B. 
 
 
 17 Ch 
 23 Ch, 
 9Q.B. 
 7 App. 
 9Q. B 
 102 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 22 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 213 
 
 16 Ch. D. 362 
 11 Q. B. D. 616 ; 13 Q. B. D. 
 
 69 ; 10 App. Cas. 404 
 
 6 App. Cas. 588 .. 
 11 Q. B. D. 229 .. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 619 
 
 26 Ch. D. 575 
 14 Q. B. D. 811 .. 
 6Q. B. D. 206 
 14 Q. B. D. 950 .. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 121 
 26Ch. D.746 
 
 27 Ch. D. 251 
 23Ch. D. 204 
 
 21Ch. D.243 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 807 .. 
 
 22Ch. D.573 
 
 21Ch. D. 9.. 
 
 6 App. Cas. 636 .. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 708 
 
 18 Ch. D. 182 
 17Ch. D.746 
 
 22 Ch. D. 773 
 
 824 
 1456 
 
 153 
 
 367 
 
 1137 
 
 897, 1648 
 
 190 
 
 411 
 121, 772 
 
 118 
 
 182 
 1192 
 42 
 1188 
 1018 
 1468 
 
 232 
 1363 
 
 614 
 1171 
 1204 
 
 35 
 
 1693 
 
 1447 
 
 653 
 
 1401 
 
 427 
 
 120 
 
 131 
 
 1016 
 
 1486 
 
 1403 
 
 409 
 
 499 
 
 1708 
 
 663 
 
 624 
 
 163 
 
 551 
 
 1201 
 
 1151 
 
 1195 
 
 (1053 
 
 11634 
 
 1211 
 
 fl675 
 
 <1682 
 
 11705 
 
 741 
 
 313 
 
 430 
 
 566 
 
 176 
 
 196 
 
TABLE OF CASES; IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Walton V. Edge 
 
 Wandsworth Board of Works 
 Company 
 
 United Telephone) 
 
 Warburg, Ex parte. 
 -, Ex parte. 
 
 -, Williams v. 
 
 In re Whalley . 
 In re Whalley . 
 
 Warburton v. Heyworth 
 Ward, Ex parte. In re Ward 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Ward 
 
 , In re 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Bennett 
 
 V. Morse. In re Brown 
 
 • V. National Bank of New Zealand 
 
 , liidgway v. 
 
 , Tilletti). 
 
 Warder v. Saunders 
 AVardlaw, Campbell V. .. 
 Ward's Estates, In re . . 
 " Warkwortli," The 
 
 Warner v. Jacob 
 
 V. Moir. In re Moir . 
 
 V. Mosses 
 
 V. 
 
 to Steel. In re Warner's Settled Estates 
 
 Warner's Settled Estates, In re. Warner to Steel 
 Wari-en, Ex parte. In re Holland . .. ... 
 
 , Line v. 
 
 Warren's Trusts, In re 
 
 Warrington Waterworks Company v. Longsbaw 
 
 Warwicker v. Bretnall . . 
 
 Washburn and Moen Manufacturing Company 
 
 Patterson 
 Waterford and Limerick Eailway' Company, Great^ 
 
 Western Eailway Company v. 
 Waterbouse V. Gilbert .. 
 Waterlow, Law Society of the United Kingdom v. 
 
 Law Society !>. Skinner ...-.I ■ .. 
 Watkins, Dymock t). .. .. ■ ■ 
 
 V. Rymill 
 
 Watmough, In re. Sergenson v. Beloe 
 
 Watney, Chatterton u. .. 
 
 Watson (a person of Unsound Mind), In re ., 
 , In re. Ex parte Oram 
 
 •1 
 
 sat) 
 
 ^0.1) 
 
 io. 2) 
 
 -, Ashbury v. 
 
 - V. Cave ^No. 
 • V. (No 
 
 - V. Great Western Railway Company 
 
 - V. HoUiday 
 
 -, Jonmenjoy Coondoo i). 
 -, Kettlewelli). .. 
 
 -, Kipling & Co., In re.. 
 
 -, New Zealand and Australian Land Co. v. 
 ; Studds V. 
 
 ■ V. Watson 
 
 ■ V. Young 
 
 ■■{ 
 
 24 Ch. D. 421 ; 10 App. Cas.\ 
 33 / 
 
 13Q. B. D. 904 .. 
 
 13Q. B. D. 211 .. 
 24Ch. D.364 
 25Ch. D.336 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 1 
 20 Ch. I). 356 
 22Ch.D. 132 
 28Ch. D.719 
 16Ch.D. 541 
 23Ch.D. 377 
 
 8 Apix Gas. 755 
 14Q. B. D. 110 .. 
 10 Q. B. D. 17 
 lOQ. B. D. 114 .. 
 8App. Gas. 641 ., 
 28Ch. D. 100 
 
 9 P. I). 20 
 
 9P. D. 145 
 
 20Ch.D. 220 
 
 25 Ch. D. 605 
 
 16 Ch. D. 100 
 19Ch. D. 72 
 
 17 Ch. D. 711 
 
 17 Ch. D. 711 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 73, 548 
 26Ch. D. 208 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 145 
 23Ch. D. 188 
 
 29 Ch. D. 48 
 
 17Ch.D.493 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 569 .. 
 
 9Q.B. D. l;8App.Cas.407 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 451 .. .. 
 
 lOQ. B. D. 178 .. 
 24 Ch. D. 280 
 
 16 Ch. D. 378; 17 Ch. D.l 
 259 .. .. ( 
 
 19 Ch. D. 384 
 15 Q. B. D. 399 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 56; 30 Ch. D.) 
 376 .. . } 
 
 17Cli. D. 19 
 
 17 Ch. D. 23 
 6Q. B. D. 163 
 20Ch. D. 780 
 
 9 App. Cas. 561 .. 
 
 21Cli.D.685;26Ch.D. 501 
 23 Ch. D. 500 
 7.Q. B. D. 374 
 28Ch. D. 305 
 
 7 P. D. 10 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 436 
 
 274, 379 
 
 879 
 
 882 
 
 185^ 
 
 116 
 
 870 
 115, 1552 
 
 132 
 1526 
 
 191 
 1219 
 1263 
 50 
 1587 
 1156 
 1381 
 
 787 
 1099 
 1099 - 
 
 911 
 1674 
 1189 
 1221 
 1342 
 1342 
 
 170 
 
 941 
 1455 
 1658 
 
 687 
 
 1182 
 
 1294 
 1231 
 1544 
 
 446 
 
 408 
 452 
 
 1204 
 
 1610 
 129 
 
 328 
 
 1236 
 1238 
 1228 
 
 14H 
 1093 
 1635 
 
 378 
 1256 
 1621 
 1664 
 1688 
 
TABLE OF 'OASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Watts, In re. Cornford v. Elliott 
 
 , la re. Smith v. Watts 
 
 , Bournemouth Commissioners v. 
 
 , Bussell ■!). .. .. 
 
 .Smiths. In re Watts 
 
 Wayall, Weguellin ■!;. .. 
 
 Waye v. Thompson 
 
 Weardale Iron and Coal Company,. Eden v. .. 
 
 Wearmouth Crown Glass Compa,ny, In re .. 
 
 Weaver, In re .. 
 
 , In re. Higgs v. Weaver .. 
 
 , Higgs D. In re .. 
 
 Wehb ■!). Beavan 
 
 , Poakes •». 
 
 , Gray v. .. 
 
 , Seearu. .. 
 
 ■Ui Smith.. .. .. .. •• 
 
 -. — : — v^ Stenton 
 
 w. Wright 
 
 Webherw. Leo .. 
 
 Webster, Ex parte. In re Morris ■ .. 
 
 , In re. Derby Union (Guardians 
 
 Sharratt 
 
 , Isaacson v. 
 
 V. Myer 
 
 ■ V. Patteson 
 
 of) 
 
 In re Bonn 
 
 :.! 
 
 Webster's Estate In re. 
 Wedgewood, Jones v. . 
 
 Widgen v. Mello 
 
 Wedgwood Coal and Iron Company, Batten v. 
 
 Weems, Thomson v. .. 
 Weguellin v. Wayall .. 
 
 Weil, Eeg. j; 
 
 Welch Vi Channell. InreJSvans ... .... 
 
 , Le May v. In re Le May's Eegistered Design 
 
 «. Peterborough (Bishop of) .. 
 
 Weld (a Lunatic),. In re .. 
 
 , In. re 
 
 Weldon v.. De Bathe .. 
 
 w. Gounod 
 
 u..Neal 
 
 , Strickland u. .. 
 
 ■!;. Weldon 
 
 i;. Winslow 
 
 Wellard, Reg. v. , .. ' .. 
 Wellington .(Mayor of) «. Plimmer .. 
 Wells «. Berwick. In re Hardy 
 
 , Parker t;. .. .. .. 
 
 —, Leonard & Ellis v. In re Leonard & Ellis' 
 
 Trade-mark .. 
 Wemyss, Ex parte. 
 
 Wenlock (Baroness) v. Eiver Dee Company.. 
 Wensley, In the Goods of .. .. 
 
 Werderfiiann v. Soci^t6 G&^rale d'Electricit^ 
 
 West, In re. Ex parte Good « m m 
 
 s's) 
 
 ^} 
 
 27Ch.D.318;29fCh.D.947 
 
 22Ch. D. 5 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 87 
 
 25 Qh. D. 559 ; 10 App. Cas. 
 
 590 
 22Ch. D. 5.. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 838 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 342 .. 
 
 28 Ch. D. 333 
 19 Ch. D. 640 
 21 Ch. D. 615 
 
 29 Oh. D. 236 
 
 29 Ch. D. 236 
 IIQ. B. D. 609 .. 
 28 Oh. D. 287 
 21 Ch. D. 802 
 25 Oh. D. 84 
 
 30 Oh. D. 192 
 11 Q. B. D. 518 .. 
 8App. Cas. 318 .. 
 9 Q. B. D. 315 
 22Ch. D. 136 
 
 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 16 Ch! D. 47 
 14Q. B. D. 231 .. 
 
 25 0hiD. 626 
 23 Ch. D. 737 
 
 19 Ch. D. 56 
 
 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 9 App. Oas. 671 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 838 .. 
 9 Q. B. D. 701 
 
 26 Oh. D. 58 
 28 Ch. D. 24 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 432 .. 
 28Ch. D. 514,. .. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 451 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 339 .. 
 15Q. B.D. 622 .. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 471 .. 
 28 Ch. D. 426 
 9P. D.52 .. 
 lOP. D. 72.. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 784 .. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 63 
 
 9 App. Cas. 699 .. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 798 
 
 18 Oh. D. 477 
 
 26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 244 .. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 354 .. 
 7P. D. 13 .. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 .. I 21 Ch. D. I 
 
 290 
 895 
 819 
 
 803 
 
 895 
 
 1324 
 
 823 
 
 1150 
 
 32 
 
 848 
 
 183 
 
 183 
 
 500 
 
 1171 
 
 1149 
 
 1163 
 
 46 
 
 1203 
 
 309 
 
 601 
 
 244 
 
 848, 
 
 1702 
 
 1196 
 
 901 
 
 1698 
 
 36 
 
 f 336 
 
 {1227 
 
 (.1541 
 
 689 
 
 1324 
 
 570 
 
 669 
 
 427 
 
 19 
 
 851 
 
 839 
 
 639 
 
 1133 
 
 617 
 
 288 
 
 1114 
 
 1114 
 
 638 
 
 468 
 
 315 
 
 1691 
 
 1166 
 
 1579 
 
 129 
 
 432 
 
 10 
 
 1042 
 
 1153 
 
 142 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Kame of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Coluum 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 West Bromwicli (Overseers of), West .Bromwich 
 School Board t;. .. .. 
 
 West Bromwich School Board v. Overseers of West 
 Bromwich .. .. ..... 
 
 West Cork Jlailwa-y Company, Hutton v. 
 
 West Derby (Assessment Committee of), Martin .v. . . 
 
 West Devon Great Consols Mine, In re 
 
 West Ham Assessment Committee, lies v. .. 
 
 (Guardians of), HoUingbourn (Guardians 
 
 , Plomesgate (Guardians 
 
 of) V. 
 
 of) V. .. 
 West India and Panama Telegraph Company v. Home 
 
 and Colonial Marine Insurance Company .. 
 West Kent Sewerage Board, Bexley Local Board .1;. .. 
 
 West LomloQ Commercial Bank v. Kitson 
 
 V. Reliance Perman- 
 
 ent Building Society 
 West Middlesex Waterworks Company, Colemaa v. 
 : , Eichards v. 
 
 West of England and South Wales District Bank v. 
 Murch 
 
 West Hiding (Justices of) Middlesborough .(Overseers 
 
 of) V. .. 
 
 (Justices of) Peg. «. 
 
 (Justices of ) i). Reg. 
 
 West Biding Union Banking Company, Ex parte. In 
 
 re Turner 
 Westbury-on-Sevem Rural Sanitary Authority, v. 
 
 Meredith 
 Western, Eaton ■«. 
 
 , Leggott V. 
 
 Western Counties Railway Company v. Windsor and 
 
 Annapolis Railway Company 
 Westhead I). Riley 
 Westlake, In re. Ex parte Willoughby 
 
 Weston V. Metropolitan Asylum District (Manager of) 
 
 Westropp V. Elligott .. .. .. .. ... 
 
 Wetley Brick and Pottery Company, General Share 
 and Trust Company -y. 
 
 Whalley, In re. Ex parte Warburg 
 , In re. Ex parte ■ 
 
 ■ V. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Co. 
 Wheater, Wood D. 
 Wheatley, In re. Smith v. Spence . . 
 
 , Lynch w. 
 
 V. Silkstone and Haigh Moor Coal Co. 
 
 Wheeler f. Le Marchant 
 
 u.' United Telephone Company 
 
 Wheelwright v. Walker 
 Whetham v. Davey 
 
 , Pooley's Trustee in Bankruptcy V. 
 
 Whinney, Ex parte. In re iSandars ^ 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 929 .. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 929 .. 
 
 US Ch.'D. 654 
 ai Q. B. D. 145 .. 
 27 Ch..D. 106 
 8Q. B. D. 69; 8 App. Cas.) 
 386 ) 
 
 6Q. B. D. 580 
 ■6Q. B. D. 576 
 
 1074 
 
 1074 
 
 352 
 
 1069 
 
 381 
 
 1075 
 
 1062 
 
 1065 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 51 
 
 .. 
 
 695 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 518 
 
 .. .. 
 
 36 
 
 J.2 Q. B. D. 157 , 
 360 
 
 13Q.B.D.) 
 
 358 
 
 27 Ch. D. 187; 29 Ch. D. 954 
 
 920 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 529 
 
 
 1659 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 660 
 
 .. 
 
 1661 
 ( 563 
 
 •2Z Ch. D. 138 
 
 .. 
 
 Il468 
 )1602 
 ll642 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 239 
 
 
 621 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 417 
 
 
 681 
 
 8 App. Cas. 781 
 
 
 623 
 
 19 Ch. D. 105 
 
 .. 
 
 125 
 
 30 Ch. D. 38T 
 
 
 1245 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 636 
 
 
 34 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 287 
 
 .. 
 
 1205 
 
 7 App. Cas. 178 
 
 .. 
 
 298 
 
 25 Ch. D. 413 
 
 
 1211 
 
 16 Ch. D. 604 
 
 
 1488 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 387 ; 
 
 9 Q. B. D.) 
 
 772 
 
 404 
 
 9 App.-Cas. 815 
 
 .. 
 
 702 
 
 20 Ch. D. 130 
 
 .* 
 
 1197 
 
 20 Ch. D. 260. 
 
 
 774 
 
 24 Ch. D. 364 
 
 
 185 
 
 25 Ch. D. 336 
 
 
 116 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 131 
 
 
 1652 
 
 22 Ch. D. 281 
 
 
 1205 
 
 27 Ch. D. 606 
 
 
 526 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 504 
 
 
 1007 
 
 29Ch. D. 715.. 
 
 
 335 
 
 17 Ch. D. 675 
 
 .. 
 
 1179 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 597 
 
 
 1152 
 
 23 Ch. D. 752 
 
 
 1447 
 
 30 Ch. D. 574 
 
 .. 
 
 901 
 
 28 Ch. D. 38 
 
 
 1181 
 
 i3 Q. B- D. 476 
 
 .. 
 
 112 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 "Whinney, Colonial Bank i;. .. 
 
 Whipp, Northern Counties of England Fire. Insurance) 
 
 ....( 
 
 ••{ 
 
 Company v. 
 
 Whitchurch, Ex parte 
 
 — ,Eeg. V. .. 
 
 White, Ex parte. . Jn re White 
 ^-, In tiie Groods of 
 
 , Carter «. 
 
 , V. Coquetdale (Justices of) .. 
 
 , Dixon V. .. .. .^ 
 
 , Field w. In re Eownson 
 
 , Grange V. 
 
 , Eeg-v 
 
 1;. White 
 
 " White Eose " Trade-mark, In re . . 
 Whitecross Wire Company v. Savill .. 
 Whitehead, Ex parte. In re Whitehead 
 
 , In re 
 
 — — i ,.Sdow v. 
 
 Whitfield, Daniel a.. 
 
 , Macdonald v. 
 
 ^jEeg. v 
 
 Whitiiig to Loomes 
 
 Whitnall, Ex parte.. In re Whitnall . . 
 
 Whittaker.In re. . Whittaker v. Whittaker 
 
 i». Whittaker 
 
 '■ v, In re Whittaker 
 
 Whitworth's. Case. In re Silkstone and Dodworth)^ 
 
 Coal and Iron Company .. .. .. . .. 
 
 Whyte u. Ahrens 
 
 ^u. Eollok 
 
 Wickham K. Wickham 
 
 Wicks, Ex parte. . In re Wicks 
 
 Widgen 17. Mello. . In re Webster's Estate .. 
 Wigan (Corporation of), Eeg. u. 
 Wigney t». Wigney. 
 
 — ^ v.- . 
 
 Wigsell V. School for Indigent Blind , . 
 Wiiby, Cooke 17. .... 
 
 Wilcoxon, In re. Ex parte Andrews 
 
 , Inre. Ex parte Griffith .. 
 
 Wilder w. Pigott 
 
 Wilding, Thwaites v. .. 
 
 Wilkes' Estate, Inre , 
 
 Wilkins, Inre. Spencer «. Duckworth 
 
 , In- re. Wilkins v. Eotherham 
 
 17. Birmingham (Mayor of) .. 
 
 ^ v. Day . . .... 
 
 -v. Eotherham. In re Wilkins 
 
 Wilkinson, Ex parte. In re Berry 
 
 -: -, Inre. Ex parte Stuhbins 
 
 , In the Goods of 
 
 u. Collyer .. 
 
 ■y, Corfield .. 
 
 1^-: V, Hull, &c., Eailway and^Dook Company 
 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume anc 
 
 Page. 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 30 Ch. D, 261, 
 
 
 164 
 
 26 Ch. D. 482 
 
 • • •• 
 
 916 
 
 6Q.B. D. 545 
 
 .. 
 
 820 
 
 7Q. B. b. 534 
 
 .. .. 
 
 1235 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 600 
 
 .. .. 
 
 143 
 
 7 P. D. 65 .. 
 
 
 leys 
 
 20 Ch. D. 225; 
 666 
 
 25 Ch. D.-i 
 
 231, 1263 
 
 7,Q B. P. 238 
 
 
 . 681 
 
 8 App. Cas. 833 
 
 .* .. 
 
 1395 
 
 29 Ch. D. 358 
 
 .. .. 
 
 - 567„-. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 612 
 
 . 
 
 1016 
 
 IIQ. B.D.309; 
 358 
 
 14Q.B.D.| 
 
 1061 
 
 22 Ch. D. 555 
 
 
 .. 524 
 
 30 Ch. D. 505 
 
 .. 
 
 1583 
 
 8 ,Q. B. D. 653 
 
 .. 
 
 1486 
 
 14 Q. B, D. 419 
 
 .« .. 
 
 171 
 
 2§ Ch. D. 614 
 
 
 1542 
 
 2a Ch. D. 588 
 
 .. .i 
 
 1652 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 408 
 
 .. 
 
 51 
 
 8 App. Cas. 733 
 
 ■ ■ .. 
 
 233 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 122 
 
 .. 
 
 847 
 
 17 Ch. D. 10 
 
 .. 
 
 1339 
 
 20 Ch. b. 438 
 
 .. 
 
 197 
 
 2i Ch. D. 657 
 
 .. 
 
 641, 698 
 
 7P. D.'i5 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1118 
 
 21 Oh. D. 657 
 
 .. 
 
 641 
 
 19 Ch. D. 118 
 
 .. 
 
 392 
 
 26 Ch. b. 417 
 
 •• .. 
 
 1174 
 
 7 App. Cas. 400 
 
 .. .. 
 
 1405 
 
 6 P. D. 11 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 nil 
 
 17 Ch. D. 70 
 
 .. 
 
 141 
 
 23 Ch. b. 737 
 
 .. 
 
 1698- 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 908 
 
 .. 
 
 943 
 
 7P. D. 177.. 
 
 .. 
 
 1116 
 
 7'P. D. 228.. 
 
 .. 
 
 1116 - 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 357 
 
 .. 
 
 , 483 
 
 25 Ch. D. 769 
 
 .. 
 
 1191 
 
 25 Cb. D. 505 
 
 . 
 
 152 
 
 23 Ch. D. 69 
 
 .. .. 
 
 . ]67 
 
 22 Ch. b. 263 
 
 .. 
 
 847, 14 £9 
 
 ii Q.B.b. 421 i 
 4 .. ■■ .. 
 
 12 Q. B.D.I 
 
 769 
 
 16 Ch. b. 597 
 
 
 787 
 
 18 Ch. b. 634 
 
 .. 
 
 1674 
 
 27 Ch. b. 703 
 
 .. 
 
 560, 
 
 25 Ch. b. 78 
 
 .. 
 
 737 
 
 i2Q. B.D. 110 
 
 .. 
 
 961 
 
 27 Cn. b. 703 
 
 .. 
 
 560 
 
 22 Ch. b. 788 
 
 • * .. 
 
 111 
 
 17 Ch. b. 58 
 
 .. .. 
 
 166 
 
 6P. D. 100.. 
 
 .. 
 
 1270 
 
 13Q. B. D. 1 
 
 •• .. 
 
 765 
 
 6 P. D. 27 .. 
 
 .. 
 
 1131 
 
 20 Ch. D. 323 
 
 .. 
 
 1288 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Wilkinson & Co. v. Unwin 
 
 Wilks V. Bannister 
 
 Willey, Ex parte. In re Wright 
 
 " William Symington," The .. 
 
 Williams, Ex parte. In re Kit Hill Tunnel 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Eaggett .. 
 
 , Ex parte. In re Williams 
 
 •, In re. Ex parte Pearce .. 
 
 • — ■ — V. Brisco 
 
 — 1;. Davies 
 
 V. Earley. Early v. Early.. 
 
 -u. Hopkins. In re Hopkins 
 
 V. Meroier 
 
 , Merriman v. 
 
 V. Murrell. In re Damhle 
 
 , Penrice v. ., 
 
 V.Phillips .. 
 
 ■V.Preston .. 
 
 ; Reg. ■;; 
 
 , Thomas v. .. 
 
 1). Walker 
 
 V. Wandsworth Board of Works 
 
 V. Williams .. 
 
 Williamson, Evans v. In re Eoose 
 , Hunnings v. 
 
 V. Williamson 
 
 Willoughby (an Infant), In re 
 
 Willmott V. Barber 
 
 Willoughby, Ex parte. In re Westlake 
 
 WiUoughby-Osborne v. Holyoake 
 
 Willows, York Tramways Company v. 
 
 Willshire, Reg. v. 
 
 Wilson (a Lunatic), In re 
 
 ■ , In re. Alexander v. Calder 
 
 , In re. Parker v Winder 
 
 , In re. Wilson v. AUtree 
 
 V. Alltree. In re Wilson 
 
 , Bentham ■!;. In re Parker .. 
 
 j;. Birchall. In re Birchall .. 
 
 • , Borneman v. .. 
 
 V. Ooxwell 
 
 V. De Coulon .. 
 
 u.jDuguid 
 
 V. Baffalovich . . 
 
 V. Roberts 
 
 -y. Strugnell 
 
 , Threlfallv. .. 
 
 - V. Turner 
 
 , Wade V. 
 
 V. Wilson 
 
 Wilsthorpe (Overseer of), Peterborough (Corporation) 
 
 of) V. 
 
 Wilts (Justices of). Guardians of Amesbury v. 
 Wimbledon Local Board, Reg. 1). 
 Winder, Parker V. In re Wilson 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 636 
 30 Ch. D. 512 
 23 Ch. D. 118 
 
 10 P. D. 1 .. 
 16 Ch. D. 590 
 16 Ch. D. 117 
 18 Ch. D. 495 
 25 Ch. D. 656 
 
 22 Ch. D. 441 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 74 
 
 16 Ch. D. 214, n. 
 18 Ch. D. 370 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 337 ; 
 Cas. 1 .. 
 
 7 App. Cas. 484- 
 
 23 Ch. D. 360 
 
 23 Ch. D. 353 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 437 
 20 Ch. D. 672 
 
 9 App. Cas. 418 
 
 24 Ch. D. 558 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 576 
 13 Q. B. D. 211 
 
 17 Ch. D. 437 
 20 Ch. D. 659 
 17 Ch. D. 696 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 459 
 
 11 Q. B. D. 533 
 7 P. D. 76 .. 
 30 Ch. D. 324 
 17 Ch. D. 772 
 
 16 Ch. D. 604 
 
 22 Ch. D. 238 
 8Q. B. D. 685 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 366 
 29 Ch. D. 790 
 28 Ch. D. 457 
 24 Ch. D. 664 
 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 17 Ch. D. 262 
 16 Ch. D. 41 
 
 28 Ch. D. 53 
 
 23 Ch. D. 764 
 22 Ch. D. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 
 9 Q. B. D. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 
 
 8 P. D. 18 .. 
 22 Ch. D. 521 
 22Ch.D. 235 
 
 9 P. D. 1 .. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 480 
 8 Q. B. D. 459 
 24 Ch. D. 664 
 
 10 App.) 
 
 841 
 244 
 553 
 137 
 548 
 
 238 
 
 1704 
 
 190 
 
 1104 
 
 376 
 
 896 
 
 197 
 
 247 
 
 740 
 
 203 
 
 893 
 
 556 
 
 641 
 
 1460 
 
 307 
 
 1683 
 
 1172 
 
 661 
 
 1164 
 
 314 
 
 1469 
 
 653 
 
 882 
 
 563 
 
 1535 
 
 1705 
 
 1164 
 
 883 
 
 1110 
 
 669 
 
 1221 
 
 1488 
 
 1084 
 
 343 
 
 459 
 
 1534 
 
 1214 
 
 1666 
 
 1185 
 
 1185 
 
 1704 
 
 665 
 
 1146 
 
 566 
 
 1192 
 
 1455 
 
 1175 
 
 243 
 
 410 
 
 1131 
 
 1465 
 
 903 
 
 1106 
 
 1234 
 
 622 
 1278 
 1666 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case.- 
 
 
 Column 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 of 
 
 
 Digest. 
 
 7 App. Cas. 178 
 
 298 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 224 .. 
 
 126 
 
 20-Oh. D.-6-i5 
 
 556 
 
 26Ch. D. 382 
 
 1453 
 
 13Q. B.D. 784 .. 
 
 638 
 
 6 Q. B. D 42 
 
 689 
 
 8F. D. 176; 9P. D. 85 ... 
 
 1514 
 
 8 Q. B. D:'650 
 
 1163 
 
 10 Q.,B. D. 218 .. 
 
 528 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 425 
 
 444 
 
 20Ch.D.'230 " .. 
 
 1546 
 
 28Ch. D.'413 .. 
 
 902 
 
 ]6Cli. D;337 
 
 375 
 
 IIQ. B. D.788 .. 
 
 825 
 
 27 Ch. D. 260 
 
 426 
 
 24 Ch. D. 26 
 
 175 
 
 2lCh.D;i94 
 
 1585 
 
 24Ch.D. 707 
 
 900 
 
 14Q. B. D. 32 
 
 140 
 
 29Ch. D. 557 
 
 706 
 
 29 Ch. D. 557 
 
 706 
 
 23Ch. D;'644 
 
 126 
 
 19Ch.D.367 
 
 194 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 276 
 
 396,1164 
 
 27 Oh. D. 172 
 
 1629 
 
 29 Ch. D. 626 
 
 1629' 
 
 28 Ch. D. 327 
 
 505. 
 
 15Q. B. p. 415; .. 
 
 530« 
 
 23 Ch. D. 248 
 
 1244 
 
 22Ch. D. 281 
 
 1205- 
 
 13Q. B. D. 479 .. 
 
 112- 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 479 .. 
 
 112 
 
 25'Ch. D. 707 
 
 1162- 
 
 IIQ. B. D.'47 
 
 1476- 
 
 28Ch. D. 190 
 
 1293 
 
 lOP. D. 172 
 
 62S 
 
 26Ch. D. 179 
 
 554 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 318 
 
 952 
 
 21 Ch. D. 169 
 
 920 
 
 17Ch.D. 416 
 
 1647 
 
 6Q. B. D. 654 
 
 275 
 
 22Ch. D.255 
 
 1595 
 
 21 Ch. D. 831 
 
 546 
 
 30 Ch. D. 617 
 
 1088 
 
 26 Ch. D. 578 
 
 801 
 
 28 Ch. D. 552 
 
 1695 
 
 17Ch. D. 167 
 
 1664 
 
 27 Ch. D. 676 
 
 811 
 
 18 Ch. D. 521 
 
 441 
 
 10Q.B.D. 118 .. 
 
 620 
 
 29 Ch. D, 551 
 
 1578 
 
 26 Ch. D. 169 
 
 1543 
 
 Windsor and Annapolis Kailway Company, Western) 
 Counties Bailway Compa,ny w. .. .. ..J 
 
 Windus, Hough V. .. .. .. 
 
 Winehouse w. Winehouse. In re Maggi ;; 
 
 Winnington, Domvile v. .. .. .. .. 
 
 Winslow, Weldon v. .. ... ,. 
 
 Winspear t;. Accident Insurance Company .. 
 
 " Winston," The ... .. , .. .'. 
 
 Winter, Lumsden 1^. .. .. .. .. ,. 
 
 Winyard V. Toogood. Hance v. Fortnum .. ,. 
 
 Wi^B, Davies V. .. .. .. ,. 
 
 Wisli, Rhodes u. lii re Seaman .. .. ,. 
 
 Withall w. Nixon .. ■ .. .. 
 
 Withernsea iirickworks, In re 
 
 Withington rtjocal Board for), Midland Railway Co. ■!;. 
 
 Wittman v. Oppenheim .. .. ' .. 
 
 Witton, In re. Ex parte Arnal .. 
 
 Wolfe*. Matthews .. , ■ , .. .i .. 
 
 Wolverhampton and Staffordsliirej Baflking Company) 
 V. Gfeorge .. .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Wolverhampton Banking Company, Ex parte. In rej 
 Campbell ., . .. .. ■> ». .. ... ( 
 
 Womersley, In re. Etheridge v. Womersley 
 
 Womersley, Etheri4ge v. In re Womersley 
 
 Wood, In re. Ex parte Hall .. 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Horrocks 
 
 , Clacki;. 
 
 and Dames, In re 
 
 ■_ , In re 
 
 v. Douglass. In re Douglass ., 
 
 -, London School Board ■;;. 
 
 • V. Madras Irrigation and Canal Company. 
 
 Inl 
 
 re Madras Irrigation and Canal Company 
 
 ■!;. Wheater 
 
 Woodall, Ex parte. In;re Woodall 
 
 , In re. Ex parte Woodall 
 
 Woodfin, Gill V. . .. ..., 
 
 Woodley v. Michell 
 
 VVoodruif w. Brecon and Merthyr Tydfil Jimction) 
 
 Railway Company .. .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Woods 1). Woods .. 
 
 , Wrights. In re Harvey 
 
 Woodward, Stevens ii. .. 
 
 WooUey i;. Colman .. d. ■ .. 
 
 Woollven, Breton v. In re Bretorfs Estate 
 
 Woolwich (Overseers of) ,u Robertson \ 
 
 Worcester City and County Banking Company. v. ) 
 
 Bhck. In re Pnmfrey .. .. .. .. ) 
 
 Working Men's Mutual Society, In re 
 
 Worknian -w. Petgrave. In re Wait ., 
 
 Worley, Holland u. .. 
 
 Worrall, Pollock v. In re Pollock .. 
 
 Wormald i;. Muzeen .. 
 
 Worsley, Blaohford «. In re Blacbford 
 
 Worth, In re .. 
 
 Worthing Local Board, Kent v. 
 
 Wi'agg's Trade-mark, In re 
 
 Wray v. Kemp .. >, 
 
 12 
 
TABLE OF CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case- 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 ••{ 
 
 Wreford, Kn^pman y. In re Knapman ., 
 Wrey, In re. Stuart ■!;. Wrey 
 
 ,'ReD.tj p. .. .. ,. ., 
 
 , Stuart u. In re Wrey.. 
 
 Wright, In re; Ex parte WiUey 
 
 , Baines v. 
 
 —jVesiav. In re Dean.. .. .1 
 
 , London School Board v. 
 
 , Mansfield (Gruardians of) v. .. 
 
 v. Marwood 
 
 V. Sanderson .. 
 
 , Thompson v. .. 
 
 , "Webb V. 
 
 ?;. Woods. In re Harvey 
 
 Wright's Trustees and Marshall, In re 
 
 Trusts, In re .. 
 
 Wrigley, Leigh v. 
 
 ■ , Looker v. 
 
 Wroughton, 'In re. In re Montagu. Montagu -w. 
 
 Pesting .. __ .. 
 
 Wyatt, Hockley v. 
 
 Wye Valley Eail way Company «. Hawes 
 Wynter, BuUmore u.- .. 
 
 •■\ 
 
 •■{ 
 
 " Yan- Yean," The 
 
 Yates, Dicks i;. .. 
 
 Yates and Moody's Contract, In re .. 
 
 . Reg. V. 
 
 Yatton (Overseers of), Mogg «. 
 Yeaman, Fleming v. .. 
 Yeates v, Fraser. In re Fraser 
 
 , Eamsden v. 
 
 Yeatman, Bx parte. In re Yeatman 
 Yewens ■». Noakes 
 
 York Tramways Company v. Willows 
 Yorke, Brewer i;. Yorke ■«. Brewer .. ,. 
 
 Yorkshire Fire and Life Insurance Company v. Claytbn-i 
 
 Yorkshire (Justices of North Hiding of). Middles-) 
 borough (Overseers of) u. .. .. .. .. f 
 
 Yorkshire Railway Wagon Company v. Macliire . . \ 
 
 Young, Ex parte. In re Kitchin 
 
 , Bx parte. In re Quartz Hill &o. Co. 
 
 Ex parte. In re Young 
 In re. Trye tj. Sullivan 
 , Bannerman v. In re Bannerman's Estate .. 
 , Bradford v. 
 
 21 
 
 Ch. D.l 
 
 V. In re Palconar's Trusts 
 
 18 Ch. D. 300 
 30-Ch. D. 507 
 
 19 Oh. D.492; 
 332 
 
 30 Ch. D. 507 
 23 Ch. D. 118 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 102 
 21-Oh. D.-581 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 578 
 9 Q. B. D. 683 
 7%B. D.62 
 
 9 P. D. 149 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 8 App. Cas. 318 
 26 Ch. D. 179 
 28 Ch. D. 93 
 24Ch. D. 662 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 397 
 9 Q. B. D. 397 
 
 28 Ch. D. 82 
 
 7 P. D. 239 .. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 489 
 22 Ch. D. 619 
 
 8P. D.147.. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 76 
 28 Ob. D. 661; 30 Ch. 
 
 344 
 
 IKJ.B. D. 750;14Q.B 
 
 •648 
 6 Q. B. D. 10 
 9 App. Cas. 966 
 22 Ch. D: 827 
 6 Q. B. D. 583 
 
 16 Ch. D. 283 
 6 Q. B. D; 530 
 8 Q. B. D. 685 
 20Ch. D.669 
 6 Q. B. D. 557 ,- 8 Q. B. 
 
 421 
 11 Q. B. D. 490; 12 Q. B. 
 239 
 
 19 Ch. D; 478; 21 Ch. D.i 
 309 
 
 17 Ch. D. 668 
 21 Ch. D. 642 
 19 ■( h. D. 124 
 
 28 Ch. D.-705 
 21 Ch. D. 105 
 
 26 Ch. D; 656 
 
 29 •Ch. Dv617 
 28Ch. D.18 
 
 565 
 1701 
 
 1080 
 
 1701 
 
 190 
 
 122 
 
 552 
 
 531 
 
 1265 
 
 1485 
 
 1270 
 
 1231 
 
 309 
 
 554 
 
 1469 
 
 1448 
 
 269 
 
 269 
 
 668 
 
 1131 
 1143 
 1706 
 
 1519 
 422 
 
 1640 
 
 467 
 
 1070 
 
 1371 
 287 
 625 
 132 
 
 1324 
 343 
 
 1160 
 
 1324 
 621 
 
 1284 
 
 1266 
 
 1190 
 
 115, 1139 
 
 641 
 
 1703 
 
 (1245, 
 
 11271 
 
 514 
 
 1160 
 
TABLE OP CASES IN THE DIGEST. 
 
 Name of Case. 
 
 Volume and Page. 
 
 Column 
 
 of 
 Digest. 
 
 Young, Greer r. 
 
 24Ch. D. 545 
 29 Oh. D. 691 
 27Ch. D. 652 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 579 ; 8 App. Gas.\ 
 517 ! 
 
 IIQ. B. D. 651 .. 
 28Ch. D. 436 
 30Ch. D. 421 
 30Ch. D. 421 
 
 9 P. D. 114 
 
 14Q. B. D. 960 .. 
 
 7App. Gas. 427 .. 
 
 1539 
 TR9A 
 
 , James V. 
 
 886 
 SI 7 
 
 
 542 
 1688 
 1237 
 1237 
 
 1508 
 
 178 
 
 1381 
 
 , Watson i;. 
 
 Youngs, In re. Doggett v. Eevett .. 
 — '■ , In re. VoUum ■!;. Eevett 
 
 z. 
 
 "Zadok,"The 
 
 Zerfass, Ex parte. In re Sandwell .. 
 
 Zetland (Earl of) w. Hislop 
 
( cxix ) 
 
 CASES 
 
 FOLLOWED, OYEERULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 Merdeen, Magistrates of v. Wore (1813, Hume's 
 Dec. 502) considered 10 App. Cas. 693 
 See Scotch Law — ^Husband and Wife. 
 2. 
 
 Aberdeen, Tailors of v. Coutts (1 Kob. App. Cas. 
 296) followed - - 7 App. Cas. 427 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Pbo- 
 
 PEETT. 1. 
 Abemethy v. Hutcliinson (3 L. J. (Oh.) (O.S.) 209 ; 
 1 H. & T. 28) considered 26 Ch. D. 374 
 See CoPYBiOHT — Books. 2. 
 Airam v. Curmingham (2 Lev. 182) distinguished 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 220 
 See ADMmiSTBATOK — Gbant. 8. 
 Adams' Settled Estate, In re (9 Ch. D. 116) not 
 followed - - - 21 Ch. D. 123 
 
 See Settled Estates Acts. 5. 
 Agra Sank, Ex parte. In re Worcester (Law Eep. 
 3 Oh. 555) discussed - 14 Q. B. D, 424 
 See Company — Shakes — Teansfeb. 2, 
 Aird's Estate, In re (12 Ch. D. 291) not followed 
 See Will— Mistake. 2. [22 Ch. D. 495 
 Albion Life Assurance Society, In re (16 Ch. D. 
 83) distinguished - 18 Ch. D. 639 
 
 See Company — Life Instjeance Com- 
 pany. 4. 
 Albion Steel and Wire Company, In re (7 Ch. D. 
 54:7) followed - - 16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Company— Pbefeeential Debts. 
 Alderson v. Maddison (7 Q. B. D. at p. 178) ap- 
 proved - - 10 Q. B. D. 148 
 See Feauds, Statute op. 2. 
 Alina, The (5 Ex. D. 227) followed 7 P. D. 247 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 2. 
 
 __^-^____ distinguished 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 165 
 See County Court— Jurisdiction. 1. 
 Allem,'V.Bichardson(}Z Ch. D. 524) dissented from 
 
 [13 Q. B, S. 351 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 Alston, Ex parte (Law Eep. 4 Ch. 168), followed 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 148 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 6. 
 Ambrose Lake Tin and Copper Mining Company, 
 In re (14 Ch. D. 390), discussed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 221 
 See Peincipal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 1. 
 Ames, In re (25 Ch. D. 72) distinguished 
 
 [27 Ch, S. S84 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 16. 
 
 Am^ V. Cadogan (12 Ch. D. 868) discussed 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 172 
 See Power — Execution. 18. 
 Amiss V. Sail (3 Jur. (N.S.) 584) considered 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 142 
 See Trustee — ^Liabilities. 7. 
 
 Ancona v. Waddell (10 Ch. D. 157) distinguished 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 623 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 6. 
 
 Anderson's Case (17 Ch. D. 373) approved 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 413 
 See Company — Shares — Allotment 3. 
 
 Andrew Y. Buchanan (Law Kep. 2 H. L., Sc. 286) 
 considered - 8 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law— Mine. 2. 
 
 Andrews v. Salt (Law Eep. 8 Ch. 622) considered 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 817 
 
 See Infant — Education. 2. 
 
 Anon. (3 Dyer, 323 b) discussed and reconciled 
 
 See Advowson. 1. [30 Ch. D. 298 
 
 Ansley v. Cotton (16 L. J. (Ch.) 55) discussed and 
 
 followed - 26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 See Will — Heirloom. 3. 
 Armitage, Ex parte (17 Ch. D. 13) approved 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 553 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Jurisdiction. 4. 
 
 Arrowsmith's Trusts, In re (29 L. J. (Ch.) 774 ; 
 2 D. F. & J. 474) approved and followed 
 [18 Ch. D. 218 
 See Will — ^Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 2. 
 Ashbury Company v. Biche (Law Eep. 7 H. L. 
 653) considered - 10 App. Cas. 354 
 See Corporation. 2. 
 Ashworfh v. Outram (5 Ch. D. 943) explained 
 
 [80 Ch. D. 493 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 1. 
 Aspdeny. Sedden (Law Eep. 10 Ch. 394) approved 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 833 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 2. 
 
 Astley T. Weldon (2 B. & P. 346) commented on 
 See Penalty. [21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 Atkyns v. Kinnier (4 Ex. 776) commented on 
 
 See Penalty. [21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 Attorney'Oeneral v. Cockermouth Local Board 
 (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 172) considered 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 762 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 1. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEREULBD, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. 
 
 Attorney-General v. Compton (1 Y. & C. (Oh.) 417) 
 distinguished - 23 Ch. D. 60 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 15. 
 
 — • T. Ely, Saddenham, and Sutton 
 
 Bailway Company (Law Eep. 4 Cli. 194) 
 considered 21 Ch. D. 752 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Court — In- 
 junction. 1. 
 
 v. Emerson (10 Q. B. D. 191) 
 
 distinguished ■ 26 Ch. D 724 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction of Documents. 20. 
 V. Great Eastern Railway Com- 
 pany (11 Ch. D. 449) considered 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 752 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 1. 
 
 V. Guardians of the Poor of 
 
 Union of Dorking (20 Ch. D. 595) (dis- 
 tinguished - 23 Ch. D. 767 
 See Nuisance — ^Eemedies. 6. 
 
 V. Kingston (Corporation of) 
 
 (13 "W. E. 888) discussed 28 Ch. D. 688 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 1. 
 
 V. Sidney-Sussex College (15 
 
 W. E. 162) observed upon 21 Ch. D. 613 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 3. 
 
 fol- 
 
 lowed - 18 Ch. D. 696 
 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 1. 
 
 V. Swansea Improvements and 
 
 Tramways Company (9 Ch. D. 46) con- 
 sidered - 24 Ch. D. 306 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 15. 
 Attree v. Haioe (9 Ch. D. 337) distinguished 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 544 
 See Charity — Mortmain. 3. 
 
 Atwood V. Sellar (4 Q. B. D. 342 ; 5 Q. B. D. 
 286) discussed - 10 App. Cas. 404 
 
 See Ship— General Average. 4. 
 
 V. Small (6 CI. & F. 232) considered and 
 
 explained - 20 Ch. D, 1 
 
 See False Eepresentation. 1. 
 
 AucTcland (Lord) v. Westminster District Board of 
 Works (Law Eep. 7 Ch. 597) distin- 
 guished - - - 27 Ch. D. 362 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 3. 
 Aynsley v. Glover (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 544) con- 
 sidered - - 26 Ch. D. 678 
 See Light — Obstruction. 2. 
 Backliouse v. Bonomi (9 H. L. C. 503) discussed 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 125 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 2. 
 Baddeley v. BaMeley (9 Ch. D. 118) considered 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 416 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 1. 
 Baines v. Bromley (6 Q. B. D. 691) explained 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 821 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 13. 
 Ball, In re (Law Eep. 8 C. P. 104) explained 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 44 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 5. 
 
 Bank of Bengal v. Macleod (5 Moore, Ind. Ap. 1 ; 
 7 Moore, P. C. 35) distinguished 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 561 
 See Power of Attorney. 1. 
 Banner, Exparte (2 Ch. D, 278), considered 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 755 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Seccriites fob. 
 
 4. 
 
 Barker, In re (7 H. & N. 109 ; 30 L. J. (Ex.) 404) 
 
 foUowed - - 6 Q. B. D. 548. 
 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 1. 
 
 Barrett v. JIamm^nd.(10 Ch. D. 285) followed 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 532 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 1. 
 Barrow v. Barrow (4 K. & J. 409) followed 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 263 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 3. 
 Bartlett v. Ilees (Law Eep. 12 Eq. 395) followed 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 549 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 10. 
 
 followed 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 462 ; 27 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 14, 16. 
 
 Batsford v. Kebbell (3 Ves. 363) distinguished 
 
 See Will— Vesting. 2. [30 Ch. D. 507 
 
 Baynton v. Collins (27 Ch. D. 604) foUowed 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 177 
 See Husband and Wife — Mareied 
 Women's Property Acts. 8. 
 
 Beavan v. Beavan (24 Ch. D. 649, n.) followed 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 643 
 
 S9e Executor — Administration. 6. 
 
 V. Oxford (Earl of) (6 D. M. & G. 492) 
 
 See Judgment. 4. [29 Ch. D. 527 
 
 Becket v. Hoioe (Law Eep. 2 P. & M. 1 ) disap- 
 proved - 7 P. D. 102 
 See Probate — Execution. 1. 
 
 Beckett v. Midland Railway Company (Law Eep. 
 3 C. P. 82) approved 7 App. Cas. 259 
 See Scotch Law — E ailway Company. 4. 
 
 Bedford (Duke of) v. Trustees of the Briiish 
 Museum (2 My. & K. 552) explained 
 See Covenant — Breach. [28 Ch. D. IDS 
 
 Beemr v. Luck (Law Eep. 4 Eq. 537) commented 
 on . . 6 App. Cas. 698 
 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation. 2. 
 
 not fol- 
 lowed - - - 19 Ch. D. 630 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation. 3. 
 
 Begg v. Jack (3 Court. Sess. Cas. (4th Series), 35) 
 approved - 7 App. Cas. 647 
 
 See Scotch Law — Public Eights. 
 
 Belaney v. Ffrench (Law Eep. 8 Ch. 918) distis- 
 guished - - 24 Ch. D. 408 
 
 See Solicitor — Lien. 12. 
 
 Belcher v. Smitli (9 Bing. 82) distinguished 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 632 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Intes- 
 plbader. 8. 
 
 Bellamy and Metropolitan Board of Works, In re 
 (24 Ch. D. 387) followed 27 Ch. D. 582 
 See Vendor and Pukohasbe — Convey- 
 ance. 6. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED: 
 
 Belmonte v. Ayriard (4 C. P. D. 221, 352") diatin- 
 guished ' 14 Q. B. D. 639 
 
 ' See I'kactioe — Sdpkemb Coubt— Seotj- 
 BiTT FOR Costs. 3. 
 Sengough v. Walker (IS Ves. 507) considered 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 81 
 See Settlement — Satisfaction. 
 BennsY. Mosley (2 C. B. (N.S.) 116) followed 
 
 See Habeas Cobpus. [15 Q. B. D. 471 
 Berdan v. Greenwood, (3 Ex. D. 251) followed 
 
 See SoLioiTOE— Lien. 1. [19 Ch. D. 311 
 V. (20 Ch. D. 764, n.) distin- 
 guished - 24 Ch. D. 522 
 See 'Peagtioe — Supbemb Codet — Evi- 
 dence. 13. 
 Besant r. Wood (12 Ch. D.- 605) commented on 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 420 
 See Husband and Wife— Wife's Con- 
 
 7ETAN0E. 3. 
 Besch V. Frolich (1 Ph. 172) followed 17 Ch. D. 
 See Pabtneeship — Dissolijtion. 1. [S29 
 Besley v. Besley (9 Ch. D. 103) dissented from 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 351 
 iSee Vendob and Puechasee — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 Best, Ex parte (18 Ch. D. 488) explained 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 281 
 See BANKEtTPTCY — Composition. 3. 
 Beits V. Bureh (4 H. & N. 506) commented on 
 
 See Penalty. [21 Ch. D, 243 
 V. Willmott (Law Uep. 6 Ch. 239) distin- 
 guished - 25 Ch. D. 1 
 See Patent — Infbingement. 2. 
 Beyer v. Adams (26 L. J. (Ch.) 841) overruled 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 363 
 See Pbincipal and Agent — Pbinoi- 
 pal's Liability. 7. 
 Biddle v. Bond (6 B. & S. 225) distinguished 
 
 See Bailment. [19 Ch. D, 86 
 
 Biggs v. Head (Sausse & Scully, 335) approved 
 and adopted - - 20 Ch. D. 733 
 
 See Solioitoe — Liabilities. 1. 
 Birmingham Canal Company v. Cartwright (11 
 Ch. D. 421) oven'uled 20 Ch. D. 662 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Sdpebfltjous 
 Lands. 2. 
 Birmingham Oas Light Co., Ex parte (Law Rep. 
 11 Eq. 615) commented on 13 Q. B. D, 
 See Bankbuptoy — Distress. 1. [753 
 Blackburn and District Benefit Building Society 
 (24 Ch. D. 421 ; 10 App. Cas. 33) fol- 
 lowed - - 28 Ch. D. 559 
 See Company — Disteiedtion op Assets. 
 3. 
 Blackett v. Moyal Exchange Assurance Co. (2 C. 
 & J. 244) followed 14 ft. B. D. 665 
 ^ee Insubahoe, Maeine — Policy. 8. 
 Blake v. Izard'Q.6 W. R. 108) followed 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 436 
 See Bill of Sale — Registeation, 2. 
 Bland v. Boss (The Julia) (Lush. 231 ; 14 Moo. 
 P. 0. 210) commented on and approved 
 ;See Ship— Pilot. 7. [6 App. Cas. 217 
 Blandford v. Bland/ford (8 P. D. 19) considered 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 206 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 1. 
 
 Blease, Esi parte (14 Q. B. D.'123) not followed 
 
 [15 ft. B. 0. 338 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Appeal. 13. , 
 
 Blower v. Morrett (2 Ves. Sen. 420) dissented 
 from: - - .17 Ch. D. 798 
 
 See Will — Pbiobity of Legacies. 
 
 Blyth and'Fanshawe, In re (10 Q B. D. 207) ex- 
 plained 15 ft. B. D. 420 
 
 See Solioitoe — Bill op Costs. 14- 
 
 Blyth and Young, In re (13 Ch. D. 416) con- 
 sidered - - 22 Ch. D. 484 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Coubt — Ap- 
 peal. 36. 
 Boale V. Dickson (13 V. 0. C. P. 337) overruled 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 392 
 See Colonial Law— Canada— Ontario. 
 5. 
 Bolckow V. Fisher (10 Q. B. D. 161) distinguished 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 110 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Intee- 
 
 BOGATOBIES. 6. 
 
 Bold BuccUugh, The (7 Moo. P. C. 267) con- 
 sidered - 6 P. D. 106 
 See FoEEiSN Judgment. 2. 
 
 Borries v. Butchinson (8 C. B. (N.S.) 445) dis- 
 tinguished - 8 ft. B. D. 457 
 
 See Damages — Remoteness. 4. 
 
 Bos V. Helsham (Law Rep. 2 Ex. 72) followed 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 351 
 
 See Vendor and Puechasee- Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 Bostock V. Floyer (Law Rep. 1 Eq. 26) explained 
 
 [22Ch. D. 727 
 See Teustee- Liabilities. 2. 
 
 Bothamley v. Sherson (Law Rep. 20 Eq. 304) ex- 
 plained 20 Ch. D. 676 
 ;See Will — Specifio Legacy. 
 
 Bouqhion v. Bouqhion (23 Ch. D. 169) distin- 
 guished - - 24Ch. D. 408 
 See Solicitor— Lien. 12. 
 
 Boulton, Ex parte, In re Sketchley (1 De G-. & J 
 163) discussed 14 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 See Company — Shares — Teansfbe. 2. 
 
 Bower v. Peate (1 Q. B. D. 321) approved 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 740 
 See SuppoET. 3. 
 
 considered 
 
 [8 App. Cas, 443 
 
 See Pbincipal and Agent — ^Peinoipal's 
 
 Liability. 1. 
 
 Bowyer v. Griffifii (Law Rep. 9 Eq. 340) considered 
 
 and followed - 21 Ch. D. 862, 865 
 
 See Trustee— Costs and Chaeges. 1, 2. 
 
 Baud's Settled Estates, In re (21 W. R. 667) over- 
 ruled - 22Ch. D. 93 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Court — Pay- 
 ment into Coubt. 5. 
 , , fol- 
 lowed - 18 Ch, D. 646 
 See Lands Clauses Act— Purchase- 
 money. 4. 
 Bones v. Bedale (1 H. & M. 798) disapproved 
 ■^ [17 Ch, D. 266 
 See Distributions, Statute of. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OR SPECLiLLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 JBoyes v. Bedale (1 H. & M. 798) observed upon 
 See Will— WOKDS. 13. [24 Ch. D. 637 
 
 • V. Cook (14 Ch. D. 53) followed 27 Ch. D. 
 
 See PowEE — Execution. 16. [284 
 
 JBrackenhury v. Gibbons (2 Ch. D. 417) considered 
 [18Ch. D. 524; 24 Ch. D. 633 
 
 See Will — Contingent Remaindee. 1, 
 2. 
 
 Brandon t. Brandon (7 D. M. & G. 365) con- 
 sidered and distinguished 21 Ch. D. 1 
 See Peactiob — Supeeme Couet — 
 Appeal. 34. 
 
 Brantcm v. Griffits (1 0. P. D. 349 ; 2 C. P. D. 
 212) distinguished - 16 Ch. D. 104 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Registeation. 3. 
 
 Breslauer r. Brown (3 App. Caa. 672) explained 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 131 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — Composition. 9. 
 
 Brewer v. Jones (10 Ex. 655) dissented from 
 
 See Sheeipf. 2. [6 Q. B. D. 171 
 
 Briee \. Bannister (3 Q. B. D. 569) distinguished 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 782 
 
 See BankeuptcT' — Assets. 6. 
 
 Brights Settlement, In re (13 Ch. D. 314) con- 
 sidered - 18 Ch. S. 381 
 See Baneecptot — Assets. 15. 
 
 Briggs v. Sharp (Law Rep. 20 Eq. 317) followed 
 See Advowson. 2. [15 ft. B. D. 432 
 
 BrocMebanlc t. King's Lynn Steamship Company 
 (3 C. P D. 365) followed 19 Ch. D. 457 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 14. 
 
 BrockleJmrst v. Jessop (7 Sim. 442) dictum disap- 
 proved - 18 Ch. D, 449 
 
 See MOETGAQE — POWEES. 6. 
 
 Brook V. Badley (Law Rep. 3 Ch. 672) approved 
 
 [29Ch. D.947 
 
 See Chaeity — Moetmain. 5. 
 
 Brown, Ex parte (Law Rep. 9 Ch. 304) explained 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Annulment. 1. 
 
 V. Bateman (Law Rep. 2 C. P. 272) fol- 
 lowed 12 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Registeation. 2. 
 
 V. Gellatly (Law Rep. 2 Ch. 751) distin- 
 guished - - 26 Ch, D. 42 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Auministeation. 4. 
 
 V. Smith (15 Beav. 444) approved and 
 
 followed - 13 ft. B. D. 418 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Bankeuptoy Peti- 
 tion. 3. 
 Browne v. Savage (4 Drew. 635) considered 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 674 
 See Moetgage — Peioeity. 13. 
 Brwisdon v. AUard (2 E. & E. 19) approved 
 
 [8 P. D. 144 
 See Pbaotioe — Admiealty — Costs. 4. 
 
 BuTJb v. Padwicli (13 Ch. D. 517) disapproved 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 218 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 2. 
 Bulkeley v. Schutz (Law Rep. 3 P. C. 764) ap- 
 proved - 6 App. Cas. 386 
 See Colonial Law — West Austealia. 1. 
 
 Bulhek V. Corry (3 Q. B. D. 356) followed 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 114 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Supeeme Codet — Peo- 
 DUCTION OF Documents. 22. 
 Bunn, In re (16 Ch. D. 47) observed upon 
 
 See Will— Vesting. 2. [30 Ch. D. 507 
 
 Burdett v. Abbot (14 East, 1) commented upon 
 and approved - 12 ft. B. D. 271 
 
 See Pabliament — Peocedube. 
 
 V. discussed - 26 Ch. D. 644 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Couet — At- 
 tachment. 6. 
 
 Burke v. South Eastern Railway Company (5 
 C. P. D. 1) considered 10 ft. B. D. 178 
 See CoNTEACT — Acceptance. 2. 
 
 Burliner v. Boyle (5 C. P. D. 354) approved 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 706 
 See Bankeuptcy — Composition. 10. 
 
 Burrell, Ex parte (1 Ch. D. 537) distinguished 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 505 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Annulment. 4. 
 
 Burstall v. Bryant (12 Q. B. D. 103) doubted 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 371 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Intee- 
 
 PLEADEE. 5. 
 
 Busk V. Aldam (Law Eep. 19 Eq. 16) observed 
 upon - - 29 Ch. D. 535 
 
 See Teustee — Liabilities. 10. 
 
 BuM {Marquis of) v. Cunynghame (2 Rusa. 275), 
 observations upon 16 Ch. D. 211 
 
 See Moetgage — Contract. 5. 
 
 Button V. O'Neill (4 C. P. D. 354) distinguished 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 871 
 See Bill of Sale — Foemalities. 7. 
 
 Caffarini v. Walker (Ir. Eep. 9 C. L. 431 ; Jr. 
 Rep. 10 C. L. 250) considered 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 516 
 See Ship — Chaeteepaety. 10. 
 
 Caldecott, Ex parte C4 Ch. D. 150) distinguished 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 32 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — ^Assets. 11. 
 
 Caledonian Bailway Company v. Ogilvy (2 Maoq 
 229) explained and distinguished 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 259 
 See Scotch Law — Railway Company. 4. 
 
 Callislier v. Bischoffsheim (Law Rep. 5 Q. B. 449) 
 questioned - 17 Ch. D. 480 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoof. 16. 
 Campbell's Case (Law Bep. 9 Ch. 1) followed 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 268 
 See Company — Reduction op Capital. 2. 
 Cann v. Cann (3 Sim. 447) followed 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 361 
 See Vbndob and Pueohasee — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 Cape Breton Company v. Fenn iVI Ch. D. 198) 
 considered - - 23 Ch. D. 511 
 
 See Company— Costs. 2. 
 Carew, Ex parte (Law Rep. 10 Ch. 308), ex- 
 plained and distinguished 16 Ch. D. 131 
 See Bankeuptcy — Composition. 9. 
 Cargo ex Argos (Law Rep. 5 P. C. 134) followed 
 
 [7 P. D. 247 
 See County Couet — Jueisdiction. 2. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEERTJLED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 Cwrt&r V. Wake (4 Ch. D. 605) distinguished 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 619 
 
 See MOBTGAQE — CONTBAOT. 10. 
 
 Casseh v. Lamli (12 Court Sess. Cas. 4tli Series, 
 722) affirmed - 10 App. Cas. S53 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Peo- 
 
 PEBTT. 5. 
 Catterina Ohiazmre, The (1 P. D. 368) considered 
 and distinguished - 21 Ch. D. 202 
 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Cotjet — Stat- 
 ing Pboceedings. 6. 
 Cawfhorm v. Gwdrey (13 C. B. (N.S.) 406; 
 32 L. J. (C.P) 152) distinguished 
 
 [11 Q. B. D, 123 
 See Feauds, Statute of. 1. 
 Challinor, Ex parte (16 Ch. D. 260) explained 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 98, 419 
 See Bill op Sale— Foemalities. 18, 21. 
 Chamberlain v. West End of London Bailway Com- 
 pany (2 B. & S, 605) approved 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 289 
 See Scotch Law — Railway Compant. 4. 
 
 Chapman v. Midland Bailway (5 Q. B. D. 167 ; 
 431) discussed - 10 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — ^CosTS. 
 29. 
 
 •^— V. Boyal Netherlands Steam Navigation 
 
 Company (4 P. D. 157) overruled 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 795 
 See Peactice— Admibaltt — Limitation 
 of Liability. 1. 
 Chappell's Case (Law Rep. 6 Ch. 902) distinguished 
 
 [25 Ch, D. 118 
 See Company — Shaees — Teansfee. 7. 
 
 Charing Cross Advance and Deposit BanTc, Ex 
 parte (16 Ch. D. 35) distinguished 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 260 
 See Bill of Sale — Foemalities. 17. 
 
 Charlton v. Attorney-General (4 App. Cas. 427) 
 followed - - 6 ft. B. D. 548 
 
 See Revenue — Succession Duty. 1. 
 
 Chinery, Ex parte (12 Q. B. D. 342), explained 
 
 [14 ft. B. B. 627 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — ^Act of Bankeuptoy. 
 10. 
 Christopherson v. Naylor (1 Mer. 320) followed 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 737 
 See "Will — Substitutional Gift. 1. 
 
 Citizens Insurance Company of Canada v. Parsons 
 (7 App. Cas. 96) approved and distin- 
 guished - - 7 App. Cas. 136 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 3. 
 Clare v. Clare (21 Ch. D. 865) not followed 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 195 
 See Teustee — Costs and Charges. 3. 
 
 ClarTt V. Browne (2 Sm. & Giff. 524) not followed 
 See Will— Words. 9. [30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 Olarhe v. Sart (6 H. L. C. 633) distinguished 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 660 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 2. 
 
 V. Law (2 K. & J. 28) approved 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 642 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 5. 
 
 Clarice's Trusts, In re (21 Ch. D. 748) questioned 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 411 
 See Husband and Wife — Sep abate 
 Estate. 15. 
 Clayton's Case (1 Mer. 572) recognised 
 
 See Bankee— Lien [6 App. Cas. 722 
 
 , distinguished 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 857 
 See Building Society. 7. 
 
 , followed 
 
 [25 Ch. S. 692 
 See Peincipal and Surety — Liability. 
 2. 
 Cleric V. Dumfries Commissioners of Supply 
 (7 Court Sess. Cas. 4th Ser. 1157) dis- 
 approved - - 9 App. Cas. 61 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 1. 
 
 Collet V. Woodward (Law Rep. 14 Eq. 407) over- 
 ruled - 21 Ch. D. 369 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 1. 
 
 CochriU v. Sparkes (1 H. & C. 699) distinguished 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 291 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Pee- 
 soNAL Actions. 10. 
 
 Collins V. Vestry of Paddington (5 Q. B. D. 368) 
 distinguished - - 9 ft. B. D. 621 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Coubt — Ap- 
 peal. 2. 
 Colvill V. Wood (2 C. B. 210) commented on 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 49 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Water 
 
 Rate. 3. 
 
 Commercial Bank of India, In re (Law Rep. 
 
 6 Eq. 517) approved 27 Ch. D. 225 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 2. 
 
 Cooke V. Chilcott (3 Ch. D. 694) questioned 
 
 [8 ft. B. D. 403 ; 29 Ch. D. 760 
 
 See Covenant — Running with Land. 
 2,4. 
 Cork and Yougal Bailway Company (Law Rep. 
 4,Ch.748j followed 22 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Building Society. 7. 
 
 Corser v. Cartm'ight (Law Rep. 7 H. L. 731) fol- 
 lowed - - 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 7. 
 
 Cothav V. Sydenham (2 Bro. C. C. 391) considered 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 437 
 See Solioitoe — ^Liabilities. 2. 
 
 Cotterell v. Stratton (Law Rep. 8 Ch. 295) fol- 
 lowed - 20 Ch. D. 303 
 See Peactice— Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 25. 
 Cotton, In re (1 Ch. D. 232) discussed 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 331 
 See Infant — ^Maintenance. 6. 
 Counsel v. Oarvie (It. Rep. 5 0. L. 74) considered 
 
 [13 ft. B. B. 835 
 See County Court — Practice. 4. 
 Coventry and Dixon's Case (14 Oh. D. 660) com- 
 mented on - 21 Ch, D. 492, 519 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 
 3,5. 
 Coverdale v. Charlton (4 Q. B. D. 104) followed 
 
 [13 ft. B, D. 904 
 See. Metropolis — Management Acts. 7. 
 
cxxiv CASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEULED, OE SPECIALLY OONSIDEEED. 
 
 Cowell V. Simpson (16 Ves. 275) observed on 
 
 See Inn— Innkeepek. 2. [23 Cli. D. 330 
 Cox V. Land and Water Journal Company (Law 
 Eep 9 Eq. 32i)-not followed 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 708 
 See CoPYEiGHT — Newspapers. 
 
 V. Mitchell (7 C. B. (N.S.) 55) considered 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 397 
 See Pbaotice — Stjpeeme Court — Stay- 
 ing Pboceedings. 6. 
 Craioford, Ex parte (28 L. T. (N.S.) 244 (ap- 
 proved and followed 21 Ch. D. 61 
 See Bankeuptoy — Examination. 2. 
 
 V. Field (2 Court Sess. Cas. 4th Seriesi 
 
 20) distinguished - 8 App. Cas. 265 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 5. 
 
 Crawshaw v. Grawshaw (14 Ch. D. 817) con- 
 sidered - 29 Ch. D. 142 
 See Will— Eesiduaey Gift. 2. 
 
 Craytliorne v. Swinburne (14 Ves. 160) discussed 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 44 
 See Peinoipal and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 3. 
 Creaton v. Creatoh (3 Sm. & Giff. 386) followed 
 
 See Will— Trustees 1. [21 Ch. D. 790 
 Cromack v. HeatTicote (2 B. & B. 4) overruled 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 153 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 
 Grookes v. Whitworth (10 Ch. D. 289) not fol- 
 lowed - - 16 Ch. D. 362 
 See Partition Suit— Sale. 3. 
 Crosbie, Ex parte (7 Ch. D. 123) distinguished 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 605 
 See Bankruptcy — Peotboted Trans- 
 action. 2. 
 Croughton's Trusts, In re (8 Ch. D. 460) followed 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 411 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 15. 
 
 distin- 
 
 tinguished - - 21 Ch. D. 748 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 14. 
 Crowther v. Thorley (32 W. E. 330) followed 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1 
 See Company — Unregistered Com- 
 pany. 4. 
 
 distinguished 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 379 
 See Company — TJnbegistered Com- 
 pany. 5. 
 Crutwell V. Lye (17 Ves. 335) followed 
 
 See Goodwill. 2. [19 Ch. D. 355 
 
 CulUy, Ex parte (9 Ch. D. 307) followed 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 184 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 6. 
 Cumber v. Wane (Stra. 426) observed upon 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 37 
 See Accord and Satisfaction. 1. 
 
 followed 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 605 
 See Accord and Satisfaction. 2. 
 Cundy, Ex parte (2 Eose, 357) followed) 21'-Ch. D. 
 See Bankruptcy — Teadbb. 2. [394 
 
 Camich v. Tu^ilcer (Law Eep. 17 Eq. 320) com- 
 mented on - 24 Ch. D. 199 
 See Will— Precatory Trust. 2. 
 
 Currie v. Misa (Law Eep. 10 Ex. 153; 1 App. 
 Cas. 153) commented on 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 See Scotch Law— Bill of Exchange. 1. 
 
 Custanee v. Sradahaw (4 Hare, 315) discussed 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 275 
 
 See Eevende— Probate Duty. 2. 
 DaUon v. Angus (6 App. Cas. 740) discussed 
 
 See Support. 4. [24 Ch. D, 739 
 applied 
 
 See INOLOSUEE. 1. [10 ft. B. D. 547 
 
 D'Anqibau, In re (15 Oh. D. 228) noticed 
 
 ^ [16 Ch. D. 376 
 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 
 . MENT. 2. 
 
 Dann, Ex parte (17 Ch. D. 26), commented on 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 788 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankeuptoy. 
 3. 
 Davies v. Humphreys (6 M. & W. 153) followed 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 44 
 See Peincipal and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 V. McVeaqh (4 Ex. D. 265) considered 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 87 
 See Ship — Chaeterparty. 11. 
 
 Davis, Ex parte (2 Ch. D. 231) overruled 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 256 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 2. 
 Dawson v. Bank of Whitehaven (6 Ch. D. 218; 
 distinguished 8 ft. B. D. 31 
 
 See Dower. 2. 
 Day V. Whittaker (6 Ch. D. 734) followed 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 242 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — Dis- 
 trict Eegistey. 
 De Bay, The (8 App. Cas. 559) considered 
 
 See Ship— Salvage. 5. [9 P. D. 182 
 
 De la Cliaumette v. Bank of England (9 B. & C. 
 208) explained 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 See Bankee — Cheque. 2. 
 
 De Pereda v. De Mancha (19 Ch. D. 451) ob- 
 served upon - - 25 Ch. D. 86 
 See Infant — Ward of Court. 2. 
 
 Dearie v. Hall (3 Euss. 1) distinguished 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 424 
 See Company — Shaees — Teansfbb. 2. 
 
 Delaney v. Delaney (27 Sol. J. 418) distinguished 
 
 - [24 Ch. D. 126 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 7. 
 Delta, Tlie (1 P. D. 393) considered and distin- 
 guished - 21 Ch. D. 202 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 6. 
 Denston v. Ashton (Law Eep. 4 Q. B. 590) ques- 
 tioned - 28 Ch. D. 38 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity FOE Costs. 8. 
 Dent V. Dent (34 L. J. (P. M. & Ad.) 118 ; 4 Sw, 
 & Tr. 106) questioned 9 App. Cas. 205 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 1. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEREULBD, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 exxv 
 
 Billon (Lord) v. Akares (i Yes. 357) not fol- 
 lowed - - 22 Oh. D. 397 
 See Pkactioe — Sdpkeme Coukt — Stay- 
 ing Pbooebdings. 6. 
 Billon V. Cunningham (Law Eep. 8 Ex. 23) dia- 
 tinguislied - - 14 ft. B. D. 973 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 11. 
 Bitton, Ex parte (3 Oh. D. 459) followed 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 122 
 See Bankeuptct — Disclaimer. 5. 
 Bixon, Ex parte (13 Q. B. D. 118) explained 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 899 
 See Bankbuptcsy — Receiver. 8. 
 Bdbson \. Faithwaite (30 Beav. 228) followed 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 126 
 See Practice — Sdpbeme Court — 
 Change op Parties. 7. 
 Bodds V. Shepherd (1 Ex. D. 75) considered 
 
 [19 Ch. B. 216 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 1. 
 Boe V. Biggs (2 Taunt. 109) distinguished 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 465 
 See Will — Charge of Debts. 
 
 V. Brindley (12 Moo. C. P. 37) questioned 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 622 
 See Building Contract. 2. 
 — - V. Harris (5 C. & P. 592) overruled 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 153 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 
 V. Witlien (2 B. & Ad. 896) doubted 20 Ch. D. 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 3. [261 
 Bouglass v. Howland (24 Wendell, 35) followed 
 
 [17Ch. D. 668 
 
 See Principal and Surety — Liability. 
 
 3. 
 
 Down V. Hailing (4 B. & 0. 330) considered and 
 
 distingnisbed - - 8 ft. B, D. 288 
 
 See Banker — Cheque. 1. 
 
 Bornnes v. Grazebrooh (3 Mer. 200) observed upon 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 220 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 5. 
 B<mse,Tlw (Law Rep. 3 A. & E. 135) followed 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 165 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 1. 
 Bronfield Silkstone Coal Company, In re (23 
 Ch. D. 511) not followed 27 Ch. D. 33 
 See Company — Costs. 3. 
 Bundonald (Earl of) v. Masterman (Law Eep. 
 7 Eq. 504) considered 28 Ch. D. 340 
 See Partnership — Liabilities. 
 Burant v. Durant (1 Hagg. Eoc. Eep. 761) dis- 
 approved - - 9 App. Cas. 206 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 1, 
 Byeart Case (6 App. Cas. 507) followed 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 763 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 4. 
 Eade v. Jacobs (3 Ex. D. 335) explained 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 29 
 ;See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 8. 
 Early, Ex parte (13 Ch. D. 800) followed 
 
 [16Ch. D. 655 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 9. 
 
 East and West India Bode Company v. Hill 
 (22 Ch. D. 14) followed 9 ft. B. D. 281 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 12. 
 East Botallack Consolidated Mining Company, 
 Be (34 Beav. 82) disapproved 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 472 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 1. 
 Eastern Counties and London and Blackwall 
 Railway Companies v., Marriage (9 H. 
 L. C. 32) distinguished 9 App. Cas. 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 4. 
 Eceleshill Local Board, In re (13 Ch. D. 365) dis- 
 approved - 18 Ch. D. 146 
 See Lands Clauses Act-t^jOmpulsory 
 Powers. 5. 
 Edmundson, Be (17 Q. B. 67) overruled 
 
 [18 ft. B. D. 586 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 6. 
 EUnnger Actien-Oeselhchafft v. Armstrong (Law 
 Eep. 9 Q. B. 473) approved 
 
 [16 ft. B. S. 86 
 See Damages — Contract. 2. 
 Electric Telegraph Company v. Salford (11 Ex. 
 181) followed - 13 ft. B. D. 700 
 See Poor-rate — Occupation. 6. 
 Ella A. Clarh, The (Br. & L. 32) overruled 
 
 [10 P. D. 44 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 1. 
 Ellis V. Be Silva (6 Q. B. D. 521) followed 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 841 
 Bee Practice — Supreme Court — Costs, 
 42. 
 Ettis' Trusts, In re (Law Eep. 17 Eq. 409) fol- 
 lowed - - 21 Ch. D. 748 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate Es- 
 tate. 14. 
 
 dis- 
 
 tinguished 27 Ch. D. 411 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 15. 
 Elworthy, Ex parte (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 742) not 
 followed - - 18 Ch. D. 495 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 7. 
 Emanuel, Ex parte (17 Ch. D. 35) explained 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 397 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee., 1. 
 Emperor v. Bolfe(l Ves. Sen. 208) followed 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 9. [428 
 
 Empire Assurance Corporation, In re (17 L. T. 
 
 (N.S.) 488) discussed 25 Ch. D. 400 
 
 See Company-^Evidence. 4. 
 
 Empress Eugenie, The (Lush. 140), overruled 
 
 [10 P. D. 112 
 ■See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 7. 
 
 England v. Marsden (Law Eep. 1 C. P. 529) 
 questioned - 14 ft. B. D. 811 
 
 See Indemnity. 
 Ennor v. Barwell (1 D. F. & J.) 529) distinguished 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 366 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 spection of Property. 
 Enohin v. Wylie (10 H. L. C. 1), Lord Westbury's 
 dicta disapproved - 9 App. Cas.- 34 
 See Executor — Actions. 16. 
 
cxxvi CASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. 
 
 Emhin v. Wflie (10 H. L. C. 13) Lord Westbury's 
 dicta dissented from 10 App. Cas. 453 
 See Scotch Law — Jueisdiction. 
 Erlanger v. New Sombrero Plwsphate Company 
 (3 App. Cae. 1218) discussed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 221 
 See Pkinoipal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 4. 
 Msdaile v. Visser (13 Ch. X). 421) observed tipon*i 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 178 
 See Aeeest — ^Deetoes' Act. 4. 
 Evans v. Carrington (2 De G. P. & J. 481) con- 
 sidered - - 14 Q. B. D. 792 
 See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 2. 
 
 V. Walker (3 Ch. D. 211) not followed 
 
 See Will— Annuity. 2. [19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 Evers v. Challis (7 H. L. C. 531) explained 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 436 
 See Will — Peepetuity. 1. 
 Ewer V. Sayden (Cro. Eliz. 476, 658) followed 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 60 
 See Will — Speaking peom Death. 3. 
 
 Fanny M. Carvill, The (Aspinall's Maritime Cases, 
 (N.S.) vol. 2, p. 569) approved 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 512 
 See Peactice — Admiealty — Appoe- 
 
 TIONMENT OF DAMAGE. 
 
 Farebrotlier v. Gibson (1 De G. & J. 602) dis- 
 tinguished 9 Q. B. D. 616 
 See Vendoe and Puechasee — Deposit. 
 3. 
 Farrow v. Austin (18 Ch. D. 58) followed 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 303 ; 29 Ch. D. 495 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 25, 26. 
 Fearnside v. Flint (22 Ch. D. 579) distinguished 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 291 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 10. 
 Fearon v. Bowers (1 H. Bl. 364) reflected on 
 
 See Trover. [7 App. Cas, 591 
 
 Penning, Ex parte (3 Ch. D. 455), discussed 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Bankuptoy — Liquidation. 4. 
 
 Ferguson v. Gibson (Law Eep. 14 Eq. 379) con- 
 sidered - - 27 Ch. D. 478 
 See Ketalnee. 
 
 Ferrier v. Jay (Law Eep. 10 Eq. 550) observed 
 upon - - - 29 Ch, D. 535 
 
 See Teubteb — Liabilities. 10. 
 
 Festing v. Allen (12 M. & W. 279) distinguished 
 See Will— Teustees. 1. [21 Ch. D. 790 
 Firth, In re (19 Ch. D. 419), distinguished 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 36 
 See Bill op Sale— Foemalities. 19. 
 Flamanlc,.Ex parte (1 Sim. (N.S.) 260) dissented 
 from - - 27 Ch. D. 309 
 
 , See Lunatic — Peopeety. 8. 
 
 Fletcher v. Bylands (Law Eep. 3 H. L. 330) ap- 
 plied - 7 Q. B. D. 418 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 4. 
 .fol- 
 
 lowed 
 
 See Water. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 388 
 
 Florence Land and Public Works Company, In re 
 (10 Ch. D. 530), distinguished 29 Ch. D. 
 See Company — Debentubes. 5. [736 
 Follett V. Jefferyes (1 Sim. (N.S.) 1) approved 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 153 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 Foster, In re (8 Cli. D. 598), dissented from 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 189 
 See SoLiciTOE — Bill of Costs. 8. 
 
 V. Great Western Railway Company 
 
 (8 Q. B. D. 25, 515) 24 Ch. D. 273 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 31. 
 Fourth City Mutual Benefit Building Society v. 
 Williams (14 Cli. D. 140) commented 
 on 12 Q. B. B. 423 
 See Mortgage— Peioeity. 2. 
 dis- 
 cussed - 28 Ch. D. 298 
 See Building Society. 12. 
 Fox V. Fox (Law Eep. 19 Bq. 286) distinguished 
 See Will— Vesting. 3. [16 Ch. D. 44 
 
 V. Hawks (13 Ch. D. 822) considered 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 416 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 1. 
 Foai's Case (Law ifep. 5 Eq. 118) observed upon 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 413 
 See Company — Shaees— Allotment. 3 
 Franconia, The (2 P. D. 163) overruled 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 59 
 See Peactice — • Admiealty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 (3 P. D. 164) explained 
 
 [10 P. D. 21 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Limita- 
 tion OF Liability. 3. 
 Freeman v. Coolce (2 Ex. 654), dictum of Parke, B., 
 in, approved - 6 App. Cas. 82 
 
 See Estoppel— Conduct. 1. 
 
 V. approved 8 App. Cas. 
 
 See Colonial Law — Queensland. [120 
 Freeth v. Burr (Law Eep. 5 C. P. 208) approved 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 648 
 See Sale of Goods — Eescission. 2. 
 Freme v. Clement (18 Ch. D. 499) disapproved 
 
 See Will— Lapse. 2. [26 Ch. D. 266 
 French v. Chichester (2 Vern. 568 ; 3 Bro. P. C, 
 2nd ed., p. 16) explained 28 Ch. D. 446 
 See Executor — Administration. 9. 
 Freston, In re (11 Q. B. D. 545), discussed 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 644 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — ^At- 
 tachment. 6. 
 
 , followed 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 44 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 5. ' 
 Fnth v. Forbes (4 D. F. & J. 409) distinguished 
 [13 Q. B. D. 766; 29 Ch. D. 813, 848 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Securities for. 
 2, 4, 5. 
 
 Frodsham v. Frodsham (15 Ch. D. 317) distin- 
 guished - - 22 Ch. D. 636 
 
 See Trustee Eelief Act. 1. 
 
 dis- 
 
 tinguished - 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 2. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. cxivii 
 
 Frog's Creditors (Mor. 4262) considered 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 677 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Hekitablb Pbopeett. 
 
 4. 
 
 Fryer's Settlement, In re (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 468) 
 
 not followed - - 20 Ch. D. 203 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 
 MOKBT. 6. 
 
 Furdoonjee's Case (3 Ch. D. 264) dlaouased and 
 not followed - - 28 Ch. D. 415 
 
 See Company — Oontmbutoky. 3. 
 Gaffee, In re (1 Mac. & G. 541), discussed 
 
 [23 Ch, D. 712 
 See Htiseand and "Wife — Sep abate 
 Estate. 7. 
 Gale, In re (22 Ch. D. 820), considered 
 
 [26 Ch. D, 783 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Pek- 
 sonal Actions. 6. 
 Gambler v. Overseers of Lydford (3 E. & B. 346 ; 
 23 L. J. (M.C.) 69) approved 
 
 [11 Q. B. D, 146 
 See Pook-bate — Occupation. 3. 
 Gandy v. Gandy CI P. D. 168) followed 
 
 [7 P. D. 228 
 See Practice — Divokce— Condonation. 
 1. 
 Garland, Ex parte (10 Ves. 110) followed 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 856 
 See Scotch Law — Tbustbe. 
 
 : — '■ considered 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 245 
 See Tbustee — Powers. 3. 
 Gartside v. Outram (26 L. J. (Ch.)113) approved 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 183 
 See. Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 Geils V. Geils (1 Macq. 255) followed 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and Wife — Divorce. 
 
 v. (1855. 17 Court Sess. Cas. 2nd 
 
 Series, 397) considered 10 App. Cas. 692 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 2. 
 General Credit and Discount Company v. Glegg 
 (22 Ch. D. 549) followed 25 Ch. D. 462 
 See MoRTOAGE — Foreclosure. 14. 
 
 Genery v. Fitzgerald (Jac. 468) applied 23 Ch. D. 
 See Will — Interim Income. 2. [360 
 
 George, *i re (5 Ch. D. 837) discussed 29 Ch. D. 
 See Infant — ^Maintenance. 6. [331 
 
 Gibson v. Fisher (Law Eep. 5 Eq. 1) disapproved 
 See Will— Class. 1. [24 Ch. D. 664 
 
 GiVbertson v. Richards (4 H. & N. 277) dissented 
 from - - 20 Ch. D. 562 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Superfluous 
 Lands. 2. 
 
 Giiborne v. Gisbome (2 App. [Cas. 300) distin- 
 guished - - - 21 Ch. D. 615 
 See Lunatics-Maintenance. 1. 
 
 GUaa. Ex parte (19 Ch. D. 7) explained 
 
 ""' [20 Ch. D. 341 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 4. 
 
 Glennv and Hartley, In re (25 Ch. D. 611) com- 
 mented on 27 Ch, D, 333 
 See Settlement — Powers. 9. 
 
 Glossop V. Heston and Isleworth Local Board (12 
 
 Ch. D 102) approved and followed 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 595 
 
 See Nuisance, — ^Eemedibs. 5. 
 Golding v. Wharton Saltworks Company (1 Q. B. 
 
 D. 374) explained - 19 Ch. D. 22 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Amend- 
 . , ment. 4. 
 Goodman's Trusts, In re (17 Ch. D. 266), observed 
 
 upon - - - 24 Ch. D. 637 
 
 See Will— Words. 13. 
 Gordon, In re (6 Ch. D. 531) distinguished 
 
 See Election. 3. [30 Ch. D. 654 
 
 Gothenburg Commercial Co., In re (29 W. B. 358) 
 followed 13 ft. B. D. 740 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Securities fob. 
 1. 
 Gowan v. Broitghion (Law Eep. 19 Eq. 77) dis- 
 tinguished - 28 Ch. D. 159 
 See Executor — Actions. 12. 
 Graham v. Chapman (12 C. B. 85) overruled 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 626 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 4. 
 Grant v. Grani (Law Eep. 5 C. P. 380, 727) dis- 
 sented from - - 17 Ch. D. 382 
 See Will— Words. 12. 
 Gray v. Mathias (5 Yds. 286) observed upon 
 See Bond. [26 Ch. D. 353 
 Great Australian Gold Mining Company v. Martin 
 (5 Ch. D. 1) overruled 20 Ch. D. 240 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — See- 
 vice, 3, 
 Great Western Railway Company v. Bishop (Law 
 Eep. 7 Q. B. 550) cfistinguished 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 138 
 See Local Government— Offences. 1. 
 
 V. Sutton (Law 
 
 Eep. 4 H. L. 226) followed 14 ft.B. D. 209 
 See Railway Company . — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 2. 
 Great Western Railway Company v. Waterford 
 and Limerich Railway Company {Yl Ch. 
 D. 493) explained 20, Ch, D. 190 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction, 7. 
 Green v. BritUn (42 L. J. (Ch.) 187) followed 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 573 
 See Will — Disclaimer. 1. 
 
 V. Low (22 Beav. 625). distinguished 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 394 
 See Landlord and Tenant— Lease. 16. 
 Gregory v. Williams (3 Mer. 582) explained 
 
 [16 Ch. B. 125 
 See Company— Contracts. 2. 
 Gribble v. Buchanan (18 C. B. 691) not followed 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 841 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 42. 
 Griffin, Ex parte (12 Ch. D. 480) approved and 
 followed - 20 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Bankruptcy —Costs. 1. 
 Grundy v. Grice (Seton on Decrees, 4th ed., vol. 
 ii,, p. 1036, Form No, 2) considered 
 
 [28 Ch. S. 181 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 18. 
 
csxviii CASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OK SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 GruneKns, Ex parte (WeeMy Notes, 1876, p. 244) 
 considered 18 Ch. D. 488 
 
 See Bankktjptot — Composition. 2. 
 
 Gulhj V Davis (Law Rep. 10 Eq. 562) discussed 
 and distinguished - SB Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Will— WOHDS. 16. 
 
 OwilUm T. Gwillim (3 Sw. & Tr. 200) disapproved 
 
 [7 P. D. 102 
 See Peobate — Execution. 1. 
 
 Sach V. London Provident Building Society (23 
 Ch. D. 103) approved 9 App. Cas. 260 
 See Bdildinq Sooiett. 2. 
 
 Hackett v. Baiss (Law Rep. 20 Eq. 494) con- 
 sidered - 24 Ch. D, 282 
 See Light — Obsteuotion. 1. 
 
 Hall V. Bohinson (American — 8 Iredell, 56) fol- 
 lowed - 17 Ch. D. 825 
 See Pbinoipal and Subety — Conteibu- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 Sallows V. Fernie (Law Rep. 3 Ch. 467) distin- 
 guished - 17 Ch. D. 373 
 See Company — Peospectus. 2. 
 
 Hamiltonv. Denny (1 B. & B. 199) commented on 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 552 
 See Insdeance, Life — Assionment. 1. 
 
 Hammack v. White (11 C. B. (N.S.) 588 ; 31 L. J. 
 (O.P.) 129) upheld 6 Q. B. D. 145 
 
 See Negligence — Evidence. 2. 
 
 Hammersmith Railway Company v. Brand (Law 
 Rep. 7 H. L. 171) diatinguished 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 423 
 See Nuisance — Definition. 2. 
 
 Hampson v. Fellows (Law Rep. 6 Eq. 575) not 
 ^ followed - 18 Ch. D. 127 
 
 See Moetgage— Contkact. 1. 
 
 Hampson v. Price's Patent Candle Company (24 
 W. R. 754) distinguished 23 Ch. D. 664 
 See Company — Management. 2. 
 
 Hanna, The (Law Rop. 1 A. & E. 283) followed 
 See Ship— Pilot. 5. [7 P. D 240 
 
 Hardman v. Johnson (3 Mer. 347) distinguished 
 
 [26 Oh. S. 590 
 See Leasehold— Renewable Lease. 1. 
 
 Harford's Trusts, In re (13 Ch. D. 135), not fol- 
 lowed - 23 Ch. D. 217 
 See Teustee Acts — New Tbustees. 4. 
 
 Hartnan v. Johnson (2 E. & B. 61) considered 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 340 
 See PAETNEB3HIP— Liabilities. 
 
 Harper v. Serimgeour (5 C. P. D. 366) observed 
 upon 9 Q. B. D. 178 
 
 See Abeest — Debtoes Act. 4. 
 
 Harris, In re (15 Ch. D. 561) explained 29 Ch. D. 
 See Chaeity — Moetmain. 5. [947 
 
 Harrison v. Cornwall Minerals Railway Company 
 (18 Ch. D. 334) distinguished 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 98 
 See Peaoticb — Supeeme Court — Costs. 
 8. 
 
 Hartley, In re (30 Beav. 620) explained 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 108 
 See SoLioiTOE — Bill of Costs. 17. 
 
 Harvey's Estate, In re (13 Ch. D. 216) followed 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 749 
 See Husband and Wife— Separate Es- 
 tate. 12. 
 
 HawJiins v. Chappel (1 Atk. 621) followed 
 
 See Advowson. 2. [15 Q. B. D. 432 
 HawTcsworth v. HawTtsworth (Law Rep. 6 Ch. 
 539) considered - 21 Ch. D. 817 
 
 See Infant — Education. 2. 
 Heald v. Kenworthy (10 Ex. 745) considered 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 623 
 See Peincipal and Agent — PfimciPAL's 
 Liability. 2. 
 Heath v. Nugent (29 Beav. 226) followed 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 70S 
 See ExECUTOE — Administration. 7. 
 Hebhert v. Purehas (Law Rep. 4 P. C. 301) ap- 
 proved - - - 6 App. Cas. 424 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Moni- 
 tion. 
 Hedley v. Bates (13 Ch. D. 498) explained 
 
 [20 Ch. B. 190 
 See Pbaotioe — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 7. 
 Heelis v. Blain (18 C. B. (N.S.) 90) followed 
 
 [12 Q. B. S. 369 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 11. 
 
 Henderson v. Nimmo (2 Court Sess. Cas. 2nd 
 
 Series, 869) - - 8 App. Cas. 265 
 
 See Scotch Law — Railway Company. 5. 
 
 v. Stevenson (Law Rep. 2 H. L., Sc. 470) 
 
 considered - 10 ft. B. D, 178 
 
 See Contract — ^Acceptance. 2. 
 
 Hereford and South Wales Waggon and Engineer- 
 ing Company, In re (2 Ch. D. 621), con- 
 sidered - 25 Ch. D. 103 
 See Company — Formation. 
 
 Heske v. Samuelson (12 Q. B. D. 30) approved 
 and followed 13 ft. B. D. 583 
 
 See Mastek and Servant — Mastee's 
 Liability. 6. 
 
 Hetherington v. Grooms (13 Q. B. D. 789) followed 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 619 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 10. 
 
 Higginson v. Hall (]0 Ch. D. 235) dissented from 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 189 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OP Documents. 5. 
 
 Hill, Ex parte (6 Oh. D. 63), commented on 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 75S 
 See Bankruptcy— Distress. 1. 
 
 v. Hill (10 W. R. 400) considered 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Infant — Education. 2. [817 
 
 V. Kirkwood (28 W. R. 358) considered 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 690 
 See Mortgage — Powees. 3. 
 Hinchinhrolte (Lord) v. Seymour (1 Bro. C. 0^ 
 395) considered - 21 Ch. D. 332 
 
 See PowEE — Execution. 3. 
 Hind V. Whitmore (2 K. & J. 458) not followed " 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 288 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 10. 
 Hoare v. Osborne (12 W. E. 661; 33 L. J. (Ch.) 
 586) disapproved 22 Ch, D. 238 
 
 See PowEE — Execution. 11. 
 
 v. Bennie (5 H. & N. 19) considered 
 
 [7 ft. B. D 92 
 See Sale of Goods — Rescission. 1. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVBEEULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. cxxix 
 
 Eobhe V. London and South Western Bailviay Com- 
 pany (Law Kep. 10 Q. B. Ill) com- 
 mented upon - - 7 Q. B. D. 591 
 See Damages — Eemoteness. 3. 
 
 V. Aeraman (12 M. & W. 170) com- 
 mented on 6 Q. B. D. 84 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — Pkotected Tbansao- 
 
 TION. 5. 
 Eodsoll V. Baxter (E. B. & E. 88i) followed 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 302 
 
 iSee Practice — Supreme Couet — "Wbit 
 
 SPECIALLY INDOKSED. 2. 
 
 Hoffman v. Posf«7Z(LawEep. 4 Ch. 673) explained 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 29 
 See Pbactice — Sdpkeme Coubt — In- 
 
 TEBBOGATOKIBS. 8. 
 
 Sogg V. Jones (32 Beav. 45) distinguished 
 
 See Will— Heibloom. 1. [24Ch.D. 102 
 
 Sollier V. Bwrne (Law Eep. 16 Eq: 163) followed 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 624 
 See Leasehold — Renewable Lease. 3. 
 
 V. Laurie (3 C. B. 334) discussed 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 873 
 See Practice — Supeeme Coubt — Inter- 
 
 PLEADEB. 12. 
 
 Eolloway v. Cheston (19 Oh. D. 516) not followed 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 131 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Coubt — ^Ap- 
 peal. 21. 
 Holme V. Guy (5 Ch. D. 901) observed upon 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 596 
 See Ohaeity — Commissioners. 1. 
 
 Holmes v. Buclcley (1 Eq. Cas. Ab. 27) discussed 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 750 
 See Covenant — Eunning with Land. 4. 
 
 V. Holmes (1 Bro. 0. C. 555) considered 
 
 [20 Ch. B. 81 
 
 See Settlement — Satisfaction. 
 
 Eolroyd v. Marshall (10 H. L. C. 191) distin- 
 guished - 20 Ch. D. 768 
 See BttL OP Sale — Operation. 2. 
 
 — distin- 
 guished - - 12 ft, B. D. 436 
 See Bill oe Sale — -Eegisteation. 2. 
 
 Home Investment Society, In re (14 Ch. D. 167), 
 considered - - 23 Ch. D. 511 
 
 See Company — Costs. 2. 
 
 fbl- 
 
 - 27 Ch. D. 33 
 
 lowed 
 
 See Company — Costs. 3. 
 
 Eopgood V. Parkin (Law Eep. 11 Bq. 74) ques- 
 tioned 22 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 2. 
 
 EopTtinson v. Bolt (9 H. L. C. 514) followed 
 
 See Banker — Lien. [6 App. Cas. 722 
 
 — •■ followed 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 149 
 See Mortgage — ^Priority. 3. 
 
 Hopper, In re (Law Eep. 2 Q. B. 367) explained 
 and distinguished 15 ft. B. S, 426 
 
 See Arbitration — Submission. 4. 
 
 Hopton V. Dryden (Fieo. in Ch. 179) distinguished 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 764 
 See Executor — Retainer, 6. 
 
 Horhury Bridge Coal, Iron, and Waggon Company, 
 In re (11 Ch. D. 109) considered 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 169 
 See Company — Voluntary Winding-up. 
 1. 
 Hornby, Be (7 W. E, 729) followed 18 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Will — Lapse. 4. 
 Eosliiiis, In re (6 Ch. D. 281) disapproved 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 303 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 25. 
 Houldsworth v. City of Glasgow Bank (5 App. 
 Cas. 317) distinguished 18 Ch. D. 587 
 See Company — Debentures. 2. 
 
 Howe V. Dartmouth {Earl of) (7 Ves. 137) distin- 
 guished - 26 Ch. D. 42 
 See Exeoutob — Administbation, 4. 
 
 Huddersfield, Corporation of, and Jacomb, In re 
 (10 Oh. D. 92) followed 6 ft. B. D. 67 
 See Arbitration — Award. 3. 
 
 Hudson V. Barleer (1 Eobert. 14) followed 
 
 [7 P. D. 102 
 
 See Probate — Execution. 1. 
 
 V. Bevett (5 Bing. 368) distinguished 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 2. 
 
 Hughes v. Fritehard (6 Ch. D. 24) distinguished 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 696 
 See Will — Eesiduary Gift. 1. 
 Humble v. Shore (7 Hare, 247) considered 
 
 [29 Ch. L. 142 
 See Will — Eesiduary Girr. 2. 
 Hunt V. Hunt (4 D. E. & J. 221 ; 31 L. J. (Ch.) 
 161) commented on 8 App. Cas. 420 
 
 See Husband and Wipe— Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 ■ V. Wirnbledon Local Board (4 C. P. D. 48) 
 
 approved - - 8 App. Cas. 617 
 
 See Local Govbbnment — Local Autho- 
 
 BITY. 3. 
 
 Hutaliin v. Mannington (1 Ves. 366) distinguished 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 218 
 See Will— Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 2. 
 Hutchins V. Hutchins (1 Hogan, 315) approved 
 and adopted - - 20 Ch.' D. 733 
 
 See SoLioiTOB — Liabilities. 1. 
 Hutchinson v. Copestake (9 C. B. (N.S,) 863) con- 
 sidered - - - 27 Ch. D. 43 
 See Light — Title. 1. 
 
 . V. Glover (1 Q. B. D. 138) discussed 
 
 [10 ft. B. S. 36 
 See Pkaotior — -Supbeme Coubt — Peo- 
 duction of Documents. 7. 
 Hutchinson and Tenant, In re (8 Ch. D. 540) com- 
 mented on - - 24 Ch. D. 199 
 See Will — Pbecatoby Trust. 2. 
 
 Hutchison v. National Loan Assurance Company 
 (7 Court Sess. Cas. 2nd Series, 471) not 
 approved 9 App. Cas. 671 
 
 See Insurance, Life — Policy. 3. 
 
 Imperial Hydropathic Hotel Company v. Hampson 
 (23 Ch. D. 1) explained 27 Ch. D. 268 
 See Company — Eeducpion or Capital. 
 2. 
 
 i 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVBEEULBD, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. 
 
 Irvine v. Watson (5 Q. B. D. 102) cotisldered 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 623 
 See Pkincipal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 2. 
 Isherwood, Ex parte (22 Ch. D. 384), explained 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 115 
 See Bankeuptot — Disclaimer. 10. 
 
 • , adopted 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 26 
 -Disclaimer. 11. 
 
 See Bankruftoy- 
 
 Islington Marlcet Case (12 M. & W. 20, n. ; 3 CI. 
 & F. 513) considered 25 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Market. 2. 
 
 Izard, Mx parte (23 Ch. D. 115) not followed 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 26 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimeb. 11. 
 
 Jdblochlcoff Electric Light and Power Company, 
 In re (Weekly Notes, 1883, p. 189), dis- 
 tinguished - 28 Ch. D. 65 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 7. 
 
 Jackson, Ex parte (14 Ch. D. 725) discussed 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 442 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 4. 
 
 V. Dover (2 H. & M. 209) followed 
 
 See Will— Class. 6. [21 Ch. D. 806 
 
 v. Litchfield (8 Q. B. D. 474) followed 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Jacques v. Millar (6 Ch. X>. 153) overruled 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 233 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Agree- 
 ment. 1. 
 JaTteman v. Ooolc (4 Ex. D. 26) distinguished 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 464 
 See Bankeuptoy — Composition. 11. 
 
 James v. Bownes (18 Ves. 522) discussed and ex- 
 plained - 25 Ch. D. 778 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 9. 
 
 Jarmain v. Hooper (6 M. & G. 287) distiaguished 
 See Shbkief. 3. [9 ft. B. D. 340 
 
 Jeffries v. Alexander (8 H. L. C. 594) considered 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 166 
 See Charity — Mortmain. 2. 
 
 Jennings v. Hammond (9 Q. B. D. 225) approved 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 663 
 See Company — Unregistered Company. 
 3. 
 
 V. Jordan (6 App. Cas. 698) considered 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 630 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation. 3. 
 
 Jervis v. Lawrence (22 Ch. D. 202) not followed 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 844 
 
 See Charity — Mortmain. 3. 
 
 Jewis V. Lawrence (Law Kep. 8 Eq. 345) ques- 
 tioned 29 Ch. D. 893 
 See Will — Executors. 
 
 Joh V. Jpb (6 Ch. D. 562) followed 
 See Executor — Actions. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 
 
 9. 
 
 757 
 
 Johnson, Ex parte (12 Ch. D. 905) distinguished 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Annulment. 1. 
 
 Johnson v. Chapman (19 C. B. (N.S.) 563 ; 35 
 L. J. (C.P.) 23) commented upon 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 62 
 See Ship — General Average. 1. 
 
 v. Crook (12 Ch. D. 639) approved 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 218, 634 
 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 1, 2. 
 V. Emerson (Law Eep. 6 Ex. 329) com- 
 mented upon - - 11 ft. B. D. 674 
 See Malicious Prosecution. 1. 
 
 Jones V. Green (Law Rep. 5 Eq. 555) considered 
 See Will— Ademption. [22 Ch. D. 622 
 
 V. Jones (7 C. B. (N.S.) 832) overruled 
 
 [8 ft. B. S. 470 
 
 See Peaotice^Suprbme Couet— Costs. 
 40. 
 
 V. Lloyd (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 265) foUowed 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 263 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 3. 
 
 V. Monte Video Gas Company (5 Q. B. D. 
 
 556) explained - - 29 Ch. D. 307 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 6. 
 Joseph V. Lyons (15 Q. B. D. 280) followed 
 
 [15.ft. B. D. 288 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 5. 
 Joys, in the Goods of (4 Sw. & Tr. 214) considered 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 99 
 See Power — Execution. 13. 
 Jupp V. Cooper (5 C. P. D. 26) considered 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 335 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Notice or Motion. 1. 
 
 Kay V. FieU (10 Q. B. D. 241) followed 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 543 
 See Ship — Charterpabty. 9. 
 
 V. Oxley (Law Eep. 10 Q. B. 360) followed 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 616; 26 Ch. D. 434 
 See Way. 1, 2. 
 Kearsley v. Phillips (10 Q. B. D. 465) distin- 
 guished - - 15 ft. B. D. 7 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — ^Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 3. 
 Keighley's Case (10 Eep. 139) followed 
 
 See Sea Wall. [14 ft. B. D. 661 
 
 Kelly, Ex parte (7 Ch. D. 161), explained 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 672 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 2. 
 Kemhle v. Farren (6 Bing. 141) commented on 
 
 See Penalty. [21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 Kendillon v. Malthy (Car. & M. 402 ; 2 M. & B. 
 438) dissented from 11 ft. B. D. 588 
 
 See Defamation— Privilege. 2. 
 
 Kennard v. Kennard (Law Eep. S Oh. 227) ob- 
 served upon - 25 Ch. D. 373 
 See Power — Execution. 4. 
 
 Kennedy v. Broun (13 C. B. (N.S.) 677) com- 
 mented on - 9 App. Cas. 745 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 7. 
 
 V. Green (3 My. & K. 699) distinguished 
 
 [21Ch.D. 685 
 See VENDOR AND Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. oxxxi 
 
 Kensey v. Langham (Gas. t. Tal. 14:3) discussed 
 and reconciled - - 80 Ch. D. 298 
 
 See Advowson. 1. 
 Khedive, The (5 App. Gas. 876) explained 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 25. [9 P, D. 16 
 Kibble v. Gough (38 L. T. (N.S.) 204) followed 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 228 
 See Sale or Goods — Contbact. 3. 
 Kirk V. Bell (16 Q. B. 290) considered 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 681 
 See Company — Director's Atjthokity. 
 3. 
 Kirkman v. Booth (11 Beav. 279) distinguished 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 42 
 See ExECUTOB — Administration. 4. 
 Kitto V. Luke (28 W. R. 411) followed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 465 
 See Practice — Shpeemb Oouet — Costs. 
 27. 
 Knapp V. Williams (4 Ves. 430, n.) followed 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 544 
 See Charity —MoETMAiN. 3. 
 Knight v. Majoribanks (2 Mac. & G. 10) approved 
 
 [7 App. Ca». 307 
 See Colonial Law— Victoria. 2. 
 Knowles v. McAdam (3 Ex. D. 23) disapproved 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 315 
 See Scotch Law — Revenue. 
 Krehl v. Barrett {7 Gh. D. 551) considered 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 578 
 See Light — Obstruction. 2. 
 Jjobowihere v. Dawson (Law Rep. 13 Eq. 322) 
 distinguished - - 19 Ch. S, 365 
 See Goodwill. 2. 
 over- 
 ruled - 27 Ch. D. 145 
 See Goodwill 3. 
 Ladbury, Ex parte (17 Gh. D. 532), explained and 
 distinguished - 22 Ch. D. 384 
 jSee Bankruptcy — Disolaimek. 9. 
 Laing v. Beed (Law Rep. 5 Ch. 8) Lord Hather- 
 ley's dictum disapproved 9 App. Cas. 519 
 ;See Building Society. 9. 
 Lamb v. Walker (3 Q. B. D. 389) overruled 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 125 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 9. 
 Lambe v. Eames (Law Rep. 6 Ch. 597) com- 
 mented on - - 24 Ch. D. 199 
 See Will — Precatory Trust. 2. 
 Landore Siemens Steel Company In re (10 Gh. D. 
 489) not followed 16 Ch. D. 702 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trans- 
 fer. 1. 
 
 Langley v. Hammond (Law Rep. 8 Ex. 161) not 
 followed - 18 Ch. D. 616 
 
 See Way. 1. 
 
 Large's Case (2 Leon. 82 ; 3 Leon. 182) ex- 
 plained - 26 Ch. B. 801 
 See Will — Condition. 2. 
 
 Latham v. Latham (2 Sw. & Tr. 298) overruled 
 
 [8 P. B. 188 
 iSee Practice — Divoeob — Alimony. 1. 
 
 LeMarchantY. Le Marchant (Law Rep. 18 Eq. 
 
 ' 414) commented on - 24 Ch. B. 199 
 
 See Will — Precatory Trust. 2. 
 
 Leehmere & Lloyd, In re (18 Ch. D. 524) considered 
 r [24 Ch. B. 633 
 
 See Will — Contingent Remainder. 
 Leda, The (Swa. 40) followed - 7 P. B. 126 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 8. 
 Leeming, In re (3 D. F. & J. 43) considered 
 
 See Will— Ademption. [22 Ch. B. 622 
 Leigh v. Leigh (] 5 Ves. 92) distinguished 
 
 [19Ch.B. 520 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 5. 
 Lem v. Lovell (14 Ch. D. 234) followed 
 
 [17 Ch. B. 74 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 1. 
 Lewis V. Freke (2 Ves. 507) distinguished 
 
 [23 Ch. B. 472 
 See Settlement — ^Powers. 14. 
 
 V. Trask (21 Ch. D. 862) followed 
 
 [23 Ch. B. 195 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 3. 
 Leyland v. lllingwarth (2 De G. F. & J. 248) dis- 
 tinguished - f9Q. B. B. 616 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Deposit. 
 3. 
 Libra, The (6 P. D. 139) explained 8 P. B. 126 ; 
 See Ship— Navigation 31. [9 P. B. 47 
 Life Association of Scotland v. Foster (11 Court 
 Sess. Cas. 3rd. Series, 351) distinguished 
 [9 App. Gas. 671 
 See Insurance, Lite — ^Policy. 3. 
 Lighifoot Y. Burstall (1 H. & M. 546) considered 
 
 [29 Ch. B. 142 
 See Will — Residuary Gift. 2. 
 Little's Case (8 Ch. D. 806) considered and dis- 
 tinguished - 22 Ch. B. 484 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 36. 
 Littledale, Ex parte. In re Fearse (6 De G. M. & 
 G. 714) discussed - 14 ft. B. B. 424 
 See Company-^Shares — -Transfer. 2. 
 Loane v. Casey (2 W. Bl. 965) followed 30 Ch. B. 
 See Executor— Retainer. 8. [15 
 Lloyd V. Lloyd (Law Rep. 2 Eq. ^22) distin- 
 guished - 30 Ch. B. 623 
 See Settlement — Construction. 6. 
 Loffas V. Maw (3 Giff. 592) disapproved 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 467 
 See Contract — Validity. 4. 
 Lolley's Case (Russ. & Ry. 237) explained 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and Wipe — -Divorce. 
 London and North Western Bailway Company v. 
 Evershed (3 App. Cas. 1029) followed 
 
 [14 ft. B. B. 209 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 2. 
 Longbottom v. Berry (Law Rep. 5 Q. B. 123) 
 approved - 15 ft. B. B. 358 
 
 See Fixtures. 
 Lovat {Lord) v. Duchess of Leeds (2 Dr. & Sm. 62) 
 followed - - 21 Ch. B 105 
 
 See Will — Words. 2. 
 Lowestoft, Yarmouth, and Southwold Tramways- 
 Company (6 Gh. D. 484) followed 
 
 [28 Ch. B. 652 
 See Railway Company — Abandonment. 
 3. 
 
 i 2 
 
cxxxii CASES FOLLOWED, OVEBBULBD, OE SPECLALLY CONSIDEEED. 
 
 Lowndes v. Davies (6 Sim. 468) dissented from 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 29 
 
 See Peaotioe — Stipeeme Codkt — Intek- 
 
 KO.GATORIES. 8. 
 
 Lows V. Telford (1 App. Gas. 414) considered 
 
 See Forcible Entkt. 1. [17 Ch. D. 174 
 
 Lumley v. Gye (2 E. & B. 216 ; 22 L. J. (Q.B.) 
 463) followed - - 6 Q. B. D, 333 
 
 See Master ixm Servant — Eemedies. 
 1. 
 Lynch, Exparie (2 Ch. D. 227) overruled 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 109 
 See Bankrtjptot — Trader. 3. 
 
 McAndrew v. Barker (7 Ch. D. 701) considered 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 484 
 See Practice — Stjpreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 36. 
 
 McCarthy V. JDecaix (Eusa. & My. 614) dissented 
 from 8 App. Cas. 43 
 
 See Husband and WirE — Divorce. 
 
 Macdonald v. Union Bank (2 Court. Sess. Cas. 
 3rd Series, 963) approved 9 App. Cas. 95 
 See Banker — Cheque. 2. 
 
 sidered - - 10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wipe. 
 
 2. 
 McHenry v. Le^ns (22 Ch. D. 397) approved and 
 applied - - - 10 P. D. 141 
 
 See Practice — Admiraltt — Lis Alibi 
 
 Pendens. 2. 
 
 Mcintosh V. Sinclair (Ir. Eep. 11 C. L. 456) con- 
 sidered - - 14 Q. B. D. 616 
 See Ship — Charter? artt. 10. 
 
 Mackay v. Dick (6 App. Cas. 251) followed 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 49 
 See Scotch Law — ^Practice. 8. 
 
 v. followed 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 95 
 See Scotch Law— Bill oe Exchange. 1. 
 
 .. V. Doaglas (Law Eep. 14 Eq. 106), ap- 
 proved and followed 19 Ch. D. 688 
 jSee Bankruptcy — ^VoiD Settlement. 1. 
 
 Mackleay, In re (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 186), com- 
 mented on - - 26 Ch. D. 801 
 
 See Will — Condition. 2. 
 
 McLeod V. Drummond (14 Ves. 353 ; 17 Ves. 152) 
 distinguished - 20 Ch, D. 611 
 
 jSee Vendor and Purchaser— Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 
 McMurray v. Spicer (Law Eep. 5 Eq. 527) con- 
 sidered - - 27 Ch, D, 359 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 3. 
 
 Macnair v. Cathcart(Morx. Diet. 12,832) approved 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 547 
 See Scotch Law — Public Eights. 
 
 Madeline Smith (1857. 2 bving's Justiciary Eep. 
 653) considered - 10 App. Cas. 692 
 ;See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 2. 
 
 ■Maddy v. Hale (3 Ch. D. 327) followed 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 824 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewabi.e Lease. 3. 
 
 Maden v. Taylor (45 L. J. (Ch.) 5G9) approved 
 and followed - - 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Evidence — Presumption. 
 
 Magee v. Lavell (Law Eep. 9 C. P. 107) com- 
 mented on - - 21Ch. D. 243 
 See Penalty. 
 
 Maghee v. McAllister (3 Ir. (Ch.) 604) affirmed 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and Wife— Divorce. 
 
 Mainwaring's Settlement, In re (Law Eep. 2 Eq. 
 487), observed ubon 22 Ch. D. 275 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 94 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 
 5, 10. 
 
 Malcolm v. Charlesworth (1 Keen, 36) approved 
 See Eegistry Acts. [29 Ch. D. 702 
 
 V. Bodgkinson (Law Eep. 8 Q. B. 209) 
 
 followed - 19 Ch. D, 457 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 14. 
 
 Mali Ivo, The (Law Eep. 2 A. & E. 356) con- 
 sidered and distinguished 21 Ch. D. 202 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 6. 
 
 Mammoth Gopperopolis of Utah, In re (50 L. J. 
 (Ch.) 11) distinguished - 21 Ch. D. 149 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 4. 
 
 Manchester, Union Bank of, Ex parte. In re Jack- 
 son (Law Eep. 12 Eq. 354) discussed 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 424 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 2. 
 Mansoii v. Thacher (7 Ch. D. 720) disapproved 
 
 [13 a. B. B, 351 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 Marris v. Ingram (13 Cli. D. 338) distinguished 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 632 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 1. 
 Marshall v. Marshall (5 P. D. 19) approved 
 
 [10 P. D, 188 
 See Practice — Divorce — Separation 
 Deed. 1. 
 V. Smith (Law Eep. 8 C. P. 416) distin- 
 guished - - - 8 Q. B. D. 603 
 See Local Government — Offences. 2. 
 Marson v. Cox CH Ch. D. 147) discussed 
 
 [28 Ch, D, 298 
 See Building Society. 12. 
 Martin v. Mackonochie (Law Eep. 3 P. C. 409) 
 approved - 6 App, Cas, 424 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Moni- 
 tion. 
 V. Martin (Law Eep. 2 Eq. 404) distin- 
 guished - 18 Ch. D. 218 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 2. 
 
 V. Lee (14 Moore, P. C. 142) explained 
 
 [10 App. Cas, 653 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 
 V, Sedgwich (9 Beav. 333) dissented from 
 
 [14 Q. B, S. 424 
 See Company— Shares— Transfer, 2. 
 Mathews v, Paul (3 Sw. 328) observed upon 
 
 [26 Ch, B, 382 
 See Settlement— Ccnstruction. 3. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEKEULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. cxxxiii 
 
 Maude v. BaiUon Local Board (10 Q. B. D. 393) 
 questioned 13 Q, B. D. 184 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 10. 
 
 MayJiery v. Mansfield (9 Q. B. D. 754) followed 
 See Shebiff. 2. [6 Q B. D. 171 
 
 Maijer v. Murray (8 Ch. X). 424) folio-wed 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 757 
 See ExEOUTOB — Actions. 9. 
 
 Megson v. Sindle (15 Ch. D. 198) distinguished 
 See Will— Childken. 2. [30 Ch. D. 110 
 
 Mellor V. Denliam (5 Q. B. D. 467) followed 
 
 [7 a. B. D. 634 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 8. 
 Melloi-'s Policy Trusts, In re (6 Ch. D. 127 ; 7 Ch. 
 T>. 200), not followed - 23 Ch. D. 525 
 See Husband and Wife — Mabeied 
 Women's Phopeett Acts. 5. 
 
 Mercers' Company, Ex parte (10 Ch. D. 481), fol- 
 lowed - 24 Ch. D. 669 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Oodet — Costs. 
 24. 
 
 Merchants' Company, In re (Law Eep. 4 Eq. 454) 
 discussed - - 25 Ch. D. 400 
 
 See Company — Eyidencb. 4. 
 
 Merritt, In the Goods of (1 Sw. & Tr. 112) con- 
 sidered - - 20 Ch. D. 99 
 See PowEE — Execution. 13. 
 
 Mersey Docks Trustees v. O^ths (Law Eep. 1 H. L. 
 
 93) approved - 9 App. Cas. 418 
 
 ' See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 1. 
 
 Metropolitan Asylum District (Managers of) v. 
 Hill (6 App. Cas. 193) discussed 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 423 
 
 See Nuisance — ^Definition. 2. 
 
 Metropolitan Board of Works v. London and North 
 Western Bailway Company (17 Ch. D. 
 246) considered - - 22 Ch. D. 221 
 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 4. 
 
 V. McCarthy (Law 
 
 Eep. 7 H. L. 243) held undistinguish- 
 able 7 App. Cas. 259 
 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 4. 
 
 Mette's Estate, In re (Law Eep. 7 Eq. 72) ap- 
 proved - - 28 Ch. D. 628 
 See Settled Land Act — Puechase- 
 
 MONEY. 2. 
 Meux's Executors' Case (2 D. M. & G. 522) dis- 
 tinguished 22 Ch. D. 593 
 See Evidence — Geneeal. 4. 
 
 MeyricVs Charity, In re (1 Jur. (N.S.) 438) fol- 
 lowed - 18 Ch. D. 596 
 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 1. 
 
 Middleton v. Beay CI Hare, 106) distingruished 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 134 
 See Teustee — Powers. 1. 
 Miller v. Sawyer (American — 30 Vermont, 412) 
 followed - 17 Ch. D. 826 
 
 See Principal and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 3. 
 Milllown (Lord) v. Stuart (8 Sim. 34) considered 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 84 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 6. 
 
 MUroy v. Lmd (4 D. F. & J. 264) followed 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 416 
 
 ;8ee Voluntary Conveyance. 1. 
 
 Milward, Ex pwrte (16 Oh. D. 256) explained and 
 followed 16Ch. D. 641 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Liquidation. 3. 
 
 Miner v. Oilmour (12 Moore's Ind. Ap. Cas. 131) 
 approved - - 10 App. Cas. 336 
 
 See Colonial Law — Cape of Good 
 Hope. 4. 
 
 Molyneux' Estate, In re (I. E. 6 Eq. 411) dis- 
 cussed - 23 Ch. D. 712 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 7. 
 
 Montagu v. Lord Inchiquin (23 W. E. 592) dis- 
 cussed 26 Ch. D. 538 
 See Will — Heirloom. 3. 
 
 Moore v. Moore (29 Beav. 496) distinguished 
 
 See Will— Words. 9. [30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 Morland v. Cook (Law Eep. 6 Eq 252) explained 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 750 
 See Covenant— EuNNiNG with Land. 
 4. 
 Morton v. Woods (Law Eep. 3 Q. B. 658 ; 4 Q. B. 
 293) explained and followed 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 226, 274 
 See Bankeuptoy — Disteess. 2, 3. 
 
 Mudford's Claim (14 Ch. D. 634) followed 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 687 
 
 See Company — DebentuSes. 2. 
 
 Mullins V. Collins (Law Eep. 9 Q. B. 292> 
 discussed 12 Q. B. D. 360 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 4. 
 
 Mundy v. Howe (Earl) (4 Bro. C. C. 224) com- 
 mented on - 22 Ch. D. 621 
 See Settlement — Powers. 5. 
 Murphy, In re (2 Q. B. D. 397) discussed 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 388 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 Fees. 1. 
 Murray v. Walter (Cr. & Ph. 114) distinguished 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. r 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 3. 
 
 ■ followed 
 
 [10 Q,. B. S. 465 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Pro- 
 duction of Documents. 7. 
 Mutton, Ex parte (Law Eep. 14 Eq. 178), not fol- 
 lowed - - 16 Ch. D. 668 
 See Bill of Sale — Appaeent Posses- 
 sion. 2. 
 Mutual Society, In re (24 Oh. D. 425, n.) distin- 
 guished - - 28 Ch. D. 559 
 See Company — Disteibution of Assets, 
 3. 
 Nanson v. Gordon (1 App. Cas. 195) followed 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 620 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoof. 18. 
 Nash, In re (16 Ch. D. 503) not followed 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Oedees. 8. 
 
 National Funds Assurance Company, In re (10 
 
 Ch. D. 118) considered 21 Ch. D. 619 
 
 See Company — Directoe's Liability. 5. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVERKULED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 National Mercantile Sanli, Ex parte (15 Ch. D. 
 
 42) considered 16 Ch. D. 35 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 98, 419 
 
 See Bill osp Salk — Formalities. 18, 20, 
 
 21. 
 
 New Callao, In re (22 Ch. D. 484) approved 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 488 
 See Phaotiob — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 37. 
 Newman, In re (4 Ch. D. 724) commented on 
 
 See Penalty. [21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 Newton v. Chorlton (10 Hare, 646) followed 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 615 
 See Principal and Surety — Indemnity. 
 2. 
 V. Harland (1 Scott, N. E. 474) consi- 
 dered - 17 Ch. D. 174 
 See Forcible Entry. 1. 
 
 Niboyet v, Niboyet (4 P. D. 1) considered 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and Wife — Divobcb. 
 
 Nicholls, Ex parte (22 Ch. D. 782), distinguished 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 310 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 10. 
 
 Nicklin V. Williams (10 Ex. 259) discussed 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 125 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 2 
 
 Norris v. Norris, Lawson and Mason (4 Sw. & Tr. 
 237; 30 L. J. (P. & M.) Ill) distin- 
 guished 10 P. D. 174 
 See Practice — Divorce — Condonation. 
 2. 
 
 Northam v. Burley (1 E. & B. 665) distinguished 
 See Watercourse. 1. [23 Ch. D. 566 
 
 Northfield Iron and Steel Company, In re (14 
 L. T. (N.S.) 695) distinguished 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 470 
 See Bankruptcy — Jurisdiction. 5. 
 
 Norton v. London and North Westei-n Railway 
 Company (9 Ch. D. 623) considered 
 See Light— Title. 3. [24 Ch. D. 1 
 
 Nunn V. Fahian (Law Rep. 1 Ch. 35) considered 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 148 
 
 See Frauds, Statute of. 2. 
 
 'Oliver v. Oliver (10 Ch. D. 765) considered 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 778 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 1. 
 Omichnnd v. Sarker (1 Atykns, 21 ; Willes, 538) 
 followed and applied 14 Q. B. D. 667 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. 
 
 Oram v. Brearey (2 Ex. D. 346) overruled 
 
 See Prohibition. [14 Q. B. D. 865 
 
 Original Hartlepool Collieries Company v. Gibbs 
 (5 Ch. D. 713) not followed 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 174 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 4. 
 
 Fadstow Total Loss and Collision Insurance Asso- 
 ciation (20 Ch. D. 137) followed 
 
 [11 Q, B. D. 563 
 
 See Company — Unregistered Company. 
 3. 
 
 Palmer v. Jones (43 L. J. (Ch.) 349) followed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 465 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 27. 
 
 V. Temple (9 Ad. & E. 508) distinguished 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 89 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Deposit. 
 2. 
 Parana, The (2 P. D. 118) approved 9 P. D. 105 
 See Damages— Remotent:ss. 1. 
 
 Parnaby v. Lancaster Canal Company (11 Ad. & 
 E. 223) approved - 9 App. Cas. 418 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 1. 
 
 Parfs Case (Law Eep. 10 Eq. 622) not followed 
 See Company— Costs. 4. [18 Ch. D. 530 
 
 Paterson, Ex parte (11 Ch. D. 908) followed and 
 approved 22 Ch. D. 410 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Disclaimer. 3. 
 
 (1 Rose, 402) followed 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 394 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Trader. 2. 
 
 Patscheider v. Great Western Railway Company 
 (3 Ex. D. 153) distinguished 
 
 [14 Q. B. 0. 228 
 
 See Railway Company — Passenger's 
 Luggage. 
 
 Paul v. Paul (15 Ch. D. 580) not followed 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 742 
 
 See Settlement — Revocation. 2. 
 
 Pawsey v. Armstrong (18 Ch. D. 698) questioned 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 460 
 See Partnership — Contract. 4. 
 
 Peacock v. Burt (4 L. J (N.S.) (Ch.) 33) not 
 extended - - - 29 Ch. B. 954 
 
 See Mortgage — Redemption. 5. 
 
 Pease v. Jackson (Law Kep. 3 Ch. 576) discussed 
 
 [28 Ch. S. 298 
 See Building Society. 12. 
 
 . discussed 
 
 [12 Q. B. S. 423 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 2. 
 
 Penysyflog Mining Company, Re (30 L. T. S61) 
 considered - 19 Ch. D. 118 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 2. 
 
 Percival, Ex parte (Law Eep. 6 Eq. 519), con- 
 sidered - - 23 Ch. D. 511 
 
 See Company — Costs. 2. 
 
 Perry-Berrick v. Attimod (25 Befl v. 205 ; 2 De G. 
 & J. 21) explained and followed 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 124 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 6. 
 
 Philipps V. Fhilipps (4 Q. B. D. 127) followed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 778 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coukt — Strik- 
 ing out Pleadings. 1. 
 
 Pike V. Fitzgibbon (17 Ch. D. 454) followed 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 631 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 2. 
 
 Pirn V. Curell (6 M. & W. 234) discussed 
 
 See Fishery. 1. [8 App. Cas. 135 
 
 Pinnel's Case (5 Rep. 117 a) followed 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 605 
 See Accord and Satisfaction. 2. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEtlLED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. «xxv. 
 
 Finney v. Himt (6 CIi. D. 98) followed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 656 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Ooubt — Jubis- 
 
 DIOTION. 1. 
 Pitt V. Fitt (4 Maoq. 657) discussed 8 App. Caa. 
 See Husband and Wife — Divoece. [43 
 Poeock's Poliey, In re (Law Eep. 6 Ch. 445) ob- 
 served upon - - 29 Ch. D. 635 
 See Tkcstee — Liabilities. 10. 
 Fallen v. Brewer (7 C. B. (N.S.) 371) considered 
 See Forcible Entet. 1. [17 Ch. D. 174 
 Fontifex v. Foord (12 Q. B. D. 152) followed 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 161 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Coubt — Thied 
 Pabtt. 5. 
 Pool V. Sacheverel (1 P. Wms. 675) questioned 
 
 See Contempt oe Court. [17 Ch. D. 49 
 
 Popple V. Sylvester (22 Ch. D. 98) distinguished 
 See Judgment. 3. [25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 Portpatricle Bailviay Company v. Caledonian 
 Railway Company (3 Nev. & Mac. 189) 
 disapproved 17 Ch, D. 493 
 
 See Eailwat Company — Eailways Ee- 
 GULATioN Acts. 1. 
 Potter's Trusts, In re (Law Eep. 8 Eq. 52) fol- 
 lowed - 17 Ch. D. 788 
 See Will — Substitutional Gift. 2. 
 Fowell's Trusts, In re (39 L. J. (Ch.) 188) dis- 
 cussed and not followed 29 Ch. D. 621 
 See PowEE — Execution. 12. 
 Foioell Duffryn Steam Coal Company v. Taff Vale 
 MaUway Company (Law Eep. 9 Cli. 331) 
 , distinguished 28 Ch. D. 190 
 See Eailwav Company — Eailway 
 Clauses Act. 1. 
 Fowles V. Hargreaves (3 D. M. & G. 453) con- 
 sidered - 7 App. Cas. 366 
 jSee Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange. 3. 
 
 V. Sider (6 E. & B. 207) considered 
 
 [8 Q. B. 7) 104 
 See Negligence — Liability. 1. 
 Preston v. Melvill (2 Eob. App. 107) explained 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 453 
 See Scotch Law — Jurisdiction. 
 Friee v. Carver (3 My. & Cr. 157) followed 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 158 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosube. 8. 
 
 V. Jenkins (5 Ch. D. 619) distinguished 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 74 
 See Fraudulent Conveyance. 2. 
 FHnce V. Lewis (5 B. & C. 363) considered 
 
 See Market. 2. [25 Ch. D. 511 
 
 Prince of Saxe Colurg, The (3 Moo. P. C. 1), ex- 
 plained - 9 P. D. 177 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 2. 
 Printing and Numerical Registering Company, In 
 re (8 Ch. D. 535) overruled 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 337 
 See Company — Secured Creditor. 1. 
 ^tiarman v. Burnett (6 M. & W. 499) followed 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 890 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 1. 
 Bdbone & Co., In re (Seb. Dig. 395) followed 
 
 [28 Ch. S. 666 
 See Tbade-maek — Eegistkation. 9. 
 
 Railway Steel and Plant Company, Ex parte. In 
 re Taylor (8 Ch. D. 183) doubted 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 442 
 
 See Company — Injunction. 1. 
 
 Rakestraw v. Bruyer (Select Cas. in Ch. 55); 
 Mosely, 189) considered 17 Ch. D. 104 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Ebalty. 
 
 7. 
 
 Bam Sabuk Bose v. Monomdhini Dossee (Law Eep. 
 2 lud. Ap. 81) approved 7 App. Cas. 321 
 See Peactice — Privy Council — Leave 
 TO Appeal. 5. 
 
 Ramsden v. Dyson (Law Eep. 1 H. L. 129) ap- 
 proved - - 9 App. Cas. 699 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 2. 
 
 Rartdall v. Russell (3 Mer. 190) considered 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 673 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 2. 
 
 RanelaugTi {Lord) v. Hayes (1 Vem. 189) not fol- 
 lowed - 22 Ch. D. 661 
 See Teustee — Indemnity. 3. 
 
 Ransome v. Burgess (Law Eep. 3 Bq. 773) disap- 
 approved - - 22 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See Settlement — Powebs. 5. 
 Ray V. Ray (G. Coop. 264) distinguished 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 93 
 See ExECUTOE — Administbation. 3. 
 Read v. Anderson (13 Q. B. D. 779) followed 
 
 [14 Q, B. D. 460 
 See Peincipal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 4. 
 
 distinguished 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 467 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Peincipal's 
 Liability. 5. 
 Redondo v. Cliaytor (4 Q. B. D. 453) followed 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 232 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Se- 
 curity FOR Costs. 7. 
 
 V. Whitmore (4 De G. J. & S. 1 ; 33 L. J- 
 (Ch.') 63) distinguished 12 Q. B. D. 436 
 See Bill of Sale^Eegistration. 2. 
 
 Beg. V. Boyes (1 B. & S. 311) followed 
 See Evidence — Witness. 2. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 
 
 [294 
 
 V. Brampton Union (3 Q. B. D. 479) followed 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 31 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 15. 
 
 V. Diclcen (14 Cox, C. C. 8) followed 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 74 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women. 
 
 V. B'Oyley (12 Ad. & E. 139) followed 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 159 
 See Company — ^Voluntary Winding-up. 
 1. 
 
 V. Gibion (6 Q. B. D. 168) disapproved 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 383 
 See Justices — Disqualification. 4. 
 
 V. Guardians of North Aylesford (37 J. P. 
 
 148) explained ■ - 6 Q. B. D. 139 
 
 See Poor-rate — Eateable Value. 2. 
 
 V. Lewis (9 C. & P. 523) doubted 10 ft. B. L. 
 
 [381 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Peeson. 4. 
 
CXXXVl 
 
 CASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 Beg. V. M'Gratli fLaw Rep. 1 C. C. R. 205) fol- 
 lowed - 8 Q. B. D. 185 
 See Criminal Law — LAiirENY. 3. 
 
 ■ V, Maidstone Union (5 Q. B. D. 31) distin- 
 guished - 9 Q. B. D. 622 
 See PooK-LAW — Settlbmekt. 8. 
 
 • T. Fercij (Law Rep. 9 Q. B. 64) not followed 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 474 
 See Justices — Pkaotice. 3. 
 
 V. Price (Law Rep. 6 Q. B. 411) overruled 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 575 
 .See Parliament — Election Commis- 
 sioners. 
 
 V. St. George (9 C.& P. 483) doubted 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 381 
 See Criminal Law — Offences agaikst 
 Person. 4. ' 
 
 Beuss (^Frineess of) v. Bos (Law Rep 5 H. L. 176) 
 discussed and distinguished 21 Ch.. S. 
 
 [209 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 1. 
 
 Bex T. Commissioners of Sewers for Somerset 
 (8 T. R. 312) followed 14 Q. B. D. 561 
 See Sea Wall. 
 
 V. Lords Commissioners of Treasury 'i A. & E 
 
 286) disapproved 12 Q. B. D. 461 
 
 See Mandamus. 2. 
 
 V. Smith (1 Phil. & Am. on Evidence, 118) 
 
 overruled - - 14 ft. B. D. 153 
 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 
 BeynoUs v. Wheeler (10 C. B. (N.S.) 561) ap- 
 proved - 8 App. Cas. 733 
 See Bill of Exchange — Liability of 
 Parties. 
 
 Bhodes v. Bate (Law Rep. 1 Ch. 252) commented 
 on - - - 8 Q. B. D. 687 
 
 See Gift. 
 
 Bichards & Co,, In re (11 Ch. D. 676) approved 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 337 
 See Company — Secured Creditor. 1. 
 
 . doubted 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 442 
 See Company — Injunction. 1. 
 
 V. James (Law Rep. 2 Q. B. 285) 
 
 doubted - - 21 Ch. D. 610 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Registration. 8. 
 
 (Law Rep. 2 Q. B. 285) dis- 
 tinguished 23 Ch. D. 254 
 jSee Bill of Sale — Registration. 11. 
 
 Biclcard v. Jfooi-e (38 L. T. (N.S.) 841) discussed 
 
 [15 Q, B. D. 228 
 See Sale of Goods — -Contract. 3. 
 
 Biclcet V. Metropolitan Bailway Company (Law 
 Rep. 7 H. L. 175) examined 7 App. Cas. 
 
 [259 
 See Scotch Law — Railway Company. 4. 
 V. Garnett (3 De G. & Sm. 629) distin- 
 guished - 17 Ch. D. 211 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 3. 
 
 Bipon (Earl o/) v. Hohart (3 My. & K. 169) dis- 
 cussed - - 28 Ch, D. 688 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 1 
 V. Bawding (Ambl, 665) commented 
 upon - - 13 Q. B. D. 147 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 
 TATE. 1. 
 
 Biley 
 
 Bishton v. CoTjb (5 My. & Cr. 145) doubted 
 
 See Will— Condition. 11. [25 Ch. D. 685 
 Bdbertson v. Howard (3 C. P. D. 280) disapproved 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 616 
 
 iSee Practice — Supreme Court — Writ 
 
 SPECIALLY indorsed. 1. 
 
 V. Norris (1 Giff. 421) observed upon 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 220 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 5. 
 
 (1 Giff. 421) disapproved 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 857 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 2. 
 
 V. Bobertson (6 P. D. 119) referred to 
 
 [7 P. D. 84 
 See Practice — Divorce — Costs. 2. 
 Bdbey & Co.'s Perseverance Ironworks Company v. 
 Oilier (Law Rep. 7 Cli. 695) approved 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 813 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Securities pok. 
 
 4. 
 
 Bobinson v. Shepherd (4 D. J. & S. 129) approved 
 
 See Will— Class. 1. [24 Ch. D. 664 
 
 — V. Trevor (12 Q. B. D. 423) considered 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 298, 39S 
 See Building Society. 12, 13. 
 Bochdale Canal Company v. King (2 Sim. (N.S.) 
 78) distinguished - 20 Ch. D. 689 
 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 2. 
 Bodrigues v. Melhuish (10 Ex. 110) followed 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 6. [7 P. D. 217 
 Bosenthal, Ex parte (20 Ch. D. 315) considered 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 701 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 7. 
 Botlischild V. Comey (9 B. & C. 388) considered 
 and distinguished 8 Q. B. D. 288 
 
 jSee Bansee — Cheque. 1. 
 Bourke v. Wliite Moss Colliery Company (1 0. P. 
 D. 556) explained 28 Ch. D. 482 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Security for Costs. 12. 
 
 (2 C. P. 
 
 D. 205) distinguished 14 Q. B. D. 890 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 1. 
 Bow V. Bow (Law Rep. 7 Eq. 414) distinguished 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 159 
 See Executor — Actions. 12. 
 Bowbotham v. Wilson (8 H. L. C. 348) considered 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 833 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 2. 
 Boyce v. Charlton (S Q. B. D. 1) overruled 
 
 See Apprentice. 2. [9 Q. B. B. 636 
 Bussell, Ex parte (Law Rep. 10 Ch. 255) distin- 
 guished - 16 Ch. D. 655 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquidation. 9. 
 
 V. Jackson (9 Hare, 387) approved 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 153 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 
 V. Big. (7 App. Cas. 829) explained and 
 
 approved 9 App. Cas, 117 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Onta- 
 rio. 2. 
 Euston V. Tobin (10 Ch. D. 55S) commented on 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 365 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 4. 
 
OASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEULED, OE SPECLiLLY COI^SIDEEED. cxxxvii 
 
 Byder v. Wombwell (Law Eep. 3 Ex. 90) dis- 
 sented from - - 13 ft. B. D. 410 
 
 See Infant — Conteacts. 3. 
 
 Bylands v. Fletclier (Law Eep. 3 H. L. 330) fol- 
 lowed - 27 Ch. D. 588 
 See Wateb. 2. 
 
 ■ ap- 
 
 plied 
 
 See Meteopolis- 
 
 7 a. B. S. 418 
 
 -Management Acts. 4. 
 
 St. Albans, Bishop of, v. BatUrsby (3 Q. B. D. 359) 
 approved - 16 Ch, D. 645 
 
 See Landlokd and Tenant — Lease. 6. 
 
 St. Thomas^ Dock Company, In re (2 Ch. D. 116) 
 followed - - 21 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Okdbb. 16. 
 
 Salvin v. North Brancepeth Coal Company (Law 
 Rep. 9 Ch. 705) discussed 28 Ch. D. 688 
 See Noisanoe — Eemedies. 1. 
 
 Sampson v. Soddinott (1 C. B. (K.S.) 590) dis- 
 tinguished - 23 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Watercourse. 1. 
 
 Sanderson v. Geddes (1 Court Sess. Cas. (4th 
 Series) 1198) approved 7 App. Cas 547 
 See Scotch Law — Public Eights. 
 
 Sandon v. Hooper (6 Beav. 246 ; 14 L. J. (Ch.) 
 120) commented on - 21 Ch. D. 469 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 8. 
 
 Sargent, Ex parte (Law Eep. 17 Eq. 273) con- 
 sidered - 26 Ch. D. 257 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 1. 
 
 Saunders, JEx parte (11 Q. B. D. 191) followed 
 
 [13 Q, B. D. 681 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 12. 
 
 Saunders v. Crawford (9 Q. B. D. 612) not fol- 
 lowed - - - 10 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 Attendance. 2. 
 
 V. Jones (7 Ch. D. 438) explained and 
 
 discussed - - 16 Ch. D. 93 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Inter- 
 rogatories. 9. 
 
 V. Bichardson (7 Q. B. D. 388) approved 
 
 [12 Q. B. S. 578 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 Pees. 2. 
 
 T. South Eastern Bailway Co. (5 Q. B. D. 
 
 456) followed - - 7 Q. B. D. 32 
 
 See Eailway CoMPAirr — By-laws. 
 
 Schomberg, Ex parte (Law Eep. 10 Ch. 172) ap- 
 proved and followed - 20 Ch. D. 697 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 1. 
 
 Schulte, Ex parte (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 409) followed 
 [18 Ch. D, 137 ; 13 ft. B. D. 727 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Protected Trans- 
 action. 4, 7. 
 
 Seott V. Cumberland (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 578) dis- 
 tinguished 28 Ch. D. 159 
 See Executor — Actions. 12. 
 
 Selmes v. Judge (Law Rep. 6 Q. B. 724) followed 
 
 [lift. B.S. 788 
 See Local Governmfnt — Practice. 4. 
 
 Seidell, Ex parte (13 Ch. D. 266) explained 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 312 
 See Bankhuptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 18. 
 Seymour v. Bridge (14 Q. B. D. 460) distinguished 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 467 
 Bee Principal and Agent — Principals 
 Liability. 5. 
 Shaftoe's Charity, In re (3 App. Cas. 872) ap- 
 proved - - - 7 App. Cas, 91 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 3. 
 Shapcott V. Chappell (12 Q. B. D. 58) questioned 
 
 [13 ft, B, D. 403 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Appeal. 7. 
 Sharpe v. Birch (8 Q. B. D. Ill) followed 
 
 [9 ft. B. S. 13» 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 3. 
 Shaw, In re (49 L. J. (Ch.) 213) not followed 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 362 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 3. 
 Sibree v. Tripp (15 M. & W. 23) observed upon 
 
 [9 ft, B. D. 37 
 See Accord and Satisfaction. 1. 
 
 Silcock V. Farmer (46 L. T. (N.S.) 404) com- 
 mented upon - 22 Ch, S. 410 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 3. 
 
 Simphin v. Justices of Birmingham (Law Eep. 
 7 Q. B. 482) followed - 7 ft. B, D. 238 
 See Inn — Licence. 2. 
 
 Simpson v. Smith (Law Eep. 6 C. P. 87) over- 
 ruled - - - 10 App. Cas. 229 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 2. 
 
 Slade v. Fooks (9 Sim. 386) followed 19 Ch. D. 201 
 See Will — Words. 6. 
 
 Smethurst v. Mitchell (28 L. J. (Q.B.) 241) con- 
 sidered 9 ft. B. B. 623 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 2. 
 
 Smith, In re (6 Ch. D. 692) followed 20 Ch. D. 538 
 See Executor — Actions. 8. 
 
 V. Butcher (10 Ch. D. 113) distinguished 
 
 See Will— Words. 10. [25 Ch. D. 212 
 
 V. Davies (28 Ch. D. 650) questioned 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 827 
 See Pbacttce -Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 8 
 
 ■ V. Day (21 Ch. D. 421) dictum of Jessel, 
 
 M.E., dissented from - 27 Ch. D. 474 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 9. 
 
 V. Lucas (18 Ch. D. 531) dissented from 
 
 See Election. 6. [28 Ch. D, 124 
 
 followed 
 
 [22 Ch, D. 263 
 See Settlement — Future Peoperi'Y. 3. 
 
 V. Morgan (5 C. P. D. 337) approved and 
 
 followed - 20 Ch. D. 645 
 
 See ExECDTOR — Actions. 20. 
 
 — v. Smith (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 500) considered 
 
 [26 Ch. D, 878 
 See Light — Obstruction. 2. 
 of Practical Knowledge v. Abbott (2 Beav. 
 559) distinguished 17 Ch. D. 467 
 
 See Company — Dibectok's Liability. 2. 
 
cxxxviii CASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. 
 
 Solway Bailway Company v. Jaclcson (1 Court 
 Sess. Gas. 4th Series, 831) affirmed 
 
 [8 App, Cas, 265 
 See Scotch Law — Bail wax Company. 5. 
 
 Sottomaior, In re (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 677) dissented 
 from - - - 30 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Lunatic — Inquisition. 3. 
 
 Spalding v. Muding (6 Beav. 376; 12 L..T. (Ch.) 
 503) followed - - 7 App. Cas. 573 
 
 See Sale of Goods — Lien. 1. 
 
 Sparrow v. Farmer (28 L. J. (Ch.) .537) distin- 
 guished - - 26 Ch. D 273 
 
 See Building Society. 4. 
 
 Speight, In re (13 Q. B. D. 42) followed 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 123 
 
 See Bankkuptcy — Appeal. 12. 
 
 not followed 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 338 
 See Bankbuptct — Appeal. 13. 
 
 • Speller v. Bristol Steam Navigation Company (18 
 Q. B. D. 96) distinguished 29 Ch D, 344 
 See Pkactioe— Supkeme Coukt — Third 
 Paety. 7. 
 
 Staff, Ex parte (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 775) approved 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 670 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 6. 
 
 distinguished 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 655 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 9. 
 Stains v. Banks (9 Jur. (N.S.) 104:9) ; reversed on 
 appeal, Eeg. Lib, 7 B., 1863, 1761) con- 
 sidered - - 16 Ch. D. 53 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 3. 
 
 Stanford v. Roberts (26 Ch. D. 155) approved 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 28 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 22. 
 
 StanJwpe's Trusts, Be (27 Beav. 2U1), followed 
 
 See Will— Class. 5. [25 Ch. D. 162 
 
 Steele v. McKinlay (5 App. Cas. 754) distin- 
 guished - 8 App, Cas. 733 
 See Bill op Exchange — Liability op 
 Parties. 
 
 Stelfox V. Sugden (1 Joh. 234) considered. 
 
 See Will— Annuity. 1. [17 Ch, D, 167 
 Sierndale v. Hanldnson (1 Sim. 393) observed 
 
 upon - - 18 Ch, D, 561 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 4. 
 Stevens v. Midland Bailway Company (10 Ex. 
 
 352) not followed 6 Q, B, D. 287 
 
 See Corporation. 1. 
 Stevenson v. Lamhard (2 East, 576) considered 
 
 [10 Q, B, D, 48 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment, 2, 
 Stewart, Ex parte, In re Shelley (4 De G. J. & S. 
 
 543) discussed - - 14 Q. B. D. 424 
 
 See Company — Shares— Transfer. 2. 
 
 V. Jones (3 De G. & J. 532) followed 
 
 See Will— Lapse. 9. [27 Ch. D. 346 
 
 Stocltdale v. Hansard (9 Ad. & E. 1) commented 
 upon and approved 12 Q, B, D. 271 
 
 See Parliament — Procedure. 
 
 Stockport Waterworks Company v. Potter (3 H. & 
 C. 300) approved - 11 Q. B. D. 155 
 See Watercourse. 2. 
 
 Stockton Iron Furnace Company, In re (10 Ch. D. 
 335) discussed 21 Ch. S. 442 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 4. 
 
 Stokes Bay Bailway Company v. London and South 
 
 Western Bailway Company (2 Nev. & 
 
 Mac. 143) disapproved - 17 Ch. D. 493 
 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways Ee- 
 
 gulation Acts. 1. 
 
 Stringer's Case (Law Eep. 4 Ch. 475) distin- 
 guished - 21 Ch. D. 149 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 4. 
 
 Stuart V. CockereU (Law Eep. 5 Ch. 713) distin- 
 guished - - 28 Ch. S, 436 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 1. 
 
 Studd V. Cook (8 App. Cas. 577) discussed 
 
 See Probate— Grant. 4. [26 Ch. D. 656 
 Sturgis v. Corp (13 Yes. 190) discussed 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 712 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 7. 
 SufeU V. Bank of England (9 Q. B. D. 555) fol- 
 lowed - 11 Q. B, D. 84 
 See Bell of Exchange— Alteration. 3. 
 Sullivan v. Pearsmi. Ex parte Morrison (Law 
 Eep. 4 Q. B. 153) approved 8 P. D. 144 
 See Practice— Admiralty — Costs. 4. 
 Sutton V. Sutton (22 Ch. D. 511) followed 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 579 
 See Limitations, Statote of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 9. 
 
 V. — — distinguished 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 291 
 See Limitations, Statute of — ^Personal 
 Actions. 10. 
 Swan v. Swan (8 Price, 518) commented on 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 552 
 See Insurance, Life — Assignment. 
 Swinhanki, Ex parte (11 Ch. D. 525) distinguished 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 249 
 See Solicitor — Authority. 
 Swindon Waterworks Company v. Wilts and Berks 
 Navigation Company (Law Eep. 7 H. L. 
 697) considered - - 24 Ch. D, 1 
 
 See Light — Title. 3. 
 Talhot v. Marshfield (2 Dr. & Sm. 549) followed 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 609 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 27. 
 Tapling v. Jones (12 C. B. (N.S.) 826 ; 11 H. L. C. 
 290) considered - - 27 Ch. D. 48 
 
 See Light — Title. 1. 
 Tassell v. Smith (2 De G. & J. 713 ; 27 L. J. (Ch.) 
 694) overruled 6 App. Cas. 698 
 
 See Mortgage— Consolidation. 2. 
 Taunton v. Boyal Insurance Company (2 H. & M. 
 135) distinguished - 23 Ch. D, 664 
 See Company — Management. 2. 
 Taijlor V. Gillott (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 682) com- 
 mented upon 7 Q. B. D. 624 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 17. 
 
 v. Meltliam. Local Board (47 L. J. (C.P.) 
 
 12) distinguished 11 Q. B. D. 286 
 
 See Local Government — Practice. 3 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVERRULED, OR SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. cxxxix 
 
 Taylor v. Taylor (Law Rep. 20 Eq. 155) dissented 
 from - - - 29 Ch, D. 260 
 
 See Advancement. 1. 
 
 Templer'$ TruMs, In re (4 N. R. 494) considered 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 359 
 See Teustee_Acts — Vesting Okdbrs. 3. 
 
 Terrell, Ex parte (4 Ch. D. 293) distinguished 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 773 
 See Bankktjptct — Cohposition. 5. 
 
 ThamesSaven Sock and Sailway Company v. 
 Base (4 Man. & G. 552) considered 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 681 
 
 See Company — Dibectok's Authority. 
 
 3. 
 
 Tharp, In re (2 Sim. & Giff. 578, n.), commented 
 
 on - 23 Ch. D. 552 
 
 See Insubance, Life — Assignment. 1. 
 
 Thomas v. Daw (Law Eep. 2 Ch. 1) considered 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 486 
 See London — Commissioners of Seweks. 
 
 Thompson v. Waterlow (Law Rep. 6 Eq. 36) not 
 followed - 18 Ch. D. 616 
 
 See Wat. 1. 
 
 Thracian, The (3 A. & E. 504), not followed 
 
 [10 P. D. 1 
 See Practice — ^Admiealtt — Costs. 8. 
 
 Tinker, Ex parte (Law Rep. 9 Ch. 716) distin- 
 guished - 19 Ch D. 140 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquidation. 5. 
 
 Todd, Ex parte (3 Q. B. D. 407) overruled 
 
 See Inn— Licence. 6. [11 Q. B. D. 638 
 
 Tooth V. EaUett (Law Rep. 4 Ch. 242) distin- 
 guished - 14 Q. B, D. 310 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 10. 
 
 Touche V. Metropolitan Bailway Warehousing 
 Company (Law Eep. 6 Oh. 671) con- 
 sidered - 30 Ch. D. 67 
 ;See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 2. 
 Trams v. HUngmrth (2 Dr. & Sm. .844) not fol- 
 lowed 28 Ch, D. 611 
 See Settlement — Powers. 8. 
 ap- 
 proved and followed 27 Ch. D. 333 
 See Settlement — Powers. 9. 
 Treloar v. Bigge (Law Rep. 9 Ex. 151) followed 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 387 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 2. 
 Tucker v. Morris (1 Cr. & M. 73) distinguished 
 
 [13 Q. B. J). 632 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 8. 
 Tulk V. Moxhay (2 Ph. 774) considered 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 662 
 See Lands Clauses Act-^Superfluous 
 Lands. 2. 
 
 — explained 8 ft, B. D. 
 
 [403 
 See Covenant — Running with Land. 2. 
 
 distinguished 
 
 [29 Ch. D, 760 
 See Covenant — Running with Land. 4. 
 Turner, In re (12 W. R. 337) followed 
 
 [21 Ch, D, 189 
 See Executor — Actions. 6. 
 
 Turner v. Morgan (Law Rep. 10 C. P. 587) com- 
 mented on - - 14 Q. B, B. 725 
 See Game. 2. 
 
 V. Turner (21 L. J. (Ch.) 843) distin- 
 guished - 28 Ch. D, 66 
 See Will — Words. 16. 
 
 Tioo Ellens, The (Law Rep. 4 P. C. 161) ex- 
 plained - - - 10 P. D, 44 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 1. 
 
 UnswoHh V. Speakman (4 Ch. D. 620) disap- 
 proved - - - 27 Ch. D. 346 
 See Will — Lapse. 9. 
 
 Upmann v. Forester (24 Ch. D. 231) followed 
 
 [27 Ch. S, 260 
 See Copyright — Designs. 1. 
 
 Uruguay Central and Hygueritas Bailway Com- 
 pany of Monte Video (11 Ch. D. 372j 
 approved - - 24 Ch. D. 269 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 17. 
 distin- 
 
 guished - 27 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 11. 
 
 Vaisey v. Beynolds (5 Russ. 12) disapproved of 
 
 See Will— Words. 8. [17 Ch. D. 696 
 
 Van Breda v. SiWerbauer (Law Rep. 3 P. C. 84) 
 approved 10 App, Cas, 336 
 
 See Colonial Law — Cape of Good 
 Hope. 4. 
 Vansandau v. Bose (2 Jac. & W. 264) discussed 
 and explained - - 25 Ch. D. 778 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 9. 
 Vavasseur v. Krupp (15 Ch. D. 474) questioned 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 174 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 4. 
 
 — — overruled 
 
 [11 Q. B. B. 464 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Dis- 
 continuance. 
 Veal V. Veal (27 Beav. 303) followed 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 631 
 iSee Donatio Mortis Caus^J. 
 Venables v. Smith (2 Q. B. D. 279) considered 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 104 
 See Negligence — Liability. 1. 
 
 Venour's Settled Estates, Inre (2 Ch. D. 522) cor- 
 rected - - 22 Ch. D. 811 
 See Statute. 
 
 Vint V. Fadget (2 De G. & J. 611) distinguished 
 
 [19 Ch, B. 630 
 See Mortgage^Consolidation. 3. 
 
 Vivian v. Little (11 Q. B. D. 370) distinguished 
 
 [18 ft. B. D. 7 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction op Documents. 3. 
 Vize V. Stoney(2 D. & Wal. 659; 1 D. & War. 
 337) observed upon - 30 Ch, B. 607 
 See Will — Vesting. 2. 
 Wainman v. Field (Kay, 507) distinguished 
 
 See Will— Lapse. 7. [23 Ch. B. 218 
 Walburn v. Ingilby (I My. & K. 61) discussed 
 
 [10 ft. B. B. 36 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OP Documents. 7. 
 
cxl 
 
 CASES FOLLOWED, OVEEEULED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDEEED. 
 
 Waliurn v. Ingilby (1 My. & K. 79) considered 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 18 
 See Pkactioe — Scpkeme Cotjkt — Stat- 
 ing Peooeedings. 14. 
 
 Walker v. Moitram (19 Ch. D. 355) followed 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 504 
 See Paetnekship — DissoLtwoN. 3. 
 
 Walmsley v. Foxliall (1 D. J. & S. 451) considered 
 and distinguished - 21 Ch. D. 1 
 See Pkaotioe — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 34. 
 Ward V. Lloyd (7 Scott, N. E. 499) followed 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 572 
 See Bill of Exchange — Consideba- 
 
 TION. 
 
 Waring, Hx parte (19 Yes. 345 ; 2 Rose, 182) con- 
 sidered 7 App. Cas. 366 
 See Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange. 3. 
 
 ■ , applied 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 611 
 
 See Bill or Exchange — Secdeities foe. 
 
 3. 
 
 Warrant Finance Company's Case (Law Rep. 
 
 6 Ch. 86) distinguished 17 Ch. D. 334 
 
 See Baneeuptcy — Peoof. 12. 
 
 (No. 2) (Law 
 
 Eep. 5 Ch. 88) distinguished 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 334 
 See Bankeuptot— Pboop. 12. 
 
 Warrender v. Warrender (2 CI. & F. 418) followed 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and AVife— Divoeoe. 
 
 WaterUuse v. Keen ii B. & C. 200) followed 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 788 
 
 See Local Goveenment— Peactice. 4. 
 
 Watson, Ex parte (5 Ch. D. 35), distinguished 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 89 
 
 See Sale of Goods — Lien. 4. 
 
 T. London and Brighton Railway Com- 
 pany (4 C. P. D. 118) followed 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 82 
 See Railway Company — By-laws. 
 
 • V. Row (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 680) dissented 
 
 from - - - 18 Ch. D. 616 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Actions. 10. 
 
 , Kipling, & Co.. In re (23 Ch. D. 500) 
 
 distinguished - - 28 Ch. D. 470 
 
 See Company — Rates. 2. 
 
 Watts V. Kelson (Law Eep. 6 Ch. 166) followed 
 [18 Ch. D. 616; 26 Ch. D. 434 
 See "Way. 1, 2. 
 
 Welh V. AdUns (14 C. B. 401 ; 23 L. J. (C.P.) 
 96) followed - 12 ft. B, D. 294 
 
 See Pkactioe — Supreme Coubt — Stay- 
 ing Peoceedings. 3. 
 
 Webster v. British Empire Mutual Life Assurance 
 
 Company (15 Ch. D. 169) commented on 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 534 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — 
 
 Paeties. 7. 
 
 T. Whewall (15 Ch. D. 120) observed upon 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 42 
 See Peactice— Supeeme Couet — Pbo- 
 DUCTioN OP Documents, 13. 
 
 Weldon v. Lichs (10 Ch. D. 247) considered 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 76 ; 23 Ch. D. 727 
 See Copyright —Books. 3, 5. 
 
 West Bartlepool Iron Company, In re (34 L. T. 
 (N.S.) 568) distinguished 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 470, 474 
 See Company — Eates. 2, 3. 
 
 Westcott, Ex parte (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 626) dis- 
 tinguished 16 Ch. D. 620 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoof. 18. 
 
 Westzinthus, In re (5 B. & Ad. 817) 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 573 
 See Sale of Goods — Lien. 1. 
 
 Wheatley, In re (27 Ch. D. 606) dissented from 
 See Election. 6. [28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 Wheeldon v. Burrows (12 Ch, D. 31) considered 
 See Light— Title. 6. [16 Ch. D. 355 
 
 followed 
 
 See Light— Title. 5. [25 Ch. D. 559 
 
 WMtchurch, .Ex parte (6 Q. B. D. 545) distin- 
 guished 11 ft. B. D. 191 ; 13 ft. D. 681 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 11, 12. 
 
 WhiU, In re (9 L. T. (N.S.) 702), explained and 
 distinguished 14 ft. B. D. 936 
 
 ;See Bankruptcy — Discharge. 4. 
 
 V. Cliitty (Law Rep. 1 Eq. 372) distin- 
 guished - 30 Ch. D. 62S 
 See Settlement — Constkuction. 6. 
 
 V. Sillaere (8 Y. & C. Ex. 597) approved 
 
 and followed - 19 Ch. D. 630; 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 698 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation. 2, 3. 
 
 V. Hindley Local Board (Law Eep. 10 
 
 Q. B. 219) approved - 9 ft. B. D. 451 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 5 
 
 V. Justices of Coquetdate (7 Q. B. D. 238) 
 
 overruled - - H ft. B, D. 638 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 6. 
 Wliitelwuse v. Fellowes (10 0. B. (N.S.) 765) dis- 
 cussed - - 14 ft. B. S. 125 
 See Limitations, Statute of — ^Per- 
 sonal Actions. 2. 
 Whiting to Loomes (14 Ch. D. 822 ; 17 Ch. D. 10) 
 distinguished - 24 Ch. D. 119 
 See Eevenue — Stamps. 5. 
 Whitwoj-th V. B:all(2 B. & Ad. 695) approved 
 
 See Champerty. 2. [10 App. Cas. 210 
 Wiclcens v. Townshend (1 Russ. & My. 361) ap- 
 plied - 22 Ch. D. 604 
 See Executor — Retainer. 2. 
 Wier, Ex parte (Law Eep. 7 Ch. 319) approved 
 and followed - 20 Ch. D. 856 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankbuptoy. 
 17. 
 Wigfield V. Potter (45 L. J. (N.S.) 612) approved 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1 
 See Company — Unregistered Company. 
 4. 
 Wildes V. Davies (1 Sm. & Giff. 475) explained 
 
 See Will— Executors. [29 Ch. D. 893 
 Wilkes' Estate, In re (16 Ch. D. 597) approved 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 628 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 money. 2. 
 
CASES FOLLOWED, OVEREXJLED, OE SPECIALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 cxU 
 
 Wilkinson v. Anglo-California Gold Mining Com- 
 pany (18 Q. B. 728) distinguished 
 See Deed. 2. [10 App. Cas. 293 
 
 Williams, Ex parte CI Ch. D. 138) discussed 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 442 
 See Bankkuptct — Disteess. 4. 
 T. Bayley (Law Eep. 1 H. L. 200) ex- 
 plained - 10 Q. B. D. 572 
 SSe Bill of Exchanse — Considera- 
 tion. 
 
 v. Cooke (4 Giff. 343) distinguished 
 
 [23 Ch, S. 181 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Ebal 
 Estate. 2. 
 
 V. Crosling (3 C. B. 957) followed 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. S39 
 See Pbactioe — Sdpkeme Cocbt— Secu- 
 KiTT FOE Costs. 3. 
 
 . ■ V. Kershaw (5 Cl. & F. Ill, n.) distiu- 
 
 giiished - - 28 Ch. D. 464 
 
 See Chaeitt — Gift to. 1. 
 
 V. Owen (13 Sim. 597) not followed 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 615 
 See Peincipal and Sueety— Indemnity. 
 2. 
 Williamson v. Williamson (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 729) 
 distinguished 30 Ch, D. 404 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 3. 
 WillougTiby v. Middleton (2 J. & H. 344) ques- 
 tioned - - - 18 Ch, D, 531 
 See Settlement — Fdtuee Peopeety. 2. 
 Wilson, In re (28 Ch. D. 457) considered 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 913 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Codbt — Cham- 
 bees. 10. 
 
 T. Church (11 Ch. D. 576) explained 
 
 [18 Ch. S, 394 
 See Peactiob — Siipeeme (Jouet— Stat- 
 ing Peoobedings. 11. 
 
 V. (12 Ch. D. 454) considered 
 
 [28 Ch, D, 18 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Cotjkt — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 14. 
 
 T. Coxwell (23 Ch. D. 764) questioned 
 
 [30 Ch. D. IS 
 See ExECUTOE — Retainer. 8. 
 
 T. Men (11 Beav. 237; 5 Ex. 752; 
 
 14 Beav. 317; 18 Q. B. 474; 16 Beav. 
 153) discussed 28 Ch, D, 66 
 
 See Will — Words. 16. 
 
 T. Sart (Law Eep. 1 Ch. 463) considered 
 
 [17 Ch, D. 363 
 See Vendoe and Pukohaseb — Title. 8. 
 
 V. Pea7i;e (3 Jur. (N.S.) 155) distinguished 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 142 
 See Teustee — ^Liabilities. 7. 
 
 T. Struqnell Cl Q. B. D. 548) overruled 
 
 [15 a. B, D, 661 
 See Contract — ^Validity. 2. 
 Winder, Ex parte (1 Oh. D. 290, 560) considered 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 26 
 See Bankeottcy— Act of Bankruptcy. 
 2. 
 Wvnqiield v. WinqfieU (9 Ch. D. 658) followed 
 See Will-Words. 10, [28 Ch. D, 212 
 
 Winter v. Bartholomew (11 Ex. 704) approved 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 873 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 12. 
 Witt V. Corcoran (2 Ch. D. 69) followed 
 
 [29 Ch, D, 60 
 See Practice — ■ Supreme Court — 
 Appeal. 28. 
 Wolley V. Jenkins (23 Beav. 53) discussed 
 
 [24 Ch. S. 238 
 See Settled Estates Acts. 4. 
 Wolverhampton and Walsall Railway Company 
 v. London and North Western Hailway 
 Company (Law Eep. 16 Eq. 433) con- 
 sidered 22 Ch. D. 835 
 See Specific Performance. 3. 
 Womersley v. Church (Yl L. T. (N.S.) 190) ex- 
 plained 26 Ch, D, 194 
 See Water. 3. 
 Wood, Ex parte (4 D. M. & G. 875) approved and 
 followed - - 20 Ch. D. 356 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 17. 
 
 Wood's Estate, In re (Law Eep. 10 Eq. 572) fol- 
 lowed - 18 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 3. 
 
 Woodgate v. Godfrey (5 Ex. D. 24) followed 
 
 [7 ft. B .D. 80 
 See Bill of Sale — Eegisteation. 4. 
 Woolridge v. Woolridge (Joh. 63) distinguished 
 
 See Election 1. [22 Ch. D. 555 
 
 Wootton's Estate, In re (Law Eep. 1 Eq. 589) 
 
 followed - - - 16 Ch, D. 597 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Pueohase- 
 
 money. 2. 
 
 approved 28 Ch, D, 628 
 
 See Settled Land Act — ■ Purchase- 
 money. 2. 
 Wright v. Monarch Investment Building Society 
 (5 Ch. D. 726) approved 23 Ch, D, 103 ; 
 [9 App. Cas. 260 
 See Building Society. 1, 2. 
 
 Telverton v. Telverton (1 Sw & Tr. 574) approved 
 and followed - 13 ft, B, D, 418 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 Teioens v Noakes'(6 Q. B. D. 530) explained 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 673 
 
 See Eevbnue — House Duty. 4. 
 Younq, Ex parte (19 Ch. D. 124) considered 
 
 [10 ft. B. D, 436 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 12. 
 
 T. Brassey (1 Ch. D. 277) not followed 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 460 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Seevioe. 8. 
 V. Waterpark (Lard) (13 Sim. 199) distin- 
 guished 23 Ch. D. 472 
 See Settlement — Powbes. 14. 
 Zunz V. South Eastern Bailway Company (Law 
 Eep. 4 Q. B. 539) considered 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 178 
 See CoNTEAOT — Acceptance, 2. 
 
( cxliii ) 
 
 STATUTES 
 
 ABSTEACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO. 
 
 I. lUFEBIAL STATUTES. 
 
 13 Edw. I— Statute Be Bonis 80 Ch. D. 136 
 See Settled Land Act — ^Ebsteiotions. 
 2. 
 2.5 Edw. 3, stat. 1 — Naturalisation 
 
 See Alien. [22 Ch. D. 243 
 
 5 Bich. 2, Bt. 1, c. &— Forcible Entry 17 Ch. D. 
 
 [174; 18Ch, D. 199 
 
 iSiee FOBCIBLE Entry. 1, 2. 
 
 23 Hen. 8, c. 5— Land Brainage 14 Q. B, D. 561 
 
 See Sea Wall. 
 27 Hen. 8, o. 10— Statute of Uses 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 369 
 See Parliament — Franchise. II. 
 32 Hen. 8, c. 9, a. 2—Glmmperty 9 Q. B. D. 128 ; 
 [15 Q. B. S. 491 
 See EiaHT of Entbt. 1, 2. 
 32 Hen. 8, c. ^i— Covenants - 10 Q. B. D. 48 
 See Landlobd and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 2. 
 5 Eliz. 0. 23, B. 2 — EcclesiasticaZ Law 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 376 
 See Practice — Ecolbsi astioal — Chtjbch 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 
 Bs. 2, 11 - 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 13 Eliz. c. 5 — Fradnlent Conveyances 
 
 [20Ch. D. 389; 22 Ch. D, 74; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 523 
 
 See Feauddlent Oonvetance. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 - 26 Ch. D. 319 
 
 See Bankkuptct — Act ov Bankruptcy. 
 1. 
 
 -. - 19 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Void Settlement. 
 19. 
 
 - 21 Ch. D. 653 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Jurisdiction. 4. ^■ 
 13 Eliz. c. 9— Land Brainage 14 Q. B. D. 561 
 
 See Se^Wall. 
 13 Eliz. c. 20— Ecclesiastical Pension 30 Ch. D. 
 See MoBTGAGB — Contract. 3. [520 
 27 Eliz. 0. 4, s. 1 — Fraudulent Conveyances 
 
 [24 Ch. S. 697 
 See Voluntary Oonteyance. 3. 
 31 Eliz. c. 5— Penal Statute - 7 Q. B. D, 465 
 
 See Penal Action. 1. 
 43 Eliz. c. 2, s. 1—Poor - 12 Q. B. D, 562 
 See Poor-rate— Occupation. 5. 
 
 STATUTES- 
 
 43 Eliz. c. 2, s. 7 - - 6 ft. B, D. 615 
 
 See Poor Law — -Maintenance. 3. 
 
 21 Jao. 1, c. 16' — Limitations. 
 
 See Cases under Limitations, Statute 
 of — Personal Actions. 
 
 as. 3, 7 - 15 a. B. D. 667 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Married Wo- 
 men's Property Acts. 1. 
 
 s. e - - 10 App. Cas. 279 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 3. 
 12 Car. 2, c. 24t-~Chiardian 24 Ch. D. 317 
 
 See Infant — ^Education. 1, 
 
 22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 10— Bistributions 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See Distributions, Statute of. 
 
 s. 5 - 29Ch,D.250 
 
 See Advancement. 1. 
 
 29 Car. 2, o. 3, a. 1— Frauds 21 Ch. D. 442 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 4. 
 
 - — 8. 4 
 
 See Cases under Frauds, Statute of. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 467 
 
 See Contract — Validity. 4. 
 
 — 20 Ch. D. 90 ; 28 Ch, D. 305 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Agree- 
 ment. 2, 3. 
 
 - 14 Q. B. D. 419 
 
 ' See Bankruptcy — Protected Trans- 
 action. 9. 
 
 s. 7 - 13 Q. B. D. 147 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. I. 
 
 - — s. 17 - - 16 Q. B. D. 228 
 
 See Sale of Goods — Contract. 3. 
 
 2 Wm. & M. sess. 1, c. 5, s. 2 — Bistress 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 386 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lodger. 4. 
 
 4 & 5 Wm. & M. c. 20, a. S— Judgments 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 189 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 6. 
 
 9 & 10 Will. 3, 0. 15, a. 2— Arbitration 
 
 [6 Q. B. D, 67 
 See Arbitration — Award. 3. 
 
 2 & 3 Ann. u. 4 — West Biding Registry 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 601 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
cxliv 
 
 STATUTES ABSTEAOTED OE SPECIALLY EBFEEEED TO. 
 
 STATUTES— continued. 
 
 4 & 5 Ann. u. 3, s. 9 — Landlord and Tenant 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 366 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 s. 25— Costs - - 29 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeiie Codbt- — Ap- 
 peal. 27. 
 
 6 Ann. c. 11, Art. 19 — Treaty of Union 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 453 
 See Scotch Law — Jukisdiction. 
 
 7 Ann. o. 5— Naturalization 23 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Alien. 
 - 30 Ch. D. 324 
 
 See Infant — Guardian. 1. 
 7 Ann. c. 20— Middlesex Registry 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Pdbchasbb — Purchase 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 s. 1 - - 29 Ch. D. 702 
 
 See Eegistbt Acts. 
 
 5 Ann. c. 14, ss. 6, 7— Distress 11 ft. B. D. 668 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^Distress. 
 4. 
 9 Ann. o. 20 — Mandamus - 14 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 
 2 Geo. 2, c. 25 — Criminal Law 6 App. Cas. 229 
 iSee Criminal Law — Pbactioe. 2. 
 
 4 Geo. 2, c. 21, s. 1 — BritisJi Subjects 
 
 See Alien. [22 Ch. D. 243 
 
 • - 30 Ch. D. 324 
 
 See Infant — Guabdian. 1. 
 
 9 Geo. 2, c. 36 — Mortmain. 
 
 See Cases under Charity — Mortmain. 
 
 11 Geo. 2, 0. 19, 8. 1 — Landlord and Tenant 
 
 [11 Q, B. D. 668 
 See Landlord and Tenast — Distress. 
 4. 
 
 ss. 4, 5 6 a. B. D. 669 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Distress. 
 3. 
 17 Geo. 2, c. 3, s. \—Poor - 9 Q. B. D. 47 
 See Poor-rate — Pkocedube. 7. 
 
 17 Geo. 2, c. 38, s. i—Foor 6 Q. B. D. 100 
 
 See Poor-rate — Procedure. 5. 
 
 29 Geo. 2, c. ili—lnclosure - 20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 See Inclosure. 3. 
 13 Geo. 3, c. 21, s. 1 — Naturalization 
 
 See Alien. [22 Ch. D. 243 
 30 Ch. D. 324 
 
 See Infant — Guardian. 1. 
 
 36 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. 6 — Legacy Duty 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 697 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. I. 
 
 ss. 6, 22 - - 11 Q. B. D. 16 
 
 See Eevenue — Legacy Duty. 
 
 s. 18 - 6 Q. B. D. 648 
 
 See Eevende — Succession Duty. 1. 
 
 38 Geo. 3, u. 87, s. 1 — Administration 
 
 [6 P. D. 104 
 See Administrator — Limited. 1. 
 
 39 &40 Geo. 3, c, 98, s. 1 — Accumulations 
 
 See Accumulations. 2. [25 Ch. D. 729 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 42 Geo. 3, c. 119, s. 2— Gaming 11 Q. B. D. 207 
 
 See Gaming. 3. 
 
 43 Geo. 3, c. 108— C7iMre7i Building 28 Ch. D. 
 
 See Charity — Mortmain. 6. [372 
 
 46 Geo. 3, u. cxix. — West Middlesex Water- 
 works - - 15 Q. B. D. 660 
 See Waterworks Company — Water 
 Eate. 6. 
 48 Geo. 3, c. 75— JBuri^ils 6 ft. B. D. 654 
 
 See Burial Ground. 2. 
 50 Geo. 3, c. cxxxii. — West Middlesex Water- 
 works - - 15 ft. B. D. 660 
 See Waterworks Company ■ — Wateb 
 Eate. 6. 
 
 52 Geo. 3, c. 101— Sir S. Momilly's 24 Ch. D. 
 
 See Church Building Acts. [213 
 
 53 Geo. 3, c. 127— Clergy - 6 ft. B. D. 376 
 
 /See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Church 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 s. 1 - 8 P. D. 79 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 See Pbactice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2, 3. 
 
 54 Geo. 3, c. 170, s. 6— Poor 7 ft. B. D. 539 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 14. 
 
 55 Geo. 3, c. 194, b. li— Apothecaries 29 Ch. D. 
 
 jSee Medical Practitioner. [596 
 
 56 Geo. 3, c. 50, s. 11 — Landlord and Tenant 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 8 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 13. 
 
 57 Geo. 3, c. 25— House Tax 7 ft. B. D. 136 
 
 See Eevenue — House Duty. 1. 
 57 Geo. 3, c. xxix. — Metropolitan Paving 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 486 
 See London— CoMMissioNEBS op Sewers. 
 
 ss. 80, 82 - - 30 Ch. D. 642 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 10. 
 59 Geo. 3, c. 12, s. 19— Poor 8 App. Cas. 386 
 jSee Poor-rate — Eating op Owners. 
 
 5 Geo. 4, M. 83, s. Z— Vagrant Act 12 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Vagrant Acts. 3. [306 
 
 s. 4 - - 14 ft. B. D. 92 
 
 See Vagrant Acts. 1. 
 
 6 Geo. 4, o. 94, s. 1— Factors 8 App. Cas. 874 
 
 See Factor. 3. 
 6 Geo. 4, c. 120, b. iO—GourU of Law, Scotland 
 [6 App. Cas. 251 ; 7 App. Cas. 49 
 
 See Scotch Law — Practice. 2, 3. 
 ■ 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange. 1. 
 
 6 Geo. 4, c. 125, s. 59— Navigation 7 P. D. 240 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 5. 
 
 7 Geo. 4, u. 57— Insolvency - 20 Ch. D. 637 
 
 See Insolvency. 
 7 Geo. 4, s. cxl. o. 27— IToier Company 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 49 
 See Waterworks Company — Water 
 Eate. 3. 
 7 & 8 Geo. 4,0. 31, s. 2—Constailes 
 
 See EiOT. [7 ft. B. D. 201 
 
 9 Geo. 4, 0. 61, ss. 1, 4, 13, li—I/i^nsing Act 
 [7 ft. B, D. 238, 642 
 See Inn — Licence. 1, 2. 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEREED TO. 
 
 cxlv 
 
 STA.TTJT'ES— continued. 
 
 9 Geo. 4, c. 61, ss. 4, 14 11 Q. B. D. 417 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 4. 
 s. 14 ~ - 11 Q. B. D. 638 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 6. 
 ■ ■ s. 27 - - 12 Q. B. D. 620 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 5. 
 11 Goo. 4 & 1 Will. 4, i;. 65, ss. 12, U—SettUd 
 
 Estates 29 Ch. S. 248 
 
 See Infant — Peopertt. 3. 
 11 Geo. 4 & 1 Wm. 4, c. 68, s. I— Carriers 
 
 [10 a. B. D, 142 
 
 See Carriee — Caeeiees Act. 
 1 Will. 4, c. 21— Mandamus - 14 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, 0. 22, ss. 6, 20, 2Z— Hackney Car- 
 riages - 8 Q. B. D. 104 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 1. 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37, ss. 1, 2, 3, 4, 23 -Truck Act 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 693 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Peeeerential Debt. 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 41, ss. 5, W—Comtahle 
 
 See Constable [14 Q. B. D. 720 
 
 1 & 2 Will. 4, u. 58— Courts of Law 
 
 [6 Q. B. B. 63 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 2. 
 
 s. 6 - - 26 Ch. D. 605 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 11. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 216 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Appeal. 1. 
 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. ii— Allotments 26 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 9. 
 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 45, S9. 18, 26— iJe/orm Act 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 365 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 12. 
 B. 26 12 Q. B. D. 369 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 11. 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 51, s. 15 — Vice-Admiralty 
 
 Courts - - - 8 App. Cas. 32a 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 5. 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 71, s. 1 — Prescription 
 
 See Common. [17 Ch. D. 635 
 - 20 Ch.D. 753 
 
 See Copyhold — Custom. 1. 
 8. 2 19 Ch. D. 281 ; 6 App Cas. 740 
 
 See Support. 2, 3. 
 sa. 2, 4, 5, 6 
 
 See Prescription. 1. 
 
 See Light — Title. 4 
 See Easement. 2. 
 
 13 d. B. D. 304 
 
 19 Ch. B. 462 
 
 19 Ch. S. 22 
 
 _ . . g. 8 - - 15 ft. B. D. 629 
 
 See Prescription. 2. 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 93, s. 1— Contempts in Eccle- 
 siastical Courts 6 App. Cas. 657 
 See Pbactice— Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 120— Stage Carriages 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 105 
 See JIetropolis — Public Caeeiageb 
 Acts. 
 
 aTATTJTES-continued. 
 
 2 & 3 Will. 4, 0. cv.—Hull Pilots 8 P. D. 132 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 3. 
 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 15, s. 1— Copyright 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 232 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 3. 
 
 ss. 1, 2 - - 11 ft. B. D. 102 ; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 843 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 1, 2. 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, 0. 27— Limitations. 
 
 See Cases under Limitations, Statute 
 of — Realty. 
 
 s. 7 - - - 9 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 See Eailway Company — Property. 3. 
 
 s. 7, 25, 34 - 22 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Trusts. 
 3. 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, 0. 42, s. 2 — Amendment of Proce- 
 dure - - 21 Ch. D. 484 
 See Executor — Actions. 2. 
 
 s. 3 - - - 7 ft. B. D. 465 
 
 See Penal Action. 1. 
 s, 40 - - 17 Ch. D. 787 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 7. 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, 0. 74, s. 22 — Fines and Recoveries 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 3. [16 Ch. D. 176 
 
 — • ss. 40, 47 - - 29 Ch. D. 133 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 1. 
 
 s. 77- - - 18Ch, D. 106 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Wife's Eever- 
 
 SION. 2. 
 - 23 Ch. D. 181, 344 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wipe's Real 
 Estate. 2, 3. 
 
 ss. 77, 79 - Oft. B. D. 576 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 6. 
 
 - 29 Ch. D. 693 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance. 3. 
 
 s. 84 - 6 ft. B. D. 154 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 1. 
 
 s. 91 - 10 ft. B. D. 284 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 2. 
 
 - - 29 Ch. B. 996 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 5. 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, u. 104 — Administration 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 182 
 See Executor — Eetainer. 7. 
 
 - 27 Ch. D. 478 
 
 See Retainer. 
 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 106, s. 2— Inheritance 
 
 See Descent. [28 Ch. D. 327 
 
 4 & 5 Will. 4, 0. 36 — Central Criminal Court 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 479 
 
 See Court — Central Criminal Court. 
 
 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 92, ss. 68, SI— Fines and Re- 
 coveries {Ireland.) - 8 App. Cas. 420 
 See Hcsband and Wife — Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 h 
 
cxlvi 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEERED TO. 
 
 SIATTJT'ES— continued. 
 
 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50, ss. 5, 29— Eigliways . 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 946 
 See Local Goveenment — Eates. 1. 
 
 ■8.51 
 
 -Eepaie. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 210 
 11. 
 
 6 Q. B. S. 583 
 
 12. 
 
 13 Q. B. D. 121 
 
 See Highwat- 
 . s. 54 
 
 See Highway — Eepaik, 
 s. 72 
 
 See Highway — Obstruction. 
 ss. 84, 85, 101 13 Q. B. D. 640 
 
 See Highway — Stopping-up. h 
 . s. 109 11 Q. B. D. 286 
 
 See Local Goyeenment — Peactice. 3. 
 
 5 & 6 -Will. 4, 0. 76, a. 2 — Municipal Corporations 
 
 [21 Ch. D. Ill 
 See MoNioiPAL Coepobation — Pko- 
 peety. 
 
 s. 9 - - 24 Ch. D. 587 
 
 See Chaeitt — Commissioners. 7. 
 
 s. 43 6 Q. B. D. 323 
 
 See Municipal Corpokation — Elec- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 s. 52 - - 16 Ch. D. 143 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 s. 57 - 7 a. B. D. 648 
 
 See Conteact — Validity. 1. 
 
 s. 82 - 6 Q. B. D. 135 
 
 See Municipal Coepobation — Eates. 
 
 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32— Building Society. 
 
 See Cases under Building Society. 
 - - 8 Q. B. D. 31 
 
 &e DowEB. 2. 
 s. 5 - - - 12 a. B. D. 423 
 
 See Moetgage— Peiobity. 2. 
 6.& 7 Will. 4, c. 37, ss. 6, 7— Bread 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 110; IS Q. B. B. 408 
 
 See Bakee. 1, 2. 
 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 71, a. 67— Tithes Commutation 
 
 See Tithes. [30 Ch. D. 84 
 
 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 96, [s. 1 — Parochial Assess- 
 
 ments - - - 9 App. Cas. 49 
 
 See Watebwoekb Company — Water 
 Eate. 3. 
 
 1837. 
 
 7 Will. 1 & 1 Vict. c. 26, ss. 1, 27—Wills 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 648 ; 18 Ch. D. 499 ; 23 Ch. D. 
 
 See Power — Execution. 8, 10, 15. [313 
 s. 3 - 21 Ch. D. 667 
 
 See Will — Lapse. 6. 
 ss. 3, 33 - 17 Ch. D. 115 
 
 See Will — Speaking fbom Death. 1. 
 a. 9 - - 7 App. Cas. 192 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 11. 
 - 7 P. D. 102 
 
 See Probate — Execution. 1. 
 ^ ss. 9, 10 26 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Power — Execution. 4. 
 . s. 15 - - 6 Q, B. D. 311 
 
 See Will — Attesting Witness. 
 
 as. 2.3, 24 - 19Ch. D. 432; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 80 
 
 See Will — Speaking fbom Death 2, 3. 
 
 STATITTES — continued. 
 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 26, s. 24 38 Ch. D. 709 
 See Husband and Wife— Maeeied Wo- 
 men's Peopbety Act. 10. 
 
 S3. 24, 27 - 27 Ch. D. 284 
 
 See PowBB — Execution. 16. 
 
 a. 26 - 28 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Will— WOBDS. 16. 
 
 s. 33 - - 19 Ch. D. 612; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 663 ; 26 Ch. D. 266 
 See Will— Lapse. 2, 3, 5. 
 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 28— Limitations 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 639 ; 7 App. Cas. 235 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 4. 
 7 Will. 4 & 1 Tict. c. 45, s. 2 — Parish Notices 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 47 
 See POOB-EATE — Pboceduee. 7. 
 
 1838. 
 
 1 & 2 Viet. c. 45, s. 2 — Courts of Law 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 216 
 See Bankeuptcy — Appeal. 1. 
 
 1 & 2 Vict. u. 109— Titlies, Ireland 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 14 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 8. 
 
 1 & 2 Vict. e. 110, s. 14 — Judgments 
 
 [8 a. B. D. 17 
 See Peactice — Supreme Cocet — 
 Charging Oudebs. 1. 
 
 s. 19 - - 29 Ch. D. 527 
 
 See Judgment. 4. 
 
 1839. 
 
 2 c& 3 Vict. c. 11 — Judgments — s. 4 
 
 See Judgment. 4. [29 Ch. D. 527 
 
 2 & 3 Vict. c. 93, a. S— Police 14 Q. B. D. 720 
 
 See Constable. 
 
 1840. 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. 54, s. 2— Lunatics 8 App, Cas. 339 
 
 See Lunatic — Criminal. 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. 61, s. 1 — Beerlwuses 
 
 See Inn— Licence. 3. [8 Q. B. D. 369 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65, H. 6— Admiralty 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 609 
 See Peactice — Admibalty — Jueisdic- 
 TION. ti. 
 
 10 P. D. 44 ; 9 App. Cas. 356 
 
 See Ship — Mabitime Lien. 1, 7. 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. S2— Judgments - 8 ft. B. D. 17 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — 
 Chaegiisg Oedebs. 1. 
 
 a. 2 - 29 Ch. D. 527 
 
 See Judgment. 4. 
 
 3 iSc 4 Vict. c. Se— Church Discipline 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 316 ; 8 P. D. 191 
 
 See Peactice — Ecclesiastical — Juris- 
 diction. 1, 2. 
 
 6 P. D. 157 
 
 .•■^ee Peactice — Ecclesiastical — 
 Chueoh Discipline Act. 1. 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEPEEKED TO. 
 
 cxlvii 
 
 STATVT^S— continued. 
 
 3 & 4 Viot. e. 86 6 App. Cas. 424 
 
 See Practioe — Ecclesiastical — Mosi- 
 
 TION. 
 
 S3. 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 24 9 Q. B. D. 454 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — 
 Church Discipline Act. 3. 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. 0. 89— Poor-rate. 
 
 See Poor-bate — ^Exemptions — Statutes. 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. 97, s. 5— Railways 28 Ch. D. 190 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 8. 
 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. 113 — Ecclesiastical Commis- 
 
 sioners - 16 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 See Adyowson. 2. 
 
 1841. 
 
 4 & 5 Vict. c. 59 — Highway Rate. 
 
 See Turnpike Acts — Statutes. 
 
 1842. 
 
 5 & 6 Vict. e. 5, ss. 4, 5 — Administration of 
 
 .Justice - - 23 Ch. D. 849 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^In- 
 junction. 2. 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. 35, s. 54— Income Tax 10 App. Cas. 
 
 See Eevenue — Income Tax. 9. [438 
 s. 60, Sched. A. 8 App. Cas. 891 
 
 See Revenue — ^Income Tax. 6. 
 ■ Sched. A. & D. 7 ft. B. D. 485 ; 
 
 [13 a. B. S. 9 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 2, 3. 
 (Sched. A.), r. 3 ; s. 100 (Sched. 
 
 D.) - - - 14 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 4. 
 
 ss. 60, 63, Sched. A. & B. 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 61 
 
 See Eevenue — Income Tax. 1. 
 s. 100, Sched. D. 8 Q. B. D. 414 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 8. 
 
 S3. 100, 102, 159, Sched. D. 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 174 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 5. 
 ss. 100, 159 6 App. Cas. 318 
 
 See Scotch Law — Revenue. 
 5 & 6 Vict. 0. 36 — Australia 6 App. Cas. 636 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 1. 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. W— Factors 10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 See Factor. 1. 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. i5— Copyright 17 Ch. D. 708 
 
 See Copybight^Newspapeeb. 
 83. 2, 20, 22 - - 21 Ch. D. 232 
 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 3. 
 
 83.13,16,24 - 21Ch. D. 369; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See Copyright— Books. 1, 3. 
 ss. 20, 21 - 11 ft. B. D. 102 
 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 1. 
 5 & 6 Viot. c. 55, ss. 4, 6, 12— JJoflioaj/s 
 
 [28 Ot(, S. 190 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 8. 
 
 STATUTES— oonfemaec?. 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. 57, s. U—Foor 15 ft, B. D. 382 
 
 See Poor-hate — Guardians. 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. 79, s. 2— Stamp Duties 
 
 [6 ft. B. D, 216 
 See Railway Company — Passenger 
 Duty. 
 
 s. 23 - - 12 ft. B. D. 461 
 
 See Mandamus. 2. 
 5 & 6 Vict. 0. 97, s. 5— Costs 11 ft, B, B, 286 
 See Local Government — Practice. 3. 
 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. 122, SB. 37, B9— Bankruptcy 
 
 [27 Ch, D. 687 
 See Bankruptcy — Discharge. 2. 
 
 1843. 
 
 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, s. 7 — Parliamentary Registra- 
 
 tion - - 12 ft, B. D, 373 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 10. 
 6 & 7 Viot. 0. 37, ss. 11, 15 — Church Building 
 [10 ft. B. D. 418 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clergy. 1. 
 6 & 7 Viot. c. 68, s. 1— Theatres 12 ft. B. D. 11 
 
 See Theatre. 
 6 & 7 Viot. c. 73, 3. %— Solicitors 8 ft. B. D. 187 ; 
 [15 ft. B. D. 348 ; 8 App. Cas. 407 
 
 See Solicitor — Unqualified. 1, 2, 4. 
 ■ ■ s. 37 - - 18 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See County Court — Costs. 3. 
 ■ ■ s. 37. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Bill op 
 Costs. 
 3. 38 - - 17 Ch. D, 108 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 17. 
 s. 41 11 ft. B. D. 377; 29 Ch. D. 571 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 1, 2. 
 3. 43 - 24 Ch, D. 405 
 
 See Solicitor — ^Bill op Costs. 9. 
 
 6 & 7 Vict. 0. 86, BS. 10, 21, 24, 28, 35— Trafiu 
 
 —Metropolis 8 ft. B. D. i04 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 1. 
 
 1844. 
 
 7 & 8 Vict. 0. 22, s. 3— Plate - 7 ft, B. D. 465 
 
 See Penal Action. 1. 
 7 & 8 Vict. 0. 32, ss. 11, 12— Bankers 
 
 See-BANKEB- Notes. [12 ft. B. D. 605 
 
 7 & 8 Viot. ci lOJ, s. 5— Poor 9 ft. B. D, 338 
 
 See Bastardy. 1. 
 
 "3. 70 - - 14 ft. B. D. 364 
 
 See Bastardy. 7. 
 
 1846. 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. 0. 16, ss. 41, 42 — Companies Clauses 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 411 ; 24 Ch, D. 85 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 3, 7. 
 ss. 67, 90, 91 23 Ch. D. 654 
 
 See Company — Management. 2. 
 S3. 70, 88, 89, 91 25 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Company — Management. 5. 
 s. 108 - - 12 ft. B. D. 68 
 
 See Company — Management. 1. 
 8 & 9 Viot. c. 18— iands Clauses 30 Ch, L, 38 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Cost.s. 22. 
 k 2 
 
cxlviii 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEPEEEED TO. 
 
 BTATVr^S—contviued. 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, f3. 3, 16, 84, 85 9 App. Cas. 787 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsokt 
 Powers. 3. 
 
 ss. 6, 16 - 19 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See Railway Company — ■ Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 4. 
 
 •s. 7 
 
 27 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopekty. 8. 
 
 SB. 7, 9 18 Ch. D. 429 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — CoinpuLsonY 
 PowEns. 8. 
 
 8. 18 22 Ch. D. 142 ; 30 Ch. D. 653 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsoey 
 Powers. 1, 6. 
 
 es. 18, 121 - 25 Ch. D. 78 
 
 See Labocheks' Dwellings Acts. 1. 
 
 ss. 23, 34, 53 - 11 ft. B. D. 34S 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 1. 
 
 — - s. 24 13 ft. B. D. 586 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — • Compensa- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 SB. 38, 51 - 12 ft. B. D. 481 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 7. 
 — ss. 49, 50 - 9 ft. B. D. 741 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act ■ — Compensa- 
 tion. 5. 
 
 — - 19 Ch. D. 508 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Okdeks. 2. 
 
 s. 63 14 ft. B. D. 747, 763 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 2, 3. 
 
 s. 68 - 16 ft. B. D. 572 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 4. 
 
 ss. 68, 84, 85. 91 9 App. Cas. 480 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 4. 
 
 s. 69 20 Ch, D, 203 ; 21 Ch. D. 228 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 93 ; 28 Ch. D. 100 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 money. 3, 5, 6, 7. 
 
 8. 70 - 
 
 See Lands Clauses 
 
 MONEY. 4. 
 
 s. 74 - 
 
 See Lands Clauses 
 MONET. 2. 
 - 28 Ch. D. 628 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 
 MONEY^ 2. 
 
 . ss. 75, 80, 82 24 Ch. D, 119 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps. 5. 
 ss. 75, 85 - 18 Ch. D. 146 
 
 See. Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 
 Powers. 5. 
 s. 76 - ■ 24 Ch, D. 263 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Pcrchase- 
 
 MONEY. 1. 
 
 s. 80 17 Ch. D, 329 ; 24 Ch. D. 669 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 3, 4. 
 
 ss. 80, 85 28 Ch, D. 237 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. C. 
 
 - 18 Ch. D. 646 
 
 Act — PuECHASE- 
 
 ■ 16 Ch. D. 597 
 
 Act — PuRCHASE- 
 
 STATTTTES — continued. 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, 8. 83 - - 23 Ch. D. 167 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 2. 
 
 s. 85 - 21 Ch. D. 143 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act— Compulsory 
 Powers. 2. 
 
 . - 25 Ch. D. 168, 371 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 11, 14. 
 
 3. 92 - - 27 Ch. D. 536 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 
 POWEES. 7. 
 
 8. 96 - 25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title 
 Deeds. 
 
 s. 121 - - 26 Ch. D. 78 
 
 See Laboueers' Dwellings Acts. 1. 
 
 s. 127 - 9 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 See Eailway Company — Property. 3. 
 
 ss. 127, 128 - 21 Ch. D. 95 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 6. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Superfluous Lands. 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 19 — Lands Claiises (Scotland) 
 
 [7 App, Cas. 259 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 
 4. 
 
 ss. 48, 61 - - 8 App. Cas. 623 
 
 See Scotch Law — Harboir. 1. 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 20, 8s. 6, 77 — Eailways Clauses 
 [9 App. Cas, 480 
 See Lands Clauses Act— Compulsory 
 Powers. 4. 
 
 ss. 6, 140 - 13 ft. B. D. 686 ; 
 
 [15 ft B. S. 572 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 4, 6. 
 
 S3. 15, 16, 68 20 Ch. D. 323 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 1. 
 
 s. 68 7 ft. B. D. 322 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 3. 
 
 s. 76 - - 28 Ch. D. 190 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 8. 
 
 83.77,78,79 - 19Ch. D. 659; 
 
 [20Ch. D. 562; lift. B. D, 820; 
 [30 Ch. S. 634 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 4, 5, 6, 7. 
 
 s. 90 - - 14 ft. B. D. 209 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 2. 
 
 8. 95 
 
 9 ft. B. S. 744 
 
 -Traffic Man- 
 
 See Railway Company- 
 
 AGEMENT. 3. 
 
 - 7 ft. B. D. 32 
 -By-laws. 
 
 ss. 103, 145 8 ft. B. D. 161 
 
 See Justices — Practice. 4. 
 
 - — ss. 103, 109 
 See Railway Company- 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO. 
 
 cxlix 
 
 STATTTTES— co»<TOMe<?. 
 8 & 9 Vict. 0. 33, s. 6 — Jtaihoays Clauses (Scot- 
 land) 7 App. Cas. 259 ; 8 App, Cas. 265 
 See Scotch Law — Eaiiway Company. 
 4,5. 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 70, s. 22~Church Building 
 
 [24 Ch. S. 213 
 See Chukch Building Acts. 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100, ss. 72, 9'J— Lunatics 
 
 See Lunatic— Custody. [15 ft. B. D. 667 
 
 8 & 9 Viot. c. 106, s. 6—Beal Property 
 
 [9 Q. B. B. 128; IS d.B. D. 491 
 
 See Eight of Entey. 1, 2. 
 a. 6 - - 9 ft. B. B. 366 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 1. 
 s. 9 - 7 ft. B. B. 524 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — Disclaimer. 17. 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 109, B. 18— Gaming 
 
 See Gaming. 1. [13 ft. B. D. 779 
 15 ft. B. B. 363 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 7. 
 s. 19 - - - 27 Ch. D. 116 
 
 See Lunatic — Inquisition. 2. 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. ] IS—Inclosure - 8 ft. B. B. 437 
 
 See Inclosure. 2. 
 
 1846. 
 
 9 & 10 Vict. c. 66, f. l—Foor 7 ft. B. B. 539 ; 
 
 [8 ft. B B. 50 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 14, 16. 
 
 9 & 10 Vict. c. m— Death hy Accident 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 367 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 8. 
 
 ■ 9 ft. B. B. 160 ; 25 Ch. D. 409 
 
 See Damages — Lord Campbell's Act. 
 1,2. 
 
 - - 10 App. Cas. 69 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 1847. 
 
 10 & 11 Viot. c. 17, s. 35 — Waterworlcs Clauses 
 
 [12 ft. B. B. 443 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply op 
 "Water. 6. 
 
 ■ s. 37-43 7 ft. B. D. 505 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply of 
 Water. 5. 
 
 6S. 43, 74 - 8 ft. B. B. 632 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply op 
 Water. 2. 
 
 s. 68 - - 28 Ch. B. 138 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply op 
 Water. 1. 
 
 9 ft. B. B. 146 ; 15 ft. B, B. 660 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Water 
 Bate. 1, 6. 
 10 & 11 Vict. c. 27, es. 5i, 52, 5Z—Harhoms 
 Clauses - - 10 P. B. 24, 131 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 9, 10. 
 
 8. 52 - 8 P. B. 66 ; 9 P. B. 3 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 32, 
 
 STATUTES— confenwecZ. 
 
 10 & 11 Vict. c. 27, s. 74 - 7 P. B. 190 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 1. 
 
 ■- s. 83 - 10 ft. B. B. 387 
 
 See Docks and Harbours. 1. 
 
 10 & 11 Vict. c. 34, ss. 47-50— Totc/is Improve- 
 ment - 8 App. Cas. 494 
 See Highway — Eepair. 4. ' 
 
 ss. 47, 49, 50, 51 15 ft. B. B. 25 
 
 See Highway — Eepair. G. 
 
 s. 53 - 10 App. Cas. 364 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 10. 
 
 10 & 11 Vict. c. Q6-— Trustee Relief Act. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Belief Act. 
 
 10 & 11 Vict. c. 98 — Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Bishop — ■ 
 Statutes. 
 
 1848. 
 
 11 & 12 Vict. 0. 43, B. 11 — Summary Jurisdic- 
 
 tion - 13 ft. B. B. 58G 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 6. 
 11 & 12 Vict. c. 44, s. 5— Justices of the Peace 
 [14 ft. B. B. 474 
 See Justices — Practice. 3. 
 11 & 12 Vict. u. 63, s. 2— Public Health 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 798 
 See Local Government — Streets. 4. 
 
 s. 48 - 27 Ch. B. 665 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 14. 
 11 & 12 Vict. c. Ill, s. ^—Poor 8 ft. B. B. 50 
 See Poor Law — Settle.mext. 16. 
 
 1848. 
 
 13 Vict. c. 26— ieases 24 Ch. B. 624 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 4. 
 13 Vict. c. 45, s. 1 — Quarter Sessions 
 
 [6 ft. B. B. 669 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Distress. 
 3. 
 s. 11 - 3 ft. B. B. 586 
 
 12 & 
 
 12 & 
 
 12 ft. B, B, 1 ; 15 ft. B. B. 76 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 3, 4. 
 12 & 13 Vict. 0. 92, ss. 2, 29— Cruelty to Ani- 
 mals - 12 ft. B. B. 66 
 See Cruelty to Animals. 
 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 121}— BanJiru23tcy 
 
 [25 Ch. B. 400 
 See Company — Evidence. 4. 
 
 s. 141 18 Ch. B. 381 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 23 Ch. B. 344 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 3. 
 
 s. 199 - 27 Ch. B. 687 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Discharge. 2. 
 12 & 13 Vict. ^. 109, s. 26— Petty Bag Office 
 
 [6 ft. B. B. 376 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Church 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 
ol 
 
 STATUTES ABSTKACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO. 
 
 ST ATVIES— confirmed. 
 
 12 & 13 Vict. c. xci. — General Land Drainage 
 avd Jri'provement Company 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 208 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioneks. 
 
 1850. 
 
 ) 3 & li Vict, c. GO— Trustee Act 26 Ch. D. 82 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Chabses. 8. 
 
 S3. 2, 23 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Trustee Act — Vesting Orders. 
 
 846 
 12. 
 
 S3. 2, 32, 35, 40 - 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Trustee Acts — VESTmo Orders. 2. 
 
 . 3. 3 - 16 Ch. D. 672 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 6. 
 
 — - s. 5 16 Ch. D. 503 ; 19 Ch. D. 384 ; 
 [22 Ch. D. 535 
 
 See Trustee Acts — ^Vesting Orders. 
 7, 8, II. 
 
 s. 10 - 27 Ch. D. 359 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Obdbrs. 3. 
 
 ss. 15, 28 
 
 See Trustee Acts- 
 
 23 Ch. D. 205 
 
 -Vesting Orders. 4. 
 
 s. 32 - 26 Ch. D. 745 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 9. 
 
 ss. 32, 34 21 Ch. D. 778 ; 22 Ch. D. 
 
 [633 ; 23 Ch. D. 217 ; 28 Ch. D. 77 
 
 See Trustee Acts — New Trustees. 
 2—5. 
 
 1851. 
 
 14 & 15 Vict. c. 81, s. I — India — Lunatic 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 18 
 See Criminal Law — Practice. 1. 
 
 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 2i— Criminal Law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 229 
 See CBiinNAL Law — Practice. 2. 
 
 . s. 29 14 Q. B. D. 63 
 
 See Criminal Law — Nuisance. 
 
 14 & 15 Vict. K. 104 — Church Estates Commis- 
 sioners. 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 
 - — s. 3 - 29 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 4. 
 
 14 & 15 Vict. c. xci., s. 54 — City of London 
 Sewers 28 Ch. D. 486 
 
 See London — Commissioners of Sewers. 
 
 14 & 15 Vict. c. xeiv. — High Feak Mines 
 
 See Mine — Working. 1. 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 195 
 
 1852. 
 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 27 — Evidence, Scotland 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and "Wwe. 
 3. 
 15 & IG Vict. c. 55, s. 1 — Trustee Extension Act 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 646 
 iSVf Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 
 10. 
 
 — 3. 3 - - 20 Ch. D. 536 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 5. 
 
 s. 6 28 Ch. D. 629 
 
 Sue Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 2. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 15 & 16 Vict. V. 55, s. 9 24 Ch. D. 271 
 
 See Trustee Acts — New Trustees. 1. 
 15 & 16 Vict. 0. 76 — Common Law Procedure 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 58 
 See Arbitration — Award. 2. 
 
 8. 205 - 18 Ch, D. 362 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 23. 
 
 s. 210 14 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entet. 
 
 7. 
 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 80, ss. 11, 26, 27— Master in 
 
 Chancery Aholition 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 2. 
 
 ■ 33. 26, 27 22 Ch. D. 635 
 
 See Trustee Eelief Act. 1. 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, ss. 6, i3—Patmt Law 
 Amendment 21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 See Patent — Validitt. 2. 
 
 s. 41 17 Ch. D. 137 ; 22 Ch. D. 629 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 1, 4. 
 
 - 10 App. Cas. 249 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 1. 
 
 s. 43 - - 29 Ch. D. 325, 366 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 2, 3. 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 85 — Burial Grounds 
 
 See Burial Ground. 1. [6 Q. B. D. 290 
 
 s. 22 - 13 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 See Eetenue — Income Tax. 2. 
 15 & 16 Vict, u. 86, s. 22 — Chancery Improvement 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 833 
 See Evidence — Documents. 1. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Practice — • Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 9. 
 
 • ss. 38, 40, 41 - 21 Ch. D. 642 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 430 ; 28 Ch. S. 669 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 2, 5, 8. 
 
 s. 44 - 19 Ch. D. 534 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Parties. 7. 
 15 & 16 Vict. 0. Ixxvii., s. 18 — London, City, 
 Small Debts Extension 10 P. D. 36 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Service. 1. 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. civil., s. iS—Waier Company 
 [9 App. Cas. 49 
 See Waterworks Company — Water 
 Eate. 3. 
 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. clix.— TT"es« Middlesex Water- 
 
 leorlis - - 15 Q. B. D. 660 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Water 
 Bate. 6. 
 
 1853. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict. c. 20 — Evidence, Scotland 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 3. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict. c. 34, s. 2— Income Tax 
 
 [8Q. B. S. 414 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 8. 
 s. 10 7 Q. B, L. 562 
 
 See Eevenue — Income Tax. 7. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFBEEED TO. 
 
 cU 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict.c. 34, Soh. A. & B. 9 App. Cas. 61 
 
 See Eevenue — Income Tax. 1. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict. c. 51, ss. 1, 42, 44 — Succession 
 Duty - 29 Ch. D. 697 
 
 See Settlement — Constbuotion. 1. 
 
 • BS. 2, 5, 10, 32 - 8 Q. B. D, 125 
 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 6. 
 
 ss. 2, 18 6 Q. B. D. 177, 548 
 
 See Eevenue— Succession Duty. 1, 4. 
 
 s. 10 21 Ch. D. 100 ; 22 Ch. D. 545 
 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 2, 3. 
 
 ss. 39, 40, 41 - 17 Ch. D. 711 
 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 5. 
 
 16 & 17 Viot. u. 70, ss. 41, 52 — Lunacy Megula- 
 tion - - 20 Ch. D. 269 
 
 See Lunatic — Jukisdiction. 1. 
 
 s. 116 - - 23 Ch. D. 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 2. 
 
 577 
 
 28 Ch, S. 514 
 10. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 306 
 6. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 622 
 
 17 Ch. D. 515 
 
 5. 
 
 ■ ss. 116, 124 - 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 
 s. 118 
 
 See Lunatic — ^Peopbety. 
 ss. 118, 119 - 
 
 See Will — -Ademption. 
 s. 141 
 
 See Lunatic — ^Peopeety'. 
 16 & 17 Viot. c. 96, s. i^-Imnatics 15 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Lunatic — Custody. [667 
 
 16 & 17 Viot. c. 97, s. 68 — Lunatic Asylums 
 
 [15 Q, B. D. 122 
 
 See Lunatic — Jukisdiction. 2. 
 ss. 94, 104 - - 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 3. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict. 0. 119, ss. 1, 3— Gaming. 
 See Cases under Gaming. 4 — 7. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict. 0. 129, s. il—Mercliant Slapping 
 
 See Ship— Pilot. 5. [7 P. D. 240 
 
 16 & 17 Viot. c. IBi— Burials 6 Q. B. D. 290 
 
 See BUEIAL-GEOUND. 1. 
 
 16 & 17 Viot. 0. 137, B. n—Oharitahle Trusts 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 39, 41, n. 
 
 See Chaeity — Commissionees. 4, 5. 
 ■ ss. 17, 62 - - 28 Ch. D. 426 
 
 See Chabity — Management. 4. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 596 ; 21 Ch. D. 513, 
 
 [514, n. 
 
 See Chaeity — Commissionees. 1, 2, 3. 
 s. 21 - - - 20 Ch. D. 516 
 
 See Chaeity— Management. 1. 
 ss. 24, 26 - - 26 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Chaeity — Commissionebs. 9. 
 
 s. 62 17 Ch, D. 407 ; 24 Ch. D, 587, 592 
 
 See Chaeity — Commissionees. 6, 7, 8. 
 
 1854. 
 
 17 & 18 Viot. u. 31 — Railways and Canals. 
 
 /See -Cases under Eailway Company — 
 Eailways Eegulation Acts. 
 
 ss. 2, 3, 6 - 14 a. B. D. 209 
 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 2. 
 
 STATUTES— conimwed!. 
 17 & 18 Viot. 0. 31, s. 7 
 See Eailway 
 
 Management. 
 
 17 & 18 Vict. 0. 34, s. 1 
 
 ^ 8 App. Cas. 703 
 
 Company — Teafeio 
 1. 
 
 See EviDENCE- 
 
 17 & 18 Vict. c. 36— Bills of Sale 
 See FixTUEES. 
 
 Witnesses 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 39 
 
 -Witness. 1. 
 
 15 Q. B. S. 
 
 [358 
 
 ■ ss. 1, 7 16 Ch. D. 104 ; 21 Ch. D. 510 
 
 See Bill oe Sale — Eeqisteation. 3, ?. 
 
 16 Ch, D. 622 
 
 See Building Conteaot. 2. 
 
 - 9 App, Css. 653 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Appaeent ji'osses- 
 
 SION. 3. 
 17 & 18 Viot. u. 38, b. ir— Gaming 
 
 See Gaming. 2. [13 Q, B. D. 505 
 
 17 & 18 Viot. c. 60, s. 3 — Cruelty to Animals 
 
 , [12 ft. B, D. 66 
 
 See Ceuelty to Animals. 
 
 17 & 18 Viot. c. 82, s. 8 — Lancaster Court 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 280 
 See Court — Lanoastee Couet. 
 17 & 18 Viot. 0. 104, ss. 2, 458, iSO— Merchant 
 Shipping - - 7 P. D. 126 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 8. 
 
 8. 21 - - - 10 P. D. 21 
 
 See Peactice — Adjhealty — Limita- 
 tion of Liability. 3. 
 
 ss. 55, 58 - 7 App. Cas. 127 
 
 See Ship — Mbechant Shipping Acts. 7. 
 
 s. 147, sut-s. 1 - 7 ft. B. D. 160 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts. 3. 
 
 s. 172 - 13 ft. B. D. 109 
 
 See Ship^Meechant Shipping Acts. 6. 
 
 s. 189 - - 8 App. Cas. 329 
 
 ,See Peactice — -Admibalty — Jueisdic- 
 TION. 5. 
 
 ss. 242, 432 - 7 P. D. 207 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts. 2. 
 
 s. 243 - 11 ft. B. D. 225 
 
 See Ship — Seamen. 
 . ss. 353, 370, 376, 388 7 P. D. 240 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 5. 
 s. 388 - 7 P. D. 190 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 1. 
 s. 410. 
 
 See Ship— Meechant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 s. 430 - 14 ft. B. D. 770 
 
 See PooB-BATE — Eatbaele Value. 1. 
 s. 512 - , - - 9 P. D. 88 
 
 See Peactice — Admibalty — Jubisdic- 
 tion. 2. 
 17 & 18 Vict. c. 113— ioefce King's Act 
 
 [16Ch. D. 322; 24 Ch. D. 94 
 
 See Will — Exoneeation. 2, 3. 
 - - - 21 Ch. D. 583 
 
 See Company — ^Mbmeee's -Liability. 1. 
 17 & 18 Viot. 0. 125 — Common Law Procedure 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 629 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 4. 
 
clii 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OR SPECIALLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 STATVTES— continued. 
 
 17 & 18 Vict. 0. 125, s. 11 23 Ch, D. 103 
 
 See BciLDiXG Societt. 1. 
 ■ e. 13 12 a. B. D. 310 
 
 See Abbitkation — Submission. 2. 
 s. 15 13Q. B. D. 688 
 
 See AuBiTKATioN — Awaed. 1. 
 
 s. 17 18 Q. B. D. 426 
 
 See Aebiteation — Submission. 4. 
 
 s. 18 - 10 Q. B. D. 451 
 
 See County Court — Peactioe. 6. 
 
 B. 61 13 a. B. D. 199 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Couet — Gae- 
 
 NISHEE OeDEES. 4. 
 
 s. 77 - - 14 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 ;^. e Mandamus. 1. 
 
 ■ ss. 79, 82 - - 20 Ch. D. 501 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Coukt — In- 
 junction. 3. 
 
 1855. 
 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 32, s. 22— Stannaries 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 106 
 See Company — Cost-eook Company. 8. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 42, ss. 1, 2, 3— Affidavits 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 332 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 6. 
 18 & 19 Vict. 0. 43— Infants' Settlements 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 482 
 See Infant — Settlement. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 70, s. e— Crown Lands 
 
 See Public Libeary. [8 Q. B. D. 459 
 18 & 19 Vict. u. 81, s. 9 — Religious Worship 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 813 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 3. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 91, s. 2 — Colonial Lighthouses 
 See Ship — Meechaut Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. Ill, s. I— Bills of Lading 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 74 
 See Ship — Bill op Lading. 4. 
 18 & 19 Vict. e. 120 — Metropolis Management 
 
 [23 Ch, D. 60 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 15. 
 
 s. 6 - 15 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 17. 
 
 S3. 54, 60 - 11 Q. B. D. 533 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 16. 
 
 s. 73 - - - 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 See Will — ^Wordb. 14. 
 
 — • ss. 78, 250 - 15 Q. B. D. 662 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 14. 
 
 s. 88 - - 16 Ch. D. 449 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 6. 
 
 s. 96 - 13 ft. B. D. 904 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 7. 
 
 S3. 96, 105, 250 - 8 App. Cas. 687 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 12. 
 
 ss. 96, 116 - - 9 ft. B. D. 451 
 
 &e Metropolis — Management Acts. 5. 
 
 STATOTES — conlin ued. 
 18 & 19 Vict. u. 120, s. 105 - 9 Q. B. D. 632 ; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 1 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 9, 
 10. 
 
 ss. 135, 136 - 17 Ch. D. 246 ; 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 418 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 4 9. 
 
 ■ 'ss. 135, 220 - 22Ch. D. 221 
 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 4. 
 
 ss. 158, 161 14 ft. B. D. 328 
 
 See Meteopous — Management Acts. 8. 
 
 s. 231 - 9 ft. B. D. 41 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 1. 
 
 s. 250 - - 13 ft. B. D. 2111 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 13. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 122, ss. 27, 28, W6-Metm- 
 politan Building Act - 10 ft. B. D. 236 
 See Metropolis — Building Acts. 2. 
 
 ss. 73, 97 6 ft. B. D. 112 
 
 See Metropolis — Building Acts. 1. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 124, ss. 29, i8— Charities 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 407 ; 24 Ch. D. 587, 591 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 6, 7, 8. 
 
 s. 38 - - 26 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Chakity^Commissioners. 9. 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 128, s. 12— Burials 
 
 See Burial Boaed. [13 ft, B. D. 339 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 134, s. 16— Despatch of Busi- 
 ness - - 22 Ch. D. 635 
 See Teustee Relief Act. 1. 
 
 s. 16 - - 25 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — Cham- 
 bers. 15. 
 
 - 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 5ee Trustee Act — Vesting Orders. 2> 
 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. c. — Newton Improvement 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 25 
 See Highway — Repair. 6. 
 
 1856. 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. c. 60, s. 1— Mercantile Law, Scot- 
 
 land - 6 App. Cas. 58Si 
 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods. 2. 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. c. 79, ss. 14, 31— Bankruptcy^ 
 Scotland - 9 App. Cas. 966 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bankruptcy. 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. c. 97, s. 5 — Mercantile Law- 
 Amendment - 29 Ch. D. 254 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 3. 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. c. 104, S3. 14, 15— Church Build- 
 ing - - 10 ft. B. D. 418. 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clergy. 1. 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. o. 108, s. 2e— County Courts 
 
 [10 ft. B. S. 11 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 8. 
 
 ■ 12 ft, B. D. 21 ; 14 ft. B. IX 58 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — New 
 Trial. 1, 2. 
 
 s. 32 - - 7 ft. B. D. 329 
 
 See County Court — ^Practice. 3. 
 
 ss. 35, 36 18 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See County Court — Costs 3. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OK SPECIALLY KEFEKKED TO. 
 
 cliii 
 
 STATVTES— continued. 
 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 36 - 6 ft. B. D. 607 ; 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 408 
 See County Goukt — Costs. 1, 2. 
 
 s. 39 - 14 Q, B. D. 905 
 
 See Master and Sekvant — Master's 
 
 Liability. 11. 
 s. 44 - - 6 Q. B. D. 608 
 
 See County Court — Appeal. 3. 
 s. 72 - - 7 Q. B. D. 425 
 
 See County Court — Pbaotioe. 1. 
 
 19 & 20 Vict. 0, 120, s. 23— Settled Estates 
 
 [17 Ch, D. 241 
 See Lunatic — Property. 9. 
 
 ss. 23-25 - - 19 Ch. D. 302 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 6. 
 
 1857. 
 
 20 Vict. 0. 19, s. 1— Poor - 9 Q. B. D. 47 
 
 See Poor-rate — Procedure. 7. 
 20 & 21 Vict. 0. 43 — Summary Proceedings 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 680 
 See Justices — Practice. 1. 
 20 & 21 Vict. c. 77, o. 26~Prdbate Court 
 
 [6 P. D. 33 
 See Practice — ^Probate — Evidence. 1. 
 
 s. 35 - - 8 P. D. 206 
 
 See Practice — ^Probate — Trial. 
 
 ■ s. 61 - - 7 P. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Probate — Citation. 
 s. 73 - 7 P. D. 13 
 
 See Administrator — Grant. 6. 
 ■ - 6 P. D. 103 
 
 See Probate — Married Woman. 2. 
 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85— Divorce Court 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Dower. 1. [164 
 ss. 7, 21, 25, 26 30 Ch. D. SOO 
 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 4. 
 s. 25 - - 27 Ch. D. 160 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 1. 
 s. 25 - - 30 Ch. D, 143 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 4. 
 
 s. 32 7P. D. 122; 8P. D. 94, 188 
 
 " See Practice — Divorce — Alimony. 1, 
 2,3. 
 s. 52 - - 13 Q. B. D. 865 
 
 See Action. 1. 
 
 20 & 21 Vict. c. clvii., sa. 10, 22— JMaj^or's Court 
 
 [9 Q, B. D. 35 
 See Court — Mayor's Court. 5. 
 
 s. 12 - - 14 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 See Court — ^Mayor's Court. 4. 
 
 s. 48 - - 11 Q. B. D. 120 
 
 See Court — Mayor's Court. 2. 
 
 1858. 
 
 21 & 22 Vict. 0. 27—Lord Cairns' Act 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 See Damages — Lord Cairns' Act. 
 
 - 29 Ch. D. 326 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 2. 
 
 s. 2 6 ft. B. D. 333 
 
 See Master and Servant — Remedies. 
 1. 
 
 St ATVTES— continued. 
 21 & 22 Vict. u. 27, s. 2 - 26 Ch. D. 578 
 
 See Light — Obstruction. 2. 
 16 ft, B. D, 549 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment, 6. 
 21 & 22 Vict, c. 56, s. 12— Confirmation and 
 
 Probate - - 10 App, Cas. 453 
 
 See Scotch Law — Jurisdiction. 
 21 & 22 Vict. c. 90, ss. 32, iO— Medical Practi- 
 tioners 29 Ch, D, 696 
 
 See Medical Practitioner. 
 21 & 22 Vict. 0. 95, s. 18— Proiate Court 
 
 [6 P. D, 104 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 1. 
 s. 31 - - - 25 Ch, D, 769' 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence, 9. 
 21 & 22 Vict, u. 98, s. Zi— Local Government 
 
 [8 App, Cas, 798 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 4. 
 21 & 22 Vict, c, Ixiii, — Wallasey Improvement. 
 [11 ft. B. D, 229» 
 
 See Contract— Breach. ]. 
 21 & 22 Vict, 0. xcii., s. 139— Mersey Docks 
 
 See Ship— Navigation. 6. [7 P, D, 217 
 
 21 & 22 Vict. c. cxlix., ss. 76, Si— Clyde Navi- 
 
 gation, Scotland 6 App. Cas. 273, 
 
 See Scotch Law — Kiver. 
 
 ss. 98, 99 - - 8 App, Cas, 65a 
 
 See Scotch Law — Harbour. 2. 
 
 1859. 
 
 22 Vict. c. 26, ss. 2, 4, 1— Superannuation 
 
 See Prison. 1. 9 App, Cas, 757 
 
 22 Vict. c. S2— Penalty - 12 ft, B, D, 530' 
 
 See Penal Action. 3. 
 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, s. 10— Law of Property 
 
 See Eent-chabge. [14 ft, B, D. 318; 
 s. 16 16 Ch. D, 3- 
 
 See Administrator — With Will an- 
 nexed, 1. 
 , s. 30 - 16 Ch, D, 687, 588, n> 
 
 See Trustee Kelibp Act. 4, 5. 
 
 22 & 23 Vict. c. 61, s. H— Divorce Court 
 
 [7P, D, 177; 9P, D, 76, 122 
 See Practice— Divorce — Settlements. 
 1, 6, 8. 
 
 1860. 
 
 23 & 24 Vict, c. 38, s. 3— Law of Property 
 
 [21 Ch, D, 189> 
 See Executor — Actions. 6, 
 
 s. 10 18 Ch. D. 646 ; 22 Ch, D, 93 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 money. 4, 5. 
 
 s. 13 - - - 29 Ch, D. 964 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Lega- 
 cies. 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 124 — Ecclesiastical Commis- 
 sioners - 29 Ch. D, 231 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 4. 
 23 & 24 Vict. e. 126, s. 1 — Common Law Pro- 
 cedure - 14 ft. B, D, 347 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entey, 
 7 
 
cliv 
 
 STATUTES ABSTEACTED OK SPECIALLY EEFEBKED TO. 
 
 STA1VTES— continued. 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 126, ss. 13, 14, 17 26 Ch. D, 605 ; 
 See Shebbet. 1. [12 Q. B. D. 213 
 S3. 13, 14, 17 26 Ch, D. 605 
 
 Sse Peaotioe — Supkeme Cocet — Intee- 
 
 PLEADEE. 11. 
 
 ■ SS. 14, 17 - 19 Ch, D. 216 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Appeal. 1 . 
 9 a. B. D. 65 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Cocet — Inter- 
 
 PLEADEE. 3. 
 
 ^;s. 17 15 ft. B. D. 569 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supeeme Cocet — Intee- 
 
 PLEADEE. 6. 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 26— Solicitors 
 
 [8Q, B. D. 187; 15 Q. B. D. 348 ; 
 [8 App. Cas. 407 
 See SoLiciTOE — TJnqcalified. 1, 2, 4. 
 
 s. 28. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitoe — ^LrEU. 1-7. 
 
 9 Q. B. D. 598 
 
 See Peaotioe — Scpeejjie Court — Chasi- 
 
 BERS. 6. 
 
 - - 8 P. D. 209 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 11. 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. Ii2— Union of Benefices 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 520 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 3. 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 144, s. 2— Divorce 10 P. D. 110 
 
 See Practice — Divoboe — Appeal. 2. 
 s. 7 - - 8 P. D. 188 
 
 See Peaotioe — Divoeoe — Alimout. 1. 
 - 9 P. D. 218 
 
 See Practice — ■ Ditoece — Inteeven- 
 
 TlOlf. 
 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, s. 25— Trustees— Lord 
 
 Cranworth's Act - - 22 Ch. D. 583 
 
 See Infant — Maintenance. 2. 
 
 s. 27 23 Ch. D. 138 ; 24 Ch. D. 698 ; 
 
 [25 Ch, S. 611 
 
 See Settlement — Powees. 8, 12, 13. 
 ss. 27, 30 - - 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Tp.ustee — Powers. 1. 
 
 1861. 
 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 10, s. 7— Admiralty 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 609; 10 App. Cas. 69 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 1, 6. 
 
 s. 5 10 P. D. 44 
 
 See Ship — Maeitime Lien. 1. 
 
 a. 8 - - 10 P. D. 4 
 
 See Ship — Ownees. 1. 
 
 s. 10 - 8 P. D. 48 
 
 See Ship — Maeitime Lien. 4. 
 
 s. 18 10 P. D, 40 
 
 SeePRAcrrcE — Admiralty — Inspection 
 OF Peopeety. 
 
 s. 34 - - 10 P. D. 33 
 
 ;See Peaotice — Admiralty — Counter- 
 claim. 
 24 & 25 Vict. u. 47, s. 10— Earhours 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 5. [7 P. D, 240 
 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 55, s. 3— Poor 9 Q, B. D. 522 
 See PooE Law— Settlement. 8. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 24 & 25 Viet. c. 55, s. 10 - 10 Q. B. D. 172 
 
 ifiiee PooE Law — Settlement. 11. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 70, ss. 8-12 — Locomotives 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 313 
 
 See Highway — Locomotive. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 3— Larceny 15 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Oeehinal Law — Larceny. 2. [323 
 ss. 75, 76 - - 8 Q. B. D. 706 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Misappeopeiation. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, ss. 11, 12 — Malicious Injury 
 
 to Property 7 ft. B. D. 201 
 
 See EiOT. 
 s. 52 - - 8 ft. B. D. 283 
 
 iSee Ceiminal Law — ^Malicious Injuet 
 TO Peopeety. 
 24 & 25 Vict. u. 100, s. i— Offences against Per- 
 son - - 7 ft. B. D. 244 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Offences against 
 Peeson. 5. 
 ss. 14, 15 - - 10 ft. B. D. 381 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Person. 4. 
 s. 20 - - 8 ft. B. D. 54 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Person. 1. 
 ■ ■ s. 43 - - 10 P. D. 172 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Judicial 
 Separation. 
 ss. 48, 51 - - 10 ft. B. D, 74 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women. 
 s. 57 - - 11 ft. B. D. 118 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Bigamy. 2. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 109, s. 31— Inspectors. 
 
 See FisHEEY Acts — Statutes. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 114— TFiHs - 6 P. D. 211 ; 
 
 See Probate— Grant. 1, 2. [9 P. D. 130 
 - 25 Ch. D. 373 
 
 jSee Power — ^Exeoution. 4. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 133, s. 33— Improvement of 
 
 Land - - - 14 ft. B. D. 561 
 
 See Sea Wall. 
 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. iv. — Wallasey Improvement 
 
 [11 ft, B. D. 229 
 See Contract — Breach. 1. 
 
 1862. 
 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. i2— Bolt's Act 29 Ch. D. 325 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 2. 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 61, s. 2— Highways 
 
 [15 ft. B. S, 20 
 
 See Highway — Eepair. 2. 
 ss. 9, 39 - - 11 ft. B. D. 704 
 
 See Highway — Board. 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 32— Mercliant Shipping 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 8. [10 P, D. 65 
 s. 41 - - - 9 P, D. 86 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 2. 
 , s. 54. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Admiralty 
 — Limitation of Liability. 
 s. 60 
 
 See Shu- — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Statuteis. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEBEED T«. 
 
 elv 
 
 SIATXITES— continued. 
 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, ss. 66-78 7 App. Cas. 591 
 See Tboveb. 
 
 • s. 67 - 8 P. D. 178 
 
 See Ship — Merchant SHiPPiNa Acts. 4. 
 25 & 26 Vict. i:. 68, ss. 1, i— Copyright 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 627 
 
 See COPYBIGHT — PlOTUEES. 
 
 25 & 26 Yiot. u. 86, o. 3 — Lunacy Regulation 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 320 
 See Lunatic— Pkopeety. 3. 
 
 s. 4 - - 27 Ch. D. 116 
 
 See Lunatic — Inquisition. 2. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 496 
 — Pbopebtt. 7. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 677 
 
 —Maintenance. 2. 
 
 -Companies 28 Ch. D. 643 
 
 ■ s. 12 
 
 See Lunatic- 
 ss. 16 
 
 See LuNATic- 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 89- 
 
 See Crown. 
 ■ ss. 9, 38 
 
 See Company— 
 
 ■ s. 12 - 
 
 See CoMPANY- 
 ciation. 1. 
 
 ss. 12, 23 
 
 See CoMPANY- 
 1. 
 
 • s. 20 -. 
 
 See Company 
 
 PANY. 8. 
 
 ■ • s. 23 
 
 See Company— 
 
 12 Q. B. S. 176 
 
 •Mbmbee's Liability. 2. 
 
 - 30 Ch. D. 376 
 
 -Memorandum op Asso- 
 
 17 Ch. D. 76 
 
 -Eeduction op Capital. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 638 
 
 — Unregistered Com- 
 
 - 29 Ch. D. 421 
 
 Shares — ^Allotment. 1. 
 
 — • 25Ch. d;283 
 
 See Company — Director's Qualifica- 
 tion. 1. 
 s. 30 - 14 a. B. D. 424 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 2. 
 
 s. 35 - - 9 ft. B. D. 436 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 4. 
 
 - 34 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 6. 
 
 s. 38, sub-s. 7 - 30 Ch. D. 629 
 
 See Company — Proof. 1. 
 
 s. 51 - - 29Ch.D. 204 
 
 See Company— Eeduction of Capital. 
 
 5. 
 
 ss. 67, 133, sub-ss. 2, 141 • 
 
 - [26 Ch. D. 70 
 See Company — Voluntary Winding-up. 
 
 2. 
 
 s. 69 - - - 23 Ch. D. 368 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity for Costs. 1. 
 
 ss. 75, 76, 103, 105, 106 29 Ch. D. 
 
 See Executor— Eetainer. 4. [934 
 
 ss. 75, 77 - - 25 Ch. D. 415 
 
 See Company — Contributory. 3. 
 
 s. 77 - - - 19 Ch. D. 77 
 
 See Company — OoNTBiBUTOEt. 2. 
 
 s. 79 - - 20 Ch. D. 151, 169 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 209 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 1, 
 4,5. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 25 & 26 Viot. e. 89, ss. 80, 82 - 23 Ch. D. 292 
 See Company — Winding-up Obdee. 12. 
 
 ss. 81, 116 - 18 Ch. D. 472 
 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 1. 
 
 s. 82 - 28 Ch. D. 183 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 6. 
 
 ss. 84, 153 - - 28 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Company — Proof. 3. 
 
 ■ ss. 85, 87 - 16 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Secured Creditor. 1. 
 
 ss. 85, 163 - 20 Ch. D. 442 
 
 See Company — Injunction. 1. 
 - 23 Oh. D. 154 
 
 See Company — Disteess. 2. 
 
 SB. 85, 199, 201, 204 17 Ch, D. 600 
 
 See Company — Uneegisteeed Company. 
 7. 
 
 ss. 86, 92 - - 27 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 11. 
 
 ss. 87, 163 - - 17 Ch. D. 250 
 
 See Company — Disteess. 3. 
 
 - 16 Ch. S. 246 
 
 Insurance Com- 
 
 s. 91 
 
 See Company — Life 
 
 PANY. 2. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 769 ; 24 Ch, D, 259 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 16, 
 
 17. 
 e. 95 - - 17 Ch. D. 234 
 
 See Company — Liquidator. 3. 
 s. 101 - 8 Q. B. D. 179 
 
 See Company — Set-off. 2. 
 
 - — S3. 101, 165 21 Ch. D. 492 
 
 See Company — Dieectoe's Liability. 3. 
 
 s. 107 - 16 Ch. D. 590 
 
 See Company — Sbcueed Creditor. 2. 
 
 s. 109 - - 23 Ch. D. 297 
 
 See Company — Contributory. 4. 
 
 s. 115 19 Ch. D. 118 ; 20Ch.D. 376; 
 
 [25 Ch. D, 400 ; 27 Ch. D. 516 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 2 — 5. 
 s. 153 - - 28 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Company — Proof. 3. 
 s. 155 - - 15 Q. B. D. 473 
 
 iS'ee PRACTICE' — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction op Documents. 3. 
 8. 158 - 17 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Peoof. 2. 
 ss. 161, 162 - 28 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Company — Eeconsteuction. 
 s. 163 - 21 Ch. D, 510 
 
 See Company — Injunction. 2. 
 
 s. 165 21 Ch, D, 149 ; 26 Ch. D. 762 
 
 See Company — Dieectoe's Liability. 
 4,6. 
 - 22 Ch. D. 714 
 
 See Company — Liquidator. 1. 
 - 25 Ch. D. 587 
 
 See Company — Set-off^, 1. 
 s. 165 - 26 Ch. D. 221 
 
 See Peincipal and Agent — ^Agent's 
 Liability. 1. 
 
clvi 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY KEFEKEED TO. 
 
 STATUTES— continued. 
 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 89, ». 199 - 36 Ch. D, 527 
 
 See COITPANY — UnKEGISTERED COJIPANY. 
 
 9. 
 — ^ 27 Ch. D. 226 ; 29 Ch. D. 219 
 
 See C'o-MPANY — Winding-up Okdek. 2,3. 
 
 . Table A., Art. 43 29 Ch. D. 159 
 
 See Company — Volumtaky Wlsdixg-up. 
 1. 
 
 Table A., Arts. 26 and 27 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 642 
 See Company — Eeductios of Capital. 
 3. 
 
 Table A., Art. 72 8 App. Cas. 65 
 
 See Company — Dividends. 3. 
 
 Table A., Arts. 95, 97 24 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Pkospectds. 6. 
 
 25 & 26 Vict. 0. 102, s. &\— Metropolis Manage- 
 ment - - 17 Ch. D. 246 
 See Metkopolis — Management Acts. 9. 
 
 ■ ss. 74, 75 27 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Metkopolis — Management Acts. 3. 
 
 s. 75 9 Q. B. D. 41 ; 10 App. Cas. 229 
 
 See Meteopolis — Management Acts. 
 1,2. 
 
 s. 77 13 Q. B. D. 211 ; 8 App. Cas. 687 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 12, 13. 
 
 s. 96 9Cl. B.D. 632; 13Q. B. D. 1 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 
 9,10. 
 
 ss. 96, 97 - 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 -See Will — "Woeds. 14. 
 
 s. 98 8 Q. B. D. 445 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 11. 
 
 s. 112 - - 15 Q. B. D. 662 
 
 See Metkopolis — Management Acts. 
 14. 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 103, s. 19— Poor Law 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 83 
 See Pook-rate— Pbooeduke. 2. 
 
 25 & 26 Viet. c. Ill, s. 20— Lunatics 11 Q. B, D. 
 See PoOE-LAW — Settlement. 9. [113 
 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 114, s. 2— Game 
 
 See Game. 2. [14 Q. B. D. 726 
 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. XXX. — Bristol Waterioorlts 
 
 [16 Q. B. S. 637 
 See Wateewoeks Company — Water 
 Eate. 5. 
 
 1863. 
 
 26 & 27 Vict. 0. 24, s. 10, sub-s. W— Vice- 
 
 Admiralty Courts - 9 App. Cas, 366 
 iSee Ship — Makitime Lien. 7. 
 
 26 & 27 Vict. u. 29, s. 'Z— Corrupt Practices 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 408 
 See Paeliament — Election. 1. 
 
 . s. 7 - - 8 Q. B. D. 267 
 
 6'ee Ceiminal Law — Evidence. 4. 
 
 . - 7 Q. B. D. 676 
 
 See Paeliament — Election Commis- 
 
 fclONERS. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 26 & 27 Vict. c. 93, ss. 14, 16— Watencorlts 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply op 
 Water. 2. 
 26 & 27 Vii't. c. lOo — Promissory Notes. 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Statutes. 
 
 26 & 27 Vict. c. 112, ss. 2, 3, 12— Telegraph 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 904 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 7. 
 
 , s. 3 - - 6 a. B. D. 244 
 
 See Telegeaph Company. 
 26 & 27 Vict. u. 118, part 3 — Companies Clauses 
 [8 App. Cas. 780 
 See Company — Debentuees. 1. 
 26 & 27 Vict. c. 120— Advowson 15 ft. B. D. 432 
 
 See Advowson. 2. 
 26 & 27 Vict. L-. Ixxxix.— Pit Z Harbour 
 
 [11 Q. B. S. 496 
 See Docks and Hakbobes. 2. 
 
 26 & 27 Vict. 1-. ccxviii., s. 51 — London, 
 
 Brighton, and South Coast Raihcay 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 605 
 See Eailway Company— Eailways Ee- 
 GULATiON Acts. 4. 
 
 1864. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. 0. 29, s. 2— Criminal Lunatics 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 339 
 
 See Lunatic — Criminal. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. 39, s. 1— Poor-rate 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 83 ; 16 Q. B. S. 451 
 
 See Poor-rate — Procedure. 2, 3. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. 0. 95 — Lord Campbell's Amend- 
 ment Act - - 26 Ch. D. 409 
 See Damages — Lord Campbell's Act. 1. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. 101, s. 32— Highways 
 
 [16 Q. B. S. 382 
 
 See Poor-rate — Guardians. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. 112— Judgments 17 Ch. D. 269 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 2. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. 114, ss. 49, 51, 66— Tmprone- 
 mcnt of Land - - 29 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 money. 5. 
 27 & 28 Vict. u. cxxv. — Bailway Passengers 
 ■ Lisurance - - 9 Q, B. D. 188 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — Stay- 
 ing Peooebdinqs. 4. 
 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. cclxvii., ss. 2, 29— Veto Brighton 
 
 Pier .. . _ 7P. D. 190 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 1. 
 
 1865. 
 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. ie— Militia Ballots SusiKnsion. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. 79, s. 8— Poor 10 ft. B. D. 17!i 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 11. 
 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. 83— £o<?omo«i)es. 
 
 See Highway — Locomotive — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 3, 4, 7 - - 7 ft. B. D. 31» 
 
 See Highway — Locomotive. 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EBFBREED TO. 
 
 clvii 
 
 STATUTES— oonf/rattefJ. 
 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. 104, ss. 31, 34, 95— Cj-owji 
 
 Suits - 14 Q. B. D. 667 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. 
 28 & 29 Vict c. 121, s. 3— Fisheries 
 
 See Fishery Acts. 1. [10 Q, B. D. 131 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. 126, ss. 4, 5, 8, 23, ii— Prisons 
 
 See Prison. 3. [9 Q. B. D. 506 
 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. xxfi.— Bristol Watei-icorks 
 
 [15 a. B. D, 637 
 See ■Waterworks Company — Abater 
 Eate. 5. 
 
 1866. 
 
 29 & 80 Vict. c. 19— Parliamentary Oath 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 38 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 2. 
 - 8 Q. B. S. 83 
 
 See Practice — Supreme CorsT — Writ. 
 2. 
 - 12 Q. B. D. 271 
 
 See Parliament — Procedure. 
 ss. 3, 5 - 14 a. B. D. 667 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. 
 s. 5 - - - 11 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 See Champerty. 1. 
 8 App. Cas. 354 
 
 See Penal Action. 2. 
 29 & 30 Vict. .;. 32, ». 1— Divorce 6 P. D. 213 ; 
 
 [7 P. D. 122 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Alimony. 3, 5. 
 - 15 a. B. D. 239 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 3. 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 36, s. S— Income Tax 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 315 
 
 See Scotch Law — Eevenue. 
 7 a. B. D. 485 : 14 a. B. D. 491 
 
 See Ebvbnue — Income Tax. 3, 4. 
 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 52 — Frosecation Expenses, 
 See Justices — Practice — Statutes. 
 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 96, s. 5—BilU,of Sale 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 653 
 See Bill of Sale — Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 3. 
 23 & 30 Vict. c. 114, ss. 5, 7 — Libraries 
 
 See Public Library. [8 a. B. D. 459 
 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 118, s. 14 — Industrial Schools 
 See Industrial School. [10 a. B. D. 360 
 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. cxliii. — MiddUsiorough Im- 
 irrovemetii - 12 a- B. I>. 239 
 
 See Highway — Eepair. 1. 
 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. ccxlvii., s. 3 — Yarmouth Har- 
 
 bour - - 9 P. D. 3 
 
 See Ship — Kavigation. 32. 
 
 1867. 
 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 3, ss. 65, 92— British North 
 
 America - - 10 App. Cas. 141 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 4. 
 
 33. 91, 92 - - 7 App. Cas. 829 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 157 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Do- 
 minion. 2, 3. 
 
 Si tL.TT5TE&— continued. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 3 - - 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 3. 
 
 ss. 91, 92, 129 7 App. Cas. 136 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 3. 
 
 ss. 102, 109 - 8 App. Cas. 767 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 i. 
 
 ■ s. 108 7 App. Cas, 178 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Do- 
 minion. 1. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. e— Metropolitan Poor 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 193 
 See Nuisance — Definition. 1. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 29, s. l—Banldng Companies 
 See Stock Exchange. 1. [9 a. B. D. 546 
 
 14 a. B. D. 460 ; 15 a. B. D. 
 
 [388 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 4, 5. 
 30 & 31 Vict. 0. 48, ». 7— Auctions 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 561 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Sale 
 by Court. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 97, s. 2, sub-s. 3— Trusts, Scot- 
 land 8 App. Cas. 641 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property 
 2. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, 83. 3, Gl—Bepresentation 
 of People 10 a. B. D. 577 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 3. 
 
 a- 4 - 8 a. B. D. 247 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 4. 
 
 s- 61 8 a. B. D. 195 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 2. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 106, s. 27— Poor Law Board 
 
 [8 a. B. S. 158 
 See Elementary Education Acts — At- 
 tendance. 4. 
 30 & 31 Vict. u. 124, 8. 9— Merchant Shipping 
 
 [10 P. D. 21 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Limitation 
 op Liability. 3. 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 127, ss. 3, i—Bailways 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 320 
 See Eailway Company — ^Property. 1. 
 
 s. 4 21 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Eailway Company — Constitution. 
 
 ss. 4, 23 - 6 a. B. D. 36 
 
 See Railway Company — Property. 2. 
 
 S3. 4, 31, 35 - 18 Ch. D. 155 
 
 See Eailway Company — Abandonment 
 
 1. 
 
 30 & 31 Viet. c. 131, s. 9— Companies 17 Ch. D. 
 
 [76; 29 Ch. D. 683 
 
 See Company — Eeduction op Capital 
 
 1,4. 
 
 8. 24, sub-8. 3-8 App. Cas. 65 
 
 See Company — Dividends. 3. 
 
 s. 25 - - 18 Ch. D. 587 
 
 See Company— Debentures. 2. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 542 
 
 See Company — Eeduction of Capital 
 3. 
 
olviii 
 
 STATUTES ABSTEACTED OR SPECIALLY EEPEEEED TO. 
 
 STATUTES— continued. 
 30 & 31 Vict. B. 131, s. 25 
 
 See CkjMPANY- 
 s. 26 
 
 See CoMPANT- 
 ■ a. 38 - 
 
 See OoMPANY- 
 
 s. 40 - 
 
 See CoMPANT- 
 
 23 Ch. D. 545, n. ; 
 [30 Ch. D. 163 
 
 -Shakes — Issue. 1, 2. 
 
 14 Q. B. S. 882 
 -Shaees — Teanseee. 6. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 301 
 -Peospeotus. 6. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 849 
 -■Winding-up Oedee. 13. 
 
 30 & 31 Vict. 0. 142, s. 5—Counhj Courts 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 470 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 40. 
 
 ss. 7, 8, 10 - 27 Ch. D. 533 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Couet — Jueis- 
 
 DICTION. 3. 
 B. 10 - 8 Q. B. D. 411 
 
 See County Couet — Jueisdiction. 7. 
 - 13 Q. B. D. 835 
 
 See County Couet — Peaotice. 4. 
 8 Q. B. D. 325 
 
 See Peaotice ■ — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 6. 
 e. 13 - - 13 Q. B. D. 694 
 
 See County Couet — Appeal. 1. 
 — - s. 31 - 7 a. B. D. 425 
 
 Ste County Couet — Peactice. 1. 
 30 & 31 Vict. u. 144 — Life Insurance 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See MoETGAQB — Pbioeity. 13. 
 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. cxxxix., ss. 43, 49 — KirTtcaXdy 
 
 and Dysart Waterioorlcs 7 App. Cas. 694 
 See Scotch Law — Statutoey Duty. 
 
 1868. 
 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. iO—Fartitwn 19 Ch. D. 646 
 
 See Tkustee Acts— Vesting Oedees. 10. 
 ■ ■ s. 4 - - 22 Ch. D. 284 
 
 See Paetition Suit — Jurisdiction. 2. 
 
 — s. 8 19 Ch. D. 302 ; 27 Ch. D. 258 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 5, 6. 
 ■ - 17 Ch. D. 241 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 9. 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 11— County Courts 6 Q. B. D. 46 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 21. 
 s. 2 - - 6 Q, B. D. 165 
 
 See County Couet — Jurisdiction. 1. 
 ss.3,5 7P. D. 247; 13 ft. B.D. 142 
 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 2, 4. 
 ss. 3, 11 - - 6 P. D. 84 
 
 See County Court — Peactice. 2. 
 s. 6 - - - 8 P. D. 34 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 4. 
 8. 23 - 10 P. D. 36 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Service. 1. 
 ss. 26, 27 - 9 P. D. 12 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Appeal. 1. 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 12— Oaths 1 Q. B. D. 38 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 2. 
 - 14 Q. B. D, 667 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. ' 
 
 STA1VTES— continued. 
 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 72 - 8 Q. B, D. 63 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Weit. 
 2. 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 77 — Divorce and Matrimonial 
 [9 App. Cas. 631 
 See Peactice — Divoece — Appeal. 1. 
 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 100, s. 29— Court of Session, 
 Scotland - 6 App. Cas. 560 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 2. 
 
 31 & 32 Vict. e. 101, ss. 19, 20— Titles to Land, 
 Scotland - 8 App. Cas. 677 
 
 See yooTCH Law — Heritable Property. 
 4. 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 110, s. 2^Telegro.plis 
 
 [13 Q. B. B. 904 
 See Metropolis — ^Management Acts. 7. 
 
 ■ - 6 ft. B. D, 244 
 
 See Telegraph Company. 
 
 31 & 32 Viot. e. 121, s. Vl— Pharmacy Act 
 
 See Phaemacy Acts. [8 ft. B. D. 397 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 122, s. 38— Poor Law 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 89 ; 13 ft. B. D. 25 
 
 See Poor Law — Maintenance. 1, 2. 
 
 s. 37 - - 8 ft. B. D. 571 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Offences against 
 
 Peeson. 3. 
 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 125, ss. 2, 2&—meclion Petition 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 290 
 
 See Paeliament — Election Petition. 
 
 1. 
 
 ss. 34, 41, and Eules 7 ft. B. D. 477 
 
 See Paeliament — Election Petition. 
 2. 
 
 31 & 32 Vipt. 0. cxxx., s. 1—Salford Hundred 
 
 See Peobibition. [14 ft. B. D. 855 
 
 1869. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 11, s. ^—Colonial Certificates 
 
 of Competency. 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 14, s. U-Inland Bevenue 
 
 [6 ft. B. B. 530 
 See Eevenue — House Duty. 3. 
 
 32 & 33 Viot. 0. 18— Lands Clauses 
 
 [11 ft. B. S. 346 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 1. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. 0. 21— Corrupt Practices. 
 
 See Parliament — Election Commis- 
 siONEES — Statutes. 
 32 & 33 Vict. 0. 27, s. S—Fiiblic Houses 
 
 See Inn^Licence. 3. [8 ft. B. D. 869 
 s. 19 - - 12 ft. B. D. 620 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 5. 
 32 & 33 Viot. c. 41, s. i— Assessed Taxes 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 195 
 
 See Wateeworks Company — Watee- 
 
 EATE. 2. 
 
 s. 16 - - 7 ft. B. D. 223 
 
 See Poor-rate — Occupation. 2. 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. iG— Specialty Debts 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 368 ; 23 Ch. D. 764 
 
 (■^ee Executor — Eetainer. G, 9. 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEREED TO. 
 
 clix 
 
 STATUTES— coniinued. 
 
 32 & S3 Vict, c 46 - - 37 Ch. D. 478 
 
 See Eetainee. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. u. 51, s. i— County Courts. 
 
 See Cases under County Coukt — Juris- 
 diction. 1—4. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 56^Endowed Sclwols. 
 
 See Endowed Schools Act — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 5, 11, 14, sub-s. 1 ; s. 19, sub-s. 2 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 463 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 2. 
 
 ss. 9, 19, sub-s. 2 10 App. Cas. 304 
 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 1. 
 
 ss. 11. 39 - 7 App. Cas. 91 
 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 3. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 62, s. i— Debtors Act 
 
 [20Ch. D. 632; 21 Oh, D, 230 
 See Peactioe — Supbeme Cocet — At- 
 tachment. 1, 2. 
 
 10' P, D. 183, 184 
 
 See Aekest — Debtoes Act. 1, 2. 
 
 - 10 P. D. 185 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Damages. 
 
 s. 4, sub-s. 4 . 11 Q. B. D. 545 
 
 See Solioitoe-^Liabilities. 4. 
 ss. 4, 6 - - '29 Ch. D. 341 
 
 See Aerest — Nb exeat regno. 
 . s. 5 13 a. B. D. 901 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 10. 
 - 14 a..B. D. 973 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separate Es- 
 tate. 11. 
 - 15 Q. B. D. 335 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Teansfee. 2. 
 
 sjib-s. 2 - 9 Q. B. D. 178 ; 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 597 
 
 See Aeeest— Debtoes Act. 4, 5. 
 s. 13 8 Q. B. D. 630 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Fraudulent 
 Debtoe. 
 ^ s. 21 - - 16 Ch. D. 143 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeatign — Qdalifi- 
 cation. 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. e~—Valuathn.(MettopoUs) Act 
 [10 Q. B. D. 327 
 
 See Poor-rate — Occupation. 1. 
 ss. 36, 46, 47 - 13 ft. B. D. 364 
 
 See Metropolis— Valuation Acts. 
 
 s. 47 - - 14 Q. B. D. 361 
 
 See Poor-rate — Procedure. 1. 
 
 82 & 33 Vict. c. 68— Evidence - 7 Q. B. D. 38 
 See Parliament — ^Election. 2. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 71, ss. 4, 15, 17, 88, 89, 90— 
 Bankruptcy - 21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 13. 
 
 s. 6 - - 23 Ch. D. 133 
 
 See Bankruptcy — AdjAdioation. 2. 
 
 - - 17Ch, D. 191 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 15. 
 
 sub-3. 2. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Act of 
 Bankeuptoy. 1 — 5. 
 
 STATUTES— coHfinMed!. 
 82 & 33 Vict. 0. 71, s. 6, sub-s. 2, s. 92 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 58 
 See Bankeuptoy — Fraudulent Pre- 
 ference. 1. 
 
 s. 6, sub-s. 3-25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 25. 
 
 : sub-ss. 3, 6 20 Ch. D. 697 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 1. 
 
 — - ss. 6, 8 -31 Ch. D. 394 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Trader. 2. 
 
 ss. 6, 10, 71 - 22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Annulment. 1. 
 
 ss. 6, 82 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 
 3. 
 
 ss. 6, 87 - - 11 Q. B. D. 430 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 1. 
 
 ss. 6, 125 16 Ch. D. 541 ; 
 
 [34 Ch. D. 353 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 3, 4. 
 
 ss. 6, 125, sub-s. 12 18 Ch. D. 109 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 3. 
 s. 7. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Act op 
 Bankruptcy. 12 — 22. 
 19 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 11. 
 ■ • s. 11 - - 22 Ch. D. 782 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 6. 
 ss. 11, 15, 94,95, 115 21 Ch. D. 849 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 13. 
 
 — ss. 11, 95 17 Ch. D. 839 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Protected Transac- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 s. 12, 47, 54 - 22 Ch. D. 686 ; 
 
 [34 Ch. D. 673 
 See Bankeuptoy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 2, 3. 
 
 : ss. 12, 81, 49, 125, sub-s. 10 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 342 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 8. 
 • s. 13 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankruptcy- 
 INGS. 1. 
 ss. 14, 20 - 
 
 ,665 
 
 -Staying Pboceed- 
 
 ■ 17Ch. D. 38; 
 [31 Ch. D. 397 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 1, 2. 
 s. 15, sub-s. 4 . 29 Ch. D. 1005 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 11. 
 sub-s. 5 - 20 Ch, D, 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Disclaimer. 4. [341 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Order 
 
 AND Disposition. 
 s. 16, sub-s. 5 17 Ch, D, 74 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 1. 
 s. 17 - 17 Ch, D, 768 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt, 4, 
 ss. 17, 23, 24, 83, sub-s. 6 ; ss. 89, 90, 
 
 125 - - 9 ft, B, D. 473 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Trustee. 6. 
 
ds 
 
 STATUTES ABSTKACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEREED TO. 
 
 STATTJTES — continued. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 71, ss. 17, 28, 83 16 Ch. D. 541 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Liquidation. 3. 
 - — - s. 19 - 21 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Bankkcptoy — Examination. 2. 
 g. 20 - 16 Ch. D. 497 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Keceivek. 2. 
 25 Ch. D. 144 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — Pboop. 1. 
 as. 20, 28, 125 19 Ch, D. 140 
 
 See Bankkcptoy — Liquidation. 5. 
 
 ss. 21, 48, 78 13 Q. B. D. 56 
 
 See Bankkcptoy — Discharge. 1. 
 
 s. 22 18 Ch. D. 381 ; 21 Ch. D. 868 
 
 See Bankecptcy — Assets. 15, 16. 
 ss. 23, 24. 
 
 See Cases under Bankkuptoy — Dis- 
 claimer. 1 — 18. 
 s. 28. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Anncl- 
 ment. 
 33. 28, 80, subs. 10 16 Ch. D. 256 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 2. 
 8. 31 - - 20 Ch. D. 780 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 7. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 24 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Costs. 
 35. 
 . • - 25 Ch. D. 415 
 
 See Company — Contributory. 3. 
 ■ 17 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Proof. 2. 
 17 Ch. D 342 
 
 See Executor— Actions. 19. 
 33. 31, 39, 49 9 Q. B. D. 113 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Mutual Dealings. 6. 
 ss. 31, 49 17 Ch. D. 122 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 22. 
 3. 32 - 26 Ch. D. 693 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Preferential Debts. 
 - 20 Ch. D. 545 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 20. 
 16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Company — Preferential Debts. 
 a. 34 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Distress. 
 
 ss. 34, 39 - 22 Ch, D. 410 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 3. 
 ■ s. 39. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Mutual 
 Dealings. 2 — 6. 
 22 Ch. D. 586 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 18. 
 - 30 Ch. D. 216 
 
 See Company — Contracts. 4. 
 
 ss. 39, 47, 48, 54 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 686 ; 24 Ch. D. 672 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — Undischarged Bank- 
 KCPT. 2, 3. 
 SB. 47, 54, 71 - 20 Ch. D. 308 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 1. 
 s. 49 21 Ch. D. 865 ; 23 Ch, D, 195 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 2, 3. 
 
 STATUTES— confmued. 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 71, a. 49 
 
 See Bankruptcy— 
 s. 55 - 
 
 See Bankruptcy— 
 ss. 65, 71 - 
 
 11 Q,. B. S. 351 
 
 ■Dischakge. 5. 
 
 - 7 a. B. D, 9 
 •Trustee. 5. 
 
 19Ch. D. 216; 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 315 ; 22 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Bakkrdptoy — Appeal. 1, 5, 8. 
 
 ss. 66, 96 13 Q. B. D. 963 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Jurisdiction. 2. 
 
 s. 72 - 19 Ch. D. 86 
 
 See Bailment. 
 
 17 Ch, D. 13 ; 21 Ch. D. 553 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 238 
 /See Bankruptcy — Jurisdiction. 1,3,4. 
 
 s. 74 - - - 30 Ch. D. 119 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 5. 
 
 s. 82 - 25 Ch. D. 112 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Act of BAifKBUPTCY. 
 19. 
 
 ss. 82, 127 - 20 Ch, D. 438 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Composition. 8. 
 
 s. 83, sub-s. 4 - 14 a. B. D. 177 ! 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 107 
 See Bankruptcy — Tbustee. 8, 12. 
 
 s. 85 - - - 17 Ch. D. 618 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 7. 
 
 s. 87 8 Q. B. D. 392; 9 Q. B, D, 432; 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 241 
 See Bankruptcy— Assets. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 - 16Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company' — Secured Creditor. 1. 
 
 s. 90 - 17 Ch. D. 70 ; 21 Ch. D. 85 ; 
 
 [14 Q. B. D, 301 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 12, 13, 14. 
 
 s. 91 - - 19 Ch. D. 688 
 
 (See Bankruptcy — ^Voro Settlement. 1. 
 
 s. 92. 
 
 See Cases under Bankkuptoy — Fkaudu- 
 LENT Preference. 
 
 S3. 94, 95. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Pao- 
 TECTED Transaction. 1 — 5, 8. 
 
 8. 95, sub-8. 2 ; s. 125, eub-s. 5 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 644 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Ke- 
 
 OEIVER. 1. 
 
 25 Ch. 
 4. 
 20 Ch. 
 2. 
 
 D. 400 
 
 D. 294 
 
 ■Eti- 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 
 8. 96 - 
 
 See Evidence — Witness 
 ss. 96, 97. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy 
 
 DENCE. 
 
 — ^ 88. 119, 125 - - 29 Ch. D. 8 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 13. 
 
 s. 125. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy- Liquida- 
 tion. 
 
 — - 7 Q. B. D, 524 
 
 See Bankruptcy- Disclaimer. 17. 
 8ub-8. 12 - 18 Ch. D. 109 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Trader. 3. 
 — 12 Q. B, D. 497 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Ai-judication. 5. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTBD OK SPECIALLY EBFEEEED TO. 
 
 clxi 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 32 & 33 Vict. 0. 71, s. 126. 
 
 See Oases under Bankeuptot — Com- 
 position. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 636 
 
 ■ See Bakkbuptcy — Anitulment. 2. 
 
 , 8 App. Cas. 606 
 
 See Bankbdptot — Seocked Oeeditob. 7. 
 
 - 26Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 12. 
 
 - 14 a. B. D. 402 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Teusteb. 9. 
 
 - 29 Ch. D. 196 
 
 See Settlement — Consteuotion. 4. 
 32 & 33 Vict. 0. 73, es. 2, Z— Telegraphs 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 904 
 See Meteopolis — ^Management Acts. 7. 
 
 SB. 3-6 - 6 ft. B. D. 244 
 
 See Telegeaph Company. 
 32 & 33 Vict. 0. 83, s. 15— Banlcruptcy Repeal 
 See Insolybncy. [20 Ch. D. 637 
 
 ' 32 & 33 Vict. 0. 114 — Aiandonmetit of Mailways 
 
 [18 Ch. B. ISS 
 See Eailway Company — Abandonment. 
 1. 
 32 & 33 Vict, c, 115— Metropolis— Traffie 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 105 
 See Meteopolis — Public Caeeiages 
 Acts. 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. 0. ox. — Huddersfield WaterworTcs 
 
 [12 ft. B. S. 443 
 See Wateewobes Company — Supply op 
 Wateb. 6. 
 
 1870. 
 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 14 — Naturalization 
 
 [6 P. D. 211 ; 9 P. D. 130 
 See Peobate — Geant. 1, 2. 
 33 & 34 Vict. 0. 23,8. S— Forfeitures for Treason 
 and Felony - - - 19 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankbcptcy. 
 12. 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 28, s. 4 — Attorneys and Solici- 
 tors - - 30 Ch. D. 114 
 See Solioitob — Bill op Costs. 12. 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 30 — Master and Servant 
 
 [12 ft. B. S. 8 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Couet — Gae- 
 nishee Oedebs. 10. 
 
 ■ s. 1 - 9 ft, B. D. 45 
 
 See Masteb and Servant — Wages. 1. 
 33 & 34 Viot. c. 35 — Apportionment 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 160; 26 Ch. B. 795 
 See Appoetionment. 1, 3. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 161 
 
 See Company — Distbess. 1. 
 
 33 & 34 Vict. 0. i9— Oaths 7 ft. B. D. 38 
 
 See Pabliament — ^Election. 2. 
 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 52, s. 8— Extradition 
 
 See Exteadition. 1. [9 ft. B. D. 701 
 
 : ss. 9, 10 10 ft. B. D. 513 
 
 See Extradition. 3. 
 
 BS. 10, 1.5, 26 9 ft. B. D. 93 
 
 • See Extradition. 2. 
 
 STAIVTES— continued. 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 61, s. 3— Life Insurance 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 837 
 See Company — Life Insubanoe Com- 
 pany. 1. 
 
 ss. 21, 22 - 16 Ch. D. 246 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 351 
 See Company — Life Insubanoe Com- 
 pany. 2, 6. 
 
 38 & 34 Vict. u. 71, s. 22— National Debt 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 176 
 See Local Gotbenment — Local Autho- 
 
 BITY. 9. 
 
 BS. 51, 54, 55 - 28 Ch. D. 816 
 
 See National Debt Commissionees. 
 
 33 & 34 Viot. c. 75 — Elementwry Education 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 382 
 
 See POOE-EATE — GUAEDIANS. 
 
 - 13 ft. B. D. 225 
 
 See Blementaey Education Acts — 
 Home Lessons. 
 
 - 13 ft. B. D. 929 
 
 See PooE-BATE — Eateable Value. 3. 
 
 8. 3 7 ft. B. D. 502 
 
 See Elbmentaby Education Acts — 
 Attendance. 5. 
 
 s. 11 - - 9 ft. B. D. 259 
 
 See Blementaey Education Acts — 
 
 Attendance. 6. 
 
 12 ft. B. D. 578 
 
 See Blementaey Education Acts — 
 Pees. 2. 
 
 s. 17 - - 7 ft. B. D. 388 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 Fees. 1. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 639 
 Education Acts — 
 
 88. 19, 20, 22 
 
 See Blementaey 
 School Board. 
 
 8. 30, 8ub-8B. 1, 4, 
 
 Schedule 7 - 
 
 See CoRPOEATiON. 3. 
 
 s. 74 
 
 6; s. 35, Third 
 14 ft. B. S. 500 
 
 13 ft. B. D. 176 ; 
 [15 ft. B. D. 415 
 
 See Blementaey Education Acts — 
 Attendance, S, 7. 
 
 33 & 34 Vict. 0. 78, ss. 28, 29, 55— Tramways 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 16 
 
 See Teamway Company. 2. 
 
 B. 54 - - 6 ft, B, D. 70 
 
 See Teamway Company. 1. 
 
 33 & 34 Vict. 0. m — Married Women's Fro- 
 
 I Cases under Husband and Wipe — 
 Maeeied Women's Pbopeety Acts. 
 2—5, 13. 
 
 s. 14 - - 6 ft. B. D. 615 
 
 See PooE Law — ^Maintenance. 3. 
 
 33 & 34 Viot. y>. 97— Stamps. 
 
 See Cases under Eevenue — Stamps. 
 
 8. 59 - - 8 ft, B, B. 434 
 
 See Souoitob — Unqualified. 3. 
 
 33 & 34 Viot. 0. 0. s. 93~Brighton Sewers 
 
 [9 ft, B, B. 723 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 6. 
 
 I 
 
clxii 
 
 STATUTES ABSTEACTBD OE SPECIALLY REPEERED TO. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 1871. 
 
 34 & 35 Vict. c. 31, ss. 2, 3, i— Trade Unions 
 
 See Teade Union. [21 Cli. D. 194 
 
 ' 34 & 35 Vict. c. 43, sb. 12-16, 72— Ecclesiastical 
 Dilapidations - - 16 Q. B. D. 222 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Dilapida- 
 tions. 
 
 34 & 35 Vict. c. 44, s. 10 — Incumbents' Resig- 
 nation 17 Ch. D. 1 
 See Ecolesustical Law — Olbkgt. 3. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 626 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Supkemb Cotjet — CouN- 
 
 TEE-OLAIM. 7. 
 
 34 & 35 Vict. c. 79 — Lodgers' Goods Protection. 
 
 See Cases under Landlokd and Ten- 
 ant — Lodger. 
 34 & 35 Vict. u. 86, s. 3 — Begulation of Forces 
 
 Act - - 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Moktgage — Peioeity. 12. 
 34 & 35 Vict. c. 87 — Sunday Observance. 
 
 See Sunday Oeseevanoe — Statutes. 
 
 34 & 35 Vict. o. 112, a. 19 — Prevention of Crime 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 522 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 6. 
 
 1872. 
 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. 33— Ballot. 
 
 &ePAELiAMENT — ELECTION — Statutes. 
 Municipal Coepoeation — Election 
 — Statutes. 
 
 B. 20 - 6 Q. B. D. 323 
 
 See Municipal Cobpoeation — Elec- 
 tion. 3. 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. eO— Corrupt Practices 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 293 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Elec- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 s. 13, sub-s. 6 - 6 a. B. D. 323 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — • Elec- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 s. 14, sub-ss. 5, ss. 20, 22 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 494 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Elec- 
 tion. 1. 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. eS— Bastards. 
 
 See Cases under Bastaedt. 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. 76, s. 18— Mines 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 592 
 See Mine — Mines Eegulation Acts. 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. 86, s. 6— County Courts 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 120 
 See Court — Mayoe's Couet. 2. 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. 94, s. 3 — Licensing Act 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 2. [8 Q. B. D, 
 
 S3. 3, 51 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 1. 
 
 ■ — s. 9 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 4. 
 
 ■ s. 17 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 4, 
 
 s. 42 7 Q. B. D. 642 ; 14 Q. B. D. 584 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 1, 9. 
 
 s. 45 8 Q. B. D. 389 
 
 See Inn — Licence, 3. 
 
 373 
 8 Q. B. D. Sll 
 
 - 11 Q. B. D. 417 
 
 12 Q, B. D. 360 
 
 ST&TVTES— continued. 
 
 1873. 
 
 36 & 37 Vict. v;. 12, s. 1— Infants Custody 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 115 ; 25 Ch. D. 220; 
 [13 Q. B. S. 614 
 
 See Infant — Custody. 1, 2, 3. 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 38, s. 3— Vagrants 
 
 See Vageant Acts. 2. [10 Q. B. D. 44 
 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 48 — Railways and Canals 
 
 See Railway Company — Eailways Ee- 
 
 gitlation Acts — Statutes. 
 
 6 a. B. D. 686; 7Q.B. D. 182 
 
 See Eailway Company — Railways Re- 
 gulation Acts. 3, 5. 
 
 s. 8 17 Ch. D. 493 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways Re- 
 gulation Acts. 1. 
 
 s. 11 10 Q. B. D. 231 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Regulation Acts. 6. 
 
 SB. 15, 26 - 15 Q. B. D. 505 
 
 See Railway Company — Eailways Re- 
 gulation Acts. 4. 
 
 s. 28 - - 8 Q. B, D, 515 
 
 See Eailwat Company — Eailways Re- 
 gulation Acts. 2. 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 3, 1&— Judicature 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 787 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Eti- 
 dbnce. 7. 
 
 . s. 16 - - 18 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See County Couet — Costs. 3. 
 
 . 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Teustee Acts — ^Vesting Orders. 2. 
 
 - 10 P. D. 110 
 
 See Peactice — Divoece — Appeal. 2. 
 
 . • ss. 16, 23 - - 10 P. D. 122 
 
 See Peactice — Divorce — Nullity of 
 Maeeiage. 8. 
 
 — - ss. 16, 24, 73 - 25 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Cham- 
 bees. 15. 
 
 ss. 16, 25, 34, 36 - 26 Ch. D. 656 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 38T 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Juris- 
 diction. 1, 2. 
 
 s. 19 14 a. B. D. 371, 377 
 
 See PRACTICE' — Supeeme Couet— Iniek- 
 pleadbr. 5, 7. 
 
 6 a. B. D. 32S 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Elec- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 12 a. B, D. 1 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 3. 
 
 ■ ss. 19, 45 15 a. B. D. 76 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 4. 
 
 ss. 19, 47 ■ - 10 a. B. D. 378 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 9. 
 
 ss. 19, 47 - 9 a. B. D. 701 
 
 See Extradition. 1. 
 
 — 14 a. B. D. 667 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OR SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO. 
 
 olxiii 
 
 S1\1JJTES— continued. 
 36 & 37 Viot. 0. 66, s. 22 - 21 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See Will — Condition. 1. 
 s. 24 - 16 Ch. D. 544 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supkeme Coubt — Ee- 
 
 CEIVEE. 1. 
 
 ■ - 12 Q. B. D. 287 
 
 See Pbacticb — Supbemb Couet — 
 Chakginq Orders. 2. 
 
 sub-s. 3-17 Ch. D. 174 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 473 ; 21 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 1, 4, 5. 
 
 B. 49 - 8 Q. B. D. 329 
 
 See Pbaotice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 48. 
 
 12 Q. B. D. 533 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Tbibd 
 Party. 8. 
 
 sub-ss. 3, 7 8 Q. B. D. 428 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 PLT. 1. 
 
 sub-s. 5 12 a. B. D. 165 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 5. 
 
 . sub-ss. 5, 7 - 25 Ch. D. 723 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ee- 
 
 CErVER. 7. 
 
 sub-s. 7 - 15 Q. B. D. 549 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 6. 
 
 9 ft. B. B. 320 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stat- 
 ing Proceedings. 5. 
 
 ss. 24, 25 - - 7 App. Cas. 235 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 4. 
 
 ■ s. 24, sub-s. 7, s. 25, sub-s. 8 
 
 [IS Q. B. D. 807 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 ceiter. 6. 
 
 sub-s. 8 - 19 Ch. D. 473 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Coun- 
 
 . TER-CLAIM. 1. 
 
 s. 25, sub-s. 2 - 18 Ch. D. 254 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Trusts. 
 2. 
 — : sub-s. 6 
 
 See Company — Set-off. 
 
 22 Ch. B. 122 ; 
 [25 Ch. D. 587 
 1. 
 
 — - 6 ft. B. D. 626; 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 347, 511 
 See Assignment of Debt. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 12 ft. B. D. 518 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 5. 
 
 • sub-Si 7 11 ft. B. D. 123 
 
 See Frauds, Statute of. 1. 
 
 sub-s. 8 16 Ch. D. 660 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 601 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 3, 5. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Eeoeitee. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 405 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 9. 
 
 S1ATUTES— continued. 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, s. 25, sub-s. 8 11 ft. B. D. 30 
 See Arbitration — Staying Proceed- 
 ings. 
 
 - 7P. D. 15 
 
 See Practice — Divorce— Costs. 1. 
 
 25 Ch, D. 238 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 20. 
 
 13ft.B.D. 67 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 terpleader. 10. 
 
 sub-s. 8, a. 34 16 Ch. D. 143 
 
 See Municipal Corporation— Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 sub-s. 9 - 10 ft. B. D, 521 
 
 See Ship — Bill of Lading. 1. 
 
 sub-s. 10 - 13 ft. B. D. 614 
 
 See Infant — Custody. 1. 
 
 sub-s. 11 29 Ch. D. 725 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 9. 
 
 ■ . 29 Ch. D. 996 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 5. 
 
 15 ft. B. D. 280 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 4. 
 
 — s. 39 - 6 ft. B. D. 622 
 
 See Solicitor — Lien. 3. 
 
 13 ft. B. D. 218 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 5. 
 
 s. 45 6 ft. B, D. 309 ; 8 ft. B. D. 325 ; 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 76 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 4, 5, 6. ' 
 
 s. 47 - 7 ft. B. D. 634, 575 
 
 See Practice — ^Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 8, 13. 
 
 12 ft. B. D. 148 
 
 See Solicitor — Misconduct. 1. 
 
 ■ - — s. 49. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme: 
 Court — Appeal. 
 
 s. 49 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser— Purchase - 
 wiTHOCT Notice. 1. 
 
 8 ft. B. D. 82 ; 12 ft. B. D. 100 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 1, 9. 
 
 B. 50 - - - 19 Ch. D. 326 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 5. 
 
 88. 56, 57, 58. 
 
 iSee Cases under Practice- 
 Court — Eefereb. 
 
 -Supreme- 
 
 - - 25 Ch. D. 772- 
 
 ScpREME Court — Trial. 
 
 s. 57 
 
 See Practice- 
 2. 
 
 ss. 64, 66 - 20 Ch, D. 638- 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 8. 
 
 s. 67 - - 27 Ch. D. 533 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supreme Court — Juris- 
 diction. 3. 
 
 s. 89 - 7 ft. B, D, 623 
 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 5. 
 I 2 
 
clxiy 
 
 STATUTES ABSTEAOTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO. 
 
 STATUTES— contrnwed. 
 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, s. 89 - 10 ft. B. D. 804 
 
 See CouET — Mayoe's Coubt. 3. 
 
 B. 100 11 a. B. D. 251 
 
 See Peaotioe — Sotkeme Court — Intee- 
 
 BOGATORIES. 4. 
 
 . 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supebme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 22. 
 23 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supreme Oouet — Mo- 
 tion EOB Judgment. 2. 
 
 36"& 37 Viot. c. 71, s. 15— Salmon Fishery 
 
 See Fishery Acts. 2. [10 ft. B. D. 510 
 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 85, s. 17 — Merchant Shipping 
 [7 App. Cas. 512 
 See Peaotioe — Admiealty — Appor- 
 tionment OP Damage. 
 
 See Cages under Ship — Navigation. 8, 
 10, 11, 14, 29. 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 86 — Elementary Education 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 678 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 Fees. 2. 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 87, s. 7— Endowed Schools 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 304 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 1. 
 
 1874. 
 
 12 Q. B. S. 126 
 
 37 & 38 Vict. u. 15— Gaming 
 
 See GrAMINQ. 5. 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. 4:2— Building Societies. 
 
 See Cases under Building Sooiett. 
 
 ss. 14, 16 - - 8 App. Cas, 235 
 
 See Building Society. 14. 
 sa. 15, 16, 43 - 9 ft. B. D. 397 
 
 See Building Society. 6. 
 ■ s. 16, sub-ss. 9, 34 9 App. Cas. 260 
 
 See Building Society. 2. 
 • s. 34 23 Ch. D. 103 
 
 See Building Society. 1. 
 
 s. 42 26 Ch. D. 273 ; 28 Ch, D. 298, 
 
 See Building Society. 4, 12, 13. [398 
 
 37 & 38 Viot. c. 49, s. 3 — Licensing Act 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 6. [11 ft. B, D. 71 
 
 8.15- 7 ft. B. D. 542; 11 ft.B. D. 
 
 See Inn — ^Licence. 1, 4. [417 
 
 37 & 38 Viot. c. 50, ss. 1, 2— Married Women 
 [10 ft, B. B. 129 
 
 See Husband ajto Wefe — Married Wo- 
 men's Property Acts. 2. 
 
 s 5 - - 8 ft. B. D. 380 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Married Wo- 
 men's Property Acts. 3. 
 
 37j,&'38 Viot. u. 54, s. 4, sub-s. {a)—Poor-rate. 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 13 
 
 See Poor-rate — Eatbable Value. 4. 
 
 37 & 38 Vict. 0. 57 — Seal Property Limitation 
 [18 Ch. D. 229 ; 19 Ch. D. 639 
 
 See LiMiTATioits, Statute of — Ebalty. 
 5. 
 
 STATTTTES — continued. 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. 57 - 22 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Trusts. 
 3. 
 
 s. 1 9 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 See Eailway Company — Peopeety. 3. 
 
 S3. 1, 9, 10 27 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Eealtt. 
 3. 
 
 s. 7 - 17 Ch. D. 132 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Eealty. 
 6. 
 
 B. 8 - 22 Ch. B. 611, 579 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 291 
 See Limit ATioNS, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 8, 9, 10. 
 
 s. 10 - - 27 Ch. D. 676 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Legacy. 
 
 37 & 38 Viot. c. 62, s. 1— Infants' Belief 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 109 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 3. 
 
 37 & 38 Viot. o. e4r— Divorce, Scotland 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 489 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wipe. 
 3. 
 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. 78 — Vendors and Purchasers 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 711 
 See Eetbnue — Succession Duty. 5. 
 
 - - 24Ch. D. 
 
 See Will — Estate in Eealty. 1. 
 
 190 
 
 - 16 Ch. B. 696 
 
 See Will — Eesiduaey Gift. 1. 
 
 B. 2 - - 17 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Vendor and Puechaser — Title. 3. 
 
 - 24 Ch. D. 11 
 
 See Vendor and Porohaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 4. 
 
 s. 6 29 Ch. B. 693 
 
 See Vendor and Pubchaseb — Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 8. 7 - 12 ft. B. B. 423 
 
 See Moetgage — Prioeity. 2. 
 
 s. 9 - 29 Ch. B. 691 
 
 See Vendor and Pueohasee — Con- 
 ditions OF Sale. 2. 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. S5—PublicWorship Begulation 
 [7 P. D. 161 ; 7 App. Cas. 240 
 See Peactice — Ecolesiastioai. — Public 
 WoEsHip Act. 1, 2. 
 
 83.7,9,13 - 8P. B. 79; 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 667 
 See Peaotioe — Ecolesiasticai — Con- 
 tempt. 2, 3. 
 
 ss. 7, 9, 13, 16, 19 - 6 ft. B. B. 376 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical— Church 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 
 37 & 38 Viot. c. cviii. — Middleshorough Im- 
 
 provement - 12 ft. B. D. 239 
 
 See Highway — Eepaib. 1. 
 
 1875. 
 
 38 & 39 Viot. 0. 9— Building Societies 
 
 9 App. Cas. 619 
 See Building Society. 9. 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEREED TO. 
 
 clxv 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 38 & 39 Vict. 0. 36— Artizans' Dwellings 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 614 
 See Laboueers' Dwellings Acts. 2. 
 
 s. 19, Soiled. 6 - 25 Ch. D. 78 
 
 See Laboueebs' D'welldjgs Acts. 1. 
 38 '& 39 Vict. 0. 40, B. 1, sub-s. 2— Municipal 
 Elections 7 Q. B. D. 369 ; 8 Q. B. D. 450 ; 
 [12 Q, B. D. 257 
 See Mtjotoipal Coepoeation — Eleo- 
 Tiosf. 4, 5, 7. 
 38 & 39 Vict. 0. 49, s. 15— Licensing Act 
 
 See Inn— Licence. 1. [7 ft. B. D. 642 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 50, s. 6— County Court 
 
 [6 Q, B. D. 508 ; 9 Q. B. D. 386 
 See County Couet — Appeal. 2, 3. 
 
 18 ft. B. D. 58; 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 55 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — New 
 Trial. 2, 3. 
 
 9 P. D, 12 
 
 See Practice — Admihaltx — Appeal. 1. 
 
 . - - 13 ft. B. D. 403 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme^ Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 7. 
 
 s. 8 - 18 Ch. D. 521 ; 9 ft. B. D. 
 
 See County Couet — Costs. 1, 3. [408 
 38 & 39 "Vict. c. 55, ss. 4, 150— Public HeaZlh 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 394 
 See Local Govbenment — Streets. 2. 
 
 , 4, 150 - 
 
 29 Ch. D, 760 
 
 See Highway — Dedication. 
 
 BS. 4, 156, 157 8 App. Cas. 798 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 4. 
 
 S8. 4, 257 
 
 See Local Government- 
 
 17 Ch. D. 782 
 
 ■Steebts. 8. 
 
 s. 13 - 28 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Local Goternment — Sewers. 2. 
 
 ss. 15, 16, 175, 308 - 8 ft. B. D. 86 
 
 See Local Government — Sewbes. 1. 
 ss. 15, 23 ' - - 22 Ch. D. 221 
 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 4. 
 B. 17 - - 20 Ch. D. 696 
 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 5. 
 s. 21 - - 23 Ch. D. 767 
 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 6. 
 SB. 39, 149, 264, 368 14 ft. B. D. 928 
 
 See Local Government — Compensa- 
 tion. 2. 
 - — BS. 44, 276 - 12 ft. B. D. 617 
 
 See Local Goveenment — By-laws. 
 —^ s. 47 8 ft. B. D. 97 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Offences. 3. 
 s. 62 - 13 ft. B. D. 216 
 
 See Local Government — Bates. 3. 
 -, — s. 91, sub-B. 4 10 ft. B. D. 138 
 
 See Local Government — Offences. 1. 
 ss. 92, 94 7 ft. B. D. 534 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 8. 
 
 ss. 94, 96 - - 6 ft. B. D. 548 ; 
 
 [11 ft. B. S. 191 ; 13 ft. B. S. 681 
 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 thority. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 STATUXTES— continued. 
 38 & 39 Vict. i;. 55, ss. 116, 117 10 ft. B. D. 63 ; 
 [15 ft. B. D. 342 
 
 See Local Government — Offences. 4, 5. 
 
 ■ • — - B3. 144, 149, 179, 308 6 ft. B. D. 264 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Compensa- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 B3. 144, 189 - 13 ft. B. D. 640 
 
 See Highway — Stopping-up. 
 
 . ■ ss. 144, 216, 217 - 13 ft. B. D. 946 
 
 See Local Government — Bates. 1. 
 
 ss. 144, 264, 341 - 11 ft. B. D. 286 
 
 See Local Government — Practice. 3. 
 
 s. 149 • - 10 ft. B. D. 118 
 
 See Highway — Nuisance. 
 
 s. 150 6ft.B.D.30O; 9 ft. B.D. 183; 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 849 
 
 /SeeLocAL Government— Streets. 1, 6, 7. 
 
 ss. 150, 174, 257 14 ft: B. D. 87 
 
 See Local Government— Local Autho- 
 rity. 8. 
 
 BS. 150, 257, 268 - 8 ft. B. D. 39; 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 309 
 See LooAL Government — Streets. 5, 9. 
 
 ss. 150, 268 - 12 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Peaotioe. 2. 
 
 ■ SB. 155, 158 ; Sobed. I., rr. 2, 9 ; 
 
 Sobed. II., Part I., r. 65 ; Part II., r. 2 
 
 [30 Ch. B. 350 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 15. 
 
 ss. 156, 252 8 ft. B, D. 603 
 
 See Local Government — Offences. 2. 
 
 B. 157 - 8 App. Cas. 798 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Streets. 4. 
 
 ss. 173, 174 - 22 Ch. D. 637 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 617 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 1, 3. 
 
 ^ s. 174 - 11 ft. B. D. 229 
 
 See Contract — Breach. 1. 
 
 ss. 174, 175, 189, 193, 265 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 735, 911 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 
 THOEITY. 4, 5. 
 
 . SB. 174, 200 7 ft. B.D. 629 
 
 See Local Government — ^Local Autho- 
 rity. 2. 
 • ss. 179, 180, 308| 9 App. Cas. 596 
 
 Goveenment — Oompensa- 
 
 LOOAL 
 TION. 1. 
 
 — s. 193' 
 'ee Local 
 
 THOEITY. 
 
 . 14 ft. B. D. 739 
 
 Government — Local Au- 
 6. 
 - 12 ft. B. D. 630 
 
 Sec Penal Action. 3. 
 s. 211 - 8 ft. B. D. 486 
 
 See Local Government — Bates. 2. 
 _ - - 19 Ch. D. 640 
 
 See Apportionment. 2. 
 B. 256 - , - 14 ft. B. D. 730 
 
 See Justices- Peactice. 2. 
 B. 258 - 9 ft. B. D. 394 
 
 See Local Government — Practice. 1. 
 
olxTi 
 
 STATUTES ABSTEAOTED OE SPECIALLY EEPEEEED TO. 
 
 STATUTES— oonii»«e(J. 
 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55, s. 258 - 8 Q. B. D. 383 
 
 See Justices — Disqualification. 4. 
 s. 264 - 11 Q. B. D. 299, 788 
 
 See Local Goteenment — ^Peactioe. i, 5. 
 8. 275 - - 17 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Local G-ovebnment — Local Autho- 
 
 EIIT. 13. 
 
 a. 310 - 21 Ch. D. 176 
 
 See Local Goteebment — Local Au- 
 
 THOHITT. 9. 
 Soh. r. 64, 70 - 7 ft. B. D. 611 
 
 See Local Goveenment — ^Local Autho- 
 
 EITY. 7. 
 38 & 39 Viot. c. eO^Friendly Societies 
 
 See Feiendlt Society. [19 Ch. D. 64 
 
 s. 16, sub-3. 7 - 28 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Building Society. 13. 
 
 s. 23 - 21 Ch. D, 798 
 
 See Pkactice — Supebme Coubt — ^In- 
 junction. 4. 
 38 & 39 Vict. o. 63, a. 6— Sale of Goods 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 193, 845 
 See Adulteeation. 2, 3. 
 
 S3. 6, 12, 13, 14, 20, 21 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 172 ; 10 Q. B. D. 618 
 See Adulteeation. 5, 6. 
 
 . sa. 6, 25 - 12 a. B. D. 97 
 
 See Adulteeation. 1. 
 
 es. 13, 14 6 Q. B. D. 17 
 
 See Adulteeation. 4. 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 66 — Statute Law Bevision 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 376 
 See Peactice— Ecclesiastical— Ohueoh 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 
 8 Q. B, D. 63 
 
 See Pkactice — Supeeme Coubt — ^Weit. 
 2. 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 10— Judicature. 
 
 See Cases under Exeoutob — Actions. 
 17—21. 
 
 - 15 Q. B. D. 280 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 4. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 337, 590 
 
 See Company — Secured Ceeditoe. 1, 2. 
 
 - 17 Ch. D. 260 
 
 See Company — Distress. 3. 
 
 - 17 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Proof. 2. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 686 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischabged Bank- 
 rupt. 3. 
 
 - 9 App. Cas. 434 
 -Eescission. 2. 
 
 - 25 Ch. D. 687 
 
 See Company — Set-off. 1. 
 
 28 Ch. S. 643 
 
 See Crown. 
 - 16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Company — Preferential Debts. 
 a. 11 - - 26 Ch. D. 656 
 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Court — JuRis- 
 diotton. 1. 
 s. 17 - - - 25 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Peaotioe — ^Supreme Court — Cham- 
 
 P.ERS. 15. 
 
 See Sale of Goods- 
 
 STATTTTES — continued. 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, a. 18 10 P. D. 110 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Appeal. 2. 
 
 s. 24 - - 12 Q. B. D. 633 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Thibd 
 Party. 3. 
 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 84 — Parliamentary Elections. 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 87, s. 129— Land Transfer 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 423 
 See Mortgage — ^Peioeity. 2. 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 90— Workmen 13 Q. B. D. 618 
 
 See Master and Servant — Ebmedies. 2. 
 
 a. 4 11 ft. B. D. 225 
 
 See Ship — Seamen. 
 ss. 4, 10 - 6 ft. B. D. 182 
 
 See Master and Servant — Ebmedies. 3. 
 ss. 5, 6 - - 12 ft. B, D. 352 
 
 See Infant — Contracts. 1. 
 ! a. 10 13 ft. B. D. 832 
 
 See Master and SERVAirr — Master's 
 Liability. 9. 
 s. 11 - - - 6 ft B. D. 1 
 
 See Master and Servant — Wages. 2. 
 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 91, as. 2, 3, 5, 10— Trade-marhs 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 804 ; 26 Ch. D. 288 ; 30 Ch. D. 454 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eegibtrahon. 1,4,11. 
 
 a. 5 - - 26 Ch. D. 48 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eegistbation. 14. 
 
 a. 6 - 21 Ch. D. 223 
 
 See Teade-mabk — Eegistbation. 10. 
 
 as. 6, 10 - - 26 Ch. D. 409 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eegistbation. 16. 
 
 rule 33 - - 25 Ch. D. 194 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eegistration. 15. 
 38 & 39 Vict. 0. 94, s. i— Offences against the 
 Person - - 10 ft. B, D, 74 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women. 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. oMii., b. 93— TFes^ Kent Sewer- 
 age - - - 9 ft. B. D. 518 
 See Abbitbation — Submission. 1. 
 
 1876. 
 
 39 & 40 Viot. 0. n— Partition 19 Ch. B. 646 
 See Trustee Acts — ^VESTiNfl Obdebs. 
 10. 
 
 a. 3 - - - 16 Ch. B. 360 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 1. 
 
 a. 6 - 16 Ch.D. 362; 18 Ch.D. 612 
 
 See Partition Suit— Sale. 3, 4. 
 39 & 40 Vict. c. 33, =. 1— Trade-marhs 
 
 [30 Ch. L. 454 
 See Trade-marks — Eegistration. 11. 
 39 & 40 Vict. V. 59— Appellate Jurisdiction 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 631 
 See Praotiok — Divorce — Appeal. 1. 
 
 s. 17 - - 26 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Practice — Supreme — Court — Cham- 
 bers. 15. 
 
 s. 20 - 15 ft, B. D. 569 
 
 Se« Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 
 PLE.'^DER. 6, 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OR SPECIALLY EEFBERED TO. 
 
 clxvii 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 39 & 40 Vict. u. 61, 88. 34, 35— Poor Law. 
 
 See Cases under Poor Law — Settle- 
 ment. 
 
 s. 44 - - 6 Q. B. D. 576 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 13. 
 39 & 40 Viot. 0. 75, ss. 2, 3, S—Bivers Pollution 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 595 
 See NtJiSANOE — Remedies. 5. 
 
 39 & 40 Vict. c. 79 — Elementary Education 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 578 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — 
 Fees. 2. 
 
 ss. 4, 5, 8, 11 - 10 Q. B. B. 218 ; 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 176 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — At- 
 tendance. 2, 3. 
 
 ■ ■ as. 8, 11, sub-s. 1 9 Q. B. D. 259, 612 
 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — At- 
 tendance. 1, 6. 
 
 s. 9 - - 13 Q. B. D. 225 
 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — 
 Home Lessons. 
 
 ■ ss. 10, 11, 12 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 388 
 
 Eleuentart Education Acts — 
 Fees. 1. 
 
 as. 12, 34 - - 8 Q. B. D, 158 
 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — At- 
 tendance. 4. 
 
 39 & 40 Vict.o. 80, ss. 6, 10— Merchant Shipping 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 372 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts. 1. 
 
 s. 17. 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 1877. 
 
 40 & 41 Viot. c. 16, s. i—Harlours 7 P. D. 151 
 
 See Negligence— LiABiLiTT. 8. 
 
 <- 11 Q. B. D. 496 
 
 ;See.DocKS and Haeboubs. 2. 
 
 40 & 41 Vict. c. ISSettled Estates 
 
 [21 Ch. S. 41, 123 ; 24 Ch. B. 238 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 1, 4. 
 
 — a. 22 - - - 17 Ch. D. 711 
 
 See Eevenue— Succession Dutt. 5. 
 
 ss. 34-36 - - 19 Ch. D. 302 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 6. 
 
 s. 50 26 Ch. D. 220; 28 Ch. D. 171 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 2, 3. 
 
 40 & 41 Vict. c. 21, S3. 4, 57— Prisons 8 App. Cas. 
 See Lunatic — Criminal. [339 
 
 - 7 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Prison. 2. 
 
 83. 5, 48, 60 ■ 
 
 See Prison. 3. 
 
 9Q. B. D.606 
 9 App._Cas. 767 
 
 a. 36 
 
 See Prison. 1. 
 
 40 & 41 Vict. c. 25, s. 23, and Sched. II.— Soli- 
 citors - - 15 Q, B. D. 467 
 See Solicitor — Certificate. 
 
 40 & 41 Viot. 0. 26—C<ympanies 29 Ch. D. 683 
 .Sfee CoMPANT — Reduction of Capital. 
 4. 
 
 STATUTES— coniinaeiJ. 
 40 & 41 Viot. 0. 34 — Loclce King's Amendment 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 94 
 See Will — Exoneration. 3. 
 
 40 & 41 Viot. 0. 54, s. 1 — Libraries 
 
 See Public Libbabt [8 Q. B. D. 469 
 
 40 & 41 Viot. 0. 62, ss. 2, Z— Solicitors 
 
 [8 App. Cas, 407 
 See SoLiciTOB — Unqualified. 4. 
 
 40 & 41 Viot. 0. coxxxv. — Metropolitan Street 
 
 Improvements -' 22 Ch, D. 142 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsort 
 Powers. 1. 
 
 1878. 
 
 41 & 42 Viot. c. 15, s. 13 — Inland Bevenue. 
 
 See Cases under Revenue — House Duty. 
 
 41 & 42 Viot. 0. 16— Factories 9 Q, B. D. 612 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — At- 
 tendance. 1. 
 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 19, s. 3— Divorce 7 P. D. 177 
 See Practice — Divoboe — Settlements. 1. 
 
 3. 4 - 10 P, D, 172 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Judicial 
 
 Sepabation. 
 
 41 & 42 Viot. 0. 26, s. 5 — Parliamentary and 
 
 Municipal Registration 8 Q, B. D. 195 ; 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 677 
 
 See Pabliament — Fbanohise. 2, 3. 
 
 12 ft. B. D. 381 
 
 See Municipal Coepohation — Fran- 
 chise. 
 — s. 15, sub-s. 2 - 12 ft, B, D. 376 
 
 See Pabliament— Feanchise. 7. 
 
 ss. 22, 23 8 ft. B. L, 247 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 4. 
 
 a. 28 
 
 See Paeliament- 
 
 • sub-a. 2 
 
 14Q.B, D. 607 
 
 -Franchise. 9. 
 
 8 ft. B. B. 259 ; 
 [16 ft. B. D. 46x 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 5, 6. 
 
 ■ • aub-sa. 12, 13 10 ft. B, D. 87 ; 
 
 [14 ft. B. B. 604 
 
 See Parliament — Feanchise. 1, 8. 
 ■ sub-s. 15 12 ft, B. D. 376 
 
 See Pabliament — Feanchise. 7. 
 41 & 42 Viot. 0. SI— Bills of Sale 7 ft. B. D. 80 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Eegisteation. 4, 5. 
 
 - 24 Ch. D. 210 
 
 See Bankeoptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 2. 
 as. 3, 4 - - 14 ft. B. D. 386 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 6. 
 a. 4 - - 12 ft, B. D. 436 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Eegisteation. 2. 
 ss. 4, 7 - - 13 ft. B, D. 794 
 
 See Bill of Sale — ^Formalities. 24. 
 ss. 4, 8 - - 7 ft. B. D. 616 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 1. 
 
 ss. 4, 9 - - 23 Ch, D. 626 
 
 * See Bill of Sale — Eegisteation. 1. 
 
clxviii 
 
 STATUTES ABgTKACTBD OK SPECIALLY KEFEEEED TO. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 31, ss. 4, 10 14 Q. B. D. 636 
 
 See Bankbcptoy — Obdek and Disposi- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 S3. 8, 10. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 Bill of Sale — Fobmalities. 
 Bill or Sale — Eeqisteation. 
 
 ■ s. 8 16 Ch. D. 668 ; 9 App. Cas. 653 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Appabent Posses- 
 sion. 2. 3. 
 
 as. 8, 10 - 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankbwptoy — Act of Bankbuptct. 
 5. 
 
 ss. 9, 10 sub-s. (2), 20 21 Ch. D. 871 
 
 See Bankbuptct — Obdeb and Disposi- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 s. 11 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Foemalitles. 6. 
 
 ss. 14, 23 - 10 Q. B. D. 477 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Eegistbation. 12. 
 
 s. 20 
 
 See Bankbuptct 
 position. 3. 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 32, ss. 14, 16 
 
 - 23 Ch. S. 409 
 
 Obdeb and Dis- 
 
 -Building Acts 
 [14 a. B. D. 479 
 
 See Metbopolis — Botlding Acts. 3. 
 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 51, ss. 4, 5, 6, 7, ^1— Roads and 
 Bridges, Scotland - 6 App. Cas. 881 
 See Scotch Law — Highwat. 3. 
 
 41 & 42 Vict. 0. 54, s. 1— Debtors 20 Ch. D. 632 
 See Pbactice — Supbeme Coubt — At- 
 tachment. 1. 
 
 - 11 Q. B. D. 545 
 
 See SoLiciTOB — Liabilities. 4. 
 
 41 & 42 Vict. o. 74 — Contagious Diseases (Ani- 
 mals) - 12 ft B. D. 629 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 Acts. 
 
 s. 50 - 14 ft. B. D, 720 
 
 See Constable. 
 
 41 & 42 Vict. 0. 77, ss. 13, 16, 23— Highways 
 
 and Locomotives. 
 
 See Cases under Higbtwat — Kepaib. 
 1—10. 
 
 ss. 28, 29, 38 7 ft. B. D. 313 
 
 See Highwat — Locomotite. 
 
 1879. 
 
 42 & 43 Vict. c. 30, s. 3— Adulteration 
 
 See Adultebation 4. [6 ft. B. D. 17 
 s. 6 - 10 ft. B. D. 618 
 
 See Adultebation. 6. 
 42 & 43 Vict. 0. 49, ss. 6, 21, 35— Summary 
 
 Jurisdiction - 8 ft. B. D. 151 
 
 See Justices — Pbactice. 4. 
 8. 21, sub-s. 3 8 ft. B. D. 611 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 1. 
 8. 31, sub-s. 2, s. 32 6 ft. B. D. 669 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^Distkess. 
 3. 
 s. 33 - 14 ft. B. D. 730 
 
 See Justices — Pbactice. 2. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 
 42 & 43 Vict. u. 49, ss. 50, 51 10 App. Cas. 45 
 See Bastaedt. 6. 
 
 42 & 43 Vict. u. 59— Civil Procedure Repeal 
 
 [6 ft. B. S. 376 
 
 See Pbactice — ■Ecclesiastical— Chuech 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 
 ss. 2, 4 - - 29 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Coubt— Ap- 
 peal. 27. 
 42 & 43 Vict. 0. 72, b. 2— Merchant Shipping 
 
 [6P. D. 182; 7P, D. 194 
 See Ship— Meechant Shipping Acts. 5,. 
 8. 
 
 42 & 43 Vict. c. civ. — Scotch Railway 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 114 
 See Scotch Law — Eailwat Company. 2. 
 
 1880. 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 15, s. 1 — Industrial Schools 
 
 See iNDUSTELiL School. [10 ft. B. D. 360 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 16 — Merchant Seamen. 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 18 — Parliamentary Elections. 
 See Paeliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. 
 Revenue 
 See Eetenue- 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 23- 
 
 20, s. 33, sub-s. 3— InZaniJ 
 10 ft. B. D. 483 
 -Excise. 
 
 -Elementary Education 
 
 [12 ft. B. S. 57S 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — 
 Fees. 2. 
 
 - 9 ft. B. D. 259 
 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — At- 
 tendance, 6. 
 
 s. 4 7 ft. B. D. 388 
 
 See Elementabt Education Acts — 
 Fees. 1. 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 34, s. G— Debtors (Scotland) 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 966 
 See Scotch Law — Bankbuptct. 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 41, s. 11— BuriaU. 
 
 jSee Ecclesiastical Law — Chcbchtaeds- 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. 42 — Employers' Liability. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Master 
 AND Seevant — Masteb's Lubilitt. 
 
 43 & 44 Vict. c. il-Ground Game 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 559 
 See Landlobd and Tenant — Gbound 
 Game. 
 
 1881. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 2—Buriah. 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Chuechtabds 
 — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 3— Judicial Committee. 
 
 See Peivt Covscu.— Statutes. ■ 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 10— Inland Revenue— Buildings. 
 
 See Eetenue — Collection — Statutes^ 
 44 & 45 Vict, c, U—Sea Fisheries. 
 
 See FiSHEET Acts— Statutes. 
 
STATUTES ABSTRACTED OB SPECIALLY EEFERKED TO. 
 
 clxis 
 
 SIATVIES— continued. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12— Customs and Inland Be- 
 
 See Eevenue — Customs — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 Ebvbntje — HoDSB Duty — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — Income Tax — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — Legacy Duty — Statutes. 
 Revenue — Probate Duty — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 Revenue — Succession Duty — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 s. 24 14 Q. B. D. 838 
 
 See Revenue — House Duty. 5. 
 
 ss. 27, 41 
 
 See Revenue- 
 
 23 Ch, S. 545 
 
 -Succession Duty. 3. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 19 — Newspapers. 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. 0. 20—Post-offioe 
 
 See Post Opmce — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 21 — Married Women's Property 
 (Scotland) - - 8 App. Cas. 678 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wiee. 
 6. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 24 — Summary Jurisdiction. 
 See Justices — Practice — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 4, 6 
 
 See Bastabdy. 6. 
 
 10 App. Cas. 45 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 26 — Gunpowder. 
 
 See MnjE — Minbs_ Regulation Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 34 — Open Spaces. 
 
 See London — Metropolis Management 
 Acts — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict c. 37 — Alkali and other Works. 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. 0. 41 — Conveyancing and Law 
 of Property - - 9 Q. B. D. 672 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Re-entry. 
 6. 
 
 8. 2. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 ■ ss. 2, 3. 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions op Sale — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 2, 4, 5, 8. 
 
 See Vbndoe and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance — Statutes. 
 
 B. 3, sub-8. 2, s. 9 25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Vendor and Pubcbaseb — Title 
 Deeds. 
 
 ■ sub-ss. 3, 11 15 Q. B. D. 261 
 
 See Vendor and Pukchasek — Condi- 
 tions op Sale. 8. 
 
 subs-ss. 4, 6 30 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 2. 
 
 ; sub-s. 6 - 80 Ch. D. 42 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 1. 
 
 B. 5 - - - 26 Ch. D. 788 
 
 See Vendor and Puhchaser — Condi- 
 tions OP Sale. 6. 
 
 STATUTES— omiimMed. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41, s. 5 28 Ch. D. 402 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance. 4. 
 
 ss. 6, 7. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 See Title Deeds — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease — 
 Statutes. 
 
 ■ s. 13. 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OP Sale — Statutes. 
 
 B. 14. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Re-entry 
 — Statutes. 
 
 - ea. B. D. 672; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 454 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Re-entry. 
 5, 6. 
 
 ■ ■ s. 15 20 Ch. D. 724 ; 26 Ch. D. 567 
 
 See Mortgage — Redemption. 2, 3. 
 
 SB. 15, 16. 
 
 See Mortgage — Redemption — Statutes. 
 
 ■ — s. 17. 
 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 27 Ch. D. 679 
 
 See Mortgage — Poreclosure. 5. 
 
 SB. 18-24. 
 
 See Mortgage — Powers — Statutes. 
 
 s. 19, Bub-s. 3 25 Ch. D. 23S 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 20. 
 
 — s. 25 20 Ch. D. 463 ; 22 Ch. D. 235 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 21, 22. 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure — Statutes. 
 - 21 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See Mortgage — Redemption. 4. 
 
 SB. 26, 27, 28, 29. 
 
 See Mortgage — Statutory Form — 
 Statutes. 
 s. 30 - 26 Ch. D. 432 
 
 See Trustee Acts— Vesting Orders. 1. 
 
 See Will — Trust Estates — Statutes. 
 
 SB. 31, 33 - - 24 Ch. D. 698 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. S. 1 ; 29 Ch. D. 247 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 10, 11, 13. 
 s. 31 - 26 Ch. D. 82 
 
 See Trustee— Costs and Charges. 8. 
 ss. 31, 33, 34. 
 
 See Trustee — Appointment — Statutes. 
 SB. 32, 34. 
 
 See Trustee — Retirement — Statutes. 
 ss. 35-38. 
 
 See Trustee — Powers — Statutes. 
 B. 39. 
 
 See Husband and "Wife — Separate 
 Estate — Statutes. 
 ■ - 20 Ch. D. 749 
 
 See Husband and Wipe— Separate Es- 
 tate. 12. 
 
clxx 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41, s. 40. 
 
 See PowEK OF Attorney — Statutes. 
 
 ■ BS. 41, 42, 43. 
 
 See Infant — Peopertt — Statutes. 
 
 s. 43 26 Ch, D. 426 ; 25 Ch. D. 743 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 331 
 
 See Infant — Maintenance. 4, 5, 6. 
 SB. 44, 45. 
 
 See Eent-ohaese — Statutes. 
 ■ • SB. 46, 47, 48. 
 
 See PowEK OP Attorney — Statutes. 
 SB. 49-51, 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 ■ B. 52. 
 
 See PowEB — Extinction — Statutes. 
 BB. 53-64. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 s. 56 - - 24 Ch. D. 387 
 
 See Vendor and Purohaser — Convey- 
 ance. 5. 
 
 a. 65. 
 
 See Leasehold — ^Long Terms — Statutes. 
 
 . 29 Ch. D. 1007, 1009, n. 
 
 See Leasehold — Long Terms. 1, 2. 
 
 B. 66. 
 
 See Conveyancing Act, 1881 — Statutes. 
 
 s. 70 - - 21 Ch. D. 41 
 
 See Vendor and Pubchaser — Title. 5. 
 
 See Vendor and Pdbchaseb — Title — 
 Statutes. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 43 — Superannuation. 
 See Pension — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 44 — Solicitors' Bemuneration. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Solicitor 
 — Bill of Costs. 
 44 & 45 Vict. 0. iS—Fedlars. 
 
 See Pedlar — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Viet. c. 46 — Patriotic Fund. 
 See Patbiotio Fdnd — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. 0. 48 — Metropolitan Board of 
 
 Worlcs. 
 
 See Metropolis — ^MAif agement Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 44 & 45 Vict. 0. 49, s. 58, sub-s. 3 — Land Law, 
 
 Ireland - - 9 App. Cas. 815 
 
 See Irish Land Law Act. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 51~Wild Birds. 
 
 See Birds Protection Act- 
 
 -Staiutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. cc. 57, 5i—Army. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 58, s. 176, sub-s. 4. 15 Q. B, D. 
 See Army and Navy. [488 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 60, bb. 1, 2 — Neicspapers. 
 See Copyright — ^Newspapers — Statutes. 
 
 8. 2. 
 
 See Defamation — ^Libel — Statutes. 
 
 8. 3 - - 14 Q. B. 648 
 
 See Criminal Law — Libel. 2. 
 
 • BB. 3—6. 
 
 See Crisiinal Law — Libel— 5ita<«(es. 
 
 STATimS — continued. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 61, s. 3 — Licensing Act 
 
 [SQ. B. D, 119;lia.B. D 71 
 See Inn — Offences. 5, 6. 
 44 &45 Vict. c. 62 — Veterinary Surgeon. 
 
 See Veteeinaey Surgeon — Statutes. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 64:— Prisons. 
 See Prison — Statutes. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 67— Petroleum. 
 See Petrolecm —Statutes. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 68, ss. 1 — ^27 — Supreme Court 
 of Judicature. 
 See Court — Statutes. 
 
 8S.9, 10. 
 
 See Peactice — Divorce — Appeal— /SJa- 
 tutes. 
 
 10 P. D. 110 ; 9 App. Cas. 631 
 
 See Pbactice — Divoece — An-EAi,. 1, 2. 
 
 s. 14. 
 
 See MuNaciPAij Corporation — ^Election 
 — Statutes. 
 Parliament — PROCEDUEE^Stofirfes. 
 
 - 14 Q. B. D. 548 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation— Elec- 
 tion. 8. 
 
 8. 19 - - 25 Ch. B. 384 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 15. 
 44 & 45 Vict. c. 69— Fugitive Offenders. 
 See JuEiSDiCTiON — Statutes. 
 
 44 & 45 Vict. 0. 72 — Highways. 
 
 See Highway — Board — Statutes. 
 
 1882. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 2— Reply Post Cards. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 3— Slate Mines. 
 
 See Mine — Mines Eegulation Acts — 
 Statutes 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 9— Evidence. 
 
 See Evidence — Public Dooumehts — 
 Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 12 — Militia Storehouses. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 14 — Buildings and Streets. 
 
 See Metropolis — Buzlding Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 Metropolis — Management Acts 
 — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 15 — Commons. 
 See Inclostee — Statutes. 
 
 Metropolis — Commons Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 19— Burial. 
 
 See Pelo de se — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 20— Poor-rate. 
 
 See Poor-rate — Occupation — Statute*. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 21— Sites for Places of Worship, 
 See Chuech Building Acts — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 22— Boiler Explosions. 
 See Boileb — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 2Z— Fruit Pickers. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OK SPECIALLY EEFBKEED TO. 
 
 olxxi 
 
 SXATTTTES — continued. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 11— Highway Rate. 
 See Highway — ^Eatb — i 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. SO— Baths and Washhouses. 
 See Baths and Washhouses — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 31 — Judgments of Inferior 
 
 Courts. 
 
 See Judgment — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 33 — Metropolitan Board of 
 
 WorTcs. 
 
 See Metropolis— Management Acts— 
 Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 34 — Beer Licenoes. 
 
 See Inn — Licence — Statutes. 
 
 S.1 lOQ. B.D.213; 11 Q. B. B. 66 
 
 See Inn — Licence. 7, 8. 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 35 — Friendly Societies. 
 See Friendly Society — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 3G— Casual Poor. 
 
 See Poor Law — Eelief — Statutes. 
 Metropolis — Management Acts— 
 — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 37— Com Returns. 
 See Corn Eetdrns— 5fto<«ie«. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 38— Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Oases and Statutes under Settled 
 Land Act. 
 ■ - 24 Ch. D. 608 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 18. 
 
 ■ ■ ss. 3, 53 - - 34 Ch. D. 558 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 17. 
 
 45 & 46 Viet. o. 39, s. 2 — Conveyancing. 
 
 See Vendor and Purchases — Title — 
 Statutes. 
 
 s. 3. 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Pur- 
 chase without Notice — Statutes. 
 
 s. 4. 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale— Statutes. 
 
 s. 5 . - 28 Ch. D. 725 
 
 See Trustee Acts — New Trustees. 6. 
 
 See Trustee — ^Appointment— Stotete. 
 
 s. 6. 
 
 See Power — Extinction — Statutes. 
 
 See Huseakd and Wife — Wipe's Con- 
 TBYANCE — Statutes. 
 sa. 8, 9. 
 
 See Power of Attorney — Statutes. 
 s. 10. 
 
 See Executory Limitation — Statutes. 
 
 8. 11. 
 
 See Leasehold — Long Teems — Statutes. 
 
 s. 12. 
 
 See Mortgage — Kedemption — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Viot. c. 40 — Musical Compositions. 
 See Copyright — Music — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 41 — Chicory and Coffee. 
 See Eevbnue — Excise — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. a. 4:3— Bills of SaU. 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Statutes. 
 
 - 24 Ch. D. 810 
 
 -Order and Disposi- 
 
 STATTJTES — continued. 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 43 
 
 See Bankeuptcy- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 12 Q, B. D. 291, 490 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Formalities. 8, 25. 
 
 s. 3 12 Q. B, D. 436 ; 28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 See Bill of Sale— Eegistration. 2, 5. 
 
 9 App, Cas. 653 
 See Bill of Sale — Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 3. 
 
 S3. 3, 15 - 23 Ch. D. 409 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 ss. 4, 5,\ 6, sub-B. 1, S3. 8, 9, and 
 
 Sched. ' - - 13 Q. B. D. 794 
 
 See Bill op Sale — ^Formalities. 24. 
 
 3. 7 - 11 Q. B, D. 301 
 
 &e Bill, of Sale — Operation. 8. 
 S3. 7, 9. 
 
 See Cases under Bill op Sale — For- 
 malities. 8 — 14, 24. 
 3. 8 - - - 23 Ch. D. 690 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Eegistration. 10. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 386 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 6. 
 s. 13 - - 13 Q. B. D. 789 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 9. 
 
 45 & 46 Viot. u. 44- 
 
 See Pension — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 48 — Reserve Forces. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Viot. c. 4:9— Militia. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Viot. 0. 50 — Municipal Corporations. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Constitu- 
 tion — Statutes. 
 S3. 9, 31 - - 12 ft. B. D. 381 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Fran- 
 chise. 
 _ s. 36 - - 14 ft. B. D. 908 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Eesigna- 
 
 TlON. 
 
 ■ 3. 60, sub-s. 4 - 13 ft. B. D. 388 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — ^Election. 
 9. 
 
 • S3. 87, 88, 91, 93, 242, Sched. 3, 
 
 Part II., rr. 3, 10 - 14 ft. B. D. 648 
 See Municipal Corporation — Election. 
 8. 
 
 s. 241 - - 15 ft. B. ». 273 
 
 See Municipal Corporation .r- Elec- 
 tion. 6. 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 51 — Government Annuities. 
 
 See National Deht Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 52 — Turnpike Roads. 
 See Turnpike Acts — Statutes. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. u. 54 — Artizans' Dwellings. 
 
 See Labourers' Dwellings Acts — Sta- 
 tutes, 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. 55 — Merchant Shipping. 
 
 See Ship— Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
clxxii 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFBEEBD TO. 
 
 STK'iVt'Zi— continued. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 56 — Electric Lighting. 
 
 See Eleotkio Light — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 57 — Costs in County Court. 
 
 See County Court — Costs — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 58— Poor Law. 
 
 See PoOE Law — Management — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. 0. ei— Bills of Exchange. 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Statutes. 
 ■ fl. 3 - - 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange. 1. 
 ss. 64, 89 - 11 Q. B. D. 84 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — ^Altekation. 3. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 65 — Prison Charities. 
 
 See Peison — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 73 — Ancient Monuments. 
 
 See Ancient Monuments — Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 74:— Revenue. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 2-7. 
 
 See Eevenue — Customs — Statutes. 
 
 88. 8-17. 
 
 See Eetence — Stamps — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — Collection — Statutes. 
 
 88. 18-24. 
 
 See National Debt Commissionees — 
 Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75 — Married Women's Property. 
 See Husband and Wife ■ — Maeeied 
 Women's Peopeety Act — Statutes. 
 
 15 Q. B. D. 667 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied Wo- 
 men's Peopeety Acts. 1 . 
 
 . B. 1 12 Q, B. D. 533 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Thied 
 Paety. 3. 
 
 - 28 Ch. D. 171 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 3. 
 
 sub-s. 1,2 - 8P. D, 18 
 
 See Pbaotice — Peobate — Costs. 4. 
 
 sub-s. 2 - 13 ft. B. D. 784 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Maeeied 
 Women's Peopeety Acts. 6. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 418 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 EiTY FOR Costs. 5. 
 
 sub-ss. 1, 2 - 26 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Settled Estates Acts. 2. ' 
 
 — sub-ss. 2, 3, 4 ; ss. 3, 12, 13 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 831 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied 
 Women's Peopeety Acts. 9. 
 
 s. 1, sub-ss. 3, 4 27 Ch. D. 
 
 [632 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeried 
 Women's Peopeety Acts. 14. 
 
 sub-s. 4 - 30Ch, D. 169; 
 [15 ft. B. D. 234 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied Wo- 
 men's Peopeety Acts. 11, 12. 
 
 ss. 1, 5 27 Ch. D. 166 
 
 See Will — Joint Tenancy. 
 
 ^- ss. 1, 5, 24 - 8 P. D. 168 
 
 See Administeatoe — Maeeied Woman. 
 1. 
 
 STATUTES — continued. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75, ss. 1, 19 13 ft. B. D. 691 
 See Practice — Supeeme Coubt — Wbit 
 specially indoesed. 4. 
 
 S3. 1-23 - - 28 Ch. D. 709 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married 
 Women's Property Acts. 10. 
 
 s. 5 27 Ch. D. 604 ; 29 Ch. D. 177 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied 
 Women's Property Acts. 7, 8. 
 
 . S3. 5, 19 - 24 Ch. D. 195 
 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 3. 
 
 ss. 11-22 23 Ch. D. 525 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied 
 Women's Peopeety Acts. 4, 5. 
 
 ss. 12, 16 - - 12 ft. B. D. 266 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Evidenoe. 2. 
 
 s. 22 - - 14 ft. B. D. 339 
 
 See Husband and Wife — ^Married Wo- 
 men's Peopeety Acts. 13. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 76 — Colonial Courts of Inquiry. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 80— Allotments for the Poor. 
 
 See Poor Law — Belief — Statutes. 
 . S8. 4, 5, 11, 15 26 Ch. D. 17S 
 
 See Chaeity — Commibsionees. 9. 
 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. S2— Lunacy. 
 
 See Lunacy — Jueisdiction— yStotufea. 
 
 1883. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 3 — Explosive Substances. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Explosives — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. u. & — Army Discipline. 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 10 — Customs' and Inland Ee- 
 venue. 
 See Eevenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. 0. 11 — Expenses of Guardians. 
 
 See Poor Law — Management — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. 0. \5— Umpire. 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 18 — Municipal Corporation. 
 
 See Municipal Coepobation — Consti- 
 tution — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 21— Turnpike. 
 
 See TuENPiKE Acts — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. 0. 22— &a Fisheries. 
 
 See Fisheey Acts — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. 0. 27— Xoans. 
 
 See Metbopolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 28— Companies. 
 
 See Company — Prefeeential Debts — 
 Statutes. 
 46 ■& 47 Vict. c. 29— Paj/ Office of Supreme 
 Court. 
 
 See Couet — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 30 — Colonial Registers. 
 
 See Company — Shaees — Eegistee — 
 Statutes. 
 
STATUTES ABSTKACTED OH SPECIALLY REFEEEED TO. 
 
 elxxiii 
 
 STATUTES— conKnued. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 31~Payment of Wages. 
 
 See Master anu Servant ^ WAaBS — 
 Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Viot. 0. 3i— Passenger Duty. 
 
 'See Eailwat Company — Passenger 
 Duty — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Viot. 0. 35 — Diseases- Prevention. 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Viot. 0. 36 — London Charities. 
 
 See London — Metropolis — Charities 
 
 46 Sc 47 Viot. c. S7— Public Health. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Viot. 0. 38 — Criminal Lunatic. 
 
 See Lttnatic — Criminal — Statutes. < 
 46 & 47 Viot. c. il— Fishing Boats. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. i'i^Borough Constable. 
 
 See McTNiciPAL Corporation — Consti- 
 tution — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Viot. 0. i5— Counterfeit Coin. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Coining — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Viot. e. 47 — Friendly Societies. 
 See Friendly Society — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 4ff — Inferior Courts. 
 See Court — Sxatdtes. 
 
 s. 3 - - 14 Q, B. D. 13 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 
 ■ s. 5 - 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Trustee Acts — ^Vesting Orders. 2. 
 46 & 47 Viot. 0. 51 — Corrupt Practices. 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 40-44. 
 
 See Parliament — Election Petition — 
 Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. 0. 52 — Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1SS3— Statutes. 
 
 s. 4, sub-s. 1 - 13 a. B. D. 113 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eecbivbr. 6. 
 
 sut-s. 1 (a), B. 7, sub-s. 3, ss. 15, 
 
 16, 17, 18 13 Q. B. D. 118 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceivbr. 7. 
 
 sub-ss. 1 (f), 1 (h) 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 471 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 25. 
 
 aub-B. 1 (0, s. 148 12 Q. B. D. 332 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 subs. 1 (g). 
 
 See Oases under Bankruptcy — Act of 
 Bankruptcy. 6 — 11. 
 
 ss. 5, 6, 105, sub-s. 3 14 Q. B. D. 184 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 _ sub-s. 1 (h) 13 Q. B. D. 469 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 24. 
 
 ss. 4, 5, 94, 104, 169 12 Q,. B. D. 497 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Adjudication. 5. 
 
 STATTnES— continued. 
 46 &47 Vict. c. 52, ss. 4, 5, 7, 169 12 Q. B. D. 334 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeoeiver. 4. 
 
 ss. 5, 8, 104 - 13 Q. B. D. 244 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeoeiver. 9. 
 
 s. 6, sub-3. 1 (d) 13 Q. B. D. 418 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 sub-s. 2 ; Sohed. I. rr. 10, 12 ; 
 
 Sohed. II. rr. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 128 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 11. 
 
 s. 7, sub-s. 3 16 a. B. D. 399 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Eeoeiver. 8. 
 
 ■ . s. 7, sub-s. 4 - 14 Q. B. D. 49 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 1. ' 
 
 — s. 9 - - - 30 Ch. D. 480 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Eeoeiver. 10. 
 
 SB. 9, sub-s. 1 ; s. 10, sub-s. 2 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 235 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Proceed- 
 ings. 2. 
 
 SB. 9, 10, 21, 54, 56, 68-70 
 
 [15 Q,. B. D. 196 
 
 See BANKRtiPTOY — Eeoeiver. 11. 
 SB. 9, 121 - - 15 Q. B. D. 329 
 
 See Arrest — Debtor's Act. 3. 
 s. 17, Bub-B. 4 15 ft. B. D. 54 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Examination. 1. 
 
 s. 18 - 13 ft. B, D. 426, 438 ; 
 
 [15 ft. B. D, 213 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Scheme of Arrange- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3. 
 ss. 27, 125 - 15 ft, B. D. 159 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Deceased Debtor. 1. 
 s. 28 - 14 ft. B. D. 936 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Discharge. 4. 
 sub-s. 3 (c) 14 ft. B. D. 600 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Discharge. 3. 
 sub-B. 3 (d) 13 ft. B. D. 438 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Scheme of Arrange- 
 ment. 3. 
 ss. 30, 40, 150 28 Ch. D. 643 
 
 See Crown. 
 a. 37 - 15 ft. B. D. 239 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 3. 
 s. 38 - - 14 ft. B. D. 963 
 
 S'ee Bankruptcy — Mutual Dealings. 1. 
 s. 44 14 ft. B. D. 950 ; 15 ft, B. D. 441 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 9, 10. 
 sub-s. 2 29 Ch. D. 1005 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 11. 
 
 : sub-s. 3 14 ft. B, D. 636 ; 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 261 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 6, 11. 
 SB. 44, 55, 168 14 ft. B. D. 966 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 19. 
 BB. 45, 46 - 14 ft. B, D, 966 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. Z: 
 s. 46, sub-ss. 1, 2 13 ft. B, D. 415 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Costs, 6. 
 
clxxiT 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OR SPECIALLY REFERRED TO. 
 
 STA.TUT'ES— continued. 
 46 &47 Viot. c. 52, sa. 46 (2), 168 15 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Peoteoted Teaks- 
 
 AOTION. 6. 
 
 ■ 3. 47 - 15 ft. B. D. 682 
 
 See Bankeuptct — Void Settlement. 2. 
 
 ss. 51, 121 14 Q, B. D. 960 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Disolaimee. 21. 
 
 s. 53 - - 14 ft. B. D. 301 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Assets. 12.. 
 
 B. 55. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptot — Dis- 
 OLAIMEE. 19 — 24. 
 
 8. 83 - 28 Ch. D. 38 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Couet — Seou- 
 bitt foe Costs. 8. 
 
 ss. 95, 97 - - 14 ft. B. D. 37 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Reoeiyee. 5. 
 
 s. 97, sub-3. 2 ; s. 104, sut-s. 2 
 
 [13 ft. B. B. 484 
 See Bankeuptot — Teansfee. 1. 
 
 68. 100, 102, 151, 168 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 169 
 See Bankeuptot — Stating Peoceed- 
 ings. 3. 
 
 s. 102, sub-s. 1 - 13 ft. B. D. 238 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Jueisdiction. 1. 
 
 ■ sub-s. 5 ; s. 162, sub-s. 2 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 402 
 See Bankeuptot — Teustee. 9. 
 
 s. 103, sub-ss. 4, 5 16 ft. B. D, 336 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Tbanspee. 2. 
 
 ss. 103, 104 13 ft. B. D. 901 
 
 See Bankeuptot — ^Appeal. 10. 
 
 s. 105, sub-s. 1 - 13 ft. B. D. 492 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Costs. 5. 
 
 Bub-s. 4 - 13 ft. B. D. 466 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Disolaimee. 23. 
 
 s. 125 - - 29C11. D. 236; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 552 
 See Bankeuptot — Deceased Debtor. 
 2,3. 
 
 s. 135, Scbed. 1, r. 14 16 ft. B. D. 
 
 See BANBtKUPTCT — Evidence. 6. [332 
 
 s. 142, Schedule 2, r. 13 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 121 
 See Bankeuptot — Seoueed Creditoe. 
 12. 
 
 s. 145 - 12 ft. B. D. 162 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Seoueed Ceeditoe. 9. 
 
 - 12 ft. B. D. 224 
 
 -Secueed Ceeditoe. 
 
 - 13 ft. B. D. 454 
 
 -Bankeuptot Peti- 
 
 ss. 146, 169 
 
 See Bankbuptct- 
 10. 
 s. 149 
 
 See Bankeuptot- 
 TION. 4. 
 46 & 47 Viot. c. 53 — Wliite Lead Factories and 
 
 Bakehouses. 
 
 See Faotobt Acts — Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 5i~National Debt. 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 55, ss. 2, 11— Customs and 
 
 Revenue. 
 
 See Revenue — Customs — Statutes. 
 
 STATTTTES — continued. 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 55, ss. 12-14. 
 
 See Revenue — Collection — Statutes. 
 8. 15. 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 57, ss. 3-46, 82-102, 103-106, 
 113-117 — Patents and Trade-marks. 
 See Patent — Statutes. 
 
 ss. 18, 19 26 Ch. D. 106 ; 28 Oh. D. 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 1, 2. [14g 
 
 — 8. 25, cI. 4 9 App. Cas. 592 
 
 See Patent — Prolongation. 1. 
 
 — — ss. 25, 113 - 9 App. Cas, 589 
 
 See Patent — Peolongation. 3. 
 8. 32 - 28 Ch. D. 394 
 
 See Patent — Inpbingement. 5. 
 —■ 8. 47 - - 28 Ch. D. 24 
 
 See CopTEiGHT — Designs. 2. 
 8S. 47-61. 
 
 See OoPTEiGHT — Designs — Statutes. 
 • 83. 51, 113 - 27 Ch. D. 260 
 
 See CoPTEiGHT — Designs. 1. 
 s. 62 - 30 Ch. D, 505 
 
 See Tbade-maek — Registbation. 12. 
 ss. 62-81. 
 
 See Teade-maek — ^Registeation — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 s. 64 - - 27 011. r. 681; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 877 
 
 See Teade-maek — Registration. 5, 6. 
 
 ss. 74, 76, 90 - 29 Ch. D. 551 
 
 See Teade-maek — Registration. 3. 
 
 ss. 76, 90, 113 - 27 Ch. D. 646 
 
 See Teade-maek — Registeation. 2. 
 
 s. 85 - 28 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Teade-maek — ^Registeation. 9. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 5S— Money Orders. 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 59 — Epidemic Diseases. 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 61 — Agricultural Holdings. 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant— Disteess. 
 — Statutes. 
 Landlord and Tenant — Fixtures 
 
 — Statutes. 
 Landlord and Tenant — ^Improve- 
 ments — Statutes. 
 Landloed and Tenant — Yeablt 
 Tenant— Sfaiuies. 
 
 s. 33 - - 16 ft. B. D. 601 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Yeaelt 
 Tenant. 
 
 s. 45 - 15 ft. B. D. 457 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Disteess. 
 1. 
 
 1884. 
 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 2— National Debt Act. 
 
 See National Debt Commissionbbs — 
 Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 3— Broker. 
 See Beokee — Statutes. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OR SPECIALLY EEFEREED TO. 
 
 clxxv 
 
 STATUTES^continued. 
 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 5 — Metropolis Valuation. 
 
 See Metropolis Valuatiox Act — 
 Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 9— Appeal. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Tiot. 0. 11— Fresh Water Fish. 
 
 See Fishery Acts— Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 12,— Public Health Act. 
 
 See Local Government — By-laws — 
 Statutes. 
 47 <fe 48 Viot. 0. 13 — Landing or Export of Ani- 
 mals. 
 
 See Ooktagious Diseases (Amimals) 
 Acts — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 14 — Evidence of Husband or 
 Wife under Married Women's Property 
 Act, 1882. 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — ^Maeeied "Wo- 
 men's Property Acts — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Yict. 0. 17 — Metropolitan Police. 
 
 See Metropolis — Police Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 18 — Settled Land Act Amend- 
 ment Act. 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 
 s. 7 - - 30 Ch. D. 102 
 
 See .Settled Land Act — Puechase- 
 
 MONEY. 1. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 20 — GreeJi Marriages Act. 
 
 See Greek MaeHiages — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. 23 — National Debt Conversion. 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 25 — Customs and Inland Se- 
 
 venue. 
 
 See Eevenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 
 Ebvenue — ^Income Tax — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. 26 — Oyster, Crab and Lobster. 
 
 See Fishery Acts — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 27—Cockles. 
 
 See Fishery Acts — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 29 — Licensing — Evidence. 
 
 See Inn — Offences — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 37 — Public Libraries. 
 See Public Library — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 39— Discipline. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 41 — Building Societies Act 
 
 Amendment. 
 
 See Building Society — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 43 — Summary Jurisdiction Act, 
 
 1884. 
 
 See Justices — Practice — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. iG— Enlistment. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 47 — Transfer of Districts. 
 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 Acts — Statutes, 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. 50 — Loans by Metropolitan 
 
 Board of Works. 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. o. 51 — Enlarging Prisons, 
 
 See Peison — Statutes. 
 
 STATUTES— contoued. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 54 — Yorkshire Registry. 
 
 See Registry Acts — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. 55— Pay. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 56 — Chartered Company. 
 
 See Chaetbred Company — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. c. 57 — Superannuation. 
 
 See Pension — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. u. 58 — Public Prosecutor. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Practice — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 60 — Loan under Metropolitcm 
 
 Poor Act. 
 
 See Meteopolis — Management Acts — • 
 Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 61 — Supreme Court of Judica- 
 ture. 
 
 See Court — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 62 — Inland Bevenue Amend- 
 ment — -Claims on Post-Office — Vouchers 
 for Army and Navy Services — Vessels — 
 Plate. 
 
 See Revenue — Collection — Statutes. 
 Revenue — Income Tax — Statutes. 
 Revenue — Probate Duty — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 64 — Criminal Lunatic. 
 
 See Lunatic — Criminal — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 65 — New Parishes and Church 
 Buildings. , 
 
 See Church Building Acts — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 67 — Charge on Ecclesiastical 
 Land. 
 See Inclosure — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Viot. I). 68 — Matrimonial Causes Acts 
 Amendment. 
 
 See Practice — Divorce-Restitution 
 op Conjugal Rights — Statutes. 
 
 ■ - - 10 P. D. 72 
 
 See PRACTICE' — Divorce — Restitution 
 op Conjugal Rights. 2. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 70 — Municipal Elections Corrupt 
 Practices. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — JElection 
 — Statutes. 
 
 s. 38 — School Board. 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 School Board — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Vict. 0. 71 — Administration. 
 
 See Administrator — Nominee op Crown 
 — Statutes. 
 Real Estate — -Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. 0. 72 — Disused Burial Ground. 
 
 See Burial Ground — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. o. 7i— Penalties under Public 
 Health Act. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. 15— Canal Boats. 
 See Canal Boats — Statutes. 
 
 47 & 48 Viot. c. 76— Post Office. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 1885. 
 
 48 & 49 Viot. c. 1 — Income Taa. 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax — t 
 
clxxvi 
 
 STATUTES ABSTRACTED OE SPECIALLY EEFEEBED TO. 
 
 STATVTYS— continued. 
 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 3 — Representation of the People. 
 See Pakliament — Franchise — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 4 — Yorkshire Registry Amend- 
 ment. 
 
 See Eegistkt Acts — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. \i. 9 — Qualification to vote in 
 Borough. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Qualifi- 
 cation — Statutes. 
 48,& 49 Vict. c. 10— flbwrs of Poll. 
 
 See Municipal Cokpoeation— Election 
 — Statutes. 
 Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 13 — Hedges abutting on High- 
 
 ivays. 
 
 See HiOHWAY — Repair — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. e. 15— Registration Act, 1885. 
 
 See Parliament — Registration — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 18 — Metropolitan Police Area. 
 
 See Metropolis — Police Acts — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. ^1— Burial Boards. 
 
 See Burial Board — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. 0. 22 — Conferences of Local Autho- 
 
 See Local Government — Rates — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 23— Redistribution of Seats. 
 
 See Parliament — Redistribution of 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 26 — Yorlcshire Registry Amend- 
 ment. 
 See Registry Acts— Statutes. 
 
 48 & 49 Vict. 0. 27 — Friendly Societies. 
 See Friendly Society — Statutes. 
 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 29 — Honorary Freedom of 
 Boroughs. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — CoNSTrrn- 
 TION — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 30— Local Loans. 
 
 See Local Government — • Powers — 
 Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 31— Tatenhill Rectory. 
 
 • See Ecclesiastical Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 32 — Redemption of Rent- 
 charge. 
 See Tithes — Statutes. 
 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 33— Board of Worlcs. 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 34:— Explains Waterworks 
 
 Clauses Act, 1847. 
 
 See Waterworks Clauses Act — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. c. 85 — Port Sanitary Authority. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. c. 36 — Shooting Ranges. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 37— Turnpike Acts Continuance 
 
 Act, 1885. 
 
 See Turnpike Acts — Statutes. 
 
 j STAIVTES-continued. 
 
 48 & 49 Viot. o. 38— School Board. 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 School Board — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. u. iS— Medical Belief— Disquali- 
 fication. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Fean- 
 CHISE — Statutes. 
 Parliament— Franchise— Stofafes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. il— Board of Trade Officers. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. c. 49 — Submarine Cables. 
 
 See Telegeath — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 50 — Loans for Metropolitcm 
 Board of Works. 
 
 See Metropolis — -Management Acts— 
 Statuies. 
 48 & 49 Viot. 0. 51 — Customs and Inland Re- 
 venue. 
 
 See Revenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 Revenue — Income Tax — 6™,, 
 Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. o. 52— Pauper Lunatics. 
 
 See Lunatic— JuRisDicTioN-jjBjiMies. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 53—Disgua.lificati^m' Local 
 Authorities. ' 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 bity — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. 0. 54r— Pluralities. ' 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Olebgt — 
 Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 55— Church Estateit,: 
 
 See Ecclesiastical CommissSnebs — 
 Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. 0. 56 -Parliament-Leave to Em- 
 ployes to vote. 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 58— Sixpenny Telegrams. 
 
 See Telegraph — Post Opitce — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59 — Expiring Laws Continuance 
 Act, 1885. 
 See passim. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 62— Charges of Returning 
 Officer. 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. u. es— Patents. 
 
 See Patent — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. c. 68 — Police Superannuation. 
 
 See Metropolis — Police Acts — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, ss. 2-10, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19— 
 Protection of Women and Girls. 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 s. 11. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences agalnst 
 Tebsois— Statutes. 
 
 s. 20. 
 
 See Crimlnal Law — Evidenoe — 
 Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Vict. 0. 12— Artisans' and Labourers' 
 Dwelling-houses. 
 
 See Laboueebs' Dwellings Acts 
 
 Statutes. 
 And see Local Government — By-laws 
 
 — Statutes. 
 And see Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 
STATUTES ABSTEACTED OR SPECIALLY REFBEEED TO. 
 
 olxxvii 
 
 SXATXriES— continued, 
 is & 49 Vict. 0. 74 — Evidence by Commission. 
 
 See Etidenoe — General — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. 0. 75 — Prevention of Crime. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — ^Pkaotice — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. 0. 76 — Thames Preservation. 
 
 See River — Statutes. 
 48 & 49 Viot. 0. 79 — Land Revenues of Crown. 
 
 See Crown Lands — Statutes. 
 
 II. COLONIAL STATUTES (BEFEBBES TO IN 
 THE BEFOBTEB CASES). 
 
 Canada — Dominion. 
 
 12 Viot. 0. 87, s. 5— Timber 9 App. Cas. 392 
 See Colonial Law— Canada — Ontario. 
 5. 
 20 Viot. 0. 227, s. IS— Tolls 8 App. Cas. 723 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Domi- 
 nion. 4. 
 22 Viot. c 23— Timber 9 App. Cas. 160 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 9. 
 22 Vict. o. 66 — Presbyterian Church 
 
 [7 App. Cas, 136 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 3. 
 22 Viot. 0. 124— ToZ/s - 8 App. Cas. 723 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Domi- 
 nion. 4. 
 37 Viot. 0. 16— Railway 7 App. Cas. 178 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Domi- 
 nion. 1. 
 
 37 Vict. c. 103 — Colonial Building Associa- 
 tion - - 9 App. Cas. 167 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Doiu- 
 
 NION. 3. 
 
 38 Viot. c. 11, 8. 22 — Supreme Court 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 644 
 iSee Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 1. 
 
 39 Vict. 0. 27, s. 19— Petition of Right 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 746 
 See Colonial Law— Canada— Quebec. 
 7. 
 43 Viot. 0. 25 — Criminal Procedure 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 675 
 See Peactiob — ^Privt Council — Leate 
 TO Appeal. 1. 
 Ceylon. 
 
 31 Vict. No. 11— Crown 9 App. Cas. 571 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 4. 
 Mauritius. 
 
 16 Vict. No. 33, ES. 40, 43, 50— Bankruptcy 
 [9 App. Cas. 413 
 See Colonial Law — ^Mauritius. 2. 
 New Brunswick. 
 
 31 Vict. 0. 36, 8. 4 — Income Tax 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 373 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — New 
 
 3BBUNSWICK. 
 
 aTAIVTSS— continued. 
 New South Wales. 
 
 11 Viot. No. 13, s. 1 - 10 App. Cas. 279 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 3. 
 25 Vict. No. 1, ss. 3, 5 — Crown Lands 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 636 
 iSee Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 1. 
 
 s. 13 - - 6 App. Cas. 628 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 2. 
 
 43 Vict. No. 25, s. 35— Railways 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 720 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 5. 
 New Zealand. 
 
 44 Vict. No. 21 (loc.)— Wellington Har- 
 bour - - - 9 App. Cas. 699 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 2. 
 
 45 Viot. No. 8— Crown Suits 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 418 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 1. 
 
 46 Viot. No. 37—PuUic Worlcs 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 699 
 See Colonial Law— New Zealand. 2. 
 
 . Ontario. 
 
 Revised Statutes, o. 181 — Liquor Licences 
 [9 App. Cas. 117 
 >See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 2. 
 
 39 Viot. 0. 24 — Insurance 7 App. Cas. 96 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 3. 
 Quebec. 
 
 38 Viot. c. 64 — Presbyterian Church 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 136 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 3. 
 43 & 44 Viot. 0. Q— Stamps 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 141 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 4. 
 
 Queensland. 
 
 30 & 31 Vict. 0. 38 — Queensland Constitu- 
 tion - - - 8 App. Cas. 120 
 
 See Colonial Law — Queensland. 
 
 South Australia. 
 
 24 & 25 Viot. c. 22, b. 3d— Registration 
 
 [8 App. Cas, 314 
 See Colonial Law — South Australia. 
 
 Victoria. 
 
 33 & 34 Viot. No. 388, s. 2, sub-s. 7— 
 Probate Duty - - 8 App. Cas, 82 
 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 3. 
 
 West Australia. 
 
 42 Vict No. 31, ss. 12, U— Railways 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 142 
 
 See Colonial Law — West Australia. 2 
 
( clxxix ) 
 
 TABLE 
 
 TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEEENCES. 
 
 The TITLES and SUB-TITLES under which the Cases and Statutes are arranged are 
 printed in this Table in Capitals, and the CBOSS-BEFEBENCES in ordinary Type. 
 
 Tlie SUB-TITLES are arranged Alphabetically {with a few trifling deviations, the object of 
 which will be apparent) under all the TITLES except BANKRUPTCY, COMPANY, 
 and PRACTICE. 
 
 Abandonment. 
 
 Abatement of Annuity. 
 
 Abatement of Suit. 
 
 Abduction. 
 
 Absconding Debtor. 
 
 Absence beyond Seas. 
 
 Absolute Conveyance. 
 
 Absolute Gift. 
 
 Absolute Transfer. 
 
 Abstract of Title. 
 
 Abstraction of Water. 
 
 Abuse of Bankruptcy Law. 
 
 Abuse of Winding-up Acts. 
 
 Acceleration of Remainder. 
 
 Acceptance. 
 
 Access to Children. 
 
 Accident. 
 
 Accommodation Bills. 
 
 Accommodation Works. 
 
 ACCORD AND SATISFACTION. 
 
 Account. 
 
 Accountant. 
 
 ACCUMULATIONS. 
 
 Accumulation Fund. 
 
 Accused Person. 
 
 Acknowledgment. 
 
 Acquiescence. 
 
 Act of Bankruptcy. 
 
 Act of God. 
 
 Acting Drama. 
 
 Actio Personalis Moritur cum Persona. 
 
 Actio Popularis. 
 
 ACTION. 
 
 Ad Valorem Stamp. 
 Adding Parties. 
 Ademption. 
 
 Adjoining Landowners. 
 Adjoining Tenement. 
 Adjournment to Judge. 
 Adjudication of Bankruptcy. 
 Adjustment of Rights of Contributories. 
 Administration. 
 Administration Bond. 
 Administration of Oath. 
 ADMINISTRATOR:— 
 I. Geant. 
 II. Limited. 
 
 III. Maebied Woman. 
 
 IV. Nominee of Ceown. 
 V. Powees. 
 
 VI. With Will annexed. 
 Admiralty. 
 Admission. 
 
 Admissions in Pleadings. 
 ADULTERATION. 
 Adultery. 
 Advance. 
 
 ADVANCEMENT. 
 Adverse Possession. 
 Advertisement. 
 Advocate. 
 ADVOWSON. 
 Affidavit. 
 Africa. 
 
 After-acquired Property. 
 Agency Charges. 
 
 m 2 
 
clxxx 
 
 TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND OEOSS-EEFEEENOES. 
 
 Agent. 
 
 Agreement. 
 
 Agricultui-al Custom. 
 
 Agricultural Holdings (England) Act, 1883. 
 
 Alderman. 
 
 Alehouse. 
 
 ALIEN. 
 
 Alienation. 
 
 AJimony. 
 
 Alkali Works Eegulation Act, 1881. 
 
 Allocatur. 
 
 Allotment of Shares. 
 
 Allotments for the Poor. 
 
 Allowance. 
 
 Alteration. 
 
 Alternative Rates. 
 
 Alternative Relief. 
 
 Ambassador. 
 
 Ambiguity. 
 
 Amendment. 
 
 Analysis. 
 
 Ancient Buildings. 
 
 ANCIENT MONUMENTS. 
 
 Angle of 45°. 
 
 Anglo-Indian Domicil. 
 
 Animals. 
 
 Annual Value. 
 
 Annuity. 
 
 Annulment of Bankruptcy. 
 
 Ante-nuptial Debts of Wife. 
 
 Anticipation. 
 
 Apparent Possession. 
 
 Appeal. 
 
 Appeal Court. 
 
 Appearance. 
 
 Application for Shares. 
 
 Appointment. 
 
 Appointment of Member of Board. 
 
 Appointment of Trustee. 
 
 APPORTIONMENT. 
 
 APPRENTICE. 
 
 Apprentice Fees. 
 
 Appropriation of Payments. 
 
 Appropriation of Securities. 
 
 ARBITRATION :— 
 
 I. AWAED. 
 
 11. Costs. 
 
 III. Staying Peoceedings. 
 
 IV. Submission. 
 Arbitrator. 
 Architect. 
 
 Arms. 
 
 ARMY" (AND NAVY). 
 
 Army Agent. 
 
 Arrangement. 
 
 Arrears. 
 
 ARREST:— 
 
 I. Debtor's Act. 
 II. Nb Exeat Regno. 
 Ai-ticled Clerk. 
 Articles of Association. 
 Articles of Partnership. 
 Artificial Stream. 
 Artillery Range. 
 Artizans' Dwellings Act. 
 Assault. 
 Assembly. 
 
 Assessment^Committee. 
 Assessors. 
 Assets. 
 Assignment. 
 ASSIGNMENT OP DEBT. 
 
 Assize Court. 
 Association for Gain. 
 Asylum. 
 
 Attachment of Debt. 
 Attachment of Goods. 
 Attachmentjof Person. 
 Attaining Twenty-one. 
 Attestation. 
 Attestation'[Clause. 
 Attesting Witness. 
 Attorney-General. 
 ATTORNEY-GENERAL 
 
 OP L.^NC ASTER. 
 Attonmient. 
 AUCTION. 
 Audited Accounts. 
 Auditor. 
 
 Australian Bamki-uptcy. 
 Australian|Probate. 
 Authority. 
 Average. 
 Average Bond. 
 Averment. 
 Award. 
 
 Bail. 
 
 Bail Bond. 
 
 BAILMENT. 
 
 OP DUCHY 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CROSS-EEPEEENCES. 
 
 clxxxi 
 
 Bakehouses. 
 BAKER. 
 Balance Order. 
 Ballot. 
 
 Bank of England. 
 Bank Notes. 
 BANKER :— 
 I. Cheque. 
 II. Lien. 
 III. Notes. 
 Banking Company. 
 BAISTKRUPTCT :— 
 
 I. Statutes and Gazette. 
 II. Act op Bankruptcy. 
 
 III. Teadee. 
 
 IV. Bankeuptct Petition. 
 V. Secueed Ceeditoe. 
 
 VI. Receivee. 
 VII. Examination. 
 VIII. Scheme op Aeeangement. 
 IX. Adjudication. 
 X. Teustee. 
 XI. Assets. 
 XII. Dischaeqe. 
 Xni. Undischaeged Bankeupt. 
 XIV. Annulment. 
 XV. Peoop. 
 
 XVI. Mutual Dealings. 
 XVII. Peepeeential Debts. 
 XVIII. Disteess. 
 XIX Oedee and Disposition. 
 XX. Void Settlement. 
 XXI. Feaudulent Peefeeence. 
 XXII. Peotected Teansactions. 
 
 XXIII. DiSCLAIMEE. 
 
 XXIV. Jueisdiction. 
 
 XXV. Stating Peoceedings. 
 XXVI. Teanspee. 
 XXVII. Deceased Debtoe. 
 XXVIII. Appeal. 
 XXIX. Costs. 
 XXX. Evidence. 
 
 XXXI. Liquidation (Act op 1869). 
 XXXII. Composition (Act op 1869). 
 BankiTiptcy Rules, 1870. 
 Bankruptcy. Rules, 1871. 
 Bankruptcy Rule, May 1873. 
 Bankruptcy Rules, NoTember, 187 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1883. 
 Baptism. 
 Bare Trustee. 
 
 Barge. 
 
 Barratiy. 
 
 Earner. 
 
 Barrister. 
 
 BASTARDY. 
 
 Bastardy Orders. 
 
 Bath. 
 
 BATHS AND WASH-HOUSES. 
 
 Beer. 
 
 Beer Dealers' Retail Licenses Amendment 
 Act, 1882. 
 
 Beerhouse. 
 
 Begging. 
 
 Benefice. 
 
 Betting. 
 
 Bicycle. 
 
 Bigamy. 
 
 BUI of Costs. 
 
 BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PROMIS- 
 SORY NOTE) :— 
 I. Statutes. 
 II. Acceptance. 
 
 III. Alteeation. 
 
 IV. Consideration. 
 V. FoEEiGN Bill. 
 
 VI. Liability op Paeties. 
 VII. Securities poe. 
 VIII. Transfer. 
 Bill of Lading. 
 BILL OF SALE :— 
 I. Statutes. 
 II. Apparent Possession. 
 
 III. Formalities. 
 
 IV. Operation. 
 
 V. Registration. 
 Bird. 
 
 BIRDS PROTECTION ACT. 
 
 Biretta. 
 
 Birth. 
 
 Bii-ths and Deaths Registration Act, 1874. 
 
 Bishop. 
 
 Blanks in "Will. 
 
 Boai-d of Trade. 
 
 Board of Trade Rules, August 28, 1872. 
 
 Boarding Ship. 
 
 Boat. 
 
 Boat Race. 
 
 BOILER. 
 
 Bona Fides. 
 
 Bona Vacantia. 
 
 BOND. 
 
clxxxii 
 
 TABLE OP TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CROSS-EBFERElirCES. 
 
 Bond of Corroboration. 
 Bonus. 
 Book. 
 
 Booty of War. 
 Borneo. 
 Borough. 
 
 Borough Constables Act, 1883. 
 Borough Vote. 
 Borrowing Powers. 
 Bottomry. 
 Branch Railway. 
 Breach of Trust. 
 Bread. 
 
 Breaking open Door. 
 Brewers' Licenses. 
 Bridge. 
 Bristol Court. 
 British Honduras. 
 British Subject. 
 BROKER. 
 Brothel. 
 Building. 
 
 BUILDING CONTRACT. 
 Building Estate. 
 BUILDUsTG SOCIETY. 
 Bullion. 
 Burgesses. 
 Burgh. 
 
 Burial and Registration Acts (Doubts Re- 
 moval) Act, 1881. 
 BURIAL BOARD. 
 BURIAL GROUND. 
 Burning Dead Body. 
 Business. 
 By-Law. 
 
 Cab. 
 
 Calcining. 
 
 Call. 
 
 Canada, Law of. 
 
 CANAL BOATS. 
 
 Canvassers. 
 
 Cape of Good Hope, Law of. 
 
 Capital. 
 
 Capture and Seizure. 
 
 Cargo. 
 
 CARRIER :— 
 
 I. Caebiers' Act. 
 11. Damages. 
 III. Goods. 
 Case stated. 
 
 Cases specially considered in this Digest. 
 
 Cash. 
 
 Casual Poor Act. 
 
 Catalogue. 
 
 Cattle. 
 
 Cattle Station. 
 
 Cause of Action.- 
 
 Centi-al Criminal Court. 
 
 Central Crimiual Court (Prisons) Act, 1881, 
 
 Certificate. 
 
 Certiorari. 
 
 Cestui que Ti'ust. 
 
 Ceylon. 
 
 Chairman. 
 
 Chambers. 
 
 CHAMPERTY (and MAINTENANCE.) 
 
 Chancery Court of York. 
 
 Chancery Division. 
 
 Chancery Funds Rules. 
 
 Charge. 
 
 Charges of Trustee. 
 
 Charging Order. 
 
 Charitable Institution. 
 
 CHARITY:— 
 
 I. Commissioners. 
 11. Gift to. 
 
 III. Management. 
 
 IV. Mortmain. 
 CHARTER. 
 
 CHARTERED COMPANY. 
 Chartered Freight. 
 Charterparty. 
 
 Chattel. 
 
 Cheap Trains Act, 1883. 
 Checkweigher. 
 Chemical Manure Works. 
 Chemical Process. 
 Cheque. 
 Chicory. 
 
 Child— Children. 
 Chinese Domioil. 
 Chlorine Works. 
 Cholera. 
 
 Chose in Action. 
 Church. 
 
 CHURCH BUILDING ACTS. 
 Church Estates Commissioners. 
 Churchwarden. 
 Circuity of Action. 
 
 City of London Parochial Charities Act, 
 1883. 
 
TABLE OP TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-KEFEEENCES. 
 
 clxxxiii 
 
 Civil Code of Lower Canada. 
 
 Civil Procedure Code of Lower Canada. 
 
 Civil Procedure Code of Mauritius. 
 
 Civil Service Pension. 
 
 Claims and Objections. 
 
 Clam and Bait Beds. 
 
 Class. 
 
 Clay. 
 
 Clayton's Case. 
 
 Clergyman. 
 
 Clerical Error. 
 
 Close of Bankruptcy. 
 
 Close of Insolvency. 
 
 Closs of Liquidation. 
 
 CLUB. 
 
 Clyde Navigation. 
 
 Coal Mine. 
 
 Coctles. 
 
 Code of Telegraphy. 
 
 Co-Defendants. 
 
 Codicil. 
 
 Coffee, Substitute for. 
 
 Oobabitation. 
 
 Collateral Security. 
 
 College Books. 
 
 Collegiate Body. 
 
 CoUision. 
 
 CoUusion. 
 
 Colonial Certificates. 
 
 Colonial Court. 
 
 Colonial Courts of Inquiry. 
 
 COLONIAL LAW:— 
 
 I. Canada — Dominion. 
 II. Canada — New Bbunswick. 
 
 III. Canada — Nota Scotia. 
 
 IV. Canada — Ontabio. 
 V. Canada — Quebec. 
 
 VI. Cape of Good Hope. 
 VII. Ceylon. 
 VIII. Geiqtjaland. 
 
 IX. HONDITEAS. 
 
 X. Jeesbt. 
 XL Malta. 
 XII. Matjeitius. 
 
 XIII. Natal. 
 
 XIV. New South Wales. 
 XV. New Zealand. 
 
 XVI. Queensland. 
 XVII. South Austealxa. 
 XVIII. Steaits Settlements. 
 XIX. Teinidad. 
 
 COLONIAL liAW—continmd. 
 
 XX. ViCTOEIA. 
 
 XXI. West Austealia. 
 Colonial Registers. 
 Colonial Statutes specially referred to in 
 
 this Digest. 
 Colony. 
 
 Comity of Nations. 
 Oonunencement of Title. 
 Commencing Business. 
 Commission. 
 Commission in Army. 
 Commission to examine Witness. 
 Commissioners. 
 Committal. 
 Committee. 
 Committee of Lunatic. 
 COMMON. 
 Common Informer. 
 Common Law Procedure Act. 
 Commonable Rights Compensation Act, 
 
 1882. 
 Commutation of Pensions. 
 Companies Act, 1883. 
 Companies (Colonial Registers Act), 1883. 
 COMPANY :— 
 
 I. Foemation. 
 II. Peospectus. 
 
 III. Mbmoeandum and Aeticlek. 
 
 IV. Conteacts. 
 
 V. Actions (bt and against). 
 VI. Dbbentuees (and Moet- 
 
 GAGES). 
 
 VII. Dividends. 
 VIII. Reduction op Capital. 
 IX. Shaebs — Allotment. 
 X. Shaees— Issue. 
 XL Shaees— Teanspee. 
 XII. Shaebs — Registbe. 
 
 XIII. Management. 
 
 XIV. Mbmbee's Liability. 
 
 XV. Dieectoe's Appointment. 
 
 XVI. Dieectoe's Authoeity. 
 XVII. Dieectoe's Liability. 
 
 XVIII. Dieectoe's Qualification. 
 XIX. Winding-up Oedee. 
 XX. VoLUNTAEY Winding-up. 
 XXI. Injunction (and leaye to 
 
 peoceed). 
 XXII. Liquidatoe. 
 
 XXIII. CONTEIBUTOEY. 
 
clxxxiv TABLE OP TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEEENCES. 
 
 COMPA'NY—cmiUnued. 
 XXIV. Pbooe. 
 XXV. Peepeeential Debts. 
 XXVI. Sbt-oef. 
 XXVII. Secueed Ceeditoe. 
 
 XXVIII. DiSTEESS. 
 
 XXIX. Rates. 
 
 XXX. DiSTEIBTJTION OF AsSETS. 
 XXXI. RECONSTEtrCTION. 
 
 XXXII. Cost-book Company. 
 
 XXXIII. Uneegistered Company. 
 
 XXXIV. Life Insueance Company. 
 XXXV. Appeai. 
 
 XXXVI. Costs. 
 XXXVII. Evidence. 
 
 Compensation. 
 
 Competency. 
 
 Composition. 
 
 Composition with Creditors. 
 
 Compound Interest. 
 
 Compounding Felony. 
 
 Compromise. 
 
 Comptroller of Trade-marks. 
 
 Compulsory Pilotage. 
 
 Compulsory Powers. 
 
 Computation of Time. 
 
 Concealment. 
 
 Concurrent Suits. 
 
 CONDITION. 
 
 Conditions of Sale. 
 
 Condonation. 
 
 Conduct of Cause. 
 
 Conduit. 
 
 Conference of Local Government Autho- 
 rities. 
 
 Confession. 
 
 Confirmation. 
 
 CONFLICT OF LAWS. 
 
 Conjugal Rights. 
 
 Consanguinity. 
 
 Consent. 
 
 Consideration. 
 
 Consignments. 
 
 Consolidated Orders. 
 
 Consolidated Statutes of Lower Canada. 
 
 ConsoKdation of Mortgages. 
 
 CONSPIRACY. 
 
 CONSTABLE. 
 
 Construction. 
 
 Constructive Notice. 
 
 Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act. 
 
 Contemporaneous Conveyances. 
 Contemporaneous Explanation. 
 Contemporaneous Securities. 
 Contempt. 
 
 CONTEMPT OF COURT. 
 Context. 
 
 Contingent Interest. 
 Contingent Legacy. 
 Contingent Liability. 
 Contingent Remainder. 
 Continuance of Action. 
 Continuing Breach. 
 CONTRACT :— 
 
 I. Acceptance. 
 II. Beeach. 
 III. Validity. 
 Contractor. 
 Contrary Intention. 
 Contribution. 
 Contributory Mistake. 
 Contributory NegKgence 
 Contumacy. 
 Convenience. 
 Conversion of Goods. 
 Conversion of Real and Personal Estate. 
 Conveyance. 
 Conveyance of Troops. 
 Conveyance of Voters. 
 CONVEYANCING ACT, I88I. 
 Conveyancing Act, 1882. 
 Conveyancing Business. 
 Co-ownership. 
 Coparceners. 
 Copy. 
 COPYHOLD :— 
 
 I. Custom. 
 
 II. Stteeendee and Admittancb. 
 COPYRIGHT:— 
 
 I. Books. 
 
 II. Designs. 
 
 III. Deamatic. 
 
 IV. Music. 
 
 V. Newspapees. 
 VI. Picttjees. 
 CORN RETURNS. 
 Corner House. 
 Cornwall. 
 CORONER. 
 
 Corporate and Incorporate Bodies. 
 CORPORATION. 
 Oon-espondence. 
 Corroboration. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND OEOSS-UEFEEENOES. 
 
 clxxxv 
 
 Corrupt and Illegal Practices Preveution 
 
 Act, 1883. 
 Cost-book Company. 
 Costs. 
 Co-Surety. 
 Counsel. 
 Counterclaim. 
 Counterfeit Mark. 
 Counterfeit Medal Act, 1883. 
 County. 
 COUNTY COURT:— 
 
 I. Appeal. 
 n. Costs. 
 
 III. JlTEISDICTION. 
 
 IV. Practice. 
 County Court Rules, 1875. 
 County Court Rules, 1884. 
 County Rate. 
 
 County Stock. 
 County Vote. 
 Coupons. 
 COURT:— 
 
 I. Statutes and Gazette. 
 II. Centkal Ckiminal Coitkt. 
 
 III. Lancastee Coukt. 
 
 IV. Mayor's Court. 
 Cousin. 
 COVENANT:— 
 
 I. Breach. 
 
 II. Running with Land. 
 m. Validity. 
 
 Creditor. 
 Creditors' Deed. 
 Cremation. 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW:— 
 I. Bigamy. 
 II. Coining. 
 
 III. Conspiracy. 
 
 IV. Explosives. 
 
 V. PORGEKY. 
 
 VI. Fraudulent Debtor. 
 VII. Larceny. 
 VIII. Libel. 
 IX. Malicious Injury. 
 X. Misappropriation. 
 XI. Misdemeanor. 
 XII. Nuisance. 
 
 XIII. Offences against Person. 
 
 XIV. Offences against Women. 
 XV. Unlawful Assembl*. 
 
 XVI. Evidence. 
 XVII. Practice. 
 
 Criminal Lunatic. 
 
 Crops. 
 
 Cross Actions. 
 
 Cross-Examination. 
 
 Cross-Notice of Appeal. 
 
 Cross-Remainders. 
 
 Crossed Cheque. 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 Crown Lands. 
 
 Cruelty. 
 
 CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. 
 
 Curtesy. 
 
 Custody of Children. 
 
 Custody of Deeds. 
 
 Custody of Goods. 
 
 Custom. 
 
 Custom House Agent. 
 
 CUSTOMS ANNUITY FUND. 
 
 Customs and Inland Revenue Acts. 
 
 Customs Regulation Act, 1879. 
 
 Customaiy Rent. 
 
 Customers. 
 
 Cy-pres. 
 
 Damage. 
 DAMAGES:— 
 
 I. Contract. 
 II. Lord Cairns' Act. 
 
 III. Lord Campbell's Act. 
 
 IV. Remoteness. 
 Danube. 
 
 De Bene Esse. 
 
 Dead Body. 
 
 Dean Forest. 
 
 Death. 
 
 Debenture. 
 
 Debenture Stock. 
 
 Debt. 
 
 Debtor. 
 
 Debtor's Summons. 
 
 Deceased Debtor. 
 
 Deceased Partner. 
 
 Deceit. 
 
 Declaration by Deceased Person. 
 
 Declaration of Future Rights. 
 
 Declaration of Legitimacy. 
 
 Declaration of Trust. 
 
 Decree Nisi. 
 
 Dedication. 
 
 DEED. 
 
clxxxvi TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES. AND CE0SS-EEFEEENCE8. 
 
 DEFAMATION:— 
 I. Libel. 
 II. Peivilege. 
 III. Slandbe. 
 Default. 
 Defaulter. 
 Defeasance. 
 
 Defeating and delaying Creditors. 
 Defect in Title. 
 Defence. 
 Defendant. 
 Defilement. 
 Delay. 
 Deliveiy. 
 Demurrage. 
 DemuiTer. 
 
 Denial of Plaintiff's Title. 
 Departing from DweUing-liouse. 
 Deposit. 
 
 Deposit of Deeds. 
 Deposition. 
 Deprivation. 
 Derelict. 
 
 Derivative Settlement. 
 DESCENT. 
 
 Description of Residence. 
 Desertion 
 Designs. 
 
 Destruction of Machine. 
 Detention. 
 Devastavit. 
 Devise. 
 Dictation. 
 Differences. 
 Diggiag up Soil. 
 Dilapidations. 
 Director. 
 Disability. 
 Disbursements. 
 Discharge. 
 
 Discharge of Incumbrances. 
 Disclaimer. 
 
 Discontinuance of Action. 
 Discount. 
 Discovery. 
 Discretion. 
 Disease. 
 Diseases Prevention (Metropolis) Act, 
 
 1883. 
 Disentailing Deed. 
 Dismissal for want of Prosecution. 
 
 Dismissal of Directors. 
 
 Disqualification. 
 
 Dissolution of Marriage. 
 
 Dissolution of Partnership. 
 
 Distress. 
 
 DISTRESS DAMAGE FEASANT. 
 
 Distress Warrant. 
 
 DISTRIBUTIONS, STATUTE OF. 
 
 District Board. 
 
 District Parishes. 
 
 District Registry. 
 
 Distringas. 
 
 Diversion of Footpath. 
 
 Dividend. 
 
 Dividend "Warrant. 
 
 Divisible Gift. 
 
 Divisions of Metropolis. 
 
 Divorce. 
 
 Divorce Court. 
 
 Divorce Suit. 
 
 Divorced Husband. 
 
 Divorced Wife. 
 
 Dock. 
 
 Dock Company. 
 
 Dock Warrant. 
 
 DOCKS AND HARBOURS. 
 
 Documentary Evidence Act, 1882. 
 
 Documents. 
 
 DOMICIL. 
 
 Dominion of Canada. 
 
 DONATIO MORTIS CAUSl. 
 
 Double Insolvency. 
 
 Double Portions. 
 
 Doubtful Title. 
 
 DOWER. 
 
 Drainage. 
 
 Drama. 
 
 Drawer. 
 
 Duchy of Lancaster. 
 
 Dues. 
 
 Durante Minore jEtate. 
 
 Duty. 
 
 Dwelling-house. 
 
 Dying without Issue. 
 
 Earnings. 
 
 EASEMENT. 
 
 East India Stock. 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. 
 
TABLE or TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEEENCBS. 
 
 oIxKxvii 
 
 BOCLESIASTIOAL LAW:— 
 I. Bishop. 
 II. Chtjech. 
 
 III. Chtjechzard. 
 
 IV. Olebgt, 
 
 V. Dilapidations. 
 Education. 
 Ejectment. 
 Bjusdem Greneris. 
 Eldest Son. 
 ELECTION". 
 Election Agent. 
 Election CommisBioners. 
 Election for Parliament. 
 Election for School Board. 
 Election, Municipal. 
 Election Petition. 
 ELECTRIC LIGHT. 
 Elegit. 
 ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS :— 
 
 I. Attendance. 
 
 II. Fees. 
 
 III. Home Lessons. 
 
 IV. School Board. 
 Emban-asaing Pleadings. 
 Employer and Workman. 
 Endowed Schools Act. 
 Endowment. 
 Enfranchisement. 
 Engineer. 
 
 English Will. 
 
 Engravings. 
 
 Entail. 
 
 Enti-y in Books. 
 
 Entry into House. 
 
 Entry of Appeal. 
 
 Entry on Land. 
 
 Entry, Right of. 
 
 Epidemic and other Diseases Prevention 
 
 Act, 1883; 
 Equitable Assets. 
 Equitable Execution. 
 Equitable Mortgage. 
 Equity of Redemption. 
 Equity to Settlement. 
 Equivalent. 
 Escheat. 
 Estate Clause. 
 Estate TaU. 
 ESTOPPEL:— 
 I. Conduct. 
 II. Judgment, 
 
 Estovers. 
 EVIDENCE :— 
 I. General. 
 
 II. Declaration by deceased Per- 
 son. 
 
 III. Documents. 
 
 IV. Entry by deceased Person , 
 V. Presumption. 
 
 VI. Public Documents. 
 VII. Witness. 
 Ex parte Appeal. 
 Ex parte Application. 
 Ex parte Order. 
 Ex parte Paterna. 
 Examination. 
 Exception. 
 Exchange. 
 Execution. 
 Execution of Deed. 
 Execution of Will. 
 Executive Government. 
 EXECUTOR :— 
 I. Actions. 
 II. Administration. 
 
 III. Liabilities (and Duties). 
 
 IV. POVTERS. 
 
 V. Retainer. 
 Executory Devise. , 
 EXECUTORY LIMITATION. 
 Executrix. 
 Exhibits. 
 Exoneration. 
 Expenses. 
 Experiment. 
 Expert. 
 Explosions. 
 Explosives. 
 Express Trust. 
 Expulsion. 
 Extension of Time. 
 Extinction of Power. 
 EXTRADITION. 
 Extraordinary Flood. 
 Exti-aordinary Resolutions. 
 Extras. 
 
 Fact, Matter of. 
 
 FACTOR. 
 
 FACTORY ACTS. 
 
 Failure of particular Estate. 
 
 False Pretences. 
 
 FALSE REPRESENTATION. 
 
clxxxviii TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEEEKCES. 
 
 Fancy Name. 
 
 Forfeiture. 
 
 Farming Stock. 
 
 Forgery. 
 
 Fascia. 
 
 Franchise. 
 
 Father. 
 
 Fraud. 
 
 Fees. 
 
 FRAUDS, STATUTE OF. 
 
 FBLO DE SE. 
 
 Fraudulent Appointment. 
 
 Felon. 
 
 FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE. 
 
 Felonious Demolition. 
 
 Fraudulent Debtor. 
 
 Felony. 
 
 Fi-audulent Pledge. 
 
 Fea Chai-ter. 
 
 Fraudulent Preference. 
 
 Feu Contract. 
 
 Fraudulent Transfer. 
 
 Feu Duty. 
 
 Free Miners. 
 
 Fiar. 
 
 Freeman. 
 
 Fictitious Sale. 
 
 Freight. 
 
 Fiduciary Relation. 
 
 FRIENDLY SOCIETY. 
 
 Fieri Facias. 
 
 Frivolous Action. 
 
 Fifty Pounds Rental Voter. 
 
 Fi-ost. 
 
 Fine. 
 
 Fruit Pickers. 
 
 Fire Ineui-ance. 
 
 FUGITIVE OFFENDERS. 
 
 First Meeting. 
 
 Fund in Court. 
 
 FISHERY. 
 
 Furniture. 
 
 FISHERY ACTS. 
 
 Further Consideration. 
 
 Fishing Boats. 
 
 Future Rights. 
 
 Fixtures. 
 
 Futurity. 
 
 Flange Wheel. 
 
 
 Flints. 
 
 Gale. 
 
 Flood. 
 
 GAME. 
 
 FORCIBLE ENTRY. 
 
 GAMING. 
 
 Foreclosure. 
 
 Garnishee Order. 
 
 Foreign Action. 
 
 GAS COMPANY. 
 
 Foreign Assets. 
 
 Gas Liquor Works. 
 
 Foreign Attachment. 
 
 General Average. 
 
 Foreign BiU of Exchange. 
 
 General Line of Buildings. 
 
 Foreign Company. 
 
 General Meeting. 
 
 Foreign Corporation. 
 
 General Order. 
 
 Foreign Creditors. 
 
 General Orders in Chancery, 1861. 
 
 Foreign Divorce. 
 
 General Orders under Companies Act, 1862. 
 
 Foreign Domicil. 
 
 General Orders under Companies Act, 1868 
 
 FOREIGN JUDGMENT. 
 
 General Rules, Hil. Term, 1853. 
 
 Foreign Law. 
 
 General Words. 
 
 Foreign Life Insurance Company. 
 
 Gibraltar. 
 
 Foreign Manufacture. 
 
 GIFT. 
 
 Foreign Patent. 
 
 Gin. 
 
 Foreign Probate. 
 
 Giris. 
 
 Foreign Security. 
 
 Glebe Lands. 
 
 Foreign Ship. 
 
 GOODWILL. 
 
 Foreign Sovereign. 
 
 Government Annuities. 
 
 Foreign Trade-mark. 
 
 Government Stock. 
 
 Foreign Will. 
 
 Governor of Prison. 
 
 Foreigner. 
 
 Grammar School. 
 
 Foreshore. 
 
 Grant. 
 
TABLE OP TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEKENCES. 
 
 clxxxix 
 
 Gratuity. 
 
 Grave. 
 
 Grazing. 
 
 GREEK MARRIAGES. 
 
 Ground Game. 
 
 Growing Ci-ops. 
 
 Guarantee. 
 
 Guarantee Society. 
 
 Guardian. 
 
 Guardian ad Litem. 
 
 Guardians of Poor. 
 
 Guildhall. 
 
 Gunpowder. 
 
 HABEAS CORPUS. 
 
 Habit and Repute. 
 
 Handwriting. 
 
 Harbour. 
 
 Harbour Master. 
 
 Hawker of Petroleum. 
 
 Hearsay Eridence. 
 
 Hedges. 
 
 Heir-at-Law. 
 
 Heirloom. 
 
 Herbage. 
 
 Heritable Property. 
 
 Heritage. 
 
 High Bailiff. 
 
 High Peat Mine. 
 
 Higher or Lower]^ Scale. 
 
 HIGHWAY :— * 
 
 I. BOAED. 
 
 n. Dedication. 
 in. Locomotive. 
 ly. Nuisance. 
 V. Obstkttction. 
 VI. Rate. 
 VII. Repaik. 
 VIII. Stopping-tip. 
 IX. Watwaeden. 
 Hiring Furniture. 
 Hiring Rooms. 
 Holograph Agreement. 
 Holograph Will. 
 Home for Working Girls. 
 Hospital. 
 Hotchpot. 
 Hours of Poll. 
 House. 
 House Duty. 
 House of Commons. 
 
 Household Franchise. 
 Humber Rules. 
 Hundred. 
 
 HUSBAlsa) AND WIPE:— 
 I. Divorce. 
 II. Judicial Separation. 
 
 III. Liability op Husband. 
 
 IV. Married Women's Property 
 
 Acts. 
 
 V. Separate Estate. 
 
 VI. Separation Deed. 
 
 VII. Wipe's Conveyance. 
 
 VIII. Wipe's Real Estate. 
 
 IX. Wipe's Reversion. 
 Hypothec. 
 
 Identification of Property. 
 
 Illegality. 
 
 Illegitimacy. 
 
 Illegitimate Child. 
 
 Illusory Appointment. 
 
 Imitation. 
 
 Immoral Consideration. 
 
 Implication. 
 
 Importation. 
 
 Impossibility of can-jdng on Business. 
 
 Impotence. 
 
 Imprisonment. 
 
 Improvements. 
 
 Improvement Bond. 
 
 INCLOSURE. 
 
 Inclosure Commissioners. 
 
 Income. 
 
 Income-producing Fund. 
 
 Income Tax. 
 
 Incoming Tenant. 
 
 Incongruity. 
 
 Inconsistent Clauses. 
 
 Incorporation of District. 
 
 Incorporation of Documents. 
 
 Incumbent of Church. 
 
 Incumbrances. 
 
 Indecency. 
 
 Indefeasible Title. 
 
 Indefinite Trust. 
 
 INDEMNITY. 
 
 India. 
 
 India Stock. 
 
 Indictment. 
 
 Indorsement. 
 
 INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CKOSS-KEFEEENCES, 
 
 Lis Pendens. 
 List of Voters. 
 Literary Work. 
 Loading. 
 
 Loan (Local) Act, 1875. 
 Loan Society. 
 Lobster. 
 Local Board. 
 
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT :— 
 I. By-Laws. 
 IL Compensation. 
 
 III. Local Authority. 
 
 IV. Offences. 
 V. Practice. 
 
 VI. Public Health Acts. 
 VII. Rates. 
 VIII. Sewebs. 
 IX. Streets. 
 Locks on tlie Thames. 
 Locke King's Act. 
 Locomotives. 
 Locus Standi. 
 Lodger. 
 
 Lodging House. 
 Log Book. 
 LONDON (City of) :— 
 
 I. Charities. 
 
 II. Commissioners op Sewers. 
 Long Tei-m. 
 Long Vacation. 
 Lord Campbell's Act. 
 Lower Canada, Law of. 
 Luggage. 
 Lunacy Orders. 
 LUNATIC :— 
 
 I. Committee. 
 
 II. Criminal. 
 
 III. Custody. 
 
 IV. Deceased Lunatic. 
 V. Inquisition. 
 
 VI. Jurisdiction. 
 VII. Maintenance. 
 VIII. Property. 
 Lunatic Removal (India) Act, 1851. 
 
 Main Road. 
 Maintenance. 
 Majority of Creditors. 
 Majority of Shareholders. 
 MALICIOUS PROSECUTION. 
 Management of Company. 
 
 MANDAMUS. 
 
 Manor. 
 
 Mansion-house. 
 
 Manslaughter. 
 
 Manufactured Article. 
 
 Marginal Advice. 
 
 Mai'ginal Note. 
 
 Marine Insurance. 
 
 Maritime Lien. 
 
 MARKET. 
 
 Marriage. 
 
 Man-iage Contract. 
 
 Marriage Settlement. 
 
 Married Woman. 
 
 Married Women's Property Acts. 
 
 Man-ied Women's Property Act (Scotland). 
 
 Marshalling. 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT:— 
 
 I. Master's Liability. 
 
 II. Remedies. 
 III. Wages. 
 
 Master of Ship. 
 
 Master of the Rolls. 
 
 Material Men. 
 
 Matrimonial Causes Act, 1884. 
 
 Mauritius. 
 
 Maxims of Law. 
 
 Mayor. 
 
 Mayor's Court. 
 
 Measure. 
 
 Measure of Damages. 
 
 Medical Officer. 
 
 Medical Practice. 
 
 MEDICAL PRACTITIONER. 
 
 Medical Relief. 
 
 Medical Witness. 
 
 Meeting of Creditors. 
 
 Meeting of Shareholders. 
 
 Melbourne Harbour Ti-ust. 
 
 Member of Club. 
 
 Memorandum of Association. 
 
 Merchant Seamen Payment of Wages and 
 
 Rating Act, 1880. 
 Merchant Shipping Acts. 
 Merger. 
 Mersey. 
 Meter. 
 METROPOLIS :— 
 
 I. Building Acts. 
 
 II. Commons Act. 
 
 III. Management Acts. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEEENOES. 
 
 METROFOlilS— continued. 
 
 IV. Police Acts. 
 V. PooE Acts. 
 
 VI. Public Caeeiages Acts. 
 VII. Valuation Act. 
 Metropolis Management Acts. 
 Metropolis Management and Building Acts 
 
 Amendment Act, 1882. 
 Metropolis Valuation List. 
 Metropolitan Board of Works (Money) Acts, 
 
 1881 & 1883. 
 Metropolitan BuUding Act. 
 Metropolitan Open Spaces Act, 1881. 
 Metropolitan Poor Act. 
 Metropolitan Public Carriages Act. 
 Metropolitan Street Improvement Act. 
 Middlesex Registry Acts. 
 Military Law. 
 Militia. 
 
 MiHtia Act, 1882. 
 Militia Storehouses Act, 1882. 
 Milk. 
 
 MINE AND MINERALS:— 
 I. Peee Miners. 
 
 II. Lease. 
 
 III. Mines Regulation Acts. 
 
 IV. WOBKING. 
 
 Minister. 
 
 Minutes. 
 
 Misconduct. 
 
 Misdemeanor. 
 
 Misdirection. 
 
 Misjoinder. 
 
 Misleading Conditions of Sale. 
 
 Misrepresentation. 
 
 MISTAKE. 
 
 Mittimus. 
 
 Mixed Fund. 
 
 Molestation. 
 
 Money. 
 
 Money had and received. 
 
 Money Orders. 
 
 Money paid. 
 
 Monition. 
 
 Monthly Tenancy. 
 
 Monument. 
 
 MORTGAGE :— 
 
 I. CONTEACT. 
 
 II. Consolidation. 
 
 ni. POKBCLOSUEE. 
 
 IV. Moetgagee in Possession. 
 
 'M.OB.TGAG:^— continued. 
 
 V. MOETGAGOE IN POSSESSION. 
 
 VI. Powers. 
 VII. Peioritt. 
 VIII. Redemption. 
 IX. Statutory Poem. 
 Mortmain. 
 Mother. 
 Motion. 
 
 MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ■— 
 I. Constitution. 
 II. Election. 
 
 III. Feanchise. 
 
 IV. Property. 
 
 V. Qualification. 
 VI. Rates. 
 
 VII. Resignation. 
 Municipal Elections Corrupt and Illegal 
 
 Practices Act, 1884. 
 Murder. 
 Museum. 
 
 Musical Composition. 
 Mutual Credit. 
 Mutual Dealings. 
 Mutual Life Insurance Company. 
 Mutual Loan Society. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Name and Anns Clause. 
 Natal. 
 
 NATIONAL DEBT COMMISSIONERS- 
 Nationality. 
 Nautical Assessors. 
 Navigable River. 
 Navigation. 
 Navy. 
 
 Ne Exeat Regno. 
 Necessai'ies. 
 NEGLIGENCE -.— 
 I. Evidence. 
 II. Liability. 
 Nephews and Nieces. 
 Net Profits. 
 New Parish. 
 New South Wales. 
 New Street. 
 New Trial. 
 New Trustees. 
 New Zealand.' 
 Newspaper. 
 Next Friend. 
 
TABLE OP TITLES, BUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-REPEEENCES. 
 
 Next of Kin. 
 Nitric Acid Works. 
 Nomination Paper. 
 Non- Access. 
 Non-Professional Work. 
 Non-Riparian Owner. 
 Nonsuit. 
 Non- User. 
 Notary. 
 Notice. 
 
 Notour BankiTiptcy. 
 Nova Scotia. 
 Novation. 
 Novelty. 
 NUISANCE :— 
 I. Definition. 
 II. Kemedies. 
 Nullity of Man-iage. 
 
 Oath. 
 
 Objection. 
 
 Obsolete Punisliment. 
 
 Obstruction. 
 
 Occupation. 
 
 Occupier. 
 
 Official Assignee. 
 
 Official Liquidator. 
 
 Official Receiver. 
 
 Official Referee. 
 
 Officer. 
 
 Omission of Words. 
 
 Omnibus. 
 
 Onerous Holder. 
 
 Onerous Legacy. 
 
 Ontario. 
 
 Onus Probandi. 
 
 Open. Spaces. 
 
 Opening Biddings. 
 
 Opening Poi-eclosure. 
 
 Opening of tbe Royal Courts of Justice. 
 
 Opinion of Counsel. 
 
 Option of Purcbase. 
 
 Option to renew Lease. 
 
 Order. 
 
 Order and Disposition. 
 
 Order in Council. 
 
 Original or Substitutional Gift, 
 
 Original Will. 
 
 Originating Summons. 
 
 Outgoing Tenant. 
 
 Outgoings. 
 
 Overdrawing Account. 
 
 Overseers. 
 
 Overstocking Land with Game, 
 
 Owner. 
 
 Ownership. 
 
 Oyster. 
 
 Paid-up Shares. 
 Paintings. 
 Palace. 
 
 Palatine Court of Lancaster. 
 Parcels. 
 Parcels Post. 
 Parish. 
 Parish Rates. 
 PARLIAMENT :— 
 I. Election. 
 11. Election Commissionees^ 
 
 III. Election Petition. 
 
 IV. Fbanchise. 
 Y. Peoceduee. 
 
 VI. Registeation. 
 VII. Redisteibution of Seats, 
 Parliament of Dominion of Canada, 
 Parliamentai'y Deposit. 
 Parol Oonti-act. 
 Part of House. 
 Part Performance. 
 Partial Interest. 
 Partial Invalidity. 
 Participating Policy-holder. 
 Participation in Profits. 
 Pai-ticulars. 
 Parties. 
 PARTITION SUIT;— 
 
 I. JUEISDICTION. 
 
 II. Sale. 
 PARTNERSHIP :— 
 
 I. CONTEACT. 
 
 II. Dissolution. 
 
 III. Liabilities. 
 Party WaU. 
 Passage, Court of. 
 Passenger Act. 1885. 
 Passenger Duty. 
 Passenger Ships. 
 Pasture. 
 PATENT .— 
 
 I. Statutes and Gazette, 
 II. Amendment. 
 III. Assignment. 
 
TABLE OP TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND OROSS-EEFEREN^CES. 
 
 PATENT— cowfrntted. 
 IV. Infeingembnt. 
 V. Peactice. 
 VI. Peolongation. 
 
 VII. VALIDITY. 
 
 PATRIOTIC FUND. 
 
 Pauper. 
 
 Paving Expenses. 
 
 Pay and Pensions. 
 
 Pay Office of Supreme Court. 
 
 "Payable." 
 
 PAYMENT. 
 
 Payment into Court. 
 
 Payment out of Court. 
 
 "Pedigree. 
 
 PEDLAR. 
 
 Peerage. 
 
 PBNAl ACTION. 
 
 PENALTY. 
 
 Penang. 
 
 Pendente Lite. 
 
 Pending Business. 
 
 Pending Proceedings. 
 
 PENSION. 
 
 Peppercorn Rent. 
 
 Per Stirpes. 
 
 Percentage. 
 
 Perils of the Sea. 
 
 Period of Vesting. 
 
 Peq'ury. 
 
 Permanent Improvements. 
 
 Perpetuity. 
 
 Persian Law. 
 
 " Person." 
 
 Person aggrieved. 
 
 Personse Designatse. 
 
 Personal Action. 
 
 Personal Obligation. 
 
 Personal Representative. 
 
 Petition. 
 
 Petition of Rigbt. 
 
 Petition of Rigbt (Canada) Act. 
 
 PETROLEUM. 
 
 PHARMACY ACTS. 
 
 Pbotograpb. 
 
 Physician. 
 
 Pilot — Pilotage. 
 
 Place of Election. 
 
 Places of Worship Sites Amendment Act, 
 
 1882. 
 Plaintiff. 
 
 Plate. 
 
 Pleading. 
 
 Pledge. 
 
 Pluralities. 
 
 Poaching. 
 
 Poison. 
 
 Police. 
 
 Police Acts. 
 
 Police Station. 
 
 Policy of Insurance. 
 
 Policy-holder. 
 
 Poll. 
 
 Polling Districts. 
 
 Pollution. 
 
 POOR LAW:— 
 
 I. Management. 
 II. Maintenance. 
 
 III. Relief. 
 
 IV. Settlement and Removal. 
 Poor Law Conferences Act, 1883. 
 POOR RATE:— 
 
 I. Application. 
 II. Exemptions. 
 
 III. GUAEDIANS. 
 
 IV. Occupation. 
 V. Peocbduee. 
 
 VI. Rateable Value. 
 VII. Rating of Ownbes. 
 Poor-rate Assessment and Collection Act 
 
 Amendment Act, 1882. 
 Port. 
 
 Port Sanitary Authority. 
 Portions. 
 Possession. 
 Possession Money. 
 POST OFFICE. 
 Post Office Protection Act, 1884 
 Post Office Savings Bank. 
 Post-nuptial Settlement. 
 Pound. 
 Poundage. 
 POWER:— 
 
 I. Execution. 
 II. Extinction. 
 POWER OF ATTORNEY. 
 PRACTICE— ADMIRALTY :— 
 I. Pebliminart Act. 
 II. Sbevice. 
 
 III. Pleadings. 
 
 IV. Default. 
 
 V. Countee-claim. 
 
cxcvi 
 
 TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND OKOSS-EEFEBEXCES. 
 
 PEAOTIOE— ADMIRALTY— con^inMec?. 
 VI. Third Paett. 
 VII. Aerbst of Ship. 
 
 VIII. CoNcrrEEENT Actions. 
 
 IX. Evidence. 
 
 X. Peodtjction of Docttments. 
 XI. Inspection op Peopbett. 
 XII. Teial. 
 
 XIII. Appeal. 
 
 XIV. Limitation op Liability. 
 XV. Appoetionmbnt op Damage. 
 
 XVI. Lis Alibi Pendens. 
 XVIL Salvage. 
 XVIII. Costs. 
 XIX. Jurisdiction. 
 Practice — Bankruptcy. 
 Practice — Central Criminal Court. 
 Practice — County Court. 
 PRACTICE— DIVORCE :— 
 I. Service. 
 II. Paeties. 
 
 III. Pleading. 
 
 IV. Evidence. 
 
 V. Inteevention. 
 VI. Alimony. 
 VII. Desertion. 
 VIII. Condonation. 
 
 IX. Misconduct of Petitionee. 
 
 X. Delay. 
 XI. Deceee. 
 
 XII. Damages. 
 
 XIII. Appeal. 
 
 XIV. Nullity of Maeeiage. 
 
 XV. Restitution op Conjugal 
 
 Rights. 
 XVI. Separation Deed. 
 XVIL Settlements. 
 XVIII. Custody of Children. 
 XIX. Sequestration. 
 XX. -Costs. 
 PRACTICE— ECCLESIASTICAL :— 
 I. Particulars. 
 II. Chuech Discipline Act. 
 
 III. Public Worship Act. 
 
 IV. Monition. 
 
 V. Contempt. 
 
 "VI. JUEIgDICTION. 
 
 Practice — Lancaster Court. 
 Practice — Mayor's Court. 
 PRACTICE— PRIVY COUNCIL :— 
 
 I. JUEISDICTION. 
 
 II. Leave to appeal. 
 
 PRACTICE— PROBATE :— 
 I. Citation. 
 
 II. GUAEDIAN. 
 
 III. Pleading. 
 
 IV. Particulars. 
 V. Evidence. 
 
 VL Trial. 
 VII. Compeomisb. 
 Vin. Costs. 
 PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT:— 
 I. Weit. 
 II. Seevice. 
 
 III. Weit specially indoesed. 
 
 IV. Paeties. 
 
 V. Next Peiend. 
 VI. Third Paety. 
 VII. Change op Paeties. 
 VIII. Conduct of Cause. 
 IX. Defence. 
 X. Counter-claim. 
 XI. Reply. 
 XII. Payment into Couet. 
 
 XIII. Payment out of Court. 
 
 XIV. Demueebe (and Point of 
 
 Law). 
 XV. Paeticulaes. 
 XVI. Steiking out Pleadings. 
 XVIL Discontinuance. 
 XVIII. Staying Pkoceedings. 
 XIX. Default. 
 XX. Amendment. 
 XXI. Inteeeogatories. 
 XXII. Production of Documents 
 
 XXIII. Security foe Costs. 
 
 XXIV. Inquiries and Accounts. 
 XXV. Special Case. 
 
 XXVI. DiSTEICT Registey. 
 
 XXVII. Notice of Trial. 
 XXVIII. Trial. 
 XXIX. Referee. 
 XXX. Evidence. 
 XXXI. New Trial. 
 XXXII. Motion foe Judgment, 
 
 XXXIII. Judgment. 
 
 XXXIV. Sequestration. 
 XXXV. Attachment. 
 
 XXXVI. Gaenishee Oeders. 
 XXXVII. Charging Oedbes (and 
 
 Stop Oeders). 
 XXXVIII. Weit of Possession. 
 XXXIX. Teanspbe. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFEKENOES. 
 
 PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— 
 continued. 
 
 XL. Inspection op Peopektt. 
 XLI. Injunction. 
 XLII. Receivee. 
 XLIII. Sale by Cotjet. 
 XLIV. Notice op Motion. 
 XLV. Chambees. 
 XLVI. Costs. 
 XL VII. Intebplbadee. 
 XL VIII. Consent. 
 XLIX. Appeal. 
 
 L. JUEISDICTION. 
 
 Precatory Trust. 
 Precognitions. 
 Pre-emption. 
 Preference Shares. 
 Preferential Debt. 
 Preliminary Accounts. 
 Premium. 
 
 Prerogative of Crown. 
 PRESCRIPTION. 
 Presentation of Cheque. 
 Presentation to Churcli. 
 Pressure. 
 Presumption. 
 Pretenced Title. 
 Prevention of Crime. 
 Primogeniture. 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND AGENT :— 
 I. Agent's Aitthoeity. 
 11. Agent's Liability. 
 
 III. Peincipal's Liability. 
 PRINCIPAL AND SURETY:- 
 
 I. Conteact. 
 II. Conteibution. 
 
 III. DiSCHAEGE. 
 
 IV. Indemnity. 
 V. Liability. 
 
 Printing. 
 
 Priority. 
 
 PRISON. 
 
 Prisoner. 
 
 Private Improvement Expenses. 
 
 Privilege. 
 
 Pi-ivity of Contract. 
 
 PRIVY COUNCIL. 
 
 Prize Fight. 
 
 PROBATE :— 
 
 I. Exbcittion. 
 II. Geant. 
 
 PROBATE— co»ifm«e(?. 
 
 III. Knowledge op Contents. 
 
 IV. Maeeied Women. 
 Probate Duty. 
 
 Proctor. 
 Procuration. 
 
 Production of Documents. 
 Professional Witness. 
 Profit a prendre. 
 Profits. 
 
 PROHIBITION. 
 Prolixity. 
 
 Prolongation of Patent. 
 Pi'omissory Note. 
 Promoter of Company. 
 Proof of Debts. 
 Property. 
 Prosecution. 
 Prospectus. 
 Protected Transaction. 
 Protection of Estate. 
 Protection of Post Offices and Letters. 
 Protection of Property. 
 Protector of Settlement. 
 Provident Nominations and Small Intes- 
 tacies Act, 1883. 
 Provisional Specification. 
 Proximate Cause. 
 Proxy. 
 Public Body. 
 Public Health Acts. 
 Public-house. 
 PUBLIC LIBRARY. 
 Public Officer. 
 Public Policy. 
 Public Prosecutor. 
 Public Recreation. 
 Public Register. 
 Public Worship Act. 
 Publication. 
 Publici Juris. 
 Publisher. 
 Purchase-money. 
 Purchase without Notice. 
 
 Qualification. 
 Quantum Meruit. 
 Quare Impedit. 
 Quai-ter Sessions. 
 Quebec. 
 Queen's Bench. 
 
cxoviii TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND OEOSS-EBFEEENOES. 
 
 Question of Title. 
 
 Quia Timet Action. 
 
 " Quicquid plantatur solo solo cedit." 
 
 Quit Rent. 
 
 Quorum. 
 
 Railway. 
 
 Railway Commissioners. 
 HAIL WAT COMPANY:— 
 I. Abandonment. 
 II. By-laws. 
 
 III. Constitution. 
 
 IV. Liabilities. 
 
 V. Passengee Duty. 
 
 VI. Passenoeb's Luggage. 
 VII. Propeety. 
 VIII. Railways Clauses Act. 
 IX. Railways Regulation Acts. 
 X. Traffic Management. 
 JRailway Construction Facilities Act, 1864. 
 Rape. 
 
 Rateable Value. 
 Hates. 
 Ratiiication. 
 
 Real and Personal Estate. 
 Real and Personal Representatives. 
 REAL ESTATE. 
 Real Security. 
 
 Reasonable and probable Cause. 
 Reasonableness of Charges. 
 Receipt in Deed. 
 Receiver. 
 Receiving Order. 
 Receiving Stolen Goods. 
 Recital. 
 
 Reconstruction of Company. 
 Reconveyance. 
 Record. 
 
 RECORD OFFICE, 
 Recovei'y of Land. 
 Rectification. 
 Redemption. 
 
 Redistribution of Seats Act, 1885. 
 Reduction of Capital. 
 Reduction of Contracts. 
 Reduction of Debt. 
 Reduction of Interest. 
 Reduction of Proof. 
 Re-entry. 
 Referee. 
 Reference. 
 
 Refreshers. 
 
 Refusal of Application. 
 
 Register — Registration. 
 
 Register County. 
 
 Registrar. 
 
 Registration Act, 1885. 
 
 REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND 
 
 DEATHS. 
 REGISTRY ACTS. 
 Regulation of the Forces Act, 1881. 
 Regulations for preventing Collisions at 
 
 Sea. 
 Re-bearing. 
 Re-indorsement. 
 Re-insurance. 
 Re-investment. 
 Relation of Title. 
 Relations of Lunatic. 
 Release of Surety. 
 Religious Education. 
 Religious Worship. 
 Relinquishment of Debt. 
 Remainderman. 
 Remoteness. 
 Removal of Pauper. 
 Remuneration. 
 Renewable Lease. 
 Renewal of Lease. 
 Renewal Patent. 
 Renewal of Registration. 
 Rent. 
 
 RENT-CHARGE. 
 Rents and Profits. 
 Renunciation. 
 Re-opening Bankruptcy. 
 Repairs. 
 
 Repealed Statute. 
 Reply. 
 
 Reply Post Cards. 
 Report. 
 
 Representation. 
 
 Representation of the People Acts. 
 Representative Suit. 
 Repudiation. 
 Repugnancy. 
 Reputed Ownership. 
 Requisitions. 
 Res Judicata. 
 Rescission of Contract. 
 Reservation of Minerals. 
 Reservation of Right of Way. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-EEFERENCES. 
 
 Reserve Forces Act, 1882. 
 
 Resei've Fund. 
 
 Reservoir. 
 
 Residence. 
 
 Residuary Gift. 
 
 Residuary Legatee. 
 
 Residue. 
 
 Resignation. 
 
 Resolution. 
 
 Restitutio in Integnim. 
 
 Restitution of Conjugal Rights. 
 
 Restitution of Goods. 
 
 Restraint of Marriage. 
 
 Restraint of SMp. 
 
 Restraint of Trade. 
 
 Restraint on Alienation. 
 
 Restraint on Anticipation. 
 
 Restrictions in Feu Charter. 
 
 Restrictive Covenant. 
 
 RETAINER. 
 
 Retainer of Solicitor. 
 
 Retaiaiag WaU. 
 
 Retirement. 
 
 Return to Mandamus. 
 
 Returning Officer. 
 
 rev:entte:— 
 
 I. Collection (and Management). 
 II. CtrsTOMS. 
 
 III. Excise. 
 
 IV. House Dtttt. 
 Y. Income Tax. 
 
 YI. Legacy Dott. 
 YII. Peobate Dittt. 
 YIII. Stamps. 
 
 IX. SrccESSiON Duty. 
 Reversion. 
 Revision of Yotes. 
 Revivor. 
 Revocation. 
 Right of Action. 
 Right of Common. 
 RIGHT OF ENTRY, 
 [^.ight of Way. 
 RIOT. 
 
 Riparian Owner. 
 Risk. 
 RIYBR. 
 Road. 
 
 Roads and Bridges Act. 
 Roller. 
 Rolling StDck. 
 
 Roman-Dutch Law. 
 
 Royal Peculiar. 
 
 Royal Residence. 
 
 Royal Society. 
 
 Royal Warrant. 
 
 Royalty. 
 
 Rule of Court. 
 
 Eules for Preventing Collisions at Sea., 
 
 ■Rules of Building Society. 
 
 Rules of Club. 
 
 Rides of Mutual Loan Society. 
 
 Rules of Stock Exchange. 
 
 Rules of the Supreme Court, 1875. 
 
 Rules of the. Supreme Court (Costs), Aug: 
 
 1875. 
 Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883. 
 Rules of the Supreme Court — Fund Rules. 
 Rules under Solicitors' Remuneration Act- 
 Sailing Rules. 
 St. Lawrence. 
 Salary. 
 Sale. 
 SALE OF GOODS. 
 
 I. Contkact. 
 II. Lien. 
 III. Rescission. 
 Salmon Fisheiy Acts. 
 Salvage. 
 Salvage Money. 
 Sample. 
 
 Sanction of Court. 
 Satisfaction. 
 Savings Bank Acts. 
 Scheme for Charity. 
 Scheme for Endowed Schools. 
 Scheme for Arrangement. 
 School. 
 School Board. 
 School of Art. 
 Scope of Business. 
 Scotch Assets. 
 Scotch Charity. 
 Scotch Divorce. 
 SCOTCH LAW :— 
 
 I. Bankkuptcy. 
 11. Bill os Exchange. 
 
 III. Building Society. 
 
 lY. Conveyance. 
 Y. Entail. 
 
 YI. Haebouk. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-REFEEENCE? 
 
 SCOTCH LAW continued. 
 
 YII. Heeitable Pkopebtt. 
 VIII. Highway. 
 IX. Husband and Wife. 
 
 X. JrillSDICTION. 
 
 XI. Landlord and Tenant. 
 XII. Mine. 
 XIII. Nuisance. 
 XIY. Paetneeship. 
 XV. Patent. 
 XVI. Peeeage. 
 XVII. Public Rights. 
 XVIII. Railway Company. 
 XIX. Revenue. 
 
 XX. RiVEE. 
 
 XXI. Sale op Goods. 
 XXII. Statutoey Duty. 
 
 XXIII. Teustee. 
 
 XXIV. "Will. 
 XXV. Peactice. 
 
 Scotch Sequestration. 
 
 Scotch Will. 
 
 Scotland. 
 
 Sea Pisheries. 
 
 SEA WALL. 
 
 Seal. 
 
 Sealing up Entries. 
 
 Seaman. 
 
 Search. 
 
 Seaworthiness. 
 
 Second Cousins. 
 
 Second Mortgagee. 
 
 Secret Trust. 
 
 Secured Creditor. 
 
 Security. 
 
 Seizure without Sale. 
 
 Sentence. 
 
 Separate Estate of Wife. 
 
 Separate Examination. 
 
 Separate Use. 
 
 Separation Deed. 
 
 Sequestration. 
 
 Servant. 
 
 Service. 
 
 SESSIONS. 
 
 SET-OFF. 
 
 Setting aside Award. 
 
 Setting aside Judgment. 
 
 Setting aside Settlement. 
 
 Settled Account. 
 
 Settled Estate. 
 
 SETTLED ESTATES ACTS. 
 SETTLED LAND ACT:— 
 
 I. Statutes. 
 
 II. Definitions. 
 
 III. Disabilities. 
 
 IV. PUECHASE-MONEY. 
 
 V. Resteictions. 
 
 VI. Tenant fob Life (and Limitee^ 
 
 Ownee). 
 VII. Teustees. 
 SETTLEMENT :— 
 I. Aeticles. 
 
 II. CONSTEUCTION. 
 
 III. Equity to Settlement. 
 
 IV. FUTUEE Peopeety. 
 
 V. POWEES. 
 
 VI. Revocation. 
 VII. Satisfaction. 
 Settlement of Poor. 
 Settling-day. 
 Severance. 
 Sewage. 
 Sewer. 
 
 Sewering and paving. 
 Sewers Board. 
 Shade. 
 Shanghai. 
 
 Share of Partnership. 
 Shareholder. 
 Shares. 
 
 Shelley's Case. 
 SHERIFF. 
 Sheriff's Court. 
 SHIP :— 
 
 I. Bill op Lading. 
 
 II. Chaeteepaety. 
 
 III. Feeight. 
 
 IV. Geneeal Aveeage. 
 V. Maeitime Lien. 
 
 VI. Mastee. 
 
 VII. Meechant Shipping Acts.. 
 VIII. Navigation. 
 
 IX. Ownee. 
 X. Pilot. 
 XI. Salvage. 
 XII. Seamen. 
 Shiphuilding Contract. 
 Ship's Husband. 
 Shooting, Right of. 
 Short Notice of Motion. 
 Shorthand Notes. 
 
l^BLE Oil* TITLKS, saB-TlTLl5S, AND CEOSS-EEl'EREX+CliS. 
 
 Siam. 
 
 Siding. 
 
 Signature. 
 
 Significavit. 
 
 Similal-ity. 
 
 Simple Contract Debt. 
 
 Site for Places of Worship. 
 
 Slander. 
 
 Slander of Title. 
 
 Slate Mines (Gimpowdcr) Act, 1882. 
 
 Small Bankruptcies. 
 
 Soil. 
 
 " Sole use and disposal." 
 
 Soliciting Customers. 
 
 SOLICITOR :— 
 
 I. AETiciiED Clerk. 
 II. Authority. 
 
 III. Bill of Coai'a. 
 
 IV. Duties. 
 
 V. Liabilities. 
 YI. Lien. 
 VII. Misconduct. 
 VIII. Retainer. 
 IX. Unqualified. 
 Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881. 
 Soutli Africa. 
 Spanish. Law. 
 Special Act. 
 Special Case. 
 Special Circumstances. 
 Special Referee. 
 SPECIALTY DEBT. 
 Specific Devise. 
 Specific Legacy. 
 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 
 Specification. 
 Spirits. 
 Sporting. 
 Stamp. 
 
 Stannaries Court. 
 Statement of Claim. 
 Statement of Consideration. 
 Statement of Debts and Assets. 
 Statement of Defence. 
 Status of Married Women. 
 STATUTE. 
 Statute of Frauds. 
 Statute of Limitations. 
 Statutes specially referred to in this Digest. 
 Statutory Charge. 
 Statutory Contract. 
 
 Statutory Duty. 
 
 Statutory Form. 
 
 Statutory Powers. 
 
 Statutory Receipt. 
 
 Statutory Rights. 
 
 Staying Proceedings. 
 
 Steam Tug. 
 
 Stock. 
 
 Stock-in-Tradc. 
 
 Stockbroker. 
 
 STOCK EXCHANGE. 
 
 Stole. 
 
 Stolen Goods. 
 
 Stop Order. 
 
 Stoppage in Transitu. 
 
 Straits Settlements. 
 
 Stratified Ironstone Mines (Gunpowder) 
 
 Act, I88I. 
 Street. 
 Strike. 
 
 Striking off Rolls. 
 Sticking out Pleadings. 
 Sub-Feu. 
 
 Submarine Telegraph. 
 .Submission. 
 Sub-Mortgage. 
 Subpoena. 
 Subrogation. 
 Sub-Sale. 
 
 Subscriber of Memorandum. 
 Subsidence. 
 Substituted Service. 
 Substitutional Gift. 
 Succession. 
 Succession Duty. 
 Suez Canal. 
 
 Suing and Labouring Clause. 
 Sulphate of Ammonia Works. 
 Sulphuric Acid Works. 
 Summary Jurisdiction Acts. 
 Summons. 
 Sunday. 
 
 SUNDAY OBSERVANCE. 
 Superannuation. 
 Superannuation Act, 1881. 
 Superfluous Lands. 
 Superior and Vassal. 
 Supplemental Action. ' 
 
 Supplemental Deed. 
 SUPPORT. 
 Supreme Court of Canada. 
 
TABLE OP TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CROSS-RBFEBENCES. 
 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1881. 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1884. 
 Supreme Court of Judicature (Funds, &c,) 
 
 Act, 1883. 
 Siiroharge. 
 Surety. 
 Surface. 
 Surplus Income. 
 Surrender of Lease. 
 Survey. 
 Surveyor. 
 
 Survival of Action, 
 Survivor. 
 Survivorsliip. 
 Suspending Order. 
 Bwino. 
 Synod. 
 
 Tacking. 
 
 Tatenbill Rectory. 
 
 Taxation of Costs. 
 
 Tees. 
 
 TELEGKAPH. 
 
 TELEGKAPH COMPANY. 
 
 Telegraphy. 
 
 Telephone. 
 
 Temporary Nuisance. 
 
 Tenant at Will. 
 
 TENANT FOR LIFE. 
 
 Tenant from Tear to Year. 
 
 TENANT IN COMMON. 
 
 TENANT IN TAIL. 
 
 Tenant of Manor. 
 
 Tenant pur autre Vie. 
 
 Tendency to decieive. 
 
 Tender. 
 
 Terminal Charges. 
 
 Territorial Sovereignty. 
 
 Testamentary Power. 
 
 Thames. 
 
 THEATRE. 
 
 Third Party. 
 
 Tidal River. 
 
 Tierce Opposition. 
 
 TIMBER. 
 
 Time. 
 
 Time Policy. 
 
 TITHES. 
 
 Title. 
 
 TITLE DEEDS, 
 
 Title of Action. 
 
 Title of Book. 
 
 Title of Dignity. 
 
 Tobacco. 
 
 Tolls. 
 
 Tolzey Court of Bristol. 
 
 Tonnage. 
 
 Tort. 
 
 Towage. 
 
 Towing-path. 
 
 Trade. 
 
 Trade or Business. 
 
 TRADE MARK:— 
 
 I. Infeingement. 
 
 II. Registration. 
 Trade-mark Rules, 1876. 
 TRADE NAME. 
 TRADE UNION. 
 Trader. 
 
 Traffic. 
 
 Tramway. 
 
 TRAMWAY COMPANY. 
 
 Transcript of Record. 
 
 Transfer. 
 
 Transshipment. 
 
 TRESPASS. 
 
 Trial. 
 
 Trial of Lunatics Act, 1883. 
 
 Ti'icyole. 
 
 Trinity Master. 
 
 TROVER. 
 
 Ti-ust. 
 
 Trust Estate. 
 
 TRUSTEE :— 
 
 I. Appointment. 
 
 II. Costs and Charges. 
 
 III. Indemnity. 
 
 IV. Liabilities. 
 V. Powers. 
 
 VI. Retirement. 
 Trustee in Banln-uptoy. 
 Trustee in Liqiudation. 
 TRUSTEE ACTS:— 
 I. New Trustees. 
 II. Vesting Orders. 
 TRUSTEE RELIEF ACT. 
 Tunis. 
 
 TURNPIKE ACTS. 
 Turnpike Bonds. 
 Turnpike Dehentui'es, 
 Turnpike Road. 
 
TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-BEFEEENCES. 
 
 Ultra Vires Act. 
 Umpire. 
 Uncertainty. 
 Unclaimed Dividends. 
 Underground Water. 
 Underlease. 
 
 Underpinning Building. 
 Undertaking. 
 Undertaking of Company, 
 Undervalue. 
 Underwood. 
 Underwriter. 
 Undischarged Bankrupt. 
 Undisclosed Principal. 
 UNDUE INFLUENCE. 
 Unfinished Article. 
 Unity of Person. 
 Unity of Possession. 
 Unliquidated Damages. 
 " Unmarried." 
 Unqualified Person. 
 Untregistered Bill of Sale. 
 Unregistered Company. 
 Unregistered Deed. 
 Unregistered Will. 
 Unsound Mind. 
 Unstamped Deed. 
 Urban Authority. 
 Urinal. 
 Usage. 
 
 Use and Occupation. 
 User. 
 Utility. 
 
 Vacant Land. 
 
 Vacating B/egistration. 
 
 VAGRANT ACTS. 
 
 Validity. 
 
 Valuation. 
 
 Valuation List. 
 
 Valued Policy. 
 
 Variance. 
 
 Varying Minutes. 
 
 Vassal. 
 
 VENDOR AND PURCHASER: 
 
 L Ageeement. 
 
 IL Compensation. 
 IIL Conditions op Sale. 
 IV. Conveyance. 
 
 V. Deposit. 
 
 VI. Fbaud, 
 
 VENDOR AND PURCHASER— cowfci. 
 VII, Lien. 
 
 VIII. PlTECHASE WITHOtTT NOTICE, 
 
 IX. Rescission. 
 X.' Title. 
 
 XI. Title Deeds, 
 Venue. 
 Verdict. 
 
 Vested Interests. 
 Vesting, 
 Vesting Order. 
 Vestments. 
 Vestry. 
 
 VETERINARY SURGEON. 
 Vice-Admii'alty Court. 
 Victoria. 
 Vis Major. 
 Visitor. 
 
 Voluntary Allowance. 
 VOLUNTARY CONVEYANCE. 
 Voluntary Subscriptions. 
 Voluntary Winding-xip. 
 Volunteer. 
 Vote. 
 
 Voting Paper. 
 Vouchers. 
 
 Wager. 
 Wages. 
 Waiver. 
 
 Ward of Court. • 
 Warehouseman. 
 Warrant of Arrest. 
 Warrant of Distress. 
 Warranty. 
 Waste. 
 WATER. 
 
 WATERCOURSE. 
 Water-rate. 
 
 Waterworks Clauses Act. 
 WATERWORKS COMPANY. 
 I. Supply op Wateb. 
 II. Watee-Rate. 
 WAY. 
 Waywarden. 
 
 WEIGHTS AND MEASURES. 
 Well. 
 
 West Australia. 
 West Riding Registry. 
 Westminster, Palace of. 
 Wharfinger, 
 
COIV 
 
 TABLE OF TITLES, SUB-TITLES, AND CEOSS-tlEEEEENCES. 
 
 WMte Lead Factory. 
 
 Widow. 
 
 Wife. 
 
 Wild Birds Protection Act, 1881. 
 
 Wilful Default. 
 
 ■\7ILL :— 
 
 I. Absolute Gift. 
 II. Ademption. 
 
 III. Ambiguity. 
 
 IV. Annuity. 
 
 V. Attesting Witness. 
 VI. Ohaege of Debts. 
 VII. Children. 
 VIII. Class. 
 IX. Condition. 
 X. Contingent Remaindee. 
 XI. Conversion. 
 XII. Cross Remainders. 
 
 XIII. Death coupled with 
 
 Contingency. 
 
 XIV. Disclaimer. 
 
 XV. Estate in Realty. 
 XVI. Executors. 
 XVII. Exoneration. 
 XVIII. Heirloom. 
 XIX. Incorporated Documents. 
 XX. Interim Income. 
 XXI. Joint Tenancy. 
 XXII. Lapse. 
 
 XXIII. Mistake. 
 
 XXIV. Perpetuity. 
 XXV. Precatory Trust. 
 
 XXVI. Priority of Legacies. 
 XXVII. Repugnancy. 
 XXVIII. Residuary Gift. 
 XXIX. Revocation. 
 
 WILL — continued. 
 
 XXX. Satisfaction. 
 XXXI. Separate Use. 
 XXXII. Speaking from Death. 
 
 XXXIII. Specific Legacy. 
 
 XXXIV. Substitutional Gift. 
 XXXV. Survivor. 
 
 XXXVI. Trust Estates. 
 XXXVII. Trustees. 
 XXXVIII. Vesting. 
 i XXXIX. Words. 
 I Windfalls. 
 
 Winding-up. 
 i Window. 
 
 Withdrawal. 
 
 Witness, 
 
 Woman past childbeai-ing. 
 
 Woods and Forests. 
 
 Words. 
 
 Words of Limitation. 
 
 W^orkman. 
 
 Working of Mine. 
 
 Wreck. 
 
 Wreck Commissioners. 
 
 Writ. 
 
 Written Agreement. 
 
 Written Order. 
 
 Wrongful Seizure. 
 
 Yearly Rents. 
 
 Yearly Tenant. 
 
 Years of Discretion. 
 
 York. 
 
 Yorkshire Registiy. 
 
 Younger Son. 
 
 Youngest Son. 
 
THE LAW REPORTS. 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 -Costs 16 Ch. D. 273 
 
 SUPBEME COUKT — 
 
 ( 1 ) 
 
 aBAHDONMEHT— Appeal 
 See Practice — 
 Costs. 1. 
 
 Domicil 29 Ch. D. 617 ; 30 Ch. D. 165 ; 
 
 See DoinciL. 1, 2, 3. [10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 Father's right — Religious education 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 817 
 See Infant — Education. 2. 
 
 Motion— Costs - 16 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See PuACTiCB — Supeeme Coubt — 
 Costs. 2. 
 
 . EaUway 18 Ch. D. 155 ; 25 Ch. D. 251 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 662 
 See Railway Company — Abandonment. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 ■ Railway— Costs - - 28 Ch. D. 237 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 6. 
 
 ' Ship — Constructive total loss — Notice — 
 
 Suing and labouring clause 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 11 
 See Insubanoe, Mabine — Loss, Total. 
 
 Ship — Finding of fact — Appeal 7 App. Cas. 
 
 See Scotch Law — Peactioe. 3. [49 
 
 • Trade-mark - 26 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Tbade-mabk — Eegisteation. 12. 
 
 Undertaking 25 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Company — Dibeotoe's Qualifioa- 
 
 TION. 1. 
 ABATEMENT OF ANNUITY 27 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See BxBCDTOR — Administration. 7. 
 ABATEMENT OF SUIT— Action of tort- Death 
 of party to reference before award 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 565 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Coubt — 
 Change or Parties. 4. 
 
 ^ Revivor— Discretion of Court 20 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Pbaotice — Supreme Coubt — 
 Change of Paeties. 6. 
 ABDUCTION. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law— Oepenobs against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 ABSCONDING DEBTOR - 20 Ch. D 697 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Teadeb. 1. 
 
 . _ _ 22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 23. 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 ABSENCE BEYOND SEAS— Statute of Limita- 
 tions - - kl? Ch. D, 104 
 See Limitations, Statute of— Realty. 
 7. 
 ABSOLUTE CONVEYANCE— Right of way 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 572 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Ageeb- 
 MENT. 1. 
 
 ABSOLUTE GIFT— Will- Construction 24 Ch. D. 
 See Will — Absolute Gift. 1. [616 
 
 Will— Qualified by gift over 21 Ch. D. 811 
 
 See Will — Class. 2. 
 ABSOLUTE TRANSFEK— Bill of sale— Order 
 and disposition - 24 Ch, D. 210 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Oedee and Disposi- 
 tion. 2. 
 ABSTRACT OF TITLE— Costs of 30 Ch. D. 42 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Title. 1. - 
 
 Perusal of — Remuneration 29 Ch. D. 199 
 
 See Solioitoe — Bill op Costs. 20. 
 ABSTRACTION OF WATER 27 Ch. D. 122 
 
 See Wateecoubse. 1. 
 ABUSE OF BANKRUPTCY LAW 20 Ch. D. 670 ; 
 [22 Ch. D. 773, 778 
 See Bankeuptcy — Composition. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 - - - - 30 Ch. D. 685 ' 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Costs. 1. 
 
 ABUSE OF WINDING-UP ACTS 23 Ch. D. 210 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 10. 
 
 ACCELERATION OF REMAINDER 21 Ch. D. " 
 
 See Will — Condition. 1. [278 
 
 ACCEPTANCE— Bill of exchange 25 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Acceptance. 1, 
 
 Sale of goods — Statute of Frauds, s. 17 
 
 [IS Q. B. D. 228 
 
 See Sale of Goods — Conteact. 3. 
 
 ACCESS TO CHILDREN - 28 Ch. D. 606 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Sepaeation 
 
 Deed. -5. 
 
 ACCIDENT— Death by - 6 Q. B. D. 42 ; 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 216 
 See iNStiEANOE, Life — Policy. 1. 2. 
 
 Death by— Compensation 28 Ch, D. 409; 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 160 
 See Damages — Lord Campbell's Act. 
 1,2. 
 
 B 
 
( 3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 ACCOMMODATION BILLS— Proof in bankruptcy 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 330 
 
 See Bankruptcy — PEOOr. 4. 
 
 ACCOMMODATION "WOEKS 20 Ch. D. 323 
 
 See Eailway Company — Bailways 
 CiAUSES Act. 1. ' 
 ACCOED AND SATISFACTION, 
 
 1. Cheque. — A., being indebted- to B. in 
 
 £125 7s. 9rf. for goods sold and delivered, gave B. 
 a cheque for £100 payable on demand, -which B. 
 accepted in satisfaction.— jffeZrf, a good accord and 
 satisfaction.- Cumber v. Wane (Stra. 426) and 
 Sibree v. Tripp (15 M. & W. 23) observed upon. 
 GOBDAED V. O'Beien - 9 Q. B. D. 37 
 
 2. Consideration — Contract hy Creditor 
 
 to tahe less than Sum diie.'] An agreement between 
 judgment debtor and creditor, that in considera- 
 tion of the debtor paying down part of the judg- 
 ment debt and costs, and on condition of his pay- 
 ing to the creditor or his nominee the residue by 
 instalments, the creditor will not take any pro- 
 ceedings on the judgment, is nudum pactum, 
 being without consideration, and does not prevent 
 the creditor after payment of the whole debt and 
 costs from proceeding to enforce payment of the 
 interest upon the judgment. — So Held affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal. — Pinnel's Case 
 (5 Kep. 117 a) and Cumber v. Wane (1 Str. 426) 
 followed. EoAKES v. Beek 11 ft. B. D. 221 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 605 
 
 ACCOUNT— Action for— Collegiate body 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 696 
 
 See Chaotty— Commissioners. 1. 
 . Action for— Mistake of law 29 Ch. D. 902 
 
 See Bdilmno Society. 8. 
 ■ After judgment - 21 Ch. D. 767 
 
 See ExECCTOE — Actions. 9. 
 Auditing— Building society 28 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Building Society. 3. 
 Banker — Advances to executor 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Powees. 1. [181 
 
 —— Bankruptcy — Duty of bankrupt to furnish 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Bankeuptcy— Examination. 2. 
 
 Claim for— Particulars of demand 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 119 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Couet— Pae- 
 ticulaes. 1. 
 . Discovery 16 Ch. D.,93 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 9. 
 
 — — Duty on. 
 
 See Eevenue — Stamvs— Statutes. 
 
 In Chambers — Adjournment into Court 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 731 
 See Practice— Supeeme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 1. 
 
 I Mortgage — Eoreolosnre 29 Ch. D. 827 
 
 See MoETGAGE— Foreclosure. 2. 
 
 Mortgage— Settled account 6 App. Cas. 181 
 
 A^ee Mortgage— Conteaot. H. 
 —^Mortgage — Surplus of sale by_ first jnort- 
 
 ACCOUNT — conf inued. 
 
 Mortgagee in possession - 16 Ch. D. 53 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 478 ; 30 Ch. D, 336 
 
 See Moetgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 1, 3, 4. 
 Order for— District Eegistrar 20 Ch. D. 638 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 8. 
 Patent— Duty of patentee 6 App. Cas. 176 
 
 See Patent — Prolongation. 2. 
 Patent— Profits 17 Ch. D. 423 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 1. 
 Preliminary - 29 Ch. D. 566, 834 
 
 See Practice — Supre5ie Court — In- 
 quiries AND Accounts. 1, 2. 
 Settled account— Form of order 27 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 2. 
 ACCOUNTANT — Eight to appoint — Auditor — 
 
 Company - - 12 ft, B. D. 68 
 
 See Company — Management. 1. 
 
 ACCUMULATIONS. 
 
 1. Accumulation to pay Mortgage Debts 
 
 — Sale of Mortgaged Estate hy Mortgagee — Bight 
 of Tenant for Life to j:)ossession.] A testator 
 devised his real estates (in the events which 
 happened) to the use of the Plaintiff for life ; 
 with remainder to the nse of the Plaintiff's first 
 and other sons successively in tail male; with 
 remainder over to the use of another person in 
 fee. Tlie will provided that, immediately after 
 the death of a prior tenant for life (who died 
 before the testator), the trustees of the will 
 should receive the rents, and, after paying there- 
 out the interest on the mortgages on the estates, 
 should accumulate the residue, imtil the amount 
 of the accumulations should be sufficient to dis- 
 charge the principal of the mortgages. And the 
 testator directed that, as soon as the accumula- 
 tions should be sufficient to pay off the mortgages, 
 the trustees should forthwith pay them off. And 
 he declared that the Plaintiff, or other the person 
 for the time being entitled for life or in tail to 
 the estates under the limitations of the wUI, 
 should not be entitled . to receive any part of the 
 rents until the mortgages had been paid off. 
 After the testator's death the mortgagees sold 
 those parts of the estates which were comprised 
 in their mortgages. The proceeds of sale were 
 not enough to pay the whole of the mortgage 
 debts, and the balance was paid out of the accu- 
 mulations of rents. A surplus of accumulations 
 remained : — Beld, that the tenant for life was 
 entitled to be let into possession of the estates 
 which remained unsold, and to have the surplus 
 of the accumulations paid to him. Norton v. 
 Johnstone - - 30 Ch. D. 649 
 
 2. ■ Thellusson Act (39 * 40 Geo. 3,c, 98), 
 
 s. 1 — Trtist for Accumulation.'] The four different 
 
 gagee 
 
 IS Ch, D, 254 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of- 
 2, 
 
 -Trusts. 
 
 periods beyond which the accumulation of in- 
 come is unlawful under the 1st section of the 
 Thellusson Act are alternative and not cumu- 
 lative; therefore when one period has been ap- 
 plied and exhausted, a second period cannot be 
 resorted to and applied, in order to extend the 
 time for accumulation. — In applying the Act the 
 Court is bound to consider not merely the events 
 which have happened, but also those which might 
 have happened. — By a post-nuptial settlement the 
 
( 5 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( e ) 
 
 A.CCmSJS'L&.TIO'SS— continued. 
 husband assigned all liis personal estate to trus- 
 tees iipon trust to apply the income to his own 
 maintenance, and subject thereto, during the 
 joint lives of himself aud his wife, and the life 
 of the survivor of them, to apply all or any part 
 of the income for the maintenance of the wife and 
 the children of the marriage, and to accumulate 
 the surplus (if any) so that the accumulations 
 should be added to the principal fund and follow 
 the destination thereof, with liberty for the trus- 
 tees to resort to the accumulations of any pre- 
 ceding years and apply the same for the main- 
 tenance of the wife and children ; and after the 
 deatli of the survivor of the settlor and his wife 
 upon trust, as to both capital and income, for 
 such of their issue as the settlor and his wife by 
 deed jointly, or the survivor by will, should 
 appoint, and in default for the children of the 
 marriage as tenants in common, sons at twenty- 
 one, and daughters at twenty-one or marriage : — 
 Held, that the only one of the said four periods of 
 the Thellusson Act applicable to the case was the 
 first, viz., the life of the settlor; and that the 
 trust for accumulation contained in the settlement 
 was void as from the death of the husband. 
 Jagger v. Jagger 25 Ch. D. 729 
 Allowance out of — Maintenance of infants 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 807 ; 19 Ch. D. 305 ; 22 Ch. D. 583 
 
 See IxFANT — Maintenaitoe. 1, 2, 3. 
 Separate estate - 30 Ch. D. 183 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separate 
 Estate. 8. 
 Trustee— Breach of trust 17 Ch. D. 142 
 
 See Trcstee — Liabilities. 7. 
 
 ACCUMTILATION FUND — Foreign life insurance 
 company - - - 31 Ch. D. 837 
 
 See Company -^LiFE Insurance Com- 
 pany. 1. 
 ACCUSED PEESON — Evidence of— Offences 
 against women 
 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence — 
 Statutes. 
 
 ACKNOWIEDGMENT— Married woman. 
 
 See Husband and "Wife— "Wipe's Con- 
 veyance — Statutes. 
 
 Married woman — Fines and Recoveries Act 
 
 — Tarying form of certificate 
 
 [6 a. B. D. 154 
 See Husband and "Wife — "Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 1. 
 
 Married woman — "Wife's reversionary in- 
 terest 23 Ch. D. 181, 344 
 See Husband and "Wife — "Wipe's Eeal 
 Estate. 2, 3. 
 
 Statute of Limitations 38 Ch. D. 474 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 1. 
 
 Statute of Limitations 19 Ch. D. 373 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. a. 882 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Realty. 
 1,2. 
 
 ACQUIESCENCE — Breach of covenants — Altera- 
 tion of character of property 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 103 
 See Covenant — Breach. 1. 
 
 ACftUIESCENCE— confmuecZ. 
 
 Breach of trust - - 30 Ch. D. 490 
 
 See Trustee — Liability. 5. 
 Ultrk vires act 26 Ch. D. 107 
 
 See Company — Memorandum and Ar- 
 ticles. 3. 
 
 ACT OF BANKRUPTCY. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Act op 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 ■ See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1S83— Statutes. 
 
 Creditor's deed — Subsequent bankruptcy of 
 
 debtor — Liability of trustee to account 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 25 
 See BANKRUPTcy — Trustee. 3. 
 
 Failure to comply with bankruptcy notice — 
 
 Appeal — Stay of proceedings 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 49 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 Mutual dealings 7 App. Cas. 79 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Mutual Dealings. 
 3. 
 
 Notice of — Protected transaction. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Pro- 
 tected Transaction. 
 
 Solicitor — Petitioning creditor — Payment 
 
 with notice of act of bankruptcy 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 747 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 7. 
 
 Trader— Proof of trading 20 Ch. D. 697 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 394 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 1 , 2. 
 ACT OF GOD — Extraordinary violence of sea 
 
 See Sea-wall. [14 Q. B. D. 661 
 
 ACTING DEAMA— Copyright — Publication 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 232 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 3. 
 
 ACTIO PEESONALIS MOEITUE CUM PEESONA 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 484 ; 24 Ch. D. 439 ; 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 110 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 ACTIO POPULAEIS 
 
 See Scotch Law- 
 
 7 App. Cas. 547 
 
 -Public Rights. 
 
 ACTION. 
 
 1, Alimony — Pendente lite — Order of 
 
 Probate and Divorce Division.'] In an action for 
 arrears of alimony pendente lite payable under 
 an order of the Probate and Divorce Division : — 
 Held, by the Divisional Court, that an order to 
 enter final judgment under Order xiv., rule 1, 
 could not be made : — Held, by the Coiurt of Ap- 
 peal, that the order for payment of alimony could 
 only be enforced in the manner pointed out by 
 20 & 21 Yict. t-. 85, s. 52, and therefore no action 
 would lie to recover the arrears, and the decision 
 must be affirmed. Bailey v. Bailey 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 855 
 
 2. Cause of — Statement of Claim shewing 
 
 Pelony — Demurrer.l A statement of claim is not 
 demurrable on the ground that it shews the 
 cause of action to be a felony, for which the felon 
 has not been prosecuted. EooPB v. D'Avigdor 
 
 [10 a. B. D. 412 
 B 2 
 
( 7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 ACJIOTX— continued. 
 
 • For deceit — Misrepresentation in prospectus 
 
 [17 Ch, D. 301 ; 29 Ch. D. 459 ; 9 App. Cas. 
 
 [187 
 See Company — Prospectus. 1, 3, 5. 
 
 Felony' — Neglect to prosecute felon 
 
 See Insurance, Fire. 1. [6 ft. B. D. 661 
 
 In personam — Bying -with the person 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 481 ; 24 Ch. D. 439 ; 
 [9 ft. B. D. 110 
 See Executor — Actions. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 In personam — Two actions on same subject 
 
 — Stny of proceedings 21 Ch. D. 202 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 6. 
 
 In rem — Ship — Jnrisdiction of Admiraltv 
 
 Division 9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App, Caa. 59 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. ] . 
 ■ Eight of — Undischarged bankrapt — Per- 
 sonal earnings — Trustee 17 Ch. D. 768 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 4. 
 AD VALOREM STAMP 17 Ch, D. 10 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps. 3. 
 ADDING PAETIES. 
 
 See Cases imder Practice — Supbejie 
 Court — Parties. 
 
 After judgment — Foreclosure action 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 760 
 See Practice — Suprejie Court — 
 Amendment. 2. 
 ADEMPTION— Legacy 22 Cn. D. 622 
 
 See Will — Ademption. 
 
 Purchase-money of estate sold - 30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 See Will — Words. 9. 
 
 Satisfaction by advance in testator's life- 
 time 17 Ch. D, 701 ; 28 Ch, D. 522 ; 
 [15 ft. B, D. 300 
 See Will — Satisfaction. 1, 2, 3. 
 ADJOINING LANDOWNERS— Liability of 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 441 ; 8 App, Cas. 443 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 1. 
 ADJOINING TENEMENT— Eight to easement 
 
 See Easement. 1. [22 Ch. D. 177 
 
 ADJOURNMENT TO JUDGE — Costs — Mortga- 
 gees' accounts - 22 Ch. D. 6 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 7. 
 
 ADJUDICATION OF BANKRUPTCY. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Adjudi- 
 cation. 
 
 Annulment. 
 
 See Cases under Bankisuptcy — Annul- 
 ment. 
 
 ■ Infant - - 18 Cb, D, 109 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Tradeh. 3. 
 
 ■ Liciuidating debtor 22 Ch, D. 813 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 35 
 See Bankruptcy' — Liquidation. I, 6. 
 
 ADJUSTMENT OF EIGHTS OF CONTRIBU- 
 TORIES - 23 Ch, D. 297 
 
 See Company — Contributory. 4. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION— Action for. 
 
 See Cases under Executor — Actions. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION— coreimited. 
 
 Action for— Claim by creditor — Statute of 
 
 Limitations - 18 Ch. D. 561 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 4. 
 
 Action for — Conduct of— Bankrupt execu- 
 tors - 19 Ch. D. 61 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Con- 
 duct OF Cause. 1. 
 
 Action for — Costs — County Court 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See County Covi-.t — Costs. 3. [521 
 
 Action for — Costs of defaulting trustee 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 195 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 3. 
 
 Action for — Costs — Eemuneration of soli- 
 citor - 26 Ch. D. 155 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 21. 
 
 Action for — Deceased bankrupt 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 672 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 2. 
 
 Action for — Eeference to chambers 
 
 [26 Ch, D. 66 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Chambers. 7. 
 
 — - Action for — Sale by Court — Leave to solici- 
 tor to bid — Fiduciary relation 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 424 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 6. 
 
 Amount of bond - 10 P. D. 196, 198 
 
 Si'.e Administrator — Grant. 1, 2. 
 
 Assets of bankrupt 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Assets. 
 
 Assets of deceased person 
 
 See Cases under Executor — Adminis- 
 tration. 
 
 Deceased insolvent debtor's estate— Transfer 
 
 to Bankruptcy Court. 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 18SS— Statutes. 
 
 — Deceased insolvent debtor's estate — Transfer 
 to Bankruptcy Court 13 ft. B. D. 552 ; 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 159 ; 29 Ch. D. 236 
 See Bankruptcy — Deceased Debtor. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 — Duty on - 22 Ch. D. 645 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 3. 
 
 — Grant of. 
 See Cases under Administrator. 
 
 — Judgment against executor — Ini'unction 
 See Judgment. 1. [29 Ch. D. 557 
 
 — Judgment for 29 Ch. D. 913 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 
 Chambers. 10. 
 
 — Eetainer by executor 
 See Cases under Executor — Eetainer. 
 
 — Eetainer by heir-at-law - 27 Ch, D. 478 
 
 See Retainer. 
 
 — Scotch law — Estate of Scotch testator 
 [10 App. Cas. 463 
 
 See Scotch Law — Jurisdiction. 
 
 — Severance of funds — Liability of trustees 
 [6 App, Cas, 856 
 
 See Scotch Law — Trustee. 
 
< 9 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 10 ) 
 
 ADMINISTEATION— conWm«c(i!. 
 
 -^— Summons for— Suit of creditor 30 Ch. D. 291 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Pee- 
 soNAL Actions. 10. 
 
 ADMINISTBATION BOND— Married woman- 
 Consent of husband 8 P. D. 16, 168 
 See Administkator — Makkibd Woman. 
 1,2. 
 
 ADMINISTEATION OF OATH— Commission to 
 take evidence - - 22 Ch. D. 841 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Eti- 
 
 DENCE. 12. 
 
 ADMIKISTKATOE :— Col. 
 
 I. Grant _ - _ _ 9 
 
 II. Limited - - - - 10 
 
 III. Married Woman - 11 
 
 IV. Nominee of Crown - - - ] 2 
 
 V. Powers - - - 12 
 VI. With Will annexed - - 13 
 
 1. ADMINISTBATOE— GEANT. 
 
 1. Amount of Bond.] An estate having 
 
 been partly administered and a, further bond 
 become necessary, the Court allowed the adminis- 
 trator to take the grant for the amount then due to 
 the estate, and to give security only for double 
 that amount. In the Goods of Halhwell 
 
 [10 P. D. 198 
 
 8. Amount of Bond — Sureties.'} The 
 
 Court wUl not by reason of the property being 
 large and the risk small dispense with sureties to 
 an administration bond or lessen the amount to 
 be secured. But it will allow the security to be 
 made up of any number of bonds. In the Goods 
 OP Eable - - 10 P. D. 196 
 
 lAnd see In the Goods of McGowan, 10 P. D. 197.] 
 
 3. Duchy of Cornwall — Evidence.'] On 
 
 motion for grant of letters of administration of 
 an intestate's effects to His Koyal Highness the 
 Prince of Wales, as Duke of Cornwall, it is not 
 necessary, if the facts are suflSciently set forth in 
 the warrant, that they should be verified by affi- 
 davit. In the Goods of Griffith 9 P. D. 63 
 
 4. English and Scotch Assets — • 'Will 
 
 proved in Scotland only — Bight of Legatee to insist 
 upon Proof in England.] W. E. died possessed 
 of property of small value in England, and en- 
 titled under the will of J. 0. E. to large assets 
 in Scotland, which were being duly administered 
 there. The executors of W. E. proved his will in 
 Scotland only. G. W. H., a legntee under W. E.'s 
 will, applied for a grant of administration of the 
 estate of W. E. in England, which application 
 was opposed by the executors: — Held, that tlie 
 Court is not bound to make such a grant, but that 
 its power is discretionary : — Held, also, that it not 
 having been shewn that the executors were not 
 doing their duty, there was no necessity for any 
 grant in this country. Application refused. — A 
 similar application was made by another legatee 
 upon the ground also that such a grant was neces- 
 sary to substantiate proceedings in Chancery. — 
 Application refused, on its being proved that the 
 grant was not necessary for the suit in Chancery. 
 In the Goods of Ewing - 6 P. D. 19 
 
 5. Executrix de son tort — Creditor.'] An 
 
 executrix who, without having taken probate, 
 had intermeddled in the estate of her testator. 
 
 I. ADMINISTEATOE— GEAHT— cow«4TOe«Z. 
 
 died possessed of property belonging to him :— 
 Held, after citation of her next of kin and their 
 non-appearance, that the representative of the 
 testator was entitled as u creditor to a general 
 grant of letters of administration of her estate. 
 In the Goods of Mellob 8 P. D. 108 
 
 6. Insolvency of the Estate — Special 
 
 Circumstances— 20 & 21 Vict. c. 77, s. 73.] J. W., 
 entitled to the property of his wife, E W., who 
 predeceased him, became indebted to the estate 
 of J. P. The estate of E. W. afterwards became 
 entitled to a share in the residuary estate of J. P. 
 — The executrix of J. W. refused to take out 
 letters of administration to E. W.'s estate, and a 
 grant was necessary to enable the creditors of 
 J. W. to obtain E. W.'s share of the residuary 
 estate in satisfaction of their debt : — The Court 
 granted (under s. 73 of 20 & 21 Vict. 0. 77) ad- 
 ministration of the estate of E. W. to a creditor 
 of J. W. In the Goods of Wensley 7 P. D. 13 
 
 7. Personal Estate, Proceeds of — Sale 
 
 under Settled Estates Acts.] The proceeds of real 
 property sold under the Settled Estates Acts and 
 not yet converted into realty have not become 
 personal property in. respect of which letters of 
 administration can be granted. In the Goods 
 OF Lloyd - - 9 P. D. 65 
 
 8. Will not appointing Executors — Sup- 
 pression of 'Will — Sale of Leaselwlds by Adminis- 
 trator — Title of PiircTiaser.] A grant of letters of 
 administration obtained by suppressing a will 
 containing no appointment of executors is not 
 void ah initio, and accordingly a sale of lease- 
 holds by an administratrix, who had obtained a 
 grant of administration under sucli circumstances, 
 to a purchaser who was ignorant of the suppres- 
 sion of the will, was uplield by the Coxu^t, al- 
 though the grant was revoked after the sale. — ■ 
 Abram v. Cunningham (2 Lev. 182) distinguished. 
 Boxall v. Boxall - 27 Ch. D. 320 
 
 II. ADMINISTEATOE— LIMITED. 
 
 1. De bonis non — 38 Geo. 3, c. 87, s. 1 ; 
 
 21 (6 22 Vict. c. 95, s. 18 — Creditor — Administra- 
 tor out of the Jurisdiction.] An assignee in bank- 
 ruptcy of an administrator who is out of the 
 jurisdiction is a creditor within iie meaning of 
 38 Geo. 3, k:. 87, s. 1, and 21 & 22 Vict. c. 95, 
 s. 18, and as such may obtain administration de 
 bonis non of the intestate limited to the fund to 
 which the assignee is entitled. In the Goods op 
 Hammond - 6 P. D. 104 
 
 2. De bonis non — Administration with 
 
 'Will annexed — Grant to Legatee — Citation — Justi- 
 fying Security.] The estate of a testatrix having 
 been administered, except as to one legacy, the 
 Court granted administration with will annexed 
 de bonis non to the legatee, without requiring 
 the representative of the executor or residunry 
 legatees to be cited, but ordered that the sureties 
 should justify. In the Goods of King 
 
 [8 P. D. 162 
 
 3. De bonis non — Attorney of Executor — 
 
 Further Grant de bonis non^] A grant to the 
 attorney of an executor does not break the chaia 
 of representation. — L., an attorney for the execu- 
 tor, obtained a grant of letters of administration 
 with the will annexed of a testatrix. The execu- 
 
('11:0 
 
 • DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 12 ) 
 
 II. ADMINISTBATOE— lIMITEr— confcucf?. 
 tor died leaving part of the property unadminis- 
 tered : — Held, that the executor's representative 
 was entitled to deal wilh the property left unad- 
 minietered of the testatrix, and that no further 
 grant was necessary. In the Goods of Donna 
 Makia Yea Murgcia 9 P. D. 236 
 
 4. Durante minore aetate — Power to sell.'] 
 
 An administrator durante minore setate has, for 
 the time, all the powers of an ordinary adminis- 
 trator, including a power to sell the estate of the 
 deceased for payment of debts. In re Cope. 
 Cope v. Cope - 16 Ch. D. 49 
 
 5. Foreign Assets — Title of Administra- 
 tor — Limited Administration granted to Attorney 
 of Principal Administrator.'} E. having died in 
 Ireland intestate, letters of administration were 
 granted in Ireland to the Plaintiff. Part of his 
 assets being in India, the Plaintiff sent out a 
 power of attorney (o F. & Co. in India, who pro- 
 cured letters of administration to be granted to 
 them in India for tlie use and benefit of the 
 Plaintiff, received the Indian assets, paid the 
 Indian debts, and remitted the surplus to their 
 agents in England. The Irish lettrrs of adminis- 
 tration were sealed in England : — Held, that the 
 agents in England were bound to hand over the 
 fund to the Plaintiff, and could not require the 
 concurrence of the next of kin, tliey not having 
 taken any legal proceedings to prevent the Plain- 
 tiff from receiving the assets. — Decision of Fry, J., 
 affirmed. Eames v. Haoon 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 407 ; 18 Ch. D. 347 
 
 6. Toieign Will — Will made abroad hy a 
 
 Foreigner — Property in this Country — Itelfers of 
 Administration founded on a Foreign Decree — 
 Proof of Persian Law.'] D. M. K., a Persian sub- 
 ject, was by a decree of a Persian Court declared 
 entitled to "certain property in this country. The 
 decree, though founded partly upon a will, made 
 no mention of it, and the Court which had cus- 
 tody of the will refused to give a copy of it. — 
 The Court of Probate granted letters of adminis- 
 tration limited to the property mentioned in a 
 duly authenticated copy of the decree. — The 
 Court allowed tlie law applicable to the case to 
 be proved by a Persian ambassador. In the 
 Goods of Dost Aly Khan - 6 P. D. 6 
 
 7. Pendente Lite — Surety — Guarantee 
 
 Society.] The " Guarantee Society " may be ac- 
 cepted as surety to a bond given by an adminis- 
 trator pending suit, even though the directors do 
 not by the bond render themselves personally 
 liable. Cabpentek v. Qceen's Prootor 
 
 [7 P. D. 235 
 
 III. ABMINISTEATOE— MAEEIED WOMAN. 
 
 1. Administration Bond — Consent of Bus- 
 
 hand.] Since the Married Women's Property Act, 
 1882, when a married woman is administratrix it 
 is not necessary tliat her husband should join in 
 the administration bond. In the Goods op 
 Aykes - - - 8 P. D. 168 
 
 2. • ■ Deed of Separation — Grant of Letters 
 
 of Administration to Wife's Father.] A husband 
 agreed by deed of separation that if his wife died 
 intestate her next of kin should be entitled to 
 lier property.— She died intestate, leaving sepa- 
 late property of which she had become possessed 
 
 III. ADMINISTEATOE— MAEEIED WOMAN— 
 
 continued: 
 by virtue of the deed, and the Court, notwith- 
 standing that the husband objected, granted 
 letters of administration to her father limited to 
 tliat property. Allen v. Humphrts 8 P. D. 16 
 
 IV. ADMINISTEATOE— NOMINEE OF CEOWN. 
 Tlie Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 71, s. 2, enacts that 
 
 where administration of the personal estate of any 
 deceased person is granted to a nominee of the 
 Crown, any proceeding hy or against such nominee 
 for the recovery of such personal estate shall he sub- 
 ject to the same rides (including Statutes of Limita- 
 tion) as if .the administration had been to next of 
 kin of deceased. 
 
 Sect. 3 limits proceedings on the part of, or 
 against, the Crown to recover personal estate, to the 
 same time and rules as are now applicable in the 
 case of a subject. 
 
 See also Eeal Estate — Statutes. 
 
 V. ADMINISTEATOE— POWEES. 
 
 1, Power to grant TTnderlease — Under- 
 lease with Option of Purchase — Breach of Trust?^ 
 In dealing with the leaseholds of a testator 
 or intestate, an executor or administrator may 
 grant an underlease, if necessary for the due 
 administration of the property, but cannot give 
 an option of purchase at a future time. — An ad- 
 ministrator granted an underlease of a leasehold 
 estate of his intestate, with an oj>tion of pur- 
 chase to the underlessee within seven years at a 
 fixed price : — Held (affirming the decision of the 
 Vice-chancellor of the Lancaster Court), that the 
 option of purchase was ultrk vires, and could not 
 be supported against the next of kin, although it 
 appeared from the evidence to be advantageous to 
 the estate. Oceanic Steam Kavigation Com- 
 pany V. SuTHERBEIiEY 16 Ch. D. 236 
 
 2. Power to mortgage — Breach of Trust 
 
 — Settlement of Accounts — Withdrawal of Autlio- 
 rity — Notice.] A., B., and C, as the only next of 
 kin with D., the administrator, of their intestate 
 father, signed a, memorandum in 1872, autho- 
 rizing D. to borrow, upon mortgage or otherwise 
 as he might deem best, upon the security of 
 certain house property, held by the intestate under 
 an agreement for a lease to be granted on com- 
 pletion of repairs, such money as D. required for 
 carrying out these matters, and to charge their 
 respective shares with the interest. — A lease of 
 the houses was soon afterwards granted to D. as 
 the sole legal personal representative of the intes- 
 tate, which, wilh the memorandum, was shortly 
 afterwards deposited by D. as a security for his 
 own debt with E. — In 1875 the administration 
 accounts, shewing a balance due to D., were settled 
 between A., B., C, and D., and D. then told A., 
 B. and C. that he had not borrowed any money 
 upon the security of their sliares under the memo- 
 randum of 1872.— In 1877 D., who had previously 
 mortgaged his sliare of the Ijouse property to E., 
 executed a further mortgage to liim of the entirety, 
 reciting the authority of 1872. No notice was 
 given by E. to A., B., and C, that he held any 
 ciiarge upon their shares under the memorandum : 
 — Held, that, in the absence of any notice by B. 
 to A., B., and C, of a charge to him of their shares 
 by D. under the autliority of 1872, the mortgage 
 
( 13 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( li ) 
 
 T. ADMINISTRATOR— POWERS— conMnjjecZ. 
 
 of 1877, after that authority had been withdrawn 
 by the settlement of accounts, did not affect their 
 shares, and that they were entitled to an assign- 
 ment from E. of their shares of the property oom- 
 I)ri3ed in the lease, which had been mortgaged by 
 D, Jones v. Stohwasseb 16 Ch. D. 577 
 
 3. Power to mortgage — Leaseholds of In- 
 testate — Repairs^ An administrator has no power 
 to mortgage leaseholds of the intestate under 
 leases not containing repairing covenants, in 
 order to raise money for repairing the property. — 
 And such a mortgage will be set aside as against 
 a mortgagee who has notice of the purpose for 
 which the money is raised. Eioketts v. Lewis 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 74S 
 
 TI. ADMINISTRATOR — WITH WILL AN- 
 NEXED. 
 1. Charge of Debts — Benunciation htj Exe- 
 cutor — Power of Administrator with Will annexed 
 to seH— 22 & 23 Vict. v. 35, s. 16.] A testator 
 directed that his debts should be paid by his 
 executors thereinafter named, and in case his 
 personal estate should be insufBcient, he charged 
 his real estate with the deficiency; and he ap- 
 pointed two persons his executors. Both the 
 executors renounced probate, and an adminis- 
 trator with the will annexed was appointed: — 
 Held, on summons taken out under the Vendor 
 and Purchaser Act, 1874, that the administrator 
 with the will annexed had no power to sell the 
 I'eal estate, either under the terms of the will or 
 by virtue of the 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, s. 16. In re 
 Clat and Tetley 16 Ch. D. 3 
 
 2. Infant — Grant to the Guardian for use 
 
 and lenefit of Minor.'] The next of kin of a minor, 
 the universal legatee, were an uncle who was 
 abroad, an aunt who was in poor circumstances, 
 and another aunt who had renounced. The Court 
 granted letters of administration with will an- 
 nexed for the use and benefit of the minor to 
 a guardian elected by her. In the Goods of 
 Gabdineb - - 9 P. D. 66 
 
 3, Interest — Sister — Legatee — Widow.] 
 
 In a contest for administration with the will an- 
 nexed the Court preferred the sister of the testa- 
 tor to tlie widow, as it appeared that the sister, as 
 a legatee, had the larger interest in the property 
 to be distributed. In the Goods oi? Homan 
 
 [9 P. D. 61 
 
 ADMINISTRATOR— Bankruptcy of-^Conduct of 
 action - - 19 Oh. D. 61 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Supreme Codet — CoN- 
 DTJCT OF Cause. 1. 
 
 Deceased partner — Bankruptcy 16 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoof. 18. 
 
 Default by— Attachment - 10 P. D. 184 
 
 See Abkest — Debtoes Act. 1. 
 
 Husband— Wife's reversion - 25 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Kevee- 
 
 SION. 1. 
 
 Option of purchasing freehold 24 Ch. D. 199 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 16. 
 
 ADMIRALTY — County Court — Jurisdiction. 
 
 See Cases under County Coubt — JuKis- 
 
 DICTION. 1 — i. 
 
 ADMIRALTY- cottiwmefj. 
 
 Discipline. 
 
 See Army and Navy^ — Statutes. 
 
 Jurisdiction — Action in rem — Lord Camp- 
 bell's Act 9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App. Cas. 59 
 See Pbaoticb — Admiealty — Jcbisdio- 
 
 TION. 1. 
 
 Nautical assessors - 6 P. D. 84 
 
 See County Couet — Pbaotice. 2. 
 ADMISSION — By dead man against interest 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 415 
 
 See Banketjptcy — Proof. 8. 
 By master of ship— Evidence 10 P. D. 137 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Evidence. 
 1. 
 
 By witness — Witness in bankruptcy 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 580 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Evidence. 7. 
 ADMISSIONS IN PLEADINGS — Motion for 
 
 judgment 21 Ch. D. 716 ; 23 Ch. D, 204; 
 [11 Q. B. D. 531 
 
 See Peaotice— SuPEEME Couet — Mo- 
 tion foe Judgment. 1,2,3. 
 
 Liability of trustee — Payment into Court 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 251 
 
 See Peactice — Supeejie Couet — Pay- 
 ment into Couet. 2. 
 ADULTERATION. 
 
 Article demanded — Sale of Food and 
 
 Drugs Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. e. 63), ss. 6, 25 
 — Written Warranty — ■ Contract to supply Milk 
 each Day for Six Months, whether a Warranty 
 within the Act] By s. 25 of the Sale of Food 
 and Drugs Act, 1875, " if the defendant, in any 
 prosecution under this Act, prove to the .satisfac- 
 tion of the justices that he had purchased the 
 article in question as the same in nature, sub- 
 stance, aad quality as that demanded of him by 
 the prosecutor, and with a written warranty to 
 that effect," he shall, under certain other specified 
 conditions, be entitled to be discharged from the 
 prpsecution. Upon the hearing of an information 
 against the Appellant for having, contrary to the 
 provisions of the Act, sold, on the 12th of April, 
 1883, certain milk to the Respondent, which was 
 not of the nature, substance, and quality demanded 
 by him, as it contained a percentage of water, the 
 Appellant proved that he had purohased the 
 article in question under a written contract made 
 with F. on the 24th of March, 1883, whereby F. 
 agreed to sell to the Appellant eighty-six gallons 
 of good and pure milk (each and every day) for 
 six months, " the said milk to be delivered twice 
 daily :" Held, that this contract did not consti- 
 tute" a written warranty within the meaning of 
 s. 25 in respect of the specific article sold by tbe 
 Appellant to the Respondent on the 12th of April ; 
 and therefore that the Appellant was not entitled 
 to be discharged from the prosecution. Haeeis 
 V. May - 12 ft- B. D. 97 
 
 2. Article demanded — Sale of Food and. 
 
 Drugs Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. a. 63), s. G— Milk- 
 Sale of Article not of the Nature, Substance, and 
 Quality of the Article demanded — Prejudice of the 
 Purchaser.] It was proved on an information 
 under sect. 6 of the Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 
 1875, that the Appellant, who was an inspector 
 under the Act, on asking the Respondent, a milk 
 
( 15 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 16 ) 
 
 ADULTERATION— coniOTMCci. 
 
 seller, for "milk," was supplied by the Eespon- 
 dent with milk which had been skimmed, and 
 which was, in consequence, as compared with 
 normal milk as it comes from the cow, deficient in 
 butter fat to an extent of 60 per cent : — Held, that 
 on these facts it was not proved that any offence 
 had been committed by the Respondent against 
 the provisions of sect. 6 of the Sale of Food and 
 Drugs Act, 1875. Lane v. Collins 14 ft, B. D. 
 
 [193 
 
 3. • Article demanded — Sale of Food and. 
 
 Drugs Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 63), s. 6— Sale 
 of Article not of " nature, substance, and quality " 
 demanded.'] The Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 
 1875, after reciting that it is desirable to amend 
 the law regarding the sale of food and drugs in a 
 pure and genuine condition, provides by sect. 6 
 that no person shall sell to the prejudice of the 
 piu'chaser any article of food or any drug which 
 is not of the nature, substance, and quality of 
 the article demanded by such purchaser, under a 
 
 ' penalty : — Held, that sect. 6 was not limited in 
 its application to sales of adulterated articles, but 
 that it applied also to cases in which the article 
 sold was unadulterated but wholly different from 
 
 -that demanded by the purchaser. Kkight v. 
 BowEKS - 14 Q. B. D. 845 
 
 4. Sample — Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 
 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 63), ss. 13, 14— &Je of 
 Food and Drugs Act Amendment A ct, 1879 (42 & 43 
 Vict. c. 30), s. 3 — Sample of Milk procured for 
 Analysis — Portion of Sample not delivered to Seller 
 or his Agent.'] . It is not necessary, where a sample 
 of mOk in course of delivery is procured for 
 analysis under sect. 3 of the Sale of Food and 
 Drugs Act Amendment Act, 1879, for the officer 
 procuring such sample to notify to the seller or 
 his agent his intention of having the sample 
 analysed, or to deliver to the seller or his agent a 
 portion of the sample in accordance witli the pro- 
 visions of sect. 14 of the Sale of Food and Drugs 
 Act, 1875. KoucH v. Hall 6 ft. B. D. 17 
 
 5. — — ■ Sample — Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 63), ss. 6, 12, 13, 14, 20, 21— 
 Private Purchaser — Public Officer — Penalty, Pro- 
 ceedings to recover — Notification to Seller of In- 
 tention to have Article analysed — Condition pre- 
 cedent] The provisions of sect. 14 of the Sale of 
 Food and Drugs Act, 1875, apply to the purchase 
 of an article by a private person as well as by one 
 of the public ofiBcers named in the Act ; so that 
 it is a condition precedent to the right of a 
 private purchaser to take proceedings for a penalty 
 under the Act that he should have given to the 
 seller the notification required by that section. 
 Parsons v. Birmingham Dairy Compant 
 
 [9 Q, B, D. 172 
 
 6. SpiritB — Sale of Food and Drugs Act, 
 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 63), ss. 6, S—Sale of Food 
 and Drugs Act Amendment Act, 1879 (42 <£ 43 
 Vdct. c. 30), s. 6 — Gin more than 35 Degrees under 
 Proof:] By sect. 6 of 42 & 43 Vict. c. 30, it is 
 provided that " in determining whether an offence 
 has been committed under 38 & 39 Vict. c. 63, s. 6, 
 by selling to the prejudice of the purchaser spirits 
 not adulterated otherwise than by the admixture 
 of water, it shall be a good defence to prove that 
 such admixture has not reduced the spirits more 
 
 ADTTITEEATIOK— co»ii«Me(?. 
 than .... 35 degrees imder proof for gin." The- 
 Appellant sold to the Eespondent gin more than 
 35 degrees under proof, but, at the time of sale, 
 brought to his knowledge a printed notice hang- 
 ing up in the room to the effect that all spirits- 
 were sold "as diluted spirits, no alcoholic strength, 
 guaranteed ": — Held, that although the Appellant 
 had not a good defence under 42 & 43 Vict. c. 30,. 
 s. 6, he was not by that section deprived of any 
 defence which he would have had under 38 & 39' 
 Vict. c. 63. and that the sale not having been to 
 the prejudice of the purchaser, no offence had 
 been committed under 38 & 39 Vict. c. 63, s. 6. 
 Gage v. Elsey - - - 10 ft. B. D. 518 
 
 ADTJLTEEY — Condonation — Divorce — Scotch, 
 
 law - 9 App. Caa. 205 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and WrFE. 
 1. 
 
 Conduct conducing to - 9 P. D. 231 ; 
 
 [10 P. D, 177 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Miscondcot' 
 OP Petitionee. 1, 2. 
 Covenant against molestation — Separation 
 
 deed - - 14 a. B. D. 792 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 3. 
 Cross-examination as to - 10 P. D. 175 
 
 See Practice — ^Divorce — Nullity op 
 Mabkiage. 5. 
 ADVANCE — By receiver in liquidation 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 75. 
 
 Sec Bankbottct — Eeceiter. 3. 
 
 • By trustee carrying on business 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 245 
 
 See Trustee — Powers. 3. 
 
 ■ ■ By traslee— Estimated value 23 Ch. D. 483 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 3. 
 
 To executor— Banker 16 Ch. B. 151 
 
 See Exeoutoe — Powers. 1. 
 
 ADVANCEMENT. 
 
 1. Portion — Father and Child — Death 
 
 of Father intestate — Statute of Distributions 
 22 & 23 -Gar. 2, c. 10), s. 5.] A gift by a father 
 to a sou to enable the son to pay a debt : — Held, 
 on the death of the father intestate, to be an 
 " advancement by portion " of the son, within 
 sect. 5 of the Statute of Distributions. — The 
 opinion expressed by Jessel, M.E., in Taylor v. 
 Taylor (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 155) dissented from. 
 In re Blockley. Blooelet v. Blockley 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 250 
 
 2. Transfer into joint Names — Ti-ust — 
 
 Intention to benefit — Claim to have He-transfer. '^ 
 The Plaintiff, a widow, in the year 1880 caused 
 a sum of £6000 Consols to be transferred into- 
 the joint names of herself and the Defendant,, 
 who was her godson, and in whose welfare she 
 took great interest. This transfer was not made 
 known to the Defendant. In 1882 the Plaintiff, 
 then eighty-eight years old, married a second 
 husband, and soon afterwards applied to the De- 
 fendant to re-transfer the stock into lier name 
 alone : — Held, upon the evidence, that the trans- 
 fer was originally made with the deliberate inten- 
 tion of benefiting the Defendant, and not with 
 a view to the creation of a trust. The Court 
 
( 17 ) 
 
 DffiBST OF CASES. 
 
 ( IS ) 
 
 22 Ch. S. 614 
 
 Statute op — Trusts. 
 
 49 
 
 ADVANCEMENT— coniMMtea'. 
 could not, tlierefore, compel the Defeudant to re- 
 transfer tlie stock. Standing v. Bowking 
 
 [27 Ch, D. 341 
 [Affirmed in the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch, D. 282.] 
 
 To children 17 Ch. D. 701 ; 15 Q. B. D. 300 
 
 See Will— Satisfaction. 1, 2. 
 ADVERSE POSSESSION- Acts of ownership 
 
 [6 App. Cas, 164 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 1. 
 
 Satisfied mortgagee 
 
 See Limitations. 
 3. 
 ADVERTISEMENT— Contempt of Court 
 
 See Contempt of Cocht. [17 Ch. D, 
 
 Petition— Keductlon of capital 29 Ch. D. 683 
 
 See Company — Keduction of Capital. 4, 
 
 • ■ "Warning against infringement of patent 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 394 
 
 See Patent — Infeingemekt. 5. 
 
 ADVOCATE — Words uttered in judicial proceed- 
 ing—Slander 11 Q. B, D. 588 
 See Defamation — ^Pkivilege. 2. 
 
 ADVOWSON. 
 
 1. Description — Freehold Sereditament 
 
 " situate in the parish of D" — Parcels — General 
 Words — Becitals.'] An advowson, although it is 
 a hereditament, and as being the right of presen- 
 tation to a church at a particular place, " does 
 coacern land at a certaia place," is hut a right 
 collateral to land, and is not aptly described as 
 " being situate at" a particular place. — Such a 
 description, however, may pass an advowson 
 under certain circrunstances, e.g. when upon an 
 examination of the whole instrument a clear in- 
 tention is shewn that it shall pass, or upon evi- 
 dence that there is no other property in that 
 particular place capable of being disposed of by 
 the instrument. — Anon. (3 Dyer, 323 b) and Kensey 
 V. Langham (Cas. t. Tal. 143) discussed and re- 
 conciled. — General words, although introduced 
 for the purpose of sweeping into the assurance 
 everything which has been omitted by mistake, 
 apply prima facie only to things ejusdem generis 
 with those specifically enumerated. — G. J., tenant 
 in tail in possession of manors, lands, and heredita- 
 ments, devised by the will of J. J., and also of the 
 advowson of Christ Church, Doncaster, appointed 
 to somewhat similar uses by a separate devise in 
 the same will, by a deed which recited only the 
 devise of the manors, &c., disentailed and limited 
 to the use of himself in fee, " All and singular 
 the manors, lands, hereditaments and premises 
 devised by the said will, and also all other the 
 lands, hereditaments, and premises whatsoever, of 
 which be was seised as tenant in tail in possession 
 in anywise howsoever." — By a deed of resettle- 
 ment executed the next day, after reciting that 
 he was seised of " The several manors and here- 
 ditaments comprised in the schedule subject to 
 certain charges," and desired to settle " the same 
 , hereditaments " he assured to trustees in strict 
 settlement, " All and singular the manors, mes- 
 suages, farms, lands, and hereditaments comprised 
 and described in the schedule," '' and all other the 
 freehold hereditaments of him the said 6. J. 
 situate in the parish of Doncaster." The sche- 
 
 ADVOWSON— coniMMCcZ. 
 
 dule contained a detailed description of the 
 parcels, but neither in it nor the deed itself was 
 there any reference to, or any provision applicable 
 to the advowson. G. J. had property other than 
 the advowson in the parish of D., and the advow- 
 son was not subject to any charges. — It. was 
 admitted that some portions of the disentailed 
 property had been intentionally omitted from the 
 resettlement: — Held, by North, J., that the ad- 
 vowson was included in the disentailing deed. — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal (affirming the- 
 decision of North, J.), that having regard to the- 
 recitals, the omission of parts of the property, and 
 looking to the whole scope of the deed, the ad- 
 vowson was not by force of the general words- 
 " all other hereditaments situate in the p.arish of 
 D." included in the deed of resettlement. Ceomp- 
 TON V. Jaeeatt 30 Ch, D. 29& 
 
 2. Bight of Presentation — ■ Qnare Im- 
 
 pedit — Consolidated Benefice under 3 it 4 Viet, 
 c. 113, and 26 * 27 Vict. c. 120.] The vicarage of 
 P. formerly consisted of two medieties, known re- 
 spectively as the upper vicarage and the lower 
 vicarage, the profits and spiritual charge being 
 divided between two incumbents. There was 
 only one parish church, and the right of patron- 
 age and nomination to the upper vicarage was 
 vested in the Lord Chancellor, and that of the 
 lower in the Eev. H. P. Welch. In 1873, Welch 
 presented himself to the lower vicarage. In 
 1875, he mortgaged the advowson thereof (with 
 a power of sale) to Howes for 8001., and in 187T 
 made a further charge upon it in favour of Howes- 
 of 250Z.— In 1878, the Lord Chancellor, under 
 26 & 27 Vict. c. 120, conveyed to Welch the ad- 
 vowson of the upper vicarage, subject to the then- 
 existing incumbency. There was a proviso in the 
 Act restricting the purchaser from selling the ad- 
 vowson or next presentation until after the expi- 
 ration of five years from the date of the purchase. 
 In May, 1879, the incumbency of the lower vicar- 
 age having become vacant, the two vicarages 
 were under 3 & 4 Vict. c. 11,? and an Order in 
 Council consolidated, and the two medieties be- 
 came in respect both of the profits and the spiritual 
 charge one undivided benefice, of which Welchi 
 without any form of institution became the in- 
 cumbent, in whom was vested the advowson or 
 right of patronage and nomination of the whole 
 undivided benefice. On the 1st of August, 1879, 
 Welch mortgaged the advowson of the consoli- 
 dated benefice to Howes, to secure the previous 
 and further advances, with the usual power of 
 sale. — In March, 1882, Howes died, lea-ving a 
 widow, and havim,' by his will devised and be- 
 queathed his residuary real and personal estate, 
 to trustees, in trust for his wife for life, cSic. In 
 March, 1883, the executors of Howes contracted 
 to sell the advowson of the undivided benefice to. 
 his widow, and she, in April, 1883, contracted to- 
 sell the same to one Ellison. In June, 1883,, 
 Welch died insolvent (the debt to Howes still 
 remaining unpaid^, having by his will devised, 
 and bequeathed all his real and personal estate 
 to trustees in trust for his widow (the now Plain- 
 tiff) for life, &c, — The Plaintiff and the executors 
 of Howes each claimed the right to present to the 
 undivided vicarage -.—Held, — upon the authority 
 
( 19 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 20 ) 
 
 ADVOWSON— codtmaed. 
 
 of Hawkins v. Chappel (1 Atk. 621) and Briggs v. 
 Sharp (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 317),— that the right to 
 nominate was in the Plaintiff, she being under 
 her husband's will beneficial owner for life of his 
 estate real and personal, and there being no indi- 
 cation of an intention that during her life the 
 right to nominate should be exercised by any 
 other person. Welch v. Bishop of Peteebokotigh 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 Transfer during vacancy - 10 Q. B. D. 407 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Oleksy. 2. 
 ArFIDAVIT — Agreement to take evidence by 
 
 [lech. D. 100 
 . See Pkactice — Scpkeme Couet — Evi- 
 dence. 1. 
 
 Cross-examination on 21 Ch. D. 642 ; 25 Ch. D. 
 
 [297; 28 Ch. D. 669; 29 Ch. D. 711 
 See Pkactice — Supkeme Coukt — Evi- 
 dence. 2, 3, 4, 5. 
 
 Cross-examination on — Right to withdraw 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 126 
 See Bankedptcy — Evidence. 1. 
 
 Description of deponent 24 Ch. D. 271 
 
 &e Teustee Acts — jSTew Teustees. 1. 
 
 ■ Evidence de bens esse 26 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Pkactice — Sdpeeme Couet — Evi- 
 dence. 18. 
 
 In reply — Irrelevancy 16 Ch. D, 594 
 
 See Practice — Scpkeme Coukt — Evi- 
 dence. 6. 
 
 Of service — Non-production of — Dismissal 
 
 of motion - 25 Ch. D. 84 
 
 See Pkactice — Sopkeme Couet — De- 
 fault. 6. 
 
 Production of documents 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Couet — Production op Documents. 
 
 Production of documents 8 App. Cas. 217 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Intee- 
 
 EOGATOHIES. 11. 
 
 Production of documents — OfScial liquida- 
 tor - 22 Ch, D. 714 
 See Company — Liquidator. 1. 
 
 Prolixity— Costs - 21 Ch. D. 835 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Produc- 
 tion OP Documents. 1. 
 
 Prolixity— Taking off the file 26 Ch. D. 470 
 
 See Pka(.!Tice — Supreme Court— Strik- 
 ing out Pleadings. 3. 
 
 Service of — Motion for attachment 
 
 [25 Ch. D, 64 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — At- 
 tachment. 7. 
 
 Sworn abroad - 25 Ch. D, 769 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Evi- 
 dence. 9. 
 
 Sworn abroad — British Vice-Conbiil — 
 
 Notarial certificate 16 ft. B. D. 332 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 6. 
 
 Taken on comriiission 9 P. D. 241 
 
 See Evidence — General. 1. 
 
 Taxation of costs — AfSdavit of increase 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 726 
 See Pkactice — Supreme Coukt— Costs. 
 i. 
 
 Sale — Foh- 
 
 AFFIDAVIT — continued. 
 
 With bill of sale. 
 
 See Cases under Bill op 
 
 MALITIES. 
 
 With bill of sale 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankeuptcy. 
 5. 
 AFBICA — Order in Council 
 
 See JUEISDIOTION — Gazette. 
 AFTEE-ACftinRED PEOPEETY— Assignment of 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 342 
 See Bankruptcy — Void Settlement. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Discharged debtor 19 Ch. D, 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Liquidation. 5. [140 
 
 Bill of sale. 
 
 See Cases under Bill of Sale — Opera- 
 tion. 1-5. 
 
 Bill of sale — Statement of consideration 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 794 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 24. 
 
 Covenant to settle. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Future 
 Propeett. 
 
 Covenant to settle 9 ft. B. D. 337 ; 11 ft. B. D. 
 
 [27 ; 23 Ch. D. 712 ; 10 App. Cas. 1 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate Es- 
 tate. 6, 7, 9. 
 
 Covenant to settle — Female infant 
 
 See Election. 6. [28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 Insolvent Acts 20 Ch. D. 637 
 
 See Insolvency. 
 Married woman - - 28 Ch. D. 709 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married 
 Women's Property Act. 10. 
 
 Remainder — Severance of joint tenancy 
 
 See Joint Tenant. 2. [28 Ch. D. 416 
 
 Undischarged bankrupt - 24 Ch. D. 672 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischaeged Baitk- 
 
 EUPT. 2. 
 
 Will speaking from death 19 Ch. D. 432 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 50 
 
 See Will — Speaking prom Death. 2, 3. 
 
 AGENCY CHARGES— Taxation - 30 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See SoLiciTOE — Bill of Costs. 3. 
 AGENT. 
 
 See Cases under Principal and Agent. 
 
 Bankruptcy of principal — Fraudulent 
 
 transfer - - 24 Ch. D. 339 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 9. 
 
 Candidate for Parliament — Payment of ex- 
 penses 21 Ch. D. 408 
 See Parliament — Election. 1. 
 
 Evidence of agency — Acknowledgment 
 
 under Statute of Limitations 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 882 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Realty. 
 1. 
 
 Factors' Act — Lien - 25 Ch. D. 31 ; 
 
 See Factoe. 1, 2. [10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 Insolvency of — Liability of trustee 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 238 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 1. 
 
( 21 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 22 ) 
 
 AO^'ST— continued. 
 
 Knowledge of— Interrogatories 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 110 ; 10 Q. B. D. 161 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Cotjbt — Inter; 
 
 BOGATOMES. 5, 6. 
 
 London agent of solicitor — Refusal to pay- 
 lay client amount of debt recovered in 
 action - - 8 ft. B. D. 262 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 8. 
 
 Eevocation of authority by notice of act of 
 
 bankruptcy - 7 App. Cas. 79 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Mutual Dealings. 
 3. 
 
 Statement by — Admissibility of evidence 
 
 See Evidence — General. 4. [22 Ch. D. 693 
 AGISTMENT— Distress— Exemption 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 467 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Distress. 
 
 1. 
 
 AGEEEMEHT— Application of funds of trade 
 
 union — Injunction 21 Ch. D. 194 
 
 See Trade Union. 
 
 By letters - - 20 Ch. D. 705 
 
 See Specific Performance. 4. 
 
 Compromise — Local board - 22 Ch. D. 537 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 1. 
 
 Fraud— Eescission - 26 Ch. D, 616 
 
 See Company — Contracts. 3. 
 
 Grant of right of way — Holograph writing 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 340 
 See Scotch Law — Landlord and 
 Tenant. 
 
 Lea?e. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 — Agreement. 
 
 Lease — Custom of country - 21 Ch. D. 18 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 508 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom of 
 Country. 
 
 Lease — Disclaimer by trustee in bankruptcy 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 956 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 19. 
 
 Lease by mortgagor — Notice to pay rent to 
 
 mortgagee - - 25 Ch. D. 678 
 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 2. 
 
 Lease — Power in settlement 24 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 4. 
 
 Lease — Reservation of ground game 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 569 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ground 
 Game. 
 
 Married woman — Release of jointure 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 420 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 Mutual mistake - - 10 App. Cas. 325 
 
 See Mistake. 2. 
 
 Remuneration, between solicitor and his 
 
 client. 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 Remuneration of solicitor - 25 Ch. D. 279 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 114 
 See SoLiciTOE — Bill op Costs. 12, 23. 
 
 AGREEMENT— co)i«i!itte(?. 
 
 Sale of land. 
 
 See Cases under Vendor and Puh- 
 CHASEK — Agreement. 
 
 Several documents — Failure to prove one 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 395 
 See Specific Performance. 1. 
 
 Tenant for life and remainderman 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 2. [128 
 
 To pay creditor in full 18 Ch. D. 464 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 11. 
 
 To settle - 17 Ch. D. 361, 365, n. 
 
 See Settlement — Articles. 1, 2. 
 
 To settle appointed fund — Fraud on power 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 205 
 
 See Power — Execution. 5. 
 
 AGSICULTURAL CUSTOM 21 Ch. D. 18 ; 
 
 [8 App, Cas. 608 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom of 
 Country. 
 
 AGEICULTtTRAL HOLDINGS (ENGLAND) ACT, 
 1883. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Fixtures 
 — Statutes. 
 Landlord and Tenant — Distress 
 
 — Statutes. 
 Landlord and Tenant — Yearly 
 
 Tenant — Statutes. 
 Landlord and Tenant — Improve- 
 ments — Statutes. 
 
 Half year's notice — Six months' notice 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 501 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Yearly 
 Tenant. 
 ALDERMAN — Disqualification — Insolvency 
 
 [16 Ch, D. 143 
 See Municipal Corporation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 ALEHOUSE. 
 
 See Cases under Inn. 
 ALIEN. 
 
 Nationality — Bight to mlierit Land in 
 
 England — Descendants horn Abroad of natural- 
 horn British Subject — Status of British Subject — ■ 
 Ambassador — Officer in Military Service of Crown 
 abroad — 25 Edw. 3, stat. 1 — 7 Anne, c. 5 — 4 
 Geo. 2, c. 21, 8. 1—13 Geo. 3, c. 21, ». 1.] The 
 status of natural-born British subjects, which, by 
 the Acts 7 Anne, c. 5, 4 Geo. 2, u. 21, and 13 
 Geo. 3, c. 21, is conferred on children and grand- 
 children born abroad of natm-al-born British sub- 
 jects, is a merely personal status, and is not by 
 those Acts made transmissible to the descendants 
 of the persons to wliom that status is thereby 
 given. — There is no foundation for the notion that 
 by the common law of England the posterity of 
 a natural-born British subject, though born 
 abroad, must be treated as British subjects for 
 ever. — The rule that the children born abroad of 
 ambassadors in the service of the Crown of Eng- 
 land abroad, are treated as natural-bom British 
 subjects, does not apply to the children born 
 abroad of officers in the military service of the 
 Crown in foreign parts. De Geer v. Stone 
 
 [22 Ch. D, 243 
 
( 23 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 24 ) 
 
 ALIEN — continued. 
 
 Infant - - - - 25 Ch. D. 56 
 
 See Infant — Waed op Couet. 2. 
 
 "Will executed according to Englisli law 
 
 See Pbobate— GuANT. 2. [9 P. D, 130 
 
 ALIENATION— Forfeiture by - 21 Ch. D. 278 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 801 
 See Will — ^Condition. 1, 2. 
 ALIMONY. 
 
 See Cases under Pbaotioe — Divokce — • 
 Alimoi^. 
 
 Arrears— Mode of enforcing payment 
 
 See Action. 1. [13 Q. B. D. 855 
 
 Assignment of — Allowance to wife of 
 
 lunatic - 27 Ch, D. 160 
 
 See Lunatic — Pboperty. 1. 
 
 Nullity of marriage — Decree nisi 9 P. D. 80 
 
 See Pkactioe — Divokce — Ndllitt op 
 Maekiagb. 1. 
 
 Proof in bankruptcy for 15 Q. B. D. 239 
 
 See Bankrtiptoy^Peoop. 3. 
 
 Separation deed — Covenant not to sue for 
 
 greater allowance 7 P. D. 168 
 
 See Peaotice — Divoece — Sepaeation 
 Deed. 2. 
 
 ALKALI WOEKS EEGTJLATION ACT, 1881 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health — Statutes. 
 
 ALLOCATUR— Taxation of costs 20 Ch. D. 685 
 See Bankeuptcy — Costs. 1. 
 
 ALLOTMENT OF SHAEES - 8 Q. B. D. 685 ; 
 [23 Ch. D. 413 ; 29 Ch. D. 421 
 
 See Company — Shakes — Allotment. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 ALLOTMENTS FOE THE POOR. 
 
 See PooB Law — Relief — Statutes. 
 
 ALLOWANCE— Lunatic— Committee 20 Ch. D. 
 See Lunatic — Committee. 1. [451 
 
 ■ Lunatic — Poor relations 21 Ch. D. 297 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 2. 
 
 ■ Lunatic — Tenant in tail in remainder 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 320 
 See Lunatic — Peopebty. 3. 
 
 Voluntary, to bankrupt 17 Ch. D. 70 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Assets. 14. 
 
 ALTERATION— Articles of association— Com- 
 pany — Power of general meeting 
 
 [23 Ch. D, 1 
 See Company — Dieectob's Appoint- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Bank note 9 ft. B. D. 555 ; 11 ft. B. D. 84 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Alteration. 
 2,3. 
 
 ■ Bill of exchange— Figures 10 ft. B. D. 30 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Alteration. 1. 
 
 Character of property - 28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 See Covenant — Beeach. 1. 
 
 ■ Easement- Light 27 Ch. D. 43 ; 29 Ch. D. 
 
 See Light— Title. 1, 2. [155 
 
 ■ ■ - Memorandum of association 30 Ch. D. 376 
 See Company — Memoeandum and 
 Aeticles. 1. 
 
 ALTERATION — continued. 
 
 Order for production of documents — ^Plaoe of 
 
 production - 24 Ch. D. 376 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Couet— Pbo- 
 DUCTION OF Documents. 11. 
 
 Order of Court - 29 Ch. D. 827 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 8. 
 
 Property — Will speaking from death 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 50 
 See Will — Speaking from Death. 3. 
 
 Will— Position of signature - 6 P. D. 100 
 
 See Probate — Execution. 2. 
 
 ALTERNATIVE RATES - 10 ft. B.D. 250; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 703 
 See Railway Compasty — Traffic Man- 
 agement. 1. 
 ALTERNATIVE RELIEF— Specific performance 
 —Damages 28 Ch, D. 35S 
 
 See Specific Performance. 2. 
 
 AMB ASS ADOE — Certificate — Proof of foreign law 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 7. [9 P. D. 234 
 
 Cliildren born abroad - 22 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Alien. 
 
 AMBIGUITY— Contract- 
 
 -Agreement for lease 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 233 
 
 AND Tenant — Ageee- 
 
 See Lantjlord 
 
 MENT. 1. 
 
 Conveyance — Scotch law 8 App. Cas. 853 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 1. 
 
 Misrepresentation — ^Pleading 9 App. Cas. 187 
 
 See Company — Pbospectus. 1. 
 
 Specification of patent - 29 Ch. D. 36& 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 5. 
 
 Time policy 9 App. Cas. 345- 
 
 See Inscbance, Mabine — Policy. 9. 
 
 Will 7 App. Cas. 400' 
 
 See Scotch Law — Will. 
 AMENDMENT— Bankruptcy petition 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 289 
 See Bankruptcy — Secueed Ceeditok. 
 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy petition - 14 ft. B. D. 184 
 
 See Bakkeuptcy — Bankeuptcy Peti- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Bankruptcy petition 22 Ch. D. 629 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 5. 
 
 Judgment — Action against partners in name 
 
 of firm lift. B.D. 485; 10 App, Cas, 680 
 See Peactice — Scpeeme Cocet — Par- 
 ties. 10. 
 
 Notice of motion — Court of Appeal 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 707 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — De- 
 fault. 4. 
 — — Order passed and entered 30 Ch. D. 239 
 
 See Peactice — Svpeeme Couet — Judg- 
 ment. 9. 
 
 Order under Trustee Act 26 Ch. D. 432 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Oedebs. 1. 
 
 Parliamentary list - 14 ft. B. D. 507 
 
 See Paeliament — Fbanohise. 9. 
 
 Particulars of objection — Patent 26 Ch. D. 
 
 [700; 10 App. Cas. 24ft 
 See Patent — ^%''alidity. 1. 
 
( 25 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES- 
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 AMENDMENT— oonWn«e(i. 
 
 Particulars of objeetion — Patent 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Patent — Pbaotioe. 1. [137 
 Pleadings. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Amendment. 
 PleadinRs - 28 Ch. D. 356 
 
 >Siee Specific Performance. 2. 
 Pleadings — Change of parties 16 Ch. D. 121 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Parties. 6. 
 
 Pleadings— Costs ■ 11 Q. B. D. 627 
 
 iSee Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 5. 
 
 Pleadings— Patent suit - 17 Ch. D. 721 ; 
 
 [8 App. Gas, 5 
 See Patent — Infringement. 6. 
 
 Proof in bankruptcy - 19 Ch. D. 394 ; 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 121 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 5, 12. 
 
 Special case - 22 Ch. D. 495 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Spe- 
 cial Case. 1. 
 
 Specification 26 Ch. D. 106 ; 28 Ch. D. 148 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 1, 2. 
 ANALYSIS— Adulteration of food— Sample 
 
 [6Q. B.D. 17; 9 Q. B. D. 172 
 See Adulteration. 4, 5. 
 
 ANCTENT BUILDINGS— Eight of support 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 281 ; 6 App. Cas. 740 
 See Support. ' 2, 3. 
 ANCIENT MONUMENTS. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 73 (i7« Ancient Monu- 
 ments Protection Act, 1882), provides for the hetter 
 /protection of ancient monuments 
 
 Sect. 2. The owner of any monument described 
 in the schedule to the Act may hy deed under his 
 hand constitute the Commissioners of Her Majesty's 
 Works and Public Buildings the guardians of such 
 monument. Where the Commissioners have been 
 •constituted guardians of a monument, they shall 
 thenceforth, until they shall receive notice in writ- 
 dng to the contrary from any succeeding owner not 
 iiound by such deed as aforesaid, maintain such 
 monument, and shall, for the purpose of such 
 maintenance, at all reasonable times by themselves 
 and their workmen have access to such monument 
 for the purpose of inspecting it, and of bringing 
 su^h materials and doing such acts and things as 
 may be required for the maintenance thereof. 
 
 The owner of an ancient monument of which the 
 Commissioners are guardians to have, save as in 
 the Act expressly provided, the same estate, right, 
 title, and interest in and, to such monument in all 
 /respects as if the commissioners had not been con- 
 Mtuted guardians thereof. 
 
 The expressions "maintain '' and "maintenance" 
 micltide the fencing, repairing, cleansing, covering 
 in, or doing any other act or thing which may be 
 tequiredfor the purpose of repairing any monument 
 or protecting the same from decay or injury. 
 
 'The cost of maintenance is to be defrayed from 
 moneys to be provided by Parliament. _ 
 
 Sect. 3. Powers to Commissioners to purchase 
 .ancient monuments. 
 
 Sect. 4. Any person may hy deed or will give. 
 
 ANCIENT MONUMENTS— cora««»uc(!. 
 
 devise, or bequeath to the Commissioners any 
 
 ancient mmiument to which the Act applies. 
 
 Sect. 5. Commissioners to appoint inspectors of 
 ancient monuments. 
 
 Sect. 6. Penalty for injuring or defacing any 
 ancient monument : — 
 
 (1.) Any sum not exceeding £5, and in addition 
 
 thereto such sum as the Court may thinii 
 
 just for the purpose of repairing any 
 
 damage caused by the offender ; or, 
 
 (2.) Imprisonment loith or without hard labour 
 
 for any term not exceeding one month. 
 The owner of an ancient monument not to be 
 punisliable under the section in respect of any act 
 which he may do to such monument, except in cases 
 where the Commissioners have berni constituted guar- 
 dians of such monument, in which case the owner 
 is to be deemed to have relinquished his right of 
 ownership so far as relates to any injury or deface- 
 ment of such monument, and may be dealt with as 
 if he were not the owner. 
 
 Sect. 1. Offences and penalties under the Act to 
 be prosecuted and recovered in manner provided by 
 the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. 
 
 An appeal lies to a Court of general or •quarter 
 sessions. 
 
 Sect. 8. Tlie Commissioners to be a corporation 
 and have perpetual succession and a common seed, 
 and may purchase or acquire by gift, will, or other- 
 wise, and hold witliout licence in mortmain, any 
 land or estate or interest in land for (he purposes 
 of the Act ; and any conveyance, appointment, 
 devise, or bequest of land, or any estate or interest 
 in land under the Act, to them not to be deemed a 
 conveyance, appointment, devise, or bequest to u, 
 charitable use wiihin the meaning of tlie Act re- 
 lating to charitable uses. 
 
 Sect. 9 defines " owners " of ancient monuments 
 for the purposes of the Act to be : — 
 
 (1.) Any person entitled for liis own benefit, at 
 law or in equity, for an estate in fee to the 
 possession or receipt of the rents and 
 profits of any freehold or copijhold land, 
 being the site of an ancient monument, 
 lohether such land is or is not subject to 
 incumbrances. 
 (2.) Any person absolutely entitled in possession, 
 at law or in equity, for his own benefit, to 
 a beneficial lease of land, being the site of 
 an ancient monument, of which not less 
 thanforty-five years are unexpired, whether 
 such land is or is not subject to incum- 
 brances ; but no lease shall be deemed to be 
 a beneficial lease, within the meaning of 
 the Act, if the rent reserved thereon exceeds 
 one-third part of the full annual value of 
 the land demised by such lease. 
 (3.) Any person entitled under any existing or 
 future settlement, at law or in equity, for 
 his own benefit, and for the term of his 
 own life, orfortJie life of any other person, 
 to the possession or receipt of the rents and 
 profits of land of any tenure, being the site 
 of an ancient monument, whether subject 
 or not to incumbrances, in which the estate 
 for the time being subject to the trusts of 
 the settlement is an estate for lives or years 
 renewable for ever, oris an estate renewable 
 for a term of not less than sixtj/ years, or is 
 
( 27 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 28 ) 
 
 ANCIENT MONUMENTS— con«nae<J. 
 
 an estate for a term of years of wliich not 
 less than sixty are unexpired, or is a greater 
 estate than any of the foregoing estates. 
 (40 Any body corporate, any eorporation sole, 
 any' trustee for charities, and any commis- 
 sioners or trustees for ecclesiastical, colle- 
 giate, or other public purposes, entitled at 
 law or in equity, and whether subject or 
 not to incumbrances, in the case of free- 
 hold or copyhold land, being the site of an 
 ancient monument, in fee, and in the .case 
 of leasehold land, being the site of an 
 ancient monument, to a lease for an un- 
 expired term of not less than sixty years. 
 Where any owner as aforesaid is a minor, or of 
 unsound mind, or a married woman, the guardian, 
 committee, or husband, as the case may be, of such 
 owner, is the owner for the purpose of the Act ; but 
 a married woman entitled for her separate use, and | 
 not restrained from anticipation, is to be treated 
 as a feme sole for the purposes of the Act. 
 
 Every person deriving title to any ancient monu- I 
 mentfrom, through, or under any owner wlio has 
 constituted the Commissioners the guardians of 1 
 such monument shall be bound by the deed executed 
 by such owner for that purpose. i 
 
 Sect. 10. List of scheduled monuments may be 
 added to by Order in Council. 
 
 By sect. 11 (he expression " ancient monument " 
 includes the site of such monument and such por- 
 tion of land adjoining the same as may be required 
 to fence, cover in, or otherwise preserve from injury 
 the monument standing on such site, also the means 
 of access to such monument. 
 
 ANGLE OF 45°— Obstruction of light 24Cli.D. 
 See Light — Obstkxjction. 1. [282 
 
 ANGLO-INDIAN DOMICIL— Legacy duty 
 
 See DoMioiL. 4. [23 Ch. D. 532 
 
 ANIMALS — Domestic animals — Decoy birds — 
 Cruelty 12 ft. B. D. 66 
 
 See Ckuelty to Animals. 
 
 Movement of, into proscribed districts — 
 
 Justices- Jurisdiction 12 Q. B. D 629 
 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 
 Act. 
 
 ANNUAL VALUE— Water-rate 10 Q. B. D. 837 ; 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 529 ; 9 App. Cas. 49 
 
 See Wateewokks Company — Watek- 
 
 kate. 3, 4. 
 
 Water rate — Definition. 
 
 See Watekwokks Company — Watek 
 Eate — Statutes. 
 ANNUITY— Abatement - - 27 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 7. 
 
 Charge on capital or income 17 Ch. D, 167 
 
 See Will — Annuity. 1. 
 
 Charged on land — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 231 
 See Limitations, Statute of— Bealtt. 
 3. 
 
 For life or perpetual - 19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 See Will— Annuity. 2. 
 Gift of clear yearly sum free of all deduc- 
 tion—Income-tax - 21 Ch. D. 106 ; 
 [22 Ch. D. 182, 269 
 See Will— WoKDS. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 ATSTSrUIT'i— continued.. 
 
 Payable to widow of deceased partner 
 
 [25 Ch, D. 89 
 
 See Paetneeship — Contract. 1. 
 Perpetuity 19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 2. 
 
 Widow — Voidable marriage 25 Ch. D. 685 
 
 (See AVill- -Condition. 11. 
 
 ANNULMENT OF BANKRUPTCY. 
 
 See Cases under Bankkui'toy — Annul- 
 ment. 
 
 ANTE-NUPTIAL DEBTS OF WIFE 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 380 ; 10 Q. B. D. 380 
 
 See Husband and Wife —Married Wo- 
 men's Property Acts. 2, 3. 
 
 ANTICIPATION— Patent 21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 2. 
 ■ Kestraint on 
 
 See Cases under Husband and Wife — 
 Separate Estate. 9 — 15. 
 ■ Eestraint on — Election 27 Ch. D. 606 
 
 See Election. 5. 
 
 APPAEENT POSSESSION— Bill of sale 
 
 See Cases under Bill op Sale— Appa- 
 rent Possession. 
 
 APPEAL— Admiralty Court — Withdrawal — Cross- 
 appeal - 10 P. D. 18 
 (See Practice —Admiralty — Appeal. 2. 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Appeal. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 936 
 
 Discharge. 4. 
 
 25 Ch. D. 26ft 
 
 -Annulment. 3. 
 
 ■ Bankruptcy — Costs 
 
 See Bankeuptoy- 
 
 ■ Bankruptcy — Costs - 
 
 See Bankruptcy- 
 
 ■ Baiikruptcy — Evidence 22 Ch. D. 312 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 18. 
 
 ■ Bankruptcy — For costs 19 Ch. D. 14fr 
 
 jSee Bankedptcy — Liquid.^tion. 5. 
 
 ■ Bankruptcy petition — Stay of proceedings 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 49 
 See Bankeuptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 ■ Bankruptcy — Trustee 17 Ch. D. 518 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 7. 
 
 ■ Case stated by sessions 6 ft. B. D. 309 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeue Coukt — Ap- 
 peal. 5. 
 • Chambers — Leave to appeal - 9 P. D, 68 
 See Peaotice — ^Peobate — Pleading. 
 
 - Costs of - 16 Ch. D. 273 ; 19 Ch. D. 80 ;• 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 76 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 1, 6, 45. 
 
 - County Court. 
 
 See Cases under County Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 
 
 - Court of Passage — Leave to appeal 
 
 [9 P. D. 12 
 See Peaotice — Admiralty — Appeal. 1^ 
 
 - Criminal matter— Bail - 10 Q. B. D. 378 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal 9. 
 
( 29 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASKS. 
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 APPEAL — continued. I 
 
 Criminal matter — Local Government Acts 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 534 ' 
 See Practice — Supreme Coukt — ^Ap- [ 
 
 PEAL. 8. 
 
 Criminal matter — Trial at bar — Notice of I 
 
 motion 14 Q. B. D. 667 \ 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. 
 
 Criminal matter — Mandamus 7 Q. B. D. 575 
 
 See Parliament — Election Commis- 
 sioners. 
 
 Cross notice— Costs 18 Ch. D, 334 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. 0. 98 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 7,8. 
 
 Discretion of Judge 20 Ch. D. 365 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 4. 
 
 Divorce Court — Application for new trial 
 
 [10 P. D. 110 
 See Practice — Divorce — Appeal. 2. 
 
 For costs. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Appeal. 24 — ^33. 
 
 For costs 17 Ch. D. 772 ; 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 16, 17. 
 
 For costs - - 18 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 5. 
 
 For costs - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 
 . For costs - - - 23 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 5. 
 
 Form of oonvevance settled by Judge 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 466 
 See Vendor and Purchaser— Convey- 
 ance. 1. 
 
 From summary jurisdiction 
 
 See Justices — Practice — Statutes. 
 
 High Court of Justice. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Appeal. 
 
 Infants Cnstody Act 16 Ch. D. 115 
 
 See Infant — Custody. 2. 
 
 Interpleader— Judgment upon trial of issue 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 377 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 7. 
 
 Interpleader — Judge finally disposing of 
 
 whole matter 14 ft. B. D. 371 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 5. 
 Interpleader— Summary decision at Cham- 
 bers - - 14 ft. B.D. 569 
 See Practice- Supreme Court— Inter- 
 pleader. 6. 
 
 Judgment by default - - 29 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 1. 
 
 Licence- Kenewal - 12 «■ B. D. 620 
 
 See Inn — ^Licence. 5. 
 
 Liquidator— Leave to appeal 21 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Company— Costs. 1. 
 
 Local Government Board 12 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 See Local Government— Practice. 2. 
 
 APPEAL — continued. 
 
 Lower Canada — Imprisonment of debtor 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 530 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 2. 
 ' Municipal election — Special case 
 
 [14 ft. B, S. 54» 
 See Municipal Corporation — Election. 
 8. , 
 
 Notice of — Notice sent by post 
 
 [14 ft, B. D. 121 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 12. 
 
 Order in Chambers - - 19 Ch. D. 516 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 20. 
 
 Order in Chambers — Enlarging time — 
 
 Powers.of Judge - 6 ft. B. D. 116 
 See Practice — ^ Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 5. 
 
 Order of revivor - 17 Ch, D. 767 
 
 See Practice ■ — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 5. 
 
 Poor law — Case stated under 12 & 13 Vict. 
 
 u. 45, s. 11 - 15 ft. B. D. 76 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 10. 
 
 Poor-rate — Case stated to Court of Appeal — 
 
 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45, s. 11 12 ft. B. D. 1 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 
 PE.\L. 3. 
 
 — Poor-rate — Case stated to quarter sessions 
 [15 ft. B. D. 451 
 
 See Poor-rate — Procedure, 3, 
 
 — Privy Council — -Leave to appeal 
 See Cases under Practice — ■ Privy 
 
 Council — Leave to appeal. 
 
 — Probate and Divorce Division 9 App, Cas. 
 
 [631 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Appeal. 1. 
 
 — Salvage — ^Amount of award 9 P, D, 14 
 See Ship— Salvage. 7. 
 
 — Sclieme of Charity Commissioners 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 310 
 
 See Charity — Management. 3. 
 
 — Scotch law 6 App. Cas. 251 ; 7 App. Cas. 49 ; 
 [10 App. Cas. 171 
 
 See Scotch Law — Practice. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 — Security for costs. 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 
 Court — Security for Costs. 9 — 12. 
 
 — Staying proceedings. 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 
 Court — Staying Proceedings. 
 11—16. 
 
 — Time for — Bankruptcy. 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Appeal. 
 
 5—9. 
 
 — Time for — Supreme Court. 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 
 Court-:-Appeal. 34 — 44. 
 
 Varying minutes— Notice 20 Ch. D. 130 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 6. 
 
 Winding-up order — Security for costs 
 
 See Company— Appeal. [23 Ch. D. 370 
 
( 31 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 32 ) 
 
 APPEAL — continued. 
 
 Withdrawal - - - 17 Ch. D. 23 
 
 See Pbacttoe — Supeeme Coubt — Ap- 
 peal. 23. 
 
 Witness— Winding-up 19 Ch, D. 118 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 2. 
 APPEAL COTJBT — Division of opinion — Previous 
 decision. 9 P. D. 96 
 
 See Pp.aotioe — ADinKALTT — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 Interpleader — Trial by jury^ — Nev? trial 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 103 
 See Peaotioe — Supkeme Coukt — Inter- 
 pleader. 4. 
 
 Order in Council as to. 
 
 See Court — Statutes and Gazette. 
 Summary jurisdiction — Order striking soli- 
 tor off the rolls - 28 Ch. D. 614 ; 
 [12 Q. B. D. 148 
 See Solicitor — Misconduct. 1, 2. 
 -APPEARANCE — Defendant to counter-claim 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 685 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 
 COUNTER-CLAra. 3. 
 
 Sequestration to compel - 16 Ch. D. 665 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Proceed- 
 ings. 1. 
 A^PPLICATION FOK SHARES. 
 See Cases under 
 
 Company — Shares — Allotment. 
 -APPOINTMENT— Power. 
 
 See Cases under Power — Execution. 
 Power — Default of — Class when to be ascer- 
 tained 24 Ch. D. 244 
 See Settlement — Construction. 8. 
 
 Power— Election - - 22 Ch. D. 555 
 
 See Election. 1. 
 
 Power— Invalidity— Election 26 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 7. 
 
 Power — Testamentary power 23 Ch. D. 235 
 
 See Customs Annuity Fund. 
 
 Power— Will— Child of testator 26 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See Will — Lapse. 2. 
 APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER OF BOARD. 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 350 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 thority, 15. 
 APPOINTMENT OF TRUSTEE— Power in settle- 
 ment. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Powers. 
 8-13. 
 
 Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Cases under Settled Land Act — 
 Trustees. 1 — i. 
 
 ■ ' Trustee Acts. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Acts — New 
 Trustees. 
 APPORTIONMENT. 
 
 1. Dividends — Tenant for Life and Ma- 
 
 mainderman — Investment.'] A testator after the 
 
 Apportionment Act, 1870, bequeathed £ to 
 
 trustees, such sum to oaiTy interest at 4i per 
 cent, until the same should be paid or appro- 
 priated, upon trust, with the consent of his wife, 
 to invest the same in certain specified securities, 
 and to pay the annual income of the legacy and 
 
 APPORTIONMENT— confmftei?. 
 the investments thereof, including in such income 
 the interest payable in respect of such legacy 
 to his wife for life, with remainders over. — 
 Interest was paid to the widow up to the day 
 when, pursuant to an order of the Court, the be- 
 queathed sum was invested in stocks on some of 
 which five months' dividend had then accrued : — 
 Held, that the Apportionment Acts did not apply 
 and that the widow was entitled to the whole of 
 the dividends when received upon the purchased 
 stocks. In re Clarke. Barker v. Perowne 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 160 
 
 2. Parish Rates — Company — -Liquidation 
 
 — Public Health Act, 1875, s. 211.] Parish rates 
 were assessed on the 20th of April for the ensuing 
 six months upon the premises of a company which 
 was wound up on the 22nd of the following 
 August, the business being subsequently carried 
 on by the liquidators as a going concern ; — Held, 
 that there was no power to apportion these rates 
 under the Apportionment Act, and that there was 
 no change in the occupation under the Public 
 Health Act, since the liquidators were in posses- 
 sion under the direction of the Court ; and, con- 
 sequently, that the whole of the April rates 
 must be proved for in the liquidation. In re 
 Weabmouth Crown Glass Company 
 
 [19 Ch, D. 640 
 
 3. Will before the Act — Apportiomnent 
 
 Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 35)— Death of Tenant 
 for Life after the Act.'] A testator who died 
 before the Apportionment Act, 1870, came into 
 operation, gave the income of his residuary estate, 
 which included railway, preference, and ordinaiy 
 stock, to his wife for life, with remainder to his 
 nephews. The widow claimed under the old law 
 and received the entire dividends upon the rail- 
 way stock which were declared and became re- 
 ceivable after the testator's death. On the death 
 of the widow the residuary legatees claimed the 
 whole of the railway dividends becoming payable 
 after the death of the widow : — Held, that the 
 executors of the widow were entitled, under the 
 new law, to an apportioned part of the dividends 
 up to her deatli. Lawrence v. Lawrence 
 
 [26 Ch, D, 795 
 
 Annuities — Deticient estate 27 Ch, D. 703 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 7. 
 
 Business carried on after death of testator 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 672 
 See Executor — Administration. 1. 
 
 Capital and income — Conversion 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 643, 649, n. 
 See Executor — Administration. 5, 6. 
 
 Condition on severance of reversion 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Contemporaneous securities 16 Ch. D. 211, 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 4, 5. [214, n. 
 
 Costs ■ - 26 Ch, D. 465 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 27. 
 
 I Costs — Administration action 19 Ch, D. 552 
 
 ; See Executor — Actions. 11. 
 
 j Costs— Appeal 18 Ch, D. 334 ; 23 Ch. D, 98 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Costs. 
 1 7,8. 
 
( 33 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 APPOETIONMENT— coreMnMe^. 
 
 Costs — Claim aad oounter-olaim 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 377 
 See Pbaotice — Sdpkbue Ootjet — Costs. 
 10. 
 Costs— Mortgage suit - 27 Ch. D. 679 
 
 See MOETGAGE — ^FOBEOLOStrEB. 5. 
 
 Costs— Patent suit - 29 Ch. L. 366 
 
 See Patent— Pbaotice. 3. 
 Gift to charity— Mortmain 29 Ch. D. 947 
 
 See Chaeity — Moetmain. 5. 
 Locke King's Actr-Mixed fund 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Will— ExONEBATiON. 2. [322 
 Profit and loss— Settlement of business 
 
 See Tenant foe Life. [26 Ch. D. 588 
 
 Purchase-money — ^Leaseholds for lives 
 
 1118 Ch. D. 624 
 See Leasehold — Kenewable Lease. 3. 
 
 Eent — Assignment of term 10 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Rent — Winding-up of company 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Company — Disteess. 1. [161 
 
 Eent-charge — ^Eelease of part 14 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Eent-ohaese. [318 
 Salvage - - - 8 P. D. 24 
 
 See Ship— Salvage. 3. 
 
 Securities forbUls of exchange 26 Ch. D. 765 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 813 
 
 See Bill op Exchange— Secueitiespoe. 
 4. 
 Void legacy— Mortmain 16 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Chabity — Moe'imain. 1. 
 
 APPEENTICE. 
 
 1. Place of _ Performance — Contract of 
 
 Apprenticeship.'] A "deed of apprenticeship con- 
 tained the usual provision that the master should 
 teach the apprentice, but no express provision as 
 to the place where the contract was to be per- 
 formed by the master : — Held, that no stipulation 
 could be implied that it was to be performed at 
 the place where at the time of its execution the 
 master carried on business and the parties to the 
 deed resided. Eoyce v. Chablton 8 Q,. B. D. 1 
 
 2. Place of Performance — Contract of 
 
 Apprenticeship — Change of Locality of Business — 
 Unlawful Commamd — Outdoor Apprentice — Divi- 
 sion of Business.'] The Plaintiff was bound ap- 
 prentice to the Defendants and their partners and 
 successors in business in the trade of an engi- 
 neer ; and his father covenanted to provide him 
 with board, lodging, and other necessaries. At 
 the date of the indenture the business was car- 
 ried on by the former Defendants in London, 
 where also the father of the apprentice resided, 
 but there was no stipulation in the indenture as 
 to the place where the business should be carried 
 on. Before the term of the apprenticeship ex- 
 pired the Defendants' partnership was dissolved 
 and two firms established, one in London con- 
 sisting of two of the Defendants, and the other 
 at Derby consisting of the other two; the manu- 
 facturing part of the old business being carried 
 on at Derby and the selling part in London. The 
 Defendants called on the Plaintiff to attend at 
 
 APPEENTICE— coniinucd. 
 the place of business at Derby : — Held, that there 
 was an implied stipulation that the contract was 
 to be performed at the place where the business 
 was carried on and the parties resided at the date 
 of the indenture ; and that the direction to the 
 apprentice to go to Derby was an unreasonable 
 command which he was not bound to obey. — 
 Held, also, that as the business was not carried 
 on in its entirety by either of the two new firms, 
 neither of them was the successor of the original 
 firm or entitled to the services of the apprentice. 
 — Boyce v. Charlton (8 Q. B. D. 1) overruled. 
 Eaton v. Westeen - 9 ft. B. D. 636 
 Contract not for benefit of infant — Em- 
 ployers and Workmen Act, 1875 
 
 ri2Q.B.D.352 
 See Infant — Oonteacts. 1. 
 APPEENTICE FEES— Charity scheme 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 310 
 See Chaeity — ^Management. 3. 
 APPEOPEIATION Or PAYMENTS 18 Ch, D. 449 
 See Moetgage — Powers. 6. 
 
 Guarantee 25 Ch. D. 692 
 
 See Peincipal and Sueety — Liability. 
 2. 
 APPEOPEIATION OF SECTJEITIES. 
 
 See Cases under Bill op Exchange— 
 Secueities foe. 
 
 AEBITEATION :— Col. 
 
 I. AWAED _ _ - 34 
 
 II. Costs - - - 35 
 
 III. Staying Peooeedinss - 35 
 
 IV. Submission - - - 35. 
 I. AEBITEATION— AWAED. 
 
 1. Enlargement of Time — Common Law- 
 
 Procedure Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 125), s. 15.] 
 By a submission in writing the time within 
 which the award was to be made was iixed at- 
 one month. The submission contained no power 
 to enlarge the time. The award was in fact 
 made after the expiration of the month : — Held; 
 that the Court had power subsequently to the 
 making of the award to enlarge the time under 
 sect. 15 of the Common Law Procedure Act, 
 1854. May v. Haeoouet - 13 Q. B. D. 688 
 
 2. Setting aside — Objections to he speci- 
 
 fled — Common Law Procedure Act, 1852 — Beg. 
 Gen. Hit Term, 1853, r. 169.] A notice of motion 
 in the Chancery Division to set aside the award 
 of an arbitrator should specify the grounds of 
 objection, by analogy to the practice under the 
 Common Law Procedure Act, 1852 : Eeg. Gen. 
 Hil. Term, 1853, r. 169 : an objection on " good 
 grounds" being insufficient. Meeciee v. Pep- 
 Iesell - - 19Ch, D. 58 
 
 3, Setting aside — Time — Notice of Motion 
 
 —9 & 10 'Will. 3, 0. 15, «. 2.] An action having 
 been referred to arbitration the award was pub- 
 lished on the 14th of July. On the 24th cf 
 November (being the last day but one of the 
 old Michaelmas Term) the Defendants moved 
 the Court to set aside the award, but the Com-t 
 refused the application on the ground that notice 
 of motion had not been given to the PlaintifE 
 as required by Eules of Supreme Court, 1875, 
 
 C 
 
( 35 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 36 ) 
 
 I. AEBITEATION— AWAED— cojiimucd. 
 Order Lin., -rules 3 & 4. Tlje Defendants after- 
 wards on the same day served on the Plaintiff 
 a notice that on the 27th of November they 
 would move the Court to set aside the award : — 
 Held, on the authority of In re Corporation of 
 Huddersfield, and Jacomh (Law Eep. 17 Eq. 476 ; 
 30 Ch. 92) that the service of notice of motion 
 on the 24th of November was a complaint made 
 in the Court before the last day of the next term 
 after the publication of the award within 9 & 10 
 Will. 3, c. 15, s. 2, although no affidavit was filed 
 before the last day, as had been done in that 
 case. Smith v. Pakksibe Mmme Compaut 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 67 
 
 II. AEBITEATION— COSTS. 
 
 " Costs of Eeference " — Award — • Costs of 
 Award.'] Power, in a submission'; to arbitration, 
 over the " cost of the reference," includes power 
 to award the costs of the award. In re KS Abbi- 
 TKATION BETWEEN WaLKER & SON, AND BkOWN 
 
 [9 ft. B. S. 434 
 
 in. AEBITEATION— STATING PEOCEEBINGS. 
 Jurisdiction — Injunction to restrain proceed- 
 ing with Arbitration — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, 
 sub-s. 8.] The Judicature Act, 1873, sect. 25, 
 sub-sect. 8, has given no power to the High 
 Court to issue an injunction in a case in which 
 mo Court before that Act had power to give any 
 remedy whatever. — Therefore the High Court 
 .has no jurisdiction to issue an injunction to 
 restrain a party from proceeding with an arbitra- 
 tion in a matter beyond the agreement to refer, 
 although such arbitration proceeding may be 
 futile and vexatious: — Sernble, per Brett, L.J., 
 that the Judicature Act, 1873, has dealt only with 
 procedure, and not with jurisdiction at all, and 
 that if no Court had power to issue an injunction 
 before that Act, the High Court has no such 
 power now. Nobth London Eailwat Company 
 1). Great Nobthebn Railway Company 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 30 
 
 Vr. AEBITEATION— SUBMISSION. 
 
 1. Jurisfliction — West Kent Main Sewer- 
 age Act, 38 & 39 Vict. c. clxiii. — Construction of 
 sect. 93.] The West Kent Sewerage Board is 
 incorporated by a local Act of 38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. clxiii., and by sect. 93 it is enacted that, if 
 any difference arises between the board" on the 
 one hand and any constituted authority or person 
 on the other hand, or between any two or more 
 constituted authorities, or between any constituted 
 authority and any parish or person, respecting 
 any assessment of a main sewer rate, or any 
 determination of the board, or any controversy 
 or other matter under the Act, the same shall by 
 virtue of the Act stand referred for decision to 
 the Local Government Board, whose decision 
 thereon and respecting the costs of the reference 
 shall be final and binding. — A dispute having 
 arisen between the West Kent Sewerage Board 
 and the Bexley Local Board respecting a claim 
 made by the local board against the sewerage 
 board for compensation for damage done to the 
 highways, &c., of the district, the disputants 
 with the consent of the Local Government Board, 
 stated a case for the opinion of this Court : — Seld, 
 that it was not competent to them to do so, the 
 
 IV. AEBITEATION— STIBMISSION—coneinue*^. 
 Local Government Board being by sect. 93 consti- 
 tuted the tribvmal whose decision on the matter 
 was to be final and binding, and this not being 
 a submission to arbitration within sect. 5 of the 
 Common Law Procedure Act, 1854. Bexley 
 Local Boaed v. West Kent Sewebage Boabd 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 518 
 
 2. Eevocation — Appointment of Arhilrator 
 
 hy one Party — Common Law Procedure Act, 1854 
 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 125), «. 13— Revocation of Autho- 
 rity.'] Where there is an agreement to refer a dis- 
 pute to two arbitrators, one to be appointed by 
 each party, but no agreement to make the submis- 
 sion a rule of Court, and, one of the parties having 
 faUed to appoint an arbitrator, the otlier party, 
 by virtue of s. 13 of the Common Law Procedure 
 Act, 1854, appoints his arbitrator to act as sole 
 arbitrator, the authority of such arbitrator may 
 be revoked by either party before an award is 
 made. Feasee v. Ehbenspebgee 12 ft. B. D. 310 
 
 3. Eule of Court — Action — Eeference to 
 
 Arbitration — Enforcing Award.] Where an action 
 has been referred to an arbitrator by the Chancery 
 Division it is not necessary to make the award a 
 rule of Court before an order can be made 
 founded on the award. Jones v. Wedgewood 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See also In re Foeeest. Bubeowes v. Fobbest. 
 [19 Ch. D. 57, n. 
 
 4. Eule of Court — Agreement to appoint 
 
 Valuers — Landlord and Tenant — Valuation on 
 Expiration of Tenancy — Common Law Procedure 
 Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict, c 125), s. 17.] An 
 agreement between landlord and tenant for the 
 letting of a farm provided, that the tenant 
 should be paid at the expiration of the tenancy 
 the usual and customary valuation, as between 
 outgoing and incoming tenant, in the same 
 manner as he paid on entering the premises. 
 And it was thereby mutually agreed by and 
 between the parties thereto, that, when any 
 valuation of the covenants should be made between 
 the tenant and the landlord, or his incoming 
 tenant, the persons making such valuation should 
 take into consideration the state, condition, and 
 usage of the farm, and, if not left in a proper and 
 creditable state, should determine what sum of 
 money should be paid to the landlord as com- 
 pensation therefor, and should deduct such sum 
 from the amount of the valuation. On the ex- 
 piration of the tenancy, there being no incoming 
 tenant, the landlord and tenant respectively 
 appointed a valuer. The valuers could not agree 
 upon the amount of the valuation, and they ap- 
 pointed an umpire, who held a sitting and heard 
 witnesses, and then made and published an 
 award in writing. The tenant, with the view of 
 obtaining an order remitting the matters in dis- 
 pute to the umpire for reconsideration, applied 
 for an order to make the submission to arbitra- 
 tion contained in the agreement, together with 
 the appointment of arbitrators and umpire, a rule 
 of court, under s. 17 of the Common Law Pro- 
 cedure Act, 1854 : — Beld, that the agreement did 
 not contain any submission to arbitration, but 
 that it provided only for the appointment of 
 valuers, and that it could not, therefore, be made 
 
( 37 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 38 ) 
 
 IV. AKBITEATIOir— SUBMISSION— confinMed. 
 a rale of court.— Jji re Eopyer (Law Eep. 2 Q. B. 
 367) explained and distinguished. In re Dawdy 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 426 
 
 AEBITBATIOK— Building society 23 Ch. D, 103 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 260 
 
 (See Building Society. 1,2. 
 
 Clause of— Separation deed 18 Ch. D. 670 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Sepabation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 I Compensation under Public Health Act 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 735; 9 App. Cas. 595 
 
 See Local Government — Compensa- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 • Costs— Event 14 ft. B. D. 821, 841 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 13, 42. 
 
 ^— Excess of jurisdiction — Sale note 
 
 [13 Q. B. 861 
 See Prinoipal and Agent — ^Agent's 
 Liability. 2. 
 
 — Lands Clauses Act - - 30 Ch. D. 563 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 6. 
 
 Production of documents 23 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 2. 
 
 Eeconstruction of company — Inspection of 
 
 books - - 28 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Company — Eeconstruction. 
 
 Eailway company - - 17 Ch. D. 493 
 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways Ee- 
 GULATiON Acts. 1. 
 
 Stay of proceedings - 9 Q. B. B. 188 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Pbooeedings. 4. 
 
 Witness out of jurisdiction — "Trial" — 
 
 Evidence - - 12 Q. B. D. 39 
 
 See Evidence— Witness. 1. 
 
 ABBITEATOE— Attendance of witness before 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 787 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 7. 
 
 Dwellings Improvement Act 25 Ch. D. 78 
 
 See Labourers' Dwellings Acts. 1. 
 
 AECHITECT— Undischarged bankrupt— Personal 
 earnings - - - 17 Ch. D. 768 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 4. 
 
 ABMS— Eoyal Arms. 
 
 See Patent — Gazette. 
 
 AEMT AND NAVY. 
 
 Tlie Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 57 (the Begulation of 
 the Forces Act, 1881), amends (in part) the Army 
 Discipline and BegulaUon Act, 1879, and other 
 enactments respecting the regulation of Her 
 Majesty's Forces. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 58 (the Army Act, 
 1881), as amended by 45 <£ 46 Vict. eo. 7 and 48 
 and continued by 46 & 47 Vict. c. 6, consolidate 
 the Army Discipline and Begulation Act, 1879, 
 and the subsequent Acts amending the same, 
 
 ArWllery or Eifle Eanges.] Sy 43 & 49 Vict. 
 
 ARMY AND S&.YY— continued. 
 
 c. 36, a Secretary of State may make by-laws for 
 
 Government, or Volunteer Corps, ranges. 
 
 Conveyance by Eailway.] See 46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 34, s. 6. 
 
 Militia.] The Aet 45 & 46 Vict. c. 49 (the 
 Militia Act, 1882) repeals the Militia (Voluntary 
 Enlistment) Act, 1875, and re-enacts the same with 
 such modifications as are rendered necessary by 
 the passing of the Begulation of the Forces Act, 
 1881, and the Army Act, 1881. 
 
 Militia Ballot Expenses.] The Act 48 & 49 
 Vict. c. 59, continues the Act 28 & 29 Vict. c. 46, 
 until the 31st Dec. 1886. 
 
 Militia Storehouses.] The Act 45 & 46 Vict. 
 c. 12 (the Militia Storehouse Act, 1882) amends 
 the law relating to the application of moneys 
 arising from the sale of militia storehouses. 
 
 Navy.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 39 (Naval 
 Discipline Act, 1884) amends the Naval Discipline 
 Act, 1866. 
 
 The Act 47 * 48 Vict. c. 46 (Naval Enlistment 
 Act, 1884) amends the Naval Enlistment Act, 1858. 
 
 Pay and Pensions.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 55 
 mahes furtlier provision with regard to the pen- 
 sions of soldiers, and to the pay and pensions of 
 the yeomanry. 
 
 Sect. 6 directs that certain penalties and sums 
 payable under the Yeomanry Act, 1804 (44 Oeo. 3, 
 c. 54;) may be enforced under the Summary Juris- 
 diction Acts. 
 
 Eeserve Forces.] The Act 45 <6 46 Vict. •:. 48 
 (the Beserve Forces Act, 1882) repeals divers en- 
 actments and consolidates the Acts relating to the 
 Beserve Forces. 
 
 Volunteers.] Order of lith April, 1884, amend- 
 ing Order of 3l8< July, 1880, relative to the effici- 
 ency of Volunteers under the Volunteer Act, 1863 
 [L. G. 1884, p, 1749 
 
 Order of 12th August, 1884, amending same 
 
 [I. Q. 1885, p. 3834 
 
 Military law — Habeas Corpus — Canteen- 
 Steward— Army Act, 1881, 44 * 45 Vict. c. 58, 
 8. 176, sub-s. 4.] A canteen-steward appointed by 
 the commanding officer of the district, acting 
 under a committee consisting of three officers, 
 and having no interest in the profits of the can- 
 teen, but receiving such pay or allowance as the 
 committee may think fit to award him, and being 
 liable to dismissal at the pleasure of the com- 
 mittee, though performing no military duty, 
 wearing no uniform, bearing no arms, and having 
 free ingress and egress at his pleasure to and 
 from the barracks, — is still a person subject to 
 military law within s. 176, sub-s. 4, of the Army 
 Act, 1881. In re Flint 16 Q. B. D. 488 
 
 Domicil of British subject - 30 Ch. D. 165 
 
 See Domicil. 
 
 Officer's commission — Charge on 
 
 [19 Ch, D. 17 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 12. 
 
 ABMT AGENT — ^Notice to — Assignment of money 
 payable on officer's retirement 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 30. 
 
 . Value of commission- 
 See Set-opf. 1. 
 
 -Lien- 
 
 ■Set-off 
 [17 Ch. D. 
 C2 
 
 520 
 
( 39 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 40 ) 
 
 AESANGEMENT — Bankruptcy — Approval of 
 Court — Discretion of Eegistrar 
 
 [15 Q. B. D, 213 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Scheme of Abkange- 
 
 MENT. 2. 
 
 Dismissal of petition — " Sufficient cause " 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 399 
 
 See Bankkuptct — Eeoeivek. 8. 
 
 ■ Preference of creditor — Fraud 15 ft. B.D. 605 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — Fkauduleut Pkefer- 
 
 ENOE. 2. 
 
 ARKEAKS — Alimony — Mode of enforcing pay- 
 ment - - - 13 Q. B, D. 855 
 See Action. 1. 
 
 Tithe rent-charge - 30 Ch. D. 84 
 
 See Tithes. 
 
 ARREST :— Col. 
 
 I- Debtors Act 39 
 
 II. Ne Exeat Eegno 40 
 
 I. ARREST— DEBTORS ACT. 
 
 1. Default liy Administratrix — Attach- 
 ment — Debtors Act, 18B9.] Letters of administra- 
 tion had been granted to the widow of a deceased 
 person upon the suggestion of intestacy, and she 
 had received a sum of money, part of the deceased's 
 property. The letters of administration were 
 subsequently called in in an action propounding a 
 will of the deceased, and in that action she was 
 ordered to pay the sum of money to the adminis- 
 trator pending suit, which order she had not 
 obeyed : — SeU, that she was not protected by the 
 Debtors Act, 1869, and therefore was liable to 
 attachment. TiNNUcai v. Smart 10 P. D. 184 
 
 2. Divorce — Wife's Costs — Security — 
 
 Debtors Act, 1869.] Notwithstanding the provi- 
 sions of the Debtors Act, 1869, a husband is liable 
 to attachment if he does not find security for his 
 wife's costs of suit. Lynch v. Lynch 
 
 [10 P. D. 183 
 
 3. . ■ Judgment Debt — Commitment Order — 
 
 Arrest of Debtor — Payment under Protest — Title of 
 Trustee to Money paid — Sanlcruptcy Act, 1883, ss. 9, 
 121— County Court Rules, 1884, rr. 1-4.] After a 
 commitment order had been issued by the Mayor's 
 Court in London against a judgment debtor for 
 default in payment of an instalment of the judg- 
 ment debt, a receiving order was made against 
 him under s. 9 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883 : — 
 Seld, that the commitment order was not a pro- 
 cess for contempt of Court, but to enforce payment 
 of a debt provable in the bankruptcy, and that 
 after the making of the receiving order the debtor 
 was privileged from arrest. In re Kyley. Ex, 
 parte The Official Eeceivek 16 Q. B, D. 329 
 
 4. Means to pay — Committal — 32 & 33 
 
 Vict. c. 62, 8. 5, suh-s. 2.] The Plaintiff moved to 
 commit the Defendant for default in payment 
 of a judgment debt of £29 for goods supplied to 
 him, the application being supported by an affi- 
 davit that the Defendant kept up a large estab- 
 lishment, and was to all appearance a man of 
 means. The Defendant made an afSdavit stating 
 that he was an undischarged bankrupt, bad no 
 money, and was unable to pay the Plaintiff's de- 
 mand, and that his wife's property was settled 
 to her separate use Stephen, J., made an order 
 
 I. ARREST— DEBTORS Affl— continued. 
 committing the Defendant for six weeks, or until' 
 payment, and this order was affirmed by a Divi- 
 sional Court. The Defendant appealed, and 
 filed a further afSdavit shewing that he was living 
 in a very small way, and that the expenses of the 
 establishment were all paid by his wife out of her 
 separate estate. The Court of Appeal being satis- 
 fied that the Defendant had no means of payment 
 discharged the order for committal. — Harper v. 
 Serimgeour (5 C. P. D. 366), and the observation 
 of James, L.J., in Esdaile v. Visser (18 Ch. D: 
 421) observed upon. Chard v. Jeevis 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 178 
 
 5. Means to pay — Judgment Summons — 
 
 Order to pay Debt by Instalments — Money — 
 arising from Gift — 32 & 33 Viet. v. 62, «. 5, 
 sub-s. 2.] Per Cotton and Lindley, L.JJ. : — 
 For the purpose of determining whether a judg- 
 ment debtor has had " the means to pay " the 
 judgment debt, with the view of making an order 
 for his committal under sub-sect. 2 of sect. 5 of 
 the Debtors Act, 1869, money derived from a gift 
 may be taken iato account. It is not necessary 
 that the "means to pay" should have been 
 derived from the debtor's earnings, or from a fixed, 
 iuoome. Ex parte Kosteh. In re Park 
 
 [14 Q. B. 597 
 
 II. ARREST— NE EXEAT REGNO. 
 
 Service— Debtors Act, 1869 (32 & 33 VicC 
 
 c. 62), ss. i, 6.] An order was made that a trustee 
 should within seven days after service of the order 
 pay to his cestui que trust, the Plaintiff, a sum foui i d- 
 due to liim by the Chief Clerk's certificate. The 
 Plaintiff could not find the trustee so as to serve 
 the order, and applied for a writ of ne exeat ohl 
 the ground that the trustee was about to go out 
 of the jurisdiction : — Held, that the case did not 
 fall within the third exception in sect. 4 of tlie 
 Debtors Act, 1869, the trustee not being in de- 
 fault, as the order only directed payment after 
 service and had not been served, and that as the 
 debt was not now due and payable a writ of ne, 
 exeat could not be granted. Colveeson v. Bloo m- 
 FiELD - - 29 Ch. D. 341 
 
 ARREST— Debtor— Banki-uptcy Act, 1883. 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 
 Debtor— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 480- 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Receiveb. 10. 
 
 Debtors Act — Married woman 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 973 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate. 
 Estate. 11. 
 
 Ship ■ — Defendant's costs — Commission ou, 
 
 bail - 10 P. D. 158 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Salvage. 6. 
 
 ARTICLED CLERK— Death of solicitor- Eeturn 
 of premium - 28 Ch. D. 409 
 
 See SoLiciTOE — Articled Clerk. 
 
 ARTICLES or ASSOCIATION 25 Ch. D. 108 
 
 See Company — Formation. 
 22 Ch. D. 349 ; 26 Ch. D. 107 | 30 Ch, D. 37& 
 
 See Company — SrEMORASDUM ani> 
 Articles. 1, 2, 3. 
 
< " ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 42 ) 
 
 AETICLES or ASSOCIATION— comMmMed. 
 ' Alteration of— Power of general meeting 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 1 
 See Company — Dibeotoe's Appoint- 
 
 MBNT. 2. 
 — — Alteration of— Eeduction of capital 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 268 
 See Company — Eeduction of Capital. 
 2. 
 
 Payment of dividends in proportion to 
 
 shares - - 8 App. Cas. 65 
 
 See Company— Dividends. 3. 
 
 AETICLES OF PARTHEESHIP. 
 
 See Cases under Paktnebship — Con- 
 tract. 
 
 AETIFICIAL STEEAM 27 Ch. S. 122 
 
 See Watebcobbse. 1. 
 
 AETILLEEY EANGE 
 
 See Abmy and Navy — Statutes. 
 AETIZANS' DWEILINGS ACTS 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Laeoueees' 
 Dwellings Acts. 
 
 ASSAULT — Judicial separation— Jurisdiction of 
 magistrates - - 10 P. D. 172 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Judicial 
 Sepabation. 
 
 ASSEMBLY— Unlawful— Meeting for lawful pur- 
 pose - - 9 a. B. D. 308 
 See Cbiminal Law — Unlawful As- 
 sembly. 
 ASSESSMENTCOMMITTEE— Poor-rate— Appeal 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 451 
 See Poob-bate — ^Peoceduee. 3. 
 AS8ESS0ES — Nautical — ^Duty of^County Court 
 
 [6 P. D. 84 
 See County Couet — ^Peactick 2. 
 
 ASSETS — Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptoy — Assets. 
 
 Executor. 
 
 See Cases under Ekecutoe — Adminis- 
 tbation. 
 
 Partly in England, partly in Scotland 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 453 
 See Scotch Law — Jueisdiction. 
 
 ASSIGNMENT — After-acquired property — Bank- 
 ruptcy - 22 Ch. D. 782 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 6. 
 
 All debtor's property. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptcy — Act of 
 Bankbuptcy. 1 — 5. 
 
 Bill of costs 28 Ch. D. 719 ; 12 ft. B. D. 618 
 
 See SoLiciTOE — Bill of Costs, i, 5. 
 
 Bin of sale— Transfer - 6 Q. B. D. 676 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Keoistration. 9. 
 
 Book debts of bankrupt - 21 Ch. D. 868 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 16. 
 
 Debt 
 
 See Cases under Assignment of Debt. 
 
 Debt — Building contract — Eelation back of 
 
 trustee's title - - 14 ft. B. D. 310 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — ^Assets. 10 
 
 — Equity of redemption — Consolidation of 
 mortgages - 19 Ch. D. 630 
 
 Bee Mortgage — Consolidation. 3. 
 
 ASSIGNMENT— conimuedt. 
 
 For benefit of creditors 22 Ch. D. 797 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 13. 
 Future crops— Surrender of premises — Ex- 
 pense of cultivation - 11 ft. B. D. 808 
 See Bill of Sale— Operation. 1. 
 
 Lease — Indemnity 29 Ch. D. 264 ; 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 366 1 10 ft. B. D. 48 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Mortgage — Eight of mortgagor to call for 
 
 assignment - - 20 Ch. D. 724 
 
 See Mortgage — Eedemption. 2. 
 
 Patent - 17 Ch. D. 423 ; 19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 1, 2. 
 
 Pendente lite— Amendment 16 Ch. D. 121 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — 
 Pabties. 6. 
 
 Property of company — Official liquidator 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 234 
 See Company — Liquidatob. 3. 
 
 Share of partnership 6 App. Cas. 64 
 
 See Scotch Law — Paetneeship. 
 Share of testator's estate — ^Eetainer by exe- 
 cutor - 16 Ch. D. 202 
 See ExECUTOB — Eetaineb. 3. 
 
 Voluntary — Furniture 17 Ch. D. 416 
 
 See VoLUNTABY Conveyance. 1. 
 
 Wife's reversion — Bankruptcy of husband 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 344 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 3. 
 
 ASSIGNMENT OF DEBT. 
 
 1. Balance at Bank — Notice of Assign- 
 ment after Assignor's Death — Judicature Act, 1873 
 (36 & 37 Vict. e. 66), s. 25, sub-s. 6] By a deed 
 of assignment all moneys then or thereafter to be 
 standing to the credit of the assignor at a bank 
 were assigned to a trustee, on trust for the assignor 
 for his life, and after his death on other trusts. 
 At ■ the date of the assignment the assignor's 
 balance at the bank was £48, at his death it was 
 £217. Notice of the assignment was not given 
 to the bank until after the assignor's death. In 
 an action by the trustee against the bank to re- 
 cover the balance of £217 : — Meld, that the bank, 
 being a stranger to the assignment, could not set 
 up the defence that it was voluntary and there- 
 fore invalid in equity; that the balance at the 
 time of the assignor's death was a debt or legal 
 chose in action within the meaning of sect. 25, 
 sub-s. 6 of the Judicature Act, 1873 ; that notice 
 after the death of the assignor was sufficient ; and 
 that the Plaintiff was entitled to recover. Walkee 
 V. Bradford Old Bank 12 ft. B. D. 511 
 
 2. Mortgage — Charge — Judicature Act, 
 
 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, sub-s. 6.] By a 
 mortgage deed in 1877 premises were assigned to 
 secure repayment of £1380 due from the mortgagor 
 to the mortgagee with interest, and the mortgagor 
 covenanted to pay debt and interest six months 
 thence. The mortgagee in 1878 deposited the 
 deed with his bankers as security for the balanoa 
 of his banking account, and by deed in 1879 as- 
 signed and transferred to them the sum of £1380 
 due on the mortgage deed, and all interest 
 
( 43 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 44 ) 
 
 ASSIGNMENT OF DEBT— amtiimecZ. 
 thenceforth to become due, and all securities for 
 principal and interest and all benefit and advant- 
 age thereof, and all his right, title, interest, and 
 property therein to secure repayment to tho 
 bankers of £939 then due to them on his banking 
 account, and any further sum not exceeding 
 £1200 which might thereafter become due to them 
 from him, with a proviso for reconveyance of the 
 premises if the assignor should on a day named 
 pay them back the £939 and any further sum not 
 exceeding £1200 which might be due, with in- 
 terest. The bank having given notice in writing 
 of this assignment to the mortgagor sued him for 
 £984 then due on the assignor's banking account : 
 — Held, by Pollock, B., that the assignment to the 
 bank by the deed of 1879 was not an " absolute 
 assignment (not purporting to be by way of charge 
 only) " within the Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 
 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, sub-s. 6, and that the action 
 could not be maintained. National Pkovincial 
 Bank of England v. Haele 6 Q,. B. D. 626 
 
 3. Mortgage — Judicature Act, 1873 
 
 (36 * 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, sub-s. 6.] A deed by 
 which debts were assigned to the Plaintiff upon 
 trust that he should receive them, and out of 
 them pay himself a sum due to him from the as- 
 signor, and pay the surplus to the assignor : — 
 Held, an " absolute assignment (not purporting to 
 be by way of charge only) " within the Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-s. 6, and that the Plaintiff 
 might sue in his own name for the debts. Buk- 
 LiNSON V. Hall - 12 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 4. Order for Payment — Equitable As- 
 signment — Specific Fund^ An order by a 
 creditor to his debtor to pay a sum of money to a 
 third person is not an equitable assignment unless 
 it specifies the fund or debt out of which the pay- 
 ment is to be made. Thus, where A., a builder, 
 being a debtor to the Plaintiff, P., but a creditor 
 of the Defendant, handed to P. the following order 
 signed by A. and addressed to the Defendant, who 
 received due notice thereof : " Please pay P. the 
 amount of his account, £42 14s. 6<f . for goods sup- 
 plied " : — Held, that, the order did not operate as 
 an equitable assignment. Peeoival v. Dunn 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 128 
 
 Auctioneer's charges - 30 Ch. D. 192 
 
 See Auction. 2. 
 
 ASSIGNS — Mortgage for money due from mort- 
 gagor or assigns - 22 Ch. D. 5 
 See Mortgage — Conteaot. 7. 
 
 ASSIZE COTTBTS— Income tax 10 Q. B. D. 267 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 61 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 1. 
 
 ASSOCIATION FOR GAIN. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Unregis- 
 tered Company. 1 — 5. 
 
 ASYLUM — Infectious diseases 6 App. Cas. 193 
 
 See Nuisance — Definition. 1. 
 
 ATTACHMENT OF DEBT- 
 
 nishee - 
 
 See Bankeuptoy- 
 action. 1. 
 
 - Bankruptcy — Gar- 
 17 Ch. D. 663 
 
 ■Peoteoted Teans- 
 
 ■ Bankruptcy — Eeceiving order 30 Ch. D. 
 See Bankruptcy — Beoeiver. 10. 
 
 480 
 
 ATTACHMENT OF liERT:— continued. 
 
 Charging order 
 
 See Oases under Practice — Supeemb 
 Court — Chaeging Oeders. 
 
 Charging order — Solicitor— Lien. 
 
 See Cases under Soucitoe — Lien. 1 — 7. 
 
 Divorce - 7 P. D. 15 
 
 See Practice — Divoece — Costs. 1.; g 
 
 Garnishee order 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supeeme 
 Court — Garnishee Orders. 
 Garnishee order absolute — " Final judg- 
 ment "—Bankruptcy 12 Q. B. D. 342 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 a. 
 
 Married woman — ^Restraint on anticipation 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 27 
 See Husband and Wife — Sepaeate 
 Estate. 9. 
 ATTACHMENT OF GOODS— To compel appear- 
 ance 17 Ch. D. 74 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 1. 
 
 Voluntary allowance to banjkrupt 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 70 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 14. 
 ATTACHMENT OF PERSON 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Attachment. 
 
 Appeal from refusal to commit 20 Ch. D. 493 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 1. 
 
 Divorce Court — Contempt — Restitution of 
 
 conjugal rights 9 P. D. 52 ; 10 P. D. 72 
 See Practice — Divorce — Restitution 
 OF Conjugal Rights. 1, 2. 
 
 Non-payment of money. 
 
 See Cases under Akeest — Debtors Act. 
 
 Notice of motion - 9 Q. B. D. 335 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet— Notice 
 OF Motion. 1. 
 
 Service of order on solicitor 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — ^Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 16. 
 
 Solicitor — Order for payment of money — 
 
 Contempt 11 Q. B. D. 545 ; 12 Q. B. D. 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 4, 5. [44 
 
 Solicitor — Unqualified practitioner 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 348. 
 See Solicitor — Unqualified. 2. 
 ATTAINING TWENTY-ONE— Remoteness 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 43& 
 See Will — Perpetuity 1. 
 
 ATTESTATION— Bill of sale— Affidavit. 
 
 See Cases under Bill of Sale — ^Forma- 
 lities. 1 — 7. 
 Bill of sale — Statutory provisions. 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Statutes. 
 WiU. 
 
 See Cases under Probate — Grant. 
 ATTESTATION CLAXTSE- How far part of codicil 
 
 See Probate— Grant. 10. [8 P. D. 165 
 
 ATTESTING WITNESS— Will— Execution-Evi- 
 dence [9 p. D. 14a 
 See Probate — Execution. 4. 
 
( 45 ) 
 
 •DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( A6 ) 
 
 ATTESTING WIT'S'ESa— continued. 
 
 Will — Man-iage with devisee 6 Q. B. D. 311 
 
 See Will — Attesting Witness. 
 
 ATTOENEY-GEKEBAL— Charity scheme 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 827 ; 28 Ch. D. 426 
 
 See Chaeity— Management. 2, 4. 
 
 Public injury— Illegal act - 21 Ch. D. 752 
 
 See Pkactice — Supreme Couet — In- 
 junction. 1. 
 
 ATTOENEY-GENEEAL OF DUCHY OF LANCAS- 
 TEE. 
 
 English Information, Eight to exhibit.'] 
 
 It is not competent to the Attorney-General of 
 the Duchy of Lancaster to exhibit an information 
 in the High Court of Justice, and the Court will 
 order an information exhibited by him to be taken 
 off the file on the application of the Defendant 
 even after answer put in by the Defendant. 
 .Attorney-General or Duchy of Lancaster v. 
 Duke of Devonshire - - 14 Q. B. D. 195 
 
 Eight to attend proceedings in Lunacy 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 613 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 4. 
 ATTORNMENT— Clause of— Mortgage 16 Ch. D. 
 [226, 274;21Ch. D. 442 
 See BANKEurrcY — Distress. 2, 3, 4. 
 
 Clause of— Mortgage - 18 Ch. D. 127 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 1. 
 
 Clause of — Mortgage — Bankruptcy 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 384 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Disclaimer. 9. 
 Clause of — Mortgage — Mortgagee in pos- 
 session - 22 Ch. D 478 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee I^f Posses- 
 sion. 1. 
 
 Mortgage — Tenancy — Judgment under 
 
 Order xiv. 13 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ 
 specially indorsed. 5. 
 
 AUCTION. 
 
 1, — i — Action against Auctioneer — Besoiision 
 of Contract — Return of Deposit — Staying Pro- 
 ceedings^ The Plaintiff, who had bought pro- 
 perty at an auction, and paid a deposit to the 
 auctioneers, brought an action against the vendors 
 and the auctioneers to have the contract rescinded, 
 the deposit repaid with interest, the coats of the 
 action paid, and for damages. The statement of 
 claim alleged that all, or nearly all, of the bid- 
 dings previous to that of the Plaintiff were ficti- 
 tious, and were either biddings by the vendors or 
 their agents, or were announced by the auctioneer 
 vpithout any bidding having in fact been made. 
 The auctioneers applied for liberty to pay the de- 
 posit into Court, and to have the action dismissed 
 against tliem on such payment being made. The 
 Master of the Rolls made an order that, the ven- 
 dors undertaking to pay the auctioneers their 
 costs of the auction without prejudice to how 
 they should ultimately be borne, and to pay any 
 interest and damages to which the Plaintiff might 
 be held entitled, and the auctioneers undertak- 
 ing, in the event of the vendors not carrying out 
 their undertaking, to pay to the Plaintiff interest 
 on the deposit up to the time of payment into 
 Court, and the costs of the action up to and in- 
 
 i-VCTiaS— continued. 
 
 eluding that application in the event of the Court 
 holding the Plaintiff entitled to sucli interest and 
 costs, the auctioneers should be at liberty to pay 
 the deposit into Court, and that all further pro- 
 ceedings against thein should be stayed : — Held, 
 on appeal, that the order must be discharged, the 
 auctioneers not having submitted to give the 
 Plaintiff all the relief which he could in any event 
 be entitled to against them ; for that if the allega- 
 tions in the statement of claim were established 
 the Plaintiff would be entitled to have judgment 
 against them for the deposit with interest, and to 
 )}ave an order for costs of the action against all tlie 
 Defendants. Heatley v. Newton 19 Ch. D. 326 
 
 2. Auctioneer's Lien — Assignment of Debt 
 
 — Marshalling — Two Funds, one subject to Lien, 
 the other »oi.] The Defendants were auctioneers 
 and had sold for a customer a brewery, and part of 
 the proceeds of the sale was in their hands subject 
 to their claim for charges incurred in connection 
 with the sale : they had also in their hands the 
 balance of the price of some furniture sold by 
 them for the same customer. The Plaintiff was 
 a creditor of the Defendants' customer, and he by 
 letter chai-ged the proceeds of the sale of the 
 brewery in favour of the Plaintiff. The Defen- 
 dants wrote to the Plaintiff acknowledging the 
 receipt of the letter of charge. The Defendants 
 afterwards paid their customer the balance of the 
 price of the furniture, and appropriated the part 
 of the proceeds of the sale of the brewery in their 
 hands to the payment of their charges: — lleld, 
 first, that the letter of charge and the Defendants' 
 acknowledgment thereof amounted to a good 
 equitable assignment in favour of the Plaintiff' : — 
 Secondly, that the Defendants, as auctioneers, 
 had a lien for their charges upon the part of tlie 
 proceeds of the sale of the brewery in their 
 hands: — Thirdly, that the Defendants were at 
 liberty to appropriate the part of the proceeds of 
 the sale of the brewery in their hands to the pay- 
 ment of their charges, and were not bound to 
 take payment of their charges out of the price of 
 the furniture in order to enable the Plaintiff to 
 obtain payment of his charge, and that the doc- 
 trine of marshalling did not apply. Webb v. 
 Smith - - - ■ 30 Ch. D. 192 
 
 Charges of auctioneer 29 Ch. D. 608, 790 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 24, 25. 
 
 Payment of deposit by cheque 25 Ch, D. 636 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 3. 
 
 Sale by auctioneer with notice of adverse 
 
 claim - 19 Ch. D. 86 
 
 See Bailment. 
 
 Statement in auction room - 25 Ch. D. 357 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 5. 
 Statute of Frauds — Identification of pro- 
 perty - - - 20 Ch. D. 90 
 &e Vendor and Purchaser — Agree- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Witness — Auctioneer — Expenses 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Evidence — Witness. 4. [831 
 
 AUDITED ACCOUNTS — Benefit society — Im- 
 peaching accounts 27 Ch, D. Ill 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ciiam- 
 
 EEES. 2. 
 
( 47 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( iS ) 
 
 AUDITED ACCOVSTS— continued. 
 
 Building society - - 28 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Building Sooibtt. 3. 
 
 ATTDIIOB — EigM to appoint accountant 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 68 
 
 See Company — Management. 1. 
 
 AUSTEAIIAN BANKETIPTCY - 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Paetition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 ATTSTEALIAN PEOBATE - 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Pabtition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 
 AT7TH0EITY— Agent - - 24 Ch. D. 367 
 
 See Pkinoipal and Agent — ^Agent's 
 Authority. 2. 
 
 -Solicitor 
 [24 Ch, D. 387 
 See Vendob and Pubchasek — Convey- 
 ance. 5. 
 ■ "Withdrawal of — Administrator — Settlement 
 of accounts - 16 Ch. D. 577 
 
 See Administkatok — Poweks. 2. 
 
 ■ To receive purchase-money- 
 
 AVEBAOE — General. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — General Ave- 
 
 EAGE. 
 
 General — Marine insurance — ^Warranty — 
 
 Adding distinct successive losses 
 
 togetlier - 14 Q. B. D. 555 
 
 See Insubanoe, Mabine — Policy. 8. 
 AVEBAGE BOND — Salvage — Cargo — Duty of 
 
 shipowner - - - 10 P. D. 114 
 
 See Ship— Salvage. 1. 
 AVEEMENT— Pleading 6 App. Cas. 156 
 
 See Defamation — Slander. 2. 
 AWAED. 
 
 See Cases under Akeiteation. 
 Compulsory purchase of land 27 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Laboubees' Dwellings Acts. 2. 
 Law of Mauritius - 8 App. Cas. 296 
 
 See Colonial Law — Maubitius. 1. 
 Salvage — Apportionment 7 P. D. 47 
 
 See Peaotice — Admibalty — Salvage. 
 3. 
 
( 49 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 50 ) 
 
 B. 
 
 BAIL — Action of salvage — Defendant's costs 
 
 [10 P. D, 158 
 See Pbactice — Admiealty — Salvage. 
 6. 
 
 Arrest of ship — Exorbitant amount — Costs 
 
 [9 P. D. 46 
 See Practice — Admikaltt.— Costs. 1. 
 
 Bottomry — Private agreement 10 P. D. 141 
 
 See Pbaotioe— Adhikalty — Lis Alibi 
 Pendens. 2. 
 
 Commission paid for — Damages— Salvage 
 
 action - - 9 P. D. 128 
 
 See Damages — Eemoteness. 2. 
 
 Money paid as indemnity— Illegality 
 
 [7 Q. B. S. S48 ; IS Q. B. D. 561 
 
 See Conteaot — VALiDr^Y, 1, 2. 
 
 BAIL-BOND — Commission on ship — Arrest 
 
 t [10 P. D. 158 
 
 See Pbactice — AriMifiALTY — Salvage. 
 
 - Form of - 
 
 See Pbactioe- 
 Ship. 1. 
 
 - - 10 P. D. 16 
 
 -ADMIB4LTT — AbKEST OF 
 
 BAILMENT. 
 
 . ■ Estoppel — Jus tertii — Sale by Bailor for 
 
 Bailee after notice of adverse Claim — Bight to 
 Proceeds of Sale — Trustee in Bankruptcy- — Auc- 
 
 tioneei Court of Bankruptcy — Jurisdiction — - 
 
 Bankruptcy^ Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), e. 72.] 
 Although in certain cases a bailee may set up 
 the jus tertii, yet if he accepts the bailment with 
 full knowledge of an adverse claim, he cannot 
 afterwards set up the existence of such claim as 
 against his bailor. — After the filing of a liquida- 
 tion petition the holder of a registered bill of sale 
 executed by the debtor instructed an auctioneer 
 to take possession of the chattels comprised in it. 
 The auctioneer took possession, and advertised 
 the goods for sale on behalf of the bill of sale 
 holder. The sale was stopped by injunction, and 
 the auctioneer remained in possession of the goods 
 •on behalf of the receiver under the petition. On 
 the appointment of a trustee the auctioneer held 
 possession for him, and ultimately by his direc- 
 tions advertised the goods for sale, the advertise- 
 ments and the catalogues of the goods being 
 headed " In liquidation. By order of the trustee." 
 The goods were sold, and the proceeds of sale 
 were received by the auctioneer. The bill of sale 
 holder gave him notice not to pay them to the 
 trustee, and he declined to pay them over. The 
 trustee applied to the Court of Bankruptcy for an 
 Kirder for payment to him, serving notice of his 
 motion on the auctioneer only. On the hearing 
 of this motion an order was made by consent, that 
 the money should be paid into Court, and the 
 hearing adjourned, notice being meanwhile given 
 to the bill of sale holder. Notice was served on 
 him, but not a four days' notice as required by 
 rule 50 of the Bankruptcy Bules, 1870, and be 
 did not appear on the adjourned hearing, He 
 
 BAILMENT— eoni/jroecJ. 
 
 had meanwhile commenced an action against the 
 auctioneer for the proceeds of sale : — 'Eeld (aflBrm- 
 ing the decision of Bacon, C.J.), that the Court 
 of Bankruptcy ought to exercise its jurisdiction 
 under sect. 72 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and 
 that the money must be paid out to the trustee, 
 on the ground that the auctioneer had, with full 
 knowledge of the adverse claim, deliberately 
 elected to sell the goods for the trustee, and was, 
 therefore estopped from denying his title. — Biddle 
 V. Bmid (6 B. & S. 225) distinguished. Ex parte 
 Davies. In re Sadlee - 19 Ch. D. 86 
 Infant— Larceny - - 15 Q. B. D. 323 
 
 See Criminal Law — ^Larceny. 2. 
 Innkeeper— Lien - 23 Ch. D, 330 
 
 See Inn — Innkeeper. 2. 
 BAKEHOUSES. 
 
 See Faotoey Acts — Statutes. 
 BAEEB. 
 
 1. Weighing Bread — Delivery iy Cart 
 
 without Beam and Scales — 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 37, 
 ss. 6, 7.] The appellant, a baker, having received 
 through his traveller an order from a customer 
 for a quartern loaf, the manager of the baker's 
 shop selected, weighed, and appropriated to the 
 customer a loaf which was then carried out in a 
 cart and delivered to the customer, on credit, by 
 a servant of the baker without being provided 
 with any beam and scales with proper weights : 
 — Held, that the appellant was rightly convicted 
 under 6 & 7 "Wm. 4, c. 37, s. 7, which enacts that 
 every baker beyond certain metropolitan limits 
 who shall " carry out bread for sale in and from 
 any cart " shall be provided with a correct beam 
 and scales with proper weights, in order that all 
 bread sold by him may be weighed in the pre- 
 sence of the purchaser; and in case any such 
 baker shall "carry out or deliver any bread" 
 without being provided with such beam and scales 
 with proper weights, he shall be liable to a 
 penalty. Eidgway v. Ward 14 Q. B. D. 110 
 
 2. Weighing Bread — Delivery hy Cart 
 
 without Beam and Scales — Delivery to oblige 
 Customer— G & 7 Wm. 4, c. 37, s; 7.] Sect. 7 of 
 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 37, provides that every baker or 
 seller of bread, and every servant employed by 
 such baker or seller of bread, who shall convey 
 or carry out bread for sale in and from any cart, 
 shall be provided with a beam and scales with 
 proper weights, in order that all bread sold by 
 any such baker or seller of bread, or his servant, 
 may be weighed in the presence of the purchaser 
 thereof; and in case any "such baker or seller of 
 bread " or his servant shall carry out or deliver 
 any bread without being provided with such 
 beam and scales, every such baker or seller of 
 bread shall be liable to a penalty. — A customer 
 bought three loaves in a baker's shop. The 
 baker weighed the loaves in her presence, and 
 subsequently, at her request and to oblige her, 
 his servant carried them out in a cart and delivered 
 
( 51 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 52 ) 
 
 BAKER — continued. 
 
 them at her house, ■without being provided with 
 any beam and scales : — Held, that the baker had 
 not carried out or delivered the loaves as " such 
 baker or seller of bread," and therefore could not 
 be convicted of an offence under sect. 7. Daniel 
 V. Whitfield - 15 ft. B. D, 408 
 BALANCE OBDEB — Executor of shareholder — 
 Retainer - - 29 Ch, D. 934 
 See ExEOUTOK — Eetaineb. 4. 
 Final judgment — ^Bankruptcy notice — Com- 
 pany - 13 ft. B. D. 476 
 See Bakkkuptct — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 7. 
 
 BALLOT— Militia Expenses of 
 
 See Abmt and Nayt — Statutes. 
 
 BANK OF ENGLAND— Duty to register stock in 
 name of Local Board 21 Ch. D. 176 
 See Local GovEioraiENT Local Au- 
 
 THOEITT. 9. 
 
 Injunction to restrain transfer of stock 
 
 [23 Oh. D. 649 
 See Pkactioe — Scpkeme Coukt — In- 
 junction. 2. 
 BANK NOTES— Issue— Penalties— 7 & 8 Tict. 
 c. 32, ss. II, 12 12 Q. B. D. 605 
 
 See Bankeb — Notes. 
 
 BANKER:— 
 
 I. Cheque 
 11. Lien 
 III. Notes - 
 
 Col. 
 
 - 51 
 
 - 52 
 
 - 53 
 
 I, BANKER- CHEQUE. 
 
 1. — — Presentation— iac/ieso/ Nearer.] The 
 rule of law as to bills of exchange and promissory 
 notes — that an indorsee taking them after maturity 
 takes them upon the credit of and can stand in no 
 better position than his indorser — does not apply 
 to cheques. — A cheque for £98, dated the 21st of 
 August, 1880, directing the National Bank to pay 
 that sum to A. M. or bearer, was handed by the 
 Defendant (the drawer) to one C. under circum- 
 stances which, if C. had been suing upon it, would 
 have been an answer to his claim. In fraud of the 
 Defendant, C. on the 29th paid it into his account 
 with the London and County Banking Company, 
 who, upon the presentment and dishonour of the 
 cheque on the same or the following day, sued 
 the drawer for the amount. There was no evi- 
 dence of the absence of bona fides on the part of 
 the Plaintiffs, or that they had notice of the alleged 
 fraud of C. : — Seld, by Field, J., on further con- 
 sideration, that the Plaintiffs were entitled to re- 
 cover. — Down V. Hailing (4 B. & C. 330), and 
 Bothscldld V. Corney (9 B. & 0. 388), considered 
 and disiiuguished. London and County Bank- 
 ing Company v. Groome - - 8 Q. B, D. 288 
 
 2. . — — Negotiability — Countermand of Drawer 
 — Onerous Indorsee — Findings of the Court of 
 Session on Appeal from Sheriff's Court — Judi- 
 cature Act of Scotland, 1825 (6 Geo. 4, o. 120) 
 s. iO— Bills of Exchange Act, 1882 (45 * 46 Vict, 
 c. 61, ss. 3, 73.] A banker's draft or cheque is 
 substantially a biU of exchange, attended with 
 many, though not all of the privileges of such ; 
 and both in England and Scotland it is as 
 much a negotiable instrument ; consequently, the 
 
 I. BANKER— CHEQUE— COTifimueti. 
 
 holder, to whom the property in it has been 
 transferred for value, either by delivery, or by in- 
 dorsation, is entitled to sue upon it if upon due 
 presentation it is not paid. — Per Lord Black- 
 bum : The definition given in sect. 3 of the 
 Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, embraces in it a 
 cheque : and that Act is declaratory of the prior 
 law. — On a Saturday A. granted a cheque on his 
 account with the Bank of S. for, inter alia, £250, 
 crossed blank in favour of B. On the same day 
 
 B. indorsed the cheque, and paid it into the Bank 
 of C, of which he was a customer. The Bank of 
 
 C. immediately on receipt of the cheque carried 
 the amount to B.'s credit, and thus reduced a 
 debit balance standing against him. On the 
 Monday following A. stopped payment of the 
 cheque at the Bank of S., consequently when the 
 Bank of C. presented it, payment was refused. 
 The Bank of C. sued A. in the Sheriffs Court for 
 the amount. On appeal, the Court of Session 
 found that the cheque was granted to B. to 
 reduce the balance at his debit with the Bank of 
 C. ; that A. agreed the cheque should be so used ; 
 and that in pursuance of that agreement the 
 cheque was indorsed to the Bank of C. and given 
 to them as cash,; and the contents being put to 
 B.'s credit the bailance at his debit was thereby 
 reduced : — Held, that in accordance with Mackay 
 V. Dieli (6 App, Cas. 251) : statute 1825, s. 40, 
 this House was limited to the findings of the 
 Court of Session and the record ; that the find- 
 ings in fact were distinct, intelligible, and within 
 the record ; that it followed from them as a matter 
 of law that the Bank of C. were onerous holders 
 of the cheque, and therefore the Bank of S. not 
 having paid the cheque on demand, the Court 
 below was right in holding that A. was liable. — 
 Currie v. Misa (1876, Law Rep. 10 Ex. 158 ; 1 
 App. Cas. 554) commented on. De la Cliaumette 
 V. Bank of England (1829, 9 B. & C. 208) ex- 
 plained. Dicta of the Judges in Macdonald v. 
 Vnion Bank (1864, 2 Court Sess. Cas. 3rd Series, 
 963) approved. M'Lean v. Clydesdale Bankino 
 Company 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 II. BANKER— LIEN. 
 
 Priority — Deposit of Title Deeds with 
 
 Bank — Loan hy equitable Mortgagee after Notice 
 of Contract qf Sale — Vendor and Purchaser — Lien 
 of Unpaid Vendor.'] The owner of land, after 
 depositing the title deeds with a bank as security 
 for all sums then or thereafter to become due on 
 the general balance of liis account with tlie bank, 
 contracted with the knowledge of the bank to sell 
 the land to one who had notice of the terms of the 
 deposit. The vendor afterwards paid into his own 
 account at the bank sums which in the whole ex- 
 ceeded the debt due to the bank on his balance at 
 the time of the contract of sale, so that on the 
 principle of Clayton's Case (1 Mer. 572) that debt 
 was discharged. The bank, without giving notice 
 to the purchaser, continued the account and made 
 fresh advances to the vendor, so that on the gene- 
 ral balance there was always a debt to the bank. 
 Tho purchaser, who never had notice of the fresh 
 advances, paid the purchase-money by instalments 
 to the vendor : — Held (affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal), that on the principle of 
 Hopkinson v. RoU (9 H. L. C. 514), the bank 
 
( 53 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 C 54 ) 
 
 II. BANKEB— LIEN— conM»««(J. 
 had no charge on the land as against the pur-' 
 ■ chaser for the fresh advances. — Held, also, that the 
 bank had no charge upon the purchase-money.^ 
 Per Lord Blackburn : A purchaser of land, with 
 notice that the title deeds have been deposited 
 with a bank as security for the general balance 
 on the vendor's present and future account, is not 
 bound to inquire ■whether the bank has after 
 notice of the purchase made fresh advances. The 
 burden lies on the bank advancing on the security 
 of the unpaid vendor's lien to give the purchaser 
 notice that it has so done or intends so to do. 
 London and County Banking Company v. Eat- 
 CLiETE - - - 6 App. Cas. 722 
 
 III. BANKER— NOTES. 
 
 Issue — Penalties — Banh Charter Act, 
 
 1844 (7 <fe 8 Victc. 32), ss. 11, 12.] By sect. 11 of the 
 Bank Charter Act, 1844, it shall not be lawful for 
 any banker to " is.sue " any note payable on de- 
 mand, except that any banker carrying on business 
 as such on the 6th of May, 1844, and then lawfully 
 issuing his own notes, may continue to issue them 
 under specified conditions ; and, by sect. 12, if any 
 banter, entitled after the passing of the Act to 
 issue bank notes, " shall cease to carry on the busi- 
 ness of a banker," it shall not be lawful for him to 
 issue such notes at any time thereafter. In 1880 
 a fii-m of bankers, entitled to issue their own notes 
 under the exception in sect. 11, sold their business 
 to a limited liability company upon the following 
 terms : — The company took over the whole of the 
 business as a going concern, and the goodwill, 
 except and reserving to the firm the right to issue 
 their own notes, but including in the sale and 
 purchase such benefit of the issue as was thereby 
 agreed to be given to the company ; the firm were 
 to issue their notes in the same form as there- 
 tofore, but through the company's officers only, 
 and might nominate those officers and make the 
 return required by statute through them; the 
 company were to allow and pay the firm £2 per 
 cent, interest on the amount of all notes from 
 time to time in circulation: for the purposes of 
 the issue only the firm might continue to use 
 their accustomed name, but they were not to 
 assign their rights, nor to take new partners for 
 the purpose of continuing the issue without the 
 consent of the company, nor to carry on the busi- 
 ness of banking within a defined district without 
 the like consent, except so far as related to the 
 issue of their notes under the agreement : if the 
 right of issue should at any time be taken away 
 from the firm they were to pay any compensation 
 they might receive to the company, unless the 
 company should get an equal right of issue, in 
 which case the firm might retain the compensa- 
 tion : if the company acquired a right to issue 
 their own notes, the firm's right of issue was to 
 cease. When the business was taken over by the 
 company, a large number of the firm's notes being 
 in circijation, the amount of them was deducted 
 from the purchase-money, and the notes, when 
 presented for payment, were cashed by the com- 
 pany, and reissued by them. Notes in hand when 
 the business was taken over were treated as cash 
 lent by the firm to the company. Daily returns 
 were made by the company shewing the number 
 of the firm's notes in circulation, and twice a year 
 
 III, BANKEE— NOTES— conWrnaefJ- 
 the company paid £2 per cent, interest to the firm 
 on the amount so ascertained. On an information 
 against the firm and the company for penalties in 
 respect of their having issued the notes contrary 
 to the provisions of the Act -.—Held, that the com- 
 pany had " issued " the notes within the meaning 
 of sect. 11 of the Bank Charter Act, 1844 ; that the 
 firm, in issuing the notes, were not protected by 
 the exception in sect. 11, because after the making 
 of the agreement they had " ceased to carry on 
 the business of bankers" within; the meaning of 
 sect. 12 ; and therefore that all the Defendants 
 were liable. Attokney Gbnebal v. Bibkbeck 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 605 
 
 BANKER— Account— Over-drawing — Borrowing 
 powers 29 Ch. D. 902 ; 9 ft. B. D. 397 ; 
 [9 App. Cas. 857 
 See Building Society. 6, 7, 8. 
 
 Advances to executor — Separate account 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 151 
 
 See ExECUTOB — Powees. 1. 
 Balance at— Sequestration 22 Ch. D. 233 
 
 See Peactioe— SuPEEME Coubt — Se- 
 
 QUESTEATION. 1. 
 
 Bank note— Alteration 9 ft. B. D. 565 ; 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 84 
 See Bill ov Exchange— Altebation. 
 2,3. 
 Bill of exchange— Specific appropriation- 
 Accommodation acceptances 
 
 [13 ft. B, D. 740 
 See Bill or Exchange — Seoueities foe. 
 1. 
 
 Guarantee — Proof in bankruptcy 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Peooe. 11. [98 
 
 Lien— Army agent - 17 Ch. D. 520 
 
 See Set-oef. 8. 
 
 Pledge of goods — Memorandum in bank's 
 
 lldger - 14 a. B.D. 386 
 
 See Bill op Sale- Opebation. 6. 
 BANKING COMPANY- Sale of shares— Omission 
 to specify numbers — Broker's right to 
 indemnity 14 ft. B. D. 480 ; 16 ft. B. D, 388 
 See Peincipal and Agent — Peinoipal's 
 Liability. 4, 5. 
 
 Sale of bank shares — Custom of Stock 
 
 Exchange — Negligence of broker 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 1. [9 ft. B. D. 646 
 
 BANKRUPTCY :— Col. 
 
 I. Statutes and Gazette - - 55 
 
 U. Act of Bankeuptoy - - 109 
 (a.) Assignment of whole Peo- 
 
 PBBTY. 
 
 (6.) Bankeuptoy Notice. 
 
 (c.) Debtoe's Summons. 
 
 (d.) Depaeting fbom Dwellxng 
 
 house. 
 (e.) Notice of Suspension of 
 
 Payment. 
 (/.) Eemaining Abeoad. 
 III. Teadeb - - 118 
 
 rv. Bankruptcy Petition - - 119 
 
( 55 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 56 ) 
 
 3&:SKRVBTCY— continued. Col. 
 
 V. Seouked Ckeditoe - - 122 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 (6.) Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 yi. Eecbiveb - - 126 
 
 (a.) Bankkuptcy Act, 1869. 
 (6.) Keoeiving Okdek — Bank- 
 ; BUPTOY Act, 1883. 
 
 (c.) Official Eeoeiter. 
 YII. Examination - 130 
 
 Till. Scheme of Abkangejient 130 
 
 IX. Adjudication - 131 
 
 X. Trustee - - 133 
 
 XI. Assets - - - 137 
 
 (o.) Execution. 
 (6.) Eelation op Trustee's 
 
 Title. 
 (e.) Salary and Income. 
 (d.) General. 
 XII. Discharge 142 
 
 XIII. Undischarged Bankrupt 144 
 
 XIV. Annulment 145 
 XV. Proof - 148 
 
 XVI. Mutual Dealings 154 
 
 XVII. Preferential Debts 156 
 
 XVIII. Distress - 157 
 
 XIX. Ordee and Disposition - 159 
 
 XX. Void Settlement - - 165 
 
 XXI. Fraudulent Preference 166 
 
 XXII. Protected Teansaction 168 
 
 XXIII. Disclaimer - 171 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1860. 
 (6.) Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 XXIV. Jurisdiction - 179 
 XXV. Staying Peooeedings - - 180 
 
 (a.) Bankbuptoy Act, 1869. 
 (&.) Bankbuptoy Act, 1883. 
 XXVI. Tbansper 182 
 
 XXVII. Deceased Debtor - - 183 
 
 XXVIII. Appeal - 184 
 
 (a.) Banerupioy Act, 1869. 
 (ft.) Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 , XXIX. Costs - - 187 
 
 (a.) Bankeuptoy Act, 1869. 
 (6.) Bankbuptoy Act, 1883. 
 XXX. Evidence- - - 189 
 
 XXXI. Liquidation (Act of 1869) - 190 
 XXXII. Composition (Act of 1869) 195 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE. 
 Bankbuptoy Act, 1883. 
 The Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 46 & 47 Vict. c. 52, 
 repeals (s. 169) — 
 
 13 Edw. 1, c. 18, in part, 
 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 62, suh-s. (6) of s. 5, and 
 
 ss. 21 & 22. 
 52 * 33 Vict. c. 71, 
 
 32 * 33 Vict. a. 89, s. 19, 
 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 76, 
 
 34 * 35 Vict. c. 50, ss. 6, 7, 8. 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77, ss. 9 & 32. 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— 
 
 contimied. 
 and amends and consolidates the Law of Bank- 
 ruptcy. 
 
 Sect. 3. Commencement of Act, 31st of December, 
 1883. 
 
 By sect. 168, amongst other things — " available 
 act of bankruptcy " means any act of bankruptcy 
 available for a bankruptcy petition at the date of 
 the presentation of the petition on which the re- 
 ceiving order is made. 
 
 "Debt provable in bankruptcy" or "provahle 
 debt" includes any debt or liability by the Act 
 made 'provable in bankruptcy. 
 
 " Goods " includes chatleh personal. 
 
 "Local bank" means any 'bank in or in the 
 neighbourhood of the bankrupt^ district in which 
 the proceedings are taken. 
 
 "Ordinary resolution" means a resolution de- 
 cided by a majority in value of the creditors 
 •present, personally or by proxy, at a meeting of 
 creditors and voting on the resolution. 
 
 " Person " includes a body of persons corporate 
 or unincorporate. 
 
 "Property" includes money, goods, things in 
 action, land and every description of property, 
 whether real or personal, and whether situate in 
 England or elsewhere ; also, obligations, easements, 
 and every description of estate, interest, and profit, 
 present or future, vested or contingent, arising out 
 of or incident to property as above defined. 
 
 " Besolution" means ordinary resolution. 
 
 " Secured creditor " means a person holding a 
 mortgage, charge, or lien on the property of the 
 debtor, or any part thereof, as a security for a debt 
 due to him. 
 
 " Special resolution " means a resolution decided 
 by a majority in number and three-fourths in value 
 of the creditors present, pe>'sona.lly or by proxy, at 
 a meeting of creditors and voting on the resolu- 
 tion. 
 
 The schedules to the Act are to be construed and 
 to take effect as part of the Act. 
 
 Part I. Proceedings from Act of Bankruptcy to 
 
 Part II. Disqualification of Bankrupt. 
 Part III. Administration of Property. 
 Part IV. Official Beceivers. 
 Part V. Trustees in Bankruptcy. 
 Part VI. Constitution, Procedure, and Powers 
 of Court. 
 
 Part VII. Small Bankruptcies. 
 Part VIII. Supplemental Provisions. 
 
 Paet I. Peooeedings from Act of Bankruptcy 
 to Discharge. 
 
 Acts of Bankruptcy.] Sect. 4. — (1.) A debtor 
 commits an act of bankruptcy in each of the 
 following cases ; — 
 
 (rt.) If in England or elsewhere he makes a con- 
 veyance or assignment of his property to a 
 trustee or trustees for the benefit of his 
 creditors generally ; 
 
 (b.) If in England or elsewhere he makes a 
 fraudulent conveyance, gift, delivery, or 
 transfer of his property, or of any part 
 thereof: 
 
( 57 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 58 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (o.) If in England or elsewhere he makes any 
 conveyance or transfer of his property or 
 any part thereof, or creates any charge 
 thereon which would under this or any 
 other Act he void as a fraudulent preference 
 if he were adjudged bankrupt. 
 (d.) If ivith intent to defeat or delay his 
 creditors he does any of the following 
 things, namely, departs out of England, or 
 ieing out of England remains out of 
 England, or departs from his dwelling- 
 house, or otherwise absents himself, or 
 begins to keep house : 
 (e.) If execution issued against him has been 
 levied by seizure and sale of his goods 
 under process in an action in any Court, 
 or in any civil proceeding in the High 
 Court : 
 (f.) If he files in the Court a declaration of his 
 inability to pay his debts or presents a 
 bankruptcy petition against himself : 
 (g.) If a creditor has obtained a final judgment 
 L __ a-gainsthim for any amount, and execution 
 thereon not having been stayed, 1ms served 
 on him in England, or by leave of the 
 Court, elsewhere, a bankruptcy notice under 
 this Act, requiring him to pay the judg- 
 ment debt in accordance with the terms of 
 the judgment, or to secure or compound 
 for it to the satisfaction of the creditor 
 or the Court, and he does not, within seven 
 days after service of the notice, in case 
 the service is effected in England, and 
 in case the service is effected elsewhere, 
 then within the time limited in that behalf 
 by the order giving leave to effect the 
 service, either comply with the requirements 
 of the notice, or satisfy the Court that he 
 has a counter-claim, set-off or cross demand 
 which equals or exceeds the amount of the 
 judgment debt, and which he could not set 
 up in the action in which the judgment was 
 obtained : 
 (h.) If the debtor gives notice to any of his credi- 
 tors that he has suspended, or that he is 
 about to suspend, payment of his debts. 
 (2.) A bankruptcy notice under this Act shall be 
 in the prescribed form, and shall state the conse- 
 quences of non-compliance therewith, and shall be 
 served in the prescribed manner. 
 
 Bankruptcy Petition and Eeceiving Order.] 
 Sect. 5. Subject to the conditions hereinafter speci- 
 fied, if a debtor commits an act of bankruptcy the 
 Court may, on a bankruptcy petition being pre- 
 sented either by a creditor or by the debtor, make 
 an order, in this Act called a receiving order, for 
 the protection of the estate. 
 
 Sect. 6. — (1.) A creditor shall not be entitled to 
 present a bankruptcy petition against a debtor 
 
 (a.) The debt owing by the debtor to the petition- 
 ing creditor, or, if two or more creditors 
 join in the petition, the aggregate amovmt 
 of debts owing to the several petitioning 
 creditors, amounts to fifty pounds, and 
 
 (b.) The debt is a liquidated mum, payable either 
 immediately or at some certain future time, 
 and 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (c.) The act of bankruptcy on which the petition- 
 is grounded has occurred within three- 
 months before the presentation of the peti- 
 tion, and 
 
 (d.) The debtor is domiciled in England, or 
 within a year before the date of the presen- 
 tation of the petition, has ordinarily re- 
 sided or had a dwelling-house, or place of 
 business in England. 
 
 (2.) If the petitioning creditor is u secured' 
 creditor, he must, in 7ms petition, either state that 
 he is willing to give up his security for the benefit 
 of the creditors in the event of the debtor being 
 adjudged bankrupt, or give an estimate of the value 
 of his security. In the latter case, he may be- 
 admitted as a petitioning creditor to the extent of 
 the balance of the debt due to him, after deducting 
 the value so estimated in the same manner as if he- 
 were an unsecured creditor. 
 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) A creditor's petition shall be verified- 
 by affidavit of the creditor, or of some person on his 
 behalf having knowledge of the facts, and served in- 
 the prescribed manner. 
 
 (2.) At the hearing the Court shall require proof 
 of the debt of the petitioning creditor, of the service- 
 of the petition, and of the act of bankruptcy, or, if 
 more than one act of bankruptcy is alleged in the- 
 petition, of some of the alleged acts of bank- 
 ruptcy, and if satisfied with the proof, may make 
 a receiving order in pursuance of the petition. 
 
 (3.) If the Court is not satisfied with the proof 
 of the petitioning creditor's debt, or of the act of 
 bankruptcy, or of the service of the petition, or is- 
 satisfied by the debtor that he is able to pay his 
 debts, or that for other sufficient cause no order 
 ought to be made, the Court may dismiss the peti- 
 tion. 
 
 (4.) When the act of bankruptcy relied on is 
 non-compliance with a bankruptcy notice to pay, 
 secure, or compound for a judgment debt, the Court 
 may, if it thinks fit, stay or dismiss the petition on-- 
 the ground that an appeal is pending from the- 
 judgment. 
 
 (5.) Where the debtor appears on the petition, 
 and denies that he is indebted to the petitioner, or- 
 that he is indebted to such an amount as would 
 justify the petitioner in presenting a petition 
 against him, the Court, on such security {if anyy 
 being given as the Court may require for payment 
 to the petitioner of any debt which may be established 
 against him in due course of law, and of the costs 
 of establishing the debt, may instead of dismissing- 
 the petition stay all proceedings o» the petition for 
 such time as may be required for trial of the ques- 
 tion relating to the debt. 
 
 (6.) Where proceedings are stayed, the Court 
 may, if by reason of the delay caused by the stay 
 of proceedings or for any other cause it thinks just, 
 make a receiving order on the petition of some other- 
 creditor, and shall thereupon dismiss, on such terms 
 as it thinks just, the petition in which proceedings 
 have been stayed as aforesaid. 
 
 (7.) A creditor's petition shall not, after pre- 
 sentment, he withdrawn without the leave of the- 
 Court. 
 
 Sect. 8. — (1.) A debtor's petition shall allege that 
 the debtor is unable to pay his debts, and the pre- 
 sentation thereof shall be deemed an act of banJc- 
 
( 59 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 60 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 ruptcy without the previous filing hy the debtor of 
 any declaration of inability to pay his debts, and, 
 the Court shall thereupon make a receiving order. 
 
 (2.) A debtor's petition shall not, after present- 
 ment, be withdravm without the leave of the Court. 
 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) Onthe making of a receiving order 
 an official receiver shall be thereby constituted 
 receiver of the property of the debtor, and there- 
 after, except as directed by this Act, no creditor to 
 whom the debtor is indebted in respect of any debt 
 provable in bankruptcy shall have any remedy 
 against the property or person of the debtor in 
 respect of the debt, or shall commence any action or 
 other legal proceedings unless with the leave of the 
 Court or on such terms as the Court may impose. 
 
 (2.) But this section shall not affect the power of 
 any secured creditor to realize or otherwise deal 
 with his security in the same manner as he would 
 have been entitled to realize or deal with it if this 
 section had not been passed. 
 
 Sect. 10. — (1.) The Court may if it is shewn to be 
 necessary for the protection of the estate, at any 
 time after the presentation of a bankruptcy petition, 
 and before a receiving order is made, appoint the 
 official receiver to be interim receiver of the property 
 of the debtor, or of any part thereof, and direct 
 him to take immediate possession thereof or of any 
 part thereof. 
 
 (2.) The Court may at any time after the presen- 
 tation of a bankruptcy petition stay any action, 
 execution, or other legal process against the property 
 or person of the debtor, and any Court in which 
 proceedings are pending against a debtor may, 
 on proof that a bankruptcy petition has been pre- 
 sented by or against the debtor, either stay the pro- 
 ceedings or allow them to continue on such terms as 
 it may think just. 
 
 Sect. 11. Where the Court makes an order staying 
 any action or proceeding, or staying proceedings 
 generally, the order may be served by sending a 
 copy thereof, under the seal of the Court, by prepaid 
 post letter, to the address for service of the plaintiff 
 or other party prosecuting such proceeding. 
 
 Sect. 12. — {1.) The official receiver of a debtor's 
 estate may, on the application of any creditor or 
 creditors, and if satisfied that the nature of the 
 debtors estate or business or the interests of the 
 creditor's generally require the appointment of a 
 special manager of the estate or business other titan 
 the official receiver, appoint a manager thereof 
 accordingly to act until a trustee is appointed, and 
 with such powers (including any of the powers of 
 a receiver') as may be entrusted to him by the official 
 receiver. 
 
 (2.) The special manager shall give security and 
 account in such manner as the Board of Trade may 
 direct. 
 
 (3.) The special manager shall receive such re- 
 muneration as the creditors may, by resolution at 
 an ordinary meeting, determine, or in default of 
 any such resolution, as may be prescribed. 
 
 Sect. 13. Notice of every receiving order, stating 
 the name, address, and description of the debtor, 
 the date of the order, the Court by which the order 
 is made, and the date of the petition, shall be 
 gazetted and advertised in a local paper in the 
 prescribed mariner. 
 
 Sect. 14:. If in any case where a receiving order 
 
 I. BANKETTPTCT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 has been made on a bankruptcy petition it shall 
 appear to the Court by which such order was made, 
 upon an application by the official receiver, or any 
 creditor or other person interested, that a majority 
 of the creditors in number and value are resident 
 in Scotland or in Ireland, and that from the 
 situation of the property of the debtor, or other 
 causes, his estate and effects ought to be distributed 
 among the creditors under the Bankrupt or Insol- 
 vent Laws of Scotland or Ireland, the said Court, 
 after such inquiry as to it shall seem fit, may rescind 
 the receiving order and stay all proceedings on, or 
 dismiss the petition upon such terms, if any, as the 
 Court may think fit. 
 
 First Meeting of Creditors.] Sect. 15.— (1.) 
 As soon as may he after the making of a receiving 
 order against a debtor a general meeting of his 
 creditors (in this Act referred to as the first meet- 
 ing of creditors) shall be held for the purpose of con- 
 sidering whether a proposal for a composition or 
 scheme of arrangement shall be entertained, or 
 whether it is expedient that the debtor shall be 
 adjudged bankrupt, and generally as to the made 
 of dealing with the debtor's property. 
 
 (2.) With respect to the summoning of and pro- 
 ceedings at the first and other meetings of creditors, 
 the rules in the first Schednle shall be observed. 
 
 Statement of Affairs.] Sect. 16. — (1.) Where a 
 receiving order is made against a debtor, he shall 
 make out and submit to the official receiver a state- 
 ment of and in relation to his afairs in the pre- 
 scribed form, verified by affidavit, and shewing the 
 particulars of the debtor's assets, debts, and liabili- 
 ties, the names, residences, and occupations of his 
 creditors, the securities held by them respectively, 
 the dates when the securities were respectively given, 
 and such further or other information as may be 
 prescribed or as the official receiver may require. 
 
 (2.) Tlie statement shall be so submitted loithin the 
 following times, namely : 
 
 (i.) If the order is made ore the petition of the 
 debtor, within three days from the date of 
 the order. 
 
 (ii.) If the order is made on the petition of a 
 creditor within seven days from Hie date of 
 the order. 
 
 But tlie Court may in either case, for special 
 reasons, extend the time. 
 
 (3.) If the debtor fails without reasonable excuse 
 to comply with tlie requirements of this section, the 
 Court may, on the application of the official re- 
 ceiver, or of any creditor, adjudge him bankrupt. 
 
 (i.) Any person stating himself in icriting to be 
 a creditor of the bankrupt may, personally or hy 
 agent, inspect this statement at all reasonable times, 
 and take any copy thereof or extract therefrom, but 
 any person untruthfully so stating himself to he a 
 creditor shall be guilty of a contempt of Court, and 
 shall be punishable accordingly on the application 
 of tlie trustee or official receiver. 
 
 Public Examination of Debtor.] Sect. 17. — (1.) 
 Where a Court makes a receiving order it shall 
 hold a public sitting on a day to be appointed by 
 the Court, for the examination of the debtor, and 
 tlie debtor shall attend thereat, and shall he ex- 
 amined as to his conduct, dealings, and property. 
 
 (2.) Tlie examination shall he held as soon as 
 conveniently may be after the expiration of tlie 
 
( 61 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 62 ) 
 
 I. BANKETIPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 time for the submission of the debtor's statement of 
 affairs. 
 
 (3.) The Court may adjourn, the examination 
 from tim^e to time. 
 
 (i.) Any creditor who has tendered u, proof, or 
 his representative authorized in writing, may ques- 
 tion the debtor concerning his affairs and the causes 
 of his failure. 
 
 (5.) Tlie official receiver shall taJcepart in the 
 examination of the debtor; and for the purpose 
 thereof, if specially authorized Tnj the Board of 
 Trade, may employ a solicitor with or without 
 counsel. 
 
 (6.) If a trustee is appointed before the conclu- 
 sion of the examination he may take part therein. 
 
 (7.) The Court may put such questions to the 
 debtor as it may think expedient. 
 
 (8.) The debtor shall be examined upon oath, and 
 it shall be his duty to answer all such questions as 
 the Court may put or allow to be put to him. Such 
 notes of the examination as the Court thinlcs proper 
 sliall be taken down in writing, and shall be read 
 over to and signed by the debtor, and may thereafter 
 he used in evidence against him ; they shall also he 
 open to the inspection of any creditor at all reason- 
 able times. 
 
 (9.) Wh.en the Court is of opinion that the affairs 
 of the debtor have been sufficiently investigated, it 
 shall, by order, declare that his examination is con- 
 cluded, bat sujih order sTiall not be made until after 
 the day appointed for the first meeting of creditors. 
 
 Compositiou or Scheme of Arrangement.] Sect. 
 18. — (1 ) The creditors may at the first meeting or 
 any adjournment thereof, by special resolution, re- 
 solve to entertain a proposal for a composition in 
 satisfaction of the debts due to tliem from the 
 debtor, or a proposal for a scheme of arrangement 
 of the debtor's affairs. 
 
 (2.) The composition or sclieme shall not be 
 binding on the creditors unless it is confirmed by a 
 resolution passed (by a majority in number repre- 
 senting three-fourths in value of all the creditors 
 who have proved") at a subsequent meeting of the 
 creditors, and is approved by the Court. 
 
 Any creditor who has proved his debt may assent 
 to or dissent from such composition or scheme by a 
 letter addressed to the official receiver in the pre- 
 scribed form, and attested hy a witness, so as to he 
 received by such official receiver not later than the 
 day preceding such subsequent meeting, and su^ch 
 creditor shall be taken as heing present and voting 
 at such meeting. 
 
 (3.) The subsequent meeting shall he summoned 
 by the official receiver by not less than seven days' 
 notice, and shall not be held until after the public 
 examination of the debtor is concluded. The notice 
 shall state generally the terms of the proposal, and 
 shall he accompanied hy a report of the official 
 receiver thereon. 
 
 (4.) The debtor or the official receiver may, after 
 the composition or scheme is accepted by the credi- 
 tors, apply to the Court to approve it, and notice of 
 the time appointed for hearing the application sliall 
 he given to each creditor who has proved. 
 
 (5.) The Court shall, before approving a com- 
 position, or scheme, hear a report of the official 
 receiver as to the terms of the compositionor scheme 
 and as to the conduct of the debtor, and any objec- 
 
 I. BANKETTPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 tions which may he made hy or on hehalf of any 
 creditor. 
 
 (6.) If the Court is of opinion that the terms of 
 the composition or scheme are not reasonaMe, or are 
 not calculated to benefit the general body of credi- 
 tors, or in any case in which the Court is required 
 under this Act where the debtor is adjudged bank- 
 rupt to refuse Ms discharge, the Court shall, or if 
 any such fads are proved as would under this Act 
 justify the Court in refusing, qualifying, or sus- 
 pending the debtor's discharge, the Court may, in 
 its discretion, refuse to approve the composition or 
 scheme. 
 
 (7.) If the Court approve the composition or 
 scheme, the approval may be testified hy the seal of 
 the Court being attached to the instrument con- 
 taining the terms of the composition or scheme, or 
 hy the terms being embodied in an order of the 
 Court. 
 
 (8.) A composition or scheme accepted and ap- 
 proved in pursuance of this section shall be binding 
 on all the creditors so far as relates to any debts 
 due to them from the debtor and provable in bank- 
 ruptcy. 
 
 (9.) A certificate of the official receiver that a 
 composition or scheme has been duly accepted and 
 approved shall, in the absence of fraud, be conclu- 
 sive as to its validity. 
 
 (10.) The provisions of a composition or scheme 
 under this section Tnay he enforced by the Court on 
 application hy any person interested, and any dis- 
 obedience of an order of the Court made on the 
 application shall he deemed a contempt of Court. 
 
 (11.) If default is made in payment of any in- 
 stalment due in pursuance of the composition or 
 scheme, or if it appears to the Court, on satisfactory 
 evidence, that the composition or scheme cannot in 
 consequence of legal difficulties, or for any sufficient 
 cause, proceed without injustice or undue delay to 
 the creditors or to the debtor, or that the approval, 
 of the Court was obtained by fraud, the Court may, 
 if it thinks fit, on application by any creditor, 
 adjudge the debtor bankrupt, and annul the com- 
 position or scheme, hut without prejudice to the 
 validity of any sale, disposition, or payment duly 
 made, or thing duly done under or in pursuance of 
 the composition or scheme. Wliere a debtor is ad- 
 judged bankrupt under this subsection any debt 
 provable in other respects, which has been contracted 
 before the date of the adjudication, shall he provable 
 in the bankruptcy. 
 
 (12.) If, under or in pursuance of o composition 
 or scheme, a trustee is appointed to administer the 
 debtor's property or manage his business. Fart V. 
 of this Act shall apply to the trustee as if he were 
 a trustee in a bamruptcy, and as if the terms 
 "bankruptcy," "bankrupt," and "order of ad- 
 judication," included respectively a composition or 
 scheme of arrangement, a compounding or arrang- 
 ing debtor, and order approving the composition or 
 scheme. 
 
 (13.) Part III. of this Act shall, so far as the 
 nature of the case and the terms of the composition 
 or scheme admit, apply thereto, the same interpre- 
 tation being given- to the words "truitee," "bank- 
 ruptcy," " bankrupt" and " order of adjudication," 
 as in the last preceding sub-section. 
 
 (14.) No composition or scheme shall be approved 
 
( 03 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 64 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 hy the Court which does not provide for the payment 
 in priority to other debts of all debts directed to be 
 so paid in the distribution of the property of a 
 bankrupt. 
 
 (15.) The acceptance hy a creditor of a composi- 
 tion or scheme shall not release any person who 
 under this Jet would not he released hy an order of 
 discharge if the debtor had been ad/judged bankrupt. 
 
 (19.) Notwithstanding the acceptance and ap- 
 proval of a composition or scheme, such composition 
 or scheme shall not he hinding on any creditor so 
 far as regards a debt or liability from which, under 
 the provisions of this Act, the debtor would not he 
 discharged hy an order of discharge in bankruptcy, 
 unless the creditor assents to the composition or 
 scheme. 
 
 Adjudication of Bankruptcy.] Sect. 20. — (1.) 
 Where a receiving order is made against a debtor, 
 then, if the creditors at tlie first meeting or any 
 adjournment thereof by ordinary resolution resolve 
 that the debtor he. adjudged bankrupt, or pass no 
 resolution, or if the creditors do not meet, or if a 
 composition or scheme is not accepted or approved 
 in pursuance of this Act within fourteen days after 
 the conclusion of the examination of the debtor or 
 such further time as the Court may allow, the Court 
 shall adjudge the debtor bankrupt ; and thereupon 
 the property of the hankrupt shall become divisible 
 among his creditors and shall vest in a trustee. 
 
 (2.) Notice of every order adjudging a debtor 
 hankrupt, stating the name, address, and descrip- 
 tion of the bankrupt, the date of the adjudication, 
 and the Court hy which the adjudication is made, 
 shall be gazetted aiid advertised in a local paper in 
 the prescribed manner, and the date of the order 
 shall for the purposes of this Act he the date of the 
 adjudication. 
 
 Appointment of Trustees.] Sect. 21. — (1.) 
 Wliere u, debtor is adjudged bankrupt, or the 
 creditors have resolved that he he adjudged bank- 
 rupt, the creditors may, by ordinary resolution, 
 appoint some fit person, whether a creditor or not, 
 to fill the office of trustee of the property of the 
 hankrupt ; or they may resolve to leave his appoint- 
 ment to the committee of inspection hereinafter 
 mentioned. 
 
 (2.) Tlie person so appointed shall give security 
 in manner prescribed to the satisfaction of the 
 Board of Trade, and the Board, if satisfied with 
 the security, shall certify that his appointment has 
 been duly made, unless they object to the appoint- 
 ment on the ground that it has not been made in 
 good faith hy a majority in value of the creditors 
 voting, or that the person appointed is not fit to act 
 as trustee, or that his connection with or relation to 
 the hankrupt or his estate or any particular creditor 
 makes it difficult for him to act with impartiality 
 in the interests of the creditors generally. 
 
 (3.) Provided that wliere the Board make any 
 such objection they shall, if so requested hy a 
 majority in value of the creditors, notify the objec- 
 tion to the High Court, and thereupon the High 
 Court may decide on its validity. 
 
 (4.) The appointment of a trustee shaU take 
 effect as from the date of the certificate. 
 
 (6.) The official receiver shall not, save as hy this 
 Act provided, be the trustee of the hankrupt's pro- 
 perty. 
 
 I. BANKHTJPTCT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (6.) If a trustee is not appointed hy tlie creditors 
 within four weeks from the date of tlie adjudication, 
 or, in the event of negotiations for a composition or 
 scheme heing pending at tlie expiration of those 
 four weeks, then within seven days from the close of 
 those negotiations hy the refusal of the creditors ta 
 accept, or of the Court to approve, the composition 
 or scheme, the official receiver shall report the matter 
 to the Board of Trade, and thereupon the Board 
 of Trade shall appoint some fit person to be trustee 
 of the hankrupt's property and shall certify ther 
 appointment. 
 
 (7.) Provided that the creditors or the committee 
 of inspection (if so authorized by resolution of the 
 creditors') may, at any subsequent time, if they 
 think fit, appoint a trustee, and on the appointment 
 being made and certified the person appointed shall 
 become trustee in the place of the person appointed 
 hy the Board of Trade 
 
 (8.) Wlien a debtor is adjudged hankrupt after 
 the first meeting of creditors has been held, and a, 
 trustee has not been appointed prior to the adjudi- 
 cation, the official receiver shall forthwith summon 
 a meeting of creditors for the purpose of appointing' 
 a trustee. 
 
 Conunittee of Inspection.] Sect. 22. — (1.) The 
 creditors qualified to vote, may at their first or any 
 subsequent meeting, by resolution, appoint from 
 among the creditors qualified to vote, or the Iwlders 
 of general proxies or general powers of attorney 
 from such creditors, a committee of inspection for 
 the purpose of superintending the administration 
 of the hankrupt's property hy the trustee. The com- 
 mittee of inspection shall consist of not more than 
 five nor less than three persons. 
 
 (2.) The committee of inspection shall meet at 
 such times as they shall from time to time appoint, 
 and failing such appointment, at least once cr 
 month ; and tlie trustee or any member of tlie com- 
 mittee may also call a meeting of the committee as^ 
 and wlien he thinks necessary. 
 
 (3.) The committee may act hy a majority of 
 their members present at a meeting, hut shall not 
 act unless a majority of the committee are present 
 at the meeting. 
 
 (4.) Any member of the committee may resign h is- 
 office by notice in writing signed by him, and de- 
 livered to the trustee. 
 
 (5.) If a member of the committee becomes bank- 
 rupt, or compounds or arranges with his credi- 
 tors, or is absent from five consecutive meetings of 
 the committee, his office shall thereupon become 
 vacant. 
 
 (6.) Any member of the committee may be re- 
 moved hy an ordinary resolution at any meeting of 
 creditors of which sew7i days' notice has been given, 
 stating the object of the meeting. 
 
 (7.) On a vacancy occurring in the office of a- 
 member of the committee, the trustees sliall forthwith 
 summon a meeting of creditors for the purpose of 
 filling the vacancy, and the meeting may, hy a reso- 
 lution, appoint another creditor or other person 
 eligible as above to fill the vacancy. 
 
 (8.) The continuing members of the committee, 
 provided there he not less than two such continuing 
 members, may act notwitlistanding any vacancy in 
 their body ; and wliere the number of members of 
 the committee of inspection is for the time being less^ 
 
( 65 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 66 ) 
 
 •I. BANKEUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 than five, the creditors may increase that number so 
 that it do not exceed five. 
 
 (9.) If there 6e no committee of inspection, any 
 ■act or thing or any direction or permission hy this 
 Act authorized or required to be done or given by 
 ilie committee may be done or given by the Board 
 ■of Trade on the application of the trustee. 
 
 Composition or Scheme after Adjudication.] 
 Sect. 23. — (1.) Where a debtor is adjudged bank- 
 rupt the creditors may, if they think fit, at any 
 time after the adjudication, by special resolution, 
 resolve to entertain a proposal for a composition in 
 eatisfaction of the debts due to them under the 
 bankruptcy, or for a scheme of arrangement of the 
 bankrupts affairs; and thereupon the same pro- 
 ceedings sliall be taken and the same consequences 
 ■shall ensue as in the case of a composition or scheme 
 ■accepted before adjudication. 
 
 (2.) If the Court approve the composition or 
 scheme it may make an order annulling the bank- 
 ruptcy and vesting the property of the bankrupt in 
 iiiiii or in such other person as the Court may 
 appoint, on such terms, and subject to such condi- 
 •tions, if any, as the Court may declare. 
 
 (3.) If default is made in payment of any in- 
 •stalment due in pursuance of the composition or 
 scheme, or if it appears to the Court that the com- 
 position or scheme cannot proceed without injustice 
 or undue delay, or that the approval of the Court 
 was obtained by fraud, the Court may, if it thinks 
 fit, on application by any person interested, adjudge 
 the debtor bankrupt, and annul the composition or 
 scheme, but without prejudice to the validity of any 
 sale, disposition, or payment duly made, or thing 
 ■duly done, under or in pursuance of the composition 
 or scheme. Where a debtor is adjudged bankrupt 
 under this sub-section, all debts, provable in other 
 respects,whichhave been contrasted before the date of 
 suchadjudication,shallbeprovableinthebankruptcy. 
 
 Control over Person and Property of Debtor.] 
 ■Sect. 24. — (1.) Every debtor against whom a re- 
 ceiving order is made shall, unless prevented by 
 sickness or other sufficient cause, attend the first 
 meeting of his creditors, and shall submit to such 
 examination and give such information as the 
 ■meeting may require. 
 
 (2.) He shall give such inventory of his property, 
 such list of his creditors and debtors, and of the 
 ■debts due to and from them respectively, submit to 
 such examination in respect of his property or his 
 creditors, attend such other meetings of his creditors, 
 wait at such times on the official receiver, special 
 manager, or trustee, execute such poivers of attor- 
 ney, conveyances, deeds, and instruments, and 
 generally do all such acts and things in relation to 
 Ms property and the distribution of the proceeds 
 amongst his creditors, as may be reasonably re- 
 quired by the official receiver, special manager, or 
 trustee, or as may be prescribed by general rules, or 
 he directed by the Court by any special order or 
 orders made in reference to any particular case, 
 •or made on the occasion of any special application 
 by the official receiver, special manager, trustee, or 
 any creditor or person interested. 
 
 (3.) He shall, if adjudged bankrupt, aid, to the 
 ntmmt of his power, in the realization of his pro- 
 perty and the distribution of the proceeds among 
 his creditors. 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (4.) If a debtor wilfully fails to perform the 
 duties imposed on him hy this section, or to deliver 
 possession of any part of his property, which is 
 divisible amongst his creditors under this Act, and 
 which is for the time being in his possession or 
 under his control, to the official receiver or to the 
 trustee, or to any person authorized by the Court to 
 take possession of it, he shall, in addition to any 
 other punishment to which he may be subject, be 
 guilty of a contempt of Court, and may be punished 
 accordingly. 
 
 Arrest of Debtor.] Sect. 25.— (1.) The Court 
 may, by warrant addressed to any constable or 
 prescribed officer of the Court, cause a debtm- to be 
 arrested, and any books, papers, m,oney, and goods 
 in his possession to be seized, and him and them to be 
 safely kept as prescribed until such time as the Court 
 may order under the following circumstances : 
 (a.) If after a bankruptcy notice has been issued 
 under this Act, or after presentation of a 
 bankruptcy petition by or against him, it 
 appears to the Court that there is probable 
 reason for believing that he is about to 
 abscond vnth a view of avoiding payment 
 of the debt in respect of which the bank- 
 ruptcy notice was issued, or of avoiding 
 service of u, bankruptcy petition, or of 
 avoiding appearance to any such petition, 
 or of avoiding examination in respect of 
 his affairs, or of otherwise avoiding, de- 
 laying, or embarrassing proceedings in 
 bankruptcy against him. 
 (b.) If after presentation of a bankruptcy 
 petition by or against him, it appears to 
 the Court that there is probable cause for 
 believing that he is about to remove his 
 goods with a view of preventing or delay- 
 ing possession being taken of them by the 
 official receiver or trustee, or that there is 
 probable ground for believing that he has 
 concealed oi' is about to conceal or destroy 
 any of his goods, or any books, documents, 
 or writings, which may be of use to his 
 creditors in the course of his bankruptcy. 
 (c.) If, after service of a bankruptcy petition on 
 him, or after a receiving order is made 
 against him, he removes any goods in his 
 possession above the value of five pounds, 
 without the leave of the official receiver or 
 
 (d) If, without good cause shewn, he fails to 
 attend any examination ordered by the 
 Court. 
 
 Provided that no arrest upon a bankruptcy 
 notice shall be valid and protected unless the 
 debtor before or at the time of his arrest shall be 
 served with such bankruptcy notice. 
 
 (2.) No payment or composition made or security 
 given after arrest made under this section shall be 
 exempt from the provisions of this Act relating to 
 fraudulent preferences. 
 
 Be-direction of Debtor's Letters.] Sect. 26. 
 Where a receiving ordfr is made against a debtor, 
 the Court, on the application of the oficial re- 
 ceiver or trustee, may from time to time order that 
 for such time, not exceeding three months, as the 
 Court thinks fit, post letters addressed to the debtor 
 at any place, or places, mentioned in the order for 
 
 D 
 
( 67 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 68 ) 
 
 I. BANKETJPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 re-direction shall lie re-directed, sent or delivered 
 hij the Postmaster-General, or the officers acting 
 under him, to the official receiver or the trustee, or 
 otherwise as the Court directs, and the same shall 
 he done accordingly. 
 
 Discovery of Debtor's Property.] Sect. 27. — 
 (1.) The Court may, on the application of the 
 official receiver or trustee, at any time after a 
 receiving order has been made against a debtor, 
 summon before it the debtor or his wife, or any 
 person hnoum or suspected to have in Ms possession 
 any of the estate or effects belonging to the debtor, 
 or supposed to be indebted to the debtor, or any 
 person whom the Court may deem capable of giving 
 information respecting the debtor, his dealings, or 
 property, and the Court may require any such 
 person to produce any documents in his custody or 
 power relating to the debtor, his dealings, or 
 property. 
 
 (2.) If any person so summoned, after having 
 been tendered a reasmiable sum, refuses to come 
 before the Court at the time appointed, or refuses 
 to produce any such document, having no lawful 
 impediment made hnown in the Court at the time 
 of its sitting and allowed by it, the Court may, by 
 warrant, cause him to be apprehended and brought 
 up for examination. 
 
 (3.) The Court may examine on oath, either by 
 word of mouth or by written interrogatories, any 
 person so brought before it concerning the debtor, 
 his dealings, or property. 
 
 (4.) If any person on examination before the 
 Court admits that he is indebted to the debtor, the 
 Court may, on the application of tlie official 
 receiver or trustee, order him to pay to the receiver 
 or trustee, at such time and in much manner as to 
 the Court seems expedient, the amount admitted, 
 <yr any part thereof, either in full discharge of the 
 whole amount in question or not, as the Court 
 tliinlfsfit, without costs of the examination. 
 
 (5.) If any person on examination before the 
 Court admits that he has in his possession any 
 property belonging to the debtor, the Court may, on 
 the application of the official receiver or trustee, 
 order him to deliver to the official receiver or 
 trustee such properly, or any part thereof, at such 
 time, and in such manner, and on such terms as to 
 the Court may seem just. 
 
 (6.) The Court may, if it things fit, order that 
 any person who if in England would be liable to be 
 brought before it under this section shall be 
 examined in Scotland or Ireland or in any other 
 place out of England. 
 
 Discharge of Bankrupt.] Sect. 28. — (1.) A 
 bankrupt may, at any time after being adjudged 
 bankrupt, apply to the Court for an order of dis- 
 charge, and the Court shall appoint a day for 
 hearing the application, but the application shall 
 not be heard until the public examination of the 
 bankrupt is concluded. The application shall be 
 heard in open Court. 
 
 (2.) On the hearing of the application the Court 
 shall take into consideration u, report of the 
 official receiver as to the bankrupt's conduct and 
 affairs, and may either grant or refuse an absolute 
 order of discharge, or suspend the operation of the 
 order for a specified time, or grant an order of 
 discharge subject to any conditions loith respect to 
 
 I. BANKETTPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 any earnings or income which may afterwards 
 become due to the bankrupt, or with respect to his 
 after-acquired property : Provided that the Court 
 shall refuse the discharge in all cases where the 
 bankrupt has committed any misdemeanor under 
 this Act, or Part II. of the Debtors Act, 1869, or 
 any amendment thereof, and shall, on proof of anjf 
 of the f cults hereinafter mentioned, either refuse tli& 
 order, or suspend the operation of the order for a 
 specified time, or grant an order of discharge,, 
 subject to such conditions as aforesaid. 
 
 (3.) The facts hereinbefore referred to are — 
 (a.) Tliat the bankrupt has omitted to keep such 
 books of account as are usual and proper 
 •in the business carried on by him and as 
 sufficiently disclose his business transac- 
 tions and financial position within the 
 three years immediately preceding his 
 bankruptcy : 
 (b.) That the bankrupt has continued to trade 
 
 after knowing himself to be insolvent : 
 (c.) That tlie bankrupt has contracted any debt 
 provable in the bankruptcy, without having 
 at the time of contracting it any reasonable 
 or probable ground of expectation (proof 
 whereof shall lie on him) of being cSjIe to 
 pay it : 
 (d.) That the bankrupt has brought on his bank- 
 ruptcy by rash and hazardous speculaiions 
 or unjustifiable extravagance in living ; 
 (e.) That the bankrupt has put any of his 
 creditors to unnecessary expertse by u, 
 frivolous or vexatious defence to any action 
 properly brought against him : 
 (f.) That the bankrupt has within three montlis 
 pi'eceding the date of the receiving order, 
 when unable to pay his debts as they 
 became due, given an undue preference to 
 any of his creditors : 
 (g.) That the bankrupt has on any previous 
 occasion been adjudged bankrupt, or made 
 a statutory composition or arrangement 
 with his creditors : 
 (b.) That tlie bankrupt has been guilty of any 
 
 fraud or fraudulent breach of trust, 
 (i.) For the purposes of this section the report of 
 the official receiver shall be prima facte evidence 
 of the statements therein contained. 
 
 (5.) Notice of the appointment by the Court of 
 the day for liearing the application for discharge 
 shall be published in the prescribed manner and 
 sent fourteen days at least before the day so ap- 
 pointed to each creditor who has proved, and the 
 Courtmay liear the official receiver and the trustee, 
 and may also hear any creditor. At the hearing 
 the Court may put such questions to the debtor and 
 receive such evidence as it may think fit. 
 
 (6.) The Court may, as one of the conditions 
 referred to in this section, require the bankrupt to 
 consent to judgment being entered against him by 
 the official receiver or truafee for any balance of the 
 debts provable under the bankruptcy ichich is not 
 satisfied at the date of his discharge; but in such 
 case execution shall not be issued on the judgment 
 ivitliout leave of the Court, which leave may be 
 given on proof that the bankrupt has since his dis- 
 charge acquired property or income available for 
 payment of his debts. 
 
C 69 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 70 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (7.) A lUscharged ianlerupt shall, notinthstand- 
 iiig his discharge, give such assistance as the 
 trustee may require in the realization and distri- 
 bution of such of Ms property as is vested in the 
 trustee, and if he fails to do so he shall be guilty of 
 a contempt of Court ; and the Court may also, if it 
 thinks fit, revoke his discharge, but without pre- 
 judice to the validity of any sale, disposition, or 
 payment duly made or thing duly done subsequent 
 to the discharge, but before its revocation. 
 
 Sect. 29, In either of the following cases ; that 
 is to say, 
 
 (1.) In the case of a settlement made before and 
 
 in consideration of marriage where the 
 
 settlor is not at the time of making the 
 
 settlement able to pay all his debts without 
 
 the aid of the property comprised in the 
 
 settlement; or 
 
 (2.) In ike case of any covenant or contract 
 
 made in consideration of marriage for the 
 
 future settlement on or for the settlor's wife 
 
 ■or children of any money or property 
 
 wherein he had not at the date of his 
 
 marriage any estate or interest (not being 
 
 money or property of or in right of hie 
 
 wife) ; 
 
 If the settlor is adjudged bankrupt or compounds 
 
 or arranges with his creditors, and it appears to 
 
 the Court that such settlement, covenant, or contract 
 
 toas made in order to defeat or delay creditors, or 
 
 was unjustifiable having regard to the state of the 
 
 settlor's affairs at the time when it was made, the 
 
 Court may refuse or suspend an order of discharge, 
 
 or grant an order subject to conditions, or refuse to 
 
 approve a composition or arrangement, as the case 
 
 may be, in like manner as in cases where the debtor 
 
 has been guilty of fraud. 
 
 Sect. 30. — (1.) An order of discharge shall not 
 release the bankrupt from any debt on a recogniz- 
 ance nor any debt with which the bankrupt may be 
 clmrgeaMe at the suit of the Crown or of any 
 person for any offence against a statute relating to 
 any branch of the public revenue, or at the suit of 
 the sheriff or other public officer on a hail bond 
 entered into for the appearance of any person pro- 
 secuted for any such offence, and he shall not be 
 discharged from such excepted debts unless the 
 Treasury certify in writing their consent to his 
 being discharged therefrom. An order of discharge 
 shaU not release the bankrupt from any debt or 
 liability incurred by means of any fraud or 
 fraudulent breach of trust to which he was a party, 
 nor from any debt or liability whereof he has ob- 
 tained forbearance by any fraud to which he was a 
 party, 
 
 (2.) An order of discharge shall release the bank- 
 rupt from all other debts provable in bankruptcy. 
 
 (3.) An order of discharge shall be conclusive 
 evidence of the bankruptcy, and of the validity of 
 the proceedings therein, arid in any proceedings that 
 may be instituted against a bankrupt who has 
 obtained an order of discharge in respect of any 
 debt from which lie is released by the order, the 
 bankrupt may plead that the cause of action 
 occurred before his discharge, and may give this 
 Act and the special niatter in evidence. 
 
 (4.) An order of discharge shall not release any 
 person who at the date of the receiving order was a 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 partner or co-trustee with the bankrupt or was 
 jointly bound or had made any joint, contract with 
 him or any person icho has been surety or in the 
 nature of a surety for him. 
 
 Undischarged Bankrupt obtaining Oredit.] 
 Sect. 31. Where an undischarged bankrupt who 
 has been adjudged bankrupt under this Act obtains, 
 credit to the extent of twenty pounds or upwards 
 from any person witliout informing such person 
 that he is an undischarged bankrupt he shall be 
 guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be dealt with 
 and punished as if lie had been guilty of a misde- 
 meanor under the Debtors Act, 1869, and the pro- 
 visions of that Act shall apply to proceedings under 
 this section. 
 
 Paet II. Disqualifications of Bankrupt. 
 
 Sect 32. — (1.) Where a debtor is adjudged bank- 
 rupt, he shall, subject to the provisions of this Aet^ 
 be disqualified for — 
 
 (a.) Sitting or voting in the House of Lords, or on. 
 any committee thereof, or being elected as 
 a peer for Scotland or Ireland to sit and:'', 
 vote in the House of Lords. 
 (b.) Being elected to, or sitting or voting in, the ■ 
 House of ComTnons, or on any committee ■ 
 thereof; 
 (c.) Being appointed or acting as a justice of 
 
 the peace ; 
 (d.) Being elected to or holding or exercising the 
 
 office of mayor, alderman, or councillor ; 
 (e.) Being elected to or holding or exercising the 
 office of guardian of the poor, overseer of 
 the poor, member of a sanitary authority,, 
 or member of a school board, highway 
 board, burial board, or select vestry. 
 (2.) Thedisqualifications to which a bankrupt is 
 subject under this section shall be removed and 
 cease if and when, — 
 
 (a.) the adjudication of bankruptcy against him 
 
 is annulled ; or 
 (b.) he obtains from the Court his discharge 
 with a certificate to the effect that his ■ 
 bankruptcy was caused by misfortune with- 
 out any misconduct on his part. 
 Tlie Court may grant or ivithhold such certificate - 
 as it thinks fit, but any refusal of such certificate ■ 
 shall be subject to appeal. 
 
 (3.) The disquxilifications imposed by this sec- 
 tion shall extend to all parts of the United King- 
 dom. 
 
 Sect. 33. — (1.) If a member of the House of ' 
 Commons is adjudged bankrupt, and the disquali- 
 fications arising therefrom under this Act are not 
 removed within six months from the date of the: 
 order, the Court shall, immediately after the expira- 
 tion of that time, certify the same to the Speaker of 
 the House of Commons, and thereupon the seat of 
 the member shall be vacant. 
 
 (2.) Where the seat of u member so becomes 
 vacant, the Spealter, during a recess of the House, 
 whether by prorogation or by adjournment, shall 
 forthwith, after receiving the certificate, cause 
 notice thereof to be published in the London 
 Gazette ; and. after the expiration of six days after 
 the publication sliall (unless the House has met 
 before ihat day, or will meet on the day of tlie 
 issue) issue his warrant to the Clerk of the Crown 
 
 D 2 
 
( 71 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF GASES. 
 
 ( 72 ) 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 to malce out a new writ for electing another member 
 in the room of the member whose seat has so become 
 vacant, 
 
 (3.) Tlie powers of the Act of the twentyfourth 
 year of the reign of King George the Third, chapter 
 twenty-six, " to repeal so much of two Acts made in 
 the tenth and fifteenth years of the reign of His 
 present Majesty as authorizes the Spealcer of the 
 House of Commons to issue his warrant to the Clerk 
 of the Crown for malting out writs for the election 
 of members to serve in Parliament in the manner 
 therein mentioned ; and for substituting other pro- 
 visions for the lihe purposes," so far as those powers 
 enable the Spealter to nominate and appoint other 
 persons, being members of the House of Commons, 
 to issue warrants for the making out of new writs 
 during the vacancy of the office of Spealcer, or 
 during his absence out of the realm, shall extend to 
 enable him to malce the like nominationand appoint- 
 ment for issuing warrants, under the like circum- 
 stances and conditions, for the election of a member 
 in the room of any member whose seat becomes 
 vacant under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 34. If a person is adjudged bankrupt 
 whilst holding the office of mayor, alderman, coun- 
 cillor, guardian, overseer, or member of a sanitary 
 authority, school board, highway board, burial 
 board, or select vestry, his office shall thereupon 
 become vacant. 
 
 Annulment by Adjudication.] Sect. 35. — (1.) 
 Where in the opinion of the Court a debtor ought 
 not to have been adjudged bankrupt, or where it is 
 proved to the satisfaction of the Court that the 
 ■ debts of the bankrupt are paid in full, the Court 
 may, on the application of any person interested, 
 by order, annul the adjudication. 
 
 (2.) Where an adjudication is annulled under 
 .Hhis section, all sides and dispositions of property 
 and payments duly made, and all acts theretofore 
 done, by the official receiver, trustee, or other person 
 acting under their authority, or by the Court, shall 
 be valid, but the property of the debtor who was 
 adjudged bankrupt shall vest in such person as the 
 Court may appoint, or in default of any such ap- 
 pointment revert to the debtor for all his estate or 
 interest therein on such terms and subject to such 
 conditions, if any, as the Court may declare by 
 order. 
 
 (3.) Notice of the order annulling an adjudica- 
 tion shall be forthwith gazetted and published in a 
 . local paper. 
 
 Sect. 36. For the purposes of this Part of this 
 ...Act, any debt disputed by a debtor shall be con- 
 ■sidered as paid in full, if the debtor enters into a 
 bond, in such sum and with such sureties as the 
 Court approves, to pay the amount to be recovered 
 in any proceeding for the recovery of or concerning 
 the debt, with costs, and any debt due to a creditor 
 who cannot be found or cannot be identified 
 shall be considered as paid in full if paid into 
 Court. 
 
 Paet III. Administkation of Pbopeett. 
 
 Proof of Debts.] Sect. 37. — (1.) Demands in the 
 nature of unliquidated damages arising otherwise 
 than by reason of a contract, promise, or breach of 
 trust, shall not be provable in bankruptcy. 
 
 (2.) A person having notice of any act of hank~ 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 ruptcy available against the debtor shall not prove 
 under the order for any debt or liability contracted 
 by the debtor subsequently to the date of his so 
 having notice. 
 
 (3.) Save as aforesaid, all debts and liabilities, 
 present or future, certain or contingent, to which 
 the debtor is subject at the date of the receiving 
 order, or to which he may become subject before his 
 discharge by reason of any obligation incurred 
 before the date of the receiving order, shall be 
 deemed to be debts provable in bankruptcy. 
 
 (4.) An estimate shall be made by the trustee of 
 the value of any debt or liability provable as afore- 
 said, which by reason of its being subject to any 
 contingency or contingencies, or for any other reason, 
 does not bear a certain value. 
 
 (5.) Any person aggrieved by any estimate made 
 by the trustees as aforesaid may appeal to the 
 Court. 
 
 (6.) If, in the opinion of the Court, the value of 
 the debt or liability is incapable of being fairly 
 estimated, the Court may make an order- to that 
 effect, and thereupon the debt or liability shall, for 
 the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be a debt not 
 provable in bankruptcy. 
 
 (7.) If, in tlie opinion of the Court, the value of 
 the debt or liability is capable of being fairly esti- 
 mated, the Court may direct the value to be assessed 
 before the Court itself without the intervention of a 
 jury, and may give all necessary directions for this 
 purpose, and the amount of the value when assessed 
 shall be deemed t^> be a debt provable in bankruptcy. 
 
 (8.) " Liability " sliall for the purposes of this 
 Act iticlude any compensation for work or labour 
 done, any obligation or possibility of an obligation 
 to pay money or money^s worth on the breach of 
 any express or implied covenant, contract, agree- 
 ment, or undertaking, whether the breach does or 
 does not occur, or is or is not likely to occur or 
 capable of occurring before the discharge of the 
 debtor, and generally it shall include any express 
 or implied engagement, agreement or undertaking 
 to pay, or capable of resulting in the payment of 
 money, or money's worth, whether the paijment is, 
 as respects amount, fixed and unliquidated; as 
 respects time, present or future, certain or depen- 
 dent on any one contingency or on two or more 
 contingencies ; as to mode of valuation capable of 
 being ascertained by fixed rules, or as matter of 
 opinion. 
 
 Mutual Credit and Set-off.] Sect 3S. Where 
 there have been mutual credits, mutual debts, or 
 other mutual dealings between a debtor against 
 whom a receiving order shall be made under this 
 Act, and any other person proving or claiming to 
 prove a debt under su^h receiving order, an account 
 shall be taken of what is due from the one party to 
 the other in respect of such mutual dealings, and- 
 the sum due from the one party shall be set off 
 against any sum due from the other party, and the 
 balance of the account, and no more, shall be 
 claimed or paid on either side respectively ; but a 
 person shall not be entitled wilder this section to 
 claim the benefit of any set-off against the property 
 of a debtor in any case ivhere he had, at the time 
 of gin'ng credit to the debtor, notice of an act of 
 bankruptcy committed by the debtor and available 
 against him. 
 
( 73 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 74 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Sect. 39. With respect to the mode of proving 
 debts, the right of proof by secured and other 
 creditors, the admission and rejection of proofs, 
 and the other matters referred to in the Second 
 Schedule, the rules in that schedule shall be ob- 
 served. 
 
 Priority of Debts.] Sect. 40.— (1.) In the dis- 
 tribution of the property of a bankrupt there shall 
 be paid in priority to all other debts — 
 
 (a.) All parochial or other local rates due from 
 the bankrupt at the date of the receiving 
 order, and having become due and pay- 
 able mthin 12 months next before such 
 time, and all assessed taxes, land tax, p7'0- 
 perty or income tax, assessed on him up to 
 the 5th day of April next before the date 
 of the receiving order, and not exceeding 
 in the whole one yearns assessment : 
 (b.) All wages or salary of any cleric or servant 
 in respect of services rendered to the bank- 
 rupt during four months before the date of 
 the receiving order, not exceeding £50 ; 
 and 
 (c.) All wages of any labourer or workman, not 
 exceeding £50, whether payable for time or 
 piece-work, in respect of services rendered 
 to the bankrupt during four months before 
 the date of the receiving order. 
 (2.) The foregoing debts shall rank equally 
 between themselves, and shall be paid in full, unless 
 the property of the bankrupt is insufficient to meet 
 them, in which case they shall abate in equal pro- 
 portions between themselves. 
 
 (3.) In the case of partners, the joint estate shall 
 be applicable in the first instance in payment of 
 their joint debts, and the separate estate of each 
 partner shall be applicable in the first instance in 
 payment of his separate debts. If there is a surplus 
 of the separate estates it shall he dealt with as part 
 of the joint estate. If there is a surplus of the 
 joint estate it shall be dealt with as part of the 
 respective separate estates in proportion to the 
 right and interest of each partner in tlie joint 
 estate. 
 
 (4.) Subject to the provisions of this Act all 
 debts proved in the bankruptcy shall be paid pari 
 passu. 
 
 (5.) If there is any surplus after payment of the 
 foregoing debts, it shall be applied in payment of 
 interest from the date of the receiving order at the 
 rate of £4 per centum per annum on all debts 
 proved in the bankruptcy. 
 
 (6.) Nothing in this section shall alter the effect 
 of sect. 5 of the Act 28 & 29 Vict. c. 86, "to 
 amend the Law of Partnership," or shall pre- 
 judice the provisions of the Friendly Societies Act, 
 1875. 
 
 Preferential Claims.] Sect. 41. — (1.) Where at 
 the time of the presentation of the bankruptcy 
 petition any person is apprenticed or is an articled 
 clerk to the bankrupt, the adjudication of bcmk- 
 ruptcy shall, if either the bankrupt or apprentice 
 or clerk gives notice in writing to the trustee to that 
 effect, be a complete discharge of the indenture of 
 apprenticeship or articles of agreement; and if 
 any money has been paid by or on behalf of the 
 apprentice or clerk to the bankrupt as a fee, the 
 trustee may, on the application of the apprentice 
 
 X. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 or clerk, or of some person on his behalf, pay such 
 sum as the trustee, subject to an appeal to the 
 Court, thinks reasonable, out of the bankrupt's pro- 
 perty to or for the use of the apprentice or clerk, 
 regard being had to the amount paid by him or on 
 his behalf, and to the time during which he served 
 with the bankrupt wider the indenture or articles 
 before the commencement of the bankruptcy, and to 
 the other circumstances of the case. 
 
 (2.) Where it appears expedient to a trustee, he 
 may, on the application of any apprentice or arti- 
 cled clerk to the bankrupt, or any person acting on 
 belialf of such apprentice or articled clerk, instead 
 of acting under the preceding provisions of this 
 section transfer the indenture of apprenticeship or 
 articles of agreement to some other person. 
 
 Sect. 42. — (1.) The landlord or other person to 
 whom any rent is due from the bankrupt may at 
 any time, either before or after the commencemsnt 
 of the bankruptcy, distrain upon the goods or effects 
 of the bankrupt for the rent due to him from the 
 bankrupt, with this limitation, that if such distress 
 for rent be levied after the commencement of the 
 bankruptcy it shall be available only for one year's 
 rent accrued due prior to the date of the order of 
 adjudication, but the landlord or other person to 
 whom the rent may be due from the bankrupt may 
 prove under the bankruptcy for the surplus due for 
 which the distress may not have been available. 
 
 (2.) For the purposes of this section the term 
 " order of adjudication " shall he deemed to include 
 an order for the administration of the estate of a 
 debtor whose debts do not exceed £50, or of a de- 
 ceased person who dies insolvent. 
 
 Property available for Payment of Debts.] 
 Sect. 43. The bankruptcy of a debtor, whether the 
 same takes place on the debtor's own petition or 
 upon that of a creditor or creditors, shall be deemed 
 to have relation back to, and to commence at, the 
 time of the act of bankruptcy being committed on 
 which a receiving order is made against him, or, if 
 the bankrupt is proved to have committed more acts 
 of bankruptcy than one, to have relation back to, 
 and to commence at, the time of the first of the acts 
 of bankruptcy proved to have been committed by the 
 bankrupt within three months next preceding the 
 date of the presentation of thebankruptcy petition : 
 but no bankruptcy petition, receiving order, or ad- 
 judication shall be rendered invalid by reason of 
 any act of bankruptcy anterior to the debt of the 
 petitioning creditor. 
 
 Sect. 44. The property of the bankrupt divisible 
 amongst his creditors, and in this Act referred to 
 as the property of the bankrupt, shall not comprise 
 the following particulars : — 
 
 (1.) Property held by the bankrupt on trust for 
 
 any other person : 
 
 (2.) The tools (if any) of his trade and the 
 
 necessary wearing apparel and bedding of 
 
 himself, his wife and children, to a valve, 
 
 inclusive of tools and apparel and bedding, 
 
 not exceeding £20 in the whole : 
 
 But it shall comprise the following particulars : — • 
 
 (i.) 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 before his discharge ; and, 
 
 (ii.) The capacity to exercise and to take pro- 
 
( 75 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 76 ) 
 
 I. BANKETTPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 ceedings far exercising all such powers in 
 or over or in respect of property as might 
 have Jjeen exercised hy the hanlcrupt for his 
 own benefit at the commencement of his 
 lanlcruptcy or before his discharge, except 
 the right of nomination to a vacant eccle- 
 siastical henefice ; and, 
 (iii.) All goods being, at the commencement of 
 the bankruptcy, in the possession, order or 
 disposition of the bankrupt, in his trade or 
 business, by the consent and permission of 
 the true owner, under such circumstances 
 that he is the reputed owner thereof; pro- 
 , vided that things in action other than debts 
 due or growing due to the bankrupt in the 
 course of Ms trade or business, shall not be 
 deemed goods within the meaning of this 
 section. 
 Effect of Bankruptcy on antecedent Transac- 
 tions.] Sect. 4:5. — (1.) Where a creditor has issued 
 execution against the goods or lands of a debtor, or 
 has attached any debt due to him, he shall not be 
 entitled to retain the benefit of the execution or 
 attachment against the trustee in bankruptcy of the 
 debtor, unless he has completed the execution or 
 attachment before the date of the receiving order, 
 and before notice of the presentation of any bank- 
 ruptcy petition by or against the debtor, or of the 
 commission of any available act of bankruptcy by 
 the debtor. 
 
 (2.) For the purposes of this Act, an execution 
 against goods is completed by seizure and sale ; an 
 attachment of a debt is completed by receipt of the 
 debt ; and an execution against land is completed 
 by seizure, or, in the case of an equitable interest, 
 by the appointment of a receiver. 
 
 Sect. 46. — (1.) Where the goods of a debtor are 
 taken in execution, and before the sale thereof notice 
 is served on the sheriff that a receiving order has 
 been made against the debtor, the sheriff shall, on 
 request, deliver the goods to the official receiver or 
 trustee under the order, but the costs of the execu- 
 tion shall be a charge on the goods so delivered, and 
 the official receiver or trustee may sell tlie goods or 
 an adequate part thereof for the purpose of satisfy- 
 ing the charge. 
 
 (2.) Wliere the goods of a debtor are sold under 
 an execution in respect of a judgment for a sum 
 exceeding £20, the sheriff shall deduct the costs of 
 the execution from the proceeds of sale, and retain 
 the balance for fourteen days, and if within that 
 time notice is served on him of a bankruptcy peti- 
 tion having been presented against or by the debtor, 
 and the debtor is adjudged bankrupt thereon or on 
 any other petition of which the sheriff -has notice, 
 the sheriff shall pay the balance to the trustee in the 
 bankruptcy, who shall be entitled to retain the same 
 as against the execution creditor, but otherwise he 
 shall deal with it as if no notice of the presentation 
 of a bankruptcy petition had been served, on him. 
 
 (3.) An execution levied by seizure and sale on 
 the goods of a debtor is not invalid by reason only 
 of its being an act of bankruptcy, and a person 
 loho purchases the goods in good faith under a sale 
 by the sheriff shall in all cases acquire a good title 
 to them against the trustee in bankruptcy. 
 
 Voluntary Settlements.] Sect. 47. — (1.) Any 
 settlement of property not being a settlement made 
 
 I, BANKBTTPTCT — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 before and in consideration of marriage, err made 
 in favour of a purchaser or incumbrancer in good 
 faith, and for valuable consideration, or a settle- 
 ment made on or for the wife or children of the 
 settlor of property which has accrued to the settlor 
 after marriage in right of his wife, shall, if the 
 settlor becomes bankrupt within two years after the 
 date of the settlement, be void against the trustee in 
 bankruptcy, and shall, if the settlor becomes bank- 
 rupt at any subsequent time within ten years after 
 the date of the settlement, be void against the 
 trustee in the bankruptcy, unless the parties claim- 
 ing under the settlement can prove that the settlor 
 was at the time of malting the settlement able to 
 pay all his debts vrithout tlie aid of the property 
 comprised in the settlement, and that the interest 
 of the settlor in such property had passed to the 
 trustee of such settlement on the execution thereof. 
 
 (2.) Any covenant or contract made in considera- 
 tion of marriage, for the future settlement on or for 
 the settloi'^s wife or children of any money or pro- 
 perty wherein he had not at the date of his marriage 
 any estate or interest, whether vested or contingent, 
 in possession or remainder, and not being money or 
 property of or in right of his wife, shall, on his 
 becoming bankrupt before the property or money 
 has been actually transferred or paid 2)ursuant to 
 the contract or covenant, be void against the trustee 
 in bankruptcy. 
 
 (3.) "Settlement" shall for the purposes of this 
 section include any conveyance or transfer of pro- 
 perty. 
 
 Fraudulent Preference.] Sect. 48. — (1.) Every 
 conveyance or transfer of property, or charge thereon 
 made, every payment made, every obligation in- 
 curred, and every judicial proceeding taken or 
 suffered by any person unable to pay his debts as 
 they become due from his own money in favour of 
 any creditor, or any person in trust for any creditor 
 with a view of giving such creditor a preference 
 over the other creditors shall, if the person making, 
 taking, paying, or suffering tlie same is adjudged 
 bankrupt on abankruptcy petition presented within 
 three months after the date of making, taking, pay- 
 ing or suffering the same, be deemed fraudulent 
 and void as against the trustee in the bankruptcy. 
 
 (2.) This section shall not affect the rights of any 
 person 'making title in good faith and for valuable 
 consideration through or under a creditor of the 
 bankrupt. 
 
 Protected Transactions.] Sect. 49. Subject to 
 the foregoing provisions of this Act loith respect to 
 the effect of bankruptcy on a« execution or attach- 
 ment, and loith respect to the avoidance of certain 
 settlements and preferences, nothing in this Act 
 shall invalidate, in the case of a bankruptcy — ■ 
 
 (a.) Any payment by the bankrupt to any of his 
 creditors : 
 
 (b.) Any payment or delivery to the bankrupt : 
 
 (o.) Any conveyance or assignment by the bank- 
 rupt for valuable consideration : 
 
 Provided that both the following conditions are 
 complied with, namely : — 
 
 (1.) The payment, delivery, conveyance, assign- 
 ment, contract, dealing or transaction, as 
 the case may be, takes place before the date 
 of till' receiving order ; and 
 
 (2.) Tlie person {other than the debtor') to, by, or 
 
( 77 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 78 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 with whom the payment, delivery, convey- 
 ance, assignment, contract, dealiiig, or 
 transaction was made, executed, or entered 
 into, has not at the time of the payment, 
 delivery, conveyance, assignment, contract, 
 dealing, or transaction, notice of any 
 available act of bankruptcy committed by 
 the banhrupt before that time. 
 Eealization of Property,] Sect. 50— (1.) The 
 trustee shall, as soon as may be, take possession of 
 ihe deeds, books, and documents of the bankrupt, 
 ■and all other pa/rts of his property capable of 
 manual delivery. 
 
 (2.) The trustee shall, in relation to and for the 
 purpose of acquiring or retaining possession of the 
 property of the bankrupt, be in the same position as 
 if he were a receiver of the property appointed by 
 ihe Sigh Court, and the Court may on his appli- 
 cation enforce such acquisition or retention aocord- 
 
 (3.) Where amy part of the property of the bank- 
 rupt consists of stock, shares in ships, shares, or any 
 ■other property transferable in the books of any 
 ■company, office, or person, the trustee may exercise 
 the right to transfer the property to the same extent 
 as the bankrupt might have exercised it if he had 
 not become bankrupt. 
 
 (4.) Where any part of the property of the bank- 
 rupt is of copyhold or customary tenure, or is any 
 like property passing by surrender and admittance 
 ■or in any similar manner, the trustee shall not be 
 ■compellable to be admitted to the property, but may 
 deal with it in the same manner as if it had been 
 •capable of being and had been duly surrendered or 
 foAerwise conveyed to such ttscs as the trustee may 
 ■appoint ; and any appointee of the trustee shall be 
 admitted to or otherwise invested with the property 
 ■accordingly. 
 
 (5.) Where any part of the property of the banJc- 
 rupt consists of things in action, such things shall 
 he deemed to have been duly assigned to the trustee. 
 
 (6.) Any treasurer or other officer, or any banker, 
 ■attorney, or agent of a bankrupt, shall pay and 
 tleliver to the trustee all money and securities in 
 Ms possession or power, as such officer, banker, 
 ■attorney, or agent, which he is not by law entitled 
 to retain as against the bankrupt or the trustee. 
 If he does not he shall be guilty of a contempt of 
 •Court, and -may be punished accordingly on the 
 application of the trustee. 
 
 Seizure of Bankrupt's Property.] Sect. 51. 
 Any person acting under warrant of the Court may 
 seize any part of the property of ■a bankrupt in the 
 ■custody or possession of the bankrupt, or of any 
 tother person, and with a view to such seizure may 
 break open any house, building, or room of the 
 hankmpt where the bankrupt is supposed to be, or 
 any building or receptacle of the banhrupt where 
 any of his property is supposed to be ; and where 
 the Court is satisfied that there is reason to believe 
 that property of the bankrupt is concealed in a 
 house or place not belonging to him, the Court may, 
 if it thinks fit, grant a search warrant to any 
 ■constable or officer of the Court, who may execute it 
 •according to its tenor. 
 
 Sequestration.] Sect. 52. — (1.) Where a bank- 
 rupt is a beneficed clergyman, tlie trustee may 
 cpply for a sequestration of the profits of the 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 benefice, and the certificate of the appointment of 
 the trustee shall be sufficient authority for the 
 granting of sequestration without any writ or other 
 proceeding, and the same shall accordingly be 
 issued as on a writ of levari facias founded on a 
 judgment against the bankrupt, and shall have 
 priority over any other sequestration issued after 
 the commencement of the bankruptcy in respect of a 
 debt provable in the bankruptcy, except a sequestra- 
 tion issued before the date of the receiving order by 
 or on behalf of a person who at the time of the 
 issue thereof had not notice of an act of bank- 
 ruptcy committed by ihe bankrupt, and available 
 for grounding a receiving order against him. 
 
 (2.) The bishop of the diocese in which the 
 benefice is situate may, if he thinks fit, appoint to 
 the bankrupt such or the like stipend as he might 
 by law have appointed to a curate duly licensed to 
 serve the benefice in case the bankrupt had been 
 non-resident, and the sequestrator shall pay the 
 sum so appointed out of the profits of the benefice 
 to the bankrupt, by quarterly instalments while he 
 performs the duties of the benefice. 
 
 (3.) The sequestrator shall also pay out of tlie 
 profits of the benefice the salary payable to any 
 duly licensed curate of the church of the benefice in 
 respect of duties performed by him as such during 
 four months before the date of the receiving order 
 not exceeding fifty pounds. 
 
 (4.) Nothing in this section shall prejudice the 
 operation of the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Act, 
 1871, or the Sequestration Act, 1871, or any mort- 
 gage or charge duly created under any Act of Par- 
 liament before the commencement of the bankruptcy 
 on the profits of the benefice. 
 
 Appropriation of Salary and Pension.] Sect. 
 53.— (1.) Where a bankrupt is an officer of the 
 army or navy, or an officer or clerk or otherwise 
 employed or engaged in the civil service of the 
 Crown, the trustee shall receive for distribution 
 amongst the creditors so much of the bankrupt's 
 pay or salary as the Court, on the application of 
 the trustee, with the consent of the chief ofieer of 
 the department under which the pay or salary is 
 enjoyed, may direct. Before making any order 
 under this sub-section the Court shall communicate 
 with the chief officer of the department as to the 
 amount, time, and manner of the payment to the 
 trustee, and shall obtain the written consent of the 
 chief officer to the terms of such payment. 
 
 (2.) Where the bankrupt is in the receipt of a 
 salary or income other than as aforesaid, or is 
 entitled to any half-pay, or pension, or to any com- 
 pensation granted by the Treasury, the Court, on 
 the application of tlie trustee, shall from time to 
 time make such order as it thinks just for the pay- 
 ment of the salary, income, half-pay, pension, or 
 compensation, or of any part thereof, to the trustee 
 to be applied by him in such manner as the Court 
 may direct. 
 
 (3.) Nothing in this section shall take away or 
 abridge any power of the chief officer of any public 
 department to dismiss a bankrupt, or to declare the 
 pension, half -pay, or compensation of any bankrupt 
 to be forfeited. \ 
 
 Vesting and Transfer of Property.] Sect. 54. — 
 (1.) Unless a trustee is appointed the official re- 
 ceiver shall be the trustee for the purposes of this 
 
( 79 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 80 ) 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCT — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 Act, and immediately on a debtor heing adjudged 
 hankrupt, the property of the bankrupt shall vest in 
 the trustee: 
 
 (2. ) On the appointment of a trustee the property 
 shall forthwith pass to and vest in the trustee ap- 
 pointed. 
 
 (3.) The property of the hankrupt shall pass 
 from trustee to trustee, including under that term 
 the official receiver when he fills the office of trustee, 
 and shall vest in the trustee for the time being 
 during his continuance in office, without any con- 
 veyance, assignment, or transfer whatever. 
 
 (4.) The certificate of appointment of a trustee 
 shall, for all purposes of any law in force in any 
 part of the British dominions requiring registra- 
 tion, enrolment, or recording of conveyances or 
 assignments of property, and may he registered, 
 enrolled, and recorded accordingly. 
 
 Disclaimer of Onerous Property.] Sect. 55. — 
 (1.) Where any part of the property of the hanlc- 
 rupt consists of land of any tenure, burdened with 
 onerous covenants, of shares or stock in companies, 
 of unprofitable contracts, or of any other property 
 that is unsaleable, or not readily saleable, by reason 
 of its binding the possessor thereof to the perform- 
 ance of any onerous act, or to the payment of any 
 sum of money, the trustee, notwithstanding that he 
 Juxs endeavoured to sell or has taken possession of 
 the property, or exercised any act of ownership in 
 relation thereto, but subject to the provisions of this 
 section, may, by writing signed by him, at any time 
 within three months after the first appointment of 
 a trustee, disclaim the property : Provided that 
 where any such property shall not have come to the 
 Jmowledge of the trustee within one month after 
 such appointment, he may disclaim such property 
 at any time within two months after lie first became 
 aware thereof. 
 
 (2.) The 'disclaimer shall operate to determine, 
 as from the date of disclaimer, the rights, interests, 
 and liabilities of the bankrupt and his property in 
 or in respect of the property disclaimed, and shall 
 also discharge the trustee from all personal liability 
 in respect of the property disclaimed as from the 
 date when the property vested in him, but shall not, 
 except so far as is necessary for the purpose of 
 releasing the hankrupt and his property and the 
 trustee from liability, affect the rights or liabilities 
 of any other person. 
 
 (3.) A trustee shall not he entitled to disclaim a 
 lease without the leave of the Court, except in any 
 cases which may he prescribed by general rules, 
 and the Court may, before or on granting such 
 leave, require such notice to be given to persons 
 interested, and impose such terms as a condition of 
 granting leave, and make such orders with respect 
 to fixtures, tenant's improvemants, and other 
 matters arising out of the tenancy as the Court 
 thinks just. 
 
 (4.) The trustee shall not he entitled to disclaim 
 any property in pursuance of this section in any 
 ca.se where an application in writing has been made 
 to the trustee by any person interested in the 
 property requiring him to decide whether lie loill 
 disclaim or not, and the trustee lias for a period of 
 twenty-eight days after the receipt of the applica- 
 tion, or such extended period as may be alloioed by 
 the Court, declined or neglected to give notice 
 
 I. BANKEtrPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 ■ — continued, 
 whether he disclaims the property or not, and in 
 the case of a contract, if the trustee, after such ap- 
 plication as aforesaid, does not within tlie said 
 period or extended period disclaim the contract, he 
 shall be deemed to have adopted it. 
 
 (5.) The Court may, on the application of any 
 person who is, as against the trustee, entitled to the 
 benefit or subject to the burden of a contract made 
 with the bankrupt, make an order rescinding the 
 contract on such terms as to payment by or to eithetr 
 party of damages for the non-performance of the 
 contract, or otherwise, as to the Court may seem 
 equitable, and any damages payable under the 
 order to any such person may be proved by him as 
 a debt under the bankruptcy. 
 
 (6.) The Court may, on application hy any, 
 person either claiming any interest in any dis- 
 claimed property, or under any liability not dis- 
 charged by this Act in respect of any disclaimed 
 property, and on hearing such persons as it thinks 
 fit, make an order for the vesting of the property in 
 or delivery thereof to any person entitled theretoi 
 or to whom it may seem just that the same should 
 he delivered by way of compensation for such 
 liability as aforesaid, or a trustee for him, and on 
 such terms as the Court thinks just ; and on any 
 such vesting order being made, the property com- 
 prised therein shall vest accordingly in tlie person 
 therein named in that behalf without any convey- 
 ance or assignment for the purpose. 
 
 Provided always, that where the property dis- 
 claimed is of a leasehold nature, tlie Court sludl 
 not make a vesting order in favour of any person 
 claiming under the bankrupt, whether as under- 
 lessee or as mortgagee by demise except upon the 
 terms of making such person subject to tlie same 
 liabilities and obligations as the bankrupt was 
 subject to under the lease in respect of tlie property 
 at the date when tlie bankruptcy petition was filed, 
 and any mortgagee or under-lessee declining to 
 accept a vesting order upon such terms sliall he 
 excluded from all interest in and security upon the 
 property, and if there shall be no person claiming 
 under the hankrupt ivho is willing to accept an. 
 order upon such terms, the Court shall have power 
 to vest the bankrupts estate and interest in the 
 property in any person liable either personally or in, 
 a representative character, and either alone or 
 jointly with the hankrupt to perform the lessee's 
 covenants in such lease, freed and discharged from 
 all estates, incumbrances, and interests created 
 therein by tlie hankrupt. 
 
 (7.) Any person injured by the operation of » 
 disclaimer under this section shall he deemed to be 
 a creditor of the bankrupt to the extent of the 
 injury, ai}d may accordingly prove the same as a 
 debt under the bankruptcy. 
 
 Powers of Trustee.] Sect. 56. Subject to tlia 
 provisions of this Act, the trustee may do all or 
 any of the following things : 
 
 (1.) Sell all or any part of the property of tlie 
 bankrupt (including the goodwill of the 
 business, if any, and tlie book debts due 
 or growing due to the bankrupt), by public 
 auction or private contract, with power to. 
 transfer the whole thereof to any person or 
 company, or to sell the same in parcels : 
 (2.) Give receipts for any money received by him. 
 
( 81 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 82 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 tcMcli receipts shall effectually diselmrge 
 the person paying the money from all re- 
 sponsibility in respect of the application 
 thereof: 
 
 (3.) Prove, rank, claim, and draw a dividend in 
 respect of any debt due to the bankrupt : 
 
 (4.) Exercise any powers the capacity to exercise 
 which is vested in the trustee under this 
 Act, arid execute any powers of attorney, 
 deeds, and other instruments for the pur- 
 pose of carrying into effect the provisions 
 of this Act : 
 
 (5.) Deal with any property to which the bank- 
 rupt is beneficially entitled as tenant in 
 tail in the same manner as the bankrupt 
 might have dealt with it ; and sections 
 fifty-six to seventy-three (both inclusive) of 
 the Act of the session of the third and 
 fourth years of the reign of King William 
 the Fourth (chapter seventy-four), "for the 
 abolition of fines and recoveries, and for 
 the substitution of more simple modes of 
 assurance," shall extend and apply to pro- 
 ceedings under this Act, as if those sections 
 were here re-enacted arid made applicable 
 in terms to those proceedings. 
 
 Sect. 57. The trustee may, with the permission of 
 tlie committee of inspection, do all or any of the 
 following things : 
 
 (1.) Carry on the business of the bankrupt, so 
 far as may be necessary for the beneficial 
 winding up of the same : 
 
 (2.) Bring, institute, or defend any action or 
 other legal proceeding relating to the pro- 
 perty of the bankrupt : 
 
 (3.) Employ a solicitor or other agent to take 
 any proceedings or do any business which 
 may be sanctioned by the committee of 
 impection : 
 
 (4.) Accept as the consideration for the sale of 
 any property of the bankrupt a sum of 
 money payable at a future time subject to 
 such stipulations as to security and other- 
 wise as the committee think fit : 
 
 (5.) Mortgage or pledge any part of the property 
 of the bankrupt for the purpose of raising 
 money for the payment of his debts : 
 
 (6.) Mefer any dispute to arbitration, compromise 
 all debts, claims, and liabilities, whether 
 present or future, certain or contingent, 
 liquidated or unliquidated, subsisting or 
 supposed to subsist between the bankrupt 
 and any person who may have incurred any 
 liability to the bankrupt, on the receipt of 
 such sums, payable at such times, and 
 generally on such terms as may be agreed 
 on: 
 
 (7.) Make sueh compromise or other arrangement 
 as may be thought expedient with creditors, 
 or persons claiming to be creditors, in 
 respect of any debts provable under the 
 bankruptcy : 
 
 (8.) Make sueh compromise or other arrangement 
 as may be thought expedient with respect 
 to any claim arising out of or incidental 
 to the property of the bankrupt, made or 
 capable of being made on the trustee by any 
 person, or by the trustee on any person : 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (9.) Divide in its existing form among the credi- 
 tors, acom-ding to its estimated value, any, 
 property which from its peculiar nature or 
 other special circumstances cannot be readily 
 or advantageously sold. 
 
 The permission given for the purposes of this 
 section shall not be a general permission to do all 
 or any of the above-mentioned ffiings, but shall only 
 be a permission to do the particular thing or things 
 for which permission is sought in the specified case 
 or cases. 
 
 Distribution of Property.] Sect. 58. — (1.) Sub- 
 ject to the retention of such sums as may be neces- 
 sary for the costs of administration, or otherwise, 
 the trustee shall, with all convenient speed, declare 
 and distribute dividends amongst the creditors who 
 have proved their debts. 
 
 (2.) The first dividend, if any, shall be declared 
 and distributed within four months after the con- 
 clusion of the first meeting of creditors, unless the 
 trustee satisfies the committee of inspection tlrnt 
 there is sufficient reason for postponing the declara- 
 tion to a later date. 
 
 (3.) Subsequent dividends shall, in the absence of 
 sufficient reason to the contrary, be declared and 
 distributed at intervals of not more than six months. 
 
 (4.) Before declaring a dividend the trustee shall 
 cause notice of his intention to do so to be gazetted 
 in the prescribed manner, and shall also send reason- 
 able notice thereof to each creditor mentioned in the 
 bankrupt's statement who lias not proved his debt. 
 
 (5.) When the trustee has declared a dividend lie 
 shall send to each creditor who lias proved a notice 
 shewing the amount of the dividend and when and 
 how it is payable, ami a statement in the prescribed 
 form as to the particulars of the estate. 
 
 Sect. 59. — (1.) Where one partner of a firm is 
 adjudged bankrupt, a creditor to whom the bankrupt 
 is indebted jointly with the other partners of tlie 
 firm, or any of them, shall not receive any dividend 
 out of the separate property of the bankrupt until 
 all the separate creditors have received the full 
 amount of their respective debts. 
 
 (2.) Where joint and separate properties are 
 being ad/ministered, dividends of 'the joint and 
 separate properties shall, subject to any order to the 
 contrary that may be made by the Court on the 
 application of any person interested, be declared 
 together ; and the expenses of aiid incident to such 
 dividends shall be fairly apportioned by the trustee 
 between the joint and separate properties, regard 
 being had to the wm-k done for and the benefit 
 received by each property. 
 
 Sect. 60. In the calculation and distribution of 
 a dividend the trustee shall make provision for 
 debts provable in bankruptcy appearing from the 
 bankrupts statements or otherwise to be due to 
 persons resident in places so distant from the place 
 where the trustee is acting that in the mdinary 
 course of communication they have not liad sufficient 
 time to tender their proofs, or to establish them if 
 disputed, and also for debts provable in bankruptcy 
 the subject of claims not yet determined. He shall 
 also nvxke provision for any disputed proofs on 
 claims, and for the expenses necessary for the 
 administration of the estate or otherwise, and, 
 subject to the foregoing provisions, he shall distri- 
 bute as dividend all money in hand. 
 
( 83 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 8i ) 
 
 I. BANKETJI'TCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Sect. 61. Any creditor iiiho lias not proved Ms 
 (kht hefore the declaration of any dividend or 
 dividends shall he entitled to he paid oid of any 
 mcmey for the time heing in the hands of the trustee 
 any dividend or dividends he may have failed to 
 ■receive hefdre that money is applied to the payment 
 of amy future dividend or dividends, hut he shall 
 oiot he entitled to disturb the distribution of any 
 dividend declared hefme his debt was proved by 
 reason that he has not participated therein. 
 
 Sect. 62. Wlien the trustee has realized all the 
 property of the bankrupt, or so much thereof as 
 can, in the joint opinion of himself and of the com- 
 mittee of inspection, be realized without needlessly 
 2yrotraetiivj the trusteeship, he shall declare a final 
 dividend, hut before so doing he shall give notice in 
 •manner prescribed to the persons lohose claims to 
 he creditors have been notified to him, but not 
 established to his satisfaction, that if they do not 
 establish their claims to the satisfaction of the Court 
 within a time limited by the notice, lie will proceed 
 to make a fined dividend, without regard to their 
 claims. After the expiration of the time so limited, 
 or, if the Court on application by any such claimant 
 grant Mm further time for establishing his claim, 
 then on the expiration of sueh further time the 
 property of the bankrupt shall he divided among 
 the creditors who have proved their debts, without 
 regard to the claims of any other persons. 
 
 Seat. 63. No action for a dividend shall lie 
 against the trustee, but if the trustee refuses to pay 
 any divideiid the Court may, if it thinks fit, order 
 him to pay it, and also to pay out of his own 
 money interest thereon for the time that it is with- 
 held, and the costs of the application. 
 
 Sect. 6i. — (1.) The trustee, with the permission of 
 the committee of inspection, may appoint the bank- 
 rupt himself to superintend the management of the 
 property of the bankrupt or of any part thereof, or 
 to carry on the trade (if any) of the bankrupt for 
 the beiiefit of his creditors, and in any other 
 respect to aid in ad/ministering the property in such 
 manner and on such terms as the trustee may 
 direct. 
 
 (2.) The trustee may from time to time, with the 
 permission of the committee of inspection, make 
 such alloivance as he may think just to the bankrupt 
 out of his property for the support of the bankrupt 
 and his family, or in consideration of his services 
 if he is engaged in winding up his estate, hut any 
 such allowance may be reduced by the Court. 
 
 Sect. 65. The bankrupt shall he entitled to any 
 surplus remaining after payment in full of Ms 
 creditors, with interest, as by this Act provided, and 
 of the costs, charges, and expenses of the proceed- 
 ings under tlie bankruptcy petition. 
 
 Paet IV. Obtioial Receivers A"sd Stajf or 
 
 BOAKD OF TkADE. 
 
 Sect. 66. — (1.) Tlie Board of Trade may, at any 
 time after the passing of this Act, and from time to 
 time, appoint such persons as they think fit to he 
 official receitfers of debtors' estates, and may remove 
 any person so appointed from such office. The 
 official receivers of debtors' estates shall act under 
 the general authority and directions of the Board 
 of Trade, hut shall also be officers of the Courts to 
 which they are respectively attached. 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (2.) The number of official receivers so to be 
 appointed, and the districts to he assigned to them, 
 shall be fixed by the Board of Trade, with the con- 
 currence of the Treasury. One person only slmll be 
 appointed for each district unless the Board of 
 Trade, with the concurrence of the Treasury, shall 
 otherwise direct; but the same person may, with- 
 the like concurrence, be appointed to act for more 
 than one district. 
 
 (3.) Where more than one official receiver is 
 attached to the Court, such one of them as is for 
 the time being appointed by the Court for any par- 
 ticular estate shall be the official receiver for the 
 purposes of that estate. The Court shall distribute 
 the receiverships of the particular estates among 
 the official receivers in the prescribed manner. 
 
 Sect. 67.— (1.) The Board of Trade may, from 
 time to time, by order direct that any of its officers 
 mentioned in the order shall be capable of dis- 
 charging the duties of any official receiver during 
 any temporary vacancy in the office, or during the 
 temporary absence of any official receiver through 
 illness or otherwise. 
 
 (2.) The Board of Trade may, on the application 
 of an official receiver, at any time hy order nomi- 
 nate some fit person to be his deputy, and to act for 
 him for such time not exceeding two months as the 
 order may fix, and under such conditions as to 
 remuneration and othei-wise as may be prescribed. 
 
 Sect. 68. — (1.) The duties of the official receiver 
 shall have relation both to the conduct of the debtor 
 and to the administration of his estate. 
 
 (2.) An official receiver may, for tlie purpose of 
 affidavits verifying proofs, petitions, or other pro- 
 ceedings under this Act, administer oaths. 
 
 (3.) All expressions referring to the trustee under 
 a bankruptcy shall, unless the context otherwise re- 
 quires, or the Act otherwise provides, include the 
 official receiver when acting as trustee. 
 
 (4.) The trustee shall supply the official receiver 
 with such information, anU give him such access to, 
 and facilities for inspecting the bankrupts hooks 
 and documents and generally slmll give him such 
 aid, as may he requisite- for enabling the official 
 receiver to perform 7m duties under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 69. As regards the debtor, it shall be the 
 duty of tlie official receiver — 
 
 (1.) To investigate the conduct of tlie debtor and 
 to report to the Court, stating whether tliere is 
 reason to believe that the debtor has committed any 
 act which constitutes u. misdemeanor under the 
 Debtors Act, 1869, or any amendment thereof, or 
 under this Act, or which would justify tlie Court in 
 refusing, suspending or qualifying an order for his 
 discharge. 
 
 (2.) To make such other reports concerning the 
 conduct of the debtor as the Board of Trade may 
 direct. 
 
 (3.) To take such part as rnay he directed hy Oie 
 Board of Trade in tlie public examination of the 
 
 (4.) To take such part, raui give such assistance, 
 in relation to tlie prosecution of any fraudulent 
 debtor as the Board of Trade may direct. 
 
 Sect. 70. — (1.) .is regards the estate of a debtor, 
 it shall he the duty of the official receiver — 
 
 (a.) Pending the appointment of a U-ustee, to act 
 as interim receiver of tlie debtor's estate. 
 
( 85 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 86 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AHD GAZETTE 
 
 — contimied. 
 
 and, loJiere a special manager is not ap- 
 pointed, as manager thereof: 
 (b.) To autliorize the special manager to raise 
 money or make advances for the purposes 
 of the estate in any case where, in the m- 
 terests of the (yreditors, it appears necessary 
 so to do : 
 (o.) To summon and preside at the first meeting 
 
 of creditors : 
 (d.) To issiie forms of proxy for use at the meet- 
 ings of creditors : 
 (e.) To report to theicreditors as to any proposal 
 which the debtor may have made with 
 respect to the mode of liquidating his 
 affairs : 
 (f.) To advertise tlie receiving order, the date 
 of the creditors' first meeting, and of the 
 debtor's public examination, and siwh other 
 matters as it may he necessary to adver- 
 tise : 
 (g.) To act as trustee during any vacancy in the 
 
 office of trustee. 
 (2.) For the purpose of his duties as interim 
 receiver or mxmager the official receiver shall have 
 the same powers as if he were a receiver and 
 manager appointed Iry the Sigh Court, hut shall, 
 as far as practicable, consult the wishes of the 
 creditors with respect to the management of the 
 debtor's property, and may for that purpose, if he 
 thinks it advisable, summon meetings of the persons 
 claiming to be creditors, and shall not, unless the 
 JBoard of Trade otherwise order, iiyyur any expense 
 beyond such as is requisite for the protection of the 
 debtor's property or the disposing of perishable 
 goods. 
 
 Provided that when a debtor camwt himself pre- 
 pare ti. proper statement of affairs, the official 
 receiver may, subject to any prescribed ccmditions, 
 and at the expense of the estate, employ some person 
 or persons to assist in the preparation of the state- 
 ment of affairs. 
 
 (3.) Every official receiver shall account to the 
 Board of Trade and pay over all moneys and deal 
 with all securities in such manner as the Board 
 from time to time direct. 
 
 Sect. 71. The Board of Trade may, at any 
 time after the passing of this Act, and from time 
 to time, with tJie approval of the Treasury, appoint 
 such additional officers, including official receivers, 
 clerks and servants (if any) as may be required by 
 the Board for the execution of this Act, and may 
 '^'""'t any person so 
 
 Pabt V. Tbustees Df Bankktjftoy. 
 
 Eemuneration of Trustee.] Sect. 72. — (1.) 
 Where the creditors appoint any person to be 
 trustee of a debtor's estate, his remuneration (if 
 any) shall he fixed hy an ordinary resolution of the 
 creditors or if the creditors so resolve by the com- 
 mittee of inspection, and sludl be in the nature of 
 a commission or percentage, of which one part shall 
 ie payable on the amount realized, after deducting 
 any sums paid to secured creditors out of the pro- 
 ceeds of their secu/rities, and the other part on the 
 amount distributed in dividend. 
 
 (2.) If one fourth in number or value of the 
 creditors dissent from the resolution, or the bank- 
 rupt satisfies the Board of Trade tlrnt the remune- 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 ration is unnecessarily large, the Board of Trade 
 shall fix the amount of the remuneration. 
 
 (3.) The resolution shall express what expenses 
 the remuneration is to cover, and no liability shall 
 attach to the bankrupt's estate, or to the creditors, 
 in respect of any expenses which the remuneration 
 is expressed to cover. 
 
 (i.) Where no remuneration has been voted to a 
 trustee he shall he allowed out of the bankrupt's 
 estate such proper costs a/nd expenses incurred by 
 him in or about the proceedings of the bankruptcy 
 as the taxing officer may allow. 
 
 (5.) A trustee shall not, under any circumstances 
 whatever, make any arra/ngement for or accept from 
 the bankrupt, or any solicitor, auctioneer, or any 
 other person that may he employed about a bank- 
 ruptcy, any gift, remuneration, or pecuniary or 
 other consideration or benefit wlmtever beyond the 
 remuneration fixed hy the creditors and payable 
 out of the estate, nor shall he make any arrange- 
 ment for giving up, or give up, any part of his 
 remuneration, either as receiver, manager, or 
 trustee to the bankrupt, m' any solicitor or otlier 
 person that may he employed about a bankruptcy. 
 
 Coats.] Sect. 73. — (1.) Where a trustee or 
 manager receives remuneration fcrr his services as 
 such no payment shall be allowed in his accounts 
 in respect of the performance by any other person 
 of the ordinary duties which are required by 
 statute or rules to he performed by himself. 
 
 (2.) Where the trustee is a solicitor lie may con- 
 tract that the remuneration for his services as 
 trustee shall include all professional services. 
 
 (3.) All bills and charges of solicitors, managers, 
 accountants, auctioneers, brokers, and other per- 
 sons, not being trustees, shall be taxed hy the 
 prescribed officer, and no payments in respect 
 thereof shall he allowed in the trustee's accounts 
 without proof of such taxation having been made. 
 The taxing-master shall satisfy himself before 
 passing such bills and charges that the employment 
 of such solicitors and other persons, in respect of 
 the particular matters out of which such charges 
 arise, has been duly sanctioned. 
 
 (4.) Every such person, shall, on request by the 
 trustee (which request the trustee shall make a 
 suffieient time before declaring a dividend), deliver 
 his bill of costs or charges to the proper officer for 
 taxation, and if he fails to do so within seven days 
 after receipt of the request, or such further time as 
 the Court, on application, may grant, the trustee 
 shall declare and distribute the dividend without 
 regard to any claim by him, and thereupon any 
 such claim shall be forfeited as well against the 
 trustee personally as against the estate. 
 
 Eeceipts, Payments, Accounts, Audit.] Sect. 7i. 
 — (1.) An account, called the Bankruptcy Estates 
 Account, shall be kept hy the Board of Trade with 
 the Bank of England, and all moneys received by 
 the Board of Trade in respect of proceedings under 
 this Act shall be paid to that account. 
 
 (2.) The account of the Accountant in Bank- 
 ruptcy at the Bank of England shall he transferred 
 to the Bankruptcy Estates Account. 
 
 (3.) Every trustee in bankruptcy shall, in such 
 manner and at such times as the Board of Trade 
 with the concurrence of the Treasury direct, pay the 
 money received by him to the Bankruptcy Estates 
 
( 87 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 
 
 ) 
 
 I. BANKETJPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 Account at the Bank of England, and the Board 
 of Trade shall furnish him with a certificate of 
 receipt of the money so paid. 
 
 (4.) Provided that if it appears to the committee 
 of inspection that for the purpose of carrying on 
 the debtor's business, or of obtaining advances, or 
 because of the probable amount of the cash balance, 
 or if the committee shall satisfy the Board of Trade 
 that for any other reason it is for the advantage of 
 the creditors that the trustee should have an account 
 with a local bank, the Board of Trade shall, on the 
 application of the committee of inspection, autho- 
 rize the trustee to make his payments into and out 
 of such local bank as the committee may select. 
 Such account shall be opened and kept by the 
 trustee in the name of the debtor's estate ; and any 
 interest receivable in respect of the account shall be 
 part of the assets of the estate. 
 
 The trustee shall make his payments into and out 
 of such local bank in the prescribed manner. 
 
 (5.) Subject to any general rules relating to small 
 bankruptcies under Part TIL of this Act, where 
 the debtor at the date of the receiving order has an 
 account at a bank, such account shall not be with- 
 drawn until the expiration of seven days from the 
 day appointed for the first meeting of creditors, 
 unless the Board of Trade, for the safety of the 
 account, or other sufficient cause, order the with- 
 drawal of the account. 
 
 (6.) If a trustee at any time retains for more 
 than ten days a sum exceeding £50, or such other 
 amount as the Board of Trade in any particular 
 case authorize him to retain, then, unless he explains 
 the retention to the satisfaction of the Board of 
 Trade, he shall pay interest on the amount so re- 
 tained in excess at the rate of £20 per centum per 
 annum, and shall have no claim for remuneration, 
 and may be removed from his officeby the Board of 
 Trade, and shall be liable to pay any expense occa- 
 sioned by reason of his default. 
 
 (7.) All payments out of money standing to the 
 credit of the Board of Trade in the Bankruptcy 
 Estates Account shall be made by the Bank of 
 England in the prescribed manner. 
 
 Sect. 75. No trustee in a bankruptcy or under 
 any composition or scheme of arrangement shall 
 pay any sums received by him as trustee into his 
 private banking account. 
 
 Sect. 76. — (1.) Whenever the cash balance stand- 
 ing to the credit of the Bankruptcy Estates Account 
 is in excess of the amount which in the opinion of 
 the Board of Trade is required for the time being 
 to answer demands in respect of bankrupts' estates, 
 the Board of Trade shall notify the same to the 
 Treasury, and shall pay over the same or any part 
 thereof as the Treasury may require to the Treasury, 
 to such account as the Treasury may direct, and the 
 Treasury may invest the said sums or any part 
 thereof in Government securities to be placed to the 
 credit of the said account. 
 
 [By the Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 47, the Treasury 
 may employ so much of these sums as may be 
 necessary, in defraying office accommodation for 
 any officers appointed by the Board of Trade under 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883.] 
 
 (2.) Whenever any part of the money so invested 
 is, in the opinion of the Board of Trade, required 
 to answer any demands in respect of bankrupt 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 ■ — continued, 
 estates, the Board of Trade shall notify to the 
 Treasury the amount so required, and the Treasury 
 shall thereupon repay to the Board of Trade swih 
 sum as may be required to the credit of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Estates Account, and for tliat purpose mayr 
 direct the sale of such part of the said securities as 
 may be necessary. 
 
 (3.) I'he dividends on the investments under this 
 section shall be paid to such account as the Treasury/ 
 may direct, and regard shall be had to the amount 
 thus derived infixing the fees payable in respect of 
 bankruptcy proceedings. • 
 
 Sect. 77. The Treasury may from time to time 
 issue to the Board of Trade in aid of tlie votes of 
 Parliament, out of the receipts arising from fees,, 
 fee stamps, and dividends on investments under 
 this Act, any sums which may be necessary to meet 
 the charges estimated by tfie Board of Trade 
 in respect of salaries and expenses under this 
 Act 
 
 Sect. 78. — (1.) Every trustee shall, at such time» 
 as may be prescribed, but not less than twice in each 
 year during his tenure of office, send to tlie Board 
 of Trade, or as they direct, an account of Ms receipts 
 and payments as such trustee. 
 
 (2.) The account shall be in a prescribed form, 
 shall be made in duplicate, and shall be verified 
 by a statutory declaration in the prescribed form. 
 
 (3.) The Board of Trade shall cau^Mhti^ticounis 
 so sent to be audited, and for the pttrf^P'tv^^he 
 audit the trustee shall furnish the Bom^ en,^^% 
 vouchers and information as the Boardnn'y r\ ^ ^^^ 
 and the Board may at any time reqiin ll^rpprodue- 
 tion of and inspect any books or ac^*'*f kept by 
 the trustee. ° jf 
 
 (4.) Vllien any such account tfuJ^Un audited 
 one copy thereof shall be filed '^4' "^P^ % *'" 
 Board, and the other copy shall he filed vriti Sie 
 Court, and each copy sliall be open to the inspection 
 of any creditor, or of the bankrupt, or of any person 
 interested. 
 
 Sect, 79. Ttie trustee slidll, wlienever required by 
 any creditor so to do, and on payment by such 
 creditor of the prescribed fee, furnish and transmit 
 to such creditor by post a list of the creditors, shetc- 
 ing in such list the amount of the debt due to each 
 of such creditors. 
 
 Sect. 80. The trustee shall keep, in manner pre- 
 cribed, proper books, in which he sliall from 
 time to time cause to be made entries or minutes 
 of proceedings at meetings, and of such other 
 matters as may be prescribed, and any creditor 
 of the bankrupt may, subject to the control of tlie 
 Court, personally or by his agent inspect any such 
 books. 
 
 Sect. 81. — (1.) Every trustee in a bankruptcy 
 shall from time to time, as may be prescribed, and 
 not less than once in every year during the con' 
 tinuance of the bankruptcy, transmit to the Board 
 of Trade a statement shewing tlie proceedings in the 
 bankruptcy up to the date of the statement, contain- 
 ing the prescribed particulars, and made out in the 
 prescribed form. 
 
 (2.) The Board of Trade shall cause the state- 
 ments so transmitted to be examined, and shall call 
 the trustee to account for any misfeasance, neglect, 
 or omission which may appear on the said state- 
 ments or in his accounts or otherwise, and may 
 
( 89 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 90 ) 
 
 X BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 require the trustee tn malce good any loss wMch the 
 estate of the liankrupt may have sustained by the 
 misfeasance^ neglect, or omission. 
 
 Eelease of Trustee.] Sect. 82.— (1.) When the 
 trustee has realized all the property of the bankrupt, 
 01- so much thereof as can, in his opinion, be realized 
 without needlessly protracting the trusteeship, and 
 distributed a final dividend, if any, or has ceased 
 to act by reason of a composition having been 
 approved, or has resigned, or has been removed 
 from his office, the Board of Trade shall, on his 
 application, cause a report on his accounts to be 
 prepared, and, on his complying with all the re- 
 quirements of the Board, shall take into considera- 
 tion the report, and any objection which may be 
 urged by any creditor or person interested against 
 the release of the trustee, and sliall either grant or 
 withhold the release accordingly, subject neverthe- 
 less to an appeal to the High Court. 
 
 (2.) Where the release of a trustee is withheld 
 the Court may, on the application of any creditor 
 or person interested, make such order as it thinks 
 just, charging the trustee with the consequences of 
 any act or default he may have done or made 
 ■contrary to his duty. 
 
 (3.) An order of the Board releasing the trustee 
 shall discharge him from all liability in respect of 
 ■any act done or default made by him in the ad- 
 ministration of the affairs of the bankrupt, or 
 <jtherwise in relation to his conduct as trustee, but 
 ■any such order may be revoked on proof that it was 
 ■obtained by fraud or by suppression or concealment 
 of any material fact. 
 
 (4.) Where the trustee has not previously re- 
 signed or been removed, his release sliall operate as 
 a removal of him from his office, and thereupon the 
 official receiver sliall be the trustee. 
 
 Official Name.] Sect. 83. The trustee may sue 
 and may he sued by the official name of •' the 
 trustee of the property of a bankrupt" in- 
 
 serting the name of the bankrupt, and by that 
 name may in any part of the British dominions or 
 elsewhere hold property of every description, make 
 ■contracts, sue, and be sued, enter into any engage- 
 ments binding on himself and his successors in 
 office, and do all other acts necessary or expedient 
 to be done in the execution of Ms office. 
 
 Appointment and Removal.] Sect. Si. — (1.) 
 The creditors may, if they think fit, appoint more 
 persons than one to the office of trustee, and when 
 Tnore persons than one are appointed they shall 
 tdeelare luhether any act required or authorized to 
 he done by the trustee is to be done by all or any 
 ■one or more of such persons, but all such persons 
 •are in this Act included, under the term " trustee," 
 and shall be joint-tenants of the property of the 
 hankrupt. 
 
 (2.) The creditors may also appoint persons to 
 ■act as trustees in succession in the event of one or 
 more of the persons first named declining to accept 
 ■the office of trustee, or failing to give security or not 
 •being approved of by the Board of Trade. 
 
 Sect. 85. If a receiving order is made against a 
 trustee lie shall thereby vacate his office of trustee. 
 
 Sect. 86. — (1.) The creditors may, by ordinary 
 resolution, at a meeting especially called for that 
 purpose, of which seven days' notice has been given, 
 remove a trustee appointed by them, and may at the 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY- STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 same or any subsequent meeting appoint another 
 person to fill the vacancy as hereinafter provided in 
 case of a vacancy in the office of trustee. 
 
 (2.) If the Board of Trade are of opinion that a 
 trustee appointed by the creditors is guilty of 
 misconduct, or fails to perform his duties under this 
 Act, the Board may remove him from his office, but 
 if the creditors, by ordinary resolution, disapprove 
 of his removal, lie or they may appeal against it to 
 the High Court. 
 
 Sect. 87. — (1.) If a vacancy occurs in the office 
 of a trustee the creditors in general meeting may 
 appoint a person to fill the vacancy, and thereupon 
 the same proceedings shall be taken as in the case 
 of a first appointment. 
 
 (2.) The official receiver shall, on the requisition 
 of any creditor, summon a meeting for the purpose 
 of filling any such vacancy. 
 
 { 3.) if the creditors do not within three weeks 
 after the occurrence of a vacancy appoint a person 
 to fill the vacancy, the official receiver shall report 
 the matter to the Board of Trade, and the Board 
 may appoint a trustee ; but in such cases the credi- 
 tors or committee of inspection shall have the same 
 power of appointing a trustee as in the case of a 
 first appointment. 
 
 (4.) During any vacancy in the office of trustee' 
 the official receiver shall act as trustee. 
 
 Voting Powers of Trustee.] Sect. 88. The vote 
 of the trustee, or of his partner, clerk, solicitor, or 
 solicitor's clerk, either as creditor or as proxy for a 
 creditor, shall not be reckoned in the majority 
 required for passing any resolution affecting the re- 
 muneration or conduct of the trustee. 
 
 Control over Trustee.] Sect. 89. — (1.) Subject 
 to the provisions of the Act the trustee shall in the 
 administration of the property of the bankrupt, 
 and in the distribution thereof amongst his creditors, 
 have regard to any directions that may be given by 
 resolution of the creditors at any general meeting, 
 or by the committee of inspection, and any direc- 
 tions so given by the creditors at any general 
 meeting shall in case of conflict be deemed to over- . 
 ride any directions given by the committee of 
 inspection. 
 
 (2.) The trustee may from time to tirne summon 
 general meetings of the creditors for the purpose of 
 ascertaining their wishes, and it shall be his duty 
 to summon meetings at such times as the creditors, 
 by resolution either at the meeting appointing the 
 trustee or otherwise may direct, orwhenever requested 
 in writing to do so by one fourth in value of the 
 creditors. 
 
 (3.) The trustee may apply to the Court in 
 manner prescribed for directions in relation to any 
 particular matter arising under the bankruptcy. 
 
 (4.) Subject to the provisions of this Act the 
 trustee shall use his own discretion in the manage- 
 ment of the estate and its distribution among the 
 creditors. 
 
 Sect. 90. If the bankrupt or any of the creditors, 
 or any other person, is aggrieved by any act or 
 decision of the trustee, he may apply to the Court, 
 and the Court may confirm, reverse, or modify the 
 act or decision complained of, and malie such 
 orders in the premises as it thinks just. 
 
 Sect. 91.— (1.) The Board of Trade shall take 
 cognizance of the conduct of , trustees, and in the 
 
( »1 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 92 ) 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 event of any trustee not faithfully performing Ms 
 duties, and duly observing all the requirements 
 imposed on 7m« by statute, rules or otherwise, with 
 respect to the performance of his duties, or in the 
 event of any complaint being made to the Board by 
 any creditor in regard thereto, the Board sliall 
 inquire into the matter and take such action thereon 
 as may be deemed expedient, 
 
 (2.) Tlie Board may at any time require any 
 trustee to answer any inquiry made by them in 
 relation to any bankruptcy in which the trustee is 
 engaged, and may, if the Board think fit, apply to 
 the Court to examine on oath the trustee or any 
 other person concerning the bankruptcy. 
 
 (3.) The Board may also direct a local investi- 
 gation to be made of the books and vouchers of the 
 trustee. 
 
 Pakt VI. Constitution, Pkooeduke, and 
 
 POWEKS OF COCBT. 
 
 Jurisdiction. 
 
 Sect. 92. — (1.) The Courts having jurisdiction in 
 bankruptcy shall be the Sigh Court and the County 
 Courts, 
 
 (2.) But the Lord Chancellor may from time to 
 time, by order under his hand, exclude any County 
 Court from having jurisdiction in bankruptcy, arid 
 for the purposes of bankruptcy jurisdiction may 
 attach its district or any part tkereof to the Sigh 
 Court, or to any other County Court or Courts, and 
 may from time to time revoke or vary any order so 
 made. Tlie Lord Chancellor may, in like manner 
 and subject to tlie like conditions, detach the district 
 of any County Court or any part thereof from the 
 district and jurisdiction of the Sigh Court, 
 
 (3.) The term " district," when used in this Act 
 with reference to a County Court, means the district 
 of the Court for the purposes of bankruptcy juris- 
 diction. 
 
 (4.) A County Court which, at the commencement 
 of this Act, is excluded from having bankruptcy 
 jurisdiction, shall continue to be so excluded until 
 the Lord Chancellor otherwise orders. 
 
 (5.) Periodical sittings fm the transaction of 
 bankruptcy business by County Courts having juris- 
 diction in bankruptcy shall be holden at such times 
 and at such intervals as the Lord Chancellor shall 
 prescribe for each such Court. 
 
 Sect. 93. — (1.) From and after the commence- 
 ment of this Act the London Bankruptcy Court 
 shall be united and consolidated with and form 
 part of the Supreme Court of Judicature, and the 
 jurisdiction of tlie London Bankruptcy Court shall 
 be transferred to tlie Sigh Court. 
 
 (2.) For the purposes of this union, consolida- 
 tion, and transfer, and of all matters incidental 
 thereto and consequential thereon, the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature Act, 1873, as amended by 
 subsequent Acts, shall, subject to the provisions of 
 this Act, have effect as if the union, consolidation, 
 and transfer had been effected by that Act, except 
 that all expressions referring to the time appointed 
 for the commencement of that Act shall be construed 
 as referring to the commencement of this Act, and, 
 subject as aforesaid, this Act and the said above- 
 mentioned Acts shall be read and construed to- 
 gether. 
 
 Seat. 94. — (1.) Subject to general rules, and to 
 
 I, BANKRUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 orders of transfer made under the authority of the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873, and Acts; 
 amending it, — 
 
 (a.) All matters pending in the London Bank- 
 ruptcy Court at the commencement of this 
 Act ; and 
 
 (b.) All matters which would have been within 
 the exclusive jurisdiction of the London 
 Bankruptcy Court if this Act had not 
 passed ; and 
 
 (c.) All matters in respect of which jurisdiction 
 is given to the Sigh Court by this Act, 
 shall be assigned to such Division of the Sigh 
 Court as the Lord Cliancellor may from time tO' 
 time direct. 
 
 (2.) All such matters shall, subject as aforesaid, 
 be ordinarily transacted and disposed of by or 
 under the direction of one of the judges of the Sigh 
 Court, and the Lord Chancellor shall from time to 
 time assign a judge for that purpose. 
 
 (3.) Provided that during vacation, or during 
 the illness of the judge so assigned, or during hi& 
 absence or for any other reasonable cause such 
 matters, or any part thereof, may be transacted and 
 disposed of by or under the direction of any judge 
 of the Sigh Court named for tliat purpose by the: 
 Lord Cliancellor. 
 
 (4.) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the 
 officers, clerks, and subordinate persons who are, at 
 the commencement of this Act, attached to the 
 London Bankruptcy Court, and their successors^ 
 shall be officers of the Supreme Court of Judicature^ 
 and shall be attached to tlie Sigh Court. 
 
 (5.) Subject to general rules, all bankruptcy 
 matters sliall be entitled, " In bankruptcy." 
 
 Sect. 95. — (1.) If the debtor against or by whom 
 a bankruptcy petition is presented has resided or 
 carried on busi)iess within the London Bankruptcy 
 Sistrict as defined by this Act for the greater part 
 of the six montlis immediately pi'ecedi7ig tlie pre- 
 sentation of the petition, or for a longer period 
 during those six months than in the district of any 
 County Court, or is not resident in England, or if 
 the petitioning creditor is utiable to ascertain the 
 residence of the debtor, the petition shall be pre- 
 sented to tlie Sigh Court. 
 
 (2.) In any other case the petition shall be pre- 
 sented to tlie County Court for the district in icliich 
 the debtor has resided or carried on business for 
 the longest period during the six months imme- 
 diately preceding tlie presentation of the petition. 
 
 (3.) Nothing in this section shall invalidate a 
 proceeding by reason of its being taken in a wrong 
 Court. 
 
 Sect. 96. The London Bankruptcy District shall, 
 for the purposes of this Act, comprise the city of 
 London and the liberties thereof, and all such paris 
 of the metropolis and other places as are situated 
 within the district of any County Court described as 
 a metropolitan County Court in the list contained in- 
 the third schedule. 
 
 Sect. 97. — (1.) Subject to the provisions of this 
 Act, every Court having original jurisdiction in 
 bankruptcy shall have jurisdiction throughout Eng- 
 land. 
 
 (2.) Any proceedings in bankruptcy ma;/ at any 
 time, and at any stage thereof, and either u-ith or 
 without application from any of the parties thereto. 
 
( 93 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, 
 
 ( 94 ) 
 
 T. BANKRUPTCY - 
 
 — continued. 
 
 -STATTTXES AND GAZETTE I, BANKEUPTCY - 
 
 — continued. 
 
 -STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 he transferred hj any prescribed authority and in 
 the prescribed manner from one Court to another 
 Court, or may by the like authority he retained in 
 the Court in which the proceedings were commenced, 
 although it may vot he the Court in which the pro- 
 ceedings ought to have heen commenced. 
 
 (3.) If any question of law arises in any hanle- 
 iiuptcy proceeding in a County Court which all the 
 pctfties to the proceeding desire, or which one of 
 them and the judge of the County Court may desire, 
 to have determined in the first instance in the High 
 Court, the judge shall state the facts, in the form of 
 a special case, for the opinion of the Sigh Court. 
 The special case and proceedings, or such of them 
 as may be required, shall be transmitted to the 
 High Court for the purposes of the determination. 
 
 Sect. 98. Subject to the provisions of this Act and 
 to general rules the judge of the High Court exer- 
 cising jurisdiction in bankruptcy may exercise in 
 charrAers the whole or any part of his jv/risdic- 
 tion. 
 
 Seat. 99. — (1.) The registrars in bankruptcy of 
 the High Court, and the registrars of a County 
 Court having jurisdiction in bankruptcy, shall have 
 the power and jurisdiction in this section mentioned, 
 and any order made or act done by such registrars 
 in the exercise of the said powers and jurisdiction 
 shall he deemed the order or act of the Court. 
 
 (2.) Subject to general rules limiting the powers 
 conferred by this section, a registrar shall have 
 power — 
 
 (a.) To hear bankruptcy petitions, and to make 
 receiving orders and adjudications thereon : 
 (b.) To hold public examinations of debtors : 
 (c.) To grant orders of discliarge where the ap- 
 plication is not opposed : 
 (d.) To approve compositions or schemes of ar- 
 rangement when they are not opposed : 
 (e.) To make interim orders in any case of 
 
 urgency : 
 (f.) To make any order or exercise any jurisdic- 
 tion which by any rule in that behalf is 
 prescribed as proper to he made or exercised 
 in chambers : 
 (g.) To hear and determine any unopposed or ex 
 
 parte application : 
 (h.) To summon and examine any person known 
 or suspected to have in his possession effects 
 of the debtor or to be indebted to Mm, or 
 capable of giving information respecting 
 the debtor, his dealings, or property. 
 (3.) The registrars in bankruptcy of the High 
 Court shall also have power to grant orders of dis- 
 charge and certificates of removal of disqualifica- 
 tions, and to approve compositions and schemes of 
 arrangement. 
 
 (4) A registrar shall not have power to commit 
 for contempt of Court. 
 
 (5.) The Lord Chancellor niay from. time to time 
 hy order direct timt any specified registraf of a 
 County Court shall have and exercise all the powers 
 of a bankruptcy registrar of the High Court. 
 
 Sect. 100. A County Court shall, for the purposes 
 of its banhruptcy jurisdiction, in, addition to the 
 ordinary powers of the Court, have all the powers 
 and jurisdiction of the High Court, and orders of 
 the Court may be enforced accordingly in manner 
 
 Sect. 101. Where any money or funds have heen 
 received by an official receiver, or by the Board of 
 Trade, and the Court makes an order declaring 
 that any person is entitled to such moneys or funds, 
 the Board of Trade shall make an order for the 
 payment thereof to the person so entitled as afore- 
 said. 
 
 Sect. 102. — (1.) Subject to the provisions of this 
 Act, every Court having jurisdiction in bankruptcy 
 wider this Act shall have full power to decide all 
 questions of priorities, and all other questions what- 
 soever, whether of laio or fact, which may arise in 
 any case of bankruptcy coming within tlie cogni- 
 zance of the Court, or which the Court may deem it 
 expedient or necessary to decide for the purpose of 
 doing complete justice or making a complete distri- 
 bution of property in any such case. 
 
 Provided that the jurisdiction hereby given shall 
 not be exercised by the County Court for the purpose 
 of adjudicating upon any claim, not arising out of 
 the bankruptcy, which might heretofore have been 
 enforced by action in the High Court, unless all 
 parties to the proceeding consent thereto, or the 
 money, money's worth, or right in dispute does not 
 in the opinion of the judge exceed in value £200. 
 
 (2.) A Court having jurisdiction in bankru/ptcy 
 under this Act shall not he subject to he restrained 
 in the execution of its powers under this Act hy 
 the order of any other Court, iwr sliall any appeal 
 lie from its decisions, except in manner directed hy 
 this Act. 
 
 (3.) If in any proceeding in bankruptcy there 
 arises any question of fact which either of the 
 parties desire to he tried before a jury instead of by 
 the Court itself, or which the Court thinks ought to 
 be tried by a jury, the Court may if it thinks fit 
 direct the trial to he had with a jury, and the trial 
 may be had accordingly, in the High Court in the 
 same manner as if it were the trial of an issue of 
 fact in an action, and in the County Court in tlie 
 manner in which jury trials in ordinary cases are 
 hy law held in that Court. 
 
 (4.) Where a receiving order has been made in 
 the High Court under this Act, the judge hy whom 
 such order was made shall have power, if he sees 
 fit, without any further consent, to order the transfer 
 to such judge of any action pending in any other 
 division, brought or continued by or against the 
 bankrupt. 
 
 (5.) Where default is made hy a trustee, debtor, 
 or other person in obeying any order or direction 
 given by the Board of Trade or by cm official 
 receiver or any other officer of the Board of Trade 
 under any power conferred by this Act, the Court 
 may, on the application of the Board of Trade or 
 cm official receiver or other, duly authorized person 
 order such defcmlting trustee, debtor, or person to 
 comply with the order or direction so given ; and 
 the. Court may also, if it shall think fit, upon any 
 such application make an immediate order for the 
 committal of such defaulting trustee, debtor, or other 
 person ; provided that the power given by this sub- 
 section shall he deemed to be in addition to and 
 not in substitution for amy other right or remedy in 
 respect of such default. 
 
 Judgment Debtors.] Sect. 103. — (1.) It shall 
 be lawful for the Lord Chamcellor hy order to direct 
 tliat the jurisdiction and powers wider sect. 5 of the 
 
( 95 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 90 ) 
 
 J. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 Debtors Act, 1869, now vested in (lie High Court, 
 shall he assigned to and exercised iy the judge to 
 whom iankruptcy husiness is assigned, 
 
 (2.) It shall be lawful also for the Lord Chan- 
 cellor in like manner to direct that the whole or 
 any part of the said jurisdiction aiid powers shall 
 he delegated to and exercised hy the bankruptcy 
 /registrars of the High Court. 
 
 (3.) Any order made under this section may, at 
 any time, in like manner, he rescinded or varied., 
 
 (4.) Every County Court within the jurisdiction 
 &f which a judgment debtor is or resides shall have 
 jurisdiction under sect. 5 of the Debtors Act, 1869, 
 although tlie' amount of the judgment debt may 
 exceed £50. 
 
 (5.) Wliere, under sect. 5 of the Debtors Act, 
 1869, application is made hy a judgment creditor 
 to a Court, having bankruptcy jurisdiction, for the 
 emnmittal of a judgment debtor, the Court may, if 
 it thinks fit, decline to commit, and in lieu thereof, 
 with the consent of the judgment creditor, and on 
 payment by him of the prescribed fee, make a 
 receiving order against the debtor. In such case 
 the judgment debtor shall he deemed to have com- 
 mitted an act of bankruptcy at the tim£ the order is 
 made. 
 
 (6.) General rules under this Act may be made 
 for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions 
 of the Debtors Act, 1869. 
 
 Appeals.] Sect. 104. — (1.) Every Court haviru) 
 jurisdiction in bankruptcy under this Act may 
 review, rescind, or vary any order made by it under 
 its bankruptcy jurisdiction. 
 
 [By the Act 47 Vict. c. 9, subsection 2 of this 
 section is repealed; and an appeal lies at the 
 instance of any person aggrieved from the order of 
 a County Court to a Divisional Court of the High 
 Court, of which the judge to whom bankruptcy 
 husiness is assigned shall he a member for the time 
 being. 
 
 The decision of such Divisional Court is final; 
 unless leave he given by it. or by the Court of 
 Appeal, to appeal to the Court of Appeal, which 
 appeal is final.'] 
 
 Procedure.] Serf. 105. — (1.) Subject to the pro- 
 visions of this Act and to geiieral rules, the costs 
 of and incidental to any proceeding in Court under 
 this Act shall be in the discretion of the Court ; 
 Provided that where any issue is tried by a jury 
 the costs shall follow the event, unless, upon appli- 
 .cation made at the trial for good cause shewn, the 
 judge hefme whom such issue is tried shall other- 
 wise order. 
 
 (2.) The Court may at any time adjourn any 
 proceedings before it upon such terms, if any, as it 
 ^may think fit to impose. 
 
 (8.) The Court may at any time amend any 
 •written process or proceeding under this Act upon 
 such terms, if any, as it may think fit to impose. 
 
 (4.) Where hy this Act or hy general rules, the 
 time for doing any act or thing is limited, the 
 Court nay extend the time either before or after 
 the expiration thereof, upon such terms, if amy, as 
 the Court may think fit to impose. 
 
 (5.) Subject to general rules, the Court may in 
 any matter take the whole or any part of the 
 evidence either viva voce, or hy interrogatories, or 
 upon affidavit, or hy commission ahvad. 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY — STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 —continued. 
 
 (6.) For the purpose of approving a composition 
 or scheme by joint debtors, the Court may, if it 
 thinks fit, and on the report of the official receiver 
 that it is expedient so to do, dispense with the 
 public examination of one of such joint debtors if 
 he is unavoidably prevented from attending the 
 examination hy illness or absence abroad. 
 
 Sect. 106. Where two or more bankruptcy 
 petitions are presented against the same debtor or 
 against joint debtors, the Court may consolidate 
 the proceedings, or any of them, on such terms as 
 the Court thinks fit. 
 
 Sect. 107. Where the petitioner does not proceed 
 with due diligence on his petition, the Court may 
 substitute as petitioner any other creditor to whom 
 the debtor may he indebted in the amaunt required 
 by this Act in the case of the petitioning creditor. 
 
 Sect. 108. If a debtor hy or against whom a 
 bankruptcy petition has been presented dies, the 
 proceedings in the matter shall, unless the Court 
 otherwise orders, be continued as if he were alive. 
 
 Sect. 109. The Court may at any time, for 
 sufficient reason, make an order staying the pro- 
 ceedings under a bankruptcy petition, either alto- 
 getlier or for a limited time, on such terms and stdj- 
 ject to such conditions as the Court may think just. 
 
 Sect. 110. Any creditor whose debt is sufficient 
 to entitle him to present a bankruptcy petition 
 against all the partners of a firm may present a 
 petition against any one or more partners of the 
 firm without including the others. 
 
 Sect. 111. Where there are more respondents 
 than one to a petition the Court tnay dismiss the 
 petition as to one or more of them, without prejudice 
 to the effect of the petition as against the other err 
 others of them. 
 
 Sect. 112. Where a receiving order has been 
 made on a bankruptcy petition against or by one 
 merriber of a partnership, any other bankruptcy 
 petition against or by a member of the same partner- 
 ship shall be filed in or transferred to the Court in 
 which the first mentioned petition is in course of 
 prosecution, and, unless the Court otherwise directs, 
 the same trustee or receiver shall be appointed as 
 inay have been appointed in respect of the property 
 of the first mentioned members of the partnership, 
 and the Court may give such directions for con- 
 solidating (lie proceedings under (he petitions as it 
 
 Sect. 113. Where a member of a partnership is 
 adjudged bankrupt, the Court may authorize the 
 trustee to commence and prosecute any action in the 
 names of (he trustee and of the bankrupt's partner ; 
 and any release by suxih partner of the debt or 
 demand to which the action relates shall be void ; 
 hut notice of the application for authority to com- 
 mence the action shall he given to him, and he may 
 shew cause against it, and on his application the 
 Court may, if it thinks fit, direct (hat he shaU 
 receive his proper share of the proceeds of the 
 action, and xf he does not claim any benefit there- 
 from he shall be indemnified against costs in 
 respect thereof as (he Court directs. 
 
 Sect. 114. Wliere a bankrupt is a contractor in 
 respect of any contract joinUy with any person or 
 persons, such person or persons may sue or he sued 
 in respect of the contract without the joinder of the 
 bankrupt. 
 
('97 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 1. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Sect. 115. Any two or more persons, being part- 
 ners, or any person carrying on business under u, 
 partnersliip Tiame, may take proceedings or be pro- 
 <ieeded against under this Act in the name of the 
 firm, but in such case the Court may, on application 
 by any person interested, order the names of the 
 persons who are partners in such firm, or the name 
 of Sttoft person to be disclosed in such manner, and 
 verified on oath, or othericise as the Court may 
 direct. 
 
 Officers.] Sect. 116. — (1.) No registrar or other 
 officer attached to any Court liaving jurisdiction in 
 bankruptcy shall, during his continuance in office, 
 be capable of being elected or sitting as a member 
 of the Bouse of Commons. 
 
 (2.) No registrar or official receiver or other 
 officer attached to any such Court shall, during his 
 continuance in office, either directly or indirectly, 
 by himself, his clerh, or partner, act as solicitor in 
 any proceedings in bankruptcy or in any prosecu- 
 tion of a debtor by order of the Court, and if he 
 does so act he shall be liable to be dismissed from 
 office. 
 
 Provided that nothing in this section shall affect 
 the right of any registrar or officer appointed before 
 the passing of this Act to act as solicitor by himself, 
 his clerk, or partner to the extent permitted by 
 sect. 69 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 
 Orders and Warrants of Court.] Sect. HI. Any 
 order made by a Court having jurisdiction in bank- 
 ruptcy in England under this Act shall be enforced 
 in Scotland and Ireland in the Courts havvig juris- 
 diction in bankruptcy in tliose parts of the tfnitsd 
 Kingdom respectively, in tJie same manner in all 
 respects as if the order had been made by the Court 
 liereby required to enforce it ; and in Wee manner 
 any order made by a Court liaving jurisdiction in 
 ■bankruptcy in Scotland shall be enforced in England 
 and Ireland, and any order made by u, Court 
 having jurisdiction in bankruptcy in Ireland shall 
 i)e enforced in England and Scotland by tlie Courts 
 respectively having jurisdiction in bankruptcy in 
 the part of the United Kingdom where the orders 
 may require to be enforced, and in the same manner 
 in all respects as if the order had been made by the 
 Court required to enforce it in a case of bankruptcy 
 within its own jurisdiction. 
 
 Sect. 118. Tlie High Court, the County Courts, 
 the Courts having jurisdiction in bankruptcy in 
 Scotland and Ireland, and every British Court 
 ■elsewhere having jurisdiction in bankruptcy or 
 insolvency, and the officers of tliose Courts respe/i- 
 tively, shall severally act in aid of and be auxiliary 
 to each other in all matters of bankruptcy, and an 
 order of the Court seeking aid, with a request to 
 another of the said Courts, shall be deemed suffi- 
 cient to enable the latter Court to exercise, in 
 regard to the matters directed by the order, such 
 jurisdiction, as eitlier the Court which made the 
 request, or the Court to which the request is made, 
 could exercise in regard to similar matters within 
 their respective jurisdictions. 
 
 Seci..ll9. — (i.) Any warrant of a Court having 
 jurisdiction in bankruptcy in England may be 
 ^refoj-ced in Scotland, Ireland, Isle of Man, the 
 Channel Isles, and elsewhere in Her ^ Majesty's 
 dominions, in the same manner and subject to the 
 ■same privileges in and subject to which a warrant 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 issued by^ any justice of the peace against a person 
 for an indictable offence against the laws of 
 England, may be executed in those parts of Her 
 Majesty's dominions respectively in pursuance of 
 the Acts of Parliament in that behalf. 
 
 (2.) A search warrant issued by a Court having 
 jurisdiction in bankruptcy for the discovery of any 
 property of a debtor may be executed in manner 
 pi-escribed, or in the same manner and subject to 
 the same privileges in and subject to which a search 
 warrant for property supposed to be stolen may be 
 executed according to law. 
 
 Sect. 120. Where the Court commits Q,ny person 
 to prison, the commitment may be to such convenient 
 prison as the Court thinks expedient, and if the 
 gaoler of any prison refuses to receive any person 
 so committed he shall be liable for every such 
 refusal to a fine not exceeding £100. 
 
 Pakt VII. Small Bankeuptoies. 
 Sect. 121. When a petition is presented by or 
 against a debtor, if the Court is satisfied by affi- 
 davit or otherwise, or tlie official receiver reports to 
 the Court that the property of the debtor is not 
 likely to exceed in value £300, the Court may make 
 an order that the debtor's estate be administered in 
 a summary manner, and thereupon the provisions 
 of this Act sliall be subject to the following modifi- 
 cations : — 
 
 (1.) If the debtor is adjudged bankrupt the 
 
 official receiver shall be the trustee in tlie 
 
 bankruptcy : 
 
 (2.) There shall be no committee of inspection, 
 
 but the official receiver may do with the 
 
 permission of the Board of Trade all things 
 
 which may be done by the trustee with the 
 
 permission of the committee of inspection : 
 
 (3.) Such other modifications Tnay be made in the 
 
 provisions of this Act as may be prescribed 
 
 by general rules with the view of saving 
 
 expense and simplifying procedure ; but 
 
 nothing in this section shall permit the 
 
 modification of the provisions of this Act 
 
 relating to the examination or diseha,rge of 
 
 the debtor. 
 
 Provided that the creditors may at any time, by 
 
 special resolution, resolve that some person other 
 
 than the official receiver be appointed trustee in the 
 
 bankruptcy, and thereupon the bankruptcy shall 
 
 proceed as if an order for summary administration 
 
 had not been marie. 
 
 Sect. 122. — (1.) Wliere a judgment has been ob- 
 tained in a County Court and tlie debtor is unable to 
 pay the amount forthwith, and alleges that his 
 whole indebtedness amounts to a sum not exceeding 
 £50, inclusive of the debt for which tlie judgment is 
 obtained, the County Court may make an order pro- 
 viding for the administration of his estate, and for 
 the payment of his debts by instalments or other- 
 wise, and either in full or to such extent as to the 
 County Court under the circumstances of the case 
 appears practicable, and subject to any conditions 
 as to his future earnings or income which the Court 
 may think just. 
 
 (2.) Tlie order shall not be invalid by reason only 
 that the total amount of the debts is found at any 
 time to exceed £50, but in such case the County Court 
 may, if it thinks fit, set aside the order. 
 
C 99 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 100 ) 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (3.) Where, in the opinion of the County Court in 
 which the judgment is obtained, it would be incon- 
 venient that that Court should administer the estate, 
 it shall cause a certificate of the judgment to be 
 forwarded to the County Court in the. district of 
 rohich the debtor or the majority of the creditm-s 
 resides or reside, and thereupon the latter County 
 Court shall have all the powers which it would have 
 under this section, had the judgment been obtained 
 in it. 
 
 (4.) Wliere it appears to the registrar of the 
 County Court that property of the debtor exceeds in 
 value £10, he shall, at the request of any creditor, 
 and without fee, issue execution against the debtor's 
 goods, but the household goods, wearing apparel, 
 and bedding of the debtor or his family, and the 
 tools and implements of his trade to the value in the 
 aggregate of £20, shall to that extent be protected 
 from seizure. 
 
 (5.) When the order is made no creditor shall 
 have any remedy against the person or property of 
 the debtor in respect of any debt which the debtor 
 has notified to a County Court, except with the leave 
 of that County Court, and on such terms as that 
 Court may impose ; and any County Court or in- 
 ferior Court in which proceedings are pending 
 against the debtor in respect of any such debt shall, 
 on receiving notice of the order, stay the proceedings, 
 but may allow costs already incurred by the creditor, 
 and such costs may, on application, be added to the 
 debt notified. 
 
 (6.) if the debtor makes default in payment of 
 any instalment payable in pursuance of any order 
 under this section, he shall, unless the contrary is 
 proved, be deemed to have had since the date of the 
 order the means to pay the sum in respect of which 
 he has made default and to have refused or neglected 
 to pay the same. 
 
 (7.) The order shall be carried into effect in such 
 manner as may he prescribed by general rules. 
 
 (8.) Money paid into Court under the order shall 
 be appropriated first in satisfaction of the costs of 
 the plaintiff in the action, next in satisfaction of 
 the costs of administration (which shall not aeoeed 
 2s. in the pound on the total amount of the debts), 
 and then in liquidation of debts in accordance with 
 the order. 
 
 (9.) Notice of the order shall be sent to the regis- 
 trar of County Court judgments, and be posted in the 
 office of tlie County Court of the district in which the 
 debtor resides, and sent to every creditor notified by 
 the debtor, or who has proved. 
 
 (10.) Any creditor of the debtor, on proof of his 
 debt before the registrar, shall be entitled to be 
 scheduled as a creditor of the debtor for the amount 
 of his proof. 
 
 (11.) Any creditor may^in the. prescribed manner 
 object to any debt schechiled, or to the manner in 
 lohich payment is directed to be made by instal- 
 ments. 
 
 (12.) Any person who after the date of the order 
 becomes a creditor of the debtor, shall, on proof of 
 his debt before the registrar, be scheduled as a 
 creditor of the debtor for the amount of his proof, 
 but shall not be entitled to any dividend under the 
 order until those creditors who are scheduled as 
 having been creditors before the date of the order 
 have been paid to the extent provided by the order. 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 (13.) When the amount received under the order 
 is sufficient to pay each creditor scheduled to the 
 extent thereby provided, and the costs of the plaintiff, 
 and of the administration, the order shall be super- 
 seded, and the debtor shall be discharged from his 
 debts to the scheduled creditors. 
 
 (14.) In computing the salary of a registrar 
 under the County Court Acts every creditor 
 scheduled, not being a judgment creditor, shall 
 count as a plaint. 
 
 Pabt VIII. S^:pPLElIE^-TAL Peovisions. 
 
 Application of Act.] Sect. 123. A receiving 
 order shall not be made against any corporation, or 
 against any partnership or association, or company 
 registered under the Companies Act, 1862. 
 
 Sect. 124. // a person having privilege of Par- 
 liament commits an act of bankruptcy, he may be 
 dealt with under this Act in like manner as if lie 
 had not such privilege. 
 
 Sect. 126. No person not being a trader within 
 the meaning of the Bankruptcy Act, 1861, shall be 
 adjudged bankrupt in respect of a debt contracted, 
 before the passing of the Act. 
 
 Administration of Deceased Insolvent Debtor's 
 Estate.] Sect. 125. — (1.) Any creditor of a de- 
 ceased debtor whose debt woidd have been sufficient 
 to support a bankruptcy petition against such 
 debtor, had hebeen alive, may present to the Court a 
 petition in the prescribed form praying for an order 
 for the administration of the estate of the deceased 
 debtor, accmding to the Laic of Bankruptcy. 
 
 (2.) Upon the prescribed notice being given to the 
 legal personal representative of the deceased debtor, 
 the Court may in tlie prescribed manner, upon proof 
 of the petitioner's debt, unless the Court is satisfied! 
 that there is a reasonable probability that the estate 
 wiU be sufficient for the payment of the debts owimp 
 by the deceased, make an order for the administra- 
 tion in bankruptcy of tlie deceased debtor's estate, 
 or mayupon cause shewn dismiss such petition with 
 or without costs. 
 
 (3.) An order of administration under thissection 
 sliall not be made until tlie expiration of two months- 
 from the date of tlie grant of probate or letters of 
 administration, unless with the concurrence of the 
 legal personal representative of the deceased debtor, 
 or unless the petitioner proves to the satisfaction of 
 the Court that the debtor committed an act of bank- 
 ruptcy within three months prior to his decease. 
 
 (4.) A petition for administration under this 
 section shall not be presented to the Court after pro- 
 ceedings have been commenced in any CouH of 
 justice for the administration of tlie deceased' 
 debtm-'s estate, but that Court may in such case, on- 
 the application of any creditor, and on proof that 
 the estate is insufficient to pay its debts, transfer the 
 proceedings to the Court exercising jurisdiction in 
 bankruptcy, and thereupon such last-mentioned 
 Court may, in the prescribed manner, make an 
 order for the administration of the estate of the 
 deceased debtor, and the like consequences shall 
 ensue as under «)i administration ordei- made on 
 tlie petition of a creditor. 
 
 (5.) Upon an order being made for the adminis- 
 tration of a deceased debtor's estate, the property of 
 tlie debtor shall vest in the official receirer of the 
 Court, as trustee thereof, and he shall forthwith- 
 
( 101 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 102 ) 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AMD GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 ■proceed to realize and distribute, the same in accord- 
 ance with the provisions of this Act. 
 
 (6.) With tlie modifications hereinafter men- 
 tioned, all the promsiims of Part III. of this Act, 
 relating to the administration of the property of a 
 ianltrupt, shall, so far as the same are applicable, 
 apply to the case of an administration order under 
 this section in like manner as to an order of adju- 
 dication under this Act. 
 
 (7.) In the administration of the property of the 
 deceased debtor under an order of administration, 
 the official receiver shall have regard to any claim, 
 by the legal personal representative of the deceased 
 debtor to payment of the proper funeral and testa- 
 mentary expenses incurred by him in and about the 
 debtor's estate, and such claims shall be deemed a 
 preferential debt under the order, aiid be payable in 
 full, out of the debtor's estate, in priority to all 
 other debts. 
 
 (8.) If, on the administration of a deceased 
 debtor's esfetie, any surplus remains in the hands of 
 the official receiver, after payment in full of all the 
 debts due from the debtor, together with the costs of 
 the administration and interest as provided by this 
 Act in ease of bankruptcy, such surplus shall be 
 paid over to the legal personal representative of the 
 deceased debtoi''s estate, or dealt with in such other 
 manner as may be prescribed. 
 
 (9.) Notice to the legal personal representative of 
 a deceased debtor of the presentation by a creditor 
 of a petition under this section shall, in the event of 
 an order for administration beinrj made thereon, he 
 deemed to be equivalent to notice of an act of bank- 
 ruptcy, and after such notice no payment or transfer 
 of property made by the legal personal representa- 
 tive shall operate as a discharge to him as between 
 himself and the qfflcial receiver ; save as aforesaid 
 nothing in this section shall invalidate any pay- 
 ment made, or any act or thing done in good faith 
 by the legal personal representative before the date 
 of the order for administration. 
 
 (10.) Unless the context otherwise requires, 
 " Court," in this section, means the Court within the 
 jurisdieticm of which the debtor resided or carried 
 an business for the greater part of the six months 
 immediately prior to his decease ; *' creditor " 
 means one or more creditors qualified to present a 
 bankruptcy petition, as in this Act provided. 
 
 (11.) General rules, fw carrtjing into effect the 
 provisions of this section, may be made in the same 
 manner and to the like effect and extent as in bank- 
 ruptcy. 
 
 Construction of former Acts, &c.] Sect. 149. — 
 (1.) Where in any Act of Parliament, instrument, 
 or proceeding passed, executed, or taken before tlie 
 commencement of this Act, mention is made of a 
 commission of bankruptcy or fiat in bankruptcy, 
 the same shall be construed, with reference to the 
 proceedings under a bankruptcy petition, as if a 
 commission of or flat in bankruptcy had been 
 actually issued at the time of the presentation of 
 such petition. 
 
 (2.) Where by any act or instrument reference 
 
 is made to the 'Bankruptcy Act, 1869, the act or 
 
 ' instrument shall he construed and have effect as if 
 
 reference were made therein to tlie corresponding 
 
 provisions of this Act. 
 
 Crown.] Sect. 150. Save as lierein provided 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 the provisions of this Act relating to the remedies 
 against the property of a debtor, the priorities of 
 debts, the effect of a composition or scheme of ar- 
 rangement and the effect of a discharge shall bind 
 the Crown. 
 
 Audience, Bight of.] Sect. 151. Nothing in this 
 Act, or in any transfer of jurisdiction effected 
 thereby, shall take away or affect any right of 
 audience that any person may have had at the 
 commencement of this Act, and all solicitors and 
 other persons loho had the right of audience before 
 tlie Chief Judge in Bankruptcy shall have the like 
 right of audience in bankruptcy matters in tlie 
 High Court. 
 
 Married Women.] Sect. 152. Nothing in this 
 Act shall affect the provisions of the Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882. 
 
 Evidence.] Sect. 132. — (1.) A copy of the 
 London Gazette containing any notice inserted 
 therein in pursuance of this Act shall be evidence of 
 the facts stated in the notice. 
 
 (2.) The production of a copy of the London 
 Gazette containing any notice of a receiving order, 
 or of an order adjudging a debtor bankrupt, shall be 
 conclusive evidence in all legal proceedings of tlie 
 order having been duly made, and of its date. 
 
 Sect. 133. — (1.) A minute of proceedings at a 
 meeting of creditors under this Act, signed at the 
 same or the next ensuing meeting, by a person 
 describing himself as, or appearing to be, chairman 
 of the meeting at which the minute is signed, shall 
 be received in evidence without further proof. 
 
 (2.) Until the contrary is proved, every meeting 
 of creditors in respect of tlie proceedings whereof a 
 minute lias been so signed shall be deemed to have 
 been duly convened and held, and all resolutions 
 passed or proceedings had thereat to have been duly 
 passed or had. 
 
 Sect. 134. Any petition or copy of a petition in 
 bankruptcy, any order or certificate or copy of an 
 order or certificate made by any Court having 
 jurisdiction in bankruptcy, any instrument or copy 
 of an instrument, affidavit, or document made or 
 used in the course of any bankruptcy proceedings, 
 or other proceedings had under this Act, shall, if 
 it appears to be sealed with tlie seal of any Court 
 having jurisdiction in bankruptcy, or purports to 
 be signed by any judge thereof, or is certified as a 
 true copy by any registrar thereof, be receivable in 
 evidence in all legal proceedings whatever. 
 
 Sect. 135. Subject to general rules, any affidavit 
 to be used in u, Bankruptcy Court may be sworn 
 befoi'e any person authorized to administer oaths in 
 the Sigh Court, or in tlie Court of Chancery of the 
 County Palatine of Lancaster, or before any regis- 
 trar of a Bankruptcy Court, or before any officer 
 of a Bankruptcy Court authorized in writing on 
 that behalf by the judge of the Court, or, in case of 
 a person residing in Scotland or in Ireland, before 
 a judge ordinary, magistrate, m justice of the 
 peace, or, in the case of a person who is out of the 
 Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, before a 
 magistrate or justice of the peace or other person 
 qualified to administer oaths in the country where 
 he resides {he being certified to be a magistrate or 
 justice of the peace, or qualified as afm-esaid by a 
 British minister or British consul, or by a notary 
 public). 
 
 E 2 
 
( 103 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 104 ) 
 
 I. BANKETTPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Sect. 136. In case of the death of the debtor or 
 his wife, or of a witness whose evidence lias Iteen 
 received hy any Court in. any proceeding under 
 this Act, the deposition of the person so deceased, 
 purportinfj to ie sealed with the seal of the Court, 
 or a copy thereof purporting to he so sealed, shall 
 he admitted as evidence of the matters therein de- 
 posed to. 
 
 Sect. 137. Every Court hnvinrj jurisdiction in 
 hanliruptcy under this Act shall have aseal describ- 
 ing the Court in such manner as may he directed 
 hy order of the Lord Chancellor, and judicial 
 notice shall be taken of the seed, and of the signa- 
 ture of the judge or registrar of any such Court, in 
 all legal proceedings. 
 
 Sect. 138. A certificate of the Board of Trade 
 that a person has been appointed trustee under this 
 Act, shall he conclusive evidence of his appointment. 
 
 Sect. 139. Where by this Act an appeal to the 
 Sigh Court is given against any decision of the 
 Board of Trade, or of the official receirer, the appeal 
 shall be hrought ivifliin twenty-one days from the 
 time when the decision appealed against is pro- 
 nounced or made. 
 
 Sect. 140. — (1.) All documents purpiorting to be 
 orders or certificates made or isstied by tlie Board 
 of Trade, and to be sealed with the seal of the 
 Board, or to he signed by a secretary or assistant 
 secretary of the Board, or any person authoHzed in 
 that behalf by the President of the Board, shall he 
 received in evidence, and deemed to be such ord-ers 
 or certificates witltout further proof unless the con- 
 trary is slieivn. 
 
 (2.) A certificate signed hy the President of the 
 Board of Trade, that any order made, certificate 
 issued, or act done, is the order, certificate, or act 
 of the Board of Trade shall be conclusive evidence 
 of the fact so certitied.. 
 
 Time.] Sect. 111.— (1.) Wliere hy this Act any 
 limited time from or after any date or event is ap- 
 pointed or allowed for tlie doing of any act or the 
 tailing of any proceeding, tlien in tlie computation of 
 that limited time tlie same shall he tahen as exclusive 
 of the day of tltut date or of the happening of that 
 event, and as commencing at the beginning of the 
 next following day ; and the act or proceeding shall 
 be done or taken at latest on the last day of that 
 limited time as is computed, unless the last day is a 
 Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday, or Monday 
 or Tuesday in Easter week, or a day appointed for 
 public fast, humiliation, or thanksgiving, or a day 
 on which the Court does not sit, in which case any 
 act or proceeding shall he considered as done or 
 taken in due time if it is done or taken on the next 
 day afterwards, which shall not he one of the days 
 in this section specified. 
 
 (2.) Mliere hy tliis Act any act or proceeding is 
 directed to be done or taJien on a certain day, then 
 if that day happens to be one of tlie days in this 
 section specified, the act or proceeding shall be con- 
 sidered as done or taken in due time if it is done 
 or taken on the ne.vt day aftenvards, ivliich shall 
 not he one of the days in this section specified. 
 
 Notices.] Sect. 142. All notices and other docu- 
 ments for the service of which no special m/)de is 
 directed may be sent hy prepaid post letter to the 
 last known address of tliepterson to he served there- 
 with. 
 
 I. BANKETIPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Formal Defects.] Sect. 143.— (1.) No pro- 
 ceeding in bankruptcy shall he invalidated by any 
 formal defect or by any irregularity unless the 
 Court before which an objection is made to the 
 jjroceeding is of opinion that substantial injustice 
 has been caused hy the defect or irregularity and 
 that the injustice cannot he remedied by any oiHer 
 of that Court. 
 
 (2.) No defect or irregularity in the appointment 
 or election of a receiver, trustee, or member of a 
 committee of inspection shall vitiate any act done 
 hy him in good faith. 
 
 General Rules.] Sect, 127 empoivers the Lord 
 Chancellor to make rules for carrying into effect 
 the objects of the Act, which rules, when sanctioned 
 by Parliament, are to take effect as if enacted by 
 the Act. 
 
 Feea.] Sect. 128 empowers the Lord Chancellor 
 to prescribe a scale of fees and percentages to be 
 charged for in respect of proceedings under the 
 Act. 
 
 Sect. 129. As to judicial salaries, &c. 
 
 Sect. 130. Annual aciounts of receipts and ez- 
 pemliture in respect of bankruptcy proceedings to 
 be laid before Parliament and to be audited. 
 
 Sect. 131. Bankruptcy officers to make returns of 
 the business in their respective Courts and offices. 
 
 PeudiriK Prooeediugs.] Sect. 169. — (1.) Repeal 
 of enactments. 
 
 (2.) Savings. 
 
 (3.) Notwithstanding the repeal effected by this 
 Act, the proceedings under any bankruptcy petition, 
 liquidation hy arrangement or composition witli 
 creditors under the Bankruptcy Act, ISdS, pending 
 at the commencement of this Act shall, except so far 
 as any provision of this Act is expressly applied 
 to pending proceedings, continue, and all tlie pro- 
 visions of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869^ shall, except 
 as aforesaid, apply thereto, as if this Act Imd )wt 
 
 Sect. 170. After the p>assing of this Act no com- 
 position or liquidation by arrangement under sects. 
 125 and 126 of the' Bankruptcy Act, 1869, shall be 
 entered into or allowed without the sanction of the 
 Court or registrar having jurisdiction in tlie 
 matter; such sanction shall not he granted unUss 
 the composition or liquidation appears to the Court 
 or registrar to he reasonable and calculated tu 
 benefit the general body of creditors. 
 
 Stamp Duty.] Sect. 144. Every deed, convey- 
 ance, assignment, surrender, admission, or other 
 assurance relating solely to freehold, leaseluM, 
 copyhold, or customary property, or to any mort- 
 gage, charge, or other incumbrance on, or any 
 estate, right, or interest in any real or persoiml 
 property which is part of the estate of any bankrupt, 
 and which, after the exicution of the deed, convey- 
 ance, assignjnenf, surrender, ailniL^sion, or other 
 assurance, either at laiv or in equity, is or remains 
 the estate of tits bankrupt or of the trustee under 
 the bankruptcy, a)Hl every power of attorney, proxy 
 paper, irrit, order, certificate, affidavit, bond, or 
 other instrument or writing relating solely to the 
 property of any bankrupt, or to any proaeeding 
 under any bankruptcy, .•ihallhe exempt from stamp 
 duty, except in respect of fees under this Act, 
 
 Exiciitious.] Sect. 145. Wliere the sheriff sells 
 the goods of a debtor under an c.vecution for a sum 
 
C 105 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 106 ) 
 
 I. BANKEUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 exceeding twenty pounds (including legal incidental 
 expenses), the sale shall, unless the Court from 
 which the process issued otherwise orders, be mcide 
 T)y public auction, and not hy bill of sale or private 
 contract, and shall be puUicly advertised hy the 
 sheriff on and during three days next preceding the 
 day of sale. 
 
 Sect. 146. — (1.) The sheriff shall not under a 
 writ of elegit deliver the goods of u. debtor nor 
 shall a u-rit of elegit extend to goods. 
 . (2.) No in-it of levari facias shall hereafter be 
 issued in any civil proceeding. 
 
 Bankrupt Trustee.] Sect. 147. Wiere a bank- 
 rupt is a trustee within the Trustee Act, 1850, sect, 
 thirty-two of that Act sludl have effect so as to 
 authorize the appointment of a new trustee in 
 substitution for the banhrupt (whether voluntarily 
 resigning or not), if it appears expedient to do so, 
 and all provisions of that Act, and of any other 
 Act relative thereto, shall hare effect accordingly. 
 
 Corporations, &c.] Sect. 148. For all or any of 
 the purposes of this Act a corporation may act hy 
 any of its officers authorized in that behalf under 
 tlie seal of the corporation, a firm may act by any 
 of its members, and a lunatic may act hy his com- 
 mittee or curator bonis. 
 
 Transitory Provisions.] Sect. 153. As to comp- 
 troller in bankruptcy, and other officers and their 
 staff. 
 
 Sect. 154 empowers Lord Chancellor to abolish 
 existing offices. 
 
 Sect. 155. As to performance of nsw duties by 
 pa-sons whose offices are abolished. 
 
 Sect. 156. Fersons appointed to any office or 
 employment under the Act to be selected from 
 persons lohose offices or employments have been 
 abolished under the Act. 
 
 Sect. 157. As to acceptance of public employment 
 hy any person to whom a compensation annuity is 
 granted under the Act. 
 
 Sect. 158. Superannuation of registrars, &c. 
 Sect. 159. In every liquidation by arrangement, 
 under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, pending at the 
 commencement of this Act, if at any time after the 
 commencement of this Act there is no trustee acting 
 in the liqwidation by reason of death, or for any 
 other cause, such of the official receivers of bank- 
 rupts' estates as is appointed by the Board of Trade 
 for that purpose, shall become and be the trustee in 
 tlie liquidation, and the property of the liquidating 
 debtor shall pass to and vest in him accordingly ; 
 but this provision shall not prejudice the right of the 
 creditors in the liquidation to appoint a new trustee, 
 in manner directed by the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 or the rules thereunder, and on such appointment 
 the property of the liquidating debtor shall pass to 
 and vest in the new trustee. 
 
 The provisions of this Act with respect to the 
 duties and responsibilities of and accounting hy a 
 trustee in a bankruptcy under this Act sludl apply, 
 as nearly as may be, to a trustee acting under the 
 provisions of this section. 
 
 Sect. 160. Where a bankruptcy or liquidation by 
 arrangement under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, has 
 been or is hereafter closed, any property of the 
 bankrupt or liquidating debtor which vested in the 
 trustee and has not been recdized or distributed 
 shall vest in such person as may be appointed by 
 
 I. BAWKSUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 the Board of Trade for that purpose, and he shall 
 thereupon proceed to get in, realize, and distribute 
 the property in like manner, and with and subject 
 to the like poioers and obligations, as far as ap- 
 plicable, as if the bankruptcy or liquidation were 
 continuing, and he were acting as trustee there- 
 under. 
 
 Sect. 161. In every bankruptcy under the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1SG9, pendijig at the commencement of 
 this Act, lohere a registrar of the London Bank- 
 ruptcy Court, or of any County Court is or would 
 hereafter but for this enactment become the trustee 
 under tlie bankruptcy, su^h of the official receivers 
 of bankrupts' estates as may be appointed by the 
 Board of Trade for that purpose shall from and 
 after the commencement of this Act be the trustee in 
 the place of tlie registrar, and the property of the 
 bankrupt shall pass to and vest in the official 
 receiver ancordingly. 
 
 Unclaimed Funds or Dividends.] Sect. 162. — 
 (1.) Where the , trustee, under any bankruptcy, 
 composition or scheme pursuant to this Act, shall 
 have under his control any unclaimed dividend 
 which has remained unclaimed for more than six 
 months, or where, after making a final dividend, 
 such trustee shall have in his hands or under his 
 control any unclaimed or undistributed moneys 
 arising from the property of the debtor, he shall 
 forthwith pay the same to the Bankruptcy Estates 
 Account at the Bank of England. The Board of 
 Trade shall furnish him with a certificate of receipt 
 of the money so paid, which shall be an effectual 
 discharge to him in respect thereof. 
 
 (2.) (a.) Wliere, after the passing of this Act, 
 any unclaimed or undistributed funds or dividends 
 in the hands or under the control of any trustee or 
 other person empowered to collect, receive, or dis- 
 tribute any funds or dividends under any Act of 
 Parliament mentioned in the Fourth Schedule, or 
 any petition, resolution, deed, or other proceeding 
 under or in pursuance of any such Act, have re- 
 mained or remain unclaimed or undistributed for 
 six months after the same became claimable or 
 distributable, or in any other case for two years 
 after the receipt thereof by such trustee or other 
 person, it shall be the duty of such trustee or other 
 person forthwith to pay the same to the Bankruptcy 
 Estates Account at the Bank of England. The 
 Board of Trade shall furnish such trustee or oilier 
 person with a certificate of receipt of the money so 
 paid, which shall be an effectual discharge to him 
 in respect thereof. 
 
 (b.) The Board of Trade may at any time order 
 any such trustee or other person to submit to them 
 an account verified by affidavit of the sums received 
 and paid by him under or in pursuance of any 
 such petition, resolution, deed, or other proceeding 
 as aforesaid, and may direct and enforce an audit 
 of the account. 
 
 (c.) The Board of Trade, with the concurrence 
 of the Treasury, may from time to time appoint a 
 person to collect and get in all such unclaimed or 
 undistributed funds or dividends, and for the pur- 
 poses of this section any Court liaving jurisdiction 
 in bankruptcy shall have and at the instance of the 
 person so appointed, or of the Board of Trade, may 
 exercise all the powers conferred by this Act with 
 respect to the discovery and realization of the pro- 
 
( 107 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 108 ) 
 
 I. BANESTTPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — amtinued. 
 ferty of a debtor, and die provisions of Part. I. of 
 this Act with respect thereto shall, with any neces- 
 sary modification, apply to proceedings under this 
 section. 
 
 (3.) Tlie provisions of this section shall not, 
 except as expressly declared herein, deprive any 
 person of any larger or other right or remedy to 
 which he may he entitled against such trustee or 
 other person. 
 
 (4.) Any person claiming to he entitled to any 
 moneys paid in to the Banhruptcy Estates Account 
 pursuant to this section may apply to the Board of 
 Trade for payment to 1dm of the same, and the 
 Board of Trade, if satisfied that tlie person claim/- 
 ing is entitled, shall make an order for the payment 
 to such person of the sum due. 
 
 Any person dissatisfied with the decision of the 
 Board of Trade in respect of his claim may appeal 
 to the High Court. 
 
 (5.) Tlie Board of Trade may at any time after 
 tlie passing of this Act open the account at the 
 Bank of JEngland referred to in this Act as the 
 Bankruptcy jEstates Account. 
 
 Fraudulent Debtors, Punisliinent of.] Sect. 163. 
 —(1.) Sects. 11 and 12 of the Debtors Act, 1869, 
 relating to the punishment of fraudulent debtors 
 and imposing a penalty for absconding with pi'O- 
 perty, shall liave effect as if there were substituted 
 therein for the words " if after the presentation of 
 a bankruptcy petition against him," the words, "if 
 after the presentation of a bankruptcy petition by 
 or against him." 
 
 (2.) The provisions of the Debtors Act, 1869, as 
 TO offences by bankrupts shall apply to any person 
 wliethei' a trader or not in respect of whose estate a 
 receiving order lias been made as if tlie term 
 "bankrupt" in that Act iiicJudcd a person in 
 respect of whose estate a receiving order had been 
 made. 
 
 Sect. 164. Sect. 16 of the Debtors Act, 1869, shall 
 be construed and have effect as if tlie term. " a 
 trustee in any bankruptcy" included the official 
 receiver of a bankrupt's estate, and shall apply to 
 offences under this Act as well as to offences under 
 ihe DeMors Act, 1869, 
 
 Sect. 165. — (1.) Where there is, in the opinion 
 of the Court, ground to believe that the bankrupt 
 or any other person has been guilty of any offence 
 which is by statute made a misdemeanor in case of 
 bankruptcy, the Court may commit the bankrupt or 
 such other person for trial. 
 
 {'2.) For the purpose of committing the bankrupt 
 or such other person for trial the Court shall liave 
 all the power of a stipendiary magistrate as to 
 taking depositions, binding over witnesses to appear, 
 admitting the accused to bail, or otherwise. 
 
 Nothing in this sub-section shall he construed as 
 derogating from the power or jurisdiction of the 
 Sigh Court. 
 
 Sect. 166. Wliere the Court orders the prosecution 
 of any person for any offence under the Debtors 
 Act) 1869, or Acts amending it. or for any offence 
 arising out of or connected with any bankruptcy 
 proceedings, it shall be the duty of the Director of 
 Public Prosecutions to institute and carry on the 
 prosecution. 
 
 Sect. 167. Wliere a debtor has been guilty of any 
 criminal offence he shall not be exempt from being 
 
 I. BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued, 
 proceeded against tlierefor hy reason that he has 
 obtained Ms discharge, or that a composition or 
 scheme of arrangement has been accepted or ap- 
 proved. 
 
 The General Eules of 1883 made puksuant 
 TO SECT. 127 OP THE Bankeuptcy Act, 1883, 
 
 IlEFEK TO THE FOLLOWING MATTERS : — 
 
 B. 1. Preliminary. 
 [^B. 2a. Additional 
 B. 4. Forms. 
 
 L. G., 1884, p. 1721] 
 
 Past I. Court Procedure. 
 
 B. 5. Court and Clumibers. 
 
 B. 8. Proceedings. 
 
 B. 16. Transfer of proceedings. 
 
 B. 19. Motions and practice. 
 
 B. 30. Security in Court. 
 
 B. H9. Affidavits. 
 
 B. 5). Stamps. 
 
 B. 53. Witnesses and depositions. 
 
 [B. 59 is amiuUed and r. 59a is substituted 
 for it - L. G., 1884, p. 536] 
 
 B. 64. Discovery. 
 
 B. 65. Taking accounts of property mortgaged, 
 and of the sale thereof. 
 
 B. 70. Discovery of debtor's piroperty. 
 
 B. 71. Appropriation of pay, salary, pension, 
 &e. 
 
 B. 75. Warrants, arrests, and commitments. 
 
 B. 79. Sei'vice and execution of p^rocess. 
 
 K. 84. Tri(d by jury. 
 
 B. 88. Sittings of County Court. 
 
 B. 90. Bules relating to the business of the High 
 Court. 
 
 B. 98. Costs. 
 
 B. 111. Appieals. 
 
 [B. 114 is annulled, and r. 114a /s substituted 
 for it - - - L. G., 1884, p. 1721] 
 
 [J?. 116 is annulled, and r. 116a is substituted 
 for it - - - L. G., 1884, p. 1721] 
 
 Part II. Pkoceedinss from Act op Bakk- 
 KUPTCY TO Discharge. 
 
 B. 117. Declaration of inability to pay debts. 
 
 B. 118. Bankruptcy notice. 
 
 B. 125. Banln-uptry petition. 
 
 B. 129. Creditor's petition. 
 
 B. 144. Service of creditor's petition. 
 
 B. 1-I-9. Hearing of petition. 
 
 B. 150. Beceiring order. 
 
 B. 155. Adjudication. 
 
 B. 159. Composition or scheme tinder sects. 18 
 or 23. 
 
 B. 168. Statement of affairs. 
 
 B. 169. Proof of debts'. 
 
 B. 175. Dividends. 
 
 B, 178. Discharge. 
 
 It. 183. Proxies and voting letters. 
 
 B. 184. Meetings of creditors. 
 
 B. 191. Proceedings hy company or co-partner- 
 ship. 
 
 It. 192. Proceedings hy or against firm. 
 
 Part III. Special Procedures. 
 
 B. 198. Small bankru2iteies. 
 B. 200. Administration of estate of persons dying 
 insolvent. 
 
( 109 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 C 110 ) 
 
 X BANKRUPTCY— STATUTES AND GAZETTE 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Fast IV. — Officeus, Thustees, Audit, &c. 
 -K. 203. Gazetting. 
 
 B. 204. Boolcs to he l-cpt and returns to be made 
 J>y Begistrars. 
 
 -B. 207. Accounts and audit. 
 
 R. 218. Trustees. 
 
 B. 232. Disclaimer of kase. 
 
 B: 233. 0£icial receivers. 
 
 B. 251. Payment into and out of hank. 
 
 B. 253. Security hy trustee or special manager. 
 
 B. 254. Bemuneration of special manager, &c. 
 
 B. 255. Unclaimed funds, &c., under sect. 162. 
 
 PAiiT V. — Miscellaneous. 
 
 B. 257. Miscellaneous matters. 
 B. 265. Jurisdiction of High Court under sect. 5 
 of the Debtors Act, 1869, and sect. 103 of this Act. 
 
 Department.] Establishment of a neio depart- 
 ment to be called the Bankruptcy Department. 
 Jan. \st, 1884 - 1. G., 1884, p. 8 
 
 Pees.] Table of fees to he paid on proceedings 
 ^nder this Act. Dec. 28, 1883 I. G., 1883, p. 6709 
 
 Amendment of above notice with regard to 
 ■stamps. July 1st, 1884 I. G., 1884, p. 3011 
 
 Fees and percentages to be charged under the 
 JBanlcruptcy Act, 1883, after 1st of July, 1885. 
 Order of Lord Chancellor, 15th of June, 1885 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 2935 
 
 Notice of the appointment of one official receiver 
 Jor the district of the High Court, and fixing the 
 number of official receivers for County Courts. 
 Jan. 1st, 1884 - - - I. G., 1884, p. 6 
 
 Beoeivers.] Preliminary noticeof25th of August, 
 1883, of Board of Trade, under sect. 162 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act of 1883, viith regard to unclaimed 
 dividends and other undistributed funds in the 
 hands of persons empoieered to receive the same 
 under 7 A 8 Vict. c. 70, 13 Vict. c. 106, 25 Vict. 
 c. 134, and 33 Vict. c. 71 L. G., 1883, p. 4229 
 
 II. BANKEUPTCY— ACT OF BANKRUPTCY. 
 
 (a.) Assignment of whole Pkopektt. 
 
 1. ■ • Secret Undertaking by Assignee to 
 
 ■pay Debt — Belease of existing Debt — Intent to de- 
 Jeat or delay Creditors — 13 Eliz. c. 5 — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 6, suh-s. 2.] A 
 trader in embarrassed oiroumstanoes in July, 1882, 
 assigned substantially the whole of his property 
 ■(including his stook-in-ti'ade, book debts, and the 
 ..goodwill of his business) to a single creditor, in 
 •consideration, (as expressed in the deed) of the 
 release by that creditor of a debt of £3271 then 
 owing to him by the debtor. In fact, at the date 
 of the assignment, only £1370 was due by the 
 •assignor to the assignee, and the real consideration 
 was the release by the assignee of that debt, and 
 .a secret verbal agi-eement between him and the 
 assignor that he should undertake the payment 
 •of the assignor's debts (either the whole of his 
 debts, or, at any rate, his trade debts). On the 
 •same day the assignor entered into a written 
 agreement to manage the business as the servant 
 of the assignee at a weekly salary. The assignee, 
 a few days before the execution of the deed, but 
 after the arrangement between the parties had 
 been come to, paid out some executions for the 
 .assignor, and shortly after the execution of the 
 
 II. BANKRUPTCY— ACT OP BANKEUPTCY— 
 
 continued, 
 (a) Assignment of whole Pkopeety — cOnfd. 
 deed he paid an arrear of rent which the assignor 
 owed to his landlord. The business was, after 
 the execution of the deed, cari'ied on by the 
 assignor in his own name, just as it was before, 
 there being nothing to shew that he was not the 
 real, as well as the apparent, owner of it, though 
 he was in fact acting under the directions of the 
 assignee. None of the other creditors knew of 
 the assignment. In March, 1883, the assignor 
 was adjudged a bankrupt. At the date of the 
 bankruptcy neurly all the trade debts due by the 
 assignor at the date of the deed had been paid in 
 the course of the carrying on of the business :^ 
 Held, by Cotton and Bowen, L.JJ., that the deed 
 was void as against the trustee in the bankruptcy 
 as an act of banlcruptcy, its necessary effect being 
 to defeat and delay the assignor's creditors in 
 enforcing their ordinary remedies for the recovery 
 of their debts, and there being no means by which 
 they could compel the fulfilment by the assignee 
 of his agreement to pay their debts : — Held, by 
 Fry, L.J., that the deed was void as against the 
 assignor's creditors under tlie statute 13 Eliz. c. 5. 
 — Held, also, that the assignee was not entitled 
 to payment in full out of the bankrupt's estate of 
 the sums which he had paid under the agreement, 
 but that he could only prove for them in the 
 bankruptcy. Ex parte Chaplin. In re Sinol aik 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 319 
 
 2. Security for past Debt — Further Ad- 
 vances — Substantial Exception — Tenant Bight — 
 Contemplation of further Advances — Notice of 
 Act of Bankruptcy.'] In order that the execution 
 of a bill of sale of substantially the whole of the 
 grantor's property as security for a pre-existing 
 debt and further advances may not be an act of 
 bankruptcy, it is necessary that there should 
 be an agreement binding the grantee to make 
 further advances. — It is not suflScient that further 
 advances should have been in the contemplation 
 of the parties, the deed being stamped so as to 
 cover them, and further advances having been 
 actually made after the execution of the deed. — 
 A farmer assigned by a bill of sale, as a security 
 for a pre-existing debt and further advances, the 
 whole of his property, except a part of his tenant 
 right under his agreement of tenancy. That 
 agreement provided that the tenant should be 
 paid on quitting the farm for all fallows made in 
 the last year of the tenancy (not exceeding a cer- 
 tain proportion), for all seeds duly sown by him, 
 for all dung made during the last year, for all 
 hay, fodder, and straw the produce of the last 
 year, &c., at a valuation. But it was also pro- 
 vided that, in case of any breach or non-perform- 
 ance of any of the stipulations on the part of the 
 tenant, it should be lawful for the landlord to 
 re-enter, and that, in case no entry should be 
 made, the landlord should on the expiration of 
 the tenancy be entitled to an allowance from the 
 tenant in respect of any such breach or non-per- 
 formance, to be deducted from the tenant's 
 valuation. There was no covenant or agreement 
 binding the grantee to make further advances, 
 though the deed was stamped so as to cover a 
 further advance: — Held, that the tenant right 
 
( 111 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 112 ) 
 
 II. BANKSUPTCY— ACT OF BANKETJPTCY— 
 
 continued. 
 (a) Assignment of whole Pkopertt — contd. 
 did not form a substantial exception from the 
 deed ; that the execution of the deed vpas an act 
 of bankruptcy by the grantor; and that it was 
 void as against the trustee in his bankruptcy, 
 which commenced within three months after- 
 wards. — Some small further advances were, in 
 fact, made by the grantee to the grantor, soon 
 after the execution of the deed, to enable him to 
 pay the wages of his labourers : — Held, that in- 
 asmuch as i;he grantee had made those advances 
 with notice of the not of bankruptcy committed 
 by the execution of the deed, he could not retain 
 them out of the proceeds of sale of the grantor's 
 stock which he had seized under the deed. — Ex 
 parte Winder (1 Ch. D. 290, 560) considered. 
 Ex parte Vavs. In re Pat.ker - 17 Ch. D, 26 
 
 3. Security (or past Debt — Further Ad- 
 
 ra nee— Bankruptcy Act, 1869(32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 5. ij, «m6-s. 2.] In order that a deed, assigning 
 the whole of a debtor's property as security for an 
 existing debt, may not be fraudulent and an act 
 of bankruptcy within sub-sect. 2 of sect. 6 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, on the ground that the 
 assignee agreed to make further advances to the 
 assignor, it is not necessary that the agreement 
 should be technically binding at law or iu equity ; 
 a bona fide promise is sufBoieut. — The question 
 in all such cases is whether the arrangement was 
 made bona fide with the view of enabling the 
 debtor to continue his business, or whether it was 
 a mere scheme to obtain payment of the existing 
 debt. — Ex parte Dann (17 Gh. D. 26) commented 
 on. Ex parte WvLKiNSoyi . Jii re Bekey 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 788 
 
 4. Security for past Debt — Further Ad- 
 
 rance — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 6, suh-s. 2.] 
 Graham v. Chapman (12 C. B. 85), so far as it 
 decides that a bill of sale which, to secure an 
 existing debt and a present advauce, assigns the 
 whole of the grantor's property, including that 
 which he may purchase by means of the advance, 
 is necessarily void as an act of bankruptcy, must 
 be taken to have been overruled. Ex parte 
 Hauxweil. Jn re Hemingway 23 Ch. D. 626 
 
 6. Security for past Debt — Further Ad- 
 vance — Statement of Consideration — Affidavit on 
 Begistration — Jurat — Omission of Commissioner' e 
 Title— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 '& 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 6, sub-s. 2— Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 * 42 
 Vict. 0. 31), ss. 8, 10.] "When a bill of sale of 
 the whole of a trader's property is executed as 
 security for an existing debt and a fresh advance, 
 the true test whether the execution of the deed 
 is an act of bankruptcy, is. Was the fresh advance 
 made by the lender with the intention of en- 
 abling the borrower to continue his business, and 
 had he reasonable grounds for believing that the 
 advance would enable tlie borrower to do so? 
 If these questions can be answered in the affir- 
 mative, the execution of the deed is not an act of 
 bankruptcy. The Court ought not to look at the 
 imcommunioated intention of thc^orrower, nor 
 at the actual result of the loan. The considera- 
 tion for a bill of sale is sufficiently stated, so as 
 to satisfy tlie requirements of sect. S of the Bills 
 of Sale Act, 1878, if it is stated with substantial 
 
 II. BANKEOTTCY— ACT OF BANKEITPTCY — 
 
 continued, 
 (a) Assignmest of whole Pkopektt — contd. 
 accuracy — if the true legal or business effect of 
 what actually took place is stated. Strict literal 
 accuracy of statement is not necessary. The- 
 affidavit filed on the registration of a bill of sale 
 was sworn before a commissioner to administer 
 oaths, but in the jurat he merely signed his 
 name, and did not add his title as commissioner : 
 — Held, that, notwithstanding this omission, the 
 affidavit was sufiieient. E.r parte Johnson. In re 
 Chapman 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 (6.) Bankhtiptcy Xotice. 
 
 6. Conditional Payment of Debt within 
 
 Seven Days after Strrice of Notice — Promissory 
 Note — Beceiving Order — Banhruptcy Act, 1883 (46 
 * 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 4, sub-s. 1 (3).] Within 
 seven days after the service of a b.inkruptcy 
 notice the debtor gave to the creditor a promissory 
 note, payable two months after date, for the 
 amount of the debt, which note tlie creditor 
 accepted : — Held, that, the note being a condi- 
 tional payment of the debt, the creditor could not, 
 during the currency of the note, avail himself of 
 the bankruptcy notice to obtain a receiving order 
 against the debtor. Ex parte Matthew 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 506 
 
 7. FiualJudgment — Company — Wind- 
 ing-up) — Contributory — Balance Order — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 18S3 (46 * 47 Vict. c. 52), s. i, sub-s. 1 
 ((/).] A '■ balance order," made in the volimtary 
 winding-up of a company on a contributory, for 
 the payment of calls which had been made upon 
 him before the commencement of the winding-up, 
 is not a " final judgment " within the meaning of 
 sub-s. 1 (g) of sect. 4 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 and therefore a bankruptcy notice cannot be 
 issued in respect of such an order. Ex parte 
 Wuinney. In re Sandeks 13 Q. B. D. 476 
 
 8. ■ Final Judgment — Executor of original 
 
 Judgment Creditor — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 tSt 
 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 4, suh-s. 1 (3) — Rules of Supreme 
 Court, 1883, Order XLii., r. 23.] The executor 
 of a creditor wlio has obtained a final judgment is 
 not entitled to issue a bankruptcy notice against 
 the judgment debtor, unless he has obtained 
 leave from the Court, under rule 23 of Order 
 XLII. of the Rules of the Supreme Court of 1883, 
 to issue execution on the judgment. — Under sub- 
 sect. 1 ((7) of sect. 4 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 the creditor who issues a bankruptcy notice must 
 be in a position to issue execution on the judg- 
 ment. Ex parte WooDALL. In re Woodall 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 479 
 
 9. Final Judgment — Garnishee Order 
 
 absolute — Bankruptcy Act, 1SS3 (46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 52), s. 4, sub-s. 1 ((/).] A garnishee order abso- 
 lute is not a " final j udgment " against the gar- 
 nishee within sub-s. 1 (g) of sect. 4 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883, and the judgment creditor who 
 has obtained tlie order cannot issue a bankruptcy 
 notice against the garnishee in respect of it. Ex 
 parte Chinery - 12 Q. B. D. 342 
 
 10. Final Judgment — Judgment for Costs 
 
 —Banh-uptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), 
 s. 4, sui-s. 1 (<;).] At the trial of an action in the 
 
( 113 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 111 ) 
 
 II. BANKEUPTCY— ACT OF BANKRUPTCY— 
 eontimied, 
 (6) Bankeuptot Notice — continued. 
 Chancery Division, upon motion for judgment, in 
 default of pleading, judgment was given ordering' 
 and adjudging that the Defendant should be per- 
 petually restrained from practising as a solicitor 
 at Liverpool or otlierwise in violation of his cove- 
 nant with the Plaintiff. And the Court declared 
 that the partnership between the Plaintiff and 
 the Defendant ought to be dissolved as from the 
 date of the Plaintiff's notice, and ordered and 
 decreed the same accordingly. And it was or- 
 dered that an inquiry should be made what was 
 the amount of the damages which the Plaintiff 
 had sustained by reason of the Defendant's breach 
 of covenant, and that the Defendant should, within 
 fourteen days from the date of the Chief Clerk's 
 certificate, pay the amount of the damages, when 
 certified, to the Plaintiff. And it was ordered 
 that the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff 
 his taxed costs of the action. The costs were 
 taxed and were partly paid by the Defendant. 
 The inquiry as to damages was not prosecuted : — 
 Held, that the order for the payment of costs was 
 a " final judgment " within the meaning of sect, i, 
 sub-sect. 1 (3), of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, and 
 that the Plaintiff was entitled to serve the Defen- 
 dant with a bankruptcy notice for the unpaid 
 balance of costs. — Ex parte Chinery (12 Q. B. D. 
 342) explained. Ex parte Moobe. In re Faith- 
 full - - 14 a. B. D. 627 
 
 11. Final Judgment — Order for Payment 
 
 of Costs— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict, 
 e. 52), s. 4, svh-s. i (3).] The Defendants to an 
 action for the specific performance of a contract 
 executed the deeds necessary to carry out the 
 contract, and an order was then made by consent 
 that, on the Defendants paying the Plaintiff's 
 taxed costs of the action allfiirther proceedings in 
 the action shoidd be stayed. The costs were 
 taxed, and an order was made that the Defendants 
 should, on or before a day named, pay the taxed 
 amount. Payment was not made within the 
 time appointed : — Held, that the order for pay- 
 ment was not a "final judgment," within the mean- 
 ing of sub-sect. 1 (g) of sect. 4 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1883, and that a bankruptcy notice could 
 not be founded on it. Ex parte Sohmitz 
 
 [12 Q. B. S. 509 
 
 (c.) Debtob's Summons. 
 
 12. — — ■ Convicted Felon — Adjudication of 
 Bankruptcy— 33 & 34 Vict. c. 23, «. 8.] Not- 
 withstanding the provision contained in sect. 8 
 of the Act 33 & 34 Yict. c. 23, that every convicted 
 felon shall, during the time while he shall be 
 subject to the operation of the Act, be incapable 
 of alienating or charging any property, such a 
 convict can pay a debt which is claimed by a 
 debtor's summons issued and served on him after 
 his conviction, and if he fails to pay the debt 
 within the time limited by the summons, he will 
 commit an act of bankruptcy, upon which an 
 adjudication can be made against liim. Ex parte 
 Geaves. In re PIaeeis - 19 Ch. D. 1 
 
 13. — — ■ Dismissal — Legal or equitable Defence 
 to Actirni— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. 
 e. 71, «. 7 — ■ Inchoate Agreement between Debtor 
 
 II. BANKEUPTCY— ACT OF BANKEUPTCY — 
 
 continued. 
 
 (e.) Debtor's Summons — continued, 
 and Creditors.'} In order to justify the issuing of 
 a debtor's summons under s. 7 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, the alleged debt must be an 
 exigible debt ; if the debtor would have any 
 defencei legal or equitable, to an ■ action for the 
 debt the summons ought to be dismissed. — Two 
 partners in trade whose affairs were embarrassed, 
 without filing a liquidation' petition, summoned a 
 meeting of their creditors. Nineteen out of 
 twenty-seven creditors attended the meeting, their 
 debts amounting to £2400 out of a total of £2628, 
 and a resolution was passed that a deed of assign- 
 ment of the debtor's estate and effects should be 
 made to three persons named, as trustees for the 
 benefit of the creditors, with power for them to 
 ean-y on the business for such time as they should 
 think fit, and to sell the concern as a going con- 
 cern, or otherwise. One of the debtors was to 
 have his discharge on payment of £200, or other- 
 wise as the creditors might direct. The resolution 
 was signed by the chairman of the meeting, but 
 by no one else. The day after the meeting the 
 debtors gave up possession of their assets to the 
 persons named in the resolution as trustees, and 
 those persons carried on the business for a few 
 weeks, and proceeded to collect the book debts. 
 A draft deed of assignment was prepared in 
 accordance with the resolution, but it was never 
 executed, the other creditors not having assented 
 to the arrangement embodied in the resolution : — 
 Seld, that, inasmuch as all the cieditors did not 
 come in and assent to the arrangement, there was 
 no binding agreement between the debtors and 
 their creditors, and that, consequently, a creditor 
 who was present at the meeting, even if he had 
 assented to the resolution, which appeared to be 
 doubtful, was entitled to issue a debtor'.s sum- 
 mons for his debt. Ex parte Fostee. In re 
 Foster - - - 22 Ch. D. 797 
 
 14. Jurisdiction — Residence of and carry- 
 ing on of Business by Debtor — Bankruptcy Mules, 
 1870, r. 17.] Held, that a debtor, who was em- 
 ployed as a clerk in a bank, the office of which 
 was within the district ot the London Bankruptcy 
 Court, was within the meaning of rule 17 of the 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, "can-ying on business" 
 within the district of that Court, and that conse- 
 quently that Court had jurisdiction to grant a 
 debtor's summons against him. — The debtor's 
 private residence was in one of the suburbs, out- 
 side the district of the London Court : — Held, by 
 James, L.J., that he was also, within the meaning 
 of rule 17, " residing " within the district of the 
 London Court. Ex parte Bkeull. In re Bowie 
 
 [16 Ch. D, 484 
 
 16. Liquidated Demand — Equitable Mort- 
 gage by Deposit — Interest — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 s. 6.] In April, 1879, A. deposited title deeds 
 with B. to secure repayment of an advance of 
 £1000, and an agreement was at the same time 
 executed that the deeds should be held as an 
 equitable security for payment on the 15th of 
 July, 1879, of the £1000 and interest at 7i per 
 cent, per annum, and also that A. should exe- 
 cute to B. a legal mortgage of the property, with 
 power of sale and such other powers as B. might 
 
( 1]5 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 116 ) 
 
 JI. BANKSUPTCY— ACT OF BANKETIPTCT— 
 continued. 
 (c) Dbbtoe's Summons — eontintied. 
 aequire for further securing payment of the 
 money which should then be owing on the secu- 
 rity of the agreement, " with interest for the 
 same after the rate aforesaid." — In January, 1881, 
 JB. tool: out a debtor's summons for £150, on the 
 footing that interest continued to be paid at the 
 rate of 7 J per cent, down to the date of demand, 
 :and not merely until the 15th of July, 1879 (in 
 which case the debt would have been under 
 ^50) : — Held, that the agreement amounted to a 
 contract that if the £1000 was not rejiaid in July, 
 1879, interest at 7J per cent, should continue to 
 be paid, and accordingly that there was a liqui- 
 dated demand of sufficient amount within the 
 Banliruptcy Act, 1869, sect. 6, to support the 
 debtor's summons. Ex imrte Fubbeb. In re 
 King - 17 Ch. D. 191 
 
 16. PartnersMp — Judgment against Firm 
 
 — Debtor's Summons against Partner not served 
 •icith Writ — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 7.] A part- 
 nership consisting of several members was dis- 
 solved as to one of them on the 17th of December, 
 and the business was thenceforth continued by 
 the others under the old firm name, and at the 
 old place of business. On the 18th of December 
 ■a creditor of the old partnership, who was igno- 
 rant of the dissolution, commenced an action 
 ■against the partners (suing them in the firm 
 name) in respect of a debt contracted before 
 the dissolution. On the 21st of December the 
 writ was served personally on one of the con- 
 tinuing partners. Tlie retired partner was not 
 served in any way. No appearance was entered 
 to the writ, and on the 29th of . December the 
 Plaintiff signed judgment by default. E.'iecution 
 ■was issued, but the sheriff found no goods of the 
 partnership upon which to levy. No application 
 was made nnder rule 8 of Order xlii. for leave to 
 issue execution against tlie retired partner. In 
 the following May, the retired partner having 
 had no previous notice of the action, the Plain- 
 tiff served him with particulars of demand of the 
 judgment debt, and he not having paid it, tlie 
 Plaintiff served him with a debtor's summons 
 ■founded. on the judgment debt. He denied the 
 debt, and applied to the Bankruptcy Court to dis- 
 ,miss the summons : — Held, by Lord Selborne, 
 L.C., and Cotton, L.J. (dissentiente Brett, L.J.), 
 that the judgment would not support the debtor's 
 summons, and that the summons must be dis- 
 'missed. Ex parte Young. In re Young 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 124 
 
 17. Security — Banh-uptcy Act, 1869 
 
 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), 6. 7.] Wiieu the proceed- 
 ings on a debtor's summons are stayed, pending 
 an action to try the validity of the alleged debt, 
 in determining whether the alleged debtor should 
 be required to give security regard ought to be 
 liad not only to his solvency or insolvency, but 
 to the probability of his success in the action. 
 If the Court can see that he has no reasonable 
 ■defence he ought to be required to give seouritv. 
 —Ex parte Wood (4 D. M. & G. 875) and Ex 
 parte Wier (Law Eep. 7 Ch. 319) approved and 
 followed. Ex parte Waed. In re Wakd 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 356 
 
 II. BANKETTPTCY— ACT OF BANKETTPTCY — 
 
 — continued, 
 (c.) Debtoe's Summons — continued. 
 
 18. ' Security — Solvent Debtor — Bmia fide 
 
 Dispute as to Debt — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 1— Bight of Respondent to 
 insist on having Ms Evidence lieard.'] Proceedings 
 on a debtor's summons, pending the trial of an 
 action for the debt, will not necessarily be stayed 
 without security, though the alleged debtor is 
 solvent and there is a bona fide dispute as to the 
 debt. The probability of success in the action is 
 one element to be considered. — If a Judge of 
 first instance is prepared to decide in favour of a 
 defendant or respondent without hearing his evi- 
 dence, his counsel is entitled to insist that the 
 evidence shall be heard before the decision is 
 given. If, however, the counsel does not exercise 
 that right, but accepts the decision in his favour 
 on his opponent's evidence, the Court of Appeal 
 has still power to allow the evidence to be taken 
 before reversing the decision. — Ex parte Sewell 
 (13 Ch. D. 266) explained. Ex parte Jacobson. 
 In re PiNCOFTS - - 22 Ch. D. 312 
 
 19. Service — Inaccurate Copy of Sum- 
 mons — Service by Cleric of Creditor — '^Formal 
 defect or irregularity " — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Viet. c. 71), s. S2— Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1870, rr. 59, 61.] On serving a debtor mth a 
 debtor's summons the sealed copy which was 
 delivered to him stated the amount of the debt 
 claimed by the creditor to be £2-1 (instead of £74, 
 the real amount), but these words were added, 
 " being the sum claimed of you by him according 
 to the particulars hereunto annexed." The par- 
 ticulars thus refeiTcd to were set forth on the 
 second half of a sheet of paper, the first half of 
 which contained the summons. The particulars 
 stated the amount of the debt, and the ch'cum- 
 stances under which it arose, correctly: — Held, 
 that tlie error in the summons was a merely 
 " formal defect " within the meaning of sect. 82, 
 by which the debtor could not possibly have been 
 misled, and that no substantial injustice had been 
 caused to him by it, and, consequently, that the 
 service of the summons was not invalidated by 
 it, and an adjudication of bankruptcy founded on 
 the summons could not be impeached. — The sum- 
 moning creditor was a solicitor, and the service of 
 the summons was effected by his clerk, instead of 
 by liimself or his attorney, or by an oificer of the 
 Court, as required by rule Gl : — Held, that this 
 irregularity also was cured by sect. 82. Ex parte 
 Johnson. In re Johnsox 25 Ch. D. 112 
 
 20. Service — Time — Snhsfituted Service 
 
 —Bankruptcy Hides, 1870, rr. 59, 61.] Rule 59 
 of the Bankruptcy Eules, 1870, does not apply 
 to substituted service of a debtor's summons, but, 
 if personal service cannot be effected, an order 
 for substituted service may be made under rule 61 
 after the expiration of the time limited by 
 rule 59 for effecting personal service, and the 
 substituted service must be effected within such 
 reasonable time as the Court may fix. See 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, rr. 122, 123, 144, 145. 
 Ex parte Waeburg. In re Whallet 
 
 [25 Oh. D. 336 
 
 21. Statement of Consideration.] When 
 
 a debtor's summons is founded on » judgment 
 
( 117 ; 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 C 118 ) 
 
 II. BANKRUPTCY— ACT OF BANKRUPTCY— 
 
 continued. 
 (c) Debtor's Sdmmojjs — continued. 
 debt it ia not necessary to state the consideration 
 for the judgment in the summons, and a mis- 
 statement of the consideration will not vitiate 
 the summons. Ex parte EiTSO. In re Kitso 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 529 
 
 22. — — Stay of Proceedings — Conditional 
 Agreement for Meduotion of Debt — Default in ful- 
 filling Condition — Revivor of Original Debt — 
 Penalty — Waiver — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vipt, c. 71), s. 7.] A creditor having issued a 
 debtor's summons in respect of a judgment debt 
 of £344, an agreement was made that the debtor 
 should give the creditor a cheque for £.50, and 
 three bills of exchange for £50 each, accepted by 
 a third person, and payable respectively in three, 
 six, and nine mouths, and that, upon payment 
 of the cheque and the bills in due course, and a 
 leceipt for a debt due by the creditor to the 
 debtor's brother being hunded to the creditor, 
 lie should give a receipt in full satisfaction 
 of the judgment debt. In default of payment 
 of any or either of the cheque or bills, the credi- 
 tor was to be at liberty to proceed for the full 
 amount due. The cheque and the first two bills 
 were paid in due course, but the third bill was 
 not paid at maturity, the acceptor having for- 
 gotten to provide his bankers with funds to meet 
 it. The creditor issued a writ against the accep- 
 tor, and he paid Jhe dishonoured bill' within a 
 week after it became due. The creditor then 
 issued a debtor's summons against the debtor for 
 the unpaid balance of the original debt : — Held, 
 that the provision in (he agreement for the revivor 
 of the original debt upon default being made in 
 the performance of any of the conditions was not 
 a penalty, but that on tlie dishonour of the third 
 biU the creditor was remitted to his original right, 
 and that he had not waived that right by suing 
 the acceptor. — The debtor having applied to the 
 Court of Banki'uptcy to dismiss the summons : — 
 Seld (reversing the decision of the Eegistrar), 
 that the proceedings on the summons ought not 
 to have been stayed pending the trial of an action 
 to determine the validity of the debt, but that the 
 Eegistriir ought to have decided the question 
 himseif, and to have dismissed the application. 
 M parte Bueden. In re Neil 16 Ch. D. 676 
 
 (d.) Depabtisg peom Dwelling-house. 
 
 23. Onus of Proof.] A petitioning creditor, 
 
 who alleges that his debtor has committed an act 
 of bankruptcy, by departing from his dwelling- 
 house witli intent to defeat and delay his creditors, 
 is bound to shew that the debtor is alive and 
 in some other place. Ex parte G(eisel. In re 
 Stangeb - - - 22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 (e.) Notice of Suspeksion op Payment. 
 
 24. Verbal Notice — Banlcruptoy Act, 1883 
 
 <46 & 47 Vict. c. 62), «. 4, tubs. 1 (h')— Bankruptcy 
 BuUs, 1883, rule 11.] A notice by a debtor that 
 lie has suspended, or that he is about to suspend, 
 payment of his debts need not, in order that it 
 may constitute an act of bankruptcy, be in writing. 
 It is sufficient if a verbal statement to that efi'eot 
 
 II. BANKEUPTCY— ACT OF BANKRUPTCY— 
 
 continued. 
 (e.) Notice of Suspension op Payment — contd. 
 be made by the debtor to one of his creditors. Ex 
 parte Nickoll. In re Walkeb 13 Q. B. D. 469 
 
 25. Verbal Notice of Inability — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883(46 & 47 fict. c. 52), 's. 4,su6-ss. 1 
 (/), 1 (ft).] A,n oral statement made by a debtor 
 to a creditor that he is unable to pay his debts in 
 full, is not a notice he has suspended, or is about 
 to suspend, payment of his debts, so as to consti- 
 tute an act of bankruptcy within sub-s. 1 (h) of s. 4 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883. — Such a notice may 
 be given orally, but it must be given formally and 
 deliberately, and with the intention of giving 
 notice. Ex parte Oastlee. In re Pbiedlandeb 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 471 
 
 (/.) Eemaining Abboad. 
 
 26. Domiciled Englishman redding Abroad 
 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 A 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 6, sub-s. 3.] A domiciled Englishman went in 
 1876, with his family, to reside in France, where 
 he took a house. He was not then being pressed 
 by any creditors in England. For a period of 
 fourteen months in 1877 and 1878 he was in 
 England, carrying on the business of a newspaper 
 which he had purchased, and he then had a fur- 
 nished lodging in London. During that period 
 he retained his house in France and bis wife and 
 family lived in it. During the same period he 
 contracted a debt for costs to a solicitor in Loudon. 
 At tlie end of the fourteen montlis he discon- 
 tinued the business,, and went back to his resi- 
 dence in France. In ISSO he, with his family, 
 occupied for nine months a furnished house in 
 England, his house in France being let fur- 
 nished ; at the end of the nine months he returned 
 to that house. He then continued to reside there, 
 paying occasional visits to England. During one 
 of these visits he accidentally met the solicitor, 
 who asked him why ho had not paid his debt, 
 and he answered that his newspaper speculation 
 had left him with a number of claims, and he 
 thought if he kept abroad he should be able to 
 settle them more easily. The solicitor i^resented 
 a bankruptcy petition against the debtor, alleging 
 as an act of bankruptcy that he had remained 
 out of England witli intent to defeat or delay 
 his creditors : — Held, that, as the debtor was re- 
 maining out of England at his own permanent 
 residence abroad, no intent to defeat or delay his 
 creditors could be imputed to him from that cir- 
 cumstance alone, and that the conversation with 
 the petitioning creditor was not sufficient to prove 
 such an intent. Ex parte Beandon. In re 
 Teench - - - - 25 Ch. D. 500 
 
 Fraudulent transfer - 17 Ch, D. 58 
 
 See Bankelptoy — Feauditlent Peefe- 
 
 EENOE. 1. 
 
 Notice of— Protected transaction 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptoy — Pko- 
 
 TECTED TeAKSAOTION. 
 
 III. BANKRUPTCY— TRADER. 
 
 1. Being a Trader — " Departing from 
 
 Dwelling-house or otherwise absenting himself" — 
 Summary Adjudication — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 6,e«6-ss. 3, 6 — Bankruptcy 
 
( no ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 120 ) 
 
 III. "BASKRVnCY—TEADJ^B,— continued. 
 
 Btdes, 1870, r. 65.] The words " being a trader," 
 ia sub-s. 3 of sect. 6 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 are to be construed in the same way as the same 
 words in sub-sect. 6 of the section, and they mean 
 in sub-sect. 3 that the debtor must be actually 
 carrying on a trade at the time when he is alleged 
 to have committed any of the acts therein men- 
 tioned as acts of bankruptcy if committed by a 
 trader. It is not sufficient that he was carrying 
 on a trade at the time when the petitioning 
 creditor's debt was contracted. — A summary ad- 
 judication cannot be obtained under rule 65 unless 
 the debtor was a trader at the time when he is 
 alleged to have "departed from his dwelling- 
 house or otherwise absented himself." — Ex parte 
 Schomberg (Law Eep. 10 Ch. 172) approved and 
 followed. Mx parte M'Geoege. In re Steyexs 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 697 
 
 2. Being a Trader — Discontinuance of 
 
 Trade with Intention of resuming it — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 6, 8.] If a 
 debtor, who has been a trader, is not actually 
 can-ying on trade at the time wlien it is alleged 
 by a petitioning creditor that he has dune or 
 omitted to do that, the doing or omission of which 
 would be an act of bankruptcy only if it was done 
 or omitted by a trader, it is a question of inten- 
 tion, to be decided on the evidence, whether the 
 debtor has permanently ceased to trade, or has 
 only temporarily discontinued his trade with the 
 intention of resuming it. In the latter case he is 
 still a trader within the meaning of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act. — The law on this point is still as it 
 was laid down in Ex paHe Paterson (1 Rose, 402; 
 and Ex parte Cundy (2 Eose, 357). — Per Jessel, 
 M.E. . If a petitioning creditor alleges that the 
 debtor has committed an act of bankruptcy which 
 can be committed only by a trader, the onus is on 
 him to prove that the debtor was, within tlie 
 meaning of the Bankruptcy Act, a trader at the 
 time when the act was committed. Ex parte 
 Salamax. In re Tatlok 21 Ch. D. 384 
 
 3. Infant — Adjudication of Bankruptcy 
 
 — Trading Contract — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), sf. 6, 125, suh-s. 12— Infants' 
 Belief Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict, c. 62), s. 1.] An 
 infant who has traded cannot be adjudicated a 
 bankrupt on the petition of a person who has 
 supplied him with goods on credit for trade pur- 
 poses, but to whom he has made no express repre- 
 sentation that he is of full age, even though he 
 has previously filed a liquidation petition the pro- 
 ceedings under which have become abortive. — 
 Nor could the Court under such circumstances 
 make an adjudication against the infant under 
 sub-sect. 12 of sect. 125 of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869. — Whether, if the infant had expressly le- 
 presented to the petitioning creditor that he was 
 of full age, an adjudication could be made, qusere. 
 The Infants' Belief Act, 1874, applies to the con- 
 tracts of an infant. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., re- 
 versed. — Ex parte Lynch (2 Ch. D. 227) overruled. 
 Ex parte JoxES. Li re Jones - 18 Ch. D. 109 
 
 IV. BANKRUPTCY— BANZEUPTCY PETITION. 
 
 1. Adjournment— J^ai7«re to comply uith 
 
 Bankruptcy Notice to pay Judgment Debt — Appeal 
 pending from Judgment — Staying Proceedings — 
 
 IV. BANKEUPTCY— BANKEUPTCY PETITION 
 
 .—continued. 
 Discretion ofBegistrar — Appeal — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 7, suh-s. 4.] The 
 Court of Appeal will not interfere with the exer- 
 cise of discretion by the Eegistrar, under sub-sect. 4 
 of sect. 7 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, in adjourn- 
 ing the hearing of, or dismissing, a bankruptcy 
 petition founded on non-compliance with a bank- 
 ruptcy notice in respect of a judgment debt, when 
 an appeal is pending from the judgment, unless it 
 is clear that the Eegistrar could not have been right. 
 — If the appeal appears to be a bona fide one, the 
 hearing of the bankruptcy petition ought to be 
 adjourned. — If the appeal is evidently frivolous, 
 a receiving order ought to be made, notwithstand- 
 ing its pendency. Ex parte Hetwokth. In re 
 Ehodes - • 14 Q. B. D. 49 
 
 2. Attorney . — Bankruptcy Petition by 
 
 Creditor — Signature — Signature by Attorney — 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, r. 12.') — Appendix, Form 
 No. 10.] A bankruptcy petition by a creditor may 
 be signed on his behalf by his duly constituted 
 attorney. — A power of attorney authorized the 
 attorney (inter alia) " to commence and carry on, 
 or to defend, at law or in equity, all actions, suits, 
 or other proceedings touching anytbing in wljich 
 I or my ships or other personal estate may be in 
 anywise concerned " : — Meld, that this power 
 authorized the attorney to sign on behalf of his 
 principal a bankruptcy petition against a debtor 
 of the principal. Fx parte Wallace. In re 
 Wallace - 14 Q. B. D. 22 
 
 3. . Domicil of Debtor— Onjts of Proof- 
 Officer in British Army serving out of England 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Viet. c. 52), 
 s. 6, sub-s. 1 (d).] Sub-sect. 1 (d) of sect. 6 of 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, enacts that a creditor 
 shall not be entitled to present a bankruptcy 
 petition against a debtor unless (inter alia) "the 
 debtor is domiciled in England " : — Held, that 
 this must be taken to mean domiciled in England, 
 as distinguished from Scotland or Ireland. — The 
 onus is, in the first instance, on the petitioning 
 creditor to prove the domicil, though he may 
 adduce such priniH facie evidence as will thiow 
 the burden of disproving the domicil on the 
 debtor. But the mere fact that the debtor bears 
 an English name, and is an oflBcer in the British 
 army, does not raise any presumption that his 
 domicil is English as distinguished from Scotch or 
 Irish, inasmuch as his domicil of origin might 
 have been Scotch or Irish, and in cither of those 
 cases he w-ould not by entering into the British 
 army have lost his domicil of origin. — Yelverton 
 V. Yeherton (1 Sw. & Tr. 574), and Brown v. 
 Umith (15 Beav. 444), approved and followed. 
 The cases relating to Anglo-Indian domicil com- 
 mented on and explained. Ex parte Ccsxixgham. 
 In re Mitchell - - 13 Q. B. D. 418 
 
 4. landlord and Tenant — Forfeiture on 
 
 Tenant " being Bankrupt " — Bankruptcy Petition 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), 
 s. 149 — Fixtures — Notice of Breach by Landlord 
 — Conveyancing Act, 1881 (4t & 45 Vict. c. 41), 
 s. 14.] A lease executed in 1880, of a mill 
 and warehouse, for twenty-one years, contained 
 a covenant by the lessors with the lessees (inter 
 alia) (4) that certain articles mentioned in a 
 
( 121 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 122 ) 
 
 IV. BANKBTJPTCY— BANKKTJPTCY PETITION 
 
 — continued. 
 schedule should be the property of the lessees, 
 and should be removable by them, they making 
 good all damage done by such removal. The 
 articles mentioned in the schedule were iron 
 columns, beams, floors, brick piers and things 
 ejusdem generis. There was a proviso (1) that 
 in case (inter alia) the lessees should during 
 the term be bankrupts, or file a petition in liqui- 
 dation, the term should cease ; (2) that the lessees 
 might by notice determine the term at the end of 
 seven or fourteen years ; (3) that on the determi- 
 nation or cesser of the term all the raacliinery. 
 and also all the buildings erected by the lessees 
 (other than certain specified buildings) should be 
 their property and should be removed by them 
 previously to the determination or cesser of the 
 term, unless it should be then mutually agreed 
 that the lessors should purchase them, the lessees, 
 in case of removal, to make good all damages 
 which migljt be caused by such removal. After 
 "the Bankruptcy Act, 1889, came into operation, 
 the lessees presented a banki'uptcy petition, and 
 a receiving order was made : — Held, first, that 
 the presentation of the petition caused a forfeiture 
 of the term ; secondly, tliat notwithstanding the 
 forfeiture, the official receiver was entitled to the 
 articles mentioned in clause (4) of the covenant 
 and clause (3) of the proviso as being property of 
 the lessees. — Quaire, whether the receiver was 
 entitled to enter and remove the articles or 
 whether he could only call on the lessors to deli- 
 ver them to him. — Held, further, that sect. 14 of 
 the Conveyancing Act, 1881, had no application. 
 Ex parte Gould. In re Walkee 13 Q,. B. D. 454 
 
 6. Lunatic — Leave to Committee to file 
 
 Declaration of Insolveneij — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 (46 * 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 4, subs. 1 (/), 148.] AVhere 
 it appears to be for the benefit of a lunatic that 
 lie should be made bankrupt, the Court will give 
 leave to the committee in the name of the lunatic 
 to file a declaration of insolvency, or to present a 
 bankruptcy petition under the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883, s. 4, sub-s. 1 (f ). In re James 12 Q. B. D. 332 
 
 6. Petitioning Creditor — Trustee for abso- 
 lute Beneficial Owner — Joining Equitable Owner 
 of Debt — Amendment of Petition — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 4, sub-s. 1 (3), 5, 
 6, 105 (sub-s. 3).] Under the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883, as under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, a mere 
 trustee of a debt for an absolute beneficial owner 
 is not entitled to present a bankruptcy petition 
 ■against the debtor unless the cestui que trust, 
 if capable of dealing with the debt, joins as a 
 co-petitioner. — Ex parte Culley (9 Ch. D. 307) 
 followed. — ^When an act of bankruptcy has been 
 committed by the failure of a debtor to comply 
 with a bankruptcy summons, any creditor may 
 avail himself of it for the purpose of presenting 
 ■a bankruptcy petition against the debtor ; the 
 right to petition is not limited to the creditor 
 who has served the bankruptcy notice. — A bank- 
 ruptcy petition having been presented by a bare 
 trustee of a debt, and dismissed on the ground 
 that the cestui que trust ought to have been 
 joined as a petitioner, leave was given by the 
 Court of Appeal (though more than three months 
 iad elapsed since the presentation of the petition) 
 
 IV. BANKRUPTCY— BANKRUPTCY PETITION 
 
 — continued. 
 to amend it by joining the cestui que trust, with 
 her consent, but the Appellant was ordered to 
 pay the costs of the appeal, and the costs (if 
 any) occasioned by tlie amendment. Ex parte 
 Dbarle. In re Hastings - 14 Q. B. D. 184 
 
 V. BANKRUPTCY— SECURED CREDITOR. 
 
 (o) Bankeuptoy Act, 1869. 
 
 1. Attachment — Tolzey Court of Bristol — 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 16, 
 sub-s. 5.] An attachment of the goods of the De- 
 fendant in an action of debt in the Tolzey Court 
 of Bristol is only a process to compel the appear- 
 ance of the Defendant, and does not make the 
 Plaintiff a secured creditor within the meaningof 
 sect. 16, sub-sect. 5, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 — The effect of an attachment in the Tolzey 
 Court is the same as that of a foreign attachment 
 under the custom of the Mayor's Court of London. 
 — Levyv. Lovetl (14 Ch. D. 234) followed. Ex 
 parte Se.ik. In re Peioe - 17 Ch. D. 74 
 
 2. Deposit of Goods — Bill given for Debt 
 
 indorsed away — Composition paid to Indorsee 
 without deducting Value of Security.^ The Plain- 
 tiif gave credit to the Defendants for goods sold, 
 and made advances to them, goods being deposited 
 by the Defendants with the Plaintiff as security, 
 and bills being drawn by the Plaintiff and ac- 
 cepted by tlie Defendants for the amounts of the 
 goods sold and advances made. — The Plaintiff 
 indorsed away such bills for value. During tlie 
 currency thereof the Defendants filed a petition 
 for liquidation by way of arrangement or compo- 
 sition with their creditors under the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869. The creditors of the Defendants passed 
 resolutions for the acceptance of a composition. 
 The holders of the bills, by arrangement between 
 themselves and the Plaintiff, claimed and were 
 paid tlie composition on the total amounts of the 
 bills, the Plaintiff paying them the balance 
 thereof. The Plaintiff having realized his secu- 
 rity by sale of the goods deposited claimed to hold 
 the proceeds against the balance so paid by him 
 upon the bills : — Held, that under the above cir- 
 cumstances the Plaintiff could not be considered 
 to have abandoned or forfeited his right to the se- 
 curity, but that the Plaintiff was not entitled to 
 stand in a better position than that which he 
 would have occupied if he had not negotiated the 
 bills, in which case he could only have received a 
 composition on the balance of his debt after de- 
 ducting tlie value of the security ; and that con- 
 sequently he was bound to account to the Defend- 
 ants for the amount by which the composition 
 paid on the bills exceeded that which would have 
 been paid if the value of the security had been 
 deducted before ascertaining the amount of the 
 composition. Batnes v. Weight 15 Q. B. D. 102 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 16 ft. B, D. 330] 
 
 3. Formal Defect — Petition — Statement of 
 
 readiness to give up Security — Valuation — Amend- 
 ment—Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 «e. 6, 82— Bankruptcy Mules, 1870, r. 10%— Bank- 
 ruptcy Forms, 1870, No, 10.] If a petitioning 
 creditor who holds security for his debt is willing to 
 give an estimate of the value of his security, sect. 6 
 
( 123 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 124 ) 
 
 V. BANKRUPTCY — SECT7EED CEEDITOE — 
 
 continued. 
 (a) Bankbuptoy Act, 1869 — continued. 
 of the BankruiJtoy Act, 1869, does not require 
 this fact to be stated in the petition, but it is suf- 
 ficient for the Petitioner to give notice of it to the 
 Eespondent, before the hearing of the petition. It 
 is, however, proper as a matter of convenience 
 that tire Petitioner's willingness to estimate the 
 value of his security, should, iir accordance with 
 Form No. 10, be stated in the petition. A peti- 
 tioning creditor stated in his petition that he held 
 no security for his debt. He in fact held a charge 
 on some property of the debtor, and before the 
 ]iearing of the petition his solicitors, in a letter to 
 the debtor's solicitors, said that the security was 
 not valued at anything, and at the hearing it was 
 stated that the Petitioner was reudy to give up his 
 security for the benefit of the creditors. The Re- 
 gistrar dismissed the petition, on the ground that 
 the Petitioner's readiness to give up his security 
 ought in conformity with sect. 6 to have been 
 stated in the petition : — Held, that the defect was 
 a merely formal one, and that the Registrar ought 
 to have amended the petition by adding a state- 
 ment of the security and that the Petitioner was 
 ready to give it up, and then to have made an 
 adjudication. And the Court of Appeal made the 
 amendment and the adjudication, but gave no 
 costs of the appeal. Ex parte Vandeiilinden. In 
 re PoGOSE - - 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 4. Mortgage — Application to Court hy 
 
 Eqititahle Mortgagee for a Sale — Insuj^c-if at Secu- 
 rity — Conduct of Sale — Costs of Trustee — Banl;- 
 ruptey Rules 1870, rr. 78, 79, 80 — Bauhmptcy 
 Hules, 1SS3, rr. 68-70.] "When an equitable 
 mortgagee applies to tlie Coiurt to realize his 
 security, the conduct of the sale is in the discre- 
 tion of the Court. As a general rule where the 
 security is sufiBcient tlie conduct of the sale will 
 be given to the trustee, but where the security 
 is insufficient tlie conduct of the sale will be 
 given to the mortgagee. In either case the costs, 
 charges, and expenses of the trustee, properly 
 incurred, will be a first charge upon the proceeds 
 of sale. J)t j'C JoKDAN. i'.t Jln^^' Hakiuson 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 228 
 
 5. Partnership — Composition — Joint Cre- 
 ditors — Creditors with Joint and Separate Security 
 — Valuation of Proof for Joint Ueht — Close of 
 Composition — Action for Redewptimi of Security — 
 Claimto retain Separate Security — Amendment of 
 Proof.'] 13. & Co. were creditors of a partnership 
 for £2-100, for which they held a security com- 
 prising joint property of the firm and also sepa- 
 rate property of one of the partners. The firm 
 being in difficulties, the joint ci-editors agreed to 
 accept a composition, and B. & C'o. valued their 
 security at £800, and proved and received the 
 composition upon the balance. Subsequently 
 they received from their security more than £800 
 and interest from the date of valuation. Four 
 years after the close of the composition the debtors 
 brought an action to redeem tlieir security. B. & 
 Co. claimed to retain the security on the separate 
 property until they had received payment in full 
 of their claim, on the ground that they need not 
 have deducted the separate property : — Seld, by 
 Jessel, M.E., that B. & Co. having received £800 
 
 V. BAWKaTJPICY — SECTOED CEEDITOE — 
 
 continued, 
 (a) Bankkuptoy Act, 1869 — continued. 
 from the security and accepted the eompositioa 
 on the balance, their whole debt was discliarged, 
 and they could not retain the separate security. — 
 Tliis decision affirmed on appeal, on the ground 
 that although B. & Co. need not have deducted 
 the value of the separate security, yet, inasmuch, 
 as the composition had been fixed, and the whole 
 proceeding in the composition had been taken 
 and completed upon the footing of the valuation 
 of the compound security at £800, it was too late- 
 to upset the transaction : — Held, that leave tO' 
 amend the proof could not now be given, whatever 
 might have been the case had a proper application 
 for that purpose been made during the jjendenoy" 
 of the composition proceedings. CorLDEKT v.. 
 Babtktjm - 19 Ch. D. 394 
 
 6. • Partnership — • Fraudulent Fledge ly 
 
 Partnership Firm — Other Security held hy Pledgee 
 — Separate Guarantee of one Partner — Marshall- 
 ing Securities.] A partnership firm wrongfully 
 pledged to their bankers, to secure a debt of the 
 firm, the delivery warrants of some brandy which 
 had been left in their custody in the ordinary 
 course of business by the owner. One of the 
 partners in the firm had no knowledge of the 
 fraud. The debt due by the firm to the bankers- 
 was also secured by a separate guarantee of the 
 innocent partner. The firm filed a liquidation 
 petition, and the bankers sold the brandy, and 
 applied the proceeds of sale in pari; payment of 
 their debt. The owner of the brandy knew 
 nothing of the pledge until the stoppage of the 
 firm. The separate estate of the innocent partner 
 was sufficient to pay all his separate creditors in.' 
 full (including the balance remaining due to the 
 bankers), and to leave a surplus : — Held, that the 
 owner of the brandy was entitled to have the' 
 bankers' securities marshalled, and, to the extent 
 of the value of the brandy, to have the benefit- 
 of the guarantee, and to prove against the sepa- 
 rate estate of the innocent partner. — Ex parte 
 Alston (Law Eep. 4 Ch. 168) followed. Ex parte 
 Salting. In re Stratton - 25 Ch. D. 148 
 
 7. Proof — Bcdance of Debt above assessed 
 
 Value of Security — Composition — Banliruptcy Act,. 
 1SG9 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 126— Genera! Rules, 
 1870, Mule 272.] The effect of Rule 272 of the 
 General Rules, 1870, read together with sect. 126. 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 is that in composition proceedings under sect. 126. 
 a secured creditor, who proves for the balance of 
 his debt after deducting the assessed value of his- 
 security, and afterwards realizes the security, 
 must pay to the debtor any surplus realized above 
 the assessed value, after allowing interest upon' 
 the assessed value from the assessment until the 
 realization : — So held, affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal. Societe Gen er ale de 
 Paris v. Geen - - 8 App. Cas. 606 
 
 8. Proof — Deduction of Value of Security 
 
 — Security on Lease- of Bankrupt unci former 
 Partner.'] The rule as to what securities a secured 
 creditor of a bankrupt is bound to value and 
 deduct on proving against the bankrupt's estate,, 
 explained. — Two partnei-s; who were interested in. 
 
< 125 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 12& ). 
 
 V, BANKRUPTCY — SECURED CREDITOR — 
 
 — continued, 
 (a) Bankruptcy Act, 1869 — cmitinued. 
 equal shares in the bxisiness of the partnership, 
 dissolved partnership. They had carried on busi- 
 ness at some mills, of ■which tliey held a lease, 
 granted to them, their executors, administrators, 
 and assigns. On the dissolution, the partnership 
 assets, other than the lease and the fixtures, -were 
 divided equally between the two partners. It 
 ■was agreed that one of them should be entitled to 
 carry on the business for seven years on his own 
 account, and that he should pay the debts of the 
 firm and indemnify the retiring partner against 
 them. The retiring partner lent the other the 
 value of his moiety of the partnership assets 
 (other than the lease and fixtures) and granted 
 him a lease for seven years of his moiety of the 
 miUs and fixtures. The original lease was depo- 
 sited by the continuing and the retiring partners 
 with the bankers of the former, as security for the 
 balance ■which might for the time being be due 
 from him to them, it being expressly provided 
 that the retiring partner should be liable to the 
 bankers only as a surety for the other. The cou- 
 tinuing partner, before the end of the seven years, 
 filed a liquidation petition : — Held, that, as to a 
 moiety of the lease and fixtures, the bankers' secu- 
 rity ■was upon separate estate of the liquidating 
 debtor, and that, before proving in the liquidation 
 for the balance due to them by him, they must 
 deduct a moiety of the value of the lease and fix- 
 tures. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., affirmed. Ex 
 parte West Kiding Union Banking Company. 
 In re TciiNBU - 19 Ch. D. 105 
 
 (6.) Bankeuptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 9. Execution — Sale iy Sheriff — Applica- 
 tion ex parte to sell Goods hy Private Contract — 
 Discretion — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. 
 c. 52), s. 145.] Under s. 145 of the Bankrujitcy 
 Act, 1888, the Court has a discretion to order 
 goods taken in execution by the sheriff to be 
 sold by private contract instead of by public auc- 
 tion, notwithstanding that the application for 
 leave to sell by private contract is made by the 
 execution creditor ex parte, and in the absence of 
 all the other creditors of the execution debtor. 
 HrNT ■». Fensham - - 12 ft. B. D. 162 
 
 10. Execution — Seizure but not delivery 
 
 of the Goods— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 * 47 
 Vict. c. 52), ss. 146, 169.] By the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1883, s. 146, " the sheriff shall not under a 
 writ of elegit deliver the goods of a debtor, nor 
 shall a ■writ of elegit extend to goods," and by 
 o. 169, which repeals amongst other enactments 
 so much of 13 Edw. 1, c. 18, as relates to the 
 chattels of the debtor save only his oxen and 
 beasts of the plough, it is enacted that "the 
 repeal effected by this Act shall not affect any- 
 thing done before the commencement of this Act 
 under any enactment repealed by this Act, nor 
 any right or privilege acquired or duty imposed, 
 or liability or disqualification incurred under any 
 enactment so repealed." Some days before the 
 1st of January, 1884, when the Bankruptcy Act 
 of 1883 came into operation, the sheriff entered 
 into possession and seized goods of the Defen- 
 dant, under a writ of elegit issued imder statute 
 
 V. BANKRUPTCY— SECURED CREDITOR — 
 
 continued, 
 (h) Bankruptcy Act, 1883 — continued. 
 13 Edw. 1, c. 18, at the suit of the Plaintiff, a. 
 judgment creditor of the Defendant, but no deli- 
 very of such goods had been made to the Plaintiff 
 before the 1st of January, 1884 ■.—Held, reversing 
 the decision of the Queen's Bench Division, that 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, had not deprived the 
 Plaintiff of his right to the delivery of such goods. 
 Hough v. Windus 12 Q. B, D. 224 
 
 11. Mortgage — Valuation of Security — 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), s. G 
 (s«6-s. 2) ; sched. 1, rr. 10, 12 ; sched. 2, rr. 9, 10, 
 11, 12, 13.] When a secured creditor presents a 
 banki-uptcy petition against his debtor it is not 
 necessary that the estimate given by the peti- 
 tioner of the value of his security should be a true 
 estimate ; but if an adjudication is made, the 
 trustee in the bankruptcy will be entitled to re- 
 deem the seom-ity at the amount of the peti- 
 tioner's estimate. Ex parte Taylor 13 ft. B. D. 
 
 [128 
 
 12. Valuation of Security — Amendment 
 
 of Proof — Seco7id Mortgagee — Notice of AppeaV 
 — Time — Notice sent hy Post — Trustee — Costs — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), ». 142 ; 
 Schedule 2, r. 13 — Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, rr. 112, 
 114 A., 116 A. [Bules of Uth of April, 1884]— 
 Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order LVIII. r. 15.] 
 If notice of a bankruptcy appeal is sent by post, . 
 as provided by sect. 142 of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883, quiere whether the notice will be in time 
 unless the letter is received by the respondent, 
 before the expiration of the twenty-one days 
 limited for appealing. — A mortgagee who has 
 valued his security will in a proper case be 
 allowed, under rule 13 in schedule 2 to the Act, 
 to amend iiis valuation and proof, notwithstand- 
 ing the opposition of a subsequent mortgagee. — A 
 trustee in bankruptcy who is served with notice 
 of an appeal, and who appears and only asks for 
 his costs, will not be allowed his costs of appear- 
 ance. Ex parte Aeden. In re Aeden 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 121 
 
 VI. BANKRUPTCY— RECEIVER, 
 
 (a.) Bankeuptcy Act, 1869. 
 
 1. :- Injunction — Undertaking as to Da- 
 mages — Enforcement — Delay.'] Au application to 
 enforce an undertaking to be answerable in 
 damages, given by a receiver in bankruptcy on the 
 granting of an injunction to restrain proceedings 
 in relation to property alleged to form part of the 
 bankrupt's estate, ought to be made within a 
 reasonable time after it is ascertained that the in- 
 junction has been improj)erly granted. — Unex- 
 plained and unreasonable delay in making sucli 
 an application will be a sufficient ground for re- 
 fusing it, even if the bankruptcy proceedings 
 are still pending and the receiver has not ob- 
 tained his discharge : — Held, that an unexplained 
 delay of nearly four years in making such an 
 application was a sufficient answer to it, though 
 the applicant had shewn a prima facie case. Ex 
 parte Hall. In re Wood - 23 Ch. D. 644 
 
 2. Remuneration — Complaint agaiaisf 
 
 Trustee—Locus Standi — " Person aggrieved " — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c:. 71), s. 20- 
 
( 127 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 128 ) 
 
 VI. BANKRUPTCY— RECEIVEE—coniMwetZ. 
 
 (a) Bankeuptcy Act, 1869 — txmtinued. 
 ■ — Banlcruptcy Rules, 1871, rr. 3, 7.] A Receiver 
 in bankruptcy or liquidation has no lien upon 
 the assets for his remuneration ; he is only 
 entitled to be paid out of the net assets. — And he 
 is not entitled to come to tlie Court to complain 
 •of the conduct of the trustee in the administration 
 of the assets. — Such a complaint can be made 
 •only by the creditors. Ex parte Browne. In re 
 Maltbt - 16 Ch. D. 497 
 
 3. Taxation — Receiver and Manager — 
 
 Charges — Money advanced tvi&out Authority of 
 Court — Right to Indemnity — Banlcruptcy Rides, 
 1871, rr. 5, 6, 7.] Under rule 5 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Eules, 1871, the charges of a receiver 
 ■and manager of a business for disbursements 
 out of pocket (e.g., travelling expenses and 
 salaries of assistants) are liable to taxation. — 
 A receiver and manager of a business who desires 
 to advance money of his own for the purposes 
 of the business may, before doing so, apply to 
 the Court for its authority, and the Court 
 will, as a general rule, allow him interest at 5 per 
 cent, on the amount which it authorizes him 
 to advance, and will give him a charge on the 
 debtor's assets for the advance and the interest. — 
 If the receiver and manager advances money 
 without such a previous authority, he is entitled 
 to an indemnity out of the assets, but he cannot 
 obtain a personal order agiiinst the trustee for 
 payment. Ex parte IzAm). J« re Bush ell (No. 1) 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 76 
 
 (b.) Eeoeiving Ordek — Bakkeuptoy Act, 1883. 
 
 4. Act of Bankruptcy hefore the Ist of 
 
 January, 1884 — Pending Liquidation Proceed- 
 ings — Proof of Act of Bankruptcy — Appearance 
 of Debtor— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 * 47 Vict, 
 ■c. 52). ss. i, 5, 7, 169— Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, 
 rr. 189, 262, 263, 264.] A receiving order can be 
 made on a bankruptcy petition presented under 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1S83, founded on an act of 
 bankruptcy committed before that Act came into 
 operation, but in respect of which no bankruptcy 
 pioceedingB had been taken before that date. 
 And the fact that liquidation proceedings under 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, were pending when 
 the Act of 1883 came into operation, and that 
 those proceedings afterwards came to an end by 
 reason of the creditors failing to pass any resoln- 
 -tion, does not atfect the power of the Court to 
 make the receiving order. — If, on the hearing of 
 a bankruptcy petition, the act of bankruptcy 
 alleged is not strictly proved, but the debtor ap- 
 pears and does not raise the objection, and a 
 receiving order is made, he cannot on H.n appeal 
 from that order raise the objection. Ex parte 
 Pbatt 12 ft. B. D. 334 
 
 5. Jurisdiction — Petition in wrong Court 
 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 * 47 Viet. c. 52), ss. 
 95, 97.] If a bankruptcy petition is by inadver- 
 -tence presented in a wrong bankruptcy court, the 
 court to which it is presented has jurisdiction to 
 make a receiving order. — If, however, the petition 
 is wilfully presented in a wrong court, this is a 
 ground for dismissing it. — The Divisional Court 
 made a receiving order, which it held that the 
 ■county court ought to have made, aud to which 
 
 VI. BANKRUPTCY— EECEIVEE—comiTOttetJ. 
 
 (6) Receiving Okdek. — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 — continued. 
 the debtor bad raised no other objection than 
 want of jurisdiction, giving leave to the debtor 
 to apply afterwards to the Divisional Court to 
 discharge the order on any ground arising since 
 the hearing in the county court. Ex parte Mat. 
 In re Bhightmoee - - 14 Q. B. D. 37 
 
 6. Partnership — Notice in Name of Part- 
 ners — Bankruptcy of one Partner before Bearing 
 of Petition — Right of solvent Partner to receive 
 Partnership Assets as against Trustee of bankrupt 
 Partner— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 52), s. i,sub-s. 1 (3).] After the bankruptcy of 
 a partner and the appointment of a trustee of his 
 property his solvent partner has a right to receive, 
 and can give a good discharge for, the partnership 
 assets, and is entitled, for the purpose of collect- 
 ing or recovering the assets, to use the name of 
 the trustee, upon giving him an indemnity. — ■ 
 After one of two partners had filed a liquidation 
 petition and a receiver had been appointed, a 
 judgment was recovered in an action previously 
 commenced in the names of the two partners 
 against O., a debtor of the firm. A bankruptcy 
 notice in the names of the two partners was then 
 served on 0. ; he failed to comply with it within 
 the seven days limited for the purpose, and a 
 bankruptcy petition was presented against him in 
 the names of the two partners. Before this peti- 
 tion came on to be heard, the creditors of the 
 partner who had filed the liquidation petition had 
 resolved on a liquldatiou by aiTangement, and had 
 appointed a trustee of his property : — Held, that 
 though there was a good act of bankruptcy, a re- 
 ceiving order could not properly be made against 
 0., unless the trustee in the liquidation was 
 joined as a co-petitioner. Ex parte Owen 
 
 [13 Q, B. D. 113 
 
 7. • Power of Court to refuse — " Sufficient 
 
 Cause " — Execution of Creditors' Deed — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 4, 
 sub-s. 1 (a), s. 7, sub-s. 3, ss. 15, 16, 17, 18— Official 
 Receive} — Appearance on Appeal — Costs.'] The 
 fact that shortly before the presentation of a 
 bankruptcy petition against a debtor he has, with 
 the assent of a large majority of his creditors, 
 executed n deed assigning the whole of his pro- 
 perty to trustees appointed by the creditors to be 
 administered by them as in bankruptcy, is not, 
 within the meaning of sub-sect. 3 of sect. 7 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, a " sufficient cause '' for re- 
 fusing to make a receiving order on the petition. — 
 As a general rule the official receiver, though 
 served with a notice of appeal, ought not to ap- 
 pear on the hearing, unless there are special cir- 
 cumstances which he desires to bring before the 
 Court, and in the absence of special circum- 
 stances he will not be allowed his costs of appear- 
 ance. Ex parte DixoN - - 13 Q. B. D. 118 
 
 8. Po-wer of Court to refuse — " Sufficient 
 
 cause" — Adjournment — Prior Airangement be- 
 tween Debtor and Creditors — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), «. 7 (3).] The fact that a 
 debtor has, shortly before the presentation of a 
 bankruptcy petition against him, entered into an 
 arrangement with Ms creditors (to which the 
 
( 129 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 130 ) 
 
 VI. BANKRTIPTCY— RECEIVER— coreijmueci. 
 (6) Eeoeiving Order— Bankeuptct Act, 1883 
 — continued. 
 petitioner has not assented) is not, however bene- 
 ficial to the creditors the terms of the arrange- 
 ment may be, a " sufficient cause " within tlie 
 meaning of s. 7 (3) of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 for dismissing the petition.- And, there being no 
 jurisdiction under such circumstances to dismiss 
 the petition, there is no jurisdiction to adjourn 
 the hearing of It with a view to its ultimate dis- 
 missal in case the arrangement shall be found 
 to work well. — The decision in Ex parte Dixon 
 (13 Q. B. D. 118) did not depend upon the par- 
 ticular terms of the arrangement in that ease, but 
 on the fact that the arrangement was made at 
 such a time and in such a manner as not to bind 
 the dissentient creditors. Ex parte Oram. In re 
 "Watson - - 15 Q. B. D. 399 
 
 9. Power to rescind Order — Petition by 
 
 Behtor — Payment of Creditors in full — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 5, 8, 
 104.] A debtor presented a bankruptcy petition 
 and a receiving order was made. The debtor's 
 father, who was a partly secured creditor, imme- 
 diately afterwards paid all the unsecured creditors 
 in full. The only other creditor was fully secured. 
 The debtor then applied to the Court to rescind 
 the receiving order and to allow him to withdraw 
 his petition. The application was assented to by 
 the fully seemed creditor and by the father. The 
 Judge held that he had no jurisdiction to rescind 
 the order, but he made an order staying all further 
 proceedings under the order : — Held, that there 
 was jurisdiction to grant the application. Ex 
 parte Wemyss. In re Wemyss 13 Q. B. D. 214 
 
 10. Protection — Arrest of Debtor between 
 
 Date and signing of Ordei Bankruptcy Act, 
 
 1883, s. Q— Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, r. 153 ; Ap- 
 pendix, Forms 29 and 30.] Having regard to the 
 terms of eect. 9 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, as 
 to the effect of a receiving order in protecting a 
 debtor from arrest, the order must be deemed to 
 have been " made " on the day it was pronounced, 
 and therefore as protecting the debtor as from 
 that day. — Therefore, where a debtor had been 
 arrested under an order of the Chancery Division 
 made after the date of a receiving order pro- 
 nounced before, but not drawn up and signed by 
 the JReglstrar (Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, r. 153, 
 Appendix, Forms 29 and 30) until after the 
 arrest, he was ordered to be discharged, notwith- 
 standing that he had by his counsel submitted 
 to the order of attachment. — Order of Kay, J., 
 affirmed. In re Manning - 30 Ch. D, 480 
 
 (c.) Official Eeoeivbb. 
 
 11. Powers and Duties — Powers wJien 
 
 acting as Trustee — Power to sell Bankrupt's Pro- 
 perty—Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. e. 52), 
 ss. 9, 10, 20, 21, 54, 56, 68-70, 121.] The official 
 receiver, when acting as trustee in a bankruptcy 
 in the interval between the adjudication and the 
 appointment of a trustee by the creditors, has 
 power to sell the bankrupt's property, even though 
 it be not of a perishable nature. — Decision of 
 Cave, J., reversed. Ex parte Ttiequand. Ex 
 parte Board op Trade. In re Parker 
 
 [14 Q. B. S 407 ; 15 Q, B. S, 196 
 
 VII. BANKRUPTCY— EXAMINATION. 
 
 ,1. Solicitor — Bightof Audience— Exami- 
 nation of a Debtor by a Solicitor — Solicitor to be 
 authorised in Writing — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 (46 & 47 Vict. e. 52), s. 17, sub-s. 4.] The Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883, e. 17, sub-s. 4, euacts with re- 
 ference to the public examination of a debtor 
 under that Act, " that any creditor who has ten- 
 dered a proof, or his representative authorized in 
 writing, may question the debtor concerning his 
 affairs, and the causes of his failure " : — Seld, 
 that a solicitor who appears at a bankruptcy 
 court for a creditor who has tendered a proof, is 
 the creditor's representative wlthia the meaning 
 of that sub-section, and is iherefore not entitled 
 soto question the debtor without being autho- 
 rised m writing and producing his authority 
 if required by the Court to do so. Qumre, if 
 such solicitor, when Ids right of audience has 
 been so denied to him, is '• a party," within the 
 meaning of s. 43 of the County Courts Act, 1856 
 (19 & 2u Vict. 0. 108), who is entitled to apply to 
 the superior Court for a rule to compel the County 
 Conrt Judge to give him audience. The Queen 
 V. Eegistrar of Greenwich County Court 
 
 [15 Q. B, S. 54 
 
 2. Statement of Property — Duty of Bank- 
 rupt to furnish Accounts — Order to file Cash Ac- 
 count—Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 83 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 19.] Sect. 19 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 gives the Court power to order a bankrupt to 
 filfe a cash account of his receipts and payments 
 for a specified period before his bankruptcy, and, 
 if the circumstances which appear on the file 
 of proceedings shew that such an order ought 
 to be made, the Court can make it without any 
 further evidence. — The Court, however, has a 
 discretion in the matter, and such an order ought 
 not to be made as a matter of course, but only 
 under special circumstances. — Ex parte Crawford 
 (28 L. T. (N.S.) 244) approved and followed.— A 
 bankrupt who had been engaged in an extensive 
 business as a promoter of public companies, had 
 kept no accounts, aud could produce no record 
 whatever of his transactions, except his banker's 
 pass-book, andsome counterfoils of recent cheques : 
 — Held, that this was a sufficient reason for order- 
 ing him to file a cash account of his receipts and 
 payments for two years before his bankruptcy. Ex 
 parte MoiR. In re Mom - - 21 Ch. D. 61 
 
 VIII. BANKRUPTCY- SCHEME OF ARRANGE- 
 MENT. 
 1. Approval of Conrt — Reasonableness- 
 Discharge of Debtor left to Discretion of Committee 
 of Inspection — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 
 Vict. c. 52), s. 18.] A scheme for the arrange- 
 ment of the affairs of debtors who had presented 
 a bankruptcy petition, duly assented to by the 
 creditors, as provided by sect. 18 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883, contained, inter alia, provisions 
 for the appointment of a trustee and a committee 
 of inspection, and also a provision that "the 
 debtors shall be discharged when the committee 
 of inspection shall so resolve " : — Held, that the 
 latter provision was not in accordance with the 
 intention of the Act, and was unreasonable, aud 
 that, though the debtors asked that the scheme 
 might be approved by the Court, the approval 
 
 F 
 
( 131 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 132 ) 
 
 VIII. BANKRUPTCY— SCHEME OF ABEANGE- 
 
 MENT — continued. 
 ouglit not to be given. Ex parte Claek. In re 
 Clabk - 13 a. B. D. 426 
 
 2. ■ Approval of Court — Discretion of Ee- 
 
 gistrar — Wishes of Creditors — Evidence of Facts 
 justifying Court in refusing to approve — Report 
 of Official Meceiver — Banltruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 
 il Vict. c. 52), ss. 18, 28.] The report of the 
 official receiver is, under sect. 18 of the Bankruptcy- 
 Act, 1883 (as it is under sect. 28), prima facie 
 evidence of the statements contained in it. — The 
 registrar, in deciding whether he will or will not 
 approve a composition or scheme of arrangement 
 accepted by the creditors of a bankrupt, is exer- 
 cising a judicial discretion, and the Court of Appeal 
 will not readily set aside his order. — It is the duty 
 of the registrar to form his own judgment, and not 
 to be influenced by the wishes of the creditors. 
 Ex parte Campbell. In re Wallace 
 
 [IS Q. B. D. 213 
 
 3. Approval of Court — Reasonableness — 
 
 Rash and hazardous Speculation — Retrospective 
 Effect ofAct—Banhruptcij Act, 1883 (46 & 47 7ict. 
 c. 52), ss. 18, 28, suh-s. 3 (d.).] In determining 
 whether a composition accepted by creditors under 
 the piovisions of sect. 18 is reasonable, the Court 
 must exercise its own judgment, though it will 
 -take into account the fact that the creditors are 
 mainly interested in the questiou. — The Coiu-t 
 anust have regard to the debtor's assets and lia- 
 'bilities, and if, for a large proportion of the debts 
 set down in his slatement of affairs proofs have 
 not been tendered, or if the Court considers that 
 
 "the proofs which have been tendered require to 
 be investigated by a trustee, the Court ought to 
 decline to approve of the composition. — The Court 
 of Appeal will not overrule the exercise of the 
 discretion of the judge of first instance as to the 
 approval of a composition, unless it is clearly 
 satisfied that he was wrong. — The quasi penal 
 provisions of sub-sects. 2 and 3 of sect. 28 are 
 retrospective, i.e., they apply to acts done by the 
 <lebtor before the Act came into operation, if 
 tlie proceedings are Instituted under that Act. — 
 A trader, after he knew that one of his debtors 
 who owed him about £32,000 was in pecuniary 
 difficulties, allowed him, in the course of eighteen 
 months, to increase his debt to £65,000, and 
 to the extent of £11,000 this increase was due to 
 accommodation bills. The trader then stopped 
 payment, and presented a bankruptcy petition. 
 The debt of £65,000 was apparently irrecover- 
 able : — Held, that the debtor had been guilty of 
 rash and hazardous speculations, and that on this 
 ground (inter alia) the Court ought to refuse to 
 approve of a composition which his creditors 
 iad, under tlie provisions of sect. 18, agreed to 
 accept. TT.c parte Eogeks. In re Eogees 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 438 
 
 IX. BANKRUPTCY— ADJUDICATION. 
 
 1. Disputed Debtr— Siay of Proceedings 
 
 pending Triid of Validity of Debt— Discretion of 
 Registrar — Waiver of irregularity — Bankruptcy 
 Rules, 1870, r. 43.] When the proceedings on a 
 bankruptcy petition have been stayed for the trial 
 of the question of tlie validity of the petitioning 
 creditor's debt, and the validity of the debt has 
 
 IX. EANKEUPTCY— ADJUDICATION— conW. 
 
 been established by the judgment of a Court of 
 first instance, the Kegistrar has a judicial discre- 
 tion to proceed with the hearing of the petition 
 and to make an adjudication of bankruptcy upon 
 it, and is not bound to wait for a final decision of 
 a Court of Appeal on the validity of the debt. — 
 If, however, he is satisfied that a bonS, fide appeal 
 is pending from the judgment of the Court of first 
 instance, he ought to adjourn the further hearing 
 of the petition until after the appeal is disposed 
 of. — Before fixing a day for continuing the pro- 
 ceedings on the petition, the Registrar is bound 
 to require the production of the judgment estab- 
 lishing the debt, or an office copy of it. — ^But, if 
 the day is fixed irregularly, without the produc- 
 tion of the judgment, the irregularity will be 
 waived by the appearance of the debtor or his 
 solicitor on the day fixed without taking the ob- 
 jection, which cannot then be raised at any sub- 
 sequent stage of the proceedings. — Seld, that an 
 appeal from an adjudication of bankruptcy ought 
 to stand over pending the trial of an action, the 
 result of which, it was alleged by the Appellant, 
 would be to render a fund available to satisfy the 
 debt claimed by the pejAtioning creditor. Ex 
 parte YEATMAif. In re YeA-itmak 16 Ch. D. 283 
 
 2. Petitioning Creditor's Debt—" Liqui- 
 dated Sum" — Defaulter oil £ifcmdon Stock Ex- 
 change — Amount of -ZM^B^|S- fixed by Official 
 Assignee — Banlcruptfy^ff^^mGd (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), s. 6.] The amount^p the differences due 
 by a defaulter on the LoBclon Stock Exchange 
 (as fixed by the official assignee of that body 
 under its rules) to a StocK Exchange creditor, is 
 a " liquidated sum" within the nijeaningof sect. 6 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1$69, and will support a 
 bankruptcy petition by the creditor against the 
 defaulter. Ex parte Wakd. In re Waed 
 
 [22C11.D.132 
 
 3. Practice — Amendment of Petition.'] 
 
 When a bankruptcy petition is amended under 
 an order of the Court the Judge has a discretion 
 as to requiring the amendment to be verified by 
 affidavit, and if the alteration is an immaterial 
 one an affidavit will not be required. Ex parte 
 EiTSO. In re EiTSO - 22 Ch. D. 629 
 
 4. Prior Scotch Sequestration — Jurisdic- 
 tion to make Adjudication — Discretion of Court.} 
 Though the Court has jurisdiction to adjudge 
 bankrupt a debtor against whom there is existing 
 'a prior unclosed Scotcli sequestration in which 
 he has not obtained a discharge, the Court has a 
 discretion in the matter, and it will decline to 
 make an adjudication if it does not appear that 
 the debtor has any assets in England, or any 
 debts contracted since the commencement of the 
 sequestration : — Per Jessel, M.E. : Prima facie the 
 existence of a Scotch sequestration is a reason for 
 declining to make an adjudication. Ex parte 
 EoBiNSON'. In re Eoeinson 22 Ch. D. 816 
 
 5. Rehearing — Jurisdiction — Actof Bank- 
 ruptcy committed before Commencement of Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1SS3 — Liquidation Proceedings under 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 — Failure of Proceedings 
 after 1st of January, 1884 — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 (40 & 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 4, 5, 94, 104, 169— jBonfc- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 125, sub-s. 
 
( 133 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 131 ) 
 
 IX. BANKEUPTCT— ADJUDICATION— conM. 
 
 12.] A debtor filed a liquidation petition in De- 
 cemtpr, 1883, and a receiver of his property was 
 appointed. On the IStii of January, 1884, the 
 adjourned first meeting of the creditors was held, 
 when the creditors separated without passing any 
 resolutions, and without again adjourning the 
 meeting. On the 21st of January one of the cre- 
 ditors presented a bankruptcy petition against the 
 debtor under the Act of 1869, alleging the filing 
 of the liquidation petition as an act of bankruptcy. 
 On the 1st of Febiuary, the Registrar adjudicated 
 the debtor bankrupt on the petition. Tiie debtor 
 was present, and raised no objection to the juris- 
 diction of the Court to make the order. The re- 
 ceiver had not been ditoharged. On the 14th of 
 March (Ex parte Pratt, 12 Q. B. D. 334, having 
 meanwhile been decided), ' the debtor applied to 
 the Kegistrar for a rehearing of the petition, and 
 ii reversal of the order of adjudication, on the 
 ground that there was no jurisdiction to make it. 
 The Kegistrar refused the application: — Held, 
 that the Court had no jurisdiction to make the 
 adjudication under the Act of 1869 on the ground 
 that an act of bankruptcy had been committed, 
 but that it would have had jurisdiction to make 
 it under the power given by sub-sect. 12 of sect. 
 125 of that Act— Beld, iherefore, that, as the ob- 
 jection had not been raised before the Registrar, 
 a rehearing ought not to be allowed. — Observa- 
 tions as to the exercise of the power to allow a 
 rehearing. Hx parte May - 12 Q. B. D. 497 
 After liquidation - 22 Ch. D. 813 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Liquidation. 1. 
 Annulment of adjudication. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptcy — Annul- 
 ment. 
 
 Eesolution for liquidation after adjudication 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 256, 541 
 
 See Bankbuptoy— Liquidation. 2, 3. 
 
 X. BANKETIPTCY- TEirSTEE. 
 
 1. Administration of Property — Direo- 
 
 tions of Oreditors— Application to Court for Direc- 
 tions— Fower of Court to direct Trustee to disregard 
 Eesolution of Creditors— Barilcruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 14, 20.] Under sect. 20 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1S69, a trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy is entitled to apply to the Court for direc- 
 tions in relation to any particular matter arising 
 under the bankruptcy, as to which the creditors 
 have already by resolution at a general meeting, 
 given him directions, and the Court has power 
 for just cause shewn to direct the trustee to dis- 
 regard the directions of the creditors and to act 
 contrary to them. In such a case the Court ought 
 not to order the resolution to be vacated or to 
 declare it void, but simply to direct the trustee 
 to disregard it.— Even though there be no fraud 
 in the passing of a resolution giving the trustee 
 directions as to the administration of the estate, 
 yet, if the majority of the creditors have voted, 
 not simply with the view of administering the 
 estate in the best way for the benefit of all the 
 creditors but with the view of favouring the 
 debtor or persons whom he is alleged to have 
 fraudulently preferred, the Court ought to direct 
 the trustee to disregard the resolution.— Sect. 20 
 is to be construed with reference to sect. U.—Ex 
 
 X. BANKETTPTCY- TETJSTEE- oonfOTMed 
 parte Emmanuel (17 Ch. D. 35) explained. Ex 
 parte Cocks. In re PooLE - 21 Ch. D, 397 
 
 2. Carrying on Business by Trustee— 
 
 Power of Creditors — Bankruptcy Act, 3 869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. 0. 71), ss. 14, 20, 25.] The 
 creditors of a],bankrupt trader have no power to 
 authorize the trustee to caiTy on the business of 
 the bankrupt, except so far as may be necessary 
 for the ' beneficial winding-up of the business. — ^If 
 the majority of the creditors pass a resolution 
 authorizing the trustee to carry on the business 
 for any other purpose, such as the hope of making 
 a profit thereby, the resolution is not binding 
 upon the non-assenting minority, and the Court 
 ought to interfere and to declare it invalid. Ex 
 parte Emmanuel. In re Batey - 17 Ch. D. 35 
 
 3. Creditors' Deed — Act of Bankruptcy — ■ 
 
 Subsequent Bankruptcy of Debtor — Liability of 
 Trustee under Deed to account to Trustee in Bank- 
 ruptcy.'] "When the trustee under a creditors' deed 
 takes possession of the debtor's property and carries 
 on his business under the provisions of the deed, 
 and the debtor is subsequently adjudicated a bank- 
 rupt on the act of banlcruptcy committed by the 
 execution of the deed, the trustee in the bank- 
 ruptcy must elect to treat the trustee under the 
 deed either as a trespasser or as his agent. If he 
 elects to treat him as a trespasser, the trustee under 
 the deed must deliver up to him all the property 
 of the bankrupt of which he took possession, and 
 which remains in his possession unconverted, and 
 must pay him the value of that property which he 
 has converted. Ex parte Vaughan. In re Em- 
 DEOUGH - _ . _ 14 Q. B. D. 25 
 
 4. Debt incurred by Fraud — Action 
 
 against Debtor and Trustee in Liquidation — 
 Separhte Estate of Debtor — Bight of Action against 
 Trustee.] In an action against liquidating debtors 
 and their trustee, to recover advances of money 
 obtained from the Plaintiffs by the debtors 
 through false and fraudulent representations be- 
 fore the liquidation, the Plaintilfs claimed, inter 
 alia, a declaration that they were entitled to prove 
 for the amount of the advances, and interest at 
 5 per cent, to the date of the liquidation, either 
 against the joint estate of the liquidating debtors 
 or against the separate estate, as the Plaintifi's 
 might elect: — Held, on demurrer by the trustee, 
 that, as the Plaintiffs might in this action obtain 
 some relief against him, the claim was good. 
 Hale v. Boustead - - 8 Q, B. D. 453 
 
 5. Default in rendering Accounts — Covi- 
 
 miltal for Contempt — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32. & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 55— General Rules, 126 
 178, 179.] The mere fact that a trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy has within four days after his resignation 
 or removal from office neglected to render the 
 accounts' prescribed by General Eule 126 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, is not sufiScient ground 
 for his committal to prison by the Court of Bank- 
 ruptcy, as for a contempt. To warrant such com- 
 mittal there must be some evidence that he has 
 after notice from the Court wilfully failed to per- 
 form the duties imposed upon him by the rule. 
 Be PooKES KoYLE - - - 7 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 6. leasehold — Liquidation — Election 
 
 by Trustee to take Lease — Bankruptcy Act, 1SG9 
 
 F 2 
 
( 135 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 136 ) 
 
 X, BANKRTTPTCY— TRUSTEE— conh'iiMed. 
 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 17, 23, 24, 83 subs. 6, 
 89, 90, 125.] The leasehold estate of a bank- 
 rupt or debtor liquidating his affairs by arrange- 
 ment vests absolutely in the truBtoe upon his 
 appointment, and he has no right of election 
 to accept or decline the leases, his only remedy 
 being by disclaimer ; and if he neglects or is un- 
 able to disclaim, he becomes personally liable in 
 respect of the covenants contained in the leases as 
 from the date of his appointment ; but he is not 
 liable for any breach of covenant happening be- 
 fore his appointment. — The Plaintiff demised to 
 M. a wharf for twenty-one years : the lease con- 
 tained covenants for rent and repairs by the lessee. 
 M. deposited the lease with S. as security for a 
 debt. M. filed a petition for liquidation on the 
 8th of December, 1880, and the Defendant was 
 appointed trustee on the 3rd of January, 1881. 
 The Defendant never took possession of the wharf; 
 but he negotiated with S. for the assignment of the 
 lease to him : the negotiations proved abortive. 
 The Plaintiff served the Defendant with a notice 
 requiring him to disclaim; but the Defendant 
 failed to do this. The Plaintiff then brought the 
 present action to recover two quarters' rent, due 
 respectively on the 25th of December, 1880, and 
 in the 25th of March, 1881, and damages for breach 
 of the covenant to repair : — Held, that the Plain- 
 tiff could not recover from the Defendant the 
 quarter's rent falling due on the 25th of Decem- 
 ber, 1880, because the Defenrl.int was not ap- 
 pointed trustee until the 3rd of January, 1881 ; 
 but that the Defendant was personally liable for 
 the quarter's rent due on the 25th of March, 1881, 
 and for breach of the covtoant to repair, on the 
 grounds, first, that by virtue of his appointment 
 as trustee all the property of the liquidating debtor 
 vested in him without any election on his part; 
 and, secondly, if an election on his part was neces- 
 sary, he hai, by his conduct, elected to accept the 
 lease. Titterton v. Cooper - 9 ft. B. D. 473 
 
 7. Letters addressed to Bankrupt— Orfer 
 
 for Re-direction — Appeal — Person agqrieved — 
 Locus Standi— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. u. 71), s. 85.] Under sect. 85 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, an application for an order for 
 the redirection of letters addressed to a bankrupt 
 can only be made by the trustee in the bank- 
 ruptcy. — The petitioning creditor has no locus 
 standi either to make application or to appeal 
 from an order made on the application of the 
 trustee if he thinks that order not sufficiently 
 extensive. — If the trustee refuses to apply for 
 such an order, or to appeal from an order made on 
 his application, the petitioning creditor cannot 
 apply to the Court himself. — SemUe, that he 
 might obtain authority to use the name of the 
 trustee. JSx parte Lister. In re Halberstamm 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 618 
 
 8, liquidation— BemouaZ of Trustee hy 
 
 Court — Jurisdiction — Discretion of Eegistrar — 
 " Cause shewn"— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 
 Vict. c. 71), s. 83 (,Vide Banlcmptcy Act, 1883, 
 ss. 84, 86.)] The power given to the Court by sub- 
 sect. 4 of sect. 83 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, to 
 " remove any trustee upon cause shewn," author- 
 izes the removal of one of several co-trustees 
 without the removal of all. "Cause shewn" 
 
 X. BANKETIPTCY— TSTTSTEE— cowfintiei. 
 
 does not mean only conduct amounting to fraud 
 or dishonesty on the part of the trustee ; it is 
 enough to prove conduct — suc];i as vexatious 
 obstruction of the realization of the estate in the 
 interest of the debtor — which shews that it is no 
 longer fit that the trustee should remain a trustee. 
 Though the making of an order to remove a 
 trustee is not a matter of pure discretion, and the 
 Court of Appeal is bound to see that cause was 
 shewn in order to found tbe jurisdiction of the 
 registrar, yet if the facts are capable of two' 
 reasonable interpretations, the Court of Appeal 
 will trust to the discretion of the registrar in de- 
 termining which is the more reasonable interpre- 
 tation of the two, and will not disturb his order 
 for the removal of a trustee, he, from his acquain- 
 tance with the proceedings throughout, having 
 far better means of judging than the Court of 
 Appeal has. Ex parte Newitt. In re Maxsel. 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 177 
 
 9. Liquidation — Belease and Discharge of 
 
 Trustee — Power of Board of Trade to require Ac- 
 count — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 126 — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1883, s. 102, suh-s. 5, s. 162, sub-s. 2.] A 
 trustee under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, who has 
 obtained his statutory release and discharge under 
 that Act, after the 25th of August, 1883 ("the date 
 of the passing of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883), is 
 not thereby relieved from rendering an account 
 to the Board of Trade of his receipts and pay- 
 ments as such trustee if, on that date, he had in 
 his hands any-undistributed funds, although such 
 funds may have been disposed of by a subse- 
 q uent resolution of the creditors. In re Chudlet. 
 fe ^arfe Board OE Trade 14 Q. B. D. 402 
 
 10. Personal Liability — Costs.'] A trustee 
 
 in bankruptcy can be made personally liable for 
 costs of a suit to which he is a party, subject to 
 the Court of Bankruptcy allowing him to recoup 
 himself out of the bankrupt estate, if his conduct 
 has been bona fide. Pitts v. La FoNTArsE 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 482 
 
 11. Power of Appointment — Bankruptcy 
 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 15, sub-s. 4— 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 44 
 (ii.) — Property of Bankrupt — Power of Ap- 
 pointment.'] A debtor had a general power of 
 appointment by deed or will : — Held, that his 
 trustee in liquidation had no power after the 
 death of the debtor to appoint the property the 
 subject of the power. Nichols to ?fi.'^ET 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1005 
 12. Eemoval of Trustee — Judicial Discre- 
 tion—Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. v. 71), 
 s. 83, svJi-s. 4.] A trustee in bankruptcy can be 
 removed by the Court from his office under 
 sect. 83, sub-sect. 4, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 only upon good cause shewn, not at the mere dis- 
 cretion of the Eegistrar. — But, in making an 
 order for the removal of a trustee for good cause, 
 the Registrar is exercising a judicial discretion, 
 and if he has exercised his discretion according 
 to law, the Court of Appeal will not distm-b his 
 order. Ex parte Sheard. In re Pooley (No. 1) 
 
 [16 Ch. D. lOT 
 ■ Protection of — Costs — Annulment of bank- 
 ruptcy - 22 Ch. D. 436 
 See BANKBcrTCY — Amxulmext. 1. 
 
( 137 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 138 ) 
 
 X. BAWKEUPTCY— TEUSTEE— conf/imed. 
 
 Belatiou back of title 
 
 See Cases under Banketjptoy — Assets. 
 6—11. 
 
 EemoTal of, before hearing of appeal 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 110 
 
 See Baukeuptcy — Appeal. 2. 
 
 Solicitor of— Costs - 20 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Costs. 1. 
 
 XL BANKEUPTCY— ASSETS. 
 
 (a.) EXEOUTIOV. 
 
 1. "Proceeds " of Sale—Banh-uptcy Act, 
 
 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. c. 71), ss. 6, SI— Seizure and 
 Sale — Notice to Sheriff of Petition in Bankruptcy 
 — Sale made on two different Days.} Sect. 87 
 ef the Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. 
 c. 71), enacts that, where the goods of any trader 
 have been taken in execution in respect of a judg- 
 ment for a sum exceeding £50, and sold, the sjbieriff 
 shall retain the proceeds of such sale in his hands 
 for a period of fourteen days, and, upon notice 
 being served on him within tiiat period of a bank- 
 ruptcy petition having been presented against 
 such trader (followed by an adjudication), shall 
 hold the proceeds of such sale, after deducting 
 expenses, on trust to pay the same to the trustee. 
 — On the 29th of December, 1882,an execution was 
 issued at the suit of the Plaintiff against the De- 
 fendants, traders, upon a judgment for £87 19s. id. 
 debt and costs, and lodged with the sheriff, who 
 on the same day seized certain goods of the De- 
 fendants and sold them on the 10th of January, 
 1883, realizing by that sale £41 12s. 7d. On the 
 12th of January other goods of the Defendants 
 which were upon otherpremises occupied by them 
 were sold under thefl. fa. and realized £74 10s. lOd. 
 On the 24th of January, 1883, a petition in bank- 
 ruptcy was presented against the Defendants, 
 under which they were adjudicated bankrupts on 
 the 19th of February. The sheriff had notice of 
 the petition on the 25th of January : — Held, that 
 the trustee was entitled to the whole proceeds, as 
 the " sale " contemplated by sect. 87 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, was not completed until the 
 12th of January, within fourteen days from the 
 receipt by the sheriff of notice of the filing of 
 the petition. Jones v. Paboell 11 Q. B. D. 430 
 
 2. Sum below £20 — Sale— Notice to Sheriff 
 
 of Bankruptcy Petition — Title of Trustee — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883, ss. 45, 46.] Where the sheriff 
 sells under an execution for more than £20, and 
 within fourteen days afterwards receives notice of 
 a bankruptcy petition, the effect of sect. 46, sub- 
 sect. 2, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, is not to 
 render the sale absolutely void, but to deprive 
 the execution creditor of the fruits of the sale, 
 and to transfer them to the trustee in the bank- 
 ruptcy for the benefit of the general body of the 
 creditors.— Where, therefore, a sheriff is in pos- 
 Bession under several writs, some for more and 
 some for less than £20, and proceeds to sell, the 
 writs are payable in order of priority so long as 
 there are funds to pay ; but, if he receives notice 
 of a bankruptcy petition within fourteen days 
 after the sale, only those writs are entitled to be 
 paid which are for less than £20, and which 
 
 XI. BANKEUPTCY- ASSETS— oojiiiJiucd: 
 (a.) Execution — continued. 
 
 would have been paid had not bankruptcy super- 
 vened. In re Peabce. Ex parte Crossthwaite 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 966 
 
 3. Sum exceeding £50 — Liquidation — 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. e. 71 ), s. 87— 
 Abandonment of Part of Judgment Debt.l Judg- 
 ment was signed in an action against a trader 
 for debt and costs amounting to less than £50. 
 The judgment creditor delivered to the sheriff a 
 writ of fi. fa. indorsed to levy the amount of the 
 debt and costs, with the expenses of and incidental 
 tu the execution. The expenses of and incidental 
 to the execution, added to the amount of the debt 
 and costs, made a total exceeding £50, but upon 
 notice of a liquidation petition against the execu- 
 tion debtor, the execution creditor directed the 
 sheriff's officer not to sell for an amount exceeding 
 £50, and accordingly goods to the amount of 
 £49 17s. only were sold : —fle?c?, that the execu- 
 tion creditor could, by abandoning so much of his 
 judgment debt as might be necessary to keep the 
 total amount for which the goods were sold under 
 £50, avoid the operation of s. 87 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869, and that, therefore, the execution cre- 
 ditor and not the trustee in liquidation was 
 entitled to the proceeds of the execution. Tueneb 
 V. Beidgett - 8 Q. B. D. 392 
 
 4. Sum exceeding £50 — Reduced by pay- 
 ment on Account — Faymsid of Balance by Trustee 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 87.] 
 After seizure under a fi. fa. for a sum which was 
 increased by possession money to an amount 
 above £50, payments on account were made by 
 the execution debtor, reducing the amount below 
 £50. The execution creditor knew and approved 
 of such payments, and authorized the sheriff to 
 give the execution debtor further time to pay the 
 balance, so that a sale might be avoided. — Pro- 
 ceedings in bankruptcy having been taken against 
 the execution debtor, his trustee paid the balance 
 to the sheriff, who gave possession of the goods to 
 the trustee : — Held, that the execution creditor 
 was entitled to the balance, as the proceeds of an 
 execution for a sum not exceeding £50. Mostyn 
 V. Stock - - 9 Q, B. D. 432 
 
 5. Sum exceeding £50 — Partnership — 
 
 Dissolution-Appointment of Receiver.'] E. and 
 F. being in partnership as wine merchants, P. 
 brought an action in the Chancery Division for a 
 dissolution of the partnership, and an order was 
 made by the Court for a dissolution, and the 
 appointment of a receiver, under which a receiver 
 took possession of the partnership effects and 
 carried on the business, F. ceasing to take any 
 part in the business, and having no other occu- 
 pation than that of book-keeper to a trading 
 company. An action having been commenced 
 against B. and F. upon bills accepted by the firm 
 before the receiver took possession, judgment was 
 signed against F. and his separate property taken 
 in execution for a sum exceeding £50: — Held, 
 that F. was not at the time of the execution a 
 " trader ' within the meaning of sect. 87 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. o. 71). 
 Dawe v. Veegaka - - 11 Q. B. D, 241 
 
( 139 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( HO ) 
 
 XI. BANKRUPTCY— ASSETS— confenwecZ. 
 (6.) Relation back of Trustee's Title. 
 
 6. Assignment of future Receipts — 
 
 Bankruptcy of Assignor — Relation hacli of Trustee's 
 Tllh— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 11.] An assignment by a trader of the future 
 receipts of his business, even if made for value, 
 is, as regards receipts accruing after the com- 
 ifjcncement of his subseqxient bankruptcy, in- 
 operative as against the title of the trustee in the 
 bankruptcy. — Brice v. Bannister (3 Q. B. D. 569) 
 distinguished. JEx parte Nichols. In re Jones 
 
 L22 Ch. D. 782 
 
 7, Money paid to Solicitor — Money re- 
 ceived hy Petitioning Creditor's Solicitor during 
 Pendency of Petition, and paid over to Peti- 
 tioning Creditoi — Xdability of Solicitor to refund 
 to Trustee — Principal and Agent.'] Pending 
 the hearing of a bankruptcy petition, and with 
 notice of the act of bankruptcy on which it was 
 founded, the solicitor of the petitioning creditor, 
 as his agent, received from the debtor various 
 sums of money as consideration for successive 
 adjournments of the hearing of the petition, and 
 these sums he paid over, or accounted for, to his 
 client (the petitioning creditor). Afterwards an 
 adjudication was made on tlie petition : — Held, 
 that, the solicitor having received the money with 
 notice of the act of bankruptcy to which the title 
 of the trustee related back, the payment by him 
 was a wrongful act, and he was liable to repay 
 tlie money to the trustee, and was not discharged 
 by the payment to his own principal. Ex parte 
 Edwabds. In re Chapman 13 Q. B. D. 747 
 
 8. Money paid to Solicitor — Money paid 
 
 hy Debtor to his Solicitor to oppose Petition — 
 Adjudication — Title of Trustee.'] Money bona 
 fide paid by a debtor to his solicitor to defray 
 counsel's fees and other legal expenses in oppos- 
 ing proceedings in bankruptcy that have been 
 commenced against him, cannot, should adjudi- 
 cation follow, be recovered from the solicitor by 
 the trustee in bankruptcy, even although the 
 solicitor knew of the acts of bankruptcy on which 
 the proceedings were based. In re SiNCLAin. Ex 
 parte Payne - - 15 ft. B. D. 616 
 
 9. Payment by Agent — Liability of Agent 
 
 to Trustee in Bankrupta/ of Principal — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 6, sub-s. 2.] 
 An agent, who, in obedience to the previous 
 direction of Iiis principal, pays awiiy money of the 
 principal which is in his hands, knowing before 
 Jie makes the payment (though he did not know 
 v.hen he received the money) that the payment 
 will when completed constitute an act of bank- 
 ruptcy on the part of the principal, is not liable 
 to the trustee in the subsequent bankruptcy of 
 the principal for the money so paid away. — The 
 trustee could recover the money from the agent 
 only ou the ground that he had paid away the 
 money of the ' trustee, and in such a case the 
 money would become the trustee's money only on 
 the completion of the act of bankruptcy to wliich 
 his title would relate back, i.e., not until after 
 the money had left tlie agent's hands. Ex parte 
 Heldek. In re Lewis 24 Ch. D. 339 
 
 10. Ship-building Contract — Assignment 
 
 of Debt — Completion by Trustee.] A shipbuilder 
 
 XI. BANEEUPTCT— ASSETS— coniinaerf. 
 (&.) Eelation back of Trustee's Title — 
 continued. 
 agreed to build a vessel, the price to be paid in 
 specified instalments. Part of the work having 
 been done, but less than the value of such part 
 having been paid to the builder, he charged in 
 favour of a creditor the instalment due to him on 
 the delivery of the vessel. Before the ship was 
 completed he became bankrupt. The trustee in 
 the bankruptcy completed the vessel, and in so 
 doing expended less than the amount wliich re- 
 mained to be paid by the purchaser : — Held, that 
 the charge, being upon money which had been 
 already earned by the builder, was valid as against 
 the trustee.— i^a; parte Nicholls (22 Ch. D. 782) 
 and Tooth v. Hallett (Law Eep. 4 Ch. 242) dis- 
 tinguished. Ex parte Moss. In re Toward 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 31» 
 
 1 1 . Withdrawal of Criminal Prosecution — 
 
 Illegal Consideration — Eight of Trustee to recover 
 from Payee.] A banking company commenced a 
 prosecution against a customer for having obtained 
 credit from them under false pretences, which is, 
 by sect. 13 of the Debtors Act, 1869, made a misde- 
 meanour. At this time the bank had notice of an 
 act of bankruptcy committed by the customer. 
 On the day ou which the summons was to be 
 heard by the magistrate, H. (whose wife was an 
 aunt of the customer's wife) signed 'an under- 
 taking that, if the magistrate would allow the 
 summons to be withdrawn, he would pay the 
 bank the sum which the customer had obtained 
 from them by false pretences. An application 
 was made to the magistrate by the customer's 
 solicitor to allow the summons to be withdrawn. 
 The application was assented to by the bank's 
 solicitor and was granted by the magistrate. H. 
 then paid the money to the bank. The bank 
 manager believed that H. was paying the money 
 out of his own pocket. The customer was soon 
 afterwards adjudicated a baiilrrupt, upon the act 
 of bankruptcy of which the bank had notice. The 
 trustee in the bankruptcy discovered that the 
 money which H. had paid to the bank had been 
 previously handed to him by the bankrupt's wife, 
 she having, with the bankrupt's knowledge, taken 
 it for tbe purpose of paying the bank out of a bag 
 of money belonging to the bankrupt : — Held, that, 
 the consideration for the payment to the bank 
 being the stifilng of a prosecution, there was no 
 legal consideration, and that, though H., being in 
 pari delicto, could not have recovered the money 
 from the bank, the trustee, to whom, by virtue of 
 the relation back of his title to the act of bank- 
 ruptcy, the money really belonged, could recover 
 it. — Ex parte Caldecott (4 Ch. I). 150) distin- 
 guished. — Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal 
 refused. Ex parte Wolvekhampton Banking 
 Company. In re Campbell 14 Q. B. D. 32 
 
 (c.) Salaey or Income. 
 
 12. Future Earnings of Professional Man. 
 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 90.] The word " income " in sect. 90 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, applies only to an " in- 
 come" ejusdem generis with a " salary," and 
 does not enable the Court to set aside for the 
 benefit of the creditors of a professional man, who 
 
( HI ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1*2 ) 
 
 XI. BANKETJPTCY— ASSETS— oonifewetZ. 
 
 (c.) Salaet or Income — continued. 
 is an undischarged bankrupt, any part of his/pro- 
 spective and contingent earnings in the exercise 
 of his personal skill and knowledge. ISx parte 
 Bentvell. In re Hutton 14 ft. B. D. 301 
 
 13. ■ Pension of Ketired Judge — Judge of 
 
 Crown Colony— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 71), ss. 4, 15, 17, 88, 89, 90.] The effect of 
 sects. 15 and 17 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, is to 
 vest in the trustee in a bankruptcy all the " pro- 
 perty " of the bankrujjt of whatever nature, in- 
 cluding the matters dealt with by sect. 23 and 
 sects. 87 to 95, but subject to the exceptions and 
 qualifications introduced by those sections. — The 
 pension of a retired Judge of a Crown colony, 
 granted by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, 
 and voted annually by the Legislature of the 
 colony, is, in case of the bankiuptoy of the Judge, 
 "property" which vests in the trustee in the 
 bankruptcy, but it is "income" of the bankrupt 
 within sect. 90 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and 
 is subject to the power thereby givea to the Court 
 to determine how much of it shall be set aside for 
 the benefit of the bankrupt's creditors. JEx parte 
 HuGGiNS. In re Huggins 21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 14. Voluntary Allowance — Banlcruptcy 
 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 90.] A purely 
 voluntary allowance made to a bankrupt is not 
 " income " within the meaning of sect. 90 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and no order can be made 
 for the payment of any part of such an allowance, 
 when received by the bankrupt, to the trustee in 
 the bankruptcy. — In order that sect. 90 may 
 apply, the payment must be one to which the 
 bankrupt has a legal or equitable claim. — Decision 
 of Bacon, C.J., reversed. Ex parte yfiOKS. hi 
 re Wicks - - - 17 Ch. D. 70 
 
 (d.) Genbbal. 
 
 15. Assignment of Chose in Action — 
 
 Notice of — Estate of Trustee in Liquidation — 
 Priority — Stop Order — Bankruptcy Act, 1849, 
 s. 14:1— Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 22— Vendor 
 and Purchaser — Doubtful Title.'] A legatee of 
 a reversionary interest under a will, which had 
 been paid into Court in an administration suit, 
 presented a petition for liquidation in March, 
 1873, and a trustee was appointed. In July he 
 assigned his interest in the legacy to J., who 
 obtained a stop order on the fund in Court. 
 In November, 1876, he assigned his interest to 
 E., without notice of the liquidation, who also 
 obtained a stop order on the fund. Afterwards 
 the trustee in liquidation obtained a stop order. 
 The Plaintiffs jDurchased the interest of the trus- 
 tee in liquidation and of J., and. contracted to 
 sell the legacy to the Defendant. The Defendant 
 required B.'s mortgage to be abstracted as an 
 incumbrance on the estate : — Seld, by Jessel, 
 M.E., that B. having obtained a stop order before 
 the trustee in liquidation, his interest was prior 
 to that of the trustee's, and was an incumbrance 
 on the estate. — In re Bright' s Settlement (13 Ch. D. 
 413) considered.— B"eZd, by the Court of Appeal, 
 that the question of the priority of E.'s incum- 
 brance was too doubtful to justify the vendor in 
 omitting it from the abstract ; and the decision of 
 
 XI. BANKKUPTCY— ASSETS— flOJiJiBMed. 
 (cJ.) General — continued. 
 
 the Master of the Rolls was accordingly aflSrmed. 
 Pamieb v. Locke - - 18 Ch. D. 381 
 
 16. Books of Account — Assignment — 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 22— 
 Bankruptcy Mules, 1870, r. 110.] A bona fide 
 purchaser for value of the book-debts, books, and 
 all the intei'est in the partnership of his partner 
 prior to a dissolution, will not be compelled upon 
 the subsequent bankruptcy of such late partner to 
 hand over to the trustee the books of account 
 which passed by the assignment, and thereupon 
 ceased to be property of the bankrupt within the 
 meaning of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 22, aud 
 Bankruptcy Bules, 1870, r. 110. In re West. 
 Ex parte Good . - - 21 Ch. D. 868 
 
 17. Gift of Chattels — Bankruptcy of 
 
 Donoi:'] In 1866 A., soon after the birth of his 
 son T., pruchased a pipe of wine for his son, and 
 had it bottled and laid down in his cellar, and 
 from that time it remained intact in the cellar 
 and was known in the family and amongst their 
 friends as T.'s wine. In 1885 A. became bank- 
 rupt : — Held, that there was not sufficient evidence 
 of an intention to make an immediate present gift 
 of the wine to T., and that it passed to the trustee 
 in bankruptcy. In re Ridgwat. Ex parte 
 Eidgwat - - - 15 ft. B. D. 447 
 
 XII. BANKHTIPTCY- DISCHAEGE. 
 
 1. AppUoatlon before close of Bankruptcy 
 
 . — Assent of Creditors — Meeting summoned by Trus- 
 tee — Advertisement — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 21, 48, 18— Bankruptcy Bules, 
 1870, rr. 89, 95, 138, 142.] When a meeting of 
 the creditors of a banlsrupt under the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869, is summoned by the trustee (for the 
 purpose, e.g. of ascertaining whether the creditors 
 will assent to an application by the bankrupt for 
 an order of discharge) it is only necessary that.it 
 should be summoned by means of a notice sent by 
 the trastee to each creditor in accordance with 
 the provisions of rule 95 ; it is not necessary that 
 advertisements of the meeting should be published 
 as provided by rule 89 in reference to the first 
 meeting of the creditors. Sect. 78 has not the 
 effect of incorporating the Bankruptcy Rules into 
 the Act for the purposes of construction. But, 
 even if the rules are to be considered as, by virtue 
 of sect. 78, incorporated into the Act, sect. 21 does 
 not mak;e rule 89 applicable to meetings summoned 
 by the trustee, a special provision for the sum- 
 moning of such meetings being made by rule 95. 
 Ex parte Cohen 13 ft. B. D. 66 
 
 2. Certificate of Conformity — Effect of 
 
 Suspending Order — Bankruptcy Act, 1842 (5 4 6 
 Vict. u. 122), ss. 37, 39 — Bankrupt Law Consoli- 
 dation Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Vict. e. 106), s. 199.] 
 In July, 1848, an order was made that the grant 
 of a certificate of conformity to a bankrupt be 
 suspended for three years. — During the period 
 of suspension, the Bankruptcy Act of 1849 came 
 into operation ; which provided (s. 199) that 
 " every certificate of conformity, allowed by any 
 Commissioner before the time appointed for the 
 commencement of this Act, though not confirmed 
 according to the laws in force before that time, 
 shall discharge the bankrupt from all debts due 
 
( 113 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 144 ) 
 
 XII. BANKRTTPTCT— DISCHARGE— conM»Me(J. 
 
 by Mm when he became bankrupt, and from all 
 claims and demands made provable under the 
 fiat " : — Held, that, as, by virtue of that section, 
 confirmation of the order of July, 184y, was no 
 longer required, that order became, at the expira- 
 tion of the period of suspension, of itself a com- 
 plete discharge to the bankrupt, and that pro- 
 perty acquired by him after the expiration of 
 that period belonged to him and not to the assig- 
 nee In the bankruptcy. In re Dote. Bousfield 
 V. Dove - - 27 Ch. D. 687 
 
 3. Condition — Contracting Beht without 
 
 reasonable or prohable Ground of Expectation of 
 heing able topay it — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 
 Vict. c. 52), s. 28, suh-s. 3 (c).] Two partners, who 
 had no capital of their own, commenced business 
 by means of borrowed money, assigning to the 
 lender as security their leasehold premises, the 
 goodwill of their business, and all their existing 
 and after-acquired stock-in-trade, fixtures, furni- 
 ture, and book-debts, giving him power to take 
 possession at any time. They contracted debts in 
 carrying on the business, and became bankrupts. 
 The mortgagee took possession under his deed, and 
 his security was insufficient. The registi'ar granted 
 the bankrupts a discharge, on condition of their 
 consenting to judgment being entered up against 
 them by the trustee for the whole of the debts 
 provable in the bankruptcy: — Held, that the 
 bankrupts had contracted debts without having at 
 the time of contracting them any reasonable or 
 probable ground of expectation of being able to 
 pay them, and that the registrar's decision was 
 right. Ex parte Whtte. In re White 
 
 [U Q. B. D. 600 
 
 4. Condition — "Eash andhazardous specu- 
 lations " — Conduct of Bankrupt before Commence- 
 ment of Act — Betrospective Effect of Act — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), ». 2S— Costs 
 — Appeal.'] Upon an application by a bankrupt 
 under sect. 28 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, for an 
 order of discharge, the Oourt may take into con- 
 sideration conduct of the bankrupt of the nature 
 mentioned in sub-sect. 3, though it took place 
 before the commencement of the Act, and in that 
 sense sect. 28 is retrospective. — In re White 
 (9 L. T. (N.S.) 702) explained and distinguished. 
 — A solicitor who had no capital of his own 
 bought land in the city of London by means of 
 money which he borrowed on the security of mort- 
 gages of the land, his intention being to sell at an 
 advanced price. He afterwards borrowed more 
 money on a further mortgage for the purpose of 
 building on the land. The land was valued by 
 professional valuers at considerably more than the 
 amount borrowed. He was unable to sell or let 
 the property, and he became a bankrupt : — 
 Held, that he had been guilty of " rash and ha- 
 zardous speculations," and that the registrar was 
 right in granting him an order of discharge subject 
 to the condition that, after setting aside out of his 
 earnings £300 a year for the maintenance of him- 
 self and his family, he should pay over to the 
 official receiver the balance of his earnings, until 
 he should have paid IDs. in the pound on all 
 the debts which had been, or might be, proved 
 in the bankruptcy. — -Creditors served with notice 
 of an appeal by a bankrupt from an order grant- 
 
 XII. BANKEUPTC Y— DISCHAEGE —continued. 
 ing him a conditional discharge will not be al- 
 lowed their costs of appearing on the hearing of 
 the appeal when the official receiver or trustee 
 appears. Ex parte Salaman. In re Salaman 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 936 
 
 5. -— Eifeot of Order of Discharge — Debt in- 
 curred by the Fraud or Breach of Trust of a Part- 
 ner—Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 it- 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 49.] The 49th section of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), which enacts that " an 
 order of discharge shall not release the bankrupt 
 from any debt or liability incurred by means of 
 any fraud or breach of trust," is not confined to a 
 fraud or breach of trust committed by the bank- 
 rupt personally. — Therefore, where a debt has 
 been incurred by one of several partners for which 
 the partnership is liable, and the partnership goes 
 into liquidation under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 a partner who has received his order of discharge 
 is not thereby released from such debt if it was 
 incurred by fraud, though he himself wasinnoeent 
 of such fraud. Ooopek v. Pbiohabd 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 351 
 
 XIII. BANKEUPTCY— TJNDISCHAEGED BANK- 
 EirPT. 
 
 1. Close of Bankruptcy — Bankrupt witli- 
 
 out Assets — Power of Court to reopen Proceedings 
 — Bights of new Creditors — Bankruptcy Act. 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. V. 71), ss. 47, 54, 71.] The Court 
 has power under sect. 47 of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869, to make an order closing a bankruptcy in 
 a case where it does not appear that the bank- 
 rupt has any assets. — After an order has been 
 made closing a bankruptcy, the Court has, under 
 sect. 71, power to reopen it. — But such an order 
 ought not to be made without notice to the 
 creditors of the bankrupt (if any) whose debts 
 have been contracted after the adjudication, nor 
 without letting them in to prove as creditors 
 against any property of the bankrupt acquired 
 by him after the date of the order to close the 
 bankruptcy. Ex parte Pitt. In re Gosling 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 308 
 
 2. - — Close of Bankmptoy — Death of Bank- 
 rupt within Three Years after Close — After-acquired 
 Property — Eights of Old Creditors — Administror 
 tion Action— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vicl. 
 c. 71), ss. 12, 15, 47, 48, 49, 54.] An undischarged 
 bankrupt died intestate within three years after 
 the close of his bankruptcy, having in the interval 
 acquired fresh property and contracted fresh debts. 
 Only a small dividend had been paid in the bank- 
 ruptcy, and the bankrupt had not, after the close 
 of the bankruptcy, made any further payments to 
 the creditors who had proved. An action was 
 brought by one of the new creditors to administer 
 the bankrupt's estate. The estate was sufficient 
 to pay the costs of the action, to pay the new 
 creditors in full, and to leave a surplus. This sur- 
 plus was claimed by the old creditors : — Held, that 
 the administratrix was entitled to the surplus, and 
 that the old creditors had no right to it. — The 
 creditors of an undischarged bankrupt under the 
 Act of 1869 have no rights against property ac- 
 quired by him after the close of the bankruptcy, 
 except such rights as are given to them by 
 sect. 54, and those rights cannot be enforced after 
 
( 145 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( IIR ) 
 
 XIII. BAKKRUPTCY— TJNDISCHAEGED BANK- 
 
 HVBl— continued. 
 the death of the banki-upt. — Sect. 12 applies to 
 property acquired by an undischarged bankrupt 
 after the close of the bankruptcy as well as to pro- 
 perty divisible among the creditors in the bank- 
 ruptcy. — Ex parte Kelly (7 Oh. D. 161) explained. 
 In re Smith. Gbbbn v. Smith 24 Ch. D. 678 
 
 3. Close of Bankruptcy — Death of Bank- 
 rupt — Bights of Creditors — Set-off — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 12, 39, 47, 54— 
 Judicature Act, 1875 (38 & 39 7ict. c. 77), s. 10.] 
 When a bankrupt has not obtained an order of 
 discharge, a creditor who has proved in the bank- 
 ruptcy, and who is being sued by the bankrupt, 
 or by his executor, after his death, for a debt 
 due to the bankrupt on a contract entered into 
 after the commencement of the bankruptcy, can- 
 not, during the period of three years from the 
 close of the bankruptcy, set-off the unpaid balance 
 of his proved debt against the sum claimed in the 
 action. — ^The scope of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 is that, during the period of three years after the 
 close of the bankruptcy, none of the creditors 
 who could prove in the bankruptcy shall be able 
 to obtain a preference over the others, and that 
 after the expiration of the three years, the un- 
 paid balances of the proved debts shall be 
 enforced against the property of the debtor only 
 under the direction of the Oourt of Bankruptcy, 
 so that any sums which may be thus recovered 
 may be distributed among the creditors who have 
 proved pari passu. In re Smith. Green v. Smith 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 886 
 
 4. Earnings of Personal labour — Architect 
 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 17 
 — Practice — Adding Plaintiff — Bules of Court, 
 1875, Order XYi., r. 13.] The Plaintiff, who was 
 an architect, sued for remuneration in respect of 
 employment under a contract made in 1877, and 
 for damages for an alleged wrongful dismissal 
 from such 'employment in 1880. The Plaintiff 
 was adjudicated bankrupt in 1878, and had never 
 obtained his discharge; — Held (affirming the 
 decision of Fry, J.) that the cause of action for 
 remuneration and damages passed to the trustee, 
 and that the proper course was to add him as 
 eo-Plaintiff in the action, and give him the 
 conduct of the action. Emden v. Caete 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 169, 768 
 
 XIV. BANKETIPTCT— ANNULMENT. 
 
 1. Application to annul— itmii of Time 
 
 — Protection of Trustee — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 6, 10, 11— Bankrwpicy 
 Rules, 1870, r. 143.] In a proper case an adjudi- 
 cation of bankruptcy may be annulled upon an 
 application made after the expiration of the time 
 limited for appealing from it. — Sect. 10 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, has no application to an 
 appeal from an adjudication, or to an application 
 to annul it. — Ex parte Brown (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 
 304) explained. — Ex parte Johnson (12 Oh. D. 
 905) distinguished. — A petitioning creditor, who 
 alleges that his debtor has committed an act of 
 bankruptcy, by departing from his dwelling-house 
 with intent to defeat and delay his creditors, is 
 bound to shew that the debtor is alive and in 
 some other place. — An order was made by the 
 
 XIV. BANKRUPTCY— ANNULMENT— coSicJ. 
 
 Oourt of Appeal to annul an adjudication of bank- 
 ruptcy, on the ground that the debtor must be 
 presumed to have been dead when it was made. 
 Probate had been granted of a will executed by 
 the debtor : — Held, that the costs and charges of 
 the trustee properly incurred, and the costs of all 
 parties of the application to annul and of the 
 appeal, must be paid out of the estate, and that 
 the executors must confirm all acts properly done 
 by the trustee in the bankruptcy. Ex parte 
 Geisel. In re Stangeh - - 22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 2. Scheme of Settlement — Approval of 
 
 Oourt — Judicial Discretion — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869 (32 <fc 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 28, 126.] In giving 
 or withholding the approval of the Court to a 
 composition with creditors, accepted by the proper 
 majority under sect. 28 of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869, tlie Judge is exercising a judicial discretion, 
 and is bound to consider the objections brought 
 before him by a dissentient creditor and to give 
 his decision judicially upon sufficient reasons. — 
 The power of the Court under sect. 28 is not 
 limited, as in the case of a composition accepted 
 by the resolution of two meetings of creditors 
 under sect. 126, to setting aside the resolution on 
 the ground of fraud in the proceedings. — The 
 propriety of the resolutions is to be judged of by 
 the Court upon the facts as they appear at tlie 
 time when its approval is sought, not as they 
 appeared at the time when the resolutions were 
 passed. — The exercise of the discretion by the 
 Judge is subject to appeal, but the Oourt of 
 Appeal ought not to interfere unless it is clearly 
 shewn that the Judge has exercised his discretion 
 wrongly — Decision of Bacon, C.J., reversed. — 
 The fact that by composition resolutions under 
 sect. 28 no security was given for some of the 
 instalments, and the management of the assets 
 was intrusted to a debtor who for several years 
 previously had indulged in recklessly extravagant 
 expenditure : — Held, to be a sufficient reason for 
 refusing to give the approval of the Oourt to the 
 resolutions. Ex parte Meeohant Banking Com- 
 pany or London. In re Durham 16 Ch. D. 623 
 
 3. Scheme of Settlement. — Approval of 
 
 Court — Notice of Meeting of Creditors — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 28— 
 Trustee — Gosts^ Under sect. 28 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869, the Court is not bound to approve of 
 resolutions passed by the creditors of a bankrupt 
 authorizing the trustee to accept a composition, 
 or assent to a general scheme of settlement of the 
 bankrupt's affairs, even if it sees that the majority 
 have been acting bona fide in the interest of the 
 creditors, and that better terms cannot be obtained 
 for the creditors. It is the duty of the Court to 
 look at all the circumstances, and to have regard 
 to the moral aspect of the case, and not to give 
 its approval to the proposed aiTangement, al- 
 though it may be for the benefit of the creditors, 
 if it can see that the money which they are to 
 receive under it is to be paid in order to hush up 
 and prevent investigation into some discreditable 
 transaction. The trustee in a bankruptcy applied 
 to the County Court for its approval of a com- 
 position offered by the bankrupt and sanctioned 
 by resolutions passed by the creditors under sect. 
 28. The Judge refused to give his approval 
 
C 147 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 148 ) 
 
 XIV. BANKRUPTCY— ANKUIMENT—cojjfcJ. 
 The trustee appealed to the Chief Judge, who 
 held that the approval of the Court ought to be 
 given. On the application of dissentient credi- 
 tors the Court of Appeal restored the order of 
 the County Court Judge : — Held, that the trustee 
 was entitled to apply to the County Court, but 
 that he ought not to have appealed. Conse- 
 quently, though he was allowed out of the bank- 
 rupt's estate his costs of the application to the 
 County Court, he was ordered to pay personally 
 the costs of both appeals. Ex parte Stkaw- 
 EEiDGE. Ill re Hickman 25 Ch. D. 266 
 
 4. Scheme of Settlement — Banleruptcy 
 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. c. 71), s. 28 — Debtor left 
 in Possession of Assets — Default in Payment of 
 Composition— Sights of Trustees — Assignment of 
 Book Dehts hy Debtor — Surety for Payment of 
 Composition — Counter-Indemnity by Debtor.'] Two 
 parties in trade filed a liquidation petition, under 
 which a trustee of their property was appointed. 
 Afterwards the creditors, under the provisions of 
 sect. 28 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, passed 
 resolutions authorizing the trustee to accept a 
 composition from the debtors, and the arrangement 
 was approved by the Court. The composition 
 was to be paid in four instalments, part of the 
 last of which was to be secu]'ed by a surety. One 
 of the debtors, who was about to carry on the 
 business alone, agreed to pay £30 to the trustee 
 weekly, until he should have paid the amount of 
 the composition. In case of his making default, 
 the trustee was to be at liberty to take possession 
 of his stock-in-trade, assets, and effects, and realise 
 them for the benefit of the creditors of the firm. 
 The discharge of the debtors was to be granted, 
 the liquidation closed, and the trustee released, so 
 soon as the trastee should certify to the Court 
 that a sum sufficient to pay the composition had 
 been paid to him by the debtor. The first instal- 
 ment was duly paid, but the debtor afterwards 
 made default, and the trustee took possession of 
 his stock-in-trade and effects. It then appeared 
 that the debtors had, shortly before the seizure, 
 executed a deed assigning the outstanding book 
 debts of the firm to the surety and another person, 
 as security for moneys advanced by them, and also 
 as a security to the surety against his liability in 
 respect of the last instalment of the composition. 
 The advances had been made since the passing 
 of the resolutions, to enable the debtor to carry 
 on the business and to jjay the first instalment of 
 the composition : — Held, that the resolutions of 
 the creditors gave an implied authority to the 
 debtor to carry on the business in the ordinary 
 way, and to pledge the assets in order to raise 
 money for the purposes of the business, or fijr the 
 purpose of paying the composition, and thojt the 
 assignees were entitled to the book debts as a 
 security for the advances which they had made. 
 — But held, that the resolutions did not authorize 
 the pledging of the assets as an indemnity m the 
 surety against his liability in respect of th#'last 
 instalment of the composition, and that the deed 
 could not stand as a security in that respect. — Ex 
 parte Burrell (1 Ch. D. 537) distinguished. Ex 
 parte Allakd. In re Simons 16 Ch. D. 505 
 
 5. Scheme of Settlement — Composition 
 
 under Sect. 28 of Bankruptcy Act, 1869 — Locus 
 
 XrV. BANKKTTPTCY— ANHUIHENT— con<d. 
 
 Standi of Bankrupt to apply to reduce Proof of 
 a Creditor — File of Proceedings in Bankruptcy 
 — Estoppel.'] After the creditors of a bankrupt 
 have resolved under sect. 28 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1S69, to accept a composition ofiered by the 
 bankrupt, the bankrupt, though undischarged, 
 has a locus standi to apply to the Com't to reduce 
 the amount of the proof of a creditor, and the mere 
 fact that the proof has been upon the file of the 
 proceedings in the bankruptcy for upwards of a 
 year does not estop the banla-upt from making 
 the application. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., affirmed. 
 • — The file of the proceedings in a bankruptcy is 
 not of the nature of a record, and does not create 
 an estoppel. Ex parte Bacon. In re Bond 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 447 
 
 6. Scheme of Settlement — Discharge of 
 
 Bankrupt— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 [32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), s. 28.] When a bankruptcy has been annulled 
 under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 28, and a 
 scheme of arrangement of the bankrupt's affairs 
 has been approved of by the Court, the bankrupt 
 is discharged from his debts, and no action is 
 maintainable against him in respect of any debt 
 provable under the bankruptcy. Gilbet v. 
 Jeffbies - - - 11 Q. B. D. 559 
 
 XV. BANKRUPTCY— PROOF. 
 
 1. Admission by Trustee — Application 
 
 by Creditor to expunge — Locus Standi — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 20— 
 Bankruptcy Bules, 1870, rr. 67, 70-74.] A cre- 
 ditor who has proved a debt in a bankruptcy has 
 an interest which entitles him to apply to the 
 Court to expunge the proof of anothei; creditor 
 which has been admitted by the trustee. Ex 
 parte Mekkesian. In re Stenson 25 Ch. D. 144 
 
 2. Admission by Trustee — Eight to apply 
 
 to expunge — Lapse of Time — Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1870, rr. 72, 73.]. Under rule 73 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Rules, 1870, as under the previous practice, 
 a trustee in bankruptcy who has admitted a proof 
 against the estate is entitled at any time after- 
 wards to apply to the Court to expunge the 
 proof, on the ground that it was originally 
 wrongly adpiitted. Mere lapse of time is no 
 objection to the application, but, though the 
 proof is expunged, the creditor will be entitled 
 to retain any dividend which he may have pre- 
 viously received.. Ex piarte'H.Ani'EB. InreTAiT 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 637 
 
 3. Alimony — " Debt or Liability "—Order 
 
 of Divorce Court for Payment of monthly or 
 weekly Alimony — 29 & 30 Vict. c. 32, s. 1 — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883 (46 ct- 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 37— 
 Debtors Act, 1869 (32 ct 33 Vict. c. 62), s. 5.] 
 Future weekly or monthly payments of alimony, 
 payable by a husband by virtue of an order of 
 the Divorce Court made under sect. 1 of the Act 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 32, are not capable of valuation, 
 and are not a " debt or liability " within the mean- 
 mg of sect 37 of the Banki-uptoy Act, 1 883. They 
 cannot, therefore, be proved in the bankruptcy of 
 the husband, and he is, notwithstanding his bank- 
 ruptcy, liable to continue the payments. — Arrears 
 of payments of alimony under such an order 
 constitute a debt enforceable under sect. 5 of the 
 Debtors Act, 1SC9. — Decision of Cave, J., affirmed. 
 Linton v. Linton - 15 Q. B, D. 239 
 
( 1^9 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 150 ) 
 
 XV. BANKETJPTCT— PROOF— contmaed. 
 
 4. Bill, of Exchange — Accommodation 
 
 Hill deposited as Security for less than its nominal 
 Amounf] When a bill of exchange, accepted for 
 the accommodation of the drawer, la deposited by 
 him as security for a debt less than the amount 
 of the bill, the holder is entitled to prove in the 
 bankruptcy of the acceptor for the full amount of 
 the bill, though he cannot receive dividends in 
 excess of the debt due to him by the drawer. — 
 Decision of Bacon, C.J., reversed. Ex parte 
 Newtos". Ex parte Gkiffin. In re Bu:*itabd 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 330 
 
 5. Breach of Trust by Firm — Joint and 
 
 several Liability — Joint Judgment against Firm 
 — Merger of several Liabilihj. — Bankruptcy of 
 Firm — Bight of Proof against Separate Estate.'] 
 Where a firm is adjudicated bankrupt on a judg- 
 ment debt recovered against the firm jointly, if 
 the partners are also severally liable in respect 
 of the same matter by reason, for instance, of its 
 arising out of breach of trust, the several lia- 
 bility of the partners is not, solely by reason of 
 the creditor having sued for and obtained a joint 
 judgment, merged in such judgment, so as to pre- 
 clude a proof by the judgment creditor against 
 their respective separate estates. In re Davison 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. SO 
 
 6. Covenant not to revoke Will — Re- 
 straint of Marriage — Contingent Liability — Cove- 
 nant ancillary to Mortgage — Discliarge.'] An 
 unmarried woman, having a power of appointing 
 a sum of money by will, made a will appointing 
 it to a mortgagee, and covenanted not to revoke 
 the will. She afterwards became bankrupt and 
 obtained her discharge. After her discharge she 
 revoked her will, and made another appointing 
 the sum of money to another person : — Beld 
 (afSrming the decision of Kay, J.), first, that the, 
 covenant not to revoke the will was divisible, and 
 was not wholly void, although in one alternative 
 it was in restraint of marriage,' secondly, that 
 the contingent liability under the covenant was 
 incapable of proof under, the bankmptcy, that 
 ihe covenant was not released by the bankruptcy, 
 and that an action would lie lor damages for a 
 breach of the covenant committed after the bank- 
 ruptcy. EOBINSON V. OmMANNEY 
 
 [31 Ch. D. 780 ; 23 Ch. D, 285 
 
 7. Damages — Account — Infringement of 
 
 Patent— Proof for Profits— 32, & 33 Vict. c. 71, 
 s. 31— ^ot demurring — Costs.] Where a patentee 
 is entitled to recover the amount of profits made 
 by infringing his patent, the amount of those 
 profits is not recoverable in the nature of damages, 
 but as money had and received to his use ; and 
 he is therefore not prevented by the 31st section 
 of the Bankruptcy Act of 1869 from proving in 
 the bankraptcy of the infringer for the amount 
 of those profits. — When a bankrupt Defendant 
 does not appear at the hearing, and his trustees 
 appear and defend, they are liable to the costs 
 of the action. Watson v. Holliday 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 780 
 
 8. Evidence — Admissibility — Admission 
 
 by Dead Man against Interest— Banlcrupt's State- 
 ment of Affairs — Judgment Debt — Inquiry into 
 Consideration.] In order that an' admission made 
 by a dead man may be admissible in evidence on 
 
 XV. BANKRUPTCY— PEOOF—cojiiTOMerf. 
 
 the ground that it was against his interest, it 
 must, have been actually against his interest at 
 the time when it was made ; it is not sufficient 
 that it might possibly tm-n out afterwards _ to 
 have, been against his interest. — An admission 
 made by a bankrupt in his statement of aifaii'S 
 that a debt is due from him, is not after his death 
 admissible evidence as against his assignee in. 
 bankruptcy of the existence of the debt, merely 
 because it might turn out that there was a surplus 
 after paying the creditors. Ex parte Edwabds. 
 Im re ToLLEMACHE - - 14Q. B. D. 415 
 
 9, ^widienee— Admissibility — Banltrupt's 
 
 Statement of Affairs— Judgment Debt^Inquiry 
 into Consideration^ An admission of a debt, con- 
 tained iu a bankrupt's statement of his affairs 
 made after the commencement of the bankruptcy 
 proceedings, is not evidence as against his cre- 
 ditors of the existence of a debt, even though the 
 statement was verified by his oath (without cross- 
 examination), and he has since died. — The Court 
 of Bankruptcy is not conclusively bound by a 
 judgment for a debt, but has power, on a claim to 
 prove the debt in the bankruptcy of the judgment 
 debtor, to inquire into the consideration tor the 
 debt. — But, qu^re, whether it will do so unless a 
 prima facie case ot suspicion is shewn. Ex parte 
 Eevell. • In re Tollemaohe (No. l) 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 720 
 
 10. Felony, Claim arising out oi— Com- 
 pounding a Felony!] Bankers allowed a customer 
 to overdraw his current account on his depositing 
 with them as security for the overdraft some bills 
 of exchange drawn by him upon, and purporting 
 to be aoceptedby, a third person. After the cus- 
 tomer had overdrawn his account the bankers 
 discovered that the acceptances were forgeries. 
 They then communicated with the customer, and 
 ultimately gave up the forged acceptances to him, 
 receiving from him in exchange joint and several 
 promissory notes of himself and his father. The 
 customer was afterwards adjudicated a bankrupt. 
 The notes were not paid at maturity : — Held, that 
 though the bankers had not prosecuted the bank- 
 rupt for the felony, and whether they had or had 
 not agreed not to prosecute him, they were en- 
 titled to prove in the bankruptcy for the balance 
 due to them upon the bankrupt's current account. 
 £» jjarte Leslie. In re Guekkiek 20 Ch, D. 131 
 
 11, Guarantee to Bankers — Payment by 
 
 Surety after Proof by Creditor — Reduction _ of 
 Proof — Agreement between Surety and Creditor 
 that Receipt by Creditor of Dividends in^ Bank- 
 ruptcy of principal Debtor shall not diminish Lia- 
 bility of Surety to pay in full] A customer gave 
 to his bankers, as a security for the balance which 
 might from time to time be due from him to them, 
 the joint and several bond for £1000 of himself 
 and a surety, the liability of the sui-ety being ex- 
 pressly lunited to £500, There was a proviso m 
 the bond that any dividends received by, the 
 bankers in the bankruptcy of the customer should 
 not, so far as concerned the surety, go in discharge 
 of his liability ; but the bankers should notwith- 
 standing be entitled to recover on the bond 
 against the surety to the full extent of £500, or 
 so much thereof as should, together with the 
 dividends, amount to 20s. in the pound on the 
 
( 151 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 152 ) 
 
 XV. BANKEUPTCY— PEOOF— coiitoiwecf. 
 
 debt due by the customer to the bankers. The 
 customer filed a liquidation petition, and the 
 bankers proved for the debt due to them. After- 
 awards the surety paid the bankers £500, and he 
 then proved in the liquidation for £500 : — Eeld, 
 by Bacon, C. J., that the proof of the bankers must 
 be reduced by £500, but that this reduction would 
 not prejudice any right of the bankers against the 
 surety : — Jleld, by the Court of Appeal, that the 
 bankers were entitled to retain their proof for the 
 fuU amount. Ex parte National Pbovinoial 
 Bank op England. In re Eees 17 Ch. D. 98 
 
 12. Interest — After Adjudication — Joint 
 
 and Separate Estates.'] A creditor whose proof 
 is admitted against both the separate estates of 
 two bankrupts who have been partners is not 
 entitled to receive any dividend in respect of in- 
 terest accrued on his debt subsequently to the 
 date of the adjudication, until the joint creditors 
 have been paid the principal of their debts in full. 
 — Warrant Finance Company's Case (Law Rep. 
 5 Ch. 86), and Warrant Finance Company's Case 
 (No. 2) (Law Eep. 5 Ch. 88) distinguished. Ex 
 parte Findlat. In re Collie - 17 Ch. D. 334 
 
 13. Interest — Mortgage to Building So- 
 ciety — Frincipal and Interest payable iy Monthly 
 Instalments — Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, r. 77.] A 
 mortgage to a building society provided that the 
 loan, with a premium and interest on the advance, 
 should be paid in equal monthly instalments dur- 
 ing a term of twelve years, and that each monthly, 
 instalment, when paid, should be applied (1) .in 
 payment of the interest due at the timeof payment, 
 (2) in payment of the premium till the whole 
 should be discharged, and (3) in payment of the 
 principal. Two years after the execution of the 
 mortgage the mortgagor filed a liquidation peti- 
 tion, and the society claimed to prove in the 
 liquidation for the total amount of the monthly 
 instalments which remained due under the deed, 
 less the amount at which they valued their 
 security : — Held, that, as to so much of the sum 
 claimed as represented interest payable subse- 
 quently to the filing of the liquidation petition, 
 the proof must be rejected. — Decision of Bacon, 
 O.J., reversed. Ex parte Bath. In re Phillips 
 
 [22 Ch. D, 460 
 
 14. Judgment Deht — Evidence.'] When 
 
 in support of a claim to prove a debt in a bank- 
 ruptcy the only evidence of the debt is a judg- 
 ment, and that judgment has been obtained after 
 the act of bankruptcy, the judgment debt cannot 
 be proved. Ex parte Bonham. In re Tollem ache 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 604 
 
 15. Judgment Debt — Evidence — Proof 
 
 of Consideration.'] When a claim is made to 
 prove in a bankruptcy in respect of a judgment 
 debt, though the judgment is primS. facie evi- 
 dence of the debt, it is not conclusive evidence, 
 and, if the circumstances are suspicious, the 
 Court will call upon the claimant to prove the 
 consideration for the judgment, and if he is un- 
 able to prove it, by reason of the loss of docu- 
 ments, or the lapse of time or otherwise, the proof 
 will be rejected. — A judgment may be proved by 
 the production of a duly certified copy of an entry 
 in the entry book of judgments of Ihe Court in 
 
 XV. BANKEUPTCT— PEOOF— con«rae(?. 
 
 which the judgment was recovered. Ex parte 
 Andekson. In re Tollemache 14 ft. B. D. 606 
 
 16. Judgment Debt — Power of Court to 
 
 go hehind Judgment] The Court of Bankruptcy 
 will go behind a judgment or a compromise, and 
 refuse to admit a proof founded upon it, if it can 
 see that the original claim was not a bona fide 
 one, but was made for purposes of extortion, the 
 claimant knowing that he had no legal claim, but 
 being aware of circumstances affecting the cha- 
 racter of the Defendant which would prevent the 
 latter from submitting to a cross-examination. — • 
 Per Brett, L.J., Callishsr v. Bisc'hoffaheim (Law 
 Eep. 5 Q. B. 449) questioned. Ex parte Banner. 
 In re Bltthe - 17 Ch. D. 480 
 
 17. loan from Building Society — Pre- 
 mium payable in Instalments.] A member of a 
 building society borrowed from the society, on 
 the security of a mortgage, £1200, for which he 
 was to pay £144 premium and interest at 5 per 
 cent, per annum. The principal, premium, and 
 interest were made payable by the borrower to 
 the society in a fixed number of monthly instal- 
 ments, each of which consisted of principal, pre- 
 mium, and interest. The borrower having filed 
 a liquidation petition, and the mortgage being 
 insufficient : — Held (affirming the decision of 
 Bacon, C. J.), that the premium was not in the 
 nature of interest, and that the society were en- 
 titled to prove for it in the liquidation. Ex parte 
 Bath. In re Phillips - - 27 Ch. D. 809 
 
 18. Partnership — Administrator of De- 
 ceased Partner — Share of Deceased Partner's Capi- 
 tal retained in Business without A uthority.] Three 
 persons carried on business in partnership with- 
 out any articles of partnership. The profits were 
 divided between them in equal'shares. After the 
 death of one of them the survivors continued to 
 carry on the business, retaining in it, without any 
 authority, the deceased partner's share of the 
 capital, and dividing the profits of the business 
 between themselves equally. They afterwards 
 filed a liquidation petition. There were stiU 
 some joint debts of the partnership of the three 
 remaining unpaid : — Held, that the administratrix 
 of the deceased partner could not prove in the 
 liquidation in competition with his creditors in 
 respect of his share of the capital. — Nanson v. 
 Gordon (1 App. Cas. 195) followed. — Ex parte 
 Westcott (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 626) distinguished. 
 Ex parte Blythe. In re Bltthe. 16 Ch. D. 620 
 
 19. Partnership — Competition with Credi- 
 tors.] The rule, that neither a partner, nor a 
 retired partner, nor the representatives of a 
 deceased partner, can prove in the bankruptcy 
 of the continuing or surviving partner or partners 
 in competition with the joint creditors of the 
 firm of which the partner, or retired or deceased 
 partner was a member, has no application unless 
 there has been actually proved in the bankruptcy 
 some debt in respect of which the bankrupt or 
 bankrupts and the retired or deceased partner 
 were jointly liable. — The mere possibility that 
 such debts may be proved in the bankruptcy is 
 not sufficient to introduce the application of the 
 rule. Ex parte Axdeews. In re Wilcoxon 
 
 [25 Ch. D. S05 
 
( 153 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 154 ) 
 
 XV. BANKRUPTCY— PROOF— co)i«mue«Z. 
 
 20. Partnership — Deceased Fartner — 
 
 Trust of Real Estate to pay Debts— No Heal Estate 
 — Debts Statute-barred — Bankruptcy of continuing 
 Partners — Proof by Executors of Deceased Partner 
 — Bule against proving in Competition with, one's 
 own Creditors,"] A devise of real estate upon trust 
 to pay debts does not prevent the operation of the 
 Statute of Limitations when the testator leaves 
 no real estate to support the trust. A., B. and 0. 
 carried on business in co-partnership. In 1875, 
 A. retired from the firm, his share being purchased 
 by B. and 0., the continuing partners. Od his 
 retirement, A., at the request of the continuing 
 partners, paid certain mortgage debts of the 
 business, and took transfers to himself of these 
 mortgage debts with the securities for the same. 
 He also at their request lent them money on 
 mortgage of other portions of the partnership 
 property. He died in 1876. B. and 0. continued 
 the business until 1883, when they became bank- 
 rupt. At this time there were cash creditors of 
 the old iirm still unpaid, who carried in proofs 
 against the joint estate of B. and 0. The 
 executors of A. also carried in a proof against 
 the separate estates of B. and C, for (1) the 
 balance of the purchase-money of A.'s share ; 
 (2) the mortgage debts paid off by A. on transfer 
 to himself; (3) the moneys lent by A. on mortgage 
 after his retirement. Tliis proof was rejected by 
 the trustee on the ground that to admit it would 
 infringe against the rule forbidding a partner to 
 prove in competition with his own creditors : — 
 Held, that as the debts proved by the cash 
 creditors were, as against A.'s estate, statute- 
 barred, the rule did not apply, and that the proof 
 must be admitted. In re Hbpbues. Ex parte 
 Smith - - 14 Q. B. D. 894 
 
 21. Partnership — Fartner in one Firm 
 
 the secret and sole Principal in another Firm — 
 Bankruptcy of both Firms — Right of Proof by one 
 Firm against the other ] A. and B. traded in 
 partnership as A. & Co. in England and abroad, 
 A. managing the home business and B. the branch 
 abroad. C. and D. carried on business in England 
 as D. & Co. under an agreement by which C. was 
 to be the sole principal of D., who was to be the 
 manager of the business at a salary with a share 
 of profits. Business transactions took place in 
 England between A. & Co. and D. & Co., and on 
 the bankniptcy of both firms a large balance was 
 due to A. & Co. from D. & Co. C. was in fact the 
 agent of A., who was the secret and sole principal 
 of D., but this was unknown to B. and D. until 
 after the bankruptcy, and D. had held himself 
 out to A. & Co. and others as a principal. The 
 trustee of A. & Co. tendered a proof against the 
 estate of D. for the balance due from D. & Co. to 
 A. & Co. -.—Held, that the proof could not be 
 sustained, for that, under the circumstances, there 
 was no contract between D. and A. that D. should 
 pay for the goods that had been supplied. In re 
 Wakeham - - - - 13 Q. B. D. 43 
 
 22. Promoter of Company — Secret Profit 
 
 —Discharge — " Unliquidated Damages " — " Con- 
 tract"— " Debt incurred by means of Fraud or 
 Breach of Trust "—Bankruptcy Act, 1869, ss. 31, 
 49,] Under a secret agreement between the 
 vendors of a mine and G., a financial agent who 
 
 XV. BANKRUPTCY— PROOF— corafenued. 
 
 was promoting and afterwards formed a com- 
 pany for its purchase, G. received from the ven- 
 dors part of the purchase-money without the 
 knowledge of the company. In an action by the 
 company to make G. liable for the amount of the 
 secret profit he had so made, a, specific sum was 
 found due from him to the company upon that 
 footing. G. then presented a petition for liqui- 
 dation, and his creditors passed a resolution for 
 liquidation of his affairs by arrangement ; a trus- 
 tee was appointed of his estate, and he obtained 
 his certificate of discharge : — Held, that the com- 
 pany were to be at liberty to go in and prove 
 against G.'s estate as creditors for the sum found 
 due from him in the action, it not being a 
 " demand in the nature of unliquidated damages 
 arising otherwise than by reason of a contract." — 
 Seld, also, that the debt so due from G. was incur- 
 red by " fraud " and was also a " breach of trust " 
 within sect. 49 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and 
 that, accordingly, G. was not released from such 
 debt by his discharge; and he was thereupon 
 ordered personally to pay the debt to the com- 
 pany, or so much thereof as should not be received 
 by the company under the liquidation. Emma 
 Silver Miners Company v. Gbant 17 Ch. D. 122 
 
 Secured creditor 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptoy — Seoueed 
 Ceeditok. 
 
 XVI. BANKRUPTCY— MUTUAL DEALINGS. 
 
 1. Set-off — Bill accepted and paid by 
 
 Creditor after Notice of Debtor's Bankruptcy — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, «. 38.] Where there are 
 mutual dealings between a debtor and his credi- 
 tors, the line as to set-off must, as a general rule, 
 and in the absence of special circumstances, be 
 drawn at the date of the commencement of the 
 bankruptcy. In re Gillespie. Ex parte Eeid & 
 Sons - - - 14 Q. B. D. 963 
 
 2. Set-off — • Landlord and Tenant — 
 
 Trustee in Bankruptcy — Non - disclaimer of 
 Tenancy, Effect of — Outgoing Tenant — Land- 
 lord's Right to set-off Rent accrued due before 
 Bankruptcy against Trustee's Claim as outgoing 
 Tenant for Tillages — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 s. 39.] A debtor, who was tenant from year to 
 year of a farm upon the terms that, at the ex- 
 piration of the tenancy, he should be paid by the 
 landlord allowances for tillages and cultivation 
 according to the custom of the country, filed a 
 petition for liquidation of his affairs under the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and a trustee was ap- 
 pointed, who did not disclaim the tenancy, but 
 carried on the business of the farm for the benefit 
 of the creditors until the tenancy was determined 
 by notice to quit. The debtor's estate was suffi- 
 cient to indemnify the trustee against any per- 
 sonal liability in respect of the tenancy. In an 
 action to recover the value of tillages and culti- 
 vation by the trustee during his tenancy, accord- 
 ing to the custom : — Held, that the landlord was 
 not entitled to set-off rent, accrued due from the 
 debtor before the liquidation proceedings, against 
 the trustee's claim. Alloway v. Steeee 
 
 [10 Q, B. D. 22 
 
 3. Set-off — Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 
 Authority not revoked till Notice of Act of Bank- 
 
( 155 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 156 
 
 XVI. BANKRUPTCY — MTJTXrAL DEALINGS — 
 
 contimMd. 
 ruptey — Banltrwptmj Act, 1869, s. 39.] The object 
 of sect. 39 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, is that 
 where there are mutual accounts a secret act of 
 bankruptcy should not stop the currency of those 
 accounts ; the existence of mutual dealings and 
 accounts protects the credits and debts on each 
 side from the operation of the act of bankruptcy 
 until notice of it. The exact date at which a 
 mutual account is to stop must depend on the 
 circumstances of the case and the nature of the 
 credits, but may and ought to be taken at least 
 up to the date when the person claiming the 
 benefit of sect. 39 has notice of an act of bank- 
 ruptcy. — Where authority had been given pre- 
 vious to an act of bankruptcy by the bankrupts 
 to the Defendant in the course of mutual deal- 
 ings to receive the purchase-money of their estate 
 and to place it to account, and such authority 
 had been acted upon before notice of an act of 
 bankruptcy : — Seld, that such authority was not 
 revoked by the act of bankruptcy ; that the pay- 
 ment thereof to the Defendant was a rightful 
 payment ; that being so received it became a debt 
 and an item in the account between him'and the 
 bnnkrupts before notice of any act of bankruptcy, 
 and that the Defendant was entitled to set off 
 against it, in an action brought by the trustee in 
 bankruptcy, the debt due from the bankrupts to 
 him. Elliott v. Tuequand - 7 App. Cas. 79 
 
 4. ■ ■ Set-off — Secured Creditor — Valuation 
 
 of Security — Partnership Debt — Security on 
 Separate Estate — Mutual Credit — Set-off — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 38 Vict. c. 71), s. 39]. A 
 father and son were partners in business. The 
 father mortgaged real estate, which was his sepa- 
 rate property, to the bankers of the firm, to secure 
 the balance for the time being of the current ac- 
 count of the firm. Afterwards he contracted to 
 sell the real estate, and the bankers joined in the 
 conveyance to the purchaser on the terms of an 
 agreement that the father should deposit the 
 purchase-money with the bankers in his own 
 name, at interest ; that the deposit should be a 
 security to the bankers for the debt of the firm, 
 but that, subject to that security, the deposit 
 should remain the separate property of the father; 
 that, until payment of the debt of the firm, 
 the father should not be entitled to withdraw any 
 part of the deposit, but, until demand by the 
 bankers for payment of the debt, he should be at 
 liberty to draw out half yearly the interest on 
 the deposit ; and tbat, in case demand should be 
 made by the bankers for payment, they might, at 
 any time after the expiration of twelve months 
 from the making of the demand, but not sooner, 
 apply the deposit and the interest thereon from 
 the time of making the demand, in or towards 
 the payment of the debt of the firm. The father 
 also entered into a covenant for payment of the 
 debt of the firm. This arrangement was carried 
 out: — Held, that, the arrangement being a bona 
 fide one for the purpose of giving a security to 
 the bankers, in substitution for their security on 
 the real estate, the bankers could prove in the 
 liquidation of the father and son against the 
 joint estate for the full amount of their debt, 
 without deducting the amount of the deposit. 
 
 XVI. BANKEUPTCY — mUTUAL DEALINGS — 
 
 continued. 
 and that no Set-off arose by virtue of sect. 39 of 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. Ex parte Caldioott. 
 In re Haet - 25 Ch. D. 716 
 
 5. Set-off — Unliquidated Damages — 
 
 Action by Trustee in Liquidation — -"Mutual 
 Credits and Dealings " — Banhruptcy Act, 1869 (32 
 & 33 Vict, c, 71), s. 39.] The right of set-off 
 under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, extends to un- 
 liquidated damages. — Such set-off may be pleaded 
 by the Defendant to an action by the trustee 
 without recourse to a Court of Banlcruptcy. — H„ 
 who had contracted to deliver iron to the Defen- 
 dants by successive monthly deliveries, sued for 
 the price, and went into liquidation. The Plain- 
 tiff, who had been appointed trustee, continued 
 the action. The Defendants counter-claimed 
 damages for nnn-delivei-y of part of the iron : — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal (Jessel, M.E., 
 Brett, and Cotton, L. JJ.), that these unliquidated 
 damages could be pleaded as a set-oft' to the 
 Plaintiff's claim. Peat v. Joxes 8 ft. B. D. 147 
 
 6. Set-off — Unliquidated Damages — 
 
 Fraudulent Bepresentation on Sale of a Chattel — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, ss. 31, 39, 49.] A claim for 
 unliquidated damages for a fraudulent representa- 
 tion made by a bankrupt on the sale of a chattel 
 is within the mutual credit clause (sect. 39) of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and consequently may be 
 set off in an action brought by the trustee for the 
 unpaid price, — such fraudulent representation not 
 being a mere personal tort, but a breach of the 
 obligation arising out of the contract of sale. 
 Jack ». Kipping - - - 9 Q. B, D. 113 
 
 XVII. BANKETIPTCYI — PEEFEEENTIAL 
 DEBTS. 
 
 Wages — Employer and Worliman — Pay- 
 ment of Wages in Coin — Deductions to pay Doctor 
 —Banlcruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 32— TrweS; Act (1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 37, ss. 1, 2, 3, 
 4, 23.] By an arrangement between employers 
 and their workmen certain deductions were made 
 from the workmen's wages (which were paid 
 monthly) for a " doctor's fund" which was estab- 
 lished for the purpose of paying a doctor, who 
 attended the workmen and their families and 
 supplied them with medicines in case of illness. 
 The sums thus deducted were handed over by the 
 employers to the doctor from time to time. There 
 was no contract in writing between the employers 
 and the workmen authorizing the employers to 
 make the deductions, nor was there any evidence 
 that the doctor had accepted the liability of the 
 employers. The employers filed a liquidation 
 petition, and at this time there stood to the credit 
 of the " doctor's fund" in their books, a sum of 
 £149, which had arisen from deductions thus 
 made from the workmen's wages, and had not 
 yet been paid over to the doctor: — Held, that 
 there had been no valid payment (within the 
 Truck Act) of the £149 to the workmen, and that 
 they were entitled to be paid the £149 in full 
 out of the employer's estate as unpaid wages. — 
 Whether, if the £149 had been, in pursuance of 
 the arrangement, actually paid over by the em- 
 ployers to the doctor, in discharge of a debt for 
 whicli the workmen were liable, or if the doctor 
 
( 157 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 158 ) 
 
 PEErEEEHTIAl 
 
 XVII. BANESrPTCY — 
 DEBTS — continued. 
 
 had accepted the liability of the employers, the 
 Track Act would, notwithstanding the absence of 
 a contract in -writing signed by the workmen, 
 have applied,— Qurere. Ex parte Coovus.. In re 
 MoRBis - - 26 Ch. D. 693 
 
 XVIII. BANZBTTPTCY— DISTRESS. 
 
 1. Honey due to Gas Company—" Bent "— 
 
 Bankruptcy Ad, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71, s 34.] 
 By their special Act (39 & 40 Viot. c. cxix., s.44) 
 the corporation of Walsall were empowered to 
 " recover from any person any rent or charge due 
 to them by him for gas supplied, by the like 
 means as landlords are for the time being by 
 law allowed to recover rent in arrear " : — Seld, 
 that, after the filing of a liquidation petition 
 by a customer, the corporation were entitled as 
 against the trustee in the liquidation to levy a 
 distress in respect of a sum due by the debtor for 
 gas supplied to him before the filing of the peti- 
 tion : — Seld, also, that the corporation were not, 
 within the meaning of sect. 34 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869, " other persons " to whom any rent was 
 due by the debtor, but that, by virtue of sect. 44 of 
 the special Act, they were entitled to the rights 
 given to landlords by sect. 34. — The payment due 
 to a gas company for gas supplied, though it is 
 called " rent " in some Acts of Parliament, is not 
 really of the nature of rent, and consequently a. 
 gas company does not come withiu the words 
 " other person to whom any rent is due " in sect. 34 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. Those words apply 
 only to a person who, though he is not the land- 
 ' lord of the bankrupt, fills a position analogous to 
 that of a landlord, because he is entitled to re- 
 ceive that which is "rent" strictly so called. 
 — Decision of Cave, J., affirmed, but on a different 
 ground. — Ex parte Birmingham Gas Light Go. 
 (Law Eep. 11 Eq. 615) and Ex parte Hill (6 Ch. 
 D. 63) commented on. Ex parte Hakeison. In 
 re Peaee - - - - 13 Q. B. D. 753 
 
 2. Mortgage — Attornment Clause — Dis- 
 tress levied after Bankruptcy of Mortgagor — Fix 
 lures— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 .s. 34 — PuMic-himse — Goodwill.'] An attornment 
 by a mortgagor to a second mortgagee is valid, 
 notwithstanding the fact that the mortgagor has 
 already attorned tenaut to the first mortgagee of 
 the same property. And if the amount of the 
 rents fixed by the two attornment clauses is a 
 fair rent of the property, so that there is no fraud 
 on the bankrupt law, valid distresses can be levied 
 by both mortgagees after the commencement of 
 the bankruptcy of the mortgagor. — Morton v. 
 Woods (Law Eep. 3 Q. B. 658 ; Ibid. 4 Q. B. 293) 
 explained and followed. — A mortgage (by way of 
 underlease) executed in 1877 of a leasehold public- 
 house contained no express assignment of the fix- 
 tures. There was a clause by which, "for the 
 purpose of better securing the punctual payment 
 of the interest" on the mortgage debt, the mort- 
 gagor attorned tenant to the mortgagee of the 
 mortgaged property at a yearly rent equal to the 
 amount of a year's interest. And there was a, 
 proviso that the mortgagee might, at any time 
 after the day when the first instalment of rent 
 should become due, enter upon the property and 
 determine the tenancy, without giving the mort- 
 
 XVIII. BANKRUPTCY- DISTHESS- co»i<MMC(i. 
 gagor any notice to quit. Two years afterwards 
 the mortgagor became bankrupt. The mortgagee 
 had tsiken no step to determine the tenancy : — 
 Held, that, as the tenancy was created only for the 
 purpose of giving an additional security for the 
 payment of the interest, the mortgagee did not 
 cease to be a mortgagee because he was made a 
 landlord, and that he was entitled as against the 
 trustee in the bankruptcy of the mortgagor to 
 trade fixtm-es which had been annexed to the 
 public-house after the execution of the mortgage. 
 — The goodwill of a public-house is not a personal 
 goodwill, but on a sale of the house passes with 
 it. Ex parte Ptjnnbtt. In re Kjtohin 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 226 
 
 3. Mortgage — ■ Attornment Clause — Te- 
 nancy from Tear to Tear or at Will — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869, s. 34.] A mortgage deed contained an 
 attornment clause whereby A. (the mortgagor) 
 attorned and became tenant from year to year to 
 B. (the mortgagee) for and in respect of the mort- 
 gaged premises, at the yearly rent of £800, to be 
 paid by equal quarterly payments. And it was 
 thereby agreed that it should be lawful for B., at 
 any time after three months from the date of the 
 naortgage, without giving previous notice of his 
 intention so to do, to enter upon and take posses- 
 sion of the premises whereof A. had attorned 
 tenant, and to determine the tenancy created by 
 the aforesaid attornment. A. filed a liquidation 
 petition, and on the same day a receiver was ap- 
 pointed, who entered into possession of A.'s estate 
 and elfeots. — Notice of the petition and of the ap- 
 pointment of a receiver was sent to B., who two 
 days later, by virtue of the attornment clause, 
 distrained upon the goods and chattels on the 
 mortgaged premises for half a year's rent then 
 due : — Held (affirming the decision of Bacon, 0. J.), 
 that a tenancy from year to year and not a tenancy 
 at will was created by the attornment clause, and 
 that B. was entitled, under the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869, s. 34, to distrain for the rent due to him 
 from A. at the time of filing the liquidation peti- 
 tion. — Mcyrton v. Woods (Law Bep. 4 Q. B. 293) 
 explained. In re Theel-pall. Ex parte Qceen's 
 Bekefit Building Sooiett - 16 Ch. D. 274 
 
 4. Mortgage — Attornment Clause — Vali- 
 dity — Bankruptcy of Mortgagor, — Mortgage to 
 Building Society — Advance repayable in Monthly 
 Instalments — Monthly Tenancy — Statute of Frauds 
 (29 Car. 2, o. 3), s. 1 — Lease not in writing — " Un- 
 certain " Bent] A member of a building society 
 borrowed £7500 from the society, which was to be 
 repaid in a series of monthly instalments of 
 £71 17s. 6d. each, including interest at 7 per cent. 
 The instalments were payable at the monthly 
 meetings of the society, and, if the member 
 neglected to pay them when due, he became 
 liable to a fine, at the rate of 5 per cent, per 
 month' on the total amount in arrear and unpaid 
 at each meeting. To secure the loan he executed 
 to the trustees of the society a mortgage of real 
 estate. The deed contained a proviso that if the 
 member should fail for three monthly meetings 
 to pay his subscriptions, interest, fines, or other 
 moneys, or ' to observe the regulations of the 
 society, or in the event of his becoming bankrupt, 
 the mortgagees might enter into possession or 
 
( 159 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 160 ) 
 
 XVIII. BANKETTPTCY— DISTRESS— coBtoMed. 
 
 receipt of the rents of the mortgaged property. 
 And " for the hetter securing the paymentB whicli 
 by the rules of the society ought to be made by 
 the mortgagor," it was agreed that, if the mort- 
 gagees should at any time become entitled to 
 enter into possession or receipt of the rents, and 
 the mortgagor should then or afterwards be In 
 the occupation of the whole or part of the pro- 
 perty, he should during such occupation be tenant 
 thereof from month to month to the mortgagees, 
 at a monthly rent equal in amount to the moneys 
 which ought to be paid monthly by the mortgagor 
 from time to time for subscriptions, interest, fines, 
 and other moneys under the rules, and that the 
 tenancy should commence on the day up to which 
 he should have fully paid all and every part of 
 such subscriptions, interest, fines, and other 
 moneys, and the rent for the period intervening 
 between the commencement of the tenancy and 
 the day on which the trustees should be entitled 
 to enter into possession or receipt of rents should 
 be payable and paid on that day, and the monthly 
 rent due upon and subsequently to that day sliould 
 become due monthly in advance, and be payable 
 at the monthly meetings, the first payment of rent 
 becoming due on that day on which the mort- 
 gagees should first become entitled to enter into 
 possession. Power was given to the mortgagees 
 to determine the tenancy by fourteen days' notice. 
 — The deed was not executed by the mortgagees, 
 nor was it registered under the Bills of Sale Act. 
 The mortgagor committed default in his pay- 
 ments, and was afterwards adjudicated a bank- 
 rupt : — Held, that the attornment clause, and 
 distresses levied under it for rent which accrued 
 due both before and after the commencement of 
 the bankruptcy, were valid as against the trustee 
 in the bankruptcy. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., 
 affirmed. — Seld, that it was no objection to the 
 attornment clause that the monthly rent was 
 fluctuating in amount. — A rent the amount of 
 which may fluctuate according to the happening 
 of certain events is not an uncertain rent. — Held, 
 also, that the tenancy under the attornment clause 
 was not made by sect. 1 of the Statute of Frauds, 
 a tenancy at will. — Ex parte Williams (7 Ch. D. 
 138) ; In re StocMon Iron Furnace Company (10 
 Ch. D. 335) ; and Ex parte Jackson (14 Ch. D. 
 725) discussed. Ex parte Voisey In re Knisht 
 
 r21 Ch. D. 442 
 
 6. Kent after filing of Petition— 32 & 33 
 
 Vict. c. 71, 8. 34.] A landlord, between the filing 
 of a liquidation petition by his tenant and the 
 appointinent of trustees, levied a distress for two 
 half-year's rent accrued due before the filing of 
 the petition. After the appointment of trustees 
 the landlord levied a second distress for a third 
 half-year's rent accrued due between the filing of 
 the petition and the appointment of the trustees : 
 — Held, that the second distress was void under 
 sect. 34 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. Ex parte 
 SiE W. Hakt Dyke. In re Moerish 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 410 
 
 XIX, BANKBUPTCY — ORDER AND DISPOSI- 
 TION, 
 
 1. BiUs of Sale Act (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), 
 
 ss. 8, 20 — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 15, sub-s. 5.] 
 During the period of seven days between the 
 
 XIX. BANKRirPTCY — ORDER AND DISPOSI- 
 TION — continued. 
 making and registration of a bill of sale, the 
 order and disposition clause (Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869), sect 15, sub-sect. 5, does not apply to the 
 goods and chattels comprised in the bill of sale, 
 so that as against the trustee in bankruptcy, 
 who by the receiver has before the expiration of 
 the seven days taken possession of such goods, 
 the bill of sale holder is entitled. Ex parte 
 Kahen. In re Hewee - 21 Ch, D, 871 
 
 2. Bill of Sale Act — Security — Bills of 
 
 Sale Acts, 1878 and \SH2 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31; 
 45 * 46 Vict. c. 43.] The BiUs of Sale Act, 1882, 
 repeals the 20 th section of the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878, in resj)ect of bills of sale given by way ot 
 security, but not in respect of bills of sale given 
 by way of absolute transfer, and therefore chattels 
 comprised in a registered bill of sale given by way 
 of absolute transfer are not in the order and dis- 
 position of the grantor within the Bankruptcy 
 Act. SwirT V. Pannell - - 24 Ch, D, 210 
 
 3. Bills of Sale Act (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), 
 
 s. 20— Bills of Sale Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), 
 ss. 3, \5— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 4 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), s. 15, suh-s. 5.] Notwithstandiug the re- 
 peal of sect. 20 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, by 
 sect. 15 of the BUls of Sale Act, 1882, the effect 
 of sect. 3 of the latter Act is, that the grantee of 
 a bill of sale, registered under the Act of 1878 
 before the coming into operation of the Act of 
 1882, is, so long as the registration is subsisting, 
 entitled to the protection afforded by sect. 20 
 against the "order and disposition" of the gran- 
 tor, even when an act of bankruptcy is committed 
 by the grantor after the coming into operation of 
 the Act of 1882. Ex parte Iza'&d. In re OaKPFLt: 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 409 
 
 4. Furniture — Custom, of Hiring — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 15, 
 suh-s. 5.] The fact that it is the custom of furni- 
 ture dealers to let out furniture on a three years' 
 hiring and purchase agreement does not dis- 
 entitle the general public to assume that au 
 ordinary householder is the real owner of the fur- 
 niture which is in his house. — The furniture in 
 the dwelling-house of a trader having been seized 
 under an execution, a friend of his bought it 
 from the sheriff at a valuation, and then verbally 
 agreed that the debtor should continue in pos- 
 session of it and use it as before, paying, by way 
 of rent, interest at 5 per cent, per annum on the 
 purchase-money, until he should be able to re- 
 purchase it at the price given for it. This 
 arrangement was carried out, and the debtor re- 
 mained in possession of the furniture as before, 
 until he filed a liquidation petition. He had not 
 repurchased it. The trustee in the liquidation 
 claimed it under the reputed ownership clause. 
 It was admitted that there is a custom for furni- 
 ture dealers to let out fiu-niture on a three years' 
 hiring and purchase agreement, but there was no 
 other evidence as to the existence of any custom 
 of hiring fm-niture -.—Held (by Bacon, V.C, and 
 by the Court of Appeal), that the trustee was 
 entitled to the furniture. Ex parte Beooks. 
 In re Fowler - - 23 Ch. D. 261 
 
 8. Furnitura— Ct{6«0)» of hiring— Evi- 
 
( 161 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 162 ) 
 
 XIX. BANKKUPTCY — OEDES AND DISPOSI- 
 TION — eontinued. 
 dence — Castom of Trade— Professional Confi- 
 dence.l The Plaintiff lent furniture on hire to 
 ■the Defendants, -who were hotel-keepers, at a 
 fixed sum to be paid by instalments, with a pro- 
 ■vision that until all the instalments were paid 
 the property should remain in the Plaintiff, and 
 if any instalment should not be paid when due 
 the Plaintiff was to be at liberty to retake posses- 
 sion of his goods and the instalments to be for- 
 feited, but upon all the instalments being paid 
 the furniture to become the property of the 
 Defendants. Upon one instalment being unpaid 
 the Plaintiff put a man in possession of the 
 ■furniture, and the Defendants executed an as- 
 ■signment of the lease of the hotel (which had 
 been previously mortgaged to persons whom the 
 Plaintiff had paid off) and of all their personal 
 •chattels and effects, including the hired furni- 
 ture, to the Plaintiff, and . afterwards became 
 bankrupt : — Held (afSrming the decision of Ma- 
 lins, V.C), that the hiring agreement did not 
 ■operate as a bill of sale ; that the assignment of 
 the whole property of the Defendants, which was 
 •duly registered under the Bills of Sale Act, was 
 an act of bankruptcy, but that the Plaintiff's fur- 
 niture, not having been paid for, remained the 
 property of the Plaintiff, and was not in the order 
 •and disposition of the bankrupt, and did not pass 
 by the assignment ; that the assignment was good 
 •so far as it was a mortgage of the leasehold, but 
 was void so far as it' was an assignment of the 
 ■chattels as being an act of bankruptcy ; and that 
 the trustee in bankruptcy was entitled to all the 
 personal effects of the bankrupt, but not to the 
 hired furniture. — ^The custom of hotel-keepers 
 holding their furniture on hire is now so well 
 established that it ought to be taken judicial 
 notice of. Ckawcouk v. Salter 18 Ch. D. 30 
 
 6. Furniture — Custom of Biring — Trade 
 
 Custom- — Hotel Keeper — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 (46 & il Vict. 0. 52), s. 44, sub-s. 3— Sill of Sale 
 — Registration — Transfer of Registered Bill of 
 Sale — Equitable sub-Mortgage — Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 4, 10.] The custom 
 for hotel-keepers to hire the furniture of their 
 hotels is so notorious, and has been so often proved, 
 that it need not now be proved, but the Court 
 will take judicial notice of it. And the custom 
 extends, not only to fm-niture in the strictest sense 
 •of the word, but to all the articles which are 
 necessary for the furnishing of an hotel for the 
 purpose of using it as an hotel. — The effect of the 
 ■custom is absolutely to exclude the reputation of 
 •ownership by the hotel-keeper of all those articles 
 in the hotel, at the time of his bankruptcy, which 
 •are within the scope of the custom, without regard 
 to the question whether the particular articles are 
 or are not in fact hired by him. — Consequently, 
 ■articles which are his property subject to a mort- 
 gage by bill of sale, will be excluded from the 
 -operation of the reputed ownership clause. — A 
 memorandum by way of equitable sub-mortgage 
 .given by the transferee of a registered bill of sale, 
 •accompanied by a deposit of the registered bill of 
 ■sale and the transfer, does not require registration 
 as a bill of sale under the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, 
 ■even though, after the mortgage, the transferee 
 
 XIX. BANKEUPTCY— OEDER AND DISPOSI- 
 TION — continued. 
 acquires by assignment the equity of redemption 
 of the original grantor. Ex parte Tdequand.. 
 In re Pabkeb - - - 14 Q. B. D. 636 
 
 7. Principal and Agent — Property, pass- 
 ing of, in Goods bought by Agent — Trustee — Trust 
 Funds misapplied, following Proceeds of — Moneys 
 held in a Fiduciary Character — Advances for par- 
 ticular Purpose misappropriated — False Repre- 
 sentation— Estoppel — Trustee in Bankruptcy takes 
 Property subject to same rights and Equities as 
 Bankrupt — Reputed Ownership.'] The Defendants 
 were brewers and employed P. as their " malting 
 agent." The regular course of business between 
 the Defendants and F. was as follows : — P. occu- 
 pied the malting premises, and took oilt the neces- 
 sary licenses. It was his duty to buy barley in 
 his own name as principal for cash, to send in to 
 the Defendants certain periodical accounts of the 
 barley so bought from time to time, and the prices 
 of the same, to submit samples to the Defendants, 
 and if the barley was approved of by them to malt it 
 and deliver the malt to the Defendants, receiving 
 a commission upon the quantity of barley steeped. 
 Tlie quantity of malt required by large brewers 
 being very great, the brewers, and not the malt- 
 ing agentsi provide the capital for the purchase of 
 the barley. In the present case the Defendants 
 kept accounts at certain provincial banks, upon 
 which F. was empowered to draw, and from time 
 to time the Defendants paid in lump sums to the 
 credit of those accounts, in accordance with current 
 requirements, as shewn by the accounts sent in by 
 F. of barley purchased, but these sums were not 
 intended to, nor did they, represent any payments 
 for any specific barley. F.'s business was to act 
 as malting agent for the Defendants exclusively. 
 The Defendants paid the duty as the same became 
 payable upon the malt in F.'s premises. F. had 
 fraudulently departed from the regular course of 
 business. Instead of buying barley for cash and 
 applying the balances at the provincial banks in 
 payment for the same, he had been in the habit 
 of sending in to the Defendants fictitious accounts 
 of barley purchased, misapplying the sums paid 
 in for his own purposes, and providing the malt 
 needed for the Defendants' purposes by purchas- 
 ing barley or ready-made malt upon credit. He 
 likewise from time to time sold barley which had 
 been brought on to the maltings to raise money 
 for his own purposes. The Defendants believed, 
 in consequence of the fictitious accounts and other 
 false representations of F., that barley was from 
 time to time purchased for cash, in accordance 
 with the regular course of business, and on the 
 faith thereof continued to pay sums of money into 
 the banks for the purpose of paying for such 
 barley, which they believed were so applied. F. 
 subsequently absconded.leaving upon his premises 
 barley to the value of about £22,000, and malt to 
 the value of about £35,000, upon part of which 
 duty had been paid by the Defendants. The value 
 of such malt and barley was less than the amount 
 drawn from the banlrs and misappropriated by F. 
 He absconded and thereby committed an act of 
 bankruptcy. Between the time of F.'s abscond- 
 ing and the time when he was adjudged a bank- 
 rupt, the Defendants seized the barley and the 
 
 G 
 
( 163 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 164 ) 
 
 Xrx. BAITKEWPTCY — OEDEE AHD DISPOSI- 
 TION — continued. 
 malt left on his premises. The PlainKfl^ trustee 
 in F.s bankraptey, sued the Defendants for the 
 value of the same : — Held, affirming the judgment 
 of the Queen's Bench Division, that the Plaintiff 
 could not recover, our the ground that the relation 
 between the Defendants and F. was that of 
 principals and agent, and that the property in 
 the barley and the malt had vested in the Defea- 
 dants, and that the bsirley and the malt were not 
 in the order and dispoeition of F. as the reputed 
 owner thereof it being notorious that " malting 
 agents " are in many instances not the owners of 
 the barley and malt on their malting premises ; 
 and also on the further ground that the moneys 
 advanced by the Defendants to provide for the 
 purchase of the barley were impressed with a 
 trust ; that even if the barley and the malt left 
 on the premises of F. were noi bong:ht in accord- 
 ance with the authority given to him, and the 
 legal property in the same was not vested in the 
 Defendants but in F., nevertheless F. was a trustee 
 for the Defendants, to the extent of the sums 
 advanced by them, of such barley and malt, the 
 same being either the product of the trust moneys, 
 or in substitution for the barley in payment for 
 which F. ought to have applied such trust 
 moneys; that F. could not have set up his own 
 breach of trust or have been heard to allege that 
 the- barley was bought otherwise than according 
 to the authority given to him by the Defendants ; 
 aad that the Plaintiff, as F.'s trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy, could not in this respect stand in a bener 
 position than F. himself. Haekis r. Tkumas I 
 [7 Q. B. D. 340; 9 ft. B. D. 264 j 
 
 8. "Trade or Business" — Bankmylcy Act, 
 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict n. 71), s. 15, svh-». 5.] 'VVhen 
 a trader is in possession at his place of business 
 of articles not in their nature connected with his 
 .'business, and the trustee in his bankruptcy claims 
 the articles on the ground that the bankrupt was 
 the reputed owner of them, much stronger evi- 
 dence will be required to prove the reputed 
 ownership tUan in the case of articles connected 
 with the business, the inference from the nature 
 of the articles being that ther are not connected 
 with the business. Ex parte Lovebisg. Jn re 
 :srrBBZLL - 24 Ch. D. 31 
 
 9. . "Trade or Business" — Home Farm 
 
 — Farming and iTarlxt Gardemnj for Pleasure 
 —Lice and Head StockSiU of Sale— Order and 
 Di^.isition—Eesidential Edati— Bankruptcy Act, 
 1SS3, o. a.'] A perion who occupies a residential 
 property and engages in fanning and market 
 gardening for his pleasure, and carries on the 
 same at a profit, is not carrying on a "trade or 
 business" within the meaning of sect 44 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, ISSS. even although he sells his 
 surplus produce after supplying his household.-- 
 But if the primary intention is abandoned, and 
 the business is carried on with a view to profit as 
 a means of livelihood, he wUl come within the 
 mischief of the section. In re Waujs. Ex parte 
 SriXY - - - - 14a.B.D.950 
 
 10. "Trade or Business"— SftarestB Com - 
 
 pamj— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 <t 47 TiM. c. 52), 
 .?. 44.] J-, who carried on business as a stock- 
 broker, silversmilii, and watchmaker, deposited 
 
 XIX. BANKaUPTCY— OEDEE AHD DISPOSI- 
 TION — continued. 
 with his bankers the certificates of thirty shares 
 in a joint stock company as s/^urity for the 
 balance of his overdrawn account. There was no 
 formal transfer of the shares. The company had 
 notice of the deposit on the 31st of .January, 1884. 
 On the 2nd of February a petition in bankruptcy 
 was filed against J., and a receiving order made, 
 and he was subsequently adjudged bankrupt 
 The act of bankruptcy relied on was committed 
 on the 27th of January : — Held, that the shares 
 were not at the conmiencement of the bankruptcy 
 "in the possession, order, or disposition of the 
 bankrupt in his trade or Imginess," within sect 44 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, ISSo. In re jESKCfsoy. 
 Ex parte 'Sotjtsgrajs. axj> IfomxGHAiisHiEE 
 Ba>-k - 15 0. B. D. 441 
 
 11. " Trade or Business " — Shares in In- 
 corporated Companv — Chos^ in Action — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Tirf. c. 52), g. 44, a«6- 
 *. fit.] B. and T. were partners as stockbrokers, 
 and their practice was &om time to time to buy 
 shares in the way of their business, and to obtain 
 advances on them by equitable mortage or other- 
 wise for the purposes of their business, and for 
 convenience the shares were generally taken in 
 the name of R, who held them as trustee for the 
 partnership. B. deposited the certificates together 
 with a blank transfer of railway sharra, bought 
 with partnership moneys, and registered in his 
 name, with a bank to secure moneys due to the 
 bank from the firm. B. and T. becsime bankrupt, 
 and no notice of the deposit was given to the 
 railway company until alter the commencement 
 of the bankruptcy : — Held, that as the shares 
 were bought with partnership moneys, and in- 
 tended to be used for the purposes of the partner- 
 ship business, they were at the time of the bank- 
 ruptcy in the order and dispositi' ^n of B. in Ws 
 business, for that the business of the partnership 
 was B.'s business, although another persen was 
 associated with him in it ; and further, that as no 
 notice of the deposit had been given to the rail- 
 way company, the shares were ia the order and 
 disposition of B., by the consent and permission 
 of the true owner, under such circumstances that 
 B. was the reputed owner of them : — Held, there- 
 fore; that the shares must pass to the trustee in 
 bankruptcy, unless they were taken out of the 
 reputed ownership clause, Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 s. 44, sub-s. iiL, by the proviso excluding choses 
 in action from the operation of the oLinse. — Hdd, 
 by Cotton and Ijndley, L..JJ.. dissentiente Fry, 
 L.J., that the shares were not choses in action 
 within the meaning of the proviso, and that they 
 passed to the trustee. — Order of Bacon, V.C., 
 affirmed. Coiosial Baxk r. ^nTvxTv 
 
 [30 Ol D. 261 
 
 12. Wife's Separate Property— Property 
 
 passing to Trustee — Reputed Ownership — ilarriage 
 Settlement made in For^Mgn CourdryS\ The rule 
 that a husband is a tnutee for his wife of her 
 separate property when no other trustee has been 
 appointed, applies to that which becomes her sepa- 
 rate property by virtue of a marriaye contract 
 entered into in a foreign c.^natry. — ^^'hen. there- 
 fore, such picpeny is in the p-'ssession of a hus- 
 band at the commencement c f his bankruptoy it 
 
( 163 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 166 ) 
 
 XIX. BANKRUPTCY— OEDEE AND DISPOSI- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 does not pass to his trustee. Ex parte Sibeth. 
 In re Sibeth - - 14 Q. B. D. 417 
 
 XX. BANKRUPTCY— VOID SETTLEMENT. 
 
 1. Intent to delay Creditors — Sank- 
 
 ruptcy Act (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 91—13 Uliz. 
 V. 5 — Costs — Trustees.'] In determiaing whether 
 a trader who has executed a voluntary settlement 
 was, within the meaning of sect. 91 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, "at the time of making the 
 settlement able to pay all his debts without the 
 aid of the property comprised in such settle- 
 ment," the value of the implements of his trade 
 and of the goodwill of his business is not, if he 
 was intending to continue bis business, to be 
 taken into account. — At any rate, if that value 
 is to be taken into account, it can only be such a 
 value as would be realized at a forced sale. — Per 
 Lindley, L.J. : It is essential that the settlor 
 should be able to pay his debts in the way in 
 which he is proposing to pay them, i.e., in' the 
 ordinary coui'se of his business, if he is proposing 
 to continue it. — A triader, who had for many years 
 carried on the business of a baker, and had saved 
 some money, being about to purchase a grocery 
 business, which he intended to carry on in addi- 
 tion to the other, made a voluntary settlement of 
 the bulk of his property for the benefit of his wife 
 and children. He afterwards bought the grocery 
 business, and carried it on for about six months, 
 but lost money by it. He then sold it for as 
 much money as he had given for it, and after- 
 wards carried on the baker's business alone, 
 imtil, about three years after the execution of 
 the settlement, he filed a liquidation petition, 
 his liabilities largely exceeding his assets. The 
 debts which he owed at the date of the settlement 
 had been all paid : — Held, that, independently of 
 the question whether he was solvent at the date 
 of the settlement, the settlement was void as 
 against the trustee in the liquidation under the 
 statute 13 Eliz. c. 5, on the ground that it was 
 evidently executed with the view of putting the 
 settlor's property out of the reach of his creditors 
 in case he should fail in the speculation on which 
 he was about to enter in carrying on a new busi- 
 ness of which he knew nothing. — Macleay v. 
 Douglas (Law Eep. 14 Eq. 106) approved and 
 followed. — Held, also, that ruider the circum- 
 stances, the settlement was void against the 
 trustee in the liquidation under sect. 91 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869. — Decision of Bacon, O.J., 
 reversed. — -The Judge of the County Court set 
 aside the settlement. He gave the trustee in the 
 liquidation his costs out of the debtor's estate, 
 but made no order as to the costs of the trustees of 
 the settlement. The trustees of the settlement 
 appealed to the Chief Judge, who discharged the 
 order of the County Court. The Court of Appeal 
 restored the order of the County Court. — Held, 
 that the trustees of the settlement ought to have 
 been satisfied with the decision of the County 
 Court, and that they must bear their own cost of 
 both appeals, and must pay the costs of the trus- 
 tee in the liquidation of both appeals. Hx parte 
 EtJSSELL. In re Buttebwobth - 19 Ch. D. 588 
 
 2. " Settlement of Property "—Gift of 
 
 Money to &n— 46 & 47 Viet. c. 52, =. 47.] A 
 
 XX. BANKBUPTOY — VOID SETTLEMENT — 
 continued. 
 
 gilt of money to a son, made for the purpose of 
 enabling him to commence carrying on business 
 on his own account, is not a " settlement of pro- 
 perty," within the meaning of sect. 47 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, which renders such settle- 
 ments void in certain specified cases as against 
 the trustee in the bankruptcy of the settlor. In 
 re Playeb. Ex parte Hakvey 15 ft. B. D. 682 
 
 XXI. BANKSUPTCY— raAUDULENT PEEFES- 
 
 ENCE. 
 
 !■ Breach of Tsrast— Application of Pur- 
 chase-money of Goods to make good. Breach of 
 Trust— Banlcruptey Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. c. 71), 
 ss. 6 (sit6-s. 2), 92.] An actual sale! of goods for 
 money, the vendor intending to use the purchase- 
 money in making a voluntary payment and the 
 purchaser knowing of that intention, is not a 
 fraudulent transfer within sect. 6 (sub-sect. 2) of 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. — A voluntary prefer- 
 ence of a creditor, though it can be set aside as a 
 fraud on the bankrupt law, is not an act of bank- 
 ruptcy. — If a debtor on the eve of bankruptcy 
 voluntarily makes good trust money which he has 
 misapplied, the payment cannot be set aside as a 
 fraudulent preference of the trust estate.— With- 
 in three months before the filing of a liquidation 
 petition the debtor, who was one of the executors 
 of a wiU, sold some goods to his co-executor with 
 the intention of applying the purchase-money in 
 repaying to the testator's estate money which he 
 had improperly abstracted from it. This inten- 
 tion was known to the co-executor, and the pur-, 
 chase-money was, with his knowledge, imme- 
 diately after its payment by him, paid by the 
 vendor into a bank to the credit of the executors ; 
 —Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the trans- - 
 action was not _either - » fraudulent preference 
 within sect. 92 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, or a 
 fraudulent transfer of property within sect. 6 
 (sub-sect. 2), and that neither the co-executor nor 
 the testator's estate could be compelled to refund 
 the money.-. Decision of Bacon, C.J., afSrmed. 
 Ex parte Stubbins. In re Wilkinson 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 58 
 
 2. Composition Arrangement — Prefer- 
 ence of same Creditors — Fraud.} The essence of 
 a composition arrangement between a debtor and 
 his creditors is equality between the creditors, and 
 consequently a creditor who has executed a com- 
 position deed is entitled to repudiate it, if he 
 afterwards discovers that other creditors have 
 been induced to execute the deed by means of a 
 secret bargain for a payment to them in excess of 
 the composition, even if the bargain was made 
 after his own execution of the deed. :This prin- 
 ciple applies even if the additional payment is tO' 
 be made at the expense of a third person, pro- 
 vided that the bargain is made with the debtor's 
 knowledge, and it applies \7hether the composition- 
 arrangement is made, under the provisions of a 
 statute or not. Ex parte Milnee. In re Milnbe 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 605 
 
 3. Motive of Tiehtoi — Bankrupiari Act, 
 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 92.] In ofder that 
 a payment of money or a transfer of property made 
 by a debtor in favour of one of his creditors should 
 
 G 2 
 
( 1G7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 168 ) 
 
 XXI. BANKEUPTCY— rEATTDUlENT PEEFEE- 
 
 ENCE — oontinued. 
 be void afl a fraudulent preference under sect. 92, 
 it is sufficient that tlie preferring the creditor 
 should have been the substantial, eifectual, or 
 dominant view with which the debtor made it ; 
 it is not necessary that it should have been hia 
 sole view. Ex parte Hill. In re Bibd 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 695 
 
 4. Pressure by Creditor — SanTcruptcy 
 
 Act, 1869. s. 92.] On the 17th of February a 
 trader told one of Ms creditors that he was about 
 to stop payment. The creditor then pressed for 
 security for his debt, and threatened to commence 
 proceedings against the debtor at once, if he did 
 not fuliil a verbal promise which he had on the 
 17th of January, when the debt was contracted, 
 made to supply the creditor with goods, or their 
 equivalent, as security. The creditor had on the 
 14th of February, before he knew that the debtor 
 was about to stop payment, pressed the debtor for 
 the promised security, and the debtor had then 
 again promised to give it. On the 19th of Febru- 
 ary, the debtor delivered two bills of exchange, 
 accepted by some other firms, to a, third person, 
 telling him to hand them to the creditor. On 
 the 24th of February the debtor filed a liquida- 
 tion petition, and on the 10th of March he was 
 adjudicated a bankrupt : — Held, that the delivery 
 of the bills of exchange amounted to a fraudulent 
 preference of the creditor, and that it was void as 
 against the trustee in bankruptcy under sect. 92. 
 — Per Jessel, M.E. : Inasmuch as the threat to 
 bring an action could have no influence on a man 
 "who was just about to become bankrupt, there 
 was no real pressure exerted by the creditor on 
 the 17th of February, and the prior pressure on 
 the 14th of February, having been inefteetual, 
 could not be taken into account. Ex parte Hall. 
 In re Coopee - 19 Ch. D. 580 
 
 5. Statutory Definition — Value of Old 
 
 Decisions — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. 
 ,c. 71), s. 92.] In determining whether a transac- 
 tion amounts to a fraudulent preference the Court 
 ought now to have regard simply to the statutory 
 definition contained in sect. 92 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act 1869. — The decisions on the subject before 
 the Act may be useful as guides, but the stand- 
 .ards laid down in them must not be substituted 
 for that which is laid down in the Act. Ex parte 
 Gkifpith. In re Wilooxon 23 Ch. D. 69 
 
 6. "Suffering Judicial Proceeding" — 
 
 Non-appearance to Writ — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 92.] A debtor failed to 
 ■enter an appearance to a specially indorsed writ 
 
 served on him by his father-in-law. Judgment 
 was signed on tlie 15th of May (the earliest day 
 possible), a writ of elegit was issued the same 
 day, and on the 16th of May the sheriff seized the 
 Defendant's goods. The inquisition was held on 
 the 19th of May, and the goods were delivered to 
 the Plaintiff in part satisfaction of his debt. On 
 the 22nd of May the Defendant filed a liquidation 
 petition, and his statement of affairs shewed that 
 lis debts were £6542, and his assets £607. He 
 had committed no act of bankruptcy before the 
 filing of the petition. He had before the writ was 
 issued been advised by a solicitor, who acted for 
 ihe father-in-law, and who issued the writ anil 
 
 XXI. BANKEUPTCY— FEAUDiriENT PEEFEE- 
 ENCE — continued. 
 
 signed the judgment on his behalf. The debtor 
 also consulted that solicitor after the isspe of the 
 elegit, and that solicitor filed the petition for 
 him. The trustee in the liquidation claimed to 
 set aside the judgment and the subsequent pro- 
 ceedings under it as a fraudulent preference : — 
 Held, that though the circumstances were suspi- 
 cious, yet having regard especially to the fact 
 that, when the transactions took place, no creditor 
 was in a position to take proceedings in bank- 
 ruptcy against the debtor, he not having com- 
 mitted any act of bankruptcy, the trustee had 
 failed to prove that the debtor had allowed judg- 
 ment to go against him by default with the view 
 of preferring the father-in-law. Ex parte Lah- 
 OASTEE. In reMAESDEN - 25 Ch. D. 311 
 
 XXII. BANKEITPTCY — PEOTECTED TEANS- 
 ACTION. 
 
 1. Attachment — Oarnishee Order — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1839 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 94 
 (suh-s. 3), 95 (sub-s. 3).] A garnishee order, 
 attaching a debt due to a bankrupt, is not a 
 " dealing" with the bankrupt within sect. 94, 
 sub-sect. 3, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. — 
 Whether such an order is " an attachment against 
 goods " of a bankrupt within sect. 95, sub-sect. 3, 
 quxre. — But, if it is, it is not within the protec- 
 tion of sect. 95, sub-sect. 3, unless the garnishor 
 has obtained actual payment of the attached debt 
 from the garnishee before the order of adjudica- 
 tion. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., reversed. — Leave 
 to appeal to the House of Lords refused. Ex 
 parte Pellees. In re Ccetots 17 Ch. D. 653 , 
 
 2. . ■ Debtor's Summons — Notice of act of 
 
 Bankruptcy available for Adjudication — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, s. 94, suh-s. 3.] After the Plain- 
 tiff had commenced an action against the Defen- 
 dant for dissolution of partnership, the Plaintiff 
 took out a debtor's summons against the Defen- 
 dant. The Defendant failed to comply with it, 
 and the Plaintiff filed a petition of bankruptcy 
 against him based on the summons. — Another cre- 
 ditor afterwards took out a debtor's summons 
 against the Defendant, and on his non-compliance 
 with it, filed a petition and obtained adjudication 
 of bankruptcy against him. Before the adjudica- 
 tion and without notice of the act of bankruptcy 
 on which it was based, the Plaintiff entered into 
 an agreement with the Defendant for compromise 
 of the action, which the trustee in the bank- 
 ruptcy sought to impeach as void against the 
 creditors : — Held (reversing the decision of Chitty, 
 J.), that although the non-compliance witli the 
 Plaintiffs debtor's summons was not an act of 
 bankruptcy available for adjudication on the peti- 
 tion of the particular creditor who obtained the 
 adjudication against the Defendant, it was an 
 act of bankruptcy " available for adjudication " 
 within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 s. 94, and therefore the agreement for compromise 
 between the Plaintiff and Defendant was not a 
 protected transaction under that section, — Ex 
 parte Croshie (7 Ch. D. 123) distinguished, and 
 the judgment of James, L.J., explained. Hood 
 V. Newby 21 Ch. D. 605 
 
 8. 
 
 Execution Creditor — Elegit against 
 
( 169 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 170 ) 
 
 XXII. BANKEUPTCY — PEOTECTED TRANS- 
 ACTION— cowiinued. 
 
 Goods and Chattels executed hy Seizure hut not by 
 Sale after hut without Notice of act of Bankruptcy 
 — Relation hack — Transaction not protected — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 11, 
 95 (mb-s. 3).] After an act of bankruptcy had 
 been committed, a judgment creditor for a sum 
 exceeding £50, without notice of the act of bank- 
 ruptcy, issued an elegit against the goods of the 
 bankrupt (there being no land) ; but before in- 
 quisition proceediQgs preparatory to sale had 
 been commenced, a bankruptcy petition founded 
 on the act of bankruptcy was presented, and the 
 sheriff was restrained : — Held, that the transaction 
 was not protected by sub-sect. 3 of sect. 95. Ex 
 parte Sulgbr. In re Chinn - 17 Ch. D. 839 
 
 4. Execution Creditor — Notice of act of 
 
 Bankruptcy— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & ZiViet. 
 c. 71), s. 95.] The delivery to the execution cre- 
 ditor of goods seized by the sheriff under an elegit, 
 at the value appraised by the jury on the inqui- 
 sition, is a sale of the goods within the meaning 
 of sect. 95 (sub-sect. 3) of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869, and is protected by that sub-section if the 
 creditor had not at the time of the delivery notice 
 of any act of bankruptcy committed by the debtor 
 prior to the seizure, and available against him 
 for adjudication. — Notice of an act of bankruptcy 
 committed between the seizure and the delivery 
 will not deprive the creditor of the protection. — 
 Ex parte Schtdte (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 409) followed. 
 Ex parte Vale. In re Bannister 18 Ch. D. 137 
 
 5. Execution Creditor — Notice of act of 
 
 Bankruptcy —32 & 33 Vict. c. 71, s. 95, suh-s. 3.] 
 A notice to an execution creditor which states 
 that a petition in bankruptcy against the execu- 
 tion debtor has been filed on a date, at a Court, 
 and by a person, named in the notice, is sufficient 
 notice of an act of bankruptcy to prevent the, exe- 
 cution being a protected transaction within 32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 71, B. 95, sub-s. 3. since such creditor 
 ought to know that the petition would contaiu a 
 statement that the debtor has committed an act of 
 bankruptcy : — So held, affirming the decision of 
 the Common Pleas Division. — Socking v, Acra- 
 man (12 M. & W. 170) commented on. Lucas ■». 
 DiOKJEK - - - 6 Q. B. D. 84 
 
 6. Execution Cxeiitot— Notice to Sheriff 
 
 of Bankruptcy Petition against or hy Debtor — Sale 
 under Execution — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 
 47 Vict: c. 52) ss. 46 (2), 168.] The notice of a 
 bankruptoypetition mentioned in sub-s. 2 of sect.46 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, must be served on 
 the sheriff or his recognised agent (such as the 
 uuder-sheriff), for the purpose of receiving such 
 notices ; it is not sufficient to serve it upon an 
 ordinary bailiff or man in possession. — The effect 
 of the provision of sect. 168 that " sheriff includes 
 any officer charged with the execution of a writ 
 or other process," is to bring within sect. 46 officers 
 of inferior courts who discharge for those courts 
 duties similar to those which the sheriff dis- 
 charges for the High Court.— On P., the serjeant- 
 at-mace of tlie Mayor's Court of London, pro- 
 ceeding to execute a warrant issued to enforce 
 a judgment for more than £20 obtained in that 
 court, he found H., an officer of the sheriffs of 
 
 XXII. BANKRUPTCY — PKOTECTED TEANS- 
 
 AGTIQTS— continued. 
 London, in possession of the goods of the debtor 
 under a writ issued by the Queen's Bench Divi- 
 sion, nnd thereupou, in accordance with the usual 
 practice, he^delivered the warrant to PI. for execu- 
 tion. H. sold the goods, and out of the proceeds 
 paid the amount of the warrant to F. The next 
 day notice was served on H. of a bankruptcy 
 petition having been presented against the debtor 
 on which he was afterwards adjudged bankrupt. 
 No notice of the petition was served on F. : — 
 Seld, by Cave, J., that, by virtue of s. 168, H. 
 must under the circumstances be deemed to be 
 " the sheriff" for the purposes of s. 46, sub-s. 2 ; 
 and that therefore the trustee in the bankruptcy 
 was, as against the execution creditor, entitled to 
 the money. — Held, by the Com-t of Appeal, that 
 even if an effectual notice could ever have been 
 served on H., a notice served on him after he had 
 handed over the money to F., and his agency for 
 F. had thus been determined, was ineffectual, and 
 that consequently the execution creditor was en- 
 titled to the proceeds of sale. Ex parte Waeren. 
 In re Holland 15 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 7. - — Onus of Viooi— Notice of Act of Bank- 
 ruptcy — Judgment recovered after act of Bank- 
 ruptcy.'] When a creditor claims to prove in a 
 bankruptcy in respect of a debt which came into 
 existence after the commission of the act of bank- 
 ruptcy on which the flat was baaed (the bank- 
 ruptcy being under the old bankruptcy law), the 
 onus is on him to prove that he had no notice of 
 the act of bankruptcy before the creation of the 
 debt. — Ex parte Schulte (Law Kep. 9 Ch. 40Sf) 
 followed. Ex parte Ebvell. In re TollEmache 
 (No. 2.) - - - 13 Q. B. D. 727 
 
 8. Post-dated Cheque — Bankruptcy of 
 
 Payee before Date of Cheque — Duty of Drawer to 
 stop Cheque — Holder for Value — Banker and Cus- 
 tomer — Payment of Cheque or Bill to Customer's 
 Credit— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. 
 c. 71), s. 94.] The drawer of a post-dated cheque 
 given for value is under no obligation to stop its 
 payment before its date for the benefit of a third 
 person. — If, for instance, before the date of pay- 
 ment the drawer receives notice of an adjudica- 
 tion of bankruptcy made against the payee since 
 tlie delivery of the cheque to him upon an act of 
 bankruptcy committed by him before the delivery 
 he is not bound, for the benefit of the bankrupt's 
 creditors, to give notice to his bankers not to pay 
 the cheque and thus expose himself to the risk of 
 an action by a bona fide holder of the cheque for 
 value. — If the cheque was originally delivered by 
 the drawer to the payee in good faith and for 
 value, and without notice of an act of bankruptcy 
 previously committed by the payee, on which an 
 adjudication is subsequently made, the transac- 
 tion is protected by sect. 94 (sub-s. 3) of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, and the trustee in the bank- 
 ruptcy cannot recover the amount of the cheque 
 from the drawer. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., re- 
 versed. — When a customer pays a cheque to his 
 bankers with the intention that the amount of 
 it shall be at once placed to his credit, and the 
 bankers cany the amount to his credit accord- 
 ingly, they become immediately holders of the 
 cheque for value, even though the customer's 
 
( 171 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 172 ) 
 
 XXII. BANKETJPTCY — PBOTECTED TRLSS- 
 
 AGTIOIS— continued. 
 account is not overdrawn. Ex parte Eichdale. In 
 re Palmer - 19 Ch. D, 409 
 
 9. Wife's Chose in AcHon— Ante-nuptial 
 
 Parol Agreement to settle — Part Performance — 
 Statute of Frauds, s. 4 — Gift by Susland to Wife 
 — Banhruptcy of Husband — Title of Trustee.'] On 
 a marriage it was verbally agreed between the 
 husband and the wife that a sum of money stand- 
 ing to the credit of the wife on deposit at a bank 
 in her maiden name should be her separate pro- 
 perty. Nothing further was done ; but after the 
 marriage the money, with the husband's consent, 
 remained at the bank in the wife's maiden name ; 
 and she received the interest on it for two years 
 after the marriage, when she drew the money out 
 of the bank. The trustee in the subsequent liq^li- 
 dation of the husband having claimed payment 
 of the money from the wife as part of her husband's 
 property : — Held, by Cave, J., that there had been 
 no such jiart performance by the husband of tlie 
 parol contract to settle as to take the case out of 
 the Statute of Frauds, and, therefore, that the 
 trustee was entitled to the money subject to the 
 wife's equity to a settlement, if any. — Reld, by the 
 Court of Appeal, without deciding the question on 
 the Statute of Frauds, that there had been a gift 
 of the money by the husband to the wife after the 
 marriage ; that he had become a trustee of it for 
 her as her separate property ; and that, conse- 
 quently, it did not pass to the trustee in his liqui- 
 dation. Ex parte Whitehead. In re White- 
 head - ]4ft. B. D. 419 
 
 XXIII. BANKETJPTCY— DISCIAIMEE. 
 
 (o) Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 
 1. Assignment by Trustee to Pauper — 
 
 Banlcruptcy of Tenant — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 
 cV- 33 Vict, c, 71), ss. 23, 24 — Non-disclaimer after 
 Notice.] Although a trustee in bankruptcy, who 
 has taken actual possession of leasehold property 
 of the bankrupt, receives notice from the landlord 
 to disclaim the lease under the Banla-uptcy Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), but does not disclaim, 
 he may nevertheless relieve himself of liability 
 to the landlord by assigning the lease, even with- 
 out having previously offered to surrender it, and 
 the mere fact that the trustee knows the assignee 
 to be a pauper will not invalidate such assign- 
 ment. HOPKINSON V. LOVEEING 11 Q, B. D. 93 
 
 2. Fixtures — License hy Lesser to remove 
 
 after Expiration of Term — Bemoval hy Trustee 
 before Disclaimer — Bight' of Lessor — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 23.] A lease 
 contained a proviso that the lessee, his execu- 
 tors, administrators, and assigns, might at any 
 time or times during the continuance of the term, 
 or within twelve months from the expiration or 
 other sooner determination thereof, but not after- 
 wards, remove any buildings or machinery which 
 he or they might have erected on the demised 
 premises for trade purposes. The lessee iiled a 
 liquidation petition, and a trustee in the liquida- 
 tion sold the trade machinery and fixtures, which 
 were then removed by the purchaser. The trustee 
 afterwards disclaimed the lease : — Held, by 
 Bacon, C. J., that the removal of the fixtures was 
 justified by the proviso in the lease, and that the 
 
 XXIII. BANKEirPTCY— DISCIAIMEE— eoJiicZ. 
 
 (a.) Bankkuptoy Act, 1869 — continued. 
 trustee, notwithstanding the disclaimer, was en- 
 titled to retain the proceeds of sale. — Held, by the 
 Court of Appeal, that, the disclaimer having, by 
 virtue of sect. 23, tlie operation of a surrender of 
 the lease as from the date of the appointment of 
 the trustee, the proviso was, by construction of the 
 law, with all the other provisions of the lease, 
 put an end to before the -removal, and conse- 
 quently that the removal could not be justified, 
 and the lessor was entitled to the proceeds of 
 sale. Ex parte Glegg. In re Latham 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 7 
 
 3. lease determined before Disclaimer 
 
 — Landlord and Tenant — Distress for Rent after 
 Bankruptcy — Breach of Covenant — Forfeiture — 
 Entry — Action to recover Possession — Proof for 
 Damages — Set-off — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Viet. e. 71), as. 23, 34, 39.] The tnistee in 
 a bankruptcy may disclaim a lease of the bank- 
 rupt even though the lease has been determined, 
 by effluxion of time or by forfeitiire, between 
 the appointment of the trustee and the execu- 
 tion of the disclaimer. And in such a case 
 the effect of the disclaimer, when executed, 
 is that neither the lessor nor the trustee can 
 claim tlie benefit of any provisions contained in 
 the lease which were to come into operation at 
 the expiration or sooner determination of the 
 term. — Semble, that the trustee may also disclaim 
 a lease which has been determined before his ap- 
 pointment. — Ex parte Paterson (11 Ch. D. 908) 
 followed and approved. — A landlord, between the 
 filing of a liquidation petition by his tenant and 
 the appointment of trustees, levied a distress for 
 two half-years' rent accrued due before the filing of 
 the petition. After the appointment of trustees 
 the landlord levied a second distress for a third 
 half-year's rent accrued due between the filing of 
 the petition and the appointment of the trustees : 
 — Held, that the second distress was void under 
 sect. 34 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. — Held, also, 
 that, in respect of breaches of covenant committed 
 by the tenant during his occupation, the only 
 remedy of the landlord was to prove for damages in 
 the liquidation, and that the landlord had no right 
 of set-off as against moneys due by him to the 
 trustee for severed crops. — When a lease contains 
 a proviso giving the lessor a right to re-enter in 
 the event of breach of covenant by the lessee (but 
 not making the lease ipso facto void in that 
 event) : — Qusire, whether under the present prac- 
 tice the mere commencement of an action by the 
 lessor to recover possession of the property for 
 breach of covenant, or the commencement of such 
 action followed by appearance by the trustees, 
 will, without actual entry, operate to determine 
 the lease.— /Sacoc/i; v. Fai-mer (46 L. T. (N.S.) 
 404) commented upon. Ex parte Hart Dyke. 
 In re MoRRiSH - - - 22 Ch. D. 410 
 
 4. lease of Land and Chattels — Beputed 
 
 Ownership— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. 
 c. 71), ss. 15 isub-s. 5), 23.] Sect. 15 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, must be read in eon- 
 junction with and as qualified by sect. 23, and 
 the effect of a disclaimer of a lease to a bank- 
 rupt by the trustee in the bankruptcy, is to give 
 up to the lessor the entirety of that which is 
 
( 173 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( m ) 
 
 XXIII. BANKSTJPICY— DISCLAIMEH— cOTid. 
 
 (a.) BankbottoY Act, 18^9— continued. 
 commisediii1;be;demise. Therefore, if a bankrupt 
 be tfii lessee of land and personal chattels, demised 
 to Wni'as onesiibject-niatterat one entire rent, a 
 disclaimer of t"he lease by the trustee operates as 
 a'surrender to the lessor of the chattels, as well as 
 thelaild, and'the trustee cannot claim the chattels, 
 imder sect. 15 (sub-sect. 5), as haying been at the 
 cominencenjent of the bankruptcy in the order or 
 disposition of the 'Vanknipt as reputed owner with 
 the' consent of the' true owner; A disclaimer of a 
 lease to a bankrupt by the trustee in the bankruptcy 
 operates to relieve the trustee from all liability 
 uiider the lease, nijt merely from liability as from 
 the- date of the adjudication. — Ex parte Glegg 
 (19 Oh. D. 7) explained. — Leave to appeal to the 
 House of Lords refused. Ex parte Allen. In re 
 FtJSSELL - J' _ _ 80 Ch. D. 341 
 
 5. leave ef Court — Lease — Appeal after 
 
 Execution of Disclaimer — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 <32&-33 Vict. c:71), s. iZ— Bankruptcy Mules, 
 1871^ 'r, 28.] After an unconditionaMeave has 
 been 'given by the Court to a ti-ustee in bank- 
 ruptcy to disclaiiQ' ft lease of the bankrupt and 
 the-tii;stee. has executed a disclaimer, it is toe 
 late for ^the lessor to appeal from the order even 
 forthe purpose of getting conditions imposed on 
 thte'triistee.' The'Ooart of Appeal has then no 
 poyver to impose conditions. If the lessor' desires 
 to appeal fro'in' such an order, he ought to apply 
 when it is made for a stay of proceedings under 
 it^ljlx parte Vition (3. Ch. D. 459) followed. Ex 
 p&rle Sadler. ' Jn re Hawes - 19 Ch. D. 122 
 
 6. leave of Court — Ledse — Bankruptcy 
 
 Act, 1869 (32 (fc 33 Vict. c. 71), s.,23--Bankruptcy 
 Bales, 1871, r. '28.] In determining whether leave 
 shquld'bB giveii to a tnistee in ba^ruptcy to dis- 
 claim a' leasehold iijterest of the bankrupt, the 
 Court ought to hkve regard only to the question 
 whether the disclaimer wilfbe for the benefit of 
 the ^prsons interested • in the ' administration of 
 the'bankrupt'S estate, and ought not to have re- 
 gard to any collateral consideration, such as the 
 injury which the ' 'discjaimer might occasion to 
 third ^^arties.-^LeaVe to appeal to the House of 
 Lords refused, on the ground that the appeal 
 ■Jrould be froih the discretion of the Court. Ex 
 parte 'EjiST and West India Dock CoiJiPAtNt.' 
 in »rCLAEKE ' — ' - - 17 Ch. D. 759 
 
 (.J 7- ~ leave of , Cqurt — ;Lease — Conditions 
 
 imposed— Bankruptcy' Act, 1869 (32 <£ 33 Vict. 
 e.:71X 8., 23— Bakkrwptcy 'Bulea, 1871, r. 28.] A 
 lease of land and minerals was granted to two 
 partners in trade as, joint tenants. The partner- 
 ship was afterwards dissolved, on the terms that 
 the business should b.e carried on by one of the 
 partners alone, and that .he shoiild purchase the 
 ihterestof the o^^erfor £12,00(J, which was to be 
 paid, in forty equal half-yearly instalments. The 
 retiriQg partner oov.enaAted'that he would stand 
 possessed of his sh,are and interest in the demised 
 preinisesiu trustfor the continuing partner. The 
 coiitinuing pMtner" covenanted with the retirijig 
 partner to pay the £12,000 in the manner ag:reed 
 mran,and assigned to him the buildings, ma- 
 chinery, and flxtiirfeS bn''tho demised premises by 
 Way of n;brtgagfe'-to secure the payment of the 
 £12,000, and covenanted that the leasehold pre- 
 
 XXIII. BANKEUPTCY—DISCLAIMEB— comic?. 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1869 — .continued. 
 mises should stand charged there-with. A year 
 afterwards the continuing partner filed a liquida- 
 tion petition, under which a trustee of his property 
 was appointed. The trustee occvipied the demised 
 propeity for some time with a view to the benefit 
 of the debtor's' estate. The rent due under the 
 lease was paid to the landlord by the retired 
 partner : — Seld, that leave to disclaim the debtO}''a , 
 interest in the lease ought to be given ,to the, 
 tnistee only on condition of, his paying to the 
 retired partner the rent of the premises from the 
 date of the tmstee's appointment until the day 
 when his beneficial occupation thereof ceased. 
 Ex parte Good. In re Salkeld 13 Q. B. D. 731 
 
 8. Leave of Court — Lease — Conditions 
 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 23' — Bankruptcy Rules, 1871, r. 28.] In 
 giving leave to the trustee in a bankruptcy to 
 disclaim a leasehold interest of tbe bankrupt, the 
 Court has, under rule 28 of 1871, power to impose 
 a condition (such as the payment to the lessor of 
 the rent hi full up to the date of the disclaimer) 
 even though no third party has acquired from 
 the bankrupt an interest in the lease. Ex' parte 
 Ladbuet. In re Turner 17 Ch. D. 538 
 
 • 9. Leave of Court — Lease — Conditions. 
 
 —Mortgage — Attornment Clause —Mortgage to 
 Building Society — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (.32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 71), s. iS— Bankruptcy Bules, 1871, 
 r. 28.] On giving leave, under rule 28, of 
 the Bankruptcy Rules, 1871, to the trustee in 
 a bankmptcy to disclaim a leasehold interest 
 of the bankrupt, the Court will not order the 
 trustee to pay the landlord any compensation 
 for his use and occupation of the demised pro- 
 pertyi except under special circumstances, one in- 
 stance being where the trustee's occupation has 
 been beneficial to the bankrupt's estate. Eule 28 
 does not. mean that in every case in which leave, 
 to disclaim a lease is given, the lessor is to be 
 placed in the same position as regards the interval 
 before execution of the disclaimer aS' if there had 
 been no disclaimer. — Ex parte Ladbery (17 Ch. 
 D.532J, explained and distinguished. — Notwith- 
 standing the insertion of an attornment clause in 
 a mortgage, deed, the real relation between the 
 parties is that, not of landlord and tenant, but of 
 mortgagee and mortgagor, and this fact, as well. 
 as the nature of the rent reserved by the clause, 
 must be taken into account in qonsidering 
 whether, outgiving leave to the trustee in the 
 bankruptcy of the mortgagpr to disclaim the 
 tenancy created by the attornment clause, any 
 terms sliould be injposed ,for the bqijefit of the 
 mortgagee. Ex parte Isherwood. Jtn re Knight 
 , ; [22 Ch. D. 884 
 
 10. Leave of Court — Lease — Compensation 
 
 to Landlord— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), ss. 23, 2i— Bankruptcy Bules, 1871, r. 28.] 
 When the trustee in a, bankruptcy applies for 
 leave to disclaim a lease of the bankrupt, the 
 Court will not order any compensation to- be paid 
 to the landlord unless the trustee has kept him 
 out of possession of the property, and his occupa- 
 tion has resulted in a benefit to the bankrupt's 
 estate. — The principle on whjoh the Court exer- 
 
( 175 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 176 ) 
 
 XXIII, BANKETTPTCY— DISCIAIMER— donfeZ. 
 
 (a.) Bankrottct Act, ISed—continued. ., 
 cisea its discretion under rule 28 is that the trus- 
 tee ought not to be allowed to increase the bank- 
 rupt's estate at the expense of the landlord.— £a; 
 parte Islierwood (22 Ch. D. 384) explained. Ex 
 parte Izard. In re Bushell (No. 2) 
 
 L23 Ch. D. 115 
 
 !!• Leave of Court — Lease — Conditions 
 
 to he imposed on Trustee — Banlcruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 23—JBankruptay Rules, 
 1871, r. 28.] In determining whether, on giving 
 leave to the trustee in a bankruptcy to disclaim 
 a lease of the bankrupt, the trustee should be 
 ordered to pay compensation to the landlord in 
 respect of his occupation of the leasehold premises, 
 the Court will have regard not merely to the ques- 
 tion whether the occupation has actually produced 
 a profit to the bankrupt's estate, but also to the 
 question whether the possession was retained by 
 the trustee with a view to obtaining such a profit. 
 — The rule as laid down by Cotton, L.J., in Ex 
 parte Isherwood (22 Ch. D. 384) adopted in pre- 
 t'erance to (hat expressed by Jessel, M.R., in Ex 
 parte Izard (23 Ch. D. 115). — The imposing of 
 conditions on the trustee is, however, a matter of 
 judicial discretion, and Ihe Court of Appeal will 
 not readily interfere wi th the exercise of discre- 
 tion by the Judge of first instance. — The Court 
 ordered compensation to be paid by the trustee 
 in a bankruptcy as a condition of giving him leave 
 to disclaim the lease of the bankrupt's place of 
 business, although during part of the time during 
 which the trustee had been in occupation a bailiff 
 had been in possession of the bankrupt's goods 
 under a distress for rent, and the landlord liad 
 been allowed to place bills on the premises stating 
 that they were to be let, and that application for 
 that purpose was to be made to him. Ex parte 
 Aenal. In re Witton 24 Ch. D. 26 
 
 12. liability of lessee for Kent — Lease — 
 
 Liaiility of Bankrupt's Surety — Bisclaimer of Lease 
 by Trustee of Assignee.'] The Plaintiff being lessee 
 of a farm for a term of years assigned the lease to 
 P., taking the covenant of the Defendant as 
 surety for the due payment of the rent to the 
 lessor for the residue of the term. During the 
 continuance of the term P. became bankrupt, and 
 his trustee having obtained the requisite leave of 
 the Court disclaimed all interest in the lease. 
 Subsequently the lessor demanded from the Plain- 
 tiff the half-year's rent accruing after the bank- 
 ruptcy. The Plaintift" paid the rent and brought 
 an action to recover the amount from the Defen- 
 dant imder his covenant. Neither the Plaintiff 
 nor the Defendant had entered upon or taken 
 possession of the farm : — Held, by Manisty and 
 Watkin Williams, JJ., that the Plaintiff was en- 
 titled to recover By Manisty, J., on the ground 
 that the disclaimer operated only as a surrender 
 so far as was necessary to relieve the bankrupt, 
 his estate, and the trustee, from liability without 
 otherwise affecting third parties, and tliat the 
 Plaintiff as lessee remained liable for the rent and 
 had his remedy over against the Defendant as the 
 bankrupt's surety. By Watkin Williams, J., 
 solely on the authority of East and West India 
 Dock Company v. Hill (22 Ch. D. 14). Habding 
 ,;. Preeoe - - - - 9 Q. B. D. 281 
 
 XXIII. BANKBUPTCY— DISCLAIMER— coji«(f. 
 
 (a.) Banketjptot Act, 1869 — continued., 
 
 13. Liquidation — Lease — Covenant not 
 
 to use Hay, Straw, &c. — 56 Geo. 3, e. 50, s. 11' — ■ 
 Bankruptcy Act (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 119, 125.], 
 The enactment in statute 56 Geo. 3, c. 50, s. 11, 
 that the assignee of any bankrupt shall not take 
 or use any hay, straw, &c., on any farm of the 
 bankrupt in any other way than the bankrupt 
 ought to have done, is still in force, and applies 
 to a trustee in bankruptcy or liquidation under 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1869. — A lessee was bound 
 by the covenants in his lease not to sell the hay,. 
 straw, &c., grown on his farm without the consent 
 of the landlord. The lessee became a liquidating: 
 debtor under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 125,. 
 and the trustee in the liquidation^disclaimed the 
 lease : — Held, that the trustee was bound by 
 56 Geo. 3, c. 50, s. 11, notwithstanding the dis- 
 claimer, and an injunction was granted to restrain 
 him from selling the hay, straw, &o., grown on the 
 farm. Ltbee v. Habt - 29 Ch. D. 8 
 
 14. Practice — Lease — Extension of Time- 
 
 —Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s- 
 24.] The mere fact that the lessor has availed 
 himself of the provisions contained in the debtor's 
 lease to compel the trustee in liquidation to pay 
 half a year's rent in advance, is not, in the ab- 
 sence of negotiation, or of anything to mislead the 
 trustee, or of special circumstances to excuse the 
 delay, a ground for enlarging the time, after the 
 expiration of the twenty-eight days (fixed by the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 24), for notice to be. 
 given by the trustee, whether he disclaims the 
 lease or not. Jn re Kichakdson. Ex parte'SiS.^is 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 613 
 
 15. Eights of Third Parties — Lease — 
 
 Comtruction of Statutes — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 23— Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1871, r. 28.] A disclaimer by the trustee in a 
 bankruptcy of a lease or other onerous property 
 of the bankrupt operates as a surrender only 
 80 far as is necessary to relieve the bankrupt 
 and his estate and the trustee from liability, and 
 does not otherwise affect the rights or liabilities, 
 of third parties in relation to the property 
 disclaimed. — If, for instance, the bankrupt has. 
 granted an underlease of property demised to 
 him, a disclaimer of the original lease by his 
 trustee in bankruptcy does not affect the right 
 of the lessor to distrain on the property for 
 the rent reserved by the original lease, and to 
 re-enter for breach of the lessee's covenants in 
 the lease, or for non-payment of the rent reserved 
 thereby. But, if the underlease is made at a rent 
 less than the rent reserved by the original lease, 
 the underlessee is, after the disclaimer, entitled; 
 to prove in the bankruptcy for the value of the 
 difference between the two rents. — A statute may 
 be construed contrary to its literal meaning, 
 when a literal construction would result in an 
 absurdity or inconsistency, and the words are 
 susceptible of another construction which will 
 carry out the manifest intention. Ex parte 
 Walton. In re Levy - - 17 Ch. D, 746 
 
 16. Sights of Lessor against Lessee after 
 
 Disclaimer — Lease — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. V. 71), B. 23.] The assignee of a lease 
 for a term of years became bankrupt, and hia 
 
( 177 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 178 > 
 
 XXIII. BAHKEtlPTCT— DISCIAIMEE— conW. 
 
 (a.) Bankeuptoy Act, 1869 — continued. 
 trustee by leave of the Court disclaimed under 
 sect. 23 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. 0. 71), all the bankrupt's property and In- 
 terest in the premises. The lessor having brought 
 an action against the original lessee upon his 
 covenant to pay rent for the rent accrued due 
 since the appointment of the trustee: — Held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal, by 
 Earl Cairns and Lords Blackburn and Watson, 
 Lord Bramwell dissenting, that notwithstanding 
 the disclaimer the lessee remained liable upon his 
 covenant. Hill v. East and West India Dock 
 COMPANT 22 Ch. D. 14; 9 App. Cas. 448 
 
 17. Sub-lease — Disclaimer hy Lessee's 
 
 Trustee of Lessee's Interest in Premises — 8 cfc 9 
 Vict: c. 106, ». 9— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 * 33 
 Vict. 0. 71), ss. 23, 125.] When a lessee sublets 
 and afterwards becomes bankrupt, and his trus- 
 tee, under sect. 23 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 and under an order of the Court of Bank- 
 ruptcy, disclaims the lessee's interest in the 
 premises, the lessor is not entitled to eject the 
 sub-tenant.- — Lessee for a term of years by deed 
 demised part of the premises for a shorter term, 
 and the sub-lessee entered into possession. The 
 lessee afterwards liquidated by arrangement, 
 under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, and his trustee, 
 under an order of the Court of Bankruptcy, dis- 
 claimed the lessee's interest in the premises. 
 Notice of the application to the Court for leave 
 to disclaim was given to the sub-lessee within a 
 reasonable time before the order was made. The 
 lessor having brought an action to recover pos- 
 session of the part of the premises demised to 
 the sub-lessee as from the date of the appoint- 
 ment of the trustee: — Seld, reversing the judg- 
 ment of Mathew, J., that the lessor was not en- 
 titled to recover possession. — Taylor v. Gillott 
 (Law Kep 20 Eq. 682) commented upon. Smal- 
 LEY V. Haedqjqb 6 ft. B. D, 371 ; 7 Q. B. D. 524 
 
 18. Use and Occupation — Yearly Tenant — 
 
 Bamhruptay Act, 1869, s. 23 — Rule 28 of (he Bank- 
 ruptcy BmZcs, 1 871 .] W., who occupied premises as 
 a yearly tenant, was adjudicated bankrupt on the 
 7th of September, 1883. The Defendant, as trus- 
 tee, entered into possession of the premises and 
 held them until the 29th of January, 1884 (when 
 he tendered the keys to the Plaintiff, the land- 
 lord), for the purpose of winding up the bank- 
 rupt's business and realizing his assets for the 
 benefit of the estate, — ^paying rent down to the 
 25th of December, 1883.— On the 26th of Feb- 
 ruary, 1884, the trustee with the leave of the 
 Court, and after notice to the landlord, disclaimed 
 all interest in the term : — Held, that the disclaimer 
 relating back by force of sect. 23 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, to the date of the adjudication, 
 the trustee was not liable to an action in respect of 
 his subsequent occupation of the premises (either 
 as assignee or as a trespasser); the landlord's 
 only remedy being by application to the Court of 
 Bankruptcy under rule 28 of the Bankruptcy 
 Rules, 1871. Gabbiel v. Blankenstein 
 
 [13 Q. B. B. 684 
 
 (6.) Bankeuptoy Act, 1883. 
 19. Agreement for a Lease — " Land bm- 
 
 XXIII. BANKEUPTCY— DISCIAIMER— oonttT. 
 
 (6.) Bankbuptoy Act, 1883 — continued, 
 dened with onerous covenants " — " Property '' — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, ss, 44, 55, 168.] The right- 
 of disclaimer conferred on trustees by sect. 55 of 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, is not limited to pro- 
 perty of the bankrupt divisible amongst his credi- 
 tors as defined by sect. 44, but extends to any 
 property as defined by sect. 168 from which no- 
 benefit can accrue to the bankrupt's estate. — A 
 debtor held his business premises for a term o£ 
 years under an agreement for a lease, and entered 
 into a binding contract for the sale and assign- 
 ment of his business and his business premises to 
 a company, but became bankrupt before the com- 
 pletion of the contract : — Held, that the debtor's 
 interest in the agreement for a lease was in the 
 nature of land burdened with onerous covenants 
 which his trustee in bankruptcy could under the 
 circumstances disclaim. In re Maushan. Ex 
 parte Mohkhouse - 14 ft. B. D. 956 
 
 20. Fixtures — Lease — Bankruptcy Act, 
 
 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 55.] Where 
 there are trade fixtures on the leasehold pre- 
 mises of a bankrupt, removable by the tenant, 
 and the trustee applies for leave to disclaim the' 
 lease, the same rule will be applied as between 
 the landlord and trustee as would obtain if the 
 lease had been determined in an ordinary way. 
 Therefore the, landlord must either take over tha 
 fixtures at a valuation, or the trustee must have 
 a reasonable time, before disclaiming, in which to 
 sever and remove them. In re Mosee 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 738 
 
 31. Landlord's Claim for Compensation — 
 
 Lease — Jurisdiction — Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 ss. 51, 121 — Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, r. 232.]- 
 Where an order is made under sect. 121 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, for the summary adminis- 
 tration of a bankrupt's estate, and the trustee 
 in pursuance of the power conferred on him by 
 rule 232 of the Banfauptcy Kules, 1883, dis- 
 claims, without any application to the Court, the 
 leasehold premises of the bankrupt, the Court 
 has no jurisdiction to give any compensation to 
 the landlord out of the bankrupt's estate for the 
 use and occupation by the trustee of the leasehold 
 premises for the purposes of the bankruptcy, even 
 although a benefit has thereby resulted to the 
 estate. In re Sandwell. Ex parte Zebpass 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 960 
 22. Mortgagee — Lease — Superior Land- 
 lord — Form of Order — Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 s. 55, suh-s. 6.] On a disclaimer of leaseholds by 
 a trustee in bankruptcy under sect. 55, sub-sect. 6, 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, the landlord has 
 not such an interest in the " disclaimed property " 
 as to be entitled to a vesting order under the sub- 
 section. The right to a vesting order is only con- 
 ferred on a person claiming an interest in the pro- 
 perty through or under the bankrupt. Where in 
 such a ease a mortgagee does not appear on the 
 trustee's application to disclaim, the proper course 
 is to order that the mortgagee be excluded from 
 all interest in and security upon the property, 
 unless he shallby a short date declare his option 
 to take a vesting order in the terms of the sub- 
 section, tn re Pabkee and Pabkbe (1). Ex 
 ■pdHe Tubquaud - - 14 ft. B, D. 405 
 
( 179 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 180 ) 
 
 XXIII. BANKRUPTCY— DISCIAIMEIUrConM. 
 
 (6.) BankruptoV Act, 1883 — -contmued. 
 
 23. r Practice — Lease — Extension of Timet 
 
 —^ Banhrnptcij Act, ■ 1883, ss. 55, 105, subs. 4.] 
 Although the three months given to a, trustee by • 
 s. 55, Bub-s. 1, within \*hioh ,to disclaim onerous 
 property may have expired, the Oom-t had power 
 ander s. 105, sub's. 4,: to grant the trustee an 
 extension of time.^When a trustee applies ;for 
 an extension of tiine,- he should give some - good 
 reason for the indulgence he asks, and if the 
 rights of' other pSirties will be prejudiced by the; 
 time being extended, the Court will, as a general 
 rule, put the trustee upon terms. In re Price. 
 Ex parte Foreman - - 13 Q. B. D. 466 
 
 24. Practice — Lease — Landlord's Notice 
 
 — Trustee's Neglect — Costs — Sanhruptoy Act, 
 1883, s. 55, suh-s. 4.] When a landlord gives 
 a trustee notice under sub-sect. 4 of the 55th 
 section of thte Bankruptcy Act, 1883, requiring 
 him to decide whether he will disclaim or not 
 the bankrupt's leaseholds, and the - trustee de- 
 clines/ or neglects within the twenty-eight days 
 limited by the sub-section to give notice whether 
 he disclaims or not, and subsequently applies to 
 the Court for leave to disclaim, he may rfenflei' 
 himself personally liable to the payment of , rent 
 and costs. In re Page Bhothersj Ex parte 
 Maokay - - - - 14 Q. B. D; 401 
 
 Election to take lease - 9 Q. B; D. 473 
 
 See Bankruptcy — TrcsteiS. 6. 
 
 XXIV. BANKRUPTCY— JUEISDICTIOir. 
 
 : .1. -. — Conflicting Claims between Strangers 
 ^^Sanltruptcy Act, 1S69, s. 1%-^Banlaaiptcy Act. 
 1883', s. 102, svh-s. 1.] The jurisdiction' conferred 
 on the Court of Bankruptcy by sub-seot. 1 of sect. 
 102, of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, isdd^ntical with 
 that conferi'ed on that Court by sect. 7,2 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869. — ^WJiere, therefore, there 
 are conflicting, claims to any part^pf a bankrupt's 
 property, between parties who are Ejtj-angers to 
 the bankruptcy,! and in which the. trustee in bank- 
 yuptcy has no interest, the Court of , Bankruptcy 
 will decline to adjudicate upon the questions at 
 issue. In re Lowenthal. Ex parte Be^isty 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 238 
 3. —. — ^.Contempt of, Court^CoM»i)/ Courtr— 
 Committal — Prohibition — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33. Vict. c. 71), ss. 66, 96.] The Banki'uptcy 
 Act, 1869, s. 66, which conferred upon the Judge 
 of a County Court sitting in bankruptcy all the 
 powers and jurisdiction of a Judge of the pourt of 
 Chancery, thereby gave to him the ppwjer^^ com- 
 mit for, a contempt of, Cpur'i audi therefore a 
 person who disobeyed a Bumrnons issued under 
 sect. 96 of that statute to attend and give evi- 
 dence as to, the bankrupt's estate and to produce 
 documeip,ts in,, his control relating, thereto,. might 
 be attached for contempt; and %ha power of com- 
 mitment was ngt- taken away by the fact that the 
 latter section also conferred a power on the 
 Judge of the County Court to order by warrant 
 the person who had disobeyed the summons to 
 be apprehended and brought up for examination, 
 this latter remedy being ,only cumulative. The 
 Queen f. Ju]?ge of Croydon County Court 
 
 [13Q.B.D. 963 
 
 ." 3. Discretion of -Court — Banlirvpicy Act, 
 
 XXIV. BANKKUPTCY— JUBISDICTION--«)«((Z. 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 72.] Although.as a 
 general rule, cases in which the trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy is asserting a claim to property, by a 
 higher title than that, of the bankrupt himself 
 ought to be tried in the Court of Bankruptcy, yet 
 the rule is not an inflexible one, but the Court 
 has a judicial discretion to be exercised with re- 
 gard to all the circumstances of the case : — Meld, 
 that the fact that a large amount was at stake, 
 aiid tha,t questions of character were involved, 
 were sufBcient grounds for refusing to allow a 
 cage, in which the trustee in a liquidation was 
 seeking to set aside some transactions of the 
 debtors as frauduleiit under the bankruptcy law tp 
 be tried in a County Court. Ex parte Armitage. 
 Jn re Learoyd, "VViLTON, & Co. - ITCh. D. 13 
 
 4. Discretion of Court — Fraudulent Deed 
 
 —13 Eliz. c. 5— Bankruptcy Act^ 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 71), s. 72.] When the trustee in a bank- 
 ruptcy which is proceeding in a. County Court 
 impeaches a deed executed by the. bankrupt as 
 fraudulent under the Statute of Elizabethiif the 
 amount at stake is beyond the ordinary jurisdic- 
 tion of a County Court and serious questions of 
 character are involved, and the person interested 
 under the deed desires that the question should 
 not be . tried iri the County Court, the Judge 
 ought to decline to exercise the jurisdiction cout 
 ferred by sect, 72,aii,d ought to leave the matte? 
 to be fri^ in an action in the High Cojirt in the 
 ordinary vf&y. — Exparte Armitage (17 Oh. D. 13) 
 approved. Ex parte Price. In re- Roberts ' 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 553 
 
 5. Railway Com'pany-'-Lien forFreiglit — 
 
 Agreement for General Lien — Bec'eiver.'] A trader 
 opened with a railway company a; ■ credit aeobunt 
 for freight, by which if; was agreed that the com- 
 pany, should have a general lien for all moneys 
 due by him to them on any account on all gdods 
 belonging to him in their hands. He afterwards 
 filed a liquidation petition, under which 'a re- 
 ceiver of his property and manager of his business 
 wa,8 appointed. Inorder to carry on the business 
 the receiver bought some goods, which hp paid 
 for with his own money, and sent them to the 
 company consigned to the trader. The oopipany 
 claimed the benefit of the agreement, and refused 
 to deliver the goods until they were paid thg 
 amount which the trader owed them for freight 
 due at the tip?e of the filing of the petition. The 
 receiver in order to obtain the goods paid the 
 oc)mp8,ny,,£5p under protest, and then , applied: to 
 the Cpurf of Bankruptcy to ord^tte company to 
 repay him the £50, and an order was made ac- 
 cordingly : — Held, on appeal, that the Court of 
 Bankruptcy had no jui-isdictiou to mabe.ithe 
 order.. — But, semble, that the company woiild 
 have no defence to an action by the receiver for 
 the £50. — In re Nqrlhjield Iron find Steel OompaHy 
 (14 .L. T. (N.S.) 695) distinguished. Ex parte 
 Great Western Eailway Company. In re 
 BusHELL - - 22 CU. p. 470 
 
 XXV. BANKRUPTCY — STAYING PROCEED- 
 INGS. 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 1. Action agciinst Bankrupt in Colonial 
 
 I Court — ■ Seguestration to compel Appearance — 
 
( isi ) 
 
 DIGEST GF CASES. 
 
 ( 1S2 ) 
 
 XXV. BANXETTPTCY — STAYING PROCEED- 
 INGS — contd. 
 (a.) BakKBUptct Act, 1869 — eontinned. 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 <fe 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 13 
 — Banltruptcy Mules, 1870, r. 260.] Before issuing 
 a sequestratiaa against real estate of a bankrupt 
 situate in a colony, for the purpose of compelling 
 his appearance in an action in the Colonial Cpurt 
 to realize a mortgage given by him of other real 
 estate in the colony, the leave of the Court of 
 Bankruptcy ought to bo obtained.-^But '■where 
 such a sequestration had been issued ■without 
 leave, and an appeara'nce had been entered in 
 the colonial action : — Held, that it ■was sufficient 
 that the Plaintiffs in the action should undeirtake 
 not to use the sequestration for any other pur- 
 pose. Ex parte Eogeks. In re Boustead 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 665 
 
 (i.) Bankruptcy Act, 1883. , 
 
 3. Attachment — Pending Action in Chan'- 
 
 eery Division — Non-payment of Trust Money into 
 Court — Motion for Writ of Attachment — Bank- 
 ruptcy of Trustee — Debt provable in Bankruptcy — 
 Jurisdiction of Bankruptcy' Court to interfere— 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, s. 9, suh-s. 1 -and' s. 10, 
 sub-s, 2.] The Plaintiff in an action in theChan- 
 cery Division having failed to pay into Court, 
 when ordered, a suin of money ■which ho had 
 received i'Q a fiduciary capacity, ■was served ■with 
 a notice of motion for a ■writ of attachment against 
 him. He thereupon ' filed his petition in bank- 
 ruptcy, and applied to the Court of Bankruptcy 
 under s. 9 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883; to 'Stay 
 further proceedings in the action oii the ground 
 that the claim against him ■was a debt provable 
 in his bankruptcy : — Held, that his application 
 must be refused, for that no good reason ■was 
 shewn why the Court of Bankruptcy should inter- 
 fere. — Semble, the jurisdiction conferred on the 
 Court of Bankruptcy by s. 9 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1883, is discretionary, and will not, as a 
 general rule, be exercised in favour of a bank- 
 rupt personally, where he has by some miscon- 
 duct in some other proceedings rendered-himself 
 liable to imprisonment. In re Mackintosh. ,. Ez 
 parte Mackintosh - , 13 Q. B. D. 235 
 
 3. County Court — Power of County C&iirt 
 
 io restrain Proceedings in High Coiirt— ^Solicitor 
 — Bight of Audience — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 
 & 47 Vict. c. 52), ss^ 100, 102, 151, 168.J ' Under 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, a county court sitting 
 in bankruptcy has no power to restrain proceed- 
 ings in an action in the High Court/^^DeciSion of 
 Cave ahd Wills, JJ., reversed.— There is no 
 absolute 'rule that a question relating' to" the 
 estate of a bankrupt' ought to be ddtormihed by 
 the Court of Bankruptcy, and not by' the High 
 Court, whenever the trustee in the bankruptcy is, 
 by virtue of the bankruptcy law, claiming by a 
 iigher title than that of the bankrupt himself. 
 It is a matter of judicial discretion in each case 
 how the question shall best be tried. — In such a 
 matter the Court of Appeal ought 'Uot readily to 
 overrule the discretion of the bankruptcy judge. 
 Per Cave and Wills, JJ. : A solicitor has a right 
 of audience on an appeal to the Divisional Court 
 from a county court sitting in banki'uptcy. Ex 
 pwrte Keynolds. In re Baknett 15 Q. B. D. 169 
 
 XXVI. BANKRUPTCY— TSANSFEK. 
 
 1. Certificate of Judge — Disoretion^Ap- 
 
 peal— Costs— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 (fe 47 Vict. 
 c. 52), ss. 97 (sub-s. i), 104 (sub-s. 2) — Banhruptcy 
 Mules, 1883, )■;•. 16, 17, 111 (3).] The refusal of a 
 judge of a County Court to grant a certificate; 
 under rule 16 of the Bankruptcy BuleSj 18S3, 
 that in his opinion the proceedings under a bank- 
 ruptcy petition would be more ' advantageously 
 conducted in another Court, ia an order from 
 which an appeal lies, -if the Judge has refused to 
 exercise his discretion in the matter. — In such a 
 case the Court of Appeal, if it is of opinion that 
 the certificate ought to have been granted, will 
 not refer the matter back to the Coimty Court, but 
 will itself grant tie certificate. — Two partners in 
 trade presented a bankruptcy petition in a County 
 Court. Their statement of affairs shewed that 
 t.hey had lost nearly £200,000 in five years' trad- 
 ing. Some of the creditors applied to the Judge 
 for a certificate that in his opinion the proceed- 
 ings would be more advantageously conducted in 
 the London Court. The Judge refused the appli- 
 cation, on the ground that it was premature. An 
 appeal was presented, but was afterwards withr 
 drawn, and on this occasibn some correspondence 
 took place between the solicitors of the applican'ts 
 and the solicitors of other creditors who, opposed 
 the proposed transfer. The application was after- 
 wards renewed, and there was evidence that the 
 debtors o^wed a large amount to creditors in 
 London, Liverpool, and other places, and that, in 
 order to: carry out a proper investigation of their 
 accounts, it would be necessary to refer to the 
 books of various merchants in London Jwith whom 
 they had traded, and also to the books of their 
 bankers and of the' bankers' London agents. The 
 Judge refused the application, on the ground that 
 the applicants were estopped by the correspond- 
 ence between the solicitors from making it -.—Held, 
 that there was po such estoppel, and that, as the 
 Judge had therefore decided on a wrong ground, 
 he had in effect refused to ; exercise his discre- 
 tionary power, and there was an appeal from his 
 deoisiou.^-fleM, also, that under the circum- 
 stances the proceedings would be more advan- 
 tageously conducted in the London Court, and 
 that the certificate asked for ought -to have been 
 granted, and the Divisional Court itself granted 
 the certifioate.-^Per Cave, J. If an agreement 
 not to renew the application for a certificate, had 
 been in fact entered into between the soltoitors of 
 the' applicants and the solicitors of the other cre^ 
 ditors, it could not have affected the power of the 
 Court to makb the .certificate,, though ii> Blight 
 have affected the -tight of the applicants to costs. 
 — Order mad6''that ' the applicants Should have 
 their costs out of the debtors' assets, in case the 
 creditors should ultimately approve of the . pro- 
 posed transfer. '.Ec parte SoANES. J» j-'e Walker 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 484 
 
 2. Judgment Summons for Committal — 
 
 County Court— Transfer to Bankruptcy. Court — 
 Meceiving Order — •Notice to Judgment Debtor — 
 Debtors Act., 1869, s^ 5— Bankruptcy Act, 1883, 
 s. 103, sub-ss'. 4, 5 — Bankrviptcy Mules, 'IS^S!, 
 r. 268 (1) (a).] When a judgment summons for 
 a committal comes before- the judge of a county 
 court, not having jurisdiction in bankruptcy, and 
 
( 183 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 18i ) 
 
 XXVI. BANKRUPTCY— TRANSFER— co)iW. 
 he, being of opinion that a receiving order should 
 be made in lieu of a committal, makes an order 
 transferring the matter to the Bankruptcy Court, 
 notice of the subsequent proceedings under the 
 order of transfer must be served on the judgment 
 debtor. — In such a case the Oourt of Bankruptcy 
 is not bound to act on the opinion of the county 
 court judge, and to make a receiving order as of 
 course, but must exercise its judicial discretion on 
 hearing the case on its merits. In re Andrews. 
 Ex parte Andrews - 15 Q. B. D. 335 
 
 Deceased debtor — Administration in bank- 
 ruptcy of insolvent estate — Transfer to 
 County Oourt— 46 & 47 Vict. o. 52, s. 125 
 [13 a. B. D. 552 
 See Bankbuptcy — Deceased Deetok. 3. 
 
 XXVII. BANKRUPTCY— DECEASED DEBTOR. 
 
 1. Discovery of Debtor's Property — Ad- 
 ministration in JBanhruptay of Estate of Person 
 dying Jnsoli^ent — Power to 8ummo7i Person to he 
 examined — Banhruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. 
 c. 52), ss. 27, 125 — Bide 58 (^Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1883).] The provisions of s. 27 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1883, do not apply to an administration of 
 the estate of a person dying insolvent under a. 
 125 of tho Act. — There is no power in cases of 
 such administration, either under s. 27 or under 
 rule 58 (Bankruptcy Eulea, 1883), to summon a 
 person to be examined for the purpose of dis- 
 covery of the deceased debtor's estate. In re 
 Hewitt 15 ft. B. D. 159 
 
 2. Disoretion of Court — Administration 
 
 of Insolvent Estate — Transfer to Court of Bank- 
 ruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 52), s. 125.] The power given by sect. 125 of 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, to transfer the pro- 
 ceedings in an action brought for the adminis- 
 tration of an insolvent estate to the Court of 
 Bankruptcy, is a discretionary one, and it will 
 not be exercised where the estate is small, the 
 number of creditors is small, and considerable 
 expense has been already incurred in Chambers 
 in the proceedings under an administration judg- 
 ment. — Semble, that an application for transfer 
 can only be made by a creditor who has absolutely 
 proved his debt. In re Weavee. Hioas. v. 
 Weaves - - 29 Ch. D. 236 
 
 3. Ex parte Application — Administration 
 
 in Bankruptcy of Insolvent Estate — Transfer of 
 Administration Proceedings from Sigh Court to 
 County Court— Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 
 Vict. c. 52), s. 125, suh-ss. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5— Bankruptcy 
 Forms, 1883, Nos. 11, 31, 32.] When proceedings 
 for the administration of a deceased debtor's 
 estate have been commenced in the Chancery 
 Division of the High Court, and an order has 
 been made, under sub-sect. 4 of sect. 125 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, for the transfer of the 
 proceedings to the Court exercising jurisdiction 
 in bankruptcy, that Court may make an adminis- 
 tration order on an ex parte application by a 
 creditor, but the order cannot be made until the 
 expiration of two months from the date of the 
 grant of probate or letters of administration, unless 
 with the concurrence of the legal personal repre- 
 Bentativfij or unless it is proved that the debtor 
 
 XXVII. BANKRUPTCY— DECEASED DEBTOR 
 
 — continued. 
 committed an act of bankruptcy within three 
 months prior to his decease. Ex parte May. 
 In re Mat 13 ft. B. D. 552 
 
 XXVin. BANKRUPTCY— APPEAL. 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 
 1. Interpleader Order — -Ilehearing — 1 & 2 
 
 Will. 4, c. 58, s. 6—1 & 2 Vict. c. 45, s. 2 -Com- 
 mon Law Procedure Act, 1860 (23 & 24 Vict, 
 c. 126), ss. 14, n— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 65, 71 — Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1870, r. 50 — -Sheriff — Interpleader — Costs."] Any 
 order in interpleader made by the Chief Judge in 
 Bankruptcy can be appealed from. — The proper 
 mode for the sheriff to apply to the Court of 
 Bankruptcy for an interpleader order under the 
 Act 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 58, is by motion, of which 
 notice is served on the claimants, and on the hear- 
 ing of the motion the Court can determine their 
 rights, without first making an order that they 
 attend and interplead. — A person against whom 
 an order is made on his default in appearing may 
 appeal from the order on its merits. — Dodds v.Sliep- 
 herd (1 Ex. D. 75) considered. — ^On the hearing of 
 a motion by a slieriff in the Court of Bankruptcy 
 for an interpleader order, one of the claimants 
 was represented by the managing clerk of his 
 solicitors, who was not himself a solicitor. The 
 Registrar, supposing him to be a solicitor, allowed 
 him to cross-examine the witnesses on the other 
 side, but, when he discovered the mistake, he 
 declined to hear him as an advocate, and decided 
 against his client, and he afterwards refused an 
 application by the client for a rehearing : — Held, 
 that the Registrar ought to have adjourned the 
 case to give the client an opportunity of being re- 
 presented by counsel or a solicitor, and that the 
 client was entitled to a rehearing. — The sheriff's 
 costs of the appeal wero ordered to be paid by 
 the party who should ultimately be decided to 
 be in the wrong. Ex parte Stkeeter. In re 
 MoEKis - - - 19 Ch. D. 216 
 
 2. Locus Standi — Appeal iy Trustee in 
 
 Bankruptcy — Removal of Trustee before Hearing 
 — Refusal of New Trustee to prosecute Appeal 
 — Costs."] The trustee in a bankruptcy pre- 
 sented an appeal against the admission of a 
 proof. Before the appeal came on for hearing 
 the Appellant had been removed from his office, 
 and a new trustee appointed, who declined to 
 prosecute the appeal : — Held, that the Appellant 
 had no locus standi, but that the appeal must 
 stand over for a fortnight to give the creditors 
 an opportunity of prosecuting it. At the end of 
 the fortnight no creditor had adopted the appeal : 
 — Held, that the appeal must be dismissed, and 
 that the Respondent was entitled to have his 
 costs paid out of the deposit, but that no per- 
 sonal order for costs could be made against the 
 Appellant. Ex parte Sheaed. In re PoaLBT 
 (No. 2) 16 Ch. D. 110 
 
 3. Notice — Debtor not she/veing Cause 
 
 against Petition — Substituted Service — Juris- 
 diction — Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, rr. 36, 37.] 
 When a debtor gives no notice under rule 36 of 
 his intention to sliew cause against a bankruptcy 
 petition, and the petition is consequently heard 
 
( 185 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 186 ) 
 
 XXVIII. BANKEUPTCY— APPEAL— con 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1869 — continued. 
 in Ms absence, and the Court refuses to make an, 
 adjudication, if the petitioning creditor desires to 
 appeal against the refusal lie must serve notice of 
 the appeal on the debtor. — In a proper case the 
 Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to make an order 
 for substituted service of a notice of appeal, though 
 no express provision to that effect is contained in 
 the. Rules of Court. Ex parte "Wab^vrg. In re 
 Whalley - - 34 Ch. D. 364 
 
 4. Notice — Registrar — JEx parte Appeal.'] 
 
 Notice of an appeal from a Kegistrar acting as 
 Chief Judge ought not (even if it is ex parte) to 
 be addressed to or served on the Eegistrar. Notice 
 of an ex parte appeal was addressed to and served 
 on the Eegistrar, and he appeared by counsel on 
 the hearing : — Selcl, that the Appellant ought not 
 to be ordered to pay the Eegistrar's costs. Ex 
 parte Izabd. In re Mora 20 Ch. D. 703 
 
 5. Sehearing — Limit of Time — . 
 
 of Adjudication — Debtor's Summons — Judgment 
 Debt — Statement of Consideration — Amendment 
 of Fetition — Affidavit — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 
 * 33 Vict. 0. 71), s. 11— Bankruptcy Bules, 1870, 
 r. Ii3— Rules of Court, 1875, Order LVIII., r. 15.] 
 Though as a general rule a rehearing of a bank- 
 ruptcy matter ought not to be allowed after the 
 expiration of the time limited for appealing from 
 the order, yet, there being no time fixed by the 
 Act or the Eules for applying for a rehearing, 
 the Court will on special grounds allow a rehear- 
 ing when it is applied for after the expiration of 
 the time for appealing, even when the application 
 is to rehear a bankruptcy petition which has 
 been dismissed. — ^But, semble, that an application 
 for a rehearing should not be made ex parte. — 
 When a debtor's summons is founded on a judg- 
 ment debt it is not necessary to state the con- 
 sideration for the judgment in the summons, and 
 a misstatement of the consideration will not 
 vitiate the summons. — When a bankruptcy peti- 
 tion is amended under an order of the Court the 
 Judge has a discretion as to requiring the amend- 
 ment to be verified by affidavit, and if the alter- 
 ation is an immaterial one an affidavit will not 
 be required. Ex parte Eitso. In re Eitso 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 529 
 
 6. Time for Appeal — From County Court 
 
 — Notice to Registrar — " Forthwith " — Bankruptcy 
 Rules, 1870, rr. 143, 144.] When an act is re- 
 quired by a statute or a rule of Court to be done 
 " forthwith," the word " forthwith " must be con- 
 strued with regard to the object of the provision 
 and the circumstances of the case. — The London 
 agents of the country solicitors of an appellant 
 from an order made by a County Court in bank- 
 ruptcy entered the appeal with the Eegistrar of 
 Appeals in London on Friday, the 5th of August, 
 the last possible day, but did not post a copy of 
 the appeal notice to the country solicitors until 
 the following day, and it was not received by 
 them until Monday, the 8tli of August, and on 
 that day they sent a copy of the notice to the 
 Eegistrar of the County Court : — Held, that the 
 copy of the notice had not been sent to the 
 Eegistrar of the County Court " forthwith f on 
 entering the appeal as required by rule 144, and 
 
 XXVIII. BANKETJPTCY— APPEAL— confiwed. 
 
 (a.) Bankkuptoy Act, 1869 — -continued. 
 that consequently the appeal was out of time. 
 Ex parte Lamb. In re Sodtham 19 Ch. D. 169 
 
 7. Time for Appeal — From County Court 
 
 — Payment of Deposit "■at or before" entry of 
 Appeal — Mistake of Officer of Court — Bank- 
 ruptcy Rules, 1870, r. 145 — Bankruptcy Rules, 
 Nov. 1878, r. 2.] The practice laid down in 
 Ex parte Rosenthal (20 Ch. D. 315) that before 
 entering an appeal in bankruptcy the Eegistrar 
 ought now- to give a direction to the Bank 
 of England to receive the deposit payable on 
 the entry, and not to enter the appeal until he 
 receives from the Bank a certificate that the 
 money has been paid, applies to appeals from the 
 Chief Judge to the Court of Appeal, as well as to 
 appeals from a County Court to tbe Chief Judge. 
 — ^A notice of appeal from an order made by the 
 Chief Judge on the 24th of April was taken to the 
 office of the Eegistrar of Appeals on the 28th of 
 April. The Eegistrar's clerk entered the appeal, 
 and gave a direction to the Bank to receive the 
 deposit. The money was paid to the Bank on the 
 8th of May. The certificate of the Bank of the 
 payment was then taken to the Eegistrar's office, 
 but the clerk made no further entry of the appeal : 
 — Held, that the clerk had made a mistaite in 
 entering the appeal before receiving the Bank's 
 certificate of the payment of the deposit, but that 
 as there had been no default on the part of the 
 Appellant the appeal could be entertained. Ex 
 parte LuxoN. In re Piusley - 20 Ch. D. 701 
 
 8. . • Time for Appeal — From County Court 
 
 — Payment of Deposit — Formal Defect or Irregu- 
 larity—Bankruptcy ^c«,,1869 (32 & as Vict. c. 71), 
 ss. 71, 82— Bankruptcy Rules,1870, r. Ii5— Bank- 
 ruptcy Rules, Nov. 1878, r. 2.] Eule 2 of Novem- 
 ber, 1878, has not altered the requirement of rule 
 145 of 1870, that the deposit on an appeal from a 
 County Court shall be paid " at or before the time 
 of entering " the appeal : — Semble, however, that 
 the payment would be in time if it was made at 
 the earliest possible moment after the entry of the 
 appeal. — An appeal was entered on the 17th of 
 February, but the deposit was not paid till the 
 6th of March : — Held, that this was not a formal 
 defect or an irregularity which could be cured 
 under the power given to the Court by sect. 82, 
 and that the appeal could not be entertained. — 
 Having regard to rule 2 of November, 1878, the 
 proper practice now is for the Eegistrar, before 
 entering an appeal, to give a direction to the 
 Bank of England to receive the deposit on the 
 appeal, and, after receiving a certificate from the 
 bank that the money has been paid, to enter the 
 appeal. Ex parte Eosesthal. In re Dickinsok 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 315 
 
 9. Time for Appeal — From County Court 
 
 — Reckoning of Time — Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, 
 r. US— Bankruptcy Rule of26ih May, 1873— Rules 
 of Court, 1875, Order Lviii., rr. 9, 15.] Notwith- 
 standing the rules under the Judicature Acts, 
 the time for appealing to the Chief Judge from 
 an order made in a bankruptcy matter by a 
 County Court is still regulated by the Bank- 
 ruptcy Eules. And, in reckoning the twenty-one 
 days allowed by rule 143 of the Bankruptcy 
 Eules, 1870, for appealing, Sundays are, by virtue 
 
( 1S7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 188 ) 
 
 XXVIII. BANKETTPTCY— APPEAl— caKiimtted. 
 (a.) Bankbuptoy Act, 1869 — coniimied. 
 
 of the Bule in Bankruptcy of the 26th of May, 
 1S73, Dot to be taken into account. Ex parte 
 Hall. In re Alven - - 16 Ch. D. 801 
 
 (6.) Baskbuptoy Act, 1 883. 
 
 10. Committal — Judgment Summons — 
 
 Judgment under £50 — Appeal from Judge of High 
 Court — Court of Appeal — Sanlcruptcy Act, 1883 
 (46 * 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 103, Wi— Debtors Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62), s. 5.] Under the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883, s. 103 — which enables 
 the jurisdiction under sect. 5 of the Debtors Act, 
 1869, to be delegated to and exercised by the bank- 
 ruptcy registrars of the High Court, and sect. 104, 
 by which in bankruptcy laatters, an appeal 
 lies from the order of the High Court to the Court 
 of Appeal — an appeal from an order of the judge 
 havLug jurisdiction in bankruptcy respecting the 
 commitment of a judgment debtor must be made 
 to the Court of Appeal and not to the Divisional 
 Court. Genese v. Lasoelles 13 ft. B. D. 901 
 
 11. Preliminary Objection — Notice — 
 
 Costs.] Where the Eespondent to an appeaj 
 intends to take a preliminary objection he should 
 give notice to the Appellant of his intention so to 
 do. If no such notice is given and the objection 
 prevails, the appeal will be dismissed without 
 costs. In re Speight - 13 ft. B. D. 42 
 
 12. Preliminary Objection — Notice — 
 
 Costs.] A respondent to an appeal who in- 
 tends to rely on a preliminary objection ought 
 to give notice to the appellant of his intention so 
 to do. — If he does not, and the objection is suc- 
 cessful, the appeal will be dismissed without 
 costs.— J» re Speight (13 Q. B. D. 42) followed. 
 Ex parte Blease. In re Blinkhokn 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 123 
 
 13. Preliminary Objection — Notice — 
 
 Costs.] The solicitor of a respondent, if he is 
 aware of a preliminary objection to an appeal, 
 ought, as a matter of courtesy, to inform his oppo- 
 nent of it without delay, but the omission to do so 
 is not, if the appeal is dismissed on the prelimi- 
 nary objection, a sufficient reason for depriving 
 the respondent of the costs of the appeal. — In re 
 Speight (13 Q. B. D. 42), and Ex parte Blease 
 (14 Q. B. D. 123) not followed. Ex parte Shead. 
 In re Mundt - , 16 ft. B. D. 338 
 
 14. Rejection of Proof — Trustee — Notice 
 
 of Motion — Banhruptctj Rules, 1883, rr. 19, 174.] 
 If a creditor desires tc appeal against the rejection 
 of his proof by the trustee he must give notice of 
 motion in the usual way under_rule 19 of the 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, and within the twenty- 
 one days limited by the 174th rule. The old 
 practice of applying to the Court, in the first in- 
 stance, to fix a time and day for hearing such an 
 application no longer obtains. In re Gillespie. 
 Ex parte Mo-saKO-s - - 14 ft. B. D. 385 
 
 XXIX. BANKKUPTCY— COSTS. 
 
 (a.) Bankruptcy Act, 1869. 
 
 1. Solicitor of TruBtee--iJ«(/M to Costs out 
 
 of Estate — Discretion of Court — Improper Conduct 
 — Ahuse of Bankruptcy Law — Taxation of Costs — 
 Tower of Court to go behind Allocatur.'] The 
 right of the solicitor of a. trustee in bankruptcy 
 
 XXIX. SATSSKRVSTCY— COSTS— continued. 
 
 (a.) Bankeuptoy Act, 1869 — continued. 
 to be paid his costs out of the bankrupt's estate is 
 only the right of his client, the trustee ; he has 
 no independent right. If either the trustee or the 
 solicitor has been guilty of misconduct, the Court 
 can refuse to allow the solicitor's costs to be paid 
 out of the estate, and this notwithstanding that 
 the costs have been taxed a,nd an allocatur has 
 been made by the Taxing Master.— It is an abuse 
 of the bankruptcy law to purchase a debt due by 
 a banki'upt in order so procnre the appointment 
 of a trustee favourable to the bankrupt or to a 
 creditor or a particular class of creditors, or to 
 purchase a debt for the purpose of making the 
 debtor (e.g„ the trustee in a bankruptcy) a bank- 
 rupt with the view, not of recovering the debt, 
 but of putting pressure upon hiTn for a collateral 
 object, or of injuring him in some way. — -Ex parte 
 Griffin (12 Ch. D. 480) approved and followed.— 
 The trustee in a bankruptcy and his solicitor 
 having been engaged in transactions of this kind, 
 the Court, after taxation of the solicitor's costs, 
 refused to allow them to be paid out of the bank- 
 rupt's estate. Ex parte Habpeb. In re Pooley 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 685 
 
 (6.) Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 2. Between Solicitor and Client — Bank- 
 ruptcy Rules, 1883, r. 98.] Rule 98 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Rules, 1883, only empowers the Court to 
 du-ect that costs shall be taxed and paid as be- 
 tween solicitor and client at the time when the 
 order is made awarding the costs. If such a 
 direction is not given at that time, the Court has 
 no power to give it subsequently. Ex parte 
 Shoolbhed. In re Angell 14 ft. B. D. 298 
 
 3. Costs of Taxation — Solicitor to Trustee 
 
 in Bankruptcy— Q & 7 Viet. c. 73, ss. 37, 38, 39.] 
 Under an ordinary reference to tax the costs of tie 
 solicitor to a trustee in bankruptcy the taxation is 
 regulated by the practice of the Court of Bank- 
 ruptcy, and the provisions of the Act 6 & 7 Vict. 
 o.,73, have no application. — There is no rule in 
 the Court of Bankruptcy that, if on such a taxa- 
 tion the amount of the solicitor's bill is reduced 
 by more than one-sixth, he is to pay the costs of 
 the taxation. Ex parte Maesh. In re Maksh 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 340 
 
 4. Official Keoeiver— Jjjjjea!.] An order 
 
 made by a county court, on the application of the 
 official receiver setting aside a payment made by 
 a debtor as a fraudulent preference, having been 
 reversed on appeal -.—Held, that the costs of the 
 appellants and of the official receiver, in both 
 courts, must be paid out of the debtor's assets, 
 the costs of the appellants having priority. Ex 
 parte Leioestersbiee Banking Company. In re 
 Dale - - - 14 ft, B. D, 48 
 
 5. Petitioner's Costs — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion — Costs incidental to second JHeeting of Cre- 
 ditors — ^'Proceeding in Court" — Jurisdiction — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 * 47 Vict. c. 52), s. 105, 
 sub-s. 1 — Bankruptcy Bules, 1883, rr. 100, 105.] 
 The second meeting of creditors under a bank- 
 ruptcy petition (held to consider tlie confirmation 
 of a scheme of arrangement of the debtor's aifairs 
 accepted at the first meeting) is not a " proueeding 
 iu court " within the meaning of sub-sect. 1 of 
 
( 189 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF' CASES. 
 
 ( 190 ) 
 
 XXIX. ■BA^KRVnCY—CQSTa— continued. 
 (6.) Baitkruptct Act, 1883 — continued. 
 
 B6ot. 105 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, and the 
 Court has no power to order the coats of the peti- 
 tioner incidental to that meeting to be paid out 
 of the debtor's estate. — But the Court has power 
 to order the petitioner's costs incidental to the 
 public examination of the debtor to be paid out 
 of the estate. Ex parte The Board of TeadEi 
 In re Strand - - - 13 Q. B. D. 492 
 
 6. Sheriff's Fees — Poundage—" Costs o/ 
 
 Execution '' — Bankruptcy, Act, 1883, s. 46, sub-ss. 
 I, 2.] When the banki.'nptoy of a judgment debtor 
 supervenes after seizure, but before sale, by the 
 sheriff under a writ of fi. fa., the sheriff is not 
 entitled to poundage under the words " costs of 
 execution " in sub-seot. 1 of sect. 46 of the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883, In re Ludmore 13 Q. B. D. 416 
 
 Costs of trustee— Annulment of bankruptcy 
 
 [22 Ch. J>. 436 
 See Bankbtjptct — Annulment. 1. 
 
 XXX. BANKRUPTCY— EVIDENCE. 
 
 1. Cross-examination on Affidavit — S,ight 
 
 to withdraw Affidavit} Seld (in accordance -with 
 a certificate of the Eegistrars of the London Court 
 of Bankruptcy), that, according to the practice of 
 that Court, when an afiBdavit has been filed by 
 one of the parties to an application, the opposite 
 party is not entitled to cross-examine the deponent 
 on the affidavit, until it has been read on behalf 
 of the party who has filed it. That party has a 
 right, if he pleases, not to make use of the affidavit, 
 and, if he does not use it, the deponent cannot be 
 cross-examined on it : — Per Jessel. M.K. : In 
 the High Court the deponent could be cross- 
 examined, even if the affidavit was not used by 
 the party who filed it. Ex parte CmLp. In re 
 Ottawat - 20 Ch. D. 126 
 
 2. - — — Examination as to Bankrupt's Property 
 — Jurisdiction to order Account — Bwrikrwptcy Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 96, 97.] Under 
 sects. 96 and 97 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, the 
 Court of Bankruptcy has no jurisdiction to order 
 a witness to fm-nish an account ia writing (not on 
 oath) of money transactions between himself and 
 the bankrupt, or property of the bankrupt received 
 by him. Ex parte Hetnolds. In re Reynolds 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 601 
 
 ,3. Examination as to Bankrupt's Property 
 
 — Production of Documents — Discretion of Court- 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. u. 71), ». 96.] 
 In determining whether an order for the produc- 
 tion of documents should be made under sect. 96 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, the Court has to 
 exercise a discretion. — From the examination of 
 a person summoijed for examination under sect. 96, 
 at the instance of the trustee of a bankrupt, it 
 appeared that a policy of insurance on the life of 
 the bankrupt's wife, which had been effected by 
 her before her marriage with, the bankrupt, and 
 which had been after the marriage assigned by 
 the husband and wife to trustees, on tmst for the 
 wife for her separate use, had after the bankruptcy 
 been assigned by way of mortgage, by a deed to 
 which the bankrupt and his wife were parties ; 
 that the mortgage had been afterwards transferred 
 to the witness ; and that the wife had subsequently 
 executed a deed assigning the equity of redemp- 
 
 XXX. BANKRUPTCY— EVIDENCE— conimuecZ. 
 tion to him : — Seld, that the witness must produce 
 the Mortgage deed, the deed of transfer,, and the 
 deed of assignment. Ex parte Tatton. In re 
 Thorb - - _ : _ 17 Ch. D. 512 
 
 4. Examination of Creditor- 
 
 — Jwrisdiction — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 71), ss. 96, 125, IIS— Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1870, rr. 166, 171.] Sect 96 of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869, has no application to composition pro- 
 oeedings.^DeciSionbf Bacon, C.J., reversed. Ex 
 parte Willey. In re Wright - 23 Ch. D. 118 
 
 5. Examinatioa of Creditor — Right to 
 
 Copy of Depositions— Si & 33 Vict. c. 71, s. 96— 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, rr. 9, 12.] The Coui-t has 
 a discretion whether to give a copy of the short- 
 hand notes of the, deposition of a witness examined 
 under sect. 96 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, but 
 where a creditor has been so examined he was 
 allowed a copy. Ex parte Pratt. In re Hay- 
 man - - - - 21 Ch. D. 439 
 
 6. Notarial Certificate — Affidavit sworn 
 
 Abroad — British Vice-consul— iS & 19 Vict, c, 42, 
 ss. 1, 2, 3 — Bankruptcy Act, 1883, s. 135 — 
 Schedule I., r. 14 — Bankruptcy Rules, 1883, r. 50.] 
 When an affidavit or proof in bankruptcy is sworn 
 abroad before a British consul, or vice-consul, 
 a notarial certificate in verification of- the signa- 
 ture and qualification of the consul, or vice- 
 consul, is not-required. — The notarial certificate 
 is only required when such an affidavit or proof is 
 sworn before a foreign functionary. In re Magee. 
 Ex parte Magee - - 15 Q. B. D. 332 
 
 7. Service of Copy of Deposition- Oosfe 
 
 — Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, r. 50.] A deposition 
 of a witness, taken in the Court of Bankruptcy 
 for one purpose, and filed, may be used against 
 him as an admission in any other proceeding in 
 the matter of the same bankruptcy. — But when a 
 party to au application in the Court of Bankruptcy 
 gives notice to his opponent of his intention to 
 use as evidence on the hearing of the application 
 a deposition which is on the file, though it was 
 originally taketi for another purpose, he ought not 
 to serve hisi opponent with a copy of it, and if he 
 does so, will not, though successful on the applica- 
 tion, be allowed the'costs of the copy thus served. 
 Exparte Hall. In re Cooper - 19 Ch. D. 580 
 
 XXXI. BANKRUPTCY— IiauIDATION (ACT OF 
 1869). 
 1. Adjudication — After Liquidation Peti- 
 tion—Power to adjudicate Debtor a Bankrupt — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Viet. c. 71), s. 125, 
 suh-8. 12.] The power given to' the Court by 
 sect. 125, sub-sect. 12 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, 
 to adjudge a debtor who bas filed a liquidation 
 petition a bankrupt, may be exercised even though 
 no liquidation or composition resolutions have 
 been passed by the creditors. .Efc^arfe Walker. 
 In re MoHeney - - 22 Ch. D. 813 
 
 2. -. — After Adjudication — 6„„„„^„„,.„ ^^^y^^. 
 tration of Resolution for Liquidation or, Composi- 
 tion — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, ss., 28, 80, sub.-S; 10 — 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, r. 266.] The Kegistrar has 
 no power to register a resolution for liquidation or 
 composition after au adjudication of bankruptcy 
 .has been made ; unless the adjudication has been 
 
( 191 
 
 DIUEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 192 
 
 XXXI. BANKEUPTCY — IlftlJIDATION (ACT 
 
 OF 1869) — continued. 
 made under rule 266 of the Bankruptcy Eules, 
 1870, in wliicli case the adjudication is intended 
 to be merely ancillary to the liquidation. — Ex 
 parte Bams (2 Ch. D. 231) overruled. In re 
 Stanley. Ex parte Milwaed 16 Ch. D. 256 
 
 3. After Adjudication — Subsequent Beso- 
 
 lutinns for lAquidation hy Arrangement — Vesting 
 of Vector's Property — Bankruptcy Act, 1869, ss. 17, 
 28, 83 (sub-s. 6), 125— Bankruptcy Eules, 1870, 
 r. 266.] After an ordinary adjudication of bank- 
 ruptcy has been made (not an adjudication merely 
 for the purpose of protecting the debtor's property 
 pending proceedings for liquidation or composi- 
 tion) the creditors have no power to pass resolu- 
 tions for either liquidation or composition, and 
 such resolutions if passed will be inoperative.— 
 Ex parte Milward (16 Ch. D. 256) explained and 
 followed. Ex parte Bennett. In re Wakd 
 
 ■ [lejCh. D. 541 
 
 4. Appointment of Trastee — Lapse of 
 
 •more than Six Months from filing of Petition — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (82 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 6, 
 125, suh-s. 7.] A trustee can be appointed by the 
 creditors under a liquidation petition, though 
 more than six months have elapsed since the 
 filing of the petition. — Ex parte Penning (3 Ch. T>. 
 455) discussed. — The last clause of sub-sect. 7 of 
 sect. 125 relates only to the effect of the appoint- 
 ment of a trustee under a liquidation after lie has 
 Tjeen appointed, and does not impose _on the 
 making of the appointment any limitation similar 
 to that which by sect. 6 is imposed on the making 
 of an adjudication of bankruptcy, viz., that the 
 act of banki-uptcy on which the adjudication is 
 founded must have occurred within six months 
 before the presentation of the petition for adjudi- 
 cation. Ex parte Credit Company. In re 
 McHenkt - 24 Ch. D. 363 
 
 5. Close of liijuidation — Discharge of 
 
 Eebtor — Sale of Estate to Trustee — Right to after- 
 ■acquired Property — • Costs — Appeal for Costs — ■ 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), "ss. 20, 
 28, 125.] The creditors of a liquidating debtor in 
 1877 passed a special resolution authorizing the 
 sale of his estate to the trustee at such a price as 
 -would pay a dividend of 5s. in the pound to the 
 creditors, and also the costs of the liquidation. 
 The resolution was sanctioned by the Conrt, and 
 was carried out by the trustee. .The debtor was 
 not a party to the arrangement, and did not know 
 ■of it for some time afterwards. The creditors did 
 not pass any formal resolution fixing the close of 
 the liquidation, or granting the debtor a discharge, 
 but he commenced another business. In 1881 
 this came to the knowledge of the trustee, and he 
 thereupon took possession of the debtor's stock-in- 
 trade, claiming it on behajf of the creditors nnder 
 the liquidation : — Held, that the resolution did 
 ■not amount in substance to a close of the liquida- 
 tion or a discharge of the debtor, and that conse- 
 quently the trustee was entitled to the debtor's 
 after-acquired property for the benefit of the 
 creditors.— But, held, that under the circum- 
 stances, the costs might properly be the subject of 
 appeal, and that the debtor's costs must be paid 
 out of the estate, and (reversing the decision of 
 iBacon, C.J.) that the trustee's costs must also 
 
 XXXI. BANEEUPTCY — lIQiriDATION (ACT 
 
 OF 1^69)— continued. 
 be allowed out of the estate. — Ex parte Tinker 
 (Law Bep. 9 Ch. 716) distinguished. Ex parte 
 Wainwbight. In re Wainweight 19 Ch. D. 140 
 
 6. —. — Failure to pass Eesolutions — Belay — 
 Power to adjudicate Bebto'r a Bankrupt — Pendency 
 of Proceedings — Power to order fresh First Meet- 
 ing of Creditors — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & ;-,3 
 Vict c. 71), s. 125, suh-'s. 12.] A debtor filed a 
 liquidation petition in August, 1879. A receiver 
 of his property was at once appointed, and injunc- 
 tions were granted to restrain some of the creditors 
 from proceeding against him for their debts. The 
 first meeting of the creditors was held on the 20th 
 of October, 1879, when it wag resolved to adjourn 
 to the 15th of December, 1879. Similar resolutions 
 for adjournment were passed again and again, the 
 meeting being ultimately, on the 15th of Novem- 
 ber, 1882, adjourned to the 28th of March, 1883. 
 No resolutions for liquidation by arrangement or 
 composition were passed. In January, 1883, two 
 of the creditors applied to the Court of Banki-uptcy 
 by motion, under sub-sect. 12 of sect. 125 of the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, for an adjudication of 
 bankruptcy against the debtor. At the adjourned 
 meeting on the 28th of March, 1883, the creditors 
 resolved that it was inexpedient in the interest of 
 the creditors that any further proceedings should 
 be taken under the petition, and that application 
 should be made to the Court to discharge the re- 
 ceiver, and dismiss the petition, or stay all further 
 proceedings under it. The Kegistrar, on the 3rd 
 of May, made an adjudication. ■ The debtor ap- 
 pealed, and on the hearing of Ihe appeal an 
 offer was made by a friend of his to pay the debts 
 of the two creditors in full and to provide for their 
 costs of the application, the payment to be made 
 by the friend out of his own moneys, and an under- 
 taking being given by him that neither directly 
 nor indirectly should the payment be made out of 
 the debtor's assets : — Held, that notwithstanding 
 the resolution of the 28th of March, and having 
 regard to the fact that the receiver had not been 
 discharged the liquidation proceedings were still 
 pending, and that if the adjudication order was 
 discharged no other creditor would be injured, for 
 that the Court would have jurisdiction to adjudi- 
 cate the debtor a banki-upt on the application 
 of any other creditor. — The adjudication was ac- 
 cordingly discharged on the terms of payment 
 proposed, and on the undertaking of the debtor to 
 apply to the Court of Bankruptcy ibr leave to 
 summon a fresh fii'st meeting of the creditors. 
 — Held, by Baggallay and Cotton, L.JJ., and 
 semble per Bowen, L.J., that the Court bad 
 jurisdiction to order a fresh first meeting of the 
 creditors under the petition. Ex parte McHeney. 
 In re MoHeney - - 24 Ch. D. 35 
 
 7. Resolutions — Befusal of Registration 
 
 — Power of Court to order Return of Stamp Duty 
 paid on filing of Resolutions— Order of 1st Janu- 
 ary, 1870, as to Fees — Ex parte Appeal — Senicc 
 on Registrar — Appearance hy Counsel — Costs.'] 
 When the registration of liquidation resolutions 
 is refused, the Court has no power to order repay- 
 ment of the ad valorem duty paid on the pre- 
 sentation of the resolutions for registration. The 
 only mode of obtaining a return of the duty is by 
 
C 193 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 191 ) 
 
 XXXI. BANKBTTPTCT — LIQiriDATION (ACT 
 OP 1869) — continued. 
 
 a memorial to the Commissioners of Inland Re- 
 venue. Notice of an appeal from a Registrar 
 acting as Chief Judge ought not (even if it is 
 ex parte) to be addressed to or served on the 
 Registrar. Notice of an ex parte appeal was 
 addressed to and served on the Registrar, and he 
 appeared by counsel on the hearing : — Seld, that 
 the Appellant ought not to be ordered to pay the 
 Registrar's costs. Ex parte Izabd. Tn re MoiR 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 703 
 
 8. Sesolutions — Segistration — Locus 
 
 Standi to oppose — " Creditor " — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869(32(6 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 125 — Bankruptcy 
 Bules, 1870, rr. 67, 70, 271, 295.] Upon the hear- 
 ing of an application to .register liquidation reso- 
 lutions no one has a locus standi to be heard in 
 opposition but a creditor who has previously 
 proved a debt in the mode prescribed by the rules. 
 ^-A person who claims to be a creditor, and in 
 that character to oppose the registration, cannot 
 prove his debt when he comes before the Regis- 
 trar to oppose. If he has not previously proved 
 a debt he cannot be heard. Ex parte Bagsteb. 
 In re Bagsteb - 24 Ch. D. 477 
 
 9. Besolutions — Registration — Small 
 
 Amount of Assets — Bona fides of Creditors — Oppo- 
 sition by Judgment Creditor — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), «. 125 — Bankruptcy 
 Bules, 1870, r. 295.] The statement of affairs of 
 a debtor who had filed a liquidation petition 
 shewed that his debts were £1759 and his assets 
 £85, the latter sum being subject to a deduotiou 
 in respect to preferential debts. The creditors 
 resolved upon a liquidation by arrangement, and 
 gave the debtor an immediate discharge. They 
 also voted £10 for the remuneration of the trustee. 
 The registration of the resolutions was opposed 
 by a creditor who had brought an action against 
 the debtor for £182, but who had been restrained 
 from proceeding with this action. He was in a, 
 position to sign judgment and issue execution so 
 soon as the injunction should be dissolved : — 
 Held (by Bacon, C.J., and by the Court of Appeal), 
 that, notwithstanding the small amount of the 
 assets, the resolutions ought to be registered, the 
 contest being really whether the assets, such as 
 they were, should be distributed among the 
 creditors generally, or be swept away by the 
 judgment creditor, and this although the judg- 
 ment creditor offered in the Court of Appeal to 
 undertake to present a bankruptcy petition 
 against the debtor. — Ex parte Early (13 Ch. D. 
 300) followed.— .Ba; parte Staff (ha^ Rep. 20 Eq. 
 775) and Ex parte Bussell (Law Rep. 10 Oh. 255) 
 distinguished. Exparte Mathewes. In re Shabpe 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 655 
 
 10. Statement of Af&irs — Distinction 
 
 hetween Joint and Separate Debts and Assets — 
 Debtor formerly in Partnership — Begistration of 
 Besolutions— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), s. V25— Bankruptcy Bules, 1870, rr. 287, 
 295.] A debtor, who in his liquidation petition 
 describes himself as having been formerly in 
 partnership, ought in his statement of affairs to 
 distinguish between his joint and separate debts 
 and assets, or to state expressly that no debts and 
 no assets of the former partnership exist. — If the 
 
 XXXI. BANKEOTTCT— LIQUIDATION (ACT or 
 
 1869) — continued. 
 statement of affairs fails to do this, resolutions 
 passed by the creditors under the petition ought 
 not to be registered. — The statement of affairs 
 ought not to be supplemented by afSdavits filed 
 after the meeting of the creditors. Ex 'parte 
 Buckley. In re Btjoklet 16 Ch. L. 513 
 
 11. Statement of Affairs — Sufficiency — 
 
 Debtor in Partnership — Solvent Partner — -Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 125, 
 126.] A debtor who carries on one business 
 alone, and another in partnership, must wheli he 
 files a liquidation petition (his partner being sol- 
 vent) set forth in his statement of affairs the 
 assets and liabilities of the partnership business 
 in detail, as well as his own separate assets and 
 liabilities; i.e. in each case he must give the 
 names of the creditors, with the amount due to 
 each and the names of the debtors, with the 
 amount due from each. He must also state the 
 account between himself and his partner, so as to 
 shew the balance (if any) due to him. — If he does 
 not give these particulars, his statement of affairs 
 will be insuflSoient, and any liquidation or com- 
 position resolutions founded on it cannot be re- 
 gistered. — If for any reason it is impossible for' 
 the debtor to make such a statement of the affairs 
 of the partnership, he cannot have a liquidation 
 of his affairs by arrangement or a composition, 
 but must submit to bankruptcy. — If without set- 
 ting out the above particulars in his statement of 
 affairs, the debtor refers (in such a way as to in- 
 corporate it with his statement) to a report made 
 by an accountant which contains the necessary 
 information, and which is produced to the meet- 
 ings of creditors, — Semble, that this would be a 
 sufficient statement. Ex parte Amoe. In re Amok 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 694 
 
 12. Statement of Affairs — Time at which 
 
 Interest should be calculated — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869, s. 126— Bankruptcy Bules, 1870, rr. 77, 92, 
 2,7 i— Bankruptcy Forms, 1870, No. 39.] In a 
 debtor's statement of his affairs presented to the 
 first meeting of his creditors under a liquidation 
 petition under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, he is 
 bound only to shew the state of his affairs at the 
 date of the filing of the petition, and is not, 
 therefore, bound to calculate interest on interest- 
 bearing debts beyond that date. Exparte Fewings. 
 In re Snetd - - 25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 13. Transfer to Another Court — Meetings 
 
 of Joint and Separate Creditors — Bankruptcy 
 Bules, 1870, rr. 285, 288.] The proceedings under 
 a liquidation petition filed by partners cannot be 
 transferred from the Court in which they were 
 commenced to another Court, unless a resolution 
 directing the transfer is passed, not only by a, 
 general meeting of the joint creditors, but also 
 by separate general meetings of the separate cre- 
 ditors of each partner. — Rule 285 applies to all 
 cases in which meetings of creditors have to be- 
 held under a liquidation petition by partners, and 
 in all such cases separate meetings must be held 
 of the joint creditors and of the separate creditors 
 of each partner. Ex parte Hobeooks. In re Wood- 
 ^ [19 Ch, D, 367 
 
 Assets— Chose in action— Notice 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankbuptcy— Assets. 15. [881 
 H 
 
( 195 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 196 ) 
 
 XXXII. BANKRUPTCY — COMPOSITION (ACT 
 OF 1869). 
 
 !■ " Extraordinary Eesolutioa " — Secured 
 
 Creditor — Execution levied before Registration — 
 Banlcruplcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, c. 71), ». 126.] 
 A non-assenting creditor of a compounding 
 debtor under sect. 126 of the Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869, against whom no equity can be raised by 
 reason of his personal conduct, can acquire a valid 
 security for his debt by levying an execution on 
 the debtor's goods at any time before the registra- 
 tion of the extraordinary resolution accepting the 
 composition. — The resolution does not become an 
 " extraordinary " one until it has been confirmed 
 at the second meeting of the creditors, and it has 
 no validity whatever until it is registered. — The 
 mere fact that a judgment creditor, who is entered 
 in the debtor's statement of affairs as having no 
 security for his debt, is present in silence at the 
 first meeting of the creditors, not proving his debt 
 or taking any other part in the proceedings, will 
 not raise an equity against him so as to prevent 
 his levying an execution on his judgment, and 
 thus acquiring a valid security for his debt before 
 the registration of an extraordinary resolution ac- 
 cepting a composition. Ex parte MoLaben. In 
 re MoCoLLA - - - 16 Ch. D. 534 
 
 2. ■ Besolutions — Registration — Fresence of 
 
 Debtor at Creditors' Meetings— Bankruptcy Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 126.] The meaning 
 of sect. 126 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, is that 
 the debtor must as a rule be personally present 
 at the meetings of his creditors to consider a pro- 
 posed composition, and personally produce his 
 statement of affairs. — It is not sufficient that he 
 should be in a room immediately adjoining that 
 in which the meeting is held, ready to be called 
 in if the creditors wish to examine him, even 
 though the creditors are informed of tliis. — If he 
 is not actually present in the room, he is bound 
 to shew that he was prevented by sickness, or 
 that the creditors, for some other cause satisfac- 
 tory to them, excused his presence. If he does 
 not do this, any resolutions passed accepting a 
 <;omposition wiU be invalid and cannot be regis- 
 tered. — Ex parte Grunelins (Weekly Notes (1876) 
 -244) considered. Ex parte Best. In re Best 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 488 
 
 3. Besolutions — Registration — Examina- 
 
 Mon of Debtor at Creditors' Meetings — Fresence of 
 Shorthand Writer — Duty of Chairman — Statement 
 
 .of Affairs — Imufficiency — Irregularity of Froceed- 
 ijigs — Order to summonfresh Meeting — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 126— Bank- 
 ruptcy Rules, 1870, rr. 208, 295.] Inasmuch as 
 the answers given by a debtor to questions put 
 to him at the meetings of his creditors under a 
 liquidation petition form part of his statement of 
 affairs, it is essential tliat a written record of 
 -those answers should be made, and therefore a 
 creditor who desires to examine the debtor is en- 
 -titled to have a shorthand writer present at the 
 jneetiiig to take notes of the examination, though, 
 if several creditors wish to employ a shorthand 
 writer, the meeting has power to limit the num- 
 ber who may be present. — It is no part of tlie 
 duty, of the chairman of the meeting to take notes 
 of the debtor's examination.— Per Jessel, M.R. : 
 If for any reason a debtor who files a liquidation 
 
 XXXII. BANKEUPTCT — COMPOSITION (ACT 
 
 OF 1669)— continued. 
 petition is unable to produce a proper statement 
 of his affairs, he cannot have a liquidation by 
 arrangement or composition, but must submit to 
 be made a bankrupt.^A meeting of creditors 
 under a liquidation petition refused to allow a 
 shorthand writer to be present on behalf of one of 
 the creditors to take notes of the debtor's exami- 
 nation by him, and no note of the examination 
 was taken. The debtor's written statement of 
 his affairs was, in the opinion of the Court, 
 grossly insufficient. Besolutions accepting a 
 composition were passed by the statutory majo- 
 rity : — Held, that the proceedings were irregular, 
 and that the resolutions ought not to be regis- 
 tered : — But held, that there being no proof of 
 mala fldeS; and as the large majority of the cre- 
 ditors had shewn that they desired to have a 
 composition, a fresh meeting ought to be sum- 
 moned. — And leave was given to use at the fresh 
 meeting the proofs and proxies which were already 
 on the file.— ^a; paHe Best (18 Ch. D. 488) ex- 
 plained. Ex parte Solomon. In re Tillet 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 281 
 
 4. Besolutions — Registration — Small 
 
 Amount of Assets — Abuse of Process of Court — 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 126 — Bankruptcy Rules, 
 1870, r. 295.] The creditors of a debtor whose 
 debts amounted to £304 18s., and whose assets 
 were only £8 13s., resolved to accept a composi- 
 tion of 3d. in the pound, the payment of which 
 was to be secured by one of the creditors. The 
 registration of the resolutions was opposed by a 
 dissentient creditor : — Held, that, ha-ving regard 
 to the small amount of the composition, the reso- 
 lutions must have been passed solely in the inte- 
 rest of the debtor; that they were an abuse of 
 the process of the Court ; and that they ought 
 not to be registered. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., 
 reversed. Ex parte Eussell. In re Eobins 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 778 
 
 6. Besolutions — Registration — Small 
 
 Amount of Assets — Security — Bona fides — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. a. 71), s. 126— 
 Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, ■/-. 295.] Held, that reso- 
 lutions accepting a composition of Is. in the 
 pound ought to be registered, the debtor having 
 no assets, but the payment of the composition 
 being secured by a third person. — The question 
 in all such oases is whether the creditors, in 
 accepting the composition offered, have acted 
 bona fide, i.e., in the interest of the creditors, and 
 not merely with a view to benefit the debtor. — 
 There is no hard and fast line as to the amount 
 of composition which may be accepted, except 
 that the sum must not be so small that no reason- 
 able man would accept it ; for in such a case the 
 amount would in itself be evidence of want of 
 bona fides. — There is no absolute rule that a 
 debtor who has no assets cannot file a liquidation 
 petition.- ^x parte Terrell (4 Ch. D. 293) dis- 
 tinguished. Ex parte Hudson. In re Walton 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 773 
 
 6. Besolutions — Registration — Small 
 
 Amount of Composition — Abuse of Procedure of 
 Court— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. 
 c. 71), s. 126— Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, r. 295.] 
 The statement of affaii-s of a debtor, who had 
 
( 197 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 198 ) 
 
 XXXII. BANKEUPTCY— COMPOSITION (ACT 
 
 OF 1869) — continued. 
 filed a, liquidation petition, shewed that his debts 
 amounted to £1293, and that he had no assets. 
 At the first meeting of liis creditors he admitted 
 in answer to questions put to him that he was in 
 the receipt of a salary of £5 a week. The credi- 
 tors resolved hy the proper statutory majority to 
 accept a composition otGd. in the pound, to be 
 paid withia a month after the registration of the 
 resolutions, and to be secured to the satisfaction 
 of the chaiimau of the meeting. The resolutions 
 were confirmed at the second meeting: — Seld, 
 that the proceedings were an abuse of the process 
 of the Court, and that the resolutions ought not 
 to be registered. — Ex parte Staff (Law Eep. 20 
 Eq. 775) approved. Ex parte Ball. In re Pak- 
 NELL - - - 20 Ch. D. 670 
 
 7. Resolutions— jSmaH Amount of Com- 
 position — Want of Bona fidei — Registration — 
 Duty of Registrar — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 71), «. ne— Bankruptcy Buhs, 1870, 
 r. 295.] When the Eegistrar is satisfied, either 
 from the small amount of composition offered or 
 otherwise, that resolutions accepting a composi- 
 tion have been passed in the interest of the 
 debtor, and not for the benefit of the creditors, it 
 is his duty to refuse to register them, even though 
 no creditor opposes the registration. — Kesolutions 
 accepting a composition of 2d. in the pound, pay- 
 able in three months, and not secured in any 
 way, were passed by the statutory majority of a 
 debtor's creditors. His statement of affairs shewed 
 that he had no assets: — Seld, that the resolu- 
 tions must have been passed in the interest of the 
 debtor, not of the creditors ; that they could not 
 therefore bind tlie dissentient creditors ; and that 
 the Eegistrar was right in refusing to register 
 them, though no creditor opposed the registra- 
 tion.— fi; parte Elworthy (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 742) 
 not followed. Ex parte Williams. In re Wil- 
 liams - - - 18 Ch. D. 496 
 
 8. Eesolutions — Vacating Begistration — 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. o. 71), ss. 82, 
 127.] A debtor will not be allowed, by delaying 
 registration of the resolutions, to postpone pay- 
 ment of a composition which has been accepted 
 by his creditors. — ^Accordingly a delay of more 
 than three weeks, owing to non-payment by in- 
 advertence of the fees for stamps in obtaining the 
 registration of resolutions for a composition, is 
 ground for vacating, on the application of a 
 creditor, the registration. Ex parte Whitnall. 
 In re Whitnall - - - 20 Ch. D. 438 
 
 9. ~ — Statement ot ASeixa— Creditor omitted 
 — Application after Begistration of Eesolutions to 
 admit Froof — Jurisdiction of Court — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 126.] After 
 the registration of simple composition resolutions 
 (by which no trustee is appointed for the receipt 
 and distribution of the composition and no secu- 
 rity is given for its payment) the proceedings are 
 at an end, and the Court of Bankruptcy has no 
 jurisdiction to entertain an application by a 
 creditor, who was omitted from the debtor's state- 
 ment of affairs, and who has taken no part in the 
 proceedings, for the admission of a proof of his 
 debt.— jBa; parte Oarew (Law Eep. 10 Ch. 308) 
 
 XXXII. BANKRUPTCY— COMPOSITION (ACT 
 
 OF 1869)— continued, 
 explained and distinguished — Breslauer v, Brown 
 (3 App. Cas. 672) explained. — Decision of Bacon, 
 C. J., reversed. Ex parte Lacev. In re Lacey 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 131 
 
 10. Statement of ASails^Misstatement of 
 
 Debt — Action by Creditor — Injunction — Correction 
 of Error— Delay— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. a. 71), s. 126 — Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, 
 r. 306.] A liquidating debtor in his statement oif 
 affairs by mistake inserted the amount of the 
 debt due by him to one of his creditors as £17, 
 the amount being really £17 15s. : — Held, that 
 the creditor was not bound by composition reso- 
 lutions which were passed by the statutory 
 majority, but to which he did not assent. — Held, 
 also, that, after a delay of four months from the 
 time when the debtor first became aware of the 
 mistake, the Court would not restrain the creditor 
 from proceeding with an action for the debt, even 
 for the purpose of enabling the debtor to summon 
 a general meeting of his creditors, under rule 306, 
 in order to obtain their assent to the correction 
 of the mistake in the statement of affairs. — Per 
 Fry, L.J. : Whether, having regard to the nega- 
 tive words of sect. 126, an injunction could be in 
 any case granted for such a purpose, gusere. — 
 Burliner v. Moyle (5 0. P. D. 351) approved. 
 Ex parte Engelhaedt. In re Engelhaedt 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 706 
 
 11. Subsequent Agreement to pay one 
 
 Creditor in 'Evil— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 71, s. 126.] After composition resolutions 
 under spot. 126 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, have 
 been passed and registered, the debtor cannot, 
 before the completion of the composition in ac- 
 cordance with the resolutions, enter into a valid 
 agreement with one of the creditors who is bound 
 by the resolutions, to pay him his debt in full 
 even though the creditor agrees at the same time 
 to give the debtor fresh credit. — Such an agree- 
 ment would be inconsistent with good faith to the 
 other creditors, and with the spirit of sect. 126. — 
 The debtor does not stand in the same position as 
 a discharged bankrupt until the composition has 
 been fully paid. — Jakeman v. Cook (4 Ex. D. 26) 
 distinguished, on the ground that there the debtor 
 had obtained his discharge in a liquidation by 
 arrangement. Ex parte Babeow. In re Andeews 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 464 
 
 Annulment of bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptct — Annul- 
 ment. 
 Proof under - - 19 Ch. D. 394 
 
 /See Bankeuptcy — Seoueed£eeditoe. 5. 
 
 BAH KRUPTCY— Appellant - 10 App. Cas. 171 
 
 See Scotch Law — Peaotioe. 1. 
 
 Assignee — Intestate — ■ Administration de 
 
 bonis non 6 P. D. 104 
 
 See Administeatob — Limited. 1. 
 
 Australian — Eeal estate in England 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 674 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 
 Banknipt executor— One of two executors — 
 
 Costs - - 18 Ch. D. 616 
 
 See ExEOUTOH — Actions. 10. 
 
 H 2 
 
( 199 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 200 ) 
 
 Bantrupt petitioner for divorce 
 
 BANKETIPTCY— eontimtfctZ. 
 
 Bankrupt executor or administrator — 
 
 Conduct of suit - - 19 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Practice — Scpkeme Ooukt — Con- 
 duct OF Cause. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy of husband — Acknowledged 
 
 deed of wife - 23 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 3. 
 
 Bankrupt member of company — Contri- 
 butory 19 Ch. D. 77 ; 26 Ch, D. 415 
 See Company — Contkibutokt. 2, 3. 
 
 Bankrupt member of company — Petition to 
 
 wind up - - 21 Ch. D. 849 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 13. 
 
 Bankrupt member of company — Eights of 
 
 trustee - - - 28 Ch. D. 363 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 1. 
 
 ■ Bankrupt mortgagor — Purchase of mortgage 
 
 by trustee 24 Ch. D. 618 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 1. 
 
 - Claim for 
 7 P. D. 227 
 
 See Practice — Divorce— Costs. 3. 
 
 Bankrupt Plaintiff — Kefusal of trustee to 
 
 proceed 10 ft. B. D. 114 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 1. 
 
 Bankrupt tenant for life — Power of consent- 
 ing - 27 Ch. D. 565 
 See Power — Extinction. 2. 
 
 Bankrupt trustee — Bankruptcy Act, 1883 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883— Staiuies. 
 
 Bankrupt trustee— Costs 21 Ch. D. 862, 865 ; 
 
 [23Ch. D. 195; 25 Ch. D. 175 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 1 — i. 
 
 Bankrupt trustee — Custody of title deeds — 
 
 Wife's estate - - 26 Ch. D. 81 
 
 See Title Deeds. 
 
 Bill of sale — Statement of consideration — 
 
 Power to seize goods 14 ft. B. D. 43 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 13. 
 
 . Condition determining estate on 
 
 See Will— Condition. 3. [21 Ch. D. 838 
 
 Husband of executrix — Action — Costs 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 24 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 35. 
 
 Injunction — Jurisdiction 16 Ch. D. 143 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Jurisdiction — Money in hand of auctioneer 
 
 See Bailment. [19 Ch. D. 86 
 
 Lunatic — Consent of committee 23 Ch. D. 
 
 See Lunatic — Committee. 3. [216 
 
 Maker of unregistered bill of sale 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 254 
 
 See Bill of Sale— Eeoistration. 11. 
 Maliciously procuring 10 App. Cas. 210 
 
 See Champerty. 2. 
 Mauritius, law of- - 9 App. Cas. 413 
 
 See Colonial Law — Mauritius. 2. 
 
 BANKETIPTCY — continued. 
 
 Payment in fraud of creditors — Eight to 
 
 follow money 11 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Deposit. 
 4. 
 
 Petitioning creditor's debt 17 Ch. D. 44 
 
 See Principal and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 Eemoving property with intent to defraud 
 
 creditors — Criminal law 8 ft. B. D. 530 
 See Crimlnal Law — Fraudulent Deb- 
 tor. 
 
 Sale of goodwill by trustee 19 Ch. D. 355 
 
 See Goodwill. 2. 
 
 Scotch law - 9 App. Cas. 966 
 
 jSec Scotch Law — Bankruptcy. 
 
 Scotch law - - 7 App. Cas. 366 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bill op Exchange. 3. 
 
 Scotch law — Delivery before bankruptcy 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 588 
 See Scotch Law — Sale op Goods. 2. 
 
 Secured creditor — Bills of exchange. 
 
 See Cases under Bill op Exchange — 
 Securities for. 
 
 Stoppage In transitu — ^End of transit 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 39; 29 Ch. D. 81» 
 See Sale op Goods — Lien. 2, 4. 
 
 Title of receiver - - 16 Ch. D. 544 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 ceiver. 1. 
 
 Trustee suing in official name 28 Ch. D. 38- 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Se- 
 curity FOR Costs. 8. 
 
 Witness — ^Answer tending to criminate 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 294 
 See Evidence— Witness. 2. 
 
 BANKRUPTCY BVLES — Application to adminis- 
 tration of insolvent estates. 
 See Cases under Executor — Actions. 
 17—21. 
 BANKEUPTCY HULES, 1870, rr. 9, 12 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 439 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 5. 
 
 — r. 17 - - 16 Ch. D. 484 
 See Bankruptcy— Act of Bankruptcy. 
 
 14. 
 
 — rr. 36, 37 24 Ch. D. 364 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 3. 
 
 — r. 43 16 Ch. D. 283 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 1. 
 
 — r. 50 - 19 Ch. D. 21& 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 1. 
 
 19 Ch. D. 680 
 
 See Bankruptcy — E^'IDENCE. 7. 
 
 — rr. 59, 61 25 Ch. D. 112, 336 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 
 19, 20. 
 
 — r. 65 - 20 Ch. D. 697 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 1. 
 
 — rr. 67, 70, 271 24 Ch. D. 477 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 8. 
 
 — rr, 72, 73 21 Ch. D. 537 ; 25 Ch, D, 144 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 1, 2. 
 
 — r. 77 - - - 22 Ch. D, 460 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 13. 
 
( 201 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 202 ) 
 
 BANKSTIPTCY BTILES, lilO— continued. 
 r. 77 - - - 17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 19. 
 rr. 77, 92, 274 25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankktiptcy — Liquidation. 12. 
 rr. 99, 100, 101 - 18 Ch. D. 370 
 
 See ExECDTOB — Actions. 21. 
 rr. 99, 102 - 16 Ch. D. 590 
 
 See Company — Seouked Ceedttob. 2. 
 r. 110 - - 21 Ch. D. 868 
 
 See Bankkuptcy — Assets. 16. 
 rr. 126, 178, 179 7 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 See Bankbcptoy — Trustee. 5. 
 
 r. 143 - 16 Ch. D. 501 ; 19 Ch. D. 169 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 629 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 5, 6, 9. 
 - - 22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Annulment. 1. 
 
 r. 144 - - - 19 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See Bankruptct-^Appeal. 6. 
 r. 145 - 20 Ch. D. 315, 701 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 7, 8. 
 rr. 166, 171 23 Ch. D. 118 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Evidence. 4. 
 
 r. 208 - - 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secueed Creditor. 3. 
 
 rr. 208, 295 - 20 Ch. D. 281 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 3. 
 
 r. 260 - - - 16 Ch. D. 665 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Proceedings. 
 1. 
 
 r. 266 - - 16 Ch. D. 266, 841 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 2, 3. 
 
 r. 268 (1) (a) 15 Q. B. D. 336 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Transfer. 2. 
 r. 272 - 8 App. Cas. 606 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 7. 
 
 rr. 285, 288 - 19 Ch. D. 367 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 13. 
 
 rr. 287, 295 16 Ch. D. 513, 655 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. J). 447 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquidation. 8, 9, 10. 
 
 r. 295 - 18 Ch. D. 495 ; 20 Ch. D. 670 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 773, 778 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 4 — 7. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 706 
 
 -Composition. 10. 
 
 - r. 306 - 
 
 See Bankruptcy- 
 
 rorms. No. 10 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 3. 
 forms. No. 39 25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 12. 
 Tees, Table A - 20 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 7. 
 BANKETJPTCY EULES, 1871, rr. 3, 7 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — EECErrER. 2 [497 
 rr. 6, 6, 7 23 Ch. D. 78 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eboeiver. 3. 
 r. 28 ■ 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Dis- 
 claimer. 
 BANKKUPTCY KULE, May, 1873 16 Ch. D. 501 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 9. 
 
 BANKEUPTCY ETTLES, Nov. 1878, r. 2 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 316, 701 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 7, 8. 
 
 BANEBITPICY EULES, 1883, r, 16, 17, 111 (3) 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 484 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Transfer. 1. 
 
 rr. 19, 174 14 ft. B. D. 385 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 14. 
 
 r. 80 - 15 ft. B. D. 332 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 6. 
 
 r. 58 15 ft. B. D. 159 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Deceased Debtor. 1. 
 
 rr. 68-70 13 ft. B. D. 228 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 4. 
 
 r. 98 - 14 ft. B. D. 298 
 
 See BANBacpTCY — Costs. 2. 
 
 rr. 100, 106 13 ft. B. D. 492 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Costs. 5. 
 
 r. 125, Porm No. 10 - 14 ft. B. D. 22 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 rr. 139, 262, 263, 264 12 ft. B. S. 334 
 
 See Bankruptcy — .Receiver. 4. 
 
 r. 153, Forms Nos. 29 and 30 30 Ch. D. 480 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceiver. 10. 
 
 r. 232 14 ft. B. D. 960 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 21. 
 
 Forms No. 11, 31, 32 - 13 ft. B. D. 582 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Deceased Debtor. 3. 
 
 Sched. 1, rr. 10, 12; Sched. 2, rr. 9, 10, ll, 
 
 12, 13 - 13 ft. B. D. 128 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 11. 
 
 Sched. 2, r. 13; rr. 113, 114a, 116a 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 121 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 12. 
 BAPTISM— Kegister of— Date of birth 
 
 [29 Ch. B. 985 
 See Evidence — Declaration by de- 
 ceased Person. 1. 
 BAEE TETTSTEE — Vendor and Purchaser Act 
 
 [29 Ch. B. 693 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance. 3. 
 BAEGE--" Ship or boat " - - 7 P. D. 126 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 8. 
 BAEE&TEY — Detention of ship for smuggling — 
 Barratrous act of master — Warranty 
 free from capture and seizure. 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 463 ; 8 App. Cas. 393 
 See Insurance, Marine — Policy. 3. 
 BAEEIEE — Covenant to leave — Coal mine 
 
 See Mine— Lease. 2. [23 Ch. D. 81 
 BAEBISTEE — Law of Quebec— Eemuneration 
 
 [9 App. Cas, 748 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 7. 
 
 BASTAEDY. 
 
 1. Affiliation Order—Arrears — Discretion 
 
 of Justices to enforce Payment — 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, 
 s. 5—35 ll- 36 Vict. c. 65, s. 4.] By 7 & 8 Vict. 
 0. 101, s. 5, all money payable under a bastardy 
 order "shall be due and payable to the, mother of 
 the bastard child in respect of such time and so 
 
( 203 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 204 ) 
 
 BASTARDY — continued. 
 
 long as she lives. . . ." By 35 & 36 Vict. c. 65, 
 s. 4, if it be made to appear to any one justice 
 that any sum to be paid in pu'suance of such 
 order has not been paid, Buch justice may, by 
 ■warrant, cause the putative father to be brouglit 
 up before any two justices, and in case he neglect 
 or refuse payment they may by warrant direct the 
 sum to be recovered by distress, and may detain 
 him until the return to the warrant of distress ; 
 but if on the return, or by admission, it appear 
 that no sufficient distress can be had, they may, 
 if they see fit, cause him to be committed : — Held, 
 by Grove, J., that the enforcement by the justices 
 of the payment of sums due under such order is 
 discretionary. By Huddleston, B., that the justices 
 are bound to enforce it. Davies v. Evans 
 
 [9 Q,. B. S. 238 
 
 3.— —Maintenance Order — Marriage of Mother 
 after making of Order — Liability of Putative 
 Father.^ An order obtained by a single woman 
 for the maintenance of a basterd child can be 
 enforced against the putative father after the 
 marriage of the mother. Sothekon v. Scott 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 518 
 
 3. Maintenance Order — Marriage of 
 
 Mother after malcing of Order — Liability of Puta- 
 tive Father — Ability of Husband to maintain 
 Bastard Child.'] An order obtained by a woman 
 for the maintenance of a bastard child can be 
 enforced against the putative father after the 
 marriage of the mother, although her husband is 
 able to maintain the child. Habdy v. Atherton 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 264 
 
 4. Maintenance Order — Order made since 
 
 35 & 36 Vict. c. 65, for Payment until the Child 
 attains the age of Sixteen or the Mother marries — ■ 
 Discretion of Justices to order Payment for less than 
 Maximum Period.'] Tlie justices have a discretion 
 under i35 & 36 Vict. u. 65, to order weekly pay- 
 ments for the maintenance of a bastard child for 
 a less period than the maximum period given by 
 sect. 5 of the Act, and consequently, where the 
 justices made an order for weekly payments until 
 the child attained the age of sixteen or the mother 
 married, such order was held not to be in force 
 after the marriage of the mother. Peaeson v. 
 Hbys - - 7 Q. B. D. 260 
 
 8. Maintenance Order— Order for Payment 
 
 until the Child attains the age of Tldrteen or the 
 Mother marries — Marriage of Mother — Power of 
 Justices to make second Order after death of Hus- 
 band.] Upon the hearing of an affiliation sum- 
 mons the justices made an order under 35 & 36 
 Vict. c. 65, for the payment of a weekly sum until 
 the child should attain the age of thirteen years 
 or die, or the mother should marry. The mother 
 married, and her husband died before the child 
 attained the age of thirteen. The mother took 
 out a fresh summons upon which the justices made 
 an order for payment of a weekly allowance : — 
 Held (Hawkins, J., doubting), tliat the matter 
 was res judicata, and the second order was bad. 
 Williams v. Davies - 11 ft. B. D. 74 
 
 6. Service of Summons — Scotland — Juris- 
 diction of Justices where Putative Father resident 
 in Scotland — Bastardy Laws Amendment Act, 1872 
 (35 <fe 36 'Vict. c. 65)— Summary Jurisdiction (Pro- 
 cess) Act, 1881 (44 & 45 'Vict. c. 24), 88. 4, 6.] The 
 
 BASTARDY — continued. 
 
 Summary Jurisdiction (Process) Act 1881 (44 & 45 
 Vict. c. 24) does not enable a bastardy summons 
 to be issued by justices in England and served in 
 Scotland upon the putative father domiciled and 
 resident in Scotland ; and if a summons is so 
 served and the putative father does not appear 
 before the justices they have no jurisdiclion to 
 mHke a bastardy order against him. — So helcC, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal. 
 Eeg. v. Thompson. Bekkley v. Thompson 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 261 ; 10 App. Cas. 45 
 
 7. Witness — Voluntary Attendance — Be- 
 
 fusal to give Evidence ■ — • Power of Justices to 
 commit — 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 70 — Bastardy Laws 
 Amendment Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 65), s. 4.] 
 By 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101, s. 70, justices may, at the 
 request of any party to bastardy proceedings 
 before them, summon any person to appear and 
 give evidence upon the matter of such proceed- 
 ings, and if the person summoned neglect or 
 refuse to appear the justice by warrant may 
 require such person to be brought before him or 
 any justices before whom such proceedings are 
 to be had, " and if any person coming or brought 
 before any such justice in any such proceedings 
 refuse to give evidence thereon," the justices may 
 commit such person to the house of correction : — 
 Held (by Grove and Hawkins, JJ., Smith, J., 
 disseutiug), that the power to commit extended 
 to any witness, and was not confined to witnesses 
 who appeared in answer to a summons or warrant. 
 The Qceen v. Plavell - 14 ft. B. D. 364 
 
 BASTARDY ORDERS— Service of, in Scotland 
 See Justices — Pkactice — Statutes. 
 
 BATH— Supply of water 25 Ch. D. 443, 446, u. 
 
 See Wateewokks Company — Supply op 
 Watek. 3, 4. 
 
 BATHS AND WASH-HOUSES. 
 
 Tlie Act 45 *46 Vict. c. 30, amends and extends 
 9 & 10 Vict. V. 74, ss. 24 & 27, and gives increased 
 facilities to local authorities for providing baths and 
 wash-houses. 
 
 BEER— Duty— Brewer 10 ft. B. D. 483 
 
 See Revenue — Excise. 
 
 Duty 
 
 See Eevenue — Customs — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 
 ■ Sale of — Breach of covenant 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 646, 718 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 6, 7. 
 
 Sale of — Licence. 
 
 See Cases under Inn — Licence. 
 
 BEER DEALERS RETAIL LICENCES AMEND- 
 MENT ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Inn — Licence — Statutes. 
 
 BEERHOUSE— Covenant not to keep 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 645, 718 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 6, 7. 
 Covenant not to sell land for 19 Ch. D. 268 
 
 See.CovENANT — Running with Land. 1. 
 BEGGING - 12 ft. B. D. 306 
 
 See Vageant Acts. 3. 
 BENEFICE— Mortgage— 13 Eliz. c. 20 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 520 
 
 See MoETGAGE — Conteact. 3. 
 
( 205 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 206 ) 
 
 BENEFICE— contimuecZ. 
 
 Right of presentation — Consolidation — 
 
 Quare iinpedit - 16 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 See Advowson. 2. 
 BETTING— Employment of agent to bet in his 
 
 own name — Authority to pay bet. 
 
 See Gaming. 1. [13 Q. B. D. 779 
 Employment of agent to bet for principal — 
 
 Action for the money received 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 363 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Pbinoipal's 
 Liability. 7. 
 
 ■ Place used for betting. 
 
 See Oases under Gaming. 
 
 4—7. 
 
 BICYCIE GROUND— Eaces— Betting— Liability 
 
 of manager - 13 Q. B. D. 377 
 
 See Gaming. 4. 
 BIGAMY— Evidence - - 11 Q. B. D. 118 
 
 See Cbiminal Law — Bigamy. 2. 
 
 Presumption of duration of life 
 
 [6 Q. B. Q. 366 
 
 See Criminal Law — Bigamy. 1. 
 BILL or COSTS. 
 
 See Oases under Solicitor — Bill op 
 Costs. 
 Charge on property recovered 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Lien. 1-7. 
 
 BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FBOMISSOBY 
 
 NOTE):- Col. 
 
 I. Statutes - 205 
 
 II. Acceptance 231 
 
 III. Alteration. - 231 
 
 IV. Consideration - 232 
 V. Foreign Bill - 233 
 
 VI. Liability op Parties 233 
 
 Vn. Securities for - 233 
 
 VIII. Transfer. - 268 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FBOUISSOBY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. v. 61 (the Bills of Ex- 
 change Act, 1882) repeals divers enactments (in- 
 eluding the Sills of Exchange Act, 1878, and the 
 Crossed Cheques Act, 1876), and codifies the law 
 relating to bills of exchange, cheques, and promis- 
 sory notes. 
 
 1. JBUls of exchange. 
 
 2. Cheques and crossed cheques. 
 
 3. Dividend warrants. 
 
 4. Promissory notes. 
 
 General.] Sect. 2. In the Act, unless the con- 
 text otherwise requires, — 
 
 "Acdeptanee" means an acceptance completed 
 hy delivery or notification. 
 
 " Actimi " incluxles counterclaim and set-off. 
 
 " Banker '' includes a iody of persons whether 
 incorporated or not who carry on the business 
 of banking. 
 
 " Bankrupt " includes any person whose estate is 
 vested in a trustee or assignee under the law 
 for the time being in force relating to bank- 
 ruptcy. 
 
 " Bearer " means the person in possession of a 
 bill or note which is payable to bearer. 
 
 "Bill" means bill of exchange, and "note" 
 means promissory note. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOBY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conMnued. 
 
 " Delivery " means transfer of possession, actual 
 or constructive, from one person to another. 
 
 " Solder " means the payee or indorsee of a bill 
 or note who is in possession of it, or the bearer 
 thereof. 
 
 " Indorsement " means an indorsement completed 
 by delivery. 
 
 " Issue " means the first delivery of a bill or note, 
 complete in form to a person who takes it as 
 a holder. 
 
 " Person " includes a body of persons whether 
 incorporated or not. 
 
 " Value " m^ans valuable consideration. 
 
 " Written " includes printed, and " writing " in- 
 cludes print. 
 
 Sect. 90. A thing is deemed to be done in good 
 faith, within the meaning of this Act, where it is 
 in fact done honestly, whether it is done negligently 
 or not. 
 
 Sect. 91. — (1.) Wliere, by this Act, any instru- 
 ment or writing is required to be signed by any 
 person, it is not necessary that he should sign it 
 with his own hand, hut it is sufficient if his signa- 
 ture is written thereon by some other person by or 
 under his authority. 
 
 (2.) In the case of a corporation, where, by this 
 Act, any instrument or writing is required to be. 
 signed, it is sufficient if the instrument or writincj 
 be sealed with the corporate seal. 
 
 But nothing in this section shall be construed as 
 requiring the hill or note of a corporation to he 
 wilder seal. 
 
 Sect. 92. Wliere,by this Act, the time limited for 
 doing any act or thing is less than three days, in 
 reckoning time, non-husiness days are excluded. 
 
 " Non-husiness days " for the purposes of this Act 
 mean — 
 
 (a.) Sunday, Good Friday, Christmas Day : 
 (b.) A bank holiday under the Bank Holidays 
 
 Act, 1871, or Acts amending it : 
 (c.) A day appointed by Royal proclamation 
 as a public fast or thanksgiving day. 
 
 Any other day is a business day. 
 
 Sect. 93. For the purposes of this Act, where a 
 bill or'note is required to he protested within a speci- 
 fied time or before some further proceeding is taken, 
 it is sufficient that the hill has been noted for protest 
 before the expiration of the specified time or the 
 taking of the proceeding ; and the formal protest 
 may be extended at any time (hereafter as of the 
 date of the noting. 
 
 Sect. 94. Wliere a dishonoured bill or note is 
 authorizefi or required to be protested, and the ser- 
 vices of a notary cannot he obtained at the place 
 where the bill is dishonoured, any householder or 
 substantial resident of the place may, in the pre- 
 sence of two witnesses, give a certificate, signed by 
 them, attesting the dishonour of the bill, and the 
 certificate shall in all respects operate as if it were 
 a formal protest of the bill. 
 
 The form given in Schedule I. of this Act may be 
 used with necessary modifications, and if used shall 
 he sufficient. 
 
 Sect. 96 repeals enactments mentioned in the 
 second schedule to this Act as from the commence- 
 ment of this Act to the extent in that schedule men- 
 tion^ : 
 
 Provided that such repeal shall not affect any- 
 
( 207 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 208 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FBOUISSOBT 
 
 NOTE)— STATITTES— oonfe'mued. 
 thing drnie or suffered, or any right, title, or interest 
 acquired or accrued before the commencement of tJie 
 Act, or any legal proceeding or remedy in respect of 
 any such thing, right, title, or interest. 
 
 Sect. 97. — (1.) The rules in bankruptcy relating 
 to bills of exchatige, promissory notes, and cheques 
 shall continue to apply thereto notwithstanding 
 anything in this Act contained. 
 
 (2.) The rules of common law including the law 
 merchant, save in so far as they are inconsistent 
 with the express provisions of this Act, shall continue 
 to apply to bills of exchange, promissory notes, and 
 cheques. 
 
 (3.) Nothing in this Act, or in any repeal effected 
 thereby, shall affect — 
 
 (a.) The provisions of the Stamp Act, 1870, or 
 Acts amending it or any law or eruichment 
 for the time being in force relating to the 
 revenue : 
 (b.) The provisions of the Companies Act, 1862, 
 or Acts amending it, or any Act relating 
 to joint stock banks or companies : 
 (c.) The provisions of any Act relating to or 
 confirming the privileges of the Sank of 
 England or the Bank of Ireland respec- 
 tively : 
 (d.) Tlie validity of any usage relating to divi- 
 dend, warrants or the indorsements thereof. 
 Sect. 99. Where any Act or document refers to 
 any enactinent repealed by this Act, the Act or docu- 
 ment shall be construed and shall operate as if it 
 referred to the corresponding provisions of this Act. 
 
 1. Bills of Exchange. 
 
 Form, Interpretation, and Acceptance. 
 
 Capacity and Authority of Parties. 
 
 Consideration. 
 
 Negotiation. 
 
 Megistration. 
 
 Fresentment for Acceptance and Notice of Dis- 
 honour. 
 
 Acceptance and Payment for Honour. 
 
 lAabilitiei of Parties. 
 
 Discharge, Alteration, and Cancellation, &c., of 
 Bills. 
 
 Lost Bills. 
 
 Bills in a Set. 
 
 Conflict of Laws. 
 
 Form, Interpretation, and Acceptance.] Sect. 3. 
 — (1.) A bill of exchange is an unconditional order 
 in writing, addressed by one person to another, 
 signed by the person giving it, requiring the person 
 to whom it is addressed to pay on demand or at a 
 fixed or determinable future time a sum certain in 
 money to or to the order of a specified person or to 
 bearer. 
 
 (2.) An instrument which does not comply with 
 these conditions, or which orders any cuit to be done 
 in addition to the payment of money, is not a bill 
 of exchange. 
 
 (3.) An order to pay out of a particular fund is 
 not unconditional within the meaning of this sec- 
 tion; but an unqualified order to pay, coupled 
 with (a) an indication of a particular fwnd out of 
 which the drawee is to re-imburse himself or a par- 
 ticular account to be debited with the amount, or 
 (b) a statement of the transaction which gives rise 
 to the bill, is unconditional. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PBOmiSSOET 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conMnttetJ. 
 
 (4.) A bill is not invalid by reason — 
 
 (a.) That it is not dated : 
 
 (b.) That it does not specify the value given, or 
 that any value has been given therefor : 
 
 (c.) That it does not specify the place where it is 
 drawn, or the place where it is payable. 
 
 Sect. 4. — (1.) An inland bill is a bill which is 
 or on the face of it purports to be (a) both drawn 
 or payable within the British Islands, or (b) 
 drawn within the British Islands upon someperson 
 resident therein. Any other bill is a foreign bill. 
 
 For the purposes of the Act " British Islands " 
 mean any part of the United Kingdom of Great 
 Britain, the Channel Islands, and the Isle of 
 Man. 
 
 (2.) Unless the contrary appear on the fcux of 
 the bill the holder may treat it as an inland bill. 
 
 Sect. 5. — (1.) A bill may be drawn payable to, 
 or to the order of, the drawer ; or it may be drawn 
 payable to, or to the order of, the drawee. 
 
 (2.) Where in a bill drawer and drawee are the 
 same person, or where the dratoee is a fictitious, 
 person or a person not having capacity to contract, 
 the holder may treat the instrument, at his option, 
 either as a bill of exchange or as a promissory note. 
 
 Sect. 6. — (1). The drawee must be named or 
 otherwise indicated in a bill with reasonable 
 certainty. 
 
 (2.) A bill may be addressed to two or more 
 drawees whether they are partners or not, but an 
 order addressed to two drawees in the alternative 
 or to two or more drawees in succession is not a 
 bill of exchange. 
 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) Where a bill is not payable to 
 bearer, the payee must be named or otherwise in- 
 dicated therein with reasonable certainty. 
 
 (2.) A bill may be made payable to two or more 
 payees jointly, or it may be made payable in the 
 alternative to one of two, or one or some of several 
 payees. A bill may also be made payable to tlte 
 holder of an office for the time being. 
 
 (3.) Where the payee is a fictitious or non- 
 existing person the hill may be treated as payable 
 to bearer. 
 
 Sect. 8. — (1.) When a bill contains words pro- 
 hibiting transfer, or indicating an intention that 
 it should not be transferable, it is valid as between 
 the parties thereto, but is not negotiable. 
 
 (2.) A negotiable bill may be payable either to 
 order or to bearer, 
 
 (3.) A bill is payable to bearer which is expressed 
 to be so payable, or on which the only or last in- 
 dorsement is an indorsement in blank. 
 
 (4.) A bill is payable to order which is expressed 
 to be so payable, or which is expressed to be payable 
 to a particular person, and does not contain words 
 prohibiting transfer or indicating an intention that 
 it should not be transferable. 
 
 (5.) Where a bill, either originally or by in- 
 dorsement, is expressed to be payable to the order 
 of a specified person, and not to him or his order, 
 it is nevertheless payable to him or his order at his 
 option. 
 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) The sum payable by a bill is a sum 
 certain within the meaning of this Act, although it 
 is required to be paid — 
 
 (a.) With interest. 
 
 (b.) By stated instalments. 
 
( 209 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 210 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PBOMISSOBY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— eo»<m«e(Z. 
 (c.) By stated instalments, with a provision that 
 upon default in payment of any instalment 
 the whole shall become due. 
 (d.) According to an indicated rate of exchange, 
 or according to a rate of exchange to he 
 ascertained as directed by the bill. 
 (2.) When the sum, •payable is expressed in words 
 and also in figures, and there is a disarepancy 
 between the two, the sum denoted by the words is 
 the amount payable. 
 
 (3.) Where a bill is expressed to be payable with 
 interest, unless the instrument otherwise provides 
 interest runs from the date of the bill, and if the 
 bill is undated from the issue thereof. 
 
 Sect. 10. — (1.) A bill is payable on demand — 
 (a.) Which is expressed to be payable on demand 
 
 or at sight, or on presentation, or 
 (b.) in ivhich no time for payment is expressed. 
 (2.) When a bill is accepted or indorsed when it 
 is overdue, it shall, as regards the acceptor who so 
 accepts, or any indorser who so indorses it, be deemed 
 a bill payable on demand. 
 
 Sect. 11. A bill is payable at a determinable 
 future time within the meaning of this Act, which 
 is expressed to be payable — 
 
 (iT) At a fixed period after date or sight. 
 (2.) On or at a fixed period after the occurrence 
 of a specified event which is certain to 
 happen though the time of happening may 
 be uncertain. 
 An instrument expressed to be payable on a 
 contingency is not u, hill, and the happen- 
 ing of the event does not cure the defect. 
 Sect. 12. Wliere a hill expressed to he payable at 
 a fixed period after date is issued undated, or where 
 the acceptance of a hill payable at a fixed period 
 after sight is undated, any holder may insert therein 
 the true date of issue or acceptance, and the hill 
 shall he payable accordingly. 
 
 Provided that (1) where the holder in good faith 
 and by mistake inserts a wrong date, and (2) in 
 every case where a wrong date is inserted, if the hill 
 subsequently comes into the haiids of a holder in 
 due course the hill shall not be avoided thereby, but 
 shall operate and he payable as if the date so in- 
 serted had been the true date. 
 
 Sect. 13. — (1.) Where a hill or an acceptance or 
 any indorsement on a hill is dated, the date shall, 
 unless the contrary be proved, be deemed to he the 
 true date of the drawing, acceptance, or indorse- 
 ment, as the case may be. 
 
 (2.) A hill is not invalid by reason only that it is 
 ante-dated or post-dated, or that it bears date on a 
 Sunday. 
 
 Sect. 14. Where a hill is not payable on demand 
 the day on which it falls due is determined as 
 follows : 
 
 (1.) Three days, called days of grace, are, in 
 every case where the hill itself does not 
 otherwise provide, added to the time of 
 payment as fixed by the bill, and the bill is 
 due and payable on the last day of grace : 
 Provided that— 
 (a.) When the last day of grace falls on Sun- 
 day, Christmas Day, Good Friday, or a 
 day appointed by Boyal Proclamation as 
 a public fast or thanksgiving day, the 
 bill is, except in the case hereinafter pro- 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FBOUISSOBT 
 NOTE)— ST ATir lES— continued. 
 
 vided for, due and payable on the pre- 
 ceding business day ; 
 (b.) When the last day of grace is a Bank 
 Holiday (other than Christmas Day or 
 Good Friday} under the Bank Holidays 
 Act, 1871, and Acts amending or ex- 
 tending it, or when the last day of 
 grace is a Sunday, and, the second day 
 of grace is a Bank Holiday, the hill 
 is due and payable on the succeeding 
 business day. 
 (2.) When a bill is payable at a fixed period 
 after date, after sight, or after the happen- 
 ing of a specified event, the time of pay- 
 ment is determined hy excluding the day 
 from which the time is to begin to run, and 
 by including the day of payment. 
 (3.) Where a hill is payable at a fixed period 
 after sight, the time begins to run from the 
 date of the acceptance if the bill be accepted, 
 and from the date of noting or protest if the 
 hill be noted or protested for non-acceptance 
 or for non-delivery. 
 (4.) The term " month " in a bill means calendar 
 
 month. 
 Sect. 15. TTie drawer of a hill and any indorser 
 may insert therein the name of a person to whom 
 the liolder may resort in case of need, that is to 
 say, in case the hill is dishonoured hy non-accept- 
 ance or by non-payment. Such person is called the 
 referee in case of need. It is in the option of the 
 holder to resort to the referee in case of need or 
 not, as he may think fit. 
 
 Sect. 16. The drawer of a bill, and any indorser, 
 may insert therein an express stipulation — 
 
 (1.) Negativing or limiting his own liability to 
 
 the holder : 
 (2.) Waiving as regards himself, some, or all of 
 
 the holder's duties. 
 Sect. 17. — (1.) The acceptance of a hill is tlie 
 signification by the drawee of his assent to the order 
 of the drawer. 
 
 (2.) An acceptance is invalid unless it complies 
 with the following conditions, namely : 
 
 (a.) It must be written on the hill and be signed 
 hy the drawee. The mere signature of the 
 drawee without additional words is suf- 
 ficient. 
 (b.) It must not express that the drawee will 
 perform his promise by any otlier means 
 than the payment of money. 
 Sect. IS. A bill may. be accepted : 
 (1.) Before it has been signed hy the drawer, or 
 
 while otherwise incomplete : 
 (2.) When it is overdue, or after it has been dis- 
 honoured by a previous refusal to accept, 
 or by non-payment : 
 (3.) When a hill payable after sight is dis- 
 honouredby non-acceptance, and the drawee 
 subsequently accepts it, the holder, in the 
 absence of any different agreement, is en- 
 tilled to have the bill accepted as of the 
 date of first presentment to the drawee for 
 acceptance. 
 Sect. 19. — (1.) An acceptance is either (a) gene- 
 ral or (b) qualified. 
 
 (2.) A general acceptance assents luithout quali- 
 fication to the order of the drawer. A qualified 
 
( 211 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 212 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (aud PKOMISSOEY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— cOTiiinued. 
 
 acceptance in express terms varies the effect of the 
 bill as drawn. 
 
 In particular an acceptance is qualified which 
 is — 
 
 (a.) conditional, that is to say, which makes pay- 
 ment by the acceptor dependent on the ful- 
 filment of a condition therein stated : 
 (b.) partial, that is to say, an acceptance to pay 
 part only of the amount for which the bill 
 is drawn : 
 (c.) heal, that is to say, an acceptance to pay 
 
 only at a particular specified place : 
 An acceptance to pay at a piarticular place is a 
 general acceptance, unUss it expressly states 
 that the bill is to be paid there only and 
 not elsewhere : 
 (d.) qualified as to time : 
 (e.) the acceptance of some one or more of the 
 
 drawees, but not of all. 
 Sect. 20. — (1.) Where a simple signature or a 
 hlanh stamped paper is delivered by the signer in 
 order that it may be converted into a bill, it operates 
 as a prima facie authority to fill it up as a com- 
 plete bill for any amounl the stamp will cover, 
 using the signature for that of the drawer or the 
 acceptor, or an indorser ; and, in like manner, 
 when a bill is wanting in any material particular, 
 the person in possession of it has a prima facie 
 authority to fill up the omission in any way he 
 thinks fit. 
 
 (2.) In order that any such instrument when 
 completed may be enforceable against any person 
 loho became a party thereto prior to its completion, 
 it must be filled up within a reasonable time, and 
 strictly in accordance with the authority given. 
 Measonable time for this purpose is a question of 
 fact. 
 
 Provided that if any such instrument after com- 
 pletion is negotiated to a holder in due course it 
 shall he valid and effectual for all purposes in his 
 hands, and he may enforce it as if it had been 
 filled up within a reasonable time, and strictly in 
 accordance with the authority given. 
 
 Sect. 21. — (1.) Every contract on a bill, wliether 
 it be the drawer's, the acceptor's, or an indorser's, 
 is incomplete and retiocable until delivery of the 
 instrument in order to give effect thereto. 
 
 Provided' that where an acceptance is written on 
 a hill, and the drawee gives notice to or according 
 to the directions of the person entitled to the bill 
 that he has accepted it, the acceptance then becomes 
 complete and irrevocable. 
 
 (2.) As between immediate parties, and as re- 
 gards a remote party other than a holder in due 
 course, the delivery — • 
 
 (a.) In order to be effectual must he made either 
 by or under the aiithority of the party 
 drawing, accepting, or indorsing, as the 
 case may he : 
 <!).) May he shewn to have been conditional, or 
 for a special purpose only, and not for the 
 purpose of transferring the property in the 
 bill. 
 But if the hill he in the hands of a holder 
 in due course, a valid delivery of the bill 
 by all parties prior to him so as to make 
 them liable to him is conclusively pre- 
 sumed. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOET 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— co»fentte(J. 
 
 (3.) Where a hill is no longer in the possession 
 of a party who has signed it as drawer, acceptor, 
 or indorser, a valid and unconditional delivery by 
 him is presumed until the contrary is proved. 
 
 Capacity and Authority of Parties.] Sect. 22. 
 (1.) Capacity to incur liajiility as a party to a bill 
 is co-extensive ivith capacity to contract. 
 
 Provided that nothing in this section sliall enahle 
 a corporation to malie itself liable as drawer, 
 acceptor, or indorser of a bill unless it is com- 
 petent to it so to do under the law for the time 
 being in force relating to corporations. 
 
 (2.) Where a bill is drawn or indorsed by an 
 infant, minor, or corporation having no capacity 
 or power to incur liability on a hill, tlie drawing 
 or indorsement entitles the Iwlder to receive pay- 
 ment of the bill, and to enforce it against any 
 other party thereto. 
 
 Sect. 23. No person is liable as drawer, indorser, 
 or acceptor of a bill who has not signed it as such : 
 
 Provided that 
 
 (1) mere a person signs a bill in u trade or 
 assumed name, he is liable thereon as if he 
 had signed it in his oion name : 
 
 (2.) The signature of the name of u, firm is 
 equivalent to the signature by the person so 
 signing of the names of all persons liable 
 as partners in that firm. 
 
 Sect. 24. Subject to the provisions of this Act, 
 where a signature on a bill is forged or placed 
 thereon without the authority of the person whose 
 signature it purports to he, tlie forged or unautho- 
 rized signature is wholly inoperative, and no right 
 to retain the bill or to give a discharge therefor 
 or to enforce payment thereof against any party 
 thereto can be acquired through or wider that sig- 
 nature, unless the party against whom it is sought 
 to retain or enforce payment of the bill is precluded 
 from setting up the forgery or want of authority. 
 
 Provided that nothiTig in this section shaU affect 
 the ratification of an unauthorized signature not 
 amounting to a forgery. 
 
 Sect. 25. A signature by procuration operates 
 as notice that the agent has hut a limited authority 
 to sign, and the principal is only bound by such 
 signature if the agent in so signing was acting 
 within the actual limits of his authority. 
 
 Sect. 26. — (1.) Where a person signs a bill as 
 draioer, indorser, or acceptor, and adds words to 
 his signature indicating that he signs for or on 
 behalf of a principal, or in a representative char- 
 acter, he is not personally liable thereon : hut die 
 mere addition to his signature of words describing 
 him as an agent, or as filling a representative 
 character, does not exempt him from personal 
 liability. 
 
 (2.) In determining whether a signature on a 
 bill is that of the principal or that of the agent by 
 ivhose hand it is written, the construction most 
 favourable to the validity of the instrument shall 
 be adopted. 
 
 Consideration for a Bill.] Sect. 21 .— (1.) Yalu- 
 able consideration for a bill may be constituted 
 by— 
 
 (a.) Any consideration sufficient to support u. 
 simple contract ; 
 
 (b.) An antecedent debt or liability. Stick a 
 debt or liability is deemed valuable con- 
 
( 213 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 214 ) 
 
 I. BIIL OF EXCHANGE (and PBOMISSOEY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— oonimitec?. 
 
 sideration whether the hill is payable on 
 
 demand or at a future time. 
 
 (2.) Wliere valug has at any time been given for 
 
 a hill the holder is deemed to he a holder for value 
 
 as regards the acceptor, and all parties to the hill 
 
 who hecome parties prior to such time. 
 
 (3.) Wliere the holder of a hill has a lien on it 
 arising either from contract or hy implication of 
 law, he is deemed to he a holder for value to the 
 extent of the sum for which he has a lien. 
 
 Sect. 28. — (1.) An accommodation party to a hill 
 is a person who has signed a hill as drawer, ac- 
 ceptor, or indorser, without receiving value therefor, 
 and for the purpose of lending his name to some 
 other person. > 
 
 (2.) An accommodation party is liable on the 
 hill to a holder for value; and it is immaterial 
 whether, when such holder took the hill, he knew 
 such party to he an accommodation party or not. 
 
 Sect. 29. — (1.) A holder in due course is a holder 
 who has taken a hill, complete and regular on the 
 face of it, under the following conditions ; namely, 
 (a.) That he became the holder of it before it was 
 overdue, and without notice that it liad 
 been previously dishonoured, if such teas 
 the fact: 
 (b.) That he took the hill in good faith and for 
 value, and that at the time the hill was 
 negotiated to him he had no notice of any 
 defect in the title of the person who nego- 
 tiated it. 
 (2.) In particular the title of a person who nego- 
 tiates a bill is defective within the meaning of this 
 Act when he obtained the bill, or the acceptance 
 thereof, hy fraud, duress, or force and fear, or other 
 unlawful means, or for an illegal consideration, or 
 when he negotiates it in breach of faith, or under 
 such circumstances as amount to a fraud. 
 
 (3.) A holder (whether for value or not) who 
 derives his title to a hill through a holder in due 
 course, and who is not himself a party to any fraud 
 or illegality affecting it, has all the rights of that 
 holder in due course as regards the acceptor and 
 all parties to the bill prior to that holder. 
 
 Sect. 30. — (1.) Every party whose signature ap- 
 pears on a bill is prima facie deemed to have be- 
 come a party thereto for value. 
 
 (2.) Every holder of a hill is prima facie deemed 
 to be a holder in due course ; but if in an action 
 on a hill it is admitted or proved that the accept- 
 ance, issue, or subsequent negotiation of the hill is 
 affected with fraud, duress, or force and fear, or 
 illegality, the burden of proof is shifted, unless and 
 until the holder proves that, subsequent to the alleged 
 fraud or illegality, value has in good faith been 
 given for the bill. 
 
 Negotiation of Bills.] Sect. 31.— (1.) A hill is 
 negotiated when it is transferred from one person 
 to another in such a manner as to constitute the 
 transferee the holder of the bill. 
 
 (2.) A hill payable to hearer is negotiated by 
 
 (3.) A bill payable to order is negotiated by the 
 indorsement of the holder completed by delivery. 
 
 (4.) Where the holder of a bill payable to his 
 order transfers it for value without indorsing it, 
 the transfer gives the transferee such title as the 
 transferor had in the bill, and the transferee in 
 
 I. BILL or EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSORT 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— confenwed. 
 addition acquires the right to have the indorsement 
 of the transferor. 
 
 (5.) Where any person is under obligation to 
 indorse a hill in a representative capacity, lie may 
 indorse the hill in such terms as to negative personal 
 liability. 
 
 Sect. 32. An indorsement in order to operate as 
 a negotiation must comply with the following con- 
 ditions, namely: — 
 
 (1.) It must be written on the hill itself and be 
 signed hy the indorser. Tlie simple signa- 
 ture of the indorser on the hill, without 
 additional words, is sufficient. 
 An indorsement icritten on an allonge, w on a 
 " copy " of a hill issued or negotiated in a 
 country where " copies " are recognised, is 
 deemed to be written on tlie hill itself. 
 (2.) It must be an indorsement of the entire bill. 
 A partial indorsement, tliat is to say, an. 
 indorsement which purports to transfer to 
 tlie indorsee a part only of the amount pay- 
 able, or which purports to transfer the bill 
 to two or more indorsees severally, does not 
 operate as a negotiation of the hill. 
 (3.) Where a hill is payable to tlie order of two 
 or more payees or indorsees who are not 
 partners all must indorse, unless the one 
 indorsing has authority to indorse for the 
 others. 
 (4.) Where, in a bill payable to order, the payee 
 or indorsee is wrongly designated, or his 
 name is mis-spelt, he may indorse the hill 
 as therein described, adding, if he think fit, 
 his proper signature. 
 (5.) Wliere there are two or more indorsements 
 cm u. bill, each indorsement is deemed to 
 have been made in the order in which it 
 appears on the hill, until the contrary is 
 proved. 
 (6.) An indorsement may he made in blank or 
 special. It may also contain terms making 
 it restrictive. 
 Sect. 33. Wliere a hill purports to be indorsed 
 conditionally the condition may be disregarded by 
 the payer, and payment to the indorsee is valid 
 whether the condition has been fulfilled or not. 
 
 Sect. 34. — (1.) An indorsement in blank specifies 
 no indorsee, and a hill so indorsed becomes payable 
 to hearer, 
 
 (2.) A special indorsement specifies the person 
 
 to whom, or to whose order, tlie bill is to be payable. 
 
 (3.) Tlie provisions of this Act relating to a payee 
 
 apply with the necessary modifications to an iiidm-see 
 
 under a special indorsement. 
 
 (4.) When a hill has been indorsed in blank, any 
 holder may convert the blank ' indorsement into a 
 special indorsement by writing above the indorser's 
 signature a direction to pay the bill to or to the 
 order of himself or some other person. 
 
 Sect. 35. — ^(1.) An indorsement is restrictivewhich 
 prohibits the further negotiation of the bill, or iHjiich 
 expresses that it is a mere authority to deal with 
 the bill as thereby directed and not a transfer of 
 the ownership thereof, as, for example, if a bill he 
 indorsed "Pay D. only," or " Fay D.for the account 
 of X.," or " Fay D. or order for collection." 
 
 (2.) A restrictive indorsement gives the indorsee 
 the right to receive payment of the bill and to sue 
 
( 215 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 216 ) 
 
 I. BILL or EXCHANGE (and PBOMISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conttnaed. 
 any party thereto that Ms indorser could have 
 sued, hut gives him no power to transfer his right 
 as indorsee unless it expressly authorize him to 
 do so. 
 
 (3.) Where a restrictive indorsement authorizes 
 further transfer, all subsequent indorsees take the 
 bill with the same rights and subject to the same 
 liabilities as the first indorsee under the restrictive 
 indorsement. 
 
 Sect. 36. — (1.) Where u, iill is negotiable in its 
 origin it continues to be negotiable until it has 
 been (a) restrictively indorsed or (b) discharged by 
 payment or otherwise. 
 
 (2) Where an overdue hill is negotiated, it can 
 only he negotiated subject to any defect of title 
 affecting it at its maturity, and thenceforward no 
 person who takes it can acquire or give a better 
 title than that which the person from lohom he took 
 it had. 
 
 (3.) A bill payable on demand is deemed to be 
 overdue within the meaning and for the purposes 
 of this section, when it appears on the face of it to 
 have been in circulation for an unreasonable length 
 of time. What is an unreasonable length of time 
 for this purpose is a question of fact. 
 
 (4.) hxcept where an instrument bears date after 
 the maturity of the hill, every negotiation is prima 
 facie deemed to have been effected before the hill 
 was overdue. 
 
 (5.) Where a bill which is not overdue has been 
 dishonoured, any person who takes it with notice of 
 the dishonour, takes it subject to any defect of title 
 attaching thereto at the time of dishonour, but 
 nothing in this sub-section shall affect the right of a 
 holder in due course. 
 
 Sect. 37. Where a hill is negotiated back to the 
 drawer, or to a prior indorser or to the acceptor, 
 such party may, subject to the provisions of this 
 Act, reissue and further negotiate the hill, hut he is 
 not entitled to enforce payment of the hill against 
 any intervening party to whom he was previously 
 liable. 
 
 Sect. 38. The rights and poioers of the holder of 
 the hill are as follows : — 
 
 (1.) Be may sue on the bill in his own name : 
 (2.) Wliere he is a holder in due course, he holds 
 the bill free from any defect of title of 
 prior parties, as well as from mere personal 
 defences available to prior parties amo7ig 
 thernselves, and may enforce payment 
 against all parties liable on the bill : 
 (3.) Where his title is defective (a) if he nego- 
 tiates the hill to a holder in due course, 
 that holder obtains a good and complete 
 title to the bill, and (b) if he obtains pay- 
 ment of the bill the person who pays him 
 in due course gets a valid discharge for the 
 Mil. 
 Presentment for Acceptance and Kotice of Dis- 
 honour.] Sect. 39. — (1.) Wliere a bill is payable 
 after sight, presentment for acceptance is necessary 
 in order to fix the maturity of the instrument. 
 
 (2.) Wliere a hill expressly stipulates that it 
 ehall be presented for acceptance, or where a bill 
 is drawn payable elsewhere than at the residence 
 or place of business of the drawee, it must he pre- 
 sented for acceptance before it can he presented for 
 payment. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PBOMISSOEY 
 NOTE — STATUTES — continued. 
 (3.) In no other case is presentment for accept- 
 ance necessary in order to render liable any party 
 to the hill. 
 
 (4.) Where the holder of a bill, drawn payable 
 elsewhere than at the place of business or residence 
 of the drawee, has not time, with the exercise of 
 reasonable diligence, to present the hill for accept- 
 ance before presenting it for payment on the day 
 that it falls due, the delay caused by presenting the 
 bill for acceptance before presenting it for payment 
 is excused, and does not discharge the drawer or 
 indorsers. 
 
 Sect. 40. — (1.) Subject to the provisions of this 
 Act, when a bill payable after sight is negotiated, 
 the holder must either present it for acceptance or 
 negotiate it within a reasonable time. 
 
 (2.) If he do not do so, the drawer and all in- 
 dorsers prior to that holder are discharged. 
 
 (3.) In determining what is a reasonable time 
 within the meaning of this section, regard shall be 
 had to the nature of the bill, the usage of trade 
 with respect to similar hills, and the facts of the 
 particular case. 
 
 Sect. 42. — (1.) A bill is duly presented for ac- 
 ceptance which is presented in accordance with the 
 following rules: 
 
 (a.) The presentment must he made by or on 
 behalf of the holder to the drawee or to 
 some person authorized to accept or refuse 
 acceptance on his behalf at a reasonable 
 hour on a business day and before the bill 
 is overdue : 
 (b.) Where a bill is addressed to two or more 
 drawees, who are not partners, present- 
 ment must he made to them all, unless one 
 lias authority to accept for all, then pre- 
 sentment may be made to him only : 
 (c.) Where the drawee is dead, presentment may 
 
 be made to his personal representative : 
 (J.) Where the drawee is bankrupt, presentment 
 
 may he made to him or his trustee : 
 (e.) Where authorized by agreement or usage, 
 u, presentment though the post office is 
 sufficient. 
 (2.) Presentment in accordance with these rules 
 is excused, and a bill may be treated as dishotioured 
 by non-acceptance — 
 
 (a.) Where the drawee is dead or bankrupt, or 
 is a fictitious person or a person not having 
 capacity to contract by bill : 
 (b.) Where, after the exercise of reasonable dili- 
 gence, such presentment cannot be effected : 
 (c.) Where although the presentment has been 
 irregular, acceptance has been refused on 
 some other ground : 
 (3.) The fact that the holder has reason to believe 
 that the hill, on presentment, will be dishonoured 
 does not excuse presentment. 
 
 Sect. 42. — (1.) Wlien a hill is duly presented for 
 acceptance and is not accepted within the cus- 
 tomary time, the person presenting it must treat it 
 as dishonoured hy non-acceptance. If he do not, 
 the holder shall lose his right of recourse against 
 the drawer and indorsers. 
 Sect. 43. — (1.) A bill is dishonoured by non- 
 acceptance — ■ 
 (a.) when it is duly presented for acceptance, 
 and such an acceptance as is prescribed hy 
 
( 217 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 218 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES — contimled. 
 
 this Act is refused or cannot he obtained ; 
 or ' 
 
 (b.) when presentment for acceptance is excused 
 
 and the hill is not accepted, 
 (2.) Subject to the provisions of this Act when a 
 hill is dishonoured by Tion-aeceptance, an immediate 
 right of recourse against tlie drawer and indorsers 
 axxrues to the holder, and wo presentment for pay- 
 me'nt is necessary. 
 
 Sect. 44. — (1.) Tlie holder of a hill may refuse to 
 take a qualified acceptance, and if he does not 
 obtain an unqualified acceptance may treat the 
 hill as dishonoured hy non-acceptance. 
 
 (2.) Where a qualified acceptance is taken, and 
 the drawer or an indorser has not expressly or im- 
 pliedly authorized the holder to take u. qualified 
 acceptance, or does not subsequently assent thereto, 
 such drawer or indorser is discharged from his 
 liability on the hill. 
 
 The provisions of this sub-section do not apply to 
 a partial acceptance, whereof due notice has been 
 given. Where a foreign bill has been accepted as 
 to part, it 'must be protested as to the balance. 
 
 (3.) When tlie drawer or indorser of a hill 
 receives notice of a qualified acceptance, and does 
 not within a reasonable time express his dissent to 
 the holder, he shall be deemed to have absented 
 thereto. 
 
 Sect. 45. Subject to the provisions of this Act 0, 
 hill must be duly presented for payment. If it be 
 net presented the drawer and indorsers shall he 
 discharged. 
 
 A bill is duly presented for payment which is 
 presented in accordance with the following rules : — 
 (1.) Where the hill is not payable on demand, 
 presentment must he made on the day it 
 falls due. 
 (2.) Where the bill is payable on demand, then, 
 subject to the provisions of this Act, pre- 
 sentment must be made within a reasonable 
 time after its issue in order to render the 
 drawer liable, and within a reasonable time 
 after its indorsement, in order to render 
 the indorser liable. 
 In determining what is a reasonable time, 
 regard shall be had to the nature of the 
 hill, the usage of trade with regard to 
 similar bills, and the facts of the parti- 
 cular case. 
 (3.) Presentment must be made hy the holder, 
 or hy some person authorized to receive 
 payment on his behalf, at a reasonable hour 
 on a business day, at a proper place as 
 hereinafter defined, either to the person de- 
 signated hy the hill as payer, or to some 
 person authorized to pay, or refuse pay- 
 ment on. his behalf, if with the exercise of 
 reasonable diligence such person can there 
 be found. 
 (4.) A bill is presented at the proper place :^ 
 (a.) Where a place of payment is specified in 
 
 the hill and the hill is there presented. 
 (b.) Where no place of payment is specified, 
 but the address of the drawee or acceptor 
 is given in the bill, and the bill is there 
 presented. 
 (o.) Wliere no place of payment is specified 
 and no address given, and the hill is 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conMnijcd 
 
 presented at tlie drawee's or acceptor's 
 place of business if known, and if not, 
 at his ordinary residence if known. 
 (d.) In any other case if presented to the 
 drawee or acceptor wherever he can he 
 found, or if presented at his last known 
 place of business or residence. 
 (5.) Wliere a bill is presented at tlie proper 
 place, and after the exercise of reasonable 
 diligence no person authorized to pay or 
 refuse payment can he found there, no 
 further 'presentment to the drawee or 
 acceptor is required. 
 (6.) Where a hill is drawn upon, or accepted hy 
 two or more persons who are not partners, 
 and no place of payment is specified, pre- 
 sentment, must he made to them, all. 
 (7.) Where the drawee or acceptor of a hill is 
 dead, and no place of payment is specified, 
 presentment must be made to a personal 
 representative, if such there be, and with 
 the exercise of reasonable diligence he can 
 he found. 
 (8.) Where authorized hy agreement or usage a 
 presentment through the post office is 
 sufficient. 
 Sect. 46. — (1.) Delay in making presentment for 
 payment is excused when the delay is caused by 
 circumstances beyond the control of the holder, and 
 not imputable to his default, misconduct, or negli- 
 gence. When the cause of delay ceases to operate 
 presentment must be made with reasonable dili- 
 gence. 
 
 (2.) Presentment for payment is dispensed with, — • 
 (a.) Where, after the exercise of rea^sondble dili- 
 gence presentment, as required by this Act, 
 cannot be effected. 
 The fact that the holder has reason to believe 
 thai the bill will, on presentment, be dis- 
 honoured, does not dispense with the neces- 
 sity for presentment. 
 (b.) Where the drawee is a fictitious person. 
 (o.) As regards the drawer where the drawee or 
 acceptor is not bound, as between himself 
 and the draioer, to accept or pay the bill, 
 and the drawer lias no reason to believe 
 that the bill would be paid if presented. 
 (d.) As regards an indorser, where tlie bill was 
 accepted or made for tlie accommiodation of 
 that indorser, and lie has no reason to expect 
 that the bill would he paid if presented. 
 "(e.) By waiver of presentment, express or im- 
 plied. 
 Sect. 47. — (1.) A bill is dishonoured hy non-pay- 
 ment (a.) when it is duly presented for payment 
 and payment is refused or cannot he obtained, or 
 (b.) when 'presentment is excused and the hill is 
 overdue and unpaid. 
 
 (2.) Subject to tlie provisions of this Act, when a 
 bill is dishonoured by non-payment, an immediate 
 right of recourse against the drawer a'nd indorsers 
 accrues to the holder. 
 
 Sect. . 48. Subject to the provisions of this Act, 
 when a bill has been dishonoured by non-acceptance 
 or hy 'non-payment, notice of dislwnour mMst he 
 given to the draiver and each indorser, a'nd any 
 drawer or i'ndorser to whom such notice is not given 
 is discharged ; Provided that, — 
 
( 219 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 220 ) 
 
 I. BIIL OF EXCHANBE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— cojstirjwece. 
 
 (1.) Where a hill is dishonoured by non-accept- 
 ance, and iiotice of dishonour is not given, 
 the rights of a holder in due course subse- 
 quent to tlie omission, shall not Tie prejudiced 
 hy the omission. 
 
 (2.) Where a hill is dishonoured hy non-accept- 
 ance and dm notice of dishonour is given, 
 it shall not he necessary to give notice of a 
 suhseguent dishonour hy non-payment un- 
 less tlie hill shall in the meantime liave heen 
 accepted. 
 
 Sect. 49. Notice of dishonour in order to he valid 
 and effectual must he given in accordance with the 
 following rules : — • 
 
 (1.) The notice must he given hy or on hehalf of 
 the holder, or hy or on hehalf of an indorser, 
 who at the time of giving it is himself liable 
 on the hill. ' 
 
 (2.) Notice of dishonour may he given hy an agent, 
 either in his own name, or in the name of 
 any party entitled to give notice, whether 
 that party he his principal or not. 
 
 (3.) Where the iwtice is given hy or on hehalf of 
 the holder, it enures for the henefit of all 
 subsequent holders arid all prior indorsers 
 who have a right of recourse against the 
 party to whcym it is given. 
 
 (4.) iVliere iwtice is given hy or on hehalf of an in- 
 dorser entitled to give notice as liereinbefore 
 provided, it enures for the henefit of the 
 holder and all indorsers subsequent to the 
 party to whom notice is given. 
 
 (5.) Tlie iwtice may he given in writing or hy 
 personal communication, and may he given 
 in any terms which sufficiently identify the 
 hill, and intimate that the hill 1ms heen dis- 
 honoured hy non-acceptance or iwn-pay- 
 ment. 
 
 (6.) The return of a dishonoured hill to tlie 
 draicer or an indorser is, in point of form, 
 deemed a sufficient notice of dishonour. 
 
 (7.) A written notice need not he signed, and an 
 insufficient written notice may he supple- 
 mented and validated hy verbal communi- 
 cation. A misdescription of the hill shall 
 not vitiate the notice unless tlie party to 
 whom ihe notice is given is in fact misled 
 thereby. 
 
 (8.) Where notice of dishonour is required to he 
 given to any person, it may be given either 
 to the party himself, or to his agent in that 
 behalf. 
 
 (9.) Wliere the drawer or indorser is dead, and 
 the party giving notice knows it, the notice 
 must be given to a personal representative 
 if such there he, and with the exercise of 
 reasonable diligence he can be found. 
 (10.) Where the drawer or indorser is hanhrupt, 
 notice may he given either to the party 
 himself or to the trustee. 
 (11.) Where there are tvio or more drawers or 
 indorsers who are not partners, iwtice must 
 he given to each of them, unless one of 
 them has authority to receive such notice for 
 the others. 
 (12.) Tlie notice may he given as soon as the bill 
 is dishonoured, and must be given within a 
 reasonable time thereafter. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conM»Med!. 
 
 In the absence of special circumstances 
 iwtice is not deemed to have heen given 
 within a reasonable time, unless — 
 
 (a.) where the person giving and the per- 
 son to receive iwtice reside in the 
 same place, tlie notice is given or sent 
 off in time to reach tlie latter on the 
 day after tlie dishonour of the hill. 
 (b.) where the person giving and the 
 person to receive rwtice reside in 
 different places, the notice is sent off 
 on (lie day after the dishonour of the 
 bill, if therebe a post at a convenient 
 hour on that day, and if there he no 
 such post on that day then hy the 
 next post thereafter. 
 (13.) Wliere a ■ hiU when dishonoured is in the 
 liands of an agent, he may either himself 
 give rwtice to the parties liable on the hill, 
 or he may give notice to his principal. If 
 lie give notice to his principal, lie must do 
 so within tlie same time as if he were the 
 holder, and tlie principal upon receipt of 
 such notice lias himself the same time for 
 giving iwtice as if tlie agent liad been an 
 independent holder. 
 (14.) Where a party to a hill receives due iwtice 
 of dishonour, he has after the receipt of 
 such notice the same period of time for 
 giving notice to antecedent parties that the 
 holder has after the dislwnour. 
 (15.) Where a notice of dishonour is duly ad- 
 dressed and posted, the sender is deemed to 
 have given due iwtice of dishonour, not- 
 withstanding any miscarriage of the post 
 office. 
 Sect. 50. — (1.) Delay in giving iwtice of dis- 
 honour is excused where the delay is caused hy 
 circumstances heyond the control of the party giving 
 notice, and not imputable to his default, miscon- 
 duct, or negligence. Wlien the caus^ of delay 
 ceases to operate the iwtice must be given with 
 reasonable diligence. 
 
 (2.) Notice of dislwnour is dispensed with : — 
 (a.) When, after tlie exercise of reasonable 
 diligence, notice as required hy this Act 
 cannot he given to or does not reach the 
 drawer or indorser sought to he charged. 
 (b.) By loaiver express or implied. Notice 
 of dishonour may be waived before the 
 time of giving notice has arrived, or after 
 the omission to give due iwtice : 
 (c.) As regards the drawer in the following 
 cases, namely, (1) where drawer aiid 
 drawee are the same person, (2) where 
 the drawee is a fictitious person or a 
 personnot having capacity to contract, (3) 
 where the drawer is the person to whom 
 the bill is presented foi- payment, (4) 
 where the drawee or acceptor is as be- 
 tween himself and the drawer under no 
 obligation to accept or pay the bill, (5) 
 where the draicer has countermanded 
 payment : 
 (d.) As regards the indorser in the following 
 cases, namely, (1) where the drawee is a 
 fictitious person or a person not having 
 capacity to contract and the indorser was 
 
( 221 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 222 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FBOHISSOBY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— oonMnued. 
 
 aware of the fact at the time he indorsed 
 
 the Mil, (2) where the indorser is the 
 
 'person to whom the hill is presented for 
 
 payment, (3) where the hill was accepted 
 
 or made for his accommodation. 
 
 Sect. 51. — (1.) Where an inland hill lias heen 
 
 dishonoured, it may, if the holder think fit, he noted 
 
 for non-acceptance or non-payment, as the case may 
 
 be ; hut it shall not be necessary to note or protest 
 
 any such bill in order to preserve the recourse 
 
 against the drawer or indorser. 
 
 (2.) When a foreign bill, appearing on the face 
 of it to be such, has been dishonoured by non-accept- 
 ance, it must be duly protested for non-acceptance, 
 and where such a bill, which has not been previously 
 dishonoured by non-acceptance, is dishonoured by 
 non-payment, it must be duly protested for non- 
 payment. If it be not so protested the drawer and 
 indorsers are discharged. Where a bill does not 
 appear on the face of it to be a foreign Mil protest 
 thereof in case of dishonour is unnecessary. 
 
 (3.) A Mil which has been protested for non- 
 acceptance may be subsequently protested for non- 
 payment. 
 
 (4.) Subject to the provisions of this Act, when a 
 bill is noted or protested, it must be noted on the 
 day of its dishonour. When a bill has been duly 
 noted, the protest may be svhseguently extended as 
 of the date of the noting. 
 
 (5.) Wliere the acceptor of a bill becomes bank- 
 rupt or insolvent or suspends payment before it 
 matures, the holder may cause the Mil to be pro- 
 tested for better security against the drawer and 
 indorsers. 
 
 (6.) A bill must be protested at the place where 
 it is dishonoured : Provided that — ■ 
 
 (a.) When a Mil is presented through the post 
 office, and returned by post dishonoured, it 
 may be protested at the place to which it is 
 returned and on the day of its return if 
 received during business hours, and if not 
 received during business hours, then not 
 later than the next business day ; 
 (b.) When a bill drawn payable at the place of 
 business or residence of some person other 
 than the drawee, has been dishonoured by 
 non-acceptance, it must be protested for 
 non-payment at the place where it is ex- 
 pressed to be payahle, and no further pre- 
 sentment for payment to, or demand on, 
 the drawee is necessary. 
 (7.) A protest must contain a copy of the Mil, 
 and must be signed by the notary making it, and 
 must specify — 
 
 (a.) The person at whose request tlie bill is pro- 
 tested : 
 (b.) The place and date of protest, the cause or 
 reason for protesting the bill, the demand 
 made, and tlie answer given, if any, or the 
 fact that the drawee or acceptor could not 
 be found. 
 (8.) Where a bill is lost or destroyed, or is 
 wrongly detained from the person entitled to hold 
 it, protest may be made on a copy or written par- 
 ticulars thereof. 
 
 (9.) Protest is dispensed with by any circum- 
 stance which would dispense with notice of dis- 
 honour. Delay in noting or protesting is excused 
 
 I, BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOST 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conMwed. 
 
 when the delay is caused by circumstances beyond 
 tlie control of the holder, and not imputable to his 
 default, misconduct, or negligence. When the cause 
 of delay ceases to operate the bill must be noted or 
 protested with reasonable diligence. 
 
 Sect. 52. — (1.) When a Mil is accepted generally 
 presentment for payment is not necessary in order 
 to render the acceptor liable. 
 
 (2.) When by tlie terms of a qualified acceptance 
 presentment for payment is required, the acceptor, 
 in the absence of an express stipulation to that 
 effect, is not discharged by the omission to present 
 the Mil for paxjment on the day that it matures. 
 
 (3.) In order to render the acceptor of a bill 
 liable it is not necessary to protest it, or that notice 
 of dishonour should be given to him. 
 
 (4.) Where the holder of a Mil presents it for 
 payment, he shall exhibit tliebillto the person from 
 whom he demands payment, and when a bill is paid 
 the holder shall forthwith deliver it up to the party 
 paying it. 
 
 Acceptance and Payment for Honour.] Sect. 
 65. — (1.) Where a bill of exchange has been pro- 
 tested for dishonour by non-acceptance, or protested 
 for better security, and is not overdue, any person, 
 not being a party already liable thereon, may ivith 
 the consent of the holder, intervene and accept the 
 Mil supra protest, for the honour of any party 
 liable thereon, or for the honour of the person for 
 whose account the bill is drawn. 
 
 (2.) A bill may be accepted for honour for part 
 only of the sum for which it is drawn. 
 
 (3.) An acceptance for lionour supra protest in 
 order to be valid must — 
 
 (a.) be written on the bill, and indicate that it is 
 an acceptance for honour ; 
 
 (b.) be signed by the acceptor for honour : 
 
 (4.) Wliere an acceptance for honour does not 
 expressly state for whose honour it is made, it is 
 deemed to be an acceptance for the honour of the 
 drawer. 
 
 (5.) Where a bill payable after sight is accepted 
 for honour, its maturity is calculated from the date 
 of the noting for non-acceptance, and not from the 
 date of the acceptance for honour. 
 
 Sect. 66. — (1.) The acceptor for honour of a bill 
 by accepting it engages that he will, on due pre- 
 sentment, pay the Mil according to the tenor of his 
 acceptance, if it is not paid by the drawee, pro- 
 vided it has been duly presented for payment, and 
 protested for non-payment, and that he receives 
 notice of these facts. 
 
 (2.) The acceptor for honour is liable to tlie 
 holder and to all parties to the bill subsequent to 
 the party for whose honour he has accepted. 
 
 Sect. 67. — (1.) Where a dishonoured bill has 
 been accepted for honour supra protest, or contains 
 a reference in case of need, it must be protested for 
 non-payment before it is presented for payment 
 to the acceptor^ for honour, or referee in case of 
 Tieed. 
 
 (2.) Where the address of tlie acceptor for honour 
 is in the same place lohere the bill is protested for 
 non-payment, the bill must be presented to him 
 not later than tlie day following its maturity : and 
 where the address of the acceptor for honour is in 
 the same place other than the place where it was pro- 
 tested for non-payment, the bill must be forwarded 
 
( 223 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 224 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES — continued, 
 not later than the day following its maturity for 
 presentment to Mm. 
 
 (3.) Delay in presentment or mm-presentmsnt is 
 excused hy any circumstance which would excuse 
 delay in presentment for payment or non-present- 
 ment for payment. 
 
 (4.) When a hill of exchange is dishonoured hy 
 the acceptor for honour it must he protested for 
 rum-payment hy him. 
 
 Sect. 68. — (1.) Where a hill has heen protested for 
 non-payment, any person may intervene and pay it 
 supra protest for the honour of any party licible 
 thereon, or for the honour of the person for whose 
 account the hill is drawn. 
 
 (2.) Where two or more persons offer to pay a hill 
 for the honour of different parties, the person whose 
 payment will discharge most parties to the hill shall 
 have the preference. 
 
 (3.) Payment for honour supra protest, in order 
 to operate as such and not as a mere voluntary pay- 
 ment, must he attested hy a notarial act of honour 
 which may he appended to the protest or form an 
 extension of it. 
 
 (4.) The notarial act of honour must he founded 
 on a declaration made hy the payee for honour, or 
 his agent in that hehalf, declaring his intention to 
 pay the hill for honour, and for whose honour he 
 pays. 
 
 (5.) Where a hill has heen paid for honour, all 
 parties subsequent to the party for whose honour it 
 is paid are discharged, hut the payer for honour is 
 subrogated for, and succeeds to both the rights and 
 duties of, the holder as regards the party for whose 
 honour he pays, and all parties liable to that party. 
 
 (6.) The payer for honour on paying to the 
 holder the amount of the hill and the notarial 
 expenses incidental to its dishonour is entitled to 
 receive hath the hill itself and the protest. If the 
 holder do not on demand deliver them up lie shall 
 he liable to the payer for honour in damages. 
 
 (7.) Wliere the holder of a hill refuses to receive 
 payment supra protest he shall lose his right of 
 recourse against any party who would have been 
 discharged by such payment. 
 
 Liability of Parties.] Sect. 53.— (1.) A Mil, of 
 itself, does not operate as an assignment of funds in 
 the hands of the drawee available for the payment 
 thereof, and the drawee of a bill who does not accept 
 as required by this Act is not liable on the instru- 
 ment. This subsection shall not extend to Scotland. 
 
 (2.) In Scotland, where the draime of a bill has 
 in his hands funds available for the payment 
 thereof, the hill operates as an assignment of the 
 sum for which it is drawn in favour of the holder, 
 frmn the time when the bill is presented to the 
 drawee. 
 
 Sect. 54. Tlie acceptor of a hill, hy accepting it — 
 
 (1.) Engages that he will pay it according to the 
 tenor of his acceptance : 
 
 (2.) Is precluded from, denying to a holder in 
 due course : 
 (a.) The existence of the drawer, tlie genuine- 
 ness of his signature, and his capacity 
 and authority to draw the hill : 
 (b.) In the case of a hill payable to drawer's 
 order, the then capacity of the draioer 
 to indorse, hut not the genuineness or 
 validity of his indorsement : 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FBOMISSOBY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— coniJiiMed. 
 
 (c.) In the case of a hill payable to the order 
 of a third person, the existence of the 
 payee and his then capaaity to indorse, 
 hut not the genuineness or validity of his 
 indorsement. 
 Sect. 55. — (1 .) The drawer of a hill, hy drawing 
 it— 
 
 (a.) Engages that on due presentment it shall he 
 accepted and paid according to its tenor, 
 and that if it he dishonoured he will com- 
 pensate the holder or any indorser who is 
 compelled to pay it, provided that the re- 
 quisite proceedings on dishonour be duly 
 taken. 
 (b.) Is precluded from denying to a holder in 
 due course the existence of the payee and 
 his then capacity to indorse. 
 (2.) The indorser of a hill, by indorsing it — 
 (a.) Engages that on due presentment it shall he 
 accepted and paid according to its tenor, 
 and that if it he dishonoured he will com- 
 pensate the holder or a subsequent indorser 
 who is compelled to pay it, provided that 
 the requisite proceedings on dishonour he 
 duly tahen ; 
 (b.) Is precluded from denying to a holder in 
 due course the genuineness and regularity 
 in all respects of the drawer's signature 
 and all previous indorsements ; 
 (o.) Is precluded from denying to his immediate 
 or a subsequent indorsee that the bill was 
 at the time of his indorsement a valid and 
 subsisting bill, and that he had then a good 
 title thereto. 
 Sect. 56. Where a person signs a hill otherwise 
 than as drawer or acceptor, lie thereby incurs the 
 liabilities of an indorser to a holder in due course. 
 Sect. 57. Where a bill is dishonoured, the 
 measure of damages, which shall he deemed to be 
 liquidated damages, shall he as follows : 
 
 (1.) Tlie holder may recover from any party 
 liable on the hill, and the drawer who has 
 heen compelled to pay the bill may recover 
 from the acceptor, and an indorser who 
 lias been compelled to pay the bill may re- 
 cover from the acceptor or from the drawer, 
 or from a prior indorser — 
 (a.) The amount of the bill : 
 (b.) Interest thereon from the time of present- 
 ment for payment if the hill is payable 
 on demand, and from the maturity of 
 the bill in any other case: 
 (c.) The expenses of noting, or when protest 
 is necessary, and the protest has been 
 extended, tlie expenses of protest. 
 (2.) In the case of a bill which has heen dis- 
 honoured abroad, in lieu of the above 
 damages, the holder may recover from the 
 drawer or an indorser, and the drawer or 
 an indorser who has fceen compelled to pay 
 the hill may recover from any party liable 
 to him, the amount of tlie re-exchange with 
 interest thereon until the time of payment. 
 (3.) Where hy this Act interest may he recovered 
 as damages, such interest may, if justice 
 require it, be u-ithlteld wholly or in part, 
 and where a bill is expressed to he payable 
 with interest at a given rate, interest as 
 
( 225 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 226 ) 
 
 L BILL or EXCHANGE (and PROMISSORY 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— cowimaed. 
 
 damages may or may not he given at the 
 same rate as interest proper. 
 Sect. 58.— (1) Wliere the holder of a Ull pay- 
 able to hearer negotiates it by delivery without 
 indorsing it, he is called a "transferor" by "de- 
 livery." 
 
 (2.) A transferor by delivery is not liable on 
 the instrument. 
 
 (3.) A transferor by delivery who negotiates a 
 hill fliereby warrants to his immediate transferee 
 being a holder for value that Hie hill is what it 
 purports to he, tlmt he has a right to transfer it, 
 and that at the tim/e of transfer he is not aware of 
 any fact which renders it valueless. 
 
 Discharge, Alteration, and Cancellation of 
 Bill.] Sect. 59.— (1.) A hill is discharged hy pay- 
 ment in due course hy or on behalf of the drawee or 
 acceptor. 
 
 " Payment in due course '' means payment made 
 at or after the maturity of the hill to the holder 
 thereof in good faith and without notice that his 
 title to the bill is defective. 
 
 (2.) Subject to the provisions hereinafter con- 
 tained, when a hill is paid by the drawer or an 
 indorser it is not discharged ; but 
 
 (a.) Where a hill payable to, or to the order of, a 
 third party is paid hy the drawer, the 
 drawer may enforce payment thereof against 
 the acceptor, hut may not reissue the bill. ' 
 <(h.) Where a hill is paid hy an indorser, or 
 where a bill payable to drawer's order is 
 paid by the drawer, the party paying it is 
 ■remitted to his former rights as regards the 
 acceptor or antecedent parties, and he may, 
 if he thinks fit, strilee out his own and sub- 
 sequent indorsements, and again negotiate 
 the bill. 
 (3.) Where an accommodation bill is paid in 
 due course by the party accommodated the hill is 
 
 Sect. 60. When a bill payable to order on demand 
 is dravm on a banker, and the banker on whom it 
 is drawn pays the hill in good faith and in the 
 ordinary course of business, it is not incumbent on 
 the hanker to shew thai the indorsement of the 
 payee or any svbseguent indorsement was made hy 
 or under the authority of the person whose indorse- 
 ment it purports to he, and the banker is deemed to 
 have paid the hill in due course, although such 
 indorsement has been forged and made without 
 authority. 
 
 Sect. 61. When the acceptor of a hill is or be- 
 comes the holder of it at or after its maturity, in 
 his own right, the bill is discharged. 
 
 Sect. 62. — (1.) When the holder of a bill at or 
 after its maturity absolutely and unconditionally 
 renounces his rights against the acceptor the hill is 
 
 The renunciation must be in writing, unless the 
 hill is delivered up to the acceptor. 
 
 (2). The liabilities of any party to a bill may in 
 like manner he renounced hy the holder before, at, 
 or after its maturity ; but nothing in this section 
 shall affect the rights of a holder in due course 
 without renunciation. 
 
 Sect. 63. — (1.) Where a hill is intentionally can- 
 celled by the holder or his agent, and the cancella- 
 tion is apparent thereon, the hill is discharged. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PROMISSORY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conH««e(?. 
 
 (2.) In like manner any party liable on a hill 
 may be discharged hy the intentional cancellation 
 of his signature hy the holder or his agent. In 
 such case any indorser who would have had a right 
 of recourse against the party whose signature is 
 cancelled, is also discharged. 
 
 (3.) A cancellation made unintentionally, or 
 under a mistake, or without the authority of the 
 holder is inoperative; but wliere a bill or any 
 signature thereon appears to have been cancelled, 
 the burden of proof lies on the party who alleges 
 that the cancellation was made unintentionally, or 
 under a mistake, or without authority. 
 
 Sect. 64. — (1.) Where a hill or acceptance is 
 materially altered without the assent of all parties 
 liable on the hill, the hill is avoided except as 
 against a party who has himself made, authorized, 
 or assented to the alteration, and subsequent in- 
 dorsers. 
 
 Provided that 
 
 Where a hill has been materially altered, hut the 
 alteration is not apparent, and the bill is in 
 the hands of a liolder in due course, such 
 holder may avail himself of the hill as if it 
 had not been altered, and may enforce payment 
 of it according to its original tenor. 
 
 (2.) In particular the following alterations are 
 material, namely, any alteration of the date, the 
 sum payable, the time of payment, the place of 
 payment, and, where a hill has been accepted gene- 
 rally, the addition of a place of payment without 
 the acceptor's assent. 
 
 Lost Bills.] Sect. 69. WJiere a hill has been 
 lost before it is overdue, the person who toas the 
 holder of it may apply to the drawer to give him 
 another bill of the sarrte tenor, giving security to 
 the drawer if required to indemnify him against 
 all persons whatever in case the bill alleged to have 
 been lost shall he found again. 
 
 If the drawer on request as aforesaid refuses to 
 give such duplicate bill, he may be compelled to 
 do so. 
 
 Sect. 70. In any action or proceeding upon a 
 bill, the Court or a Judge may order that the loss 
 of the instrument shall not be set up, provided an 
 indemnity be given to the satisfaction of the Court 
 or Judge against the claims of any other person 
 upon the instrument in question. 
 
 Bill in a Set.] Sect. 71.— (1.) Where a bill is 
 drawn in u, set, each part of the set being num- 
 bered, and containing a reference to the other parts, 
 the whole of the parts constitute one hill. 
 
 (2.) Where the holder of a set indorses two or 
 more parts to different persons, he is liable on every 
 such part, and every indorser subsequent to him is 
 liable on the part he has himself indorsed as if the 
 said parts were separate bills. 
 
 (8.) Where two or more parts of a set are nego-' 
 tiated to different holders in due course, the holder 
 whose title first accrues is as between such holders 
 deemed the true owner of the hill ; hut nothing in 
 this subsection shall affect the rights of a person 
 who in due course accepts or pays the part first 
 presented to him. 
 
 (4.) The acceptance may be written on any part, 
 and it must be written on one part only. 
 
 If the drawee accepts more than one part, and 
 such accepted parts get into the hands of different 
 
( 227 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 228 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— co««mMe(J. 
 holders in due course, lie is liable on every such, 
 part as if it were a separate bill. 
 
 (5.) When the acceptor of a hill dravm in a set 
 pays it without requiring the part bearing his 
 acceptan^ce to be delivered up to him, and that 
 part at maturity is outstanding in the hands of 
 a holder in due course, he is liable to the holder 
 thereof. 
 
 (6.) Subject to the preceding rules, where any 
 one part of a hill drawn in a set is discharged by 
 payment or otherwise, the whole bill is discharged. 
 Conflict of Laws.] Sect. 72. Where a hill drawn 
 in one country is negotiated, accepted, or payable 
 in another, the rights, duties, and liabilities of the 
 parties thereto are determined as follows: — 
 
 (1.) Tlie validity of a hill as regards requisites 
 in form is determined hy the law of the 
 place of issue, and the validity as regards 
 requisites in form of the supervening con- 
 tracts, such as acceptance, or indorsement, 
 or acceptance supra protest, is determined 
 by tlie law of the place where such contract 
 was made. 
 Provided that — 
 
 (a.i Where a bill is issued out of the United 
 Kingdom it is not invalid hy reason only 
 that it is not stamped in accordance with 
 tlie law of the place of issue : 
 (b.) Where a hill, issued otit of the United 
 Kingdom, conforms, as regards requisites 
 , in form, to the law of the United Kingdom, 
 it may, for the purpose of enforcing pay- 
 ment thereof, be treated as valid as between 
 all persons tiiho negotiate, hold, or become 
 parties to it in the United Kingdom. 
 (2.) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the 
 interpretation of the drawing, indorsement, 
 acceptance, or acceptance supra protest, of 
 a bill is determined by the law of the place 
 where such contract is made. 
 , Provided that where an inland hill is indorsed 
 in a foreign country the indorsement shall, as re- 
 gards the payer, be interpreted according to tlie 
 law of the United Kingdom. 
 
 (3.) The duties of the holder with respect to the 
 presentment for acceptance or payment, 
 and the necessity for or sufficiency of a 
 protest or notice of dishonour, or otherwise, 
 are determined by the law of the place 
 where tlie act is done or the hill is dis- 
 honoured. 
 (4.) Where a hill is drawn out of but payable 
 in the United Kingdom and the sum pay- 
 able is not expressed in tlie currency of tlie 
 United Kingdom, the amount shall, in the 
 absence of some express stipulation, he cal- 
 culated according to the rate of exchange 
 for sight drafts at the place of payment on 
 the day the bill is payable. 
 (5.) Where a hill is drawn in one country and is 
 payable in another, the due date thereof is 
 determined according to tlie law of tlie 
 place where it is payable. 
 
 2. Cheques and Crossed Cheques. 
 Sect. 73. A cheque is a bill of exchange drawn 
 on a hanlc or payable on demand. 
 JSxcept as otlierwise provided in this part, the 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOMISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— eo«M»«e(i. 
 provisions of the Act applicable to a bill of exchange 
 payable on demand apply to a cheque. 
 
 Sect. 74. Subject to tlie provisions of this Act — 
 (1.) Where a cheque is not presented for pay- 
 merd within a reasonable time of its issue, 
 and the drawer or the person on whose 
 account it is drawn had the right at the 
 time of such presentment as between him 
 and the banker to have the cheque paid 
 and suffers actual damage through the 
 delay, he is discharged to the extent of such 
 damage, that is to say, to the extent to 
 which such drawer or person is a creditor 
 of such banlier to a larger amount than he 
 loould have been had such cheque been 
 paid. 
 (2.) In determining what is a reasonable time, 
 regard shall be had to tlie nature of the 
 instrument, the usage of the trade and of 
 bankers, and the facts of the particular 
 case. 
 (3.) Tlie holder of such cheque as to which such 
 drawer or person is discharged shall be a 
 creditor, in lieu of such drawer or person, 
 of such banker to the extent of such dis- 
 charge, and entitled to recover the amount 
 from him. 
 Sect. 75. The duty and authority of a banker to 
 pay a cheque drawn on him by Ids customer are 
 determined hy — 
 
 (1.) Countermand of payment : 
 (2.) Notice of the customer's death. 
 Sect. 76. — (1.) Where a cheque bears across its 
 face an addition of — 
 
 (a.) The words " and company " or any abbre- 
 viation thereof between tivo parallel trans- 
 verse lines, either with or without the words 
 " not negotiable " ; or 
 (b.) Two parallel transverse lines simphj, either 
 with or without the words "not nego- 
 tiable ; " 
 that addition constitutes a crossing, and the cheque 
 is crossed generally. 
 
 (2.) Where a cheque hears across its face an 
 addition of the name of a hanker, either ii-ith or 
 without the words " not negotiable," that addition 
 constitutes a crossing, and the cheque is crossed 
 specially and to that banker. ' 
 
 Sect. 77. — (1.) A cheque may he crossed generally 
 or specially by the drawer. 
 
 (2.) Where a cheque is uncrossed,tlic holder may 
 cross it generally or specially. 
 
 (3.) Where a cheque is crossed generally the 
 holder may cross it specially. 
 
 (4.) Where a cheque is crossed generally or 
 specially, the holder may add the iconis "not 
 
 (5.) Where a cheque is crossed speciallij. the 
 banker to whom it is crossed may again cross it 
 specially to another hanker for collection. 
 
 (6.) Where an uncrossed cheque, or u, cheque 
 crossed generally, is sent to a banker for collection, 
 he may cross it specially to himself. 
 
 Sect. 78. A crossing authorized hy this Act is a 
 material part of the cheque ; it shall not be lanfid 
 for any person to obliterate or, except as authorized 
 by this Act, to add to or alter the crossing. 
 
 Sect. 79. — (1.) Where a cheque is crossed speci- 
 
( 229 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF cases; 
 
 C 230- )' 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and FKOMISSOBY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— conMreued. 
 ally to more than one hanker except when crossed 
 to an agent for collection heing a hanker, the 
 banker on whom it is drawn shall refuse payment 
 
 (2.) Where the hanker on whom a cheque is 
 draimi which is so crossed nevertheless pays the 
 same, or pays a cheque crossed generally otherwise 
 than to a hanker, or if crossed specially otherwise 
 tlian to the hanker to whom it is crossed, or his 
 agent for collection heing a hanker, lie is liable to 
 the true owner of tJie cheque for any loss he may 
 sustain owing to the cheque having heen so paid. 
 
 Provided that where a cheque is presented for 
 payment which does not at the time of presentment 
 appear to he crossed, or to have had a crossing 
 which has heen obliterated, or to have 6ce» added 
 to or altered otherwise than as authorized by this 
 Act, the hanker paying the cheque in good faith 
 and without negligence shall not he responsible or 
 incur any liability, nor shall the payment he ques- 
 tioned by reason of the cheque liaving been crossed, 
 or of the crossing having been obliterated or having 
 been added to or altered otherwise than as autho- 
 rized by this Act, and of payment having been 
 made otherwise than to a hanker or to the hanker 
 to whom the cheque is or was crossed, or to his 
 agent for collection being a banker, as the case 
 may he. 
 
 Sect. 80. Where the hanker, on whom a crossed 
 cheque is drawn, in good faith and without negli- 
 gence pays it, if crossed generally, to a banker, and 
 if crossed specially, to the banker to whom it is 
 crossed, or his agent for collection being a banker, 
 the banker paying the cheque, and if the cheque 
 has come into the hands of the payee, the drawer, 
 shall respectively be entitled to the same rights and 
 be placed in the same position as if payment of the 
 cheque had 6ee)i made to the true owners thereof. 
 
 Sect. 81. Where a person takes a crossed cheque 
 which bears on it the words "not negotiable," he 
 shall not have, and shall not he capable of giving a 
 better title to the cheque than that which the person 
 from whom he took it had. 
 
 Sect. 82. Where a banker in good, faith and 
 without negligence receives payment for a customer 
 of a cheque crossed generally or specially to himself, 
 and the customer has no title or a defective title 
 thereto, the banker shall not incur any liability to 
 the true owner of the cheque by reason only of 
 having received such payment, 
 
 3. DiviDEiro Waebants. 
 
 Sy sect. 95 the provisions of the Act as to crossed 
 cheques apply to a warrant for payment of divi- 
 dend. 
 
 By sect. 97, sub-sect. 3, nothing in the Act or in 
 amy repeal effected thereby shall affect the validity 
 of any usage relating to dividend warrants, or the 
 indorsements thereof. 
 
 i. Pbomissoey Notes. 
 
 Sect 83. — (1.) A promissory note is an uncondi- 
 tional promise in writing made by one person to 
 another signed by the maker, engaging to pay, on 
 demand or at a fixed or determinable future time, 
 a sum certain in money, to, or to the order of, a 
 specified person or to hearer. 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PROMISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— co»fe»«e^. 
 
 (2.) An instrument in the form of a note payable 
 to maker's order is not a note within the meaning of 
 this section unless and until it is indorsed hy the 
 maker. ' 
 
 (3.) A note is not invalid hy reason only that it 
 contains also a pledge of collateral security with 
 authority to sell or dispose thereof. 
 
 (4.) A note which is, or on the face of it purports 
 to- be, both made and payable within the British 
 Islands is an inland note^ Any other note is a 
 foreign note. 
 
 Sect. 84. A promissory note is inchoate and in- 
 complete until delivery thereof to the payee or 
 hearer. 
 
 . Sect. 85. — (1.) A promissory note may he made 
 by two or more makers, and they may be liable 
 thereon jointly, or jointly and severally according 
 to its tenor. 
 
 (2.) Where a note rans " I promise to pay " and 
 is signed by two or more persons it is deemed to be 
 their joint and several note. 
 
 Sect. 86. — (1.) Where a note payable on demand 
 lias been indorsed, it must he presented for payment 
 within a reasonable, time of the indorsement,- If 
 it be not so presented the indorser is discharged, 
 
 (2.) In determining what is a reasonable time, 
 regard shall be had to the nature of the instrument, 
 the usage of trade, and the facts of the particular 
 case, 
 
 (3.) Wliere a note payable on demand is nego- 
 tiated, it is not deemed to he overdue, for the pur 
 pose of affecting the holder with defects of title of 
 which he had no notice, hy reason that it appears 
 that a reasonable time for presenting it for payment 
 has elapsed since its issue. 
 
 Sect, 87. — (1.) Wliere a promissory note is in the 
 body of it made payable at a particular place, it 
 must be presented for payment at that place in 
 order to render the maker liable. In any other 
 case, presentment for payment is not necessary in 
 order to render the maker liable, 
 
 (2.) Presentment for payment is necessary in 
 order to render the indorser of a note liable. 
 
 (3.) Wliere a note is in the body of it made pay- 
 able at a particular place, presentment at that 
 place is necessary in order to render an indorser- 
 liable ; but when a place of payment is indicated 
 by way of memorandum only, presentment at that 
 place is sufficient to render the indorser liable, but 
 a presentment to the marker elsewhere, if sufficient 
 in other respects, shall also suffice. 
 
 Sect. 88. The maker of a promissory note by- 
 making it — 
 
 (1.) Engages that he will pay it according to its 
 tenor ; 
 
 (2.) Is precluded from denying to a holder in 
 due course the existence of the payee and 
 his then capacity to indorse. 
 
 Sect, 89. — (1.) Subject to the provisions in this^. 
 part, and, except as by this section provided, the 
 provisions of this Act relating to hills of exchange 
 apply, with the necessary modifications, to promis- 
 sory notes, , . , . ; 
 
 (2.) In applying those' p^-ovisioni' the, mfiher of a 
 note shall he deemed to correspond with, the acceptor 
 of a bill, and the first indorser of a note shall he 
 deemed to correspond with the drawer of an acr 
 cepted hill payable to drawer's order, 
 
 I 2 
 
( 231 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 C 232 ) 
 
 I. BILL OF EXCHANGE (and PEOHISSOEY 
 
 NOTE)— STATUTES— coraimaed. 
 
 (3.) The following provisions as to hills do not 
 apply to notes ; namely, provisions relating to — 
 
 (a.) Presentment for acceptance ; 
 
 (b.) Acceptance; 
 
 (o.) Acceptance supra protest ; 
 
 (d.) Sills in a set. 
 
 (4.) Where a foreign note is dishonoured, pro- 
 test thereof is unnecessary. 
 
 Promissory Notes.] The Act 48 * 49 Vict. c. 59, 
 continues the Act 26 & 27 Vict. c. 105 (JPromissory 
 Notes') until the 31s< December, 1886. 
 
 II. BILL OF EXCHANGE— ACCEPTANCE. 
 
 Acceptance in Blank— iJigAt to fill up 
 
 Drawer's Name after Death of Acceptor.'] A bill 
 of exchange accepted for valuable consideration, 
 with the drawer's name left blank, may be com- 
 pleted by the drawer's name being added after 
 the death of the acceptor. Caktek v. White 
 
 [20 Oh. D. 226 ; 25 Ch. D. 666 
 
 III. BILL OF EXCHANGE— ALTEBATION. 
 
 1. . — — Acceptanoe in Blank — Effect of 
 Figures in Margin — Fraudulent Alteration of 
 Figures— Negligence.'] The Defendant signed an 
 ;acceptance, the amount in the body of which 
 Tvas then left in blank, but in the margin of 
 which were the figures £14 Os. Gd., that being the 
 .sum for which the Defendant desired to accept. 
 He then handed the acceptance to the drawer, 
 who subsequently filled in the blank in the body 
 of the bill for £164 Os. Qd. and fraudulently 
 altered the figures m the margin to that sum. 
 The bill was then indorsed by the drawer to the 
 Plaintiffs, who took it bona fide for value for the 
 larger amount : — Held, that the Defendant was 
 liable on the bill for such larger amount, on the 
 grounds that the marginal figures are not an 
 essential part of a biU of exchange ; that one 
 who gives an acceptance in blank holds out the 
 person he entrusts therewith as having authority 
 to fill in the bill as he pleases within the limits 
 of the stamp ; and that no alteration (even if it 
 be fraudulent and unauthorized) of the marginal 
 figures can vitiate the biU as a bill for the full 
 amount inserted in the body, when it reaches the 
 iands of a holder for value who is unaware that 
 ■the marginal figures have been improperly altered. 
 Gakkakd v. Lewis - - 10 Q. B. D. 30 
 
 2. Bank-note — Action on Note — Erasure 
 
 of Number — Material Alteration.] In an action 
 .against the Bank of England for the non-pay- 
 ment of notes payable to bearer which had been 
 regularly issued by the bank, it appeared that 
 the notes had been bonl fide purchased by the 
 Plaintiff for value, but that before the Plaintiff 
 took them the notes had been altered by erasing 
 the numbers upon them and substituting others, 
 with the object of preventing the notes from 
 being traced, as payment had been stopped and 
 a notice issued specifying their numbers :—Seld, 
 reversing the decision of Lord Coleridge, C.J., 
 that, although the alteration did not vary the 
 contract, it was material iti the sense of altering 
 the notes in an essential part, and that therefore 
 the notes were vitiated, so that the Plaintiff could 
 
 ni, BILL OF EXCHANGE- ALTEEATION — 
 
 continued. 
 not recover in his action on them against the 
 bank. Suffell v. Bank of England 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 270 ; 9 Q. B. D. 556 
 
 3. Bank-note — Action on Note — Bond 
 
 fide Transfer for Value — Rejection by Bank — 
 45 & 46 Viet. c. 61 {Bills of Exchange Act, 1882), 
 88. 64, 89 — 'Worthless Document — Action for Money 
 paid to Transferor.] A Bank of England note, 
 which had been materially altered in number and 
 date, was paid to the Plaiutiffs bank for value by 
 the Defendant, both parties believing the note 
 to be good. The Plaintiffs paid away the note, 
 which was afterwards presented at the Bank 
 of England, where the alteration was perceived 
 and payment was refused. The note was returned 
 to the Plaintiffs as a bad one, and, after a fortnight 
 spent in tracing the note to the Defendant, the 
 Plaintiffs demanded payment of it from him, and 
 on the 21st of July, 1882, sued him for the 
 amount —On the 18th of August, 1882, the Bills 
 of Exchange Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 61), 
 received the royal assent. By sect. 64, where a bill 
 or acceptanoe is materially altered, without the 
 assent of all parties liable on the bill, the bill is 
 avoided except as against a party who has himself 
 made the alteration, and subsequent indorsers. 
 Provided that where a bill has been materially 
 altered, but the alteration is " not apparent," and 
 the bill is in the hands of a holder in due course, 
 such holder may avail himself of the bUl as if it 
 had not been altered, and may enforce payment 
 of it according to its original tenor. By sect. 89 
 the provisions of this Act relating to bills of ex- 
 change apply, " with the necessary modifications," 
 to promissory notes : — Held, that the doctrine as 
 to notice of infirmity in bills and notes was inap- 
 plicable to a forged Bank of England note, and 
 that the delay in giving notice of the alteration to 
 the Defendant was no ground of defence ; that be- 
 fore the Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, the Bank 
 of England was not liable on the altered note ; 
 Suffell V. Bank of England (9 Q. B. D. 555); 
 which was therefore worthless ; that sect. 64 was 
 not retrospective, and that even if it were so, the 
 " necessary modifications " referred to in sect. 89 
 would exclude Bank of England notes altogether 
 from the operation of sect. 64, and that even if 
 the proviso of sect. 64 would otherwise have 
 affected the altered bank note, ihe alteration was 
 " apparent," as the Bank of England could at once 
 discern and point out to the holder of the note 
 that it had been materially altered, although the 
 alteration was not obvious to everybody; and, 
 consequently, that the Plaintiffs, having received 
 from the Defendant a worthless note on which no 
 one could be sued, were entitled to recover in the 
 action for money had and received. Leeds and 
 County Bane v. Walkek •- H Q. B. D. 84 
 
 IV. BILL OF EXCHANGE— CONSIDEEAIION. 
 
 Compounding Felony — Illegality — Lia- 
 bility of Acceptor — Indorsee.] In order to render 
 illegal the receipt of securities by a creditor from 
 his debtor, where the debt has been contracted 
 under circumstances which might render the 
 debtor liable to criminal proceedings, it is not 
 enough to shew that the creditor was thereby 
 
( 233 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 234 ) 
 
 IV. BILL OF EXCHANGE— CONSIDEEATION— 
 
 continued. 
 induced to abstain from prosecuting. — Ward v. 
 Lloyd (7 Scott, N. E. 499) follovied.— Williams v. 
 BayUy (LawEep. 1 H. L. 200) explained.— ;Sem5Ze, 
 per Brett and Cotton, L.JJ., in an action by an 
 indorsee of a bill of exchange against an acceptor 
 for valuable consideration, it is no defence that 
 the bill was indorsed by the drawer to the Plain- 
 tiff in order to stifle a prosecution for felony. 
 Floweb v. Sadlee 9 Q. B. D. 83 ; 10 ft. B. D. 672 
 
 V. BILL OF EXCHANGE— FOREIGN BILL. 
 
 Confict of Law — Foreign Indorsement — 
 
 Company — Winding-up — Liquidator — Costs.'] 
 Bills of exchange were drawn in France by -a 
 domiciled Frenchman in the French language, 
 in English form, on an English company, who 
 duly accepted them. The drawer indorsed the 
 bills and sent them to an Englishman in Eng- 
 land : — Held, that the acceptor could not dispute 
 the negotiability of the bills by reason of the 
 indorsements being invalid according to French 
 law. — Costs of successful claims in a winding-up 
 were not given against the liquidator personally, 
 but out of the assets. In re Mabsbilles Exten- 
 sion Railway and Land Company. Smallpage's 
 AND Brandon's Cases - 30 Ch. D. 698 
 
 VI. BILL OF EXCHANGE — LIABILITY OF 
 PASTIES. 
 
 Fromissary Notes — Indorsement as co- 
 Sureties — Liability of Indorsers to equal Contri- 
 hution inter se.] The liabilities inter se of suc- 
 cessive indorsers of a bill or note must in the 
 absence of all evidence to the contrary be deter- 
 mined according to the ordinary principles of 
 the law-merchant, whereby a prior indorser must 
 indemnify a subsequent one.- — But the whole 
 circumstances attendant upon the making, issue 
 and transference of a bill or note may be legiti- 
 mately referred to for the purpose of ascertain- 
 ing the true relation to each other of the par- 
 ties who put their signatures upon it either as 
 makers or indorsers; and reasonable inferences 
 derived from these facts and circumstances are 
 admitted to the effect of qualifying, altering, or 
 even inverting the relative liabilities which the 
 law merchant would otherwise assign to them. — . 
 Where the directors of a company mutually agreed 
 with each other to become sureties to the bank 
 for the same debts of the company, and in pursu- 
 ance of that agreement successively indorsed three 
 promissory notes of the company : — ^jETeM, reversing 
 the judgment of the Court below, that they were 
 entitled and liable to equal contribution inter se, 
 and were not liable to iudemnify each other suc- 
 cessively according to the priority of their indorse- 
 ments.— iJe«/mo2ds V. Wheeler (10 C. B. (N.S.) 561) 
 approved ; Steele v. McKinlay (5 App/Cas. 754) 
 distinguished.^According to the Civil Code of 
 Lower Canada (arts. 2340 and 2346) the law of 
 England, in force on the 30th of May, 1849, is 
 applicable to the question raised in this appeal. 
 Macdonald v. Whitfield - 8 App. Cas. 733 
 
 VII. BILL OF EXCHANGE— SECUBITIES FOR, 
 
 1, Specific Appropriatioii-^.4ece^femec8/or 
 
 Accommodation of Drawer — Bemittances to cover 
 Acceptances — Insolvency of Acceptor — Interest 
 
 VII. BILL OF EXCHANGE— SECURITIES FOR— 
 
 continued, 
 credited hy Acceptor ic Drawer.'] A banker in 
 London wa3_ ia the habit of accepting for the 
 accommodation of a customerj a merchant in 
 Sweden, bills drawn on him by the merchant, 
 who used to remit other bills to the banker to 
 put him in funds to meet 'the acceptances when 
 they became due. The banker, with the know- 
 ledge of the customer, generally discounted the 
 remitted bills before they fell due, and paid the 
 
 Eroceeds to his current account with his own 
 ankers. He rendered yearly accounts to the' 
 customer, and in those accounts he credited him 
 with interest on the amounts of the remitted bills 
 from their due dates, and debited him with in- 
 terest on the amounts which he paid in discharge 
 of the' acceptances. The amounts of the bills 
 remitted by the customer did riot alvrays exactly 
 correspond with the amounts of the acceptances 
 which they were intended to cover. In April, 
 1883, the banker accepted a bill for £450 drawn 
 on him by the customer, and maturing oh the 
 21st of July. On the 13th of July the customer 
 sent to the banker a bill for £450 upon W., of 
 London, payable at sight. This bill was received 
 by the banker on the 17th of July, and the pro- 
 ceeds were paid to his bankers and carried' to his 
 current account. On the 20th of July the banker 
 stopped payment. His acceptance for £450 was 
 dishonoured the next day, and the customer had 
 to pay it. In November, 1883, the banker filed a 
 liquidation petition : — Held, that the remitted bill 
 for £450 was not specifically ajppropriated to meet 
 the banker's acceptance for £450, and that, as' the 
 amount of the bill had been received by the 
 banker before the commencement of the liquida- 
 tion, the customer was not entitled to the proceeds 
 in specie, but could only prove for the amount as 
 a debt in the liquidation. — Semble, that, if the re- 
 mitted bill had remained in specie at the com- 
 mencement of the liquidation, the customer would, 
 on retiring the acceptance, have been entitled to 
 have the bill returned to him. — In re GatJienburg 
 Commercial Co. (29 W. E. 358) approved and 
 f611owed. J« i-e Bkoad. Ex parte Neck 
 
 [13 Q. B. D, 740 
 
 2. Specific Appropriation — Bill of Hx- 
 
 cliange drawn against Goods — Insolvency of Ac- 
 ceptor — Bights of Bill-holder and Drawer — In- 
 terest credited by Acceptor to Drawer.] ' Bankers 
 in London, at the request of M., who was acting 
 as the agent in London of S., a merchant at 
 Shanghai, on the 16th of March, 1888, granted to 
 S. a lettei: of credit for £20,000. The letter 
 authorized S. " to draw on us four months' sight 
 for any sums not exceeding £20,000, such draft 
 or drafts to be accompanied by bills of lading 
 and invoices of tea, purchased according to order 
 of M., and shipped by steamers to London, and 
 marine insurance policies relating thereto, and 
 these documents to be surrendered to us against 
 our acceptances. And we hereby agree with you, 
 and also as a separate engagement with th6 bona 
 fide holders respectively of the bills drawn in 
 compliance with the terms of this credit, that' 
 the same shall be duly accepted on presentation 
 and paid at maturity, if drawn arid negotiated on 
 or before the 31st of December, 1883." It was 
 
( 235 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 236 ) 
 
 VII, BILL OFEXCHANOE— SECiraiTIES FOE— 
 
 continiwd. 
 agreed that a commission of 1 per cent, should 
 be paid to the bankers on all drafts drawn under 
 the credit, and M. agreed that lie would meet 
 all the acceptances on or before their due dates, 
 " the usual rate of 2J per cent, being allowed on 
 all prepayments." Bills were drawn by S. under 
 this credit against various parcels of tea consigned 
 by him to M. for sale. In each case the bill 
 mentioned the parcel of tea against which it was 
 drawn, and purported to be drawn under the letter 
 of credit, the date of which was mentioned, and 
 the bills of lading and other shipping documents 
 were in each case attached to the bill. S., in 
 each case, advised the bankers of the drawing of 
 the bill, mentioning the tea against which it was 
 drawn and the name of the vessel by which it was 
 shipped. S. discounted the bills with a Chinese 
 bank, and their agent in London presented the 
 bills for acceptance, and in exchange for the ac- 
 ceptance delivered the bills of ladiag and other 
 ■documents attached to the London bankers, in 
 whose name the tea was then warehoused with a 
 dock company. As M. from time to time required 
 portions of the tea for delivery to purchasers, the 
 bankers handed to him warrants or delivery 
 orders, he paying them the value of the tea com- 
 prised therein. The moneys thus received were 
 paid to the credit of the general current account 
 of the bankers with their own bankers. In an 
 account in tlieir books with M., they debited him 
 with the amounts of the acceptances and credited 
 him with the amounts received by the sales and 
 with 2§ per cent, according to the agreement. — 
 The Loudon bankers suspended payment and 
 iiled a liquidation petition before their acceptances 
 matured : — Held, that, having regard to the terms 
 of the letter of credit, the bill-holders could not 
 <5laim any specific appropriation of the teas to meet 
 the acceptances : — But, held, that S. was entitled 
 to have the teas which remained in specie at the 
 ■date of the suspension (but not the proceeds of the 
 sale of the teas which were sold before the sus- 
 pension) applied in payment of the acceptances. 
 —Frith V. Forbes (4 Ij. F. & J. 409) distinguished. 
 Fx parte Dever. In re SusE - 13 ft. B, D. 766 
 
 3. Specific Appropriation— JittJJciaZ In- 
 solvency of Drawer and Acceptor — Application of 
 Bemittances remaining in Specie — Muh in Ex 
 parte Waring (19 Ves. 345).] Bankers in London 
 granted to merchants in Ceylon a letter of credit, 
 authorizing the merchants to draw on them at 
 three, four, or six months sight, for any sums not 
 exceeding £10,000 at one time, the drafts to be 
 covered within two, three, or five months (accord- 
 ing as they had been issued at three, four, or six 
 months), by remittances on good London houses. 
 And the bankers thereby agreed with the mer- 
 chants, and also, as a separate engagement, with 
 the bona fide holders respectively of the bills, that 
 the bills should be duly accepted on presentation, 
 and paid at maturity. The course of dealing 
 between the parties was this — if the remittances 
 sent as cover for the merchants' drafts matured 
 later than the drafts accepted, interest was debited 
 by the bankers against the merchants from the 
 date of the maturity of the acceptances to that of 
 the maturity of the remittances, w bile, if the remit- 
 
 VIL BILL OF EXCHANGE— SECimiTIES FOB 
 
 — continued. 
 tances matured earlier than the acceptances, in- 
 terest was credited to the merchants. In all cases 
 the bankers dealt with the remittances as they 
 thought expedient, and the proceeds were paid 
 into the general banking account of then- firm. 
 Under this letter of credit a number of bills were 
 drawn by the merchants on the bankers, and were 
 accepted by them, and other bills were remitted 
 by the merchants to cover the acceptances, the 
 letters which accompanied the remittances always 
 describing them as sent to cover particular drafts 
 which were specified in the letters. The bankers 
 stopped payment and filed a liquidation petition, 
 under which a trustee was afterwards appointed. 
 In consequence of their stoppage the merchants 
 also stopped payment. At the date of the liqui- 
 dation petition acceptances under the letter of 
 credit to the amount of £11,535 were outstanding, 
 to meet which the bankers had received from the 
 merchants remittances to the amount of £3009, of 
 which two bills remained in specie in the hands 
 of the bankers, the others having been convei'ted 
 by them into cash. After the filing of the peti- 
 tion two other bills, which had been posted by the 
 merchants before they knew of the stoppage of 
 the bankers, came into the hands of the receiver 
 appointed under the petition. The merchants' 
 finn consisted of two partners, one of whom was 
 insane, and resident in Germany. The sane part- 
 ner procured an adjudication of insolvency against 
 himself in Ceylon, and under this insolvency an 
 assignee was appointed . The sane partner deposed 
 that " under this insolvency my estate, and also 
 the estate of my firm, so far as legally can be, is 
 now being administered," and this evidence was 
 not contradicted : — Held, that the joint estate of 
 the merchants, as well as that of the bankers, was 
 under n. forced administration, and that conse- 
 quently the rule in Fx parte Wanng (19 Ves. 
 345) applied. — Held, therefore, that the proceeds 
 of the four remitted bills which were in specie at 
 the commencement of the liquidation must he 
 applied, not in paying the whole of the acceptances 
 rateably, nor in paying rateably all those accept- 
 ances to meet which remittances had been sent 
 before the filing of the liquidation petition, but in 
 paying those acceptances to meet which the four 
 bUls had been appropriated by the letters with 
 which they were sent. — ^When remittances are sent 
 under such circumstances to cover drafts of the 
 remitter accepted by the remittee, the remittee 
 may, so long as he is solvent, be entitled, by 
 mercantile usage or the course of dealing between 
 the parties, to deal with the remittances as he 
 pleases ; but, so soon as he becomes insolvent, the 
 remitter is entitled to insist on having the remit- 
 tances applied in paying the acceptances, and that 
 right is the foundation of the rule in JEe parte 
 Waring (19 Ves. 345), but the right extends only 
 to those remittances which remain in specie at the 
 date of the insolvency. Ex parte Devee. In 
 re SosE. (No. 2.) - - 14 ft. B. D. 611 
 
 4. Speoiflo Appropriation — Marginal 
 
 Advice.'] A firm at Liverpool and a firm at Pern- 
 ambuco employed B. as their agent at New York. 
 According to their course of business the firm at 
 Pemambuco received orders from pei'sons there to 
 
( 237 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 238 ) 
 
 Til. BILL OF EXCHANGE— SECUEITIES FOK 
 
 — :Continued. 
 puroliase goods at New York. The firm instructed 
 the Liverpool firm,-who instructed B. B. then pur- 
 chased the goods in New York and shipped them 
 to the firm at Pernambuoo with the bills of lading. 
 B. drew bills on the Liverpool firm to pay for 
 the goods, but not for the precise amount of the 
 shipments, and sold the bills in New York. B. 
 advised the Liverpool firm of the bills, and with 
 the advice forwarded a statement of his account 
 with them. To each bill was attached a counter- 
 foil headed " Advice of draft," and containing 
 a memorandum of amount of the bill and the 
 name of the drawer, with the words "Against 
 shipments per (naming the vessel). Please pro- 
 tect the draft as advised above." The Liverpool 
 firm on the bills being presented to them for 
 acceptance detached the counterfoils and kept 
 them in their own possession. The Plaintiffs 
 were the holders for value of bUls drawn on the 
 Liverpool firm in accordance with this course of 
 dealing, the goods having been shipped by B. to 
 -the Pernambuoo firm and the bills of lading being 
 also sent to that firm. — On the 10th of June, 1879, 
 the Liverpool firm stopped payment. — The three 
 bills having been dishonoured by the Liverpool 
 firm, the Plaintiffs brought an action against the 
 Pernambuco firm claiming to have the bills paid 
 out of the proceeds of the goods as having been 
 specifically appropriated to meet the bills : — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Bacon, V.C), that 
 there was no specific appropriation of the goods 
 either by the course of dealing or by the " advice 
 of draft " attached to the bills. — Frith v. Forbes 
 (4 D. F. & J. 409) distinguished.— /tofte;/ & Co.'s 
 Perseverance Ironworks v. Oilier (Law Rep. 7 Ch. 
 695) approved. Phelps, Stokes & Co. -o. Combeb 
 [26 Ch. D. 755 ; 29 Ch. D. 813 
 
 5. Specific Appropriation — Direction on 
 
 Bill to charge it to Account of Cargo as advised 
 — Contemporaneous Letter of Advice.'] A. pur- 
 chased from B. & Co. in America a bill of ex- 
 change dated the 5th of August, 1875, payable 
 sixty days after sight, for £2500 drawn upon K. 
 in London, on the face of which was a direction 
 " to charge the same on account of cheese per 
 Britannic and lard per Greece as advised," and 
 on the same day B. & Co. wrote to K. a letter of 
 adviccj inclosing bills of lading for the cheese 
 and lard, and informing K. that as against these 
 they valued on him at sixty days' sight for £2500 
 favour A. The bill was not accepted, K. having 
 heard that B. & Co. had suspended payment on 
 the 7th of August ; but, on the arrival of the con- 
 signmenlis in England, K. took possession of them 
 and realised them, receiving the proceeds, out of 
 which he claimed to retain a balance due to him 
 on the general account between him and B. & Co. 
 — From the evidence as to the course of dealing 
 between A. and B. and Co., it appeared that B. & 
 Co. had for many years previously been in the 
 habit of consigning American produce to K., and 
 drawing bills on him in a similar form to that of 
 the 5th of August, but that there had not been 
 any practice of specifically appropriating the 
 remittances to meet any particular bills,— A. 
 brought an action against K. and the trustee in 
 bankruptcy of B. & Co. claiming to be entitled to 
 
 TIL BILL 01" EXCHANGE— SECURITIES JOB 
 
 — continued. 
 a"charge on the proceeds of the cheese and lard 
 in priority to all other persons. No question was 
 raised as between K. and the trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy as to their respective rights ; — Beld, by 
 the Court of Appeal (affirming the decision of 
 Chitty, J.), that A. was not entitled to the charge 
 claimed, either (1.) on the ground that the direc- 
 tion on the face of the bill of exchange operated 
 as an equitable assignment ; or (2.) that on the 
 authority of Frith v. Forhes (4 D. F. & J. 409), 
 the letter of advice created a specific appropria- 
 tion of the remittances to meet the bill in favour 
 of B. & Co., the benefit of which was transferred 
 to A. by the direction on the bill of exchange. — 
 The case of Frith v. Forbes, if and in so far as it 
 intended to lay down that, as a general principle 
 of law, such a letter of advice created a specific 
 appropriation in favour of the consignors and 
 drawers of the bills, the benefit of which was 
 transferred by the direction on the bill to the 
 bill-holders — is erroneous, and must not be fol- 
 lowed.- Bkown, Shipley, & Co. v. Kough 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 848 
 
 VIII. BILL OF EXCHANGE— TKANSFEE. 
 
 Beindorsement — Indorser and Indorsee— 
 
 Circuity of Action.] The son of the- Defendant 
 bought goods of the Plaintiffs, and required credit 
 to enable him to pay. It was agreed that the 
 Defendant should become surety for the price of 
 the goods. The Plaintiffs accordingly drew two 
 bills of exchange and indorsed them to the De- 
 fendant, who reindorsod them to the Plaintiffs. 
 The bills having been dishonoured at maturity : 
 — Seld, that the Plaintiffs were not precluded 
 from suing the Defendant on the ground of 
 circuity of action, and that they could recover 
 the amount of the bills from the Defendant. 
 Wilkinson & Co. v. Unwin 7 Q. B. D. 636 
 
 BILL OF EXCHANGE — Acceptor and indorser — 
 Suretyship — Indemnity 6 App. Cas. 1 
 See Peincipal and Sueety — Indemnity. 
 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Composition — • Payment to 
 
 indorsee without deducting value of 
 security - - 15 Q. B. D. 102 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Seodked Obbditob. 
 2. 
 
 Cheque 8 Q. B. D. 288 ; 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 See Banker — Cheque. 1, 2. 
 Company — No power to accept bills — Ac- 
 ceptance by directors " for and on behalf 
 of company " — Personal liability 
 
 [13 Q. B. B. 360 
 See Company — Dieectob's Liability. 1. 
 - 7 a. B. D. 78 
 -Forqeby. 
 
 • Forgery r 
 
 See Criminal Law- 
 
 Forgery — Adoption of signature 6 App. Cas. 
 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 1. [83 
 
 Proof in bankruptcy — Accommodation bills 
 
 [16 Ch. B, 330 
 See Banke'uptoy — Peoof. 4. 
 
 Scotch law 6 App. Cas. 82 ; 7 App. Cas. 366 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 9S 
 See Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange. 
 1, 2, S. 
 
( 239 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 210 ) 
 
 BILL OF 'EXCSA'SQK— continued. 
 
 Taken in payment — Loss of lien 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Ship — Makitime Lien. 6. [604 
 Winding-up of company — Proof 28 Ch. D. 
 
 See Company — Peoof. 3. [634 
 
 BILL OF LADING. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Bill op Lading. 
 Exceptions — " Dangers and accidents of the 
 
 seas " - - 10 P. D. 103 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 13. 
 
 Incorporation of conditions in charterparty 
 
 [13 a. B. D, 317 ; 15 Q. B. D. 164 
 
 See Ship — Chartebpabtt. 1, 7. 
 Indorsement — Priority - 6 ft. B. D. 475 ; 
 
 See Tboteb. [7 App. Cas. 591 
 
 Indorsement — Stoppage in transitu 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 573 
 
 See Sale op Goods — Lien. 1. 
 Payment in exchange for — Tender 11 Q, B. S. 
 
 See Sale op Goods — Contract. 4. [327 
 
 BILL OF SALE:— Col. 
 
 I. Statutes - - _ 239 
 
 II. Apparent Possession 242 
 
 III. Formalities - 213 
 
 (a) Affidavit. 
 
 (V) FoKM in Schedule. 
 
 (o) Statement op Consideration. 
 
 IV. Operation - - 253 
 V. Registkation - 257 
 
 I. BILL OF SALE— STATUTES :— 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 43, amends the Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878, and enacts : — 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited for all purposes as the 
 BiUs of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 2. Act to come into operation on the 1st of 
 Ncnienriber, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 3. The Act, so far as consistent with the 
 tenor thereof, to he construed as one with the Bills 
 of Sale Act, 1878 (^styled " the principal Act") ; 
 hut unless the context otherwise requires not to 
 apply to any hill of sale duly registered before the 
 commencement of the Act so long as the registration 
 thereof is not avoided hy non-renewal or otherwise. 
 
 The expression " hill of sale " and other expres- 
 sions in the Act to have the same meaning as in the 
 principal Act, except as to bills of sale or other 
 documents mentioned in section four of the prin- 
 cipal Act, which may he given otherwise than by 
 way of security for the payment of money, to which 
 last mentioned bills of sale and other documents 
 the Act does not apply. 
 
 Sect. 4. Every bill of sale shall have annexed 
 thereto or written thereon a schedule containing an 
 inventory of the personal phatteh comprised in the 
 hill of tale ; and such bill of sale, save as herein- 
 after mentioned, sliall have effect only in respect of 
 the personal chattels specifically described in the 
 said schedule ; and shall he void, except as against 
 the grantor, in respect of any personal chattels not 
 so specifically described. 
 
 Sect. 5. Save as hereinafter mentioned, a bill of 
 sale shall be void, except as against the grantor, in 
 respect of any personal chatteh specifically de- 
 scribed in the schedule thereto of which the grantor 
 was not the true owner at the time of the execution 
 of the hill of sale. 
 
 1. BILL OF SALE— STATUTES- cow«i»Be(?. 
 
 Sect. 6. Nothing contained in the foregoing sec- 
 tions of this Act shall render a bill of sale void in re- 
 spect of any of the following things (that is to say) : 
 (1.) Any growing crops separately assigTied or 
 charged where such crops were actually 
 growing at tlie time when the hill of sate 
 was executed. 
 (2.) Any fixtures separately assigned or charged, 
 and any plant, or trade machinery where 
 such fixtures, plant or trade machinery 
 are used in, attached to, or brought upon 
 any land, farm, factory, workshop, shop, 
 Jiotise, warehouse, or other place in substi- 
 tution for any of the like fixtures, plant, 
 or trade machinery specifically described 
 in the schedule to such bill of sale. 
 Sect. 7. Personal chattels assigned under a hill 
 of sale shall not be liable to he seized or taken posses- 
 sion of by the grantee for any other than the 
 following causes : — 
 
 (1.) Tf the grantor shall make default in pay- 
 ment of the sum or sums of money thereby 
 secured at the time therein provided for 
 payment, or in the performance of any 
 covenant or agreement contained in the bill 
 of sale and necessary for maintaining the 
 
 (2.) If the grantor shall become a bankrupt or 
 suffer the said goods or any of them to he 
 distrained for rent, rates, or taxes; 
 (3.) If the grantor shall fraudulently either re- 
 move or suffer the said goods or any of them 
 to he removed from the premises; 
 (4.) If tlie grantor shall not, without reasonable' 
 excuse, upon demand in loriting hy the- 
 grantee, produce to him his last receipts fop 
 rent, rates, and taxes ; 
 (5.) If execution sliall have been levied against 
 the goods of the grantor under any judg- 
 ment at law; provided that the grantor 
 may within five days from the seizure or 
 taking possession of any chattels on aecount 
 of any of the above mentioned causes apply 
 to the High Court or to a Judge thereof in 
 Charnbers, and such Court or Judge, if 
 satisfied tliatby payment of money or other- 
 vnse the said cause of seizure no longer 
 exists, may restrain the grantee from re- 
 moving or selling the said chattels, or maif 
 make such other order as may seem just. 
 Sect. 8. Every bill of sale shall be duly attested 
 and shall be registered under the principal Act 
 within seven clear days after the execution thereof,, 
 or if it is executed in any place out of England then 
 within seven clear days after the time at which 
 it would in the ordinary course of post arrive in 
 England if posted immediately after the execution 
 thereof, and shall truly set forth the consideration 
 for which it was given, otherioise such hill of sale 
 shall he void in respect of such personal chattels 
 comprised therein. 
 
 Sect. 9. A bill of sale made or given hy way of 
 security for the payment of m/>ney by the grantor 
 thereof sliall he void unless made in accordance 
 with the form in the schedule to the Act. 
 
 Sect. 10. The execution of every hill of sale hy 
 tlie grantor shall he attested by one or more credible 
 witness or witnesses, not being a party or parties 
 thereto. So much of sect. 10 of the principal 
 
( 211 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES, 
 
 ( 242 ) 
 
 I. Bin OF SALE— STATUTES— coniinijed. 
 
 Aot as requires that the execution of every hill of 
 sale sliall be attested hy a solicitor of the Hupreme 
 Court, and that . the attestation shall state that 
 hefore the execution of the iill of sale the effect 
 thereof has heen explained to the grantor by the 
 attesting witness, is hereby 'repealed. 
 
 Sect. 11. Wliere the affidavit (which under sect. 
 10 of the principal Act is required to accompany 
 a biU of sale when presented for registration) 
 describes the residence of the person making or 
 giving the sams, or of the person against whom the 
 process is issued, to be in some place outside the 
 London bankruptcy district as defined by the 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, or where the hill of sale 
 descries the chattels enumerated therein as being 
 in some place outside the said London Bankruptcy 
 district, the registrar under the principal Act shall 
 forthwith and within three clear days after regis- 
 tration in the principal registry and in accordance 
 with the prescribed directions transmit an abstract 
 in the prescribed form of the contents of such bill of 
 sale to tlie County Court registrar in whose district 
 such places are situate, and, if such places are in 
 the district of different registrars, to each such 
 registrar. Every abstract so transmitted shall be 
 filed, kept, and indexed by the registrar of the 
 County Court in the prescribed manner, and any 
 person may search, inspect, make extracts from and 
 obtain copies of the abstract so registered in the 
 like manner and upon the like terms as to payment 
 or otherwise as near as may be as in the case of 
 bills of sale registered by the registrar under the 
 principal Act. 
 
 Sect. 12. Every bill of sale made or given in 
 consideration of any sum under thirty pounds shall 
 he void. 
 
 Sect. 13. AU personal chattels seized or of which 
 possession is talcen after the commencement of this 
 Act under or by virtue of any bill of sale (whether 
 registered before or after the commencement of this 
 Act) shall remain on the premises where they were 
 so seized or so taken possession of and shall not be 
 removed or sold until, after the expiration of five 
 clear days from, the day they were so seized or so 
 talcen possession of. 
 
 Sect. 14. A bill of sale to which the Act applies 
 to he no protection in respect of personal chattels 
 included in sv/ih hill of sale which but for such Mil 
 of sale would have heen liable to distress under a 
 warrant for the recovery of taxes and poor and 
 other parochial rates. 
 
 Sect. 15 r.epeals sects. 8 and 20 of the principal 
 Act, and also all other enactments contained in the 
 principal Act which are inconsistent with the Act, 
 bat the repeal is not to affect the validity of any- 
 thing done or suffered under the principal Act 
 hefore the commencement of the Act. 
 
 Sect. 16 repeals so much of sect. 16 of the princi- 
 pal Act as enacts that any person shall he entitled 
 at all reasonable times to search the register, and 
 every registered bill of sale upon'payment of one 
 shilling for every copy of u, hill of sale inspected, 
 and enacts that from and after the commencement 
 of the Act any person shall he entitled at all rea- 
 sonable times to search the register on payment of 
 a fee of one shilling, or such other fie ds may be 
 pretcrSxd, and subject to such regulations as may 
 be prescribed, and shall be entitled at all reasonable 
 times to inspect, examine, and make extracts from 
 
 I. BILL OF SALE — STATUTES — continued. 
 
 any and every registered hill of sale without being 
 required to make a written application, or to 
 specify any particulars in reference theretti, upon 
 payment of one shilling for each hill of sale in- 
 spected, and such payment shall be made by a 
 judicature stamp : Provided that the said extracts 
 shall be limited to the dates of execution, registra- 
 tion, renewal of registration, and satisfaction,, to 
 the names, addresses, and occupation of the 'parties^ 
 to the amount of the consideration, and to any 
 further prescribed particulars. 
 
 Sect. 17. Nothing in the Act is to apply to any 
 debentures issued by any mortgage, loan, or other 
 incorporated company, and secured upon the 
 capital, stock, or goods, chattels, and effects of such 
 company. 
 
 II. BILL OP SALE— APPAKENT POSSESSION. 
 
 1. Man in Possession-^ — Bills of Sale Act. 
 
 1878, ss. 4, 8,] J. having executed a bill of sale, 
 a man was put in possession of, tlie goods com- 
 prised in it by the grantee. The house in which 
 the goods were, belonged to J., and he had a key 
 of it : he did not sleep in it, but he went in and 
 out as he pleased : — Held, that the goods were in 
 the possession or apparent possession of J. within 
 the meaning of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, ss. 4, 8. 
 Seal v. Clabidge - 7 Q. B. D. 616 
 
 2. Possession of Sheriff— BiHs of Sale 
 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict c. 31), s. 8.] If the goods 
 comprised in an unregistered bill of sale are, at 
 the time of the filing of a bankruptcy petition 
 against the grantor, in the actual visible posses- 
 sion of the sheriff under an execution, issued 
 either by the grantee or by a third person, th^y 
 are not, even though the grantee has himself 
 taken no possession, in the " apparent posses- 
 sion " of the grantor, and the Bills of Sale Act 
 does not apply.^ — Ex parte Mutton (Law Eep. 14 
 Eq. 178) not followed. Ex parte Saitekt. In re 
 Bbennee - 16 Ch. D. 668 
 
 3. Eegistration not renewed — Bills of 
 
 Sale Acts 1854 (17 & 18 Vict c. 36) ss. 1, 7—1866 
 (29 & 30 Vict c. 96), s. 5—1878 (41 & 42 Vict 
 c. 31), 8. 8—1882 (45 & 46 Vict c. 43), s. 3.] In 
 1873 S. executed a bill of sale of furniture to the 
 Respondents to secure a loan, with an absolute un- 
 conditional power to take possession and sell in 
 case of default of payment upon demand. The 
 bill was duly registered, but never re-registered. 
 In 1883 the Eespondents, in order to protect the 
 furniture from S.'s creditors, demanded payment, 
 and on default took possession of the furniture and 
 sold it to C, givinghim a receipt for the purchase- 
 money though no money actually passed. At the 
 same time 0., not being able to pay, executed a bill 
 of sale of the furniture to the Respondents to secure 
 the purchase-money. This bill was duly regis- 
 tered : the receipt was not registered. The trans- 
 action with 0. was found by the jury to be a bona 
 fide one. The furniture having been afterwards. 
 seized under a fi. fa. against S. : — Held, aifinning 
 the decision of the Coiirt of Appeal, that the sale 
 to 0. being an absolute and bona fide transfer of 
 the property, the bill of 1 873 was spent and satis- 
 fied, and the Bills of Sale Acts of 1854, 1866, 1878, 
 and 1882 had no application whatever to it at the 
 time of the execution, whether the furnituria was 
 
( 243 ) 
 
 PIGEST OF OASES 
 
 ( 244 ) 
 
 II. BILL OF SALE— APPARENT POSSESSION— 
 continued, 
 
 or was not at that time in the apparent possession 
 of S. ; and that the Eespondents were entitled to 
 the furniture. Cookson v. Swike 9 App. Cas. 653 
 
 III. BILL OF SALE— FOKMALITIES. 
 
 (o) Affidavit. 
 
 , 1. Attestation — Solicitm- — Grantee — Bilh 
 
 of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Viet. c. 31), ss. 4, 8, 10.] 
 The grantee of a bill of sale, although he may be 
 a solicitor, cannot be the attesting witness thereof 
 under the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, sect. 10, sub- 
 sect. 1. Seal v. Olaeidge 7 Q. B. D. 616 
 
 3. Attestation — Solicitor of Grantee — 
 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), s. 10.] 
 The affidavit " of its due execution and attesta- 
 tion," filed with a registered biU of sale under 
 41 & 42 "Vict. c. 31, s. 10, sub-s. 2, must state, 
 inter alia, that the bill of sale was " duly attested " 
 by the attesting solicitor, i.e. that he was present 
 and witnessed the due execution ; an affidavit 
 merely verifying his signature to the attestation 
 clause, and describing his residence and occupa- 
 tion, is defective, and will therefore invalidate the 
 registration. Shabpe v. Bieoh 8 ft. B. D. Ill 
 
 3. Attestation — Solicitm — Sills of Sale 
 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 8, 10.] The 
 affidavit which is filed on the registration of a bill 
 of sale must' shew that the solicitor whose name 
 appears as the attesting witness to the deed did in 
 fact attest it, i.e. was present when it was executed 
 by the grantor. — The affidavit is not sufficient if 
 it only verifies the signature of the solicitor to 
 the attestation clause. — Sharpe v. Birch (8 Q. B. D. 
 Ill) followed. FoED V. Kettle 9 Q. B. D. 139 
 
 4. Attestation — Solicitor of Grantee — ■ 
 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), s. 10, 
 sul-s. 1.] The execution by the grantor of a bill 
 of sale attested and registered under the Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31. ». 10), may 
 be attested by the solicitor of the grantee. Pen- 
 
 WABDKN ll.EOBEKTS. HeATH ». KOBEETS. WlLSON 
 
 V. EoBBETS - - 9 Q. B. D. 137 
 
 5. Description of Besidence — Attesting 
 
 Witness— Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. 
 c. 31), 8. 10, sub-s: 2.] The affidavit filed on regis- 
 tration of a bill of sale in pursuance of the Bills 
 of Sale Act, 1878, s. 10, sub-s. 2, contained in the 
 introductory part describing the deponent an ac- 
 curate description of his residence. The body of 
 the affidavit contained, inter alia, the following 
 statements : — " I (the deponent) was present and 
 saw the said grantor of the bill of sale duly execute 
 the said bill of sale on the 15th day of December, 
 1881. The name subscribed to the said bill of sale 
 as that of the witness attesting the due execution 
 thereof is in the proper handwriting of this de- 
 ponent. I am a solicitor of the Supreme Court, and 
 
 reside at ; " there being thus no description 
 
 of the residence of the attesting witness in the 
 body of the affidavit : — Seld, that the affidavit 
 was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878, s. 10, sub-s. 2, in respect 
 of the description of the residence of the attesting 
 witness. — By Manisty, J. : The body of the affi- 
 davit sufficiently incorporated by reference the 
 description of the residence of the attesting wit- 
 
 III. BILI OF SiLE— FORMALITIES— cojrfd 
 
 (o.) Affidavit — eontinv^d. 
 ness contained in the introductory part. — By 
 North, J. : It is sufficient that the description of 
 the occupation and residence of the attesting 
 witness should be found in the introductory part 
 of the affidavit. Blaibeeg v. Paeke 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 90 
 
 6. Description of Residence — Renewal of 
 
 Registration— Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 <642 Viet, 
 c. 31), s. 11 — Shorthand Notes of Evidence — Sheriff 
 — Interpleader — Oasts.'] The affidavit made of the 
 re-registration of a biU of sale must state the resi- 
 dence of the grantee as it was stated in the bill of 
 sale, even though it was there erroneously stated. — 
 In a bill of sale the grantee was described as of 
 " Boldock in the county of Hereford," her residence 
 really being at Baldock in the county of Hertford. 
 The bill of sale was registered and was re-regis- 
 tered within five years. The affidavit made on the 
 re-registration stated only the true residence of 
 the grantee : — Held, that sect. 11 of the Act had 
 not been complied with, and that the bill of sale 
 was void as against an execution creditor of the 
 grantor. — Costs will not be allowed of shorthand 
 notes of evidence which are not used on the hear- 
 ing of an appeal, the decision turning ' on a 
 question of law. — The order on an interpleader 
 issue between a bill of sale holder and an execu- 
 tion creditor gave the sheriff his costs, to be paid 
 by the bill of sale holder. The bill of sale 
 holder appealed, and by the notice of appeal 
 asked that the sheriff's costs might be paid by 
 the execution creditor. The notice was served 
 on the sheriif, and he appeared by counsel on the 
 hearing of the appeal. His counsel took no part 
 ia the argument of the appeal, but only asked for 
 costs. It was not suggested that the execution 
 creditor was not as well able to pay the sheriff's 
 costs as the bill of sale holder; — Meld, that, 
 tliough it was an error to serve the sheriff with a 
 formal notice of the appeal, he ought not to have 
 appeared on the hearing, and that he was not 
 entitled to any costs of the appeal. Ex parte 
 Websteh. In re Moebis - - 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 7. Description of Residence — True Copy 
 
 —Clerical Error— il & 42 Vict. c. 31, ss. 8, 10.] 
 A " true copy " of a bill of sale within the Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878, s. 10, sub-s. 2, must not neces- 
 sarily be an exact copy, so long as any errors or 
 omissions in the copy filed are merely clerical and 
 of such a nature that no one could be thereby 
 misled. — The description of the residence of the 
 maker of a bill of sale required by the Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878, s. 10, sub-s. 2, to be stated in the 
 affidavit filed therewith, is not rendered incorrect 
 so as to avoid the bill of sale, by the fact that 
 between the execution of the bill of sale and the 
 date of the affidavit the maker had left his resi- 
 dence, as described in the affidavit, for America. 
 -Button V. O'Neill (4 0. P. D. 354) distinguished. 
 In re Hewee. Ex parte Kahen - 21 Ch. D. 871 
 
 (5.) FoEM IN Schedule. 
 
 8. Agreement to pay Insurance — " Main- 
 tenance of the Security" — Bills of Sale Act (1878) 
 Amendment Act, 1882 (45 * 46 Vict. a. 43).] An 
 agreement in a bill of sale of chattels, that the 
 grantoi- will pay all premiums necessary for in- 
 
( 245 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 C' 246 ), 
 
 III, BILL or SALE— FOKMAIITIES— oojiM, 
 
 (6.) FoBM IN Schedule — continued. 
 suring and keeping insured the chattels against 
 loss by fire, and forthwith after every payment in 
 respect of such insurance produce, and, if re- 
 quired, deliver to the grantee the receipt or 
 voucher for the same, is not unnecessary for the 
 maintenance of the security, and does not contra- 
 vene the Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment 
 Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43). Hammonb v. 
 HocKiNS - - - 12 ft. B. D. 291 
 
 9. — ~ Agreement to pay on Demand — 
 Power to seize and sell on Default ire such Fay- 
 wsnt— Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act, 
 1882 (45 <fc 46 Vict. c. 43), ss. 7, 9, 18.] A bill of 
 sale, given by way of security for payment of 
 moaey, contained an agreement by the grantor to 
 pay the sum advanced and interest upon demand 
 made in writing, and gave power to the grantee to 
 seize and sell the goods on default in payment on 
 demand in writing : — Held, that the agreement 
 to pay the money on demand was not an agree- 
 ment to pay it at a stipulated time in accordance 
 with the form in the schedule to the Bills of Sale 
 Act (1878) Amendment Act, 1882, and that there- 
 fore the bill of sale was void by sect. 9 of that 
 Act : — Seld, also, by Brett, M.E., and Fry, L.J. 
 (Bpwen, L. J., doubting), that the bill of sale was 
 void on the ground that it gave power to sell on 
 default in payment on demand without waiting 
 for five clear days as required by sect. 13. Hether- 
 
 INGTON V. GrKOOME - - 13 ft. B. D. 789 
 
 10.. Agreement to pay on Demand — 
 
 Stipulated Time for Payment — Seven Days after 
 Demand — Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment 
 Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), ss. 7, 9, and 
 Schedule.^ A bill of sale was given by way of 
 indemnity to the grantee on his becoming secu- 
 rity for the payment by the grantor of a sum of 
 money, being an instalment of a composition 
 duGj by him to his creditors. The grantor agreed 
 that he would pay the said sum of money to his 
 creditors on a given day, and the bill of sale pro- 
 vided that if he did not pay the money on the 
 day named, and the grantee should be obliged to 
 pay the same, the grantor would repay to the 
 grantee the amount within seven days after 
 demand in writing, with power in default to the 
 grantee to seize and sell the goods : — Held (on the 
 authority of Hetherington v. Groome (13 Q. B. D. 
 789)), that the bill of sale did not contain an 
 agreement to pay the money secured at a stipu- 
 lated time in accordance with the form given in 
 the schedule to the Bills of Sale Act (1878) 
 Amendment A,ct, 1882, and was therefore void. 
 Sibley v. Higgs. Taplin, Claimant 
 
 [15 ft. B. B. 619 
 
 11. Power to seize — Agreement to pay 
 
 Bent, &e. — Bills of Sale Ad (1878) Amendment 
 Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), 8«. 7, 9.] The 
 BUlsof Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act, 1882, 
 provides that a bill of sale made or given by way 
 of security for tho payment of money by the 
 grantor tbereof shall be void unless made in 
 accordance with the form ip the schedule to the 
 Act annexed. — Tte Act also provides that per- 
 gonal chattels assigned under a bill of sale shall 
 not be liaTble to be seized by the grantee for any 
 other than the following^ causes, viz., among 
 
 III. BILL OF SALE— rOEMALITIES— coniti. 
 
 (6.) FoBM IN ScHEDDLE — Continued. 
 •others; 1. If the grantor shall make default in 
 payment of the sum or sums of money thereby 
 secured at the time therein provided for payment 
 or in the performance of any covenant or agree- 
 ment contained in the bill of sale, and neoessai-y 
 for maintaining the security. 2. If the grantor 
 shall become a bankrupt, or suffer the said goods 
 or any of them to be distrained for rent, rates, or 
 taxes. 4. If the grantor shall, not, without 
 reasonable excuse, upon demand in writing by 
 the grantee, produce to him his last receipts for 
 rent, rates, and taxes.— By a bill of sale the 
 grantor assigned to the grantee the goods enu- 
 merated in the schedule thereto by way of security 
 for the payment of £300 money advanced and 
 £180 for agreed capitalised interest thereon at the 
 rate of sixty per cent, per annum, making to- 
 gether the sum of £480, by instalments of a 
 certain amount at certain specified dates. The 
 grantor also covenanted, amongst other things, 
 that she would deliver to the grantee the receipts 
 for rent, rates, and taxes, in respect of the pre- 
 mises on which the goods assigned might be, 
 when demanded in writing or otherwise ; and also 
 that she would not make any assignment for 
 the benefit of creditors, or file a petition for 
 liquidation or composition with creditors, or do or 
 suffer anything whereby she should render her- 
 self liable to be made or become bankrupt. It 
 was also by the said bill of sale agreed that if the 
 grantor should break any of tlie covenants, all 
 the moneys thereby secured should immediately 
 become diie and be forthwith paid to the grantee, 
 and it was provided that the chattels assigned 
 should not be liable to seizure for any other 
 cause than those specified in the Bills of Sale Act 
 (1878) Amendment Act, 1882 -.—Held, that the 
 bill of sale was void as not made in accordance 
 with the form given in the schedule : — Held, 
 also, that the bill of sale could not be supported, 
 inasmuch as it enabled the grantee to seize the 
 goods upon a failure by the grantor to produce 
 the receipts for rent, rates, and taxes, after a 
 verbal demand. Davis v. Bubton 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 414 ; 11 ft. B. B. 537 
 
 12. Power to seize — Bills of Sale Act 
 
 (1878) Amendment Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict, 
 c. 43), ss. 7, 9.] By a bill of sale executed two 
 days before his bankruptcy. A. (the grantor), in 
 consideration of £30 paid to him by B., and also 
 in consideration of £10 charged by B. by way 
 of bonus, assigned chattels to B. by . way of mort- 
 gage for payment of £40. A. thereby agreed that 
 he would " forthwith" pay to B. the £40, together 
 with interest and costs then due thereon, and 
 also pay the rent, rates, and taxes, and the pre- 
 miums for insurance ; and would " forthwith " 
 after every payment produce and deliver to B. 
 the receipts for the same. On default in payment 
 of the sums thereby secured, " or if he should do 
 or suffer anything whereby he should render 
 himself liable to become a bankrupt, or remove, 
 or suffer tho chattels to be removed from the pre- 
 mises, or if execution should be or should have 
 been levied against the goods of A.," or if he 
 ^hoidd make default in the performance of any 
 of the covenants, or commit any breach thereof — 
 
( 247 ) 
 
 DiaEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 248 ) 
 
 III. BILL OF SALE— rOEMALITIES— PonM. 
 
 (6.) Form in Schedule — continued. 
 it should be lawful for B. "forthwith or when 
 and as soon as he should think fit " to enter and 
 take possession, and after taking possession to 
 relinquish and again take possession as often and 
 whenever he should think fit. All expenses of 
 entry and seizure (including a fee of 5 per cent, 
 on the whole amount then duo and secured by 
 the bill of sale), and in the exercise by B. of any 
 of the powers, rights, and remedies therein con- 
 tained, were to be added thereto and to form part 
 of the sum secured, as if such costs, charges, pay- 
 ments, damages, and expenses had originally con- 
 stituted an integral part of the advance. It was 
 also provided that further advances, not exceed- 
 ing £100, might be made and added to the secu- 
 rity ; and it was finally provided (in the terms of 
 the form in the schedule to the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1882), that the chattels thereby assigned should 
 not be liable to seizure or to be taken possession 
 of by B., for any cause other than those expressed 
 in sect. 7 of the Act: — Held, having regard to 
 the provision for bonus in addition to the sum 
 actually paid by the grantee, and especially to 
 the power to seize in events other than those 
 mentioned in sect. 7, that this bill of sale was 
 void as being plainly in contravention of the pro- 
 visions of the Act of 1882, and the form in the 
 schedule thereto ; and that the defects were not 
 cured by the final proviso. In re Williams. Ex 
 parte Pbakce - - 25 Ch. D. 656 
 
 13. Power to seize — BiUs of Sale Act, 
 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), ss. 7, 9.] A bill of sale 
 empowered the grantee to spize the property in 
 case (inter alia) the grantor " shall do or suffer 
 any matter or thing whereby he shaU become a 
 bankrupt": — Held, that this event was in sub- 
 stance equivalent to the event " if the grantor 
 shall become a bankrupt" in which, by sect. 7 
 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1882, a grantee is 
 permitted to seize under a bill of sale, and that 
 consequently the bill of sale was not void under 
 sect. 9. Ex parte Allam. In re Mukday 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 43 
 
 14, Several Mortgagees — Consolidation 
 
 of Securities — Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amend- 
 ment Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Viet, c 43), s. 9.] A bUl 
 of sale which is in its terms so complicated as 
 to substantially vary from the form in the schedule 
 to the Bills of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act, 
 1882, is void by sect. 9 of that Act, notwithstand- 
 ing it may not contravene any of ihe other sections. 
 — Therefore a bill of sale made between the 
 grantor and four sets of mortgagees to secure dif- 
 ferent debts owing to each respectively at different 
 times, with a declaration that in case of default 
 in payment of any sum thereby secured or of any 
 other default mentioned as a cause of seizure in 
 sect. 7 of that Act, it should be lawful for the mort- 
 gagees to seize and sell the goods assigned, was 
 held by the Court of Appeal, reversing the decision 
 of the Queen's Bench Division, to be not in con- 
 formity with the form in the schedule, and void. 
 — Semble, the sum secured should be made payable 
 on a specified day, and a bill of sale making it 
 payable on demand is contrary to such form. 
 Melville v. Stringer - 12 Q. B. D. 132 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 392 
 
 III. BILL OF SALE— FOEMALITIES— con^cJ. 
 (c.) Statement op Consideration. 
 
 15. Agreement to lend — Past Debt — 
 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), e. 8.] 
 A. being indebted to B., gave him a bill of sale 
 to secure the sum of £7350, which, on stating 
 the accounts between them, was found to be the 
 balance due, and by such bill of sale this sum 
 was to be paid by A. with ioterest on demand in 
 writing. The bill of sale recited that B. had 
 agreed to lend A. £7350, and the consideration 
 for such bill of sale was stated therein to be £7350. 
 then paid by B. to A. : — Held, that the bill of 
 sale truly set forth the consideration for which it 
 was given so as to satisfy sect. 8 of the Bills of Sale 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31 ), although no money 
 in fact passed from B. to A. at the time the biU oi 
 sale was given. Credit Company v. Pott 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 295 
 
 16. Deduction of CommisBion on Loan — 
 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. e. 31), «. 8.] 
 At the execution of a bill of sale expressed to be 
 " in consideration of £700 now ia hand paid " a 
 sum of £7 10s. was paid to or retained by the 
 grantee out of the £700 for commission on the 
 loan and expenses in connection therewith in 
 pursuance of a previous arrangement to that 
 effect: — Held, affirming the decision of the 
 Queen's Bench Division, that the consideration 
 was not truly stated as required by'sect. 8 of the 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 \ 42 Vict. c. 31), and 
 that the bill of sale was void. [Hamilton v. 
 Chaine - - "t'ft. B. D. 1, 319 
 
 17. Deduction of Expenses — Costs — Bills 
 
 of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), s. 8.] A 
 bill of sale is not vitiated under sect. 8 of the 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878, because a part of the 
 sum stated in it as the consideration is retained 
 by the grantee to pay the solicitor's costs- of 
 preparing the deed and a further agreed sum 
 for costs previously incuri-ed, and the fee of an 
 auctioneer for valuing the property with a view 
 to making the loan. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., 
 reversed. — Ex parte Charing Cross Advance and 
 Deposit Bank (16 Ch. D. 35) distinguished.— The 
 " consideration " mentioned by sect. 8 is that which 
 the grantor receives for giving tbe bill of sale, not 
 necessarily the amount secured by it. — A bill 
 of sale was given to secure, not only a present 
 advance, but also the amount for the time being 
 due to the grantee upon a mortgage including 
 future advances which had been previously given 
 to him by the grantor. The recitals in the bill of 
 sale in stating the amount then due on the mort- 
 gage omitted a sum which had been advanced on 
 a bill then current: — Held, that this misstate- 
 ment formed no objection under sect. 8 to the 
 validity of the bill of sale. Ex parte Challinor. 
 In re EoGERS - - 16 Ch. D. 260 
 
 18. Deduction of Expenses — Bills of Sale 
 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. v. 31), «. 8— Appeal- 
 Evidence — Duty of Appellant — Eight to raise new 
 Point in Court of Appeal.'] If the amount of the 
 expenses incident to the preparation of a bill of 
 sale, given by way of mortgage, is deducted from 
 the sum stated in it as the consideration, and the 
 balance only is actually paid by the lender to 
 the borrower, the consideration is not truly stated 
 so as to satisfy sect. 8 of the Bills of Sale Act, 
 
( 249 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASKS. 
 
 ( 250 ) 
 
 ni. BIIL OF SALE— FOEMAUTIES— con(d. 
 
 (c.) Statement op Consideeation — continued. 
 1878. — Ex parte National Mercantile Bank (15 
 Oh. D. 42) and £>x parte ChaUinor ( 16 Oh. D. 260) 
 must be treated as binding authorities only in so 
 far as, they decide that, if part of the sum stated 
 in a bill of sale as the consideration js, by the 
 grantor's direction, given at the time of the exe- 
 cution of the deed, applied in satisfying a then 
 existing debt due by Mm, the money so applied 
 may be properly stated in the deed to be money 
 then paid to him.; — It is the duty of an appellant 
 to bring before the Court of Appeal the whole of 
 the evidence, oral as well as written, on which 
 the order appealed from was ^founded, and if he 
 does not do this, his appeal ought to be dismissed. 
 —The Court of Appeal, however, has power, by 
 way of indulgence, in a case where a note of oral 
 eyidenoe has been accidentally lost, to allow that 
 evidence to be taken over again. — An appellant 
 will not be allowed to raise in the Court of Appeal 
 a point which he did not raise in the Coujt below, 
 even though, there is some evidence in support of 
 it, if the nature of that evidence is such that, by 
 any possibility, the Kespondent might have been 
 able to rebut it if the point had been raised 
 originally. Ex parte Fibth. In re Cowburn 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 419 
 
 19. Deduction of Expenses — Costs — Soli- 
 citor acting for hotli Parties^Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878, s. 8.] A bill of sale in its operative part was 
 stated to be given " in consideration of the sum 
 ■of £10 now paid by H. to C." In the preparation 
 of the bill of sale D. acted as solicitor for both 
 H. and C, and on the execution of the deed re- 
 tained with C.'s consent, £9 out of the £10 in 
 payment of his bill of costs in the matter, and 
 only handed C. the balance of £1 : — Held, that, 
 imder the circumstances, the consideration was 
 truly stated in the deed so as to satisfy sect. 8 of 
 the BUls of Sale Act, 1878, for that, on the exe- 
 cution of the deed, D. no longer held the money 
 as agent for H. or bad any duty to perform to- 
 wards him, but held the money as C.'s agent 
 and could with C.'s consent retain the amount of 
 his bill of costs.— .Eb parte Firth (19 Ch. D. 419) 
 distinguished. In re Cann 13 Q. B. D. 36 
 
 20. ' Seduction of Expenses and Interest 
 
 —SiUs of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. a. 31), 
 «. 8'.] In the operative part of a bill of sale it 
 was expressed to be made in consideration of 
 £120 advanced upon its execution by the grantee 
 to the grantor. In fact, only £90 was paid to 
 the grantor, £30 being retained by the grantee 
 for' " interest and expenses." The execution of 
 the deed was attested by a solicitor, and the 
 attestation clause stated that before its execu- 
 tion the effect of the deed was explained by him 
 to the grantor. At the foot of the deed, imme- 
 diatfely after the attestation clause, there was a 
 receipt, sigrned by the grantor, which stated that 
 the £90, " together with the agreed sum of £30 
 for interest and expenses," made the sum of £120, 
 " the consideration money within expressed to be 
 paid " : — Seld, that the receipt was not part of 
 the deed ; and that the deed did not set forth the 
 consideration for it, and was therefore made, by 
 sect. 8 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, void as 
 against the trustee in the liquidation of the 
 
 HI. BILL OF SALE— FOEMALITIES— conW.' 
 
 (c.) Statement op Consideration — continued. 
 grantor. — Ex parte National Mercantile Bank 
 (15 Ch. D. 42) distinguished. Ex parte Chabing 
 Cross Advance and Deposit Bane.. In re 
 Pabker - - - 16 Ch. D. 35 
 
 21. Deduction of Expenses and Rent — 
 
 Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), s. 8.] 
 A bill of sale of chattels, dated the 23rd of 
 March, was expressed to be made " in conside- 
 ration of £50 by the assignee paid to the assignor 
 at or before the execution hereof." In fact' only 
 £21 10s. was paid to the assignor on the execu- 
 tion of .the deed, £3 10s. being retained by the 
 assignee for the expenses of the d-eed, and £25 
 being also retained and paid by him on the 30th 
 of March to the landlord of the assignor's house, 
 in which the chattels comprised in the deed were, 
 for two quarters' rent for the quarters ending 
 respectively the 25th of March and the 24th 
 of June. The rent of the house was payable 
 quarterly, but there was nothing to shew that it 
 was payable in advance. The £3 10s. and the 
 £25 were retained' upon the written request of 
 the assignor dated the day of the execution of 
 the deed. On the 25th of April the assignor 
 filed a liquidation petition, and the trustee in the 
 liquidation claimed the goods, on the ground that 
 the consideration for the deed had not been stated 
 in it in compliance with sect. 8 of the Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878 -.—Held, by the Court of Appeal 
 (reversing the decision of Bacon, C. J.), that the 
 consideration was not truly stated in the deed, 
 and that it was, therefore, void as against the 
 trustee, 1, because the £25 was not paid to the 
 assignor, but only agreed to be paid on his behalf; 
 2, because, even if the £25 were, taken to have 
 been paid to the assignor, it was not paid " at or 
 before the execution" of the deed.— Ex parte 
 National Mercantile Bank (15 Ch. D. 42) and 
 Ex parte ChaUinor (16 Ch. D. 260) explained. 
 Ex parte Rolph. In re Spindleb 19 Ch. D. 98 
 
 22. Defeasance or Conii^on— Agreement 
 
 not to register — Payment of increased Bonus — 
 Misdescription of Grantor — BUls of Sale Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 8, 10.] A bill of 
 sale was expressed to be made in consideration 
 of £242 advanced by the grantee to the grantors, 
 and the grantors agreed to repay the advance, 
 together with a sum of £100 by way of interest 
 and bonus, in certain instalments. There was 
 a_ verbal agreement by the grantee not to re- 
 gister the bill of sale, in consequence of which 
 he charged a larger bonus for the advance than 
 he would otherwise have done -.—Seld, that the 
 agreement not to register was a mere collateral 
 agreement, and not part of the consideration for 
 the bill of sale, and that, therefore, it was unne- 
 cessary to state it in the deed -.—Held, also, that 
 the agreement, was not a " defeasance or condi- 
 tion " to which the deed was subject within the 
 meaning of sect. 10 of the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878. — A bill of sale and the affidavit filed on 
 its registration described the grantors (who were 
 father and son) by their true addresses, and 
 added that they were mantle manufacturers 
 carrying on business together under a specified 
 firm. They had in fact formerly carried on the 
 business of mantle manufacturers in partnership, 
 
( 251 > 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 252 ) 
 
 III. BILL OF SALE— FOBMALITIEa— cojtW. 
 
 (c.) Statement of Consideration — continued. 
 but, at the timo when the bill of sale was exe- 
 cuted, the partnership had been dissolved, and 
 the business was being carried on by the father 
 alone, the sou being in his employment as a 
 clerk. The property comprised in the deed in 
 fact belonged to the father alone, though both 
 father and son joined in the assignment. The 
 father alone filed a liquidation petition. — Reld, 
 that there was no misdescription of the grantors 
 such as to affect the validity of the registration ; 
 (1) because the son not being a bankrupt, any 
 misdescription of him was immaterial; (2) be- 
 cause as to the father, the statement that he was 
 carrying on business with his son was mere sur- 
 plusage, and was not misleading. JEx parte Pop- 
 PLEWELL. In re Stobey - 21 Ch. D. 73 
 
 23. Explanation by Attesting Solicitor 
 
 —Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. <;. 31), 
 88. 8, 10.] A mortgage of a leasehold brewery 
 and some chattels was stated to be made in con- 
 sideration of £2000 paid by the grantee to the 
 grantor " immediately before the execution of 
 these presents." No money was in fact paid 
 by the grantee to the grantor, but the £2000 
 was the balance due by the grantor to the gran- 
 tee in respect of the purchase-money of the 
 brewery, which had been assigned by the gran- 
 tee to the grantor, in consideration of £2500, 
 by a deed executed immediately before the mort- 
 gage. Of this sum only £500 was paid by the 
 grantor, it being agreed that the balance of £2000 
 should be secured by the mortgage : — Held, that 
 the consideration was truly stated in the mortgage 
 deed, so as to satisfy sect. 8 of the Bills of Sale 
 Act, 1878. — It is not necessary that the affidavit 
 filed on the registration of a bill of sale should 
 state that the solicitor who attested the execution 
 of the deed explained the effect of it to the grantor 
 before he executed it. — Decision of Bacon, C.J., 
 affirmed. Ex parte Bolland. In re Eopek 
 
 [81 Ch. D. 543 
 
 24. Growing Crops — After-acquired Pro- 
 perty — " Separately assigned " — " By way of 
 Security " — " Specifically described " — Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878 (41 * 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 4, 7 
 —BiUs of Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), ss. 4, 5, 6, sub-s. 1, ss. 8, 
 9, and sch.2 A bill of sale, duly registered 
 and dated the 30th of April, 1883, and made 
 between one grantor and three grantees, recited 
 that two of the grantees (E. & D.) were liable 
 as sureties for the grantor on a bill of exchange 
 for £60, which h^d been discounted at a bank : 
 that two of the grantees (D. & E.) and one 0. 
 were liable as sureties for the grantors on a bill 
 of exchange for £100, which had been discounted 
 at the same bank ; that the grantor was unable 
 to meet the said bills, and was also in urgent 
 need for a further sum of £45, and had applied 
 to the grantees to take np the said two bills 
 of exchange and make him a further advance 
 of £45, which they had agreed to do in considera- 
 tion of the grantor entering into the bill of sale, 
 " for the purpose of securing repayment to them 
 with interest as well of the said sum of £45, as 
 also of the said two bills of £60 and £100 re- 
 spectively with all expenses due thereon." The 
 
 III. BILL OF SALE— FORMALITIES— eo»M. 
 (c.) Statement op Consideration — continued. 
 
 bill of sale then witnessed that " in consideration 
 of the sum of £45 now paid to the said " grantor 
 " by the said grantees (the receipt whereof the 
 said" grantor "hereby acknowledges), and of the 
 covenant on the part of the grantees hereinafter 
 contained," the grantor covenanted with the 
 grantees on demand to " pay to the grantees all 
 and every the said several sums of £60, £100, and 
 £45, and all costs, charges, and expenses," and 
 meanwhile to pay interest thereon. The bill of 
 sale also witnessed that " in further pursuance of 
 the said agreement and in consideration of the 
 premises," the grantor assigned unto the grantees 
 "all the crops now growing, or which shall at 
 any time hereafter during the continuance of this 
 security be growing in or upon" certain farm- 
 lands in the grantor's occupation, " and also all 
 horses, cattle, carts, carriages, implements of 
 husbandry, farming machinery, tools, utensils, 
 hay, straw, consumable stores, live and dead 
 stock, furniture, and household effects, which now 
 are, or at any time hereafter during the continu- 
 ance of this security shall be, in, upon, or about 
 the same farm, or the farmhouse, bams, stables, 
 or other buildings or erections thereon ; and all 
 which said crops, stock, implements, furniture, 
 and effects are intended to be specifically de- 
 scribed in the schedule hereunder written (but the 
 said schedule is not to abridge the other words of 
 description contained in these presents "). The 
 bill of sale contained many covenants by the 
 grantor, but none by the grantees. It did not 
 contain the phrase " by way of security " amongst 
 the operative words. The schedule to the bill of 
 sale contained a list of live stock, and the words 
 "household furniture and effects," without any 
 list or inventory thereof, and also under the 
 heading " crops " a list of fields with their names, 
 acreage, and the nature of Ihe crops growing 
 thereon. The instruments described as " bills of 
 exchange " were in truth, promissory notes, and 
 had not been discounted. The goods and chattels 
 comprised in the bill of sale were seized on behalf 
 of execution creditors of the grantor, and an 
 interpleader issue was directed between the 
 grantees and the execution creditors, but no 
 after-acquired property was seized on behalf of 
 the execution creditors: — Held, that the biU of 
 sale was valid under the Bills of Sale Act (1878) 
 Amendment Act, 1882, except as to after-acquired 
 property and the household furniture and effects ; 
 for the consideration was stated with sufficient 
 accuracy, and " was truly set forth " within the 
 meaning of sect. 8, notwithstanding the misdescrip- 
 tion of the promissory notes, and that the agree- 
 ment to take np the bills recited in the deed was 
 in effect a covenant to take up the promissory 
 notes ; that the grant of the after-acquired pro- 
 perty did not invalidate the grant of me existing 
 property; that the growing crops were separately 
 assigned within the true meaning of the statute ; 
 that the omission of the words "by way of se- 
 curity" was rectified by the other terms of the . 
 deed ; that in the schedule the chattels, except 
 the "household furniture and effects," wero 
 " specifically described " within the meaning of 
 sect. 4 ; but that the bill of sale was void as against 
 
( 253 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES; 
 
 ( 254 ) 
 
 in. BILL OF SALE— rOEMALITIES— conR 
 
 (o.) Statement of Coksidebation — continued. 
 execution creditors of the grantor in respect of 
 any property afterwards acquired by the grantor, 
 and also as to the household furniture and effects 
 because they were not specifloally described within 
 the meaning of sect. 4. Eobekts v. Koeerts 
 
 [13 ft, B. D. 794 
 
 25. Part repayable on Demand — £30 — 
 
 Immediate Demand — Bills of Sale Act (1878) 
 Amendment Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43).] A 
 bill of sale expressed to be in consideration of 
 £30, of which £15 is repayable on demand and 
 the rest by monthly instalments, may, in the 
 absence of evidence that the transaction is a 
 stam, be valid, notwithstanding the Bills of Sale 
 Act (1878) Amendment Act, 1882, sect. 12, if 
 £30 is bouS. fide paid to the grantor, even 
 although, at his own request, demand for £15 is 
 immediately made by the grantee, and it is at 
 once returned to him. Davis v. XJshek 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 490 
 
 26. Prior Bill of Sale—Bilh of Sale Act, 
 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), s. 8.] On the 12th of 
 February a bill of sale was executed to secure an 
 actual advance in cash of £1500. After its execu- 
 tion it was discovered that it contained some 
 clauses which made it void under the Bills of Sale 
 Acts. It was thereupon cancelled, and a new biU 
 of sale was, on the 16th of February, executed in 
 substitution for the first, and was registered on 
 the 1 8th of February. The second deed contained 
 nothing to shew that it was given in place of a 
 prior bUl of sale, but it purported to be given 
 "in consideration of £1500 now paid" by the 
 grantee to the grantor : — Held, that the conside- 
 ration was truly stated, and that it was not neces- 
 sary to state the whole history of the transaction. 
 Ex parte Allah. In re Mcnday 14 Q. B. D. 43 
 
 IV. BILL or SALE— OPERATION. 
 
 1, After-acquired Property — Assignment 
 
 of Future Crops — Landlord and Tenant — Sur- 
 render — Bights of Bill of Sale Solder against 
 Landlord of Grantee.'] B., the tenant of a farm, 
 by bill of sale made in September, 1880, assigned 
 to the Plaintiff his stock-in-trade and effects on 
 the said farm, together with all the growing and 
 other crops " which at any time thereafter should 
 he in or about the same or any other premises" 
 of the said B. On the 25th of April, 1881, the De- 
 fendant, who was B.'s landlord of the said farm, 
 distrained for rent, and afterwards agreed with B. 
 to withdraw such distress and to forego all claim 
 for rent on B. agreeing to give up possession and 
 surrender the tenancy to the Defendant on the 
 24th of June then next. The Defendant ac- 
 cordingly withdrew the distress, and on the 24th 
 of June he took possession of the farm according 
 to the said agreement, and afterwards cultivated 
 the crops which were growing there, and when 
 they arrived at maturity he reaped and sold 
 them. Between the time he withdrew the dis- 
 tress and the time he took possession of the farm, 
 viz., on the 19th of May, the Defendant had notice 
 for the first time of the Plaintiff's claim under the 
 bill of sale to the growing crops. The amount of 
 rent which would have been due to the Defendant 
 had the tenancy continued, and the expenses he 
 
 rv. BILL OF SALE— OPERATION- co)i«(Z. 
 incurred in cultivating and reaping the crops, 
 exceeded their market • value when sold : — Seld, 
 in an action by the Plaintiff against the Defen- 
 dant for the value of these crops, that the de- 
 scription in the bill of sale of the future crops on 
 the farm was suiSoiently specific to make a valid 
 assignment of them in equity. — Seld, also, that, 
 assuming that the Plaintiff had a right in equity 
 to such crops as against the Defendant, yet such 
 right was subject to the payment of the rent 
 and of the expenses of cultivating and reaping 
 the crops, and as such rent and expenses exceeded 
 the value of the crops the Plaintiff had not been 
 injured, and had no cause of action against the 
 Defendant. Clements v. Matthews 
 
 [11 Q,. B. S. 808 
 
 2. After-aoquired Property — ■ Charge of 
 
 all Personalty.'] A person by a written instru- 
 ment charged " all his present and future per- 
 sonalty " to secure to the Plaintiff any sums he 
 might become indebted to him, and afterwards 
 incurred debts to the Plaintiff: — Seld, that this 
 instrument operated to charge all the personal 
 property belonging to the debtor at the date of 
 the instrument, but did not operate to charge 
 after-acquired property. — Solroyd v. Marshall 
 (10 H. L. 0. 191) distinguished. In re Oocnt 
 D'Epineuil (2). Tadman v. D'Epineutl 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 758 
 
 3. After-acquired Property — Covenant to 
 
 assign — Liability — • Order of Discharge — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 12, 13, 
 49, 125, sub-s. 10.] A debtor by bill of sale as- 
 signed for value to a creditor certain specified 
 chattels at his place of business, " and all other 
 chattels which might be or at anytime thereafter 
 be brought thereon in addition to or in substitu- 
 tion thereof." The debtor became bankrupt, and 
 after his order of discbarge brought other chattels 
 upon the premises. The creditor did not prove 
 for his debt in the bankruptcy : — Seld (reversing 
 the decision of Hall, V.C.), that the assignment 
 of the after-acquired chattels, although absolute 
 in form, amounted merely to a contract to assign 
 for the breach of which the assignor incurred a 
 liability provable in his bankruptcy, and from 
 which he was released by the order of discharge ; 
 that consequently the goods brought on the pre- 
 mises after the order of discharge could not be 
 seized by the creditor under his bill of sale.-^ 
 Whether the same rule applies to a covenant in 
 a marriage settlement to settle future property, 
 gusere. Collter v. Isaacs 19 Ch. D. 342 
 
 4. After-acquired Property— Prior Equi- 
 table Estate — Subsequent Legal Estate without 
 Notice — Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, 1873, 
 1875 (36 & 37 Vict. o. 66 ; 38 & 39 Vict. c. 77.] 
 The Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, 1873, 
 1875, have n6t abolished the distinction between 
 legal and equitable interests, they merely enable 
 the High Court to administer legal and equitable 
 remedies ; and therefore notwithstanding these 
 statutes, the grant of future-acquired chattels 
 confers only an equitable interest therein upon the 
 grantee; and if when they come into existence, 
 but before the grantee takes possession thereof, the 
 legal estate and interest therein, without notice of 
 the gi'antee'a existing equitable interest, become 
 
( 255 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 256 ) 
 
 IV. BILI OF SALE— OPERATION— co»fe"»Me(«. 
 vested in another person, the latter ia entitled to 
 the future-acquired chattels comprised in the 
 grant, and becomes the owner thereof, both at law 
 and in equity.— By a bill of sale a jeweller, for a 
 valuable consideration, assigned to the Plaintiff his 
 after-acquired stock-in-trade subject to a proviso 
 for redemption : before the Plaintiff took posses- 
 sion of the after-acquired stock-in-trade, the 
 jeweller pledged a portion of it with the Defendant, 
 whq had no notice of the Plaintiff's bill of sale : — 
 Held, that the Defendant was entitled to retain 
 the stock-in-trade pledged with him as against 
 the Plaintiff, and that no action of detinue or 
 ■conversion would lie. Joseph v. Lyons 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 280 
 
 5. After-acquired Property — Subsequent 
 
 Bill of Sale — Grant of Legal Interest — Seizure 
 by Owner of Equitable Interest.'] By a bill of 
 sale executed in 1875, K. granted -to M. the after- 
 acquired chattels which should bo upon certain 
 premises of R. The title of M. under the bill 
 of sale ultimately vested in the Defendant. E. 
 brought upon the premises chattels acquired by 
 him after 1875, and before the coming into ope- 
 ration of the Bills of Sale Act, 1882, by a bill of 
 sale granted to the Plaintiff, these after-acquired 
 chattels. The Plaintiff had no notice of the bill 
 of sale in favour of M. In January, 1884, the 
 Defendant seized the after-acquired oliattels then 
 upon the premises of K. The Plaintiff demanded 
 possession of them from the Defendant, who refused 
 to give them up; and the Plaintiff thereupon 
 brought an action to recover their value ■.—Held, 
 that the Plaintiff was entitled to recover from the 
 Defendant the value of the goods in question ; for 
 the grant of the after-acquired chattels to M. 
 carried only an equitable interest, while the 
 Plaintiff by the grant to him took the legal 
 interest without notice of the prior equitable 
 interest vested in M. and had a better title than 
 the Defendant. — Joseph v. Lyons (15 Q. B. D. 280) 
 followed. Hallas v. Eobinson 15 Q. B. D. 288 
 
 6. Goods bought on Credit — Banker and 
 
 Customer — Pledge of Goods bouglit on Credit — 
 Delivery Order — Memorandum in Bank Ledger — 
 Bill of Sale — Possession — Bills of Sale Act, 1878 
 (41 * 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 3, i— Bills of Sale Act, 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. o. 43), s. 9.] Whatever docu- 
 ments are included in the expression "bill of 
 sale " as defined by the Bills of Sale Acts, they 
 must still, by force of sect. 3 of the Bills of Sale 
 Act, 1878, be limited to documents " whereby 
 the holder or grantee has power to seize or take 
 possession of any personal chattels comprised in 
 or made subject to such " document. The Acts 
 therefore do not include letters of hypothecation 
 accompanying a deposit of goods or pawn tickets 
 given by a pawnbroker, or in fact any case where 
 the object and effect of the transaction are im- 
 mediately to transfer the possession of the chattels 
 from the grantor to the grantee. — A trader, whose 
 banking account was largely overdrawn, and who 
 required a further advance of £500, deposited 
 with his bank the invoice of goods bought by 
 him on credit and consigned to him by rail, and 
 gave the bank a delivery order directed to the 
 railway company reqxiiring the company to hold 
 the goods to the order of the bank. The invoice 
 
 IV. BIIL OP SALE— OPEEATION— com«n«ed. 
 shewed that the goods were bought on credit. 
 On aiTival of the goods the company sent the 
 usual advice note to the bank stating that they 
 held the goods to the order of the bank. The 
 £500 was then advanced, and a minute of the 
 transaction, stating the rate of interest on the 
 advance, the terms on which the goods were to 
 be redeemed, &o., was entered in the bank ledger, 
 and was signed by the trader and stamped! 
 Eleven months afterwards the trader became 
 bankrupt -.—Held, that as the effect of the trans- 
 action was immediately to transfer the posses- 
 sion of the goods to the bank, the delivery order 
 and minute did not require registration as a bill 
 of sale, and that the title of the bank was good as 
 against the trustee in bankruptcy. — SemUe, a 
 pledge by a trader of stock-in-trade which he 
 has bought on credit, and not paid for, is not a 
 " transfer in the ordinary course of business of 
 his trade or calling," within the exception con- 
 tamed in sect. 4 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878. 
 In re Hall. Ex parte Close 14 ft. B. D. 386 
 
 7. Eight to Possession — Possession by 
 
 Mortgagor— Sale by Mortgagor to Third Persort— 
 Conversion.] In consideration of a loan of money, 
 G. [the mortgagor] by bill of sale conveyed his 
 furniture, stock-in-trade, and other effects in and 
 upon the farmhouse occupied by him, to the 
 Plaintiff, and all things of the like nature which 
 might at any tune during the continuance of the 
 security be brought on the premises. The bill of 
 sale contained provisoes that if the mortga°-or 
 should upon demand delivered to him or his 
 assigns pay the amount secured the security 
 should be void, and that in case he should make 
 default in payment of the amount, or in case he 
 should assign the goods or permit them to be 
 removed from the premises before such payment 
 it should be lawful for tlie Plaintiff to enter upon 
 the premises and take possession of and sell the 
 goods assigned. There was a further proviso that 
 until the mortgagor or his assigns should make 
 default, or do any act whereby the power of entry 
 might be put in force, it should be lawful for him 
 or his assigns to hold and possess the goods as- 
 signed. The mortgagor, while part of the con- 
 sideration money remained unpaid, sold and 
 delivered off his premises to the Defendant part 
 of the goods assigned. The Plaintiff thereupon 
 demanded these goods from the Defendant, and 
 upon his refusal to give them up, brought an 
 action for their conversion. At the trial the jury 
 found that the sale to the Defendant was not in 
 the ordinary course of business -.-Held, that the 
 Defendant was liable, for upon the true construc- 
 tion of the bill of sale the sale and removal of the 
 goods gave no title to the Defendant as against 
 the Plaintiff. Payne v. Feen 6 ft. B. D. 620 
 
 8- ^Bi^^'ce-" Seasonable excuse" for Non- 
 production of Beceipt for Bent — Belief aaainst 
 Seizure of Goods— Bills of Sale Act, 1878, Arnold- 
 ment Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43), s. l—BiU of 
 Sale registered before the Commencement of the Act.] 
 The provisions of sect. 7 of the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878, Amendment Act, 1882, apply to goods seized 
 atfer the date of the commencement of the Act 
 under a bill of sale executed and registered 
 before such date.— Where the grantor of a bill of 
 
( 257 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 258 ) 
 
 IV. BILI OF SALE— OPERATION— coMiinaefl!. 
 sale did not, upon demand in writing by the 
 grantee, produce a receipt for rent which had 
 only become due a few days, and of which it 
 appeared the landlord had not yet required 
 payment : — Held, that the grantor had not " with- 
 out reasonable excuse " failed to produce his last 
 receipt for rent, within the meaning of the 4th 
 sub-section of sect. 7 of the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878, Amendment, Act, 1882. — ^Where, after goods 
 had been seized under a bill of sale for default 
 in payment of instalments due thereunder, the 
 grantor offered to pay the amount due, but the 
 grantee refused to receive the same : — Seld, that 
 the Court had power, under the above-mentioned 
 section, to make an order restraining the grantee 
 from selling the goods on condition that the 
 amount due was paid. Ex parte Cotton 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 301 
 
 V. BIIL or SALE— SEGISTEATION. 
 
 1. Agreement to give Bill of Sale — Bills 
 
 of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), is. 4, 9.] 
 A parol agreement to give a bill of sale does not 
 require registration under the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1878, and a bill of sale given in pursuance of 
 such an agreement is not void under the Act by 
 reason of the non-registration of the agreement. 
 — Decision of Bacon, C. J., reversed on additional 
 evidence. Ex parte Hadxwell. In re Heming- 
 way _ - - 23 Ch. D. 626 
 
 2. Building Agreement — Glcmse vesting 
 
 Materials in Landowner — Bills of Sale Aet, 1878 
 (41 * 42 Vict. V. 31), s. i— Amendment Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43).] An agreement, by a clause 
 in an ordinary building Contract, that all building 
 and other materials brought by the builder upon 
 the land shall become the property of the land- 
 owner, is not a bill of sale within the Bills of Sale 
 Act, 1878 (41 &42 Vict. o. SI).— Bromi v. Bate- 
 man (Law Eep. 2 0. P. 272) and Blake v. Izard 
 (16 W. E. 108) followed.— Beeue v. Whitmore 
 (4 De G. J. & S. 1 ; 33 L. J. (Ch.) 63) and Holroyd 
 V. Marshall (10 H. L. C. 191 ; 33 L. J. (Ch.) 193) 
 distinguished. Beeves v. Barlow 11 Q. B. D. 
 
 [610 ; 12 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 3. Growing Crops — Severance — Bills 
 
 of Sale Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 36), ss. 1, 7.] 
 Thou'gh a bill of sale under the Bills of Sale Act, 
 1854, does not require registration in respect of 
 growing crops, yet, when the crops are subse- 
 quently severed by the grantor they become per- 
 sonal chattels, and, if possession has not been 
 taken of them by the grantee before the com- 
 mencement of the bankruptcy of the grantor, 
 they will pass to the trustee in the bankruptcy. 
 Brantom v. Ch-iffits (1 C. P. D. 849 ; 2 C. P. D. 212) 
 distinguished. Ex parte National Mekoantile 
 Bank. In re Phillips 16 Ch. D. 104 
 
 4. Inventory of Goods— iJeceipi of Sheriff's 
 
 Officer for Purchase-money of Goods sold under 
 Execution— Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. 
 c. 31).] The sheriff having seized the goods of the 
 Defendant under a writ of fi. fa. issued by 0-, sold 
 them to the claimant for £65. A deposit of £40 
 was paid at the time of sale, and £25 on the fol- 
 lowing day; the sheriff, thereupon, gave to the 
 claimant an inventory of the goods, and a receipt 
 for the price, which were never registered under 
 
 V. BILL OF SALE— ■REQISTS.ATIOS— continued. 
 the Bills of Sale Act, 1878. The Defendant re- 
 mained in possession of the goods, which were 
 afterwards seized by the sheriff under a writ of 
 fi. fa. issued in the present action : — Seld, that 
 the inventory and receipt did not amount to a 
 " bill of sale " within the meaning of the Bills of 
 Sale Act, 1878 ; and that the claimant was en- 
 titled to the goods as against the Plaintiffs. — 
 Woodgate v. Godfr.ey (5 Ex. D. 24) followed. 
 Maksden v. Meadows - - 7 Q. B. D. 80 
 
 ,5. Joint Stock Company — Dock Warrant 
 
 — Immediate Possession — Bills of Sale Act, 1878 
 (41 & 42 Viot. c. 31)— Bills of Sale Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 43).] Bills of sale given by 
 joint stock companies are within the Bills of Sale 
 Act, 1882. — Where a security on goods with pos- 
 session is given the security is valid without regis- 
 tration. — ^A wharfinger's warrant was indorsed 
 over to a lender with an accompanying memo- 
 raadum of terms of security including a power 
 of sale: — Held, that there was a good security 
 which did not require registration. In re Cun- 
 ningham & Co., Limited. Attenboroitgh's Case 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 6. Priority — Bills of Sale Aet, 1878 
 
 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 8, 10 — Unregistered and 
 Registered Bills of Sale.'] Chattels were assigned 
 to the Defendant by a bill of sale which was not 
 registered. The grantor subsequently gave 
 another bill of sale comprising the chattels to the 
 Plaintiff, who registered it. The Defendant after- 
 wards took possession of the chattels under his 
 bill of sale. In an action against him by the 
 Plaintiff for conversion: — Meld, reversing the 
 judgment of the Queen's Bench Division, that 
 the registered bill of sale took priority over the 
 unregistered bill of sale, and that the Plaintiff 
 was entitled to judgment. Lyons v. Tuoker 
 
 [6Q.B.D.660; 7 Q. B. D. 623 
 
 7. Priority — Registered Bill of Sale — 
 
 Unregistered Bill of Sale — Bills of Sale Act, 1878 
 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), s. 10.] A bill of sale attested 
 and registered under the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, 
 takes priority over one that is earlier but unregis- 
 tered, as to any chattels which may be comprised 
 in both. CoNELLY v. Steer - 7 a. B. D. S20 
 
 8. Priority— 17 & 18 Vict. c. 36, 8.1— 
 
 Execution, — Unregistered Bill of Sale.] Whether, 
 under 17 & 18 Vict. c. 36, s. 1, the taking in exe- 
 cution of goods comprised in an unregistered bill 
 of sale defeated the bill of sale wholly or only to 
 the extent necessary to give effect io the execu- 
 tion, quasre. — The position in Richards v. James 
 ( Law Eep. 2 Q. B. 285), that it has the former 
 effect, doubted. In re Aktistio Oolohr Print- 
 ing Company. Ex parte FonRDRmiER 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 610 
 
 9. Transfer — Assignment — Bills of Sale 
 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), ss. 8, 10.] A bill 
 of sale of goods, which was duly registered, was 
 given to secure £500 with interest, part of which 
 was at a subsequent date paid off. A deed was 
 afterwards made between the two parties to the 
 bill of sale, and the Plaintiff, whereby the security 
 was transferred and the goods assigned to him, on 
 his paying off the amount remaining due on the 
 
( 259 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 260 ) 
 
 V. BILL OF SALE— EEGISTBATION— coB^iniietJ. 
 bill of sale and making a further advance to the 
 grantor, the whole amount secured by this deed 
 being £501 ISs. dd., with interest, and the rate of 
 interest and tlie times of payment being different 
 from those of the former deed ; — Held (by Watkin 
 Williams and Mathew, JJ.), that this deed was a 
 transfer and not a new bill of sale, and need not 
 be registered under the Bills of Sale Act, 1 878, 
 to be effectual as to the whole amount secured by 
 it, against an execution creditor. — Held, by the 
 Oourt of Appeal (Bramwell, Eaggallay, and Lush, 
 L.JJ.), that whether or not the deed was an 
 eff'ectual security, without registration, for the 
 fresh advance, it was, as to the amount which re- 
 mained due on the former bill of sale, a transfer 
 and valid to that extent without registration under 
 the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, so as to entitle the 
 Plaintiff to the goods. Hobne v. Hughes 
 
 [6 Q. B, D. 676 
 
 10. trnregistered Bill of Sale — Bills of 
 
 Sale Act (1878) Amendment Act, 1882 (45 * 46 
 Vict. c. 43), s. 8,] The Bills of Sale Act, 1882, 
 sect. 8, which makes a bill of sale void unless it is 
 registered within seveu clear days after execution, 
 does not avoid an unregistered bill of sale which 
 was executed more than seven clear days before 
 the Act came into operation. Hickson v. Daelow 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 690 
 
 11. Unregistered Bill of Sale — Extent of 
 
 Avoidance — Bankruptcy of Grantm — Bills of Sale 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31), s. 8.] The eff'eot 
 of sect. 8 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, in avoid- 
 ing an unregistered bill of sale as against an 
 execution creditor of the grantor is to avoid it 
 only to the extent necessary to satisfy the execu- 
 tion. — BicJiards v. James (law Eep. 2 Q. B. 285) 
 distinguished, on the ground that the words of 
 sect. 1 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1854, are different 
 from those of sect. 8 of the Act of 1878. — If after 
 the sheriff under an execution has seized tlie 
 goods comprised in an imregistered bill of sale to 
 which the Act of 1878 applies, the bill of sale 
 holder takes a sufficient possession before the 
 filing of a bankruptcy petition on which the 
 grantor is afterwards adjudicated a bankrupt, 
 and the execution is then avoided by virtue of the 
 relation back of the title of the trustee in the 
 bankruptcy to an act of bankruptcy committed 
 before the levy of the execution, the execution is 
 swept away as if it had never existed, and the bill 
 of sale holder is entitled to the goods as against 
 the trustee. Ex parte Blaibekg. In re Toomek 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 254 
 
 12. TTnregistered Bill of Sale — Bectifica- 
 
 iion of Begister under Bills of Sale Act, 1878, s. 14 
 — Bill of Sale void at Commencement of the Act — 
 BilU of Sale Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 31). 
 ss. 14, 23.] A bill of sale, void for want of re- 
 newal of registration at the commencement of 
 the Bills of Sale Act, 1878, cannot be renewed 
 under sect. 14 of that Act. Askew v, Lewis 
 
 [10 Q, B. D. 477 
 
 BILL OF SALE — Bankruptcy of grantor — Order 
 
 and disposition 21 Ch. D. 871 ; 23 Ch. D. 
 
 [409; 24C11, D. 210 
 
 See Bankhuptot — Okdek and Disposi- 
 tion. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 BILL or SALE — continued. 
 
 • Building contract — Power to seize materials 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 622 
 
 See Building Conteact. 2. 
 
 Eegistration — Mortgage of machinery ■— 
 
 Fixtures - 15 ft. B. D. 358 
 
 See FixTUEES. 
 
 Eegistration — Transfer of registered bill of 
 
 sale — Equitable sub-mortgage 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 636 
 See Bankeuptct — Oedee and Disposi- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Statement of consideration 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Act of Banketiptct, 
 5. 
 
 Unregistered — Administration of estate of 
 
 deceased person 20 Ch. D. 217 
 
 See BxECUTOE — Actions. 17. 
 BIED— Decoy bird— Cruelty - 12 ft. B. D. 66 
 See Cruelty to Animals. 
 
 BIRDS PROTECTION ACT. 
 
 Wild Birds.] The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 51 (the 
 Wild Birds Protection Act, 1881), extends the pro- 
 visions of tlie Wild Birds Protection Acts, 1880 
 and 1881, to larks. 
 
 Sect. 1 repeals the exception in sect. 3 of the 
 Wild Birds Protection Act, 1880, and enacts that 
 a person shall not be liable to be convicted under 
 that section by exposing or offering for sale, or 
 having the control or possession of, any wild bird 
 recently killed, if he satisfies tlie Court before whom 
 he is charged either — 
 
 (1.) That the killing of such wild bird, if in a 
 place to which the said Act extends, was 
 lawful at the time when and by the person 
 by whom it was killed; or 
 (2.) That the wild bird was killed in some place 
 to which the said Act does not extend, and 
 the fact that the wild bird was imported 
 from, some place to which the said Act does 
 not extend shall, until the contrary »s 
 proved, be evidence that the bird was 
 killed in some place to which the said Act 
 does not extend. 
 
 BIRETTA 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 See Peactice — Ecclesiastical — Public 
 Worship Act. 1. 
 
 BIRTH— Date of - - 29 Ch. D. 986 
 
 See Evidence — Declaeation op De- 
 ceased Peeson. 1. 
 
 BIRTHS AND DEATHS REGISTRATION ACT, 
 1874, 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Chuechtaeds 
 — Statutes. 
 
 BISHOP— Cplouial— Status of 7 App. Cas. 484 
 See Colonial Law — Cape of Good 
 Hope. 1. 
 
 Power to adjudicate upon ecclesiastical 
 
 offence — Promotion of suit — Interest 
 
 [9 ft, B. D. 464 
 See Pbactioe — Ecclesiastical — Church 
 Discipline Act. 3. 
 
 Refusal to institute clerk — Action by patron 
 
 —Ecclesiastical law 12 ft, B. D. 404 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Bishop. 
 
( 261 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 262 ) 
 
 BLANKS IN WILL - - 30 Ch. D. 390 
 
 See Will — Mistake. 1. 
 
 BOAED OF TEADE— Appeal— Costs 7 P. D. 207 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts. 
 2. 
 
 Discretionary power — Eail-way company 
 
 [lOApp. Cas.'579 
 See Scotch Law — Railway Company. 1. 
 
 Inquiry — Condition precedent — Foreign 
 
 ship— Collision - 9 P. D. 88 
 
 See Pkactice — Admiealtt — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 BOAED OF TEADE EXILES, 28tli August, 1872, 
 r. 6 - 21 Oh, D. 837 
 
 See Company — Life Insueancb Com- 
 pany. 1. 
 
 BOAEDING SHIP— Unlawfully. 
 
 See Smp — ^Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 BOAT— Canal— Children on. 
 
 See Canal 'Boh.TS— Statutes. 
 BOAT EACE— Thames. 
 
 See EiVER — Gazette. 
 
 BOILEE. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Viet. c. 22, makes better provi- 
 sion for inquiries with regard to boiler explosions. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to be cited as the Boiler Explosions 
 Act, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 2 defines " boiler " to mean any closed vessel 
 used for generating steam, or for heating water, or 
 for heating other liquids, or into which stea/m is 
 admitted for heating, steaming, boiling, or other 
 similar purposes. 
 
 Sect. 3. Act extends to the whole of the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Sect. 4. Act not to apply to any boiler used ex- 
 clusively for domestic purposes, or to any boiler 
 used in the service of Her Majesty, or to any boiler 
 on board a steamship having a certificate from the 
 Board of Trade, or to any boiler explosion into 
 which an inquiry may be held under the provisions 
 of the Coal Mines Begulation Act, 1872, and the 
 Metalliferous Mines Regulation Act, 1872, or either 
 of them. 
 
 Sect. 5. Notice of boiler explosion to be sent to 
 Board of Trade within twenty-four hours of its 
 occurrence with certain particulars. 
 
 Penalty for not complying with requirements of 
 the section. 
 
 Sect. 6 empowers Board of Trade on receipt 
 of notice to direct a preliminary inquiry as to the 
 boiler explosion; and, if deemed ex pedient, to 
 direct a formal investigation before two Commis- 
 sioners. 
 
 Method in which formal investigation is to be 
 conducted. 
 
 Sect 7. As to costs and expenses of the inquiry. 
 
 Sect. 8. Fines payable under the Act to he re- 
 covered in manner provided by the Smmnary 
 Jurisdiction Acts. 
 
 BONA FIDES— Creditors — Eesolution for liqui- 
 dation 16 Ch. D. 655 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquitation. 9. 
 
 Eesolution for composition 18 Ch. D. 495 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 773, 778 
 See Bankruptcy- Composition. 4, 5, 7. 
 
 BONA VACANTIA— Crown— Interest 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Interest. 1. [771 
 
 BOND. 
 
 '■ Immoral Consideration — Continuance of 
 
 Cohabitation — Presumption.'] The testator six 
 months before his death gave a bond to a lady 
 with whom he had cohabited for more than thirty 
 years, conditioned for the payment to her at the 
 expiration of two years of a sum of money and 
 interest ; and he continued to cohabit with her 
 until bis death. There was nothing on the face 
 of the bond with reference to the cohabitation, 
 and there was no evidence that it was in fact 
 given to secure the continuance of the cohabita- 
 tion. — Held, that the mere continuance of the 
 cohabitation was not enough to raise the pre- 
 sumption that the bond was given in consideration 
 of future cohabitation, and accordingly that the 
 bond was good. — Observations on Gray v. Mathias 
 (5 Ves. 286). In re Vallanoe. Vallance v. 
 Blagden ■ - - - 26 Ch. D. 363 
 
 • Administration - 
 
 See Administrator- 
 
 10 P. D. 196, 198 
 
 -Grant. 1, 2. 
 
 Satisfaction of — Double portions 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 81 
 
 See Settlement — Satisfaction. 
 
 Statute of Limitations — Mortgagee 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 579; 30 Ch. D. 291 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 9, 10. 
 
 Deposit with solicitor — Liability of part- 
 ners - 28 Ch. D. 340 
 See Partnership — Liabilities. 
 
 BOND OF COEEOBOEATION 10 App. Cas. 119 
 See Scotch Law — Building Society. 
 
 BONITS — ^Whether capital or income 29 Ch. D. 636 ; 
 [14 Q. B. D. 239; 10 App. Cas. 438 
 
 See Company — Dividends.. 1, 2. 
 
 BOOK— Copyright. 
 
 See Cases Tmder Copyright — Books. 
 
 BOOTY OF WAE, 
 
 Eoyal Warrant — Grant — Trust or 
 
 Agency.] The Queen by Eoyal Warrant "granted" 
 booty of war to the Secretary of State for India 
 in Council " in trust " for the ofBoers and men of 
 certain forces, to be distributed, by the Secretary 
 of State or by any other person he might appoint, 
 according to certain scales and proportions ; any 
 doubts arising to be determined finally by the 
 Secretary of State or by such persons to whom he 
 might refer them unless the Queen should other- 
 wise order. — An action having been brought 
 against the Secretary of State for India in Council 
 by the Appellant on behalf of himself and all 
 other persons entitled under the royal grant to 
 share in the booty, alleging a distribution of part 
 and possession by the Secretary of State of the 
 residue, and claiming an account and distribution 
 of the residue : — Held, affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal, that the warrant did not 
 transfer the prmjcrty, or create a trust enforceable 
 by the High Court of Justice : and that the 
 Secretary of State being merely the agent of the 
 Crown to distribute the fund the action could not 
 
 K 2 
 
( 263 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 264 ) 
 
 BOOTY OF WAR— continued. 
 
 he maintained. Kinlooh v. Seoketaey of State 
 
 FOB India in Council - 7 App. Cas. 619 
 
 BOSNEO 
 
 See Chaeter — Gazette. 
 BOROITGH — Division of borougha — Parliament 
 
 See Parliament — Eedistbibution op 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 Jurisdiction of mayor — No commission of 
 
 peace - - 7 ft. B. D, 548 
 
 See GoNTEAOT — Validity. 1. 
 
 Ijiability to county rate — Main roads 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 239 
 See Highway — Eepaie. 1. 
 
 Municipal — Incorporation of — School board 
 
 — Affected by 
 
 See Elementaey Education Acts — 
 School Board — Statutes. 
 
 New — Parliament 
 
 See Parliament — Eedistribution of 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 
 Occupation franchise 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise — Statutes. 
 
 ■ Seats in Parliament 
 
 See Parliament — Eedistribiition op 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 
 BOROUGH CONSTABLES ACT, 1883. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Statutes. 
 
 BOROUGH TOTE. 
 
 See Cases under Parliament — Fran- 
 chise. 1 — 9. 
 BORROWING POWERS— Building society 
 
 See Cases under Building Society. 
 4—10. 
 
 Company - 17 Ch. D. 715 
 
 See Company — Director's Authority. 
 2. 
 
 Company 18 Ch. D. 334 ; 8 App. Cas. 780 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 1. 
 
 Corporation - 10 App. Cas. 854 
 
 See Corporation. 2. 
 Railway company - 21 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Railway Company — Constitution, 
 
 BOTTOMRY— Foreign ship - - 7 P. D. 137 
 
 See Conflict op Laws. 4. 
 
 Foreign ship — Necessaries 10 P. D. 44 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 1. 
 
 Eeduction of amount — Jurisdiction of regis- 
 trar and merchants 9 P. D. 177 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 2. 
 
 BRANCH RAILWAY- Siding— Eight of user- 
 Liability of landowner 28 Ch. D. 190 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 8. 
 
 BREACH OF TRUST— Administrator 16 Ch. D. 
 
 [236, 557 
 
 See Administrator — Powers. 1, 2. 
 
 Attachment of trustee 20 Ch. D. 532 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 1. 
 
 Company — Directors— Shareholders 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 149 
 See CoMPAKY — Dikectoe's Liability. 4. 
 
 BREACH OF TUVST— continued. 
 
 Costs of trustee — Bankruptcy 
 
 [21 Ch. B. 862, 865 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 1, 2. 
 Devastavit— Lapse of time 20 Ch. B. 230 
 
 See Specialty Debt. 
 Liability of trustee. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee — Liabilities. 
 
 Liability of trustee — Indemnity 28 Ch. D. 
 
 See Trustee — Indemnity. 1. [595 
 
 Payment of purchase-money to solicitor 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 387 
 See A'endor and Purchases — Convey- 
 ance. 5. 
 
 Sale of goods to make good 17 Ch. S, 58 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Fraudulent Prefer- 
 ence. 1. 
 
 Waiver of - 20 Ch. D. 109 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 8. 
 BREAD — Sale of — Delivery by cart without beam 
 and scales 14 Q. B. B. 110 ; 15 Q. B. B. 408 
 See Bakee. 1, 2. 
 BREAKING OPEN DOOR - - 26 Ch. D. 644 
 See Pkactice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 6. 
 BREWERS' LICENCES. 
 
 See Eevence — Excise — Statutes. 
 
 BRIDGE — Freedom from toll — Liability to poor- 
 rate 7 Q. B. D. 223 
 See Poor-rate — Occupation. 2. 
 
 Over railway — Paving expenses 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 412 ; 8 App. Cas. 687 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 12. 
 Eemoval of broken bridge — ^Railway com- 
 pany — Scotch law - 10 App. Cas. 579 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 1. 
 
 BRISTOL COURT— Tolzey Court— Attachment of 
 goods - - 17 Ch. D. 74 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Secured Creditor. 1. 
 
 BRITISH HONDURAS — Adverse possession 
 against the Crown - 6 App. Cas. 14S 
 See Colonial Law — Honduras. 
 
 BRITISH SUBJECT— Infant resident abroad— 
 Guardian 30 Ch, D. 324 
 
 See Infant — Guardian. 1. 
 
 Military service abroad 30 Ch. D, 165 
 
 See DoMioiL. 2. 
 Settler in colony— Privileges of English 
 
 law - - 10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 See DoMiciL. 3. 
 Status of — Descendants born abroad 
 
 See Alien. [22 Ch. D, 243 
 
 BROKER. 
 
 London.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 3, relieves 
 (after the 2dth September, 1886), broilers in tlie City 
 of London from the necessity of being admitted by 
 the Court of Aldermen, and from yearly payments. 
 It repeals 57 Geo. 3, c. Ix., s. 2 Qocal and personal) 
 and 83 & 34 Vict. c. 60, s. 6, from the above dale. 
 
 Contract by - - 18 ft. B, D, 636, 861 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 2, 6. 
 
( 265 ) 
 
 . DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 2G6 ) 
 
 SBOKDB — continued,. 
 
 Employment of — Loss of trust fund 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 727 ; 9 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 2. 
 
 Right to indemnity — Usage of Stock Ex- 
 change 14 Q. B. D. 460 ; 15 Q. B. D. 388 
 
 See Pbinoipal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 4, 5. 
 BBOXHEL 
 
 See CriminalLaw — ^Nuisance — -Statutes. 
 
 Criminal Law — OErENCES against 
 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 STTILSIHG — Custom of mining — Attachment to 
 
 the soil 7 Q. B. S. 295 ; 8 App. Cas. 195 
 
 See Mine— Working. 1. 
 
 General line of 30 Ch. D. 350 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 15. 
 
 . General line of 27 Ch. D. 362 ; 13 Q. B. D. 
 
 [878 ; 10 App. Cas. 229 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 2,3. 
 - — — Prohibition against — Superfluous land 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1012 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Superfluous 
 Lands. 4. 
 
 Right of support. 
 
 See Cases under Support. 
 
 BUILDING CONTKACT. 
 
 1. Extras — Certificate of Surveyor con- 
 clusive.'] Where a contract for the erection of 
 certain works provided that all extras or additions, 
 payment for which the contractor should become 
 entitled to under the said contract, should be paid 
 for at the price fixed by the surveyor appointed by 
 the contractor's employer : — Held, that this provi- 
 sion impliedly gave power to the surveyor to de- 
 termine what were extras under the contract, and 
 consequently that his certificate awarding a 
 certain amount to be due for extras was conclu- 
 sive. Richards v. May 10 Q. B. S. 400 
 
 2, Forfeituie^lTaiDer — Power for Land- 
 lord to seize Materials on Default of Builder — 
 Seizure after act of Bankruptcy hy Builder — Bill 
 of Sale — Registration — " Licence to talte Possession 
 of Personal Chattels as Security for any Debt " — 
 Mis of Sale Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. e. 36), ss. 1, 
 7.] A building agreement between a landowner 
 and a builder contained a stipulation tbat the 
 landowner upon the default of the builder in ful- 
 filling his part of the agreement, might re-enter 
 upon the land and expel the builder, and that on 
 such re-entry all the materials then in and about 
 the premises should be forfeited to and become 
 the property of the landowner " as and for liqui- 
 dated damages :" — Held, that this stipulation was 
 not a bill of sale within the meaning of sect. 7 of 
 the Bills of Sale Act, 1854, inasmuch as, though 
 it was a " licence to take possession of personal 
 chattels," the possession was not to be taken " as 
 security for any debt." — Decision of Bacon, C.J., 
 reversed. — Semble, that if the ground of forfeiture 
 was the omission of the builder to complete the 
 buildings on the day appointed by the agreement. 
 and the landowner had after that day made ad- 
 vances of money to the builder for the purposes of 
 the agreement, or had in any other way treated 
 
 BUILDING CONTEACT— confenuei. 
 
 the agreement as still subsisting, he would have 
 waived the forfeiture. — The decision in JDoe v. 
 BrindUy (12 Moo. C. P. 37) questioned.— Under 
 such a, stipulation, the interest of the builder in 
 the materials being a defeasible one, the right of 
 the landowner to seize is not defeated by the com- 
 mission of an act of bankruptcy by the builder 
 before the seizure is made. The trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy of the builder takes subject to the right of 
 the landowner tmder the agreement. ISx parte 
 Newitt. In re Garrud 16 Ch. D. 522 
 
 Clause vesting materials in landowner — Bill 
 
 of sale - - - 12 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Registration. 2. 
 
 Estate in land — Tenant for life and remain- 
 derman - - - 19 Ch. D. 22 
 See Easement. 2. 
 
 BUILDING ESTATE— Alteration in estate— Re- 
 strictive covenants 28 Ch. D. 103 
 See Covenant — Breach. 
 
 Investment — Trustee - 30 Ch. D. 490 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 5. 
 
 Mutual easements - - 25 Ch. D. 559 ; 
 
 See Light — Title. 5. [10 App. Cas. 590 
 
 BUILDING SOCIETY. 
 
 Arbitration.] Tlie Act 47 & 48 Vict. 
 
 c. 41, defines the word " disputes" in the Building 
 Societies Acts. 
 
 1. Arbitration — Dispute between Society 
 
 and Member— Mortgage — 17 & 18 Viet. c. 125, 
 s. 11—37 & 38 Vict. c. 42, s. 3i— Simmons to 
 refer to Arbitration and to stay the Action.] By 
 the rules of a building society incorporated under 
 the Building Societies Act, 1874, it was provided, 
 pursuant to sect. 16, sub-sect. 9 of the Act, that a 
 reference of every matter in dispute between the 
 society and any member of the society should be 
 referred to the arbitration of the Registrar of 
 Friendly Societies. The Plaintiff, who was an 
 advanced member of the society and had executed 
 a mortgage for securing his subscriptions and 
 fines in respect of the advance, commenced an 
 action against the society for an account in 
 respect of the mortgage transaction : — Held (af- 
 firming the decision of Pearson, J.), that the 
 jurisdiction of the Court was ousted, and that the 
 society was entitled to have the dispute referred 
 to arbitration. — Wright v. Monarch Investment 
 Building Society (5 Ch. D. 726) approved. Hack 
 V. London Provident Building Society 
 
 [23 Ch. D, 103 
 
 2. Arbitration — Jurisdiction of High 
 
 Court over Dispute between Society and Member — - 
 Building Societies Act, 1874 (37 * 38 Vict. c. 42), 
 8. 16, suh-s. 9, 8. 34.] When the rules of a benefit 
 building society governed by 37 & 38 Vict. c. 42 
 provide for the settlement by arbitration of dis- 
 putes between the society and any of its members, 
 the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain 
 an action by the society against a member for 
 moneys due to it under covenants in mortgage 
 deeds executed by the member, as such, to the 
 society : — So held by Lords Blackburn and Watson, 
 the Earl of Selborne,L.C., dissenting. — Wright v. 
 Monarch Investment Building Society (5 Ch. D. 
 
( 267 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 268 ) 
 
 BUILDING SOCIETY— continued. 
 726) and Sack v. London Provident Building 
 Society (23 Ch. D. 103) approved. Municipal Per- 
 MASENT Investment BDiLDme Society v. Kent 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 260 
 
 3. Audit — Account — Order for Accounts 
 
 not referring to Settled Accounts.^ Under an 
 order directing an account, and not referring to 
 settled accounts, the accounting party may set up 
 settled accounts, though the order does not direct 
 that settled accounts shall not be disturbed, and 
 the opposite party may impeach them, though the 
 order does not expressly give him liberty to do 
 so. — By the rules of a benefit society it was pro- 
 vided that the accounts should be audited, and 
 that, after they had been audited and signed by 
 the auditors, the secretary and treasurer should 
 not be answerable for any mistakes, omissions, or 
 errors that might afterwards be proved in them. 
 By statute 10 Groo. 4, c. 56, s. 33, it was directed 
 that the accounts of a society of this description 
 should be audited by two or more members of the 
 society. In December, 1883, an order was made 
 for an account of all moneys received by S., the 
 late secretary. S. carried in audited accounts 
 down to October, 1880, and claimed to have them 
 treated as conclusive, while the Plaintiffs claimed 
 to have them disregarded. The Court of Appeal 
 decided (27 Ch. D. Ill) that accounts audited and 
 signed according to the rules were prima facie 
 evidence in favour of S., but that the Plaintiffs, 
 in taking the accounts directed by the order, might 
 impeach such audited accounts for fraud. On 
 examination of the audited accounts, it appeared 
 that they had throughout been audited and signed 
 by one person only, who was not a member of the 
 society. Bacon, V.C., made an order expressing 
 his opinion that the accounts had been audited in 
 accordance with the rules, and directing the 
 account under the order of December, 1883, to 
 commence from October, 1880, the date of the last 
 audit : — Held, on appeal, that the accounts had 
 not been duly audited in accordance witli the 
 statute and the rules, and that the order of the 
 Vice-Chancellor must be discharged, but without 
 prejudice to the right of the Defendant to shew 
 that tlie accounts in question were to be treated as 
 settled accounts on any other ground than that 
 they were audited in accordance with the statute 
 and the rules. Holgate v. Shutt 28 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 4. Borrowing Powers — Loans repayable 
 
 hy Instalments and Premiums — Interest on Pre- 
 miums — Statutory Receipt — .S7 & 38 Vict. c. 42, 
 s. 42.] Under the rules of a building society 
 which required that loans upon a mortgage should 
 be repaid by annual instalments and premiums 
 spread over a certain number of years, it was held 
 that the society was justified in adding the whole 
 of the annual premiums to the capital, and charg- 
 ing interest upon the combined amount; and 
 upon the borrower redeeming before the end of the 
 period, he was not entitled to a rebate in respect 
 of the premiums contracted to be paid. — Where a 
 boiTowing member of a building society has mort- 
 gaged property to the society to secure advances 
 and all payments due from him to the society, 
 and the society on payment off of the mortgage 
 indorses a statutory receipt under the 42nd section 
 of the Building Societies Act, 1874, such receipt 
 
 BUILDING 80C1ETI— continued. 
 precludes them from questioning the sufiiciency 
 of the payment, and from making any further 
 claim against the mortgagor in respect of the 
 debt— Sparrow v. Farmer (28 L. J. (Ch.) 537) 
 distinguished. Hakvet v. Municipal Permanent 
 Investment Building Socibtt 26 Ch. D. 273 
 
 6. Borrowing Powers — "Monthly Sub- 
 scriptions and Deposits on Loans " — Winding-up 
 — Priority of Depositors — 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32.] One 
 of the rules of a benefit building society, formed 
 under the Act 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32, provided that 
 the society " is established for the purpose of rais- 
 ing by monthly subscriptions and deposits on loans 
 a fund to make advances to members of the value 
 of their shares," &c. Another rule provided that 
 the directors should meet at specified times, " for 
 the purpose of conducting the business of the 
 society." A third rule provided that at the end of 
 every five years a general account of the affairs (rf 
 the society should be prepared, shewing the gross 
 receipts and expenditure and liabilities, and that 
 " if on taking the accounts there appears to be a 
 deficiency of income, by which the society may be 
 prevented from meeting its anticipated expendi- 
 ture and liabilities, the amount of such deficiency 
 shall be equitably and equally apportioned by the 
 directors between the investing and borrowing 
 members, and be paid forthwith by such monthly 
 or quarterly instalments as the directors shall 
 determine" : — Held, that the first rule authorized 
 the borrowing of money from persons not members 
 of the society ; that the second rule enabled the 
 directors to exercise the power ; and that the 
 third rule did not enable the directors to pledge 
 the individual credit of the members to the lenders 
 of money to the society, but that, even if it did, 
 and was thus ultra vires, as being inconsistent 
 with the nature of a building society under the 
 Act, that rule might be rejected, leaving the 
 borrowing power unaffected. — Held, that the 
 lenders of money to the society were entitled, on 
 its being wound up, to be paid out of the assets 
 in priority to any of the members. — Decision of 
 Kay, J., affirmed. In re Mutual Aid Permanent 
 Benefit Building Society 29 Ch. D. 182 ; 
 
 fSO Ch. D. 434 
 
 6. Borrowing Powers — Overdrawn Bank- 
 ing Account, whether a " Loaii " within the Act — 
 Building Societies Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 42), 
 ss. 15, 16, 43 — Rules — Deposits or Loans in excess 
 of Limits prescribed by the Act — Liability of 
 Directors.'] By sect. 15 of the Building Societies 
 Act, 1874, any society under the Act may receive 
 deposits or loans at interest from the members or 
 other persons within the limits provided by the 
 section; and in a terminating society the total 
 amount so received on deposit or loan and not re- 
 paid may either bo a sum not exceeding two-thirds 
 of the amount for the time being secured to the 
 society by mortgages from its members, or a sum 
 not exceeding twelve months' subscriptions on the 
 shares for the time being in force. — By sect. 16. 
 the rules of every society shall set forth whether 
 the society intends to avail itself of the borrowing 
 powers contained in the Act, and, if so within 
 what limits not exceeding the limits prescribed by 
 the Act.— By sect. 43, if any society receives loan* 
 or deposits in excess of the limits prescribed by 
 
( 269 ) 
 
 DIGEST Of" CASES. 
 
 ( 270 ) 
 
 BUILDING SOCl'ETt— continued. 
 the Act, the directors or committee of management 
 of such society receiving such loans or deposits on 
 its behalf shall be personally liable for the amount 
 so received in excess. — Where by the rules of a 
 terminating society the amount to be received upon 
 deposit or loan was limited to an amount not ex- 
 ceeding two-thirds of the amount for the time 
 being secured to the society by mortgages from its 
 members: — iTeMjinan action against the direc- 
 tors under sect. 43, that they were personally liable 
 in respect of sums received by the society on de- 
 posit or loan in excess of the limit prescribed by 
 the rules, notwithstanding that the amount re- 
 ceived on deposit or loan did not exceed the other 
 of the alternative limits prescribed by sect. 15 : — 
 Held, also, that a loan at interest to the society 
 from its bankers, secured by deposit of title-deeds, 
 and made by allowing the society to overdraw its 
 account at the bank, was a " loan" within the 
 meaning of sect. 15. Looker v. Weiglbt. Lemh 
 V. Wbiglby - - - 9 Q, B, D, 397 
 
 7. Borrowing Powers — Overdrawing 
 
 Banher's Account — Payments to withdrawing 
 Mertibers — Lien, equitable — Rule in Clayton's 
 Case (1 Mer. 572).] A benefit building society 
 which had no power to borrow money, was 
 allowed by its bankers to make large overdrafts. 
 In 1876 a memorandum was signed by the officers 
 of the society and confirmed by the directors 
 stating that certain deeds of borrowing members 
 which had been deposited with the bankers were 
 deposited not only for safe custody, but as a 
 security for the balance from time to lime. In 
 1881 an order for winding up the society was 
 made, and the bankers claimed to retain the deeds 
 as security for the balance of their account. No 
 evidence was given as to the application of the 
 money which was drawn out by the society ; but 
 it was admitted that some part was applied in 
 payment of members withdrawing from the so- 
 ciety, and the remainder in payment of salaries, 
 legal expenses, and expenses of mortgaged pro- 
 perty. — Xhe Court of Appeal held that the over- 
 drafts were ultrk vires, being a borrowing not 
 authorized by the rules, and not properly incident 
 to the course and conduct of the society's busi- 
 ness for its proper purposes ; and that the bankers 
 were not creditors of the society in respect of the 
 overdrafts ; but that they were entitled to hold 
 the deeds as a security for repayment of so much 
 only of the moneys advanced by them as was 
 applied in payment of the debts and liabilities of 
 the society properly payable and had not been 
 repaid to the bankers, excluding payments to 
 withdrawing members ; that the burden of 
 
 ■ proving this lay on the bankers, and that in satis- 
 fying that burden the bankers could not have 
 the benefit of the rule in Clayton's Case (1 Mer. 
 572). — The Court of Appeal made an order ac- 
 cordingly, directing inquiries ; with a declaration 
 that in making the inquiries the bankers were to 
 
 • be charged with all sums received by them on ac- 
 count of the society since it ceased to have any 
 balance to its credit with the bankers, and that 
 they were not to be allowed any sums advanced 
 by them since that date which were applied in 
 making payments to withdrawing members or 
 otherwise than in paying such debts and liabili- 
 
 BUILDING SOCIETY— continued. 
 ties of the society as aforesaid. The society did 
 not appeal against the order ; the bankers did. — 
 Without expressing any opinion upon the ques- 
 tion of payments to withdrawing members, or 
 the bankers' right to hold the securities, held, 
 that the decision and order of the Court of Appeal 
 were in other respects right. Cunliffe Brooks 
 & Co. V. Blaokbcen Buildino Society 
 
 [82 Ch. D. 61 ; 9 App. Cas. 867 
 
 8. Boirowlng Powers — Overdrawing 
 
 Bankers' Account — Action for Account — Money 
 paid in Mistake of Law — Ratification — Fayment 
 to withdrawing Members — Priority of Securities.^ 
 A benefit building society which had never been 
 incorporated, and had no power to borrow money, 
 was allowed by its bankers to make large over- 
 drafts, and the directors of the society signed a 
 memorandum giving the bankers a lien upon all 
 the society's deeds, to secure all moneys which 
 from time to time might be owing by the society 
 to the bankers on the balance of the banking 
 account. Annual balance-sheets, shewing the 
 amounts due to the bankers, were sent to all the 
 members of the society, and adopted at the annual 
 meetings. The society was afterwards ordered to 
 be wound up, and as the overdrafts were ultrb, vires, 
 being a borrowing unauthorized by the rules, the 
 oflScial liquidator brought an acllon against the 
 bankers to recover all moneys which had been 
 paid to them by the society and applied by the 
 bankers in discharge of their loan to the society : 
 — Held, that it was no answer to such action that 
 the moneys had been so applied by the order of 
 the directors of the society under a mistake of 
 law as to their power to borrow, since the acts of 
 the directors, both in borrowing and in directing 
 the application of the moneys, were unauthorized 
 and not binding on the society. Held, also, that 
 there had been no ratification of such acts of the 
 directors by all the members of the society, as 
 such ratification could not be implied from merely 
 seeing and not questioning the balance-sheet 
 accounts which had been sent to them, and no 
 ratification of such acts by the majority would 
 bind the minority of the members. The bankers 
 were, however, allowed to stand in the place of 
 withdrawing members of the society who had been 
 paid ou notice of withdrawal out of moneys so 
 advanced by the bankers, and to receive the 
 amounts which would be payable to such mem- 
 bers if they had not been paid off. The bankers 
 were also to have the benefit of securities obtained 
 by the society by means of overdrafts allowed by 
 the bankers, and to have the benefit of such se- 
 curities according to their order of priority with- 
 out being postponed until after other securities 
 granted to the society. Blackburn and Dis- 
 trict Benefit Building Society v. Cunlipfe 
 Brooks & Co. - - 29 Ch. D. 902 
 
 9. Borrowing Powers — Unlimited Power 
 
 of Borrowing — Deposit of Deeds — Preference 
 Shares — Priorities in Winding-up — Certificate of 
 Barrister— Q & 7 Will. 4, c. 32.] A benefit build- 
 ing society, enrolled under 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32, by 
 its 32nd rule authorized the direol;ors from time 
 to time, as occasion might require, to borrow any 
 sums of money at interest from any persons ; the 
 borrowed money to be a first charge upon the 
 
( 271 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 272 ) 
 
 BUILDING SOCIETY— continued. 
 funds and propeity of the society. — Under this 
 rule the directors bon-owed large sums for the 
 proper purposes of the society, and deposited with 
 the lenders, as security, title deeds of properties 
 which had been mortgaged to the society by 
 advanced members : — Seld, reversing the decision 
 of the Court of Appeal, thnt the rule was valid, 
 and that the lenders were entitled in the winding- 
 up to payment out of the assets, after satisfaction 
 of the outside creditors, and in priority to the 
 claims of all shareholders or members ; but that 
 the lenders must give up their securities to the 
 oflBcial liquidator, the claim to special equitable 
 charges upon specific properties being inconsistent 
 with the true meaning of the rule, which was 
 that all the moneys borrowed under it were to 
 have the benefit, equally and pari passu, of a first 
 charge upon the general funds and property. — 
 Lord Hatherley's dictum in Laing v. Beed (Law 
 Eep. 5 Oh. 8) as to an unlimited power of borrow- 
 ing, overruled. — The 31st rale authorized the 
 board to issue deposit or paid-up shares for £30 
 each at 5 per cent, interest with the right of with- 
 drawing the whole or part of the deposit upon 
 notice in preference to all other shares. — This 
 rule was struck out by the certifying barrister, 
 but the directors printed and acted upon it by 
 issuing shares accordingly. Some years after- 
 wards the rule was amended, by altering £30 iato 
 £1, and the amendment was certified by the 
 barrister; and those who had taken £30 shares 
 had them exchanged for £1 shares, and other £1 
 shares were issued to new shtireholders. The 
 moneys paid by these shareholders were applied 
 for the purposes of the society : — ITeH, aifirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal, that such 
 shareholders, whether they had become so before 
 or after the amendment was certified, and whether 
 they had given notice of withdrawal or not, were 
 entitled to be paid in the winding-up in prefer- 
 ence to the uiiadvanced members. In re Gcak- 
 DIAN Permanent Building Society. Muekay v. 
 SooTT. Agnew v. Muekay. Brtmelow v. Muk- 
 BAY - 23 Ch. D. 440 ; 9 App. Cas. 519 
 
 10. Borrowing Powers — Unincorporated 
 
 Society — Certified Bules — Borrowing in Excess of 
 Prescribed Limit — Agent — Authority — Holding out 
 by Society and Directors.'] By the certified rules 
 of an unincorporated building society the directors 
 might boiTow money not exceeding a prescribed 
 amount. Loans were made to the society through 
 its secretary in accordance with advertisements, 
 issued with the authority of the directors, that such 
 loans might be so made by bringing the money to 
 the office of the secretary. In each case a receipt 
 was given by the secretary for the money as a loan 
 to the society, with a written undertaking by him 
 " to procure the promissory note of the directors for 
 the loan," and afterwards in pursuance of such 
 undertaking, the receipt was exchanged for such 
 note which always bore the date of the receipt. 
 After au amount had been so borrowed exceeding 
 the limit prescribed by the rules, the PJaintifis, 
 who had on several previous occasions lent money 
 to the society according to the above mode, paid a 
 sum to the secretary as a loan to the society, and 
 received from him the usual receipt and under- 
 taking, but no promissory note of the directors 
 
 BUILDING SOCIESY— continued. 
 was ever afterwards given, and the secretary ab- 
 sconded, appropriating that sum, with other mo- 
 neys of the society, to his own use. In an action 
 against the society and directors, the jury found 
 that the society held out the secretary to the 
 Plaintiffs as having authority to receive the loan 
 on their behalf on the terms on which it was re- 
 ceived, and that the directors did the same : — 
 BeM, that such finding was bad in point of law as 
 against the society, and that, as the limit for bor- 
 rowing prescribed by the rules had been exceeded 
 when the loan was made by the Plaintiff's, the 
 society, which had derived no benefit, was not 
 liable for such loan : — Held (Bram well, L. J., 
 doubting), that ^although there was no fraud on 
 the part of the directors they were personally 
 liable to the Plaintiifs fop: the money which had 
 been so advanced. Chapleo v. Bkunswick Peb- 
 MANENT Building Society 6 Q. B, D. 696 
 
 11. ■ Incorporation — Irregularity of Pro- 
 ceedings — Power of Court to declare Certificate 
 void — Prerogative of Crown — Building Societies 
 Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 42), ss. 7, 9, 12, 32.] 
 The Court has no power to declare the certificate 
 of incorporation of a building society, given by 
 the Registrar under the provisions of the Build- 
 ing Societies Act, 1874, void on the ground that 
 it had been obtained irregularly. Glovee v. Giles 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 173 
 
 12. Mortgages — Mortgage Debt paid by 
 
 Third Party and Deed, with Statutory Beceipt in- 
 dorsed thereon, handed to him — Intermediate Sale 
 and Conveyance of Part of Mortgaged Property to 
 Fourth Party — Effect of indorsed Beceipt under 
 s. 42 of Building Societies Act, 1874 (37 <fe 38 
 Vict. c. 42).] Land and four houses thereon were 
 vested in a building society as mortgagees, and 
 on the society being paid off by the Plaintiff, by 
 request of the mortgagor, the mortgage deed, with 
 a receipt indorsed in accordance with the 42nd 
 section of the Building Societies Act, 1874 (37 & 38 
 Vict. o. 42), was with other title-deeds handed to 
 him, and the mortgagor shortly afterwards con- 
 veyed to him the property, on mortgage for a larger 
 loan. The mortgagor had prior to the payment 
 to the building society conveyed one house in fee 
 to the Defendant, who was ignorant of the mort- 
 gage to the society, and he at once took posses- 
 sion of it, but the Plaintiff knew nothing of the 
 sale and purchase: — Held, that in accordance with 
 previous decisions, though not agreeing with them, 
 the effect of the indorsed receipt was to vest the 
 legal estate in the Plaintiff, and to give him, to 
 the extent of the money paid to the society and 
 the interest thereon, priority over Defendant's 
 claim. — Pease v. Jachson (Law Eep. 3 Ch. 576), 
 Fourth City Mutual Benefit Building Society v. 
 Williams, Marson v. Cox (14 Ch. D. 140, 147), 
 and Bobinson v. Trevor (12 Q. B. D. 423), dis- 
 cussed. Sangsteb V, CoCHKANE 28 Ch. D. 298 
 
 ' 13. Mortgages — Beconveyance — Indorsed 
 
 Beceipt— Priority— 38 & 39 Vict. c. 60, ». 16, suh- 
 s. 7.] A piece of land was mortgaged to a friendly 
 society, and by way of second mortgage to a bank- 
 ing company. A building society agieed to pay off 
 the first mortgage, and to make a further advance, 
 having no notice of the second mortgage. Ac- 
 cordingly by a deed indorsed on the first mortgage 
 
( 273 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 274 ) 
 
 BTJILDING SOCIESY— continued. 
 deed, the first mortgagees reconveyed to the mort- 
 gagor ; and by another deed he conveyed the land 
 to the building society to secure the repayment of 
 the sum paid to the first mortgagees, and the 
 further advance : — Seld, that as the legal estate 
 had passed by a reconveyance and not by a receipt 
 under 38 & 39 Vict. o. (iO,s. 16, sub-s."7, it was 
 vested in the building society, and gave them 
 priority over the second mortgagees. — Bohinson 
 V. Trevor (12 Q. B. D. 423j distinguished. Oab- 
 liiSLB Banking Company v. Thompson 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 398 
 
 14. 'Winding-up — Effect of Winding-up 
 
 Order on Position of Members — Compulsory With- 
 drawal — Bight of Borrowing Member to receive 
 Credit for all Instahnents, and pay up Balance 
 of Loan, and be relieved of further Liabilities — 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. i2{Building Societies Act, 1874), 
 ss. 14, 16.] A building society registered under 
 the Building Societies Act, 1874, had for its 
 objects : 1, to form a good investment for inves- 
 tors ; 2, to advance to shareholders money for 
 building and other purposes, to a not greater 
 extent than the amount of their shares, on their 
 granting a bond for the same over heritable eecu- 
 rity. The rules provided that the shares were to 
 be limited to £25 ; that a shareholder who had 
 not received an advance was to pay up his shares 
 by monthly instalments ; and when such instal- 
 ments with profits amounted to £25 per share he 
 was to be paid out. — As to a, member who had 
 received an advance, it was provided that he 
 should pay up his advance by monthly instal- 
 ments on his shares with interest at the rate of 
 5 per cent, on the loan. It was also provided 
 that members could withdraw on giving a month's 
 notice. On withdrawal by an nnadvanced member, 
 he was to receive the whole instalments paid on 
 his shares with interest. On withdrawal by a 
 borrowing member, he was to pay up the whole of 
 his debt, interest, and penalties, after deducting 
 the amount of the monthly instalments paid upon 
 his shares with interest calculated thereon. A. 
 took shares for the sole purpose of obtaining an 
 advance. He executed a bond in common form 
 as security ; and the society granted him a back- 
 letter, to the effect that they agreed not to enforce 
 the bond so long as the regular payments of the 
 instalments, interest, and other sums due upon 
 his shares were paid. A. regularly paid his in- 
 stalments with interest charged on the whole 
 sum lent. Losses having been incurred, the 
 society was in February, 1880, ordered to be 
 wound up voluntarily. There were no outside 
 creditors. In July, 1880, A. gave notice, under 
 the rules, of withdrawal to the liquidators, and 
 claimed a discharge of his bond on his paying 
 to them the difference between his loan and the 
 amount in cumulo of the instalments paid by 
 him, with interest added. The liquidators denied 
 his right to withdraw after liquidation, unless he 
 paid up the whole loan and left the instalments 
 to be refunded according to the result of the 
 liquidation :—Be?(i, afSrming, with a variation, 
 the judgment of the Court below, that the ad- 
 vance had pro tanto been extinguished by the 
 total amount of the instalments paid by A. ; that 
 from and after the date of the winding-up order 
 
 BUILDING mUTErZ— continued. 
 A. had a right to redeem his security by paying 
 to the liquidators the difference between his ad- 
 vance and his instalments with interest added 
 thereon as against excess of interest which he 
 had been charged ; and on payment of such dif- 
 ference, with interest thereon, he was entitled to 
 be relieved of all further liability as a contri- 
 butory or otherwise. Bbownhb v. Etissell 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 235 
 
 15. Withdrawal of Members — Oonstrue- 
 
 tion of Bute "provided the funds permit" — Wind- 
 ing-up — Priorities in Winding-up.'] The rules of 
 a benefit building society allowed any investing 
 member to withdraw " provided tiie funds permit," 
 upon giving notice ; and declared that "no further 
 liabilities shall be incurred by the society till 
 such member has been repaid " The society was 
 ordered to be wouhd up and the assets were in- 
 sufficient to pay everybody : — Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal, thai; those in- 
 vesting members who had given notice of with- 
 drawal and whose notices had expired before the 
 winding-up began, were entitled to be paid out of 
 the assets (after the outside creditors) in priority 
 to those members who had not given notice of 
 withdrawal, notwithstanding the fact that be- 
 tween the giving of the notices and the wind- 
 ing-up there never were any funds for payment. 
 In re Blackburn Benefit Btjildins Sooiett. 
 Walton v. Edge 24 Ch. D. 421 ; 10 App. Cas. 33 
 
 Mortgage to— Bankruptcy — Disclaimer 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 384 
 See Bankruptcy — Disolaimeb. 9. 
 
 Mortgage to— Bankruptcy — Proof 
 
 [22Ch. D. 450; 27 Oh. D. 509 
 See Bankbuptoy — Pbooi'. 13, 17. 
 
 Eeceipt by trustees — Mortgage — Tacking 
 
 —Priorities - - 12 Q. B. D. 423 
 
 See Mobtgaqe — Pbioeity. 2. 
 
 Scotch law - - 10 App. Cas. 119 
 
 See Scotch Law — Building Society. 
 
 BULLIOM' — Liability to contribute to salvage 
 
 [6 P. D. 60 
 
 See Pbactice — Admibalty — Salvage. 
 4. 
 
 BUEGESSES— Votes— Parliament 
 
 See Pabliament — Fbanchise — Statutes. 
 BUEGH— Common good of 7 App. Cas. 647 
 
 See Scotch Law — Public Eights. 
 BUEIAL AND EEGISTEATION ACTS (DOUBTS 
 EEMOVAL) act, 1881. 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Chubchyabds 
 — Statutes. 
 
 BUEIAL BOAED. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 21, directs that the 
 reasonable expenses incurred in talcing a poll on 
 appointment of a burial board, or vacancy therein, 
 shall be defrayed as if expenses of the Burial Acts. 
 
 Appointment of Burial Board — 18 <fc 19 
 
 Vict. c. 128, s. 12.] The existence of a legally 
 constituted burial board for the whole of a 
 parish, does not prevent the vestry of an 
 ecclesiaslical district formed out of such parish 
 under 1 & 2 Will. 4, o. 38, and which does not 
 separately maintain its own poor, from legally 
 
( 275 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 276 ) 
 
 BTTEIAL BOAED- 
 
 appointing a burial board for such district under 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 128, s. 12. The Queen v. 
 
 OVBKBEERS OF THE PaEISH OF ToNBKIDGE 
 
 [11 Q.. B. D. 134 ; 13 Q. B. S. 339 
 
 Income tax — Application of surplus income 
 
 in aid of poor-rate - 13 Q. B. D. 9 
 See Eeventje — Income Tax. 2. 
 
 BURIAL GKOTTNl). 
 
 The Aet 47 & 48 Vict. c. 72 (^Disused Burial 
 Grounds Act), 1884), prohibits luildings to le 
 erected on any disused burial ground, closed by 
 order in Council. It does not apply to any case 
 where a faculty had been obtained before this Act, 
 nor to such grounds sold under Act of Parliament. 
 
 1. Burial Board — Grave — Grant in Per- 
 petuity — Fa/mily Rights — Executor — Purchase of 
 Grave—Burial Acts (15 * IQ.Vict.. c. 85 ; 16 * 17 
 Vict. c. 134).] A burial board may, under the 
 Burial Acts (15 & 16 Vict. c. 85, and 16 & 17 
 Vict. c. 134), grant a grave space to the grantee 
 and his heirs, and the title to the burial rights 
 under such grant will descend to the heirs of the 
 grantee, and will not be vested in all members 
 of the family of the grantee. Matthews v. 
 Jeffket - -■ - 6 ft. B. D. 290 
 
 2, Dead Bodies cast on Shore — Tidal 
 
 Biver — Liability of Parish — 48 Geo. 3, c. 75.] 
 By 48 Geo. 3, c. 75, s. 1, the overseers of parishes 
 throughout England in which any dead human 
 bodies shall be found thrown in or cast on shore 
 from the sea, by wreck or otherwise, are required 
 to cause such bodies to be buried, and by sect. 5, 
 the overseers are to be reimbursed such expenses 
 by the county treasurer. A steamship was sunk 
 by collision in the River Thames, near Woolwich, 
 at a place below low water mark, and a number 
 of persons were drowned. Some of the bodies 
 were found ashore within the boundaries of "Wool- 
 wich, in Kent, and were buried by the overseers. 
 The Kiver Thames at Woolwich and at the places 
 where the bodies were found ashore is a navigable 
 tidal river where great ships go : — Held, that the 
 county treasurer could not be made liable for the 
 expenses incurred by the overseers, for the bodies 
 were not cast on shore " from the sea " within the 
 meaning of the Act. Oveeseeks of Woolwich 
 V. KoBBBTSON 6 ft. B. D. 654 
 
 BURNING DEAD BODY 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 247 ; 13 ft. B. D. 331 
 
 /See'CBiMiNAL Law — Misdemeanob. 1, 2, 
 BUSINESS — Articles not connected with — Order 
 and disposition 24 Ch. D. 31 
 
 See Banketjptct — Oedeb and Disposi- 
 tion. 8. 
 
 Carried on by executor - 18 Oh. D. 93 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 19, 672 
 See ExECOTOB — Administkation. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Carried on by trustee 26 Ch. D. 245 
 
 See Tetjstbb — Powees. 3. 
 
 Goodwill of 19 Ch. D. 356 ; 25 Ch. D. 472 ; 
 
 See Goodwill. 1, 2, 3. [27 Ch. D. 145 
 
 Place of carrying on 8 ft. B. D. 1 ; 
 
 See Appbentice. 1, 2. [9 ft. B. D. 636 
 
 Settlement of — Profits — Successive tenants 
 
 for life 26 Ch. D. 688 
 
 See Tenant eok Life. 
 BY-LAW — Dock company — ^Validity 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 387 
 See Docks and Haeboues. 1. 
 
 Local government 
 
 See Local Govebnment — By-laws — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Local Government Acts — Validity — Swine 
 
 " kept near dwelling-house 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 617 
 See Local Goteenment — Bt-laws. 
 
 Metropolitan Board of Works — Construction 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 479 
 See Meteopolis — Building Acts. 3. 
 Eailway company — Validity and construc- 
 tion of - - 7 ft. B. D. 32 
 See Railway Company — By-laws. 
 
 School board-T-Non-payment of fees 
 
 [16 ft. B. D. 415 
 See Blementaey Education Acts — 
 Attendance. 7. 
 
 Thames — Boat race. 
 
 See River — Gazette. 
 
 Thames — Fishery. 
 
 See Fisheey Acts — Gazette. 
 
 Urban authority 21 Ch. D. 621 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 798 
 See Local Govebnment — Steeets. 4. 
 
( 277 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 .( 278 ) 
 
 0. 
 
 ■ Practice — ^Appeal 
 See Peactice- 
 
 TO APPEAL. 
 
 CAB — Liability of proprietor for negligence of 
 driver - 8 Q. B. S. 104 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 1. 
 
 CALCINING— Nuisance 7 App. Cas. 518 
 
 Bee Scotch Law — Nuisance. 
 
 CALL— Ultrk vires - - 16 Ch. D. 681 
 
 See Compant-Dibeotob's Authoeitv. 3. 
 
 Unpaid— Beceiver - 18 Oh. D. 165 
 
 See Kailwat Oompant — Abandon- 
 ment. 1. 
 CANADA, LAW 01'. 
 
 See Cases under — 
 OoLONiAL Law — Oanada — ^Dominion. 
 Oolonial Law — Oanada — New 
 
 Bbunswick. 
 Colonial Law — Canada — Nova 
 
 Scotia. 
 Colonial Law — Canada — Ontabio. 
 Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 
 - 8 App. Cas. 103, 574 ; 
 [10 App. Cas. 675 
 ■Pbivt Council — Leave 
 1, 2, 4. 
 
 CANAL BOATS. 
 
 TU Act 47 & 48 Viet. c. 75 (the Canal Boats 
 Act, 1884), amends the 40 & 41 Vict. c. 60 {the 
 Canal Boats Act, 187T). 
 
 By sect. 5, the power of the Local Government 
 Board to make regulations as to school certificates, 
 &c., includes school certificates, (fee, to he used hy 
 children in canal ioats. 
 
 By sect. 10 the definition " canal hoat " in sect. 
 14 of Act of 1877, may he extended hy Local 
 Government Board to vessels registered under 
 Merchant Shipping Act, 1854. 
 
 CANVASSERS —Election for Parliament — Ex- 
 penses - 21 Ch, D. 408 
 
 See Paeliament — Election. 1. 
 
 CAPE OF GOOD HOPE, LAW OF. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law — Cape 
 op Good Hope. 
 
 CAPITAL — Charge on annuity — Income 
 
 See Wll— Annuity. 1. [17 Ch. D. 167 
 
 Charge on — Land drainage 29 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Pukchasb- 
 MONEY 5. 
 
 Company— Application 22 Ch. D. 349 
 
 See CojiPANT — Mbmobandum and Ae- 
 ticlbs. 2. 
 Company — Bonus whether capital or in- 
 come 29 Ch. D. 635 ; 10 App. Cas. 438 
 See Company — Dividend. 1, 2. 
 
 Company — Not called up 17 Ch. D. 715 
 
 See Company — Dieeotoe's Authoeity. 
 2. 
 
 Company — ^Payment of dividend out of 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 344 
 See Company — Dividend. 4. 
 
 CAPITAL— co«(im«ed. 
 
 Company — Payment of dividend out of 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 149, 519; 25 Ch. D. 762 
 See Company — Dieeotoe's Liability. 
 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Company — Eeduction of. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Reduction 
 OP Capital. 
 
 Income — Permanent improvements 27 Ch. D. 
 
 See Settlement — Powees. 7. [196 
 
 CAPTUEE AND SEIZURE- Ship^Insurance 
 
 [9 Q. B, D. 463 ; 10 Q. B. D. 432 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas, 393 
 
 See Insueance, Maeine — Policy. 3, 4. 
 
 CARGO — Expense of re-shipping 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 69 ; 10 App. Cas. 404 
 
 See Ship — Genebal Aveeaqb. 4. 
 
 CARRIER :— 
 
 Ool. 
 
 I. Caeeiees' Act 
 
 278 
 
 II. Damages 
 
 - 278 
 
 III. Goods - 
 
 279 
 
 I. CARRIER— CARRIERS' ACT. 
 
 1. Temporary Lobs of Goods — Negligence 
 
 —Carriers' Act (11 Geo. 4 & 1 Will, i, c. 68), 
 s. 1 — Damages.'] A carrier is not deprived of the 
 protection afforded by the Carriers' Act (11 Geo. 4 
 & 1 Will. 4, 0. 68), s. 1, merely by the fact that 
 the loss of the goods is temporary and not per- 
 manent, nor can the owner of goods, which ought 
 to have been but were not declared pursuant to 
 that statute, recover damages for the consequences 
 of the loss of them, as distinguished from the loss 
 itself. — The Plaintiff delivered to the Defendants, 
 who were carriers for hire from London to Eome, 
 a trunk to be sent by rail from London to Liver- 
 pool, and thence shipped by steamer for Italy, 
 Owing to the Defendants' negligence the trunk 
 was put on board a vessel bound for New York, 
 where it arrived, and a long time elapsed before 
 it was restored to the Plaintiff. The trunk con- 
 tained articles within the Carriers' Act, the value 
 of which exceeded £10. The Plaintiif was obliged 
 to replace at enhanced prices t)ie articles within 
 the Carriers' Act contained in the trunk : — Held, 
 that the Plaintiif could not recover from the De- 
 fendants damages either for the temporary loss of 
 the articles within the Carriers' Act or for being 
 obliged to replace them at enhanced prices, a 
 carrier being protecttd by the statute not only as 
 to a loss but alto as to all consequences flowing 
 from it. MiLLEN v. Bbasch - 8 ft. B. D. 36 ; 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 II. CARRIER— DAMAGES. 
 
 Measure of Damages — Liability for. 
 
 Delay in Transmission of Goods.] On the 19th of 
 December, 1881, eighteen bales marked "Eaga" 
 were delivered by the Plaintiffs in London to 
 the Defendants for conveyance to W. station in 
 Kent, where in the ordinary course they should 
 
( 279 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 280 ) 
 
 II. CAEKIER— DAMAGES— conttjiMucl. 
 
 have been delivered ■within tvrenty-four hours. 
 By mistake they were forwarded to another place, 
 and did not reach the W. station until the 4th of 
 January, 1882, when, finding them to have 
 become heated (through being packed in a damp 
 state) and therefore unfit for the manufacture of 
 paper, the consignees rejected them; and ulti- 
 mately the rags were found useless for any purpose, 
 and were destroyed. — There being an admitted 
 breach of duty on the part of the Defendants, and 
 it being conceded that the rags would have sus- 
 tained no injury if they had been packed dry, the 
 County Court Judge gave a verdict for the Plaintiffs, 
 but for nominal damages only, on the ground that 
 the loss was attributable to the Plaintiffs' own 
 act in packing i the rags in a damp state, without 
 informing the Defendants that special care was 
 necessary. — Upon a motion to enter a verdict for 
 the Plaintiffs for the admitted value of the goods : 
 — Seld, that the ruling of the Judge was correct. 
 Baldwin & Co. v. London, Chatham, and Dover 
 Eailway Company 9 Q. B. D. 582 
 
 III. CAEBIEE— GOODS. 
 
 Freight — Non-payment of Freight hy 
 
 Consignee — Liability of Consignor.'] The Defen- 
 dants hired £>■ trolly, and agreed with the owner 
 to pay for the carriage both ways. The Defen- 
 dants delivered the trolly to the Plaintiffs, to be 
 returned to the owner under a consignment note 
 which stated that the Defendants requested the 
 Plaintiffs to receive and forward the trolly as per 
 address and particulars on the note, and on the 
 conditions stated therein. The note gave the 
 name of the owner as consignee, and in a column 
 headed " who pays carriage " w4,s inserted " con- 
 signee." The Plaintiffs delivered the goods to 
 the consignee, who declined to pay the freight on 
 the ground that the Defendants had agreed to 
 pay it. In an action to recover the freight from 
 the Defendants: — Seld, that under the circum- 
 stances the Defendants could not be treated merely 
 as agents of the consignee to make the contract 
 for the carriage of the trolly, but were them- 
 selves contracfing parties, and liable to pay the 
 freight. Gbeat Western Railway Company v. 
 Bagge - - - 15 Q. B. D. 625 
 
 CAREIEE — Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act 
 —Proscribed district 12 Q. B. D. 629 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 Acts. 
 
 . Lien for freight— Bankruptcy 22 Ch. D. 470 
 
 See BANKErPTOY — Jurisdiction. 5. 
 
 Kailway company — Alternative rates 
 
 L_ . [10 ft. B. D. 250; 8 App. Cas. 703 
 
 See Railway Company— Tkai'Fio Man- 
 agement. 1. 
 
 Eailway company — Detention 
 
 [8 ft. B. D. 44 
 See Eailway Company — Liabilities. 2. 
 
 ■ Eailway company — Passenger's luggage 
 
 [14 ft. B. D, 228 
 See Railway Company — Passenger's 
 Luggage. 
 
 Enilway company — Inequality of tolls ^ 
 
 Group rates 14 ft. B, D. 209 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 2. 
 
 CASE STATED— Power to state case for opinion 
 of Court — Reference to Local Govern- 
 ment Board under local Act — Common 
 Law Procedure Act, 1854 9 ft. B. D. 518 
 
 See Arbitration — Submission. 1. 
 
 Power of justices to state case — General 
 
 district rate — Order for payment 
 
 [14 ft, B. D. 730 
 See Justices — Practice. 2. 
 
 Power of justices to state case — Eailway 
 
 commissioners 15 ft. B, D. 505 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Regulation Acts. 4. 
 CASES SPECIALLY CONSIDERED IN THIS 
 DIGEST. 
 
 See Table of Cases (ante, p. cxix). 
 CASH— Under control of Court - 20 Ch. D. 203 
 See Land Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 Money. 6. 
 CASUAL POOE ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Poor Law — Relief — Statutes. 
 Metropolis — Poor Acts — Statutes. 
 
 CATALOGUE— Illustrated— Copyright 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 1. [369 
 
 CATTLE — Levant and oouohant — Common 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 753 
 
 See Copyhold — Custom. 1. 
 
 CATTLE STATION — Nuisance — Powers of rail- 
 way company - 29 Ch. D. 89 
 See Nuisance — Definition. 2. 
 
 CAUSE OF ACTION — Res judicata — Separate 
 actions in respect of same wrongful act 
 See Judgment. 5. [14 ft. B. D. 141 
 
 — — Support — Statute of Limitations — Personal 
 actions - 14 ft. B. D. 125 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Personal 
 Actions. 2. 
 CENTEAL CEIMINAL COTTRT— Mandamus 
 
 [11 ft. B. D, 479 
 See Court — Central Criminal Court. 
 
 CENTEAL CEIMINAL COTTET (PEISONS) ACT, 
 1881. 
 
 See Prison — Statutes. 
 
 CEETIFICATE — Architect — General line of 
 
 buildings - 13 ft. B. D. 878 ; 
 
 [10 App, Cas. 229 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 2. 
 
 Breaches of patent - 21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 2. 
 
 Competency of ship — Colonial. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 Conformity — Bankruptcy - 27 Ch. D. 687 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disohabgb. 2. 
 Engineer 11 ft, B. D. 229 
 
 See Contract — Breach. 1. 
 
 Incorporation of building society 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See Building Society. 11. [173 
 
 Patent suit 29 Ch. D. 366 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 3. 
 
 Rules of buildiug society 23 Ch. D. 440 ; 
 
 [9 App, Cas. 519 
 
 See Building Society. 9. 
 
( 281 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 282 ) 
 
 CEETIFICATE — continued. 
 
 Survey of ship — Colonial. 
 
 See Ship — ^Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 Solicitor — Neglect to renew 16 Q. B. D. 467 
 
 See SoLiciTOB — Certificate. 
 CEBTIOBABI — Discretion — InqTiisition under 
 Lands Clauses Act - 9 Q. B. D. 741 
 See Land Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 5. 
 CESTUI QUE TRUST— Improperly made party- 
 Costs - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 See Vendor and Purchaseb — Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 
 Right of action — Breach of covenant 
 
 [30 Ch. B. 57 
 See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 2. 
 CEYLON— Law of. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law — 
 Ceylon. 
 CHAIBUAN' — Company — Statement by — Agent 
 
 [22 Ch. B. 893 
 See BviDENOE — General. 4. 
 
 Meeting of shareholders 29 Ch. B. 159 
 
 See Company — Voluittabt Winding-up. 
 1. 
 CHAMBERS — ^Adjournment to Judge — Costs 
 
 [22 Ch. B, 5 
 S'ee Mortgage — Contract. 7. 
 
 Evidence in - 22 Ch. B. 430 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 8. 
 
 Order in— Alteration - 29 Ch. B. 827 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 8. 
 
 Practice in. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Chambers. 
 
 Practice in - 28 Ch. B. 650 
 
 See Mortgage — Foebclosure. 2. 
 
 Practice in — Appeal from order 19 Ch. B. 
 
 [516 ; 21 Ch. B. 131 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 20, 21. 
 
 Practice in— Trustee Acts - 28 Ch. B. 529 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 2. 
 
 Practice in — ^Trustee Belief Act 
 
 [22 Ch. B. 635 
 See Trustee Belief Act. 1. 
 
 CHAMPERTY (and MAINTENANCE), 
 
 1. Common Interest, what amounts to,] 
 
 The Plaintiff having sat and voted as a member 
 of Parliament without having made and sub- 
 scribed the oath appointed by the 5th section of 
 29 & 30 Vict, c. 19, the Defendant, who was also 
 a member of Parliament, procured 0. to sue the 
 Plaintiff for the penalty imposed by that section 
 for contravention thereof. C. was a person of 
 insufficient means to pay the costs in the event 
 of the action being unsuccessful. After the com- 
 mencement of the action the Defendant gave to 
 C. a bond of indemnity against all costs and 
 expenses he might incur in consequence of the 
 action. It was ultimately decided in the House 
 of Lords that the above mentioned section does 
 
 CHAMPERTY (and MAINTENANCE)— conif?. 
 
 not enable a common Informer to sue for the 
 penalty, and that therefore the action would not 
 lie. The Plaintiff brought an action for mainte- 
 nance against the Defendant : — Held, that the 
 Defendant and C. had no common interest in the 
 result of the action for the penalty ; that the con- 
 duct of the Defendant in respect of such action 
 amounted to maintenance ; and that the action 
 for maintenance was therefore maintainable. 
 Bradlaugh v. Newdbgate 11 Q, B, B, 1 
 
 2. Maliciously procuring Bankruptcy — 
 
 Maintenance — Banliruptcy Act, 1869 — Order XXYi - 
 r. 4 — Cause of Action passing to Trustee in Banli- 
 ruptcy — Company in Liquidation — Corporation^ 
 A bankrupt whose adjudication in bankruptcy 
 has not been set aside cannot maintain an action 
 for maliciously procuring the bankruptcy : and 
 such an action may be summarily dismissed upon 
 summons as frivolous and vexatious. WJiitwortli 
 V, Sail (2 B. & Ad. 695) approved.— A bankrupt 
 cannot maintain an action for maintenance on the 
 ground that the defendant incited and supported 
 bankruptcy proceedings' in which he had no 
 common interest, since the cause of action (if any) 
 passed to the trustee in bankruptcy ; and such an 
 action may be summarily- dismissed upon sum- 
 mons as frivolous and vexatious : — Seld, also by 
 the Earl of Selborne, L.C, that a corporation in 
 liquidation, as distinct from the individual liqui- 
 dator, is. incapable of committing such an act of 
 maintenance. — The inherent jurisdiction of the 
 Court to protect itself from abuse is recognised 
 and extended by Order xxv., rule 4, of the Judi- 
 cature Eules of 1883. Metropolitan Bank v. 
 PooLBY - 10 App, Cas. 210 
 
 CHANCERY COURT OF YORK 7 Q. B, B, 273 ; 
 
 [6 App, Cas, 657 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 CHANCERY BIVISION— Change of venue 
 
 [26 Ch, B. 621 
 ,See Pbactice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 6. 
 
 Jurisdiction — Action for sum below £10 
 
 [30 Ch, B. 387 
 See Practice — Supreme Courts-Juris- 
 diction. 2. 
 
 Jurisdiction — ^Probate 26 Ch, B, 656 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Juris- 
 diction. 1. 
 
 '- Probate — Revocation — Jurisdiction 9 P, B. 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment, 1, [210 
 CHANCERY FUNBS RUEES, 1874, rr, 14, 19 
 
 [21 Ch, B, 776 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 5. 
 CHARG-E — Annuity — Income or capital 
 
 See Will— Annuity. 1. [17 Ch. B. 167 
 
 Debt of married woman — Separate estate — 
 
 Injunction - - 16 Ch, B, 371, 660 
 
 See Practice^ — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 6. 
 
 Debts— Will - - 20 Ch, B, 465 
 
 See Will — Charge of Debts. 
 
 : Debts- Will - 16 Ch, B, 3 
 
 ! 'See Administrator — With Will an- 
 nexed, 1. 
 
( 2S3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 284 ; 
 
 CHABGS — continued. 
 
 Debts — Will — Legal estate in executors 
 
 See Will — Estate in Kealtt. 1. 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 190 
 Land drainage - - 29 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Pukohase- 
 
 MONET. 5. 
 
 26 Ch. D. 19 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 2. 
 
 On ecclesiastical land 
 
 See Inolosube — Ecclesiastical Land — 
 Statutes. 
 
 On officer's commission money 16 Ch. D. 571 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 17 
 See Moktgage— Pkiority. 12. 
 
 On property of company — Debenture 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 411 ; 29 Ch. D. 736 
 See CoMPAHT — Debentdkes. 5, 7. 
 
 On property recovered 
 
 See Cases under Solioitob — Lien. 1 — 7. 
 
 On real estate — Charity 
 
 See Cases under Chaeitt — Mortmain. 
 
 Private improvement expenses 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 782 
 See Local Government — Streets. 8. 
 CHAEGES OF TRUSTEE. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee — Costs and 
 Charses. 
 CHAEGING ORDEE. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Charging Orders. 
 
 Solicitor's lien. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Lien. 1 — 7. 
 
 CHABITABLE INSTITUTION— Eestrictive cove- 
 nant in lease 25 Ch. D. 206 ; 
 [27 Ch. D. 71 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 4. 
 
 CHARITY. Col. 
 
 I. Commissioners - 283 
 
 II. Gift to 286 
 
 III. Management 286 
 
 rV. Mortmain 288 
 
 Church Building. 
 
 See Church Building Acts. 
 
 Endowed Schools. 
 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 
 
 I. CHAEITY— COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 1. Co-asent— Collegiate Body — Surplus 
 
 Bevenue to he paid to Ecclesiastical Commissioners 
 for Administratimi — Action against Collegiate 
 Body for Accounts — Charitable Trusts Act, 1853 
 (16 * 17 Vict. 0. 137), ss. 17, 69,— Mandamus.'] By 
 an ancient charter a collegiate body was founded 
 at Manchester, and they were seised of the rectory 
 of the parish, and of the tithes, glebe lands, and 
 other property for religious and temporal purposes 
 in the parish. The property having considerably 
 increased in value, an Act of Parliament was ; in 
 1850 passed authorizing the division of the parish 
 into several parishes, and for the application of 
 the revenues. Accounts of receipts and expendi- 
 ture by the collegiate body were to be rendered 
 yearly to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, by 
 whom it was to be applied and the surplus paid, 
 inter aUa, in payment of yearly or other sums as 
 
 I. CHAEITY— COMMISSIONERS— oo»fa'n««e(?. 
 to them should seem fit to each and every or any 
 or one or more of the incumbents of the benefices 
 in the parish. The accounts which were rendered 
 by the collegiate body to the Commissioners were 
 complained of by the incumbents on the ground 
 that many of the disbursements were illegal. A 
 request made to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners 
 to take proceedings to check the expenditure 
 being declined, the incumbents brought an action 
 against the collegiate body for the purpose of 
 enforcing a compliance with the statute, and the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners were made co-Defen- 
 dants. A mandamus was claimed against the 
 collegiate body to compel them to render accounts. 
 Both Defendants demurred, one ground being 
 that the consent of the Charity Commissioners to 
 the action had not been obtained -.—Held, that the 
 object of the action was to obtain a proper account 
 of the funds which ought to be transferred to the 
 Ecclesiastical Commissioners and which would be 
 administered by them as charity for the benefit of 
 the incumbents of the benefices, therefore the 
 consent of the CharityJCommiesioners to the action 
 proceeding was, under the 17th section of the 
 Charitable Trusts Act of 1853, necessary. — In re 
 Meyrick's Charity (1 Jur. (N.S.) 438) and Attor- 
 ney-General V. Sidney-Sussex College (15 W. R. 
 162) followed. — Seld, also, that, though a manda- 
 mus was the only relief sought for, the matter 
 would still be left within the operation of the 17tli 
 section of the Act, because a mandamus is a pro- 
 ceeding for obtaining an order concerning a 
 charity. — Holme v. Guy (5 Ch. D. 901) observed 
 upon. Attorney-General v. Dean and Canons 
 OE Manchester - 18 Ch. D. 696 
 
 2. Consent— College— le & 17 Vict. c. 137, 
 
 ss. 17, 62.] An information cannot be brought 
 against a college in one of the Universities with- 
 out the leave of the Charity Commissioners. At- 
 torney-General 17. Sidney-Sussex College, 
 Cambridge - 21 Ch. D. 814, n. 
 
 3. Consent — Place for Beligious Meetings 
 
 — Registered Building — 16 & 17 Vict. c. 137, ss. 17, 
 62 — 18 (£19 Vict. c. 81, s. 9.] An action for remov- 
 ing the minister of a building registered as a place 
 of meeting for religious worship and for adminis- 
 tering the trusts of the deed relating to such 
 building can be prosecuted without the certificate 
 of the Charity Commissioners. — Attorney-General 
 V. Sidney-Sussex College (21 Ch. D. 514, n.) observed 
 upon. Glen v. Gregg 21 Ch. D. 513 
 
 4. Consent — Recipient of Charity Funds 
 
 —Schoolmaster— 16 tic 17 Vict. 0.137, s. 17.] The 
 Plaintiif had been appointed schoolmaster of a 
 free school by the churchwardens and overseers 
 of the parish, and part of his salary was paid to 
 him by the trustees of a charity under a scheme 
 of the Court of Chancery. He brought an action 
 against the trustees, alleging that they had re- 
 fused to pay what was due to him, and claiming 
 an account of the income of the charity : — Seld, 
 on demurrer, that the consent of the Charity 
 Commissioners to the action was necessary. Brit- 
 tain V. Overton 25 Ch. D. 41, n. 
 
 6. Consent — Resident Medical Officer — ■ 
 
 Recipient of Funds of Charity — Charitable Trusts 
 Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 137), s. 17.] The 
 Plaintiff had been appointed in pursuance of 
 
( 285 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 286 ) 
 
 I, CHARITY— COMMISSIONERS— con«i«u«(?. 
 certain rules framed by the committee of a hospital 
 established by a trust deed of March, 1879, under 
 the powers conferred by the deed, resident medi- 
 cal superintendent of the institution, for life, sub- 
 ject to his removal on three months' notice by the 
 committee on proof to them of neglect of duty ; 
 and he was let into possession of a house which 
 was annexed to the office. The funds of the hos- 
 pital not being sufficient to maintain a resident 
 medical officer, the committee gave the Plaintiff 
 three months' notice of removal, no charge of 
 neglect of duty being brought against him. The 
 committee gave the notice with the intention of 
 applying for a new scheme which would render 
 the office unnecessary. — The Plaintiff commenced 
 an action against the committee for a declaration 
 that he was entitled to hold his office during good 
 behaviour, and for an injunction to restrain them 
 from ejecting him from his residence and from 
 otherwise interfering with the tenure of his office : 
 — Seld, by Ohitty, J., on motion for an injunction, 
 that the Plaintiff before issuing his writ ought to 
 have obtained the certificate of the Charity Oom- 
 missioners as required by sect. 17 of the Charitable 
 Trusts Act, 1853, and the motion was refused 
 with costs. — Held by the Court of Appeal, that if 
 the object of the action was anything beyond pre- 
 venting the Defendants from excluding the Plain- 
 tiff; it required the sanction of the Commissioners. 
 And the Defendants at the Bar expressing their 
 intention not to exclude the Plaintiff unless and 
 until a new scheme should be sanctioned, or until 
 the trial of the action, the order of the Court 
 below was affirmed. Benthall v. -Eabl of Kil- 
 MOBET - 25 Ch. D. 39 
 
 6. Consent — Boyal Society — Voluntary 
 
 Association — Sale of Land — Charitahle Trusts 
 Acts, 1853, s. 62, and 1855, ss. 29, 48.] The Eoyal 
 Society, a voluntary association of learned men 
 founded in the reign of King Charles II., in 1732, 
 purchased, out of moneys arising from the sub- 
 scriptions of the members, real estate at Acton, 
 and in 1881 sold part of it. An objection was 
 taken by the purchaser that the consent of the 
 Oommissioners under the Charitable Trusts Acts, 
 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 137, s. 62) and 1855 
 (18 & 49 Vict. c. 124, s. 29), was necessary on the 
 ground that the society was an endowed charita- 
 ble institution : — Seld, that the estate having 
 been purchased out of the moneys arising from 
 the voluntary contributions of members which 
 could be by the society legally applied for such 
 purpose, the society came within the exemptions 
 of the 62nd section of the Charitable Trusts Act, 
 1853, and the 48th section of the Act of 1855, and 
 that, notwithstanding the 29th section of the Act 
 of 1855, the society had power to sell the estate 
 without the consent of the Commissioners. Eotal 
 SooiETT OF London and Thompson 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 407 
 
 7. Consent — Sale of Land — 16 & Yl Vict. 
 
 c. 137—18 & 19 Vict. c. 124, ». 29—5 * 6 Will. 4. 
 c. 7G-^City Ward.l Land purchased by one of 
 the wards of the city of London out of common 
 moneys belonging to the ward, for the purpose, 
 as declared by a deed of trust then executed, of 
 providing a watch-house and suitable rooms for 
 transacting the business and keeping the records 
 
 I. CHARITY— COMMISSIONERS— coM/iwaed. 
 
 of the ward, and subsequently let out on lease, 
 may be conveyed to a railway company (requiring 
 to take the premises under their compulsory 
 powers) without the consent of either the Charity 
 Commissioners under the Charitable Trusts Acts, 
 1853 and 1855, or the Lords of the Treasury 
 under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1835 ; nor 
 is it necessary that the sale should be completed 
 under the provisions of the Lands Clauses Act. 
 FiNNis AND Young to Forbes and Poohin. 
 (No. 1.) _ _ _ _ 24Ch.D. 687 
 
 8. Consent — Saleof Land — Charity wholly 
 
 maintained by Voluntary Gontributions — 16 & 17 
 Vict, c 137, s. 62—18 & 19 Vict. c. 124, ss. 29, 48.] 
 Land purchased by one of the City wards and 
 used for the purposes of the ward charity school, 
 which had no endowment and was wholly main- 
 tained by voluntary contributions, is within the 
 exceptions of the Charitable Trust Act, 1853, 
 sect. 62, and sect. 48 of the Act of 1855, and may 
 be sold without the concurrence or consent of the 
 Charity Oommissioners. Finnis and Young to 
 Forbes and Poohin. (No. 2.) 24 Ch. D. 591 
 
 9. Consent— So?e of Land — Charitable 
 
 Trusts Act, 1853 (16 * 17 Vict. c. 137), ss. 24-26 
 — Charitahle Trusts Amendment Act, W55 (18 & 19 
 Vict. c. 124), s. 38 — Allotments Extension Act, 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 80), ss. 4, 5, 11, 15— Allot- 
 ment Act (2 (fe 3 Will. 4, c. 42).] The Allotments 
 Extension Act, 1882, has not taken away from the 
 Charity Oommissioners the power of authorizing 
 a sale of charity lands vested in them under the 
 Charitable Trusts Act, 1853, and the Charitable 
 Trusts Amendment Act, 1855. Parish of Sut- 
 ton TO Church - - 26 Ch. D. 173 
 
 Action on account of subscriptions 28 Ch. D. 
 
 See Charity — Management. 4. [426 
 
 II. CHARITY— GIFT TO. 
 
 1. "Charitable and deserving objects " — 
 
 Will — Construction. — "Jlfone)/."] A testatrix by 
 her will desired " that the whole of the money 
 over which I have a disposing power be given in 
 charitable and deserving objects, the amount being 
 six hundred pounds sterling " : — Beld, that this 
 was a good charitable gift. — Williams v. Kershaw 
 (5 01. & F. Ill, n.)distinguiahed.— Atthedateof 
 the will in August, 1881, the testatrix had over 
 £600 at her bankers. In February, 1883, she 
 invested £600 in the purchase of £586 Consols. 
 At the date of her death in May, 1884, she had 
 the £586 Consols, £555 at her bankers, and £8 
 cash in her house : — Held, that the word " money " 
 in the will ought not to be extended beyond its 
 strict meaning. In re Sutton. Stone v. Attor- 
 
 NET-GrENEBAL 28 Ch. D. 464 
 
 2. Cy-pres — WUl — Charitable Legacy — 
 
 Lapse.'] A legacy to an ophthalmic hospital which 
 had ceased to exist at the date of the testator's 
 will held to have lapsed and not to be adminis- 
 tered oy-pr^s. In re Ovet. Broadbent v. Baekow 
 
 [29 Ch, D. 660 
 
 III. CHARITY- MANAGEMENT. 
 
 1. Scheme — Alteration — Benewable Leases 
 
 —Charitable Trusts Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict, 
 c. 137), s. 21.] A scheme, settled in 1856, for the ad- 
 ministration of a charity, authorized the granting. 
 
( 287 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 288 ) 
 
 III. CHARITY— MAKAGEMENT—coreiireMcd. 
 of building leases with the sauotion of the 
 Charity Oommissioners for ninety-nine years ab- 
 solute, or for twenty-one years with a covenant 
 for perpetual renewal at the expiration of every 
 twenty-one years, on payment of a fine of one half 
 the then annual value of the demised premises. 
 Tha Attorney-General applied to have this scheme 
 amended by striking out the clause as to grant- 
 ing leases -.—Held, by the Court of Appeal, affirm- 
 ing the decision of Chitty, J., that the clause 
 ought to be struck out, leaving the granting of 
 leases to be governed by the Charitable Trusts 
 Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 137), s. 21. In re 
 Smith's Charity (Habtlepool) 20 Ch. D. 816 
 
 2. Scheme — Attorney- General — Applica- 
 tion to Scotch Cov/rt.'] An English testator be- 
 queathed the residue of his estate to his executors, 
 and to trustees to be appointed by them, on trust 
 for the benefit of the blind in Inverness-shire. 
 The surviving executor declined to act in the 
 trust, or even to appoint new ti'ustees : — Held, 
 that the Attorney-General, and not the surviving 
 executor, was the person to whom liberty ought 
 to be given to apply to the Court of Session in 
 Scotland for the settlement of a scheme for the 
 charity. In re Fkasee. Yeates v. Fkaser 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 827 
 
 3. —. — Scheme — Charity Commissioners — 
 Cy-pres — Eleemosynary Gift — Apprentice Fees — 
 Application to Education — Discretion of Commis- 
 sioners — Appeal.l A sum of money was given by 
 a testatrix in 1643 -to be laid out in the purchase 
 of lands of the annual value of £10, one half to be 
 applied towards the better relief of the most poor 
 and needy people of good life and conversation in 
 the parish of K., to be paid to them half-yearly in 
 the church or the porch thereof : and the other 
 half to apprentice one poor boy or more of the 
 parish. At that time K. was a small village, but 
 it had now increased to a large and wealthy town, 
 and the income of the charity estate had increased 
 to more than £2000. — The Charity Commissioners 
 settled a scheme by which they appropriated the 
 income to the following objects : (a) The relief of 
 poor deserving objects of the parish in case of 
 sudden accident, sickness, or distress. (6) Sub- 
 criptions to dispensaries aad hospitals in the 
 parish, (o) Annuities for deserving and neces- 
 sitous persons who had resided seven years in the 
 parish, (d) The advancement of the education of 
 children attending elementary schools, (e) Pre- 
 miums for apprenticeship and outfits for poor boys 
 of the parish. (/) Payments to encourage the 
 continuance of scholars at public elementary 
 schools above the age of eleven yeajs. (3) Exhi- 
 bitions at higher places of education, (ft) Pro- 
 viding lectures and evening classes. — Some of the 
 parishioners objected to the application of the 
 income to educational purposes : — Held (reversing 
 the decision of Hall, V.C), that, considering the 
 enormous increase of the income of the charity 
 and of the population of the parish, and the 
 change of the circumstances and habits of the 
 people, the application of the income of the charity 
 cy-pres to educational and other charitable pur- 
 poses was justifiable, and that the scheme of the 
 Charity Commissioners ought to be confirmed.— 
 A long continued unauthorized oy-prbs applica- 
 
 III. CHAEITY— MANAGEMENT— cofifiwite^. 
 tion of charity funds by the trustees is no ground 
 of objection to a scheme of the Charity Commis- 
 sioners directing a different cy-pres application. — 
 The Court of Appeal will not interfere vrith the 
 details of a scheme of the Charity Oommissioners, 
 unless they have exceeded their authority or the 
 scheme contains something wrong in principle or 
 wrong in law. In re Campdeu Chakities 
 
 [I8CI1.D. 310 
 
 4. Voluntary Fund — Action for Account 
 
 — Parties — Representative Plaintiff — Attorney- 
 General — Fund raised by Voluntary Subscriptions 
 — Action by some Members of Committee on behalf of 
 all against former Member — Certificate of Charity 
 Commissioners — Charitable Trusts Act, 1853 (16ife 
 17 Vict. c. 137), ss. 17, 62.] An action was brought 
 by five of the members of a church building com- 
 mittee, on behalf of themselves and the other 
 members of the committee, against a former mem- 
 ber, claiming an account of all moneys received 
 and paid by him in respect of the Church Build- 
 ing Fund during the period of his membership. 
 The fund was raised by voluntary subscriptions ; 
 seventeen persons having constituted themselves 
 into a committee to receive subscriptions for the 
 purpose of improving the church of the parish, 
 and to apply the moneys thus collected : — Held, 
 that, the members of the committee being mere 
 agents of the subscribers, the action could not be 
 maintained by some of the agents against others. 
 — But held, also, that, even if all the subscribers 
 were suing, the action could not be maintained in 
 the absence of the Attorney-General. — Whether 
 the action could be maintained without the certi- 
 ficate of the Charity Couimissioners, quxre. 
 Stkicbxand v. Weldon 28 Ch. D. 426 
 
 IV. CHARITY— MOETMAIN. 
 
 1. Apportionment — Charge on Land — 
 
 Proceeds of Sale.'] A testator gave a share of his 
 residuary personal estate to charities. His resi- 
 duary estate consisted of a legacy from another 
 testator payable out of the proceeds of that testa- 
 tor's ;real and mixed estate and pure personal 
 estate : — Held, that the bequests ^o the charities 
 must be apportioned according to the values of the 
 real and mixed estate and personal estate of the 
 first testator, and that the bequests failed as to 
 the portion attributable to the real and mixed 
 estate, but were good as to the portion attributable 
 to the pure personal estate. In re Hill's Trusts 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 173 
 
 2. Debt payable out of Land — Hiring 
 
 Booms,'] A settlor by deed covenanted to pay 
 within twelve months the sum of £20,000 to trus- 
 tees on trust for his wife for her life, with re- 
 mainder to the settlor for his life, with remainder 
 as his wife should by will appoint. The wife by 
 her will appointed the £20,000 to the same trus- 
 tees on trust to pay thereout legacies amounting 
 to £2000 and certain life annuities, and to pay 
 the residue as she should by deed appoint. By 
 a deed-poll she appointed the residue to charitable 
 uses. All the instruments were executed at the 
 same time. The settlor survived his wife and 
 died, not having paid the £20,000. Part of his 
 estate at his death consisted of impure personalty, 
 and the pure personalty would be insufficient for 
 
( 289 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 299 ) 
 
 IV. CHARITY— MORTMAIN— coBiMtteci. 
 payment of the £20,000 : — Held (reversing the 
 decision of Bacon, V.O.), that the £20,000 was a 
 mere debt from the settlor's estate, and thougli it 
 would be in part payable to the trustees for the 
 charity out of the proceeds of land, the gift of the 
 residue to charitable uses was not in any part void 
 under the Mortmain Act. — A direction to hire 
 rooms does not bring a gift within the Mortmain 
 Act. — Jeffries v. AlStander (8 H. L. C. 59i} con- 
 sidered. In re Eobson. Bmley v. Davidson 
 
 [19C11.D.186 
 
 3. Harbour Commissioners' Bond — 9 Geo. 
 
 2, c. 36 — Interest in Land.'] A bond by Harbour 
 Commissioners, in form prescribed by their Act, 
 assigning the duties arising by virtue of- the Act 
 (which directed the application of such duties : 
 let, in payment of the costs and expenses of ob- 
 taining the Act ; 2, in payment of the interest of 
 moneys advanced for defraying such expenses : 
 
 3, in payment of the interest of moneys borrowed 
 under the Act ; 4, in defraying working expenses ; 
 and, 5, in payment of principal moneys borrowed 
 under the Act), is an interest in, or affecting land 
 within 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, and therefore cannot be 
 given by will for charitable purposes. — Knapp v. 
 Williams (iVes. 430,n.) followed; Attree v. Hawe 
 (9 Ch. D. 337) and In re Harris (15 Ch. D. 561) 
 distinguished ; Jervi's v. Lawrence (22 Ch. D. 202) 
 not followed. In re Christmas.' Maetdi v. Laoon 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 544 
 
 4. Improvement Bond — Mortgage of Bates 
 
 —Pure Personalty — 9 Geo. 2, c. 30.] By an Act 
 passed for the improvement of a suburban estate. 
 Commissioners were empowered to inake rates 
 upon the occupiers of houses, lands, tenements, 
 and hereditaments, within the limits of the Act, 
 and to borrow at interest on the credit of the rates, 
 and to assign over the rates or any part thereof as 
 a security for repayment of the sums borrowed. If 
 any person rated did not pay, power was given to 
 the Commissioners to recover the rate by action 
 of debt, or by distress and sale of the goods and 
 chattels of such person.— By the Metropolis Local 
 Management Acl^ 1S35, the powers of the Com- 
 missioners in this and other like cases were vested 
 in the vestries " @f the "parishes, with power to 
 require the overseers to levy and pay over sums 
 required for the expenses- of the execution of the 
 Act : and the overseers for the pui-pose of levying 
 such rates were to proceed in the same manner 
 and with the same powers as for levying money 
 for the relief of the poor. In case of non-payment 
 of any rate, any justice might on complaint by the 
 vestry issue a warrant for levying the amount by 
 distress and sale of the goods of the overseers ; 
 but the vestries of certain parishes, including the 
 parish in which this estate was situated, were 
 themselves to levy the rates directly on the occu- 
 piers instead of on the overseers. In case of non- 
 payment of principal or interest due on any 
 mortgage under the Act, the mortgagee could 
 obtain a receiver : — Held, that an assignment by 
 way of mortgage of a proportion of the rates 
 arising under the Improvement Act, to secure the 
 repayment of a sum advanced by the assignee, did 
 not create an interest in land within the meaning 
 of the Mortmain Act. Jebvis v. La whence 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 202 
 
 IV. CHARITY— MORTMAIN— coniinuec?. 
 
 6. Mortgage — Interest in Land — Mort- 
 gage of Interest of Cestui que trust in Funds in- 
 vested partly on Mortgage of Real Estate — Appor- 
 tionment — 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, s.'3.] A testator was 
 entitled to £800, secured by mortgage of the life 
 interest of a widow lady in ihe funds held on the 
 trusts of her marriage settlement, and the rever- 
 sionary interest of one of her children in the same 
 funds. At the date of the mortgage and of the 
 testator's death, part of tliese funds was pure per- 
 sonalty, and the rest was invested under a power 
 in the settlement on mortgage of real estate. The 
 testator bequeathed to charities such part of his 
 residuary estate as could be so bequeathed : — 
 Held, that the £800 was an interest in land within 
 the meaning of 9 Geo. 2, o, 36, s. 3, and could not 
 be given by will to a charity, and that there could 
 not be any apportionment so as to make a part of 
 the sum available for charity. — Brooh v. Badley 
 (Law Eep. 3 Ch. 672) approved and followed. — 
 Observations of Jessel, M.R., in In reHarris (15 
 Ch. D. 561) explained. In re Watts. Coknfokd 
 
 V. Elliott - 27 Ch. D. 318 ; 29 Ch, D. 947 
 
 6. ■ Secret Trust — Church — Mortmain Act, 
 
 9 Geo. 2, e. 36 — Church Building Act, 43 Geo. 3, 
 c. 108 — Site with existing Church.'] A testator, by 
 his will executed three months before his death, 
 devised all his real estate, which included a piece 
 of land of about one aci e, with an unconsecrated 
 building thereon licensed by the bishop for public 
 worship, to his wife absolutely. The devise was 
 in pursuance of a secret agreement between the 
 testator and his wife, whereby the latter undertook 
 to hold the land and building upon trust, after her 
 husband's death, to convey the same as and for a 
 parish or district church in perpetuity : — Held, 
 that the devise was legal under the statute 
 43 Geo. 3, c. 108, and was not rendered illegal by 
 any provisions of the Mortmain Act, 9 Geo. 2, 
 c. 36. O'Brien v. Tyssen 28 Ch. D, 372 
 
 CHARITY- Charities of the City of London. 
 See London — Charities — Statutes. 
 
 Perpetuity 7 Q. B. D. 106 ; 7 App. Cas. 633 
 
 See Fishery. 3. 
 
 Prison charity, scheme for. 
 
 See Prison — Statutes. 
 Purchase by railway company — Interim in- 
 vestment - - - 23 Ch, D, 171 
 See Settled Land Act — Pueohase- 
 
 MOKEY. 6. 
 
 Scheme — Apportionment — District parishes 
 
 [24 Ch, D, 213 
 See Chdeoh Building Acts. 
 
 Trade or business — Covenant in lease 
 
 [27 Ch.D. ri- 
 fe Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 4. 
 
 CHARTER. 
 
 Borneo.] Charter granted, Nov. 1st., 1881, to 
 the North British Borneo Company upon petition to 
 the Queen in Council L. G. 1881, p. 5448 
 
 Market — 'Waiver of rights 25 Ch. D. Sll ; 
 
 See Market, 2. [9 App. Cas. 927 
 
 CHARTERED COMPANY. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Viet. e. 56, declares the law 
 relating to the incorporation of Chartered Com- 
 
< m ) 
 
 Dinmr <;k (;ahkm. 
 
 C 'zn ) 
 
 OHAETEHEI) TSZIOHT - 6 Q. B. 0, 648 ; 
 
 |7Q,B,I),73; 7AdP'0m,670 
 
 Hri: ImilUAHdK, MaK/KR— Vnhll'.t. I, 'i. 
 
 OKAETZSFABTT, 
 
 Xr*! (jiMWJK llfldl^r Hllll' OlMKTKIir'AW'iy, 
 
 — — Vir.i'fMMvm uSitimA ^HUmiirtuj( wiKiin iv^o 
 i(i'/f/l,li« fiClyrr rfCA:\]A hi ICi/j/IiukI 
 ><«« UcvKrtr.'K HtamI'X l.'iftP. D, ai» 
 
 Opi.i'di of fMiitiiiiUis^ MuriiKi 'iii>tnn,uiv, 
 
 ilnnoiidmi-Mi - - 7 ft, B. D. 78 
 
 Hii, fnm!H\ni!r,,MA,mtV/- i'ni.u.v. I. 
 
 I''^ril» </f t)/'; »(;» - - Q. B. S, eit : 
 
 (7App, Ca«,fl7<> 
 f^mlnminAHKiK, MAnirih t'ohiiv. 2, 
 
 CHATEBI.— f !'«ii,w,f, /lo), (/, «jU 22 Cb, D, i36 
 H'>e Hi-c/jorw I'y.hinmHAMUK. I). 
 
 — • Uhi-Uijifi'tr hy irmU'M iif ((fnikrn;/), 20 Ch, D, 
 Hr/;IUnKiii:i'ii:v Uim.hMnvM. i, |841 
 
 CHEAP TBAIirs ACT, 1888, 
 
 X«« iiA;/,wAy O/xi-ABY— i'AmmWH 
 
 I »'-■'/•/ HUiImU'A. 
 CH£CZWZiaHZR~Mii/'' K«'//ii-l MmnMAmtmi 
 
 — V!»li<Jit,y— ;« A, W) Vi'rt,, '), 7«, «. 1^- 
 
 (14a.B,I). »02 
 A(/;'! M(«K— M/*)»t Mrw.i.A'ivm Ai/ih, 
 CHEMICAL MAKOBE WOBSR, 
 
 I I f.A I/I II A','/ » Hhi,l,v.U.i. 
 
 CHEMICAI, raOCE«8 - - aflCh.D, 866 
 
 H".'i I'AiK'ir Vauuity. S, 
 
 CHZHTTE- Jxlivry iif—Am^inl awl inttMiiiA'um 
 
 [0 Q. B, S, 87 
 
 ««; \i,uii:ii ADD HA'tuniAiyruin, I. 
 I ;'/>,;/ ','/ m'/rii«ca)l«4 - 27 Cb. S, 681 
 
 «w; l)'/,1ATIoM</irn#'Mi,i<A, 
 — — //j/:)/<r« '/f (/-lOircf - - 8 ft. B. 0. 288 
 
 /fe/< liASIUKIt- fUimiiK. I. 
 
 .— HHU'AM^iM.y -'M/Mh law 9 A]>p. Cm. 08 
 >^«« Hi'^/iim (/AW liiUjtjrKxiiiiAmns, i. 
 
 l'imt^h.Ufl~- IkK/krijj/t/ry of ;».r<!'-. 
 
 fid Cb. D, 409 
 
 Hi/', hASKiwyinv i'iiirrr/riKii'1'iiAniiAi,- , 
 rw)». X. I 
 
 — Htatni/^rv -.iiM^.iiif.iriM rh*yr.i.\iiv,. 
 
 Hh)', luu, ijir KximAvmi—H'iATuriat. 
 CHICOBY— H>itM(U/t'! for. 
 
 CHILD- CHILDKZU A/Jvarcjftlo/.-Ht U j/^/rtl//n 
 ()i»tv(t/i)»F/(, - - 29Clt.l>. 2M 
 >fe« Ai/VAHhf.ny.Kr. I. 
 
 r;);,«,/f-.^;iff. t/y will. 
 
 AVi C!a«ft* Hrcl/ri- Vfnjj—CuAm, 
 
 <','i>,1//lj, i/lw.tdi'iii, miA iiiH.'iiii'mn.iiiV:, 
 
 HiK ijttmM mi'litr invAwr—i'/KwrinjIl. 
 
 infAni V.iiKitArvni. 
 
 l%rAwt- MA(,«r«»A»<;e. 
 0>wt//«ly i/r~H'-j',nrhj - - 8 7, D. 161 
 
 Hw VuA'rrii:i!r—lnvom>ii—(/i:)ifi'/i/r ir»\ 
 
 <',IIIUlliK», I 
 
 Crwi/z-ly of - ' U(lk.V.mo 
 
 W! H(,WA,or/ A*» Wll* -Hbi-amt;//* 
 *.>»■,»/>, j. 
 
 — — D<,-*th ifi lif'Aiiiiii </f t<«fcii//r 10 Cll, 9. 012 ; 
 H'>', 'f/iu,- ;.Am. 2, -'}. f26 Ch. 0, 806 
 
 CHILD CHILDEEir miMmiAil. 
 
 — — llUijfiiilimU:- <',iill>lirili^,ii;ll iii will 
 
 meHi.-D.mi; 30 Ob. S, 110 
 
 //'» W(W/"-<;i()/,(/i»f,«. 1, 2, 
 
 Hllll Wii.l. WniiiM. C), 
 CKIVA — (MurUi CnnniiU. 
 
 Hint iJtiitiHiiiiriKiii -<liimW'„ 
 CHIirE»E BOHICtt- i.-f;'-y 'M.y 
 
 Hllll Vimuiih. 4 . ( 28 Cb, D, «32 
 
 CELOEIirX W0BK8, 
 
 Hii^i l/i'iAh (liiismmMf.m- — S'imiai; 
 Ukai/iii A</r» HhiJ/nUtn, 
 CHOLEBA lU-ajiUd'uiiiH fur finrlii, 
 
 Hi:/'. it'il.M, (iiiVKHUmi-.H'l' I'VUIM 
 
 iU:M/iil OiwMit. 
 
 lu i/,iitiMiiiit( Uttt [Htrii/f liiiiiiliiii, 
 
 Hllll yiy/iiifji'iiUii -MAHAnnnr.ar Aim - 
 (IiikkIM. 
 
 0H08E IH KOnOftl -'AmW.inii'iiii iiif lUiU-^ 
 Niit,ii;ii tif lumijiiiini-.iii afUrr Htiiivtur/» 
 'iiiiM, - - - 12(l.B,».Ml 
 
 Hix AmiiiKMyjUr im Sn.nii, I. 
 
 — Amipifiuiliir I'r'mrHy SiiiUin 
 
 1 18 Ch. 0. 881 
 
 81X) iiA)tKiii:i''ii;Y An'-fn n. I'r 
 
 — MawW yrnmiMt- IhinUniirtiHy iif)im)MiiS 
 
 m Oh, 0.844 
 
 Hm llrmiAHi) Ann Win; Wiirh'H Hf.Ai, 
 !>( <•(»;, Ji, 
 — - ¥A'/jiiiMridii,ii 22 Cb. D, 288 
 
 Hm l'iui/ni;i; H'.'cwc.mk <>/',;i7 Hf^ 
 ifi-.mrHArtini, I. 
 CHVVUSK- ('//iiviiUliiM hiiiiiiiU-/; Hivlit. lA ymi- 
 
 f-MiiUMi/ii </,ii,i,ii.tiui^'Ul 16 4-B. D.482 
 
 Hm Aii7i/v/f//'i. 'I, 
 1/1 H'/uU. A\t\iv,„ -HiaUm of 7 App. Cm. 4»4 
 
 *y! C/itumiAlj JjAW— Oack 'rtf '/'//// 
 
 — — 'Sriimttn lit ii/ivonvni liat'mif yxntuviy 
 
 (10 Q.B, 0.407 
 
 Hi'/i y//:i,fMiAimi:Ai, I. AW <',i,Kmr, % 
 
 OKUBCH BVILSIV0 A«r8. 
 
 .",!»>« f'/r )'li./^^i< <yf W'/M),r(/. J //// a, A; iK VIH, 
 
 1:. Zl (IJi/i /'l/i/K* 0/ tVirrtld'/i rUlAK Aiiuvdiiuiid 
 
 A'lL XWi), «, \, IM I'lji/mt i,J W'frtMp HUa» Ael, 
 
 IHTu, hImXI, hn wntl/nunl, nt i-aUwUwj Ui mtUu/rhn 
 
 ii.mj r/rrjii/riiU/m, wUimixI'md irr l/tij, viMlnif mM 
 
 irr ii/fijir^fii,U., iiwl, ii.V'i iijjI/'/rx, h/.tl.mn nj IJui //««/», 
 
 l/rml/f/'A, i/r I'/mi/mUnl^rii^/rii luilJ.l.n/i hi/n/l, fur '/n^Ue, 
 
 I'/nil/ifi/mt/i/i^d, pmiiiM/d, i.lui.filiiiiU;, m oUier pUf' 
 
 pinuit i/r oI/JwIm, I/i ij-rwid, tu/iimKij, m mjfiiwiliilm/vr 
 
 IM 'i/ti/riiiiMii iif f.li/1 All. mi/ih iiwi/id'dy 0/ taim u* 
 
 l.luirnin ■ifiKiii/i/fiiA'/l,, ■fnifnUh'/l, I 
 
 (fi.,j An ly/ilADiuMiJiiU infriHiTuiAim *<<«, hetuff 
 
 Iml/nn ttw, MgiMy Iif a M*hop, liuiU im 
 
 iiuiku miy maft mind vMum Um nmmid 
 
 in wrUkfj 0/ ifu; Irlth/p uf tht lUtjneu Ut 
 
 wlutm jwiivUMim h« /< mu/jeel. 
 
 <\i., A mmiidikud i//ri)<niiUim MU wil mak*, 
 
 ' o/ftf/ mtek armtt i/Mlf/iU Uuf ni/nmrU, in 
 
 ; -ir/riUw,! of ttut (l</mDiiimUm«ri of U*r 
 
 j Mii^nxlyi/ K 't'-fi'/iAii/nj, 
 
 <i:.) 1'ii.iiMil. junjHirtiy tiuM iuA. I/O m gruttUd 
 
 wiUu/id Uie eurmni nf a mujjurHy uf ih*- 
 
 i ri/M//i/yir» i/.'/f/, wr/tuvn 1^ jm/pmrty in (A« 
 
( 293 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 294 ) 
 
 CHURCH BUILDING ACTS— coiiJimierf. 
 
 parii'li to which the prnpeiiij Moiuja, as- 
 
 Mmhh'il lit (I mci'tiiig to (m coiiiviiod 
 
 iiifonlhiij to the mode jwiiilfd out in the 
 
 A,-r 5 .(■ li Will. I, c. (>9, and of fh^ Loml 
 
 ilon'riinii'iit Hoiird and of th<' ijunrdiniis 
 
 of thi' poor of the itnrifh or of the ttnton 
 
 foniprifiiiij the porinh, tvstijiod by their 
 
 ht'i)h] povtir^i to tht^ roitrei/once. 
 
 01.) rropertji hrhl on trust fur rhoritohh' piir- 
 
 posfs fholl not Im so (/ranti'd wilhont the 
 
 ronsitit of the Clioriti/ Commissioners for 
 
 Kntfhind and Wales. 
 
 Sivt. i. Tiie said Aft shall he eonstriied as e.r- 
 
 ttndinti to anthori::e any pn'son srisi'd or entitled 
 
 only for life or lives of or to any manor or lands of 
 
 freehold tiniire to nialie Midi ijrant, eonveyanee, or 
 
 enfranehisement as is mentioned, in. the saidAet in 
 
 eases irhere the person next entitled to the same for 
 
 a henefieial interest in remainder in fre simjde or 
 
 fee tail is unltorn or nnaiteertoined : provided that 
 
 ■HO fueh grant, eonveyanee. or enfranehisement made 
 
 hy any siieh person seised only for a life or lires 
 
 fhall he ralla tinless the per.ion siised or entitled 
 
 Jor a henejieial intere.<t for life or lires, or for an 
 
 estate iu fra simple or fee tail {.as the ease may be) 
 
 Jn remainder immediately e.ri>eetaut on the estate 
 
 <)/ stieh unborn or uua.'>eerlained person (f or lo 
 
 stuth manor or land {if any and if leyally eom- 
 
 petenl) shall he a parly to and shall join in the 
 
 jsame ; and if there be «« sneh person, or if such 
 
 person ba not leijally eomp<tent, unle.is the triiftee.^ 
 
 or trustee, if any, oi' sneh manor or lands durinii 
 
 the snspenst or eontinyeney if the then imnudiate 
 
 or e.rpeetant estate in fee simple or fee tail in sneh 
 
 siKiiKir Of lands shall in lihe manmtr concur. 
 
 JVie Act 47 iC: IS Viet. e. i\o (the .Y. ir Parishes 
 Aet and Church Buildings Acts Ametidment Act, 
 1S84), amends the Xeie Parishes Acts and Wi« 
 Church Huildinij Aets. 
 
 Now rai'ishos.] Seel. '2. Keelesiastical Com- 
 missioners may irilh consent of tfit) Queen in 
 Conneil dissolve rtiit/ district I'ornwd under Xeir 
 I'artshes .l.-Z.s (i >0 7 Viet. e. '.\l. 7 .(• S Viet, i: 94, 
 19 >(• -0 I'(V/. c. lot, and reincorporate its area, or 
 part thereof, in the parisit or district out oftchich 
 tt icas ivn.'tiluted. or add it to some other district. 
 ^^r^ ;? amends .<ect. 1 of SI <t ;!;i Viet. e. 94. 
 Oliuroh Buililhijrs,] Seet.i. The Commi.<sioners 
 may with content of parliesaffivled by it, n'tYito or 
 filter any deed making provision for the mainten- 
 ance of minii>tirs and clerks out ofjKtc rents under 
 sect. i6ofl .(-2 Vict. c. 107. 
 
 Ac?, ri. Short titles,for Church Building Acts. 
 
 District Parishes — tliarity^-Seheme — - (^i- 
 
 yortiomiunt — Discharge of Urdi r — .lurisdietion — 
 fl-i Glco. 8, c. 101— S <t 9 Viet. e. 70, .<. 'J-'.J AVlu-io 
 under tlie Oliiiroh Building Acts distiiot. parishes 
 linve boon foniiiMl o\it of an oriijiiml jmrish, and 
 <ho Oourt has, nnd<<r sei'l . '.2'2 of tlio Church Bnild- 
 iiij; .Vol. S * 9 \"iot. 0. 70. inodo nn onier appor- 
 tioning a olmritablo gift totwoou those diatriot 
 lunislios and tlio ivniaiudor of the originnl parish, 
 such order is not to he treated as final, but the 
 Court has jurisdiotiou to mako fi-osh ordoi-s from 
 time lo (inu> to meet ll»o ebanjtiug oiroumslnnees 
 of stich (list riot parishes or original jiarisli, eitlier 
 by disoliarginj; or varyinsc former onlers made 
 under the seel ion, — Hv an order made iu 18.'i-, 
 
 CHURCH BUILDING ACTS— continued. 
 upon a petition presented under tlio Cliuroh 
 Buildin;;- Art (8 & 9 X\eL o. 70), and Sir Samuel 
 Eomilly's Aot, (.Ti (^eo. 9, e. 101), the Court net iug- 
 uudor soot, l!2 of the former Aot, apportioned the 
 ineonie of certain oharltios established for tlui 
 lieueilt of the poor of the parish of IC, between 
 live dislriot parishes, whioh had been formed out 
 of tlvat parisii, aud tlio remnindor of that parish, 
 and directed the trustees of the charities to apply 
 the inoouie iu the speoiliod proportions. Further 
 district parishes liaviiif;' been subsequently formed 
 out of the palish of K., one of thoin haviuj' had 
 assigaed to it a portion of one of tho orisiuol live 
 dislriots, iu 1879 a sohenie was settled by llio 
 Charity Commissioners appropriating the ineoino 
 of tho cliarilies to certain objects, the scheme also 
 providius' that the trustees of tho oliarities were, 
 ia llio application of tho income, to have regard 
 lo the apportionment of 1S;)'2. It being found, 
 owiiifT to the oliaiiges that had taken place since 
 the order of IS.'i'i in the populations of the viu-ioiis 
 dislriots constituting i\\o parish of K., impraoti- 
 oablo to carry out tlio scheme of 1879 while 
 roliiining llieapportionmoul diroolod by tlic order 
 of 1 So 2, tho Irusleos prosoutod a petition under 
 llio above Aet for the discharge of that order: — 
 Sold, that the Court had jurisdiction to disohai'go 
 the order, whioli was disoliarged aeoordiiigly. In 
 re C.^Mi'iiKN CiiAuiTiKs. (No. li.) 24 Ch, D. 213 
 — — Devise of land with existing church 
 
 [28 Ch, D, S73 
 .^('c Charity — JIoutjiaix. 0. 
 CHURCH ESTATES COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 ^\'l) ECCLESIASTIOAI, C0M511SS10NEBS — 
 
 Statutes. 
 CHURCHWARDEN— Substitution as promoter 
 
 [7 P. D, 161 
 ^^■(' paaotice — ecolesiastioal — publio 
 Worship Act. 2. 
 CIRCUITY OF ACTION 7 Q, B. D, 636 
 
 A (1 Hill op Kxokan^gk — Transfer. 
 CITY OF LONDON PAROCHIAL CHARITIES 
 ACT. 1883. 
 
 Ao I.ONixix — Cu.^RiTiES — StaUttes. 
 CIVIL CODE OF LOWER CANADA, Art. 501 
 
 [9 App, Cas, 170 
 Av Colonial J,aw— Canada — Qdeuec, 
 S. 
 
 Art, 8274 - 8 App, Cas, 680 
 
 t-^id Colonial Law — Canada — QrEBKC, 
 2, 
 CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE OF LOWER CANADA. 
 Arts, 766, 1178, 1360 - 8 App. Cas, 530 
 
 A',' Colonial Law — Oan.uja — QrEm:o, 
 ,» 
 
 Art, 712 - - 10 App, Cas. 643 
 
 .8(1' Colonial Latt — Canada — ^Quebec, 
 1, 
 
 CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE OF MAURITIUS, 
 Art, 174 - - 8 App, Cas, 296 
 
 Ao Colonial L.vw — MAPMrrus, 1, 
 
 CIVIL SERVICE PENSION, 
 
 8(0 Pension— Statute, 
 
 CLAIMS AND OBJECTIONS-Eegistration of votoi. 
 
 A'(' rARLIAMr.NT — KeO'STRATION — 
 Statutes. 
 
 L 2 
 
( 295 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 296 ) 
 
 CLAM AND BAIT BEDS. 
 
 See Fishery Acts — Statutes. 
 
 CLASS— Gift to. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Class. 
 
 Gift to, at twentv-one 16 Ch. D. 44 
 
 See Will — ^Vesting. 3. 
 
 Gift to — Eemoteness - 18 Ch. D. 441 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 294 ; 28 Ch. D. 436 
 See Will — Pekpetuitt. 1, 2, 4. 
 
 Original or substitutional gift 23 Ch. D. 737 
 
 See Will — Substitutional Gift. I. 
 
 Period of ascertaining 25 Ch. D. 458 ; 
 
 See Will— Condition. 4. [28 Ch. D. 523 
 
 Period of ascertaining— Default of appoint- 
 ment - 24 Ch. D. 244 
 See Settlement — Coxsteuction. 8. 
 
 CLAY — Exception out of conyeyance to railway- 
 company - - - 20 Ch. D. 552 
 See Eailway Company — Kailwats 
 Clauses Act. 5. 
 
 CLAYTON'S CASE— Rule in - 22 Ch. D. 61 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 857 
 See Building Society. 7. 
 
 CLERGYMAN. 
 
 See Cases under Eoolesiastioal Law — 
 Clekgy. 
 
 CLERICAL ERROK 21 Ch. D. 871 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Fokmalities. 7. 
 
 Specification of patent 26 Ch. D. 105 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 1. 
 
 CLOSE OE BANKRUPTCY - 20 Ch. D, 308 ; 
 [22 Ch, D. 686 ; 24 Ch. D. 672 
 See Bankbuptoy — Undischakged Bank- 
 BUPT. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 CLOSE OF INSOLVENCY— After-acquired pro- 
 perty 20 Ch. D. 637 
 See Insolvency. 
 
 CLOSE OF LiaUIDATION 19 Ch. D. 140 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Liquidation. 5. 
 
 CLUB. 
 
 Power of Expulsion of Member — Validity 
 
 of Rule — Conduct injurious to Character and In- 
 terests of Cltdi — Bona fides — Irregularity — Inter- 
 ference of Court.^ The Court will not interfere 
 against the decision of the members of a club 
 professing to act under iheir rules, unless it can 
 be shewn either that the rules are contrary to 
 natural justice, or tl]at what has been done is con- 
 trary to the rules, or that there has been mala 
 fides or malice in arriving at the decision. — One 
 of the rules of a club provided that a general 
 meeting might alter any of the standing rules 
 affecting the general interests of the club, pro- 
 vided this was done with certain formalities and 
 by a certain majority : — Held, that a rule provid- 
 ing for the expulsion of members who should be 
 guilty of conduct injurious to the interest of the 
 club was within the regulation, and could be 
 validly passed by a general meeting. — One of the 
 rules of a club provided that in case the conduct 
 of any member should, in the opinion of the com- 
 mittee, be injurious to the character and interests 
 of the club, the committee should be empowered 
 to recommend such member to resign, and if he 
 should not comply, the committee should then 
 call a general meeting, and if a majority of two- 
 thirds of the meeting agreed by ballot to the 
 
 CLUB — continued. 
 
 exptdsion of such member, he should be expeUe J. 
 — The Plaintiff, a member of the club, sent a 
 pamphlet which reflected on the conduct of S., 
 a gentleman in a high ofSoial position, also a 
 member of the club, to S., at his official address, 
 enclosed in an envelope on the outside of which 
 was printed " Dishonourable Conduct of S." The 
 committee being of opinion that this action was 
 injurious to the character and interests of the 
 club, called upon the Plaintiff for an explanation, 
 which he refused to give. They then called on 
 him to resign, and as he did not comply with 
 their recommendation, they duly summoaed a 
 general meeting, at which a resolution was passed, 
 by the requisite majority expelling the Plaintiff 
 from the club : — Held (affirming the decision of 
 Jessel, M.E.), that the Court would not interfere 
 to restrain the committee from excluding the 
 Plaintiff from the club. — The fact that a decision 
 is unreasonable may be strong evidence of malice, 
 but it is not conclusive, and may be rebutted by- 
 evidence of bona fides. Da-wkins v. Antroeus 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 615 
 Gaming — Baccarat — Liability of proprie- 
 tor and players 13 Q. B. D. 505- 
 
 See Gaming. 2. 
 Licensing Acts — Sale by retail 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 2. [8 Q. B. D. 37S 
 CLYDE NAVIGATION 6 App. Cas. 27S 
 
 See Scotch Law — Kivek. 
 Harbour dues 8 App. Cas. 65S 
 
 See Scotch Law — Hasboue. 2. 
 COAL MINE. 
 
 See Cases imder Mine. 
 Income tax 6 App. Cas. 315 
 
 See Scotch Law — Eevenue. 
 Scotch law - ■ 8 App. Cas. 641 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heeitaele Peopekty- 
 2. 
 
 Scotch law — Liberty of working 
 
 • '[10 App. Cas. 81S 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Mike. 1. 
 Settlement of 23 Ch. D, 58S 
 
 See Settlement — Powees. 1. 
 COCKLES. 
 
 See Fisheey Acts — Statutes. 
 CODE OF TELEGRAPHY— Copyright 
 
 See CoPYBiGHT— Books. 4. [26 Ch. D. G37 
 CO-DEFENDANTS— Costs - 17Ch. D. 600r 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Coukt — Costs. 
 14, 15. 
 CODICIL— Confirmation of wiU 23 Ch, D. 337 
 
 See Will — Eevooation. 2. 
 Incorporation in subsequent codicil 6 P. D. 9 
 
 See Will — Incoepoe ated Documents. 1 . 
 Unattested — Made abroad ( 25 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See PowEE — Execution. 4. 
 Eevocation - ^^ 8 P. D. 169 ; 23 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Will — Eevocation. 1, 2. 
 COFFEE, SUBSTITUTE FOR. 
 
 See Eevenue- Excise— Stahffe. 
 COHABITATION — Consideration of bond— Im- 
 ti morality - 26 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Bond. 
 
( 297 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 298 ) 
 
 COHABITATION— continued. 
 
 Scotch marriage - 6 App. Cas. 489 
 
 See ScoTOu Law — Htisbaot) and Wife. 
 3. 
 COLXATEEAL SECURITY 16 Ch. D. 211, 314, n. 
 
 See MoETQASE — Contract. 4, 5. 
 
 -COLLEGE BOOKS— Entry in - 17 Ch. D. 429 
 
 See Evidence — ^Entby by Deceased 
 Person. 
 
 OOLLEG-IATE BODY — Ecclesiastical Commis- 
 sioners 18 Ch. S. 696 ; 21 Ch, D, 514, n. 
 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 1, 2. 
 
 COLLISION. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Navigation. 
 
 Damages — Loss of market — Kemoteuess 
 
 [9 P. D. lOS 
 
 See Damages — Eemoteness. 1. 
 
 Inspection of lights — Trinity Masters 
 
 [10 P. D. 40 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Inspection 
 op Property. 
 
 Negligence — " Perils of the sea " 
 
 [10 Q. B. S, 521 ; 11 Q. B. S. 47 
 See Ship — Bill op Lading. 1, 3. 
 
 Sailing rules. 
 
 See Cases and Gazettes under Ship — 
 Navigation. 
 
 Thames Knles. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Navigation. 28- 
 31. 
 
 COLLUSION— Judgment obtained by 30 Ch. D. 421 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 18. 
 
 COLONIAL CEBTIFICATES. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 COLONIAL COITET- Sequestration— Bankruptcy 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 665 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Pkooeed- 
 
 INQg. 1. 
 
 COLONIAL COTJBTS OT INQUIRY. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 COLONIAL LAW:— Col. 
 
 I. Canada— Dominion - 298 
 
 II. Canada — New Brunswick 299 
 
 HI. Canada — ^Nova Scotia 299 
 
 IV. Canada — Ontario - - 299 
 
 v. Canada — Quebec -- - 302 
 
 VI. Cape op Good Hope - 306 
 
 Vn. Ceylon - 308 
 
 VIII. Griqualand - - 309 
 
 IX. Honduras _ _ _ 309 
 
 X. Jersey - - _ . 310 
 
 XI. Malta - - - - 310 
 
 XII. Mauritius - 312 
 
 XIII. Natal - - 312 
 
 XIV. New South Wales - - 313 
 XV. New Zealand - - _ 314 
 
 XVI. Queensland - - - 315 
 
 XVII. South Australia - - 316 
 
 COLONIAL LAW—eontinued. [' : ' ; 
 
 XVIII. Straits Settlements - - 316 
 
 XIX. Trinidad - - > 316 
 
 XX. Victoria - - 317 
 
 XXI. West Australia 318 
 
 I. COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— DOMINION. 
 
 1. Legislative Power — British North 
 
 Ameriea Act, 1867, s. 108 — Power of Oanndian 
 Legislature — Construction of Dominion Act, 37 
 Vict. e. 16.] Under the British North America 
 Act, 1867, s. 108, read in connection with the 3rd 
 schedule thereto, all railways belonging to the pro- 
 vince of Nova Scotia, including the railway in suit, 
 passed to and became vested on the 1st of July 
 1867, in the Dominion of Canada; but not for 
 any larger interest therein than at that date 
 belonged to the province. — The railway in suit 
 being at the date of the statutory transfer subject 
 to an obligation on tlie part of the provincial 
 Government, confirmed by provincial Act, 30 Vict. 
 c. 36, to enter into a traffic arrangement with tlie 
 respondent company, the Dominion Government, 
 in pursuance of that obligation entered into a 
 further agreement relating thereto of the 22nd of 
 September, 1871 : — Qusere, whether it was ultra 
 vires the Dominion Parliament by an enactment 
 to that effect to extinguish the rights of the re- 
 spondent company under the said agreement. — 
 But held, that Dominion Act, 37 Vict. c. 16, did 
 not, upon its true construction, purport so to do. 
 And although it authorized a transfer of the 
 railway to the Appellant, it did not enact such 
 transfer in derogation of the Respondent's rights 
 under the agreement of the 22nd of September, 
 1871, or otherwise. Western Counties Kailway 
 Company v. Windsor and Annapolis Eailway 
 Company - 7 App. Cas. 178 
 
 2. Legislative Powers — Dominion Parlia- 
 
 ment — British North America Act, 1867, ss. 91, 
 92, suh.-ss. 9, 13, 16 — Validity of Canada Tem- 
 perance Act, 1878.J Seld, that the Canada Tem- 
 perance Act, 1878, which in effect, wherever 
 throughout the Dominion it is put in force, uni- 
 formly prohibits the sale of intoxicating liquors 
 except in wholesale quantities, or for certain 
 specified purposes, regulates the traffic in the 
 excepted cases, makes sales of liquors in violation 
 of the prohibitions and regulations contained in 
 the Act criminal offences, punishable by fine and 
 for the third or subsequent offence by imprison- 
 ment, is within the legislative competence of the 
 Dominion Parliament.— The objects and scope of 
 the Act are general, viz., to promote temperance 
 by means of a uniform law throughout the 
 Dominion. They relate to the peace, order, and 
 good government of Canada, and not to the class 
 of subjects "property and civil rights." Pro- 
 vision for the special application of the Act to 
 particular places does not alter its character as 
 general legislation. Kussell v. The Queen 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 829 
 3. Legislative Powers — Dominion Parlia- 
 ment — British North America Act, 1867, ss. 91, 92 
 — Canadian Act, 37 Vict. a. 103.] Held, that 
 Canadian Act, 37 Vict. c. 103, which created a 
 corporation with power to carry on certain definite 
 kinds of business within the Dominion was within 
 the legislative competence of the Dominion Parlia- 
 
( 299 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 300 ) 
 
 I. COLONIAL LAW — CANADA— DOMIiriON— 
 
 continued. 
 iment. The fact that the corporation chose to 
 confine the exercise of its powers to one province 
 and to local and provincial objects did not affect 
 its status as a corporation, or operate to render 
 its original incorporation illegal as ultrk vires of 
 the said Parliament. — Held, further, that the cor- 
 poration could not be prohibited generally from 
 acting as such within the province; nor could it 
 be restrained from doing specified acts in viola- 
 tion of the provincial law upon a. petition not 
 directed and adapted to that purpose. Oolonial 
 Building and Investment Associatiox v. At- 
 ■ toeney-General of Quebec 9 App. Cas, 157 
 
 4. Eailway — Canadian Act, 20 Vict. 
 
 c. 227, s. 16—22 Vict. c. 124— Power to levy Tolls 
 — Seasonahleness of Charges.^ Held, that the 
 International Bridge Company was under Cana- 
 dian Act, 20 Vict. c. 227, s. 16, entrusted ^^ifh a 
 general and unqualified power of making bye- 
 laws and regulations as to the use of its bridge 
 and the teims on which it should be used in point 
 of payment ; and that there is nothing in sect. 2 of 
 the amending Act (22 Vict. c. 1 24), when read and 
 construed together with the principal Act, which 
 cuts down that power as to the regulation of the 
 use of the bridge and as to the terms on which it 
 may be used by railway trains. — As to the reason- 
 ableness of charges, the principle is not what profit 
 it may be reasonable for a company to make, but 
 what it is reasonable to charge to the person who 
 is charged. Canada Southern Eailway Com- 
 pany V. International Bbidoe Company 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 723 
 
 II, COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— NEW BRUNS- 
 WICK. 
 
 . Income Tax — 31 Vict. c. 36, s. 4 — Balance 
 
 of Gain over Loss.~} The lax imposed by sect. 4 
 of New Brunswick Act, 31 Viot c. 36, upon " in- 
 come " is leviable in respect of the balance of 
 gain over loss made in the fiscal year, and where 
 no such balance of gain has been made there is 
 no income or fund which is capable of being as- 
 sessed. There is nothing in the said section or 
 in the context which should induce a construc- 
 tion of the word " income," when applied to the 
 income of a commercial business for a year, other- 
 wise than its natural and commonly - accepted 
 sense, as the balance of gain over loss. Lawless 
 V. Sullivan - 6 App. Cas. 373 
 
 ni. COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— NOVA SCOTIA. 
 
 Lease — Nova Scotia Revised Statutes, ith 
 
 Series, c. 9 — BigTit to lease — Priority of Aj>plica- 
 tion.'] Nova Scotia Eevised Statutes, 4th Series, 
 c. 9, contemplates the grant of both licenses and 
 leaseb in all districts whether proclaimed or un- 
 proclaimed. The first applicant, whether for a 
 license or a lease, is entitled. Applications must 
 be made in writing to the Commissioner or Deputy- 
 Commissioner. A licensee is entitled to a lease 
 under sect. 42. "Oocu])ying and staking off" 
 is not a condition precedent to all leases in an 
 unproclaimed district. Mott v. Lookhart 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 668 
 
 IV. COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— ONTARIO. 
 
 1. Jurisdiction — Court of Queen's Bench 
 
 and Supreme Court — Law Reform Act (Ontario) — 
 
 IV. COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— ONTAEIO— 
 
 continued. 
 38 Vict. c. 11 (Canada), s. 11 — Bule to set aside Ver- 
 dict — Misdirection — New Trial.^ Upon a rule nisi 
 calling upon the Plaintiff in an action upon a 
 policy of life insurance to shew cause why a ver- 
 dict obtained by her should not be set aside and a 
 nonsuit or verdict entered for the Defendant pur- 
 suant to the Law Eeform Act, or a new trial had 
 between the parties, said verdict being contrary to 
 law and evidence, and the finding virtually for 
 the Defendant ; and for misdirection in that the 
 jury had not been directed on the evidence to find 
 for the Defendant, the Court of Queen's Bench 
 for Ontario ordered the verdict for the Plaintiff to 
 be set aside and the same to be entered for the 
 Defendant, while the Supreme Court eventually 
 reversed this order and restored the verdict for 
 the Plaintiff, being of opinion that they had no- 
 power to direct a new trial on the ground of the 
 verdict being against the weight of evidence : — 
 Held, that although the Court of Queen's Bench 
 would have had power to enter the verdict in ac- 
 cordance with what they deemed to be the true 
 construction of the findings coupled with other 
 facts admitted or beyond controversy, they had no- 
 power to set aside the verdict for the Plaintiff 
 and direct a verdict to be entered for the Defen- 
 dant in direct opposition to the finding of the 
 jury on a material issue.^Under 38 Vict. c. 11 
 (Canada), the Supreme Court has power to make 
 any order or to give any judgment which the 
 Court below might or ought to have given, and 
 amongst other things to order a new trial on the 
 ground either of misdirection or the verdict being 
 against the weight of evidence ; and that power ia 
 not taken away by sect. 22 in this case, in which 
 the Court below did not exercise any discretion 
 as to the question of a new trial, and where the 
 appeal from their judgment did not relate to that 
 subject. — Although the Privy Council have the 
 right, if they tliink fit, to order a new trial on any 
 ground, that power will not be exercised merely 
 where the verdict is not altogether satisfactory, 
 but only where the evidence so strongly prepon- 
 derates against it as to lead to the conclusion that 
 the jury have either wilfully disregarded the 
 evidence or failed to understand or appreciate it. 
 Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company 
 OP Hertford v. Moore 6 App. Cas. 644 
 
 a. Legislative Power — British North 
 
 America Act,lS&7,ss. 91, SI — Liquor License Act of 
 1877, 0. 181, Beiised Statutes of Ontario — Powers- 
 of Local Legislature — Begulations of Local Board 
 — Imprisonment with Hard Labour.'] Subjeots- 
 which in one aspect and for one purpose fall 
 within sect. 92 of the British North America. 
 Act, 1867, may in another aspect and for another 
 purpose fall within sect. 91. — Busselly. The Qiteen 
 (7 App. Cas. 829) explained and approved. — Heldr 
 that " The Liquor License Act of 1877, c. 181, 
 Eevised Statutes of Ontaiio," Which in respect of 
 'Sects. 4 and .5, makes regulations in the nature of 
 police or municipal regulations of a merely local 
 character for the good government of taverns,. 
 &c., does not in respect of those sections interfere 
 with " the general regulation of trade or com- 
 merce;" hut comes within NoS. 8, 15, and 16, of 
 sect. 92 of the Act of 1867, and is within the 
 
( 301 ) 
 
 IV. COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— ONIAEIO— 
 
 cmitinued. 
 
 powers of the provincial legislature. — Edd, 
 further, that the local legislature had power by 
 the said Act of 1867 to entrust to a Board of Com- 
 missioners authority to enact regulations of the 
 above character, and thereby to create offences 
 and annex penalties thereto. "Imprisonment" 
 in No. 15 of sect. 92 of the Act of 1867 means im- 
 prisonment with or without hard labour. Hodge 
 
 V. The Qteen - - - 9 App, Cas. 117 
 
 3. Legislative Power — British North 
 
 America Act, 1867, ss. 91, 92 — "Property and 
 civil rights — " Begulation of trade and ccnnmerce " 
 — Validity of Ontario Act, 39 Vict. c. 24 — Con- 
 struction — Statutory Condition of Policies of In- 
 surance — Interim Notes.] Sects. 91 and 92 of the 
 British North America Act, 1867, must in regard 
 to the classes of subjects generally described in 
 sect. 91, be read together, and the language of 
 one interpreted and, where necessary, modified 
 by that of the other, so as to reconcile the re- 
 spective powers they contain and give effect to 
 all of them. Each question should be decided 
 as best it can, without entering more largely than 
 is necessary upon an interpretation of the statute. 
 — Seld, that ; — ^In No. 13 of sect. 92, the words 
 "property and civil riglits in the province" in- 
 clude rights arising from contract (whicli are not 
 in express terms included under sect. 91) and are 
 not limited to such rights only as flow from the 
 law, e.g., the status of persons. — In No. 2 of 
 sect. 91, the words "regulation of trade and com- 
 merce " include political arrangements in regard 
 to trade requiring the sanction of parliament, 
 regulation of trade in matters of inter-provinoial 
 concern, and, it may be, general regulation of 
 trade aifeoting the whole dominion; but do not 
 include the regulation of the contracts of a par- 
 ticular business or trade such as the business of fire 
 insurance in a single province, and therefore do not 
 conflict with the power of property and civil rights 
 conferred by sect. 92, No. 13. — Consequently ; — 
 (Ontario) Act, 39 Vict. c. 24, which deals with 
 policies of insurance entered into or in force in 
 the Province of Ontario for insuring property 
 situate therein against fire, and prescribes certain 
 conditions which are to form part of such con- 
 tracts, is a valid Act, applicable to the contracts 
 of all such insurers in Ontario, including corpora- 
 tions and companies, whatever may be their 
 origin, whether incorporated by British authority 
 or by foreign or colonial authority. — Held, further, 
 that the said Ontario Act is not inconsistent with 
 Dominion Act, 38 Vict. o. 20, which requires all 
 insurance companies whether incorporated by 
 foreign dominion or provincial authority to obtain 
 a license, to be granted upon compliance with 
 the conditions prescribed by the Act. — Held, 
 further, that according to the'true construction of 
 the Ontario Act, whatever may be the conditions 
 sought to be imposed by insurance companies, no 
 such conditions shall avail against the statutory 
 conditions, and the latter shall alone be deemed to 
 be part of the policy and resorted to by the in- 
 surers, notwithstanding any conditions of their 
 own, unless the latter are indicated as variations 
 in the manner prescribed by the Act. The penalty 
 for not observing that manner is that the policy 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 (■ 302 ) 
 
 IV. COLONIAL LAW — CANADA— OWTAEIO— 
 
 continued. 
 becomes subject to the statutory conditions, 
 whether printed or not. Where a company has 
 printed its own conditions and failed to print the 
 statutory ones it is not the case that the policy 
 must be deemed to be without any conditions at 
 all.-^An interim note being merely an agreement 
 for interim insurance preliminary to the grant of 
 a policy is not a policy within the meaning of 
 that term in the Ontario Act. "Subject to all 
 the usual terms and conditions of this company " 
 in such note means that such conditions ought to 
 be read into the interim contract to the extent to 
 which they may lawfully be made a part of the 
 policy when issued by following the directions of 
 the statute, subject always to the statutable con- 
 dition that they should be held to be just and 
 reasonable by the Court or judge. Citizens In- 
 surance Co. OF Canada v. Paesons. Queen 
 Insubance Co. v. Pabsons 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 4. Escheats — Bights of the Province — 
 
 British North America Act, ss. 102, 109.] Held, 
 that lands in Canada escheated to the Crown for 
 defect of heirs belong to the province in which 
 they are situated, and not to the Dominion. — At 
 the date of passing the British North America 
 Apt, 1867, the revenue arising from all escheats to 
 the Crown within the tlien province of Canada 
 was subject to the disposal and appropriation of 
 the Canadian Legislature, and not of the Crown. 
 Although sect. 102 of the Act imposed upon the 
 Dominion the charge of the general public 
 revenue as then existing of the provinces ; yet by 
 sect. 109 the casual revenue arising from lands 
 escheated to the Crown after the Union was re- 
 served to the provinces — the words " lands, mines, 
 minerals, and royalties," therein including, 
 according to their true construction, royalties in 
 respect of lands, such as escheats. Attoeney- 
 Genebal of Ontaeio v. Meeceb 8 App. Cas. 767 
 
 5. Timber — Sight to float Timber down the 
 
 Streams — Bight to use Improvements without Com- 
 pensation — Canadian Act, 12 Vict. e. 87, s. 5.] 
 Held, that the right conferred to float timber and 
 logs down streams by Canadian Statute, 12 Vict. 
 c. 87, B. 5, is not limited to such streams as in 
 their natural state, without improvements, during 
 freshets, permit said logs, timber, &c., to be 
 floated down them, but extends to the user with- 
 out compensation of all improvements upon such 
 streams, even when such streams have been 
 rendered floatable thereby. — Boale v. Dickson (13 
 U. C. C. P. 387) overruled.— Such right is only 
 conferred by the statute during freshets; quiere 
 as to the rights at other seasons of the year of 
 the parties, that is, of the lumberers on the one 
 side, and the owners of the improvements and the 
 bed of the stream whereon they have been effected, 
 on the other. Caldwell v. MoLaben 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 392 
 
 V. COLONIAL LAW— CANADA— QUEBEC. 
 
 1. Execution — Sheriff's Sale of an Im- 
 
 meuble — Duty of Vendor to give Possession — Bights 
 of Purchaser.'] A sheriff's sale of a sugar factory 
 with the fixed machinery therein, as of an im- 
 meuble, having taken place on the distinct footing 
 
( 303 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 304 ) 
 
 V. COLONIAL LAW- 
 
 oantinued. 
 
 - CANADA — QUEBEC - 
 
 tliat the property was sold free of all charges, 
 the customs authorities on the next day, acting 
 under a bref d'assistance, seized the whole ma- 
 cliinery and refused to give or allow delivery 
 until the whole duties chargeable in respect of 
 the machinery were paid : — Seld, that whether 
 the claim of the Crown was well founded or not, 
 the seizing and detaining the machinery was in 
 viitue of a warrant ex facie regular, and effec- 
 tually prevented the seller from giving posses- 
 sion, and consequently relieved the purchaser 
 from his obligation to pay the price. — There is 
 nothing either in the Civil or Procedure Code of 
 Lower Canada which casts upon such a purchaser 
 the obligation to pay the price and thereafter get 
 possession fiom a third party as he may. Sect. 
 712 of the C. P. L. C. relates to dispossessing the 
 judgment debtor only. Prevost v. La Compagsie 
 DE Fives-Lille - 10 App. Gas. 643 
 
 2. Imprisonment for Debt — Civil Code 
 
 of Lower Canada, art. 2274 — Consolidated 
 Statutes of Lower Canada, a. 87, o. 12 — Code of 
 Civil Procedure of Lower Canada, arts. 766, 1178, 
 aiid 1360 — Might of Appeal — Special Leave of 
 Appeal.'] The general intention of the Canadian 
 Legislature seems to have been that the Civil Code 
 and the Code of Civil Procedure, which latter 
 Code came into force ten months after the former, 
 should stand together and be construed together; 
 guiere, therefore whether sect. 1860 of the latter 
 Code repealed not only all laws in force before 
 the passing of either Code, but also all parts of the 
 former Code which touched procedure. — Held, that 
 Art. 2274 C. C. should be read as meaning that any 
 debtor imprisoned or held to bail in a cause wherein 
 judgment for a sum of |80 or upwards is rendered, 
 is obliged to make a statement under oath, and 
 a declaration of abandonment of all his property 
 according to the rules and subject to the penalty 
 of imprisonment in certain cases provided inc. 87 
 of the Consolidated Statutes until the Code of 
 Civil Procedure comes into force and then in the 
 manner and form specified in the Code of Civil 
 Procedure ; the italicized words being interpolated 
 so as to fulfil (see art. 12 of C. C.) the intention 
 of the Legislature and to attain the object for 
 which the article was passed. — Consequently the 
 penalty of a year's imprisonment cannot be im- 
 posed on a person refusing to perform the duty 
 prescribed by sect. 766 of the C. C. P., inasmuch 
 as the same is not authorized by any of the 
 provisions of the said Code. As to how he is com- 
 pellable to perform such duty, — quxre. — Held, 
 that under Art. 1178 C. C. P., no appeal lies as 
 of right from a judgment of the Court of Qneen's 
 Bench for Lower Canada in the matter of a 
 penalty of imprisonment. Special leave of ap- 
 peal granted on the ground of the importance of 
 the question at issue. Caktee v. Molson 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 530 
 
 3, Legislative Power — Corporation — 
 
 British North America Act, 1867, ss. 91, 92, 129— 
 Canada Act, 22 Vict. c. 66—Livalidity of Quebec 
 Act, 38 Vict. c. 64 — Bight to sue — Po-wers of Synod.] 
 The powers conferred by the British North 
 America Act, 1867, s. 129, upon the provincial 
 Legislatures of Ontario and Quebec, to repeal 
 
 V. COLONIAL LAW — CANADA — QTJEBEC — 
 
 continued. 
 and alter the statutes of the old Parliament of 
 Canada, are precisely co-extensive with the powers 
 of direct legislation with which those bodies are 
 invested by the other clauses of the Act of 1867. 
 —Held, that 22 Vict. o. 66 (of the Parliament of 
 Canada), which created a corporation, having its 
 corporate existence and lights in the provinces of 
 Ontario and Quebec, could not be repealed or 
 modified by the Legislature of either province or 
 by the conjoint operation of both, but only 
 by the Parliament of the Dominion. — Held, 
 further, that the Quebec Act, 38 Vict. c. 64, 
 which assumed to repeal and amend the said 
 22 Vict. c. 66 and (1) to destroy a corporation 
 created by the Canadian Parliament and substi- 
 tute a new one ; (2) to alter materially the class 
 of persons interested in the corporate funds, and 
 not merely to impose conditions upon the transac- 
 tion of business by the corporation within the 
 province, was invalid. — Citizens Insurance Com- 
 pany of Canada v. Parsmis (Law Eep. 7 App. 
 Cas. 96), approved and distinguished — In a suit 
 for a declaration of (he invalidity of the Quebec 
 Act and relief : held, that the Plaintiff as a con- 
 tributor to the fund affected by 22 Vict. c. 66, 
 was entilled to sue, and that his suit was not 
 barred by reason of the Quebec Act having been 
 passed in conformity with the resolution of a 
 synod of the Church to which he belonged. 
 dobie v. boakd for the management of the 
 Temporalities Fund of tbe Presbyterian 
 CnuRdH OF Canada 7 App. Cas. 136 
 
 4. — Legislative Power — • British North 
 America Act, 1867, ss. 65, 92, sub-ss. 2, 14 — 
 Quebec Act, 43 & 44 Vict. c. 9 — Duty upon Ex- 
 hibits.'] Held, that Quebec Act (43 & 44 Vict, 
 e. 9) which imposed a duty of 10 cents, upon 
 every exhibit filed in Court in any action depend- 
 ing therein is ultra vires of the provincial legisla- 
 ture. Attohnet-Genebal for Qdebec v. Keed. 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 141 
 
 5. Mortgage — Notice — Bight of Interven- 
 tion — Sect. 154 of Civil Procedure Code.] Where 
 a registered deed referred to and by reference 
 incorporated certain other transfers and agree- 
 ments whereby it appeared that the deed, though 
 professedly one of sale, was in substance and 
 reality the triinsfer to the ostensible purchaser 
 of an estate which had been specifically allotted 
 to him as part of his share of the residue under 
 his father's will ; held that a mortgagee from the 
 said purchaser must be treated as having full 
 knowledge that the property was by the vrill 
 gr^vc de substitutions in favour of the mortgagor's 
 wife and family, liis usufruct being not arrestable 
 for his debts, especially as the mortgagee's agent 
 was personally cognizant of the traiLsfers and agree- 
 ments of which the deed gave notice. — Certain 
 rents and dividends of the said mortgagor having 
 been attached, held that under sect. 154 of the 
 Civil Procedure Code those who were only entitled 
 under the will to the corpus of the property and 
 the shares had no right to intervene in a pro- 
 ceeding between the mortgagor and mortgagee to 
 declare such rents and dividends insaisissables 
 during the mortgagor's life. Carter v. Molson. 
 Holmes v. Carter 10 App. Cas. 664 
 
( 305 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 306 ) 
 
 V. COLONIAL LAW — CANADA — QVEBEC — 
 
 continued. 
 
 6. Power — Power to apportion amongst a 
 
 Class includes Power of Exclusion — Illusory Ap- 
 pointments — Will — Construction.'] Where a tes- 
 tator domiciled in Lower Canada bequeathed a 
 portion of his residuary estate to his executors upon 
 trust to '' pay upon the death of his son, the capital 
 thereof to such son's children in such proportion 
 as my said son shall decide by his last will and 
 testament, but in default of such decision then 
 share and share alike as their absolute property 
 for ever " : — Held, that the son had not only the 
 right to apportion the capital between all his 
 children, as well those of his then existing mar- 
 riage as those of any futm'e marriage, but also 
 the right to dispose of the property in favour of 
 •one or more of his children to the exclusion of the 
 others. — The English doctrine as to illusory and 
 unsubstantial appointments under a power is not 
 and never was any part of the old French law or 
 of the law of Lower Canada. — An English will 
 by a testator domiciled in Lower Canada must be 
 interpreted with regard to the law of Lower 
 Canada, and not tliat of England. — Martin v. Lee 
 (1-1 Moore, P. C. 142) explained. MoGibbon v. 
 Abbott ■ 10 App. Cas. 653 
 
 7. Eights of Barristers — Quantum meruit 
 
 — Canada Petition of Right Act, 1876, sect. 19, 
 suh-s. 3.] According to the law of Quebec, a 
 inember of the Bar is entitled, in the absence of 
 special stipulation, to sue for and recover on a 
 quantum merait in respect of professional services 
 rendered by him, and may lawfully contract for 
 any rate of remuneration which is not contra bonos 
 mores, or in violation of the mles of the Bar. — 
 Where a member of the Bar of Lower Canada 
 ^Quebec) was retained by the Government as one 
 of their counsel before the Fisheries Commission 
 sitting in Nova Scotia, held, that in the absence 
 of stipulation to the contrary, express or implied, 
 ■he must be deemed to have been employed upon 
 the usual terms according to which such services 
 are rendered, and that his status in respect both 
 of right and remedy was not affected either by 
 the lex loci contractus or the lex loci solutionis. — 
 Held, further, that the Petition of Kight, Canada, 
 Act, 1876, sect' 19, sub-sect. 3, does not in such 
 case bar the remedy against the Crown by peti- 
 -tion.— Kennedy v. Broun (13 G. B. (N.S.) 677) 
 commented upon. The Queen v. Doutee 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 745 
 
 8, Eiparian Proprietors — Servitudes — 
 
 Accumulation of Flow of Water — Civil Code of 
 Lower Canada, sect. 501.] By sect. 501 of the Civil 
 Code of Lower Canada the proprietor of the higher 
 land can do nothing to aggravate the servitude of 
 the lower land. Where the Plaintiffs, being en- 
 titled to a flow of water from their land, executed 
 certain works which had the effect of accumu- 
 " luting the volume of water, and probably of in- 
 creasing the depth of its channel : — Held, that to 
 the extent of such accumulation and consequent 
 increase of flow, they had aggravated the servi- 
 tude of the lower land, and to that extent hswi no 
 ii"ht to demand a free course for the water sent 
 down by them. Having insisted on their right 
 to the existing flow, and refused to allege and 
 prove a case for relief pro tanto, their suit was 
 
 V, COLONIAL LA-W — CANADA — QUEBEC — 
 
 continued. 
 dismissed with costs. Fkeohbttb v. La Oom- 
 PASNIE Manufaotueieee de St. Hyaointhe 
 
 [9 App, Cas. 170 
 
 9. Timber Limits — Consolidated Statutes 
 
 of Canada, c. 23 — Priority of Licenses — Warranty 
 on Sale.^ On a sale of "timber limits" held 
 under licenses in pursuance of the Consolida- 
 ted Statutes of Canada, c. 23, a clause of simple 
 warranty (garantie de tons troubles generalement 
 quelconquea) does not operate to protect the pur- 
 chaser against eviction by a person claiming to 
 be entitled under a prior license to a p ortion of 
 the limits sold. Ddookdit -v. Ddpby 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 160 
 
 10. Turnpike Roads — Canadian Act 
 
 (16 Viet. c. 235) — Debentures issued hy Trustees 
 of the Quehec Turnpike Soads — LidbiUty of Pro- 
 vince.'] Held, that the debentures in suit which 
 had been issued under the authority of the 
 Canadian Act (16 Yict. c. 285) by the trustees of 
 the Quebec turnpike roads, appointed under 
 Ordinance 4 Vict, c 17, and empowered thereby 
 to borrow moneys " on the credit and security of 
 the tolls thereby authorized to be imposed, and of 
 other moneys which might come into the posses- 
 sion and be at the disposal of the said trustees, 
 under and by virtue of the Ordinance, and not to 
 be paid out of or chargeable against the general 
 revenue of this proviuoe," did not create a liability 
 on the part of the province in respect of either the 
 principal or the interest thereof: — Held, further, 
 that tlie province of Canada had not by its con- 
 duct and legislation recognised its liability to pay 
 the same. The 7th section of the Act 16 Vict, 
 expressly took away the power which had been 
 conferred by the 27th section of the Ordinance to 
 make advances out of provincial funds for the 
 payment of interest, and by its proviso distin- 
 guished these debentures from tliose which had a 
 provincial guai antee. The Queen v. Belleau 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 473 
 
 TI. COLONIAL LA-W— CAPE OF GOOD HOPE. 
 
 1. Church of South Africa — Endowments 
 
 of the Church of England in South Africa — Con- 
 struction of Articles of Constitution — Effect of 
 Proviso repudiating Privy Council Decisions.] The 
 Church of the Province of South Africa is not a 
 Church in connection with the Church of England 
 as by law established. — Although there are in the 
 articles of the constitution of the Church of the 
 Province of South Africa general expressions 
 affirming in the strongest way the connection of 
 the Church of the Province with the Church of 
 England, and its adherence to the faith and 
 doctrine of the Church of England, yet by the 
 proviso in the said articles to the effect that in 
 the interpretation of such faith and doctrine it is 
 not bound by the decisions of the tribunals of the 
 Church of England, it is practically declared that 
 the connection is not maintained. — In a suit by 
 the Bishop of Graham's Town (one of the dioceses 
 of the Church of the Province) against the 
 officiating minister in possession of the church of 
 St. George in Graham's Town to enforce sentences 
 of the Diocesan Court of Graham's Town, whereby 
 the Defendant, a member of the Church of the 
 
( 307 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 308 ) 
 
 VI. COLOKIAI LAW— CAPE OF GOOD HOPE— 
 
 continued, 
 Proyiuce, subject to its constitution and canons, 
 and to the episcopal jurisdiction of the Plaintiff, 
 had been found guilty of contumacious disobe- 
 dience, suspended from his ministerial functions 
 until he should engage not to repeat the offence 
 of preventing the bishop from presiching or 
 ministering in the church of St. George, and 
 finally excommunicated : it appeared that the 
 church of St. George had been duly dedicated to 
 ecclesiastical purposes in connection with the 
 Church of England as by law established, and for 
 no other purposes, and was held by trustees for 
 those purposes : — Held, that the Plaintiff had no 
 right in the said church of St. George, and that 
 his suit must be dismissed. Mereiman v. Wil- 
 liams - - - - 7 App. Cas. 484 
 
 2. Equitable Jarisdiction — Bemoval of 
 
 Trustees.'] There is a jurisdiction in Courts of 
 Equity to remove old trustees and substitute new 
 ones in cases requiring such a remedy. — The 
 main principle on which such jurisdiction should 
 be exercised is the welfare of the beneficiaries 
 and of the trust estate. — Case in which their 
 Lordships, overruling the decree of the Court 
 below, held that the trustees (the Board of 
 Executors of Cape Town, a body incorporated 
 by an ordinance of the Cape of Good Hope) 
 should, in the special circumstances of the case, 
 be removed without costs of appeal, the Appellant 
 having persisted in charges of fraud which the 
 evidence did not sustain. Letteestedt v. 
 Bboeks 9 App. Cas. 371 
 
 3. Principal and Agent — Cape of Good 
 
 Hope Act Ho/ 1863, s. 2 — Construction of Con- 
 tract.'] Where a contract between the Defendant 
 and E. in terms purported to be one of guarantee 
 or agency, the Defendant guaranteeing the sale 
 of E.'s property in whole or by lots at a fixed price, 
 E. giving the Defendant a power of attorney to 
 deal with the property as he thinks fit, and agree- 
 ing that he should receive any surplus over and 
 above the fixed price as his commission on and 
 recompense for the said guarantee ; but the real 
 effect of the transaction was to give E. every 
 right which a vendor could legally claim, and 
 to confer on the Defendant every right which a 
 purchaser could legally demand : — Seld, that the 
 defendant was liable to pay duty on his purcliase- 
 money under Act H of 1863, sect. 2. Hutton v. 
 LiPPEBT - - 8 App. Cas. 309 
 
 4. Watercourse — Prescription — Eoman- 
 
 Dutch Law — Bights of the Owner of Springs — • 
 Bights of Biparian Proprietors'^ The Eespondent's 
 predecessor in title in 1820 constructed a water- 
 course on Crown lands, by means of which he 
 diverted the water of two springs which rose 
 thereon, so that they mingled with the waters of 
 a private stream admittedly belonging to the 
 farm, of -sriiich the Respondent owned a portion. 
 He did so with the license of those who acted as 
 agents for the Government, in order to have the 
 permanent use of the water for his farm, and con- 
 tinued his user for the period of prescription, after 
 which the Respondent applied for and obtained 
 fi'om the Colonial Government a renewal of the 
 license originally granted to his predecessor: — 
 Held, that the user of the diverted water by the 
 
 VI. COLONIAL LAW— CAPE OF GOOD HOPE— 
 
 continued. 
 Eespondent's predecessor was not precarious, and 
 that the act of the Respondent had not deprived! 
 him of the prescriptive right acquired by the pre- 
 decessor so as to enable the Crown to give to the 
 Plaintiffs in 1881 a title to the said water. — ^It is 
 very doubtful whether, by Dutch-Roman law, the 
 owner of the sources of streams has exclusive 
 dominion over their waters. They are at least 
 subject to rights of user acquired by prescription, 
 and probably also to the rights which English 
 law recognises in riparian ■ proprietors to water 
 fiowing in a known or definite channel. — Miner v. 
 Gilmour (12 Moore's Ind. Ap. Ca. 131) and 'Van 
 Breda v. Silberbauer (Law Rep. 3 P. 0. 84) ap- 
 proved. — When a prescriptive right is once ac- 
 quired, it cannot be lost by any subsequent act 
 not amounting to a surrender, even thougli such 
 act would have, previous to the acquisition of such 
 right, rendered the user precarious. Commis- 
 sioners 01' Fbench Hoek v. Hugo 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 33e 
 
 Vn. COLONIAL LAW— CEYLON. 
 
 1. Adverse Possession — Ceylon Ordi- 
 nances, No. 8 of 1834, iVo._22 of 1871— Ads of 
 Ownership.] Ceylon Ordinances No. 8 of 1834, 
 and No. 22 of 1871, require that a Defendant 
 should have had ten years' undisturbed and un- 
 interrupted possession, meaning actual and not 
 ideal possession, of land in dispute in order to b& 
 entitled to the benefit of such Ordinances. Al- 
 though acts done upon parts of a district of land 
 may be evidence of possession of the whole, yet 
 as regards lands within a disputed boundaiy acts 
 of ownership by either party outside the boundary 
 are no evidence of title to the lands within it. 
 Claek v. Elphinstone - 6 App. Cas. 164 
 
 2. Judgment Debtor — Execution — Ceyhn 
 
 Ordinance, No. 4, 1867, ss. 53, 54 — Application to 
 set aside Sale for Irregularity — Bule as to Thirty 
 Days imperative.] By Ceylon Ordinance No. 4, 
 1867, sects, 53, 54, any application by a judgment 
 debtor to set aside a sale in execution of immovable 
 property must be made within thirty days, and 
 the absence of the judgment debtor from Ceylon is 
 no excuse for non-compliance with the positive 
 terms of the Ordinance. Sillert v. Hakmanis 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 99' 
 
 3. Presumption of Marriaga — Onus Fro- 
 
 bandi.] According to the Roman-Dutch law 
 there is a presumption in favour of marriage 
 rather than of concubinage. According to the 
 law of Ceylon, as in England, where a man and 
 woman are proved to have lived together as man 
 and wife, tlie law will presume, unless the con- 
 trary be clearly proved, that they were living 
 together in consequence of a valid marriage, and 
 not in a state of concubinage. Where it is proved 
 that they have gone through a form of marriage, 
 and thereby shewn an intention to be married, 
 held, that those who claim by virtue of the mar- 
 riage are not bound to prove that all necessary 
 ceremonies have been performed. Sastby Ve- 
 laideb Abonbqaby v. Sembeouttt Yaigalie 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 864 
 
 4. Bight to sue the Crown — Boman-Butch 
 
 Law of Holland — Bight of Set-off bettoeen (lie 
 
( 309 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 310 ) 
 
 VII. COLONIAL LAW— CEYLON— cojiW«i(S(Z. 
 Crornn and the Subject.'] There is no authority 
 for saying that the Koman-Dutch law of Holland, 
 •which Was in force in Ceylon at the date of its 
 conquest by the British, and has not since been 
 abrogated, empowered the subject to sue the 
 Government. — But since the conquest a very ex- 
 teiiisive practice of suing the Crown has sprung 
 up and has been reodgiiised by the Legislature : 
 see the 117th section of Ordinance No. 11 of 
 1868, whioli re-enacted an Ordinance of 1856 :— 
 Beld, therefore, that such suits are now incorpo- 
 rated ;into the law of the land. — Held, further, 
 that where the Crown is Plaintiff and the De- 
 fendants sue in reconvention, the Court is not 
 bound to give separate judgments, but may set 
 off the amoiint awarded to the Defendants against 
 that awarded to theCrown, and give judgment 
 for the balance. Hettihewage Appu v. The 
 QoBEs'fe Advocate 9 App, Cas. 871 
 
 VIII. COLONIAL LAW— GEIftUALAND. 
 
 Grant of Laai—GHqualand West — Inde- 
 
 feaeible British Kile — Conditions of Graiit.'] 
 Held, that the Plaintiff, who liad obtained a 
 judgment from the Land Court of Griqualand 
 West in respect of certain lands, was entitled to 
 the grant of an indefeasible British title thereto 
 under the seal of the province in confirmation of 
 the Presidential grant of the 3rd of December, 
 1862 ; and that he was not compellable to accept 
 a title containing conditions not expressed in 
 that grant, and not shewn to be incidents im- 
 plied therein,, nor to be duties or regulations 
 since established concerning lands granted upon 
 the like conditions. — Seld, further, that he 
 might reasonably object to the clause " that the 
 issue of this title without the express reservation 
 to Goyernment of its rights to all precious stones 
 gold, or silver found on or under the surface of 
 the said land shall in no degree prejudice the 
 position of the Government in regard to the 
 same." — Qusere, whether the Civil Commissioner 
 of the district was the proper officer to be sued in 
 respect of title to lands in his district; but, held, 
 that he as Respondent could not by such objection 
 defend the judgment which he had obtained or 
 defeat an appeal therefrom. Webb v. Wright 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 318 
 
 K. COLONIAL LAW— HONDUBAS. 
 
 Territorial Sovereignty — Adverse Posses- 
 sion against the Crovm.] Held, in an information 
 of intrusion relating to land in British Honduras, 
 that the Defendants having shewn sixty years' 
 adverse possession there from before 1817, by 
 •themselves and their predecessors in title, with- 
 out disturbance or effectual claim by the Crown, 
 such information must be dismissed. Although 
 British Honduras was formerly declared to be a 
 British, Colony, and formally annexed to British 
 dominions ' by a proclamation of Her Majesty, 
 dated the 12th of May, 1862, yet grants of land 
 . having been made therein by the Crown as early 
 as 1817; held, overruling the opinion of the 
 Supreme Court, that the territorial sovereignty 
 of the Crown must be deemed to have been ac- 
 quired in or before that year. Attorney- 
 General FOR British Honduras v. Bbistowe 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 143 
 
 X. COLONIAL LAW— JERSEY. 
 
 1. Criminal Cases — Practice - 
 
 Lea/ue to appeal— Order in Council of ISth of 
 May, 1572.] An order of Court directing a De- 
 fendant to plead to an information (or' other 
 analogous proceeding), for libel, and directing 
 that having pleaded he should be tried without ai 
 iury, iS' not a specific sentence within the mean- 
 ing of the Order of Council of 13th of May, 1572. 
 Special leave to appeal therefrom refused. — 
 Qussre, as to granting special leave to appeal in 
 criminal cases in Jersey, or where there has been 
 no definitive sentence. Esnoot v. Attornet- 
 Generai; FOR Jersey - - 8 App, Cas. 304u 
 
 2. Public Begister — Megistration by 
 
 Order of Court — Hypothec.'] The legal effect of 
 the registration in the public register of Jersey 
 pursuant to an order of the Boyal Court of a 
 marriage contract, is to confer a right of hypothec- 
 in respect of its provisions from the date of the 
 said order. Simon v. Vernon 8 App. Cas. 642- 
 
 i 3. Set-off — Liquid Demand.] According: 
 
 to the law of Jersey a claim by way of compensa- 
 tion or set-off is, admissible, when it is for a liquidl 
 demand.' — Such claims having been dismissed by 
 the Court below the case was remanded to ascer- 
 tain whether they were in whole or in part liquidE 
 debts or debts " inconteste'es on du moins incon- 
 testables " as alleged by the Appellants. Dyson 
 V. GoDFBAY - 9 App. Cas. 726 
 
 XL COLONIAL LAW— MALTA. 
 
 1, . Primogenitura— OonsirMcfe'oB ofI)eed.'\ 
 
 B. by deed (1678) gave all his property to his 
 nephew, reserving the right quoad the " bona 
 stabilia " to establish a primogenitura. After 
 the death of his nephew he executed a deed 
 (1686) which recited the gift and the death of 
 the donee without establishing the primogeni- 
 tura, and directed that at the death of the donor, 
 the donee's eldest son Martinus Antouius should! 
 succeed. The deed then contained the following 
 clauses, under the first of which N. succeeded a» 
 a primogenituB mas and died in 1875.-^1. " Scili- 
 cet quoddeindecenseantur bona predicta vinculata 
 et fideicommisso perpetuo supposita pro omnibus 
 primogenitis maribus legittimis et naturalibus, et; 
 ex legittimo matrimonio nascituris, per directam 
 lineam ex dicto Martino Antonio de primogenito 
 in primogenitum in infinitum, cunotisque futuris. 
 temporibus, et sine uUa temporis perfinitione." — - 
 3. "Et in defectu primogeniti maris ex dictO' 
 Domino Martino Antonio, dicta bona pervenire- 
 debeant ac perveniant et pervenire debeant ad 
 filios ejusdem Domini Martini Antonj, legit- 
 timos et naturales, et ex legittimo ■ matrimonio 
 nascituros quousque in secundo gradu nepotum 
 dicti Domini Martini Antonij nasceretur mascnlus- 
 ex aliqua de filiabus dicti D. Martini Antonij 
 legittimis et naturalibus et ex legittimo matri- 
 monio, cui nepoti nato statim dicta bona devol- 
 vant cum onere ut supra transeundi de primo- 
 genito nepote dicti Martini Antonj in primo- 
 genitum nepotem legittimura et de legittimo 
 ■ matrimonio nasoiturum."— On the death without 
 issue in 1875 of N.'s daughter's son who had 
 succeeded under clause 3, the succession opened. 
 — In a suit by 6. the daughter's son (born 1861) 
 of a younger sister of the deceased, claiming aa 
 
( 311 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 312 ) 
 
 XI. COLONIAL LAW- IS. kZT A.— continued. 
 the male descendant in the nearest oollateralline, 
 the Defendant, the son (born 1834) of the youngest 
 sister of the deceased, oontendeii that he was 
 •entitled by priority of birth under the 3rd clause, 
 and denied that G. was a primogenitus mas within 
 the meaning of the deed: — Seld, that G. was 
 ■entitled to the estate by virtue of the ordinary 
 rules of law applicable to the primogenitura 
 established by clause 1. Although the primo- 
 -genitura as created by clause 1 is so far qualified 
 in favour of males as in the events which happened 
 to devolve on G. in preference to his mother, it is 
 not an agnatial primogenitura so as to prevent 
 females from constituting lines of descent ; line is 
 ■to be considered in preference to degree, sex, or 
 age ; and therefore G. succeeds, being in a nearer 
 collateral line, viz., that of the elder sister, than 
 the Appellant, who though born first is in the line 
 of the younger sister. — A deviation from the 
 ordinary mode in which a primogenitura descends 
 is not to be construed as interfering with that 
 iQode of descent more than is necessary to give 
 ■effect to such deviatien ; and therefore assuming 
 that in the event contemplated by clause 3 females 
 are to take collectively, it by no means follows 
 that all or any of them are prevented from forming 
 lines of descent. The clause applies only to the 
 ■case therein stated, viz., when upon the opening 
 of the succession there is no " primogenitus mas," 
 in which case the estate devolves on females who 
 are to be displaced by the first male bom from 
 any of them. G. being a primogenitus mas in 
 existence at the death of the deceased, clause 3 
 had no operation. Apap v. Steickland 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 156 
 
 2. Primogenitura — Construction of Deed.'] 
 
 The general rule governing the succession to a 
 primogenitura is that line is to be considered in 
 "the first place, degree in the second, sex in the 
 third, and age in the fourth. A prescribed de- 
 viation therefrom must not be construed as inter- 
 fering therewith more than is necessary to give 
 effect to the deviation. — The deed of foundation 
 of a primogenitura prescribed that sex should be 
 preferred to line and degree, and gave certain 
 powers of nomination. Under clause 3, which 
 ■directed that in the events which happened the 
 succession should go " ad unum e masculis descen- 
 dentibus a feminis de eadem linea masculina ;" N. 
 succeeded. The clause further provided that in 
 subsequent successions the order of line should be 
 the direct before the collateral, the nearer colla- 
 teral before the more remote. — The deed contained 
 also the following clause : — 5. " Quod quilibet 
 possessor pro tempore prassentis primogeniturse, si 
 fuerit masculus, possit nominare et eligere suum 
 iimmodiatum successorem aliquem vel aliquam ex 
 vocatis in prsesenti instrumento ad sui libitum, 
 etiam si sit sibi magis remotus vel remota, vel 
 minor natu, dummodo non pervertat ordinem voca- 
 tionis et prjElationis superius prajscriptum ; et non 
 facta hujusmodinominationeetelectionecenseatur 
 semper nominatus magis proximus ultimo posses- 
 aori pro tempore in gradu naturae, et in paritate 
 gradus major Estate." — On the death in 1875 of N. 
 without issue, the succession opened. — In a suit 
 by the Eespondent, the son (born 1834) of N.'s 
 youngest sister claiming as nearest in degree of 
 
 XI. COLONIAL LAW— MALTA— confe'raetZ. 
 nature; the Appellant, the grandson (born 1861) 
 of an elder sister of N. contended that he was en- 
 titled by priority of line : — Held, that the Appellant 
 was entitled. — The devolution of theprimogenitura 
 in the absence of nomination must be ascertained 
 by construing clause 5 relatively to the power of 
 nomination given thereby, which merely enables 
 the possessor to regulate the order of succession 
 within the prescribed order of lines. Priority of 
 line is always to be regarded, and in the absence 
 of nomination priority in degree, and then in age 
 must also be attended to. Stbiokland v. Apap 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 106 
 
 XII. COLONIAL LAW— HATTRITITJS. 
 
 1. Arbitration — Tierce Opposition — 
 
 Judgment Creditors claiming under their Debtor 
 are hound hy Ms acts — Civil Procedure Code, 
 Art. 474.] Where accounts between a firm and 
 one of its debtors had been settled by a reference 
 and an award made thereunder, Mid, that the 
 judgment creditors of the firm could not without 
 alleging fraud or collusion in the proceedings on 
 the reference be admitted to impeach the award 
 by way of tierce opposition or otherwise. Al- 
 though they were not parties to the reference and 
 were hostile to the firm down to judgment, yet by 
 virtue of the judgment they derived rights under 
 a party to the reference within the meaning of 
 Art. 474 of the Code de Procedure Civile. Mak- 
 TiN V. BouiAUGER 8 App. Cas. 296 
 
 2. Bankrupt — Mauritius Ordinance of 
 
 1853, No. 33, ss. 40, 43, 50— Validity of Adjudica- 
 tion.] The Court of Bankruptcy of the Mauritius 
 has jurisdiction to order adjudication against a 
 firm on the petition of the sole member of that 
 firm. Such order is valid against the petitioner 
 personally. — Under sects. 40, 43, and 50 of Ordi- 
 nance No. 33 of 1853, a creditor cannot challenge 
 the validity of such order on the ground that the 
 bankrupt has not made it appear to the satisfac- 
 tion of the Court that his estate is sufficient to 
 pay his creditors at least five shillings in the 
 pound clear of all bankruptcy charges. Such 
 qualified solvency is not a fact to be put in issue 
 and proved, but provisionally to appear to the 
 satisfaction of the Court, the propriety of whose 
 conclusion cannot by any process be contested. 
 Okiental Bank Coepokation v. Eichee & Co. 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 413 
 
 XIII. COLONIAL LAW— NATAL. 
 
 1. ■ Public Officer — Jurisdiction — Suit 
 
 against Puhlie Officer in 7ws Official Capacity — 
 Liability of Servants of tlie Crown — Petition of 
 Bight.] In a suit against Her Majesty's Deputy 
 Commissary-General for Natal, and as such repre- 
 senting Her Majesty's Commissariat Department, 
 to recover certain moneys as the price or hire of 
 certain waggons and oxen, for the carriage of cer- 
 tain goods, for damages for illegal acts of Defen- 
 dant or his employes, and for general damage : — 
 Seld, on exceptions by the Defendant to the juris- 
 diction of the Court and to the declaration that 
 the Defendant could not be sued, either person- 
 ally, or in his official capacity, upon a contract 
 entered into by him on behalf of the Commis- 
 sariat Department ; and that there was no cause 
 of action against him. — The Government revenue 
 
( 313 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 3U ) 
 
 Xni. COIONIAL L&.'Vr—SA.TA-L— continued. 
 cannot be reached by a suit against a public 
 officer in bis official capacity. — Quasre, ■whether 
 the Court ■would have bad jurisdiction if a peti- 
 tion of right had been presented and the Crown 
 bad ordered that right should be done. Palmeb 
 V. Hutchinson 6 App. Cas. 619 
 
 3. Surety Bond by a Woman — Effect of 
 
 Non-Renunciation of Legal Privileges.^ By the 
 law ■which prevails in Natal a woman cannot be 
 effectually bound as a surety, unless she specially 
 renounces the privileges secured to her by the 
 Senatus Consultum Villeianum and other rules 
 of l&w. — Where a husband under a general power 
 of attorney from bis wife professed to bind her 
 personally as surety under a mortgage bond duly 
 executed, held, that, there being no authority to 
 renounce as aforesaid, express or implied, given 
 by tlie power of attorney, such deed was void. 
 Maokellae v. Bond 9 App. Cas. 715 
 
 XIT. COLONIAL LAW— NEW SOUTH WALES. 
 
 1. Cro-wn Lands — Dedication of Land to 
 
 Public Purposes hy the Crown — Presumption from 
 User — Crown Lands Alienation Act, 1861, ss. 3, 5 
 — 5 & 6 Vict. c. 36.] From long-continued user 
 of a way by the public, whether land belongs to 
 to the Crown or to a private owner, dedication 
 from the Crown or private owner, as the case may 
 be, in the absence of anything to rebut the pre- 
 sumption may and ought to be presumed. — The 
 same presumption from user should be made in 
 the case of Crown lands in the colony of New 
 South Wales, apart from the Crown Lands 
 Alienation Act, 1861, though the nature of the 
 user and the weight to be given to it vary in 
 each particular case. — Assuming that the effect 
 of the 3rd and 5th sections of the Act is that any 
 dedication by the Crown must since 1861 be in 
 manner prescribed by the statute : — Seld, that 
 from a continuous user of twenty-one years before 
 the statute continued since 1861 down to the time 
 of the action without any interruption or inter- 
 ference on the part of tlie Crown, a dedication 
 prior to the statute, and at a time when the Crown 
 had power to dedicate, might be presumed ; and 
 that that presumption was strengthened by the 
 subsequent user. — 5 & 6 Vict. c. 36, of the Im- 
 perial Parliament leaves the power of the Crown 
 with regard to public roads as it existed by the 
 common law, and does not interfere with its right 
 to dedicate lands for that purpose. Tubner ■». 
 Walsh 6 App. Cas. 636 
 
 2. ■ Crown Lands — Lands forfeited to the 
 
 Crown cannot he conditionally sold— Crown Lands 
 Alienation Act, 1861, s. 13.] Lands taken under 
 a conditional sale and afterwards forfeited to the 
 Crown are not open to a conditional purchase 
 under sect. 13 of the Crown Lands Alienation 
 Act, 1861. The Cro'wn has, under the 18th sec- 
 tion, the option either to sell them by public 
 auction or to retain them in its own hands. 
 Blaokbuen v. Flavelle 6 App. Cas. 628 
 
 3. Legislative Po^wers— 11 Vict. No. 13, 
 
 s. 1 — Costs of Action of Slander.'] Held, that the 
 Legislature of New Soutli Wales bad power to 
 repeal the Statute of James (21 Jac. 1, c. 16), 
 s. 6, and had impliedly done so by 11 Vict. No._13, 
 s. 1, which, according to its trae construction, 
 
 XIV. COLONIAL LAW— NEW SOUTH WALES 
 
 — continued. 
 placed an action for words spoken upon the same 
 footing as regards costs and other matters as an 
 action for written slander. Haeeis d. Davies 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 279' 
 4, Legislative Po'wers — Customs Regula- 
 tion Act of 1879, s. 133 — Duties levied under am 
 Order in Council.'] A Colonial Legislature is not 
 a delegate of the Imperial Legislature. It is re- 
 stricted in the area of its powers, but within that 
 area it is unrestricted. — Held, that the Customs 
 Kegulation Act of 1879, s. 133, was within the 
 plenary powers of legislation conferred upon the 
 New South Wales Legislature by the Constitution 
 Act (scheduled to 18 & 19 Vict. c. 54), ss. 1 and 
 45. — Held, further, that duties levied by an Order 
 in Council issued under sect. 133, are really levied 
 by authority of the Legislature and not of the 
 Executive. Also that under sect. 133 "the 
 opinion of the collector," whether right or wrong, 
 authorizes the action of the Governor. Powell. 
 V. Apollo Candle Company 10 App. Cas. 282 
 
 6. Tramways — New South "Wales Act, 
 
 43 Vict. No. 25, ss. 3, 5 — Right to run Steam 
 Motors on Tramways.] Held, that the Commis- 
 sioner for Kailways in New South Wales has, 
 according to the true construction of Act 43' 
 Vict. No. 25, sect. 3, a legal right to run steam 
 motors upon the tramway lines mentioned in the 
 2nd schedule thereto. — Semble, sect. 5 is sufficient 
 to legalise the use of steam motors upon the other 
 tramways governed by the said Act. CoMMrs- 
 siONEE EOE Kailways v. Toohey 9 App. Cas. 720 
 
 XV. COLONIAL LAW— NEW ZEALAND. 
 
 1. Harbour — New Zealand Crown Suits 
 
 Act, 1881 (45 Vict. No. 8), sect. S7— Executive 
 Government — Liability for Negligence — Reason- 
 able Care — Damage to Vessels using the Defendant's 
 Staiths.] Where the Executive Government pos- 
 sessed the control and management of a tidal 
 harbour with authority to remove obstructions in 
 it, and the public had a right to navigate therein, 
 subject to the harbour regulations and without 
 payment of harbour dues; the staiths and 
 wharves belonging to the Executive Government 
 which received wharfage and tonnage dues in re- 
 spect of vessels using them : — Held, that there was 
 a duty imposed by law upon the Executive Govern- 
 ment to take reasonable care that vessels using the 
 staiths in the ordinary manner might do so with- 
 out damage to the vessel. Eeasonable care is 
 not shewn when after notice of danger at a parti- 
 cular spot, no inquiry is made as to its existence 
 and extent, and no warning is given. — The prin- 
 ciple of liability for negligence established by 
 Parnahy v. Lancaster Canal Company (11 Ad. & B. 
 223) and Mersey Docks Trustees v.'. Gibbs (Law 
 Eep. 1 H. L. 93) approved of and applied to the 
 Executive Government in the above circumstances, 
 which were distinguishable in respect of non- 
 receipt of harbour dues ; notwithstanding the 
 Crown Suits Act, 1881, sect. 37. The Queen v. 
 Williams - - - 9 App. Cas. 418 
 
 2. Public Works — Compensation— TVel- 
 
 lington Harbour Board and Corporation Act, 1880 
 —The Public Worhs Act, 1882, s. 4—" Estate or 
 interest in land."] Land having become vested in 
 
( 315 ) 
 
 DiaEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 316 ) 
 
 XV. COLONIAL LAW— NEW ZEALAND— oo»«(Z. 
 
 the Eespondents under the "Wellington Harljour 
 Board and Corporation Land Act, 1880 (44 Vict. 
 ~So. 21), the Appellants claimed compensation 
 under the Public Worts Act, 1882 (46 Vict. No. 37), 
 ■on the ground of their having some estate or in- 
 terest therein within the meaning of the latter 
 Act. — It appeared that the AppeUants' lessor (or 
 his predecessor ih title) had in 1848 erected a 
 wharf on the said land, with the permission 
 of the Government, and in 1855 a jetty ; that 
 in 1856, at the request and for the benefit of the 
 <Jovemment, he incurred large expenditure for 
 the extension of his jetty and for the erection of a 
 warehouse ; that in subsequent years the Govern- 
 toent used, paid for, and, with the consent of the 
 said lessor, improved the said land and works : — 
 Held, that the lessor must be deemed to have 
 occupied the ground from 1848 under a revocable 
 license to use it for the purposes of a wharfinger ; 
 That by virtue of the transactions of 1856 such 
 license ceased to be revocable at the will of the 
 ■Government, whereby the lessor acquired an in- 
 ■definite, that is, practically, a perpetual right to 
 •the jetty for the purposes aforesaid. The equit- 
 able right so acquired is an " estate or interest in, 
 to or out of land" within the wide meaning of 
 the Act of 1882, which directs that in ascertain- 
 ing title to compensation the Court should not 
 be boimd to regard strict legal rights only but 
 should do what is reasonable and just. — Ramsden 
 \. Dyson (Law Eep. 1 H. L. 129) approved. 
 Plimmee v. Matok, &c., or Welltngton 
 
 [9 App, Cas. 699 
 
 XVI. COLONIAL LAW— QUEENSLAND. 
 
 Principal and Agent — Queetisland Con- 
 stitution Act of 1867, ss. 6, 1— Estoppel.'] In an 
 action to recover penalties agaiQst the Defendant 
 for having contrary to the Queensland Constitu- 
 tion Act of 1867 sat in the Legislative Assembly 
 as a member thereof and voted therein ; it ap- 
 peared that M., M., & Co. had in 1878 " for and 
 on behalf of the owners of the ship S. H.," but 
 contrary to the express direction of the Defendant 
 (one of such owners), concluded a charterparty 
 witli the local Government; that such charter- 
 party was made in pursuance of an agreement 
 between M., M., & Co. and the Government to 
 supply ships of a particular description to carry 
 emigrants, which agreement did not provide for 
 any privity of contract between the owners of 
 such ships and the Government ; that M., M., & 
 Co. were the general agents of the Defendant to 
 charter ships in which he held shares, and that 
 one of the firm was registered as managing owner 
 of S. S.; and that it was neither alleged nor 
 proved , that the Government ever knew that M., 
 M., & Co., or any member of that firm had gene- 
 ral authority to bind the Defendant, and had 
 acted upon the belief that such general authority 
 continued unrestricted -.—Held, that under such 
 circumstances the Government could not ;have 
 held the, Defendant bound to them, and conse- 
 quently that he was not disqualified under the 
 Act—FreeTnan v. Cooke (2 Ex. 654) approved.— 
 Qussre, whether in the absence of any notice to 
 the Government of such special restriction, the 
 general authority of the agent if known to the 
 Government would have sufficed to bind the De- 
 
 XVI. COLONIAL LAW— QUEENSLAND- confei. : 
 
 fendant so as to disqualify him under the Act. — < 
 Qusere, also, as to the meaning of " presume to sit 
 and vote " in sect. 7 of the Act, and as to what ' 
 knowledge by a member of his disqualification is 
 implied thereby. Miles v. MoIlwraith 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 120 
 
 XVII. COLONIAL LAW— SOUTH AUSTEALIA. 
 
 Unregistered Deed — South Australian 
 
 Act 22 0/1861,8. 39— Equitahle Bight.'] Although 
 an unregistered deed is not effectual to pass any 
 interest in land under sect. 39 of Act 22 of 1861, 
 yet it is effectual to pass an equitable right to set 
 aside a certificate of title relating thereto which 
 has been obtained by fraud. McEllistek v. 
 Biggs - 8 App. Cas. 314 
 
 XVIII. COLONIAL LAW— STBAITS SETTLE- 
 MENTS. 
 
 1. Evidence — Penang — Ordinaiice 8 of 
 
 1873, ». 12, suh-s. 2 and s. 26 — Insufficient Cancel- 
 lation — Additional Stamp — Admissibility in Evi- 
 dence.] Sect. 26 of Ordinance 8 of 1873, applies 
 to all oases where a document has not been duly 
 stamped, and for which a special provision in the 
 ordinance has not been previously made, as in the 
 case of bills of exchange and other documents.^ 
 Where an agreement, liable to stamp duty under 
 Schedule A. had not been cancelled in manner 
 provided by sect. 12, sub-sect. 2 (the date of can- 
 cellation only, and not the initials appearing 
 thereon) : — Held, that it could be and was ren- 
 dered admissible in evidence by means of an 
 additional stamp under sect. 26. Allen v. Meeka 
 PuLLAT - 7 App. Cas. 173 
 
 2. • ■ Treaty — Construction— Grant to A. his 
 
 Heirs and Successors.'} Case where the grant by 
 a treaty between two sovereigns of a monthly 
 pension to A., his heirs and successors, was held, 
 according to its true construction, not to confer 
 such an interest therein upon A. as to enable him 
 to assign it beyond the period of his own life. 
 Eavena Mana Chena Allagappa Chitty ■». 
 TuNKU Allum bin Sultan Allie Iskander 
 Shah _ _ - 8 App. Cas. 751 
 
 XIX. COLONIAL LAW— TRINIDAD. 
 
 Legitimacy — Status of Children hoi-n 
 
 hefore Marriage — Law of Inheritance — Ordinance 
 No. 24 of 1845, s. 5, ajid No. 7 of 1858, <!. 7.] Ac- 
 cording to the Spanish laws originally in forc« in 
 Trinidad, children bom beforemarriage (contracted 
 before the 12th of March, 1846), have the same 
 rights of inheritance from their father and mother 
 as children born after marriage. — Sect. 12 of Or- 
 dinance No. 24 of 1845, while preventing marriage 
 after that date from legitimating the ante nati 
 children, does not take away the status of legiti- 
 macy previously acquired. — Where a mother 
 married before that date, died intestate in 1862, 
 leaving seven children, three of whom were ante 
 nati and four post nati, 7(eM,that; each by inherit- 
 ance took one seventh of the estate which she had 
 acquired by purchase under sect. 5 of No. 24 of 
 1845 : — Held, with regard to the shares of two 
 ante nati who had died thereafter intestate with- 
 out issue, that under sect. 5 above cited and 
 sect. 7 of No. 7 of 1858, they wore divisible equally 
 amongst the four surviving children, whether 
 
( 317 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 318 ) 
 
 XIX. COLONIAL LAW— TEINIDAD— contomecJ. 
 ante nati or post nati, and the issue of a deceased 
 daughter. Esoallieb v. Esoalliek 
 
 [10 App. Gas. 312 
 
 XX. COLONIAL LAW— VICTORIA. 
 
 1. Insolvency — Beal Estate in England.'] 
 
 Beal estate in. England does not vest in an 
 assignee under a Victorian insolvency. Waitb v. 
 BiifQLET - 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 2. Insolvency— Sttii to set aside Melease 
 
 of Equity of Bedemption — Misrepresentation- 
 Onus Prdbandi.'] In a suit by the Kespondent 
 (lately an insolvent) to set aside on the ground of 
 misrepresentation or mutual mistake a release by 
 the official assignee of the Respondent's equity 
 of redemption of a certain mortgage, for accounts 
 against the Appellants, the mortgagees, and in 
 effect to have the benefit of a subsequent resale 
 by the releasee's purchaser, it appeared that the 
 ofScial assignee had in the release admitted the 
 truth of the representations made to him, and 
 that the Respondent had thereafter taken a con- 
 veyance from him of all the estate vested in him 
 under the insolvency : — Sdd, that the onus was 
 upon the Respondent, who was primS. facie bound 
 by the admissions under the seal of his vendor, 
 to prove the falsehood of the representations, and 
 not upon the Appellants to establish their truth. 
 — Held, further, that where a mortgagor in con- 
 sideration of the mortgage debt releases the equity 
 of redemption to the mortgagee, the parties should 
 be regarded, untU the contrary is shewn by the 
 party impeaching the deed, as on the ordinary 
 footing of vendor and purchaser. — Knight v. Mar- 
 Joribanks (2 Mac. & 6. 10) approved. — If such 
 release is voidable an equity to set it aside is an 
 equitable interest in the property to which it 
 relates, and therefore in this case was part qf the 
 estate vested in the official assignee. The Re- 
 spondent, under his conveyance from the official 
 assignee, obtained a locus standi to maintain this 
 suit. Mblboubne Bakking Cokporation v. 
 Beougham 7 App. Cas. 307 
 
 3. Lex Domicilii — iex Loci as applied to 
 
 tlie Personal Assets of a Testator — Victorian Act 
 No. 388 of 1870, s. 2, sub-a. 7— Probate Duty.'] 
 Although the law of a testator's domicil governs 
 the foreign personal assets of his estate for the 
 purpose of succession and enjoyment, yet those 
 assets are, for the purpose of legal representation, 
 of collection and of administration, as distin- 
 guished from distribution among the successors, 
 governed by the law of their own locality and 
 not by that of the testator's domicil. — Held, that, 
 according to t'ne true construction and intention 
 of Victorian Act No. 388 of 1870, " The Duties on 
 the Estates of Deceased Persons Statute, 1870," a 
 legal personal representative in Victoria should, 
 as regards the "personal estate" of the deceased 
 mentioned in sect. 2, sub-sect. 7, state accounts 
 only of so much thereof as comes under his con- 
 trol" by virtue of his Victorian probate. Black- 
 •wooD V. The Queen - - 8 App. Cas. 82 
 
 4, Notice of Action— Melbourne Harbour^ 
 
 Trust Act, sect. iG—Interpretation^Acts divided 
 into Headings.] Held, that an action against the 
 Melbourne Harbour Trust Commissioners was an 
 action brought against a "person" within the 
 
 XX. COLONIAL IKM—TlGtO'Slk.— continued, 
 meaning of sect. 46 of the Melbourne Harbour 
 Trust Act ; and that notice in writing thereof 
 complying in form or in substance with the 
 requirements of the section was necessaiv. — ■ 
 Remarks as to the effect upon interpretation of 
 dividing an Act into parts with appropriate 
 headings. — Eastern Counties and London and 
 Blackwall Bailway Companies v. Marriage (9 
 H. L. C. 32), distinguished. TJinoN Steamship 
 Company op New Zealand v. Meleoubne 
 Haeboub Teust Commissioners 9 App. Cas. 365 
 
 5. Solicitor — •'Victorian Common Law Pro- 
 cedure Act, s. 369 — Power of Court to order de- 
 livery of Attorney's Bill.] Under sect. 396 of the 
 Victorian Common Law Procedure Act, the Court 
 has power to order delivery of his bill by an 
 attorney, whether or not it has been paid, and 
 whether or not it is one which it would have 
 jurisdiction to refer to taxation. Duepett v. 
 McEvoY - 10 App. Cas. 300 
 
 XXI. COLONIAL LAW— WEST AtTSTEALIA. 
 
 1. Foreign Country— Oon/?icf of Laws — 
 
 Liability of Foreign Corporation — Lex Loci Con- 
 tractus.] Held, that the Western Australian Joint 
 Stock Companies Ordinance Act, 1858, does not 
 apply to foreign corporations or to companies in- 
 corporated out of Western Australia and properly 
 and lawfully carrying on business as such. Con- 
 sequently a limited company incorporated else- 
 where, not having complied with its provisions, 
 can nevertheless cany on business and make con- 
 tracts in Ayestern Australia by its agent without 
 its members being liable individually for its debts 
 and engagements. — Held, further, that a company 
 duly registered and incorporated in Victoria could 
 not be again registered as a company in Western 
 Australia. — Bullceley v. Sehutz (Law Rep. 3 P. C. 
 764) approved. Bateman v. Sebvioe 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 386 
 
 2. EaUway — Western Australian Bail- 
 ways Act of 1878 (42 Vict. No. 31), ss. 14 and 16 
 — Notice — Bight of Besumption — Compensation.] 
 Held, in a case where the Crown had a power of 
 resumption under the terms of its grant, and had 
 given lawful notice in exercise of such power, 
 such notice must not be deemed to be under 
 sect. 12 of the Railways Act of 1878 (entitling the 
 parties affected to compensation under sect. 14) ; 
 secus where notice could not have been lawfully 
 given except under this Act. Thomas v. Sheb- 
 wooB ■ - 9 App. Cas. 142 
 
 COLONIAL LAW— Anglo-Indian domicil 
 
 See Domicil. 4. [23 Ch. D. 532 
 
 Canada — Bill of exchange 8 App. Cas. 733 
 
 See Bill dp Exchange — Liability op 
 Pabties. 
 
 Jamaica - 7 App. Cas. 79 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Mutual Dealings. 3. 
 
 Practice — Leave to appeal to Privy Council. 
 
 See Cases imderPBAOTiOE—-PEivT Coun- 
 cil—Leave TO APPEAL. : 
 
 COLONIAL EEGISTEKS. 
 
 See Company — Shaees- 
 Statutes. 
 
 -Reqistee — 
 
( 319 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 320 ) 
 
 COLONIAL STATUTES SPECIALLY BEFESSED 
 TO IN THIS DIGEST. 
 
 See Table of Statutes, Colonial {ante, 
 p. clxxvii). 
 COLONY— English settlers— Privileges of English 
 
 law - 10 App, Cas. 692 
 
 See Scotch Law^Husband and Wife. 2. 
 Evidence in. 
 
 See Evidence — General — Statutes. 
 User of invention in - 19 Ch. D, 26S 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 4. 
 COMITY OF NATIONS— Infant resident abroad 
 
 See Infant— Guardian. 1. [30Ch. D. 324 
 COMMENCEMENT OF TITLE 28 Ch. D. 586 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 1. 
 COMMENCING BUSINESS— Company 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 209 
 
 See OoMPANT — ^Winding-up Order. 1. 
 COMMISSION— Bail bond— Arrest of ship— Da- 
 mages 10 P. D. 158 
 
 SeePRACTioE — Admiealtt — Salvage. 6. 
 Mortgage payable by instalments 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Mortgage— Contract. 10. [549 
 COMMISSION IN AEMY— Army agent's lien- 
 Set-off - 17 Ch. D. 520 
 
 See Set-off. 1. 
 
 Value of, on retirement — Charge on 
 
 [leCh. D. 671; 19 Ch, D. 17 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 12. 
 COMMISSION TO EXAMINE WITNESS, 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — ^Evidence. 10 — 16. 
 Evidence by. 
 
 See Evidence — General — Statutes. 
 COMMISSIONERS- Charity. 
 
 See Cases under Charity — Commis- 
 sioners. 
 Ecclesiastical - 20 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioners. 
 Endowed Schools Act 10 App. Cas. 304 
 
 /See Endowed Schools Act. 1. 
 Land. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 National debt. 
 
 ;See National Debt Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 Parliamentary elections. 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Parlia- 
 ment — Election Commissioners. 
 Sewers 28 Ch, D. 486 
 
 See London — Commissioners of Sewers. 
 Sewers — Disqualification by reason of 
 
 interest 14 Q. B. D. 561 
 
 See Sea Wall. 
 COMMITTAL — Appeal from Judge of High 
 
 Court— Court of Appeal 13 Q. B. D, 901 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 10. 
 Contempt— Appeal - 20 Ch, D, 493 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Ap- 
 peal. 1. 
 Contempt of Court - 17 Ch. D. 49 
 
 See Contempt op Court. 
 County Court — Power to enforce interlocu- 
 tory order - 7 ft. B. D, 623 
 
 See County Court — Jubisdiction. 5. 
 
 COMMITTAL — continued. 
 
 Order for — Judgment debtor — Privilege 
 
 from arrest - ■ 15 ft. B. D. 329 
 
 See Arrest — Debtors' Act. 3. 
 
 Order to pay debt by instalments — " Means 
 
 to pay " 9 ft. B. D. 178 ; 14 ft. B. D. 597 
 See Arrest — Debtors Act. 4, 5. 
 
 COMMITTEE— Church building— Voluntary sub- 
 scriptions - - 28 Ch. i). 426 
 
 See Charity — Management. 4. 
 
 Directors of company 25 Ch. D. 118 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 7. 
 
 ■ Stoclv Exchange 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 
 
 - 20 Ch. D. 356 
 
 2. 
 
 COMMITTEE OF LUNATIC. 
 
 See Cases under Lunatic — Committee. 
 
 Suit by committee for dissolution of lunatic's 
 
 marriage - - 6 P. D. 13 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Parties. 3. 
 
 COMMON. 
 
 ' Common of Pasturage and Herbage ' 
 
 — Jus seeandi velfalcandi — Ccmmum of Estovers — ■ 
 Prescription — Profit a prendre in alierw solo — 
 2*3 Will. 4, c. 71, s. 1.] Previous to the dis- 
 afforestation and grant of A. Forest in 1677, the 
 Crown was absolute owner of the soil of the 
 forest and possessed of all the rights belonging to 
 such ownership including vert and venison. The 
 tenants of the adjoining manors had customary 
 rights of common of pasture, herbage, and pan- 
 nage, but the Court Rolls and other documents 
 contained no evidence of any customary right in 
 the commoners to cut and carry away from the 
 forest brakes, fern, and litter, except by permis- 
 sion of the forest officers, and afforded negative 
 evidence that no such right was ever claimed or 
 lawfully exercised. — In a suit instituted in 1691, 
 for the purpose of determining how much of the 
 forest might properly be inclosed having regard 
 to the rights of common, the commoners by their 
 answers claimed rights of pasturage, and pannage 
 for swine, and, as to such of them as had houses, 
 certain quantities of fuel wood for their houses, 
 but made no claim in respect of any other estovers. 
 By the decree made in 1693, after allotting to the 
 owners for inolosure and improvement portions of 
 the forest within which the commoners were to 
 be excluded and debarred from any common of 
 pastinre, herbage, or paimage, the residue of the 
 forest (containing 6400 acres) was allotted to 
 remain open and uninclosed, " and the said defen- 
 dants, their heirs, tenants, and assigns, and all 
 other persons having right of common in the said 
 forest according to their respective interests- 
 therein, shall from time to time have and take 
 the sole common pasturage and herbage of all 
 and every the lands allotted and left for common 
 as aforesaid " — the owners, their heirs and assigns,, 
 tenants and farmers, being for ever excluded 
 " from having or claiming any common of pasture, 
 or herbage upon or in the said lands so left for 
 common as aforesaid." In an action brought by 
 the owner of the inheritance in 1878 to restrain 
 one of the commoners from cutting and carrying 
 away brakes, fern, and litter from the 6400 acres, 
 for use upon the copyhold tenement in respect of 
 which he had liis right of common, the Defendant 
 
( 321 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 322 ) 
 
 COMMON— <!0«(m«ed. 
 
 claimed this right as one of the commoners 
 ■entitled to the benefit of the decree in 1693, and 
 also alternatively by prescription in respect of 
 his particular tenement: — Held, by Bacon, V.C., 
 and by the Court of Appeal, 1. That upon the 
 construction of the decree of 1693, by which the 
 respective rights of the lord and the commoners 
 were defined and determined, the right of the 
 commoners over the 6400 acres was limited to 
 common of pasturage and herbage, and did not 
 include the right to cut and carry away the 
 ferakes, fern, heather, and litter growing therein. 
 — 2. That the existence at the date of that decree 
 of any special custom authorizing the commoners 
 to cut and carry away brakes, &o., and litter in 
 that which had been a royal forest, had not been 
 established, and was negatived by the absence of 
 ^ny claim to such a custom by the commoners in 
 the suit in which that decree was made. — 3. That 
 evidence of usage subsequent to the date of the 
 decree of 1693 could not affect the construction of 
 that decree, which in its terms was clear and 
 unambiguous. — Held, by Bacon, V.C., that the 
 alternative claim to the alleged right by pre- 
 scription iji respect of the particular tenement 
 being a claim of a profit a prendre in alieno solo 
 could not be sustained. — Held, on appeal, that as 
 the Defendant and his predecessors in title were 
 shewn to have claimed to take, and to have 
 actually taken, as of right and without any per- 
 mission- from the lord, litter from 6400 acres for 
 the use of the tenement for upwards of sixty 
 years immediately before the action, they had, 
 under the Prescription Act (2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 71), 
 acquired a right to do so, although they had 
 claimed to do the acts complaioed of under the 
 mistaken supposition that all the commoners 
 were entitled to do them. — In order to establish 
 a right under the Prescription Act, it is only 
 necessary to shew that the benefit claimed has 
 been actually enjoyed by the claimant for the 
 requisite period as of right and not by permission, 
 and that the right claimed is one which could 
 have a legal origin by custom, prescription, or 
 grant, and it is immaterial on what ground the 
 claimant rested his alleged right to enjoy it. Eakl 
 De la "Waeb v. Miles - - 17 Ch. D. 636 
 
 ■ Appurtenant — Copyholder - 
 See Copyhold — CusTOir. 
 
 20 Ch, S. 753 
 
 1. 
 
 Extinguishment of right — Inclosure 
 
 See Inclosueb. 2, 3. [8 ft. B. D. 437 ; 
 [20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 Land for recreation - 6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law— Highway. 1. 
 COMMON INFOBMEE— Eecovery of penalty- 
 Offence against Crown 7 Q. B. D. 38 ; 
 See Penal Action. 2. [8 App. Cas. 354 
 COMMON IAW PBOCEDTTRE ACT— Victoria 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 300 
 See Colonial Law— Victobia. 5. 
 COMMONABLE BIGHTS COMPENSATION ACT, 
 1882. 
 See iNCLOSuiiE — Statutes. 
 
 Metkopolis — Commons Acts— Sta- 
 tutes. 
 COMMUTATION OF PENSIONS. 
 See Pension — Statutes. 
 
 COMPANIES ACT, 1883. 
 
 See Company — Peefeeential Debts — 
 Statutes. 
 COMPANIES (COLONIAL EEGISTEES) ACT, 
 1883. 
 
 See Company — Shabes — Eegistee — 
 
 Statutes. 
 
 COMPANY. Col. 
 
 I. Formation - - 322 
 
 II. Peospectcs - - 323 
 
 III. Memoeandbm and Aetioles 327 
 
 IV. CONTEACTS 329 
 
 V. Actions (by and against) - 331 
 VI. Debentubes (and Moetgages) 332 
 
 VII. Dividends 337 
 
 VIII. Reduction op Capital - 340 
 
 IX. Shabes — Allotment 342 
 
 X. Shabes — Issue - 344 
 
 XI. Shabes — Teanbeee 344 
 
 Xll. Shabes — Eegister 349 
 
 XIII. Management 351 
 
 XIV. Membee's Liability — 354 
 XV. Dieeotoe's Appointment - 356 
 
 XVI. Dieeotoe's Authority 357 
 
 XVII. Dieeotoe's Liability 358 
 
 XVIII. Dieectoe's Qualifioation - 362 
 
 XIX. Winding-up Oedeb 363 
 
 XX. VOLUNTAEY WlNDING-UP 368 
 
 XXI. Injunction (and Leave to pro- 
 ceed) 369 
 
 XXII. LiQUIDATOB - 370 
 
 XXIII. CONTEIEUTOEY 372 
 
 XXIV. Proof - - - 373 
 XXV. Peefeeential Debts 374 
 
 XXVI. Set-ope - 374 
 
 XXVII. Sbcubed Cbeditoe - - 375 
 
 XXVIIL DisTBESS 376 
 
 XXIX. Bates 37? 
 
 XXX. Disteibution of Assets - - 379 
 
 XXXI. Keconsteuction - 380 
 
 XXXII. Cost-book Company 381 
 
 XXXIII. XJneegisteeed Company 382 
 
 XXXIV. Lite Insueancb Company 387 
 XXXV. Appeal 389 
 
 XXXVI. Costs 389 
 
 XXXVII. Evidence - - 391 
 Building Society. 
 
 See Building Society. 
 Chaetered Company. 
 
 See Chaetebed Company. 
 Railway Company. 
 
 See Railway Company. 
 I. COMPANY— EOEMATION. 
 
 Costs of Eormation — Claim hy Solicitor 
 
 of Promoter against the Company.^ M. employed 
 P. as solicitor in the formation of a limited com- 
 pany for the purpose of taking over M.'s business. 
 The company was formed, and the articles pro- 
 vided that all expenses incurred about the forma- 
 tion of the company should be paid by the com- 
 pany. After the company was formed P. acted 
 
 M 
 
( 323 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 324 ) 
 
 I, COMPANY— rOEHATION—eoKimMiJ. 
 
 as its solicitor, and M. 'sras one of the directors. 
 At a meeting of the directors, at -which M. was 
 present. P. asked for payment of his costs incurred 
 about the formation of the company, and a con- 
 versation took place tending to shew that the 
 company would undertake to pay them, but 
 nothing appeared on the minutes. At a subse- 
 quent meeting a resolution was passed on the 
 proposal of M. that a cheque for £39 shoiild be 
 given to P. in discharge of a certain part of these 
 costs. The company having been ordered to be 
 woimd up, P. carried in a claim for his bill of costs, 
 which was referred to the Taxing Master. The 
 Taxing Master disallowed all items incurred 
 before the formation of the company, and Bacon, 
 V.C., refused to disturb his decision. P. ap- 
 pealed : — Held, that P. could not maintain his 
 claim on the gi'ound that the company having 
 had the benefit of his services was bound to pay 
 for them, as his services had been rendered on 
 the retainer of M. — In re Hereford and South- 
 Wales Waggon and Engineering Company (2 
 Oh. D. 621) considered.— fi'eZcZ, further, that P. 
 could not maintain his claim on the ground of 
 novation, the conversation at the first meeting 
 not being supported by anything in the minutes, 
 and the subsequent giving of the cheque being 
 capable of being referred to the obligation of the 
 company to indemnify M. against the costs in- 
 curi'ed in its formation, and so not being suffi- 
 cient evidence of an agreement by the company 
 with P. to pay him. In re Kothekham Altim 
 AND Chemical Company - 25 Ch, D. 103 
 
 II. COMPANY— PEOSPECTUS. 
 
 1, Misrepresentation — Ambiguous state- 
 ment — Action of Deceit — • Burden of Proof on 
 Plaintiff.'] The prospectus of a company which 
 was being formed to take over ironworks, con- 
 tained a statement that " the present value of 
 the turnover or output of the entire works is 
 over £1,000,000 sterling per annum." If that 
 statement meant that the works had actually in 
 one year turned out produce worth at present 
 prices more than a million, or at that rate per 
 year, it was untrue. If it meant only that the 
 works were capable of turning out that amount 
 of produce it was true. In an action of deceit for 
 fraudulent misrepresentation whereby the Plain- 
 tiff was induced to take shares he swore in answer 
 to interrogatories that he " understood the mean- 
 ing" of the statement "to be that which the 
 words obviously conveyed," and at the trial was 
 not asked either in examination or cross-examina- 
 tion 'what interpretation he had put upon the 
 words: — Held, by the Earl of Selborne, L.C. 
 and Lords Blackburn and Watson, affirming the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal, that the state- 
 ment taken in connection with the context was 
 ambiguous and capable of the two meanings ; that 
 it lay on the Plaintiff to prove that he had inter- 
 preted the words in the sense in which they were 
 false and had in fact been deceived by them into 
 taking the shares, and that as he had as a matter 
 of fact failed to prove this the action could not be 
 maintained. — Held, by Lord Bramwell, that the 
 statement was capable only of the meaning in 
 which it was untrue, and that the Plaintiff had 
 proved that he had understood it in that sense ; 
 
 II. COMPANY— PEOSPECTirS—contoitted. 
 but that there was not sufficient evidence that 
 the statement was fraudulent on the part of the. 
 Defendants, and that the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal should be affirmed on that ground. Smith 
 V. Chadwiok - 20 Ch. D. 37 ; 9 App, Cas. 187 
 
 2. Misrepresentation — Change of Direc- 
 tors — Sliareliolder' s Name removed.] An appli- 
 cant for shares in a company received a letter of 
 allotment, and at the same time a letter inform- 
 ing him that two of the four directors named iu 
 the prospectus had retired. The applicant on 
 the same day wrote to the company stating that 
 he had applied for shares entirely in consequence 
 of these two directors being directors, and asking 
 to have the allotment cancelled : — Held, that 
 under the circumstances the applicant was en- 
 titled to have his name removed from the register 
 of shareholders. — Hallows v. Fernie (Law Eep. 
 3 Ch. 467) distinguished. In re Scottish Peteo- 
 LEUM Company. Andeeson's Case 17 Ch. D. 373 
 
 3. Misrepresentation — Concealment of 
 
 Contract — Companies Act, 1867, s. Z9,— Action of 
 Deceit — Measure of Damages:] The prospectus 
 of a company formed for taking over a business, 
 after mentioning the price to be paid by the com- 
 pany for the' business, stated that the remunera- 
 tion of the directors would be fixed by the share- 
 holders, and that it was proposed that they should 
 be paid only by a commission on the profits made, 
 and that no promotion money would be paid to 
 them by the company. The vendors of the busi- 
 ness, who became directors, received part payment 
 in 3000 fully paid-up shares of the company, and 
 an agreement for such part payment was disclosed 
 in the prospectus. Shortly after the formation 
 of the company the vendors transferred SOO of 
 these shares (being of the nominal amount of 
 £4000), as to 350 to the solicitors who had acted 
 in the formation of the company, and as to the 
 remaining 450 to the directors other than the 
 vendors. The Plaintiff took shares on the faith 
 of the prospectus and paid them up in full. Some 
 time afterwards the shareholders discovered the 
 transfer of the 800 shares and removed the direc- 
 tors. A claim was made on behalf of the company 
 against the directors who had received the 450 
 shares, and they by way of compromise surrendered 
 those shares to the company. The Plaintiff re- 
 tained his shares, and nearly two years after the 
 transfer to the directors had been discovered he 
 commenced an action against the old directors 
 and the solicitors, alleging that the Defendants 
 other than the vendors had agreed to become 
 promoters on the terms of receiving as remunera- 
 tion £4000 in fully paid-up shares or money, out 
 of the shares or money to be received by the ven- 
 dors ; that the nominal purchase-money included 
 this promotion money of £4000 as well as the real 
 purchase-money ; that the value of the property 
 was not so much as the nominal purchase-money, 
 less £4000 ; and that the slatements in the pro- 
 spectus were false; and he claimed as damages 
 the whole nominal amount of his shares, on the 
 ground that they had become utterly worthless. 
 It appeared in evidence that at the time when 
 the prospectus was issued, or at least before the 
 Plaintiff took his shares, there was an understand- 
 ing between the vendors and the other directors 
 
( 325 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 326 ) 
 
 II. COMPANY— PBOSPECTTTS—eoreitrntefZ. 
 
 that the other directors sliould receive from the 
 vendors some remuneration, and that on the day 
 when the Plaintiff's application was accepted the 
 transfer of the 450 shares to the other directors 
 was agreed to ; but there was no evidence of 
 there having been any understanding for remu- 
 neration at the time of the contract for sale to 
 the company, and it appeared that . the price 
 agreed to be given by the company was a fair 
 one : — Seld, by Fry, J., that although the under- 
 standing that the directors should receive remu- 
 neration was not such a contract as is requii'ed 
 to be specified in the prospectus by sect. 38 of 
 the Companies Act, 1867, the concealment of the 
 arrangement was a material misrepresentation, and 
 made the prospectus fraudulent ii'respectively of 
 the statute ; and that the Plaintiff was entitled 
 to recover by way of damages the excess of the 
 money paid foj: his shaves over the real value of 
 them at the time when he took them. — Seld, on 
 appeal, that tbe case was to be decided, not ac- 
 cording to the principles applicable to an action 
 to rescind the agreement by the Plaintiff to take 
 shares, but according to the principles applicable 
 to a common law action for deceit ; that, there 
 being no arrangement for the directors to receive 
 any promotion money from the company, the pro- 
 spectus did not contain any misstatement on which 
 an action for deceit could be grounded ; and that 
 the action must be dismissed. Abkweiost v. 
 Newbold - - - 17 Ch. D. 301 
 
 4. Misrepresentation — False and Fraudu- 
 lent Statements.'] The Plaintiff was a dealer in 
 stocks and shares, and had formerly been a 
 member of the Stock Exchange. The Defen- 
 dants were largely interested as shareholders in 
 the Date-Coffee Company, a company whose 
 objects were declared to be (amongst others) the 
 acquisition of licenses to use an invention for 
 manufacturing from dates a substitute for coffee, 
 for which a patent had been granted to Henley 
 (one of the Defendants), and to sell, &c., the 
 patent-rights when acquired by the company. 
 Of this company Haymen (another of the Defen- 
 dants) was chairman, the Defendant Tucker was 
 the solicitor, and Henley consulting engineer. — 
 Henley was also possessed of a patent for the 
 manufacture and sale of date-coffee in France ; 
 and a company was formed for that purpose, 
 caRed The French Date-Coffee Company, with a 
 capital of £100,000 in 100,000 shares of £1 each 
 (under substantially the same management as 
 that of the English company), by whom Henley's 
 patent for France was purchased for £50,000, 
 which sum it was agreed should be divided as a 
 bonus amongst the shareholders in the English 
 company. Early in February, 1881, the Defen- 
 dants prepared and issued a prospectus of the 
 French company, containing the following pas- 
 sage, — " From the success attending the company 
 formed for the working of Henley's English 
 patent, when a duty of 2d. per lb. is payable, 
 and the coffee sold at Is. per lb., the directors 
 feel justified in stating they confidently believe 
 the profits of this company will be more than 
 sufficient to pay dividends of at least 50 per cent, 
 on the nominal capital, and will exceed those of 
 the company working the English patent, which. 
 
 II. eOTS.FASY—V^03?-ECTVS— continued. 
 
 having only been formed a little over twelve 
 months, has entered into a contract which will 
 yield the return by way of annual dividends of a 
 sum equal to the whole paid-up capital of the 
 company of £31,000." — At the time at which this 
 prospectus was issued the period had not arrived 
 at which " profits " in a commercial sense could 
 liave been acquired by the English company ; but 
 the article had been sold in the English market 
 and received with some favour, and an agreement 
 had been entered into by the company with a 
 merchant or broker in London to take all they 
 could make. — The Plaintiff, influenced, as he 
 said, partly by the above statement in the pro- 
 spectus, partly from information derived from 
 another source, and partly by the favourable 
 opinion he had formed of the article to be manu- 
 factured, purchased 100 shares in the French 
 company, and paid the deposit. He had no con- 
 nection with the English company. Owing, as it 
 was said, to the duty imposed upon the date-coffee 
 in England, and to other circumstances, the hopes 
 held out in the prospectus were not realized, and 
 the French Date-Coffee Company was ultimately 
 wound up ; and, after the lapse of nearly two 
 years, when the Plaintiff was called upon as a 
 contributory, he sought to recover from the Defen- 
 dants the sum he had paid as deposit money and 
 the amount of calls for which he had become and' 
 would become liable, as damages for the alleged!, 
 false and deceitful representations contained in^ 
 the above statements in the prospectus : — Held, . 
 that the statements complained of, though ex- 
 pressing the strongest confidence that the company 
 referred to would be successful and would make- 
 large profits by the sale of the article to be 
 manufactured, could not fairly be read as alleging 
 that profits in a commercial sense had actually 
 been made, and consequently that there was no 
 evidence which could be properly left to a jury 
 in support of the charge of wilful and fraudulent , 
 misrepresentation. Bellaies v. Tuokek 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 562 
 
 5. Misrepresentation — Issue of Deben- 
 tures — Misstatement of Object of Loan — Contri- 
 butory Mistalce of Flaintiff."] A misstatement of 
 the intention of the Defendant in doing a particu- 
 lar act may be a misstatement of fact, and if the 
 Plaintiff was misled by it, an action of deceit 
 may be founded on it. — ^Where a Plaintiff has 
 been induced both by his own mistake and by a. 
 material misstatement by the Defendant to do an> 
 act by which he receives injury, the Defendant 
 may be made liable in an action for deceit. — The 
 directors of a company issued a prospectus in- 
 viting subscriptions for debentures, and stating 
 that the objects of the issue of debentures were to 
 complete alterations in the building of the cpm- 
 pany, to purchase horses and vans, and to develop 
 the trade of the company. The real object of 
 the loan was to enable the directors to pay off 
 pressing liabilities. The Plaintiff advanced 
 money on some of the debentures under the 
 erroneous belief that the prospectus offered a 
 charge upon the property of the company, and 
 stated in his evidence that he j would not hav» 
 advanced his money but for such belief, but tha> 
 he also relied upon the statements contained in 
 
 M 
 
( 327 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 328 ) 
 
 II. COMPANY— PROSPECTUS— confeV.MCfJ. 
 
 the prospectus. The oompany became insol- 
 vent : — Held (afflnning; the decree of Deninan, J.), 
 that the misstatement of the objects for which 
 the debentures were issued was a material mis- 
 statement of fact, iniiuencing the conduct of the 
 Plaintiif, and rendered the directors liable to an 
 action for deceit, although the Plaintiff was also 
 influenced by his own mistake. Egdington v. 
 EiTZMAUKioE 29 Ch. D. 459 
 
 6. Misrepresentation — Notice— Delay — 
 
 Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89)j s. 35 ; 
 Table A, Articles 95, 97.] The provisions of 
 articles 95, 97, of Table A to the Companies Act, 
 1862, for the service of notices by a company on 
 its members, apply only to notices relating to the 
 ordinary business of a company, and service in 
 the way there pointed out is not sufficient for the 
 purpose of fixing a shareholder with knowledge 
 of a misrepresentation which would entitle him 
 to repudiate his shares, unless he had been 
 guilty of laches after notice of the misrepresenta- 
 tion. In re London and Staffoedshiee Fike 
 Insdeanoe Company 24 Ch. D, 149 
 
 III. COMPANY— MEMOEAlfDirM AND ARTI- 
 CLES. 
 
 1. Alteration of Articles — Preference and 
 
 Ordinary Shares — Siibsequent Special Besolutions 
 acted upon for ten years, altering the Appropriation 
 of Revenue, invalid — Bights of Shareholders under 
 original Contraci^25 & 26 Vict. c. 89, s. 12.] The 
 memorandum of association of a company incorpo- 
 rated under the Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict, 
 c. 89), stated that a portion of the shai'es were to 
 have a right of receiving a dividend by preference 
 to the other shares, and that the preference shares 
 should have a right to a dividend of 7 per cent, 
 per annum in priority over the ordinary shares, 
 and to one-fifth of the remainder of the net revenue 
 after a deduction of a sum sufficient for paying 
 7 per cent, per annum on the ordinary shares ; and 
 also that those shares should have a right to the 
 rest of the dividend, whatever it might be, up to 
 7 per cent, after paying 7 per cent, to the prefer- 
 ence shares and to four-fifths of the remainder of 
 the net revenue, after deduction of a sum sufficient 
 to pay the dividends to the preference and ordinary 
 shares. — The directors applied the profits of the 
 company in substantial accordance with the pro- 
 visions in the articles of association till Novembei', 
 1872, when the company passed special resolutions 
 which altered the priorities and payments of the 
 net revenue as between the preference and ordi- 
 nary shareholders, and which provided for the 
 redemption of shares out of the surplus profits, 
 and they were acted upon without any objection 
 being raised to them by any of the members of the 
 company till July, 1883, when the company passed 
 a special resolution by which the original appro- 
 priation of the revenue as provided by the memo- 
 randum of association was restored ; — Seld (affirm- 
 ing the decision of Kay, J.), that the resolutions 
 of 1872 were not valid, as they altered a condition 
 in the memorandum of association in contravention 
 of sect. 12 of the Companies Act, 1862 -.—Held, 
 also, that even if the resolutions of 1872 would be 
 valid if ratified by every member of the company, 
 there was no evidence on which the Court, acting 
 as a jury, ought to infer that every member of tlie 
 
 III. COMPANY— MEMORANDUM AND ARTI- 
 CLES — continued. 
 company had ratified such resolutions with full 
 knowledge of what had been done. Ashbuey v. 
 Watson - 23 Ch. D, 56 ; 30 Ch. D. 376 
 
 2. Articles inconsistent with Memoran- 
 dum — Application of Capital.'] By the memo- 
 randum of association of a company limited by 
 shares it was stated that the objects of the com- 
 pany were, the cultivation of lands in Ireland, 
 and other similar purposes there specified, and to 
 do all such other things as the company might 
 deem incidental or conducive to the attainment 
 of any of these objects, and that the capital of the 
 company was £1,050,000, divided into 140,000 A 
 shares of £5 each, and 3500 B shares of £100 
 each. By the 8th of the contemporaneous articles 
 of association it was provided that the capital 
 produced by the issue of B shares should be in- 
 vested, and that the income, and so far as neces- 
 sary the capita], should be applied so as to make 
 good to the holders of A shares a preferential 
 dividend of £5 per cent, on the amounts paid up 
 on the A shares. Subject to this, the B fund was 
 to belong to the owners of B sliares. The profits 
 of the company, after paying the £5 per cent, 
 dividend to the A shareholders were to be apphed 
 in payment of a non-cumulative dividend of £5 
 per cent, to the B shareholders, and the surplus 
 was to be divided rateably between the A share- 
 holders and B shareholders according to the 
 amounts paid up' on their respective shares : — ■ 
 Held, by Chitty, J., and by the Court of Appeal, 
 tliat article 8 was invalid, as it purported to make 
 the B capital applicable to purposes not within 
 the objects of the company as defined by the 
 memorandum of association, and in a way not 
 incidental or conducive to the attainment of 
 those objects, and that the directors must be 
 restrained from acting upon it. — The articles of 
 association of a company cannot, except in the 
 cases provided for by sect. 12 of the Companies 
 Act, 1862, modify the memorandum of association 
 in any of the particulars required by the Act to 
 be stated in the memorandum. Guinness v. Land 
 CoBPOEATiON ov Ikeland 22 Ch. D. 349 
 
 3. Ultra Vires — Liability of Directors — 
 
 Acquiescence — Batification.'] The objects of a 
 company were stated by the memorandum of 
 association to be " the carrying on for profit or 
 gain the trades or businesses of discounters, 
 lenders of, and dealers in money " . . . " the ad- 
 vancing and lending of money on real, personal, 
 or mixed securities . . on stocks and shares of 
 railway, canal, dock, and other joint stock com- 
 panies, corporations, associations, and other under- 
 takings of whatever nature or description ... on 
 ships, goods, merchandize, materials, produce, 
 works, plant, chattels, debts, choses in action, 
 articles and effects, or on any other property of 
 whatever kind and description ... in the making 
 of purchases, investments, sales, or any other 
 dealings of or in any of the above-named articles 
 or securities . . . and the entering into and caray- 
 ing on of any monetary and financial arrange- 
 ments or operations, and the doing of all matters 
 and things which may appear to the company to 
 be incident or conducive to the objects aforesaid, 
 or any of tliem " : — Held, that the entering into an 
 
( 3:9 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 330 ) 
 
 III. COMPANY— MEMORANDUM AND AETI- 
 CLES — continued. 
 
 agreement to purchase " on joint aoconnt " -with 
 two other parties, for £310,000, an estate, on which 
 one of the other parties (K. & L.) undertook to 
 finish a building (the Alexandra Palace), grounds, 
 racecourse and stand, lodges, roads, terraces, and 
 drainage, for a sum not exceeding £200,000, the 
 company undertaking to iioat another (the Alex- 
 andra Palace) company for the purpose of acqui- 
 ring materials and building the palace, was a 
 transaction within the powers of the company : — 
 Held, further, that such an agreement did not 
 constitute a partnership between the three parties 
 to it. — Observations on the effect of acquiescence 
 by shareholders ia the contracts and acts of their 
 directors. London Financial Association ■». 
 Kelk - _ _ 26 Ch. D. 107 
 
 ■ — — Alteration — Power of general meeting- 
 Dismissal of directors ■ 23 Ch. D. 1 
 See CoMPANT — ^Directoe's Appointment. 
 2. 
 
 AlteratioiT- Power to reduce capital 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 268 
 See Company — Keduotion of Capital. 
 2. 
 Application of rules to winding-up — ^With- 
 drawing and continuing members — 
 Charge on particular fund 24 Ch. D. 
 [425, n ; 28 Ch. D. 559 ; 10 App. Cas. 33 
 See Company — Disthibution op Assets. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 General meeting — ^Eesolution for winding- 
 up - 29 Ch. D. 159 
 See Company — ^Voltntaky ■Winding-'dp. 
 1. 
 
 IV. COMPANY— CONTRACTS. 
 
 1. Contract by Directors — Loan to 
 
 Company — Whetlier Directors personally liable.^ 
 By agreement between the T. Company aqd the 
 Plaintiff, the Defendants, describing themselves 
 as " we the undersigned, three of the directors," 
 agreed to repay £500 advanced by the Plaintiff 
 " to the company," and assigned to the Plaintiff 
 as security for the advance certain "machines 
 and tools," which were the property of the com- 
 pany : — Held, after hearing parol evidence to ex- 
 plain the ambiguity of the agreement, that the 
 Defendants were personally liable to repay the 
 £500. McCoLLiN V. Gilpin 6 Q. B. D. 516 
 
 2. Contract by Promoters — Ratification 
 
 hy Company — Contract to pay Money to Third 
 Party. ^ A. and B. agreed with C. on behalf of 
 a company intended to be formed, that A. and B. 
 should sell and the company buy a certain busi- 
 ness, and it was a term of the agreement that 
 sixty guineas should be paid to J. & P. solicitors, 
 for their expenses and charges in registering 
 the company. The memorandum of association 
 adopted this agreement, and the directors subse- 
 quently ratified it. An order having been made 
 for winding-up the company, J. & P. claimed to 
 prove for the sixty guineas : — Held (affirming the 
 decision of the Vice-Chanoellor of the County 
 Palatine), that the claim must be disallowed, 
 for that the contract between A. and B. and C. 
 having been entered into before the company 
 was in existence, could not by mere ratification 
 be made binding on the company, and that a 
 
 IV. COMPANY— CONTEACTS-coiiti/ittefi. 
 contract between A. and B. and the company, 
 to which J. & P. were in no way parties, that the 
 company should pay money to J. & P., would not 
 entitle J. & P. to proceed against the company. — 
 Gregory v. Williams (3 Mer. 582) explained. In 
 re Empbess Engineering Company 16 Ch. D. 125 
 
 3. ■ ■ Fraudulent Agreement — Rescinding 
 
 Fraudulent Agreement — Winding-up.'] B., for the 
 purpose of enabling a company to have a fictitious 
 credit in case of inquiries at their bankers, placed 
 money to their credit which they were to hold in 
 trust for him. Some of the money having been 
 drawn out with B.'s consent, and the company 
 having been ordered to be wound up while a 
 balance remained : — Held (affirming the decision 
 of Bacon, V.C.), that B. could not claim to have 
 the balance paid to him. In re Great Berlin 
 Steamboat Company 26 Ch. D. 616 
 
 4. Winding-up — Running Contract — 
 
 Charge on Moneys payable under the Contract — 
 Winding-up of contracting Company — Set-off — 
 Salvage Money — Moneys payable under concurrent 
 Contracts — Notice — Mutual Credit — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869 (82 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 39.] By the 
 terms of a contract between the Commissioners of 
 Sewers and a wood paving company, the company 
 were to pave a particular street called Victoria 
 Street, and the Commissioners were to pay 60 per 
 cent, of the moneys due a month after the engineer 
 certified the works to be complete ; 30 per cent, 
 within three months afterwards ; and 10 per cent, 
 at the expiration of two years. During the two 
 years the company were to keep the wood surface 
 of the roadway in repair, and if, before the expi- 
 ration of the two years, the Commissioners should 
 give them notice, the company were also to keep 
 the roadway in repair for fifteen years upon being 
 paid for tlie same at the annual rate of 6d. per 
 square yard. The Commissioners were to be at 
 liberty to retain from time to time " out of any 
 money payable by them to the contractors," an 
 amount equal to the above annual charge, by way 
 of security ; and in the event of failure by the 
 company to perform the contract, the moneys re- 
 tained were to be forfeited, and to be held by 
 the Commissioners as liquidated damages for the 
 default ; and it was provided that whenever " ac- 
 cording to the terms of this contract," any money 
 should be due from the company to the Commis- 
 sioners for damages or otherwise, the Commis- 
 sioners might either sue for such money or deduct 
 or set off the same against any money due from 
 them to the company .^The contract being dated 
 on the 22nd of September, 1882, the company on 
 the 15th of November, 1882, gave to L. and C, 
 timber merchants, a charge on all their interest 
 in the contract to secure a debt for goods sold and 
 delivered; and on the 9th of December, 1882, 
 notice of this charge was given to the Commis- 
 sioners. — On the same 9th of December, 1882, but 
 after the notice, the company presented a petition 
 for a winding-up order, and on the 12th and 16th 
 of December the provisional official liquidator was 
 empowered and ordered to complete the contract 
 and to obtain the necessary timber on security of 
 the moneys to be received subject to L. and C.'s 
 charge. On the 13th of January, 1883, the wind- 
 ing-up order was made ; on the 29th of January 
 
( 331 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 332 ) 
 
 IV. COM-PATHY— COTXTRACrS— continued. 
 the liquidator, having completed the work, sent 
 in a claim to the Oommissioners, and on the 8th 
 of March, 1883, the engineer certified the work to 
 be complete. On the 19th of March, 1883, the 
 Commissionera sent to the liquidator a claim of 
 set-off for anticipated loss by breach of the con- 
 tract to repair for fifteen years, the amount of such 
 claim being estimated by the diflference between 
 Is. a square yard, which the Commissioners con- 
 sidered they would have to pay for the repairs, 
 and the 6d. a square yard provided for by the 
 agreement. They also claimed to set off damages 
 accrued and anticipated under other contracts for 
 paving other streets. Except as to a trifling sum, 
 it was not alleged that any cause of action for 
 breach of any of these contracts accrued before 
 the 27th of January, 1883. On the 25th of May, 
 1883, the Commissioners served the company (in 
 liquidation) with formal notice to repair for fifteen 
 years from the 8th of March, 1885 : — Held, that 
 the liquidator was not entitled to a first charge on 
 the moneys payable under the contract for the 
 cost of completing tbe work incuired by him 
 since the winding-up. — Decision of Bacon, V.C., 
 reversed. — Held, further, that the chargees, L. 
 and C, were entitled to a charge on 90 per cent, 
 of the moneys payable under the contract (subject 
 as above) undiminished by any retainer or set-off 
 by the Commissioners either under the Victoria 
 Street contract or otherwise. — Decision of Bacon, 
 V.C., aflirmed. — Held, further, that the Commis- 
 sioners might prove for their cross-claim under 
 the contract of the 22nd of September, 1882. — 
 Decision of Bacon, V.O., affirmed. — Held, further, 
 that the Commissioners were not entitled to retain 
 any moneys due under the contract of the 22nd of 
 September, 1882, in respect of moneya due under 
 aviy of the concurrent contracts. — Decision of 
 Bacon, V.C, affirmed. In re Asphaltio Wood 
 Pavement Company. Lee & Chapman's Case 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 624 ; 30 Ch. D. 216 
 
 V. COMPANY— ACTIONS (by and against). 
 
 Leave to sue in Name of Company — 
 
 Winding-up.'] An order was made on the appli- 
 cation of E., in a winding-up, directing that he 
 should receive his costs of the application out of 
 the assets. H. & Co. were his solicitors in this 
 application, but had no other connection with 
 the company or its affairs. The costs were not 
 paid, and K. became bankrupt. Subsequently 
 Blalins, V.C, made an order, on the application 
 of H. & Co., that they should be at liberty, on 
 giv.ing such indemnity as the Judge should direct, 
 to institute such proceedings as they might be 
 advised against the former directors and pro- 
 moters, to recover certain sums from them, the 
 applicants undertaking to pay into the bank 
 to the credit of the liquidators whatever was 
 recovered, and also to abide by any order the 
 Court or Judge might make as to the costs of 
 such proceedings. H. & Co. thereupon commenced 
 this action in the name of the company, against 
 the former directors and promoters without having 
 taken any steps to have the indemnity fixed by 
 the Judge, The Defendants moved that all 
 further proceedings might be stayed, or the suit 
 and all proceedings under it set aside, on the 
 ground that the action had been commenced 
 
 V. COMPANY — ACTIONS (by and against)— 
 
 ayntinued. 
 without proper authority. This application was 
 refused by Malins, V.C, who expressed his opinion 
 that the undertaking of H. & Co., contained in 
 the order, was a sufficient indemnity : — Held, on 
 appeal, that as H. & Co. were strangers to the 
 company, being neither creditors nor contribu- 
 tories, and having no charge on the assets, there 
 was no jurisdiction to give them leave to sue in 
 the name of the company: — Held, also, that if 
 there had been jurisdiction to make such an 
 order, the action would still have been com- 
 menced without authority, the condition precedent 
 of H. & Co. giving indemnity not having been 
 complied with : — Held, therefore, that the action 
 must be dismissed, as having been instituted 
 without authority, and that H. & Co. must pay 
 the costs of all parties, including the official 
 liquidators ; the costs of the company being taxed 
 as between solicitor and client, and the other 
 costs as between party and party. Cape Bketon 
 Company v. Fenn - - - 17 Ch. D. 198 
 
 VI. COMPANY — DEBENTTJEES (and MOET- 
 GAGES). 
 
 1. Borrowing Powers — Debenture Stoch 
 
 — Mortgages — Companies Clauses Act, 1863 (26 
 & 27 Vict. c. 118), Part Jil. — Priority — Debenture 
 Stock " at any time created by the Company " — 
 Practice — Bules of Court, 1875, Order ltiii., r. 6 — 
 Costs — Cross Notice of Appeal.] By the Cornwall 
 Minerals Railway Act, 1873, the Cornwall Minerals 
 Kailway Company was empowered to borrow on 
 mortgage to the extent of £250,000, and to issue 
 debenture stock subject to the provisions of the 
 Companies Clauses Act, 1868, Part in., but not- 
 withstanding anything therein contained, the 
 interest of all debenture stock, at any time 
 created by the company was to rank pari passu 
 with the interest of all mortgages " at any time 
 granted by the company " and should have 
 priority over all principal money secured by such 
 mortgages. — By a later Act of 1875, the company 
 were empowered to raise additional capital ; and 
 after providing that the principal secured by all 
 mortgages granted by the company before the 
 passing of the Act, should have priority over the 
 principal secured by all mortgages granted by 
 virtue of that Act, the company was empowered 
 to issue debenture stock subject to the provisions 
 of the Companies Clauses Act, 1863, but tlie 
 interest of all debenture stock created and issued 
 at any time after the passing of that Act was to 
 rank pari passu with the interest of all mortgages 
 granted after the passing of that Act, and should 
 have priority over all principal moneys secured 
 by such mortgages. — By another Act of 1877 
 power to raise a further sum by the issue of 
 debenture stock under provisions similar to those 
 in the Act of 1875 was given to the company. — 
 The company granted mortgages and issued de- 
 benture stock under the powers of the Act of 
 1873 before the passing of the Act of 1875.— 
 They also issued further debenture stock under 
 the powers of the Act of 1873 after the passing 
 of the Act of 1875, but before the passing of the 
 Act of 1877. They also issued fui'ther debenture 
 stock under the powers of the Act of 1S73 after 
 the passing of the Act of 1877 ; and also issued 
 
( 333 ) 
 
 DiaEST OF OASES, 
 
 ( 334 ) 
 
 TI. COMPANY — DEBENTURES (and MOET- 
 
 &AOES — continued. 
 debentuie stock under the powers of the Acts of 
 1875 and 1877 after the passing of the Act of 
 1877. — The company being unable to pay the 
 iaterest on all these mortgages and debenture 
 stock in full, a receiver of the undertaking was 
 appointed by the Court, and a special case settled 
 for ascertaining the priorities -.—Seld, first, that 
 notwithstanding the words " at any time " in the 
 Act of 1873 the enactment therein contained 
 applied only to the mortgage debt and debenture 
 stock for which provision was made by that Act. 
 — Secondly, that upon the true ooustriiotion of 
 the several Acts of 1873, 1875, and 1877, the 
 order of priority of the interest on the mortgages 
 and debenture stocks was as follows : — (1.) The 
 interest on the mortgages and debenture stocks 
 granted and issued under the powers of the Act 
 ■of 1873 previously to the passing of the Act of 
 1875. — (2.) The interest on the debenture stock 
 jssued under the Act of 1873 after the passing of 
 the Act of 1875, but before the Act of 1877.— 
 |(3.) The interest on the debentiu'e stock created 
 under any of the Acts, after the passing of the 
 Act of 1877. — Thirdly, that the principal of 
 mortgages for the time being due had priority 
 of payment next after the interest of the deben- 
 ture stock issued before the passing of the Act of 
 1875.— The decision of Hall, V.C, substantially 
 aflSrmed. Hakbison' v. Cobkwall Minerals 
 Kail WAT Compant. Fentojt v. Harwsos- 
 
 [16 Ch. v. 66 ; 18 Ch. D. 334 ; 8 App. Cas. 780 
 
 3. • Cancellation — Debentures given up to 
 
 he cancelled — Contract hy Company to issue fully 
 f aid-up Shares — Consideration — Contributory — 
 Proof for Damages in the Liquidation — Com- 
 panies' Act, 1867, s. 25.J A., a director, and the 
 solicitor of the Great Australian Gold Mining 
 Company, obtained by assignments from K., one 
 of the vendors of a mine, situate in South Australia, 
 to the company two debentures of and which were 
 given by the company for £500 each in part pay- 
 ment of the purchase-money ; and in consideration 
 of A. giving them up to be cancelled the company 
 ■contracted to issue to him 500 £2 fully paid-up 
 shares. No contract was ever registered under 
 the provisions of the 25th section of the Com- 
 panies Act, 1867. A. had been by order of the 
 Court placed on the list of coutributories for the 
 500 shares. — On summons taken out by A. : — 
 Seld, that there was no duty cast upon him to 
 register the contract ; and that the breach of the 
 contract by the company having been established, 
 A. was entitled to prove in the liquidation for 
 damages for calls made or which might be made 
 on the shares. — Mudford's Claim (14 Oh. D. 634) 
 followed. — Bouldsworth v. City of Glasgow Bank 
 (5 App. Cas. 317) distinguished. Great Austea- 
 iiAN Gold Mining Company. Ex parte Apple- 
 yard - - - 18 Ch. D. 587 
 
 3. Irregularity in Issue — Companies 
 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 — Transferee far 
 Value without Notice — ■Estoppel.'] Where a com- 
 pany has power to issue legally transferable securi- 
 ties an irregularity in the issue cannot be set up 
 against even the original holder if he has a right 
 to presume omnia rite acta. If such securities 
 
 VI. COMPANY — DEBEHXVEES (and MOET- 
 
 GAGES — continued. 
 bo legally transferable such an irregularity and 
 a fortiori any equity against the original holder, 
 cannot be asserted by the company against a 
 bonS, fide transferee for value without notice. 
 Nor can such an equity be set up against , an 
 equitable transferee, whether the securities were 
 transferable at law or not, if by the original con- 
 duct of the company in issuing the securities 
 or by their subsequent dealing with the transferee 
 he has a superior equity. If the original conduct 
 of the company in Issuing debentures was such 
 that the public were justified in treating it as n 
 representation that they were legally transferable, 
 there would be an equity on the part of any per- 
 son who had agreed for value to take a transfer 
 of these debentures to restrain the company from 
 pleading their invalidity, although that might be 
 a defence at law to an action by the transferor. — 
 A company having, subject to the conditions in 
 the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 
 (8 & 9 Vict. 0. 16), the power of borrowing, issued, 
 after resolutions jjassed at a meeting at which an 
 insuflBcient number of shareholders were present, 
 debentures to the contractor J. B. P., who was 
 present at the meeting and knew of the irregu- 
 larities of the company. — J. B. P. transferred some 
 of the debentures to Y., a sub-contractor, for a 
 nominal consideration, and some to C. for value. 
 — Y. had a bill against J. B. P., and P. dis- 
 counted it and took as security a deposit of some 
 of the debentures which had been registered in 
 the name of J. B. P. These debentures were 
 not transferred to P. and the transfer to Y. 
 was not registered. — T. took a transfer of other 
 debentures from Y. for a nominal consideration 
 which had not been registered in the name of 
 J. B. P., but the transfer to Y. had been 
 registered and T. alleged that he gave value 
 to Y. Kegistration of the transfer to T. was 
 refused. He brought an action against the 
 company for payment and for registration, but it 
 was stopped by the winding-up, C. had a transfer 
 for full value and registered: — Held, that C. 
 had a valid claim to be paid his debentures, 
 and that the company were estopped from setting 
 up the irregularity in the issue of them : — Held, 
 also, that P. and T. must be treated as equit- 
 able transferees only, but without reason to sus- 
 pect any irregularity in the issue, and that they 
 could be allowed to recover only such a sum as 
 each of them might be able to prove he bonS. fide 
 advanced upon the securities which he received. 
 In re Eomeord Canal Company. Pooook's 
 Claim. Teiokett's Claim. Cabew's- Claim 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 85 
 
 4, Power of Company to deal with Pro- 
 perty — Charge on General Undertaldng — Mort- 
 gage — Priority.'} The directors of a company 
 with power to borrow or create mortgages or 
 issue debentures, issued debentures purporting to 
 charge the undertaking and the hereditaments 
 and effects of the company with the payment of 
 the sums mentioned in the debentures respec- 
 tively, to the intent that the debentures might 
 rank equally as a first charge on the undertaking, 
 hereditaments and effects of the company. They 
 
( 335 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 336 ) 
 
 VI. COMPAKY — DEBENTTJEES (and MOET- 
 
 QAGES) — continued. 
 afterwards, in consideration of £4000 advanced 
 and applied to the purposes of the company, 
 deposited with the Plaintiff the title-deeds of the 
 colliery the property of the company, and by a 
 written agreement charged the property com- 
 prised in the deeds with the payment to the 
 Plaintiff of £4000 and interest : — Held, that the 
 mortgage to the Plaintiff had priority over the 
 debentures. Wheatley v. Silkstone and Haiqh 
 MooE Coal Company - - 29 Ch. D. 715 
 
 S. Power of Company to deal with Pro- 
 perty — Charge on all Property present and future 
 — Floating Seeurity.] A company which carried 
 on the business of ironmasters and manufac- 
 turers, issued debentures for a total sum of 
 £500,000, by which they charged their under- 
 taking, works, stock-in-trade, plant, moneys, and 
 other real and personal property, both present and 
 future, with the 'payment of the sums secured by 
 the deijentures " to the intent that the same charge 
 shall, until default in the payment of the prin- 
 cipal or interest to accrue due or become payable 
 in respect of the said sum of £500,000, or some 
 part thereof, be a floating security upon the 
 undertaking, works, and property of the company, 
 not hindering sales or leases of, or other dealings 
 with, any of the property or assets of the company 
 in the course of its business as a going concern." 
 The company afterwards contracted to sell some 
 of their land : — Eeld, that the purchaser was en- 
 titled to reasonable evidence that there had been 
 no default in the payment of the principal or in- 
 terest of the debentures. — In re Florence Land 
 and Public Works Company (10 Ch. D. 530) and 
 In re Colonial Trusts Cor2)oration (15 Ch. D. 465) 
 distinguished. In re Hoene and Hellakd 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 736 
 
 6. Priority — Costs of Bealization — Action 
 
 hy Debenture-holders — Receiver and Manager — 
 Trustees — Practice — Set-off — BuZes of Supreme 
 Court, 1883, Order Lxr., r. 27, sub-s. 21."] In a suit 
 instituted by a debenture-holder of a company, on 
 behalf of himself and the other debenture-holders, 
 against the company and the trustees of a deed, 
 by which leasehold collieries and plant of the 
 company were assigned to trustees to secure the 
 payment of the debentures, to enforce the security, 
 a receiver and manager was appointed. He 
 worked the collieries for some years at a loss. 
 Ultimately the property was sold, the Plaintiff 
 having the conduct of the sale, and the purchase- 
 money was paid into Court. The fund was in- 
 sufficient. The original Plaintiff became bankrupt 
 in the course of the proceedings, and another 
 debenture-holder was substituted for him as 
 Plaintiff. On the further consideration of the 
 suit : — Beld, that the costs and other expenses 
 must be paid out of the fund in the following 
 order :— (1.) The Plaintiff's costs of the realiza- 
 tion of the property, including the costs of an 
 abortive attempt to sell. (2.) The balance due 
 to the receiver and manager (including his re- 
 muneration) and his costs of the suit. (3.) The 
 costs, charges, and expenses of the trustees of 
 the deed. (4.) The two Plaintiffs' costs of the 
 suit, pari passu. — When the second Plaintiff was 
 
 VI. COMPANY — DEBENTURES and MOEr- 
 
 Q AQYS— continued. 
 substituted for the first, an order was made that 
 the solicitors of the first Plaintiff should^ without 
 prejudice to their Hen (if any) deliver up to the 
 solicitor of the second Plaintiff all documents in 
 their possession relating to the conduct and pro- 
 secution of the suit : — Held, that the solicitors of 
 the first Plaintiff had no lien on the documents 
 which could entitle them to priority in respect of 
 their costs. — Two summonses taken out by the 
 Plaintiff were heard with the further considera- 
 tion of the suit, and were dismissed with costs. — 
 Held, that these costs must be set off against the 
 costs which the Plaintiff was entitled to receive 
 out of the fund. Batten v. Wedgwood CoAi. 
 AND Ikon Company - - 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 7. Priority — Saloage — Statutory Charge 
 
 ■ — Condition Precedent — " Owner of a Limited 
 Interest in Land" — Special Act — Borrowing 
 Powers — Directory Clauses — Companies Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 4 9 Vict. c. 16), ss. 41, 
 42.] The special Act (11 & 12 Vict, c 142) incor- 
 porating a company for the purpose (inter alia) of 
 draining and reclaiming land, empowered the 
 " owner of a limited interest in land " to contract 
 with the company for the execution of drainage 
 and reclamation works, and for that purpose to 
 charge on the land (in the manner provided by 
 the Act), the cost of executing the works. The 
 Act defined the term " owner of a limited interest 
 in land," as including "any person entitled to^ 
 any land subject to any mortgage or charge 
 thereon, provided such person shall be in posses- 
 sion of the land mortgaged or charged " : — Held, 
 that this definition included a purchaser in pos- 
 session of land upon which the vendor had a lien 
 for unpaid purchase-money. — The Act provided 
 (by sect. 34) that " from and after the due exe- 
 cution of the works mentioned in any contract " 
 (between the company and an owner of land) " or 
 any part of any such works, such execution, to- 
 gether with the amount due in respect of the 
 same, being duly certified by three directors of" 
 the company under the seal of the company, the 
 company shall be entitled to, and shall have a 
 Hen and charge upon the lands so drained, &c., 
 for the moneys or money mentioned in such cer- 
 tificate as aforesaid. . . . and such lien or charge 
 shall have priority over every other charge or 
 incumbrance affecting the same land," except 
 ground rents and tithe commutation rent-charge : 
 — Held, that the certificate of the directors was 
 not conclusive, but only primS, facie evidence of 
 the due execution of the works mentioned in it, 
 and that if, notwithstanding the certificate, it 
 was shewn that the works had not been duly exe- 
 cuted according to the contract, the company 
 would not be entitled to the statutory charge on 
 the laud as against a prior incumbrancer, or even 
 as against the equitable owner. A second mort- 
 gagee who is in possession of the mortgaged 
 property and expends money in permanently in>- 
 proving or preserving it, is not entitled as against 
 the first mortgagee to any charge on the property 
 for the money so expended. — The 41st and 42ad 
 sections of the Companies Clauses Act, 1845, re- 
 quiring mortgages to be duly stamped and the 
 
( 337 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 < 33S ) 
 
 VI. COMPANY — DEBENTURES (and MOET- 
 
 OrA.SES)— continued. 
 oonsideration to be duly stated, do not make 
 void an instrument tho consideration for which 
 is apparent, though it is not in terms stated.— 
 A provision in a company's special Act that 
 moneys were to be borrowed by order of a 
 general meeting: — Held, to be directory only, 
 and not to postpone money borrowed without such 
 order to other mortgages of the company, ranking 
 in other respects pari passu. — The borrowing 
 powers of companies and the priorities of mort- 
 gagees under the 42nd section of the Companies 
 Clauses Act considered. Landowneks West of 
 
 EiS^GLAND AND SoUTH "WALES LAND DkAINAGE 
 AND InCLOSURE COMPANY V. ASHFOED 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 411 
 
 Misrepresentation as to object of loan 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 489 
 See Company — ^Peospeotus. 5. 
 
 VII. COMPANY— DIVIDENDS. 
 
 1. Bonus — Capital or Income — Tenant 
 
 for Life and Remainderman.'] A testator died 
 in 1876 having bequeathed his residuary personal 
 estate to his executor T. B. in trust for the tes- 
 tator's wife for life, and after her death to T. B. 
 Part of the residuary estate consisted of 600 
 shares in a company whose directors had power, 
 before recommending a dividend, to set apart out 
 of the profits such sum as they thought proper 
 as a reserved fund, for meeting contingencies, 
 equalizing dividends, or repairing or maintaining 
 the works. The shares were £10 shares on which 
 £7 10s. per share had been paid up. In 1880 the 
 reserved fund was £100,000, which had been 
 made up in the testator's lifetime, and there was 
 also an "undivided profit" fund of £36,070, 
 more than half of which arose from profits earned 
 in his lifetime. In September, 1880, the direc- 
 tors proposed to add to the "undivided profit" 
 fund £7246, and recommended that the £100,000, 
 and £38,000 out of the undivided profit fund, 
 should be distributed as a "bonus dividend" of 
 £2 10s. per share, and that there should be created 
 new £10 shares amounting in number to one- 
 third of the original shares, so that one new share 
 might be allotted to each shareholder for every 
 three original shares which he held, .£7 10s. per 
 share to be paid on allotment, which £7 10s. the 
 bonus would enable him to pay. At a general 
 meeting these recommendations were adopted, 
 and special refolutions were passed, authorizing 
 the directors, with the sanction of a general meet- 
 ing, to declare a bonus out of the reserved and 
 undivided profit fund, and providing for the issue 
 and allotment of new shares. These resolutions 
 were confirmed at a subsequent meeting, at which 
 an ordinary resolution was passed for paying the 
 bonus of £2 10s. per share. The warrant for the 
 bonus had at its foot a memorandum to be signed 
 by the shareholder directing the registrar of the 
 company to apply the bonus in payment of the 
 call. T. B. accepted the 200 new shares allotted 
 to him, and signed the memorandum, and the 
 new shares were registered in his name. After 
 the death of the testator's wife in 1883, the ques- 
 tion was raised whether the bonus of 1880 and 
 the new shares belonged to the widow as tenant 
 ■ for life, or to T. B. as entitled to the caijital of 
 
 VII. COMPANY— DIVIDENDS— coniinMed. 
 the testator's estate at her death : — Held, by 
 Kay, J., that they were capital and belonged to 
 T. B. — Held, on appeal, that there is no rule 
 that where a sum, whether called bonus or divi- 
 dend, is distributed by a company among its 
 shareholders, it must, if it is paid out of the accu- 
 mulated profits of past years, be treated between 
 tenant for life and remainderman as capital. In 
 most, if not all, cases, the inquiry when the 
 profits out of which it is paid were earned is 
 immaterial, the question being whether the com- 
 pany, having the power of distributing its profits 
 as dividend, or of converting them into capital, 
 has taken the former or the latter course. — Held, 
 that in the present case the company had not, by 
 setting aside profits to a reserved fund applicable 
 for purposes several of which, were not such as 
 ought to be satisfied out of capital, or to an un- 
 divided profits fund, made them capital,— that 
 the distribution of the bonus was not conditional 
 on the shareholders accej)ting the new shares, 
 and that it was not converted into capital by the 
 offer of the new shares, the shareholders not being 
 bound to apply it in taking them, that it must 
 therefore be treated as income belonging to the 
 tenant for life, and that the new shares acquired 
 by means of it belonged to her estate. In re 
 BouoH. Speoule v. Bouoh 29 Ch. D. 635 
 
 2. Bonus — Income Tax — Insurance Com- 
 pany — " Annual Profits or Gains " — Sums paid as 
 Bonuses to participating Policy-lwlders — 5 <fe 6 
 Vict. c. 35, s. 54.] A life insurance company 
 issued "participating policies," at an increased 
 premium, according to the terms of which at the 
 end of each quinquennial period "the gross 
 profits " of such policies were thus dealt with : 
 two-thirds were returned by way of bonus or 
 abatement of premiums to the holders of such 
 policies then in force : the remaining third went 
 to the company who bore the whole expenses of 
 the business, ttie portion remaining after payment 
 of expenses constituting the only profit available 
 for division among the shareholders : — Held re- 
 versing the decision of the Court of Appeal, by 
 Lords Blackburn and FitzGerald, Lord Bramwell 
 dissenting, that the two-thirds returned to the 
 policy-holders were " annual profits or gains," 
 and assessable to income tax. Last v. London 
 ASSUEANOE COKPOEATION - 12 Q. B. D. 389 ; 
 [14 Q. B. D. 239 ; 10 App. Cas. 438 
 
 3. Payment in " proportion to Shares " — • 
 
 Shares fully and partly paid up — Participation 
 equally in Dividend — Construction of Articles of 
 Association — Companies Act, 1 862 (25 & 26 Vict, 
 c. 89), \st Sched., Table A., Beg. 72 ; and Com- 
 panies Amendment Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 1 31), 
 s. 24, sub-s. 3.] The capital of a company, incor- 
 porated under the Acts of 1862 and 1867, con- 
 sisted of 60,000 shares of £1 ; 40,000 were fulJy 
 paid-up, and 20,000 to the extent of only 5s. per 
 share. By the 7lBt article of association tiie 
 directors may " declare a dividend to be paid to 
 the members in proportion to their shares." By 
 the definition clauses the word "capital" was de- 
 clared to mean the capital for the time being of 
 the company, and the word " shares" the shares 
 into which the capital is divided. In a question 
 whether the directors could competently recom- 
 
( 339 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 340 ) 
 
 VII. COMPANY— DIVIDEKBS—coniijmefJ. 
 
 mend a dividend payable to each shareholder in 
 proportion to the amount paid up upon the shares 
 held by him : — Held, affirming the decision of the 
 Court below, that such a declaration of dividend 
 was incompetent, because upon the true construc- 
 tion of the articles of association, read with the 
 Acta of 1862 and 1867, all the shares were entitled 
 to participate equally in dividend, without regard 
 to the amount paid up upon each. — ^See opinions 
 of the Lords at pp. 74, 77, 99, as to the effect of 
 sub-sect. 3, sect. 24, of the Companies Amendment 
 Act, 1867. Oakbank Oil Company v. Okum 
 
 [8 App. Gas. 65 
 
 4. Payment out of Capital — Tramway 
 
 Compamj — Maintenance of Works — Depreciation 
 of Capital — Heinstating Capital — Reserve Fund 
 — Ordinary Shareholders — Preference Share- 
 holders — " Net Profits " ■ — Profits of particular 
 Year.'] The articles of association of a limited 
 tramway company provided that no dividend 
 should be declared except " out of profits " ; that 
 the directors should, with the sanction of the 
 company, declare annual dividends " out of pro- 
 fits " : and that the directors should, before recom- 
 mending a dividend, set aside " out of profits," 
 subject to the sanction of the company, " a reserve 
 fund for maintenance, repairs, depreciation, and 
 renewals." The company had for several years 
 carried on their business, paying a dividend 
 half-yearly on their ordinary shares; but they 
 failed to set apart a reserve fund adequate for 
 the maintenance of their tramway, which eventu- 
 ally became worn out. The company having 
 again declared a half-yearly dividend on their 
 ordinary shares, and the total sum appropriated 
 for the dividend being, as it appeared, much less 
 than the sum required to reinstate the tram- 
 way ; — Held, that the company could only declare 
 a dividend out of the net profits, and that the 
 net profits could not be ascertained without first 
 restoring the tramway to an efficient condition, 
 or making due provision for the purpose out of 
 the company's assets. An injunction was ac- 
 cordingly granted restraining the company from 
 paying the half-yearly dividend they had de- 
 clared, hut leave was given them to move to 
 dissolve the injunction, in the event of their 
 being able to satisfy the Court that there were 
 profits available for the dividend: — Held, how- 
 ever that the holders of preference sliares, the 
 dividend on which was " dependent on the profits 
 of the particular year only," were entitled to a 
 dividend out of the profits of any year after 
 setting aside a proportionate amount sufficient 
 for the maintenance of the tramway for that 
 year only ; and were not to be deprived of that 
 dividend in order to make good the sums which 
 in previous years should have been set aside by 
 the company for maintenance, but which had 
 been improperly applied by them in paying 
 dividends. Dent v. London Tramways Com- 
 pany - 16 Ch, D, 344 
 See also Davison v. Gillies - 16 Ch. D. 347, n. 
 
 Liability of directors— Payment of dividends 
 
 out of capital -' 21 Ch. D. 149, 619 ; 
 [25 Ch. D. 762 
 See Company — Dibbotok's Liability. 
 4, 5, 6. 
 
 vni. COMPANY- EEDTJCTION OF CAPITAL 
 
 1. Purchase by Company of its own Shares 
 
 — Companies Act, 1862, es. 12, 23 — Companies 
 Act, 1867, s. 9.] The memorandum of association 
 of a limited colliery company gave the company 
 power to do all things which it should consider 
 conducive to the attainments of its objects, but 
 did not in terms give any power to purchase its 
 own shares. The 10th clause of the articles 
 empowered the directors to purchase for the 
 company any shares in the company, and directed 
 that the shares so pm'chased should be dealt with 
 as if they had never been issued, and that any 
 profit arising on the re-issuing or subsequent sale 
 of such shares should be deemed profits of the 
 year in which they were re-issued or sold. In 
 1872, disputes having arisen as to the conduct of 
 the business, the directors agreed with W., the 
 largest shareholder, who was also one of the 
 directors, to purchase for the company his shares 
 and also his interest as landlord of the mines 
 worked by the company. This arrangement was 
 confirmed by an extraordinary general meeting of 
 the company, and was earned into effect by an 
 assignment of his interest in the mines to the 
 company for a specific sum, and by a transfer to 
 the company of his shares for another specific 
 sum. The company was entered in the share 
 register as holder of these shares, and in all the 
 subsequent returns to the Eegistrar of Joint 
 Stock Companies the company was entered as 
 such holder. The company for some time was 
 prosperous, but afterwards fell into difficulties, 
 and in 1879 an order was made for winding it 
 up : — Held, by Jessel, M.B., that the power to 
 the company to purchase its own shares was 
 illegal, and that W. must be placed on the list of 
 contributories. — Held, on appeal, that although 
 the articles could not effectually authorize a 
 general trafficking in shares, as that would be 
 extending the business of the company in a way 
 not authorized by the memorandum, there was 
 nothing illegal in a clause authorizing a pur- 
 chase of shares, not for profit, but for carrying 
 into effect an arrangement considered to be for 
 the benefit of the company; that such a pur- 
 chase did not reduce the capital of the company 
 in any sense in which such reduction is pro- 
 hibited by the Companies Acts ; and that "W. 
 had effectually surrendered his shares to the 
 company and ceased to be a shareholder ftom 
 the date of the surrender, and was not a contri- 
 butory : — Held, further, that if the transaction, 
 supposing it to have been carried into effect 
 without the sanction of the extraordinary general 
 meeting, would have been questionable, the com- 
 pany having confirmed it, and taken the benefit 
 of it, could not now have impeached it, and that 
 the liquidator had no better right. In re Dkon- 
 
 FIELD SiLKSTONE CoAL COMPANY 17 Ch. D. 76 
 
 2. Purchase by Company of its own 
 
 Shares — Power to alter Articles of Association — 
 Resolution effecting tioo Objects.'] A company 
 having formed a scheme for reducing their capital 
 by the purchase of fully paid shares, and this 
 being in violation of their articles of association, 
 passed a resolution at a general meeting : " That 
 notwithstanding anything contained in the 
 articles, the directors be authorized to carry out 
 
( 341 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 342 ) 
 
 VIII. COMPANY— EEDXrCTION OF CAPITAL— 
 
 ctmtinued. 
 the following compromise or modification of the 
 agreement with the vendors," which was in effect 
 to cancel 12,000 fully paid vendors' £5 shares 
 upon payment of £1 3s. id. per share: — Held, 
 that this resolution was valid, notwithstanding 
 that'the effect of it was to carry out two distinct 
 ohjecta, viz., to set aside for the purpose of this 
 transaction the article forbidding the purchase of 
 shares, and to authorize the directors to carry out 
 the proposed scheme. — Imperial Hydropatliic 
 Hotel Company v. Hampson (28 Ch. D. 1) dis- 
 cussed and explained. — GampbelVs Case (Law Kep. 
 9 Ch. 1) followed. Tatlob v. Pilsek Joel and 
 Genebal Electkio Light Company 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 268 
 
 3, Sanction of Court — Notice to Creditors 
 
 — Advertisement of Petition— Companies Act, 1862, 
 Sclied. 1 , Table A., arts. 26 and 27 — Companies Act, 
 1877— Gen. Ord. Nov., 1862, r. 53— Gen. Ord. 
 March, 1868, rr. 4, 5.] A company was empowered 
 by its articles of association to increase its capital 
 by the issue of new shares and to issue such shares 
 at a discount ; also to reduce its capital. Of the 
 company's original capital, which was made up 
 of £10 shares, some of the shares taken were 
 fully paid up, and others were issued and taken 
 at the price of £2 per share, £8 per share being 
 credited as paid in pursuance of a contract duly 
 registered under sect. 25 of the Companies Act, 
 1867. Part of their capital having been lost the 
 company passed a resolution for the reduction of 
 its nominal amount by writing off £7 from each 
 fully paid £10 share and from each £10 share on 
 which £8 had been credited as paid, and by re- 
 ducing all shares remaining unissued from £10 
 to £3 per share. — A petition was then presented 
 under the Companies Acts, 1867 and 1877, to 
 obtain the sanction of the Court to this resolution, 
 the petition being supported by evidence that all 
 the creditors of the company had been paid up 
 to a recent date, except one, who appeared and 
 consented to the petition. The Court made the 
 order as prayed, and dispensed with the usual 
 notices to creditors and advertisement of the 
 petition. In re Plaskynaston Tube Company 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 542 
 
 5. Sanction of Court — Notice to Creditors 
 
 — Advertisement of Petition — Companies Act, 1867 
 — Companies Act, 1877— (?e«. Ord. March, 1868, 
 r. 5.'] A limited company whose shares were all 
 fully paid up, having lost part of its capital, pre- 
 sented a petition to reduce the nominal capital 
 by the amount of the loss, reducing the nominal 
 amount of each share from £1 to 12s. 6d Bacon, 
 V.-C, refused to hear the petition until its pre- 
 sentation had bee a advertised as prescribed by 
 the 5th rule of the General Order of 1868, made 
 under the Companies Act, 1867 : — Held, on 
 appeal, that a petition for reduction of capital 
 authorized by the Companies Act, 1877, ought 
 prim& facie to be advertised as directed by the 
 General Order of 1868, though the Judge has 
 a discretion to dispense with advertisements if he 
 is satisfied that the interests of creditors cannot 
 be affected by what is proposed, and that as in 
 the present case the Judge in his discretion 
 thought that the petition ought to be advertised. 
 
 VIII. COMPANY- BEDTICTION OF CAPITAL— 
 
 continued. 
 the Court of Appeal would not interfere. In re 
 Tambbaohebby Estates Company 39 Ch, D. 683 
 
 4. Special Resolution — Commutation of 
 
 Time— Companies Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89), 
 8. 51.] The interval of not less than fourteen 
 days which under sect. 51 of the Companies Act, 
 1862, is to elapse between the meetings passing 
 and confirming a special resolution of a company 
 is an interval of fourteen clear days, exclusive of 
 the respective days of meeting, and therefore a 
 special resolution for reduction of capital passed 
 at a meeting held on the 25th of February, 1885, 
 and confirmed at a meeting held on the 11th of 
 March, 1885, was held to be bad. In re Eail- 
 WAY Sleepees Supply Company 29 Ch. D, 204 
 
 IX. COffiPANY—SHAEES— ALLOTMENT. 
 
 1. . Contract — Mescission — Cancellatimi of 
 
 Shares— Companies Act, 186?, s. 23.] W. T. and 
 P. applied for sliares in a limited company estab- 
 lished for the purpose of purchasing and working 
 a concession from a foreign Government. T. & P. 
 were directors of the company. The directors 
 sent letters of allotment to the applicants, in which 
 they called on them to pay the allotment money 
 by a certain day. But their names were never 
 entered on the register, nor was any allotment 
 money paid nor certificates of shares issued. 
 Three years afterwards the directors made afresh 
 arrangement with the owners of the concession 
 under which they purported to cancel tlje old 
 allotments and to allot all the shares, except a 
 few reserved for the directors and other persons, 
 to the vendor of the concession and his nominees. 
 The shares were accordingly entered in the re- 
 gister in their names. Soon afterwards the com- 
 pany was ordered to be wound up, and the 
 liquidator applied to the Court to rectify the 
 register by placing on it the names of W. T. & P. 
 for the number of shares allotted to them, and to 
 diminish the number of shares for which the 
 vendor of the concession was entered on the re- 
 gister to a like amount : — Held (affirming the 
 decision of Chitty, J.), that whether the effect of 
 the application and allotment was that W. T. & 
 ]?. became actual members of the company in 
 respect of the shares allotted to them or only 
 agreed to become such members, it was now too 
 late, under tfie circumstances which had ocouiTed, 
 for the company to insist on placing their names 
 on the register. — But, semble, according to tlio 
 true construction of the 23rd section of the Com- 
 panies Act, 1862, they did not become members 
 in respect of the allotted shares, the entry on the 
 register being a condition precedent to such mem- 
 bership. — Held also, that the fact that T. & P. 
 were directors whose duty it was to place the 
 allottees on the register did not affect the ques- 
 tion. In re Eloeenoe Land and Public Wobks 
 Company. Nicol's Case. Tufnell & Ponsoney's 
 Case - - 29 Ch. D, 421 
 
 2. Director — Calls — Estoppel.'] The 
 
 Plaintiff company was constituted by seven per- 
 sons signing the memorandum of association. 
 Afterwards they all were summoned to attend a 
 meeting, but only four attended and they elected 
 three directors. These three elected three other 
 
( 343 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 344 ) 
 
 IX. COMPANY — SHARES — AIIOTMENT — 
 
 continued. 
 
 directors. The three original directora resigned, 
 and afterwards one of the remaining directors sent 
 in his resignation. The Defendant then applied 
 for fifty shares. The two remaining directors 
 resolved that fifty shares should be allotted to 
 the Defendant, that he should be appointed a 
 director, and that the resignation of the retiring 
 director sliould be accepted. The Defendant 
 afterwards attended a meeting of the directors, 
 confirmed the allotment to himself, and joined in 
 passing a resolution, that the shares allotted to 
 himself should be paid up in full forthwith. The 
 Defendant subsequently withdrew his applica- 
 tion and refused to pay the amount of the shares 
 allotted to him. By the articles of association 
 the number of the directors was to be not less 
 than three, and any casual racancy occm-ring in 
 the board might be filled up by the board, and 
 the continuing board might act notwithstanding 
 any vacancy in their body -.—Seld, that the De- 
 fendant was liable to pay the amount of the shares. 
 York Teamways Company v. Willows 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 685 
 
 3. Eepndiation of voidable Contract to 
 
 take Shares — Change of Directors — Quorum of 
 Directors.'] By the articles of association of a 
 limited company it was provided that the number 
 of directors should not be less than four or more 
 than seven, and G., E., S., and T., were named 
 the first directors. It was provided that two di- 
 rectors should form a quorum, and that the con- 
 tinuing directors might act notwithstanding any 
 vacancy in the Board. The directors were em- 
 powered to fill up casual vacancies. A prospectus 
 was issued giving the names of the directors and 
 mentioning G. as chairman. W., who was ac- 
 quainted with G., after communicating with him, 
 applied for shares on the faith of G. and K. being 
 directors. At the first meeting of directors on 
 the 12th of November, 1880, S. and Y. only were 
 present, G. and E. having sent in their resigna- 
 tion on that day ; S. and Y. elected a third di- 
 retor who was not present, and proceeded to allot 
 shares. A letter of allotment in the common 
 form was received by W. about the 15th of No- 
 vember, accompanied with a letter stating that 
 G. and E. had resigned. W. on the 27th wrote 
 to withdraw his offer to take shares on the ground 
 of G. and E. not being directors. The company 
 refused to withdraw his name. On the 3rd of 
 February, 1881, Anderson, another shareholder, 
 obtained an order to remove his name from the 
 register on the ground of the change in the board, 
 but no agreement was shewn that the proceedings 
 in his case should govern the cases of other re- 
 pudiating allottees : — Held, that alihough there 
 was not a board of four directors, a quorum of 
 two was competent to allot shares. — Held, also, 
 that the letter accompanying the letter of allot- 
 ment, and stating the fact of the retirement of G. 
 and E. did not qualify the letter of allotment, so 
 as to prevent it from being an unconditional 
 acceptance of W.'s offer to take shart'S. — Held, 
 therefore, that the allotment was not void. — Held, 
 by Kay, J., that W. never had any right to repu- 
 diate his shares, but held by the Court of Appeal, 
 approving Anderson's Case (17 Oh. D. 373), that 
 
 IX. COMPANY — SHARES — AIIOTMENT — 
 
 continued. 
 as the application to take shares was made on the 
 faith of G. and E. being directors, and they had 
 ceased to be so before allotment, the allotment 
 was voidable.- — Whether a repudiation by W. so 
 late as the 27th of November would in the case 
 of a going concern have entitled him to be relieved 
 from the shares qusere. — But, held, by Kay, J., 
 and by the Court of Appeal that assuming W. to 
 have had a right to rescind, still as he had not 
 before the winding-up taken any proceedings to 
 have his name removed from the register, and no 
 agreement was shewn that the cases of other re- 
 pudiating allottees should be governed by the 
 result of the proceedings in Anderson's Case, W. 
 must be on the list of contributories. — Fox's Case 
 (Law Eep. 5 Eq. 118) observed upon. In re 
 Scottish Petroleum CoMPA^T 23 Ch. D. 413 
 
 X. COMPANY— SHARES— ISSUE. 
 
 1. ■ Issue at a 'Disnovjit— Registered Con- 
 tract — XJltra Vires — Companies Act,\8&7,s.25r\ A 
 limited company may, where so authorized by its 
 articles of association, issue shares at a discount 
 under a contract duly registered pursuant to 
 sect. 25 of the Companies Act, 1867. In re Inoe 
 Hall Eollino Mills Comfant 23 Ch. D. 545, n. 
 [See also In re Plaskynaston Tube Company 
 
 23 Ch. D. 542]; 
 
 2. Numbers of Shares — Faid-up Sliares — 
 
 Companies Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 131), s. 25.j 
 A contract to issue fully paid-up shares for a con- 
 sideration other than money, registered under the 
 Companies Act, 1867, sect. 25, need not specify 
 the numbers of the shares. In re Delta Syndi- 
 cate, Limited. Ex parte Fobde 30 Ch. D. 153 
 
 XI. COMPANY— SHARES— TRANSFER. 
 
 1. Blank Tiansfer— Pledge of Sliares.} 
 
 F., the registered holder of shares in a company, 
 deposited the certificates with C. as security for 
 £150, and gave him a transfer signed by F., with 
 the consideration, the date, and the name of the 
 transferee left in blank. C. deposited the certifi- 
 cates and the blank transfer with Q. as security 
 for £250. C. died insolvent, after wliich Q. filled 
 in his own name as transferee, and sent in the 
 transfer for registration. The shares were ac- 
 cordingly registered in Q.'s name, but whether 
 this was done before notice given by F. to the 
 company and to Q. that P. denied the validity of 
 the transfer, was doubtful on the evidence: — 
 Held, affirming the decision of Fry, J , that Q. 
 had no title against F. except to the extent ot 
 what was due from F. to C. — A person who with- 
 out inquiry takes from another an instrument 
 signed in blank by a third party, and fills up the 
 blanks, cannot, even in the case of a negotiable 
 instrument, claim the benefit of being a purchaser 
 for value without notice, so as to acquire a greater 
 right than the person from whom he himself re- 
 ceived the instrument. — If a debtor delivers to 
 his creditor a blank transfer by way of security, 
 that does not enable the creditor to delegate to 
 another person authority to fill it up for pur- 
 poses foreign to the original contract. — Ex parte 
 Sargent. (Law Eep. 17 Eq. 273) observed upon. 
 France r. Clark 22 Ch. D. 830 ; 26 Ch. D. 257 
 
( 345 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 346 ) 
 
 XI. COMPANY — SHARES — TBANSFER — 
 
 contimied. 
 
 2. Blank Transfer — Transfer of Shares 
 
 by Deed — Delivery of Transfer iy Transferor as 
 his Deed — Equitable Mortgage of Shares — Notice 
 — Priority — Maxim, "Q«J prior est tempore, 
 potior est jure " — Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 89), s. 30 — Mode of giving Notice to 
 Company — Notice to Secretary as an Individual.^ 
 Where tlie shares of a company registered under 
 the Companies Act, 1862, are pursuant to the 
 articles of assooiettion thereof to be transferred by 
 deed, a transfer at the time when the transferor 
 parts with the possession and control thereof, 
 must contain the name of the transferee and must 
 identify the shares ; and a transfer In blank, that 
 is, a transfer, which at the time above mentioned 
 neither contains the name of the transferee nor 
 identifies the shares, is void, even although the 
 name of the transferee and the number and the 
 numbers of the shares afterwards, but not in the 
 presence nor by the direction of the transferor, are 
 filled in, and he then adopts and acknowledges the 
 transfer ; for the mere adoption and acknowledg- 
 ment by the transferor of the transfer after it has 
 been filled in, it not being either in his possession or 
 under his control at the time of the adoption and 
 acknowledgment, do not amount to a delivery of the 
 transfer by him as his deed. — Hudson v. Mevett 
 <5 Bino^. 368) distinguished. — The principle estab- 
 lished in Dearie v. Hall (3 Euss. 1), as to the 
 ■effect of notice in determining the priorities of 
 equitable rights, does not extend to the shares of 
 •companies registered under the Companies Act, 
 1862, or to companies governed by regulations 
 liaving a provision similar to sect. 30 of that Act. — 
 The Companies Act, 1862, s. 30, forbids the entry 
 ■of any trust on the register of companies, and 
 where the shares of a company either registered 
 mnder that statute, or containins; a regulation to 
 the like effect with sect. 30 thereof, are equitably 
 assigned or mortgaged more than once, the priority 
 of the assignees or mortgagees will be determined 
 by the priority of the assignments or mortgages, 
 and not by the priority of the notices thereof given 
 to the company : — So held by Brett, M.B., on the 
 ground that a notice of an equitable assignment 
 ■or mortgage, in order to be effectual, must turn 
 the person to whom it is addressed into a trustee, 
 and the Companies Act, 1862, s. 30, and any regu- 
 lation of a company of a like nature, not only for- 
 ■bid the entry of any trust on the register, but also 
 exempt the company from any liability for acting 
 in contravention of a notice of the equitable as- 
 signment or mortgage: — By Cotton, L..T., on the 
 ground that although the directors may be person- 
 ally liable for permitting a transfer to be registered 
 in contravention of equitable rights of which they 
 have actual notice, nevertheless the company 
 itself is not bound to recognise trusts, and cannot 
 be made liable for accepting a transfer by any 
 notice not to allow it : — By Lindley, L. J., on the 
 ground that although the directors may be per- 
 .«onally liable if they allow a transfer to be regis- 
 tered which they know to be fraudulent, neverthe- 
 less the only right of an equitable assignee or 
 mortgagee against the company is to apply to the 
 High Court under 5 Vict. o. 5, s. 4, and Kules of 
 the Supreme Court, 1883, Order XLVi., for an 
 order restraining the company from allowing a 
 
 XI. COMPANY — SHAEES — TEANSEEK — 
 
 continued, 
 transfer to be made in contravention of his rights, 
 and the company itself is not bound to take notice 
 of equitable interests in shares not followed up in 
 a reasonable time by proceedings to restrain a 
 transfer. — Senible, by Brett, M.E., that the directors 
 and secretary of the company will not be per- 
 sonally liable for disregarding a notice of a trust 
 as to shares and for allowing them to be transferred 
 in contravention thereof. — Martin v. Sedgwick (9 
 Beav. 333) dissented from. — Ex parte Littledale, 
 In re Pearse (6 De G. M. & G. 714) ; Ex parte 
 Stewart, In re Shelley (4 De G. J. & S. 543) ; Ex 
 parte Boulton, In re Sketchley (1 De G. & J. 163); 
 Ex parte Union Bank of Manchester, In re Jackson 
 (LawEep. 12 Eq. 354); aad Ex parte Agra Bank, 
 In re Wm-cester (Law Eep. 3 Ch. 555) discussed. 
 — In order that a notice to a company may be 
 effectual, either it must be given to the company 
 itself through its proper officers, or it must be 
 received by the company in the course of the trans- 
 action of its business : casual knowledge, acquired 
 by the secretary as an individual and not whilst 
 he is engaged in transacting the business of the 
 company, cannot be deemed notice to the company. 
 — In March, 1881, M. deposited with S. tlie certifi- 
 cates and a blank transfer of 100 sliares in a 
 company as security for money advanced. In 
 February, 1882, S. died, and the secretary of the 
 company, who was a relative of S., attended his 
 funeral, and during a discussion of the deceased's 
 affairs became acquainted with the existence of 
 the charge on the shares. In December, 1882, M. 
 was heavily in debt to the Plaintiffs, and as they 
 pressed him for payment, he fraudulently delivered 
 to them another blank transfer of the same shares. 
 Some days afterwards, the transfer to the Plaintiffs 
 was in the absence of M. filled up with the name of 
 the Plaintiff C. as transferee and with the numbers 
 of the shares. The company refused to register 
 the transfer to the Plaintiffs on the ground that 
 the certificates were not produced, and thereupon 
 M. offered to indemnify the company against any 
 other claim, but shortly after the executors of S. 
 gave notice to the company of tlie existence of the 
 charge in favour of their testator. The company 
 was registered under the Companies Act, 1862, 
 and one of the articles of association provided that 
 the shares should be transferred by deed, and 
 another provided that the company should not be 
 bound by or recognise any equitable interest. In 
 an action by the Plaintiffs against the executors 
 of S. to obtain a declaration of their title to the 
 100 shares : — Seld, first, that the knowledge ac- 
 quired by the secretary of the company at the 
 funeral of S. of the existence of the charge in his 
 favour could not be deemed notice of its existence 
 to the company itself: — Held, secondly, that the 
 offer of M. to indemnify the company could not 
 be deemed to bo a delivery of the transfer as his 
 deed, after it had been filled in with the name of 
 0. as transferee and with the numbers of the 100 
 shares, and that the shares had not been legally 
 transferred to the Plaintiffs who had only an equit- 
 able mortgage : — Held, thirdly, that the notice by 
 the Plaintiffs to the company of the charge exist- 
 ing in their favour was notice of a trust, and 
 therefore was invalid, and that the charge in 
 favour of S. being prior in point of time, his execu- 
 
( 347 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 348 ) 
 
 XI. COMPAHY — SHAKES — TEANSFEE — 
 
 continued. 
 tors had the better title in equity to the shares. 
 SociETE Geneeale de Pakis v. Teamwats Union 
 Company - - - 14 ft, B. D. 424 
 
 [Affirmed in the House of Lords, 11 App. Cas. 20.] 
 
 3. Lien of Company — Priority — Deposit 
 
 of Certificates of Shares — Lien of Company on 
 Shares for Moneys due from Shareholder — Notice.'] 
 The articles of association of a company provided 
 that the company should have a first and per- 
 manent lien and charge, available at law and in 
 equity, on every share, for all debts due from the 
 shareholder to the company. A shareholder de- 
 posited the certificates of his shares with his 
 bankers as security for the balance then due from 
 him to them on his current account, and notice 
 of the deposit was given to the company . — Held, 
 that Hopliinson v. Bolt (9 H. L. C. 514) applied, 
 and that the company could not claim priority 
 over the bankers in respect of moneys which 
 became due from the shareholder to the company 
 after notice of the bankers' advance, but that 
 the bankers were entitled to priority. Bbadfokd 
 Banking Compasy ii. Beiggs & Co. 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 149 
 [Eeversed by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 19.] 
 
 4. Eefusal to register Transfer — Com- 
 pany's Lien on Shares — Companies Act, 1862 
 (25 <£- 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 35, Soiled. 1, TahU A., 
 clause 10.] Table A in the 1st schedule to the 
 Companies Act, 1862, contains regulations which 
 may be adopted for the management of a com- 
 pany limited by shares. The 10th clause of the 
 Table provides that " the company may decline 
 to register any transfer of shares made by a 
 member who is indebted to them " : — Seld, that 
 this provision is not limited to cases where the 
 member is indebted for calls or otherwise in 
 respect of the particular share proposed to be 
 transfeiTcd, but enables the company to decline 
 to register the transfer if the member is indebted 
 to them on any accoimt whatever. Ex parte 
 Steingeb - - - 9 a. B. D. 436 
 
 5. ■ Kefnsal to register Transfer — Share- 
 
 Iwlder indebted to Company — Liquidation of Share- 
 holder — Trustee.] By the articles of association 
 of a company it was provided that the direc- 
 tors might refuse to register a transfer of shai-es 
 while the shareholder making the same was in- 
 debted to the company, or If they should consider 
 the transferee an irresponsible person. It was also 
 provided that persons becoming entitled to shares 
 in consequence of the death, insolvency, or bank- 
 ruptcy of a shareholder might be registered on the 
 production of such evidence as might from time 
 to time be required by the directors, and that any 
 transfer or pretended transfer of shaves not being 
 approved by the directors should be absolutely 
 void. — A holder of shares in the company ex- 
 ecuted transfers of such shares to the nominees 
 of a bank as a security for advances. The com- 
 pany refused to register these transfers, on the 
 ground that the transferor was indebted to the 
 company. Subsequently, the transferor having 
 filed a liquidation petition, a trustee in liquida- 
 tion was duly appointed. Such trustee, with the 
 consent of the bank and their nominees, applied 
 to the directors of the company to be registered as 
 
 XI. COMPANY — SHAEES — TEANSFEE — 
 
 continued. 
 the owner of the shares, but they refused the ap- 
 plication. The bank, though consenting to the 
 trustee's registration, had never waived their 
 security : — Held (by the Earl of Selbome, L.C., 
 Brett, M.R., and Cotton, L.J.), that the declining 
 to register the transfers by the directors was not a 
 disapproval of them so as to render them void 
 within the meaning of the articles, that the 
 trustee was not entitled to the shares within the 
 meaning of the articles so long as the transfers 
 remained in force, and that the trustee was not 
 entitled to be registered, notwithstanding the 
 consent of the transferees. Ex parte Haekison, 
 In re Cannock and Ecgelet Collieet Com- 
 pany - - 26Ch. D. 522; 28Ch. D. 36S 
 
 6. Eefusal to register Transfer — Measure 
 
 of Damages ■ — • Companies Act, 1867 (80 & 31 
 Vict. V. 131), 6. 20.] The Plaintiff transferred 
 shares of his in a registered company to A. B. on 
 an agreement between them that if A. B. was 
 accepted as shareholder by the company the 
 shares should be taken by him at their market 
 value in reduction of a debt due to him from the 
 Plaintiff. The consideration was stated in the 
 transfer to be only the sum of 5s., and the transfer 
 was brought to the company for registration with- 
 out any notice of the said agreement between the 
 Plaintiff and A. B. The company refused to 
 register, on the ground that the plaintiff was 
 indebted to them, but on its being established 
 after an interval of eighteen months that the 
 Plaintiff was not so indebted, the company regis- 
 tered the transfer. In an action against the 
 company for wrongfully refusing to register, the 
 Plaintiff sought to recover as damages the loss in 
 the market value of the shares between the time 
 when the transfer was brought to the company to 
 be registered and the time when it was in fact 
 registered : — Held, that the Plaintiff was entitled 
 to recover only nominal damages, as the contract 
 between the Plaintiff and A. B. was a special one, 
 of which the company had had no notice, and the 
 ordinary contract on the sale of registered shares 
 was only that the seller should give to the pur- 
 chaser a valid transfer and do all required to 
 enable the purchaser to be registered as member 
 in respect of such shares, the duty of the pur- 
 chaser, which has not been altered by sect. 26 of 
 the Companies Act, 1867, being to get himself 
 registered as such member. Skinner v. City op 
 London Marine Insurance Coepokation 
 
 [14 Q. B. D, 882 
 
 7. "Winding-up — Transfer of Sliares pend- 
 ing Proceedings for Voluntary Liquidation — 
 Voluntary Winding-up followed hi/ Compulsory 
 Winding-up — Commencement of JVinding-up — 
 Committee of Directors ] The aj'ticles of a com- 
 pany enabled the board of directors to appoint 
 committees of their own number, and to delegate 
 to any such committee all or any of the powers of 
 the board. Transfers of shares were to be effected 
 only by instruments executed both by the trans- 
 feror and transferee, and were not to be made 
 without the approval of the board, which liad an 
 absolute discretion as to accepting a transfer. 
 On the 2nd of November, 1874, the board ap- 
 pointed H. B. a committee with all the powers of 
 
( 349 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 350 ) 
 
 XI. COMPANY — SHARES — TEANSFER — 
 
 continued. 
 the board. On the 24tli of December, 187i, a 
 board meeting was held, at which only H. B. 
 and the secretary were present. At this meeting 
 transfers, which had on the previous day been 
 executed by X. and Y. to various persons of 1519 
 shares standing in the joint names of X. and Y., 
 were approved, and the transferees placed on the 
 register. H. B. deposed that all formalities had 
 been waived, and there was no evidence whether 
 the transfers had been executed by the trans- 
 ferees. On the same day a general meeting of 
 shareholders was held, at which resolutions were 
 passed for a voluntary winding-up of the com- 
 pany, and the transfer of its business to a new 
 company, each shareholder in the old company 
 taking the same number of shares in the new, 
 and this was confirmed by a meeting of the 15th 
 of January, 1875. At neither of these meetings 
 did the transferors vote in respect of the shares 
 transferred, but several of the transferees did, 
 and the transferees were registered as shareholders 
 in the new company. It did not appear that the 
 old company was insolvent, but it was considered 
 desirable to reconstitute it. In March, 1877, a 
 petition was presented by some of the transferees 
 for the compulsory winding-up of the old com- 
 pany, upon which an order was made on the 17th 
 of the same month. The transferees were placed 
 on the list of oontributories. In 1881 some cre- 
 ditors, pursuant to leave given, applied in the 
 name of the official liquidator to put X. and Y. 
 on a supplemental list of contributories of the old 
 company for the 1519 shares, and if not then on 
 a B list as past members. The application was 
 refused by Bacon, V.C. : — Seld, that the fact that 
 the transferors knew that the company was on 
 on the eve of being wound up voluntarily did 
 not take away their power of transferring their 
 shares, and that the transfers of the 1519 shares 
 were not invalid on that ground. — Chappell's 
 Case (Law Rep. 6 Ch. 902) distinguished. — Held, 
 also, that a committee of the board of directors 
 need not consist of more than one person,, and 
 that H. B. had authority to approve the transfers : 
 — Seld, also, that it was not to be inferred in the 
 absence of express evidence that the transfers 
 had not been executed by the transferees.— BeM, 
 that, if they had not been so executed they were 
 not a nullity but only irregular, and that after 
 they had been acted upon and treated as valid 
 for so long a period they could not be impeached : 
 Held, therefore, that X. and Y. could not be 
 placed on the list of contributories as present 
 members: — Held, by Lindley and Fry, L.JJ., 
 that X. and Y. could not be placed on the B list 
 as past members, for that the winding-up was to 
 be treated as having commenced at the presenta- 
 tion of the petition, which was more than twelve 
 months after they transferred their shares ; dis- 
 sentiente, Cotton, L. J., who was of opinion that it 
 commenced from the date of the resolution for 
 voluntary winding-up, at which time X. and Y. 
 had not ceased for twelve months to be share- 
 holders. In re Taurine Company 25 Ch. D. 118 
 
 XII. COMPANT-tSHAEES— EEGISTEE. 
 
 Form of Eegister.] Alteration by the Board of 
 Trade on Hth April, 1885, of Form E., in the second 
 
 XII. COMPANY— SHAEES—EEGHSTEE—oon<<^ . 
 
 fcliedule of 25 & 2(5 Vict. c. 89 (the Companies Act, 
 1862), btj virtue of s. 71 of that Act 
 
 [L. G. 1885, p. 1673 
 
 Colonial Register.] The Act 46 * 47 Vict. e. 30 
 (the Companies Colonial Registers Act, 1883), 
 which is to be construed as one with the Companies 
 Acts, 1862 to 1880, enacts— 
 
 Sect. 3. — (1.) Any company whose objects com- 
 prise the transaction of business in a colony may, 
 if authorized so to do by its regulations, as origi- 
 nally framed or as altered by special resolution, 
 cause to be Icept in any colony in which it transacts 
 business a branch register or registers of members 
 resident in such colony. 
 
 (2.) The company shall give to the registrar of 
 joint stock companies notice of the situation of th-e 
 office where any siich branch register (in this Act 
 called a colonial register') is kept, and of any 
 change therein, and of the discontinuance of any 
 such office in the event of the same being discon- 
 tinued. 
 
 (3.) A colonial register shall, as regards the par- 
 ticulars entered therein, be deemed to be a part of 
 the company's register of members, and shall be 
 prima facie evidence of all particulars entered 
 therein. Any such register shall be kept in the 
 manner provided by the Companies Acts, 1862 to 
 1880, with tins gualification, that the advertise- 
 ment entered in sect, 33 of the Companies Act, 1862, 
 shall be inserted in some newspaper circulating in 
 the district wherein the register to be closed is kept, 
 and that any competent Court in the colony where 
 such register is kept shall be entitled to exercise the 
 same jurisdiction of rectifying the same as is by 
 sect. 35 of the Companies Act, 1862, vested, as 
 respects a register, in England and Ireland, in 
 Her Majesty's superior Courts of Law or Equity, 
 and that all offences under sect. 32 of the Com- 
 panies Act, 1862, may as regards a colonial register, 
 be prosecuted summarily before any tribunal in the 
 colony where such register is kept having summary 
 criminal jurisdiction. 
 
 (4.) The company shall transmit to its registered 
 office a copy of every entry in its colonial register 
 or registers as soon as may be after such entry is 
 made, and the company shall cause to be kept at 
 its registered office, duly entered up from time to 
 time, a duplicate or duplicates of its colonial 
 register or registers. The provisions of sect. 32 of 
 the Companies Act, 1862, shall apply to every such 
 duplicate, and every such duplicate shall, for all 
 the purposes of the Companies Acts, 1862 to 1880, 
 be deemed to be part of the register of members of 
 the company. 
 
 (5.) Subject to the provisions of this Act, with 
 respect to the duplicate register, the shares re- 
 gistered in a colonial register shall be distinguished 
 from tile shares registered in the principal register, 
 and no transaction with respect to any shares re- 
 gistered in a colonial register shall, during the 
 continuance of the registration of such shares in 
 such colonial register, be registered in any other 
 
 (6.) Tlie company may discontinue to Iceep any 
 colonial register, and thereupon all entries in that 
 register shall be transferred to some other colonial 
 register Icept by the company in the same colony, or 
 to the register of members kept at the registered 
 office of the company. 
 
( 351 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 352 ) 
 
 XII. COMPANY— SHARES— EE6ISTEE—co»2M. XIII. COMPANY— MANAGEMENT— cojiiintted 
 
 (7.) In relation to stamp duties the following 
 provisions shall have effect : — 
 
 (a.) An instrument of transfer of a share regis- 
 tered in a colonial register under this Act 
 shall be deemed to he a transfer of property 
 situated out of the United Kingdom, and 
 unless executed in any part of the United 
 Kingdom shall he exempt from British 
 stamp duty. 
 (b.) Upon the death of a memher registered in a 
 colonial register under this Act, the share 
 or other interest of the deceased member 
 shall for the purposes of this Act so far as 
 relates to British duties he deemed to he 
 part of his estates and effects situated in 
 the United Kingdom for or in respect of 
 which probate or letters of administration 
 is or are to he granted, or whereof an in- 
 ventory is to he exhibited and recorded in 
 like manner as if he were registered in the 
 register of members kexit at the registered 
 office of the company. 
 (8.) S&ject to the provisions of this Act any 
 company may, by its regulations as originally 
 framed, or as altered by special resolution, make 
 such provisions as it may think fit respecting the 
 keeping of colonial registers. 
 XIII. COMPANY— MANAGEMENT. 
 
 1. ^ Auditor — Eight of, to appoint Ac- 
 countant — Companies Clauses Act, 1845 (8 <fc 9 
 
 Vict. c. 16), s. 108.] An auditor appointed under 
 the Companies Clauses Act, 1845, is entitled to 
 appoint an accountant under sect. 108 of tiiat 
 Act, without the consent of his co-auditor. 
 Steele v. Sutton Gas Company 12 Q. B. D. 68 
 
 2. General Meeting — Gratuities to Ser- 
 vants — Remuneration to Directors for past Services 
 — Companies Clauses Act, 1845 (8 <$: 9 Vict. c. 16), 
 ss. 67, 90, 91,] A company carrying on business 
 has power, by the vote of a general meeting, to 
 expend a portion of its funds in gvatuities to 
 servants or directors, provided such grants are 
 made for the purpose of advancing the interests 
 of the company. But this does not apply to a 
 case where the company has transferred its under- 
 taking to another company and is being wound 
 up. — A railway company which had no provision 
 in its articles for paying remuneration to direc- 
 tors, and had never paid any, sold its undertaking 
 to another company at a price to be determined 
 by an arbitrator. By the Act authorizing the 
 transfer it was provided that on the completion 
 of the transfer the company should be dissolved 
 except for the purpose of regulating their internal 
 affairs and winding up the same and of dividing 
 the purchase-money. The purchase-money was 
 to be applied in paying the costs of the arbitration 
 and in paying off any revenue debts or charges 
 of the company, and the residue was to be divided 
 among the debenture holders and shareholders. 
 After the completion of the transfer a general 
 meeting of the company was held at which a 
 resolution was passed to apply £1050 of the 
 purchase-money in compensating the paid officials 
 of the company for their loss of employment 
 although they had no legal claim for any com- 
 pensation, and £1500 in remuneration to the 
 directors for their past services ; — Held, by the 
 
 Court of Appeal (disaentiente Baggallay, L.J.), 
 that the resolution was invalid, as the company 
 was no longer a going concern, and only existed 
 for the purpose of winding-up. — Sampson v. Price's 
 Patent Candle Company (24 W. E. 754) and Taun- 
 ton V. Boyal Insurance Company (2 H. & M. 135) 
 distinguished. — Per Baggallay, L.J. : The vote 
 was within the powers of the company as it still 
 retained the power of regulating its internal 
 affairs. — Per Fry, L.J. : Eemuneration for past 
 services of directors cannot be voted at an ordi- 
 nary general meeting unless special notice be 
 given of the intention to propose such a resolu- 
 tion. HuTTON v. West Cokk Eailwat Com- 
 pany - 23 Ch. D. 654 
 
 3. General Meeting — Poll — Mbde of tak- 
 ing Poll — Chairman, Direction of — Companies 
 Act, 1862, Table A, Art. 43.] The articles of 
 association of a company provided (in the terms of 
 art. 43 of Table A to the Companies Act, 1862) 
 that if at any general meeting of the company a 
 poll should be demanded it should be taken " in 
 such manner as the chairman shall direct." — -A 
 poll having been demanded at a meeting summoned 
 to consider a resolution for a voluntary winding- 
 up, the chairman directed the poll be taken then 
 and there. It was so taken, and the resolution was 
 carried: — Held, that the poll had been rightly 
 taken. In re Chillington Ikon Company 
 
 [29 Ch, D. 159 
 
 4. General Meeting — Proxies.] By the 
 
 65th of the articles of association of a steamship 
 company, it was provided that votes might be 
 given personally or by proxy. Article 66 provided 
 that the instrument appointing a proxy should be 
 in writing under the hand of the appointor, and 
 should be attested by one or more witness or wit- 
 nesses, and that no person should be appointed 
 a proxy who was not a member of the company. 
 Article 68 gave a form of proxy containing an 
 attestation clause. By a special resolution, 
 article 68 was repealed, and a new form given 
 without an attestation clause, but the resolution 
 did not purport to repeal art. 66 : — Held, by 
 Chitty, J., and by the Court of Appeal, that as 
 the special resolution did not purport to affect 
 art. 66, the provision requiring the signature to 
 be attested remained in force, and that it was not 
 merely directory, but that attestation was essen- 
 tial to the validity of a proxy, and that unattested 
 proxies must be rejected. — Disputes arose as to 
 the number of directors to be appointed, as to the 
 change of the port of the company, and as to the 
 amount of dividend to be declared. There having 
 been seven directors, five of whom remained in 
 office, a poll was taken to determine whether M. 
 and T. should be elected, and the number of 
 directors continued at seven, or whether the five 
 Plaintiffs should be elected, and the number of 
 directors increased to ten. A poll was also taken 
 on the question whether the dividend proposed 
 by the old directors should be paid or a larger 
 dividend which had been proposed by persons 
 who sided with the Plaintiffs. A poll was also 
 taken on the question whether the port should 
 be changed or should remain where it was. In 
 each case the result of the poll was in favour of 
 the first alternative if unattested proxies were 
 
( 353 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 354 ) 
 
 XIII. COMPANY— MANAGEMENT— continued. 
 
 admitted, tut for the second, if they were excluded. 
 The chairman in each case held the proxies ad- 
 missible. The five old directors and M. and T. 
 accordingly claimed to be the board of directors, 
 and excluded the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs there- 
 upon commenced their action on behalf of them- 
 selves and all other the shareholders except the 
 Defendants, making the company a co-Plaintiff, 
 against the seven to restrain them from paying 
 any dividend except the increased dividend, and 
 from excluding the Plaintiffs, and from doing any- 
 thing contrary to the resolution against changing 
 the port, and to restrain M. and T. from acting as 
 directors. After the action was commenced a re- 
 quisition was handed in to the board to call an 
 extraordinary general meeting for the purpose of 
 considering certain proposed resolutions, the effect 
 of which would be to confirm the resolutions in 
 favour of which the unattested proxies had been 
 given, and to rescind the resolutions on which 
 the Plaintiffs relied. The Defendants summoned 
 the meeting. The Plaintiffs then amended their 
 writ, and asked for an injunction against the 
 holding the meeting. Chitty. J., granted an in- 
 junction to restrain M. and T. &om acting as 
 directors, to restrain the Defendants from ex- 
 cluding the Plaintiffs, to restrain them changing 
 the port, and to restrain them from holding the 
 meeting: — The Court of Appeal considered that 
 the matters in dispute were matters to be deter- 
 mined by the shareholders, and upon under- 
 takings being given by both parties to keep 
 matters in statu quo, discharged the order of 
 Chitty, J., for an injunction, and directed the 
 appeal to stand over until the sense of the share- 
 holders had been taken at a general meeting to 
 be convened for that purpose. Such meeting 
 was held, and a resolution was passed by a large 
 majority rescinding the election of the Plaintiffs 
 as directors. — The Court of Appeal, though hold- 
 ing that the resolution not iaving. been passed 
 as a special resolution was not an effectual exer- 
 cise of the power given by the articles to remove 
 directors, refused to grant an interlocutory in- 
 junction to prevent the exclusion of the Plain- 
 tiffs, but exacted an undertaking that M. and T. 
 should not act. Haebbn ». Phillips 23C1i. D, 14 
 
 General Meeting — Beqmsition to call 
 _ — Power to remove Directors — Gom- 
 panies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 <fc 9 
 Viet. c. 16), ss. 70, 88, 89, 91.] A sufficient 
 number of shareholders required the directors of 
 a railway company to call a meeting of the com- 
 pany for the following objects : 1. To appoint a 
 committee to inquire into the working and gene- 
 ral management of the company, and the means 
 of reducing the working expenses, to empower 
 such committee to consolidate offices, to remove 
 any of the officers and appoint others, and to 
 authorize and require the directors to carry out 
 the recommendations of the committee; 2. To 
 remove, if deemed necessary or expedient, any of 
 the present directors, and to elect directors to fill 
 any vacancy in the board. The directors issued 
 a notice for a meeting " for the purpose of con- 
 sidering and determining upon a demand of the 
 requisitionists for the appointment of a committee 
 to inquire into the working and general manage- 
 
 XIII. CO MPANY— MANAGEMENT— coKK»«cd. 
 
 ment of the company and the means of reducing 
 the working expenses." The requisitionists gave 
 notice that they should not attend the meeting, 
 as the notice did not provide for all their objects, 
 they did not attend, and they then themselves 
 issued o. notice under sect. 70 of the Companies 
 Clauses Act, calling a meeting for the purposes 
 mentioned in their requibitiou. The directors 
 brought an action in the name of the company to 
 restrain the requisitionists from holding the meet- 
 ing : — Held, by Kay, J., that everything in the 
 first part of the requisition beyond the appoint- 
 ment of a committee was illegal, for that it pro- 
 posed to transfer the powers of the directors to 
 a committee, and that the directors were there- 
 fore justified in not entertaining the latter part 
 of the first head of the requisition :■ — Held, also, 
 by Kay, J., that the second head of the requisi- 
 tion was too vague and did not "fully express 
 the object of the meeting," and that the directors 
 had no power to call a meeting for that purpose, 
 whether a general meeting had power to remove 
 directors or not : — Held, therefore, by Kay, J., 
 that the directors had not failed to call a meet- 
 ing within the meaning of the Companies Clauses 
 Act, 1845, s. 70, that the power of the share- 
 holders to call it had therefore not arisen, and 
 that an injunction must be granted. — Held, on 
 appeal, that all the objects of the first part of the 
 requisition were objects that could be carried out 
 in a legal way, that the Court will not restrain 
 the holding of a meeting because the notice call- 
 ing it is so expressed that consistently with its 
 terms resolutions might be passed which would 
 be ultrJi vii'es, and that the directors were not 
 justified in excluding from their notice the ob- 
 jects in the first part of the requisition other than-: 
 the appointment of a committee: — Held, also,, 
 that under sect. 91 of the Companies Clauses Act 
 a general meeting has power to remove directors, 
 that a notice of a proposal to remove " any of the 
 directors" was sufficiently distinct, that the 
 general meeting could at all events fill up vacau- - 
 cies in the board if all the directors were removed 
 or if the directors declined to exercise the power 
 given by sect. 89, and that the directors were 
 therefore bound to include in their notice the 
 objects mentioned in the second pait of the re- 
 quisition: — Held, therefore, that the requisi-- 
 tionists were entitled to call a meeting, and that 
 the injunction must be discharged. Isle 01" Wight 
 Eailwat Company v. Tahocedin 25 Ch. D. 320 
 
 XIV. COMPANY— MEMBER'S LIABILITY. 
 
 1. Charge — Contribution — LocTce King's 
 
 Act (17 & 18 Vict. c. 113).] A testator held 
 shares in a banking company by whose deed of' 
 settlement it was provided that if any share- 
 holder did not on demand pay all moneys due 
 from him to the company, the directors might, 
 declare his shares forfeited, and that nevertheless 
 he should still be liable to pay the debt, and it 
 was also provided that a shareholder must have 
 paid all moneys due from him to the company 
 before he could transfer his shares. The testator 
 borrowed money from the company, and deposited 
 the deeds of certain real estate with them as 
 security. By his will he gave the above estate to 
 his son A., and his residuary property to his. 
 
 N 
 
( 355 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 356 ) 
 
 XIV. COMPAKY— MEMBEE'S LIABILITY — 
 
 continued. 
 other Bona. A. claimed that the testator's shares 
 in the bank should contribute rateably to pay- 
 ment of the debt : — Held, by Chitty, J., and by 
 the Court of Appeal, that the provisions of the 
 deed of settlemeotdid not create a charge or lien 
 on the shares for a debt due from the holder, and 
 that no case for contribution arose : — Held, also 
 that if the deed of settlement had charged the 
 shares with all debts due from the shareholder 
 to the company, a debt for which real estate had 
 been specifically mortgaged would still have 
 been payable out of the mortgaged estate before 
 resorting to the shares which were only subject 
 to a general lien. In re DuNLOP. Dunlop v. 
 Ddnlop 21 Ch. D. 583 
 
 2. ■ Mutual Marine Insurance Association 
 
 — Company limited hxj Guarantee — Memorandum 
 and Articles of Association — Limitation of Liabi- 
 lity in file Event of winding up the Association — 
 Companies Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89), ss. 9, 
 38.] The Defendant was the owner of a ship 
 insured and entered in a certain class of a mutual 
 insurance association, which was limited by 
 guarantee and incorporated under the Companies 
 Act, 1862. The object of the association was 
 i:he mutual insurance of ships of members, or in 
 which they were interested. According to its 
 rules a person by entering his ship to be insured, 
 as the Defendant had done, became a member of 
 
 -the association, and whilst his ship was insured 
 by the other members of his own class he was an 
 assurer of the vessels of such other members 
 entered in the same class as that in which his 
 ■own had been so entered. By the memorandum 
 of association the declaration of the undertaking 
 Tequired, by sect. 9 of the Companies Act, 1862, 
 on the part of a member of an association limited 
 by guarantee was as follows : " Every member of 
 the association undertakes to contribute to the 
 assets of the association in the event of the same 
 being wound up during the time that he is a 
 member, or within one year afterwards, for pay- 
 jnent of the debts and liabilities of the associa- 
 tion contracted before the time at which he ceases 
 to be a member, and the costs, charges, and ex- 
 jpenses of winding up the same, and for the adjust- 
 ment of the rights of the contributories amongst 
 themselves, such amount as may be required, not 
 exceeding £5." Whilst the Defendant's ship 
 continued to be so insured and the Defendant was 
 such member the association resolved to be wound 
 up voluntarily: — Held, that the Defendant was 
 liable to pay his proportion of losses in respect of 
 vessels entered and insured in the same class as 
 his own, and that his liability was not limited to 
 £5, since the debts and liabilities mentioned in 
 the declaration of undei-taking were those of the 
 association as against its members, and in respect 
 of which the 9th section of the statute required 
 such declaration to be contained in the memo- 
 randum of association, and were not the debts 
 and liabilities to which the members by the rules 
 of the association were to contribute as insurers 
 or as assured. Lion Mutual Marine Insueanoe 
 ASSOOIATION V. TUOKEK - 12 Q, B. D. 176 
 
 3. Trustee of Shares — Lien on Shares fen- 
 
 Debt of Trustee— Equitable Title to Shares — Pri- 
 
 XIV. COMPANY— MEMBER'S LIABILITY — 
 
 continued, 
 ority.'] The trustees of a marriage settlement 
 which authorized them to invest in the shares 
 of any trading company, invested part of their 
 trust funds in the purchase of shares in a limited 
 banking company, which were transferred into 
 their joint names. By the articles it was pro- 
 vided that the company should have a first and 
 I)aramount charge on the shares of any share- 
 holder for all moneys owing to the company from 
 him alone or jointly with any other person, and 
 that when a share was held by more persons than 
 one the company should have a like lieu and 
 charge thereon in respect of all moneys so owing 
 to them from all or any of the holders thereof 
 alone or jointly with any other person. One of 
 the trustees was a partner in a firm which after- 
 wards went into liquidation, at which time it 
 owed the company a debt which had arisen long 
 after the registration of the shares in the names 
 of the trustees: — Held, by Bacon, V.C, and by 
 the Court of Appeal, that the bank had a lien on 
 the shares for this debt which must prevail over 
 the title of the cestuis que trust. — "Whether as 
 between themselves and the cestuis que trust 
 the trustees were authorized to make such an 
 investment, qusere. New London and Bbaziliai? 
 Bank v. Bbooklebank 21 Ch. D. 302 
 
 XV. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S APPOINTMENT 
 
 1. Casual Vacancy — General Meeting.'] 
 
 The articles of association of a company provided 
 that the directors might fill up any casual vacancy 
 on the board. — A casual vacancy occurred, and 
 before it was filled up by the board a general 
 meeting of the company was held. — The vacancy 
 was not filled up by the general meeting : — Held, 
 that the power of the board to fill up the vacancy 
 remained. — Semble, the general meeting could 
 have filled up the vacancy. Munstek v. Cammell 
 Company - - - 21 Ch. D. 183 
 
 2. Dismissal of Directors — Power of 
 
 General Meeting — Alteration of Articles — Costs 
 out of Company's Funds."] A joint stock company 
 whose directors are appointed for a definite period 
 has no inherent power to remove them before the 
 expiration of that period. — If the articles of asso- 
 ciation of a company contain no power to remove 
 directors before the expiration of their period of 
 office, but authorize the shareholders by special 
 resolution to alter any of the articles, there must 
 be a separate special resolution altering the 
 articles so as to give power to remove directors 
 before a resolution can be passed to remove any 
 of them. — Certain shareholders who were ap- 
 pointed directors by a general meeting in the 
 place of the existing directors, brought an action 
 in the name of the company against the existing 
 directors to restrain them from acting. The Court 
 held that the new directors were not duly ap- 
 pointed, and refused the relief prayed with costs ; 
 but inasmuch as the Plaintiffs substantially re- 
 presented the wishes of the majority of the share- 
 holders, although technically they had no right 
 to use the name of the company, the Court allowed 
 the costs to be paid out of the company's assets. 
 Impebial Hydeopathic Hotel Company, Black- 
 pool V. Hampson - - - 23 Ch. D. 1 
 
( ,357 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 358 ) 
 
 XV. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'3 APPOINTMENT 
 
 continued. 
 
 f Dismissal of directors — Power of general 
 
 meeting - - - 25 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Company — Management. 5. 
 
 XVI. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S AUTHOEITY. 
 
 _ 1. Application of Funds — Direetors — TTltra 
 
 Vires — Winding-up Petition.'] A proviso in the 
 articles of association of a company that the direc- 
 tors may " at any time direct any- action or other 
 legal proceedings to be commenced and prosecuted 
 on behalf of the company in the name of the com- 
 pany or of such officer or other person as the 
 directors may be advised; and may defend any 
 action, &c., and may release, discontinue, or com- 
 promise any such action or other proceeding as 
 they shall deem expedient ; and they shall be 
 indemnified out of the funds of the company 
 against all costs, damages, and expenses by reason 
 of such action, suit, or proceedings," does not 
 authorize the application by the directors of the 
 assets of the company in paying the costs of a 
 petition for winding up the company presented 
 by themselves, but opposed by a number of the 
 shareholders and a minority of the directors, and 
 the costs of an appeal from the dismissal of such 
 petition ; and such intended aisplication will be 
 restrained' as an act illegal and ultrk vires. Smith 
 <s. Duke of Manchester - - 24 Ch. D. 611 
 
 2. Mortgage — Ultra Vires — Limit — Capi- 
 tal not called up — Shares not issued.'] Among 
 the objects of a company was to purchase ships ; 
 and the directors were empowered to do all need- 
 ful acts in furtherance of the objects of the com- 
 pany ; they were also expressly authorized to 
 borrow, on the security of the property of the com- 
 pany, any sum of money not exceeding two-thirds 
 of the capital of the company not called up. — 
 The directors mortgaged a ship, the only property 
 of the company, to secure the payment of a sum 
 of money advanced to the company, and of unpaid 
 purchase-money of the ship ; the amount so se- 
 cured much exceeding two-thirds of the amount 
 not called up of the shares actually issued, but 
 being within two-thirds of the whole nominal 
 capital not called up : — Held, that the mortgage 
 was within the powers of the directors, and was 
 valid ; and that the term " capital not called up " 
 included shares which had not been issued. Eng- 
 lish Channel Steamship Company v. Bolt 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 715 
 
 3. Quorum of Directors — Articles of Asso- 
 ciation — Business to be conducted iy not less than 
 a certain Number — Call — Forfeiture — Tlltra 
 Vires.] Where the articles of association of a 
 company provide that " the business of the com- 
 pany shall be conducted by not less than " a speci- 
 fied number of directors, the words are imperative, 
 not merely directory : consequently a call made 
 or a forfeiture of shares declared by less than the 
 specified number of directors is invalid. — The 
 articles of association of a limited company pro- 
 vided (Art. 35) that " the business of the com- 
 pany should be conducted by not less than five 
 nor more than seven directors ; " also that the 
 ofSce of director should be vacated on bankruptcy 
 or insolvency ; and that " the directors might de- 
 termine the quorum necessary for the transaction 
 
 XVI. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S ATJTHOEITY— 
 
 continued. 
 of business." — The articles named six persona 
 only as directors, of whom B. was one. These 
 directors fixed three of their number as a quorum. 
 — ^In October, 1877, the number of directors being 
 then reduced by death to five, B. became insol- 
 vent, and therefore disqualified as a director.— In 
 November the company passed, at an ordinary 
 meeting, a resolution altering article 35 by sub- 
 stituting " three " directors for '■ five." This re- 
 solution was admitted to be invalid as not having 
 been passed in accordance with the articles. — In 
 December the four remaining directors made a 
 call. B. having made default in payment of this 
 call, as well as a former call made prior to his in- 
 solvency, the same directors passed a, resolution 
 declaring his shares forfeited. — The company 
 afterwards passed a resolution for a voluntary 
 winding-up, in the course of which it turned out 
 that there were surplus assets available for divi- 
 sion among the shareholders : — Seld, that the 
 second call and the forfeiture, having been made 
 and declared by four directors only, were invalid : 
 and, therefore, that B. was entitled, on payment 
 of his calls to the liquidator, to be treated as a 
 shareholder, and to participate in the surplus 
 assets accordingly. — Tliames - Haven DooJc and 
 Railway Company v. Ease (4 Man. & G. 552), and 
 Kirlc V. Bell (16 Q. B. 290) considered. In re 
 Alma Spinning Company. Bottomley's Case 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 631 
 
 XVII. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S LIABILITY. 
 
 1. Acceptance of Bills "for and on hehalf 
 
 of Company" — Personal LiaMlity.] A bill of 
 exchange payable to order and addressed to the 
 B. & I. Company, which was incorporated under 
 local Acts and had no power to accept bills, 
 was accepted by the Defendants, who were two 
 of the directors of the company, and also by the 
 secretary, as follows : — " Accepted for and on 
 behalf of the B. & I. Company, G. K., F. S. P. 
 directors; B. W. secretary." The bill was so 
 accepted and given by the Defendants to the 
 drawer, the engineer of the company, on account 
 of the company's debt to him for professional 
 services, and although he was told by the Defen- 
 dants that they gave him the bill on the un- 
 derstanding that he should not negotiate it, but 
 merely as a recognition of the company's debt 
 to him, as the company had no power to accept 
 bills, yet the Defendants knew that he would get 
 it discounted, and they meant that he should have 
 the power of doing so. The bill was indorsed by 
 the drawer to the Plaintiffs for value, and without 
 notice of the understanding between him and the 
 Defendants : — Held, afBrming the decision of the 
 Queen's Bench Division, that the Defendants were 
 personally liable, as by their acceptance they re- 
 presented that they had authority to accept on 
 behalf of the company, which being a false repre- 
 sentation of a matter of fact and not of law, gave 
 a cause of action to the Plaintiffs, who had acted 
 upon it. West London Commeecial Bank v. 
 &Tsoit - 12 Q. B. D, 167 ; 13 a. B. D. 360 
 
 2. Fiduciary Eelation — Company intended. 
 
 to he ioorleed as a Private Partnership — Share- 
 holders subsequently admitted.] • A company was 
 formed and registered consisting of eight persons, 
 
 N 2 
 
( 359 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 360 ) 
 
 XVII. COMPANY— DIRECTOE'S LIABIIITY— 
 
 continued. 
 seven of whom were directors and the eighth the 
 solicitor, for the purchase and working of a patent 
 helonging to some of the members. The direc- 
 tors allotted shares without consideration to some 
 of their number. It was proved to the satisfac- 
 tion of the Court that it was intended at that 
 time to work the company as a private partner- 
 ship, and to admit no other members. All the 
 members consented to what was done, and it was 
 sanctioned at a general meeting of tlie company. 
 No prospectus was issued. Kather more than a 
 year afterwards, the company being in need of 
 more capital, some fresh shareholders were ad- 
 mitted, who alleged that they were not informed 
 of tlie manner in which the original shares had 
 been allotted. The company was ordered to be 
 wound up : — Held (aflarming the decision of 
 Jessel, M.E.), that no fraud had been committed 
 on the company, and that the official liquidator, 
 as representing the company, could not call upon 
 the directors under the 165th section of the Com- 
 panies Act, 1862, to account for the value of the 
 shares so allotted to them. — Society of Practical 
 Knowledge v. Abbott (2 Beav. 559) distinguished. 
 In re Bbitibh Seamless Paper Box Company 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 467 
 
 3. Misappropriation of Funds — Repay- 
 ment by Directors — Investment of Money misappro- 
 priated in Debentures of the Company — 8et-of by 
 Director— Companies Act, 1862 (25 (fe 26 Vict. 
 c. 89), 88. 101, 165.] The directors of a company 
 passed a resolution to pay £3000 to P., who was 
 one of the promoters, for services rendered, upon 
 an understanding, which was not reduced into 
 writing, that he should expend £400 in advertise- 
 ments and advance the residue to the company 
 on the security of debentures. The directors 
 accordingly paid P. the money, and he spent £400 
 as arranged, and advanced the remaining £2600 
 to the company on debentures, which he divided 
 between himself and certain of the directors. The 
 company was afterwards wound up : — Held, (affirm- 
 ing tl)e decision of Hall, V.O.), that the directors 
 were jointly and severally liable to repay tbe 
 £2600 to the company ; that the advance of the 
 money to the company ou debentures was not a 
 repayment to the company ; and that it made no 
 ditference whether the arrangement to invest the 
 money in debentures under which it was originally 
 paid to P., was binding or not. — At the time of 
 the winding-up the company was indebted to one of 
 the directors who were thus held liable, for money 
 advanced for expenses : — Held, that he could not 
 set off the debt against his liability for the mis- 
 appropriation of the company's money. — Coventry 
 and Dixon's Case (14 Ch. D. 660) commented on. 
 In re Anglo-Fbenoh Co-opekative Society. Ex 
 parte Pelly - - - 21 Ch. D, 492 
 
 4, Payment of Dividend out of Capital — 
 
 Money borrowed to pay Dividend — Measure of 
 Damages — Shareholders and Creditors Parties to 
 Breach of Trust— Indemnity — Delay-^Stale De- 
 mand—Companies Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89), 
 s. 165] The articles of association of a company 
 provided that all dividends on shares should be 
 made only out of the clear profits of the company, 
 and that all moneys borrowed by the company and 
 
 XVII. COMPANY— DIEECTOK'S LIABILITY— 
 
 continued. 
 all moneys received under insurances of the conr- 
 pany's property against destruction or damage by 
 fire should be deemed capital. — A building of the 
 company having been destroyed by fire, the com- 
 pany resolved to increase the capital by £150,000 
 for the purpose of reconstructing the building 
 and to issue for this purpose 15,000 preference 
 shares. These shares were issued, and during 
 the reconstruction of the building, no profits- 
 having been earned by the company, the direc- 
 tors paid four dividends on the shares. The first 
 dividend was paid out of moneys received from 
 an insurance company in respect of the loss occa- 
 sioned by the fire. The other three dividends 
 were paid by means of moneys borrowed expressly 
 for the purpose from the contractors of the com- 
 pany and a financial company, both of whom had 
 notice of the purpose for which the money was 
 borrowed, and both of whom held a large number 
 of the preference shares: — Held, that the direc- 
 tors were, under sect. 165 of the Companies Act, 
 1862, jointly and severally liable to pay to the 
 liquidator the amoimt of the first dividend. — But 
 with respect to the other three dividends, held 
 that the result of the transactions, as a whole, had 
 been only to increase the amount of the proofs 
 against the company by the amount of the loans, 
 and that, consequently the directors were jointly 
 and severally liable to pay to the liquidator only 
 such a sum as would enable him to pay on al'l 
 the debts of the company a dividend equal to 
 that which would have been paid on all the debts 
 (other than the loans), in case no proof had beerr 
 made in respect of the loans. — But, held, that the 
 order must be made without prejudice to the 
 right of the directors to be indemnified by any 
 shareholders or creditors of the company who. 
 were parties or privies to the payment of the 
 dividends out of capital, and that three months, 
 from the date of the Chief Clerk's certificate of 
 the amount payable by the directors must be given 
 to them to make the payment.- — The dividends in. 
 question were paid in January and July, 1874, 
 and in January and July, 1875. The order to 
 wind up the company was made in November, 
 1876. A liquidator was appointed in December, 
 1876; he afterwards retired, and his successor 
 was appointed in December, 1878. The summons 
 against the directors was issued in February, 
 1880: — Held, that there had been no such delay 
 as to disentitle the liquidator to make the appli- 
 cation. — Stringer's Case (Law Eep. 4 Ch. 475) and 
 In re Mammoth Copperopolis of Utah (50 L. J. 
 (Ch.) 11) distinguished. In re Alexandra Pa- 
 lace Company 21 Ch. D. 149 
 
 6. Payment of Dividend out of Capital — 
 
 Set-off — Statute of Limitations.'] The directors of 
 a limited company for several years presented to- 
 the general meetings of shareholders reports and 
 balance-sheets in which various debts known by 
 the directors to be bad were entered as assets, so 
 that an apparent profit was shewn though in fact 
 there was none. The shareholders, relying on 
 these documents, passed resolutions declaring divi- 
 dends, which the directora accordingly paid. An 
 order having been made to wind up the company 
 the liquidator applied, under sect. 165 of th& 
 
( 3Cl ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 362 ) 
 
 XVII. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S LIABILITY— 
 
 continued. 
 Companies Act, 1862, for an order on the directors 
 to replace the amount of dividends thus paid out 
 of capital: — Held, by Bacon, V.O., and by the 
 Court of Appeal, that as regards each half-yearly 
 dividend the persons who were directors when it 
 was paid were liable for the whole amount paid 
 for the dividends of that half-year, and that In re 
 National Funds Assurance Company (10 Ch. D. 
 118) is in no way affected by Coventrt/ and Dixon's 
 Case (14 Ch. D. 660). The order of Bacon, V.C, 
 declared them to be jointly liable, but this was 
 varied on appeal by declaring them jointly and 
 severally liable : — Seld, that even if the share- 
 holders had known the true facts, so that their 
 ratification of the payment of dividends would 
 have bound themselves individually, they could 
 not bind the company, for that the payment of 
 dividends out of corpus was ultrk vires the com- 
 pany, and incapable of ratification by the share- 
 holders : — Held, further, that the fact that the 
 capital thus improperly applied was distributed pro 
 rats, among the whole body of shareholders did 
 aiot protect the directoi-a, for that the shareholders 
 were not the corporation, and that payment to 
 them would not prevent the corporation before 
 winding-up, or the liquidator after winding-up, 
 from compelling the directors to replace the 
 money that it might be applied to proper pur- 
 poses : — Seld, further, that the directors could not 
 eet off any money due from the company to them 
 against the amounts which they were ordered to 
 replace: Eeld, also, that the claim was for a 
 breach of trust, and that the Statute of Limita- 
 tions could not be set up. In re Exchange Bakk- 
 iNG Company. Flitoroft's Case 21 Ch. D. 519 
 
 6. Payment of Dividend out of Capital — 
 
 — Negligence — Misfeasance — Breach of Trust — 
 Innocent Director — Companies Act, 1862 (2.5 & 26 
 Vict. 89), s. 165.] An innocent director of a 
 company is not liable for the fraud of his co- 
 directora in issuing to the shareholders false and 
 fraudulent reports and balance sheets if the 
 books and accounts of the company have been 
 kept and audited by duly appointed and respon- 
 sible officers, and he has no ground for suspect- 
 ing fraud. Consequently, if such a director has 
 received, together with the other shareholders, 
 dividends declared and paid in pursuance of 
 such reports and balance sheets, such dividends 
 Laving been, in fact, payments out of capital, 
 iie cannot be called upon, imder sect. 165 of the 
 Companies Act, 1862, to repay the dividends so 
 paid, nor even the dividends received by himself. 
 A director is not bound to examine entries in any 
 of the company's books; nor is the doctrine of 
 constructive notice to be so extended as to impute 
 to him a knowledge of the contents of the books. 
 — The articles of association of a company vested 
 in D., the vendor to the company and its chair- 
 man, the " suj)reme control " of its management 
 and business ; also power " to the exclusion of 
 general meetings and the board" to determine 
 the amount of dividend, and, generally, power to 
 exercise any of the authorities thereby conferred 
 on the general meetings and boards of directors, 
 and in doing so to " supersede the authority of 
 general meetings and boards." The articles then. 
 
 XVII. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S LIABILITY— 
 
 continued. 
 " subject and without prejudice to the authorities 
 thereby given to " T>., vested the general conduct 
 and management of the business of the company 
 in the board of directors, and required them to 
 keep and render proper accounts, reports, and 
 balance sheets. Tlie articles also prohibited the 
 payment of dividends except out of profits. The 
 company had a regular book-keeper and duly 
 appointed auditors. During a period of four 
 years printed annual reports, with balance sheets 
 annexed, were issued to the shareholders pur- 
 porting to shew profits each year available for a 
 15 per cent, dividend, which was declared and 
 paid accordingly. Each report was headed with 
 the names of the four directors of the company 
 including D., the chairman, and ended with the 
 words, "By order of the directors — ^D., chair- 
 man " ; the balance sheets being signed as ap- 
 proved by the auditors. C. was one of the direc- 
 tors named at the head of the reports, but he 
 never attended any of the board meetings or took 
 any actual part in the preparation or issue of the 
 reports and balance sheets, and during the four 
 years he only occasionally attended the company's 
 general meetings, at one of which, at D.'s request; 
 he formally moved the resolution declaring the 
 15 per cent, dividend for that year. — On the com- 
 pany having subsequently been ordered to be 
 wound up, it was found that the dividends for the 
 four years had been paid out of capital and not 
 out of profits, and that in order to shew profits 
 available for the 15 per cent, dividend the accounts 
 had been fraudulently manipulated by D. and the 
 book-keeper, though without the knowledge of C, 
 who had no grounds for suspecting misconduct on 
 the part of any of the officers of the company. A 
 summons having been taken out under sect. 165 
 of the Companies Act, 1862, by certain creditors 
 of the company to compel C. to repay the amount 
 of dividends so paid out of capital : — Held, that C. 
 was not personally responsible for the fraudulent 
 reports and balance sheets and the dividends paid 
 under them, the words, " By order of the direc- 
 tors " at the foot of the reports not being alone 
 sufficient to fix him with individual liability; 
 and that — having regard to the powers by the 
 articles vested in D., and to the fact that the 
 books had been kept and audited by duly autho- 
 rised officers, and that 0. had had no reason to 
 suspect any misconduct — C. had not been guilty 
 of such negligence or abnegation of duty as to 
 render himself liable to repay the whole amount 
 of capital paid away as dividends to himself and 
 the other shareholders, nor even the amount re- 
 ceived by himself alone as a shareholder, nor the 
 single dividend for which he had formally moved 
 the resolution. In re Denham & Co. 25 Ch, D. 762 
 
 XVIII. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S QUALIFICA- 
 TION. 
 
 1. Contract to obtain Qualification — Sub- 
 scriber of Memorandum — Beasonable Time for Per- 
 formance — Abortive Company — Companies Act, 
 1862, «. 23.] A company was registered in June, 
 1879. B. and H, signed the memorandum of 
 association as subscribers for.one share each. By 
 the articles B. and H. were named as original 
 directors, and it was provided that the qualifioa- 
 
( 363 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 364 ) 
 
 XVni. COMPANY— DIEECTOE'S QTTALIFICA- 
 
 TION — continued. 
 tiou of a director should be fifty shares. B. and 
 H. attended meetings of the direotoiB, but no 
 shares were allotted to them, nor did their names 
 appear on the register for any shaves except those 
 for wliioh they had signed the memorandum. In 
 September B. resigned his oflBce, but H. continued 
 a director. No business was ever done by the 
 company, and in November a resolution was 
 passed to wind up the company. The liquidator 
 placed B. and H. on the list of contributories for 
 fifty shares each : — Held (affirming the decision 
 of Kay, J.), that assuming that the contract en- 
 tered into by B. and H. to obtain a qualification 
 amounted to an agreement to take fifty shares 
 "within the 23rd section of the Companies Act, 
 1862, they were entitled to a reasonable time for 
 performing the agi'eement, and that under the 
 circumstances such reasonable time had not 
 elapsed at the commencement of the winding-up 
 of the company. Consequently they could not be 
 held liable as contributories in respect of the fifty 
 shares. — ^Whether the contract amounted to an 
 agreement to take the fifty shares within the 23rd 
 section, qumre. In re Colombia Chemical Fac- 
 tory Manuke and Phosphate Works. Hewitt's 
 Case. Bkett's Case - - 25 Ch. D. 283 
 
 2. Provided hy Promoter — Joint and 
 
 several Liability.'] The first five directors of a 
 company being bound by the articles of associa- 
 tion to hold twenty shares each as a qualifica- 
 tion, accepted, with the knowledge and approval 
 of each other, twenty fully paid shares each from 
 the promoter who had received them as cash from 
 the company : — Held, upon summons by the 
 official liquidator in the winding-up, that all the 
 directors were jointly and severally liable to pay 
 the full value of the shares. — One only of the five 
 directors, upon finding that he was not justified 
 in receiving the shares without payment, offered 
 to pay the full sum due from him, and gave a 
 cheque for the amount, which, however, was ac- 
 cepted as an advance to tlie company, and was 
 added to previous advances made by him for pre- 
 liminary expenses : — Held, that this director was 
 not at liberty to set off the value of his shares 
 against the amount paid in respect of advances, 
 though he would have a claim against the com- 
 pany for those advances. In re Caehiage Co- 
 OPEKATIVB Supply Association - 27 Ch, D. 322 
 
 XIX. COMPANY— •WINDING-UP OEDER. 
 
 1. Commencing Business — Business of 
 
 the Company at Home and Abroad — Companies 
 Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. e. 89), s. 79, svb-s. 2.] When 
 a company is incorporated to carry on business in 
 the United Kingdom and in other parts of the 
 world, and it hsks commenced to carry on its busi- 
 ness in a. foreign country, and there appears a 
 bou9, fide intention to commence business in the 
 country, the mere fact that it has not actually 
 commenced in this country the objects for which 
 it was incorporated within a year from its incorpo- 
 ration is not a sufficient ground for ordering the 
 company to be wound up under the Companies 
 Act, 1862, s. 79, sub-s. 2. — Princess of Reuss v. 
 Bos (Law Eep. 5 H. L. 176) discussed and dis- 
 tinguished. In re Capital Fire Insurance 
 Association - - - 21 Ch, D, 209 
 
 XIX. COMPANY — WINDING-UP OEDEB — 
 
 continued, 
 
 2. Foreign Company — Branch Office in 
 
 England^.Iurisdiction to wind up — Fending 
 Foreign Liquidation — Companies Act, 1862, 
 «. 199.] The Court has jurisdiction under 
 sect. 199 of the Companies Act, 1862, to wind up 
 an unregistered joint stock company, formed, and 
 having its principal place of business in New 
 Zealand, but having a branch office, agent, assets, 
 and liabilities in England. — The pendency of a 
 foreign liquidation does not affect the. jurisdiction 
 of the Court to make a winding-up order, in re- 
 spect of the company under such liquidation, 
 although the Court will as a matter of inter- 
 national comity have regard to the order of the 
 foreign Court. — It being alleged that proceedings. ■ 
 to wind up the company were pending in New 
 Zealand, the Court, in order to secure the English 
 assets until proceedings should be taken by the 
 New Zealand liquidators to make them available 
 for the English creditors pari passu with those in 
 New Zealand, sanctioned the acceptance of an un- 
 dertaking by the solicitor for the English agent 
 of the company, that the English assets should 
 remain in statu quo until the further order of the 
 Court. — In re Commercial Bank of India (Law 
 Eep. 6 Eq. 517) approved. In re Mathesos 
 Brothers, Limited - - - 27 Ch. D. 225 
 
 3. Foreign Company — Jurisdiction — 
 
 Companies Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 199.;i 
 There is no jurisdiction under the Companies 
 Act, 1862, to "wind up a foreign company which 
 has carried on business in England by means of 
 agents, but which has no branch office of its own 
 there. In re Lloyd Generale Italiano 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 219 
 
 4. Impossibility of carrying on Business 
 
 — Failure of Object of Company — " Jmt and 
 Equitable Cause " forWinding-up — Companies Act, 
 1862, 8. 79, sub-s. 5 — General Words in Memo- 
 randum of Association.] The memorandum of 
 association of a company stated that it was formed 
 for working a German patent which had been or 
 would be granted for manufacturing coffee from 
 dates, and also for obtaining other patents for 
 improvements and extensions of the said inven- 
 tions or any modifications thereof or incident 
 thereto ; and to acquire or purchase any other in- 
 ventions for similar purposes, and to import and 
 export all descriptions of produce for the pui-pose 
 of food, and to acquire or lease buildings either in 
 connection with the above-mentioned purposes or 
 otherwise, for the purposes of the company. — The 
 intended German patent was never granted, but 
 the company purchased a Swedish patent, and also 
 established works ai Hamburg, where they made 
 and sold coffee made from dates without a patent. 
 Many of the shareholders "withdrew from the com- 
 pany on ascertaining that the G erman patent could 
 not be obtained ; but the large majority of those who 
 remained desired to continue the company, which 
 was in solvent circumstances. — A petition having 
 been presented by two shareholders: — Held, 
 (affirming the decision of Kay, J.), that the sub- 
 stratum of the company had failed, and it was 
 impossible to carry out the objects for which it 
 was formed; and therefore it was just and equit- 
 able that the company should be wound up. 
 
C 365 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 366 ) 
 
 XIX. COMPABTY — WINDING-TJP OEDEE — 
 
 continued. 
 although the petition was pfeseiited within a year 
 from its incorporation. — The effect of general 
 ■words describing the objects of a company in the 
 memorajidum of aeeooiation considered. In re 
 Gebman Date Coffee Company 20 Ch. D. 169 
 
 5. Impossihility of carrying on Business 
 
 — " Just and Equitable Cause " for Wiiiding-up — 
 Majority of Shareholders desirous of going mi — 
 Fraud — Companies Aot, 1862, s. 79, siX)-s. 5.] 
 Where the Court is satisfied that the subject- 
 matter of the business for which a company was 
 formed has substantially ceased to exist, it will 
 make an order for winding-up the company, 
 although the large majority of the shareholders 
 desire to continue to carry on the company, — 
 Therefore, where a company was established for 
 working a gold> mine in New Zealand and it 
 turned out that the company had no title to the 
 mine, and had no prospect of obtaiuing possession 
 of it, except as to a small portion for a few months, 
 a winding-up order was made, although there 
 were general words in the memorandum of associa- 
 tion enabling the company to purchase and work 
 other mines in New Zealand, and the large 
 majority of the shareholders wished to continue 
 the company. — But, s&mble, the mere fact of there 
 having been fraud in the formation of the com- 
 pany, or fraudulent misrepresentation in the pro- 
 spectus, would not in itself be sufiSoient to induce 
 the Court to make a winding-up order, because 
 the majority of the shareholders would have 
 power at a general meeting to waive the fraud 
 and confirm the transactions affected by it. — The 
 decision of Bacon, V.O., reversed. In re Haven 
 Gold Mining Company - 20 Ch. D. 151 
 
 6. Petition — Costs — Withdrawal — Ad- 
 
 vertiseinents — Contributories — Companies Act, 
 1862, (25 & 26 Vict. u. 89), s. 82 — Bules of 
 Novemher, 1862, r. 2.] A winding-up petition 
 had a,ppeared in the Court paper from time to 
 lime which had never been advertised: — Seld, 
 that the petition could be withdrawn without 
 payment of the costs of a shareholder appearing 
 to oppose. In re United Stock Exchange, 
 Limited. Ex parte Philp & Kidd 28 Ch. D. 183 
 
 7. — — - Petition — Costs — Dismissal of Petition 
 on Application of Petitioner — Shareholders and 
 Creditors appearing to consent.^ Where a winding- 
 up petition is dismissed on the application of the 
 petitioner, shareholders and creditors appearing 
 either to oppose- or support the petition are 
 entitled to theireosts. — In re,Jahlochlu)ff Electric 
 Light and Power Company (Weekly Notes, 1883, 
 p. 189) distinguished. In re Nactupai Gold 
 Mining Company - - 28 Ch. D. 65 
 
 8. — ; — Petition — Costs — Bival Petitions.] A 
 creditor who presents a petition for winding-up in 
 ignorance of a prior petition, is entitled to his 
 cpsts up to the time when he has notice of the 
 prior petition, but if he then proceeds, he will not 
 he allowed his further costs ; unless he has good 
 reason to suppose that the other petition is not 
 bona, fide, in which case he is justified in pro- 
 ceeding and may be allowed his costs. In re 
 Qenebal Financial Bank 20 Ch. D. 276 
 
 . 9. Petition — Creditor whose Deht is dis- 
 
 XIX. COMPANY — WINBING-UP OEDEE — 
 
 continued, 
 puted — Jurisdiction — Solvent Company — Injunc- 
 tion.'] The Court has jurisdiction to restrain by in- 
 junction a person claiming to be a creditor of a 
 company, from presenting a petition to wind up the 
 company, where the debt is bona fide disputed, 
 and the company is solvent. Cekole Eestatjbant 
 Castiglione Company v. Laveky 18 Ch. D. 555 
 Niger Merchants Company «. Capper 18 Ch, D. 
 
 [667, n. 
 10. Petition — -Creditor whose Debt is dis- 
 puted — Evidence of Insolvency — Dismissal of 
 Petition on Motion.] B., a dismissed servant of 
 a company, claimed £15 for arrears of salary, 
 and £95 damages for alleged wrongful dismissal. 
 The company disputed both claims". B. filed a 
 petition to wind up the company, alleging it to be 
 insolvent, but there was no evidence of insol- 
 vency except the common statutory affidavit of 
 the Petitioner. The company at once moved to 
 stay proceedings on the petition, and in support 
 of the motion filed an. affidavit by their secretary 
 shewing that the claims of the Petitioner were 
 bona fide disputed, and that the company was 
 solvent. Bacon V.C., ordered that on payment 
 by the company of £110 into, Court all proceed- 
 ings should be stayed until an taction to be 
 brought by the Petitioner had been tried. The 
 company paid the £110 into Court and appealed ; 
 — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that where a 
 petition to wind up is improperly filed the Court 
 has jurisdiction on motion to stay all proceedings 
 under it, or to dismiss it ; that the present peti- 
 tion was an abuse of the process of the Court, 
 being brought to compel payment of a small debt 
 which was bonS, fide disputed, and being unsup- 
 ported by any evidence that the company was in- 
 solvent ; that the petition therefore must be dis- 
 missed with costs, and the £110 returned to the 
 company. In re Gold Hill Mines 23 Ch. D. 210 
 
 11. Petition — Creditor — Debenture-holder 
 
 ■ — Trust Deed — Debenture payable to Bearer — De- 
 benture held as Security — Inquiry as to existence 
 of Assets — Appointment of Provisional Liquidator 
 with Powers of Official Liquidator — Companies 
 Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), ss. 86, 92.] ' A 
 company issued debentures payable to bearer, the 
 payment of which was secured by a deed by 
 which the company purported to assign all then- 
 present and future property to trustees, on trust 
 for the benefit of the debenture-holders, and 
 covenanted with the trustees for payment of the 
 principal and interest of the debehtures. By 
 the debentures the company agreed to pay the 
 amount thereby secured to the bearer: — Reld^ 
 that the holder of some of the debentures the in- 
 terest on which was overdue (the debentures 
 having been deposited with him by the original 
 holder as security for a debt) was entitled to pe- 
 tition for the winding-up of the company. — In re 
 Uruguay Central and Sygueritaa Railway Com- 
 pany of Monte Video (11 Ch. D. 372) distinguished. 
 — There being some evidence that the company 
 had no assets beyond the property comprised in 
 the trust deed, the Court directed an inquiry in 
 Chambers whether the company had any and 
 what assets not included in the deed and avail- 
 able for the general creditors, and referred it to 
 
( 367 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 368 ) 
 
 XIX. COMPANY — WINDING-UP OEDEE — 
 
 continued. 
 Chambers to appoint a provisional liquidator, 
 with all the powers of an official liquidator, but 
 the liquidator was to take no steps without the 
 direction of the Judge in Chambers, beyond 
 taking possession of the company's property 
 within the jurisdiction, Including their books and 
 papers. In re Olathe Silver Mining Com- 
 pany - 27 Ch. D. 278 
 
 12. Petition — Creditor's Debt — Companies 
 
 Act, 1862, ss. 80, S2— Lands Clauses Act, 1845.] 
 A claim against a limited company by a land- 
 owner for the amount of purchase and compensa- 
 tion money in respect of land taken, which has 
 been assessed by arbitration under the provisions 
 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, does not, until 
 the title has been investigated and accepted by 
 the company, constitute a debt in respect of which 
 the landowner is entitled as an unpaid creditor 
 within the Companies Act, 1862, s. 82, to apply 
 for a winding-up order. In re Milfokd Docks 
 Company. Listee's Petition 23 Ch. D. 292 
 
 13. Petition — Insolvent Contributory — 
 
 Trustee— Companies Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict, 
 c. 131), s. iO— Period of Six Months—" Held "— 
 Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. S9)—Banh- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), ss. 11, 15, 
 94, U5, 115.] A contributory of a company may 
 present a petition to wind up the company where 
 his name appears on the register as the holder of 
 shares, though a trustee may have been appointed 
 under a liquidation petition filed by such con- 
 tributory, during the period of six months men- 
 tioned in sect. 40 of the Companies Act, 1867. — 
 The word " held " in such section has no technical 
 meaning, the true meaning of the word being that 
 the name of the contributory has been on the 
 Tef;ister as the holder of shares for the period in 
 question. In re Wala Wynaad Indian Gold 
 Mining Company - 21 Ch. D. 849 
 
 14. Petition — Security for Costs — Subse- 
 quent Petition by same Petitioner for Liquidation 
 of his own Affairs.} After the presentation and 
 before the hearing of a winding-up petition, the 
 petitioner filed a petition for the liquidation of 
 liis own alfairs under the 125th and 126th sections 
 of the Banki-uptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c, 71) ; — Reld, that he must give security for costs 
 in the winding-up petition. — Malcolm v. Hodgkin- 
 son (Law Eep. 8 Q. B. 209) and Brocklebank v. 
 Kiiig's Lynn Steamship Company (S C. P. D. 365) 
 followed. In re Carta Para Mining Company 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 457 
 
 15. Previous Voluntary Winding-up.] A 
 
 compulsory order for winding-up does not avoid 
 ab initio all the proceedings under a previous 
 resolution for voluntary winding-up. Thomas v. 
 Patent Lignite Company - 17 Ch. D. 260 
 
 16. Wishes of Creditors — Companies Act, 
 
 1862 (25 (fc 26 FW. c. 89), s. 91.] In determin- 
 ing whether regard should be paid to the wishes 
 of creditors who oppose tlie making of a winding- 
 up order, the Court ought to consider not only 
 the number of the creditors and the amount of 
 their debts, but also the reasons which they 
 assign for their conclusion. — The prima facie right 
 of an unpaid creditor of a company to a winding- 
 
 XIX. COMPANY — WINDING-UP OEDEE — 
 
 continued. 
 up order is rebutted when it is shewn that a large 
 mass of other creditors oppose the making of 
 such an order. — ^A creditor's winding-up petition 
 ordered to stand over for six months upon terms 
 similar to those imposed in In re St. Thomas' Dock 
 Company (2 Ch. D. 116). In re Great Western 
 (Forest of Dean) Coal Consumers' Company. 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 769 
 17. WishesofCreditors-^.B!3ftitoa Wind- 
 ing-up Order ex debito justitise — Companies Act, 
 1862, s. 91.] Although as a general rule an un- 
 paid creditor of a company/ which cannot pay its 
 debts is entitled to a windibg-up order, that order 
 will not be made when tit is shewn that the 
 petitioning creditor caun9t gain anything by a 
 winding-up order, and, a foitiori, it will not be 
 made under those ciroujmstances if the other 
 creditors oppose it. — In fe Uruguay Central and 
 Hygueritas Railway Company of Monte Video 
 (U Ch. D. 372) approved?— The 9l8t section of the 
 Companies Act, 1862, is not confined to cases 
 where a winding-up order has been made, but 
 applies also where a petition for winding-up is 
 before the Court. — The vsoUiery belonging to a 
 colliery company was subjtect to a large mortgage 
 payable by instalments, and all its assets had been 
 assigned to trustees upon trust for its debenture 
 holders, who had no present right of action against 
 the company for the principal of their debts, 
 which was not payable till 1885, but only for the 
 arrears of interest, which were considerable. The 
 colliery was not worth so much as the mortgage 
 money, but it was worked at a profit, and the in- 
 stalments of the mortgage debt were being paid, 
 but nothing was left to pay interest to the deben- 
 ture holders. There' appeared, however, to be 
 reason to think tMt if the business were con- 
 tinued, and the coal trade improved, there would 
 be something .for the dejjenture holders. The 
 colliery was leasehold an^ 'liable to forfeiture if 
 the company/was wound up. A holder of deben- 
 tures to a small amount presented a petition to 
 wind up the company, the debt on the footing of 
 which he petitioned being the arrears of interest 
 on his debentures. A vast majority of the other 
 debenture holders opposed the jietition, and none 
 of them supported it. Kay, J., thought the case 
 not a proper one for making a winding-up order, 
 but directad the petition to stand over for six 
 months : — Seld, on appeal, that the petition ought 
 to be dismissed at once. In re Chapel House 
 Colliery Company - 24 Ch. D. 259 
 
 XX, COMPANY— VOLTJNTAEY WINDING-TTP 
 
 1. . — — General Meeting — Poll — Mode of 
 taking Poll — Chairman, Direction of — Compa- 
 nies Act, 1862, Table A, Art. 43.] The 'articles of 
 association of a company provided (in the terms of 
 art. 43 of Table A to the Companies Act, 1862) 
 that if at any general meeting of the company a 
 poll should be demanded it should be taken "in 
 such manner as the chairman shall direct," — A 
 poll having been demanded at a meeting sum- 
 moned to consider a resolution for a voluntary 
 winding-up, the chairman directed the poll be 
 taken then and there. It was so taken, and the 
 resolution was carried : — Held, that the poll had 
 been rightly taken.— Reg. v. D'Oyly (12 Ad, & E. 
 
( 369 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 (; 370 ) 
 
 XX. COMPANY— VOLTJNTABT -WINDING-TIF 
 
 — continued. 
 
 139; followed. — Observations on the dicta of 
 Jessel, M.R., and Brett, L.J., in In re Sm-Tmry 
 Bridge, Coal, Iron, and Waggon Company (11 
 Oh. D. 109, 114). In re CHiLLUfSTON Iron Com- 
 pany - - - 29 Ch. D. 169 
 3. Special Besolation requiring Confirma- 
 tion — Besolution appointing liquidator — Notice 
 of proposed Resolution — Necessity for — Companies 
 Act, 1862 (25 & 26 riot. c. 89), ss. 67, 133, sia>.-8. 2, 
 141.] A resolution appointing a liquidator is 
 operative only when there is an effective resolu- 
 tion to wind up. — Where therefore a special 
 resolution to wind up voluntarily which requu-es 
 confii-mation, has been passed at the first meeting, 
 although it is unobjectionable to pass at the same 
 meeting a resolution appointing a liquidator, the 
 latter resolution by itself can have no effect ; and 
 if at the subsequent meeting the latter is rejected 
 it is immaterial that the principal resolution, i.e. 
 to wind up, has been confirmed— nor is it possible 
 to fall back upon the resolution appointing a 
 liquidator which was passed at the first meeting 
 and treat it as binding. — The chairman of a general 
 meeting has prima facie authority to decide all 
 incidental questions which arise at such meeting, 
 and necessarily require decision at the time, and 
 the entry by him in the minute book of the result 
 of a poll, or of his decision of all such questions, 
 although not conclusive, is prima facie evidence 
 of that result, or of the correctness of that deci- 
 sion, and the onus of displacing that evidence is 
 thrown on those who impeach the entry. — Where 
 the chairman at a confirmation meeting disallowed 
 certain votes which had been given against the 
 confirmation of a resolution passed at the first 
 meeting appointing a liquidator, the effect of such 
 disallowance being to confirm such resolution, and 
 he made an entry in the minute book that such 
 resolution had been confirmed, the Court in the 
 absence of evidence that the votes were improperly 
 disallowed, declined to question the decision of 
 the chairman. But, having regard to the unsatis- 
 factory state of the evidence, the Court of Appeal 
 in the interest of all parties by its own order con- 
 firmed the appointment of the liquidator. In re 
 Indiajst Zoedone Cojupant 26 Ch. D, 70 
 
 XXI. COMPANY — INJUNCTION (and LEAVE 
 TO PEOCEED). 
 
 1. Execution — ■ Companies Act, 1862 
 
 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89, ss. 85, 163)— Forbearance by 
 Creditor.'} A creditor of a mining company made 
 repeated applications for payment through the 
 year 1881, and on the 21st of December obtained 
 a payment on account, and being unable to obtain 
 moie, he, on the 28th of December, issued a writ. 
 On the 4th of January, 1882, a paid-up share- 
 holder in the company who was under consider- 
 able liability as a surety for the company, pre- 
 sented a petition to wind it up, setting out a 
 balance sheet which shewed that the assets 
 greatly exceeded the liabilities, but not alleging 
 as a fact that they did so, stating that the com- 
 pany was unable to pay its debts, and that it was 
 just and equitable that it should be wound up. 
 On the 6th of January the creditor recovered 
 filial judgment without notice of the winding-up 
 petition, and on the following day issued execu- 
 
 XXI. COMPANY — INJUNCTION (and LEAVE 
 TO FROCEED)— continued. 
 
 tion. ; On the 14th of January the petition came 
 on to be heard and was supported by creditors, 
 and a winding-up order was made. The creditor 
 then applied for leave to go on with the execu- 
 tion : — Held, by Bacon, V.C., that leave ought to 
 be granted : — Meld, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 the petition could not be treated as a petition col- 
 lusively presented on behalf of a solvent company 
 for the purpose of defeating the execution, for that 
 the balance sheet could not be treated as proving 
 the company to he solvent, and the Petitioner, 
 though not legally a creditor, was virtually such, 
 and by amending the petition by joining one of 
 the supporting creditors it might have been made 
 a creditor's petition ; and consequently that leave 
 to proceed with the execution ought not to be 
 given: — Held, also, that leave ought not to be 
 given on the ground that the creditor had. given 
 indulgence to the company, as he had never given 
 time to the company in the sense of binding 
 himself not to sue, but had merely abstained from 
 suing : — Whether the having given indulgence to 
 a company is a sufiicient reason for allowing a 
 creditor to continue his proceedings notwithstand- 
 ing a winding-up, qusere. — JSx parte Railway Steel 
 and Plant Company, In re Taylor (8 Oh. D. 183) 
 and In re Richards & Co. (11 Ch. D. 676) doubted. 
 In re Veon Ooluert Company 20 Ch. D. 442 
 
 8. Execution — Cmrfipanies Act, 1862 (25 
 
 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 163.] Where an execution 
 against the goods of a company which is being 
 wound up is avoided by the Companies Act, 1862, 
 s. 163, it is avoided altogether,' and the creditor 
 retains no interest under it. In re AktIstic 
 Colour Printing Company. Ex parte Fovbvui- 
 NIER - - - 31 Ch. D, 510 
 
 Injunction against winding-up petition 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 555 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 9. 
 Staying proceedings — ^Delay 17 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Company — Unregistered Com- 
 pany. 7. 
 
 XXII. COMPANY— LIQTJIDATOE. 
 
 1. Official — Affidavit embracing distinct 
 
 Cases against different Parties — Affidavit of Docu- 
 ments by Official Liquidator — Companies Act, 1862, 
 s. 165.] The official liquidator of a company ap- 
 plied under sect. 165 of the Companies Act, 1862, 
 to make a number of gentlemen, some of whom 
 were and others had been directors, responsible 
 for acts of misfeasance. The alleged acts were 
 107 in number. B. had been a. director only 
 during the period in which the first eleven of 
 these acts were done, and it was not sought to 
 make him liable in respect of any others. The 
 liquidator filed an affidavit of 1150 folios, in- 
 cluding all the cases. E., who appeared alone, 
 applied for an order that the liquidator might 
 state what paragraphs he intended to read against 
 E. It appeared that E.'s solicitor had boiTowed 
 the affidavit and was, on his own shewing, able 
 to make out what parts of the affidavit affected 
 B. : — Held, affirming tire decision of Chitty, J., 
 that E.'s application must be refused, for that 
 although the Court would interfere if the cases 
 against different parties were mixed up together 
 
( 371 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 372 ) 
 
 XXII. COMPANY— LIftUIDATOB—conii»MC(i. 
 
 in a way which was oppressive, a Defendant 
 must, as a general rule, ascertain for himself 
 what part of the Plaintiff's evidence affects him, 
 and that there were no circumstances in the pre- 
 sent case to take it out of the general rule. — 
 E. applied that the of&cial liquidator might be 
 ordered to make the usual affidavit as to docu- 
 ments in his possession: — Held, affirming the 
 decision of Chitty. J., that such an order ought 
 not to be made, for that the official liquidator, 
 being an officer of the Court, is not, even in pro- 
 ceedings under sect. 165, in the position of an 
 ordinary litigant, and will not in the absence of 
 special circnmstanoes, be required to make an 
 affidavit as to documents in his possession, though 
 he is bound to produce to the adverse litigant the 
 documents which the latter requires to see. In re 
 Mutual Society - - 22 Ch. D. 714 
 
 2. Official — Appointment.'] An official 
 
 liquidator ought not to be appointed on the hear- 
 ing of a winding-up petition, it being now the 
 settled practice to direct a reference to Chambers 
 for that purpose. In re General Financial 
 Bank - 20 Ch. D. 376 
 
 3. Official — Assignment hij Official Liqui- 
 dator of all the Property of a Company — Claims 
 against Directors for Misfeasance — Companies Act, 
 1862, 8. 95, svh-s. 3.] A company being in course 
 of wiiiding-up, an arrangement was entered into 
 with the sanction of the Court, in pm-suance of 
 which the official liquidators assigned toW., in 
 the most general terms, all the estate, property 
 and effects of the .company which the liquidators 
 had power to dispose of, in consideration of cer- 
 tain payments to be made by W., and which were 
 duly made. W. entered into the arrangement on 
 behalf of E., an officer of the company. After this 
 the liquidators brought forward claims against E. 
 and some of the directors, alleging that they had 
 improvidently sold property of the company at an 
 undervalue, and seeking to make them liable for 
 the loss, and also alleging that E. and some of 
 the directors had purchased for the company 
 certain property, and concealed the fict that it 
 had shortlv before been bought by E. for little 
 more than half the amount, and seeking to make 
 them liable for the difference. The existence of 
 these claims was not known at the time when 
 the above anrangement was entered into. E. 
 took out a summons to restrain the liquidators 
 from prosecuting these claims without his consent, 
 which application was refused by HaU, V.C. :— 
 Held, on appeal, that claims of this nature were 
 " things in action " of the company within the 
 meaning of the Companies Act, 1862, s. 95, 
 sub-s. 3, and could be assigned by the official 
 liquidator, that they were assigned by the deed, 
 and that E. was entitled to the order which he 
 asked, but that the order ought to be made with- 
 out prejudice to any application which the liqui- 
 dators might make to the Vice-Chanoellor to 
 enforce the claims, in case they should be suc- 
 cessful in the proceedings to set aside the arrange- 
 ment. In re Pabk Gate Waggon Wokks Gou- 
 PAKY - - - 17Ch.D.234 
 
 4, Official — Remuneration — Internal Liti- 
 gation^ Wliere the assets of a company in com- 
 pulsory liquidation are insufficient for payment 
 
 XXII. COMPANY— LIQTJIDATOE — continued. 
 of the costs of the winding-up, the official liqui- 
 dator is not entitled to any remuneration. In re 
 Dbonfibld Silkstone Coal Company (No. 2) 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 511 
 
 Costs of official liquidator 21 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Company — ^Costs.' 1. 
 
 Payment of rates — Beneficial occupation 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 500 ; 28 Ch. D. 470, 474 
 See Company — Eates. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 XXIII. COMPANY— CONTEIBUTOEY. 
 
 1. Husband in his Wife's Name.] S. (a 
 
 Parsee merchant) applied for 300 shares in the 
 London, Bombay, and Mediten-anean Bank, lOO 
 in his own name and 200 in tlie name of his wife,_ 
 M., paying the deposit on the whole 300 out of 
 his own moneys. The company allotted the 
 shares accordingly, and S. subscribed the memo- 
 randum and articles of association on M.'s behalf 
 as well as his own, and paid all calls upon all the 
 shares. S. afterwards sold and transferred 140 of 
 the shares allotted to M., executing the transfers 
 for her, or in her name. All these transactions 
 took place without M.'s knowledge. — In 1866 the 
 company was ordered to be wound up, and at that 
 date the name of "M. the wife of S." was on the 
 register as a past holder of 140 shares, and the 
 then holder of sixty shares — S. died shortly after- 
 wards, and the name of M. was placed upon the 
 A list of contributoiies in respect of sixty shares, 
 and upon the B list in respect of 140 shares. — 
 M. had no separate estate. — Upon an application 
 by the liquidator to have the B list rectified by 
 placing thereon the names of S.'s executors in- 
 stead of the name of M. :—Seld, that the company 
 having accepted the wife as a shareholder without 
 any misrepresentation or concealment on the part 
 of the husband, his estate vfas not liable, and the_ 
 company were not entitled to any rectification of 
 the list. In re London, Bombay, and Meditee- 
 EANEAN Bank 18 Ch. D. 581 
 
 2. Insolvent — Jurisdiction — Application 
 
 ly Stranger— Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. 
 c. 89), s. 77.] E., a contributory, became bank- 
 rupt. After this he took out a summons asking 
 that the official liquidator might be directed to 
 take proceedings against a director to recover 
 sums of money alleged to have been improperly 
 received by him. Fry, J., made an order that on 
 B.'s depositing £100 the liquidator should take 
 the opinion of counsel on the case alleged against 
 the director, and on obtaining his opinion should 
 apply to the Judge for directions. Two contri- 
 butoiies and creditors who had liberty to attend 
 proceedings appealed from this order : — Seld, by 
 the Court of Appeal, that E., having become 
 bankrupt, was a stranger to the company — that 
 there was no jurisdiction to make any order on 
 his application, and that the order must tlierefore 
 be discharged without any regard to the question 
 whether it was right or wrong on the merits. In 
 re Cape Bbeton Company - IS Ch. D. 77 
 
 3. Insolvent — Witiding-up of Compatiy 
 
 after and pending the Liquidation — Order of Dis- 
 charge — Subsequent Oall—Contrilitttory— Provable 
 Debt or Liability — Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 89 1, ss. 75, n—Banlzruptcy Act, 180^ 
 (32 ifc 33 Viet. a. 71), s. 31.] The liability in respect 
 
( 373 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, 
 
 ( 374 ) 
 
 XXni. COMPAlfY— CONTRIBUTORY— coiiW. 
 
 of calls of a liquidating member of a company 
 where the liquidation proceedings commence prior 
 to the -winding-up of the company, and are pend- 
 ing at the time of the -winding-up, is a debt or 
 liability -which is not " incapable of being fairly 
 estimated," and -which is therefore provable in the 
 liquidation. When, therefore, under those cir- 
 cumstances, a company winding up has failed to 
 carry in a proof in the liquidation proceedings of 
 a member of the company for calls, and the liqui- 
 dating member obtains his discharge, he cannot 
 afterwards be placed on the list of contributories. 
 — Furdoonjee's Cage (3 Ch. D. 264) discussed and 
 not followed. In re Mekoantile Mutual Makind 
 Insueanoe Association - 25 Ch. D. 415 
 
 4. Jnrisaiction — Adjustment of Bights of 
 
 Contributories — Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict, 
 c. 89), s. 109.] Under sect. 109 of the Companies 
 Act, 1862, the Court has jurisdiction to adjust the 
 rights inter se of contributories ; it cannot enforce 
 equities which persons who, as tortfeasors (being 
 also contributories), have been ordered to pay 
 money under sect. 165, may have against other 
 persons, who happen also to be contributories, to 
 compel them to make good the money so ordered 
 to be paid. In re Alexandba Palace Company 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 297 
 XXIV. COMPANY— PROOF. 
 
 1. Directors' Pees — Companies Act, 1862 
 
 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 38, svh-s. 1— Priorities of 
 Debts.'] In a company where directors were obliged 
 to be members : — Held, that a director's unpaid 
 fees were debts due to him in his character of 
 member, and to be postponed to outside creditors. 
 In re Leicbsteb Clue and County Racecouese 
 Company. .Ec parte Cannon - 30 Ch. D. 629 
 
 2. Fire Insurance — Fires before and after 
 
 Winding-up Order — Right of Proof — Companies 
 Act, 1862, s. 158— Ge». Ord. November, 1862, r. 25— 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 31 — Banltruptcy Sules, 
 1870, r. 27— Judicature Act, 1875, s. 10.] The 
 holder of a fire policy issued by a fire insurance 
 company is entitled, upon the company being 
 ordered to be wound up, to prove in the winding- 
 up for the fvdl amount of loss covered by the policy 
 and sustained by him through a fire which has 
 occurred in the course of the winding-up although 
 after the date of the winding-up order, and whether 
 the time limited for sending in claims in the -wind- 
 ing-up has expired or not. — A fortiori, a claim on 
 account of a fire which has occurred after the pre- 
 sentation of the petition but before the order to 
 wind up, is entitled to proof. In re Noethekn 
 Counties op England Fibe Insubance Company. 
 Macpaelane's Claim 17 Ch. D. 337 
 
 3. Payments without Notice of 'Winding- 
 up— Cow^anses Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Viet. c. 89), 
 ss. 84, 153.] Inconsiderationofmoneyspaidinat 
 a distant foreign branch of a banking company 
 whose head office was in London, drafts on the head 
 office were given after presentation of a petition to 
 wind up the company, and appointment of a pro- 
 visional liquidator in England, but before (from 
 want of direct telegraphic communication) any 
 notice of the stoppage of the bank in London had 
 been received at the foreign branch, and before 
 the date of the winding-up order : — Meld, that the 
 
 XXIV. COMPANY— PROOF— conimue^: 
 
 contract which was entered into by the officers 
 of the foreign branch on behalf of the company 
 without any notice of the winding-up proceedings, 
 and therefore before revocation of their axithority, 
 was not invalidated by the Companies Act, 1862, 
 s. 153; and accordingly that the creditors in 
 respect of such transaction were not entitled to 
 have their money refunded as on the footing of a 
 void transaction, but merely to prove for the 
 amount under the winding-up pari passu with 
 the other creditors. ^As between the holders for 
 value of the drafts and the persons by whom the 
 consideration was paid, the holders were held 
 entitled to prove. In re Obiental Bank Cob- 
 pobation. Ex parte Guillemin 28 Ch. D. 634 
 — ^ Servants' wages - - 16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Company — Peepebential Debts. 
 
 XXV. COMPANY— PREFERENTIAL DEBTS. 
 
 Tlie Act 46 & 47 Viet. c. 28 ^Companies Act, 
 1883), which came into operation on the 1st of 
 September, 1883, enacts : 
 
 Sect. 4. In the distribution of the assets of any 
 company being wound up under the Companies 
 Acts, 1862 and 1867, tliere shall he paid in priority 
 to other debts, — 
 
 (a.) All wages or salary of any clerk or servant 
 in respect of service rendered ^ to the com- 
 pany during four months before the com- 
 mencement of the winding-up not exceeding 
 £50; and 
 (b.) All wages of any labourer or workman in 
 respect of services rendered to the company 
 during two months before the commence- 
 ment of the winding-up.^ 
 Sect. 5. The foregoing debts shall rank equally 
 among theinselves, and shall be paid in full,, unless 
 the assets of the company are insuf/icient to meet 
 them, in which case they shall abate in equal pro- 
 portions between themselves. 
 
 Sect. 6. Subject to the retention of such sums as 
 may be necessary for the cost of administration or 
 • otherwise, the liquidator or liquidators or official 
 liquidator shall discharge the foregoing debts forth- 
 with, so far as the assets of the company are and 
 will be sufficient to meet them, as and when such 
 assets come into the hands of such liquidator or 
 liquidators or official liquidator. 
 
 Wages — Rule in Bankruptcy — 32 & 33 
 
 Viet. u. 71, s. 32.] The rule in bankruptcy that 
 servants' wages shall be paid in priority to all 
 other debts, is, by sect. 10 of the Judicature Act, 
 1875, extended to windings-up. — In re Albion 
 Steel and Wire Company (7 Ch. D. 547) followed. 
 In re Association op Land Financiees 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 XXVI. COMPANY— SET-OFF. 
 
 1. Assignment of Claim — Claim against 
 
 Company assigned to Debtor to Company and again 
 assigned by him — Judicature Act, 1875, s. 10 — 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Order xix., r. 3.] A com- 
 pany in 1877 was ordered to be wound up. In 
 1879 H. took assignments for value of the debts, 
 proved by and certified to be due to several cre- 
 ditors. On the 23rd of January, 1880, the liqui- 
 dator took out a summons under sect. 165 of the 
 Companies Act, 1862, that H., who had been a 
 director, might be ordered to pay £2P00, the 
 
(. 375 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 376 ) 
 
 XXVI. COMPANY— SET-OFF— oon«j»a«cJ. . 
 Eominal value of certain shares in the company 
 received by him from the promoter, or to make 
 compensation on the ground of misfeasance. On 
 the 25th of February, 1880, H. assigned the above 
 debts to T. for value, T. knowing nothing of the 
 claims against H., and notice of the assignment 
 was at once given to the liquidator. In July, 
 1880, an order was made on the summons for H. 
 to pay £2000 to the liquidator. On the Ith of 
 August, 1881, an order was made giving the 
 liquidator liberty to declare a dividend of lie. in 
 the pound on the debts of the company. T. ap- 
 plied for payment of this dividend on the debts 
 assigned to him, but the liquidator claimed to 
 retain the dividend by way of set-off against the 
 £2000 : — Held (aifirming the decision of Kay, J.), 
 that the liquidator had no such right of set-off, 
 and that T. was entitled to receive the dividend. 
 In re Milan Tkamwats Company. Ex parte 
 Theys 22 Ch. D. 122; 25 Oh. D. 687 
 
 2. Contract before Winding-up — Goods 
 
 delivered after Commeiwement of Winding-up — 
 Companies Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89).] In an 
 action by a limited company in the course of 
 compulsory winding-up by the Court for the price 
 of goods supplied to the Defendants by the com- 
 pany after, but in pursuance of a contract entered 
 into before, the commencement of the winding-up, 
 i.e., the presentation of the petition for winding-up, 
 such contract not being a sale of specific goods : — 
 Held, that the Defendants could not set off a debt 
 fi'om the Plaintiffs to themselves incurred prior to 
 the commencement of the winding-up. Inge Hall 
 EoLLiNG Mills Company v. Douglas Fobge Com- 
 pany - - 8 a. B. D. 179 
 
 XXVII. COMPANY— SECT7EED CEEDITOE. 
 
 1. Execution Creditor — Judicature Act, 
 
 1875, s. 10— Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 87— Com- 
 panies Act, 1862, S8. 85, 87.] A creditor having 
 recovered judgment against a company, the sheriff, 
 on the 10th of July, 1880, seized the goods of the 
 company under a fl. fa. for £89. On the 14th of 
 July a winding-up petition was presented, and on 
 the 15th of July an order was made restraining all 
 further proceedings in the action until the petition 
 was disposed of or withdrawn. The sheriff there- 
 upon withdrew from possession. On the 30th of 
 July a winding-up order was made. On the 31st 
 of July the creditor applied for leave to enforce 
 Ms judgment, and the value of the goods seized 
 being much greater than the amount of the debt, 
 an order was made by Malins,V.C.,that the liqui- 
 dator should pay the amount of the debt : — Held. 
 on appeal, that this order was right.— Sect. 87 of 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, which deprives execu- 
 tion creditors of the fruits of the execution where 
 the sheriff has notice of a bankruptcy within 
 fourteen days after sale, is not made applicable to 
 the winding-up of companies by the Judicature 
 Act, 1875, s. 10.— In re Richards & Co. (11 Ch. D. 
 676) approved.— -Jn re Printing and Numerical 
 Registering Company (8 Ch. D. 535) overruled. 
 In re Witheknsea Bsiokworks 16 Ch, D. 337 
 
 2. Failure of Security — Creditors' Rigid 
 
 ta prove— Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. 
 c. 89), s. 107— Judicature Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. 
 c. 77), s. 10— Bankruptcy Rules, 1870, rr. 99-102.] 
 
 XXVII. COMPANY — SECTIEED CEEDITOE — 
 
 continued. 
 A creditor of a company, believing himself to be 
 fully secured by the hypothecation under the 
 hand of the managing director of a call on the 
 company's shares, made no claim for his debt in 
 the winding-up. The security turning out defec- 
 tive, by reason of the call moneys having been 
 paid away partly before and partly since the letter 
 of hypothecation: — Held, that the creditor, never 
 having assessed the value of his security, was not 
 prevented by the operation of sect. 10 of the Judi- 
 cature Act. 1875, and rule 101 of the Bankruptcy 
 Rules, 1870, from coming in and proving for the 
 unsecured balance of his debt, on the terms of his 
 disturbing no past dividend. In re Kit Hill 
 Tunnel. Ex parte Williams 16 Ch. D. 690 
 
 XXVIII. COMPANY— DISTBESS. 
 
 1. Apportionment of Bent — Apportion- 
 ment Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 35).] Where a 
 company in liquidation continued in the posses- 
 sion of leasehold premises for the purpose of 
 carrying on their business : — Held, that the rent 
 of the premises must be apportioned under the 
 Act 33 & 34 Vict. c. 35, the landlord of the pre- 
 mises being entitled to prove jointly with the other 
 creditors for so much rent as became due up to 
 the date of the presentation of the petition for 
 winding up, when a provisional liquidator was 
 appointed, and being entitled to distrain for the 
 full rent due after that day. — Quxre, whether 
 there would be any such apportionment in a case 
 where the landlord sought to proceed by re-entry 
 instead of by distress. In re South Kensington 
 Co-operative Society - - 17 Ch. D. 161 
 
 2. Collateral Security — Companies Act, 
 
 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89), ss. 85, 163.] The mle 
 that a landlord will not be allowed to realize a 
 distress for rent levied on the goods of a company 
 between the presentation of a winding-up petitiou 
 and the making of a winding-up order, if he is a 
 creditor entitled to prove in the winding-up for 
 the rent distrained for : — Held, not to apply to a 
 case in which the company were not tenants of 
 the landlord (but undertenants of his lessee), and 
 the landlord had accepted as collateral security 
 for the overdue rent a promissory note of the 
 company upon which he was entitled to prove in 
 the winding-up: — Held, that in such a case the 
 landlord ought to be allowed to realize his dis- 
 tress. In re Carriage Co-operative Supply 
 Association. Ex parte Olemence 23 Ch. D. 154 
 
 3. — •— Commencement of Winding-up — 
 
 Voluntary Winding-up — Compulsory Winding-up 
 ■ — Appointment of Liquidator — 25'& 26 Vict. c. 89, 
 ss. 87, leS— Judicature Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 77), s. 10.] After an extraordinary resolution 
 for the voluntary winding-up of a company had 
 been passed, but before a liquidator had been ap- 
 pointed, a landlord distrained for rent due from 
 the company before the resolution was passed. 
 Immediately afterwards an action was commenced 
 on behalf of the debenture holders of the com- 
 pany, in whose favour the company had made a 
 mortgage of its assets, and the company moved 
 for and obtained in this action an order to restrain 
 the landlords from proceeding with their distress. 
 A receiver appointed in the action thereupon 
 
( 377 ) 
 
 . DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 378 ) 
 
 XXVIII. COMPANY— DISTEESS—corefinwed. 
 took possession of the chattels distrained, and by- 
 arrangement a sum of money was set apart to 
 meet the claim of the landlords if the Court 
 should hold them entitled to the benefit of their 
 distress. Subsequently an order for the compul- 
 sory winding-up of the company was made which 
 did not refer to the proceedings in the voluntary 
 winding-up : — Seld, by Malins, V.C., that the dis- 
 tress was good ; first, because at the time when it 
 was made there was no liquidator to interfere ; 
 and secondly, because the voluntary winding-up 
 was superseded by the compulsory winding-up, 
 and ordered the rent to be paid to the landlords 
 out of the proceeds of the chattels. — Held, on 
 appeal, that the distress was avoided by sect. 163 
 of the Companies Act, 1862, unless sufBcient 
 grounds could be shewn for inducing the Court to 
 exercise the discretionary power given by sect. 87, 
 and that the circumstances of the case did not 
 furnish any such ground, the case not being one 
 where the landlords could not prove for rent. — 
 The making a compulsory order for winding up a 
 company does not avoid ab initio all the proceed- 
 ings under a previous resolution for voluntary 
 winding-up. — The 10th section of the Judicature 
 Act, 1875, does not import into winding-up the 
 ^Ith section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, which 
 gives a landlord priority for a year's rent. 
 Thomas v. Patent LioNrrE Company 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 250 
 
 4. nine.] E. demised a colliery to a 
 
 limited company for twenty-five years from Janu- 
 ary, 1858. The company mortgaged it by under- 
 lease. In 1878 an agreement was come to be- 
 tween E. and the company for a new lease of the 
 colliery and of the mines under 163 acres of ad- 
 joining land, these latter mines to be worked by 
 outstroke. The company then brought plant and 
 machinery on the 163 acres, sunk trial pits, and 
 found coal, but no new lease was granted. On 
 the 28th of January, 1880, the mortgagees took 
 possession of the colliery, but did not interfere 
 with the 163 acres. On the 3l8t of January, 1880, 
 a petition was presented to wind up the company, 
 on which an order was made. The liquidator did 
 not take possession either of the colliery or of the 
 163 acres, or the minerals under them, nor did he 
 take any steps to give the demised property up to 
 E. The plant and machinery brought on the 163 
 acres remained there. In May, 1880, the liquida- 
 tor had the whole plant and machinery, both on 
 the colliery and on the 163 acres, valued, with a 
 view to a sale of these chattels to the mortgagees, 
 that they might sell the property as a going con- 
 cern, but this purchase by the mortgagees was 
 not carried into effect. In May, 1881, the liqui- 
 dator advertised the whole plant and machinery 
 for sale. On the 30th of May, 1881, E. took out 
 a smnmons for leave to distrain on the plant and 
 machinery on the 163 acres, or to have the pro- 
 ceeds paid to him. In June, 1881, the plant and 
 machinery were sold. In January, 1882, Kay, J., 
 made an order on the summons that the liquidator 
 should pay to E. all the rent accrued since the 
 commencement of the winding-up :—Beld, on ap- 
 peal, that no case has gone the length of deciding 
 that a landlord is entitled to distrain for or be 
 paid in full rent accrued since the commencement 
 
 XXVIII. COMPAHY— DISTRESS— confenaecZ. 
 
 of the winding-up, where the liquidator has done 
 nothing except abstain from trying to get rid of 
 the property of which the company is lessee, and 
 that the facts that the liquidator left the com- 
 pany's plant and machinery where he found them, 
 that he had them valued for sale in May, 1880, 
 and that he took no steps to surrender the com- 
 "pany's interest in the colliery and the 163 acres, 
 did not entitle the landlord to distrain or to be 
 paid in full, and that the summons ought to have 
 been dismissed. In re Oak Pits Collieey Com- 
 pany - - - 21 Ch. D. 323 
 
 5. Mine — Power to distrain and stop 
 
 working — Fayment of full Rent.'] The owner of 
 a coal mine leased to a company, having power to 
 distrain for rent in arrear and to stop the working 
 of the mine, gave notice to the liquidator requiring 
 payment of a half-year's rent which became due 
 after the winding-up of the company, or that 
 the working should be stopped. The liquidator 
 neither paid the rent nor stopped the working : — ■ 
 Seld, upon summons by the lessor for leave to 
 distrain, that the liquidator having elected to 
 continue the working for the advantage of the 
 company, must pay the full rent out of the first 
 assets. In re Silkstone and Dodworth Coal 
 and Iron Company 17 Ch. D. 168 
 
 6. Mortgage — Star/ of Action— Interest 
 
 on Mortgage Debt.'] Mortgagees having a right 
 of distress to enforce payment of interest will be 
 allowed to distrain after a winding-up for interest 
 accrued while the liquidators were in possession, 
 but not for arrears accrued before the winding-up. 
 In re Bkown, Bayley, & DixoN. Ex parte Eo- 
 bekts akd Weight - 18 Ch. D. 649 
 
 XXIX. COMPANY— BATES. 
 
 1. Beneficial Occupation — Voluntary 
 
 Winding-up — Poor's and Local Board of Sealth 
 Sates — Summons for Payment in full dismissed.] 
 Where the occupation by the liquidator of the 
 property of a company in liquidation had not been 
 beneficial, an application for payment in full of 
 poor's rates and Local Board of Health rates made 
 after the liquidation commenced was refused. In 
 re Watson, Kipling, & Co. - 23 Ch, D. 500 
 
 2. Beneficial Occupation — -Winding-up — 
 
 Business carried on ty the Liquidator.] An 
 hotel company was wound up under an order 
 of the Court, and the liquidator was directed to 
 sell the hotel, but with liberty to carry on the 
 business till the sale, so as to sell it as a going 
 concern. The liquidator accordingly carried on 
 the business in the hotel, but made no profit by 
 it. Shortly after the commencement of the wind- 
 ing-up a poor-rate was made, and the overseers 
 claimed payment of the rate from the liquidator 
 in respect of his occupation of the hotel : — Held 
 (afSrming the decree of the Vice-Chancellor of 
 the county palatine of Lancaster) that the rate 
 must be paid in full. — In re West Hartlepool Iron 
 Company (34 L. T. (N.S.) 568), and In re Watson, 
 Kipling, & Co. (23 Oh. D. 500), distinguished. 
 In re Inteknational Mabinb Hydropathic- 
 Company _ _ . 28Ch. D. 470' 
 
 3. Beneficial Ocoupation— TTindingr-itp— 
 
 Business Premises, Occupation of, hy Liquida- 
 tor.] A company was being wound up under 
 
( 379 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 380 ) 
 
 XXIX. COTO.VASY—'R&.TEa— continued. 
 supervision, the liquidation commencing in 1882. 
 The liquidator did not keep the concern in full 
 worlr, but remained in occupation of the business 
 premises for the purpose of carrying out some 
 pending contracts, finishing a quantity of un- 
 finished articles, and storing and keeping in 
 order a quantity of completed articles with a view 
 to selling them. In March, 1883, a rating autho- 
 rity made a rate for 1883 on all the property 
 ■within the district. The liquidator allowed the 
 time for appealing against the assessment to go 
 by. The rating authority applied to the Court 
 for payment of the rate in fuU : — Beld, that as 
 the liquidator had from the commencement of the 
 winding-up occupied the property for the pur- 
 poses of the company, and with a view to acquiring 
 gain or avoiding loss to the company, the rate 
 ought to be paid in full. — ^Whether, in order to 
 entitle the rating authority to be paid in full, it 
 is necessary for the liquidator to have any more 
 beneficial occupation of the property than is re- 
 quired under the ordinary law as to rating, qusere. 
 The test in In re West Hartlepool Iron Company 
 (34 L. T. (N.S.) 568) doubted.— Where the liqui- 
 dator, being in possession, does not appeal against 
 the assessment, the Court will not refuse to order 
 payment of the rate in full on the ground of its 
 being too high, except perhaps in extreme cases. 
 In re National Abms and Ammunition Company 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 474 
 
 XXX. COMPANY— DISTEIBTTTION Or ASSETS. 
 1. Withdrawal of Members — Winding-up 
 
 — Payment out of " existing Moneys " — Applicabi- 
 lity of Rules to Winding-up.'] One of the rules of a 
 mutual loan society permitted that members who 
 wished to withdraw should be entitled to have their 
 money repaid, but such payments were to be made 
 solely out of moneys existing at the time in a 
 special fund, and they were to be repaid in rota- 
 tion according to the date of their notices of with- 
 drawal. The company being wound up : — Held, 
 that the rule as to withdrawing members was only 
 applicable to the company as a going concern, and 
 that the members who had given notice before the 
 winding-up had no priority of those who had 
 given no notice. In re Mctdal Society 
 
 [34 Ch. S. 425, n. 
 
 3. Withdrawal of Members^ TTimdrajf-Ky 
 
 — Construction of Rule "provided the funds 
 permit " — Priorities in Winding-up.] The rules of 
 a benefit building society allowed any investing 
 member to withdraw "provided the funds permit," 
 upon giving notice ; and declared that " no further 
 liabilities shall be incurred by the society till 
 . such member has been repaid." The society was 
 ordered to be wound up and the assets were in- 
 sufficient to pay everybody : — Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Coui't of Appeal, tbat those in- 
 vesting members who had given notice of with- 
 drawal and whose notices had expired before the 
 winding-up began, were entitled to be paid out of 
 the assets (after the outside creditors) in priority 
 to those members who had not given notice of 
 withdi-awal, notwithstanding the fact that be- 
 tween the giving of the notices and the winding- 
 up there never were any funds for payment. In 
 re Blaokbubn Benefit Building Society. 
 Walton v. Edge 24 Ch. D. 421 ; 10 App. Cas. 33 
 
 XXX. COMPANY— DISTEIBTJTION Or ASSETS 
 
 . — continued. 
 
 3. Withdrawal of Members — Winding-up 
 
 — Mutual Loan Society — Payment out of Special 
 Fund — Applicability of Rules to Winding-up.] 
 The rules of an unlimited mutual loan society 
 provided that a separate fund should be formed by 
 the subscriptions of members joining in each year, 
 which subscriptions might, with the consent of 
 the directors, be paid in advance. The accounts 
 of each fund were to be kept distinct, and the 
 members were to receive advances called " appro- 
 priations," out of the accumulations of the par- 
 ticular fund to which they subscribed. The 
 appropriations were to be repaid by instalments 
 extending over twenty years. Members might 
 withdraw on giving notice, and were in that case 
 entitled to a return of their subscriptions, together 
 with payment of the bonuses declared in respect 
 of their shares, such payments to be made in the 
 order of the dates of their notices, and only out of 
 moneys received after the date of their notices in 
 repayment of appropriations. — When appropria- 
 tions had been made to all members of a fund, or 
 before that under certain circumstances, the fund 
 was to be declared closed and the accumulations 
 were to be divided among the continuing members 
 of the fund. — The company was wound up volun- 
 tarily, and the liquidator applied for the direction 
 of the Court as to the distribution of the assets 
 among the members, there being no outside 
 creditors. — There were four classes of members 
 whose interests were in dispute : — 1. Members 
 who had given notice of withdrawal before the 
 closing of their funds, and before the commence- 
 ment of the winding-up.— 2. Members who had 
 given notice of withdrawal after the closing of 
 their funds, but before the commencement of the 
 winding-up. — 3. Continuing members who had 
 paid subscriptions in advance. — 4. Continuing 
 members who had not paid any subscriptions in 
 advance. — Held, by Kay, J., that the provision 
 for the repayment of withdrawing members out of 
 the particular fund ceased to apply on the winding- 
 up of the company, and that those members who 
 had given notice of withdrawal before the com- 
 mencement of the winding-up had no priority 
 over the continuing members: — Held, also, that 
 the continuing members who had paid their sub- 
 scriptions in advance had no priority over the 
 other members : — But, held, by the Court of Ap- 
 peal, that, according to the true construction of 
 the articles, members who had given notice of 
 withdrawal before the closing of their fund and 
 before the commencement of the winding-up had 
 a charge on the repayments of appropriations 
 belonging to their particular funds; that such 
 charge did not cease on the closing of tlie fund or 
 on the winding-up, and that they were therefore 
 entitled to be paid in full out of such repayments 
 in priority to all other members. — In re Blackburn 
 and District Benefit Building Society (24 Ch. D. 
 421 ; 10 App. Cas. 33) followed.— In re Mutual 
 Society (24 Ch. D. 425, n.) distinguished. In re 
 Alliance Society - - 28 Ch. D. 669 
 
 XXXI. COMPANY— RECONSTETICTION. 
 
 Dissentient Member — Winding-up — 
 
 Right of dissentient Member to inspect before going 
 into Arbitration — Companies Act, 1862, ss. 161, 
 
( 381 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 382 ) 
 
 XXXI. COMPANY— EECONSTRTJCTION— conic!. 
 162.] A banking company being in the oonrae of 
 voluntary -winding-up for the purpose of recon- 
 struction, one of the members having been, with 
 the others, offered 5s. in the pound for her holding 
 in the old company, gave notice to arbitrate under 
 the 161st section, as a dissentient. She then 
 •claimed the right to examine the books of the 
 company in order to see whether it would be 
 better for her to accept the offer of 5s. or go on 
 with the arbitration. — Application refused, with 
 costs of adioumment into Court. In re G-lamob- 
 
 GANSHIEE BaNKIKS COMPANY. MOKGAn'S CaSE 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 620 
 
 XXXII. COMPANY— COST-BOOK COMPANY. 
 
 1. Business never commenced — Mine — 
 
 Jurisdiction of Sigh Court — Stannaries Court — 
 Companies Act, 1862, ss. 81, 116.] The words 
 " engaged in working" mines in the 81st section 
 of the Companies Act, 1862, mean, " is or has 
 been engaged in working," or " now or formerly 
 engaged in working" mines in Cornwall, and do 
 not apply to a case where the company, although 
 they have purchased a mine in Cornwall, have 
 not begun to work it. — Where, therefore, a com- 
 pany was formed to purchase mines in " Cornwall 
 or elsewhere in England," and contracted to pur- 
 chase a right to have a lesse of a mine in Corn- 
 wall, but never acquired the lease or began to 
 work the mine : — Held, that the High Court of 
 Justice had jurisdiction to make a winding-up 
 order. — lie Bast Botallaclc Consolidated Mining 
 Company (34 Beav. '82) disapproved of. In re 
 SiLVEK Valley Mines - - 18 Ch. D. 472 
 
 2. Delay — Mine — Partner — Claim, — 
 
 Lying-by.'] At a meeting of the partners in a cost- 
 book mine held in 1874, it was stated that the 
 mine was £2003 in debt, and a call of £25 was 
 made upon each of the six shares in the mine. 
 Two of the partners did not pay this call, and 
 were in arrear for other calls. At subsequent 
 meetings in June, 1874, the shares of these part- 
 ners were declared [to be forfeited. These two 
 partners took no steps as to the mine until July, 
 
 1879, when they made a claim, and in September, 
 
 1880, they brought an action, alleging that the 
 shares had not been regularly forfeited, and claim- 
 ing to be still partners. It appeared that the 
 mine was in debt in 1878: — Seld, ibat even 
 assuming the shares not to have been regularly 
 forfeited, the Plaintiffs, under the circumstances, 
 could not, after lying-by for more than six years, 
 successfully asssrt their claim to be partners. — 
 Clarice v. Bart (6 H. L. C. 633) distinguished. 
 KuLB V. Jewell - - - 18 Ch. D, 660 
 
 3. Inspection of Documents — Winding- 
 up Petition — Stannaries Court — 18 * 19 Vict. c. 32, 
 s. 22.] The practice of the Stannaries Court is the 
 same as that of the High Court of Justice, that the 
 mere fact of a winding-up petition is not enough 
 to justify an order for inspection of books. But if 
 grounds are shewn, the petition may projjerly be 
 ordered to stand over to allow the petitioner to 
 enforce his right as a shareholder to inspection. — 
 The right of inspection under the 22nd section>f 
 the Stannaries Act, 1855, is personal to the share- 
 holder, and does not extend to his solicitors or 
 asents. In re West Devon Gkeat Consols Mine 
 
 ^ [27 Ch, D. 106 
 
 XXXII. COMPANY— COST-BOOK COMPANY— 
 
 continued. 
 4. Retiring Shareholder — Mine — Con- 
 tribution.'] In a company formed on the cost-book 
 system the practice had been for a shareholder to 
 be at liberty to retire on the terms that if the 
 company was solvent he received from the com- 
 pany a sum of money equally to his rateable pro- 
 portion of the excess of the assets above the 
 liabilities, but if the company was msolvent he 
 paid to the company his rateable proportion of the 
 excess of the liabilities above the assets. In 
 every case in which a shareholder had retired 
 when the liabihties were in excess of the assets 
 the purser in calculating the value of the assets 
 had entered all the arrears of calls as good debts, 
 and the shareholder retired on paying only his 
 proportionate part of the excess of the liabilities 
 over the assets according to the number of shares, 
 without regard to the solvency or insolvency of 
 the other shareholders. — C. gave notice to retire 
 in November, ] 879, but no account was made out 
 shewing what he was to pay. In March, 1 880, 
 an order was made to wind up the company. The 
 liquidator, in 1882, made out an account shewing 
 what C. was to pay, and in estimating the assets 
 omitted all arrears of calls owing by insolvent 
 shareholders, and then calculated O.'s contri- 
 bution by dividing the excess of liabilities over 
 assets rateably among C. and the other solvent 
 shareholders. The Vice-Warden of the Stan- 
 naries held that this was correct, and ordered 
 payment by 0. of the amount with which he was 
 thus charged : — Seld, on appeal, that this deci- 
 sion was correct in principle, and that the fact 
 that on all previous occasions the assets had been 
 reckoned without any allowance for the insol- 
 vency of persons owing arrears of calls, and the 
 contribution of the retiring' shareholder ascer- 
 tained without reference to the insolvency of any 
 of the continuing shareholders, was not sufficient 
 evidence of an agreement among the shareholders 
 that the contribution of a retiring shareholder 
 should be calculated on that footing. — The course 
 of practice followed by an officer of a company is 
 not so strong evidence of an agreement sanction- 
 ing that practice as a course of practice in an 
 ordinaiy partnership of few members. — But, lield, 
 that C. was entitled to have the assets of the 
 company valued on the footing of its being a 
 going concern, which it was when he gave notice 
 of retirement, and that the solvency of the persons 
 who owed calls, and of the continuing share- 
 holders, must be taken as matters stood at the 
 date of the notice of retirement, and not at the 
 time when the account was made out. In re 
 Fbank Mills Mining Company 23 Ch. D. 52 
 
 XXXIII. COMPANY— TTNEEGISTEEED COM- 
 PANY. 
 
 1. Association of more than Twenty 
 
 Members — Illegality — Companies Act, 1862, s. 4 
 — 6mn by Individual Members — Company, the 
 formation of which is prohibited.'] By the rules 
 of a mutual marine insurance association, which 
 was not registered under the Companies Act, it 
 was provided that all persons who effected ah in- 
 surance with the association should be members. 
 No ship was to be insured for more than threcr 
 fourths of its value, the person insuring paid a 
 
( 383 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 384 ) 
 
 XXXIII. COMPANY — UNEEGISTEEED COM- 
 PANY — continued. 
 deposit of 25s. per cent, on the amount of the in- 
 surance, and in case of the total loss of a vessel, 
 the members -were to pay the loser the amount for 
 which he had insured it rateably, according to the 
 amounts assured to them respectively. The asso- 
 ciation consisted of more than twenty members. 
 A vessel insured by E. was lost, and the amount 
 of the loss was referred to arbitration. E. assigned 
 his claim to his bankers, who obtained JTidgment 
 in E.'s name on the award, and, not obtaining 
 payment, presented a petition to wind up the 
 association, the petition stating that the associa- 
 tion consisted of more than seven members, but 
 not stating that it consisted of more than twenty. 
 The petition was served at the abandoned office 
 of the association which had ceased to carry on 
 business, and the proper advertisements were 
 issued. On the 28th of May, 1880, a winding-up 
 order was made, no one appearing to oppose. In 
 November, 1881, another member of the associa- 
 tion heard, for the first time, of the winding-up 
 order, and within a week applied for leave to 
 appeal against It : — Held, that the order having 
 been made by a superior Court having jurisdic- 
 tion in winding-up, and having authority to decide 
 as to its own competency, must, if the association 
 was one which ought not to be wound up, be 
 treated merely as an erroneous order, and not as 
 an order void for want of jurisdiction, and that 
 the proper manner of getting rid of it was to 
 appeal : — Held, that as the Appellant was not a 
 party to the order, and applied for leave to appeal 
 as soon as he knew of it, he ought to have leave 
 to appeal notwithstanding the lapse of time : — 
 Held, that although the business of the associa- 
 tion had not for its object the acquisition of gain 
 by the association, it had for its object the acqui- 
 sition of gain by the individual members ; that as 
 it consisted of more than twenty memljers and 
 was not registered, its formation was forbidden by 
 the Companies Act, 1862, s. i ; that the Court, 
 therefore, could not recognise it as having any 
 legal existence, and that the order for winding it 
 up must be discharged. In re Paestow Total 
 Loss AND Collision Assubance Association 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 137 
 
 2. Association of more than Twenty 
 
 Members — Loan Society — Illegality — Companies 
 Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. i— Association 
 having for its Object the Acguintion of Gain."] 
 Persons to a number exceeding twenty Ijad formed 
 themselves into a society called the " Ipswich 
 Mechanics Mutual Benefit Society." From the 
 rales of the society it appeared that there were 
 four hundred shares in the society of £10 each, 
 and that no member could hold more than twenty 
 shares. The object of the society was to raise by 
 monthly subscriptions and payments payable by 
 the members in respect of their shares a fund for 
 the purpose of making advances to members. 
 From time to time as soon as the fund in hand 
 amounted to a certain sum it was put up for sale 
 by auction amongst the members, the highest 
 bidder receiving the amount on loan from the 
 society at interest. No member could receive on 
 loan more than the nominal amount of the share 
 or shares held by him, but ultimately every 
 
 XXXIII. COMPANY — TTNBEGISTEEED COM- 
 PANY — continued. 
 member, who did not withdraw his share under 
 the rale providing for such withdrawal, was to 
 have advanced or allotted to him out of the funds 
 accruing to the society the sum of £10 for every 
 share held by him. The society was not regis- 
 tered under the Companies Act, 1862 : — HeXd, 
 that the society was illegal by reason of the pro- 
 visions of the Companies Act, 1862, s. 4, which 
 prohibits the formation of any company, associa- 
 tion, or partnership consisting of more than 
 twenty persons for the purpose of carrying on any 
 business (other than banking) that has for its 
 object the acquisition of gain by the company, 
 association, or partnership, or by the individual 
 members thereof, unless registered as a company 
 under the Act: — Held also, that a promissory 
 note given by a member to the trustee of the 
 society to secure a sum of money advanced t» 
 such member under the rules of the society was- 
 invalid, and no action could be maintained there- 
 on. Jennings v. Hammond 9 Q. B. D. 225 
 
 3. Association of more than Twenty 
 
 Members — Loan Society — Illegality — Association 
 having fur its Object the Acquisition of Gain — 
 Gain by Individual Members — Companies Act, 
 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 4.] T. was the 
 president of a loan society. The objects of the 
 society were to form a ftmd. from which money 
 might be advanced to enable shareholders to 
 build or purchase a dwelling-house or other 
 buildings, or to lend money to each other on ap- 
 proved personal security ; five per cent, interest 
 was to be charged on all moneys advanced by the 
 society. The society consisted of more than 
 twenty members, and was not registered under 
 any statute. The society advanced a sum of 
 money to the Defendants, who signed promissory 
 notes by way of secui-ity for the loan ; and whea 
 T. went out of office, he indorsed the promissory 
 notes to the Plaintiff, who succeeded him. The 
 Plaintiff having sued upon the notes for the bene- 
 fit of the society: — Held, that the society not 
 having been registered, was rendered illegal by 
 the Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), 
 s. 4, it being an association having "for its 
 object the acquisition of gain," within the mean- 
 ing of that enactment ; that the Plaintiff could 
 not be in a better position than the society, and 
 therefore could not recover upon the promissory 
 notes. — In re Padstow Total Loss and Collision 
 Assurance Association (20 Ch. D. 137) followed. 
 Jennings Hammond (9 Q. B. 'D. 225) approved. 
 Shaw v. Benson H q, b. D. 563 
 
 4. Association of more than Twenty Per- 
 sons — Freehold Land Society — Illegality— Busi- 
 ness for the Acquisition of Gain — Companies Act. 
 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 4.] In 1873 an asso- 
 ciation of more than twenty persons was formed for 
 the object, as stated in its deed of settlement, of 
 purchasing a freehold estate and reselling it in 
 allotments to the membera of the association.. 
 The deed was executed by all the members, the 
 name of each, the number of his allotment the 
 total amount he was to pay, and the amount of 
 his monthly payment to be made in respect of it, 
 being specified in a schedule to the deed. Tho 
 property was vested in trastees, and its manage- 
 
( 385 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 386 ) 
 
 XXXIII. COMPANY — TJKEEGISXEEED COM- 
 PANY — cmitinued. 
 ment was vested in a president, vice-president, 
 treasurer, secretary, and a committee. The deed 
 contained provisions for the conveyance to the 
 members of their allotments when they had paid 
 up the whole amount payable in respect of them, 
 and for forfeiture and sale of the allotments of 
 defaulting members. Powers were given to the 
 committee to make roads, drains, &c., on the land, 
 and powers were given to the trustees of borrow- 
 ing money on mortgage with the consent of a 
 general meeting. When all mortgages had been 
 paid off and all the allotments had been con- 
 veyed the society was to come to an end. The 
 society was not registered under the Companies 
 Act, 1862 : — Held, that the society was not an 
 association formed for the purpose of carrying on 
 any business that had for its object the acquisi- 
 tion of gain, and was not made iUegal by the 
 Companies Act, 1862, s. 4. — Crowther v. Thorley 
 (32 W. R. 330) followed.— TTig^eZd v. FoUer 
 (45 L. T. (N. S.) 612) approved. In re Siddall 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1 
 
 5. Association of more than twenty 
 
 Members — Loan Society — Illegality — Svhsequent 
 Increase of Members — Borroming Member — Ac- 
 quiescence — Banlirwptcy of Borrowing Member — 
 Proof for Loan — Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 
 Vict. 0. 89), «. 4.] An unregistered money club, 
 which in its inception comprises less than twenty 
 members, becomes an illegal association within 
 sect. 4 of the Companies Act, 1862, so soon as it 
 comprises upwards of twenty members. Such a 
 society is none the less within the mischief of the 
 Act because its business is carried on and managed 
 by a committee of seven members as the agents of 
 the society, although they may have full powers as 
 to management and may make by-laws. — Cronether 
 V. ThorUy (32 W. E. 330) distinguished.— In 1881 
 seven persons formed a loan society, and when 
 business was commenced their members had in- 
 creased to twenty. In June, 1883, the society was 
 registered under the Companies Act, 1862, with 
 the knowledge and consent of all the members. 
 In 1881 the society advanced lOOZ. to a borrowing 
 menlber, repayable by monthly instalments, and 
 he duly paid the instalments as they fell due until 
 December, 1883, when he became bankrupt: — 
 Seld, that under the circumstances the inference 
 was, that all the members had, either expressly 
 or by acquiescence, mutually agreed that all the 
 transactions of the society previous to its registra- 
 tion should continue to be binding on the regis- 
 tered society ; and, consequently, that the regis- 
 tered society could prove for the balance of the 
 loan. In re Thomas. Ex parte Poppletok 
 
 [14 Q. B. D, 379 
 
 6. Formation before the Companies Act, 
 
 1862 — Change of Members — Coriipanies Act, 1862 
 (25 * 26 Vict. 0. 89), s. 4.] An association, con- 
 sisting of more than twenty persons, was formed 
 before the commencement of the Companies Act, 
 1862, to receive contributions from the members, 
 and sell the money in hand, from time to time, 
 in shares varying from £20 to £100, to the highest 
 bidder among them. The premiums paid by the 
 purchasers were divided as profits among all the 
 members. When the amount of the contributions 
 
 XXXIII. COMPANY — UNBEGISTEBED COM- 
 PANY — continued. 
 and profits of a member who had purchased a 
 share equalled the amount of such share, or, in 
 the ease of a member who did not borrow, when 
 the amount of his contributions and profits 
 equalled the amount of the share in respect of 
 which he had joined, and he was paid off, mem- 
 bership ceased in respect of such share. New 
 members, however, were continually joining, and 
 the existence of the society was continuous : — 
 Seld, that the association was not " formed " 
 within the meaning of sect. 4 of the Act, on each 
 occasion of a change of membership, and did not 
 require to be registered under the Act. Shaw v. 
 Simmons - - - 12 ft, B. D, 117 
 
 7. Petition to wind up — Part IV. of 
 
 Companies Act, 1 862 — Application to Unregis- 
 tered Companies' — Companies Act, 1862, ss. 85, 
 199, 201, 20i— Judgment against Company after 
 Petition to wind up.'] W. being entitled to the 
 money payable on a policy of insurance on the ■ 
 life of his wife, who had lately died, assigned 
 it to E. E. brought an action against the insur- 
 ance company, which was an unregistered com- 
 pany, and W., to recover the money. The com- 
 pany paid it into Court. The Plaintiil' applied 
 by summons to have it paid out to her, and to 
 have her costs taxed and paid by the company ; 
 and W. took out a summons for payment of his 
 costs. On the 6th of August, 1880, an order was 
 made for payment of the money to the Plaintiff, 
 and for payment of her costs by the company ; 
 and all proceedings were stayed, except on W.'s 
 summons, which was adjourned. The Plaintiff's 
 costs were taxed and paid. In October, 1 880, two 
 petitions were presented for winding-up the com- 
 pany. On the 3rd of December, 1880, W.'s sum- 
 mons was heard, and the Vice-Chancellor ordered 
 the Plaintiff to pay W.'s costs, and ordered the 
 company to repay the Plaintiff what he should so 
 pay, no objection being taken by the company on 
 the ground of the pendency of the winding-up 
 petitions, although the claim was resisted on 
 other grounds. The Plaintiff paid W.'s costs, 
 and applied to the company for repayment, which 
 was refused : and the company applied in the 
 action to restrain the Plaintiff from issuing exe- ■ 
 cution for these costs. The winding-up petitions 
 were still pending, and no order for winding up 
 had been made : — Held, by Bacon, V.C., that the 
 company being unregistered, and no winding-up 
 order having been made, sect. 85 of the Com- 
 panies Act, 1862, did not apply ; and that there 
 was no jurisdiction to make the order. — Held, by 
 the Court of Appeal, that where proceedings are 
 pending for winding-up an unregistered company, 
 all the provisions of Part IV. of the Companies 
 Act, 1862, other than those expressly excepted, . 
 are applicable ; and that under sect. 85 the Court 
 had jurisdiction to make the order asked for ; the 
 direction in sect. 204, that " an unregistered, 
 company shall not, except in the event of its being 
 wound up, be deemed to be a company under 
 this Act," not being intended to confine the ap- 
 plication of the Act to a company which has been 
 actually ordered to be wound up: — But held, that 
 as the company had allowed the order of the_3rd 
 of December, 1880, to be made without raising; 
 
 
 
( 387 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 388 ) 
 
 XXXIII. COMPANY — UNEEeiSTERED COM- 
 PANY — continued. 
 
 the objection that the pendency of the winding- 
 up proceedings made such an order improper, and 
 had lain by till that order could not be appealed 
 from, the Court ought not now to exercise in their 
 fuvour the discretionary power to stay proceedings 
 which is giTon by sect. 85. EuDOw v. Geeat 
 Bkitain Mutual Life Assdsanoe Society 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 600 
 
 8. Similarity of Name — Intended Regis- 
 tration of New Company — Companies Act, 1862, 
 8. 20 — Injunction quia timet.'] A company not 
 registered under the Companies Act, 1862, can 
 restrain the registration under that Act of a pro- 
 jected new company, which is intended to carry 
 on the same business as tlie unregistered com- 
 pany and to bear a name so similar to that of the 
 unregistered company as to be calculated to de- 
 ceive the public. Hendbiks v. Montagu 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 638 
 
 9. Tramway Company — Winding-up — 
 
 Unregistered Company — " Railviay Company " — • 
 Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 199.] 
 . An unregistered tramway company incorporated 
 by a special Act does not fall within the excep- 
 tion of " railway companies incorporated by Act 
 of Parliament" in sect. 199 of the Companies 
 Act, 1862, and it may therefore be wound up 
 under that section. In re Bkentfobd and Isle- 
 worth Teamways Company 26 Ch. D. 527 
 
 XXXIV. COMPANY— IIFE INSTJEANCE COM- 
 PANY, 
 
 1. Foreign Company — Return of Deposit 
 
 ■^-Accumulation Fund in Foreign Country — Life 
 Assurance Companies Acts, 1870 to 1872 — Life 
 Assurance Companies Act, 1870, 8. 3 — Board of 
 Trade Rules, 2Sih August, 1872, r. 6.] On a peti- 
 tion by depositors under the Life Assurance Com- 
 panies Acts, 1870 to 1872, and the Board of Trade 
 Eules thereunder, for payment out to them of the 
 £20,000 required to be deposited in Court by a 
 foreign life assurance company before commencing 
 business in this country, the Court will, having 
 regard to rule G of the Board of Trade Eules, 
 make the order notwithstanding that the Life 
 
 - Assurance Companies Act, 1870, sect. 3, enacts 
 that the deposit shall be returned " to the com- 
 pany." — The life assurance fund required by that 
 section to have been accumulated prior to the 
 return of the deposit may consist of accumulations 
 
 ; already existing abroad and arising from the 
 original business of the company. In re Colonial 
 .Mutual Life Assueance Society 21 Ch, D. 837 
 
 2. Jurisdiction — Winding-up Order — 
 
 Mutual Insurance Society — Contributory _ — Lia- 
 bility of Mernbers— Disputed Claim— Evidence- 
 Reduction of Contracts — Companies Act, 1862 
 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), s. SI— Life Assurance 
 Companies Act, 1870 (33 & Si Vict. c. 61), ss. 21, 
 22.] The Court has, by virtue of sect. 2 of the 
 Life Assurance Companies Act, 1870, jurisdiction 
 to wind up an unregistered mutual life assu- 
 rance society under the Companies Act, 1862. — 
 But, semhle, that the holders of policies in such 
 a society are not liable to contribute to tlie pay- 
 ment of any debts ; and that all that can be 
 
 XXXIV. COMPANY— IIFE INSUBANCE COM- 
 PANY — continued. 
 done in the winding-up is after'payment of the 
 costs to distribute the funds of the society among 
 the policy-holders in proportion to the amounts 
 of their respective claims. — When a company, 
 Eespondents to a winding-up petition, dispute 
 the validity of the Petitioner's debt they must 
 adduce on the hearing such evidence as will 
 shew the Court that there is a question to be tried. 
 If they fail to do this, a winding-up order ought 
 to be made. Two petitions having been presented 
 by policy-holders for the winding-up of a mutual 
 life assurance society, the society admitted their 
 insolvency, and a winding-up order was made on 
 the second petition, on the ground that the 
 validity of the first Petitioner's debt was disputed. 
 But liberty was given to the first Petitioner to 
 apply for the costs of her petition, if her claim 
 should be ultimately established. She appealed, 
 and before the appeal came on for hearing a com- 
 mittee of policy-holders was formed, who desired 
 that the Court should exercise the power given 
 to it by sect. 22 of the Life Assm-ance Companies 
 Act, 1870, of reducing the amount of the contracts 
 of the society instead of mailing a winding-up 
 order : — Held, that this power could not be exer- 
 cised so long as the winding-up order remained, 
 and that the order ought to be discharged, and a 
 meeting of the policy-holders summoned in order 
 to ascertain their wishes. And the further hear- 
 ing of the appeal was adjourned imtil after the 
 meeting should have been held. In re Geeat 
 Beitain Mutual Life Assueance Society 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 246 
 
 3. Participating Policy — Winding^p — 
 
 Mutual Insurance Society — Contributory — Lia- 
 bility of Sharelwlders and participating Policy- 
 holders inter se — Partnership — Partidpatimi in 
 Profit and ioss.] The articles of association of 
 an unlimited mutual insurance society provided 
 that the company should at first consist of two 
 classes of members, namely, shareholders, so long 
 as there should be any, and assurance members, 
 who were policy-holders with participation in the 
 profits and registered as members; and that 
 when the shareholders should be paid oflf under 
 the scheme provided for, then the company should 
 consist of assurance members only. The share- 
 holders were to have £6 per cent, on their paid- 
 up calls, and every three years the profits were 
 to be calculated, and one fourth paid to the 
 shareholders, and the other three-fourths carried 
 to the assurance fund and appropriated by way 
 of bonus to the policies of the participating 
 policy-holders who have paid five years' premiums. 
 The company was wound up .before the share- 
 holders had been paid off, and the participating 
 policy-holders were declared by the Court to be 
 contributories : — Held (affirming the decision of 
 Malins, V.C), that although the participating 
 policy-holders were members and contributories 
 under the special terms of tlie articles, they could 
 not be called upon to contribute until the shaxe- 
 holders had been exhausted. — The presumption 
 of law that the absence of express stipulation 
 partners must share losses in the same proportion 
 as they share profits, held not to apply to such 
 a case, the assured members having no direct 
 
( 389 > 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 390' J 
 
 XXXIV. COMPAITT— LIFE INSUBANCE COM- 
 PANY — continiied. 
 
 participation in profits. In re Albion Life 
 AssTiKANCB Society 16 Ch, D. 83 
 
 4. Participating Tohej— Winding-up — 
 
 Mutual Insurance Soeiety^Contributory — Assign- 
 ment of Folicy.'] It having been held in In re 
 Albion Life Assurance Society (16 Ch. I). 83) that 
 assurance members, being participating policy- 
 holders of the Albion Society, were contributories 
 in the ■winding-up of the company : — Held, that 
 a policy-holder who had assigned his policy 
 ■ceased to be liable as a contributory, although 
 no other person had been made liable to con- 
 tribute in respect of his policy in his stead. In re 
 Albion Life Assubanoe Societt. Bkown's Case 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 639 
 
 5. Participating Policy — Winding-up — 
 
 Mutual Insurance Society — Contributory — Assign- 
 Tnent — Evidence of Transfer — Rectification of 
 Segister.'] Under the articles of association of 
 an assurance society " members " included " the 
 lioldera of participating policies duly registered," 
 and payment of premium was to be deemed an 
 agreement to become a member. — The directors 
 of the company had power to require evidence 
 of the assignment of policies before registering the 
 assignees as members. — A participating policy 
 liad been assigned, and the assignee had paid a 
 premium on it five months before the winding- 
 up of the company, but no evidence of the as- 
 signment had been offered to or required by the 
 directors ; and the name of the assignee was not 
 entered upon the register of inembers: — Setd, 
 that the assignee was not a contributory. In re 
 Albion Life Assueance Sooiett. Sandebs' Case 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 403 
 
 6. Eeduction of Contracts — Winding-up 
 
 — Life Assurance Companies Act, 1870 (33 & 34 
 Vict. e. 11], s. 22 — Date at which Contracts to he 
 ascertained,'] A, petition having been presented 
 for the winding-up of a life assurance company, an 
 order was made under the Life Assurance Com- 
 panies Act, 1870, sect. 22, directing a scheme to 
 be prepared for the reduction of the contracts of 
 the company : — Held (afSrming the decision of 
 Hall, V.O.), that in the absence of special circum- 
 stances the contracts to be included in a scheme 
 for reduction are to be ascertained, not at the 
 time of settling the scheme, nor at the date of 
 the order directing a scheme, but at the date of 
 the presentation of the winding-up petition, so 
 that no persons whose contracts have not matured 
 into debts until after the presentation of the 
 petition are entitled to be paid in full. In re 
 Geeat Britain Mutual Life Assceanoe Society 
 
 [19Ch.D. 39; 20 Ch, S. 351 
 
 XXXV. COMPANY— APPEAL 
 
 Security for Costs — Winding-up Order — 
 
 Appeal by Company.'] Where a limited company 
 alone appeals If om a winding-up order without 
 joining any one .personally responsible for costs, 
 it will generally be prdeied to give security for 
 costs. In re Photogeaphio Aktists' Coopeba- 
 TivB Supply Association - 23 Ch. D, 370 
 
 XXXVI. COMPANY— COSTS. 
 
 1. — ^liquidator — Winding-up — Application 
 for Leave to appeaV^Rules of Court, 1875, Order 
 
 XXXVI. COMfANY—COSTS— cojiiimued. 
 £F.] On the 29th of July; 1881, a petition was 
 presented to wind up a company. On the same 
 day an order was made by Bacon, V.C., on an 
 application by A. that his name should be taken 
 off the register of shareholders and his money' 
 returned to him. This order was made in ignor- ■ 
 ance that a winding-up petition had been pre- 
 sented, and was drawn up as of the 24th of 
 August, 1881. On the 26th of August a winding- 
 up order was made by Hall, V.C. A. claimed as 
 a creditor for the moneys ordered to be refunded 
 to him, and his claim was allowed. The liqui- 
 dator was advised he ought to obtain a decision 
 on the question whether V.C. Bacon's order was 
 right, he thereupon took out a. summons to have 
 the claim of A. to rank, as a creditor disallowed. 
 Kay, J., on the 24th of June, 1882, dismissed the 
 summons as misconceived, since he had no juris- 
 diction to disturb V.C. Bacon's order, and refused 
 to give the liquidator his costs out of the estate. 
 The liquidator on the 29th of June took out a sum- 
 mons for leave to appeal against V.C Bacon's order 
 of the 24th of August, 1881 , and Mr. Justice Kay's ; 
 order of the 24th of June, 1882. Kay, J., dismissed 
 the summons with costs, refusing the liquidator 
 his costs out of the estate. The liquidator applied 
 to vary this order: — Held, that an offloial liquir , 
 dator is a person who as a general rule is entitled 
 to his costs out of the estate, and that under 
 Order LV. an appeal would lie. — But, held, that 
 as the application of the 24th of June was a 
 manifest mistake it was competent to the Judge 
 below to refuse the liquidator his costs of it, and 
 the Court of Appeal would not interfere with his 
 decision. — A liquidator, though in some sense a 
 trustee, is . a paid agent bound to discharge his 
 duties with reasonable care and skUl, and may be 
 deprived of costs for a mistake which would not , 
 be sufficient to disentitle an ordinary gratuitous , 
 trustee to costs. — Held, that a liquidator who 
 applies for leave to appeal from an order is as a 
 general rule entitled to the costs of the applica- , 
 tion, but they will be refused if the appeal would, , 
 be frivolous. — Held, that if the application qf the, , 
 29th of June had only been for leave to appeal 
 against tile order of the 24th of June, 1882, the 
 Court of Appeal would not have interfered as to 
 the costs, but that an application for leave to 
 appeal against the order of the 24th of August, 
 1881, was reasonable, and that as the including 
 in the application liberty to appeal against the 
 other order did not increase the costs, the liqui- 
 dator must be allowed his costs of that application 
 out of the estate. — Leave to appeal against the 
 order of the 24th of August, 1881, so as to entitle 
 the liquidator to costs in any event was however 
 refused on the ground of lapse of time. — The , 
 principles upon which applications by official > 
 liquidators for leave to appeal are to be dealt ( 
 with, considered. In re Silvee Valley Mines 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 381 
 
 3. liquidator — Winding-up~Bemunera- ' 
 
 tion — Cost of Bealization — General Costs — Insuf- 
 ficiency of Assets — PHority — Internal Litigation.'] • 
 Where the assets of a company, in compulsory 
 liquidation are insufficient for payinent of the 
 costs of the winding-up, the official liquidator is 
 not entitled to any remuneration. — Where in the ' 
 
 O 2 
 
( 391 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 392 ) 
 
 XXXVI. COMPANY— COSTS— co»«mue(J. 
 compulsory winding-up of a company tlie assets 
 are insufficient for the payment in full of costs, 
 the costs of realization are payable out of the 
 assets in priority to costs incurred in Internal 
 litigation, and these latter costs, including those 
 of the liquidator, are payable, rateably, without 
 regard to priority in the dates of the orders under 
 which such costs have been directed to be paid. — 
 Ex parte Percival (Law Kep. 6 Eq. 519), Cape 
 Breton Company v, Fenn (17 Ch. D. 198), and In 
 re Home Investment Society (14 Ch. D. 167) con- 
 sidered. In re Dbonfield Silkstone Coal Com- 
 pany (No. 2) - .. - 23Ch.D. 511 
 
 3. Priority — Winding-up — Costs of Sitc- 
 
 eessful Litigant — General Costs of Liquidation.'] 
 In the winding-up of a company the liquidator 
 changed his solicitor. Tlie first solicitor claimed 
 to be paid his costs. The liquidator set up in 
 defence that he had, in pursuance of an order of 
 the Court, paid away part of the assets in dis- 
 charging the costs of an unsuccessful attempt to 
 settle an alleged shareholder on the list of con- 
 tributories, and that the only remaining assets 
 amounted to £9, which was quite insufficient to pay 
 the applicant, and which he claimed to retain for 
 costs out of pocket : — Held (affirming the decision 
 of Pearson, J.), that the successful litigant whose 
 costs were ordered to be paid by the liquidator, 
 was entitled to immediate payment of those costs 
 in priority to tlie general costs of liquidation in- 
 cluding costs of realization ; and that the remain- 
 ing assets, amounting to £9, must be apportioned 
 equally between the liquidator and the applicant. 
 — In re Some Investment Society (14 Ch. D. 167) 
 followed ; In re Dronjield Silkstone Coal Company 
 (23 Ch. D. 511) not followed.— The order giving 
 the costs to the successful litigant directed that 
 they should be paid by the official liqtlidator, and 
 that he should be at liberty to retain them out of 
 the assets of the company : — Held, that this form 
 of order gave the official liquidator the right to 
 repay himself the costs out of the assets in 
 priority to all other creditors. In re Dominion 
 OP Canada Plumbago Company 27 Ch. D. 33 
 
 4. Eepresentative Case — Costs — Winding- 
 up."] In a representative case for the opinion of 
 the Court in the winding-up of a company, the 
 costs of the parties will be allowed out of the estate 
 as between party and party only, and not as be- 
 tween solicitor and client.— Part's Case (Law Eep. 
 10 Eq. 622) not followed on this point. In re 
 Mutual Society. Gbimwade v. Mutual Society 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 630 
 
 XXXVn. COMPANY— EVmENCE. 
 
 1, Interrogatories — Winding-up — Frac- 
 
 tice — Action — Corporation — Rules of Court, 1875, 
 Order xxxi., rr. 1, 4.] The liquidator of a com- 
 pany is entitled to deliver interrogatories to a 
 person claiming to prove who has made an affidavit 
 of documents. In re Alexandra Palace Com- 
 pany - - - - 16 Ch. D. 68 
 
 2. Witness — Winding-up — Companies 
 
 Act, 1802, s. 115 — Examination by Liquidator — 
 by Coniributories — Locus Standi of, to appeal.] 
 The only ground on which a witness summoned 
 to attend for examination can contest the validity 
 of the summons is a want of jurisdiction to issue 
 
 XXXVII. COMPANY— EVIDENCE— confmwc*. 
 the summons or make the order. If the jurisdic- 
 tion exists, a witness has no locus standi to appeal 
 against the order. — The examination under the 
 115th section of the Companies Act, 1862, is as a 
 general rule entrusted to the liquidator, but it is 
 discretionary with the Judge whether he will 
 entrust either the whole or any part of the exami- 
 nation to creditors or contributories, and whether 
 he will or will not confine that examination within- 
 certain limits. — Be Penysyflog Mining Companyi 
 (30 L. T. (N.S.) 861) considered. In re Silk- 
 stone AND DODWOBTH CoAL AND IeON COMPANY. 
 Whitwokth's Case - 19 Ch. D. 118 
 
 3. Witness — Winding-up — Examination/ 
 
 of Witness under Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 89), s. 115 — Presence of Counsel and Soli- 
 citor on behalf of Person summoned for Examination 
 — Bight to take and carry away Notes — Be-exami- 
 nation.] A person summoned for the purpose of 
 being examined under the Companies Act, 1868, 
 s. 115, is entitled to have counsel and solicitor on 
 his belialf present during his examination, and 
 to be re-examined for the purpose of explaining 
 his examination-in-chief, but the re-examination 
 must be limited to that purpose ; and his counsel 
 and solicitor are entitled to take and carry away 
 notes of the examination, but only to use such 
 notes for the purpose of the re-examination. In re- 
 Cambeian Mining Company 20 Ch. D. 376- 
 
 4. Witness — Winding-up — Examination 
 
 before an Examiner — Creditors' Right of attending- 
 —Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict c. 89), s. 115 
 — Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act, 1849 (12 it- \S 
 Vict. c. 106), s. 120— General Order of the 11th of 
 November, 1862, Bule Lx — Bankruptcy Act, 1869' 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 96.] Admitted creditors 
 of a company in course of winding-up have not a 
 general right under rule lx. of the General Order 
 to regulate the proceedings under the Companies 
 Act, 1862, of the 11th of November, 1862, to- 
 attend an examination of witnesses before an 
 examiner summoned under sect. 115 of the Com- 
 panies Act, 1862. But the Court in its discretion- 
 may allow the attendance. — The word " proceed- 
 ings " in that rule cannot be held to include an 
 examination before an examiner which is strictly 
 of a private character. — In re Empire Assurance- 
 Corporation (17 L. T. (N.S.) 488) and In re Mer- 
 chant^ Company (Law Rep. 4 Eq. 454) discussed. 
 In re Gkey's Bkeweby Company 26 Ch. D. 400 
 
 6. Witness — Winding-up — Examination- 
 
 of former Officer under Companies Act, 1862 (25 dr 
 26 Vict. c. 89), s. 115— General Order of the llth 
 of November, 1862, Bule LX. — Leave to Creditor to 
 attend "(he Proceedings"— Bight of Creditor to 
 be present^ A person who had brought in a large 
 claim as creditor of a company which was being 
 wound up, obtained an order giving him liberty 
 " to attend the proceedings in this matter at his 
 own expense." The liquidator afterwards took 
 out a summons under sect. 115 for the examina- 
 tion of a former officer of the company with u. 
 view to obtaining information as to the circum- 
 stances under which the claim of the alleged 
 creditor arose, the alleged creditor claimed aright 
 to be present at the examination : — Held (affirm- 
 ing the decision of Bacon, V.C), that he ought 
 
< 393 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 39t ) 
 
 XXXVII. COMPAHY— EVIDENCE— oonMnued. 
 Bot to be allowed to be present at the examination. 
 In re Norwich Equitable Fire Assurance 
 Company - - - - 27 Ch. D. 515 
 
 COMPANY— Bill of sale by - 28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Eeqistration. 
 — Charging orders — Sale of shares 
 
 [12 Q. B. S. 287 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Charg- 
 iNQ Orders. 2. 
 
 Costs — Liquidator — Successful claims 
 
 against - - - 30 Ch. D. 698 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Foreign Bill, 
 
 Certificates of shares-^Beputed ownership — 
 
 Bankruptcy - - 15 Q. B. D. 441 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 10. 
 
 • Chartered company. 
 
 See Chartered Company- 
 
 ■Statutes. 
 
 ■ Detention of shares — Second action for same 
 
 cause of action - 15 Q. B. S. 549 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 6. 
 
 - Director — Misfeasance - 29 Ch. D. 795 
 
 See Principal and Agent — ^Agent's 
 Liability. 
 
 - Forged certificate - - 13 Q. B. D. 108 
 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 2. 
 
 ■ Foreign corporation - 6 App. Cas. 386 
 
 See Colonial Law — West Australia. 
 1. 
 
 - Lease to — Clause of re-entry — ^Distress 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 260 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^Ee-entry. 
 8. 
 
 - Malicious prosecution — ^Petition to wind up 
 
 — ^Beasonable and probable cause 
 
 [11 a. B. D. 674 
 See Malicious Prosecution. 1. 
 
 - Plaintifif in action — Security for costs 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 358 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity roR Costs. 1. 
 
 - Purchase of lands — Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 - Purchase-money — Eeinvestmcnt — ^Land tax 
 
 —Costs - - - 17 Ch. D. 378 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 39. 
 
 - Bailway company. 
 
 See Oases under Kailw at Company. 
 
 - Set-off in winding-up - 9 ft. B. D. 648 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 434 
 See Sale of Goods — Ebscission. 2. 
 
 - Voluntary winding-up — Liquidator — Pro- 
 
 duction of documents 15 Q,. B. D. 473 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Pro- 
 duction of Documents. 3. 
 
 - Winding-up — Apportionment of rates 
 
 See Apportionment. 2. [19 Ch. D. 640 
 
 - Winding-up — Balance order — Eetainer by 
 
 executor - - - 29 Ch. D. 934 
 
 See Executor — Eetainer. 4. 
 
 - Winding-up— Crown debts 28 Ch, D. 643 
 
 See Grown. 
 
 COMPANY— continued. 
 
 Winding-up order — Solicitor's lien on docu- 
 ments - - - 24 Ch. S. 408 
 See Solicitor — Lien. 12. 
 
 COMPENSATION— Agricultural improvements. • 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Improve- 
 ments — Statutes. 
 
 Conditions of sale — Error discovered after 
 
 execution of conveyance 13 Q, B. D. 351 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 
 Damage to surface - 10 Q. B. D. 647 ; 
 
 See Inclosure. 1. [9 App. Cas. 286 
 
 Damage — Support of surface 8 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law — Mike. 2. 
 
 Death by accident — Lord Campbell's Act 
 
 [25Ch. D. 409; 9Q.B.]). 160 
 See Damages — Lord Campbell's Act. 
 1,2. 
 
 Improvement in streams - 9 App. Cas. 892 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada— Ontario. 
 5. 
 
 Incumbent of benefice — ^Mortgage 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 520 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 3. 
 
 Labourers' Dwellings Act - 27 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Labourers' Dwelunqs Act. 2. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Compensation. 
 
 Public Health Act. 
 
 See Gases under Local Government — 
 Compensation. 
 
 Public Works Act — New Zealand 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 699 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 2. 
 
 Eailway — Scotch law - 7 App. Cas. 259 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 265 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 
 4,5. 
 
 Eailway company — Eesumption of grant by 
 
 Crown - - - 9 App. Cas. 142 
 
 See Colonial Law — West Australia. 2. 
 
 Sale of land-Misrepresentation 28 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions op Sale. 7. 
 COMPETENCY— Colonial certificate of. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Act — 
 Gazette. 
 COMPOSITION — Tithe rent-charge— Statute of 
 Limitations - - 10 App. Cas, 14 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 8. 
 COMPOSITION WITH CEEDITOES. 
 See Cases under 
 
 Bankruptcy — Composition. 
 Bankruptcy — Scheme op Ar- 
 rangement. 
 
 After bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Annul- 
 ment. 2-6. 
 
 Disqualification of alderman 16 Ch, D. 143 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
( 395 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 C 396 ) 
 
 COMPOSITION WITH CEEDITOES— com«t*ue(Z. 
 
 ■ Forfeitiu'e on insolvency — Settlement 
 
 [29 eh. D. 196 
 
 See Settlement — Cokstrcction. 4. 
 
 — — Preference of creditor - 15 Q. B. D. 605 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Fraudulent Pbe- 
 
 FERENOE. 2. 
 
 Proof— Secured creditor - 19 Ch, D. 394 ; 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 102 ; 8 App. Gas. 606 
 See Bankbuetoy — Secured Creditob. 
 2, 5, 7. 
 
 Eight of retainer by executor of creditor 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 202 
 See Executob— Eetainbr. 3. 
 
 Witness - 23 Ch. D. 118 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence, i. 
 COMPOTTND INTEREST - 6 App. Cas. 181 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 11. 
 
 Proof in bankruptcy 20 Ch. D. 131 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Pboof. 10. 
 
 Trustee-^Breaoh. of trust 17 Ch. D. 142 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 7. 
 
 COMPOUNDING FELONY— Liability of acceptor 
 — Indorsee 10 Q. B. D. 572 
 
 See Bill op Exchange — Consideration. 
 
 COMPEOMISE — Administration suit — Locke 
 . King's Act - 24 Ch. D. 94 
 
 See Will — Exoneration. 3. 
 
 Divorce suit - - - 18 Ch. D. 670 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 Infant - - - 16 Ch. D. 41 
 
 See Infant — Contracts. 2. 
 
 Local board - - 22 Ch. D. 537 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 
 BITY. 1. 
 COUPTBOILEB OF TEASE-MABES 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 681 
 
 See Trade-mark — Registration. 5. 
 COMPTTLSOEY PILOTAGE. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Pilot. 
 COMPULSORY POWEES — Commissioners of 
 
 Sewers 28 Ch. D. 486 
 
 See London — Commissioners of Sewers. 
 
 — ^ Labourers' Dwellings Act 27 Ch. D. 614 
 See Labourers' Dwellings Acts. 2. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Compulsory Powers. 
 
 llinerals — Railway company 19 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 4. 
 ' Scotch Law — Harbour trustees 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 623 
 See Scotch Law — Harbour. 1. 
 
 — — School Board — Elementary Education Act 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 639 
 
 See Elembntaey Education Acts — 
 
 School Board. 
 
 COMPUTATION OF TIME— Notice of meeting of 
 
 company - - - 29 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Company — Reduction op Capital. 
 
 5. 
 
 CONCEALMENT — Material fact — Marine insur- 
 ance - 6 Q. B, D. 222; 15 Q. B. D. 368 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Concealment. 
 1,2. 
 
 CONCUEEENT SUITS — Conduct of proceedings. 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Conduct of Cause. 
 
 Staying proceedings. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 CouET — Staying Proceedings. 
 
 CONDITION. 
 
 1. Condition Precedent — Furnished House 
 
 — Agreement to deliver up Souse and Furniture 
 and pay Sum for JQamage to he ascertained hif 
 Valuers^ Where by a written agreement a tenant 
 of a furnished house agrees at the expiration of the 
 tenancy to deliver up possession of the house and 
 the furniture iu good order, and in the event of 
 loss, damage, or breakage, to make good or pay 
 for the same, the amount of such payment if dis- 
 puted to be settled by two valuers, the settlement 
 of the amount of the payment by the valuers is a 
 condition precedent to the right of the landlord 
 to bring an action in respect of the dilapidations. 
 Babbage v. Coulbubn - - 9 Q. B. D. 235 
 
 2. Condition rendered impossible hy De- 
 fendant — " Title to he approved hy my Solicitor."^ 
 The Plaintiffs claim was for commission on the 
 sale of a piece of land by A. to the Defendant, one 
 term of the Plaintiff's contract being that A.'s 
 title should be approved by the Defendant's soli- 
 citor. The Defendant broke off the sale of his own 
 accord, so that A. 'a title was never submitted to 
 the Defendant's solicitor : — Held, that the Plaintiff' 
 could not succeed without proving that the Defen- 
 dant's solicitor had approved A.'s title, or else that 
 such a title was submitted to him as it was un- 
 reasonable for him to disapprove. Clack v. Wood 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 276. 
 
 Bill of costs — Conditional payment 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 441 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 7. 
 
 Conditional acknowledgment — Statute of 
 
 Limitations 23 Ch. D. 207 ; 26 Ch. D. 474 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Personal. 
 Actions. 1. 
 
 Conditional application — Shares 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 373. 
 See Company — Prospectus. 2. 
 
 Conditional debt — Garnishee order 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 508 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Order. 5. 
 
 Disclaimer by trustee in bankruptcy — Con- 
 ditions imposed by Court. ' " 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Dis- 
 claimer. 5 — 11. 
 
 Feu charter — Right of co-feuar to enforce 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 560 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 2. 
 
 Life estate— Settled Laud Act 30Ch.D. 161 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 2. 
 
 ■ Option of purchase - 
 
 See Will — Condition. 
 
 30 Ch.,D. 203 
 
( 397 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 
 
 ) 
 
 COSTiTnOS— continued. 
 
 Precedent — Agreement for lease — Nominee 
 
 ■ of lessee ■ - - 22 Ch. D. 441 
 
 See Landloed aud Tenant — Agbee- 
 
 MENT. 2. 
 
 Precedent— Charterparty— Efficiency of ship 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 648 ; 7 App. Cas. 670 
 iSee Insueanoe, Marine — Policy. 2, 
 
 Precedent — Compulsory purchase 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 142 
 See Lands CiiAuses Act — Compulsory 
 
 POWEKS. 1. 
 
 Precedent — Covenant to renew leaser-Notice 
 
 of option- - - 22 Ch. D, 640 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 13. 
 
 Precedent — Performance of covenants 
 
 [18 Ch, D. 238 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 12. 
 
 Reduction of debt — Non-performance 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 675 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 22. 
 
 Subsequent — ^Heirlooms - 23 Ch. D. 158 
 
 See Will — Heirloom. 4. 
 
 — "wm. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Condition. 
 CONDITIONS OF SAIE. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Vendor 
 
 AND PUECHASEE — CONDITIONS OP SALE 
 
 Lauds forfeitedito Crown 6 App. Cas. 628 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 ' 2, 
 
 ;- Misdescription — Error discovered after ex- 
 
 , , ecution of conveyance — Compensation - 
 [13Q. B. D. 351 
 . See Vesdor and Pueohasee — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 CONDONATION— Adultery. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Divoecb — 
 Condonation. 
 
 Adultery — Scotch law - 9 App. Cas. 205 
 
 ;See Scotch Law — Husband and Wipe. 1. 
 CONDUCT OF CAUSE. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 CoDBT — Conduct op Cause. 
 CONDUIT— Interference with - 25 Ch. D. 182 
 
 See Wateecouese. 3. 
 CONFEEENCES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT 
 AUTBOEITIES. 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Bates — 
 Statutes. 
 CONFESSION— Admissibility of— Evidence 
 
 [7 a. B. D. 147 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 1. 
 XONFIEMATION—SettlemeDt— Infant 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 263 
 See Settlement — Futcee Property. 3. 
 
 Will— Reference in will - 23 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Will — Revocation. 2. 
 
 CONFLICT OF LAWS. 
 
 1. ConXract — Construction and enforce- 
 
 inent of a Contract made in England hetween Mer- 
 chants residing there, for the delivery in London 
 ■Sf Goods shipped at a foreign Fort hy a foreign 
 Company -^ Vis ' Major.'] The Defendants, a 
 
 CONFLICT OF likVlS—eontinuid,. 
 London firm, contracted in London to dell. to the 
 Plaintiffs, merchants in London, 20,000 tons of 
 Algerian esparto, to be shipped by a French 
 company at an Algerian port, at certain prices, 
 .according to specified qualities, on board vessels 
 to be provided by the Plaintiffs in London, and 
 to btj paid for by the Plaintiffs in London by 
 cash on or before arrival of the ship or ships at 
 her or their port of destination, less interest at 
 5 per cent, per annum for the unexpired portion 
 of three months from date of bill of lading, for 
 the fall amount of the invoice based on shipping 
 weight. — The Defendants caused lio be delivered 
 and were paid for 9000 tons of esparto, but failed 
 to deliver the remaining 11,000 tons. — In an 
 action for this breach of contract : — Jleld, affirm- 
 ing the judgment of the Queen's Bench Division, 
 that the contract was an English contract, and to 
 be construed and dealt with according to the law 
 of this country ; and,, consequently, that it was 
 no answer to say that by the French law (which 
 prevailed at the port of shipment) the Defendants 
 were excused from performing their contract if 
 prevented from so doing by " force majeure," viz., 
 the prohibitioii by the constituted authorities of 
 the export of esparto from Algeria, by reason of 
 an insurrection and consequent hostilities in that 
 country. Jacobs v. Credit Lyonnais 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 589 
 
 2. Foreign Divorce — Marriage in Eng- 
 land hetween Scotchman domiciled in Scotland an<l 
 Englishwoman — Decree of Divorce by Scotch Courts 
 by reason of Husband's Adultery only^Validity 
 of Divorce in England] The English Courts 
 will recognise as valid the decisionof a competent 
 foreign Christian tribunal dissolving the marriage 
 between a domiciled native in the country, where 
 such tribunal has jurisdiction, and an English 
 woman, when the decree of divorce is not im- 
 peached by any species of collusion or fraud. 
 And this, although the marriage may have been 
 solemnized in England, and may have been dis- 
 solved for a, cause which would not have been 
 sufficient to obtain a divorce in England. — When 
 an English woman marries a domiciled foreigner, 
 the marriage is constituted according to the lex 
 loci contractus ; but she takes his domicil and is 
 subject to his law. — A domiciled Scotchman mar- 
 ried, in England, an English woman. Imme- 
 diately after the ceremony the married couple 
 went to Scotland and resided there as their ma- 
 trimonial home. Two years after the wife ob- 
 tained in Scotland a divorce k vinculo matrimonii, 
 on the ground of her husband's adultery only. 
 The husband came to England, and married there 
 another English woman, the first wife being still 
 alive. In a suit for a declaration of the nullity of 
 the second marriage at the instance of the second 
 wife : — Seld, affirming the decision of the Court 
 below, that the divorce in Scotland was a sen- 
 tence of a Court of competent jurisdictioh^ not 
 only effectual within that jurisdiction but enti- 
 tled to recognition in the Courts of this country 
 also. — Lolley's Case (Euss. & Ey. 237) explained ; 
 Warrender v. Warrender (2 CI. & F. 488) ; Geils 
 V. Geils (1 Macq. 255) undistinguishable ; Maghee 
 v. M^Alister (3 Xr. (Oh.) 604) also undistinguish- 
 able and affirmed; M'Carthy v. Decadx (2 Euss. 
 
( 399 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( iOO ) 
 
 CONFLICT OF Li.Wa— continued. 
 & My, 614) dissented from. — Quatre, Whether a 
 bona fide change of domicil which was English 
 at the date of the contract would affect the ques- 
 tion of dissolution ; and whether Pitt v. Pitt 
 ( -t Macq. 627) would govern cases like N0)oyet v. 
 Niboyet (4 P. D. 1) if they arose in Scotland. 
 Harvey v. Faknie 6 F. I), 35 ; 8 App. Cas. 43 
 
 3. Incorporeal Hereditament — Lease 
 
 made in England by Englishmen of Sporting 
 Right over Land in Scotland— Absence of Seal — 
 Action in England — Enjoyment of Bight.'] By 
 Scotch law an instrument under seal is not ne- 
 cessary for the conveyance of a sporting right, 
 and therefore the stipulations of an unsealed 
 lease made between Englishmen in England of a 
 .sporting right over land in Scotland may be en- 
 forced by action in the English Courts, as the 
 provision of the law of England that an instru- 
 ment under seal is necessary for the conveyance 
 of a right to an incorporeal hereditament, is not 
 part of the Jex fori. — -Even if such lease were 
 invalid for want of a seal, the lessee, after having 
 had an enjoyment of the right, could not set up 
 the invalidity as a defence to an action lor breach 
 of a stipulation in the lease to leave a good 
 breeding stock of game on the giound at the 
 termination of the lease. Adams v. Clutteb- 
 BUCK - 10 ft. B. D. 403 
 
 4. Ship — Bottomry — Foreign Ship — Law 
 
 of the Flag.J The owner of cargo who ships it 
 on board a foreign vessel, ships it to be dealt 
 with by the master according to the Jaw of the 
 flag, that is the law of the country to which the 
 vessel belongs, unless that authority be limited 
 by express stipulation at the time of the ship- 
 ment. Therefore a bond made by the master of 
 a foreign ship hypothecating cargo laden on 
 board such ship if valid according to the law 
 of the flag of the ship, will be enforced by the 
 English Admiralty Court, on the arrest of the 
 ship and cargo at the Port of London (the port 
 of discharge within the meaning of the bond), 
 although the conditions imposed by English law 
 as essential to the validity of such bond have not 
 been comiilied with. The '■ Gaetajio and Maria" 
 
 [7 P. B. 1, 137 
 
 5. Ship — Law applicable in Case of Col- 
 lision between British and Foreign Vessel.] In 
 an action in personam, brought by the owners of 
 a British vessel against the owners of a Spanish 
 vessel to recover damages caused to the British 
 vessel by collision with the Spanish vessel on the 
 high seas, the Defendants pleaded that they were 
 Spanish subjects, and that if there was any neg- 
 ligence on the part of those in charge of the 
 Spanish vessel it was negligence for which the 
 master and crew alone, and not the Defendants, 
 were liable according to the law of Spain : — Seld, 
 bad on demurrer. The " Leon" - 6 P. D. 148 
 Foreign bill of exchange - 30 Ch. D. 598 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Foreign Bill. 
 
 Foreign corporation - 6 App. Cas. 386 
 
 See Colonial Law — West Australia. 
 1. 
 
 Foreign decree — Property in this country 
 
 [6P.D.6 
 See Administrator — Limited. 6. 
 
 CONFLICT OF LAWS—contimied. 
 
 Legitimacy — Bequest to children 
 
 >See Will— Words. 13. [24 Ch. D. 637 
 CONJUGAL EIGHTS — ^Restitution— Decree. 
 
 See Practice — DrvORCE — Eestitution 
 OP Conjugal Eights — Statutes. 
 
 Eestitution — Contempt — Attachment 
 
 [9 P. D. 62 ; 10 P. D. 72 
 See Practice — Divorce — Eestitution 
 OF Conjugal Eights. 1, 2. 
 CONSANGUINITY- Nephew— Will 17 Ch. 382 
 
 See Will— Words. 12. 
 CONSENT — Action— Strangers to action 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 560 
 See Scotch Law — Convetance. 2. 
 
 Assignment of lease — Unreasonable refusal 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 387 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 2. 
 
 Charity Commissioners. 
 
 See Cases under Charity — Commis- 
 sioners. 
 
 Marriage with consent of guardians 
 
 See Will— Condition. 9. [18 Ch. D. 61 
 
 Order by consent - - 26 Ch. D. 249 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Con- 
 sent. 
 
 Power of advancement — Tenant for life — 
 
 Bankruptcy - 27 Ch. D. 565 
 
 See Power — Extinction. 2. 
 
 Sale of land — Settled Land Act 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 144 
 See Settled Land Act — -Trustees. 8. 
 
 Scotch marriage — Evidence 6 App. Cas. 489 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Husband and Wife. 
 3. 
 
 Tenant for life— Assignment 23 Ch. D. 583 
 
 iSee Settlement — Powers. 1. 
 CONSIDEBATION — Accord and satisfaction 
 [9 Q. B. D. 37 ; 11 Q. B. D. 221 ; 9 App. Cas. 605 
 See Accord and Satisfaction. 1, 2. 
 
 Assignment of all debtor's property. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Act of 
 Bankruptcy. 1 — 5. 
 
 Bill of exchange— Illegality 10 Q. B. D. 572 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Consideration. 
 
 Bond— Immorality - 26 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Bond. 
 
 Statement of — Bill of .sale. 
 
 See Cases under Bill of Sale — ^For- 
 malities. 15 — 26. 
 
 Statement of— Judgment debt 22 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 21. 
 CONSIGNMENTS— Appropriation to meet bills. 
 See Cases under Bill of Exchange — 
 Securities for. 
 CONSOLIDATED OEDEES XXIII., r. 10 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 360 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 3. 
 
 XXXIII. r. 7 - 16 Ch. D. 594 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 6. 
 
 ■ XXXV., r. 1 - 
 
 See Trustee Belief Act. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 635 
 
 1. 
 
( 401 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 402 ) 
 
 -CONSOLIDATED O'R'DERa— continued. 
 
 XXXV,, r. 1 - - 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Trtistee Acts — Vesting Ordebs. 2. 
 tJONSOLIDATED STATUTES OF lOWEE 
 
 CANADA, c. 87, s. U 8 App, Cas. 530 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 2. 
 CONSOLIDATION OF MOETGAGES. 
 
 See Cases under Moetgage — Consoli- 
 dation. 
 
 Restriction of. 
 
 See MoBTGAGE — Consolidation — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 CONSPIEACT. 
 
 Combination for unlawful Object — In- 
 terim or Interlocutory Injunction — Irreparable 
 Damage.} A confederation or conspiracy by an 
 associated body of shipowners whicb is calculated 
 to have and has the effect of driving the ships of 
 other merchants or owners, and those of the Plain- 
 tiffs in particular, out of a certain line of trade, — 
 even though the immediate and avowed object be, 
 not to injure the Plaintiffs, but to secure to the 
 conspirators themselves a monopoly of the carry- 
 ing trade between certain foreign ports and this 
 country, — is, or may be, an indictable offence, and 
 therefore actionable if private and particular 
 damage can be shewn. — To warrant the Court, 
 however, in granting an interim or interlocutory 
 injunction to restrain the parties from continuing 
 to pursue the objectionable course, those who com- 
 plain must at least shew that they have sustained 
 •or will sustain "irreparable damage," — that is, 
 damage for which they cannot obtain adequate 
 compensation without the special interference 
 of the Court. Mogul Steamship Company v. 
 M'Gbegor, Gow, & Co. - 15 Q. B. D. 476 
 
 Criminal law - - 12 ft. B, D. 241 
 
 See Cbiminal Law — Conspieacy. 
 
 <!ONSTABL£ — ^Notice of Action — Trial in County, 
 tojiere Fact committed — 1 & 2 WHl. i, v. 41, «s. 5, 
 19 — 2 & 3 Vict. c. 93, «. 8 — Contagious Diseases 
 {^Animals) Act, 1878 (41 * 42 Vict. c. 74), s. 50.] 
 An officer of police, appointed under 2 & 3 Vict. 
 c. 93, s. 8, who is sued for anything done in in- 
 tended pursuance of the duties imposed and powers 
 conferred upon him by the Contagious Diseases 
 (Animals) Act, 1878, s. 50, is not entitled by 
 virtue of 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 41, ss. 5, 19, to notice 
 of action and to have the action tried in the 
 county where the alleged grievance has been 
 committed ; for, although 2 & 3 Vict. c. 93, s. 8, 
 incorporates 1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 41, nevertheless the 
 protection afforded by sect. 19 of the last-named 
 statute extends by force of sect. 5 only to those 
 cases where a constable appointed under it is 
 intending to act with the power and authority 
 given to a constable by the common law or by 
 some statute existing when 1 & 2 WUl. 4, o. 41, 
 ■was passed. Bbyson v. Eussell 14 ft. B. D. 720 
 
 Borough constable. 
 
 See Municipal Coepobation — Consti- 
 tution — Statutes. 
 
 Costs as Defendant in action — Liability of 
 
 borough fund - - 6 ft. B. D. 136 
 
 See Municipal Cobpobation— Bates. 
 
 CONSTITUENCY— Parliament. 
 
 See Paeliasient — Eedistkibution of 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 CONSTEUCTION— Settlement. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement. 
 Statute - - - 6 App. Cas. 114 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bail way Company. 2. 
 Will. 
 
 See Cases under Will. 
 
 CONSTEUCTIVE NOTICE— Vendor's lien 
 
 [26 Cb. D. 501 
 
 See Vendob and Puechaseb— Lien. 2. 
 
 CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (AmUALS) ACTS. 
 
 Tlie Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 13 (the Contagious 
 Diseases Animals Act, 1884), extends the power of 
 the Friey Council to prohibit the landing or export 
 of animals : and amends 41 & 42 Vict. v. 74 (fhe 
 Contagious Diseases Animals Act, 1878). 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 47 {the Contagious 
 Diseases Animals Transfer of Parts of Districts 
 Act, 1884), enables local authorities to transfer the 
 whole or certain parts of their districts for the 
 purposes of the Contagious Diseases Animals Act, 
 1878, to the districts of neighbouring local autho- 
 rities. 
 
 Obdebs in Council under the Contagious 
 Diseases Animals Act, 1878. 
 
 Order in Council of 5th February,, 1884, revok- 
 ing certain earlier Orders - L. G., 1884, p. 643 
 Order in Council of 5th February, 1884 (the 
 Animals Order of 1884) provides for the manage- 
 ment of diseased animals, their disinfection, 
 transit and otherwise. 
 
 Analysis of this Order. 
 
 Pabt I. Pbeliminaey. 
 
 Pabt II. Disease. 
 
 1. Cattle plague. 
 
 2. Pleuro-pnewmonia. 
 
 3. Foot-and-mouth disease. 
 
 4. Sheep-pox. 
 
 5. Sheep-scab. 
 
 6. Glanders and farcy. 
 
 7. Swine fever. 
 
 8. Agreements of local authorities respecting 
 movement. 
 
 9. General regulations as to movement licences. 
 
 10. Offences. 
 
 11. Pleuro-pneumonia, or foot-and-mouth dis- 
 ease, or swine fever found in a market, railway 
 station, grazing park, or other like place, or during 
 transit. 
 
 12. Exposure or movement of diseased animals, 
 horses, asses, and mules. 
 
 13. Removal of dung or other things. 
 
 14. Carcases. 
 
 15. Slaughter houses. 
 
 16. Begulation by local authorities of markets, 
 fairs, and other places. 
 
 Paet III. Disinfection. 
 
 17. Water traffic. 
 
 18. Railway traffic. 
 
 19. Road traffic. 
 
 20 J Landing places. 
 21. Miscellaneous. 
 
( 403 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 404 ) 
 
 CONTAGIOTTS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS— 
 
 continued. 
 
 22. Offences. 
 
 23. Markets, fairs, sale-yards, places of exhibi- 
 tion, lairSy and other places. 
 
 Pabt IV. TeanSIT. 
 
 24. Transit hy water. 
 
 25. Shipping and unshipping places. 
 
 26. Transit hy railway. 
 
 27. Offences. - ' 
 
 28. Water supply on railways. 
 
 PaET V. G-ENEHAL. 
 
 29. Inspectors and Forms. 
 
 30. Miscellaneous. 
 
 Schedules. 
 
 [L. a, 1884, p. 645 
 
 Order in Countyil of 5fh of February, 1884, de- 
 claring the foot-and-mouth disease. Temporary 
 Order of 1884 - - I. G., 1884, p. 738 
 
 Order in Council of \lth of November, 1884, re- 
 vokes 'so much of last as applies specially to the 
 Metropolis - - - L. G., 1884, p. 4889 
 
 Order in Council of ith of April, 1884, revokes 
 art. 105 of the Animals Order of 1884, and enables 
 local autliorities to make regulations for cleansing 
 and disinfection of animals - L, G., 1884, p. 1603 
 
 Order in Council of 12th of May, 188i,provides 
 
 for foreign animals landed at an Admiralty wharf 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 2128 
 
 Order in Council of 16th of May, 1884, revokes 
 art. 62 of the Ariimals Order of 1884, and pro- 
 vides for swine affected with swine fever 
 
 [1. G,, 1884, p. 2176 
 
 Order in Council of 29th of July, 1884, provides 
 for the formation of swine fever infected circles 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 3482 
 
 Order in Council of 13th of November, 1884, 
 adds rules to the rules contained in the ith Schedule 
 of 41 & 42 Vict. c. 74, with' regard to foot-and- 
 mouth disease infected places L. G., 1884, p. 4890 
 
 Order in Council of 13th of February, 1885 (the 
 Foot and Mouth Disease Slaughter Order of 1885), 
 declares concerning slaughter in cases of foot-and- 
 mouth disease - ' - 1. G., 1885, p. 627 
 
 Order in Council of 15th of June, 1885 (the 
 Foreign Animals Order of 1885), declares cqncern- 
 iug foreign animals landed in England, 'Wales and 
 Scotland. 
 
 Analysis of this Order. 
 
 4. Interpretation. 
 
 5. Prohibited countries. 
 
 6. Forts having foreign animals wharves, 
 
 7. Conditions of landing. 
 
 8. Exception in favour of Admiralty wharves, 
 
 9. Megulations applying to landing stage.^ 
 
 10. Charge of animals on landing. 
 
 11. Disposal of animals on landing, 
 
 12. Megulations applying to reception lair. 
 
 13. Megulations applying to all parts of foreign 
 animals wharf (other than reception lair) on de- 
 tection of disease. 
 
 14. Feeding and watering. 
 
 15. Time for slaughter. 
 
 16. Movement of carcases, manure, &c, 
 
 17. Disinfection of foreign animals wharf. 
 
 18. Restriction on use of foreign animah wharf. 
 
 CONTAGIOTIS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS-r- 
 
 19. Ports having' quarantine stations. 
 
 20. Animals intended for reshipmerd to a foreign 
 country. 
 
 21. Animals intended for purposes of exhibition, 
 or for other exceptional purposes (otlier than 
 reshipment.') 
 
 22. Movement of carcases. 
 
 23. Disinfection of dung and manure: 
 
 24. Disinfection of quarantine station. 
 
 25. Restriction on use of quarantine station. ■ 
 26, -Free countries.' 
 
 27. Landing place. 
 
 28. Conditions of landing. 
 
 _ 29. Twelve hours detention. . 
 
 30. Examination and consequences. 
 
 31. Continuance of one cargo. 
 
 32. Detention of suspected animals. 
 
 33. Movement of animals, carcases, manure, &e. 
 
 34. Disinfection of landing place. 
 
 35. Restriction on use of landing place, 
 
 36. Landing of other foreign animals. 
 
 37. Channel Islands. 
 
 38. Isle of Man. 
 
 39. Ship's cows and goats. 
 
 40. Landing and disposal of dung, fodder, 
 litter, utensils, and other things. 
 
 42. Removal from wliarf or station or landing 
 place. 
 
 43. Vessels. 
 
 44. Moveable gangways and other apparatus. 
 
 45. Substitution in existing orders. 
 
 46. Fittings of vessels. 
 
 47. Shorn sheep. 
 
 48. Gangways for sheep pens. 
 
 49. Detention. 
 
 50. Water. 
 
 51. Food. 
 
 52. Disinfection of persons and clothes. 
 
 53. Foreign animals injured on voyage. 
 
 54. Carcases of animals dying on voyage, 
 
 55. General power of detention. 
 
 56. Duties of local authorities and police. 
 
 57. Offences. 
 
 List of ■ prohibited countries. 
 
 List of free countries. 
 
 Rules for foreign animals wharf. 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 2741 
 
 Order in Council of I5fh June, 1885 (the Dairies, 
 Cowsheds, and Milkshops Order of 1885), provides 
 concerning registration of dairymen, construction 
 of new dairies, contamination of milk, disease in 
 cow-sheds, &c. - L. G., 1885, p, 2751 
 
 Order in Council of ith December, 1885, approves 
 of a landing place in the port of London (Thames 
 Haven) for foreign animals L. G., 1885, p. 5935 
 
 Justices — Jurisdiction — 41 (fc 42 Vict. 
 
 c. 74 — Offences against Act — Carriers — Persons 
 "causing or permitting" Movement of Animals 
 into Proscribed Districts.'] By an Order of 
 Council made under tlie Contagious Diseases 
 (Animals) Act, 1878, if an animal is moved in 
 contravention of the regulations of any local 
 authority, the person " causing, directing, or per- 
 mitting" the movement shall be deemed guilty 
 of an offence against the Act. The local autho- 
 rity of the county of Dorset having by regulations 
 
( 405 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 406 .) 
 
 COKTAOIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS— 
 
 continued. 
 proHbited the movement of animals into their 
 district except under specified conditions, animals 
 were consigned to a place within the district, 
 with through bills from Cork viS, Bristol and a 
 specified' route. The Appellants were no parties 
 to the contract with the consignor, but in further- 
 ance of the scheme of carriage carried the animals 
 on their railway over a portion of the route to a 
 point outside the county of Dorset whence they 
 were subsequently carried into that county by 
 another company : — Held, that the Appellants 
 were liable to be convicted of an offence against 
 the Act as persons "causing, directing, or per- 
 mitting" the movement of the animals within the 
 meaning' of the Order of Coimcil ; and that the 
 justices of the county of Dorset had jurisdiction 
 to Convict. Midland Railway Company v. 
 Fbeeman - - - 12 a. B. D. 629 
 
 Notice of action — Trial in county where fact 
 
 committed - - 14 Q. B. D. 720 
 
 See Constable. 
 CONTEMPOKANEOUS CONVEYANCES— Base- 
 ments - - 16 Ch. D, 366 
 See Light — Title. 6. 
 
 Priority - - - 21 Ch. D. 762 
 
 See IteED. 1. 
 CONTEMPOEANEOUS EXPLANATION — Sta- 
 tutes - - - 8 App. Cas. 658 
 See Scotch Law — HARBOtrE. 2. 
 CONTEMPOEANEOUS SECTJEITIES— Freehold 
 and leasehold 16 Ch. D. 211, 214, n. 
 See Moetgage — Oontkact. 4, 5. 
 CONTEMPT — Admiralty Court- Nptice of war- 
 rant— Bemoval of ship 10 P. D. 120 
 iSee Practice — Admiralty — Arrest op 
 Ship. 2. 
 
 Attachment. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Attachment. 
 
 Attachment— Divorce Court — ^Payment of 
 
 costs - - 9 P. D. 82 ; 10 P. D. 72 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Kestitution 
 01" Conjugal Eights. 1, 2. 
 — — Attachment — Solicitor — Order for pajTtnent 
 of money 11 Q. B. D. 545 ; 12 Q. B. D. 44 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. ;4, 5. 
 —^ Attachment— Solioitor-^Unqualified person 
 [8 Q. B. S. 187 ; 15 Q. B. D. 348 
 See Solicitor — Unqualified. 1, 2. 
 ^■^ Bankruptcy — Trustee — Default in render- 
 ing accounts - - 7 Q. B. D. 9 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 5. 
 
 County Court - - 13 Q. B. D. 963 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Jueisdiction. 2. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Court 7 P. D. 94 ; 7 ft. B. D. 273 '; 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 657 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical— Con- 
 tempt. 1, 2. 
 
 Befusal to commit — Eight to appeal 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 493 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Ap- 
 peal. 1. 
 
 Ward of Court - - 25 Ch. D. 482 
 
 See Infant — Settlement. 1. 
 
 CONTEMPT OF COTTET. 
 
 Advertisement for Subscription to defend 
 
 a Suit — Advertisement of Reward for Evidence.'] 
 An injunction having been granted to restrain 
 the Defendants from infringing a patent for 
 nickel-plating, they gave notice of appeal and 
 published in a newspaper an advertisement in- 
 viting the trade to subscribe towards the expenses 
 of the appeal, and also an advertisement offering 
 a reward of £100 to any one who could produce 
 documentary evidence that nickel-plating was 
 done -befora 1869. The Plaintiffs moved to 
 commit the publishers of .the newspaper for con- 
 tempt of Court in publishing these advertise- 
 ments, as being an interference with the course of 
 justice, stating at the same time that they did not 
 press for a committal, but would be satisfied with 
 an expression of regret and an undertaking not 
 to repeat the advertisements : — Held, that as all 
 persons engaged in the trade of plating had a 
 common interest in resisting the claims of tha 
 Plaintiffs, an advertisement asking them to con- 
 tribute to the expenses of defending the proceed- 
 ings was open to no objection : — Held, also, that 
 the advertisement offering n reward for docu- 
 mentary evidence was free from objection. — Pool 
 V. Sacheverel (1 P. Wms. 675) questioned. — The 
 Court will discourage motions to commit where 
 no real case for committal is made, and only an 
 apology and costs are asked for. i?LATiNG Com- 
 pany V. Faequharson - - 17 Ch. D. 49 
 
 CONTEXT— Eeference to — Misdescription 
 
 See Will— Mistake. 3. [28 Ch. D. 153 
 
 CONTINGENT INTEREST - 16 Ch. D. 691 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 186 
 
 See PowER-^ExECUTiON. 1, 14. . 
 
 Heirlooms- Vesting - 24 Ch. D. 102 
 
 See Will — Heirloom. 1. 
 
 Tenant for life— Settled Land Act 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 114 
 
 /See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 1. 
 
 CONTINGENT LEGACY - - 18 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Will — Lapse. 4. 
 
 Interim income 23 Ch. D. 360; 25 Ch. D. 743 
 
 See Will-^Intebim Income. 2, 3. 
 
 Intermediate income. 
 
 See Cases under Infant — Maintenance. 
 4—7. 
 Proof in administration - 17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 See Executor— Actions. 19. 
 
 CONTINGENT LIABILITY— Covenant not to 
 revoke will 21 Ch. D. 780 ; 23 Ch. D. 285 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 6. 
 
 CONTINGENT -EEMAINDEE- Will 18 Ch. D. 
 [624 ; 24 Ch. S, 633 
 
 See Will — Contingent Eemaindee, 
 1,2. 
 
 Will • - - - 17 Ch. D. 211 
 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 3. 
 
 CONTINUANCE OF ACTION— Trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy — Adoption of previous proceed- 
 ings - - 28 Ch. D. 53 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 2. 
 
( 407 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 408 ) 
 
 CONTINITANCE OF &.CTIOHS— continued. 
 
 Trustee in bankruptcy — Suing in official 
 
 name - 28 Ch. D. 38 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity FOR Costs. 8. 
 
 CONTimnNG BREACH— Covenant— Lease 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 19 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OP Sale. 3 
 
 CONTEACT. 
 
 
 Col. 
 
 I. Acceptance - 
 
 « 
 
 - 407 
 
 II. Breach 
 
 _ 
 
 - 408 
 
 III. Validity 
 
 - 
 
 - 410 
 
 ^— Sale of Goods : 
 
 
 
 See Sale op Goods. 
 
 
 
 — ^ Sale op Land : 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser. 
 
 I. CONTEACT— ACCEPTANCE. 
 
 !• Correspondence — Consensus ad idem 
 
 — Misunderstanding of Parties as to Subject-matter 
 of Negotiation.'] A negotiation took place as to 
 the sale by L. to P. of a British patent and 
 certain foreign patents for the same inventions, 
 and ultimately an offer was made for sale at £500 
 and accepted by letter, but it was not quite clear 
 whether the offer and acceptance related to all 
 the patents, or to the British patent only. P. 
 brought his action for specific performance, treat- 
 ing the contract as including all the patents, and 
 moved for an injunction to restrain L. from 
 partiug with them. At the hearing of the motion 
 he asked for leave to amend his writ, and for an 
 injunction as to the British patent only : — Held, 
 by Kay, J., that as L. had understood that he was 
 negotiating about the British patent .only, and P. 
 that he was negotiating as to all the patents, 
 there never was the consensus ad idem which is 
 necessary to make a contract; that there was, 
 therefore, no contract which P. could enforce ; and 
 that an Injunction must be refused. — Held, on 
 appeal, that an injunction should be granted, for 
 that where a written agreement has been signed, 
 though it is in some cases a defence to an action 
 for specific performance according to its terms 
 that the defendant did not understand it according 
 to what the Court holds to be its true construction, 
 the fact that the plaintiff has put an erroneous 
 construction upon it, and insisted that it included 
 what it did not include, does not prevent there 
 being a contract, nor preclude the plaintiff from 
 waiving the question of construction and obtain- 
 ing specific performance according to what the de- 
 fendant admits to be its true construction. 
 Preston v. Luck - - 27 Ch. D. 497 
 
 2. Incorporation of Conditions — Bepo- 
 
 sitory for Sale of Borses and Carriages — Receipt 
 delivered to Customer — Incorporation of Con- 
 ditions exhibited upon Premises — Presumption of 
 Assent."] The Defendant was keeper of a reposi- 
 tory for the sale on commission of horses and car- 
 riages. The Plaintiff delivered to him a wag- 
 gonette to be sold, and took from him a printed 
 form which contained a receipt for the waggonette, 
 followed by the words, " Subject to the conditions 
 as exhibited upon the premises." By one of the 
 conditions exhibited upon the premises the De- 
 
 I. COKTBACT— ACCEPTANCE— corai«»M«d. 
 fendant had power to sell any property sent to 
 the repository which remained over one month 
 unless all expenses were previously paid. The 
 Plaintiff did not read this receipt, but put it into 
 his pocket without noticing it The Defendant 
 having sold the waggonette in the exercise of the 
 p«wer of sale in the conditions, the Plaintiff 
 brought an action to recover its value, and at the 
 trial the jury, having been directed that the 
 question was whether the Defendant had or had 
 not given the Plaintiff reasonable notice of the con- 
 ditions, found a verdict for the Plaintiff: — Mdd, 
 that the jury had been misdirected, for the condi- 
 tion was not unreasonable, and, having regard to 
 the circumstances, there was nothing to take the 
 case out of the general rule that if a document in a 
 common form is delivered by one of two contract- 
 ing parties to and accepted without objection by 
 the other, it is binding upon him, whether he in- 
 forms himself of its contents or not, and that judg- 
 ment ought to be entered for the Defendant with- 
 out a new trial, for there was no evidence upon 
 which the jury could have properly found for the 
 Plaintiff. — Zum v. South Eastern Railway Com- 
 pany (Law Kep. 4 Q. B. 539) ; Henderson v. 
 Stevenson (Law Eep. 2 H. L., Sc. 470) ; Burke v. 
 South Eastern Railway Company (5 C. P. D. 1) 
 considered. Watkins v. Etioll 10 Q, B. D. 178 
 
 II. CONTEACT— BEEACH. 
 
 1. Certificate of Engineer — Local Govern- 
 ment Acts — PiMie Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55), 8. 174 — Walkisey Improvement Acts, 1858 
 (21 & 22 Vict. c. Ixiii.) and 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. 
 c. iv.y] The Wallasey Local Board, a local board of 
 health under the Public Health Act, 1848 (11 & 12 
 Vict. c. 63), and an urban sanitary authority under 
 the Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict o. 55), 
 were authorized by the Wallasey Improvement 
 Acts, 1858 and 1861, to acquire and work certain 
 ferries between Liverpool and the Cheshire side 
 of the Mersey, amongst others Seacombe Ferry. 
 In May, 1878, they entered into a contract under 
 their seal with the Plaintiff for the removal by 
 dredging of a large quantity of soil from the bed 
 of the river at Seacombe Ferry for £5000, the 
 work, to be executed under the direction and to 
 the satisfaction of the engineer of the board by a 
 given day, subject to an extension of time (as the 
 engineer might think reasonable) in case the 
 staging on the site to be dredged (which belongeS 
 to another contractor) should not be removed in 
 time to enable the Plaintiff to complete the work 
 by the day named. — The general superintendence 
 of the works connected with their ferries was in- 
 trusted by the board to the engineer, subject to 
 the control of a, " ferry-works committee " ap- 
 pointed under sect. 200 of the Public Health Act, 
 1875, and acting under the powers conferred by 
 that Act. The contract between the board and 
 the Plaintiff contained a clause that " if any 
 difference shall arise between the local board and 
 the contractor concerning the work hereby con- 
 tracted for, or any part thereof, or concerning any- 
 thing in connection with this contract, such differ- 
 ence shall be referred to the engineer, and his 
 decision thereon shall be final and binding on the 
 local board and the contractor." — In answer to a- 
 complaint by the Plaintiff on the 15th of January, 
 
( 409 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 410 ) 
 
 II. CONTRACT— BEEACH—floniinMetJ. 
 
 1879, that hiaprogress was obstructed by the non- 
 removal of the staging, the engineer wrote, " I note 
 that you are put to extra expense consequent on 
 this delay, and I am prepared to compensate you 
 for it on settlement." This was reported by the 
 engineer to the ferry works committee, with an in- 
 timation that, "inasmuch as the Plaintiff was not 
 able to complete his contract until the piles had 
 been removed, the board would be liable for the 
 rent of the dredgers until the Plaintiff could re- 
 commence." The committee thereupon by a 
 minute which was subsequently confirmed by the 
 board, ordered the engineer to use all speed in the 
 removal of the piles. The staging referred to was 
 not in fact removed until September, 1879, and 
 the Plaintiff was put to considerable expense in 
 consequence of this delay, by the detention of his 
 plant and for the hire of dredgers and machinery, 
 &c. The works were completed on the 11th of 
 November. — After some correspondence betweea 
 the Plaintiff and the engineer as to the amount 
 due to the former on account of the contract and 
 for delay, the latter gave the Plaintiff the follow- 
 ing certificate ; — " I certify that Mr. George 
 Lawson has completed to my satisfaction the work 
 which he contracted to execute at Seacombe Perry 
 for the Wallasey Local Board, and that he is 
 therefore entitled to the sum of £500, being the 
 balance of the sum of £5000 mentioned in his con- 
 tract after deducting £4500 already paid him on 
 account ; and I further certify that Mr. George 
 Lawsonisentitled to the further sumof £565 19s. 2d. 
 for extra work executed by him at Seacombe 
 Ferry in connection with the said contract, being 
 the balance of £1324 lOs., after deducting 
 £758 10s. lOd. paid by the Wallasey Local Board 
 at his request for the hire of dredger, tug, hoppers, 
 and insurance ; and that such several balances 
 of £500 and £565 19«. 2d. are to be received by 
 Mr. George Lawson in full satisfaction of all his 
 claims on the Wallasey Local Board for work exe- 
 cuted by him at Seacombe pursuant to the con- 
 tract and in connection with it." — The Plaintiff 
 declined to accept those sums iu satisfaction, but 
 claimed a balance of £2489 3s. lid. — ^It was ad- 
 mitted that nooe of the forms prescribed by the 
 Public Health Act, 1875, sect. 174, were complied 
 with, that there was no consideration for any 
 contract entered into or action taken by the De- 
 fendant board except as appeared in the case, and 
 that no document other than the original contract 
 was under the seal of the board : — Held, first, that, 
 looking at the terms of the contract, which pro- 
 vided for a definite amount of dredging to be done 
 by a certain time, with power to the engineer to 
 extend that time as he should think reasonable in 
 case of the non-removal of staging, there was an 
 imphed contract on the part of the board that the 
 removal of the staging should not be unreasonably 
 delayed ; and that for this breach, if proved, the 
 Plaintiff would be entitled to recover damages 
 from the Defendants, — the proper measure of such 
 damages being the loss which the Plaintiff had 
 unavoidably sustained in consequence of such 
 unreasonable delay ; secondly, that this was not 
 a difference " concerning a matter in connection 
 with tlie contract," as to which the decision of the 
 engineer was to be conclusive. Lawson v. Wal- 
 lasey Local Board - - 11 Q. B. D, 229 
 
 II, CONTEACT— BEEACH— comfanuedf. 
 
 2. Condition of Article — Implied Under- 
 taking — State of Repair and fitness for Use.'] The 
 Plaintiff, a master mariner, contracted with the 
 Defendants, for a lump sum to be paid him by 
 the Defendants, to take a certain specified steam- 
 tug of the Defendants, towing six sailing barges, 
 from Hull to the Brazils, the Plaintiff paying the 
 crew and providing provisions for all on board for 
 seventy days. The engines of the steam-tug were 
 damaged and out of repair at the time of the con- 
 tract, but neither the Plaintiff nor Defendants 
 were then aware of this. The consequence how- 
 ever of the engines being so defective was that 
 the time occupied in the voyage was increased, 
 and the Plaintiff's gain in performing his contract 
 was much less than it would otherwise have 
 been :-^Beld, by Brett and Cotton, L.JJ., that as. 
 the contract related to a specified vessel, there 
 was no implied undertaking by the Defendants 
 that it should be reasonably efficient for the pur- 
 poses of the voyage, and that therefore the defec- 
 tive state of the engines gave the Plaintiff no 
 cause of action, it not appearing that the engines 
 were in a worse state when the Plaintiff took pos- 
 session of the vessel than they were at the time of 
 the contract. — Seld, contra, by Bramwell, L.J., 
 that the defective state of the engines gave the 
 Plaintiff a cause of action, as there was an implied, 
 undertaking by the Defendants that the engines, 
 were not so defective. Eobertson v. Amazon 
 Tno AND Lighterage Company 7 Q. B, D. 598 
 
 III. CONTEACT— VALIDITY. 
 
 1, Bail in Criminal Case— Indemnity Jof 
 
 Surety — Contract against Public Polioy^-Muni- 
 cipal Corporations Act (5 (fc 6 Will. 4, c. 76), s. 57 — • 
 Borough without Commission of Peace — Mayor a 
 Justice of the Peace for Borough."] The mayor of 
 a borough, without a commission of the peace,, 
 before whom a person was brought charged with, 
 embezzlement, remanded the accused to the next, 
 meeting of the justices of the peace for the county 
 in which the borough was situated, and admitted 
 him to bail, taking the recognizance of the De- 
 fendant in £100 for the appearance of the accused. 
 The accused paid to the Defendant £100 to in- 
 demnify him against liability under the recogni- 
 zances. The accused did not appear before the 
 county justices, who, not recognizing the autho- 
 rity of the mayor to remand prisoners for appear- 
 ance before the County bench, took no steps on 
 the information preferred before him, but pro- 
 ceeded on a fresh information, and issued a war- 
 rant against the accused which was not executed. 
 It did not appear that the Defendant's recogni- 
 zance had been either forfeited or discharged or 
 that he had paid anything under it. The accused 
 having been adjudicated bankrupt, the Plaintiff, 
 as trustee, sued to recover the £100 from the De- 
 fendant:— jHeM (by Stephen, J.), that, by sect. 57 
 of the Municipal Corporations Act, the mayor was. 
 a justice of the peace for the borough, and the 
 recognizance was valid ; that the £100 was paid 
 to the Defendant in pursuance of a contract which 
 was contrary to public policy, but that the contract 
 had not been executed, and therefore the Plaintiff 
 was entitled to recover. Wilson v. Steugnell 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 648 
 
 2, Bail in Criminal Case — Indemnity of 
 
( 411 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( «2 ) 
 
 III. COKTEACT— VALIDITY— con<™«e£i. 
 
 Smety^— Deposit of Money with Surety — Action to 
 recover Money deposited J\ A contract is illegal; 
 ■whereby a Defendant in a criminal case, who has 
 been ordered to find baU for his good behaviour 
 duiing a specified period, deposits money with his 
 surety upon the terms that the money is to be 
 retained by the surety during the specified period 
 for his own protection against the Defendant's 
 default, and at the expiration of that period is to 
 be returned ; and no action by the Defendant in 
 the criminal case will lie to recover back the 
 money deposited with the surety either before or 
 after the expiration of the specified period, al- 
 though the defendant in the criminal case has 
 not committed any default, and although the 
 surety has not been compelled to pay the amount 
 for which he has become bound. — Wilson y, Strug- 
 nell (7 Q. B. D. 548) as to this point overruled. 
 Herman v. Jeuohuee 15 Q. B. D. 561 
 
 3. Fraud on Bankrupt Law — Shipbuild- 
 ing Obntract — Fower for Buyer in the event of 
 Bankruptcy of Builder to use Materials belonging 
 to Builder in completion of Sliip.'] A contract for 
 the building of a ship provided that, if at any 
 time the builder should cease working on the ship 
 for fourteen days, or should allow the time for 
 completion and delivery of the ship to expire for 
 one month without the same having been com- 
 pleted and ready for delivery, or in the event of 
 the bankruptcy or insolvency of the builder, it 
 should be lawful then and thenceforth for the 
 buyer to cause the ship to be completed by any 
 person he might see fit to employ, or to contract 
 with some other person for the completion of the 
 work agreed to be done by the builder, and to 
 employ such materials belonging to the builder 
 as should be then on his premises, and which 
 should either have been intended to be, or be 
 considered fit and applicable for the purpose : — 
 Seld, that, so far as this clause applied to the 
 bankruptcy of the builder, it was void as against 
 the trustee in his bankruptcy as being an attempt 
 to control the user after bankruptcy of property 
 vested in the bankrupt at .the date of the bank- 
 ruptcy, and as depriving the trustee of the right 
 to elect whether he would complete the ship or 
 not as might seem most advantageous for the 
 creditors under the bankruptcy, and transfto-ing 
 that right of election to the buyer -.—Held, also, 
 that, this clause having been put in force by the 
 buyer on the filing of a liquidation petition by 
 the builder, the user of the builder's goods in the 
 completion of the ship could not be justified on 
 the ground of a subsequent cesser of work on the 
 ship. JEic parte Barteb. i'sc parte Black. In re 
 Walker - - 26 Ch. D. 610 
 
 4. Bepresentatioa influencing Conduct — 
 
 Farol Contract relating to Interest in Land — Part 
 Performance— Statute of Frauds, s. 4.] An intes- 
 tate induced a woman to serve him as his house- 
 keeper without wages for many years and to give 
 up other prospects of establishment in life by a 
 verbal promise to make a will leaving her a life 
 estate in land, and afterwards signed a will, not 
 duly attested; by which he left her the^life estate : 
 — JEZeZd, that there was no contract, and that even 
 if thei'e had been and although the woman had 
 wholly performed her part by serving till the in- 
 
 III. CONTEACT— VALIDITY— coBimtjetZ. 
 
 testate's death without wages, yet her service was 
 not unequivocally and in its own nature referable 
 to any contract, and was not such a part perform- 
 ance as to take the case out of the operation of 
 the Statute of Frauds, s. 4 ; and that she could 
 not maintain an action against the heir for a de- 
 claration that she was entitled to a life estate in 
 the land.— io/«s v. Maw (3 Giff. 592) disap- 
 proved. Maddison v. ALDEBSOif 7 ft. B. D. 174 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas, 467 
 CONTEACT— Breach of— Damages 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 357 ; 15 Q. B. D. 85 
 See Damages — Contract. 1, 2. 
 
 Breach of contract — Summary jurisdiction 
 
 [6Q. B. D. 182; 13 Q. B. D. 618 
 See Master and Sebvakt — ^Kemedies. 
 2,3. 
 
 Building contract — Extras— Certificate of 
 
 ^ surveyor - 10 ft. B. D. 400 
 
 See Building Contract. 1. 
 
 Company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Contracts. 
 
 Company— Prospectus 17 Ch. D. 301 
 
 See Company— Prospectus. 8. 
 
 Company — To obtain qualification 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 283 
 See Company — Director's Qualietca- 
 TION. 1. 
 
 Company — To take shares 23 Ch. D. 413 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 421 
 See Company — Shares — Allotment. 
 1,3. 
 Company — To take shares — ^Agent's autho- 
 rity - - ' 24 Ch. D. 367 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Authority. 2. 
 
 Consideration — Contract by creditor to take 
 
 less than due, whether valid 9 ft. B .D. 37 ; 
 [11 ft. B. D. 221 ; 9 App. Cas. 605 
 See Accord and Satiseaction. 1, 2. 
 
 Corporation — Appointment of officer not 
 
 under seal - - 14 ft. B. D. 500 
 See Corporation. 3. 
 Damages — Loss of profit on contract to re- 
 sell - - 8 ft. B, D. 457 
 See Damages — Eemotbness. 4. 
 
 For benefit of third party - 16 Ch. D. 290 
 
 See Principal and Surety — Contract. 
 
 . Forfeiture — Liquidated damages 
 
 See Penalty. [21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 Husband and wife - 8 App. Cas. 420 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 Interest of officials in. 
 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 thority— Siateies. 
 
 Local Board. 
 
 See Cases under Local Government — 
 Local Authority. 1 — 8. 
 
 Married woman - 30 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See Husband and Wife — ^Maebied Wo- 
 men's Property Act. 12. 
 
 Partnership articles. 
 
 See Cases under Partnership — Con- 
 tbact. 
 
( 413 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 414 ) 
 
 C ONTK ACT— comiMjMed. 
 
 Privity of - - _ 19 ch. D. 246 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 2. 
 
 Privity of 84 Ch. D. 84 ; 10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 See Factob. 1. 
 
 Procuring breach of— Master and servant 
 
 [6 Q. E. D. 333 
 See Master and Servant — Eemedibs. 
 
 Promoters of company — Formation 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 103 
 See Company — Formation. 
 
 Eesoission — Contract for delivery by instal- 
 ments 9 Q. B. D. 648 ; 9 App. Cas. 434 
 See Sale of Goods^Eescission. 2. 
 
 Eesoission — Misrepresentation 20 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See False Eepeesentation. 1. 
 
 —— Sale of goods. 
 
 See Cases under Sale of Goods. 
 
 -, Sale of goods — Scotch law 6 App. Cas. 
 
 [251, 58S 
 See Scotch Lavt^Sale or Goods. 1, 2. 
 
 Sale of land. 
 
 See Cases under Veneob and Pdbohasee. 
 
 Sale of land — Confirmation 26 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 2. 
 
 Sale of land — Implied conditions. 
 
 See Vendob and Pdbchaseb — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale — Statutes. 
 
 Service — ^Wages — Forfeiture 6 ft. B. D. 1 
 
 ■ See Master and Servant — Wages. 2. 
 Validity— Lunatic - - 31 Ch. D. 615 
 
 (See Lunatic — Maintenance. 1. 
 
 Wife with husband — Agreement to assign 
 
 real estate — Heir-at-law 9 Q. B. D. 576 
 
 See Husband and Wife— Wife's Eeal 
 
 Estate. 6. 
 
 CONTBACTOE— Liability - 19 Ch. D. 281 ; 
 
 See Support. 2, 3. [6 App. Cas. 740 
 
 Liability of principal - 8 App. Cas. 443 
 
 See Pbinoipal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 1. 
 CONTEAEY INTENTION— Will speaking from 
 death - - 30 Ch. D. 50 
 
 See Will— Speaking from Death. 3. 
 CONTEIBTJTION— Costs— Co-Defendants 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 236 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 14. 
 
 Co-surety 17 Ch. D. 44, 825 ; 34 Ch. D. 709 
 
 ySee Principal and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Tenants in common - 15 ft. B. D. 60 
 
 See Tenant in Common. 
 
 Mortgage of land and charge on shares 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 683 
 See Company— Member's Llability. 1. 
 
 ■ Shareholders of cost-book mine 23 Ch. D. 52 
 
 See Company— OosT-EOOK Company. 4. 
 
 Ship — General average loss. 
 
 See Cases under Ship— General Aver- 
 age. 
 
 Third party - - - 26 Ch. D. 161 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt— Thibd 
 Party. 5. 
 
 CONTEIBUTOEY — Company — Winding-up — 
 
 Costs — Winding-up petition 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 183 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 6. 
 Director— Qualification - 27 Ch. D. 323 
 
 See Company-^Dibeotob's , Qualifioa? 
 
 TION. 2. 
 ^ — - Executor of shareholder — Eetainer 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 934 
 See Executor — Eetainer. 4. 
 
 Life insurance company — Participating 
 
 policy-holder. 
 
 See Cases under Company — ^Lipe Insur- 
 ance Company. 
 
 C0NTEIB¥T0EY MISTAKE h 29 Ch. D. 459 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 5. 
 
 CONTEIBUTOaYNECaiGHNCE— Collision 
 
 [6 P. D. 76; 9 App. Cas. 136, 640, 873 
 
 See Smp— Navigation. 2, 21, 28, 31. 
 
 '■ Damage to ship - - 6 App. Cas. 317 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 7. 
 
 CONTUMACY- Ecclesiasticallaw 7 P. D. 94 ; 
 [7 ft. B. D. 373 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 TEMPT. 1, 2. 
 
 CONVENIENCE --Accommodation works — D is- 
 cretion of railway company 20 Ch, D. 323 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses' Act. 1. 
 
 Balance of — ^Injunction - 27 Ch. D. 4S 
 
 See Light — Title. 1. 
 
 Balance of — ^Injunction^Trade circular 
 
 [2SCh. D. r 
 See Patent — Infringement. 2. 
 
 CONVEESION or GOODS— Demand and refusal 
 —Limitations - 11 ft. B. D. 99 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Personal 
 Actions. 3. 
 
 Warehouseman - - {S ft. B. D. 475 ; 
 
 See Trover. [7 App. Cas. 591 
 
 CONVEESION OF EEAI AND PERSONAL 
 ESTATE — Accumulations of personal 
 estate — -Investment in realty 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 895 
 See Eevenue — Probate Duty. 1. 
 
 Bequest to separate use — Power of anticipa- 
 tion - - 31 Ch. D. 748 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 , .Estate. 14. , , 
 
 Direction in will - - 36 Ch. D. 601 
 
 See Will — Conversion. 
 
 Election to take personalty as realty 
 
 See Election. 3. [30 Ch. D. 654 
 
 Lunatic's estate — .Partition suit 17 Ch. D. 
 
 [341; 27Ch. D. 309 
 See Lunatic — Propbbty. 8, 9. 
 
 Order for sale - 25 Ch. D. 735 
 
 See Executor- Actions. 4. 
 
 Power of sale of land — ^Eein vestment , in' 
 
 Government funds - 16 Ch. D. 618 
 See Power— Execution. 15, 
 
 ^— Eealty forming partnej;s)iip a-ssets — ]?robate 
 duty -r - - , 13 ft, B. D. 275 
 
 See Eevenue — ^Probate Duty. 2, 
 
( «5 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 416 ) 
 
 CONVERSION OF HEAL AND PERSONAL 
 
 I,STATi:— continued. 
 
 Sale under Partition Act — Married woman 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 362; 18 Ch. D. 612; 19 Ch. D. 302 
 See Paktition Suit — Sale. 3, 4, 6. 
 
 Trust for — Apportionment 24 Ch. D. 643, 
 
 [649, n. 
 8ee ExEODTOK — Administeation. 5, 6. 
 CONVEYANCE. 
 
 See Oases and Statutes under Tendob 
 
 AND PUECHASEK — OONVEYANOE. 
 
 — By married woman. 
 
 See Oases under Husband and Wife — 
 Wife's Conveyance. 
 
 By married woman — Wife's reversion 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 106 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Ke- 
 vebsion. 2. 
 
 Costs of— Lands Clauses Act 23 Ch. D. 167 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 1. 
 
 Execution of. 
 
 See Vendor and Pubchaseb — Con- 
 veyance — Statutes. 
 
 Fraudulent— 13 Eliz. c. 5. 
 
 See Cases under Fraudulent Convey- 
 ance. 
 
 Objection to — Eight to rescind 28 Ch. D. 712 
 
 See Vendob and Pdbchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 9. 
 
 Payment of purchase-money 27 Ch. D. 692 
 
 See Vendor and Pubchaseb — Convey- 
 ance. 6. 
 
 To oneself. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 Voluntary— 27 Eliz. c. 4. 
 
 See Oases under Voluntary Convby- 
 
 ' ANCE. 
 
 CONVEYANCE OF TROOPS. 
 
 See Abmy and Navy — Statutes. 
 CONVEYANCE OP VOTERS. 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 CONVEYANCING ACT, 1881. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. u. 41, simplifies and im- 
 proves the practice of conveyancing ; vests in 
 trustees, mortgagees, and others, various powers 
 commonly conferred hy provisions inserted in settle- 
 ments, mortgages, wills, and other instruments ; 
 and amends in various particulars the law of pro- 
 
 Adoption of Act] Sect. 66. — (1.) It is hereby 
 declared that the powers given hy this Act to any 
 person, and the covenants, provisions, stipulations, 
 and words ivhich under this Act are to be deemed 
 included or implied in any instrument, or are by 
 this Act made applicable to any contract for sale or 
 other transaction, are and shall be deemed in law 
 proper powers, covenants, provisions, stipulations, 
 and words, to be given by or to be contained in any 
 such instrument, or to be adopted in connection with 
 or applied to, any such contract or transaction; 
 and a solicitor shall not be deemed guilty of neglect 
 or breach of duty, or become in any way lialih, by 
 reason of his omitting in good faith, in any such 
 instrument, or in connection with any such contract 
 or transaction, to negative the giving, inclusion, 
 implication, or application of any of those powers, 
 
 CONVEYANCING ACT, liil— continued, 
 covenants, provisions, stipulations, or words, or to 
 insert or apply any others in place thereof, in any 
 case where the provisions of this Act would allow 
 of his doing so. 
 
 (2.) But nothing in this Act shall be taken to 
 imply that the insertion in any such instrument, or 
 the adoption in connection with, or the application 
 to, any contract or transaction, of any further or 
 other powers, covenants, provisions, stipulations or 
 words is improper. 
 
 (3.) Where the solicitor is acting for trustees, 
 
 executors, or other persons in a fiduciary positiort, 
 
 those persons shall also be protected in like manner. 
 
 (4). Where such persons are acting without a 
 
 solicitor they shall he protected in like manner. 
 
 Commencement of Act.] By sect. 1 the Act 
 came into operation on the Slsi of December, 1881. 
 Conditions of Sale.] See Vendor and Pub- 
 chaseb — Conditions op Sale — Statutes. 
 
 Discharge of Incumbrances.] See Vendor and 
 Purchaser — Conveyance — Statutes. 
 
 Deeds — Construction.] See Deeds — Statutes, 
 Execution of Purchase Deed.] See Vendor 
 AND Pubchaseb — Conveyance — Statutes. 
 Infants.] See Infant — -Pbopeett — Statutes. 
 Leases.] See Landlord and Tenant — Lease 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Long Terms.] See Leasehold — Long Tebms 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Married Women.] See Husband and Wife — 
 Wife's Conveyance — Statutes. 
 Mortgages.] 
 
 See Mortgage — ^Powers — Statutes. 
 
 Mortgage — Consolidation — Statutes^ 
 Moetoage — Eedemption — Statutes. 
 Mortgage — Foeeclosube — Statutes. 
 Power of Attorney.] See Power of Attorxet 
 - — Statutes. 
 Eent-charges.] See Eent-chaege — Statutes. 
 Trust estates.] See Will — Trust Estates — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Trustees.] See Trtjsize— Statutes. 
 Procedure.] Sect. 67. — (1.) Any notice required 
 or authorized by this Act to be served shall he in 
 writing. 
 
 (2.) Any notice required or authorized by this 
 Act to he served on a lessee or mortgagor shall he 
 sufficient, although only addressed to the lessee or 
 mortgagor by that designation, without his name, 
 or generally to the persons interested, without any 
 name, and notwitlistanding that any person to he 
 affected by the notice is absent, under disability^ 
 unborn, or unascertained. 
 
 (3.) Any notice required or authorized hy this 
 Act to he served shall he sufficiently served if it is 
 left at the last-known place of abode or business in 
 tlie United Kingdom of the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, 
 mortgagor, or other person to be served, or in case 
 of a notice required or authorized to he served on a 
 lessee or mortgagor, is affixed or left for him on the 
 land or any house or building comprised in the 
 lease or mxirtgage, or, in case of a mining lease, is 
 left for the lessee at the office or counting-house of 
 the mine. 
 
 (4.) Any notice required or authorized by this 
 Act to be served shall also he sufficiently served, if 
 it is sent hy post in a registered letter addressed to- 
 the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or otlier 
 person to be served, hy name, at the aforesaid place: 
 
( 417 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( «8 ) 
 
 COITVEYANCING ACT, 1661— continued, 
 of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and 
 if that letter is not returned though the post-office 
 undelivered ; and that service shall be deemed to be 
 made at the time at which the registered letter 
 would in the ordinary course be delivered. 
 
 (5.) This section does not apply to notices served 
 in 2Jroceedings in this Court. 
 
 Sect. 68. The Act 5 & 6 Will. 4, a. 62, shall, 
 by virtue of this Act, have the short title of the 
 Statutory Declarations Act, 1835, and may be 
 cited by that short title in any declaration made 
 for any purpose under or by virtue of that Act, 
 <M- in any other document, or in any Act of Parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 Sect. 69. — (1.) All matters within the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Court under this Act shall, subject to 
 the Acts regulating the Court, be assigned to the 
 Chancery Division of the Court. 
 
 (2.) Payment of money into Court shall effect- 
 ually exonerate therefrom the person making the 
 payment. 
 
 (3.) Every application to the Court shall, except 
 where it is otherwise expressed, be by summons at 
 Chambers. 
 
 (4.) On an application by a purchaser notice 
 shall be served in the first instance on the vendor. 
 
 (5.) On an application by a vendor notice shall 
 he served in the first instance on the purchaser. 
 
 (6.) On any application notice sliall be served on 
 such persons, if any, as the Court thinks fit. 
 
 (7.) The Court shall have full power and discre- 
 tion to make such order as it thinks fit respecting 
 the costs, charges, or expenses of all or any of the 
 parties to any application. 
 
 (8.) General Mules for purposes of this Act shall 
 be deemed Rules of Court within sect. 17 of the 
 Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, and maybe made 
 accordingly. 
 
 (9.) The powers of the Court may, as regards 
 land in the County Palatine of Lancaster, be exer- 
 cised also by the Court of Chancery of the County 
 Palatine ; and rules for regulating proceedings in 
 that Court shall be from time to time made by the 
 Chancellor of the Dv/ihy of Lancaster, with the 
 advice and consent of a Judge of the High Court 
 acting in the Chancery Division, and of the Tiee- 
 Chancellor of the County Palatine. 
 
 (10.) General Rules, and Rules of the Court of 
 Chancery of the County Palatine, under this Act 
 may he made at any time after the passing of this 
 Act, to lake effect on or after the commencement of 
 this Act. 
 
 Sect. 70. — (1.) An order of the Court under any 
 statutory or other jurisdiction shall not as against 
 a purchaser, be invalidated on the ground of want 
 of jurisdiction, or of want of any concurrence, con- 
 sent, notice, or service, whether the purchaser has 
 notice of any such want or not. 
 
 (2.) Tliis section shall have effect with respect to 
 any lease, sale, or other act under the authority of 
 the Court, and purporting to be in pursuance of the 
 Settled Estates Act, 1877, notwithstanding the ex- 
 ception in sect. 40 of that Act, or to be in pursuance 
 of any former Act repealed by that Act, notwith- 
 standing any exception in such former Act. 
 
 (3.) This section applies to all orders made before 
 or after the commencement of this Act, except any 
 order which has before the commencement of this 
 Act been set aside or determined to he invalid on 
 
 CONVEYANCING ACT, 1S61— continued, 
 any ground, and except any order as regards which 
 an action or proceeding is at the commencement of 
 this Act pending for having it set aside or deter- 
 mened to be invalid. 
 
 Eepeals.] Sect. 71 repeals 8 <£ 9 Tict. c. 119 ; 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, ss. 11-30. 
 
 sect, 25 - - 21 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See MoETOASE — Redemption. 4. 
 
 sect. 70 - - 21 Ch. D. 41 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 1. 
 
 CONVEYANCING ACT, 1882 (45 & 46 Viot. c, 39). 
 
 See ExEcuTOBY LiMiTATiON^Stofaies. 
 Husband and Wife — Wife's Con- 
 
 VEYAUOB — Statutes. 
 Leasehold — Long Teem — Statutes. 
 MoKTGAGE — Redemption — Statutes. 
 Power — Extinction — Statutes. 
 PowEB op Attoenet — Statutes. 
 Trustee — Appointment — Statutes. 
 Vendor and Purchaser — Con- 
 ditions OF Sale — Statutes. 
 Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 
 without Notice — Statutes. 
 Vendor and Purchaser — Title — 
 Statutes. 
 CONVEYANCING BUSINESS— Bemuneration of 
 solicitor 25 Ch. D. 301 ; 26 Ch. D. 155 ; 
 [29 Ch. D. 199 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 19, 20, 2 1. 
 CO-OWNEESHIP — Action of restraint — Form of 
 bail bond - - - 10 P. D. 15 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Arrest of 
 Ship. 1. 
 
 Charter — Managing owner — Commission 
 
 [10 P. D. 69 
 See Ship — Chaetebpartt. 15. 
 
 Order of sale— Admiralty - 10 P. D. 4 
 
 See Ship — Owners. 1. 
 COFABCENEBS — ^Trustee Act — Vesting order 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 359 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 3. 
 COPY— Bill of sale— Registration 21 Ch. D. 871 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 7. 
 
 Depositions in bankniptcy — Service 
 
 [19 Ch. D, 580 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 7. 
 
 Pleadings— Costs 19 Ch. D. 72 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 16. 
 
 Summons — Inaccurate copy 25 Ch. D. 112 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 19. 
 
 COPYHOLD :— Col. 
 
 I. Custom - - 418 
 
 II. Surrender and Admittance - 419 
 
 Fees.] List of fees ordered by Copyhold Com- 
 missioners to he taken in respect of enfranchise- 
 ments and other transactions under the Copyhold 
 and other Acts in accordance with 31 <{: 32 Vict, 
 c. 89, ». 6 - I. G,, 1882, p. 2477 
 
 I, COPYHOLD— CUSTOM. 
 
 1. Common — Appurtenant — Prescription 
 
 Act (2 <fe 3 Wilt. 4, c. 71), s. 1— Cattle levant and 
 couahant.'] A copyholder cannot lawfully claim 
 
( 419 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 420 ) 
 
 I. COPYHOLD— CTTSTOM—coniMiMecZ. 
 
 common appurtenant without stint in respect of 
 his copyhold tenement, but such common must 
 be limited to the cattle levant and couohant on 
 the tenement to which it is annexed, or the num- 
 ber must be ascertained by the Court rolls or in 
 some other manner. Moblet v. Cliffokd 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 753 
 
 2. Descent — Jus Bepresentationis.'] The 
 
 custom of a manor was stated! to be that all copy- 
 holds descended to the youngest son or daughter, 
 brother or sister, uncle or aunt. — A tenant died 
 intestate seised of customary lands of the manor, 
 leaving neither son, daughter, brother, sister, 
 uncle, nor aunt; but leaving sons of deceased 
 uncles : — Held, that the youngest son of the 
 youngest uncle was not entitled, and that the 
 heir-at-law was entitled to the lands. In re 
 Smaht. Smart v. Smaet 18 Ch, D. 165 
 
 II. COPYHOLD — STJREENDEE AND ADMIT- 
 TANCE. 
 
 1, Arbitrary Fine — Omission to demand 
 
 fixed Sum — Three Years' improved Annual Value.'] 
 A lord, who is entitled by the custom of the 
 manor to a reasonable fine upon admission to a 
 copyhold tenement, may demand and recover such 
 fine by the description of three years' improved 
 annual value of the tenement to which the ad- 
 mittance relates, and without stating in money 
 the precise amount of the fine. Fbaser v. Mason 
 [10 Q. B. D. 398 ; 11 ft. B. D. 574 
 
 3. Eight to split Admittance — Purchase 
 
 of several distinct Tenements under one Disposi- 
 tion — Fines — Special Custom — Evidence.'] There 
 is no general copyhold law that, in manors in 
 which a fine is only payable on the first admit- 
 tance of a tenant, a purchaser of several distinct 
 copyhold tenements under one disposition — 
 whether a will, or surrender, or otherwise — is 
 entitled as of right to split his admittances, i.e., 
 is entitled to compel the lord of the manor to 
 admit him to any one or more of such several 
 tenements, and to take admittance to the others 
 at any subsequent time, as and when he pleases. 
 — A special custom in a manor, that a purchaser 
 of several distinct copyhold, tenements under one 
 disposition, must take admittance to all at one 
 and the same time, and pay one general iine in 
 respect of all, is good.— Such'a special custom may 
 be evidenced by a uniform course of practice or 
 usage in the manor for a number of years, although 
 it does not otherwise appear either on the Court 
 rolls, or in any custumal or other record, of the 
 manor. Johnstone v. Eael Spencer 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 581 
 3, Trustees — Customary Seiress of De- 
 visee of Surviving Trustee — Bight of_ JSscheat — 
 Mandamus.] A testatrix who died in 1851 de- 
 vised her copyhold property to a trustee in trust 
 to pay the rents and profits to J. ICing for life, 
 and after her death to certain charitable purposes 
 which were void under the Mortmain Acts. The 
 testatrix died without heirs. The trustee named 
 in the will refused the trust, and two trustees 
 were appointed by order of the Court in 1853, who 
 were admitted upon the court rolls to hold upon 
 the trusts of the will. One trustee died in 1873, 
 and the surviving trustee, who died in 1877, 
 
 II. COPYHOLD — STJEEENDEE AND ADMIT- 
 TANCE — continued. 
 devised his trust estates to two trustees, neither of 
 whom was admitted to the copyholds. The- 
 survivor of these trustees made no devise of his- 
 trust estates and died leaving his youngest 
 daughter, Janet Hawkins, his customary heiress 
 according to the custom ot this manor. The 
 tenant for life under the will died in 1883 : — 
 Held, that Janet Hawkins, who claimed by 
 escheat and under a resulting trust, was entitled 
 to be admitted as tenant to the copyhold property 
 for her own benefit as against the lord of the 
 manor. Gallaed v. Hawkins 27 Ch. D. 295 
 
 COPYHOLD — Enfranchisement — Acknowledg- 
 ment of right to production of deeds 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 600 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 
 Deeds. 
 
 Enfranchisement— Lunatic 20 Ch. D. 514 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 4. 
 
 Trustee dying without heir — ^Vesting order 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 205' 
 See Trustee Act — Vesting Orders. 4. 
 
 COPYEIGHT :— Col. 
 
 I. Books _ - _ - 420' 
 
 IL Designs - - - 422 
 
 ni. Dramatic - - - - 427 
 
 IV. Music - - 428 
 
 V. Newspapees _ _ _ 42^ 
 
 VI. PiCTUEBS _ _ _ 430 
 
 I. COPYRIGHT— BOOKS. 
 
 Illustrated Catalogue — -Boole of En- 
 Copyright Act (5 4 6 Vict. c. 45).l 
 the Plaintiffs, who were upholsterers, published 
 an illustrated catalogue of articles of furniture 
 which was duly registered under the Copyright 
 Acts as a book. The illustrations were engraved 
 from original drawings made by artists employed 
 by the Plaintiffs, but the book contained no letter- 
 press of such a description as to be the subject of 
 copyright, and it was not published for sale, but 
 was used by the Plaintiffs as an advertisement. 
 The Defendants published an illustrated catalogue, 
 many of the illustrations in which were copied 
 from those in the Plaintiff's book : — Held, by the 
 Coiirt of Appeal (affirming the decision of Vioe- 
 Chancellor Hall), that the Plaintiffs were entitled 
 to an injunction restraining the Defendants from 
 publishing any catalogue containing illustrations 
 copied from the Plaintiffs' book. — A collection of 
 prints published together in a volume is a hook 
 within the meaning of the Copyright Acts and 
 the proper subject of copyright, though it con- 
 tains no such letterpress as could be tbe subject 
 of copyright, and it makes no difference that the 
 book is not published for sale but only used as 
 an advertisement. — Cobbett v. "WoodiDard (Law 
 Kep. 14 Eq. 407) overruled. Maple & Co. v. 
 Junior Army and Navy Stores 21 Ch. D. 369 
 
 2. Lecture in Manuscript — Delivered from 
 
 Memory — Audience admitted by Tickets — Notes 
 taken by Shorthand "Writei — Publication of Lec- 
 ture in " Phonographic Lecturer " — Implied Con- 
 tract — Injunction.] N., an author and a lecturer 
 upon various scientific subjects, delivered from 
 memory, though it was in manuscript, a lecture 
 
( 421 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 422 ) 
 
 I. COPYRIGHT— BOOKS— coniiimeti. 
 
 at the Working Men's College upon " The Dog 
 as the Friend of Man." The audience were ad- 
 mitted to the room by tickets issued gratuitously 
 by the committee of the college. P., the author 
 of a system of shorthand -writing, and the pub- 
 lisher of -works intended for instruction in the art 
 of shorthand -writing, attended the lecture, and 
 took notes, nearly verbatim, in shorthand of it, 
 and afterwards published the lecture in his 
 monthly periodical "The Phonographic Lec- 
 turer." — On motion for an injunction to restrain 
 the publication : — Seld, that where a lecture of 
 this kind is delivered to an audience, limited and 
 admitted by tickets, the understanding bet-ween 
 the lecturer and the audience is that, whether the 
 lecture has been committed to writing beforehand 
 or not, the audience are quite at liberty to take 
 the fullest notes for their own personal purposes, 
 but they are not at liberty to use them afterwards 
 for the purpose of publishing the lecture for profit ; 
 and the publication of the lecture in shorthand 
 characters is not regarded as being different in 
 any material sense from any other ; and injunc- 
 tion accordingly. — Abernethy v. HutcMnson (3 
 L. J. (Oh.) (O.S.) 209 ; 1 H. & T. 28) discussed. 
 jSTicols v. Pitman - - - 26 Ch. D. 374 
 
 3. Begistration — Pleading — Objections — 
 
 Copyright Act, 1842 (5*6 Vict. e. 45), ss. 13, 16, 
 24.] Kegistration of a copyright is bad, if the 
 name entered as that of " the publisher " is not 
 that of the first publisher. — Weldon v. Diclis (10 
 Ch. D. 247) followed. — In an action for infringe- 
 ment of copyright, where objections to the regis- 
 tration are not delivered within the prescribed 
 time, the action may nevertheless be dismissed if 
 a defect in the registration is brought out from the 
 PlaiutifPs e-ridence. Coote v. Jtidd 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 727 
 
 4. Telegraphy — Telegraphic Code com- 
 piled from the Words for use of Agents — Infringe- 
 •ment of Copyright — Injunctions^ The Plaintiff 
 published " The Standard Telegram Code," a 
 book of words selected from eight languages, for 
 use in telegraphic transmissions of messages, and 
 it was accompanied by figure cyphers for refer- 
 ence or private interpretation. The book -was 
 registered under the Copyright Act, 5 & 6 Vict, 
 c. 45. The Defendant bought a copy of the book, 
 and compiled for their own use with its aid a ne-w 
 and independent work, as alleged, -which was 
 their o-wn private telegraph code, and they dis- 
 tributed copies of their book amongst their agents 
 at home and abroad, but they had not printed 
 their book for sale or exportation : — Meld, that 
 the Defendants had infringed the copyright of the 
 Plaintiff, and that a perpetual injunction must be 
 granted. Ager v. Peninsulab akd Okiental 
 Steam Navigation Company 26 Ch. D. 637 
 
 5. Title of Book — Begistration of Fart of 
 
 a Booh — Practice — Appeal for Coste.] The Plain- 
 tiff published in numbers, in a weekly periodical 
 called " Every Week," a tale intituled " Splendid 
 Misery ; or, East End and West End,'' by C. A. 
 Hazlewood. The Defendant subsequentjy com- 
 menced issuing in weekly parts, in a newpaper 
 published by him, a tale by Miss Braddon intituled 
 " Splendid Misery." Plaintiff was registered as 
 the proprietor of " Every Week " before the publi- 
 
 I. COPYEIGHT— BOOKS— conKnticd. 
 
 cation of it began, and after the tale had been 
 completed he had Jiimself registered as the pro- 
 prietor of " Splendid Misery ; or. East End and 
 West End," giving the date of publication of the 
 number of " Every Week " which contained the 
 first number of the tale as the date of the publi- 
 cation of the tale. He then commenced an action 
 to restrain the Defendant from continuing his 
 publication of Miss Braddon's tale under the title 
 of " Splendid Misery," and moved for an injunc- 
 tion. Before the motion was made, the Defen- 
 dant had altered the title of Miss Braddon's tale, 
 and the motion was ordered to stand over till the 
 trial, the Defendant undertaking not to alter the 
 new title in the meantime. The tale was finished 
 under the new title before the trial. It was 
 proved that a novel -which once had a large circu- 
 lation had been published in 1801 under the title 
 of "Splendid Misery," and that second-hand 
 copies could still be met with. At the trial 
 Bacon, V.C, held that the Defendant had in- 
 fringed the Plaintiff's copyright, and made an> 
 order containing no declaration of right, but, 
 simply ordering the Defendant to pay the whole 
 costs of the action. The Defendant appealed,,, 
 contending that the Plaintiff had no title, and,, 
 that the action ought to have been dismissed : — 
 Held, that it is not within the discretion of the 
 Court to make a Defendant pay the whole costs of 
 an action if the Plaintiff has no right to sue, that 
 there was therefore implied in the order a declara- 
 tion that the Plaintiff had a good cause of action, 
 and that an appeal would lie. — Keld, that though 
 the registration of "Every Week" being made 
 before any part of that periodical was published 
 was not a good registration, the subsequent regis- 
 tration of the first number of the tale was a good 
 registration to enable him to sue in respect of 
 infringement of copyright in the title of the tale„ 
 supposing such copyright to exist : — But held, 
 that the Plaintiff had no copyright in the title 
 " Splendid Misery," for that copyright can only 
 exist in something original, and the mere adopting 
 as a title a hackneyed phrase, which moreover 
 had been used as the title of a novel many years 
 before, and which for anything that appeared 
 might have been copied from that novel, could not 
 give any copyright in that title : — BeZd, therefore- 
 that the Plaintiff had no title to sue for infringe-- 
 ment of copyright, and that as it was clear that 
 the public could not be misled into purchas- 
 ing the Defendant's ,tale under the belief that it 
 was the same as that of the Plaintiff, so that there 
 was no ground for the interference of the Com't on , 
 the principles applicable to trade-marks, the- 
 action ought to be dismissed with costs. — Semhle,^ 
 that as a general rule, there cannot be any copy- 
 right in the title of a book.— rTTeMon v. Dicks (10 
 Ch. D. 247) considered. Dicks v. Yates 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 76 
 
 II. COPYEIGHT— DESIGNS. 
 
 The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 57, «. 113 (Patents, 
 Designs and Trade Marks Act, 1883), repeaU 
 (inter alia) 
 
 5*6 Vict. c. 100, 
 6*7 Vict. 0. 65, 
 13 * 14 Vict. c. 104, 
 21 & 22 Vict. c. 70, 
 
 P 2 
 
( 423 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 424 ) 
 
 II. COPYRIGHT— DESIGNS-^coniinued:. 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 73, 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. 3, 
 33 * 34 Vict. c. 27, 
 33 * 34 Vict. e. 97, s. 65, 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 93, 
 and consolidates and amends the law relating to 
 Copyright in Designs. 
 
 Sect. 3. Act to commence on the 31st of Deoemlier, 
 1883. 
 
 Definitions.] Sect. 60. In and for the purposes 
 of this Act 
 
 " Design " means any design appliccMe to any 
 article of manufacture, or to any substance artifi- 
 cial or natural, or partly artificial and partly 
 natural, whether the design is applicable for the 
 pattern, or for the shape or configuration, or for 
 the ornament thereof, or for any two or m,ore of 
 such purposes, and hy whatever means it is applic- 
 able, whether hy printing, painting, embroidery, 
 weaving, sewing, modelling, casting, embossing, en- 
 graving, staining, or any other means whatever, 
 manual, mechanical, or chemical, separate or com,- 
 hined, not being a design for a sculpture, or other 
 thing within the protection of the Sculpture Copy- 
 right Act of the year 1814 (54 Geo. 3, c. 56). 
 
 " Copyright" means the exclusive right to apply 
 a design to any article of manufacture or to any 
 such substance as aforesaid in the class or classes in 
 which the design is registered. 
 
 Sect. 61. The author of any new and original 
 design shall be considered the proprietor thereof, 
 unless he executed the work on behalf of another 
 person for a good or valuable consideration, in 
 which case such person shall be considered the pro- 
 prietor, and every person acquiring for a good or 
 valuable consideration a new and original design, 
 «!• the right to apply the same to any such article 
 or substance as aforesaid, either exclusively of any 
 other person or otherwise, and also every person mi 
 whom the property in such design or such right to 
 the application thereof sliall devolve, shall be con- 
 sidered the proprietor of the design in respect to 
 ivhich the same may have been so acquired, and to 
 that extent, but not otherwise. 
 
 Duration of Copyright.] Sect. 50. — (1.) Wlien 
 a design is registered, the registered proprietor of 
 the design shall, subject to the provisions of this 
 Act, have copyright in the design during five years 
 from the date of registration. 
 
 (2.) Before delivery on sale of any articles to 
 which a registered design has been applied, the 
 proprietor must {if exact representations or speci- 
 mens were not furnished on the application for 
 registration), furnish to the Comptroller the pre- 
 scribed number of exact representations or speci- 
 mens of the design ; and if he fails to do so, tlie 
 Comptroller may erase his name from the register, 
 and thereupon his copyright in the design shall 
 cease. 
 
 Sect. 51. Before delivery on sale of any articles 
 to which a registered design has been applied, the 
 proprietor of the design shall cause each such article 
 to be marked with the prescribed mark, or with the 
 prescribed word or words or figures, denoting that 
 the design is registered ! o,nd if he fails to do so 
 the copyright in the design shall cease, unless the 
 proprietor shews that he took all proper steps to 
 ensure the making of the article. 
 
 Sect. 52. — (1.) During the existence of copyright 
 
 II. COPYEIGHT— DESIGNS— co»Mmtte(i. 
 
 in a design, the design shall not be open to inspec- 
 tion except by the proprietor, or a person autho- 
 rised in writing by the proprietor, or a person 
 authorized by the Comptroller or by the Court, and 
 furnishing such information as may enable the 
 Comptroller to identify the design, nor except in the 
 presence of the Comptroller, or of an officer acting 
 under him, nor except on payment of the prescribed 
 fee ; and the person making the inspection shall not 
 be entitled to take any copy of the design, or of any 
 part thereof. 
 
 (2.) When the copyright in a design has ceased, 
 the design shall be open to inspection, and copies 
 thereof may be taken by any person on payment of 
 the prescribed fee. 
 
 Sect. 53. On the request of any person producing 
 u, particular design, together with its mark of 
 registration, or producing only its mark of registra- 
 tion, or furnishing such information as may enable 
 the Comptroller to identify the design, and on pay- 
 ment of the prescribed fee, it shall be the duty of 
 the Comptroller to inform such person whether the 
 registration still exists in respect of such design, 
 and if so, in respect of what class or classes of 
 goods, and stating also the date of registration, and 
 the name and address of the registered proprietor. 
 Sect. 54. If a registered design is used in manu- 
 facture in any foreign country and is not used in 
 this country within six mentis of its registration in 
 this country, the copyright in the design shall 
 cease. 
 
 Exhibition at Industrial and International 
 Exhibitions.] Sect. 57. Tlie exhibition at an in- 
 dustrial or international exhibition, certified as 
 such by the Board of Trade, or the exhibition else- 
 where during the period of the holding of the 
 exhibition, without tlie privity or consent of the 
 proprietor, of a design, or of any article to which 
 a design is applied, or the publication, during the 
 holding of any such exhibition, of a description of 
 a design, shall not prevent the design from being 
 registered, or invalidate the registration thereof, 
 •provided that both the following conditions are 
 complied with ; namely, — 
 
 (a.) Tlie exhibitor must, hefore exhibiting tlie 
 design or article, or publishing a descrip- 
 tion of the design, give the Comptroller the 
 prescribed notice of his intention to do so ; 
 and 
 (b.) The application for registration must be 
 made before or within six months from tlie 
 date of the opening of the exhibition. 
 Pees.] Sect. 56. There shall be paid in respect 
 of applications and registration and other matters 
 under this part of this Act such fees as may be 
 from time to time, with the sanction of the Treasury, 
 prescribed by the Board of Trade ; and such fees 
 shall be levied and paid to the account of Her 
 Majesty's Exchequer in such manner as the Treasury 
 shall from time to time direct. 
 
 Legal Proceedings.] Sect. 58. During the ex- 
 istence of copyright in any design — • 
 
 (a.) It shall not be lawful for any person without 
 the license or written, consent of tlie regis- 
 tered proprietor to apply such design or 
 any fraudulent or obvious imitation there- 
 of, in the class or classes of goods in which 
 such design is registered, for purposes of 
 sale to any article of manufacture or to 
 
( 125 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 426 ) 
 
 II. COPYRIGHT— DESIGNS— coniJnued 
 
 any substance artificial or natural or 
 partly artificial and partly natural ; and 
 
 (b.) It shall not be lawful for any person to 
 publish or expose for sale any article of 
 tnanufacture or any substance to which such 
 design or any fraudulent or obvious imita- 
 tion thereof shall have been so applied, 
 hnowing that the same has been so applied 
 'without the consent of the registered pro- 
 prietor. 
 
 Any person who acts in contravention of this 
 section shall be liable for every offence to forfeit a 
 sum not exceeding £50 to the registered proprietor 
 of the design, who may recover such sum as a 
 simple contract debt by action in any Cotirt of com- 
 petent jurisdiction. 
 
 Sect. 59. Notwithstanding the remedy given by 
 this Act for the recovery of such penalty as afore- 
 said, the registered proprietor of any design may 
 (if he elects to do so") bring an action for the re- 
 covery of any dximages arising from the application 
 of any su/ih design,, or of any fraudulent or obvious 
 imitation thereof for the purpose of sale, to any 
 article of manufacture or substance, or from the 
 publication, sale, or exposure for sale by any person 
 of any article or substance to which such design or 
 any fraudulent or obvious imitation thereof shall 
 have been so applied, such person knowing that the 
 proprietor had not given his consent to such appli- 
 cation. 
 
 Eegister of Designs.] Sect. 55. — (1.) There shall 
 be kept at the Patent Office a booh called the Re- 
 gister of Designs wherein shall be entered the 
 names and addresses of proprietors of registered 
 designs, notifications of assignments and of trans- 
 missions of registered designs, and such other 
 matters as may from time to time be prescribed. 
 
 (2.) The register of designs shall be prima facie 
 evidence of any matters by this Act directed or 
 authorized to be entered therein. 
 
 Eegistration of Designs.] Sect,. 47. The Comp- 
 troller may, on application by or on behalf of any 
 person claiming to be the proprietor of any new or 
 original design not previously published in the 
 United Kingdom, register the design under this 
 part of this Act. 
 
 (2.) The application must be made in the form 
 set forth in tlie 1st Schedule to this Act, or in such 
 other form as may be from time to time prescribed, 
 and must be left at, or sent by post to, the Patent 
 Office in the prescribed manner. 
 
 (3.) The application must contain a statement of 
 the nature of the design, and the class or classes of 
 goods in which the applicant desires that the design 
 
 (4.) The design may be registered in more than 
 one class. 
 
 (5.) In case of doubt as to the class in which a 
 design ought to be registered, the Comptroller may 
 decide the question. 
 
 (6.) The Comptroller may, if he thinks fit, refuse 
 to register any design presented to him for registra- 
 tion, but any person aggrieved by any such refusal 
 may appeal therefrom to the Board of Trade. 
 
 (7.) The Board of Trade shall, if required, hear 
 the applicant and the Comptroller, and may make 
 an order determining whether, and subject to what 
 conditions, if any, registration is to be permitted. 
 
 Sect. 48. — (1.) On applicationfor registration of 
 
 II. COPYRIGHT— DESIGNS— conimuefJ. 
 
 a design the applicant shall furnish to the Comp- 
 troller the prescribed number of copies of drawings, 
 photographs, or tracings of the design sufficient, in 
 tlie opinion of the Comptroller, for enabling him to 
 identify the design ; or the applicant may, instead 
 of such copies, furnish exact representations or 
 specimens of the design. 
 
 (2.) The Comptroller may, if he thinks fit, refuse 
 any drawing, photograph, tracing, representation, 
 or specimen which is not, in his opinion, suitable 
 for the official records. 
 
 Sect. 49. — (1.) Tlie Comptroller shall grant a 
 certificate of registration to the proprietor of the 
 design when registered. 
 
 (2.) Tlie Comptroller may, in case of loss of the 
 original certificate, or in any other case in which 
 he deems it expedient, grant a copy or copies of the 
 certificate. 
 
 General.] Sects. 82-102 provide for the consti- 
 tution of the Patent Office and the proceedings 
 thereat, including the rectification and alteration ■ 
 of the register. 
 
 Sects. 103, 104 relate to International and Colo- 
 nial arrangements. 
 
 Sects. 105, 106, as to offences against the Act, 
 
 And see Patent — Statutes. 
 
 1. Article erroneously marked — Patents, 
 
 Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 57), 88. 51, m— Designs Rules, 1883, r. Si- 
 Costs — Innocent Infringer — Notice before Action.'] 
 Sect. 51 of the Patents, Designs, and Trade-marks 
 Act, 1883, appliesto the delivery on sale of articles 
 to which a design registered under the Act 5 & 6 
 Vict. 0. 100, has been applied, and the marking of 
 such goods since the Act of 1883 came into opera- 
 tion is regulated by that Act. Consequently, the 
 proprietor of a design registered under the Act 
 5 & 6 Vict. c. 100, is in a proper case entitled to 
 the benefit of the proviso contained in sect. 51, 
 which relieves him from the forfeiture of his 
 copyright resulting from the omission to mark the 
 articles with the prescribed mark, if he shews 
 that he " took all proper steps to ensure the 
 marking." — The proprietor of a registered design 
 instructed the manufacturer, who made for him 
 the articles to which the design was applied, to 
 stamp the proper mark upon them, and furnished 
 him with a die for the purpose. By inadvertence 
 the manufacturer marked some of the articles 
 with a mark which belonged to another design 
 registered by the same proprietor, the copyright of 
 which had expired, using for the purpose by 
 mistake an old die which remained in his posses- 
 sion, and the proprietor, after the Act of 1883 
 came into operation, sold some of the articles 
 thus wrongly marked without observing the error. 
 The letters Rd. formed part of both the marks : — 
 Held, that the proprietor had not forfeited his 
 copyright, but that he was protected by the 
 proviso in sect. 51. — Held, that an innocent 
 infringer of a registered^ design must pay the 
 costs of a motion for an injunction to restrain him 
 from infringing, though the Plaintiff had given 
 him no notice of the infringement before serving 
 him with the writ in the action. — Vpmann v. 
 Forester (24 Ch. D. 231) followed. Wittman v. 
 Oppenheim ■ 27 Ch. D. 260 
 
 2. New or Original Design — Patents, 
 
( 427 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 428 ) 
 
 II, COPYEIGHT— DESIGNS— confanMccZ. 
 Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 1883 (4:S & 47 Viet, 
 c. 57), s. 47.] A design is not a proper sub- 
 ject of registration under the Patents, Designs, 
 and Trade-marks Act, 1883, unless there is a 
 clearly marked and defined difference involving 
 substantial novelty between it and any design 
 previously in use. — A design for a shirt collar was 
 registered, the advantages claimed for which were 
 — the height of the collar above the stud which 
 fastened it in front, the cutting away of the comers 
 in a segment of a circle, and the absence of a band. 
 A collar was shewn to have been previously in 
 use which had no band, and in which the comers 
 were cut away in arcs of circles ; but the cxitting 
 away was not so wide, and the height above the 
 stud was not so great, as in the registered de- 
 sign : — Held, that the registered design was not 
 new or original within the meaning of the Act, 
 and must be removed from the register. Le Mat 
 ». Welch. In re Le Mat's Kegistebed Design 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 24 
 
 III. COPYEIGHT— DEAMATIC. 
 
 1. Place of Entertainment — 3 & 4 Wm. 4, 
 
 •c. 15, ss. 1, 2—5 & 6 Vict. c. 45, S8. 20, 21.] The 
 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 15, s. 1, gives the author of a 
 dramatic piece not printed or published the sole 
 liberty of representing it at any place of dramatic 
 entertainment, and sect. 2 enacts that if any 
 person shall, during the continuance of such sole 
 liberty, without the consent of the author, repre- 
 sent such piece at any place of dramatic entertain- 
 ment, " every such offender " , shall be liable for 
 each and every such representation to the pay- 
 ment of not less than 406. or to the full amount of 
 the benefit arising from such representation or the 
 loss sustained therefrom, whichever shall be the 
 greater damages. — The 5 & 6 Vict. c. 45, by sect. 
 20, enacts that the 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 15, shall apply 
 to musical compositions, and that the sole liberty 
 of representing any dramatic piece or musical 
 composition shall be the property of the author 
 and his assigns for the term then mentioned, and 
 by sect. 21 enacts that the person who shall have 
 such sole liberty of representing such dramatic 
 piece or musical composition, " shall have and 
 enjoy the remedies given and provided by 3 & 4 
 Wm. 4, c. 15, as if the same were re-enacted" in 
 that Act : — Seld, affirming the judgment of the 
 Queen's Bench Division (Cotton, L. J., dissenting), 
 that the person whose right under sect. 20 of 5 & 6 
 A'ict. u. 45, to such sole liberty of representing a 
 musical composition, has been infringed, is en- 
 titled to recover the penalty of 40s. given by 
 sect. 2 of 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 15, although such 
 musical composition has not been represented at 
 a place of dramatic entertainment. Wall v, 
 Taylok. Wall v. Mabtin 9 ft. B. D. 727 ; 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 102 
 
 2. Place of Entertainment — Performance 
 
 in Private Boom — Admission without Payment — 
 3 <£ 4 Wm. 4, o. 15, ss. 1, 2.] The Defendant and 
 others joined in representing a dramatic piece in a 
 room of an hospital, without the consent of the 
 proprietor of the copyright in the drama. The 
 performance was merely for the entertainment of 
 the nurses, attendants, and others connected with 
 the hospital, who were admitted free of charge : — 
 Held, by Brett, M.E., and Bowen, L.J. (Fry, L.J., 
 
 III. COPTEIGHT— DEAMATIC— coBiinuei^. 
 dissenting), that the room where the drama was 
 represented was not a place of public entertain- 
 ment, and consequently that the Defendant was 
 not liable to damages or penalties under 3 & 4 
 Wm. 4, c. 15, ss. 1, 2. — Judgment of the Queen's 
 Bench Division affirmed. Duck v. Bates 
 
 [la Q. B. D. 79 ; 13 ft. B. D. 843 
 
 3. Printing and Puhlishing — Musical 
 
 Composition — Acting or Performing — 3 & 4 Wm. 4, 
 c. 15, 8. 1—5 & 6 Vict. c. 45, ss. 2, 20, 22.] The 
 publication in this country of a dramatic piece, or 
 musical composition, as a book before it has been 
 publicly represented or performed does not deprive 
 the author of such dramatic piece or musical com- 
 position, or his assignee, of the exclusive right of 
 representing or performing it. Chappell r. 
 Booset - - 21 Ch. D. 232 
 
 IV. COPYEIGHT— MUSIC. 
 
 By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 40 (Copyright Musical 
 Compositions Act, 1882), s. 1, on and after tlie 
 passing of the Act (10th of August, 1882) the pro- 
 prietor of the copyright in any musical composition 
 first published after the passing of the Act, or his 
 assignee, who shall he entitled to and ie desirous 
 of retaining in his own hands exclusively the right 
 of public representation or performance of the 
 same, shall print or cause to be printed on the 
 titlepage of every published copy of such musical 
 composition a notice to the effect that the right of 
 public representation or performance is reserved. 
 
 Sect. 2. In case, after the passing of the Act, the 
 right of public representation or performance of, 
 and the copyright in, any musical composition shall 
 be or become vested before publication of any copy 
 thereof in different owners then, if the owner of 
 the right of public representation or performance 
 shall desire to retain the samz, lie shall, before any 
 such publication of any copy of such musical com- 
 position, give to the owner of the copyright therein 
 notice in writing requiring him to print upon 
 every copy of such musical composition a notice to 
 the effect that the right of public representation or 
 performance is reserved ; but in case the right of 
 public representation or performance of, and the 
 copyright in, any musical composition shall, after 
 publication of any copy thereof siibsequently to the 
 passing of the Act, first become vested in different 
 owners, and such notice as aforesaid shall have 
 been duly printed on all copies published after the 
 passing of the Act previously to such vesting, then, 
 if the owner of the right of performance and repre- 
 sentation shall desire to retain the same, he shaU, 
 before the publication of any further copies of such 
 musical composition, give notice in writing to the 
 person in wliom the copyright shall be then vested, 
 requiring him to print such notice as aforesaid o« 
 every copy of such musical composition to be tliere- 
 after published. 
 
 Sect. 3. If the owner for the time being of the 
 copyright in any musical composition shall, after 
 due notice being given to him or his predecessor in 
 title at the time, and generally in accordance with 
 the last preceding section, neglect or fail to print 
 legibly and conspicuously upon every copy of such 
 composition published by him or by his authority, 
 or by any person lawfully entitled to publish (lie 
 same, and claiming through or under him, a note 
 or memorandum stating that the right of public 
 
( 429 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 430 ) 
 
 IV. COVYUmwr—mjBIC— continued. 
 
 trepresentation or performance is reserved, tlien and 
 in such case the owner of the copyright at the time 
 of the happening of inch neglect or default, shall 
 forfeit and pay to the owner of the right of public 
 representation or performance of such composition, 
 the sum of £20 to be recovered in any Court of 
 competent jurisdiction. 
 
 Sect. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions ofS&i 
 Will. 4, c. 15, or any other Act in which those pro- 
 msions are incorporated, the costs of any action or 
 proceeding for penalties or damages in respect of 
 the unauthorized representation or performance of 
 •any musical composition published before the 10th 
 of August, 1882, shall in cases in which the plain- 
 tiff shall not recover more than 40s. as penalty or 
 damages, be in the discretion of the Court or judge 
 before wliom such action or proceeding shall be 
 tried. 
 
 T. COPYRIGHT— NEWSPAPEES. 
 
 Eegistration.] By the Newspaper Libel and 
 Registration Act, 18S1 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 60), s. 8, 
 a register of newspaper proprietors as defined by 
 Vie Act is to be established under the superintend- 
 ence of a Registrar. 
 
 Sect. 1 defines (inter alia) the word " news- 
 paper " to mean any paper containing public news, 
 intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarks or ob- 
 servations therein, printed for sale and published 
 in England or Ireland periodically, or in parts or 
 Slumbers, at intervals not exceeding twenty-six days 
 between the publication of any two stich papers, 
 parts, or numbers. 
 
 Also any paper printed in order to be dispersed 
 ■and made public weekly or oftener, or at intervals 
 not exceeding twenty-six days, containing only or 
 principally advertisements. 
 
 Tlie word "proprietor " to mean and include as 
 zoeTl the sole proprietor of any newspaper, as also, 
 in the case of a divided proprietorship, the persons 
 who, as partners or otherwise, represent and are 
 responsible for any share or interest in the news- 
 paper as between themselves and the persons in lilie 
 manner representing or responsible for the other 
 shares or interests therein, and no other person. 
 
 Sect. 7. Where in the opinion of the Board of 
 Trade inconvenience would arise or be caused in 
 any case from the registry of the names of all the 
 proprietors of the newspaper (either owing to 
 minority, coverture, absence from, the United King- 
 ■dom, minute subdivision of shares, or other special 
 ^lircmnstances) it shall be lawful for the Board of 
 Trade to authorize the registration of such news- 
 paper in the name or names of some one or more 
 responsible " representative proprietors." 
 
 Sect. 9. Printers and publishers of newspapers 
 to make annual returns on or before the Slst of 
 July in every year, according to scheduled form, 
 of:- 
 
 (a.) The title of a newspaper. 
 
 (b.) The names of all the proprietors of such 
 newspapers, together with their respective 
 occupations, places of business (if any), 
 and places of residence. 
 
 Sect. 10. Penalty for omitting to make annual 
 ■return within one month of the specified time. 
 
 Sect. 11. Power to any party to a transfer or 
 transmission of or dealing with any share of or 
 interest in any newspaper, whereby any person 
 
 V. COPYEIGHT —ISEVraTAB^na— continued, 
 ceases to be a proprietor, or any new proprietor is 
 introduced, at any time to make a return according 
 to a prescribed form. 
 
 Sect. 12. Penalty for knowingly and wilfully 
 making a misleading return. 
 
 Sect. 13. Register to be kept by registrar and to 
 be open to public inspection, &c., during business 
 hours. 
 
 Sect. 14. Fees to be paid in making returns and 
 for inspecting, &c., register. 
 
 Sect. 15. Copies of entries in and extracts from 
 register to be evidence. 
 
 Seat. 16. Penalties to be recoveredbefore a Court 
 of summary jurisdiction in manner provided by 
 the Summary Jurisdiction Acts; and summary 
 orders to be enforced in manner provided by sect. 
 34 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, which 
 section is made applicable to Ireland. 
 
 Sect. 17 defines a " court of summary jurisdic- 
 tion " and the expression " Summary Jurisdiction 
 Acts." 
 
 Sect. 18 provisions of the Act as to registration 
 of newspaper proprietors not to apply to any news- 
 paper which belongs to a joint stock company 
 incorporated under the Companies Acts, 1862 to 
 1879. 
 
 Eegistration — Newspaper Article — 
 
 Author — Injunction — Copyright Act (5 <fc 6 Vict. 
 
 0. 45).] A newspaper is within the Copyright 
 Act (5 & 6 Vict. c. 45), and requires registration 
 under that Act in order to give the proprietor the 
 copyright in its contents and so enable him to sue 
 in respect of a piracy. — Cox v. Land and Water 
 Journal Company (Law Eep. 9 Eq. 324) not 
 followed. — Also to enable the proprietor of a 
 newspaper to sue in respect of a piracy of any 
 article therein, he must shew, not merely that the 
 author of the article has been paid for his services, 
 but that it has been composed on the terms that 
 the copyright therein shall belong to such pro- 
 prietor. Walter v. Howe - 17 Ch. D. 708 
 
 VI. COPYEIGHT— PICTTTEES. 
 
 Photograph — " Author '' — Joint Authors 
 
 —Copyright Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 68), ss. 1, 
 4 — Amendment of Pleadings — Costs.'] A. and B. 
 carried on business in copartnership as photo- 
 graphers under the firm of the L. Company. They 
 did not take photogi-aphs themselves, but em- 
 ployed managers and a large staff of photographic 
 artists and assistants. One of their managers, 
 thinking that the photogi'aph of the Australian 
 Cricketers would sell well, arranged for the photo- 
 graphs to be taken without any payment being 
 made for taking them, and sent one of the artists 
 in the employ of the firm to take the negative. 
 From this negative the photograph was in the 
 usual way produced and sold by the firm in the 
 ordinary course of business ; and A. and B. regis- 
 tered themselves under the Copyright Act, 1862, 
 in their individual names as the proprietors and 
 authors of the photograph. In an action by the 
 firm to restrain the pirating of their copyright in 
 the photograph : — Held, that A. and B. were not 
 the authors of the photograph. — Semble, that the 
 person who took the negative was the author. — 
 Two or more persons may be registered under the 
 Act as the " authors " of a painting, or a drawing, 
 or a photograph ; but in such a case quxre, 
 
( 431 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 432 ) 
 
 VI. COPYEIGHT— PICTO U'ES—oontimied. 
 whether the copyright would subsist for the joint 
 lives of the authors, and seven years afterwards, 
 or for the lives and life of the survivors and sur- 
 vivor and seven years afterwards. Nottage v. 
 Jackson - - 11 Q. B, D. 627 
 
 COEN EETUENS. 
 
 Tlie Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 37 (the Corn Eeturns 
 Act, 1882), repeals 5 &6 Vict. c. 14, 27 & 28 Vict, 
 c. 87, and s. 56 of 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 71, and amends 
 the law respecting the obtaining of weekly returns 
 of purchases of British corn so as to ascertain the 
 average price of British corn. 
 
 COENEE HOUSE 27 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 3. 
 
 COENWALI — Company for working mine in. 
 
 See Cases under Compani — Cost-book 
 Company. 
 
 Duchy ■ — Intestacy — Administration — Evi- 
 dence - - 9 P. D. 63 
 See Administratok — Grant. 3. 
 
 COEOKEE. 
 
 Mistehaviour in Office — Unnecessary 
 
 Delay — Neglect or refusal to hold Inquest — Sudden 
 Death without Information as to Cause — Discre- 
 tion of Coroner as to holding Inquest.'] A coroner 
 is not justified in delaying the inquest upon a 
 dead body in a state of decomposition for so long 
 a period as five days in order that the body may 
 be identified, and buried and registered under 
 the right name, and the mere fact that it has been 
 placed in a mortuary can make no difference. — A 
 coroner received from the proper police authorities 
 a report with a view to an inquest, that a man 
 within his district, aged sixty-one, had been found 
 dead in his bed. It did not appear on the one 
 hand that there had been any previous disease or 
 illness, or on the other hand that there was any 
 suspicion of violence, suicide, or crime. A medical 
 man, moreover, refused to give a certificate of the 
 cause of death, and the friends and relatives of the 
 deceased made no objection to an inquest : — Beld, 
 that the coroner had, in the absence of further 
 information as to the cause of death, no discre- 
 tion to refuse to hold an inquest upon the ground 
 that it was unnecessary. In re Hull 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 689 
 
 Justice of the peace — Disqualification 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 613 
 See Justices — Disqitalification. 1. 
 
 Prevention of inquest — Burning dead body 
 
 [12 «. B. D. 247 ; 13 Q. B. D. 331 
 
 See Criminal Law — Misdemeanor. 1, 2. 
 
 COEPOEATE AND INCOEPOEATE BODIES— 
 
 Duty on. 
 
 See Eevekue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 COEPOEATION. 
 
 1. Action for Malioions Prosecution.] An 
 
 action for a malicious prosecution will lie against 
 an incorporated company. — Stevens v. Midland 
 Baihvay Company (10 Ex. 3.')2) not followed. — 
 The employment of a policeman by a company to 
 protect their property is an act within the scope 
 of the incorporation of the company. Edwards 
 V. Midland Eailway Company 6 Q. B. D. 287 
 
 COEPOEATION— cojiiinaed. 
 
 3. Borrowing Powers — Ultra vires.'] 
 
 The Eespondents were constituted a company by 
 an Act of Geo. 2, for the purpose of recovering 
 and preserving the navigation of the Biver Dee. 
 This Act was amended by subsequent Acts, but 
 none of them expressly authorized or forbade the 
 company to borrow, till the Act 14 & 15 Vict. 
 0. Ixxxvii., which, by sect. 24, empowered the 
 company to borrow at interest for the purposes of 
 their Acts upon bond or mortgage of the lands 
 recovered and inclosed by them, or partly upon 
 bond and partly upon such mortgage, a sum not 
 exceeding £25,000, and also a further sum, not 
 exceeding £25,000, upon mortgage of their tolls, 
 rates and duties : — Held, affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal, that whether the earlier Acts 
 gave an implied power to borrow or not, the 
 company was prohibited by the 14 & 15 Vict. 
 c. Ixxxvii. from borrowing except in accordance 
 with the provisions of that Act. — By Lord 
 Blackburn : — The law laid down by the House of 
 Lords in Ashbury Company v. Biche (Law Eep. 7 
 H. L. 653) applies to all companies created by any 
 statute for a particular purpose, and not only to 
 companies created under the Companies Act, 1862 
 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89). Baroness Wenlock v. 
 EivER Dee Company - 10 App. Cas. 354 
 
 3. Contract not under Seal — School Board 
 
 — Appointment of Architect — Orders to — Minutes 
 of Board duly signed — Validity^-33 & 34 Vict, 
 c. 75, s. 30, sub-ss. 1, 4, 6Sect. 35— Third Sche- 
 dule, 7.] By 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75 (the Elementary 
 Education Act, 1870), a. 30, sub-s. (1), " The school 
 board shall be a body corporate .... having 
 a perpetual succession and a common seal . , . ." 
 sub-seot. (4) " any minute made of proceedings at 
 meetings of the school board, if signed by ... . 
 the chairman .... shall be receivable in evidence 
 inall legal proceedings without further proof . . .." 
 sub-sect. (6) "the rules contained in the third 
 schedule . . . shall be observed." — By sect. 35 "a 
 school board may appoint a clerk and a treasurer 
 and other necessary officers . . . ." — By the Third 
 Schedule, 7, "the appointment of any officer of the 
 board may be made by a minute of the board, 
 signed by the chairman of the board, and countex- 
 signed by the clerk (if any) of the board, and any 
 appointment so made shall be as valid as if it were 
 made under the seal of the board." — By a minute 
 signed by the chairman of a school board and 
 countersigned by the clerk, the plaintiff was ap- 
 pointed architect of the board, and under orders 
 given by subsequent minutes so signed and counter^ 
 signed and communicated to him, he prepared 
 plans for the board : — Held, that by virtue of the 
 provisions of the Act he was entitled to recover 
 payment for his services although the appointment 
 and orders were not under seal. Soott.'p. Clifton 
 School Board - 14 Q. B. D. 600 
 
 Contract with. 
 
 See Cases under Local Government — 
 Local Authority. 1 — 8. 
 
 Municipal corporation — Eesignation of ofSea 
 
 — Power to withdraw resignation 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 908 
 See Municipal Corporation — Eesigna.- 
 
 TION. 
 
( 433 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 434 ) 
 
 COEPOEATION— conimtiecZ. 
 
 Discovery — Winding-up - 16 Ch. D. 58 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 1. 
 
 Income tax - - 8 App. Cas. 891 
 
 See Ebvenue — Income Tax. 6, 
 
 Law of Canada - ■ 7 App, Cas. 136 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 3. 
 
 Maintenance — Maliciously procuring bank- 
 ruptcy - 10 App. Cas. 210 
 See Champeett. 2. 
 
 COaSESPONDENCE— Ante litem motam 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 609 
 
 See Pkactice — -Supkeme Court — -Pko- 
 duotion of Documents. 27. 
 COBKOBOEATION— Claim against estate of de- 
 ceased person - 23 Ch, D, 267 
 See ExEcuTOK — Actions. 1 5. 
 
 Claim for separate estate - 21 Ch. D. 657 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Sepaeate 
 Estate. 3. 
 COKETJPT AND ILIEGAL PEACTICES PEE- 
 VENTION ACT, 1883 — Municipal 
 election. 
 
 See Municipal Cokpobation — Election 
 ■ — Statutes. 
 
 Parliamentary election. 
 
 ;See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 Parliamentary election — Repeal of dis- 
 qualification of certain persons 
 See Parliament — Redistribution of 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 COST-BOOK COMPANY. 
 
 See. Cases under Company — Cost-book 
 Company. 
 COSTS. 
 
 See Cflses under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Costs. 
 
 Action by debenture-holder 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 See Company— Debenture. 6. 
 
 Action in name of company 23 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Company — Dieectoe's Appoint- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Action of salvage — Commission on bail 
 
 [10 P. D, 158 
 See Practice — Admiealty — ■ Salvage. 
 6. 
 
 Administration action. 
 
 See Cases under Executor — Actions. 
 10—14. 
 
 Administration proceedings 29 Ch. D, 913 
 
 Bee Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 10. 
 
 • Administration action — BantruptDefendant 
 
 [21 Ch. S. 862, 866 
 /See Trustee— Costs AND Charges. 1,2. 
 , Administration action — Solicitors' [^Remu- 
 neration Act - 26 Ch, D. 155 
 See Solicitor— Bill of Costs. 21. 
 
 Admiralty. 
 
 See Cases under Practice— Admiralty 
 — Costs. 
 
 Afadavit— Prolixity - 21 Ch. D. 835 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 1. 
 
 COSTS — continued. 
 
 Appeal— Bankruptcy 16 Ch. D. 110 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 2. 
 Appeal — Cross notice 19 Ch, D. 17 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Appeal. 30. 
 Appeal — Scotch law - 6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law — Highway. 1. 
 Appeal for. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — ^Appeal. 24 — 33. 
 Appeal for - 19 Ch. D, 140 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 5. 
 Appeal for - - 18 Ch, D. 76 
 
 See Copyeisht — Books. 5. 
 
 Arbitration — Lands Clauses Act 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 345 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 1. 
 
 Assignment of bill of costs 12 Q. B. D. 518 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 719 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 4, 5. 
 Bankruptcy 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Costs. 
 
 Bankruptcy- Appeal - 25 Ch, D. 266 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Annulment. 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Appeal — Preliminary ob- 
 jection 13 Q. B. D. 42 ; 14 ft, B. D. 123 ; 
 [15 ft. B. D. 338 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 11, 12, 13. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Appeal — Creditors served 
 
 with notice - 14 ft. B, D. 936 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Discharge. 4. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Mortgagor and mortgagee — 
 
 Application by equitable mortgagee for 
 sale — Insufficient security — Costs of 
 trustee - 13 ft. B, D. 228 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 4. 
 
 Bankruptcy — OflScial receiver — Appearance 
 
 on appeal 13 ft. B. D. 118 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Receiver. 7. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Trustee served with notice of 
 
 appeal - - 14 ft. B, D. 121 
 
 See BANKRUPTCY' — Secured Creditor. 
 12. 
 
 Between solicitor and client 16 Ch. D. 393 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 7. 
 
 Board of Trade — Shipping casualty — 
 
 Appeal - - - 7P. D. 207 
 
 See Ship — ^Merchant Shipping Acts. 2. 
 
 Breach of sailing rules — Collision — Inevit- 
 able accident 6 P. D. 152 
 See Ship — Navigation. 11. 
 
 • Case stated by justices — Jurisdiction 
 
 [13 ft, B. D, 680 
 See Justices — Practice. 1. 
 
 Case stated by sessions— Practice 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 139> 
 See Poor-rate — Procedure. 4. 
 
 Copies of deed — Transfer of mortgage 
 
 ' [17 Ch, D. 348 
 See Mortgage — Redemption. 6. 
 
 Counsel — rAUowance of three counsel 
 
 [9 P. D. 126 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 6. 
 
C 435 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 436 ) 
 
 COSTS — coniinued. 
 County Court. 
 
 See Cases under County Couet — Costs. 
 ■ County Court — Statute respecting. 
 
 See CouNTT Cotjkt— Costs— Sta««<es. 
 — Country solicitor — Taxation 26 Ch. D. 189 
 
 See SoLioiTOE — Bill of Costs. 8. 
 Discretion of Court - - 22 Ch. S. 611 
 
 See Practice — Supbeme Court — Pay- 
 ment INTO Court. 1. 
 
 District registry — Administration action 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 242 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 trict Keqistrt. 
 
 Divorce— Attachment — Contempt 
 
 [10 P. D. 72 
 See Practice — ^Divorce — Eestitution 
 OP Conjugal Kishts. 2. 
 
 Divorce — Failure of husband to give security 
 
 for wife's costs— Debtors Act, 1869 
 
 [10 P. D. 183 
 See Arrest — Debtors Act. 2. 
 
 Divorce — Variation of settlements 
 
 [7 P. D. 228 ; 9 P. D. 122; 10 P. D. 179 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Settlements. 
 3, 5, 6. 
 
 Former action — Staying proceedings in 
 
 second action 23 Ch. D. 288 ; 25 Ch. D. 
 
 [12 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 9, 10. 
 
 Infringement of copyright — Innocent in- 
 fringer - 27 Ch. D. 260 
 See Copyright — Designs. 1. 
 
 Injunction against sheriff - 21 Ch. D. 69 
 
 See Sheriff. 4. 
 
 Interpleader — Appeal - 8 ft. B. D. 82 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 1. 
 
 Interpleader — Power of Master to order 
 
 Plaintiff to pay Defendant's costs 
 
 [12 ft. B. B. 100 
 See Practice — Suj>reme Court — ^Inter- 
 pleader. 9. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Costs. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act — Petition 24 Ch. D. 119 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps. 5. 
 
 Lien for — Solicitor and client. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor— Lien. 
 
 ■ MaiTied woman 
 See Husband 
 Estate. 10. 
 
 - 30 Ch. B. 159 
 
 Wife — Separate 
 
 Member of vestry 
 
 See Metropolis 
 15. 
 
 Mortgage — Adjom-nment to Judge 
 
 [22 Ch 
 See Mortgage— Contract. 7. 
 
 Mortgage suit 22 Ch. D. 666 ; 25 Ch. B. 796 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. B. 679 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 - 23Ch.B. 60 
 
 Management Acts. 
 
 . B. 6 
 
 COSti— continued. 
 
 Offences against women 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 Official liquidator - - 21 Ch. B. 381 
 
 See Company — Costs. 1. 
 
 Official receiver — Bankruptcy — Personal 
 
 liability — Unsuccessful appeal 
 
 [14 ft. B. B. 48 
 Bee Bankruptcy — Costs. 4. 
 
 Official solicitor - - 21 Ch. B. 776 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act— Costs. 5. 
 
 Order for payment — " Final judgment " — 
 
 Bankruptcy 12 ft. B. B. 509 ; 14 ft. B. B. 
 
 [627 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Aot op Bankruptcy. 
 10, 11. 
 
 Order for payment by solicitor — Appeal 
 
 [15 ft. E. B. 635 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 32. 
 
 Order in Chambers— Discretion — Appeal 
 
 [10 ft. B. B. 457 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 29. 
 
 Overseers of parish — Opposition to bill in 
 
 Parliament - - 14 ft. B. B. 358 
 
 See Poor Law — Management. 
 
 Patent action - - 29 Ch. D. 325, 366 
 
 See Patent — Practice. 2, 3. 
 
 Payment into Court — ^Denial of liability — 
 
 Action for several breaches of contract — ■ 
 Acceptance in satisfaction of all demands 
 [14 ft. B. B. 766 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment INTO Couet. 3. 
 
 ■ Payment by solicitorpersonally 19 Ch. B. 94 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Next 
 Feiend. 2. 
 
 ' Petition to vary settlements - 9 P. B. 122 
 
 See Practice — ^Divorce — Settlements. 
 7. 
 
 Practice in Chambers 20 Ch, D. 731 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 3. 
 
 Previous application - 25 Ch, B. 182 
 
 See Watercourse. 3. 
 
 Probate suit — Set-off against legacies 
 
 [18 Ch. B. 300 
 See Executor — Eetainee. 5. 
 
 Railway Commissioners — Successful Defend- 
 ant not liable to pay costs 8 ft. B, B. 515 
 See Railway Company — Railways Re- 
 gulation Acts. 2. 
 
 Reference — Award - - 9 ft. B, B, 434 
 
 See Arbitration — Costs. 
 
 Reference — Discretion of Court 10 P. B. 112 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 7. 
 
 Respondent to appeal 22 Ch. B. 484 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 86. 
 
 Salvage — Abandonment - 9 P. B. 27 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 9. 
 
( 437 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 438 ) 
 
 COSTS— continiied. 
 
 Salvage — AmoTint of tender 7 P. D. 199 
 
 See Peactiob — Admibalty — Salvage. 
 9. 
 
 Salvage — Tender after action 10 P. D. 1 
 
 See Peactioe — Admikalty — Costs. 8. 
 
 Security for. 
 
 See Cases imder Peactiob — Supeemb 
 CouET — Secueity foe Costs. 
 
 Security for — Action remitted to County 
 
 Court — Practice - 13 Q. B. D. 836 
 
 See OopNTY Coubt — iPbaotiob. 4. 
 
 Security for — Administration — MaiTied 
 
 Tvoman - 8 P. D. 18 
 
 See Peactiob — ^Peobate — Costs. 4. 
 
 Security for — -Appeal from ■winding-up order 
 
 See Company — ^Appbal [23 Ch. D. 370 
 
 Security for — ^Next Mend of married woman 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 94 
 See Peaotice — StrPEBiTB Cooet — Next 
 Feiend. 2. 
 
 Sequestration for - 17 Ch. D. 433 
 
 See Peactiob — Supebme Coubt — Se- 
 
 QUESTEATION. 3. 
 
 Settled Land Act - - 25 Ch. D. 651 
 
 See Settled Laot) Act — Pueohase- 
 
 MONEY. 3. 
 
 Sheriff - 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Foemalities. 6. 
 
 Shorthand notes - 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Fobmalitibs. 6. 
 
 Solicitor — Defendant in person 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 872 
 See Peaotice — Supeemb Coubt — Costs. 
 47. 
 
 Solicitor — Order to pay costs personally 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 635 
 See Peaotice — Supebme Coubt — Ap- 
 peal. 32. 
 
 Solicitor and client — County Court 18 Ch. D. 
 
 [521 ; 6 ft. B. D. 607; 9 ft. B, D. 408 
 See County Couet — Costs. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Solicitor and client — Taxation — ■ Bill of 
 
 costs. 
 
 See Cases under Solioitoe — Bill op 
 Costs. 
 
 Special directions as to — Appeal 26 Ch. D. 
 
 [614 
 See Peacticb — Supebme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 44. 
 
 Staying proceedings pending appeal 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 669 
 See Peaotice — Supeemb Couet — Stay- 
 ing Peoobedings. 13. 
 
 Supreme Court — ^Practice. 
 
 See Cases under Peaotice — Supbeme 
 Couet — Costs. 
 
 Taxation of bill of costs • - 27 Ch, D. 485 
 
 See Solioitoe — ^Bill of Costs. 6. 
 
 Tenant for life — Protection of estate 
 
 [16 Ch. D, 587, 588, n. 
 See Teustee Belief Act. 4, 5. 
 
 Third party - - 21 Ch. D, 198 
 
 See Peactiob — Supbeme Couet — Thied 
 Paety. 2. 
 
 COSTS— continued. 
 
 Trade-mark — Innocent consignee 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 231 
 See Teade-mabk — Infringement. 2. 
 
 Trustee. 
 
 See Cases under Teustee — Costs and 
 Chaeges. 
 
 Trustee — Administration action 29 Ch. D. 
 
 [495 
 See Peaotice — Supeemb Coubt — ^Ap- 
 peal. 26. 
 
 Trustee— Appeal - 19 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Void Settlement. 1. 
 
 Trustee in bankruptcy 6 App. Cas 482 
 
 See Peaotice — Peivy Council — Jueis- 
 
 DIOTION. 
 
 Trustee of void settlement 23 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See VoLUNTAEY Conveyance. 5. 
 
 Vendor and purchaser — Making out title 
 
 [28Ch. D. 84; 30 Ch. D. 42 
 
 See Vendoe and Puechasbk — Title. 1. 
 
 Victoria, Law of— Slander 10 App. Cas. 300 
 
 See Colonial Law — ^Victoria. 5. 
 
 When payable — Arbitration — -Lands Clauses 
 
 Act - - - 11 ft. B. D. 345 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 1. 
 
 Wife's costs payable by husband — Limita- 
 tion of amount ■ 6 P. D. 119 
 See Peactiob — D1VOBCE7— Costs. 4. 
 
 Will — Eesiduary legatee under prior will 
 
 [7 P. D. 239 
 See Peaotice — Probate — Costs. 3. 
 
 • Winding-up of company. 
 
 See Cases under Company- 
 
 ■COSTS. 
 
 Winding-up— Liquidation - 30 Ch. D. 598 
 
 See Bill oi? Exchange — Foebign Bill. 
 
 Winding-up petition 20 Ch. D. 276 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 65, 183 
 See CoMPAiTY — Winding-up Oedbe. 
 6, 7, 8. 
 
 Witness - 21 Ch. D. 831 
 
 See Evidence — Witness. 4. 
 
 Wreck Commissioner — Appeal — Shipping 
 
 casualty - - - 6 P. D. 188 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts. 8. 
 
 CO-SURETY — Indorsers of promissory note 
 
 [8 App. Gas. 733 
 
 See Bill op Exchange — Liability op 
 
 Parties. 
 
 ^— Eelease of one - 8 App. Cas. 755 
 
 5'ee Principal AND Surety — Discharge. 
 
 1.. 
 
 Bight to contribution 17 Ch. D. 44, 825 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 709 
 See pEmciPAL and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 1, 2, 3. 
 COUKSEI— Fees - - 16 Ch. D. 517 
 
 See Practice— Supbeme Coubt — Costs. 
 38. 
 
 Fees - - 30 Ch. D. 1 ; 15 ft. B. D. 420 
 
 See Solioitoe— Bill op Costs. 3, 14. 
 
 For witness — Winding-up of company 
 
 [20 Oh. S. 376 
 See Company — Evidence. 3. 
 
( 439 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 440 ) 
 
 COVSSEJj— continued. 
 
 Eequest for sale by — Married woman 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Pabtition Suit — Sale. 1. 
 COTTNTEE-CLAIM. 
 
 See Cases under Pbaotioe — Sdpkeme 
 CouET — Counter-claim. 
 Collision — Security for damages — Foreign 
 
 government 10 P. D. 33 
 
 See Pkaotice — Abmiealtt — Countek- 
 
 CLAIM. 
 
 Costs — Claim and counter-claim 6 Q. B. D. 
 
 [691 ; 10 Q. B. S. 286 ; 14 Q. B. D. 821 ; 
 [23 Ch. D. 377 
 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 10—13. 
 
 Default in pleading - 25 Ch. D. 68 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 2. 
 
 DiBoontinuance of action 11 ft. B. D. 464 
 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 continuance. 
 
 Salvage— Misconduct of salvors 8 P. D. 147 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 10. 
 Security for costs — Defendant out of juris- 
 diction - - - 15 ft. B. D. 423 
 See Practice — Supbemb Court — Se- 
 curity FOR Costs. 2. 
 
 Set-off — Winding-up of company 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 648 ; 9 App. Cas. 434 
 See Sale of Goods — Kescission 2. 
 
 Specific performance — Transfer to Chancery 
 
 Division - - 13 ft. B. D. 640 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trans- 
 fer. 2. 
 COTTNTEEFEIT MARK — Silver wares — Party 
 grieved - 7 ft. B. D, 465 
 
 See Penal Action. 1. 
 
 COUNTEEPEIT MEDAL ACT, 1883. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Coining — Statutes. 
 COUNTY — Dead bodies cast on shore by sea — 
 
 Expenses of burial - 6 ft. B. D. 654 
 
 See Burial Geound. 2. 
 Highway — Distirrnpiked road. 
 
 See Cases under Highway — Befaie. 2-6. 
 
 Main roads — Expense of removing snow 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 480 
 
 See Highway — Ebpair. 3. 
 Number of members — Parliament 
 
 See Parliament — Kedisteibution of 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 
 COUNTY COUET:— 
 I. Appeal 
 II. Costs 
 
 III. JUEISDIOTION 
 
 IV. Peactice 
 
 Col. 
 439 
 440 
 441 
 443 
 
 I. COUNTY COUET— APPEAL. 
 
 1. Leave of Judge — Discretion of Judge 
 
 under 30 & 31 Vict. c. 142, s. 13.] A County Court 
 judge having given a Defendant leave to appeal, 
 but subject to a condition that he should pay the 
 Plaintiff's costs of the appeal in any event, and 
 should also, in case the appeal were unsuccessful, 
 pay the costs of the trial upon the higher scale, 
 
 I. COUNTY COUET— APPEAL— conimtted;. 
 
 the Divisional Court held that it had no power to 
 interfere with the discretion vested in him by 
 30 & 81 Vict. c. 142, s. 13. Goodes v. Clufp 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 694 
 
 2, Point not raised at Trial — Condition 
 
 Precedent^County Courts Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vid. 
 c. 50), s. 6.] It is a condition precedent to the 
 right to appeal under sect. 6 of the County Courts- 
 Act, 1875, that the question of law upon which 
 it ia desired to appeal should have been raised 
 before the County Court Judge at the trial. Claek- 
 SON V. Musgbave - 9 ft. B. D. 386 
 
 3. Eequest to Judge to take Note — Appli- 
 cation to compel Judge to sign Note or to hear Case 
 — Adjournment of Trial in County Court — 38 4 39 
 Vict. c. 50, s. 6 — Order XXXTII., rule 26 of County 
 Court Mules, \S15—AppeaU-\^ & 20 Vict. e. 10^•, 
 s. 44.] Kule 26 of Order xxxvii."of the County 
 Court Eules, 1875, whicli enables parties to a 
 County Court action, " at any time before the 
 action is called on, by consent and without pay- 
 ment of any trial fee, to postpone the trial to 
 such subsequent Court as the Judge shall direct," 
 does not enable such parties to adjourn the trial 
 without the consent of the Judge ; and therefore 
 where, after a cause has been adjourned by the 
 Judge, the parties by agreement amongst them- 
 selves further adjourn the trial without the sanc- 
 tion of the Judge, he has jurisdiction to hear and 
 dispose of the cause as if there had been no such 
 further adjournment. — A request to a County 
 Court Judge, at the commencement of the trial, 
 and before any specific question of law has been 
 raised, that he should take a note of the evidence, 
 as it was an important case and might go to the 
 superior Court, is not a sufficient request within 
 tbe meaning of sect. 6 of the Countv Courts Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 50) ; and therefore a not& 
 which the Judge afterwards took, and which he 
 stated was an incomplete one, and not such as 
 he would have taken if he had been requested to> 
 take a note of any specific question of law and of 
 the evidence in relation thereto, is not a note taken 
 under that section which the Court will order him 
 to sign. — The right to appeal from an order of a 
 Divisional Court, discharging a rule for an order 
 on a County Court judge to hear an action, is not 
 taken away because sect. 44 of 19 & 20 Vict. c. IDS, 
 which substitutes such rule for a mandamus to 
 the County Court judge, enacts that, where any 
 superior Court shall have refused such rule, no 
 other superior Court shall grant it. Morgan v. 
 Rees - - 6 ft. B. S. 89, 503 
 
 ■ Prohibition 8 ft. B. D. 9 
 
 See County Couet — Peactice. 5. 
 
 II. COUNTY COUETS— COSTS, 
 
 Tlie Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 57, sect. 2, repeals so 
 much of sect. 91 of the County Courts Act, 1846, as 
 was then still in force ; and in lieu thereof enacts 
 that no person other than a solicitor of the Supreme 
 Court shall he entitled to have or recover any fee or 
 reward for appearing or acting on behalf of any 
 other party in any proceeding in a County Court ; 
 provided that nothing in the Act contained shall 
 affect the right of any harrister-at-law to appear or 
 act in any County Court, or of any solicitor of the 
 Supreme Court to recover costs in respect of his 
 
( 441 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 442 ) 
 
 II. COUNTY COVRT—COS^a— continued. 
 
 ■employment of a barrister-at-law to appear or act 
 •as aforesaid. 
 
 By sect. 4 the 5th section of 30 & Vict, c. 142 
 shall he read and construed as if the words " less 
 than" were substituted for the words "not ex- 
 ceeding." 
 
 Sect. 5. Notwithstanding any Act of Parliament 
 or any rule to the contrary, it shall be in the power 
 of the judge of a County Court to award costs on 
 the higher scale to the Plaintiff on any amount re- 
 covered, however small, or to the Defendant who 
 successfully defends an action brought for any 
 amount, however small, provided the said Judge 
 ctrtify that the action involved some novel or diffi- 
 cult point of law, or that the question litigated loas 
 of importance to some class or body of persons, or 
 of general or pvhlic interest. 
 
 1. — ^ — Action under £20 — Worh done before 
 andafter Action — County Courts Act, 1875(38 & 39 
 Vict. c. 50), s. 8 ; 19 <fe 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 36.] The 
 scale of costs and charges in actions In the County 
 Court under £20 framed in pursuance of 38 & 39 
 Vict. c. 50, a. 8, does not prevent a solicitor from 
 recovering charges other than those specified in 
 the scale for work done out of Court before and 
 after the commencement of an action, although 
 there has been no agreement in writing for further 
 costs under 19 & 20 Vict. o. 108, s. 36. Be Emanukl 
 & Co. 9 Q. B. D. 408 
 
 2 Between Solicitor and Client — Limit 
 
 where not more than £20 claimed — County Courts 
 A£t, 1856 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 108), s. 36.] The 
 36th section of the County Courts Act, 1856, which 
 fixes a limit to costs, as between solicitor and 
 client, in actions where not more than £20 is 
 claimed, applies to County Court actions only. 
 In re Copp - - - 6 Q. B. D. 607 
 
 3. Between Solicitor and Client — Taxa- 
 
 Hon — Jurisdiction of Sigh Court — Attorneys and 
 Solicitors Act, 1843 (6*7 Vict. c. 73), s. 37— 
 County Courts Act, 1856 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 108), 
 ss. 35, 3G— Judicature Act, 1873 (36 <fe 37 Vict. 
 c. 66), s. 16— County Courts Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Vict. c. 50), s. 8 — County Courts Bules, 1875, Order 
 xxxTi., r. 1.] By the combined operation of the 
 Attorneys and Solicitors Act, 1843 (6 & 7 Vict, 
 c. 73), s. 37, and the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 16, 
 as modified by the County Courts Act, 1856, s. 36, 
 the costs as between solicitor and client in a 
 ■County Com-t action in which the claim exceeds 
 £20 may be taxed in the High Court of Justice ; 
 consequently, the costs as between solicitor and 
 client in a County Court administration action may 
 ■fee taxed in the Chancery Division. In re Worth 
 
 [18 Ch. D. Sai 
 
 III. COUNTY COUET— JURISDICTION. 
 
 Districts.] Order in Council of 23rd of August, 
 1883, respecting limits of certain districts of County 
 .Courts - - L. G. 1883, p. 4210 
 
 Judges ] Bank and precedence of County Court 
 Judges. August 7th, 1884 - L. G. 1884, p. 3569 
 
 1_ Admiralty — Action for Necessa/ries — 
 
 British Ship — Owners domiciled in Great Britain 
 
 County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 1868 
 
 (31 & 32 Vict. V. 71), s. 2— County Courts Admi- 
 ralty Jurisdiction Amendment Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 51), ss. 2, 3.j A County Court having 
 
 III. COUNTY COURT— JURISDICTION— co««. 
 
 Admiralty jurisdiction has no greater jurisdiction 
 in respect of a claim for necessaries than that pos- 
 sessed by the Admiralty Division of the High 
 Court, and consequently cannot entertain an action 
 for necessaries supplied to a British ship, the 
 owners of which are domiciled in Great Britain. 
 —The Dowse (Law Kep. 3 A. & B. 135) followed. 
 — The Alina (5 Ex. D. 227) distinguished. Allek 
 V. Gakbtjtt - - 6 Q. B. D. 165 
 
 2. Admiralty — Claim in relation to the 
 
 carriage of Goods in any Ship — County Courts 
 Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Viet, 
 c. 71), s. 3 — County Courts Admiralty Jurisdic- 
 tion Act Amendment Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 51), s. 2.] A Court having County Court Ad- 
 miralty jurisdiction under the County Courts 
 Admiralty Acts, 1868 and 1869, has jurisdiction 
 to try and determine an action at the suit of 
 the holder of a bill of lading against a British 
 ship to recover for a breach of the contract of 
 carriage in the bill of lading, notwithstanding that 
 it is shewn to the Court that at the time of the 
 institution of the suit the owner of the ship pro- 
 ceeded against was domiciled in England or 
 Wales. — The Cargo ex Argos (Law Eep. 5 P. C. 
 134) and The Alina (5 Ex.'D. 227) followed. • The 
 " Edna " - - 7 P. D. 247 
 
 3. Admiralty— Ckim in relation to the 
 
 carriage of Goods in any Ship — City of London 
 Court— Passengers' Luggage — County Courts Ad- 
 miralty Jurisdiction Amendment Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 51), s. 2.] Passengers' luggage carried on 
 board a ship is not " goods " within the meaning 
 of the County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction 
 Amendment Act, 1869, and consequently the Act 
 does not confer jurisdiction to try a claim arising 
 out of the loss of such luggage on a County Court 
 having Admiralty jurisdiction. The Queen v. 
 JuDSE OP City of LoNDO^f Court 12 Q. B. D. 115 
 
 4. Admiralty — Claims under Charter- 
 parties — Maritime Causes — Actions under £50 — 
 County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 1868 
 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 71), ss. 3, 5— County Courts Ad- 
 miralty Jurisdiction Amendment Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
 Vict. a. 51), s. 2.] The statutes 31 & 32 Vict. c. 71, 
 and 32 & 33 Vict. c. 51, do not deprive County 
 Courts not having Admiralty jurisdiction of their 
 jurisdiction to try actions to recover freight under 
 charterparties where the amount claimed is less 
 than £50. The Queen v. Judge or the South- 
 end County Court - 13 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 6. Contempt — Interlocutory Order en- 
 forced by Committal — Judicature Act, 1873 
 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 89, Order XLii., r. 5.] The 
 power of a County Court under the Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 89, in actions within the jurisdiction 
 to enforce obedience to its orders by committal 
 extends to interlocutory as well as to final orders. 
 
 BlOHAEDS V. CULLERNE - 7 ft, B. D. 623 
 
 6. Mandamus — Brighton Intercepting and 
 
 Outfall Sewers Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. c.)— 
 Mandamus to the Judge of the Sussex County Court 
 to hear and determine a Dispute between the Sewers 
 Board and the Hove Commissioners, under s. 93 
 of the Act.] By sect. 93 of 33 & 3i Vict. c. c, an 
 Act the main object of which was the diverting of 
 the sewage of Brighton fromjhe existing storm- 
 
( 443 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 444 ) 
 
 III. COUNTY COUST— JURISDICTION— co«M, 
 
 outfalls and carrying it to a distance from the 
 town, — it was enacted that " any dispute which 
 might frona time to time arise between the sewers 
 board and any local authority with respect to 
 carrying into effect the provisions of the Act or 
 incidental thereto might, at the instance of either 
 party, be referred to the Judge for the time being 
 of the Sussex County Court, who should hear and 
 determine such dispute, and whose decision should 
 be final and conclusive." — A dispute having arisen 
 between the sewers board and the Hove Commis- 
 sioners (one of the local authorities) with respect 
 to the mode of carrying out the provisions of the 
 Act, and the sewers board requiring it to be re- 
 ferred to the County Court Judge : — Seld, that the 
 County Court Judge was bound to hear and deter- 
 mine the matter, and that mandamus was the 
 proper course to compel him to do so, and not a 
 rule or order under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 43,— 
 this not being a matter within his ordinary juris- 
 diction, but a special duty imposed upon him by 
 statute. Re Brighton Sewees Act 9 Q. B. D. 723 
 
 7. Transfer to County Court — Action sent 
 
 from tlie High Court — Fower to stay Proceedings 
 —30 & 31 Vict. c. 142 s. 10.] Where an action, 
 commenced in the High Court, has been trans- 
 ferred to a County Court under 30 & 31 Vict. 
 c. 142, s. 10, the County Court Judge has power 
 to make an order staying the proceedings untU 
 the Plaintiff has paid the costs of a previous 
 action brought by him in the High Court against 
 the same Defendant. The Queen v. Batlet 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 411 
 
 8. Transfer to County Court — Action sent 
 
 for Trial from the High Court — Action for Un- 
 liquidated Damages — Indor'sement of Amount of 
 Claim upon Writ—IQ & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 26.] 
 There is no power under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 26, 
 of the Judicature Act, 1875, to order an action 
 for unliquidated damages to be tried in a County 
 Court, even where the writ is indorsed with a 
 claim for a specified sum. Knight v. Abbott 
 
 [10 a. B. D. 11 
 
 IV. COUNTY COURT— PEACTICE. 
 
 The County Couet Bcles of 1886, mode the 7th 
 Hecemler, 1885, under 19 * 20 Tict. c. 108, s. 32, 
 
 EEFEK TO THE EOLLOWraG MATTEKS : — 
 
 0. 1. Court and offices. 
 
 0. 2. Officers. 
 
 0. 3. PaHies. 
 
 0. 4. Joinder of causes of action. 
 
 0. 5. Commencement of action. 
 
 0. 6. Particulars and statement of claim. 
 
 0. 7. Plaint note and summons. 
 
 0. 8. Consolidation of actions or stay of pro- 
 
 0. 9. Discontinuance, confession, admission, and 
 payment into or out of Court. 
 
 0. 10. Specicd defences. 
 
 0. 11. Claim for contribution, invUmnity, &c. 
 
 0. 12. Interlocutory and interim: orders and 
 proceedings. 
 
 0, 13. Receiver. 
 
 0. 14. Amendment. 
 
 0. 15. Application for directions. 
 
 0. 16. Discovery and inspection. 
 
 0. 17. Change of parties. 
 
 IV. COUNTY COURT— PRACTICE— coiieinueti. 
 
 0. 18. Evidence. 
 
 0. 19. Affidavits, 
 
 0. 20. Arbitration. 
 
 0. 21. Assessors (County Courts Act, 1875). 
 
 0. 22. Trial. 
 
 0. 23. Judgments and orders. 
 
 0, 24. Accounts and inquiries. 
 
 0. 25. Enforcement of judgments and orders. 
 
 0. 26. Attachment of debts. 
 
 0. 27. Interpleader. 
 
 0. 28. Transmission of proceeds of warrants 
 from foreign districts. 
 
 0. 29. Security. 
 
 0. 30. Proceedings by and against executors and 
 administrators. 
 
 0. 31. New trial. 
 
 0. 32. Appeals. 
 
 0. 33. Actions or matters remitted from or 
 transferred to the High Court of Justice, 
 
 0. 34. Replevin. 
 
 0. 35. Bills of Exchange Act, 1855. 
 
 0. 36. Registry of judgments. 
 
 0. 37. Funds (County Courts Act, 1865). 
 
 0. 38. Trustee Belief Acts, the Settled Lancl 
 Act, 1882, the County Courts Act, 1867, s. 24. 
 
 0. 39. Admiralty actions. 
 
 0. 40. Agricultural Holdings (England) Acts, 
 1875 and 1883. 
 
 0. 41. The Friendly Societies Act, 1875, d-c. 
 
 0. 42. Winding-up of companies and societies. 
 
 0. 43. The Local Loans Act, 1875. 
 
 0. 44. The Employers Liability Act, 1880. 
 
 0. 45. Inferior Courts Judgments Extension Act, 
 1882. 
 
 0. 46. Married Women's Property Act, 1882. 
 
 0. 47. Acknowledgments by married women. 
 
 0. 48. Charitable Trusts. 
 
 0. 49. Probate or Letters of administration, 
 
 0. 50. CosU. 
 
 0. 51. General provisions. 
 
 0. 52. Interpretation of terms. 
 
 1. Interpleader — Deposit — Bequest — Sale 
 
 by High Sailiff—19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 72— 
 30 (6 31 Vict. c. 142, s. 31— County Court Order 
 XXL, r. 1.] Under Order xxi., rule 1, of the 
 County Courts Orders and Rules, 1875, it is not 
 necessary for the high bailiff, before selling gooda 
 seized in execution and claimed, to request the 
 claimant to deposit the amount of tlie value of 
 the goods or possession money, and, if no such 
 deposit be made, the high bailiff is entitled 
 under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108 (the County Courts 
 Act, 1856), s. 72, to sell the goods without first 
 applying for an interpleader summons under 
 30 & 31 Viet. c. 142 (the County Courts Act, 
 1867), s. 31. Davies v. Wise ; Cbamee & Co., 
 Claimants ; Cramer v Matthews 7 ft. B. D. 425 
 
 3. Nautical Assessors — Admiralty Juris- 
 diction Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict, c 71), ss. 3, 11-1 
 Nautical assessors summoned under the County 
 Courts Admii-alty Jurisdiction Act, 1868, to attend 
 at the hearing of an Admiralty action tried by a 
 County Court Judge, are present merely to advise 
 the Judge, and the Judge ought to decide the 
 case in accordance with his own opinion as to 
 the law and merits of the case. The " Aid " 
 
 [6 P. D. 84 
 
 3. Nonsuit— OrcJcr.VTZ, rule 17 of County 
 
( 445 ) 
 
 IV. COUNTY COTTET— PEACTICE 
 
 Court Orders, 1875— Authority to malce such Rule 
 —County Courts Act, 1856 (19 & 20 Viot. c. 108), 
 s. 32.] By Order xvi., rule 17, of County Court 
 Orders, 1875, "any judgment of nonsuit, unless 
 the Judge otherwise directs, shall have the same 
 effect as a judgment upon the merits for the De- 
 fendant." Such rule is a copy of Order XLi., 
 rule 6, of the Judicature Orders, and was made by 
 a committee of County Court Judges with the 
 approval of the Lord Chancellor under the autho- 
 rity of sect. 32 of the County Courts Act, 1856 
 (19 & 20 Vict" c. 108), which authorizes such 
 Comity Court Judges with such approval to frame 
 rules and orders for "regulating the practice of 
 the Courts and- forms of proceedings therein.: " — • 
 Seld, that unless rule 17 of the County Court 
 Orders was ultrb, vires a judgment of nonsuit in a 
 County Court not appealed against nor set aside, 
 was a bar to an action by the Plaintiff for the 
 same debt in the superior Court. Seld, also 
 (Bramwell, L. J., dissenting), that rule 17 was not 
 ultrk vires but was covered by the authority given 
 to the committee of County Court Judges by the 
 County Courts Act, 1856, s. 32. Potser v. Minors 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 329 
 
 4. Security for Costs — Remission of Action 
 
 to County Court — " Visible Means " of Plaintiff — 
 County Courts Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. e. 142), 
 s. 10.] By the lerm " visible means " as used in 
 sect. 10 of the County Courts Act, 1867, is intended 
 such means as could be fairly ascertained by a 
 reasonable person in the position of the Defen- 
 dant. — On the filing of the affidavit the jurisdiction 
 of the Judge arises, and he is to satisfy himself 
 not merely whether the Plaintiff has any " visible 
 means," but whether he has any means at all of 
 paying the costs, and the Judge has a judicial 
 discretion whether he will make the order. — On 
 an application under sect. 10 of the County Courts 
 Act, 1867, it appeared from the affidavit that the 
 Defendant was in possession of certain property 
 of the Plaintiff under a claim for rent for £5929, 
 that the Plaintiff had no property upon which an 
 execution under a judgment for £2404 could be 
 levied, that his furniture had been sold under an 
 execution, and that he had assigned his property 
 for the benefit of his creditors. It also appeared 
 that the Plaintiff was being employed as a colliery 
 manager at a weekly wage of £4, the employment 
 being determinable on three months' notice, or on 
 payment of three months' salary in lieu of notice, 
 or without notice in the event of wilful miscon- 
 duct : — Held, that, whether or not the salary could 
 be attached, the Plaintiff had no substantial means 
 of paying the costs of the action in the event of 
 the verdict being for the Defendant, and that an 
 order was rightly made under s. 10. — Counsel v. 
 Garvie (Ir. it. 5 0. L. 74) considered. Lea «. 
 Parker - - 13 ft. B, D. 835 
 
 5, Time — Action to recover Lands — De- 
 livery of Summons to Bailiff — County Court Rules, 
 1875, Order Yili., r. 7 — Jurisdiction — Appeal — 
 Prohibition.'] By Order vin., rule 7, of the 
 County Court Kules, 1875, " the summons in an 
 action brought to recover lands shall be delivered 
 to the Bailiff forty clear days at least before 
 the return day, and shall be served thirty-five 
 clear days before the return day thereof." The 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 446 ) 
 
 IV. COUNTY COURT— PEACTICE— co»«m«e(Z. 
 Plaintiff in an action in the County Court to re- 
 cover lands delivered the summons to the bailiff 
 thii'ty-nine clear days and the bailiff served it 
 upon the Defendant thirty-eight clear days, before ' 
 the return day. At the hearing the County Court 
 Judge ruled that the service was good, and tried 
 the case, giving judgment for the Plaintiff:— 
 Held, that the provision in rule 7 with respect to 
 the time of delivering tlie summons to the bailiff 
 was obligatory, and not merely directory, and 
 therefore that the Judge ought not to have tried 
 the case. Held, also, that the Defendant's proper 
 remedy was to appeal from the Judge's ruling, 
 and not to apply for a prohibition against the 
 issue of execution on the judgment. Barker v. 
 Palmer - _ 8 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 6. Trial — Right of Defendant to sum up 
 
 Eoidence—n & 18 Vict. c. 125, s. 18.] An action 
 remitted from the Queen's Bench Division to a 
 County Court was tried before the County Court 
 Judge with a jury. After the Defendant's evidence 
 had closed his counsel claimed to address the 
 jury, but the Judge refused to allow it. The 
 jury having given a verdict for the Plaintiff the 
 Defendant applied for a rule nisi for a new trial 
 on the ground that his counsel ought to have been 
 allowed to sum up the evidence : — Held, affirming 
 the decision of a Divisional Court, that as the 
 right claimed did not exist at common law, and- 
 the 18th section of the Common Law Procediire 
 Act, 1854, which gave such a right in the superior 
 Courts, did not apply to County Courts, there was 
 no ground for interfering- with the practice of any 
 County Court in which the Defendant was not 
 allowed to sum up the evidence. Dymock v. 
 Watkins - - 10 Q. B. D. 451 
 
 COUNTY COUET— Action remitted for trial— Costs 
 — Order Lxv., rr. 1, 4 - 14 Q. B. D. 6 
 
 See Practice — Sdprbme Court — Costs. 
 20. 
 
 Action remitted — New trial 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 55 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — New 
 Trial. 2. 
 
 Action remitted for trial — Trial before judge 
 
 without jury - - 12 Q. B. D. 21 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — New 
 Trial. 1. 
 
 Admiralty jm-isdiction — Costs — Certificate 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 46 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 21. 
 
 Admiralty jurisdiction — Dock 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 609 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Admiralty — Appeal - - 9 P. D. 12 
 
 See Practice — ^Admiralty — Appeal. 
 1. 
 
 Appeal — Notice of motion 13 Q. B. D. 403 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 7. 
 
 Bankruptcy— Appeal 16 Ch. D. 601 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 169 ; 20 Ch, D. 315, 701 
 See Bankruptcy— Appeal. 6—9. 
 
( 447 ) 
 
 COUNTY COVRT— continued. 
 
 • Bankruptcy— Contempt 13 ft. B. D, 963 
 
 See Bankbuptct— JcKisDiCTiON. 2. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Power to restrain proceedings 
 
 in High Court - 15 ft. B. D. 169 
 
 See Bankkcptoy — Staying Pkoceed- 
 
 INGS. 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy • — Transfer of proceedings — 
 
 Certificateof judge — Discretion — Appeal 
 —Costs - 13 ft. B. D. 484 
 
 See Bankbuptot— Tkansfek. 1. 
 
 Costs — Breach of promise to marry — Verdict 
 
 in High Court for £20 14 ft. B. D. 53 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 19. 
 
 Employers' Liability Act — Action of tort — 
 
 Stay of proceedings 14 ft. B. D . 905 
 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 11. 
 
 Employers' Liability Act — Certiorari to 
 
 remove action - - 10 ft. B. D. 59 
 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 10. 
 
 ■^^ Motion for new trial — Improper rejection of 
 evidence - - 12 ft. B. D. 58 
 
 See Practioe — Supreme Court — New 
 Trial. 3. 
 
 Transfer of action - 27 Ch. D. 533 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Juris- 
 diction. 3. 
 Transfer of action — Appeal to Court of Ap- 
 peal - 8 ft. B. D. 325 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 6. 
 
 COUNTY COUET EUtES, 1875— Order VIII. r. 7 
 
 [8 ft. B. D. 9 
 
 See County Court — Practice. 5. 
 
 Order XVI., r. 17 - - 7 ft. B. D. 329 
 
 See County Court — Practice. 3. 
 Order XX., r. 1 - - 27 Ch, D. 533 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Cocbt — Jueis- 
 
 DICTION. 3. 
 
 Order XXI., r. 1 - 7 ft. B. D. 425 
 
 See County Court — ^Practice. 1. 
 Order XXXVII., r. 26 - 6 ft. B, D. 508 
 
 See County Court — Appeal. 3. 
 
 COUNTY COUET EULES, 1884— Eules 1-4 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 329 
 
 See Arrest — Debtors Act. 3. 
 
 COUNTY EATE — Criminal lunatic — Maintenance 
 of - 6 ft. B. D. 47; 8 App. Cas. 339 
 
 See Lunatic — Criminal. 
 
 Expenses of conveyance of prisoners 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 156 ; 7 App. Cas. 1 
 See Prison. 2. 
 Expenses of maintaining highway — Contri- 
 bution. 
 
 See Cases under Highway — Eepaie. 
 1—6. 
 
 COUNTY STOCK— Duty on. 
 
 See Eevenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 COUNTY VOTE— Occupation franchise. 
 
 &e Parliament — Franchise— Stafuies. 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 448 ) 
 
 COUNTY VOTE— continued. 
 
 Eent-charge — Actual possession — 2 & 3 Wm. 
 
 4, 0. 45, s. 26 12 ft. B. D. 369 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 11. 
 
 Kent-charge for life or lives below £5 
 
 [12 ft. B. S. 365 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 12. 
 
 COUPONS — Foreign — Income tax on. 
 
 See Eevenue — Income Tax — Statutes. 
 
 COUET :— Col. 
 
 I. Statutes and Gazettes - - 448 
 
 II. Central Criminal Court - - 452 
 
 III. Lancaster Court - - _ 452 
 
 rv. Mayor's Court _ _ _ 452 
 
 Admiralty Court. 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty. 
 
 County Court. 
 
 See County Court. 
 
 Court op Revision. 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 
 
 Divorce Court. 
 
 See Practice — Divorce. 
 
 ■ Ecclesiastical Court. 
 
 See Practice— Ecclesiastical. 
 
 Privy Council. 
 
 See Practice — Privy Council. 
 
 Stannaries Court. 
 
 See Compab-y — Oost-eook Company. 
 
 Supreme Court. 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet. 
 
 I. COUET— STATUTES AND GAZETTE. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 68 (the Supreme Court 
 of Judicature Act, 1881), amends the constitution 
 of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, and makes 
 further provision concerning the Supreme Court 
 of Judicature and the officers thereof, and other 
 matters. 
 
 Sect. 2. Master of the Soils to he a Judge of 
 Appeal only. 
 
 Sect. 3. Existing vacancy in Court of Appeal 
 not to he filled up. 
 
 Sect. 4. President of Prolate, &c.. Division to be 
 an ex-officio Judge of the Court of Appeal. 
 
 Sect. 5. A new Judge of High Court to be ap- 
 pointed instead of Master of the Bolls. 
 
 Sect. 6. Judges of Chancery Division to be not 
 Uss than five in number. 
 
 Sect. 7. Bolls Court Chambers and clerics, &c., to 
 be attached to a Judge of the Chancery Division. 
 
 Sect. 8 amends sect. 4 of the Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1877. 
 
 Sect. 9. As to appeals under Divorce Acts. 
 
 Sect. 10. As to appeal against decree nisi for 
 dissolution or nullity of marriage. 
 
 Sect. 11. Qualification of Judges of divisional 
 Courts to sit on appeals. 
 
 Sect. 12. In cases of urgency, iUness, &c., one 
 Judge may officiate for another. 
 
 Sect. 13. Judges for trial of election petitions to 
 be selected from Queen's Bench Division. 
 
 Sect. 14. As to jurisdiction of High Court ore 
 appeals on questions of law in municipal and 
 parliamentary, borough registration, and election 
 cases. 
 
 Sect. 15. Fire or more of the Judges of tlie High 
 
( 449 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 450 ) 
 
 I. COURT— STATTTTES AND GAZETTE— oonfd. 
 Court may exercise the jurisdiction and authority 
 in relation to questions of law arising in criminal 
 trials which under sect. 47 of the Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1873, is vested in stick Judges. 
 
 Sect. 16. Proceedings with regard to nomination 
 of sheriffs. 
 
 Sect. 17. Presentation and swearing in of Lord 
 Mayor of London. 
 
 Sect. 18. As Infixing sessions of Central Criminal 
 ■Court. 
 
 Sect. 19. Power to make rules under 39 & 40 
 Vict. c. 59. 
 
 Sect. 20 extends sect. 14 of 32 & 33 Vict. c. 91, 
 to all officers of the Supreme Court, and all officers 
 in Lunacy. 
 
 Sect. 21. As to notice of vacancies in offices of 
 the Supreme Court. 
 
 Sect. 22. Solicitors may he appointed district 
 registrars. 
 
 Sect. 23. Appointments to Iceep order, &c., in 
 Jtoyal Courts of Justice. 
 
 Sect. 24. Powers as to solicitors. 
 
 Sect. 25. Chief Justice of England to liave powers 
 of Chief Justice of Common Pleas and Chief Baron 
 of the Exchequer. 
 
 Sect. 26. Certain appointments of commissioners 
 for acknowledgments by married woman declared 
 valid. 
 
 Sect. 27. Powers to make rules for County 
 Courts. 
 
 Act of 1884.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 61 (the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1884), amends 
 the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts 1873 to 1879 
 and 1881. 
 
 Sect. 3. The rank of President of Probate, &c.. 
 Division in Court of Appeal fixed. 
 
 Sect. 4 amends 39 & 40 Vict. c. 39, s. 17. 
 
 Sect. 5. Any Judge of any Division of the Sigh 
 Court may act for another absent from illness, &c., 
 or as an additional Judge of any Division. 
 
 Sect 7. 13 & 14 Vict. c. 25, extended to Judges 
 of County Courts. 
 
 Sect. 8 extends sect. 45 of 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, to 
 all appeals from compulsory reference to arbitra- 
 tion in any cause in the Queen's Bench Division. 
 
 Sect. 10. In all cases where matter may be re- 
 ferred to Master, &c., under sects. 3, 6, or 12 of 
 Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, svAih matter 
 rniay now be referred to official referee. 
 
 Sect. 11. Parties under agreement of reference 
 may refer to official referee. 
 
 Sect. 12. Saving as to district registrars. 
 
 Sect. 13. Sect. 16 of 18 <fc_19 Vict. c. 134, extends 
 to all applications under any existing or future 
 Act, hy virtue of which a Court or Judge may 
 make orders upon petition or motion in a summary 
 way. 
 
 Sect. 14. Execution of instruments by order of 
 the Court. 
 
 Sect. 15. Proceedings in quo warranto are deemed 
 civil proceedings. 
 
 Sect. 16 amends 17 & IS Vict. c. 34, s. 1, as to 
 process. 
 
 Sect. YI. Power to transfer interpleader pro- 
 ceedings not exceeding £500 in value to County 
 Court. 
 
 Sect. 18. Jurisdiction of Inferior Courts in 
 counter-claims under 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 89 
 and 90. 
 
 I. COTTET— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— oonid. 
 Sect. 19. Patronage under 42 & 43 Vict. c. 78. 
 Sect. 20. Civil Service certificates for officers of 
 Supreme Court under 42 & 43 Vict. c. 78. 
 Sect. 21. Appointment of circuit officers. 
 Sect, 22. Abolishes the offices of sworn clerks to 
 examiners in Chancery. 
 
 Sect. 23. The power to make rules under 38 & 39 
 Vict. u. 77, includes power to make rules concern- 
 ing appeals from inferior Courts. 
 
 Sect. 24. The power of making rules for the 
 procedure of an inferior Court of civil jurisdic- 
 tion is to be subject to the concurrence of the 
 authority empowered to make rules for the Supreme 
 Court. 
 
 Inferior Courts.] By 46 & 47 Vict. c. 49, s. 8, 
 it shall be lawful for the Queen from time to time 
 by Order in Council to extend to any inferior Court 
 of civil jurisdiction any of the provisions of the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873, and Acts 
 amending it, or of the Rules of Court made there- 
 under, with any such modifications as may be 
 necessary or desirable, in the same manner as and 
 to the like extent that the provisions of the Common 
 Law Procedure Acts, 1852, 1854, and 1860, and of 
 the general rules made thereunder, might, under 
 the powers given by those Acts, have been extended 
 to any such Court. 
 
 Pay OfBce.] The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 29, con- 
 solidates the accounting departments of the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature. 
 
 Sect. 1 establishes one accounting department for 
 the Supreme Court of Judicature. 
 
 Sect. 2. As to funds in Chancery Division. 
 
 Sect. 3. As to funds paid into Court in any other 
 division of the High Court. 
 
 Sect. 4 empowers Lord Chancellor to make rules 
 to give effect to sect. 3. 
 
 Sect. 5. All acts to be done by Paymaster-General 
 pursuant to rules to be valid. 
 
 Sect. 6. Crossed cheques or other documents re- 
 mitted by post to any person pursuant to the rules 
 to be equivalent to delivery of such cheques or 
 documents to such person. 
 
 Sect. 7 amends 35 & 36 Vict. c. 44, s. 10. 
 
 Sect. 8. Act to be cited as Supreme Court of 
 Judicature (Funds, <£c.) Act, 1883. 
 
 Bristol.] Order that certain sections of 1 & 2 
 Will. 4, c. 58, shall apply to the Tolzey Court and 
 Pie Poudre Court of the City and County of 
 Bristol - - - I. G., 1883, p. 3707 
 
 Clerks.] Courts of Justice (Salaries and Funds') 
 
 Act, 1868. Pay, constitution, &c., of clerks in 
 
 Central Office, Treasury Order of SOth June. 1882 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p.' 3644 
 
 Ditto, clerks in the Admiralty Division. Trea- 
 sury Order of 10th July, 1882 L. G., 1882, p. 3647 
 
 Ditto, clerks in the Probate and Divorce Divi- 
 sion. Treasury Order of \ith July, 1882 
 
 [I. G., 1882, p. 3644 
 
 Court of Appeal.] Order in Council as to sit- 
 tings of the Court of Appeal. Dec. 12th, 1883 
 
 [L. G., 1883, p. 6567 
 
 Fees.] Supreme Court of Judicature, amending 
 Order of July 12th, 1881 - L. G., 1881, p. 3462 
 
 Schedule of fees of Clerk of the Crown in Chartr- 
 eery Office. August Sth, 1881 L. G., 1881, p. 4188 
 
 Guildhall.] Order in Council, under 28 & 29 
 Viet. V. 48, of May 22nd, 1883, directing that in 
 future all issues in cases at Nisi Prius hitherto 
 
 Q 
 
( 451 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 452 ) 
 
 I. C0UET-STATUTE3 AND GAZETTE-confe?. 
 tried and executed in the Citi/ of London he now 
 tried at the Boyal Courts of justice 
 
 „ ,. , ^ [!■• G-. 1883, p, 2733 
 
 V acation,] Order that the Trinity, sittings of the 
 Court of Appeal, and in London and Middlesex 
 of the High Court of Justice, shall extend till 12th 
 August inclusive, that the Long Vacation shall com- 
 mence 13th August, that the Michaelmas Sittings 
 of the same Courts shall commence on 2ith October, 
 and that the Long Vacation shall terminate on 
 23rd October - - - I, G., 1883, p. 6567 
 
 Crown Offices Rules, 1SS6.] These rules loere 
 made the ISth of December, 1885, and come into 
 force 28th April, 1886. 
 
 ^ R. 1. All existing rtdes or practice on the Crown 
 side, inconsistent with these rules, are hereby re- 
 pealed, and the following rules shall henceforth he 
 in force. 
 
 B. 2. No order or rule annulled by any former 
 order shall be revived by any of these rules, unUfs 
 expressly so declared, and where no other provision 
 is made by these rules, the present procedure and 
 practice remain in force, 
 
 B. 3. Custody of records. 
 
 B, 4. Bate of proceedings. 
 
 B. 5. Affidavits, 
 
 B, 28. Certiorari. 
 
 B. 43. Indictments and informations. 
 
 B. 51. Quo warranto. 
 
 B. 60. Mandamus. 
 
 B. 80. Orders in tlifi nature of mandamus. 
 
 B. 81. Prohibition.' 
 
 B. 83. Appearance to indictment, information, 
 and inquisition. 
 
 B. 99. Outlaiory. 
 
 B. 113. Beversal of outlawry. 
 
 B. 122. Bail. 
 
 B. 123. Becognizances. 
 
 B. 127. Scire facias. 
 
 B. 128. Pleadings. 
 
 B. 138. Copies of proceedings and service. 
 
 B. 140. Special cases and demurrers. 
 
 B. 143. Paper books. 
 
 B. 148. Notice of trial. 
 
 B. 155. Continuances. 
 
 B. 156. Entering record for trial. 
 
 B. 158. Jury. 
 
 B. 159. View. 
 
 B. 160. Trial at bar. 
 
 B. 166. New trial. 
 
 B. 170. Judgment by default. 
 
 B. 171. Judgment. 
 
 B. 183. Error. 
 
 B. 207. Error upon judgments in the Queen's 
 Bench Division. 
 
 B. 216. Appeals. 
 
 B. 217. E.vecution. 
 
 B. 229. Writs. 
 
 B. 235. Habeas corpus. 
 
 B. 250. Motions. 
 
 B. 261. Attachment for contempt. 
 
 B. 277. De contumace capiendo — de excommuni- 
 cato capiendo. 
 B. 280. Articles of the peace. 
 U. 293. Time. 
 B. 299. Amendment. 
 B. 300. Costs. 
 B. 302, Notices. 
 B, 303. Non-compUancc. 
 
 I. COURT— STATUTES AND C-AZETTE— conSd. 
 B. 304. Applications at chambers. 
 
 B. 306. Interpretation clause. 
 B. 307. Bepeal. 
 B. 308. Forms. 
 
 II. COTJET— CENTEAL CEIMINAL COUET. 
 Mandamus — 4 * 5 mil. 4, t. 36.] 
 
 Mandamus will not lie to the judges and justices 
 of tlie Central Criminal Court. — The Hecorder of 
 London, upon the trial and conviction of a prisoner 
 charged with larceny, having refused to order 
 (under 24 & 25 Vict. "c. 96, s. 100) the person with 
 whom the stolen property was pledged to restore 
 it to tlie prosecutor, — the Queen's Bench refused 
 to grant a mandamus directed to " the judges 
 and justices of the Central Criminal Court," to 
 compel the Recorder to make such order. The 
 Queen v. Justices of Cekteal Criminal Coukt 
 
 [11 Q. B, D. 479 
 
 III. COUET— lANCASTEE COFET. 
 
 Service out of Jurisdiction — Chancery 
 
 Court of County Palatine — 17 & 18 Vict. c. 82, 
 s. 8.] Where the sole Defendant to an action 
 commenced in the Chancery Court of the County 
 Palatine of Lancaster is resident out of the juris- 
 diction of that Court leave to serve the writ of 
 summons upon him out of the jurisdiction, if it 
 will be granted to all (as to which qumre), will 
 only be granted under very special circumstances. 
 In re Watmough. Sekgenson •;;. Beloe 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 280 
 
 IV. COTTET— HAYOE'S COTTET. 
 
 1- Foreign Attachment— Garms/iee.] The 
 
 process against a garnishee, to enforce obedience 
 to the jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor's Com-t in 
 foreign attachment, is personal, and cannot be 
 applied to a corporation aggregate. — "Where, 
 therefore, a corporation aggregate was cited, as 
 garnishee, to appear in the Lord Mayor's Court, it 
 wa,s held entitled to maintain^ prohibition. — The 
 suit of foreign attachment is founded upon ancient 
 custom, and in itself is perfectly valid. Th.e 
 process by which it is sought to be enforced must 
 be strictly pursued according to the custom. Ficti- 
 tious summonses and returns will render the suit 
 invalid. — No payment, but a payment made by 
 compulsion of law, can discharge a garnishee from 
 his original liability to his creditor. Cokpoua- 
 TioN OF London v. Lonuon Joint Stock Bank 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 393 
 
 2. Judgment — Execution issued from High 
 
 Court upon Judgment of' Mayor's Court — Mayor's 
 Court of London Procedure Act, 1857 (20 * 21 Vict. 
 c. clvii.), s. 48 — Borough and Local Courts of 
 BecordAct, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c.86),s. S— Statute, 
 Construction of— Bepeal by Implication — Permis- 
 sive Words.} By the Mayor's Court of London 
 Procedure Act, 1857, sect. 48, execution might 
 be issued in a superior Court upon a judgment 
 obtained in the Mayor's Court. By the Borough 
 and Local Courts of Record Act, 1872, sect. 6, 
 where final judgment has been obtained in any 
 local Court for a sum not exceeding £20, " such 
 Court shall be at liberty to send a writ or precept 
 for the recovery of the same to the registrar of 
 any County Court within the jurisdiction of 
 
( 453 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( i5i ) 
 
 IV. COURT— MAYOR'S COVHX— continued. 
 whicli the Defendant may possess any gdocls or 
 cliattels .... and thereupon the high bailiff of 
 such County Court shall execute the same in the 
 same manner as if such writ or precept had been 
 issued out of such County Court" -.—Held, that 
 the two statutes were not inconsistent,' and that 
 the Mayor's Coiurt of London Procedure Act. 
 1857, sect. 48, had not been repealed by tlie 
 Borough and Local Courts of Eecord Act, 1872, 
 sect. 6; and that notwitlistaudiug the latter 
 statute execution might be issued iu the High 
 Court of Justice upon a judgment for a sum not 
 exceeding £20 obtained in the Mayor's Court. 
 Paine v. Slater 11 Q. B. D, 120 
 
 3. ■ ■ Jurisdiction — Power to give Judgment 
 
 under Order XL., Rule 10— Judicattti-e Act, 1873, 
 s. 89.] The Judge of the Mayor's Coiirt, London, 
 has uo power, on a motion before that Court for a 
 new trial, to direct judgment to be entered for 
 either of the par-ties in the action, as a Judge of 
 the High Court can do under Order xl., rule 10, 
 no rules having been made for applying the rules 
 of the Judicature Acts to that Court, and no such 
 power being given to an inferior Court by sect. 89 
 of the Judicature Act, 1873. — Where, notwith- 
 standing such want of power, the Judge of the 
 Mayor's Court has acted as if he had such power, 
 an appeal will lie to the Court of Appeal in 
 respect of his having so erroneously acted. Petok 
 6. City Offices Company - 10 Q. B. D. 504 
 
 4. Jurisdiction — FroTiiUtion — Mayor's 
 
 Court Procedure Act (20 & 21 Vict. c. elvii.), s. 12 
 — Cause of Action arising wholly or in part within 
 the City of Loudon or lAbertiea thereof.'] The 
 terms of a sale of the lease, goodwUl and iixtnres 
 of a business carried on in Surrey having been 
 agreed upon orally, two counterpart documents 
 were drawn up, embodying such terms. One of 
 these was signed by the purchaser at Bow in the 
 county of Middlesex. The other was subsequently 
 signed by the vendor in the city of London. Tlie 
 two documents were then exchanged between the 
 parties, and the deposit was paid at the office of 
 the purchaser's solicitor in the city of London. 
 The sum of £50, part of the purchase-money, 
 being unpaid, the vendor sued for the same in the 
 Mayor's Court : — Held, that the cause of action 
 did not in part arise within the jurisdiction of 
 the Mayor's Court, and that therefore a writ of 
 prohibition must issue. Aldekton v. Akohek 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 5. Hew Trial — Mayor's Court Procedure 
 
 Act, 1857 (20 & 21 Vict. c. clvii.), ss. 10, 22.] 
 AVhere a rule has been obtained to enter a non- 
 suit or for a new trial in the Mayor's Court, 
 London, under sect, 22 of 20 & 21 Vict. c. clvii., 
 it is uot competent to the unsuccessful party after- 
 wards, even with the leave of the Judge, to move 
 the Divisional Court under sect. 10. Meaes v. 
 CiiiTTiOK - 9 Q. B. D. 35 
 
 COURT — Appeal Court — Jurisdiction — Previous 
 decision 9 P. D. 96 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Admibalty — Jdbisdic- 
 Tiojr. .3. 
 
 Appeal Court — Jurisdiction of— Misconduct 
 
 of solicitor - 28 Oh. D. 614 
 
 See SoLiciTOB— Misconduct. 2. 
 
 COVRI— continued. 
 
 Lancaster Court— Concurrent suits 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 647 ; 23 Ch. D. 100 
 See Practice — Sdpheme Court — Con- 
 duct OF Cause. 2, 3. 
 
 Lancaster Court — Eehearing — Jurisdiction 
 
 [24 Ch. t). 438 
 See Pbaotioe— Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 37. 
 
 Ofrecord— Municipal election— Amendment 
 
 of orders - 9 Q. B. D. 494 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Elec- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 Of session — ^Equitable jurisdiciion 
 
 [7 App, Cas. 547 
 See Scotch Law — Public Eights. 
 
 COUSIK— Will-^Construction- First and second 
 
 cousins - 17 Ch. D. 262 ; 19 Ch. D. 201 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D, 512 
 
 See Will — Wobds. 4, 5, b'. 
 
 COVENANT :— 
 
 Col. 
 
 I. Breach - - - 
 
 - 454 
 
 II. Running with Land 
 
 455 
 
 III. Validity 
 
 - 456 
 
 In Conveyance. 
 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser- 
 
 -Convey- 
 
 ANOE. 
 
 
 In Lease. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant— Lease. 
 
 I. COVENANT- BREACH. 
 
 !■ Alteration of Character of Estate 
 
 Mutual Eestrictive Covenants— Building Estate 
 
 Acquiescence.'] A building estate was laid out in 
 lots, which were sold by the owners of the estate to 
 different purchasers, each of whom covenanted 
 with the vendors and with the purchasers of the 
 other lots entitled to the benefit of the covenant 
 not to build a shop on his land, or to use his house 
 as a shop or to carry on any trade therein. The 
 purchaser of one of the lots, who occupied his 
 house as a private residence, brought an action 
 against the purchaser of another lot, who was- 
 using his house as a beershop with an "off" 
 licence, to restrain him from brealnng his covenant 
 and for damages. The Plaintiff had known for 
 three years before the action was commenced that 
 the Defendant was using his house as a beer- 
 shop, and had himself bought beer at the shop 
 There was evidence that some of the houses built 
 on other lots had been for some time used as 
 shops notwithstanding the covenant, and that 
 some of the houses near the Plaintiffs house were 
 occupied, not each by a single tenant, but by two 
 families at weekly rents -.—Held, that the chan°-e- 
 in the character of the neighbourhood was not in 
 itself a ground for refusing relief to the Plaintiff 
 as the change was not caused by his conduct ■■ 
 but that the Plaintiff had lost the right to enforce 
 his covenant either by injunction or damages 
 thi-ough his acquiescence in the proceedings of 
 the Defendant.— Uafe of Bedford v. Trustees of 
 the British Museum (2 My. & K. 552) explained 
 Sayehs v. Collteb 24 Ch. D. 180; 28 Ch. D, loa 
 
 Q 2 
 
( 155 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 456 ) 
 
 II. COVENANT — EUNNING WITH LAND. 
 
 1. Beershop — Off Licence — Notice — Da- 
 
 mages.'] Upon the sale in 1863, to A., for the 
 purposes of a public-house, of part of an estate 
 intended to be laid out for building, the trus- 
 tees of the estate covenanted with A., his heirs 
 and assigns, that they, their heirs and assigns, 
 would not thereafter sell any portions of the 
 estate without requiring the purchaser to enter 
 into a covenant " not to erect thereon or use 
 or permit to be used any building to be erected 
 thereon as u tavern, public-house, or beershop." 
 — Further portions of the estate were sold in 
 1870 by the then trustees to G., who cove- 
 nanted with the vendors not to use or permit 
 to be used any buildings erected on the land and 
 premises intended to be thereby assured as a 
 tavern, public-house, or beershop. The rest of the 
 estate was sold to other persons. In 1879 H. 
 purchased from G. part of the land comprised 
 in G-.'s purchase of 1870, and entered into a cove- 
 nant with G., in terms similar to those of the 
 covenant in the deed of 1870. — I., a yearly tenant 
 under H. of one of the houses, having obtained 
 an "off licence." sold under it beer which was not 
 drunk upon the premises : — Held, that the pro- 
 perty was bound by the restrictive covenant 
 entered into by the vendors in 1863, and that B., 
 an fissign of A., was entitled to an injunction and 
 damages against H. and I., in respect of the 
 breach of covenant in selling beer under an " off 
 licence." Niooll v. Fenning 19 Ch. D. 258 
 
 2. Land suhject to Eent-charge — Cove- 
 nant hy Grantee to build and repair Buildings — 
 Assignment of Land and Rent-charge — Whetlier 
 Assignee of Land liable on Covenant to Repair — 
 Notice.'] Where land has been granted in fee in 
 consideration of a rent-charge and a covenant to 
 build and repair buildings, the assignee of the 
 grantee of the land is not liable, either at law or 
 in equity, on the ground of notice, to the assignee 
 of the grantee of the rent-charge on the covenant 
 to repair.— TmJ/c v. Moxhay (2 Ph. 774) explained. 
 —Coolie V. Chilcott (3 Oh. D. 694) questioned. 
 Haywood v. Brunswick Pekmanent Benetit 
 Building Society 8 ft. B. D. 403 
 
 3. Land subject to Eent-charge — Re- 
 strictive Covenant — Assignee.'] Land was granted 
 in fee in consideration of a rent-charge, and the 
 deed of grant contained a covenant to build houses 
 on the land the rent of which should be double 
 the value of the rent reserved by the deed, without 
 limiting any time within which such building was 
 to be required.— ifeZd, that such covenant was 
 unusually restrictive.— SembZe, that although the 
 assignee of the grantee of the land was not liable 
 afiarmatively on such covenant, he might be called 
 on to allow the house to be built in accordance 
 with the covenant. Andrew v. Aitkin 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 218 
 
 4, To repair — Assigns — Perso^ial Covenant 
 
 —Notice, Equitable Doctrine of] The doctrine 
 in Tulle V. Moxhay (2 Ph. 774) is limited to re- 
 strictive stipulations, and will not be extended so 
 as to bind in equity a purchaser taking with 
 notice of a covenant to expend money on repairs 
 or otherwise which does not run with the land at 
 la,w.—Semble, that the burden of a covenant (not 
 involving a grant) never runs with the land at 
 
 II. COVENANT — EUNNING WITH LAND — 
 
 continued. 
 law, except as between landlord and tenant. — 
 Coohe V. Chilcott (3 Ch. D. 694) overruled on this 
 point. — Morland v. Cook (Law Rep. 6 Eq. 252) 
 explained. — Holmes v. Buckley (1 Eq. C. Ab. 27) 
 discussed. Consideration of the circumstances 
 under which a covenant will be held to touch or 
 concern the land of the covenantee so that the 
 benefit may run with the land. — A., by deed, con- 
 veyed for value to trustees in fee a piece of land 
 as part of the site of a road intended to he made 
 and maintained by the trustees under the provi- 
 sions of a contemporaneous trust deed (being a 
 deed of settlement for the benefit of a joint stock 
 company established to raise the necessary capital 
 for making the road) ; and in the conveyance the 
 trustees covenanted with A., his heirs and assigns, 
 that they, the trustees, their heirs and assigns, 
 would make the road and at all times keep it in 
 repair, and allow the use of it by the public sub- 
 ject to tolls. The piece of land so conveyed was 
 bounded on both sides by other lands belonging 
 to A. The trustees duly made the road, which 
 afforded the necessary access to A.'s adjoining 
 lands. A. afterwards sold his adjoining lands to 
 the Plaintiff, and the trustees sold the road to the 
 Defendants, both parties taking with notice of the 
 covenant to repair : — Held (aifirming the decision 
 of the Vice-Chaneellor of the Duchy of Lancaster), 
 that the Plaintiff could not enforce the covenant 
 against the Defendants. Austerberky o. Cor- 
 poration OF Oldham - - 29 Ch. D. 750 
 
 III. COVENANT— VALIDITY. 
 
 Hot to revoke Will.] A covenant not 
 
 to revoke a will is not necessarily against public 
 policy as being in restraint of marriage. Eobis- 
 SON V. Ommanney 21 Ch. D. 780 ; 23 Ch. D. 285 
 
 COVENANT — Binding on representatives. 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 Breach — Continuing breach 7 App. Cas 19 
 
 See Vendor and Puechaseb — Condi- 
 tions or Sale. 3. 
 
 • Breach — Proof in bankruptcy 22 Ch. D. 410 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 5. 
 
 Debt under — Eetainer by executor 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 15 
 
 See Executor — Eetainer. 8. 
 
 ■ For title implied. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 Interest— Judgment — Merger 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Judgment. 3. 
 
 Lapse of time — Laches - 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 ;See Specialty Debt. 
 
 Lease — Disclaimer by trustee 29 Ch. D. 8 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 13. 
 
 Leaseholds — Indemnity of trustees 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 723 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 9. 
 
 - 23 Ch. D. 81 
 1. 
 
 • Mortgagor — Judgment in foreclosure action 
 [28 Ch. D. 181 
 -Foreolosuke. 18. 
 
 ■ Mining lease - 
 
 See Mine — Lease. 
 
 See Mortgage- 
 
( 457 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 458 ) 
 
 COVENANT — continued. 
 
 Not to revoke -will — Proof in bankruptcy 
 
 [23 Ch D. 285 
 
 See Bankeuptot— Peoop. 6. 
 Notice of - 17 Ch, D. 353 
 
 See Vendor and Puechaoee — Title. 3. 
 Offensive trade 9 Q. B. D. 404 
 
 See Landlobd and Tenant — Ee-entkt. 
 4. 
 Partnership articles — ^Annuity of -widow of 
 
 deceased partner - - 25 Ch. D. 89 
 
 See Paktnehship — Contkact. 1. 
 
 Proof in administration 17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 See ExEODTOK — Actions. 19. 
 
 Quiet enjoyment — Breach — General system 
 
 of drainage - 13 Q. B. D. 547 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 1. 
 
 Eenewable lease - 9 App. Cas, 844 
 
 See Landlord AND Tenant — Lease. 14. 
 
 Restrictive — Conveyance settled by Judge 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 466 
 See Vendor and Purohasek — Convey- 
 ance. 1. 
 
 Restrictive — Non-disclosure to purchaser — 
 
 Right to rescind - 15 Q. B. D. 261 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OP Sale. 8. 
 
 Restrictive— Objection to title 21 Ch. D. 95 
 
 See Vendor and Pdkchaseh — Title. 6. 
 
 Running -with property — Assignment of 
 
 patent - 19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 2. 
 
 Running with reversion. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Separation deed. . 
 
 See Cases under Husband and Wife — 
 Sepabation Deed. 
 
 Stamp duty on. 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 ■ Statute of Limitations — ^Mortgage 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 611 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 8. 
 
 To pay anuuity^Power to reduce amount 
 
 [8 P. D. 159 
 See Peactioe — Divorce — Settlements. 
 2. 
 
 To pay money free from all deductions 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 697 
 See Settlement — Construction. 1. 
 
 To pay premimns on policy — Surety 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 615 
 See Principal and Surety — Indemnity. 
 2. 
 
 To pay rates — ^Metropolis Management Acts 
 
 [9 Q,. B. D. 632 ; 13 Q. E. S. 1 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 
 9,10. 
 To pay rates— Water supplied by water- 
 works company 13 Q. B. D, 202 
 See Landlord AND Tenant — Lease. 11. 
 
 To pay rent, how far divisible 10 Q,. B. D. 48 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^AtsicN- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 COVENANT— coirfmtjeA 
 
 To re-convey — Railway company ■ — Super- 
 fluous lands 20 Ch. D. 562 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Superfluous 
 Lands. 2. 
 
 To renew lease 18 Ch. D. 238 ; 22 Ch. D. 
 
 [640 ; 9 App. Cas. 844 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 12, 
 13, 14. 
 
 To repair road - - 29 Ch, D. 750 
 
 See Highway — Dedication'. 
 
 To settle 19 Ch. D. 342 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Void Settlement. 1 . 
 
 To settle after-acquired property. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Future 
 Property. 
 
 To settle future property 9 Q. B. D. 337 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 1 
 See Husband and Wife — -Separate 
 Estate. 6. 
 
 To settle — Severance of joint tenancy 
 
 See Joint Tenant. 2. [17 Ch. D. 388 
 
 To settle— Female infant 28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Election. 6. 
 
 Underlease - 30 Ch. D. 404 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 3. 
 
 CBABS. 
 
 See Fishery Acts — Statutes. 
 
 CBEBITOR — Claim in administration suit — 
 Statute of Limitations - 18 Ch. D. 551 
 See Limitations, Statute of^Pee- 
 soNAL Actions. 4. 
 
 Examination of — Bankruptcy — Composition 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 118 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 4. 
 
 Execution against company 20 Ch, D. 442 
 
 See Company — Injunction. 1. 
 
 Grant of administration to — Special cir- 
 cumstances - 7 P. D. 13 
 See Administrator — Grant. 6. 
 
 Opposition to registration of liquidation 
 
 resolutions - 24 Ch. D. 477 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Liquidation. 8. 
 
 Partnership — Action against estate of de- 
 ceased partner - 23 Ch. D. 16 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Con- 
 duct OF Cause. 4. 
 
 Power of, to authorize trustee to carry on 
 
 business 17 Ch. D. 35 
 
 See Bankruptcy- — Trustee. 2. 
 
 Resolution of creditors — Direction to trus- 
 tees - 21 Ch. D. 397 
 See Bankedptcy — Tecstee. 1. 
 
 Rights of — Lunatic — Insolvent estate 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 577 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 2. 
 
 Secured — Administration action — Rules of 
 
 bankruptcy - - 20 Ch. D, 545 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 20. 
 
 Secured — -Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptcy — Secueed 
 Ceeditoe. 
 
 Winding up of company — Attendance at 
 
 examination of witnesses 25 Ch. D, 283 ; 
 [27 Ch, D. 518 
 See Company — Evidence. 4, 5. 
 
( m ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 460 ) 
 
 Cn'EDUOn— continued. 
 
 "Winding-up petition by. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Winding-up 
 Order. 8 — 12. 
 
 CEEDITOES' DEED. 
 
 Time for executing.] Incumbrancers 
 
 who had claimed priority over a, creditors' deed 
 
 and failed ia their contention were not allowed 
 
 afterwards to execute and take the benefit of the 
 
 deed. In re Meredith. Meeedith v. Facet 
 
 [29 a. D. 745 
 
 Costs of trustees - 25 Ch. D. 617 
 
 See Teustee — Costs and Chahges. 6. 
 
 CREMATION— Dead body 20 Ch. D. 659 
 
 See BxECOTOR — ^Powbes. 3. 
 
 Dead body— Misdemeanor 12 Q. B. D. 247 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Misdemeanoe. 1. 
 
 ■ Dead body — Prevention of inquest — Ob- 
 struction of coroner - 13 ft. B. D. 331 
 See Ceiminal Law — Misdemeanoe. 2. 
 
 CSIME— Prevention of. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law— Peaotioe— S^toiuJes. 
 
 CEIMIITAL LAW:— Col. 
 
 I. Bigamy - _ _ 4.59 
 
 II. Coining - _ 460 
 
 III. Conspikacy - _ _ 460 
 
 IV- EXPLOSR'ES _ _ _ 460 
 
 V. FOEGEEY - - 463 
 
 VI. Feacdtjlent Debtor - - 463 
 
 VII. Laeoeny _ _ _ 464 
 
 VIII. Libel _ 465 
 
 IX. Malicious Injuet - 467 
 
 X. Misappeopeiation 467 
 
 XI. Misdemeanoe - - 467 
 
 XII. Nuisance 467 
 
 SIII. Offences against Peeson 46S 
 
 XIV. Offences against Women - 471 
 
 XV. TjNLAWFrL Assembly - - 473 
 
 XVI. Evidence - - - 473 
 
 XVII. Peaotioe - - - - 475 
 
 I. CRIMINAL LAW— BIGAMY. 
 
 1. Evidence — Duration of Life, Presump- 
 tion of — Conflictinrj Presumptions.'] In 1864, W. 
 married A. In 1868 he was charged with bigamy 
 in marrying B. in 1868, his wife A. being then 
 alive, and was on such charge convicted. In 
 1879 he married C-, and in 1880, C. being then 
 alive, he married D. Afterwards, upon a charge 
 of bigamy in marrying D., C. being then alive, 
 W. was convicted, it being held by the presiding 
 Judge that there was no evidence that A. was 
 alive when W. married C, or tliat the marriage 
 with C. was invalid by reason of A. being then 
 alive : — Held, by the Court (Lord Coleridge, C. J., 
 Lindley, Hawkins, Lopes, and Bowen, JJ.), that 
 the conviction could not be sustained, as the 
 question should have been lelt to the jury whether 
 upon the above facts A. was alive or not when W. 
 married C. The Queen 1;. Willshieb 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 366 
 
 2. Evidence — Presumption of continuance 
 
 of Cohabitation— a it 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 57.1 The 
 prisoner was convicted of bigamy. It was proved 
 
 I. CRIMINAL LAW— BIGAMY— eonfaraae^. 
 that he had married W. in 1865, and lived with ' 
 her after the marriage, but for how long was not 
 known ; that in 1882, W. being still alive, he had 
 gone through the form of marriage with another 
 woman, but there was no evidence as to the pri- 
 soner and W. having ever separated or as to- 
 when, if separated, they last saw each other : — 
 Held, by the Court (Lord Coleridge. C.J., Pol- 
 lock, B., Manisty, Lopes, and Stephen, JJ.), that 
 the prisoner was rightly convicted. The Queen 
 r. Jones - - - 11 ft B. D. 118 
 
 II. CRIMINAL LAW— COINING. 
 
 By the Counterfeit Medal Act, 1883 (46 * 47 Vict, 
 c. 45), s. 2, any person who, without due authority ■ 
 or excuse (tlie proof whereof lies on tlie person 
 accused), makes or has in Ms possession for sale, or 
 offers for sale, or sells, any medal, cast, coin, or 
 other like thing made wholly or partially of metal ' 
 or any metallic combination, and resembling in 
 si:e, figure, and colour any of the Queen's current 
 gold or silver coin, or having thereon a device 
 resembling any device on any of the Queen's current 
 gold or silver coin, or being so formed that it can 
 by gilding, silvering, colouring, washing, or other 
 like process, be so dealt with as to resemble any of 
 tte Queen's current gold or silver coin, shall be 
 guilty of a misdemeanor, and on being convicted 
 shall be liahle to be imprisoned for any term not 
 exceeding one year, with or without hard labour. 
 
 Sect. 3. "The Queen's current gold and silver 
 coin " includes any gold or silver coin coined in or 
 for any of Her Majesty's mints, or lawfully current 
 by virtue of any proclamation oriotherwise in any 
 part of Her Majesty's dominions, whether ujithinfli.e 
 United Kingdom or otherwise. 
 
 III. CRIMINAL LAW— CONSPIRACY. 
 
 Indictment against Two for conspiring 
 
 together — Acquittal or Conviction of both.] Where 
 two persons arc indicted for conspiring together 
 and they are tried together, both must be acquitted 
 or both convicted. The Queen v. Manning 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 241 
 
 IV. CRIMINAL LAW— EXPLOSIVES. 
 
 The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 3 (Explosive Substances 
 Act, 1S83) amends the law relating to explosive 
 substances. 
 
 ^ Sect. 2. Any person who unlawfully and mali- 
 ciously causes by any explosive substance an e.r^- 
 plosion of a nature likely to endanger life or to 
 cause serious injury to property shall, whether any 
 injury to person or property has been actually caused 
 or not, be guilty of felony, and on convictionshall 
 be liable to penal serritude for life, or for any less 
 term (not less than the minimum term allowed by 
 laic), or to imprisonment with or without hard 
 labour for a term not exceeding two years. 
 
 Sect. 3. Any person who tciihin or (being a sid)- 
 ject of Her Majesty) without Her Majesty s domi- 
 nions unlaufnlly and maliciously — 
 
 (a.) Does any act n-ith intent to cause by an ex- 
 plosive snh.itance, or conspires to cause by 
 an explosive substance an explosion in the 
 United Kingdom of a nature likely to en- 
 danger life or to cause- serious injury to 
 property; or 
 (b.) Makes or has in his possession or under his 
 
( -iei ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 462 ) 
 
 IV. CRIMINAL LAW— EXPLOSIVES— confoZ. 
 
 control any explosive substance with intent 
 by means thereof to endanger life, or cause 
 serious injury to property in the United 
 I Kingdom, or to en/Ale any other person by 
 means thereof to endanger life or cause 
 serious injury to property in the United 
 Kingdom, shall, lohether any explosion 
 does or not take place, and whether any 
 injury to person or property has been 
 acftially caused or not, be guilty of felony, 
 and on conviction shall be liable to penal 
 servitude for a term not exceeding twenty 
 years, or to imprisonment with or without 
 hard labour for a term not exceeding two 
 years, and the explosive substance shall be 
 forfeited. 
 Sect. i. — (1.) Any person who makes or know- 
 ingly has in his possession or under his control any 
 explosive substance" under such circumstances as to 
 <jive rise to a reasonable suspicion that he is not 
 making it or docs not have it in his possession or 
 under his control for a lawful object, shall, unless 
 lie can shew that he made it or had it in his posses- 
 sion or under his control for a lawful object, he 
 guilty of felony, and on conviction, shall be liable 
 to penal servitude for a term not exceeding fourteen 
 years, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 
 two years with or without hard labour, and the 
 explosive substance shall be forfeited. 
 
 (2.) In any proceeding against any person for a 
 ■crime under this section, such person and his wife, 
 or husband, as the case may be, may, if such person 
 thinks fit, be adled, sworn, examined, and cross- 
 examined as an ordinary witness in the case. 
 
 Sect. 5. Any person who within or {being a sub- 
 ject of Her Majesty) without Her Majesty's domi- 
 nions by the supply of or solicitation for money, 
 the providing of premises, the supply of materials, 
 or in any manner whatsoever procures, counsels, 
 aids, abets, or is accessory to, the commission of any 
 erime under this Act, shall be guilty of felony, and 
 shall he liable to be tried and punished for that 
 erime, as if lie had been guilty as a principal. 
 
 Sect. 6. — (1.) Where the Attorney-General has 
 reasonable ground to believe that any crime under 
 this Act has been committed, he may order an 
 inquiry under this section, and thereupon any 
 justice for the county, borough, or place in which 
 the crime was committed, or is suspected to have 
 been committed, who is authorized in that behalf by 
 the Attorney-General, may, although no person may 
 he charged before Mm with the commission of such 
 crime, sit at a police court, or petty sessional or 
 occasional court house, or police station in the said 
 county, borough, or place, and examine on oath 
 concerning such crime any witness appearing before 
 Mm, and may take the deposition of such witness, 
 and, if he see cause, may bind such witness by re- 
 cognizance to appear and give evidence at the next 
 petty sessions, or when called upon wifjiin three 
 months from the date of such recognizance ; and 
 the law relating to the compelling of the attendance 
 of a witness before a justice and required to give 
 evidence concerning the matter of an information 
 or complaint, shall apply to compelling the attend- 
 ance of a witness for examination and to a witness 
 attending under this section. 
 
 (2.) A witness examined under this section shall 
 not he excused from answering any question on the 
 
 IV. CSIMISTAL LAW- EXPLOSIVES— coraW. 
 
 ground that the answer thereto may criminate or 
 tend to criminate himself; but any statement made 
 by any person in answer to any question put to him 
 on any examination under this section shall not, 
 except in the case of an indictment or other criminal 
 ]}roceeding for perjury, be admissible in evidence 
 against him in any proceeding, civil or criminal. 
 
 (3.) A justice who condticts the examination 
 under this section of a person concerning any crime 
 shall not take part in the committal for trial of 
 such person for such crime. 
 
 (4.) Whenever any person is hound by recogni- 
 zance to give evidence before justices, or any crimi- 
 nal Court, in respect of any crime under this Act, 
 any justice, if he sees fit, upon information being 
 made in writing, and on oath, thai such person is 
 about to abscond, or has absconded, may issue his 
 warrant for the arrest of such person, and if such 
 person is arrested any justice, upon being satisfied 
 that the ends of justice would otherwise be defeated, 
 may commit such person to prison until the time at 
 which he is bound by such recognizance to give 
 evidence, unless in the meantime he produces su^- 
 cient sureties : Provided that any person so arrested 
 shall he entitled on demand to receive a copy of the 
 information upon which the warrant for his arrest 
 was issued. 
 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) If any person is charged before a 
 justice loith any crime under this Act, no further 
 proceeding shall he taken against such person with- 
 out the consent of the Attorney-General, except such 
 as the justice may think necessary by remand, or 
 otherivise, to secure the safe custody of such person. 
 
 (2.) In framing an indictment the same criminal 
 act may be charged in different counts as constitut- 
 ing different' crimes under this Act, and upon the 
 trial of any such indictment the prosecutor shall 
 not be put to his election as to the count on which 
 he must proceed. 
 
 (3.) For all purposes of and incidental to arrest, 
 trial, and punishment, a crime for which a person 
 is liable to he punished under this Act, when com- 
 mitted out of the United Kingdom, shall be deemed 
 to have been committed in the place in which such 
 person is apprehended or is in custody. 
 
 (4.) Tliis Aet shall not exempt any person from 
 any indictment or proceeding for a crime or offence ■ 
 which is punishable at common law, or by any Act 
 of Parliament other than this Act, but no person 
 shall be punished twice for the same criminal act. 
 
 Sect. 8.— (1.) Sects. 73, 74, 75, 89, and 96 of the 
 Explosives Act, 1875 (iiihieh sections relate to the 
 search for, seizure, and detention of explosive sub- 
 stances, and the forfeiture thereof, and the disposal 
 of explosive substances, seized or forfeited), shall ' 
 apply in like manner as if a crime or forfeiture 
 under this Act were an offence or forfeiture under 
 the Explosives Act, 1875. 
 
 (2.) Where the master or owner of any vessel has 
 reasonable cause to suspect that any dangerous 
 goods or goods of a dangerous nature which, if 
 found, lie would be entitled to throxe overboard in 
 pursuance of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1873, are 
 concealed on board his vessel, he may search any 
 part of such vessel for such goods, and for the purr 
 pose of such search may, if necessary, break open 
 any box, package, or parcel, or receptacle on board 
 the vessel, and such master or owner, if he finds 
 any such dangerous goods, or goods of a dangerous 
 
( 4G3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 46i > 
 
 IV. CRIMINAL LAW— EXPLOSIVES— conM. 
 
 nature, sliall he entitled to deal with the same in 
 manner provided hy the said Act, and if he do not 
 find the same, he shall not he subject to any liability, 
 civil or criminal, if it appears to the tribunal, 
 before which the question of his liability is raised, 
 that he had reasonable cause to suspect that such 
 goods were so concealed as aforesaid. 
 
 By sect. 9. The expression " explosive substance^' 
 shall he deemed to include any maierials for making 
 any explosive substance; also any apparatus, 
 machine, implement, or materials used, or intended 
 to he used, or adapted for causing, or aiding in 
 causing, any explosion in or with any explosive 
 substance ; also any part of any such apparatus, 
 machine, or implement. 
 
 Explosives Act, 1875.] Notice as to fees for 
 licences. Dated March 31, 1882 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 1472 
 
 Keeping Explosives — Certiiicates.] Orders in 
 Council under Explosives Act, 1875, all dated 
 20ft April, 1883 L. G., 1883, pp. 2099, 2101, 2102 
 
 Fees.] Notice as to fees for amenditig licences 
 
 for toy firewoi-lis factories. Dated Feb. 26, 1884 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 971 
 
 Fireworks.] Order of Sept. 1, 1884, placing 
 explosives of the 1th (Pireworli) class under the 
 Explosives Act, 1875, s. 40, sub-s. 9 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 2994 
 
 Premises registered for keeping Explosives.] 
 Order of 12ft Jvly, 1885, revoking part of order 
 of Nov. 27, 1875, and prescribing in lieu thereof 
 [L. G., 1886, p. 3779 
 
 V. CEIMINAL LAW— FOEGEEY. 
 
 Bill of Exchange — Inchoate Negotiable 
 
 Instrument."] II. purchased goods upon the terms 
 that he should give to the vendors his acceptance 
 for the price, indorsed by a solvent third party. 
 The vendors sent to him for such acceptance and 
 indorsement a document in the form of a bill of 
 exchange, for the price, but without any drawer's 
 name thereon. H. returned this document ac- 
 cepted by himself, and with what purported to be 
 an indorsement by a solvent third party. This 
 indorsement was fictitious and had been forged 
 by H. No drawer's name was ever placed upon 
 the document : — Held, by the Court (Lord Cole- 
 ridge, C J., Grove, Hawkins, Lopes, and Stephen, 
 JJ.), that the document was not a bill of ex- 
 change, as it bore no drawer's name, and that H. 
 could not be convicted of feloniously forging or 
 feloniously uttering an indorsement on a bill of 
 exchange. — Semhle,th.&i he might have been con- 
 victed of a common law forgery. The Queen v. 
 Habpeb - - 7 Q. B. D. 78 
 
 VI. CEIMINAL LAW— FEATTDULENTDEBTOE. 
 Eemoving Property — Debtors Act, 1869 
 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62), s. 13 (3) — Execution, re- 
 moving Property to defeat — Evidence — Indict- 
 ment—Execution Creditor.'] A., B., and C, were 
 convicted, under sect. 13, sub-sect. 3, of 32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 62, of having, with intent to defraud the 
 creditors of A., removed the property of A. since 
 the date of an unsatisfied judgment against A. — 
 The evidence was, that on the next night after a 
 judgment, which was still unsatisfied, had been 
 obtained against A., the property of A. was re- 
 moved from his house by A., B. and C, in order 
 
 VI. CEIMINAL LAW— EEATTDTJLENT DEBTOR 
 
 — continued. 
 to defeat the creditor who had obtained the judg- 
 ment, and to prevent him from levying thereon to 
 satisfy the judgment. There was no evidence 
 that A. had any other creditors, or that there was 
 any intention to defeat the claims of any cre- 
 ditors of A. other than this particular creditor. — 
 No petition in bankruptcy had been presented 
 against A., nor had any proceedings been taken 
 to have his affairs liquidated by arrangement : — 
 Held, by Lord Coleridge, 0. J., Denman, Stephen, 
 Mathew, and Cave, JJ., that the absence of pro- 
 ceedings in bankruptcy or for liquidation was 
 not material ; that the provisions in question of 
 the above statute applied to all persons ; but 
 that the couvictiou must nevertheless be quashed, 
 inasmuch as an intent to defraud creditors was 
 charged but was not proved. The Queen v. 
 EowLANDS - 8 Q. B. D. 530 
 
 VII. CEIMINAL LAW— LAECENT. 
 
 1. Bailment of Money — Larceny hy 
 
 Sailee.] A prisoner was convicted of larceny 
 under the following circumstances : — The prose- 
 cutor gave a mare of his into the care of the 
 prisoner, telliag him that it was to be sold on the 
 next Wednesday. On the next Wednesday the 
 prosecutor did not go himself to sell his mare, but 
 sent his wife, who went to where the prisoner was 
 and saw him riding the mare about a horse fair, 
 and sell her to a third party, and receive on such 
 sale some money. The prosecutor's wife after 
 such sale asked the prisoner to give her the 
 money, saying she would pay his expenses ; this 
 the prisoner declined to do, and eventually he 
 absconded with the money and without account- 
 ing : — Held, by the Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J.,. 
 Grove, Field, and Smith, JJ., Stephen, J., dis- 
 senting) that there was evidence that the prisoner 
 was a bailee of the money thus paid to him, and 
 that the conviction could be supported. The 
 Queen v. De Banks - 13 Q. B. D. 29 
 
 2. Bailment to Infant— 24 & 25 Viet. 
 
 c. 96, s. 3.] An infant over fourteen years of age 
 fraudulently converted to his own use goods which, 
 had been delivered to him by the owner under an> 
 agreement for the hire of the same : — Held, that 
 he was rightly convicted of larceny as a bailee of 
 the goods under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 3. The. 
 Queen v. McDonald 15 Q, B. D. 323 
 
 3. Money demanded with Menaces.} 
 
 The prosecutrix gave L., a travelling grinder, six 
 knives to grind for her, the ordinary^charge for 
 grinding which would be Is. 3rf. L. ground the- 
 knives, and then demanded with threats 5s. 6d. as 
 his charge from the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix, 
 being thus frightened, in consequence of her 
 fears paid L. the sum demanded: — The jury 
 found that the money was obtained by menaces, 
 and convicted L. of larceny : — Held, by the Court 
 (Lord Coleridge, C.J,, Lindley, Hawkins, Lopes, 
 and Boweu, JJ.), that the conviction was right. — 
 Reg. V. M'Grath (L. E. 1 C. 0. E. 205) followed. 
 The Queen v. Lovell - 8 Q. B. D. 186 
 
 4. ■ Einglng the Changes — Larceny hy 
 
 Trick.] The two prisoners by a series of tricks 
 fraudulently induced a barmaid to pay over money- 
 of her master to them, without having received 
 
( 465 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 166 ) 
 
 Vn. CEIMINAX lAW— lABCENY— coniiraietf. 
 from them in return the proper change ; the bar- 
 maid had no authority to pay over money without 
 receiving the proper change, and had no intention 
 of or knowledge that she was so doing : — Held, by 
 the Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Deuman, Haw- 
 kins, Williams, and Mathew, JJ.). ^^^^ ^^^ Pri- 
 soners were properly convicted of larceny. The 
 Queen v. HollIs - - 13 Q. B. D. 25 
 
 5. Water stored in Pipes, whether the 
 
 subject of Larceny at Common Law.^ Water 
 supplied by a water company to a consumer, and 
 standing in his pipes, may be the subject of a 
 larceny at common law. 1'ekeks v. O'Brten 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 21 
 
 VIII. CEIMINAL LAW— LIBEL. 
 
 Tlie Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 60 (^Newspaper Libel 
 and Registration Act, 1881) amends the law affect' 
 ing civil actions and criminal prosecutions for 
 newspaper libel. 
 
 Sect. 1 defines (inter alia') the word "news- 
 paper " to mean any paper containing piiblic news, 
 intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarhs or 
 observations thereon, printed for sale and pub- 
 lished in England or Ireland periodically, or in 
 parts or numbers, at intervals not exceeding twenty- 
 six days between the publication of any two such 
 papers, parts or numbers. 
 
 Also any paper- printed in order to be dispersed 
 and made public weekly or oftener, or at intervals 
 not exceeding twenty-six days, containing only or 
 principally advertisements. 
 
 Tlie word "proprietor" to mean and include as 
 well the sole proprietor of any newspaper, as also, 
 in the case of a divided proprietorship, tlie persons 
 who as partners or otherwise represent and are 
 respons&le for any share or interest in the news- 
 paper as between themselves and the persons in like 
 manner representing or responsible for tlie other 
 shares or interests therein, and no other person. 
 
 Sect. 2. Any report published in any newspaper 
 of the proceedings of a public meeting shall be 
 privileged, if such meeting was lawfully convened 
 for a lawful purpose and open to the public, and 
 if such report was fair and accurate, and pub- 
 lished without m,alice, and if the publication of the 
 matter complained of was for the public benefit ; 
 provided always, that the protection intended to 
 be afforded by this section shall not be available as 
 a defence in any proceeding if the Plaintiff or 
 prosecutor can shew that the Defendant has reused 
 to insert in the newspaper in which the report 
 containing the matter complained of appeared a 
 reasonable letter br statement of explanation or 
 contradiction by or on behalf of such Plaintiff or 
 prosecutor. 
 
 Sect. 3. No criminal prosecution shall be com- 
 menced against any proprietor, publisher, editor, 
 or any person responsible for the publication of a 
 newspaper, for any libel published therein without 
 the written fiat or allowance of the Director of 
 Public Prosecutions in England or Her Majesty's 
 Attorney-Oeneral in Ireland being first had and 
 obtained. 
 
 p I Sect. 4. A Court of summary jurisdiction upon 
 the hearing of a charge against a proprietor, pub- 
 lisher, or editor, or any person responsible for the 
 publication of a newspaper, for a libel published 
 therein, may receive evidence as to the publication 
 
 VIII, CEIMINAL LAW— ^IB^L— continued. ' 
 being for the public benefit, and as to the matters 
 charged in the libel being true, and as to the 
 report being fair and accurate, and published 
 without malice, and as to any matter which under 
 this or any other Act, or otherwise, might be given 
 in evidence by way of defence by the person charged 
 on his trial on indictment, and the Court, if of 
 opinion after hearing such evidence, that there is a 
 strong or probable presumption that the jury on the 
 trial would acquit the person charged, may dismiss 
 the case. 
 
 Sect. 5. If a Court of summary jurisdiction upon 
 the hearing of a charge against a proprietor, pub- 
 lisher, editor, or any person responsible for the 
 publication of a newspaper, for a libel published 
 therein, is of opinion that though the person charged 
 is shewn to have been guilty the libel was of a 
 trivial character, and that the offence may be 
 adequately punished by virtue of the powers of this 
 section, the Court shall cause the charge to be 
 reduced into writing and read to the person charged 
 and then address a question to him to the following 
 effect : " Do you desire to be tried by a jury or do- 
 you consent to the case being dealt with sum- 
 marily ? '' and if such person assents to the case 
 being dealt with summarily, the Court may sum- 
 marily convict him and adjudge him to pay a fine 
 not exceeding fifty paaiids. 
 
 Sect. 27 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, 
 shall so far as is consistent with the tenor thereof 
 apply to every such proceeding as if it were 
 herein enacted and extended to Ireland, and as if 
 the Summary Jurisdiction Acts were therein re- 
 ferred to instead of the Summary Jurisdiction Act,, 
 1848. 
 
 Sect. 6. Every libel, or alleged libel, and every 
 offence under this Act shall be deemed to be an- 
 offence within and subject to the provisions of the. 
 Act 22 & 23 Vict. c. Vl,' intituled "An Act to 
 prevent vexatious indictments for certain misde- 
 meanors." 
 
 1. ■ Discretion of Court — Leave to file Infor- 
 mation — Libel upon Deceased Foreign Nobleman — 
 Applicant resident Abroad,"] Upon ajjplication 
 for leave to file a criminal information in respect 
 of a libel upon a deceased foreign nobleman made 
 by his representative who was not resident in 
 this country : — Held, that the Court, in the exer- 
 cise of its discretion, must reject the application, 
 for the rule to be collected from the modern deci- 
 sions is that a criminal information for libel can 
 only be granted at the suit of persons who are in- 
 some public ofSce or position, and not at the suit 
 of private persons : — Held, also, that the fact that 
 the applicant does not reside in this country is a. 
 strong reason for rejecting such an application. — 
 Semble, that an application for a criminal infor- 
 mation for a libel upon a deceased person made 
 by his representative will not be granted. The. 
 Queen v. Labouohere - - 12 ft. B. D. 320 
 
 2. Newspaper — Criminal Information 
 
 for Libel — Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 
 1881 (44 & 45 Vict c. 60), s. Z— Information filed' 
 without Fiat of Director of Public Prosecutions.'^ 
 The 3rd section of the Newspaper Libel and 
 Eegistration Act, 1881, which enacts that no 
 criminal prosecution shall be commenced against 
 any proprietor, publisher, or editor, or any person 
 
( 467 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 468 ) 
 
 VIII. CEIMINAL I&vr—LIBEI— continued. 
 responsible for the publication of a newspaper, for 
 any libel published therein, without the written 
 fiat or allowance of the Director of Public Prose- 
 <;ntions in England, or her Majesty's Attorney 
 General in Ireland, being first had and obtained, 
 does not apply to a criminal information for libel 
 iiled by order of the Court. Yates v. The Queen 
 
 [U Q, B. D. 750; 14 Q. B. D, 648 
 
 IX. CEIMIWAI LAW — MALICIOUS IKJUEY 
 TO PEOPERTY. 
 
 Herbage Eight — Malicious Injuries to 
 
 Froperty Act (24 & 25 Vict. c. 97), s. 51— " Heal 
 or Personal Property" — Incorporeal Heredita- 
 ment.'] The soil of a town moor was vested in 
 "the corporation of the town in fee, but freemen 
 and widows of deceased freemen of the town 
 were under statute entitled to the " full right 
 and benefit to the herbage" of the town moor 
 for two milch cows : — Held, that this right to the 
 herbage was not " any real or personal property 
 "whatsoever " within the meaning of the Malicious 
 Injuries to Property Act (24 & 25 Vict. c. 97), 
 s. 52, which applies only to tangible property 
 and not to a mere incorporeal right. Laws v. 
 Eltkingham - 8 Q. B. D. 283 
 
 X. CEIMINAL LAW— MISAPPEOPSIATION. 
 
 Property intrusted for safe Custody — 
 
 Larceny Act (24 * 25 Vict. c. 96), ss. 75, 76.] N., 
 a solicitor, was intrusted by a client with money 
 to invest on mortgage on the client's behalf ; he, 
 instead of so doing, fraudulently appropriated the 
 money to his own use : Held, by Lord Coleridge, 
 C.J., Denman, Stephen, Mathew, and Cave, JJ., 
 that N. was not intrusted with such money for 
 " safe custody " within sect. 76 of 24 & 25 Vict. 
 ii. 96 (the Larceny Act). The Queen v. Newman 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 706 
 
 XI. CEIMINAL LAW— MISDEMEANOE. 
 
 1, Burning Dead Body — Nuisance — In- 
 quest — Preventing Inquest heing held.'] To burn 
 a dtad body, instead of burying it, is not a mis- 
 demeanor, unless it is so done as to amount to a 
 public nuisance. — If an inquest ought to be held 
 upon a dead body, it is a misdemeanor so to 
 dispose of the body as to prevent the coroner 
 from holding the inquest. The Queen v. Pbice 
 
 [12 Q. B, D. 247 
 
 2. Obstructing Coroner — Inquest, Destruc- 
 tion of Body to prevent — Misdemeanor, dbstrvcling 
 Justice — Burning Bead Body.] It is a misde- 
 meanor to burn or otherwise dispose of a dead 
 body, with intent thereby to prevent the holding 
 upon such body of an intended coroner's inquest, 
 and so to obstruct a coroner in the execution of 
 his duty, in a case where the inquest is one which 
 the coroner has jurisdiction to hold. A coroner 
 lias jurisdiction to hold, and is justified in hold- 
 ing, an inquest if he honestly believes information 
 which has been given to him to be true, which, 
 if true, would make it his duty to hold Such 
 inquest. The Queen v. Stevhenson 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 331 
 
 XII. CEIMINAL LAW— NUISANCE. 
 
 Brothel.] The Act 48 * 49 Vict. o. 69, s. 13, 
 enables summary proceedings to he taken against 
 
 XII. CEIMINAL LAW— ITOISANCE— COTifc?. 
 a hrothel keeper, &c., under the Summary Juris- 
 diction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49). The 
 enactments contained in 25 Geo. 2, c. 36, ss. 5, 6, 
 and 7, and 58 Geo. 3, c. 70, to apply to these sum- 
 mary proceedings. 
 
 ■ Indecent Exposure — Public Place — Public 
 
 Nuisance— \i & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 29.] The 
 prisoner was convicted of indecently exposing 
 his person to divers subjects of the Queen in a 
 certain public place, upon evidence shewing that 
 the place in question was out of sight of the 
 public footpath, but was a place to which tlie 
 prisoner had gone with several little girls, though 
 without any legal right to go there, and was a 
 place to which persons were in the habit of going 
 without having any strict legal right so to do, 
 and that persons so going were never in any way 
 hindered or interfered with : — Held, by the Court 
 (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Grove, J., Huddleston, B., 
 Manisty, and Mathew, JJ.), that the conviction 
 was correct, and that the jury were justified in 
 finding that the place was public. — Semble, that 
 the ofi'ence may be indictable if committed before 
 divers subjects of the realm, even if the place be ' 
 not public. The Queen v. Wellakd 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 63 
 
 XIII. CEIMINAL LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 PEESON. 
 
 Indecent Act with Male Person.] The Act 
 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, s. 11, punishes as a mis- 
 demeanor any commission, or attempted commis- 
 sion, hy a maleperson of any act of gross indecency 
 with another male person, in public or private. 
 
 1. ■ ■ Grievous Bodily Harm — Malice — 
 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, ». 20.] Sliortly before the 
 conclusion of a performance at a theatre, M., 
 with tlie intention and with the result of causing 
 terror in the minds of persons leaving the theatre, 
 put out the gaslights on a staircase which a large 
 niimber of such persons had to descend in order 
 to leave the theatre, and he also, witli the inten- 
 tion and with the result of obstructing the exit, 
 placed an iron bar across a doorway through 
 which they had in leaving to pass. — Upon the 
 liglits being thus extinguished a panic seized a 
 large portion of the audience, and they rushed in 
 fright down the staircase forcing those in front 
 against the iron bar. By reason of the pressure 
 and struggling of the crowd thus created on the 
 staircase, several of the audience were thrown 
 down or otherwise severely injured, and amongst 
 them A. and B. — On proof of tUese facts the jury 
 convicted M. of unlawfully and maliciously in- 
 flicting grievous bodily harm upon A. and B. : — 
 Held, by the Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Field, 
 Hawkins, Stephen, and Cave, JJ.), that M. was 
 rightly convicted. The Queen v. Mabtin 
 
 [8 Q. B. S. 54 
 
 2. ■ Manslaughter — Death caused by dan- 
 gerous Act performed without proper Precautions — 
 Fire-arms, negligent use of — Joint Wrongdoers.] 
 A., B., and C. went into a field in pi-oximity to 
 certain roads and houses, taking with them a 
 rifle which would be deadly at a mile, for the 
 purpose of practising firing with it. B. placed a 
 board, which was handed to him by A., in the 
 presence of C, in ... tree in the field as a target. 
 
( 469 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 470 ) 
 
 XIII. CEIMINAI LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 
 r'E'RSOyf— continued. 
 All three fired shots directed at the board so 
 placed, from a distance of about 100 yards.— No 
 precautions of any kind were taken to prevent 
 danger from such firing.— One of the shots thus 
 fired by one, though it was not proved by which 
 one, of them, killed a boy in a tree in a garden 
 near the field, at a spot distant 393 yards from 
 ■the firing point. A., B., and C, were all found 
 guilty by a jury of manslaughter : — Beld, by the 
 Court (Lord" Coleridge, 0. J.. Field, Lopes, Stephen, 
 and Williams, JJ.), that A., B., and C, had been 
 guilty of a breach of duty in firing at the spot in 
 question, without taking proper precautions to 
 prevent injury to others, and were rightly con- 
 victed of manslaughter. The Queen v. Salmon, 
 Hancock, and Salmon - - 6 Q. B. D. 79 
 
 3. Manslaughter — Neglect of Parent to 
 
 provide Medical Aid for Child — Bmden.ee — 31 & 
 32 Vict. c. 122, 8. 37.] M. was convicted of the 
 manslaughter of his son, a child of tender years. 
 The child died of confiuent small-pox, and the 
 prisoner, though able to do so, did not, owing to 
 certain religious views he held, employ any 
 medical practitioner, nor afford to the child during 
 its illness any medical aid or attendance. It was 
 proved that proper medical aid and attendance 
 might have saved or prolonged the child's life, 
 and would have increased its chance of recovery, 
 but that it might have been of no avail ; and there 
 was no positive evidence that the death was 
 caused or accelerated by the neglect to provide 
 medical aid or attendance : — Held, by Lord Cole- 
 ridge, C. J., Grove, Stephen, Mathew, and Cave, 
 JJ., that under the above circumstances the con- 
 viction could not be sustained. The Queen v. 
 MoEBY 8 Q. B. D. 571 
 
 4. Murder — Attempt to commit — 24 & 25 
 
 Viet. c. 100, ss. 14, 15.] B. drew a loaded pistol 
 from his pocket for the purpose of murdering S., 
 but before he had time to do anything further in 
 pursuance of his purpose the pistol was snatched 
 out of his hand, and he was at once arrested : — 
 Held, by the Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Pol- 
 lock, B., Huddleston, B., Manisty and Stephen, 
 JJ.), that the ofiisnce was not within sect. 15 of 
 24 & 25 "Vict. c. 100, under which section the 
 prisoner had been tried and convicted. — SembU, 
 that the oifence was within sect. 14 of 24 & 25 
 Vict. c. 100.— Meg. v. St. George (9 C. & P. 483), 
 and Beg. v. Lewis (9 C. & P. 523), doubted. The 
 Qdeen v. Bkown - 10 Q. B. D. 381 
 
 5. Murder — Inciting to — Foreign Sove- 
 reign, Newspaper Article inciting to Murder of — 
 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 4.] M. was indicted 
 under 24 & 25 Vict. o. 100, o. 4. The encourage- 
 ment and endeavour to persuade to murder, proved 
 at the trial, was the publication and circulation 
 by him of an article, written in German in a news- 
 paj)er published in that language in London, 
 exulting in the recent murder of the Emperor of 
 Russia, and commending it as an example to revo- 
 lutionists throughout the world. The jury were 
 ■directed that if they thought that by the publica- 
 tion of the article M. did intend lo, and did, 
 encourage or endeavour to persuade any person 
 to murder any other person, whether a subject of 
 Her Majesty or not, and whether within the 
 
 XIII, CRIMINAL LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 
 r:E'RSOTi!— continued. 
 Queen's dominions or not, and that such en- 
 couragement and endeavouring to persuade was 
 the natural and reasonable eifect of the article, 
 they should find him guilty : — Held, by the Court 
 (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Grove, and Dcmnan, JJ., 
 Huddleston, B., and Watkin "Williams, J.), that 
 such direction was correct, and that the publica- 
 tion and circulation of a newspaper article might 
 be an encouragement, or endeavour to persuade 
 to murder, within sect.; 4 of 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, 
 although not addressed to any person in par- 
 ticular. The Queen v. Most 7 ft. B. D. 344 
 
 6. Murder — Killing and eating Flesh of 
 
 Human Seing under Pressure of Hunger — " Neces- 
 sity" — Special Verdict — Certiorari — -Offence on 
 High Seas — Jurisdiction of High Gourt.^ A man 
 who, in order to escape death from hunger, kills 
 another for the purpose of eating his flesh, is 
 guilty of murder ; although at the time of the 
 act he is in such circumstances that be believes 
 and has reasonable ground for believing that it 
 affords the only chance of preserving his life. At 
 the trial of an indictment for murder it appeared, 
 upon a special verdict, that the prisoners D. and S., 
 seamen, and the deceased, a boy between seven- 
 teen and eighteen, were east away in a storm on 
 the high seas, and compelled to put into an open 
 boat : that the boat was drifting on the ocean, and 
 was probably more than 1000 miles from land ; 
 that on tlie eighteenth day, when they had been 
 seven days without food and five without water, 
 D. proposed to S. that lots should be cast who 
 should be put to death to save the rest, and that 
 they afterwards thought it would be better to 
 kill the boy that their lives should be saved ; that 
 on the twentieth day D., with the assent of S., 
 killed the boy, and both D. and S. fed on his flesh 
 for four days ; that at the time of the act there 
 was no sail in sight nor any reasonable prospect 
 of relief; that under these circumstances there 
 appeared to the prisoners every probability that 
 unless they then or very soon fed upon the boy, 
 or one of themselves, they would die of starvation : 
 — Held, that upon these facts, there was no proof 
 of any such necessity as could justify the prisoners 
 in killing the boy, and that they were guilty of 
 murder. The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 273 
 
 7. Prize-fight — Aiding and Abetting.} 
 
 Two men fought with each .other in a ring, formed 
 by ropes supported by posts, in the presence of 
 a large crowd. Amongst that crowd were the 
 prisoners. It did not appear that the prisoners 
 took any active part in the management of the 
 fight, or that they said or did anything. They 
 were tried and convicted of assault, as being 
 principals in the second degree. — The jury were 
 directed that prize-fights are illegal, and that 
 all persons who go to a prize-fight to see the 
 combatants strike each other, and who are present 
 when they do so, are guilty in law of an assault, 
 and that if the persons charged were not casually 
 passing by, but stayed at the place, they en- 
 couraged the fight by their presence, although 
 they did not do or say anything. Upon this 
 direction the jury found the prisoners guilty; 
 but added, that they did so in consequence of 
 
( 471 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 472 ) 
 
 XIII. CRIMINAL LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 PEBSON — continued. 
 
 such direction of law, as they found that the 
 prisoners did not aid or abet: — Held, by Den- 
 man, J., Huddlestou, B , Manisty, Hawkins, Lopes, 
 Stephen, Cave, and North, JJ. (Lord Coleridge, 
 C.J., Pollock, B., and Mathew, J., dissenting), 
 that the above direction was not correct, that 
 mere voluntary presence at a fight does not as a 
 matter of law necessarily render persons so pre- 
 sent guilty of an assault as aiding and abetting 
 in such fight, and that the conviction could not be 
 sustained: — Held, by Lord Coleridge, C.J., Pol- 
 lock, B., and Mathew, J., that the conviction 
 could be sustained, that the legal inference to be 
 drawn from mere presence, as a voluntary spec- 
 tator, at a prize-fight is, in the absence of other 
 evidence to rebut such inference, that the person 
 so present is encouraging, aiding and abetting 
 such fight, and consequently guilty of assault : — 
 Held, by the whole Court, that a prize-fight is 
 illegal, and that all persons aiding and abetting 
 therein are guilty of assault, and that the consent 
 of the persons actually engaged in fighting to the 
 interchange of blows does not afford any answer 
 to the criminal charge of assault: — SembU, that 
 mere presence of a person, unexplained, at a 
 prize-fight affords some evidence for the consider- 
 ation of a jury of an aiding or abetting in such 
 fight. The Queen v. Coney - 8 Q. B. D. 534 
 
 Eape — Girl between twelve and thirteen 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 74 
 
 See Cbiminal Law — Oefences against 
 "Women. 
 
 XIV. CRIMINAL LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 WOMEN. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 09 (the Criminal Law 
 Amendment Act, 1885), makes further prooision 
 for the protection of women. 
 
 Repeal.] Sect. 19 repeals 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, 
 s. 49, and of sect. 52 the words " or any attempt to 
 have carnal knowledge of any girl under 12 years 
 of age," and the whole of y8 & 39 Vict. c. 94 
 (Offences against the Person Act, 1875). 
 
 Procuration.] Sect. 2 (1), procuration of fe- 
 males not of known immoral character, and under 
 twenty-one years, for immorality within or without 
 the Queen's dominions ; or, 
 
 (2, 3, 4), procuration of females of any age for 
 common prostitution or for brothels within or with- 
 out the Qtteen's dominions, 
 
 is a misdemeanor. One witness will not suffice 
 for a conviction, unless corroborated in some mate- 
 rial particular. 
 
 Defilement ] Sect. 3. The 'procuring of defile- 
 ment of any female by threats or fraud within or 
 icitlwut the Queen's dominions or by drugs within 
 the Queen's dominions, is a misdemeanor. 
 
 One witness will not suffice for u c07iviction 
 unless corroborated in some material particular. 
 
 Girls under 18.] Sect. 4. Defilement of a girl 
 under thirteen years is felony. Attempt to defile 
 the same is a misdemeanor. 
 
 An offender whose age does not exceed sixteen 
 years may be ichijiped instead, under 25 &2G Vict. 
 c. 18, and in addition may be sent to areformatory. 
 
 The girl or any other child of tender years may 
 give evidence cdthoucjh not on oath. This evidence 
 
 XIV. CRIMINAL LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 
 WOMEN — continued, 
 will not suffice for a conviction unless corroborated 
 in some material particular. 
 
 Girls under 16.] Sect. 5 (1). Defilement or at- 
 tempted defilement of a girl above thirteen years 
 and under sixteen years ; or (2), of any female 
 idiot, is a misdemeanor. 
 
 Seasonable belief that the girl was over sixteen 
 years is a defence to suh-sect. 1. No prosecution 
 to be commenced under this sub-section after three 
 months from the offence. 
 
 Eape.] Sect. 4. Connection icith u. married 
 woman by personating her husband, is rape. 
 
 Householder permitting Defilement on his Pre- 
 mises.] Sect. 6. Any person occupying or manag- 
 ing premises inducing or suffering a girl to be on 
 his premises for defilement — 
 
 (1) is guilty of felony if the girl is under thirteen 
 years ; 
 
 (2) is guilty of misdemeanor if the girl be under 
 sixteen years, 
 
 Measonable belief that the girl loas over sixteen 
 years is a defence to sub-sect. 1. 
 
 Abduction.] Sect. 7. Abduction from parents, 
 or person in charge, of unmarried girl under 
 eighteen for deiilement is a misdemeanor. 
 
 Beasondble belief that tlie girl was over eighteen 
 years is a defence. 
 
 Detention.] Sect. 8. Detention of a female 
 against her will 
 
 (1) 071 any premises loith intent to defile her ; or 
 
 (2) in any brothel, 
 is a misdemeanor. 
 
 Detention of apparel or goods of a female, or 
 threat to take legal proceedings against her for 
 taking away apparel lent her, is, under certain 
 circumstances, a detention under this section. 
 
 Indictment.] Sect. 9. Power on indictment for 
 rape or offences under sect. 4 of this Act to convict 
 of certain misdemeanors. 
 
 Sect. 17. Every misdemeanor to he within 
 Vexatious Indictments Act (22 & 23 Vict, i . 17). 
 
 No indictment to be tried at Quarter Sessions. 
 
 Search.] Sect. 10. A justice may on infoi-ma- 
 tion that a female is unlawfully detained for 
 immoral purposes issue a warrant for supei'ior 
 officer of police to search for and detain the same 
 in a place of safety, and may by warrant cause 
 any person unlawfully detaining the female to be 
 apprehended. A female may not he detained for 
 immoral purposes if (a) she he under sixteen years, 
 or (b) if over sixteen and under eighteen years she 
 be detained against her oion icill or that of her 
 parent or guardian, or (c) if over eighteen years, 
 she he detained against her will, 
 
 Custody of Girls under 16.] Sect. 12. Power to 
 take girl under sixteen from parents, guardians^ 
 &c., ivhe7'e her prostitution is favoured by them, 
 and place her in charge of guardians until she be 
 twenty-one years of age. 
 
 Other Proceedings.] Sect. 16. This Act is not 
 derogatory to other 2>roceedings, provided that no- 
 one he punished twice for same offence. 
 
 Costs.] Sect. 18. Costs of prosecution under 
 this Act of misdemeanors alloiced as in felonies. 
 
 Evidence.] See Ckiminal Law — Evidence — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Rape — Girl between Twelve and Thirteen 
 
( 473 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 474 ) 
 
 XIV. CRIMINAL LAW— OFFENCES AGAINST 
 
 Vf OWETH— continued. 
 —Statutes 2-i & 2,') Vict. c. 100, ss. 48, 51 ; 38 * 39 
 Yict. 0. 94, 8. 4.] The statute 38 & 89 Vict. o. 94, 
 s. 4, whioli enacted that " whosoever shall unlaw- 
 fully and carnally know and abuse any girl being 
 above the age of twelve years and under the age 
 of thirteen years, whether with or withovit her 
 consent, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor," &c., 
 did not operate to prevent a conviction for felony. 
 Tinder 24 & 25 Vict. o. 100, s. 48, of a person com- 
 mitting a rape upon a girl between those ages. — 
 Beg. V. Dicl<m (14 Cox, C. C. 8) followed. The 
 Queen v. Katoliefe - 10 Q, B. D. 74 
 
 XV. CRIMINAL LAW — UNLAWFUL AS- 
 SEMBLY. 
 
 Meeting for lawful Purpose — Knowledge 
 
 that others will commit a Breach of the Peace.^ 
 The Appellants assembled with others for a law- 
 ful purpose, and with no intention of carrying it 
 out unlawfully, but with the knowledge that their 
 assembly would be opposed, and with good reason 
 to suppose that a breach of the peace would be 
 committed by those who opposed it : — Held, by 
 Field and Cave, JJ., that they could not be rightly 
 convicted of an unlawful assembly. Beattt v. 
 GiLLBANKS 9 Q,. B. D. 308 
 
 XVI. CRIMINAL LAW— EVIDENCE. 
 
 By 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, ». 20, every person 
 charged under this Act, or under 24 & 25 Vict. 
 c. 100, ss. 48, and 52 to 55 inclusive, may give evi- 
 dence. The same as to husband or wife of party 
 charged. 
 
 1. Confession — Admissibility of."] On a 
 
 trial for larceny, evidence was received of a con- 
 fession made by the prisoner to the prosecutor in 
 the presence of a police inspector, immediately 
 after the prosecutor had said to the prisoner, 
 " The inspector tells me you are making house- 
 breaking implements ; if that is so, you had better 
 tell the truth, it may be better for you " : — Held, 
 by the Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Grove, Haw- 
 kins, Lopes, and Stephen, JJ.), that the confes- 
 sion was not admissible in evidence. The Qtjeen 
 «. Fennell - - - 7 Q. B. D. 147 
 
 2. Husband and Wife — Larceny by Wife 
 
 — Witness, Competency of — Married Women's Pro- 
 perty Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. a. 75), ss. 12, 16.] 
 Upon the trial of a married woman jointly with 
 another person for larceny of the property of her 
 husband, the husband was called as a witness 
 against his wife : — Held, by the Court (Lord 
 Coleridge, C.J., Hawkins, Lopes, and Mathew, 
 JJ. ; Stephen, J., doubting), that the evidence of 
 the husband was improperly received, and that 
 the conviction which had taken place founded 
 upon it was bad as against both the prisoners. 
 The Qtieen v. Bkittleton - 12 Q. B. D. 266 
 [But see 47 & 48 Vict. c. 14.] 
 
 3. Husband and Wife — Statement of Wife 
 
 in presence of Husband — Admission.'] Upon the 
 trial of a prisoner for feloniously receiving stolen 
 property, a list of the stolen articles which the 
 prisoner, who was a marine store dealer, had 
 bought, was received in evidence in order to shew 
 that he had bought at an under value. _ The cir- 
 cumstances under which the list was written were 
 
 XVI. CRIMINAL LAW— EVIDENCE— conM. 
 as follows : A police constable asked the prisoner 
 to consider when he had bought the stolen pro- 
 perty, to which the prisoner replied that his wife 
 should make out a list of it, and on the next day 
 the prisoner's wife in her husband's presence 
 handed to another constable the list tendered in 
 evidence, saying in her husband's hearing " this 
 is a list of what we bought, and what we gave for 
 them." The question reserved was whether such 
 list was properly admitted in evidence: — Held, 
 by the Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Grove, Field, 
 Stephen and Smith, JJ.), that the list was clearly 
 admissible in evidence. The Queen v. Malloet 
 
 [13 Q. B, D, 33 
 
 i. Perjury — Indictment — ■ Information — 
 
 Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1863 (26 & 27 
 Vict. c. 29), s. 7.] By sect. 7 of the Corrupt 
 Practices Prevention Act, 1863, no person sum- 
 moned as a, witness before any commissioners 
 appointed under the Corrupt Practices Acts shall 
 be excused from answering any question relating 
 to corrupt practices forming the subject of inquiry 
 on the ground that the answer would tend to 
 criminate himself, " provided that no statement 
 made by any person in answer to any question 
 put by or before such commissioners shall, except 
 in eases of indictments for perjury, be admissible 
 in evidence in any proceeding civil or crimhial :" — 
 Held, that the exception in the proviso did not 
 apply to an ex oiEcio information hy the Attorney- 
 General for perjury. The Queen v. Slatok 
 
 [8 Q, B. D. 267 
 
 6. Privileged Communication — Solicitor 
 
 and Client, Communications between — Communi- 
 cation in furtherance of Criminal Purpose.'] All 
 communications between a solicitor and his client 
 are not privileged from disclosure, but only those 
 passing between them in professional confidence 
 and in the legitimate course of professional 
 employment of the solicitor. Communications 
 made to a solicitor by his client before the 
 commission of a crime for the purpose of being 
 guided or helped in the commission of it, are 
 not privileged from disclosure. — 0. and E. were 
 partners under a deed of partnership. M. brought 
 an action against E. & Co., and obtained judg- 
 ment therein, and issued execution against the 
 goods of E. The goods seized in execution were 
 then claimed by C. as his absolute property 
 under a bill of sale executed in his favour by E. 
 at a date subsequent to the above-mentioned 
 judgment. An interpleader issue was ordered to 
 determine the validity of the bill of sale, and 
 upon the trial of this issue, the partnership deed 
 was produced on C.'s behalf, bearing an indorse- 
 ment purporting to be a memorandum of dissolu- 
 tion of the said partnership, prior to the com- 
 mencement of the action by M. Subsequently C. 
 and E. were tried and convicted upon a charge of 
 conspiring to defraud M., and upon that trial the 
 case for the prosecution was, that the bill of sale 
 was fraudulent, that the partnership between E. 
 and C. was in truth subsisting when it was 
 given, and that the memorandum of dissolution 
 indorsed on the deed was put there after M. had 
 obtained judgment, and fraudulently ante-dated, 
 the whole transaction being, it was alleged, a 
 fraud intended to cheat M. of the fruits of his 
 
( i75 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 476 ) 
 
 XVI. CRIMINAL LAW— EVIDENCE— conic?, 
 execution. Upon the trial a solicitor was called 
 on behalf of the prosecution to prove that after 
 M. had obtained the judgment C. and K. together 
 consulted him as to how they could defeat M.'s 
 I'udgment, and as to whether a bill of sale could 
 legally be executed by E. in favour of C. so as to 
 defeat sucli judgment, and that no suggestion was 
 then made of any dissolution of partnership 
 having taken place. The reception of this evi- 
 dence being objected to, on the ground that the 
 coromunication was one between solicitor and 
 client, and privileged, the evidence was received, 
 but the question of whether it was properly re- 
 ceived was reserved for this Court : — Held, by the 
 Court (Grove, J., Pollock and Huddleston, BB., 
 Hawkins, Lopes, Stephen, Watkin Williams, 
 Mathew, Day, and Smith, JJ.), that the evidence 
 was properly received. — Cromacli v. Heathcote 
 (2 B. & B. 4) ; Mex v. SmWi (1 Phil. & Arn. on 
 Evidence, 118); and Doe v. Harris (5 C. & P. 
 592) oveTm\ed.—Follettv. Jefferyes (1 Sim. (N.S.) 
 1) ; Eussell v. Jackson (9 Hare, 387) ; and Gart- 
 side V. Outmm (26 L. J. (Ch.) 113) approved. 
 The Queen v. Cox and Eailton 14 Q. B. D. 153 
 
 6. ■ ■ Eeoeiviug Stolen Goods — Guilty Know- 
 ledge — Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871 (34 & 35 
 Vict. c. 112), s. 19.] Upon the trial of a prisoner 
 for receiving stolen property with a guilty know- 
 ledge, evidence was admitted that shortly before 
 the stealing of the property in question lie had 
 been in possession of other stolen property of a 
 similar character, though he had parted with the 
 possession of such other property before the date 
 of the stealing of the property charged in the 
 indictment: — Held, by the Court (Lord Cole- 
 ridge, C.J., Hawkins, Stephen, Williams, and 
 Mathew, JJ.), that such evidence was inadmis- 
 sible, and did not fall within the words of sect. 19 
 of the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871. The 
 Queen v. Cakteb 12 ft. B. D. 622 
 
 XVII. CEIMINAL LAW— PRACTICE. 
 
 Public Prosecutor.] Tlie Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 58 
 (i/ie Prosecution of Offences Act, 1884), revokes all 
 appointments made in pursuance of 42 & 43 Vict, 
 c. 22 (the Prosecution of Offences Act, 1879), and 
 appoints the Solicitor of the Treasury to he director 
 of public prosecutions. 
 
 Sect. 5 repeals the first paragraph of sect. 2, and 
 sects. 3&iofi2& 43 Vict. c. 22. 
 
 Prevention of Crime.] The 48 & 49 Vict. c. 75, 
 amends the Prevention of Crimes Act, 1871 (34 & 35 
 Vict. c. 112), B. 12. 
 
 1. Lunatic — India — Inquiry as to Sanity 
 
 of Accused — Removal to England — Detention in 
 Asylum— U & 15 Viet. e. 81, s. 1.] By 14 & 15 
 Yict. c. 81, s. 1, if any person shall be indicted 
 for or charged with any crime or offence in any 
 Court in India, and shall be acquitted of or not 
 be tried for such crime or offence on the ground 
 of his being found to be of unsoxmd mind, he 
 may be removed to England in tlie manner pre- 
 scribed by the Act.— A European British subject 
 in India having been arrested for homicide, a dis- 
 trict magistrate was informed of it, and went with 
 witnesses to a private house in the presidency, 
 where the accused was detained. On seeing liim 
 and receiving medical testimony on oath as to liis 
 
 XVIL CRIMINAL LAW— PRACTICE— conW. 
 
 state of mind, the magistrate deemed him insane 
 and unfit to be tried, and so reported to the Go- 
 vernment of the Presidency. The Government 
 made an order under 14 & 15 Vict. c. 81, s. 1, for 
 the removal of the prisoner to England. By virtue 
 of the order he was brought in custody to Eng- 
 land, and on his arrival a Eoyal warrant was 
 issued, under sect. 2, for his reception into a 
 lunatic asylum, where he was accordingly kept: — 
 Held, that the prisoner was charged with a crime 
 in a " Court," and " not tried " on the ground of 
 being " found " to be of unsound mind within the 
 meaning of sect. 1, and that his detention was 
 lawful. In re Maltbt 7 Q. B. D. 18 
 
 2, Misdemeanor — Indictment — Tico 
 
 Counts — General Verdict — Second Term of Punish- 
 ment beginning at the end of the First.'] An in- 
 dictment for perjury contained two counts, 
 charging perjiu'y to have been committed by the 
 Defendant on two different occasions, one in the 
 progress of a trial, the other in an affidavit in 
 Chancery. Both acts of perjury, had the same 
 object in view: — Eeld, 1. That they were distinct 
 offences, and a punishment might be inflicted in 
 respect of each. — 2. That though the offences 
 were in this way distinct, they miglit both be in- 
 cluded in the same indictment, and that a general 
 finding of guilty on the charges contained in both 
 counts was good. — 3. That the full punishment of 
 seven years' penal servitude might be inflicted for 
 each offence, and that the second term of pena^ ser- 
 vitude was properly made to begin at the termina- 
 tion of the first term,— 4. The 2 Geo. 2, c. 25, s. 2, 
 authorizes the Judge before whom a person shall 
 be convicted of perjury, to order such person to be 
 sent to a house of correction for seven years, there 
 to be kept to hard labour ; " and thereupon judg- 
 ment shall be given that the pei'son convicted 
 shall be committed accordingly, over and beside 
 such punishment as shall be adjudged to be in- 
 flicted upon such person, agreeable to the laws 
 now in being " : —Held, that this statitte did not 
 impose on the Court the necessity of awarding 
 any punishment previous to that of penal servi- 
 tude so as to give the sentence of penal servi- 
 tude the form of an additional punishment. — The 
 conclusion to a count " contra formam statuti " is 
 now, by 14 & 15 Yict. c. 100, s, 24, no longer ne- 
 cessary. Castro v. The Queen 6 App. Cas, 229 
 
 3. Obstruotiou of Highway — Acquittal- 
 New Trial. ] Upon the trial of an indictment for 
 obstructing a highway the Defendant, was ac- 
 quitted : — Held, that a new trial on the ground 
 of misreception of evidence, misdirection, and 
 that the verdict was against evidence, could not 
 be granted. The Queen «. Duncan 7Q. B.D. 198 
 
 4. ■ • Venue — False Pretences— Pkice of 
 
 Trial.'] H. wrote and posted at N. in England a 
 letter, addressed to G. at a place out of England, 
 containing a false pretence by means of which he 
 fraudulently induced G. to transmit to N. a draft 
 for £150 which he there cashed: — Held, by the 
 Court (Lord Coleridge, C.J., Denman, Hawkins, 
 Williams, and Mathew, JJ.), that there was juris- 
 diction to try H. at N"., that the pretence was 
 made at N., where also the money obtained by 
 means of it was received. The Queen v. Holmes 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 23 
 
( 477 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 478 ) 
 
 CRIMINAL LAW— Bail— ludomuity to surety — 
 Action to recover deposit 15 ft. B. D. 661 
 See CosTKACT — Validity. 2. 
 
 Colony — Appeal to Privy Council 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 675 
 See Practice — Privy Council — Leave 
 
 TO APPEAL. 1. 
 
 Fugitive offenders. 
 
 See Jurisdiction — Statutes. 
 
 Extradition — Jurisdiction of magistrate — 
 
 Decision of magistrate conclusive — 
 Weight of evidence. 10 Q. B. D. 513 
 
 See Extradition. 3. 
 
 Jersey - - - 8 App, Cas. 304 
 
 See Colonial Law— Jersey. 1. 
 
 Larceny from British ship at foreign port — 
 
 Felonious receiving - 10 Q. B. D. 76 
 See Jurisdiction. 2. 
 
 Eiot — Felonious demolition — Action against 
 
 hundred - 7 Q. B. I). 201 
 
 See ElOT. 
 
 CEIMIHAL LUNATIC. 
 
 See Lunatic — Criminal — Stat utes. 
 
 ■ Maintenance 6 Q. B. D. 47 ; 8 App. Cas. 339 
 
 See Lunatic — Criminal. 
 
 CHOPS — Assignment — Bill of sale— Distress — 
 Landlord and tenant - 11 Q. B. D. 808 
 See Bill op Sale — Operation. 1. 
 
 Bill of sale — Separate assignment 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 794 
 See Bill op Sale— Foemalities. 24. 
 
 Valuation of- - 22 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 13. 
 
 CROSS ACTIONS— Ees judicata - 29 Ch. D. 448 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 2. 
 
 CROSS-EXAffllNATION— Afadavit 20 Ch D. 126 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 1. 
 
 Afadavit— Costs of deponent 24 Ch. D. 606 ; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 297 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 22. 
 
 Afadavit— Withdrawal - 21 Ch. D, 642 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 5. 
 
 As to adultery - - 10 P. D. 175 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Kullity op 
 Marriage. 5. 
 
 - 25 Ch. D. 297 ; 
 [29 Ch. D. 711 
 
 See. Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 3, 4. 
 
 18 Ch, D. 334 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 98 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— Costs. 
 7,8. 
 . _ - 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court- Ap- 
 peal. 30. 
 
 CROSS REMAINDERS - 20 Ch, D. 406 
 
 See Will— Cross Eemaindebs. 
 
 Expenses of witnesses 
 
 CROSS NOTICE OF APPEAL 
 
 CROSSED CHEftTJE — Statutory enactments re- 
 specting. 
 
 See Bills op Exchange Act, 1882 — 
 Statutes. 
 
 CROWN. 
 
 Prerogative — Companies Aot, 1862 (25 & 
 
 26 Vict. c. SO)— Judicature Act, 1875, s. 10— Bank- 
 ruptcijAct, 1883 (46 tSk 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 30, 40, 150.] 
 The provisions of tlie Batikruptoy Act, 1883, which 
 take away the priority of the Crown over other 
 creditors in the distribution of assets in bank- 
 ruptcy, have not, by virtue of the assimilating 
 provisions contained in the Judicature Act, 1875, 
 s. 10, been incorporated into the Companies Act, 
 1862, so as to bar the prerogative right of tlie 
 Crown to issue process and thus to obtain pay- 
 ment in full, in priority over other creditors, in 
 respect of a debt due from a company in course 
 of liquidation under the Companies Act, In re 
 Oriental Bank Corporation. Ex parte The 
 Chown - 28 Ch, D, 643 
 
 ■ Administration by nominee of — Proceedings. 
 
 See Administrator — Nominee op 
 Crown — Statutes. 
 
 Adverse possession against 6 App, Cas. 143 
 
 See Colonial Law — Honduras, 
 
 Booly of war - - 7 App, Cas, 619 
 
 See Booty op War. 
 
 Forfeiture of gale— Election 27 Ch, D, 652 
 
 See Mine — Free Miners. 
 
 Lands Clauses Aot — Claim for purchase- 
 money - 24 Ch. D. 253 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Pubohase- 
 MONEY, 1, 
 
 Mandamus — Commissioners of Inland Re- 
 venue 12 Q, B, D, 461 
 See Mandamus. 2. 
 
 Payment of interest by — Bona vacantia 
 
 See. Interest. 1. [17 Ch, D, 771 
 
 Prerogative — Incorporation of building 
 
 society — Irregularity 18 Ch, D, 173 
 
 See Building Society, 11. 
 
 ■ Prerogative^Eecovery of penalty 
 
 . [7 Q. B. D, 38 ; 8 App. Cas. 354 
 See Penal Action. 2. 
 
 Eeservation of rights of — Prolongation ot 
 
 patent - - . 6 App. Cac. 174 
 
 See Patent — Prolongation. 4. 
 
 Eight of subject to sue Crown — Set-off 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 671 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 4 
 
 Servants of— Liability - 6 App. Cas, 619 
 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 1. 
 
 ■ Service of — Domicil 
 See Domicil. 2. 
 
 30 Ch. D. 165 
 
 CROWN LANDS. 
 
 The Act 48 * 49 Vict. c. 79 {the Crown Lands 
 Act, 1885), amends the lata relating to the manage- 
 ment of the woods, forests, and land revenues of the 
 Crown, and amends 10 Geo. 4, c. 50, and 14 (£ 15 
 Vict. c. 42. 
 
( i79 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 480 ) 
 
 CEOWN LAlSJiS— continued. 
 
 Griqualand - - 8 App. Cas. 318 
 
 See Colonial Law — Geiqualand. 
 
 New South Wales 6 App. Cas. 629, 636 
 
 See OoLONiAL Law — New South Wales. 
 1,2. 
 
 Sale of. 
 
 See Real Estate — Statutes. 
 
 CaOWN OITICE ETTIES. 
 
 See OoUHT — Statutes and Gazette. 
 
 CETJELTY— Condonation - 8 P. D. 98 
 
 See Peactice — Divorce — Condonation. 
 1. 
 
 CETIELTY TO ANIMALS. 
 
 " Domestic Animals '' — 12 & 13 Viet. 
 
 c. 92, ss. 2, 29—17 & 18 Viet. c. 60, ». 3— 
 JBirds trained and kept as Decoy Birds.} Birds 
 kept in a state of captivity and trained as decoy 
 birds for the purpose of "bird-catching are " do- 
 mestic animals" within tlie meaning of 12 & 13 
 Tict. c. 92, the Act for the more effectual Preven- 
 tion of Cruelty to Animals. Colam v. Pagett 
 
 [12 a. B. D, 66 
 
 CUETESY — Devise to married daughter — Death 
 before testator - 17 Ch. D. 115 
 
 See Will — Speaking eeom Death. 1. 
 
 OirSTODY OF CHILDEEN, 
 
 See Cases under Infant — Custody. 
 
 Covenant respecting ■ 18 Ch. D, 670 
 
 See Husband and Wiee — Sepaeation 
 Deeds. 1. 
 
 Girls under sixteen. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Offenoes against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 CUSTODY OF DEEDS — Acknowledgment on con- 
 veyance. 
 See Title Deeds — Statutes. 
 
 Trustee in bankruptcy - 26 Ch. D. 31 
 
 See Title Deeds. 
 
 CUSTODY OF GOODS— Innkeeper 23 Ch. D. 330 
 
 See Inn — Innkeepee. 2. 
 
 CUSTOM — Borough — Individual benefit of free- 
 men - - 21 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Municipal OoEPOKATiON — Peopeety. 
 
 Country— Eight to sell flints 21 Ch. D. 18 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 508 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom 
 OF Country. 
 
 Manor 18 Ch. D. 165 ; 20 Ch. D. 753 
 
 See Copyhold — Custom. 1, 2. 
 • Manor— Admittance - 30 Ch. D. 581 
 
 See Copyhold — Subebndee and Admit- 
 tance. 2. 
 
 Mine — Bight of miner to remove buildings 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 296; 8 App. Cas, 196 
 
 See Mine — Working. 1. 
 
 Stock Exchange — Sale of lank shares 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 460; 16 Q. B. D, 388 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 4, 5. 
 
 CUSTOM — continued. 
 
 Stock Exchange — Sale of shares — Illegality 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 1. [9 ft. B. D. 546 
 
 Trade — Hiring furniture - 18 Ch. D. 30 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 261 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Oedee and Disposi- 
 tion. 4, 5. 
 
 Trade — Implied contract between manufac- 
 turer of iron plates and customer 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 438 
 See Sale of Goods — Contract. 1. 
 
 Trade — Port of discharge — Evidence 
 
 [6 P. D. 68 
 See Ship — Chaeteepabty. 16. 
 
 CUSTOM HOUSE AGENT— Infringement of patent 
 
 —Transshipment - 17 Ch. D. 721 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 6 
 
 See Patent — Infringement. 6. 
 
 CUSTOMAEY EENT 16 Ch. D. 730 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entby. 
 2. 
 
 CUSTOMEES— Solicitation of - 27 Ch. D. 145 
 
 See Goodwill. 3. 
 
 Solicitation of 22 Ch. D. 504 
 
 See Paetneeship —Dissolution. 3. 
 
 CUSTOMS ANNUITY FUND. 
 
 Power of Subscriber to bequeath Sum 
 
 assured.] The Customs Annuity and Benevolent 
 Fund was established for the benefit of the 
 widows, children, or other relatives of ofiicers of 
 the Customs, by Act of Parliament, which gave 
 power to frame rules for its management. By 
 the rules it was provided that the fund should 
 be jaised by subscriptions on the principle of life 
 insurance, and should form a fund for the bene- 
 fit of widows, children, relatives, and nominees 
 of the subscribers. It was provided that the ad- 
 mission of a nominee by the directors should 
 take place during tlie life of the subscriber ; that 
 the capital money forthcoming at a subscriber's 
 death under his insurance should, subject to the 
 regulations thereinafter contained, be appropriated 
 according to the directions contained in his will 
 or in any instrument deposited with the directors 
 as therein mentioned ; that the widow's share 
 should not be less than one-third, or a life in- 
 terest in two-thirds, and that the remainder should 
 be applied according to the directions of the sub- 
 scriber for the benefit of his widow, children, 
 blood relations, or any of them, or his nominee or 
 nominees who had been duly admitted by the di- 
 rectors ; that if the widow was otherwise provided 
 for as therein mentioned the whole money should 
 be subject to the directions of the subscriber " in 
 favour of his widow, children, blood relations, or 
 nominees, or any of them as aforesaid ;" that if 
 the widow received the income of two-thirds the 
 capital of the two-thirds should be held, subject 
 to the directions of the subscriber, to take effect 
 at the death of the widow, and the remaining 
 capital, subject to the directions of the subscriber, 
 to take effect at his own death ; that if the widow 
 was provided for as thereinbefore mentioned, or if 
 there was no widow, then the whole capital should 
 be " subject to the directions of the subscriber as 
 aforesaid ;' that if a subscriber died leaving issue 
 
( 4S1 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 482 ) 
 
 CUSTOMS ANNtriTY rXTND— oorfiiMJCcJ. 
 ■without having hy will or such other instrument 
 as aforesaid directed the application of the capital 
 placed at his disposal, it should go to his children 
 and the issue of deceased children as therein men- 
 tioned, and if none, to his next of kin. A sub- 
 scriber died a widower leaving children. No 
 nominee had been accepted by the directors in his 
 lifetime. By his will he bequeathed the fund 
 •coming from his insurance to a stranger in blood : 
 — Meld, by Bacon, V.C, that the legatee was en- 
 titled : — Seld, by the Court of Appeal, that the 
 subrcriber had no property in the fund, but only 
 «, limited power of appointment over it, and that 
 this power could only be exercised in favour of 
 Ms widow, children, blood relations, and nominees 
 admitted by the directors in his lifetime ; that he 
 had therefore no power to bequeath the fund to a 
 stranger in blood, who had not in his lifetime 
 been accepted by the directors as a nominee, and 
 
 CUSTOMS ANNUITY SVSJi— continued. 
 
 that the fund therefore belonged to the children. 
 
 In re William Phillips' Insceanoe 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 235 
 CUSTOMS AND INLAND KEVENUE ACTS. 
 See Ebvenue — Customs — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 Eevende — Income Tax — Statutes. 
 Eevbnde — Legacy Duty — Statutes. 
 Eevenue — PeokateDuty — Statutes, 
 Eevenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 CUSTOMS REGULATION ACT, 1879— New South 
 Wales - - 10 App. Cas. 282 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 4. 
 
 CY-PEES— Charity— Scheme - 18 Ch. D. 310 
 See Chabity — Management. 3. 
 
 Charity which has ceased to e.xist 
 
 See Charity, Gift to. 2. [29 Ch. D. 560 
 
( 483 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 484 ) 
 
 D. 
 
 DAMAGE — Amendment — Mistake in preliminary 
 act - - 7 P. D. 185 
 
 See Pkaotice — Admiealtt — Peelimi- 
 NAEY Act. 
 
 Harbour master — Harbour Commissioners — 
 
 Liability - 10 P. D. 24, 131 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 9, 10. 
 
 Limitation of liability — Tonnage of ship 
 
 [6 P. D. 200 
 Bee Peaotice ■ — Admikalty — Limita- 
 tion OF Liability. 4. 
 
 DAMAGES :— Col. 
 
 L Conteaot _ _ _ 4S3 
 
 II. LoED Caiens' Act - 484 
 
 in. LoED Campbell's Act - - 484 
 
 IV. Kemoteness - - 485 
 
 I. DAMAGES— CONTRACT. 
 
 1.' Measure of Damages — Cost of Ferform- 
 
 ance not tlie Measure.'] The grantees of certain land 
 had covenanted with the grantor, since deceased, 
 that the land, except as to the entrance to be 
 made by them towards an intended new road, 
 should be and be kept enclosed on all the sides abut- 
 ting on the land of the grantor with a brick wall 
 seven feet high. The grantees not having erected 
 a wall in pursuance of the covenant, an action was 
 brought against them by the executors and de- 
 visees of the grantor for damages for the breach of 
 covenant. It appeared that, in the events that 
 had happened, the value of the adjoining land of 
 the Plaintiffs was not decreased by the non-erec- 
 tion of the wall to anything like the amount which 
 it would have cost to build the wall : — fl'eM,that, 
 the true measure of damages being the pecuniary 
 amount of the difference between the position of 
 the Plaintiffs upon the breach of contract and what 
 it would have been if the contract had been per- 
 formed, under the circumstances of the case the 
 amount that it would cost to build the wall was 
 not the correct measure of the damages. Wigsell 
 V. School foe the Indigent Blind 8 Q, B. D. 357 
 
 2. Measure of Damages — Sale of Goods to 
 
 fulfil a Contract hy VendeeJ] The Defendants con- 
 tracted with the Plaintiff to deliver goods to him of 
 a particular shape and description at certain prices 
 and by instalments at different times. When the 
 contract was made the Defendants knew that, 
 except as to price, it corresponded with and was 
 substantially the same as a contract which the 
 Plaintiff had entered into with a French customer 
 of his, and that it was made in order to enable 
 the Plaintiff to fulfil such last-mentioned contract. 
 The Defendants broke their contract, and there 
 being no market for goods of the description con- 
 tracted for, the Plaintiff's customer recovered 
 damages against him in the French Court to the 
 amount of £28 : — Held, in an action against the 
 Defendants for their breach of contract, that the 
 Plaintiff was not only entitled to recover as 
 damages the amount of profit he would have 
 
 I. DAMAGES— CONTEACT—COTrfmMefZ. 
 
 made had he been able to fulfil his contract with 
 his customer, but also damages in respect of his 
 liability to such customer, and that in estimating 
 such last-mentioned damages the £28 which the 
 French Court had given might be treated as not an 
 unreasonable sum at which such damages might be 
 assessed. — The case of Elbinger Actien-Gesell- 
 scliaft V. Armstrong (Law Kep. 9 Q. B. 473) ap- 
 proved of. Geebeet-Boegnis v. Nugent 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 85 
 
 II. DAMAGES— lOED CAIENS' ACT. 
 
 Nominal Damages — Repeal of Act.] Lord 
 
 Cairns' Act (21 & 22 Vict. c. 27) is applicable to 
 cases where the damage sustained by the Plain- 
 tiff is only nominal, as well as to cases where he 
 is entitled to substantial damages. — The repeal 
 of Lord Cairns' Act by 46 & 47 Vict. c. 49 has 
 not affected the jurisdiction of the Court. — Fi:r 
 Fry, L.J. : An amount of acquiescence on the 
 part of the Plaintiff which would not be suflicient 
 to bar his action, may be sufficient to induce the 
 Court to give damages instead of an injunction. 
 Sayees v. Collyee - 28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 III. DAMAGES— LOED CAMPBELL'S ACT. 
 
 1. Distribution of the Fund — Railway Ac- 
 cident — Compensation — Compromise — No action 
 hrouglit—Lord Campbell's Act (9 & 10 Vict. c. 93) 
 —Amendment Act (27 & 28 Vict. v. 95).] A sum 
 of money was received from a railway company by 
 way of compensation by the executors of a person 
 whose death had resulted from injuries received in 
 an accident on the railway, no action having been 
 brought under Lord Campbell's Act (9 & 10 Vict, 
 c. 93). — The executors brought an action in the 
 Chancery Division, to which all the relatives of 
 the deceased referred to in sect. 2 of 9 & 10 Vict. 
 0. 28, were parties, asking for a declaration as to 
 the persons entitled to the money : — Held, that 
 the Court could distribute the fund amongst such 
 of the relatives of the deceased as suffered damage 
 by reason of the death, in the same manner as a 
 JU17 could have done in an action under the Act. 
 BULMERU. BULMBR 25 Ch. D. 409 
 
 2. Evidence of Pecuniary JjOss— Action 
 
 for causing Death through Negligence — 9 (fe 10 Vict, 
 c. 93), s. 2 — Pecuniary Loss to surviritig Rela- 
 tive.] In an action brought, under 9 & 10 Vict. 
 c. 93, for the benefit of the father of the deceased, 
 evidence was given that the father, who was fifty- 
 nine years of age, was nearly blind and injured in 
 his leg and hands, and was not so able to 'work as 
 he had been, but worked when he could; that 
 the son used to contribute to his support ; that 
 five or six years previously, the father being out of 
 work for six months, the son had assisted him 
 pecuniarily out of his earnings, but had not done so 
 since : — Held, that there was evidence for the jury 
 of pecuniary injury to the father from the son's 
 death. Hethebington v. Noeth Eastern Kail- 
 way Company - 9 Q. B. D. 160 
 
( 485 ) 
 
 DIWEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 486 ) 
 
 IV. DAMAGES— REMOTENESS. 
 
 1. Collision — Loss of MarhetJ] A ship 
 
 haviiig been damaged by a collision with another 
 ship, the owners of cargo on the former claimed 
 damages from the owners of the latter ship. The 
 cargo-owners claimed, inter alia, for damages in 
 respect of the loss of market in consequence of a 
 portion of the cargo having been delayed in its 
 arrival at the port of destination : — Held, affirm- 
 ing the judgment of Sir Jameg Hannen, that loss 
 of market was too remote a consequence to be 
 considered as an element of damage, and that 
 there was no difference ia the principles which 
 regulate the measure of damages in an action of 
 collision, and an action for a breach of duty 
 under a shipping contract. — The Parana (2 P. D. 
 118) approved. The " Kotting Hill " 9 P. D. 106 
 
 3. Commission for Bail — Salvage Action.'] 
 
 Commission paid for bail in a salvage action will 
 not be allowed as part of the damages recoverable 
 by the salved vessel in an action of damage. The 
 " BbiTISH COMMEBCE " - ' 9 P. D. 128 
 
 3. Innkeeper.] The Defendant, an inn- 
 keeper, contracted with the Plaintiff, a horse- 
 dealer, to provide him with stabling for a number 
 of horses during a fair at which they were to be 
 sold, but in consequence of the Defendant, in 
 breach of such contract, having let his stables to 
 another person,;the Plaintiffs horses, after they 
 had been put into the Defendant's stables on their 
 arrival there, from a railway journey, were turned 
 out by that person, assisted by the Defendant's 
 servant, without their clothing, and they remained 
 in the Defendant's yard exposed to the weather for 
 some time until the Plaintiff could find suitable 
 stables for them elsewhere. Owing to this ex- 
 posure several of them caught cold, which depre- 
 ciated their value in the market : — Seld, that the 
 damage in respect of such cold was recoverable, 
 as it was the probable consequence of the Defen- 
 dant's breach of contract, and was not therefore 
 too remote. — Hdbbs v. London and South Western 
 Railway Company (Law Kep. 10 Q. B. Ill) com- 
 mented on. MoMahon v. Field 7 Q. B. D. 691 
 
 4. IiOBS of Profit on Contract to resell.'] In 
 
 an action for breach of contract. to deliver goods it 
 was shewn that the goods were not procurable in 
 the market, that the Plaintiff had entered into a 
 contract of subsale, which in consequence of the 
 non-delivery he could not perform, that such con- 
 tract was not known to the Defendant at the time 
 of sale, but that he knew that the goods had been 
 purchased by the Plaintiff for resale : — Beld, by 
 Grove, J., that the Plaintiff was not entitled to re- 
 cover damages for loss of profit on the resale. — 
 Barries v. Hutchinson (8 0. B. (N.S.) 445) dis- 
 tinguished. Thol 11. Henderson 8 Q. B. D, 457 
 
 5. Warehouseman — Breach of Contract — 
 
 Negligence.] The Defendant contracted to ware- 
 house certain goods for the Plaintiff at a parti- 
 cular place, but he warehoused a, part of them at 
 another place where, without any negligence on 
 his part, they were destroyed. In an action to 
 recover as damages the value of the goods: — 
 Seld (by Grove, Lindley, and Stephen, JJ.), that 
 the damage was not too remote, and that the 
 Defendant, by his breach of contract, had ren- 
 dered himself liable for the loss of the goods. 
 Lillet v. Dotjbleday - - 7 Q. B. D. 510 
 
 DAMAGES — Abandonment of railway — Land- 
 owner [26 Ch. D. 251 
 See Railway Company — Abandonment. 
 2. 
 
 Agreement for lease — Lessor only entitled 
 
 to moiety - 19 Ch. D. 175 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Agree- 
 ment. 3. 
 
 -■ Application for new trial — Power of Court 
 
 to reduce damages - 12 Q. B, D. 356 
 See Practice — Supreme CouRa'-— New 
 Trial. 4. 
 
 Breach of covenant — Proof in bankruptcy 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 410 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 5. 
 
 Cargo — Reshipment — Use of damaged cargo 
 
 See Ship— Navigation. 3. [10 P. D. 167 
 
 Carrier — Negligence — Temporary loss of. 
 
 gpods - - 10 Q. B. D. 142 
 
 See Carrier — Carriers' Act. 
 
 Collision — Apportionment 7 App. Cas. 512 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Appor- 
 tionment 01' Damage. 
 
 Company — Neglect to register transfer of . 
 
 shares - 14 Q. B. D. 882 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 6. 
 
 Covenant for quiet enjoyment 9 Q. B. D. 128 
 
 See, Right of Entry. 2. 
 
 Damage to estate of intestate arising out of 
 
 injury to his person 9 Q. B. D. 110' 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 1. 
 
 Defamation - 11 Q. B. D. 407 
 
 See Defamation — Slander. 4. 
 
 Divorce — ^Condonation 10 P. D. 174 
 
 See Practice — Divorob — Condonation. . 
 2. 
 
 : False representation - 20 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See False Representation. 1. 
 
 Forcible entry - - 17 Ch, D. 174 
 
 See Forcible Entry. 1. 
 
 Infringement of -patent — Proof in bank- 
 ruptcy - - - 20 Ch. D. 780 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 7. 
 
 Inquiry as to - 16 Ch. B. 81 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Costs. 
 33. 
 
 Liquidated— Penalty - 21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Penalty. 
 
 — r. Lord Cairns' Act — Light — Discretion of 
 Court 26 Ch, D. 57& 
 
 See Light — Obstruction. 2. 
 
 Lord Campbell's Act — Widow of workman 
 
 how far bound by his contract not to claim 
 compensation - 9 ft. B. D. 357 
 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 8. 
 
 ■Salvage 
 
 [10 P. D. 168 
 
 ■Admiralty— Salvage. 
 
 ■ Malicious arrest of ship- 
 
 See Practice- 
 6. 
 
 - Measure of — Action of deceit 17 Ch. D. 301 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 3. 
 
 - Measure of^— Collision - 8 P. D. 109 
 
 See Ship — Navigation, 1. 
 
 E 2 
 
( 487 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 488 ) 
 
 pilot- 
 D. 218 
 
 DAMAGES — continued. 
 
 Measure of — Collision — Compulsory 
 
 age - - - 8 P. 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 4. 
 
 Measure of — Delay in transmission of goods 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 682 
 
 See Oaeeiee — Damages. 
 Measure of— Guarantee 16 Ch. D. 290 
 
 See Pkinoipal and Surety — Costraot. 
 
 Measure of — Improper sale by solicitor 
 
 [16 Cli. D. 393 
 
 See SoLioiTOB — Liabilities. 7. 
 
 ' Measure of — Principal and agent — Consign- 
 ment of goods not of description ordered 
 [11 a. B. D. 797 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 3. 
 
 Measure of — Warranty of authority 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 367 
 See PEmoiPAL and Agent — Agent's 
 Authority. 2. 
 
 Eecovered in previous action — Ees judicata 
 
 See Judgment. 5. [14 Q. B. D. 141 
 
 Set-off— Misconduct'of director 22 Ch. D. 
 
 [122 ; 25 Ch. D. 587 
 See Company — Set-oef. 1. 
 
 Slander of title 19 Ch. D. 386 
 
 See Patent — Infringement. 4. 
 
 Specific performance — Alternative relief 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 356 
 See Speoifio Pehpoemanoe. 2. 
 
 Undertaking as to 21 Ch, D. 421 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 474 
 See Praotiob — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 8, 9. 
 
 Undertaking as to — Receiver in bankruptcy 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 644 
 See Bankruptcy — Keoeiver. 1. 
 
 Undischarged banki'upt — Eight of action 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 768 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 4. 
 "DANUBE — ^Navigation of — Collision 
 
 [10 App. Cas, 276 
 See Ship — Navigation. 4. 
 DE BENE ESSE— Evidence 16 Ch. D. 100 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 224 ; 26 Ch. D. 1 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 1, 17, 18. 
 DEAD BODY — Cast on shore — Burial — ^Liability 
 of county - 6 ft. B. D. 664 
 
 See BuEiAL Ground. 2. 
 
 Cremation of 12 ft. B. D. 247 ; 13 ft. B. D. 331 
 
 See Cbiminal Law — Misdemeanor. 1, 2. 
 
 Eight of property— Executor 20 Ch. D. 659 
 
 See Executor — Powers. 3. 
 
 DEAN FOSEST 27 Ch. D. 652 
 
 See Mine— Free Miners. 
 DEATH — Acceptor of bill drawn in blank — Sub- 
 sequent completion of bill 20 Ch. D. 
 [225 ; 26 Ch. D, 663 
 
 See Bill of Exchange— Acceptance. 
 
 Before completion of contract. 
 
 See Vendor and PvRCHASEn — Convey- 
 ance — Statutes. 
 
 DEATH — continued. 
 
 Before date of will — Class — Substitutional 
 
 gift 17 Ch. D. 788 ; 23 Ch. D. 737 
 
 See Will — Substixutionai Gift. 1, 2. 
 
 Before payment 30 Ch, D. 512 
 
 See Will — Words. 4. 
 
 Before testator. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Lapse. 
 
 Before testator 22 Ch. D, 111 
 
 See Will — Class. 3. 
 
 Before testator 16 Ch. D. 18 
 
 See Power — Execution. 6. 
 
 Coupled with some contingency — Construc- 
 tion of will 
 See Cases under Will — Death coupled 
 
 WITH CONTINGENCT. 
 
 Party to reference before award — Eight of 
 
 executor - 16 ft. B. D. 565 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 4. 
 
 Protector of settlement — Estate tail 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 2. [16 Ch, D. 176 
 
 DEBENTURE. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Deben- 
 tures. 
 
 Contemporaneous deeds — Priority of opera- 
 tion - - 21 Ch. D. 762 
 See Deed. 1. 
 
 Holder of — Petition to wind up company 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 278 
 See Company — Winhing-up Order. 12. 
 
 Investment of money — Misappropriated by 
 
 directors - - 21 Ch. D. 492 
 
 See Company — Director's Liability'. 3. 
 
 Misstatement of object |'of loan — Action of 
 
 deceit - 29 Ch. D. 459 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 5. 
 
 Mortgage of chattels — Exception from Act. 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Statutes. 
 
 — — Property of lunatic - 17 Ch. D, 516 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 5. 
 
 Eight to rolling stock 21 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Eailway Company — Constitution. 
 
 Stamp duty - - 7 ft. B, D. 165 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps. 2. 
 
 Stamp duty — Statute respecting. 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 Turnpike roads — Law of Canada 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 473 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 10. 
 
 DEBENTURE STOCK— Investment 23 Ch. D, 750 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 money. 7. 
 
 Priority— ^Borrowing powers 18 Ch, D, 334; 
 
 [8 App, Cas, 780 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 1. 
 DEBT — Accord and satisfaction. 
 
 See Cases under Accord and Satisfac- 
 tion. 
 
 Assignment. 
 
 .See Cases under Assignment of Debt. 
 
 Attachment of. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 CouET — Garnishee Orders. 
 
( 489 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 490 ) 
 
 SEBT — continued. 
 
 Bequest of" estate and effects " 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Will— Words. 7. [573 
 Charge of debts - - 20 Ch. D. 465 
 
 See Will — Chaege oi? Debts. 
 
 Direction to pay debts — Estate of trustees 
 
 See Will— Tbustees. 1. [21 Ch. D. 790 
 
 Disputed — Debtor's summons 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 312 
 See Bankbuptoy — Act of Bankbuptcy. 
 18. 
 
 Disputed — Petition for adjudication 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Bakkbuptoy — Adjudication. 1. 
 
 Disputed — ^Petition for winding up. 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 555, 657, n. ; 23 Ch. D. 210 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 9, 
 10. 
 
 Incurred by fraud — Proof in bankruptcy 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 122 
 See Banketiptoy — ^Pboop. 22. 
 
 Inquiry as to debts - 20 Ch. D. 465 
 
 See Will — Chakge of Debts. 
 
 ■ Mai'ried woman- 
 
 ■Separate estate 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 749 
 
 Wife — Sepaeate 
 
 fee Husband and 
 Estate. 12. 
 
 e — How far " absolute assignment " 
 witliin 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, s. 25 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 347 
 See Assignment op Debt. 3. 
 
 ■ Of record — Balance due from receiver 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 296 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Pee- 
 soNAL Actions. 11. 
 
 - Payable out of real estate 19 Ch. D. 156 
 
 See Chabity — Moetmain. 2. 
 
 - Payment of, by felon 19 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Act op Bankbuptcy. 
 12. 
 
 - Kelinquisbment of — Condition 21 Ch. D. 431 
 
 See Will — Condition. 8. 
 
 ■ Specialty 
 
 See Specialty Debt. 
 
 - 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 BEBTOE— Arrest of. 
 
 See Cases under Aebest — Debtoe's Act. 
 
 Arrest of — Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Statutes. 
 
 Imprisonment of — Appeal — Law of Lower 
 
 Canada - - 8 App. Cas. 530 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 2. 
 
 DEBTOBS ACT — Order for payment of damages 
 into registry— Default 10 P. D. 185 
 
 See Pbaotice — Divoboe — Damages. 
 
 SEBTOK'S SUMMONS. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptcy — Act of 
 Bankbuptcy. 12 — 22. 
 
 Act of bankruptcy — Discontinuance of trade 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 394 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Teadeb. 2. 
 
 DEBTOE'S SVWiS.O'SS— continued. 
 
 Act of bankruptcy available for adjudication 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 605 
 See Bankbuptcy — Peotected Teansac- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 Judgment debt - 22 Ch. D. 829 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Appeal. 5. 
 
 Partner, on judgment against firm 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 124 
 See Pbaotice — Supeeme Coubt — Pab- 
 ties. 11. 
 DECEASES DEBTOE — Administration of estate 
 in bankruptcy. 
 See Bankbuptcy — Statutes. 
 
 Cases under Bankbuptcy — De- 
 ceased Debtoe. 
 
 Claim against— Corroboration 23 Ch. D, 267 
 
 See ExEcuTOE — Actions. 15. 
 DECEASED FAETNEB — Administration action — 
 Joint creditors - 25 Ch. D. 16 
 
 See Pbaotice — Supbeme Court — Con- 
 duct of Cause. 4. 
 
 Share of - 8 App. Cas. 822 
 
 See Pabtneeship — Conteaot. 2. 
 DECEIT— Action for 17 Ch. D. 301 ; 20 Ch. D. 27 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 187 
 See Company — Prospectus. 1, 3. 
 
 DECLAEATION OF DECEASED PEESON 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 985; 13 Q. B. D. 818 
 
 See Evidence — Declaration by De- 
 ceased Peeson. 1, 2. 
 
 Scotch law - 6 App. Cas, 489 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 3. 
 DECIABATION OF FUTUEE EIGHTS— Appeal 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 1 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Ap- 
 peal. 34. 
 DECLAEATION of legitimacy— Appeal from 
 grant or refusal of. 
 
 See Pbaotice — Divoece — Appeal — 
 Statutes. 
 DECLAEATION OF TETTST 17 Ch. D. 416 
 
 See VoLUNTABY Conveyance. 1. 
 
 DECBEE NISI — Ee-marriage before decree abso- 
 lute - - 6 P. D. 11 
 See Pbaotice — Divoece — Decree. 3. 
 
 DEDICATION— Highway 16 Ch. D. 449 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 6. 
 Highway - 29 Ch. D. 750 
 
 See Highway — Dedication. 
 Land to public purposes - 6 App. Cas. 636 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 
 1, 
 DEED. 
 
 „ Construction and Effect.] The Act 44 (645 Vict. 
 c. 41 (^Conveyancing Act, 1881), enacts, sect. 2 : — 
 
 In this Act — 
 
 (i.) Property, unless a contrary intention ap- 
 pears, includes real and personal property^ and 
 any estate or interest in any property, real or 
 personal, and any debt, and anything in action, 
 and any other right or interest : 
 
 (ii.) Land, unless a contrary intention appears, 
 includes land of any tenure, and tenements and 
 
( 491 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( i92 ) 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 liereditaments, corporeal or incorporeal, and Jiouses 
 and other buildings, also an undivided share in 
 land : 
 
 (v.) Conveyance, unless a contrary intention 
 appears, includes assignment, appointment, lease, 
 settlement, and other assurance, and covenant to 
 surrender, made by deed, on a sale, mortgage, de- 
 mise, or settlement of any property, or on any 
 other dealing with or for any property ; and con- 
 vey, unless a contrary intention appears, has a 
 meaning corresponding with that of conveyance. 
 
 Conveyance to oneself.] Sect. 6. — (1.) Freehold 
 laud or a thing in action may he conveyed hy a 
 person to himself jointly with another personhy the 
 like means hy which it might he conveyed hy him to 
 another person ; and may, in like manner, he con- 
 veyed hy a husband to his wife. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to conveyances 
 made after the commencement of this Act — 31si of 
 December, 1881. 
 
 Covenants binding Representatives.] Sect. 58. — 
 (1.) A covenant relating to land of inheritance, or 
 devolving on the heir as special occupant, shall he 
 deemed to he made with the covenantee his heirs 
 and assigns, and shall have effect as if heirs and 
 assigns were expressed. 
 
 (2.) A covenant, relating to land not of inherit- 
 ance, or not devolving on the heir as special 
 occupant, shall he deemed to he made with the 
 covenantee, his executors, administrators, and as- 
 signs, and shall have effect as if executors, adminis- 
 trators, and assigns were expressed. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only to covenants made 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 59. — (1.) Acovenant, and a contract under 
 seal, and a bond or obligation under seal, though 
 not expressed to hind the heirs, shall operate in law 
 to bind the heirs and real estate, as well as the 
 executors and administrators and personal estate, 
 of the person making the same, as if heirs loere ex- 
 pressed. 
 
 (2.) This section extends to a covenant implied 
 hy virtue of this Act. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the covenant, 
 contract, bond, or obligation, and shall have effect 
 subject to the terms of the covenant, contract, bond, 
 or obligation, and to the provisions therein con- 
 tained. 
 
 (i.) This section applies only to a covenant, con- 
 tract, bond, or obligation made or implied after the 
 commencement of this A ct. 
 
 Sect. 60. — (1.) A covenant, and a contract under 
 seal, and a bond or obligation under seal, mads 
 with two or more jointly, to pay money or to make 
 a conveyance, or to do any other act, to them or for 
 their benefit, shall be deemed to include, and shall, 
 hy virtue of this Act, imply, an obligation to do the 
 act to, or for the benefit of, the survivor or sur- 
 vivors of them, and to, or for the benefit of, any 
 other person to whom the right to sue on the 
 covenant, contract, bond, or obligation devolves. 
 
 (2.) This section extends to a covenant implied 
 hy cirtue of this Act. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the covenant, 
 rontract, bond, or obligation, and shall have effect 
 subject to the covenant, contract, bond, or c"' 
 tion, and to the provisions therein contained. 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 (4.) TIds section applies only to a covenant, con- 
 tract, bond, or obligation made or implied after the 
 commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 64. In the construction of a covenant or 
 proviso, or other provision, implied in a deed by 
 virtue of this Act, words importing the singularor 
 plural number, or the masculine gender, shall he 
 read as also importing the plural or singular 
 number, or as extending to females, as the case mhy 
 require. 
 
 Covenants for Title, when implied.] Sect. 7. — 
 (1.) In a conveyance there shall in the several 
 cases in this section mentioned, be deemed to he in- 
 cluded, and there shall in those several cases, hy 
 virtue of this Act, he implied, a covenant to the 
 effect in this section stated, by the person or hyjsaeh 
 person who conveys, as far as regards the subject- 
 matter or share of subject-matter expressed to he 
 conveyed hy him, with the person, if one, to whom, 
 the conveyance is made, or with the persons jointly, 
 if more than one, to whom the conveyance is made 
 as joint tenants, or with each of the persons, if 
 more than one, to whom the conveyance is made as 
 tenants in common, that is to say : 
 
 (A.) In a conveyance for valuable consideration, 
 other than a mortgage, the follmoing covenants by a 
 person who conveys and is expressed to convey as 
 beneficial owner {namely') : 
 
 Bight to convey. 
 
 Quiet enjoyment. 
 
 Freedom from incumbrances. 
 
 Further assurance 
 (in which covenant a purchase for value shall iwt 
 he deemed to include a conveyance in consideration 
 of marriage). 
 
 (B.) In a conveyance of leasehold property for 
 valuable consideration, other than a mortgage, the 
 following further covenant by a person who conveys 
 and is expressed to convey as beneficial ovoner 
 (namely) : 
 
 Validity of lease, 
 (in which covenant a purchase for value shall not 
 be deemed to include a conveyance in consideration 
 of marriage). 
 
 (C.) In a conveyance hy way of mortgage, the 
 following covenants hy a person who conveys and is 
 expressed to convey as beneficial owner (namely) : 
 
 Bight to convey. 
 
 Quiet enjoyment. 
 
 Freedom from incumbrances. 
 
 Further assurance. 
 (D.) In a conveyance hy way of mortgage of 
 leasehold property, the further following covenants 
 by a person who conveys and is expressed to convey 
 as beneficial owner (namely) ; 
 
 Validity of lease. 
 
 Payment of rent and performance of coven- 
 ants. 
 
 To indemnify against breach of covenants. 
 (E.) In u, conveyance hy way of settlement, the 
 following covenants hy a person who conveys and is 
 expressed to convey as settlor (namely) : 
 
 For further assurance limited. 
 (F.) In any conveyance the follmoing covenant 
 hy every person who conveys and is expressed to 
 convey as trustee or mortgagee, or as personal re- 
 presentative of a deceased person, or a^s committee 
 of a lunatic so found by inquisition, en- under an 
 order of the Court, which covenant shall he deemed 
 
( 493 ) 
 
 BIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 49i ) 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 to extend^ to every euch 'person's own acts only 
 
 (namely) : 
 
 Against incumbrances. 
 
 (2.) Where in a conveyance it is expressed that 
 by direction of a person expressed to direct as 
 henefldal owner another person conveys, tlien, 
 viithin this section, the person giving the direction, 
 iuihetlier he conveys and is expressed to 'convey as 
 beneficial owner or not, shall he .deemed to convey 
 •and to he expressed to convey as heneficial owner 
 the subject-^matter so conveyed hy his direction; 
 ■and a covenant on his part shall be implied 
 •accordingly. 
 
 (3.) Where a wife conveys and is expressed to 
 ■convey as' beneficial owner, and the husband also 
 ■conveys and is expressed to convey as beneficial 
 ■owner, then, within this section, the wife shall be 
 deemed to convey and to be expressed to convey by 
 direction of the husband, as beneficial owner '; and, 
 in addition to the covenant implied on the part of 
 the wife, there shall also be implied, first, a covenant 
 ■on the part of the husband as the person giving that 
 ■direction, and secondly, a covenant on the part of 
 the husband in the same terms as the covenant im- 
 plied on the part of the wife. 
 
 (4.) Where in a conveyance a person conveying 
 is not expressed to convey as beneficial owner, or as 
 .settlor, or as trustee, or as mortgagee, or as personal 
 representative of a deceased person, or as committee 
 ■of a lunatic so found by inquisition, or under an 
 order of the Court, or by direction of a person as 
 beneficial owner, no covenant on the part of the 
 person conveying shall be, by virtue of this section, 
 implied in the conveyance. 
 
 (5.) In this section a conveyance.includes a deed 
 ■conferring the right to admittance to copyhold or 
 customary land, but does not include a demise by 
 way of lease at d rent, or any customary assurance, 
 ■other than a deed, conferring the right to admit- 
 tance to copyhold or customary land. 
 
 (6.) The benefit of a covenant implied as afore- 
 said shall be annexed and incident to, and shall go 
 with, the estate or interest of the implied covenantee, 
 ■and shall be capable of being enforced by every 
 person in whom that estate or interest is, for the 
 whole or any part thereof, from time to time 
 
 (7.) A covenant implied as aforesaid may be 
 varied or extended by deed, and, as so varied or 
 extended, shall, as far as may be, operate in the 
 like manner, and with all the Wee incidents, effects, 
 ■arul consequences, as if such variations or extensions 
 were directed in this section to be implied. 
 
 (8.) This section applies only to conveyances 
 made after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Easement.] Sect. 62. — (1.) A conveyance of 
 Jreehold land to (he use that any person may have. 
 Jar an estate or interest not exceeding in duration, 
 the estate conveyed in the land, any easement, right, 
 liberty, or privilege in, or over, or with respect to 
 tjiat land, or any part thereof, shall operate to vest 
 in possession in that person that easement, right, 
 liberty, or privilege, for the estate or interest ex- 
 pressed to be limited to him ; and he, and the per- 
 sons deriving title under Mm, shall have, use, and 
 ■enjoy the same accordingly. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to conveyances 
 made after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Estate Clause.] Sect. 63. — (1.) Every convey- 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 ance shall, by virtue of this Act, be effectual to pass 
 all the estate, right, title, interest, claim, and iJAi- 
 mand which the conveying parties respectively have, 
 in, to, or on the property conveyed, or expressed or 
 intended so to be, or which they respectively have 
 powers to convey in, to, or on the same. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only if and so far as a 
 contrary intention is riot expressed in the convey- 
 ance, and shall have effect subject to the terms of 
 the conveyance and to the provisions therein con- 
 tained. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only to conveyances 
 made after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Forms.] Deeds in the form of and using the 
 expressions in the forms given in the fourth schedule 
 to this Act, or in the like form or using expressions 
 to the Wee effect, shall, as regards form and expres- 
 sion in relation to the provisions of this Act be 
 sufficient. 
 
 General Words.] Sect. 6. — (1.) A conveyance of 
 land shall be deemed to include, and shall, by virtue 
 of the Act, operate to convey with the land all build- 
 ings, erections, fixtures, commons, hedges, ditches, 
 fences, ways, waters, watercourses, liberties, privi- 
 leges, easements, rights, and advantages, whatsoever, 
 appertaining or reputed to appertain to the land, 
 or any part thereof, or at the time of conveyance 
 demised, occupied, or enjoyed with, or reputed or 
 known as part or parcel of or appurtenant to the 
 land or any part thereof. 
 
 (2.) A conveyance of land,having houses or other 
 buildings thereon, sliall be deemed to include and 
 shall by virtue of the Act operate to convey, with 
 the land, houses, or other buildings, all outlwuses, 
 erections, fixtures, cellars, areas, courts, courtyards, 
 cisterns, sewers, gutters, drains, ways, passages, 
 lights, watercourses, liberties, privileges, easements, 
 rights and advantages, whatsoever, appertaining or 
 reputed to appertain to the land, houses, and other 
 buildings conveyed, or any of them, or any part 
 thereof, or at the time of conveyance demised, occu- 
 pied, or enjoyed with, or reputed or known as part 
 or parcel of or appurtenant to the land, houses, or 
 other buildings conveyed, or any of them or any 
 part thereof. 
 
 (3.) A conveyance of a manor shall be deemed to 
 include and shall by virtue of the Act operate to 
 convey, with the manor, all pastures, feedings, 
 wastes,warrens, commons,mines,minerals, guarries, 
 furzes, trees, woods, underwoods, coppices, and the 
 ground and soil thereof, fishings, fisheries, fowlings, 
 courts leet, courts baron, and other, courts, view of 
 frankpledge and all that to view of frankpledge 
 doth belong, mills, mulctures, customs, tolls, duties, 
 reliefs, heriots, fines, sums of money, amerciaments, 
 waifs, estrays, chief-rents, quit-rents, rentsohargg, 
 rents seek, rents of assize, fee farm rents, services, 
 royalties, jurisdictions, franchises, liberties, privi- 
 leges, easements, profits, advantages, rights, emolu- 
 ments, and hereditaments whatsoever, to the manor 
 appertaining or reputed to appertain, or at the 
 time of conveyance demised, occupied, or enjoyed 
 with the same, or reputed or known as part, parcel, 
 or member thereof. 
 
 (4.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the convey- 
 ance, and sliall have effect subject to the terms of 
 the conveyance and to the provisions therein con- 
 tained. 
 
( 495 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 496 ) 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 (5.) Tliis section shall not be construed as giving 
 to any person a better title to any projierty, right, 
 or thing in this section mentioned than the title 
 which the conveyance gives to him to the land or 
 manor expressed to he conveyed, or as conveying to 
 him any property, right, or thing in this section 
 mentioned, further or otherwise than as the same 
 could have been conveyed to him by the conveying 
 parties. 
 
 (6.) This section applies only to conveyances 
 made after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Joint Account Clause.] Sect. 61. — (1.) Wlie/re 
 in a mortgage, or an obligation for payment of 
 mjoney, or a transfer of a inortgage or of such an 
 obligation, the sum, or any part of the sum, ad- 
 vanced or owing is expressed to be advanced by or 
 owing to more persons than one out of money, or as 
 money, belonging to them on a joint account, or a 
 nwrtgage, or such an obligation, or such a transfer 
 is made to more persons than one, jointly, and not 
 in sliares, the mortgage money, or other money, or 
 money's worth for the time being due to those per- 
 sons on the mmtgage or obligation, shall be deemed 
 to be and remain money or money's worth belonging 
 to those persons on a joint account, as between them 
 and the mortgagor or obligor ; and the receipt in 
 writing of the survivors or last survivor of them, or 
 of the personal representatives of the last survivor, 
 shall be a complete discharge for all money or 
 money's worth for the time being due, notwithstand- 
 ing any notice to the payer of a severance of the 
 joint account. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the mortgage, 
 or obligation, or transfer, and shall have effect 
 subject to the terms of the mortgage, or obligation, 
 or transfer, and to the provisions therein con- 
 tained. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only to a mortgage, or 
 obligation, or transfer made after the commencement 
 of this Act. 
 
 Eeoeipts.] Sect. 54. — (1.) A receipt for con- 
 sideration money or securities in the body of a deed 
 shall be a sufficient discharge for the same to the 
 person paying or delivering the same, viithout any 
 further receipt for the same being indorsed on the 
 deed. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to deeds executed 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 55. — (1.) A receipt for consideration money 
 or other consideration in the body of a deed or in- 
 dorsed thereon shall, in favour of a subsequent 
 purchaser, not having notice that the money or 
 other consideration thereby acknowledged to be re- 
 ceived was not in fact paid or given, wliolly or in 
 part, be sufficient evidence of the payment or giving 
 of the whole amount thereof. 
 
 (2.) Tliis section applies only to deeds executed 
 after the commencement of this Act, 
 
 Sect. 56. — (1.) Where a solicitor produces a deed, 
 having in the body thereof or indorsed thereon a 
 receipt for consideration money or other considera- 
 tion, the deed being executed, or the indorsed receipt 
 being signed, by the person entitled to give a receipt 
 for that consideration, the deed shall be sufficient 
 authority to the person liable to pay or give the 
 same for his paying or giving the same to the 
 solicitor, and without the solicitor producing any 
 separate or oilier direction or autlwrity in that 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 behalf from tJie person who executed or signed the 
 
 deed or receipt. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only in cases where- 
 consideration is to be paid or given after tlie com- 
 mencement of this Act. 
 
 Supplemental Deed.] Sect.fiS. — (1.) A deed ex>- 
 pressed to be supplemental to a previous deed, or 
 directed to be read as an annex thereto shall, as far 
 as may be, be read and have effect as if the deed sa 
 expressed or directed were made by way of in- 
 dorsement on th^ previous deed or contained a full 
 recital thereof. 
 
 (2.) 27ms section applies to deeds executed eitlier 
 before or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Word "Grant" unnecessary.] Sect. 49. — (1.). 
 It is hereby declared that the use of the word grant 
 is not necessary in order to convey tenements or 
 hereditaments, corporeal or incorporeal. 
 
 (2.) This section applies to conveyances made 
 before or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Words of Limitation.] Sect. 51. — (1.) In a deed! 
 it shall be sufficient, in the limitation of an estate 
 in fee simple, to use the words in fee simple, with- 
 out the word heirs; and in the limitation of an 
 estate in tail, to use the words in tail without the 
 words heirs of tlie body ; and in the limitation of 
 an estate in tail male or in tail female, to use tlie 
 words in tail male, or in tail female, as the case 
 requires, without the words heirs male of the body 
 or heirs female of the body. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to deeds executedt 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 1, Deeds executed on same day — Priority 
 
 of Operation — Debentures of Company.'] Wlien 
 two deeds relating to the same subject-matter are 
 executed on the same day, the Court will inquire- 
 whioli of them was executed iirst. — But if there is 
 anything in the deeds themselves to shew an in- 
 tention either that they shall take effect pari 
 passu, or that one should take effect in priority to 
 the other, the Court will presume that they were- 
 executed in such an order as to give effect to the 
 manifest intention. — One hundi-ed and fifty deben- 
 tures of a company, each for £100, were all sealed, 
 with the company's seal on the same day. They 
 bore the numbers 501 to 650. Each of the first 
 hundred (Nos. 501 to 600) contained a provision 
 that it " and all other debentures of the company 
 to the amount of £10,000 (the amount intended 
 to be now borrowed by the company), or such of 
 them as shall be for the time being be due and 
 unpaid, shall be all taken and considered, a»- 
 between the company and the several holders- 
 thereof, as one debenture, and shall not be entitled 
 to any preference or priority by reason of priority 
 of date or otherwise, but shall be paid pari passu 
 out of the funds of the company." Each of the 
 other fifty debentures contained a similar provi- 
 sion, substituting the sum of £5000 for £10,000i 
 There was evidence that the company's seal was 
 affixed to the debentures in the order of theix 
 numbers, beginning with the earliest. The com- 
 pany being in liquidation : — Held, that the 
 holders of the debentures for £10,000 were en- 
 titled to priority over the holders of the deben- 
 tures for £5000. Gaktside v. Silkstonb ani> 
 
 DODWOBTH Co.\L AKD IkON COMPANY 
 
 [31 Ch. D. 762 
 
( 497 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 498 ) 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 3. Execution of Deed of Assignment — 
 
 Effect of Note appended to Signature.^ Not every 
 attempt by a form of execution to restrain the full 
 operation of a deed can be treated as a non-execu- 
 tion of it. — Where a deed of assignment by debtors 
 to a trastee for the benefit of all creditors who 
 should execute the deed was executed by the 
 Plaintiffs, who appended a note that they exe- 
 cuted only in respect of certain claims scheduled 
 to the deed and amounting to £73,531, and it ap- 
 peared that subsequently thereto they received a 
 sum of money from the trustee by virtue of their 
 execution of the deed : — Seld, that the Plaintiffs 
 were hound. The note did not amount to a re- 
 fusal to execute ; and the Plaintiffs having 
 received payment under the deed could not be 
 heard to repudiate it, and deny their execution. — 
 Wilkinson v. Anglo-Calif omian Gold Mining 
 Company (18 Q. B. 728) held to be Inapplicable. 
 Exchange Bank op Yarmouth v. Blethen 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 293 
 
 Delivery of— Foreclosure 22 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Mortgage — Fobeclosuee. 4. 
 
 Deposit of — Banker - 6 App, Cas. 722 
 
 See Banker — Lien. 
 
 Deposit of — Bonds — Solicitor — Liability of 
 
 partner 28 Ch. D. 340 
 
 See Paetnebship — Liabilities. 
 
 Deposit of— Building society 30 Ch. D. 434 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 519 
 See Building Society. S, 9. 
 
 Deposit of — Equitable mortgage — Priority 
 
 [18 Ch, D. 560 
 See MOETGAGE — ^Pbioritt. 4. 
 
 Execution of — Knowledge of contents 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 611 
 See Vendoe and Pubchasee — Pdbohase 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 Not in vendor's possession — Expense of pro- 
 duction - 30 Ch, D. 42 
 See Vendor and Puechaser — Title. 1. 
 
 I. DEFAMATIOH— LIBEL— oontmMec?. 
 
 sons wlio as partners or otherwise represent and ai'e 
 responsible for any share or interest in the neios- 
 paper as between themselves and the persons in 
 nice manner representing or responsible for the 
 other shares or interests therein, and no other 
 
 DEFAMATION : - - 
 
 I. Libel 
 II. Privilege 
 in. Slander 
 
 Col. 
 497 
 499 
 500 
 
 I. DEFAMATION— LIBEL. 
 
 Newspaper.] The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 60 (the 
 Newspaper Libel and Registration Act, 1881), 
 amends the law affecting civil actions and criminal 
 prosecutions for newspaper libel. 
 
 Sect. 1 defines (inter alia) the word "news- 
 paper " to mean any paper containing public news, 
 intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarks or 
 observations thereon, printed for sale and published 
 in England or Ireland periodically, or in parts or 
 numbers, at intervals not exceeding twenty-six days 
 between the publication of any two such papers, 
 parts or n,umbers. 
 
 Also any paper printed in order to be dispersed 
 and made public weekly or oftener, or at intervals 
 not exceeding twenty -six days, containing only or 
 principally advertisements. 
 
 The word "proprietor" to mean and include as 
 loeU the sole proprietor of any newspaper, as also, 
 in the case of a divided proprietorship, the per- 
 
 Sect. 2. Any report publislied in any newspaper 
 of the proceedings of a public meeting shall be 
 privileged, if such meeting was lawfully convened 
 for a lawful purpose and open to the public, and 
 if such report was fair and accurate, and pub- 
 lished without malice, and if the publication of the 
 matter complained of was for the public benefit ; 
 provided always, that thfi protection intended to 
 be afforded by this section shall not be available as 
 a defence in any proceeding if the Plaintiff or 
 prosecutor can shew that the Defendant has refused 
 to insert in the newspaper in which the report 
 containing the matter complained of appeared a 
 reasonable letter or statement of explanation err 
 contradiction by or on behalf of such Plaintiff or 
 prosecutor. 
 
 1. Innuendo — Evidence of Defamatory 
 
 Meaning.'] H. & Sons were in the habit of receive 
 -ing, in payment from their customers, cheques on 
 various branches of a bank, which the bank 
 cashed for the convenience of H. & Sons at a par- 
 ticular branch. Having had a squabble with the' 
 manager of that branch H. & Sons sent a printed 
 circular to a large number of their customers (who, 
 knew nothing of the squabble) — " H. & Sona 
 hereby give notice that they will not receive in 
 payment cheques drawn on any of the branches of 
 the" bank. The circular became known to other 
 persons ; there was a run on the bank and loss 
 inflicted. The bank having brought an action 
 against H. & Sons for libel, with an innuendo that 
 the circularimputed insolvency : — Held, affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal (Lord Pers- 
 zance dissenting) that in their natural meaning 
 the words were not libellous : that the inference- 
 suggested by the innuendo was not the inference 
 which reasonable persons would draw : that the 
 onus lay on the bank to shew that the circular 
 had a libellous tendency ; that the evidence con- 
 sisting of the circumstances attending the publi- 
 cation, failed to shew it; that there was no case 
 to go to the jury ; and that the Defendants were- 
 entitled to judgment. Capital and Counties 
 Bank v. Hentt - - 7 App. Cas. 741 
 
 2. Justification — Evidence of Plaintiff's 
 
 general bad Character — Humours of Plaintiff 
 having committed Offences charged in Libel — 
 Mitigation of Damages — Facts not stated in Plead- 
 ings — Order XIX., r. 4.] Action for a libel alleging- 
 that the Plaintiff, a theatrical critic, had endea- 
 voured to extort money by threatening to publish 
 defamatory matter concerning a deceased actress. 
 Defence — that the allegation was true in sub- 
 stance and fact : — Held, by Mathew, and Cave, JJ., 
 that evidence of rumours before the publication of 
 the libel that the Plaintiff had committed the 
 offences charged in it, and evidence of particular 
 facts and circumstances tending to shew the mis- 
 conduct of the Plaintiff as a theatrical critic could 
 not be admitted in reduction of damages : — Beld, 
 further, that assuming such evidence to be mate- 
 rial it was rightly rejected, for the particular facts 
 
( 499 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 500 ) 
 
 I. DEFAMATION— IIBEl—coniinaed. 
 
 and circumstances were not stated or referred to 
 in the pleadings as required by Order xix., r. 4. 
 SooTT V. Sampson - 8 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 II. DEFAMATION— PEIVILEGE. 
 
 1. Charity Organisation Society.] A. 
 
 interested lierseif in obtaining subscriptions for 
 the relief of the Plaintiff, a lady in distressed cir- 
 cumstances. B., who was interested in the case, 
 applied to the Defendant, the Secretary of the 
 Charity Organisation Society, for information as 
 to the Plaintiff's character, and received an un- 
 fa vom'able report which, by leave of the secretary, 
 she communicated to A. • The subscriptions were 
 thereupon withdrawn. The Plaintiff then sued 
 the secretary for libel. The society was formed 
 for the purpose (inter alia) of investigating the 
 cases of applicants for charitable relief: — Held, 
 that the report was a privileged communication, 
 and that, in the absence of proof of malice, the 
 action could not be maintained. Wallee v. Loch. 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 619 
 
 2. Judicial Proceeding — Advocate — Eele- 
 
 vancy — Malice.'] No action will lie against an 
 advocate for defamatory words spoken with refer- 
 ence to, and in the course of, an inquiry before a 
 
 ■ judicial tribunal, although they are uttered by 
 the advocate maliciously and not with the object 
 of supporting the case of his client, and are uttered 
 without any justification or even excuse, and from 
 personal ill-wUl or anger towards the person de- 
 famed arising out of a previously existing cause, 
 and are irrelevant to every issue of fact which is 
 contested before the tribunal. — H. was charged 
 before a Court of petty sessions with administer- 
 ing drugs to the inmates of M.'s house in order to 
 facilitate the commission of a burglary at it. M. 
 was the prosecutor, and L., who was a solicitor, 
 appeared for the defence of H. There was some 
 evidence, although of a veiy slight character, that 
 a narcotic drug had been administered to the in- 
 mates of M.'s house upon the evening before the 
 burglary, and H. had been at M.'s house on that 
 evening. During the proceedings before the 
 Court of petty sessions, L., acting as advocate for 
 H., suggested that M. might be keeping drugs at 
 his house for immoral or criminal purposes. There 
 was no evidence that M. kept any di'ugs for those 
 purposes : — Beld, that no action by M. for defama- 
 tion would lie against L. — Kendillon v. Maltby 
 (Car. & M. 402 ; 2 M. & B. 438) dissented from. 
 MuNSTEE «. Lamb - - 11 ft. B. D. 588 
 
 3. Publication by Mistake — Negligence.'] 
 
 The Defendant wrote defamatory [statements of 
 the Plaintiff in a letter to W. under circumstances 
 which made the publication of the letter to W. 
 privileged, but by mistake the Defendant placed 
 it in an envelope directed to another person who 
 received and read the letter. In an action for 
 libel -.—Held, that the letter having been written 
 to W. under circumstances which caused the legal 
 implication of malice to be rebutted, the publica- 
 tion to the other person, though made through the 
 negligence of the Defendant, was privileged in 
 the absence of malice in fact on his part. Tomp- 
 SON V. Dashwood - - - 11 ft. B. D. 43 
 
 4. Witness — Farliament — Select Com- 
 mittee of House of Comvions.] To an action of 
 
 II. DEFAMATION— PEIVILEGE— coniimwea. 
 
 slander Defendant pleaded that the statements 
 complained of were part of the evidence given by 
 him in the character of a witness before a Select 
 Committee of the House of Commons : — Held, 
 that the statements so made were privileged, and 
 that the action would not lie. Goffin v. Don- 
 nelly - - - - 6 Q. B. D. 307 
 
 III. DEFAMATION— SLANDEE. 
 
 1. Innuendo — Criminal Offence — Indict- 
 able Offence — TFords actionable per se.] Words 
 imputing that the Plaintiff has been guilty of a 
 criminal offence will support an action for slander, 
 without special damage ; and it is not necessary 
 to allege in the statement of claim that they im- 
 pute an indictable offence. "Webb v. Beavan 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 609 
 
 2. Innuendo — Prefatory Averment.] 
 
 Words merely conveying suspicion will not sus- 
 tain an action for slander. Where such words 
 admit fairly, and in their natural sense, of two 
 meanings, the one being an imputation of sus- 
 picion only, the other of guilt, the sense in which 
 they were uttered should be left to the jury. — 
 The innuendoes not declaring that the words were 
 spoken with the intention of imputing to the 
 Plaintiff a felony, and not importing to enlarge 
 the meaning of those words : — Held, that the 
 prefatory averments which only professed to give 
 the motives of the Defendant could not be sub- 
 stituted for those innuendoes whereby the Plaifl- 
 tiff undertook to give the meaning of the words 
 spoken. Simmons v. Mitchell 6 App. Cas. 156 
 
 3. Letters addressed to Agent at the 
 
 PrincipaTs Office — Mandatory Injunction.] B. 
 was employed to manage one of L.'s branch 
 offices for the sale of machines, and , resided on 
 the premises. He was dismissed by L., and on 
 leaving gave the postmaster directions to for- 
 ward to his private residence all letters addressed 
 to him at L.'s branch office. He admitted that 
 among the letters so forwarded to him were two 
 which related to L.'s business, and that he did 
 not hand them to L., but returned them to the 
 senders. After his dismissal he went about 
 among the customers, making oral statements 
 reflecting on the solvency of L., and advised 
 sonie of them not to pay L. for machines which 
 had been supplied through himself. L. brought 
 an action to restrain B. from making statements 
 to the customers or any other person or persons 
 that L. was about to stop payment, or was in dif- 
 ficulties or insolvent, and from in any manner 
 slandering L. or injuring his reputation or busi- 
 ness, and from giving notice to the post-ofiBce to 
 forward to B.'s residence letters addressed to him 
 at L.'s office, and also asking that he might be 
 ordered to withdraw the notice already given to 
 the post-ofi5ce : — Held, by Pearson, J., and the 
 Court of Appeal, that the Court has jurisdiction 
 to restrain a person from making slanderous 
 statements calculated to injure the business of 
 another person, and that this jurisdiction extends 
 to oral as well as written statements, though it re- 
 quu'es to be exercised with great caution as 
 regards oral statements ; and that in the present 
 case an injunction ought to be granted : — Held, 
 also, by Pearson, J., and by the Court of Appeal, 
 
( 501 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 502 ) 
 
 in. DEFAMATION— SLAHl)ER—oo»«mMe(?. 
 that the Defendant had no right to give a notice 
 to the post-office the effect of -which would be to 
 hand over to him letters of which it was pro- 
 bable that the greater part related only to L.'a 
 business ; and that the case was one in which a 
 mandatory injunction compeiliug the Defendant 
 to withdraw his notice could properly be made, 
 the Plaintiff being put under an undertaking only 
 to open the letters at certain specified times, with 
 liberty for the Defendant to be present at the 
 opening. Hekmann Loog v. Bean 26 Ch. D. 306 
 
 4. Eemoteness of T)a,ma.ge— Damage not 
 
 natural and probable Consequence of Words 
 spolcen.'] Claim, that the Plaintiff was a candi- 
 date for membership of the E. Club, but upon a 
 ballot of the members was not elected; that a 
 meeting of the members was called to consider 
 an alteration of the rules regarding the election 
 of members; that the Defendant falsely and mali- 
 ciously spoke and published of the Plaintiff as 
 follows : " The conduct of the" Plaintiff "was 
 so bad at a club in M. that a round robin was 
 signed urging the committee to expel " him ; " as 
 however " he was " there only for a short time, 
 the committee did not proceed further ;" whereby 
 the Defendant induced a majority of the members 
 of the club to retain the regulations under which 
 the Plaintiff had been rejected, and thereby pre- 
 vented thePlaintiff from again seekingto be elected 
 to the club : — jHeW,upon demurrer, that the claim 
 disclosed no cause of action ; for the words com- 
 plained of, not being actionable in themselves, 
 .must be supported by special damage in order to 
 enable the Plaintiff to sue; and the damage 
 alleged was not pecuniary or capable of being 
 estimated in money, and was not the natural and 
 probable consequence of the Defendant's words. 
 Chameeelain v. Botd - - 11 Q. B. D. 407 
 
 DEFAMATION — Criminal information— News- 
 paper libel — Fiat of director of public 
 prosecutions - - 14 Q. B. D. 648 
 
 See CEiMisrAL Law — Libel. 2. 
 
 • Criminal prosecution- 
 See Criminal Law- 
 
 -Newspaper. 
 -LiEEL — Statutes. 
 
 - Injunction to restrain - 20 Ch. D. 501 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 798 
 
 See Peaotice — Sdpeeme Coubt — In- 
 junction'. 4, 5. 
 
 - Interrogatoriea — ^Libel — Handwriting 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 439 
 See Pbaotice — Supeeme Court — Inter- 
 
 EOGATOBIES. 7. 
 
 - Leave to file information — Libel upon de- 
 
 ceased foreign nobleman — • Applicant 
 resident abroad - 12 Q. B. D. 320 
 
 See Criminal Law — Libel. 1. 
 
 - Particulars of persons to whom slander 
 
 uttered - - - 12 Q. B. D. 94 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Parti- 
 culars. 2. 
 
 ■ Publication — Interrogatories 10 Q. B. D. 110 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 15. 
 
 ■ Slander uttered abroad— Service out of juris- 
 
 diction - - 7 ft. B. D. 434 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 11. 
 
 DEFATTIT— Pleading— Practice. 
 
 See Cases under Pijaotioe — Supreme 
 Court — Default. 
 DEFAULTEE— Stock Exchange 20 Ch. D, 356 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 2. 
 DEFEASANCE- Bill of sale - 21 Ch. D. 73 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 22. 
 DEFEATING AND DELAYING CBEDITOES 
 
 [25Ch. D. 500; 26 Ch. D. 319 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 1, 23, 26. 
 
 - - 20Ch, D. 389; 22Ch. D. 74, 436 
 
 See Fraudulent Conveyance. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy— Trader - 20 Ch. D. 697 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Voluntaiy settlement 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 588 
 /See Bankeuptot — Void Settlement. 1. 
 DEFECT IN TITIE— Eemovable or irremovable 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 320 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Title. 9. 
 DEFENCE— Delivered after proper time 
 
 [2S Ch. D. 707 ; 26 Ch. D. 66 
 See Practice — Supreme CourT; — De- 
 fault. 3, 4. 
 
 Omitting to deny Plaintiff's title 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 645 ; 8 App. Cas. 456 
 See Practice — 'Supreme Court — De- 
 fence. 
 
 Putting in new defence — ^Fraud of solicitors 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 678 
 (See Practice — Supreme Court — Amend- 
 ment. , 3. 
 
 Withdrawal of— Costs - 18 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Costs. 
 23. 
 
 DEFENDANT— Adding - - 28 Ch. D. 414 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Court — Par- 
 ties. 5. 
 
 Bankruptcy of 7 ft. B. D. 413; 28 Ch. D. 53 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 1, 2. 
 
 Cross-examination of 29 Ch, D. 711 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 4. 
 
 DEFILEMENT— Of women. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 On premises. 
 
 See, Criminal Law — Nuisance — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 DELAY — Agreement to settle - 17 Ch. D. 361 
 
 See Settlement. — Articles. 1. 
 ^Devastavit by executor 27 Ch. D. 622 
 
 See Executor — Liabilities. 1. 
 Expunging proof - 21 Ch. D. 537 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 2. 
 
 Forfeiture of shares — Cost-book mine 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 660 
 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 9. 
 
 Loading of ship — Frost 10 ft. B. D. 241 ; 
 
 [11 ft. B, D, 543 ; 9 App. Cas, 470 
 
 See Ship — Charterparty. . 8, 9. 
 
 Misconduct of directors 21 Ch, D, 149 
 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 4. 
 
( 503 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 504 ) 
 
 DELAY — continued, 
 
 Mistake in statement of debta — Delay in 
 
 correcting mistake 23 Ch. D. 706 
 
 See Bankeuptot — Composition. 10. 
 
 Motion for security for costs 22 Ch. D. 83 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Supkeme Coukt — Sectj- 
 EiTY FOE Costs. 9. 
 
 Nullity of marriage — Impotence 10 P. D. 75 
 
 See Peaotioe — Divoeoe — Nullity of 
 Maeeiaoe. 3. 
 
 Petition for divorce — Poverty - 8 P. D. 21 
 
 See Peaotice — Divoeoe — Delay. 
 
 Presentment of cheque 8 Q. B. D. 288 
 
 See Bankee — Cheque. 1. 
 
 Principal — Discharge of surety 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 666 
 See Peinoifal atsd Sueety — Disohaege. 
 3. 
 
 Kectification of register 24 Ch. S. 149 
 
 See Company — Peospeotus. 6. 
 
 Eevlvor of suit - 20 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Pkactice — Supeemb Couet — 
 Change of Paeties. 6. 
 
 Setting aside fraudulent conveyance 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 523 
 See Feaudulent Conveyance. 3. 
 
 Specialty debt - 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 See Specialty Debt. 
 
 Undertaking as to damages 23 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Bankecptoy — Eeceivee. 1. 
 
 DELIVEEY— Bill of costs— Taxation 30 Ch. D. 
 See SoLioiTOE — Bill of Costs. 7. [441 
 — — Goods — Before bankruptcy — Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 588 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods. 2. 
 
 Goods— Instalments - 9 Q. B. D. 648 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 434 
 See Sale of Goods — ^Rescission. 2. 
 
 BEMUBBAGE. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Chaeteepaett. 
 2, 5—13. 
 BEMUBBEB, 
 
 See Cases under Peaotice — Supreme 
 Couet — Demukeee. 
 
 - - 26Ch. D. 36 
 
 See Pkactice — Supeeme Couet — Pae- 
 ties. 16. 
 
 Parties - - - 20 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissionees. 
 
 Proceedings in lieu of 28 Ch. D. 372 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — De- 
 mueeee. 3. 
 DENIAL or PLAINTIFF'S TITLE 18 Ch. D. 477 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — In- 
 tekeogatoeies. 3. 
 
 Omission of 6 Q. B. D. 645 ; 8 App. Cas. 456 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court— De- 
 fence. 
 DEPABTING FEOM DWELLING-HOITSE 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 697 
 See Bankkuptcy — Trader. 1. 
 
 - 22 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankbuptoy. 
 
 23. 
 
 DEPOSIT— Appeal - - 20 Ch. D. 701 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 7. 
 
 Foreign life insurance company 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 837 
 See Company — Life Insurance Com- 
 pany. J. 
 
 Forfeiture of ■ 27 Ch. D. 89 
 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Deposit. 
 2. 
 
 Forfeiture of 21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Penalty. 
 
 Loan to building society - 30 Ch. D. 434 
 
 See Building Society. 5. 
 
 Parliamentary — Railway company 
 
 [18Ch.D. 155; 25 Ch. D. 251; 
 [28 Ch. D. 652 
 See Railway Company — Abandon- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3. 
 DEPOSIT OF DEEDS— Banker 6 App. Cas. 722 
 See Bankee — Lien. 
 
 Bonds — Solicitor — Liability of partner 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 340 
 See Paetneeship — Liabilities. 
 
 Building society 23 Ch. D. 440 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 519 
 See Building Society. 9. 
 
 Mortgage— Priority 18 Ch. D. 560 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 725 
 See MoETGAGE — Peioeity. 4, 9. 
 Mortgage— Transfer - 30 Ch. D. 396 
 
 See MOETGAGE — CONTEAOT. 8. 
 
 DEPOSITION — Bankruptcy —Admission — Ser- 
 vice of copy 19 Ch. D. 580 
 See Bankecptcy — Evidence. 7. 
 
 Bankruptcy — ^Right of witness to copy 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 439 
 See Bankeuptcy — Evidence. 5. 
 DEPEIVATION— Contumacy 6 P. D. 157 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Chuech 
 Discipline Act. 1. 
 
 Sentence of— Jurisdiction 22 Ch. D. 316 
 
 See Peactice — Ecclesiastical — Juris- 
 diction. 2. 
 DEBELICT — Abandonment by salvors — Distribu- 
 tion of salvage reward 6 P. D. 193 
 See Peactice — Admiralty — Salvage- 
 7. 
 
 Right to freight after abandonment of ship 
 
 See Ship — Freight. 2. [7 P, D. 5 
 
 DERIVATIVE SETTLEMENT— Settled Land Act 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 707 
 See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 7. 
 
 DESCENT. 
 
 Ex parte PaternS, or Ex parte Matema. 
 
 —Inheritance Act (8*4 Will. 4, c. 106), s. 2.] 
 A testator who died in 1853 devised as his own 
 an estate which had devolved on his late wife 
 in fee as heiress-at-law of her mother. The 
 devise was to trustees in fee, on trust to pay the 
 rents to the testator's only son and to his two 
 daughters in equal shares, and to the survivors or 
 survivor of them, with remainder on trust for the 
 children of the son and the daughters respec- 
 tively in fee, with an ultimate remainder unto 
 and to the use of tlie testator's own right heirs. 
 
( 505 ) 
 
 D'ESC'EST— continued. 
 
 The son and both, the daughters survived the 
 testator, but they all died without issue. The son 
 survived the daughters, and died intestate. He 
 was the heir-at-law of his father, and also of his 
 mother. The testator had also devised real estate 
 of his own to the son, who elected to confirm the 
 •will : — Held, that the equitable estate, which the 
 son took under the will and by virtue of his elec- 
 tion, merged ia the legal estate which descended to 
 him from his mother, and that the descent was 
 regulated by the legal estate, and that, conse- 
 quently, on his death intestate and without issue, 
 the property descended to the heir of his maternal 
 grandmother, who was the last purchaser of the 
 legal estate, and not to his own heir. In re 
 Douglas. Wood v. Dotjglas - 28 Ch. D. 327 
 
 Custom of manor — Youngest son 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 165 
 See Copyhold— Custom. 2. 
 
 Law of Malta - - 7 App. Cas. 166 
 
 See Colonial Law — Malta. 1. 
 BESCEIPTION OF EESIDENCE 21 Ch. D. 871 ; 
 [22C11. D. 136; 10 Q. B. D. 90 
 See Bill of Sale— Formalities. 5, 6. 7. 
 
 DESERTION. 
 
 See Ca^es under Pbactioe— Divokoe— 
 Deseetion. 
 
 Condonation — Subsequent adultery — Ee- 
 
 Tival - - 8 P. D. 19 
 
 See Pbactioe— -DrvoBCE — Condonation. 
 3. 
 
 Wife by husband — Settlement by residence 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 522 
 See Pook-law — Settlement. 8. 
 
 DESIGNS — Copyright in. 
 
 See CopTEiGHT — Designs — Statutes. 
 
 Copyright in 27 Ch. D. 260; 28 Ch. D. 24 
 
 See CoPYKiGHT— Designs. 1, 2. 
 
 BESTETTCTION OF MACHINE 
 
 See Patent — Stjpkeme 
 
 FBINGEMENT. 8. 
 
 DETENTION— Scholar - - 13 ft. B. D. 225 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 Home Lessons. 
 
 Woman, for immoral purposes. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 DEVASTAVIT - 27 Ch. D. 622 
 
 See Executor — Liabilities. 1. 
 Claim against executor — Statute of Limi- 
 tations 22 Ch. D. 820 ; 26 Ch. D. 783 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of— Pebsonal 
 Actions. 5, 6. 
 
 Debt barred by Statute of Frauds 
 
 [29 Ch. D 
 
 See Exeoutob— Ketainee. 10. 
 Lapse of time - - 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 See Specialty Debt. 
 
 DEVISE. 
 
 See Oases under Will. 
 
 Foreclosure -Infant heir of mortgagor 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 158 
 See Moetgage— FoEEOLOSUEE. 8. 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 506 ) 
 
 26 Ch. D. 766 
 
 Court — In- 
 
 .358 
 
 DICTATION — ^Written agreement — Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 340 
 See Scotch Law — Landlord and 
 Tenant. 
 
 DIFFERENCES— Stock Exchange 22 Ch. D. 132 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 2. 
 
 DIGGING UP SOIL— Inspection of property 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 356 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 spection OF Peopeety. 
 
 DILAPIDATIONS (ECCLESIASTICAL)— Kepairs 
 
 done by sequestrator — Objection to 
 accounts - - 15 ft. B. D. 222 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Dilapida- 
 tions. 
 
 DIRECTOR — Appointment and dismissal 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 183 ; 23 Ch D. 1 
 
 See Company — Dibeotoe's Appoint- 
 ment. 1, 2. 
 
 Authority of 16 Ch. D. 681 ; 17 Ch. D. 715 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Company — Dieectob's Authority. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Change of - 23 Ch. D. 413 
 
 See Company — Shares— Allotment. 3. 
 
 Committee of directors 25 Ch. D. 118 
 
 See Company — Shaees — Teansfee. 7. 
 
 Fees— Proof— Winding-up 30 Ch, D. 629 
 
 See Company — Peoof. I. 
 
 Liability of - 26 Ch. D. 107 
 
 See Company-^Memorandum and Arti- 
 cles. 3. 
 
 Liability of - - 29 Ch. D. 795 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 1. 
 
 Liability for calls - 8 ft. B. D. 685 
 
 See Company — Shares — Allotment. 2. 
 
 Liability for misconduct. 
 
 See Cases under Company — DmscTOR's 
 Liability. 
 
 Liability for misconduct — Eight of action 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 234 
 See Company — Liquidatoe. 3. 
 
 Liability on contract 6 ft. B. D. 516 
 
 See Company — Contracts. 1. 
 
 Qualification 25 Ch. D. 283 ; 27 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Company — Diebctoe's Qualifica- 
 tion. 1, 2. 
 
 Quorum of — Forfeiture of shares 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 681 
 See Company — Director's Authority. 
 3. 
 
 Quorum of — Power to allot shares 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 413 
 See Company — Shaees — Allotment. 3. 
 
 Eemuneration — Gratuity — Power of general 
 
 meeting - 23 Ch. D. 654 
 
 See Company — Management. 2. 
 
 Eetirement of — Application for shares 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 373 
 See Company — Prospectus. 2. 
 
 Statement by— Agent 22 Ch. D, 593 
 
 See Evidence — Geneeal. 4. 
 
( 507 > 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 508 ) 
 
 DISABILITY— Statute of Limitations 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 104, 132 
 See LmiTATioifs, Statute op — Realty. 
 6,7. 
 DISBUESEMENTS — Master of ship— Maritime 
 lien - - - 8 P. D. 48 
 
 See Ship — ^Maritime Lien. 4. 
 DISCHAEGE— Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptct — Dis- 
 
 OHAHGE. 
 
 Bankruptcy — After-acquired chattels 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 342 
 See Bill of Sale — OPEEATiosr. 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 See Bankbuptct — Bankkuptot Act, 
 1?,?,^— Statutes. 
 
 ^-^ Bankruptcy — Subsequent breach of cove- 
 nant - - 23 Ch. D. 285 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoop. 6. 
 
 Liquidation - - 19 Ch. D. 140 
 
 See Bankkuptcy— Liquidation. 5. 
 
 Liquidation — ^Member of company 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 415 
 See Company — Contkebutoey. 3. 
 
 Prisoner in custody for contempt 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 230 
 See Peacticb — Supeeme Couet — At- 
 tachment. 2. 
 Surety - 25 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See PEINOIf AL AND SUEETY — DiSCHAEGE. 
 
 5. 
 DISCHAEGE OF INCUMBEANCES. 
 
 See Vendoe and Pubchasbb — Contey- 
 ANOE — Statutes, 
 DISCLAIHEE — ^Lessor's title— Ejectment 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 730 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Ke-entey. 
 2. 
 
 Onerous legacy 22 Ch. D. 573 ; 30 Ch. D. 
 
 See Will — Disclaimee. 1, 2. [614 
 
 Second mortgagee— Costs - 22 Ch. D. 566 
 
 See MOETGAGE — POEECLOSOEE. 4. 
 
 Trustee in bankruptcy. 
 
 See Oases under Bankruptcy — Dis- 
 claimee. 
 Trustee in liquidation - 29 Ch. D. 8 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Disclaimee. 13. 
 
 Trustee in liquidation — Election to take 
 
 lease - - - 9 «. B. D. 473 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Teustee. 6. 
 
 Specification - - 28 Ch. D. 148 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 2. 
 DISCONTINUANCE OE ACTION— Costs 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 559 
 See Peaotioe — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 2. 
 
 Counter-claim - - 11 Q. B. D. 464 
 
 See Peacticb — Supeeme Court — Dis- 
 continuance. 
 DISCOUNT— Issue of shares at 23 Ch. D. 545, n. 
 
 See Company — Shaees — Issue. 1, 2. 
 DISCOVEEY— Bocks of account of bankrupt 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 868 
 See Bankeuptcy — Assets. 16. 
 
 DISCOVEEY— co»iM«Me(?. 
 
 — - Depositions before Eeceiver of Wreck 
 
 [9 P. D, 6 
 See Peactice — Admiealty — Pkoduo- 
 TioN OF Documents. 
 
 Disobedience to order - 25 Ch. D. 64 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — ^At- 
 tachment. 7. 
 Inspection of books of company — Arbitra- 
 tion - 28 Ch. D. 620 
 See Company — Reconsteuction. 
 
 Interrogatories. 
 
 jSee Cases under Peactice — Supeeme 
 Couet — Inteeeogatoeies. 
 
 Interrogatories — Winding-up 16 Ch. D. 68 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 1. 
 
 Production of documents. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Supeeme 
 Couet — Peoduotion of Documents. 
 
 Property of deceased debtor 15 Q. B. D. 159 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Deceased Debtoe. 1. 
 
 Solicitor and client — Injunction 20 Ch. D. 
 
 See Solicitor — ^Liabilities. 1. [733 
 DISCEETION— Charity Commissioners— Appeal 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 310 
 See Chabitt — Management. 3. 
 
 Court — Appeal - - 9 P. D. 122 
 
 See Peactice — Divoece — Settlements. 
 7. 
 
 Com-t — Bankruptcy - - 17 Ch. D. 13 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 553 
 See Bankeuptcy — Jueisdiction. 3, 4. 
 
 Court — Bankruptcy - 16 Ch. D. 623 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Annulment. 2. 
 
 Court — Bankruptcy — Costs 20 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Costs. 1. 
 
 Court — Bankruptcy — Disclaimer bv trustee 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 115 
 See Bankeuptcy — Disclaimee. 10. 
 
 Court — Bankruptcy— Removal of trustee 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 107 
 See Bankeuptcy— Teustee. 12. 
 
 Court — Bankruptcy — Scotch sequestration 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 816 
 See Bankeuptcy — Adjudication. 4. 
 
 Court— Costs - 22 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet— Pay- 
 ment into Cqubt. 4. 
 
 Court— Costs — Compulsory purchase 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 669 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 24. 
 
 Court — Injunction or damages 26 Ch. D. 578 
 
 See Light — Obstruction. 2. 
 
 Court — ^Notice to third party 16 Ch. D. 489 
 
 See Peacticb— Supeeme Couet — Thied 
 Paety. 4. 
 
 Court — Refusal to commit— Appeal 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 493 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 1. 
 
 Court — Revivor - 20 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — 
 Change op Paeties. 6. 
 
( 509 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 510 ) 
 
 SISCBETION — continued. 
 
 Court — Time for appealing 27 Ch. D. 237 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Coukt — Ap- 
 peal. 38. 
 
 Court — Trial by jury — Appeal 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 365 
 SeePKACTicE — Sdpeeme Coukt — Trial. 
 4. 
 
 Executors — Power of sale - 26 Ch. D. 601 
 
 See "Will — Conversion. 
 
 Railway company — ^Accommodation worts 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 323 
 See Eailway Company — Eailwats 
 Clauses Act. 1. 
 
 Trustees - - 16 Ch. D. 161 
 
 See Infant — Pbopebtt. 2. 
 
 Trustees - 21 Ch. D. S71, 576, n. 
 
 See Trustee — ^Powers. 4, 5. 
 
 Trustees - - 29 Chi D. 889 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 6. 
 DISEA.se — Contagious, of animals. 
 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act 
 ■ — Statutes. 
 DISEASES PREVENTION (METEOPOLIS) ACT, 
 1883. 
 
 See Meteopolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 DISENTAIIING DEED - - 16 Oh. D. 176 ; 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 1, 2. [29 Ch. D. 133 
 
 Existiag power of sale 28 Ch. D, 93 
 
 See Settlement— PoWEES. 16. 
 
 DISMISSAL EOE WANT OF PROSECUTION. 
 
 [25Ch. D. 84; 27 Ch. D. 354; 
 [6 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 5, 6, 7. 
 
 Costs — Discretion of the Judge 29 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See ■ Peactice — Supreme Oouet — Ap- 
 peal. 27. 
 DISMISSAL OF DIRECTORS 23 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Company — Dieectoe's Appoint- 
 ment. 2. 
 DISQUALIFICATION— Alderman 16 Ch. D. 143 
 See Municipal Corporation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 2. 
 
 Bankrupt. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1S83— Statutes. 
 
 Commissioners of Sewers — Interest 
 
 See Sea-wall. [14 Q. B, D. 561 
 
 Committee of Stock Exchange 20 Ch. D. 356 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 2. 
 
 Guardian — Clerk of highway or of school 
 
 board ■ - - 15 ft. B. D. 382 
 
 See Pooe-eate — Guaedians. 
 
 Justice of peace. 
 
 See Cases under Justices — Disqualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Legislative assembly — Queensland 
 
 [8 App, Cas. 120 
 See Colonial Law — Queensland. 
 
 Municipal election — Voting. 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation— Qualifi- 
 cation — Statutes. 
 
 DISQUALIFICATION— cora«»«cd:. 
 
 Parliamentary election. 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE — Appeal from 
 
 decree. 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Appeal — 
 Statutes. 
 Dower - - - 21 Ch. D. 164 
 
 See DoWEE. 1. 
 DISSOLUTION OF PARTNERSHIP. 
 
 See Cases under Partnership — Dissolu- 
 tion. 
 
 Eights of partners under contract 
 
 [18 Ch, D. 698 
 
 See Paetnebship — Contract. 3. 
 DISTRESS- After bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptoy — Dis- 
 
 TEESS. 
 
 After winding-up of company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Distress. 
 
 Agistment of cattle — Exemption 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 457 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Distress. 
 1. 
 
 Company — Winding-up 20 Ch. D. 260 
 
 /See Landloed and Tenant— Ee-entey. 
 8. 
 
 Entry by raising window partly open 
 
 [15 ft. D. D. 312 
 See Landloed and Tenaut — Distress. 
 2. 
 
 Executory agreement for lease 21 Ch. D. 9 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Agree- 
 ment. 4. 
 
 Fraudulent removal - 6 ft. B. D. 669 ; 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 668 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Distress. 
 3,4. 
 
 Lodger — Lodgers' Goods Protection Act 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 — Lodgee. 
 
 Mortgage — • Attornment — Application of 
 
 proceeds - - 18 Ch. D. 127 
 
 See MOETGAGE— CONTEACT. 1. 
 
 Mortgage — Attornment— Seizure of goods 
 
 of stranger 11 ft. B. D. 621 
 
 See MoETGAGE — Contract. 2. 
 
 Payment of rent by surety - 29 Ch. D, 2S4 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 3. 
 Statute respecting. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Disteess 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Water-rate — Arrears - 15 ft. B. D. 660 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Water- 
 rate. 6. 
 
 DISTRESS DAMAGE FEASANT. 
 
 Impounding on Premises — Tender of 
 
 Damages — -Exeessive Demand — Payment under 
 Protest — Action for Money Jiad and received — Ex- 
 tortion-l Where an animal distrained as damage 
 feasant is impounded on private premises, and not 
 in a common pound, a subsequent tender of suffi- 
 cient compensation for the damage actually done 
 is good ; and if the distrainor, by demanding an 
 
( 511 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 512 ) 
 
 DISTRESS DAMAGE FEASANT— conKnuecZ. 
 excessive sum for. damages as the condition of Ms 
 Tclease of the animal, obtains payment of such 
 sum from the owner, such payment is not volun- 
 tary, and the sum paid may be recovered in an 
 action for money had and received. Green v. 
 DnOKETT - - - 11 Q. B. D. 275 
 
 DISTRESS WAEEANT— Justices— Power to de- 
 lay execution • 7 ft. B. D. 398 
 See POOR-EATE — Peooeduke. 6. 
 DISTEIBUTIONS, STATUTE OF. 
 
 Next of Kin — Brother's Child — Intestate 
 
 domiciled in Mngland — Child legitimated hy sub- 
 sequent Marriage— 22 & 23 Car. 2, e. 10, ss^ 6, 7— 
 Foreign Law.} The Statute of Distributions being 
 H statute not for Englishmen only but for all 
 jjersons, English or not, dying intestate and domi- 
 ciled in England, and applying universally to 
 persons of all countries, races, and religions what- 
 soever, the proper law for determining the " kin- 
 dred " under that statute is the international law 
 adopted by the comity of states. — Therefore a 
 child born before wedlock, of parents who were at 
 her birth domiciled in Holland, but legitimated 
 according to the law of Holland by the subsequent 
 marriage of her parents: — Held (by James and 
 Cotton, L.JJ., dissentiente Lush, L.J.), entitled to 
 a share in the personal estate of an intestate dying 
 domiciled in England as one of her next of kin, 
 under the Statute of Distributions. — Boyes v. 
 Bedale (1 H. & M. 798) disapproved.— The deci- 
 sion of Jessel, M.K., reversed. In re Goodman's 
 Tbtjsts 17 Ch. D. 266 
 
 Advancement - 29 Ch. D. 250 
 
 See Advancement. 1. 
 DISTRICT BOARD — Liability for acts of pre- 
 decessors - 17 Ch. D. 685 
 See Local Goveenment — Local AnTHO- 
 
 EITT. 13. 
 
 DISTRICT PARISHES — Apportionment of chari- 
 ties - 24 Ch. D. 213 
 See Chtjech Building Acts. 
 
 DISTRICT REGISTRY — Administration action — 
 Order for account 20 Ch. D. 638 
 
 See BxECtTTOB — Actions. 8. 
 
 Taxation of costs - 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Scpeeme Cotjet — Dis- 
 
 TEICT EeGISTET. 
 
 DISTRINGAS— Notice in Ueu of 23 Ch. D. 549 
 
 See Peaotioe— Supreme Couet — In- 
 junction. 2. 
 
 DISUSED BURIAL-GROUND. 
 
 See BuEiAL-GROUND — Statutes. 
 
 DIVERSION OF FOOTPATH— Duty to fence 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 918 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 5. 
 
 DIVIDEND — Bonus, whether capital or income 
 [29 Ch. D. 636; 14 Q. B. D. 239; 10 App. 
 [Cas. 438 
 See Company — Dividends. 1, 2. 
 
 Legacy— Apportionment 18 Ch. D. 160 
 
 See Appoetionment. 1. 
 
 Payment in proportion to shares 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 66 
 See Company— Dividends. 3. 
 
 DIYl'D'ES'D— continued. 
 Payment out of capital 
 
 21 Ch. D. 149,519; 
 [25 Ch. D. 762 
 
 Directok's Liability. 
 
 See Company 
 4, 5, 8. 
 Payment out of capital 16 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Company — Dividends. 4. 
 DIVIDEND WARRANT— Statutory enactments 
 
 respecting. 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Statutes. 
 DIVISIBLE GIFT- Remoteness 28 Ch. D. 436 
 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 1. 
 DIVISIONS OF METROPOLIS — School board 
 
 affected by. 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 School Board — Statutes. 
 DIVORCE. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — ^DrvoBCE. 
 Alimony— Lunatic - 27 Ch. D. 160 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 1. 
 
 Alimony — Order for payment of — Bank- 
 ruptcy-Proof - - 15 Q. B. D. 239 
 See Bankeuptcy — Proop. 3. 
 
 Dower 21 Ch. D. 164 
 
 See Dower. 1. 
 
 Scotch divorce— English wife 6 P. D. 35 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and Wife — DrvoRCE. 
 
 Scotch law - 9 App. Cas. 205 ; 10 App. 
 
 [Cas. 171 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 1,7. 
 DIVORCE COURT— Practice in. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — ^Ditoece. 
 DIVORCE SUIT— Appeal from decree. 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Appeal — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 Compromise of - 18 Ch. D. 670 
 
 See Husband and Wife— Separation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 Sequestration in - 18 Ch. D. 663 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Se- 
 questration. 2. 
 DIVORCED HUSBAND— Legacv to husband 
 
 See Will— Words. 11. [22 Ch, D. 619 
 DIVORCED WIFE— Annuity during widowhood 
 [22Ch.D. 697; 26 Ch. D. 686 
 See Will — Condition. 11. 
 DOCK— Admiralty jurisdiction 8 ft. B. D. 609 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Entering — Arrival at port 11 ft. B. D. 783; 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 38 
 See Ship — Charterpaety. 5, 6. 
 DOCK COMPANY— Railway ancillary to docks- 
 Taking railway plant in execution 
 
 [13 ft. B, D, 320 
 See Railway Company — Peopeety. 1. 
 DOCK WARRANT— Indorsement 28 Ch. D. 682 
 See Bill of Sale — Registration. 5. 
 
 DOCKS AND HARBOURS. 
 
 1. By-laws- — Validity of — Harhours, 
 
 Docks, and Piers Clauses Act, iS47 (10 & 11 
 Vict. c. 27), £. 83 — Bock Company — Sliip — Dis- 
 
( 513 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 514 •) 
 
 DOCKS AND HAEBOTIES— coniimMerf. 
 charge of Cargo — Employment of Lumpers.'] By 
 10 & 11 Vict. c. 27, s. 83, the undertakers autho- 
 rized by any special Act to construct a dock may 
 from time to time make such by-laws as they 
 shall think fit for (amongst other purposes) regu- 
 lating the shipping, unshipping, and removing of 
 all goods -within the limits of the dock, and for 
 regulating the duties and conduct of all persons, 
 as well the servante of the undertakers as others, 
 employed in the dock. A dock company, who 
 were the undertakers under a special Act, made 
 by-laws that no lumpers should be allowed to 
 work on board any vessel in the dock, but such as 
 were authorized by the company, unless permis- 
 sion in writing had been previously obtained from 
 the superintendent of the dock, and that servants 
 of the company only should be allowed to work 
 within the dock premises, whether on ship, lighter, 
 or shore : — Held, that the by-laws were in excess 
 of the power conferred upon the dock company 
 by sect. 83, and were therefore invalid. Dick v. 
 Badabt PHi)EES - - - 10 Q. B. D. 387 
 
 2. Removal of Wreck — Sarhour Autho- 
 rity, Liability of — Acts, Local and General, Con- 
 struction of] By Act of Parliament 26 & 27 Vict. 
 c. Ixsxix. the Harbour of B. was vested in the 
 Defendants, the limits were defined, and the De- 
 fendants had jurisdiction over the harbour of P. 
 and the channel of P. beyond those limits for the 
 purpose of, inter alia, buoying " the said harbour 
 and channel," but they were not to levy dues or 
 rates beyond the harbour of B. By 42 & 43 Vict. 
 c. cxlvi. a moiety of the residue of light duties to 
 which ships entering or leaving the harbour of P. 
 contributed, were to be paid to the Defendants and 
 to be applied by them in, inter alia, buoying and 
 lighting the harbour and channel of P. A vessel 
 was wrecked in the channel of P., which under 
 the Wrecks Kemoval Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Viot. 
 c. 16), s. 4, the Defendants had power to, and did 
 partially, remove. The wreck not removed was 
 not buoyed, and the Plaintiff's vessel was in con- 
 sequence wrecked : — Held, that the statutes im- 
 posed upon the Defendants- an obligation to 
 remove the wreck from the channel or to mark its 
 position by buoys, and that not having done so 
 they were liable in damages to the Plaintiff. Doe- 
 MONT V. Ftjbness Eailwat Co. 11 Q. B. D. 496 
 
 DOCUMEKTAEY EVIDENCE ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Etidence — Documents — Statutes. 
 
 DOCUMENTS— Contemporaneous 20 Ch. D. 27 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 187 
 
 See Company — Pbospeotus. 1. 
 
 Evidence - 17 Ch. D. 833; 21 Ch. D. 674; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 472 
 
 See Evidence — Documents. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Evidence — Entry in college books 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 429 
 See Evidence — Entbt et deceased 
 Pebson. 
 
 ^— Evidence — Public documents. 
 
 See Evidence — Public Documents — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Inspection of — Deceased lunatic 
 
 [16 Ch, D. 673 
 See Lunatic — Deceased Lunatic. 
 
 DOCUMENTS— confemtecZ. 
 
 Inspection of — Stannaries Court 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 106 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 3. 
 
 Lien on — Solicitor. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitoe — Lien. 8 — 
 12. 
 
 Production of. 
 
 See Cases under Peaotice — Supeeme 
 CouET — Peoduotion of Documents. 
 
 Production of — Banki-uptcy 17 Ch. D. 512 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Evidence. 3. 
 
 Production of — Books on account of bank- 
 rupt - - 21 Ch. D. 868 
 See Bankeuptcy — Assets. 16. 
 
 Production of— Costs 16 Ch. D. 517 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 38. 
 
 Valueless 
 
 See Recoed Office — Statutes and 
 Gazette. 
 
 DOMICIL. 
 
 Abandonment — Acquired Domicil — Fro- 
 
 hate — Construction of Will expressed in Terms of 
 Foreign Law.] A Scotchman came to live in 
 England and acquired an English domicil. He 
 afterwards went for two years to France and re- 
 turned to England, where he soon after died. He 
 left an unsigned will of personal estate, made in 
 1827, which was drawn by a Scotch lawyer, and 
 contained several technical words of Scotch law. 
 The will was admitted to probate by the Englishi 
 Court. It was held by Pearson, J. : — (1), that 
 the grant of the probate was not conclusive that 
 the testator was- domiciled in England ; (2), that 
 the Scotch domicil of the testator had revived, 
 and that he died a domiciled Scotchman ; (3), that 
 the will must be construed according to Scotch 
 law ; and (4), that upon the true construction of 
 the will the Plaintiff was entitled to the estate : 
 — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that whether the 
 testator was domiciled in Scotland or England, 
 and whether the will was to be construed accord- 
 ing to English or Scotch law, on the true con- 
 struction of the will the Plaintiff was entitled to ■ 
 the estate; and therefore the question of domicil 
 was immaterial. — But, semhle, the testator died 
 domiciled in England, his residence in France 
 not being sufficient evidence of his intention to- 
 abandon his English domicil. — Semhle, also, the 
 use of some technical Scotch terms in his will dii 
 not furnish sufficient indication of the intention- 
 of the testator to induce the Court to construe it- 
 according to Scotch law. Beadfoed v. Young 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 617 
 
 2. Abandonment — Acquired Domicil — 
 
 British Subject in Military Service of Crown.] 
 The rule that a British subject does not, by enter- 
 ing into and remaining in the military service of 
 the Crown, abandon the domioU which he had 
 when he entered into the ser-yice, applies to an 
 acquired domicil as well as to a domicil of origin. 
 — An infant, whose father was then living in 
 Jersey, where he had acquired a domicil in place 
 'of his English domicU of origin, obtained a com- 
 mission in the British army in 1854 and joined 
 his regiment in England; He sei-ved with the 
 
 S 
 
( 515 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 516 ) 
 
 DOJUICIL— continued. 
 
 regiment in different parts of the world, and ulti- 
 mately, in 1863, he died in Canada, where he 
 then was with the regiment. He had in the 
 meantime paid occasional visits to Jersey while on 
 leave : — Seld, that he retained his Jersey domioil 
 at the time of his death. In re Maceeight. Pax- 
 ton V. Maobeight 30 Ch. D. 165 
 
 3. Abandonment — Evidence — Settlers in 
 
 Colony:] A change of domicil must be a residence 
 sine animo revertendi. A temporary residence 
 for the purposes of health, travel or business does 
 not change the domicil. Also (1) every pre- 
 sumption is to be made in favour, of the original 
 domicil; (2) no change can occur without an 
 actual residence in a new place ; and (3) no new 
 domioil can be obtained without a clear intention 
 of abandoning the old. — Per Lord Blackburn: 
 "When English settlers go out to a colony and 
 settle there they carry with them, so far as may 
 be applicable to their purpose, all the immunities 
 and privileges of the law of JEngland as the law 
 of England was at that time. The Laudekdale 
 Peeease 10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 4. Chinese Domioil — Petition — Legacy 
 
 Duty— Anglo-Indian Domicil.'] Notwithstanding 
 the constitution of the Supreme Court of China 
 and Japan, and the jurisdiction conferred on that 
 Court over British subjects having a fixed place 
 •of residence in China, a British subject caimot 
 acquire by residence in China a new domicil so as 
 to exempt his personal estate on death from the 
 
 ■operation of the Legacy Duty Acts. — British 
 subjects resident in Chinese teiritory cannot ac- 
 quire in China a domicil similar to that existing 
 in India, and commonly known as Anglo-Indian. 
 In re Tootal's Teusts 23 Ch. D. 532 
 
 5. Unsettled Eesidence — Territorial Limits 
 
 of England — Domicil of Origin.] P. was bom in 
 Scotland, in 1792, of Scotch parents. In 1810 he 
 obtained a commission in the army, and imme- 
 diately proceeded with his regiment on foreign 
 service, and served abroad till 1S60, when he re- 
 tired from the army. From 1860 till his death 
 he resided in lodgings, hotels, and boarding-houses 
 in various places in England, dying in 1882, in- 
 testate and a bachelor, in a private hotel in 
 London, leaving no real estate in England, and 
 no property whatsoever in Scotland. From the 
 year 1810 till his death he never revisited Scot- 
 land, and for the last twenty-two years of his life 
 never left the territorial limits of England — Held, 
 that the domicil of the intestate at his death was 
 Scotch. In re Patience. Patience v. Main 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 976 
 
 Alien— Execution of will 9 P. D. 130 
 
 See Pkobate — Geant. 2. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Officer in British army serv- 
 ing out of England - 13 Q. B. D. 418 
 See Bankbuptoy — Bankedptoy Peti- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 407 ; 
 [18 Ch, D, 347 
 Limited. 5. 
 
 - Foreign — Administration 
 
 See Administkatoe — Limited, o. 
 
 ■ Foreign — Administration — English assets — 
 Foreign creditors 28 Ch. D. 175 
 
 See ExEOUTOE — Administbation. 8. 
 
 D OMICIL — continued. 
 
 Foreign husband — English settlement 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 284 
 See PowEE — Execution. 16. 
 
 Foreign — Succession duty — Fund in Court 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 100 
 
 See Eevenue — StrocESSiON Duty. 2. 
 
 Illegitimate children 17 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See DiSTEiBUTioNS, Statute of. 
 
 Law of — Representatives 8 App. Cas. 82 
 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 3. 
 
 ■ Legitimacy — Will 
 
 See Will — ^Woeds. 
 
 13. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 637 
 
 Probate of will— Estoppel - 29 Ch. D. 268 
 
 See Estoppel — Judsment. 4. 
 
 Proof of— Probate of will - 26 Ch. D. 656 
 
 See Probate — Gbant. 4. 
 
 Eesidence in Scotland or Ireland — Service 
 
 of writ 80 Ch. D. 240 ; 12 ft. B. D. 50 ; 
 [14 0. B. D. 78 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 VICE.2, 3, 10. 
 
 Scotch — Action for administration in Eng- 
 land 32 Ch. D. 456 ; 9 App. Cas. 34 
 
 See ExEOUTOE — Actions. 16. 
 
 Scotch divorce — Validity in England 
 
 [6 P. D. 35 ; 8 App. Cas. 43 
 
 See Husband and Wjfe — Divorce. 
 
 DOMIKION OF CANADA. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law — 
 Canada — Dominion. 
 
 DONATIO MORTIS CAUSA. 
 
 Cheque payoible to] Donor or Order.] A 
 
 cheque payable t» the donor or order and, with- 
 out having been indorsed by him, given by the 
 donor during his last iUness to his son, stands on 
 the same footing as a promissory note or bill of 
 exchange payable to the donor or order, and, fol- 
 lowing Veal V. VeaX (27 Beav. 303), will pass to 
 the son by way of donatio mmtis causa. Clement 
 V. Cheesman - - 27 Ch. D. 631 
 
 • Duty on. 
 
 See Eevenue — Stamts- 
 
 -Statutes. 
 
 DOUBLE INSOIVENCY— Bill of exchange -Doc- 
 trine of Ex parte Waring 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 366 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange 3. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 611 
 
 -Securities fob. 
 
 See Bill op Exohange- 
 3. 
 DOUBIE PORTIONS - 20 Ch. D. 81 
 
 See Settlement — Satisfaction. 
 
 DOUBTFUL TITLE— Specific performance— Ven- 
 dor and purchaser 18 Ch. D. 381 
 See Bankbuptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 DOWKE. 
 
 1. DiTcrce— 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85.] A wife 
 
 having obtained a decree for dissolution of mani- 
 age in the Court for Divorce and Matrimonial 
 Causes -on the ground of her husband's miscon- 
 duct : — Seld, by so doing t» have lost her right 
 to dower. Feaupton ij. "Stephens 21 Ch. D. 164 
 
(. 517 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 518 ) 
 
 VOWER— continued. 
 
 2. Release of hy Widow to Mortgagee— 
 
 Beconveyance.'] The owner in fee of certain 
 lands died intestate, leaving a -widow entitled to 
 dower thereout. The heir-at-law executed a 
 mortgage of the lands to secure a sum of money 
 advanced to him by a building society. The 
 ■widow was a party to the mortgage deed, by 
 which, " for the purpose of extinguishing her 
 right to dower," she granted and released the 
 lands to the mortgagees, the trustees of the 
 building society. It was provided by the deed 
 that, upon repayment of the moneys secured 
 thereby, a receipt should be indorsed thereon in 
 the form given by 6 & 7 "Will. 4, c. 32, to the 
 intent that the deed should be vacated and the 
 property comprised therein be revested in the 
 person or persons for the time being interested 
 in the equity of redemption therein. The moneys 
 secured by the deed having been repaid, and the 
 statutory receipt indorsed thereon: — Meld, that 
 the widow was, notwithstanding the release of 
 her dower contained in the mortgage deed, enti- 
 tled to have dower assigned to her out of the 
 premises comprised in the deed. — Dawson v. Banle 
 of Whitehaven (6 Oh. D. 218) distinguished. 
 Meek v. Ohambeblain - - 8 Q. E. D. 31 
 
 DRAINAGE - " 27 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 14. 
 
 Cost of — Ordinary outgoings 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 See Will — Words. 14. 
 
 Nuisance by Local Board 22 Ch. D. 221 
 
 See Nuisance— Remedies. 4. 
 
 Eight to use - - - 17 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts; 9. 
 
 DRAMA— Copyright in" - 13 Q,. B, D. 843 ; 
 
 [21 Ch.D. 232 
 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 2, 3. 
 DRAWER — Bill of exchange — Name in blank 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 666 
 See Bill of. Exchange — Accept aitce. 
 
 Cheque — Bankruptcy of payee — Duty to 
 
 stop cheque - - 19 Ch. D. 409 
 See Bankruptcy — Peotboted Trans- 
 action. 8. 
 DXfCHY OF LANCASTER— Attorney-General of— 
 Eight to file information in High Court 
 [14 Q. B. D. 195 
 See Attorney-General of Duchy of 
 Lancaster. 
 Attorney-General of — Eight to attend pro- 
 ceedings in lunacy - 21 Ch. D. 613 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 4. 
 DUES— Harbour— Scotch law 8 App. Cas, 658 
 
 See Scotch Law — Harbour. 2. 
 DITBANTE HINORE .STATE - 16 Ch. D. 49 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 4. 
 DUTY- Public revenue. 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Ebvenue. 
 DWEIIING-HOITSE— Occupation of part of 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 381 
 ■ See Municipal Coepobation — Fran- 
 chise. 
 
 Occupation of part of - 8 Q. B. D. 195 ; 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 577 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 2, 3. 
 
 Separate estate - - 24 Ch D 346 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separate 
 Estate. 2. 
 DYING WITHOUT ISSUE - 9 App. Cas. 890 
 See Will — Estate in Eealty. 2. 
 
 S 2 
 
( 519 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 520 X 
 
 E. 
 
 EARNINGS — Personal labour of bankrupt 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 768 
 
 See Bankeuptct — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 4. 
 EASEMENT. 
 
 Light. 
 
 See Light. 
 
 Support. 
 
 See Support. 
 
 Wateeoourse. 
 
 See 'Wateeoourse. 
 
 Way. 
 
 See Way. 
 
 1. Fascia — Adjoining Tenement — Common 
 
 Landlord.'] The Plaintiff was lessee of a house 
 numbered 152 in A. Street, but which lay behind 
 Noa. 151 and 153 in that street, and at the bottom 
 of a court approached by a passage from A. Street, 
 half of which passage was under the first floor 
 of No. 151, and the other half under the first 
 floor of No. 153. The passage was closed by a 
 gate in the plane of the front of 151 and 153, 
 which was hung on the wall of 153, but was ad- 
 mitted to be part ofthe Plaintiff's premises. All 
 three houses belonged to the same landlord. 
 Above the gate was a fascia of cement eight feet 
 long, half of which was" on the wall of 151, and 
 the other half on that of 153. The fascia had 
 existed from about 1845, and the number of the 
 Plaintiffs house and the name and business of 
 the occupier for the time being had always been 
 painted on it. No. 153 was demised to the De- 
 fendant in 1874 without any express reservation 
 of the fascia, and the Plaintiff became lessee of 
 No. 152 in 1876 : — Held (aflnrming the decision of 
 Kay, J.), that the fascia must be held to be a 
 parcel of the property demised to the Plaintiff, 
 and that he was entitled to prevent the Defen- 
 dant from interfering with it. Francis v. Hat- 
 ward - 20 Ch. D. 773; 22 Ch. D. 177 
 
 2. Foreshore — Prescription Act (2 4 3 
 
 Will- 4, c. 71), s. 8 — " Person entitled to any re- 
 version " — Building Agreement by Tenant for Life 
 — Amendment of Pleadings — Practice.'] In an 
 action to restrain the removal of shingle from, 
 and the placing of bathing-machines upon, a part 
 of the foreshore of the sea at M., the Plaintiff 
 claimed to be tenant in possession of the locus in 
 quo under a buildiag agreement granted him by 
 the lord of the manor of M., who was tenant for 
 life of the property under a settlement. By his 
 statement of defence the Defendant set up a forty 
 years' uninterrupted user and enjoyment of the 
 locus in quo by himself and his predecessors in 
 title for the purposes complained of, and denied 
 that the Plaintiff was or ever had been in posses- 
 sion of the locus in quo " save subject to the right 
 of the Defendant." At the trial. Pry, J., refused 
 the Defendant leave to amend his statement of 
 defence by striking out the qualifying words, so 
 as to make his denial of the Plaintiff's possession 
 an unqualified one : — Held, on appeal, that the 
 
 "EASEWSST— continued. 
 
 amendment ought to have been allowed. — Gold- 
 ing V. Wharton Saltworlcs Company (1 Q. B. D. 
 374) explained. — Held, also, per Pi^', J., that the. 
 words " per.sou entitled to any reversion " in. 
 the 8th section of the Prescription Act (2 & 3 
 Will. 4, 0. 71) included a person entitled as a re- 
 mainderman ; that the Plaintiff being in posses- 
 sion of the locus in quo under the agreement at. 
 least as tenant at wUl to the reversioner, was also 
 a person " entitled to any reversion " within the- 
 section, and could therefore maintain the action- 
 — But, held, by the Oourt of Appeal, 1. That on 
 the true construction of the building agreement 
 the Plaintiff had no estate whatever in the locus.- 
 in quo, but only a right of entry thereon for the 
 purposes of that agreement, and therefore couli 
 not maintain the action; 2. That it was, there- 
 fore, unnecessary to decide the question raised on- 
 the 8th section of the Prescription Act; but. 
 their Lordships intimated that it must not be 
 concluded that they agreed with the decision of 
 the Court below on that point. Laird d. Beiggs 
 [16 Ch. D. 440 ; 19 Ch. D. 22 
 
 Grant of. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 Railway — Right to cross lands of another 
 
 company 22 Ch. D. 677 ; 9 App. Cas. 78T 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 3. 
 
 Railway — ^Right to make tunnel 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 143: 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Ocmhpulsort 
 Powers. 2. 
 
 Right of way — Porty years' enjoyment — 
 
 Remainderman — Reversion expectant oa 
 term of life or years - 15 Q..B. D. 629 
 See Peescbiption. 2. 
 EAST INDIA STOCK— Investment of money iu 
 Court - 22 Ch. D. 93 
 
 See Practice — Supeemb Court — Pay- 
 ment INTO COCET. 5. 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 Church Estates Commissioners.] TAe Act 14 &■ 
 15 Vict. c. 104, so far as it is not repealed, and. 
 the several Acts amending the same are continued 
 until the 31st of December, 1886, by the Act 48 & 4i> 
 Vict. c. 59. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 55, explains sect. 34 
 of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners Act, 1840. 
 
 Tatenhill Rectory.] By the Act 48 & 49 Vid. 
 c. 31, the Act 3 (fc 4 Vict. c. 113, and Acts amend- 
 ing the same, apply to rectory of Tatenhill. 
 
 Glebe Lands— Drainage and Improvement 
 
 Company — Bent-charge — Inclosure Commissioners, 
 Order by — Arrears — Sale of Lands — Demurrer.'] 
 A rent-charge for a certain period of time, in 
 arrear, charged by an order made by the Inclosure 
 Commissioners upon the inheritance of the glebe 
 lands of a rectory, under the provisions of the 
 General Land Drainage and Improvement Com- 
 
< 521 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 522 ) 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONEES—conM. 
 
 pany's Act of 1849 (12 & 13 Vict. o. xci.), was, 
 ainder the provisions of tlie same Act, ordered to 
 .be raised by a sale of the glebe lands. — In an 
 action by the owners of a rent-charge in arrear, 
 charged on glebe lands, for a declaration that they 
 were entitled under the order made by the In- 
 closure Commissioners to a charge on the lands for 
 the sums due and to become due of the rent-charge, 
 and asking for a sale of the lands, the Eccle- 
 siastical Commissioners were made Defendants : — 
 Seld, on demurrer, that they were not necessary 
 parties. Scottish Widows' Fund v. Craig 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 208 
 Action against collegiate body 18 Ch. D. 696 
 
 See Chabity — Commissionebs. 1. 
 Inclosure of commons. 
 
 See Inclostieb — Statutes. 
 Land of— Easement - 19 Ch. D. 281 
 
 See Stjppobt. 2. 
 ICCLESIASXICAL JUEISDICTION. 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Bishop — 
 Statutes. 
 
 SCCLZSIASTICAL LAW : 
 
 — 
 
 
 Col. 
 
 I. Bishop 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 521 
 
 n. Church 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 521 
 
 III. Churchtaed 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 522 
 
 IV. Clergy 
 
 - 
 
 
 - 522 
 
 V. Dilapidatioss 
 
 - 
 
 
 - 523 
 
 Practice. 
 
 See Practice— Ecclesiastical. 
 
 I. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— BISHOP. 
 
 Jurisdiction.] Such, of the provisions of the Act 
 iO & 11 Vict. c. 98 as are continued by 21 & 22 
 Vict. c. 50, are continued by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, 
 tmtil the Slst of December, 1886. 
 
 Quare Impedit — Benefice — Refusal of 
 
 Bishop to institute Clerh — Gi-ounds of Befusal — 
 iFitness of Clerk — Offences against Mcclesiaitical 
 £o«!.] A bishop refused to institute a clerk in 
 holy orders to a benefice on the grounds that he 
 had, whilst acting as curate to a former holder of 
 the benefice, habitually committed offences against 
 ecclesiastical law and failed to observe the Book 
 of Common Prayer, by wearing unlawful vest- 
 ments and doing unlawful acts in respect of 
 matters of ritual when officiating in the com- 
 Eiunion service ; and that he declined to under- 
 take not to repeat the offences in the future. In 
 sax action against the bishop in which the patron 
 claimed a declaration that he was entitled to have 
 the clerk instituted : — Beld, that the Defendant 
 had acted within his discretion in refusing to 
 institute the clerk upon the grounds stated, and 
 was therefore entitled to judgment. Heywood v. 
 Bishop of Manchester - 12 ft. B. D. 404 
 
 II. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— CHTJECH. 
 
 Faculty — Judicial Discretion — Opinion 
 
 <ef Parishioners— Matters of Taste and Fancy.'] 
 Where the incumbent and churchwardens with 
 the approval of the vestry apply for a faculty for 
 alterations in their parish church, and the grant 
 ■or refusal of the faculty is merely a matter for the 
 discretion of the ordinary, the faculty ought not 
 to be granted unless it is proved to the satisfaction 
 
 II. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— CHTJECH— cohW. 
 
 of the ordinary that if the proposed alterations are 
 carried out, the church will be thereby rendered 
 more convenient, more fit for the accommodation 
 of the parishioners who worship there, more suit- 
 able, more appropriate or more adequate to its 
 purposes, or that there exists either on the part of 
 the parishioners generally, or of the parishioners 
 actually attending the church, a general desire in 
 favour of the faculty being granted. Peek v. 
 Tbowee - - 7P. D. 21 
 
 III. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— CHTTECHYAED. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 2 {the Burial and Re- 
 gistration Act Doubts Removal Act, 1881), sect. 1 
 enacts: Nothing in the Wth section of the Burial 
 Laws Amendment Act, 1880, shall have, or ^ be 
 deemed in laio to have had, the effect of repealing, 
 or in any manner altering, any of the provisions 
 contained in the llth section of the Births and 
 Deaths Registration Act, 1874, in any case what- 
 ever, save and except only the ease of a burial 
 under the Burial Laws Amendment Act, 1880. 
 
 IV. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— CLEEGY. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 51, amends the law re- 
 lating to Pluralities. 
 
 1. District — New Parish — Marriages, 
 
 Right to solemnize — Marriage Fees, Right to — New 
 Parish Act, 1843 (6 4 7 Vict. c. 37), ss. 11, 15— 
 New Parish Act, 1856 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 104), ss. 14, 
 15.] The publication of the banns of marriage 
 and the solemnization of marriage are " ecclesias- 
 tical purposes" within the meaning of 19 & 20 
 Vict. c. 104, o. 14, and, where a district becomes 
 within this section a separate and distinct parish 
 for ecclesiastical purposes, the incumbent of such 
 parish has the exclusive right of performing the 
 oiEce of marriage in the case of persons resident 
 in his parish, and of receiving the fees for such 
 marriages, and consequently the incumbent of the 
 mother parish has no right to solemnize such 
 marriages in the church of the mother parish or to 
 receive the fees for the same. Puller v. Alfoed 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 418 
 
 2. Donative — Transfer of Advowson by 
 
 Patron during Vacancy — Trust to appoint Nomi- 
 nee — Nomination of Self — Right to Benefice.'] The 
 patron of a donative benefice, being a qualified 
 clergyman and officiating curate of the church, 
 by deed-poll, executed during a vacancy of the 
 benefice, granted the advowson to a trustee in 
 trust to present whomsoever the patron should 
 nominate; the patron then by word of mouth 
 nominated himself, and the trustee by deed-poll 
 granted the office of rector to him : — flisM, that 
 the transaction was valid, and that he thereupon 
 became rector and Qutitled to the profits of the 
 benefice. Lowe v. Bishop ov Chester 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 407 
 
 3. Incumbents' Eesignation Act, 1871 
 
 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 44), s. W— Retired Clerk— Pen- 
 sion — Debt due by retired Clerk to Incumbent — 
 Set-off.] By the lOtli section of the Incumbents' 
 Eesignation Act, 1871, the pension allowed to a 
 retiring clerk is made a charge upon the revenues 
 of the benefice, " and shall be recoverable as a 
 debt at law or in equity from the incumbent of 
 the said benefice by the retired clerk, his execu- 
 
( 523 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 524 ) 
 
 IV. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— CLEEGY— conid. 
 tors, administrators, and assigns, .... but shall 
 not be transferable at law or in equity." — In an 
 action by a retired clerk against the incumbent of 
 the benefice for payment of the arrears of the pen- 
 sion that had been allowed him under the Act : — 
 Seld, that the incumbent could not set off against 
 such arrears a judgment debt previously due to 
 Mm from the retired clerk. Gathebcole v. Smith 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 1 
 
 V. ECCLESIASTICAL LAW— DILAPIDATIONS. 
 
 Sequestration of Benefice — Dilapidations 
 
 of Glebe Buildings — Bepairs dons hy. Sequestrator 
 — Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Act, 1871 (34 & 35 
 Vict. c. 43), 88. 12-16, 72 — Accounts of Sequestrator, 
 Ohjection to.] A benefice having been sequestrated 
 under a writ of sequestration in an action, an in- 
 spection of the glebe buildings by the diocesan 
 surveyor was directed by the bishop, and a report 
 made by such surveyor imder the Ecclesiastical 
 Dilapidations Act, 1871. The report estimated the 
 cost of the necessary repairs to the buildings at 
 £140, and no objections were taken to such report 
 imder s. 16 of the Act. The sequestrator, being 
 subsequently of opinion that the repairs provided 
 for by the siuveyor's report were inadequate, ex- 
 pended on the repairs of the buildings a. much 
 larger sum than £140. No inspection or report, 
 except as before mentioned, was ordered by the 
 bishop or made by the surveyor : — Held, that the 
 sequestrator had no authority to expend on repairs 
 out of the proceeds of the benefice a larger sum 
 than that estimated as necessary by the sur- 
 veyor's report under the Ecclesiastical Dilapida- 
 tions Act, 1871, and that such expenditure must 
 be disallowed. Kimbee v. Pabavioini 
 
 [15 a. B. D. 222 
 
 LAW 
 
 ■ Church of South 
 
 1 App. Cas. 484 
 
 -Cape of Good Hope. 
 
 -Eight 
 
 ECCLESIASTICAL 
 
 Africa 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 1. 
 
 Advowsou — Consolidated benefice 
 
 of presentation — Quare impedit 
 
 See Advowson. 2. [15 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 EDXTCATION — Application of charitable gift to 
 
 [IS Ch. D. 310 
 
 See Chaeitt — Management. 3. 
 
 Appropriation of charitable gift to 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 463 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 2. 
 
 Infant— Eight to control - 21 Ch. D. 817 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 317 ; 28 Ch. D. 82 
 See Infant — Education. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 EJECTMENT — Disclaimer of lessor's titlo 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 730 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Ee-entry. 
 2. 
 
 Discovery 20 Ch. D. 484 ; 8 App. Cas. 217 
 
 See Peaotice — Supkeme Court — ^Inteb- 
 eogatories. 11. 
 
 Eelief against forfeiture — Non-payment of 
 
 rent — Disallowance of costs to Plaintiff 
 [14 ft. B. D. 347 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entry. 
 
 7. 
 
 EJECTMENT— coji^mMcd. 
 
 Statute of Limitations — Mortgage 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 345 ; 7 App. Cas. 235 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Ebalty. 
 4. 
 
 Tenant holding over — Expiration of land- 
 lord's title — Writ of possession 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 294 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entet. 
 3. 
 
 EJTTSDEM GENESIS— Bequest in will 
 
 See Will— Words. 9. [30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 ELDEST SON 26 Ch. D. 363, 382 
 
 See Settlement — Consteuction. 2, 3^ 
 
 ELECTION. 
 
 1. • Appointment] A testator, having 
 
 power under a settlement to appoint the settled 
 hereditaments to children of his first marriage 
 only, appointed the settled hereditaments (describ- 
 ing them as his own property) in favour of a sou 
 of the first marriage subject to a charge in favour 
 of his other children, including the children of his 
 second marriage, and he devised property of his 
 own to the same sou subject to the same charges 
 in favour of his other children " so as to equalise 
 the shares of all his children in all his pro- 
 perty": — Held, that a case of election arose in 
 favour of the children of the second marriage. — 
 Woolridge v. Woolridge (Joh. 63) distinguished. 
 White v. White - 22 Ch. D. 555 
 
 2. — ; — Appointment — Special Fmoer — Ap- 
 pointment to Persons not Objects of Power — 
 Direction to pay Dehts of Appointor.'] A testatrix 
 had, under the will of a brother who had pre- 
 deceased her, a power to appoint hia property by 
 wiU among his nephews and nieces and the 
 children or child of deceased nephews and nieces. 
 She, by her will, gave all the real and personal 
 estate of which she might be seised or possessed 
 at the time of her death, or over which she 
 might have any testamentary power of disposi- 
 tion, to trustees, upon trust for sale and conver- 
 sion, and to stand possessed of the proceeds 
 (which she described as " my said trust funds ") 
 upon trust to pay costs and expenses, and to 
 pay her debts and funeral expenses and certain 
 pecuniary legacies, and then upon trust as to 
 two one-fourth parts of her trust funds respec- 
 tively for persons who were objects of the power ; 
 and upon trust as to the other two one-fourth 
 parts respectively for persons who were not ob- 
 jects of the power. And she declared that, in 
 case of the failure of the trusts thereinbefore de- 
 clared of any of the one-fourth parts of her trust 
 funds, the one-fourth part, or so much thereof of 
 which the trusts should fail, should be held upon 
 the trusts thereinbefore deolaied of the others or 
 
 'other of the fourth parts of which the trusts 
 should not fail : — Held, that the testatrix had 
 manifested an intention to exercise the power, 
 and that as to one moiety of the brother's pro- 
 perty the power was well exercised : — Held, also, 
 that, as to the other moiety of the brother's pro- 
 perty, the appointment was invalid, but that, by 
 virtue of the gift " in case of the failure of any of 
 the trusts thereinbefore declared," that moiety 
 went to the persons to whom the first moiety was 
 
( 525 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 526 ) 
 
 'ELECnaS— continued. 
 
 ■well appointed, and that, consequently, no case of 
 election arose. In re Swinbuene. Swinburne v. 
 Pitt - - 27 Ch. D. 696 
 
 3. Conversion — Heal and Fersonal Mstate 
 
 — Election to talce Personalty as Mealty — Real 
 Estate in Lease with Option to Tenant to purchase 
 Beversion.'] A testator by his will gave his real 
 estate and the residue of his personal estate to 
 trustees, on trust to sell his real estate, and to 
 convert and get in his residuaiy personal estate, 
 and to stand possessed of the moneys arising from 
 both, on trust to invest the same, and to pay the 
 income to his wife during her life or widowhood, 
 and, after her death or second marriage, upon 
 trust to divide the trust ftmds equally between 
 such -of his children as should be living at his 
 death, and the issue of such of them as might be 
 then dead. The testator died in 1869. The wife 
 and two infant children survived him. There 
 were no issue of any deceased child. Both the 
 children died before the wife unmarried and in- 
 testate, the one who died last dying in 1876. The 
 wife did not marry again, and she died in 1885 
 intestate. The only real estate of the testator was 
 a house, of which he had in 1869 agreed to grant 
 a lease for twenty years, with an option to the 
 tenant to purchase the reversion at any time 
 during the term. At the death of the widow this 
 option had not been exercised, and the house had 
 not been sold by the trustees. After the deaths of 
 the children the widow continued in receipt of the 
 rent of the house : — Held, that by reason of the 
 tenant's option to purchase the house, the widow's 
 continued receipt of the rent was no evidence of 
 an election by her to take the property as real 
 estate, and that on her death it descended as per- 
 sonalty to her next of kin. — In re Gordon (6 Ch. D. 
 531) distinguished. In re Lewis. Poxwell v. 
 Lewis - _ _ 30 Ch. D. 654 
 
 4. Married Woman — Appointment — 
 
 Donee unaware of Power — Exercise of Power — 
 Approbation and Reprobation.'] A married woiuan 
 being (although unaware of it) the doneg of a 
 general power of appointment by deed or will 
 over poUcy moneys payable upon her own death, 
 concurred with her husband in settling certain 
 family estates by an identure which treated the 
 policy moneys as the husband's own property, 
 and settled them also. Her concurrence in the 
 settlement was for a purpose entirely unconnected 
 with the policy moneys, and under it she took a 
 life interest in remainder after her husband's 
 death in the estates, but no interest in the policy 
 moneys. She survived her husband, received in 
 respect of her life interest in the estates siuns 
 exceeding the amount of the policy moneys, and 
 died, having by her will given all property over 
 which she had any disposing power to certain 
 beneficiaries: — Held, that by her will she had ex- 
 ercised her general power so as to make the policy 
 moneys her own assets, and Held also, that having 
 taken under the settlement, benefits exceeding 
 the value of the policy moneys, she could not by 
 the exercise of the power take the policy moneys 
 out of the settlement, without making good to the 
 settlement beneficiaries an equal amount from her 
 own estate; and accordingly that the policy 
 moneys must be paid to the settlement trustees. 
 
 "ELEXSntySi— continued. 
 
 — SembU, The concurrence of the donee of the 
 power in the deed of settlement, for purposes un- 
 connected with the policy moneys subject to the 
 power, and in ignorance of the existence of the 
 power, could not operate as an exercise of the 
 power although the deed purported to pass the 
 policy moneys. Geiffith-Boscawen v. Soott 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 358 
 
 5. Married Woman ■ — Restraint on An- 
 ticipation.'] In the case of a married woman to 
 whom an interest with a restraint on anticipation 
 attached thereto is given by the same instrument 
 as that which gives rise to a question of election, 
 the doctrine of election does not apply, as the 
 value of her interest in the property to be relin- 
 quished by way of compensation has, by the terms 
 of the instrument, been made inalienable. In re 
 Wheatley. Smith v. Spenoe - 27 Ch. D. 606 
 
 6. Married Woman — Settlewient on Mar- 
 riage of Female Infant — Life Interest for Se- 
 parate Use — Restraint on Anticipation — Covenant 
 by 'her to settle after-acquired Property — Bequest 
 to her after Twenty-one during Coverture for her 
 Separate Use — Voidable Covenant — Approbation 
 and Reprobation — Sequestration of Life Interest] 
 The doctrine of election is founded upoi; the rule 
 that a person cannot take under and against the 
 same instrument, and the equity is not that the 
 person electing to take against the instrument 
 shall be required to assign, but that he shall not 
 be permitted to take, the benefit given to him 
 thereunder. — Accordingly the Court is not pre- 
 vented from enforcing this rule by the incapacity 
 of the person so electing to alienate the interest 
 taken under the settlement. And upon this prin- 
 ciple the Court can, notwithstanding a restraint 
 on anticipation attaching thereto, sequester the 
 life interest of a married woman electing to take 
 against a settlement until compensation has been 
 made thereout to the persons disappointed under 
 the settlement by such election. — Upon the mar- 
 riage of a female infant in 1860 personalty was 
 settled by her father upon trusts under which she 
 took the first life interest for her separate use 
 without power of anticipation, and the settlement 
 contained a covenant by her to settle all her after- 
 acquired property upon tiiists under which the 
 liusbaud took the first life interest. In 1883 and 
 during the coverture personal property was be- 
 queathed to her for her separate use, and she choso' 
 to avoid her covenant and to take this property 
 instead of bringing it into the settlement. She- 
 also contended that she was entitled to keep the 
 life interest under the settlement which she was 
 restrained from anticipating without making com- 
 pensation thereout to the persons disappointed 
 under the settlement, upon the ground that as she 
 was restrained from alienating such life interest 
 the Court could not impound it : — Held, that as 
 the married woman had elected to defeat one of 
 the provisions of the settlement, she was not com- 
 petent to take a life interest under another of 
 them, and that, notwithstanding the restraint on 
 anticipation, the income which would have been 
 payable to her if she had not so elected, ought to 
 be applied in making compensation to the persons 
 disappointed by her election for the benefits of 
 which they had been thereby deprived, and that 
 
( 527 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 528 ) 
 
 ELECTION- 
 
 the trustees of the settlement must retain and 
 apply the same accordingly. — Smith v. Lucas 
 (18 Oh. D. 531) and In re Wheatley (27 Ch. D. 
 606) dissented from. In re Vaedon's Trusts 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 124 
 [Beversed by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 276.] 
 
 Invalid appointment - 26 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 7. 
 
 Lunatic — Confirmation of settlement by 
 
 married woman — Election by Court 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 263 
 See Settlement — Future Propertt. 3. 
 
 Married woman — Separate estate — Eestraint 
 
 on anticipation - - 18 Ch. D. 531 
 
 See Settlement — Future Peopeety. 2. 
 
 Of remedy — Concurrent actions 22 Ch. D. 
 
 [397 ; 23 Ch. D. 225 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court- — Stat- 
 ing Proceedings. 6, 7. 
 
 Sale under partition action — Married woman 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 362 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 3. 
 
 To charge old or new firm 7 App. Cas. 345 
 
 See Partnership — Dissolution, i. 
 ELECTION AGENT. 
 
 See Parliament — Election— Sfatoies. 
 
 ELECTION COMMISSIONERS— Expenses of 
 
 See Parliament — Election Commis- 
 sioners — Statutes. 
 ELECTION FOE PAELIAMENT. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under 
 Parliament — Election. 
 Parliament — Franchise. 
 ELECTION FOB SCHOOL BOABD. 
 
 See Elementary Education Acts — 
 School Board — Statutes. 
 ELECTION, MUNICIPAL. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under 
 
 Municipal Cokporation — Elec- 
 tion. 
 Municipal Corpoeation — Fran- 
 chise. 
 
 ELECTION PETITION. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under 
 
 Parliament — Election Petition. 
 Municipal Corpoeation — Elec- 
 tion. 
 
 ELECTEIC LIGHT. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. u. 56 (the Electric 
 Lighting Act, 1882), facilitates and regulates the 
 supply of electricity for lighting and other purposes 
 in the United Kingdom. 
 
 ELEGIT — Application for receiver 6 Q. B. D. 75 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 
 CBIVER. 2. 
 
 Bankruptcy — ^Seizure but not delivery of 
 
 possession - 12 Q. B. D. 224 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 10. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Protected transaction 
 
 [18 Ch, D. 137 
 See Bankruptcy — Protected Trans- 
 action, i. 
 
 ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS :— Col. 
 
 I. Attendance - - 528 
 
 II. Pees 530 
 
 III. Home Lessons 531 
 
 IV. School Board - 531 
 
 I. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS — AT- 
 TENDANCE. 
 
 1. Employment of Child— 39 & 40 Vict. 
 
 c. 79, ss. 8, 11, siih-s, 1 ; 41 d- 42 Vict. c. 16, Sehed.— 
 "Full Time Emphyment."} By 39 & 40 Vict. 
 c. 79, s. 11, sub-s. 1, if the parent of any child 
 above the age of five years " who is mider this 
 Act prohibited from being taken into full time 
 employment," habitually and without reasonable 
 excuse neglects to provide efficient elementary 
 instruction for his child, a court of summary 
 jurisdiction may order that the child do attend 
 school : — Seld, that sub-sect. 1 refers to sect. 8, 
 which applies certain sections of the Factory Acts 
 to the employment and education of children, 
 and that, as those sections have been repealed by 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 16, Sched., there can be no child 
 within the terms of 39 & 40 Vict. c. 79, s. 11, 
 sub-s. 1, " who is under this Act prohibited from 
 being taken into full time employment," and 
 therefore sub-sect. 1 has ceased to operate. Saun- 
 ders V. Crawford 9 ft. B. D. 612 
 
 2. Employment of CMii—" FuU Time 
 
 Employment "—39 * 40 Vict. c. 79, ss. 4, 5, 8, 11.] 
 By sect. 5 of the Elementary Education Act, 
 1876, a person shall not take into his employment 
 any child (1) who is under the age of ten years, 
 or (2) who, being of the age of ten years or up- 
 wards, has not obtained the certificate of pro- 
 ficiency, or of due attendance at school, prescribed 
 by the Act, unless such child, being of the age of 
 ten years and upwards, is employed and attend- 
 ing school under the Factory Acts, or any by-law 
 made under the Elementary Education Act, 1870. 
 — By sect. 11, if the parent of any child above 
 the age of five years, " who is under this Act pro- 
 hibited from being taken into full time employ- 
 ment," habitually, and without reasonable ex- 
 cuse, "neglects to provide eflicient elementary 
 instraction for such child, an order that the child 
 attend one of the prescribed schools may be 
 obtained by the local authority of the district 
 before a Court of summary jurisdiction. — By 
 sect. 48 "a child in this Act means a child 
 between the ages of five and fourteen years." — • 
 An attendance order was applied for, vmder 
 sect. 11, in respect of two children aged nine and 
 thii'teeu years respectively. Neither of the chil- 
 dren were in any employment, nor attending any 
 school, nor had either of them obtained any certi- 
 ficate under sect. 5 : — Held, that the words of 
 sect. 11 " any child who is under this Act prohi- 
 bited from being taken into full time employ- 
 ment " applied to any child prohibited from being 
 taken into employment by sect. 5, and therefore 
 that an attendance order could be made in 
 respect of each child. — Saunders v. Crawford 
 (9 Q. B. D. 612) not followed. Winyaed v. Too- 
 good. Hance v. Foetnum - 10 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 3. Employment of ChUd— 33 d; 34 Vict. 
 
 c. 75, ». 74, and 39 & 40 Vict. c. 79— Bylaws 
 — Eeasonable Excuse.'] A school board made a 
 by-law_ under sect. 74 of the Elementary Educa- 
 
( 529 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 530 ) 
 
 I. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS— ATTEN- 
 DANCE — continued. 
 tion Act, 1870, providing that "the parent of 
 every child of not less than five nor more than 
 thirteen years of age shall cause such chDd to 
 attend school, unless there he a reasonahle excuse 
 for non-attendance," and that " any of the follow- 
 ing reasons shall be a reasonable excuse, namely, 
 that the child is under efficient instruction in 
 some other manner ; that the child has been pre- 
 vented from attending school by sickness or any 
 anavoidahle cause ; that there is no public ele- 
 mentary school open, which the child could 
 attend, within two miles from the residence of 
 Buch child." "Where it was shewn that non- 
 attendance was caused by the child, a girl aged 
 twelve, with fair elementary instruction, having 
 ijeen in respectable employment, earning wages, 
 which she gave to her parents, who were poor, 
 industrious, and. respectable people, and applied 
 them to the support of their other children, whom 
 otherwise, from no fault of the parents, they 
 would have been unable sufficiently to support : 
 Seld, that these facts constituted a " reasonable 
 excuse " for non-attendance. London School 
 BOABD V. DUGGAN - - 13 Q. B. D. 176 
 
 4. Justices — Jurisdiction in Cases under 
 
 the Elementary Education Acts — Union extending 
 into several Counties — Elementary Education Act, 
 1876 (39 & 40 Viet. c. 79), ss. 12, 34 ; Poor Law 
 Amendment Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 106, s. 27.] 
 The effect of sect. 34 of the Elementary Education 
 Act, 1876 (39 &l0Vict. c. 79) — which incorporates 
 for certain purposes all enactments relating to 
 guardians and their officers — is to enable pro- 
 ceedings before justices for non-compliance with 
 attendance orders and for breach of by-laws under 
 the Elementary Education Acts, in cases where 
 the parents proceeded against reside in a union 
 extending into different counties, to be taken be- 
 fore the justices of either coimty. The Queen v. 
 Eaton - - 8 Q. B. D. 158 
 
 5. Eiahility of Parent— 33 & 34 Vict. 
 
 c. 75, s. 3— Neglect to ediuMte a Child — Liahility 
 where Child in the Actual Custody of some other 
 Person.2 The Bespondent was summoned for 
 non-compliance with an order under sect. 11 of 
 the Elementary Education Act, 1876, to educate 
 a child of which she was the parent. The child 
 was not residing with the Kespondent, but with 
 a relative, and the magistrate on that ground 
 refused to convict : — Held (by Lord Coleridge, C. J., 
 Pollock, B., and Manisty, J.), that sect. 3 of 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75, which declares that the term 
 parent shall include " guardian and every person 
 who is liable to maintain, or has the actual 
 custody of any child," does not affect the primary 
 liability of the parent, if there be one, and that 
 the Kespondent ought to have been convicted. 
 School Boabd fob London v. Jackson 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 502 
 
 6. Liability of Parent— 33 & 34 Viet. 
 
 0. 75 ; 39 * 40 Vict. c. 79 ; 43 * 44 Vict. c. 23— 
 " Reasonable Excuse " — By-laws.J A by-law 
 made under the Elementary Education Acts. pro- 
 vided that, " The parent of every child of not less 
 than five nor more than thirteen years of age, 
 shall cause such child to attend school, rmless 
 there be a reasonable excuse for non-attendance. 
 
 L ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS— ATTEN- 
 DANCE — contimued. 
 Keasonable excuses. — Any of the following reasons 
 shall be a reasonable excuse, namely : (a.) That 
 the child is under efficient instruction in some 
 other manner ; (6.) That the child has been pre- 
 vented from attending school by sickness or an 
 unavoidable cause ; (c.) That there is no public 
 elementary school open which the child can 
 attend within two miles. . . ." — From the 18th 
 of May to the 23rd of September, the Kespondent, 
 an engine-driver, caused his child to be sent daily 
 from home in time to arrive at school when it 
 opened. He did not receive any notice that the 
 child had not duly attended, except on two occa- 
 sions. On both occasions the Eespondent's wife 
 corrected the child. Nevertheless it often failed 
 to attend school. At the hearing of an informa- 
 tion, which charged that the Kespondent on and 
 ever since the 18th of May had neglected the by- 
 law in not causing his child to attend school, the 
 justices found that he had done all that could 
 reasonably be expected of him to secure the 
 attendance of the child at school, and had reason- 
 able grounds for believing, and did believe, 
 the child was duly attending school, and had, 
 therefore, a " reasonable excuse " for not causing 
 the child to attend school : — Meld, that there may 
 be other " reasonable excuses " within the mean- 
 ing of the by-law besides the three reasons therein 
 specified, and that the justices were right. Bel- 
 PER School Attendance Committee v. Bailey 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 259 
 
 7. Non-payment of Fees — Causing Child 
 
 to attend School, what is — By-law — Penalty — Ele- 
 mentary Education Act, 1870 (33 (fe 34 Vict. c. 75), 
 s. 74.] The London School Board made by-laws, 
 under s. 74 of the Elementary Education Act, 
 1870, providing that the parent of every child, if 
 not less than five nor more tlian thirteen years of 
 age, should cause such child to attend school 
 unless there was a reasonable cause for non-at- 
 tendance, and that every parent who should not 
 observe or neglect any by-law should be liable 
 upon conviction to a penalty. — The Respondent 
 sent his child, aged ten, to one of the Board's 
 schools, but did not pay, though he was able to 
 pay, the weekly fees for tuition prescribed by the 
 School Board with the consent of the Education 
 Department. The child was admitted to the 
 school, and received instruction therein : — Held, 
 that the Respondent had not caused his child to 
 attend school within the meaning of the by-laws, 
 and therefore was liable to the penalty. London 
 School Board v. Wood 15 Q, B. D. 415 
 
 II. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS— FEES. 
 
 1. Liability of Vstrent— Child attending 
 
 Board School without Fees — 33 (fe 34 Vict. c. 75, 
 s. 17; 39 <{; 40 Vict, c.ld, ss. 10, 11, 12 ; 43 <fc 
 44 Vict. c. 23, 8. 4.] A parent who, under an 
 order by a court of summary jurisdiction that his 
 child shall attend a board school, and that he do 
 see that the order is complied with, causes the 
 child to attend school, but without the school fees, 
 and without having applied to the guardians 
 under 33 & 34 Vict. o. 75, for payment of such 
 fees, or to the school board under sect. 17 for a 
 remission of them, is liable to be convicted under 
 the Elementary Education Act, 1876 (39 & 
 
( 531 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 532 ) 
 
 II. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS— FEES— 
 
 contimied. 
 40 Vict. 0. 79), a. 10, for non-compliance with the 
 order.— J» re Murphy (2 Q. B. D. 397) discussed. 
 
 ElCHAEDSON V. SauNDEHS. SauNDERS 11. KlOHABB- 
 
 SON 6 Q. B. D. 313 ; 7 Q. B. D. 388 
 
 2. Liability of Parent — Action to recover 
 
 Fees for Tuition — Implied Promise to pay Fees — 
 Action of Debt upon Statutes — By-laws — 33 & 34 
 Vict. V. 75—36 * 37 Viet. c. 86—39 & 40 Vict. 
 c. 79^3 & 44 Vict. e. 23.] No action to recover 
 arrears of fees for tuition can be maintained 
 by a Bcbool board against the parent of a child 
 attending a public elementary school; for, it 
 being compulsory upon the parent to cause his 
 child to attend a school, his act in sending the 
 child to school is not voluntary, and no promise 
 to pay the fees can be implied; and the Ele- 
 mentary Education Acts, 1870 to 1880, contem- 
 plate that the remedy to enforce payment of fees 
 shall be by an attendance order and by summary 
 proceedings before justices and not by action. — 
 Saunders v. Sichardson (7 Q. B. D. 388) approved. 
 School Board foe London v. "Weioht 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. S78 
 
 III. ELEMEHTAET EDUCATION ACTS— HOME 
 LESSONS. 
 
 Detention of Scholar —Assault— 33 & 34 
 
 Vict. c. 75—39 <fc 40 Vict. a. 79.] The Elemen- 
 tary Education Acts, 1870 and 1876, do not 
 authorize the setting of lessons to be prepared at 
 home by children attending a board school. The 
 detention at school after school hours of a child 
 for not doing home lessons is therefore imlawful, 
 and renders the master who detains the child 
 liable to be convicted for an assault. Huntek v. 
 Johnson - - - - 13 Q. B. D. 225 
 
 IV. ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACTS— SCHOOL 
 BOARD. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. u. 70, s. 38, repeals 
 section 33 of 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75 (tlie Elementary 
 Education Act, 1870). 
 
 The Act 48 * 49 Vict. v. 38 {the School Boards 
 Act, 1885) amends the law relating to school hoards 
 so far as affected hy the incorporation of a muni- 
 cipal horough and as respects the divisions of the 
 metropolis. 
 
 Election.] Order modifying the General Orders 
 regulating the triennial election of school hoards in 
 horoughs and parishes, ith Oct., 1882. 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 45G3 
 
 Compulsory Purchase of Lands — Elemen- 
 tary Education Act, 1870 (83 & 34 Vict. a. 75), 
 ssi 19, 20, 22 — Agreement for Exchange with Third 
 Farty prior to Notice to Treat.'] A School Board 
 served on K. the customary notice to treat for 
 land belonging to him, all the requisite prelimi- 
 naries required by the Elementary Education 
 Act, 1870, having previously been complied with. 
 — Prior, however, to the service of such notice to 
 treat and to the passing of the Confirmation Act 
 as required by the above Act, the Board had 
 entertained and adopted, subject to the sanction 
 of the Education Department, a proposal from one 
 B., a neighbouring landowner, for exchanging a 
 portion of the land to be acquired by the Board 
 from B. for a piece of B.'s land, he undertaking 
 
 IV. ELEMENTARY EDTTCATION ACTS— SCHOOL 
 
 B ARD — continued. 
 to form the land so to be conveyed to him by the 
 Board into a public road. There was evidence to 
 shew that such road, when made, would be ad- 
 vantageous to the school intended to be erected : — 
 Held, on motion by E. for an injunction to restrain 
 the Board from putting in force their statutory 
 powers with respect to so much of the land com- 
 prised in the notice to treat as they proposed to 
 convey to B., that the Board were justified in the 
 course they had taken, and could, if they obtained 
 the sanction of the Education Department, carry 
 out the proposal. Bolls v. School Board fob 
 London - - - 27 Ch. D. 639 
 
 School Board — Poor-rate — Eateability 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 929 
 
 See Poor-rate — Eateable Value. 3. 
 
 EMBARRASSING PLEADINGS - 26 Ch. D. 778 
 
 See Peacticb — Supreme Court — Strik- 
 ing OUT Pleadings. 2. 
 
 - 22 Ch. D. 481 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment. 1. 
 
 . - _ _ 29Cli. D. 344 
 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Court — Third 
 
 Paktt. 7. 
 
 EMPLOYER AND "WORKMAN— Apprenticeship 
 
 deed — Contract not for the benefit of 
 infant— 38 & 39 Vict. c. 90, ss. 5, 6 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 352 
 
 See Infant — Contracts. 
 
 Liability of master. ^ w ** . 
 
 See Cases under Master and Servant — 
 Master's Liability. 
 
 Summary proceeding before justices — Neg- 
 lect of seamen to join ship 
 See Ship— Seamen.-^. [11 Q. B. D. 225 
 
 ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT. 
 
 The Act 48 <S;,'49 Vict. c. 59, continues as to cer- 
 tain powers the Endowed Schools Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 56), and the several Acts amending the 
 same, until the 31st of December, 1886. 
 
 1. Powers of Commissioners — 32 & 33 
 
 Vict. 0. 56, ss. 9, 19, sub-s. 2—36 & 37 Vict. c. 87, 
 s. 7 — Denominational School — Or igiTial Subscribers 
 —Effect of Begulations.'] Where the Commissioners 
 by their scheme provided that certain eadovrments 
 which had theretofore been applied in carrying on 
 the schools of a particular parish, should thence- 
 forth be applied in exhibitions for the benefit of a 
 larger area of schools ; Held, that this was within 
 their powers under sect. 9 of the Act of 1869, and 
 that being so the way in wliieh those powers had 
 been exercised was not the proper subject of ap- 
 peal. — Held, that a charity which has no instru- 
 ment of foundation, or statutes, or duly authorized 
 regulations impressing upon it a denominational 
 character, does not fall within the 19th clause of 
 the Act of 1869, or the 7th clause of the Act of 
 1873. Its trustees cannot impress upon it that 
 character, nor is any practice for the time being 
 as to the application of its funds sufficient evi- 
 dence of there ever having been regulations in 
 existence which prescribed it. — Where a charity 
 
( 533 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 534 ) 
 
 ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT — continued. 
 is established by subscriptions, the original sub- 
 scribers alone are the founders, the later benefac- 
 tions are on the footingof the original foundation. 
 If its regulations are relied upon as impressing 
 upon it a denominational character, they must be 
 shewn to have been authorized by all the founders, 
 and to have been issued before fifty years from 
 their deaths. In re St. Leonaed, Shokeditoh, 
 PAKOCHIAIi SOHOOLS - 10 App. Cas. 304 
 
 2. Vested Interests— 32 & 33 Yiei. a. 56, 
 
 ss. 5, 11, 14, svb-s. 1 ; s. 19, subs. 2— Appropria- 
 tion of Charitable Endowments to Educational 
 Purposes hy Order of Court— Due Regard to Educa- 
 tional Interests.l Endowments originally given 
 for charitable uses but made- applicable to the 
 purposes of education by a scheme and an order 
 of the Court of Chancery are educational endow- 
 ments within the meaning of the Endowed Schools 
 Act, 1869, s. 5. — ^Where such endowments were 
 actually given more than fifty years before the 
 passing of the Act, Seld that such subsequent ap- 
 propriation of them as aforesaid cannot be deemed 
 to be an original gift thereof within the mean- 
 ing of sect. 14, sub-sect. 1, or of sect. 19, sub- 
 sect. 2, so as to require the assent of, their 
 governing body to any scheme or provision made 
 by the Charity Commissioners relating thereto. — 
 Where the scheme of the Charity Commissioners 
 increased the amount of tuition fees previously 
 payable by a certain class of boys and a,dded the 
 condition that the trustees shall be satisfied that 
 aid is needed, by their parents. Held that such pro- 
 vision does not fail in due regard to their educa- 
 tional interests within the meaning of sect. 11 of 
 the Act of 1869, and sect. 5 of the Amendment 
 Act of 1873. Eoss v. Charity Commissioners 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 463 
 
 3. Vested Interests— 32 & 33 Yict. c. 56, 
 
 s. 39^ — Petition hy Inhabitants of Locality.'] In 
 an appeal under sect; 39 of the Endowed Schools 
 Act, 1869, by the corporation of Sutton Coldfield 
 against two schemes of the Charity Commissioners , 
 by which it was proposed to withdraw from that 
 part of the funds of the corporation which was 
 applicable for educational purposes a sum equal 
 to £15,000, to be applied as part of the founda- 
 tion of Sutton Coldfield Grammar School : — Held, 
 that the scheme could not be regarded as wanting 
 in the finality required by the Act, because it 
 was expressed to be without prejudice to a future 
 scheme to be framed in accordance with the Acts 
 of Parliament, words to that effect being surplu- 
 sage.— BeM further, that sect. 11 of the Act of 
 1869 protects vested interests only, that is the 
 privileges or educational advantages to which the 
 class of persons thereby or by later Acts design- 
 ated have a legal title, and cannot be invoked to 
 protect benefits which have been enjoyed by the 
 permission or bounty of another. — In a similar 
 appeal by the inhabitants of the locality, JSeld, 
 that such inhabitants had no locus standi to pre- 
 sent it. — In re Shaftoe's Charity (3 App. Cas. 872) 
 approved. In re SnTTON Ooldfi^sld Grammar 
 School - - - 1 App. Cas. 91 
 
 ENDOWMENT— Church of England in South 
 
 Africa - 7 App. Cas. 484 
 
 See Colonial Law— Cape op Good 
 Hope. 1. 
 
 ENFKANCHISEMENT — Acknowledgment of 
 
 right to production of deeds 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title 
 Deeds. 
 Copyhold— Lunatic's estate 20 Ch. D. 514 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 4. 
 ENGINEEB— Certificate - 11 Q,. B. D, 229 
 
 See Contract — ^Breaoh. 1. 
 Lien on ship 16 Ch. D. 604 
 
 See Ship — ^Maritime Lien. 6. 
 ENGLISH WILL— Scotch lands 8 App. Cas. 677 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 4. 
 ENGRAVINGS— Book of— Copyright 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Copyright— Books. 1. [369 
 
 ENTAIL— Scotch law - 7 App. Cas, 713 
 
 See Scotch Law — Entail. 
 
 Scotch law— English will 8 App. Cas, 577 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Pbopert-sc 
 4. 
 ENTEY IN BOOKS— College-^Evidence 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 429 
 
 See Evidence — Entry by Deceased 
 
 Person. 
 
 ENTRY INTO HOUSE— Forcible 17 Ch. D. 174 ; 
 
 See FOBOIBIE Entry. 1, 2. [18 Ch. D. 189 
 
 ENTRY OF APPEAL— Payment of deposit 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 701 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 7. 
 ENTRY ON LAND — Kailway company 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 25 ; 9 App. Cas. 480 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 4. 
 ENTRY, RIGHT OF-Pretenced title— Pm'chase 
 —Forfeiture - - 9 Q. B. D. 128 ; 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 491 
 See Eight of Entry. 1, 2. 
 EPIDEMIC AND OTHER DISEASES PREVEN- 
 TION ACT, 1883. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 EQUITABLE ASSETS - - 18 Ch. D. 182 
 
 See Executor — Retainer. 7. 
 EQUITABLE EXECUTION - 16Ch. D. 544; 
 [25 Ch. D. 413 ; 29 Ch. D. 993 
 See Practice-Supreme Court — Ee- 
 
 CEITER. 1, 3, 4. 
 
 EQUITABLE MORTGAGE — Foreclosure— Form 
 of order 22 Ch. D. 283 ; 25 Ch. D. 158 
 
 . See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 7, 8. 
 
 EQUITY OF REDEMPTION— Assignment of— 
 Consolidation of mortgages 19 Ch, D. 
 See Mortgage- Consolidation. 3. [630 
 
 — :— Eelease of— Bill to set aside 7 App. Cas. 
 See Colonial Law— Victoria. 2. [307 
 
 Seizure in execution — Duty of sheriff 
 
 See Sheriff. 1. [12 Q. B. D. 213 
 
 EQUITY TO SETTLEMENT 16 Ch, D, 376 ; 
 
 [17Ch, D. 778; 27 Ch, D, 220 
 
 See Settlement — ^Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3> 
 EQUIVALENT— Chemical process 24 Ch, D. 166 
 See Patent — Infringement. 1. 
 
( 535 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 536 ) 
 
 HQ.VIYAL'ETHi:— continued. 
 
 Use of - - 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 2. 
 XSCHEAT. 
 
 See Keal Estate — Statutes. 
 Admission to copyholds 27 Ch. D. 
 
 See Copyhold — Sueeendee and 
 
 MITTANOE. 3. 
 
 Dominion of Canada - 8 App. Cas. 
 
 720 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 4. 
 
 298 
 
 Ad- 
 
 767 
 
 -Canada — Ontakio. 
 
 ESTATE CLAUSE— When implied. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 ESTATE TAIL. 
 
 See Cases under Tenant in Tail. 
 After-acquired property of wife 25 Ch. D. 200 
 
 /See Settlement — Pctuee Peopekty. 1. 
 Kule in Shelley's Case 9 App. Cas. 890 
 
 See Will — Estate in Realty. 2. 
 
 Title of dignity — Settled Land Act 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Kesteictions. 
 2. 
 
 ESTOPPEL :— Col. 
 
 I. Conduct _ _ _ _ 535 
 
 11. Judgment - - - - 537 
 
 I. ESTOPPEL— CONDirCT. 
 
 1. Forgery — Bill of Exchange — Silence 
 
 — Adoption of Signature.'] A person who knows 
 that a bank is relying upon his forged signature 
 to a bill, cannot lie by and not divulge the fact 
 until he sees that the position of the bank is 
 altered for the worse. But there is no principle 
 on which Ms mere silence for a fortnight from 
 the time when he first knew of the forgery, 
 during which the position of the bank was in no 
 way altered or prejudiced, can be held to be an 
 admission or adoption of liability, or an estoppel. 
 The names of A. and B. appeared on a bill as 
 drawers and indorsers to the B. L. Co. The 
 B. L. Co.'s Inverness bank discounted it for C, 
 who signed it as acceptor. They had no previous 
 dealings with A. or B. Being dishonoured when 
 due, notice to that effect was sent to A. and B., 
 and received late on a Saturday, hut they did 
 not communicate with the bank. On the follow- 
 ing Monday, being the 14th of April, C. brought 
 to the B. L. Co. a blank bill with A. and B.'s names 
 as drawers and indorsers, apparently in the same 
 handwriting as the previous bill. It was agreed 
 to accept it as a renewal of the previous bill but 
 for a less amount, the difference being paid in 
 cash by C. Three days before it was due, notice 
 was sent to A. and B., and again when it was 
 dishonoured, and then through the B. L. Co.'s 
 law agent. A fortnight after the first notice the 
 B. L. Co. were informed for the first time that A. 
 and B.'s signatures were forgeries, and that they 
 declined to pay the amount in the bill. A. 
 alleged that he called on C. on the 14th of April 
 about the first bill, that C. admitted that he had 
 forged his name, handed him the bill, and solemnly 
 assured him that it had been taken up by cash ; 
 and so assured he did not think it necessary to 
 oommunicate with the bank. He admitted that 
 on that day he drank with C. and borrowed £4 
 
 I. ESTOPPEL— CONDTTCT—cobWwmci^. 
 of him. He denied positively any knowledge of 
 the second bill until he received the bank notices. 
 C. was convicted of the forgery. The B. L. Co. 
 charged A. with payment of the bill on the 
 ground that he had either authorized the. use of 
 his name, or had subsequently adopted, and ac- 
 credited the bill, and therefore was estopped from 
 denying his liability : — Held, reversing the deci- 
 sion of the Court below, that on the facts proved 
 A. had neither authorized nor assented to the 
 use of his name : nor did the circumstances of 
 the case raise any estoppel against him. — Dictum 
 of Parke, B., as to estoppel in Freeman v. Coo}ce 
 (2 Ex. 654), approved ot^ M'Kenzie 11, British 
 Linen Company - - 6 App. Cas. 82 
 
 2. Forgery— ;8/iare Certificate issued iy 
 
 Secretary — Principal and Agent — Scope of Em- 
 ployment.'] It was the duty of a secretary of a 
 company to procure the execution of certificates 
 of shares in the company with all requisite and 
 prescribed formalities, and to issue them to the 
 persons entitled to receive the same. By a reso- 
 lution of the directors of the company it was 
 provided that certificates of shares should be 
 signed by one director, the secretary, and the 
 accountant. The secretaiy of the company having 
 executed a deed purporting to transfer certain 
 shares in the company to one G., a purchaser of 
 such shares, issued to G. a certificate stating 
 that he had been registered as the owner of the 
 shares. Such certificate was in the usual and 
 authorized form, and sealed with the company's 
 seal, but the signature of the director appended 
 thereto was a forgery, and the seal of the com- 
 pany was, In fact, affixed thereto without the 
 authority of the directors. — G. deposited the cer- 
 tificate with the Plaintiff as a security for ad- 
 vances, and subsequently executed a transfer of 
 the shares to the Plaintiff. Neither G. nor the 
 Plaintiff had any knowledge or reason to suspect 
 that the certificate was otherwise than a genuine 
 document, or that the matters stated therein were 
 untrue. — The company refused to register the 
 Plaintiff as owner of the shares, stating that 
 there were no such shares standing in G.'s name 
 in their books : — Held, that the company were 
 estopped by the certificate issued by their secre- 
 tary from disputing the Plaintiff's title to the 
 shares. Shaw u. Poet Philip Gold Mining 
 Company - 13 ft. B. D. 103 
 
 3. Negligence — Proximate Cause — Sail- 
 way Company — Delivery Order.] The Defen- 
 dants received a consignment of wheat and issued 
 a delivery order for it, which came into the bauds 
 of B. Upon this delivery order B. obtained ad- 
 vances from the Plaintifl's. Shortly afterwards 
 the Defendants issued a second delivery order in 
 respect of the same consignment of wheat. The 
 two delivery orders were different, and such as 
 might be reasonably supposed to relate to dis- 
 tinct consignments of wheat. Upon this second 
 delivery order B. obtained further advances from 
 the Plaintiffs, who were under the belief that the 
 delivery orders related to distinct consignments 
 of wlieat. B. having afterwards become insol- 
 vent : — Held, that the Defendants were estopped 
 by their negligence from shewing that the two 
 delivery orders related ouly.to one consignment 
 
( 537 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 538 ) 
 
 I. ESTOPPEL— CONDUCT— conMnwed. 
 
 of wheat, and that they were liable to compen- 
 sate the Plaintiffs for the loss sustained by them, 
 through the advances to B. Coventry v. Gheat 
 Eastern Railway Company 11 Q. B. D. 776 
 
 II. ESTOPPEL— JUDGMENT. 
 
 1. Chancery and Probate Divisions — Re- 
 vocation of Probate — Forgery — Jurisdiction of 
 Chancery Division.'] In an action in the Probate 
 Division T. and G. propounded an earlier and P. 
 a later will. The action was compromised, and 
 by consent verdict and judgment were taken for 
 establishing the earlier will. Subsequently P. 
 discovered that the earlier will was a forgery, and 
 in an action ia the Chancery Division, to which 
 T. and G. were parties, obtained the verdict of a 
 jury to that effect, and judgment that the com- 
 promise should be set aside. In another action 
 in the Probate Division for revocation of the 
 probate of the earlier will : — Meld, affirming the 
 decision of the President of the Probate Division, 
 that T. and G. were estopped from denying the 
 forgery. — Sernble,'a, Court of the Chancery Division 
 has no jurisdiction to revoke the probate of a 
 will. Pbiestman v. Thomas 9 P. D. 70, 210 
 
 2. English and Irish Courts — Bes Judi- 
 cata — Pleading — Evidence of Proceedings in Irish 
 Action — Beport of Judge.'] Held, by Pearson, J., 
 that in order to raise the defence of res judicata 
 it is not necessary to set forth in detail in the 
 defence the pleadings in the other action the 
 judgment in which is said to operate as res judi- 
 cata, but, in order to judge whether the same 
 questions were at issue in the first action as in 
 the second, the Court will look at the pleadings 
 in the first action, though they were not set forth 
 in the defence in the second action. Whether 
 a judgment obtained in one action before the 
 trial of another can operate by way of estoppel as 
 res judicata, imless the judgment was obtained 
 before the issue of the writ in the second action, 
 qussre, — On appeal by the Defendant an order 
 was taken by arrangement : — fiCeld, by the Court 
 of Appeal, that a report made by an Irish Judge 
 to a Divisional Court in Ireland to be used on an 
 application to set aside the verdict, was evidence 
 in an English action between the same parties of 
 what took place at the trial and what the Judge 
 decided. — An affidavit verifying .the shorthand 
 note of the judgment in the action pleaded as res 
 judicata was also adiaitted. Hotjstotin v. Mab- 
 Quis op Sliqo 29 Ch. D. 448 
 
 3. Jndgment by Consent — Limitation of 
 
 Liability — Bight of Claim.] In an action for 
 damages by collision between the owners of the 
 A. and the B., the Court, by consent of the 
 parties, made a decree dismissing the action. 
 Subsequently another action was brought by the 
 owners of the cargo on the A. against the B. in 
 respect of the same collision, and the Court found 
 both vessels to blame. The owners of the B. 
 then commenced an action against the owners of 
 cargo on the A. for the purpose of limiting their 
 liability in respect of all claims arising out of 
 this collision, and paid th&amount of their statu- 
 tory liability into Court. , Subsequently, sigain by 
 consent qf the owners.. of the_X and the B., the 
 assistant registrar rescinded the decree by consent 
 
 II. ESTOPPEL— JUDGMENT— coniinue^. 
 
 in the first action, and the owners of the A. then 
 brought in a claim in thfe limitation action against 
 the fund in Court. The registrar held such claim 
 to be inadmissible. On motion to confirm the 
 report : — Held, that the report should be con- 
 firmed, as the owners of the A. and B. could not 
 by consent rescind the decree of the Court, and 
 that the decree by consent was a bar to a claim 
 against the fund in Court, as it estopped the 
 owners of the .4. from bringing any further action 
 against the B. The " Bellcaien " 10 P. D. 161 
 
 4. — — Judgment in rem— Bes Judicata — 
 Finding on Issues on which Judgment in rem is 
 founded.] A native of Chili made his will in 
 London, in i^ ovember, 1859, and died in February, 
 I860. A caveat having been entered on behalf of 
 the testator's daughter, the will was propounded 
 by the executors in solemn form, the executors 
 alleging that the testator was domiciled in Eng- 
 land. The daughter alleged that the testator 
 was domiciled in Chili, and .that his will was not 
 executed according to Chilian law. In July, 
 1860, the Judge of the Probate Court made a 
 decree by which he pronounced for the validity 
 of the will, found that the testator was domiciled 
 in England, and decreed probate to the exe- 
 cutors. In September, 1860, the executors filed a 
 bill against the residuary legatee and a pecu- 
 niary legatee for administration of the estate, in 
 which a decree was made in November, 1860. 
 In 1S62, the daughter filed a bill against the 
 executors, alleging that the testator was a domi- 
 ciled Chilian, that his will being executed in 
 England, according to English law, was good by 
 the law of Chili, but so far only as the testator 
 could by the law of Chili dispose of his property 
 by will : that according to that law he could only 
 dispose by will of one-fourth of his personal estate, 
 and that the other three-fourths belonged to the 
 Plaintiff. The executors by answer set up the 
 decree of the Probate Court as a bar, and no 
 further steps were taken in the suit. In 1877, 
 an order was made staying proceedings in the 
 latter suit, and in another suit, but giving liberty 
 to any of the parties to apply to add to the decree 
 in the former cause all accounts and inquiries 
 necessary to determine all questions in the suits; 
 so stayed. Pursuant to this leave, the daughter 
 and her husband applied to add to the decree 
 inquiries as to the legitimacy of the daughter 
 and the domicil of the testator, and as to what 
 part of his personal estate he could according to 
 Chilian law dispose of by will, and an order was 
 made in 1878 directing inquiries as to the legi- 
 timacy the rest of the application to stand over. 
 In 1881 and 1882 orders were made transfering 
 the conduct of the cause from the Plaintiff, the 
 surviving executor, to the residuary legatee, dis- 
 pensing'with services of any notices or proceed- 
 ings on the Plaintiff, and appointing the residuary 
 legatee to represent the estate of the testator in 
 the cause: In 1884 the application for an inquiry 
 as to domicil was renewed against the residuary 
 legatee, but without notice to the executor, and 
 Bacon, V.C, made an order directing the inquiry 
 as asked. The residuary legatee appealed: — 
 Held, that the decree of the Probate Court was 
 not conclusive in rem as to. the domicile for that it 
 
( 539 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 540 ) 
 
 II. ESTOPPEL— JUDGMENT— eonfenueti. 
 
 did not appear that the decree was neeeasarily 
 based on the finding as t6 domicil. And, qusere, 
 ■whether the findings on which a judgment in rem 
 is based are in all cases conclusive against the 
 world. — Held, further, that the finding by the 
 Probate Court as to domicil was not binding 
 inter partes as between the daughter and the 
 residuary legatee, for that it was a finding be- 
 tween the daughter and the executors, that the 
 executors could not by litigating in that suit a 
 question of domicil, which it was not necessary 
 to decide for the purposes of the suit, conclude 
 the residuary legatee as to the extent of the 
 testator's power of disposing of his property, and 
 did not represent him for that purpose, and that 
 as the residuary legatee was not bound, the 
 daughter could not be bound, siuce estoppel must 
 be mutual. — Seld, therefore, that the inquiry wag 
 properly directed, and this notwithstanding that 
 the application had not been served on the exe- 
 cutor. — An application by counsel for the exe- 
 cutor for leave to be heard on the appeal was 
 refused. De Moka v. Concha - 29 Ch. D. 268 
 
 5. Order not declaring Eights — Bes 
 
 Judicata — " Until further Order " — • Leave to 
 appeal.'] Testator directed trustees to stand 
 possessed of residuary real and personal estate 
 upon trust to pay thereout to his wife, during 
 her life, such an annual sum as, together with 
 the income of a settled fund of £10,000, should 
 produce to her " a clear annual income of £1500." 
 He gave several legacies and annuities, and to- 
 wards the end of his will declared that " no 
 deduction shall be made from any of the legacies 
 given by this my will, or to be given by any 
 codicil thereto, for the legacy tax or any other 
 matter, cause, or thing whatever." — An adminis- 
 tration suit having been brought, an order was 
 made in 1861that the trustees of the will should 
 repay to the widow certain sums which had been 
 deducted from her annuity by mistake for succes- 
 sion duty, and that they should pay her until 
 further order an annuity of £1500 free of all 
 deductions except income tax, but no express 
 declaration of her rights was made. This order 
 was acted upon until 1882, when a petition was 
 presented by the widow asking that the income 
 tax which had been deducted might be paid to 
 her, and that in future her annuity might be 
 paid free of income tax : — Held, by the Court of 
 Appeal, that the order of 1861 amounted to a 
 declaration of the right of the widow to receive 
 the annuity free of all deductions except income 
 tax, notwithstanding the words "until further 
 order," and that the matter was res judicata and 
 could not now be reconsidered : — Held, also, that 
 considering the lapse of time leave ought not to 
 be given to appeal from the order. Peaketh v. 
 Makbiott - - - 22 Ch. D. 182 
 
 6, Second Action for same Cause of 
 
 Action — Injunction — Res Judicata — Prayer for 
 "further or other Belief" — Chancery Amendment 
 Act, 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 27), «. 2— Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 24, euh-s. 7.] In March, 1881, the 
 Plaiutiff handed to one Bird, a broker, shares in 
 a mining company, with a transfer signed (a 
 blank being left for the name of the transferee), 
 for the purpose of sale. Bird died ; and it was 
 
 II. ESTOPPEL— JUDGMENT— conimMet^. 
 then discovered that he had, without the know- 
 ledge or authority of the Plaintiff, lodged the 
 shares with the Defendant's firm as security for an 
 advance. Having received notice from the com- 
 pany that they were about to register the shares 
 in the name of the Defendant, the Plaintiff com- 
 menced an action in the Chancery Division of 
 the High Court to restrain the Defendant's firm 
 and the company from parting with the shares 
 or registering the Defendant as transferee, — con- 
 cluding with the usual prayer for " such further 
 or other relief as the nature of the case might 
 require."— On the 23rd of February, 1882, the 
 Defendants in that action consented to an order 
 for the delivery up of the shares to the Plain- 
 tiff forthwith. The order directed that, " upon 
 dehvery of the deed or form of transfer and the 
 securities representing the same, and upon pay- 
 ment of costs to the Plaintiff and the mining 
 company, all proceedings in the said Chan- 
 cery action should be stayed." — The shares were 
 not delivered up to the Plaintiff until the 28th 
 of April, 1882, when they were sold at a con- 
 siderable loss. — In an action against the Defend- 
 ant in the Queen's Bench Division to recover 
 damages for this detention, the jiu'y found that 
 the Plaintiff did not authorize Bird to pledge the 
 shares for his own debt, or lend them to Imn for 
 that purpose : — Held, that the Plaintiff was es- 
 topped by the consent order made in the Chancery 
 action on the 23rd of February, 1882, from re- 
 covering in this action damages for such deten- 
 tion, and that the Defendant was not responsible 
 for the detention of the shares by the mining 
 company after the order had been made in the 
 suit in the Chancery Division. Serrao v. Noel 
 
 [15 Q, B. D. 549 
 
 7. Separate Actions in respect of same 
 
 wrongful Act — Damage to Property and Injury 
 to Person — Damages recoverable in previous Action 
 — Maxim, "Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et 
 eddem causa " — Maxim, " Interest reipublicie ut sit 
 finis litium."'] Damage to goods and injury to 
 the person, although they have been occasioned 
 by one and the same wrongful act, are infringe- 
 ments of different. rights, and give rise to distinct 
 causes of action ; and therefore the recovery in 
 an action of compensation for the damage to the 
 goods is no bar to an action subsequently com- 
 menced for the injury to the person. — So held by 
 Brett, M.E., and Bowen, L. J., Lord Coleridge, C. J., 
 dissenting. — The Plaintiff brought an action in a 
 County Court for damage to his cab occasioned by 
 the negligence of the Defendant's servant, and, 
 having recovered the amount claimed, afterwards 
 brought an action in the High Court of Justice 
 against the Defendant, claiming damages for per- 
 sonal injury sustained by the Plaintiif through 
 the same negligence : — Held, by Brett, M.K., and 
 Bowen, L.J., Lord Coleridge, C.J., dissenting, 
 that the action in the High Court was maintain- 
 able, and was not baiTed by the previous proceed- 
 ings in the County Court. — Judgment of the 
 Queen's Bench Division reversed. Beunsden v. 
 Humphrey - H Q. B. D. 712; 14 ft. B. D. 141 
 
 ESTOPPEL— Bailee— Sale with notice of adverse 
 claims - - - 19 Ch. D. 86 
 
 See Bailment. 
 
( 5il ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 542 ) 
 
 ESTOPPEL— eomimued. 
 
 Dii'ector— Calls - - 8 Q. B. D. 686 
 
 See Company — Shaees — AiiLotment. 2. 
 Justices — Ees judicata 6 Q. B. D. 300 
 
 See Local Goteenment; — Steebts. 1. 
 
 — : — Petition — Discovery of fresh evidence 
 
 [28 Ch. D, 516 
 
 See National Debt Commissionees. 
 Probate of will — Whether conclusive as to 
 
 domicil - - - 36 Ch. D. 656 
 
 See Peobate— Grant. 3. 
 
 Patentee — ^Denying validity of patent 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 700 ; 10 App. Cas. 249 
 
 See Patent— Validitt. 1. 
 Proceedings in bantruptQy — Amount of 
 
 debt - - 17Ch. D.447 
 
 See Bankkuptoy — AmroLUENT. 5. 
 Kepresentations by agent 18 Ch. D. 660 
 
 See MOBTQAGE — ]?EIORITY. i. 
 
 Trustee - 9 ft. B. D. 264 
 
 See Banketjptoy — Oedbe and Disposi- 
 tion. 7. 
 ESTOVERS - - - 17 Ch. D. 535 
 
 See Common. 
 
 EVIDENCE :— Col. 
 
 I. Geneeal _ _ _ 541 
 
 II. Deolaeation by deceased Pbeson 542 
 
 III. Documents- - 543 
 
 TV. Bntey by deceased Person - 543 
 
 V. Peesumption _ _ - 543 
 
 VI. Public Documents - - 544 
 
 Vn. Witness - - - 544 
 
 I. EVIDENCE— GENEEAL. 
 
 Evidence by Commission.] The Act 48 & 49 
 Viet. c. 74, amends the law for taking evidence hy 
 commission in the colonies and elsewhere, and 
 amends the Act 22 Vict. o. 20. 
 
 1. Affidavit sworn Ahroad — Consul re- 
 fusing to administer Oath.'] Where by German 
 law a British consul is not allowed to administer 
 an oath, the affidavit may be sworn before a 
 Gennan Judge. In the Goods op Fawous 
 
 [9 P. D. 241 
 
 2. Illegitimacy — Bequest to Children of 
 
 C. equally— Non-access of Husband and Wife — 
 Presumption of Legitimacy rebutted.'] Testator 
 bequeathed Government annuities upon trust for 
 his daughter C. for life, and after her decease for 
 her children equally. C. married H. G., and by 
 him had two children at the time when H. G. 
 deserted her and his family. C. went to live 
 with a man named J. H., and while living with 
 him had five children, the eldest of whom was 
 M., who was, according to the evidence, born 
 during the lifetime of H. G. M. claimed a share 
 of the fund in Court : — Beld, that, considering 
 all the circumstances from which non-access be- 
 tween the husband and wife might be inferred, 
 the presumption of the legitimacy of M. was 
 rebutted, and that she was not entitled to any 
 share of the fund. Hawes v. Dbaegeb 
 
 [23Ch. D. 173 
 
 3. Signature by Agent loth for Prin- 
 cipal and in his own Bight— Guarantee— Parol 
 
 I. EVIDENCE— &ENEEAL—con«m«ei. 
 Evidence.] By articles of agreement under seal 
 between J. A. & Co. and, Y. & Co., Y. & Co. 
 agreed to do certain work for which J. A. & Co. 
 were to make certain payments, and the agree- 
 ment contained this clause, "It- is further under- 
 stood between the parties to this contract that 
 J. O. Sohuler guarantees payment to Y. & Co. of 
 all moneys due to them under this contract." 
 The attestation clause was "signed and delivered 
 by the said J. A. & Co. in the presence of C. T.," 
 and Sohuler, acting under a power of attorney, 
 signed as follows: "P.P.A— J. A &. Co., J. O. 
 Schuier." Y. & Co. sued Sohuler as guarantor, 
 and evidence was given at the trial of statements 
 by Sohuler at the time of execution that he in- 
 tended to sign on his own behalf as well as on 
 that of A. & Co. A verdict was found for the 
 Plaintiffs. Sohuler moved for a new trial on the 
 ground that he had not signed the guarantee : — 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Queen's Bench 
 Division, that evidence that Sohuler intended to 
 sign in his own right as well as on behalf of 
 A. & Co. did not contradict the document, and 
 was admissible, and that Sohuler must be taken 
 to have signed as a contracting party. Young v 
 ScHULEE - - 11 a. B. D. 651 
 
 i, statement hy Agent- 
 
 Company — Director — Sectification of Begister.] 
 A shareholder in a company applied to have his 
 name removed from the register of members on 
 the gi'oimd that he had been induced to become 
 a shareholder by a material misrepresentation in 
 a prospectus issued by the ' company. The only 
 evidence of the untruth of the representation was 
 a statement made by the chairman of the com- 
 pany in a speech addressed by him to a meeting 
 of the shareholders : — Held, that this statement 
 was not admissible evidence against the company, 
 inasmuch as the chairman in making it was not 
 acting as the agent of the company in a transac- 
 tion between them and a third party, but was 
 making a confidential report to his own principal. 
 —Meux's Executors' Case (2 D. M. & G. 522) dis- 
 tinguished. In re Devala Peovident Gold 
 Mining Company - - - 22 Ch. D. 593 
 
 II. EVIDENCE— DECLABATION BY DECEASED 
 PEBSON. 
 
 1. Legitimacy — Baptismal Begister — 
 
 Entry of Date of Birth-^Deelarations of deceased 
 Father.] Although an entry in a baptismal 
 register by the officiating clergyman of the day 
 when the baptized child was bom furnishes uo 
 proof per se that the child was bom on the day 
 stated, the entry will not be rejected altogether 
 as an item of evidence upon an inquiry as to the 
 legitimacy, from its birth before or after the mar- 
 riage of its reputed parents, of the child in ques- 
 tion. — Declarations by a reputed father conta.ined 
 in business letters written by one of his daughters 
 in his name and under his dictation admitted as 
 evidence after his death of the date of their birth 
 upon the question of their legitimacy. In re 
 Tueneh. Glenistee v. HARDiNa 29 Ch. D, 985 
 
 2. Pedigree— J3erarsa!/—Proo/ of Birth — 
 
 Deelaraticm of DeceasedPa/rent.] The rule which 
 admits hearsay evidence in pedigree oases is con- 
 fined to the proof of pedigree, and does not apply 
 
( 5i3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 544 ) 
 
 II. EVIDENCE— DECLAEATION BY DECEASED 
 FEBSON — continued. 
 
 to proof of the facts which constitute a pedigree, 
 such as birth, death, and marriage, when they 
 have to be proved for other purposes.— Therefore 
 in an action for goods sold, to which the defence 
 was infancy, au affidavit stating the date of the 
 Defendant's birth, which had been made by his 
 deceased father in an action to which the plaintiff 
 was not a party, was held inadmissible as evi- 
 dence of the age of the Defendant in support of 
 his defence. Haines v. Guthkie 13 Q. B. D, 818 
 
 III. EVIDENCE— DOCtTMENTS. 
 
 1. Notary Public — Chancery Procedure 
 
 Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 86), s. 22.] The exe- 
 cution of a release was attested by a notary in a 
 colony. There was no evidence that the attesta- 
 tion was for the purpose of using the deed in 
 Court : — Seld, nevertheless, that it was a docu- 
 ment to be used in Court within 15 & 16 Vict, 
 u. 8S, s. 22, and that the Court would take judicial 
 notice of the notary's seal and signature. Brooke v. 
 Beooke - 17 Ch. D. 833 
 
 2. Report of Surveyor — Resolution of 
 
 Fuhlic Body.} A public body passed a resolution 
 directing their solicitor to write a letter to the 
 Plaintifl', the resolution being based upon the 
 report of their own surveyor. The Plaintiff 
 wished to put the report in evidence to shew the 
 grounds for passing the resolution, and to explain 
 the letter : — Seld, that the report was not admis- 
 sible. CooPEK V. Metkopolitan Board op 
 WoKKS - 25 Ch. D. 4'/2 
 
 3. Will of Eeal Estate Tnade in Colony.'] 
 
 For the purposes of the usual preliminary judg- 
 ment in a partition action letters testimonial of 
 the Supreme Court of the Colony of Victoria, 
 Probate Jurisdiction, setting out the will verba- 
 tim, were accepted as sufficient proof of a will 
 made in Victoria of real estate in England. 
 Waite v. Binqlet - 21 Oh. D. 674 
 
 IV. EVIDENCE— ENTEY BY DECEASED PEE- 
 SON. 
 
 Entry in College Booka— Admissibility.} 
 
 It was the. practice that the proceedings of the 
 Provost and Fellows of King's College Cambridge, 
 should be entered in a book, and that the entries 
 should be signed by the Registrar of the College, 
 who was a notary public, and who signed the 
 entries in that character. One or two of the 
 entries were not so signed : — Held, that an un- 
 signed entry was not admissible in evidence, not- 
 withstanding that it was proved to be in the 
 handwriting of the person who usually made the 
 entries at the time when it was made. Fox v. 
 Bearblock - - 17Ch.D. 429 
 
 V. EVIDENCE— PEESDMPTION, 
 
 Woman past Child bearing — Will— Con- 
 struction— " Survivor.' J A testator bequeathed 
 the dividends of a sum of £10,000 Consols unto 
 and equally between his four daughters, and from 
 and immediately after their several and respec- 
 tive deceases he bequeathed the £10,000 to their 
 children respectively — viz., one fourth part thereof 
 unto and equally between the children of each 
 daughter. And, in case any one or more of the 
 daughters should die without leaving issue her or 
 
 V. EVIDENCE— PEESTTMPTION—confenMetf. 
 
 them surviving, he bequeathed the share or shares 
 of the stock so bequeathed to and intended for tha 
 issue (had there been such) " unto the survivors 
 or survivor " of the four daughters, equally if 
 more than one, and if but one, to that one abso- 
 lutely. Three of the daughters married, and died 
 leaving children. The fourth was the longest 
 liver, and was a spinster of the age of fifty-fom- : — 
 Held, that on hej death without leaving issue she 
 would be entitled to her own one-fourth share of 
 the £10,000 absolutely; that it might be assumed 
 that she would never have any children ; and that 
 the share might be transferred to her at once. — 
 Maden v. Taylor (45 L. J. (Ch.) 569) approved and 
 followed. Davidson v. Kimpton 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 VI. EVIDENCE— PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. 
 
 Tlie Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 9 (^Documentary 
 Evidence Act, 1882) amends the Documentary 
 Evidence Act, 1868, and other enactments relating 
 to the evidence of documents hy means of copies 
 printed hy the Government Printers. 
 
 Sect. 2. Where any enactment, whether passed 
 before or after the passing of this Act, provides 
 that a copy of any Act of Parliament, proclama- 
 tion, order, regulation, rule, warrant, circular, list,, 
 gazette, or document sliall he conclusive evidence,or 
 evidence, or have any other effect, when purporting 
 to he printed by the Government Printer, or a 
 printer authorized hy Her Majesty, or otherwise 
 under Her Majesty's authority, wliatever may he 
 the precise expression used, such copy shall also he 
 conclusive evidence, or evidence, or have the said 
 effect \as the' ease may he) if it purports to he 
 printed under the superintendence or authority of 
 Her Majesty's Stationery Office. 
 
 Sect. 3. If any person prints any copy of any Act, 
 proclamation, order, regulation, &c., which falsely 
 purports to have heen printed under the superin- 
 tendence or authority of Her Majesty's Stationery 
 office, or tenders in evidence any copy which falsely 
 purports to have heen printed as aforesaid, knowing 
 that the same was not so printed, he shall he guiltif 
 of felony, and shall, on conviction, he licMe to 
 penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven 
 years, or to he imprisoned for a term not exceeding 
 two years, with or without hard labour. 
 
 VII. EVIDENCE— WITNESS. 
 
 1. Out of Jurisdiction — Arbitration — Re- 
 ference of Action and " All Matters in Difference " 
 — " Trial"— n & 18 Vict. c. 34, s. 1.] When, 
 an action and " all matters in difference " between 
 the parties have been referred by consent to an 
 arbitrator, no writ of subpoena will be granted 
 under 17 & 18 Vict. c. 34, s. 1, in order to compel 
 the attendance at the hearing before the arbitra- 
 tor of witnesses residing within the United King- 
 dom but out of the jurisdiction of the Queen's 
 Bench Division ; for the hearing before the arbi- 
 trator is not a " trial " within the meaning of that 
 enactment. Hall v. Brand 12 ft. B. D. 39 
 
 2. Privilege — Answer tending to crimi- 
 nate — Refusal to answer — Power of Judge — Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 96.], 
 Where a witness refuses to answer a question 
 put to him on the ground that his answer might 
 tend to criminate himself, his mere statement at 
 his belief that his answer will have that eifect iff 
 
( 545 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 546 ) 
 
 Vn. EVIDENCE— WITNESS— conHmuetJ. 
 not enough to excuse him from answering, but 
 the Court must be satisfied from the circumstances 
 of the case, and the nature of the evidence which 
 the witness is called upon to give, that there is 
 reasonable ground to apprehend danger to him 
 from his being compelled to answer. — But, if it is 
 once made to appear that the witness is in danger, 
 great latitude should be allowed to him in judg- 
 ing for himself of the effect of any particular 
 question. — Subject, however, to that reservation, 
 the Judge is bound to insist on the witness 
 answering, unless he is satisfied that the answer 
 will tend to place him in peril. — Decision of the 
 Court of Queen's Bench in Beg. v. Boyes (1 B. & S. 
 311) approved and followed. Ex parte Eey- 
 NOLDs. In re Eevnolds 20 Ch, D. 894 
 
 3. Privilege — Professional Correspond- 
 ence — Solicitor — Execution of Deed.'] A solicitor 
 employed to obtain the execution of a deed, 
 and who is one of the witnesses, is not precluded, 
 on the ground of a breach of professional con- 
 fidence, from, giving evidence as to what passed 
 at the time of execution, by which the deed may 
 be proved invalid. Ceawooub v. Salteb 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 30 
 
 4. Professional Witness — Auctioneer — 
 
 Expenses — Loss of Time.'] An auctioneer sum- 
 moned to give evidence before a special examiner 
 appointed under proceedings in the Chancery 
 Division is, as a professional witness, entitled to 
 be paid a guinea a day by way of compensation 
 for his loss of time, together with the amount of 
 his travelling expenses, if any, including therein 
 his railway fare, first class, from his residence to 
 the place of his examination and back again. 
 And, although sworn, he may refuse to answer 
 any questions until a sum sufficient to cover 
 these amounts has been paid him. In re Woek- 
 ma Men's Mbttjal Society - 81 Ch. D. 831 
 
 EVIDENCE. 
 
 See Cases under Pkactioe — Supreme 
 
 Court — Evidence. 
 
 — — Admiralty Court — Appeal — Leave to adduce 
 
 fresh evidence - 9 P. D. 18 
 
 5ee Practice — Admiralty — Appeal. 1. 
 
 Admission by master of ship 10 P. D. 137 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Evidence. 
 1. 
 
 Admission of debt — Bankrupt's admission — 
 
 How far binding on trustee 13 Q. B. D. 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 9. [720 
 
 Admission of deceased person against in- 
 terest—Bankruptcy 14 Q. B. D. 418 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 8. 
 
 Agreement in several documents 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Specific Performance. 1. [395 
 
 Appeal 19 Ch. D. 419 
 
 See Bill of Sale— Formalities. 18. 
 
 Attesting witness — Execution 9 P. D. 149 
 
 See Probate— Execution. 4. 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 jSeeCasesunder Bankruptcy— Evidence. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Administration of estate of 
 
 person dying insolvent — Power to sum- 
 mon persons to be examined 15 Q.B.D,169 
 iSee Bankruptcy — Deceased Debtor. 1. 
 
 EVIDENCE— oojitmucc?. 
 
 Bought and sold notes — Liability of brokers 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 635 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 6. 
 
 Claim against estate of deceased person— 
 
 Corroboration - 83 Ch. D, 267 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 15. 
 
 Connection of papers constituting will 
 
 [6 P. D. 1 
 See Practice — Probate — Evidence. 2. 
 
 Contemporaneous documents 80 Ch. D, 27 ; 
 
 [9 App, Cas. 187 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 1. 
 
 Criminal law. 
 
 See Cases under Criminal Law — Evi- 
 dence. 
 Custom of manor - 30 Ch. D. 581 
 
 See Copyhold — Surrender and Admit- 
 tance. 2. 
 Custom — Port of discharge - 6 P. D, 68 
 
 See Ship — Chakteepabty. 16. 
 Damage to salving ship 8 P. D. 137 ; 9 P. D. 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 5, 6. [182 
 
 Declaration of deceased person — Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 3. 
 
 Desertion - - - 9 P. D. 245 
 
 See Pbactice — Divorce — Desertion. 1. 
 
 Discovery of fresh 28 Ch. D. 231 ; 28 Ch. D. 
 
 [816 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners. 
 
 Divorce Court — Commission to examine 
 
 witnesses - 9 P. D. 8 
 
 See Pbactice — Divorce — Evidence. 1. 
 
 Divorce Court — Perpetuation of testimony 
 
 [9 P. D. 180 
 
 See Pbactice — Divorce — Evidence. 2. 
 
 Engineer's log— Action of damage 10 P. D. 31 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Evidence. 
 2. 
 
 Entry against interest 29 Ch. D. 882 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 1. 
 
 Family repute — Hearsay evidence 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 763 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 4. 
 
 Gift of husband to separate use of wife — 
 
 Corroboration - 21 Ch. D. 657 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 3. 
 
 Husband and wife — Criminal law 12 Q. B. D. 
 
 [266 ; 13 Q. B. D. 33 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 2, 3. 
 
 Infant — Necessaries 13 Q, B. D, 410 
 
 See Infant — Contracts. 3. 
 
 Insolvency — Winding-up petition 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 210 
 
 See Company— Winding-up Order. 10. 
 
 Interruption of easement - 19 Ch, D. 468 
 
 See Light — Title. 4. 
 
 T 
 
( 547 ) 
 
 PIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 548 ) 
 
 EVIDENCE — continued. 
 
 Irisb. inquisition — Ti-anscript of record 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 269 
 See Lunatic— J OBiSDiOTiON. 1. 
 
 Judgment debt— Proof 14 Q. B. D. 604, 606 
 
 See Bankrhptot — Pboof. 14, 15. 
 
 Libel - 8 Q. B. D, 491 ; 7 App. Cas. 741 
 
 See Defamation — Libel. 1, 2. 
 
 Licensing Act. 
 
 See Inn — Oppenoes — Statutes. 
 
 Malicious prosecution — Burden of proof 
 
 [11 a. B, D. 440 
 See Malicious Pkosecution. 3. 
 
 Marriage— Ceylon 6 App. Cas. 364 
 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 3. 
 
 Marriage — Scotch marriage 6App. Cas, 489; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 692, 763 
 See Scotch Law— Husband and Wife. 
 2, 3, 4. 
 
 Misrepresentation — Impeaching deed 
 
 [7 App. Cas, 307 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 2. 
 
 Nes-ligence — Carriage and driver 
 
 [6 a. B. D. 145 
 See Negligence — Evidence. 2. 
 
 Offences against women. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Evidence — Sta- 
 tutes, 
 Poor-rate — Diminution of income — Altera- 
 tion of valuation list 13 Q, B. D. 364 
 See Metkopolis — Valuation Acts. 
 
 Possession — Judgment in former action 
 
 See FiSHEBY. 1. [8 App, Cas. 135 
 
 Precognitions - - 6 App. Cas, 489 
 
 See Scotch Law— Husband and AVife. 
 3. 
 
 Presumption — Evidence to rebut 89 Ch, D. 
 
 See Will — Exbcotoks. [893 
 
 Presumption of continuance of cohabitation 
 
 between husband and wife 
 
 [11 Q. B, D. 118 
 See Ckiminal Law — Bigamy. 2. 
 
 Presumption of duration of life 6 Q. B. D, 366 
 
 See Criminal Law— Bigamy. 1. 
 
 Proceedings in Irish action — Shorthand 
 
 notes - 29 Ch. D. 448 
 
 See Estoppel— Judgment. 2. 
 
 Proof of foreign law 6 P. D, 6 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 6. 
 Proof of foreign law — Certilioate of ambas- 
 sador - 9 P. D. 234 
 See Probate- Grant. 7. 
 
 Eegister in church — Memorandum by rector 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 692 
 See Scotch Law— Husband and Wipe. 
 2. 
 
 Eight to sum up - 10 Q. B, D. 451 
 
 See County Court — Practice. 6. 
 Sale of land — Intention of parties to con- 
 veyance - 9 Q. B. D. 506 
 See Prison. 3. 
 
 Service of writ out of jurisdiction 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 240 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice, 3. 
 
 EVIDENCE — contimied. 
 Stamps 
 
 7 App. Cas, 172 
 
 -Straits Settle- 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 
 MENTS. 1. 
 — — Statement of deceased person 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wipe. 
 3. 
 
 Statement of third person — Hearsay 
 
 [7 P. D. 151 
 See Negligence — Liability. 8. 
 
 Statements post litem motam 10 App. Cas. 
 
 [763 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 4. 
 
 Survevor's certificate 28 Ch. D. 661 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 644 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 2. 
 
 Technical meaning of " beerhouse " 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 718 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^Lease. 
 7. 
 
 Will proved in Victoria - 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 
 . Winding-up petition 16 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Company — Life Insurance Com- 
 pany. 2. 
 
 Witness — Voluntary attendance — Refusal to 
 
 give evidence - 14 Q. B, D, 364 
 
 See Bastardy. 7. 
 
 EX PAETE APPEAL— Bankruptcy 20 Ch, D. 703 
 See Bankruptcy — Liquidation. 7. 
 
 SX PAETE APPLICATION— Injunction— Parting 
 with legal estate 21 Ch. D. 490 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 7. 
 - — - Leave to serve third party 16 Ch. D. 489 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Third 
 Party'. 4. 
 
 Eegistration of trade-mark 26 Ch. D. 187 
 
 See Tkade-maek — Eegistration. 8. 
 
 EX PAETE OEDEE— Taxation 25 Ch. D. 279 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 23. 
 
 EX PAETE PATEENA— iSi parte maternd 
 
 See Descent. [28 Ch. D. 327 
 
 EXAMINATION— Alleged lunatic— Justices 
 
 [15 a. B. D. 122 
 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 2. 
 
 Bankrupt. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 Bankrupt 15 Q. B. D. 54 ; 21 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Examination. 1, 2. 
 
 Bankrupt — ^De bene esse 16 Ch. D. 100 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 1. 
 
 ■ Compounding debtor 
 See Bankruptoy- 
 
 - 20 Ch. D. 281 
 
 -Composition. 3. 
 
 - Judgment debtor - 16 Ch, D, 8 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 6. 
 
 - Married woman — Settled Estates Act. 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 220 ; 28 Ch. D, 171 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 2, 3. 
 
( 5« ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 550 ) 
 
 ■ Before composition 
 See Baskebptcy- 
 
 EXAMINATION— comteiueci. 
 Witness abroad. 
 
 See Oases under Peaotice — Sdpbeme 
 OOUKT — ^EvroBNOE. 9 — 16. 
 Witness in bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbtjptot — Evi- 
 dence. 
 Witness in winding-up. 
 
 See Oases under Company— Eyidenoe. 
 EXCHANGE— Agi-eement for— Before notice to 
 
 treat - - 27 Cli. D. 639 
 
 See Elementauy Education Act — 
 School Boaed. 
 EXCEPTIOK—Eesiduary gift— Intestacy 
 
 See Will— Lapse. 7. [23 Ch, D. 218 
 
 Substantial — Assigument' of all debtor's 
 
 property 17 Ch. D. 26 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankeuptoy. 
 2. 
 EXECUTION— Abandonment of part of judgment 
 debt - 8 Q. B. D. 392 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 3. 
 
 Action against partner in name of firm 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 435; 10 App. Cas. 680 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — 
 Paeties. 10. 
 
 Bantniptcy — ^Application to sell by private 
 
 contract - - 12 Q. B. B, 162 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Seoueed Ceeditoe. 9. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 534 
 
 -Composition. 1. 
 
 Equitable — Ecceiver of debts 16 Ch. D. 544; 
 
 [25Ch. D. 413; 29 Ch. D. 993 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — Ee- 
 ceiver. 1, 3, 4. 
 
 Equity of redemption — Duty as sberiif 
 
 See SiiEEiFF. 1. [12 Q. B. D. 213 
 
 Leave to proceed after winding-up of com- 
 pany - 20 Ch. D. 442 ; 21 Ch. D. 510 
 
 See Company — Injunction. 1, 2. 
 
 Levy for a sum with possession money above 
 
 £50 9 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Assets. 4. 
 
 Eule to set aside — Ceylon law 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 99 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 2. 
 
 Sale by sheriff — Notice of bankruptcy peti- 
 tion - 15 a. B. D. 48 
 See Bankeuptoy — ^Peotected Teans- 
 aotion. 6. 
 
 Seizure without sale — ^Notice of act of bank- 
 ruptcy - - 17 Ch. D. 839 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoteotbd Teansac- 
 
 TION. 3. 
 
 Unregistered bill of sale - 23 Ch, D. 254 
 
 See Bill of SalE' — Ebgisteation. 11. 
 
 Unregistered bill of sale — Apparent pos- 
 session - - - 16 Ch. D. 668 
 See Bill oe Sale— Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 2. 
 
 Winding-up order - 16 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Seoueed Creditor. 1. 
 
 Wrongful seizure 21 Ch. D. 69; 9 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Sheriff. 3, 4. [340 
 
 EXECUTION OF DEED- Creditor's deed 29 Ch. D. 
 See Ceeditoe's Deed. [745 
 
 Evidence of — Professional confidence 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 30 
 • See Evidence — ^Witness. 3. 
 
 Qualified execution - 10 App, Cas. 293 
 
 See Deed. 2. ; 
 
 Statutory effect. 
 
 See Vendor and Pueohasee — Convey- 
 ance — Statutes. 
 EXECUTION OF WILL 
 
 See Cases under Peobate — Execution. 
 EXECUTIVE GOVERNHENT— Liability of 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 418 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 1. 
 
 EXECUTOR, Col. 
 
 I. Actions (By and Against) - 550 
 (a) Action for Trespass. 
 (h) Administration Action, 
 (e) Costs. 
 
 (d) Evidence, 
 
 (e) Foreign Assets. 
 (/) Insolvent Estates; 
 
 II, Administration - 556 
 
 (a) Caeeying on Business. 
 (6) Conversion. 
 
 (c) Payment of Debts and 
 Legacies. 
 
 III. Liabilities (and Duties) - 561 
 
 IV. Powers - - - -562 
 V. Eetainee - - - 564 
 
 I. EXECUTOR— ACTIONS (by and against), 
 (a) Action foe Teespass. 
 
 1. Actio personalis moritur cum personS, 
 
 — Action for Damage to Estate of Intestate arising 
 out of Injury to Ms Person — Medical Expenses — 
 Loss of Wages.2 The Plaintiff sued as the ad- 
 ministratrix of her late husband, who, whilst 
 crossing the Defendants' railway at a level cross- 
 ing, was, through the negligence of the Defen- 
 dants, run over by an engine and sustained per- 
 sonal injuries which prevented him from following 
 his occupation and earning wages, and caused him 
 to incur expenses for medical attendance and 
 nursing, whereby his personal estate was dimin-, 
 ished in value: — Seld, that the Plaintiff could 
 not sue in respect of damage to the intestate's 
 estate aiising, as above mentioned, from the tor- 
 tious injury to the intestate's person, and, that 
 the action was therefore not maintainable. Pul- 
 ling V. Geeat Easteen Bail way Company 
 
 [9 Q, B. D. 110 
 
 2, Actio personalis moritur cum persona 
 
 — Continuance of Action against Executors — 3 <fe 4 
 Wm. 4, e. 42, s. 2 — Death of sole Defendant trading 
 under Naime of Firm — Executors carrying on Trade 
 under same Firm — Rules of Court, 1875, Order zii., 
 r. 12a.,- Order £.] The Plaintiff brought his 
 action for damages and an injunction against the 
 firm of T. & Co. for tovts committed by the firm. 
 The firm consisted of T. alone, who died more than 
 six months after the commencement of action, and 
 the action was continued against his executors : — 
 Seld (affirming the decision of Hall V.-C), that 
 T. having died more than six months after the 
 
 T 2 
 
( 551 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 552 ) 
 
 I. EXECTTTOB— ACTIONS (by and against)— 
 continued. 
 (a) Action fob Teespass — continued. 
 commission of the acts complained of, no action 
 either for damages or injunction could be main- 
 tained against his executors ; although the action 
 had been commenced in the lifetime of the testa- 
 tor, and although the executors continued the 
 business in the name of the firm. Kiek v. Todd 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 484 
 
 3. Actio personalis moritur cum persona 
 
 — Benefit received hy Trespasser.'] By the decree 
 in 1870 it was declared that H. & P. and the 
 estate of their deceased partner were liable to the 
 Plaintiffs for minerals taken by them under the 
 Plaintiff's farm, and that H. & P. were liable to 
 compensate the Plaintiffs for user of all roads and 
 passages under the farm, and inquiries were 
 directed — 1. As to the quantity of minerals taken 
 and the value. 2. What quantities of minerals 
 had been carried by the Defendants .through the 
 roads or passages imder the farm. 3. What upon 
 the result of the second inquiry ought to be paid 
 by the Defendants as wayleave for the user of the 
 roads and passages. 4. Whether the farm, and 
 the mineral property of the Plaintiffs under it, 
 had sustained any and what damage by reason of 
 the way in which the Defendants had worked 
 under the farm. Pending these inquiries P. died, 
 and his executrix moved to stay proceedings under 
 the second, third, and fourlh inquiries : — Seld, by 
 Pearson, J., that the fourth inquiry must be 
 stayed, but that as the estate of P. had derived 
 profit from the trespasses to which the second and 
 third inquiries related, it was liable after his death 
 and that those inquiries must be prosecuted : — 
 Beld, on appeal by Cotton and Bowen, L.JJ., dis- 
 sentiente Baggallay, L.J., that proceedings under 
 the second and third inquiries must also be stayed, 
 for that, apart from cases of breach of contract, a 
 remedy for a wrongful act done by a deceased 
 person cannot be pursued against his estate, un- 
 less property or the proceeds or value of property 
 belonging to another person have been appro- 
 priated by the deceased person and added to his 
 estate. Philips v. Homfray 24 Ch, D. 439 
 
 (6) Administeation Action. 
 4. Order for Sale — Poioer of Sale in Trus- 
 tees — Conversion.'] An absolute order for sale 
 made within the jurisdiction of the Court in an 
 administration suit operates as a, conversion from 
 the date of the order and before any sale has taken 
 place. Hyett v. Mekin 26 Ch. D. 735 
 
 8. Payment into Court — Legacy for Life 
 
 — Residuary Legatee — Administration hy the 
 Court] The rule that if personal property con- 
 sisting of money or stock is limited to A. for life, 
 and after his death to B. absolutely, it will be 
 ordered into Court for administration in an action 
 by B. for the purpose, is not absolute, and will 
 only be enforced as against A. where there is 
 reasonable groimd, such as danger to the fund, 
 for the application. In re Beaithwaite. Beaith- 
 WAiTE V. Wallis - 21 Ch, D. 121 
 
 6. Protection of ^xecutOT— Judgment — 
 
 Megistration — Priority — Order of Administration 
 —i&5 TFm. & M. c. 20, ,. 3—23 & 24 Vict. c. 38, 
 6. 3.] The meaning of sect. 3 of the Act 23 & 24 
 
 I. EXECUTOR— ACTIONS (by and against)— 
 
 continued. 
 (6.) Administration Action — continued. 
 Vict. c. 38, like that of sect. 3 of the Act 4 & 5 
 Wm. & M. c. 20, is not merely that protection is 
 given to an executor or administrator against an 
 action for a devastavit by a judgment creditor of 
 the testator or intestate whose judgment has not 
 been registered, but that such a judgment debt is 
 not entitled in the administration of the estate to 
 any priority over the simple contract debts of 
 the testator or intestate. — In re Turner (12 W. E. 
 337) followed. Van Gheluive v. Nbeinckx 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 189 
 
 7. Kevocation of Probate — Dismissal of 
 
 Action.] A decree was made at the suit of resi- 
 duary legatees for the administration of the real 
 and personal estate of a testator. After this a 
 subsequent will was discovered by which the 
 estate was disposed of in a different way. Pro- 
 bate of the old will was recalled, and letters of 
 administration with the later will annexed were 
 granted to one of the beneficiaries. — Under these 
 circumstances the Court of Appeal made an order 
 dismissing the action. In re Dean. Dean v. 
 Weight - 21 Ch. D. 581 
 
 8. Wilful Default-" Ordinary Account " 
 
 — District Registrar — Jurisdiction — Form of Re- 
 port—Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), 
 ss. 64, ee— Rules of Court, 1875, Order UI., r. 8— 
 Order XT., r. I — Order xxxT., rr. la, 4.] A claim 
 against an executor for an account on the footing 
 of wilful default is not a " case of ordinary ac- 
 count " within the meaning of rule 8 of Order m., 
 and consequently « summary order for such an 
 account cannot be made under rule 1 of Order xv. 
 — By virtue of rules la and 4 of Order xxxv., a 
 District Registrar has power to make an order for 
 an account under rule 1 of Order xv., and if the 
 order so directs (but not otherwise) he can then 
 proceed to take the account himself. — In re Smith 
 (6 Ch. D. 692) followed. — In making a report to 
 the Court under sect. 66 of the Judicature Act, 
 1873, of tlie result of an account in an adminis- 
 tration action, the District Registrar ought to 
 adopt the form of a Chief Clerk's certificate, and 
 to state in the report the persons who were pre- 
 sent before him, and the materials upon which he 
 proceeded. In re Bowen. Bennett v. Bowen 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 538 
 
 9. Wilful Default — Adding Accounts and 
 
 Inquiries after Judgment — Rules of Court, 1875, 
 Order xxxiii.] When the statement of claim in 
 an admininistration action against an executor 
 alleges that he has committed wilful default, but 
 the judgment at the trial gives no relief on that 
 footing. (the claim to such relief not being, how- 
 ever, diemisscd), the Court can at any subsequent 
 stage of the proceedings, if evidence of wilful de- 
 fault is adduced, direct further accounts and in- 
 quiries to be taken and made on that footing. — 
 Job V. Job (6 Ch. D. 562) as explained by Mayer 
 V. Murray (S Ch. D. 424) followed. In re Symons. 
 Luke v. Tonkin - - - 21 Ch. D. 757 
 
 (c) Costs. 
 10, Executors appearing by same Soli- 
 citor — Defaulting Execidor — Bankruptcy.] Two 
 executors, Defendants in an administration ao- 
 
( 553 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 554 ) 
 
 I. EXECUTOE — ACTIONS (by and against)— 
 conlimted. 
 (o.) Costs — continued. 
 "tion, -were represented by the same solicitor, to 
 ■whom they had given a joint retainer. One of 
 them was a debtor to the estate, and became 
 bankrupt : — Seld, that the costs incurred by them 
 prior to the bankraptcy should be distinguished, 
 and that the solvent executor should be allowed 
 only his own proportion out of the fund, the de- 
 faulter's proportion being set off against the debt 
 due from him: but that the costs incurred by 
 both subsequently to the bankruptcy should be 
 allowed in full. — Watson v. Bow (Law Rep. 18 Eq. 
 €80) dissented from. Smith v. Dale 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 516 
 
 11. • — — Eeal and Personal Estate — Inquiries 
 as to Real Estate — Apportionment of Costs.'] It is 
 tlie now settled practice of the Chancery Division 
 that the costs of an administration action so far 
 as they have been increased by the administration 
 ■of the real estate are to be borne by that real estate. 
 — An action was brought by the heir-at-law of a 
 testatrix who had given by will certain legacies, 
 but had died intestate as to her real estate and 
 residuai'y personalty, for the administration of her 
 Teal and personal estate : — Beld, by Fry, J., that 
 the entire costs of the action were payable 
 primarily out of the residuary personal estate : — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, varying the order 
 of Fry, J., that the costs of the action, so far as 
 ■they had been increased by the administration of 
 the real estate, must be borne by the real estate. — 
 Fer Jessel, M.E. . When an estate is insufficient 
 "the Plaintiff does not necessarily get his costs in 
 priority to the Defendants. In re Middleton. 
 Thompson v. Harris - - 19 Ch. D. 552 
 
 12. Eeal Estate — Descended Real Estate 
 
 — Interest accruing to Heir iy Reason of Forfeiture 
 under Provisions of Will.'] Real estate which had 
 descended to a testator's heir-at-law, not because 
 it was not originally disposed of by the will, but 
 by reason of a subsequent forfeiture by the devisee 
 under the provisions of the will, held not liable to 
 pay the costs of an action to administer the testa- 
 tor's estate in priority to specifically devised and 
 bequeathed freehold and leasehold estate. — Scott 
 V. Cumberland (Law Rep. 18 Eq. 578), Gowan v. 
 Broughton (Law Eep. 19 Eq. 77), and Row v. Row 
 .(Law Rep. 7 Eq. 414) distinguished. Hurst v. 
 Hurst - - 28 Ch. D. 169 
 
 13. Besidnary Estate — Accounts^ In an 
 
 administration action no costs ought to be given 
 out of the estate, except for those proceedings 
 that are in their origin directed with some shew 
 of reason and a proper foundation for the benefit 
 of the estate, or which have in their result con- 
 duced to the benefit thereof. — A tenant for life 
 under a will who had duly received the income 
 of the estate, and whose solicitors had expressed 
 themselves satisfied with the accounts rendered 
 'by the executors, instituted an action for the ad- 
 ministration of the estate. The accounts taken 
 shewed that the Plaintiff had been slightly over- 
 paid: — Eeld, that the Plaintiff must have no 
 •costs of the action, and must pay the costs of the 
 rendering of the income account. Croggan v. 
 Allen - - - - 22 Ch. D. 101 
 
 I. EXECUTOE— ACTIONS (by and against)— 
 
 continued. 
 (o.) Costs — continued. 
 
 14. Solicitor and Client — Residuary Le- 
 gatee Plaintiff — Insufficient Estate.] A residuaiy 
 legatee Plaintiff" in an administration action is 
 entitled to his costs as between solicitor and client 
 where the estate is insufficient for payment of 
 legacies, provided it is suiHcient for payment of 
 debts, but not otherwise. In re Harvey. Wright 
 V. Woods - - - 26 Ch. D. 179 
 
 (d.) Evidence. 
 
 15. ■ Evidence of Claimant — Corroboration,] 
 
 The rule that a claim upon the estate of a deceased 
 person cannot be maintained upon the unsup- 
 ported testimony of the claimant applies to cases 
 of alleged debt as well as to cases of alleged gift. 
 — Per Jessel, M.R. : The rule is a rule of prudence 
 rather than of law ; and in an action tried by a 
 jury it is the duty of the Judge to recommend the 
 jury to disregard the unsupported evidence of the 
 claimant ; but if they should decline to do so, and 
 should find for the claimant, quiBre if their verdict 
 could be interfered with. An English widow lady 
 residing in Paris in a house which belonged to her 
 for her separate use, married an English gentle- 
 man, and by the marriage settlement certain plate 
 which formerly belonged to her first husband 
 was settled to her separate use. After the mar- 
 riage, her husband having family plate of hia 
 own, sent it to his wife's house in Paris, and she 
 then sent her own plate to her son by her first 
 marriage. Upon the death of the husband his 
 family plate, and also a marble bust of himself, 
 was in his wife's house at Paris. In a suit for 
 the administration of his estate his wife claimed 
 the plate as having been given her in exchange 
 for her own plate, and the bust as having been 
 presented to her by her husband : — Held (revers- 
 ing the decision of Kay, J.), that the surround- 
 ing circumstances did not furnish corroborative 
 evidence in support of the claim by the wife to the 
 plate and bust, and that as the claim rested on her 
 unsupported testimony it could not be allowed. 
 In re Finch. Finch v. Finch 23 Ch. D. 267 
 
 (e.) Foreign Assets. 
 
 16. Jurisdiction of English Court over 
 
 Scotch Assets of Testator domiciled in Scotland — 
 Scotch Assets.] A testator domiciled in Scotland, 
 and possessed of a large personal and some herit- 
 able property in Scotland and of a compara^ 
 tively small personal property in England, by 
 will made in Scotch form appointed several per- 
 sons to be executors and trustees, some of whom 
 resided in England and some in Scotland. The 
 trustees obtained a confirmation of the will in 
 Scotland, and the confirmation was sealed by 
 the English Court of Probate under 21 & 22 Vict, 
 c. 56. An infant legatee resident in England 
 brought by his next friend an action here to 
 administer the estate, and the writ was served 
 upon some of the trustees in England, and (under 
 an order) upon the Scotch trustees in Scotland. 
 The trustees appeared without protest and took 
 no steps to discharge the order, but obtained an 
 order of reference to inquire whether the further 
 prosecution of the action would be for the benefit 
 of the infant plaintiff; upon which an order (not 
 
( 555 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 556 ) 
 
 I. EXECUTOE— ACTIONS (by and against)— 
 
 continiiecl. 
 
 (e.) FoEEiGN Assets — continued. 
 appealed from) was made for the further prosecu- 
 tion of the action. The trustees removed all the 
 English personalty into Scotland before the action 
 came on for trial : — Seld, affirming the decision 
 of tho Court of Appeal, tbat the English Court 
 had jurisdiction to administer the trusts of the 
 will as to the whole estate, both Scotch and 
 English ; and that as no proceedings were pend- 
 ing in a Scotch Court (if such were possible) by 
 which the interests of the infant plaintiff could 
 have been equally protected, the jurisdiction was 
 not discretionary, but that the decree was a 
 matter of course. — The dicta of Lord Westbury 
 in EnoTiin v. Wylie (10 H. L. 0. 1) disapproved. 
 EwiNG V. Okk EwiKG - 22 Ch. D. 456 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 34 
 
 [As to jurisdiction of Scotch Courts, see S. C. 
 10 Ch. D. 453.] 
 
 (/.) Insolvent Estate. 
 
 17. Bankruptcy Eules — Judicature Act, 
 
 1875, s. W—Bill of Sale.'] The 10th section of 
 the Judicature Act, 1 875, is not intended to enlarge 
 the assets of an insolvent estate, but only to vary 
 the rights of the persons entitled to the assets. — 
 And therefore that section does not apply the 
 rules of bankruptcy so as to mate an unregistered 
 bill of sale void as against the unsecured creditors 
 of an insolvent estate. In re Count D'Epin- 
 EciL (1). Tadman 1!. EPINE0IL 20 Ch. D, 217 
 
 18. Bankruptcy Eules — Mutual Credits 
 
 —Judicature Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 77), s. 10.] 
 The mutual credit clause (sect. 39) of the Bank- 
 i-uptcy Act, 1869, will not be applied in the admin- 
 istration of the estate of a deceased person until 
 it is shewn that the estate is insolvent, but the 
 Court may direct that a debt claimed on behalf of 
 the estate from a creditor shall be paid into Court 
 to a separate account, with liberty to the creditor 
 to apply, iu case tlie estate shall prove to be 
 insolvent. In re Smith. Gkeen v. Smith 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 586 
 
 19. Bankruptcy EiUes, 1870, r. 17— Proof 
 
 — Judicature Act, 1875, s. 10 — Baultruptcy Act, 
 1869, s. 31 — Covenant topay on certain Event — An- 
 nuity — Valuation — Ccyntingent Liahilities — Contin- 
 gency happening during Administration — Proof of 
 Debts — Uebate of Interest.'] A testator covenanted 
 by deed for payment to his daughter of a sum of 
 £6000, with interest at 4 per cent, per annum, 
 within one month after the death of his wife ; also 
 for payment to his daughter of an annuity of 
 £100 during the joiat lives of himself and his wife 
 and tlie lifeof thesiuvivor,if his daughter should 
 so long live. — The testator died in 1879, insolvent, 
 leaving his widow and daughter surviving, and a 
 judgment was made, in a creditor's action for 
 admin istrationofhis estate. — The daiigh ter having 
 sent in claims in respect of the piincipal sum and 
 the annuity, they were both allowed on a valuation 
 as at the date of the judgment, but subseqxiently 
 the widow died. No certificate had yet been 
 made in the action: — Held, applying the rules iu 
 bankruptcy as to contingent liabilities (Judica- 
 ture Act, 1875, s. 10), that tlie daughter was 
 entitled to prove for the full amount of the £5000, 
 
 I. EXECUTOE— ACTIONS (hy and against)— con- 
 
 tinued. 
 (/.) Insolvent Estate — continued. 
 less a rebate of interest at 4 per cent, per annum 
 for the period between the date of the judgment 
 and the death of the widow, and that her proof in 
 respect of the annuity must be treated on the same 
 principle. In re Bkidges. Hill v. Bkidges 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 20. Bankruptcy Eules — Secured and un- 
 secured Creditors — Priority — Judgment recovered 
 against Executors before Administration Judgment 
 —Judicature Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 77), s. 10 
 —Banlcruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 32.] Sect. 10 of the Judicature Act, 1875, does 
 not introduce into the administration of insolvent 
 estates of deceased persons the provision of sect. 32 
 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, that all debts (with 
 certain exceptions) are to be paid pari passu. — 
 Sect. 10 aiiects only the rights of the class of 
 secured creditors as conflicting with those of the 
 class of unsecured creditors ; it does not affect the 
 rights inter se of the members of those classes. — 
 Therefore if a creditor of an insolvent testator re- 
 covers judgment for his debt against the executor 
 before the date of a judgment in an administration 
 action, he is, notwithstanding sect. 10, entitled to 
 be paid out of the assets in priority to the other 
 creditors of equal degree.- — Smith v. Morgan 
 (5 C. P. D. 337) approved and followed. In re 
 Maggi. Winehouse v. Winehouse 20 Ch. D. 545 
 
 21. Bankruptcy Eules, 1870, rr. 99, 100, 
 
 101 — Secured Creditor — Judicature Act, 1875, 
 «. 10.] An equitable mortgagee obtained a 
 common decree for administration of his deceased 
 debtor's estate, and sent in a claim for the whole 
 amount of his debt. When the certificate of debts 
 came to be settled the mistake was pointed out, 
 and the Chief Clerk required the Plaintiff to put 
 a value on his security. He did so, and was 
 admitted as a creditor for the balance, £28. The 
 estate was then believed to be insolvent, but the 
 fact had not been formally established. After the 
 certificate had become binding the Plaintiff toot 
 out a summons asking that the property might be 
 sold, and that he might be allowed to prove for 
 the deficiency. A sale was ordered, and the sum- 
 mons directed to stand over. The property sold 
 for much less than the value set upon it, and the 
 summons was then brought on again : — Held, by 
 Fry, J., and by the Coui-t of Appeal, that by 
 sect. 10 of the Judicature Act, 1875, rule 101 of 
 the Bankruptcy Eules of 1870 was made applic- 
 able to the case, and that the Plaintiff could only 
 stand as accreditor for £28. In re Hopkins. Wil- 
 liams V. Hopkins - 18 Ch. D. 370 
 Ketainer — Eight of, after administration 
 
 judgment 16 Ch. D. 198 ; 22 Ch. D. 604 
 See ExECLTOE — Eetainer. 1, 2. 
 
 II. EXECUTOE— ADMINISTEATION. 
 
 (O.) CaKRVING on BrSLNESS. 
 
 1. Apportionment of Loss — Tenant for 
 
 Life and Bcmuinderman — Settlement by Will of 
 Shai-e of Business.] A ti-ader devised and be- 
 queathed to trustees all his real and personal 
 estate, including his share in tho business in 
 which ho was a partner, on trust as to one moiety 
 thereof to pay the annual proceeds (including the 
 
( 557 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 558 ) 
 
 II. EXECUTOH— ADMINISTEATION— conJii. 
 
 (a) Cakrying on Business — oontinued. 
 net profits of the business) to his daughter for her 
 life, for her separate use without power of antici- 
 pation, and after her death the moiety was to be 
 held in trust for her children or remoter issue. 
 He directed his trustees to carry on the business 
 after his death until the expiration of the partner- 
 ship term, and authorized them to use, not only 
 such capital as he should have in the business at 
 the time of his death, but also such other part of 
 the trust premises as they should think fit. The 
 partnership deed authorized the partners to dis- 
 pose of their shares by will; it did not provide 
 how any loss in carrying on the business should 
 be borne. The will contained no provision as to 
 the mode in which any such loss sliould be borne 
 as between the persons interested in the testator's 
 estate. It had been the practice of the firm in 
 prosperous years to divide the whole profit among 
 the partners, and in years in which there was a 
 loss to write off each partner's proportion of the 
 loss from his share of the capital. The testator 
 died in 1879. After his death the business w^s 
 carried on by his trustees in partnership with the 
 other partners. Up to the end of 1880 it was 
 carried on at a profit, and half the testator's share 
 of that profit was paid by the trustees to the 
 daughter. For the year 1881 there was a loss, 
 and the testator's share of the loss was written off 
 from his share of the capital in the books of the 
 firm. For the year 1882 there was a profit: — 
 Seld, that the daughter was entitled to receive 
 half that share of the profits which the testator, 
 according to the practice of the firm, would have 
 received if he had been alive, and that, con- 
 sequently, she _was entitled to receive half his 
 share of the profits for the year 1882, without 
 any decjnction for the purpose of making good 
 the corpus of the settled share in the interest of 
 the remaindermen. Gow v. Foestjsk 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 672 
 
 2. Occupation of Business Premises^ 
 
 Direction to Executors to pay Legacies " out of my 
 Estate" — Direction to carry on Testator's Busi- 
 ness.'] A testator, after giving legacies and an- 
 nuities, proceeded to say: "My executors may 
 realize such part of my estate as they think right 
 and in their judgment to pay the aforenamed 
 legacies." He then directed his business to be 
 oarriiad on till his sou attained the age of thirty, 
 but did not dispose of the profits, nor did his will 
 contain any further disposition of his real or per- 
 sonal estate, except a gi(t of a particular house. 
 The testator carried on his business in a freehold 
 mill which was his own property. Held, by the 
 Vioe-Ohancellor of the Court of the County 
 Palatine of Lancaster, that the testator died in- 
 testate as to his real estate except the house, that 
 his business was to be carried on till the son 
 attained thirty or further order, and that the pro- 
 fits after providing for the legacies and annuities 
 went to the next of kin. That the testator died 
 intestate as to his residuary personal estate, and 
 that an occupation rent should be paid to the 
 heir-at-law from the testator's death in respect of 
 the real estate and the fixtures forming part 
 thereof which wore used in the business. Held, 
 on appeal (affirming the decision of the Vice- 
 
 II. EXECTITOE— ADMINISTRATION— conM. 
 
 (a.) Cabrting on Business — -continued. 
 Chancellor), that the legacies were not charged 
 on the real estate, for that the direction to the 
 executors to realize such parts of his estate as 
 they thought right to pay the legacies was satis- 
 fied by holding it to apply to property whicli 
 they took as executors. Held (reversing the 
 decision of the Vioe-Chancellor), that so long as 
 the testator's business was continued for the 
 purposes and under the directions of the Will, the 
 executors were entitled to the free use and occu- 
 pation of the business premises, and of the fixed 
 plant and machinery therein without paying any 
 rent for the same. But held (varying the decision 
 of the Vice-Chancellor), that the descended real 
 estate could not be affected by the direction to 
 carry on the testator's business any further or 
 otherwise than such carrying on might be neces- 
 sary for payment of the legacies and annuities 
 giveu by the will, and that, so soon as they were 
 provided for, the direction to carry on tlje business 
 became inoperative, and ceased to be binding 
 either on the heir-at-law or the next of kin, and 
 that any surplus profits which had arisen since 
 the testator's decease, after providing for the 
 legacies and annuities, must be apportioned 
 between the heir-at-law and the next of kin 
 according to the values of the real and personal 
 estate employed in the business. In re Cameron. 
 Nixon v. Cameron - 26 Ch, D, 19 
 
 3. Hedging Testator's Assets — Testator's 
 
 Goods seized under Fi. Fa. against Executor — 
 Lapse of Time — Acquiescence — Renewal of Tes- 
 tator's Lease in Executor's own Name — Deposit to 
 secure Executor's own Debt — Equities — Priority — 
 Purchaser for Value without Notice — Possession of 
 Title Deeds — Order to give up Deed to facilitate 
 Sale.'] If an executor, in pursuance of the direc- 
 tions contained in the testator's will, carries on the 
 testator's business, and in so doing contracts debts, 
 the fact that he has carried on the business in his 
 own name and that the testator's assets employed 
 in it are ostensibly the executor's own property, 
 will not entitle a judgment creditor of the execu- 
 tor to take in execution the testator's assets. — 
 Lapse of time and an enjoyment of the assets in 
 a manner inconsistent with the trusts of the will, 
 coupled with the consent of the beneficiaries, may, 
 however, raise an inference of a gift of the assets 
 by them to the executor, and entitle his judgment 
 creditor to take them in execution. But, when 
 the possession and the time which has elapsed 
 are in accordance with the trusts of the will, no 
 such inference can arise. — Ray v. Ray (G. Coop. 
 264) distinguished. — An executor, six years after 
 the death of the testator, surrendered a lease be- 
 longing to the testator, and took a renewed lease, 
 including additional property, and at an increased 
 rent, in his own name. He afterwards deposited 
 the lease as security for money advanced to him, 
 which he applied to his own pm-poses. The 
 renewed lease contained no mention of the sur- 
 render, and the mortgagee did not know that the 
 borrower was an executor, or that he was not the 
 beneficial owner of tlie lease. He did not, how- 
 ever, make any inquiry into the title. An action 
 was afterwards brought to administer the testa- 
 tor's estate, and a consent order was made for the 
 
( 559 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 560 ) 
 
 II. EXECTTTOB— ADMINISTEATION— coftM. 
 
 (a) Cakeyino on Business — continued. 
 sale of the leasehold property, without prejudice 
 to any right, the mortgagee giving up the lease 
 to facilitate the sale. He claimed to be paid the 
 amount due to him by the executor out of the 
 proceeds of sale. — Held (affirming the decision of 
 Fry, J.), that the lease was in equity part of the 
 testator's estate, and that the equity of the estate 
 being prior to the equity of the mortgagee, must 
 prevail against it : — Held, also, that the equitable 
 mortgagee was not Injured by the order to give 
 Tip the indenture of lease, and did not thereby 
 acquire any claim upon the proceeds of the sale. 
 In re Mokgan. Pillgkem v. Pillgeem 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 93 
 
 4. Profits until Sale — Trust for Sale — 
 
 Direction as to interim Profits — Capital or In- 
 come.'] A testator devised and bequeathed his 
 real and personal estate upon usual trusts for sale 
 and conversion, the proceeds to be invested and 
 to be held upon trust for his wife for life, and, 
 after her death, for his children. The will con- 
 tained the usual power to postpone the sale and 
 conversion of the real and personal estate, and the 
 usual direction that until sale and conversion the 
 rents, profits, and income thereof should be paid 
 and applied to the same persons and in the same 
 manner as the income of the trust estate. The 
 will contained no reference whatever to the busi- 
 ness of the testator, which comprised the bulk of 
 his estate. The executors carried on the business 
 for nearly two years with a view to its sale as a 
 going concern, and the question arose whether the 
 profits of the business during that period were to 
 be treated as capital or income : — Held, that the 
 executors had power to carry on the business for 
 a reasonable period with a view to its sale as a 
 going concern ; and that, as the testator had ex- 
 pressly directed that the profits of his personal 
 estate until conversion were to be treated as income, 
 the general rule laid down in Howe v. Earl of Bart- 
 mouth (7 Ves. 137) did not apply, and therefore 
 the widow was entitled to the profits of the busi- 
 ness. — Brown v. Gellatly (Law Hep. 2 Ch. 751) and 
 Kirkman v. Booth (11 Beav. 279) distinguished. 
 In re Chancellor. Chanoellob v. Brown 
 
 [26 Ch. S, 42 
 (6.) Conversion. 
 
 5. Power to postpone— Residue — Tenant 
 
 for Life and Semainderman — Apportionment be- 
 tween Capital and Income — Compound Interest.} 
 A testator died entitled to an annuity secured on 
 the grantor's estate in land expectant on the death 
 of his father, and also to a mortgage debt on the 
 same estate. The testator devised his residuary 
 estate to trustees upon trust to convert at their 
 uncontrolled discretion, and to pay the income to 
 his wife for life, and after her death to his children. 
 The mortgaged estate did not fall into possession 
 till several years after testator's death, and the 
 arrears of the annuity and the mortgage debt were 
 then paid : — Held, that the amount ought to be 
 apportioned between capital and income, on the 
 principle of ascertaining the amount which if put 
 out at interest on the death of the testator at 
 compound interest would with the accumulations 
 have amounted on the day of payment to the sum 
 actually paid, and the sum so ascertained should 
 
 II. EXECUTOR— ADMINISTKATION—cobW. 
 
 (6.) Conversion — continued. 
 be treated as capita], and the difference between 
 that sum and the sum actually paid should be 
 treated as income, and paid to the tenants for life. 
 Beav AN v. Beav an - - 24 Ch. D. 649, n. 
 
 6. Power to postpone — Will — Residuary 
 
 Gift — Tenant for Life and Bemainderman — Ex- 
 pectancy — Property falling in after Testator's 
 Death — Apportionment between Capital and In- 
 come, how made — Compound Interest — Yearly 
 Bests.'] Where a testator has bequeathed his re- 
 siduary personal estate to trustees upon trust for 
 conversion, with power to postpone such conver- 
 sion at their discretion, and to hold the proceeds 
 upon trust for a person for life with remainders 
 over, and such residue includes outstanding per- 
 sonal estate, the conversion of which the trustees, 
 in the exercise of their discretion, postpone for 
 the benefit of the estate, and which eventually 
 falls in some years after the testator's death — 
 as for instance a mortgage debt with arrears of 
 interest, or arrears of an annuity with interest, or 
 moneys payable upon a life policy — such out- 
 standing personal estate should, on falling in, be 
 apportioned as between capital and income by 
 ascertaining the sum which, put out at interest at 
 i per cent, per annum on the day of the testator's 
 death, and accumulating at compound interest 
 calculated at that rate with yearly rests and 
 deducting income tax, would, with the accumula- 
 tions of interest, have produced, at the day of 
 receipt, the amount actually received ; and the 
 sum so ascertained should be treated as capital, 
 and the residue as income. — Beavan v. Beavan 
 (24 Ch. D. 649, n.) followed. In re Earl of 
 Chestereield's Trusts 24 Ch. D. 643 
 
 (c.) Payment of Debts and Legacies. 
 
 1, Deficient Estate — Abatement of An- 
 nuities — Apportionment — Direction to pay An- 
 nuity free of Legacy Duty — Costs of Plaintiff 
 in Legatee's Administration Action.] When a 
 testator's estate is insufficient (after payment of 
 his debts) to pay in full annuities given by hia 
 will, the fund must (after payment of costs) be 
 apportioned between the annuitants in the pro- 
 portion which the sums composed of the arrears 
 of the annuity in each case plus the present value 
 of the future payments bear to each other, and 
 this rule applies in a case in which the annuitants 
 are all living at the time of distribution. — Heath v. 
 Nugent (29 Beav. 226) followed. — A testator gave 
 an annuity of £150 to his widow, an annuity of 
 £100 to a stranger in blood, and he directed that 
 the second annuity should be paid free of legacy 
 duty, which should be paid out of his estate. 
 After payment of his debts, the estate was insuf- 
 ficient to pay the annuities in full : — Held, that 
 (after payment of costs) the fund must be appor- 
 tioned as above between the two annuitants ; that 
 the legacy duty payable on the sum apportioned 
 to the second annuitant must be deducted from 
 the whole fund, and the balance then divided in 
 the same proportion between the two annuitants. 
 — It is the settled rule that the plaintiff in a 
 legatee's administration action is, when the estate 
 is insufficient to pay the legacies in full, entitled 
 to receive his costs out of the fund as between 
 
( 561 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 562 ) 
 
 II. EXECTJTOE— ADMINISTBATION— co»W. 
 
 (c) Payment of Debts and Legacies — oontd. 
 solicitor and client, and this rule applies even 
 when there is a contest between him and anotlier 
 legatee aa to the proper mode of dividing the 
 fund. In, re WiLKras. Wilkins v. Eotherham 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 703 
 
 8. Domicil — Priorities.'] In the admin- 
 istration of the English estate of a deceased 
 •domiciled abroad, foreign creditors are entitled to 
 dividends pari passu with English creditors. In 
 re Klcebe. Kanneeutheb v. Geiselbbboht 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 175 
 
 9. Exoneration of General Personal Estate 
 
 — Trust for Payment of Debts.'] The rule that a 
 charge of debts on real estate does not of itself 
 -exonerate the personal estate applies to a case 
 where a charge for payment of debts after the 
 grantor's death is created by deed. But no such 
 rule applies to specific personal estate given on 
 .similar trusts ; in such a case the specific personal 
 estate will be the primary fund for the payment 
 of the debts. — ^A testator by a deed executed in 
 his lifetime conveyed and assigned real and per- 
 sonal estate to trustees, in trust for himself during 
 his life, and after his death to sell and convert 
 the property, and to stand possessed of the pro- 
 ceeds on trust, after payment of costs, to pay all 
 the debts which should be due from him, and his 
 funeral expenses, and, after such payment as afore- 
 said, upon trusts for his sons and their children. 
 By his will the testator, after reciting the deed, 
 devised and bequeathed all and every the residue 
 of his real and personal estate not comprised in 
 and subject to the trusts of the deed, to his wife 
 for her life, with remainders over, and he appointed 
 his wife and one of the trustees of the deed execu- 
 tors of his will, -which was proved by the widow 
 and one of the trustees : — Held, that, as regarded 
 the real estate comprised in the deed, the testa- 
 tor's general personal estate was not exonerated 
 from its primary liability to pay his debts. — But 
 held, that the personal estate comprised in the deed 
 was the primary fund for the payment of the 
 debts. — French v. Chichester (2 Vem. 568 ; 3 Bro. 
 P. C. 2nd Ed. p. 16) discussed and explained. 
 Tkott v. BijOHANAn - 28 Ch. D. 446 
 
 III. EXECUTOE— LIABILITIES (and DUTIES). 
 
 1. Laches — Devastavit.] Mere laches 
 
 in abstaining from calling upon the executors to 
 realise for the purpose of paying his debt will not 
 deprive a creditor of his right to sue the executors 
 for devastavit, unless there has been such a course 
 of conduct, or express authority, on his part that 
 the executors have been thereby misled into part- 
 ing with the assets, available to answer his claim. 
 In re Bibch. Koe v. Bibch - 27 Ch. D. 622 
 
 2. Purchase by Executor who has not 
 
 proved — Suit to set aside Sale.] Held, that a 
 sale is not to be avoided merely because when 
 entered upon the purchaser has the power to 
 become trustee of the property purchased, as for 
 instance by proving the will which relates thereto, 
 though in point of fact he never does become 
 such. Such a purchaser is under no disability, 
 .and in order to avoid such sale it must be shewn 
 
 III. EXECUTOE— LIABILITIES (and DUTIES) 
 — continued. 
 
 that he in fact used his power in such a way as 
 to render it inequitable that the sale should be 
 upheld. Clabk v. Clark - 9 App. Cas, 733 
 
 IV. EXECUTOE— POWEES. 
 
 JBy i4 * 45 'Vict. v. 41, s. 37.— (1.) An executor 
 may pay or allow any debt or claim on any evi- 
 dence that he thinks sufficient. 
 
 (2.) An executormay, if and as he thinks fit, accept 
 any composition or any security, real or personal, 
 for any debt, or for any property, real or personal, 
 claimed, and Tnay allow any time for payment of 
 any debt, and may compromise, compound, abandon, 
 submit to arbitration, or otherwise settle any debt, 
 account, claim, or thing whatever relating to the 
 testator's estate, and for any of those purposes Tnay 
 enter into, give, execute, and do such agreements, 
 instruments of composition or arrangement, releases, 
 and other things as to Mm seems expedient, without 
 being responsible for any loss occasioned by any act 
 or thing so done by him in good faith. 
 
 The section applies to executorships constituted 
 or created either before or after the commencement 
 of the Act. 
 
 By sect. 38. — (1.) 'Where a power is given to two 
 or more executors jointly, then unless the contrary 
 is expressed in the instrument, if any, creating the 
 power, the same may be exercised or performed by 
 the survivor or survivors of them for the time 
 
 (2.) The section applies only to executorships 
 constituted after or created by instruments coming 
 into operation after the commencement of the Act— 
 31st of DecenAer, 1881. 
 
 1. Advances to an Exeontor — Banhers — 
 
 Executorial Purposes — Separate Account of Exe- 
 cutor.] One of two executors, who was himself a 
 residuary legatee, cBtered an account with a 
 banker in his own name for executorial purposes, 
 and the banker, without notice of the dispositions 
 under the will, made advances to the executor 
 for payments connected with the executorship, 
 and securities were deposited for repayment of 
 the advances. The co-executor assented to the 
 first advance, but upon a second advance being 
 made to the acting executor upon other securities, 
 he withdrew his assent, and objected to the banker 
 being repaid out of the trust property, on the 
 ground that the money had been placed to the 
 separate account of the acting executor. The 
 advances were duly applied to the purposes of 
 the administration. Upon an action being brought 
 by the banker for a lien upon the second securities 
 for repayment of his advances : — Held, that the 
 banker was justified in advancing money to the 
 acting executor for executorial purposes, and 
 that the assent of the co-executor in the first in- 
 stance was a further justification for placing con- 
 fidence in the acting executor and in making 
 further advances to him. The repayment was 
 therefore decreed with mortgagee's costs. Child 
 & Co. V. Thobley - - - 16 Ch. D. 161 
 
 2. Charge of 'SitiMs— Partnership Pro- 
 perty — Power of Executor to sell — 23 & 24 'Vict, 
 c. 145, s. 30.] A testator, who carried on business 
 in partnership with his brother, by his will, dated 
 
( 563 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 561 ) 
 
 IV. EXECTITOE— POWERS— conMii«ed. 
 
 the 23rd of November, 1863, directed payment of 
 liis debts, and, after bequeathing specific and 
 pecuniary legacies, he devised and bequeathed 
 all his real and leasehold and personal estate to 
 trustees, upon trust for sale and conversion into 
 money, and to hold the proceeds of sale on certain 
 trusts. In 1872 the brother and the testator's 
 ■widow, who was then the sole trustee and execu- 
 trix of the will, joined in selling and conveying 
 real estate, of which the brother and the testator 
 had been tenants in common, and which was in 
 fact partnership property, to a limited company 
 "who purchased the business. The purchase- 
 money was to be paid partly in cash and partly 
 in fully paid-up shares and debentures of the 
 company. At the same time an arrangement 
 was made for the handing over of the whole pur- 
 chase-money to the bankers of tlie partnership, to 
 whom the partnership was largely indebted, and 
 whose debt was secured by mortgages of the 
 partnership property, in satisfaction of the debt 
 due to the bankers, the bankers undertaking to 
 pay the other creditors of the partnership, and 
 handing back to the executrix a sum of cash and 
 some of the debentures, and providing certain 
 other benefits for the brother. The conveyance 
 of the real estate to the company contained a 
 recital that the brother and the widow were en- 
 titled to the property in equal undivided moieties, 
 and the widow purported to convey as trustee of 
 her husband's will, but it was not stated in the 
 deed that she was his executrix or that the pro- 
 perty was partnership property. — On a subsequent 
 sale of the property by the company, the pur- 
 chaser objected that the sale by the widow was 
 not authorized by the trust for sale, the considera- 
 tion not being entirely paid in money : — Held, 
 that the arrangement as to the disposition of the 
 purchase - money received from the company 
 amounted to a compromise by the widow with 
 the creditors and with the surviving partner into 
 which it was competent to her as executrix to 
 enter under sect. 30 of the Act 23 & 24 Vict, 
 c. 145 : — And lield, on the authority of Corser v. 
 Cartwright (Law Eep. 7 H. L. 731), that this 
 being so, and the real estate being partnership 
 property which the widow, as executrix, was en- 
 titled to sell, and inasmuch as she, as trustee, 
 had the legal estate, and as executrix was the 
 proper person to receive the purchase-money, the 
 sale to the company was a valid one and their 
 title good. West of England and South 
 Wales Distkiot Bank v. Mukoh 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 3. Dead Body — Property — Possession — 
 
 Direction hy Will — Cremation — Claim founded on 
 FraudJ] A testator' directed W. to burn his 
 body, and directed his executors to repay W. the 
 expense of so doing. The body was buried in 
 unconsecrated ground with the assent of the 
 executors. Afterwards W. representing to the 
 "Under-Secretary of State that she intended to 
 bury it in consecrated ground, obtained his license 
 to remove it. She caused it to be burnt in Italy, 
 and then brought an action against the executors 
 for the expenses. The action was dismissed : — 
 Meld, that there is no property in a dead body, 
 but the executors have a right to the possession 
 
 rV. EXECTTTOE— POWEES— coratOTuecJ. 
 of the body, and their duty is to biu:y it. — HcM, 
 that a direction by will as to the disposition of 
 the testator's body cannot be enforced. — Whetljer 
 it is lawful to burn a dead body, qusere. Wil- 
 liams V. WiLLi.iMS 20 Ch. D. 659 
 
 V. EXECUTOH— RETAINER. 
 
 1. Administration Action — Executor 
 
 suing on behalf of himself and all other Creditors.^ 
 In the administration of a testator's estate, the 
 right of an executor to retain for his debt is not 
 affected by the circumstances that he is himself 
 the Plaintiff, suing on behalf of himself and all 
 other the creditors, and that he has submitted to 
 account in the ordinary form of an administra- 
 tion decree. Ex parte Campbell. Campbell v. 
 Campbell - - - - 16 Ch. D. 198 
 
 2. 
 
 Administration Action — Solicitor — 
 
 Conflict of Interest and Duty — Appointment of 
 Receiver.'] In a creditor's administration action, 
 brought against the administrator of an intestate 
 (the Defendant being a solicitor, and a member of 
 the firm of solicitors who were acting for the 
 Plaintiff) after judgment for admiuisti-atiou had 
 been pronounced, an order was made on the ap- 
 plication of the Plaintiff by his solicitors for the 
 appointment of a specified person, "upon his 
 giving security," to receive the rents of the intes- 
 tate's real estate, and to collect and get in his 
 outstanding personal estate. On the application 
 for this order the Defendant made an affidavit 
 stating his approval of the person proposed. 
 Before the receiver had perfected his security 
 some money arising from the sale of fuimiture 
 belonging to the intestate was received by the 
 Defendant's firm, and appropriated by him, and 
 he claimed to retain out of it a debt due to him 
 by the intestate: — Held, that, by reason of the 
 relation in which the Defendant stood to the 
 Plaintiff as a member of the firm of solicitors who 
 were acting for him, the Defendant stood in no 
 better position than he would have stood after 
 the receiver had perfected his security, and that 
 the Defendant could not under the circumstances 
 exercise his right of retainer. — Wickens v. Town- 
 shend (1 Euss. & My. 661) applied. In re Bikt. 
 BiKT r. BlKT - 22 Ch. D, 604 
 
 3, Bequest to Bankrupt Dehtor — Compo- 
 sition — Assignment hy Debtor of Sliare of Estate,] 
 D., who was indebted to his father L., on a bill 
 of sale, and a promissory note, was adjudicated 
 banki'upt. At a meeting of the creditors of D., a 
 composition of 2s. Gd. in the pound was accepted 
 in satisfaction of the debts due to them, and the 
 bankruptcy was annulled. L., who did not prove 
 his debt, and was not paid the composition, died, 
 having iDequeathed to D. a share of his estate. 
 The executors who proved the will (D. being an 
 executor who did not prove) did not prove the 
 debt under the composition. D. assigned his 
 share of the estate to B., who brought an action 
 for the administration of L.'s estate. The execu- 
 tors claimed a right of retainer against B. for the 
 debt : — Held, that the amount of coinposition was 
 substituted for the provable debts, whether such 
 debts were proved by the creditors or not ; and 
 
( 565 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 566 ) 
 
 V. EXECUTOR— SETAIiraE—conJijiuefJ. 
 
 that the executors were not entitled to the right 
 of retainer against the bequest of the share of the 
 estate for the whole debt, but only for the compo- 
 sition on the debt and interest ; six years' arrears 
 of interest on the promissory note, and the whole 
 arrears on the bUl of sale. In re Okpbn. Bes- 
 wioK V. Orpen - 16 Ch. D. 802 
 
 4. Contributory to Company — Liquida- 
 tor — Balance Order — Joint Creditor — Companies 
 Act, 1882, ss. 75, 76, 103, 105, lOS— Gen. Ord. 
 Nov. 1862, r. 35; Sched. III., Form 39.] _ Where 
 under sects. 76 and 103 of the Companies Act, 
 1862, and Kule 35 of Gen. Ord. Nov. 1862, a 
 balance order has been obtained by the official 
 liquidator of a company against the legal personal 
 representative of a deceased contributory for pay- 
 ment of a call made after the death, the order 
 being in accordance with Form 39 in Sched. III. 
 to the Gen. Ord., and directing the legal personal 
 representative to pay the call " out of the assets of 
 the deceased in his hands as such legal personal 
 representative to be administered in due course of 
 administration," such an order is not in the nature 
 of a judgment so as to constitute the liquidator a 
 judgment creditor ; it is to be treated simply as 
 analogous to a common administration judgment, 
 or as a step to the administration judgment which 
 may be obtained by the liquidator under sect. 105 
 of the Companies Act, 1862, and which is his 
 proper remedy in case the legal personal repre- 
 sentative has failed to comply with the order; 
 and therefore the order, whether followed by an 
 administration judgment or not, leaves untouched 
 all priorities and rights usually existing in the 
 due course of the administration of the estate of a 
 deceased person, including au executor's right of 
 retainer. Thus, the order, if obtained against 
 executors, does not give the liquidator priority 
 over a debt due to one of them from the testator, 
 and tlierefore retained by that executor out of the 
 assets, even though the order be prior in date to 
 notice of the retainer. — One of several executors 
 is entitled to a right of retainer in respect of a 
 mortgage debt due from the testator to a body of 
 trustees of whom that executor is one. — Decision 
 of Bacon, V.C., reversed. In re Hubbaok. In- 
 ternational Marine Hydkopathio Company v. 
 Hawes - - - - 29 Ch. D. 934 
 
 5. Costs incurred in Probate Suit against 
 
 Legacy.} Legatees who were also next of kin of 
 the testator," brought an action against the execu- 
 tor, seeking a revocation of the probate, but failed, 
 and were ordered to pay the executor's costs of the 
 action. While the action was pending, some of 
 the Plaintiffs assigned and others mortgaged their 
 shares whether under the will or on an intestacy. 
 Afterwards the legatees commenced an action 
 against the executor in the Chancery Division for 
 the administration of the estate -.^-Reld (affirming 
 the decision of Hall, V.C), that the executor was 
 entitled to set off the costs in the probate suit 
 against the legacies, notwithstanding the assign- 
 ments and incumbrances. In re Knafman. 
 Knapman v. Weeeoed - 18 Ch. D. 300 
 
 6. Creditor in higher Degree — Executor 
 
 of Executor of original Testator — Hinde Palmer's 
 
 V. EXECUTOE— EETAINEE— confe'KttetZ. 
 Act (32 & 33 Vict. c. 46), s. 1.] The right of re- 
 tainer by an executor has not been abolished by 
 Hinde Palmer's Act, nor has it been enlarged so 
 as to enable the executor to retain his debt as 
 against a creditor of higher degree than himself. 
 — Notwithstanding the Act, an executor who is 
 only a simple contract creditor of his testator 
 cannot retain his debt as against a specialty cre- 
 ditor. — If an executor dies after having claimed a 
 right of retainer, but without having actually ex- 
 ercised it, leaving another executor of the original 
 testator surviving, the executors of the deceased 
 executor have the right of retainer for the benefit; 
 of his estate. — Hopton v. Dryden (Prec. in Ch. 
 179) distinguished. — A right of retainer being- 
 claimed on behalf of the estate of an executor 
 who was a simple contract creditor of the testa- 
 tor, and there being a specialty creditor : — Held, 
 that the assets must (after payment of costs) be 
 apportioned on the footing of giving an equal divi- 
 dend to all the creditors (specialty and simple 
 contract) ; that the dividend must be paid in full 
 to the specialty creditor ; that the executor must 
 then retain his debt out of the residue ; and that 
 the surplus (if any) must be divided equally 
 among the simple contract creditors. Wilson v. 
 CoxwELL - - - 23.Ch. D. 764 
 
 7. Equitahle Assets — Beal Estate — 3 & 4 
 
 Will. 4, 0. ] 04.] Eeal estate is, by the statute 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 104, made assets for the payment 
 of debts only in equity, and an executor has no 
 right of retainer against it. Personal estate being 
 the primary fund for the payment of specialty 
 debts, the circumstance that the specialty debts 
 of a testator, whose personal estate is insufficient 
 to pay those debts in full, have been actually paid 
 in the first instance partly out of the proceeds of 
 the sale of real estate, will not give the executor 
 a right to retain his own simple contract debt 
 out of personal estate subsequently realized, 
 which he would not have had if the whole per- 
 sonal estate had been applied in the first instance 
 in payment of the specialty debts. Walters v. 
 Walters - 18 Ch. D. 182 
 
 8. Executor of Executor — Assets received! 
 
 or paid into Court after Death of Executor — 
 Debt under Covenant—Arbitrary Damages.} Au 
 executor's right of retainer is limited to so much 
 of the assets of his testator as comes into the pos- 
 session or under the control of the executor, or is 
 paid into Court during his lifetime. — If au execu- 
 tor asserts in his lifetime a right of retainer, but; 
 dies without having exercised it, his representa- 
 tives may exercise that right for the benefit of his. 
 estate only as to anything which came into the 
 actual possession or under the actual control of 
 their testator, or which was paid into Court during 
 his lifetime.— TTiZson v. Coxwell-(23 Ch. D. 764), 
 luiless restricted in this way, must be treated as 
 overruled. — Claims by au executor for breach of a 
 covenant to assign a policy, and to replace furni- 
 ture, if sold, by other furniture of like value, are 
 claims for damages for breach of pecuniary con- 
 tracts for which there is a certain standard or 
 measure, and may therefore, on the authority of 
 Loane v. Casey (2 W. Bl. 965), be retained. In 
 re CoMPTON. Norton v. Compton 30 Ch, D. 15 
 
( 567 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 568 ) 
 
 T. EXECTJTOE— EETAINEE— cojifTOMed. 
 
 9. Joint Creditors — One Executor — 32 & 
 
 33 Vict. c. 46.] One of three executors who is 
 also one of two joint creditors has a right of 
 retainer in respect of his joint debt. The riglit of 
 retainer is not affected by the Act abolishing the 
 distinction between specialty and simple contract 
 debts. Ceowdee v. Stewaet 16 Ch. B. 368 
 
 10. Statute of Frauds, Debt barred by — 
 
 Devastavif] An executor or administrator would 
 commit a devastayit who paid a debt to a creditor 
 who is prevented from enforcing it by the Statute 
 •of Frauds. And for the same reason an executor 
 or administrator cannot retain such debt if due to 
 himself. — A father in consideration of the mar- 
 riage of his daughter made a verbal promise to 
 pay his daughter and her husband £500. He 
 died intestate without performing his promise, 
 and the daughter took out administration to his 
 estate: — Seld (affirming the decision of Kay, J.), 
 that the administratrix could not retain the debt 
 out of the assets. In re Eownson. Field v. 
 White 29 Ch. D. 358 
 
 EXECUTOR— According to tenor - 8 P. D. 216 
 See Peobate — G-eant. 6. 
 
 Action commenced before probate — Staying 
 
 proceedings 12 Q. B. D. 294 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Coukt — Stat- 
 ing Peooeedings. 3. 
 
 Adopting Conveyancing Act — Protection of. 
 
 See CoNVETANOiNG Act, 1881 — Statutes. 
 
 Bankruptcy of — Conduct of cause 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 81 
 See Peagtice — Supeeme Cockt — CoN- 
 DL'OT OF Cause. 1. 
 
 Charge of debts— Legal title 24 Ch. D. 190 
 
 See Will — Estate in Realty. 1. 
 
 Charge of debts — Power to sell 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 465 
 See Will — Chaege of Debts. 
 
 Debtor to estate— Set-off - 25 Ch. D, 176 
 
 See Set-off. 3. 
 
 Devastavit — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [22 Ch. iD. 820 ; 26 Ch. D, 783 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Pee- 
 sonal Actions. 5, 6. 
 
 Indefinite trust 26 Ch. D. 631 
 
 See Will — Teustees. 
 
 Judgment creditor — ^Bankruptcy 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 479 
 See Bankeuptoy — Act of Bankeuptcy. 
 8. 
 
 Legacy to - - 29 Ch, D, 893 
 
 See Will — Exeoutoes. 
 
 Liability of — Insolvency of agent 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 238 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 1. 
 
 Married woman — Power of appointment — 
 
 Separate estate - 7 P. D, 61 
 
 See Probate — Mareied Woman. 5. 
 
 One suing alone — Application to add the 
 
 other - 28 Ch. D. 414 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — 
 Parties. 5. 
 
 "EXECUTOR— continued. 
 
 Order of reference — Death of party before 
 
 making of award 15 ft. B. D. 565 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — 
 Change op Paeties. 4. 
 
 Eenunciation - - - 16 Ch. D. 3 
 
 See Administeatoe— With Will an- 
 nexed. 1. 
 
 Solicitor — Professional charges 
 
 [27 Ch. D, 684 
 See SoLioiTOB — Bill op Costs. 15. 
 
 EXECUTORY DEVISE - 
 
 See Will — Contingent 
 1,2. 
 
 Eemoteness 
 
 See Will — Peepetuitt. 
 
 Leaseholds for lives 
 
 18Ch. D. 524; 
 [24 Ch. D. 633 
 
 Kemaindee. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 211 
 3. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Leasehold — Benewable Lease. 3. 
 
 EXECUTOEY IIMITATION. 
 
 By i5&i6 Vict. c. 39 QGonveyancing Act, 1 882), 
 Sect. 10. — (1.) Where there is a person entitled to 
 land for an estate in fee, or for a term of years 
 absolute or determinable on life, or for term of life, 
 with an executory limitation over on default or 
 failure of all or any of his issue, whether within 
 or at any specified period of time or not, that exe- 
 cutory limitation shall be or become void and in- 
 capable of talcing effect, if (and as soon os) there 
 is living any issue who has attained the age of 
 twenty-one years, of the class on default or failure 
 whereof the limitation over was to take effect. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only where the executory 
 limitation is contained in an instrument coming 
 into operation after the commencement of this Act — 
 Z\st December, 1882. 
 
 Implication - - - 20 Ch. D. 406 
 
 See Will — Ceoss-bemaindees. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 662 
 
 -Superfluous 
 
 Perpetuity 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act- 
 Land. 2. 
 
 Tenant for life — Settled Land Act 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 114 
 See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 
 1. 
 
 EXECUTEIX — Married woman — Husband ob- 
 jecting to probate - 6 P. D. 103 
 See Probate — Maeeied Woman. 2. 
 
 EXHIBITS- Costs of perusal - 24 Ch. D. 684 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 37. 
 
 Duty on — Canadian law 10 App. Cas. 141 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 4. 
 
 EXONERATION- Lapsed bequest 29 Ch. D. 145 
 See Will — Exoneeation. 1. 
 
 Mortgaged estate - - 16 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Will — Exoneration. 2. 
 
 Personal estate — Trust for payment of debts 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 446 
 See Executoe — Administration. 9. 
 
 24 Ch. D. 
 
 Purchased estate — Vendor's lien 
 
 See Will — Exoneration. 3. 
 
 [94 
 
( 569 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 570 ) 
 
 EXPENSES— Election for Parliament 21 Ch. D. 
 See Pabliament — Election. 1. [408 
 
 Prisoner — Conveying to prison 6 ft. B. D. 1S6 ; 
 
 See Prison. 2. [7 App. Cas. 1 
 
 'Winnino; coal — Eeimbursement 7 App. Caa. 
 
 See Mine — Workinq. 2. [43 
 
 Witness - - 21 Ch. D. 831 
 
 See Evidence — Witness. 4. 
 
 EXFEBIUENT — User for— Infringement of pa- 
 tent - 29 Ch. D. 164 
 
 See Patent — Infringement. 7. 
 
 EXPERT— Advice to Court - 24 Ch. D. 156 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 5. 
 
 EXPLOSIONS — Causing — Criminal law. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Explosives— Sfa- 
 
 EXPLOSIVES — Having in possession. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Explosives— Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 Patent for protecting - 17 Ch. D. 721 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 5 
 See Patent — ^Infringement. 6. 
 EXPRESS TRUST— Statute of Limitations 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 254; 22 Ch. D. 614; 27 Ch. D. 
 
 [676 
 See Limitations, Statute os — Trusts. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 EXPULSION- Member of club - 17 Ch. D. 615 
 
 See Club. 
 Partner — Soliciting customers 22 Ch. D. 504 
 
 See Partnership — Dissolution. 3. 
 
 EXTENSION OF TIME— Appeal. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Appeal. 35 — 38. 
 
 Disclaimer — Trustee in bankruptcy 16 Ch D. 
 
 See Bankeuptot— Disclaimer. 14. [613 
 
 Indorsement on writ - 16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ. 
 1. 
 
 EXTINCTION or POWER — Alienation of in- 
 terest 26 Ch. D. 417 ; 27 Ch. D. 565 
 See Power — Extinction. 1, 2. 
 
 EXTRADITION. 
 
 Treaties under the Extradiiion Acts, 1870 to 
 1873, entered into since 1st Jan. 1881, hy Great 
 Britain with the 
 
 Netherlands. Order in Council, March 2nd, 
 
 1881 - - L. G., 1881, p. 983 
 
 Salvador. Order in Council, Dec. IGth, 1882 
 
 [L. 0., 1883, p. 1 
 
 Switzerland. Order in Council, May 18th, 
 
 1881 - - I". G., 1881, p. 2609 
 
 Tonqa. Order in Council, Nov. 30ft, 1882. 
 
 [I. G., 1882, p. 6136 
 
 Uruauav. Order in Council, March 5th, 1 885. 
 
 ■' [L. G., 1885, p. 1028 
 
 And see Jurisdiction — Statutes. 
 
 Canada.] Suspension of Act of 1870 in Canada 
 
 eo far as relates to foreign states. Order in Council, 
 
 Dec. 28th, 1S82 - - L. G., 1883, p. 81 
 
 Cyprus.] Order in Council, of July 15th, 1881, 
 
 for the surrender under Foreign Jurisdiction Acts, 
 
 1843 to 1878 (and any enactment amending the 
 
 EXTRADITION — continued, 
 same), hy Cyprus of fugitives from any foreign- 
 country or from any part of the Ottoman dominions 
 [L. G., 1881, p. 3652 
 Straits Settlements.] Order in Council, Nov. 
 29ft, 1884, rescinding an earlier Order in Council 
 rendering it obligatory on the governor of the 
 Straits Settlements to surrender fugitive criminals to 
 foreign slates under the statute 29 & 30 Vict. c. 115.. 
 . [L. G., 1884, p. 6657 
 
 1. " ApprehenBion " — Person already in 
 
 Custody — Arrest without a Warrant — Extradition 
 Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 52), s. 8— Court of Ap- 
 peal — Jurisdiction — Criminal Mattel Habeas 
 
 Corpus — Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. 
 c. 66), ss. 19, 47.] Under sect. 8 of the Extradi- 
 tion Act, 1870, a fugitive criminal who is already 
 in custody may be detained for an offence coming 
 within the Act, even though he was originally 
 arrested without any warrant. The word " appre- 
 hension " in sect. 8 includes " detention." — Semble, 
 per Brett, L.J., that a constable would be justified 
 in arresting without a warrant a fugitive from a 
 foreign country on reasonable grounds of suspi- 
 cion that he has committed a crime which would 
 be a felony if committed in the United Kingdom.. 
 Whether the Court of Appeal has any jurisdiction 
 to entertain an appeal from the refusal of a Divi- 
 sional Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus, on 
 the application of a person who has been arrested 
 for an alleged extradition crime, qusere. The 
 V. Weil - - - 9 Q. B. D. 701 
 
 2. Foreign Warrant of Arrest — Authen- 
 tication of — Extradition of Subject of State not 
 party to Extradition Treaty — Extradition Act,. 
 1870 (33 & 34 Viet. c. 52), ss. 10, 15, 26.] An 
 extradition treaty between the United Kingdom 
 and the Netherlands provided that the Govern- 
 ments, parties to the treaty, should reciprocally 
 deliver up to each other any persons who, being 
 accused of any of certain specified crimes com- 
 mitted within the jurisdiction of the party 
 requiring the extradition, should be found in the 
 territories of the other party. The treaty further 
 provided that neither of the contracting govern- 
 ments should be bound to deliver up its own 
 subjects, and that a person arrested under the 
 treaty in either country should be discharged, it 
 within fourteen days a requisition should not have 
 been made for his surrender by the diplomatic 
 agent of " his " country : — Held, that the provi- 
 sions for the extradition of criminals under the 
 treaty were not confined to persons who were 
 subjects of the state requiring the extradition, 
 but applied to all persons who had committed any 
 of the specified crimes witljin the jurisdiction 
 of such state of whatever nationality they might 
 be, except subjects of the state from which ex- 
 tradition was required. A document produced 
 before a magistrate as the " foreign warrant " of 
 arrest under sect. 10 of the Extradition Act, 1870,. 
 was sealed with the seal of the department of 
 justice at the Hague, and purported to be a copy 
 of the record or minutes of a certain order or 
 decree of the Criminal Court of Justice there, 
 setting forth the charges against the criminal 
 whose extradition was sought, and authorizing 
 proceedings against him and his arrest: — Held,. 
 
( 571 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 572 ) 
 
 EXTRADITION— confmztet?. 
 that the production of such a document before the 
 magistrate was a sufficient compliance with the 
 provisions of sect. 10 of the Extradition Act, 1870, 
 which provides that the magistrate may commit 
 the criminal to prison, if, inter alia, the foreign 
 warrant authorizing his aiTest is duly authenti- 
 cated. — Semble, such document must be regarded 
 as in the nature of an original for this purpose. 
 The Queen v. Gaitz - - 9 Q, B, S. 93 
 
 3. Jurisdiction of Magistrate — Decision 
 
 of Magistrate conclusive — Weight of Evidence — 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 52, ss. 9, 10.] Upon an applica- 
 tion for a habeas corpus in the case of a fugitive 
 criminal committed by a police magistrate under 
 the Extradition Act, the Court has no power to 
 review the decision of the magistrate on the 
 
 EXTB.ADUIO'S— continued. 
 ground that it was against the weight of evidence 
 laid before him, there being sufficient evidence 
 before him to give him jurisdiction in the matter. 
 The Queen v. Maubeb - 10 Q. B. D. 613 
 
 Jurisdiction. 
 
 See JuKiSDiOTiON — Statutes. 
 
 EXTEAOEDINAEY FLOOD— Damage from 
 
 [7 App. Gas. 694 
 
 See Scotch Law — Statutobt Dutt. 
 
 EXTEAOEDINAEY EESOLTJTION 16 Ch. D. 334 
 
 See Bankkuptct — Composition. 1. 
 
 EXTEAS — Certificate of surveyor — ^How far con- 
 clusive - - - 10 Q. B. D. 400 
 
 See BciLDiKQ Coxtbact. 1. 
 
( 573 ), 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 574 ) 
 
 F. 
 
 FACT, MATTER OF— Matter of opinion 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 671 
 See Insurance, Life — Policy. 3. 
 
 TACTOB. 
 
 1. Lien — Advances hy Brokers to Agents 
 
 for Sale — Antecedent Debt — Privity of Contract — 
 Money had and received — Factors Act, 5*6 Vict. 
 c. 39, ss. 3, 7.] The Appellants, merchants at 
 Singapore, employed M. in London as agent to 
 sell, without authority to pledge, cargoes which 
 they from time to time consigned to hira. M. 
 employed the Eespondents, London brokers, to 
 sell the Appellants' consignments, and also in 
 speculative purchases on his own account. The 
 Eespondents purchased shellac for M. without 
 disclosing that they were buying as agents, and 
 therefore were personally liable to the vendors 
 on the contracts. Subsequently they made ad- 
 vances to M. to enable him to pay deposits on 
 the shellac, and took as security bills of lading 
 of some of the Appellants' cargoes. They had no 
 notice that M. was acting improperly in pledg- 
 ing the cargoes. On obtaining the advances M. 
 gave the Eespondents cheques for the amount 
 of the deposits, which were then paid by the 
 Eespondents : — Held, affirming in this respect the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal, that the obliga- 
 tion under which M. lay to the Eespondents to 
 pay the deposits and thus prevent their being 
 called upon to pay them, did not constitute an 
 antecedent debt within the meaning of the Factors 
 Act (5 & 6 Vict. c. 39), s. 3, and that the pledges 
 were made in respect of bona fide advances and 
 not of antecedent debts, and were valid against 
 the Appellants. — ^M. also pledged with the Ee- 
 spondents pepper consigned to him for sale by the 
 Appellants, to secure an advance protected by the 
 Factors Acts. The goods had been sold for M. by 
 the Eespondents, but not delivered to the pur- 
 chasers, nor paid for, when M. died insolvent and 
 heavily indebted to the Eespondents on a general 
 account. After the sale, but before receiving the 
 proceeds, the Eespondents had notice that the 
 Appellants claimed the pepper and the proceeds : 
 — Held, reversing in this respect the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal, that after repayment of the 
 Eespondents' advance the surplus proceeds of sale 
 belonged to the Appellants ; that the Appellants 
 could sue the Eespondents for such surplus, whether 
 on the ground of privity of contract, or on the 
 ground of property, or under the Factors Act 
 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 39), s. 7. — New Zealand and Aus- 
 tralian Land Company v. Watson (7 Q. B. D. 
 374) distinguished and explained. Kaltekbach 
 V. Lewis - 24 Ch. D. 54 ; 10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 2. Lien — Bestrictions placed hy Principal 
 
 on Powers of Factor.'] An agent who is entrusted 
 with the possession of goods for the purpose of 
 sale does not lose his character of factor, or the 
 
 FACTOR— continued. 
 
 right of lien attached to it, by reason of his acting 
 under special instructions from his principal to 
 sell the goods at a particular price and to sell in 
 the principal's name. Stevens v. Billee 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 31 
 
 3. Lien — Undisclosed Principal — Foreign 
 
 Merchants — Privity of Contract betiveen Principal 
 and Consignee — Money had and received — Notice 
 or Knowledge — Set-off— Factors Act (6 Oeo. i, 
 c. 9i), 8. 1.] Merchants in London, upon the 
 instruction of shipping agents at Havannah with 
 respect to a cargo of tobacco to be consigned to 
 the London merchants and after receiving the 
 shipping documents, effected policies of marine 
 insurance in the ordinary form on behalf and for 
 the benefit of all parties whom it might concern. 
 The Havannah agents shipped and consigned 
 the tobacco in their own names, but were in fact 
 acting as commission agents for Havannah mer- 
 chants to whom the tobacco belonged ; and the 
 London merchants before effecting the policies 
 had notice that the Havannah agents had an un- 
 named principal. A total loss having occurred, 
 the London merchants received the policy moneys, 
 but before receipt had notice that the moneys 
 were claimed by the Havannah principals : — Held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal, that 
 an action lay by the Havannah principals against 
 the London merchants for the policy moneys ; that 
 the London merchants were not entitled to a lien 
 upon the moneys for the balance of their general 
 account with the Havannah agents, and could not 
 in that action set off their claim to that balance, 
 or set off anything except the premiums, stamps 
 and commission in respect of the insurance. — 
 Held also by Lord Blackburn, that the case fell 
 within the Factors Act (6 Geo. 4, c. 94), s. I. — ■ 
 Sed qusere by Lord FitzGerald. Mildbed v. 
 Maspons - 9 Q. B. D. 530 ; 8 App. Cas. 874 
 
 FACTORY ACTS. 
 
 The Act 46 <i 47 Vict. e. 53, amends the^ law re- 
 lating to certain Factories and Bakehouses. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited as the Factory and Work- 
 shop Act, 1883. 
 
 White Lead Factoeies. 
 
 Sect. 2. It is unlawful to carry on a white lead 
 factory unless such factory is certified hy an in- 
 spector to be in conformity with the Act. 
 
 Sect. 3. Certificate of conformity not to he granted 
 unless scheduled conditions have been complied 
 with. 
 
 Sect. 4. How certificate is to be obtained. 
 
 Sect. 5. Certificate may be withdrawn if default 
 is made in complying with the conditions. 
 
 Sect. 6. Penalty on carrying on factory without 
 certificate. 
 
( 575 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 576 ) 
 
 FACTORY ACTS— continued. 
 
 Sect. 7. Special rules to be established for every 
 white lead factory. 
 
 Sect. 8. As to framing and approval of special 
 rules. 
 
 Sect. 9. Special rules how to be amended. 
 
 Sect. 10. Penalty for malcing false statement 
 loith respect to special rules, and for not transmitting 
 special rules for approval. 
 
 Sect. 11. Publication of special rules. 
 
 Sect. 12. Penalty for defacing. &c., special rules. 
 
 Sect. 13 explains s. S3 of the Factory and Work- 
 shop Act, 1878, as to the employment of young 
 persons and women. 
 
 Sect. 14 amends ss. 12 and 14 of the Factory and 
 Workshop Act, 1878, as to the period of employ- 
 ment of children in certain cases. 
 
 Bakehouses. 
 
 Sect. 15. Regulations for new bakehouses. 
 Sect. 16. Penalty for any bakehouse being unfit 
 on sanitary grounds for use as a bakehouse. 
 
 Sect. 17. Enforcement of law as to retail bake- 
 liouses by local authorities. 
 
 Sect. 18. Act to be construed as one with the 
 Factory, &c., Act, 1878. 
 Definitions. 
 Schedule of conditions for certificate. 
 
 Okdees by the Home Seceetaky with eeeekenoe 
 TO THE statute 41 ViCT. c. 16 (Factory and 
 Workshop Act, 1878). 
 
 Lime-washing.] Order of December 20th, 1882 . 
 Regulations under sect. 33 of the Act not to apply 
 to factories and ivorkshops in Schedule A, nor, 
 under certain provisions, to Schedule B. 
 Schedule A. 
 
 The whole of the following non-textile factories 
 and workshops : — 
 
 Blast furnaces. 
 
 Copper mills. 
 
 Iron mills. 
 
 Foundries. 
 
 Distilleries. 
 
 Breweries. 
 
 Sugar factories. 
 
 Cement worlcs. 
 
 Manure works. 
 
 Stone and marble works. 
 
 Paint, colour, and varnish works. 
 
 Chemical works. 
 
 Works in which alkali is used. 
 
 Glass factories. 
 
 Flax scutch mills in which neither children nor 
 young persons are employed, and which are worked 
 intermittently for not more than six months in the 
 year. 
 
 Works in which there are no glazed windows. 
 Schedule B. 
 
 Parts of non-textile factories and workshops as 
 hereinafter mentioned ; — 
 
 1. Such loarerooms or other rooms in any non- 
 textile factory or workshop as are used for the 
 storage of articles (whether on shelves or otherwise), 
 and not for the constant carrying on therein of any 
 manufacturing process or handicraft. 
 
 2. Suxh parts of any non-textile factory or work- 
 
 FACTOEY ACrS—cmtinued. 
 shop as are subject to the influence of steam in- 
 volved in the processes of manufacture. 
 
 3. Such parts of any non-textile factory or work- 
 shop as are places in which pitch, tar, or like 
 material is used. 
 
 4. Such parts of any non-textile factory or work- 
 shop as are places in which unpainted or unvar- 
 nished wood is manufactured. 
 
 5. Such parts of any non-textile factory as are 
 places in which metal is moulded, cast, or founded. 
 
 6. Such walls of a workshop in a dwelling-house 
 as are prepared. 
 
 7. Such ceilings or tops of rooms in any non- 
 textile factory or workshop as are of slate or iron, 
 or are at least twenty feet from the floor. 
 
 8. All ceilings o)' tops of rooms in any n.on-textile 
 factory or workshop in which any of the following 
 occupations are carried on ; — ■ 
 
 Print ivorks. 
 
 Bleach works. 
 
 Dye works. 
 
 Engineering and machine shops. 
 
 Agricultural implement making. 
 
 Coachmaldng. 
 
 Fellmongers, curriers, tanners. 
 
 Making of aerated loater. 
 
 Making of preserved fruits, sweetmeats, bonbons- 
 Engraving. 
 
 Manufacture of soap, starch, candles. 
 
 Cornflour mills. 
 
 Manufacture of watch movements, slmving, bor- 
 ing, turning, and fitting of brass. 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 6524 
 
 Meals, Places forbidden for.] Order of Decem- 
 ber 20th, 1882. Prohibition under sect. 39 of the 
 Act to extend to the following : — 
 
 Every part of a factory or workshop in which 
 part wool err hair is sorted or dusted, or in which 
 rags are sorted, dusted, or ground. 
 
 Every part of a textile factory in which part 
 gassing is carried on. 
 
 Every part of a printwork, bleaehwork, or dye- 
 work, in which part singeing is carried on. 
 
 Every part of a factory or imrkshop in which 
 part any of the following processes are carried 
 on : — 
 
 Grinding, glazing, or polishing on a wheel. 
 
 Brass casting, type founding. 
 
 Dipping metal in aquafortis or other acid solu- 
 tion. 
 
 Metal bronzing. 
 
 Majolica painting on earthenware. 
 
 Cat-gut cleaning and repairing. 
 
 Gutting, turning, polishing, bone, ivory, pearl- 
 shell, snail-shell. 
 
 Every factory or workshop in which chemicals or 
 artificial manures are manufactured, except any 
 room used solely for meals. 
 
 Every factory or workshop in which white lead 
 is manufactured, except any room tliereof used 
 solely for ineals. 
 
 Every part of a factory or workshop in which 
 part dry powder or dust is used in any of the 
 following processes : — Lithographic printing. Play- 
 ing-card making. Fancy box making. Paper 
 staining. Almanac making. Artificial flower 
 making. Paper colouring and enamelling. Colour 
 making - - - I, G., 1882, p. 662& 
 
( 577 ) 
 
 DIGEST. OF OASES. 
 
 ( 578 ) 
 
 rACTORY ACTS— continued. 
 
 Period of Employment : 8 a.m. to S p.m.] Order 
 of Deccmftei! 20th, 1882. Exception under sect. AH 
 of file Act to extend to the following ; — 
 Faper-staining works. 
 Lace warehouses. 
 Hosiery warehouses. 
 The manufacture of : — 
 Silver plate. 
 Electro-plate. 
 Britannia metal. 
 
 Files. 
 
 Jewellery. 
 
 Enamelling. 
 
 Ornaments and appliances for personal use. 
 
 Die sinking. 
 
 Tobacco. 
 
 Non-textile factories and workshops in which 
 card-making and straw-hoard lining are carried 
 on. 
 
 Bibbon warehouses being workshops. Turning 
 and cutting wood, bone, and ivory. Cabinet and 
 furniture making - - L. G., 1882, p. 6525 
 
 Period of Employment : 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.] Order 
 of December 20th, 1882. Exception under sect. 43 
 of tlie Act to apply to workshops in which the 
 curing offish is carried out L. G., 1882, p. 6520 
 
 Subiititution of another Day for Saturday.] Sub- 
 stitution allowed under sect. 46 of the Act in fol- 
 lowing places ; — 
 
 (a.) Non-textile factories in which is carried on 
 the printing of newspapers, or of periodicals, oi- of 
 railway time tables, or of law or parliamentary 
 proceedings. 
 
 (b.) Non-textile factories or workshops in which 
 any manufacturing process or handicraft is carried 
 on in connection with a retail shop on the same 
 premises. 
 
 (c.) Non-textile factories and workshops in which 
 is carried on the making of any article of wearing 
 apparel or of food. 
 
 (d.) Non-textile factories and workshops in places 
 in which the marltet day is Saturday, or in which 
 a special day has been set apart for weekly half- 
 holiday. 
 
 Thefdllowing non-textile factories and workshops, 
 viz. : — Dressing floors, tin streams, china clay-pits, 
 and quarries, in the county of Cornwall 
 
 [E. G., 1882, p. 6526 
 
 Five Hours' Spell.] Order of December 20th, 
 1882. Exception under sect. 48 of this Act ex- 
 tended to hosiery factories, woollen factories in the 
 counties of Oxford, Wilts, Worcester, Gloucester, 
 and Somerset, factories in which the only processes 
 carried on are those of winding and throwing 
 raw silk, or either of such processes 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 6526 
 
 Different Holidays to different Sets.] Order of 
 December 20th, 1882; exception granted under 
 sect. 49 of the Act to the following : — 
 
 (a.) Non-textile factories in which is carried on 
 the printing of newspapers, or of periodicals, or of 
 railway time tables, or of law or parliamentary 
 proceedings. 
 
 ■ ,{h.) Non-textile factories and workshops in which 
 any manufacturing process or handicraft is carried 
 
 FACTORY ACTS—continued. 
 
 on in connection with a retail shop on the same 
 
 premises, 
 
 (c.) Non-textile factories and workshops in which 
 is carried on the making of any article of wearing 
 apparel or of food. 
 
 (d.) Non-textile factories in which is carried on 
 the manufacture of plate glass L. G., 1882, p. 6527 
 
 Meal Hours, different.] Order of December 20th, 
 1882 ; exception tinder sect. 52 of the Act in favour 
 of the following : — 
 
 (a.) Textile factories wherein female young per- 
 sons or women, employed in a distitict department 
 in which there is no machinery, commence work at 
 a later hour than tlie men and other young persons, 
 subject to condition that all in the same department 
 shall have their meals at the same time. 
 
 (b.) Non-textile factories and workshops where- 
 in is carried on the making of wearing apparel. 
 
 (o.) Non-textile factories and workshops wherein 
 there are two or more departments or sets of young 
 persons, subject to condition that all in the same 
 department or set shall have their meals at the same 
 time, 
 
 (d.) The following non-textile factories and 
 
 workshops, viz. : — Dressing floors, tin streams, china 
 
 clay-pits, and quarries, in the county of Cornwall 
 
 [I. G., 1882, p. 6527 
 
 Meal Hours, Employment, &e'., during.] Order 
 of December 20th, 1882 ; exception under sect. 52 
 of the Act in favour of the factories and workshops 
 in the last schedule mentioned X. 0., 1882, p, 6527 
 
 Additional two Hours.] Order of 20th Decem- 
 ber, 1882. Exception under sect, 53 of the Act in 
 favour of thefdllowing : — 
 
 The occiipation of die-sinking, card-board 
 making, paper colouring, and enamelling, rolling 
 of tea-lead. 
 
 The occupation of the making of gas-holders, 
 boilers, and other apparatus, partly manufactured 
 in the open air. 
 
 The following non-textile factories and work- 
 shops, viz. : — Dressing floors, tin streams, china 
 clay-pits, and quarries, in the county of Cornwall. 
 
 Non-textile factories in which the only pro- 
 cesses carried on are the processes of calendering, 
 finishing, hooking, lapping, or making up and 
 packing up of any yarn or cloth, or any of such 
 processes. 
 
 Workshops wherein the manufacture of fireworks 
 is carried on- - - L. G., 1882, p. 6628 
 
 Watermills — Lost Time.] Order of 20th Decemr- 
 ber, 1882. Exception permitting employment from 
 6 A.M. to 7 P.M. under sect. 57 of the Act, for 
 factories in which water power alone is used to 
 move the machinery - - I. G., 1882, p, 6528 
 
 Nigbtwork. — Male Young Persons above Six- 
 teen.] Order of 20th December, 1882. Exception 
 in favour of work, under sect. 58 o/ the Act, in the 
 following places : — 
 
 Oil and seed crushing mills (^factories). 
 
 Copper and yellow metal rolling mills. 
 
 Iron and metal tube works, in which the furnaces 
 used are Siemens' gas furnaces. 
 
 The knocking-out and cutting departments of 
 non-textile factories engaged in the refining of loaf 
 suga/r. 
 
 Such parts of mineral dressing-floors in Corn- 
 wall [whether non-textile factories or workshops') as 
 
 V 
 
( 579 ) 
 
 FACTORY ACTS— continued. 
 
 are appropriated to (he processes of calcining and 
 
 stamping - - . L. G., 1882, p. 6529 
 
 Overtime 30 Minutes.— Incomplete Process.] 
 Order of 20th Decemher, 1882. Exception in 
 favour of worlcing overtime, under sect. 54 of the 
 Act, in the following places : — 
 
 Non-textile factories and workshops, or parts 
 thereof, in which is carried on the process of baking 
 of bread or biscuits. 
 
 The following non-textile factories and work- 
 shops, viz. : — Dressing-floors, tin streams, china 
 clay-pits, and quarries, in the county of Cornwall 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 6529 
 
 Overtime — Condition under whicli the addi- 
 tional two Hours may be worked.] Order of 20ift 
 December, 1882, directing, under sect. 63 of the Act, 
 it to be a condition of the employment in any 
 factory or workshop under Part 3, Schedule 8, of 
 the Act, of any young person or woman in pur- 
 suance of exceptions under sect. 53 of the Act, that 
 there be a cubic space of at least 400 feet for every 
 young person and woman so employed 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 6529 
 
 Overtime, additional two Hours.] Order of llnd 
 Novemher, 1883. Exception under sect. 53 of the 
 Act in favour of fumitories and workshops for the 
 making of pork pies - L. G., 1883, p. 6861 
 
 Period of Employment : 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.] Order 
 of 12th January, 1884. Exception under sect. 43, 
 in favour of factories in the Metropolis, in which 
 bookbinding is carried on - L. G., 1884, p. 292 
 
 Overtime, additional two Hours.] Order of I2th 
 March, 1884. Exception under sect. 53 of the Act 
 in favour of factories and workshops for the pro- 
 cesses of warping, winding, or filling, or either of 
 them, as incidental to the weaving of ribbons in 
 workshops - - I. G., 1884, p. 1263 
 
 Period of Employment : 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.] Order 
 of \^th April, 1884. Exception under sect. 43 of 
 the Act to workrooms in connection with drapers' 
 retail establishments, within the boroughs of Man- 
 chester and Salford - ■ L. G., 1884, p. 1769 
 
 Overtime, additional two Hours.] Order of 21th 
 August, 1884. Exception under sect. 53 in favour 
 of the processes carried on in non-textile factories 
 of calendering, finishing, hooking, lapping, or 
 making up and packing of any yarn or cloth, or 
 any of such processes, and none other 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 3958 
 
 Period of Employment : 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.] Order 
 of August 30th, 1884, extending exception under 
 sect. i2, in favour of print works, bleach works, and 
 dyeworks - - L. G., 1884, p. 3958 
 
 FAILURE OF PAETICTILAE ESTATE 21 Ch. D. 
 See Will— Tkustees. 1. [790 
 
 FALSE PRETENCES— Place of trial 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 23 
 
 See Criminal Law — Pkaotioe. 4. 
 
 FALSE REPRESEHTATION. 
 
 1. Opportunity of discovering Trrafh— Specific 
 Performance — Bescinding Contract — Reasonable 
 Diligence— Damages:] The Plaintiff, a solicitor, 
 publislied in the Law Times an advertisement 
 headed " Law Partnership," stating that the ad- 
 vertiser, an elderly solicitor of moderate practice, 
 ■with extensive connections, shortly retiring, and 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 580 ) 
 
 FALSE REPRESENTATION- comiJBttet?. 
 having no successor, would first take as partner 
 an efficient lawyer who would not object to pur- 
 chase the advertiser's suburban residence, value 
 £1600. The Defendant answered the advertise- 
 ment, and had an interview with the Plaintiff, at 
 which the latter stated that his business brought 
 in about £300 a year. The Defendant wrote say- 
 ing that he should like to have some idea of the 
 amount of business done for the last three years, 
 and asking an interview for the pmpose. At this 
 interview the Plaintiff produced tliree summaries- 
 shewing a business of not quite £200 a year. The 
 Defendant asked how the difference was made up, 
 and the Plaintiff shewed him a number of papers 
 which he said related to other business not in- 
 cluded in the summaries. These papers, which 
 the Defendant did not examine, shewed only a 
 most trifling amount of business, and the gross 
 returns of the business were in fact only about 
 £200 a year. The Defendant shortly afterwards 
 signed an agreement to purchase the house for 
 £1600; and paid a deposit, the Plaintiff refusing 
 to have any reference to the business inserted in 
 the agreement. The Defendant took possession, 
 but finding, as he alleged, that the business was 
 worthless, refused to complete. The Plaintiff 
 brought his action for specific performance. The 
 Defendant put in a defence, in which he disputed 
 the right to specific performance on the ground 
 of misrepresentations as to the business, and by 
 counter-claim claimed on the same ground to 
 have the contract rescinded, and to have damages 
 on the ground of the expenses he had been put to 
 and the loss incurred by giving up his own prac- 
 tice. He did not in his counter-claim specifically 
 state what representations had been made, nor 
 allege that they were false to the Plaintiffs know- 
 ledge: — Held, by Fry, J., that the Defendant 
 having had opportunity afforded him of ascer- 
 taining the truth of the representations made to 
 him as to the amount of the business, and having 
 to some extent, though carelessly and inefficiently, 
 inquired into it, must be taken not to have relied 
 on the representations, and that the Plaintiff was 
 entitled to specific performance : — Seld, on appeal, 
 that where one person induces another to enter 
 iuto an agreement with him by a material repre- 
 sentation which is untrue, it is no defence to an 
 action to rescind the contract that the person to 
 whom the representation was made had the means 
 of discovering, and might with reasonable dili- 
 gence have discovered, that it was untrue : — Meld, 
 further, that it is no defence in such an action 
 that the Defendant made a cursory and incomplete 
 inquiry into the facts, for that if a material repre- 
 sentation is made to him he must be taken to have 
 entered into the contract on the faith of it ; and in 
 order to take away his right to have the contract 
 rescinded if it is untrue, it must be shewn either 
 that he had knowledge of facts which shewed it 
 to be untrue, or that he stated in terms, or shewed 
 clearly by his conduct, that he did not rely on the 
 representation : — Held, therefore, that the Defen- 
 dant was entitled to have the contract rescinded 
 and the deposit returned, but that as he had not 
 pleaded knowledge on the part of the Plaintiff 
 that the statements as to the business were un- 
 true, and had not specifically alleged the state- 
 
( 581 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 582 ) 
 
 FALSE EEPEESENTATION— co«ii»Me(Z. 
 ments in his counter-claim, he could not recover 
 damages.— ^iwood v. STnall (6 CI. & F. 232) con- 
 sidered and explained. Kedgeave v. Hubd 
 
 [20 Ch, D. 1 
 
 2. Vendor and Purchaser — Sale under the 
 
 Direction of the Court — Misrepresentation hy Fur- 
 chaser — Suppression of Facts hy Purchaser.^ The 
 life interest of H. in a fund of about £300,000 was 
 put up for sale in a suit for the administration of 
 the estate of a testator who had purchased it. An 
 attempted sale by auction having proved abortive, 
 C, a solicitor, and B.,an actuary, stated to L. & Co., 
 the solicitors who conducted the sale, that they 
 could produce evidence as to the life of H. which 
 would induce the Court to accept a less sum than 
 the supposed value, and that they were prepared 
 to make an offer on behalf of themselves and four 
 others, including H. The negotiation proceeded, 
 and pending the settlement of a draft contract, B. 
 prepared and sent to L. & Co., to be laid before 
 the Judge, a " skeleton case," which stated that 
 H. ha^ been examined by three specified medical 
 men on behalf of the three insurance offices of 
 which they were the respective medical examiners, 
 and set out their joint opinion that the insurance 
 of the life of H. was very hazardous, and should 
 not be accepted at a less addition than fifteen 
 years to his age, and that the whole premiums 
 should be paid within ten years. It further stated 
 that one of the three medical men had informed 
 B. that he should advise his office to decline the 
 proposal — which was thereupon withdrawn ; that 
 another of the offices refused to insure ; and that 
 the third consented to insure for £5000 at a £12 
 per cent, premium. It set out separate opinions 
 of later date by two of the three medical men 
 which were at least as unfavourable as the joint 
 opinion, and concluded with the statement that 
 H. had not since been examined on behalf of any 
 life office. The Judge upon these materials took 
 the opinions of actuaries, and when their reports 
 were brought before him B. urged upon him that 
 the income was liable to be reduced to £9000 by 
 investment in Consols, and he sanctioned an agree- 
 ment for purchase at £40,000, which was about 
 the value of the life interest if the income was 
 taken at £9000 and the life as only insurable at a 
 £12 per cent, premium. The sale was completed, 
 and nine years afterwards an action was brought 
 on behalf of the creditors of the testator to im- 
 peach it. It appeared that, at the time when the 
 skeleton case was made out, C. and B. had in 
 their hands a later opinion by one of the above- 
 mentioned medical officers to the effect that a £1 
 per cent, premium would be the fair one, and 
 before the contract was approved by the Judge 
 several Scotch offices had agreed to grant, at pre- 
 miums of £10 lis. payable for ten years, insurances 
 for sums sufficient in the whole to cover the pur- 
 chase-money, and an English office had expressed 
 its willingness to grant an insurance for £4000 on 
 still more favourable terms. None of these facts 
 were mentioned in the skeleton case or disclosed 
 to the Judge : — Seld (reversing the judgment of 
 Pry, J.), that' the sale must be set aside, for that 
 0. and B. knew that the materials which they 
 laid before the Judge to enable him to form his 
 
 FAISE EEPEESENTATION— conimaed. 
 opinion whether the sale should be sanctioned 
 were incomplete, and calculated to produce the 
 false impression that the life could only be insured 
 at £12 per cent., and that the sanction of the 
 Judge must therefore be regarded as obtained by 
 fraud. — A person desirous of buying property 
 which is being sold under the direction of the 
 Court must either abstain from laying any in- 
 formation before the Court in order to obtain its 
 approval, or he must lay before it all the informa,- 
 tion he possesses which is material to enable the 
 Court to form a correct opinion, and he will not 
 be held excused from so doing because the Court 
 does not ask for further information : — Meld, that 
 if the Scotch insurances were known to L. & Co., 
 the solicitors conducting the sale (a fact which 
 the Court considered not proved), the Defendants 
 could not successfully contend that they were not 
 responsible for the failure of L. & Co. to mention 
 them to the Judge, for that it was the duty of B., 
 who took an active personal part in obtaining the 
 sanction of the Judge, and who had reason to 
 believe that the Judge did not know of them, to 
 see that he was informed of them. Boswell v. 
 OoAKS - - 23 Ch. D. 802 ; 27 Ch. D, 424 
 [Eeversed hy the House of Lords.] 
 
 Misrepresentation in prospectus of company. 
 
 See Cases under Cohpant — Peospeotus. 
 
 • Life insurance 
 
 See Insubance, Life- 
 
 9 App. Cas. 671 
 -EOLICY. 3. 
 
 Sale of land — Action for damages 
 
 [11 Q. B. S. 255 
 See Vendoe aud Pueohasee— Compen- 
 sation. 1. . 
 FANCY NAME— Trade-mark - 27 Ch. D. 681 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 877 
 See Tbade-maek — Eegisteation, 5, 6. 
 
 FAEMING STOCK— Bequest of 17 Ch. D. 696 
 See Will — Words. 8. 
 
 FASCIA- Eight to use 20 Ch. D. 773 ; 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See. Easement. 1. [177 
 
 FATHEE — Advancement to child— Distribution 
 See Advancement. 1. [29 Ch. D. 260 
 
 Eight to custody of child 25 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Infant— Cdstodt. . 3. 
 
 Eight to receive income for maintenance of 
 
 child - 22 Ch. D, 521 
 
 See Settlement — ^Powebs. • 5. 
 
 Undue influence 18 Ch. D. 188 
 
 See Undue Influence. 
 
 Wishes of — Eeligious education 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Infant — Education. 2. [817 
 
 FEES — Counsel's 
 
 See Pbaotice- 
 38. 
 
 Counsel's 
 
 See Solicitoe- 
 
 16 Ch. D. 517 
 
 -SuPBBME Coubt — Costs. 
 
 30 Ch, 
 
 -Bill of Costs. 3. 
 
 D, 1 
 
 ■ Court. 
 
 See Coubt — Gazette. 
 
 ■ Directors of company — Proof in winding-up 
 
 See Company— Pboof. 1. [30 Ch. D. 629 
 U 2 
 
( 583 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 584 ) 
 
 TEES — eontinued. 
 
 School board 7 Q. B. D. 388 ; 12 Q. B. D. 578 
 
 See Blementabt Education Acts — 
 Fees. 1, 2. 
 
 EELO SE SE. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 19, repeals 4 Geo. 4, 
 ti, 52 (which pi'ovided that the remains of persons 
 against whom a verdict of felo de se should be 
 found should be privately buried by night in the 
 parish churchyard), and enacts that the remains 
 of such persons felo de se shall be interred in the 
 churchyard or other burial-ground of the parish or 
 place where the remains of such person might by 
 laws or custom of England be interred if the 
 verdict of felo de se had not been found. 
 
 By Sect. 3 the interment of any such felo de se 
 may be made in any of the ways prescribed or 
 authorized by the Burial Laws Amendment Act, 
 1880. 
 
 By sect. 4 the rites of Christian burial are not to 
 be perforpied on interment. 
 
 FELON— Bankruptcy of - - 19 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Bankbuptct — Act of Bankbuptcy. 
 12. 
 
 FELONIOUS DEMOLITION — Action against 
 hundred - - 7 ft. B. D. 201 
 
 See EiOT. 
 EELONY — Claim arising out of — Proof in bank- 
 ruptcy - 20 Ch. D. 131 
 See Bankrtjptot — ^Pboop. 10. 
 
 Compounding — Bill of exchange 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 572 
 See Bill of Exchange — Considera- 
 tion. 
 
 Prosecution before action 10 ft. B. D. 412 
 
 See Action. 2. 
 
 Prosecution before action - 6 ft. B. D. 561 
 
 See Insueance, Fire. 1. 
 
 Sale of goods in market overt 8 ft. B. D. 109 
 
 See SalB of Goods— Contract. 2. 
 
 EETJ CHARTEE - 6 App. Cas. 660 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 2. 
 
 Eestrictions in - 7 App. Cas. 427 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Peopekty. 
 1. 
 EETT CONTRACT 8 App. Cas. 266 ; 10 App. Cas. 
 
 [147 
 See Scotch Law — ^Eailway Company. 
 3,5. 
 PETJ DUTY— Failure to pay 10 App. Cas. 653 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 5. 
 EIAE— Scotch law— Coal mine 8 App. Cas. 641 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 2. 
 TICTITIOUS SALE— Railway company 
 
 [21 C11.D. 309 
 
 See Eailway Company — Constitution. 
 
 1. 
 
 FIDTTCIAEY RELATION— Director 17 Ch. D. 467 
 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 2. 
 
 Executor who has not proved 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 733 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Fbaud. 1. 
 
 FIDUCIARY EELATION— eonfe'Mued. 
 
 Mortgagees — ^Power of sale 21 Ch. D. 857 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 289 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 2, 4. 
 
 Physician - - 8 ft. B. D. 587 
 
 See Gift. 
 
 Solicitor- Improper sale - 16 Ch. D. 393 
 
 See Solicitor — ^Liabilities. 7. 
 
 FIEEI FACIAS— Assets of testator— Debt in- 
 cuirred by executor 18 Ch. D. 93 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Administbation. 3. 
 
 ■ Wrongful seizure 
 See Sheriff. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 
 
 FIFTY POUNDS RENTAL VOTEE, 
 
 See Parliament — Eegisteation — 
 Statutes. 
 FINE— Copyhold - - 30 Ch. D. 581 
 
 See Copyhold — Subeendee and Admit- 
 tance. 2. 
 FIEE INSURANCE. 
 
 See Cases under Insueance — ^Fiee. 
 
 Law of Canada - 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontaeio. 
 3. 
 
 FIRST MEETING— Fresh first meeting— Com- 
 pounding debtor 20 Ch. D. 281 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 3. 
 
 Fresh first meeting — Liquidation 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 35 
 See Bankeuptoy — Liquidation. 6. 
 
 FISHERY. 
 
 1. Navigable Tidal Eiver — Prescription 
 
 — Emdence — Judgment in Possessory Suit— Judg- 
 ment by Default.'] In an action for trespass to a 
 several fishery in a navigable tidal river in Ire- 
 land the Defendants justified on the ground that 
 the public had the right of fishing. The Plain- 
 tiff's paper title (if the possession and enjoyment 
 were consistent with it) aiforded irresistible 
 ground for a presumption that the fishery was 
 put in defence before Magna Charta. As evi- 
 dence of possession and user the Plaintiff tendered 
 (inter alia) the proceedings and decree in 1687 in 
 a "possessory suit" brought in the Court of 
 Chancery in Ireland by C. (the Plaiutiff's pre- 
 decessor in title) against strangers to the present 
 action; by which decree an injunction was 
 awarded to quiet C. and his undertenants in such 
 possession of their fishing as they had at the 
 time of exhibiting the bill and three years before, 
 to continue, until evicted by due course of law, 
 both parties being at liberty to take proceedings 
 at law against each other for ascertaining their 
 titles : — Seld, that as the decree was a solemn 
 and final adjudication, not collusive, and as it 
 could not have been made except upon proof of 
 unbroken user and enjoyment for at least three 
 years before the bUl, inconsistent with any actual 
 exercise at that time of a public right of fishing, 
 the proceedings and decree were admissible ; and 
 that the effect of this evidence (not being met by 
 any counter evidence applicable to the same 
 period) was extremely strong to establish posses- 
 siou and enjoyment of the fishery in the latter 
 
( 585 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 586 ) 
 
 FISHERY — continued. 
 
 part of the 17th century, consistent with the 
 paper title and exclusive of the public. — Fim v. 
 Curell (U M. & W. 234) dkciisseA.—S'eld, also, 
 tliat ajudKment obtained by the Plaintiff in 1826 
 in an action against a, stranger for trespass by 
 fishing in the locus in quo, in which action the 
 Defendant appeared but allowed judgment to go 
 by default of pleading, was evidence in the 
 present action of possession in. 1826. . The De- 
 fendants proved that cot-fishing had been carried 
 on in the locus in quo with the knowledge of the 
 Plaintiff or his agents and without interruption 
 by them as far back as living memory extended : 
 — Held, that if the Plaintiff's right to a several 
 fishery were once proved the exercise of cot- 
 fishing could not 'take it away or confer any 
 right on the public ; for the public cannot in law 
 prescribe for a profit h prendre in alieno solo, nor 
 acquire any right adversely to the owner under 
 any statute of limitation ; and an incorporeal 
 hereditament such as a several fishery, which can 
 only pass by deed, cannot be " abandoned." 
 Neill v. Duke of Devonshibe 8 App. Cas. 135 
 
 2. Non-tidal Biver — Biver in part Navi- 
 gable.'] There can be no public right of fishing 
 in non-tidal waters, even where they are to some 
 extent " navigable rivers." Peabcb v. Scotoher 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 163 
 
 3. Oysters — Prescription — Profit a 
 
 prendre in alieno solo — Presumption of lawful 
 
 Origin — • Usei Charitable Trust — Perpetuity.] 
 
 A prescriptive right to a several oyster fishery in 
 a navigable tidal river was proved to have been 
 exercised from time immemorial by a borough 
 corporation and its lessees, without any qualifi- 
 cation except that the free inhabitants of ancient 
 tenements in the borough had from time imme- 
 morial without interruption, and claiming as of 
 right, exercised the privilege of dredging for 
 oysters in the locus in quo from the 2nd of 
 February to Easter Eve in each year, and of 
 catching and carrying away the same without 
 stint for sale and otherwise. p?his usage of the 
 inhabitants tended to the destruction of the 
 fishery, and if continued would destroy it : — Beld 
 (Lord Blackburn dissenting), that tiie claim of 
 the inhabitants was not to a profit a prendre in 
 alieno solo: that a lawful origin for the usage 
 ought to be presumed if reasonably possible : and 
 that the presumption which ought to be drawn, 
 as reasonable in law and probable in fact, was 
 that the original grant to the" corporation was 
 subject to a trust or condition in favour of tlie 
 free inhabitants of ancient tenements in the 
 borough in accordance with the usage. Goodman 
 V. Matob op SaiiTash - - 7 ft. B. D. 106; 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 633 
 
 Tidal navigable river - 8 ft. B. D. 626 
 
 See Justices — .JuBiSDicTioif. 
 
 nSHEEY ACTS. 
 
 Fresh Water Fish.] The Act. 47 & 48 Vict. 
 c. 11 {Fresh'Water Fisheries Acjt, 1884) extends the 
 powers of Boards of Conservators for the further 
 protection offish other than salmon in fresh waters. 
 It is to be construed with 41 & 42 Vict, c 39 
 (.Fresh Water Fisheries Act, 1878). 
 
 nSHEEY ACTS— continued. 
 
 Oyster, Crab, and Lobster.] The Act 47 * 48 
 Vict. e. 26 {Fisheries Oyster, Crah, and Lobsters, 
 Act, 1877, Amendment Act, 1884^ enables the 
 Board of Trade to direct that the prorAso in the 
 last paragraph of sect. 8 of iO & 41 Vict. c. 42, 
 shall not apply within any certain area. 
 
 Eegistry of Fishing Boats of Barrow-in-Fur- 
 ness.] Regulations of May Srd, 1882, for lettering, 
 numbering, and registering of sea fishing boats ef 
 Barroio-in-Furness under the Sea Fisheries Act, 
 1868 (31 <6 32 Vict. e. 45), s. 23 X. G., 1882, p. 2127 
 
 Sea Fisheries.] The Sea Fisheries {Clam and 
 Bait Beds) Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. IV), further 
 amends the Jaw relating to Sea Fisheries by pro- 
 viding for the protection of clam and other bait 
 beds. 
 
 The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 22. (Sea Fisheries Act, 
 1883), carries into effect an International Conven- 
 tion concerning the fisheries in the North Sea, and 
 amends the laws relating to British Sea Fisheries. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 27 {Sea Fisheries Act, 
 1884) extends the powers conferred by Part III. of 
 the Sea Fisheries Act, 1868, upon the Board of 
 Trade, and enables it to make orders with regard 
 to cockles. 
 
 Salmon.] Sect. 31 of the Act 21 & 25 Vict, 
 c. 109, as to the appointment of inspectors, is con- 
 tinued until the 'dlst of December, 1886, by the 
 48 & 49 Viet. e. 59. 
 
 Thames Fishery By-laws, 1883.] Order in 
 Council of July 19, 1883, allows the following 
 by-laws for the protection, preservation, and regu- 
 lation of the fisheries in the Biver Thames, made 
 by the Conservators of the Biver Thames, in exercise 
 of the power and authority vested in them by t]w 
 'fliames Conservancy Acts, 1857 and 186-t, tlie 
 Thames Navigation Act, 1866, the Thames Con- 
 servancy Act, 1867, tlie Thames Navigation Act, 
 1870, amd the Thames Conservancy Act, 1878, and 
 otherwise. 
 
 4. These by-laws extend and apply to tlie rivers 
 Thames and Isis hereinafter called the Biver 
 Thames, from, Criclclade in the county of Wilts, 
 to Yantlet Creek in tlie county of Kent, save and 
 except where the application thereof is hereby ex- 
 pressly limited to any particular part of tlie said 
 river, or to any particular and specified class of 
 fish and to that extent only. 
 
 5. In these by-laws, unless there is something 
 inconsistent in the context, the words and expres- 
 sions hereinafter mentioned shall have respectively 
 the meanings hereby assigned to them, that is to 
 say :— 
 
 " Person " shall include any body of persons, 
 corporate or incorporate. 
 
 " Court " shall mean two or more justices as- 
 sembled in petty sessions or a stipendiary 
 magistrate. 
 
 " Fishery " shall inelitde oyster and shell 
 fisheries. 
 
 " Fish " shall include oysters and shell fish, 
 and also the spawn, brood or fry of fish, 
 oysters and shellfish. ■ "■ ' 
 
 " Vessel" shall mean any ship, lighter, keel, 
 bfirge, boat, punt, wherry, raft, or craft, or 
 amy other kind of vessel whatever, whether 
 navigated by steam or otherwise. 
 
 6. Subject to the reservation of rights in these 
 
( 587 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 588 ) 
 
 riSHEEY ACTS— continued. 
 hy-law8 contained, every net or engine, or apparatus 
 for taking or attempting to take fish, which is not 
 expressly authorized by these by-laws, shall be 
 deemed to be a prohibited net or engine, or appa- 
 ratus within the same, and the following n^s or 
 engines shall be deemed to be nets or engines 
 authorized to be used within the limits under- 
 mentioned : — 
 
 (1.) For pike, jack, A flew or stream net of a 
 perch, roach, mesh not less than three 
 dace, chub, inches throughout when wet, 
 and barbel . and not more than sixteen 
 fathoms long. To be used 
 only in the river below Bich- 
 mond Bridge. 
 (2.) For flounders A net of a mesh not less 
 and soles . than two and a half inches 
 throughout when wet, and 
 not more than sixteen 
 fathoms long. To be used 
 only in the river below 
 Richmond Bridge. 
 (3.) For roach and A single blay net, of a 
 dace . . . mesh not less than two inches 
 and a quarter when wet, 
 and not more than thirteen 
 fathoms long ; to fleet with 
 the stream with a boat and 
 buoy attached to it. To be 
 used only in the river below 
 Bichmond Bridge. 
 (4.) For eels . . Grig weels to be used for 
 eels only in the river below 
 the City Stone at Staines. 
 (5.) For smelts . A net of not less than one 
 inch and a quarter in the 
 mesh token wet, and not 
 more than sixteen fathoms 
 long, except in the middle of 
 the net where a space of six 
 fathoms long shall be one 
 inch in the mesh when wet ; 
 to be worked by fleeting with 
 the stream, with a boat and 
 buoy attached to it. To be 
 used only in the river below 
 Michmond Bridge. 
 (6.) For shrimps . A trawl net of a mesh not 
 less than one inch when wet, 
 except near the cod end, 
 wherever that may be, but 
 not smaller than half an 
 iruih mesh when wet, to be 
 used only in the river be- 
 tween Greenhithe and Yant- 
 let Creek ; or a trim-tram 
 net, with a mesh of not less 
 than half an inch when icet, 
 and u. weighted beam of 
 twenty-one feet in length. 
 To be used only in the river 
 below Richmond Bridge. 
 (7.) For sprats . A stow-boat net not less 
 than one inch in the mesh 
 when wet. To he used only 
 in the river below Richmond 
 
 FISHIEY ACra— continued. 
 
 than half an inch in the 
 mesh when wet. To be used 
 only in the river below Rich- 
 mond Bridge. 
 
 (8.) For whitebait A stow-boat net not less 
 
 (9.) For minnows 
 
 (10.) 
 
 (11.) 
 
 (12.) 
 
 A round drop minnow net 
 not exceeding three feet in 
 diameter, which may be used 
 in all parts of the river. 
 
 A smull landing net for 
 securing fish taken in ang- 
 ling, which may be used in 
 all parts of the river. 
 
 A hand or well net, to be 
 used for removing fish from 
 tlte well of u, boat, or for 
 carrying or preserving fish 
 after capture, which may be 
 For General use .^used in all parts of the 
 river. 
 
 A casting or bait net, not 
 exceeding thirty feet in cir- 
 cumferetice, to be used only 
 by assistant river keepers or 
 registered fishermen in ob- 
 taining bait to be employed 
 in angling, the sack or purse 
 thereof not being more than 
 six inches in depth when 
 extended to the utmost, which 
 may be used in all parts of 
 \the river. 
 
 7. No fish of tlie species hereinafter mentioned, 
 shall be taken in or out of the River Thames, w 
 having been taken, shall be had in possession, or 
 exposed for sale on the River ThoTnes, or on the 
 shore thereof, or any lands adjoining oi' near to 
 the river, of less than the respective sizes and 
 dimenMons following : — (This section is Tiot in- 
 tended to apply to any person who takes such Jish 
 accidentally, and forthwith returns the same to the 
 water with the least possible injury.) 
 
 Pilce or jack 
 
 . Extreme len 
 
 gth, 18 i 
 
 nches. 
 
 Perch . 
 
 • )) 
 
 
 , 8 
 
 )) 
 
 Chu:b 
 
 
 
 , 10 
 
 
 Roach 
 
 )i 
 
 
 7 
 
 „ 
 
 Dace 
 
 
 
 <5 
 
 „ 
 
 Barbel . 
 
 „ 
 
 
 , 13 
 
 „ 
 
 Trout 
 
 „ 
 
 
 , 16 
 
 „ 
 
 Grayling 
 
 „ 
 
 
 9 
 
 „ 
 
 Bream . 
 
 „ 
 
 
 , 10 
 
 „ 
 
 Carp 
 
 „ 
 
 
 , 10 
 
 „ 
 
 Tench . 
 
 )» 
 
 
 8 
 
 „ 
 
 Rudd . 
 
 
 
 6 
 
 „ 
 
 Gudgeon . 
 
 „ 
 
 
 4 
 
 „ 
 
 Flounders 
 
 „ 
 
 
 7 
 
 „ 
 
 Smelts . 
 
 
 
 , 5i 
 
 „ 
 
 Shrimps . 
 
 . to be 
 
 sifted 
 
 hrough a sieve of 
 
 
 ^-in. 
 
 betwci 
 
 en the wires, and 
 
 
 those only 
 
 taken which wiU 
 
 
 not 
 
 pass 
 
 through 
 
 such u. 
 
 
 siev( 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 Soles or slips 
 
 . Extreme len 
 
 gth, 7 inches. 
 
 Wliiting . 
 
 jj 
 
 
 7 
 
 )) 
 
 Plaice or dal 
 
 „ 
 
 
 „ 8 
 
 )) 
 
 Fence Season. 
 8. The times and seasons for fishing in the River 
 Thames, and for taking the following fish therein. 
 
( 589 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 590 ) 
 
 TISHERY ACTS— co?j(m«e(7. 
 
 «ncJ the close, or fence seasons, when such fish shall 
 
 not he fished for or talten therein, are as follows : — ■ 
 
 
 Times when fishing 
 is permitted. 
 
 Fence Season, 
 
 when fishing is not 
 
 permitted. 
 
 Salmon, salmoi 
 
 I From the \st of 
 
 From the 11th Sep- 
 
 trout^ trou 
 
 April to the 10th 
 
 tember in each year. 
 
 and char . 
 
 September inclu- 
 
 to theSlst March in 
 
 
 sive. 
 
 the following year, 
 both days inclusioe. 
 
 Eels . , 
 
 May be taken all 
 
 Not by rod and line 
 
 
 the year, but not 
 
 frffm tlie 15th of 
 
 
 hy rod and line 
 
 March to the 15th 
 
 
 from the I5th of 
 
 June, both days in^ 
 
 
 March to the 15th 
 
 elusive. 
 
 
 of June. 
 
 
 Pike or jack 
 
 % 
 
 
 Peiy^h . . 
 
 
 
 Roach . 
 
 
 
 
 Dace 
 
 
 
 
 Chub , 
 
 
 
 
 Jiudd . 
 
 
 
 
 Barbel . 
 
 
 
 
 Carp . 
 
 
 
 
 Tench . 
 
 
 
 
 Bream . 
 
 
 From the 16th of 
 
 From the 15th March 
 
 Gi-ayling 
 
 
 I June to the lUh of 
 
 in each year to the 
 
 Gudgeon 
 
 
 ' March following. 
 
 15th June follow- 
 
 Pope . 
 
 
 both days inclu- 
 
 ing, both days in- 
 
 Crayfish 
 
 
 sive. 
 
 clusive. 
 
 Bleak . 
 
 
 
 
 Minnow^ anc 
 
 I 
 
 
 every othe 
 
 
 
 l-ind of ftsJ 
 
 I 
 
 
 Icnovm a 
 
 
 
 fresh - wate'} 
 
 
 
 fish, excep 
 
 
 
 as aforesaid 
 
 J 
 
 
 Flounders, 
 
 "j 
 
 
 plaice, soles 
 and dabs . 
 
 1 May be taken all 
 
 
 Whitings . . 
 
 f the year. 
 
 
 Shrimps . . 
 
 J 
 
 
 Smelts . . 
 
 From the 2Gth of 
 
 From tJie 2oth March 
 
 
 July to the 2Uk of 
 
 to the 25th July fol- 
 
 
 March following. 
 
 lowing, both days 
 
 
 inclusive. 
 
 inclusive. 
 
 Lampems , 
 
 From the 2ith Au- 
 
 From the 1st April 
 
 
 gust to the 'ilst 
 
 to the 23rd August 
 
 
 March following. 
 
 following, both 
 days inclusive. 
 
 Nothing in this section shall apply to any person 
 who shall during tlie period hetween the let day of 
 April and the IQth day of September, hoth days 
 inclusive, take, oi- attempt to take, hleak, minnows 
 or gudgeon for use as halt for trout. 
 
 9. The places hereinafter mentioned are tlie pre- 
 serves staked and marked hij the conservators for 
 the preservation of the fishery, and no person shall 
 take up or remove any stake, hm-r, boat, punt, or 
 any other thing placed for the purpose of impeding 
 fishing, or wilfully distiirli the said preserves or 
 spawning beds in any way, and no person shall 
 fish or attempt to take fish in any of the said 
 places, except hy angling with rod and line and 
 grig weels for eels only, hy fishermen only. 
 
 Eichmond. . From Richmond Bridge to the 
 Duke of Buccleuch's grounds — a 
 distance of 700 yards in length, 
 or thereabouts. 
 
 Kingston 
 
 Thames Ditton 
 Hampton . 
 
 Sunhury , 
 
 Walton . 
 Sliepperton 
 
 Weyhridge 
 
 Cliertsey 
 
 Penton Hook , 
 
 Staines 
 
 FISHEBY IlCTS— continued. 
 Twickenham . From the upper end of the lawn at 
 Fope's Villa to the island, heing 
 400 yards in length. 
 From Mr. Park's lawn at Ted- 
 dington through the hackwater 
 (the Crowlock) up to the Lower 
 Malthouse at Hampton Wick, 
 heing 1960 yards in length. 
 From Lord Senry Fitzgerald's — 
 
 eastward, 512 yards in length. 
 
 From Moulsey Lock to Garrick's 
 
 Lawn, Hampton, heing 1514 
 
 yards in length, or thereabouts. 
 
 From Sunhury Weir — 683 yards 
 
 in length, to the eastward. 
 Walton Sale — 250 yards in length. 
 Upper Deep — 240 yards eastward 
 
 of Creek Rails. 
 Lower Deep — 200 yards eastward 
 
 of the public drain. 
 From Shepperton Lock round the 
 course of the river to the weir — 
 830 yards in length. 
 From the weir to 80 yards below 
 the bridge, being 445 yards in 
 length. 
 From the weir round the island 
 and up to the lock at Penton 
 Hook, being 1150 yards in 
 length. 
 From the City Stone to a point 
 210 yards below the road bridge 
 at Staines. 
 10. No person shall do, aid, or assist in doing 
 the following things, or any of them, that is to 
 say:— 
 
 (a. ) Fish with, use, trawl, lay or set a prohibited 
 
 net or engine, or apparatus. 
 (b.) Have in his possession while on the river, 
 or on the shore tliereof, or on any lands 
 adjoining or near to the river, a prohibited 
 net or engine, unless he shews to tlie satis- 
 faction of the justices before whom lie is 
 charged, that he had not the same in his 
 possession with intent at the time of such 
 possession to fish with, use, trawl, lay or set 
 the same in the river. 
 (c.) Fish for or take, or attempt to take, any fish 
 by using baited or unbaited hooks, or wire 
 or snare, or any other engine for the purpose 
 of foul hooking comimonly called snatching 
 or snaring. 
 (d.) Fish from any vessel, boat, or punt, for or 
 take, or attempt to take, above Richmond 
 Bridge any fish except in the daytime, 
 that is to Say, between the beginning of the 
 last hour before sunrise, and the end of the 
 first hour after sunset. 
 (e.) Fish for or take, or attempt to take, any fish 
 
 within the fence season for the same. 
 (f.) Buy, sell, or expose for sale or liave in his 
 possession any fish that has been caught or 
 taken within the fence season for the same, 
 in the River Thames. 
 (g.) Take, or attempt to take, or disturb any fish 
 
 when spawning. 
 (h.) Take, destroy, or spoil any spavin, fry or 
 brood offish, or spat of oysters. 
 
( 591 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASEa 
 
 ( 592 ) 
 
 riSHEEY ACTS— contintuxL. 
 
 (i.) Use more than two rode at any one and the 
 same time for angling. 
 
 (j.) Use eel spears commonly so called for the 
 purpose of taking fish. 
 
 (k.) Attach any net, engine or other device to any 
 anchor, or fix the sams in any manner so as 
 to cross any part of the River Tliames. 
 
 (1.) Lay night hooks or night lines of any de- 
 scription whatever, or any fixed hooks or 
 lines hy night or day above Kew Bridge. 
 
 (m.) Use double walled net or nets with false or 
 double bottoms with cod or pouse. 
 
 11. On and after the \st day of January, 1883, 
 every person following the business of a fisherman 
 on the River Thames, or who shall keep to be let for 
 hire for fishing in the River Thames any boat, punt, 
 or vessel, shaU cause his name and place of abode 
 to be duly registered in a book to be kept for that 
 purpose by the secretary to the Conservators of the 
 River Thames, at their office in London, which is 
 now situate at 41, Trinity Square, Tower Hill, and 
 every such person shall pay one shilling for every 
 registry of each boat, punt, or vessel, and on every 
 registry the secretary to the said Conservators shall 
 deliver a number for each boat, punt, or vessel, to 
 suxih person, and such person shall cause to be 
 painted and kept in legible characters of not less 
 than two inches long and broad in proportion on 
 the stern, and on each bow of each boat, punt, or 
 vessel, such number togetlier with his name and 
 place of abode, so as to be plainly seen in the day- 
 tirrte ; and if suchperson shall neglect to cause such 
 boat, punt, or vessel to he duly registered, or such 
 number together with his "name and place of abode 
 to be painted and preserved in legible characters as 
 aforesaid, or shall wilfully suffer the same to be 
 altered or defaced, and if not renewed he shall be 
 liable to a penalty for a breach of these by-laws, 
 and it shall not be lawful for any person following 
 the business of afisJierman on the River Thames, and 
 having a boat, punt, or vessel for that purpose, or 
 who shall keep a boat or boats, punts or vessels, to 
 be let for hire for fishing, to use or let for hire for 
 fishing any boat, punt, or vessel without having the 
 same registered, and his name and place of abode, 
 together with the registered number, legibly painted 
 thereon as hereinbefore mentioned. 
 
 12. No person shall put down in the River 
 Thames, at the mouth of any creek, river, or back- 
 water communicating with the River Thames, or 
 running into the said river, or at any mill or 
 sluice, any net or device whatever to stop, catch, or 
 hinder tlie fish, or spawn or fry of fish, from coming 
 into the said River Tliames. 
 
 When a prohibited net or engine or other appa- 
 ratus is seized under the provisions of tlw Acts or 
 any or either of them in such case made, or tltese 
 by-laws, the same may be burnt, or otherwise de- 
 stroyed, by order of tlw justices before whom the same 
 is brought, without prejudice to the infiiction of a 
 penalty on or other remedy against tlie person 
 offending, in respect of such net, engine or appa- 
 ratus. 
 
 13. Nothing in these by-laws shall prevent any 
 person, provided he 1ms the previous consent of the 
 Conservators in writing under tlieir common seal, 
 
 from obtaining fish' for the purposes of artificial 
 propagation or scientific purposes, or from having 
 
 FISHEEY ACTS— continued, 
 in his possession salmon roe or trout roe for any of 
 those purposes, or for taking or attempting to take 
 salmon or trout when spawning, or near the spawn- 
 ing beds. 
 
 14. Nothing in these by-laws except the provi- 
 sions relative to the fence season, shall take away, 
 or abridge the right, if any, of the owner or occupier 
 of a private fishery, if any, or any person having 
 authority in writing from any such owner or occu- 
 pier, to do any of the following things within the 
 limits of sueh private fishery only ; tliat is, to fish 
 for, or to take or attempt to take fish and eels by 
 means of nets commonly called cast nets and cray- 
 fish nets, or by grig or ground weels for eels, or by 
 night lines, or by means of eel bucks or stages, so 
 far only as the same or any of them can be legally 
 used irrespective of these by-laws. Provided that 
 on a special license being obtained from the Conser- 
 vators in writing, under their common seal, and 
 not otherwise, such owners or occupiers, or persons 
 having authority as aforesaid, may in sueh private 
 fishery only take fish by means of a net commonltf 
 called a hoop net, having a mesh of not less than 
 two inches from knot to knot when wet, or eight 
 inches all round, and not being more than six yards 
 long, or by means of a net commonly called a drag 
 net, and having a mesh of not less than two inches 
 from knot to knot when wet, or eight inches all 
 round. 
 
 15. Any person committing any breach of or in 
 any way infringing any of these by-laws other 
 than and except catching or attempting to catch or 
 kill any fresh-water fish during the fence season, 
 shall be liable to a penalty of, and shall forfeit a 
 sum not exceeding £5, and for catching or attempt- 
 ing to catcher kill any fresh-water fish during such 
 fence season shall be liable on a first conviction to a 
 penalty of and shall forfeit a sum not exceeding 
 40s., and on a second or any subsequent conviction 
 to a penalty of and shall forfeit a sum not exceed- 
 ing £5, which said penalties respectively sliall b& 
 recovered, enforced, and applied according to the 
 provisions of " The Thames Acts, 1857 to 1878," 
 and of tlie statutes in such case made and provided. 
 
 Eepeal of earlier By-laws, Rules, &c.] Tlie rules 
 and oidiiiances made in pursuance of the Act of 
 30 Geo. 2, by the mayor and aldermen of the city 
 of London, on the ith day of October, 1785, ancj 
 duly approved and confirmed on the 22nd and 
 2ith days of the same month, and by tlie Conser- 
 vators of tlie River Thames, in pursuance of the 
 same Act, on the 23rd day of January, 1860, and 
 duly approved and confirmed on the iSth day of 
 tlie same mxynth ; and 
 
 The rules and by-laws made by the Conservators 
 of tlie River Thames on tlie 14ft day of June, 1869, 
 and duly allowed by Her Majesty in Council, on 
 tlie nth day of November, follmoing,; and 
 
 The rules and by-laws made by the said Conser- 
 vators on the 1th day of July, 1873, and duly 
 allowed by Her Majesty in Council, on the SOth 
 day of September, following ; and 
 
 Tlie rules and by-laws made by tlie said Conser- 
 vators and duly allowed by Her Majesty in Council, 
 on the 28th day of October, 1879, and all otlier (if 
 any) tlie rules, ordinances, and by-laws heretofore 
 made by the Conservators of the River Tliames, 
 and heretofore in force for protecting, preserving. 
 
( 593 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 591 ), 
 
 FISHEEY ACTS— oontinued. 
 or regulating the fisheries of the River Thames, 
 are all hereby repealed I. G., 1883, p. 3636 
 
 And see Kiybb — Statutes. 
 
 !• Salmon Tishery (28 & 29 Vict. c. 
 
 121), s. 3— Fishery Districts— Definition of Limits 
 hy Secretary of State's Certificate—Miver—" Tri- 
 butary," what is—Beservoirs.'] By 28 & 29 Vict. 
 c. 121, the limits of a rivet shall be defined, and 
 a fishery district shall be formed, for the purpose 
 of the Salmon Fishery Acts, by a Secretary of 
 State's certificate describing the limits of the 
 river and district, and, by sect. 3 " river " shall 
 include "such portion of any stream with its 
 tributaries " as may be declared in the certificate. 
 Prior to 1845 the Whittle Bum in the coimty of 
 Northumberland was a tributary of the Tyne. 
 In 1845 a water company, under powers given by 
 local Acts, constructed works for the supply of 
 water to a neighbouring town, by placing a dam 
 across the stream of the Whittle' Bum, and 
 forming a series of reservoirs; the water being 
 taken by underground pipes from the stream 
 into the highest reservoir, and. from thence to the 
 others. All water not required for the reservoirs 
 was allowed to pass down a watercourse running 
 outside the reservoirs into the ancient water- 
 course of the bum, down which it flowed into 
 the Tyne. Sometimes all the water comin g do wn 
 the Whittle Bum was taken into, and impounded 
 in, the reservoii's, and none flowed into the Tyne. 
 At other times all the water flowed into the Tyne 
 without having entered the resei-voirs. There 
 were outlets with sluices from the reservoirs by 
 which surplus water flowed into the Tyne down 
 watercourses also running into the ancient water- 
 course of the burn. In 1866, the Fishery Dis- 
 trict of the Kiver Tyne was formed, and the 
 Secretary of State's certificate defined the limits 
 as _" so much of the Eiver Tyne with its tribu- 
 taries " as was situate (inter alia) in the county 
 of Northumberland:— fieW, that the reservoirs 
 were not tributaries of the Tyne within the mean- 
 ing of the certificate. Hakbottlb v. Terei' 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 131 
 
 2. Salmon Fishery — Placing a Device to 
 
 catch Fish — Permanent Structure erected before 
 the passing of the Acf] The 15th section of 
 the Salmon Fishery Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. 
 c. 71), enacts that no person between the 1st day 
 of January and the 24th day of June shall place 
 in any inland water any device whatsoever to 
 catch or obstruct any fish descending the stream. 
 — A permanent structure for the purpose of 
 catching eels had been erected at a. weir upon a 
 river before the passing of the above-mentioned 
 Act. The nature of such structure was as fol- 
 lows :— There were floodgates or shuttles in the 
 weir, and a grating of iron bars, through which 
 the eels could not pass, was fixed below such 
 floodgates. When the floodgates were raised the 
 rush of water through them carried the eels on to 
 and over the end of the grating into a trough, 
 which communicated with a well from which 
 they could not escape. The Appellant, on a day 
 between the 1st of January and the 24th of June, 
 1882, raised the floodgates and so brought the 
 trap into action, with the result that eels were 
 caaght in the trap : — Seld, that by so doing the I 
 
 FISHEEY ACTS— cmfinued. 
 
 Appellant had been guilty of an oflence within 
 
 the above-mentioned section. Bbiggs v. Swan- 
 
 ^ICK - - - 10 Q, B. D. 610 
 FISHING BOATS. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shippino Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 FIXTUEES^ilibrfg'agror and Mortgagee — Driving- 
 belts— Bills of Sale Act, 1854 (17 * 18 Viet, 
 c. 36).] A wheel-factory, including the machinery 
 and gear, was mortgaged to the Plaintiffs. The 
 deed of mortgage was not registered as a bill of 
 sale. Leathern driving-belts were used in work- 
 ing the machinery at the factory ; they were fas- 
 tened to certain wheels or drums, but could be 
 removed at pleasure when the macliinery was 
 thrown out of gear. They were necessary parts of 
 the machinery. The mortgagor having liquidated 
 his afiairs under the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, the 
 Defendant, his trastee, sold the belts -.—Held, that 
 the belts passed to the Plaintiffs under the mort- 
 gage, and that they were entitled to maintain an 
 "Ction of conversion against the defendant. — 
 Longbottom v. Berry (Law Eep. 5 Q. B. 123) ap- 
 proved. Sheffield and South Yokkshire Per- 
 manent Building Society v. Habbison 
 
 [16 Q. B. B. 35S 
 
 Agricultural Holdings Act. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Fixtures 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Disclaimer of leasehold in- 
 terest - 13 Q. B. D. 738 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 20. 
 
 Buildings for working mine 7 Q. B. S. 295 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 195 
 See Mine — Working. 1. 
 
 Landlord and tenant— Forfeiture on tenant 
 
 " being bankrupt "—Eight of removal 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. Ui 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankeuptcy Peti- 
 tion. 4. 
 
 Law of Lower Canada — ■ Sale of fixed 
 
 machinery 10 App. Cas. 643 
 
 See Colonial Law — -Canada — ^Quebec, 
 
 Mortgage of— Distress 16 Ch. D. 226 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 2. 
 
 Mortgage of — Lease by mortgagor after 
 
 mortgage — Eights of tenant 
 
 [16 Q. B. B. 218 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Fixtures. 
 
 Eemoval of - - 19 Ch. D. 7 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimbb. 2. 
 FLANGEWHEEL— User upon tramway 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 70 
 See Tbamway Company. 1. 
 FLINTS— Eight to sell - • 21 Ch. D. 18 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 608 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom 
 op Country. 
 
 FLOOD — Damage from 7 App. Cas. 694 
 
 See Scotch Law — Statutory Duty. 
 
 FOG — Collision — Sailing rules — Articles 13, 18. 
 See^ Cases under Ship — Navigation. 
 14—18, 23. 
 
( 595 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 596 ) 
 
 rOECIBLE ENTRY. 
 
 1. Damages — Independent Wrong — 
 
 Injury to Furniture — 5 Bieh. 2, stat. 1, c. 8.] 
 Damages cannot be recovered against the rightful 
 owner for a forcible entry on land, for the statute 
 5 Rich. 2, stat. 1, c. 8, only makes a forcible entry 
 an indictable offence, and does not create any 
 civil remedy for it. But for any independent 
 wrong (such as an assault or an injury to furni- 
 ture) committed in the course of the forcible 
 entry, damages can be recovered, even by a 
 person whose possession was wrongful, for the 
 statute makes a possession obtained by force 
 unlawful, even when it is so obtained by the 
 rightful owner. — Newton v. Sarland (1 Scott, 
 >r. E. 474), PolUn v. Brewer (7 C. B. (N.S.) 371), 
 and Lows v. Telford (1 App. Gas. 414) considered. 
 Beddall v. Maitland - - 17 Ch. D. 174 
 
 2. license to eject — Landlord and Tenant 
 
 — 5 Rich. 2, stat. 1, e. 8.] A license by a tenant 
 to his landlord to eject him on a specified day 
 without any process of law is void, as authorizing 
 the commission of an act which is made illegal 
 by the Act 5 Rich. 2, stat. 1, c. 8. — If a person 
 who has a legal right of entry upon land which 
 is in the possession of a wrongdoer is allowed to 
 enter peaceably through the outer door, it is still 
 illegal for him to turn out the wrongdoer with 
 violence. Edwick v. Hawkes 18 Ch. D. 199 
 
 Attachment - 26 Ch. D. 644 
 
 See Pkaotice — Supreme Cobbt — At- 
 tachment. 6. 
 rOEECIOSITRE— Action for. 
 
 See Cases under Mobtgage — roREOLO- 
 sure. 
 
 Action for — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 539 ; 6 Q, B. D. 345 ; 
 [7 App. Cas. 235 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Realty. 
 4,5. 
 
 Action for — ^Writ of possession 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 281 
 See Pkaotice — Supreme Court — ^Wbit 
 OF Possession. 
 
 Order in Chambers— Alteration 29 Ch. D. 827 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 8. 
 
 Payment by instalments 22 Ch. D. 549 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 10. 
 TOBEIGN ACTION— Election 22 Ch. D. 397 ; 
 [23 Ch. D. 226 ; 24 Ch. D. 531 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Coubt — Stav- 
 ing Proceedings. 6, 7, 8. 
 EOEEIGN ASSETS— Title of administrator 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 347 
 See Administrator — Limited. 5. 
 TOSEIGN ATTACHMENT - 6 App. Cas. 393 
 
 See Court — Mayor's Court. 1. 
 FOBEIGN Bin OF EXCHANGE— Estoppel 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 82 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 1. 
 
 Indorsement— Conflict of laws 30 Ch. D. 598 
 
 ■ See Bill of Exchange — Foreign Bill. 
 
 EOBEIGN COMPANY— Jurisdiction to wind up 
 [27 Ch. D. 226 ; 29 Ch. D. 219 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 2,3. 
 
 rOBEIGN COBFOBATION - 6 App. Cas. 386 
 
 See Colonial Law — ^West Australia. 
 1. 
 
 FOBEIGN CBEDITOBS — Administration— Eng- 
 lish assets - 28 Ch. D. 176 
 
 >See Executor — ^Administration. 8. 
 
 FOBEIGN DIVOBCE— English marriage— Scotch 
 divorce 6 F. S. 35 ; 8 App. Cas, 43 
 
 See Conflict of Laws. 2. 
 
 FOBEIGN DOMICIL— Testator— English assets 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 175 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 8. 
 
 FOBEIGN GOVEBNMENT— Collision— Counter- 
 claim — Security for damages 10 P. D. 33 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Counter- 
 claim. 
 
 FOBEIGN JUDGMENT. 
 
 1. "EtkoA— Action in English Court.'] A 
 
 foreign judgment obtained by the fraud of a 
 party to the suit in the foreign Court cannot be 
 afterwards enforced by him in an action brought 
 in an English Court, even although the question 
 whether the fraud had been perpetrated was in- 
 vestigated in the foreign Court, and it was there 
 decided that the fraud had not been committed. 
 — To an action claiming the value of certain 
 goods and brought upon a foreign judgment, 
 whereby the Defendants were ordered to return 
 to the Plaintiff the goods or to pay to her their 
 value, the defence alleged that the Plaintiff ob- 
 tained the foreign judgment by fraudulently re- 
 presenting to the foreign Court that the goods 
 were not then in her possession, and by fraudu- 
 lently concealing from the foreign Court that the 
 goods then were in her possession and were con- 
 cealed by her: — Held, upon demurrer, that the 
 defence was good. Aboulofp v. Oppenheimer 
 
 [10 a. B. D. 295 
 
 2. Ship — Maritime Lien — Jurisdiction — 
 
 Action in rem to enforce Judgment of Foreign 
 Tribunal of Commerce.'] The Plaintiffs brought 
 an action and obtained judgment in the Tribunal 
 of Commerce at Lisbon against the captain and 
 owners of a British ship for damages for injury 
 caused by a collision with the Plaintiffs' ship. 
 The Portuguese Courts recognise no distinction 
 between actions in personam and actions in rem. 
 The Defendants' ship having come into a British 
 Court, the Plaintiffs commenced an action in rem 
 against the ship, claiming to enforce the judg- 
 ment of the Portuguese Court against it, and 
 arrested the ship : — Held, reversing the decision 
 of Sir R. Phillimore, that the action in the Por- 
 tuguese Court was a personal action, and that the 
 writ in the present action and all proceedings 
 under it must be set aside, the Court having no 
 jurisdiction to enforce a judgment in a personal 
 action by proceedings in rem. — All civilised 
 nations recognise the validity of maritime lien, 
 and will enforce it when it has been declared by 
 a foreign Court ; but it is essential that it should 
 appear from the proceedings of the foreign Court 
 that the object of the suit was the sale of the ship, 
 and not a personal remedy against the captain or 
 owners.— The Bold Buccleugh (7 Moo. P. C. 267) 
 considered. The " City of Mecca " 6 P. D. 106 
 
( 5D7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 598 ) 
 
 TOBEIGN JUDGMENT— conMmKei. 
 
 Writ specially indorsed — Power to sign 
 
 judgment under Order xiv. 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 303 
 
 See Pkactioe — Supreme Court — Writ 
 
 SPECIALLY INDORSED. 2. 
 
 FOREIGN LAW— Conflict of laws. 
 
 See Cases under Conflict of Laws. 
 
 Construction of will - 29 Ch. D. 617 
 
 See DoMiciL. 1. 
 
 Domicil — Alien - - 9 P. D. 130 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 2. 
 
 English and Spanish wills— Probate of Eng- 
 lish will only - 9 P. D. 64 
 See Probate — Grant. 9. 
 
 Evidence — Consul refusing to administer 
 
 oath— Affidavit 9 P. D. 241 
 
 See Evidence — General. 1. 
 
 Foreign decree — Property in this country — 
 
 Absence of will - 6 P. S. 6 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 6. 
 
 Illegitimate children 17 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See Distributions, Statute op. 
 
 Lex loci — Contract in England between 
 
 residents for delivery of cargo to be 
 shipped at foreign port by foreign com- 
 pany - 12 Q. B. D. 589 
 See Conflict of Laws. 1. 
 
 Probate of will abroad - 8 P. D. 167 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 8. 
 
 Boyal family of Eussia — Proof of Bussiau 
 
 law 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 
 ■ Will — Constmction 
 
 9 P. S. 234 
 
 6 P. D. 211 ; 
 [26 Ch. D. 656 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 1, 4. 
 EOEEIGN LIFE INSITEANCE COMPANY- 
 Deposit ■- - - 21 Ch. D. 837 
 
 See Company — ^Life Insurance Com- 
 pany. 1. 
 FOEEIGN MANTJFACTUEE— User in England 
 [17 Ch. D. 721 ; 8 App. Cas. 5 
 See Patent — Infringement. 6. 
 FOEEIGN PATENT— Accounts of profits 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 176; 9 App. Cas. 592 
 See Patent — Prolongation. 1, 2. 
 
 Licence — Eight to sell articles in England 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 1 
 See Patent — Infringement. 2. 
 FOEEIGN PEOBATE— Payment out of Court 
 
 [24 Ch, D. 177 
 See Practice — Supbbme Court — Pay- 
 ment OUT OF Court. 
 FOEEIGN SECTJEITY- Stamp duty on. 
 
 See Ebvenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 FOEEIGN SHIP— Action for wages 8 P. D. 121 
 See Jurisdiction. 3. 
 
 Action in rem— Board of Trade inquiry — 
 
 Condition precedent - 9 P. D. 88 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 2. 
 Action in rem — Jurisdiction — Lord Camp- 
 bell's Act 9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App. Cas. 59 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 FOEEIGN SHIP— c: 
 
 Application of measurement of tonnage to. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 Application of Wages and Eating Act to. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Smppma Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 Compulsory pilotage 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 
 
 Ciew space- 
 
 7 P. D. 240 
 
 27 Ch. D. 570 
 
 -Eegtstration. 7. 
 
 •Limitation of liability 
 
 [10 P. D. 21 
 
 .See Practice — -Admiralty— Limitation 
 OF Liability. 3. 
 
 English port — -Necessaries — Lien 10 P. D. 44 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 1. 
 
 FOEEIGN SOVEREIGN— Incitement to murder 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 244 
 
 See Criminal Law— Offences against 
 Person. 5. 
 
 FOEEIGN TEADE-MAEE 
 
 See Trade-makk- 
 
 FOEEIGN WILL — Unattested — Power of ap- 
 pointment 25 Ch. D. 373 
 See Power — Execution, 4. 
 
 FOEEIGNEE — Marriage of— English settlement 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 284 
 See Power — Execution. 16. 
 
 FOEESHOEE - . - 19 Ch. S, 22 
 
 See Easement. 2. 
 
 FOEFEITUEE— Bankruptcy— Composition 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 196 ; 30 Ch, D. 119, 623 
 
 See Settlement — Constbdotion. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Estate of tenant for life 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 60S 
 See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 
 6. 
 
 Building contract - 16 Ch, D. 522 
 
 See Building Contract. 2. 
 
 Condition in will. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Condition. 1 — 
 6. 
 
 Condition in will — Costs of administration 
 
 action - - 28 Ch. D. 159 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 12. 
 
 Cost-book mine - 18 Ch. D. 660 
 
 See Company— Cost-book Company. 2. 
 
 Defaulting vassal — Scotch law 
 
 [10 App, Cas. 653 
 .See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 5. 
 
 Deposit 21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Penalty. 
 
 Deposit^Purchase of land 27 Ch. D, 89 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Deposit. 
 2. 
 
 Sale - - 27 Ch. D. 652 
 
 See Mine — Free Miners. 
 
 Land - - 6 App. Cas. 628 
 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 2. 
 
 Lease — Belief against. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Re-entry 
 — Statutes. 
 
( 599 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 600 ) 
 
 TOKF'EITV'R'E— continued. 
 
 Lease — Belief against — Disallowance of 
 
 costs to Plaintiff - 14 Q. B. D. 347 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Ke-entkt. 
 7. 
 
 Eeoovery of land — Setting aside judgment 
 
 — Equitable mortgagees 12 Q. B. D. 165 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Couet — Judg- 
 ment. 5. 
 
 Sale of right of entry — Fictitious title 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 128 ; 15 ft. B. D. 491 
 See Eight of Entey. 1, 2. 
 
 Shares— Ultra vires 16 Ch. D. 681 
 
 See Company — Dieeotoe's Authoeity. 
 3. 
 
 EOEGERY — Action in Chancery Division — 
 Estoppel - 9 P. D. 210 
 
 See Estoppel— Judgment. 1. 
 
 Bill of exchange — Inchoate instrument 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 78 
 See Criminal Law — Forgeey. 
 
 Company — Share certificate issued by secre- 
 tary — Principal and agent 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 103 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 2. 
 
 Deed - - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendoe and Puechasee — Puechabe 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 rEANCHISE- Fishery. 
 
 See Cases under Fishery. 
 ■ — — Market. 
 
 See Cases under Market. 
 FRAUD — Action in English Court — Foreign 
 
 judgment - - 10 ft. B, D. 295 
 
 See Foreign Judgment, 1. 
 . Allegations of - 26 Ch. D. 717 
 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Couet — Peo- 
 duction op Documents. 10, 
 
 Appointment under power 21 Ch. D. 332 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 205 
 See Power — Execution. 3, 4. 
 
 Charge of— Trial of action 24 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Trial. 
 1. 
 
 Company — Cause for winding-up 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 161 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 5. 
 
 Company — Fictitious balance at banker 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 616 
 See Company — Contracts. 3. 
 
 Complicity in — Notice of prior fraud 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 500 
 See Power of Attorney. 2. 
 
 Composition with creditors — Undue pre- 
 ference - - 15 ft, B. D. 606 
 See Bankruptcy — Fraudulent Pre- 
 PEHENCE. 2., 
 
 Concealment — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 59 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 7. 
 
 Debt incurred by — Action against debtor 
 
 and trustee lu liquidation 8 ft. B. D. 453 
 See Bankruptcy— ^Trustee.- 4. 
 
 FBAITI) — continued. 
 
 Debt incurred by — ^Proof in bankruptcy 
 
 [17 Ch. b. 122 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 22. 
 
 False representation - 20 Ch. D. 1 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 424 
 See False Eepeesentation. 1, 2. 
 False representation — Prospectus of com- 
 pany. .. 
 See Cases under Company — Prospectus. 
 
 False representation — Sale of land 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 7 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Fraud. 2. 
 
 Forged deed - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Purchase 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 
 On bankruptcy laws 26 Ch. D. 510 
 
 See Contract — Validity. 3. 
 
 On company - 17 Ch. D. 467 
 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 2. 
 
 Solicitor — Conduct of action — Eehearing 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 672 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^ 
 Amendment. 3. 
 
 Title of literary work — Fraud on public 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 395 
 See Specific Peefoemance. 1. 
 
 User of trade-mark - 27 Ch. D. 570 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eegistration. 7. 
 
 FRAUDS, STATUTE OF. 
 
 1. ■ Contract not to be performed within, 
 
 a Year-^ — Sect. 4 — Implied Contract — Part Fer- 
 formance — Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 
 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, svh-s. 7.] A 
 contract to serve for one year, the service to 
 commence on the second day after that on which 
 the contract is made, is a contract not to be per- 
 formed within a year within the meaning of the 
 Statute of Frauds, s. 4. — Cawtliorne v. Cordrey 
 (13 C. B. (N.S.) 406 ; 32 L. J. (C.P.) 152) dis- 
 tinguished. — A contract, which is not enforceable 
 by reason of the provisions of the Statute of 
 Frauds, s. 4, nevertheless is an existing contract 
 and is not void altogether, and a fresh contract 
 cannot be implied from acts done in pursuance of 
 it. — The doctrine as to part performance, where- 
 by a contract not enforceable by an action at law, 
 owing to the provisions of the Statute of Frauds,. 
 s. 4, was rendered enforceable in equity, was eon- 
 fined to suits as to the sale of interests in land, 
 and its operation has not been extended by the 
 provisions of the Supreme Court of Judicature 
 Act, 1873. Britain v. Eossiter 11 ft. B. D. 123 
 
 2. Interest in Land — 29 Car. 2, c. 3, s. 4 
 
 ■ — Verbal Fromise to devise sucli Interest hy Will 
 — Fart Performance.2 The geneml principle as 
 to the cu'cumstances under which a part perform- 
 ance of a parol contract relating to land will bfr 
 regarded as sufficient to take it out of the opera- 
 tion of the Statute of Frauds is accurately stated 
 in the judgment in Alderson v. Maddison (7 
 Q. B. D. at p. 178) -.—Held, also, by Baggal- 
 lay, L.J., that the illustration which is there 
 given of such general principle that " payment of, 
 part or even of the whole of the purchase-money 
 is not sufficient to exclude the operation of the 
 statute " is rightly qualified by the following 
 
( 601 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 602 ) 
 
 FEATJDS, STATUTE OF— continued. 
 words which are there stated, " unless it is shewn 
 that the payment was made in respect of the par- 
 ticular land, and the particular interest in the 
 land, which is the suhject of the parol agrees 
 ment," those qualifying words being used to cover 
 such a case as Nunn v. Fdbain (Law Eep. 1 Ch. 
 35). — SenMe, per Brett, L.J., that Nunn v. 
 Fabian (Law Eep. 1 Ch. 35) is not an authority 
 for those qualifying words, and that mere pay- 
 ment of part, or even of the whole, of the pur- 
 chase-money will not he sufficient under any 
 circumstances to exclude the operation of the 
 statute. Hdmphbeys v. Gbeen 10 Q,. B. D. 148 
 
 3. Interest in land — Sect. 4 — Biglit of 
 
 Shooting — Bight to talte away Game shof] A 
 grant of a right to shoot over land and to take 
 away a part of the game killed is a grant of an 
 interest in land and within the Statute of Frauds. 
 Webbek j). Lee - - - 9 Q. B. D. 315 
 
 4. Memorandum in Writing — Sect. 4 — 
 
 Reference to Document containing Terms of Agree- 
 ment.^ The Plaintiff ha' 1 signed a memorandum 
 setting forth the terms of a contract by which the 
 Plaintiff agreed to let a carriage to the Defendant 
 for the period of a year. The Defendant in a 
 subsequent letter to the Plaintiff signed by him 
 referred to " our arrangement for the hire of your 
 carriage." — There was no other arrangement for 
 the hire of a carriage than that the terms of 
 which were contained in the memorandum signed 
 by the Plaintiff: — Seld, that the Defendant's 
 letter sufficiently referred to the document con- 
 taining the terms of the contract, to constitute a 
 good memoraudum of the contract within the 
 Statute of Frauds, sect. 4. Gave v. Hastings 
 
 [7 a. B. D. 125 
 
 Acceptance— Sect. 17 — ^Aot recosnising the 
 
 contract - - 15 ft. B. D. 228 
 
 See Sale op Goods — Oontbaot. 3. 
 
 Agreement for lease 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 
 See Landlokd and 
 
 MENT. 1, 2. 
 
 Contract for sale of land. 
 
 See Cases imder Vendor andPubchaseb 
 — Agreement. 
 
 Debt barred by — Ketainer by executor 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 358 
 See BxEOUTOn — Eetaineb. 10. 
 Husband and wife — Agreement for settle- 
 ment — Part performance — Bankruptcy 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 419 
 See Bankbitptoy — Protected Tbans- 
 
 ACTION. 9. 
 
 Lease not in writing 21 Ch. B. 442 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Distress. 4. 
 
 Eepresentation influencing conduct — ^Pro- 
 mise to make will 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 174 ; 8 App. Cas. 467 
 See CoNTBAOT — Validity. 4. 
 
 Specific performance — Eeference to formal 
 
 contract - - - 20 Ch. D. 706 
 
 See Spboipic Eebfobmanoe. 4. 
 
 TSATJBTTIENT APPOINTMENT 21 Ch. D. 232 ; 
 
 [25 Ch, D. 373 
 
 See Power— Execution, 3, 4. 
 
 33 ; 22 Ch. S, 441 
 
 Tenant — Agbee- 
 
 rBATIDlTIENT CONVEYANCE. 
 
 1. Defeating and delaying Creditors — 
 
 13 Eliz. c. 5.] By a deed of gift J. granted farm- 
 ing property in trust for her daughters, in con- 
 sideration of which thoy covenanted to pay the 
 debts " incurred by J. up to the date of the deed 
 in connection with the working arrangement of 
 the farm," and to maintain J. — J. had no other 
 property than that comprised in the deed, and 
 the Plaintiff's debt not having been incun-ed by 
 J. in connection with the farm, was defeated by 
 the deed. — The Court found that the deed was 
 an honestly intended family arrangement, and 
 was not executed with the object of defeating 
 creditors : — Held, that the deed was valid binder 
 stat. 13 Eliz. 0. 5. In re Johnson. Golden v. 
 GiLLAit - - - - 20 Ch. D. 389 
 
 2. Defeating and delajong Creditors — 
 
 13 Eliz. c. 5.] In 1872 E. E. gave to the W. Bank 
 a guarantee to secure the balance due from his 
 son E. H. E. on his banking account to the 
 extent of £1000. On the 25th of May, 1877, 
 E. H. E.'s account was overdrawn by £1515. 
 On that day E. E. made a voluntary settlement 
 of a leasehold property worth £200 a-year, which 
 he held at a rent of £3 10s. His only other pro- 
 perty was furniture worth leas than £200, and 
 a debt of £1500 due to him from E. H. E. In 
 1880 E. H. E., whose account was then over- 
 drawn by £1313, went into liquidation and paid 
 a dividend of 38. in the .pound. There was some 
 general evidence that E. H. E. was solvent at 
 th^ date of the settlement. E. E. having died, 
 the Bank took proceedings to set aside the 
 settlement and to have the leasehold treated 
 as assets of E. E. in a suit for administration of 
 his estate in which the Bank had been admitted 
 creditors for £1000 on the guarantee : — Held, by 
 Bacon, V.-C, that the settlement was valid 
 against creditors, as there was no evidence that 
 it was made with intent to defeat or delay credi- 
 tors. — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the 
 settlement was not a settlement for value within 
 the meaning of 13 Eliz. c. 5, the doctrine of 
 Frice v. Jenkins (5 Ch. D. 619) not being appli- 
 cable to cases under that statute. — But held, 
 reversing the decision below, that the settlement 
 was invalid as against creditors, for that under the 
 circumstances the liability under the guarantee 
 ought to have been regarded as a substantial one ; 
 that E, E. had no right to treat the £1500 due 
 from E. H. E. as a good debt ; that the settlement 
 must therefore be looked' upon as a settlement of 
 all his property, leaving him nothing out of which 
 he could meet his liability under the guarantee, 
 and that an intention to defeat or delay creditors 
 must 136 inferred. In re Eidleb. Eidleb v. 
 EiDLEB - - - - 22 Ch. D. 74 
 
 3. laches — 13 Eliz. c. 5.] A specialty 
 
 creditor brought an action to set aside a con- 
 veyance as fraudulent under 13 Eliz. u. 5, nearly 
 ten years after the death of the grantor. The 
 Plaintiff had been aware of the facts during the 
 whole of that period, and gave no satisfactory 
 reasonfor his delay : — Held (affirming the decision 
 of North, J.), that as the Plaintiff was coming 
 to enforce a legal right his mere delay to take 
 proceedings was no defence, as it had. not con- 
 tinued longf enough to bar his legal right, the case 
 
( 603 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 604 ) 
 
 TRAUDirLENT COJTVEYA'SGE— continued. 
 standing on a different footing from a suit to set 
 aside on equitable grounds a deed whicli was 
 valid at law. In re Maddevee. Three Towns 
 Banking Company v. Maddeveb 27 Ch. D. 623 
 
 Impeached by trustee in bankruptcy 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 553 
 See Bankeuptoy — Jurisdiction. 4. 
 
 Void under bankruptcy law 19 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See B ANKBUPTOY — Void Settlement. 1 . 
 
 FKATTDULENT DEBTOE— Punisliment of. 
 
 See Banketjpt — Bankedptoy Act, 1883 
 — Statutes. 
 
 FEAUDULEHT PLEDGE— Marshalling securities 
 
 [25 Ch., D. 148 
 See Bankeuptoy — Secueed Ceeditoe. 
 6. 
 TRAirDULENT PREFERENCE. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Feaudu- 
 
 LKNT PbEPEEENOE. 
 
 FREE MINERS 27 Ch. D. 652 
 
 See Mine — Feee Mdjees. 
 
 FREEMAN— Honorary. 
 
 See Municipal Ooepobation — Constitu- 
 tion — Statutes. 
 
 Municipal corporation — Custom of borough 
 
 [21 Ch, D. Ill 
 See MuuioiPAL Corporation — Pro- 
 
 - Begistration of. 
 
 See Parliament - 
 Seats — Statute. 
 
 ■Redistribution of 
 
 FREIGHT — Carrier — Liability of consignor 
 
 See Caeeiee — Goods. [15 Q, B. D. 625 
 
 Insurance 6 Q, B, D. 648 ; 7 ft, B. D, 73 ; 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 670 
 
 See Insueanoe, Maeine — Policy. 1, 2. 
 
 Insurance — Sum of money in nature of 
 
 freight — Advance for necessaries. 
 
 See Ship— Freight. 1. [8 P, D, 155 
 
 Liability of indorsee of bill of lading 
 
 [13 a, B. D, 159 ; 10 App. Cas. 74 
 ,See Ship — Bill of Lading. 4. 
 
 Lien for - 15 Q,. B. D, 164 
 
 See Ship^Chaeterparty. 1. 
 
 Eight to freight after abandonment of ship 
 
 See Smp— Femght. 2. [7 P. D, 5 
 
 Eight to freight — Final sailing from last 
 
 port 9 a, B. D, 679 ; 15 «, B, D. 580 
 See Ship — Charterpabtt. 3, 4. 
 
 FRESHWATER FISH. 
 
 See Fishery Acts — Gazette. 
 
 FRIENDLY SOCIETY. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. o. 35, s. 2, repeals so 
 much of sect. 14 of the Friendly Societies Act, 
 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. v. 60), and of the second sche- 
 dule to that Act, as relates to sending to the regis- 
 trar every five years a return to he called a quin- 
 quennial return of the sickness and mortality ex- 
 perienced by Friendly Societies, or as relates to 
 such return. 
 
 The Act 46 & 47 Vict, c. 47, extends the power 
 
 FRIENDLY SOCIETY— continued. 
 
 of nomination in Friendly and Industrial, &a.. 
 
 Societies, and makes further provision for cases of 
 
 intestacy in respect of personal property of mnaU 
 
 amount. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited as the Provident Nomina- 
 tion and Small Intestacies Act, 1883. 
 
 Sect. 2. Interpretation of terms. 
 
 Sect. 3 extends sub-sections 3 and 4 of sect. 15 of 
 the Friendly Societies Act,1875, sub-sections 5 and 
 6 of sect. 11 of the Industrial and Provident 
 Societies Act, 1876, sect. 10 of the Trade Union 
 Act Amendment Act, 1876, sects. 41, 42, and 43 of 
 the Trustee Savings Bank Act, 1863, sect. 10 of the 
 Act 7 (J: 8 Vict. v. 83, and sub-head (e) of sect. 6 of 
 the Government Annuities Act, 1882, to sums not 
 exceeding £100. 
 
 Sect. 4. Sow a nomination may be made. 
 
 Sect. 5. Nominations by savings bank depositors. 
 
 Sect, 6 extends sub-section 3 of sect. 15 of the 
 Friendly Societies Act, 1875, to deposits made 
 under sect. 18 of the same Act, and moneys accv^ 
 mutated under sect. 19 of the same Act, and sub- 
 sections 5 and 6 of sect. W of the Industrial and 
 Provident Societies Act, 1876, to loans and deposits 
 made under sub-section Ji¥) of sect. 10 of that Act. 
 
 Sect. 7. Provisions in case of intestacy and no 
 nomination. 
 
 Sect. 8. Provision for illegitimacy. 
 
 Sect. 9. Payments made by directors under the 
 powers given above to be valid. 
 
 Sect. 10. Conditions to be observed where fund 
 exceeds £80. Nomination or payment under tlie 
 Act not to affect liability to probate duty. 
 
 Sect. 11. As to Channel Islands and Isle of 
 Man. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 27, declares the true 
 meaning of sect. 22 of 38 & 39 Vict. u. 60 (the 
 Friendly Societies Act, 1875). 
 
 Powers of Investment — Illegal Loan — 
 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 60.] The trustees of a friendly 
 society lent out of the surplus funds of the society 
 a sum of £300 to A. on the security of a joint 
 and several promissory note made by A., and 
 by B. and 0. as his sureties. None of the 
 makers was a member of the society. 0. having 
 died, the trustees claimed to prove against his 
 estate on the note : — Held, by Fry, J., that the 
 loan on personal seom'ity to a person not a 
 member of the society was forbidden by the 
 Friendly Societies Act, that the transaction 
 therefore was illegal, and that as C. had not re- 
 ceived any money of the society, and the society 
 had no claim against his estate except under the 
 contract, the proof must be rejected. — Held, on 
 appeal, that as it was not alleged that the money 
 was bon-owed for an illegal purpose, the contract 
 was not illegal, but merely unauthorized ; that it 
 was not competent to the makers of the note to 
 allege by way of defence that the payee had no 
 authority to lend the money, and that the proof, 
 therefore, must be admitted. In re Coltman. 
 
 COLTMAN V. OOLTMAN 19 Ch. D, 64 
 
 Libel — Injunction 21 Ch, D, 798 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — In- 
 junction. 4. 
 FRIVOLOirS ACTION - - 26 Ch. D. 35 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 16. 
 
( 605 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 606 ) 
 
 TEOST— Preventing loading of ship 10 Q. B. D. 
 [241 ; 11 Q,. B. D, 543 ; 9 App. Cas. 470 
 
 See Ship — Charteepaett. 8, 9. 
 FBTTIT PICKERS. 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 FUGITIVE OFFENDERS. 
 
 See JtfBiSDiOTiON — Statutes. 
 FUND IN COUET— Proceeds of real estate— Suo- 
 
 cesaion duty — Illegitimate children 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 100 
 
 See Revenue — Succession Duty. 2. 
 Stop order— Notice 29 Ch, D. 786 
 
 See MoETGAGE— Peioeitt. 10. 
 Stop order— Priority - 23 Ch. D. 497 
 
 See Peaotiob — Supeeme Court — 
 Charging Orders. 3. 
 
 FUENITUEE— Custom of hiring— Bankruptcy 
 [18Ch. D. 30; 23 Ch. D. 261 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 4, 5. 
 
 Gift of— Things ejusdem generis 30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 See Will — Words. 9. 
 
 FUETHEE CONSIDEEATION— Eeport of ofSoial 
 referee - 19 Ch. D. 644 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Eb- 
 
 EEREE. 6. 
 
 FUTURE RIGHTS — Declaration of— Appeal 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 1 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 34. 
 
 FUTUEITY— Words of - 6 App. Cas. 471 
 
 See Will — Estate in Eealtt. 4. 
 
( 607 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 608 ) 
 
 G. 
 
 GALE— Forfeiture of - - 27 Ch. D. 652 
 
 See Mine — Free Mineks. 
 
 OAUE. 
 
 1. ■ Injury to Crops — Beservation of Eight 
 
 of Shooting ■ — ■ Overstocking Land with Game — 
 Sight of Action.'] Where land is let to a tenant 
 reserving the right of shooting over the land, the 
 tenant may maintain an action against the persons 
 entitled to the right of shooting for overstocking 
 the land with game so as to cause damage to the 
 tenant's crops. Faeeek v. Nelson 15 Q. B. D. 258 
 
 2. PoaoMng — Search by Constable in 
 
 Highway — Seizure — 25 & 26 Vict, c, 114, s. 2.] A 
 police constable saw the Appellant in a highway 
 with some rabbits slung over his back. The 
 Appellaot left the highway and ran across a 
 meadow followed by the police constable, and on 
 being overtaken, at a distance from the highway, 
 he threw the rabbits on the ground, and they 
 were then and there taken possession of by the 
 police constable. Oa appeal against a conviction 
 under 25 & 26 Vict. c. 114, s. 2 -.—Held, that the 
 conviction was right — Turner v. Morgan (Law 
 Kep. 10 0. P. .587) commented on. Lloyd v. 
 Lloyd - - 14 Q. B. D. 725 
 Ground Game Act - 26 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Geodnd 
 Game. 
 GAMIKG. 
 
 1. Betting — Employment of Agent to bet 
 
 in his own Name — Implied Authm-ity to pay Bet — 
 "When Authority is irrevocable — 8 & 9 Vict. c. 109, 
 s. 18.] The employment of an agent to make a 
 bet in his own name ou behalf of his principal 
 may imply an authority to pay the bet if lost, and 
 on the making of the bet that authority may 
 become irrevocable. — So held, by Bowen and 
 Fry, L.JJ., Brett, M.E., dissenting. Eead v. 
 Anderson 10 Q. B. D. 100 ; 13 Q. B. D. 779 
 
 2. Common Gaming House — Unlawful 
 
 Gaming within 17 & 18 Vict. c. 38, s. 4 — "Bac- 
 carat."] The 4th section of 17 & 18 Yict. u. 38, 
 enacts that " any person, being the owner or 
 occupier or having the use of any house, room, or 
 place, who shall use the same for the purpose of 
 unlawful gaming being carried on therein ; and 
 any person who, being the owner or occupier of 
 any laouse or room, shall knowingly and wilfully 
 permit the same to be opened, kept, or used by 
 any other person for the purpose aforesaid ; and 
 every person having the care or management of 
 or in any manner assisting in conducting the 
 business of any house, room, or place opened, kept, 
 or used for the purpose aforesaid ; and any person 
 who shall advance or furnish money for the pur- 
 pose of gaming with persons frequenting such 
 house, room, or place, may, on summary convic- 
 tion thereof before any two justices of the peace, 
 Ac," forfeit and pay a penalty not exceeding 
 £500. — A. was the _proprietor of the Park Club, 
 and was also occupier of the premises used by the 
 
 GAKING — continued. 
 
 club, and received the profits. B., C, D., and E. 
 were members of the committee of management, 
 whose duty it was to regulate the internal manage- 
 ment of the club, and (amongst other things) to 
 make by-laws and regulations for the carrying it 
 on and for the government of its membera, who 
 were elected by them. F., G., and H. were mem- 
 bers of the club. — By the rules and regulations of 
 the dull, hazard was not to be played, dice were 
 excluded, and the points at whist were limited to 
 £1 ; all games were to be played for ready money : 
 and under no pretence were strangers to be ad- 
 mitted in the card-room. — An entrance fee of 
 10 guineas and an annual subscription of 6 guineas 
 was paid by each member of the club. The 
 kitcliiiu Wiis conducted at a loss, and wines and 
 cigars supplied at a slight excess over cost price. 
 Tlie profits accruing to the proprietor arose from 
 the entrance-fees and subscriptions and what was 
 called " card money." Members' cheques were 
 cashed by the proprietor to the amount of £200, 
 for which he charged 1 per cent. — The game of 
 baccarat was played nightly, as follows : — About 
 twelve persons at a time played at it. A special 
 table was provided, with arrangements for the 
 banker and players. Three packs of cards sliiifiled 
 together were used. One card was dealt to each 
 person, the banker included. The object of the 
 game was to get 9 in pips or as near thereto as 
 possible. After each had a card dealt to him and 
 had seen it, it was at his option whether he would 
 stand upon it or take another ; and in the exercise 
 of this option consisted the only semblance of 
 skill in the game. If the banker had 9, and none 
 of the others had, he swept the board : if he Lad 
 not 9 but a less number, he won from all who 
 were further from 9, and paid to all who were 
 neiirer to 9 than he was. The banker had a slight 
 advantage, inasmuch as he had an extra " draw," 
 and consequently with luck would win more 
 quickly than an ordinary player. — Play com- 
 menced at 4.30 P.M., and continued till 7.30 ; 
 commencing again at 10.30 p.m.. and continuing 
 till 3 and sometimes till S a.m. There was a fresh 
 bank about every twenty minutes. A " regulation 
 bank " was one held by any member who chose to 
 take it by putting his name on a slate : it must 
 not be less than £50. Every third bank before 
 2 a.m. was a regulation bank. The other banks 
 (which originally ranged from £25 to £300, but 
 sometimes extended to £1000 and even more) 
 were offered at auction. Each banker paid 1 per 
 cent., and the punters (players) 5s. each, which 
 was called " card money," up to 2 a.m. ; after that 
 hour 5s. an hour was charged untO 5 a.m., when 
 £1 an hour was charged. The banker had to put 
 down ready money to the amount of £300. — Upon 
 an information charging the eight persons above 
 named with having committed offences against 
 sect. 4 of 17 & 18 Vict. c. 38, A., the proprietor, was 
 adjudged to have been guilty of " keeping and 
 using the Park Club for the purpose of unlawful 
 
( 609 ) 
 
 BIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 610 
 
 6AUIIT0 — continued. 
 
 gaming," and fined £500. The four committee- 
 men were adjudged to have been guilty, as per- 
 sona "having the care or management of and 
 assisting in conducting the business " of the house 
 so kept and used for the pm-pose of unlawful 
 gaming, and each fined £500. The tliree players 
 were also adjudged to have been guilty of the 
 offence, as persons who " assisted by playing in 
 conducting the buaiuess of the house so kept and 
 used for the purpose of unlawful gaming," and 
 were each fined £100 : — Held, that the proprietor 
 of the club and the four members of the committee 
 were properly convicted : but that the players — 
 though possibly liable to be indicted for unlawful 
 gaming in a common gaming-house — were not 
 liable to be summarily convicted uuderthisstatute. 
 — ^Per Hawkins, J. : If the house in question had 
 been opened and used for a double purpose, viz. 
 as an honest social club for those who did not 
 desire to play, as well as for the purposes of 
 gaming for those who did, it would not the less 
 be a house opened and kept " for the purpose of 
 gaming." — To constitute " unlawful gaming," it 
 is not necessary that the games played shall be 
 unlawful games : it is enough tliat the play is 
 carried on in a "common gaming-house." The 
 expression " unlawful games " was intended by 
 the Legislature to cover and include some games 
 which, being lawful in themselves, were only 
 made unlawful when played in particular places 
 or by particular persons. — It makes no difference 
 that the use of the house and the gaming therein 
 is limited to the subscribers or members of the 
 club, and that it is not open to all persons who 
 might be desirous of using it. It is not a public, 
 but a common gaming-house, that is prohibited. — ■ 
 " Baccarat " is a game of chance, and unlawful 
 within 17 & 18 Vict. c.38,s. 4. — Excessive gaming, 
 per se, is not any longer a legal offence : it was 
 not an offence at common law ; and there now 
 exists no statute against it. But the fact that it is 
 habitually carried on in a house kept for the pur- 
 pose of gaming is cogent evidence for a jury or 
 other tribunal called upon to determine whether 
 the house in which it is carried on is a common 
 gaming-house, so as to make the keeper of it liable 
 to be indicted for a nuisance at common law. — 
 Per Smith, J. . A " common gaming-house " is u, 
 house kept or used for playing therein at any 
 game of chance, or any mixed game of chance and 
 skill, in which (1) a bank is kept by one or more 
 of the players exclusively of the others, or (2) in 
 which any game is played the cliances of which 
 are not alike favourable to all the players, in- 
 cluding among the players the banker or other 
 person by whom the game is managed or against 
 whom the other players stake, play, or bet. — It is 
 immaterial whether the bank is kept by the owner 
 or occupier or keeper of the house or by one of the 
 players. Jenks v. Tbbpin 13 Q. B. D. SOS 
 
 3. lottery — Sale of PacJcets of Tea con- 
 taining Coupons for Frizes — 42 Geo. 3, a. 119; s. 2.] 
 By 42 Geo. 3, o. 119, s. 2, it is made an offence to 
 keep any office or place to exercise any lottery not 
 anthorizedbyParliainent.— The Appellant erjjcted 
 a tent, in which he sold packets, each containing 
 a, pound of tea, at 2s. Hd. a packet. In each 
 packet was a coupon entitling the purchaser to a 
 
 OAUIHG — continued. 
 
 prize, and this was publicly stated by the Appel- 
 lant before the sale, but the purchasers did not 
 know until after the sale what prizes they were 
 entitled to, and the prizes varied in character and 
 value. The tea was good and worth the money 
 paid for it : — Seld, that what the Appellant did 
 constituted a lottery within the meaning of the 
 statute. Taylob v. Smetten - 11 Q. B. D. 207 
 
 4. Place used for Betting - 
 
 Grounds — Manager of — Betting there — Liability 
 of Manager (16 * 17 Vict. c. 119, ss. 1, 3).] The 
 Appellant was manager of bicycle grounds. 
 Bicycle races, at which 20,000 spectators were 
 present, took place there. Placards with the 
 words " No betting allowed," were posted in the 
 grounds, and twelve police constables were em- 
 ployed there by the manager, but some betting 
 took place about twenty yards from the winning- 
 post where he stood, acting as judge of the races. 
 He was aware that betting would and did take 
 place, but could not have wholly prevented it 
 under the circumstances, although he might have 
 repressed it to a certain extent with the aid of 
 the constables : — Held, that as the business of the 
 grounds was not that of illegal betting within 
 16 & 17 Vict. c. 119, s. 1, he was not liable to 
 conviction under sect. 3, as a " person having the 
 care or management of or in any manner assisting 
 in conducting the business of any .... place 
 opened, kept, or used for the purposes aforesaid." 
 The Queen v. Cook - - 13 Q. B. D. 377 
 
 5. Place used for Betting — Information 
 
 or Advice with respect to Bet or Wager — Ad- 
 vertisement — Betting Acts, 1853 and 1874 (16 & 17 
 Vict. c. 119 and 37 & 38 Vict. c. 15).] The Betting 
 Act, 1874, is confined to such bets as are men- 
 tioned in the Betting Act, 1853^-that is, to bets 
 made in any house, office, or place kept for 
 betting — and the Act does not apply to advertise- 
 ments offering information for the purpose of bets 
 not to be made in any house, oifice, or place kept 
 for tliat purpose. Cox v. Andbews 12 Q. B. D. 
 
 [126 
 
 6. Place used for Betting — Payment for 
 
 Admission — 16 & 17 Vict. c. IIH, ss. 1, 3.J Dog- 
 races were held in an inclosed field hired for tlie 
 purpose by a committee, the public being admitted 
 to a reserved portion of the field on payment of a 
 small sum. The Appellant attended the races, 
 and moved about the reserved portion, making 
 bets with various persons there : — Held, that the 
 Appellant did not use a place for the purpose 
 of betting with persons resorting thereto, within 
 the meaning of sects. 1 and 3 of 16 & 17 Vict. 
 c. 119, and therefore was not liable to be con- 
 victed for an offence under those sections. Snow 
 V. Hill - - - - 14 Q. B. D. 588 
 
 7. Place used for Betting— /StaMon of 
 
 Betting Man at a movecMe Box within Ring at 
 Bacea—\Q & 17 Vict. c. 119, s. 3.] By 16 & 17 
 Vict. c. 119, s. 3, " any person who, being the 
 owner or occupier of any house, office, room, or 
 other place, or a person using the same, shall 
 open, keep, or use the same for the purposes " of 
 betting with persons resorting thereto, is liable to 
 a penalty. The Eespondent and a companion, 
 having paid for admission, were in a railed inclo- 
 
 X 
 
( cu ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES; 
 
 ( 612 ) 
 
 GAMING — continued. 
 
 sure of the gi'aud stand at a race meeting. The 
 companion stood on a small wooden box not 
 attached to the ground, and he and the Respon- 
 dent called out offering to make and making bets 
 with other persons. The companion received the 
 money for bets made, and the Respondent booked 
 the same. They stood together in one place 
 within the inolosure during the races : — Held, 
 that the fixed and ascertained spot defined in the 
 inclosure by the box at wliich the Respondent 
 orally advertised his willingness to bet was a 
 "place " used by him for the purpose of betting 
 with persons resorting tliereto, and he was liable 
 to a penalty imder 16 & 17 Vict. c. 119, s. 3. 
 Gallaway v. Makies - 8 ft. B. D. 275 
 
 Licensed premises — Knowledge of servant 
 
 —Licensing Acts 12 Q. B. D. 360 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 4. 
 
 • Railway carriage 
 
 See Va&kant Acts. 
 
 10 Q. B. D. 4.4 
 
 GARNISHEE OSDER — " Pinal judgment " — 
 Bankruptcy notice 12 ft. B. D. 342 
 
 See Bankkuptot — Act of Bankkuptcy. 
 9. 
 
 Foreign attachment - 6 App. Cas. 393 
 
 See Court — Mayoe's Coukt. 1. 
 
 Practice — Supreme Court. 
 
 See Cases under Pkactice — Supkeme 
 Coukt — Gaenishee Oeder. 
 
 Salary of secretary - - 9 Q. B. D. 45 
 
 See Mastek and Servant — Wages. 1. 
 
 Solicitor's lien— Priority - 14 ft. B. D. 543 
 
 See Solicitor — Lien. 4. 
 
 GAS COMPANY. 
 
 Injury to Pipes — Higliway — Repair of 
 
 Streets — Use of Steam Boilers — Statutable Bights.'] 
 The Plaintiffs, a gas company, laid down pipes 
 under the surface of certain streets, as they were 
 bound by statute to do, for the purpose of supply- 
 ing gas to light the streets and houses in the 
 streets. The streets were vested in the Defendants, 
 the vestry of the parish, by certain statutes which 
 gave them the authority of the surveyor of high- 
 ways, and with the duty to repair, but without 
 prescribing any particular mode of repair. The 
 Defendants used steam-rollers for the repair of 
 the streets, as being a mode of repair most advan- 
 tageous to both the ratepayers and the public, but 
 the rollers they used were so heavy as to fre- 
 quently injure the Plaintiffs' pipes, though the 
 pipes were sufficiently below the surface not to 
 have been injured by the ordinary mode of repair 
 if such rollers had not been used : — Held, that tlie 
 Plaintiffs were entitled not only to recover dam- 
 ages for the injury which had been done, but 
 also to have an injunction to restrain the Defen- 
 dants from using steam rollers in such a way as 
 to injure the pipes of the Plaintiffs. Gas Light 
 AND Coke Company v. Vestry of St. Mary Ab- 
 bott's, Kensington 15 ft. B. D. 1 
 Bankruptcy of consumer — Distress for 
 
 amount due — Preferential debt 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 753 
 
 See Bankeup TCV — Distress. 1. 
 
 GAS LIftUOE WOEKS. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 GENEEAI AVEEAGE. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — General Aver- 
 age. 
 
 GENESAL LINE OF BiriLDINGS27 Ch. D. 362; 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 41 ; 13 ft. B. D. 878 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 229 
 
 See Metropolis — IManagement Acts. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 . _ 30 Ch. D. 350 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 3. 
 
 GENEEAI MEETING^Coihpany 23 Ch. D. 654 ; 
 [25 Ch. D. 320 ; 29 Ch. D. 159 
 
 See Company — Management. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 GENEEAI OEDEE, AUG., 1882— Solicitors' Re- 
 muneration Act, 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — JBill of 
 Costs. 18—25. 
 
 r. 36, Sched. III., Form 39 - 29 Ch. D. 934 
 
 See Executor — Retainer. 4. 
 
 GENEEAI OEDEES IN CHANCEEY, 1st FEB. 
 1861 18 Ch. D. 646 ; 22 Ch. D. 93 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 money. 4, 5. 
 
 GENEEAI OEDEES UNDEE COMPANIES ACT, 
 
 NOV. 1862. 
 r. 25 - - 17 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Proof. 2. 
 r. 53 - - 23 Ch. D, 642 
 
 See Company — Reduction op Capital. 
 3. 
 
 r. 60 - 25 Ch. D. 400 ; 27 Ch. D. 515 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 4, 5. 
 
 GENEEAI OEDEES TJNDEE COMPANIES ACT, 
 
 MAECH, 1868, rr. 4, 5 23 Ch. D. 542 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 683 
 
 See Company — Reduction of Capital. 
 3,4. 
 
 GENERAL ETJIES, Hil. Term, 1853, r. 169 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 58 
 
 See Arbitration — Award. 2. 
 
 GENEEAI ■WOEDS— Convevanoe 18 Ch. D. 616 
 See 'Way. 1. 
 
 Ejusdem generis - - 30 Ch. D. 298 
 
 See Advowson. 1. 
 
 Memorandum of association — Object of com- 
 pany - 20 Ch, D. 169 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 4. 
 
 ■ Policy of insurance - 6 ft. B. D. 51 
 
 See Insurance, Makine — Policy. 6. 
 
 Statutory effect. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 GIBEAITAR— Orders in Council. 
 
 See Jurisdiction — Gazette. 
 GIFT. 
 
 ■ — — Fiduciary 'S.els&ssi— Physician and Pa- 
 tient — Independent Advice."] Although a gift 
 made to a person standing n a confidential rela- 
 tion to the donor, as by a patient to a physician, 
 may be voidable, yet, if after the confidential re- 
 lation has ceased to exist, the donor intentionally 
 
( ei3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 614 ) 
 
 'GlFT—conlinued. 
 
 •elfeetsto abide by the g^ift, and does in fact abide 
 by it, it cannot be-impeached after his death, even 
 if.it is not proved that the donor was aware that 
 the gift was voidable at his election. The Plain- 
 tiffs were executors of G., to whom the Defendant 
 had acted as medical adviser. 6. made a gift of 
 £800 to, the Defendant. At the time of the gift 
 no independent advice was given to G., and the 
 relation of physician and patient then existed ; 
 but the Defendant had not been guilty of any 
 undue influence, and after the relation of physi- 
 cian and patient had ceased, G. elected to abide 
 by the gift, and did in fact abide by it during the 
 rest of ier life. It was not proved that G. was 
 aware that the gift was voidable -.—Held, that the 
 gift made by G. to the Defendant could not be 
 impeached after her death. — Rhodes v. Bate (Law 
 Eep. 1 Ch. 252) commented on. Mitchell v. 
 HoMPEAT - - - - 8 Q. B. D. 587 
 By infant - - 19 Ch. D. 603 
 
 See Infant — Acts. 
 By will. 
 
 See Oases under Will. 
 - .: Chattels — ^Parent and child — Assets 
 
 [15 a. B. D. 447 
 
 See Bankbdptoy— Assets. 17. 
 Furniture - - -17 Ch. D. 416 
 
 See Voluntabt Conveyanok. 1. 
 — — Money — Father to son — Voluntary settle- 
 ment — Bankruptcy — ^Void settlement 
 
 [15 e. B. D. 682 
 
 See Bankkuptct — Void Settlement. 2. 
 GIN— Adulteration - 10 Q. B. D. 518 
 
 See ADnLTEKATioN. 6. . 
 
 -GIELS— Under thirteen. 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Offences against 
 WosiEN — Statutes. 
 — T— Under sixteen. 
 
 See Okuiinal Law — Offences against 
 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 'GLEBE lANDS — Purchase-money — Lands 
 
 Olauses Act - 20 Ch. D. 203 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Pubchase- 
 
 MONEY. 6. 
 
 Sale of — Eent-charge — Land drainage com- 
 pany - - 20 Ch. D. 208 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioners. 
 
 iGOODWILI. 
 
 1. Mortgage — Trade Premises.'] Al- 
 though in some cases the goodwill of trade premises 
 ■passes to a mortgagee, that does not apply to a 
 -case where the goodwill depends on the personal 
 ^Idll of the owner. Cooper v. Metropolitan 
 BoAP-D OP WoEKS 25 Ch. D. 472 
 
 2. Sale of — Bights of Purclmser — From 
 
 Vendor personally — From Trustees in Banhruptcij 
 — Solieitation of Old Customers.] The rule of 
 Laboiichere v. Dawson (Law Rep. 13 Eq. 322), by 
 which in tlie case of a voluntary sale the vendor 
 ■of the goodwill of a business is precluded from 
 afterwards soliciting the former customers of that 
 business, cannot be extended to the case of a eom- 
 rpulsory alienation. The obligation enforced by 
 the rule is purely personal, and not a mere in- 
 cident to the transfer of property. Therefore the 
 jpurchaser of the goodwill of a business from a 
 
 GOOJiWlLL— continued. 
 
 tirustee in bankruptcy or liquidation has no right 
 to restrain the bankrupt or liquidating debtor 
 from setting up bona iide a fresh business and 
 soliciting the customers of his former business, 
 and it is immaterial whether the bankrupt has or 
 has not joined in th^.conveyance of the goodwill 
 to the purchaser. — Per Lindley and Lush, L.JJ. : 
 The case of Ldbouchere v. Dawson is still ap- 
 plicable to the ease of voluntary sales. — The deci- 
 sion in that case questioned by Baggallay, L.J. — 
 Cruttwell V. Lye (17 Ves.335) followed. Walkek 
 V. MoTTRAM - - - 19 Ch. D. 356 
 
 3. Sale — Vendor setting up new Business 
 
 — Right to solicit old Custoiners.] , T. P., as 
 trustee of a will, carried on a business which 
 had been caiTied on by the testator under the 
 name of James P. By an agreement made to 
 compromise a suit, James P.^ a sou of the testator 
 and a beneficiary under his will, agreed to sell to 
 T. P. all his interest in the business, and in the 
 property on which it was carried, on. And it was 
 provided that nothing in the agreement should 
 prevent James P. from carrying on the like busi- 
 ness where he should think fit, and under the 
 name of James P. T. P. brought this action to 
 enforce this agreement, and to restrain James P. 
 from soliciting the customers of the old firm. An 
 injunction was accordingly granted by Kay, J., on 
 the authority of Lahouchere v. Dawson (Law Hep. 
 13 Eq. 322) and the cases in which it had been 
 followed : — Held, by Baggallay and Cotton, L.JJ., 
 disseutiente Lindley, L.J., that Lahouchere v. 
 Dawson was wrongly decided, and ought to be - 
 overruled, and that even apart from the proviso in 
 the agreement, the Plaintiff was not entitled to 
 the injunction which he had obtained.^-fleZ(Z, by 
 the whole Court, that the proviso in the agreement 
 authorized the Defendant to carry on business in 
 the same way as any stranger might lawfully dQ,_ 
 and took the case out of the authority of Lahou- 
 cliere v. Dawson, supposing that case to have been 
 well decided. Pearson v. Peakson 27 Ch. D. 145 
 
 Compensation — Mortgagee ■ 25 Ch. D. 472 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensation. 
 1. 
 
 Sale of — Bankruptcy - 16 Ch. D. 226 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 2. 
 
 Sale of — Dissolution of partnership 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 698 
 See Paetneeship— Contract. 3. 
 GOVEENMENT ANNUITIES. 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners—. 
 Statutes. 
 Friendly Society — Statutes. 
 GOVEENMENT STOCK— Local board— Vestmg— 
 • Duty of Bank of England 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 176 
 See Local Govebnment — Local Au- 
 
 THOEITY. 9. 
 
 GOVERNOE or PEIS ON— Superannuation al- 
 lowance 11 ft. B. D, 656 ; 9 App. Cas. 757 
 See Peison. 1. 
 
 GEAMMAE SCHOOL - - 7 App. Cas. 91 
 
 See Endowed Schools Act. S. 
 GEANT — Crown— Booty of war 7 App. Cas. 619 
 See Booty op War. 
 
 X2 
 
( 615 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 616 ) 
 
 GRANT — continued. 
 
 Crown lands — Eesumption of grants 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 142 
 See Colonial Law — West Austealla. 2. 
 
 Implied — Eight to support 21 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See Sl'Ppokt. 1. 
 
 Monthly pensions — " Heirs and successors" 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 761 
 See Colonial Law — Straits Settle- 
 ments. 2. 
 GEATTJITY — Servants and directors of company 
 ■ — Power of general meeting 23 Ch. D. 
 See Company — Management. 2. [654 
 GEAVE— Grant in perpetuity - 6 Q. B. D. 290 
 
 See BUKIAL-GEOIIND. 1. 
 
 GBAZING — Eight of — Poor-rate — Occupation 
 
 [6 ft. B. D, 10 
 
 See PooK-EATE — Occupation. 4. 
 
 OBEEE KAKBIAGES. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 20, renders valid cer- 
 tain marriages celebrated in the Greek Church in 
 London between 1836 and 1857. 
 
 GROUND GAME— Eeservation of 26 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ground 
 Game. 
 GROWING CROPS— Bill of sale--Eegistration 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 104 
 See Bill op Sale — ^Eegistration. 3. 
 GUARANTEE— Construction - 16 Ch. D. 290 
 See Principal and Surety — Contract. 
 Death of surety — Appropriation of pay- 
 ments - 25 Ch. D. 692 
 See Principal and Surety — Discharge. 
 3. 
 
 Directors of railway company 19 Ch. D. 478 
 
 See Eailway Company —Constitution. 
 
 Disoharpe 9 Q. B. D. 783 ; 8 App. Cas. 755 
 
 See Principal and Surety- — Discharge. 
 1,2. 
 
 GUARANTEE- conWntted. 
 
 One of several partners 25 Ch. D. 148 
 
 ySee Bankbuptot — Secured Creditor. 6. 
 Proof in bankruptcy - - 17 Ch. D. 98 
 
 See Bankbuptct — Peoop. 11. 
 GUARANTEE SOCIETY - - 7 P. D. 235 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 7. 
 GUARDIAN — Administration — Grant for benefit 
 
 of minor 9 P. D. 66 
 
 iSee Administrator — With Will an- 
 nexed. 2. 
 Consent to marriage - - 18 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Will — Condition. 9. 
 Infant resident abroad - 30 Ch. D. 324 
 
 See Infant. — Guardian. 1. 
 Eeligious education 21 Ch. D. 817 
 
 See Infant — Education. 2. 
 Vouchers of expenditure - 26 Ch. D. 58' 
 
 See Ineant — Guardian. 2. 
 GUARDIAN AD LITEM— lufant 19 Ch. D, 460 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 8. 
 Interrogatories — Answer - 11 Q. B. D. 251 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 4. 
 Probate action - - 7 P. D. 234 
 
 See Practice — Probate — Guardian. 
 GUARDIANS OF POOR. 
 
 See Poor Law — Management — Statutes. 
 Disqualification — Clerk of highway or school 
 
 board - 15 ft. B. D. 382 
 
 See Poor-rate — Guardians. 
 Maintenance of lunatic - 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 3. 
 GUILDHALL. 
 
 See Court — Gazette. 
 GUNPOWDER— Used in mines. 
 
 See Mine — Mines Eegulation Act — 
 Statutes. 
 
( 617 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 018 ) 
 
 H. 
 
 BABEAS COB.rVa—Prii!oner— Party to Motion.'] 
 'The Court cannot grant a habeas corpus to a 
 party to a suit, in custody, to enable him to ap- 
 pear in Court merely for the purpose of arguing 
 his case in person. — Benns v. MosUy (2 C. B. 
 <N.S.) 116; followed. Weldon v. Neal 
 
 [IS Q. B, D. 471 
 Custody of infant— Discretion 13 Q. B. D. 614 
 
 See Infant— Custody. 1. 
 Military law — Canteen steward 
 
 See Akmt and Navy. [16 Q. B. D. 488 
 -HABIT AHB EEPTTTE— Scotch marriage 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 3. 
 SANBWBITING — Comparison — Interrogatories 
 
 —Libel - - 15 Q. B. D. 439 
 
 See Pkactioe — Supkesie Coukt — Intbe- 
 
 BOGATOEIES. 7. ' 
 
 HABBOTTB — Dues leviable - 8 App. Cas. 658 
 See Scotch Law — Hakeoub. 2. 
 
 Duties — ^Assignment — Mortmain 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 544 
 See Chaeity — Mortmain. 3. 
 
 Infringement of regulations - 9 F. D, 3 
 
 See Ship-^Navigation. 32. 
 
 Eemoval of wreck - 11 ft. B. D. 496 
 
 See Docks asd Habboues. 2. 
 
 Trustees of — Lands Clauses Act — Scotch 
 
 law - - 8 App. Cas. 623 
 
 See Scotch Law — Haeboue. 1. 
 
 SABBOITB MASTER— Damage to ship— Mooring 
 and beaching of vessels — Harbour Com- 
 missioners'—Liability 10 P. D. 24, 131 
 See Negligence — Liability. 9, 10. 
 
 HAWEEB OF FETBOLEVM. 
 
 See Petroleum — Statutes. 
 
 HEAESAY EVIDENCE— Family repute 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 763 
 See Scotch Law — Husbakd and Wife. 
 4. 
 
 HEDGES— In west of England. 
 
 See Highway — Repaie — Statutes. 
 
 EEIB-AT-LAW — Customary heir — Jus represen- 
 tationis - 18 Ch. D. 166 
 
 See Copyhold — Custom. 2. 
 
 Retainer for debts - - 27 Ch. D. 478 
 
 See Eetainbe. 
 
 HEIELOOU. 
 
 See Cases under Will — ^Heirloom. 
 
 Sale of— Settled Land Act 27 Ch. D. 179 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 136 
 See Settled Land Act. — Kesteictions. 
 1,2. 
 
 Sale of— Settled Land Act 30 Ch. D. 102, 127 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Pcechase- 
 jioney. 1, 4. 
 
 Tenant for life's power of sale over. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — ^Statutes. 
 
 HERBAGE- Common of - - 17 Ch. D. 635 
 
 See Common. 
 
 Malicious injuiy — " Heal or personal pro- 
 perty " - - - 8 Q. B. D. 283 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Malicious Injury 
 to Property. 
 
 HEBITABLE FBOFEBTT. 
 
 See Cases under Scotch Law — Heri- 
 table Property. 
 HEEITAGE— Conveyance of - 8 App. Cas. 853 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 1. 
 
 HIGH BAILIFF- City of London Com-t- War- 
 rant of arrest— Service — Clerk 
 
 [10 P. D. 36 
 See Practice — -Admiralty — Service. 1. 
 
 HIGH PEAK MINE— Custom— Erection of build- 
 ings 7 ft. B. D, 296 ; 8 App. Cas. 196 
 See Mine — Working. 1. 
 
 HIGHEE OB lOWEE SCALE— Costs. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Costs. 
 
 HIGHWAY. Col. 
 
 I. Board - _ _ _ 618 
 
 II. Dedication - 618 
 
 in. Locomotive - - - 619 
 
 IV. Nuisance - - 619 
 
 V. Obstruction - 620 
 
 VI. Kate - 620 
 
 VIL Eepair . . _ 620 
 
 (a.) County Bate. 
 
 (6.) DiSTCBNPlKED EOADS. 
 
 (c.) Extraordinary Expenses. 
 {d.) Materials. 
 VIII. Stopping-up - - - 625 
 
 IX. Waywarden - - 626 
 
 I. HIGHWAY— BOAED. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 72, amends sect. 13 of 
 the Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 
 1878. 
 
 Dissolution of Highway District- 
 
 way Board existing after such Dissolution — Sigh- 
 way Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 61), ss. 9 and 
 39.] By the dissolution of a highway district, in 
 respect of which a highway board had been con- 
 stituted under the Highway Act, 1862, the high- 
 way board, though it ceases to have any control 
 over the highways in its district, does not cease to 
 exist as a corporate body for the performance of 
 its other duties, such as those of suing or being 
 sued, and of acting generally for the purpose of 
 winding up its affairs. The Queen v. Justices of 
 Essex - - - 11 ft. B. D. 704 
 
 IL HIGHWAY— DEDICATION. 
 
 Eeservation of Tolls — Private Owners — 
 
 Tolls — "Highway repairable hy Inhabitants at 
 ■' -38 & 3y Vict. 0. 55, ss. 4, 150.] The 
 
( 610 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( G20 ) 
 
 II. HIGHWAY— DEDICATION— conijjiMei. 
 promoters of an intended road by deed declared 
 that the road should not only be enjoyed by them 
 for their individual purposes, but " should be open 
 to the use of the public at large for all manner of 
 purposes in all respects as a common turnpike 
 ro!i4," but subject to the payment of tolls by the 
 persons using it : — Held, that this was not a dedi- 
 cation of the road to the public, and that the 
 road was not a highway repairable by the inha- 
 bitants at large under sect. 150 6f the Public 
 Health Act, 1875. — Semble, an individual cannot, 
 witliout legislative autHority, dedicate a road to 
 the public if he reserves the right to charge tolls 
 for the user; and the mere fact that a number 
 of persons form themselves into a company for 
 making and maintaining a road, and erect gates 
 and bars and charge tolls, does not make the road 
 a " turnpike road " in the sense of a turnpike road 
 made such by Act of Parliament, and so dedicated 
 to the public. Atisteebuky v. Cokporation or 
 Oldham _ _ _ 29 Ch. D. 750 
 
 III. HIGHWAY- LOCOMOTIVE. 
 
 The Aet 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, continues the Loco- 
 motives Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 83), and the 
 Acts amending the same until the Slsi of December, 
 1886. 
 
 Tricycle— iocomoh'fes Act, 1861 (24 & 25 
 
 Vict. c. 70), ss. 8, 12 — Locomotives Act, 1865 
 (28 it- 29 Vict. V. 83), ss. 3, 4, l—Highways and 
 Locoriiotives ^(^Amendm^nt) Act, 1878 (41 & 42 
 Vict. c. 77), ss. 28, 29, 38.] A tricycle was 
 capable of being propelled by the feet of the 
 rider, or by^ steam as an auxiliary, or by steam 
 alone. There was no smoke, nor escape of steam 
 into the air, nor anything to indicate that it 
 was being worked by steam, nor anything which 
 could frighten horses, or cause danger to the 
 public using tlie highway beyond any ordinary 
 tricycle. The weight was about two hundred 
 weight, and the tires of the wheels about one 
 and a half inches in width. The tires being 
 of india-rubber, no injury would be done to the 
 surface of the road by working the machine on 
 it : — Held, by Lord" Coleridge, C.J., Pollock, B., 
 and Maniaty, J., thut the tricycle was a " locomo- 
 tive " within the deiinition in sect. 38 of the 
 Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), and was therefore 
 subject to the rules and regulations for the use 
 of locomotives on highways prescribed by sects. 28 
 and 29 of that Act, by the Locomotives Act, 1861 
 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 70), s. 12, and the Locomotives 
 Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 83), ss. 3, 4, 7. Pak- 
 KYNS V. Pkeist - - - 7 ft. B. D. 313 
 
 IV. HIGHWAY— HUISANCE. 
 
 Coyer of Water Valve — Frojection qf — 
 
 Wearing away of Eoad — Local Board — Wafer and 
 Highway Authority, Liability of — 38 & 39 Vict. 
 
 V. 55 {Public Health Act, 1875), 8. 149.] The iron 
 cover of a valve connected with a water main was 
 properly fixed in a, highway by the Defendants, 
 but in consequence of the ordinary wearing away 
 of tlie highway the valve cover projected an inch 
 above it. The Plaintiff's horse using the high- 
 way stumbled over the valve cover and was hurt. 
 In an action against the Defendants, who were 
 botli the water authority and the highway autho- 
 
 rV. HIGHWAY— NUISANCE— coni("nuec?. 
 rity, for the injuiy to the horse : — Held, that ib 
 was the duty of the Defendants to make sucli) 
 an'angements that works under their care should, 
 not become a nuisance to the highway, and that 
 the Plaintiff was entitled to recover. Kekt v.. 
 WoBTHiNG Local Boakd or. Health 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. n« 
 
 lAnd see Meteopolis — Management Acts. 5.]^ 
 
 V. HIGHWAY— OBSTRUCTION. 
 
 Omission to remove Olistruction-.^iZi^fe- 
 
 way ^e<,.1835 (5 & 6 Will. 4, e. 50), s. 72.] In. 
 order to constitute wilful obstruction of a highway 
 within 5 & 6 Will. 4, o. 50, s. 72, it is not neces- 
 sary that there should be aijy act of commission, 
 but the offeiice may be complete by an offlissioii on., 
 the part of the person whosa duty itis to remove.anj 
 obstruction to do so after ilptice. Gully v. S-Mte. 
 / [12 ft. B. D. 121 
 
 VI. HIGHWAY— BATE. 1, 
 
 Tlie Act 45 & 46 Vict. Jc. 27, extends ceaiain, 
 provisions of the Poor Bate'.Assessment and Collec- 
 tion Act, 1869, to the Highway Hate. 
 
 Seat. 1. Act to be cited 'a^ t^c Highway Bate 
 Assessment and Expenditure Act, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 2. Extent of Act. ' 
 
 Sect. 3. Sect. 3 and 4 of (the Poor Rate Assess- 
 ment and Collection Act, 1869, to extend to~ajtd 
 include the hightoay rate. 
 
 Power to rate and compound with mcners of 
 small tenements. 
 
 Repeal of 5 & Q Will. 4, c. 50, s. 30. 
 
 Sect. 4. Valuation lists to be conclusive for high— 
 loay rate. 
 
 Sect. 5. Provision for balances of outgoing sur- 
 veyor. 
 
 Sect. 6. Power .to, mnintain milestones and tO' 
 fence. 
 
 Sect. 7. Extends and applies 41 <t 42 Vict. c. 77^ 
 and 42 & 43 Vict. c. 6, as to waywarden's rate 
 accounts. 
 
 Sect. 8. As to recovery and payment of certified 
 balances. \ 
 
 Sect. 9. Proolsion as to escciudsd parts of 
 parishes. 
 
 Sect, 10. Interpretation of terms. 
 
 VII. HIGHWAY— BEPAIB. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 13, ambles highicayj 
 authorities in the counties of Wilts, Dorset, Somer- 
 set, Devon, and Cornwall to cut hedges, lop trfies, 
 &c., to avert shade. 
 
 (o.) County Kate. 
 
 1. Borough — -Liability to County Rate — 
 
 Middlesborough Extension and. Improvement Act, 
 1874 (37 & 3S Vict. c. cviii.') — Highways and Loco- 
 motives Amendment Act, 1878 (41 * 42 Vict, c.77),.. 
 s. 18]. By a local Act passed in 1874 the limits 
 of the borough of Middlesborough were extended. 
 By sect. 20 of that Act it was enacted that the 
 extended area " shall be exempt from all county 
 rates save only in respect of the purposes for 
 which any county rates are now leviable within 
 the existing borough." At the time of the pass- 
 ing of that Act general couiity rates were leviable- 
 within the existing borough for all purposes- f« 
 which general county rates could be levied in any. 
 
( G21 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( G22 ) 
 
 VII. HIGHWAY— KEPAIE—oo»Hmied. ■ 
 
 (a.) County Eate — continued. 
 part of the riding. By sect. 13 of the Highways 
 and Locomotives Amendment Act, 1878, any road 
 ■which has ceased to be a turnpike road in manner 
 described by the Act shall be deemed to be a main 
 road, and one-half of the expenses inoui-red by the 
 highway authority in the maintenance of snch 
 road shall be contributed out of the county rate : 
 — Held, that as ■within the borough existing at the 
 time of the passing of the local Act general county 
 rates were leviable for all purposes, the saving of 
 such liability rendered the exemption in sect. 20 
 inoperative ; and therefore the inhabitants of the 
 extended area of the borough were not exempt 
 from liability to pay county rates for the main- 
 tenance of a road under sect. 13 of tlie Highways 
 and Locomotives Amendinent Act, 1878. — The 
 decision of the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. 
 Overseers of Middlesbobocigh' ■;;. Justices op 
 North Riding of Yobkshire 11 Q. B. D. 490 ; 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 239 
 
 2. BoioxLgh-rExpenses of Maintenance — 
 
 Contribution from County Authority — Highway 
 Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 61), s. 2— Highways and 
 Locof/wtives ^Amendment) Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict, 
 c. 77), ss. 13, 38.] By the Highway Act, 1862 
 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 61), s. 2, defining the word 
 " county,";" for the purposes of this Act all liberties 
 and franchises except boroughs ..... shall be 
 considered as foi-ming part of that county by which 
 they are suiTounded." — By the Highways and 
 Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878 (41 & 42 
 Vict. c. 77), s. 38, " in this Act ' county ' has the 
 same meaning as it has in the Highway Acts, 
 1862 and 1864," and by sect. 13 any road which 
 has between the 31st of December, 1870, and the 
 date of the Act ceased to be a turnpike road .... 
 shall be deemed to be a main road, and one-half 
 of the expenses incurred in tlie maintenance shall, 
 as to every part thereof which is within the limits 
 of any highway area, be paid to the highway 
 authority of such area " by the county authority 
 of the county in which such road is situate " out 
 of the county rate.— A road in the borough and 
 highway area of Over Darwen, in Lancashire, 
 ceased to be a turnpike road in 1877 : — Held, that, 
 although for the purposes of the Highway Act, 
 1862, boroughs are not to be considered as forming 
 parts of counties, yet as the road was within the 
 geographical limits of Lancashire, the county of 
 Lancaster was the " county in which such road is 
 situate " within 41 & 42 Vict. c. 77i s. 18, and the 
 county authority was liable to pay half the ex- 
 penses incuiTed in the maintenance of such road. 
 — Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division af- 
 firmed. Mayor, &c., of Over Darwen v. Justices 
 of Lancaster 13 Q. B. B. 497 ; 15 Q. B. D. 20 
 
 3. Expense of removing Snow — Liability 
 
 of County Authority — Highways and Locomotives 
 {Amendment) Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), 
 s. 13.] The main roads within the district of 
 a highway authority became impassable from 
 snow, which the highway authority removed, and 
 they claimed one-half of the expense of doing so 
 from the county authority under the Highways 
 and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878, s. 13: 
 — Held, that this was an " expense incurred in 
 the maintenance " of such roads within that sec- 
 
 VII. UmKWAY— 'REPAIR— continued. 
 
 (a.) County Rate — continued. 
 tion, and that the county authority were liable. 
 Guardians of Amesburt v. Justices of Wilts 
 
 [10 Q. B, D. 480 
 
 (6.) Disturnpiked Roads. 
 
 4. , Ceasing to he Turnpike RoB.i.— Main 
 
 Road — Highways and Locomotives (^Amendment') 
 Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), s. 13.] The 
 Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), by sect. 13, enacts that 
 any road which has '' between the 31st of Decem- 
 ber, ] 870, and the date of this Act ceased to be a 
 turnpike road" .... ''shall be deemed to be a 
 main road, and one-half of the expenses incun'ed 
 from and after the 29th of September, 1878, by 
 the highway authority in the maintenance of such 
 road, shall, as to every part thereof which is 
 within the limits of any highway area, be paid to 
 tlie highway authority of such area by the county 
 authority of the county in which such road is 
 situate, out of the county rate:"^The corporation 
 of the town and borough of E. was the highway 
 authority of the R. highway area. Under sects. 
 47-50 of the Towns Improvement Clauses Act, 
 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 34), such portions of the 
 turnpike roads entering U, as came within the 
 area of the town were taken out of the turnpike 
 trusts, and the obligation to repair the same was 
 imposed upon the corporation. By a local Act in 
 1872, the boundaries of the borough were enlarged 
 and all the provisions of the Acts relating to the 
 " town " were made applicable to the- enlarged 
 area of the borough. The effect was tbat the 
 further portions of the turnpike roads, thus for tho 
 first time brought within the area of the borough, 
 were taken out of the turnpike trusts by the 
 operation of the Towns Improvement Clauses 
 Act, 1847, and ceased to be turnpike roads : — 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Court of Ap- 
 peal, tbat these further portions, being only 
 parts of turnpike roads, had not " ceased to be 
 turnpike roads," and were not to be deemed to be 
 " main roads " within sect. 13 of the Highways 
 and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878: and 
 that the county authority were not liable to pay 
 half the expenses of their maintenance. Corpora- 
 Tiox of Rochdale v. Justices of Lancashire 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 525 ; 8 Q. B. S. 12 ; 8 App. Cas. 494 
 
 5. Continuing to be Turnpike Bead — 
 
 Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), «. 13.] The Highways 
 and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878,3. 13, 
 provides for the maintieuance of roads which 
 have since the Slst of December, 1870, ceased to 
 be turnpike roads. A provision in turnpike Acts 
 coming into operation before the Slst of Decem- 
 ber, 1870, that turnpike trustees shall not spend 
 money or levy, toll upon certain portions of turn- 
 pike roads does not prevent such portions of the 
 roads from being still turnpike roads on the 31st 
 of December, 1870, within the meaning of sect. 13 
 of the Highways, and Locomotives (Amendment) 
 Act, 1878. So as to an agreement under the Local 
 Government Act, 1858(21 & 22 Vict. c. 98), s. 41, 
 made before the 31st of December, 1870, between 
 turnpike trustees and a corporation, under which 
 the turnpikes upon certain portions of turnpike 
 
( 623 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 624 ) 
 
 VII. HIGHWAY— EEPAIE—coKtiiHtecZ. 
 
 (6.) DiSTCRNPlKED EoADS — Continued. 
 roads were removed and the repair of such portions 
 was undertaken by tlie corporation :— So held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal. 
 Justices of West Hiding of Yobk v. The Queen 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 781 
 
 G. Main Boad — Conirihntion frcrni County 
 
 foT Repair — SigJiwaye and Locomotives (^Amend- 
 ment) Act, 1878 (41 * 42 Vict. c. 77), «. IS- 
 IS & 19 Vict. c. c. — Towns Improvement Clauses 
 Act, 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. u. 34), ss. 47, 49, 50, 51— 
 Expiration of Turnpike Trusts in 1877 — Cesser 
 of Turnpike Boad.'] By a local Act (18 & 19 
 Vict. V. c.) passed in 1855, and incorporating the 
 Towns Improvement Glauses Act, 1847 (10 & 11 
 Vict. c. 34), the maintenance of all highways 
 within a district, including a, turnpike road, 
 became vested in commissioners. The trustees 
 of the turnpike road thereupon ceased to repair 
 it within the limits of the district. The turnpike 
 trust expired in 1877. The commissioners were 
 the " highway authority " for the district, which 
 was a "highway area" within the Highways 
 and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878 (41 & 
 42 Vict. c. 77), s. 13 : — Held, that, notwithstand- 
 ing the special legislation in 1855 providing for 
 the maintenance of part of the road by the com- 
 missioners, it only " ceased to be a turnpike road " 
 within the meaning of sect. 13 of the Highways 
 and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878, on the 
 expiration of the turnpike trust between 1870 
 and the date of passing that Act, and therefore 
 should be " deemed to be a main road," and one- 
 half of the expenses of the maintenance of the 
 part within the highway area should be paid to 
 the highway authority by the county authority 
 under sect. 13. — Judgment of the Queen's Bench 
 Division affirmed. Impkovement Commissioners 
 OF Newton in Makerfield v. Justices of Lan- 
 caster - 13 Q. B. S. 623 ; 15 Q. B. D. 25 
 
 7. ■ • Main Bead — Provisional Order to 
 
 declare Ordinary Highway — Highways and Loco- 
 motives Amendment Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict, 
 c. 77), 8. 16 — Boad disturnpiked between the 
 31st of December, 1870, and the passing of the 
 Act.'] The 16th section of the Highways and 
 Locomotives Amendment Act, 1878, provides as 
 follows : "If it appears to a county authority that 
 any road within their county which, within the 
 period between the 31st of December, 1870, and 
 the date of the passing of this Act, ceased to 
 be a turnpike road, ought not to become a main 
 road in pursuance of this Act, such authority 
 shall, before the 1st of February, 1879, make an 
 application to the Local- Government Board for a 
 provisional order declaring that such road ought 
 not to become a main road." The section further 
 provides that, " Subject as ■ aforesaid, where it 
 appears to a county authority that any road 
 within their county, which has become a main 
 road in pursuance of this Act, ought to cease to 
 be a main road and become an ordinary highway, 
 such authority may apply to the Local Govern- 
 ment Board for a provisional order declaring 
 that such road has ceased to be a main road and 
 become an ordinary highway : — Held, that a road 
 which had ceased to be a turnpike road within 
 the period specified by the first of the above- 
 
 VII. HIGHWAY— EEPAIE—corefmued. 
 (6.) Disturnpiked Koads — continued. 
 mentioned provisions, and had become a main 
 road, there being no application for a provisional 
 order before the Ist of February, 1879, was not 
 excluded from the operation of the second of the 
 above-mentioned provisions, and that the Local 
 Government Board had, tlierefore, jurisdiction to 
 make a provisional order declaring such road au 
 ordinary highway upon an application made sub- 
 sequently to the 1st of February, 1879. The 
 Queen v. Local Government Board 15 ft. B. D. 
 
 [70 
 
 (e.) Extkaordinary Expenses. 
 
 8. Excessive Weight — Branch Boad — • 
 
 Conveyance of Manure to Farm — Traction Engines 
 — Highways and Locomotives Amendment Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), e. 23.] Justices 
 having made an order charging the expenses of 
 repairing a highway upon the Appellants as 
 being extraordinary expenses within 41 & 42 
 Vict. c. 77, s. 23, it appeared that the highway 
 communicated at either end with main roads, and 
 was principally used by farmers and occupiers of 
 land adjoining it for ordinary farm traffic. The 
 Appellants having been employed to convey a 
 quantity of manure to a farm adjoining the road, 
 carried it there by means of a traction engine and 
 trucks, the engine weighing eight and the truck 
 five tons. The road, which had not been pre- 
 pared for, and was not adapted to, the weight of 
 traction engines, was, in consequence of such 
 traffic, rendered unfit for use. The can-iage of 
 farm materials and produce by traction engines 
 was usual in the neighbourhood, though not upon 
 this particular road: — Held, that the order was 
 Tight, the passage of traction engines and trucks 
 being " extraordinary traffic " upon the particular 
 road. The Queen v. Ellis - 8 ft. B. D. 466 
 
 9. Excessive Weight — Traffic from re- 
 cognised [Business in Neighbourhood — Highways 
 and Locomotives Amendment Act, 1878 (41 & 42 
 Vict. c. 77), s. 23.] Upon the hearing of a com- 
 plaint made by a highway board under the High- 
 ways and Locomotives Amendment Act, 1878 
 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), s. 23, for the purpose of re- 
 covering from the Appellant extraordinary ex- 
 penses incurred by the board by reason of traffic 
 conducted by him, it appeared that he was owner 
 or occupier of stone quarries in the district, and 
 that the stone was conveyed in heavy loads over 
 the highways, so as to make the cost of repairing 
 them much larger than if they had been subject 
 to ordinary agricultural traffic ; but that the stone 
 traffic was a recognised business in the neighbour- 
 hood, and the waggon loads of the usual weight 
 in such traffic. The justices having upon these 
 facts found, first, that the traffic was not extra- 
 ordinary, secondly, that t: e weights were exces- 
 sive, and thirdly, that the expenses were extra- 
 ordinary : — Held, that the lirst finding, which 
 was warranted by the evidence, shewed that the 
 expenses were not " extraordinai-y " within the 
 meaning of the section, and that they could not 
 be recovered from tlie Appellant. Wallington 
 V. Hoskins - 6 ft. B. D. 206 
 
 10. Excessive Weight — Traffic caused 
 
 ill building a House — Highicays and Locomotives 
 
( 625 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 026 ) 
 
 VII. HIGHWAY— EEPAIE—rajiMiiMec?. 
 
 (c.) ExTEAOKBiNABT EXPENSES — Continued. 
 Amendment Act, 1878 (41 * 42 Vict. c. 77), s. 23.] 
 Materials for building a house were carried by 
 the Hespondent over a highway, and he was 
 summoned under sect. 23 of the Highways and 
 Locomotives Amendment Act, 1878, by the Ap- 
 pellants to recover the amount of expenses in- 
 ■curred by them by reason of the damage to the 
 iighway. The justices dismissed the summons, 
 subject to a special case in which they found that 
 ■the traffic conducted by the Kespondent was in 
 .aggregate weight and in quantity excessive and 
 •extraordinary as compared with the ordinary 
 traffic along the highway, which was light agri- 
 ■cultural traffic, that the highway had been 
 damaged thereby, that the amount expended on 
 the highway by reason thereof was iu excess of 
 the average expense of repairing highways in the 
 neighbomhood, and was an extraordinary expense 
 incurred, by reason of such damage, but that the 
 traffic did not materially differ in character from 
 that to be expected on the highway : — Keld (by 
 Grove and Lopes, JJ.), that the Eespondent was 
 not liable for the damage to the highway. 
 
 PlOKEELSG LttHB EaST HIGHWAY BOAKD V. 
 
 JBaret - - 8 ft. B. D. 69 
 
 (d.) Materials. 
 
 11. Gathering Stones — Inclosed Land — 
 
 Might to Compensation — 5 & 6 Will. 4, e. 50, 
 «. 51.] Under the Highway Act, 5 & 6 Will. 4, 
 c. 50, s. 51, justices are entitled to grant the sur- 
 veyor of highways a, licence to gather stones 
 upon inclosed land within the parish for the 
 repair of its highways, without making any com- 
 pensation to the owner for the value of such 
 stones. Alebsfobd Kural Sanitary Autho- 
 BiTY V. Scott 7 ft. B. D. 210 
 
 12. ■ licence to get Materials — 5 .& 6 
 
 Will. 4, c. 50, 6. 54 — " Search for, dig, and get in 
 or through " — Avenue to a House.'] A licence 
 may be granted to get materials for the repair of 
 the highways under 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50, s. 54, 
 although the materials when got must be carried 
 away by an " avenue to a house," the exception 
 of sucli an avenue (inter alia) in the section 
 j-eferring only to the digging or getting of the 
 materials, not to the caiTying of them away when 
 got. Bamsden r. Yeates - 6 ft. B. D. S83 
 
 VnL HIGHWAY— STOPPING-UP. 
 
 enses — Bight of Board to employ a 
 Solicitor at the Cost «f the Barty — Highway Act, 
 1835 (5 & 6 Wm. 4, c. 50), ss. 84, 85, 1\}\—Bublic 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 144, 
 189.] The charges of a solicitor employed by an 
 urban autliority to conduct proceedings at the 
 instance of an individual for the stopping-up or 
 diverting a highway under sects. 84, 85 of the 
 Highway Act, 5 & 6 Wm. 4, o. 50, are not " ex- 
 penses " within sect. 84 of the Act, so as to be re- 
 coverable in tlie manner pointed out by sect. 101. — 
 JSemble, that all the steps required by sect. 85 to be 
 taken for the purpose of obtaining the order oi: 
 .sessions, are ministerial acts which ought to be 
 done by the surveyor of tlie local authority. 
 United Land Company u. Tottenham Local 
 Board - - 13 ft. B. D. 640 
 
 IX. HIGHWAY— WAYWARDEN. 
 
 Election — Waywardens — Several Elec- 
 tions — Demand of Poll — Kme for — Mandamits.'] 
 At a vestry meeting held to elect waywardens for 
 eleven townships, different candidates were suc- 
 cessively and separately nominated, proposed, and 
 seconded, and, after show of hands, declared by 
 the chairman to be duly elected waywardens for 
 each township. After waywardens had been thus 
 elected for all the townships, an elector demanded 
 a poll in respect of the sixth and seventh town- 
 ships in order of election. The chairman ruled 
 that the demand was too late, and refused a poll. 
 — On a rule for a mandamus to the Defendants to 
 reassemble the meeting, and proceed to an elec- 
 tion of waywardens for the two townships : — Held, 
 that the proceeding in respect of each township 
 was a separate election, and that the demand for 
 a poll was too late, as it should, in each case, have 
 been made upon the declaration of the show of 
 hands. The Queen d. Thomas 11 ft. B. D. 282 
 
 HIGHWAY — Clerk of highway board — Dis- 
 qualification as guardian of parish or 
 union 15 ft. B. D. 3E3 
 
 See Poor-rate — Guardians. 
 
 Dedication 16 Ch. D. 449 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. G. 
 
 Houses abutting upon — Subsidence of land 
 
 [6 ft. B. S. 264 
 See Local Government — ■ Compensa- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 Indictment for obstruction of — New trial 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 198 
 See Criminal Law — Practice. 3. 
 
 Injury to pipes — Kepair of street — Use of 
 
 steam rollers - 15 ft. B. D. 1 
 
 See Gas Company. 
 
 Nuisance — Flap covering water-meter in 
 
 street — Liability of vestry 9 ft. B. D. 451 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 5. 
 
 Obstruction 12 ft. B. D. 110 
 
 See Nuisance — Kemedies, 3. 
 Rates 13 ft. B. D. 946 
 
 See Local Government — Bates. 1. 
 
 Scotch law - 6 App. Cas. 833, 881 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 378 
 
 See Scotch Law — Highway. I, 2, 3. 
 Surveyor — Local Government Acts — Period 
 
 of limitation - 11 ft. B. D. 286 
 
 See Local Government — Practice. ,3. 
 
 HIRING PTJENITITRE- Custom of trade 
 
 [18 Oh. D. 30 ; 23 Oh. D. 261 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 4, 5. 
 
 HIRING ROOMS— Mortmain 19 Ch. D. 156 
 
 See Charity — Mortmain. 2. 
 
 HOLOGRAPH AGREEMENT— Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 340 
 
 See Scotch Law — Landlord and Ten- 
 ant. 
 
 HOLOGRAPH WILL— Scotch law 7 App. Cas. 400 
 
 See Scotch Law — Will. 
 
 HOME FOR WORKING GIRLS- Covenant not to 
 carry on business j - 27 Ch. D. 71 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 4. 
 
( G27 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( C28 ,) 
 
 HOSPITAL — Covenant not to carry on business 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 81, n. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 5. 
 Nuisance 6 App. Cas. 193 
 
 See Nuis-iNOE — Definition. 1. 
 
 HOTCHPOT — Advancement — Interest payable — 
 Presumption of intention 16 Q. B. D. 300 
 See Will — Satisfaction. 1. 
 
 Advances to children 17 Ch. D. 701 
 
 See Will — Satisfaction. 2. 
 
 HOUES OF POLL— Parliament. 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 HOirSE— Direction to block up 21 Ch. D. 667 
 See Will — Lapse. (J . 
 
 Notice to treat - - 27 Ch. D. 536 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compclsoey 
 Powers. 7. ' 
 
 — — Occupation — Qualification — ^Munioipal elec- 
 tion - - 12 a. B. D. 381 
 See Municipal Corporation — Fran- 
 chise. 
 
 HOUSE DUTY. 
 
 See Cases under Eevence — House Duty. 
 
 HOUSE OF COMMONS— Procedure— Jurisdiction 
 of Courts - - 12 Q. B. D. 271 
 
 See Parliament — Procedure. 
 
 HOUSEHOLD FBAKCHISE. 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise — Statutes. 
 
 HUMBEE EULES — Stern light — Compulsory 
 pilotage — Collision - 10 P. D. 65 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. S. 
 
 HUKDEED^ Action against — Damage to houses 
 
 See Riot. [7 Q. B. D. 201 
 
 HUSBAND AND WIFE. Col. 
 
 L Divorce - - G27 
 
 II. Judicial Separation 628 
 
 III. Liability of Husband 628 
 
 IV. Married Women's Property Acts 629 
 V. Separate Estate - 640 
 
 VI. Separation Deed (J4i5 
 
 VII. Wife's Conveyance - - 649 
 
 VIII. Wife's Eeal Estate - 650 
 
 IX. Wife's Eeversion - - 653 
 
 ■ Practice of Divorce Court, 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Dn'OROE. 
 
 I. HUSBAND AND WIFE— DIVOECE. 
 
 English Marriage — Scotch Divorce — 
 
 Marriage in England lietween Scotclmian domiciled 
 in Scotland and Englishwoman — Decree of Divorce 
 by Scotch Court, l»j reason of Husband's Adultery 
 only — Validity of Divorce in England.'] The Eng- 
 lish Courts will recognise as valid the decision of 
 a competent foreign Christian tribunal dissolving 
 the marriage between a domiciled native in the 
 country where such tribunal has jurisdiction, and 
 an English woman, when the decree of divorce is 
 not impeached by any species of collusion or 
 fraud. And this, although the marriage may 
 have been solemnized in England, and may have 
 been dissolved for a cause which would not have 
 been sufficient to obtain a divorce in England. — 
 When an English woman marrios a domiciled 
 foreigner, the marriage is constituted according to 
 
 I. HUSBAND AND WIFE— DIVOECE— cMiirf. . 
 
 the lex loci contractfls ; but she takes his domiciB- 
 and is subject to his law. — A domiciled Scotch- 
 man married, in England, an English woman. 
 Immediately after the ceremony the marriei 
 couple went to Scotland and resided there as theu- 
 matrimonial home. Two years after the wife- 
 obtained in Scotland a divorce h. vinculo matri- 
 monii, ou the ground of her husband's adultery 
 only. Thehusband came to.England, and marri^- 
 there ajiother English woman, the first wife being 
 still alive. In a suit for a declaration of the- 
 nuUity of the second marriage at the instance of the 
 second wife : — Held, affirming the decision of the 
 Court below, tliat the divorce in Scotland was a 
 sentence of a Court of competent jurisdiction, not 
 only effectual within that jurisdiction, but en- 
 titled to recognition in the Courts of this country 
 also. — TjoUey's Case (Russ & Ry. 237) explained ; 
 ,Warrender \. Warrender (2 CI. & F. 488); Geils- 
 V. Geils (1 Macq. 255) undistinguishable ; Maghee 
 V. McAllister (3 Ir. (Ch.) 604) also undistinguish- 
 able and affirmed ; McCarthy v. Decaix (2 Russ. & 
 My. 614) dissented from. — Qv^re, Whether a bonfi. 
 fide change of domicil which was English at the 
 date of the contract would affect the question of" 
 dissolution ; and whether Pitt v. Fitt (i Macq.. 
 627) would govern cases like Niboyet v. Niboyet 
 (4 P. D. 1) if they arose in Scotland. Harvey v. 
 Farnie 6 p. D. 35 ; 8 App. Cas. 43 
 
 II. HUSBAND AND WIFE— JUDICIAL SEPAEA- 
 TION. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Magistrates — Aggravated^ 
 
 Assault — Matrimonial Causes Act, 1878 — 24 &- 
 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 43.] If a husband has been- 
 convicted of an aggravated assault the magistrates- 
 may grant a judicial separation, even though 
 they do' not fine or imprison him. Woods v. 
 Woods - - - 10 P. D. 172 
 
 III. HUSBAND AND WIFE — LIABILITY OF 
 HUSBAND. 
 
 Necessaries — Agency — Notice not to ■ 
 
 trust.] Where the husband neither does, nor 
 assents to, any act to shew that he has held out 
 his wife as his agent, to pledge his credit for 
 goods supplied on her order, the question whether - 
 she bears that character must be examined upon 
 the circumstances of the case. That question is 
 one of fact. The management of the husband's 
 house would raise a presumption of agency as to 
 matters necessarily connected with that manage- 
 ment, which might not be got rid of by a mere 
 private arrangement betw^n husband and -wife. 
 Otherwise where such management did not exist. 
 A. was the manager of a limited company's- 
 hotel at Bradford — where his wife acted as- 
 manageress — they cohabited — he made his -wife an 
 allowance for clotlies, but forbade her to pledge his 
 credit for them. She purchased clothes in Loudon,, 
 the bills for which were at first made out in her 
 name and were paid by her. She afterwards in- 
 curred, with the same tradesmen, a debt for clothes,, 
 payment for which was demanded from the hus- 
 band, with whom, previously, they had had no 
 communication : — Held (affirming the judgment of" 
 the Court below), that the husband was not liable 
 — that under the circumstances here the mere- 
 fact of cohabitation did not raise a presumption 
 
( 629 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 630 ) 
 
 III. HTTSBAND AND WIFE — LIABILITY OE 
 KVSBASD— continued. 
 
 of agency, nor require a pi'oof of notice not to 
 ti'iist Ms wife. Debenham v. Mellon 
 
 [6 App. Cas, 24 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MAESIED WO- 
 MEN'S PEOPERTY ACTS. 
 
 27ie Act 45 cfc 46 Vict. c. 75, consolidates and 
 aviends the Married Women's Property Acts.-. 
 
 Sect. 27. Tlie Act is to he cited as the Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 25. I'he date of the commencement of the 
 Act is the 1st of January, 1883. 
 
 Sect. 22 repeals the Married Women's Property 
 Act, 1870, and the Married Women's Property Act, 
 1870, Amendment Act, 1874 : provided that such 
 repeal shall not affect any act done or right acquired 
 while either of those Acts was in force, or any 
 right or liability of any husband or wife, married 
 before the 1st of January, 1883, to sue or be sued 
 under the provisions of those Acts or either of 
 tliem for or in respect of any debt, contract, wrong, 
 0)' other matter or thing whatsoever, for or in 
 respect of which any such right or liability shall 
 have accrued to or against such husband or wife 
 before the 1st of January, 1883. 
 
 Sect. 19. Nothing in this Act contained shall 
 interfere with or affect any settlement or agreement 
 for a settlement made or to be made, whether before 
 or after marriage, respecting the property of any 
 married woman, or shall interfere ivith or render 
 inoperative any restriction against anticipation at 
 present attached or to be hereafter attached to the 
 enjoyment of any property or income by a woman 
 under any settlement, agreement for a settlement, 
 will, or other instrument ; but no restriction against 
 anticipation contained in any settlement or agree- 
 ment for a settlement of a woman's own property 
 to he made or entered into by herself shall have any 
 validity against debts contracted by her before 
 marriage, and no settlement or agreement for a 
 settlement shall have any greater force or validity 
 against creditors of such woman than a lilie settle- 
 ment or agreement for a settlement made or entered 
 into by a man would have against his creditors. 
 
 Sect. 24. The word " contract " in the Act in- 
 ■ eludes the acceptance of any trust, or of the office 
 of executrix or administratrix, and tlte provisions 
 of the Act as to liabilities of married women ex- 
 tends to all liabilities by reason, of any breach of 
 trust or devastavit committed by any married 
 woman being a trustee or executrix or administra- 
 trix either ,6e/ore or after her marriage, and her 
 husband shall not be subject to such liabilities 
 unless he has acted or intermeddled in the trust or 
 administration. The word ^^ property" in the Act 
 includes a thing in action. 
 
 Ante-nuptial Debts and Liabilities of Wife.] 
 Sect. 13. A woman after her marriage shall con- 
 tinue to he liable in respect and to the extent of lier 
 separate property for all debts contracted, and all 
 contracts entered into or wrongs committed by lier 
 before her marriage, including any sums for which 
 she may be liable as a contributory, either before or 
 after she has been placed on the list of contribu- 
 tories, under or by virtue of the Acts relating to 
 joint stock companies ; and she may he sued for 
 any such debt and for any liability in, damages' or 
 otherwise under any such contract, or in respect of 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MARRIED WO- 
 MEN'S PROPERTY h(yi%— continued, 
 any such wrong; and all sums recovered against 
 her in 'respect thereof, or for any costs relating 
 thereto, shall be payable out of her separate pro- 
 perty; and, as between her and her husband^ 
 unless there be any contract between them to the 
 contrary, lier separate property shall be deemed .to* 
 be primarily liable for all such debts, contracts, or 
 wrongs^ and for all. damages or costs recovered in 
 respect tliereof: provided always, that notjiing in, 
 this Act shall, operate to increase or diminish the 
 liability of any woman married before the com- 
 mencement of this Act for any such debt, contract, 
 or virong as aforesaid except as to any separate 
 property to which she may become entitled by: 
 virtue of this Act, and to which she would not have 
 been entitled for her separate use under the Acts: 
 hereby repealed or othenoise, if this Act had not 
 
 Sect. 14. A husband shall he liable for the debts 
 of his wife contracted, and for all contracts entered, 
 into and lorongs committed, before ma/rriage, in^ 
 eluding any liabilities tp which she may be sO' 
 subject under the Acts relating to joint stock com- 
 panies as aforesaid, to the extent of all property: 
 whatsoever belonging to his wife which he shall 
 have acquired or become entitled to from or through 
 his vjife, after deducting therefrom any payments 
 made by him, and any sums for which judgment 
 may have been bond fide recovered against him in 
 any proceeding at law in respect of any such debts, 
 contracts, or wrongs for or in respect of which his- 
 wife was liable before her marriage as aforesaid ;■ 
 but he shall not be liable for the same any further 
 or otherioise ; and any Court in which a husband 
 shall be sv£d for any such debt shall have power to 
 direct any inquiry or proceedings which it /may- 
 think proper for the purpose of ascertaining the 
 nature, amount, or value of such property : pro- 
 vided always, that nothing in this Act contained 
 shall operate to increase or diminish the liability 
 of any hushajid married before the commencement 
 of this Act for or in respect of any such debt or 
 other liability of his wife as aforesaid. 
 
 Sect. 15. A husband and wife may be jointly- 
 sued in respect of any such debt or other liability 
 (^whether by contract or for any wrong) contracted^ 
 or incurred by the wife before marriage as afore- 
 said, if the Plaintiff in the action shall seek to 
 establish his claim, either wholly or in part, against 
 both of them ; and if in any stich action, or in any 
 action brought in respect of any such debt or lia- 
 bility against the husband alone, it is not found, 
 that the husband is liable in respect of any pro- 
 perty 'of the wife so acquired by him or to which 
 he shall have become so entitled as aforesaid, he 
 shall have judgment for his costs of defence, what- 
 ever may he the result of the action against the 
 wife if jointly sued with him ; and in any such 
 action, against husband and wife jointly, if it 
 appears that the husband is liable for the debt or 
 damages recovered, or any part thereof, the judg- 
 ment to the extent of the amount for which tlie 
 husband is liable shall he a joint judgment against 
 the husband personally and against tlie wife as to 
 her' separate property; and as to the residue, if 
 any, of such debt and damages, the judgment shall 
 he a separate judgment against the wife as to her 
 separate property only. 
 
( 631 ) 
 
 DIGBST OP OASES. 
 
 ( C32 ) 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MAEEIED WO- 
 MEN'S PEOPEETY ACTS— continued. 
 Criminal Acta by Wife.] Sect. 16. A wife doing 
 <iny act with respect to any property of her hus- 
 band, which, if done hy the husband with respect 
 to the property of the wife, would make the husband 
 ■liable to criminal proceedings by the wife under 
 this Act, shall in like manner he liable to criminal 
 proceedings by her husband. 
 
 Life Insurance.] Sect. 11. ^ married woman 
 ^may by virtue of the power of making contracts 
 hereinbefore contained effect a policy upon her own 
 life or the life of her husband for her separate use ; 
 -and the same and all benefit thereof shall enure 
 accordingly. 
 
 A policy of assurance effected hy any man on 
 Ms own life, and expressed to be for the benefit of 
 Ms wife, or of his children, or of his wife and 
 ■children, or any of them, or by any woman on her 
 own life, and expressed to he for the benefit of her 
 husband, or of her children, or of her husband and 
 children, or any of them, shall create a trust in 
 favour of the objects tlierein named ; and the moneys 
 payable under any such policy shall not, so long as 
 ■any object of the trust remains unperformed, form 
 part of the estate of the insured, or be subject to 
 Ms or Iter debts : Provided, that if it shall he 
 proved that the policy was effected and the pre- 
 iniums paid with intent to defraud the creditors of 
 the insured, they shall be entitled to receive, out of 
 ■the moneys payable under the policy, a sum equal 
 to the premiums so paid. The insured may hy the 
 policy, or by any memorandum under his or her 
 hand, appoint a trustee or trustees of the moneys 
 payable under the policy, and from time to time 
 appoint a new trustee or new trustees thereof, and 
 may make provision for the appointment of a new 
 trustee or new trustees thereof, and for the invest- 
 ■ment of the moneys payable under any such policy. 
 In default of any such appointment of a trustee, 
 such policy, immediately on its being effected, shall 
 vest in the insured and his or her legal personal 
 representatives, in trust for the purposes aforesaid. 
 If, at the time of the death of tJie insured, or at 
 any time afterwards, there shall he no trustee, or it 
 ■shall he expedient to appoint a new trustee or new 
 trustees, a trustee or trustees or a new trustee or 
 new trustees may be appointed hy any Court having 
 jurisdiction under the provisions of the Trustee 
 Act, 1850, or the Acts amending and extending the 
 same. The receipt of a tru^stee or trustees duly 
 ■appointed, or, in default of any such appointment 
 or in default of notice to the insurance office, the 
 receipt of the legal personal representative of the 
 insured, shall he a discharge to the office for the 
 sum secured by the policy, or for the value tliereof, 
 ■in whole or in part. 
 
 Loans by Wife to Husband.] Sect. 3. Any money 
 or other estate of tJie wife lent or entrusted by her 
 to her husband for the purpose of any trade or 
 business carried on by him, or otherivise, shall he 
 treated as assets of her husband's estate in case of 
 his bankruptcy, under reservation of the wife's 
 claim to a dividend as a creditor for the amount 
 ■or value of such money or other estate after, but not 
 before, all claims of the other creditors of the 
 husband for valuable consideration in money or 
 money's worth have been satisfied. 
 
 Maintenance of Cliildreu and Husband.] Sect. 
 20. Where in England the husband of any looman 
 
 IV. HTTSBAHD AND WIFE— MAEEIED WO- 
 MEN'S PEOPEETY ACTS— continued, 
 having separate property becomes chargeable to any 
 union or parish, the justices Itaving jurisdiction in 
 such union or parish may, in petty sessions assem- 
 bled, upon application of the guardians of the poor, 
 issue a summons against the wife, and make and 
 enforce such order against her for the maintenance 
 of her htisband out of such separate property as hy 
 the 33rd section of the Poor Law Amendment Act, 
 1868, they may now make and enforce against a 
 husband for the maintenance of his wife if she 
 becomes chargeable to any union or parish. Where 
 in Ireland relief is given under the provisions of 
 the Acts relating to the relief of the destitute pom' 
 to the husband of any looman having separate pro- 
 pertyy the cost price of such relief is hereby de- 
 clared to he a loan from the guardians of the union 
 in which tlis same sliall he given, and sliall he re- 
 coverable from su/ih ivoman as if she were a feme 
 sole hy the same actions and proceedings as money 
 lent. 
 
 Sect. 21. A married woman having separate pro- 
 perty shall be subject to all such liability for the 
 maintenance of her children and grandchildren as 
 the husband is now hy law subject to for the main- 
 tenance of her children and grandchildren : pro- 
 vided always, that nothing in this Act shall relieve 
 her husband from any liahility imposed upon him 
 hy law to maintain her children or grandchildren. 
 Question of Title to Property.] Sect. Yl. In 
 any question between husband and wife as to the 
 title to or possession of property, either party, or 
 any such bank, corporation, company, public body, 
 or society as aforesaid in whose books any stocks, 
 funds, or shares of either party are standing, may 
 apply by summons or otherioise in a summary way 
 to any Judge of the Sigh Court of Justice in Eng- 
 land or in Ireland, according as such property is 
 in England or Ireland, or {at the option of the 
 applicant irrespectively of the value of the property 
 in dispute') in England to the Judge of the County 
 Court of the district, or in Ireland to the chairman 
 of the Civil Bill Court of the division in which 
 either party resides, and the Judge of the Bigh 
 Court of Justice or of the County Court, or the 
 chairman of the Civil Bill Court {as the case may 
 be) may make such order with respect to the pro- 
 perty in dispute, and as to the costs of and conse- 
 quent on the application, as he thinks fit, or may 
 direct such application to stand over from time to 
 time, and any inquiry touching the matters in 
 question to he made in such manner as he sliall 
 think fit : Provided always, that any order of a 
 Judge of the High Court of Justice to he made 
 under the provisions of this section shall be subject 
 to appeal in the same way as an order made hy the 
 same Judge in a suit pending or on an equitable 
 plaint in the said Court would be ; and any order 
 of a County or Ciril Bill Court under the provisions 
 of this section shall he subject to appeal in the 
 same loay as any other order made by the same 
 Court toould he, and all proceedings in a County 
 Court or Civil Bill Court under this section in 
 which, by reason of the value of the property in 
 dispute, such Court icould not have had jurisdiction 
 if this Act or the Married Women's Property Act, 
 1870, had not passed, may, at the option of the 
 Defendant or liespondent to such proceedings, be 
 removed as of i ight into the High Court of Justice 
 
( 633 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 634 ) 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MARRIED WO- 
 
 MEN'S PROPERTY ACTS— continued, 
 in England or Ireland (^as the case may be), hy 
 writ of certiorari or otherwise as may be pre- 
 scribed by any rule of such High Court ; but any 
 order made or act done in the course of such pro- 
 ceedings prior to su^h removal shall be valid, 
 miless order slmll be made to the contrary by such 
 High Court : Provided also, that the Judge of the 
 High Court of Justice or of the County Court, or 
 the chairman of the Civil Bill Court, if either party 
 so require, may hear any such application in his 
 ■private room : Provided also, that any such banh, 
 corporation, company, public body, or society as 
 aforesaid, shall, in the matter of any such applica- 
 tion for the purposes of costs or otherwise, be 
 treated as a stakeholder only. 
 
 Separate Estate.] Sect. 6. All deposits in any 
 post office or other savings bank, or in any other 
 bank, all annuities granted by the Commissioners 
 for the Reduction of the National Debt, or by any 
 other person, and all sums forming part of the 
 public stocks or funds, or of any other stocks or 
 funds transferable in the books of the Governor 
 and Company of the Bank of England, or of any 
 other bank, which at the commencement of this Act 
 are standing in the sole name of a married woman, 
 and all shares, stock, debentures, debenture slock, 
 or other interests of or in any corporation, com- 
 pany, or public body, municipal, commercial, or 
 otherwise, or of or in any industrial, provident, 
 friendly, benefit, building, or loan society, which at 
 the commencement of this Act are standing in her 
 name, shall be deemed, unless and until the con- 
 trary be sheivn, to be the separate property of such 
 married woman ; and the fact that any such de- 
 posit, annuity, sum forming part of the public 
 stocks or funds, or of any other stocks or funds 
 transferable in the books of the Governor and Com- 
 pany of the Bank of England, or of any other bank, 
 share, stock, debenture, debenture stock, or other 
 interest as aforesaid, is standing in the sole name 
 of a married woman, shall be sufficient prima facie 
 evidence that she is beneficially entitled thereto for 
 her separate M3e, so as to avihorize and empower 
 her to receive or transfer the same, And to receive 
 the dividends, interest, and profits thereof, loithout 
 the concurrence of her husband, and to indemnify 
 the Postmaster-General, the Commissioners for the 
 Meduction of the National Debt, the Governor and 
 Company of the Bank of England, the Governor 
 and. Company of the Bank of Ireland, and all 
 directors, managers, and trustees of every such 
 bank, corporation, company, public body, or society 
 as aforesaid, in respect thereof. 
 
 Sect. 7. All sums forming part of the public 
 stock or funds, or of any other stocks or funds 
 transferable in the books of the Bank of England 
 or of any other bank, and all such deposits and 
 annuities respectively as are mentioned in the last 
 preceding section, and all shares, stock, debentures, 
 debenture stock, and other interests of or in any 
 such corporation, ccrmpany, public body, or society 
 OS aforesaid, which after the commencement of this 
 Act shall be allotted to or placed, registered, or 
 transferred in or into or made to stand in the sole 
 name of any married woman, shall be deemed, 
 unless and until the contrary be shewn, to be her 
 se%Mrate property, in respect of which so far as 
 any liability may be incident thereto her separate 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MARRIED WO- 
 MEN'S PROPERTY kZTS— continued, 
 estate shall alone be liable, whether the same shall 
 be so expressed in the document whereby her title 
 to the same is created or certified, or in the books 
 or register wherein her title is entered or recorded, 
 or not. 
 
 Provided always, that nothing in this Act shall 
 require or authorize any corporation or joint stock 
 company to admit any married woman to be ct 
 holder of any shares or stock therein to which any 
 liability may be incident, contrary to tlie provisions 
 of any Act of Parliament, charter, by-law, articles-- 
 of association, or deed of settlement regulating such 
 corporation or company. 
 
 Sect. 8. All the provisions hereinbefore contained 
 as to deposits in any post-office or other savings 
 bank, or in any other bank, annuities granted by 
 the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National 
 Debt, or by any other person, sums forming part of 
 the public stocks or funds, or of any other stocks or 
 funds transferable in the books of the Bank of 
 England, or of any otherbank, shares, stocks, deben- 
 tures, debenture stock, or other interests of or in 
 any such corporation, company, public body, or 
 society as aforesaid respectively, which at the com- 
 mencement of this Act shall be standing in the sole 
 name of a married woman, or which after that 
 time shall be allotted to or placed, registered, or 
 transferred to or into, or made to stand in; the sole 
 name of a married woman, shall respectively extend 
 and apply, so far as relates to the estate, right, title 
 or interest of the married woman, to any of the 
 particulars aforesaid which, at the commencement 
 of this Act, or at any tirAe afterwards, shall be- 
 standing in, or shall be allotted to, placed, regis- 
 tered or transferred to or into, or made to stand in, 
 the name of any married woman jointly with any 
 persons or person other than her husband. 
 
 Sect. 9. It shall not be necessary for the husband 
 of any married woman, in respect of her interest, 
 to join in the transfer of any such annuity or de- 
 posit as aforesaid, or any sum forming part of the 
 public stocks or funds, or of any other stocks or 
 funds transferable, as aforesaid, or any share, 
 stock, debenture, debenture stock, or other benefit, 
 right, claim, or other interest of or in any such 
 corporation, company, public body, or society as 
 aforesaid, which is now or shall at any time here- 
 after be standing in the sole name of any married 
 woman, or in the joint names of such married- 
 woman, and any other person or persons not being 
 her husband. 
 
 Sect. 10. If any investment in any such deposit 
 or annuity as aforesaid, or in any of the public 
 stocks or funds, or in any otlier stocks or funds 
 transferable as aforesaid, or in any share, stock, 
 debenture, or debenture stock, of any corporation, 
 company, or public body, municipal, commercial, 
 or otherwise, or in any share, debenture, benefit, 
 right, or claim whatsoever in, to, or upon the funds 
 of any industrial, provident, friendly, benefit, 
 building, or loan society, shall ha-oe been made by a 
 married woman by means of moneys of her hus- 
 band, without his consent, the Court may, upon an 
 application under sect. 17 of this Act, order such 
 investment, and the dividends thereof, or any part 
 thereof, to be transferred and paid respectively to 
 the husband; and nothing in this Act contained 
 shall give validity as against creditors of thei 
 
( C35 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 636 ) 
 
 :iV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MAEEIED WO- 
 MEN'S PROPERTY &CTS— continued, 
 ijiusband to any gift hy a husband to hie wife of amj 
 property which, after such gift, shall continue to he 
 in the order and disposition or reputed ownership 
 'Of the husband, or to any deposit or otlier invest- 
 Tnent of moneys of tlie husband made by or in tlie 
 name of his wife in fraud of his creditors ; but 
 any moneys so deposited or invested may be fol- 
 lowed as %f this Act had not been passed. 
 [_8ee also sects. 1, 2, 4 and 5, infra.'] 
 Status of Married Woman.] Sect. 1. — (1.) A 
 .married woman shall, in accordance with the pro- 
 visions of this Act, be capable of acquiring, holding, 
 and disposing by will or otlierwise, of any real of 
 personal piroperty as her separate property, in the 
 
 ■ same manner as if she were a feme sole, without 
 the intervention of any trustee. 
 
 (2.) A married woman shall be capable of enter- 
 ing into and rendering herself liable in respect of 
 and to the extent of her separate property on any 
 contract, and of suing and being sued, either in 
 
 • contract or in tort, or otherwise, in all respects as 
 if she were a feme sole, and her husband need not 
 be joined loith her as plaintiff or defendant, or be 
 lyiade a party to any action or other legal proceed- 
 ing brought by or talcen against her; and any. 
 
 ■ damages or costs recovered by her in any such action 
 or pi'oceeding shall be her separate property ; and 
 any damages or costs recovered against her in any 
 such action or proceeding shall be payable out of 
 her separate property, and not otherwise. 
 
 (3.) Every contract entered into by a married 
 woman shall he deemed to be a contract entered into 
 by her with respect to and to hind her separate pro- 
 perty, unless the contrary he shewn. 
 
 (4.) Every contract entered into by a married 
 
 • woman loith respect to and to hind her separate 
 property shall hind not only the separate property 
 ivhich site is possessed of or entitled to at the date 
 
 ' of the contract, but also all separate property lohieh 
 she may thereafter acquire. 
 
 (5.) Every married u'oman carrying on a trade 
 separately from her husband shall, in respect of lier 
 - separate property, he sithject to the bankruptcy laws 
 in the same way as if she were a feme sole. 
 
 Sect. 2. Every looman who marries after the 
 commencement of this Act shall he entitled, to have 
 
 • and to hold as her separate property and to dispose 
 ■ of in manner aforesaid all real and personal pro- 
 perty which shall belong to her at tlie time of mar- 
 riage, or shall he acquired by or devolve upon her 
 after marriage, including any wages, earnings, 
 inoney, and property gained or acquired by her in 
 any employment, trade, or occupation, in which she 
 is engaged, or which she carries on sepa/i-atch/ from 
 her husband, or by the exercise of any literary, 
 
 • artistic, or scientific slcill. 
 
 Sect. 4. The execution of a general power by will 
 In/ a married woman shall have tlie effect of making 
 the property appointed liable for Iter debts and otlier 
 liabilities in the same manner as her separate estate 
 is made liable under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 5. Every woman married before the com- 
 
 ' ftneneement of this Act shall he entitled to have and 
 to hold and to dispose of in manner aforesaid as 
 
 . her separate property all real and personal pro- 
 perty, her title to which, whether vested or contin- 
 gent, and whether in possession, reversion, or re- 
 
 • mainder, shall accrue after the commen-cemcnt of 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MABEIED WO- 
 MEN'S PEOPEETY ACTS— continued, 
 this Act, including any wages, earnings,' money, ■ 
 and property so gained or acquired by her us '• 
 
 Sect. 12. Every looman, whether married before 
 or after this Act, sliall have in lier own name against 
 all persons ii'lwmsoever, including her husband, tlie 
 same civil remedies, and also {subject as regards 
 her husband, to tlie proviso liereinafter contained) 
 the same remedies and redress hy way of criminal 
 proceedings, for tlie protection and security of lier 
 own separate property, as if such property belonged 
 to lier as a feme sole, hut, except as aforesaid, no 
 husband or wife sliall he entitled to sue tlie other 
 for a tort. In any indictment or other proceeding 
 under this section it shall he sufficient to allege such 
 property to be her property ; and in any proceeding 
 under this section a husband or wife sliall he com- 
 petent to give evidence against each other, any 
 statute or rule of law to the contrary notwithstand- 
 ing ; provided always, that no criminal proceeding 
 sliall be taken by any wife against lier husband hy 
 virtue of this Act while they are living together, as 
 to or concerning any property claimed hy lier, nor 
 ichile they are living apart, as to or concerning any 
 act done by the husband while they were living 
 together, concerning propei'ty claimed hy the wife, 
 unless such property sliall have been wrongfully -. 
 
 taken hy tlie husband wlien leaving or deserting, or 
 about to leave or desert, his wife. ' 
 
 Sect. 18. A married woman wlw is an executrix 
 or administratrix alone or jointly with any other 
 person or persons of tlie estate of any deceased \ 
 
 person, or a trustee alone or jointly as aforesaid of 
 property subject to any trust, may sus or ■be sued, 
 and may transfer or join in transferring any such 
 annuity or deposit as aforesaid, or any sum form- 
 ing part of the public stocks or funds, or of any 
 other stocks or funds transferable as aforesaid, or 
 any share, stock, debenture, debenture stock, or 
 other benefit, right, claim, or other interest of or in 
 any such corporation, company, public body, or 
 society in that cliaracter, without lier husband, as 
 if she were a feme sole. 
 
 Sect. 23. For the purposes of this Act the legal 
 personal representative of any married woman 
 sliall in respect of her separate estate have the 
 same rights and liabilities, and be subject to tlie 
 same jurisdiction as she would he if she were 
 living. 
 
 Evidence.] Tlie Act 47 * 48 Vict. c. 14, enacts 
 that in any criminal proceeding under tlie Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882, against u, husband 
 or a wife {whether under sect. 12 or any otlier 
 section) the same shall he competent witnesses, and 
 except when defendant compellable to give evidence. 
 
 And see Practice — Divokce — Restitu- 
 tion OF Conjugal Eights — Statutes. 
 
 1. • Action for Assault — Limitations, 
 
 Statute of (21 Jac. 1, c. 16), ss. 3, 7 — Married 
 Woman^—" Discovert" — Married Women's Pro- 
 perty Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75).]— A 
 married woman can maintain in her own name an 
 action for an assault and false imprisonment com- 
 mitted before the coming into operation of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882, even al- 
 tliough the cause of action accrued more than four 
 years before suit, provided the action be brought 
 
( 637 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( G3S ) 
 
 T7. HTTSBAND AND WIFE— MAKBIED WO- 
 MEN'S PROPERTY ACTS— continued. 
 ■within four yeara after the coming into operation 
 ■of that statute, for she thereby has i. become "dis- 
 <»vert" -within the meaning of 21 Jac. 1, o. 16, 
 s. 7. Lo-WB V. Pox 15 ft. B. D. 667 
 
 2. Debts before Marriage — Liability of 
 
 Husband after Wife's Death — Married Wotiien's 
 Property Act (1870) Amendment Act, 1874 
 <37 & 38 Vict. c. 50), ss. 1, 2.] A husband is not 
 liable under the Married Women's Property Act 
 <1870) Amendment Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. 
 •c. 50), after his wife's death, for her debts con- 
 tracted before the mariiage. Bell v. Stookek 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 129 
 
 3. Debts before Marriage — " Subsequent 
 
 Action" — Married Women's Property Act (1870) 
 Amendment Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 50), s. 5.] 
 The Married Women's Property Act, 1874, sect. 5, 
 enacts that -when a husband after marriage has a 
 judgment bona fide recovered against him in any 
 action brought under the Act to recover a debt of 
 the wife contracted before marriage, " then to the 
 ■extent of such judgment the husband shall hot in 
 any subsequent action be liablei " i^JTeM, that 
 the words " any subsequent action " mean any 
 action commenced subsequently to the time of 
 Ijringing the action in which judgment has been 
 recovered, and not merely any action commenced 
 subsequently to the recovery of the judgment. 
 Peak v. Castle - - 8 Q. B. D. 380 
 
 4. — — • Policy of Assurance — Trust for Wife 
 <and Children of Assured — Petition for Appoint- 
 ment of Trustees — Title of Petition — Married 
 Woman's Property Act, 1870 (83 & 3i Jict. c. 93), 
 s. 10 — i Married Womcii's Property Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), ss. 11, 22.] A petition (pre- 
 sented since the coming into operation of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882), for the 
 appointment of trustees of the proceeds of a life 
 ipolioy effected by a husband, under the provisions 
 of the Married Women's Property Act, 1870, for 
 •the benefit of his wife and children, ought to be 
 •entitled in the matter of the Act of 1882. In re 
 SoTJTAa's Policy Tbust - - 26 Ch. D. 236 
 
 5. '■ Policy of Assurance — Trust for Wife 
 
 ■and Children — " Separate use "—Married Wo- 
 amen's Property Act, 1870, s. 10 — Married Women's 
 Property Act, 1882, «. 11 — Form of Order.'] A hus- 
 Tjand effected a policy for the benefit of his wife and 
 children under the Married Women's Property 
 Act, 1870, and died insolvent. His wife and one 
 child of the marriage predeceased him. Upon a 
 rpetition by his surviving children, under the 10th 
 .section of the Act, for the appointment of a 
 'trustee of the policy-money and for a declaration 
 as to tiie rights of the petitioners: — Seld, that 
 the Court had, imder that section, no jurisdiction 
 to do more than make the order appointing u 
 trustee ; but since under the policy there was a 
 trust either for the wife for life with remainder to 
 the children, or, in the alternative, for the wife 
 :and children as joint tenants, the order was di- 
 rected to be prefaced with an expression of opinion 
 'that the wife took no interest, and that the sur- 
 viving children took as, joint tenants. — In re 
 Mellor's Policy. Trusts (6 Ch. D. 127 ; 7 Ch. D. 
 ■200) not followed.— /SemJZe, a policy effected by a 
 Jiusband under sect. 10 of the Married Women's 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MAREIED WO- 
 MEN'S PEOPEETY ACTS— continued. 
 Property Act, 1870, " for the benefit of ihis wife 
 and children," should be read in conjunction with 
 that section, and should, by virtue of the words 
 " separate use " in the section, be considered as 
 giving the wife a life interest only, with remainder 
 to the children. In re Adam's Policy Trusts 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 625 
 
 6. Power to sue — Married Worming Bight 
 
 of, to sue alone— i5 & 46 Vict. e. 75, s. 1, sub-s. 2 — 
 Cause of Action before Act.} A married woman 
 may, by virtue of the Married Women's Property 
 Act, 1882, sue alone for a tort committed before 
 that Act came, into operation. Weldon v. Win- 
 slow ^ - - 13 Q. B. D. 784 
 
 7. Eeversionary Interest — ^45 & 46 Vict. 
 
 c. 75, «. S^Accruer of Title in Possession after 
 Commencement of Act.] Property to which a 
 married woman was, at the commencement of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882, entitled 
 in reversion or remainder, and which since the 
 Act has fallen into possession, is within sect. 5, 
 and may be transferred and paid to her upon her 
 separate receipt. Baynton v. Collins 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 604 
 
 8. Eeversionary Interest — Devise of Ileal 
 
 Estate for life and in Memainder — Marriage of 
 Female Meversioner in 1878i — Married Women's 
 Property Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), s. 5— 
 ■ — Death of Tenant for Life in 1884 — Separate 
 Estate.] Testator, who died in 1875, devised his 
 real estate to his wife for life, with remainder , to 
 his children. One daughter married in 1878, and 
 the tenant for life died in 1884: — Held, following 
 the decision in Baynton v. Collins (27 Ch. D. 604), 
 that under the operation of sect. 5 of the Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. e. 75), 
 the married woman's share in the estate was her 
 separate property, and could be disposed of by her 
 without the concurrence of her husband. In re 
 Thompson and Cubzon - 29 Ch. D. 177 
 
 9. Separate Property — Action by Hus- 
 band against Wife — Money paid by Husband- for 
 Wife before and after Marriage — 45 & 46 Vict. 
 c. 75, s. 1, sub-ss. 2, 3, 4 ; ss. 3, 12, 13.] A 
 husband is entitled to maintain an action against 
 his wife, and to charge her separate property for 
 money lent by him to her after their marriage, 
 and for money paid by him for her after their 
 marriage at her request made before or after their 
 marriage, but he is not entitled, even since the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 & 46 
 Vict. 0. 75), to ■ maintain any action against her 
 for money lent to her or money paid for her be- 
 fore their marriage at her request. Butler v. 
 BoTLBE - - - - 14 a. B. D. 831 
 
 [AflSrmed by Court of Appeal, 16 Q. B. D. 374.] 
 
 10. Separate Property — After-acquired 
 
 Propertij— 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), ss. 1, 23— 
 Wai—WiUs Act (1 Vict. c. 26), s. 24.] Sect. 1, 
 sub-sect. 1, of the Married Women's Property 
 Act, 1882, gives a married woman power to dis- 
 pose by wUl only of property of which she is 
 seised or possessed while she is-under coverture. 
 — Consequently, notwithstanding sect. 24 of the 
 Wills Act, her will made during coverture is not, 
 unless it is re-executed after she has become 
 
( 639 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 610 ) 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MAEEIED WO- 
 MEN'S PROPERTY ACTS— continued. 
 discovert, effectual to dispose of property which 
 she acquires after the coverture has come to an end. 
 In re Pkice. Stafford v. Stafford 28 Ch. D. 709 
 
 11. Separate Property — Contract made ly 
 
 Married Woman hefore the Act not hinding on 
 after-acquired Separate Property — Married Wo- 
 men's Property Act, 1882 (45 <fc 46 Vict. c. 75), 
 s. 1 , subs, i — Construction not retrospective.'} Sub- 
 s. 4 of e. 1 of the Married Women's Property Act, 
 1882, is not retrospective; and, therefore, in an 
 action on a contract made by a married -woman 
 before the passing of that Act, judgment cannot 
 be ordered in such terms as to be available 
 against separate property to which the Defendant 
 became entitled after the date of the contract. 
 TCENBULL V. FOKMAN 15 Q. B. D. 234 
 
 12. Separate Property — Contract — 
 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 & 46 
 Vict. c. 75), s. 1, suh-s. 4.] The contract entered 
 into by a mai-ried woman " to bind her separate 
 Ijroperty," referred to in sect. 1, sub-sect. 4, of 
 the Married Women's Property Act, 1882, is a 
 contract entered into at a time when she has 
 existing separate property. — If the married 
 woman commits a breach of such a contract, 
 and a judgment is recovered against her for the 
 breach, the judgment can be enforced against any 
 separate property which she tlien has. — But 
 sect. 1, sub-sect. 4, does not enable a married 
 woman who has no existing separate property to 
 bind by a contract any separate property which 
 she may possibly thereafter acquire. In re 
 Shakespear. Deakin v. Lakin 30 Ch. D. 169 
 
 13. Separate Property — House in sole oc- 
 cupation of Wife— 33 & 34 Vict, c 93, and i5&iQ 
 Vict. c. 75 — Trespass for entering — Bight of Wife 
 to sue.'] A married woman in the sole occupation 
 of a house, bought by her out of her own earnings, 
 since the Married Women's Property Act, 1870, 
 can now, after tlie Married Women's Property Act, 
 1882, sue alone, without her husband, in an 
 action for trespass, a person who has entered 
 such house against her will, though he did no 
 injury to the liouse and entered it with the autho- 
 rity of her husband, but for a purpose uncon- 
 nected with the husband's desire to live with his 
 wife. — Qussre, if the husband has himself a right 
 to enter such house. Weldon v. De Bathe 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 339 
 
 14. Separate Property — 45 & 46 Vict. 
 
 c. 75, s. 1 (3) and (4) — Order of Beference hy 
 Consenf] Sect. 1 (3) and (4) of the Married Wo- 
 men's Property Act, 1882, have not a retrospec- 
 tive operation so as to include contracts entered 
 into by a married woman before the date of the 
 commencement of the Act. — But an order made 
 after the commencement of the Act by consent in 
 an action by a creditor against a married woman 
 in respect of her contract before the Act, by 
 which order all questions under the contract were 
 referred to an ai-bitrator, and the parties bound 
 themselves to abide by, obey, perform, and keep 
 the award, is an agreement by the married woman 
 after the commencement of the Act, witliin 
 sect. 1 (3), and therefore by sect. 1 (4) any 
 separate estate which she had at or after the date 
 
 IV. HUSBAND AND WIFE— MARRIED WO- 
 MEN'S PROPERTY ACTS— continued. 
 
 of such agreement is liable to pay the amount 
 found by the award to be due from her tinder 
 the contract. Conolan v. Leyland 27 Ch. D. 632 
 
 V. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPARATE ES- 
 TATE. 
 
 Eestraint on Anticipation.] By 44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 41 {Conveyancing Act, 1881), «. 39. — (1.) Not- 
 withstanding that a married woman is restrained 
 from anticipation, the Court may, if it thinks fit, 
 where it appears to the Court to he for her benefit, 
 by judgment or order, with her consent, bind her 
 interest in any property. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to judgments or 
 orders made after the commencement of the Act, 
 31st December, 1881. 
 
 1. Agreement not signed by Wife — Fee 
 
 Simple of Wife — Benundation of Marital Bights 
 by Husband — Will of Wife — Statute of Frauds 
 (29 Car. 2, c. 3), s. 7.] In order that the fee 
 simple of an intended wife may be affected with 
 a trust for her separate use by an agreement made 
 between the intended husband and wife before 
 marriage, the agreement must be in writing and 
 signed by the wife as well as by the husband : 
 if it is signed by the husband alone, it is, owing 
 to the Statute of Frauds, sect. 7, invalid as a de- 
 claration of trust for separate use as to the fee 
 simple, a husband having in his wife's land only 
 an estate for the joint lives of himself and his wife 
 with a possible estate by the curtesy ; and upon 
 the death of the wife without issue during her 
 husband's lifetime, her heir-at-law, and not her 
 devisee, will be entitled to the land of which she is 
 seised in fee simple. — Mere renunciation by an in- 
 tended husband of his marital rights in his wife's 
 real property is not sufficient to clothe her with a 
 testamentary power, or to constitute a valid de- 
 claration of trust of the iee.—Bippon v. Dawding 
 (Ambl. 565) commented on. Dye v. Dy-e 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 147 
 
 2. House — Proceedings for Judicial 
 
 Separation — Husband claiming proprietary Bight 
 to House — Interim Injunction.'] On a marriage 
 a leasehold house was settled upon the usual 
 trusts for the wife for life, for her separate use, 
 and the husband and wife continued to reside in 
 the house. Differences arose between them, they 
 ceased to cohabit, and the wife instituted proceed- 
 ings for divorce or judicial separation. The hus- 
 band claimed the right to go to and to use the 
 house when and as he thought fit, not for the 
 purpose of consorting with his wife, but for his 
 own purposes. In an action by the wife against 
 the trustees and her husband claiming adminis- 
 tration of the trusts of the settlement and an in- 
 junction to restrain the husband from entering 
 the house ; — Held, that, under the circumstances, 
 the wife was entitled to an interim injunction. 
 Symonds v. Hallett - - 24 Ch. D. 346 
 
 3. Intention of Husband — Evidence — 
 
 Absence of Corrobwation.] In the absence of proof 
 of an unequivocal, complete, and final intention 
 on the part of a husband to constitute himself a 
 trustee for his wife, the Court will not after his 
 death, upon her uncorroborated statement that he- 
 expressly authorized her to carry on the business. 
 
( 641 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 642 ) 
 
 V. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPABATE ES- 
 TATE — ccmlinuedL. 
 ■on her own account, of a, farm which she had 
 rented before marriage, and to treat the proceeds 
 as her sepai'ate property, admit her claim as 
 against his estate to the proceeds of the farm 
 ■which were invested by him during his lifetime. 
 In re Whittakbb. Whittaker v. Whittakek 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 657 
 
 4. Joint Investments — Survivorship.'] 
 
 Banking accounts were liept in the joint names 
 of husband and wife, and investments in railway 
 stock were made in their joint names. The wife 
 survived her husband five days, having executed 
 a will during coverture : — Held, that the balauces 
 of the joint accounts and the joint investments 
 survived to the wife, but did not pass under her 
 will. In re Young. Tkte v. Sullivan 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 705 
 
 5. Liability — General Engagements of 
 
 Married Woman — Judgment — Existing Property 
 — Restraint on Anticipation.'] Held, by Malins, 
 V.C., that the general engagements of a married 
 woman entitled to separate estate will be enforced 
 by a Court of Equity against such separate estate 
 as she has at the time when judgment is given, 
 including (if her husband be then dead) estate 
 limited to her separate use, without power of 
 anticipation. — Held, on appeal, that they can be 
 enforced only against so much of the separate 
 estate to which she was entitled, free from any 
 restraint on anticipation, at the time when the 
 engagements were entered into, as remains at the 
 time when judgment is given, and not against 
 separate estate to which she became entitled after 
 the time of the engagements, nor against separate 
 estate to which she was entitled at the time of the 
 engagements subject to a restraint on anticipation. 
 Pike v. FitzGibbon. Martin v. FitzGibbon 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 454 
 
 6. Liability — Debts contracted before 
 
 Marriage— 33 & 3iVict. c. 93, s. 12— Practice-— In- 
 ierpleader — Power of Court of Appeal — Bules of 
 Court, 1875, Orders L, t. 2, xc, r. 10.] A married 
 woman was sued without her husband for debts 
 contracted before her marriage. By her ante- 
 nuptial settlement it was agreed that all property 
 coming to lier or to her husband in her right 
 during the coverture should be vested in two trus- 
 tees, except jewels, which were to be for her sepa- 
 rate use. The creditors obtained judgment and 
 issued execution against her separate estate. The 
 sheriff seized jewels which belonged to her before 
 her marriage, and an interpleader issue was ordered 
 between her husband and the execution creditor. 
 The jury found that the jewels belonged to the 
 husband : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, on an 
 ■application for a new trial, that the jewels be- 
 longed to the wife for her separate use, and that 
 the execution creditor was entitled to seize them : 
 — That the creditor was right in suing the wife 
 without making her husband a party : — That the 
 Court of Appeal had power under Order xl., 
 rule 10, to order judgment in the interpleader 
 issue to be entered for the execution creditor 
 without directing a new trial. And this judgment 
 was affirmed by the House of Lords. Williams v. 
 Mekcibb 9 ft. B. D. 337; 10 App, Cas. 1 
 
 V. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPARATE ' ES- 
 TATE — continued. 
 
 7. Liability — 'Wife's Contract — Charge 
 
 on Separate Estate — Trust for Separate Use not 
 arising till after Contract — Policies on Life of 
 Husband.] By a post-nuptial settlement made in 
 pursuance of aute-nuptial articles, certain policies 
 of insurance on the life of the husband were 
 assigned to trustees upon trust to receive the 
 money and pay the income to the wife during her 
 life for her separate use, independently of any 
 futm-e husband whom she might marry. There 
 was no restraint on anticipation. During the life 
 of her first husband the wife made promissory 
 notes in favour of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff, 
 the first husband being still alive, brought an 
 action claiming a charge on the policies : — Held 
 (reversing the decision of Kay, J.), that the trust 
 for separate use did not arise till after the death 
 of the husband, and that as the contracts of a 
 married woman can only be enforced against pro- 
 perty which formed part of her separate estate at 
 the date of the contract, the action could not lie 
 maintained. — In re Gaffee (1 Mac. & G. 511), In 
 re Molyneux' Estate (I. B,. 6Eq. 411), and Siurgis 
 V. Corp. (13 Ves. 190), discussed. King v. Luoas 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 712 
 
 8. Eestraint on Anticipation — Accumu- 
 lations.] A testator directed surplus income of 
 real and personal estate, after providing an 
 annuity, to be accumulated during the life of his 
 wife, and after her death he gave the capital to 
 his children : he directed that the shares of his 
 daughters should be for their separate use, with- 
 out power of alienation or anticipation during the 
 wife's life : — Held, that his married daughters 
 during the life of their mother were entitled to 
 receive only the income of invested income. In 
 re Spencer. Thomas «. Spbnceb 30 Ch. D. 183 
 
 9. Restraint on Anticipation — Attach- 
 ment of Debts — Order XLV., r. 1.] Judgment 
 having been signed in an action against the De- 
 fendants, a man and his wife, it was sought to 
 attach in execution moneys in the hands of 
 trustees, forming part of the income of tirust funds 
 payable to the wife to her separate use, which 
 had accrued since the judgment. The will by 
 which the trust was created contained a clause 
 restraining anticipation by the wife. It appeared 
 that the action was for the amount of a promissory 
 note made by the husband and wife jointly during 
 the coverture : — Held, that the moneys in question 
 could not be attached in execution. Chapman v. 
 Biggs - - - - 11 ft. B. D. 27 
 
 10. Restraint on Anticipation — Costs — 
 
 Proceedings improperly instituted.] A married 
 woman who, under a ■will, was entitled to income 
 for her separate use, with a restraint on antici- 
 pation, instituted (without a next friend) against 
 the trustees proceedings in the course of which 
 she took out a summons which was refused : — 
 Hdd, that the restraint on anticipation did not 
 prevent the Court from giving the trustees liberly 
 to retain their costs of the proceedings out of the 
 married woman's income. In re Andrews. 
 Edwaeds v. Dewar - - 30 Ch, D. 159 
 
 11. Eestra'nt on Anticipation — Judgment 
 
 Y 
 
( eis ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 644 ) 
 
 V. HTTSBAND AND WIFE — SEPAEATE ES- 
 TATE — continued. 
 Summons — Order for Payment — Debtors Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62), s. 5.] Upon a judgment 
 summons issued under sect. 5 of the Debtors Act, 
 1869, against a married woman wlio has only 
 separate estate which she is restrained from an- 
 ticipating, an order for payment cannot be made 
 unless it is shewn that, since the date of the 
 judgment, she has received some of her separate 
 income.— If in the judgment execution ia limited 
 to separate estate which she is not restrained 
 from anticipating, qussre, whether sect. 5 of the 
 Debtors Act, 1869, applies at all. — Dillon v. Cun- 
 ningham (Law Eep. 8 Ex. 23) distinguished. 
 Meagek v. Pellew - 14 Q. B. D. 973 
 
 12. Eestraint on Anticipation — Memoml 
 
 hy Court — Payment of Debts — Consent — Convey- 
 ancing and Laio of Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 
 Yict. c. 41), s. 39.] A maiTied woman was en- 
 titled to the income of a fund in Court for her life, 
 for her separate use witliout power of anticipation, 
 with remainder in trust for her children, and in 
 default of issue, in trust for such persons as she 
 should, whether covert or sole, by will appoint, 
 and, in default of appointment, to herself abso- 
 lutely. She having had no children, and being 
 past the age of childbearing, and having con- 
 tracted a number of debts, for payment of which 
 the creditors were pressing her and causing her 
 great annoyance, she with her husband applied to 
 the Court to exercise its power under sect. 39 of 
 the Conveyancing Act, 1881, to remove the re- 
 straint on anticipation, and to order part of the 
 fund to be paid out to her to enable her to piiy 
 her debts : — Held, that, whether she did or did 
 not exercise her power of appointment, the fund 
 would at her death be subject to the payment of 
 her debts, and that under the circumstances the 
 restraint on anticipation ought to be removed and 
 a portion of the fund paid out to the applicant. — 
 In re Harvey's Estate (13 Cb. D. 216) followed.— 
 The order was made upon the evidence of the 
 married woman's consent afforded by an affidavit 
 made by her in support of the application, and a 
 letter written by her to her solicitors, strongly 
 urging them to obtain the money for her. — But, 
 qtimre, whether such an order ought in general to 
 be made without ascertaining the consent of the 
 married woman by a separate examination in the 
 ordinary way. Hodqes v. Hodges 20 Ch. D. 749 
 
 13. Restraint on Anticipation — Right to 
 
 receive Capital — Income prodticing Fund.'] Gift 
 by a testatrix of real and personal estate to trus- 
 tees upon trust to convert and invest, and to 
 stand possessed of the stocks, funds, and securi- 
 ties representing the same in trust for her chil- 
 dren who, being male, attained twenty-one, or 
 being female, attained that age or married under 
 that age ; with a declaration that the shares of 
 daughters should be for their sole and separate 
 use without power of anticipation. Power was 
 given to the tiiistees, upon the marriage of any 
 of the daughters, to revoke the trusts so far as 
 related to the share of any daughter so marrying, 
 and to settle the same for the benefit of the 
 daughter and her issue as to the trustees should 
 seem fit.— The residuary estate was represented 
 by a sum of cash and certain leasehold houses. — 
 
 V. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPABATE ^S- 
 
 lAT'E— continued. 
 Held, that the gift being of an income-prodncing- 
 fund with a restraint upon anticipation, the trus- 
 tees could not pay to the daughters during cover- 
 ture their shares upon their separate receipt. In 
 re Benton. Smith v. S^iith 19 Ch. D. 277 
 
 14. Restraint on Anticipation — Eight to- 
 
 receive Capital — Payment on Separate Beceipt — 
 Income-bearing Fund — Personal Estate — Conver- 
 sion.'] A testator bequeathed an' annuity to his 
 wife. And he directed his tmstees and executors- 
 to provide for the same, either by setting apart 
 a sufScient portion of the produce of his residuary 
 personal estate, or by pm'chasing an annuity.- 
 And, after bequeathing some pecuniary legacies,- 
 he devised and bequeathed all his real estate, and 
 the residue of his personal estate, to his two- 
 daughters, their heirs, &c., as tenants in common, 
 so that the same might be enjoyed by them, 
 dnring any and every coverture, as separate pro- 
 perty free from marital control, and without power 
 of anticipation. The executors paid the testator's, 
 debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, and 
 legacies, and purchased an annuity for thewidow.- 
 The residue of the estate then consisted of two 
 sums of stock and a sum of cash. One of the 
 daughters was married : — Held, that the will did 
 not require the conversion of the residue into- 
 money, except so far as might be neeessaiy to 
 provide for the annuity : — Held, also, that the- 
 married daughter's share of the stocks, they being^; 
 income-bearing funds, could not be transferred to 
 her, but that only the income arising from them 
 could be paid to her : — But held, that her share of 
 the cash might be paid to her on her separate 
 receipt. — In re Ellis' Trusts (Law Kep. 17 Eq.- 
 409) followed. — In re Croughton's Trusts (8 Ch. D. 
 460) distinguished. In re Clakke's Tetjsts 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 748 
 
 15. Restraint on Anticipation — Right to- 
 
 receive Capital — Incottie-^yroducing Fund.] Where 
 a testator makes a bequest to a married woman for 
 her separate use absolutely, and follows it by a 
 clause restraining her from anticipation, the- 
 question whether the restraint on anticipation is- 
 effectual does not depend on the question whether 
 it is a gift of an income-bearing fund or of a sum 
 of cash, but whether the testator has or has not- 
 shewn an intention that the trustees should keep- 
 the investment and pay the income to the married 
 woman. — A testatrix directed her trustees to 
 raise and invest a sum of £4500, and to pay the 
 income to B. during her life, and after her death- 
 to hold two shares in trust for two of her nieces 
 for life, and then for their children, and as to one 
 other share to pay it to the daughters of a deceased 
 niece, and as to the remaining share to pay it to 
 H.,"a married woman, for her separate use without- 
 power to anticipate the same, and her receipt 
 alone to be a snfBcient discharge. — Held (reversing 
 the decision of Kay, J.), on the construction of the- 
 will, that on the death of B., H. was entitled to 
 receive the capital of her share, notwithstanding 
 the restraint on anticipation. — In re Ellis' Trusts 
 (Law Eep. 17 Eq. 409) distinguished. In re 
 Clarh's Trusts (21 Ch. D. 748) questioned. In re- 
 Croughton's Trusts (8 Ch. D. 460) followed. Iw 
 re BoWN. O'Halloean r. King 27 Ch. D, 411- 
 
( 615 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( G16 ) 
 
 VI. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPARATION 
 DEED. 
 
 ►•1. Compromise of Divorce Suit — Specific 
 
 Performance of Separatioii Deed—Jtirisdiction of 
 Court — Custody of Children by Wife — Agi-eement 
 not too vagus — " Ustial Covenants" — Bum Casta 
 Clause — Reference to Arbitration — Evidence — 
 Mistake:] The Plaintiff, Mrs. H., who was the 
 wife of the Defendant, claimed specific perform- 
 ance of an agreement for a separation deed en- 
 tered into npon the compromise of a suit in the 
 Divorce Court which was instituted by the husband 
 against the wife for a divorce on the ground of 
 adultery. The agi-eement was signed by both 
 husband and wife after the husband's evidence in 
 support of his case had been heard and before the 
 wife's defence had been commenced, and was in 
 these terms : — " Petition and answer dismissed. 
 Deed of separation with usual-covenants ; costs of 
 preparing deed to be borne by Mr. H. Mr. H. to 
 pay Mrs. H. for herself and child or children £150 
 a year quarterly. Mrs. H. to maintain the child 
 or children. Mr. H. to pay wife's coats. In case 
 of difference in working out these terms matter to 
 be referred to Mr. W. and Dr. D." (the leading 
 counsel on each side) : — Held, that this Court had 
 power to enforce specific performance of an agree- 
 ment for a separation deed and for the compro- 
 mise of a suit in the Divorce Court without 
 infringing the Judicature Act prohibiting inter- 
 ference with proceedings pending in another 
 branch of the Court : — That the Court wouid not 
 refuse specific performance of an agreement for a 
 separation deed on the ground that it provided for 
 the wife having the custody of the children : — 
 That hnsband and wife were competent to make 
 a binding agreement for compromise of a divorce 
 suit, and that this agreement was not too vague 
 to be enforced by the Court : — That a dum casta 
 clause did not come within the term " usual cove- 
 nants " in a separation deed agreed to as part of 
 the terms of compromise of a divorce suit : — That 
 the Court would construe the term '• usual cove- 
 nants " in reference to s-urrounding circumstances, 
 but the adultery of the wife not having been 
 proved could not form an element for the consi- 
 deration of the Court : — That the agreement on 
 the face of it being complete, the arbitration 
 clause could only come into force in case of dif- 
 ference between the parties, and did not oust the 
 jurisdiction of the Court to settle the deed itself. 
 — Decree for specific performance; the deed of 
 separation to be settled in Chambers if the parties 
 (iiffered, and no dim casta clause to be inserted. — 
 It is no answer to a suit for specific performance 
 for Defendant to say that though he understood 
 what the words of the agreement were, he m&a 
 under a mistake as to their legal effect. Hakt v. 
 Habt - ISCh.D. 670 
 
 3, Covenant to maintain. Children — BigM 
 
 of Child to sue — Cestui que trust — Stranger suing 
 on Covenant — Practice — Action — Parties — Mis- 
 taJte — Amendment — Bules of Supreme Court, 1883, 
 Order xvi., r. 2.] To entitle a third person, not 
 named as a party to a contract, to sue either of the. 
 contracting parties, the thii-d person must possess 
 an actual beneficial right which places him in the 
 position of cestui que trust under the contract. — 
 By a deed of separation between husband and. 
 
 VI. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPARATION 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 wife, the husband covenanted with, the, trustees to 
 pay to them an annuity for the use of the wife 
 and two eldest daughters, and also to pay to the 
 trustees all the expenses of the maintenance and 
 education of the two youngest daughters, provided 
 that the trustees permitted them to go to such 
 school as the husband should direct, and provided 
 also that the covenants by the trustees were duly 
 observed and performed : provided, also, that the 
 two youngest daughters should live at such place 
 (being reasonable and proper for the purpose) as 
 the husband should direct, and should be main- 
 tained and educated at his expense, the husband 
 and wife to have all reasonable access to them. 
 And the trustees covenanted with the husband 
 that they would, during the continuance of the 
 separation, keep him inilemnified against all lia- 
 bility for the maintenance of the wife and the two 
 eldest daughters, tod against all molestation by 
 them, and that the wife would not take any pro- 
 ceedings against the husband for alimony, except 
 as aforesaid ; and that they, the trustees, would, 
 on the husband defraying all the expenses con- 
 nected therewith, carry out his desires as to the 
 school at which the two youngest daughters 
 should be educated, and the place at which they 
 should live, and would permit them, if they so 
 desired, and without any interference on the part 
 of the wife, to accept any invitation of the husband 
 to reside with him. — On one of the two youngest 
 daughters subsequently attaining sixteen, the 
 husband refused any longer to maintain hei', 
 whereupon she brought an action, by her next 
 friend, against the husband and the trustees of 
 the separation deed to enforce the husband's cove- 
 nant, the trustees having refused to allow their 
 names to be used as plaintiff;?, and Bacon, V.C., 
 gave a judgment for enforcing the covenant : — 
 Ifeld, on appeal, that upon the construction of the 
 deed, the Plaintiff was not iu the position of 
 cestui que trust under the covenant so as to entitle 
 her to maintain the action, but liberty was given 
 to her, ilnder the Rules of the Supreme Court, 
 1883, Order xvi., r. 2, to amend the writ, by add- 
 ing the trustees, the wife, and the other daughters, 
 or any of them, as Plaintiffs. — ToucAe v. Meiro- 
 politan Railway Warehousing Company (Law Eep. 
 6 Ch. 671) considered. — The trustees refusing to 
 be joined as co-Plaintiffs, the statement of claim 
 was amended by making the wife a co-Plaintiff : 
 ■ — Held, that she had such an interest as entitled 
 her to sue, the deed being an arrangement between 
 the husband and wife, and the trustees being in- 
 troduced on her behalf in order to get over the 
 difficulty that the husband and wife could not at 
 law sue each other, so that the trastees were to be 
 considered trustees for the wife, and if they re- 
 fused to sue she could sue in equity.— After the 
 separation deed the husband committed adjiltery, 
 and a decree was made for judicial separation, 
 giving the custody of the two youngest daughters 
 to the wife. After this the wife applied for in- 
 creased alimony, which was granted by the Presi- 
 dent, but his decision was reversed on appeal 
 (7 P. D. 168), both the arguments and the judg- 
 ment of the Court of Appeal proceeding on the 
 footing (though the Court did not expressly decide 
 the point) that the husband remained liable under 
 
 Y 2 
 
( C17 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 6!S ) 
 
 VI. HUSBAND AND WIFE — SEPARATION 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 the deed to pay for the maintenance and educa- 
 tion of the two youngest daughters. He now 
 contended that his covenant was put an end to by 
 the custody of the youngest daughters being given 
 to his wife : — Held, that he was not at liberty to 
 retain the benefit of a decision given on the foot- 
 ing that his liability under the covenant con- 
 tinued, and at the tame time to insist that his 
 liability under it had determined, and the appeal 
 was ordered to stand over, with liberty to the wife 
 to apply to the Divorce Court for increased 
 alimony, if she should be so advised. Gaudy v. 
 Gandt - 30 Ch. D. 57 
 
 3. Covenant to pay Annuity — Adultery 
 
 hy Wife — Condition Precedent — Independent Cove- 
 nants — Covenant against Molestation — Molestation, 
 what amounts to.'] In a separation deed a covenant, 
 by which the husband undertakes to pay his wife 
 an annuity without restrictiug his liability to such 
 time as she shall be chaste, is good and is not 
 against public policy, and the covenant remains 
 IQ force and the annuity continues payable, al- 
 though the wife afterwards commits adultery. — 
 But, semble, per Cotton, L.J., on the authority of 
 Evans v. Carrington (2 De G. F. & J. 481), that 
 if the covenant had. been inserted in the separa- 
 tion deed with the intent that the wife might be 
 at liberty to commit ailultery, the deed would 
 have been void. — Covenants in a separation deed, 
 by which respectively the husband has cove- 
 nanted to pay an annuity to a trustee for the 
 wife, and the trustee has covenanted that the 
 wife shall not molest the husband, must be con- 
 strued as independent covenants in the absence 
 of any express terms making them dependent; 
 and therefore a breach of the covenant, that a 
 wife shall not molest the husband, is not an 
 answer to an action for the annuity. — Neither 
 adultery alone by the wife, nor adultery by her 
 followed by the birth of a spurious child, is a 
 breach of a covenant in a separation deed 
 against molestation by the wife. — But, semhle, 
 adultery by the wife followed by the birth of a 
 spurious child wliom she puts forward as the 
 ■ child of her husband, especially if this is done 
 with intent to claim a title or property to which 
 the legitimate oftspring of her husband would be 
 entitled, is evidence of a breach of a covenant 
 against molestation by her. — By Brett, M.E., in 
 order to constitute a breach of a covenant in a 
 separation deed against molestation by a wife, 
 some act must be done by her or by her authority 
 with intent to annoy her husband and which is in 
 fact an annoyance to him, or at least some act 
 must be done by her or by her authority with a 
 knowledge that it must of itself without more 
 annoy her husband or annoy a husband with 
 reasonable and proper feeling. Feakon «. Eakl 
 OF AtLESFOKD 12 Q. B, D. 539 ; 14 Q. B. D. 792 
 
 4. Separation Deed — Reconciliation.'] A 
 
 husband and wife when before the Divorce Court 
 agreed that if judicial separation was decreed the 
 wife should be permitted to enjoy during her life 
 certain furniture. Judicial sei^aration wasdecroed, 
 and the wife took possession of the furuiture. The 
 husband and wife afterwards resumed cohabita- 
 tion :— Seld, in an action by the wife to recover 
 
 VI. HirSBAND AND WIFE — SEPARATION 
 DEED — continued. 
 
 the furniture, that the agreement came to an end 
 when cohabitation was resumed : — Held, that, as 
 the wife was entitled to the furniture during 
 separation only, she took nothing under 20 & 21 
 Vict. c. 8f>, s. 25, which relates to property ac- 
 quired by a wife during separation. Nicol v. 
 NiooL - - - - 30 Ch. D. 143 
 
 fAffinned by the Court of Appeal.] 
 
 5. Ward of Court — Custody of Children 
 
 — Access.] By a deed of separation made in 1880 
 between H., a medical oflSoer in the army, and his 
 wife, provision was made as to the custody of their 
 four children (of whom the eldest was eleven and 
 the youngest three years of age) during the ap- 
 proaching absence of the husband in India, after 
 which he was to resume the entire custody of 
 them, but he covenanted that full aud free liberty 
 of access to them should be always accorded to the 
 wife, to the extent at least of her having the 
 opportunity of spending one day in every fortnight 
 with them. In 188-1: he was ordered to Egypt 
 and proposed to take the tii-st and third of the 
 children with him. Mrs. H. applied for an in- 
 junction to restrain him from doing so : — Held, 
 by Pearson, J., that H. was bound by the covenant 
 to keep the children in such a place that Mrs. H. 
 could have free access to them, and that an in- 
 junction ought to be granted : — Held, by the Court 
 of Appeal, that the covenant did not bind H. to 
 keep the children in a place where Mrs. H. could 
 conveniently have access to them, and did not 
 preclude him from taking them with him to any 
 place where he miglit be ordered in the course 
 of his duties, and that the injunction must be 
 dissolved, there being no case made that he was 
 removing them for the purpose of preventing Mrs. 
 H. from having access to them. Hunt v. Hunt 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 606 
 
 VII. HUSBAND AND WIFE— WIFE'S CON- 
 VEYANCE. 
 
 Aclmowledgment of Deeds by Married Women.] 
 By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 {Conveyancing Act, 1882), 
 s. 7. — (1.) In sect. 79 of the Fines and Becoreries 
 Act, and sect. 70 of the Fines and Recoveries (Ire- 
 land) Act, there shall, hy virtue of this Act, he sub- 
 stituted for the words " two of the perpetual com- 
 missioners, or tico special commissioners," the word^ 
 " one of the perpetual commissioners, or one special 
 commissioner ;" and in sect. S3 of the Fines and 
 Recoveries Act, and sect. 74 of the Fiiu:s and Re- 
 coveries (Ireland) Act, there shall, hy virtue of this 
 Act, he substituted for the word "persons" the 
 icord "person," and for the word " commissioners" 
 the words " a commissioner ; " and all other provi- 
 sions of those Acts, and all other enactments having 
 reference in any manner to the sections aforesaid, 
 shall he read and have effect accordingly. 
 
 (2.) Where the memorandum of acknmcUdgment 
 hy a married woman of a deed purports to he signed 
 hy a 2ierson authorized to tahe the acltnowledgment, 
 the deed shall, as regards the execution thereof hy 
 the married woman, take effect at tlie time of oc- 
 knoiolcdgmrnt, and shall he conclusively taken to 
 have been duly acknotoledged. 
 
 (3.) A deed achnoivledged before or after tlie 
 commencement of this Act by a married woman. 
 
( 619 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( G30 ) 
 
 VII. HUSBAND AND WIFE — WIFE'S CON- 
 VEY AN CE— continued. 
 before a judge of the High Court of Justice in Eng- 
 land or Ireland, or before a judge of a eoimty 
 court in England, m- before a chairman in Ireland, 
 or before a perpetual commissioner or a special 
 commissioner, shall not be impeached or impeach- 
 able by reason only that snch judge, chairman, or 
 commissioner was interested or concerned either as 
 a party, m- as solicitor, or clerk to the solicitor for 
 one of the parties, or otherwise, in the transaction 
 giving occasion for the acknowledgment; and 
 General Ridss sliall be made for preventing any 
 person interested or concerned as_ aforesaid from 
 talcing an acknowledgment ; hut no such Rules shall 
 make invalid any acknowhdgment ; and those Rules 
 shall, as regards England, be deemed Bides of 
 Court within sect. 17 of the Appellate Jurisdiction 
 Act, 1876, as altered by sect. 19 of the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature Act, 1 881, and shall, as regards 
 Ireland, he deemed Hides of Court within the Su- 
 preme Court of Judicature Act {Ireland), 1877, and 
 may he made accordingly, for England and Ire- 
 land respectively, at any time after the passing of 
 this Act, to take effect on or after the commencement 
 of this A ct. 
 
 (4) repeah 3 (fc 4 Will. 4, c. 74, ss. 85-88 ; 4 <fe 5 
 Will. 4, c. 92, ss. 75 (in part) and 76-79 ; 17 * 18 
 Vict. c. 75 ; and 41 & 42 Vict. c. 23. 
 
 (5.) The foregoing provisions of this section, in- 
 cluding the repeal therein, apply only to the execu- 
 tion of deeds by married ivometi after the commence- 
 ment of this Act. 
 
 (6.) Notwithstanding the repeal or any other 
 thing in this section, tlie certificate, if not lodged 
 before the commeneement of this Act, of the taking 
 of an acknowledgment hy a married woman of a 
 deed executed before the commeneement of this Act, 
 with any affidavit relating thereto, shall be lodged, 
 examined, and filed in the like manner, and with 
 tlie like effects and conseguences as if this section 
 had not been enacted. 
 
 (7.) There shall continue to he kept in the proper 
 office of the Supreme Court of Judicature an index 
 to all certificates of acknowledgments of deeds by 
 married women lodged therein, before or after the 
 commencement of this Act, containing tlie names of 
 the married women and their husbands, alphabeti- 
 cally arranged, and tlie dates of the certificates and 
 of tlie deeds to which tliey respectively relate, and 
 ether particulars found convenient ; and every such 
 certificate lodged after the commencement of this 
 Act shall he entered in the index as soon as may be 
 after tlie certificate is filed. 
 
 (8.) An office copy of any such certificate filed 
 before or after the commencement of this Act shall 
 be delivered to any person applying for the same ; 
 and every such office copy sliall be received as evi- 
 dence of the acknowledgment of the deed to which 
 the certificate refers. 
 
 1. Acknowledgment of Deed under 3 <fc 4 
 
 Will. 4, e. 74, s. 84 — Varying the Certificate by 
 omitting the Words " of full Age."'\ By order of 
 a Vioe-Chancellor indentiu-es of settlement were 
 directed to be executed by a married -woman 
 who was an infant. The Court allowed the certi- 
 ficate of acknowledgment under 3 & 4 Will. 4, 
 c. 74, 8. 84, to be varied by omitting the words '' of 
 full ase." In re Lacey - - 6 Q. B. D. 154 
 
 VII. HUSBAND AND WIFE — WIFE'S CO^- 
 
 y^YA'SCE— continued. 
 
 8. • Husband's Concurrence — Conveyance 
 
 of Wife's Property under 3 c6 4 Will. 4, c. 74, 
 s. 91.] Where a husband and wife were living 
 apart and, the wife being devisee under a will of 
 real property on trust for sale, the husband re- 
 fused to coacur in a conveyance of tuch property 
 upon a sale under the trusts of the will, unless he 
 received a sum of money for doing so, the Court 
 granted an order dispensing with the concurrence 
 of the husband under 3 & 4 Will. 4, o. 74, s. 91, 
 although it was admitted by the affidavit that the 
 husband had, since he had left his wife, to a slight 
 extent contributed to her support. In re Caine 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 284 
 
 3. Specific Performance — Fines and Re- 
 coveries, Act for abolition of (Ireland) (4 cfc 5 
 Will. 4, c. 92j, ss. 68, 71.] A married woman was 
 entitled by an ante-nuptial settlement to a jointure 
 rent-charge after her husband's death secm-ed 
 upon his real estates in Ireland. The wife having 
 left him, the husband commenced a suit for resti- 
 tution of conjugal rights ; with a view to a com- 
 promise by an agreement for separation a docu- 
 ment was drawn up and signed by the husband, 
 wliich stipulated that the wife should release part 
 of her jomture. The wife signed this document 
 with a qualification, that no further steps were 
 taken in the matrimonial suit, but it was not 
 stayed or dismissed. A deed was prepared to 
 carry out the ternis of the compromise and was 
 executed by the husband, but the wife refused to 
 execute it or to return to her husband, and the 
 husband afterwards died:— fleZd!, reversing the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal in Ireland, tliat 
 the wife was not, when she signed the document, 
 in all respects in the same position as a feme sole, 
 and that even if any final agreement had been 
 come to she would not have been bound by it, 
 there having been no acknowledgment as required 
 by 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 92, ss. 68, 71 ; and that specific 
 performance of the agreement to release her jointure 
 could not be decreed against her. — Bunt v. Hunt 
 (4 D. P. & J. 221 ; 31 L. J. (Ch.) 161) and Besant 
 V. Wood (12 Ch. D. 605) commented on by the 
 Earl of Selborne, L.C. Cahill v. Cahill 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 420 
 
 VIII. HUSBAND AND WIFE— WIFE'S EEAt 
 ESTATE. 
 
 1. Articles of Settlement — Infant — Mar- 
 ried Woman suing alone — Trust Property — 
 Order XYL, r. 8 — Jus tertii.'] The Plaintiff's 
 husband, who married her when he was an infant 
 of about seventeen, agi'eed in writing shortly 
 before the marriage, and in consideration of the 
 same, to assign all her property to a trustee for 
 her sole and separate use. At the time of the 
 marriage the Plaintiif was possessed of some 
 leasehold property in her own right, and of other 
 leasehold property in ti-ust for her son by a former 
 marriage, and the Defendant was her agent 
 appointed by her to receive the rents of the said 
 leasehold property, and as such agent he received 
 the rents both before and after the last mamage. 
 Imme^liately after the last marriage the Plaintiff 
 was deserted by her husband, and she obtained a 
 protection order from a police magistrate, under 
 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, s. 21, protecting all her 
 
( G51 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 652 ) 
 
 VIII. HUSBAND AND WIFE— WIFE'S EEAL 
 
 YST&.T'E— continued. 
 earnings and property acquired since tbe deser- 
 tion. The action was brought by tbe Plaintiff 
 alone without her husband (who was still an 
 infant) for the rents received by the Defendant 
 after the marriage. The husband made no claim 
 to any of the rents, but the Defendant having 
 had notice of the marriage, refused to pay them 
 to the Plaintiff ; and he applied to stay the action 
 until the Plaintiff added a next friend or gave 
 security for costs. This application was refused 
 at Chambers, and on appeal by a Divisional 
 Court : — Held, that the agreement to assign was 
 void as against the infant husband : — Held, also, 
 that the protection order did not apply, but that 
 the effect of tlie refusal of the Coui't to stay the 
 action on the Defendant's application was to give 
 leave to the Plaintiff to sue alone without her 
 husband, in exercise of the authority given to a 
 Court or Judge by Order xvi., rule 8, and which 
 might be so exercised after action brought, and 
 that therefore the Plaintiff was entitled to sue 
 alone and to recover the money received from the 
 property of which she was trustee : — Held, how- 
 ever, by Lord Selborne, L.C., and Baggallay, L. J., 
 that the agreement to assign being void against 
 her husband she could not recover the money 
 received from the property which belonged to her 
 absolutely before her last maiTiage : — Held, by 
 Brett, L.J., that she could, since the husband had 
 made no claim, and therefore the Defendant, who 
 was not defending by his authority, could not set 
 up the husband's right as an answer to the action. 
 
 KINGSMA2I V. KiNGSMAN 6 Q. B. D. 122 
 
 2. Interest in Land — Mortgage Debt — 
 
 Acknowledged Seed — Fines and Becoveries Act 
 (3 & i Will. 4, c. 74), ss. 1, 77.] Under the wUl 
 of a testator who died in 1843, his three children, 
 T., W., & S., a married woman, were each entitled 
 to one-third of his residuary estate, subject to the 
 life interest therein of his widow. — In 1844 T. 
 died a bachelor and intestate. — By a deed executed 
 in 1854 (before Sir E. Malins' Act), to which the 
 tenant for life, the trustees of tlie wUl, 'W., and S. 
 and her husband, were parties, and wbich was 
 acknowledged by 8. under the Fines and Re- 
 coveries Act (3 & 4 Will. 4, 0. 74), two mortgage 
 debts, secured to the trustees on real estate and 
 forming par-t of the testator's residuary estate, were 
 assigned by the tenant for life and W. and by S. 
 and her husband, with the privity of the trustees, 
 by way of mortgage. — The deed was executed 
 under the erroneous assumption that, according to 
 the terms of a gift over in the will, T. took no 
 share in the testator's estate, and consequently his 
 administrator was not made a party. — Held, that 
 the deed was not effectual to pass S.'s share of the 
 two mortgage debts. — Williams v. Cooke (4 Gift". 
 343) distinguished. In re Newton's Trusts 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 181 
 
 3. Interest in Land — Devise in Trust for 
 
 Sale — Proceeds of Sale — Husband — Bankruptcy — 
 Creditors'' Deed — Concurrence in Wife's Assign- 
 ment — Acknowledged Dei-d — Fines and Becoveries 
 Act (3 ife 4 Will. 4, c. 74), s. 77 — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1849i s. in— Bankruptcy Act, 1861.] Under the 
 will of a testator, who died in March, 1862, M., a 
 married woman, was entitled in reversion expect- 
 
 VIII. HUSBAND AND WIFE— WIFE'S EEAL 
 
 ESTATE — continued. 
 ant on the death of a tenant for life to a share of 
 the proceeds of real estate devised to trustees in 
 trust for sale on that event. In August, 1862, in 
 the lifetime of the tenant for life, M.'s husband 
 executed a general assignment, under the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1861, of all his property to a trustee 
 for the benefit of his creditors. In August, 1866, 
 he was adjudged bankrupt, and ia December fol- 
 lowing he obtained his discharge. The tenant for 
 life died in January, 1869. By a deed executed in 
 February following, and duly acknowledged by 
 M. under sect. 77 of the Fines and Recoveries 
 Act (3 & 4 Wni. 4, c. 74), M. and her husband 
 assigned all moneys which should become due to 
 them or either of them under the testator's will 
 to S. by way of mortgage. Shortlj' afterwards 
 the trustees of the will sold the real estate, and 
 ultimately paid M.'s share of the proceeds into 
 Court under the Trustee Belief Act : — Held, that 
 the husband was not precluded by the creditors' 
 deed of 1862 or by his bankruptcy in 1866 from 
 concurring with his wife in the mortgage of 1869, 
 and accordingly that the mortgage was valid 
 against the trustee of the creditors' deed and the 
 assignee in bankruptcy. In re Jakeman's Teusts 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 344 
 
 4. Nature of Settlement — Duty of Mort- 
 gagee to inquire as to SettUment.'] When a married 
 woman executes a mortgage there is no obligation 
 on the mortgagee to inquire whether a settlement 
 was made on her marriage. Lloyd's Banking 
 CoMPASY V. Jones - - - 29 Ch. D. 221 
 
 5. Non-concurrence of Husband — Fines 
 
 and Becoveries Act, 1833 (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 74), 
 s. 91 — Husband's Interest in Bents and Profits — 
 Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-s. 11 — Wife's 
 Equity to a Settlement.'] An order in the usual 
 form obtained imder s. 91 of the Fines and 
 Recoveries Act, 1833, by a married woman, em- 
 powering her to dispose of her real estate without 
 the concurrence of her husband, does not deprive 
 him of the common law rights which he acquired 
 in the property by reason of the coverture. — 
 Where, therefore, under such an order, a married 
 woman sold and conveyed all her estate and 
 interest in real estate, her husband refusing to 
 join : — Held, that the husband's common law 
 right to the rents during the coverture remained 
 unaffected by the wife's alienation, but that (she 
 asserting her equity to a settlement) he was 
 bound, whether his estate was legal or equitable, 
 to provide for her out of the rents ; and, under the 
 circumstances, the whole of the rents were settled 
 upon her. Fowke r. Deaycott 29 Ch. D. 996 
 
 6. Post-nuptial Contract — Contract by (he 
 
 Wife with the Husband in respect of her Beal 
 Estate— 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 74, ss. 77, 79.] A 
 married woman immediately after the marriage, 
 and in consideration thereof and of her husband 
 undertaking the management of lands and tene- 
 ments of which slie was seised in fee, and of his 
 liayiug off incumbrances and defi'aying the ex- 
 pense of managing and keeping the premises in 
 repair, verbally agreed to convey the lands and 
 tenements to him, and to settle tliem upon him 
 absolutely, and to do all such acts as might be 
 
( 653 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 654 ) 
 
 VIII. HUSBAHD AND WIFE— ■WIFE'S EEAI 
 
 ESTATE— co7««Mme(i. 
 ilegally necessary for effectuating such convey- 
 ance and settlement. The husband performed 
 his part of the agreement, but the wife died with- 
 out having executed or acknowledged a deed : — 
 Held, that this contract could not be set up as an 
 equitable defence to a claim by her heir-at-law to 
 irecover the land. Williams v. Walkbb 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 676 
 
 JX. HUSBAND AND WIFE— WIFE'S REVER- 
 SION. 
 
 1. Chattels Real not vested in Possession 
 
 •during Coverture — Reversionary Interest of Wife 
 ■after Life Interest in Leaseholds for Years— Wife 
 j>redeceasing Tenant for Life — Title of Husband 
 surviving.'] A wife entitled to a term subject to 
 a life estate therein predeceased her husband 
 during the subsistence of the life estate : — Udd, 
 that it was not necessary for the husband to take 
 ■out letters of administration to her in order to 
 ■complete his title to the leaseholds. In re Bel- 
 lamy. Elder v. Pearson - 25 Ch. D, 620 
 
 3. Interest in Land — Money invested in 
 
 Iiand — Fines and Recoveries Act (3 & 4 Will. 4, 
 ■c. 74), s. 77.] A fund of personalty was settled 
 in 1842 upon trust during the joint lives of a hus- 
 band and wife for the wife for her separate use 
 without power of anticipation, then for the sur- 
 vivor dm'ing his or her life, and after the death of 
 the survivor for such of theii- children as being 
 sous should attain twenty-one, or being daughters 
 attain that age or marry, in equal shares. There 
 was no power to invest in purchase of laud. The 
 Ttrastees bought a freehold house with part of the 
 fund. The only children were two daughters, 
 who attained twenty-one and married. After this 
 the trustee, the husband and wife, and the daugh- 
 ters and their husbands, by deed duly acknow- 
 ledged by the daughters, conveyed the estate to 
 such uses as the father and mother should jointly 
 .appoint, and in default as the survivor should by 
 deed or will appoint. After the death of the 
 mother the father contracted to sell the estate. 
 The purchaser objected to the title on the ground 
 that, as the purchase of real estate was uuautho- 
 jized, the interest of the daughters was still to be 
 .treated as a reversionary interest in personalty of 
 which they could not dispose : — Held (reversing 
 -the decision of Hall, V.C), that the father could 
 make a good title. In re Duebant and Stoneb 
 
 ri8 Ch. D. 106 
 
 Agreement not signed by wife — Fee simple 
 
 of wife - - - 13 Q. B. D. 147 
 
 See HusBAiJD and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 1. 
 
 jaUSBAND AND WIFE — Action by executrix and 
 her husband— Costs 30 Ch. D. 24 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Supreme Coubt — Costs. 
 35. 
 
 Appointment by wife— Will 22 Ch, D. 238 
 
 See Power — Execution. 11. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Ante-nuptial agi-eement for 
 
 settlement — Part performance — Statute 
 of Frauds - 14 Q. B. D. 419 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Pbotected Tbans- 
 
 AOTION. 9. 
 
 HUSBAND AND VTXB-&— continued. 
 
 ^Bankruptcy — Wife's separate property in 
 
 possession of husband — Eeputed owner- 
 ship - - 14 a. B. 417 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Dispo- 
 sition. 12. 
 
 Bequest by will to — Unity of person — Mar- 
 ried Women's Property Act 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 166 
 .See Will— Joint Tenancy. 
 
 Consent of wife — Examination 26 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 2. 
 
 Conveyance — Bare trustee 29 Ch, D, 693 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 Covenant to settle after-acquii'ed property. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Future 
 Property. 
 
 Criminal law — Husband witness against 
 
 wife — Married Women's Property Act, 
 1882 - - 12 Q, B. D, 266 
 
 See Cbihinal Law — Evidence. 2. 
 
 " Desertion " - 9 ft. B. D. 522 
 
 See PooE Law — Settlement. 8. 
 
 '■ Divorce — Assignment of alimony 27 Ch. D. 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 1. [160 
 
 Divorced husband — Legacy 22 Ch. D. 619 
 
 See Will — Words. 11. 
 
 Dower - 21 Ch. D. 164; 8 Q. B. D. 31 
 
 See DowEB.' 1, 2. 
 
 Election by wife - - 26 Ch, D, 368 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 606 ; 28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Election. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Equity to settlement - 16 Ch. D. 376 ; 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 778 ; 27 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Evidence of marriage — Ceylon 6 App. Cas. 
 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 3. [364 
 
 Evidence of marriage — Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 ; 10 App. Cas. 692 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 2,3. 
 
 Evidence of non-access - 23 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Evidence — General. 2. 
 
 Evidence of, on behalf of the other — Offences 
 
 against women. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 Judgment against married woman 
 
 [8Q. B. D. 177; 13 «. B. D. 691 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Court — Writ 
 specially indorsed. ,S, 4. 
 
 Legacy to wife - 17 Ch, D, 798 
 
 See Will-^Priobity of Legacies. 
 
 Married woman executrix — Husband ob- 
 jecting to probate - - 6 P. D. 103 
 See Probate — Married Woman. 2. 
 
 Married woman — Third party — Summons 
 
 for directions ■ - 12 ft. B, D, 533 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Third- 
 Party. 3. 
 
( 655 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 656 ) 
 
 HUSBAND AND VflFS— continued. 
 
 Married woman suing separately — Security 
 
 for costs - 9 ft. B. D. 52 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Scpebme Coubt — Secu- 
 BiTY FOB Costs. 4. 
 
 Married Women's Property Act — Wife suing 
 
 as feme sole — Security for costs 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 418 
 See Pbaotioe — Supbbme Cotibt — Seop- 
 BiTT FOB Costs. 5. 
 
 Natal — Law of -Sm-ety bond by wife 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 715 
 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 2. 
 
 Nullity of marriage — Impotence — Scotch 
 
 law - - 10 App. Cas. 171 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 7. 
 
 Order upon husband for maintenance of 
 
 wife — Amount of relief granted by 
 guardians - 13 ft. B. D. 25 
 
 See PooB Law — Maintenance. 2. 
 
 Policy of insurance — Felonious act of wife 
 
 of assured - - 6 ft. B. D. 561 
 
 See Insueance, Fibe. 1. 
 
 Poor law— Adultery of wife 7 ft. B. D. 89 
 
 See PooK Law — Maintenance. 1. 
 
 Post-nuptial settlement — Wife's separate 
 
 estate - 24 Ch. D. 597 
 
 See VoLCNTAET Convetanoe. 3. 
 
 Production of documents 29 Ch. D. 899 
 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Couet' — Peo- 
 
 DCCTION OF DoOCMENTS. 4. 
 
 Protection order — Setting aside — Death of 
 
 wife - 6 P. D. 54 
 
 See Peoeate — Maeeied Woman. 3. 
 
 Eequest for sale in partition suit 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See Paetition Suit — Sale. 4. [612 
 
 HUSBAND AND WlTS—cmtinued. 
 Kestitution of conjugal rights. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Peactice 
 — DivoBOE — Kestitution of Con- 
 jugal Eights. 
 Scotch law. 
 
 See Oases under Scotch Law — Husband 
 AND Wife. 
 Separate estate — Bill of costs 24 Ch. D. 405 
 
 See SoLioiTOE — Bill of Costs. 9. 
 Separate estate — Injunction against married 
 
 woman - 16 Ch. D. 660 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — In- 
 junction. 5. 
 Separate estate — Sale under Lands Clauses 
 
 Act - 18 Ch. D. 429 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsoey 
 Powees. 8. 
 Separate examination of wife 28 Ch. D. 171 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 3. 
 Separate use — ^WiU. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Sepaeate Use. 
 Settlement on marriage. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement. 
 
 Settlement — ^After-acquired property 
 
 [a4Ch. D. 114 
 
 See Settijid Land Act — DEFiNirioifS. 1. 
 Shares taken in wife's name 18 Ch. D. 581 
 
 See Company — Conteibutoey. 1. 
 
 Subsequent marriage — Child illegitimate 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See Distbieutions, Statute of. 
 Voidable marriage — Annuity to widow 
 
 See Will — Condition. 11. [25 Ch. D. 685 
 Wife tenant for life — Custody of deeds — 
 
 Bankruptcy of husband 26 Ch. D. 31 
 
 See Title Deeds. 
 HYPOTHEC— Law of Jersey - 8 App. Cas. 542 
 
 See Colonial Law — Jeesey. 2. 
 
( 657 ) 
 
 DIGEST OIT CASES. 
 
 ( 658 ) 
 
 IDENTiriCATION OF PROPEBTY— Statute of 
 Frauds 20 Oh. D. 90 
 
 See Vendob and Purohaseb — ^Ageee- 
 
 MENT. 2. 
 
 ILLEGALITY — Contract to indemnify bail 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 848 ; 15 Q. B. D. S61 
 
 See CoNTKAOT — Validity. 1, 2. 
 Contract— Public body - 8 App. Cas. 623 
 
 See Scotch Law — Hakbouk. 1. 
 
 Contract — Local authority — Officer con- 
 cerned in contract. 
 
 See Cases under Local Goteknment — 
 Local Authoeitt. 4 — 7. 
 
 Loan — Friendly society — Investment 
 
 See Feiendly Society. [19 Ch. D. 64 
 
 Payment of bankrupt's money to procure 
 
 withdrawal of criminal prosecution — 
 Eelation back of trustee's title 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 32 
 See BANKErPTCY — Assets. 11. 
 
 Practices at municipal election. 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Election 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Practices at parliamentarj' elections. 
 
 See Paeliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 Eight of Attorney-General to sue 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 752 
 See Peactioe — Supkeme Coubt — In- 
 junction. 1. 
 
 Seizure of goods — ^Mortgagor in possession 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 285 
 
 See MOETGAGE — MOETGAGOB IN POSSES- 
 SION. 
 
 Unregistered company of more than twenty 
 
 members. 
 
 See Cases under Company — XIneegis- 
 TEEED Company. 
 
 ILLEGITIMACY — Suit to perpetuate testimony 
 
 [9 P. D. 120 
 
 See Peaotice — Divoeoe — Evidence. 2. 
 
 ILLEGITIMATE cmLD— continued. 
 
 Succession duty — Fund in Court 
 
 [21 Ch. D. lOO 
 
 See Revenue — Succession Duty. 2. 
 
 ILLUSORY APPOINTMENT — Law of Lower 
 Canada - 10 App. Cas. 653 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec, 
 6. 
 IMITATION— Trade-mark - 7 App. Cas. 219 
 See Tkade-maek — Infeinqement. 1. 
 
 ■ Trinidad, Law of 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 
 - 10 App. Cas. 312 
 
 -Teinidad. 
 
 ILLEGITIMATE CHILD — Construction of will 
 
 [24 Ch, D. 691 ; 30 Ch. D. 110 
 
 See Will — Children, 1, 2. 
 Domicil - - 24 Ch. D. 637 
 
 See Will— WoEDS. 13. 
 
 Evidence of non-access - 23 Ch. D, 173 
 
 See Evidence — Geneeal. 2. 
 
 Lunfitic — Duchy of Lancaster 21 Ch. D. 613 
 
 See Lunatic— JuEiSDiCTioN. 4. 
 
 Eight to custody - 10 Q. B. D. 464 
 
 See Infant — Custody. 4. 
 
 Subsequent marriage - 17 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See DiSTEiBUTioNS, Statute of. 
 
 IMMORAL CONSIDERATION 
 See Bond. 
 
 Bond 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 353 
 
 IMPLICATION— Contract with lunatic 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 615 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 1. 
 
 Cross remainders - 20 Ch. D. 406 
 
 See Will — Cboss Eemaindbes. 
 
 Grant— Easement — Light 25 Ch. D. 659 ; 
 
 See Light— Title. 5. [10 App. Cas. 690 
 
 Eight of support— Grant - 21 Ch. D. 659 
 
 See Suppoet. 1. 
 
 Obligation — Covenant to buy beer of land- 
 lord - 18 Ch. D. 199 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 8. 
 
 Eevocation of will - 23 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Will — Eevocation. 2. 
 
 IMPORTATION- Patented article 17 Ch. D. 721 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 5 
 
 See Patent — Infeingement. ti. 
 
 IMPOSSIBILITY OF CARRYING ON BUSINESS 
 —Winding-up 20 Ch. D. 161, 169 
 
 See Company — ^Winding-up Oedee. 4, 5. 
 
 IMPOTENCE — Nullity of marriage — Practice 
 
 [6 P. D. 13 ; 7 P. D. 16 ; 10 P. D. 75 
 
 See Peaotice — Divoece — Nullity op 
 Maeeiage. 2, 3, 4. 
 
 Nullity of marriage — Scotch law 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 171 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 
 7. 
 
 IMPRISONMENT — Debtor — Law of Lower 
 
 Canada - - 8 App, Cas. 530 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 
 2. 
 
 Law of Ontario - - 9 App. Cas. 117 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontaeio. 
 2. 
 IMPROVEMENTS— Compensation for. 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Improve- 
 ments — Stat utes. 
 
 Lunatic's estate — Charge 29 Ch. D. 306 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 6. 
 
 Settled Land Act - - 30 Ch. D. 102 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 money. 1. 
 
( 659 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 660 ) 
 
 1M'F:R0Y'E1S.'ESTS— continued. 
 
 Settled Laud Act. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 
 IMPROVEMENT BOND— Mortmain 22 Ch. D. 202 
 See Chaeitt — Moktmain. 4. 
 
 INCLOSTTEE. 
 
 Commons.] By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 15 (Common- 
 ahle Rights Compensation Act, 1882), s. 1, moneys 
 paid, under the provisions of the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845, and of railway and other 
 special Acts of Farliament, hy way of compensa- 
 tion for tlie compulsory acquisition of Common 
 Lands and the extinguishment of Eights of Com- 
 mon may be applied in one or more of the follow- 
 ing ways : 
 
 (a.) In the iin'provement of the remainder of the 
 common land in respect of a portion of 
 irliich such money has been piaid ; 
 (b.) In defraying the expense of any proceedings 
 under the Metropolitan Commons Acts or 
 under the Inclosure Acts, 1845 to 1878, 
 icith reference to a scheme for the local 
 management, or a provisional order for 
 tlie regulation, of such common land, or 
 of any application to Parliament for a 
 2jricate hill or otherwise for the preserra- 
 tion and management of such common land 
 as an open space; 
 <'c.) In defraying the expense of any legal pro- 
 ceedings for the pirotection of such common 
 land, or the commoners' rights over tlie 
 same ; 
 (d.) In the purcluase of additional land to be 
 
 used as common land ; 
 (e.) In the purchase of land to be used, as a re- 
 creation ground for the neighbourhood. 
 Any land- so purchased as aforesaid for use as 
 'Common land- to be conveyed to and vest in trustees 
 to he appoinied hy the Inclosure Commissioners. 
 
 Any land so purchased as aforesaid for use as 
 recreation ground to he conveyed to and vest in the 
 ■local authority. 
 
 Sect. 3. As to application of compinimtionmorwy 
 paid for recreation grounds and field gardens. 
 
 Sect. i. Provision for cases ivhere money paid 
 hy leay of compensation has already been applied 
 in manner authorized by the Act. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Land.] The Act 47 & 48 Viet. 
 c. 67, enacts that the Inclosure Commissioners shcdl 
 not scenction ecclesiastical land to be charged for 
 .improvement under 27 & 28 Vict. c. 1 14, without 
 
 • the consent of patron and bishop. 
 
 1. Construction of Act — Mines — Manorial 
 
 Rights — Support — Damage to Surface — Compen- 
 sation.'] An Inclosure Act enacted that allot- 
 ments should be made to the persons having a 
 right of common upon the waste of the manor, 
 that is, to the owners of every separate ancient 
 dwelling-house witliin the manor; that all right 
 
 • of common should be extinguished ; and that the 
 ■allotments should be held and enjoyed by the 
 allottees by the same tenure and estates as the 
 respective dwelling-hoiises: provided that nothing 
 should prejudice, lessen, or defeat the title and 
 interest of the lords of the manor to and in the 
 royalties, but that the lords and their successors as 
 •owners of the royalties should for ever hold and 
 ■enjoy all " rents, courts, perquisites, profits, mines, 
 
 INCLOSURE — continued. 
 
 power of using or gi-anting wayleave, waifs, estrays, 
 and all other royalties and jurisdictions whatso- 
 ever " to the owners of the manor appertaining 
 " iu as full, ample, and beneficial manner to all 
 intents and purposes as they could or might have 
 held and enjoyed the same in case this Act had not 
 been made." Provided further, that in case the 
 lords or any persons claiming under them should 
 work any mines lying under any allotment, or 
 should lay, make, or use any way or ways over any 
 allotment, such persons so working the mines, or 
 layiug. making, or using such way or ways, should 
 make " satisfaction for the damages and spoil of 
 ground occasioned thereby to the person or persons 
 who shall be in possession of such ground at the 
 time or times of such damage or spoil;" such 
 satisfaction to be settled by arbitration and " not 
 to exceed the sum of £5 yearly during the time 
 of working such mines or continuing or using 
 such way or ways for every acre of ground so 
 damaged orspoUed." — At the time of passing the 
 Act there were no customs which enlarged or cut 
 down the common law rights of the lords to work 
 the minerals under the wastes of the manor. 
 Under the Act an allotment was made in 1772 to 
 a commoner in respect of an ancient freehold 
 dwelling-house. At that time no house had been 
 built upon the allotment. More than twenty 
 years after a house had been built upon it, the 
 minerals underlying it were worked by lessees of 
 the lords of the manor so as to cause the surface 
 of the land to subside, whereby the house was 
 damaged to an amount exceeding the sum recover- 
 able under the proviso. The laud would have 
 subsided if there had been no house. An action 
 for damages having been brought against the 
 lessees by the allottee's successor in title and by 
 his tenant in possession: — Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal, that upon the 
 true construction of the Act, the proviso for satis- 
 faction did not apply to damage from subsidence ; 
 that there was nothing iu the Act giving the 
 lords the right to let down the surface ; that the 
 Plaintiffs were entitled to ha^e the house and land 
 supported by the minerals, and to recover damages 
 for the subsidence. Love v. Bell 10 Q. B. D. 
 [547 ; 9 App. Cas. 286 
 
 2. Extinguishment of Right of Common 
 
 — Allotntod — Lease of Land, to which Right of 
 Common was formerly attached — 8 & 9 Viet, 
 c. 118.] When upon the inclosure of waste lands 
 under 8 & 9 Vict. c. 118, righls of common over 
 them have been extingui3ied, the allotments 
 awarded in lieu of rights of common are not to 
 be deemed parts of the lands to which the rights 
 of common were annexed, but are to be deemed 
 to have been granted to the owner of those lands ; 
 and a leuse of land, to which rights of common 
 were formerly attached, will not, after they have 
 been extinguished by an inclosure of the waste 
 lands, pass by general words the right to the pos- 
 session of the allotment. — Eights of common over 
 H. were attached to a farm. In 1857 a provisional 
 order was made for inclosing H., and the rights of 
 common over it were extinguished as from May, 
 1859. Allotments were made to the owner of the 
 farm in lieu of the rights of common. In 1866 a 
 lease for sixty years of the farm was granted at a 
 
( 661 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 602 ) 
 
 ISCWSVKE— continued. 
 
 ifixed rent : the lease contained the usual general 
 words: — Seld, that the right to the possession 
 of the allotments did not pass with the lease. 
 Williams v. Phillips 8 Q. B. D. 437 
 
 3. Property in TTnderwood — Waste Lands 
 
 of Manor — 29 Geo. 2, c. 36 — Agreement hetween 
 Lord and Tenants under — Bight of Common of Pas- 
 ture — Freeliold Tenants with right of Property in 
 Vnd&rwood.l In the year 1769 the lord of a manor, 
 the freehold tenants of which were not only en- 
 "titled to common of pasture, but w?re also collec- 
 tively the owners of the bushes and underwoods 
 .growing on the wastes of the manor, entered into 
 un agreement, under 29 Geo. 2, c. 36, with the 
 major part of such tenants for the periodical in- 
 -closure of parts of the wastes of the manor for the 
 , growth and preservation of timber and underwood ; 
 and this agreement appeared to have been from 
 i;ime to time acted upon from the year 1773 until, 
 in the year 1880, two of tlie freehold tenants of the 
 manor brought an action ou behalf of themselves 
 .and all other the freehold tenants against the lord 
 nf the manor to restrain him from further in- 
 fringement of their rights : — Seld, in a special 
 case stated in that action, that tlie Act of 
 .29 Geo. 2, c. 36, applied only to agreements by 
 persons entitled to common of pasture, and not to 
 agi'eements by persons who were the owners of 
 the bushes and underwood ; tliat the agreement 
 •of 1769 was inoperative against such owners ; and 
 'that the lord had no right to inclose as against 
 them. NiCHOLLS v. Mitfokd 20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 IKCI.OSUB£ COMMISSIONEBS. 
 See Inolosube — Statutes. 
 
 Kent-charge — Land drainage company 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Cojimissioners. 
 
 INCOME — Application of — Purchase-moneys 
 
 under Lands Clauses Act 16 Ch. D. 597 
 
 See Lands Clauses AcT' — Pukohase- 
 
 MONET. 2. 
 
 Bankrupt — Voluntary allowance 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 70 
 See Bankedptct — Assets, 
 
 Charge on — Annuity 
 
 See Will — Annuity. 1. 
 
 Interim 
 
 See Power — Execution. 
 
 Interim— Legacy ■ 
 
 [23 Ch 
 
 17 Ch. D. 
 
 167 
 
 16 Ch. D. 691 
 14. 
 
 - 22 Ch. D. 573 ; 
 D. 360; 25 Ch. D. 743 
 
 See Will— Interim Incoue. 1, 2, 3. 
 Maintenance of infant. 
 
 See Cases under Infant — Maintenance. 
 Property of lunatic — Jurisdiction 26 Ch. D. 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 7. [496 
 
 Purchase-money — Settled Land Act 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 628 
 See Settled Land Act — Puechase- 
 MONET. 2. 
 
 Tmst estate — Expenses of action 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 710 
 See Trustee — Costs and Ohaeges. 5. 
 INCOME-PHODUCING FUND - 19Ch.D. 277; 
 [21 Ch. D. 748 ; 27 Ch. D. 411 
 See Husband and Wife— Sepabatb Es- 
 tate. 13, 14, 15. 
 
 INCOME-TAX. 
 
 ySee Cases under Kevenue — Income 
 Tax. 
 
 Bequest of annuity free from all deductions 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 105; 22 Ch. D. 182, 269 
 See Will— Words. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 New Brunswick - 6 App. Cas. 373 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — New 
 JBrunswick. 
 
 Scotch law - - 6 App. Cas. 315 
 
 See Scotch Law — Eevenue. 
 
 INCOMING TENANT - - 22 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Landlord AND Tenant— Lease. 15. 
 
 INCONGRUITY— Mistake in description 
 
 See Will— Mistake. 3. [28 Ch. D. 153 
 
 INCONSISTENT CLAUSES— Will 18 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Will— Eepugnancy. 
 
 INCOSPOEATION OF DISTSICT— Local board 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 176 
 See Local Government- — Local Au- 
 thority. 1. 
 INCOEPOEATION of DOCUMENTS— Testamen- 
 tary instrument - 6 P. D. 9, 30 ; 
 [R P. D. 14 
 See Will— Incoepoeated Documents. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 INCUMBENT OF CHUECH Compensation on 
 
 retirement— Mortgage 30 Ch. D. 520 
 See MoBTSAGE- Contract. 3. 
 
 Resignation - - 17Ch.'D. 1 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clergy. 3. 
 INCUMBEANCES— Discharge of. 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance — Statutes. 
 
 Discharge of — Conveyancing Act, 1881 
 
 [25 Ch. D, 788 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Con- 
 ditions OP Sale. 6. 
 
 Discharge of— Settled Land Act 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 588 ; 30 Ch. D. 127 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 Money. _ 4, 5. 
 INDECENCY— Exposure of person— Public place 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 63 
 See Criminal Law— Nuisance. 
 
 Male persons. 
 
 See Criminal Law— Offences against 
 the Person — Statutes. 
 INDEFEASIBLE TITLE— Land in Griqualaud 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 318 
 See Colonial Law — GeiqxJaland. 
 
 INDEFINITE TEUST— Gift by will 
 
 See Will— Teustees. 2. [26 Ch. D. 531 
 
 INDEMNITY. 
 
 Goods lawfully seized for another's Debt.'] 
 
 As a general rule, where one person's goods are 
 lawfully seized for another's debt, the owner of 
 the goods is entitled to redeem them, and to be 
 reimbursed by the debtor against the money paid 
 to redeem them, and in the event of the goods 
 being sold to satisfy the debt the owner is entitled 
 to recover the value of them from the debtor ; and 
 the right to indemnity exists although there may 
 be no agreement to indemnify, and although there 
 
( 663 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 664 ) 
 
 ISBIEKTSHTY— continued. 
 
 may be in that sense no privity between the owner 
 of the goods and the debtor. — England v. Marsden 
 (Law Kep. 1 0. P. 529) questioned.— The Defend- 
 ant bought the business of an ironmonger in his 
 own name for his two sons ; he paid the greater 
 part of the purchase-money. The banking ac- 
 count of the business was kept by him, and he 
 drew the cheques on that account. A society 
 having obtained judgment in an action against 
 the Defendant, certain goods of his sons were 
 seized by the sheriff : the sons claimed the goods : 
 but upon an interpleader summons taken out by 
 the sheriff, the claim of the sons was barred, and 
 the goods were sold. They realised £1300, and 
 this sum was paid Into Court in the action by the 
 society against the Defendant as a secxirity for 
 what might be found due to the society from the 
 Defendant upon taking certain accounts. The De- 
 fendant's sons were afterwards adjudicated bank- 
 rupts, and the Plaintiff was appointed their trus- 
 tee. The Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff that 
 in consideration of his sons' goods having been 
 seized and sold on behalf of the society in respect 
 of an alleged claim against him, he would pay 
 £300 per annum to the Plaintiff until he should 
 have paid a sufficient sum to pay the trade credi- 
 tors of his sons in full. The Plaintiif having 
 brought the present action to recover £1200 due 
 by virtue of the above-mentioned agreement, or 
 in the alternative £1300, the value of the goods 
 seized: — fleZd, that even ifthe Defendant's express 
 promise to pay £1200 was not legally binding upon 
 liim, nevertheless the action was maintainable ; 
 for although the decision upon the interpleader 
 summons did not estop the Defendant from shew- 
 ing that the seizure by the sheriff was unlawful, 
 nevertheless he had by his conduct led to the 
 seizure, and the goods of his sons had been legally 
 taken for his debt ; the Defendant, therefore, was 
 bound to indemnify his sons, and the Plaintiff, 
 as their trustee in bankruptcy, was entitled to have 
 judgment entered for him for the sum of £1200, 
 which he was willing to accept instead of £1300, 
 the value of the goods seized. Edjtonds v. Wall- 
 
 IKGFOED - - 14 a. B. D. 811 
 
 ■ Assignment of lease - 29 Ch. D. 254 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 3. 
 
 Claim for — Third party. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Supkeme 
 CouBT — Thikd Pakty. 5 — 9. 
 
 Landlord and tenant — Contract of sub- 
 
 tenant to perform covenants of lease 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 329 
 
 See Peaotioe— SrpREME Court — Costs. 
 48. 
 
 Misconduct of director — Shareholders and 
 
 creditors - - - 21 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Dibeotoe's Liability. 4. 
 
 Receiver in liquidation 23 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceivee. 3. 
 
 Surety — Composition 16 Ch, D. 605 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Annulment. 4. 
 
 Trustee - - 22 Ch. D. 255, 561, 666 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 695 
 
 See Trustee — Indemnity. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 INDEHNITY— comiMwed. 
 
 Trustee— Leaseholds — Covenants 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 72» 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 9. 
 
 Trustee — Severance of trust f onds 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 855 
 See Scotch Law — Teustee. 
 
 INDIA — Criminal law — Inquiry as to sanity of 
 accused — Eemoval to England 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 18 
 See Criminal Law — Peactice. 1. 
 INDIA STOCK — Investment of money in Court 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 93 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — ^Pay- 
 ment INTO Court. 5. 
 
 INDICTMENT — Conspiracy — Two persons in- 
 dicted together — Acquittal or conviction 
 of both - - - 12 Q. B. D. 241 
 
 See CRimNAL Law — Conspiracy. 
 
 Obstruction of highway — New trial 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 198 
 See Criminal Law— Practice. 3. 
 
 Offences against women. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences againsi 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 Two counts— Sentence ' 6 App. Cas. 229 
 
 See Criminal Law — Practice. 2. 
 INDORSEMENT — Bill of lading — Passing of 
 property 13 ft. B. 159 ; 10 App. Cas. 74 
 See Ship — Bill of Lading. 4. 
 
 BUI of exchange — Eight of indorsee to be 
 
 indemnified by acceptor 6 App. Cas. 1 
 See Principal and Surety — Indem- 
 nity. 1. 
 
 Foreign bill of exchange - 30 Ch. D. 598 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Foreign Bill. 
 
 Dock warrant 28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Eegistkation. 5. 
 
 Order of attachment 21 Ch. D. 360 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 66 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 3, 4. 
 
 Order for discovery of documents 
 
 [26 Ch, D. 746 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — At- 
 tachment. 8. 
 
 Promissory note — Co-sureties 
 
 [8 App. Cas, 733 
 See Bill of Exchange — Liability of 
 Parties. 
 
 Eeceipt — Mortgage to building society 
 
 [28 Ch. D, 39S 
 See Building Society. 13. 
 
 Writ— Extension of time - 16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Weit. 
 1. 
 
 Writ— Motion on admission 23 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — Mo- 
 tion FOE Judgment. 1. 
 
 INDTJSTEIAL SCHOOL. 
 
 Order in Council.] Directing that certain pro- 
 visions of the Industrial Sclwols Act, 1866, and 
 the Acts amending the same, shall apply to certified 
 day industrial schools. October 'Ibth, 1881 
 
 [L. G., 1881, p, 5294 
 
( 665 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 666 ) 
 
 INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL— continued. 
 
 Living in Disorderly House — House re- 
 dded in lyij Prostitutes — Industrial Schools Act, 
 1866 (29 * 30 Vict. c. 118), s. li— Industrial 
 Schools Act Amendment Act, 1880 (43 & i-1 Vict. 
 c. 15), s. 1.] A child under fourteen who lives 
 with and under the guardianship of her mother 
 in " a house resided in by prostitutes " may be 
 ordered to be sent to an industrial school under 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 118, s. 4, although there is no 
 ■evidence of any act of prostitution on the part of 
 the mother. Hiscooks v. Jermonson 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 360 
 IND0STIIIAL SOCIETY. 
 
 See Friendly Society — Statutes. 
 
 INFANT:— 
 I. Acts 
 II. Contracts - 
 
 III. Custody 
 
 IV. Education - 
 V. Guardian - 
 
 VI. Maintenance 
 VII. Property 
 VIII. Settlement 
 IX. Ward op Court 
 
 Col. 
 665 
 665 
 666 
 667 
 668 
 669 
 671 
 674 
 675 
 
 I. INFANT— ACTS. 
 
 Undue Influence — Gift of Personal Estate.'] 
 
 In the absence of proof of the exercise of control 
 or influence on the part of the donee, or of the 
 existence of the relation of guardian and ward 
 between the donee and the donor, a gift of her 
 property within a mouth before her death by an 
 infant aged twenty, of business habits, i:rm will, 
 and fully capable of managing her own affairs, to 
 a relative with whom she had been residing from 
 her father's death, for a period of five months 
 until her own death, is not invalid. Taylor v. 
 Johnston - - - 19 Ch. D. 603 
 
 II, INFANT— CONTRACTS. 
 
 1. Apprenticeship Deed — Contract not for 
 
 Benefit of Infant — Employers and Workmen Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 rict. c. 90), ss. 5, 6.] An infant 
 was apprenticed by a deed containing a provision 
 -that the master should not be liable to pay wages 
 to the apprentice so long as his business should 
 "be intermpted or impeded by or in consequence 
 of any turn-out, and that the apprentice might 
 •during any such turn-out employ himself in any 
 other manner or with any other person for his 
 own benefit : — Held, that, this provision not being 
 for the benefit of the infant, the apprenticeship 
 deed could not be enforced against the infant 
 under the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875, 
 as. 5, 6. Meakin v. Morris - 12 Q. B. D. 352 
 
 2. Compromise.] An order having been 
 
 made approving, on behalf of infant Defendants, 
 a compromise which was objected to by their 
 guardian and opposed by their counsel : — Held, 
 that the Court had no jurisdiction to enforce a 
 compromise against infants against the opinion of 
 their advisers, and that the order must be dis- 
 charged. In re Birohall. Wilson v. Bieohall 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 41 
 
 • 3. Necessaries — Evidence.'] Where an 
 
 II. INFANT— CONTEACTS—conK)Htc(J. 
 
 infant is sued for the price of goods supplied to 
 him on credit, he may, for the purpose of shewing 
 that they were not necessaries, give evidence that, 
 when the order was given, he was already sufB- 
 eiently supplied with goods of a similar descrip- 
 tion, and it is immaterial whether the Plaintiff 
 did or did not know of the existing supply.— 
 Eijder v. Womhwell (Law Rep. 3 Ex. 90) dis- 
 sented from. Barnes v. Toye 13 Q. B. D. 410 
 
 III. INFANT— CUSTODY. 
 
 1. Infants Custody Act — Habeas Gorjius 
 
 — 36 & 37 Vict. a. 12, s. I— Judicature Act, 1873 
 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), ». 25, svh-s. 10.] In the 
 exercise of its discretion under 36 & 37 Vict. c. 12, 
 s. 1, and sect. 25, sub-sect. 10 of the Judicature 
 Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), the Court will 
 look at all the surrounding circumstances before 
 they will accede to the application of the father 
 of a female child of tender years to remove her 
 from the custody of the mother and other rela- 
 tions whose conduct with regard to the child is 
 nuimpeaohed, and place her under his control. — 
 A mariner who had no fixed home, and who had 
 already married a woman who left him and went 
 to America more than seven years before and (as 
 he said) died there, went through the ceremony of 
 marriage with another woman at a registry-offlce 
 at Portsmouth. Shortly after her marriage, the 
 second wife, being informed by a stranger that 
 she had received a letter from the first wife after 
 the ceremony at the registry-office, quitted her 
 supposed husband, and went to reside with her 
 parents at Southampton, where she gave birth to 
 a female child. She afterwards took proceedings 
 against her husband for bigamy ; but, for want of 
 proof that the first wife was living at the time of 
 the second mai-riage, these became abortive. — The 
 child having reached the age of nine, the father 
 (without shewing any efforts to ascertain whether 
 his first wife was living or not) applied to a Judge 
 at Chambers for a habeas corpus to obtain its cus- 
 tody. The Judge refused the application. The 
 father appealed. — The Court, — ^not being satisfied 
 that the second was a valid marriage, or that the 
 father was in a position properly to maintain and 
 educate the child: — Held, that the Judge had 
 wisely exercised his discretion, and dismissed the 
 appeal, and also that the failure of the prosecu- 
 tion for bigamy was not entitled to any weight 
 upon a motion of this kind. In re Ethel Brown 
 
 [13 Q, B. D. 614 
 
 2, Infants Custody Act (36 & 37 Vict. 
 
 c. 12), s. 1 — Order " till further order " — Subse- 
 quent Application to vary — Appeal.] When an 
 order is made under sect. 1 of the Infants Custody 
 Act, 1873, on the petition of a mother, giving the 
 custody of an infant child to her " until further 
 order," an application to vary the order by reason 
 of something subsequent to its date should be 
 made, not by way of appeal, but by motion before 
 the Judge of first instance. Such a motion can 
 be made by the Respondent to the original peti- 
 tion. The provision of sect. 1 of the Act, that 
 the application shall be made by the mother by 
 her next friend, applies only to the original peti- 
 tion. Zm re Holt - - 16 Ch. D. 115 
 
 3. Infants Custody Act (36 & 37 Vict. 
 
( G67 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 668 ) 
 
 III. INFANT— CUSTODY— oonfe'7iMe(^. 
 
 c. 12), s. 1 — Bight of Mother — Breach of Marital 
 Duty hy Father.'] In determining whether the 
 custody of an infant child ought to be given to or 
 retained by the mother, the Court ■will take into 
 consideration three matters — the paternal right, 
 the marital duty, and the interest of the child. — 
 For this purpose the marital duty includes, not 
 only the duty which the husband and wife owe to 
 each other, but the responsibility of each of them 
 towards their children so to live that the children 
 shall have the benefit of the joint care and affec- 
 tion of both father and mother. In a case where 
 a father had cormnitted a breach of the marital 
 duty as thus defined : — Held, for this among other 
 reasons, that the mother, in whose custody two 
 children of the maniage of tender years were, 
 ought to retain the custody until further order. 
 In re Eldebton - 25 Ch. D. 220 
 
 4. Mother of Illegitimate Child.] A 
 
 woman placed her illegitimate female child soon 
 after its birth with N. and wife, who were labour- 
 ing people, intending to pay them for it. She 
 fell into ill health and was unable to continiie 
 her payments, but >f. and wife continued to 
 maintain the child till it was nearly seven years 
 old . The mother then applied to have the child 
 delivered to her, which N. and wife refused. She 
 therefore applied for a habeas corpus, which was 
 refused by Nortli, J., but granted by a Divisional 
 Court. N. and wife appealed. The mother, who 
 was a kept mistress, did not propose that the 
 child sliould live with her, but with a respectable 
 man'ied sister, whose husband was in a station 
 superior to that of N". : — Held, that the appeal must 
 be dismissed, for that the mother of an illegitimate 
 infant has a natural right to its custody, which 
 will be regarded by tlie Court. The Qteen v. 
 Nash - 10 ft. B. D. 454 
 
 IV. INFANT— EDUCATION. 
 
 1. ■ Father's Authority — Infant ahove Six- 
 teen — Free Access to and hy Mother restricted — 
 Jurisdiction of Court— 12 Car. 2, c. 24.] A father 
 has a legal right to control and direct tlie educa- 
 tion and bringing up of his children until they 
 attain the age of twenty-one years, even although 
 they are wards of Court, and the Court will not 
 inturfere with him in the exercise of his paternal 
 authority, except (1) where by his gross moral 
 turpitude he forfeits his rights, or (2) where he 
 has by his conduct abdicated his paternal autho- 
 rity, or (3) where he seeks to remove his cliildren, 
 being wards of Court, out of the jurisdiction with- 
 out tbe consent of the Court. — A father put re- 
 strictions on the intorcoui'se between his daughter 
 in her seventeenth year, who was a ward of Court, 
 and her mother, on the plea that he believed the 
 mother would alienate the daughter's affections 
 fnim him. The Court refused to interfere. In re 
 Agak-Ellis. Agae-Ellis v. Lasoelles 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 817 
 
 2. EeligiouS^ Education — Guardian ■ — 
 
 Wishes of deceased Father — Abandonment of 
 Father's Eighty An Englishman, who was a 
 Prottstant, in October, 1869, married in Germany 
 a German lady who was a Eoman Catholic. Pre- 
 viously to the marriage a written agreement was 
 signed by them both, which provided that the 
 
 IV. INFANT— EDUCATION— confe'tmed. 
 children (if any) of the marriage should be edu- 
 cated in the Eoman Catholic faith. After the 
 marriage the husband and wife lived together in 
 Germany. He never attended a Protestant place 
 of woi'ship, but often went to mass with his wife> 
 There were three children of the man-iage — a. 
 daughter bom in 1871, a son bom in 1873, and 
 another daughter bom, just after the death of 
 the father, in April, 1876. The first two children 
 were, with the father's knowledge, baptized as^ 
 Eoman Catholics, and, in the case of the son, a 
 Eoman Catholic priest in England, whom the- 
 father knew, acted as godfather at the request 
 of the father himself. The father allowed the 
 mother to bring up the two children as Eoman 
 Catholics. He died intestate, and -had not ap- 
 pointed any guardian to his children. His only 
 property was some real estate in Lancashire, 
 worth more than £2000 a year, which passed 
 to his infant son as his heir-at-law, subject tO' 
 the life estate of the paternal grandfather, who' 
 died in 1881. The mother had no fortune of her 
 own. She, as next friend of the infant son, in 
 1882 took out a summons for the appointment of 
 a guardian and the settlement of a scheme for his 
 maintenance and education. She desired that he 
 should be educated in the Eoman Catholic faith. 
 The paternal relations, on the contrary, wished 
 tliat the infant should be brought up as a Pro- 
 test.ant : — Held, that the father by his conduct 
 had abandoned his right to have the child 
 brought up in his own faith, and had indicated 
 a wish that he should be brought up as a Eoman 
 Catholic: — Held, also, that under the circum- 
 stances it would be most for the benefit of the 
 infant that he should be educated in the Eoman 
 Catholic faith. — Haiolrsifortli v. Haiolisxcorth (Law 
 Eep. 6 Cli. 539), Andreios v. Salt (Law Eep. 8 Ch. 
 622), and Hill v. HiU (10 W. E. 400) considered. 
 In re Claeke 21 Ch. D. 817 
 
 3. Religious .Education — Jurisdiction.'] 
 
 Infants interested in real estate in England, 
 whose father was dead, were living in charge of 
 their mother, who was resident out of the jiu-isdic- 
 tion, and was one of their testamentary guardians. 
 At the instance of their other two guardians aa 
 order was made declaring in what faith they 
 ought to be educated. In re Montagu. In re- 
 Weoughton. Montagu v. Festinq 28 Ch. D. 82 
 
 V. INFANT— GUARDIAN. 
 
 1. ■ Jurisdiction — Grandchild horn Abroad 
 
 of natural-iiorn British Subject — Status of British 
 Subject— 7 Anne, e. .■)— 4 Geo. 2, c. 21, s. 1—13- 
 Geo. 3, c. 21, s. 1 — International Comiti/.] If an 
 infant be born abroad whose paternal grandfather 
 was a natural-born British subject, the Court has- 
 jurisdiction to appoint a guardian of such infant, 
 although the infant is resident abroad and has no- 
 property in this country. — A Frenchwoman, who 
 was the mother of such an infant, and entitled by 
 the law of France to the status of natural guardian; 
 of the infant, was not a person who would have 
 been appointed guardian if she and the infant had 
 been domiciled in England, and she had brought 
 proceedings in the French Courts for the appoint- 
 ment of guardians, which proceedings had been- 
 directed to stand over until it should be ascertained 
 what course the English Com-ts -would adopt : — 
 
( 6G9 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( G70 ) 
 
 V. INFANT— GUARDIAN— co»fo"n«e(?. 
 
 Held, by Kay, J., that this was a case in which 
 the English Coui't should exercise its jurisdiotiou ; 
 and a guardian of the infant appointed accord- 
 ingly ; and held by the Court of Appeal, that under 
 the circumstances the decision of the Court below 
 was right. In re Willoughby - 30 Ch. D. 324 
 
 2. Voucher of Items of Expenditure.] 
 
 H. and C. were trustees and executors of a will, 
 and guardians of the testator's daughters. The 
 daughters during their infancy were maintained 
 by C, and H. allowed him to receive the income 
 for that purpose. After they attained majority 
 judgment was given for administration of the 
 testator's estate, in which the usual accounts of 
 the personal estate were directed, and an iniiuiry 
 how and by whom each of the daughters was 
 maintained during infancy, and what was proper 
 to be allowed and to whom out of the income of 
 her share for her maintenance and education. A 
 dispute having arisen in taking the accounts and 
 inquiry, H. applied for a declaration that the re- 
 ceipts by 0. of the income of the shares of the 
 daughters for maintenance were a good discharge 
 to H., and that H. was not to be e<\lled upon to 
 produce vouchers in respect of the particular 
 manner in which the income was applied. Kay, J., 
 made an order expressing the opinion of the Coiirt 
 that the accounts of the trustees should be taken 
 as directed by the judgment as between guardian 
 and ward, and ordering H. to pay the costs of the 
 application : — Held, on appeal, that H., as trustee, 
 was not discharged by the evidence of payment of 
 the income to C, as a guardian, but that under the 
 inquiry H. was not bound to vouch the items of 
 expenditure ; and if it was shewn that 0. had 
 properly maintained and educated the children, 
 the sum proper for that purpose would be allowed 
 against the balance found due on the account, 
 without vouching the details of the application. 
 In re Evans. Welch v. Channell 26 Ch. D. 58 
 
 VI. INFANT— MAINTENANCE. 
 
 1 . Accumulations for Twenty-one Years 
 
 — Tenant for Life — Infants in Remainder — Allow- 
 ance for Benefit of Infants.'] A testator left pro- 
 perty to the value of £10,000 a year to be accu- 
 mulated for twenty-one years, .and directed the 
 accumulations to be laid out in the purchase of 
 land, to be then held in trust for Sir H. Havelock 
 for life, and afterwards for his eldest son for life 
 and his first and other sons in tail, with a similar 
 trust for Sir H. Havelock's second son and his 
 issue, with subsequent limitations over : — Seld, 
 that as Sir H. Havelock was possessed of a 
 moderate income only, which was insufficient for 
 the maintenance and education of his sons, to fit 
 them for their prospective positions in life, a sum 
 of £2700 per annum should be allowed him for 
 the benefit of the infants. Havelock v. Have- 
 lock. In re Allan 17 Ch. D. 807 
 
 2. Accumulations — Defeasible Estate — 
 
 Lord Cranworth's Act (23 & 24 Vict. o. 145), s. 26.] 
 Property was bequeathed to trustees in trust for 
 an infant, with a gift over in case of his death 
 under twenty-one. — The trustees accumulated 
 the income of the property not required for !ii§ 
 maintenance, in pursuance of the powers given 
 by sect. 26 of Lord Cranworth's Act.— The infant 
 
 VI. INFANT— MAINTENANCE— oonfa'mKei^. 
 died under twenty-one. — Held, that the accumu- 
 lations of income to the time of the death of the- 
 infant, belonged to the infant, and were not to be- 
 held for the benefit of the remainderman who- 
 ultimately became entitled to the property from 
 which the accumulations aroso. In re Buckley's- 
 Trusts - 22 Ch. D. 683 
 
 3. Allo-wanoe heyond Provision in Will — 
 
 Trust for Accumulation of Surplus Income — ■ 
 Jurisdiction on Summmis.'] A testator gave the 
 residue of his estate to trustees, upon trust out of 
 the income to pay an annuity of £220 to his 
 widow, and then to pay to his daughter two 
 yearly sums of £100 for the maintenance and 
 education of her infant son and daughter respec- 
 tively (by a former marriage), as regarded the 
 son so long as he should be under twenty-five, 
 and as regarded the daughter so long as she 
 should be under twenty-one or vinmanied. The 
 residue of the income was to be accumulated 
 during the life of the widow, and on her death 
 the testator, after certain provisions for his son 
 and daughter, directed his trustees to pay £10,000 
 to his daughter's son on his attaining twenty- 
 five ; and to pay to her daughter £10,000 on her 
 attaining twenty -one, or marrying under that age,, 
 and in the event of her dying before she should 
 have attained twenty-oue or married, the £10,000 - 
 was to fall into the residue. And the testator 
 gave the residue of the trust estate equally be- 
 tween his daughter and her two children. — fjpon 
 a summons taken out after the testator's death in 
 the matter of and on behalf of the infants, with 
 the consent of the testator's widow (who was 
 seventy-seven years of age), and of their mother 
 and her second husband (so far as they were able 
 to consent), an order was made increasing the 
 allowances for the maintenance and education of ' 
 the infant son and daughter by £150 and £120 
 per annum respectively, to be paid out of the 
 income of the estate and the accumulations 
 thereof. — But it was ordered that the trustees 
 should hold the interests of the infants respec- 
 tively under the testator's will as a security for - 
 the purpose of recouping to any person entitled 
 thereto such sums of money as would be equiva- 
 lent to the sums ' which would have arisen from 
 such part of the income as should be applied in 
 payment of the increased allowances, in case the 
 same, instead of having been so applied, had been 
 accumulated as directed by the will. lu re 
 OoLGAN - 19 Ch. D. 305 
 
 4. Contingent legacy — Directions for 
 
 Accnmulation of Income until happening of Con- 
 tingency — " Contrary Intention" — Conveyancing - 
 and Law of Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. 
 0. 41), s. 43.] A testator gave a fund to trustees, 
 on trust for all the children of A. equally, who 
 being sons should attain twenty-one, or being ■ 
 daughters should attain twenty-one, or marry,, 
 with benefit of survivorship amongst them, and 
 he directed his trustees to accumulate the income ■ 
 of the shares of the children, and to pay the 
 same to them as and when their presumptive - 
 shares should become payable under the previous . 
 trust : — Held, that the will did not express a 
 "contrary intention" within the meaning, of' 
 sect. 43 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, and.. 
 
( 671 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES 
 
 ( 672 ) 
 
 VI. INFANT— MAINTENANCE— oo»(«?iMd. 
 ttat, tlie children being infants and unmarried, 
 the trustees might at their discretion apply the 
 income of the trust fund in or towards tlie 
 maintenance and education of the infants. In re 
 Thatcher's Trusts - 26 Ch. D. 426 
 
 5. Contingent legacy — Interim Income 
 
 — Conveyancing Act, 1881, s. 43.] Trustees can- 
 not, under sect. 43 of the Conveyancing Act, 
 1881, apply the income of an infant's contingent 
 legacy for the benefit of the infant, unless the 
 income will go along with the capital of the 
 legacy if and when such capital vests. In re 
 Jddkin's Trusts 25 Cli. D. 743 
 
 6. Contingent Legacy — Interim Income 
 
 — Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881 
 <44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 48.] Sect. 43 of the Con- 
 veyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, 
 empowering trustees to apply towards the main- 
 tenance of an infant the income of property held 
 in trust for him contingently on his attaining 
 the age of twenty-one years, does not authorize 
 the allowance of maintenance where, apart from 
 the Act, the infant on attaining twenty-one 
 •would only be entitled to the legacy without 
 interest. — In re Cotton (1 Oh. D. 232) and In re 
 George (5 Ch. D. 837) discussed. In re Dickson. 
 Hill v. Grant 28 Ch. D. 291 ; 29 Ch. D. 331 
 
 7. Contingent Legacy — Jurisdiction — 
 
 Discretion of Trustees."] A female infant was 
 entitled contingently on her attaining twenty- 
 one, or marrying, to a fund of which her deceased 
 mother had been tenant for life. The trustees 
 liad power " to apply all or any part " of the 
 income (about £538 a year) for her maintenance 
 and|educatiou. On a summons in the matter of 
 the infant, Bacon, V.C, held that he had juris- 
 diction to control the discretion of the trustees as 
 to the quantum to be allowed, and made an order 
 on them to pay £400 a year to the father for her 
 maintenance and education. The trustees ap- 
 pealed, and in answer to an inquiry by the Court 
 stated their intention to allow £250 to the father 
 for her maintenance and education : — Held, that 
 the order of the Vice-Chancellor w.as irregular, 
 and must be discharged, the Court having no 
 jurisdiction on a summons in the matter of an 
 infant to make any order for payment by trustees 
 or other persons. — Whether the Com-t could con- 
 trol the discretion of the trustees as to the amount 
 to be allowed for maintenance and education, so 
 long as such discretion was honestly exercised, 
 <jussre. In re Lofthouse 29 Ch. D. 921 
 
 VII. INFANT— PROPEETY. 
 
 Management.] By 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41 (Con- 
 veyancing Act, 1881). 
 
 Sect. 41. Where a person in Ms own rigid seised 
 of or entitled to land for an estate in fee simple, or 
 for any leasehold interest at a rent, is an infant, 
 ihe land shall he deemed to he a settled estate 
 within the Settled Estates Act, 1877. 
 
 Sect. 42 — (1.) If and as long as any person who 
 'wotdd hut for this section he henefieially entitled to 
 the possession of any land is an infant, and heing 
 a woman is also unmarried, the trustees appointed 
 for this purpose hy the settlement, if any, or if there 
 are none so appointed, then the persons, if any, who 
 
 VII. INFANT— PEOPERTY- continued, 
 are for tlie time heing under the settlement trustees 
 with power of sale of the settled land, or of part 
 thereof, or with power of consent to or approval of 
 the exercise of such a power of sale, or if there are 
 none, then any persons appointed as trustees for 
 this purpose hy the Court, on the application of a 
 guardian or next friend of the infant, may enter 
 into and continue in possession of tlie land ; and 
 ill every such case the subsequent provisions of this 
 section shall apply. 
 
 (2.) The trustees shall manage or superintend, 
 the management of the land, with full power to fell 
 timher or cut underwood from time to time in tlie 
 usual course for sale, or for repairs or otherwise, 
 and to erect, pull doion, rebuild, and repair houses, 
 and oilier huildings and erections, and to continue 
 tlie loorliing of mines, minerals, and quarries which 
 have usually been worked, and to drain or other- 
 wise improve the land or any part thereof, and to 
 insure against loss hy fire, and to make allowances 
 to and arrangements with tenants and others, and 
 to determine tenancies, and to accept surrenders of 
 leases and tenancies, and generally to deal with 
 tlie land in a proper and due course of manage- 
 ment ; but so that, ivliere the infant is impeach- 
 able for waste, the trustees shall not commit waste, 
 and shall cut timher on the same terms only, and 
 subject to tlie same restrictions, on and subject to 
 which the infant could, if of full age, cut tlie 
 same, 
 
 (3.) The trustees may from time to time, out of 
 the income of tlie land, including the produce of 
 the sale of timher and underwood, pay tlie expenses 
 incurred in the management, or in the exercise of 
 any power conferred by this section, or othericise in 
 relation to the land, and^ all outgoings not payable 
 hy any tenant or other person, and shall keep down 
 any annual sum, and the interest of any principal 
 sum, charged on the land. 
 
 (4.) The trustees may apply at discretion any 
 income which, in the exercise of such discretion, 
 they deem proper, according to the infant's age, for 
 his or her maintenance, education, or benefit, or pay 
 tliereout any money to the infant's parent or 
 guardian, to be applied for the same purposes. 
 
 (5.) The trustees shall lay out the residue of the 
 income of the land in investment on securities on 
 which they are by the settlement, if any, or hy law, 
 authorized to invest trust money, ivitli power to 
 vary investments ; and shall accumulate the income 
 of the investments so made in the way of compound 
 interest, hy from time to time similarly investing 
 such income and tlie resulting income of invest- 
 ments: and sliall stand possessed of the accumu- 
 lated fund arising from income of the land and 
 from investments of income on the trusts follawing 
 (namely) : 
 
 (i.) If the infant attains the age of twenty-one 
 
 years, then in trust for tlie infant ; 
 (ii.) If tlie infant is a woman and marries while 
 an infant, then in trust for her separate 
 use, independently of her husband, and 
 so that her receipt after she marries, and 
 though still an infant, shall he a good 
 discharge; hut 
 (in.) If tlie infant dies while an infant, and 
 being a tvoman witliout having been 
 married, then, where the infant loas, 
 under a settlement, tenant for life, or hy 
 
( 673 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 674 ) 
 
 VII. IHFAHT— PBOPEETT continued. 
 
 purchase tenant in tail or tail male or 
 tail female, on the trusts, if any, declared 
 of the accumulated fund by that settle- 
 ment; but where no such trusts are 
 declared, or the infant has taken the land 
 from which the accumulated fund is de- 
 rived by descent, and not by purchase, or 
 the infant is tenant for an estate in fee 
 simple, absolute or determinable, then in 
 trust for the infant's personal representa- 
 tives as part of the infant's personal 
 estate ; 
 hut the accumulations, or any part thereof, may at 
 any time be applied as if the same were income 
 arising in the then current year. 
 
 (6.) Where the infant's estate or interest is in an 
 undivided share of land, the powers of this section 
 relative to the lemd may be exercised jointly with 
 persons entitled to possession of, or having power to 
 act in relation to the other undivided share or 
 shares. 
 
 (7.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the instrument 
 under which the interest of the infant arises, and 
 shall have effect subject to the terms of that instru- 
 ment and to the provisions therein contained. 
 
 (8.) This section applies only where thai instru- 
 ment comes into operation after the commencement 
 of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 43. — (1.) Wh^re any property is held by 
 trustees in trust for an infant, eitlier for life, or for 
 any greater interest, and whether absolutely, or 
 contingently on his attaining the age of twenty-one 
 years, or on the occurrence of any event before his 
 attaining that age, the trustees may, at their sole 
 discretion, pay to the infant's parent or guardian, 
 if any, or otherwise apply for or towards the 
 infants maintenance, education, or benefit, the 
 income of that jproperty, or any part thereof, 
 whether there is any other fund applicable to the 
 same purpose, or any person bound by law to pro- 
 vide for the infant's maintenance or education, or 
 not. 
 
 (2.) TJie trustees slw-U accumulate all the residue 
 of that income in the way of compound interest, by 
 investing the same and the resulting income thereof 
 from time to time on securities on which they are 
 by the settlement, ifany,orby the Court, authorized 
 to invest trust money, and shall hold those accumu- 
 lations for the benefit of the person who ultimately 
 becomes entitled to the property from which . the 
 same arise ; hut so that the trustees may at any 
 time, if they thinh fit, apply those accumulations, 
 or any part thereof, as if the same were income 
 arising in the then current year. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only and if as far 
 OS a contrary intention is not expressed in the 
 instrument under which the interest of tire infant 
 arises, and shall have effect subject to the terms of 
 that instrument and to the provisions therein con- 
 tained. 
 
 (4.) This same applies whether that instrument 
 comes into operation before or after the commence- 
 ment of this Act. 
 
 1, Eeal Estate — Power of Court to mort- 
 gage for Bepairs.'] When an infant was abso- 
 lutely entitled subject to certain trusts to the 
 beneficial interest in real estate, the legal estate 
 
 VII. INPANT— PEOPERTT— coniMMecZ. 
 being in trustees : — Held, that the Court had 
 jurisdiction to direct the raising of money by 
 means of a mortgage of the estate for the pur- 
 pose of paying the cost of repairs certified by the 
 Chief Clerk to be absolutely necessary. In re 
 Jackson. Jackson v. Talbot 21 Ch. D, 786 
 
 2. Eeal Estate — Safe of Infant's Pro- 
 perty — Discretion of Trustees — Large Increase of 
 Income— Refusal of Court to order a Sale.] Two 
 trustees haying power to sell tlie freehold pro- 
 perty of an infant at the request of the guardians, 
 and one trustee having declined upon such re- 
 quest to exercise the power of sale, the Court 
 refused to control the discretion ot, the trustees 
 by ordering them to sell the estate— there being 
 uoabsoluta necessity for raising money and the 
 existing income being BuflScient to keep down 
 the charges upon the estate — ^notwithstanding 
 that the effect of the sale would be to increase 
 very considerably the income of the property. 
 Makquis Camden v. Mdehat - 16 Ch. D. 161 
 
 3. Surrender of Lease — 11 Geo. 4 & 
 
 1 Will. 4, c. 65, 88. 12, 14.] The provisions of 
 the Act 11 Geo. 4 & 1 Will. 4, c. 65, for the sur- 
 render of a lease to which an infant is entitled, 
 apply to a lease to which an infant is only bene- 
 ficially entitled, the legal estate being vested in a 
 trustee for him. In re Griffiths 29 Ch. D. 248 
 
 VIII. INFANT— SETTIEMENT. 
 
 "Ward of Court — Form of Settlement — 
 
 Infants Settlements Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. 43) 
 
 Settlement "upon" Marriage— Contempt-Power 
 to enforce Settlement against Ward.'] A gentle- 
 man having, in wilful defiance of an order of the 
 Court, married an infant ward of Court, the usual 
 directions were given for a settlement of her pro- 
 perty, and a settlement was prepared which pro- 
 vided that the power of testamentary appointment 
 given to her in default of issue should not be 
 exercised in favour of the husband. The wife 
 objected to this exclusion of the husband, and to 
 the proposed trustees, with whom she was not on 
 friendly terms, and she refused to execute the 
 settlement unless it was altered in these parti- 
 culars. There was no objection to the trustees 
 except her personal dislike to them. On an ap- 
 plication in the matter of the infant and under 
 the Infants Settlements Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. 43) 
 Kay, J., made an order for the husband and wife 
 to execute the settlement as It stood. — The wife 
 appealed. — fieM, by Earl Selborne, L.C., and 
 Fry, L.J. (dubitante Cotton, L. J.), that under the 
 Act IS & 19 Vict. c. 43, a settlement of an infant's 
 property may be made on the occasion of his or 
 lier marriage after the marriage has taken place 
 —Seld, by Cotton and Fry, L.JJ. fabsente Earl 
 of Selborne, L.C.), that the wife ought not to be 
 prevented from exercising in favour of her hus- 
 band the power of testamentary appointment in 
 default of issue, and that it was desirable not to 
 appoint trustees with whom she was on unplea- 
 sant terms, and that the settlement ought to be 
 modified in these respects; and the wife being 
 willing to execute the settlement so modified, the 
 Court declined to decide whether she could be 
 compelled to execute it. In re Sampson and 
 Wall, Infants - - 25 Ch. D. 482 
 
 Z 
 
( 675 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 676 ) 
 
 IX. INFANT— WAED OF COTIET. 
 
 1. Administratioii Action — Payment into 
 
 Court — Summons for Appointment of G-uardian.'] 
 In an administration action to ■which an infant 
 •was not a party, moneys -were paid in to her sepa- 
 rate account : — Held, that this was sufficient to 
 constitute the infant a ward of Court. — A sum- 
 mons for the appointment of a guardian to the 
 infant was taken out before the action, and npon 
 the heariiig of the summons no order was made, 
 but, upon the suggestion of the Judge, an arrange- 
 ment was made as to access to the infant. — 
 Semble, this was of itself sufiScient to constitute 
 the infant a ward of Court. De Peebda v. De 
 Manoha - - 19 Ch. D. 451 
 
 2. — — Allen — Infant Member of Class men- 
 tioned in Title to Account.'] A fund was carried 
 over in an administration action to a separate ac- 
 count, intituled " The account of A. B., and of 
 
 X. Y., and his issue," to answer a settled legacy 
 under the will of the testator, wherein A. B. and 
 X. T. had life interests. — X. Y. was a domiciled 
 I'renchman, and he died leaving issue three 
 daughters only, who were all French and married 
 to Frenchmen, two of them having married under 
 jige, and one being still an infant. A. B. having 
 also died, these three daughters and their hus- 
 bands petitioned for payment out to them of their 
 respective shares : — Seld, that the Court would 
 not in the exercise of its discretion treat the two 
 daughters who had married under age as wards 
 -of Court. — Semhle, the carrying of a fund to sepa- 
 rate account of an infant in an action to whicli the 
 infant is not a party will not constitute such in- 
 fant a ward of Court, and even if such carrying 
 over would have constituted a natural bom British 
 subject a ward of Court, it would not have that 
 effect in the case of an alien not resident in this 
 ■country. — Observations on De Pereda v. De 
 Mancha (19 Ch. D. 451). Bbown «. Collins 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 56 
 
 3, Out of Jurisdiction — Leave to take Ward 
 
 ■of Court out of the Jurisdiction.] A resident in 
 Jamaica died leaving two children, who were 
 bom there, and resided there with their mother 
 till 1875, when the elder, a daughter, was sent to 
 England to be educated. The mother came to 
 England in 1876 to place her son at school, and 
 returned to Jamaica in 1878. In 1880 she came 
 to England to see her children and had remained 
 there, the daughter, upon leaving school, living 
 with her. With the above exceptions the mother 
 had always lived in Jamaica, and regarded it as 
 her home. She now wished to retum thither 
 permanently, and to take with her the daughter 
 aged twenty years and three months, the son, who 
 was apprenticed to an engineer, remaining in 
 Eno-land. The children were wards of Court, and 
 the°mother had been appointed by the Court sole 
 guardian :—J3'eZd, by Kay, J., that the Court 
 would not allow a ward of Court to be taken out 
 of the jurisdiction except under very special 
 circumstances, and that there were not in the 
 present case any such special circumstances as 
 would justify giving the permission •.—Seld, on 
 appeal, that leave may be given to take a ward 
 out of the jurisdiction without a case of necessity 
 being shewn, the Court having only to be satisfied 
 that the step is for the benefit of the ward, and 
 
 IX. INFANT— WAED OF COV'B.t— continued. 
 
 that there is sufficient security that future orders 
 will be obeyed. Leave was accordingly given 
 upon a relative resident in England being ap- 
 pointed guardian along with the mother. In re 
 Callaghan. Elliott v. Lajibekt 28 Ch. D. 186 
 INFANT — ^Adjudication of bankruptcy 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 109 
 See BjLnkbdptct — Tbader. 3. 
 - — Bailment to— Larceny - 15 ft. B. D. 323 
 See Ckiminai. Law — Laecent. 2. 
 
 Compromise — How far binding 6 P. D. 219 
 
 See Peaotice — Peobate — Compeomise. 
 
 Custody — Covenant in separation deed 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 670 ; 28 Ch, D. 606 
 See Hdsband akd Wife — Sepaeation 
 Deed. 1, 5. 
 
 Joint tenant — Severance - 28 Ch. D. 416 
 
 See Joint Tenajo". 1. 
 
 Maintenance — Legacy 16 Ch. D. 44, 47 
 
 See Will — Vesting. 3, 5. 
 
 Maintenance — Eight of father to income 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 521 
 See Settlement — ^Powees. 5. 
 
 Mamage settlement — ^Minority of husband 
 
 —Wife suing alune - 6 ft. B. D. 122 
 See Husband and Wife — ^Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 1. 
 
 Married female — Election - 28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Election. 6. 
 Married female — Waiver of equity to settle- 
 ment - 16 Ch. D. 376 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Mortgagor — ^Foreclosure - 24 Ch. D. 707 ; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 168 
 See Mortgage — Fobeclosuee. 8, 9. 
 
 Next friend - 25 Ch. B. 243 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Coubt — ^Next 
 Feiend. 1. 
 
 Next friend — Production of accounts 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 189 
 See Peactice — Supkeme Couet — ^Peo- 
 DucTioN OF Documents. 5. 
 
 Order for administration 28 Ch. D. 457 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 913 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 
 BEBS. 9, 10. 
 
 Property of — Solicitor's lien 24 Ch. D. 545 
 
 See SouciTOE — ^LiEN. 2. 
 Settled Land Act — Powers as tenant for 
 
 life. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 Settled Land Act— Sale 24 Ch. D. 114, 129 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 1. 
 
 Settled Land Act— Sale - 27 Ch. D. 562 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Disabilities. 
 1. 
 
 Settlement by — Confirmation — Lunatic 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 263 
 See Settlement — Future Propebty. 3. 
 
 Supplemental action — Inquiry if for his 
 
 benefit - - 26 Ch. D. 181 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Change 
 OF Parties. 3. 
 
( 077 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 678 ) 
 
 TST&ST — continued. 
 
 Trustee of stocks — Vesting order 
 
 L20 Ch. D. 536 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vestins Oeders. 5. 
 
 INFECTIOUS DISEASES. 
 
 See Metkopolis — ^Management Aots — 
 Statutes. 
 INFEEIOB COmiTS— Jurisdiction. 
 
 See Coxjet — Statutes. 
 — — Jurisdiction - - 10 Q. B. D. 604 
 
 See Court — ^Mayor's Court. 3. 
 
 INFEEIOE COURTS JUDGHENTS EXTENSION 
 ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Judgment — Statutes. 
 
 INFORMATION — English' infonnation — At- 
 torney-General - 14 Q. B. D. 195 
 See Attorney-General of Duchy or 
 Lancaster. 
 
 Libel - 12 Q. B. D. 320 ; 14 ft. B. D. 648 
 
 See Criminal Law — Libel. 1. 2. 
 
 INFOEMEE — Eecovery of penalty — Offence 
 against Crown 7 Q. B. D. 38 ; 8 App. 
 
 See Penal Action. 2. [Cas. 354 
 
 INFEINGEMENT— Copyright. 
 
 See Cases under Copyright. 
 ■ Patent. 
 
 See Cases under Patent — Infringe- 
 ment. 
 Patent— Scotch law 8 App. Cas. 873 
 
 See Scotch Law — Patent. 
 Trade-mark. 
 
 See Cases under Tbade-makk. 
 Trade-name. 
 
 See Cases under Trade-name, 
 
 INHABITED HOUSE DUTY— Exemption— " Ser- 
 vant or other person " 6 ft. B. D. 530, 
 [673 ; 14 Q. B. D. 838 
 
 See Ebventje— House Duty. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 INHERITANCE — Descent ex parte paterna or ex 
 parte matema - 28 Ch. D. 327 
 
 See Descent. 
 
 Law of Trinidad 10 App. Cas. 312 
 
 See Colonial Law— Trinidad. 
 
 INHIBITION - - 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 SeePEAOTiCE—EoCLESiASTiCAL— Public 
 Worship Act. 1. 
 
 INJUNCTION. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Injunction. 
 Abstraction of water 37 Ch. D, 122 
 
 ■See Watercourse. 1. 
 Action by creditor after composition- Error 
 
 in settlement of debts 23 Ch. D. 706 
 
 See Baxkbuptcy — Composition. 10. 
 
 Advertisement warning against infringe- 
 ment of patent - 28Ch.D. 394 
 See Patent — Infringement. 5. 
 
 Application of funds of trade union 
 
 See Trade Union. [21 Ch. D. 194 
 Bankruptcy - 16 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Proceed- 
 ings. 1. 
 
 INJUNCTION— conimMecZ. 
 
 Committal for breach nf - 25 Ch. D. 778 
 
 See Practice — Suprejie Court — At- 
 tachment. 9. 
 
 Contract for exclusive personal service — 
 
 Procuring breach of contract 
 
 [6 Q,. B. D. 333 
 See Master and Servant — Remedies. 
 1. 
 
 Contract not to sell - - 22 Ch. D. 835 
 
 See Specific Performance. 3. 
 
 Copyright — Infringement of. 
 
 See Cases under Copyright. 
 
 Disqualification of alderman — Election of 
 
 successor - - 16 Ch. D. 143 
 
 See Municipal Corporation— Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 — - Husband and wife — Separate estate — Dwell- 
 ing-house - - 24 Ch. D. 346 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 2. 
 
 Judgment creditor — Administration action 
 
 See JuDi3MENT. 1. [29 Ch. D. 657 
 
 Licence to use metropolitan stage carriage 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 105 
 
 See Metropolis — Public Carriages 
 Acts. 
 
 Light — Obstruction of. 
 
 See Cases under Light. 
 
 — — Metropolitan main drainage 17 Ch. D. 246 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 9. 
 
 Mortgagor — Interference with possession 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 547 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 
 CEIVER. 5. 
 
 Nuisance. 
 
 See Cases under Nuisance. 
 
 Nuisance — District board 17 Oh. D. 685 
 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 thority. 13. 
 
 Patent — Infringement of. 
 
 See Cases under Patent. 
 
 Eeceiver in another action 25 Ch. D. 723 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ee- 
 
 OEIVER. 7. 
 
 Eegistration of company - 17 Ch. D. 638 
 
 See Company — tfNREGisTEBED Company. 
 8. 
 
 Restraining party from proceeding with 
 
 arbitration - - 11 Q. B. D. 30 
 
 See Arbitration — Staying Proceed- 
 ings. 
 
 Restrictive covenants — Alteration of pro- 
 perty - 24 Ch. D. 180 ; 28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 See Covenant — Beeachj 
 
 Sale by mortgagee - 20 Ch, D. 220 ; 
 
 [23 Ch, D. 690 ; 24 Ch. D. 289 
 
 See Mortgage^Powers. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 Slanderous statement about business 
 
 [26 Ch. D, 306 
 See Defamation— Slander. 3. 
 Z 2 
 
(679 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 680 ) 
 
 ISJVSCTIOH— continued. 
 
 SolicitiDg ciistomers — Expelled partner 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 604 
 See Paetneeship — ^Dissolution. 3. 
 
 Soliciting customers — Sale of goodwill 
 
 [19C11.D. 355; 27 Ch. D. 145 
 
 See Goodwill. 2, 3. 
 
 Solicitor acting against former client' 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 733 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 1. 
 
 Trade circular — Infringement of patent 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Patent — Infbingement. 2. 
 Trade-mark — ^Infringement. 
 
 See Cases under Tkade-mabk. 
 
 Trade-name — Telegraphic address 
 
 See Trade-name. 1. [30 Ch. D. 156 
 
 Undertaking as to damages 23 Ch. D. 644 
 
 See Bankrtjptot — Eeceivee. 1. 
 
 Undertaking as to damages 27 Ch. D. 474 
 
 See Practice — Supbeme Coubt — In- 
 junction. 10. 
 
 Waterworks company 28 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply of 
 Water. 1. 
 
 Winding-up petition — Solvent company 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 656 
 See Company — ^Winding-up Order. 9. 
 
 INJlTEIOtrSLT AFFECTING LANDS — Scotch 
 railway 8 App. Cas. 265 
 
 iSee Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 5 
 
 INLAND HEVENTIE BUILDINGS ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Revenue — Management — Statutes. 
 
 DTN:— Col. 
 
 I. Innkeeper - - - 679 
 
 II. Licence. - - 680 
 
 ni. Offences. - - - 683 
 
 I. INN— INNKEEPEE. 
 
 1. Liability — Property of Gvest — Tem- 
 
 porary Befreshment.'] The Plaintiff arrived at 
 Carlisle with the intention of spending the night 
 at the Defendants' hotel, which adjoined the 
 railway station. He delivered his luggage to 
 one of the porters of the hotel, but, after reading 
 u, telegram which was waiting for him, decided 
 not to spend the night at Carlisle, and went info 
 the coffee-room to order some refreshments. He 
 was not able to obtain in the coffee-room exactly 
 what he required, and went into the station 
 refreshment-room, which was under the tame 
 management as the hotel, and connected with it 
 by a covered passage. Shortly afterwards he went 
 out, telling the porter to lock up his luggage, and 
 it was looked up in a room near the refreshment- 
 room. On his return he found that part of it was 
 missing : — Seld, that at the time of the loss of 
 tlie Plaintiff's goods there was no evidence of the 
 relation of landlord and guest between him and 
 tlie Defendants, so as to make them responsible. 
 Sthauss v. County Hotel and Wine Company 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 27 
 
 2. Lien — Effect of taking Security — Bailee 
 
 — Custody of Goods.2 An innkeeper who accepts 
 
 I. INN— INNKEEPEE— conMnaed. 
 security from his guest for the payment of hotel 
 charges does not waive his lien at common law 
 upon the goods of the gaest for the amount of 
 such charges imless there is something in the 
 nature of the security, or in the circumstances 
 under which it was taken, which is inconsistent 
 with the existence or continuance of the lieu 
 and therefore destructive of it. — ^An innkeeper 
 retaining the goods of his guest by virtue of 
 such lien is not bound to use greater care as to 
 their custody than he uses as to his own goods of 
 a similar description. — Observations on CoweU v. 
 Simpson (16 Ves. 275). Angus v. McLachlan 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 330 
 n. INN— LICENCE. 
 
 Hie Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 34, amends the Beer 
 Dealers' Retail lAeences Act, 1880, and enacts 
 {sect. I) that notwithstanding anything in sect. 8 
 of the Wine and Beerhouse Act, 1869, or in any 
 other Act now in force, the licensing justices shall 
 he at liberty, in their free and unqualified discre- 
 tion, either to refuse a certificate for any licence 
 for sale of beer hy retail to be consumed off the 
 premises on any grounds appearing to them suffi- 
 cient, or to grant the same to such persons as they 
 in the execution of their statutory powers and in 
 the exercise of their discretion deem fit and proper. 
 
 Sect. 2. Such certificates to be granted at annual 
 licenring meetings only. 
 
 Sect. 3. Act to be cited as the Beer Dealers' 
 Retail Licences {Amendment) Act, 1882. 
 
 1. Continuance hy Owner — Authority to 
 
 Owner of Premises to continue the Business, where 
 the Occupier's Licence has been forfeited under s. 15 
 of the Licensing Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 49) — 
 Discretion of Justices.'] Where the occupier of a 
 beerhouse has forfeited his licence by being guilty 
 of an offence under sect. 15 of the Licensing Act, 
 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 49), the grant by the petty 
 sessions of an authority to the owner to carry on 
 the business until the next special sessions for 
 licensing purposes, is in the discretion of the 
 justices, under sects. 1, 4, and 14 of the Licensing 
 Act, 1828 (9 Geo. 4, c. 61); and the pei-son ap- 
 plying for swh authority is not entitled to notice 
 under sect. 42 of the Act of 1872 (35 & 36 Viet, 
 c. 94) of the objections intended to be urged 
 against his application. The Queen r. Mooee 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 542 
 
 2. Death of Licence-holder — Licence for 
 
 Sale of JSxeiseable Liquors — Death of Licence-holder 
 before Expiration of Licence — Expiration of Licence 
 — Application to Special Sessions— 9 Geo. 4, c. 61, 
 ss. 4, 13, 14.] K., licensed to sell intoxicating 
 liquors under 9 Geo. 4, o. 61, died on the 27th of 
 September. At the general annual licensing meet- 
 ing on the 2nd of October application was made 
 by the lessees of the house for a fresh licence, 
 without giving the requisite notices under 35 & 36 
 Vict. c. 94, as there was no time to give them. 
 This application was rejected on the ground that 
 they were not in occupation of or about to occupy 
 the premises. K.'s licence expired on the 10th of 
 October. On the 13th of November W., as assignee 
 of the heir of K., gave notice that he would apply 
 at the special sessions on the 4th of December for 
 a new Uoence in respect of the house under 9 Geo. 4, 
 0. 61, B. 14 : — Seld, following Simpkin v. Justices 
 
( 681 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 682 ) 
 
 II. IS'S—'LIC'ESCE— continued, 
 of Birmingham (Law Eep. 7 Q. B. 482), that the 
 justices had no jurisdiction to entertain the ap- 
 plication, as it was made after the expiration of 
 the period for which the previous licence remained 
 in force. White v. Justices of Coqubtdaie 
 
 [7 Q. B. S. 238 
 [But see Inn — Licence, ti.] 
 
 3. "Off" Licence — Application for Li- 
 cence — Value of Souse — 3 & 4 Vict. c. 61, s. 1 — 
 Licensing Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 94), s. 45— 
 Notice to Applicant of Grounds of Befusal — Wiiie 
 and Beerhouse Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 27), 
 s. 8.] An application for a licence to sell beer by 
 retail not to be consumed on the premises was 
 refused by justices, on the ground that the house 
 was not duly qualified by law, not being of suffi- 
 cient value under 3 & 4 Vict. c. 61, s. 1. The Wine 
 and Beerhouse Act, 1869, a. 8, requires the 
 justices, where such an application is refused on 
 the ground that the house is not duly qualified as 
 by law required, to specify in writing to the appli- 
 cant the grounds of their decision. A minute of 
 the decision with the grounds of it was made and 
 read out by the chairman in Court, in the presence 
 of the applicant, but no copy was delivered to 
 him. On a rule for a mandamus to the justices to 
 hear and determine the application: — Seld (by 
 Field and Cave, JJ.), that the provisions as to 
 rating qualification for houses for the sale of beer 
 and cider for consumption off the premises under 
 3 & 4 Vict. 0. 61, 8. 1, had not been affected by the 
 Licensing Act, 1872, s. 45, which must beconstnied 
 as applying only to premises licensed before the 
 Act, or to be licensed under it, for the sale of in- 
 toxicating liquor thereupon. — Held, also, that, in 
 the absence of any request by the applicant for a 
 writing shewing the reasons for the decision of 
 the justices, the" notice was" sufficient. The 
 Queen v. Justices op Cumbekland 
 
 [8 Q. B. S. 369 
 
 4, Eenewal — Conviction — Forfeiture of 
 
 Licence — Application by Owner of Premises to 
 Special Sessions for Licence, Befusal of — Bight of 
 Appeal to Quarter Sessions — 9 Geo. 4, c. 61, ss. 4, 
 14 ; 35 <fe 36 Vict. c. 94, s. 9 ; 37 (t 38 Vict. c. 49, 
 A 15.] The appeal clauses of 9 Geo. 4, c. 61 (the 
 Intoxicating Liquors Licensing Act, 1828), are 
 incorporated in 37 & 38 Vict. c. 49 (the Licensing 
 Act, 1874), sect. 15, and therefore when the licence 
 of a public-house keeper is forfeited by conviction 
 under 35 & 36 Vict. c. 94, s. 9, and the owner of the 
 premises duly applies under 37 & 38 Vict. c. 49, 
 s. 15, to special sessions for a licence and it is re- 
 fused, he has a right of appeal to quarter sessions. 
 The Qdeen v. Justices of West Kiding 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 417 
 
 6. Eenewal — Mortgagor and Mortgagee 
 
 — Appeal — Quarter Sessions — 9 Geo. 4, c. 61, s. 27 
 —32 & 33 Vict. c. 27, ». 19.] The tenant and 
 occupier of a liouse, licensed for the sale of beer on 
 the premises, in 1876 assigned all his interest in 
 the premises for the residue of his term of years, 
 and the benefit of the licence, to the Appellants 
 by way of first mortgage to secure the repayment 
 of moneys advanced by them ; and by the mortgage 
 deed irrevocably constituted the Appellants his 
 attorneys, in his name, and as his act and deed, to 
 do all acts necessary to procure a transfer of the 
 
 II. INN- IICENCE— co)i«m«ecZ. 
 licence. In 1883, the moneys secured by the 
 mortgage being still unpaid, the occupier sent a 
 written application for a renewal of his licence 
 to the justices at their annual licensing meet- 
 ing, and they adjourned the hearing of the ap- 
 plication. At the adjourned hearing the Appel- 
 lants applied, as mortgagees and under their 
 power of attorney, for a renewal of the licence to 
 the occupier, who appeared, but stated that he 
 did not wish for a renewal. No objection was 
 made to the renewal on any of the grounds spe- 
 cified in 32 & 33 Vict. c. 27, which Act applied 
 to the occupier's licence. The justices refused 
 the application, and the Appellants appealed to 
 quarter sessions in their own names as mort- 
 gagees, and also as attorneys of the occupier, and 
 in his name, and for and on his behalf. At the 
 hearing the occupier again appeared, and stated 
 that he did not wish the licence to be renewed, 
 and the quarter sessions thereupon affirmed the 
 order of the licensing justices : — JBeld, first, that 
 the Appellants were persons aggrieved, within 
 9 Geo. 4, 0. 61, ». 27, by the refusal of the licen- 
 sing justices to renew the occupier's licence ; and 
 were therefore entitled to appeal to quarter ses- 
 sions ; secondly, that upon the facts stated the 
 licensing justices and the court of quarter ses- 
 sions were bound to grant the application of the 
 Appellants for a renewal of the licence to the 
 occupier. Gabbett v. Justices ov Middlesex 
 
 [12 Q, B, S. 620 
 
 6. Eenewal — Neglect of Occupier about 
 
 to remove to apply for Benewal — Expiration of 
 Licence — Application to Special Sessions — 9 Geo. 4, 
 c. 61, 8. 14.] S., tenant of a house and licensed 
 to sell excisable liquors therein, made over the 
 house in June, 1881, to W., who forthwith sub-let 
 it to B. B. applied at a special sessions for a 
 transfer of the Hcence, which was opposed by S., 
 and refused. At the time of the general licensing 
 meeting B. was in occupation, but was about to 
 leave owing to illness in her family, and did not 
 apply for a renewal of the licence. She left 
 shortly afterwards and the house was shut up, and 
 no excisable liquors had been sold there since 
 June. In September, after the clqge of the 
 licensing meeting, the landlord learnt that the 
 house was vacant and took possession. The li- 
 cence expired on the 10th of October. The land- 
 lord afterwards let to D., who, in January, 1882, 
 applied to a special sessions for a renewal of the 
 licence : — Seld, that B. as occupier, though not 
 holding a licence, was a person entitled to apply 
 at the general sessions for a renewal of the licence, 
 and that the event mentioned in 9 Geo. 4, c. 61. 
 s. 14, of the occupier of a house being about to 
 quit the same neglecting to apply at the general 
 meeting for a licence to continue to sell excisable 
 liquors therein, had occurred, so that an applioa^ 
 tion under that section could be made: — Seld, 
 also, overruling JSx parte Todd (3 Q. B. D. 407), 
 and White v. Justices of Goquetdale (7 Q. B. D. 
 238), that it was not necessary that the application 
 should be made before the expiration of the period 
 for which the old licence was in force, and that 
 the justices in special sessions had jurisdiction to 
 grant the application. The Queen v. Justices op 
 LivBEPOOL - - - 11 Q. B. D. 638 
 
( 683 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 684 ) 
 
 II. I^S^S—LlC■E^SlC^E— continued. 
 
 1, Renewal — " Off" lAcenees — Appeal — 
 
 Beer Dealers' Retail Licences A ct, 1882 (45 <£ 46 
 Vict. e. 34), s. 1.] The right of appeal to quarter 
 sessions, from a refusal of licensing justices to re- 
 new a certificate for a licence to sell beer not to 
 be consumed on the premises, has not been taken 
 away by the Beer Dealers' Retail Licences Act, 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. o. 34), s. I. The Queen v. 
 ScHNEiDEB - 11 a. B. D. 66 
 
 8. Senewal — " Off" Licences — Discretion 
 
 to refuse — Beer Dealers' Setail Licences Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. e. 34), s. 1.] The unqualified dis- 
 cretion which tlie licensing justices have under 
 the Beer Dealers' EetailLicences Act, 1882 (45 &46 
 Vict. u. 34), s. 1, to refuse a certificate for any 
 licence for sale of beer by retail to be consumed 
 off the premises may be exercised, not only on an 
 application for such certificate in respect of pre- 
 mises not theretofore similarly licensed, but also 
 on an application for such certificate by way of 
 renewal. - Tke Queen v. Kay 10 ft. B. D. 213 
 
 9. Renewal — Proceedings wliere no Notice 
 
 of Opposition — Objection not made in open Court 
 —Licensing Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 94), s. 42.] 
 By sect. 42 of the Licensing Act, 1872, justices at 
 the general annual licensing meeting shall not 
 entertain any objection to the renewal of a licence, 
 or take any evidence with respect to the renewal 
 thereof, unless written notice of an intention to 
 oppose the renewal has been served upon the 
 holder of the licence in the prescribed manner : 
 " Provided that the justices may, notw ithstanding 
 that no notice has been given, on an objection 
 being made, adjourn the granting of any licence 
 to a future day, and require the attendance of the 
 holder of the licence on such day, when the case 
 will be heard and the objection considered, as if 
 the notice hereinbefore prescribed had been 
 given :" — Held, that an objection to the renewal 
 of a licence made privately to justices before they 
 came into court at the general annual licensing 
 meeting was not a good " objection made " within 
 the meaning of the proviso to sect. 42, and that, 
 therefore, the justices, had no power to adjourn 
 the case. The Queen v. Justices of Merthtk 
 TTDYtt - - - 14 ft. B. D. 884 
 
 III. INN— OFFENCES. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 29 (Licensing Evidence 
 Act, 1884), exteiids sect. 41 of 35 & 36 Vict. c. 94, 
 with respect to licences wilfully withheld iy Iwlders. 
 
 1. ■ Conviction — Fine or Imprisonment — ■ 
 
 No Order of Distress— S5 & 36 Vict. c. 94, ss. 3, 51 
 — Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1 879 (42 & 43 Vict. 
 c. 49), s. 21, sub-s. 3.] The Summary Jurisdiction 
 Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49), s. 21, sub-s. 3, does 
 not apply to the Licensing Aot, 1872 (35 & 36 
 Vict. c. 94), sect. 3, sub-sect. 1, and sect. 51, sub- 
 sect. 2, so as to give justices jurisdiction to order 
 imprisonment for non-payment of a penalty ex- 
 ceeding £5, under sect. 8, without first ordering a 
 distress. — By the Licensing Act, 1872, sect. 2, an 
 unlicensed person selling intoxicating liquors is 
 liable to a penalty or to imprisonment : — Seld, 
 that a conviction imposing a penalty exceeding 
 £5, and, in default ofpayment, imprisonment, was 
 bad. Li re Clew - - 8 ft. B. D. 611 
 
 III. INN— OFFENCES— cojifmuetZ. 
 
 2. — - " Sale by Eetail" — Club— Intoxicat- 
 ing Liquors — Licensing Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. 
 c. 94), «. 3.] The Appellant was manager of an 
 institution carried on bonS. fide as a club, under 
 rules by which members paid an entrance fee and 
 subscription; trustees were appointed in whom 
 all the club property was vested, and there was a 
 committee of management (for whom the Appel- 
 lant acted) to conduct the general business. The 
 club was not licensed for the sale of intoxicating 
 liquors, but these were supplied, at fixed prices, 
 to members for consumption on and off the pre- 
 mises, 33 per cent, above the cost price being 
 charged for liquors to be consumed off the pre- 
 mises, and the money produced thereby going to 
 the general funds of the club. The Appellant 
 having, in the course of his employment as man- 
 ager, supplied intoxicating liquors to a member 
 (who paid for them) for consumption oflf the pre- 
 premises: — Held, that the Appellant did not 
 " sell by retail " intoxicating liquors withiii the 
 meaning of sect. 3 of the Licensing Act, 1872, and 
 therefore was not liable to conviction for an offence 
 under the section. Graff v. Evans 
 
 [8 ft B. D. 373 
 
 3. Sale to Drtmken Person — Knowledge 
 
 of Condition of Customer — Licensing Act, 1872 
 (35 * 36 Vict. c. 94), s. 13.] The Licensing Act, 
 1872, sect. 13, makes it an offence for any licensed 
 person to sell any intoxicating liquor to any 
 drunken person. A publican sold intoxicating 
 liquor to a drunken person who had given no in- 
 dication of intoxication, and without being aware 
 that the person so served was drunk : — Held, that 
 the prohibition was absolute, and that knowledge 
 of tlie condition of the person served with liquor 
 was not necessary to constitute the offence. Cundt 
 V. Le Cooq - - - 13 ft. B. D. 207 
 
 4. Suffering Gaming . — Licensing Act, 
 
 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 9iy-KnowUdge of Servant 
 — Mens rea.'] Where gaming had taken place 
 upon licensed premises to the knowledge p{ a 
 servant of the licensed person employed on the 
 premises, but there was no evidence to shew any 
 connivance or wilful blindness on the part of the 
 licensed person, and it did not appear that the 
 servant was in charge of the premises : — Held, 
 that the justices were right in refusing to convict 
 the licensed person of suffering gaming on the 
 premises under the Licensing Aot, 1872, s. 17.— 
 Mullins v. Collins (Law Rep. 9 Q. B. 292) dis- 
 cussed. Somerset v. Hart 12 ft. B. D. 360 
 
 5. Sunday Closing (Wales) Act, 1881 
 
 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 61), s. 3 — Commencement o/.] 
 By sect. 3 of the Sunday Closing (Wales) Act, 
 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 61), passed on the 27th of 
 August, 1881, " This Aot shall commence and 
 come into operation with respect to each division 
 or place in Wales on the day next appointed for 
 the holding of the general annual licensing meet- 
 ing for that division or place " -.—Held, that " the 
 day next appointed " is the day which shall, after 
 the passing of the Act, be next appointed for the 
 holding of the meeting. Eioharus v. MoBride 
 
 [8 ft. B. D, 119 
 
 6. Sunday Closing (Wales) Aot, 1881 
 
 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 61) — " Christmas Day and Good 
 Friday "] By sect. 3 of the Licensing Aot, 1874 
 
( 685 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 686 ) 
 
 III. INN- OFFENCES— eoji<.n«ei7. 
 (37 & 38 "Vict. 0. 49), " all premises in which in- 
 toxicating liquors are sold by retail, wherever 
 situate, shall be closed on Christmas Day and 
 Good Friday, as if Christmas Day and Good Fri- 
 day were respectiYely Sunday." — By sect. 1 of 
 the Sunday Closing (Wales) Act, 1881 (44 & 4.5 
 Vict. c. 61), all such premises are to be closed 
 " during the whole of Sunday " : — Held, that the 
 word "Sunday" in the Welsh Act only has its 
 ordinary meaning, and that a conviction under 
 that Act for unlawfully keeping open premises 
 for the sale of intoxicating liquors on Christmas 
 Day was bad. Foksdiee v. Colquhoun 
 
 [U Q. B. D. 71 
 INNUENDO— Libel - 7 App. Cas. 741 
 
 See Defamation — Libel. 1. 
 
 Slander - - - 6 App. Cas. 156 
 
 See Dbeamation — Slander. 2. 
 
 INQUEST — Obstruction— Burning dead body 
 
 [12Q. B. D. 247; 13 Q. B. D. 331 
 See Cbiminal Law — Misdemeanor. 1, 2. 
 
 Eefusal to hold - - 9 ft. B. D. 689 
 
 See Coroner. 
 INftTJISITION— Lunatic - 18 Ch. D. 26 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 116 ; 30 Ch. D. 320 
 See Lunatich-Inquisition. 1, 2. 
 INSANITY. 
 
 See Cases under LnNATic. 
 
 Nullity of marriage - - 10 P. D. 80 
 
 See Practice — ^Divorce — ^Nullity op 
 Marriage. 6. 
 
 INSOLVENCY. 
 
 Close of Insolvency — After -acguired Tto- 
 
 perty — Siihseqiient Insolvency and Bankruptcy — 
 32 & 33 Vict. c. 83, s. 15— "Pending Matter."'] 
 In June, 1836, C. took the benefit of the Insolvent 
 Act (7 Geo. 4. c. 57) and obtained his discharge 
 having executed a warrant of attorney upon 
 which judgment was entered up. Two creditors' 
 assignees were then appointed, one being W., a 
 creditor. C. subsequently became three times 
 insolvent, and in July, 1854, he became bankrupt 
 under the Act of 1849, and obtained his certificate. 
 He died in January, 1880. 0. had married the 
 only daughter of a man who died possessed of very 
 considerable property a few months after his first 
 insolvency, whereupon he became entitled, in right 
 of his wife, to that money, which came into his 
 possession on her death in 1877. W., the sur- 
 vivor of the two creditors' assignees under the 
 first insolvency, and himself a creditor, now applied 
 for leave to prove his debt in an action to ad- 
 minister C.'s estate: — Held (affirming the de- 
 cision of Kay, J.), that, under the Act to provide 
 for the winding"up of the business of the Insol- 
 vency Courts (32 & 33 Vict; c. 83); the close of the 
 •insolvency provided for by sect. 1 5 was intended 
 to be an absolute close, and that if no steps were 
 taken to postpone the closing within twelve 
 months from the commencement of the Act, then 
 at the expiration of twelve months from the com- 
 mencement of the Act, or at the expiration of 
 twenty years from the filing of' the petition, it 
 became the duty of the Court to refuse leave to 
 issue execution ; and by analogy it was the duty 
 of this Court to refuse leave to prove the debts in 
 
 INSOLVENCY— ooniraucd. 
 
 insolvency in the administration action. — Pi?r 
 Jfessel, M.K. : A " pending matter " in any Court 
 of Justice means one in which some proceeding 
 may still be taken. In re Clagett's Estate. 
 Foedham v. Clagett - 20 Ch, D. 637 
 
 Disqualification of alderman — ^Election of 
 
 successor - 16 Ch. D. 14.3 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Evidence of — ^Winding-up petition 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 210 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 10. 
 
 New South Wales— Forfeiture 30 Ch. D, 119 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 5. 
 
 Security for costs— Trustee in bankruptcy 
 
 [28 Ch, D. 38 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity FOR Costs. 8. 
 
 INSPECTION OF DOCITMENTS. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Production op Documents. 
 
 — — Books of company — Arbitration 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Company— Ebconstbuction. 
 
 Deceased lunatic - 16 Ch. D. 673 
 
 See Lunatic — Deceased Lunatic. 
 
 INSPECTION OF PEOPEETY 27 Ch. D. 356 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 spection OP Property. 
 
 INSPECTION OF SHIP'S LIGHTS — Trinity 
 masters - - - 10 P. D. 40 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Inspection 
 OP Property. 
 
 INSTALMENTS — ^Mortgage to building society — 
 Proof in bankruptcy 22 Ch. D. 450 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 13. 
 
 INSTJEABLE INTEEEST— Marine insurance 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 564 ; 10 App. Cas. 263 
 
 See Insurance, Marine t^ Insdeablb 
 Interest. 
 
 INSTTEANCE COMPANY. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Life Insur- 
 ance Company. 
 
 Income tax — •" AnnuaV profits or gains " 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 239; 10 App. Cas. 438 
 See Eevenue-^Income Tax. 9. 
 
 INSUEANCE, FIEE. 
 
 1. Felonious Act' — Loss occasioned hy the 
 
 Felonious Act of the Wife of the Assured — Bights 
 of the Insurer— Bisks covered hy Policy — Action 
 maintainable without shewing that Felon has been 
 prosecuted.'] An insurance company granted a fii'e 
 policy to S., and during the currency of the policy 
 S.'s wife feloniously burnt the property insured. 
 The company, not admitting any claim on 'the 
 policy, brought an action against S. and his wife 
 for the damage done by the act of the wife : — Held, 
 first, that the aetion could not be 'maintained, sis 
 the insurer has no rights other than those of his 
 assured, and can enforce those only in his name 
 and after admitting the claim on the policy. Se- 
 condly, that the action for the felony if it were 
 maintainable was maintainable without shewing 
 
( 687 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 
 
 ) 
 
 INSUEAHCE, "PIR^—continiied. 
 that the felon had been prosecuted. — Senible, that 
 a felonious burning by the wife of the assured, 
 ■without his privity, is covered by the ordinary 
 fire policy. Midland Insdeanoe Compant v. 
 Smith and Wite - - 6 Q. B. D. 661 
 
 3. Settled Estate — Tenant in Tail — Pay- 
 ment of Premiums out of Bents — Policy Moneys, 
 who entitled io.] During the infancy of a tenant 
 in tail of freehold estates devised in strict settle- 
 ment, part of which consisted of a com-mUl let 
 on lease, the rents were received by his mother 
 on his behalf, and she thereout paid the premiums 
 necessary for keeping up a policy which had been 
 effected in her name for insuring the mill against 
 fire. The will contained no provision for fire 
 insurance. — The mill having been burnt down, 
 and it not being considered for the benefit o( any 
 person interested in the settled estates that it 
 should be rebuilt : — Held, that the insurance 
 moneys belonged to the infant tenant in tail as 
 his personal estate, and were not to be treated as 
 real estate for the benefit of all persons interested 
 in the settled estates. Wakwiokek v. Bbbtnall 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 188 
 
 3. Vendor and Purchaser — Fire after 
 
 Contract hut before Completion — Bight to Insurance 
 Money.'] A vendor contracted with a purchaser 
 for the sale of a house which had been insured by 
 the vendor against fire. The contract contained 
 no reference to the insurance. After the date of 
 the contract but before the time fixed for com- 
 pletion the house was damaged by fire, and the 
 vendor received a sum of money from the office : — 
 Meld, by Brett, and Cotton, L.JJ. (affirming the 
 decision of JesseljTVF.E.), James, L.J., dissentiente, 
 that the purchaser, who had completed his con- 
 tract, was not entitled as against the vendor to 
 the benefit of the insurance. Kaynek v. Peeston 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 1 
 
 4. Vendor and Purchaser — Insurance hy 
 
 Vendor — Fire after Contract but before Completion 
 — Bight to Insurance Moneys — Subrogation.'] Ac- 
 cording to the doctrine of subrogation, as between 
 the insurer and the assured, the insurer is entitled 
 to the advantage of every right of the assured, 
 .whether such right consists in contract, fulfilled 
 or unfulfilled, or in remedy for tort capable of being 
 insisted on or already insisted on, or in any other 
 right, whether by way of condition or otherwise, 
 legal or equitable, which can be, or has been, 
 exercised or has accrued, and whether such right 
 could or could not be enforced by the insurer in 
 the name of the assured, by the exercise or ac- 
 quiriog of which right or condition the loss against 
 which the assured is insured, can be or has been 
 diminished. — A vendor contracted with a pur- 
 chaser for the sale, at a specified sum, of a house, 
 which had been insured by the vendor with an 
 insurance company against fire. The contract 
 contained no reference to the insurance. After 
 the date of the contract, but before the date fixed 
 for completion, the house was damaged by fire, 
 and the vendor received the insurance money from 
 the company. The purchase was afterwards com- 
 pleted, and the purchase-money agreed upon, 
 without any abatement on account of the damage 
 by fire, was paid to the vendor : — Held, in an 
 action by the company against the vendor, that 
 
 INSUEANCE, PIEE — contimied. 
 the company were entitled to recover a sum equal 
 to the insurance-nvoney from the vendor for their 
 own benefit. Castellain v. Pbeston 8 Q,. B. B. 
 [613 ; 11 Q. B. D. 380 
 
 By mortgagee. 
 
 See Mortgage — PowEBS — Statutes. 
 
 Law of Canada - 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontakio. 
 3, 
 
 - Proof in winding-up 
 
 See Company — Pboof. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 337 
 
 2. 
 
 Col. 
 
 INSTJEANCE, LIFE :— 
 
 I. Assignment - 688 
 
 XL Policy - - 688 
 
 Insueance Company. 
 
 See Company — ^Life Insheanoe Com- 
 pany. 
 
 L IKSUEANCE, IITE— ASSIGHSIEIIT. 
 
 1. lien — Payment of Premiums by Stranger 
 
 or Part Owner — Sotlvage.] When a person, not 
 the sole beneficial owner, pays the premiums to 
 keep up a policy of life insurance, he is entitled 
 to a lien on the policy or its proceeds in the 
 following cases : (1.) By contract with the bene- 
 ficial owner ; (2.) By reason of the right of trustees 
 to an indemnity out of their trust property for 
 money expended by them in its preservation ; 
 (3.) By subrogation to their right of some person 
 who, at the request of trustees, had advanced 
 money for the preservation of the property : (4.) 
 By reason of the right of a mortgagee to add to 
 his charge any money paid by him to preserve the 
 property. — In no other cases can a lien on a policy 
 for premiums paid be acquired either by a stranger 
 or by a part owner of the policy. — In re Tharp 
 (2 Sm. & Giff. 578, n.) ; Swan v. Swan (8 Price, 
 518); and Hamilton v. Denny (1 B. & B. 199) 
 commented on. In re Leslie. Leslie v. Fbenoh 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 553 
 
 3. Parties — Absence of Personal Bepre- 
 
 sentative of Person insured — 15 & 16 Vict. o. 86, 
 s. 44.] In an action by an equitable mortgagee of 
 a policy of insurance against the insurance com- 
 pany for payment of the policy money the Court 
 has jurisdiction under the 44th section of the 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 86, to dispense with a legal per- 
 sonal representative of the assured where none 
 exists. CuETius v. Caledonian Fire and Life 
 Insueanoe Company - - 19 Ch. D. 584 
 
 II, INSTJEANCE, LIFE— POLICY. 
 
 1. Construction — Injury by Accident — 
 
 Browning — Epileptic Fit.] W. effected an 
 insurance with the Defendants against accidental 
 injury, and by the terms of the policy the Defen- 
 dants agreed to pay the amount insured to W.'s 
 legal representatives, should he sustain "any 
 personal injury caused by accidental, external, 
 and visible means," and the direct effect of such 
 injury should occasion his death. The policy also 
 contained a proviso that the insurance should not 
 extend " to any injury caused by or arising from 
 natui'al disease or weakness or exhaustion conse- 
 quent upon disease." During the time the policy 
 
( 
 
 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 690 ) 
 
 II. INSUEANCE, LIFE— POLICY— conimuecZ. 
 ■was in force, and whilst he was crossing and ford- 
 ing a stream, W. was seized with an epUeptio fit 
 and fell into the stream, and was there drowned 
 whilst suffering from the fit, but he did not tustain 
 any personal injury to occasion death other than 
 drowning : — Held, that W.'s death was occasioned 
 by an injury within the risk covered by the 
 policy, and to which the proviso did not apply. 
 WiNSPEAB V. Accident Insurance Company 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 42 
 
 2i Construction — Inmrance against Acci- 
 dent — " Sole Came of Death "Sudden Fit— Fall 
 from Platform upon Bailway.'] A policy of insur- 
 ance against deathfromaccidental injury contained 
 the following condition : " This policy insures 
 payment only in case of injuries accidentally 
 occurring from material and external causes ope- 
 rating upon the person of the insured, where such 
 accidental injury is the direct and sole cause of 
 death to the insured, but it does not insure in case 
 of death arising from fits .... or any disease 
 whatsoever arising before or at the time or follow- 
 ing such accidental injury, whether consequent 
 upon such accidental injui-y or not, and whether 
 causing such death directly or jointly with such 
 accidental injury." — The insured, whUe at a rail- 
 way station, was seized with a fit and fell forwards 
 off the platform across the railway, when an engine 
 and carriages which were passing went over his 
 body and killed him : — Held, that the death of the 
 insured was caused by an accident within the 
 meaning of the policy, and that the insurers were 
 liable. Lawrence v. Accidental Insurance 
 OoMPANY - - - 7 ft. B. D. 216 
 
 3. Validity — Truth of Answers to Queries 
 
 of Life Insurance Company — Express Warranty 
 — " Strictly Temperate " — Matter of Fact and 
 Matter of Opinion.^ A. applied to an insurance 
 ofBce to effect a policy on his life. He received a 
 printed form of proposal containing questions. 
 Among these was the following : " Question 7 
 (a) Are you temperate in your habits ? (6) and 
 nave you always been strictly so ? A. answered 
 (a) " Temperate;" (6) " Yes." Subjoined to the 
 printed questions was a declaration, which A. 
 signed, to the effect that the foregoing statements 
 were true, and that the assured agreed that this 
 declaration should be the basis of the contract, 
 and that if any untrue averment, &c., was made 
 the policy was to be absolutely void and all 
 moneys received as premium forfeited. The 
 policy recited the above declaration as the basis 
 of the contract. After A.'s decease the insurance 
 company refused payment of the policy on the 
 ground that the above-mentioned answer was 
 &lse in fact. In an action on the policy : — Held, 
 reversing the decision of the Oourt below, that the 
 declaration of A., taken in connection with the 
 policy, constituted an express warranty that the 
 answer to Question 7 was true in fact ; and as the 
 evidence clearly proved that A.'s averment as to 
 his temperance was untrue, the policy was abso- 
 lutely null and void. — Life Association of Scot- 
 land V. Foster (11 Court Sess. Cas. 3rd Series, 
 351) distinguished. — Hutchison v. National Loan 
 Assurance Company (7 Oourt Sess. Cas. 2nd Series, 
 467) not approved oi. Thomson v. Wbbms 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 671 
 
 INSTIEAHCE, LIFE— Customs Annuity Fund 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Customs Annuity Fund. 
 
 Government, contracts of insurance by. 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Husband or wife, by. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married 
 Women's Property Acts— Statutes. 
 
 Husband, by, for benefit of wife 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 525 ; 26 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married 
 Women's Property Acts. 4, 5. 
 Insurance company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Life In- 
 surance Company. 
 
 INSUEANCE, marine :— 
 
 Ool. 
 
 I. Concealment 
 
 690 
 
 II. Insurable Interest 
 
 691 
 
 III. Loss, Partial 
 
 691 
 
 IV. Loss, Total 
 
 692 
 
 v. Policy 
 
 693 
 
 VI. EisK - 
 
 696 
 
 VII. Salvage 
 
 696 
 
 I. INSTTBANCE, UABINE— CONCEALMENT. 
 
 1. Material Fact — Open Policies — De- 
 claration of Shipments at less than real Value — 
 Policies stt aside."] The , concealment by the 
 assured at the time of effecting a marine policy 
 of insurance of a fact which is material to enable 
 a rational underwriter, governing himself by the 
 principles on which underwriters in practice act, 
 to judge whether he shall accept the risk at all, 
 or at what rate, will vitiate the policy, although 
 the fact may not be material with regard to the 
 risk incurred. — The Defendants effected with the 
 Plaintiff, a Lloyd's underwriter, a series of open 
 policies for certain specified sums to cover ship- 
 ments to be declared and valued as interest might 
 appear. The policies were effected at different 
 dates, and were to succeed each other in the order 
 of date. The value of the shipments was declared 
 at considerably less than their real value, so that 
 when the later policies were effected the earlier 
 policies were in fact more exhausted than they 
 would appear to be from the declarations. The 
 uudervaluation of the shipments was systematically 
 and fraudulently made by the Defendants, and the 
 fact that they had been so undervalued was con- 
 cealed from the Plaintiff when he underwrote the 
 later policies: — Hdd, that, under these circum- 
 stances, a jury would be justified in finding that 
 the concealment was of a fact of which it was 
 material that the Plaintiff should have been in- 
 formed, in order to guide him in deciding whether 
 he would underwrite these later policies or not, 
 or at what rate ; and that on the jury so finding 
 the Plaintiff was entitled to have such later 
 policies set aside and cancelled. Eivaz v. 
 Gerussi - - - 6 Q. B. D. 222 
 
 2. Material Fact — Arrarigemsnt by As- 
 sured to employ a particular Lighterman — Bisli 
 on Craff] On policies of marine insurance on 
 goods, which included risks on crafts and lighters, 
 underwriters to the knowledge of the Plaintiffs 
 
( 691 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 692 ) 
 
 I. INSTJEANCE, MAEINE— OOKCEALMENT— 
 
 continued. 
 charged a higher rate of premium where the in- 
 surance was with no recourse against lightermen 
 (which meant where the lighterage was done 
 on the terms that the liability of the lightermen 
 was to be less than that of common carriers, 
 namely, for negligence only), than they charged 
 where there was such recourse and the liability of 
 the lightermen was to be that of common carriers. 
 The Plaintiffs effected with the Defendant, a 
 Lloyd's underwriter, a policy of marine iusurance 
 on goods which included risk on craft and lighters, 
 and was not with no recourse against lightermen. 
 At the time of effecting such policy the Plaintiffs 
 had an arrangement with one H., by which he 
 was to do all the Plaintiffs' lighterage on the 
 terms that he was only to be liable for negli- 
 gence : — Held, that if the Plaintiffs intended that 
 the goods so insured should be landed under such 
 arrangement with H., it was a fact which a 
 prudent and experienced underwriter would take 
 into consideration in estimating the premium, and 
 that therefore a jury would be justified ia finding 
 that the non-communication of it to the Defendant 
 was the concealment of a material fact which 
 vitiated the policy.— A mere disclosure of the 
 existence of such arrangement to the Defendant's 
 solicitor is not notice , of it to the Defendant. 
 Tate v. Htslop - - - 15 ft. B. D. 368 
 
 II. IKSTTEAITCE, MAEINE— IKTSTJEABLE IN- 
 TEBEST. 
 
 Goods at Purchasers' Eisk — Sale of Goods 
 
 "f.o.b."} D. sold to B. 200 tons of German sugar 
 " f.o.b. Hamburg ; payment by cash in London in 
 exchange for bill of lading;", the price to be vari- 
 able according to the percentage of saccharine 
 matter, which was not to exceed or fall short of 
 certain limits. B. resold to the Kespondent the 
 same quantity at an increased price, but other- 
 wise upon similar terms. D. also sold to the 
 Eespondent 200 tons upon similar terms. To 
 fulfil these contracts 390 tons (being ten tons 
 short) were shipped in bags on one vessel at 
 Hamburg for Bristol, no bags being set apart for 
 one contract more than the other. Each bag was 
 marked with its percentage of saccharine matter, 
 and bills of lading with marks corresponding to 
 the bags were sent to D. to be retained till pay- 
 ment in accordance with the contracts. The 
 Eespondent was insured in floating policies upon 
 "any kind of goods and merchandises" between 
 Hamburg and Bristol, and duly declared in 
 respect of this cargo. The ship sailed from Ham- 
 burg for Bristol and was lost. After receiving 
 news of the loss D. allocated 2000 bags or 200 
 tons to B.'s contract, and 1900 bags or 190 tons 
 to the other contract. In an action upon the 
 policies: — Beld, afBrming the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal, that the sales being "f. o. b. 
 Hamburg" the sugar was at the Eespondent's 
 risk after shipment; that he had an insurable 
 interest in it; and that the underwriters were 
 liable. Inglis v. Stook - 9 ft. B. D. 708 ; 
 £12 ft. B. D. S64 ; 10 App. Cas. 263 
 
 III. INSTJEANCE, MAEINE— LOSS, PAETIAL. 
 Perils insured against — Owner selUtig in- 
 stead of repairing — Mode of estimating Liability 
 
 III. INSTJEANCE, MAEINE— LOSS, PAETIAL 
 
 — contimied. 
 of Underwriters.^ Where a ship that is insured 
 is injured by perils insured against, and the owner 
 instead of repairing, sells her during the continu- 
 ance of the risk, the loss to be made good by the 
 underwriters depends on the depreciation in the 
 value of the ship and not on the amount that it 
 would have cost to repair ber with an allowance in 
 respect of new materials for old. — The estimated 
 cost of repairs, though rejected as a direct measure 
 of loss, might be the measure of the difference be- 
 tween the ship's sound and damaged values, if no 
 other means can be found for arriving at the loss 
 really sustained. — The depreciation in value is 
 to be ascertained by taking the value of the ship, 
 if sound, at the port of distress, and her value 
 there in her damaged condition. To ascertain the 
 liability of the insurers, the proportion so arrived 
 at should be applied to the real value of the ship 
 at the commencement of the risk, if the policy be 
 open, or to the agreed value if the policy be 
 valued : — So held, by Lindley, J., affirmed (except 
 as to the mode of ascertaining the depreciation in 
 value) on appeal by the majority of the Court ; 
 Jessel, M.E., and Cotton, L.J. ; Brett, L.J., dis- 
 senting. — Beld, by Brett, L.J., that the matter 
 against which the owner was indemnified was the 
 cost of repairs and not any diminution in the sale- 
 able value of the ship, and that therefore loss or 
 gain by the sale of the ship was outside the con- 
 tract of insurance and was not a matter to be con- 
 sidered between the assured and the underwriter 
 in adjusting either a total or a partial loss on ship. 
 Pitman v. Universal Mabine Insdbance Coji- 
 PAifY - - 9 ft. B. D. 193 
 
 IV. INSUEANCE, MAEINE— LOSS, TOTAL. 
 
 Ee-insurance — Constructive Total Loss-^ 
 
 Notice of Abandonment- — Suing and Labouring 
 Clause.'] Upon a constructive total loss happen- 
 ing to the ship insured, notice of abandonment 
 need not be given to i the underwriters of a policy 
 of re-insurance. The owners of a ship insured 
 her for twelve months in an ordinary Lloyd's 
 policy, which contained a suing and labouring 
 clause. The undei-writers of the Lloyd's policy 
 re-insured themselves with a French company 
 which re -insured itself with the Defendants. The 
 policy underwritten for the French company by 
 the Defendants was for £1000, bound them to 
 pay as might be paid on the original policy, was 
 to cover the risk of total loss only, and contained 
 a suing and labouring clause. Whilst the policy 
 was in force, the ship went ashore and was much 
 damaged. Her owners gave notice of abandon- 
 ment to the underwriters of the Lloyd's policy, 
 but notice of abandonment was not given to the 
 Defendants: the underwriters of the ship ulti- 
 mately settled with her owners at 88 per cent. 
 They expended more than £5000 in floating the 
 ship, and sold her to a builder, who repaired her 
 at a cost of £9000, and resold her for £11,200. 
 The cost of floating the ship (after deducting the 
 price paid by the shipbuilders) being added to the 
 88 per cent, represented a loss of 112 per cent. 
 In an action by the French company as re-insurers 
 against the Defendants: — Beld, that a construc- 
 tive total loss had occurred, and that as the De- 
 fendants had bound themselves to pay as might 
 
( 693 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( G91 ) 
 
 IV. INSTTEANCE, JIAEINE — LOSS, TOTAL — 
 continued. 
 
 be paid on the original policy, they -were liable to 
 the extent of £1000 ; but that they could not be 
 held liable for more, as the underwriters of the 
 Lloyd's policy were not the " factors, servants, or 
 assigns " of the Plaintiffs within the meaning of 
 the suing and labouring clause, and that the 
 Defendants were not liable, at least by virtue of 
 that clause, for any part of the expenses incui'red 
 in floating the ship. Uzielli v. Boston Makine 
 Insueanoe Company - 16 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 V. INSTJBANCE, MARINE— POLICY. 
 
 1. Chartered Freight — Interest — Com- 
 mencement of — Sisks "incident to Steam Navi- 
 gation " — Option of cancelling Cliarterparty — 
 Concealment.2 The Plaintiffs, on the 29th of 
 July, 1875, chartered their ship G. for a voyage 
 from New York to Odessa. The freight was 
 agreed " during the voyage aforesaid " at £5500 
 in cash at Hull, England, on the discharge of the 
 cargo in Odessa. " If the vessel has not arrived 
 at the port of New York on or before the 1st of 
 September, 1875, charterers have option of can- 
 celling this charterparty." The Plaintiffs, on the 
 7th of August, 1875, effected an insurance with 
 the Defendant "at and from London to New 
 York while there, and thence to Odessa, vifi. 
 Constantinople," on their chartered freight, in- 
 cluding, besides the ordinary ones, all risks 
 "incident to steam navigation."' The clause in 
 the charterparty giving the option to cancel was 
 not mentioned to the Defendant. — The ship 
 started from England on the 7th of August, but 
 owing to the failure of her machinery in the 
 British Channel was obliged to put back for 
 repairs, which occupied bo much time that she 
 did not reach New York until after the 1st of 
 September, whereupon the charterers cancelled 
 the charter and the freight was lost : — Held (by 
 Lord Coleridge, C.J.), that the interest in the 
 chartered freight had commenced at the time 
 when the charter was cancelled, but that the De- 
 fendant was not liable, for the freight was not 
 lost by any of the perils insured against, but by 
 the exercise of the option to cancel in the charter- 
 party ; and, further, that the withholding from 
 the Defendant information as to the power to 
 cancel vitiated the policy. Meecanttle Steam- 
 ship Company v. Tysee 7 Q. B. D. 73 
 
 2. Chartered JPrelght — Loss — Perils of 
 
 the Seas — Causa proxima — Cliarterparty — Con- 
 dition precedent.^ A ship was chartered for time 
 on monthly hire : the charterers agreeing to pay 
 the freight during employment and efficient per- 
 formance of the service, and the owner covenanting 
 that the ship should be seaworthy during the con- 
 tinuance of the charter; provided that if at any 
 time it should appear to the charterers that the 
 ship became inefficient it should be lawful for 
 them to put her out of pay, or to make such abate- 
 ment by way of mulct out of the hire or freight as 
 they should adjudge fit. The owner effected a 
 time policy of insurance " on freight outstanding." 
 During the time the ship became inefficient 
 through perils of the seas and the charterers re- 
 fused to pay freight after that date. The owner 
 having brought an action on the policy : — Held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal, that 
 
 V. INSTTEANCE, MARINE- POLICY— conW. 
 on the true construction of the charterparty tho 
 efficiency of the ship was not a condition precedent 
 to the earning of the freight ; that the pecuniary 
 loss was caused by the charterers availing them- 
 selves of the abatement clause, and not by the 
 perils of the seas ; and that the underwriters were 
 not liable. Inman Steamship Company v. Bis- 
 OHOPif - 6 Q. B. D. 648 ; 7 App. Cas, 670 
 
 3. Construction — Barratry — Perils in- 
 sured — Warranty "free from Capture and Seizure" 
 ■ — Wlietlier Barratry causing Capture within War- 
 ranty.'] In a time policy of marine insurance 
 the ordinary perils insured against (including 
 " barratry of the master") were enumerated, and 
 the subject-matter, of the jpsurance was warranted 
 "free from capture and seizure." During the 
 continuance of the policy, in consequence of the 
 barratrous act of the master, the sMp was seized 
 and detained for smuggling. In an action on 
 the policy to recover expenses incurred by the 
 owner in obtaining the release of the ship : — Held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal, that 
 the loss must be imputed to ' 'capture and seizure " 
 and not to the barratry of the master, and that the 
 underwriter was not liable. Cokt v. Bukk 
 
 [8 ft. B. D. 313; 9 Q. B. D. 463; 8 App. Cas. 393 
 
 4. Construction — " Capture and Seizure " 
 
 — Intention to Tceep the Ship, whether necessary to 
 constitute " Seizure."'] In an action on a policy 
 of insurance upon a ship, in which the subject- 
 matter was warranted "free from capture and 
 seizure, and the consequence of any attempt 
 thereat," it was proved that during the continu- 
 ance of the risk some natives took forcible pos- 
 session of the ship in the Brass Eiver, plundered 
 the cargo, and damaged her so that she became 
 a constructive total loss, and that their intention 
 in so taking possession was only to plunder the 
 cargo, and not to keep the ship : — Held, that the 
 acts of the natives constituted a " seizure " within 
 the meaning of the warranty, and therefore that 
 the underwriters were hot liable. JohnSton v. 
 Hogg - - 10 Q. B. D. 432 
 
 5. Construction — Constructive total Loss 
 
 — By-laws — Insurance confined to " Absolute 
 Damage caused hy the Perils insured against."] A 
 policy of marrino insurance effected by the Plaintiff 
 with the Defendants, a mutual insurance com- 
 pany, incorporated certain by-laws of the company 
 indorsed thereon. The policy (inter alia) ex- 
 pressed it to be thereby declared that the acts of 
 the assurer or assured in recovering, saving, or 
 preserving the property insured should not be 
 considered a waiver or acceptance of abandonment. 
 One of the by-laws provided that in the event of 
 any ship being stranded or damaged, and not 
 taken into a place of safety, it should be lawful 
 for the directors of the company to use every pos- 
 sible means in their power to procure the safety 
 of the ship, tho owner bearing his proportion of 
 the expense incurred ; and that no acts of the 
 company or its agents under or in pursuance of 
 the power thereby reserved to the company should 
 be deemed, or taken to be, an acceptance or recog- 
 nition of any abandonment, of which the assured 
 might have given notice to such company, and 
 the company under any circumstances should 
 only pay for the absolute damage caused by tho 
 
( 695 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 
 
 ) 
 
 V. INBUEANCE, MARINE-POLICT-comJd!. 
 
 perils insured against, which was in no case to ex- 
 •^^d the sum insured. The Plaintiff's vessel was, 
 f iv policy was in force, damaged by perils 
 ot the sea to such an extent that the cost of re- 
 pairing would have amounted to more than the 
 ship would have been worth when repaired. The 
 Kamtiff within a reasonable time gave notice of 
 abandonment -.—Held, that a constructive total 
 loss was covered by the policy and by the by- 
 laws, and that the Plaintiff could maintain an 
 action. Fobwood v. Nokth "Wales Insurance 
 Company - . - 9 Q. B. D. 732 
 
 6. Construction— GcneraZ Words — Mx- 
 
 phsion of Boiler of Steamer, whether a Peril 
 insured against— Contributory Cause of Loss, and 
 proximate Cause'] The explosion of the boiler of 
 a steamer is a peril insured against by a marine 
 policy in the ordinary form. — A steamer insured 
 by a time policy became a wreck, by reason of the 
 explosion of her boiler in ordinary weather under 
 ordinary pressure of steam. The causa sine qua 
 non of the explosion was that the boiler had be- 
 come from external and internal corrosion by bilge 
 water and _" scale," too thin to resist the steam. 
 The corrosion might have been discovered, and in 
 some measure prevented, by ordinary care : — Held, 
 affirming the judgment of Baggallay, L.J., that 
 though unseaworthiness was a causa sine qua 
 non of the loss, the explosion was a proximate 
 cause, and a peril insured against. West India 
 AND Panama Telegraph Company v. Home and 
 Colonial Mauine Insurance Company 
 
 [6 a. B. D. 51 
 
 7. Constructive total loss — Collision — 
 
 Recovery of Damages from Owner of Ship in default 
 — Claim by Underwriter on Sliip after Payment 
 of Sum insured to Compensation received for Loss 
 of Freight — Subrogation.'] Freight to be earned 
 under a charterparty is not an incident to the 
 ownership of the vessel ; and therefore although 
 an underwriter of a policy of insurance upon the 
 vessel herself becomes, by abandonment to him 
 upon a constructive total loss happening through 
 the fault of another vessel, entitled after payment 
 of the sum secured by the policy to every beneiit 
 accruing from the ownership of the insured vessel, 
 he cannot claim any part of the damages reco- 
 vered from the owners of the wrongdoing vessel 
 on account of loss of freight intended to be earned 
 by the insured vessel. — The Defendants being 
 owners of a ship chartered her upon a voyage, 
 and insured her with the Plaintiffs, and they in- 
 sured the freight intended to be earned with 
 other underwriters. The Defendant's ship became 
 a constructive total loss through a, collision with 
 the C. occasioned by negligence in navigating the 
 latter vessel. The Plaintiffs settled with the De- 
 fendants for a total loss of the insured ship. No 
 freight was earned under the charterparty. After- 
 wards the Defendants recovered from the owners 
 of the C. damages for the loss of their ship and of 
 her freight : — Beld, that the Plaintiffs were not 
 entitled lo any part of the damages recovered from 
 the owners of the C. on account of the loss of the 
 freight intended to be earned by the Defendants' 
 ship. Sea Insurance Company v. Hadden 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 706 
 
 8. Time Policy — Memorandum against 
 
 V. INSTTEANCE, MAEINE— POLICY— comM. 
 Average under 3 per cent. — Adding distinct succes- 
 sive Losses together.] In a time policy of marine 
 insurance the ship was warranted free from aver- 
 age under 3 per cent, unless general, or the ship 
 be stranded, sunk, or burnt: — Held, following 
 Blackett v. Moyal Exchange Assurance Co. (2 0. 
 & J. 244), that distinct successive losses on the 
 ship during the period insured, each less than 3 
 per cent., but in the aggregate amounting to more 
 than 3 per cent., were not within the exception and 
 were to be borne by the underwriters. Stewaet 
 
 V. Merchants Marine Insurance Company 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 555 
 [Eeversed by the Court of Appeal, 16 ft. B. D. 619.] 
 
 9. Time Policy — Negative 'Words — Where 
 
 no General Custom of Merchants what Facts to 
 be considered — Maxim " contra prof erentem."] A 
 time policy of marine insurance on A.'s ship, 
 from the 29th of May, 1878, to the 28th of May, 
 1879, contained the words "warranted no St. 
 Lawrence between the 1st of October and the 
 1st of April." The vessel was lost on the voyage 
 home. The underwriters refused A.'s claim for a 
 total loss on the ground of bresich of warranty, 
 inasmuch as the vessel had navigated in the Gulf 
 of St. Lawrence during the prescribed period. A. 
 contended that the above words referred exclu- 
 sively to the Eiver St. Lawrence. Admittedly 
 no general custom of merchants could be proved : 
 but the facts established that the great river which 
 discharges the waters of the North American 
 lakes, and the gulf into which it flows, both bear 
 the name of " St, Lawrence " ; that the naviga- 
 tion of both, though of the gulf in a less degree 
 than of the river, was within the prohibited period 
 dangerous : — Held, reversing the decision of the 
 Court below, that the evidence disclosed no 
 ambiguity or uncertainty sufficient to prevent 
 the application of the ordinary rules of construc- 
 tion ; and according to those rules the whole St. 
 Lawrence navigation, both gulf and river, was 
 within the fair and natural meaning of these 
 negative words, and therefore prohibited during 
 the raontlis in question. Birrell v. Dryer 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 345 
 
 VI. INSUEANCE, MAEIHE— EISK. 
 
 Ee-insurance — Policy attaching — 
 
 'Voyage ended when Policy effected — Action for 
 Premium.] The Defendant, who had insured a 
 cargo by a certain vessel lost or not lost for a 
 certain voyage, believing such vessel to be over- 
 due, effected a policy of re-insurance with the 
 Plaintiff on the same cargo and risk. — Before 
 effecting the policy of re-insurance, the vessel and 
 cargo had in fact arrived safely at the port of 
 destinatiou ; but this was not known to either the 
 Plaintiff or Defendant at the time the policy was 
 effected : — Held, that the policy had attached, and 
 that therefore the Plaintiff was entitled to the 
 premium at which it had been effected. Brad- 
 ford V. Symondeon - 7 ft. B, D. 456 
 
 VII. INSUEANCE, MAEINE— SALVAGE. 
 Valued Policy — £oss — Indemnity^ The 
 
 Respondents effected with underwriters valued 
 policies of insurance (including war risks) on a 
 cargo, which was afterwards destroyed by the 
 Alabama, a Confederate cruiser, and the under- 
 
( 697 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 Vn. INSURANCE, MARINE— SALVAGE— contd. 
 writers paid to the Eespondents as on an actual 
 total loss the valued amounts, which were less 
 than the real value. The United States, out of a 
 compensation fund created after the loss and dis- 
 tributed under an Act of Congress passed sub- 
 sequently to the loss, paid to the Eespondents the 
 difference between their real total loss and the 
 sum received from the underwriters. Under the 
 Act of Congress no claim was allowed for any loss 
 for which the party injured should have received 
 compensation from any insurer, but if such com- 
 pensation should not have been equal to the loss 
 actually suffered, allowance might be made for 
 tlie difference ; and no claim was allowed by or 
 on behalf of any insurer either in his own right 
 or in that of the party insured : — Seld, affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal, that the 
 underwriters were not entitled to recover, the 
 compensation from the Eespondents. Buknand 
 V. EoDOCANACBi 6 Q. B. D. 633 ; 7 App. Cas. 333 
 
 INS1TBANCE, MARINE- Mutual association- 
 Limitation of liability 12 Q. B. D. 176 
 See Company — Member's Liability. 2. 
 
 Payment of premiums — How far neces- 
 saries - - - 10 P. D. 44 
 See SinP — ^Maritime Lien. I. 
 
 Subrogation — Advanced freight 8 P. D. 155 
 
 See Ship — Freight. 1. 
 
 Total loss— Sale of ship - 16 Ch. D. 474 
 
 See Ship— Master. 1. 
 
 Undisclosed principal — Eight to policy 
 
 moneys— Set-off - 9 Q. B. D. 630 ; 
 [8 App. Cas. 874 
 See Principal and Agent — Prinoipal's 
 Liability. 6. 
 
 INTENT TO DELAY CREDITORS- Bankruptcy 
 —Trader. 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Trader. 
 
 Fraudulent conveyance - 20 Ch. D. 389 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 74 
 See Fraudulent Conveyance. 1, 2. 
 
 Settlement - 19 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Von) Settlement. 1. 
 
 INTENTION— Exercise of power 30 Ch. D. 617 
 See Power — Execution. 19. 
 
 INTERDICT— Costs - 7 App. Cas. 647 
 
 See Scotch Law— Public Eights. 
 
 Nuisance ,- - - 1 App. Cas. 518 
 
 See Scotch Law — Nuisance. 
 
 Patent - - 8 App. Cas. 873 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Patent. 
 
 Eestraining action — Compensation 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 265 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 5. 
 
 INTEREST. 
 
 j_ Bona Vacantia — Administration hy 
 
 [Executors — Aseignment to the Grown— Claim ly 
 Next of Kin— Interest payable hy the Crown.2 The 
 trustees and executors of a will administered the 
 estate, and upon its being decided in a suit insti- 
 tuted for the purpose that there was an intestacy, 
 and no heir or next of kin being discovered, the 
 trustees assigned the leasehold property to the 
 Solicitor for the Treasury, to be held for the 
 benefit of the Crown. The claimants, six years 
 
 INTEREST — continued. 
 
 afterwards, established their claim as next of kin 
 of the testator, affd the Court declared them en- 
 titled : — Held (reversing the decision of Malins, 
 V.C), that the Crown was not chargeable with 
 interest on the rents and profits received from the 
 property while in its possession. In re Gosman 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 771 
 
 2. Legacy.] Under a bequest of £1000 
 
 upon trust to invest the same upon mortgage of 
 tlie B. borough fund, and pay the interest as the 
 same should arise to his widow during her life 
 and widowhood, and after her death or second 
 marriage in favour of testator's children by a 
 former maiTiage, interest does not become pay- 
 able to the widow except from the end of a year 
 from the testator's death. In re Whittakek. 
 Whittaker v. Whittakeb - 21 Ch. D. 657 
 
 Advances to children — Hotchpot 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 701 
 See Will — Satisfaction. 2. 
 Breach of trust — Accumulations — Unautho- 
 rized investment - 17 Ch. D. 142 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 7. 
 Compound — Administration of estate — Con- 
 version - - 24 Ch. D. 643, 649, n. 
 See Executor — Administration. 5, 6. 
 
 Covenant in mortgage deed — Merger in 
 
 judgment - - 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Judgment. 3. 
 
 Debtor's summons - - 17 Ch. D. 191 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 15. 
 
 Legacy - - 24 Ch. D. 616 
 
 See Will — Absolute Gift. 1. 
 
 Legacy — -Statute of Limitations 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 676 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Trusts. 
 1. 
 Money in Court — Staying proceedings pend- 
 ing appeal - - 20 Ch. D. 669 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 13. 
 
 Mortgage - - 6 App. Cas. 181 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 11. 
 
 Mortgage — Arrears - 18 Ch. D. 449 
 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 6. 
 
 Mortgage — ■ Distress for — Winding-up of 
 
 company - 18 Ch. D. 64& 
 
 See Company — ^Distress. 6. 
 
 Mortgage — Foreclosure - 19 Ch. D. 49 
 
 See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 10. 
 
 Mortgage — Proviso for reduction of 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 53 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 3. 
 
 Mortgage — Tenant for life 30 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Will— Disclaimer. 2. 
 
 Payment of — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 882 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 1. 
 
 Premiums — Loan by building society 
 
 See Building Society. 4. [26 Ch. D. 27S 
 
 Proof in administration - 17 Ch. D. 342 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 19. 
 
( 699 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 700 ) 
 
 INTEEEST — continued. 
 
 Proof in bankruptcy - 17 Ch. D. 334 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 609 
 See Bankeuptcy — Peoof. 12, 17. 
 
 Purchase-money 37 Ch. D. 555 ; 29 Ch. D. 691 
 
 See Vkndok akd Purohasee — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 2, 10. 
 
 Eate of — Portions — Ii-ish estates 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 472 
 See Settlement — Poweks. 14. 
 
 Share of partnership - 8 App, Cas. 822 
 
 See Pabtnekship — Contbact. 2. 
 
 INTEBEST, DISaUALIFYING— Justice of peace 
 — Disqualification — Municipal corpora- 
 tion - 6 Q. B. D. 168 ; 8 Q. B. D. 383 
 
 See Justices — ^Disqwalifioation. B, 4. 
 
 Justice of peace — Disqualification — Local 
 
 Government Acts - 9 Q. B. D. 394 
 See Local Goveenment — Peaotioe. 1. 
 
 Commissioners of Sewers — ^Disqualiiication 
 
 See Sea Wall. [14 Q. B. D. 561 
 
 -^— Officer of local board — •" Bargain or con- 
 tract " — Demise of rooms 
 
 [14 d. B. D. 735, 739, 911 
 See LooAL Gotjsbnment — Local Autho- 
 EITY. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Officer of local board — Statute respecting; 
 
 See Local Government — Local 
 AuTHOEiTT — Statutes. 
 
 INTEEEST IN lAHD— Compensation for 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 614 
 See Laeoukers' Dwellings Acts, 2. 
 
 Contract relating to - 7 Q. B. D. 174 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 467 
 See Contbact — ^Validity. 4. 
 — — Contract relating to — Statute of Frauds 
 
 [9 Q, B. D. 315 ; 10 ft. B. D. 148 
 See Feauds, Statute of. 2, 3. 
 
 Married woman's property 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 181, 344 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 2, 3. 
 
 Mortmain. 
 
 See Cases under Chaeity — Moetmain. 
 
 INTERFERENCE OP COTJET— Club— Expulsion 
 of member - 17 Ch. D. 616 
 
 See Club. 
 
 INTEEIM INCOME— Contingent legacy 
 
 [22 Ch. D, 573 ; 23 Ch. D. 360 ; 
 [25 Ch. D. 743 
 
 See Will — Interim Income. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Infant — Contingent legacy. 
 
 See Cases under Infant — Maintenance. 
 
 Will— Vesting - - 30 Ch. D. 507 
 
 See Will — Vesting. 2. 
 INTEEIM NOTES— Fire insurance 7 App. Cas. 96 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 3. 
 INTEELOCKING APPABATUS— Railway 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 190 
 See Railway Company — Eailway 
 Clauses. 8. 
 
 INTEELOCTTTOST APPLICATION — Copies of 
 pleadings— Costs 19 Ch. D. 72 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs.- 
 16. 
 INTEELOCUTOEY INJUNCTION 20 Ch. D. 601 ; 
 [21 Ch. D. 421 ; 27 Ch. D. 474 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Coubt — In- 
 junction, 3, 4, 8, 9. 
 
 Light — Window overlooking railway 
 
 See Light— Title. 3. [24 Ch. D. 1 
 
 Trade circular — Infringement of patent 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 1 
 See Patent — Ikfeingement. 2. 
 INTEELOCUTOEY OEDEE— Appeal 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 392 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — ^Ap- 
 peal. 14. 
 
 INTEEMENTS (FELO DE SE) ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Felo de se — Statutes. 
 INTEEPLEADEE. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Supeeme 
 Court — Interpleader. 
 Attachment of debts — ^Unliquidated claim — 
 
 " Debt " attachable - 12 ft. B. D. 525 
 
 See Practice — Sivpeeme Couet — Gae- 
 
 NISHEE OeDEBS 1. 
 
 Costs of sheriff - 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Foemalities. 6. 
 
 Deposit— Sale by high bailiff 7 ft. B. D. 425 
 
 See County Couet — Peactioe. 1. 
 
 Order— Baokruptcy-Practice 19 Ch. D. 216 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Appeal. 1. 
 
 Power to enter judgment without ordering 
 
 new trial 9 ft. B. D. 337 ; 10 App. Cas. 1 
 See Husband and Wife — Sep abate Es- 
 tate. 6. 
 
 Security for costs — ^Practice 14 ft. B. D. 539 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Secu- 
 BiTY FOB Costs. 3. 
 
 INTEEEOGATOEIES. 
 
 See Cases under Practice - 
 Court — ^Intbeeogatobles. 
 
 Nullity of marriage — ^Decree nisi 
 
 [9 P. D. 57 ; 10 P. D. 122 
 See Peactice — DrvOECE — ^Nullity of 
 Mabblage. 7, S. 
 
 Patent action 
 
 See Patent — Peactice. 
 Production of documents 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme 
 ddction of Documents. 
 Winding-up 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 
 INTESVENTION— Divorce 
 
 See Peactice — Divoeoe - 
 
 TION. 
 
 INTESTACY— Administration — Statute of Limi- 
 tations - - - 29 Ch. D. 964 
 See Limitations, Statcteof — Legacy. 
 
 Duchy of Cornwall — Administration — ^Evi- 
 dence - - 9 P. D. 63 
 See Administrator — Grant. 8. 
 
 Lapse. 
 
 See Cases under Will — ^Lapse. 
 
 -Supreme 
 
 22 Ch. D. 629 
 
 4. 
 
 29 Ch. D. 307 
 Court — Peo- 
 
 6. 
 
 16 Ch. B. 58 
 
 1. 
 9 P. D. 218 
 
 ■ Inteeven- 
 
( 701 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 702 ) 
 
 INTESTACY— conijTOed. 
 
 Bight of Orown waived. 
 
 See Eeal Estate — Statutes. 
 ■ Statute of Bistributions — Illegitimate chil- 
 dren _ _ - 17Ch. D. 266 
 See DiSTRrBUTiONS, Statute of. 
 — — Trust not disclosed to executor 
 
 See Will— Tbtjstebb. 2. [26 Ch. D. 531 
 INVALIDITY — Oovenant — Eestraint of marriaj^e 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 285 
 See Covenant — Validity. 
 
 Patent. 
 
 See Oases under Patent — ^Validity. 
 INVESTMENT— Oapital money. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes.. 
 
 Friendly society — Illegal loan 19 Ch. D. 64 
 
 See Friendly Sooibty. 
 
 Interim — ^Money to be laid out in land — 
 
 Settled Land Act 33 Ch. D. 171, 750 
 iSee Settled Land Act — Pubchase- 
 MONEY. 6, 7. 
 
 Investment in joint names — ^Husband and 
 
 wife - - 28 Ch. D. 705 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Sepabate Es- 
 tate. 4. 
 
 Liability of trustee. 
 
 See Gases under Tbdstee — Liability. 
 3—7. 
 
 Liability of trustees — Shares of company 
 
 [21 Ch, D. 302 
 See OoMPANY — Member's Liability. 3. 
 
 Money in Court — Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 jSee Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 
 PUROHASE-MONBT. 
 
 Personal estate in cultivation of real 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 553 
 See Settlement — ^Powers. 6. 
 
 Purchase-money of leaseholds for lives 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 624 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 3. 
 
 Sanctioned by Court — Lands Clauses Act 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 93 
 See Peaotiob — Supreme Court — ^Pay- 
 ment INTO Court. 5. 
 
 Severance of trust funds 6 App. Cas. 855 
 
 See Scotch Law — Trustee. 
 IBELANI) — Eesidence in Ireland— Service of 
 writ - - 12 Q. B. D. 50 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 10. 
 IRISH ESTATE— Charge on— Eate of interest 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 473 
 See Settlement — Powers. . 14. 
 IRISH INQUISITION— Transcript of record 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 269 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 1. 
 
 IRISH LAND LAW ACT. 
 
 Pasture — Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881 
 
 (44 dk 45 Vict. c. 49), s. 58 subs. 3 — Land- 
 lord and Tenant — Land let to he used wliolly or 
 mainly for Pasture."] By a lease in 1861 lands 
 
 IRISH LAND LAW ^Cl—cmtinued. 
 in Ireland of more than 100 acres were demised 
 for twenty-one years, the tenant covenanting that 
 he would not without the landlord's consent break 
 up or have in tillage in any one year any greater 
 quantity than ten acres, out of a certain specified 
 portion, and that he would manage the land in 
 a good and husbandlike manner and in due and 
 regular course so that the same might not be in 
 any way injured: — At the time of the demise 
 there were only fifteen acres in tillage, and the 
 rest was used as pasture, but was not ancient 
 pasture, the whole farm having been put in til- 
 lage (in different portions at different times) 
 between 1852 and 1861. Tho tenant used the farm 
 as a dairy farm : frequently meadowing different 
 portions (about twenty acres each year), and some- 
 times selling hay off the land : — 3eld, affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal (Ireland), 
 that the farm was not a " holding let to be used 
 wholly or mainly for the purpose of pasture " 
 within the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881 (44 & 45 
 Vict. c. 49), s. 58, sub-s. (3). Westropp «. Elligott 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 815 
 IRISH TITHE RENT-CHARGE— Statute of Limi- 
 tations - - - 10 App. Cas. 14 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Eealty. 
 8. 
 IRONWORKS- Nuisance - 7 App. Cas. 518 
 
 See Scotch Law — Nuisance. 
 IRREGULARITY- Ceylon law 8 App. Cas. 99 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 2. 
 
 Dismissal of motion — Non-production of 
 
 afSdavit of service - 25 Ch. D. 84 
 jSee Practice — Supreme Ooukt — De- 
 fault. 6. 
 — — Incorporation of building society 
 
 See Building Society. 11. [18 Ch. D. 173 
 
 Issue of debentures — ^Estoppel 24 Ch. D. 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 3. 
 
 Order under Settled Estates Act 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 1. [41 
 
 Service of inaccurate copy - 25 Ch. D. 112 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Aot of Bankruptcy. 
 19. 
 IRRELEVANCY — Affidavits on interlocutory 
 motion - - - 16 Ch. D, 694 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 6. 
 
 IRRITANT CLAUSE - 10 App. Cas. 553 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Heritable Property. 
 5. ■ 
 ISOMERIC SUBSTANCES - 29 Ch. D. 366 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 5. 
 ISSUE— Bead " Children" - 26 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 7. 
 ISSUES— Fact or la,w - 7 App. Cas. 49 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Practice. 3. 
 
 Of fact — Staying proceedings on 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 88 
 See Practice — Supreme Coukt — Stay- 
 ing Pboceedikgs. 16. 
 
( "03 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 704 ) 
 
 JAMAICA— Law of— Bankruptcy 7 App. Cas. 79 
 iSee BAijKEUPTCY — MimjAL Dealings. 3. 
 
 JAPAN— Order in Council. 
 
 See JuBisDioTiON — Gazette. 
 
 JEESET— Law of. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law- — Jersey. 
 
 JEWEIS— Gift of— Heirlooms - 26 Ch. D, 538 
 
 See Will — Heieloom. 3. 
 Separate use 10 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Settlement — Future Peopeett. 6. 
 
 JOINDER OF ACTIONS— Claim for recovery of 
 land — Counter-claim - 21 Ch. D. 138 
 See Practice — Supeeme ConBT — CouN- 
 tee-claim. 5. 
 
 JOINT ACCOUNT CLATTSE— Effect of. 
 
 See Deed — Constebotion — Statutes. 
 
 JOINT AND SEPARATE DEBTS— Joint judg- 
 ment against firm — Proof against sepa- 
 rate estate - - 13 Q. B. D. 60 
 See Bankbuptct — ^Peoof. 5. 
 
 • Liquidation 16 Ch. D, 613 ; 19 Ch. D. 367 
 
 See Bankeuptct — Liquidation. 10, 18. 
 
 JOINT AND SEPARATE ESTATES— Bankruptcy 
 — Interest on debts - 17 Ch. D. 334 
 See Bankeuptct— Pkoop. 12. 
 
 JOINT CREDITORS — Joint and separate security 
 — Composition 19 Ch. D. 394 
 
 See Bankeuptct — Secueed Ceeditor. 5. 
 
 ■ Eetainer by executor 16 Ch. D. 368 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 934 
 See ExBCUTOE — Eetainer. 4, 9. 
 
 JOINT TENANT. 
 
 1. Severance — Infant.'] A marriage set- 
 tlement contained a proviso for the settlement of 
 the present and after-acquired property of the 
 intended wife, who was an infant. She was then 
 entitled in remainder jointly with two others to a 
 share in Bank annuities standing in the names of 
 trustees : — Held, that the joint tenancy was 
 severed. Buenabt v. Equitable Eevbesionaet 
 Inteeest Society - - - 28 Ch. D. 416 
 
 2. Severance — Marriage — Covenant to 
 
 settk.'] By their marriage settlement the intended 
 husband and wife each covenanted to assign and 
 settle any personal estate which should, during 
 the coverture, vest in the wife or in the husband 
 in her right. At that time the wife was entitled, 
 as one of two joint tenants, to personal estate in 
 expectancy on the death of a person who died 
 during the coverture : — Held, that the marriage 
 and the covenant to settle each operated to sever 
 the joint tenancy. Baillie v. Teehaene 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 388 
 
 Bequest to husband and wife — Unity of 
 
 person. - - 27 Ch. D. 166 
 
 See Will— Joint Tenancy. 
 
 Tenant in common 19 Ch. D. 492 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 352 
 See Power — Execution. 3. 
 
 JOINTURE— Eelease of - 8 App. Cas. 420 
 
 See Husband and Wife — ^Wipe's Con- 
 veyance. 3. 
 
 JOURNEYS- Solicitor's costs - 26 Ch. D. 189 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 8. 
 
 JUDGE — Colonial— Salary of— Bankruptcy 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 13. 
 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 Tlie Act 45 & 46 Vict. e. 31, renders judgments 
 ohtained in certain inferior Courts in England, 
 Scotland, and Ireland respectively, effectual in any 
 other part of the United Kingdom. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited for all purposes as the 
 Inferior Courts Judgments Extension Act, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 2. Interpretation of terms (inter alia) :— 
 "judgment " includes decreet, civil bill decree, dis- 
 miss, or order. " Inferior Court " includes County 
 Courts, Ciril Bill Courts, and all Courts in Eng- 
 land and Ireland having jurisdiction to hear and 
 determine civil causes, other than the High Court 
 of Justice; and in Ireland, Courts of Petty Ses- 
 sions and the Court of Bankruptcy ; and in Scot- 
 land, the Sheriffs' Courts and the Courts held under 
 the Small Debts and Debts Becovery Acts. 
 
 Sect. 3. Where judgment shall hereafter he ob- 
 tained or entered up in any of the inferior Courts 
 of England, Scotland, or Ireland respectively, for 
 any debt, damages, or costs, the registrar of such 
 inferior Court or other proper officer slmll after the 
 time for appealing against such judgment shall 
 have elapsed, and in the event of such judgment 
 not being reversed on appeal or of execution there- 
 under not being stayed, upon the application of 
 the party who has recovered such judgment, and 
 upon proof that the same has not been satisfied, and 
 upon payment of the prescribed fee, grant a certi- 
 ficate in the prescribed form. 
 
 Sect. 4. On production to the registrar or other 
 proper officer of an inferior Court in England; 
 Scotland, or Ireland of a certificate under the Act 
 purporting to be signed by the registrar or other 
 proper officer of the inferior Court where such 
 judgment was obtained, such certificate shall, on 
 payment of the prescribed fee, he registered in tlie 
 prescribed form by such registrar or other proper 
 officer to whom the same shall be produced for that 
 purpose; and all reasonable costs and charges 
 attendant upon the obtaining and registering such 
 certificate sliall he added to and recovered in like 
 manner as if tlie same were part of tlie original 
 judgment. 
 
 No certificate of any such judgment shall be 
 registered as aforesaid in any inferior Court in 
 the United Kingdom more than twelve montlis after 
 the date of such judgment. 
 
 Sect. 5. Wliere a certificate of a judgment of an% 
 of the inferior Courts aforesaid has been registered 
 under this Act, process of execution may issue 
 thereon out of tlie Court in tohich tlie same shall 
 have been so registered against any goods or chattels 
 of the person against whom such judgments shall 
 
( ™5 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 706 ) 
 
 JUDGMENT — continued. 
 
 have 'been obtained which are within the jurisdic- 
 tion of such last-mentioned Court in the same or 
 the like manner as if the judgment to be executed 
 had been obtained in the Court in which such certi- 
 ficate shall be so registered as aforesaid. 
 
 Sect. 6. The Courts of Great Britain and Ireland 
 to which this Act applies shall, in so far as relates 
 to execution under this Act, Imve and exercise the 
 same control and jurisdiction over and with respect 
 to the execution of any judgment, a certificate of 
 which shall be registered under this Act, as they 
 now have and exercise over and with respect to the 
 execution of any judgment in their own Courts. 
 
 Sect. 7. On proof of the setting aside or satisfac- 
 tion of any judgment of which a certificate shall 
 have been registered under this Act, the Court in 
 which such certificate is so registered may order the 
 registration thereof to be cancelled. 
 
 Seat. 8.. In any action brought in any of the in- 
 ferior Courts aforesaid for the purpose of enforcing 
 any judgment which might be registered under this 
 Act ill the country in which such action is brought, 
 the party bringing such action shall not recover or 
 be entitled to any costs or expenses unless the Court 
 in which such action shall be brought shall other- 
 wise order. 
 
 Sect. 9. Nothing contained in this Act shall 
 authorize the registration in an inferior Court of 
 the certificate of any judgment for a greater amount 
 than might have been recovered if the action or_ 
 proceeding had been originally commenced in such 
 inferior Court. 
 
 Provided that, where a judgment obtained in an 
 inferior Court in Scotland cannot he registered in 
 an inferior Court in England or Ireland by reason 
 of its being for a greater amount than might have 
 been recovered if the action or proceeding had been 
 originally commenced in such inferior Cpurt, it shall 
 be competent to register a certificate of such judg- 
 mentinihe register directed to be kept in the Court 
 of Common Pleas at Westminster and Dublin re- 
 spectively, to be called " The Register of Scotch 
 Judgments," by sect. 3 of the Judgments Extension 
 Act, 1868, in the same manner, to the same effect, 
 and subject to tlie same provisions as if tlie said 
 certificate had been a certificate of an extracted 
 decreet of the Court of Session registered in the 
 said register under the said Act. 
 
 Sect. 10. Tliis Act shall not apply to any judg- 
 ment pronounced by any inferior Court in England 
 against any person domiciled in Scotland or Ire- 
 land at the time of the commencement of any action 
 unless the whole cause of action shall have arisen 
 or the obligation to whioh the judgment relates 
 ought to have been fulfilled within the district of 
 such inferior Court and the summons was served 
 upon the Defendant personally within the said 
 district, nor to any judgment pronounced by. any. 
 inferior Court in Scotland against any person 
 domiciled in, England or Ireland at the time of 
 the commencement of any action unless the wliole 
 cause of action sliaM have arisen or the obligation 
 to which the judgment relates ought to have been 
 fulfilled within the district of such inferior Court 
 and the summons was served upon the Defendant 
 personally within the said district, nor to any 
 judgment pronounced by any inferior Court in 
 Ireland against any person domiciled in England 
 or Scotland at the time of the commencement of 
 any action unless the ivhole cause of action shall I 
 
 JTmOVLSyiT— continued. 
 
 have arisen or the obligation to which the judg- 
 ment relates ought to Imve been fulfilled within the 
 district of such inferior Court and the summons 
 was served upon the Defendant personally within 
 the said district. 
 
 Provided that it shall be competent to any person 
 against whom any judgment to which this Act dbes 
 not apply as aforesaid is sought to be enforced by 
 registration in the register of an inferior Court in 
 England and Ireland to apply for or obtain from 
 one of the superior Courts of England or Ireland 
 a prohibition or injunction against the enforcement 
 of such judgment and of any execution thereupon, 
 and that it shall be competent to any person 
 against whom any judgment to which this Act does 
 not apply as aforesaid is sought to be enforced by 
 registration in the register of an inferior Court in 
 Scotland to apply for and obtain from tlie Bill 
 Chamber or Court of Session in Scotland suspension 
 or suspension and interdict of or against the en- 
 forcement of such judgment and any diligence 
 tltereon and in any such proceeding as aforesaid 
 the unsuccessful party may be found liable in costs. 
 
 Sect. 11. Rules to be made from time to time for 
 tlie purposes of the Act. 
 
 1. Administration Action • — Judgment 
 
 Creditor — Comity Court — Injunction^ Pievi- 
 ously to tlie adminiatration order in a creditor's 
 action anotlier creditor had obtained judgment in 
 a County Court against the Defendant, a sole exe- 
 cutrix. The Court refused to restrain the creditor 
 from pursuing his remedy in the County Couit 
 against the executrix personally, but ordered 
 payment to the creditor by the receiver of the 
 estate, without prejudice to the question whether 
 the executrix should be allowed tlie payment. In 
 re WoMEnsLEY. Etheridgb v. Womerslet. 
 
 [29 eh. D. 867 
 
 2. Merger — Covenant — Mortga^ge.'] By 
 
 a mortgage deed the mortgagor covenanted to 
 pay the debt on a day named, and by a separate 
 covenant) to pay interest at £7 per cent., so long 
 as the £3000 or any part thereof should remain 
 due. — The mortgagee obtained a judgment for 
 the principal and interest due at the date of the 
 judgment with interest at £4 per cent, on tlie 
 sum made up by such principal and interest : — 
 Held, that the security of the mortgage was not 
 merged in the judgment, but that the mortgagee 
 was entitled to sue for the difference between 
 interest at £7 per cent, on the mortgage debt and 
 the interest at £4 per cent, paid under the judg- 
 ment. Popple v. Sylvester - 22 Ch. D. 98 
 
 8. Merger — Covenant — Mortgagor and 
 
 Mortgagee — Costs — Liquidation Petition — Compo- 
 sition.} A mortgage deed contained a covenant 
 by the mortgagor for payment of the principal sum 
 on the expiration of six months next after a speci- 
 fied day, together with interest thereon at 5 per 
 cent, per annum for the six months. And there was 
 a further covenant by the mortgagor that if the 
 principal sum, or any part thereof, should remain 
 unpaid after the expiration of the six months, the 
 mortgagor would, so long as the same sum or any 
 part thereof should remain unpaid, pay to the 
 mortgagee interest for the principal sum, or for 
 so ranch thereof as should for the time being re- 
 main unpaid at 5 per cent, per annum. After the 
 
 2 A 
 
( 707 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 708 ) 
 
 JUDGMENT — continued, 
 
 expiration of tliB six months, the mortgagee reco- 
 vered judgment against the mortgagor on tlie 
 covenant for the principal sum and interest in 
 arrear. — Seld, that, the covenant being merged 
 in the judgment, the mortgagee was, as from the 
 date of the judgment, entitled only to interest on 
 the judgment debt at the rate of 4 per cent., and 
 "was not entitled under the covenant to interest at 
 the rate of 5 per cent, on the principal sum. — 
 Decision of Bacon, C. J., reversed. — Popph v. Syl- 
 vester (22 Ch. D. 98) dsitinguished. Ex parte 
 Fewinqs. In re Sneyd - 25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 4. Begistration — Omission to re-register 
 
 within Five Years — Priorities — 1 * 2 Vict. c. 110, 
 «. 19—2 & 3 Vict. c. 11, s.i—3&i Vict. c. 82, 
 s. 2.] A., B., and C. were judgment creditors of 
 D. A. registered his judgment on the 12th of 
 March, 1840, but never re-registered; B. regis- 
 tered his judgment; in April, 1842, and re-regis- 
 tered in March, 1848 ; C. registered his judgment 
 on the 18th of March, 1845, and re-registered on 
 the 16th of March, 1850. Questions having 
 arisen as to the priorities of the several judgment 
 creditors, the fund in Court being insufficient for 
 payment in full : — Held, that on the construction 
 of the statutes 1 & 2 "Vict. c. 110, s. 19, 2 & 3 Vict. 
 0. 11, s. 4, and 3 & 4 Vict. c. 82, s. 2, and upon the 
 principle laid down in Beavan v. Earl of Oxford 
 (6 D. M. & G. 492), C. was iirst entitled to take out 
 of the fund the sum found due on A.'s judgment, 
 and then that B. was entitled to be paid the full 
 amount of his judgment before C. took anything 
 more in respect of his judgment. In re Lokd 
 KbnsiSgton. Bacon v. Fokd 29 Ch. D. 627 
 
 5. Ees Judicata — Cause of Action — 
 
 Separate Actions in respect of same wrongful Act 
 — Damage to Property and Injury to Person — 
 Damages recoverable in previous Action — Maxim, 
 " Nemo debet his vexari pro una et eddem causa " 
 — Maxim, " Interest reipuhlicfe ut sit finis litium."'} 
 Damage to goods and injui'y to the person, 
 although they have been occasioned by one and 
 the same wrongful act, are infringements of 
 different rights, and gave rise to distinct causes 
 of action ; and therefore the recovery in an action 
 of compensation for the damage to the goods is no 
 bar to an action subsequently commenced for the 
 injury to the person. So lield by Brett, M.K., 
 and Bowen, L.J., Lord Coleridge, C.J., dissent- 
 ing. — The Plaintiff brought an action in a County 
 Court for damage to his cab occasioned by the 
 negligence of the Defendant's servant, aud having 
 recovered the amount claimed, afterwards brought 
 an action in the High Court of Justice against 
 the Defendant, claiming damages for personal 
 injury sustained by the Plaintiff through the 
 same negligence : — Held, by Brett, M.E., aud 
 Bowen, L.J., Lord Coleridge, C.J., dissenting, 
 that the action in the High Court was maintain- 
 able, and was not barred by the previous proceed- 
 ings in the County Court. — Judgment of the 
 Queen's Bench Division reversed. Bbunsden v. 
 Humphrey - 11 a. B. D. 712 ; 14 Q. B. D. 141 
 Action against partner in name of firm 
 
 [19Ch. S. 124; 11 Q. B. S. 43S; 
 [10 App. Cas. 680 
 See Peaotioe — Sci'kejie CornT — Pas- 
 ties. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 JUDGMENT— cofiKmuec?. 
 
 Against company after winding-up 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 600> 
 See Company — TJneegisteked Company 
 7. 
 
 Against firm — Proceeding against partners 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 474 ; 9 Q. B. D. 355 ; 14 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Against married woman — Separate estate 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 454 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate. 
 Estate. 5. 
 
 Against principal - - 17 Ch. D. 668 
 
 See Prinoxpal and Surety — ^Liability. 
 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy — How far judgment against 
 
 bankrupt binding on trustee 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 720 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 9. 
 
 Bankruptcy — ^Powerto go behind judgment 
 
 [17Ch. D. 480; 14 ft. B. D. 415 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 8, 16. 
 
 By default 25 Ch. D. 707 ; 29 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^De- 
 fault. 1, 4. 
 
 By default — ^Admiralty - - 9 P. D. 84 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — ^Default. 
 
 By default — Evidence in subsequent actions- 
 
 See Fishery. 1. [8 App. Cas 135 
 
 Estoppel by previous judgment. 
 
 See Cases under Estoppel— Judgment. 
 Executor of judgment creditor — Bankruptcy- 
 notice - 13 ft. B. D. 47* 
 See Bankruptcy-^Act op Bankruptcy.- 
 8- 
 
 Foreclosure action — Amendment 
 
 [25 Ch. D, 75»' 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment. 2. 
 
 Form of— Obstruction of light 24 Ch. D. 282' 
 
 See Light — Obstruction. 1. 
 
 Note of— Costs of appeal - 29 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 6. 
 
 Obtained by collusion — Appeal 30 Ch. D. 421 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 18. 
 
 • Order to sign — Alimony pendente lite — 
 
 Practice - - 13 ft. B. D. 85& 
 
 See Action. 1. 
 
 Practice— rSupreme Court. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme. 
 Court — Judgment. . 
 
 Eeference — Law of Mauritius 8 App. Cas.. 
 
 See Colonial Law — MAUErrius. 1. [296 
 
 EesciSsion by conseHt — Third parties 
 
 »• - . [lOP, D. 161 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 3. 
 — — Set-off — Pension due to retired clergyman 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 1 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clergy. 3. 
 
 "^— Unregistered — Priority over simple contract 
 debts - 21 Ch, D. 18» 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 6. 
 
( 709 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 710 ) 
 
 JTTDGBIENT CSEDITOH— Garnishee order. 
 
 See Cases under Pkaotice — Supreme 
 Court — Garnishee Orders. 
 
 Opposition to resolution for liquidation 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 665 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquidation. 9. 
 
 JUDGMENT DEBTOR— Ceylon law 8 App. Cas. 
 
 See Colonial Law — Ceilon. 2. [99 
 JTTDGMEirr STTMUONS. 
 
 jSiee Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 18S3— Statutes. 
 Appeal from Judge of High Court — Court 
 
 of Appeal - - 13 ft. B D, 901 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Appeal. 10. 
 
 Committal — County Court — Transfer to 
 
 Bankruptcy Court - 15 ft. B. D. 335 
 See Bankruptcy — Transfer.. 2. 
 
 Married woman — Separate estate 
 
 [UQ,B.D.973 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 11. 
 
 Order for committal — •" Means to pay " 
 
 [9 ft. B.D. 178; 14 ft. B. D. 597 
 See Arrest — Debtors' Act. 4, 5. 
 JUDICIAL COMMITTEE. 
 
 See Privy Council — Statutes. 
 
 Effect of order - - 6 App. Cas. 482 
 
 See Practice — ^Privy Council — Juris- 
 diction. 
 JUDICIAL SEFABATION — After-acquired pro- 
 perty - - 30 Ch. D. 500 
 See Settlement. — Future Property. 4. 
 
 Jurisdiction of magistrates 10 P. D. 172 
 
 See Husband and "Wipe — Judicial 
 Separation. 
 
 Separate estate — ^Dwelling-house 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 346 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separate Es- 
 tate. 2. 
 JTrNCTION — Sidiiig on railway — Eights of land- 
 owner - - . - 28 Ch. D. 190 
 See Railway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Acts. 8. 
 JTTEAT— Bill of sale - - 26 Ch. D. 338 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 5. 
 
 JTJEISDICTION. 
 
 Fugitive Offenders.] The Act 14 & 45 Vict. 
 c. 69, repeals 6 & 1 Vict. c. 34 {the Fugitive 
 Offenders Act, 1843), and amends the law with 
 respect to fugitive offenders iri Her Majesty's domi- 
 nions, and for other purposes connected with the 
 apprehension and trial of offenders. 
 
 Sect. 1. Aet to he cited as the Fugitive OffcTiders 
 Act, 1881. 
 
 Part I. Eeturn op Fugitives. 
 , Sect. 2. IdaUlity of fugitive to he apprehended 
 wad returned to that part , of Ser Majesty's 
 dominions from which he is a fugitive. 
 
 Sect. 3. Warrant issued in one part of Her 
 Majesty's dominions may he indorsed in another 
 part of same dominions for apprehension of 
 
 Sect. 4. As to issue of provisional jimrraiit in 
 
 JXreaSJilCTIOyi— continued, 
 any part of Her Majesty's dominions for appre- 
 hension of a fugitive. 
 
 Sect. 5. As to dealing with fugitive wlien appre- 
 hended. 
 
 Sect. 6. As to return of fugitive hy warrant to 
 that part of Her Majesty's dominions from, which 
 he IS a fugitive. 
 
 ' Sect. 7. .lis to discharge of person apprehended 
 if not returned as aforesaid within one month. 
 
 Sect. 8. Person apprehended and returned may, 
 if not prosecuted within six months or acquitted; 
 he sent hack free of cost to where he was appre- 
 liended. 
 
 Sect. 9. Fart I. of the Act applies to treason 
 and piracy, and to every offence, whether called 
 felony, misdemeanor, crime, or hy any other 
 name, which is for the time heing punishable in 
 the part of Her Majesty's dominions in which it 
 leas committed, either on indictment or informa- 
 tion, hy imprisonment with hard labour for a term 
 of twelve months or more, or hy any greater punish- 
 ment; and for the purposes of the section rigorous 
 imprisonment and any confinement in a prison 
 combined with labour, hy whatever name it is 
 called, is to he deemed imprisonment with hard 
 labour. 
 
 Part I. of the Act to apply to an offence not- 
 withstanding that hy the law of- the part of Her 
 Majesty's dominions in or on his way towhich the 
 fugitive is or is suspected of heing it is not an 
 offence, or not an offence to which Part I. applies. 
 
 Sect. 10. Where it is made to appear to a 
 superior Court that hy reason of the trivial nature 
 of the case, or hy reason of the application for the 
 return of a fugitive not being made in good faith 
 in the interests of justice or otherwise, it would, 
 having regard to the distance, to the facilities for 
 communication, and to all the circumstances of the 
 case, he unjust or oppressive or too severe a punish- 
 ment to return a fugitive either at all or until the 
 expiration of a certain period, such Court may 
 discharge the fugitive, either absolutely or on hail, 
 or order that he ,shall not he returned until after 
 the expiration of the period named in the order, 
 or make such other order in the premises as to the 
 Court seems just. 
 
 Sect. 11. As to the persons in Ireland hy whom 
 the powers conferred hy Part I. are to he exercised. 
 
 Part II. Inteh-Colonial Backing op Warrants 
 and Offences. 
 
 Sect. 12. Part II. of the Act to apply only to 
 those groups of British possessions to which, hy 
 reason of their contiguity or otherwise. Her Majesty 
 may by order in Council apply the same. - 
 
 Sect. 13". As to hacking in one British possession 
 of warrant issued in another of same group. 
 
 Sect. 14. As to return of prisoner apprehended 
 under a bached warrant. 
 
 Sect. 15. As to baching in one British possession 
 of summons, &c,, for atlendanee of witnesses issued 
 in another possession of the same group. 
 
 Sect. 16. As to. issue of provisional warrant in 
 group of British possessions. 
 
 Sect. 17. As to discharge of person apprehended 
 under backed warrant if not returned within one 
 month to British possession of same group. 
 
 Sect. 18. As to sending hack of prisoner returned 
 under hacked warrant, if not prosecuted within 
 
 2 A 2 
 
( 711 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 712 ) 
 
 JURISDICTION— confiJi ued. 
 
 six montlis or acquitted, to British possession of 
 
 same group. 
 
 Sect. 19. As to discharge of prisoner sought to 
 he returned where offence is too trivial, &c. 
 
 Pakt III. Trial &c., of Offences. 
 
 Sect. 20. Where two British possessions adjoin, 
 a person accused of an offence committed on or 
 within the distance of 500 yards from the common 
 ioundary of such possessions may he apprehended, 
 tried, and punished in either of such possessions. 
 
 Sect. 21. As to trial of offences committed on 
 journey hetween two British possessions. 
 
 Sect. 22. A person accused of tlie offence (under 
 whatever name it is Icnown) of swearing or making 
 any false deposition, or of giving or fabricating 
 any false evidence, for the purposes of flie Act, 
 may he tried either in the part of Her Majesty's 
 dominions in which such deposition or evidence is 
 used, or in the part in which the same was sworn, 
 made, given, or fabricated, as the justice of the 
 case may require. 
 
 Sect. 23. Supplemental provision as to tried of 
 person in any place. 
 
 Sect. 24. As to issue of search warrants. 
 
 Sect. 25. As to removal of prisoner hy sea from 
 one place to another in a British possession. 
 
 Pabt IV. Supplemental. 
 
 Sect. 26. As to indorsement of warrants under 
 the Act. 
 
 Sect. 27. As to conveyance of fugitives and wit- 
 nesses from any part of Her Majesty's dominions 
 to another part. 
 
 Sect. 28. As to escape, recapture, and trial of 
 escaped prisoners. 
 
 Sect. 29. Depositions, &o„ to he receivable in 
 evidence when duly authenticated. 
 
 Sect. 30. The jurisdiction under Part I. of the 
 Act to hear a case, and commit a fugitive to prison 
 to await his return shall he exercised in England 
 hy a chief magistrate of the metropolitan police 
 courts, or one of the other magistrates of the metro- 
 politan police court at Bow Street. 
 
 If a fugitive is apprehended and brought before 
 a magistrate who has no power to exercise the 
 jurisdiction under the Act in respect of that fugi- 
 tive, that magistrate shall order the fugitive to he 
 brought before some magistrate having that juris- 
 diction, and such order shall he obeyed. 
 
 Sect. 31. Power to make and revoke Orders in 
 Council. 
 
 Sect. 32. Power to Legislature of British posses- 
 sions to pass laws for carrying into effect the Act. 
 
 Sect. 33. W'here an offence is triable in more 
 
 than one part of Her Majesty's dominions, a 
 
 warrant for the apprehension of the offender may 
 
 be issued in any part of Her Majesty's dominions 
 
 n which he can, if lie happens to be there, he tried. 
 
 Sect. 34 applies the Act to convicts unlawfully 
 at large before the expiration of their sentence. 
 
 Sect. 35. Wliere a person accused of an offence 
 is in custody in some part of Her Majesty's 
 dominions, and the offence is triable in some other 
 part of Her Majesty's dominiorw, ■ such ,offendfir 
 may be removed to some other part of HerMgjeety's 
 dominions in which he can be tried. 
 
 Sect. 36. Power to apply Act hy Order in Council 
 to any place out of tier Majesty's dominions in 
 which Her Majesty has jurisdiction. 
 
 JVRISDICTIOm— continued. 
 
 Sect. 37 extends Act to Channel Islands and the 
 Isle of Man. 
 
 Sect. 3S. Applies Act to offences committed before 
 the commencement of the Act. 
 
 Sect. 39. Definitions. 
 
 The following Obdeks in Council are made 
 
 UNDER the Foreign Jurisdiction Acts, 
 
 1843 to 1878:— 
 
 China and Japan.] The China and Japan 
 
 Order in Council of 2bth Oct. ISSi, for the exercise 
 
 of British jurisdiction in China and Japan, repeals 
 
 part of the China and Japan Order in Council of 
 
 1865 and confirms the rest. 
 
 2. Tliis Order shall, except as otherwise expressed, 
 commence and talte effect from and immediately 
 after the 31st day of December, 1881, which time 
 is in this Order referred to as the commencement 
 of this Order. 
 
 3. In this Order — 
 
 " China " means the dominions of the Emperor 
 of China : 
 
 " Japan " means the dominions of the Mikado 
 of Japan : 
 
 "Minister" means superior diplomatic repre- 
 sentative, lohether ambassador, envoy, minister 
 plenipotentiary, or charge' d'affaires : 
 
 " Consular officer " includes every officer in Her 
 Majesty's consular service, whether consul-general, 
 consul, vice-consul, or consular agent, or person 
 authorized to act in any such capacity in China or 
 in Japan : 
 
 *' British subject " means a subject of Her Majesty 
 whether by birth or by naturalization : 
 
 "Foreigner" means a subject of the Emperor 
 of China or of the Mikado of Japan, or a subject or 
 citizen of any other state in amity with HerMajesty : 
 
 " Treaty " includes convention, and any agree- 
 ment, regulations, rules, articles, tariff, or other 
 instrument annexed to a treaty, or agreed- on in 
 pursuance of any stipulation thereof: 
 
 " Month " means calendar month : 
 
 Words importing the plural or the singular may 
 he construed as referring to one person or thing, or 
 more than one person or thing, and words im- 
 porting the masculine as referring to females (as 
 the case may require). 
 
 Repeal. 
 
 4. Subject to the provisions of this Order, 
 articles 85 to 91 inclusive, of the China and Japan 
 Order in Council, 1865, authorizing the making o 
 regulations for the purposes and hy the authority 
 therein mentioned, and the regulations made there- 
 under, dated respectively July 11, 1866, and No- 
 vember 16, 1866, relating to mortgages, bills of sale, 
 and proceedings against partnerships or partners 
 or agents thereof, and rule 252 of the Bules of the 
 Supreme Court and other Courts in China and 
 Japan of May 4, 1865, relating to proceedings hy 
 or against partnerships, and articles 117 and IIS 
 of the China and Japan Order in Council, 1865, 
 relating to foreigners and foreign tribunals, are 
 hereby repealed, as from the commencement of this 
 Order; hut this repeal does not affect any right, 
 title, obligation or liability acquired or accnied 
 before the commencement of this Order. 
 
 Confirmation of Segulations not repealed. 
 
 5. Such regulations as are described in tlie 
 
( 713 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF GASES. 
 
 ( 714 ) 
 
 JURISDICTION— co)iJi««ecL 
 schedule to this Order, heing regulations made or 
 expressed or intended to he made under or in ex- 
 ecution of the power's conferred hij articles 85 to 
 91 of the China and Japan Order in Council, 1865, 
 and all other regulations made or expressed or in- 
 tended to he so made and having fccem approved, 
 or, in case of urgency, not disapproved, under that 
 Order, hefore the commencement of this Order, 
 except the regulations expressed to he repealed hy 
 this Order, are herehy confirmed, as from the pass- 
 ing of this Order, and the same, as far as they are 
 nolo in force, shall be in force, and shall be deemed 
 to have always been of the like validity and effect 
 as if they had been originally made by Order in 
 Council, 
 
 Authority for further Regulations. 
 
 6. Ser Majesty's minister in China may from time 
 to time, subject and according to the provisions of 
 this Order, make such regidutions as to him seem 
 fit for the peace, order, and good government of 
 British subjects, resident in or resorting to China, 
 
 7. The power aforesaid extends to tlie making of 
 regulations fey)' securing observance of the stipula- 
 tions of .treaties between Her Majesty, her heirs and 
 successors, and the JEmperor of China, and for 
 maintaining friendly relations between British 
 subjects and Chinese subjects and authorities. 
 
 8. Her Majesty's minister in China may, as lie 
 thinks fit, make any regulation under this Order 
 extend either throughout China, or to some one or 
 ^nore only of the consular districts in China. 
 
 9. Her Majesty's minister in China, in the 
 exercise of the powers aforesaid, may, 'if he thinks 
 fityjoin with the ministers of any foreign powers 
 in amity with Her Majesty in making or adopting 
 regulations with like objects as the regulations 
 described in the schedule to Uiis order, commonly 
 called .the. Shanghai Land Eegulations, or any 
 other regulations for the municipal government of 
 any foreign concession or settlement in China ; and, 
 as regards British subjects, joint regulations so 
 made shall be as valid and binding as if they 
 related to British subjects only. 
 
 10. Her Majesty's minister in China may, by 
 any regulation made under this Order, repeal or 
 alter any regulation made under tlie China and 
 Japan Order in Council, 1865, or under any prior 
 like authority. 
 
 11. — (ft.) Hegulations made under this Order 
 shall not have effect unless and until they are ap- 
 proved by Her Majesty tlie Queen, that approval 
 being signified through one of Her Majesty's Prin- 
 cipal Secretaries of State, — save that, in case of 
 urgency declared in any such regulations, the same 
 shall take effect before that approval, and shall 
 continue to have effect unless and until they are 
 disapproved by Her Majesty the Queen, that dis- 
 approval being signified through one of Her 
 Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, and until 
 notification of that disapproval has been received 
 and published by Her Majesty's minister in China. 
 
 (b ) That approval, tohere given, shall be con- 
 clusive, and the validity m- regularity of any 
 regulations so approved shall not be called in 
 question in any legal proceeding whatever. 
 
 12. Any regulations made under this Order 
 may, if Her Majesty's minister in China thinks fit, 
 impose penalties for offences against the same. 
 
 JURISDICTION— ccmWrnued. 
 
 13. Penalties so imposed shall not exceed the 
 following, namely, — for any offence imprisonment 
 for three months, with or without hard labour, and 
 with or without a fine of $500, or a fine of $500, 
 without imprisonment, — ivith or without a further 
 fine,, for a continuing offence, of f 25 /or each day 
 during which the offence continues after the original 
 fine is incurred. 
 
 14. Regulations imposing penalties shall be so 
 framed as to allow in every case of part only of 
 the highest penalty being inflicted. 
 
 15. All regulations made under this Order-, 
 whether imposing penalties or not, shall be printed, 
 and a printed copy thereof shall be affixed, and be 
 at all times kept exhibited conspicuously in the 
 public office of each consulate in China. 
 
 16. Printed copies of tlie regulations shall be 
 kept on sale at such .reasonable price as Her 
 Majesty's minister in China from, time to time 
 directs. 
 
 17. Where a regulation imposes a penalty, the 
 same shall not be enforceable in any consular dis- 
 trict until a printed copy of the regulation has 
 been affixed in the public office of the consulate for 
 that district, and has been kept exhibited conspi- 
 cuously tliere during one month. 
 
 18. .4 charge of an offence against a regulation 
 made under this Order, imposing a penalty, shall 
 be inquired of, heard, and determined as an ordi- 
 nary criminal charge under the China and Japan 
 Order in Council, 1865, except that {notwithstand- 
 ing anything in that Order) where the regulation 
 is one for securing observance of the stipulations of 
 a treaty, the charge shall be heard and determined 
 in a summary way, and (where the proceeding is 
 before a Provincial Court) witlwut assessors. 
 
 19. A printed copy of a regulation, purporting 
 to he made under this Order and to be certified 
 under the hand of Her Majesty's minister in China, 
 or under the hand and consular seal of one of Hef 
 Majesty's Consular officers in China, shall be con- 
 clusive evidence of the due making of the regula- 
 tion, and of its contents. 
 
 20. The foregoing provisions authorizing regu- 
 lations for China are herehy extended to Japan, 
 with the substitution of Japan for China, and of 
 the Mikado of Japan for the Mmperor of China, 
 and of Her Majesty's minister in Japan for Hen- 
 Majesty's minister in China, and of Her Majesty's 
 consular officers in Japan for Her Majesty's con- 
 sular officers in China. 
 
 Prison Regulations. 
 
 21. TJie respective powers aforesaid extend to 
 the making of regulations for the governance, visi- 
 tation, care, and superintendence of prisons in 
 China or in Japan, and for the infliction of cor- 
 poreal or other punishment on prisoners committing 
 offences against the rules or discipline of a prison ; 
 but the provisions of this Order respecting penal- 
 ties, and respecting the printing, affixing, exhibiting, 
 and sale of regulations, and the mode of trial of 
 charges of offences against regulations, do not 
 apply to regulations respecting piisons and offences 
 of prisoners. 
 
 Mortgages. 
 
 22. A deed or other instrument of mortgage, 
 legal or equitable, of lands or hotises in China or 
 in Japan, executed hy a British subject, may be 
 
( 715 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 71C ) 
 
 JV'RiaBICTlO'S— continued. 
 
 registered at any time after its execution at the 
 consulate of the consular dist^'ict wherein the pro- 
 perty mortgaged is situate. 
 
 2y. Registration is made as follows : The ori- 
 ginal and a copy of the deed or other instrument 
 of mortgage,- and an .a-'^davit verifying the execu- 
 tion and place of execution thereof, and verifying 
 the copy, are brought into the consulate; and the 
 copy and affidavit are left there. 
 
 24. If a deed or other instrument of mortgage is 
 Hot registered at the consulate aforesaid within the 
 respective time following (namely): 
 
 (i.) Within fourteen days after its execution, 
 where it is eosecutedin the consular district 
 wherein the property mortgaged is situate ; 
 (ii.) Within two months after its execution, 
 where it is executed in China or Japan, 
 elsewhere than in that consular district, or 
 in Song Kong : 
 (iii.) Within six months after its execution, where 
 it is executed elsewhere than in Cliina, 
 Japan, or Song Kong : 
 then, and in every such case, the mortgage debt 
 secured by., the deed or other instrument and the 
 interest thereon shall not have priority overjudgment 
 or simple contract debts contracted before the regis- 
 tration of that deed or other instrument. 
 
 25. Registered deeds or other instruments of 
 mortgage, legal, or equitable, of the same lands or 
 houses have, as among themselves, priority in order 
 (f registration. 
 
 26. — (a.) The provisions of this Order do iwt 
 apply to a deed or other instrument of mortgage 
 executed before the commencement of this Order. 
 
 (b.) As regards a deed or other instrument of 
 mortgage executed before the commencement of this 
 Order, the regulations repealed by this Order shall, 
 notwithstanding that repeal, he in force, and sliall 
 be deemed to have always been of the like validity 
 and effect as if they had originally been made by 
 Order in Council. 
 
 27. Tlie power conferred on the Chief Justice 
 of the Supreme Court for China and Japan by 
 Article 127 of the China and Japan Order in 
 Council, 1865, of framing rules from time to time, 
 is hereby extended to the framing of rules for 
 prescribing and regulating the making and heeping 
 of indexes, and of a general index, to tlie register 
 of mortgages, and searches in those indexes, and 
 other particulars connected with the making, keep- 
 ing, and using of those registers and- iiidexes, and 
 for authorizing and regulating the unregistering 
 of any deed or other instrument of mortgage, or 
 the registering of any release or satisfaction in 
 respect thereof. 
 
 Bills of Sale. 
 
 28. The provisions of this Order relating to 
 bills of sale — 
 
 (i.) Apply only to such bills of sale executed by 
 British subjects as are intended to affect 
 chattels in China or in Japan : 
 (ii.) Do not apply to bills of sale given iy 
 sheriffs or others under or in execution of 
 process authorizing seizure of chattels. 
 29. — (a.) Every bill of sale must conform with 
 the following rules (^namely) : 
 
 (1.) It must state truly the name, description, 
 and address of the grantor. 
 
 IVRISDICTIOS— continued. 
 
 (2.) It must state truly tlie consideration for 
 which it is granted. 
 
 (3.) It must have annexed tliereto or written 
 thereunder an inventory of tlie cliattels intended to 
 be comprised therein. 
 
 (4.) Any defeasance, condition, or declaration of 
 trust affecting the bill not contained in the body of 
 the bill must be written on the same paper as the bill. 
 
 (5.) The execution of the bill must be attested by 
 a credible witness, with his address and descrip- 
 tion. 
 
 (b.) Otherwise, the bill is void in China and in 
 Japan to the extent following, but not further (that 
 is to say) ; 
 
 (i.) In the case of failure to conform with the 
 rule respecting an inventory, as far as 
 regards cliattels omitted from the inven- 
 tory; and 
 
 (ii.) In any other case, wholly. 
 
 (c.) Tlie inventory, and any defeasance, condi- 
 tion, or declaration as aforesaid, respectively, is 
 for all purposes deemed part of tlie bill. 
 
 30. A bill of sale conforming, or appearing to 
 conform, with the foregoing rules, may be regis- 
 tered, if it is intended to affect chattels in China, 
 at the Supreme Court; and if it is intended to 
 affect cliattels in Japan, at the Court for Japan; 
 or in either caic at the Consulate of the Consular 
 district wherein the chattels are ; within the respec- 
 tive time following and not afterwards (namely) .■ 
 
 (i.) Within fourteen days after its execution, 
 where it is executed in the consular district 
 wherein tlie chattels are : 
 
 (ii.) Within two months after its execution, where 
 it is executed in China or in Japan, else- 
 wliere than in that consular district, or in 
 Song Kong : 
 
 (iii.) Within six months after its execution, 
 where it is executed elsewhere than in 
 China, Japan, or Song Kong. 
 
 31. Registration is made as follows : The ori- 
 ginal arid a copy of the bill of sale, and an 
 affidavit verifying the execution, and the time and 
 place of execution, and the attestation thereof, and 
 verifying the copy, are brought into the proper 
 office of the Court or the Consulate ; and the copy 
 and affidavit are left there. 
 
 32. If a bill of sale is not registered at a place 
 and within the time by this Order appointed and 
 allowed for registration thereof, it is, from and 
 after tlie expiration of that time, void in China or 
 in Japan, according as that place is in China or 
 in Japan, to the extent following, but not further 
 (that is to say) ; 
 
 (i.) As against trustees or assignees of the estate 
 of the grantor, in or under bankruptcy, 
 liquidation, or assignment for benefit of 
 creditors; and 
 
 (ii.) As against all sheriffs and others seiziiig 
 cliattels under process of any Court, and 
 any person on whose behalf the seizure is 
 made ; but only 
 
 (iii.) As regards the property in, or right to, the 
 possession of such chattels comprised in 
 the bill as, at or after the filing of the 
 petition for bankruptcy or liquidation, or 
 the execution of the assignment, or the 
 seizure, are in the grantor's possession, or 
 apparent possession. 
 
( 717 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 718 ) 
 
 JURISDICTION— cowtmtwd. 
 
 33. Registered hiUs of sale, affecting the same 
 ■chattels have as among themselves priority in order 
 ■of. registration. 
 
 34. Chattels comprised in u, registered hill of 
 sale are noi in the possession, order, or disposition 
 ■of the grantor within ilie law of hanlcruptey, 
 
 35. If in any case there is an unregistered hill 
 of fdle, and within or oh the expiration of the 
 time hy this Order allowed for registration thereof, 
 a subsequent hill of sale is granted affecting the 
 ■same or some of .the saws chattels, for the Same or 
 .part of the sam^ debt, then' the st&seguent hill is, 
 to the extent to which it comprises tlie same chattels 
 and is for the same debt, absolutely void, unless 
 ■the Supreme Court for China and Japan, or the 
 
 Court for Japan, as the case m/iy require, is 
 satisfied that the subsequent bill is granted in good 
 Jaitfi for the purpose of correcting some material 
 error in the prior bill, and not for the purpose of 
 unlawfully evading the operation of this Order. 
 
 36. The registration of a hill of sale must be 
 .renewed once at least every five years. 
 
 37. Renewal of registration is made as follows : 
 .An affidavit stating the date of and parties to the 
 bill of sale, and the date of the original registra- 
 tion, and of the last renewal, and that the hill is 
 still a subsisting security, is brought in to the 
 proper office of the Court or the Consulate of 
 original registration, and is left there. 
 
 . 38. If the registration of a bill of sale is not so 
 , .renewed in any period of five years, then on and 
 from the expiration of that period the hill is deemed 
 to he unregistered. 
 
 39. The provisions of this Order relaiing to 
 . renewal apply to hills of sale registered under, the 
 sregulations repealed hy this Order, 
 
 40. A transfer or assignment of a registered bill 
 ■of sale need not be registered; and renewal of 
 .registration is not necessary by reason only of such 
 a transfer or assignment. 
 
 41. Where the time for registration or renewal 
 ■ of registration of a bill of sale expires on a Sundfiy, 
 ■or other day on which the office for registration is 
 -closed, the registration or renewal is valid if made 
 ■on the first subsequent day on lohich the office is 
 •open. 
 
 42. If in any case the Supreme Court for China 
 and Japan^ or the Court for Japan, as the case 
 may require, is satisfied that failure to register or 
 
 .,to renew the registration of a bill of sale in due 
 time, or any omission or misstatement connected 
 with registration or renewal, was accidental or 
 inadvertent, the Court may, if it thinks fit, order 
 the failure, omission, or misstatement to be recti- 
 
 Jied in such manner and on such terms, if any, 
 
 .respecting security, notice hy advertisement or 
 otherwise, or any other matter, as tlie Court thinks 
 
 Jit. 
 
 43. (a.) The provisions of this Order, except as 
 rega/rds renewal of registration, do not apply to a 
 hill of sale, executed before the commencement of 
 
 4his Order. 
 
 , {h.) As regards a bill of sale executed before 
 .the eommencement of this Order, the regulations 
 
 repealed by this Order shall, notwithstanding that 
 .repeal, be in force, and shall be deemed to have 
 
 always been of the like validity and effect as if 
 •dhey had originally been made by Order in CounciL 
 
 44. The power conferred on the Chief Justice 
 
 JURISDICTION— coiiiMiued, 
 of the Supreme Court for China and Japan hy 
 Article 127 of the China and Japan Order in 
 Council, 1865, of framing rules from time to time, 
 is hereby extended to the framing of rules for pre- 
 scribing and regulating the making and keeping 
 of indexes, and of a general index, to the registers 
 of bills of sale, and searches in those, indexes, and 
 other particulars connected with the malii'dg, keep- 
 ing, and using of those registers and indexes, and 
 for autliorizing and regulating the unregistering 
 of any bill of sale, or the registering of any release 
 or satisfaction in. respect thereof. 
 
 Suits by or against Partners, 
 
 45. (a.) The following are Bules of Procedure 
 of Her Majesty's Courts in China and in Japan, 
 under tlie China and Japan Order in Council, 
 1865 : 
 
 (1.) Person's claiming or heinglidble as partners 
 may sue or be sued in the firm name, if any. 
 
 (2.) Where partners sue in the firm name, they 
 must, on demand in writing on behalf of (iny de- 
 fendant, forthwith declare the names and addresses 
 of the partners. ' ' 
 
 (3.) Otherwise, all proceedings in the suit may, 
 on application, he stayed on siieh terms as the 
 Court thinks fit. 
 
 (4.) Wlien the names of the partners are so 
 declared, the suit proceeds in the sarnie manner, 
 and the same consequences in all respects follow, 
 as if they had been named as the plaintiffs in the 
 petition. 
 
 (5.) AU subsequent proceedings nevertheless con- 
 tinue in the firm name. 
 
 (6.) Where partners are sued in the firm name, 
 the petition must be served either on one or more 
 of the partners within the jurisdiction. Or at the 
 principal place of the partnership business within 
 the jurisdiction on some person having then and 
 there control or management of the partnership 
 business. 
 
 (7.) Where one person, carrying on business 'in 
 the name of a firm apparently representing more 
 persons than one, is sued in the firm name, the 
 petition may be served at the. principal place of 
 the business witliin the jurisdiction on some. person 
 having then and there control or management of 
 the business. 
 
 (8.) Where partners are sued in the firm name, 
 they must appear individually .in their oion naimes. 
 
 (9.) All subsequent proceedings nevertheless con- 
 tinue in the firm name. 
 
 (10.) Where a person, carrying on business in 
 pie name of a firm . apparently representing more 
 persons than one, is. sued in the firm name he 
 must appear in his own name. 
 
 (II.) All subsequent proceedings nevertheless 
 continue in. the firm name. 
 
 (12.) In any case not hereinhefore provided for, 
 where persons claiming or being liable as partners 
 sue or are sued in the firm name, any party to the 
 suit may, on application to the Court, obtain a 
 statement of the names of the persons who are 
 partners in the firm, to . be fwrnished and verified 
 on oath or otherwise, as the Court thinks fit. ^ 
 
 (13.) Where a judgment is.against partners in 
 the firm name, execution may issue — 
 
 (i.) Against any property of the partners a 
 such; and 
 
( 719 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 720 ) 
 
 JVRISmCTIOTX—continued. 
 (ii.) Against any person who has admitted in 
 the suit that he is a partner, or who has 
 heen adjudged to be a partner ; and 
 (iii.) Against any person who has been served 
 in tlie suit as a partner, and has failed to 
 appear, 
 
 (14.) If the party who has obtained judgment 
 claims to be entitled to issue execution against any 
 otlier person, as being a partner, he may apply to 
 the Court for leave so to do ; and the Court, if the 
 liability is not disputed, raay give such leave, or if 
 it is disputed may order that the question of the 
 liability be tried and determined as a question in 
 the suit, in such manner as the Court thinks fit. 
 
 (b.) Tlie foregoing rules may be fr&m time to 
 time varied by Uules of Procedure made under the 
 China and Japan Order in Council, 1865. 
 
 (c.) Printed copies of tlie foregoing rules must 
 be exhibited conspicuously in each Court and Con- 
 sulate in China and Japan, with the otlier Rules 
 of Procedure for the time being in force under the 
 China and Japan Order in Council, 1865, and he 
 sold at such reasonable price as the Chief Justice 
 of the Supreme Court from time to time directs. 
 
 (d.) A printed copy of the foregoing rules pur- 
 porting to be certified under the hand of the Chief 
 Justice of the Supreme Court and the seal of that 
 Court is for all purposes conclusive evidence 
 thereof. 
 
 46. — (a.) The provisions of this Order do not 
 apply to proceedings instituted by or against part- 
 nerships or partners or agents thereof, before the 
 commencement of this Order. 
 
 (b.) As regards proceedinxjs instituted by or 
 against partnerships or partners or agents thereof 
 before the commencement of this Order, the regula- 
 tions repealed by this Order shall, rmtwithstanding 
 that repeal, be in force, and shall be deemed to 
 have always been of the like validity and effect as 
 if they had been Uules of Procedure made under 
 the China and Japan Order in Council, 1865 ; 
 and, as regards the same proceedings, the Mule of 
 Procedure (252) repealed by this Order shall con- 
 tinue to have effect, notwithstanding that repeal, 
 subject alioays to the operation of the regulations 
 repealed by this Order. 
 
 Suits by or against Foreigners. 
 
 il. — (a.) Where a foreigner desires to institute 
 or take a suit or proceeding of a civil nature 
 against a British subject, or a British subject 
 desires to institute or take a suit or proceeding of 
 a civil nature against a foreigner, the Supreme 
 Court for China and Japan, and the Court for 
 Japan, and a Provincial Court, according to the 
 respective jurisdiction of the Court, may entertain 
 the suit or proceeding, and hear and determine it ; 
 and, if all parties desire, or the Court directs, a 
 trial with a jury or assessors, then, with a jtiry or 
 assessors, at a place where such a trial might be 
 had if all parties were British subjects, hut in all 
 other respects according to the ordinary course of 
 the Court: 
 
 (b.) Provided, that the foreigner first obtains 
 and files in the Court the consent in writing of the 
 competent authority of his own nation to his sub- 
 mitting, and that he does submit, to the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Court, and, if required by the Court, 
 gives security to the satisfaction of the Court, and 
 
 JVB.ISJ)lC1I0il— continued. 
 
 to such reasonable amount as the Court directs, by 
 deposit or otherwise, to pay fees, damages, costs, 
 and expenses, and abide by and perform the 
 decision to be given either by the Court or on 
 appeal. 
 
 (c.) A counter-claim or cross-suit cannot be 
 brought or instituted in the Court against a plain- 
 tiff, being a foreigner, who has submitted to the 
 jurisdiction, by a defendant, except by leave of the 
 Court first obtained. 
 
 (d.) The Court, before giving leave, requires 
 proof from the defendant that his claim arises out 
 of tlie matter in dispute, and that there is reason- 
 able ground for it, and that it is Tiot made for 
 vexation or delay. 
 
 (e.) Nothing in this provision prevents the de- 
 fendant from instituting or taking in the Court 
 against the foreigner, after the termination of the 
 suit or proceeding in which the foreigner is plain- 
 tiff, any suit or proceeding that the defendant 
 might have instituted or taken in the Court against 
 the foreigner if no provision restraining counter- 
 claims or cross-suits had been inserted in this 
 Order. 
 
 (f.) Where a foreigner obtains in the Court an 
 Order against a defendant being a British subject, 
 and in another suit that defendant is plaintiff and 
 the foreigner is defendant, the Court may, if it 
 thinks fit, on the application of the British stibjectf 
 stay the enforcement of the order pending that 
 other suit, and may set off any amount ordered to 
 be paid by one party in one suit against any 
 amount ordered to be paid by tlie other party in 
 the other suit. 
 
 (g.) Where a plaintiff, being a foreigner, obtains 
 in the Court an order against two or more defen- 
 dants, being British subjects, jointly , and in another 
 suit one of them'ds plaintiff, and the foreigner is 
 defendant, the Court may, if it thinks fit, on the 
 application of the British subject, stay the enforce- 
 ment of the order pending that other suit, and 
 may set off any amount ordered to be paid by one 
 party in one suit against any amount ordered to 
 be paid by the other party in the other suit, 
 ivithout prejudice to the right of the British sub- 
 ject to require contribution from his co-defendants 
 under the joint liability. 
 
 (h.) Wliere a foreigner is co-plaintiff in a suit 
 loifh a British subject icho is within the particular 
 jurisdiction, it is not necessary for tlie foreigner to 
 make deposit or give security for costs, unless the 
 Court so directs; but the co-plaintiff British sitb- 
 ject is responsible for all fees and costs. 
 
 Chinese, Japanese, or Foreign Tribunals. 
 
 48. — (a.) Wliere it is sheien to tlie Supreme or 
 other Court that the attendance of a British sub- 
 ject to give evidence, or for any other purpose con- 
 nected with the administration of justice, is re- 
 quired in a Chinese or Japanese Court, or before a 
 Chinese or Japanese judicial officer or in a Court 
 or before a judicial officer of any state in amity 
 with Her Majesty, the Supreme or other Court 
 may, if it thinks fit, in a case and in circumstances 
 in which it would require his attendance before 
 itself, order that he do attend as so required. 
 
 (b.) A Provincial Court, hcnvever, cannot so 
 order attendance at any place beyond its particular 
 jurisdiction. 
 
( 721 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 722 ) 
 
 JURISDICTION— coniiKued. 
 
 (o.) If the person ordered to attend, having 
 reasonable notice of the time and place at which he 
 is required to attend, fails to attend accordingly, 
 and does not excuse his failure to the satisfaction 
 of the Supreme or other Court, he is, indepen- 
 dently of any other liability, guilty of an offence 
 against this Order, and for every such offence, on 
 conviction thereof, by summary trial, is liable to a 
 fine not exceeding $500, or to imprisonment for not 
 exceeding one month, in the discretion of the Court. 
 
 And tlie Foreign Office is to give the necessary 
 directions herein. 
 
 Schedule. 
 
 I. — Regulations made by Sir Butherford Alcoclc 
 while Her Majesty's Minister in China, intituled 
 or designated as Land Regulations, Regulatioris, 
 and By-Laics annexed to the Land Regulations, 
 for the foreign quarter of Shanghai north of the 
 Yang - King - Fang, and commonly called the 
 Shanghai Land Regulations. 
 
 II. — Port, Consular, Customs, and Barbour Re- 
 gulations applicable to all the Treaty ports in China, 
 dated 31st of May, 1809. L. G., 1881, p. 6289 
 
 China, Japan, and Corea.] Tlie China, Japan, 
 and Corea Order of 26th June, 1881, provides for 
 the exercise of British jurisdiction in Corea in 
 accordance with the provisions of the China and 
 Japan Orders in Council - I. G., 1884, p, 2991 
 
 The China, Japan, and Corea Order of Stli of 
 September, 1884 (^Supplemental) malies further pro- 
 vision for -tlie exercise of British jurisdiction in 
 Corea - - - L. G., 1884, p. 4115 
 
 The Order in Council of 26th of March, 1885, 
 establishes new tables of Consular fees in China, 
 Japan, and Corea • - L. 6., 1886, p. 1627 
 
 Cyprus.] Neutrality Order in Council of 
 May 18(7i, 1881, malies provision for the regulation 
 of the conduct of the inhabitants of Cyprus, and 
 other persons residing therein during the existence 
 of hostilities between States loith which Her 
 Majesty is at peace - - L. G., 1881, p. 2795 
 
 Order in Council of 15th of July, 1881, making 
 provision for appeals from the decisions of the 
 High Court of Justice for Cyprus, and from the 
 Ottoman Court there, called the Temyiz Court 
 
 [I. G., 1881, p. 3689 
 
 Ottoman Dominions.] The Ottoman Order in 
 Council of May 3rd, 1882. 
 
 1. — (a.) TTiis Order maybe cited as the Ottoman 
 Order in Council, 1882. 
 
 (b.) The Order in Council made at Windsor, the 
 12th day of December, 1873, for the regulation of 
 consular jurisdiction in the Ottoman dominions, 
 may be cited as the Ottoman Order in Council, 
 .1873. 
 
 (c.) That Order and this Order may be cited 
 together as the Ottoman Orders in Council, 1873 
 and 1882. 
 
 Commencement. 
 
 2. This Order shall commence and have effect 
 from and immediately after the 31st day of May, 
 1882. 
 
 Interpretation. 
 
 3. In this Order — 
 
 "Her Majesty's Ambassador" includes Her 
 
 JUBISDICTION — continued. 
 
 Majesty's Charge d' Affaires, or other chief 
 diplomatic representative in tlie Ottoman 
 dominions for the time being, 
 
 " Administration " means letters of administrur 
 tion, including the same with viill annexed, 
 or granted for special or limited purposes. 
 
 "Ship ' includes any vessel used in navigation, 
 howsoever propelled, with her tachle, furni- 
 ture, and apparel, and any boat or other 
 craft. 
 
 " Ottoman waters '' means the territorial wateis 
 of the Ottoman dominions. 
 
 Other words have the same meaming as in the 
 Ottoman Order in Council, 1873. 
 
 Repeal. 
 
 4. The following parts of the Ottoman Order in 
 Council, 1873, are hereby repealed : 
 
 (a.) Art. 11. — The last two paragraphs. 
 
 (b.) Art. 12. — The last paragraph. 
 
 (o ) Art. 13.' — The words " and for that purpose 
 shall have the like jurisdiction and autho- 
 rity as the assistant judge." 
 
 (d.) Art. 93. 
 
 (e.) Art. 266. — In the first paragraph the words 
 " the judge of; " and the last paragraph. 
 
 Assistant Judge of Supreme Court. 
 
 5. — (a.) The Assistant Judge of the Supreme 
 Court shall be, at the time of his appointment, a 
 member of the Bar of England, Scotland, or Ireland, 
 of seven years' standing. 
 
 (b.) The assistant judge shall hear and determine 
 such causes and matters, civil and criminal, and 
 transact such other part of the business of the 
 Supreme Court as tlie Judge of the Supreme Court, 
 from time to time, by general order or otherwise, 
 directs. 
 
 (c.) For that purpose the assistant judge shall 
 have all the like jurisdiction, power, and authority 
 as the judge. 
 
 (d.) Any party to a civil suit or proceeding, 
 wherein any matter or question is heard and deter- 
 mined by the assistant judge, and (my party to a 
 criminal proceeding, other than a proceeding by 
 summary trial, wherein any question of law is 
 heard and determined by the assistant judge, shall 
 be entitled, as of course, to a re-hearing of the 
 matter or question aforesaid before the judge, sitting 
 with the assistant judge, or, in the unavoidable 
 absence of the assistant judge, alone; provided 
 that an application for the re-liearing be made 
 within three days after the day of the decision of 
 the assistant judge. 
 
 (e.) If, on any such re-hearing, there is a differ- 
 ence of opinion between the judge and the assistant 
 judge, the opinion of the judge shall prevail. 
 Acting Judge or Acting Assistant Judge of 
 Supreme Court. 
 
 6. In case of the death or illness, or the absence 
 or intended absence from the district of the Con- 
 sulate-General of Constantinople, of the Judge 
 or Assistant Judge of the Supreme Court, Her 
 Majesty's Ambassador may appoint a fit person to 
 be the acting judge, or to be the acting assistant 
 judge, as the case may require ; but, unless in any 
 case the Secretary of State otherwise directs, the 
 assistant judge, if present, and able to act, shall 
 always be appointed to be the acting judge. 
 
( 723 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 724 ) 
 
 .'JTTEISDICTIOir — continued. 
 
 Offences on Board Ship. 
 
 7. Sect. 11 of tlie Merchant Shipping Act, 1867, 
 is hereby extended to the Ottoman dominions, with 
 such adaptations and modifications that the same 
 tmM, as regards those dominions, read as follows 
 {namely) : 
 
 If in the Mediterranean Sea, or tlie Sea of Azof, 
 or if in the Adriatic, JBgean, or Black Sea, out of 
 Ottoman waters, a British suhject commits an 
 offence on hoard a British ship, or on hoard a 
 foreign ship to which he does not belong, the 
 Supreme Court, sitting within the district of the 
 Consuhxte-General of Constantinople, siiall have 
 jurisdiction to hear and determine the ease as if 
 the offence had heen committed on hoard a British 
 ship in Ottoman waters; and the Supreme Court 
 may exercise that jurisdiction accordingly if in 
 any case the Court, in its, discretion, having regard 
 
 ■ to all the circumstances, thinks it fit and expedient 
 ^0 to do. 
 
 Detention of Ship. 
 
 8. Where the Supreme Court issues a summons 
 
 or warrant against any person on- a charge of an 
 •offence committed on hoard of or in relation to a 
 
 British ship, then, if it appears to (lie Court that 
 the interests of public justice so require, the Suprejne 
 
 Court may issue a warrant or order for the deten- 
 tion of the ship, being within the district of tlie 
 
 Consulate- General of Constantinople, and may 
 ■cause the ship to he detained accordingly, until the 
 ■charge is heard and determined and the order of 
 
 the Court thereon is fully executed, or for such 
 
 -shorter time as the Court thinks fit ; and the 
 Supreme Court shall have power to make, from 
 
 ■ tim^ to time, all such orders as appear to it neces- 
 sary or proper for carrying this provision into 
 ■effect. 
 
 Offences partly out of Jurisdiction. 
 
 9. The Admiralty Offences Colonial Act, 1860, 
 is hereby extended to the Ottoman dominions, with 
 such adaptations and irwdifications that the same 
 ioill, as 7-egards those dominions and the jurisdio- 
 •tion of the Court, read as follows (jiannely) : 
 
 Wliere a person, being feloniously stricken, 
 poisoned, or otherwise hurt, in tlie Ottoman domi- 
 nions, dies of such stroke, poisoning, or hurt, on 
 
 ■ the sea, or out of the Ottoman dominions, then every 
 
 ■ offence committed in respect of any such ca^e, 
 whether amounting to murder or to manslaughter, 
 
 ■or to the being accessory before the fact to murder, 
 •or after (lie fact to murder or to manslaughter, may 
 be dealt with, inquired of, tried, determined, and 
 punished in the Ottoman dominions in all respects 
 •as if such offence had been wholly committed in the 
 Ottoman dmuinions. 
 
 Fugitive Offenders. 
 
 10. The Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, except 
 Part II. thereof, or so much thereof, except that 
 part, as is for tlie time being in force, and any 
 enactment for the time being ill force, amending or 
 substituted for the same, are hereby extended to the 
 
 Ottoman dominions, with the adaptations following 
 :4namely): 
 
 (i.) Her Majesty's ambassador is Iterehy sub- 
 stituted for the governor of a British pos- 
 session : 
 
 JVRlSDICTIOTil— continued. 
 
 (ii.) TJie Supreme Court, or the Court for Egypt, 
 or the Court for Tunis (as the case re- 
 quires), is lierehy substituted for a Supe- 
 rior Court in a British possession : 
 (iii.) Fach Court under the Ottoman Ord£r in 
 Council, 1873, according to its jurisdic- 
 ■ tion, is substituted for amagiUfaieof any 
 part of Her Majesty's dominions. 
 
 Coroner's Inquests. 
 
 11. — (a.) The Supreme Court shall, for and 
 within the district of the Consulate-General of Con- 
 stantinople, and the Court for Egypt shall, for and 
 in Egypt, and the Court for Tunis shall, for and 
 in Tunis, have and discharge all tlie powers, rights, 
 and duties appertaining to tlie office of coroner in 
 England, in relation not only to deaths of British 
 subjects happening in that respective district or 
 country, but also to deaths of any persons having 
 happened at sea on board British ships arriving in 
 that respective district or country, and to deaths of 
 British subjects having happened at sea on board 
 
 foreign ships so arriving. 
 
 (b.) Every inquest shall he held teith a jury of 
 not less than three persons comprised in the jury ■ 
 list of the Court summoned for that purpose. 
 
 (c.) If any person fails to attend according to 
 such summons, he shall he liable to (he like fine, to 
 
 , be levied in the like manner, as is in the Ottoman 
 Order in Council, 1873, provided with respect to 
 
 juries in civil and criminal proceedings. 
 
 Jurisdiction as regards Ernhassy. 
 
 12. Tlie Court shall not exercise any jurisdiction 
 in any proceeding whatsoever over Her Majesty's 
 ambassador, or his official or other residences, or 
 his official or other property ; nor shall the Court, 
 except with the consent of Her Majesty's ambas- 
 sador, signified in writing to the Court, exercise 
 any jurisdiction in a civil action or proceeding 
 over any person attaclied to or being a member of 
 Her Majesty's embassy^ or being a domestic servant 
 of Her Majesty's ambassador. 
 
 Evidence. 
 
 13. If in any case it is made to appear to the 
 Court that the attendance of Her Majesty's ambas- 
 sador, or of any person attached to or being u. 
 member of Her Majesty's embassy, or being a 
 domestic servant of Her Majesty's ambassador, to 
 give evidence before the Court, is requisite in the 
 interest of justice, the Court slutll address to Her 
 Majesty's ambassador a request in writing for such 
 a,ttendance. 
 
 14. A person attending to give evidence before 
 the Court slicdl not be compellable to give any 
 evidence or to produce any document if, in tlie 
 opinion of Her Majesttfs ambassador, signified by 
 him personally or in writing to the Court, the giving 
 or production thereof would be injurious to Her 
 Majesty's service. 
 
 15. Sections 7 and 11 of the, Evidence Act, 1851, 
 are hereby extended to the Ottoman dominions. 
 
 16. The foUovying Acts [namehj): 
 
 The Foreign Tribunals Evidence Act, 
 1856. 
 
 The Evidence by Commission Act, 1859, — 
 or so much thereof as is for the time being in force, 
 and any enactment for the tinne being in force 
 
( 725 ) 
 
 JVRISmCTWS— continued, 
 -amending or substituted for the same, are hereby 
 extended to the Ottoman dominions, with the 
 adaptations following (namely) : 
 
 Tlie Supreme Court, or the Court for Egypt, or 
 the Court for Tunis (as the case requires), is 
 hereby substitiited for a Supreme Court in a 
 colony. 
 
 Ascertainment of Law. 
 
 17. The foUmoing Acts (namely) : 
 
 Tlw British Law Ascertainment Act, 1859, 
 Tlie Foreign Law Ascertainment Act, 
 . 1861,— 
 or so much thereof as is for the time being in force, 
 ■and any enactmsnt /or the time being in force 
 <miending or substituted for the same, are hereby 
 extended to the Ottoman dominions, with the adap- 
 ■iations following (rwmely) : 
 
 The Supreme Court, or the Court for Egypt, or 
 the Court for Tunis (as the case requires), is 
 hereby substituted far a Superior Court in a 
 colony. 
 
 Probate. 
 
 18. — (a.) Where probate, administration, or con- 
 Jirmation is granted in England, Ireland, or Scot- 
 land, and therein, or by a memorandum, thereon 
 signed by an officer of the Court granting the same, 
 tlie testator or intestate is stated to have died 
 domiciled in England, Ireland, or Scotland (as 
 ■the case may be), and the probaie, administration, 
 'Or confirmation is produced to, and a copy thereof 
 is deposited with, the Supreme Court, the Court 
 -sliall write thereon a certificate of that production 
 ■and deposit; and thereupon, notwithstanding any- 
 thing in the Ottoman Order in Council, 1873, the 
 \probate, administration, or confirmation shall, with 
 ■respect to the personal property in the Ottoman 
 ■dominions of the testator or intestate, have the like 
 effect as if he had been resident in those dominions 
 «J his death, and probate or administration to his 
 personal property there had been granted by the 
 jSupreme Court. 
 
 (b.) Any person who, in, reliance on an instru- 
 :ment purporting to be a probate, administration, or 
 ■confirmation granted in England, Ireland, or Scot- 
 Xand, and to bear such a certificate of the Supreme 
 Court as in this article prescribed, malces' or per- 
 mits any payment or transfer, in good faith, shall 
 ■be, by virtue of this Order, indemnified and pro- 
 tected in respect thereof, in tlie Ottoman dominions, 
 notwithstanding anything affecting the validity of 
 ihe probate, administration, or confirmation. 
 
 (a.) Tlie foUmoing shall be the terms of the 
 •certificate of the Supreme Court in this article 
 ^prescribed (namely) : 
 
 ■• This probate has [or these letters of administra- 
 tion Imve or i3iis confirmation has^ been pro- 
 duced to this Court, and u, copy thereof has 
 been deposited with this Court. 
 
 19. Section 51 of the . Conveyancing (Scotland) 
 Act, 1874, and any enactment for the time being 
 in force amending or substituted for the same, are 
 thereby extended to the Ottoman dorninions, with the 
 adaptation following (namely) : 
 
 The Suprem^e Court is hereby substituted for a 
 •Court of Probate in a Colony. 
 
 Becovery against Ships. 
 20. Where money ordered by the Court to be 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 72G ) 
 
 JV&lSBlCTiaiS— continued. 
 
 paid is due for seamen's wages, or is otheir money 
 recoverable under the Merchant Shipping Acts or 
 other laio relating to ships, and the person ordered 
 to pay is master or owner of a ship, and the maney 
 is not paid as ordered, the Court, in addition to 
 other powers for compelling payment, shall have 
 power to direct that the amourit unpaid be levied 
 by seizure and sale of that ship. 
 
 Judicial Notice. 
 
 21. Judicial notice shall be taken of the Otto- 
 man Order in Council, 1873, miiJ of the several 
 Orders in Council amending the same, passed or to 
 be passed, and of this Order, and of the appoint- 
 ment of all judges, officers, and persons acting 
 thereunder, and of their signatures, and of all 
 seals used thereunder ; and no proof thereof shall 
 
 And tlie Foreign Office, the Treasury, and the 
 Admiralty are to give tlie necessary direetions 
 herein as to them may respectively appertain. 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 2209 
 
 Ottoman Dominions — Tunis.] Order in Coun- 
 cil of 18tli May, 1881, maldng further regulation 
 for the exercise of British jurisdiction in the 
 Begency of Tunis - - L. G., 1881, p, 2617 
 
 Order in Council abandoning British Consular 
 jurisdiction in Tunis, Sist Dec, 1884 
 
 , [L. G., 1884, p. 71 
 
 Siam.] The Siam Order in Council of 2Gth 
 
 June, 1884, provides for the exercise of British 
 
 jurisdiction in the dominions of the Kings of Siam 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 3049 
 
 Ditto, Supplemental Order of dth September, 
 1884 - - - - 1. G., 1884, p. 4115 
 
 South Africa.] Order in Council of 27th 
 January, 1885, to exercise British jurisdiction in 
 parts of South Africa situate west of the bouridary 
 of the South African Bepublic, as defined by Con- 
 vention of 27th February, 1884. 1. G., 1885, p. 417 
 
 West Africa.] Order in Council of 2Gth March, 
 1885, to exercise British jurisdiction in parts of 
 West Africa situate west of the 25th m£ridian of 
 east longitude, south of the SOtfi pardlUl of north 
 latitude, and north of 25th parallel of south lati- 
 tude ^ - - - L. G., 1888, p. 1617 
 
 Zanzibar.] The Zanzibar Order in Council of 2Sth 
 November, 1884, malces 2^rovision for the exercise of 
 British jurisdiction in the dominions of the Sultan 
 of Zanzibar L. G., 1884, p. 6649 
 
 The following Orders have been also made as to 
 foreign jurisdiction : — 
 
 Kees.J Order in Council of 2Gth March, 1885 
 (not under the Foreign Jurisdiction Acts) estab- 
 lishing the Consular fees to be taken in all foreign 
 countries other than China, Japan, and Corea, in 
 pursuance of tlie Acts t! Geo. 4, c. 87, and 12 & 13 
 Vict 0. 68 - - - L. G., 1886, p. 1623 
 
 Gibraltar.] Tlie law of England as it existed 
 on 3lst December, 1883, to be, subject to some excep- 
 tions, hereafter in force in the city, garrison, and 
 territory of Gibraltar. Jurisdiction of the Supreme 
 Court of Gibraltar from tlie 2nd February, 1884 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 679 
 1. Land in Foreign Country — Parties resi- 
 dent in England.'] The title to immoveable pro- 
 
( 727 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 728 ) 
 
 JURISDICTION— corefe'naecL 
 perty in Saxony was in dispute between A. and 
 B. A. sold the property in Saxony, received part 
 of the purchase-money, and took a mortgage for 
 the balance. Both A. and B. being in England, 
 an action by B. to make A. account for the 
 purchase-money was dismissed for want of juris- 
 diction. In re Hawthobne. Gkaham v. Massey 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 743 
 
 2. larceny from British Ship at Foreign 
 
 Port — Feloniously receimng Property stolen from 
 British Ship at Foreign Port — Admiralty, Juris- 
 diction of — Criminal Jurisdiction over British 
 Ship^ afloat Abroad — High Seas, Criminal Juris- 
 diction o».] Certain bonds or valuable secu- 
 rities were stolen from a British ocean-going 
 merchant ship whilst she was lying afloat, in 
 the ordinary course of her trading, in the river 
 at Eotterdam, in Holland, moored to the quay, 
 and were afterwards wrongfully received in 
 England by the prisoners with a knowledge that 
 they had been thus stolen. The place where the 
 ship lay at the time of the theft was in the open 
 river, sixteen or eighteen miles from the sea, 
 but within the ebb and flow of the tide. There 
 were no bridges between the ship and the sea, 
 and the place where she lay was one where large 
 vessels usually lay. It did not appear who the 
 thief was, or under what circumstances he was on 
 board the ship : — Held (by Lord Coleridge, C. J., 
 Pollock B., Lopes, Stephen, and Watkin Wil- 
 liams, JJ.), that the prisoners could be properly 
 tried and convicted at the Central Criminal Court 
 in this country, as the larceny took place within 
 the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England. 
 The Queen v. Caer 10 Q. B. D. 76 
 
 3. Wages — ■ Foreign Ship — Protest hy 
 
 Foreign Consul — Discretion of Court. lu an 
 action for wages and damages for wrongful dis- 
 missal by British seamen who had served on a 
 Spanish ship under Spanish articles, the Spanish 
 consul at Liverpool protested against the exercise 
 of the jurisdiction of the Court, and the Court 
 accordingly dismissed the action: — Held, on 
 appeal, that to enable the Court of Appeal to 
 overrule the discretion of the Court below as to 
 entertaining tlie action, the Judge must be shewn 
 to have exercised it on wrong principles or 
 wrongly or imfuirly. — Held, further, that though 
 no express provision of the Spanish code was 
 referred to in the articles, and though it did not 
 appear in evidence that the Spanisli code com- 
 pelled the seamen to abide by the decision of a 
 Spanish tribunal, yet, under the circumstances, 
 it must be inferred that they had agreed to do so. 
 The "Leon XIII." - - 8 P. D. 121 
 Admiralty Court. 
 
 See Cases under Pkaotice — Admiralty 
 
 — JUKISDICTION. 
 
 Allowance for maintenance of infant — 
 
 Summons 19 Ch. D. 305 
 
 See Infant— Maintenance. 3. 
 
 Appellant out of 22 Ch, D. 83 
 
 See Pkactice — Supkeme Coukt — Seou- 
 KiTY FOE Costs. 9. 
 
 Appointment of guardian to infant abroad 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 324 
 See Infant — Guardian. 1. 
 
 JV&ISOICTWS— continued. 
 
 Arbitration — Public Health Act, 1875 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 735 ; 9 App. Gas. 696- 
 
 See Local Government — Compensa- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court. 
 
 See Cases under^BANKBrPTOY — Juris- 
 diction. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court 16 Ch. D. 131 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court 19 Ch. D. 86 
 
 See Bailment. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court— Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court — Debtor's summons 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 484 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 14. 
 Bankruptcy — Disclaimer of lease — Land- 
 lord's claim for compensation » 
 
 [14 Q. B.'D. 960 
 See Banki.uptct — Disclaimer. 21. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Petition presented [in wrong 
 
 court — deceiving order 14 Q. B. D. 37 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceiveh. 5. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court— Scotch sequestration 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 816 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 4. 
 
 Bankruptcy Court — Substituted service of 
 
 appeal - 24 Ch. D. 364 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 3. 
 
 Chancery Division — Probate of will 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 656 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Juris- 
 diction. 1 . 
 
 Church Building Acts - 24 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Church Building Acts. 
 
 Committee out of — Appointment 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Lunatic — Committee. 2. [775 
 
 Compromise by infant - 16 Ch. D. 41 
 
 See Infant — Contracts. 8. 
 
 Costs under Trustee Act 26 Ch. D. 82 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 8. 
 
 County Court — Admiralty. 
 
 See Cases under County Court — Juris- 
 diction. 
 
 • Court of Appeal — Solicitor 28 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Solicitor — Misconduct. 2. 
 
 Court of Queen's Bench — Supreme Court of 
 
 Canada - 6 App, Cas. 644 
 
 See Colonial Law — ■ Canada — Oni'A- 
 Rio. 1. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Court - 7 App, Cas. 240 
 
 (See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Public 
 Worship Act. 1. 
 
 ■ Ecclesiastical Court 22Ch.I).316; 8P.D.191 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Juris- 
 diction. 1, 2. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Court 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Bishop — 
 Statutes. 
 
 ■ Equitable — Eemoval of trustees 9 App, Cas. 
 
 [371 
 See Colonial Law — Cape op Good 
 Hope. 2. 
 
( 729 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 730 ) 
 
 JUBISDICTION — continued. 
 
 Foreign decree — Absence of will 6 F, D. 6 
 
 See Admlnisteatok — Limited. 6. 
 
 Foreign ship— Board of Trade— 17 & 18 
 
 Vict. c. 104, s. 512 - 9P. B. 88 
 
 See Pkactice— Admibaltt — Jubisdic- 
 
 TION. 2. 
 
 High Oonrt of Justice - 9 ft. B. D. 618 
 
 See Akbitkation — Submission. 1. 
 
 High Court of Justice — Action for sum 
 
 below £10 - - 30 Ch. D. 387 
 
 iSee Pkactice — Supbeme Couet — Jdbis- 
 DICTION. 2. 
 
 High Court of Justice— Dispute in building 
 
 society - - 9 App. Cas. 260 
 
 See Building Society. 2. 
 
 High Court of Justice — Winding-up of 
 
 mining company — Stannaries Court 
 
 [18 Ch. B. 472 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 1. 
 
 Infant's real estate - - 21 Ch. B. 786 
 
 See Infant — Peopebty. 1. 
 
 Inferior Court— Prohibition 14 ft. B. B. 858 
 
 See Peohibition. 
 
 Injunction to restrain election of alderman 
 
 [16 Ch. B. 143 
 See Municipal Cobpoeation — Qualifi- 
 cation. 
 
 Injunction to restrain proceedings before 
 
 justices - - - 20 Ch. B. 190 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Cocet— In- 
 junction. 7. 
 
 Injunction to restrain winding-up petition 
 
 [18 Ch. B. 555 
 See Company — Winding-up Okdee. 9. 
 
 • Judge under Public Worship Kegulation 
 
 Act - - 6 ft. B. B. 376 
 
 See Pkactice — Ecclesiastical— Chuech 
 Discipline Act. 2. 
 
 Justices — Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 
 Act — Movement of animals iuto pro- 
 scribed districts - 12 ft. B. B. 629 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 Acts. 
 
 Justices— Public Health Act, 1875 
 
 [12 ft. B. B. 142 
 See Local Goveknment — Pkactice. 2. 
 
 Justices— Eight of fishing— Tidal navigable 
 
 river - - - 8 ft. B. B. 626 
 
 See Justices — Jurisdiction. 
 
 Lancaster Palatine Court — Service 
 
 [24 Ch. B. 280 
 See Court — Lancaster Court. 
 
 Luoacy. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Lunatic 
 — Jurisdiction. 
 
 Lunacy — Property of small amount 
 
 [26 Ch. B. 496 
 See Lunatic — ^Property. 7. 
 
 Maritime lien — Foreign judgment 6 P. B. 
 
 See Foreign Judgment. 2. [106 
 
 Master of the Bolls— Patent 26 Ch. B. 105 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 1. 
 
 Mother of infant resident out of 28 Ch. B. 82 
 
 See Infant— Education. 3. 
 
 JV&ISDICTIOS— continued. 
 
 Murder on high seas - 14 ft. B. B. 273 
 
 See Criminal Law — Oitences against 
 Person. 6. 
 
 Partition suit 22 Ch. B. 284 ; 24 Ch. B. 622 
 
 See Partition Suit — Jurisdiction. 1, 2. 
 
 Plaintiff out of— Security for costs 28 Ch. B. 
 
 [232 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 eity foe Costs. 7. 
 
 Probate Division — Married woman — Will of 
 
 realty - - - 6 P. B. 209 
 
 See Probate — Maeeied Woman. 4. 
 
 Registrar and merchants — Bottomry — Re- 
 duction of amount - 9 P. B. 177 
 See Ship — Maeitimb Lien. 2. 
 
 Scotch assets — Administration action in 
 
 England 22 Ch. B. 456 ; 9 App. Cas. 34 
 See Executor — Actions. 16. 
 
 Scotch Courts — Assets in England and 
 
 Scotland - - 10 App. Cas. 453 
 
 See Scotch Law — Jurisdiction. 
 
 Sequestration — Payment of money in Court 
 
 to sequestrator - 18 Ch. B. 653 
 
 See Pbaotice — Supeeme Couet — Se- 
 
 QUESTEATION. 2. 
 
 Service out of. 
 
 See Cases under Peaotice — Supeeme 
 Court — Service. 2 — 10. 
 
 Specific performance of separation deed 
 
 [18 Ch. B. 670 
 See Husband and Wife — Sepaeation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 Suit against public officer 6 App. Cas. 619 
 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 1. 
 
 Transfer of action - - 16 Ch. B. 702 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Tean s- 
 
 PEE. 1. 
 
 Transfer of action - 27 Ch. B. 533 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Juris- 
 diction. 3. 
 — - "Vice-Admiralty Court 8 App. Cas. 329 
 
 See Praotice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 5. 
 
 Vice-Admiralty Court - 9 App. Cas. 356 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 7. 
 
 Ward of Court - - 28 Ch. B. 186 
 
 See Infant — Ward of Couet. 3. 
 Waterworks company — Settlement of dis- 
 putes - 28 Ch. B. 138 
 See Wateeworks Company — Supply of 
 Water. 1. 
 
 Winding-up Acts 19 Ch. B. 77 ; 23 Ch. B. 
 
 See Company^ — Conteibutoey. 2, 4. [297 
 
 . Winding-up of foreign company 27 Ch. B. 
 
 [225; 29Ch. B. 219 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 2, 3. 
 
 JUEY— Trial by 20 Ch. B. 365 ; 21 Ch. B. 134 ; 
 
 [25Ch. B. 772; 29 Ch. B. 60 
 
 See Peaotice— Supeeme Couet — Tbial. 
 
 2—5. 
 
 Trial by— Probate - - 8 P. B, 205 
 
 See Practice — Peobate — Tbial. 
 
 JITS BEFBES£inUL7IPinS - 
 
 See cioPYjsoLD — Custom. 
 
 18 Ch, B. 165 
 
( 731 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 732 ) 
 
 JUS SECANDI VEI FALCANDI 17 Ch. D. 535 
 
 ■ See Common. 
 JUS TEETH— Bailment— Estoppel 19 Ch. D. 86 
 
 See Bailmeht. 
 
 JUSTICES (OF THE PEACE) :- 
 
 I. Disqualification 
 
 II. JUBISDIOTION 
 
 IIL Pbactioe - 
 
 Col. 
 
 - 731 
 
 - 732 
 732 
 
 I. JUSTICES— DISQUALIFICATION. 
 
 1. ' Coroner.] A justice of the peace does 
 
 not become disqualified i'rom acting as such, by 
 reason of his being elected coroner for the county 
 or division for ■which he so acts as justice. Davis 
 ■u. Justices of Pembeokeshiee 7 Q. B. D. 613 
 
 2, Interest — Bias — Litigant in similar 
 
 Cases— Waiver of Objection.'] At a special sessions 
 for appeals against a poor-rate, the chairman of 
 the magistrates, -who was himself Appellant in 
 one of the cases for hearing, took part in the deci- 
 sion ,of all the cases except his own. "When his 
 own case was called on, he left the bench and 
 went to the body of tlie Court and conducted the 
 case himself. On a rule for a certiorari to bring 
 up all the orders for the piu'pose of quashing 
 them : — Held, by Field and Bowen, JJ., that the 
 chairman, being a litigant in a matter similar to 
 the other matters before the Courl", was disquali- 
 fied from acting as a justice, and that the orders 
 were bad. — Before the sessions were held the 
 Appellants gave notice to the clerk of the jus- 
 tices that objection would be made " if any 
 justices who were rated in Yarmouth heard the 
 appeals." At Ihe healing this objection, and no 
 other, was made, and it was overruled by the jus- 
 tices i^IIeld, that the Appellants were not pre- 
 cluded by the form of their notice from contending, 
 in support of the rule for a certiorari, that the 
 chairman, even if not disqualified by reason of his 
 being rated, was disqualified by reason of his 
 being himself a litigant; although this latter 
 objection was not specifically mentioned in the 
 notice, or made before the justices. The Queen 
 V. Justices of Gkbat Yarmouth 8 Q. B. D. 52S 
 
 3. Interest — TJrhan Sanitary Authority — 
 
 Municipal Corporation — Summons issued by Mem- 
 her of Corporation.'] By a local Act for the im- 
 provement of a borougli the corporation was made 
 the authority for the execution of the Act', with 
 power to direct prosecutions for this purpose. An 
 information for an offence under the Act having 
 been preferred by an officer on behalf of the cor- 
 poration, a summons was issued upon it by a 
 justice, who was also an alderman and member of 
 the corporation, but came on for hearing, before 
 justices, none of whom were connected with the 
 corporation : — Held, notwithstanding, that such 
 justices could not proceed with the hearing of the 
 summons, for it had been issued by one who was 
 virtually prosecutor. The Queen v. Gibbon 
 
 [6 ft. B, D, 168 
 
 4. Interest — Public Health Act, 1875 
 
 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 25%— Town Council- 
 Enforcing Borough Bate.] Where by statute a 
 member of the town council of a borough may 
 act as a justice of the peace in matters arising 
 under the Act, in order to disqualify him from so 
 acting it is not bufficicnt to shew that, as a member 
 
 I. JUSTICES— DISQUAIIFICATION—co«i«m«e<Z. 
 of the town council, he has a pecuniary interest ha 
 the result of the information or complaint, or that 
 the corporation of which he is a member.are the- 
 prosecutors, but it must be established that he has- 
 such a substantial interest in the result of the- 
 hearing as to make it likely that he has a real bias 
 in the matter.— JJe^r. v. Gibbon (6 Q. B. D. 168> 
 disapproved. — An officer of a corporation ap- 
 pointed to collect the borough rate obtsiined a 
 summons against a ratepayer in arrear. In so- 
 doing he acted in the discharge of his duty, but oit 
 his own responsibility and without consulting the 
 town council. At the hearing the justices dis- 
 missed the summons, on the ground that one of 
 the sitting magistrates being a town councillor 
 was tliereby disqualified from adjudicating upom 
 the summons. On motion for a mandamus tothe 
 justices to hear and adjudicate on the summons : 
 — 'Held (by Field and Cave, JJ.), that there was- 
 no ground for supposing either substantial interest 
 or likelihood of bias, and consequently no dis- 
 qualification. The Queen v. Handsley 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 383 
 
 II. JUSTICES— JURISDICTION. 
 
 Eeasonable Claim of Eight — Fishing;. 
 
 Public Bight of — Tidal navigable Biver — Tide, 
 what constitutes — Damming back of Water &?^ 
 exceptionally High Tides.] An information was 
 laid against the Appellant for unlawfully fishing- 
 in a river wherein the Eespondents had a private^ 
 right of fishery. It was proved that the river- 
 was navigable, and that at the place where the- 
 Appellant fished the water was not salt, and that 
 in ordinary tides it was unaifected by any tidall 
 influence, but that upon the occasion of very 
 high tides the, rising of the salt water in -the- 
 lower part of the river dammed back the freshi 
 water and caused it upon those occasions to rise 
 and fall wifh the flow and ebb of the , tide. The- 
 Appellant contended that, the river being navi- 
 gable and tidal at the place in question, there was- 
 a presumption that the public had a right to- 
 fish there, and that ihe juiisdiction of the justices, 
 was therefore ousted by a reasonable claim of 
 right : — Held, that the river at the place in ques- 
 tion could not be considered as tidal within tie- 
 meaning of the rule of law which gives the public- 
 a right to fish in navigable tidal rivers, and there- 
 fore there was no claim of title set up sufficient tc 
 oust the justices' jurisdiction. Eeeoe v. Miller 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 626; 
 
 III. JUSTICES— PRACTICE. 
 
 The Act a & 45 Vict. c. 24 (the Summary Juris- 
 diction Process Act, 1881), amends the law respect- 
 ing the Service of Process of Courts of Summaryi 
 Jurisdiction in England and Scotland. 
 
 Bastardy Orders.] Sect. 6. A Court of summary 
 jurisdiction in England and a Sheriff Court in 
 Scotland shall respectively have jurisdiction byi 
 order or decree to adjudge a person within the- 
 jurisdiction of the Court to pay for ihe mainte- 
 nance and education of a bastard child of which he- 
 is the putative father, and for the expenses in- 
 cidental to the birth of such child, and for the 
 funeral expenses of such child, notioithstanding-' 
 that such person ordinarily resides, or the child 
 has been born, or the mother of it ordinarilyi 
 
( 733 ), 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 731 ) 
 
 in. JUSTICES— PRACTICE— cojiMnMsd, 
 
 resides, where the Court is English in Scotland, 
 or where the Court is Scotch, in England, in 
 nice manner as the Court has jurisdiction in any 
 other case. Any process issued in England or 
 Scotland to enforce obedience to sueh order or 
 decree must he indorsed and executed in Scotland 
 and England respectively, in manner provided hy 
 this Act with respect to process of a Court of 
 summary jurisdiction. , 
 
 Any iastardy order of a Court of summary 
 Jurisdiction in England moy he registered in the 
 books of a Sheriff Court in Scotland, and thereupon 
 u, warrant of arrestment may be, issued in like 
 manner as if such order were a decree of the said 
 Slieriff Court. 
 
 Service of Process.] Subject to theproiiisions of 
 this Act any process issued under t}ie Summary 
 Jurisdiction Acts may if issued by a Court of 
 summary jurisdiction in England and'indorsed by 
 a Court of summary jurisdiction in Scotland, or 
 issued by a Court of summary jurisdiction in Scot- 
 land arid indorsed by a Court of summary jurisdic- 
 tion in England, be served and executed within the 
 jurisdiction of the indorsing Court in like manner 
 as it may he served and executed ieithin the juris- 
 diction of the issuing Court, artd tliat, by, an officer 
 either of the issuing or of the indorsing Court. 
 For the purposes of this Act : 
 (1.) Any process may he issued and indorsed 
 under the hand of anflj such person as is 
 declared by this Act to he a Couxt of sum- 
 mary jurisdiction, and may be indorsed 
 upon proof alone of the handwriting of the 
 person issuing it, and such proof may be 
 either on' oath or hy such solemn declaration 
 as is mentioned in sect. 41 of the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Act of 1879, or hy any like 
 declaration taken in Scotland before a 
 sheriff, justice of the peace, or other magis- 
 trate having the authority of a justice of 
 the peace. Such indorsement may be in 
 the form contained in the schedule to this 
 Act annexed or in a form to the like 
 effect: 
 (2.) Where any process requiring the appear- 
 ance of a person to answer any informa- 
 tion or complaint has been served in pur- 
 suance of this section, the Court before 
 issuing a warrant for the apprehension of 
 such person for failure so to appear shall 
 he satisfied on oath that there is sufficient 
 prirna facie evidence in support of such 
 information or complaint. 
 (3.) If the process is to procure the attendance of 
 a witness, the • Court issuing the process 
 shall he satisfied on oath, of the prohahility 
 that the evidence of such witness will he 
 material, and that tlie witness will not 
 appear voluntarily without such process, 
 and the witness shall not he subject to any 
 liability for not obeying the process unless 
 a reasonable amount for his expenses has 
 been paid or tendered to him. 
 (4.) This Act shall not apply to any process 
 requiring the appearance of a person to 
 answer a complaint issued hy an English 
 Court of summary jurisdiction for the re- 
 covery of a sum of money which is a civil 
 debt ivithin the meaning of the Summary 
 
 III. JUSTICES— PEACTICE—oonM»««£?, 
 
 Jurisdiction Act, 1879, or if issued by cf 
 Scotch Court in a case which falls within' 
 the definition of " civil jurisdiction " 
 contained in the Sum/mary Procedure Act, 
 1864. 
 
 Sect. 5. Where a person is apprehended under 
 any process executed in pursuance of this Act such 
 person shall be forthwith taken to some place within 
 the jurisdiction of the Court issuing the process, and 
 he there dealt with as if he had been there appre- 
 hended. 
 
 Warrant of Distreaa.] Sect. 5. A warrant of 
 distress issued in England when indorsed in pur- 
 suance of this Act, shall he executed in Scotland ' 
 as if it were a Scotch warrant of poinding and 
 sale, and a Scotch warrant of poinding and sale,, 
 wlien indorsed in pursuance of this Act, shall be 
 executed in England as if it were an English 
 warrant of distress, and the enactments relating to 
 . the said, warrants respectively shall apply accord- 
 ingly, except that any account of tjie costs and 
 charges in connection with the execution, or of the 
 money levied tJte/reby or otherwise relating to the 
 execution, shall be made^ and any money raised 
 by the execution shall be. dealt with in like manner 
 as if the warrant had been exe(}uted within the 
 jurisdiction of the Court issuing tlie warrant. 
 
 Prosecution Expenses.] The Act 48 (fe 49 Vict.. 
 c. 59, continues the Act '2,9 & 30 Vict. c. 52, until ' 
 the 31st of December, 1886. 
 
 Act of 1884.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 43 (the 
 Simimary Jurisdiction Act, 1884) repeails divers, 
 enactments rendered unnecessary by the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Acts, arid provides for. uniformity of 
 proceedings in Courts of summary jurisdiction. 
 
 Appeal.] Sect. 6. Where a person is authorized 
 hy any Act passed before the ccmimencement of the 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, to appeal from 
 the conviction or order of a Court of summary 
 jurisdiction Tnade in pursuance of the Summary- 
 Jurisdiction Acts, or from the refusal to make any 
 conviction or order in pursuance of those Acts to a 
 Court of General or Quarter Session^, he shall ' 
 after the passing of this Act appeal to such Court 
 subject to the conditions and regulations contained 
 in the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, with 
 respect to an appeal to a Court of General or 
 Quarter Sessions. 
 
 Doubts.] Sect. 7 removes certain doubts as to 
 42 <fc 43 Vict. c. 49, s. 50. 
 
 Sect. 8 removes certain doubts as to 42 & 43 Vict, 
 c. 49, 8. 30, and declares that a petty sessional 
 court-house may he outside tlie limits of such 
 division. 
 
 Sect. 9 removes certain doubts as to i2& 4:3 Vict.. 
 c. 49, s. 38. 
 
 Enactments repealed.] Sect. 4 repeals parts of ' 
 certain Acts as to Englahd. 
 
 Sect. 5. The jurisdiction of justices to act? 
 summarily in amy matter referred to in any en- 
 actments hy this Act repealed, is not taken away. 
 
 Forms.] Sect. 12. A form authorized hy any 
 rules for the time being in force in pursuance of 
 s. 29 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, shall ' 
 he of tlie same effect as if it were contained in the ■ 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict, 
 c. 43), or in any other Act to which the form is 
 made applicable. 
 
 Obsolete Punishment.] Secf, 3 repeals so much ■. 
 
( 735 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 736 ) 
 
 III. JUSTICES— PEACTICE—cow^mttccZ. 
 o/ any Act as enaets that a person, on non-payment 
 of a sum of money adjudged to he paid hy the con- 
 viction or order of a Court of summary juris- 
 diction in England, shall he liahle to whipping, or 
 to any other punishment than imprisonment with or 
 witliout hard labour. 
 
 Rates.] Sect. 10. This Act does not alter the 
 procedure for the recovery of poor or other rates, 
 the payment of which is not adjudged hy the con- 
 viction or order of a Court of Summary Juris- 
 diction. 
 
 Sect. 11. Payments certified by district auditors 
 may he enforced as if poor rates. 
 
 1. Case stated — Case stated under 20 & 21 
 
 Vict. c. 43, and remitted for amendment, hut not 
 returned — Jurisdiction over Costs^ A case having 
 been stated by justices under 20 & 21 Viet. c. 43, 
 and remitted to them for an amended statement, 
 but not returned within the proper time, and 
 therefore abandoned : — Held, that the Court still 
 had jurisdiction to order the Appellant to pay the 
 Eespondont's costs. Cbowthek v. Boult 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 680 
 
 2. Case stated — Power of Justices to state 
 
 — Summary Jurisdiction Act (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49), 
 s. 33 — Order, Determination, or other Proceeding of 
 a Court of Summary Jurisdiction — General District 
 Bate, Order for Payment of — Public Health Act, 
 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 256— Functions of 
 Justices in enforcing General District Bate."] A 
 special Case may be stated by justices under the 
 33rd section of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 
 1879, upon an application lo enforce payment of a 
 general di^trict rate under the 256th section of 
 the Public Health Act, 1875. — On an application 
 under the last-mentioned section to enforce a 
 general district rate good on the face of it, the 
 justices may not refuse to make an order for pay- 
 ment of the rate on the ground that there is a 
 concurrent rate made for the same purpose. Sand- 
 gate Local Board v. Pledge 14 Q. B. D. 730 
 
 3. Eule against Justices — Befusal to 
 
 do Act relating to Duties of Office — Bute under 
 Jl <fe 12 Vict c. 44, s. 5 — Mandamus.'] The 
 application of the 5th section of 11 & 12 Vict. 
 0. 44, is not confined to cases where the justice 
 requires protection in respect of tlie act he is called 
 upon to do.— Beg. v. Percy (Law Rep. 9 Q. B. 64) 
 not followed. The Queen v. Biron 14 Q. B. D. 
 
 [474 
 [See also Reg. o. Phillimore, 14 ft. B. D. 474, n.] 
 
 4. Sum " claimed to be due " — Summary 
 
 Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49), s«. 6, 
 21, 35 — Bailways Clauses Consolidation Act(S & 9 
 Vict c. 20), ss. 103, US-Penalty for Travelling 
 with intent to avoid Payment of Fare — Distress 
 Warrant— Procedure.'] The penalty imposed by 
 sect. 103 of the Railways Clauses Consolidation 
 Act (8 & 9 Vict. c. 20), for travelling in a railway 
 carriage without having paid the fare and with 
 intent to avoid tlie payment of it, is not " a sum 
 of money claimed to be due and recoverable on 
 complaint to a Court of summary jurisdiction " 
 
 III. JUSTICES— PEAOTICE—comim!4e(Z. 
 within the meaning of sect. 6 of the Summary 
 Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. 49), and 
 is not subject to the procedure for the recovery of 
 civil debts in a Court of summary jurisdiction 
 prescribed by sect. 35 of the same Act. The 
 Queen v. Paget - - 8 ft. B. S. 151 
 
 JUSTICES (OF THE PEACE)— Assize Cour^-In- 
 cometax 10 ft. B.D, 267; 9App.Cas.61 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 1. 
 
 Compensation under Lands Clauses Aet^ 
 
 Order — Limitation of time 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 586 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Expenses of sewering street — Jurisdiction 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 142 
 See Local Government — Pbactice. 2. 
 
 Injunction to restrain proceedings before 
 
 [20 Ch. B. 190 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 7. 
 Jurisdiction — Bastardy — Service of sum- 
 mons in Scotland - 12 ft. B. B. 261 ; 
 See Bastardy. 6. [10 App. Cas. 45 
 
 Jurisdiction to grant judicial separation — 
 
 Aggravated assault - 10 P. D. 172 
 See Husband and Wipe — Judicial 
 Sepabation. 
 
 Jurisdiction — Union extending into different 
 
 counties - - 8 ft. E. S. 1S8 
 
 See Element AEY Education Acts — 
 Attendance. 4. 
 
 Landlord and tenant — Fraudulent removal 
 
 -Notice of appeal - 6 ft. B. D. 669 
 See Landlobd and Tenant — Distress. 
 3. 
 
 Lunatic — Custody — Personal examination 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 122 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 2. 
 Member of sanitary committee — Disqualifi- 
 cation — Local Government Acts 
 
 [9 ft. B. S. 394 
 See Local Govebnment^Pbaotice. 1. 
 
 Quarter sessions — Case stated 8 ft. B. S. 586 
 
 See Sessions. 
 
 Res judicata— Estoppel 6 ft. B. D. 300 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 1. 
 
 Salvage — Jurisdiction — Appeal 7 P. D. 126 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 8. 
 
 Summary proceeding — Exclusion of civil 
 
 remedy - - 11 ft. B. D. 228 
 
 See Ship — Seamen. 
 
 K 
 
 KNOWLEDGE OE SERVANT- Interrogatories- 
 Sufficiency of answer 10 ft. B. D. 161 ; 
 [24Ch.D. 110 
 
 See Practice — Supbeme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 5, 6. 
 
( 737 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 738 ) 
 
 L. 
 
 LABOTTBEBS' SWELLIXOS ACTS. 
 
 The Aot 45 & 46 Vict. c. 54, amends the Arti- 
 ::ans' and Labourers' Dwellings Improvement Aots, 
 1875 and 1879, and the Artizans' and Labourers' 
 Swellings Acts, 186S and 1879, and malces 
 further provision for the accommodation of the 
 leorhing classes, and for the purchase and pulling 
 down of buildings unfit for human habitatimi, and 
 for the opening of alleys. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 72, amends the law 
 relating to dwellings of the working classes gene- 
 rally. 
 
 Sect. 4 amends 31 & 32 Vict. c. 130 (Artizans' 
 and Labourers' Dwellings Act, 1868). 
 
 Sects. 7 and 8 amend the sanitary law generally, 
 and the Act 38 * 39 Viet. c. 55, s. 90 (^Public 
 Health Act, 1875). 
 
 Sect. 9 amends 29 & 80 Vict. c. 90, s. 19 (^Sani- 
 tary Act, 1866). 
 
 Sect. 11 amends 45 * 46 Vict. c. 38 (Settled 
 Land Act, 1882). 
 
 It repeals part of 14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 34; part of 
 sects. 4, 6, and 7 of 2,9 & 30 Vict. c. 28 ; sects. 5 and 
 C,ofi2(t 43 Vict. c. 64 ; part of sect. 2 o/ 38 <t 39 
 Vict. c. 36; sect. 11 o/ 45 & 46 Vict. c. 54. 
 
 1. Compensation — 38 & 39 Vict. o. 36, 
 
 s. 19, Sched., s. 6 — Fvhlication — Notice to treat 
 — Arbitrator — Lands Clauses Act, 1845, ss. 18, 
 121.] Sect. 121 of the Lands Clauses Aot as to 
 compensation for interests less than a year is in- 
 corporated in the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwell- 
 ings Improvement Act, 1875. — The publication of 
 the requisition under sect. 6 of the schedule to 
 the Dwellings Improvement Act is analogous to 
 the notice to treat under the Lands Clauses Atft, 
 and a landowner aflected by it cannot afterwards 
 alter his position. — An arbitrator imder the Dwell- 
 ings Improvement Act mfty, when a claim for 
 compensation is brought before him, assess the 
 amount of compensation without deciding as to 
 the right of the claimant. Wilkins v. Mayor of 
 BlEMlNGBAM - 25 Ch. D. 78 
 
 2. Payment into Court— 38 & 39 Vict. c. 36 
 
 — Compulsory talcing of Land — Arbitration Award 
 — Appeal — Verdict of Jury for larger Sum — Pay- 
 ment of Difference into Court — Time of taking 
 Possession — Interest on Difference.'} Where, under 
 the provisions of the Artizans' and Labourers' 
 Dwellings Improvement Act, 1875, a sum of 
 money has been paid into Court by a local autho- 
 rity under the award of an arbitrator for lands 
 taken compulsorily by them, and on appeal a 
 verdict for a larger sum is given by a jury, the 
 difference between the two sums being subse- 
 quently paid into Court, interest at £4 per cent, 
 per annum from the date of the first payment 
 to the date of the second payment in is payable 
 on such difference. In re Shaw and the Cor- 
 POEATION OF Birmingham - 27 Ch. D. 614 
 
 LACHES. 
 
 See Delay and Negligence. 
 
 LANCASTER, DUCHY OF— Attorney-General— 
 Eight to exhibit information 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 195 
 
 See Attokney-General of Ddohy op 
 Lancaster. 
 Attorney-General — Right to attend proceed- 
 ings in lunacy - 21 Ch. D. 613 
 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 4. 
 
 LANCASTER PALATINE COTTRT 24 Ch. B. 280 
 
 See Court — Lancaster Court. 
 
 Contempt 7 ft. B. D. 273 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 
 Concurrent suits 21 Ch. D. 647 ; 23 Ch. D. 
 
 [100 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Con- 
 duct OF Cause. 2, 3. 
 
 Eehearing — Jurisdiction - 24 Ch. D. 488 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 37. 
 LAND — Belonging to the Crown. 
 
 See Crown Lands — Statutes. 
 
 Injuriously affected — Eailway — Scotch law 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 259 
 See Scotch Law — Eailway Company. 
 4. 
 
 In foreign country — Parties to contest iii 
 
 England - - 23 Ch. D. 743 
 
 See Jurisdiction. 1. 
 
 ■■ Power to take 28 Ch. D. 486 
 
 See Londo.x — Commissioners or Sewers. 
 
 Property of lunatic — Sale 28 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 10. 
 
 Taken by railway company. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Compulsory Powers. 
 
 LAND COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 The Act 48 d 49 Vict. v. 59, continues until the 
 31st of December, 1886, so much of the Act 4 ifc 5 
 Vict. c. 35, and Acts amending the same, as relates 
 to the appointment of and the period for holding 
 office by Copyhold, Inclosure, and Tithe Commis- 
 sioners (now Land Commissioners). 
 
 Constitution of — Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 
 LAND COMPANY— Illegality— Unregistered com- 
 pany - - - 29 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Company — Unregistered Company 
 4. 
 
 LAND DRAINAGE— Charge on capital 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 588 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 money. 5. 
 
 Eent-charge - 20 Ch. D. 203 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 money. 6. 
 
 LAND LAW (IRELAND) ACT 9 App, Cas. 816 
 See Irish Land Law Act. 
 
 2 B 
 
( 739 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 740 ) 
 
 LANS TAX COUmSSIONEBS. 
 
 See EEtBNUB — Management- 
 
 ■Statutes. 
 
 lANDLOED AND TENANT :— Col. 
 
 I. Agreement 739 
 
 II. Assignment - 741 
 
 III. Custom op Country 743 
 
 IV. Distress - - - 743 
 V. Fixtures - - - 747 
 
 VI. Ground Game _ - _ 743 
 
 VII. Improvements - - 748 
 
 VIII. Lease - - - - 761 
 
 (a.) Covenants. 
 (6.) Incoming and outgoing 
 
 Tenants. 
 (c.) Option to purchase Free- 
 hold. 
 IX. IiODGKB - _ _ 768 
 
 X. Ee-entry - - 769 
 
 XI. Yearly Tenant - - 774 
 
 Long Terms. 
 
 See Leasehold — Long Terms. 
 
 Benewable Lease. 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 
 
 I. LANDLOED AND TENANT— AGHEEMENT. 
 
 1. ■ • Ambigiions Contract — Specific Fer- 
 
 formance — Statute of Frauds.} An executory 
 agreement for a lease does not satisfy the Statute 
 of Frauds, unless it can be collected from it oa 
 ■what day the term is to begin, and there is no in- 
 ference that the term is to commence from the 
 date of the agreement in the absence of language 
 pointing to that conclusion. — Jacques v. Millar 
 (6 Oh. D. 153) overruled.— The Plaintiff offered 
 to take a lease of furnaces from the Defendant, 
 conditionally upon his being able to make aiTange- 
 ments with other persons as to ore. A loosely- 
 drawn memorandum was shortly afterwards signed 
 by the parties, substituting certain other rents for 
 the rents mentioned in the letter, which in other 
 respects was to form the basis of the agreement. 
 The Defendant, understanding that the lease was 
 to begin immediately, offered possession to the 
 Plaintiff at once, but the Plaintiff refused to take 
 it, as he had not yet made arrangements for ores, 
 and continued to treat the agreement as condi- 
 tional on his making those arrangements. Ulti- 
 mately the parties differed as to the covenants to 
 be inserted in the lease, and the Plaintiff com- 
 menced his action for specific performance :— 
 Held, although where an agreement is clear the 
 Court must act upon its own view of the construc- 
 tion without regard to the view entertained by 
 the parties, yet where a party has throughout 
 insisted on one construction of an obscure agree- 
 ment, he cannot get specific performance on the 
 footing of the opposite construction. Marshall 
 1;. Bebridge - 19 Ch. D. 233 
 
 2. Condition Precedent — Specific Per- 
 formance — Agreetnent to grant Lease to Nominee 
 of Plaintiff — ^0 Noniiiife appointed — Agreement 
 hy Letter — Statute of Frniah.'] A lessee wrote 
 to his lessor offering to sun-ender his lease and to 
 take a fresh lease for twenty-one years to a 
 nominee, or to a company which ho intended to 
 form, at an increased rent, but otherwise on the 
 same terms as the existing lease ; and by a subse- 
 
 I. LANDLORD AND TENANT— AGEEEMENT— 
 
 continued. 
 quent letter offered to instruct his solicitor to pre- 
 pare a draft lease. The lessor telegraphed to him 
 in reply to get the lease prepared. Afterwards 
 correspondence took place between the solicitors 
 as to the form of the lease, and the lessee's soli- 
 citor prepared a formal agreement. Differences 
 having arisen, the lessor refused to grant the 
 lease, and the lessee brought an action for specific 
 performance of the agreement to grant a lease and 
 for damages. No company had been formed and 
 no nominee appointed by the Plaintiff before the 
 trial of the action : — Held (reversing the decision 
 of Kay, J.), that assuming that there was a bind- 
 ing agi'eement for a lease, the formation of a 
 company or appointment of a nominee was a con- 
 dition precedent, and that the Plaintiff could not 
 maintain an action for specific performance of the 
 contract, as he had not performed the condition. 
 — But, held, also, on the construction of the cor- 
 respondence, that there was no binding agree- 
 ment between the parties, and therefore the 
 action entirely failed. Williams v. Brisco 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 441 
 
 3, Partial Interest of Lessor — Contract to 
 
 sell the Entirety — Remedy of Purchatser.'] By a 
 memorandum in writing. Defendant agreed to 
 let, the Plaintiffs agreed to take, business pre- 
 mises for one year, with an option for Plaintiffs 
 at the end of the year to have a lease for seven, 
 fourteen, or twenty-one years. Plaintiffs, having 
 gone into possession under the agreement, and 
 having laid out money in alterations, at the end 
 of the year gave notice of their intention to exer- 
 cise the option ; but when the Defendant's title 
 came to be investigated it was found that she 
 was possessed of only n moiety of the premises, 
 the other moiety being vested in her son, a minor. 
 The Defendant was decreed to perfoim specifically 
 so much of the contract as she was able to per- 
 form, with an abatement of one moiety of the 
 rent. An inquiry as to damages was refused, 
 there being no evidence that the Plaintiffs had 
 sustained any damage. Burrow v. Soammell 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 175 
 
 4. Eight of Distress — Executory Agree- 
 ment — Minimum Rent — Rent payable in Advanee."] 
 The Defendant on the 29th of May, 1879, agreed 
 to grant and the Plaintiff to accept a lease of 
 a mill for seven years at the rent of 30s. a year 
 for each loom run, the Plaintiff not to run less 
 than 540 looms. The lease to contain such stipu- 
 lations as were inserted in a certain lease of the 
 1st of May, which was a lease at a fixed rent 
 made payable in advance, and contained a stipu- 
 lation that there shoiUd at all times be payable 
 in ndvance on demand one whole year's rent in 
 addition to the proportion, if any, of the yearly 
 rent due and unpaid for the period previous to 
 such demand. The Plaintiff was let into posses- 
 s-ion and paid rent quarterly, not in advance, 
 down to the 1st of January, 1882, inclusive, 
 having run in 1881 560 looms. In March, 1882, 
 the Defendant demanded payment of £1005 14s. 
 (£840 as one whole year's rent for 560 looms 
 at 30s., and £165 146. as the proportionate part 
 of the rent from the 1st of January last), and 
 put in a distress. The Plaintiff thereupon com- 
 menced his action for damages for illegal distress, 
 
( 741 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 742 ) 
 
 J. LANDLOED AND TENANT— AGEEEMENT— 
 
 continued. 
 "for an mjunction, and for specific performance, 
 =and moved for an injunction. Fry, J., granted 
 the injunction on tlie terms of the Plaintiff 
 paying the £1005 14s. into Court. The Plaintiff 
 appealed. — Held, that since the Judicature Acts 
 "the rule no longer holds that a person occupying 
 under an executory agreement for a lease is only 
 made tenant from year to year at law by the pay- 
 ment of rent, but that he is to be treated in every 
 •Court as holding on the terms of the agreement : 
 — Held, therefore, that the Plaintiff holdiog under 
 'the agreement was subject to the same right of 
 •distress as if a lease had been granted, and that 
 if under the terms of the lease a year's rent would 
 ihave been payable in advance on demand a dis- 
 tress for that was lawful. — Semble, that such lease 
 ought to reserve a minimum rent of £810 (30s. a 
 piece on 540 looms), and that the stipulation in 
 'the lease of the 1st of May as to ]paymeut in 
 .-advance would be applicable to such minimum 
 rent though not to the whole rent. And the 
 Defendant beiug willing to submit to the injunc- 
 Ttion on having £810 paid into Court, order varied 
 accordingly, the Court being inclined to the view 
 that there was a right of distress for that amount 
 though the time had not arrived for finally deter- 
 .mining the question. "Walsh v. Lonsdale 
 
 [81 Ch. D. 9 
 
 11. LANDLOED AND TENANT— ASSIGNMENT. 
 
 1. Assignment of Eeversion — Action hy 
 
 -Assignee against original Tenant— Yearly Tenancy 
 '—Privity— i Anne, c. 16, s. 9 — 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106, 
 »s. 6.] S. made a parol demise of a tenement to 
 TM. from year to year at a rent. M. by deed as- 
 ■signed all his estate, interest, and term in the 
 tenement to a third party, but S. refused to accept 
 'the third party as his tenant. Afterwards S. 
 iassigned his reversion to the Plaintiffs, who never 
 ■accepted the third party as their tenant, and 
 'brought an action against M. for rent in arrear : — 
 Meld, affirming the judgment of the Queen's 
 Bench Division, that as no estate remained in M. 
 :after liis assignment of his yearly tenancy, the 
 rStatute 4 Anne, c. 16, s. 9, did not apply ; that 
 there was no privity of estate or of contract be- 
 tween the Plaintiffs and M., and therefore the 
 saction could not be maintained. Allcook v. 
 MooEHOUSE - 9 ft. B. D. 366 
 
 2. Assignment of Eeversion — Fart of De- 
 
 ,mised Premises — Privity of Contract — Covenant to 
 ^ay Bent, whether divisible — Apportionment— Zi 
 Hen. 8, c. 34.] 'The Defendant, being tenant of 
 (land under a lease for years granted by the Plain- 
 tiffs and containing the usual lessee's covenant to 
 ■pay rent, assigned all her interest in the term. 
 "Subsequently the Plaintiffs granted their rever- 
 .sion in part of the demised premises. No rent 
 liaving been paid by the assignees of the Defen- 
 ..dant, "the Plaintiff sued her for arrears of rent 
 •accrued due since the grant of their reversion m 
 part of the premises, the sum claimed bemg a fair 
 iapportionment of the rent in respect of the other 
 part, the reversion of which remained va. the 
 ■plaintiffs -—Held, that the covenant to pay rent 
 was divisible; that the rent could be appor- 
 tioned, although the action was founded on a 
 
 II. LANDLOED AND TENANT— ASSIGNMENT 
 
 — continued. 
 privity of contract only ; and therefore that the 
 Plaintiffs were entitled to recover. — Stevenson v. 
 Lanibard (2 East, 575) considered. Cokpobation 
 OP Swansea v. Thomas - 10 Q. B. D. 48 
 
 3, Indemnity — Right of Assignor to In- 
 demnity — Dilapidations — Mercantile Law Amend- 
 ment Act, 1«56 (19 & 20 Vict. c. 97), s. 5.] On 
 the dissolution of a partnership between H. and 
 E., H. assigned to E. all his interest in two houses 
 belonging to the partnership held under sub-leases 
 from C. and D., and E. covenanted to pay the 
 rents and observe the covenants and keep H. in- 
 demnified against them. E.'s executors sold the 
 houses to B., and B. to a company which went 
 into liquidation. The landlords C. and D. there- 
 upon sued H. for the rent, and he paid it for the 
 whole of the year 1882. D. also made a large 
 demand against H. for breaches of covenants to 
 repair, but H. made no payment. On the 15th of 
 March, 1883, D. assigned his reversion to H., and 
 in May H. acquired O.'s reversion. In June, 
 1883, H. bought the leasehold interest in both, 
 houses from the liquidators of the company, and 
 covenanted thenceforth to pay the rent and observe 
 the covenants. H. sought to prove against the 
 estate of E. for the sums paid for rent, for the 
 rent payable at Lady Day, 1883, on D.'s house, 
 and for the amount of the dilapidations in that 
 house : — Held, that the right of H., under E.'s 
 covenant of indemnity, to prove for the rents 
 which he had paid, was not taken away by his 
 covenant in the assignment hy the liquidators, 
 which could not be extended to rents already due 
 and paid : — Held, also, that this right was not 
 defeated on the ground that the right of E.'s re- 
 presentatives, if they paid rent, to recover it from 
 the owner of the lease for the time being, was in- 
 terfered with by the assignment from the liquida- 
 lors to H., for that this assignment could not take 
 away any right of action Which E.'s executors 
 might have against the persons entitled to the 
 houses at the end of 1882, and that an assignor 
 who pays rent has no lien on the term, and so 
 cannot be prejudiced by its subsequent assign- 
 ment: — Held, further, that the right was not 
 defeated on the ground that H. on paying the 
 rent became entitled to a right of distress from 
 the reversioners, .which he had destroyed by taking 
 an assignment of the Ipases, and had therefore 
 discharged the estate of E. by releasing a remedy 
 to the benefit of which E. as a surety was entitled, 
 for that a right of distress is not a security or 
 remedy to the benefit of which a surety paying 
 rent is entitled under the Mercantile Law Amend- 
 ment Act (19 & 20 Vict. 0. 97), o. 5:— Held, 
 therefore, that H. was entitled to prove against 
 E.'s estate for the rent paid in 1882, on both 
 houses : — Held, also, that he was entitled to prove 
 for the Lady Day rent on D.'s house : — But held, 
 that H. was not entitled to prove for the amount 
 of dilapidations, for that he had sustained no 
 damage by reason of them, inasmuch as he bought 
 the leases from the liquidators at a less price in 
 consequence of the breaches of the covenant to 
 repair ; nor for the Lady Day rent of C.'s house. 
 In re EussBLL. Eussell v. Shoolbbbd 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 264 
 2 B 2 
 
( 743 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 744 ) 
 
 III. LANDLORD AND TENANT— CUSTOM OF 
 COUNTEY. 
 
 1. " Mines and Minsrals "— Whether reser- 
 vation of, includes Flints.'] A farm was let under 
 a -written agreement reserving to the landlord " all 
 mines and minerals, sand, quanics of stone, brick 
 earth and gravel pits." A lociil custom (which, it 
 was suggested, had grown up within the last 30 or 
 40 years) allowed tenants of such farms, let with 
 a similar reservation, to take away the flints that 
 were turned up in the ordinary course of good 
 husbandry and to sell them for their own benefit. 
 If the flints were not turned up and removed such 
 farms could not be properly cultivated : — Held. 
 aiflrmiug the decision of the Court of Appeal, that 
 the custom was reasonable and vulid; and when 
 read into the written agreement was not incon- 
 sistent with the reservation, even assuming (but 
 without deciding) that the reservation of " mines 
 and minerals " included such Hints. Tcokek i'. 
 LiNGEK 21 Ch. D. 18 ; 8 App. Cas. 508 
 
 IV. LANDLOED AND TENANT -DISTRESS. 
 
 The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 61 {Agricultural Solcl- 
 ings Act, 1883), enacts, sect. 44, after the com- 
 mencement of this Act (let January, 1884), it shall 
 not be lawful for any landlord entitled to (lie rent 
 of any holding to which this Act applies, to dis- 
 train for rent, which, becoming due in respect of 
 such holding, mo-re than one yea^ before themahing 
 of such distress, except in the case of arrears of 
 rent in respect of a holding to which this Act 
 a^jjlies, existing at the time of the passing of this 
 Act, which arrears shall be recoveral}le by distress 
 up to the first day of January, 1885, to the same 
 extent as if this Act had not passed. Provided 
 that lohere it appears that, according to the 
 ordinary course of dealing between the landlord 
 and tenant of a holding, tlie payment of the rent 
 of snch holding has been allowed to be deferred 
 until the expiration of a quarter of a year or half 
 a year after the date at which such rent legally 
 became due, then, for the purpose of this section, 
 the rent of such holding shall be deemed to have 
 become due at the expiration of such quarter or 
 half year as aforesaid, as the case may be, and 
 not at the date at which it legally became due. 
 
 Sect. 45. Where live stock belonging to another 
 person has been taken in by the tenant of a holding 
 to which this Act applies, to be fed at a fair price 
 agreed to be paid for such feeding by the oumer of 
 such stock to the tenant, such stock shall not be 
 distrained by the landlord for rent where there is 
 otlier sufficient distress to be found, and if so dis- 
 trained by reason of other sufficient distress not 
 being found, there shall not be recovered by such 
 distress a sum exceeding the amoutit of the price 
 so agreed to be paid for the feeding, or if any part 
 i>f such price has been paid exceeding the amount 
 remaining unpaid, and it shall be lawful for the 
 owner of such stock, at any time before it is sold, 
 to redeem such stock by paying to the distrainer a 
 sum equal to such price as aforesaid, and any pay- 
 ment so made to the distrainer shall be in full dis- 
 charge as against the tenant of any sum of the like 
 amount which would be otherioise due from the 
 owner of the stock to tJie tenant in respect of the 
 price of feeding : Provided always, that so long 
 as any fortion of such live stork shall remain on 
 the said holding the right to distrain su^h portion 
 
 IV. LANDLOED AND TENANT— DI8TEESS— 
 
 continued, 
 shall continue to the full extent of the price 
 originally agreed to be paid for the feeding of the 
 whole of such live stock, or if part of such price 
 has been bond fide paid to the tenant under the 
 agreement, then to the full extent of the price then 
 remaining unpaid. 
 
 Agricultural or other machinery which is the 
 bond fide property of u, person otlier than the 
 tenant, and is on the -premises of the tenant under 
 a bond fide agreement with him for the hire or use 
 tliereof in the conduct of his business, and live 
 stock of all kinds which is the bond fide property 
 of a person other than the tenant, and is on the 
 premises of the tenant solely for breeding purposes, 
 shall not be distrained for rent in arrear. 
 
 Sect. 46. Where any dispute arises — 
 
 (a.) in respect of any distress having been levied 
 contrary to the provisions of this Act ; or 
 
 (b.) OS to the oivnership of any live stock dis- 
 trained, or as to the price to be paid for the 
 feeding of such stock ; or 
 
 (c.) as to any other matter or thing relating to a 
 distress on a holding to which this Act 
 applies : 
 such dispute may be heard and determined by the 
 County Court or by a Court of sumnmry jurisdiC' 
 Hon, and any such County Court or Court of 
 summary jurisdiction may make an order for re- 
 storation of any livestock or things unlawfully dis- 
 trained, or may declare the price agreed to be paid 
 in the case where the price of tlie feeding is required 
 to be ascertained, or may make any other order 
 lohich justice requires; any such dispute as men- 
 tioned in this section shall be deemed tobe a matter 
 in which a Court of summary jurisdiction lias 
 autliority by law to make an order an complaint in 
 pursuance of the Summary Jurisdiction Acts ; but 
 any person aggrieved by any decision of sudi Court 
 of summary jurisdiction under th is section may, on 
 giving such security to the other parly as the Court 
 ■may think just, appeal to a Court of general or 
 quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect. 47. ^Vhere the compensation due under this 
 Act, or under any custom or contract, to a tenant 
 has been ascertained before the landlord distrains 
 for rent due, the amount of such compensation may 
 be set off against the rent due. and the landlord 
 shall not be entitled to distrain for more than tlie 
 balance. 
 
 Sect. 48. An order of the County Court or of a 
 Court of summary jurisdiction under this Act shall- 
 not be quashed for want of form, or be removed by 
 certiorari or otherwise into any superior Court. 
 
 Sect. 49. No person whatsoever making any dis- 
 tress for rent on a holding to which this Act applies 
 when the sum demanded and due shall exceed the 
 sum of £20 for or in respect of such rent shall be 
 entitled to any other or more costs and charges for 
 and in respect of such distress or any matter or 
 thing done therein than such as are fixed and set 
 forth in the Second Schedule hereto. 
 
 Sect. 50. So much of an Act passed in the second 
 year of the reign of their Majeslh's King William 
 the Third and Mary, chapter five, as requires ap- 
 praisement before sale of goods distrained is herAy 
 repealed as respects any holding to which this Act 
 applies, and the landlord or other person levying a 
 distress on such holding may sell the goods and 
 
( 745 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 746 ) 
 
 IV. lANDLORD AND TENANT— DISTEESS— 
 
 eontinued. 
 tkattels distrained without causing them to be pre- 
 viously appraised ; and for the purposes of sale 
 the goods and chattels distrained shall, at the request 
 in icriting of the tenant or owner of such goods and 
 ■chattels, be removed to a public auction room or to 
 some other fit and proper place specified in such 
 request, and be there sold. The costs and expenses 
 attending any such removal, and any damage to the 
 goods and clmttels arising therefrom, shall be borne 
 and paid by the party requesting the removal. 
 
 Sect. 51. The period of five days provided in (lie 
 ^aid Act of William and Mary, chapter five, within 
 which the tenant or owner of goods and chattels 
 distrained may replevy the same slwll, in the case 
 of any distress on a holding to which this Act ap- 
 X>lies, be extended to a period of not more than 
 fifteen days, if the tenant or such owner make a 
 request in writing in that behalf to the landlord or 
 other person levying the distress, and also give secu- 
 rity for any additional costs that may be occa- 
 sioned hy such extension of time. Provided that 
 the landlord or person levying the distress may, at 
 the loi'itten request or with the written consent of 
 tile tenant, or such owner as aforesaid, sell the goods 
 and chattels distrained or part of them at any time 
 before the expiration of such extended period as 
 aforesaid. 
 
 Sect. 52. From and after the commencement of 
 this Act no person sliaU act as a bailiff to levy any 
 distress on any holding to which this Act applies 
 unless he shall be authorized to act as a bailiff by a 
 certificate in writing under the hand of ilie judge 
 of a County Court; and every County Court judge 
 sliall, on or before the 3i.st day of December, 1S83, 
 and oftenvards from time to time as occasion, sliall 
 require, appoint a competent number of fit and 
 proper persons to act as such bailiffs as aforesaid, 
 if any person so appointed shall be proved to the 
 satisfaction of the said judge to have been guilty of 
 any extortion or other misconduct in the execution 
 of his duty as a bailiff, he shall be liable to liave his 
 appointment summarily cancelled by the said 
 judge. 
 
 Sect. 35 applies the Act to Grown lands. 
 
 S'.ct. 36 applies the Act to lands of tlie Duchy of 
 Lancaster. 
 
 Sect. 37 applies the Act to lands of the Duchy of 
 CormvaU. 
 
 Sects. 38-40 designate the persons who are to 
 exercise the powers conferred by the Act in tlie case 
 of ecclesiastical and charity lands. 
 
 By sect. 54 nothing in the Act applies to a hold- 
 ing that is not either wholly agricultural or wliolly 
 pastoral, or in part agricultural and, as to the resi- 
 due pastoral, or in whole or in part cultivated as a 
 market-garden, or to any holding let to the tenant 
 during his continuance in any office, appointment, 
 or employment held under tlie landlord. 
 
 Sect. 60. General saving of rights exercisable by 
 landlord, tenant, or other person under any other 
 Act or law, or under any custom of tlie country, or 
 otherwise. 
 
 Sect. 62 repeals the Agricultural Holdings (Eng- 
 land) Act. 1875 and 1876, saving existing rights 
 and obligations tliereunder. 
 
 Secoxd Schedule. 
 
 Levying distress. Three per centum on any sum 
 
 IV. lANDLOED A7TD TENANT— DISTEESS— 
 
 continued, 
 exceeding £20 and not exceeding £50. Two and a 
 half per centum on any sum exceeding £50. 
 
 To bailiff for levy, £1 Is. 
 
 To man in possession, if boarded, Ss. Gd. per day ; 
 if not boarded, 5s, per day. 
 
 For advertisements tlie sum actually paid. 
 
 To auctioneer. For sale five pounds per centum 
 on the sum realised not exceeding £100, and .four 
 per centum on any additional sum realised not ex- 
 ceeding £100, and on any sum exceeding £,200 three 
 per centum. A fraction of £1 to be in all cases 
 considered £1. 
 
 Seasonable costs and charges where distress is 
 withdrawn or where no sale talees place, and for 
 negotiations between landlord and tenant respecting 
 tlie distress ; such costs and charges in case the 
 parties differ to be taxed by the registrar of tlie 
 County Court of the district in which the distress is 
 made. 
 
 1. . ^ Agistment of Cattle /or "fair price" 
 
 — Payment in hind — Protection from Distress — 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 61, s. 45.] Live stock agisted 
 for a fair equivalent is within 46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 61, b. 45 (tlie Agricultural Holdings Act, 1883), 
 as taken in to be icd at a " fair price," and may, 
 therefore, be exempt from distress; even although 
 such equivalent be not money. — Cows were agisted 
 on the terms " milk for meat," i.e., that the agister 
 should take their milk in exchange for their 
 pasturage : — Held, that the agistment was within 
 the Act. London and Youkshire Bank v. Belton 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 457 
 
 2. Entry — Baising Window partly open.'] 
 
 Entry into a house fur tlie purpose of distraining 
 may lawfully be made by further opening a window 
 which is partly open. Crabteee v. Kobinson 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 312 
 
 3. Fraudulent Eemoval of Goods — 11 Geo. 2, 
 
 0. 19, ss. 4, 5 ; 12 <fc 13 Vict. c. 45, s. 1 ; 42 <fc 43 
 Vict. c. 49, 8. 31, sub-s. 2, s. 32.] An appeal 
 from an order of justices under 11 Geo. 2, c. 19, 
 ss. 4, 5, by a person adjudged guilty of fraudulently 
 removing goods to prevent a distress, is subject to 
 the conditions and regulations prescribed in tlio 
 Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 & 48 Vict, 
 c. 49), s. 31, sub-s. 2, ands. 32, and therefore notice 
 of appeal must be given within seven days after 
 the decision appealed against. Eeg. v. Justices 
 OP Shropshire - - - 6 Q. B. S, 669 
 
 4. Fraudulent Eemoval of Goods — Ter- 
 mination of Tenancy — Possession of Tenant — 
 8 Anne, c. 14, ss. 6, 7—11 Oeo. 2, c. 19, s. 1.] A 
 landlord cannot follow and distrain his tenant's 
 goods which have been fraudulently removed 
 to prevent a distress for rent due, if at the time 
 of the distress the tenant's interest in the de- 
 mised premises has come to an end and he is no 
 longer in possession. — The Plaintitf was tenant to 
 the Defendant of a house. The- Defendant having 
 terminated the tenancy, the Plaintiff removed his 
 goods on the day of its termination, and on the 
 same day gave up possession of the house to the 
 Defendant. One quarter's rent was due on the 
 day when . the tenancy terminated, and as that 
 remained unpaid, within thirty dnys of the re- 
 moval the Defendant followed the Plaintiffs goods 
 
( 747 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 748 ) 
 
 IV. lANDLOED AND TENANT— DISTEESS— 
 
 continued. 
 to the place of removal, and there distrained 
 them. An action having been brought for wrong- 
 ful distress, the jury found that the goods had 
 been fraudulently removed in order to prevent a 
 distress : — Held, that, notwithstanding the finding 
 of the jury, the Plaintiff was entitled to judgment. 
 GiiAY i7. Stait - 11 Q. B. S. 668 
 
 Protection of lodger. 
 
 See Cases under Landloed and Tenakt 
 
 — LODGEB. 
 
 V. lANDLOBD AND TENANT— FIXTUBES. 
 
 By 46 & 47 Vict. c. 61, s. 34, wliere after the 
 commencement of the Act (1st of January, 1884) a 
 tenant affixes to Ms holding any engine, machinery, 
 fencing, or other fixtures, or erects any building for 
 inhich he is not under this Act or otlierioise entitled 
 to compensation, and which is not so affixed or 
 erected in pursuanct of some obligation in that 
 behalf or instead of some fixture or building belong- 
 ing to the landlord, then such fixture or building 
 shall be the property of and be removable by the 
 tenant before or within a reasonable time after the 
 termination of the tenancy. 
 
 Provided as follows : — 
 
 1. Before the removal of any fixture or building 
 
 the tenant shall pay all rent owing by him, 
 and shall perform or satisfy all other his 
 obligations to the landlord in respect to the 
 holding : 
 
 2. In the removal of any fixture or building the 
 
 tenant shall not do any avoidable damage 
 to any other building or other part of the 
 holding : 
 
 3. Immediately after the removal of any fixture 
 
 or building the tenant shall make good all 
 damage occasioned to any other building or 
 other part of the holding by the removal : 
 
 4. The tenant shall not remove any fixture or 
 
 building without giving one month's pre- 
 vious notice in writing to the- landlord of 
 tile intention of the tenant to remove it : 
 ~>. At any time before the expiration of the notice 
 of removal the landlord, by notice in writing 
 given by him to the tenant, may elect to 
 purchase any fixture or building comprised 
 in the notice of removal, and any fixture or 
 building thus elected to be purchased shall 
 be left by the tenant, and shall become the 
 property of the landlord, who shall pay the 
 tenant the fair value thereof to an incoming 
 tenant of the holding; and any difference 
 as to the value shall be settled by a refer- 
 ence under this Act, as in case of compen- 
 sation (but without appeal). 
 Sect. 35 applies the Act to Crown lands. 
 Sect. 36 applies the Act to lands of the Duchy of 
 Lancaster. 
 
 Sect. 37 applies the Act to lands of the Duchy of 
 Cornwall. 
 
 Sects. 38-40 designate the persons who are to 
 I'xercise the powers conferred by the Act with respect 
 to ecclesiastical and charity lands. 
 
 By sect. 54, nothing in the Act applies to a hold- 
 ing that is not either wholly agricultural or wholly 
 pastoral, or in part agricultural and as to the 
 residue pastoral, or in whole or in part cultivated 
 as a marhet-garden, or to any holding let to the 
 
 V. lANDIOED AND TENANT— FIXTUEES— 
 
 continued, 
 tenant during his continuance in any office, ap- 
 pointment, or employment, held under ttie land- 
 lord. 
 
 Sect. 60. General saving of rights exercisable 
 by the landlord, tenant, or other person under any 
 other Act or law, or under any custom of the 
 country, or otherwise. 
 
 Sect. 62 repeals the Agricultural Holdings (Eng- 
 land) Act, 1875 and 1876, saving existing rights 
 and obligations thereunder. 
 
 Uortgage — Lease by Mortgagor after 
 
 Mortgage — Bights of Tenant.^ A mortgagor in. 
 possession of premises let them to a teuant who 
 broxight on to them certain trade fixtures. The 
 mort;iagee subsequently entered and sold the- 
 premiios under the power of sale contained in the- 
 mortgage : — Held, that the fixtures did not pass- 
 under the mortgage, but remained the property 
 of the tenant. Sanders v. Davis 15 Q,. B. D. 218< 
 
 VI. lANDLOED AND TENANT — GEOTTND. 
 GAME. 
 
 1. Agreement for Lease — Ground Game 
 
 Act, 1880(43 & 44 Vict. c. 47.] When at the 
 date of tlie passing of the Ground Game Act, 
 1880, land is in the occupation of a tenant with a. 
 legal interest, as tenant from year to year, ex- 
 piring after the commencement of the Act, but 
 also with an equitable interest under an agree- 
 ment prior to the Act for a lease for fourteen! 
 years to commence from the expiration of the 
 legal interest, and reserving to the landlord the 
 right to the ground game on the land, such right 
 in the landlord as against the tenant is preserved 
 by the proviaions of the saving clause of the Act 
 (sect. 5) : the phrase " is vested " not being con- 
 fined to an actual legal vesting under a lease in 
 possession, but including an equitable vesting ot 
 the right under an agreement for a lease, contract 
 of tenancy, or other contract bona fide made for 
 valuable consideration. Allhusen v. Brooking 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 559> 
 
 VII. lANDLOED AND TENANT — IMPSOVE- 
 UENTS. 
 
 17(6 Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 61 (the Agricultural 
 Holdings (England) Act, 1883), enacts, sect. 1 l 
 Subject as in this Act mentioned, where a tenant 
 has made on his holding any improvement com- 
 prised in the first Schedule hereto, he shall, on and 
 after the commencement of this Act, be entitled on 
 quitting his holding at the determination of a 
 tenancy to obtain from the landlord as compensa- 
 tion under this Act for such improvement stichsum 
 as fairly represents the value of the improvement 
 to an incoming tenant : Provided ahcays, that in 
 estimating the valtte of any improvement in the first 
 Schedule hereto, there shall not be taken into 
 account as part of tlte improvement made by the 
 tenant what is justly due to the inherent capabilities 
 of the soil. 
 
 As to Improvements before the Aot.] Sect. 2. 
 Compensation under this Act shall not be payable 
 in respect of improvements executed before the com- 
 mencement of this Act, with the exceptions following,, 
 that— 
 
 (1.) Where a tenant has within ten years before 
 the commencement of this Act made am 
 
( ™ ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 750 ) 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPEOVE- 
 VCESTa—eontimied. 
 
 improvement mentioned in the third part 
 of the first Schedule hereto, and lie is not 
 entitled under any contract, or custom,' or 
 under the A gricultural IIolding»(^England) 
 Act, 1875, to compensation in respect of 
 such improrvement ; or 
 (2.) Where a tenant has executed an improve- 
 ment mentioned in the first or second part 
 of the said first Schedule within ten years 
 previous to the commencement of this Act, 
 and he is not entitled under any contract, 
 or custom, or under the Agricultural Mold- 
 ings (^England) Act, 1875, to compensation 
 in respect of such improvement, and the 
 landlord within one year after the com- 
 mencement of this Act declares in writing 
 his consent to the malung of such improve- 
 m,ent, tlien such tenant on quitting his hold- 
 ing at the determination of a tenancy after 
 the commencement of this Act may claim 
 compensation under this Act in respect of 
 such improvement in the same manner as 
 if this Act had been in force at the time of 
 tlie execution of such improvement. 
 As to ImproTements after tbe Act.] Sect. 3. 
 Compensation under this Aet shall not be payable 
 in reaped of any improvement mentioned in the 
 first part of the First Schedule liereto, and executed 
 after the commencement of this Act, unless thie land- 
 lord, or his agent duly authorized in that behalf, 
 has, previously to the execution of the improvement 
 and after the passing of this Act, consented in 
 writing to tlie making of such improvement, and 
 any such consent may be given by the landlord 
 tmconditionally, or upon such terms as to compen- 
 sation, or otherwise, as may be agreed upon between 
 the landlord and the tenant, and in the event of any 
 agreement being made between the landlord and 
 the tenant, any compensation ■ payable thereunder 
 shall be deemed to be substituted for compensation 
 under this Act, 
 
 - Sect. i. Compensation under this Act shall not 
 be payable in respect of any improvement men- 
 tioned in the second part of the First Schedule 
 hereto, and executed after the commencement of 
 this Act, unless the tenant has, not more than three 
 months and not less than two months before begin- 
 ning to execute such improvement, given to the 
 lamdlord, or his agent duly authorized in that 
 behalf, notice in writing of his intention so to do, 
 a/nd of the manner in which he proposes to do the 
 intended work, and upon such notice being given, 
 the landlord and tenant may agree on the terms as 
 to ■compensation or otherwise on which the improve- 
 ment is to be executed, and in the event of any such 
 ■agreement being made, any compensation payable 
 thereunder shall be deemed to be substituted for 
 compensation umder this Act, or the landlord may, 
 unless the notice of the tenant is previously with- 
 drawn, undertake to execute the improvement him- 
 self, and may execute the same in any reasonable 
 and proper manner which he thinks fit, and charge 
 the tenant with a sum not exceeding £5 per centum 
 per annum on the outlay incurred in executing the 
 improvement, or not exceeding such animal sum 
 payable for a period of twenty-five years as will 
 repay such outlay in the said period, with interest 
 at the rate of three per centum per annum, such 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPBOVE- 
 
 UENTS — continued, 
 annual sum to be recoverable as rent. In default 
 of any such agreement or undertaking, and also in 
 the event of the landlord failing to comply with his 
 undertaking within a reasonable time, the tenant 
 may execute the improvement himself, and shall in 
 respect thereof be entitled to compensation under 
 this Act. 
 
 The landlord and tenant may, if they think' fit, 
 disperse with any notice under this section, and 
 come to an agreement in a lease or otherwise between 
 themselves in the same manner and of the same 
 validity as if sUch notice had been given. 
 
 Sect. 5. Where, in the case of a tenancy under a 
 contract of tenancy current at the commencement 
 of this Act, any agreement in writing Or custom, or 
 the Agricultural Holdings (England) Act, 1875, 
 provides specific compensation for any improvement 
 comprised in the First Schedule hereto, compensa- 
 tion in respect of such improvement, • although 
 executed after the commencement of this Act, shall 
 be payable in pursuance of such agreement, custom, 
 or Act of Parliament, and shall be deemed to be 
 substituted for compensation under this Act. 
 
 Where in the case of a tenancy u/nder a contract 
 of tenancy beginning after the commencement of 
 this Act, any particular agreement in writing 
 secures to the tenant for any improvement mentioned 
 in the third part of the First Schedule hereto, and 
 executed after the commencement of this Act, fair 
 and reasonable compensation, having regard to the 
 circumstances existing at tlie time of making' such 
 agreement, then in such case the compensation in, 
 respect of such improvement shall be payable in 
 pursuance of the particular agreement, and shall be 
 deemed to be substituted for compensation under 
 this Act. 
 
 The last preceding provision of this section re- 
 lating to a particular agreement shall apply in the 
 case of a tenancy under a contract of tenaricy 
 current at the commencement of this Act in respect 
 of an improvement mentioned in the third part of 
 the first Schedule hereto, specific compensation for 
 which is not provided by any agreement in writ- 
 ing, or custom, or the Agricultural Holdings Act, 
 1875. 
 
 Kegulations as to Compensation for Improve- 
 ments.] Sect. 6. In the ascertainment of the 
 amount of the compensation under this Act payable 
 to the tenant in respect of any improvement there 
 shall be taken into account in reduction thereof: 
 (a.) Any benefit which the landlord has given or 
 allowed to the tenant in consideration of 
 the tenant executing the improvement ; and 
 (b.) In thecasepf compensation for manures, the 
 valve of the manure that ivould have been 
 produced by the consumption on the hold- 
 ing of any hay, straw,roots, or green crops 
 sold off or rerhoved from the holding within 
 the last two years of tenancy, or other 
 less time for which the tenancy has endured, 
 except as far as a proper return of manure 
 to the holding has been made in respect of 
 such produee so sold off or removed there- 
 from ; and ' 
 (c.) Any sums due to the landlord in respect of 
 rent, or in respect of any waste committed 
 or permitted by the tenant, or in respect of 
 any breach of covenant or other agreement 
 
( 751 ) 
 
 .DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 752 ) 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPEOTE- 
 WEHTS— continued. 
 
 connected with the contract of tenancy com- 
 mitted by the tenant, also any taxes, rates, 
 and like rent-charges due or becoming due 
 in respect of the holding to which the tenant 
 is liable as between him and the landlord, 
 There shall be taken into account in augmentation 
 of the tenant's compensation : — 
 
 (d.) Any sum due to the tenant for compensation 
 in respect of a breach of covenant or other 
 agreement connected with a contract of 
 tenancy and committed by the landlord. 
 Nothing in this section shall enable a landlord 
 to obtain under this Act compensation in respect of 
 waste by tlie tenant, or of breach by the tenant, com- 
 mitted or permitted in relation to a matter of 
 husbandry more than four years before the deter- 
 mination of the tenancy. 
 
 Procedure.] Sect. 7. A tenant claiming com- 
 pensation under this Act shall, two months at least 
 before the determination of the tenancy, give notice 
 in writing to the landlord of his intention to make 
 such claim. 
 
 Where a tenant gives such notice, the landlord 
 may, before the determination of the tenancy, or 
 icithin fourteen days thereafter, give a counter- 
 notice in writing to the tenant of his intention to 
 make a claim in respect of any waste or any breach 
 of covenant or other agreement. 
 
 Every such notice and counter-notice shall state, 
 as far as reasonably may be, the particulars and 
 amount of the attended' claim. 
 
 Sect. 8. 'file landlord and the tenant may agree 
 on the amount and mode and lime of payment of 
 compensation to be paid under this Act. 
 
 If in any case tliey do not so agree the difference 
 shall be settled by a reference. 
 
 Sect. 9. Where there is a reference under this 
 Act, a referee, or two referees and an umpire, shall 
 be appointed as follows : — 
 
 (1.) Jfilie parties concur, there may be a single 
 
 referee appointed by them jointly : 
 (2.) If before award the single referee dies or 
 becomes incapable of acting, or for seven 
 days after notice from the parties, or either 
 of them, requiring him to act, fails to act, 
 tjie proceedings shall begin afresh, as if no 
 referee had been appointed : 
 (3.) If the parties do not concur in the appoint- 
 ment of a single referee, each of them shall 
 appoint a referee : 
 (4.) If before award one of two referees dies or 
 becomes' incapable of acting, or for seven 
 days after notice from either party re- 
 quiring him to act, fails to act, the party 
 appointing him sliall appoint another 
 referee : 
 (5.) Notice of every appointment of a referee by 
 either party shall be given to the other 
 party : 
 (6.) If for fourteen days after notice by one party 
 to the other to appoint a referee, or another 
 referee, the other parly fails to do so, tlien, 
 on the application of the party giving notice, 
 the County Court shall within fourteen 
 days appoint a competent and impartial 
 person to be a referee : 
 (7.) Where two referees are appointed, then 
 (subject to the provisions of this Act) they 
 
 VII. LANDLOBD AND TENANT— IMPEOVE- 
 
 tlLESTa— continued. 
 
 shall, before they enter on the reference, 
 appoint an umpire : 
 (8.) If before award an umpire dies or becomes 
 incapable of acting, the referee shatt ap- 
 point another umpire : 
 (9.) if for seven days after request from either 
 party the referees fail to appoint an 
 umpire, or another umpiie, them,, on the 
 application of either party, the County 
 Court shall within fourteen days appoint 
 a competent and impartial person to be 
 the umpire : 
 (10.) Everif appointment, notice, and request 
 under this section sliall be in writing. 
 Sect. 10. Provided that, wliere two referees are 
 appointed, an umpire may be appointed as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 {I.) If either party, on appointing a referee, 
 requires, by notice in writing to tlie other, 
 that the umpire shall be appointed by the 
 Land Commissioners for England, then the 
 umpire, and any successor to him, shall be 
 appointed, on the application of either 
 party, by those Commissioners. 
 (2.) In every other case, if either party on ap- 
 pointing a referee requires, by notice in 
 writing to the other, that the umpire shall 
 be appointed by the County Court, then, 
 unless the other party dissents by notice in 
 writing therefrom, the umpire, and any 
 successor to Mm, shall on the application 
 of either party be so appointed, and in case 
 of such dissent the umpire, and any suc- 
 cessor to him, shall be appointed, on the 
 application of either party, by the Land 
 Commissioners for England. 
 Sect. 11. The powers of the County Court under 
 this Act relative to the appointment of a referee or 
 umpire shall be exercisable by the judge of the 
 Court having jurisdiction whether he is without or 
 within his district, and may, by consent of tlie 
 parties, be exercised by the registrar of the Court. 
 Sect. 12. The delivery to a referee of his appoint- 
 ment shall be deemed a submission to a reference by 
 the party delivering it ; and neither party shall 
 have power to revoke a submission, or the appoint- 
 ment of a referee, without the consent of the other. 
 Sect. 13. The referee or referees or umpire may 
 call for the production of any sample, or voucher, 
 or other document, or other evidence which is in the 
 possession or power of either party, or which either 
 party can produce, and which to the referee or 
 referees or umpire seems necessary for determina- 
 tion of tlie matters referred, and may take the 
 examination of the parlies and witnesses on oath, 
 and may administer oaths and take affirmations ; 
 and if any person so sworn or affirming wilfully 
 and corruptly gives false evidence he sliall be guilty 
 of perjury. 
 
 Sect. 14. The referee or referees or umpire may 
 proceed in the absence of either party whei'e the 
 same appears to him or them expedient, after notice 
 given to the parties. 
 
 Sect. 15. The award shall be in writing, signed 
 by the referee or referees or umpire. 
 
 Sect. 16. A single referee shall make his award 
 ready for delivery within twenty-eight days after 
 his appointment. 
 
( 753 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 754 ) 
 
 Vn. LANDLORD AND TENANT— IMPBOVE- 
 
 WSflTS— continued. 
 
 Two referees sliall malie their award ready for 
 delivery within twenty-eight days after the appoint- 
 ment of the last appointed of them, or within such 
 extended time (if any) as they from time to time 
 Jointly fix hy writing under their hands, so tJiat 
 they make their award ready for delivery within a 
 tims not exceeding in the whole forty-nine days 
 after the appointment of the last appointed of 
 them. 
 
 Sect. 17. In any ease provided for hy sects. 3, i, 
 •or 5, )/ compensation is claimed under this Act, 
 such compensation as under any of those sections is 
 to he deemed to be substituted for compensation 
 under this Act, if and so far as the same can, con- 
 «istently with the terms of the agreement, if any, be 
 ascertained hy tlie referees or the umpire, shall be 
 awarded in respect of any improvements thereby 
 provided for, and the award shall, wlien necessary, 
 distinguish such improvements and the amount 
 awarded in respect thereof; and an award given 
 under this section shall he subject to the appeal pro- 
 mded hy this Act. 
 
 Sect. 18. Where two referees are appointed and 
 act, if they fail to maJie their award ready for 
 delivery within the time aforesaid, then, on the 
 expiration of that time, their authority shall cease, 
 and thereupon the matters referred to titem shall 
 ■stand referred to the umpire. 
 
 The umpire shall make his award ready for deli- 
 very within twenty-eight days after notice in writing 
 given to him hy either party or referee of the refer- 
 ence to him, or within such extended time (if any) 
 as the registrar of the County Court from time to 
 time appoints, on the application of the umpire or 
 of either party, made before the expiration of the 
 time appointed by or extended under this section. 
 
 Sect. 19. Tlie award shall not aivard a sum 
 generally for compensation, but shall, so far as 
 possible, specify — 
 
 (a.) Tlie several improvements, acts, and things 
 in respect whereof compensation is awarded, 
 and tlie several matters and things taken 
 into account under the provisions of this 
 Act in reduction or augmentation of such 
 compensation ; 
 (h.) The time at which each improvement, act, 
 or thing was executed, done, committed, or 
 permitted ; 
 (c.) The sum awarded in respect of each im- 
 provement, act, matter, and thing ; and 
 (d.) Where the landlord desires to charge his 
 estate with the amount of compensation 
 found due to the tenant, tlie time at which, 
 for the purposes of such charge, each im- 
 provement, act, or thing, in respect of 
 which compensation is awarded is to be 
 deemed to be exhausted. 
 Sect 20. The costs of and attending the reference, 
 including the remuneration of the referee or re- 
 ferees, and umpire, where the umpire has been 
 required to act, and including other proper expenses, 
 ihallbe borne and paid hy the parties in such pro- 
 portion as to the referee or referees or umpire 
 appears just, regard being had to the reasonableness 
 or unreasonableness of the claim of either party in 
 respect of amount, or otherwise, and to all the 
 circumstances of the case. 
 
 Tlie award may direct tlie payment of the whole 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPBOVE - 
 
 MENTS — continued. 
 or any part of the costs aforesaid hy the one party 
 to the other, 
 
 Tlie costs aforesaid shall be subject to taxation hy 
 the registrar of the County Court, on the application 
 of either party, hut that taxation shall be stibject to 
 review hy thejtidge of the County Court. 
 
 Sect. 21. The award shall fix a day, not sooner 
 than one month after tlie delivery of the award, for 
 the payment of money awarded for compensation, 
 costs, or otherwise. 
 
 Sect. 22. A submission or award shall not be 
 made a rule of any Court, or be removable by any 
 process into any Court, and an award shall not be 
 questioned otherwise than as provided by this Act. 
 
 Sect. 23. Where the sum claimed for compensa- 
 tion exceeds £10, either party may, within seven 
 days after delivery of the award, appeal against if 
 to the judge of the County Court on all or any of 
 the following grounds : — 
 
 1. Tliat tlie award is invalid ; 
 
 2. That the award proceeds wltolly or in part 
 
 upon an improper application of or upon 
 tlie omission properly to apply the special 
 provisions of sects. 3, 4, or 5, of this Act ; 
 
 3. That compensation has been awarded for 
 
 improvements, acts, or things, breaches of 
 covenants or agreements, or for committing 
 or permitting waste, in respect of which the 
 party claiming was not entitled to compen- 
 sation ; 
 
 4. That compensation has not been awarded for 
 
 improvements, acts, or things, breaches of 
 covenants or agreements, or for committing 
 or permitting waste, in respect of which the 
 party claiming was entitled to compensa- 
 tion ; 
 and the judge shall hear and determine the appeal, 
 and may, in his discretion, remit the case to be re- 
 heard as to the whole or any part thereof by the 
 referee or referees or umpire, with such directions 
 as he may think fit. 
 
 If no appeal is so brought, the award shall be 
 final. 
 
 The decision of the judge of the County Court on 
 appeal shall he final, save that the judge shall, at 
 the request of either party, state a special case on a 
 question of law for the judgment of the High Court 
 of Justice, and the decision of the High Court on 
 the case, and respecting costs and any otlier matter 
 connected therewith, shall he final, and the judge of 
 the County Court shall act thereon. 
 
 Sect. 24. Where any money agreed or awarded 
 or ordered on appeal to be paid for compensation, 
 costs, or otherwise, is not paid within fourteen days 
 after the time when it is agreed or awarded or 
 ordered to be paid, it shall he recoverable, upon 
 order made hy the judge of the County Court, as 
 money orderedby a County Court under its ordinary 
 jurisdiction to he paid is recoverable. 
 
 Sect. 25. Where a landlord or tenant is an infant 
 without a guardian, or is of unsound mind, not so 
 found by inquisition, the County Court, on the ap- 
 plication of any person interested, may appoint a 
 guardian of the infant or person of unsound mind 
 for the purposes of this Act, and may change the 
 guardian if and as occasion requires. 
 
 Sect. 26. Where the appointment of a person 
 to act as the next friend of a married woman is 
 
755 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 750 ) 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPSOVE- 
 MENTS— conMnued. 
 
 required/or the purposes of tins Act, the County Court 
 may make such appointment, and may remove or 
 change that next friend if and as occasion requires. 
 
 A woman married before the commencement of 
 the Married Women's Property Act, 1882, entitled, 
 for Iter separate use to land, her title to which 
 accrued before such commencement as aforesaid, 
 and not restrained from anticipation, shall, for the 
 purposes of this Act, he in respect of land us if she 
 ivas unmarried. 
 
 Where any other woman married before the com- 
 mencement of the Married Wotnen's Property Act, 
 1882, is desirous of doing any act under this Act 
 in respect of land, her title to which accrued before 
 such commencement as aforesaid, her husband's 
 concurrence shall be requisite, and she shall be ex- 
 amined apart from him by the County Court, or by 
 the judge of the County Court for the place where 
 she for the time being is, touching her hnoioledge of 
 tlte nature and effect of the intended act, and it 
 shall be ascertained that she is acting freely and 
 vohmtarily. 
 
 Sect. 27. 27ie costs of proceedings in the County 
 Court under this Act sluxll be in the discretion of 
 the Court. 
 
 The Lord Chancellor may from tiine to time pre- 
 scribe a scale of costs for those proceedings, and of 
 costs to be taxed by the registrar of the Court. 
 
 Sect. 28. Any notice, request, demand, or other 
 instrument under this Act may be served on the 
 person to ibliom it is to be given, either personally 
 or by leaving it for him at his last known place of 
 abode in England, or by sending iPthrough the post 
 in a registered letter addressed to him there ; and 
 if so sent by post it shall be deemed to have been 
 served at the time when the letter containing it 
 toould be delivered in ordinary course ; and in 
 order to prove service by letter it shall be sufficient 
 to prove that the letter was properly addressed and 
 posted, and that it contained the notice, request, 
 demand, or other instrument to be served. 
 
 Charge of Tenant's Compensation.] Sect. 29. 
 A landlord, on paying to the. tenant the amount due 
 to him in respect of compensation under this Act, or 
 in respect of compensation authorized by this Act to 
 be substituted for compensation under this Act, or 
 on expending such amount as may be necessary to 
 execute an improvement under the second part of 
 the First Schedule hereto, after notice given by the 
 tenant of his intention to execute such improvement 
 in accordance with this Act, shall be entitled to 
 obtain from the County Court a. charge on the hold- 
 ing, or any part thereof, to the amount of the sum 
 so paid or expended. 
 
 The Court shall, on proof of the payment or ex- 
 penditure, and on being satisfied of the observance 
 in good faith by the parties of ttie conditions im- 
 posed by this Act, make an order charging the 
 liolding, or any part thereof, with repayment of the 
 amount paid or expended, with such interest, and 
 by such instalments, and with sjich directions for 
 giving effect to the charge, as the Court thinks 
 fit. 
 
 But, where the landlord obtaining the charge is 
 not absolute owner of the holding for his own benefit, 
 no instalment or interest shall he made payable after 
 the time when the improvement in respect whereof 
 compensation is paid will, whe^r an airnrd has 
 
 VIL LANDLORD AND TENANT— IMPEOVE- 
 MENTS — con tinned. 
 
 been made, be talusn to have been exhausted accord- 
 ing to the declaration of the award, and in any 
 other ease after the time when any such improve- 
 ment will in the opinion of the Court, after hearing 
 such evidence (if any) an it thinks expedient, have 
 become exhausted. 
 
 TJie instalments and interest shall be charged in 
 favour of the landlord, his executors, administators,. 
 and assigns. 
 
 The estate or interest of any landlord holding' 
 for an estate or interest determinable or liable to^ 
 forfeiture by reason of his creating or suffering any 
 cliarge thereon shall not be determined or forfeited 
 by reason of his obtaining a charge under this Act, 
 anything in any deed, will, or other instrument to- 
 the contrary thereof notwithstanding. 
 
 Capital money arising under the Settled Land 
 Act, 1882, may be applied in payment of any 
 moneys expended and costs incurred by a landlord 
 under or in pursuance of this Act in or about tlie 
 execution ot any improvement mentioned in the first 
 or second parts of the schedule hereto, as for an 
 improvement authorized by the said Settled Land 
 Act ; and such money may also be applied in dis~ 
 charge of any charge created on a holding under- 
 or in pursuance of this Act in respect of any such 
 improvement as aforesaid, as in disclmrge of airv 
 incumbrance aidhorized by the said Settled Land. 
 Act to be discharged out of such capital money. 
 
 Sect. 30. The sum charged by the order of a. 
 County Court under this Act shall be a charge on the 
 holding, or the part thereof charged, for the land- 
 lord's interest tiierein, and for all interests therein 
 subsequent to that of the landlord ; but so that the 
 charge shall not extend beyond the interest of the 
 landlord, his executors, administrators,and assignSr 
 in the tenancy where the landlord is himself a, 
 tenant of the holding. 
 
 Sect 31. Where the landlord is a person entitled 
 to receive the rents and profits of any holding as 
 trustee, or in any character otherwise than for his^ 
 own benefit, the amount due from such landlord in 
 respect of compensation under this Act, or in 
 respect of compensation authorized by this Act to^ 
 be substituted for compensation under this Act,, 
 shall be charged and recovered as follows and not 
 otherwise ; (that is to say,) 
 
 (1.) The amount so due shall not be recoverable 
 personally against such landlord, nor shalt 
 he he under any liability to pay such 
 amount, but the same shall he a charge on 
 and recoverable against the holding only. 
 (2.) Such landlord shall, either before or after 
 hamng paid to the teriant the amount due 
 to him, ke entitled to obtain from the County 
 Court a charge on the holding to the amount 
 of the sum required to be paid or which 
 has been paid, as the case may he, to the 
 tenant. 
 (3.) If such landlord neglect or fail within one 
 month after the tenant has quitted his hold- 
 ing to pay to lite tenant the amount due tO' 
 him, then after the expiration of such one 
 month the tenant sluxll be entitled to obtain 
 from the County Court in favour of himself,, 
 his executors, administrators, and assigns,, 
 a charge on the holding to the amount of 
 the sum due to him, and of all costs pro-. 
 
( 'oT' ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 758 ) 
 
 VII. LANDLOBD AND TENANT — IMPEOVE- 
 ME^TA—coittinued. 
 
 perly incurred by him in obtaining the 
 clMrge or in raising the amount due there- 
 under. 
 
 (4.) The Court shall on proof of the tenant's title 
 to have a charge made in his favout, make 
 an order charging the holding with pay- 
 ment of the amount of the charge, including 
 costs, in like manner and fonn as in case 
 of a charge which a landlord is entitled to 
 obtain. 
 
 Sect. 32. Any company now or hereafter incor- 
 porated by Parliament, and having power to 
 advance mtmey for the improvement of land, may 
 take an assignment of any charge m.ade by a 
 County' Court under the provisions of this Act, upon 
 such terms and condition^ as may be agreed upcm 
 between such company and the person entitled to 
 such charge, and such company may assign any 
 charge so acquired by them to any person or per- 
 sons wlMmsoever. 
 
 Ecclesiastical and Charity Lands.] Sect. 38. 
 Where lands are assigned or secured as the endow- 
 ment of a see, the powers by this Act conferred on a 
 landlord shall not be exercised by the archbishop or 
 biahop, in respect of those lands, except with the 
 previous approval in writing of the Estates Com- 
 mittee of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners fw 
 England. 
 
 Sect. 39. Where a landlord is incumbent of an 
 ecclesiastical benefice, the powers by 'this Act con- 
 ferred on: a landlord shall not be exercised by him 
 in respect of the glebe land or other land belonging 
 to the benefice, except \oith the previous approval in 
 writing of the patron of the benefice, that is, the 
 person, officer, or authority, who, in case the benefice 
 were vacant, would be entitled to present thereto, or 
 of the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty (that is, 
 the Governors of the Bounty of Queen Anne for tlie 
 A ugrrientation Of the Maintenance of the Foor 
 Clergy). 
 
 In every such case the Governors of Queen 
 Anne's Bounty may, if they think fit, on behalf of 
 the incumbent, out of any money in their hands, 
 pay to the tenant the amount of compensation due 
 to him under this Act ; and thereupon they may, 
 instead of thg incumbent, obtain from the County 
 Court a charge on the holding, in respect thereof, in 
 favonr of themselves. 
 
 Every such charge shall be effectual notwith- 
 standing any change of the incumbent. 
 
 Sect. 40. The powers by this Act ionf erred on a 
 landlord in reipect of charging the land shall not 
 be exercised by trustees for ecclesiastical or charit- 
 able purposes, except with the previous approval in 
 writing of the Charity Commissioners for England 
 and Wales. 
 
 Kesvimption for Improvements and Miscella- 
 neous.] Sect. 41. Where on a tenancy from, year 
 ■ to year a notice to quit is given bij the landlord 
 with a view to the use of land for any of the follow- 
 ing purposes : — 
 
 The erection of farm labourers' cottages or other 
 houses, with or without gardens ; 
 
 The providing of gardens for existing farm 
 labourers' cottages or other houses ; 
 
 The allotment for labourers of land for gardens 
 or other purposes ; 
 
 Hie planting of trees; 
 
 VII. lANDLOED AND TENANT— IMFEOVE- 
 
 MENXS— con tinned . 
 
 The opening or working of any ioal, ironstone, 
 limestone, or other mineral, or of a stone- 
 quarry, clay, sand, or gravel pit, or the cent- 
 struetion of any works or buildings to be used 
 in connection therewith 
 
 The obtaining of brick earth, gravel, or sand ; 
 
 The making of a watercourse or reservoir ; 
 
 The making of any road, railway, tramroad, 
 siding, canal, or basin, or any wharf , pier, or 
 other work connected therewith : 
 and the notice to quit so states, then it shall, by- 
 virtue of this Act, be no objection to the notice that 
 it relates to part only of the holding. 
 
 In every such case the )irovisions of this Act re- 
 specting compensation shall hpply as on deter- 
 mination of a tenancy in respect of an entire hold- ' 
 ing. 
 
 The tenant shall also be entitled to a propor- 
 tionate reduction of rent in respect of the land 
 comprised in the notice to quit, and in respect of 
 any depreciation of the value to him of the residue 
 of the holding, caused by the withdraieal of that 
 land from the holding or by the Mse to be made 
 thereof, and the amount of that reduction shall be 
 ascertained by agreement or settled by a reference 
 under this Act, as in case of compensation (but- 
 without appeal). 
 
 The tenant shall further be entitled, at any timer 
 within twenty-eight days after sendee of the notice 
 to quit, to serve on the landlord a notice in writing- 
 to the effect that he (the tenant) accepts the same a»- 
 a notice to quit the entire holding, to take effect at 
 the expiration of the then current year of tenancy ; 
 and the notice to quit shall have effect acoordingly. 
 
 Sect. 42. Subject to the provisions of this Act in- 
 relation to Crown, duchy, ecclesiastical, and charity 
 lands, a landlord, whatever may be his estate or 
 interest in his holding, may give any consent, rhaker 
 any agreement, or do or have done to him any act 
 in relation to improvements in respect of which 
 compensation is payable under this Act which he 
 might give or make or do or have done to him if he 
 were in the case of an estate of inheritance owner- 
 thereof in fee, and in tlie case of a leasehold pos- 
 sessed of the whole estate in the leasehold. 
 
 Sect. 43. When, by any Act of Parliament, deed,, 
 or other instrument, a lease of a holding is autho- 
 rized to be made, provided tliat the best rent m- 
 reservation in the nature of rent, is by such lease 
 reserved, then, whenever any lease of a holding is,, 
 under such authority, made to the tenant of the 
 same, it shall not be necessary, in estimating such 
 rent or reservation, to take into account against the 
 tenant the increase (if any) in thi value of such 
 holding arising from any improvements made or 
 paid for by him on such holding. 
 
 General Provisions.] Sect. 5.3. The Act comes- 
 inlo force on the 1st day of January, 1884. 
 
 Sect. 54. Nothing in this Act shall apply to a 
 holding that is not either wholly agricultural or 
 wholly pastoral, or in part agricultural, and as to- 
 the residue pastoral, or in ivhole or in part culti- 
 vated as a market-garden, or to any holding let to 
 the tenant during his continuance in any office,, 
 appointment, or employment held under the land- 
 lord. 
 
 Sect. 55. Any contract, agreement, or covenant 
 made by a tenant, by virtue of which he is deprived^ 
 
( 759 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 760 ) 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPROVE- 
 MENTS — continued, 
 cf his rigid to claim compensation under this Act 
 in respect of any improvement mentioned in the 
 Jirst Schedule hereto {except an agreement providing 
 such compensation as is hy this Act permitted to he 
 substituted for compensation under this Act) shall, 
 30 far as it deprives him of such right, he void, 
 both at law and in equity. 
 
 Sect. 56. Wliere an incoming tenant has, with 
 the consent in writing of his landlord, paid to an 
 outgoing tenant any compensation payable under 
 or in pursuance of this Act in respect of the whole 
 or part of any improvement, such incoming tenant 
 sliall be entitled in quitting the holding to claim 
 /compensation in respect of such improvement or 
 part in like manner, if at all, as the outgoing 
 ienant would have been entitled if he had remained 
 tenant of the holding, and quitted the holding at 
 the time at which the incoming tenant quits the 
 same. 
 
 Sect. Sri. A tenant shall not be entitled to claim 
 compensation by custom or otlierwise than in man- 
 ner authorized by this Act in respect of any im- 
 provement for which lie is entitled to compensation 
 (under or in pursuance of this Act, but where he is 
 not entitled to compensation under or in pursuance 
 of this Act he rnay recover compensation under any 
 other Act of Parliameiit, or any agreement or 
 custom, in the same manner as if this Act had not 
 
 Sect. 58. A tenant who has remained in his 
 holding during a change or changes of tenancy 
 ^hall not thereafter on quitting his holding at the 
 determination of a tenancy be deprived, of his right 
 to claim compensation in respect of improvements 
 hy reason only that such improvements were made 
 during a former tenancy or tenancies, and not 
 during the tenancy at the determination of which 
 he is quitting. 
 
 Sect. 59. Subject as in the section mentioned, a 
 tenant shall iwt be entitled to compensation in re- 
 spect of any improvements, other than manures as 
 defined by this Act, begun by him, if he holds from 
 year to year, within one year before he quits his 
 holding, or at any time after he has given or re- 
 ceived final notice to quit, and, if lie holds ae a 
 lessee, loithin one year before the expiration of his 
 lease. 
 
 A final notice to quit means a notice to quit 
 which has not been waived or ivithdrawn, but has 
 resulted in the tenant quitting his holding. 
 
 The foregoing provisions of this section shall not 
 apply in the case of any such improvement as afore- 
 said — 
 
 (1.) Wliere a tenant from year to year has begun 
 such improvement during the last year of 
 his tenancy, and in pursuance of a notice 
 to quit thereafter given hy tlie landlord, 
 has quitted his holding at the expiration of 
 that year ; and 
 (2.) Where a tenant, whether a tenant from year 
 to year or a lessee, previously to beginning 
 any such improvement, has served notice on 
 his landlord of his intention to begin the 
 same, and the landlord has either assented 
 or has failed for a month after tlie receipt 
 of the notice to object to the malting of the 
 improvement. 
 Sect. 60. Except as in this Act expressed, nothing 
 
 VII. LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPROVE- 
 MENTS — continued, 
 in this Act shaU take away, abridge or prejudicially 
 affect any power, right, or remedy of a landlord, 
 tenant or other person vested in or exercisable by 
 him by virtue of any other Act or law, or under any 
 custom of the country, or otherwise, in respect of a 
 contract of tenancy or other contract, or of any im- 
 provements, waste, emblements, tillages, away-going 
 crops, fixtures, tax rate, tithe, rent-charge, rent or 
 other thing. 
 
 Sect. 61. Definitions; amongst others — ■ 
 
 " Contract of tenancy " means a letting of or 
 agreement for the letting land for a term of years, 
 or for lives, or for lives and years, or from year to 
 year ; 
 
 A tenancy from year to year under a contract of 
 tenancy current at the commencement of tlie Act 
 sliallfor the purposes of this Act be deemed to con- 
 tinue to he a tenancy under a contract of tenancy 
 current at tlie commencement of this Act until the 
 first day on which either the landlord or tenant of 
 such tenancy could, the one by giving notice to the 
 other immediately after tlie commencement of this 
 Act, cause such tenancy to determine, and on and 
 after such day as aforesaid shall he deemed to he a 
 tenancy under a contract of tenancy beginning after 
 the commencement of this Act ; 
 
 " Landlord " in relation to a holding means any 
 person for tlie time being entitled to receive the rents 
 and profits of any holding ; 
 
 " Tenant " includes the executors, administrators, 
 assigns, legatee, devisee, or next of Idn, husband, 
 guardian, committee of tlie estate or trustees in 
 bankruptcy of a tenant, or any person deriving 
 title from, a tenant ; and the right to receive com- 
 pensation in respect of any improvement made hy 
 a tenant shall enure to tlie benefit of such executors, 
 administrators, assigns, and other persons as afore- 
 said ; 
 
 " Person" includes a body of persons and a cor- 
 poration aggregate or sole ; 
 
 " Manures " mean any of tlie improvements 
 numbered 22 and 23 in tlie third part of the First 
 Schedule hereto ; 
 
 Tlie designatio)is of landlord and tenant shall 
 continue to apply to tlie parties until the conclusion 
 of any proceedings talten under or in pursuance of 
 this Act in respect of compensation for improve- 
 ments or under any agreement made in pursuance 
 of this A ct. 
 
 Sects. 62 repeals the Agricultural Holdings 
 (England) Act, 1875, and the Agricultural Hold- 
 ings (England) Act, 1875, Amendment Act, 1876, 
 saving — 
 
 (a.) Any thing duly done or suffered, or any pro- 
 ceedings pending under or in pursuance of 
 any enactment hereby repealed ; or 
 
 (b.) Any rigid to compensation in respect of 
 improvements to which the Agricultural 
 Holdings {England) Act, 1875, applies,, 
 and which loere executed before tlie com- 
 mencement of this Act ; or 
 
 (c.) Any right to compensation in respect of 
 any improvement to which the Agricultural 
 Holdings {England) Act, 1875, applies, 
 although executed by a tenant after the 
 commencement of this Act if made under a 
 contract of tenancy current at tlie com- 
 mencxment of this Act ; or 
 
( 7G1 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 762 ) 
 
 VII, LANDLORD AND TENANT — IMPROVE- 
 MENTS— conM/mci. 
 
 (d.) Amj right in respect of fixtures affixed to a 
 liolding before the commencement of this 
 Act; 
 and any right reserved hy this section may he 
 enforced after the commencement of this Act in the 
 same manner in all respects as if no such repeal 
 had taken place. 
 
 Sect. 63. The Act is to he cited for all purposes 
 as the Agricultural Holdings (^England) Act, 1883. 
 
 FiKST Schedule. 
 
 Part I. Impeovements to which Consent of 
 Landlord is kequired. 
 
 (1.) Erection or enlargement of buildings. 
 (2.) Formation of silos. 
 (3.) Laying down of permanent pasture. 
 ' 4.) Making and planting of osier beds. 
 (5.) Making of water meadoios or works of irri- 
 gation. 
 
 (6.) Making of gardens. 
 
 (7.) Making or improving of roads or bridges. 
 (8.) Making or improving of watercourses, ponds, 
 wells, or reservoirs, or of works for the application 
 of water power or for supply of water for agri- 
 cultural or domestic purposes, 
 (9.) Making offences. 
 (10.) Planting of hops. 
 (11.) Planting of orchards or fruit bushes. 
 (12.) Seclaiming of waste land. 
 (13.) Warping of land. 
 (14.) Embankment and sluices against floods. 
 
 Part II. Impkovement in respect of which 
 Notice to Landlord is required. 
 
 (15.) Drainage. 
 
 Pap.t III. Improvements to which Consent of 
 • Landlord is not required. 
 
 (16.) Boning of land with undissolved bones. 
 
 (17.) Chalking of land. 
 
 (18.) Clay-burning. 
 
 (19.) Claying of land. 
 
 (20.) Liming of land. 
 
 (21.) Marling of land. 
 
 (22.) Application to land of purchased artificial 
 or other purchased manure. 
 
 (23.) Consumption on the holding by cattle, sheep, 
 or pigs of cake or other feeding stuff not produced 
 on the holding. 
 
 VIII. LANDLORD AND TENANT— LEASE. 
 
 Apportionment of Conditions on Severance of 
 Eevi-rsion.] The Act 44 <fc 45 Vict. e. 41 (Convey- 
 ancing Act, 1881), enacts: — 
 
 Sect. 12. — -'^1.) Notwithstanding the severanceby 
 conveyance, surrender, or otherwise, of the rever- 
 sionary estate in any land comprised in a lease, 
 and nutioithstanding the avoidance or cesser in any 
 other manner of the term granted by a lease as to 
 part only of the land comprised therein, every con- 
 dition or right of re-entry, and every other condi- 
 tion, contained in the lease, shall he apportioned, 
 and shall remain annexed to the severed parts of the 
 reversionary estate as severed, and shall be in force 
 with respect to the term whereon each severed part 
 is reversionary, or the term in any land which has 
 
 VIII. LANDLORD AND TENANT— LEASE— 
 
 continued, 
 not been surrendered, or as to which the term has 
 not been avoided or has not otherwise ceased, in like 
 manner as if the land comprised in each severed 
 part, or the land as to which the term remains sub- 
 sisting, as the case may be, had alone originally 
 been comprised in the lease. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to leases made 
 after the commencement of the Act — 31s< December, 
 1881. 
 
 Covenants to run witli Reversion.] Sect. 10. — 
 (1.) Bent reserved-by a lease, and the benefit of 
 every covenant or provision therein contained, 
 having reference to the subject-matter thereof, and 
 on the lessee's part to be observed or performed, and 
 every condition of re-entry and other condition 
 therein contained, shall be annexed and incident to 
 and shall go with the reversionary estate in the 
 land, or in any part thereof, immediately expectant 
 on the term granted hy the lease, notwithstanding 
 severance of that reversionary estate, and shall he 
 capable of being recovered, received, enforced, and 
 taken advantage of by the person from time to time 
 entitled, subject to the term, to the income of the 
 whole or any part, as the case may require, of the 
 land leased. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to leases made 
 after the commencement of the Act. 
 
 Sect 11. — (1.) The obligation of a covenant 
 entered into hy a lessor with reference to the svhject- 
 matler of the lease shall, if and as far as the lessor 
 has power to hind the reversionary estate imme- 
 diately expectant on the term granted by the lease, 
 be annexed and incident to and shall go with that 
 reversionary estate, or the several parts thereof, 
 notwithstanding severance of that reversionary 
 estate, and may be taken advantage of and enforced 
 by the person in whom the term is from time to 
 time vested by conveyance, devolution in law, or 
 otherwise: and, if and as far as the lessor has 
 power to bind the person from time to time entitled 
 to that reversionary estate, the obligation aforesaid 
 may be taken advantage of and enforced against 
 any person so entitled. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to leases made 
 after the commencement of the Act. 
 
 (a.) Covenants. 
 
 1. Tor quiet Enjoyment.] lu order to 
 
 constitute a breach of covenant for quiet enjoy- 
 ment in a lease of land, it is sufficient that the 
 lessee's ordiniiry and lawful enjoyment of the 
 demised land be substantially interfered with by 
 the acts of the lessor or those lawfully claiming 
 under him, although neither the title to the land 
 nor the possession of the land be otherwise af- 
 fected.— By a general system of drainage made 
 by the Defendants in a particular district, various 
 farms in that district were drained by several 
 underground drains, by which the water was 
 carried through all such farms. The Defendants 
 let one of these farms to the Plaintiff with the 
 usual covenant for quiet enjoyment against the 
 acts of the lessors or any ptrson lawfully claim- 
 ing through or under them. The Defendants hadi 
 previously let another of such farms adjoining,, 
 but lying above the Plaintiff's farm, to' one C., 
 with a right to use the drains through the Plain- 
 tiffs land, so far as they were adequate to cany 
 
7G3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( V.il ) 
 
 vm. LANDLORD AND TENANT — LEASE — 
 
 continin'ii. 
 (o.) Covenants — coiiliiwi'iJ. 
 iho water from C.'s farm. C. duiing the riain- 
 tift's tenancy, first, by nn excessive user of the 
 drainage system, whicli was properly constructed 
 for the purpose of drainnKC, caused the water 
 passings down tlio drains iu his farm to escape 
 and overflow into the Plaintiffs farm and damage 
 Jiis crops; secondly, by a pioiior user by C. of 
 t;he drains passing through the Plaintiff's farm, 
 damage was also done to a field in Plaintiff's larni 
 by the esciipe of water, but this arose from one 
 of the drains there having bien imperfectly 
 :and improperly oonstiucted : — Hi-hl, that tlie De- 
 fendants were liable to the Plaintiff' for a breach of 
 their covenant for quiet enjoyment in respect of 
 'this last damage, as there had been within (lie 
 meaning of such covenant a substantial interrup- 
 tion by a person who lawfully claimed through 
 i+ho Defendants. But that the Defendants were not 
 liable for the damage done by the excessive user 
 ty C. of the di-ninago system, which was properly 
 constructed, either uudoi- their covenant for qniet 
 enjoyment or under the law of trespass or uiii- 
 saiioe. Sandekson v. Mayob op BERWiOK-croN- 
 Ttpeed is Q. B. D. 547 
 
 2. Not to assign without Consent — 
 
 . Zhireasonahle Sefmal — Qiialijicafwn of Coiviinnf.'] 
 . A lessee, in a lease of a house and premises to 
 
 him for twenty-one years, covenanted with the 
 lessor, his executors, &c., that he would not carry 
 • or suffer to be carried on any other business 
 upon the premises than that of a grocer and tea- 
 dealer without the previous consent in writing 
 
 ■ of the lessor, his executors, &c., and that he. his 
 executors and permitted assigns, should not as- 
 
 ; sign or underlease the premises without the like 
 previoiis consent in writing, " but such consent 
 not to be unreasonably withheld," and on the 
 
 ■ granting of such consent the lessee should pay 
 a certain fee for the preparation of it, and give 
 notice of any assignment to the lessor. — The 
 premises were afti'rwards conveyed by the lessor, 
 
 : subject to the lease. The lessee applied for the 
 necessary consent to enable him to mortgage tlie 
 
 ' premises by way of underlease, and it was refused. 
 — On demurrer to an action for an injimclion, and 
 for specific performance of the covenant, or for 
 
 . damages : — Held, that the words " but such con- 
 sent not to be unreasonably withheld " did not 
 amount to a contract on the part of the lessor, 
 but were a qualification of the covenant by the 
 
 ; lessee.- — Treloar v. Birjcie (Law Eep. 9 Ex. 151) 
 followed. Seau v. House Phoperty and Invest- 
 ment Society 16 Ch. D. 887 
 
 3, Not to assign ■without Consent — 
 
 Underlease — Agrcemcid that Viiderhtase shall 
 
 ■ contain the same Covenants as on'iii}ial Lease.'] 
 The Plaintiff, who was lessee of part of the pro- 
 perty of a hospital, agreed with the Defendant 
 to grant him an underlease " to contain all usual 
 
 ■ covenants (including a covenant not to assign 
 or underlet without the consent of the I'laiutiff, 
 such consent not to bo withheld if the proposed 
 assignee or tenant be respectable and responsiblol, 
 together with such otlier covenants, clauses, and 
 provisoes as are contained in the lease under 
 
 ^ which the premises arc held." The original 
 
 VIIL LANDLORD AND TENANT— LEASE — 
 
 IVIllilluid. 
 
 (a.) Covenants — continued. 
 lease contained (I) a covenant that if any dispute 
 relating to the demised premises should arise 
 between the lessee and any other tenant of the 
 hospital, it sliould be referred to the arbitiution 
 of the hospital ; (2) that the lessee, his executors, 
 administrators, or assigns would not assign or 
 sublet witliout the licence of the hospital ; (3) 
 tliat all demises and assignments of the demised 
 premises should bo prepared by the solicitors of 
 the hospital: — Held, by Pearson, J., and by the 
 Court of Appeal, that the covenants in the origi- 
 nal lease were not to be taken as models and in- 
 serted into the vuiderleaso with the names of the 
 underlessor and underlessee substituteil for the 
 names of the original lessors and lessee respec- 
 tively, but that the Plaintiff' was entitled to have 
 them inserted without modification, so as to hind 
 the underlessee to refer disputes with tenants of 
 the hospital to the arbitration of the hospital, not 
 to assign or underlet without tJie consent of the 
 hospital, and to have bis demises and assignments 
 prepared by the solicitors of tho hospital.— 
 Williamson v. Willitvn.''nn (Law Kep. 9 Ch. 7'J'.t) 
 distinguished. H.^ywood c. Silher 80 Ch. D. 404 
 
 4. Restriction against Trade — Btt^iness 
 
 — Charihdih' Instifitfion irhcre no Payment re- 
 ceired — Home for Worlung Oirls."] The lease of 
 a house contained a covenant that the lessee 
 should not use, cxcreiso, or carry on upon the pro- 
 mises any trade or business of any description 
 whatsoever: — Held (affirming tho decision of 
 Pearson, J.), that a charitable institution called 
 a " Home for Working Girls," where tlie inmates 
 were provided with board and lodging, whether 
 any payment was tiikcn or not, was a busuicss, 
 and came within the restrictions of the covenant. 
 — It is not essential that there should be payment 
 in order to constitute a business ; nor does pay- 
 ment necessarily make that a business which 
 without payment would not be a business. Rolls 
 r. Miller ■- - 26 Ch. D. 206 ; 27 Ch, D. 71 
 
 5. Restriotion against Trade — Bmintss, 
 
 Occupation, or Calling — Hospital.'] Tho covenants 
 of a lease restrained the tenant from using the 
 house in the exercise of any trade, business, occu- 
 pation, or calling whatsoever. The Defendants 
 were an incorporated association for providing 
 patients willing to pay with medical attendance, 
 nursing. &c. ; — Held, that this was a violation of 
 the covenant. Poktji.vn v. Hojie IIosi-ital As- 
 sociation - - 27 Ch. D. 81, n. 
 
 6. Restriotion against Trade — Not to 
 
 use I'riiniscs as a Puhlic-Iiousc, Tavern, or Beer- 
 shop— Sale of Beer to be consumed off the Pre^nifes.] 
 A deed contained n covenant by the gmnteo of a 
 piece of land that no building to be erected on 
 the land .'^hould bo used us a public-house, tavern, 
 or beershop. — A lessee of tlio gi-iinteo obtained an 
 off license authorizing him to sell at his shop, on 
 the laud, beer not to bo drunk on the promises, 
 and sold beer there aecordlngly : — Held (affirming 
 the decision of tho Blaster of the KoUs), that this 
 was a breach of the covenant. — Bisliop of lit- 
 Allan's V. Battrr.'<hi/ (3 Q. B. D. ;159) approved. 
 LoNuoN ANii SrinuuBAN Land and Biildiso 
 CoJiPANY r. FiicLD - - 16 Ch, D. 646 
 
( 705 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 766 ) 
 
 Tin. LANDLORD AND TENANT — LEASE — 
 continued 
 (a.) Covenants — continued. 
 
 7. Eestriction against Trade — Not to 
 
 ■tiae Premises as a P ublic-liouse, (fee. — " Beerhouse " 
 — Construction — Teclmical Meaning — Evidence.'] 
 A person who had entered into a covenant not to 
 use a house as a public-house, tavern, or beer- 
 house, opened a grocer's shop there, at which he 
 •carried on the sale of beer to be drunk off the 
 premises as an ancillary business to his grocer's 
 business : — Held, that this was no infringement of 
 the covenant. — Evidence to shew that the word 
 " beerhouse " was understood in the trade in a 
 .technical sense rejected. Holt & Co. v. Collyek 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 718 
 
 8. Eestriction against Trade — To huy 
 
 Heer of Landlord — Implied Obligation on Cove- 
 nantee.'] A covenant by the tenant of a public- 
 house to purchase of his landlord all beer to be 
 .sold or consumed in or upon the premises, is 
 not broken by the tenant buying through an 
 sigent, without the knowledge of the landlord, 
 beer made by the landlord. — Senible, that where 
 :such a covenant is entered into by a tenant, there 
 is, in the absence of express stipulation, an im- 
 5)lied obligation on the part of the landlord to 
 supply the tenant with such kinds of beer as he 
 requires, and if this obligation is not fulfilled the 
 itenant is at liberty to buy the beer which he re- 
 quires elsewhere. Edwick v. Hawkes 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 199 
 
 9. To pay Bates — Paving Bate — ", Bates 
 
 charged -upon the Premises or on the Occupier in 
 respect thereof " — Metropolis Management Acts — 
 18<fc 19 Vict. c. 120, s. 105—25 & 26 Viet. e. 102, 
 .». 96.] The lessee of a house in a new street 
 within the metropolitan district for seven, four- 
 teen, or twenty-one years, covenanted with his 
 lessor to pay all rates and assessments taxed, rated, 
 ■charged, assessed, or imposed upon the demised 
 premises, or upon or payable by, the occupier or 
 "tenant in respect thereof ; — Held, that the propor- 
 tion of the expense of paving the new street 
 -assessed upon the demised house under 25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 102, B. 96, was not a rate payable by the 
 tenant under this covenant. Alldm v. DicSinson 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 10. To pay Bates — "Bates, taxes, and 
 
 •assessments " — Metropolis Local Management Acts, 
 1855 and 1862 (18 & 19 Vict. c. 120, s. 105,,and 
 
 -25 & 26 Vict. c. 102, o. 96).] By an agreement of 
 lease the tenant agreed to pay " all rates, taxes, 
 rand assessments payable in respect of the premises 
 during the term " : — Held, that a sum assessed 
 upon the owners as their proportion of the ex- 
 pense of paving the street upon which the pre- 
 rmises abutted, was not a rate, tax, or assessment 
 -within the meaning of the covenant, but a charge 
 'imposed upon the owner for the permanent im- 
 ■provement of his property. Wilkinson v. Collyeb 
 ^ [13 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 11. To pay Bates — " Bates chargeable in 
 
 respect of the demised premises"— Water supplied 
 
 . to Tenant by 'Water Company— 'Water-rate.'] In^a 
 lease of a shop and basement and of three rooms 
 •on the third floor of the same house, the lessor 
 .covenanted to pay " all rates and taxes ehargeable 
 
 VIII. LANDLOED AND TENANT — LEASE — 
 continued. 
 (a.) Covenants — continued. 
 in respect of the demised premises." Water was 
 separately supplied by a water company to the 
 shop and basement, and paid for by the tenant. 
 In an action to recover from the lessor the amount 
 so paid : — Held, that such charge was a " rate " 
 within the mesmiug of the covenant. Dibeot 
 Spanish Tei,egraph Co. h. Shepherd 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 203 
 
 12. To renew Lease — Condition Prece- 
 dent — Performance of Covenants] The lease of a 
 house contained a covenant by the lessee to pay 
 the rent and keep the premises in repair, and to 
 paint the outside and inside at certain fixed 
 periods ; and the lessor covenanted that tiie lessee 
 should be entitled, on giving six months' notice 
 before the end of the term, to have a further lease 
 for twenty-one years " upon paying the rent and 
 performing and observing the covenants " in his 
 lease. The lessee applied for a renewal of his 
 lease, but the lessor refused to grant such renewal, 
 on the ground that the covenants had not been 
 fulfilled either at the date of the six months' 
 notice or at its expiration : — Held, that the per- 
 formance of the covenants was a condition pre- 
 cedent to the lessee's privilege of having a re- 
 newed lease, and, the requisite painting and 
 repairs not having been completed either when 
 the six months' notice was given or when it ex- 
 pired, the lessee was not entitled to a renewal of 
 his lease. Bastin v. Bidwell 18 Ch. D. 238 
 
 13. To renew Lease — Condition Prece- 
 dent — Notice of Option to renew — Payment of 
 Fine — Notice by Secretary to Company — Notice to 
 one of Three Trustees.] A lease of household 
 property was granted in the year 1818 to the 
 trustees of an insurance company for twenty-one 
 years at a rent of £100, with a covenant that the 
 lessor, his heirs or assigns, would from time to 
 time, at any time before the expiration of the 
 term, and also before the expiration of every 
 succeeding term to be granted by every future or 
 renewed lease, whenever required by the lessees 
 or the person interested in the term, or any suc- 
 ceeding term, and upon payment of a fine or 
 premium of £1000, grant, a renewed lease for 
 twenty-one years, and in every such new lease 
 there should be a simUat covenant for renewal at 
 or before the end of every twenty-one years, it 
 being the intention of the parties that this lease 
 should be renewable for ever at the option of the 
 lessees, their executors, administrators, or assigns ; 
 and there was a covenant by the lessees that in 
 case the option to renew was not exercised they 
 would before the expiration of the term rebuild 
 or reinstate the buildings and premises as a 
 dwelling-house. — There were two renewals of the 
 lease, one in 1839 and one in 1860, which last 
 lease expired on the 24th of June, 1881. The 
 persons then entitled under the original lessor 
 were G. S., who was tenant for life of a moiety of 
 the property, and three trustees, of whom G. S. 
 was one, of the entirety subject to the life inte- 
 rest. — Under arrangements made by the insurance 
 company this lease with other property was vested 
 in five trustees upon trust to indemnify a certain 
 class of stockholders and subject thereto for the 
 
( 707 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 768 ) 
 
 VUI. LANDLOBD AND TENANT — lEASE — 
 contintied. 
 (a.) Covenants — continued. 
 company. One H. was secretary to these trustees 
 and also to the company, and it was his duty to 
 attend to the renewal of the lease. — On the 23rd 
 of June, 1881, G-. S. gave notice to H. that the 
 lease would expire on the following day. H. 
 answered that the directors of the company 
 " would of course renewthe lease." Subsequently 
 renewal was refused : — Seld, in an action for 
 specific performance, that it was not necessary 
 for the lessees to pay the fine of £1000, or exe- 
 cute a new lease before the expiration of the 
 term, but that it was necessary that notice of an 
 intention to renew should be given before the 
 end of the term ; and that the informal notice by 
 H. to G. S. was sufficient. Specific performance 
 decreed, with payment of the premium and inte- 
 rest at £5 per cent, from the end of the prior 
 lease. Nicholson v. Smith - 22 Ch. D. 610 
 
 14. — — • To renew Lease — Lease for Lives — 
 Covenant for renewal on dropping of one or more 
 Lives — Construction.'] A lessor demised heredita- 
 ments to the lessee, his heirs and assigns, for the 
 natural lives of the lessee and two other persons 
 and the longest liver of them, witli a covenant that 
 the lessor, his heirs and assigns (upon the lessee, 
 his heirs or assigns " surrendering this present 
 demise as hereinafter mentioned "), should at any 
 time therciifter at the request of the lessee, l;is 
 heirs or assigns, " as often as one or two life or 
 lives of and in the said hereditaments" should 
 drop and be determined, renew and grant a 
 further term " for any other life or two lives of 
 any other person or persons to be nominated by 
 the lessee, his heirs or assigns, in the stead of 
 the persons life or lives so dropping or determine 
 ing;" the lessee, his heirs or assigns, paying 
 to the lessor, his heirs or assigns, " for every 
 such renewal for every life or lives of such person 
 or persons so to be renewed as aforesaid the sum 
 of 10s. only, and at the same time surrendering 
 this present demise to be cancelled " : — Seld, 
 reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal, 
 that upon the true construction of the covenant 
 the right of renewal was neither perpetual, nor 
 limited to one renewaj for not more than two new 
 lives, but was a right of renewal as often as any 
 of the three original lives should drop, so that any 
 such renewal might take place either on the 
 dropping of any one of the said three lives, or 
 after the dropping of any two of them, as the 
 lessee might from time to time request. Swin- 
 burne V. MiLBURN 9 App. Cas. 844 
 
 (b) Incoming and Outgoing Tenants. 
 
 15. Valuation of Crops.] An owner in fee 
 
 demised a farm for seven years, and agreed at the 
 expiration of the term to pay for the tenanfs pro- 
 perty in and upon the farm at a valuation. He de- 
 vised the land to trustees for a term of 1000 years, 
 upon trust to raise money in aid of his personal 
 estate for payment of debts, funeral and testament- 
 ary expenses, and legacies, and subject thereto to 
 the Plaintiff for life, with divers remainders over. 
 On the testator's death thePlaintiff took possession 
 On the expiration of the term a new tenant could 
 not be found. The Plaintiff paid the outgoing 
 
 Vm. lANDLOED AND TENANT— LEASE — 
 
 contimied. 
 (6.) Incoming and Outgoing Tenants — contd. 
 tenant for his property in the farm, and claimed to 
 be repaid the amount out of the testator's estate : — 
 Held, that the liability to pay the outgoing tenant 
 was a liability attaching to the land, and that 
 the landlord for the time being was the person 
 primarily liable ; that the Plaintiff being in re- 
 ceipt of the rents and profits, was the landlord, 
 and not the trustees of the term, that he there- 
 fore was the person primarily liable, a'ld had no 
 claim to be repaid wholly or in part either out 
 of the testator's estate or by persons entitled 
 in remainder. Mansell b. Norton 22 Ch. D. 769 
 
 (c.) Option to purchase Freehold. 
 
 16. • Eeal and Personal Eepresentativas — 
 
 Nature of Interest conferred on Lessee.] A lease 
 of land contained a covenant by the lessor with 
 the lessee, his executors, administrators, and as- 
 signs, that if the lessee, his executors, adminis- 
 trators, or assigns, should at any time thereafter 
 be desirous of purchasing the fee simple of the 
 demised land, and should give notice in writing 
 to the lessor, his heirs or assigns, then the lessor, 
 his heirs or assigns, would accept £1200 for the 
 purchase of the fee simple, and on the receipt 
 thereof would convey the fee simple to the lessee, 
 his heirs or assigns, or as he or they should direct. 
 The lessee died intestate, and nearly twenty years 
 after his death, but before the expiration of the 
 term, his heir, who was also administrator of his 
 personal estate, called on the devisee of the lessor 
 to convey the fee simple to him in accordance 
 with the covenant, and a conveyance was executed 
 accordingly. The heir afterwards contracted to 
 sell part of the property thus conveyed to him : — 
 Seld (affirming the decision of Pearson, J.), that 
 on the true construction of the covenant the option 
 to purchase was attached to the lease and passed 
 with it ; that it consequently passed as part of 
 the lessee's personal estate to the administrator, 
 and that the administrator could not makeagoo<l 
 title to the purchaser unless the next of kin of 
 the lessee concurred in the sale. — Green v. Low 
 (22 Beav. 625) distinguished. In re Adams and 
 the Kensington Vestry 24 Ch. D. 199 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 394 
 IX. LANDLOED AND TENANT— LODGEE. 
 
 1. Protection from Distress -"Lodger" 
 
 —Lodgers' Goods Protection Act, 1S7 1 (34 & 35 
 Vict. c. 79).] If the landlord, reserving a room 
 in a house, lets the rest of it to a oerson, but re- 
 tains such control and dominion over it as is 
 usually retained by masters of houses let in 
 lodgings, the relation of landlord and " lodger " 
 may exist between the parties within the mean- 
 ing of the Lodgers' Goods Protection Act, 1871 
 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 79), although the lodger has the 
 right of exclusively occupying the greater part of 
 the premises, and has separate and uncontrolled 
 power of ingress and egress, and neither the land- 
 lord nor his agent sleeps or resides in the house, 
 and the lodger acts as caretaker of the part 
 reserved. — The existence of the relationship of 
 landlord and lodger is a question of fact. Ness- 
 V. Stephenson - - - 9 Q. B. D. 245 
 
 2. Protection from Distress— 34 & 35. 
 
( 769 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 770 ) 
 
 IX. LANDLORD AND TENANT — LODGES — 
 
 continued 
 Vict. c. 79, «. 1 — Declaration hy Lodger inopera- 
 tive against subsequent Distress — Illegal Distress 
 — Voluntary Abandonment.'] A declaration under 
 the Lodgers' Goods Protection Act, s. 1, will not 
 protect a lodger's goods against seizure and sale 
 by a superior landlord for rent due from his im- 
 mediate tenant, unless it has been made after the 
 distress has been levied or authorized or threat- 
 ened ; a declaration is inoperative against a dis- 
 tress subsequently levied, which has not been 
 authorized or tLreatened before the declaration is 
 made. — The Plaintiff was a lodger in one of three 
 rooms let to T., who was the immediate tenant of 
 the Defendant. Eent to the amount of £8 being 
 due from T. to the Defendant, the Defendant dis- 
 trained the goods in the rooms including the 
 Plaintiff's. She thereupon made a declaration 
 vmder the lodgers' Goods Protection Act, s. 1, 
 which was correct in all respects. T. and the 
 Defendant came to an arrangement whereby £1 
 was to be paid down, and the remaining £7 by 
 instalments ; and the distress was thereupon with- 
 drawn by the Defendant. None of the agreed 
 instalments having been paid by T., and a further 
 sum of £1 having accrued due for rent, the De- 
 fendant afterwards levied a second distress for 
 the sum of £8, under which the Plaintiff's goods 
 were again seized and sold. She made no further 
 declaration under the Lodgers' Goods Protection 
 Act, but she owed no rent to T. ; — Held, that no 
 action of trespass would lie against the Defendant 
 for distraining the Plaintiff's goods ; for the de- 
 claration made at the time of levying the first 
 distress was ineffectual against the second, and 
 the first distress had not been voluntarily aban- 
 doned. Thwaites v. Wilding 11 ft. B. D. 421 ; 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 4 
 
 3. Protection from Distress — 34 * 35 
 
 Vict. e. 79, ss. 1, 2 — " Lodger," who is — Sleeping 
 and Besidence on Premises — Occupation for Busi- 
 ness Purposes.'] The Appellant occupied the first 
 floor and basement of premises at a yearly rent, 
 carrying on the business of a publisher there, but 
 sleeping and residing elsewhere. He had no key 
 of the outer door, which was under the control of 
 his immediate landlord, who admitted him every 
 morning: — Held, that the Appellant was not a 
 " lodger " within the meanitig of s. 1 of the 
 Lodgers' Goods Protection Act, 1871. Heawood 
 V. Bone - - - - 13 ft, B, D. 179 
 
 4. Proteotioa from Distress — Sale of Dis- 
 tress before Expiration of Five Days — 2 Wm. & M. 
 sess. 1, c. 5, s. 2— Lodgers' Goods Protection Act, 
 1871 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 79), ss. 1, 2.] A landlord 
 having on the 17th of October distrained for rent 
 goods of his tenant's lodger upon the demised 
 premises, sold the same on the 22nd, i.e., before 
 tke expiration of five clear days from the distress, 
 contrary to the provisions of 2 Wm. & M., sess. 1, 
 c. 5, s. 2 : — Held, that an action was maintainable 
 by the lodger against the landlord for so selling 
 his goods. Shakp v. Fowle 12 ft. B. D. 385 
 
 X. LANDLORD AND TENANT— EE-ENTRY. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. e. 41 {Conveyancing Act, 
 1881), enacts, sect. 14.— (1.) A right of re-entry or 
 forfeiture under any proviso or stipulation in a 
 
 X. LANDLORD AND TENANT— RE-ENTRY- 
 
 continued, 
 lease, shall not be enforceable, by action ar other- 
 wise, unless and until the lessor serves on the lessee 
 a notice specifying the particular breach com- 
 plained of, and, if the breach is capable of remedy, 
 requiring the lessee to remedy the breach, and, in 
 any case, requiring the lessee to make compensation 
 in money for the breach, and the lessee fails, within 
 a reasonable time thereafter, to remedy the breach, 
 if it is capable of remedy, and to make reasonable 
 compensation in money, to the satisfaction of the 
 lessor, for the breach. 
 
 (2.) Wliere a lessor is proceeding, by action or 
 otlierwise, to enforce such a right of re-entry m- for- 
 feiture, the lessee may, in the lessor's action, if any, 
 or in any action brought by himself, apply to the 
 Court for relief ; and the Comt may grant or refuse 
 relief, as the Court, having regard to the proceed- 
 ing and conduct of the parties under the foregoing 
 provisions of this section, and to all tke other 
 circumstances, thinks fit ; and in case of relief may 
 grant it on such terms, if any, as to costs, expenses, 
 damages, compensation, penalty, or otlierwise in- 
 cluding the granting of an injunction to restrain 
 any like breach in the future, as the Court, in the 
 circumstances of each case, thinks fit. 
 
 (3.) For the purposes of this section a lease 
 includes an original or derivative underlease, also- 
 a grant at a fee farm rent, or securing a rent by 
 condition ; and a lessee includes an original or 
 derivative under-lessee, and the heirs, executors,, 
 administrators, and assigns of '<■ lessee, also a 
 grantee under such a grant as aforesaid, his heirs 
 and assigns ; and a lessor includes an original or- 
 derivative under-lessor and the heirs, executors, 
 administrators, and assigns of a lessor, also a. 
 grantor as aforesaid, and his heirs and assigns. 
 
 (4.) Tliis section applies although the proviso or 
 stipulation under which the right of re-entry, or ■ 
 forfeiture accrues is inserted in the lease in pur- 
 suance of the directions of any Act of Parliament. 
 
 (5.) For tlie purposes of this section a lease 
 limited to continue as long only as the lessee abstains 
 from committing a breach of covenant shall be and 
 take effect as a lease to continue for any longer - 
 term for which it could subsist, but determinable by 
 a proviso for re-entry on such a breach. 
 
 (6.) This section does not extend, 
 
 (i.) To a covenant or condition against the 
 assigning, underletting, parting with the 
 possession, or disposing of the land leased ; 
 or to a condition for forfeiture on thebank- 
 ruptcy of the lessee, or on ' the taking in 
 execution of the lessees interest ; or 
 
 (ii.) In case of a mining lease, to a covenant or 
 condition for allowing the lessor to have 
 access to or inspect books, accounts, records, 
 weighing machines or other things, or to- 
 enter or inspect the mine or the workings 
 thereof. 
 
 (7.) Mepeals 22 * 23 Vict. o. 35, ss. 4-9, and 
 23 & 24 Vict 0. 126, s. 2. 
 
 (8.) This section shall not affect the law relating 
 to re-entry or forfeiture or relief in case of rum- 
 payment of rent. 
 
 (9.) This section applies to leases made either 
 before or after the commencement of this Act, and' 
 shall have effect notwithstanding any stipulation 
 to the contrary. 
 
 2 
 
( 771 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 772 ) 
 
 X. LANDLORD AND TENANT— BE-ENTEY— 
 
 continued. 
 
 1. Commenoement of Action — No actual 
 
 Re-entry — No Proviso to make Lease void-l When 
 a lease contains a proviso giving tke lessor a right 
 to re-enter in the event of breach of covenant 
 by the lessee (but not making the lease ipso facto 
 void in that event) -.—Quiere, whether under the 
 present practice the mere commencement of an 
 action by the lessor to recover possession of the 
 property for breach of covenant, or the com- 
 mencement of such action followed by appearance 
 by the trustees, will, without actual entry, operate 
 to determine the lease. — Silcoclc v. Farmer (46 
 L. T. (N.S.) 404) commented upon. Ex parte 
 Sib "W. Hakt Dyke. In re Moekish 
 
 [22 Ch. D, 410 
 a. Disclaimer of Plaintiff's Title— Eject- 
 ment— Notice to Quit — " Customary iJejsi."] In 
 an action of ejectment it was proved that the 
 Plaintiffs, who claimed to be landlords of certain 
 tenements, had given notice to the Defendants, as 
 -their tenants, that the rent of the tenements 
 would be raised, and that the Defendants had 
 thereupon written a letter stating that they 
 •"disputed the Plaintiffs' alleged right to raise 
 the rent and were willing and offered to pay what 
 was due in respect of the customary rent of lis. 
 -a year, being all that they were liable to pay in 
 jespect of the property " : — Held, that this letter 
 was a repudiation of the relation of landlord and 
 tenant and an assertion of a right to hold the 
 tenements upon payment of a customary rent in 
 the sense of a quit rent, and that the Plaintiffs 
 were entitled to eject, upon proving their title, 
 without proving a valid notice to quit. Vivian 
 .V. Moat - - - 16 Oh. D. 730 
 
 3. IJjectment — Holding over after Ex- 
 piration of Term — Writ of Possession when Plain- 
 tiff's Title has expired.l Where a landlord has 
 leoovered judgment in an action against his 
 tenant for the possession of premises which had 
 been held over after the expiration of the ten- 
 ancy, he will be allowed to issue the writ of 
 possession notwithstanding that his estate in the 
 premises terminated after the commencement of 
 the action and before the trial, unless it be unjust 
 and futile to issue such writ, and it is for the De- 
 fendant to shew afBrmatively that this will be 
 ,the result of issuing such writ. Knight v. Clakke 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 294 
 
 , 4. Forfeiture — Carrying on Offensive 
 
 Trade — Extra Bent reserved in case of Breach of 
 such Covenant.'] The Defendants were assignees 
 of the lease of certain premises which had been 
 .demised by the Plaintiffs for a term of years, the 
 reddendum being as follows : " yielding and pay- 
 ing a yearly rent of £30 by equal quarterly pay- 
 ments " on the usual quarter. daiyS, " and a like 
 yearly rent of £25 by like equal payments in 
 -case any of the trades, occupations, or things 
 hereinafter covenanted not to be carried on or 
 done upon the said premises shall be carried on 
 or done." — The lessees, among othei^ usudl cove- 
 nants, covenanted hot to carry on upon the pre- 
 mises certain specified trades or businesses, nor 
 any offensive, noisome, or noisy trade or busiiiess 
 whatsoever, nor do nor suffer to be done anything 
 i\bich raiglit be or grow to the damage or annoy- 
 
 X. LANDLORD AND TENANT— RE-ENTRY— 
 
 continued. 
 ance of the lessors. The lease contained a con- 
 dition of re-entry if the said yearly rent of £30 or 
 the said further rent of £25, in case the same 
 should become payable, were in arrear, or if and 
 whenever there should be a breach of any of the 
 covenants thereinbefore contained on the part of 
 the lessees. — The Defendants having carried on 
 upon the demised premises a business within the 
 terms of the above-mentioned covenant, the 
 Plaintiffs sued to recover the premises upon a 
 forfeiture of the lease : — Held, affirming the de- 
 cision of the Queen's Bench Division, that the 
 lease could not be construed as meaning that the 
 Defendants were entitled to cany on the business 
 in question upon payment of the additional rent 
 mentioned in the reddendum, and that the Plain- 
 tiffs were entitled to re-enter under the condition 
 for re-entry should they choose to exercise that 
 option, instead of requiring the payment of the 
 additional rent. Weston v. Manasees of the 
 Metropolitan Asylum District 
 
 [8 Q,. B. D. 387; 9 Q. B. D. 404 
 
 6. Forfeiture — Tenant "being Bank- 
 rupt" — Bankruptcy Petition under Bankruptcy 
 Act, 18S3~Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 52), s. 149 — Fixtures — Notice of Breach by Land- 
 lord — Conveyancing Act, 1881 (44 (fe45 Vict. c. 41), 
 s. 14.] A lease (executed in 1880) of a mill and 
 warehouse, for twenty-one years, contained a 
 covenant by the lessors with the lessees (inter 
 alia) : (4) that certain articles mentioned in a 
 schedule should be the property of the lessees, 
 and should be removable by them, they making 
 good all damage done by such removal. The 
 articles mentioned in the schedule were iron 
 columns, beams, iJoors, brick piers, and things 
 ejusdem generis. There was a proviso (1) that 
 in case (inter alia) the lessees should dm-ing the 
 term be bankrupts, or file a petition in liquida- 
 tion, the term should cease ; (2) that the lessees 
 migiit by notice determine the term at the end 
 of seven or fourteen years ; (3) that on the deter- 
 mination or cesser of the term all the machinery, 
 and also all the buildings erected by the lessees 
 (other than certain specified buildings) should be 
 their property and should be removed by them 
 previously to the determination or cesser of the 
 term, unless it should be then mutually agreed 
 that the lessors should purchase them, the lessees, 
 in case of removal, to make good all damages 
 which might be caused by such removal. After 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, came into operation, 
 the lessees presented a bankruptcy petition, and a 
 receiving order was made : — Seld, first, that the 
 presentation of the petition caused a forfeiture of 
 the term ; secondly, that notwithstanding the 
 forfeiture, the official receiver was entitled to 
 the articles mentioned in clause (4) of the cove- 
 nant and clause (3) of the proviso as being pro- 
 perty of the lessees. — Quiere, whether the receiver 
 was entitled to enter and remove the articles or 
 whether he could only call on the lessors to 
 deliver them to him. — Held, further, that sect. 14 
 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, had no applica- 
 tion. Ex parte Gould. In re Walker 
 
 [13 Q. B, D. 454 
 
 6. Forfeiture — Melief — Conveyancing 
 
( 773 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 77-J: ) 
 
 X. lANDLOED AND TENANT — EE-ENTRT— 
 
 continued, 
 and iaw of Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. 
 c. 41), s. 14 — Pending Proceedings— Order LVIII., 
 r. 5 — Power of Court of Appeal^ A landlord 
 brought an action to recover tlie demised property 
 under a proviso of re-entry for breach of a cove- 
 nant to insure. The Defendant claimed relief 
 under statute 22 & 23- Vict. c. 35, s. 4. The 
 Plaintiif obtained judgment on the 4th of July, 
 1881. On the 4th of August the Defendant ap- 
 pealed. A stay of proceedings \¥as granted and 
 ■continued so that the Plaintiff never obtained 
 possession. On the 1st of January, 1882, the 
 Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881 
 (44 & 45 Vict. 0. 41), came into operation,, after 
 ■which'the appeal came on to be heard -.^-Seld, 
 that the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 
 1881, s. 14, sub-s. 2, is not confined to .breaches 
 taking place after the Act came into operation, 
 but extends also to breaches committed before the 
 Act, and to proceedings pending when the Act 
 came into operation, and that as the landlord had 
 not obtained possession, but the action was still 
 pending, there was. jurisdiction to grant relief to 
 the tenant under that sub-section : — Seld, also, 
 that assuming the judgment of the Court below 
 to have been correct according to the law as it 
 then stood, the Court of Appeal could grant to 
 the tenant the relief to which he was entitled 
 according to the law as it stood at the hearing of 
 the appeal, since the general orders provide that 
 appeals, shall be by way of re-liearing, and give 
 power to the Court of Appeal not merely to make 
 any order which ought to have been made by the 
 Court below, but to make such further or other 
 order as the case may require. Qdtlteb v. 
 Maplbson - - 9 a. B. D. 672 
 
 7. Porfeiture — Belief — Non-payment of 
 
 Merit— Belief, after Trial — Disallowance of Costs to 
 Plaintiff — Common Law Procedure Act, 1852 
 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 76), s. 210 ; Common Law Proce- 
 dure Act, 1860 (234 24 Vict. c. 126), s. 1.] Where 
 in an action of ejectment upon a forfeiture by non- 
 payment of rent the Plaintiff obtains judgment, 
 but without costs, the Defendant may obtain re- 
 lief from the forfeiture under the Common Law 
 Procedure Act, 1860 (23 & 24 Vict. o. 126), s. 1, 
 without being required to pay the Plaintiff any 
 costs other than those of the summons for relief. 
 Cboft 17. London and County Banking Co. 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 8. Torieittae— Winding-up of Company 
 
 — Distress hy Landlord of Company — Clause of 
 Be-entry.'} Mines were demised to a company by 
 a lease which contained a power of re-entry if 
 the rents or royalties, or any part thereof, should 
 be in arrear for thirty days, or if the company 
 " should be wound up voluntarily or by compul- 
 sion or otherwise under the provisions , of any 
 Act or . Acts of Parliament." An action was 
 brought against the company by the debenture 
 holders, and a receiver was appointed. Kent 
 being in arrear, the landlord took out a supimons 
 for leave to distrain or re-enter. , After the sum- 
 mons had been returnable, but before it was 
 heard, an order was made for winding up the 
 tiompany. , Xh?, suminpns was then amended by 
 intituling it in the winding-up as well as in the 
 
 X. LANDLOED AND TENANT— EE-ENTEY— 
 
 continued. 
 action : — Held, by Hall, V.C, that as the laud- 
 lord was a creditor of the company, leave could 
 not be given him to distrain, and that the claim 
 to re-enter ought to be left to be tried in an 
 action: — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 according to the true construction of the proviso 
 for re-entry, a right to re-enter accrued on the 
 making of a winding-up order, and that, the title 
 of the landlord to re-enter being clear, the Court 
 ought to order possession to be given to him, 
 and ought not to put him to the useless expense 
 of bringing an action to which there was no 
 defence. Gbnehal Shabe and Tbust Company 
 V. Wetley Bkick and Pottery Company 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 260 
 
 9. Notice— Poioer to determine Tenancy hy 
 
 delivering Notice to Tenant — Tenant not to he found 
 — Delivery of Notice at demised Premises.'] A 
 lease of premises for twenty-one'years contained a 
 proviso that it should be lawful for the .landlord or 
 his assigns to put an end to the demise at the end 
 of the' first fqurteen years by delivering to the 
 tenant or his assigns six calendar months' previous 
 notice in writing of his intention to do so. In an 
 action by the assignee of the reversion to recover 
 possession of the premises on the ground that the 
 demise had been duly determined by notice under 
 the proviso, it appeared that the lessee had dis- 
 appeared some years previously, after having 
 mortgaged the premises by way of underlease, 
 that his address could not be found, and that 
 written notice to determine the tenancy directed 
 to him had been sent tq his la&t known address, 
 and had also been delivered to the mortgagee and 
 to the occupier of the premises : — Held, that the 
 action could not be maintained, as there had been 
 no service of the notice on the. lessee, and as he 
 had not assigned the premises no other service 
 would satisfy the terms of the proviso. Hogg v. 
 BaooKS - 14 Q. B. D. 475 ; 15 Q. B. D. 256 
 
 XI. LANDLOED AND TENANT — YEAELY 
 
 TENANT, 
 
 Notice to quit.] Sy 46 * 47 Vict. c. 61, s. 33, 
 where a half year's notice expiring with a year of 
 tenancy is hy law necessary and sufficient for deter- 
 mination'of a tenancy from year to year, in the case 
 of any such tenancy under a contract of tenancy 
 made either before or after the commencement of 
 the Act (1st of January, 1884),. a year's notice so 
 expiring shall hy virtue of the Act he necessary and 
 sufficient for the same, unless the .landlord and 
 tenant of the holding, by writing under their hands,, 
 agree that this section shall not apply, in which case 
 a half-year's notice shall continue to he sufficient ; 
 but nothing in this section shall ■ extend to a Case 
 where the tenant is adjudged bankrupt, or has filed 
 a petition for composition or arrangement with his- 
 creditors. — ■ ■ ■ 
 
 Sect. 35 applies the Act to Crown lands. 
 
 Sect. 36 allies the Act to lands of the Duchy of 
 Lancaster. 
 
 Sect. 37 applies the Act to lands, of the Duchy of 
 Cornwall. 
 
 Sects: 38-40 designate the persons who are to 
 exercise the poViers conferred hy the Act in the case 
 of ecclesiastical and charity, lands J . i ■ , . -- - 
 
 By sect. 54, nothing in the Act applies to a liold- 
 
 2 2 
 
( 775 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 776 ) 
 
 XI. lANDLOKD AND TENANT — YEARLY 
 
 TENANT— continued, 
 ing that is not either wholly agricultural or wliolly 
 pastoral, or in part agricultural and cm to the 
 residue pastoral, or in whole or in part cultivated 
 as a market-garden, or to any holding let to the 
 tenant during his continuance in any office, ap- 
 pointment, or employment held under the landlord. 
 
 Sect. 62 repeals the Agricultural Holdings (_Eng- 
 land) Acts, 1875 and 1876, saving existing rights 
 and liaMlities thereunder. 
 
 Notice — Half-year's Notice and Six 
 
 Months' Notice, Distinction between — Agricultural 
 Holdings Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 61), s. 33.] 
 A tenancy under a written agreement from year 
 to year " until six montlis' notice shall have been 
 given ... in the usual way to determine the 
 tenancy," is not one " where a half-year's notice 
 ... is by law necessary " within the Agricultural 
 Holdings Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 61), s. 33, 
 which, therefore, does not apply so as to render a 
 year's notice necessary for the determination of 
 the tenancy. — Judgment of the Queen's Bench 
 Division affirmed. Baelow v. Teal 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 403, 501 
 
 LANDLOED AND TENANT — Agreement for 
 lease by mortgagor 25 Ch. D. 678 
 
 See Mortgage — Mobtgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 2. 
 
 Agreement — Scotch law 6 App, Cas. 340 
 
 See Scotch Law — Landlord and Ten- 
 ant. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Disclaimer by trustee. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Dis- 
 
 CLAIMEE. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Forfeiture on tenant " being 
 
 bankrupt" — Removal of fixtures — ^Offi- 
 cial receiver - 13 Q. B. D. 454 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Peti- 
 tion. 4. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Period of vesting in trustee 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 473 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 6. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Trustee— Outgoing tenant — 
 
 Set-off— Tillages - 10 ft. B. D. 22 
 See Bankruptcy — Mutual Dealings. 2. 
 
 ■ Contract by sub-tenant to perform cove- 
 nants of lease — Whether contract of 
 indemnity - - 8 ft. B. D. 329 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 48. 
 
 Distress after bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Disteess. 
 
 Distress after winding-up. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Distress. 
 
 Distress — Crops — Bill of sale — Surrender — 
 
 Expenses of cultivation 11 Q. B, D. 808 
 See Bill of Sale — Operation. 1. 
 
 Forcible entry - 18 Ch. D. 199 
 
 See Forcible Entry. 2. 
 
 ' Incorporeal hereditament — Conilict of laws 
 
 [10 Q, B. D. 403 
 
 See Conflict of Laws. 3. 
 
 ■ Irish Land Law Act 9 App. Cas. 815 
 
 See Irish Land Law Act. 
 
 lANDLOED AND TENANT— eonJmaed. 
 
 Licensee— Obligation to fence 9 ft. B. D. 80i 
 
 See Negligence — Liability. 6. 
 
 Eight of shooting — Overstocking land with 
 
 game — Injury to crops 15 ft. B. D. 258 
 
 See Game. 1. 
 Tenancy in common — Ordinary repairs — 
 
 Contribution - - 15 ft. B. D. 60 
 
 See Tenant in Common. 
 
 Tenancy under mortgage deed — Action- 
 
 to recover land — Judgment under 
 Order xiv. - 13 ft. B. D. 34T 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ 
 specially indorsed. 5. 
 Valuation on expiration of tenancy — Agree- 
 ment to appoint valuers — Eule of Court 
 [15 ft. B. D. 426 
 See Arbitration — Submission. 4. 
 LANDOWNEB — Compensation— -Abandonment of 
 railway - - 25 Ch. D. 251 
 See Railway Company — Abandon- 
 ment. 2. 
 Right to use of siding on railway — Renew- 
 ing junction - - 28Ch. D. 190 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 8. 
 
 LANDS CLAUSES ACT :— Col. 
 
 I. Compensation - 77&. 
 
 II. Compulsory Powers - 779- 
 
 ni. Costs - 784 
 
 IV. Purchase-money - - - 78G'. 
 
 V. Superfluous Lands - 788- 
 
 I. LANDS CLAUSES ACT— COMPENSATION. 
 
 Appointment of Umpire.] The Act 46 & 47" 
 Vict, c, 15, extends the powers of the Board of 
 Trade under sect. 28 of the Lands Clauses Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845, in relation to the appointment 
 of any umpire under the provisions of that section, 
 and enacts that after the passing of the Act that 
 section shall he read and have effect as follows : — 
 " If in either of the cases aforesaid the said arbi- 
 trators shall refuse or shall for seven days after 
 request of either party io such arbitration neglect to 
 appoint an umpire, the Board of Trade shall, on 
 tlie application of either party to such arbitration, 
 appoint an umpire, and the decision of such umpire 
 on the matter on which the arbitrators shall differ^ 
 or which shall be referred to him under this or the 
 special Act, shall be final." 
 
 1. Goodwill of Business — Special Agree- 
 ment — Occupier of House — Title — Metropolitan 
 Streets Improvement Act, 1877 — Mortgage.'] A 
 public body acting under the powers of their Act. 
 and of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act gave 
 notice to the Plaintiff, who was a tailor, to take 
 his house, which was leasehold. After some ne- 
 gotiation they offered him £400, of which £150- 
 was to be apportioned to his leasehold interest 
 and £250 to his trade damage and personal ex- 
 penses, to which the Plaintiff agreed. The Plain- 
 tiff had mortgaged his leasehold interest and' 
 could not make a good title. The Plaintiff then, 
 brought an action for specific performance of the 
 agreement, and the Defendants afterwards paid 
 the £400 into Court under the 76th section of the- 
 
< 777 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 778 ) 
 
 I. LiWDS CLAUSES ACT — COMPENSATION— 
 
 eoniinued. 
 Lands Clauses Act, executed a deed-poll, and 
 look possession -.—Held (affirming the decree of 
 Bacon, V.C), that the Plaintiff was entitled to 
 judgment in the action, and to have the £250 
 paid at once to him, with interest from the time 
 when the Defendants took possession. — ^Although 
 in some cases the goodwill of trade premises 
 ■passes to a mortgagee, that does not apply to a 
 ■case where the goodwill depends on the personal 
 skill of the owner. Cooper •«. Metkopolitan 
 BoAED OF Works - 26 Ch. D. 472 
 
 2. land injnrionsly affected — 8 & 9 Vict. 
 
 c. 18 — Souse — Special Value as a Public-house — 
 'Compensation for."] Under statutory powers con- 
 ferred by an Act incorporating the Lands Clauses 
 Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18), a railway company 
 stopped up a street in which were a house and 
 premises used as an hotel, whereby the value 
 thereof for using, selling, or letting as an hotel 
 and public-house was diminished : — Keld, that 
 the owner was entitled to compensation under the 
 Lands Clauses Act, 1 845, for the depreciation in 
 the special value of the premises as an hotel and 
 public-house. Wadham v. North Eastern Eail- 
 iWAY Company - - - 14 ft. B. D. 747 
 
 j;Affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 16 Q. B. B. 227] 
 
 3. Land injuriously affected — 8 * 9 Vict. 
 
 c. 18, s. 63 — Fart of Suilding Estate taJcen for 
 Sewage Farm — Valu£ of other Parts thereby depre- 
 ■ciated — Compensation for " injuriously affecting " 
 ^ame."} Part of land laid out as a building estate 
 was taken by a local board under an Act incorporat- 
 ing the Lands Clauses Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18), 
 -for the purposes of a sewage farm, whereby the 
 value of other parts of the land near to the part 
 60 taken was depreciated, even in the absence of 
 any nuisance arising from the sewage farm when 
 made : — Seld, that the owner of the estate was 
 entitled to compensation under the Lands Clauses 
 Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict v. 18), u. 63, not only in 
 Tespect of the land taken, but also for damage 
 sustained by reason of the " injuriously affecting " 
 the other lands by the exercise of the statutory 
 powers. The Queen v. Essex 14 ft. B. D. 7S3 
 [Eeversed by the Court of Appeal.] 
 
 4. Land injuriously affected — Sewer — 
 
 Mght of Access to— Injuriously affecting such Bight 
 — Cmnpensation — Lands Clauses Consolidation 
 Act, 1845, B. 68 — Railways Clauses Consolidation 
 Act, 1845, s. 6.] The Plaintiifs, in 1843, under 
 the authority of a local Act, constructed a sewer 
 on land part of which had been bought by the 
 Defendants, a railway company, but had not then 
 been used for their works. Part of the remainder 
 was bought by the Defendants after the construc- 
 tion of the sewer, but no part of the laud was 
 the Plaintiffs', or had ever been granted to them. 
 The local Act not only authorized the Plaintiffs 
 to make the sewer, but vested it in them, with the 
 duty to repair it, without, however, giving them 
 any express right of access thereto. In 1863 the 
 Defendants, in exercise of the powers conferred on 
 them by their special Act, with which was incor- 
 porated the Kailways Clauses Consolidation Act, 
 1845, constructed an embankment over the sewer 
 which, though it made it less easy, did not pre- 
 vent the Plaintiffs getting access to the sewer in 
 
 I. LANDS CLAUSES ACT - COMPENSATION— 
 
 continued. 
 order to repair it. The Plaintiffs being obliged 
 afterwards to repair, and having incurred extra 
 expense in doing so in consequence of the em- 
 bankment, claimed compensation from the De- 
 fendants under s. 68 of the Lands Clauses Conso- 
 lidation Act, 1845, and s. 6 of the Eailways 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, for injuriously 
 affecting the Plaintiffs' interest in the sewer: — 
 Held, by the Queen's Bench Division, that the 
 PI ain tiffs had no interest in land within the mean- 
 ing of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, 
 s. 68, and therefore could not maintain the claim 
 to compensation •.—Held, by the Court of Appeal, 
 that as a right of access to the sewer had not been 
 expressly given by the local Act but had to be 
 implied, the right of access which ought to be 
 implied was not any particular mode of access, 
 but such only as was reasonably necessary for 
 enabling the repair of the sewer to be done, and 
 as that had not been prevented by the Defendants' 
 embankment, but only rendered less easy and 
 convenient, the Plaintiffs had no right to com- 
 pensation. Mayor ov Birkenhead v. London 
 AND North Western Railway Company 
 
 [15 ft. B. B. 572 
 
 6. Matternotthe subject of Compensation 
 
 — Application to quash Inquisition — Certiorari, 
 Writ of — Discretion — Lands Clauses Act, 1845 
 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18).] Application having been made 
 to the High Court of Justice for a writ of certio- 
 rari, to bring up and quash the proceedings upon 
 an inquisition before the sheriff as to the amount 
 of compensation to be awarded to a claimant 
 under the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, 
 on the ground that the jury in assessing the 
 compensation had taken into consideration matters 
 which were not legally the subject of compensa- 
 tion ; it was proved that the applicants for the 
 writ had allowed five mouths to expire without 
 taking any objection to the proceedings : — Held, 
 that as the time allowed for setting aside an 
 award made under the provisions of the above- 
 mentioned Act had expired before the application 
 was made, the writ of certiorari ought not to be 
 granted. The Queen v. Sheward 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 741 
 
 6. Settlement by Justices — Lands Clauses 
 
 Act, 1845 (8 (fc 9 Vict. c. 18), s. "ii— Railways 
 Clauses Act, 1845 (8 <fc 9 Vict. c. 20), ss. 6, 140— 
 Settlement by Justices of the Amomit^Limitation 
 of Time -11 & 12 Vict. c. 43, s. 11.] The deter- 
 mination by justices under sect. 24 of the Lands 
 Clauses Act, 1845, of the compensation to be 
 paid by a railway company to a landowner for 
 having in the construction of the railway injuri- 
 ously affected his land, is not an order of the jus- 
 tices for the payment of money within sect. 11 of 
 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43 (which limits the time for 
 making a complaint to six months from the time 
 when the matter of such complaint arose), and 
 therefore the justices have jurisdiction under sect. 
 24 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, to hear and de- 
 termine the question of such disputed compensa- 
 tion, although the application be made more than 
 six months after the land has been so injuriously 
 affected.— Be Edmundson (17 Q. B. 67) overruled. 
 The Queen v. Edwards - 13 ft. B. D. 586 
 
( 779 ) 
 
 II. lANDS CLAUSES ACT — C0MPT7LS0RY 
 POWERS, 
 
 . !• Conditions Precedent — Metropolitan 
 
 Street Improvements Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Vict, 
 c. ccxxxv^— Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 
 1845 (8*9 Vict. c. 18), s. 18— Meaning of Word 
 " take."} By an Act of 1877, with which the Lands 
 Clauses Act was incorporated, the Metropolitan 
 Board of "Works were authorized to effect certain 
 street improvements, and by sect. 5 were autho- 
 rized to " enter upon, take, use, and hold " any 
 of the lands in the deposited plans and books of 
 reference, with the exception of certain specified 
 lands._ By sect. .S3, after reciting that it was 
 expedient to make provision for the accommo- 
 dation of such of the labourino; classes as would 
 be displaced by the improvements, the Board were 
 directed to acquire or appropriate lands and sell 
 them or let them on building lease for the pur- 
 pose of the erection of suitable houses for the 
 labouring classes. And it was provided that 
 before the Board should, without the consent of 
 one of the Secretaries of State, " take for the pur- 
 poses of this Act " fifteen houses or more occu- 
 pied at the passing of the Act wholly or partially 
 by persons of the labouring classes, they should 
 prove to the satisfaction of such Secretary of State 
 that suitable accommodation had been provided 
 elsewhere for the same number of persons as had 
 been accommodated in the houses to be taken. 
 The Board served on the Plaintiff notice to treat 
 for the purchase of more than fifteen houses be- 
 longing to him, which were occupied at the passing 
 of the Act by the labouring classes. The Plain- 
 tiff sent in his claim without prejudice to any 
 question as to the right of the Board to exercise 
 their powers before complying with the proviso of 
 sect. 33. The Board then served notice of their 
 intention to summon a .I'ury. It was admitted 
 that the conditions of the proviso had not yet 
 been complied with. The Plaintiff brought his 
 action to restrain the Board from proceeding on 
 their notices till they had complied with the 
 conditions : — Held, by Chitty, J., that the word 
 " take " in the proviso was not confined to taking 
 possession, but included purchasing, and that the 
 Board ought to be restrained from taking any 
 steps to acquire a title to the land till they had 
 complied with the conditions precedent. An 
 injunction was therefore granted. — On appeal, 
 lield, by Jessel, M.E., and Bowen, L.J., dissen- 
 tiente Cotton, L.J., that as the conditions prece- 
 dent to taking the Plaintiff's land were conditions 
 which the Board were able and compellable to 
 comply with, the land in question was land which 
 the Board were " authorized to purchase or take " 
 within the meaning of the Lands Clauses Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845, s. 18, and that they were 
 entitled to serve a notice to treat and summon a 
 .jury. — Held, by Jessel, M.R., and Bowen, L.J., 
 that the prohibition against " taking " the land 
 till the conditions had been complied with did not 
 prohibit the Board from taking before such com- 
 pliance any proceeding prior to tlie conveyance, 
 Jessel, M.K., giving no opinion whether they 
 were prohibited from taking a conveyance or only 
 from taking possession, and Bowen, L.J. (with 
 whom on this point Cotton, L.J., concurred) 
 holding that the getting a conveyance from the 
 landlord without entering into possession came 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 780 ) 
 
 II. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — COMPULSOEr 
 
 rO'W'ERa— continued. 
 within the meaning of the word " take." — Beld, 
 therefore, by Jessel, M.E., and Bowen, L.J. (dis- 
 sentiente Cotton, L.J.), that the injunction must 
 be dissolved. Spenceb v. Metkopolitan Boaed. 
 or WoBKS - 82 Ch. D. 142 
 
 2, Easement — ■ Railway — Compulsory 
 
 Powers — Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845. 
 (8 (fc 9 Vict. c. 18), «. 85.] A railway company was 
 entitled by a special Act to acquire compulsorily 
 an easement of tunnelling under land, unless a jury 
 should determine that such easement could not he- 
 acquired by the company without material detri- 
 ment to the remainder of such land : — Seld, that 
 tlie company might enter upon the land for the- 
 purpose of making the tunnel under sect. 85 of the 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act upon depositing- 
 the value of the easement, and could not be com- 
 pelled to deposit the value of the whole land. 
 HiiL V. Midland Eailway Cohpant 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 143 
 
 3. Easement — Raihoay Company — Here- 
 ditaments — " Land," whether includes Incorporeal 
 Hereditaments — Lands Clauses Consolidation Acty 
 1845 (8 (fc 9 Vict. c. 18),ss. 3, 16, 84, 85.] By a special 
 Act the S. Co. were authorized to make arailway- 
 and to carry it across the railway of the G. W. 
 Co., at one point by a bridge over and at another 
 by an archway under that railway, the archway 
 to remain the property of the G. W. Co. The Act 
 by sect. 8, which was inserted at the instance of the 
 G. W. Co. for their protection, provided that the 
 S. Co. should not purchase and take any land of 
 the G. W. Co. which the S. Co. were authorized 
 to use, enter upon or interfere with, but that the 
 S. Co. might purchase and take, and the G. W. 
 Co. should sell and grant accordingly, an ease- 
 ment or right of using the same in perpetuity for 
 the purposes of the Act ; and by sect. 9 that if any 
 dispute should arise respecting the matters afore- 
 said it should be settled by an arbitrator to be- 
 appointed under the Act. The Lands Clauses. 
 Act, 1845 (except where expressly varied by the- 
 Act), was incorporated therewith, and it was 
 enacted that the words and expressions to which 
 meanings were assigned by the Lands Clauses- 
 Act should have the same respective meanings- 
 unless there was something in the subject or con- 
 text repugnant to such construction. — The S. Co. 
 gave the 6. W. Co. a notice to treat for the pur- 
 chase of an easement or right in or over lands of 
 the G. W. Co. for the purposes of the crossings,, 
 and shortly afterwards a notice of their desire to 
 enter upon and use the lands for those pm:poses, 
 and of their intention to apply to the Board of 
 Trade to appoint a suiTOyor to determine the 
 value of such easement or right. The valuation 
 was made, and the S. Co. deposited the amount 
 and entered into a bond under sect. 85 of the Lands- 
 Clauses Act. — The G. W. Co. having brought an 
 action for an injunction to restrain the S. Co^ 
 from entering or continuing upon the lands men- 
 tioned in the notice to treat, or from putting in. 
 force any of the powers of the special Act or of 
 the Lands Clauses Act in relation to the com- 
 pulsory purchase of land, on the ground that the 
 capital of the S. Co. had not been duly subscribed 
 as required by sect. 16 of the Lands Clauses 
 
( 781 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 782 ) 
 
 II. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — COMPULSOaY 
 
 FO'WERS-— continued. 
 Act -.—Held, by Lords Bramwell and FitzGerald, 
 affirming the decision of the Coiirt of Appeal, Lord 
 Watson dissenting, that the S. Co. could not he re- 
 strained on that ground : — By Lord FitzGerald, 
 That (1) the assertion of the rights conferred by 
 .sect. 8 of the special Act was not a " putting in 
 force of the powers of the Lauds Clauses Act or 
 of the special Act in relation to the compulsory 
 taking of land " : and (2) that even if the per- 
 petual easements created by sect. 8 of the special 
 Act would constitute "land "within sect. 16 of the 
 Lands Clauses Act, yet the case had been taken 
 out of the compulsory powers of the Lauds Clauses 
 Act by sect. 8 of the special Act. Great Westebn 
 Kailway Company v. Swindon and Cheltenham 
 Eailway Company 22 Ch. D. 677 ; 9 App. Cas. 787 
 
 4. Expiration of Tenoi—Bailway Com- 
 pany — Entry under s. 85 of the Lands Clauses Act, 
 18i5, shortly he/ore Expiration of Period allowed 
 for Completion of Railway — Biqht of Company to 
 take Possession without Sheriff — Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 18), ss. 68, 
 84, 85, 91.] The special Act of a railway company 
 enacted that " the powers of the company for the 
 compulsory purchase of lands for the purposes of 
 this Act shall not be exercised after the expiration 
 of three years from the passing of this Act ;" and 
 that "if the railways are not completed within 
 five years from the passing of this Act, then on 
 the expiration of that period the powers by this 
 Act granted to the company for making and com- 
 pleting the railways or otherwise in relation 
 thereto, shall ceose to be exercised except as to so 
 much thereof as is then completed." A few days 
 before the expiration of the three years the com- 
 pany served on a landowner a notice to treat for 
 part of his land. A correspondence ensued, no 
 agreement was come to, and the compensation 
 was not assessed. Thirteen days before the 
 expiration of the five years the company, having 
 complied with the requirements of sect. 85 of the 
 Lands Clauses Act, 1845, entered and proceeded 
 to make the railway, the landowner objecting 
 and resisting. The land was bohS, fide required 
 for the railway : — Held, reversing the judgment 
 of the Court of Appeal and restoring the judg- 
 ment of Fi-y, J., that whether the railway could or 
 could not have been completed within the thirteen 
 days, the entry under sect. 85 was lawful ; that the 
 company could not be restrained by injunction, 
 but were entitled to remain and complete the 
 railway after the expiration of the five years. 
 
 TrVEKTON AND NOBTH DEVON EaILWAY COMPANY 
 
 V. LoosEMOBE 22 Ch. S. 25 ; 9 App, Cas, 480 
 
 5. Interest on Purchase-money — Interest, 
 
 from what time payable — Conveyance — ■ Settled 
 Lands — Trustees with Power of Sale— Tenant for 
 Life, Sale by — Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 
 1845, ss. 75, 85.] A complete contract being es- 
 tablished between a railway company and a land- 
 owner by the notice to treat, and an award under 
 the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, fixing 
 the amount of the purchase-money, the ordinary 
 rules as between vendor and purcliaser apply to 
 such a contract, including the liability of the 
 purchasing company, in a proper case, to pay 
 interest on their unpaid piu-chase-money.— Thus, 
 
 II. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — COMPTILSOEY 
 
 PO'Vr^'RS— continued. 
 where the title has not been .icoepted before 'the' 
 award, and the company, not being in possession, 
 delay paying or depositing the purchase-money, 
 they are liable to pay interest at 4 per cent, per 
 annum, not from the date of the award, but from 
 the time they might prudently have taken pos- • 
 session ; that is, when a good title was shewn. — 
 In re Eccleshill Local Board (13 Ch. D. 363) dis- 
 approved of. — Where a railway company has given 
 notices to treat to a legal tenant for life under a 
 settlement and to the trustees of the settlement 
 who liave a bare power of sale with his consent, 
 and the purchase-money for the life estate is fixed 
 as between the company and the tenant for life by 
 award imder a reference to arbitration under the 
 Lands Clauses Act in the usual way, the trustees 
 taking no part in the reference, the company can- 
 not require the sale to be completed as a sale by 
 the trustees, but it must be completed as a sale 
 by the tenant for life under the Act. In re 
 
 PiGOTT and THE GeEAT WeSTEKN EaILWAY COM- 
 PANY 18 Ch. D. 146 
 
 6, Notice to Tiea.i— Sects. 18, 19, 23, 25, 
 
 27, 28, 30 — Service on Occupier of Part of Pre- 
 mises — Notice adopted by Owner — Validity of 
 Service — Beference to Arbitration — Arbitrator 
 neglecting or refusing to act — Power of other Arbi- 
 trator to proceed ex parte,"] Where arbitrators 
 have been appointed under sect. 25 of the Lands 
 Clauses Act, 1845, and one arbitrator refuses or 
 neglects for seven days to concur in the appoint- 
 ment of an umpire, the other arbitrator has power, 
 under sect. 30 of the Act, to proceed ex parte to 
 make an award, and the previous appointment of 
 an umpire is not in such a case a condition pre- 
 cedent to the ex parte proceedings. — A corpora- 
 tion, three days before the expiration of their 
 compulsory powers, without making any attempt 
 
 no discover and serve the owner of the property, 
 served a notice to treat on an occupier of part of 
 the premises comprised in the notice to treat, who- 
 was the agent of the owner for the management 
 of his property. The occupier took it tlie same 
 day to the solicitor of the owner, and also wrote 
 to the owner; but it did not appear that, as a 
 matter of fact, the notice came to the hands of 
 the owner before the three days had expired. 
 The owner, however, after the expiration of the 
 three days gave a counter notice under sect. 92 
 requiring the corporation to take the whole of his 
 property. This notice he subsequently withdrew, 
 and required the corporation to proceed with the 
 purchase of the land specified in their notice to 
 treat, which tliey declined to do : — Held, that the 
 service of the notice to treat was irregular and 
 iuv&lid, and that the owner could not, by his sub- 
 sequent adoption of the notice, cure tlxe irregula- 
 rity and compel the corporation to proceed with 
 it. — The conditions necessary for service of a 
 notice to treat discussed. Shephebd v. Cobpoea- 
 TioN OF Noewich - 30 Ch. D. 553 
 
 7. Part of House — Bailway Company — 
 
 Notice to treat — Company taking part of a Bouse 
 to take the whole — Close — Private Boad — Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845(8 & 9 Viet.c, 18), 
 s. 92.] A house and garden were surrounded by 
 a wall. A. gate way in the wall opened into a 
 
( 783 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 78i ) 
 
 II. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — COMPULSORY 
 
 TOWERS—coiitmued. 
 paddock surrounded by a high hedge of an orna- 
 mental kind. From the gateway tlie back road 
 to the house passed through the paddock to a 
 public road which ran along the far side of the 
 paddock fence : — Held, that the paddock was part 
 of the house within sect. 92 of the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845. Baenes v. Sotithsea 
 Railway Company - 27 Ch. D. 536 
 
 8, Sale by Trustees — Persons ahsolutely 
 
 entitled — Lands Clauses Act, 1845, ss. 1, 9 — 
 Married Women entitled for Separate Use — ■ 
 Trustee acting as Surveyor under the 9th section 
 — Power of Sale, Determination of] A testator 
 devised his residuary real estate (which com- 
 prised land in respect of which notice to treat 
 had been given by a railway company) to trus- 
 tees in trust for his wife for life, and after lier 
 death to assure the same to his two married 
 daughters, in equal shares, for their separate use 
 as tenants in common, with a gift over in favour 
 ■of their issue iu events which did not happen ; 
 and "for the purpose of division" he empowered 
 his trustees to sell his residuary estate: and 
 declared that his trustees might receive payment 
 for all business done by them in relation to the 
 estate. — The testator's wife, his two daughters 
 and their husbands survived the testator : and 
 after the death of the widow the trustees sold 
 and conveyed the lands to a railway company for 
 a price which had been determined by the valua- 
 tion of two surveyors, as provided by the 9th sec- 
 tion of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, the trustees 
 having first, for the purposes of such valuation, 
 appointed one of themselves as the surveyor on 
 their behalf. One of the testator's daughters 
 disputed the validity of the sale, and brought an 
 action to restrain the company from taking or 
 using the land : — Meld, first, that whether thej 
 power of sale under the will was still in existence 
 or not, the trustees did not exercise it, but pro- 
 fessed to convey the land under the provisions of 
 the Lands Clauses Act, and therefore the validity 
 of the sale must be determined without reference 
 io the power. — Secondly, that the trustees, being 
 trustees of the land for femes covertes who were 
 absolutely entitled for their separate use, were 
 not persons competent to contract with a railway 
 company for the sale of the land under the 7th 
 ■section of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, and that 
 the sale was for that reason invalid. — Thirdly, 
 that the sale was also invalid by reason of the 
 aiJpointmeut by the trustees of one of themselves 
 ■as surveyor to value the land under the 9th sec- 
 tion of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845. — Per Jessel, 
 M.B. : The mere fact of trustees having the price 
 fixed by two surveyors, and then agreeing to sell 
 for that price, instead of first agreeing to sell for 
 a certain price and then testing the price by the 
 valuation of two surveyors, would not in itself 
 invalidate u, sale under the 9th section of the 
 Lands Clauses Act. — Per Jessel, M.R. : The power 
 of sale given to the trustees by the will did not 
 determine on the death of the tenant for life, but 
 might have been exercised within a reasonable 
 time afterwards for the purpose of dividing the 
 property. Peteks v. Lewes and East Geinstead 
 Bailway Company 16 Ch. D. 703 ; 18 Ch, D. 429 
 
 III. LANDS CLAUSES ACT— COSTS. 
 
 1. Arbitration — Lands Clauses Acts, 1845, 
 
 1869 (8*9 Vict. c. 18, ss. 23, 34 ; 32 <{; 33 Vict. 
 e. 1 8) — Settlement of Purchase-money hy Arbitration 
 — Payment doe before Conveyance.] Where the 
 amount of compensation payable to the owner of 
 lands taken under the Lands Clauses Acts, 184.'5 
 and 1869, is settled by arbitration, and the 
 amount and the costs of the arbitration are 
 awarded to the owner, the taxed coats of the 
 arbitration become payable to him within a 
 reasonable time, and the execution of the convey- 
 ance by him of the lands taken is not a condition 
 precedent to payment of such costs. Capell i;. 
 Geeat Western Railway Company 9 ft. B. D. 
 [459 ; 11 ft. B. D. 345 
 
 2. Conveyance — Taxation — 8 & 9 Vict. 
 
 c. 18, s. 83.] A railway company cannot under 
 the 83rd section of the Lands Clauses Consoli- 
 dation Act, tax the costs of conveyance after 
 payment by them of the costs. In re South 
 Eastern Railway Company. Ex parte Someb- 
 viLLE - - - 23 Ch. D. 167 
 
 3. Incumbrancers — 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, s. 80 
 
 — Payment out of Court.] After payment into 
 Court by a company of the purchase- money of land 
 belonging to a tenant for life and remaindermen, 
 some of the latter mortgaged their reversionary 
 interests in the fund. — Upon the death of the 
 tenant for life, the owners of the fund and their 
 incumbrancers presented a petition for payment 
 of the fund out of Court : — Seld, that the com- 
 pany were not liable to pay the costs incurred by 
 the mortgagees in proving their incumbrances. 
 Ex parte Geeat Western Railway Company. 
 In re Gough's Trusts - 24 Ch. D. 569 
 
 4. Litigation between adverse Claimants 
 
 — 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, t. 80.] Property which was in 
 tho possession of a mortgagee was taken by the 
 London School Board, and the purchase-money 
 paid into Court pursuant to the Lands Clauses 
 Act, 1845. The mortgagor's trustee in liquidation 
 presented a petition asking for an inquiry what 
 was due on the mortgage, for payment to the 
 mortgagee of what should be so found due, and 
 for payment of the residue of the purchase-money 
 to himself: — Held (reversing the decision of 
 Fry, J), that the Board must pay the costs of 
 the inquiry. In re Bareham - 17 Ch, D. 329 
 
 5. Official Solicitor — Chancery Funds 
 
 Bules, 1874, r. 91 — Chancery Funds Amended Or- 
 ders, 1874, r. 14 — -Bailway Company — Payment out 
 of Court — Fund exceeding £500 not dealt imth for 
 Fifteen Years.] Where a fund in Court exceeding 
 £500 in value and representing the purchase- 
 moneys of settled lands taken by a railway com- 
 pany, with accumulated iiiterest, had not been 
 dealt with for upwards of fifteen years, and it 
 had become necessary under the Chancery Funds 
 Rules, 1874, i. 91, and the Chancery Funds 
 Amended Orders, 1874, Order 14, to serve the offi- 
 cial solicitor with the petition for the payment out 
 of the fund : — HeM, first, that his costs were not 
 payable by the railway company ; secondly, that 
 such costs having been occasioned by tlie default of 
 the tenant for life, were properly payable out of 
 the portion of the fund which came to his estate. 
 In re J. Olaeke's Estate - 21 Ch. D. 776 
 
( 7S5 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 786 ) 
 
 lil. LANDS CLAUSES ACT— COSTS— coniimued. 
 
 6- "Taking Land"— 8 & 9 Viet. c. 18, 
 
 ss. 80, %5— Entry on Land— Abandonment ofBail- 
 nvay.] A railway company gave notice to treat for 
 ,a piece of land, and no agreement having been come 
 to with the owners, they entered on tlieland under 
 the powers of the 85th section of the Lands Clauses 
 Act, and paid the deposit into Court. Afterwards 
 tlie company obtained an Act by which they were 
 empowered to abandon that part of their under- 
 taking, but it was enacted that the abandonment 
 should not prejudice any landowner's rights to 
 compensation for damage done by entry and occu- 
 pation, and that the compensation should be deter- 
 Eiiined in the manner provided by the Lands 
 Clauses Act. The owners of the land then entered 
 into an agreement with the company fixing the 
 amount of compensation at £1350, but providing 
 that this should not include costs, charges and ex- 
 penses which the owners might be entitled to re- 
 cover under the company's Acts, but that such 
 costs, charges, and expenses should be recoverable 
 from the company in addition to the compensation 
 as if the agreement had not been entered into. 
 The company objected to pay the costs of ascertain- 
 ing the amount of the compensation on the ground 
 that the land had not been taken within the 
 meaning of the 80th section of the Lands Clauses 
 Act. They also objected to pay the costs of the 
 preparation of the agreement: — Held (affirming 
 the decision of Kay, J.), that the land had been 
 ■" taken " within the meaning of the 80th section, 
 and that the company must pay the costs of 
 .ascertaining the amount of compensation and of 
 the preparation of the agreement. Charlton v. 
 EoLLESTON - - 28 Ch. D. 237 
 
 T. Verdict of Jury — Lands Clauses Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845 (8*9 Viet. c. 18), ss. 38, 51 
 — " Simi previously offered."2 By sect. 38 of the 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, the pro- 
 moters of an undertaking, before issuing their 
 warrant for causing a jury to be summoned in 
 cases of disputed compensation, shall give not 
 less than ten days' notice of their intention to 
 summon a jury to the other party, and in such 
 notice shall state what sum of money they are 
 willing to give for the interest in the lands 
 sought to be purchased from him, and for the 
 damage to be sustained by him by the execution 
 of the works ; and by sect. 51 , on every such inquiry 
 before a jury where the verdict of the jury shall 
 be given for a greater sum " than the sum pre- 
 viously offered " by the promoters, all the costs of 
 the inquiry shall be borne by the promoters, 
 but if the verdict be given for a less sum the 
 costs shall be borne equally between the parties, 
 in the manner specified in that section. — ^In a 
 proceeding to take and pm-chase the claimant's 
 lands under the Lands Clauses Consolidation 
 Act, 1845, the promoters, on the 9th of March, 
 gave him the notice required by sect. 38, and 
 stated that they were willing to give him £600 
 as and for purchase-money and compensation. 
 On the 19th of March, the promoters served a 
 second notice upon the claimant that they were 
 vfilling, and thereby offered, to pay £900 as pur- 
 chase-money and compensation. 'This notice did 
 not refer to the previous one. Neither offer was 
 accepted by the claimant, and onthe 29thof March 
 
 ni. LANDS CLAUSES ACT— COSTS— conMnued. 
 the promoters issued their warrant for causing 
 a jury to be summoned, who assessed the sum to 
 which the claimant was entitled at £750. — Held, 
 first, that in cases to which sect. 88 was applic- 
 able the words " the sum previously offered " in 
 sect, 51 applied only to an offer made under sect. 
 38 ; secondly, that the promoters were not entitled 
 to rely upon their second offer of £900 as an offer 
 made under sect. 38, and that the costs of the in- 
 quiry must, therefore, be borne by them. The 
 Queen v. Smith - - 12 ft. B. D. 481 
 
 IV. LANDS CLAUSES ACT— PUECHASE-MONEY. 
 
 1. Adverse Claimants — Claim of the Crown 
 
 — 8 & 9 Tict. c. 18, s. 76.] A railway company 
 under the powers of its Act gave notice to a lord 
 of the manor to take a piece of land on the sea- 
 shore, which he claimed as part of the waste of 
 his manor. The purchase-money was assessed by 
 arbitration, but an adverse claim having been 
 made by the Crown, the company paid the pur- 
 chase-money into Court under the 76th section of 
 the Lands Clauses Act. The Crown filed an in- 
 formation against the lord of the manor claiming 
 the land together with other land as part of the 
 foreshore. The lord of the manor having filed a 
 petition for payment of the purchase-money to 
 him: — Held (affirming the decree of Kay, J.), 
 that as the Crown could not be brought before 
 the Court under the Lands Clauses Act to contest 
 the claim of the Petitioner, the petition ought to 
 stand over till the information had been heard. — 
 Qu,sere as to the course which ought to have been 
 pursued if the rival claimant had been a subject. 
 In re Manor op Lowestoft and Great Eastern 
 Eailwat Company. Ex parte Keevb 24 Ch. D. 
 
 [253 
 
 2. Application of Income — 8 & 9 Vict. 
 
 c. 18, s. 74 — Lands subject to beneficial Leases taken 
 by Railway Company — T^enant for Life and Re- 
 mainderman — Form of Order.'] A railway company 
 took freeholds settled by a will, and subject to 
 eight leases, one granted by the testator and the 
 other seven granted under powers in the will, 
 either by the trustees or the tenant for life, and 
 containing covenants by the lessee to repair or re- 
 build. The company purchased the leasehold in- 
 terests from the tenants themselves, and paid the 
 purchase-moneys of the fee, subject to the lessee's 
 interests, into Court under the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845. The income of the pur- 
 chase-moneys when invested would be greater 
 than the aggregate rents payable under the leases : 
 — Held, upon petition by the tenaut for life for 
 investment and payment to him of the dividends, 
 that, having i-egard tothe 74th section of the Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, he was entitled, 
 during the continuance of the leases, to so much 
 only of the dividends as equalled the amount of 
 the rents he would have received in case the pro- 
 perty had not been taken by the railway com- 
 pany ; that the rest of the rents must be accumu- 
 lated; and that, upon the date of falling in of 
 each lease, the tenant for life would be entitled 
 to an additional annual sum representing the 
 income of so much of the capital of the purchase- 
 moneys as was attributable to the property com- 
 prised in the lease which had fallen in, and of 
 the accumulations thereof, less the rent under 
 
( 787 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 788 ) 
 
 IV. lANDS ClAtTSES ACT— PUECHASE-MONEY 
 
 — continued. 
 such lease. — In re Wootton's Estate (Law Eep. 
 1 Eq. 589) followed. — Form of order. In re 
 AViLKEs' Estate 16 Ch. D. 897 
 
 3. ■ Payment out of Court — Person " be- 
 coming absolutely entitled " — Trustees with Power 
 of Sale — Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 
 (8*9 Vict. c. 18), s. 69]. A share of stock in 
 Court, which represented money paid into Court 
 by a railway company for the piivchase of land 
 taken under their statutory powers, had been as- 
 signed by the beneficial owner to trustees, on trust 
 for sale and conversion, at the request in writing 
 of herself during her life and afterwards at the 
 discretion of the trustees, and to hold the proceeds 
 on certain trusts : — Held, that, the settlor joining 
 in the petition, and the company not objecting, 
 the share might be transferred to the trustees as 
 persons ■' becoming absolutely entitled " within 
 the meaning of sect. 69 of the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845. In re Wakd's Estates 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 100 
 
 4. Eeinvestment — Cash under Control of 
 
 Court— 23 & 24 Vict. c. 38, s. 10— General Order 
 of Court of Chancery, 1st February, 1861, r. 1 — 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 'it- 9Vict. 
 c. 18), s. 70.] Money paid into Court under the 
 Lands Clauses Act, 1845, or under any other Act 
 which directs money so paid in to be invested in 
 specified securities, is not " cash under the con- 
 trol of the Court," within the meaning of the Act 
 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 38, o. 10, and the General Order 
 of the 1st of Februaiy, 1861, r. 1, and the Coui-t 
 cannot order such money to be invested in any 
 securities but those which are specified in the 
 Act under which it is paid in. — In re Boyd's 
 Settled Estate (21 W. E. 667) followed. Ex parte 
 ViCAE OP St. Maey, Wigton 18 Ch. D. 646 
 
 5. Eeinvestment — Cash under Control of 
 
 the Court — Money paid in under Lands Clauses 
 Act, 1845 (8 (fc 9 Vict. c. IS)— Law of Property Act, 
 1860 (23 * 24 Vict. c. 38), «. 10— General Order, 
 Feb. 1, 1861.] Money paid into Court under the 
 Lands Clauses Act is " cash under the control of 
 the Com't " within the meaning of the Act 23 & 
 
 24 Vict. c. 38, s. 10, and the General Order of the 
 Ist of February, 1861, and may be invested in any 
 of the securities sanctioned by the Court. — The 
 expression " cash under the control of the Com't " 
 means cash standing in Court in any cause or 
 matter. — In re Boyd's Settled Estates (21 W. R. 
 667) overruled. — Cash under the control of the 
 Court may be invested in East India 3J per cent. 
 Stock created since the date of the General Order. 
 Ex parte St. John Baptist College, Oxford. 
 In re Metropolitan and Distkiot Eailways 
 Act 22 Ch, D. 93 
 
 6. Reinvestment — Glebe Lands tahen by 
 
 Maihoay Company — Incumbrance — Bent-charge 
 ■ — 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, s. 69 — Cash under Control of 
 Court.'] A railway company took part of glebe 
 lands which were subject to a yearly rent- 
 charge created under the General Land Drain- 
 age and Improvement Company's Act, 1849, to 
 repay money borrowed by a former rector for 
 outlay on the glebe. The company paid the 
 purchase-moneys into Court under the Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and the in- 
 
 IV. LANDS CLAUSES ACT— PTTECHASE-MONEY 
 
 — continued. 
 cumbranoer being willing to take a lump sunj 
 in lieu of the remaining jiayments of the rent- 
 charge (eleven in number), the rector petitioned 
 to have this sum paid off out of the fund in 
 Court, and to have the residue of the fund in- 
 vested as if it were cash under the control of the 
 Court : — Held, first, that even supposing that the 
 rector could himself have charged the inheritance- 
 of the glebe to provide for or to repay similar 
 outlay, the Court ought not to disturb the exist- 
 ing state of things and allow the fund in Court 
 to be applied in anticipating the future payments 
 of the rent-charge. — Secondly, that money paid 
 into Court under the Lands Clauses Consolida- 
 tion Act, 1845, is not to be invested as cash under 
 the control of the Court, but only in the manner 
 specified in the Act. — In re Fryer's Settlement 
 (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 468) not followed. Ex parte 
 Eeotor of Kikksmeatou. In re Hull Kail way 
 and Dock Act - 20 Ch. D. 203 
 
 7. Eeinvestment— 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, s. 69— 
 
 Tenant for Life — Remainderman — Trust Estate — 
 Permanent Repairs — Recouping Trustee.'] Under 
 a will A. was tenant for life of a copyhold house 
 and two leasehold houses. The latter having 
 been taken under the Lands Clauses Consolidation 
 Act, the purchase-money was paid into Court 
 under the 69th section. The trustee of the will 
 having entered into a contract for putting the 
 copyhold house into permanent repair, and there 
 being no trust funds in hand out of which the 
 expense could be defrayed, the Court, upon a 
 petition for re-investment presented by the tenant 
 for life and the trustee, and without requiring 
 service on the remaindermen, ordered the contract 
 price of the repairs to be paid to the trustee out 
 of the fund in Com't, and the remainder to be in- 
 vested in consols, and the dividends paid to the 
 trustee. In re Aldeed's Estate 21 Ch. D. 228 
 
 V. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — SUPERFLUOUS 
 LANDS. 
 
 1. Sale by Company — Railway Company 
 
 — Landownei Pre-emption — Conveyance — Uliric 
 
 Vires — Lands Clauses Consolidation Ad (8 & 9 
 Vict. e. 18), 1845, s. 128.] The mere fact of a rail- 
 way company purporting to convey away lands 
 acquired by them for the purposes of their under- 
 taking is not conclusive to shew that the lands so 
 conveyed are superfluous lands within the mean- 
 ing of sect. 128 of the Lauds Clauses Consolidation 
 Act, 1845. — The M. Eailway Company having, 
 under their special Act passed in 1S72, acquired 
 for the purposes of their undertaking certain lands 
 forming part of a fai-m belonging to H., purported, 
 acting in excess of their parliamentary powers, to 
 sell and convey the lands to the S. Eailway Com- 
 pany under a bonS, fide arrangement by which 
 they were to be held and used for the j)urposes of 
 the undertakings of both companies. — Upon an 
 action brought by H. against both companies te 
 establish his right of pre-emption under sect. 128 
 of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, in 
 the lands conveyed, the ten years from the time 
 fixed by the M. Company's Act for the comple- 
 tion of their works not having yet expired : — 
 Held, that the mere fact of the conveyance was 
 not sufficient to shew that the lands were super- 
 
( 789 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 790 ) 
 
 V. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — SUPERFLUOUS 
 
 LANDS — continued. 
 fluous -witHii the meaning of that section ; and 
 that, Inasmnoh as it appeared from the evidence 
 that, had the lands remained in the hands of the 
 M. Company, they would i not have been super- 
 fluous for the purposes of that company within 
 that section, the Plaintiffs right of pre-emption 
 had not yet arisen ; but that the conveyance from 
 the M. Company to the S. Company must be set 
 aside as ultr^ vires. Hobbs v. Midland Bailw ay 
 Company - _ 20 Ch. D. 418 
 
 2. Sale by Company — Railway Company 
 
 — Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 <fc 9 
 Vict. e. 18), s. 127 — Covenant to reconvey — Ultra 
 Vires — Perpetuity — Land required/or Purposes of 
 Bailway.'] By a deed dated in August, 1865, 
 which recited that the Plaintiff company were 
 seised in fee simple of certain land which was no 
 longer required for the purposes of their railway, 
 the company conveyed the land to G. P. in fee 
 for £100, and G. P. covenanted with the company 
 that he, his heirs or assigns, would at any time 
 thereafter whenever the land might be requii'ed 
 for the railway or works of the company, and 
 whenever thereunto requested by the company 
 on a six calendar months' notice, and upon 
 receiving £100, reconvey the land to the com- 
 pany. In 1879 the Defendant purchased the 
 land from G. P.'s heir, with notice of the above 
 covenant. In 1880 the company gave the Defen- 
 dant notice to reconvey the land, and upon his re- 
 fusal to do so this action was brought for specific 
 performance of the covenant. The company had 
 power in 1865 by their special Act to purchase 
 land by agreement, though not oompulsorily, and 
 that power was extended to the present time by 
 subsequent Acts : — Held, by Kay, J., that the 
 transaction of 1865 was not ultra vires the com- 
 pany, that as there was at that time a strong 
 probability that the land would be required for 
 the purposes of the company, it was within their 
 power to enter into a prospective contract to pur- 
 chase it, and that the sale was not a conditional 
 sale, but an absolute sale with a personal contract 
 by the pvirchaser to resell : — Held, also, by Kay, J., 
 that an executory interest in property to arise on 
 a future event which may not happen within the 
 limits of the rule against perpetuities is void, 
 though it be limited to an ascertained person 
 who can release it at any time. — The dictum in 
 GObertson v. Bichards (4 H. & N. 277, 297) and 
 the decision in Birmingham Canal Company v. 
 CartwrigM (11 Ch. D. 421) dissented from.— -But, 
 Seld, by Kay, J., that in the present case the 
 covenant did not create any estate or interest in 
 land, and therefore was not obnoxious to the rule 
 against perpetuities, and that specific perform- 
 ance must be decreed, the covenant being bind- 
 ing on an alienee with notice on the principle of 
 Tulli V. Moxhay (2 Ph. Hi).— Held, by the Court 
 of Appeal, that the covenant in the deed of 1865 
 reserved to the company an interest in the land, 
 and that the sale was ultrk vires and void, for 
 that under the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 
 1845, s. 127, land sold by a company as super- 
 fluous land must be sold absolutely without re- 
 serving any interest to the company : — Held, also, 
 that a^ the covenant gave to the company an exe- 
 
 V. LANDS CLAUSES ACT — SUPEEFLUOUS 
 
 LANDS — contimied. 
 cutory interest in land to arise on an event which 
 might occur after the period allowed by the rules 
 as to remoteness, it was invalid on the ground of 
 remoteness. — Birmingham Canal Company v. 
 CartwrigM (11 Ch. D. 421) overruled.— The doc- 
 trine of Tulk V. Moxhay (2 Ph. 774) only applies 
 to restrictive covenants and not to covenants to 
 do acts relating to the land. London and South 
 Westeen Railway Company v. Gomm 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 563 
 
 3, Sale by Company — Bailway Company — 
 
 8 & 9 Vict. c. 18, ss. 127, 128— Bestrictive Covenant.^ 
 A railway company selling its superfluous land is' 
 at liberty to impose such restrictive conditions 
 upon the user and enjoyment of the land as may 
 most conduce to their advantage as vendors, and 
 there is nothing in the Lands Clauses Consolida- 
 tion Act, 1845, to deprive them in this respect of 
 the rights of ordinary vendors, hi re Higgins 
 AND Hitohman's Contbaot 21 Ch. D. 95 
 
 4. Sale by Company — Bailway Company — 
 
 Bestrictions — Land subject to statutory Prohibition 
 against huilding.'] An Incldsure Act passed in 
 1806 provided that no buildings should at any 
 time thereafter be erected on a certain strip of 
 land. In 1865 a railway company under their 
 statutory powers acquired a portion of the strip 
 of land for the purposes of their undertaking. A 
 part of the land thus acquired became superfluous 
 land, and the company in 1868 sold and conveyed 
 the superfluous part to a purchaser who demised 
 it to the Defendant. The Defendant in 1885 
 commenced building on the land : — Held, that the 
 laud acquired by the company was freed from the 
 prohibition of building only for the purposes of 
 the company's undertaking, and that, when part 
 of it was sold as superfluous land, the prohibition 
 of building revived in respect of that part. — An 
 injunction to restrain the Defendant from build- 
 ing on the land in contravention of the provisions 
 of the Inclosure Act was granted at the suit of an 
 owner of adjoining laud. Bibd v. Eggleton 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1012 
 LANDS CLAUSES ACT— Compensation — Dwell- 
 ings Improvement Act 25 Ch, D. 78 
 
 See Labodbebs' Dwellings Acts. 1. 
 Compulsory pirrchase — Unstamped deed 
 
 6'ee Kevenue— Stamps. 5. [24Ch. D. 119 
 Costs— Solicitor's charges - 30 Ch. D. 28 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 22.. 
 Lunatic's land— Conversion 27 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Lunatic — Peoperty. 8. 
 
 Payment out of Court — • Ee-investment — 
 
 " Summons in Chambers. 
 
 See Cases under Pbaotiob — Supreme 
 Court — Chambebs. 11 — 16. 
 - — Scotland - 8 App, Cas, 623 
 
 See Scotch Law — Harboue. 1. 
 LAPSE— Appointed share - 17 Ch. D. 151 
 
 See Power — Execution. 7. 
 
 Direction that share shall fall into residue 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 142 
 
 See Will — Residuary Gift. , 2. 
 Devise on condition - 21 Ch. D. 431 
 
 See Will — Condition. 8. 
 
( 791 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 792 ) 
 
 LAPSE — eontinued. 
 
 Devise to daughter— CurteBy 17 Ch. D. 115 
 
 See Will — Speaking fbom Death. 1. 
 Legacy. 
 
 See Oases under Will — Lapse. 
 
 Mortmain — Exoneration from debts 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 146 
 
 See Will— Exoneration. 1. 
 XAPSE OF TIME. 
 
 See Delay. 
 XAECENY. 
 
 See Cases under Criminal Law — Lar- 
 
 OENT. 
 
 By wife — Evidence of husband 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 266 
 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 2. 
 
 Misappropriation of property intrusted for 
 
 safe custody - - 8 Q. B. S. 706 
 
 See Criminal Law — Misappropriation. 
 
 Ship — Foreign port — Jurisdiction 
 
 See Jurisdiction. 2. [10 Q,. B. D. 76 
 
 LAECH TEEES— Windfalls t 28 Ch. D. 89, 220 ; 
 See Timber. 1, 2. [30 Ch. D. 485 
 
 XAEES. 
 
 See Wild Birds Protection Act, 1881 
 ^Statutes. 
 IiAITNCH — Beasonable precautions — Mersey 
 
 [7P. D. 217; 8P. D. 119 
 See Ship — Naviqation. 6, 7. 
 LEASE. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 • — Lease. 
 — — Agreement for. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 ■ — Agreement. 
 
 Agreement for — Custom of country 
 
 [21 Ch. S. 18 ; 8 App. Cas. 508 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom 
 
 OF COITNTRY. 
 
 Apportionment of conditions on severance 
 
 of reversion. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Covenants in. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 — Lease. 1 — 14. 
 
 Covenants — Continuing breach — Conditions 
 
 of sale - 7 App. Cas. 19 
 
 See Vendor and Pdechaseb — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 3. 
 
 Covenants running with the reversion. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Disclaimer by trustee in banki'uptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Dis- 
 claimer. 
 
 ■ Distress — Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Distress. 
 
 Distress — Winding-up of company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Distress. 
 
 Forfeiture, relief against. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 — Re-entry. 
 
 LEASE — continued. 
 
 Forfeiture, relief against — Statute respect- 
 ing. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entey 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Land subject to — Purchase-money —Appli- 
 cation of income - 16 Ch. D. 897 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Purchase- 
 money. 2. 
 
 Licence to assign - - 29 Ch. D. 661 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Kbsois- 
 
 SION. 1. 
 
 Mine 23 Ch. D. 81 ; 6 App. Cas. 460 
 
 See Mine — Lease. 1, 2. 
 Mines — Nova Scotia 8 App. Cas. 568 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Nova 
 Scotia. 
 Mistake— Rectification - 28 Ch. D. 265 
 
 jSee Mistake. 1. 
 Mortgagor's power to grant. 
 
 See Mortgage — ^Powers — Statutes. 
 Power of leasing. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — ^Powers. 
 1—4. 
 Renewable. 
 
 See Cases under Leasehold— Renew- 
 able Lease. 
 Renewal of, by executor 18 Ch. D. 93 
 
 See Executor — Administration. S. 
 Surrender of— Infant - 29 Ch. D. 248 
 
 See Infant — Property. 3. 
 
 LEASEHOLD. 
 
 I. Long Terms 
 II. Renewable Lease 
 
 Col. 
 792 
 794 
 
 I. LEASEHOLD— LONG lEEUS. 
 
 JBy 44 & 45 Vict. u. 41 (Conveyancing Act, 1881), 
 sect. 65 (1), where a residue unexpired of not less 
 than 200 years of a term, which, as originally 
 created, was for not less than 300 years, is subsist- 
 ing in land, whether being the whole land originally 
 comprised in the term, or part only thereof, without 
 any trust or right of redemption affecting the term 
 in favour of the freeholder, or other person entitled 
 in reversion expectant on the term, and without any 
 rent, or with merely a peppercorn rent or other rent 
 having no money value, incident to the reversion, or 
 having had a rent, not being merely a peppercorn 
 rent or other rent having no money value, originally 
 so incident, which subsequently has been released 
 or has become barred by lapse of time, or has in 
 any other way ceased to be payable, then the term 
 may be enlarged into a fee simple in the manner, 
 and subject to the restrictions, in this section pro- 
 
 (2.) Each of the following persons (namely) : 
 (i.) Any person beneficially entitled in right of 
 the term, whether subject to any incum- 
 brance or not, to possession of any land 
 comprised in the term ; but, in case of a 
 married woman, with the concurrence of 
 her husband, unless she is entitled for lier 
 separate use, whether with restraint om 
 anticipation or not, and then without his 
 concurrence ; 
 (ii.) Any person being in receipt of income as 
 trustee, in right of the term, or having the 
 
( 793 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 794 ) 
 
 I. LEASEHOID— LONG lEB.IS.S— continued. 
 
 term vested in Mm in trust for sale, whether 
 suhjeet to any incumbrance or not : 
 (iii.) Any person in whom, as personal represen- 
 tative of any deceased person, the term is 
 vested, whether subject to any incumbrance 
 or not ; 
 sImU, as far as regards the land to which he is 
 entitled, or in which he is interested, in right of the 
 term, in any such character as aforesaid, have 
 power by deed to declare to the effect that, from 
 and after the execution of the deed, the term sImII 
 be enlarged into a fee simple. 
 
 (3.) Thereupon, by virtue of the deed and of this 
 Act, the term shall become and be enlarged accord- 
 ingly, and the person in whom the term was pre- 
 viously vested shall acquire and have in the land a 
 fee simple instead of the term. 
 
 (4.) The estate in fee simple so acquired by 
 enlargement shall be subject to all the same trusts, 
 powers, executory limitations over, rights, and 
 equities, and to all the same covenants and provi- 
 sions relating to user and enjoyment, and to all 
 the same obligations of every kind, as the term 
 would have been stibjeet to if it had not been so 
 enlarged. 
 
 (5.) But where any land so held for the residue 
 of a term has been settled in trust by reference to 
 other land, being freehold land, so as to go along 
 with that other land as far as the law permits, and, 
 at the time of enlargement, the ultimate beneficial 
 interest in the term, whether subject to any subsist- 
 ing particular estate or not, has not become abso- 
 lutely and indefeasibly vested in any person, then 
 the estate in fee simple acquired as (foresaid shall, 
 without prejudice to any conveyance for value pre- 
 viously made by a person having a contingent or 
 defeasible interest in the term, be liable to be, and 
 sliall be, conveyed and settled in lihe manner as the 
 other land, being freehold land, aforesaid, and 
 until so conveyed and settled shall devolve bene- 
 ficially, as if it had been so conveyed and settled. 
 
 (6.) The estate in fee simple so acquired shall, 
 ivhether the term was originally created without 
 impeachment of waste or not, include the fee simple 
 in all mines and minerals which at the time of 
 enlargement have not been severed in right, or in 
 fact, or have not been severed or reversed by an 
 Inclosure Act or award. 
 
 (7.) This section applies to every such term as 
 aforesaid subsisting at or after the commencement 
 of this Act. 
 
 By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 (Conveyancing Act, 1882), 
 sect. 11. Sect. 65 of the Conveyancing Act of 1881 
 shall apply to and include, and shall be deemed to 
 have always applied to and included, every such 
 term as in that section mentioned, whether having 
 as the immediate reversion thereon the freehold or 
 not ; but not — 
 
 (i.) Any term liable to be determined by re-entry 
 
 for conditimt broken ; or 
 (ii.) Any term created by eub-demise out of a 
 superior term, itself incapable of being 
 enlarged into a fee simple. 
 
 " Bent having 
 and Law of 
 Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 65.] 
 Land was demised for a term of 500 years from 
 Michaelmas, 1646, at the yearly rent of "one 
 
 1. Enlargement into Fee 
 
 no money value " — ~ 
 
 I. LEASEHOLD— LONG l^nVLS—continued. 
 silver penny, if lawfully demanded " : — Seld, thaS 
 this rent was a "rent having no money value," 
 within the meaning of sect. 65 of the Convey- 
 ancing Act, 1881, and that the owner of the terns 
 in 1884 had power under that section to enlarge 
 the term into a fee. In re Chapman and Hobbs 
 
 [29 Ch. B. 1007 
 
 2. Enlargement into Eee — " Rent having 
 
 a money value " — 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41, s. 65.] 
 Land was demised for 1000 years from 1607 at 
 a yearly rent of 3«. In 1882 the land was sold as 
 freehold : — Seld, that the rent of 3s. had a money 
 value, and that the owner had no power to en- 
 large the term into a freehold under the 65th 
 section of the Conveyancing Act, 1881. In re 
 Smith and Stott - - 29 Ch. D. 1009, n. 
 
 II. LEASEHOLD— BENEWABLE LEASE. 
 
 1 . Leasehold for Lives — Settlement on Trust 
 
 for Tenant for Life and Bemaindermen— Overriding 
 Trust for Benewal — Benewal become impossible — 
 Purchase of Beversion by Assignee of first Tenancy 
 for Life and ultimate Bemainder — Rights of other 
 Cestuis que Trustenf] A leasehold for lives was 
 devised by a testator who died in 1820 to trus- 
 tees, on trust for a tenant for life and other persons- 
 in remainder, the ultimate remainder in fee being 
 given to the tenant for life. The first trust was. 
 to renew the lease from time to time, paying the 
 necessary fines and expenses out of the rents, or 
 raising them by mortgage. In 1825 the trustees 
 obtained a renewed lease for three lives, one of 
 which was that of the tenant for life. In 1855- 
 and 1859 respectively the other two lives dropped'.. 
 In October, 1876, the tenant for life contracted 
 to sell all his interest in the property to B., and 
 a conveyance was executed in March, 1879. In 
 December, 1876, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners,, 
 in whom the reversion subject to the lease was thea 
 vested, and who would not renew the lease, con- 
 tracted to sell the reversion to B., and in August, 
 1879, they executed a conveyance to him, the con- 
 veyance being expressly made subject to " such 
 trusts, equities, estates, and interests" as then? 
 affected the leasehold interest. In June, 1878, 
 the School Board for London, under their statu- 
 tory powers, took part of the property, and in 
 January, 1880, they paid the purchase-money an(J 
 compensation money into Court. The legal estate 
 in the lease was outstanding in the representatives 
 of the last surviving trustee of the will : — Held,. 
 that irrespectively of the form of the conveyance- 
 of the reversion to B., it was, according to the 
 ordinary doctrine of a Court of Equity, impossible- 
 for him to purchase the reversion otherwise than 
 as a trustee for the persons interested in the lease- 
 under the trusts of the will, and that, subject to^ 
 his right to be recouped the purchase-money, he 
 was only entitled to an order for payment on the 
 interest on the fund in Court during the life of tne 
 tenant for life under the will. — Hardman v. 
 Johnson (3 Mer. 347) distinguished. In re LoRi> 
 Kanblagh's Will - - 26 Ch. D. 690 
 
 2. Leasehold for Lives - 
 
 Tenant for Life — Purchase by Tenant for Life of 
 Beversion — Ownership of the Fee — Customary. 
 Right of Benewal — Devise of Leaseholds for Life.^ 
 with Bemainder over.'] The doctrine that a re- 
 
( 795 ) 
 
 DIUEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 796 ) 
 
 II. LEASEHOLD— KENEWABLE LEASE— conid. 
 newal of leaseholds by a tenant for life enures for 
 the benefit of the remaindermen applies equally 
 to a purchase of the reversion. — Randall v. Bussell 
 (3 Mer. 190) considered. — Testatrix devised lease- 
 holds, renewable by custom, to J. P. for the residue 
 of the term, and after the death of J. P., during 
 the residue of the term, to the children of J. P. in 
 equal shares. J. P. renewed the leaseholds more 
 than once, and finally purchased the reversion :— 
 Held, that the fee simple in the property passed 
 by the devise in the will to the children of J. P., 
 and became subject to the trusts of the will. 
 Phillips v. Phillips - 29 Ch. D. 673 
 
 3. Leasehold for Lives — Successive Limi- 
 tations — Executory Devise — Power of Alienation 
 — Tenant for Life and Remainderman — Over- 
 riding Trust for Renewal — Refusal of Reversioner 
 to renew — Sale under Settled Estates Act— Appli- 
 cation of FurcTiase-money^ When an estate pur 
 autre vie is made the subject of successive limi- 
 tations, the power of alienation of the successive 
 takers is to be regulated, as far as possible, by 
 analogy to the rules which govern similar limita- 
 tions of an estate in fee simple. — Therefore an 
 executory devise of an estate pur autre vie cannot 
 be defeated by the prior taker of a quasi estate in 
 fee simple. — Leaseholds for lives were devised on 
 trust for J. in fee, but, if he should die without 
 leaving issue living at his death, then on trust for 
 "W. in fee, and there was an overriding trust for 
 renewal of the lease out of the rents. After the 
 death of the testator the reversioner refused to 
 renew the lease or to sell the reversion, and the 
 lease was sold under the provisions of the Settled 
 Estates Act: — Held, that the purchase-money 
 must be invested in ordinary securities, and the 
 income only paid to J. for his life. — In re Wood's 
 Estate (Law Rep. 10 Eq. 572), Hollier v. Burne 
 (Law Eep. 16 Eq. 163), and Maddy v. Hale 
 (3 Ch. D. 327) followed. In re Baebee's Settled 
 Estates - - 18 Ch. D. 624 
 
 4. Mortgage — Purchase of Reversion by 
 
 Mortgagor — Mortgage of Reversion — Rights of 
 Mortgagees— U & 15 Vict. c. 104, s. 3—23 & 24 
 Vict, c, 124, e. 35.] An ecclesiastical lease of a 
 house ifor a term of years, which was renewable 
 by custom, though it contained no covenant by 
 the lessors for renewal, was mortgaged, and the 
 equity of redemption was afterwards assigned for 
 value. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners, in whom 
 the reversion had become vested, would not renew 
 the lease, but before its expiration they agreed, to 
 sell the reversion to the assignee of the equity of 
 redemption. The conveyance was not executed 
 till after the expiration of the lease. While the 
 negotiation for the purchase of the reyersion was 
 in progress the assignee borrowed £300, giving 
 the lender a memorandum in writing, which stated 
 that the money was to be secured by a mortgage 
 from him of the house " so soon as he had com- 
 pleted the enfranchisement of the property from 
 the Commissioners." The lender had no notice of 
 the jnortgageofthe lease: — HeM, that the, mort- 
 gagor could only hold the fee simple of the pro- 
 perty subject to the mortgage of the lease, and 
 that he (and consequently the lender of the £300) 
 
 • was not entitled to any prior lien on the property 
 for the purchase-money of the reversion', notwith- 
 
 II. LEASEHOLD— RENEWABLE LEASE— co»M. 
 standing the fact that the mortgagor was under 
 no obligation to the mortgagees of the lease to 
 obtain a renewal of it, or to purchase the reversion. 
 Leigh v. Buknett - 29 Ch. D. 231 
 
 LEASEHOLD — Bequest of,to go with peerage 
 
 See Will — Heerloom. 3. [26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 Devise of real estate - 28 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Will— WoEDS. 16. 
 
 Power of administrator to mortgage 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 745 
 
 See Administeatoe — Powebs. 3. 
 
 Eenewable— Charity scheme 20 Ch. D, 516 
 
 See Ohabitt — Management. 1. 
 
 Title to— Peppercorn rent 30 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Vendoe and Puechaseb. 2. 
 
 Wife's reversionary interest 25 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Ke- 
 veesion. 1. 
 
 LEAVE or COTTET- Disclaimer by trustee in 
 bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptct — Dis- 
 claimee. 5 — 11. 
 
 Settled Land Act - - 30 Ch. D. 102 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Puechase- 
 MONEY. 1. 
 
 Third party procedure 25 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Peactice — Sbpeeme Couet — Thied 
 Paett. 8. 
 
 To amend — Application at trial — ^Appeal 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 663 
 See Peactice — ^Supeeme Cotjet — ^Ap- 
 peal. 41. 
 
 To appeal — Person not a party 16 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 16. 
 
 To appeal — ^Privy Council. 
 
 ^ee Cases under Peactice — Psrvr 
 Council — Leave to appeal. 
 
 " To appeal — Privy CouncU — Criminal law 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 304 
 See Colonial Law — Jeeset. 1. 
 
 To serve writ out of jurisdiction 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 460 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — Ser- 
 vice. 8. 
 
 To use name of company 17 Ch. D, 198 
 
 See Company — Actions. 
 
 LECTTJSE- Oral delivery — Copyright 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 374 
 
 See COPYEIGHT — Books. 2. 
 
 LEENAVI6ATI0N 
 
 See ElVEK. 
 LEGACY. 
 
 See Cases under Will. 
 
 Charged on real estate - 26 Ch. D, 19 
 
 See ExECUTOE — AdminiSteation. 2. 
 
 Income of — Infant — Maintenance. 
 
 See Cases under Infant — Maintenance. 
 
 Interest on - '- - 21 Ch. D. 667 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 3. 
 
 6 App. Cas. 689 
 
( 797 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 798 ) 
 
 LEGACY — contin tied. 
 
 Interest on — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 676 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Legacy. 
 
 Life interest — Action by remainderman — 
 
 Payment into Court 21 Ch. D. 121 
 
 See Exectjtoe — Actions. 5. 
 
 Set-off— Costs in probate suit 18 Ch. D. 300 
 
 See ExECUTOB — Retainee. 5. 
 lEGACY DUTY. 
 
 See Eevexue — ^Legacy Duty — Statutes. 
 
 Direction to pay annuity free of duty 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See ExECCTOE — ^Administration. 7. 
 Foreign domicil - 23 Ch. D, 532 
 
 See Domicil. 4. 
 
 Legacies to be paid free of duty 
 
 See Will — Heikloom. 3. [26Ch.I). 538 
 
 Valuation of property by executor 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 16 
 See Eeventte — ^Legacy Dcty. 
 lECrAL ESTATE— Charge of debts— Executors 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 190 
 See Will — ^Estate in Realty. 1. 
 
 Injunction against parting with 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 490 
 See Practice — Supbeme Couet — In- 
 junction. 7. 
 
 Mortgage— Priority t 19 Ch. D. 207 
 
 iSee SoLiciTOE — Liabilities. 3. 
 
 lEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY— Queensland— Dis- 
 qualification - - 8 App. Cas. 120 
 See Colonial Law — Queensland. 
 
 LEGISLATTTEE Or CANADA— Power of 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 178, 829 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Do- 
 minion. 1, 2. 
 
 - - 7 App. Cas. 96 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontaeio. 
 3. 
 
 7 App. Cas. 136 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 3. 
 LEGITIMACY— Domicil— Will - 24 Ch. D. 637 
 See Will— Words. 13. 
 
 Evidence of non-access - 23 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Evidence — General. 2. 
 
 Scotch law — Subsequent marriage 
 
 [io App. Cas. 692 
 
 See Scotch Law— Husband and Wife. 
 
 2. 
 
 LESSOH— Title of— Notice - 17 Ch. D. 353 
 
 Sec Vendoe and Puechasee-tt-Tiisle. 3. 
 
 LETTERS — Addressed to baukrupt^lledirection 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 618 
 See Bankruptcy — Teustee. 7. 
 
 Addressed to agent - - 26 Ch. D. 306 
 
 See Defamation — Slaitder. 3. 
 
 Agreement by '- 22Ch..D. 441 
 
 See Landlord and .Tenant— tAgeee- 
 
 MENT. 2. 
 
 Agreement by - - 27 Ch. D. 497 
 
 See Contract — Acobftance. 1. 
 
 LETTEES— coiiizHueJ. 
 
 Letter of advice — Bill of exchange — Con- 
 signment of goods - 29 Ch, D. 848 
 See Bill of Exchange — Secueities foe. 
 5. 
 
 Promise by — Marriage articles 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 361 ; 17 Ch. D. 366, n. 
 See Settlement — Articles. 1, 2. 
 
 Protection of. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 LETTEES or ADMINISTEATION— Duty on. 
 
 See Revenue — Probate Duty — Statutes. 
 
 LEX DOMICILII— Personal assets of testator 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 82 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 3. 
 
 LEX LOCI — Foreign corporation 6 App. Cas. 386 
 
 See Colonial Law — West Australia. 1. 
 
 Personal assets of testator - 8 App. Cas. 82 
 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 3. 
 LIABILITY— Agent. 
 
 See Cases under Principal and Agent 
 — Agent's LiABimy. 
 
 Director of company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Director's 
 Liability. 
 
 Director of company 26 Ch. D. 107 
 
 See Company — Memoeahdum and Ae- 
 TICLES. 3. 
 
 Member of company 21 Ch. D. 302, 583 
 
 See Company — Memeee's Liability. 1. 
 
 Member of vestry 
 
 See Mbteopolis- 
 15. 
 
 Partner — Misappropriation by co-partner 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 340 
 See Partnership — Liabilities. 
 
 Principal for act of agent 
 
 See Cases under Principal and Agent 
 — Principal's Liability. 
 
 Retiring partner - 7 App. Cas. 345 
 
 See Partnership — Dissolution. 4. 
 
 Surety. 
 
 See Cases under Principal and Surety 
 — Liability. 
 
 Surety — Proof in baukraptoy 17 Ch. D. 98 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Proof. 11. 
 
 To repair turnpike-road. 
 
 See Turnpike Acts — General — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 Trustee. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee — Liabilities. 
 LIBEL. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under 
 Defamation — Libel. 
 Defamation — Peivilege. 
 
 Criminal information — Discretion of Court 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 320 
 See Criminal Law — Libel. 1. 
 
 Criminal "information— Fiat of Director of 
 
 Public Prosecutions - 14 ft. B, D. 648 
 See Criminai, Law — Libel, 2. ' 
 
 Injunction - 20 Chi D, 501 ; 21 Ch. D. 798 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet In- 
 junction. 3, 4. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 60 
 
 -Management Acts. 
 
( 799 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 800 ) 
 
 LIBEL — continued. 
 
 Interrogatories — Handwriting 15 Q. B. D. 439 
 
 See Pbaotice — Supreme Court — Inteb- 
 
 EOSATORIES. 7. 
 
 Publication — Interrogatories 10 Q. B. D. 110 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Intee- 
 
 EOOATOBIES. 15. 
 
 LIBERTY TO APPLY— Omission of 23 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 2. 
 
 LIBERTY TO ATTEND— Costs 21 Ch. D. 830 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Costs. 
 36. 
 
 LIBEAEY. 
 
 See Public Libeaet- 
 
 -Statutes. 
 
 19 Ch. S. 268 
 
 LICENCE— Patent 
 
 See Patent — Validitt. 4. 
 
 Patent 17 Ch. D. 423 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. , 1. 
 
 Patent in two countries 25 Ch, D. 1 
 
 See Patent — Infringement, 2. 
 
 Public-house. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Inn — 
 Licence. 
 
 Public-house— Off-licence 19 Ch. D. 258 
 
 See Covenant — Eunning with Land, 1. 
 
 Timber limits - 9 App, Cas, 150 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada— Quebec. 
 9. 
 
 Trade-mark 25 Ch. D. 194 
 
 See Trade-mark — Kegistbation. 15. 
 
 LICENSING ACTS. 
 
 See Statutes 
 Licence. 
 
 Ontario - - 9 App. Cas. 117 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 2. 
 
 LIEN — Auctioneer 
 
 See Auction. 2. 
 
 Carrier — Bankruptcy- 
 
 and Cases under Inn — 
 
 30 Ch, D. 192 
 
 -Eeceiver 
 
 [22 Ch. D, 470 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Jubisdiction. 5. 
 
 Company — Debt of shareholders 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Shares— Transfer. 3. 
 
 Company— Shares - 21 Ch. D. 302, 583 
 
 See Company — Member's Liability. 
 1,3. 
 
 Factors Act 25 Ch. D. 31 ; 10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 See Eactoe. 1, 2. 
 
 Freight — Bill of lading — Incorporation of 
 
 conditions in charterparty 
 
 [IS Q. B, S. 154 
 See Ship — Charterparty. 1. 
 
 - 23 Ch, D. 330 
 
 2. 
 
 ■ Innkeeper 
 
 See Inn — Innkeeper. 
 
 ■ Maritime. 
 
 See Cases under Ship- 
 
 -Maeitime Lien. 
 
 LIEN — continued. 
 Policy of insurance 
 
 See Insurance, 
 
 —Payment of premiums 
 [23 Ch. D. 552 
 
 Lite — Assignment. 1. 
 
 255 
 
 ■ Purchase-money advanced by trustee 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 
 See Trustee — Indemnity. 2. 
 
 ■ Eeceiver — Bankruptcy 16 Ch. D. 497 
 
 See Bankkuptcy — Eeceiver. 2. 
 
 • Shares — Company — Eefusal to register 
 
 transfer - - 9 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 See Company — Shares — Teansfee. 4. 
 
 • Solicitor — Costs. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitoe — Lien. 
 
 Sale of goods — Stoppage in 
 
 • Maritime — Foreign judgment 6 P. D, 106 
 See Foreign Judgment. 2. 
 
 Unpaid vendor- 
 
 transitu. 
 
 See Cases under Sale of Goods — Lien^ 
 
 Unpaid vendor— Sale of land 21 Ch. D. 243, 
 
 [685 ; 86 Ch. D. 501 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 1, 2. 
 
 Unpaid vendor — Deposit of deeds with 
 
 banker - - 6 App. Cas. 722 
 
 See Banker — Lien. 
 
 Unpaid vendor — Devise of estate — ^Locke 
 
 King's Act - 24 Ch. D. 94 
 
 See Will — Exoneration. 3. 
 
 LIFE ESTATE— Determination of, on bankruptcy 
 — Children bom afterwards 
 See Will— Condition. 4. [28 Ch. D. 52a 
 
 LITE INSTJEANCE. 
 
 See Cases under Insurance, Life. 
 
 Married woman — Petition - 26 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Husband and Wife — MaerieD' 
 Women's Property Acts. 4. 
 
 LIFE INSTJEANCE COMPANY. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Life Insur- 
 ance Company. 
 
 LIFE EENTEE— Scotch law— Coal mine 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 641 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Peopeety. 
 2. 
 
 LIGHT:— CoL 
 
 I. Obstbuction - 80O 
 
 II. Title - - 801 
 
 I, LIGHT— OBSTETTCTION, 
 
 1, Angle of i5°— Injunction— Form of 
 
 Judgment.'] There is no conclusion of law that a 
 building will not obstruct the light coming to a 
 window if it permits the light to fall on the 
 window at an angle of not less than 45° from the 
 vertical. The question of the amount of oijstruc- 
 tion is always a question of fact which depends 
 on the evidence iu each case. Therefore a Plain- 
 tiff whose ancient light is obstructed is entitled 
 to a judgment in general terms, without referring 
 to the angle of incidence of the light, unless there 
 is some special evidence justifying the insertion 
 of such a clause. — Sackelt v. Baiss (Law Eep. 
 20 Eq. 494) considered. Paekeb v. Fiest Avenue 
 Hotel Company 24 Ch. D, 282 
 
 2. Injunction or Davaages— Discretion of 
 
( 801 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 802 ) 
 
 I. LIGHT— OBSTETTCTION—con<i»Mec?. 
 Court— Lord Cairns' Act (21 & 22 Vict. c. 27), 
 s. 2.] In exercising the discretion given by 
 sect. 2 of Lord Cairns' Act, to award damages in 
 substitution for an injunction, in the case of a 
 substantial interference with the Plaintiff's an- 
 cient lights, the Court will not, when the result 
 of the Defendant's buildings would be, if tliey 
 were allowed to continue, to render the Plaintiff's 
 property absolutely useless to him, compel the 
 Plaintiff to sell his property out and out to the 
 Defendant. But, if the injury to the Plaintiff will 
 be less serious, and his property will remain sub- 
 stantially useful to him, if the Defendant's build- 
 ings are permitted to continue, the Court may 
 exercise its discretion by awarding the Plaintiff 
 damages in lieu of an injunction, and for the 
 purpose of exercising that discretion the Court 
 will take into consideration the nature and situa- 
 tion of the property, e.g., the circumstance that 
 it is situate in the centre of a large city, such as 
 Jjond.on.^Ai/nsley v. Glover (Law Kep. 18 Bq. 
 544), Krehl v. Burrell (7 Ch. D. 551), and Smith 
 V. Smith (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 500), considered. Hol- 
 land I'. WoKLET - - 26 Ch. D. 578 
 
 II. LIGHT— TITLE. 
 
 1. Alteration of Windows — Interim In- 
 junction — Balance of Convenience.'] The Plain- 
 tiffs being the owners of an ancient building which 
 had numerous windows pulled it down and re- 
 built it. A few of the windows in the new house 
 included the space occupied by ancient windows 
 but were of larger dimensions ; several others in- 
 cluded some portion of the space occupied by 
 ancient windows ; and in some cases the spaces 
 occupied by ancient windows were entirely built 
 up in the new house. The Defendants commenced 
 to build a house ,on the opposite side of the street, 
 which if completed according to the plans, would 
 materially interfere with the light coming to the 
 Plaintiffs' windows. — On a motion for an interim 
 injunction the Court, holding that the Plaintiffs 
 had shewn an intention to preserve, and not to 
 abandon, their ancient lights, and that there was 
 a fail question of right to be tried at the hearing, 
 and considering that the balance of convenience 
 was in favour of granting an injunction rather 
 tlian of allowing the Defendants to complete their 
 bnilding with an undertaking to pull it down if 
 required to do so, granted an injunction till the 
 hearing. — ^The order of Bacon, V.C., affirmed. — 
 EutcUnson v. Copestake (9 C. B. (N.S.) 863) and 
 Tapling v. Jones (12 C. B. (N.S.) 826 ; 11 H. L. C. 
 290) considered. Newson v. Pendeb 27 Ch. D. 
 
 [43 
 
 2. Alteration of Windows — Bebuilding — 
 
 Preservation of Ancient Light] In rebuilding a 
 house, which had an ancient light in its ground 
 floor front room, the front wall, which originally 
 stood out beyond the general building line four 
 feet at one end and seven feet at the other, was 
 set back into the general building line ; and in 
 the new front wall was placed a window the 
 position of which corresponded to a great extent 
 with the position of the ancient light in the 
 old front wall. The new room was about the 
 same frontage breadth as the old, but included 
 little more than half the site of it, viz., a depth of 
 nine feet at one end, and less than four feet at the 
 
 II. LIGHT— TITLE— coi!(OT!iecZ. 
 
 other : — Held, that the right to the ancient light 
 
 had not been lost. Bollers v. Dickinson 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 155 
 
 3. Easement over Railway — Adjoining 
 
 Landowner — Interlocutory Injunction.] The Plain- 
 tiff was owner of a house some of the windows of 
 which overlooked a piece of land belonging to a 
 railway company and used as a goods yard of a 
 station. When the house had been built sixteen 
 years the company put up a screen opposite the 
 Plaintiff's windows to prevent his acquiring an 
 easement of light and air. The Plaintiff brought 
 an action for an injunction to restrain the com- 
 pany from interfering with his light and air ; 
 and moved for an interlocutory injunction till 
 the hearing: — Held (reversing the decision of 
 Bacon, V.C.), that the Plaintiff had no equity to 
 restrain the company from taking measures to 
 prevent prescriptive rights from being acquired 
 for windows looking upon their land. The in- 
 junction was therefore refused. — Norton v. Lon- 
 don and North Western Bailway Company (9 Ch. 
 D. 623) and Swindon Waterioorlcs Company v. 
 Wilts and Berlcs Canal Navigation Company (Law 
 Eep. 7 H. L. 697) considered. Bonner v. Great 
 Western Railway Company 24 Ch. D. 1 
 
 4. Evidence — Enjoyment — Interruption — 
 
 Notice — Prescription Act (2 (fe 3 Will. 4, c. 71), s. 4 
 — Onus prdbandi.] Semble, that the person who 
 asserts that an alleged twenty years'" enjoyment 
 of light has been interrupted during that period 
 is bound, imder sect. 4 of the Prescription Act, 
 to prove ihat some notice (other than tiiat which 
 arises from the mere existence of a physical 
 obstruction) was given to the person interrupted 
 by the person by whose authority tlie interruption 
 was made. — A Plaintiff who alleges a twenty 
 years' enjoyment of light must prove affirmatively 
 a prima facie case of enjoyment. But, when he has 
 done this, the Defendant may displace the prima 
 facie case, either by proving the existence of an 
 obstruction at the commencement of the twenty 
 years, or a statutory interruption of the enjoyment 
 at some time during the twenty years, or by 
 shewing by other evidence that the Plaintiff's 
 evidence of enjoyment cannot be relied upon. In 
 either way the Defendant will discharge the onus 
 which is cast on him. Seddon v. Bank of Bolton 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 462 
 
 8. Implied Eeservation — Notice — Build- 
 ing Scheme — Merger of Lease — Surrender.] By 
 seven simultaneous leases seven plots of land 
 marked respectively A, B, C, D, E, P, and G, 
 and forming together one square block, were 
 demised by the owner to J. with a ground plan 
 on each lease, and with covenants for the erection 
 and maintenance of buildings upon each plot 
 according to certain plans. The leases were 
 granted with a view to the erection upon the 
 whole block of one large edifice, of which the 
 several parts and the internal arrangements were 
 to be connected together for a common use and 
 occupation; so however as to be separable (if 
 desired) into seven separate buildings. J. being 
 in the occupation of the whole, while the buildings 
 were being erected mortgaged 0, P, and G, by a 
 sub-lease which recited the building scheme and 
 the original leases of C, F, and G, and contained 
 
 2 D 
 
( 803 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 80i ) 
 
 II. LIGHT— TITLE— co)?«HiMe(7. 
 stipulations for the completion of the buildings on 
 0, F, and G. After the buildings had been substan- 
 tially completed J. mortgaged E by a deed which 
 recited the lease of E and assigned the buildings 
 thereon, subject to the covenants in the lease, to 
 one who had notice of the general plan of the 
 buildings. J. then mortgaged B. On J.'s bank- 
 ruptcy the several mortgagees obtained foreclosure 
 decrees in respect of B, C, and E. respectively : — 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal 
 and restoring the decision of Bacon, V.C., Lord 
 Blackburn dissenting, that though there was no 
 express reservation of the right to light, yet 
 looking at the plans, the covenants in the original 
 leases, and the mortgage deeds, the mortgagees of 
 and E respectively were by reasonable implica- 
 tion precluded from interfering with the light to 
 the windows in B which looked out upon and E 
 respectively, and might be restrained ac&irdingly 
 in an action by the mortgagee of B : — Held, also, 
 that the mortgagee of B could maintain such an 
 action, althougli he had surrendered the lease of 
 B and taken a fresh lease from the original lessor ; 
 for — without deciding what effect the merger of 
 the original lease might have — whenever the 
 lease of B came to an end either by surrender, 
 forfeiture, or otherwise, the original lessor would 
 have tlie same rights to light as the mortgagee 
 would have liad if the original lease had sub- 
 sisted. — Semble, by the Earl of Selborne, that if on 
 a sale and conveyance of land adjoining a house 
 to be bnilt by the vendor, it is mutually agreed 
 that one of the outer walls of that house may 
 stand wholly or partly within the verge of the 
 land sold and shall have in it particular windows 
 opening upon and overlooking the land sold, and 
 if the house is erected accordingly, the purchaser 
 •cannot afterwards build upon the land sold so as 
 to prevent or obstruct the access of light to those 
 •windows. Eussell v. Watts 25 Ch. D. 559 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 590 
 
 6. Purchase by different Persons from 
 
 same Vendor — Contemporaneous Conveyances — 
 Ii>j ii.nolion.'] Where the owner of a dwelling- 
 house and adjoining land sells the house to one 
 person and the land to another under contem- 
 poraneous conveyances, either purchaser being 
 aware of the conveyance to the other, the pur- 
 chaser of tlie land is not entitled to build thereon 
 so as to obstruct the lights of the house. — A 
 trstator being owner in fee of a piece of land 
 with two dwelling-houses thereon, and of another 
 piece of land immediately adjoining, with a ware- 
 liouse at the further end thereof, devised his real 
 estate to bis two sons and another person in trust 
 for sale, giving his two sons, or either of them, an 
 option of purchasing any part of his real estate. 
 By two separate but contemporaneous convey- 
 ances, executed by the trustees of the will, the 
 one piece of land and the two dwelling-houses 
 thereon were conveyed for value, " together with 
 all lights tliereunto belonging," and all the estate, 
 &c., to the one sou in fee, and the other adjoiuing 
 piece of land and the warehouse were conveyed for 
 value, together with all lights, &o., and all the 
 estate, &c., to the other son in fee : — An injunc- 
 tion was granted restraining the successor in title 
 to the purchaser of the last-mentioned piece of 
 
 II. LIGHT— TITLE— oonKnMet?. 
 land and warehouse from building on his land in 
 such a way as to obstruct his neighbour's lights. 
 — Wheeldon ■v. Burrows (12 Oh. D. 31) considered. 
 Allen v. Tayloe - - 16 Ch. D. 355 
 
 Trespass — Nuisance — Injury to reversion 
 
 [20Ch.D.689 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 2. 
 LIGHTEEMAN— Marine insurance — Contract as 
 to lighterage — Concealment from under- 
 writer - 15 ft. B. D. 368 
 See Insueanoe, Mabine — Conoealment. 
 2. 
 LIGHTS — Eegulation as to - 7 App. Cas, 512 
 See Pbactice — Admiealtt — Appoetion- 
 
 mbnt of Damage. 
 And see Ship — ^Navigation- 
 
 LIGHTHOTISE — Poor-rate — Kateable value- 
 Telegraph station and premises 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 770 
 See PoOE-EATE — Eateaele Value. 1. 
 And see Ship — Merchant SmppufS 
 Acts. — Gazette. 
 LIMITATION OF ACTION— Surveyor of highways 
 —Urban authority 11 Q. B. D. 386 
 
 See Local Government — Pbactice. 3. 
 
 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY— Admiralty 
 
 See Cases under Pbactice — Admiealtt 
 — Limitation of Liability. 
 
 Eescission of judgment by consent 
 
 [10 P. D. 161 
 See Estoppel — Jcdsment. 3. 
 LIMITATION OF USEE— Trade-mark 
 
 See Cases under Teade-mabk — ^Eegis- 
 teation. 8 — 11. 
 
 Col. 
 
 - 804 
 
 - 805 
 
 LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF :- 
 I. Legacy 
 II. Peesonal Actions 
 
 III. Eealty 
 
 IV. Teusts 
 
 811 
 
 I. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— LEGACY. 
 
 Administration — Statutory Bar — 23 & 24 
 
 Vict. 0. 38, s. 13 — " Dying Intestate " — " Present 
 right to receive" — Pari Payment.'] The opera- 
 tion of 23 & 24 Vict. o. 38, s. 13, is retrospective, 
 so that the limitation of twenty years " next after 
 a present right to receive the same shall have 
 accrued" thereby imposed (in analogy to 3 & 4 
 Will. 4, c. 27, s. 40) upon claims to recover per- 
 sonal estate of " any person dying Intestate, pos- 
 sessed by the legal personal representative of 
 such intestate," is not confined to the case of 
 persons dying intestate after the 31st of Decem- 
 ber, 1860, the time fixed by the section for com- 
 mencement of the operation of the enactment. 
 — Accordingly a claim by nest of kin for general 
 administration of the estate of an intestate who 
 died in 1848 was barred at the end of twenty-one 
 years from that date; and leave to revive an 
 administration suit relating to the same estate in 
 which no proceeding had been taken since the 
 decree in 1855 was refused.— But with respect to 
 assets of the intestate not received by the adminis- 
 trator until 1870 (more than twenty years after 
 the death, and within twenty years before the 
 
( 805 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 806 ) 
 
 X LIMITATIONS STATUTE OF — LEGACY — 
 
 continued. 
 issue of tlie writ) the claim of the next of kin to 
 administration, limited to such assets, was not 
 bstrred ; there being no " present right to receive " 
 on the part of the next of kin imtU the assets had 
 been actually recovered by the administrator. — 
 Part payment by the administrator out of a par- 
 ticular asset which has so fallen in will not revive 
 the right to sue for general administration which 
 was at the time of payment barred by statute. 
 In re Johnson. Sly v. Blake 29 Ch. D. 964 
 
 II. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF- PERSONAL 
 ACTIONS. 
 
 1. Acknowledgment — 21 Jac. 1, c. 16, 
 
 s. 3.] J. H. was a trustee of a settlement by 
 which the T. B. estate was settled on the wife of 
 the Defendant for life to her separate use without 
 power of anticipation. J. H. lent money to the 
 Defendant, and for some time, with the wife's 
 consent, the rents of the T. B. estate were 
 applied towards payment of the debt, the wife 
 giving receipts for them. In October, 1879, the 
 Defendant wrote to J. H., "I thank you for your 
 very kind intention to give up the rent of T. B. 
 next Christmas, but I am happy to say at that 
 time both principal and interest wilt have been 
 paid in full." — Held, that this was an acknow- 
 ledgment which woiild take the debt out of the 
 Statute of Limitations. — Decision of Pollock. B., 
 reversed. Geeen v. Htjmphrets 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 207 ; 26 Ch. D. 474 
 
 2. Cause of Action — 21 Jac. 1, c. 16 — 
 
 Mecovery of Damages for Injury after Satisfac- 
 tion for Previous Injury arising from same Act 
 — Support — Action for Subsidence after Compen- 
 sation for previous Subsidence.'] The Plaintiff 
 was the owner of certain land, and in 1867 and 
 1868, but not afterwards, the Defendants worked 
 a seam of coal lying under and near to the Plain- 
 tiff's land, which subsided in consequence of the 
 Defendants' excavations. Some cottages of the 
 plaintiff standing on his land were damaged by 
 the subsidence and were repaired by the Defen- 
 dants. In 1882 a second subsidence of the Plaiu- 
 tiif's land occurred owing to the Defendants' 
 workings in 1867 and 1868, and the Plaintiff's 
 cottages were again damaged : — Seld, that the 
 Plaintiff was entitled to maintain an action for 
 the damage done to his cottages in 1882, and 
 that his right to sue was not barred by the Statute 
 of Limitations. — NicMin v. Williams (10 Ex. 259), 
 Baclchouse v. Bonomi (E. B. & E. 622 ; 9 H. L. C. 
 503), Whitehouse v. Fellowes (10 0. B. (N.S.) 765) 
 discussed.— iam& v. Walker (3 Q. B. D. 389) over- 
 ruled. MiTOHBLL V. Daeley Main Colueet Co. 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 125 
 [Af&rmed in the House of Lords.] 
 
 3. Conversion — Demand and Befugal — 
 
 Title Deeds.] Title deeds of the Plaintiffs were 
 fraudulently taken from them and deposited by 
 a third person, without their knowledge, with the 
 •Defendant in 1859, who held them without know- 
 ledge of the fraud to secure the repayment of a 
 loan. The Plaintiffs on discovering the loss of 
 the deeds in 1882, demanded them of the Defen- 
 dant and upon his refusal to givetheiaup brought 
 an action to recover them, to which the Defendant 
 
 II. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF- PERSONAL 
 
 ACTIOTSSS— continued. 
 pleaded the Statute of Limitations : — Held, that 
 until demand and refusal to give up the deeds, to 
 the real owners they had no right of action against 
 which the statute would run. Spackman v. Fos- 
 TEB - - - - 11 Q, B. D. 99 
 
 4. Decree for Administration — Creditors 
 
 — 21 Jac. 1, c. 16.] In an administration action 
 commenced in December, 1878, by one executor 
 of a testator, who was also a creditor of his 
 testator, against his co-executor, the usual judg- 
 ment in a creditor's action was pronounced in 
 December, 1879, and some time afterwards a 
 claim was brought in by a creditor against the 
 estate upon a promissory note of the testator 
 dated in November, 1873 : — Held, that the claim 
 was barred by the statute. — Sterndale v. HanMn- 
 son (1 Sim. 393) observed upon. In re Geeavbs, 
 Deceased. Beat v. Tofield 18 Ch. D. 661 
 
 Devastavit — Executor—Mortgagor and 
 .] Testator mortgaged an estate to 
 Plaintiffs, and devised it to three executors upon 
 trusts in favour of his daughters, and after the 
 death of all his children for sale. — The executors 
 distributed the whole personal estate without 
 providing for the mortgage debt. After this one 
 of the executors died. The daughters occupied 
 the farm for twenty years after the distribution 
 of the personal estate, paying rent to the exe- 
 cutors, and until 1880 paying the interest on the 
 mortgage. The mortgagees then brought an 
 action for foreclosure or sale, and claimed to have 
 any deficiency made good by the two surviving 
 executors and the executors of the deceased exe- 
 cutor: — Held, that any claim founded on the 
 devastavit in distributing the personal estate was 
 barred after six years, but that the Plaintiffs were 
 entitled to foreclosure and to an order for admin- 
 istration of the mortgagor's estate. In re Gale. 
 Blake v. Gale 22 Ch. D. 820 
 
 6. Devastavit — Executor of Mortgagor.] 
 
 A testator mortgaged leaseholds and died. His 
 executors tools; possession of his estate, recovered 
 the rents of the .leaseholds, paid the interest on 
 the , mortgage, and, without providing for the 
 mortgage debt, made certain payments to the 
 beneficiaries under the will. In the course of 
 proceediugs by the mortgagee for the realization 
 of his security and. by the legatee for administra- 
 tion, the executor carried in an account in which 
 he claimed credit for all payments made to the 
 beneficiaries on the ground that under the 
 circumstances the mortgagee must be taken to 
 have acquiesced in such' payments, and further, 
 that as to such of the said payments as were made 
 upwards of six years before the action any claim 
 on a devastavit was barred after six years by the 
 Statute of Limitations : — Held, that there was no 
 sufficient proof of acquiescence, and that the 
 executors having acknowledged the mortgage 
 debt by payment of interest, and being bound in 
 equity by a trust properly to deal with the assets, 
 could not set up their own wrong by way of 
 devastavit as a defence in order to claim the 
 benefit of the Statute of Limitations. — In re Qale 
 (22 Ch. D. 820) considered. In re Maesden. 
 BowDBN V. Layland. Gibbs v. Layland 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 783 
 2 D 2 
 
( 807 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 808 ) 
 
 II. IIMITATIONS, STATUTE 07— PESSONAL 
 ACTIONS — continued. 
 
 7. Traud — Absence of reasonable Means 
 
 of Discovery.'] In an action to recover by way of 
 damages money lost by the fraudulent represen- 
 tations of the Defendant, a, reply to a defence of 
 the Statute of Limitations that the Plaintiff did 
 not discover and had not reasonable means of dis- 
 covering the fraud within six years before action, 
 and that the existence of such fraud was fraudu- 
 lently concealed by the Defendant until within 
 such six years, was held good by the Court of 
 Appeal (Lord Ooleridge, O.J., and Brett, Ij.J., 
 Holker, L.J., dissenting), affirming the judgment 
 of Field, J. GiBBS v. Guild - 8 Q. B. D. 296 ; 
 
 [9 ft, B. D. 59 
 
 8. Hortgage Debt — Covenant in Mort- 
 gage Deed—m & 38 Vict. c. 57. s. 8.] The limi- 
 tation of twelve years imposed by the Eeal Pro- 
 perty Limitation Act, 1874, b. 8, to action and 
 suits for the recovery of money charged on land 
 applies to the personal remedy oa the covenant 
 in a mortgage deed as well as to the remedy 
 against the land. Sutton v. Suttos 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 611 
 
 9. Mortgage Debt — Collateral Bond — 
 
 Real Property Limitation Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict, 
 c. 57), s. 8.] When a mortgage debt is secured 
 by a collateral bond the remedy on the bond is, 
 under sect. 8 of the Real Property Limitation 
 Act, 1874, barred by the lapse of twelve years 
 since the last payment of interest or acknowledg- 
 ment of the debt, equally with the remedy 
 against the land comprised in the mortgage. — ■ 
 Sutton V. Sutton (22 Ch. D. 511) followed. 
 Feaknside v. Flint - 22 Ch. D. 579 
 
 10. Mortgage Debt — Bond by Sureties 
 
 for Payment of Mortgage Debt — Heal Property 
 Limitation Act, 1874 (37 <fe 38 Vict. c. 57), s. 8— 
 Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order LY., r. 10— 
 Order for Administration at Suit of Creditor.'] In 
 1867 T. P. mortgaged an estate to L. & A. for 
 £1000, and at the same time E. P. and C. P. 
 gave to L. & A. a joint and several bond in the 
 penal sum of £400 reciting that the £1000 had 
 been advanced at the request of E. P. and C. P., 
 and that they had agreed to give as a better 
 security for part thereof a bond conditioned for 
 payment of £200 and interest. The bond was 
 conditioned to be void if the mortgagor paid the 
 mortgage money and interest according to his 
 covenant. T. P. paid the interest till December, 
 1877, after which it fell into arrear, and in 1880 
 the mortgagees entered into possession. E. P. 
 died in 1883 without having made any payment 
 or given any acknowledgment. L. & A., as 
 creditors under the bond, took out a summons for 
 administration of his estate. E. P.'s representa- 
 tives disputed the claim on the ground that this 
 was a proceeding to recover money secured on 
 land, and was barred by the lapse of twelve years 
 under the Eeal Property Limitation Act, 1874. 
 Bacon, V.O., without giving any opinion on this 
 question, dismissed the summons under the dis- 
 cretion given by Order LV., rule 10, on the ground 
 that a disputed debt ought not to be tried on 
 summons : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that as 
 there were no facts in dispute the Vice-Chancellor 
 ought to have decided the question of law on the 
 
 II. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— PEESONAL 
 
 ACTIONS — continued. 
 summons : — Held, further, that this was not a 
 proceeding to recover money secured on land, but 
 to recover damages because another person fjiiled 
 to pay money secured on land, and that it did not 
 come within the scope of the Eeal Property 
 Limitation Act, 1874, sect. 8 : — Held, further, 
 that if remedy on the bond had been barrable by 
 the lapse of twelve years under that section, the 
 payments of interest by the mortgagor would 
 have prevented the bar : — Held, therefore, that L. 
 & A. were entitled to rank as creditors against 
 the estate of E. P., and that if his representatives 
 did not admit assets, an administration order must 
 be made. — Sutton v. Sutton (22 Ch. D. 511), Fearn^ 
 side V. Flint (22 Ch. D. 579), and CochriU v. 
 Sparkes (I H. & C. 699), distinguished. In re 
 Powers. Lindsell v. Phillips 30 Ch. D. 291 
 
 11. Beceiver — Debt of Record — Trustee.'} 
 
 Money not accounted for and due from a receiver 
 under the Court is, by his recognizance, made a 
 debt of record, although the balance due has not 
 been ascertained. — The receiver is a tmstee of 
 such money for the persons entitled thereto, and 
 cannot, as against them, avail himself of the 
 Statute of Liaiitations, although his final accounts 
 have been passed and the recognizances vacated. 
 Seagram v. '1'uce - 18 Ch. D. 296 
 
 HI. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— EEALTY— 
 
 1. Acknowledgment — Entry against Irt- 
 
 terest — Payment of Interest — Agency. The repre- 
 sentative of a deceased mortgagee brought in 1884 
 a foreclosure action against the mortgagor, who 
 pleaded the Statutes of Limitations. There was 
 no evidence that any interest had been paid since 
 1866, except an entry in the books of the mort- 
 gagee of £50 as paid in 1878 by the mortgagor for 
 rent and interest : — Held, that though as an 
 acknowledgment of money received it was against 
 the interest of the person who made the entiy, yet 
 as it would prove the revival of a simple contract 
 debt then baiTed, it was for his interest, and 
 therefore could not be received as evidence on 
 behalf of his representatives. — The solicitor of a 
 mortgagor paid the interest to the mortgagee, and 
 it was taken into account between them up to 
 1866. From that time the solicitor continued to 
 pay the interest, but there was no proof that he 
 acted as agent for the mortgagor or that the mort- 
 gagor furnished the money: — Held, in a fore- 
 closure action brought in 1884, that there had 
 been no sufficient payment of interest to take the 
 case out of the Statute of Limitations, and that 
 the action was barred. Neweould v. Smith 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 882 
 
 2. Acknowledgment — Tenant in Com- 
 
 mon — Expiration of Twenty Years — 3 & 4 'Will. 4, 
 u. 27, s. 34.] T. and J. became entitled in 
 possession to a freehold as tenants in common in 
 1883. In 1 879, persons claiming under J. brought 
 an action for sale or partition. The Defendant, 
 who claimed under T., alleged that T. was in 
 receipt of the rents of the entirety from 1833 to 
 1864, without accounting, and claimed the benefit 
 of the Statute of Limitations. The parties entered 
 into admissions, which stated that T. received 
 the rents of the entirety from 1833 till his death 
 
( 809 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 810 ) 
 
 HI. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— EEALXY— 
 
 contimied. 
 in 1S77, and that T. paid to the solicitors of J.'s 
 mortgagees a moiety of the rents due in Novem- 
 her, 1864, and continued to pay to them a moiety 
 of the rents till his death. The admissions did 
 not state, nor was there any evidence, whether 
 T. did or did not account for a moiety of the 
 rents before 1864 : — Held, by Malins, V.O., that 
 the acknowledgment by T. of J.'s title, though 
 after twenty years' adverse possession, excluded 
 the operation of the Statute of Limitations, and 
 that the Plaintiffs were entitled to judgment. — 
 Beld, by the Court of Appeal, that where a tenant 
 in common has gained by the statute an adverse 
 title to another shave of the property, no pay- 
 ment of rent or acknowledgment by him can re- 
 store the title which has been extinguished by 
 th« statute : — But, held, that the payment of a 
 moiety of the rents to persons claiming under J. 
 from 1864 to 1877, raised a presumption that a 
 similar payment was made previously, and that 
 as the admissions did not negative this inference, 
 the defence on the Statute of Limitations could 
 not be supported: — Held, also, that the Defen- 
 dant ought not to be allowed to bring forward 
 fresh evidence on the appeal to shew that T. had 
 not accounted for a moiety of the rents prior to 
 1864. Sandeks v. Saiiders - 19 Ch. D. 373 
 
 3. Annuity charged on Land and the 
 
 Rents thereof — Bight first accrued in 1851 — Claim 
 first made in 1884 — Statute of Limitations (3 cfe 4 
 Will. 4, c. 27), e. 1 — Real Property Limitation 
 Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict o. 57), ss. 1, 9, 10.] By 
 an indenture executed in 1833, real estate was 
 conveyed to trustees and their heirs, upon trust 
 as to one moiety that immediately after the death 
 of M. C. they should out of the moiety and the 
 r^its and profits thereof pay unto J. M., and 
 to his heirs and assigns, or permit him or them 
 to receive it, an annuity of £8 half-yearly. 
 M. C. died in 1857. Ko payment was ever made 
 in respect of -the annuity, and the annuitant first 
 made a claim in 1884. The Chief Clerk had 
 certified that he was entitled to a perpetual an- 
 nuity. On summons to vary the certificate: — 
 Held, that, by sect. 1 of the Act 37 & 38 Vict. c. 57, 
 mo proceeding to recover any " rent," which, inas- 
 much as by sect. 9 the Act must be construed with 
 the 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27, meant by the interpreta- 
 tion clause of that Act, any annuity charged upon 
 land, could be taken after twelve years from the 
 time when the right first accrued, therefore if 
 there had not been any trust, those twelve years 
 having elapsed, none of the past instalments of 
 the annuity could be recovered, and that the effect 
 of sect. 10 of the 37 & 38 Vict. c. 57, was that no 
 payment of the annuity which became due before 
 the application was made was recoverable, the 
 remedy being only the same as if there had not been 
 any trust. Hughes v. Coles 27 Ch. D. 231 
 
 4. Mortgage — Foreclosure — ^ectment — 
 
 3 tfe 4 Will. 4, c. 27, ss. 2, 3, 24, 34 ; 7 Will. 4 
 <£ 1 Vict, c. 28 — Judicature Act, 1873, ss. 24, 
 25.] A legal mortgage of freehold land in 
 1856 ; no possession by the mortgagee, and no 
 payment of principal or interest to him, nor 
 any ackpowledgment of his title. ' In 1870 a 
 
 III. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— REALTY— 
 
 contintied. 
 bill by the mortgagee for' redemption or fore- 
 closure; in 1874 a decree nisi for redemption 
 or foreclosure ; and in 1877 an order absolute 
 for foreclosure. In 1878 an action by the mort- 
 gagees to recover possession of the land : — 
 Held, affirming the judgment of the Court of 
 Appeal, that although brought more than twenty- 
 years after the date of the mortgage deed the 
 action was not barred by the Statutes of Limita- 
 tions (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27, and 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. 
 c. 28).— Semble, per Earl Cairns, that the action, 
 being brought by one who had become absolute 
 owner of the land under the foreclosure decree, 
 was an action as to which the right to bring it 
 must be taken to have accrued within sect. 2 of 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27, at the date of that decree ; and 
 that sect, of that Act in defining when the right 
 shall be deemed to have accrued is not necessarily 
 exhaustive, or otherwise inconsistent with this 
 view. PuQH V. Heath 6 Q. B. D. 345 ; 7 App. 
 
 [Cas. 235 
 
 5. Mortgage — Foreclosure Action — Be- 
 
 covery of Land — Payment of Principal or Interest 
 iy Mortgagor or his Agent — 3 & 4 Will. 4, d. 27, 
 ss. 2, 24, 40—7 Will. 4 cfc 1 Vict a. 28.] A fore- 
 closure action is an action for the recovery of land, 
 and is therefore not within sect. 40 of 3 & 4 Will. 4, 
 c. 27, but is within sects. 2 and 24, and conse- 
 quently within the supplementary enactment of 
 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 28. — A payment to come 
 within the 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 28, must be 
 a payment of principal or interest, and must be 
 made by the mortgagor or some person bound 
 to pay principal or interest on his behalf. — So the 
 word "paid" in 3 & 4 Will. 4, o. 27, s. 40, in- 
 volves by implication the addition of "by the 
 person liable to pay." — A payment of rent made 
 by a tenant of the mortgaged property to the 
 mortgagee in consequence of a notice by the 
 mortgagee requiring the rent to be paid to him is 
 not such a payment. — The principle underlying 
 all the Statutes of Limitations is that a payment 
 to prevent the barring by statute must be an 
 acknowledgment by the person making the pay- 
 ment of his liability, and an admission of the title 
 of the person to whom the payment is made. — 
 Judgment of Fry, J., reversed. Haklook v. Ash- 
 BEEKY - - 18Ch. D, 229; 19Ch, D. 539 
 
 6. Mortgage — Mortgagee in Possession — 
 
 Redemption Action — Limitation — Disabilities — 
 Statute of Limitations (37 & 38 Vict c. 57), s. 7.] 
 Under the Real Property Limitation Act, 1874, 
 the twelve years' bar to a redemption suit from 
 the time when the mortgagee took possession, or 
 from the last written acknowledgment, is abso- 
 lute, and not to be extended by reason of any 
 disability of the mortgagor. Foester v. Pattbb- 
 BON - - - - 17 Ch. D. 132 
 
 7. Mortgage — Mortgagor in possession of 
 
 Part of Mortgaged Property — Mortgagee in Pos- 
 session of Remainder — Bight to redeem — Persons 
 under Disability — Absence of Mortgagor beyond 
 Seas — Statute of Limitations (3 (£; 4 Will. 4, c. 27), 
 ss. 16, 28.] The rule that prevailed prior to the 
 Statute of Limitations (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27), that 
 
( 811 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 812 ) 
 
 III. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— REALTY— 
 contimied, 
 
 no lap.se of time barred the right of a mortgagor 
 of lands to redeem the whole provided he held 
 possession of part (Balcestraw v. Bruyer, Select 
 Gas. in Ch. 55 ; Mosely, 189) has been abolished 
 by sect. 28 of the statute. — Accordingly, where a 
 mortgagee had been in undisturbed possession of 
 part of the land comprised in the mortgage for 
 upwards of twenty years, the right of the mort- 
 gagor to redeem was held to be barred by that 
 section, although he held possession of the re- 
 mainder of the land. — Sect. 16 of the Statute of 
 Limitations (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27), saving the 
 rights of persons under disability, such as absence 
 beyond seas, does not apply as between a mort- 
 gagor and mortgagee. Kinsmak v, Eocbe 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 104 
 
 8. Tithe Rent-charge — Ireland — Non- 
 payment for more than Twenty Years — Statute of 
 Limitations (3*4 Will 4, c. 27), ss. 1, 2, 29— 
 1 <fc 2 Viet. c. 109.] The right to the tithe rent- 
 charge in Ireland was vested in a spiritual cor- 
 poration sole until 1871, when it was transferred 
 by statute to a lay corporation. In 1877 the lay 
 corporation brought an action against the persons 
 liable to pay tithe rent-charge to recover six years' 
 arrears. For more than twenty years next before 
 action there had been no payment and no acknow- 
 ledgment in writing : — Meld, afiSrming the deci- 
 sion of the Irish Court of Appeal, that titbe rent- 
 charge was " rent " within sect. 1 of the Stattrte 
 of Limitations (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27), and not a 
 " composition " within the exception to sect. 1 , 
 compositions in Ireland having been abolished by 
 1 & 2 Vict. c. 109 ; that sect. 2 of 3 & 4 Will. 4, 
 c. 27, applied as between the owner and the per- 
 sons liable to tithe rent-charge ; that the lay cor- 
 poration could not avail themselves of the provi- 
 sions of sect. 29 in favour of spiritual corporations 
 sole ; and that the action was barred by the lapse 
 of twenty years. Commissionebs of Irish Chukoh 
 Tempoeaiities v. Grant - 10 App. Cas. 14 
 
 Mortgage — Satisfaction — Legal estate in the 
 
 mortgagee - 23 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Trusts. 
 3. 
 
 IV. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— TRUSTS. 
 
 1. Interest — Delay in realisation of Estate 
 
 —37 & 38 Vict. c. 57, s. 10.] The property of 
 a testatrix who died in 1869 consisted mainly 
 of a reversionary interest. This interest was 
 not sold by the executors, and it did not fall 
 into possession until 1881. In the opinion of the 
 Court the executors had acted for the benefit of 
 the estate in not selling the reversion : — Beld, 
 that legatees under the will who had waited for 
 the payment of their legacies until after the 
 falling in of the reversion were entitled, not 
 merely to six years' aiTcars of interest, but to 
 interest on their legacies from the expiration of 
 one year after the death of the testatrix. In re 
 Blaohfoed, Blaohfokd v. Woeslet 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 676 
 
 2. Mortgage of Ship — Express Trust — ■ 
 
 Sale by First Mortgagee — Claim for an Account hy 
 Second Mortgagee — Express and ConstnKtive 
 
 IV. LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— TRUSTS— 
 
 continued. 
 Trust.'] The second mortgagee of a ship claimed 
 an account against the first mortgagee, who had 
 sold the vessel upon the mortgagor becoming 
 bankrupt. Defendant offered to pay a specific 
 amount. The action having been commenced 
 more than six years after the sale, the Defendant 
 pleaded the Statute of Limitations. The Plain- 
 tiff set up an express trust as a bar to the- 
 statute : — Held, that there was no express trust ; 
 that in case of an ascertained surplus the first 
 mortgagee might be constructively a trustee of 
 the surplus, but after six years, evidence could 
 not be adduced to prove a surplus : — But 7ieM, 
 that although the statute was not avoided on the 
 ground of express trust, it was in this case 
 avoided by an acknowledgment within six years 
 of an unsettled account pending, which by itself 
 would have suflSced, and also by a promise to pay 
 what should be found due. The Plaintiff was 
 therefore entitled to an account.— -Where the 
 mortgagee of his own mere motion realized the- 
 mortgaged property, he was held not to be en- 
 titled to interest in lieu of notice.— An express, 
 trust bars the statute equally as to personalty and 
 realty by force of the Judicatui-e Act, 1873, sect. 25, 
 sub-sect. 2. Bannek v. Beeeidge 18 Ch. D. 254 
 
 3. Mortgage — Satisfaction — Express 
 
 Trust — Legal Estate — Tenancy at Will — 3 & 4: 
 Will. 4, c. 27, ss. 7, 125, 34—37 & 38 Vict. c. 57, 
 s. 1.] When the money due upon a mortgage has 
 been paid to the mortgagee, but no reconveyance 
 has been executed, the mortgagor becomes from 
 the date of such payment a tenant at will to the 
 mortgagee, and the legal estate of the mortgagee 
 is extinguished by thirteen years' adverse posses- 
 sion of the mortgagor. — The 25th section of the •■ 
 Statute of Limitations (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27) 
 relates to express trusts only, and does not apply 
 to the relation between a mortgagee whose mort- 
 gage has been satisfied and the mortgagor. 
 Sands to Thompson - 22 Ch. D. 614 
 
 LIMITATIONS, STATUTE OF— Action for penalty 
 — Selling silver with counterfeit mark 
 See Penal Action. 1. [7 Q. B. D. 465 
 
 Adverse possession - 9 Q. B. S. 424 
 
 See Railway Company — Pkopertt. 3. 
 
 ■ Ceylon 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 
 - 6 App. Cas. 164 
 
 ■Ceylon. I. 
 
 Devise upon trust to pay debts — No real 
 
 estate - - - 14 Q. B. D. 894 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoof. 20. 
 
 Married woman — Discoverture 15 Q. B. D. 
 
 [667 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeieb 
 Women's Peopeety Acts. 1. 
 
 Misappropriation of money by directors 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 619 
 See Company — ^Director's Liability. 5. 
 
 Sale of right of entry — Fictitious title — 
 
 Knowledge of buyer - 16 Q. B. D. 491 
 See Eight of Entry. 1. 
 
 Supply of necessaries to lunatic 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 615 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 1. 
 
( 813 ,) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 81i ) 
 
 LIMITEB ADHINISTEATION. 
 
 See Oases under Administbatob — 
 Limited. 
 
 LIMITED OWNEH— Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 Oases under Settled Land Act — 
 Definitions. 
 LIftUID DEMAND— Law of Jersey 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 726 
 See Colonial Law — Jekset. 3. 
 LIQUIDAIED DAMAGES - 21 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Penalty. 
 
 LIQUIDATED SUM— Debtor's summons 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 191 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Aot op Bankbuptoy. 
 15. 
 
 Petitioning creditor's debt 22 Ch. D. 132 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Abjudication. 2. 
 
 LIQUIDATION BY ABRANGEMENT. 
 
 See Oases under Bankbuptoy — Liqui- 
 dation.' 
 
 Member of company - 25 Ch. D,^415 
 
 See Company — Oonteibutoby. 3. 
 
 Keoeiver 16 Ch. D, 497 ; 12 Q. B. D. 334 
 
 See Bankeuptcy^Eecbivee. 2, 4. 
 
 Release and discharge of trustee — Power of 
 
 Board of Trade to require account 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 402 
 See Bankbuptoy — Teustbe. 9. 
 
 Bemoval of trustee by Court 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 177 
 See Bankeuptcy — Tbustee. 8. 
 LIQUIDATOK. 
 
 See Oases under Company — ^Liquidatoe. 
 
 Carrying on business — Bates 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 500; 28 Ch. D. 470, 474 
 See CojiPANY — Bates. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Carrying' on min e — Distress 17 Ch. D. 158 
 
 See Company — Distbess. 5. 
 
 Costs of - - 21 Ch. D. 381 ; 23 Ch, D. 
 
 [611 ; 27 Ch. D. 33 
 See Company— Costs. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Costs of - - 30 Ch. D. 598 
 
 See Bill op Exchange — ^Fobeign Bill. 
 
 Official— Appointment of 20 Ch. D. 276 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 278 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 
 8,11. 
 ^■^ Voluntary winding-up — Appointment 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 70 
 See Company — Voluntaey Winding- 
 up. 2. 
 LIS ALIBI PENDENS - 22 Ch. D. 397 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbbme Oouet— Stay- 
 ing Peoceedings. 6. 
 
 LIS PENDENS — Divorce— Variation of marriage 
 settlement— Charge - 7 P. D. 228 
 See Peaotice — ^Divoecb — Settlements. 
 3. 
 
 Protection of property 21 Ch. D. 490 
 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Oocet — ^In- 
 junction. 7. 
 
 LIST OF VOTERS — ^Parliament. 
 
 See Paeliament — Fbanchise — Statutes. 
 
 LITERARY WORK — Tille-pago — Fraud on 
 public - 16 Ch, D. 396 
 
 ^ee Specific Pebfoemance. 1, 
 LOADING— Delay of— Frost - lOQ. B, D. 241; 
 [11 Q, B. D, 543 ; 9 App. Cas. 470 
 See Ship — Cha];itbepaety. 8, 9. 
 LOAN (LOCAL) ACT, 1875. 
 
 See Local Gotebnment — Powees — 
 Statutes. 
 LOAN SOCIETY— Illegality - 9 Q, B, D, 225 ; 
 [11 ft, B, D. 563 ; 14 ft, B. D, 379 
 See Company — Qneegisteeed Company. 
 2, 3, 5. 
 LOBSTER. 
 
 See Fisheey Acts— Statutes. 
 LOCAL BOARD. 
 
 See Statutes and Oases under Local 
 
 GOVEENMENT — LOCAL AuTHOKITY. 
 
 Nuisance by — Sewage 20 Ch, D, 595 ; 
 
 [22 Ch, D, 221 ; 23 Ch, D, 767 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Ontario - - 9 App. Cas. 117 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontakio. 
 2. 
 
 LOCAL GOVERNMENT :— Col. 
 
 I. By-laws - - - 811 
 
 II. Compensation - 814 
 
 III. Local Authobity ■' 816 
 
 (a) OONTBACTS 
 (6) POWEES. 
 
 IV. Offences - 822 
 V. Pbactice - - 823 
 
 VI. Public Health Acts - 825 
 
 VII. Bates - 827 
 
 VIII. Sewees 828 
 
 IX. Stbeets - 828 
 
 London (City of). 
 
 See London. 
 
 ■ Meteopolitan Disteict. 
 
 See Mbtbopolis. 
 
 I. LOCAL GOVEENMENT— BY-LAWS, 
 
 Confirmation of By-laws,] The Act 47 & 48 
 Vict. u. 12, relates to the confirmation of by-laws 
 made under the Public Health Act, 1875, or under 
 certain Acts incorporated therewith. 
 
 Lodging-houses.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. v. 72, 
 s. 8 extends the powers of the Public Health Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 90, with regard to 
 by-laws for lodging-houses. 
 
 Validity— PufeZic Health Act, 1875 (38 & 
 
 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 44, ilQ— Nuisance — Swine kept 
 near Dwelling-houay.a.'] A rural sanitary authority, 
 purporting to act under the powers of ss. 44 and 
 276 of the Public Health Act, 1875, made a by- 
 law prohibiting the keeping of swine within the 
 distance of fifty feet from any dwelling-house 
 within their district : — Held, that the by-law was 
 unreasonable, and therefore bad. Heap v. Buen- 
 LEY Union - - 12 Q, B. D. 617 
 
 IL LOCAL GOVERNMENT— COMPENSATION. 
 
 1. • Arbitration— Ptt&Zic Health Act, 1875 
 
 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 179, 180, SOS— Jurisdiction 
 of Arbitrator when Liability under the Act is bond 
 
( 815 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 816 ) 
 
 II. lOCAl GOVERNMENT— COMPENSATION— 
 
 continued, 
 fide disputed.'] When a claim for compensation is 
 made against a local authority for damage caused 
 by the exercise of the powers conferred upon 
 them by the Public Health Act, 187."), the arbi- 
 trator has jurisdiction to hold the arbitration and 
 make his award as to the fact of damage and the 
 amount of compensation under sects. 179, 180, 
 and 308, although the local authority bona fide 
 dispute their liability to make compensation at 
 all under the Act. Their proper course is to 
 raise the question of liability, in their defence to 
 an action upon the award. — So held, affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal. Beierley 
 Hill Local Boaed v. Peabsall 11 Q. B. D. 735 ; 
 
 [9 App. Gas. 595 
 
 2. Nuisance — Urinal — Fublio Sealth 
 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. o. 55), ss. 39, 149, 264, 
 308 — Compensation — Mandatory Injunction — 
 Piihlic Bighway.'] A local board, assuming to 
 act under the authority of sect. 39 of the Public 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), erected a 
 public urinal partly upon a highway and partly 
 upon a strip of land belonging to the Plaintiff, and 
 so near to other adjoining land of the Plaintiff as 
 to be a nuisance to her and her tenants and to 
 depreciate the value of her property : — Seld, 
 that the Plaintiff was entitled to a mandatory in- 
 junction to restrain the board from continuing 
 the urinal upon her land or so near thereto as to 
 cause injury orannoyance to her or her tenants : — 
 Held also, that it was not a matter in respect of 
 ■which the Plaintiff's remedy was by compensa- 
 tion under sect. 308 of the Act. — In such a case 
 notice of action under sect. 264 is not required. — 
 Abutting upon the highway the Plaintiff had 
 land upon which an inn and some stabling were 
 erected. These stood back from the highway, 
 and in front of them was an open space (forming 
 part of the same land) which had been left open 
 to and on a level with the highway until the De- 
 fendants in exercise of their powers under s. 149 
 of the Act, and for the convenience of the public, 
 placed kerb-stones and a raised foot-path at the 
 side of the highway, leaving openings so that 
 carriages could still pass at convenient places to 
 and from the Plaintiff's land and premises : — 
 Held, that the Plaintiff was not entitled to a 
 mandatory injunction directing the Defendants to 
 remove the kerb-stones, and that in the absence 
 of any unreasonable conduct the remedy for any 
 injury caused by the kerb-stones would be by com- 
 pensation under sect. 308 of the Act. Selloes 
 V. Matlock Bath Local Boaed 14 Q, B. D. 928 
 
 3. Subsidence of Land — Highway — Houses 
 
 abutting — Raising of Boad by Local Board — 
 liaising of Houses by Owners — Compensation for 
 Cost of — Liability of Local Hoard— 3S & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55 iPvhlio Health Act, 1875), ss. 144, 149, 179, 
 308.] The Plaintiffs were owners of houses abut- 
 ting on a highway which was vested in the Defen- 
 dants, a local board acting under 38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55 (Public Health Act, 1875), and having the 
 powers and liabilities of surveyor of highways. 
 The abstraction of salt from a bed beneath them 
 caused from time to time a subsidence of the 
 ground upon which the houses and highway were 
 situate. The houses were rebuilt in 1870 on 
 
 II. LOCAI GOVERNMENT— COMPENSATION— 
 
 continued. 
 timber, so that they might be raised by screw- 
 jacks. In 1876 the surface of the highway in 
 front of the houses had subsided considerably, 
 and the houses had subsided with it. The sur- 
 face of the roadway remained continuous, so that 
 trafiSc could pass along it as before ; but the road- 
 way was in a curved hollow, and at the level to 
 which it had subsided was liable to be flooded, 
 and in fact was flooded at times, so as to render 
 traflSc impossible. The Defendants put materials 
 on the roadway so as to make the surface imme- 
 diately above the point of the lowest subsidence 
 about 4 ft. 3 in. higher than it was at the com- 
 mencement of the work. The Plaintiffs having 
 had notice from the Defendants, raised their 
 houses simultaneously with the works to the road- 
 way, and then claimed under sect. 308 of the 
 Act, and were awarded compensation for the cost 
 of raising the houses. — Having regard to the ob- 
 struction to traffic caused by floods, the raising of 
 the road was reasonably necessary to put it in a 
 proper state for traffic ; but, excluding the con- 
 sideration of floods, the raising .of the road to 
 the extent described, though a reasonable and 
 prudent act, was not necessary to put the road 
 into a proper state for traffic : — Held, that as the 
 highway was vested in the Defendants, no action 
 of trespass could have been maintained by the 
 Plaintiffs, even if more materials had been placed 
 on the road than a surveyor of highways could 
 justify, and that the Plaintiffs had no right to 
 have the road maintained at the level to which it 
 accidentally and recently sank; and that the 
 works of the Defendants were not done " in exer- 
 cise of any of the powers" of the Act within the 
 terms of sect. 308 — which mean powers created 
 by the Act, and not simply powers transferred 
 by sect. 144 from the surveyor to the local board 
 — but were done, if not strictly in pursuance of 
 their duty as surveyors of highways, at all events 
 in exercise of such powers as surveyors of high- 
 ways have, and, consequently, that the Plaintiffs 
 were not entitled to compensation. BtmaEss v. 
 NoBTHWioH Local Boaed 6 Q. B. D. 264 
 
 III. LOCAI GOVERNMENT— LOCAL AUTHO- 
 RITY. 
 
 Interest.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 53 {Public 
 Health Members and Officers Act, 1885) amends 
 sect. 193 of 38 <fc 39 Vict. c. 55 {Public Health Act, 
 1875) and permits officers of a local authority 
 under certain conditions to be interested in certain 
 contracts with the local authority. 
 
 Sect. 3. Eestriction on recovery of penalties 
 under rule 70 of Schedule IL of Public Health 
 Act, 1875. 
 
 Sect. 4. Eemoval of disqualification from any 
 member of a local authority having an interest in 
 a newspaper in which such local authority adver- 
 tises. 
 
 Loans.] Tlie Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 30, amends 
 38 * 39 Vict. V. 83 {the Local Loans Act, 1875), as 
 regards the provision of sinking funds for the dis- 
 charge of local loans. 
 
 (a) CONTEAOTS. 
 
 1. Contract not under Seal — Agreement to 
 
 compromise — Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 
C 817 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 818 ) 
 
 in. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— LOCAL AUTHO- 
 RITY — continued. 
 (o.) CoNTKACTs — Continued. 
 Vict. c. 55), ss. 173, 174.] An agreement between 
 a local board and a person against whom an 
 action to restrain his interference with a public 
 Mghway had been commenced by the local board, 
 that the action should be settled by his paying 
 the costs of the board (which exceeded £50), and 
 undertaking not to build on the unbuilt land, the 
 board agreeing not to proceed further as to pull- 
 ing down the obstruction, is not a contract within 
 the Public Health Act, 1875, necessary for carry- 
 ing the Act into execution (sect. 173) so as to 
 require to be sealed with the common seal of the 
 local board under sect. 174 ; and therefore such 
 agreement, though not under seal, is capable of 
 being enforced by the board. Attobney-General 
 V. Gaskill - 22 Ch. D. 637 
 
 2. Contract not under Seal — Contract ex- 
 ceeding £50 in Value or Amount— Corporation — 
 PatbZJo HeaUh Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. u. 55), 
 «s. 174, 200— Urban Authority.'] Sect. 174 of the 
 Public Health Act, 1875, which directs a con- 
 tract made by an urban authority to be under 
 their common seal, if " the value or amount ex- 
 ceeds £50," applies only to a contract to which 
 the parties at the time of entering into it con- 
 template that it shall exceed that sum. Scarlet 
 fever having broken out, an urban sanitary autho- 
 rity appointed a committee under sect. 200 of 
 the Public Health Act, 1875, and the committee 
 provided hospital tents. A medical man agreed 
 verbally with the committee on behalf of the 
 url)au sanitary authority, to attend the patients 
 at the rate of 5s. 3d. per tent per day, and at- 
 tended until the amount due was nearly £100 : — 
 Held, affirming the judgment of Stephen, J., that 
 the committee men were not liable to pay the 
 medical man; but — Held, reversing the judg- 
 ment of Stephen, J., that although more than 
 £50 became due, it was not a contract " whereof 
 the value or amount exceeds £50 " within the 
 meaning of the Public Health Act, 1875, b. 174, 
 because at the time of entering into it, the par- 
 ties had not ascertained that it would exceed 
 £50, and that the urban sanitary authority were 
 liable to the medical man. Eaton v. Baskeb 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 201 ; 7 Q. B. D. 529 
 
 3. Contract not under Seal hut executed — 
 
 Urban Authority— Publio Health Act, 1875 (38 * 
 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 173, 174.] Sub-sect. 1 of sect. 
 174 of the Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. 
 o. 55), which enacts that "every contract made 
 by an urban authority whereof the value or 
 amoimt exceeds £50 shall be in writing and sealed 
 with the common seal of such authority," is obli- 
 gatory and not merely directory, and applies to 
 an executed contract of which the urban authority 
 have had the full benefit and enjoyment, and 
 which has been effected by their agent duly ap- 
 pointed under their common seal. — Hunt v. Wim- 
 bledon Local Board (4 C. P. D. 48) approved. 
 YouKG ». Mayoe, &o. of Leamington Spa 
 
 [8 Q. B. D, 679; 8 App. Cas. 517 
 
 4, Contract with Board — Contract not 
 
 under Seal— Affixing Seal where Contract partly 
 performed. Effect of— Urban Authority— Illegality 
 — Offloer concerned in Contract, whether Contract 
 
 III. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— LOCAL AUTHO- 
 RITY — continued. 
 (o.) Cqnteaots — continued, 
 void— Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55), ss. 174, 193.] By sect. 174 of the Publio 
 Health Act, 1875, every contract made by an 
 urban authority whereof the value or amount 
 exceeds £50 shall be in writing and sealed with 
 the common seal of such authority. — The Defen- 
 dants, an urban authority, by contract not 
 under seal employed the Plaintiffs as engineers 
 to perform certain work. The Plaintiffs per- 
 formed part of the work exceeding in value 
 £50, and then required the Defendants to affix 
 their seal to the contract. This the Defendants 
 did, believing that it was for the benefit of the 
 ratepayers of the district that the contract should 
 be completed : — Held, that as part of the work 
 was unperformed when the seal was affixed, and 
 there was consideration for affixing it in the 
 Plaintiffs' promise to complete the work, it was 
 competent for the Defendants to constitute the con- 
 tract a good contract under seal, within sect. 174, 
 in respect of the work already done, and there- 
 fore that the Plaintiffs were entitled to maintain 
 their action for the value of that work. — By sect. 
 193, officers or servants employed under this Act 
 by the local authority shall not in anywise be 
 concerned or interested in any bargain or con- 
 tract made with such authority for any of the 
 purposes of this Act ; and if any such officer or 
 servant is so concerned or interested he shall be 
 incapable of afterwards holding or continuing in 
 any office or employment under this Act, and 
 shall forfeit and pay the sum of £50, to be re- 
 covered by any person in the prescribed manner : 
 — Held, that this section intended to limit the 
 penal consequences of a breach of its provisions 
 to the specified penalties ; and therefore that the 
 enactment did not render a contract made by an 
 officer with the local authority void, so as to dis- 
 entitle him to sue upon it. Melliss v. Shiblet 
 LOOAL BOAED - - - 14 Q. B. D. 911 
 
 [Reversed on the second point by Court of 
 
 Appeal, 16 Q, B. S. 446.] 
 5. Contract with Board — Officer — "Con- 
 cerned or interested in any bargain or contract " 
 with Board — Demise of Booms to Local Board 
 — "Allowance" in addition to Salary — Publio 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 174, 
 175, 189, 193, 265.] A demise of rooms is a 
 "bargain or. contract" within the meaning of 
 sect.' 193 of the Publio Health Act, 1875, and if 
 an officer, employed by a local board constituted 
 under that statute, lets rooms to the board at a 
 rent payable by it to him although the rooms 
 are used by it in the transaction of its busi- 
 ness, he becomes liable to the penalty imposed 
 by that section ; for the rent payable by the local 
 board cannot be considered as an "allowance" 
 to the officer in addition to his salary within the 
 meaning of sects. 189, 193, it being unconnected 
 with the performance of any services in the 
 course of his employment tmder the board. 
 BuEGESSD. Claek - - 14 Q. B, D. 738 
 
 6. Contract with Board — Officer — Share- 
 holder in Company — " Interested in any bargain 
 or contract" with Local Board — Public Health 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. o. 55), s. 193.] An 
 
( 819 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 820 ) 
 
 III. LOCAL GOVEENMENT — LOCAL AUTHO- 
 BITY — continued. 
 (a.) CoNTBAOTS — continued. 
 officer of a local board, who is a shareholder in a 
 company having a contract with the board, is, so 
 long as the contract exists, "interested in a, 
 bargain or contract " with the board within the 
 meaning of the Public Health Act, 1875, sect. 
 193, and if the contract is capable of producing 
 any profit to the shareholders of the company, 
 he is liable to the penalty imposed by that enact- 
 ment. Todd v. Boeinson 14 ft. B. D. 739 
 
 7. Contract with Board — Public Health 
 
 Act, 1875 — Local Hoard, Memler of — Liability 
 to Penalty for acting as Member wlien disabled.'] 
 By rule 6t of schedule 2 to the Public Health Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. o. 55), it is declared that any 
 member of a local board who " in any manner is 
 concerned in any bai-gain or contract entered into 
 by such board " shall " cease to be such member, 
 and his office as such shall thereupon become 
 vacant ;" and rule 70 imposes a penalty of £50 
 on " any person who, not being duly qualified to 
 act as member of the local board," " or being dis- 
 abled from acting by any provisions of this Act, 
 acts as such member " : — Held, by Brett and 
 Cotton, L.JJ. (Bramwell, L.J., dissenting), that 
 a member of such board, who having been con- 
 cerned in a contract by the board has thereupon 
 ceased to be such member by force of rule 64, is 
 a person disabled from acting as a member by a 
 provision of tlie Act within the meaning of rule 
 70, and consequently that if afterwards he does 
 so act he is liable to the penalty of £50. Fletcher 
 V. Hudson - - - 7 ft. B. D. 611 
 
 8. Contract with Board — Public Health 
 
 Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 150, 174, 257— 
 Sewering and paving — Liability for Proportion of 
 Expenses — Contract not under Seal.'] In an action 
 by a local authority to recover from the Defendant 
 his proportion of the cost of sewering, paving, &c., 
 a street under the powers of the Public Health Act, 
 1875, s. 150, it appeared that part of the work, to 
 an amount exceeding £50, had been done by con- 
 tractors employed by the local authority, bu t that 
 no written contract under the common seal of the 
 authority had been made with them (as provided 
 by sect. 174) : — Held, by Hawkins, J., and Smi th, 
 J., that the Defendant was nevertheless liable. — 
 By Smith, J., that the objection, if valid, would 
 have been an objection to the apportionment, 
 which could only be raised in the time and manner 
 provided by sect. 257. Bournemouth Oommis- 
 siONEKS V. Watts 14 ft. B. D. 87 
 
 (6) Powers. 
 
 9. Incorporation of District — 'Vesting of 
 
 Property — Government Stock — Banh of England — 
 Public Health Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 310 
 —National Debt Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 71), 
 s. 22.] The words " council of such borough " in 
 sect. 310 of the Public Health Act, 1875, mean 
 the mayor, aldermen, and burgesses acting by the 
 council. — The effect of the section, therefore, is 
 that, when the district of a local board is in- 
 corporated as a borough all the property of the 
 board (including property acquired by them by 
 purchase after the passing of the Act) vests at 
 once in the corporation, without the necessity of 
 
 III. LOCAL GOVEKNMENT — LOCAL AUTHO- 
 RITY — continued. 
 (6.) Powers — continued. 
 any conveyance or transfer. — In such a case the 
 Bank of England are bound, on the request of the 
 corporation, to register in their corporate name 
 Government stock previously standing in the 
 books of the bank in the name of the local board, 
 without requiring any transfer to be executed. 
 Corporation as Hyde v. Bank of England 
 
 [31 Ch. D. 176 
 
 10. Notice to abate Nuisance — Public 
 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. a. 55), ss. 94, 96— 
 Order of Justices — Works necessary for the Pur- 
 pose.] A nuisance existed consisting of a privy 
 and ashpit in such a state as to be a nuisance, and 
 the local sanitary authority gave notice to the 
 owner under the Public Health Act, 1875, s. 94, 
 to abate the same, and for that purpose to fill up 
 the ashpit, abandon the privy, and build a pail 
 closet. The owner failed to do so, and the justices 
 thereupon, under sect. 96, ordered the owner to 
 fill up the ashpit, to abandon the privy, and to 
 construct a proper and sufficient paU closet in 
 lieu thereof. On a rule for a certiorari to quash 
 the order of justices : — Held, by Pollock, B., and 
 Stephen, J., that the order was bad, as the justices 
 had no power under sect. 96 to order the erection 
 of the pail closet. Ex parte 'Whitchukch 
 
 [6 ft. B. S. 545 
 
 11. Kotiee to abate Nuisance — Power of 
 
 Justices to order Specifio Works — Public Health 
 Act, 1875 (38 <fc 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 94-96.] A water- 
 closet in the centre of a house being a nuisance, 
 the sanitary authority gave notice to the owner 
 of the house under the 94th section of the Public 
 Health Act, 1875, to abate the nuisance, and for 
 that purpose to remove the said closet from the 
 centre of the house and place the same near an 
 outer wall where there might be efficient ventila- 
 tion, and to fix the soil-pipe outside the walls. 
 Tlie owner making default in so doing, justices 
 thereupon, under sect. 96, ordered him to do the 
 things above specified : — Held, that they had 
 jurisdiction under the 96 th section to make the 
 order.— Ex parte Whitchurch (6 Q. B. D. 545) 
 distinguished. Ex parte Saunders 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 191 
 
 12. Notice to abate Nuisance — Power of 
 
 Justices to order specific Works — Public Health 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 94-96.] A 
 privy openly discharged nightsoil and offensive 
 matter on the bank of a river, the sanitary autho- 
 rity served the owner of the premises with a 
 notice to abate the nuisance, and for that pur- 
 pose " to remove the present pipes and pan, level 
 the floor under the seat of the privy, and provide 
 a galvanized double-handle pail under the seat, the 
 cover of which said seat to be moveable, so that 
 the premises should no longer be a nuisance or in- 
 jurious to health." And the justices at sessions 
 made an order in the terms of the notice : — Held, 
 that they had jurisdiction to make the order. — 
 Ex parte Saunders (11 Q. B. D. 191) followed ; and 
 Ex parte Whitchurdh (6 Q. B. D. 545) distinguished 
 or dissented from. The Queen ■». LlewelltU 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 681 
 
 13. Power to bind Successors — Action in 
 
( 821 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 822 ) 
 
 in. 
 
 LOCAL GOVERNMENI- 
 EITY — continued. 
 
 -LOCAL AUTHO- 
 
 (6.) PowEBS— conh'mtje^. 
 Nature of Supplemental Suit — Nuisance — Injunc- 
 tion—District Board— 38 & 39 Vict. o. 55, s. 275.] 
 A decree was made in 1875 against the corpora- 
 tion of B., as the sanitary authority of B., grant- 
 ing a perpetual injunction to restrain them from 
 allowing sewage to flow into a river so as to be 
 injurious to health or a nuisance to the Plaintifts ; 
 but tbe injunction was suspended for five years, 
 to give the corporation an opportunity to execute 
 certain works. After the expiration of that period 
 the Plaintiffs desired to enforce the injunction, 
 but in the meantime the B., T., and E. District 
 Board bad been constituted under the Public 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), as the 
 sanitary authority of the district, in the place of 
 the corporation of B. — The Plaintiffs brought an 
 action against the B., T., and K. Board, claiming 
 a declaration that they were entitled to the same 
 benefit of the decree as against the Defendants in 
 the present action as if they had been Defendants 
 in the former suit. The Defendants demurred : — 
 Seld (reversing the decision of Bacon, V.C.), that 
 the B., T., and E. Board were not made by the 
 Public Health Act subject to any liabilities of 
 their predecessors except those attaching under 
 the Act, and were, therefore, not bound by the 
 decree against them; and that, there being no 
 allegation of any nuisance committed by the B., 
 T., and E. Board, the Plaintiffs had no cause of 
 action, and the demurrer must be allowed. 
 Attornet-Genekal v. Bikmingham, Tame, and 
 EeA DBAXtfAGE BOABD - - 17 Ch. D. 685 
 
 14. Power to bind Successors — Public 
 
 Sealfh Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 68), s. 48— 
 — Trustees — Improvident Bargain — Ultra vires 
 — Change of Circumstances.'] Under the Public 
 Health Act, 1848, sect. 48, the owner of land ad- 
 joining a district by deed agreed with the local 
 board to do certain works and pay £10 a year, 
 and the board gave him leave to drain through 
 theii; drain all sewage from the property and 
 houses then belonging to the landowner and from 
 any houses thereafter to be erected on the pro- 
 perty. Many more houses were afterwards 
 erected, and the urban sanitary authority (which 
 had succeeded the local board) were under a 
 new Act of Parliament prevented from passing 
 as before the sewage through the drain into the 
 Thames: — Held, that the deed was not ultra 
 tiires, and that the board could bind their suc- 
 cessors as to the sewage of houses not then in 
 existence. — Meld, that though the board were 
 trustees for the ratepayers they had exercised 
 their discretion, and the agreement did not appear 
 at the time improvident, and its turning out badly 
 for them did not affect it. — Held, that the law 
 being altered so as to prevent the discharge of 
 sewage into the Thames was no groimd for setting 
 aside the deed. Mavob of New Windsor v. 
 Stovell - - - 27 Ch. D. 665 
 
 15, Q,uorrtm—TuUia Health Act, 1875 (38 
 
 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 155, 158 ; Sched. I, rr. 2, 9 ; 
 Sched,. II., Fart L, r. 65 ; Part II., r. 2— Casual 
 Vacancy — Lapse of Board — Informality.'] Several 
 members of a local board constituted under the 
 Public Health Act, 1875, and consisting of nine 
 
 III. LOCAL GOVEENHENT— LOCAL AITTHO- 
 
 BIIY — continued. 
 (6.) Powers — continued. • • 
 
 members, resigned, so that the quorum of three 
 required by Sohed. I., r. 2, was not left. The tWo 
 remaining members proceeded to fill up the vacah- 
 oies. The board aa thus constituted prescribgd-a 
 building line under sect. 155 of the Act : — Held,^ by 
 Pearson, J., that, as the resignations reduced the 
 nxunber of members to less than » quorum; 'the 
 board had lapsed, that the two remaining' mem- ' 
 bers could not fill up the vacancies, thait there 
 was therefore no board, that the building line was 
 therefore not well prescribed, and that Sohed. I., 
 rule 9, to the Act did not cure the defect.^-.ffeM, 
 by the Court of Appeal, that the filling up of vacan- 
 cies was " business " within the meaning of Scbed. 
 I., rule 2, that the two members were not c'om- 
 petent to transact it, and that the new meniber& 
 therefore were not duly elected, but that by 
 Sched. I., rule 9, the objection to the building 
 line, founded on the fact that some of the mem- 
 bers of the board were not duly elected, was re- 
 moved. Newhaven Local Boabd v. Newhavbn 
 School Board - - - 30 Ch. D. 350 
 
 IV. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— OFFEHCES. \ 
 
 1. Accumulation or Deposit — "Nuisance 
 
 or Injurious to Health " — Absence of Injury to • 
 Health— Public Health Act, 1875 (38 <fe 39 Vict. 
 0. 55), s. 91, sub-s. 4.] By sect, 91 of the Public 
 Health Act, 1875, " any accumulation oj deposit 
 which is a nuisance or injurious to health " shall 
 be deemed to be a nuisance liable to be dealt 
 with summarily under the Act : — Held, that an 
 offence within the section was committed where 
 the accumulation emitted offensive smells which 
 interfered with the personal' comfort of persohs'' 
 living in the neighbourhaodf but did not cause 
 injury to health. — Great 'Western Railway Com- ■ 
 pany v. Bishop (Law Eep. 7 Q. B. 550) distin- 
 guished. Bishop AuCELAiiD Local BoarIj •». 
 Bishop Auckland Iron Company 10 Q. B. D. 13& 
 
 2. Continuing Offence — Informaition — 
 
 Time— Public Health Act, ,1875 (38 & 39 Vicf 
 c. 55), ss. 156,252,],, By sect. 156 of the Public 
 Health Act, 1875, it is an offence to bring forward ■ 
 or buUd any addition to a house in a street beyond 
 the front of the house or building on either side- 
 without the consent of the urban authority ; and 
 "any person offending against this enactment 
 shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 40s.' for 
 every day during which the offence isicontinued 
 after written notice in this behalf from the urban 
 authority:" — Held,, thaX an offence to which the 
 penalty was ;appli(>g,ble continued so long as the 
 addition to tbeliQuse, was maintained after written 
 notice from the urban, authority, notwithstanding 
 that the addition was cpmfilet,e.d before the notjce ,, 
 was given. — Marshall v. Smith (Law Eep. 8 0.;P,. 
 416) distinguished. Btjmball v. Schmidt 
 
 [8 ft. B, D. 605 
 
 3. Keeping Swine — Absence of Injury to- 
 
 Health— Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. 
 c. 55), 8. 47.] It is an offence under the Public- 
 Health Act, 1875,' s^ 47, to keep swine so as to be 
 a " nuisance " in the common law meaning of the 
 term. It is not necessary to such offence that 
 
( 823 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 82i ) 
 
 IV. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— OFFENCES— conii. 
 there should be any injury to health. Banbuky 
 Ubban Sanitaby Authority v. Page 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 97 
 
 4. TTn wholesome JHeat—Evidenae of State 
 
 of Meai— Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55), s. 117 — Condemnationhy Justice — Proceed- 
 ings for Penalty.'] Wlien unwholesome meat has 
 been condemned by a justice, and proceedings 
 are afterwards taken before a Court of summary 
 jurisdiction, under 38 & 39 Vict. o. 55 (Public 
 Health Act, 1875), s. 117, against the owner of 
 the meat, evidence may be given by him as to the 
 state of the meat at the time of condemnation. 
 "Waye v. Thompson - 15 ft. B. D. 342 
 
 5. TTnwholesome Meat — Exposure for Sale 
 
 — Purchase by Customei Seizure — Condemna- 
 tion — Liability of Seller to Penalty — Public Sealth 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. v. 55), ss. 116, 117.] 
 The Kespondent, a butcher, exposed for sale part 
 of a cow which had died of disease, and sold the 
 meat to a customer, who took it home for food, 
 and some days afterwards at the request of the 
 Appellant, an inspector of nuisances, handed it 
 ■over to him, and it was condemned by a justice 
 as unfit for the food of man : — Held, that the 
 meat was not "so seized" and condemned as is 
 prescribed by sects. 116, 117, of the Public Health 
 Act, 1875, and therefore the Eespondent was not 
 liable, as the person to whom the same "did 
 belong at the time of the exposure for sale," to a 
 penalty under sect. 117. Vikteb v. Hind 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 63 
 
 V. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— PEACTICE. 
 
 1. Justices of the VeaB&Sias^Disqua- 
 
 lification — Town Council — Urban Sanitary Autlw- 
 rity— Public Health Act, 1875 (38 <fc 39 Vict. e. 55), 
 «.258.] By sect. 258 of the Public Health Act, 
 1875, " no justice of the peace shall be deemed in- 
 capable of acting in cases arising under this Act 
 by reason of his being a member of any local 
 authority." — In the borough of Wakefield the 
 sanitary committee of the town council, who were 
 the local authority under the Public Health Act, 
 1875, passed a resolution directing the town clerk 
 to prosecute S. for exposing for sale meat unfit 
 for human food, contrary to the provisions of the 
 Act, and at the hearing of an information laid in 
 pursuance of this resolution S. was convicted 
 before four justices of the borough, who imposed 
 a penalty upon him. One of the justices was a 
 member of the sanitary committee, and had been 
 present at the meeting at which the resolution 
 was passed : — Held, that sect. 258 did not remove 
 the disqualification which attached to the justice 
 by reason of his having acted as a member of the 
 sanitary committee in directing the prosecution, 
 and that a rule for a certiorari to bring up and 
 quash the conviction must be made absolute. 
 The Queen v. Lee - - 9 ft. B. D, 394 
 
 2. Justices of the Peace — Jurisdiction 
 
 ■ — Summary Proceedings — Expenses of sewering 
 Sta'eet — Appeal to Local Government Board — 
 Public Health Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict.c. 55), 
 ss. 150, 268.] Upon the hearing of a complaint 
 preferred before a police magistrate by the urban 
 authority of the district acting under sect. 150 of 
 the Public Health Act, 1875, to recover the 
 
 V, LOCAL GOVERNMENT- PRACTICE-conW. 
 amount apportioned upon a frontager in respect 
 of expenses incurred by the urban authority in 
 sewering, &o., a street, the frontager objected that 
 the plans referred to in the notice requiring him 
 to execute the work, shewed that part of the work 
 in respect of which upon his failure to comply 
 with the notice the expenses were incurred, was 
 executed upon land belonging to private owners : 
 Held, — that, as part of the work was executed on 
 a street, the urban authority had power to fix the 
 sum to be apportioned, and the magistrate had 
 jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, and could 
 only make an order for payment of the appor- 
 tioned sum, and if the frontager was aggrieved 
 by what the urban authority had done Ms only 
 remedy was to appeal to the Local Government 
 Board under sect. 268 of the Public Health Act, 
 1875. — Ex parte Wake ; Wake v. Mayoe, &o., of 
 Sheffield 11 ft. B. D. 291 ; 12 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 3. Limitation of Action — Highway — 
 
 Urban Authority — Surveyors of Highways con- 
 stituted by Local Act — 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50, s. 109 
 —5*6 Vict. 0. 97, s. 5— Public Health Act, 1875 
 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 144, 264, 341.] By a 
 local Act passed in 1862, the corporation of Sal- 
 ford were constituted surveyora of highways with- 
 in the borough, having and being subject to all 
 such powers and liabilities as any surveyors of 
 highways had or were subject to by virtue of the 
 law for the time being in force. Sect. 109 of 
 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50 (the Highway Act of 1835), 
 limits the period within which any action may be 
 brought for anything done under the authority of 
 that Act to three months after the act committed 
 for which the action is brought. Sect. 5 of 5 & 6 
 Vict. 0. 97, limits the period within which any 
 action may be brought for anything done under 
 the authority of the local Acts to two years after 
 the cause of action. By the Public Health Act, 
 1875, 3. 144, urban authorities (including by 
 sect. 6 corporations of boroughs) are constituted 
 surveyors of highways within their district, hav- 
 ing and being subject to all the powers, duties, 
 and liabilities (so far as the same are not incon- 
 sistent with the provisions of that Act) of sur- 
 veyors of highways under the law for the time 
 being in force. Sect. 264 limits the period within 
 which actions may be brought for anything done 
 under that Act to six months after the cause of 
 action accrued ; and by sect. 341 , all powers given 
 by that Act shall be deemed to be in addition to 
 and not in derogation of any other powers con- 
 ferred by statute, and such other powers may be 
 exercised in the same manner as if that Act had 
 not passed. In an action against the corporation 
 for negligence, as surveyors of highways, com- 
 menced more than three jbut less than six months 
 after the cause of action accrued : — Held, that the 
 Defendants were entitled to rely on the limitation 
 of three months provided by 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50, 
 and therefore that the action could not be main- 
 tained. — Taylor v, Meltham Local Board (47 L.J. 
 (O.P.) 12) distinguished. Bubton v. Coepoea- 
 TioN OF Salford - - 11 ft. B, S. 286 
 
 4. Limitation of Action — Money paid 
 
 under Mistalie of Fact — Money received for Plain' 
 tiff's use—PxMic Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55), s. 264.] The Defendants, under the 
 
( 825 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 826 ) 
 
 V. LOCAL GOVEEKMENT— PRACTICE— conf^. 
 Public Health Act, 1875, s. 150, gave notice to the 
 Plaintiffs, as adjoining owners, to pave a part of 
 a road situate within the Defendants' district. It 
 was then believed by both the Plaintiffs and the 
 Defendants that the road was not repairable by 
 the inhabitants at large. The Plaintiffs not 
 having done the work, the Defendants did it and 
 charged the cost to the Plaintiffs, who paid it. 
 It was afterwards discovered that the road was 
 repairable by the inhabitants at large, and there- 
 fore that the Plaintiffs were not liable, as adjoin- 
 ing owners, to pave the road. The Plaintiffs 
 thereupon demanded back from the Defendants 
 the money paid by them as the cost of paving the 
 part of the road ; but the Defendants refused to 
 return it. The Plaintiffs, thereupon, sued to 
 recover it as money paid under a mistake of fact 
 and as money received to their use : but the 
 Plaintiffe did not give the Defendants notice of 
 action, and the action was commenced more than 
 six months after the cost of paving the part of the 
 road had been paid to the Defendants : — Held, 
 that notice of action was necessary, and that the 
 action was brought too late, and that the provi- 
 sions of the Public Health Act, 1875, s. 264, 
 applied.— TfaierfeoMse v. Keen (i B. & C. 200), 
 and Selmes v. Judge (Ijaw Eep. 6 Q. B. 724), 
 followed. Midland Railway Company v. With- 
 iNGTON Local Boaed 11 Q. B. D. 788 
 
 S. Limitation of Action — Secovery of 
 
 Land^Publio Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Viet. 
 c. 55), «. 264.] Sect. 264 of the Public Health 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 89 Vict. c. 55),— which enacts 
 that no writ or process shall be sued out against 
 any local authority for anything done or intended 
 to be done under the provisions of the Act 
 until one month after written notice of action, &c., 
 and that any person to whom any such notice 
 of action is given, may tender amends to the 
 Plaintiff within one month after the service of 
 such notice — does not apply to an action for the 
 recovery of land. Foat v. Mayoe, &o., of Mar- 
 gate - - - - 11 Q. B. D. 299 
 
 VI. LOCAL GOVEEHMENT— PUBLIC HEALTH 
 
 ACTS. 
 
 Alkali, &o., Works.] The Alkali, &c.. Works Be- 
 gulations Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 37), repeals 
 the Alkali Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. e. 124), the Act 
 (31 ife 32 Vict. c. 36), which made perpetual the 
 Alkali Act, 1863, the Alkali Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. 
 0. 43) ," directs (sects. 3-10) the manner in which 
 alkali works, sulphuric acid works, and certain 
 other scheduled works shall he carried on ; provides 
 (sects. 11-20) for the registration and inspection of 
 aU such works; and (sects. 21-28) prescribes the pro- 
 cedure to be adopted in recovering fines for offences 
 against tlie Act. 
 
 Fines are to be recovered by action in the Comtty 
 Court, and an appeal lies in the form of a special 
 case to the High Court of Justice. 
 
 By sect. 25 the owner of a work is not to be liable 
 in certain cases for an offence against tlie Act, if 
 he /proves that the offence was committed without 
 his knowledge, consent, or connivance, by some agent, 
 servant, or workman, whom he shall charge by name 
 as the actual offender. 
 
 By sect. 28 where a nuisance, arising from any 
 
 VI. LOCAL GOVEENMENT— PUBLIC HEALTH 
 ACTS — continued. 
 
 noxious or offensive gas or gases, ts wholly or par- 
 tially caused by the acts or defaults of several per- 
 sons, any person injured by such nuisance may 
 proceed against any one or more of such persons 
 and may recover damages from each person made 
 a defendant in proportion to the extent of the con- 
 tribution of such defendant to the nuisance, not- 
 withstanding that the act or default of such de- 
 fendant would not separately have caused a 
 nuisance. 
 
 The section is not to apply to any defendant who 
 can produce a certificate from the chief inspector 
 that in the works of such defendant the require- 
 ments of the Act have been complied with, and were 
 complied with when the nuisance arose. 
 
 Scheduled Works. 
 
 Sulphuric Acid Works, 
 
 Chemical Manure Works, 
 
 Gas Liquor Works, 
 
 Nitric Acid Works, 
 
 Sulphate of Ammonia Works, 
 
 Chlorine Works, 
 and works of a similar character. 
 
 Epidemic Diseases.] The Epidemic and other 
 Diseases Prevention Act (46 & 47 Vict. c. 59), 1883, 
 makes better provision for the prevention of out- 
 breaks of formidable epidemic, endemic, or infec- 
 tious diseases, and amends the Public Health Act, 
 1875. 
 
 Fruit-pickers.] The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 23, 
 extends sect. 214 of the Public Health Act, 1875, 
 and empowers any local authority to make by-laws 
 for securing the decent lodging and accommodation 
 of persons engaged in the picking of fruit and 
 
 Penalties.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. a. 74, prohibits 
 /proceedings for any penalty under the Public 
 Health Act, 1875, s. 193, to be taken without the 
 consent of the Attorney-General. 
 
 Sewers.] The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 37, amends 
 tlie Public Health Act, 1875, and makes provision 
 with respect to tlie support of public sewers and 
 sewage works in mining districts. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited as Public Health Act, 
 1875 (Support of Sewers) Amendment Act, 1883, 
 and to be construed as one with Public Health Act, 
 1875. 
 
 Sect. 2. Interpretation of terms, " sanitary 
 works " and " support." . 
 
 Sect. 3. Application of provisions of the Water- 
 works Clauses Act, 1847 (10 & 11 Vict c. 17), 
 with respect to mines, to any sanitary work of a 
 local authority. 
 
 Sect. 4. Limitation of right to support for 
 sanitary works over mines. 
 
 Sect. 5. Savings. 
 
 Amendpent] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 72, 
 amends sect. 90 of the Public Health Act, 1875. 
 
 Port Sanitary Authority.] The Act 48 & 49 
 Vict. c. 35, hy sect 2 amends sect 110 of 38 & 39 
 Vict c. 55 (the Public Health Act, 1875), and by 
 sect. 3 enables the Local Government Board to 
 permanently constitute u, port sanitary authority 
 by order. 
 
 Cholera.] General Regulations (12th July, 1883) 
 of Local Government Board under Public Health 
 Act, 1875, s. 130, for all port sanitary authorities 
 
( 827 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 828 ) 
 
 TI. LOCAL GOVEENMEHT— PUBLIC HEALTH 
 
 ACTS — continued, 
 {except {he port of London'), customs ports not 
 within a port sanitary authority, and others 
 
 [L. &., 1883, p. 3535 
 
 Order (2l6i April, 1884) of Local Government 
 Board, amending above cholera regulations with 
 respect to approval of the Queen's Harbour Master 
 in certain ports - - L. G., 1884, p, 1813 
 
 Medical Officer.] Order of Local Government 
 Board under Public Health 'Act, 1875, «. 287, 
 with respect to every medical officer of health 
 appointed or reappointed on or after the 1st of 
 August, 1883, where any portion of tlw salary of 
 such officer is paid by Farliament - L. 6., 1883, 
 
 [p. 3653 
 
 Ditto, where no portion of sv/ih salary is paid by 
 Parliament - - L. G., 1883, p. 3655 
 
 Inspector of Nuisances.] Order of Local Gov- 
 ernment Board under Public Health Act, 1875, 
 s. 287, with respect to every inspector of nuisances 
 appointed or reappointed on or after the 1st August, 
 1883, where any portion of the salary of such officer 
 is paid by Parliament - 1. G., 1883, p. 3657 
 
 VII. LOCAL GOVEENMENT— BATES. 
 
 Conference.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 22, 
 provides for the expenses incurred in relation to 
 conferences of the public health and local govern- 
 ■ment authorities. 
 
 1. •■ Highway Hate — Local Board — Urban 
 
 Authority — Surveyors of Highways — Limit upon 
 Amount of Highway Bate — Highway Act, 1835 
 (5*6 Will. 4, c. 50), ss. 5, 19— Public Health Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 144, 216, 217.] The 
 Eespondents -were the local board for the district 
 of G. Part of their district, called the outer dis- 
 trict, was not rated for works of paving, water 
 supply, 'and sewerage. The Eespondents under 
 the Public Health Act, 1875, ss. 216, 217, made a 
 highway rate of 3s. id. in the pound upoa the 
 inhabitants of the outer district, whose consent to 
 the rate had not been obtained : ■ — Held, that, 
 although the local board were surveyors of high- 
 ways within the outer district, pursuant to the 
 Public Health Act, 1875, s. 144, yet the limit im- 
 posed upon rates made by surveyors of highways 
 under the Highway Act, 1835, s. 29 (lOd. in the 
 pound for one rate and 2s. 6fl!. in the pound for 
 one year) unless the consent of the parishioners 
 had been obtained, did not apply to the highway 
 rates made by a local board pursuant to the Pub- 
 lic Health Act, 1875, ss. 216, 217, and tliat the 
 rate of 3s. id. in the pound made by the Respon- 
 dents was valid. Dtson v. Gkeetland Local 
 BOAKD _ - - - 13Q. B.D. 946 
 
 2. Owner rated instead of Occupier — Bate 
 
 in respect of Tenements whether occupied or un- 
 occupied — Beduced Estimate — Proportion of an- 
 nual Value— Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Vict. c. 55), s. 211.] By the Public Health Act, 
 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 211, the owner in- 
 stead of the occupier may, at the option of .the 
 urban authority, be rated to general district rates, 
 provided that in cases where the owner is rated 
 instead of the occupier he shall be assessed on 
 such reduced estimate as the urban authority 
 deem reasonable of the nett annual value, not 
 being less than two-thirds nor more than four- 
 
 VIL LOCAL GOVESNmENT— BATES— cobM. 
 fifths of the nett annual value ; and where such 
 reduced estimate is in respect -of tenements 
 whether occupied or unoccupied, then such assess- 
 ment may be made on one half of the amount at 
 which such tenements would be liable to be rated 
 if the same were occupied, and the rate were levied 
 on the occupiers : — Held, affirming the decision of 
 the Queen's Bench Division, that a discretionary 
 power is given to the urban authority by that 
 enactment to rate the owner in respect of pre- 
 mises whether occupied or unoccupied, but where 
 the owner is so rated the assessment must only be 
 upon one-half of the rateable value. The Qceejt 
 V. Babclat - 8 Q. B. D. 306, 486 
 
 8. • Water — Supply to House — Notice to 
 
 Owner to obtain Proper Supply — Non-compliance 
 with Notice — Power to charge Bates — Public 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 65), s. 62.] A 
 local authority caused a supply of water to be 
 brought in main water-pipes along the street in 
 which a house was situate, and gave notice to the 
 owner of the house, under sect. 62 of the Public 
 Health Act, 1875, to obtain a proper supply and 
 do all such works as might be necessary for that 
 purpose. That notice was not complied with, and 
 the local authority did not exercise the power 
 given to them by that section of executing the 
 works necessary to connect the house with the 
 main. In an action by the water company for 
 water-rates: — Held,t]i&t the Defendant was liable, 
 and that it was not a condition precedent to such 
 liability that the works necessary to bring the 
 water into the house should have been executed. 
 
 SOUTHEKD WatERWOEKS CoJIPANT V. HoWARD 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 215 
 
 VIII. LOCAL GOVEEHMENT— SEWEES. 
 
 1. Obligation of Landovyner — Subjacent 
 
 Support — Compensation for Deprivation of Power 
 to work Mines— P-uhlic Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Vict. c. 55), ss. 15, 16, 175, 308.] The Public 
 Health Act, 1875, imposes on landowners, through 
 whose land a sewer is run under that Act, an 
 obligation to preserve to such sewer subjacent 
 support, and gives them a right to immediate 
 compensation for being deprived of free power to 
 work subjacent mines, but not for the risk of per- 
 colation of sewage into the subjacent mines. Li 
 re CoHPOBATiON OF Dudley 8 Q. B. D. 86 
 
 2. Vesting in Local Authority — Pvhlic 
 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 13—06- 
 struction by Owner of Soil — Injunction']. A sewer 
 made by the owner of some only of the houses in a 
 street not yet a highway, though made for the 
 purpose of draining liis own amongst other houses, 
 is not a sewer made by a person " for his own 
 profit " within the meaning of the exception in 
 sect. 13 of the Public Health Act, 1875.— The 
 word " sewer " in that Act should receive the 
 largest possible interpretation, and a di-ain is a 
 " sewer " within the meaning of sect. 13 when 
 more than one house has been connected with it. 
 Acton Local Boaed v. Batten 28 Ch. D. 283 
 
 IX. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— STREETS. 
 
 1. Finding by Justices — Estoppel — Bes 
 
 judicata — Justices, Summary Proceedings before — 
 Adjudication that Street is a Highway— Public 
 Health Act, 1S75 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 150.] Au 
 
( 829 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 830 ) 
 
 IX. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— STREETS— conicZ. 
 application to justices by a local board under the 
 Public Health Act, 1875, for a recovery of a pro- 
 portion of the expenses of sewering a street from 
 the owner of premises abutting thereon, was dis- 
 missed by the justices on the ground ,that the 
 street was a highway repairable by the inhabitants 
 at large. The local board some years afterwards 
 made an application against the same person for 
 the recovery of a proportion of paving expenses 
 subsequently inoun-ed in respect of the same 
 street, and a stipendiary magistrate made an order 
 for the payment of such expenses : — Held, that 
 the adjudication of the justices that the street was 
 a highway repairable by the inhabitants at large 
 on the first application was beyond the jurisdic- 
 tion of such justices, which was only to make or 
 refuse the order for the expenses claimed, and 
 that, therefore, such adjudication on the first ap- 
 plication did not estop the local board from claim- 
 ing the expenses they claimed on the second 
 application, and consequently that the magistrate 
 might make the order which he made for their 
 payment. The Queen v. Hutohings 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 300 
 
 2. Finding by Justices— " /Sireei," Vefi- 
 
 mtion of—FuUia Bealth Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 55), Si. 4, 150.] By sect. 4 of the Public Health 
 Act, 1875, " in this Act, if not inconsistent with 
 the context, the following words and expressions 
 have the meaning hereinafter respectively as- 
 signed to them," and (amongst other definitions) 
 "street includes any road," &c. By sect. 150 
 where any street vrithin any urban district (not 
 being a highway repairable by the inhabitants 
 at large) is not sewered, paved, and channelled 
 to the satisfaction of the urban authority they 
 may give notice to the owners of the adjoining 
 premises to sewer, &c., the street, and on failui'e 
 to comply with the notice the urban authority 
 may execute the works themselves, and recover 
 ' the expense of so doing from the adjoining 
 owners in a summary manner. Summary pro- 
 ceedings having been taken by an urban authority 
 to recover, under sect. 150, the expense of sewer- 
 ing, &o., a road within the district which was not 
 a higliway repairable by the inhabitants at large : 
 — S.ddL, that it was a question of fact for the 
 justices to determine whether or not the road 
 •was a street within sect. 150, and that they were 
 not bound to find as matter of, law that it was 
 a street by the terms of the definition in sect. 4. 
 Maude ». Baildon Local Boaed 10 Q. B. D. 394 
 
 3. General Line of Buildings — Informality 
 
 — Acquieslsence — Piiblio Bealth Act, 1875, es. 155, 
 158.] The Defendants being about to pull 
 down a school and erect a new one, submitted 
 plans to the local board. The local board ob- 
 jected to the plans, giving as a reason that they 
 violated a by-law, which obliged a person laying 
 out a new street to leave it of a certain width. 
 This by-law was not applicable, as South Lane, 
 on which the school fronted, was not a new street, 
 The Defendants disregarded the objection, com- 
 menced their works on the 5th of January, 1885, 
 laid the foundations of the main wall towards 
 South Lane on the 12th, and proceeded rapidly 
 with the erection of it. On the 22nd of January, 
 the local board prescribed a building line which 
 
 IX. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— STSEETS-cojjM. 
 did not interfere with the main wall, but would 
 prevent the erection of certain annexes not then 
 commenced, lying between South Lane and the 
 main walls, which annexes were shewn on the 
 plans laid before the board. The Defendants had 
 ground enough to allow of the annexes being 
 erected' elsewhere. The Defendants proceeded 
 with the annexes, and the board brought their 
 action to restrain them from building beyond the 
 line, and to compel them to pull down what they 
 had built beyond it : — Seld, that where a build- 
 ing is taken down to be rebuilt, a building line 
 may be prescribed under sect. 155, for any portion 
 of it which has not been commenced, although 
 other portions have been commenced, unless what 
 has been commenced necessarily involves as a 
 matter of construction a projection beyond the 
 line afterwards prescribed, and that here no such 
 necessity existed, as the annexes could be erected 
 elsewhere. That the commencement of the main 
 building therefore did not preclude the board 
 from laying down a line which would prevent the 
 erection of the annexes which had not then been 
 commenced. — Held, also, that as the notice given 
 by the board, though ineffectual for the purpose 
 of empowering them to pull down the erection 
 under sect. 158, gave the Defendants to under- 
 stand that the hoard objected on the ground that 
 buildings according to the plan would make the 
 sti'eet too narrow, the board had not done any- 
 thing to induce the Defendants to believe that 
 they would not prescribe a building line, and that 
 there was no equity to prevent the board from exer- 
 cising their powers under sect. 155 on the ground 
 that they had misled the Defendants. New- 
 haven Local Boaed o. Newhaven School 
 Board - _ _ 30 Ch. D. 360 
 
 4. " New Street " — Bringing forward 
 
 Suildings— Public Health Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict, 
 c. 63), s. 2— Local Government Act, 1858 (21 & 22 
 Viet. 0. 98), s. 3i—Pttblic Health Act, 1875 
 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 4, 156, 157.] The 
 Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), 
 s. 157, enables an urban authority to make by- 
 laws with respect (inter alia) to the level, width, 
 and construction of new streets : — Held, affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal, that the 
 words " new streets " in that section are not con- 
 fined to streets constructed for the first time, but 
 apply also to an old highway, formerly a country 
 lane, which has long been a " street " within the 
 intei-pretation clause (sect. 4) of that Act, and 
 which by the building of houses on each side of 
 it has recently become a street in the popular 
 sense of the term. — A by-law made by an urban 
 authority under that section provided that every 
 new street should be laid out and formed of such 
 width and at such level as the urban authority 
 should in each case determine : — Held, reversing 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal, thaf'width" 
 in sect. 157 of the Public Health Act, 1875, and 
 in the above by-law meant width of roadway, and 
 not width between houses on each side of the 
 street ; and that the urban authority were not en- 
 titled under the above by-law(or any other of their 
 existing by-laws) to disapprove of and pull down 
 houses in the course of erection in a new street 
 on the ground that the building line was too 
 
( 831 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 832 ) 
 
 IX. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— STEEETS—confeL 
 near the roadway. Eobinson v. Local Board 
 OF Bakton-Ecoles 21 Ch. D. 621 ; 8 App. Cas. 798 
 
 5. • Notice to several Owners — Default hy 
 
 one only — BigM to execute Works without giving 
 fresh Notice — Apportionment, when conclusive — 
 Summary Proceedings — Belay hetween Complaint 
 and Summons — Paving Expenses — 38 & 39 Vict. 
 V. 55, ss. 150, 257.] The Appellant and five 
 others were the owners of premises within the 
 district of the Respondents, an urban authority 
 under the Public Health Act, 1875. These pre- 
 mises abutted upon a street (not being a high- 
 way), which street was not sewered, levelled, 
 paved, flagged, and channelled to the satisfaction 
 of the Respondents. The Respondents gave a 
 separate notice to each of such owners requiring 
 them to sewer, level, pave, flag, and channel the 
 parts of the street in front of their premises, 
 within a specified time. Five of the owners 
 executed the works in front of their premises, 
 but the Appellant made default. The Respon- 
 dents thereupon executed the works required to 
 be don3 in front of her premises, and their sur- 
 veyor having made his apportionment, gave her 
 a notice stating that the expenses had been 
 apportioned by their surveyor, who had settled 
 that £213 13s. 6d. was payable by her according 
 to the frontage of her premises, and that they 
 required payment of that sum : — Held, first, 
 that the Respondents were not bound before exe- 
 cuting such works to give the Appellant a fresh 
 notice specifying thfe particular works which 
 remained to be done by her ; secondly, that the 
 Respondent not having given notice to dispute 
 the apportionment, it became binding on her 
 within the three months limited by sect. 257, and 
 that summary proceedings might be taken under 
 that section ifor the recovery of the amount due 
 from her; thirdly, that in such summary pro- 
 ceedings it was no objection to the validity of a 
 summons that it was issued more than a year 
 after the complaint upon which it was founded ; 
 fourthly, that the notice of apportionment, which 
 concluded with a demand of payment of the 
 amount apportioned, was not a "notice of demand " 
 within sect. 257, and that the six months within 
 which, under sect. 252, summary proceedings 
 must be taken, were not to be reckoned from 
 it but from a subsequent notice of demand. 
 Snicox V. Local Boabd for Handsworth, 
 Stafford - - 8 Q, B. D. 39 
 
 6. Paving Expenses — Apportionment — 
 
 Premises " adjoining or abutting on " a newly- 
 made Street— Puhlie Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Viet. e. 55), s. 150.] A. was the owner of three 
 houses fronting a street called York Place, 
 and adjoining or abutting at the rear upon a 
 footpath at the end of a street called St. Julian 
 Street, which formed a cul-de-sac. The ground 
 at the back of these houses was five feet above 
 the level of St. Julian Street, and the wall, 
 which was the property of A., was about twelve 
 feet high on the outside. There was no access 
 from A.'s premises to St. Julian Street : — Held, 
 that his premises "adjoined or abutted on" 
 St. Julian Street within the Act, and conse- 
 quently that he was chargeable with hi;! propor- 
 tion of the expenses of paving, &o., that street, 
 
 IX, LOCAL 60VEENMENT— STEEETS— co»f(?. 
 under the Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Vict. 0. 55), s. 150. Newport ITrban Sanitary 
 Authority v. Graham - - 9 Q, B. D, 183 
 
 7. Paving Expenses — Apportionment — • 
 
 Premines "fronting, adjoining, or abutting" — 
 Public Health Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), 
 s. 150.] The Appellant owned premises sepa- 
 rated from a street by a wall five feet high, 
 belonging, together with the land on which it 
 stood, to another person. The Appellant had no 
 direct access from his premises to the street, but in 
 order to reach it had to pass for a short distance 
 down a public footpath, or over other intervening 
 land : — Held, that the Appellant was not the 
 owner of premises " fronting, adjoining, or abut- 
 ting " on the street within the meaning of sect. 150 
 of the Public Health Act, 1875, and therefore 
 was not liable to contribute to the expenses of 
 sewering and paving the street under that section. 
 
 LiGHTBOUND V. HiGBER BeBINGTON LoOAL BOARD 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 849 
 
 [AfSnned by the Court of Appeal, 16 Q. B. D. 577] 
 
 8. ■ ■ Paving Expenses — Private Improve- 
 ment Expenses — ■ Charge upon " Premises " — 
 Leasehold Interest — Charge on Total Ownership 
 —Public Health Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Vict. c. 55), 
 ss. 4, 257.] The charge created by sect. 257 of 
 the Public Health Act, 1875, for expenses in- 
 curred by a local authority for sewering and 
 other works, and for the payment whereof the 
 owner of the premises in respect of which the 
 same are incurred is liable under that Act, is a 
 charge upon the " premises" as defined by sect. 4 ; 
 accordingly, it is a charge, not on the interest of 
 any particular owner of the premises, but on the 
 total ownership, that is to say, on the respective 
 interest of every owner for the time being in pro- 
 portion to the value of his interest. Corporation 
 OP Birmingham v. Baker - 17 Ch. D. 782 
 
 9. Paving Expenses, Recovery of — Public 
 
 Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 150," 
 257, 268 — Appeal to Local Government Board — ■ 
 Prohibition.'] Under 38 & 39 Vict. c. 55, s. 150, 
 notice was given by an urban authority to the 
 owner of premises fronting a street to pave part 
 of it, and on his default the authority executed 
 the work, and their surveyor gave him notice of 
 apportionment of the expenses for which the 
 owner was liable, and demand was made upon 
 him for the amount. — Under sect. 268, he, deem- 
 ing himself aggrieved by the " decision " of the 
 authority, addressed a memorial by way of appeal 
 to the Local Government Board, stating the 
 grounds of his complaint. — On a rule for a prohi- 
 bition to the Local Government Board: — Held, 
 that an appeal lay by the memorial to the Local 
 Government Boai'd, and that no prohibitioie 
 ought to be granted. The Queen r. Local 
 Government Board 9 Q,. B. D. 600 ; 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 309 
 
 10. Paving Expenses — Boad made good 
 
 and afterwards paved and flagged — Liability of 
 adjoining Owners — Towns Improvement Clauses 
 Act 1847 (10 & 11 Vict c. 34), s. 53.] In 
 1857 a local Act was passed which incorporated 
 sect. 53 of the Towns Improvement Clauses 
 Act, 1847 '.lO & 11 Vict. c. 34). In 1874 tlie 
 Appellants, in their capacity as the corporation 
 
( 833 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 83i ) 
 
 IX. LOCAL GOVERNMENT— STEEETS—coJiW. 
 of P.,* bought some land of the Respondents 
 abutting upon a country high road within the 
 district to which the local Act applied, and, in 
 pursuance of an agreement then made with the 
 Eespondents, at their own expense widened and 
 improved the road and laid out a footpath along 
 the side, and gravelled, channelled, and kerbed 
 the footpath. In 1879 the Appellants, in their 
 capacity as the urban authority, paved and flagged 
 the footpath and sought to recover the expense of 
 so doing from the Eespondents as adjoining owners 
 under the powers of sect. 53. The jury found that 
 before the paving and flagging in 1879 the road 
 was not a street in the popular sense of the term, 
 and that the footpath had been " made good " 
 within sect. 53 : — JSeld, affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal, that the Eespondents were 
 Hot liable, upon the ground that the footpath had 
 been " theretofore made good " within the mean- 
 ing of sect. 53, but without deciding whether the 
 road was a " street " within the meaning of that 
 section. — The word " theretofore " in sect. 53 
 refers to the period before the work is done by the 
 commissioners, not to the period before the pass- 
 ingTof the special Act. Mayok, &c. of Pobts- 
 MOTJTH V. Smith 13 ft. B. D. 184 ; 10 App. Cas. 364 
 LOCAL GOVEENMENT— Appeal to Coui-t of Ap- 
 peal — Criminal cause or matter 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 534 
 See Peactice — Supreme Codet — ^Ap- 
 peal. 8. 
 
 Highway — Costs of proceedings for stopping 
 
 up 13 Q. B. S. 640 
 
 ' See Highway — Stopping up. 
 
 Municipal corporation — Local authority — 
 
 Justice member of corporation — Disqua- 
 lification - - 6 Q. B. S. 168 
 See Justices — Disqualification. 3. 
 
 Penalty — OfBcer interested in contract — 
 
 Rescission by Crown 12 Q. B. D. 530 
 See Penal Action. 3. 
 
 Eeference to Local Government Board under 
 
 local Act — Power to state case for opinion 
 of Court — Common Law Procedure Act, 
 1854 - 9 Q. B. D. 518 
 
 See Abbitbation— Submission. 1. 
 
 Scotland — Power to make road 
 
 [6 App, Cas. 833 
 See Scotch Law — Hishwat. 1. 
 LOCKS ON TEE THAUES. 
 
 See EivEB — Gazette. 
 LOCKE KING'S ACT 16 Ch. S. 322 ; 24 Ch. D. 94 
 See Will — Exoneeation. 2, 3. 
 
 Mortgage of land and charge on shares 
 
 [21 Ch. S. S83 
 See Company — Membbb's Liability. 1. 
 LOCOMOTIVES— On road. 
 
 See Highway — Locomotive — Statutes. 
 
 On road - - 7 ft, B. D. 313 
 
 See Highway — Locomotive. 
 LOCUS STANDI — Appeal in bankruptcy 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 110 
 See Bankeuptcy — Appeal. 2. 
 
 Appeal — Witness in winding-up 
 
 [19 Ch, D. 118 
 See Company — Evidence. 2. 
 
 LODGEE— Franchise 8 Q, B. D. 195, 247 ; 
 
 [10 a. B. D. 677 
 
 See Paeliament — Fbanchise. 2, 3, 4. 
 Franchise. 
 
 See Paeliament^^Fbanohise — Statutes. 
 Distress — Lodgers' Goods Protection Act. 
 
 See Cases under Landloed and Tenant 
 
 — LOPGEE. 
 
 LODGING-HOtrSE— By-laws. 
 
 See Local Govebnment — ^By-Laws — 
 Statutes. 
 LOG BOOK — Engineer — Evidence —Action of 
 damage - - - 10 P. D. 31 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Admiealty — Evidence . , 
 2. 
 
 LONDON (CITY OF) :— Col. 
 
 I. Chaeities - - 834 
 
 II. COMMISSIONBBS OF SeWEBS - 837 
 
 Mbteopolitan District. 
 
 See Metbopolis. 
 I. LONDON— CHAEITIES. 
 
 Charities.] The Act 46 & 47 Vict, c- 36, pro- 
 vides for the better application and management of 
 the Parochial Charities of the City of London. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to lie cited as the City of London 
 Parochial Charities Act, 1883. 
 
 I. Appointment and Powers of Commissioners, 
 Sect. 2. Cliarity Commissioners for Mrigland and 
 Wales to be Commissioners under the Act, and 
 (1.) To exercise any of' the powers vested in 
 
 them by the Charitable Trusts Act, 1853. 
 (2.) To exercise the like jurisdiction, &c., as 
 might be exercised by the High Court of 
 Justice if the matter sand questions referred 
 to them had come before that Court ; 
 (3.) To determine whether any property is or is 
 not charity property subject to the powers 
 of the Act. 
 Sect. 3 provides for the appointment of two 
 additional Charity Commissioners. 
 
 Sect. 4. Powers of Commissioners to cov,tinva 
 until end of year 1887, and may be extended to end 
 of 1889, but not further. 
 
 II. Inquiry and Statement. 
 
 Sect. 5. Commissioners to inquire into the charity 
 property of the City of London, and to classify 
 same in two schedules, one of ecclesiastical and the 
 other of general charity property . 
 
 Sect. 6. Where property is mixed. Commissioners 
 to determine how much is ecclesiastical and Iww 
 much general. ' 
 
 Sect. 7. As to vested interests and equitable 
 claims. 
 
 Sect. 8. Commissioners to publish statement em- 
 bodying results of inquiry. 
 
 Sect. 9. Commissioners to send copy of statement 
 to governing bodies, &c. 
 
 Sect. 10. Any person claiming any vested interest 
 affecting any endowment mentioned in any such 
 statement, and alleging that the Commissioners 
 have not duly recognised such vested interest, or 
 any person or persons alleging thai any property, 
 mhich the Commissioners have determined to be 
 charity property within the meaning of the Act,, is 
 not charity property, but that he or they is or are 
 entitled to the same free from any charitable trust 
 
 2 E 
 
( 835 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 836 ) 
 
 I. lO'SDO'S—CHARlTlES—continued. 
 
 affecting tlie same, may within two months from the 
 date of the publication of such statement apply to 
 the Sigh Court of Justice, iy petition or summons 
 at Chamhers, ashing for a declaration that he has 
 a vested interest affecting such endowment, or that 
 such property is not charity property (as the case 
 may be). The Commissioners may appear upon 
 any such proceedings, and the decision of the Judge 
 before wliom such petition or summons is heard 
 shall be final {unless special leave to appeal shall 
 be by him given). The Judge shall make a declara- 
 tion in conformity with the justice of the case, and 
 shall have power to order that the costs of the appli- 
 cation shall be paid out of the endmoment or pro- 
 perty in question, or by any party to the application 
 as he may thinh right. 
 
 III. Schemes for better Application of Charity 
 Funds. 
 Sect. 11. After publication of statement. Com- 
 missioners to frame scheme for charity property. 
 Sect. 12. Every such scheme shall provide — 
 (a.) For the vesting of all real estate in the offi- 
 cial trustee of charity lands appointed 
 under the Charitable Trusts Acts, 1853 to 
 1869, and of all personal estate in the 
 official trustee of charitable funds appointed 
 under the same Acts, subject to all equities, 
 &c. ; 
 (b.) For the expenses of Commissioners in carry- 
 ing out the Act ; 
 (c.) For saving or malting due compensation for 
 
 vested interests. 
 Sect. 13. Special provisions to be inserted in 
 schemes relating to parishes in first Schedule. 
 
 Sect. 14. Special provisions to be inserted in 
 schemes relating to parishes in second Schedule. 
 
 Sect. 15. Schemes relating to parishes in the first 
 Schedule may provide for union of governing 
 bodies. 
 
 Sect. 16. Scheme relating to parishes in second 
 schedule may provide for payment of moneys to 
 trustees of existing institutions. 
 
 Sect. 17. In schemes relating to property, belong- 
 ing to parishes in second schedule. Commissioners 
 may create new bodies of trustees. 
 
 Sect. 18. In schemes relating to property belong- 
 ing to parishes in second Schedule, Commissioners 
 may retain or modify existing bodies of trustees. 
 
 Sect. 19. More schemes than one may be made, 
 and other objects may be provided for. 
 
 Sect. 20. Scheme need not specify precise appli- 
 cation of general charity property. 
 
 Sect. 21. No scheme to affect any endowment 
 oj-iginally given to cliaritdble uses less than fifty 
 years before the commencement of the Act. 
 
 Sect. 22. Educational interests of girls as well as 
 boys to be regarded. 
 
 Sect. 23. Schemes need not be prepared for 
 endowments which are educational endowments 
 within 32 & 33 Vict. o. 56, s. 5. 
 
 IV. Frocedure for Approving Schemes. 
 
 Sect. 24. Schemes to be printed and sent to 
 governing bodies, and otherwise circulated. 
 
 Sect. 25. Commissioners to receive and consider 
 suggestions respecting schemes. 
 
 Sect. 26. Scheme may be revised, reprinted, and 
 circulated anew. 
 
 I. LONDON— CHAEITIES—contireued. 
 
 Sect. 27. Scheme to be submitted to and approved 
 by Committee of Council on Education, and when 
 approved to be published and circulated with notice 
 stating unless within two months after publication 
 of scheme, when approved, a petition is presented 
 to the Committee of Council cm Education, such 
 scheme may be approved by Ser Majesty without 
 being laid before Parliament. 
 
 Scheme may be laid before Parliament on a 
 petition within said two months to Committee of 
 Council on Education by the governing body or not 
 less than twenty inhabitant ratepayers. 
 
 Sect. 28. Any person aggrieved by any provision 
 of a scheme, on the ground of its not making due 
 compensation for any vested interest to which he 
 has been declared entitled as aforesaid, may petition 
 against the scheme to Ser Majesty in Council, and 
 counsel may be heard in support of and against 
 the petition. 
 
 Sect. 29. Where u. scheme is remitted, the Com- 
 missioners may amend the scheme or prepare 
 another scheme, subject to the like right of petition 
 to Ser Majesty in Council as before directed. 
 
 Sect. 30. As to laying of schemes before Parlia- 
 ment where a petition has been presented. 
 
 Sect. 31. Wliere scheme relates to an endowment 
 producing less than £100 per annum no petition 
 lies to Ser Majesty in Council. 
 
 Sect. 32. On non-approval of scheme by Ser 
 Majesty, a new scheme to be prepared. 
 
 Sect. 33. Schemes may be framed for amending 
 schemes approved under the Act. 
 
 V. Supplemental Provisions. 
 
 Sect. 34. No scheme to take effect unless ap- 
 proved by Order in Council. 
 
 -Sect. 35. Effect and operation of scheme wlien 
 approved. 
 
 Sect. 36. Order in Council approving scheme to 
 be conclusive evidence of validity of scheme. 
 
 Sect. 37. Scheme to be approved by three Com- 
 missioners before being submitted to Committee of 
 Council on Education. 
 
 Sect. 38 extends sect. 11 of the Charitahle Trusts 
 Act, 1853, and sects. 6, 7, 8, and 9 of Charitable 
 Trusts Act, 1855, to Commissioners appointed under 
 the Act. 
 
 Sect. 39. Commissioners to have power to direct 
 sale of charity property and invest proceeds. 
 
 Sect. 40. During the continuance of the power of 
 matting schemes under the Act, no Court or Judge 
 shall, with respect to any charity property or endow- 
 ment which can be dealt with by a scheme under 
 the Act, make any scheme or appoint any nevy 
 trustee without the consent of the Commissioners. 
 
 Sect. 41. Persons acquiring rights after the 
 passing of the Act to be subject to schemes. Tem- 
 porary restrictions on powers of governing bodies. 
 
 Sect. 42. As to service of notices and documents 
 on governing bodies. 
 
 Sect. 43. Notices and documents may be sent by 
 post. 
 
 Sect. 44 provides for the payment of salaries 
 paid and expenses incurred in carrying the Act 
 into effect. 
 
 Sect. 45. Eequisitions, dec, of Commissioners to 
 be made under their seal. 
 
 Sect. 46. All orders of Commissioners to be sub- 
 ject to provisions of the Charitable Trusts Acts. 
 
( 837 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 838 ) 
 
 I. LOKDON—CEAaiTIES— continued. 
 
 Sect. 47. Ccmtmissioners to make anmml report 
 to he laid iefore Parliament, 
 
 VI. New Ooverning Body. 
 
 Sect. 48. New governing body to he established, 
 to he called " The Trustees of the London Parochial 
 ChaTities," and to he a hody corporate. 
 
 Sect. 49. Commissioners to make «. scheme for 
 regulating nomination of members of new governing 
 hody, &o. 
 
 Sect. 50. Schemes affecting general charity pro- 
 perty to contain no preference for any religious 
 denomination. 
 
 Sect. 51. Comimissioners to determine costs of 
 parliamentary proceedings. 
 
 Sect. .52. Saving for endmoments at Christ's 
 Sospital. 
 
 Sect. 53. Interpretation of terms. 
 
 Sect. 54. Act to he construed together with Cha- 
 ritable Trusts Acts, Schedules. 
 
 n. LONDON— COMKISSIOXKRS OF SEWEBS. 
 
 Power to take Land — 57 Geo. 3, o. xxix. 
 
 — Rigid of Pre-emption — 14 & 15 Vict. c. xci. s. 54.] 
 Two houses adjoining Wood Street, in the city of 
 London, having been destroyed by fire, the outer 
 walls only being left standing, the Oommissioners 
 of Sewers adjudicated that it was desirable to 
 widen Wood Stree.t, and that the two houses, and 
 the land on which they stood, projected into and 
 prevented them from widening the street, and 
 that the possession and purchase of those houses 
 was necessary for that purpose, and they directed 
 their solicitor to treat for the purchase. Notice 
 to treat was accordingly given for the whole of 
 the houses. The owners brought their action for 
 an injunction to restrain the Oommissioners from 
 proceeding on this notice. It was admitted by 
 the Commissioners that they only meant to use a 
 strip of 5J feet in breadth for widening the street, 
 and intended to sell the rest without giving the 
 Plaintiffs any option of pre-emption : — Seld, by 
 Kay, J., and by the Oourt of Appeal, that the 
 Plaintiffs were entitled to an injunction, for that 
 the adjudication was ultrk vires, the Commis- 
 sioners having no power to adjudicate that the 
 possession of the whole of a piece of land is 
 necessary for the pm'pose of improvements when 
 they only intend to use a small part of it for that 
 purpose, though if they made such an adjudica- 
 tion in the belief that they should require the 
 whole for the improvements, the correctness of 
 the adjudication could not be questioned. — If 
 part of a piece of land prevents an improvement, 
 the Commissioners have power to take part com- 
 pulsorily, their power of proceeding compulsorily 
 not being limite'd to taking the whole. — Whether 
 the Commissioners, if they only want a part of 
 the site of an existing house for the purpose of 
 an improvement, can adjudicate that the posses- 
 sion and purchase of the whole house are necessary 
 qusere.— Thomas v. Dam (Law Eep. 2 Oh. 1), con- 
 sidered.^By Kay, J., semhle, that the right of 
 pre-emption given by 57 Geo. 3, o. zxix., s. 96, is 
 not taken away by the City of London Sewers 
 Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. xci.), s. 54. Gard v. 
 
 COMMISSIONEKS OF SeWEBS OP THE ClTI OF 
 
 London - - - 28 Ch. D. 486 
 
 LONDON— City of London Court— Warrant of 
 arrest— Service ■ 10 P. D. 36 
 
 See Peaotioe — Admiealtst — Service. 1. 
 LONG TEEM— Enlargement into fee 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1007, 1009, n. 
 See Leasehold — ^Lonq Term. 1, 2. 
 LONG VACATION. 
 
 See Court — Gazette. 
 LORD CAIRNS' ACT— Eepeal of 28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 See Damages — Lord Cairns' Act. 
 LORD CAMPBELL'S ACT - 25 Ch, D. 409 ; 
 
 [9 Q. B. D, 160 
 See Damages — Lord Campbell's Act, 
 1,2. 
 
 Ship — Jurisdiction of Admiralty Division 
 
 [9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App. Cas, 39 
 See Practice — Admiralty— Jurisdic- 
 tion. 1. 
 LOWER CANADA— Law of. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law — Can- 
 ada — Quebec. 
 LUGGAGE — Delivery to passenger — Termination 
 of railway company's risk 14 Q, B. D. 228 
 See Railway Company — Passenger's 
 Luggage. 
 LUNACY ORDERS, Nov. 1862, rr. 7, 8 26 Ch, D. 
 See Lunatic— Property. 7. [496 
 
 1883, Orders 35, 36, 45 - 23 Ch. D. 577 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 2. 
 
 1883, rr. 61, 62 - 26 Oh, D, 496 
 
 See Lunatic— Property. 7. 
 
 LUNATIC :— 
 
 
 Col. 
 
 I. Committee 
 
 - 
 
 - 838 
 
 II. Criminal 
 
 
 889 
 
 III. Custody - 
 
 - 
 
 - 844 
 
 IV. Deceased Lunatic 
 
 - 
 
 - 844 
 
 V. Inquisition 
 
 
 845 
 
 VI. Jurisdiction 
 
 
 845 
 
 VII. Maintenance 
 
 - 
 
 847 
 
 VIII. Property 
 
 - 
 
 - 848 
 
 1. LUNATIC- COMMITTEE. 
 
 1. Allowance without Account — Power 
 
 to mortgage or deal with Allowance.'] An order 
 was made that the brother of a lunatic, who was 
 committee of his estate, should be allowed to 
 retain the family mansioo and grounds and the 
 heirlooms therein for his own occupation and use, 
 and that of his unmarried sisters, and that £4000 
 a year should be allowed him for his expenses in 
 reference thereto. The committee with his sisters 
 occupied the mansion accordingly, and incurred 
 heavy and, as it was alleged, unreasonable ex- 
 penses about the establishment. The income 
 being insufficient to pay the allowance, it fell into 
 arrear, and the committee mortgaged the arrears. 
 He subsequently was removed from being copi- 
 mittee and became bankrupt, and a large amount 
 of bills incurred in keeping up the establishment 
 remained unpaid. A, surplus having arisen ap- 
 plicable to payment of the arrears, the new com- 
 mittee presented a> petition, for direction as to its, 
 application : — Held, that although the allowance, 
 was made to the former pommittee without any 
 obligation to account, and with an intention 
 indirectly to confer a benefit on him and his 
 
 2 E 2 
 
( 839 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 840 ) 
 
 1. LTTNATIC— COMMITTEE— coji^mueiJ. 
 sisters, still it was an allowance made to a person 
 in a fiduciary position for a particular purpose, 
 and which he had no right to mortgage, and that 
 the mortgagee could stand in no better position 
 than the committee himself : — Held, also, that the 
 person to whom an allowance of this kind is made 
 has no such right to arrears as will prevent the 
 Court from dealing with them in such way as it 
 may consider just, and, if the Court finds that the 
 expenses incurred for the purposes for which the 
 allowance was granted remain unpaid, it will 
 stop the arrears, and make provision for payment 
 of such expenses. — An inquiry was therefore 
 directed as to which of the debts of the committee 
 were properly incurred in keeping up the estab- 
 lishment at the mansion. In re Weld 20 Ch. D. 451 
 
 2. Appointment out of Jurisdiction.] It 
 
 being proposed to appoint as committee a person 
 resident out of the jurisdiction, the Master in 
 Lunacy reported that as the proposed committee 
 was resident out of the jurisdiction he could not 
 approve of him. The Court, though satisfied of 
 the expediency of appointing him, declined to do 
 so until the Master had certified that the proposed 
 committee was a person whom, if resident within 
 the jurisdiction, he should have approved. In re 
 Bkuere - 17 Ch. D. 775 
 
 3. Bankruptcy — Adjudication in Bank- 
 ruptcy.'] Leave given to the committee of the 
 estate of a lunatic trader to consent to an adjudi- 
 cation in bankruptcy against the lunatic. In re 
 Lee - - 23 Ch. D. 216 
 
 4. Bankruptcy — Leave to Committee to 
 
 file Declaration of Insolvency — Bankruptcy Act, 
 
 1883 (46 (fe 47 Vict. c. 52), ss. 4, subs. 1 (/), 148.] 
 Where it appears to be for the benefit of a lunatic 
 that he should be made bankrupt, the Court will 
 give leave to the committee in the name of the 
 lunatic to file a declaration of insolvency, or to 
 present a bankruptcy petition imder the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1883, s. 4, sub-s. 1 (f). In re James 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 332 
 
 5. Execution of lease.] By a lease ex- 
 pressed to be made between a lunatic by A. B. and 
 C. D., his two committees, and other parties, the 
 lunatic acting by his committees demised. The 
 testimonium clause was " In witness whereof the 
 said parties to these presents have hereunto set 
 their hands and seals." A. B. signed his name 
 against one seal and C. D. his against another ; 
 and the attestation clause was " signed, sealed, 
 and delivered by A. B. and 0. D. in the presence 
 of &c." : — Held (affirming the decision of the 
 Comt of Appeal) that the lease was well executed 
 on behalf of the lunatic. Lawrie v. Lees 
 
 [7 App. Cas; 19 
 
 II. LUNATIC— CRIMINAL. 
 
 The Act 46 A ilVict c. 88 {the Trial of Lunatics 
 Act, 1883), amends the law respecting the trial and 
 custody of insane persons charged loith offences. 
 
 Sect. 2. — (1.) Where in any indictment or in- 
 formation any act or omission is cliarged. against 
 any person as an offence, and it is given in evidence 
 on the trial of such person for that offence that he 
 toas insane, so as not to he responsible, according 
 to law, for his actions at the time when the act was 
 done or omission made, then, if it appears to the 
 
 II. LTTNATIC— CRIMINAL— cojiijnuetf. 
 
 jury before whom such person is tried that he did 
 the act or made the omission charged, hut was 
 insane as aforesaid at the time when he did or 
 made the same, the jury shall return a special 
 verdict to the effect that the accused was guilty 
 of the act or omission charged against him, hut 
 was insane as aforesaid at the time when, he did 
 the act or made the omission. 
 
 (2.) Where such special verdict is found, the 
 Court shall order the accused to be kept in custody 
 as a criminal lunatic, in such place and in such 
 manner as the Court shall direct till Her Majesty's 
 pleasure shall be known ; and it shall be lawful for 
 Her Majesty thereupon, and from time to time, to 
 give such order for the safe custody of the said 
 person during pleasure, and in such place and in 
 such manner as to Her Majesty may seem fit. 
 
 (3.) Repealed by the Act 47 * 48 Vict. c. 64. 
 
 (4.) All provisions in any existing Act or in any 
 rules or orders made in pursuance of any existing 
 Act, having referew-e to a person or persons ac- 
 quitted on the ground of insanity, shall apply to 
 a person or persons in respect of whom u, special 
 verdict is found under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 4 repeals 39 & 40 Geo. 3, c. 94, s. 1 ; 1*2 
 Geo. 4, c. 33, s. 16 ; and 3 & i Vict. c. 54, s. 3 ; 
 but any unrepealed enactvfient referring to any 
 enactment thereby repealed, shall be construed to 
 apply to the corresponding provisions of the Act. 
 
 Act of 1884.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 64 
 {Criminal Lunatics Act, 1884), consolidates and 
 amends the law relating to criminal lunatics. 
 
 Sect. 2. Where it appears to any two members of 
 the visiting committee of a prison that a prisoner 
 is insane, they shall with two medical practitioners 
 examine such prisoner, and may certify in writing 
 that he is insane. The Secretary of State may by 
 warrant direct such prisoner to be removed to an 
 asylum, and, subject to the provisions of this Act 
 relating to discharge, the prisoner shall be detained 
 in such asylum. Provision for prisoner under 
 sentence of death. 
 
 Sect. 3. A criminal lunatic found to be sane 
 shall be remitted to prison. 
 
 Sect. 16. " Prison " means any prison or place 
 of confinement to which a person may be committed 
 whether on remand or for trial, safe custody, or 
 punishment, or otherwise, under any other than 
 civil process ; and "prisoner'' means any person 
 so committed. " Asylum," means an ayslum within 
 16 <fc 17 Vict. c. 97, and an asylum for criminal 
 lunatics within 23 & 24 Vict. c. 75, and includes 
 a hospital registered for the reception of lunatics, 
 hut does not include a licensed house. Such 
 hospital as above is not obliged to receive a 
 criminal lunatic. 
 
 Sect. 4. A periodical report of criminal lunatics 
 shall be made to the Secretary of State. 
 
 Sect. 5. A Secretary of State may transfer or 
 discharge {absolutely or conditionally) a criminal 
 lunatic, or by warrant cause him to be again taken 
 into custody. See 23 * 24 Vict. c. 75, ». 9, 27 * 28 
 Vict. c. 29, s. 2, and 30 Vict. c. 12, ss. 4, 5. 
 
 Sect. 6. On expiration of sentence the superin- 
 tendent of the asylum shall, unless satisfied that 
 the person is sane, 'place him in care of friends or 
 in a lunatic asylum. 
 
 Sect. 7 — (1.) Wliere a person being a criminal 
 lunatic is detained in an asylum or other place, 
 
( 8il ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 842 ) 
 
 II. ETINATIC— CaiMINAL— flonimued. 
 
 or beiTig a prisoner ?« a prison zs cerufied m 
 manner provided in this Act to he insane, hut has 
 not been directed hy the Secretary of Stats to he 
 removed to an asylum, and it is made to appear 
 to any justice of the peace having jurisdiction 
 where such asylum or place or prison is situate, or 
 heing a meiriber of the visiting committee of such 
 prison, hy notice in writing signed hy the superin- 
 tendent of such asylum or place, or hy the governor 
 of such prison, either — 
 (a.) that such person is about to he absolutely 
 
 discharged; or 
 (b.) {hat any term of penal servitude or im- 
 prisonment to which such person is subject 
 is about to determine, 
 and that in the opinion of such superintendent or 
 governor such person is insane and .unfit to be at 
 large, the said justice shall examine such person 
 and make any inquiry and talie any medical or 
 other evidence which he may deem necessary re- 
 specting him. 
 
 (2.) The said justice, if satisfied on such exami- 
 nation and inquiry that such person is insane and 
 a proper person to be detained under care and 
 treatment, shall mahe an order for his detention 
 as a lunatic in the asylum or place of confinement 
 for lunatics named in the order ; and if within 
 one month after the date of the said notice such 
 criminal lunatic is absolutely discharged, or such 
 term of penal servitude or imprisonment determines, 
 the said order shall thereupon take effect, and he 
 shall be deemed to he a pauper lunatic. 
 
 (3.) An order under this section shall he in such 
 form as may be prescribed by a Secretary of State, 
 and there shall be inserted in every such order, 
 wherever it be possible, the name and address of 
 one or more of the relations of the lunatic. 
 
 (4.) At any time before a person for whose de- 
 tention an order is made under this section is 
 detained in an asylum or place of confinement for 
 lunatics in pursuance thereof, such order may he 
 a/mended or cancelled and a new order made by 
 the justice who made the original order, or, if such 
 justice is unable to act,, by any other justice having 
 jurisdiction in the same place. 
 ■ Sect. 8. — (1.) Where by virtue of an order made 
 by a justice under this Act a person becomes a 
 pauper lunatic, such person shall for the purposes 
 of this Act be deemed to be prima facie chargeable 
 to tlie union or parish in the United Kingdom in 
 which it appears to the justice making the order 
 that the ordinary residence of such person was 
 situate at the time when the offend in respect of 
 which he became a criminal lunatic was alleged to 
 have been com/mitted, and, if such residence is not 
 shewn to the satisfaction of the said justice, then to 
 such union or parish in the United Kingdom as 
 fpilows, namely,— 
 
 : (a.) To that in which it appears to the said 
 justice that the said offence was alleged to 
 have been committed ; or 
 (b.) If it appears that the offence was alleged to 
 . have been committed out of the United 
 Kingdom, to that in which it appears to 
 the said justice, that such person was first 
 apprehended for such offence ; or 
 (cO If *""'' person appears to have been so ap- 
 prehended out of the United Kingdom, to 
 that in which it appears to the said justice 
 
 II. LVSATIC—O^nanSAL— continued. 
 
 that such person first landed in the United 
 
 Provided that, if such person appears to the 
 justice making the order to have been a man in the 
 naval or military service of Her Majesfy, or to have 
 l^een the wife or infant child of a mam in such 
 naval or military service, at the time wlien the 
 offence was alleged to have been committed, such 
 person shall for the purposes of this Act he deemed 
 to be prima facie chargeable to the union or parish 
 in the United Kingdom to which the man in such 
 naval or military service appears to the said justice 
 from the statements in the declaration made on his 
 entry in the naval service of Her Majesty, or in 
 his attestation paper on enlistment, or from other 
 available information, to he by law chargeable for 
 the purposes of the Acts relating to ihe relief of the 
 poor. 
 
 (2.) Subject as Iwreinafter mentioned, an order 
 made hy a justice under this Act for the detention 
 of a person as u, lunatic shall, on such person be- 
 coming a pauper lunatic, have the same effect as an 
 order of a justice, and medical certificate, made in 
 pursuance of section sixty-eight of 16 & 17 Vict, 
 c. 97 (the Lunatic Asylums Act, 1853), in tlie case 
 of a lunatic found wandering at large in the 
 union or parish to which such person is prima facie 
 chargeable, and all the provisions of ,8 & 9 Vict, 
 c. 100 (the Lunacy Act, 1845), and of 16 & 17 Vict, 
 c. 97 (the Lunatic Asylums Act, 1853), and of any 
 Acts amending those Acts, or either of them, shall 
 apply accordingly in like manner as if such person 
 had been sent from that union or parish : 
 
 And such person on becoming a pauper lunatic, 
 if detained in an asylum or place of confinement 
 to which lunatics may be sent in pursuance of the 
 said Lumatic Asylums Act, 1853, shall be deemed 
 to have been received therein in pursuance of the 
 said order of detention, and if detained elsewhere 
 shall be removed by a person named in the order, 
 or any constable, to the asylum or place of confine- 
 ment for lunatics named in the order, being 07ie to 
 which a justice ca» send a lunatic found wander- 
 ing at large in the aforesaid union or parish : 
 
 Provided that if such pauper lunatic is certified 
 by a legally qualified medical practitioner to he un- 
 fit for removal to such last-mentioned asylum or 
 place of confinement, he may either he removed to 
 and detained in any nearer asylum or place of 
 confinement for lunatics willing to receive him, or 
 may be detained in any asylum or place in which 
 a criminal lunatic may he detained, but in either 
 case he shall he deemed to have been sent to the 
 asylum or place of confinement in which he is so 
 detained, in pursuance of section sixty-eight of the 
 Lunatic Asylums. Act, 1853, and the expenses in- 
 curred in relation to such lunatic shall be defrayed, 
 and the lunatic, when fit to be removed, may he re- 
 moved accordingly, and where the lunatic is de- 
 tained in any asylum or place to which lunatics 
 cannot he sent, in pursuance of the Lunatic Asylums 
 Act, 1853, the provisions of the above-mentioned 
 Acts shall apply as if such asylum or place were 
 an asylum within the meaning of the Lunatic Asy- 
 lums Act, 1853, and the council of supervision or 
 other persons having control thereof were visitors. 
 
 Sub-sects. (3), (4), and (5), refer to cases where 
 the union chargeable is in Scotland or Ireland. 
 Sect. 9 regulates the transfer, by warrant of a 
 
( 843 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 844 ) 
 
 II. LVNATIC—CKailIlHA.1— continued. 
 
 Secretary of State, and the removal by order of a 
 justice under this Act, of a person from a criminal 
 lunatic asylum under 23 & 24 Vict. c. 75, to an 
 asylum under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 97. 
 
 Sect, 10 — (1.) Subject as in this section men- 
 tioned, all expenses incurred under this Act in 
 relation to a criminal lunatic while detained in 
 an asylum, and all expenses of removing a person 
 on his becoming under this Act a pamper lunatic to 
 an asylum or place of confinement for lunatics in 
 any part of the United Kingdom, shall be defrayed 
 out of moneys p^-ovided by Parliament, and the 
 costs of maintenance of a criminal lunatic in any 
 asylum within the meaning of the Lunatic Asylums 
 Act, 1853, shall be at the same rate as if he was a 
 lunatic sent from a union or parish situate else- 
 where than in the county or borough to which the 
 asylum belongs. 
 
 (2.) Where a person, being a criminal lunatic, 
 is absolutely discharged before the expiration of 
 any term of penal servitude or imprisonment to 
 which lie is subject, or is conditionally discharged 
 in pursuance of this Act, the Commissioners of Her 
 Majesty's Treasury may fromtime totime contribute, 
 out of moneys provided by Parliament, such sum or 
 stim.s, on the recommendation of a Secretary of State, 
 as they from time to time think fit towards the 
 costs of the maintenance of such person, until the 
 expiration of the said sentence, or so long as he 
 continues to be subject to any conditions of dis- 
 charge (as the case may be). 
 
 (3.) Sect. 104 of the Lunatic Asylums Act, 1853, 
 with respect to the application of the property of a 
 lunatic for his maintenance and for the other 
 charges in the said section mentioned, and the 
 other sections of the JJunatic Asylums Act, 1853, 
 which are ancillary to the said sect. 104, shall 
 extend to a criminal lunatic wherever he may be 
 detained, and to his property, in like manner as if 
 the said sections were herein re-enacted, and in terms 
 made applicable thereto, and any power exercisable 
 by justices under the said section may, for the pur- 
 poses of this section, be exercised by two justices of 
 the county or place where such lunatic is detained. 
 The Lord Chancellor, or other authority having 
 power to make orders with respect to the property 
 of a lunatic, under sects. 12, 13, and 14 o/ the 
 Lunacy Regulation Act, 1862, shall, if satisfied by 
 affidavit or otherwise that a person is or has been 
 a criminal lunatic, and continues to be insane and 
 to he in confinement, have power to make any such 
 order with respect to the property of such person, 
 and tlie application thereof for the maintenance or 
 benefit of him or his family, or for carrying on his 
 trade or business, as may be made in pursuance 
 of the said sections of the Lunacy Regulation Act, 
 1862. 
 
 (4.) When the criminal lunatic was a person re- 
 moved from India in pursuance of the Lunatics 
 Removal (India') Act, IS.ol, all expenses attending 
 the removal of any such person from India, and 
 his safe custody and maintenance, shall continue 
 to he defrayed in the same manner as if this Act 
 had not been passed. 
 
 Sect. 11. Sects. 11 and 12 of 23 & 24 Vict. c. 75 
 (the Criminal Lunatic Asylums Act, 1860), refer- 
 ring to recapture of escaped lunatics, &c., apply to 
 every asylum for criminal lunatics. 
 
 Sect, 12 refers to regulations for persons in 
 
 II. ITTNATIC— CEimiNAI— comimued. 
 
 prisons (not necessarily lunatics) suffering from 
 imbecility of mind. 
 
 Sect. 13. Saving of authority of Crown to make 
 orders with respect to safe custody of persons. 
 
 Sect, 14. Provisions as to existing criminal 
 lunatics. 
 
 Sect. 15. The warrant under this Act to he under 
 the hand of a Secretary of State or of an Under- 
 Secretary of State, and to be executed by the 
 person to whom addressed, or by a constable. 
 
 Repeal.] Sy sect. 17 the following Acts or por- 
 tions of Acts are repealed : — 3 & 4 Yiet, c. 54 ; 
 6 <fe 7 Vict. c. 26, s. 21 ; 16 <£: 17 Vict, c. 96,jjarf 
 of s. 38 ; 23 <£ 24 Vict. c. 75, part of s. 2, and 
 ss. 7, 9, and 10; 25 <fe 26 Vict. c. 86, ». 15 ; IT & 28 
 Vict. c. 29 ; 29 (fe 30 Vict, c. 109, paH of s. 80 ; 
 30 & 31 Vict, c. 22 ; 32 <fe 33 Vict. c. 78 ; 44 & 45 
 Vict, c, 58, part of s, 130 ; 46 & 47 Vict. c. 38, 
 s. 2, sub-s. 3. 
 
 — ■— County Bate — Maintenance — Upon what 
 Funds chargeable— 3 & 4 Vict. c. 54, s. 2—27 * 28 
 Vict. c. 29, s. 2— Prison Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Vict, 
 c, 21), ss. 4, 57.] "When a pauper prisoner -without 
 a settlement becomes insane during confinement 
 in a prison to which the Prison Act, 1877 (40 & 41 
 Vict. 0. 21) applies, the expenses of inquiring into 
 his insanity and of removing him to a county 
 lunatic asylum and of his maintenance in such 
 asylum during the currency of his sentence are, 
 by sects. 4 and 57 of that Act, to be defrayed out 
 of moneys provided by Parliament ; and the effect 
 of those sections is to repeal the provisions of 3 & 4 
 Vict. e. 54, s. 2, which made the county liable. — 
 So held, reversing the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal. The Queen v. Mews 6 Q. B. D. 47 ; 
 
 [S App. Cas. 339 
 
 III. LUNATIC— CUSTODY— Order for Detention 
 
 — Order for Discharge — 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100, ss. 72, 
 99—16 & 17 Vict. c. 96, s. 4, sched. A, No. 1.] The 
 Plaintiff was detained in a private asylum for 
 lunatics, of which the Defendant was superinten- 
 dent, under an order signed by her husband. In 
 the statement annexed to the order the question 
 " Whether first attack," was answered thus : " For 
 the last twenty years has been subject to what is 
 termed hysteria ; " and the question, " When and 
 where previously under care and treatment," was 
 answered, "During this period of twenty years 
 has been constantly under treatment": — Held, 
 that the order, together with the statement, was 
 sufBeient under 16 & 17 Vict. u. 96, s. 4, sched. A 
 (No. 1), and afforded a defence under 8 & 9 Vict 
 e. 100, s. 99, to an action for assault and false 
 imprisonment. — The Plaintiff's husband, having 
 received a letter from the Commissioners in 
 Lunacy intimating that she ought to be dis- 
 charged, wrote to the Defendant as follows: 
 " After the Commissioners' letter I suppose that I 
 must consent to Mrs. Lowe's discharge, and beg 
 you will carry out their suggestion as soon as you 
 may think it advisable " : — Held, that the letter 
 of the Plaintiff's husband was not an order of 
 discharge within 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100, s. 72. Lowe 
 V. Fox - - - 16 Q. B. D. 667 
 
 IV. LUNATIC— DECEASED LUNATIC. 
 
 Inspection of Documents — Practice — 
 
 Order to inspect Documents by a Person claiming 
 
( 845 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 81G ) 
 
 IV. lUNATIC— DECEASED LUNATIC— oo»W. 
 under a Deceased Lunatio^ A ilunatic having 
 died intestate, and an action having: been com- 
 menced for recovery of his real estate : — Held, 
 that the Defeadant, who produced prim^ facie 
 evidence of his being heir-at-law of the lunatic, 
 was entitled to an order to inspect the documents 
 relatiag to the estate which were in the custody 
 of the Eegistrars in Lunacy, although, it was sworn 
 on the other side, and not contradicted, that the 
 lands had descended to the lunatic from his 
 InQther, and that the Defendant was no relation 
 to the mother.. In re Smyth - 16 Ch. D. 673 
 
 V. ITTNATIC— INQUISITION. 
 
 Access to alleged lunatic — Order for 
 
 Visitors in Lunacy to see the alleged LunaUc — 
 Inquiry in London as] to State of Mind of Person 
 in the Country. 1 A petition for an inquiry into 
 the state of mind of an alleged lunatic having 
 been presented, and -disputes having arisen as to 
 the terms under which access of medical witnesses 
 should be allowed, the Court made an order that 
 two of the visitors in lunacy should see the 
 alleged lunatic and report to the Oourt. — The 
 rule is not inflexible that an inquiry by a jury as 
 to the state of mind of an alleged lunatic must 
 take place near his place of residence, and there 
 being reason to believe that a strong local feeling 
 as to the proceedings existed in the neighbour- 
 hood where the alleged lunatic resided, the 
 inquiry was directed to be held in London. — 
 When the medical witnesses for the alleged 
 lunatic had seen her alone it was held that they 
 were not entitled to be present when the medical 
 witnesses for the Petitioner saw her. In re Anon., 
 
 AN ALLEGED LbNATIO - 18 Ch. D. 26 
 
 a. Inquiry before Judge of High Court — 
 
 Lunacy Begulation Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 86), 
 s. 4—8. & 9 Vict. c. 109, 8. 19.] When an issue is 
 directed by an orderin Lunacy to try the question 
 of the insanity of an alleged lunatic before a 
 Judge of the High Oourt of Justice under the 
 Luneicy Eegulation Act, 1862, sect. 4, it is not 
 necessary to commence the proceedings by a writ 
 of summons, the, order for the issue being suffi- 
 cient to give jurisdiction to the Judge. In re 
 SpOTT - - - 27 Ch. D. 116 
 
 3. Inquiry when Lunacy commenced — 
 
 Lunacy Begulation Act,1862 (25(6 26 Vict. c. 86), 
 «. 3.] The Lunacy Begulation Act. 1862, s. 3, 
 takes away the power existing under the Lunacy 
 Eegulation Act, 1853, s. 47, of directing an in- 
 quiry from what time an alleged lunatic has been 
 of unsound mind.— Opinion expressed by James, 
 L.J., in In re Sottomaior (Law Eep. 9 Oh. 677) 
 dissented from. In re Danby - 30 Ch. D. 320 
 
 VI. LUNATIC— JURISDICTION. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 82 (the Lunacy Begu- 
 lation Amefidment Act, 1882), amends tlie Lunacy 
 Begulation Acts. 
 
 Sect. 2. The Act to he construed as one with the 
 16 (fe 17 Vict. c. 70, ami 25 & 26 Vict. c. 86 (the 
 Lunacy Eegulation Acts, 1853 and 1862). 
 
 By sect. 3 the 12th section of the Lunacy Begu- 
 lation Act, 1862, is to have effect as though the 
 words " two thousoMd pounds in value " had heen 
 inserted therein instead of "one thousand in 
 
 VI. LUNATIC-JURISDICTION— oontimued. 
 
 value," and the words " one hundred poun/ls per 
 annum " instead of "fifty pounds per cmnwm," 
 
 By sect. i. the Wth section of the Lunacy Be- 
 gulation Act, 1862, is to be construed as if the 
 word " twice" had been inserted therein instead of 
 '■'■four times" and as if the words " eight months " 
 had been inserted therein instead of the words 
 "four months," and as if instead of the proviso 
 therein there had been inserted the following words : 
 provided always, that every lunatic resident in a 
 private house shall, during the two years ne^t 
 following inquisition, be so visited at least four 
 times in every year. 
 
 Pauper Lunatic] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 52, 
 inacts: — 
 
 Sect. 2. Where a pauper lunatic or other 'person 
 liable to be apprehended under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 97, 
 by order of a justice or otherwise, requires immediate 
 control, the relieving officer may remove him to the 
 workhouse and carry out the req'uirements of the 
 statute afterwards. 
 
 Sect. 3 (]). Lunatics liable under 16 & 17 Vict, 
 c. 97, ss. 67 and 68 to be removed to any asylum, 
 may by order of a justice be removed to the work- 
 house instead. 
 
 (2.) Limits of su^h detention. 
 
 Sect. 4. Construction of Act. 
 
 1. Irish Inquisition — Transcript ofBecord 
 
 — Jurisdiction of English Court over Proceedings 
 in Irelcmd — Lunacy Begulation Act, 1853 (16 & 17 
 Viet. c. 70, ss. 41, 52).] Where an order in lunacy 
 has been made in Ireland by the Court having 
 jurisdiction for that purpose, and a transcript of 
 the record has, under the provisions of sect. 52 of 
 the Lunacy Eegulation Act, 1853, been trans- 
 mitted to this country, the English Court must 
 treat the order as a binding order, and has no 
 jurisdiction to entertain an application either for 
 the purpose of setting aside the proceedings in 
 Ireland, or for a supersedeas. Any such appli- 
 cation must be made to the Oourt which originally 
 made the order. — The right of an alleged lunatic 
 to demand a jury is confined to the original in- 
 quiry. In re Talbot - 20 Ch. D. 269 
 
 2. Justices — Lunatic Asylums Act, 1853 
 
 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 97), 8. 68 — Personal Examination 
 by Justices of alleged Lunatic.'] In order to give 
 two justices jurisdiction to make an order under 
 sect. 68 of the Lunatic Asylums Act, 1853, for 
 the reception of a person into a lunatic asylum 
 as a lunatic who is not a pauper, and not wander- 
 ing at large, but who is not under proper care and 
 control, it is not necessary that they should 
 examine such person in the presence of the medical 
 man whom they have called to their assistance, 
 nor that the examination should be made with 
 the knowledge of the alleged lunatic, so that he 
 should have the opportunity of explaining, if he 
 could, what might otherwise be signs of insanity. 
 Though his examination must not be a sham, yet 
 if it be made by the justices bonsl fide for the 
 purpose of satisfying themselves of the sanity or 
 insanity of the person examined, it is sufficient, 
 and their order is not without jurisdiction because 
 the examination lasted only four or five minutes 
 and was made at the door of the carriage in 
 which the alleged lunatic was seated with his 
 attendants preparatory to his being taken to the 
 
( 847 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 848 ) 
 
 VI. LVSATIC—JV-RlSmCTlOTS— continued. 
 
 aBylrnn : — So held by Sir .Tames Hanneo and 
 Lindley, L.J. (Lord Coleridge, C.J., dissent- 
 ing) : — Held, by Lord Coleridge, C.J., that where 
 the person deemed to be a lunatic is examined 
 by two justices at his place of abode or elsewhere, 
 the 68th section requires that one of such two 
 justices must already have had, as a condition 
 precedent to the vesting of the jurisdiction of the 
 justices, either an information upon oath or private 
 or personal knowledge of his own as to the insanity 
 of such person. The Queen v. Whitfield 
 
 [15 Q, B. D. 122 
 
 3. Married 'Woman — Power of Election — 
 
 Person of Unsound Mind.'] If a married woman 
 who is entitled to exercise an election is of un- 
 sound mind the Court will make an election on 
 her behalf, it having jurisdiction to bind the 
 equitable interests of lunatics, not so found by 
 inquisition, when it appears to be for their benefit. 
 Jones V. Lloyd (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 265) followed. 
 Wilder v. Pigott - - 22 Ch. D. 263 
 
 4. Parties entitled to attend Proceedings 
 
 — Illegitimate Person — Attorney- General — At- 
 torney-General of Dually of Lancaster."] A lunatic, 
 who was illegitimate and unmarried, was resident 
 in Lancashire, and part of her property consisted 
 of copyholds held of the Duchy of Lancaster : — ■ 
 Seld, that the Attorney-General of the Duchy of 
 Lancaster was not entitled to attend the proceed- 
 ings in the lunacy ; the Queen's rights being 
 sufficiently represented by the Queen's Attorney- 
 General, who had leave to attend. In re Kek- 
 SHAW - 21 Ch. D. 613 
 
 5. Trustee Belief Act.] Where a person 
 
 who has been found lunatic is entitled to a fund 
 which has been paid into Court under the Trustee 
 Eelief Act, a petition may be presented in 
 Chancery under the Trustee Eelief Act and in 
 Lunacy, and the Court has jurisdiction to make 
 an immediate order for the transfer of the fund to 
 the account of the lunatic. In re Tate 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 135 
 
 VII. LUNATIC— MAINTENANCE. 
 
 1. Allowance for past Maintenance — 
 
 — Out of what Fund — Statute of Limitations — 
 Supply of Necessaries to Lunatic] Where a 
 lunatic has property to which he is entitled for life 
 under a settlement as well as property to which 
 he is absolutely entitled, the Court will apply the 
 life interest in the first place towards his mainte- 
 nance ; unless the trustees of the settled property 
 have an absolute discretion whether to employ the 
 whole or any part of the income for the lunatic's 
 benefit. — Therefore where property was held upon 
 trust to pay the income in such way, at such time, 
 and in such manner as the trustees should think 
 fit towards the maintenance of a lunatic during 
 her life, with power to invest any surplus not re- 
 quired for the purpose as capital, it was lield that 
 the trustees had no such discretion as would oust 
 the jurisdiction of the Court to apply the whole 
 of the income in the lunatic's maintenance in ex- 
 oneration of her absolute property. — Gisbornev. 
 Gisborne (2 App. Cas. 300) distinguished. — The 
 brother of a lunatic lady not so found by inquisi- 
 tion advanced money for the maintenance of his 
 sister for several years under circumstances which 
 
 VII. LUNATIC— MAINTENANCE— comemufifZ. 
 left it doubtful whether he intended it for a gift 
 or expected to be repaid. He died, and his sister 
 was then found to be lunatic by inquisition. His 
 executors having brought in a claim against the 
 lunatic's estate for repayment of the advances, 
 the Court made an allowance to the testator's estate 
 for past maintenance, but limited it to advances 
 made within six years before the testator's death. 
 — Whether a person who supplies a lunatic with 
 necessaries, knowing him to be lunatic, can 
 maintain an action against him on the ground of 
 an implied contract gusere. In re Weaver 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 615 
 
 2. Creditors, Eights oi— Maintenance, past 
 
 and future — Insolvent Estate — 16 & 17 Vict. c. 70, 
 s. 116- 25 & 26 Vict. c. 86, «. 16— Lunacy Orders, 
 1883, Orders 35, 36, 45.] In managing the estates 
 of lunatics the Court will have regard to the 
 maintenance and comfort of the lunatic in pre- 
 ference to the claims of his creditors, although 
 the estate be insolvent. The Master in Lunacy 
 made a certificate finding that t!ie property of a 
 lunatic produced an income of £163, and that 
 his debts amounted to £7000, including £250 for 
 his past maintenance in an asylum, and £374 for 
 the past maintenance of his wife and children 
 expended by the committee : — Seld, on a sunnnons 
 taken out under Order 45 of the Lunacy Orders, 
 1883, on which some of the ordinary creditors 
 appeared and claimed payment of their debts, 
 that the expenses of past maintenance of the 
 lunatic, his wife and children, must be paid in 
 full, that capital producing £110 a year should 
 be set aside for the lunatic's future maintenance, 
 and that the residue should be divided among 
 the ordinary creditors pro rata, who were to have 
 a charge on the reserved capital, with liberty to 
 apply on the lunatic's death. In re Pink 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 57T 
 
 3. Pauper — Expenses of Maintenance — 
 
 Right of Poor Law Guardians to recover against 
 Estate of Lunatic after his Death — Lunatic Asif- 
 lums Act, 1853 (16 * 17 Vict. c. 97), ss. 94, 104.] 
 A pauper lunatic having died seised of a small 
 amount of real estate : — Held, that the amount of 
 sums paid by guardians of the union to which 
 the pauper was chargeable (though not the union 
 in which he died), in respect of his maintenance 
 at a lunatic asylum, was a debt recoverable in a 
 creditor's action against his personal and real 
 representatives, though no steps to recover pay- 
 ment of expenses incurred in respect of such 
 maintenance were taken by the guardians in the 
 pauper's lifetime. In re Webster. Guardians 
 OF Derby Union v. Sharratt 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 VIII. LUNATIC— PEOPEETY. 
 
 1. AUowanoe — Divorced Wife — Perma- 
 nent Alimony — Assignment — 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, 
 8. 25.] On a decree for judicial separation an order 
 was made for payment of £60 a year to the wife 
 as permanent alimony. The husband was after- 
 wards found lunatic by inquisition, and by am 
 order in Lunacy and Chancery the dividends 
 of a sum of stock to which he was entitled in a 
 Chancery suit were ordered to be carried to hia 
 account in the lunacy and £60 a, year to be paid 
 out of them to his wife in respect of her alimony 
 
C 8^9 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES; 
 
 ( 850 ) 
 
 VIII. LVSA.riC—VB.O^B^'RTZ— continued. .. . 
 till further order. The wife assigned the annuity 
 to a purchaser, who presented a petition in Lunacy 
 and in the suit to have the annuity paid to lier : — 
 Held, that the petition must be refused, onthe 
 ground that whetlier the annuity was considered as 
 alimony or as an allowance made to the wife by the 
 Court in Lunacy, it was not assignable. In re 
 KOBINSON - - 27 Ch. D. 160 
 
 2. Allowance — Poor Belations.'] The 
 
 income of a lunatic being much more than was 
 required for his maintenance, a respectable aged 
 clergyman, a first cousin, and one of the next of 
 kin of the lunatic, who had been reduced to in- 
 digence by unavoidable misfortune, applied for an 
 allowance out of the surplus income. It was not 
 shewn that the lunatic had ever known of the 
 existence of the applicant, and it was not sug- 
 gested that any evidence could be obtained that 
 tlie lunatic, when sane, had ever done anything for 
 him or expressed any intention in his favour : — 
 Held, that the application must be refused. — The 
 practice of granting allowances out of a lunatic's 
 property to relations for whom he is under no 
 legal obligation to provide, is rather to be nar- 
 rowed than to be extended. In re Evans 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 297 
 
 3. Allowance — Tenant in Tail in re- 
 mainder — Next of Kin not consenting — Allowance 
 sanctioned upon Terms — Charge on Inheritance — 
 Froteator of Settlement.'] A lunatic, aged sixty- 
 four, was tenant for life of certain real estates, of 
 which his nephew, aged twenty-eight, was tenant 
 in tail in remainder, producing a considerable 
 yearly income. The nepliew had been found 
 heir-at-law and one of the next of kin of the 
 lunatic. — The Court upon the nephew's petition, 
 directed an allowance of £500 per annum to be 
 made to him out of the surplus income of the 
 lunatic after providing for a yearly sum for the 
 lunatic's maintenance, in spile of the opposition 
 of some of the next of kin, upon the terms of the 
 Petitioner charging the estate with the repay- 
 ment of the sums received in respect of such 
 allowance, the Lords Justices consenting as pro- 
 tector of the settlement to the Petitioner barring 
 his estate tail, but only so far as to let in the 
 charge. In re Spakeow - - 20 Ch. D. 320 
 
 4. Ctr^yiMli.— -Enfranchisement — Devolu- 
 tion of Enfranchised Estate."] The Court on sanc- 
 tioning proceedings for carrying into effect the 
 enfranchisement of a copyhold estate belonging 
 to a lunatic, the rules of descent as to which were 
 different from those as to the descent of freeholds, 
 made a declaration that in the event of his dying 
 intestate as to the enfranchised property his 
 heir-at-law would stand seised thereof in trust for 
 the person who would have been entitled thereto 
 as his heir according to the custom of the manor 
 if it had not been enfranchised. In re H. D. Eydek 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 514 
 
 5. Debenture — Lunacy Regulation Act, 
 
 1853 (16 & n Vict. V. 70), s. 141.] A debenture 
 bond of a limited company, according to the con- 
 stitution of which debentures were transferred by 
 deed, and the deeds of transfer upon presentation 
 to the company were registered in the company's 
 book of mortgages, ordered to be tiansfeiTed under 
 
 VIII. LTINATIC— PROPESTY— ci 
 
 sect. 141 of the Lunacy Eegnlation Act, 1853.. 
 In re Mitchell - - - 17 Ch, D. 516 
 
 6. Expenses of Improvements — Lunacy 
 
 Begulation Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c..70), s. 118.1 
 A lunatic was tenant for life of the H. estate, and 
 tenant iu tail in possession of the D. estate. Ex- 
 penses were incurred by the committee in im- 
 provements on both estates, but chiefly on the 
 former : — Held, that there was no jurisdiction to 
 charge the D. estate with the expenses incurred 
 on the H. estate. In re VAVASonu 29 Ch. D. SOS 
 
 7. Property of Small Amount— Petition 
 
 for Application of Income — Opposition hy alleged 
 Lunatic — Jurisdiction — Lunacy Regulation Act, 
 1862 (25 & 26 Vict, a 86), s. Vl—Geneiral Orders 
 in Lunacy, Nov. 1862, rr. 7, 8 — Lunacy Orders, 
 1883, rr. 61, 62.] The power given to the Lord 
 Chancellor, by sect. 12 of the Lunacy Eegulation 
 Act, 1862 (extended by sect. 3 of the Limacy 
 Eegulation Amendment Act, 1882), to make an 
 order for the application of the property of a per- 
 son of unsound mind for his maintenance or bene- 
 fit, when the property is below a specified amount, 
 without directing any inquiry under a commission 
 of lunacy, ought not, even if the jurisdiction ex- 
 tends in oases in which the alleged lunatic appears 
 and denies unsoundness of mind, to be exercised 
 in such eases. In re Lees - 26 Ch. D. 496 
 
 8. Sale under Lands Clauses Act (8 tfc 9 
 
 Vict. 0. 18), s. 7 — Purchase of Land of Lunatic not 
 so found — Conversion — Real and Personal Repre- 
 sentatives.] Sect. 7 of the Lands Clauses Consoli- 
 dation Act, 1845, does not authorize a person of 
 unsoimd mind to sell land to a company or public 
 body who have statutory power to take it ; the 
 section only authorizes the committee of a lunatic 
 to sell. — A public body having given notice under 
 their statutory powers to take land belonging to a 
 lady of unsound mind not so found, the value of 
 the land was ascertained by two surveyors, one 
 appointed by an uncle of the lady, who purported 
 to act on her behalf, and the other by the public 
 body ; the sum thus ascertained was paid int» 
 Court, and the public body took possession of the 
 land. The lady afterwards died intestate, being 
 still of unsound mind, and her heir-at-law peti- 
 tioned for payment of the money to him : — Held, 
 that the land had never been converted into per- 
 sonalty, and that the heir was entitled to the 
 money. — Ex parte Flamank (1 Sim. (N.S.) 260) 
 dissented from. In re Tuswell 27 Ch. D. 309- 
 
 9. Sale under Partition Act — Conversion) 
 
 — Real and Personal Representatives — Partition 
 Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 40), s. H—SettUd Es- 
 tates Act (19 & 20 Vict. c. 120), s. 23.] By an 
 order made in a partition suit a share of real 
 estate belonging to a lunatic was sold, and the 
 proceeds paid into Court to the credit of the 
 matter of the lunacy, but they were not carried 
 to a real estate account. — The lunatic died intes- 
 tate, and his administrator claimed the money as. 
 part of the lunatic's personal estate : — Held, that 
 the money retained the character of real estate,, 
 and passed to the lunatic's heir-at-law. — The 
 words of the 23rd section of the Settled Estates 
 Act when imported into the 8th section of the 
 Partition Act are not to be restricted to a sale 
 
( 831 ,) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 852 ) 
 
 TIIL LtNATIC— PEOPEETT— confe'wMei^. 
 of estates in settlement, but apply to all sales 
 effected under the Partition Act. — ^The payment 
 of the money into Court to the credit of the lunacy 
 was not a payment " to a person becoming abso- 
 lutely entitled " within the meaning of the 23rd 
 section of the Settled Estates Act. In re Babkeb 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 241 
 
 10. Sale of Share in Eeal Estate — Lunacy 
 
 Begulation, Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 70), ss. 116, 
 124.] The 124th section of the Lunacy Regula- 
 tion Act, 1853, does not give jurisdiction to autho- 
 rize the committee of a lunatic to sell the lunatic's 
 undivided share of land to the owner of the other 
 shares. In re Weld - - 28 Ch. D. 614 
 
 Powers of committee. 
 
 See Cases under Ltinatio — Committee. 
 ITTNATIC — Business carried on in name of fii-m 
 — Service on manager 10 Q. B. D. 471 
 See Pkaotice — Suphejie Cocet— See- 
 vice. 1. 
 
 Government annuity — ^Payment. 
 
 See National Debt Commissionerb — 
 Statutes. 
 — ^ Illegitimacy — Suit to perpetuate testimony 
 
 [9 P. D. 120 
 See Peaotice — Divoeoe — Evidenob. 2. 
 
 India - - - - 7 Q. B. D. 18 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Peactice. 1. 
 
 LtTNATIC — continued. 
 
 Married woman — ^Powerof Court to elect for 
 
 [22 Ch. D, 263 
 See Settlement — Futuee Peopbett. 3. 
 
 New trustee — Deceased lunatic 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 217 ; 24 Ch. D. 271 
 
 See Teustee Acts — New Teustees. 1, 4. 
 
 Removal — Separation of husband and wife 
 
 [11 a. B. D. 113 
 See PooE Law — Settlemekt. 9. 
 
 Sale of stock — Ademption of legacy 
 
 See Will— Ademption. [22 Ch. D. 622 
 
 Tenant for life — Powers of. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 
 Tenant for life — Settled Land Act 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 464 
 See Settled Land Act — Disabilities. 
 2. 
 
 Title deeds — ^Inspection — Custody of Court 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 370 
 See Peactice — Stjpbeme Couet — ^Pbo- 
 DUCTioN OP Documents. 17. 
 
 Trustee— Vesting order. 
 
 See Cases under Teustee Acts — ^Vest- 
 ing Oedees. 6 — 9. 
 
 ITTNATIC EEMOVAl (INDIA) ACT, 1851. 
 
 See Lunatic — Ceiminal — Statutes. 
 
( 853 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 854 ) 
 
 M. 
 
 HAIX BOAD — Expenses of maintenance and 
 
 repair. 
 
 See Oases under Highway — Ebpaie. 
 1—7. 
 MAINTENANCE. 
 Children. 
 
 See Cases under Iitfaut — Maintenance. 
 Children — By married woman. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Mabbied 
 Women's Pkopertt Acts — Statutes. 
 
 Children— Clause in settlement 22 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 5. 
 
 Children — ^Divorce — Security by Kespondent 
 
 [8 P. D. 161 
 See Pbaotice — ^Divokoe — Custody of 
 Cbildben. 
 
 Children— Legacy- Vesting 16 Ch. L. 44, 47 
 
 See "Will — ^Vesting. 3, 5. 
 
 Lunatic - 21 Ch. D. 615 ; 23 Ch. D. 577 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 710 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Lunatic— Criminal - - 6 Q. B. D. 47 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 339 
 See Lunatic — Obiminal. 
 
 Pauper husband. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Mabbied 
 Women's Pbopeety Acts — Statutes. 
 
 Prisoner - 6 Q. B. D. 156 ; 7 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Peison. 2. 
 
 Wife — Divorce. 
 
 See Oases under Peactioe — Divoeoe — 
 Alimony. 
 •^— Wife— Separation deed — Subsequent divorce 
 
 6 P. D. 9S 
 See Pbaotice — Ditoboe — Sepabation 
 Deed. 3. 
 MAINTENANCE OF SUIT - 11 ft. B. D. 1 ; 
 See Champebty. 1, 2. [10 App. Cas. 210 
 MAJORITY OF CEEDITOES— Winding-up of 
 company 21 Ch. D. 769 ; 24 Ch. D. 258 
 See Company — Windinq-up Oedee. 16, 
 17. 
 MAJOBITY OF SHABEHOIDEBS 20 Ch. D. 151 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedeb. 5. 
 
 MAIICIOTJS PROSECITTION. 
 
 1. Seasonable and Probable Cause — Ma- 
 licious Presentation of Petition to wind up Trad- 
 ing Company.^ An action will lie for falsely and 
 maliciously and without reasonable or probable 
 cause presenting a petition under the Companies 
 Acts, 1862, 1867, to wind up a trading company, 
 even although no pecuniary loss or special da- 
 mage io the company can be proved, for the pre- 
 sentation of the petition is, from its very nature, 
 calculated to injure the credit of the company. — 
 The Defendant, who had been a shareholder in 
 the Plaintiff company, instructed certain brokers 
 to sell his shares, and signed a transfer. The 
 brokers informed him that they could not sell 
 
 MAIICIOTIS PEOSECTITION-^confo'mjeA 
 the shares, but the transfer was not returned to 
 him. After waiting ten or eleven days he pre- 
 sented a petition to wind up the company on the 
 ground of fraud in its formation, and of the im- 
 possibility that it could carry on business at a 
 profit. At the time of presenting the petition the 
 company, which was a trading company, had 
 property of a large amount, and Its debts were 
 trifling. The Defendant was not then in fact a 
 shareholder: his shares had been sold, and the 
 transfer had been registered. Upon discovering 
 that his shares had been sold, he gave notice that 
 the petition would be withdrawn, and it was 
 ultimately dismissed without costs. The company 
 having brought an action for falsely and malici- 
 ously and without reasonable or probable cause 
 presenting the petition, at the trial no proof of 
 damage to the company was given beyond the 
 liability to pay its own costs of defending itself 
 against the petition ; and upon this ground the 
 company was nonsuited at the close of its case : — 
 Held, that although the liability to pay "extra 
 costs " was not a ground of legal damage, never- 
 theless the nonsuit was wrong, and a new trial 
 must be had, because an action would lie for 
 falsely and maliciously and without reasonable 
 or probable cause presenting the petition to wind 
 up, which was necessarily injurious to the credit 
 of the company: — Seld, further, that as at the 
 time of presenting the petition the company was 
 an existing and going concern, and had valuable 
 property and was solvent, unless other facts could 
 be shewn, there was a want of reasonable and 
 probable cause for presenting the petition, and 
 the opinion of the jury ought to have been taken 
 whether the Defendant had been actuated by 
 malice : — Seld, further^ that if the Defendant as a 
 matter of business ought, in the opinion of the 
 jury, to have inferred from the failure of the 
 brokers to return the transfer, that the shares had 
 been sold, the Defendant would have had. no 
 reasonable or probable cause to suppose that he 
 was still a shareholder. — Johnson v. Jhnerson (Law 
 Rep. 6 Ex. 329) commented upon. Quaetz Hill 
 Gold Mining Company v. Eyee 11 ft. B. D. 674 
 
 2. Beasonable and Probable Cause — Onus 
 
 of Proof — Direction to Jury.} At the hearing of 
 a plaint in a County Court to recover rent the 
 tenant's son was called as a witness, and swore 
 that he had given up the key of the premises 
 to the landlord before the rent accrued due. 
 The landlord denied this, and subsequently pro- 
 secuted the witness for perjury. He was acquitted, 
 and brought an action against the landlord for 
 malicious prosecution. At the trial the Plaintiff 
 and Defendant repeated their evidence as to 
 the key, and the Judge dii-ected the jury alterna- 
 tively that if they could not arrive at a conclusion 
 as to which of the parties was speaking the 
 truth, the Plaintiff had not made out his case, 
 and the Defendant was entitled to a verdict; and 
 Ihat If they thought the Plaintiff did give up 
 
( 855 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 856 ) 
 
 MAIICIOTTS PROSECUTION— com<fe»ed 
 the key, but the Defendant owing to a defective 
 memory had forgotten the occurrence and went 
 on with the prosecution honestly believing that 
 the Plaintiff had sworn falsely and corruptly, 
 then the jury would not be justified in saying 
 that the Defendant maliciously and without rea- 
 sonable and probable cause prosecuted the Plain- 
 tiff, and the Defendant would be entitled to their 
 verdict: — Held, that the direction was right. 
 HiOKS V. Faulkneb - 8 Q. B. D. 167 
 
 3. Reasonable and Probable Cause — 
 
 Burden of Proof — Direction to Jury.'] In an 
 action for malicious prosecution the burden of 
 proof as to all the issues arising therein lies upon 
 the Plaintiff; and although the Plaintiff proves 
 that he was innocent of the charge laid against 
 him, and although the Judge in order to enable 
 himself to determine the issue of reasonable and 
 probable cause, leaves subsidiary questions of 
 fact to the jury, nevertheless the onus of proving 
 the existence of such facts as tend to establish 
 the want of reasonable and probable cause on 
 the part of the Defendant, rests upon the Plain- 
 tiff. The Plaintiff, a surgeon, had attended one 
 M. for bodily injuries alleged to have been sus- 
 tained in a collision upon the Defendants' rail- 
 way. M. brought an action against the Defend- 
 ants, which was compromised by the Defendants 
 paying a large sum for damages and costs. Sub- 
 sequently the directors of the Defendant com- 
 pany, having received certain information, caused 
 the statements of certain persons to be taken by a 
 solicitor; these statements tended to shew that 
 the injuries of which M. complained were not 
 caused at the collision, but were produced wil- 
 fully by the Plaintiff, with the consent of ,M., for 
 the purpose of defrauding the Defendants. These 
 statements were laid before counsel, who advised 
 that there was good ground for prosecuting the 
 Plaintiff and M. for conspiracy. The Defendants 
 accordingly prosecuted the Plaintiff, but he was 
 acquitted. In an action for malicious prosecu- 
 tion, the Judge directed the jury to find whether 
 the Defendants had taken reasonable care to inform 
 themselves of the true state of the case, and 
 whether they honestly believed the case which 
 they laid before the magistrates ; the jury having 
 answered these questions in the affirmative, the 
 Judge entered the j udgment for the Defendants : — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, reversing the de- 
 cision of the Queen's Bench Division, that the 
 direction to the jury was correct, that upon the 
 facts and the findings of the jury, the Defendants 
 had reasonable and probable cause for prosecuting 
 the Plaintiff, and that the Judge had rightly 
 entered the judgment for the Defendants. Abrath 
 V. North Eastern Bail way Company 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 79, 440 
 [Affirmed by the House of Lords,] 
 
 Action against corporation 6 Q. B. D. 287 
 
 See Corporation. 1. 
 
 MANAGEMENT OF COMPANY. 
 
 See Cases under Company— Manage- 
 
 MANDAMITS. 
 
 Pleading to Return — Return of uncon- 
 ditional Compliance — Rules of Supreme Court, 
 
 TSASVAJSJJS— continued. 
 
 1883, Order LIIL, r. 9; Order LXVIIL, r. 1 ; Order 
 LXXIL, r. 2 — 9 Anne, a. 20 IBeviaed Ed. Statutes, 
 9 Amut, c. 25]— 1 Wm. 4, c. 21—46 & 47 Vict, 
 c. 49.] A return of unconditional compliance to 
 a writ of mandamus, which is not a peremptory 
 writ, may be pleaded to, notwithstanding Order 
 Lm., rule 9, since the procedure of pleading to 
 the return to such writ as regulated by the re- 
 pealed statute 9 Anne, o. 20 [Revised Ed. Statutes, 
 9 Anne, c. 25], and 1 Wm. 4, u. 21, is preserved 
 by Order Lxvni., rule 1, and Order Lxxn., rule 2. 
 The Queen v. Justices of Pirehill North 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 696; 14 a. B. D. 13 
 
 2. Servants of the Crown — Commissioners 
 
 of Inland Revenue — Return of Probate Duty— 
 <fe 6 Vict. c. 79, s. 23.] Sect. 23 of 5 & 6 Vict, 
 c. 79, provides for the return by the Commis- 
 sioners of Stamps and Taxes of probate duty on 
 proof by oath and proper vouchers to their satis- 
 faction of the payment of debts of the deceased, 
 whereby the amount of probate duty payable on 
 the estate is reduced below the amount which 
 has been paid. By a subsequent Act the Com- 
 missioners of Inland Revenue are substituted for 
 the Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes. On an 
 application by an administrator for a mandamus 
 to the commissioners to pay to the applicant the 
 amount of duty overpaid by him, on the ground 
 that he had supplied evidence of overpayment 
 and had no other legal remedy : — Held, that the 
 mandamus ought not to issue, for the statute cre- 
 ated no duty between the commissioners and the 
 applicant, whose remedy, if the decision of the 
 commissioners could be reviewed, was by petition 
 of right. — Rex v. Lords Commissioners of the Trea,- 
 sury (i A. & E. 286) disapproved of In re 
 Nathan - 12 Q. B. D. 461 
 
 Central Criminal Court - 11 Q. B. D. 479 
 
 See Court — Central Criminal Court. 
 
 Charity - 18 Ch. D. 596 
 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 1. 
 
 Corrupt Practices Act — Criminal matter — 
 
 Appeal - - 7 ft. B. D. 575 
 
 See Parliament — Election Commis- 
 sioners. 
 
 Judge of County Court - 9 ft. B. D. 723 
 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 6. 
 
 Justices— Prison Ajot, 1877 11 ft. B, D. 656 ; 
 
 See Prison. 1. [9 App, Cas, 757 
 
 Refusal of justice to do act relating to the 
 
 duties of his office 14 ft. B, D. 474 
 
 See Justices — Practice. 3. 
 
 MANOR— Copyhold. 
 
 See Cases under Copyhold. 
 Waste lands— Common - 20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 See Inclosuee. 3. 
 
 MANSION-HOUSE— Sale of— Settled Laud Act 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 179 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Restrictions. 
 
 1. 
 
 MANSLAUGHTER— Neglect of parent to provide 
 
 medical aid - - 8 ft. B. D. 571 
 
 See Criminal Law— Offences asainst 
 
 Person. 3. 
 
( 857 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 858 ) 
 
 TS.A.'SSL&.VSKI'EB,— continued. 
 
 Negligent use of firearms - 6 Q. B, D. 79 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Person. 2. 
 MANUFACTUBED AETICIE -Name of 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 39S; 8 App. Cas. 315 
 See Trade Name. 3. 
 
 MAEGINAL ADVICE— Bill of exchange— Con- 
 signment of goods - 29 (a. D. 813 
 See Bill opExohanqb — Securities foe. 
 4. 
 
 HARGINAL NOTE— Act of Parliament 
 
 See Statute. [22 Ch. D. 511 
 
 MARINE INSTJEANCE. 
 
 See Cases under Insurance, Marine. 
 MARITIME LIEN. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Maritime Lien. 
 Jurisdiction - - 6 P. D. 106 
 
 See Foreign Judgment. 2. 
 HABEET. 
 
 1. Disturbance — Statutory Market— Ex- 
 tinguishment of Old Franchise Tiy Statute.'] Under 
 the powers of an Act of 1844, the corporation of 
 Manchester purchased the manorial rights of the 
 manor of Manchester, which was co-extensive 
 with one of the six townships included in the 
 borough. — Among these rights was an ancient 
 franchise to hold a market, which appeared to 
 have been a Saturday market. After this, ty the 
 Manchester Market Apt, 1846, the corporation 
 were empowered to hold markets on such days as 
 they should think fit at any places within the 
 borough which they should appropriate' as mar- 
 ket places, and to charge ajiy tolls not exceeding 
 those mentioned in the schedule to the Act (which 
 were higher than the old accustomed tolls), and 
 to make certain charges for weighing which could 
 mot have been made under the old franchise : — 
 3eld (affirming the decision of the Vice-Ohan- 
 cellor of the county palatine of Lancaster), that 
 there being under the Act a change of time, a 
 change of place, an alteration of the old charges, 
 an iniposition of new charges, and an extension of 
 the market from the township to the borough, the 
 eifect of the Act was to give the corporation new 
 rights of holding markets in substitution for the 
 old franchise, and that the old franchise was 
 extinguished. — ^The corporation brought ta action 
 to restrain the Defendants from' selling eggs and 
 dried fish on malrket days in their shop. The 
 shop was situated in a street which adjoined one 
 side of one of the Plaintifis' markets, and was on 
 the opposite side of the street from, but not oppo- 
 ate to, the entrance from that street to the market.. 
 The Defendants only sold their own goods in 
 their shop in the ordinary course of business.: — 
 Held (affirming the decision of the Vioe-Chan- 
 cellor), that this was no disturbance of the statu- 
 tory right of market. Corporation of Man- 
 chester V. Lyons - - - 32 Ch. D. 287 
 ISee also Corporation of Manchester v. 
 Pevbrlhy, 22 Ch. D, 294, n.] 
 
 2. Disturbance — Charter, Force of — 
 
 Waiver of Statutory Bights — Accommodation pro- 
 vided Vy Lord of Market.'] A charter of 1st Ed- 
 ward III. made by the King " with the assent of 
 ihe prelates, earls, barons, and all the commons 
 
 ULA'RKET— continued. 
 
 of our realm assembled in our present Parlia- 
 ment," granted to the citizens of the city of' 
 London certain privileges, and among them " that 
 no market within seven miles round about the city ' 
 shall be granted by us or our heirs to any one." 
 By letters patent in the 34th Charles II., reciting 
 an inquisition founded on a writ of ad quod 
 damnum, the King granted to the Respondents' 
 predecessor in title the right of holding markets 
 on Thursday and Saturday in every week in 
 Spittal Square within the seven miles. — User of 
 the market was proved since 1723. The Appel- 
 lant company set up a depot or row of stalls at 
 their terminus within 300 yards of Spittal Square 
 and let them to dealers for the purpose of selling 
 fruit and vegetables brought up by their railway 
 and justified their depot on the ground that the 
 Respondents' market was very crowded, that it 
 was difficult for dealers to get stalls' there, and 
 that if any persons other than the Respondents' 
 tenants ■wished to sell in the Respondents' market 
 there would be no room for them ; and that the 
 respondents' market infringed the provisions of 
 certain Paving Acts : — Held, affirming the deci- 
 sion of the Court of Appeal, that the charter of 
 Edward III. had, at the most, the force of a pri- 
 vate or personal statute, and concerned the cor- ' 
 poration of London only and not the general 
 public ; that the consent of the corporation was 
 to be presumed to the letters patent of Charles II. ; 
 that the letters patent of Charles II. conferred a 
 valid right of market ; that the company's depot 
 was in fact a rival market, and a disturbance of 
 the Respondents' right of market, and entitled the 
 Respondents to an injunction to restrain the com- 
 pany from using their depot in the above manner 
 or so as to interfere with the Respondents' rights ; 
 and that even if the company had proved that 
 there was not sufficient accommoda,tion in the 
 Respondents' market, or that the Paving Acts had 
 been infringed, those circumstances would have 
 afforded no answer to the action for an injunction. 
 Great Eastern Railway Company v. Goldsmid 
 [25 Ch. D. 511 1 9 App. Cas. 927 
 
 3. Market not limited by Metes and 
 
 Bounds — Extension of Market — Streets subject to 
 Market Bights— Street Acts of Parliament not 
 affecting Market — Usage — Premtnption of lost 
 Grant.] By letters patent in 34 Charles II. the 
 King granted to the predecessor in title of those 
 under whom the Defendant claimed as lessee the 
 riglit to hold two markets — one on Thursday and 
 the other on Saturday — in every wepk, " in or 
 next to Spital Square." The market-place and 
 four inner streets connected therewith were made 
 by the grantee on the square piece of laud which 
 had formerly been Spital Square, and which land 
 he had acquired when the charter was granted to 
 him, but he never acquired the adjoining land 
 which surrounded such square piece, and on which, 
 subsequently to the charter, were made certain 
 outer streets, into which the four, inner streets 
 ran. By letters patent in 4 James II., made void 
 by 2 Wm. & M. sess. 1, o. 8,' a third market was 
 given, viz., on Monday in every week, and a 
 market on Wednesday substituted for that on 
 Thursday.— In proceedings taken at the instance 
 of the local authority to restrain the Defen dan 
 
( 859 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 860 ) 
 
 MARKET — continued. 
 
 &om licensing the sale of goods in either the 
 outer or the inner streets adjoining the market, 
 the local authority relied on certain Paving Acta 
 of Geo. 3, which empowered such authority to 
 remove the obstruction caused by selling articles 
 in those specific streets, and the Defendant proved 
 a usage from the time of living memory to sell 
 vegetables and fruit in any of those streets, and 
 to pay toll to the market-owner for so doing, when 
 by reason of the market being so crowded it was 
 impossible to get nearer to the inside market, and 
 he also proved such usage to hold the market on 
 other days of the week besides on Thursday and 
 Saturday : — Seld, that the market was a market 
 without metes and bounds, and might extend, 
 therefore, from time to time, as the crowded state 
 of the market might require, over any of these sur- 
 rounding streets, all of which were to be presumed 
 to have been dedicated to the public subject to the 
 exercise of the market franchise, notwithstanding 
 the Paving Acts, as such Acts were not to be 
 construed as interfering with the market rights : 
 — Held, also, that the right to hold the market was 
 confined to the two days mentioned in the charter 
 of Charles II., and that under the particular 
 circumstances of the case a lost grant for the 
 other days of the week was not to be inferred. 
 Attokney-Genekal v. Hoenee 14 Q. B. D. 245 
 [Affirmed by the House of Lords, 11 App. Cas. 66.] 
 
 MAESIAGK — Breach of promise — Pleading — 
 Matter of aggi'avation 6 Q. B. D. 190 
 See Peactice^Supreme Coubt — Stkik- 
 
 ING OUT PLEAHrN'GS. 1. 
 
 Consent of guardians - 18 Ch, D. 61 
 
 See Will — Condition. 9. 
 
 In Greek Church. 
 
 See Greek MAERiAeES — Statutes. 
 
 Non-solemnization of — Eevoeation of settle- 
 ment - 26 Ch. D. 191 
 See Settlement— Eevooation. 1. 
 
 Presumption of — Law of Ceylon 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 364 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 3. 
 Eestraint of - - - 23 Ch. D. 285 
 
 See Covenant — ^Validity. 
 
 Bight to solemnize — ^Fees 10 Q. B. D. 418 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clergy. 1. 
 
 Scotch — Habit and repute 6 App. Cas. 489 
 
 See Scotch Law — Hcsband and Wipe. 
 3. 
 
 Severance of joint tenancy 17 Ch. D. 368 
 
 See Joint Tenant. 2. 
 
 MAEEIAGE CONTEACT — Settlement — Scotch 
 law - - 9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 See SootchLaw — ^Husband and Wife. 5. 
 
 MABRIAGE SETTLEMENT. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement. 
 
 MAEEIED WOMAN. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Husband 
 
 AND WiEB. 
 
 Action by^Costs of former action not paid 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 288 
 
 See Peaoticb — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 7. I 
 
 MAEEIED WOMAN — continued. 
 
 Action by — Security for costs 30 Ch. D. 418 ; 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 52 
 See Pkaotice — Supeeme Court — Secd- 
 RiTT FOR Costs. 4, 5. 
 
 Administratrix - - 8 P. D. 16, 168 
 
 See Administbator — Maeeied Woman. 
 1,2. 
 
 Breach of trust — Indemnity of trustees 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 595 
 See Teusteb — -Indemnity. 1. 
 
 Compromise — ^How far binding 6 P. D. 219 
 
 See Peactice — Probate — Compeomise. 
 
 Consent — Settled Estates Act 26 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 2. 
 
 Conveyance — Vendor and Purchaser Act 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 693 
 See Vendoe and Purchasee — Convey- 
 ance. 3. 
 
 Election — Female infant - 28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Election. 6. 
 
 Equity to settlement - 16 Ch. D. 376 ; 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 778 ; 27 Ch. D. 220 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Executrix. 
 
 See Cases under Probate — ^Maeeied 
 Woman. 
 
 Injimction against parting with separate 
 
 estate - - - 16 Ch. D. 660 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Couet — In- 
 junction. 6. 
 Law of Natal — Surety bond 9 App. Cas. 715 
 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 2. 
 Maintenance of children and husband. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied 
 Women's Property Acts — Statutes. 
 Next friend - - 19 Ch. D. 94 
 
 See Practice^ — Supreme Court — Next 
 Eeiend. 2. 
 Power of attorney. 
 
 See Power of Attorney — Statutes. 
 
 Sale in partition action — Request for sale 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Pabtition Suit — Sale. 3. 
 Scotch law. 
 
 .See Cases vmder Scotch Law — Husband 
 AND Wipe. 
 Separate examination - 28 Ch. D. 171 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 3. 
 Tenant for life — ^Powers of. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 Testamentary appointment 22 Ch. D. 238 
 
 See Power — Execution. 11. 
 
 MASKIED WOMEN'S PEOPEETY ACTS. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Husband 
 AND Wife — Married Women's Pro- 
 perty Acts. 
 
 MAEEIED WOMEN'S PEOPEETY ACT (SCOT- 
 LAND) - - 8 App. Cas. 678 
 jSee Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 6. 
 MAESHALLING— Securities —Bankruptcy 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 148 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 6. 
 
( 861 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 862 ) 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT :— Col. 
 
 I. Masteb's Liaeiliti - - 861 
 
 (a.) Genebal. 
 (6.) OoMMON Employment. 
 (o.) Dbpeotivb Maohinebt, &c. 
 (d.) Person entitled to Com- 
 pensation. 
 (e.) Pbaotioe. 
 (/.) Eailways. 
 
 II. Eemedies - - - 867 
 in. "Wages - - - 868 
 
 I. MASTER AND SERVANT— MASTER'S LIA- 
 BILITY. 
 
 (a.) Genesal. 
 
 1. Servant Mied to drive Cart — Iddbility 
 
 of Hirer for. ^ D. contracted with the Defendants, 
 an urban authority, to supply by the day a driver 
 and horse to drive and draw a watering-cart be- 
 longing to the Defendants. The driver was em- 
 ployed and paid by D., and was not under the 
 Defendants' direction or control otherwise than 
 that their inspector directed him what streets to 
 water. In an action to recover damages for in- 
 juries caused by the negligent conduct of the 
 driver whilst in charge of the cart : — Held, that 
 the Defendants were not liable. — Quarman v. Bw- 
 nett (6 M. & W. 499) followed ; Bourke v. White 
 Moss Colliery Co. (2 0. P. D. 205) distinguished. 
 Jones v. Cobpobation oi' Livbepool 14 Q. B. D. 
 
 [890 
 
 (6.) Common Employment. 
 
 2. Orders of Fellow "WoiTsman— Employers' 
 
 lAaUlity Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 1, suh-s. 3 
 — Injury resulting to Worhman from having con- 
 formed to Orders or Directions of Fellow Work- 
 man.] The 1st section of the Employers' Liability 
 Act, 1880, provides that, where personal injury 
 is caused to a workman (3) by reason of the 
 negligence of any person in the service of the 
 employer to whose orders or directions the work- 
 man at the time of the injury was bound to 
 conform, and ^id conform, where such injury 
 resulted from his having so conformed, the work- 
 man or, in case the injury resulted in death, his 
 legal personal representatives, shall have the 
 same right of compensation against the employer 
 as if the workman had not been a workman of nor 
 in the service of the employer nor engaged in his 
 work. — The Plaintiff, a boy employed by the De- 
 fendants, a railway company, was assisting a car- 
 man of the Defendants, under whose directions he 
 was, in unloading from a van three large iron win- 
 dow frames. The frames were standing upright in 
 the van, secured at each end to the hooks of the van 
 by a string. The carman untied the string at one 
 end of the fi'ames, and the Plaintiff untied the 
 string at the other end. The carman did not ex- 
 pressly order the Plaintiff to untie the string but 
 the Plaintiff stated that he did so without orders 
 because he had done so on previous occasions and 
 that the carman saw him untie the string and 
 made no objection. The carman then removed 
 one of the frames without retying the two remain- 
 ing frames, leaving them standing unsecured. 
 They directly afterwards fell on the Plaintiff, 
 eausing him injuries in respect of which he sued 
 
 I. MASTER "AND SERVANT— MASTER'S LIA- 
 BILITY — continued. 
 (6.) Common Employment — continued. 
 the Defendants for compensation under the Bm-- 
 ployers' Liability Act, 1880 :— Keiid, that there 
 was on the above facts evidence of an injury to 
 the Plaintiff by reason of the negligence of a 
 fellow workman to whose orders he was bound to 
 conform, and did conform, and which resulted 
 from his having so conformed. Millwabd v. 
 Midland Eailway Company 14 Q. B. D. 68 
 
 3. Superintendent — "Person having super- 
 intendence entrusted to. Mm" — Employers' tda- 
 UlityAct, 1880 (43 & 44 Viot. c.42), s.l(auh-s. 2), 
 8. 8.] The Plaintiff and one J. were employed 
 with others by the Defendants in loa4Jng sacks 
 of corn into the hold of a ship: J. 's duty was to 
 guide the beam of the crane by means of a guy- 
 rope, and to give directions when to lower and 
 hoist the chain. He neglected to use the guy- 
 rope, and the sacks in consequence fell down the 
 hatchway, and hurt the Plaintiff, ,who was work- 
 ing in the hold : — Held, that J. was " engaged in 
 manual labour," and was not '' a person having 
 superintendence entrusted to him," within the 
 meaning of the Employers' Liability Act, 1880 
 (43 & 44 Vict. 0. 42), s. 1, sub-s. 2, as deaned by 
 sect. 8. Shafpebs v.. Genebal Steam Naviga- 
 tion CoMPAiJY - - - 10 Q. B. D. 366 
 
 4. Superintendent — Superintendent assist- 
 ing in Manual Labour — Employers' Liability Act, 
 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 1.] An employer 
 may be liable under the Employers' Liability Act, 
 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. u. 42), s. 1, where personal in- 
 jury is caused to a workman (sub-s. 2), " by rea- 
 son of the negligence of any person in, the service 
 of the employer who has any superintendence 
 entrusted to him whilst in tlie exercise of such 
 superintendence," although the superintendent, 
 when negligent, is voluntarily assisting in manual 
 labour. Osborne v. Jackson - 11 Q. B..D. 619 
 
 (c.) Defective Machinery, &c. 
 
 6. Machinery — Employers' Liability Act, 
 
 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 1, sub.s. 1—" Defect 
 in condition of machinery " — Machine unsuited 
 for Purpose to which it was applied.'] The Em- 
 ployers' Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Viot. o. 42) 
 —which gives a workman a right of action against 
 his employer for personal injury by reason of any 
 defect in the condition of the machinery used in 
 the business of the employer — applies to a case 
 where the machine, though not defective in its 
 construction, was, under the circumstances in 
 which it |was used, calculated to cause injury to 
 those using it. The deceased, a workman in the 
 employment of the Defendants, was killed by a 
 piece of coke falling from », lift used at a blast 
 furnace belonging to them. The lift consisted 
 of two platforms which ascended and descended 
 alternately, and at the time when the deceased 
 was injured he was removing empty barrows from 
 the platform which vas at rest at the bottom of 
 the lift, There was evidence that the accident 
 arose either from the sides of the lift not being 
 fenced so as, to prevent coke from falling over, or 
 from the lower platform not being roofed so as to 
 protect those working on it froin falling coke ; — 
 Held, that under the circumstances there was a 
 
( 863 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 861 ) 
 
 I. MASTER AND SEEVANT— MASTEE'S IIA.- 
 
 'BILITY— continued. 
 
 (e.) Defective Maohineey, &c. — continued. 
 
 " defect in the condition " of the lift for -which the 
 
 Defendants were liable. Hbske •;;. Samuelson & 
 
 Co. - - - 12 Q. B. D. 30 
 
 6. Plant — Employers' Liability Act, 1880 
 
 (43 & 44 Vict. e. 42), s. 1 (1), s. 2 {I)— Plant unfit 
 for Purpose for which it was used — Negligence of 
 Employer.'] The Employers' Liability Act, 1880, 
 ■which gives a workman a right of action against 
 his employer for personal iniury by reason of any 
 defect in the condition of the plant used in the 
 business of the employer, applies to a case where 
 the plant is unfit for the purpose for which it is 
 used, though no part of it is shewn to be unsound. 
 — Plaintiff, a workman in Defendants' employ- 
 ment, was injured by reason of the breaking of a 
 ladder, which was being used to support a scaf- 
 fold. The ladder was insufficient for the purpose 
 for which it was being used, and the scaffold and 
 ladder had been placed and were being used under 
 the directions of one of the Defendants : — Held 
 that, under the above circumstances, there was 
 evidence that the Plaintiff had been injured by 
 reason of a defect in the condition of the plant, 
 owing to the negligence of his employer, within 
 the meaning of the Employers' Liability Act, 
 ISSO.—Heslte v. Samuelson (12 Q. B. D. 30) ap- 
 proved and followed. Cbipps v. Jddge 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 583 
 
 7. Boadway — • Obstruction — Employers' 
 
 Liability Act, 1880 (48 * 44 Vict. e. 42), s. 1, 
 suh-s. 1.] A workman was employed in the De- 
 fendants' ironworks, and part of his duty was to 
 take iron in balls, by means of a two- wheeled car, 
 along a roadway of iron plates. While he was so 
 engaged the car struck against a piece of a sub- 
 stance used for lining the furnaces, which had 
 been negligently placed projecting into the road- 
 way, and a ball fell on him, causing personal 
 injuries from which he died. In an action against 
 the employers : — Held (by Field and Stephen, JJ.), 
 that the obstruction caused by the substance pro- 
 jecting into the roadway was not a defect in the 
 condition of the way within the meaning of the 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880, s. 1, siib-s. 1, and 
 that the Defendants were not liable. MoGirFiN v. 
 Palmer's SmPBinLDiNG and Ikon Company 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 5 
 
 (d.) Peeson entitled to Compensation. 
 
 8. Contract not to claim — Employers' 
 
 Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 1— 
 Contract against Public Policy — Injury resulting 
 in Death — Lord Campbell's Act (9 <fe 10 Vict. 
 c. 93) — Widow of Workman, whether bound by his 
 Contract not to claim Compensation.'] It is com- 
 petent to a workman to contract with his employer 
 not to claim compensation for personal injuries 
 under the Employers' Liability Act, 1880. — By 
 sect. 1 of the Employers' Liability Act, 1880, where 
 personal injury is caused to a workman in certain 
 specified cases, the workman, or, in case the injury 
 results in death, his legal personal representatives 
 and any person entitled in case of death " shall 
 have the same right of compensation and remedies 
 against the employer as if the workman had not 
 been a workman of, nor in the service of, the 
 
 I. MASTEE AKD SERVANT— MASTEE'S IIA- 
 
 BlLIT'Z^continued. 
 (d.) Pekson entitled to Compensation — 
 continued. 
 employer, nor engaged in his work." — A workman 
 having contracted with his employer for himself 
 and his representatives, and any person entitled 
 in case of death, not to claim any compensation 
 under the Act for personal injury whether re- 
 sulting in death or not : — Held, that sect. 1 only 
 affected the contract of service so far as to nega- 
 tive the implication of an agreement by the 
 workman to bear the risks of the employment, 
 and therefore did not render the workman's 
 express contract not to claim compensation in- 
 valid. — Held, also, that the contract was not 
 against public policy, and that the workman's 
 widow, suing for damages under Lord Campbell's 
 Act, was bound by it. G-bippiths v, Eabl op 
 Dudley - - - 9 Q. B. D. 357 
 
 9. Omnibus Coniuctoi^Employers' Lia- 
 bility Act, 1880 (43 * 44 Vict. c. 42), s. S— Em- 
 ployers and Workmen Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict, 
 c. 90), s. 10 — "Journeyman" — "Labourer" — 
 " Otherwise engaged in Manual Labour."] An 
 omnibus conductor engaged at daily wages, paid 
 daily, is not a "person to whom the Employers 
 and "Workmen Act, 1875, applies," and therefore 
 is not entitled to the benefit of the Employers' 
 Liability Act, 1880. — Judgment of the Queen's 
 Bench Division affirmed. Morgan v. London 
 General Omnibus Co. 12 Q. B. D. 201 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 832 
 (e.) Pkaotioe. 
 
 10. Action in County Court — Semoval of 
 
 — Employers' Liability Act (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), 
 s. 6.]' By the Employers' Liability Act, 1880 
 (43 & 44 Vict. i,. 42j, s. 6, " Every action for 
 recovery of compensation under this Act shall 
 be brought in a County Court, but may, upon 
 the application of either Plaintiff or Defendant, 
 be removed into a superior Court in like manner 
 and upon the same conditions as an action com- 
 menced in a County Court may by law be re- 
 moved."— A Plaintiff having brought in the 
 County Court an action against his employers, 
 to recover compensation under the Act for an 
 injm-y through the breaking of a chain, applied 
 for a certiorari to remove the action into the 
 superior Court on the grounds that his notice 
 given under the Act was defective ; that he de- 
 sired to consolidate the action with one brought 
 by him in the superior Court to recover damages 
 for the same injury from the Defendants on their 
 common law liability, and that the questions 
 arising were of considerable complexity and legal 
 difficulty : — Held, that the power of removal 
 ought only to be exercised in exceptional cases, . 
 and that no such special grounds had been shewn 
 as to induce the Court in its discretion to grant 
 the application, Munday v. Thames Ibonwobks 
 AND Shipbuilding Company 10 Q. B. D. 59 
 
 11. Action in County Court — Stay of 
 
 Proceedings — Employers' Liability Act, 18S0 
 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 6— Action of Tort— 
 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 39.] Sect. 39 of the 
 County Courts Act, 1856, entitles the Defendant 
 " in any action of tort " where the claim exceeds 
 
( 865 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 866 ) 
 
 1 HASTES AND SERVANT— MASTER'S LIA- 
 BILITY — eontinued. 
 (e.) Pbactiob — eontinued. 
 £5 to a stay of proceedinga, upon certain con- 
 ditions as to giving security forthe amount claimed 
 and the costs of trial in one of the superior Oourts 
 of common law -.—Held, aflBrming the decision of 
 the Queen's Bench Division, that this section was 
 intended to apply only to actions which could be 
 'brought either in one of the superior Oourts or in 
 a County Oourt, and therefore did not apply to 
 an action under the Employers' Liability Act, 
 1880, which by sect. 6 of that Act must be 
 brought in a Oounty Oourt. The Queen v. 
 Judge op Oitt oi- London Ooukt 
 
 [14 Q. B. D, 818, 905 
 12. Notice of Injury — Defect or Inac- 
 curacy in Notice— Omission of Date of Irijury— 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), 
 ■s. 7.] Sect. 4 of the Employers' Liability Act, 
 1880, provides that an action to recover compen- 
 sation under the Act shall not be maintainable 
 unless notice of injury is given as provided by the 
 Act. By sect. 7, the notice shall state (inter alia) 
 ihe date of the injury ; and " a notice under this 
 section shall not be deemed invalid by reason of 
 any defect or inaccuracy therein" unless the 
 Judge who tries the action shall be of opinion 
 that the Defendant is prejudiced in his defence by 
 such defect or inaccuracy, and that it was for the 
 purpose of misleading. A notice of injury given 
 under s.eot. 4 omitted to state the date of the 
 injury, and the Judge at the trial found that the 
 Defendant was not prejudiced in his defence by 
 the omission, and that it was not for the purpose 
 of misleading -.—Held, that the omission of the 
 Jate was a " defect or inacciu'acy " in the notice 
 within the meaning of sect. 7, and therefore did 
 not render the notice invalid. Oabtee v. Dbts- 
 DALE - - 12 Q. B. D. 91 
 
 13. Notice of Injury — Inaccuracy — Em- 
 ployers' Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Viet. c. 42), 
 s. 7.] The notice of injury under sect. 7 of the 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. o. 42), 
 need not be expressed in strictly technical lan- 
 guage : it is enough if it substantially conveys to 
 the mind of the person to whom it is given, the 
 name and address of the person injured and the 
 cause and date of the injury. — A letter from the 
 Plaintiff's solicitor gave only the date of the in- 
 jury, and stated that the Plaintiff was and had for 
 some time past been under treatment at a hospital 
 "for injury to his leg:" — Held, that having regard 
 to the proviso at the end of sect. 7 the defect in 
 the notice did not render it invalid. Stone v. 
 HsDE - - 9 ft. B. D. 76 
 
 14. -- — Notice of Injury — Statement of Cause 
 of Injury — Employer^ Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 
 Vict. c. 42), s. 7.] In an action to recover compensa- 
 tion for injuries under the Employers' Liability 
 Act, 1880, the Plaintiff's notice of injury stated 
 that she was injured in consequence of the De- 
 fendants' negligence in leaving a certain hoist in 
 their warehouse unprotected whereby her foot 
 was caught in the casement of the hoist and 
 crushed. At the trial, the jury foxmd that the 
 accident occurred through the negligence of a 
 superintendent in the warehouse, in allowing the 
 Plaintiff, a young girl, to go in the hoist alone ; — 
 
 I. MASTER AND SERVANT— MASTER'S LIA- 
 BILITY — eontinued. 
 (e.) Fraotioe— continued. 
 Held, that the notice of injury sufficiently stated 
 the " cause of the injury " within sect. 7 of the 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880. Olaekson v. 
 MusoKAVE - - 9 Q. B. D, 386 
 
 15. Notice of Injury — Written Notice 
 
 necessary— Employers' Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 
 Vict. c. 42), ss. 4, 7.] By the Employers' Liability 
 Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 4, an action for 
 the recovery under this Act of compensation for 
 an injury shall not be maintainable, unless " no- 
 tice that injury has been sustained" is given 
 within six weeks. By sect. 7 notice in respect of 
 an injury under this Act shall give the name and 
 address of the person injured, and shall state in 
 ordinary language the cause of the injury and 
 the date, and shall be served on the employer, 
 and may be served by delivery or by post : — Held, 
 that notice under the Act must be in writing. 
 MoTLE V. Jenkins - - 8 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 16. Notice of Injury — Written Notice 
 
 necessary— Sufficiency of Notice — Employers' Lia- 
 bility Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Viet. c. 42), ss. 4, 7.] 
 The notice of injury sustained by a workman 
 which is to be given to an employer under the 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. 
 c. 42), must contain in writing all the particulars 
 required by sect. 7 in order to fulfil the condition 
 precedent to bringing an action enacted by sect. 4. 
 — Qusre, if such notice can be made by one writing 
 referring to another writing. — Wiiere a workman, 
 on the day he had been injured, made a verbal 
 report of such injury to his employer's inspector, 
 who took the details down in writing and sent 
 them to the employer's superintendent, and after- 
 wards the workman's solicitor wrote a letter to 
 the employer, stating that he was instructed by 
 such workman to apply for compensation for in- 
 juries received on the employer's premises, "par- 
 ticulars of which have already been communicated 
 to your superintendent" -.-Held, that such letter 
 did not refer to any other writing, and was not a 
 notice in compliance with the Act. Keen v. 
 MiLLWALL Dock Oompany - 8 Q. B. D. 482 
 
 (/.) Eailwats. 
 17. Person in Cbsxge—Emphyers' Lia- 
 bility Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 1, sub-s. 5 
 —Railway Company— Ferson having " Charge or 
 Control" of Points.'] In an action for compensa- 
 tion under the Employers' Liability Act, 1880, 
 the evidence shewed that it was the duty of F., a 
 workman employed in the signal department of 
 the Defendants' raUway, to clean, oil, and adjust 
 the points and wires of the locking apparatus at 
 various places along a portion of the line, and to 
 do slight repairs, that for these purposes he was, 
 with several other men, subject to the orders of 
 an inspector in the same department, who was re- 
 sponsible for the points and locking gear, which 
 were moved and worked by men in the signal 
 boxes, being kept in proper condition, and that P. 
 having taken the cover off some points and lock- 
 ing gear in order to oil them, negligently left it 
 projecting over the metals of the line, wherebv 
 injury was caused to a fellow workman -.-Held 
 affirming the decision of the Queen's Bench Divi- 
 
 2 F 
 
( 867 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 
 
 ) 
 
 I. MASTEE AND SERVANT— MASTEE'S LIA- 
 
 BILITY — continued. 
 (/.) Railways — continued. 
 sion, that there was no evidence for the jury that 
 ]?. had " charge or control " of the points within 
 the meaning of sect. 1, suh-sect. 5, of the Em- 
 ployers' Liability Act, 1880, so as to make the 
 Defendants liable for his negligence. Gibbs v. 
 Geeat 'Westeen Bail way Compaky 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 22; 12 Q. B. D. 208 
 
 18. Person in Charge — Negligence of a 
 
 Person " in Charge of a Train upon a Maibvay " 
 —Employers Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. 
 c. 42), s. 1, subs. 5.] H., who was in the employ 
 of a railway company as a " capstan man," with- 
 out giving the usual warning, propelled a series 
 of trucks along a line of rails in a goods station, 
 and injured tlie Plaintiff, who was engaged in 
 similar work av the other end of the line about 
 100 yards off. The capstan was set in motion by 
 hydraulic power communicated to it by H. from 
 a stationary engine at a distance :^jHeM, that 
 there was evidence to warrant the jury in finding 
 that H. was a person who had the charge or con- 
 ti'ol of "a train upon a railway" under sect. 1, 
 sub-sect. 5, of the Employers' Liability Act, 1880 
 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42). Cox v. Geeat Western 
 Eatlway Company - - 9 Q. B. D. 106 
 
 19. " Railway," Meaning of — Employers' 
 
 Liability Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 42), s. 1, 
 sub-s. 5.] Tho meaning of the term " railway " 
 as used in the 5th sub-section of the 1st section 
 of the Employers' Liability Act, 1880, is not con- 
 fined to railways belonging to railway companies 
 such as are subject to the provisions of the Rail- 
 way Regulation Acts ; but the sub-section applies 
 also to a temporary railway laid down by a con- 
 tractor for the purposes of the construction of 
 works. Doughty v. Fikbank 10 Q. B. D. 358 
 
 II. MASTEE AND SERVANT— REMEDIES. 
 
 1. Exclusive Personal Service — Action for 
 
 procuring a Breach of such Contract — Damages 
 where Injunction only claimed — 21 & 22 Vict. c. 27, 
 s. 2.] An action lies against a third person who 
 maliciously induces another to break Ms contract 
 of exclusive personal service with an employer, 
 which thereby would naturally cause, and did in 
 fact cause, an injury to such employer, although 
 the relation of master and servant may not strictly 
 exist between the employer and employed. — So 
 held by Lord Selborne, L.O., and Brett, L.J., 
 affliming the decision of the majority of the 
 Judges in Lumley v. Gye (2 E. & B. 216 ; 22 L. J. 
 (Q.B.) 463), Lord Coleridge, C.J., dissentient. — 
 Where in such an action the employed was also 
 a Defendant, but as against him the Plaintiff 
 claimed only an injunction and not damages, it 
 was held that damages might, in the discretion 
 of the Court, be given under Lord Cauns' Act 
 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 27), and that the jury, therefore, 
 should be directed by the Judge, in the event of 
 a verdict for the Plaintiff, to find such damages 
 as should be awarded ; first, if the Court should 
 think it a proper case both for injunction and 
 damages ; and secondly, if the Ooiirt should think 
 it a proper case for damages only, and not also for 
 an injunction. Bowen v. Hall 6 ft. B. D, 833 
 
 ,2. "Workman" — Tiuentor — J^mployers 
 
 II. MASTER AND SERVANT —EEMEDIKS— 
 
 continued, 
 and Workmen Act, 1875 (38 <fe 39 Vict. c. 90).] By 
 an agreement in writing between H. & Co., manu- 
 facturers, and J., — reciting that J. having a know- 
 ledge of mechanics, and H. & Co. requiring the 
 services of a person having such knowledge " tO' 
 assist the firm as a practical working mechanic 
 in developing ideas they the firm might wish to- 
 carry out, and to liimself originate and carry out 
 ideas and inventions suitable to the business of 
 such firm if such inventions were approved by 
 them," — it was mutually agreed that J. should 
 be employed by the firm " for the purpose above 
 specified": — Held, that J. was not "a mechanic 
 or workman " within the Employers and Work- 
 men Act, 1875. Jackson v. Hill 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 618 
 
 3. " Workman " — Potter's Printer — 
 
 Breach of Ms Contract through Strike of Assistants 
 employed by him — 38 ■& 39 Vict. c. 90, ss. 4, 10.^ 
 By the Employers and Workmen Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Vict. u. 90), s. 4, " a dispute under this Act be- 
 tween an employer and a workman may be heard 
 and determined by a Court of summary jurisdic- 
 tion, and such Court, for the purposes of this Act, 
 shall be deemed to be a Court of civil jurisdic- 
 tion " limited to £10. By sect. 10 " In this Act 
 the expression ' workman ' . , . means any person 
 who, being a labourer, servant in husbandry, 
 journeyman, artificer, handicraftsman, miner, or 
 otherwise engaged in manual labour, . . . has 
 entered into, or works under a contract with an 
 employer, whether the contract be ... a contract 
 of service or a contract personally to execute any 
 work or labour." — The expression " court of sum- 
 mary jurisdiction " means (inter alia) a stipen- 
 diary magistrate : — Held, that a potter's printer, 
 under a contract with his employers to do work 
 in which he was assisted by " transferrers " whom 
 he himself engaged and paid, was a " workman " 
 within the Act, and liable in proceedings before a 
 magistrate to pay damages for a breach of his 
 contract with his employers, caused by his trans- 
 ferrers' refusal to do the work, although he was 
 ready and willing to do it. Geaejgek v. Aynes- 
 LEY. Beomley V, Tams - 6 ft, B. D. 182 
 
 III. MASTER AND SERVANT- WAGES. 
 
 Payment in Public-houses prohibited.] By 
 46 & 47 Vict. c. 31 {Payment of Wages in Public 
 houses Prohibition Act, 1883), s. 3, no wages are to 
 be paid to any workman at or within any public- 
 house, beer-shop, or place for the sale of any spirits, 
 wine, cyder, or other spirituous or fermented liquor, 
 or any office, garden, or place belonging thereto or 
 occupied tlierewith, save and except such -wages as 
 are paid by the resident oimier or occupiers of such 
 public-house, beer-shop, or place to any workmen 
 bona fide employed by him. 
 
 Eoery person who contravenes or fails to comply 
 with or permits any person to contravene or fail to 
 comply icith the Act is guilty of an offence against 
 the Act. 
 
 And in the event of any wages being paid by any 
 person in contravention of the provisions of the Act 
 for or on behalf of any employer, such employee- 
 shall himself be guilty of an offence against the Act, 
 unless he proves that he had taken all reasonable 
 
( 869 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 870 ) 
 
 III. MASTER AND SEEVANT— WAGES —oo»M. 
 
 means in his power for enforcing tlie promsions of 
 the Act and to prevent such contravention. 
 
 By sect. 4 every person who is guilty of an offenee 
 against the Act is liable to a penalty not exceeding 
 £10 for each offence ; and all offences against the 
 Act may he prosecuted and all penalties under the 
 Act may he recovered hy any person summarily in 
 manner provided hy the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Ads. 
 
 Sect. 2 defines "worjmian'' to mean any person 
 who is a lahourer, servant in husbandry, journey- 
 man, artificer, handicraftsman, or is otherwise 
 engaged in manual labour, whether under the age 
 of twenty-one years or above that age ; hut does not 
 include a domestic or menial servant, nor any 
 person employed in or about any mine to which the 
 Coal Mines Begulation Act, 1872, or the Metal- 
 liferous Mines Begulation Act, 1872, applies. , 
 
 1. Attachment of Debts — Garnishee Order 
 
 — Wages Attachment Abolition Act, 1870 (33 & 34 
 Vict. c. 30), s. 1 — Salary of Secretary attachable.'] 
 The salary of a secretary to a company amount- 
 ing to £200 a year is not " wages " of a " servant " 
 within the Wages Attachment Abolition Act 
 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 30), and is therefore not ex- 
 empted from attachment by that Act. Gordon 
 V. Jennings - 9 ft. B. D. 45 
 
 2. Forfeiture of Wages — Employer and 
 
 Worlcmen — Employers and Workmen Act, 1875 
 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 90), s. 11— Wages due hut not 
 payable — Piece Work — Women.] A weaver, a 
 ■woman subject to the provisions of the Factory 
 Acts, was employed at a null in which amongst 
 the rules were rule 15, that no person shall leave 
 his or her work without giving fourteen days' 
 previous notice, such notice to be given on a 
 Saturday, and rule 16, that any person leaving 
 vrithout giving such notice " shall forfeit all 
 wages then due, or earned, or unpaid." She was 
 paid by the piece and all work done was booked 
 up at three o'clock on the Wednesday afternoon 
 in each week, and paid for on the following Sat- 
 urday, all work booked after three o'clock on the 
 Wednesday afternoon being carried forward to the 
 following week. She left the mill before three 
 o'clock on a Wednesday afternoon without giving 
 the required notice, having previously carried in 
 and had booked certain work which she had com- 
 pleted. On the tbllowing Saturday she applied 
 for the wages due at the time she left and when 
 she had completed her work, but payment was 
 refused on the ground that the same was forfeited 
 by rules 15 and 16. No claim was, however, 
 made for damage sustained by the employer. — 
 The 11th section of the Employers and Workmen 
 Act, 1875, enacts that " in the case of a child, 
 young person, or woman, subject to the provisions 
 of the Factory Acts, any forfeiture on the ground 
 of absence or leaving work shall not be deducted 
 from or set off against a claim for wages or other 
 sum due for work done before such absence or 
 leaving work, except to the amount of the damage, 
 if any, which the employer may have sustained 
 by reason of such absence or leaving work" : — 
 Held, that the above facts did not shew a weekly 
 hiring at weekly wages, but shewed that the price 
 for the work done and booked when the weaver 
 left on the Wednesday was then earned and due, 
 
 III. MASTER AND SERVANT— WAGES -conJd. 
 
 though not then payable, and that the samo 
 would have been forfeited by rules 15 and 16, ■ 
 but that as there was no damage and the weaver 
 was a woman subject to the Factory Acts she was 
 protected by the said 11th section, and could not 
 be deprived of what she had so earned. Wabbi'k- 
 TON V. Hbywobth - - 6 Q. B. D, 1 
 
 MASTER AND SERVANT— Apprentice 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 1 ; 9 Q. B. D. 636 
 
 See Appbenticb. 1, 2. 
 
 Negligence — Unsafe premises — Ignorance 
 
 of servant 13 Q. B, D. 269 
 
 See Neglioence— Liability. 7. 
 
 MASTER OF SHIP— Disbursements 8 P. D. 48 
 
 See Ship — ^Mabitime Lien. 4. 
 Sale by - 10 P. D. 13 ; 16 Ch. D. 574 
 
 See Ship — ^Mastee. 1, 2. 
 MASTER OF THE ROILS— Jurisdiction 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 105 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 1. 
 MATERIAL MEN— Wages— Lien— Priority 
 
 See Ship— Maritime Lien. 5. [9 P. D. 3T 
 MATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT, 1884 
 
 See Pbactioe — Divorce — •Ebstitution: 
 OP Conjugal Eights — Statutes. 
 
 MAUEITIirS— Law of - 8 App. Cas. 296 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 413- 
 
 See Colonial Law — Mauritius. 1, 2. 
 
 MAXIMS OF LAW — "Actio personalis moritur 
 
 cum persona " - - 15 Q, B. D. 565 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 
 Change of Parties. 4. 
 
 "Actio personalis moritur cum persons," 
 
 [21Ch. D. 484; 24Ch. D. 439; 
 [9Q. B. D. 110 
 /?ee Executor — Actions. 1,2,3. 
 
 " Interest reipublicse ut sit finis litium " 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 141 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 7. 
 
 " Nemo debet bis vexari pro unS. et eS-deni; 
 
 causa"- - 14Q. B. D. 141 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 7. 
 
 " Omnia prsesumuntur rite acta " 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 69S 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife 2.. 
 
 " Qui prior est tempore potior est jure " 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 424 
 See Company — Shares— Transfer. 2. 
 
 " Quicquid plantatur solo solo cedlt " 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 295 ; 8 App. Cas. 195 
 See Mine — Working. 1. 
 
 MAYOR — Borough without commission of peace 
 —Jurisdiction - 7 Q. B. D. 548 
 
 See Contract — Validity. 1. 
 
 MAYOR'S COTTRT- 
 
 London. 
 under 
 
 Court. 
 
 Court — Matoe's 
 
 MEASURE 
 
 See Weights and Measures — Statutes. 
 
 MEASURE OF DAMAGES — Abandonment of 
 railway — Landowner 25 Ch. D. 261 
 
 See Bail WAY Company — Abandonment. 
 2. 
 
 2 F 2 
 
(, 871 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 872 ) 
 
 MEASUEE OF DA1ILA.QES— continued. 
 
 Carrier — Liability for delay in transmission 
 
 of goods- - - 9Q. B. D. 582 
 
 See Oakeiek — Damages. 
 Collision - 8 P. D. 109 ; 10 P. D. 167 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 1, 3. 
 Collision — Compulsory pilotage 8 P. D. 218 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 4. 
 Guarantee - 16 Ch. D. 290 
 
 See Pkincipal and Subety — Contkact. 
 
 Improper sale by solicitor - 16 Ch. D. 393 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 7. 
 
 Misrepresentation in prospectus of company 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 301 
 See Company — Peospeotus. 3. 
 
 Principal and agent — Consignment of goods 
 
 not of description ordered 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 797 
 See Peincipal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 3. 
 
 Warranty of authority - 24 Ch. D. 367 
 
 See Pkinoipal and Agent — Agent's 
 
 AUTHOEITY. 2. 
 
 MEDICAI OFFICEE— Action by- Consent of 
 Charity Commissioners - 25 Ch. D. 39 
 See Chaeity — Commissioners. 5. 
 
 MEDICAI PRACTICE— Sale of - 20 Ch. D. 705 
 
 See Speoipio Peepoemanoe. 4. 
 
 MEDICAL FRACTVnOS'ER—ViK[ualified Person 
 — Bight to sue — Apotliecaries Act (55 Geo. 3, c. 194), 
 «. U— Medical Act, 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 90), 
 ss. 32, 40.] The Act 55 Geo. 3, c. 194, prohibit- 
 ing medical practice by unqualified persons is not 
 repealed by implication by the Medical Act, 
 1858. — The Defendant, a duly qualified medical 
 practitioner, agreed ■with the Plaintiff, a medical 
 practitioner not duly qualified, but who was de- 
 scribed in the agreement as " medical practi- 
 tioner," to serve the Plaintiff as assistant in 
 his profession as a medical practitioner, and not 
 to practise at B. vrithin five years after the close 
 of the engagement. The Plaintiff applied for an 
 injunction to prevent the Defendant from prac- 
 tising at E. in breach of this agreement : — Held, 
 by Pearson, J., that the Medical Act of 1858 does 
 not prohibit unqualified persons from practising 
 medicine, its object being only to enable the public 
 to distinguish between qualified and unqualified 
 practitioners — that the use by an unqualified per- 
 .son in a private agreement with another medical 
 man, of any of the titles for the wilful use of 
 which by an unqualified person, for the purpose 
 of deceiving the public, penalties are imposed by 
 sect. 40 of the Act, is not an offence within that 
 .section — that the agreement therefore was not 
 Illegal, and that the Plaintiff could enforce its 
 terms, and was entitled to an injunction. — The 
 Defendant appealed, and on appeal shewed that 
 the Plaintiff had given various certificates of 
 cause of death, which shewed that the Plaintiff 
 had attended the deceased persons during their 
 last illness, and from which it was to be infeiTed 
 that he attended patients in the way in which a 
 medical practitioner ordinarily attends, and in 
 fact personally acted as an apothecary: — Seld, 
 that his doing so was made illegal by the Act 
 55 Geo. 3, c. 194, s. 14, that the agreement there- 
 
 MEDICAL PEACTITIONEE— coniMweiJ. 
 fore was to assist the Plaintiff in carrying on a 
 business which he could not lawfully carry on, 
 and that the agreement was illegal and could not 
 be enforced : — Senible, if the Plaintiff had carried 
 on his business by means of duly qualified assist- 
 ants, without personally acting as a physician, 
 surgeon, or apothecary, the agreement might 
 have been legal. Davies v. Makuna 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 596 
 
 MEDICAI EELIEE— Municipal election. 
 
 See Municipal Coepobation — Election 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Parliament — ^Vote. 
 
 See Paeliament — ^Feanohise — Statutes. 
 
 MEDICAL WITNESS - 18 Ch. D. 26 
 
 See Lunatic— Inquisition. 1. 
 
 MEETING or CEEDITOES — Bankruptcy — 
 Scheme of arrangement 25 Ch. D. 266 
 See Bankeuptcy— Annulment. 3. 
 
 Composition 18 Ch. D. 488 ; 20 Ch. D. 281 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 2, 3. 
 
 Liquidation - 19 Ch. D. 367 ; 24 Ch. D. 35 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Liquidation. 6, 13. 
 
 MEETING OF SHAEEHOLDEES — Fourteen 
 days' notice — Computation of time 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Company — Eeduction op Capital. 
 5. 
 Poll - 29 Ch. D. 159 
 
 See Company — Management. 3. 
 
 Power of 21 Ch. D. 183 ; 23 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Company — Dieeotob's Appoint- 
 ment. 1, 2. 
 Power of — Gratuities to directors and ser- 
 vants - 23 Ch. D. 654 
 See Company — Management. 2. ^ 
 
 Proxies - 23 Ch, D. 14 
 
 See Company — Management. 4. 
 
 MELBOURNE HAEBOUE TRITST - 9 App. Cas. 
 See Colonial Law — Vicxoeia. 4. [365 
 
 MEMBEE OF CLUB— Expulsion 17 Ch. D. 615 
 See Club. 
 
 MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION. 
 
 See Cases under Company — ^Memoean- 
 
 DUM and AeTICLES. 
 
 — Subscriber of - - 25 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Company— Dibeotoe's Qualifica- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 MERCHANT SEAMEN PAYMENT OF WAGES 
 AND EATING ACT, 1880, b. 5, applied 
 to foreign ships. 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS. 
 
 See Cases, Statutes and Gazette vmder 
 Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts. 
 
 MERGER— Lease— Easement - 25 Ch, D, 659 ; 
 [10 App, Cas. 590 
 
 See Light — Title. 5. 
 
 Mortgage debt— Judgment - 22 Ch. D. 98 
 
 See Judgment. 2. 
 
( 873 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 874 ) 
 
 MEESEY — Launch. — Eeasonable precautions 
 
 [7 P. D. 817 ; 8 P. D. 119 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 6, 7. 
 
 -METEE— Waterworks company - 26 Ch. D. 443 
 
 See Waterworks Company. 3. 
 
 METROPOLIS :— 
 
 I. Building Acts 
 II. Commons Act 
 III. Management Acts 
 
 Col. 
 
 873 
 
 874 
 
 - 874 
 
 (a.) General Line op Buildings. 
 (6.) Nuisance. 
 (o.) Bates. 
 (d) Se-webs. 
 (e.) Streets. 
 (/.) Vestry, 
 IV. Police Acts - - 884 
 
 V. Poor Acts - - 884 
 
 VI. Public Carriages Acts 884 
 
 VII. Valuation Acts - - - 884 
 
 City op London. 
 
 See London. 
 
 I. METEOPOLIS— BTTILDING ACTS. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict, c. 14, amends the Metro- 
 politan Building Act, 1855, and the Acts amend- 
 ing the same, and confers further powers on the 
 Metropolitan Board of Works with respect to the 
 removal of temporary buildings and structures, and 
 with respect to dilapidated, neglected, and dangerous 
 structures. 
 
 1. Party- Wall — Dangerous Structure— 
 
 Corrwlaint against one Owner — Expenses incurred 
 by Board of Works — Reasonableness of Charges — 
 Metropolitan Building Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Vict, 
 c. 122), Part II., ss. 73, 97.] A structure -within 
 the metropolis having been surveyed by the Board 
 of Works under 18 & 19 Vict. c. 122, ss. 69, 73, an 
 order was made by a magistrate for the owner to 
 take down or otherwise secure the party-walls. 
 Upon his default the board themselves executed 
 the works and took out a summons against the 
 owner for the expenses incurred : — Held, first, 
 that upon the hearing of such summons the owner 
 could not object to his being made liable for ex- 
 penses actually incurred, by merely shewing that 
 they included items which were in excess of the 
 market price of labour and materials at the date 
 of the execution of the works. Secondly, that he 
 could not require that the other owners of the 
 party-walls should be summoned in order that 
 the expenses might be distributed among them, 
 Debenham v. Metropolitan Board op Works 
 
 [6 a. B. S. 112 
 
 2. Party-wall — United Buildings — Ap- 
 peal — Conmction — Metropolitan Building Act, 
 1855 (18 & 19 Viet. v. 122), ss. 27, 28, 106).] By 
 sect. 9 of the Metropolitan Building Act, 1855, an 
 addition to an old building is subject to the re- 
 gulations of the Act ; by sect. 27, rule 4, certain 
 buildings containing more than 216,000 cubic feet 
 are to be divided by party walls ; and by sect. 28, 
 rule 2, no buildings shall be united, if when so 
 united they will be in contravention of the Act. 
 A new building was added to an old building, 
 the united building containing more than 216,000 
 cubic feet : — Held, that the united building was 
 
 I. METEOPOLIS— BUILDING MUtS— continued. 
 not within the words of the Act, and need not be 
 divided by a party-wall. — An appeal from the 
 decision of a magistrate will lie under sect. 106 of 
 the Act, although there has not been a conviction. 
 Scott v. Leqg - - - 10 Q. B. D. 236 
 
 3. Site of Building — Removal of fsecal, 
 
 animal, or vegetable Matter from Site — By-laws 
 of Metropolitan Board of Works, Construction of — 
 Metropolis Management and Building Acts Amend- 
 ment Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 32), ss. 14, 16.] 
 By the Metropolis Management and Building Acts 
 Amendment Act, 1878, sect. 16, the Metropolitan 
 Board of Works were empowered to make by- 
 laws with respect to " the foundations of houses, 
 buildings, and other erections, and the sites of 
 houses, buildings, and other erections to be con- 
 structed after the passing of this Act, and the 
 mode in which and the materials with which 
 such foundations and sites shall be made, formed, 
 excavated, filled up, prepared, and completed for 
 securing stability, the prevention of fires, and for 
 purposes of health." By sect. 141heterm "site" 
 is defined to mean " the whole space to be occu- 
 pied by such house, buUding, or other erection 
 between the level of the bottom of the foundations 
 and the level of the base of the walls." The 
 Metropolitan Board of Works made the following 
 by-law : " No house, building, or other erection 
 shall be erected upon any site or portion of any 
 site which shall have been filled up or covered 
 with any material impregnated or mixed with any 
 fasoal, animal, or vegetable matter, or which shall 
 have been fiUed up or covered with dust, or slop, 
 or other refuse, or in or upon which any such 
 matter or refuse shall have been deposited, unless 
 and until such matter or refuse shall have been 
 properly removed by excavations or otherwise 
 from such site " : — Held, that the meaning of the 
 word "site" in the by-law was governed by the 
 interpretation of that word in the Act, so that the 
 by-law did not authorize the Metropolitan Board 
 of Works to direct the removal of fsecal, animal, 
 or vegetable matter in the soil below the level of 
 the bottom of the foundations. Blashill v. 
 Chambers - 14 ft. B. D. 479 
 
 II. METEOPOLIS— COMMONS ACT. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 15 (^Commonable Rights 
 Compensation Act, 1882), provides for the better 
 application of moneys paid by way of compensa- 
 tion, under the provisions of the Lands Glauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845, and of railway and other 
 special Acts of Parliament, for the extinction of 
 commonable rights, or for lands, being common 
 lands or in the natwre thereof, the right to the soil 
 of which belongs to the commoners. 
 [See also Inclosure.] 
 
 III. METEOPOLIS— MANAGEMENT ACTS. 
 Board of Works.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. v. 33, 
 
 further amends 18 <fc 19 Vict. c. 120, and confers 
 additional members on the Metropolitan Board of 
 Works. 
 
 Infectious Diseases.] The Act 46 & 47 Viot.. 
 c. 35, makes better provision as regards the Metro- 
 polis for the isolation and treatment of persons 
 suffering from clwlera and other infectious diseases. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited as the Diseases Preven- 
 tion (Metropolis) Act, 1883. 
 
( 875 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 876 ) 
 
 III. METROPOLIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 
 Sect. 2. Managers of the Metropolitan Asylum 
 District to he a local authority for certain purposes 
 of the Diseases Prevention Act, 1855. 
 
 Sect. 3 empowers the managers to contract with 
 hospital authorities for the reception of cholera 
 patients. 
 
 Sect. 4 provides for expenses of managers and 
 other local authority. 
 
 Sect. 5 empowers vestries and district hoards to 
 borrow for hospitals. 
 
 Sect. 6. Managers to provide places for emharlta- 
 tion, &c., of patients. 
 
 Sect. 7. Admission into hospital of person suffer- 
 ing infectious disease to he no disqualification of or 
 for any right or privilege. 
 
 Sect. 8 empowers Local Government Board to 
 assign to port sanitary authority of Fort of London 
 the duties, &c., of an urban sanitary authority 
 under the Public Health Act, 1875. 
 
 Sect. 9. Saving for duties, &c., of local autho- 
 nties. 
 
 Sect. 10 empowers Local Government Board to 
 maJce regulations. 
 
 Sect. 11 extends Diseases Prevention Act, 1885, 
 to hamlet of Nottingham. 
 
 Sect. 12. Definitions. 
 
 Sect. 13. Act not to continue in force after the 
 1st of September, 1884, except so far as regards 
 any property acquired, act done, liability incurred 
 under it prior to that date, and except as regards 
 the Port Sanitary Authority of London. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, continues this Act 
 to the 31st of December, 1886. 
 
 Cholera.] Begulations of 12ft July, 1883, /or 
 the Port of London made by the Local Government 
 Board under the Sanitary Act, 1866, s. 52, and 
 Public Sealth Act, 1875, s. 130 L. G. 1883, p. 3533 
 
 The Act il & is Vict. c. 60, provides that loorA-s 
 carried out under s. 6 of 46 & 47 Vict. c. 35, shall 
 he deemed to have been and to be purposes for 
 which money may be borrowed in pursuance of the 
 Metropolitan Poor Act, 1867, and other Acts. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 72, s. 9, amends 29 & 30 
 Vict. c. 90, s. 19 (Sanitary Act, 1866). 
 
 Loans by the Metropolitan Board of Worts.] 
 The Act 44 * 45 Vict. c. 48 {Metropolitan Board 
 of Works Money Act, 1881), as amended by 45 & 46 
 Vict. c. 33, and the Acts 46 & 47 Vict. c. 27 
 {Metropolitan Board of Worhs Money Act, 1883), 
 and 47 * 48 Vict. c. 50 {Metropolitan Board of 
 Worlis Money Act, 1884), amend the Acts relating 
 to the raising of money by the Metropolitan Board 
 of Works. 
 
 The Act 48 (£-49 Vict. c. 50 {Metropolitan Board 
 of Works Money Act, 1885), amends the earlier 
 Acts relating to the raising of money by the Metro- 
 politan Board of Works. 
 
 Open Spaces.] The Act 44 * 45 Vict. c. 34 {the 
 Metropolitan Open Spaces Act, 1880), amends the 
 Metropolitan Open Spaces Act, 1877. 
 
 Sect. 1. Interpretation clause. 
 
 Sect. 2. Poioer to trustees to transfer certain 
 open spaces to local authority. 
 
 Sect. 3. Power to any mvner to transfer open 
 spaces to local authority. 
 
 Sect, 4. Power to transfer disused burial grounds 
 to loccd anthnrity. 
 
 Sect. 5. Potcejs and duties of local authority. 
 
 III. METEOPOIIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 
 Sect. 6. By-laws. 
 
 Sect. 7. Metropolitan Board and vestry or dis- 
 trict board may carry out Act jointly. 
 
 Sect. 8. Provision for extra-parocliidl places. 
 
 Sect. 9. Provision for compensation. 
 
 Sect. 10. Expenses. 
 
 Sect. 11. Extent of Act. 
 
 Sect. 12. Application in City of London. 
 
 Sect. 13. Short title. 
 
 Offensive Business.] Tlie Order of Metropolitan 
 Board of Works, under 37 & 38 Vict. v. 67, ». 3, 
 declaring the business of a gut scraper to be an 
 offensive business, confii-med by Local Government 
 Board, 4ft January, 1881 - L. G. 1881, p. 130 
 
 Streets.] The Act 45 & 46 Vict. e. 14, amends 
 the 18 & 19 Vict. 0.120 {an Act for the better Local 
 Management of the Metropolis), and the Ads amend- 
 ing the same, and confers further powers upon 
 the Metropolitan Board of Works with respect to the 
 management of existing streets and thefonnation 
 of new streets for carriage traffic or foot traffic 
 only. 
 
 (a.) General Like of Buildikcs. 
 
 1. Appeal— t-Jasijce oftlie Peace — Quarter 
 
 Sessions — Whether Appeal lies to Quarter Sessions 
 from Order of Justice for Demolition of Building 
 — Metropolis Management Act, 1855 (18 & 19 
 Vict. c. 120), s. 231 — Metropolis Management 
 Amendment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 102), s. 75.] 
 An appeal to quarter sessions will not lie against 
 the order of a justice dii-ecting the demolition 
 of buildings under sect. 75 of the Metropolis 
 Management Amendment Act, 1862. — By sect. 231 
 of the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, any 
 person aggrieved by any adjudication of a justice 
 " with respect to any penalty or forfeiture under 
 the provisions of the Act " may appeal to quarter 
 sessions.- — ^By sect. 75 of the Metropolis Manage- 
 ment Amendment Act, 1862 (which, by sect. 110, 
 is to be construed as one Act with the Act 
 of 1855), where a building is erected beyond the 
 general line of buildings in a street without the 
 consent of the Metropolitan Board of Works, a 
 justice of the peace is empowered, upon complaint 
 made and after inquiry held as the Act directs, 
 to order the owner or occupier to demolish the 
 building, and in default of compliance with the 
 order the vesti'y of the parish or Board of Works 
 for the district shall demolish the building, and 
 may remove and sell the materials, and recover 
 the expenses of so doing from the owner or occu- 
 pier: — Held, that the order of a justice directing 
 the demolition of a building under sect. 75 of the 
 Act of 1872, was not an adjudication " with re- 
 spect to a penalty or forfeiture " within sect, 231 
 of the Act of 1855, and therefore that no appeal 
 to quarter sessions would lie against the order. 
 The Qceen v. Justices op MirDLESEX. Be 
 Elsdon - 9 Q, B D. 41 
 
 2, Certificate of AroHteot — Metropolis 
 
 Management Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 102), s. 75.] 
 The certificate of the superintending architect of 
 the Metropolitan Board of Works mode imder the 
 Metropolis Management Amendment Act, 1862 
 (25 & 26 Vict. 0. 102), s. 75, and fixing the " general 
 line of buildings " in a road is conclusive as to a 
 building erected before the certificate is made; 
 
( 877 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 8-8 ) 
 
 III. METROPOLIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 continued. 
 (a.) General Line of Buildings — continued. 
 and on the hearing of a summons (issued after the 
 making of the certificate) for an offence under 
 s. 75 alleged to have been committed in respect 
 of such building, the justice has no jurisdiction 
 to review the architect's decision or decide for 
 himself whether the line fixed by the certificate 
 is the true general line. — So held, affirming the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal. — Simpson v. 
 Smith (Law Eep. 6 C. P. 87) overruled. Space- 
 man V. Plumstead Board oir Works 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 878 ; 10 App. Cas. 229 
 
 3. House on Vacant land — Metropolis 
 
 Management Amendment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. 
 <j. 102), ss. 74, 75 — House at Comer of Two 
 Streets — Order of Magistrate — Reduction into 
 Writing — Time of Service.'] The Plaintifl' pur- 
 chased a large piece of land abutting on a high- 
 way called the K. Eoad, on -which were standing 
 a public-house and several other houses fronting 
 the highway. He pulled down the house, and 
 made a new street through the piece of land, 
 running into the K. Eoad at right angles with it, 
 which he called D. Gardens, and sold portions of 
 the land on each side of the new street to a 
 huUder. The builder erected a row of houses in 
 D. Gardens, and the superintending architect of 
 the Metropolitan Board certified the general line 
 of buildings in D. Gardens. The Plaintiff built 
 & row of houses fronting the K. Eoad, one of 
 which was at the corner of the K. Eoad and D. 
 Oardens, The side of the corner house abutting 
 on D. Gardens projected beyond the general line 
 of buildings in D. Gardens. The house was not 
 built on the site of any one of the old houses in 
 the K, Eoad, but on the site of part of the garden 
 of the public-house. A magistrate's order having 
 Saeen obtained by the vestry for the removal of the 
 projecting part of the corner house, the Plaintiff 
 brought an action to restrain the vestry from in- 
 terfering with his house: — Held, reversing the 
 decision of Bacon, V.C., (1.) That the general line 
 of buildings in D. Gardens extended to the K. 
 Eoad ; (2.) that the projecting part of the corner 
 house was anew building and came within sect. 75 
 of the Metropolis Management Amendment Act, 
 1862, and not within sect. 74, which applies to 
 existing buildings ; and (3.) that although the 
 •corner house formed part of a row in K. Eoad it 
 was also in D. Gardens, and the owner was bound 
 to keep it within the general line of buildings of 
 D. Gardens. The action was therefore dismissed. 
 — Lord AncTdand v. Westminster District Board of 
 Works (Law Eep. 7 Ch. 597) distinguished. — An 
 order was made by a magistrate under sect. 75 of 
 the Metropolis Management Amendment Act, 
 1862, for pulling down the projecting part of a 
 building within eight weeks. The order was 
 made in the presence of the owner who was sum- 
 moned, but was not reduced into wi'iting and 
 served on him till the day on which the eight 
 weeks expired : — Held, that the order was bind- 
 ing ; the Act being silent as to service of the 
 order on the owner, although it requires to be in 
 writing. Baelow v. Kensington Vestry 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 362 
 [Reversed by the House of lords.] 
 
 III. METROPOLIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 
 (6.) Nuisance. 
 
 4. Accumulation of Water from a Sewer — 
 
 Liability of Metropolitan Board of Works — 
 Metropolis Local Management Act, 1855 (18 & 19 
 Vict. c. 120), ss. 135, 136— ^cf of God.1 The 
 Defendants, under the powers conferred upon 
 them by the Metropolis Local Management Act, 
 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. o. 120), ss. 135, 136, con- 
 structed, and properly constructed, a sewer having 
 its outfall at Deptford Creek, a little above the 
 Plaintiff's coal wharf, with water-gates which it 
 was the duty of the person in charge of them to 
 open when the water within them became eight 
 feet deep, — a depth which was reached only in 
 heavy rainfalls. On the 29th of August, 1879, 
 there was an exceptionally heavy rainfall, and it 
 became necessary to open the water-gates to pre- 
 vent a large district from being flooded. This 
 having been done, and the rain increasing in 
 violence, the rush of water from the sewer carried 
 away a portion of the Plaintiff's wharf, with a 
 barge moored thereto, and a quantity of coals de- 
 posited therein and thereon : — Held, that the 
 injury complained of was occasioned by the open- 
 ing of the water-gates, and not by the act of God, 
 and therefore the Defendants were prim^ facie 
 liable for the damage done, within the principle 
 of Fletcher v. Rylands (Law Eep. 3 H. L. 330) ; 
 but that, as they were a public body acting in the 
 discharge of a public duty, and as that which 
 happened was only the inevitable result of what 
 Parliament had authorized them to do, they were 
 not liable. DixON u. Metropolitan Board of 
 Works - .. 7 Q. B. D, 418 
 
 5. Flap of Water-Meter — Highway — Im- 
 proper State of Flap— Liability of Vestry — 18({; 19 
 Vict. 0. 120, ss. 96, 116.] A water-meter, which 
 was the property of a water company and used for 
 measuring the water supplied by the company to 
 the Defendants, the vestry of a parish, for water- 
 ing the streets, was placed by the Defendants in 
 a box of theirs sunk in the footway of one of the 
 streets and covered with an iron flap. The De- 
 fendants as siich vestry were by sect. 96 of the 
 Metropolis Management Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Vict, 
 c. 120), the surveyors of highways, and by sect. 116 
 authorized to cause the streets in their parish to 
 be watered. The Plaintiff whilst walking along 
 the street stepped on the iron flap, and by reason 
 of its having been worn smooth and become slip- 
 pery and dangerous, he fell and was injured. In 
 an action by him against the Defendants for 
 damages for such injury : — Held, that though the 
 Defendants might not be liable as surveyors of the 
 highway for negligence in not keeping the iron 
 flap in a proper state, tliey were in their capacity 
 as the authority for watering the street, in which 
 capacity they had placed the iron flap there. — 
 White V. Hindley Local Board (Law Eep. 10 Q. B. 
 219) affirmed. Blackmore v. Vestry op Mile 
 End Old Town - - - 9 Q. B. D, 451 
 
 lAnd see Highway^Nuisance.] 
 
 6. ITrinal — Dedication of Court to Public 
 
 — No Thoroughfare — Metropolis Management Act, 
 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. c. 120), s. 88.] A court 
 which was not a thoroughfare had for seventy 
 or eighty years been at all hours open to the 
 
( 879 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 880 ) 
 
 III. METROPOLIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 continued, 
 (b.) Nuisance — continued. 
 public, and liad been paved, lighted, and cleansed 
 by the parish vestry, and the owners of the soil 
 were not shewn to have during that time exer- 
 cised any rights of ownership over the soil of the 
 court : — Held, by Malina, V.C., that the court had 
 been dedicated to the public so as to bring it 
 under the vestry according to the Metropolis 
 Local Management Act. — XJnder the Metropolis 
 Local Management Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. 120), 
 s. 88, the vestry has power to provide and main- 
 tain urinals in situations where they deem such 
 accommodation to be required : — Held, by Malins, 
 V.C., that any question whether one place or an- 
 other was more fit for the erection of an urinal 
 must be left to the decision of the vestry; but 
 that the vestry would be controlled by the Court 
 if they acted in an unreasonable manner and occa- 
 sioned a nuisance to the owners of adjoining pro- 
 perty : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that as the 
 erection of an urinal was not necessarily n, nui- 
 sance, the provision of the Act authorizing the 
 vestry to erect urinals did not empower them to 
 erect one where it would be a nuisance to the 
 owners of adjoining property, there being no 
 words in the Act which expressly or by necessary 
 implication authorized them to create a nuisance. 
 Vebnon v. Vestkt op St. James, Westminstek 
 
 [leCh. D 449 
 
 7. Wire across Street — Telephone Com- 
 pany — Meiropolis Management Act, 1855 (18 & 19 
 Vict. V. 120), 8. 96 — '' Street" — Property of 
 Vestry or District Board in " Street " — Telegraph 
 Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 112), ss. 2, 3, 12— 
 Teleqraph Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 110), s. 2— 
 Telegraph Act, 1869 (32 * 33 Vict. c. 73), 88. 2, 3 
 — "The Company " ^-" Telegraph Company" — 
 Consent of Local Authority — Trespass — Injunc- 
 tion.'] The Metropolis Management Act, 1855, 
 does not by sect. 96 confer upon a vestry or a board 
 of works (constituted under that statute) such a 
 property in the streets situate witbin their 
 district, as to entitle them to maintain an action 
 for an injunction against the erection of a tele- 
 phone wire across a street, the telephone wire 
 being erected at a great height and causing no 
 appreciable danger to the public or to the traffic 
 in the street. — Coverdale v. Charlton (4 Q. B. D. 
 104) followed.— Notwithstanding the Telegraph 
 Act, 1869, sect. 3, a telephone company registered 
 under the Companies Act, 1862, and not incor- 
 porated under any special Act, does not fall with- 
 in the phrase " the company " used in the Tele- 
 graph Act, 1863, and therefore is not forbidden 
 by sect. 12 of the last-named Act to erect its wires 
 across a street, unless the consent of the body 
 having the control of the street is obtained. 
 Board op Woeks fob Wandsworth District v. 
 United Telephone Compahy 13 ft. B. D. 904 
 
 (c.) Bates. 
 8. Sealing Order — Order of Board to Over- 
 seers to levy Rate — Issue of Order — 18 & 19 Vict, 
 c. 120, ss. 158-161.] By the Metropolis Manage- 
 ment Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. c. 120), sect. 158, 
 every vestry and district board shall from time to 
 time " by order under their seal require " the 
 
 III. METROPOLIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS— 
 continv^d. 
 (c.) Kates — continued. 
 overseers of their parish to levy the sums which 
 such vestry or board may require for defraying 
 the expenses of the execution of the Act. — By 
 sect. 161 the overseers " to whom any such order as 
 aforesaid is issued shaU levy the amount men- 
 tioned therein according to the exigency there- 
 of": — Held (per Stephen and Mathew, JJ., 
 Day, J., dissenting), that such an order became 
 effective when sealed, and service of it on the 
 overseers was not necessary to authorize them to 
 levy rates, but that rates made by overseers in 
 pursuance of such order, after notice of it having 
 been sealed, were valid. Glen v. Oveeseees of 
 FuLHAM - - 14 ft. B. D. 328 
 
 (d.) Sewers. 
 9. Metropolitan Main Drainage — Metro- 
 politan Area, Persons outside — Bight to use Drain- 
 age — Injunction — Metropolis Management Act, 
 1855 (18 * 19 Vict. c. 120), s. 135— Metropolis 
 Management Amendment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict, 
 c. 102), s. 61.] The Metropolis Management Act, 
 1855, vested in the Plaintiff's an open sewer, called 
 the Stamford Brook. — The Metropolis Manage- 
 ment Amendment Act, 1862, s. 61, enacted thaii 
 no person should make or branch any sewer or 
 drain, or make any opening into any sewer vested 
 in the Plaintiffs, without their previous consent 
 in writing ; provided that any person might, with 
 such consent, at his own expense, make or branch 
 any drain into any such sewer in such manner as 
 the Plaintiff should direct. After the passing of 
 the Act of 1855, the Plaintiffs allowed four old 
 cottages belonging to the Defendants, on land 
 jast outside the MetropoUtan area and bounded by 
 the Stamford Brook, to continue to drain through 
 an eighteen-inoh brick drain into Stamford Brook, 
 They subsequently, at the request of the Defen- 
 dants, who paid half the cost, covered in the 
 brook and converted it into a main sewer. Whem 
 they did this, they made a drain-eye in the newly 
 covered-in sewer as a communication lor the 
 eighteen-inch drain. — The Defendants afterwards 
 built other cottages on the same land, and claimed 
 the right to use the eighteen-inch drain for the 
 purpose of draining the new cottages through the 
 communication into the sewer : — Held, 1. That as 
 the Defendants had not proved any prescriptive 
 light to use the eighteen-inch drain for the sewage 
 of the new cottages, nor obtained the written 
 consent of the Plaintiffs for that purpose unden 
 sect. 61 of the Act of 1862, they were not entitled 
 to use the eighteen-inch drain for any other pur- 
 poses than those for which they used it when the 
 brook was covered in. 2. That, therefore, the 
 Plaintiffs were entitled to an injunction to restrain 
 the Defendants from permitting their additional 
 cottages, or any buildings other than the four old 
 cottages, to drain into the Stamford Brook. — Sem- 
 ble, that if the Plaintiffs had given their written 
 consent and fixed the size of the oommunioatiou. 
 under the 61st section of the Act of 1862, the De- 
 fendants could then have used the eighteen-inch 
 drain to the full extent of its capacity for all 
 purposes. Metropolitan Board op Works v. 
 London and North Western Railway Company 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 24a 
 
( 881 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 882 ) 
 
 in. METEOPOIIS — MAHAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 
 (e.) Stbeets. 
 
 10. GompulsoTy Purchase — 57 Geo. 3, 
 
 V. xxix., ss. 80, 82 — Severance — Vestry.^ A metro- 
 politan vestry required, for tHe purpose, of widen- 
 ing a street, a part of the buildings and site of 
 an orphanage that would leave a substantial por- 
 tion of the premisPB : — Held, that (the owners vrish- 
 ing to sell the part required only) the vestry could 
 not take the whole. Teuuere v. Vestky op St. 
 Maby Abbotts, Kensington - 30 Ch. D. 648 
 
 11. Formation of Streets — " Open at both 
 
 ends " — Metropolis Management Act, 1862 (25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 102), s. 98.] By the Metropolis Manage- 
 ment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Viot. o. 102), s. 98, no 
 road being of less width than forty feet shall here- 
 after be formed or laid out for building as a street 
 for the purposes of carriage traffic unless such 
 road be widened to the full width of forty feet, or 
 for the purposes of foot trafBc only unless such 
 road be widened to the full width of twenty feet, 
 " or " unless such streets respectively shall be open 
 at both ends : — Held, that such street must be of 
 the width prescribed and be also open at both 
 ends. Metkopolitan Boakd of Works v. Steed 
 
 [8 Q. B. S. 445 
 
 13. Paving New Street — Oicner of Land 
 
 bounding or abutting on new Street — Sailway in 
 Cutting — Bridge carrying new Street over Sailway 
 — Metropolis Management Acts, 1855 and 1862, 
 18 & 19 Vict. c. 120, ss. 96, 105, 250, and 25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 102, s. 77.] A railway line ran in a deep 
 cutting much below the level of a highway, which 
 was carried over the railway (nfearly at right 
 angles) by a bridge built by the railway company 
 under statutory powers and in pursuance of 
 sects. 46-51 of the EaQways Clauses Consoli- 
 dation Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. e. 20). The parapets 
 of the bridge consisted of two walls resting upon 
 arches which had their foundations (outside the 
 lines of the roadway) in the railway company's 
 land. The walls were not used by the company 
 otherwise than as fences for the bridge. The dis- 
 trict board of works having paved the highway, 
 which was admitted to be a new street within 
 sect. 105 of the Metropolis Management Act, 1855 
 (18 & 19 Vict. u. 120) -.—Held by Lords Black- 
 bum, Watson, and FitzGerald, reversing the deci- 
 sion of the Court of Appeal, that assuming the 
 fence walls to be the railway company's land, the 
 company were not " owners of land bounding or 
 abutting on " the highway within sect. 77 of the 
 Metropolis Management Act, 1862,(25 & 26 Viot. 
 c. 102), and were not liable as owners of the fence 
 walls to contribute to the expenses of paving. — 
 Held, also, by Lords Blackburn and Watson, that 
 the railway line and slopes being much below the 
 level of the highway, the company were not in 
 respect of such line and slopes " owners of land 
 bounding or abutting on" the highway within 
 the above section, and were not liable as owners 
 of the line and slopes to contribute to the expenses 
 of paving. Hackney District Board of Works 
 V. Great Eastern Kailwat Company 
 
 [9 Q, B. D. 412 ; 8 App. Cas. 687 
 
 13. Paving New Streets — " Owner " of 
 
 Zand — Land subject to Covenants — Mcjpenses of 
 
 III. METROPOLIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS— 
 
 continued. 
 (e.) Streets — continued, 
 paving New Street — Metropolis Management Act, 
 1855 (18 <fc 19 Vict, u, 120), s. 250— Metropolis 
 Management Amendment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict 
 c. 102), s. 77.] By the Metropolis Management 
 Act, 1855, s. 250, the word " owner " shall mean 
 the person for the time being receiving the rack- 
 rent of the lands or premises in connection with 
 which the word is used, or who would so receive 
 the same if such lands or premises were let at 
 a rack-rent ; and by the Metropolis Management 
 Amendment Act, 1862, s. 77 (which is to be read 
 as one with the Act of 1855) " owners " of land 
 abutting on any new street are made liable to con- 
 tribute towards the expenses of paving the same. 
 The Appellant having a strip of land about 4 
 inches wide and 265 feet in length, abutting upon 
 the north side of a new street, had erected a boun- 
 dary fence upon the land along its whole extent, 
 under a covenant to erect and for ever after main- 
 tain a fence thereon made with his vendor, who was 
 owner of the land adjoiningthe strip on the north 
 side : — Held, that the Appellant was the " owner " 
 of the strip of land within the meaning of sect. 250 
 of the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, and 
 therefore liable to contribute towards the ex- 
 pense of paving the new street. Williams ■». 
 Wandsworth Board of Works 13 Q. B. D. 311 
 
 14. Paving New Street — Power to make 
 
 Branch Drains to Sewer — Metropolis Management 
 Act, 1855 (18 <£ 19 Vict. c. 120), ss. 78, 250— 
 Metropolis Management Amendment Act, 1862 
 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 102), s. 112.] A builder made 
 drains from certain houses in a road to the boun- 
 dary of the forecourts of the houses. The road 
 was what is known as a builder's road, made 
 and coated with gravel and ballasted. The foot- 
 paths were made with gravel and kerbed with 
 granite. The houses on either side of the road 
 were not completed and inhabited, but the road 
 was open for carriages and foot-passengers. It 
 was lighted by the parish but had not been 
 taken to as a public road. The vestry made 
 branches from the drains into a sewer which 
 belonged to them and ran along the centre of 
 the road, and for that purpose tliey opened the 
 road and footway. The builder declined to repay 
 to the vestry the expenses inoun-ed thereby: — 
 Held, (1), that the road was not the less a street 
 within the definitions in sect. 250 of the Metropolis 
 Management Act, 1855, and sect. 112 of the Metro- 
 polis Management Amendment Act, 1862, because 
 it came trithin the definition of a new street in 
 the last-mentioned section ; — (2.) That sect. 78 of 
 the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, which 
 authorizes the opening of the pavement of any 
 street for the purpose of branching private drains 
 into a sewer, applies equally to streets and to 
 new streets ; — (3.) That, looking to the definition 
 of the word " pave" in sect. 112 of the Metropolis 
 Management Amendment Act, 1862, the road was 
 paved: — That, consequently, the vestry had 
 opened a part of the pavement of a street and 
 were entitled under sect. 78 of the Metropolis 
 Management Act, 1855, to recover the expenses 
 incurred by them. Hampstbad Vestry v. Hoopel 
 
 [15 Q. B, D. 662 
 
( 883 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 884 ) 
 
 III. METEOPOIIS — MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 contimied. 
 
 (/.) Vestbt. 
 15. Improper Expenditure of Bates — In- 
 junction — Vestrymen made Parties for Purpose of 
 Costs — Metropolis Management Act, 1855 (18 & 19 
 Vict. c. 120).] A metropolitan yestry incorporated 
 under the Act 18 & 19 Vict. o. 120, has no power 
 to apply the rates in paying the expenses of a 
 dinner or a ball, or other ceremonies in connection 
 with the opening of a new vestry hall. — A vestry 
 having passed resolutions authorizing such an 
 expenditure, an action was brought by the 
 Attorney-General, at the relation of a ratepayer, 
 and by the ratepayer as Plaintiff, against the 
 vestry and six of the vestrymen, who had pro- 
 posed, or seconded, or voted for the resolutions, 
 to restrain the proposed application of the rates. 
 The statement of claim did not allege that any of 
 the parish funds had been applied in the proposed 
 way, but it alleged an intention on the part of 
 the vestry so to apply the funds. No such inten- 
 tion was alleged on the part of the other Defen- 
 dants, and under the Act they had no control 
 over the funds. The statement of claim asked 
 that the individual Defendants might pay the 
 costs of the action, but costs wei'e not asked 
 against the vestry. On a motion for an interim 
 injunction against the vestry only, an order for a 
 perpetual injunction was consented to, but with- 
 out costs. The other Defendants delivered no 
 defences, and the Plaintiff moved for judgment 
 against them in default of pleading : — Meld, that 
 the individual Defendants were not properly made 
 parties for the purpose of obtaining costs from 
 them, and that the action must be dismissed as 
 against them. — Attorney- General v. Compton (1 Y. 
 & C. (Ch.) 417) distinguished.— Whether, if the 
 vestry had been made Uable for costs, they could 
 have recovered them from the members who had 
 induced them to act illegally, qusere. Attokney- 
 Gbnekal v. Vestey of Beemondbey 23 Ch. D. 60 
 
 16, Member interested in Contract — Act- 
 ing as Member — Penalty — Evidence — Minute-book 
 —18 & 19 Viet. c. 120, ss. 54, 60.] The brother 
 of the Defendant entered into a contract with a 
 vestry constituted under the Metropolis Manage- 
 ment Act, 1855, and in order to enable him to 
 carry it out, borrowed money from the Defendant, 
 who by way of security took an assignment of the 
 contract. Afterwards the Defendant was elected 
 a member of the vestry. An action for penalties 
 having been brought against the Defendant for 
 acting as member of the vestry, an attendance- 
 book of the members signed by the Defendant 
 and the minute-book of the vestry containing his 
 name as a member in attendance were put in as 
 evidence at the trial : — Held, that sect. 54 of the 
 Metropolis Management Act, 1855, applied to 
 contracts made as well before as after the election 
 of a member, and that the Defendant was " in- 
 terested " in the contract in question within the 
 meaning of that section ; that there was evidence 
 under sect. 60 that the Defendant had acted as 
 member of the vestry ; and that he was liable to 
 penalties for having acted after he had " ceased " 
 to be a member. Hunnings v. Williamson 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 533 
 
 17. Qualification of Vestryman— Jlfe^;-o- 
 
 III. METEOPOIIS— MANAGEMENT ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 (/.) Vestet — continued, 
 polis Management Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Viet. c. 
 120), s. 6 — Bating — Occupation.'] By 18 & 19 
 Vict. 0. 120 (Metropolis Management Act, 1855), 
 s. 6, " the vestry elected under this Act in any 
 parish shall consist of persons rated or assessed 
 to the relief of the poor upon a rental of not 
 less than £40 per annum; and no person shall 
 be capable of acting or being elected as one of 
 such vestry for any parish, unless he be the occu- 
 pier of a house, lands, tenements, or heredita- 
 ments in such parish, and be rated or assessed as 
 aforesaid upon such rental as aforesaid within 
 such parish": — Held, that to be qualified as a 
 vestryman under the Act a person must be the 
 occupier of real property in the parish and be 
 himself rated or assessed ip respect of such occu- 
 pation to the required amount. Mogg v. Olaek 
 
 [15 Q. E. D. 82 
 [AfBrmed by the Court of Appeal, 16 Q. B. D, 79.] 
 
 IV. METEOPOIIS— POLICE ACTS. 
 
 Streets.] The Act 48 * 49 Vict. c. 18, extends 
 limits of the Metropolitan Streets Act, 1867 (30 & 31 
 Vict. c. 134), to six miles. 
 
 Superannuation.] The 48 & 49 Vict. e. 68, 
 amends the Metropolitan Police Staff Superannua- 
 tion Act, 1875. 
 
 V. METEOPOIIS— POOE ACTS. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 36 (the Casual Poor 
 Act, 1882), amends the Pauper Inmate Discharge 
 and Megulation Act, 1871, prescribes the time 
 when a casual pauper may discharge himself from 
 a casual ward, and directs that persons obtaining 
 voor relief by false statements shall be dealt with 
 under sect. 3 of 5 Oeo. 4, v. 83. 
 
 VI. METEOPOIIS— PTJBIIC CAEEIAGES ACTS. 
 Stage Carriage — Licence to use — Matt- 
 
 ager— Injunction— 2 & 3 Wm. 4, u. 120—32 * 33 
 Vict. c. 115, and Pules thereunder.'] The Plain- 
 tiff' as manager of an omnibus company became, 
 under the provisions of the statutes and rules for 
 the regulation of metropolitan stage-cai'riages, 
 the licensee of their vehicles. Having ceased to 
 be such manager : — Held, that he was entitled to 
 an injtmotion to restrain the company from con- 
 tinuing to use his name upon the number plates 
 aiBsed to theu' carriages. Hodges v. London 
 Teams Omnibus Co. - - 18 Q. B. D. 105 
 
 VII. METEOPOIIS— VAITTATION ACTS. 
 
 The Actil& 48 Vict. c. 5 (Valuation (Metropolis) 
 Amendment Act, 1884), amends the Valuation (Me- 
 tropolis') Act, 1869, and enables owners and lessees 
 to appeal against valuation lists. 
 
 Supplemental Valuation list — Valuation 
 
 (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 67), ss. 36, 
 46, 47) — Alteration during preceding twelve 
 Months — Diminution of Income — Eridence — How, 
 rateable Value in Supplemental List to be ascer- 
 tained.] On an appeal from tlie assessment 
 committee as to a supplemental valuation list 
 under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 67), evidence of a falling off in receipts 
 of tonnage rates on vessels coming to certain docks 
 during the twelve mouths preceding the making 
 
( 885 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 VII. METBOPOIIS— VALUATION ACTS— contd. 
 of the supplemental liat when the rates were the 
 same, and which, as compared with former years, 
 shews a continuous and not accidental falling off, 
 is sufficient if not explained or rebutted to shew 
 an alteration in the rateable value of the docks 
 during that period within the meaning of sect. 46. 
 —When such alteration has been established, and 
 it has therefore to be entered in a supplemental 
 list, the rateable value of the docks is to be ascer- 
 tained, not by opening up the previous quinquen- 
 nial or supplemental list, but by assuming the 
 value in the list then in force to be the correct 
 value at the commencement of the twelve months 
 preceding, and by deducting from it the diminu- 
 tion in value from the alteration during that 
 period. — (Fry, L.J., dissenting). The Queen v. 
 East and West India Dock Company. The 
 Queen v. Poplab Union - 11 Q. B. D. 721 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 364 
 METEOPOIIS MANAGEMENT ACTS. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Mbtbo- 
 POLis — Management Acts. 
 Covenant to pay " rates, taxes and assess- 
 ments " 9 Q. B. D. 632 ; 13 Q. B. D. 1 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 
 9,10. 
 METEOPOIIS MANABEMENT AND BITIIDING 
 ACTS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1882. 
 See Mbteopolis — Management Acts 
 — Statutes. 
 Metropolis — Building Acts— S^ta- 
 tutes. 
 METROPOLIS VAUIATION LIST— Discretion of 
 overseers - 14 Q. B. D. 351 
 See Pook-bate— Peooeduee. 1. 
 
 METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS (MONET) 
 ACTS, 1881 AND 1883. 
 
 See Meteopolib — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 METROPOLITAN BXniDING ACT, 1865 (18 & 19 
 Vict. o. 122), part II., ss. 73, 97 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 112 
 See Metropolis — Building Acts. 1. 
 METROPOLITAN OPEN SPACES ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 METROPOLITAN POOR ACT— Nuisance 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 193 
 See Nuisance — Depinition. 1. 
 METROPOLITAN PUBLIC CARRIAGES ACT. 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 105 
 See Meteopolis — Public Carriages 
 Acts. 
 METROPOLITAN STREET IMPROVEMENT ACT 
 — Compensation - 25 Ch, D. 472 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 1. 
 MIDDLESEX REGISTRY ACTS 29 Ch. D. 702 
 See Ebgistsy Acts. 
 
 - - - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vbndoe and Pueohasee — Pubohasb 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 MILITARY LAW — Canteen steward— Habeas 
 corpus - - 15 Q. B. D, 488 
 
 See Aemt and Navy. 
 
 MILITIA — Ballot expenses. 
 
 See Aemy and Navy — Statutes. 
 MILITIA ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 MILITIA STOREHOUSES ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Aemy and Navy — Statutes. 
 MILK— Adulteration— Sample - 6 Q. B. D. 17 ; 
 [9 Q. B, D, 172 ; 12 Q. B. D. 97 ; 14 ft, B. D. 193 
 
 See Adulteration. 1, 2, 4, 5. 
 
 MINE (and MINERALS) :— Col. 
 
 I. Feee Miners - - - 886 
 
 II. Lease - - - - 886 
 
 III. Mines Eegulation Acts - 887 
 
 IV. Working - - - - 888 
 
 I. MINE— FREE MINERS. 
 
 Forfeiture of Gale — Forest of Dean — 
 
 Election — Time of Application — Empty Gale.'] 
 According to the Acts and rules regulating the 
 working of mines in the Forest of Dean, a gale or 
 lease is not forfeited by not being worked, unless 
 and until the Crown claims the forfeiture. The 
 Crown is under no obligation to claim the forfei- 
 ture. An application for a gale will not be valid, 
 unless the gale is at the time empty. A gale is 
 forfeited and becomes empty when notice that the 
 Crown claims the forfeiture has been given to the 
 galee, and an officer has been ordered to take 
 possession, though possession is not immediately 
 taken. The free miner who applies first after that 
 notice has been given is entitled to the gale. 
 James v. Young - - - 27 Ch. D. 652 
 
 II. MINE— LEASE. 
 
 1. Covenant to leave. Barriers — Support 
 
 for underlying Strata.] The owner of land 
 imder which there were several strata of coal, 
 demised one of the upper strata to the Plaintiff, 
 reserving to himself and his lessees the right 
 of working any coal not included in that demise, 
 and the same powers and privileges with respect 
 to such last-mentioned coal as if that demise 
 had not been made : provided always, that in 
 exercising such powers and privileges the work- 
 ing of the coal then demised should not be 
 prevented or unnecessarily interfered with, and 
 that compensation should be made to the Plain- 
 tiff for any necessary interference with the work- 
 ings. — The landowner afterwards demised some 
 of the strata of coal underlying the coal demised 
 to the Plaintiff, to the M. company. The Plain- 
 tiff brought an action for an injunction against 
 the landowner and the company : — Eeld, by 
 Kay, J., on the construction of the lease, that 
 working under a barrier between the demised 
 coal and an adjoining worked-out mine, in such 
 a way as might probably endanger the barrier, 
 and thereby let in a sufficiently large quantity 
 of water to delay and impede the working of the 
 upper strata, was an " unnecessary interference " 
 within the meaning of the proviso in the lease. — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the proviso in 
 the lease was imintelligible and could not deter- 
 mine the rights of the parties : that if a lessor 
 wished to reserve rights in derogation of his grant, 
 he must do so in plain, terms : and that on that 
 ground the Plaintiff was entitled to an injunction 
 if he could prove that the works threatened by 
 the Defendants would in all probability affect the 
 
( 887 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 888 ) 
 
 II. MINE— LEASE— coniinaed. 
 
 secxirity of his mine. Further evidence was 
 directed on tliis point ; and the Court ultimately 
 granted .the injunction. Mundt v. Duke of 
 EuTLAKD - - - 23 Ch. D. 81 
 
 2. Injury to the Surface.] A clause in a 
 
 mining lease that the lessee may work the mines 
 " in the usual and most approved way in which 
 the same is performed in other works of the like 
 kind in the county," refers simply to the mode of 
 carrying on the underground works for mining 
 purposes ; but does Dot suppose a custom to work 
 the mines so- as to-injure- or interfere with the 
 rights-of other people. Nor did the words that 
 the mining lessee ^ould have liberty to enter 
 upon the land and carry away the minerals, and 
 to erect buildings, and " do and execute all such 
 other acts, works, and things upon, in, or under, 
 or above, the said premises, as shall be necessary 
 or convenient for working and carrying away the 
 same," makiug compensation, &c., enlarge the 
 power so to deal with the mines as to let down 
 the surface. — Fer Lord Blackburn : In common 
 right the person who owns the surface has aright 
 to liave it properly supported below by minerals. 
 A Court of Law has to look at the documents to 
 see whether the parties have agreed upon some- 
 thing different from the common right. Davis v. 
 Teehakne - 6 App. Cas. 460 
 
 III. MINE— MINES EEGULATION ACTS. 
 
 Stratified Ironstone.] The Act 41 & 45 Vict. 
 c. 26, amende the law xelating to the use of gun- 
 powder in certain Stratified Ironstone Mineg. 
 
 Slate Mines.] The Act 45 (fe 46 Vict. v. 3 
 (^Slate Mines Gunpowder Act, 1883) empowers the 
 Secretary of State to exempt slate mines from the 
 regulations contained in sect. 23 (sub-sect. 2) of the 
 Metalliferous Mines Regulations Act, 1872, with 
 respect to tlie use of gunpowder or other explosive 
 
 ■ Check-weigher — Coal Mines Regulation 
 
 Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. u. 76), s. IS— Qualifica- 
 tion — Person " Employed in the Mine."'] By 
 the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1872, sect. 18, 
 the persons employed in a mine, and paid accord- 
 ing to the weight of the mineral gotten by them, 
 may, at their own cost, station a check-weigher 
 at the place appointed for the weighing of such 
 mineral, in order to take an account of the weight 
 thereof on behalf of the persons by whom he is so 
 stationed ; and " the check-weigher shall be one 
 of the persons employed either in the mine at 
 which he is so stationed, or in another mine be- 
 longing to the owner of that mine." — The Plain- 
 titf, a check-weigljer, duly appointed under 
 sect. 1 8, received a fortnight's notice to quit his 
 employment from the men employed in the mine. 
 Before the notice expired, the men held a fresh 
 election, at which the Plaintiff (with others) pre- 
 sented himself as a candidate, and was again ap- 
 pointed : — Seld, that the true construction of 
 sect. 18 was to limit the class of persons from whom 
 the men might appoint a check-weigher to per- 
 sons employed in the mine by the mine-owner ; 
 that the Plaintiff ceased to have any employment 
 under the mine-owner when he was first appointed 
 check-weigher by the men ; and therefore that his 
 second appointment was invalid. Hopkinson v. 
 Caunt - - - - 14 Q. B. D. 592 
 
 IV. MINE— WORKING. 
 
 1. Tistxaes—High Peak Mining Cus- 
 
 tcrnis and Mineral Courts Act, 1851 (14 & 15 
 Vict. c. xciv.") — Right of Miner to remove Build- 
 ings erected for Mining Purposes — Maxim " quic- 
 quid plantatur solo solo cedit."] Miners working 
 under customs established by the High Peak 
 Mining Customs and Minerals Courts Act, 1851 
 (14 & 15 Vict. c. xciv.) lawfully erected ma- 
 chinery and buildings accessory thereto on sur- 
 face land, of which the miners were entitled to 
 the exclusive use for mining purposes, but the free- 
 hold of which belonged to others. The buildings 
 were attached so as to be part of the soil, and so that 
 they could not be removed without some disturb- 
 ance, which would not amount to a destruction, of 
 the soU. The bmldings were from the first in- 
 tended to be accessory to the mining, and there 
 was nothing to shew that the property in them 
 was intended to be irrevocably annexed to the 
 soil : — Seld, that the maxim " quicquid plantatur 
 solo solo cedit," was not applicable, and that the 
 miners were entitled to pull down and remove the 
 buildings while their interest in the mine con- 
 tinued, and were not liable to the sjirface owners 
 for so doing. "Wake v. Hall 7 Q. B. D. 295 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 195 
 
 2. Winning Coal.] By a deed of grant 
 
 and licence the licensee was empowered to win 
 and work all and every or any of the coal mines, 
 seam and seams of coal under certain lands, and 
 to reimburse himself all expenses incurred in the 
 winning out of the profits from the sale of the 
 coal ; and it was provided that after payment to 
 the licensee of all expenses in winning the said 
 colliery, coal mines, or coal mine seam or seams 
 of coal, he should pay the grantor such royalty for 
 the coals yearly wrought out of the said coal minesj 
 seam or seams as should from time to time be 
 awarded by two arbitrators once in every five 
 years whilst the said coal mines, seam, or seams of 
 coal should continue to be wrought. — More than 
 one seam of coal lay under the lands. The 
 licensee after winning one seam went on to win 
 another : — Seld (reversing the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal upon this point), that the whole 
 colliery was not won when the first seam was won, 
 but that the deed was to be read separatim as to 
 the winning of each seam, and that the licensee 
 was entitled to reimburse himself tlie expenses of 
 winning tlie second seam before any royalty was 
 payable as to that seam. Elliot v. Lord Eokebt 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 43 
 
 MINE — Conveyance to railway company — Open 
 working 20 Ch. D. 552 
 
 See Railway Compant — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 5. 
 
 Cost-book mine. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Cost-book 
 Company. 
 
 Custom of country— Selling flints 21 Ch. D. 
 
 [18 ; 8 App. Cas. 608^ 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom 
 of Countky. 
 
 Inolosure Act — Manorial rights 
 
 [10 Q; B. D. 647 ; 9 App. Cas. 286 
 See Inclosube. 1. 
 
( 
 
 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 890 ) 
 
 KIITE — continued. 
 
 Income tax - - 6 App. Cas. 315 
 
 See Scotch Law — Eevenue. 
 
 Land taken by railway company 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 25 ; 9 App. Cas. 480 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 4. 
 
 Lease — Distress — Winding-up of company 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 168 
 
 See COMPANY: — DiSTEESS. 5. 
 
 Lease— Settled Land Act - 24 Ch. D. 129 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Trustees. 6. 
 
 Nova Sootia — Lease of gold mine 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 568 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Nova 
 Scotia. 
 
 Power of leasing - 23 Ch. D. 583 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 1. 
 
 Eailway company — Purchase by 19 Ch. D. 
 
 [559 ; 20 Ch, S. 552; 30 Ch. D. 634 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 4. 5, 6. 
 
 Railway company — Eight of support 
 
 [11 Q. B. S. 820 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 7. 
 
 Eeservation of minerals — Support — InoJo- 
 
 sure 10 Q. B. S. 547 ; 9 App. Cas. 286 
 See Inclosure. 1. 
 Scotch law — Eeservation of liberty of work- 
 ing coal - - 10 App. Cas. 813 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 1. 
 Scotch law- — Eeservation of minerals — Sup- 
 port - 8 App. Cas. 833 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 2. 
 
 Scotch law — ^Eight to profits 8 App. Cas. 
 
 1641 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 2. 
 BONISTEE— Eemoval of— Leave of Charity Com- 
 missioners - 21 Ch, D. 613 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 3. 
 MINTITES— Motion to vary 20 Ch. D. 130 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 621 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 6, 7. 
 
 MISCONDUCX.— Directors. 
 
 See Cases imder Company — Director's 
 Liability. 
 
 Solicitor 28 Ch. D. 614 ; 12 Q. B. D. 148 
 
 See Solicitor — ^Misconduct. 1, 2. 
 MISDEMEANOE— Sentence— Two counts 
 
 [6 App, Cas, 229 
 
 ■ See Orihinal Law — Practice. 2. 
 
 MISDIBECTION— Canada Court 6 App, Cas. 644 
 See Colonial Law — Canada— Ontario. 
 1. 
 TSlBZOlVmEB. — Solicitor — Discovery and costs 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 35 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 16. 
 MISLEADING CONDITIONS OF SAIE 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 11 ; 25 Ch. D. 357 
 See Vendor and Pueohaseb — Condi- 
 tions OP Sale. 4, 5. 
 
 MISEEPEESENTATION - - 20 Ch, D. 1 ; 
 
 [27 Ch, D, 424 
 
 See False Eepeesentation. 1, 2. 
 
 Agent— Sale of land - 22 Ch. D. 194 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Authority. 
 1. 
 
 Answers to queries of life insurance com- 
 
 . pany 9 App. Cas. 671 
 
 See Insurance, Life — ^Policy. 3. 
 
 • Prospectus of company. 
 
 See Cases under Company- 
 
 -Prospeotus. 
 
 Eelease of equity of redemption 7 App, Cas, 
 
 See Colonial Law— Victoria. 2. [307 
 
 Sale of land - - - 28 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — ^Fhaud. 2. 
 
 MISTAKE, 
 
 1. Lease^-JBeci«/!cafa'o»]. Where there 
 
 is mutual mistake in a deed or contract the re- 
 medy is to rectify- by substituting the terms 
 really agreed to. _ Where the mistake is unilateral 
 the remedy is not rectification but rescission, but 
 the Court may give to a defendant the option of 
 taking what the plaintiff meant to give in lieu of 
 rescission. — Plaintiff wrote a letter offering to the 
 Defendant to make a lease to him of a portion of 
 a block of three houses, consisting of the first, 
 second, third, and fourth floors of all three houses, 
 at a rent of £500 a year. Defendant wrote in 
 answer, accepting the offer; and a lease was 
 executed whereby all the upper floors of the block 
 were demised by the Plaintiff to the Defendant 
 at the rent of £500.— Plaintiff alleged that the 
 first floor of one of the houses was included in the 
 offer, and in the lease, by mistake, and that he 
 always intended to reserve such first floor for his 
 own use. Defendant denied that he accepted the 
 offer, or executed the lease, under any mistake. — ^ 
 The Court having found upon the evidence that 
 a common mistake was not sufficiently proved, 
 but that mistake on the part of the Plaintiff' was, 
 gave judgment for rescission with an option to 
 the Defendant to accept rectification instead. 
 Paget v. Marshall - 28 Ch. D. 255 
 
 2. Memorandum of Agreement — "Bis 
 
 share " equivalent to Share of Firm.] Case in 
 which it was held,-that according to the true con- 
 struction, having regard to all the circumstances 
 of the case, of a memorandum of mutual agree- 
 ment between M., the Plaintiffs, and three other 
 firms, whereby M. agreed to surrender to the- 
 Plaintiffs " his share " in a certain mortgage held 
 by him as trustee, the share of M.'s firm therein 
 passed, and not merely his own individual share, 
 as between himself and his partner. Marshall 
 V. Maclure - - - 10 App. Cas. 326 
 
 3. Money paid — Delay in reclaiming — 
 
 Alteration of Position of Payee.] The Plaintiff 
 by mistake, paid to the Defendants, who were 
 owners of the tithes of a parish, tithe rent-charge 
 in respect of lands not in his occupation. The 
 Plaintiff did not discover the mistake until the 
 two years limited by 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 71, for 
 the recovery of a tithe rent-charge had expired 
 and the Defendants had lost their remedy for the 
 arrears against the lands actually chargeable :— 
 Seld, that there was no duty cast on the Plaintiff 
 in relation to the Defendants which made his 
 
( 891 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 892 ) 
 
 WiaiKKE—continued.- 
 
 delay in discovering the mistake laches on his 
 part ; and that he was entitled to recover back 
 the amoimt paid as money paid imder a mistake 
 
 of fact. DURRANT V. BOOLESIASTIOAL COMMIS- 
 SIONERS FOE England and "Wales 6 ft. B. D. 234 
 
 Charging compound interest 6 App. Cas. 181 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 11. 
 
 Contributory - - - 29 Ch. D. 459 
 
 See Company — ^Prospectus. 5. 
 
 Disentailing deed — ^Eectifioation 29 Ch. D. 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 1. [133 
 
 Execution of will — Incomplete will 
 
 [6 P. D. 204 
 
 See Probate — Execution. 3. 
 
 Fact — ^Money had and received — Notice of 
 
 action - 11 ft. B. D. 788 
 
 See Local Goveenuent — Practice. 4. 
 
 Law — Ultra vires act — Overdrawing 
 
 banker's account - 29 Ch. D. 902 
 
 See Building Society. 8. 
 
 Misdescription of grantor — Bill of sale 
 
 [21 Ch. D, 73 
 See Bill op Sale — Formalities. 22. 
 
 i Misdescription — ^Particulars of sale — Com- 
 pensation - 13 ft. B. D. 351 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Compen- 
 sation. 2. 
 
 Misunderstanding as to contract 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 497 
 See Contbaot — Acceptance. 1. 
 
 Order of Court— Amendment 30 Ch. D. 239 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Judg- 
 ment. 9. 
 
 Payment by — Interest on purchase-money 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 691 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions of Sale. 2. 
 
 Separation deed — Specific performance 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 670 
 See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 . Statement in attestation clause 8 P. D. 165 
 
 See Probate — Grant. 10. 
 
 Statement of debts by compounding debtor 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 706 
 See Bankruptcy— Composition. 10. 
 
 Time for appeal - - 22 Ch, D. 484 
 
 See Practice — Sdpeeme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 36. 
 
 Voluntary settlement— Bectification 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 212 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 4. 
 
 Will. 
 
 See Cases under Will— Mistake. 
 
 HITTIMUS - 7 ft. B. D. 273 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 See Practice — Ecclbslastical— Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 MIXED FUND— Exoneration - 16 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Will— Exoneration. 2. 
 MOLESTATION— Separation deed— Covenant 
 
 [12 ft. B.D. 539; Uft.B.D. 792 
 See Husband and Wife— Separation 
 Deed. 3. 
 
 MONEY — Bequest of " money " — Consols. 
 
 See Charity— Gift to. 1. [28 Ch. D. 464 
 
 Bequest of " the money of which I am pos- 
 sessed " - - - 25 Ch. D. 154 
 See Will — Residuary Gift. 4. 
 
 In Court — Investment — Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — ■ 
 
 PUBCHABB-MONET. 
 
 In Court — Investments sanctioned by the 
 
 Comt - - 22 Ch, D. 93 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Pay- 
 ment INTO Court. 5. 
 
 In Court — Staying proceedings pending 
 
 appeal - - - 20 Ch. D. 669 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 13. 
 
 To be invested in land — Appointment 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 313 
 See Power — Execution. 10. 
 MONEY HAD AND EECEIVED— Extortion- 
 Payment under protest 11 ft. B. D. 275 
 See Distress Damage Peasant. 
 
 Local Government Acts — Notice of action 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 788 
 See Local Government — Praotiob. 4. 
 
 Worthless bank note - 11 ft. B. D. 84 
 
 See Bill of Exchange— Alteration. 3. 
 MONEY ORDERS. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 MONEY PAID — Indemnity — Goods lawfully 
 
 seized for another's debt 14 ft. B. D. 811 
 
 See Indemnity. 
 MONITION - 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical— Public 
 Worship Act. 1. 
 _ _ _ _ 6 App. Cas. 424 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — ^Moni- 
 tion. 
 MONTHLY TENANCY— Uncertain rent— Distress 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 442 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 4. 
 MONUMENT. 
 
 See Ancient Monuments — Statutes. 
 
 MORTGAGE :— Col. 
 
 L Contract - - - - 892 
 
 II. Consolidation - 896 
 
 III. Foreclosure 897 
 
 IV. Mortgagee in Possession 903 
 V. Mortgagor in Possession 905 
 
 VL Powers - - - - 905 
 
 VIL Priority - - - - 912 
 
 VIII. Eedemption - - 918 
 
 IX. Statutory Form - - - 921 
 
 I. MORTGAGE— CONTRACT. 
 
 1. Attornment Clause — Distress — Appli' 
 
 cation of Proceeds.'] The proceeds of a distress 
 for rent levied under an attornment clause in a 
 mortgage deed are, in the absence of any pro- 
 vision to the contrary in the deed, appUoable to 
 the payment of principal as well as interest. — 
 The fact that the yearly rent reserved by the 
 attornment clause is equal in amount to the 
 yearly interest of the mortgage debt as provided 
 
( 893 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 894 ) 
 
 I. mOETGAGE— CONTRACT— coniMiMeti. 
 by the deed, and is made payable on tbe same 
 days, is not of itself sufficient to displace the 
 primSi facie right of the mortgagee to apply the 
 proceeds of the distress in satisfaction of prin- 
 cipal as well as interest. — Sampson v. feUows 
 (Law Eep. 6 Eq. 575) not followed. Ex parte 
 Habeison. In re Betts 18 Ch. D. 137 
 
 3. Attornment Clause — Distress- 
 
 of Goods of Stranger.'] If a mortgage is created 
 by way of demise for a term of years, and the 
 mortgagor attorns and becomes tenant to the 
 mortgagee at a certain rent, the relation of laud- 
 lord and tenant is created, and upon failure to pay 
 the rent the mortgagee is entitled to distrain the 
 goods even of a stranger. J., being lessee for a 
 term of years, demised to P., by way of mortgage, 
 all his interest in the term save one day, and J. 
 attorned and became tenant to P. at a certain rent. 
 J., being mortgagor, let the mortgaged premises 
 to K., who assigned his goods thereon to E. The 
 rent due from J. to P. being unpaid, P. distrained 
 the goods assigned by K. to E. No rent was then 
 due from K. — E. having brought an action against 
 P. for the seizure of the goods: — Held, that by 
 the attornment J. had become tenant to P., and 
 that the distress was lawful. Keaeslet v. Philips 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 621 
 
 3. Benefice with Cure — Validity — ISMiz. 
 
 c. 20 — Union of Benefices Act, 1860 (23 & 24 
 Vict. c. 142) — Compensation payable to retiring 
 Inevmbent.'] In pursuance of an Order in Coun- 
 cil under the Union of Benefices Act, 1860, 
 uniting two City benefices, certain annuities were 
 granted to the retiring incumbent and his assigns 
 out of the annual income of the united benefice, 
 and made a first charge thereon during the joint 
 lives of himself and the incumbent of the united 
 benefice, so long as he should perform in person, 
 or by substitute to be approved of by the bishop, 
 the duties of curate of the united benefice under 
 the style of vicar in charge, with a provision for 
 the retiring incumbent after the death of the 
 incumbent of the united benefice: — Held, that 
 such annjiities were not a benefice with cure 
 within 13 Eliz. c. 20, and accordingly could be 
 validly mortgaged by the retired incumbent. 
 McBbam v. Deane - 30 Ch. D. 520 
 
 4. Contemporaneous Mortgages — Inci- 
 dence of Mortgage Debt — Apportionment — Col- 
 lateral Security.'] A mortgagor deposited title 
 deeds with an insurance company for securing 
 the repayment of an advance of £1200. About 
 the same time he executed an assignment of poli- 
 cies of insurance to seome the repayment of a 
 similar sum. Only one sum of £1200 was really 
 advanced -.—rHeld, that the security on the land 
 and on the policies must bear the mortgage debt 
 rateably. Baklt v. Eaely. Williams v. Baelt 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 214, n. 
 
 5. — — Contemporaneous Mortgages — Mort- 
 gage of Freeholds — Contemporaneous Security of 
 Leaseholds for Mortgage Debt — " Collateral " 
 Security— Inadenoe of Mortgage Debt] A mort- 
 gagor conveyed freeholds by way of mortgage by 
 an indenture which recited an agreement by the 
 mortgagees to advance him the principal moneys 
 upon having the repayment thereof with interest 
 secured "as hereinafter mentioned and by a 
 
 I. MOETGAGE— CONTRACT— co«fa-»Med!. 
 
 collateral security or indenture intended to bear 
 even date with" those presents. — On the same 
 day the mortgagor demised leaseholds by way of 
 mortgage to the same mortgagees to secure the 
 same advance by an indenture which recited the 
 mortgage of the freeholds, and that on the treaty 
 for the advance "it was agreed that the same 
 principal and interest should be further secured 
 by these presents." — Each of the two indentures 
 contained a covenant for the payment of the 
 mortgage debt and interest. — In an action to 
 administer the estate of the mortgagor: — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Hall, V.C), both on 
 the frame of the deeds themselves, and upon the 
 evidence as to the circumstances attending the 
 advance, that the leasehold security was not 
 "collateral" in the sense of "secondary"; and 
 accordingly that, as between the real and personal 
 representatives of the mortgagor, the mortgage 
 debt was payable rateably out of the freeholds 
 and leaseholds comprised in the two securities, 
 and not primarily out of the freeholds. — Obser- 
 vations upon Marquis of Bute v. Cunynghame (2 
 Euss. 275) and upon the meaning of the words 
 " collateral security." In re Athill. Athill ii. 
 Athill - - - 16 Ch, D. 211 
 
 6. Costs and Expenses — Might of Action 
 
 against Mortgagor.] Costs and expenses pro- 
 perly incurred by a mortgagee in relation to the 
 mortgaged property, and which the mortgagor 
 will be compelled to pay as a condition of being 
 allowed to redeem the property, do not constitute 
 a debt in respect of which an action can be 
 maintained by the mortgagee against the mort- 
 gagor. Ex parte Fbwings. Ire re Sneyd 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 338 
 
 7. Costs of Mortgagee — Costs of Adjourn- 
 ment to Judge — Mortgage to secure Moneys due 
 from Mortgagor "his Executors, Administrators, 
 or Assigns" — Advance to Assign.] W., the owner 
 and occupier of a public-house, gave to H. & Co., 
 brewers, a mortgage to secure £1300, and also 
 all sums which should at any time be owing to 
 them from W., "his executors, administrators, or 
 assigns" on any account whatsoever. "W. died 
 giving, by will, all his property to his wife for 
 life, without any directions as to carrying on his 
 business. Letters of administration, with the 
 will annexed, were graAted to the widow. The 
 widow carried on the business, and was supplied 
 with beer by H. & Co., to whom she from time to 
 time made payments which discharged the^ moneys 
 due to them from W. at his decease other than 
 the £1300, but a balance of £138 was due from 
 her to them at her decease for beer supplied. 
 H. & Co. sold the property under a power of sale, 
 and claimed to retain not only the £1300 but the 
 £138. The question was raised on summons in 
 an action for the administration of W.'s estate. 
 The Chief Clerk was prepared to make an order 
 without costs against H. & Co. to pay into Court 
 the balance of purchase-money in their hands 
 without deducting the £138; but H. & Co. in- 
 sisted on having the case heard by the Judge. 
 Kay, J., held that they must pay in the balance 
 without deducting the £138, and ordered them to 
 pay the costs of the adjournment to him as being 
 in the nature of an unsuccessful, appeal i—Held, 
 
( 895 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 896 ) 
 
 I. MORTGAGE— CONTEACT—conKiraed. 
 on appeal, that as the widow was assign of the 
 public-house, the £138 was covered by the secu- 
 rity, and H. & Co. were entitled to retain it : — 
 Seld, also, that the adjournment to the Judge 
 was not in the nature of an appeal, it being the 
 right of H. & Co. to have the point heard by the 
 Judge personally, and that even if they had been 
 wrong on the merits they ought not to have been 
 ordered to pay costs, for that a mortgagee cannot 
 be deprived of costs merely because he claims 
 bonS, fide something more than the Court holds 
 him entitled to. In re Watts. Smith v. Watts 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 5 
 
 8, Equitable Mortgage — Deposit of Deed 
 
 — Invalid Transfer of Charge — Bight to Deed.^ 
 Equitable mortgagee by a deposit of a deed can- 
 not pass his interest in the property by a parol 
 voluntary gift accompanied by delivery of the 
 deed ; and as his interest in the deed is only in- 
 cidental to his interest in the mortgage, the 
 donee of the deed has no right to retain it. Jn re 
 ElOHABDBON. Shillito V. HOBSON 30 Ch. D. 396 
 
 9. EqnitaUe Mortgage — Transferee — 
 
 Confidential Solicitor — Constructive Notice.'] A. 
 deposited deeds with his confidential solicitor 
 with a memorandum of deposit by way of equi- 
 table mortgage to secure the repayment of £3000. 
 The solicitor handed the deeds and memorandum 
 to B. as security for £2000, together with a memo- 
 randum signed by himself that the £2000, part of 
 the annexed £3000 security, then belonged to B., 
 with interest at 5 per cent. The solicitor after- 
 wards obtained a return of the deeds from B. upon 
 an assurance that in lieu thereof others of equal 
 value should be deposited. Other deeds were sub- 
 sequently deposited, which proved to be worth- 
 less. The mortgage of £3000 wa3 paid off by A.'s 
 representatives, and the genuine deeds were given 
 up to them by the solicitor without the memo- 
 randum of deposit. No notice of B.'s security had 
 been given to, A. B. then claimed payment of the 
 £2000 against the estate of A., upon -the ground 
 of constructive notice to A. through his con- 
 fidential solicitor : — Beld, that B., by neglecting 
 to give notice to A. of the transfer of the mort- 
 gage, and by giving up the documents originally 
 deposited with him, had lost any right he might 
 have had against A.'s estate. In re Loed South- 
 ampton's Estate. Allen v. Lobd Southampton. 
 Banpathee's Claim - - 16 Ch. D. 178 
 
 10, Instalments — Advance to he repaid hy 
 
 Instalments— Stipulation for Payment of " Com- 
 mission " on Instalments not duly repaid — Sale — 
 Foreclosure — One Time for Redemption.'] A mort- 
 gagee agreed to advance to a mortgagor a sum to 
 be repaid at specified dates by instalments, with 
 interest at £6 per cent, per annum, and if the 
 bank.rate should exceed £4 per cent, additional 
 interest equal to the excess. If default was made 
 in payment of any instalment at due date there 
 was also to be paid a "commission" of £1 per 
 cent, for every month or part of a month from the 
 due date to the date of payment of such instal- 
 ment:— BeM, that this "commission" was not 
 in the nature of a penalty, and that Ihe mort- 
 gagee was entitled to charge for it in taking the 
 account. — Foreclosure ordered with one term of 
 redemption for all the puisne mortgagees, as in 
 
 I. MOETGAGE— COlfTEACT- comtmueti. 
 Bartlett v. Bees (Law Rep. 12 Eq. 395).— On a 
 security upon railway shares with power of sale, 
 under which the shares were transferred to the 
 lenders : — Held, that the lender was entitled to 
 foreclosure, and that Carter v. Walce (4 Ch. D. 
 605) did not apply. Geneeal Ceedit and Dis- 
 count Company v. Glegg - 22 Ch. D. 549 
 
 11. Settled Acoount re-opened. Compound 
 
 Interest charged by Mistake — Mutual Mistake of 
 Law.] In the absence of special agreement simple 
 interest only can be charged in a mortgage account. 
 — ^Where such mortgage account had been settled 
 on the footing of compound interest with half- 
 yearly rests, both parties wrongly understanding 
 the mortgage deed to require the same: — Held, 
 that such settled account might be re-opened. — 
 Although under certain circumstances the giving 
 credit in account may be treated as so far equiva- 
 lent to payment under mistake of law as to prevent 
 sums wrongly credited being recoverable at law ; 
 yet in equity the line between mistakes in law 
 and mistakes in fact has not been so clearly and 
 sharply drawn. Dahiell v. Sinclaie 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 181 
 
 II. MOBTGAGE— COirSOLIDATION. 
 
 Eestriction on Consolidation.] The Act 44 (£ 45 
 Vict. c. 41 (^Conveyancing Act, 1881), enacts. 
 Sect. yj. — (1.) A mortgagor seeking to redeem 
 any one mortgage, shall, by virtue of this Act, 
 he entitled to do so, witliout payiftg any inoney 
 due under any separate mortgage made hy him, 
 or hy any person through whom lie claims, on pro- 
 perty other than that comprised in the mortgage 
 which he seeks to redeem. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the mortgage 
 deeds or one of them. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only where tlie mort- 
 gages or one of them are or is made after the com- 
 mencement of this Act — dlst Dec. 1881. 
 
 1. One Mortgage ceasing to exist — Mort- 
 gage in the Name of Trustees.] Two persons 
 partners in a, mercantile firm, who held a lease- 
 hold house, made an equitable mortgage of it 
 to W. Afterwards the firm took in another 
 partner who acquired u, share in the equity of 
 redemption. The firm then mortgaged their 
 interest in another house, which they held as 
 joint tenants, to W. for a further debt. The firm 
 having become bankrupt, the lease on the first- 
 mentioned house was determined by the bank- 
 ruptcy, and the lessor re-entered. W. claimed 
 to consolidate both debts, so that the second- 
 mentioned house shotdd not be redeemed without 
 paying both debts : — Held, that one mortgaged 
 property having ceased to exist, there could be 
 no consolidation of the two debts. — Whether a 
 mortgage by three persons can be consolidated 
 with a mortgage by two in trust for the three, 
 quxre. In re Eaggett. Ex parte AVilliajis 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 117 
 
 2. Bedemption Suit — Parties — Trustees 
 
 —Bules of Court, 1875, Order xvi., r. 7.] The 
 mortgagor of one property assigned the equity 
 of redemption, and afterwards mortgaged another 
 property to the mortgagee of the first. The 
 assignee of the equity of redemption having 
 
( H()7 ) 
 
 DK-IIOHT OK OAHKH. 
 
 ( 808 ) 
 
 II, MOETOAOB-OONBOLIDATION— m;rtM»?«i(/. 
 
 Iiroiighl. an anUon U> rnilinim tbo (IrMl, property, 
 l,h(i iiifirtgdKdii nlaliridil l,i) cjinMiilidiiUi tho mort- 
 jtiij-oiM : — llrtil. (afllrniliip; llifi ilnclHion of tho Court 
 <il' Appnul), tlial, tlio rl^lit of tho imrohriBor ciC 
 iijj (a|iii(,y (](' roiliiiiiiiMori cannot bo nHnnUnl by ii 
 iiiortKa^u crhiiUtd iiitnr tho piinsliiwo, luid thuf. tho 
 (iHHlpriKKi wiiH oriMMc.il to ro(U)(rn Ujn flrnt mort- 
 KiiH" witlioiil, r(i(l(i(j|iilii({ tho Hdcotid. — Alwi thai/ 
 iiTidiir Onlor xvi., nild 7, IruMtwiH of an ooidly of 
 rO(Uirii|iU()n Hiilllnicid.ly nipnidont tli(4i' cohIuI fiiin 
 iTiiNtlri a r<MliMij|>Uori hiiII., ijoilli'iicUoji l,ii Uiiuuin- 
 tniry lia.vlnn boon iiiadd by tlio f'oiirt. — '/Wmc/ v. 
 t^mtk Ci Do (K & J. 7i;J; 27 L. .1. (Ob,) CIH) 
 ov('riid(iil.- Ilci'.vdrv. //«'7i: (Tjaw Itup. 4 |i!((.B87) 
 noinmorilfld od. iVhili; v. Ililliwru (:i V. & (J. 
 ( I'lx.) TiU?) approved, .(jcnninuh d. JoiiJ)AN 
 
 [6 App. oai, ees 
 
 3, Union of Uortgngei on different Eitatei 
 
 (ifl.ir Aml.{inm(uil, tif Jijipdly of UiHlmipllott af one 
 lij' l.luim..\ Wbiili two liior-tKaK'oH, iiiado liy tbci 
 Kiirno niorl^^agor to dillnnuil inortgafjoos on dif- 
 loroiit CHbiti'M, linc.oiiiii lltiltod I'or tllU flrat IJino 
 In Olio pnrHoii afl.or tho iriorlwiKor ha» aHHl(j;ii(id 
 (by way olthor of bilIo or morl,f,'ii(,'o) tbo oiiiiily of 
 I'orliUMjiUiiii of 0III1 of tboni, tbo owiior of tbo hvo 
 nioi'l,Ka|.';iiH oiiiinot roiiNolldalo tbnm iih nj^ainut 
 tho anni|,'iioo of tlio oiinil.y of ri«lumptioii, i^voii 
 IJiou){li bulb tbo iTiortgiiftot woro oroatoil bofom 
 Ibii aHMl«iiiiioiit.-— 'I'lio iiKHlf^iind nf an ciildty of 
 roilcniptioii takoH it mibjoct to all (i(|iilU(m -whii'li 
 alliiol t,lio iiHHignor In ro«po"t of U at tho dato of 
 llio aMHifjnirioiit, but tlio poHHlbillty tlial. tho iiiort- 
 KnKO iiiay. by vlrtno of ILh NiibHuqoont union In 
 Ibo Hiuno pomoii with a iriorl.|.;a;.';o of anotlicr 
 (iHbil.o iimdd, pi'iivloUBly to tbo a»NiKninoiil,, by tho 
 winio irioiigaglir io ll illfforiiiit inoi-i^'ii^idc, bi'C.onio 
 llablo to oiiMHolidiitiiin, 1h not Kiicb an oipdly. — 
 W'liility. IlilhinrO^ V. .V 0. K\. BU7) appnivod 
 and tollowod,--/(ra!i'()i' V. liit(ik(\M\l Hi'p. I I0(|. 
 fi!17) dlMinipi'ovoil and not followod, on thuKi'Ound 
 tliiii ItN anlboi'lty liati boon iiinrb Inipait'Oil by tliu 
 obMii'vatlonH iniido noon It by Lord Obioidollor 
 Holborno and Ijiu'd Itlaokbum in Jfimhim v. 
 .hirilaii. (0 Apii. (Mm. (IIIH),— F(/»t v. I^lul^|l<l (2 Dn 
 
 (i. & ■), Oil) llktlngulHllI'd. llAllTltll II. (loi.lUN 
 
 [le Oh. S, 630 
 
 4. Voluntary Settlement by Uortgagor— 
 
 Hii.lim\qumik Miirlijimiv liy savio Mortgagor <>/ Iha 
 hMIi'iI (ind (dm of olhtr I'miii-rli/.'] A. 11, having 
 dXconUid a volnnbu'y HoUloinoni of tbo W, OKtato 
 iiiiirlKa(j;od it lu foo |.o X, Y. llo iiftorwanla 
 innrl),'aj,'c.d tbo Q. oMtato, anil tliat niorl|;ann bo- 
 oaino vohIikI In X. Y. ; — Hold, that X. Y. was not 
 oniillnd ti cnntiolldMO an agalniiit tbo pomniti 
 olaiininn nndor tho volnnbiry KoUloinont tlio 
 luoi'lKiigoH on tho W, und Q. i.'BlabiH. Jn rii Wal- 
 lUMi"niN FjHTATIO - - aOOh, D, 301 
 
 III, MOBTOAOE-I'OREOLOBUIIE, 
 
 7'/i(i Adl 1 1 ll; bl Vict, a, 41 {Conocijaiwlim Ad, 
 18H I), ('»(("(«— 
 
 Hci'l. an. — (1.) Auji jwrmii nUlthd to ndmm 
 viiirl\ii(\ivd jiivimiu may Iwiv ajiidjimiml oroi-iliv 
 /(ll- Hulii indi-AUl of for rt<ilviiiptloit in (in adion 
 limiijllit liy lUm i-Uhm- for redi'iitiitton dlimn, or for 
 nido idoni', or for mio or rodmnjdlun, in tho alti'r- 
 
 Ultlil'H. 
 
 (a.) In liny ttotion, wliolhrr for foreolofuro, ur for 
 
 III, MOHTGAOE— rOBEOLOflUEE— oonMnwii. 
 
 ri-dcmptUm, or for tale, or for the raUtng and pay- 
 ment vn any mannir of mortgage ntonry, the Oov/rt, 
 lilt Uij; ri'.iiuml of ilui mortgagee, or <ij any person 
 irdc.rcMril niUiir in the mortgage monny or in the 
 rigid, nf reikmpl.ton, a/nd, notwilhttanding the dii- 
 mnt of any olhi-.r person, and notwithstanding that 
 lli.it nuirlgagiT, or any prrsim so intnreitcd dons not 
 iijipr.ar in llm aotion, and wil.ltout allowing any 
 tmii! for fitdimpVion or for pirymi-rU of any nmrt- 
 gaiji: money, may, if il lldnlcs fit, dinnt a sale of 
 till; imirlginird property, on nwh linns as it thinks 
 fU, innluiUng, if it IMnhs fit, the ik/iosil in Court 
 of a riMsonahli! sumfiMul by the Oonrl, lo meet the 
 fxpoimiM of sale and to secure pnforinanon of tho 
 IrrniH. 
 
 (11.) Hid, in an aetion tirought tnj a person in- 
 trrediul in Ihr. right of ivdomption and seeking a 
 Kiili; Ihi: diiurt may, »« the iipiilinUion of any De- 
 fimdant, direct the I'liilntifl' lo gim; such security 
 for cods as the Court thinks Jll, and may give the 
 conduct of the sale to any l)i fenda.nl, anilmay give 
 siu;h direclionii as it thinlcH fit respecting the oosts 
 of the .Defeiiilanls or any of lliem. 
 
 (■I.) tn imy case within lltin section the Court 
 may, if it thinltH fit, direct a Hide, wilhont previously 
 determining the prioriiies of incuintirwnoers. 
 
 {ti.) Thin section applies In actions tiroitght either 
 tiefiirii iir after the commence inent of this Ant — 'Mst 
 liecendier,' mm. 
 
 (d.) Jlepeats l.'i A 10 Viet. c. K(!, s. 1-8, 
 
 1, AoeountB — Decree— It IgU of Defcn- 
 
 iliiiit to insist on I'liiiiilijf tiriiiging in Aeconiiln 
 I'riictiee—Awwndinent of -l''iirin of Summons.'] 
 Moi'tf^afii'im for tho tonii of a ooliioi'y brought 
 ftu ai'tion for foreoloeuro, Booking; duolaratiooH 
 tbiit tbo oiif^iiiiil iiiortxiiKO dond was a fjood oxor- 
 oIbo of a power of InaHliig, and Unit tbo uums 
 Hi«Mii-od by a lator dood woro also I'barnod on tho 
 b^in oroal.od by tbo first dood. Thoy olibiinod a 
 dooi'i'O )(lvln); tlioni tho doi'lanitioiiii iwUnd, and 
 dirorlingtho usual oooounta in tbo ciiho of mort- 
 gagooB in poBHOHHloii, wil.li diroiilioiiH for foroolo- 
 Hiiro in dnrailit of payinoiib A HiiininoiiH was 
 takoii out by tho Dofondant to proiidiid with tbo 
 JndKinont, iind IboChiof Olork dii-oolod tbo I'biin- 
 lill'H to brin(j in tboir ac.oimnla by a oortain doy, 
 but no onlor bi that niVool was drawn up, Tho 
 I'laintillH afterwards ImviiiK rnfimnil to bring In 
 tlioir iiouountH on Uio urnnnil tlmt, an tlioy allogod, 
 tbo nionoyH roinainlng duo to tlioiii woro many 
 l.liiioH inoro tliiiii tho vahio of tbo niortgaffud jiro- 
 porty, and that lalting tbo aoooimlH would tlioro- 
 I'orii ba USOlohH, tlio IJobindantH applind on buhii 
 nions I'or an orilor tliat tho l'liiintiirn ndgiit bring 
 tlioiii in in four dayw, not nMkiiifi; any aitornativQ 
 riillcf. I'oarHon, .)., rofuMod tbo applioalimi on tho 
 (jriinnd that tbo Defondants woro not ontitlod to 
 a four-day ordor. Tlio Dofondants nppoalod ; — 
 IMil. tiiat tbo BuuiinoiiH must lio lioatod as if it 
 had biion askod that tlio I'lainllllH might bring in 
 tliob' iiooountH in four days, or in suoli otlior time 
 as tho Court might think lit, tho suinmonB if 
 iiooHBHiiry, liolnj:; anainilod ; — Held, that aa tlio 
 Plaintin'B bad Uikon a forooloBiiro duoroo, tho 
 UofondiiiitB woro onlitlnd in liavo tho aooounta 
 bi'onjfbt in, Imt that tho ordor slioiild bo prefaood 
 Willi a statcniont timt thoy roiiiilrod thorn to bo 
 brought ill,— Whothor this statumont would givo 
 
 2 G 
 
( 899 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 900 ) 
 
 III. mOETGAGE— FORECLOSURE— coTifmaecZ. 
 tlie Court jurisdiction as to the costs if it turned 
 out that the accounts had been asked for vexa- 
 tiously and unreasonably, quiere. — Whether the 
 Court would not on a substantive application by 
 the Plaintiffs stay the taking the accounts if it 
 was satisfactorily shewn that taking them would 
 be useless, gM^rc. Taylor b. Mosttn 25CIi.I).48 
 
 2. Accounts and Inquiries — Bules of Su- 
 preme Court, 1883, Order xr., rr. 1, 2]. In fore- 
 closure actions where there is no preliminaiy 
 ■question to be tried, the Plaintiff may obtain, 
 under Eules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order xv., an 
 ■order for an account with all necessary inquiries, 
 and the usual directions as in a common fore- 
 ■closure judgment nisi. Such order should be ap- 
 plied for by summons in Chambers and not by 
 motion in Court, and only the costs of a summons 
 in Chambers attended by counsel will be allowed. 
 Smith v. Davibs - 28 Ch. D. 650 
 
 IBut see Blake v. Hakvet, 29 Ch. D. 827.] 
 
 3. Costs — Abortive Sale — Cheque for 
 
 Deposit dishonoured — Practice of Auctioneers — 
 Personal Order for Payment — Form of Order.'] 
 
 'The custom of auctioneers to accept, on sales of 
 large properties, a. cheque in lieu of cash for the 
 • deposit, is reasonable, and a mortgagee-vendor 
 was held to be justified ia acting on it, and not 
 to be guilty of negligence in the conduct of the 
 •sale, though the cheque was dishonoured. — In 
 such a case a, mortgagee, who has endeavoured 
 to sell under his powers, is entitled to add the 
 ■costs of the abortive sale to his security.— The 
 proper order in a foreclosure action, when an 
 account and an order for personal payment of 
 what may be found due is asked for against the 
 mortgagor, is to direct payment of principal and 
 interest within one month after the date of the 
 Chiaf Clerk's certificate on the taking of the 
 accounts.— /SemMe, if a mortgagee wants an im- 
 mediate order forpersonal payment, he must ask 
 for it by his pleadings and prove the amount due 
 for principal and interest at the trial. Fakeeb v. 
 Lacy, Haktland & Co. - 26 Ch. D. 636 
 
 [Affirmei by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 42.] 
 
 4. Costs — Delivery up of Deeds — Dis- 
 claimer^ "When a judgment for foreclosure is 
 given against a puisne mortgagee, the Plaintiff 
 is not entitled to delivery up of deeds of sub- 
 sequent date ia his own mortgage, dealing only 
 with the title to the equity of redemption.— 
 A Defendant to a foreclosure action, who was 
 originally properly made a party, is entitled to 
 his costs incurred subsequently to his making a 
 proper offer to disolaun.- After the commence- 
 ment of a foreclosure action the solicitors of the 
 Defendants (who were second mortgagees) wrote 
 to the Plaintiff's solicitors, offering to consent to 
 the dismissal of the action without costs, and to 
 hand over a release at Plaintiff's expense. The 
 Plaintiff brought the action to a tiial, insisting 
 that he was eatitled to delivery up by tlie Defen- 
 dants of some deeds which affected only the tile 
 to the equity of redemption :-ff«;<?, that the 
 letter contained a proper offer to disclaim ; that 
 the Defendants were entitled to their costs sub- 
 sequent to its date; and that the Plaintiff was 
 S entitled to the deeds ^l^^-^l^.^e claimed 
 Gkeexe v. Fostek - 22 Ch. D. 666 
 
 III. MOETGAGE— FOEECIGSITRE— conWntted. 
 
 5. Costs — Mortgages of two Estates — Se- 
 
 demption — Apportionment of Costs of Action — 
 Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881 
 (44: & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 17.] An action was 
 brought by a mortgagee for the foreclosure of two 
 mortgages of two distinct estates, executed by the 
 same mortgagor to secure two different advances. 
 Both mortgages were executed since the Convey- 
 ancing Act, 1881, came into operation]: — Held, 
 that the whole of the costs of the action ought to 
 be included in the account relating to each estate, 
 and that the mortgagor could not redeem either 
 estate separately without paying the whole of the 
 costs of the action. Clapham v. Andbews 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 679 
 
 6. Costs — Special.'] The plaintiff in a 
 
 foreclosure action is as a general rule entitled 
 to an account of only principal and interest due 
 to him on his mortgage, and of the costs of the 
 action. To entitle him to an account of any 
 other costs he must make out a special case. — 
 But, where the Plaintiff was the transferee of a 
 mortgage, on which interest was overdue at the 
 date of the transfer, and the mortgagor was a 
 bankrupt : — Meld, that the Plaintiff was entitled 
 to an account of costs generally. Bolingbkoke 
 V. HiNDE - '- 26 Ch. D. 795 
 
 7. Equitable Mortgage — Form of Order 
 
 — Praclice.] A decree for foreclosure in the case 
 of an equitable mortgage ought not to omit the 
 word " foi-eclose," but ought to contain directions 
 that upon default the mortgagor will be fore- 
 closed, that the hereditaments will be discharged 
 from all equity of redemption, and that a con- 
 veyance must be executed. Lees v. Fishes 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 283 
 
 8. Infant — Equitable Mortgage — Mort- 
 gagor's Estate in infant Heir-at-Laic — Day to 
 shew Cause — Form of Decree.] In an action by 
 an equitable mortgagee, without any memorandum 
 of deposit of title deeds, against the widow and 
 infant heir-at-law of the mortgagor for fore- 
 closure : — Seld, on motion for judgment, the De- 
 fendants not having appeared, that the infant 
 heir must be ordered to convey the estate when 
 he attained the age of twenty-one years, and that 
 he must have a day to shew cause in the usual 
 way. — Price V. Carver (3 My. & Cr. 157) followed. 
 Melloe v. Poetee 25 Ch. D. 168 
 
 9. Infant — Immediate Foreclosure Judg- 
 ment Ahsohite against Infant.] Judgment for an 
 immediate foreclosure absolute against an infant 
 granted, the Plaintiffs offering to pay the Defen- 
 dant's costs of the action as between solicitor and 
 client, and the Defendant's counsel not asking 
 for liberty to redeem, or that an account should 
 be taken of what was due to the Plaintiffs, upon 
 the Court being satisfied by evidence that the 
 value of the property was not sufficient to pay 
 the amount of the principal sum due on the 
 mortgage, together with interest and the costs of 
 the action, and that it would be for the benefit 
 of the infant to give judgment in that form. 
 Wolveehampton and Staffoedshike Bankinq 
 Company v. Geoege 24 Ch. D. 707 
 
 10. Interest subsequent to Certificate.] 
 
 When a judgment for foreclosure, obtained by a 
 
( 901 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 902 > 
 
 III. MORTGAGE— FOEECLOSTJEE—eonfoTiMerf. 
 first mortgagee against subsequent mortgagees and 
 the mortgagor, directs successive redemptions, 
 and foreclosures in default of redemption, and a 
 puisne mortgagee fails to pay the amount found 
 due from him to the prior mortgagee for prin- 
 cipal, interest, and costs, and is accordingly fore- 
 closed, in taking the account against the person 
 next entitled to redeem, subsequent interest ought 
 "to be computed on the whole sum found due from 
 "the person who has failed to redeem, i.e., upon 
 the interest found due from him, as well as upon 
 ithe principal and costs. Elton v. Cukteis 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 49 
 
 11. Opening Foreolosure — Receipt of 
 
 Jtente hy Mortgagee before Final Judgment — Fur- 
 ther Account.'] In an action by executors of a 
 mortgagee against the mortgagor and a puisne 
 mortgagee an order nisi for foreolosure was made, 
 giving successive periods of redemption. After 
 "the time fixed for redemption and before final 
 judgment was obtained against the puisne mort- 
 gagee, and before the expiration of the time 
 allowed to the mortgagor, the Plaintiffs received 
 a sum of money for rent. A further account had 
 leen taken against the mortgagor, and a fuither 
 ■day fixed (for redemption by him ; — Held, that it 
 was irregular to fix a further time for the mort- 
 gagor to redeem until the puisne mortgagee had 
 Ijeen finally foreclosed ; and that the receipt of 
 moneys for rent after the time fixed for the puisne 
 mortgagee to redeem and before final judgment 
 ■obtained against htm did not open the foreclosure 
 against him. — The order was to foreclose the 
 puisne mortgagee absolutely, and to take a further 
 account against the mortgagor. Webster v. 
 Patteson - - - 35 Ch. D. 626 
 
 13. Partnership, Share of — Date at 
 
 which Account of mortgaged Share is to he taken 
 — Form of Order^ • When a partner mortgages 
 his share in the partnership, and the mortgagee 
 brings an action to realise his mortgage, the 
 proper order ia to direct an account of what the 
 mortgagor's interest in the partnership was at 
 the date when the mortgagee proceeded to take 
 possession under his mortgage, i.e., at the date of 
 the writ ; but if a dissolution of the partnership 
 has previously taken place, the date of the disso- 
 lution is the date at which the account is to be 
 taken. Wbetham ». Davey 30 Ch. D. 674 
 
 13. Period of Eedemption — Several De- 
 fendants.'] In an action for foreclosure by first 
 mortgagees against a second mortgagee and the 
 mortgagor : — Meld, that successive periods for re- 
 demption ought to be allowed to the Defendants. 
 Sweet v. Combley 35 Ch. D. 463, n. 
 
 14. Period of Eedemption — Several De- 
 fendants^ Where there were two Defendants to 
 a foreclosure action— the mortgagor and second 
 mortgagee who had joined in the Plaintiff's 
 security to postpone his previously prior right, 
 and as surety for the Plaintiff : — Held, that only 
 one period of six months should be allowed for 
 redemption by both Defendants. — Bartlett v. 
 Jlees (Law Eep. 12 Eq. 395) and General Credit 
 and Discount Company v. Glegg (22 Ch. D. 549) 
 followed. Smith v. Olding - 35 Ch. D. 463 
 
 15. Period of Eedemption — Several De- 
 
 Ill. MOETGAGE — FOEEOLOSUEE — continued, 
 fendants.] As a general but not invariable rule, 
 when there are several defendants to a fore- 
 closure action, one period for redemption should 
 be allowed to all the defendants. Mctual Life 
 Assurance Society v. Langlby 86 Ch. D. 686 
 
 16. Period of Eedemption - 
 
 Incumbrancers.] A first mortgagee is 'prima facie 
 entitled to a judgment in a foreclosure action 
 limiting only one period for redemption, both as 
 against subsequent incumbrancers and the mort- 
 gagor, and where there are conflicting claims as 
 to priority between co-Defendants the practice, as 
 settled by Bartlett v. Bees (Law Kep. 12 Eq. 395), 
 is to grant only one period for redemption. Where, 
 however, the Defendants have put in a defence or 
 appeared at the bar and have proved or offered 
 to prove their incumbrances, and there is no ques- 
 tion of pi^iority between them, the Court will at 
 the request of the puisne incumbrancers, but not 
 at the request of the mortgagor, limit successive 
 periods for redemption. A mortgagor has no right 
 in himself to more than one period of six months 
 to redeem. In a foreclosure action by the trans- 
 feree of the first mortgagee, the statement of claim 
 alleged that the Defendants other than the mort- 
 gagor claimed to have some charge upon the mort- 
 gaged premises subsequent to the Plaintiff's 
 charge. None of the Defendants, including the 
 mortgagor, put in a defence or appeared at the 
 bar : — Held, that the Plaintiff was entitled to a 
 foreclosure judgment on the pleadings, allowing 
 one period for redemption as against all the De- 
 fendants. Platt v. Mendel 37 Ch. D. 246 
 
 17. Period of Eedemption — Subsequent 
 
 Incumbrances.] In a foreclosure judgment against 
 the mortgagor and subsequent incumbrancers, 
 only one period for redemption will be fixed where 
 none of the defendants appear on the motion for 
 judgment ; whether it is alleged by the statement 
 of claim that the subsequent incumbrancers are 
 " entitled " or only that they " claim to be en- 
 titled " to charges upon the mortgaged premises. 
 DoBLE V. Manley - 28 Ch. D. 664 
 
 18. Personal Judgment against Mort- 
 gagor — Form of Judgment.] Form of judgment 
 in a foreclosure action, when a personal judgment 
 is taken against the mortgagor on his covenant 
 for payment of principal and interest. — The form 
 in Grundy v. Grice (Seton on Decrees, 4th Ed. 
 vol. ii. p. 1036 (Form No. 2)), modified. Hunter 
 V. Myait - - - 38 Ch. D. 181 
 
 19. Possession — Form, of Judgment] 
 
 Where an order nisi for foreclosure and possession 
 had been made the order absolute also provided 
 for possession and was made ex parte. Withall 
 V. Nixon - - - 38 Ch. S. 413 
 
 20. Beoeiver — Judicature Act, 1873 
 
 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, mb-s. 8 — Convey- 
 ancing Act 1881 (44 <fe 45 Vict. p. 41), s. 19, 
 sub-s. 3.] A legal mortgagee being in posses- 
 sion of the mortgaged property, applied to the 
 Court for the appointment of a receiver : — Held 
 that although the mortgagee might, under the 
 COnveya,ncing Act, 1881, appoint a receiver with- 
 out coming to the Court, it was more desirable, 
 where an action was pending, that the appolnt- 
 
 2 G 2 
 
( 903 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 904 ) 
 
 III. MORTGAGE— rOBEClOSTTRi: 
 
 ment should be made by the Court under the 
 Judicature Act, 1873. Tillett v. Nixon 
 
 [25 Ch, S. 238 
 
 21, Sale — Conveyancing and Law of 
 
 Property Act, 1881 (44 * 45 Vict. c. 41), «. 25.] A 
 decree for successive redemption and foreclosiyes 
 having been obtained in an action by a second 
 mortgagee against tbe first mortgagee and several 
 successive incumbrancers, the secopd mortgagee 
 redeemed the first, and then applied for a sale of 
 tlie mortgaged property: — Held, that under tbe 
 Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, 
 sect. 25, the Court has jurisdiction to order a sale 
 of mortgaged property in a foreclosure or re- 
 iltrmption action at any time before the suit is 
 concluded by foreclosure absolute, and a sale was 
 ordered. Union Bank op London v. Ingeam 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 463 
 
 22. Sale — Conveyancing and Law of 
 
 Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 25.] 
 When at the trial of a foreclosure action the 
 Plaintiff asks for a sale of the property, and the 
 mortgagor does not appear, the Court will order 
 an account of what is due to the Plaintiff to be 
 first (aken, and then that so much of the property 
 be sold as will be sufficient to satisfy what is 
 found due to the Plaintiff. "Wade v. Wilson 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 235 
 
 IV. MOETGAGE— MORTGAGEE IN POSSESSION. 
 1. Account — Attornment Clause.'] In 
 
 taking the account in a foreclosure action between 
 first mortgagee and second mortgagee and mort- 
 gagor, an attornment clause in his mortgage deed 
 will not render the first mortgagee liable to 
 account on the footing of mortgagee in possession 
 ill respect of the rent reserved by the attornment 
 clause. Stanley v. Gkxindt - 22 Ch. D. 478 
 
 2. Lease subsequent to Mortgage — 
 
 Notice iy Mortgagee to Tenant to pay Bent to him.'} 
 C., the owner of a leasehold estate which was 
 subject to a mortgage, entered without the privity 
 of the mortgagees into an agreement with P. to 
 grant him a lease for twenty-one years, and in 
 1875 P. took possession under this agreement. 
 On the 25th of March, 1881, the mortgagees' 
 solicitors wrote to P. stating that they, on behalf 
 of the mortgagees, had withdrawn C.'s authority 
 to receive the rents and asking him to pay the 
 rent due that day and aU future rent to them. P. 
 wrote to ask C. whether he ought to pay accord- 
 ing to the notice, and C. replied that he would be 
 cnrrect in doing so. P. consulted his solicitors, 
 who inspected the mortgage deed, and advised 
 him that the mortgagees could claim rent from 
 him. P. therefore paid the mortgagees the rent 
 due on the 25th of March, and on the 22nd of 
 June gave them notice to determine his tenancy 
 at Christmas. At the end of the year the mort- 
 gagees refused to accept possession, and in June, 
 1882 they and 0. commenced this action to com- 
 pel P to take a lease according to the agree- 
 ment -.-Seld, afarming the decision of Pollock, B., 
 that the notice by the mortgagees to the tenant 
 to pay rent to them and the payment accordingly 
 did away with the agreement between O.and P. 
 and made P. tenant from year to year to the mort- 
 
 IV. MORTGAGE— MORTGAGEE IN POSSESSION 
 
 — continued. 
 gagees, and that specific performance of the agree- 
 ment could not be decreed. Cobbett v. Plowden 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 678 
 
 3. Proviso for Bednctioii of Interest — Ac- 
 counts—Bight to Higlier Bate of Interest:] Under 
 a proviso in a mortgage deed for reduction of in- 
 terest on punctual payment, a, mortgagee in pos- 
 session through the default of the mortgagor is 
 entitled, on the accounts being taken, to charge 
 the mortgagor with the higher rate of interest ; 
 and, al«o, in a proper case, with the commission 
 paid to a receiver for collecting the rents. — 
 Stains V. Banks (9 Jur. (N.S.) 1049 ; reversed on 
 appeal. Keg. Lib. 7 B. 1863, 1761) considered. 
 Union Baitk of London v. Ingram 16 Ch. D. 5S 
 
 4. Rents and Profits — Account — Liberty 
 
 to surcharge.] The Defendants had by the judg- 
 ment in the action been held to be mortgagees in 
 possession of certain mortgaged estates, and the 
 usual accounts and inquiries as against mortga- 
 gees in possession were directed. The Defendants 
 brought in an account purporting to shew their 
 receipts in respect of the rents and profits of the 
 mortgaged estates, but which in fact only shewed 
 certain lump sums received by them from one 
 J. H. Blood, then deceased, their agent. — Onmotion 
 by the Plaintiff for a further and better account : — 
 Held, by Pearson, J., that the account was sufficient 
 and that the Plaintift's proper course was to sur- 
 charge the Defendants : — Seld, by the Court of 
 Appeal (reversing the decision of Pearson, J.), 
 that tlie Defendants were bound to render the 
 further account, for that the receipts of Blood 
 were as between the Plaintiff and the Defendants 
 the receipts of the Defendants ; the Defendants 
 were bound to deliver an account shewing not 
 only what they had received from Blood but what 
 he had received from the tenants, and that it was 
 a question not of technicality but of substance, 
 for without the knowledge derived from such an 
 account the Plaintiff would be unable to proceed 
 on the inquiry as to wilful default, which was a 
 matter of surcharge, and that the death of the 
 Defendants' agent could not excuse the Defen- 
 dants from this liability. Notes v. Pollock 
 
 [30 Ch. D, 336 
 
 5. Sale by Mortgagee — Use and Occupa- 
 tion — Permanent Improvements.] If a mortgagee 
 in possession, or a mortgagee selling under his 
 power of sale, has reasonably expended money in 
 permanent works on the property, he is entitled 
 on prima facie evidence to that effect to an in- 
 quiry whether the outlay has increased the value 
 of the property, and if it has done so, he is en- 
 titled to be repaid his expenditure so far as it has 
 increased such value. And in such case it is im- 
 material whether the mortgagor had notice of the 
 expenditure. — Notice to the mortgagor is only 
 material when the expenditure is unreasonable, 
 for the purpose of shewing that he acquiesced in 
 it. — Sandon v. Hooper (6 Beav. 24&; 14 L. J. 
 (Ch;) 120) commented on. — A mortgagee in 
 possession sold the property undei- his power of 
 sale, a day being fixed for the completion of the 
 sale and for letting the purchaser into possession- 
 At the request of the purchaser the mortgagee 
 let him into possession four months before the 
 
( 905 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 (. 906 ) 
 
 IV. MORTGAGE— MOETGAGEE IN POSSESSION 
 
 — continued. 
 appointed day, but did not require him to pay any 
 rent : — Held, in an action by tlie mortgagor for 
 ascertaining the amount of the balance due to 
 him, that the mortgagee could not be charged 
 with an occupation rent for the interval during 
 ■which the purchaser had been in possession 
 before the appointed day. — ^Whether in such a 
 case the mortgagee' might be charged with wilful 
 default in not requiring a rent from the pur- 
 chaser, qusere. — The decision of Kay, J., reversed. 
 Shepakd v. Jones - 21 Ch. D. 469 
 
 Power of sale - - 18 Ch. D. 449 
 
 See MoBTGAGK — ^Powers. 6. 
 
 V. MOBIGAGE— MOBTGAGOB IN POSSESSION. 
 
 Trespass — Default in Payment on De- 
 mand — Damages for Illegal Seizure.'] Where by 
 the terms of a mortgage deed the Plaintiffs were 
 to remain in possession on their own account, and 
 manage the mortgaged property until they should 
 mate default in payment of the mortgage money 
 upon demand in writing in manner specified, and 
 such demand was-made on the wife of one of the 
 Plaintiffs during the Plaintiffs' absence by a per- 
 son who represented himself as the Defendant's 
 ■agent, and upon non-payment the Defendant forth- 
 with entered upon possession and seized the mort- 
 gaged property : — Seld, in an action of trespass 
 against the mortgagee, that such non-payment 
 before the Plaintiffs had had any opportunity 
 to inquire into the truth of the alleged- agency 
 did not constitute default, and that the Defend- 
 ant was liable to the mortgagors in substantial 
 damages. Moore v. Shelley 8 App. Cas. 285 
 
 WI. MOBTGAGE— POWEBS. 
 
 Power of leasing.] The Act 44 & 45 Yid. c. 41 
 (Conveyancing Act, 1881) enacts — 
 
 Sect. 18 — (1.) A mortgagor of land while in pos- 
 session shall, as against every incumbrancer, liave, 
 by virtue of this Act, power to make from time to 
 iime any such lease of the mortgaged land, or any 
 part thereof, as is in this section described and 
 authorized. 
 
 (2.) A mortgagee of land while in possession 
 shall, as against aU prior inoumbrancers, if any, 
 and as against the mortgagor, have, by virtue of 
 this Act, power to make from time to tims any such 
 lease as aforesaid. 
 
 (3.) The leases which this section authorizes are — 
 
 (i.) An agricultural or occupation lease foi" any 
 
 term not exceeding twenty-one years ; and 
 
 (ii.) A building lease for any term not exceeding 
 ninety-niTie years. 
 
 (4.) Every person making a lease under this 
 section may execute and do aU assurances and 
 things necessary or proper in that behalf. 
 
 (5.) Every snch lease shall be made to take effect 
 in possession not later than twelve months after its 
 date. 
 
 (6.) Every such lease shall reserve the best rent 
 that can reasonably be obtained, regard being had 
 to the circumstances of the case, but without any 
 fine being taken. 
 
 (7.) Every such lease shall contain a covenant by 
 the lessee for payment of the rent, and a condition 
 of re-entry on the rent not being paid within a time 
 therein specified not exceeding thirty days. 
 
 VI. MOBTGAGE— POWEBS — continued. 
 
 (8.) A counterpart of every such lease shall he 
 executed by the lessee and delivered to tlie^ lessor, of 
 which execution and delivery the execution of the 
 lease by the lessor shall, in favour of the lessee and 
 all persons deriving title under him, be sufficient 
 
 (9.) Every such building lease shall be made in 
 consideration of the lessee, or some person by whose 
 direction the lease is granted, having erected, or 
 agreeing to erect within not more than five years 
 from the date of the lease, buildings, new or addi- 
 tional, or having improved or repaired buildings, 
 or agreeing to improve or repair buildings within 
 that time, or having executed, or agreeing to 
 execute, within that time, on the land leased, an 
 improvement for or in connection with building 
 purposes. 
 
 (10.) In any such building lease a peppercorn 
 rent, or a nominal or other rent less than the rent 
 ultimately payable, may be made payable for the 
 first five years, or any less part of the term. 
 
 (11.) In case of a lease by the mortgagor, lie 
 shall, within one month after making the lease, 
 deliver to the mortgagee, or, where there are more 
 than one, to the mortgagee first in priority, a coun- 
 terpart of the lease duly executed by the lessee ; but 
 the lessee shall not be concerned to see that this 
 provision is complied with. 
 
 (12.) A contract to make or accept a lease under 
 this section may be enforced by or against every 
 person on whom the lease if granted would be 
 binding. 
 
 (13.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed by the mortgagor 
 and mortgagee in the mortgage deed, or otherwise 
 in writing, and shall have effect subject to the terms 
 of the mortgage deed or of any s»cA writing and to 
 the provisions therein contained. 
 
 (14.) Nothing in this Act shall prevent the mort- 
 gage deed from reserving to or conferring on the 
 mortgagor or the mortgagee, or both, any further 
 or other powers of leasing or having reference to 
 leasing; and any further or other powers so re- 
 served or conferred shall be exerciseable, as far as 
 may be, as if they were conferred by this Act, and 
 with all the like incidents, effects, and consequences, 
 unless a contrary intention is expressed in the 
 
 (15.) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to 
 enable a mortgagor or mortgagee to make a lease 
 for any longer term or on any other conditions than 
 such as could have been granted or imposedby the 
 mortgagor, with the concurrence of all the incum- 
 brancers, if this Act had not been passed. 
 
 (16.) This section applies only in case of a mort- 
 gage made after the commencement of this Act; 
 but the provisions thereof, or any of them, may, 
 by agreement in writing made after the commence- 
 ment of this Act, between mortgagor and mortgagee, 
 be applied to a mortgage made before the commence- 
 ment of this Act, so, nevertheless, that any such 
 agreement shall not prejudicially affect any right 
 or interest of any mortgagee not joining in cr 
 adopting the agreement. 
 
 (17.) The provisions of this section referring to a 
 lease shall be construed to extend and apply, as far 
 as circumstances admit, to any letting, and to an 
 agreement, whether in writing or not, for leasing or 
 letting. 
 
( 907 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 908 ) 
 
 VI. MORTGAGE— POWEES—coniinued. 
 
 Power of Sale, &c.] The Act 44 & 45 Vict. 
 c. 41 (^Conveyancing Act, 1881) enacts, sect. 19 — ■ 
 (1.) A mortgagee, where the: mortgage is made hy 
 deed, shall, by virtue of this Act, have the following 
 powers, to the like extent as if they had ieen in 
 terms conferred hy the mortgage deed, hut not 
 further (namely) : — 
 
 (i.) A power, when the mortgage-money has 
 hecome due, to sell, or to concur with any 
 other person in selling, the mortgaged pro- 
 perty, or any part thereof, either subject to 
 prior charges, or not, and either together or 
 in lots, by public auction or by private 
 contract, siibject to such conditions respect- 
 ing title, or evidence of title, or other matter, 
 as lie (the mortgagee) thinlcs fit, with power 
 to vary any contract for sale, and to re-sell, 
 without being answerable for any loss occa- 
 sioned thereby ; and 
 (ii.) A power at any time after the date of the 
 mortgage deed, to insure and Iteep insured 
 against loss or damage by fire any building, 
 or any effects or property of an insurable 
 nature, lohether affixed to the freehold or 
 not, being or forming part of the mortgaged 
 property, and the premiums paid for any 
 such insurance shall he a charge on the mort- 
 gaged property, in addition to the mortgage- 
 money and with the same priority ; and 
 with interest at the same rate, as the mort- 
 gage-money ; and 
 (iii.) A poioer, when the mortgage-money has 
 become due, to appoint a receiver of the 
 income of the mortgaged property, or of any 
 part thereof; and 
 (iv.) A power, while the mortgagee is in posses- 
 sion, to cut and sell tirr&er and other trees 
 ripe for cutting, and not planted or left 
 standing for shelter or ornament, or to con- 
 tract for any such cutting and sale, to be 
 completed within any time not exceeding 
 twelve months from tlie making of the con- 
 tract. 
 (2.) The provisions of this Act relating to the 
 foregoing powers, comprised either in this section, 
 or in any subsequent section regulating the exercise 
 of tlwse powers, may be varied or extended by the 
 mortgage deed, and, as so varied or extended, shall, 
 as far as may be, operate in the like manner and 
 with all the like incidents, effects, and consequences, 
 as if such variations or extensions were contained 
 in this Act. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the tnortgage 
 deed, and shall have effect subject to the terms of 
 the mortgage deed and. to the provisions therein 
 contained. 
 
 (4.) Tliis section applies only where the mort- 
 gage deed is executed after the commencement .of 
 this Act. 
 
 Sect. 20. A mortgagee shall not exercise the 
 power of sale conferred hy this Act unless and 
 until — 
 
 (i.) Notice requiring payment of the mortgage- 
 money has been served on tlie mortgagor or 
 one of several mortgagors, and default has 
 been made in payment of the mortgage- 
 money, or of part thereof, for three months 
 after such sen-ice ; or 
 
 VI. MOETGAGE— POWERS— conKniied. 
 
 (ii.) Some interest under the mortgage is in 
 arrear and unpaid for two months after 
 becoming due ; or 
 (iii.) Tliere has been a breach of some provision 
 contained in the mortgage deed or in this- 
 Act, and on the part of the mortgagor, or 
 of some person concurring in mOfking the- 
 mortgage, to he observed or performed,, 
 other than and besides a covenant for pay- 
 ment of ihe mortgage-money or interest 
 tliereon. 
 
 Sect. 21. — (1.) A mortgagee exercising the power 
 of sale conferred by this Act shall have power, by 
 deed, to convey the property sold, for such estate 
 and interest therein as is the subject of tlie mxtrt- 
 gage, freed from all estates, interests, and rights to 
 which the mortgage lias priority, hut subject to all 
 estates, interests, and rights which have priority iO' 
 the mortgage ; except that, in the case of copyhold 
 or customary land, tlie legal right to admittance 
 shall not pass by a deed under this section, unless^ 
 the deed is sufficient otherwise by law, or is sufficient 
 hy custom, in tliat behalf. 
 
 (2.) Where a conveyance is rmde in professed 
 exercise of the power of sale conferred by this Act,, 
 the title of the purchaser shall not he impeachable on, 
 tlie ground that no case had arisen to authorize the 
 sale, or tliatdue notice was not given, or that tlie 
 power was otherwise improperly or irregularly 
 exercised, but any person damnified hy an unautho- 
 rised, or improper, or irregular exercise of the 
 power, shall have his remedy in damages against 
 the person exercising the power. 
 
 (3.) The money which is received hy the mort- 
 gagee, arising from tlie sale, after discharge of prior 
 incumbrances to which the sale is not made subject,, 
 if any, or after payment into Court under this Act 
 of a sum to meet any prior incumbrance, shall be 
 held hy him in trtist to be applied hy him, first, in 
 payment of all costs, charges, and expenses, pro- 
 perly incurred hy him, as incident to tlie sale or 
 any attempted sale, or otherwise ; and secondly, in 
 discharge of the mortgage-money, interest, and 
 costs, and other money. If any, due under the mort- 
 gages, and tlie residue of the money so received!- 
 shall be paid to tlie. person entitled to tliemortgaged- 
 property, or authorized to give receipts for the pro- 
 ceeds of the sale thereof. 
 
 (4.) The power of sale conferred hy this Act may 
 he exercised by any person for the time being- 
 entitled to receive and give a discharge for the 
 mortffage-money. 
 
 (5.) The power of sale conferred hy this Act shall 
 not affect the right of foreclosure. 
 
 (6.) The mortgagee, his e.KCutors, administra- 
 tors, or assigns, shall not be answerable for any 
 involuntary loss happening in or about the exercise 
 or e.wcution of the power of sale conferred hy this 
 Act, or of any trust connected therewith. 
 
 (7.) At any time after the power of sale con- 
 ferred by this Act has hecome exerciseahle, the 
 person entitled to exercise tlie sanie may demanS 
 and recover from any person, other than a person 
 having in tlie mortgaged property an estatCy 
 interest, or right in priority to the mortgage, all 
 the deeds and documents relating to the property, 
 or to tlie title therito, which a purchaser under the 
 power of sale would be entitled to demand and 
 rtcurer from him. 
 
( 909 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 910 ) 
 
 VI. MORTGAGE— POWERS— coniOT«c(Z. 
 
 Sept. 22. — (1.) The receipt in writing of a mort- 
 gagee shall be a sufficient discharge for any money 
 arising under the power of sale conferred by this 
 Act, or for any money or securities comprised in 
 his mortgage, or arising thereunder ; and a person 
 passing or transferring the same to the mortgagee 
 shall not be concerned to inquire whether any money 
 remains due under the mortgage. 
 
 (2.) Money received by a mortgagee under his 
 mortgage or from the proceeds of securities com- 
 prised in his mortgage shall be applied in like 
 manner as in this Act directed respecting money 
 received by him arising from a sale under the power 
 of sale conferred by this Act ; but loith this varia- 
 tion, that the costs, charges, and expenses payable 
 shall include the costs, charges, and expenses pro- 
 perly incurred of recovering and receiving the 
 money or securities, and of conversion of seourities 
 into money, instead of those incident to sale. 
 
 Sect. 23. — (1.) The amount of an insurance 
 effected by a mortgagee against loss or damage by 
 fire under the power in that behalf conferred by 
 this Act shall not exceed the amount specified in the 
 mortgage deed, or, if no amount is tlierein specified, 
 then shall not exceed two-third parts of the amount 
 that would be required, in case of total destruction, 
 to restore the property insured. 
 
 (2.) An insurance shall not, under the power 
 conferred by this Act, be effected by a mortgagee in 
 any of the following cases (namely) : 
 (i.) Where there is a declaration in the mortgage 
 
 deed that no insurance is required : 
 (ii.) Where an insurance is, kept up by or on 
 behalf of the mortgagor in accordance viith 
 the mortgage deed : 
 (iii.) Where the mortgage deed contains no 
 stipulation respecting insurance, and an 
 insurance is kept up by or on behalf of the 
 mortgagor, to the amount in which the 
 mortgagee is by this Act authorized to in- 
 sure. 
 (3.) All money received on an insurance effected 
 under the mortgage deed or under this Act shall, if 
 the mjortgagee so requires, be applied by the mort- 
 gagor in making good the loss or damage in respect 
 of which the money is received. 
 
 (4.) Without prejudice to any obligation to the 
 contrary imposed by law, or by special contract, a 
 mortgagee may require that all money received on 
 an insurance be applied in or towards discharge of 
 the money due under his mortgage. 
 
 Sect. 24.— (1.) A mortgagee entitled to appoint 
 a receiver under the power in that behalf conferred 
 by this Act shall not appoint a receiver until he has 
 become entitled to exercise the power of sale con- 
 ferred by this Act, but may then, by writing under 
 his hand, appoint such person as he thinks fit to be 
 receiver. 
 
 (2.) The receiver shall be deemed to be the agent 
 of the mortgagor ; and the mortgagor shall be solely 
 responsible for the receiver's acts or defaults unless 
 the mortgage deed otherwise provides. 
 
 (8.) The receiver shall have power to demand 
 and recover all the income of the property of which 
 he is appointed receiver, by action, distress, or 
 ■otherwise, in the name either of the mortgagor or of 
 the mortgagee, to the full extent of the estate or in- 
 terest which the mortgagor could dispose of, and to 
 give effectual receipts, accordingly, for the same. 
 
 VI. MORTGAGE- POWERS— cojiiimiefJ. 
 
 (4.) A person paying money to the receiver shall 
 not be concerned to inquire whether any case has 
 happened to authorize the receiver to act. 
 
 (5.) The receiver may be removed, and a new 
 receiver may be appointed, from time to time, by 
 the mortgagee in writing under his hand. 
 
 (6.) The receiver shall be entitled to retain out of 
 any money received by him, for his remuneration, 
 and in satisfaction of all costs, charges, and ex- 
 penses incurred by him as receiver, a commission 
 at such rate, not exceeding 5 per centum on the 
 gross amount of all money received, as is specified 
 in his appointment, and if no rate is so specified, 
 then at the rate of 5 per centum on that gross 
 amount, or at such higher rate as the Court thinks 
 fit to allow on application made by him for tliat 
 purpose. 
 
 (7.) The receiver sliaU, if so directed in writing 
 by the mortgagee, insure and keep insured against 
 loss or damage by fire, out of -the money received by 
 him, any building, effects, or property comprised in 
 the mortgage, whether affixed to the freehold or not, 
 being of an insurable nature. 
 
 (8.) The receiver shall apply all money received 
 by him as follows (namely^ : — 
 
 (i.) In discharge of all rents, taxes, rates, and 
 outgoings whatever affecting the mortgaged 
 property; and 
 (ii.) In keeping down all annual sums or other 
 payments, and the interest on all principal 
 sums, having priority to the mortgage iu 
 right whereof he is receiver ; and 
 (iii.) In payment of his commission, and of the 
 premiums on fire, life, or other insurances, 
 if any, properly payable under the mort- 
 gage deed or under this Act, and tlie cost 
 of executing necessary or proper repairs 
 directed in writing by the mortgagee ; and 
 (iv.) In payment of the interest accruing due in 
 respect of any principal money due under 
 the mortgage : 
 and shall pay the residue of the money received by 
 him to the person who, but for the possession^ of the 
 receiver, would liave been entitled to receive the 
 income of the mortgaged property, or who is other- 
 wise entitled to that property. 
 
 1. Power of Sale — Notice to Mortgagor or 
 
 his Assigns.'] A mortgage contained a, power of 
 sale with a proviso that the mortgagee was not to 
 execute tlie power without giving notice to the 
 mortgagor or his assigns. The mortgagor assigned 
 his equity of redemption by way of mortgage to a 
 second mortgagee : — Meld, that such second mort- 
 gagee was entitled to receive notice of the first 
 mortgagee's intention to exercise his power of sale, 
 and was entitled to damage from him for default 
 in giving such notice. Hoole v. Smith 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 434 
 
 2. Power of Sale — Purchase by Secretary 
 
 of Mortgagees."] At a sale by auction under the 
 direction of a building society as mortgagees, the 
 secretary of the society openly bid for and became 
 the purchaser of two lots on his own account. 
 There was no proof of undervalue. — Held, that 
 under the circumstances the sale to the secretary 
 could not be maintained as against the mortgagor. 
 — Robertson v. Norris (1 Giff. 421) disapproved of. 
 Martinson v. Clowes - 21 Ch, D. 857 
 
( 911 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 912 ) 
 
 VI. MOETGAGE— POWEES 
 
 3. Power of Sale — Bestraining Sale — 
 
 Payment into Court.'] The general rule is that a 
 sale by a mortgagee will be restrained only on 
 payment into Court by the mortgagor of the 
 amount which the mortgagee swears to be due 
 to him, but this does not apply where the Court 
 can see on the terms of the deed that this amount 
 cannot be due on the security. — Hill v. Kirkwood 
 (28 W. E. 358) considered. Hickson v. Daklow 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 690 
 
 4. Power of Sale — Restraining Sale — 
 
 Payment of Money into Court — Mortgagee in 
 Hduciary Position — Solicitor and Client.'] The 
 ordinary rule that the Court will not grant an 
 interlocutory injunction restraining a mortgagee 
 from exercising his power of sale except on the 
 terms of the mortgagor paying into Court the 
 Biun sworn by the mortgagee to be due for prin- 
 cipal, interest, and costs, does not apply to a case 
 where the mortgagee at the time of taking the 
 mortgage was the solicitor of the mortgagor. In 
 such a ease the Court will look to all the cir- 
 cumstances of the case, and will make such order 
 as will save the mortgagor from oppression with- 
 out injuring the security of the mortgagee. — The 
 Plaintiff was a lady who was entitled to a life 
 interest in leasehold property which she had 
 mortgaged to various persons. The Defendant 
 acted as her solicitor, and with her sanction in 
 order to release her from embarrassment bought 
 up several of the incumbrances with his own 
 money and took a transfer of them to himself; 
 having previously taken a mortgage of the life 
 interest to secure his past costs and the costs 
 which he might incur in paying off the incum- 
 brances. Afterwards the Plaiutiff discharged the 
 Defendant, and employed another solicitor, who 
 applied to the Defendant for information respect- 
 ing the securities transferred. The Defendant 
 refused to give this information unless the pay- 
 ment of what was due to him was guaranteed, and 
 threatened to proceed to a sale of the property. 
 The Plaintiff then brought an action to impeach 
 the securities and to restrain the sale of the pro- 
 perty, and moved for an injunction till the hear- 
 ing : — Seld, that considering all the circumstances, 
 an injunction ought to be granted, on the Plaintiff 
 paying into Court such a sum as the Court con- 
 sidered would cover the amount actually advanced 
 by the Defendant, and amending the writ so as to 
 make it a simple action for redemption and injunc- 
 tion. MACLEOD V. Jones - - 34 Ch. D. 289 
 
 6. Power of Sale — Bestraining Sale — 
 
 Undervalue — Trustee.] If a mortgagee exercises 
 his power of sale bona tide for the purpose of 
 realizing his debt and without collusion with the 
 purchaser, the Court will not interfere even though 
 the sale be very disadvantageous unless tbe price 
 is so low as in itself to be evidence of fraud. A 
 mortgagee in exercising his power of sale is not 
 (except as to the balance of the purchase-money 
 after a sale) a trustee for the mortgagor even if 
 the mortgage is in the form of a trust for sale. — 
 Downes v. Grazebi-oolc (3 Mer. 200) and Bobertson 
 V. Norris (1 Giff. 421) observed upon. "Wakner v. 
 Jacob - _ - - 20 Ch. D. 220 
 
 6. Power of Sale — Solicitor and Client — 
 
 Mortgage hj Client to Solicitor— App-opriation of 
 
 VI. MORTGAGE— POWEES— co««ift«e(J. 
 rents hy Mortgagee in Possession.] A solicitor ad- 
 vanced money to his client on a second mortgage, 
 in which was inserted a power of sale exerciseable 
 at any time without the usual proviso requiring 
 that notice should be given, or some interest 
 should be three months in arrear ; and it was 
 not shewn that he explained to the chent that 
 the power was not in the usual form. The 
 solicitor afterwards took possession,- and for 
 several years received the rents, which, together 
 with some payments made by the mortgagor, ex- 
 ceeded the interest on both mortgages. He then 
 sold the property without notice. — Held (affirming 
 the decision of Fry, J.), in an action by the mort- 
 gagor against the solicitor, that the omission from 
 the power of sale of the usual qualifying clause 
 was a breach of duty, and that the mortgagee was 
 liable in damages as for an improper sale, unless 
 it could be shewn that some interest was three 
 months in arrear ; and whether the absence of 
 explanation did not make it improper even if there 
 was interest in aiTear, qussre. — Held, that the fact 
 that the mortgagee had received rents to an 
 amount more than sufficient to pay the interest 
 would not by itself prove that there was no in- 
 terest in arrear if no appropriation was shewn to 
 have been made. — The dictum in Brocklehurst v. 
 Jessop (7 Sim. 442) overruled. — But held, that, as 
 in an account sent by the mortgagee to the mort- 
 gagor the interest was treated as satisfied up to a 
 certain day out of the rents, there was evidence of 
 an arrangement ihat the rents should be applied 
 in discharge of interest, and that, as the final 
 account shewed that if the rents were thus appro- 
 priated there would be no interest in arrear at the 
 time of sale, the sale was improper. — ^Whether a 
 mortgagee in possession having a balance of rents 
 in hand more than sufficient for payment of the 
 interest and all expenses he has incurred can be 
 heard to say that interest is in arrear so as to 
 justify a sale because no account has been ren- 
 dered and no appropriation made, qusere. — Held 
 (reversing the decision of Fry, J.), that the differ- 
 ence between party and party costs and solicitor 
 and client costs of the present action could not be 
 given to the Plaintiff by way of damages. Cooe;- 
 BUEN V. Edwards - - 18 Ch. L. 449 
 
 Sale by mortgagee in possession — Permanent 
 
 improvements - 21 Ch. D. 469 
 
 See MoBTQAGE — ^Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 5. 
 
 VII. MOETGAGE— PEIOEITT. 
 
 1. Bankruptcy of Mortgagor — Purcliase 
 
 hy Trustee in Banhmptcy of Mortgaged Estate — 
 Bight of Second Mortgagee.] A trustee in bank- 
 ruptcy dois not by purchasing from the first 
 mortgagee of the bankrupt extinguish the first 
 mortgage, and make the second mortgagee the 
 first incumbrancer on the estate. — But such a 
 purchase does not extinguish the right of the 
 second mortgagee to redeem. Bell v. Sundeb- 
 LAND Building Society - 24 Ch. D. 618 
 
 2. Building Society — Tacking — Beceift 
 
 hy Trustees of Building Society — 6 & 7 Wm,. 4, 
 0. 32, s. 5 — 'Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874 (3'P 
 & 38 Vict. c. 78), 8. 7— Land Transfer Act, 1875 
 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 87), s. 129.] The lessee of a 
 term, in November, 1865, mortgaged it to the 
 
( 913 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 914 ) 
 
 Vn. MOETGAGE— PEIORITT— confmuecJ. 
 trustees of a building society of which he was a 
 member, to secure the payment by him of all 
 moneys which might become due from him 
 pursuant to the rules of the society. In Septem- 
 ber, 1868, the leasee of the term again mortgaged 
 it to the Plaintiff to secure the sum of £70 then 
 due from him to the Plaintiff, and such further 
 sums as should thereafter be advanced by the 
 Plaintiff. Notice of the mortgage to the Plaintiff 
 was not given to the building society. — Previously 
 to June, 1875, the lessee of the term applied to 
 the Defendants to advance to him the sum of 
 £150 on the security thereof. He informed them 
 that the property was subject to the mortgage fo 
 the building society, but was not subject to any 
 other incumbrance. In July, 1875, the Defendants 
 paid to the trustees of the building society the 
 sum of £57 18s. lid., being the full amount due 
 from the lessee of the term, and thereupon the 
 trustees, under 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 32, s. 5, signed a 
 receipt indorsed on the deed of mortgage to the 
 society, acknowledging that all moneys intended 
 to be secured by the mortgage to the building 
 society had been paid. In the same month the 
 Defendants paid to the lessee of the term the sum 
 of £92 Is. Id., being the balance of the sum of 
 £150 agreed to be advanced, and thereupon he 
 executed a mortgage of the term to the Defend- 
 ants to secure payment of the sum of £150. The 
 lessee of the term afterwards became insolvent. 
 The present action for foreclosure having been 
 brought in a County Oourt, the Judge, by his de- 
 cree, declared that the hereditaments were sub- 
 ject, first, to a charge of what might be due to 
 the Defendants in respect of the £57 ISs. lid. 
 paid by them to the building society ; secondly, 
 to a charge of what might be due to the Plaintiff 
 by virtue of the mortgage to him ; thirdly, to a 
 charge of what might be due to the Defendants 
 on the security of their mortgage, so far as the 
 same might not be included in the first charge : 
 — Held, affirming the decision of the Queen's 
 Bench Division, that the priorities were correctly 
 ascertained, and that the decree of the Oouuty 
 Court was right. — ^Per Brett, M.R., and Bowen, 
 L.J., that the present case fell within the prin- 
 ciples laid down in Pease v. Jackson (Law Eep. 
 3 Oh. 576).— Per Baggallay, L.J., first, on the 
 authority of Pease v. Jaekson (Law Eep. 3 Oh. 
 576), that the Defendants had the better equity, 
 and consequently the better right to call for the 
 legal estate, and that the legal estate in the pro- 
 perty comprised in the mortgage to the building 
 society had vested in the Defendants by virtue of 
 the indorsed receipt; nevertheless that the se- 
 curity acquired by the Defendants by reason of 
 the legal estate becoming vested in them, did not 
 extend beyond the amount advanced by them to 
 pay off the building society, and that, as regarded 
 the further advance, they were, incumbrancers 
 puisne to the Plaintiff; secondly, that notwith- 
 standing the Land Transfer Act, 1875, s. 129, the 
 Defendants, owing to the Vendor and Purchaser 
 Act, 1874, were precluded from treating the pro- 
 perty vested in them as security for the further 
 sum advanced by them to the lessee of the term. 
 — Fourth City Mutual Benefit Building Soeiety v. 
 Williams (14 Ch. D. 140) commented on. EoBm- 
 80N V. Tbevok - - 12 Q. B. D. 423 
 
 VII, MOETGAGE— PBIORITY— confemtietZ. 
 
 3. Company — Deposit — Certificates of 
 
 Shares — Lien of Company on Shares for Moneys 
 due from Shareholder — Notice.} The- articles of 
 association of a company provided that the com- 
 pany should have a first and permanent lien and 
 charge, available at law and in equity, on every 
 share, for all debts due from the shareholder to 
 the company. A shareholder deposited the 
 certificates of his shares with his bankers as 
 security for the balance then due from him to 
 them on his current account, and notice of the 
 deposit was given to the company : — Held, that 
 HopMnson v. Bolt (9 H. L. C. 514) applied, and 
 that the company could not claim priority over 
 the bankers in respect of moneys which became 
 due from the shareholder to the company after 
 notice of the bankers' advance, but that the 
 bankers were entitled to priority. Bkadfokd 
 Banking Company v. Beiggs & Co. 29 Ch. D. 149 
 
 [Reversed by Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 19.] 
 
 4. Deposit — Equitable Priorities — In- 
 
 cunibraneers without Notice — Fraud — Possession 
 of Title Deeds— Estoppel] In 1873, D., in order 
 to carry out a fraudulent scheme, obtained a 
 transfer to himself of mortgages of freehold pro- 
 perty, and after various dealings with it the legal 
 estate was, in September, 1875, conveyed by a 
 mortgagee to H. in trust for M., and in March, 
 1876, by H. to M. M. was alleged to have been an 
 accomplice of and trustee for D. — In August, 1874, 
 in pursuance of this scheme, T., claiming to be 
 entitled to this property under a fictitious lease 
 for ninety-eight years, purporting to have been 
 granted to him in March, 1870, by a merely ficti- 
 tious freeholder (an agent and accomplice of D.), 
 demised the property by way of mortgage to A. — • 
 In November, 1874, M., claiming to be entitled to 
 the same property under a fictitious lease for 
 ninety-nine years, also dated March, 1870, and 
 purporting to be granted to him by T., demised 
 the property by way of mortgage to B., the 
 mortgage deed being executed by M. only.— 
 In January, 1877, M. (to whom the 'legal estate 
 had been conveyed in March, 1876) deposited the 
 genuine title deeds of the property with 0. upon 
 a memorandum charging his estate and interest 
 in the lands comprised in the deeds and a statu- 
 tory declaration of title ; and further advances 
 were made to M. and D., who came forward and 
 stated that M. was merely a trustee for him of the 
 property. — In 1878, D.,M., and T. were convicted 
 and sentenced to penal servitude for forgery and 
 fraud in connection with this property, and 0., as 
 equitable mortgagee, entered into possession. — In 
 an action by A. to settle the priorities of himself, 
 B., and 0., as incumbrancers on the property : — 
 Held : 1. That, assuming T. to have been the agent 
 of D., so that his representations to A. of having 
 a good title were binding on D., such representa- 
 tions followed by the acquisition of the property 
 beneficially by D, did not bind the estate so as to 
 give A. a prior equitable charge as against sub- 
 sequent purchaser's for value without notice. — 
 2. That the like representations of M. to B., fol- 
 lowed by the acquisition, first, of the equitable, 
 and afterwards of the legal estate by M., did not 
 put B. in any better position, and that the doctrine 
 of estoppel did not apply so as to convert thefioti- 
 
( 915 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 916 ) 
 
 VII. MORTGAGE— PEIOEITY—conMBtted. 
 tious title acquired by B. from N. in November, 
 1874, into a valid legal title ab initio upon the 
 conveyance of the legal estate to M. in March, 
 1876. — 3. That aa purchaser for value without 
 notice by deposit of the genuine title deeds, C, 
 though subsequent in date, "was entitled in 
 priority over A. and B. Keate v. Phillips 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 560 
 
 5. Deposit — Loan hy equitable Mortgagee 
 
 after Notice of Contract of Sale — Vendor and Fur- 
 chaser — lAen of Unpaid Vendor.'] The owner of 
 land, after depositing the title deeds with a bani: 
 as security for all sums then or thereafter to be- 
 come due on the general balance of his account 
 with the bank, contracted with the knowledge of 
 the bank to sell the land to one who had notice of 
 the terms of the deposit, The vendor afterwards 
 paid into his own accoimt at the bank sums 
 which in the whole exceeded the debt due to the 
 bank on his balance at the time of the contract of 
 sale, so that on the principle of Clayton's Case 
 (1 Mer._ 585) that debt was discharged. The 
 bank, without giving notice to the purchaser, con- 
 tinued the account and made fresh advances to 
 the vendor, so that on the general balance there 
 was always a debt to the bank. The purchaser, 
 who never had notice of the fresh advances, paid 
 the purchase-money by instalments to the vendor : 
 — Held (affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal), that on tEe principle of SopMnson v. 
 Molt (9 H. L. C. 514), the bank had no charge on 
 the land as against the purchaser for the fresh 
 advances. — Meld, also, that the bank had no 
 charge upon the purchase-money. — Per Lord 
 Blackburn : A purchaser of land, with notice that 
 the title deeds have been deposited with a bank 
 as security for the general balance on the vendor's 
 present and future account, is not bound to in- 
 quire whether the bank has after notice of the 
 purchase made fresh advances. The burden lies 
 on the bank advancing on the security of the un- 
 paid vendor's lien to give the purchaser notice 
 that it has so done or intends so to do. Loneon 
 AND CouNTv Banking Compant v. Eatcliffe 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 722 
 
 6. ■ NegUgenoe of First Mortgagee— Pbs- 
 
 session of Deeds.] P. mortgaged estates to M., and 
 was allowed to retain possession of the title deeds. 
 He subsequently mortgaged one of the estates to 
 A. B., who obtained possession of the deeds, and 
 all the estates to 0., who advanced his moneys 
 after ascertaining the position of the deeds, and 
 upon the faith that A. B. was the only prior 
 mortgagee: — Held, that M., by not obtaining 
 possession of the deeds, enabled P. to deal with 
 his estates as an unincumbered owner ; that A. B. 
 having been diligent in obtaining the deeds 
 acquired priority, and that C. also having been 
 diligent in ascertaining that A. B. had the deeds, 
 apparently as first mortgagee, the same principle 
 extended to him, and he also had priority over M. 
 — The case of Perry-Herrick v. Attwood (25 Beav. 
 205 ; 2 De G. & J. 21) explained and followed. 
 Clarke ■;;. Palmeb - 21 Ch. D, 124 
 
 7. Negligence of First Mortgagee — 
 
 Possession of Deeds.] C, the manager of a joint 
 stock company, executed a legal mortgage to the 
 company of his own freehold estate, and handed 
 
 VII. MOETGAGE— PEIOEITY— coniOTMe(?. 
 over the title deeds to them. The deeds were 
 placed in a safe of the company, which had only 
 one look having duplicate keys, one of which 
 was intrusted to C, as manager. Some time 
 afterwards, C. took out of the safe the deeds 
 except the mortgage, and handed them to W., to 
 whom at the same time he executed a mortgage 
 for money advanced to him by her, without notice 
 of the company's security : — Held, reversing the 
 decision of the Vioe-Chancellor of the Court of 
 the Cormty Palatine of Lancaster, that the mort- 
 gage of the company had priority over the mort- 
 gage to W. — The Court will postpone a legal 
 mortgage to a subsequent equitable security: 
 (1) where the legal mortgagee has assisted in or 
 connived at the ftaud which led to the creation 
 of the subsequent equitable estate, of which 
 assistance or connivance the omission to use ordi- 
 nary care in inquiring after or keeping the title 
 deeds may be sufficient evidence where such 
 conduct cannot otherwise be explained; or (2), 
 where the legal mortgagee has made the mort- 
 gagor his agent with authority to raise money, 
 and the security given for raising such money has 
 by misconduct of the agent been represented as 
 the first estate. — But the Court wiU not postpone 
 a legal mortgagee to a subsequent equitable 
 mortgagee on the ground of any mere carelessness 
 or want of prudence on the part of the legal 
 mortgagee. Nobthekn Counties op England 
 FiEE Insubance Company v. Whipp 26 Ch. D. 482 
 
 8. Negligence of First Mortgagee — Pos- 
 session of Deeds — Postponement of Holder of Legal 
 Estate — Trustee of Marriage Settlement— Notice of 
 Marriage of Mortgagor — Duty of Mortgagee to in- 
 quire as to Settlement.] In November, 1875, a 
 husband deposited with his bankers the title deeds 
 of some leasehold houses, together with a memo- 
 randum of deposit, as a continuing security to the 
 bankers for any overdraft of his wife's current 
 account with them. In November, 1876, he died, 
 having bequeathed all his property to his wife, and 
 appointed her his executrix. After his death the 
 deeds remained with the bankers, and the widow 
 was allowed on the security of them to overdraw 
 her account. In May, 1877, she married again. 
 Prior to the marriage the houses were assigned by 
 her to a trustee on trust for herself for life, and after 
 her death on trust for an infant son of her first 
 marriage absolutely. Power was given to the 
 trustee to sell the houses during the life of the wife, 
 at her request, and after her death at the discre- 
 tion of the trustee. The trustee made no inquiry 
 about the title deeds, and no notice of the settle- 
 ment was given to the bankers. In June, 1877, 
 the husband and wife gave notice to the bankers 
 of their marriage, and at their request a balance, 
 which then stood to the credit of the wife's 
 current account, was transferred to a new current 
 account opened by the bankers with the husband. 
 The deeds remained with the bankers, but no 
 notice of the settlement was given to them. In 
 November, 1877, at the request of the bankers, 
 the probate of the first husband's will was sent to 
 them, and at their request a new memorandum of 
 deposit was in January, 1878, signed by the 
 husband and wife, making the deeds a continuing 
 seciu-ity to the bankers lor any overdraft of the 
 
( 917 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 918 ) 
 
 VII. MOETGAGE—PEIOEITY— continued, 
 husband's current account. In April, 1878, the 
 ■wife died. The deeds were still with the bankers, 
 and at that time the husband's current account 
 was in credit. In 1883 the trustee made some 
 inquiries, and then discovered that the deeds, 
 which he had believed to be in the custody of the 
 solicitor who had prepared the settlement, were 
 with the bankers. He then gave the bankers 
 notice of the settlement, and claimed the deeds. 
 This was the first notice that the bankers had 
 had of the settlement : — Seld, that the omlsaiou 
 of the trustee to inquire for the title deeds was 
 negligence of such a character as prevented him 
 from availing himself of the legal estate to give 
 him priority over the equitable charge of the 
 bankers, and that the cestui que trust stood in no 
 better position. — Held, that the bankers were 
 entitled to priority in respect of the amount due 
 to them on their security at the time when they 
 received notice of the settlement. — When a 
 married woman executes a mortgage there is no 
 obligation on the njortgagee to inquire whether 
 a settlement was made on her marriage. Lloyd's 
 Banking Company v. Jones - 29 Ch. D. 221 
 
 9. NegUgence of Krst Mortgagee — Post- 
 
 ponement of Legal Mortgage — Deposit of Deeds — 
 Priority — Recovery of Deeds — Purcliase for Value 
 vrithout Notice — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, 
 sub-s. 11.] A legal mortgagee had asked for the 
 deeds which the mortgagor, who was his solicitor, 
 made excuses for not giving to him. The mort- 
 gagor afterwards deposited the deeds with another 
 mortgagee as security for money advanced without 
 notice of the legal mortgage : — Held, in an action 
 by the legal mortgagee for foreclosure, that he 
 had not been guilty of fraud or negligence amount- 
 ing to fraud, and that he could not be postponed 
 to the mortgagee by deposit by reason of any 
 negligence short of that: — Held, that the legal 
 mortgagee was entitled to recover the deeds from 
 the mortgagee by deposit, notwithstanding he was 
 a purchaser for value without notice; and that 
 sect. 25, sub-sect. 11, of the Judicature Act, 1873, 
 did not alter the rule of law on the subject. 
 Mannees v. Mew - - 29 Ch. D. 725 
 
 10. Notice — Fund in Court — Notice of 
 
 Prior Incurribrance to Second Incumbrancer — Stop 
 Order.'\ A second incumbrancer of a fund in 
 Oourt, who at the time of taking his security had 
 notice of the existence of the first incumbrance, 
 caimot by obtaining a stop order gain priority 
 over the first incumbrancer, even although the 
 latter never obtains a stop order. In re Holmes 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 786 
 
 11. Notice — Fund partly in Court and 
 
 partly in Hands of Trustees^Notice — Stop Order.'] 
 When an assignment is made of an interest in a 
 trust fund part of which is in Court and part in 
 the hands of the trustees, the assignee in order to 
 complete his title must, as regards the fund in 
 Court, obtain a, stop order, and, as regards the 
 ftind in the hands of the trustees, give notice to 
 the trustees. Notice to the trustees will be in- 
 efiectual as regards the fund in Court, and as to 
 that fund the priorities of different assignees will 
 be determined by the dates at which they have 
 obtained stop orders. An assignee who has 
 obtained a stop order is entitled (as regards the 
 
 VII. MORTGAGE— PEIOBITY—eoBtoMeiJ. 
 fund in Court) to priority over a prior assignee 
 (of whose assignment he had no notice), who had 
 given notice to the trustees before the date of the 
 stop order, but who had not himself obtained any 
 stop order. Mutual Liee Insubanoe Society v. 
 Langley - - - - 26Ch. D. 686 
 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal.] 
 
 12. Notice — Officer's Commission — Begu- 
 
 lation of the Forces Ad, 1871 (34 & 35 7iet. 
 a. 86), s. 3.] When an officer retires from Her 
 Majesty's service, the amount in respect of his 
 commission to which he is entitled under 34 & 35 
 Vict. c. 86, 3. 3, " upon his retirement," though 
 it has been previously lodged by the Army Pur- 
 chase Commissioners with the army agents, and 
 by them entered in their books under the officer's 
 name, is not the money of the officer so as to 
 be capable of being affected by notice from au 
 incumbrancer to the army agents until the re- 
 tirement is gazetted. — A first incumbrancer gave 
 notice after the money was transferred by the 
 Army Purchase Commissioners to the agents and 
 again gave notice five days after the Gazette. 
 Second and third incumbrancers gave simul- 
 taneous notices on the day after the Gazette : 
 — Held, that the order of priorities was : 
 1. Second incumbrancer ; 2. Third incumbrancer ; 
 3. First incumbrancer. Johnstone v. Cox 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 571 ; 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 13, Notice — Policy — Incumirance — Legal 
 
 Estate — Trustee."] A trustee who has the legal 
 estate and takes from his cestui que trust an 
 assignment of the equitable interest by way of 
 security for money advanced to the cestui que 
 trust, can avail himself of the legal estate as a 
 protection against a prior incumbrance of which 
 he had no notice. — The note in Sugden's 
 Vendors and Purchasers (14th Ed. p. 379) on 
 Browne v. Savage (4 Drew. 635) corrected. 
 The Act 30 & 81 Vict. c. 144, is intended to 
 apply only as between the insurance office and 
 the persons interested in the policy, and does 
 not affect the rights of those persons inter se. 
 Accordingly where a first incumbrancer on a 
 policy had not given such notice as prescribed 
 by the Act, and a second incumbrancer with 
 notice of the prior charge had given the statu- 
 tory notice : — Held, that the second incumbran- 
 cer did not thereby obtain priority. Newman 
 V. Newman - - - 28 Ch. D. 674 
 
 VIII. mOETGAGE— EEDEMPTION. 
 
 Ttte Act 44 cfc 45 Vict. o. 41 (Conveyancing Act, 
 1881), enacts. Sect. 15. — (1.) Where a mortgagor 
 is entitled to redeem, he shall, by virtue of this Act, 
 have power to require the mortgagee, instead of re- 
 conveying, and on the terms on which he would he 
 bound to re-convey, to assign the mortgage debt and 
 convey the mortgaged property to any third person, 
 as tlie mortgagor directs ; and the mortgagee shall, 
 by virtue of this Act, be bound to assign and convey 
 accordingly. 
 
 (2.) This section does not apply in the case of a 
 mortgagee being or having been in possession. 
 
 (3.) This section applies to mortgages made 
 either before or after the commencement of this Act 
 (31s< Dec. 1881), and shall have effect notwith- 
 standing any stipulation to the contrary. 
 
( 919 ) 
 
 DIOBST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 920 ) 
 
 VIII. MOSTGAGE— EEDEMPTION— conimtMr?. 
 
 By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 {Conveyancing Act, 1882), 
 s. 12, the rigid of the mortgagor, under sect. 15 
 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, to require a mort- 
 gagee, instead of re-conveying, to assign the mort- 
 gage debt and convey the mortgaged property to 
 a third person, shall belong to and be capable of 
 being enforced by each incumbrancer, or by the 
 mortgagor, notwithstanding any intermediate in- 
 cumbrance ; but a requisition of an incumbrancer 
 shall prevail over a requisition of the mortgagor, 
 and, as between incumbrancers, a requisition of a 
 prior incumbrancer shall prevail over a requisition 
 of a subsequent incumbrancer. 
 
 Inspection of Title-deeds.] By the 44 & 45 
 Vict. c. 41, s. 16. — (1.) A mortgagor, as long as 
 Ms right to redeem subsists, shall, by virtue of this 
 Act, be entitled from time to time, at reasonable 
 times, on his request, and at Ms own cost, and on 
 payment of the mortgagee's costs and expenses in 
 this behalf, to inspect and make copies or abstracts 
 of or extracts from the documents of title relating 
 to the mortgaged property in the custody or power 
 of the mortgagee. 
 
 1 (2.) This section applies only to mortgages made 
 after the commencement of this Act, and shall have 
 effect notwithstanding any stipulation to the con- 
 trary. 
 
 1. Action to enforce Security — Notice to 
 
 pay off Mortgage Debt.'] A son ■who was resi- 
 dnary legatee under liis father's ■will, mortgaged 
 his interest under that ■will to H. The son died 
 having made P, his executor and A. his residuary 
 legatee. A., as residuary legatee, and H., on 
 behalf of himself and the other creditors, brought 
 an action against the executors of the son for ad- 
 ministration of the son's estate, and H. brought an 
 action against the executors of the father for ad- 
 ministration of the father's estate. Shortly after 
 this P. gave notice to H. that he should pay off 
 the mortgage m six calendar months, and this 
 notice vras accepted by H. : — Seld, that notwith- 
 standing the giving and acceptance of the notice, 
 H. having taken proceedings to recover his mort- 
 gage money was bound to accept in satisfaction 
 of his claims Ms principal money and costs with 
 interest up to the time of payment, though such 
 payment was made before the expiration of the 
 notice. In re Alcock. Pkesoott v. Phipps 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 372 
 
 2. Eight of Mortgagor to call for Assign- 
 ment — Rights of Puisne Mortgagee — Conveyancing 
 and Law of Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 41), s. 15.] If there are first and subsequent 
 mortgages of the same estate, the mortgagor 
 cannot require the first mortgagee to assign the 
 debt and property to a nominee of his own, under 
 the 15th section of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, 
 ■without the consent of the puisne mortgagee. 
 The " mortgagor entitled to redeem " in that sec- 
 tion means a mortgagor, or person claiming under 
 the mortgagor, who has a right to require a recon- 
 veyance from the mortgagee ; and no other person 
 can take advantage of that section. — The decision 
 of Fry, J., affirmed. Teevan v. Smith 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 724 
 
 3. Eight of Mortgagor to call for Assign- 
 ment to any Third Person — " On the terms" — 
 Tenant for Life — Conveyancing and Law of Pro- 
 
 Till. MOETGAGE— EEDEMPTION— conKnttecJ. 
 perty Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 15.] 
 A tenant for life of mortgaged premises who has 
 failed to keep do^wn the interest and who has 
 obtained the usual order permitting him to redeem 
 the mortgage, is not of right entitled under sect. 15 
 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 
 1881, to require the mortgagee to transfer the 
 mortgage debt and premises to a third person. 
 Aldebson v. Elgbt - - 26 Ch. D. 567 
 
 4. • Sale — Conduct of Sale — Conveyancing 
 
 and Law of PropeHy Act,lS81 (44 <fe iSVict. c. 41), 
 s. 25.] Under sect. 25 of the Conveyanoiug and 
 Law of Property Act, 1881, the Court has power 
 in a redemption action to order a sale of the mort- 
 gaged property on an interlocutory application 
 made before the trial of the action by a person in- 
 terested in the equity of redemption. — In an action 
 by the o^wner of the equity of redemption of pro- 
 perty subject to several mortgages for the redemp- 
 tion of the mortgages, the Plaintiff, soon after the 
 issue of the writ, applied by summons for an order 
 giving him liberty to sell the mortgaged property, 
 and asking that he might have the conduct of the 
 sale. The first and second mortgagees op[Osed 
 the application, the others supported it : — Held, 
 that an order for sale ought to be made, but that 
 a reserve price must be fixed large tnough to 
 cover what was due on the first and second mort- 
 gages, and that the Plaintiff must give security 
 for the costs of the sale. The conduct of the sale 
 was given to the Plaintiff on the ground that he 
 was more interested than the first or second mort- 
 gagees in obtaining as large a price as possible 
 for the property. — And it was ordered that the 
 sale should take place out of Court, and that the 
 proceeds of sale should be paid into Court. 
 WOOLLET V. COLMAN - 21 Ch. D. 169 
 
 5. Sale — Mortgagor and First Mortgagee 
 
 — Notice of SecondMortgage — Proceedsof Sale, how 
 to be applied.'] A mortgagor of a leasehold house, 
 with the concurrence of the first mortgagees, who 
 had a notice of a second equitable mortgage, sold 
 the property. Upon completion, the balance of the 
 purchase-money, after payment of the first mortga- 
 gees, was handed to the mortgagor. In an action by 
 the second mortgagees against the mortgagor (who 
 did not appear) and the first mortgagees : — Held 
 (afBrming Bacon, V.C., that the first mortgagees 
 were liable to make good to the Plaintiffs the 
 amount of their security to the extent of the 
 balance of the purchase-money. — The doctrine in 
 Peacoeh v. Burt (4 L. J. (N.S.) (Ch.) 33) will not 
 be extended. — Dictum of Wood, V.C., in Bates v. 
 Johnson (Job. 304, 313, 314), as to the right 
 of a first mortgagee to transfer to a thii'd mort- 
 gagee in preference to the second, questioned. 
 West London Commekcial Bank v. Reliance 
 Permanent Building Society 27 Ch. D. 187 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 954 
 
 6. Transferee — Taxation — Mortgagee — 
 
 Draft Mortgage or Transfer — Copies.] A firm of 
 solicitors acting for a number of sets of persons 
 (five in all) interested in moneys secured upon 
 mortgage, on the mortgage beingpaidoff, in their 
 bill of costs charged the executors of the mort- 
 gagor with the cost of five copies of the draft 
 deed of transfer, and the Taxing Master having 
 disallowed the charge for four such copies : — 
 
( 92X ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 922 ) 
 
 Vm. MORTaAGE— BEDEMPTIOK— comimaed. 
 Seld. that the Taxing Master was right in allow- 
 ing the costs of only one copy. — A mortgagee or 
 transferee of a mortgage, though entitled to keep 
 a fair copy of the draft deed for his own protec- 
 tion until the transaction is completed, has no 
 right to keep copies of the mortgage deed or deed 
 of transfer after he is paid off, but whatever copies 
 he has are as a general rule copies paid for by 
 the mortgagor, and to be delivered up to him 
 when he pays off the mortgage. In re Wade & 
 Thomas - - - 17 Ch. D. 348 
 
 Consolidation of mortgages. 
 
 See Statutes and Oases under Mortgage 
 — Consolidation. 
 
 IX. MOETGAGE— STATUTORY TORM. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41 (Conveyancing Act, 
 1881), enacts — Sect. 26.— (l.) A mortgage of free- 
 liold or leasehold land may he made by a deed ex- 
 pressed to be made by way of statidory mortgage, 
 being in the form given in Part 1. of the Third 
 Schedule to the Act, with such variations and addi- 
 tions, if any, as circumstances may reguire, and the 
 following provisions shall apply thereto. 
 
 (2.) There shall be deemed to be included, and 
 there shall by virtue of the Act be implied, .in the 
 mortgage deed :— 
 
 First, a covenant with the mortgagee by the 
 person expressed therein to convey as mortgagor to 
 the effect following (namely') : 
 
 That the mortgagor will, on the stated day, pay 
 to the mortgagee the stated mortgage money, 
 with interest thereon in the meantime, at the 
 stated rate, and will thereafter, if and as long 
 as the mortgage money, or any part thereof, 
 remains unpaid, pay to the mortgagee interest 
 thereon, or on the unpaid part thereof, at the 
 stated rate, by equal half-yearly payments, the 
 first thereof to be made at the end of six 
 calendar months from the day stated for pay- 
 ment of the mortgage money. 
 Secondly, u, proviso to the effect following 
 (namely) : 
 
 That if the mortgagor, on the stated day, pays to 
 the mortgagee the stated mortgage money, with 
 interest thereon in the meantime, at the stated 
 rate, the mortgagee at any time thereafter, at 
 the request and cost of the mortgagor, shall re- 
 convey the mortgaged property to the mortgagoi; 
 or as he shall direct. 
 Sect 27. — (1.) A transfer of a statutory mortgage 
 may be made by a deed expressed to be Tnade by way 
 of statutory transfer of mortgage, being in such one 
 of the^ three forms (a) and (b) and (c) given in 
 Part II. of the Third Schedule to the Act as may 
 be appropriate to the case, with such variations and 
 additions, if any, as circumstances may require, 
 and the following provisions shall apply thereto. 
 
 (2.) In whichever of those three forms the deed of 
 transfer is made, it shall have effect as follows 
 (namely) : — 
 (i.) There shall become vested in the person to 
 whom the benefit of the mortgage is ex- 
 pressed to be transferred, who, with Ms 
 executors, administrators, and assigns, is 
 hereafter in this section designated the 
 transferee, the right to demand, sue for, 
 recover, and give receipts for the mortgage 
 money, or the unpaid part thereof, and the 
 
 IX. MORTGAGE— STATUTORY EORM- co»M. 
 
 interest then due, if any, and thenceforth 
 to become due thereon, and the benefit of all 
 securities for the same, and the benefit of 
 and the right to sue on all covenants with 
 the mortgagee, and the right to exercise all 
 powers of the mortgagee ; 
 (ii.) All the estate and interest, subject to re- 
 demption, of the mortgagee in the moi'i- 
 gaged land shall vest in the transferee, 
 subject to redemption. 
 (3.) If the deed of transfer is mode in the 
 form (b) there shall also be deemed to be included, 
 and there shall by virtue of the Act be implied 
 therein, a covenant with the transferee by the person 
 expressed to join therein as covenantor to the effect 
 following (namely). 
 That the covenantor will, on the next of the days 
 by the mortgage deed fixed for payment of. 
 interest, pay to the transferee the stated mort- 
 gage money, or so much thereof as then remains 
 unpaid, with interest thereon, or on the unpaid 
 part thereof, in the meantime, at the rate stated 
 in the mortgage deed ; and will thereafter, as 
 long as the mortgage money, or any part 
 thereof, remains unpaid, pay to the transferee 
 interest on that sum, or the unpaid part 
 thereof, at the same rate, on the succesdve days 
 by the mortgage deed fixed for payment of 
 interest. 
 (4.) If the deed of transfer is made in tlie 
 form (c), it shall, by virtue of the Act, operate not 
 only OS a statutory transfer of mortgage, but also 
 as a statutory mortgage, and the provisions of this 
 section shall have effect in relation thereto accord- 
 ingly ; but it shall not be liable to any increased 
 stamp duty by reason only of it being designated a 
 mortgage. 
 
 Sect. 28. In a deed of statutory mortgage, or of 
 statutory transfer of mortgage, where more persons 
 than one are expressed to convey as mortgagors, or 
 to join as covenantors, the implied covenant on their 
 part shall be deemed to be a joint and several cove- 
 nant by them ; and where there are more mortgagees 
 or more transferees than one, the implied covenant 
 with them shall be deemed to be u, covenant with 
 them jointly, unless th^ amount secured is expressed 
 to be secured to them in shares or distinct sums, in 
 which latter case the implied covenant with them 
 shall be deemed to be a covenant with each severally 
 in respect of the share or distinct sum secured to 
 him. 
 
 Sect. 29. A re-conveyance of a statutory mortgage 
 may be made by a deed expressed to 'be made by 
 way of statutory re-conveyance of mortgage, being 
 in the form given in Part III. of the third Scliedule 
 to the Act with such variations and additions, if 
 any, as circumstances may require, 
 
 MORTGAGE — Action for recovery of land — Appli- 
 cation by equitable mortgagee to set 
 aside judgment - 12 Q. B. D. 166 
 
 See Practice — Supkeme Ootibt — Judg- 
 ment. 5. 
 
 Assignment of debt - 6 Q. B. D. 626 ; 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 See Assignment op Debt. 2, 3. 
 
 Attornment clause— Disclaimer 22 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Disolaiueb, 9. 
 
( 923 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 924 
 
 MORTGAGE — continued. 
 
 Attornment clause — Distress 16 Ch. D. 226, 
 
 [274; 21Ch. D. 442 
 See Bankbuptot— DisTBESS. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Attornment clause— Distress — Winding-up 
 
 ot company - - 18 Ch. D. 649 
 
 See OoMPANY — Distress. 6. 
 
 Attornment clause — Tenancy — Judgment 
 
 under Order xiT. 13 Q. B. D. 347 
 
 See Pbactice — Scpeeme Court — Weit 
 
 SPECIALLY INDOESED. 5. 
 
 Bankruptcy — ^Application by mortgagee for 
 
 sale of security — Costs of trustee 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 228 
 See Bankextptoy — Secured Creditor. 4. 
 
 Building society. 
 
 See Cases under BuiLDiKa Society. 
 — — Building society — Bankrflptcy — Proof 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 450 
 See Bankruptcy — Peooe. 13. 
 
 By administrator — ^Leaseholds 20 Ch. D. 745 
 
 See Administbatoe — Powbes. 3. 
 
 Charity— Gift to— Mortmain 29 Ch. D. 947 
 
 See Chaeity — Moetmain. 5. 
 
 Committee of lunatic — Mortgage by 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 451 
 See Lunatic — Committee. 1. 
 
 Company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Debentures. 
 
 Covenant by surety to pay premiums on 
 
 policy " - "19 Ch. D. 615 
 
 See Peinctpal and Sueety — Indemnity. 
 2. 
 
 Devise of mortgaged estate — Keeping down 
 
 interest - 30 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Will. — Disclaimer. 2. 
 
 Executor — Mortgage of lease of testator 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 93 
 See Executor — Administration. 3. 
 
 Fixtures — Driving belts — Bills of Sale Act, 
 
 1854 - - - 15 a. B. D. 358 
 See Fixtures. 
 Fixtures — Lease by mortgagor after mort- 
 gage — Eights of tenant 16 Q. B. D. 218 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Fixtuees. 
 
 Foreclosure — Amendment after judgment 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 760 
 See Practice — Sipeeme Couet — ^Amend- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Foreclosure— Ejectment ' 6 Q. B. D. 345 ; 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 235 
 See Limitations, Statute of— Realty. 
 4. 
 
 Foreclosure — Writ of possession 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 281 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Writ 
 op Possession. 
 
 Forged deed - - - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Pueohasee — Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 
 Goodwill — Eight of mortgagee to trade 
 
 name - - 22 Ch. S, 660 
 
 See Trade-name. 2. 
 
 Insufficient security — Valuation 23 Ch. D. 
 
 [483 ; 28 Ch. D. 268 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 3, 4. 
 
 MOETGAGE— conii) 
 
 Insurance by mortgagee. 
 
 See Mortgage — ^Powebs — Statutes. 
 
 Lease by mortgagor after mortgage — Eight 
 
 to trade fixtures - 15 Q. B. D. 218 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Fixtuees, 
 
 Lease of partnership premises 19 Ch. D. 106 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Secubed Ceeditoe. 8. 
 
 Lower Canada - 10 App. Cas. 664 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 5. 
 
 Merger in judgment debt — Interest 
 
 See Judgment. 2. [22 Ch. D. 98 
 
 Partition suit by mortgagee 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Pabtition Suit— Sale. 2. 
 
 Payment off — Authority of solicitor to receive 
 
 money - - - 30 Ch. D. 249 
 
 See SoLicrroE — Authority. 
 
 Power of sale — Garnishee order — Proceeds 
 
 of sale - - 17Ch. D. 259 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — Gar- 
 nishee Obdeb. 8. 
 
 Priority— Creditors' deed - 29 Ch. D. 745 
 
 See Ceeditoes' Deed. 
 
 Priority — Middlesex Eegistry Act 
 
 See Eegistry Acts. [29 Ch. D. 702 
 
 Bates — Mortmain - - 22 Ch. D. 202 
 
 See Chaeity — Moetmain. 4. 
 
 Eeceiver — Injunction - 18 Ch. D. 547 
 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Couet — Ee- 
 ceiyee, 5. 
 
 Eelease of equity of redemption — Bill to set 
 
 aside - - - 7 App. Cas. 307 
 
 See Colonial Law — ^Victobia. 2. 
 
 . Eenewable lease - - 29 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 4. 
 
 Salvage — Money expended by second mort- 
 gagee - - 16 Ch. D. 411 
 See Company — Debentubes. 7. 
 
 Several mortgagees— Consolidation of secu- 
 rities—Bill of sale - 13 ft. B. D. 392 
 See Bill of Sale — Foemalities. 14. 
 
 Ship— Action by master for wages — Mis- 
 conduct — Liability of mortgagee 
 See Ship— Master. 2. [10 P. D. 13 
 
 Solicitor and client - - 19 Ch. D. 207 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 3. 
 
 Solicitor a mortgagee — Profit costs 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 844 
 See Solicitor — ^Bill op Costs. 10. 
 
 Stamps - - - 17 Ch. D. 10 
 
 See Eevence — Stamps. 3. 
 
 Statute of Limitations. 
 
 See Cases under Limitations, Statute 
 OF — Eealty, 2, 4 — 7. 
 
 Statute of Limitations. 
 
 See Cases under Limitations, Statute 
 of—Personal Actions. 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. 
 
 Statute of Limitations — ^Express trust 
 
 [ISCh. 0.264; 22 Ch. D. 614 
 See Limitations, Statute op— Trusts. 
 2,3. 
 
 Stop order— Priority— Kotice 23 Ch. D. 497 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Charg- 
 ing Orders. 3. 
 
( 925 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 926 ) 
 
 XORIOAeX— continued. 
 
 Tenant for life with power of leasing 
 
 [23 Ch. 0. 583 
 See Settlement — ^Powees. 1. 
 
 Title deeds— Solicitor 'alien on 16 Ch. D. 617 
 
 See SoLioiTOB — Lien. 10. 
 
 To be paid off out of accumulations of rents 
 
 See AcouMULATiONS. 1. [30 Ch. D, 649 
 
 Wife's leversionaiiy interest 23 Ch. D. 181 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 2. 
 mOBTUAIIT. 
 
 See Cases under Ohamti — ^Moetmain. 
 
 Lapsed bequest — Exoneration from debts 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 145 
 iSee Will — Exonebation. 1. 
 MOTHEE— Right to custody of child 16 Ch. D. 
 [lis ; 25 Ch. D. 220 ; 13 Q. B. D. 614 
 See Infant — Custody. 1, 2, 3. 
 MOTION— Dismissal of— Affidavit of service 
 
 [25 Ch. S. 84 
 See Pkaotice — Sdpbeme Coubt — De- 
 fault. 6. 
 
 For attachment — Notice 9 ft. B. D. 335 
 
 See Pkaotice — Supbeme Coubt — Notice 
 OP Motion. 1. 
 
 For attachment — Notice - 27 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Coubt — At- 
 tachment. 4. 
 
 For judgment — Admissions 21 Ch. D. 716 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 204 ; 11 Q. B. D. 531 
 See Peactice — Supreme Coubt— Mo- 
 tion FOE Judgment. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 For judgment — Counter-claim 25 Ch. D. 68 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Coubt — De- 
 fault. 2. 
 
 For judgment — Report of referee 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 722 
 See Peactice— Supbeme Coubt — Ee- 
 feeee. 3. 
 
 Short notice of - - 22 Ch. D. 504 
 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Coubt — Notice 
 OF Motion. 3. 
 
 To discharge order in Chambers 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 326 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Couet — Cham- 
 bees. 0. 
 
 To discharge order in Chambers 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 131 
 See Peactice— Supbeme Coubt— Ap- 
 peal. 21. 
 
 To dismiss winding up petition 
 
 [23 Ch, D. 210 
 See Company — Winding-up Obdee. 10. 
 
 To vary minutes 20 Ch, D. 130 ; 21 Ch. D. 621 
 
 See Practice — Supbeme Coubt — Judg- 
 ment. 6, 7. 
 MUNICIPAL COEPDEATIOIT:— Col. 
 
 I. Constitution - . - 926 
 II. Election - - _ 933 
 
 III. Feanohise - - 941 
 
 IV. Peopebty - - 941 
 V. Qualification - - 942 
 
 VI. Eates - - 942 
 
 VII. Eesignatios - - - 943 
 
 I. MTTNICIPAI COEPOEATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50, repeals the Mimici- 
 pal Corporations Act, 1835, and divers other enact- 
 ments relating to municipal corporations (see the 
 1st schedule to the Act), and re-enacts and consoli- 
 dates the same with amendments. 
 
 Sect. 1. The Act to be cited as the Municipal Cor- 
 porations Act, 1882. 
 
 Sect. 2. Division into Parts. 
 Part I. — Preliminary 
 Part II. — Constitution and government of 
 
 borough. 
 Part HI.— Preparations for and procedure at 
 
 elections. 
 Part IV. — Corrupt practices and electionpeti- 
 
 tions. 
 Part V. — Corporate property and liabilities. 
 Part VI. — Charitable and other trusts and 
 
 Part VII. — Borough fund, borough rate, 
 
 county rate. 
 Part VIII. — Administration of justice. 
 Part IX.— Police. 
 Fart X. — Freemen. 
 Part XI. — Grant of charters. 
 Part XII. — Legal proceedings. 
 Part XIII.— General. 
 Sect. 3. Extent of Act. 
 
 Sect. 4. Act to commence the 31st of December, 
 1882. 
 
 Paet I. Peeliminaey. 
 Sect. 5 repeals enactments in first schedule. 
 Sect. 6. Application of Act. 
 Sect. 7. Interpretation and construction of terms, 
 Paet II. Constitution and Govebnment of 
 
 BOEOUGH. 
 
 Sect. 8. As to name of municipal corporation. 
 
 Sect. 9. As to qualification of burgess. 
 
 Sect. 10. Constitution of council of the hm-ough. 
 
 Sect. 11. Qualification for office of councillor. 
 
 Sect. 12. Disqualification for being caimaillor. 
 
 Sect. 13. Term of office and rotation of coun- 
 cillors. 
 
 Sect. 14. As U) number, term of office, and rota- 
 tion of aldermen. 
 
 Sect. 15. Qualification, term of office, salary, pre- 
 cedence, andpowers of mayor. 
 
 Sect. 16. Power of mayor to appoint deputy, 
 powers of deputy. 
 
 Sect. 17. As to appointment, term of office, and 
 duties of town cleric, and his deputy. 
 
 Sect. 18. As to appointment, iScc, of treasurer. 
 
 Sect. 19. As to other borough officers. 
 
 Sect. 20. As to security to be given by and re- 
 muneration of officers. 
 
 Sect. 21. Every ofiieer to account to council. 
 
 Sect. 22. Bules in secorid schedule of the Act to 
 be observed. Quarterly and other meetings of 
 council and power to appoint committees. Minutes 
 to be kept, &c. 
 
 Sect. 23. Power td'couneil to make by-laws. 
 
 Sect. 24. Production of written copy of by-law 
 under corporate seal, to be sufflcimt evidence of 
 by-law. 
 
 Sect. 25. As to number, qualification, term of 
 office, and duties of borough auditors. 
 
 Sect. 26. Treasurer to make up half-yearly 
 
( 927 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 928 ) 
 
 I. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION — CONSTITIT- 
 
 TVTlO^—continu^d. 
 
 Sect. 27. As to audit and puhlication of trea- 
 surer's accounts. 
 
 Sect. 28. Town clerh to make annual returns of 
 municipal receipts and expenditure to the Local 
 Government Board. 
 
 Penalty for not making return. 
 
 Sect. 29. As to qualification, number, and term 
 of office of revising assessors in non-parliamentary 
 
 Sect. 30. Procedure for division of horougli into 
 wards or alteration of wards. 
 
 Sect. 31. Sole and exclusive use of part of a 
 liouse, shop, &c., to he deemed a separate occupa- 
 tion for the purpose of describing a qualification. 
 
 Sect. 32. Occupier's name to he placsd on the 
 rate hoole when he claim^s to be rated to and pays 
 the poor-rate. 
 
 Sect. 33. Pules as to qualification of burgess on 
 succession, &c., to property. 
 
 Sect. 34. A qualified person when elected to a 
 corporate office to accept the office or pay a fine. 
 
 Sect. 35. As to declaration on acceptance of office. 
 
 Sect. 36. A person elected to a corporate office 
 may at any time resign on payment of a fine. 
 
 Sect. 37. Be-eligibility of office holders. 
 
 Sect. 38. Mayor and aldermen to continue mem- 
 bers of council. 
 
 , Sect. 39. Avoidance of office of mayor, alderman, 
 or councillor, by bankruptcy or absence from borough. 
 
 Sect, 40. As to filling of casual vacancies in a 
 corporate office. 
 
 Sect. 41. Penalty on unqualified person acting 
 in office. 
 
 Sect. 42. Validity of acts done whilst in posses- 
 sion of corporate office notwithstanding disqualifi- 
 cation, &c. 
 
 Sect. 43. As to person by whom duties of town 
 cleric, deputy town clerk, or treasurer are to be per- 
 formed during vacancy or incapacity. 
 
 Pakt III. Pbepabations foe and Pbocedhee at 
 Elections. 
 
 Sect. 44. As to preparation and revision of parish 
 burgess lists. 
 
 Sect. 45. As to burgess roll and ward rolls. 
 
 Sect. 46. As to arrangement of lists and rolls. 
 
 Sect. 47. As to correction of burgess roll. 
 
 Sect. 48. As to printing and sale of burgess roll 
 and other documents. 
 
 Sect. 49. Separate lists to be made of persons 
 qualified to be couneilhrs but not to be burgesses. 
 
 Sects. 50-59. As to election of councillors and 
 procedure thereon. 
 ■ Sect.&O. Time and mode of election of aldermen. 
 
 Sect. 61. Time and mode of election of mayor. 
 
 Sect. 62. Time and mode of election of auditors 
 and assessors. 
 
 Sect. 63. Eight of loomen to vote. 
 
 Sect. 64. As to polling districts. 
 
 Sect. 65. Notices of elections, how to be given. 
 
 Sect. 66. Time for filling casual vacancies. 
 
 Sect. 67. Person by whom, duties of mayor or 
 returning officer are to be performed in case of 
 illness, absence, &c., of mayor or returning officer. 
 
 Sect. 68. Person elected councillor for more than 
 one ward to be put to his election. 
 
 Sect. 69. Elections not to be held in any church. 
 
 1. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 Sect. 70. When an election is not held an the 
 appointed day or becomes void, the High Court to 
 appoint a day for the election. 
 
 Sect. 71. Burgess roll to be in operation until 
 revision of new burgess roll. 
 
 Sect. 72. Elections not necessarily invalid be- 
 cause of non-compliance with rules. 
 
 Sect. 73. Every election to be valid unless ques- 
 tioned within twelve months. 
 
 Sect. 74. Penalty for offences in relation to 
 nomination papers. 
 
 Sect. 75. Penalty for offences in relation to lists 
 and election. 
 
 Sect. 76. Revival of former law if Ballot Act, 
 1872, ceases to be in force. 
 
 Pakt IV. {Partly repealed hyil&iS Vict c. 70). 
 Corrupt Pkaotioes and ELEC?noN Petitions. 
 
 Sect. 77 (repealed in party Defines " bribery," 
 "treating," "undue influence," "personation," 
 " corrupt practices," &c. 
 
 Sect. 78 (repealed). 
 
 Sects. 79, 80 (repealed). 
 
 Sect. 81. Avoidance of election for general cor- 
 ruption. 
 
 Sects. 82, 83, 84 (repealed). 
 
 Sect. 85. As to striking off votes. 
 
 Sect. 86. As to personation. 
 
 Sect. 87. Election to be questioned by petition. 
 
 Sect. 88. Petition to be presented within twenty- 
 one days of election by four or more voters or by 
 candidate. 
 
 Sect. 89. Security for the costs of the petition to 
 be given within three days. 
 
 Sect. 90. As to when petition is at issue. 
 
 Sect. 91. lAst of election petitions to be made and 
 kept. 
 
 Sect. 92 (repealed in part). Constitution of 
 Election Court. 
 
 Sect. 93 prescribes manner in lohich election peti- 
 tions are to be tried. 
 
 Sect. 94 (repealed in part). As to summoning, 
 &c., of witnesses. 
 
 Sect. 95. As to withdrawal of petitions. 
 
 Sect. 96. Petition to abate by death of petitioner, 
 but another person may be substituted as petitioner. 
 
 Sect. 97. As to withdrawal and substitution of 
 respondents before trial of petition. 
 
 Sect. 98 (repealed in part). As to costs of election 
 petitions. 
 
 Sect. 99. Beception and attendance on Election 
 Court. 
 
 Sect. 100. Mules to be made to regulate the prac- 
 tice, procedure, and costs of petition. Jurisdiction 
 of High Court over election petitions. 
 
 Sect. 101. As to remuneration and expenses of 
 election Court 
 
 Sect. 102. Acts done by an elected candidate 
 pending a petition not to be invalidated. 
 
 Sect. 103. Provisions as to elections in the room 
 of persons unseated on petition. 
 
 Sect. 104. No person to he required to state for 
 whom lie has voted. 
 
 Part V. Corporate Property and Liabilities.- 
 
 Sect. 105. Corporation may purchase land for 
 town hall, &c. 
 
( 929 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 930 ) 
 
 L MTJNICIPAl COEPOEATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 Sect. 106. Power to horrow with, approval of 
 Treasury. 
 
 Sect. 3 07. Power to acquire land with, approval 
 of Treasury. 
 
 Sect. 108. Mestrictions on alienation of corporate 
 land without approval of Treasury, 
 
 Sect. 109. Power to dispose of land with ap- 
 proval of Treasury. 
 
 Sect. 110. As to renewal of leases, &e. 
 
 Sect. 111. As to laying out sites, &c., for working 
 r/ien's dwellings. 
 
 Sect. 112. Power for Treasury to impose condi- 
 tions as to repayment of money borrowed. 
 
 Sect. 113. Provisions as to sinking fund. 
 
 Sect. 114. Provision for replacing purchase or 
 compensation money paid into Bank of England 
 for land taken from a corporation. 
 
 Sect. 115. As to investment of proceeds of sale or 
 exchange of corporate land. 
 
 Sect. 116. Power for Treasury to authorize ap- 
 plication of certain investments for benefit of 
 borough. 
 
 Sect. 117. Penalty for misappropriation of 
 moneys. 
 
 Sect. 118. As to transfer of and other dealings 
 with corporate stock. 
 
 Sect. 119. Borough bridges to be maintained. 
 
 Sect. 120. As to loans for repairs, &c., of muni- 
 aipal buildings. 
 
 Sect. 121. Obligations and powers of corporation 
 in respect of advowsons, &o. 
 
 Sect. 122. Megulations as to sale of ecclesiastical 
 patronage belonging to corporation. 
 
 Sect. 123. Power to continue rates for special 
 purposes. 
 
 Sect. 124. Prohibition of expenditure of corporate 
 funds on parliamenlary elections. 
 
 Sect. 125. As to transfer of investments made 
 before 1860 in names of trustees. 
 
 Sect. 126. Schema respecting mmtgage debts in- 
 curred before 1860. 
 
 Sect. 127. Consolidation of debts incurred before 
 1860. 
 
 Sect. 128. Saving for sales, &c., in pursuance of 
 past contracts and resolutions. 
 
 Sect. 129. Saving for rates in respect of past debts. 
 
 Sect. 130. Saving for rights of creditors in respect 
 of tolls or dues. 
 
 Sect. 131. Saving for lawful debts contracted 
 before 5*6 WUl. i, c. 76. 
 
 Sect. 132. Saving against new liability to debts 
 contracted before 5 tfc 6 Will, i, c. 76. 
 
 Paet VI. Ohaeitable and othee Teusts and 
 
 POWEES. 
 
 Sect. 133. As to administration of charitable 
 trusts and vesting of legal estate. 
 
 Sect. 134. Corporation to be trustees where cor- 
 porators were trustees. 
 
 Sect. 135. As to appointment of members of 
 council to be trustees in cases of joint trusts and 
 other cases. 
 
 Sect. 136. Transfer of powers of local authorities 
 io municipal corporations. 
 
 Sect. 187. Power for council to extend heal light- 
 ing Act. 
 
 Sect. 138. As to exercise of powers under local 
 Acts. 
 
 I. MUNICIPAL eOEPORATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 Paet VII. Bokouoh Eund, Boeough Eate, 
 County Bate. 
 
 Sect. 139. All rents, profits, and income of cor- 
 porate property, and fines, to go to the borough fund. 
 
 Sect. 140. Application of borough fund. 
 
 Sect. 141. As to orders for payment of borough 
 fund. 
 
 Sect. 142. All payments to be made io and by 
 the treasurer. 
 
 Sect. 143. Application of surplus borough fund. 
 
 Sect. 144. Power for council to make borou,gh 
 rate and assess contribution thereto. 
 
 Sect. 145. As to collection of borough rate in un- 
 divided parishes. 
 
 Sect. 146. As to collection of borough rate in 
 divided parishes. 
 
 Sect. 147. In certain cases owners to be rated 
 instead of occupiers for borough rate. 
 
 Sect. 148. As to warrants for levy of borough 
 rate. 
 
 Sect. 149. Borough rate to go to borough fund ; 
 its application. 
 
 I Sect. 150. General exemption of quarter sessions 
 borough from county rate. 
 
 Sect. 151. Liability of quarter sessions borough 
 for prosecution expenses of county. 
 
 Sect. 152. Liability of quarter sessions borough 
 to other county expenses. 
 
 Sect. 153. Mode of accounting to county by 
 quarter sessions borough. 
 
 Paet VIII. Administbation of Justice. 
 
 Sect. 154. As to jurisdiction of county justices in 
 borou,gh. 
 
 Sect. 155. Mayor and last mayor to be borough 
 justices. 
 
 Sect. 156. Borough may have a separate com,- 
 mission of the peace. 
 
 Sect. 157. Qualification of borough justice. 
 
 Sect. 158. Jurisdiction of borough justices. 
 
 Sect. 159. Borough justices to have a clerk. 
 
 Sect. 160. Justices' room to be provided by 
 borough. 
 
 Sect. 161. Borough may have a stipendiary 
 
 Sect. 162. Borough may have a separate Court 
 of quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect. 163. Borough, having a separate Court of 
 quarter sessions may have a recorder. 
 
 Sect. 164. Borough having a separate Court of 
 quarter sessions to have a clerk of the peace. 
 
 Sect. 165. Becorder to hold Court of quarter 
 sessions at least once in every quarter of a year. 
 
 Sect. 166. Recorder may appoint a deputy. 
 
 Sect. 167. Mayor in absence of recorder and 
 deputy recorder may adjowrn the Court. 
 
 Sect. 168. Recorder may form a second Court. 
 
 Sect. 169. Liability of borough having quarter 
 sessions for prosecution expenses of felony committed 
 in the borough. 
 
 Sect. 170. livery borough, being a county in it- 
 self, to appoint a sheriff. 
 
 Sect. 171. Appointment, fees, &c., of coroner in 
 borough having separate quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect. 172. Power of borough coroner to appoint a 
 
 Sect. 173. Iteturns by borough coroners. 
 
 2 H 
 
( 931 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 932 ) ■ 
 
 I; MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 Sect, m. Countfji coroiier to act in borough not 
 having a separate Court of quarter sessions. 
 . Sect, ,175,. Judge of horough Civil , Court where 
 there is a recorder. 
 
 Sect. 176. Judge of horough Civil Court where 
 there is no recorder^ , 
 
 Sect. 177. Tenure of Judge of horough Civil 
 Court. ■ , . 
 
 Sect. 178. As to registrar and other officers and 
 fees. .... 
 
 Sect. 179. Registrar of borpugK Civil Court not 
 to practise as a solicitor in the Court. 
 
 Sect. 160. Borough Civil Court to he held four 
 times a year. ' ' 
 
 Sect. ISl. Procedure. 
 
 Sect. 182.' Foioer for Judge to maherules of pro- 
 cedure. 
 
 Sect. 183. Borough Civil Court to have jurisdic- 
 tion in personal actions where sum claimed does not 
 exceed £20, and in ejectment actions wliere the 
 annual rent does jiot exceed £20, 
 
 Sect. 184. Nothing in tlie Act to restrict existing 
 jurisdiction, &c., of a borough Civil Court, ortofiffect 
 the Borough and Local Courts of Record Act,'lWT2,. 
 
 Sect. 185. Jurisdiction of borough Civil Court 
 may he extended over adjacent district. 
 
 Sect. 186. Provisions as to juries in borough 
 having separate Court of quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect, 187. Grants to boroughs of separate Court 
 of quarter sessions, &c., not to be affected hy suhse- 
 ■quent grants to counties. 
 
 Sect. 188. As, to trial of offences committed in 
 borough being a county of a city or county of a 
 town. 
 
 ■ Sect. 189. As to jurisdiction in places Whitli 
 cease to be part of a horough. 
 
 Part IX. Police.. 
 
 Sects. 190-196 provide for the appointment of a 
 watch committee; the appointment, duties and 
 powers of borough constables, and spicial constables. 
 . Sects, 197-200 provide for. the malting and levy- 
 ing of a watch rate. 
 
 Part X. Freemeij. 
 
 Sect. 201. Definition of freemen. 
 
 Sect. 202. No person to be admitted a freeman 
 by gift or by purchase. 
 
 Sect. 203. Freeman's roll to he kept: 
 
 Sect. 204. As to admission to freedom: 
 
 Sect'iOS. Reservation of rights of property to 
 freemen and others. 
 
 Sect. 206. Limit of valWe and saving under pre- 
 ceding section. 
 
 Sect. 207. 'Saving fot power to question right or 
 title- of anif freeman. 
 
 Sect. %0S.' Besirvation of beneficial exemptions 
 tofreeminand.others.' 
 
 SeA^WQ.' Reservation of parliamentary fran- 
 chise, '&c., to freenwn. „„ . , 
 
 And see 48 & 49 Vict. c. 29, infra. 
 
 Part XI. Grant of Charters. 
 
 Sect 210 Powirto Crown in granting charter 
 to borough to extend to it the provisions of the 
 Municipal' Corporations Acts, ^ ■ '' ■•■ 
 
 Sect 211. Every petition for charter to he re- 
 ferred to Committee of Privy CoWncil. 
 
 I. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 'Sect. 212. Power by charter to settle wards, and 
 by fixing dates and otherwise to adapt the Muni- 
 .cipal Corporations Acts to first, constitutioru of n^ew 
 horough. 
 
 Sect. 213. Scheme for continuance or abolition 
 of and adjustment Of rights of existing local autho- 
 rity and offieers. 
 
 [This is modified by 45 & 46 Vict. v. 50.] 
 
 Sect. 214. Supplemental provisions as to scheme 
 and charter. 
 
 Sect. 215. Provision as to police force in new 
 horough. 
 
 Sect. 216. Validity of cliarters granted under (he- 
 Act. ■ . ■ 
 
 Sect. 217. Power to Privy Council to settle scheme 
 in cases where- charter granted within severe- years - 
 before the lith of Ailguet, 1877. 
 
 Sect. 218. Power to Privy Council to amend 
 scheme. 
 
 And see ELfiMBNTART Edtjoation Acts — 
 School BoAVOh^Staimies. 
 
 Part XII. Legal Proceedings. 
 
 Sect. 219. Summary proceedings for offences and 
 fines -under 4he -Act to he commenced within six 
 months after commission of the offence. 
 
 An appeal lies to a Court of quarter sessions. 
 
 Sect. 220. Convictions, &c., not to he quashed for 
 want of form, and not to he removed by certiorari 
 or otlierwise into the Sigh Court. 
 
 Sect. 221. As to application of fines, penalties, 
 &e., in quarter sessions horough. '■ -■ - 
 
 Sect. 222. Duties of clerk of the peace as to fines 
 and forfeitures. 
 
 Sect. 223. .4s to service of summons or warrants. 
 
 Sect. 224. Penal actions against corporate officers 
 to he brought only by a hurgess of the horough within 
 three motttlis. after cause of action driseti. Procedure 
 thereon. 
 
 Sect. 225. As to proceedings on quo warranto and 
 mandamus. 
 
 Sect. i226. Provision for protection of persons 
 acting under the Act. 
 
 Sect.'Wl. Power for horough ^xnstahles to talie 
 bail. • ' • ' 
 
 Part XIII. General. 
 
 Sect. 228. As to boundaries of horouglis and trans- 
 fer of parts to counties. 
 
 Sect. 229. .4s to adjustment of rates between 
 borouglis and counties on change of boundaries. 
 
 Sect. 230. ^s to computation of time. 
 
 Sect. 231. .4s to measurement of distances. 
 
 Sect, 232. Notices, where to he posted. 
 
 Sect. 233. As to inspection and taking copies of 
 documents. - 
 
 Sect.2Si. Tables of fees to he posted. 
 
 Sect. 235. Peiuxlty for forgery of seals and sig- 
 natures. 
 
 Sect, 236. Notice of intended applications to and 
 correspondence with Treasury to be posted on town 
 hall. 
 
 Sect. 1?,!. Acti of any deputy under the Act not 
 to he invalidated by any defect in his appointment. 
 
 Sect. 238. .4s to notices to and acts done hy over- 
 seers. 
 
 Sect, 239. Power to administer eatlis, d-c. 
 
 Sect. 240. Form in Schedule to he used. 
 
( 933 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 931 ) 
 
 r. MUNICIPAL CORPOBATION — CONSTITU- 
 TION — continued. 
 ■ SecP. -24:1. Misnomer or inaccurate diescription 
 not to hinder operation of the Act. • 
 
 Sect. 242. The Aet'to he substituted for 5 <fe. 6 
 WiU.i, V. 76, in reference to the latter in unre- 
 pealed enactments. ' • ■•''■• ,,'.,"..•■ 
 Sect. 243. As to shovtitdtles'of Acts ^partly re- 
 
 Sect. 244. Mayor of certain horOuglis to ie re- 
 tuming officer in parliamentary' elections. ■ > ' 
 
 Sect. 245. 48 to electors in disfranchised horoughs. 
 
 Sect. 246. Explanation of term "town corpor- 
 ate," de., in Licensing Acts. ' 
 
 Sect. 2i7. Bight of free trading in boronghs:* ■ 
 
 Sect. 248. Special provisions as to certain of the 
 Cinque Ports. '•' ' ' ' ' ' ' ■ ' 
 
 'liSSefcfc' 249^ Vice-Chancellor vifOamiridggivnay he 
 a-juetice for the borough^Of Gdmihridge, > ■ 
 
 Sect. 250. Saving of charters, privileges, ifec, 
 granted to existing corporations before commence- 
 ment of the Aet. r. '.1. . ': ' •■•\ .H. i. 
 
 Sect. 251. NotlHng^in Act to affect amylOcal Act 
 of Parliament. < . ■ 
 
 'Sects. 252-260. Various' special savingsi-^"- \" 
 
 The Act 46 &< 47 Vict. c. 18 (Municipal Corpora- 
 tions Act, 1883), makes provision respecting certain 
 munidpctPeorpordtiom and other local, authorities 
 not' subject to the Municipal Corporations Act, 
 1882. .. ■ . , 
 
 Borough Constable.] By the Borowgh Constable 
 Act (46 & 47 Vict. c. 44), 1883, «. 2, nothingJin 
 sect. 195 of the Municipal Corporations .4ci, 1882,. 
 shall, be taken to havetepectled' sect. 20 of the Toiwi 
 Police Clauses Act, 184'?, or sect. 12 of the Preven- 
 tion'of Crimes Act, 1871. 
 
 - Freenian.} The Act 48 4 49 Vict. c. 29, enables 
 mtmimpal' corporations to confer the honorary free- 
 dom of boroughs upon persons of distinction. ' 
 
 II. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION— ELECTION. 
 
 By'4i & 45 Viet. c. 68 (the Supreme. Court' of 
 JuAicatiwre Act, 1881), s. 14, the jurisdiction of the 
 High Court of Justice to decidJe question^ of laio upon 
 appeal or otherwise under the Act 6 <fc 7 Vict. c. 18, 
 the Corrupt ' Practiees (Mumidpal Meetions^ Act, 
 1872, the Parliamentary and Municipal Begistra- 
 tion Act, 1878, or any of the said Acts, or any Act 
 amending the same respectively, shall be final and 
 conclusive, unless in any case it shall seem, fit to 
 the said Bigh Court to give special leameto appeal 
 therefrom, to Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, whose 
 decision'in such case shall be final and conclusive. 
 
 The Aet is & 49 Vict. c. 59, continues. 35 & 36 
 VicUc. 33 (the Ballot Act, 1872), so far as it is 
 not repkaUd, and the 46 & 46 Vict. c. 50 (Munici- 
 pal Elections Act, 1882), until the 31st of Deceniber, 
 1886. 
 
 Poll.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 10 (Elections 
 Hours of Poll Act, 1885), directs that at every elec- 
 tion of a councillor, or other person named in the 
 Act, in any municipal borough being svhjecito the' 
 Municipal Corporations Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Viet. 
 V. 50), the poll shall be open from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. 
 
 Act of 1884.] The Act 47 & 48 Viet. 70 (the. 
 Municipal' Elections Corrupt and Illegal Practices 
 Act, 1884), enacts as follows : — 
 
 Corrupt Practices.]' Seet. 2 defines the ex- 
 pression " corrupt practice" at a municipal election 
 and its punishment. 
 
 II. MUNICIPAL COBPOEATION— ELECTION— 
 
 continued, 
 ' Sect. S enacts the incapacity of any candidate 
 wlu> is reported by an election Court um}er\i5 & 46 
 Vict. c. 5t) for .corrupt'practice.. i '. ..^ .(> 
 
 ' Illegal Practices.] 'Secti. Certain expenditure 
 to be deemed illegal practice. ' •'.. . 
 
 Se6t.5. Subject' to the exception* in this Act no 
 expense shall be incurred by or on behalf of a 
 candidate. 
 
 Sect. 6. Voting by a .prohibited person,' or the 
 ' publication of false statements of the. withdrawal 
 of a candidate to be an illegal practice. ■ 
 
 Sect. 7. The punishment of a person guilty of an 
 illegal practice. . . ■ 
 
 ; Sect, 8.'. An illegal practice to b& deemed to bean 
 offence against Part 4 o/ 45 <fe,46 Vict. c. 50. Any. 
 i candidate guilty of mch.qfence to'be incapoMe .of 
 being elected tosor of holding amy corporate, office 
 during a certain period, and' to 'be. subject to other 
 penalties. 
 
 Illegal Payment, Employment, aud Hiring.]^ 
 Sect.d. Wliere a person knowingly provides money 
 for any payment contrary to the proinsiqns of this 
 Act, or for any expenses in excess of the maximum, 
 allowed by this Act, or for replacing any money 
 expended'' in any suo% payment, except wliere 
 allowed by. this Act he shall be guilty of illegdl 
 payment. i 
 
 Sect. 10. — (1.) A person shall not letj lend, or 
 employ for the purpose of the conveyance of electors 
 to or from the poll, any public stage or hachiiey 
 carriage^ or any horse or ■eUter'',a/jiimdl.kept or us^ 
 for drawing the same, or any carriage, horse, or 
 other animal which he keeps or uses for the purpose 
 of letting out for hire, and if he does so knowing 
 that it is for the above purpose he shall be guilty of 
 illegal hiring. 
 
 (2.) A person shall not use for the.piirpose of the 
 conveyance of electors to or from the poll any 
 carriage, horse, or other animal which he Icnows - 
 the owner thereof is prohibited by this section to 
 employ for that purpose, and if lie does so he shall 
 be guiltyOf illegal ii/iririg. ' , ' 
 
 (3.) -This Act does not prevent, a carriage, &e., 
 being usedby an elector, or several electors at their 
 joint cost, for the p'un'pose of conveyance to or from 
 the poU. . . .. I , , 
 
 (4.) No person is liable to pay any duty or take 
 out a license for any carriage by reason only of such 
 carriage beirig used without payment for the eon- 
 vetjance of electors^ to or fromtlie poll. 
 
 Sect. 11.' Any person corruptly withdrawing, or. 
 inducing another to withdraw, from an election is-- 
 guilty as of an illegal paym,ent. ' ' 
 
 Sect. 12. — (1.) No payment' for the purpose of ' 
 promoting 'the election df A candidate shall be rfiAde:. 
 on account of bands of music, torches', flags, baMrlers,, 
 cockades, ribbons, or other nnarks of diitinctiofi.. 
 
 (2.) Subject to such exception as may be aVUhOed 
 in pursuance df this Act, amy payment made in 
 contravention of this section, either before, during, 
 or after an election, is an iUegal payrtieMiand any 
 person being a party to such contract shall be guilty 
 of illegal payment if he knew that the same was 
 made contrary to law. ■ , ' ' .■:■ ■ 
 
 Sect. 13. — (1.) No person shall,for the purpose 
 of promoting the election of a candidatibe engaged 
 for payment for any purpose except asfoUows'f 
 
 (a.) A number of persons may be employed' as 
 
 2 if a 
 
( 935 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 936 ) 
 
 II. MUNICIPAI. COEPOEATION— EIECTION— 
 
 continued. 
 
 clerks or messengers, not exceeding two 
 for a horough or ward, and if the numher 
 of electors in such horough or ward exceeds 
 two thousand, one additional person may 
 he employed for every thousand electors 
 and incomplete part of a thousand electors 
 over and above the said two thousand; 
 and, 
 
 (b.) One foiling agent may he employed in each 
 polling station : 
 
 This section does not apply to any engagement 
 bond fide made with any person in the ordinary 
 course of business. 
 
 (2.) Subject to any exception allowed in pursu- 
 ance of this Act, if any person is employed in con- 
 travention of this section, either before, during, or 
 after an election, the person employing him shall 
 be guilty of illegal employment, and the person so 
 employed shall also be guilty of illegal employment 
 if he knew that he was engaged in contravention of 
 this Act. 
 
 (3.) A person legally employed for payment 
 under this section may or may not be an elector, but 
 may not vote. 
 
 Sect. 14. Every bill or placard referring to an 
 eleetion is to bear the naine of the printer and 
 publisher. Any person printing, etc., any hiU 
 without such name is (if a candidate) guilty of 
 illegal practice, and if not a candidate is liable to 
 a fine. 
 
 Sect. 1,5. The rights of creditors, ignorant of any 
 contravention of this Act, are preserved in respect 
 of prohibited contracts or expenses. 
 
 Sect. 16. The use of certain premises for com- 
 mittee-rooms or election meetings to he deemed an 
 illegal hiring. 
 
 Sect. 17. Funishment of illegal payment, em- 
 ployment, or hiring. 
 
 Sect. 18. Consequences where illegal practices, 
 &c. have affected the result of the election. 
 
 Excuse and Exception for Practices forbidden 
 by this Act] Sect. 19. The election Court may 
 report exonerating a candidate in certain cases of 
 corrupt and illegal practice by his agents. 
 
 Sect. 20. Power of High Court and election 
 Court to except an innocent act from being an 
 illegal practice. 
 
 ^ect. 21 — (1.) Claims to be sent in within 14 
 days, and to be paid within 21 days after election. 
 
 (2.) Agent to make return in writing to candidate 
 of all expenses within 23 days after election. 
 
 (3.) Candidate elected as councillor to send re- 
 turn to town clerk accompanied by a declaration 
 'Within 28 days of all expenses. 
 
 (4.) Candidate if elected not to sit in council 
 until he has made the above return and declaration. 
 
 (.5.) Candidate failing to make return, &c., or 
 making same falsely. 
 
 (6.) Claims sent in after time Imiited by this 
 section, when allowed. 
 
 (7)' Candidate when excused for failing to 
 make return, d-c, or for making false statement. 
 
 (8) and (9.) Ditto. 
 
 (10) and (11.) The return and declaration to he 
 J-ept for 12 months, and to he open to inspection. 
 
 Sect 22. Votes of persons guilty of corrupt 
 practices and oflicr offences against this Act are 
 void. 
 
 II. MtTNICIPAL COBPOEATION— ELECTIOH— 
 
 continued 
 
 Sect. 23. Portions of sections 37 & 38 of 46 & 47 
 Vict. c. 51 (Corrupt and Illegal Practices Pre- 
 vention Act, 1883), to he part of this Act. 
 
 Disqualification of Electors.] Sect. 24. Town 
 clerk to make out list of persons who become after 
 commencement of this Act incapable of voting on 
 account of corrupt or illegal practices, and to 
 send this list not less than 14 days before the 
 publication of the parish burgess lists in the borough 
 to the overseers. 
 
 Any person in such list may object, and the 
 revising authority shall determine the claim. 
 
 The revising authority may, after notice, insert 
 in such list tlie name of any incapacitated person, 
 which is not already therein. 
 
 Any town clerk or overseer failing to carry out 
 this section is liable to a fine under 45 & 46 Vict, 
 c. 50, s. 75. 
 
 Proceedings on Election Petitions.] Sect. 25 — 
 (1.) A municipal election petition complaining of 
 the election on the ground of an illegal practice 
 may be presented at any time before the expiration 
 of fourteen days after the day on which the town 
 clerk receives the return and declaration respecting 
 election expenses by the candidate to whose election 
 the petition relates, or where there is an authorized 
 excuse for failing to make the return and declara- 
 tion then within the like time after the date of the 
 allowance of the excuse. 
 
 (2.) A municipal election petition, complaining 
 of the election on the ground of an illegal practice, 
 and specifically alleging a payment of money or 
 other act made or done since the election by the 
 candidate elected at such election, or by an agent 
 of the candidate, or with tlie privity of the candi- 
 date, in pursuance or in furtherance of such illegal 
 practice, may be presented at any time within 
 twenty-eight days after the date of such payment 
 or act, whether or not any other petition against 
 that person has been previously presented or tried. 
 
 (3.) Any election petition presented within the 
 time limited by the Municipal Corporations Act, 
 1882, may, for the purpose of complaining of the 
 election upon an allegation of an illegal practice, 
 be amended with the leave of the High Court with- 
 in the time within which a petition complaining of 
 the election on the ground of that illegal practice 
 can. under this section, be presented. 
 
 (4.) Tliis section shall apply notwithstanding 
 the illegal practice is also a corrupt practice. 
 
 Sect. 26. Withdrawal of election petition. 
 
 Sect. 27. Continuation of election petition. 
 
 Sect. 28 — (1.) Btity of the Director of Public 
 Prosecutions to attend on the trial of an election 
 petition. 
 
 (3.) Duty of the same to prosecute where neces- 
 sary. 
 
 (4.) An election Court may punish a person 
 guilty of corrujit practice by imprisonment irith 
 or withotit hard labour for a term not exceeding 
 six months, or by a fine not exceeding £200, and 
 may punish a person guilty of an illegal practice 
 by a fine. 
 
 A person charged loith corrupt practice may 
 claim a jury. 
 
 (5.) Ttte election Court may, if expedient, order a 
 person to he fried before some other Court than 
 itself. 
 
( 937 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 938 ) 
 
 II. MUNICIPAL CORPOKATION— ELECTION— 
 
 continued. 
 
 (7.) Such order cannot be discliarged or varied 
 under 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50, c. 92, subs. 6. 
 
 (9.) Goats of 'prosecution in the first instance to 
 he paid hy the Treasury. 
 
 Sect. 29. Costs where a corrupt practice is not 
 proved. Rules of Supreme Court to apply so far 
 as practicable to taxation. 
 
 Miscellaneous.] Sect. 30. General provisions 
 as to prosecution of offences, and certificates of in- 
 
 Sect. 31. A person incapacitated by conviction 
 or report of election Court to vacate his seat or 
 office. 
 
 Sect. 32. Recovery of costs. 
 
 Sect. 33. Services of notices or summons by re- 
 gistered letter and otlterwise. 
 
 Sect. 34. Definitions. 
 
 Sect. 35. This Act and Fart IV. of 45 * 46 
 Vict. f. 50 {Municipal Corporations Act, 1882) 
 apply, subject to certain exceptions, to municipal 
 elections in the City of London ; and 
 
 Sect. 36. To elections for the offices mentioned in 
 the 1st Schedule of this Act. Commissioners to be 
 appointed for the trial of election petitions under 
 Fart IV. of 45 * 46 Vict. c. 50. 
 
 Sect. 37. The elections for the offices mentioned 
 in the said \st Schedule are exempt from provisions 
 of this Act as to maximum expenses. 
 
 Sect. 38. Repeal of Acts 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75, 
 s. 33, and part o/45 & 46 Vict. c. 50. 
 
 Sect. 41. Act to be in force to end of year 1886. 
 
 Medical Relief.] The Act i& & 49 Vict. c. 46, 
 declares that medical relief at the expense of tlie 
 poor-rate shall not deprive a person of right to be 
 registered or to vote as a Voter at any municipal 
 election, or as a burgess, or as a voter at any elec- 
 tion to an office tinker the provisions of any statute. 
 
 1. Certificate of CommiBsionera of Trea- 
 sury — Expenses of Election Court — Amendment of 
 Order — Court of Record — Rate — Mandamus — 
 Corrupt Fractices {Municipal Elections) Act, 
 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 60), s. 14, sub-s. 5, ss. 20, 22.] 
 Upon the trial of a petition against the return 
 of a borough councillor under the Corrupt Prac- 
 tices (Municipal Elections) Act, 1872, the bar- 
 rister in delivering judgment said tliat he found 
 the councillor guilty of personal bribery, and that 
 all the costs of the inquiry were to be borne by 
 him, and made an order in -writing for the 
 payment by the councillor of certain costs under 
 sect. 19 of the Act. The written order made 
 no provision for the remuneration and allowances 
 to the barrister and other persons under sect. 22. 
 The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury paid 
 the amount of such remuneration and allowances 
 and certified the payment to the borough trea- 
 surer, and required him to repay them the amount 
 out of the borough fund or rates as provided by 
 sect. 22. A rate was accordingly made and levied. 
 The commissioners, afterwards, on receiving from 
 the barrister a letter that he had always intended 
 to visit all the costs upon the councillor, and had 
 said so in giving judgment, cancelled their certi- 
 ficate, and the borough corporation abandoned 
 their rate and returned the sums levied to the 
 ratepayers. Afterwards the commissioners, find- 
 ing that the barrister had made no written order 
 
 IL MUNICIPAL COEPORATION— ELECTION— 
 
 continued. 
 for the payment of the remuneration and allow- 
 ances under sect. 22, issued a fresh certificate re- 
 quiring the borough treasurer to repay them out 
 of the borough fund or rates the amount of such 
 remuneration and allowances. These facts being 
 raised upon the return to a mandamus command- 
 ing the treasurer to repay the commissioners out 
 of the borough fund or rate, and the corporation 
 to cause such repayment : — Held, that no valid 
 order was made by the barrister for the payment o 
 such allowances and remuneration under sect. 22 ; 
 that the election court for the trial of petitions 
 under the Act was by virtue of sect. 14, sub-sect. 5, 
 a Court of record, and that neither the Queen's 
 Bench Division nor the Court of Appeal on the 
 return to the mandamus could amend the bar- 
 rister's order so as to make it include the payment 
 of such remuneration and allowances ; that the 
 act of the commissioners in certifying was not a 
 judicial act, and that they had the power to make 
 the second certificate, and were entitled to a 
 peiemptory mandamus compelling the treasurer 
 to repay to them the amount of such remuneration 
 and allowances out of the borough fund or rate, 
 and compelling the corporation to order such 
 amount to be levied by a boi-ough rate. The 
 QnEEN V. ConpoRATiON OF Maidenhead 
 
 [8Q.B. D. 339; 9 Q. B. S. 494 
 
 3, Corrupt Practices — Time for delivery 
 
 of Particulars — Corrupt Fractices {Municipal 
 Elections) Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c. 60).] In a 
 municipal election petition the Respondent ap- 
 plied for an order for delivery of particulars of 
 the alleged corrupt practices : — Held, that, in the 
 absence of exceptional circumstances, the Peti- 
 tioners should not be ordered to deliver particu- 
 lars more than seven clear days before the hear- 
 ing of the petition. Lenham v. Bauuek 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 293 
 
 3, Mayor — Complaint of Conduct of — 
 
 Returning Officer — Corrupt Fractices {Municipal 
 Elections) Act, 1872 (35 A 36 Vict. o. 60), s. 13, 
 sub-s. e^Ballot Act (35 & 36 Vict. c. 33), s. 20— 
 Municipal Corporations Act (5 (£ 6 Will. 4, «. 76), 
 s. 43 — Municipal Election Petition Rules, 1872, 
 rule 44 — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 19.] Where a 
 mayor had bona fide given a decision under 
 38 & 39 Vict. c. 40, s. 1, sub-s. 3, on the validity 
 of an objection made to a nomination paper, a 
 complaint of such decision as erroneous is not a 
 " complaint of the conduct " of such mayor within 
 the meaning of 35 & 36 Vict. o. 60, s. 13, sub-s. 6. 
 — At the election of a councillor for a wai'd in a 
 borough the mayor is not the returninpr ofBcer 
 within the meaning of sect. 20 of the Ballot Act, 
 unless he also happens to be alderman of such 
 ward, or unless the office of alderman in such 
 ward be vacant. — From an order of a Divisional 
 Court upon an interlocutory matter arising in an 
 election petition, an appeal lies to the Court of 
 Appeal. Hakmon v. Park - 6 Q. B. D. 323 
 
 4. Nomination Vapei— Municipal Elec- 
 tions Act, 1875 (88 & 39 Vict. c. 40), s. 1, svh-s. 2 
 — Christian Name of Candidate — Abbreviation of 
 " William."'} A nomination paper at the election 
 of a town councillor pursuant to the Municipal 
 Elections Act, 1875, sufficiency states the ohris- 
 
( D39 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 910 ) 
 
 H. mUNICIPAI COEPORATION— ELECTION— 
 
 continued. 
 tian name " William," of the person nominated by 
 tlie abbreviation " Wm." EIenky v. Abmitage 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 257 
 
 5. Nomination Paper — Subscription of 
 
 domination Papers — Assenting Burgesses — Muni- 
 cipal Elections Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 40), «. 1, 
 sub-s. 2.] Sect. 1, sub-sect. 2 of the Mmiicipal 
 Elections Act, 1875, provides that every candi- 
 date at a municipal election shall be nominated 
 in -writing subscribed by two burgesses as pro- 
 poser and seconder, and by eight others as 
 assenting to the nomination, and that "each 
 candidate shall be nominated lay a separate nomi- 
 nation paper, but the same burgesses, or any of 
 them, may subscribe as many nomination papers 
 as there are vacancies to be filled, but no more." 
 — At a municipal election where there were four 
 vacancies to be filled a burgess subscribed four 
 nomination papers, which were delivered within 
 due time, and subsequently he subscribed a fifth 
 nomination paper, which was also delivered in 
 due time. In each case he subscribed as one of 
 the eight assenting burgesses required by the 
 Act : — Held, that the first four nomination papers 
 were valid, and that the fifth was invalid. Bun- 
 GOTNE V. Collins - - 8 Q. B. D. 450 
 
 6. Nomination Paper — Subscription of 
 
 assenting Burgess — Defect in Entry on Burgess 
 Moll — Variance — Municipal Corporations Act, 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 50), s. 241.] A nomination 
 paper at an election of town councillors was sub- 
 scribed with the full and correct name of " Charles 
 Arthur Burman" as an assenting burgess; but 
 his name was erroneously entered upon the bur- 
 gess roll as " Charles Burman " only :^- Held, that 
 the defect was not such as was remedied by 45 & 
 46 Vict. e. 50, s. 241, enacting that "no misnomer 
 or inaccurate description of any person .... 
 named in any roll .... required by this Act shall 
 hinder the full operation of this Act with respect 
 to that person .... provided the description of 
 that person .... be such as to be commonly 
 understood." — The words " commonly under- 
 stood " in this proviso mean " commonly under- 
 stood by any person comparing the nomination 
 paper and the burgess roll." Moobhouse v. 
 Linnet. Thorpe v. Linney 15 Q. B. D. 273 
 
 7. Nomination Paper- — Substitution of 
 
 different Proposer tvithout privity of assenting 
 Burgesses — Municipal Elections Act, 1875 (38 & 39 
 Vict. c. 40), s. 1, sub-s. 2.] By the Municipal 
 Elections Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 40j, s. 1, 
 sub-s. 2, at any municipal election (of council- 
 lors) every candidate shall be nominated in 
 writing; the writing shall be subscribed by two 
 enrolled burgesses of such borough or ward as 
 proposer and seconder, and by eight other enrolled 
 burgesses of such borough or ward as assenting 
 to the nomination. — At an election of a ward 
 councillor a burgess was nominated in a paper 
 signed by B.and H. as proposer and seconder, and 
 by eight other burgesses as assenting to the 
 nomination. After the nomination paper had 
 been delivered to the town clerk it was altered in 
 the absence of the seconder and assenting bur- 
 gesses by striking out the name of B. as proposer 
 and substituting that of G., another duly enrolled 
 
 II. MUNICIPAL COBPOEATION— ELECTION— 
 
 continued. 
 burgess : — Held, that the nomination was invalid. 
 Hakmon v. Park - - - 7 Q. B. D. 369 
 
 8. Petition against some only — Validity 
 
 of the Election as a whole — Municipal Corporations 
 Act, 1882 (45 (t 46 Vict. c. 50), ss. 87, 88, 91, 98, 242, 
 Sch. 3, Part II., rr. 3 and 10 — Appeal — Municipal 
 Election Petition — Specicd Case — Supreme Court 
 of Judicature Act, 1881 (44(1-45 Vict.c. 68), s. 14.] 
 An election petition may be presented under the 
 Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, s. 87, against 
 some only of the persons returned at a municipal 
 election, although the ground of the petition is 
 one aflecting the validity of the election as a 
 whole ; and the Court can on such petition declare 
 the persons so petitioned against not to have been 
 duly elected. — The three Eespondents and six 
 other persons were nominated as candidates to fill 
 four vacancies in the town council of a borough 
 under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882. An 
 objection having been made to the nomination 
 papers of H., and three other candidates (not the 
 Respondents), on the ground that they were in- 
 valid under Sch. 3, Part II., rule 10, because the 
 persons subscribing the paper in each case had 
 subscribed nomination papers of other candidates, 
 the mayor erroneously held the objection to be 
 good, being of opinion that rule 10 applied to a 
 case where there were several vacancies. The 
 objection to H. was withdrawn; but the three 
 other candidates objected to were prevented from 
 going to the poll, and at the election which was 
 afterwards held, H., and the three Bespondents 
 were declared duly elected. Upon a petition 
 against the return of the Eespondents, to whichH. 
 was not a party, it was admitted that an election 
 of town councillors where there are several vacan- 
 cies, is governed by the Municipal Corporations 
 Act, 1882, Sch. 3, Part II., rule 3, which provides 
 tiiat the same burgesses may subscribe as many 
 nomination papers as there are vacancies, and 
 that rule 10 does not apply to a case of several 
 vacancies; and it was further admitted that as 
 the objection would have been valid against all 
 the candidates returned, the whole election might 
 have been declared void if H. had been a party to 
 the petition ; but it was contended that as he was 
 not before the Court, and therefore as his election 
 could not be questioned, the return of the Eespon- 
 dents must stand good : — Held, that although the 
 erroneous decision of the mayor affected the 
 validity of the whole election, nevertheless the 
 Court had power to deal with those candidates 
 returned who were petitioned against, andj.that 
 the return of the Eespondents must be declared 
 void, notwithstanding that the return of H. eould 
 not be questioned, he not being a party to the 
 petition. — Judgment of the Queen's Bench. Divi- 
 sion aflii'med. — Notwithstanding sect. 93, sub- 
 sect. 7, of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, 
 which enacts that the decision of the High Court 
 upon a petition questioning a municipal election 
 shall be final, nevertheless an appeal, if leave be 
 given, lies from a judgment of the Queen's Bench 
 Division upon a petition of that nature to the 
 Court of Appeal, owing to sect. 242 of the statute 
 above-mentioned, which in effect incorporates the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1881, s. 14, 
 
( 941 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF, CASES. 
 
 ( 942 ) 
 
 n. MUNICIPAL eOBPOEATION— ELECTION— 
 
 contimted. 
 
 whereby in certain caees un appeal is allowed 
 
 from the High Court of Justice to the Court of 
 
 Appeal, if special leave be given. Line v. "Waeheh 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 73, 648 
 
 9, Voting Paper — Election, of Aldermen — 
 
 Insertionof Wrong Name — Signature — Ambiguity 
 — Parol Evidence — Municipal Cm-poralions Act, 
 1882 {i5-& 46 fief. c. 50), s. 60, suh-s: i.^ By the 
 Municipal Oorpoiratiolis A6t, 1882, s, 60, sub-s. 4, 
 any person entitled to vote at an ' election of 
 aldermen may vote " by signing and personally 
 delivering at the meeting to the chairman, a 
 voting paper contaioing tlie surnames and other 
 names and places of abode and descriptions of 
 the perSpBiS for whom he votes.'' A voting paper 
 was delivered commencing,- "I, the undersigned 
 A. B.," and ending with the, signature " 0. D." ; 
 and upon u petition against the return of the 
 persons elected, the commissioner received evi- 
 dence shewing that the town clerk had inserted 
 A. B.'s name in order that the voting paper might 
 be used by hiiu, but by inadvertence it was 
 handed to G. B., who signed and personally 
 delivered it to the chairman without discovering 
 the mistake : — Held, that the vote was valid, and 
 that the commissioner was right , in receiving 
 evidence of the circumstances under which it was 
 given. Summers v. MooKHdnsE ' 13 Q. B. D. 388 
 
 III. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATIOK— FRANCHISE. 
 
 Qualification — Inhphitant fibuseholder — 
 
 Dwelling-house, Occupation of. Tart of — Parlia- 
 mentary and Municipal Registration Act, 1878 (41 
 t& 42 . Vict. c. 26), s. 5-^mv/nioipal Corporations 
 Att, 1882 (45 <fc 46 Vict. c. 50), ss. 9, 31.] Occu- 
 pation of part of a dwelling-house, for the pur- 
 poses of a private dwelling only, constitutes 
 ■occupation of a " house " within sects. 9 and 31 of 
 the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, so as to 
 confer the municipal franchise upon the occupier. 
 Gkeenway v. Baohelob. Aldeidge's Case 
 
 [12 Q. B. B, 381 
 
 IV. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION— PEOPEETY. 
 Action by Freemen — Property of Borough 
 
 applied for indimdual Benefit of Freemen — 
 Custom of Borough — Municipal Corporations 
 Act, 1835 (5 <fe 6 Will. 4, c. 76), s. 2— Pleading.] 
 In an action by some (on behalf of all) of the free- 
 men of a borough to establish the right of all in- 
 dividual freemen to share for their private benefit 
 the net proceeds of certain properties vested in the 
 corporation : — Held, on demurrer, that the effect 
 of the saving of rights in sect. 2 of the Mimicipal 
 Corporations Act of 1835 was to legalise the bene- 
 ficial interests therein mentioned, without refer- 
 ence to the legality of their origin, and, in par- 
 ticular, to obviate any objection which might other- 
 wise arise in respect of the tendency towards a per- 
 petuity of any such beneficial interest. — An action 
 to establish such rights as aforesaid may be 
 brought by parties claiming to be entitled, Avith- 
 out an information by the Attorney-General. — In 
 such an action it was held on demurrer that in 
 order to enable the Plaintiffs to avail themselves 
 of such saving of rights as aforesaid, it was suffi- 
 cient for them, after stating the title of the corpo- 
 ration by charter or otherwise to the property in 
 
 IV.' MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION— PEOPEETY 
 
 — continued. 
 question, to aver tliat at the time of the passing 
 of the Act the rents; tolls, and piofits claimed by 
 them were not, nor ever had. been,, nor ought to 
 have been, held and applied to public purposes; 
 but then were, and always had been, held and 
 applied for the particular benefit of the freemen, 
 and withoutpleading that such rents, tolls, and 
 profits had been enjoyed or acquired by virtue of 
 any specific statute, charter, by-law or custom, or 
 expressly to aver that any custom to. such effect 
 as aforesaid existed.' Prestney j). Corporation 
 
 OE' COLOflESTER AND TJIE ATTOKNET-GeNERAL 
 
 [21 Ch. D. HI 
 
 V. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION— QUALIFICA- 
 TION. 
 
 Tlie Act 48 & idVict. e. 9, t'emoves disqualification 
 for voting at a municipal election in a borough, in 
 respect of occupation, where during a part of the 
 quaiifying period, not exceeding four m^ntlis, a man 
 has permitted his-'luiuee to. be. occupied as a 
 furnisJiedidweHiiigrlmuse by some other person, and 
 has not then resided' wiiliin seven miles of the 
 borough. 
 
 .. Aideiman—DisqualificatioH-^Insolvenoy 
 — Composition with Creditors — Avoiding Office — 
 Municipal Corporatiqii Act, 1835 (5 <fe 6 Will. 4, 
 c. 76), s. 5.2 — Debtors Act, 1869, s, 21 — Jurisdic- 
 tion— rlnj»nction — Assigned Business — Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-s. "8 ; s. 34.] The Plaintiff, an 
 alderman of a borough, made a composition with 
 his creditors, but executed no composition deed ; 
 nor were any composition proceedings taken 
 under the Debtors Act, 1869^ He had, however, 
 executed, a bill of sale, duly registered, to a per- 
 son not a creditor, to secure a sum of money 
 advanced by him to meet the amount of the com- 
 position. A meeting of the corporation of the 
 borough having been summoned by notice for the 
 purpose of declaring the office held by the Plain- 
 tiff void under the Municipal Corporation Act, 
 1835 (5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 76), s. 52, and the Debtors 
 Act, 1809, s. 21, and electing a successor : — An 
 injunction was granted, at the instance of the 
 Plaintiff, restraining the corporation from pro- 
 ceeding under their notice on the ground, (1) that, 
 having regard to the express words of the above 
 sections, the Plaintiff had not become disqualified 
 from holding ofiice; (2) that under sect. 25, 
 sub-s. 8, of the Judicature Act, 1873, the Court 
 had jurisdiction to grant the injunction ; and 
 (3) that, having regard to sect. 34 of the same 
 Act, the action wiiicli claimed the injunction 
 only, had been properly brought in the Chancery 
 Division. — The jurisdiction of the Chancery Di- 
 vision to interfere by injunction under Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-s. 8 considered. Aslatt v. 
 Corporation oe Southampton 16 Ch, D. 143 
 
 VI. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION— EATES. 
 Constable — Costs of Action for Malicious 
 
 Prosecution against — Borough Fund and Bates, 
 Illegal Charge upon — Municipal Corporation Act 
 (5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 76), s. 82.] The chief constable 
 of a borough having, by direction of borough 
 magistrates, laid an information against a person 
 for conspiracy, an action for malicious prosecution 
 was brought by such person against him and a 
 
( 9i3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 914 ) 
 
 VI. MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION — RATES — 
 
 continued. 
 verdict recovered for £200 : — Held, that it was not 
 competent to the town council to order payment of 
 the chief constable's costs out of the borough 
 fund or rate under 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 76, s. 82. 
 The Queen v. Cokpoeation op Exeter 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 135 
 
 VII. MTTNICrPAL COEPOEATION — EESIGNA- 
 TION. 
 
 Withdrawal — JJesigjiafJon of Corporate 
 
 Office — Delivery of Besignation to Town Clerk 
 — Power to withdraw Besignation — Municipal 
 Cyrporations Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 50), 
 8. 36.] Under the Municipal Corporations Act, 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 50), s. 36,— which enacts 
 that a person elected to a corporate office may at 
 any time, by writing signed by him and delivered 
 to the town clerk, resign the office, on payment 
 of the fine provided for non-acceptance thereof, — 
 the resignation is completed by the delivery of 
 the writing to the town clerk and the payment 
 of the fine, and cannot afterwards, even with the 
 assent of the corporation, bo withdrawn. The 
 
 QUKEN V. COEPOKATION OF WlGAN 14 ft. B. D. 908 
 
 MUNICIPAL COEPOEATION— Borough without 
 commission of peace — Mayor, a justice of 
 the peace for borough 7 ft. B, D, 548 
 See CoNTKAOT — Validity. 1. 
 
 Information for penalties — Justice member 
 
 of corporation — Interest 6 ft. B, D. 168 
 See Justices — Disqualificatiost. 3. 
 
 MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS COEEUPT AND IL- 
 LEGAL PRACTICES ACT, 1884, 
 See Municipal Cokpokation — Election 
 — Statutes. 
 
 MUEDEE— Attempt to— Criminal law 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 881 
 
 See Ckiminal Law — Offences against 
 Peeson. 4. 
 
 Inciting to - - 7 ft. B. D. 244 
 
 See Cedhnal Law — Offences against 
 Pebson. 5. 
 
 Killing and eating flesh of human being 
 
 under pressure of hunger 14 ft. B. D. 278 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Person. 6. 
 
 MUSEUM. 
 
 See Public Libeaey- 
 
 -Statutes. 
 
 MUSICAL COMPOSITION— Copyright 
 
 [21Cli. D. 232; 11 ft. B. D. 102 
 See Cqpyeight — Deamatic. 1, 3. 
 
 Eight of public performance of. 
 
 See Copyeigut — Music — Statutes. 
 
 MUTUAL CEEBIT — Administration action 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 686 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Actions. 18. 
 
 - - - 30Cli. D. 216 
 
 See Company — Conteacts. 4. 
 
 MUTUAL DEALINGS— Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptcy — ^Mutual 
 Dealings. 
 
 MUTUAL LIFE INSUEANCE COMPANY— Wind- 
 ing-up. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Life In- 
 SUEANCE Company. 
 
 MUTUAL LOAN SOCIETY - 28 Ch. D. 559 
 
 See Company — Disteibution of Assets. 
 3. 
 
( 915 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 946 ) 
 
 N. 
 
 NAME— Company— Leave to use 17 Ch. D. 198 
 See Company — Actions. 
 
 Firm— Trade-mark - - 27 Ch. D. 681 
 
 See Tbade-makk — Registration. 5. 
 
 Gift to persons bearing particular name 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 620 
 See Will — PERPBTniTT. 5. 
 
 Use of, in trade 22 Ch. D. 660 ; 30 Ch. D. 156 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 315 
 See Tkade Name. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 NAME AND ARMS CLAITSE 17 Ch. D. 211 
 
 See Will — Pehpetuitt. 3. 
 
 - - 26 Ch. D. 792 
 
 See Will — Condition. 5. 
 NATAL— Law of 6 App. Cas. 619 ; 9 App. Cas. 715 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 1, 2. 
 
 NATIONAL DEBT COMMISSIONERS. 
 
 Government Annuities and Contracts of Insur- 
 ance.] The Ant 45 & 46 Vict. o. 51 {Government 
 Annuities Act, 1882, amends and extends the Acts 
 relating to the purchase of small Government annui- 
 ties and to assuring payments of money on death 
 or at a specified age. 
 
 By sect. 2 an annuity (in the Act referred to as 
 a Savings Bank Annuity) may he granted of any 
 amount not exceeding £100 to any person not under 
 five years of age. 
 
 By sect. 3 the National Debt Commissioners may 
 contract viitli any person for a payment to be made 
 on the attainment by him of a specified age or sooner 
 in case of his death (such contract in the Act referred 
 to as a savings bank insurance). 
 
 Sect. 4. A savings bank insurance may be granted 
 for any amount not exceeding £100 to a person not 
 over (lie age of sixty-five years and not under four- 
 teen years of age, or if the amount does not exceed 
 £5, not under the age of eight years. 
 
 Sect. 5. Tables to be constructed for saving banks 
 annuities and insurances. 
 
 Sect. 6. Regulations to be observed in granting 
 such annuities and insurances. 
 
 Sect. 7. Applies the Savings Banks Acts for the 
 purposes of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 8. Trusts not to be noticed, except such 
 trusts as are from time to time recognised by lav) in 
 relation to deposits in savings banks, and except 
 such trusts as are provided for by sect. 10 of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1870, or any en- 
 actment now or hereafter to be passed relating to 
 the property of married women. 
 
 A savings bank annuity or insurance depending 
 on the life of one person may be granted to two or 
 more persons, and may be the subject of transfer. 
 
 Sect. 9. Where any person, entitled to a savings 
 bank annuity or insurance, is insane or otherwise 
 incapacitated to act, then the payment of such 
 annuity or insurance may he made at such times, 
 in such sums, and to such persons as may seem 
 proper. 
 
 Sect. 10 amends 27 & 28 Vict. c. 43, ss. 8, 11, as 
 
 NATIONAL DEBT COMMISSIONERS- conimued, 
 
 to surrender of policy or assignment of policy after 
 payment of five years' premiums. 
 
 Sect. 11. As to forfeiture of annuity or insurance 
 exceeding the maximum or where holder malces anyr 
 false declaration with respect thereto. 
 
 Sect. 12. Penalty for receiving annuity or insu- 
 rance in fraud of the Commissioners. 
 
 Sect. 13. As to application and investment of 
 sums paid for annuities and insurances. 
 
 Sect. 14. Definitions. 
 
 Sect. 15 repeals in part the (xovernment Annui~ 
 ties Acts, 1853 and 1864. 
 
 National Debt.] The Act 46 * 47 Vict. c. 54 
 (National Debt Act, 1883) makes further provision 
 respecting the National Debt, and the investment 
 of moneys in the hands of the National Debt Com- 
 missioners on account of Savings Banks, and 
 otherwise. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. v. 72, ss. 18-26, provides 
 for the application of the accumulations of frac- 
 tions of a penny on dividends of the National 
 Debt, for payment of the annual deficiency in ther 
 value of the securities held by the National Debt 
 Commissioners for Friendly Societies, and for other 
 purposes. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. a. 2 (National Debt Act, 
 1884) makes further provision respecting the con- 
 version into 1\ per cent, annuities of 3 per cent, 
 annuities held by the National Debt Commissioners 
 on account of Savings Banks ; and for the redemp- 
 tion of the Indian Loan Annuity, 1881. 
 
 Conversion of 3 per cent. Stock into Stock of 
 lower Denomination.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 23 
 (National Debt Conversion of Stock Act, 1884) 
 provides for the creation of new 2| per cent, stock, 
 for additional 2J per cent, stock, and for the ex- 
 change of 3 per cent, stock into 2f per cent, or 2J 
 per cent, stock. 
 
 By sect. 5 the regulations made in pursuance of 
 the Savings Bank Act, 1880, with respect to invest- 
 ments through the Post Office, are adapted to the 
 new stock and to the I'l per cent, stock. 
 
 By sect. 6, 3 per cent, stock held in trust may be 
 exchanged for the new stock or for 2| per cent, 
 stock. 
 
 Res judicata — Petition for re-transfer of 
 
 Stock — Dismissal of former Petition by saTne Peti- 
 tioner — Discovery of Fresh Evidence — National 
 Debt Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 71), ss. 51, 54, 55.] 
 The jurisdiction given to the Court by sect. 55 of 
 the National Debt Act, 1870, to decide upon peti- 
 tion as to the validity of a claim for the re-transfer 
 of stock, which has been transferred to tho 
 National Debt Commissioners under the pro- 
 visions of sect. 51, is to be exercised in the mode 
 in which the ordinary jurisdiction of the Court 
 is exercised. Therefore, if a petition for the re- 
 transfer of stock is heard on its merits, and is 
 dismissed on the ground that the Petitioner has 
 failed to make out his title, he cannot, on the 
 subsequent discovery of fresh evidence in support 
 
( 947 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 948 ) 
 
 ,341 
 
 ,410 
 
 ,615 
 
 NATIONAL DEBT COMMISSIONERS— co»«m«ed. 
 of his title, present a fresli petition for tlie same 
 object, without leave of the Court previously 
 obtained. —Decision of Pearson, J., affirmed. In 
 re Mat - -25 Ch. D. 231 ; 28 Ch. D. 516 
 
 NATIONALITY— Descendants of British subject 
 bom abroad - - 22 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Alien. 
 
 NAUTICAL ASSESSORS - 6 P. D. 84 
 
 See CoDNTT Court — Pbactice. 2. 
 
 NAVIGABLE KIVEE - - 9 Q. B. D. 162 ; 
 
 See Fishery. 1. 2. [8 App. Cas. 135 
 
 Scotland - ' - - 6 App. Cas. 273 
 
 See Scotch Law — Biver. 
 NAVIGATION— Collision. , 
 
 See Cases under Ship — ^Navigation. 
 NAVY. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutei. 
 
 NE EXEAT REGNO - 29 Ch. D, 
 
 See Aebest — Ne exeat regno. 
 
 NECESSARIES- For infant 13 Q. B. D, 
 
 See Infant— Contracts. 3. 
 
 For lunatic — Supplied to lunatic 
 
 [21 Ch. D, 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 1. 
 
 ^ For ship '- 10 P. D. 44 ; 16 Ch. D. 604 ; 
 
 [9 App, Cas. 356 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 1, 6, 7. 
 
 For ship — Action for — Admiralty — County 
 
 Court - - 6 Q. B. D. 165 
 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 1. 
 
 For ship — Managing owner- 
 bind other owners 
 See Ship — Owners. 2. 
 
 For wife — Liability of husband 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 24 
 See Husband and Wife — Liability of 
 Husband. 
 
 NEGLIGENCE :— Col. 
 
 I. Evidence - - - - 947 
 
 II. Liability - - - - 948 
 
 I. NEGLIGENCE -EVIDENCE. 
 
 1. Contributory Negligence — Licensee.'] 
 
 The deceased was employed by a builder to, watch 
 and protect certain unfinished buildings. Work- 
 men were employed by the Defendant, a con- 
 tractor, on the land near to where the deceased 
 was on duty, to excavate the earth for the founda- 
 tions of other buildings. In the performance of 
 this operation they employed a steam-crane and 
 winch to which were attached a chain and iron 
 bucket by means of which the earth was raised 
 from the excavation and thence to the carts which 
 were to carry it away. The deceased had nothing 
 to do with the excavations, but was standing where 
 he need not have been, watching the Defendant's 
 men • at work, and allowing the bucket to pass 
 some three feet over his, head, when the chain 
 broke and the bucket and its contents falling upon 
 him so injured him that he subsequently died : — 
 Held, that' there was no evidence of negligence 
 in the Defendaht's workmen ; that the deceased 
 was at the most a - bare licensee ; and that he 
 
 -Authority to 
 6 Q. B. D. 93 
 
 I. NEGLIGENCE— EVIDENCE— conimaetZ. 
 
 stood where he did subject to all the risks incident 
 to the position in which he had placed himself. 
 Batohelor v. Fortescue - 11 Q. B. D. 474 
 
 2. Driving Carriage — Fublic Thorougli- 
 
 "fare.'] A horse drawing a brougham under the 
 care of the Defendant's coachman in a public 
 street, suddenly and without any explainable 
 cause bolted, and, notwithstanding the utmost 
 efforts of the driver to control him, swerved on to 
 the footway and injured the Plaintiff: — Seld, no 
 evidence of negligence to go to a jury. — And lield, 
 that the fact that the horse had cast a shoe shortly 
 after he bolted, and that the driver did not under 
 the circumstances in "which he was placed call out 
 or give any warning did not alter the case. — 
 Hammaek v. While (11 C. B. (N.S.) 588 ; 31 L. J. 
 (C.P.) 129), upheld. Manzoni v. Douglas 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 146 
 
 3. , Iievel Crossing — Contributory Negli- 
 gence.'] The Defendant's railway crossed a public 
 footway on the level. About half-past four o'clock 
 in the afternoon of the 29th of March, the Plaintiff, 
 a foot-passenger, while crossing from the down side 
 to the up side of the railway, was knocked down 
 and injured at the crossing by a train of the Defen- 
 dants on the up line. Owing to the position of 
 certain buildings which stood by the line it was 
 impossible for any one crossing from the down side 
 to see a train coming until he got within a step or 
 two from the down line, but a person standing on 
 the down line or the six-foot had a clear and un- 
 interrupted view up and down the line for several 
 hundred yards. The Plaintiff, who lived near and 
 was well acquainted with the crossing, stated that 
 before crossing he looked to the ■ right along the 
 down line, but he admitted that he did not look 
 to the left along the up line, and that if he had 
 looked he must have seen the train coming. The 
 engine-driver did not whistle. There was a ser- 
 vant of the Defendants employed as a gatekeeper 
 at the crossing, whose duty it was to open the 
 carriage gates there when carriages could safely 
 be admitted, and to close them at other times. 
 He was standing at the time on the opposite side 
 of the crossing talking to two boys, with a furled 
 flag in his hand ; but he gave no warning to the 
 Plaintiff that a train was coming. The Plaintiff 
 having brought an aotiojl against the Defendants 
 to recover compensation for his injuries, was non- 
 suited on tlie above facts being proved at the 
 trial : — Held, by Brett, M.E., and Bowen, L.J. 
 (Baggallay,L. J., dissenting), that the nonsuit was 
 right as, although there was evidence of negligence 
 on the part of the Defendants, yet according to 
 the undisputed facts of the case the Plaintiff had 
 shewn that the accident was solely caused by his 
 omission to use the care which any reasonable 
 man would have used. — Decision of the Queen's 
 Bench Division affirmed. Davey v. London and 
 South Western Railway Company 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 213 ; 12 Q. B. D. 70 
 
 n. NEGLIGENCE— LIABILITY. 
 
 1. . Cab Proprietor — Liability for Neg- 
 ligence of Driver — Horse provided by hriver — 
 Metropolitan Hackney Carriages Acts (1 cfc 2 Will. 4, 
 c. 22), ss. 6, 20, 23 ; (6 & 7 Vict. c. 86), ss: 10, 21, 
 24, 28, 35.] The Plaintiff's cart and pony were 
 
( 9W ) 
 
 DIGEST 'OF CASES. 
 
 ( 950 ) 
 
 II. mEOllGKNOE— LIABILITY— coBfeiMecL .. 
 injured by a cab plyiug in the streets of London, 
 owing to the negligence ^of the oab-driTier. The 
 Defendant- was proprietor of the oab and licensed 
 to ply it for hii-e. He had let' the oab i to the 
 driver for a weekly payment, the horse, harness, 
 and 'Whip being provided by the- driver with 
 whom the Defendant had nothing to do beyond 
 receiving money from him -.^Seld, that under the 
 circumstances there was nothing in. the Metropo- 
 litan Hackney Carriages Acts (1 & 2 Wm. 4, c. 22, 
 and 6 & 7 yipt c. 86), .to .maJie the Defendant 
 liable for the negligence of the driver.— PoicZes v. 
 Sider (6 E. & B. 207), , and . FenaKes v. Smith 
 (2 Q. B. D. 279) considered. Kma v. Setike 
 
 ,, , , . , tS a. B. D. 104 
 
 2. Defective Article— SupjjZj/ of— Injury 
 
 io Stranger — ■Liability of Persomsitppiying a defec- 
 tive Article causing Injury 'to Stranger/] The De- 
 fendant supplied and erected a staging* round a 
 ahip under a contract -with the shipowner. The 
 Plaintiff was a workman in the employ of a ship 
 painter who had contracted -with the shipowner to 
 paint the outside of the ship, and in order to do 
 the painting the Plaintiff went on and used the 
 staging, when one of the ropes by which it was 
 slung, being unfit for use when supplied by the 
 Defendant, broke, and by reason thereof the 
 Plaintiff fell into the dock and was injured : — 
 Held, reversing the decision pf the Quee^'3 Bench 
 Division, that the Plaintiff, beiug.engaged on work 
 on the vessel in 'the performance of which the 
 Defendant, as dock owner, waV interested, the De-' 
 fendant was under an obligation to him to take 
 reasonable care that at the time he supplied the 
 staging and ropes they, were in a fit state to be 
 used, and that for the neglect of such duty the 
 Defendant was liable to the Plaintiff for the injury 
 he had sustained : — Held, also, by Brett, M.B., 
 that whenever one person is by circumstances 
 placed in such a position with regard to another, 
 that every one of .ordinary sense who did think 
 would at once recognise that if .he. did not use 
 ordiijary care and skill in his own conduct witlr 
 regard to those circumstances lie would cause 
 danger of injury to the person or property of the 
 other, a duty arises to use ordinary oareand skill 
 to avoid such danger. Heaven v. Pender, 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 302 ; 11 Q.B. D. 503 
 
 3. — r-^ Defect in Camiage-rtJb&masier — War- 
 ranty of Fitness.'] The Plaintiff' hired from the 
 Defendant,, a. jobmaster, for a specified -JQumej, a 
 carriage, a pair of horses, and a driver.: During 
 the journey a bolt in the under part of the carriage 
 broke, the splinter bar became displaced, the 
 horses started off, the carriage was upset, and the 
 Plaintiff injured. In an action against the Defen- 
 dant for negligence, the jury were directed that, if 
 in their opinion the DefencUiht took all reasonable 
 care to provide a fit and proper-carriage, ■ their 
 verdict ought to be for him." The jury found a 
 verdict for the-Defendant, and in particular that 
 the carriage was reasonably fit for the purpose for 
 whioli it was hired, and that the defect in the bolt 
 could not have been discovered by the Detendant- 
 by ordinary care and attention- i^-ffeW,. that the 
 direction was wrong, for that it -was the duty of 
 the Defendant to supply a carriage as fit for the 
 purpose for which it was hired as care and skill 
 
 II. NESIIGENCE— IIABIIITY— cojifiimissi. 
 could render it, and the. evidence was not such as 
 to- shew that the ■.breakage of the bolt was, -in the 
 proper sense of the word,= an accident not pre- 
 ventible by any care or skill, or to warrant the 
 finding of the jury that thb carriage was reason- 
 ably fit for the purpose' for which it was hh-ed. 
 Hyman v. Nye - - - 6 Q. B. D. 685 
 
 4. Defect in Carriage — Articles sold con- 
 signed in Defective Truck to yendee— Injury to 
 Servant of Vendee.] The Defendant, a colliery 
 owner, consigned coals sold by him to the buyers 
 by rail in a truck rented by him from a waggon 
 company for the purposes of the colliery. Througli 
 the negligence of the Defendant's servants .the 
 truck was allowed to leave the colliery in a' de- 
 fective state. In consequence of the defect in 
 the truck injury was occasioned to the Plaintiff; 
 one of the buyers' servants, who was employed in 
 unloading the coals, and had got into the ti'uck 
 for that purpose: — Peld, that there was a duty on 
 the part of the Defendant towards the Plaintiff to 
 exercise reasonable care with regard to the con- 
 dition of the truck, and 'the defendant was thfer6- 
 fore liable to the Plaintiff in respect of the injuries 
 sustained by him. Elliott v. Hall 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 315 
 
 6. Diversion of Highway — Owner of 
 
 Land — Duty to fence.] A duty is cast upon tliose 
 who, in the exercise of statutory powers, divert a 
 public footpath, to protect, by fencing or other- 
 wise, reasonably careful persons using the foot-, 
 path from injury -through. going astray at the 
 point of diversion. Hukst v. Taylob 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 918 
 
 6. — T^ Landlord of House — Licensee — Obliga- 
 tion to 'fende — Private Way.] The Defendant 
 was the landloid of a house which was let out in 
 apartments to several tenants, each of whom had 
 the' privilege of using the roof (which was flat 
 and covered with'lead, having an iron rail on its 
 outer edge),' for the purpo'se of diyiig their linen ; 
 the access to the roof being' by means of a low 
 door at the stair-head 'about two feet fr6m the 
 rail. The Piaihtiff, the occupier of one bf the 
 rooms, went upon the roof for the purpose of re- 
 moving s'oine linen, wlien, his foot dipping, and 
 the rail being out of repair (and knbwn by the 
 landlord to be so), he' feli'thrtfcrgh to the 'court- 
 yard belbw, and was' injured': — Held, that the 
 mere licence to the' lodgers to uSe' the roof as a 
 di-ying-grouhd imposed no dtityupon the Defen- 
 dant to fence it or to keep the fencein repair. Ivay 
 ». Hedges - - '■- '— 9 Q. B. D. 80 
 
 7. — — Master and Servant-^lTnga/is Premises 
 — Knowledge of McLster — Ignorance of Servant.] 
 In an action for' negligence brought by ,a servant, 
 against his .master for personal injury, resialtihg 
 from the unsafe state of the premises upon which 
 the seryaht 'was employed, the statement of claim 
 must allege not ohly,'that the master knew, but 
 that the sei'yani was ignorant of, the danger.-^ 
 Jiidgnient of the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. 
 
 (rJlIFFiTHS Di'L^NDON AND, St.; B^ATHABINB DOOKS 
 
 Qqmpany - 12Q.iB.l)..493; 13 Q. B. D. 259 
 
 8. : Ship — .Harbour ; Master — Collision, 
 
 caused by Vessel :aTpproacliing the- Spot where Navir- 
 gation of Biver rendered ' Dangerous by Sitnhen. 
 
( 951 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 952 ) 
 
 II. NEGLIGENCE— LIABILITY— conM»ue(Z. 
 Vessel — Vessel sunli by Collision for which her 
 Owner alone to hlame — Removal of Wrecks Act, 
 1877 (40 (fe 41 Vict. c. 16), s. 4 — Act done in course 
 of Dtity — Warning to Harbour -master — Hearsay 
 Mvidence — Wrongful Rejection of JSvidence.'] The 
 D. in consequence of the sole default of her 
 master and crew had sunk in the Thames, and 
 had become a wreck obstructing the navigation 
 of the river. Her mate sent a message to the 
 harbour-master at G. to Inform him of the acci- 
 dent, who said that he would cause the wreck to 
 be lighted. A few hours afterwards, the wreck 
 not having been lighted, a vessel without any 
 fault on the part of those on board her came into 
 collision with the wreck and sustained damage. 
 An action of damage having been instituted on 
 behalf of the owner of the damaged vessel against 
 the owners of the D., the Judge at the trial re- 
 fused to admit the evidence shewing that the mate 
 of the D. had sent a message to the harbour- 
 master, and that the latter had promised to light 
 the wreck : — Held, that the evidence was wrongly- 
 rejected, that the collision had not been caused by 
 the negligence of the owners of the wreck, and 
 that they were not liable for the damage done. 
 The " Douglas" - 7 P. D. 161 
 
 9. Ship — Harbour Master — Harbour Com- 
 missioners — Harbours, Docks, and Fiers Clauses 
 Act, 1847(10 & 11 Vict. c. 27), ss. 51, 52, 5Z—Fal- 
 nwutli Harbour By-laws.] The R., which was 
 anchored in F. outer harbour, having to be beached 
 in the inner harbour, S., the harbour master, 
 directed the master of the jB. where to beach her. 
 Before the R. left the outer harbour, S. came on 
 board, although a Trinity House pilot was in the 
 vessel, and when she had arrived near the place 
 where she was to be beached gave directions as 
 to the lowering of her anchor. The R. overran her 
 anchor and grounded on it, sustaining damage. 
 In an action against the harbour commissioners 
 and S., the Court found as a fact that there was 
 negligence on the part of S., and that the place 
 where the R. grounded was outside the jurisdic- 
 tion of the harbour commissioners: — Held, that 
 the duties of the harbour master comprised direc- 
 tions as to the mooring and beaching of vessels ; 
 that by giving directions when he went on board, 
 S. had resumed his functions as harbour master, 
 and that he and the commissioners were there- 
 fore liable for the damage done to the R. — Held 
 further, that S. was personally liable as a 
 volunteer. The"Ehosina" - 10 F. S. 24 
 
 10. Ship — Harbour Master — Harbour Com- 
 missioners — Harbours, Doclcs, and Piers Clauses 
 Act, 1847 (10 * 11 Vict. c. 27), s. 52.] The E., 
 which was anchored in F. outer harbour, having 
 to be beached in the inner harbour, S., the harbour 
 master, directed the master of the R. where she 
 was to be beached. Before the R. left the outer 
 harbour S. came on board, and when she arrived 
 near the place where she was to be beached, S. 
 gave orders as to the lowering of her anchor. The 
 R. overran her anchor and grounded on it, sus- 
 taining damage. The R. grounded, and the order 
 was given outside the jurisdiction of the harbour 
 commissioners, but the spot where the R. was to 
 be beached was within their jurisdiction. The 
 Court below found that S. had been negligent in 
 
 II, NEGLIGENCE— LIABILITY— cowfanaed. 
 fact : — Held by the Court of Appeal, aflSrming the 
 decision of Sir James Hannen (10 P. D. 24), that 
 the commissioners were liable, for under the cir- 
 cumstances the order given by S. was within the 
 scope of his authority as harbour master. The 
 "Ehosina"- - - lOP. D. 131 
 
 11. Solicitor and Cler^— Scope of Autho- 
 rity.'] The Plaintiffs occupied premises beneath 
 the offices of the Defendants who were solicitors. 
 One of the Defendants had a room of the offices, 
 and in it was a, lavatory for his own use exclu- 
 sively, and his orders to his clerks were that no 
 clerk should come into his room after he had left 
 A clerk went into the room to wash his hands at 
 the lavatory after his employer had left, turned 
 the water tap, and negligently left it so that 
 water flowed from it into the Plaintiff's premises 
 and damaged them. — In an action for negligence i 
 — Held, that the act of the clerk was not within 
 the scope of his authority, or incident to the ordi- 
 nary duties of his employment, and that there was 
 no evidence of negligence for which the Defen- 
 dants were liable. Stevens v. Woodwaed 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 318 
 NEGLIGENCE — Common employment — Master 
 and servant 
 
 See Cases under Master akd Sekvant 
 — Master's Liability 
 
 Condition exempting from liability 9 P. D. S 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 32. 
 
 Contributoiy — Navigation. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — NAViGATioif. 
 
 Death through negligence 25 Ch. B. 409 ;, 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 160 
 See Damages — Lokd Campbell's Act. 
 1,2. 
 Death through negligence — 'Widow of work- 
 man how far bound by his contract not 
 to claim compensation - 9 Q. B. D. 357 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 8. 
 
 Delivery order— Estoppel 11 Q. B. D. 77& 
 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 3. 
 
 Director - 25 Ch. D, 752 
 
 See Company — Dikeotor's Liability. 6. 
 
 Driver of cart — Liability of hirer 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 890 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 1. 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880 — Superin- 
 tendent 10 a. B.' D. 856 ; 11 ft. B. D. 619 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 3, 4. 
 
 . Executive Government — Liability 
 
 [9 App, Cas, 418 
 .See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 1. 
 
 Infringement of sailing rules — Contributory 
 
 negligence — Action in rem 9 P. D. 96 ; 
 [10 App. Cas. 89 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 1, 
 
 Master of tug 9 P. D. 8 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 32. 
 
 Mortgage— Priority - 21Ch. D. 124; 
 
 [26 Ch, D. 482 ; 29 Ch. D. 221, 725 
 See Mortgage — Priority, li — 9 
 
( 953 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 954 ) 
 
 NEGLIGENCE— coiitiiiuecZ. 
 
 Railway company — " Charge or control " of 
 
 points - 12 Q. B. D. 208 
 
 See Master and Servant — ^Master's 
 Liability. 17. 
 
 Eailway company — ^Liability to fence against 
 
 adjoining lands — Injury to cattle 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 322 
 See Eailway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 3. 
 
 Eailway company — Person in charge of 
 
 train - 9 Q. B. D. 106 
 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 18. 
 
 Servant. 
 
 See Cases under Master Airo Servant 
 — Master's Liability. 
 
 Sewer — Accumulation of water — ^Liability 
 
 of Metropolitan Board of Works 
 
 [7 a. B. D. 418 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 4. 
 
 Ship — Collision. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — ISTaviqation. 
 
 Solicitor - - 17 Ch. D. 437 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 2. 
 
 Solicitor's bill of costs — Taxation 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 439 
 
 See Solicitor— Bill of Costs. 11. 
 
 Tramway— Eoad authority 12 Q. B. D, 16 
 
 See Tbamway Company. 2. 
 
 Trustee 23 Ch. D. 727 ; 28 Ch. D. 268 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 2,4. 
 
 Unavoidable accident — Steam-steering gear 
 
 See Ship— Navigation. 5. [10 P. D. 99 
 
 Warehouseman — ^Damages 7 Q,. B. D. SIO 
 
 See Damages — Remoteness. 5. 
 
 NEPHEWS AND NIECES— WiU— Construction 
 See Will— Words. 12. [17 Ch. D. 382 
 
 NET PROFITS — Payment of dividend of com- 
 pany - 16 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Company — ^Dividends. 4. 
 
 NEW PAEISH. 
 
 See Church Building Acts — Statutes. 
 NEW SOTTTH WALES— Law of. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law — New 
 South Wales. 
 NEW STREET. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 Local Government — Streets. 
 Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 10—14. 
 NEW TEIAL. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — New Trial. 
 
 Canadian Court - - 6 App. Cas. 644 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 1. 
 
 Divorce Court — Application for — Time for 
 
 appealing - - 10 P. D. 110 
 
 See Practice— Divorce— Appeal. 2. 
 
 Indictment for obstruction of highway 
 
 [7 a. B. D. 198 
 See Criminal Law— Practice. 3. 
 
 NEW TETTSTEES — Appointment of— Convey- 
 ancing Act, 1881 23 Ch. D. 18 ; 
 [24 Ch. D. 698 
 See Settlement — Powers. 12, 13. 
 
 Appointment of— Petition 26 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Married 
 Women's Property Act. 4. 
 
 Appointment of^Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Cases under Settled Land Act — 
 Trustees, 
 and Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 
 Power to appoint - - 25 Ch. D. 611 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 333 ; 28 Ch. D. 1 
 See Settlement — ^Powees. 8, 9, 10. 
 
 Eefusal of executor of trustee to appoint 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 82 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 8. 
 
 Trustee Acts. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Acts — New 
 Trustees. 
 
 NEW ZEALAND— Law of 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 
 9 App. Cas. 418, 699 
 
 -New Zealand. 1, 2. 
 
 Probate in — ^Payment out of Court 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 177 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment OUT OP Court. 
 
 NEWSPAPER— Copyrisrht 17 Ch. D. 708 
 
 See Copyright — Newspapers. 
 
 Libel in. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Libel — Statutes. 
 Defamation — Libel — Statutes. 
 
 Libel in — Criminal information — Piat of 
 
 Director of Public Prosecutions 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 648 
 
 See Criminal Law — Libel. 2. 
 Post Office. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 Registration. 
 
 See Copyright — -Ne wspapers — Statutes. 
 
 NEXT FRIEND 19 Ch. D. 94; 25 Ch. D. 243 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — -Next 
 Friend. 1, 2. 
 
 Married woman — Costs of former action not 
 
 paid - - 23 Ch. D. 288 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 10. 
 
 Married woman — -Security for costs 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 418 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Security for Costs. 5. 
 
 Production of documents 80 Ch. D. 189 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 5. 
 
 NEXT OF KIN— Appointment to 30 Ch. D. 186 
 
 See Power — Execution. 1. 
 
 Bequest to — Time of ascertaining class 
 
 See Will— Class. 4. [19 Ch. D. 444 
 
 Claim of interest from the Crown 
 
 See Interest. 1. [17 Ch. D. 771 
 
 NITRIC ACID WORKS. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
( 955 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 953 y 
 
 NOMINATION PAPER . ', i. 
 
 See Cases under Municipal Corpokation 
 — Election. 4-7. 
 NON-ACCESS — Evidence of Husband and wife 
 
 [as Ch. D. 173 
 ' Spe Evidence — General. 2. 
 
 NON-PEOFESSIONAL WORK - 2S Ch. D. 279 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 23. 
 
 NON-EIPAEIAN OWNEE— Abstraction of water 
 'See WXTERCOUBSE; 1. [27 Ch. D. 122 
 
 NONSUIT— Effect of judgment— County Court- 
 Power' to make rules - 7 Q. B. D. 329 
 See County Court — ^Phactice. 3. 
 
 NON-TTSEE — Highway— SciIAoIl law 
 
 [10 App, Cas. 378 
 /Sefe Scotch Law — Highway.' 2. 
 
 Trade-mark - 26 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eesisteation. 12. 
 
 NOTAEY — Attestation by — Evidence 
 
 ' ■ [17 Ch. D. 833 
 
 See Evidence — Documents. 1. 
 
 Foreign country — Modern practice :- 
 
 [25 Ch, D. 769 
 See Practice-^Supremb Court — Evi- 
 dence. -S,- " , ■ , , -■ 
 
 Notarial certificate — Affidavit sworn abroad 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 332 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 6. 
 
 NOTICE — Abandonment — Ee-insurance — Con- 
 structive total los? — Suing and labouring 
 , clauge "-, ■ .-. - 15 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 See Insurance,' Marine — toss, Total. 
 
 Actrof bankruptcy 17 Ch. D. 26 
 
 See Bankhuptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 2. 
 
 Act of bankruptcy T^Protected transaction 
 
 See Cases under ' TJankrui'Tcy — Pro- 
 tected Transaction.' 
 
 -1 Action;— Constable— Trial in, county wherp 
 
 fact committed — Coiitagious Diseases 
 (Animals) Act, 1878' 14 a. B. D. 720 
 See Constable. 
 
 Action — Local Government Acts 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 299, 788 
 See Local Government — Practice. 4, 
 5. 
 
 Admiralty'^ — Telegiram — ^ Substitute of 
 
 marshal - 10 P. D. 120 
 
 See Practice— Admiralty — ^Arrest oe 
 ShiC 2. 
 
 Anallysis of adulterated article 6 ft. B, D. 17 ; 
 
 ' See Adulteration. 4, 5. [9 ft. B. D. 172 
 
 Appeal— Bankruptcy - 19 Ch. D. 169; 
 
 ) [24.Ch. D. 364 
 
 See Bankruptot— tAppeal. 3, 6. 
 
 Appeal— ilB formal - 22 Ch. D. 484 
 
 See pRACTibE — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 36. 
 
 Assignment of chose in action 18 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 Assignment of debt — Death of assignor 
 
 [12 ft. B.D, 511 
 See Assignment op Debt. 1. 
 
 NOTICE — continued. . ■ • .-..■: . 
 
 Bankruptcy-^Application for order of dis- 
 charge — Advertisement 13 ft. B. D. 66 
 See Bankruptcy — Dischabgb. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy petition — Sheriff 15 ft. B. D. 48 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Protected Trans- 
 action. 6." 
 
 Bankruptcy — Eeceiving order — Kotice in 
 
 name of partners - 13 ft. B. D. 113 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceiveb. 6, . 
 
 .Cliarge on officer's commission money 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 17 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 12. 
 
 Charge on shares of next of kin 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 577 
 See Administrator — Powers. 2. 
 
 Constructive and imputed - 26 Ch. D. 501 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
 Covenant not to sell land for beershop 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 258 
 
 See Covenant — Running with Land. 1. 
 
 Coyenaut to reconvey 20 Ch. D. 562 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act-^Superpluous 
 Lands. 2. 
 
 Cross notice of appeal 16 Ch. D. 270 ; 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 17 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 11, 30. 
 
 Employers' Liability Act, 1880- Notice of 
 
 injury. 
 
 See Cases under Master and Seevakt 
 ■ — Master's Liability. 12 — 16. 
 
 Equitable mortgage — Solicitor — Contract 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 178 
 See Moetgagj: — Contract. 9. 
 
 Injunction — Committal for breach 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 778- 
 See PRA.CTICE — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 9. 
 
 ' Interruption of easement - 19 Ch. D. 462 
 
 See Light — Title. 4. 
 
 Judgment summons for committal — Transfer 
 
 to Bankruptcy Court — Efeceiving order 
 — Notice to' judgment debtor 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 335 
 See Bankruptcy — Transfer. 2. 
 
 Mortgage — ^Priority. 
 
 See Cases under Mortgagf. — Priority. 
 
 Mortgage — Proceeds of sale 29 Ch. D. 954 
 
 See Mortgage — Eedemption. 5. 
 
 Mortgage— Sale - 17 Ch. D, 434 
 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 1. 
 
 Mortgage — Stop order — Priority 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 497 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Char- 
 ing Orders. 3. ' 
 
 . Mortgage— To pay off debt 23 Ch. D. 372 
 
 See Mortgage — Eedemption. 1. 
 
 Motion — Appeal — Eejection of proof— 
 
 Bankruptcy - - 14 ft. B. D. 385 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 14. 
 
 — r-, Motion for attachment 27' Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 4. 
 
( 957 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 958 ) 
 
 NOTICE-— C(j«fe'»«e(J. 
 
 Motion for attachment 9 Q. B. D. S35 
 
 Bee Pkactice — Stjpbeme Court — Notice 
 OF Motion. 1^ . ■ •, - 
 
 - — ^ Motion — Short^ — Irregularity 22 Ch. D. 604 
 See Pbactice^^Suprbme Cotjrt^Notioe 
 OF Motion. 2. 
 
 Motion to set aside award t 6 ft. B. D. 67 ; 
 
 [19 Ch D. 68 
 See Akbitration— AwAKD. 2, 3. ' 
 
 Motion to vary minutes - 20 Ch. D. 130 
 
 See PujicTiCE — Supreme Court— Judg- 
 ment. 6. 
 ^— Not to trust wife - - 6 App. Cas. 24 
 
 /• See HusBAjTD and Wipe — Liability of 
 
 Husband. 
 
 Objection-^Borougll franchise -^Mistake — 
 
 Power of amendment - 8 ft. B.' D. 259 ; 
 [15ft.B. D. 461 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 5, 6. 
 
 Objection — List of county voters — Omis- 
 sion of date - - 12 ft. B.D. 373 
 See Parliament — ^Franchise. 10. 
 
 - — Option to renew lease -. 22 Ch. I). 640 
 See Landlord AifD Tenants-Lease. 13. 
 
 Power to determine tenancy — ^Delivery to 
 
 tenant — Alisenee of tenant ' - 
 
 [15ft.B. D. 256 
 .See Landlord and Tenant — Ke-entrt. 
 9. . . ■ 
 
 Publication of poor-rate - 9 ft. B. D. 47 
 
 See Poor-rate^— Procedure. 7. 
 
 Eepair of road — ^Winding-up o'f company 
 
 [SpOh. D. 216 
 See Company — Contracts, 'i'. 
 
 Sale of land — Trttstee^-Settled Land Act 
 
 [23Ch.D. 762 
 See Settled Land Act — Tenant foe 
 Life. 4,. , . , :., 
 
 Second mortgagee — ^Proceeds of sale 
 
 , [29 Ch. D. 964 
 See Mortgage — ^Redemption.. 5. 
 Service on shareholders — Misrepresenta- 
 tion - - 24 Oh. D. 149 
 ;Siee Company — Prospectus. 6. 
 
 Third party procedure 
 
 See Cases ^ imder PitACTicE —Supreme 
 Court— Third Party.. 
 
 To quit — Disclaimer of lessor's title 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 730 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Be-entry. 
 2. 
 
 To quit— Half-year's notice — Six months' 
 
 notice - - - 16 ft. B. D. 501 
 
 iSee Landlord and Tenant — Yearly 
 Te»ant. 
 
 To quit — Statute. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant-^Yearly 
 Tenant — Statutes. 
 -, — To treat — Dwellings Improvement Act 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 78 
 See Laboukebs' Dwellings Acts. 1. 
 
 To treat— Lands Clauses Act 30 Ch. D. 663 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act— Compulsory 
 Powers. 6. 
 
 : NOTICE— cojiKwMed,- '" ■■ -■:■"■■ ■' - ■• 
 
 To trustees— ^Settled Land' Act 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 464 
 See Settled Land Act — Trustees.- '5. 
 
 ■ Transfer of shares — Equitable tuortgage — 
 
 Priority - - 14 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 See Company^ShAres— Transfer. 2. 
 
 Trial— Right of Defendant to give 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 234 
 &e Practice— Supreme Court^Notige 
 OF Trial. 
 
 Trial-^Wftnt of prosecutiqn 27 Ch. D. 364: 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Codr?: — ^ De- 
 fault. 7. 
 
 Trust^Recitals in deed - . 24 Ch. D. 720 
 
 /See Vendor and, Purchaser — Title. 4. 
 
 Trustee — Charge onfund - 26 Ch. D. 686 
 
 jSee MoRtGAGE — Priority. 11. 
 
 Undisclosisd principal 9 ft. B. D. 530 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 874 
 
 feePHINCIPAL AND AgeMT — PRINCIPAL'S 
 
 ' Liability. 6: ■ ■ . ' . . . > 
 
 Vendor's lien — Register cotinty 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 801 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
 ^Winding-up — Proof - , 23:Ch. iD. 634 
 
 See Company — Proof. 3. 
 
 Withdrawal of members^BuUding society 
 
 .,.,,, [24 Ch. D. 4gl ; 10 App. Cas. 33 
 I .See Building Society.. 15. 
 
 Withdrawal of members — Mutual loan 
 
 society - -: '■ 24.Chv D. 425, n. 
 See Company — ^DiiTRiBUTioN of Assets. 
 1. .. 
 NOTOUR BANKBUPTCY— Scotch law 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 966 
 
 jSee ScoTcn Law — Bankruptcy. 
 
 NOVA SCOTIA— Law of - 8 App. Cas. 668 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Nova 
 
 Scotia.' 
 
 NOVATION— Company -Promoter 25Ch.D. 103 
 
 See Company-tFormation. 
 NOVELTY— Patent - , - 7 ft. B. D. 305 ; 
 [19 Ch. D. 268 ; 21 Ch. D. 720 
 See Patent — ^Validity. . 2. 3, 4. ., 
 
 NUISANCE :— 
 
 I. Definition - 
 II. Remedies 
 
 Col. 
 ,958 
 959 
 
 i. NUISANCE— DEFINITION. ' 
 
 1. Hospitals ' — Metropolitan Poor Aat.'] 
 
 The Metropolitan Poor Act, 1867 rSO & 31 Vict, 
 c. 6), authorizes the formation of districts and dis- 
 trict asylums for the care and cure of sick and in- 
 firm poor, creates corporations for that purpose, 
 gives authority to the Poor Law Board (now the 
 Local Government Board) to issue directions to 
 these corporations, enables theni to purchase lands 
 and, erect buildings for the purposes of the Act, and 
 makes the rates of parishes and unipns liable for 
 the outlay thus inourredi But it does not, by 
 direct and imperative ■ provisions, order these 
 things to be- done, so that if, in doing' them; a 
 nuisance is created to .the injury of' the health or 
 property of persons resident in the neighbourhood 
 of the place where the land is purchased or the 
 
( 959 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 960 ) 
 
 I. NUISANCE— DEFINITION— conJiiiuei. 
 buildings erected, it does not afford to these acts 
 a statutory protection. And tlierefore, where 
 such nuisance was found as a, fact : — Held, that 
 the District Board could not set up the statute, 
 nor the orders of the Poor Law Board under it, 
 as an answer to an action, or to prevent an in- 
 junction issuing to restrain the Board from con- 
 tinuing the nuisance. — Per Lord Blackburn : On 
 those who seek to establish that the Legislature 
 intended to take away the private rights of indivi- 
 duals, lies the burden of shewing that such an 
 intention appears by express word^ or recessary 
 implication. — Per Lord Watson : Where the terms 
 of a statute are not imperative, but permissive, 
 the fair inference is that the Legislature intended 
 that the discretion, as to the use of tlie general 
 powers thereby confeiTcd, should be exercised 
 in strict conformity with private rights. Metko- 
 iPOLiTAN Asylum DiSTr.ioT v. Hill 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 193 
 
 2. EaUway Company — Cattle Station — 
 
 Farliamentanj Powers.'] A railway company 
 were by their Act authorized, among other 
 things, to carry cattle, and were also authorized 
 to purchase by agreement (in addition to the 
 lands which they were empowered to purchase 
 compulsorily) any lands not exceeding in the 
 whole fifty acres, in such places as should be 
 deemed eligible, for tho purpose of providing 
 additional station yards, &c., for receiving, load- 
 ing, or keeping any cattle or any goods, &c., 
 conveyed or intended to be conveyed by the 
 railway, and for making convenient ways thereto, 
 or for any other purposes connected with tne 
 undertaking which the company should judge 
 requisite ; and they were empowered to sell the 
 additional lands, and to purchase in lieu thereof 
 other lands which they should deem more eli- 
 gible for their additional purposes, and afterwards 
 to sell the same as aforesaid, and so from time to 
 time. The company bought under this power a 
 piece of land adjoining one of their stations and 
 used it as a cattle dock. The noise of the cattle 
 and di'overs was a nuisance to the occupiers of 
 <;ertain houses near the station, and they brought 
 an action to restrain the company from continuing 
 the nuisance: — Seld (affirming the decision of 
 North, J.), that the Plaintiffs were entitled to an 
 injunction, for that there was nothing in the Act 
 which by necessary implication authorized the 
 creation of a nuisance on the additional lauds. 
 Tkuman v. London, Bkighton, and Sooth Coast 
 Kailway Company 25 Ch. D. 423 : 29 Ch. D. 89 
 [Reversed by the House of Lords, 11 App. Cas. 45.] 
 n. NUISANCE— EEMEDIES. 
 
 1. Injunction — Fouling Stream — Quia 
 
 Timet Action^ In order to maintain a quia timet 
 action to restrain an apprehended injury the 
 Plaintiff must prove imminent danger of a sub- 
 stantial kind, or that the apprehended injury, if 
 it does come, will be irreparable. — Earl of Eipon 
 v. Edbart (3 My. & K. 169), Attorney-General v. 
 Corporation of Kingston (13 W. E. 888), and 
 Salmn v. Noiih Brancepetlt Coal Company (Law 
 Eep. 9 Ch. 705) discussed.— The Plaintiff was a 
 manufacturer of paper, his mills being situate on 
 the bank of a river, the water of which he used 
 to a large extent in his process of manufacture. 
 
 II. NUISANCE— IlEMEDIES—conHnMecZ. 
 for which it was essential that the water should 
 be very pure. The Defendants, who were alkali 
 manufacturers, were depositing on a piece of land 
 close to the river, and about one mile and a half 
 higher up than the Plaintiff's mills, a large heap 
 of refuse from their works. It was proved that in 
 the course of a few years a, liquid of a very 
 noxious character would flow from the heap, and 
 would continue flowing for forty years or more, 
 and that if this liquid should find its way into 
 the river to any appreciable extent the water 
 would be rendered unfit for the Plaintiff's manu- 
 facture, and his trade would be ruined. The 
 Plaintiff did not allege that he had as yet sus- 
 tained any actual injury. The Defendants said 
 that they intended to use all proper precautions 
 to prevent the noxious liquid from getting into 
 the river : — Held, that, it being quite possible by 
 the use of due care to prevent the liquid from 
 flowing into the river, and it being also possible 
 that, before it began to flow from the heap, some 
 method of rendering it innocuous might have 
 been discovered, the action could not be main- 
 tained, and must be dismissed with costs. — But 
 the dismissal was expressly declared to be with- 
 out prejudice to the right of the Plaintiff to bring 
 another action hereafter, in case of actual injury 
 or imminent danger. Fletohek v. Bealey 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 688 
 
 2. ■Obstruction of Light — Injunction — 
 
 Cause of Action — Reversioner.] The Plaintiff was 
 the owner in fee of a cottage, the Defendant 
 owned some land immediately adjoining. The 
 Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant had erected 
 on the Plaintiff's land a hoarding on poles in 
 order to block out the access of light to a window 
 in the cottage, and had in so doing committed a 
 trespass, 'rhe Plaintiff also alleged that the 
 poles and hoarding produced a rattling and creak- 
 ing noise which was an intolerable nuisance to 
 the Plaintiff and his tenants. The Plaintiff 
 claimed an injunction to restrain the trespass 
 and the nuisance. At the trial it was proved that 
 the cottage was in the occupation of a weekly 
 tenant of the Plaintiff, who was not a party to 
 the action. There was no evidence tbat the'aots 
 of the Defendant had caused any diminution of 
 value of, or other injury to, the reversion : — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Fry, J.), that tlie poles 
 and hoarding not being of such a permanent cha- 
 racter as to injure the reversion the Plaintiff 
 could not maintain an action for trespass; and 
 that the erection of the poles on the Plaintiff's 
 land was too trifling an injury to entitle the 
 Plaintiff to an injunction. — Rochdale Canal Com- 
 pany V. King (2 Sim. (N.S.) 78) distinguished. 
 CooFEit V. Cbahteee - 19 Ch, D. 193 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 589 
 3. Obstruction on Highway.] The De- 
 fendant farmed land on either side of a highway. 
 His servants removed a roller from one of his 
 fields across the highway to the gate of the 
 opposite field, and taking away the horses, left 
 the roller on the green-sward at the roadside 
 with its shafts turned up (but projecting a few 
 inches over the metalled part of the road), in- 
 tending it to remain there unMl it should suit 
 their convenience to draw it away. The Plain- 
 
( 961 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 962 ) 
 
 II. NUISANCE— REMEDIES— coiifanjjec?. 
 tiff's wife drove past tlie spot, and her pony 
 shied at the roller, overturned the carriage, and 
 caused her death. — In an action under Lord 
 Campbell's Act (9 & 10 Vict. c. 93), the jury 
 found that the accident was caused by an un- 
 reasonable user by the Defendant of the highway : 
 — Seld, that the verdict was warranted by the 
 evidence, and that the Plaintiff was entitled to 
 judgment. Wilkins v. Day 12 Q. B, D. 110 
 
 4. Sewage— iooaZ Board — Bight to send 
 
 Sewage into Sewers of adjoining District — Injunc- 
 tion — Trivial Damage — Claim of Bight — Manda- 
 tory Injunction — Stopping up existing Drains — 
 Suspension of Injunction — Metropolis Local Man- 
 agement Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Vict. c. 120), as. 135, 
 220— PwSiic Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), 
 ss. 15, 23.] Notwithstanding the obligation im- 
 posed on a local board by the Public Health Act, 
 1875, to drain their district, their right to send 
 the sewage of their district, directly or indirectly, 
 into the sewers belonging to the sanitary autho- 
 rity of an adjoining district is, in the absence of 
 express enactment or agreement, no higher than 
 the right of a landowner to send sewage from his 
 land on to the land or into the drains of a 
 neiglibouring landowner. — If, therefore, a pre- 
 scriptive right has been acquired to send some 
 sewage from one district into the sewers of 
 another, the burden cannot be increased without 
 the consent of the sanitary authority of the latter 
 district. The ratio decidendi of Metropolitan 
 Board of Works v. London and North Western 
 Bailway Company (17 Ch. D. 246) applies to a 
 local board just as it docs to an ordinary land- 
 owner. — Injunction granted in the absence of 
 proof of substantial damage, on the ground that 
 the Defendants by their pleading claimed a 
 right to continue doing that which the Court 
 held they were not entitled to do. — In an action 
 by a sanitary authority to restrain the sanitary 
 authority of a neighbouring district from autho- 
 rizing or directing sewage from their district to 
 flow into the sewers of the Plaintiffs, the Court 
 granted an injunction as to the future, but refused 
 to grant a mandatory injunction to compel the 
 stopping up of existing di-ains (1), Because to do 
 so would cause serious inconvenience to the dis- 
 trict, and (2), Because it is doubtful whether a 
 local board have power to stop up drains which 
 they have once authorized to be connected with 
 their sewers. And, inasmuch as the injunction 
 granted applied only to the future, the Court 
 refused to suspend its operation. Attoeney- 
 Geneeal v. Acton Local Boaed 22 Ch, D. 221 
 
 5. Sewage — Pollution of Stream-^Local 
 
 Board — Neglect of Ptiblio Duty — Mandamus — In- 
 junction — -Vesting oj Sewers in Local Authority — 
 Public Health Act, 1875 (38 d: 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 17 
 —Bivers Pollution Act, 1876 (39 * 40 Vict. e. 75), 
 ss. 2, 3, 8.] A sanitary authority in whom the 
 sewers are vested have only a limited ownership 
 in them ; they are not in the same position as to 
 responsibility for fouling a stream as a private 
 individual, because they cannot stop the sewers 
 on account of the damage to the inhabitants of 
 the neighbourhood. And although,_perliaps, the 
 sanitary authority might obtain an injunction to 
 restrain persons from using the sewers who had 
 
 II. ^VISATUC'E— nEMEHXES— continued. 
 no right to do so, a landowner complaining of the 
 nuisance cannot bring an action against them for 
 not doing so ; because an action cannot be main- 
 tained either at Law or in Equity to compel a 
 person to bring an action for tlie purpose of re- 
 straining a nuisance which he cannot himself 
 prevent. Where a sanitary authority have not 
 themselves constructed sewers which are a nuis- 
 ance, but only permitted them to be used as 
 formerly by the inhabitants, they are not doing 
 an act which can be restrained under the Public 
 Health Acts, or the Rivers Pollution Act, 1876. 
 But if they are neglecting their duty in providing 
 a sufficient sanitary scheme for the neighbourhood ■ '' 
 the remedy of an aggrieved landowner is by man- 
 damus. —Per Jessel, M.R. : The Court will not 
 make au order against a public body or against 
 individuals to do an act unless it is satisfied that 
 it is within their power to do it. — -Per Jessel, M.E. : 
 In dealing with the question of restraining a 
 public body from continuing a state of things 
 wliich existed before the commencement of their 
 powers, the Qourt must tal^e into consideration 
 tlie balance of convenience. — Glossop v. Heston 
 and Isleworth Local Board (12 Ch. D. 102) 
 approved and followed. — The order of Hall, V.C., 
 affirmed. Attoeney-Geneeal v. Guardians of 
 PoOE OF TJniox op Doekikg 20 Ch. D. 595 
 
 6. Sewage — Bight to compel an Action 
 
 against Third Party — Power of Local Board to stop 
 Nuisance— Public Health Act, 1875, ». 21.] On a 
 motion for au injunction to restrain a local board 
 from allowing sewage to flow into a brook opposite 
 tlie Plaintiff's house, whereby a nuisance was 
 occasioned, it appeared that the nuisance was in 
 fact caused by C. P., not a party to the action,, 
 who had passed tiie sewage of his house into the 
 brook through a pipe, which, by agreement with 
 the Defendants, he was only entitled to use for 
 surface or rain water: — Held, that although the 
 Local Board could not be compelled to construct 
 an improved system of drainage except by man- 
 damus ; nor to bring an action for an injunction 
 against a third party, particularly in cases where 
 the legal right was doubtful; still where the 
 third party was acting in violation of an agree- 
 ment entered into with, the Local Board to pass 
 surface water only through the pipe, and where 
 no special inconvenience would be caused to 
 other neighbours, the Plaintiff was entitled to an 
 injunction against the Defendants on the ground 
 that they could themselves prevent any nuisance 
 being caused, by stopping up the pipe which was 
 being used in contravention of the agreement, 
 under the powers given them by the Public 
 Health Act, and this, notwithstanding that they 
 would be preventing the third party from exer- 
 cising his right of passing surface water only 
 through the pipe. — Attorney-General v. Guardians 
 of Poor of Union of Dorking (20 Ch. D. 595) 
 distinguished. Chablesv. Finohley Local Buakd 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 767 
 NiriSANCE—Abatement— Public Health Act- 
 Power of justices to order specific works 
 [6 Q. B. D. 645 ; 11 Q. B. D. 191 • 
 [13 a, B. D. 681 
 See Local Government —Local Av- 
 THOEITY. 10, 11, 12. 
 
 2 I 
 
(< 963 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 964 ) 
 
 HTJISANCE — continned. 
 
 ■ Action against dietrict board — Liability of 
 
 successora in title - 17 Ch. D. 685 
 See LooAi Government— Local Au- 
 
 THOniTY. 13. 
 
 — — Alkali works. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health AoTS-^Statutes. 
 — — Burning dead body - 12 Q. B. D. 247 
 
 See Criminal Law — Misdemeanor. 1. 
 — : — Flap covering water meter in, street^^Liar. 
 
 bility of vestry - - 9 ft. B. D. 461 
 
 .See Metropolis — ^Management ,Acts. 
 ' ,.5- 
 
 Highway— Local board - 10. Q. B. D. 138 
 
 ■ See Local Government — Ofpenoes. 1. 
 Indecent exposure - - 14 Q. B. D. 63 
 
 See Criminal Law — Nuisance. 
 • Ironworks — - 7 App. Cas. 618 
 
 See Scotch Law^Nuisanoe. 
 Offensive business. 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 r Percolation of water - 27 Cli. D. 588 
 
 See Water. 2. 
 
 'SVISA^C'E— continued. 
 
 Swine kept near dwelling-house 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 617 
 
 See Local Government — By-laws. 
 
 Swine kept near dwelling-house 
 
 [8 a B. D. 97 
 
 See LooAt Government — OpfeSces. ,3. 
 
 ■ Urinal 
 
 See Metropolis- 
 6. 
 
 - 16 Ch. D. 449 
 
 -Management Acts. 
 
 Urinal— Public Health Act 14 ft. B. D. 928 
 
 See Local Government — Compensa- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 NULLITY OF MAEEIAGE. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — ^Divorce — 
 Nullity op Marriage. 
 
 ■ After divorce in Scotland 
 See Husband and Wife- 
 
 8 App. Gas. 43 
 
 -Divorce. 
 
 • Appeal from decree. 
 
 See Practice — Divoboe — ■ Appeal — 
 Statutes. 
 ■ Scotch law - - 10 App. Cas. 171 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and "Wife. 
 7. 
 
( 965 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 960 ) 
 
 0.. 
 
 OATH'^Admiuistrfition., of — Commission to take 
 evidence abroad -, , 22 Ch. D. 841 
 
 See. Pbaotioe — ^Supbeme Court — E>t:- 
 DENcae. 12. 
 
 Parliament— Ciaim to affirm .7 Q. B. D. 38 
 
 See Pakliament — Eleotioij; 2. 
 
 Parliaments-Disbelief ia SuJ)reMe' BBitig^ 
 
 Penillty -' - 14 Q. B. D. 667 
 
 See -Paeliament — ElEdTloN. " 3. ' ' ' ■ 
 
 ■ Parliament — ■ Proccsdings of ' House of 
 
 ■ Comtiion^ ■ - "i 12Q. B. D. 271 
 
 See P!4.ELIAMEJ)T^PfiOCEDtKE.' 
 
 OBJECTION— For want of parties 16 Ch. D. 69 
 See Pkactice — Supreme Codkt — Par- 
 ties. 7. 
 — ^-^'Eegistratiou of<copyri9;lit .-- , 23 Ch. D. 727 
 See CopY-KiGHT — Books. 3. i 
 
 Toqnalifioationof voter- '-8 Q.B. D. 259; 
 
 [12 Q. B.'D. 376; 15 Q. B: D.461 
 
 ■ ■ See Paemamext^Feanchise. 5, G, 7. 
 To- title. 
 
 See Cases under Vendor and Purchaser 
 — Title. 
 
 OBSOLETE PTTNISHMENT, , 
 
 /See-JcsTioss-^PEACTicE — Statutes. 
 
 OBSTBtrCTION— Highway - 12 Q. B. D. 121 
 
 See Highway — Obstructios. 
 
 Light, 
 
 &,' Cases under Light. 
 
 OCCUPATION— Parliamentary franchise. 
 See Cnses and Statutes -under 
 Parliament — Franchise. 
 Parliament— Eebistbation. 
 
 Eates. , ■ ' 
 
 /See'CasesunderPooB-EA-TE-^OccDPATioN. 
 
 Kates — Company in liquidation 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 600 ; 28 Ch. D. 470, 474 
 See CojiPANT — Eates. 1, 2, 3. 
 0CCT7FIEB — Lands Clauses Acts — Compensation 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 472 
 See Lands Clauses Acts — Compensa- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 OrnCIAL ASSIGNEE— stock Exchange 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 2. [20 Ch. D. 366 
 
 OFFICIAL LIQTIIDATOE. 
 
 See Oases under Company— Liquidator. 
 Appointment of - - 20 Ch. D. 276 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Ordek. 8. 
 Costs— Appeal - 21 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Company — Costs. 1. 
 
 OFFICLiL EECEIVEB. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankeupicy Act, 
 1S8S— Statutes. 
 
 Bankruptcy 13 Q. B. D. 118 ; 15 Q. B. D. 169 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceivee. 7, 11. 
 
 Bankraptcy — Costs— Appeal 14 Q, B, D. 48 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Costs. 5. 
 
 OFFICIAL EECEIVEE- eon^maed. 
 ^ — --E'eport. as to composition of scheme of 
 I ,> ' , arrangement— :How far primS, facie evi- 
 i denoe - 15 ft. B. D,. 213 
 
 See Baneruptoy-7— Scheme of Areange- 
 . ment. 2. 
 OFFICIAL EEFEEEE. 
 ■ • - 'See Cases under Peactice — Supreme 
 
 Court — Eeperee. 
 OFFICEE — In army — Bankruptov— -Domicil 
 
 ■[13 Q. B. D. 418 
 • See Bankruptcy — ^Bankruptcy Peti- 
 
 j TION. 3. 
 
 In army — Children born abroad 
 
 'See Xlien. - [22 Ch. D. 243 
 
 — — i In, ,*rmy — •3Ioney payable on retirement — 
 ..Priority of, assignment 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Mortgage — Priohity. 12. 
 
 Public — Suit, against . ,- 6 App. Cas. 619 
 
 • , . j&e Colonial Law^Natal. , 1. 
 OMISSION OF WOEDS— Will— Probate 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 192 
 .See Probate^ Grant. 1 1 . 
 OMNIBUS — Conductor ^- Employers and Work- 
 men Act - 13 Q. B. D. 832 
 See Master and Servant — ^Mastee's 
 ' Liability. 9. 
 
 Manager — Injunction to restrain use of 
 
 name - - - 12 Q. B. D. 106 
 
 Sp^ Meteopolis — ■ Public Caeeiages 
 
 "'Acts.' 
 
 ONEEOUS HOLDEE— Cheque - 9 App. Cas. 96 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bill of Exchange. 
 
 1. 
 
 ONEEOUS LEGACY— Disclaimer 22 Ch. D. 573 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 614 
 See Will — Disclaimer. 1, 2. 
 ONTAEIO— Law of. 
 
 See Cases under Colonial Law — 
 Canada — Ontario. 
 ONUS PEOBANDI— Easement - 19 Ch, D. 462 
 See Light — Title. 4. 
 
 Evidence of marriage - 6 App. Cas. 364 
 
 See Colonial Law— Ceylon. 3. 
 
 Impeaching voluntary settlement 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 6. [668 
 
 Misrepresentation — Impeaching deed 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 307 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 2. 
 
 Purchase by conservators of river 
 
 See EivER. [6 App. Cas. 686 
 
 Undue influence 18 Ch, D. 188 
 
 See Undue Influence. 
 OPEN SPACES. 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 OPENING BIDDINGS— Sale by Court 16 Ch, D, 661 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Sale 
 BY Court. 
 
 2 I a 
 
( 967 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 968 ) 
 
 OPENING FORECLOSTTEE - 35 Ch. D. 626 
 
 See MOETGAQE — FOKEOLOSUEE. 11. 
 
 OPENING OF THE EOYAI COURTS OF JtTSTICE 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 1 
 
 OPINION OF COUNSEL— Privilege 28 Ch. D. 678 
 
 See Pkactioe — Supeeme Couet — Pbo- 
 
 DtroTiON OF Documents. 25. 
 
 OPTION OF PURCHASE— Conversion— Election 
 
 See, ELEOTiOfT. 3. [30 Ch. D. 654 
 
 Invalid lease - 24 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Settlement — Powers! 4. 
 
 Lease — Option to purchase fee simple — Real 
 
 and personal representatives 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 394 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 
 16. 
 
 Power of administrator to give 16 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Administeatob — Powees. 1. 
 
 Transmission of right to executors 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 203 
 See Will — Condition. 7. 
 OPTION TO RENEW LEASE - 22 Ch. D. 640 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 
 13. 
 ORDER — Conclusive against purchaser. 
 
 See Vendoe and Pueohasee — Title — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Indorsement on — Attachment 21 Ch. D. 360 
 
 See Peactioe — Sdpeeme Couet — At- 
 tachment. 3. 
 
 To pay money 29 Ch. D. 128 
 
 See Assignment of Debt. 4. 
 ORDER AND DISPOSITION— Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptoy — Oedee 
 and Disposition. 
 ORDER IN COUNCIL— Duties levied by 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 282 
 See Colonial Law — New South Wales. 
 4. 
 
 27th JUNE, 1832 8 App, Cas. 329 
 
 See Peactioe — Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 5. 
 
 ORIGINAL OR SUBSTITUTIONAL GIFT 
 
 [17Ch. D. 788; 23 Ch. D. 737 
 
 See Will — Substitutional Gift. 1, 2. 
 
 ORIGINAL WILL— Eight to look at 
 
 See Will— Mistake. 1. [30 Ch. D. 390 
 
 ORIGINATING SUMMONS— Appeal 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Peactioe— Supeeme Couet— Ap- 
 peal. 22. 
 
 - 22 Ch. D. 769 
 
 Tenant — Lease. 
 
 AND 
 
 OUTGOING TENANT 
 
 See Landloed 
 15. 
 OUTGOINGS— Will— Tenant for life— Drainage 
 See Will— WOEDS. 14. [28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 OVERDRAWING ACCOUNT— Banker— Building 
 society 9 Q. B. D. 397 ; 22 Ch. D. 61 ; 
 [29 Ch. D. 902 ; 9 App. Cas. 857 
 See Building Societt. 6, 7, 8. 
 
 OVERSEERS— Opposition to bill in Parliament- 
 Costs - 14 Q. B. D. 858 
 
 See PooE-LAW — Management. 
 
 OVERSTOCKING LAND WITH GAME— Injury to 
 crops - 15 Q. B. D. 258 
 
 See Game. 1. 
 
 OWNER — Assessment to poor-rates 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 69 ; 8 App. Cas. 38& 
 See PooE-EATE — Bating of Ownees. 
 
 Ship - - 6 Q. B. D. 93 ; 10 P. D. 4 
 
 See Ship — Owners. 1, 2. 
 
 Ship — Duty of owners. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Merchant Ship- 
 ing Acts. 3 — 6. 
 
 OWNERSHIP- Act of - - 6 App. Cas. 164 
 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 1. 
 Voter. 
 
 See Paeliament — Eegistbation — 
 Statutes. 
 OYSTER. 
 
 See FisHEEY Acts — Statutes. 
 Eight of dredging for - 7 Q. B. D. 106 ; 
 
 See Fishery. 3. [7 App. Cas. 633 
 
( 969 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 970 ) 
 
 PAID-UP SHAKES— Contract for 30 Ch. D. 163 
 
 See Company — Shakes — Issue. 2. 
 
 PAINTINGS— Gift of— Heirlooms 36 Ch. D. 638 
 See Will — Heirloom. 3. 
 
 PALACE — Ecclesiastical juriadiotion 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 316 
 
 See Peactice — Ecclesiastical — Jubis- 
 
 DIOTION. 2. 
 PALATINE COURT OT LANCASTER 
 
 [24 Ch. S. 280 
 
 See CouKT — ^Lancaster Cocet. 
 
 Concurrent suits - 21 Ch, D. 647 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 100 
 See Pbactioe — Supreme Court — Con- 
 duct OP Cause. 2, 3. 
 
 Contempt - - 6 App. Cas. 667 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 
 Rehearing — Jurisdiction - 24 Ch. D. 488 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 37. 
 PARCELS — Description of advowson 
 
 See Advowson. 1. [30 Ch. D. 298 
 
 PARCELS POST. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 PARISH — AlteratioQ of — Parliament. 
 
 See Parliament — Redistribution of 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 
 Apportionment of charity - 24 Ch. D, 213 
 
 See Church Building Acts. 
 PARISH RATES— Winding-up of company— Ap- 
 portionment - 19 Ch. D. 640 
 See Apportionment. 2. 
 
 Col. 
 909 
 997 
 
 PARLIAMENT :— 
 I. Election - 
 II. Election Commissioners 
 HI. Election Petition 
 IV. Franchise — 
 
 (a.) Borough Vote. 
 (6.) County Vote. 
 V. Procedure - - - 
 VI. Registration 
 VII. Redistribution of Seats 
 
 1003 
 
 1009 
 1009 
 1011 
 
 I. PARLUMENT— ELECTION. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, continues 35 & 36 
 Viet. c. 33, the Ballot Act, 1872, so far as it is not 
 repealed, until the 31s( of December, 1886. 
 
 Conveyance of Voters.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict, 
 c. 59, continues the Act 43 Vict. o. 18, v/ntil the 31st 
 of December, 1886. 
 
 Returning Officers.] The Act 46 <£ 47 Vict. c. 51, 
 ■s. 32, amends the Act 38 & 39 Vict. o. 84 ; the Act 
 48 (6 49 Vict. v. 59, continues the latter until the 
 31st of Decmiber, 1886. 
 
 The Act 48 <fc 49 Vict. c. 62, amends the law 
 relating to the charges of returning officers at 
 , parliamentary elections. 
 
 I, PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— coBiJBMed!. 
 
 CoiTupt Practices.] Tlie Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51 
 {Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 
 1883), repeals (sect. 66 and Schedule 5) divers 
 enactments relating to parliamentary elections and 
 to corrupt and. illegal practices at such elections, 
 and provides for the better prevention of corrupt 
 and illegal practices at such elections. 
 
 By sect. 65 the Act and the Corrupt Practices 
 Prevention Acts may be cited together as the Corrupt 
 Practices Prevention Acts, 1854 to 1883. 
 
 By sect. 66 the Act came into operation on the 
 15th of October, 1886. 
 
 By sect. 64 the expression " committee room " 
 shall not include any house or room occupied by a 
 candidate at an election as a dwelling, by reason 
 only of the candidate there transacting business 
 with his agents in relation to such election ;' nor 
 sliall any room or dwelling be deemed to be a com- 
 mittee room for the purposes of the Act by reason 
 only of the candidate or any agent of the candi- 
 date addressing therein electors, committee-men or 
 others. 
 
 " Election " means the election of a member or 
 members to serve in Parliament. 
 
 " Election court " means two Judges presiding at 
 the trial of an election petition, or, if the matter 
 comes before the High Court of justice, that Court. 
 
 " Election petition " means a petition presented 
 in pursuance of the Parliamentary Elections Act, 
 1868, as amended by this Act. 
 
 " Elector " means any person whose name is for 
 the time being on the register roll or booh contain- 
 ing the names of the persons entitled to vote at the 
 election with reference to which the word is used. 
 
 '^Payment" includes any pecuniary or other 
 reward ; and "pecuniary reward " and " money " 
 include any office, place, or employment, and any 
 valuable security or other equivalent for money, 
 and any valuable consideration, and expressions 
 referring to money shall be construed. 
 
 " Person " includes an association or body of 
 persons, corporate or incorporate, and where any 
 act is done by any such association or body, the 
 members of such association or body who have talsen 
 part in the commission of such act shall be liable to 
 any fine or punishment imposed for the same by 
 this Act. 
 
 " Personal expenses " as used with respect to the 
 expenditure of any candidate in relation to any 
 election includes the reasonable travelling expenses 
 of his living at hotels or elsewhere for the purposes 
 of and in relation to such election. 
 
 " Polling agent " means an agent of the candi- 
 date appointed to attend at a polling station in 
 -pursuance of the Ballot Act, 1872, or of the Acts 
 therein referred to or amending the same. 
 
 " Public office " means any office under the Crown 
 or under the charter of a city or municipal borough 
 or under the Acts relating to Municipal Corpora- 
 tions or to the Poor Law, or under the Elementary 
 Education Act, 1870, or under the Public Health 
 Act, 1875, or under any Acts amending the above- 
 
( 971 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 972 ) 
 
 I. PAEIIAMENT— ELECTION— cojitintied. 
 
 mentioned Acts, or under any other Acts for the 
 time being in force (whether passed before or after 
 the commencement of this Ad), relating to local 
 government, lohether the office is that of mayor, 
 chairman, alderman, councillor, guardian, member 
 of a board, comrmssion, or other local authority in 
 any county, city, borough, union, sanitary district, 
 or other 'area, or is' the offici of clerh of the peace, 
 town clerk, cleric or other officerunder a council, 
 boards commission, or other authority, or ■ is any 
 other ojjlce, to which a person is elected or appointed 
 under any such charter or Act as above-mentioned, 
 and includes arty other municipal or parochial 
 office. ■ ■ 
 
 Oandidate.] Sect. 63. — (1.) In the Cm-rupt 
 Practices Pr'eventiM Acts, as amended by this Act, 
 the expression "candidate at an election" and the 
 expression " candidate " respectively mean, unless 
 the context otherwise requires, any person elected 
 to serve in Parliament at such election, and any 
 •person who ' is nominated as a candidate at such 
 election, or is declared by himself or by others to be 
 a 'candidate; on or after the day of the issue of 
 the writ for such election,' or after the dissolution or 
 vacancy in consequence of which such writ has been 
 
 (2.) Provided that 'where a person has been 
 nOmiriated as a candidate or declared to be a 
 candidate by others, then — 
 
 " (a.) If he udas So n&minated or declared without 
 his consent, nothing in this Act shall be 
 construed ' to impose any liability on such 
 person,' unless he has afterwards given his 
 assent to iuch nomination or declaration or 
 has been elected ; and 
 (b.) If he was so nominated or declared, eitlver 
 without his' 'consent or in his absence, and 
 takes no part in the election, he may, if he 
 thinks fit; make the declaration respecting 
 election expenses contained in the second 
 part of the Second Schedule to this Act, 
 ' and the election agent shall, 'so far as cir- 
 cumstandes admit, comply with the pro- 
 visions of this 'Act with respect to expenses 
 incurred on account of or in respect of the 
 conduit or 'management of the election in 
 like' manner as if ike candidate had been 
 nominated or declared with his consent. 
 Corrupt and Illegal Practices.] Sect. !.• Whereas 
 under sect: 4 of the Corrupt Practice Prevention 
 Act, 1854, persons other than candidates at parlia- 
 mentary elections are not- liable to any punishment 
 for 'treating, and it is expedient to make such 
 persons liable ; be it therefore enacted in substitu- 
 tion for the said sect. 4 as follows ;— ' 
 •1(1.) Any person toho corruptly by himself or by 
 ■■'■',■' any other person, either b^ore, during, or 
 • ■■ t after <xn election directly or indirectly 
 gives or provides; or pays wholly or in part 
 '" the expense' of giving or providing any 
 
 ■ ■ meat, drink; entertainthent, or provision to 
 Or for any person, for the purpose of 
 corruptly influencing ' that ' person or any 
 other person to give or refrain fromgiving 
 his vote at the election, or on account of 
 such person or any other person having 
 rated or refrained from voting, or being 
 about to vote or refrain from voting at 
 such election, shall be guilty of treating. 
 
 I. PABLXAMENT— ELECTIOH— <!0»fiBtt(3d!. 
 
 (2.) And every elector who corruptly accepts or 
 takes any suc/i meat, drink, entertainment, 
 or provision shall also be guilty of treating. 
 
 Sect. 2. Every person who shall directly or 
 indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his 
 behalf, malts use of or threaten to make use of any 
 force, violence, or restraint, or inflict or threaten to 
 inflict, by himself or by any other person, antf 
 temporal or spiritual injury, damage,harm, or loss 
 upon or against any person in order to induce or 
 compel such person to vote or refrain from voting,, 
 or on aecMunt of such person having voted or re- 
 frained from voting at any election, or wlw shall 
 by abduction, duress, or any fraudulent device or 
 contrivance impede or prevent the free exercise of the- 
 franchise of any elector, or shall thereby compel, 
 induce, or prevail upon any elector either to give or 
 to refrain from giving his vote at any election^ 
 shall be guilty of undu^ influence. -■ - - 
 
 Sect. 3. T/ie expression " corrupt practice " as 
 used in this Act means any of the foUovii-ng offences ; 
 namely, treating and und'ue influence, as defined 
 by this AH; and bribery, and personation, as de- 
 fined by 17 * 18 Vict. c. 102, ss. 2&S; 30 & 
 31 Vict. c. 102, 6. 49 ; and 35 & 36 Vict. c. 33, s. 24 ; 
 'and aiding, abetting, counselling, and procuring 
 the commission of the offence of personation, arid 
 every offence which is a corrupt practice within the 
 meaning of this Act shall be a corrupt practice 
 within the-meaning of the Parliamentary Ml-ections 
 Act, 1868. 
 
 Sect. 4. Where upon the trial of an -election 
 petition respecting- an election for a county or 
 borough the Election Court, by the report : made to- 
 the "Speaker in pursuance of sect. 11 of the Parlia- 
 mentary Elections Act; 1868, reports that any corrupt 
 practice other than treating or undue influence lias 
 been proved to have been committed in reference 
 to such election by or with the knowled-ge and con- 
 sent of any candidate at such election, or that the 
 off'ence of treating or undue influence has been 
 proved to have been committed in reference to such 
 election by any candidate at- such election, that 
 candidate sliaJl not bs capable of e-ver being elected 
 to or sitting in the House of Commons for the said 
 county or borough, and if he has been elected, Ms 
 election shall be void ; and he shall furtlier be 
 subject to the same incapacities as- if <xt the date 
 of the said- report hehad been convicted on a7i in- 
 dictment of a corrupt practice. 
 
 - Sect. 5. Upon the trial of an election petition 
 respecting an election for a county or borough, in 
 which a charge is made of any corrupt practice 
 having' been committed-in reference to such- election, 
 the Election Court shall report in writing to the 
 Speaker whether any of the candidates at such 
 election has been guilty by, his agents of any corrupt 
 practice in reference to such election ;aiid if the 
 report is that any -candidate at such election has 
 been guilty by his agents of any corrupt practice in 
 reference to such election; that candidate sliall .not 
 be capable of being elected to or sitting in the Souse 
 of Commons for such county, or borough for seven 
 years offer the date of the report, andif he has been 
 elected his election sliall be void. ■ 
 
 Sect. 6— (1.) A person who commits any corrupt 
 practice other thmi personation, or aiding, abettiiig, 
 counselling, or procuring the commission of the 
 offence of personation, shall be guilty of a mis- 
 
( 973 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 974 ) 
 
 I. PABIIAMEHT— ELECMOIT— oonfe'jiueiJ/ . . . 
 demearmr, and on conviction on indictment sliall 
 he' liable to be imprisoned, with or without hard 
 labour, for a term not exceeding one year, or to be 
 fined any sum not exceeding two- hundred pounds. 
 
 (2.) A person who commits the offence of persona- 
 tion^ or of aiding, abetting, ■ counselling, or pro- 
 curing the commission of that offence, shail be 
 guilty of felony, and any person convicted thereof 
 on inMctment shall be pimished by imprisonment 
 for a term not exceeding two years, together witji 
 hard labour. . : - . , 
 
 (3i) A person who is convicted on indictment of 
 any corrupt practice shall (in., addition to any 
 punishment as above provided) be not capabU 
 during a period of seven years from the date of his 
 conviction; 
 
 (a.) of being registered as an elector or voting at 
 any election in the. United Kitigdem, 
 whether it be ci parliamentary election or 
 an election for any public office within the 
 meaning- of 4his Act ; or, 
 
 (bi) of holding any public or judicial office 
 ' •■ within the meaning of this Act, and. y'^ he 
 
 : holds aaiy such, cffice the. office shall,-be. 
 
 ■• ■ vacated: ■■'■•, . , ^ , 
 
 "(4.) Any person so convicted of a corrupt practice 
 in reference to anyelection shaUalsa.,be iricapable 
 of being elected to and of sitting, in the House of 
 Qmtmons during the seven years next after the date 
 of his conviction,' a/nd if at that date he hc^s been 
 elected to the Souse of Commons his election shall 
 be vacated from '■the time of such conviction^ 
 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) No payment or contract' for pwy- 
 ment shall, for- the purpose of promtOting. or~pro- 
 ouring the election of a ca/ndddate at any election 
 bemade — ■ ■ . , 
 
 ■•^u.) on account of Hie conveyance of electors to or 
 y ..- .from the poll, whether .for. the hiring'Of, 
 ' ' ' horses or carriages, or for railwq,y fares, . 
 or .otherwise ; or 
 
 (b.) to an elector on account of the v^e of any 
 Iwuse, landi building, or prem/ises for the 
 '. -. •exhibition of av/y address, bill, or. notice, or 
 en- aceount of the exhibition of any address, . 
 . ' 'Mll,,or.ru)tieie; or. 
 - ■ (Ci) mi.aceountof any committee room in excess 
 •" ■ 'Of the number, allowed by the first Schedule 
 ■ . to this Act. ' . ■■ ' • 
 
 (2.), Subject to such exeeption as may he allowed 
 in pursuance of this Act, if amy payment or con- 
 tract for payment is knowingly made in contraven- 
 tion of' this, section either before, during, or after 
 an election, the person making sufih payment or 
 contract shall be -guilty of -an illegal practice, and 
 any person receiving such paymerd ei: being a party 
 to amy 'iuch' cont/ract, knowing the same to be in 
 contravention ofihis.Aci^ shall also be guilty of an 
 illegal/ maefiee. ■ . . 
 
 ■■(i.),'^Ovided.:.tTiat where it is the ordinary 
 business of an elector as an advertising agent to 
 exhibit for-'payment bilU and advertisements, a 
 jpm/Mehttoor contract with stich elector, if madein 
 the- or'dinar.y course of business, shall not be deemed 
 to be an ilUgal practice within t}ie meaning of this 
 
 Sect.'S. — (1.) Subject to sufih- exception as may 
 he-allowed inpmsuMnce of t]iis Act, no sum shall 
 be piiid -and no expense sliall be incurred by a 
 ea/ndidaie' at an election or his election agent. 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— KlECTION—sonMnueii. , . 
 
 whether before, during, or after o,u election,. on 
 account of or in respect of the conduct or manage^ 
 mentof such election,. in excess of any. maximum 
 amount in thatbehalf specified in.the first Schedule 
 of this Act: :• ".. 
 
 ■ ■ (2.) Any candidate or election agent who know- 
 ingly, acts 4n contravention of Miis- section shall he 
 guilty of an .illegal practice. ■ v,, j Xj-.u 
 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) If any per.soa.xotes or.induces or 
 procures amy person to vote at a7i/y-election,.knowing 
 that he or such person is prohibited, whetjier by this 
 or a/ny, other Act.from -voting,. at such election, he 
 sliall be guilty of an illegal practice. 
 
 (2.y.Any person who. before or during, an election 
 knowingly publis\es,a, false statement of a with- 
 drawal ■ of a candidate, at . such election ■ fqr the 
 purpose of promoting or procuring, the election of 
 another candidate shall he guilty of an illegal 
 practice. . .■,,■.< ... : ., , 
 
 .. (3.) Provided . that a .candidate, shall not be 
 liable, nor .sliaU-Jiis^ election. he. .avoided, for any 
 illegal .practice under this section committed by his 
 agent other than his election agent., . • , 
 
 Sect. 10. A person guilty of .an, illegal practice 
 whether under .the foregoing sections or.under .the 
 promisions hereinafter contained in this^Act, shall 
 on.summary. conviction he, .liable io,a fine not ex- 
 ceeding £.100, and be.inoapable during a period of 
 •five years from the. date of his conviction as being 
 registered as an . elector, or . voting at any election 
 /(whether, it be fl. parliamentary -election or an 
 election, for, a publictoffice, within the meaning of 
 this ;A.ctyheld for or within the county or borough 
 in which, the illegal practice has been committed.- --• 
 Sectfll. Whereas by.. sub-sect. U, of sect. 11 of 
 the .Parlifmientwry: Elections Act, 1868, it. is pro- 
 vided that where a.diwrge.is made. in an election 
 petition, of any corrupt, practice having .been com- 
 mitted at the election to which the petition, refers, 
 the Judge shall report inwriting to the Speaker as 
 follows:— r- ,,,...... . , 
 
 (a.) " Whetlier- any corrupt .practice lias or has 
 not, been proved to have been committed by 
 oi' with the Iciiowledge and consent of any 
 candidate at such election, and the nature 
 of such, corrupt -practice ;" 
 (b.) Tlie names of aU persons,, if any, who have 
 been provedat the trial to haveheen guilty 
 nf any corrupt practice ; 
 (o.) " }f' hether corrupt praetiees have, or whether 
 there is reason to believe corrupt practices 
 . have, extensively prevailed at the- election 
 to which the petition relates .-" . 
 And whereas.it is expedient to extend the said sub- 
 section to illegal practices : 
 
 Be it therefore enacted as follows..— • . . . 
 
 Sub-sect. 14 of sect 11 of the Parliamentary 
 Elections Act, 1868, shall apply as if that suh- 
 sectionwere herein re-enacted with the substitution 
 of illegal practice within the meaning of this. Act 
 for corrupt, practice ; and upon ■ the trial -of an 
 election petition respecting an election for a cpwnty 
 orborough,theMectimi Courtshall report in writing 
 to the Speaker the particulars required by the said 
 subsection as lierein re-enacted, and shall also 
 report whetlier any candidate at such, election has 
 been guilty by his agents of any illegal p^-acUce 
 within the meaning of this Act in reference to such 
 election, and the following consequences shall ensue 
 
( 975 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 976 ) 
 
 I. PAELIAMENT— ELECTION— conMjmei:?. 
 
 upon the report by the Election Court to the Speaker 
 
 (that is to say), 
 
 (a.) If the report is that any illegal practice has 
 
 been proved to have been committed in 
 
 reference to such election by or with the 
 
 knowledge and consent of any candidate at 
 
 such election, that candidate shall not be 
 
 capable of being elected to or sitting in the 
 
 Bouse of Commons for the said county or 
 
 borough for seven years next after the date 
 
 of the report, and if lie has been elected his 
 
 election shall be void: and he shall further 
 
 be subject to the same incapacities as if at 
 
 the date of the report he had been convicted 
 
 of such illegal practice ; and 
 
 (b.) If the report is that a candidate at such 
 
 election has been guilty by his agents of any 
 
 illegal practice in reference to such election, 
 
 that candidate shall not be capable of being 
 
 elected to or sitting in the House of 
 
 Commons for the said county or borough 
 
 during the Farliament for which tlie 
 
 election was held, and if he has been 
 
 elected, his election shall be void. 
 
 Sect. 12. Whereasby the Election Commissioners 
 
 Act, 1852, as amended by the Parliamentary 
 
 Elections Act,\%QS,it is enacted that where a joint 
 
 address of both Houses of Parliament represents to 
 
 Her Majesty that an Election Court has reported to 
 
 the Speal:er that corrupt practices have, or that 
 
 there is reason to believe that corrupt practices have, 
 
 extensively prevailed at an election in any county 
 
 or borough, and prays Her Majesty to cause inquiry 
 
 under that Act to be made by persons named in 
 
 such address (being qualified as therein mentioned), 
 
 it shall be lawful for Her Majesty to appoint the 
 
 said persons to be Election Commissioners for the 
 
 purpose of making inquiry into the existence of such 
 
 corrupt practices : 
 
 And whereas it is expedient to extend the said 
 enactment to the case of illegal practices : 
 Be it therefore enacted as follows : — 
 When Election Commissionershavebeenap2Minted 
 in pursuance of the Election Commissioners Act, 
 1852, and the enactments amending the same, they 
 may make inquiries and act and report as if " cm-- 
 rupt practices " in the said Act and the enactments 
 amending the same included illegal practices ; and 
 the Election Commissioners Act, 1852, shaU be con- 
 strued.with such modifications as are necessary fw 
 giving effect to this section, and the expression 
 " corrupt practice " in that Act shall have the same 
 meaning as in this Act. 
 
 Sect. 13. Where a person knowingly proiides 
 money for any payment which is contrary to (he 
 provisions of this Act, or for any expenses incurred 
 in excess of any maximum amount allowed by this 
 Act, or for replacing any money expended in any 
 such payment or expenses, except where the same 
 may have been previously allowed in pursuanr£ of 
 this Act to be an exception, such person shall be 
 guilty of illegal payment. 
 
 Sect. 14. — (1.) A person shall not let, lend, or 
 employ for the purpose of the conveyance of electors 
 to or from ttie poll, any public stage or hackney 
 carriage, or any horse or other animal kept or used 
 for drawing the same, or any carria-ge, horse, or 
 other animal which he keeps or uses for the purpose 
 of letting out for hire, and if he lets, lends, or 
 
 I. PAELIAMENT— ELECTIOH-coJi<ui«ed. 
 employs such carriage, lior/e, or other animal, 
 knowing that it is intended to be used for the purpose 
 of the conveyance of electors to or from the poll, lie 
 shall be guilty of an illegal hiring. 
 
 (2.) A person shall not hire, borrow, or use for 
 the purpose of the conveyance of electors to or from 
 the poll any carriage, horse, or other animal which 
 he knows the owner thereof is prohibited by this 
 section to let, lend, or employ for that purpose, and 
 if he does so he shall be guilty of an illegal hiring. 
 
 (3.) Nothing in this Act shall prevent a carriage, 
 horse, or other animal being let to or hired, em- 
 ployed, or used by an elector, or several electors at 
 their joint cost, for the purpose of being conveyed to 
 or from the poll. 
 
 (4.) No person shall be liable to pay any duty or 
 to take out a licence for any carriage by reason 
 only of such carriage being used without payment 
 or promise of paymemt for the conveyance of electors 
 to or from the poll at an election. 
 
 Sect. 15. Any person who corruptly induces or 
 procures any other person to withdraw from being 
 a candidate at an election, in consideration of any 
 payment or promise of payment, shall be guilty of 
 illegal payment, and any person witlidrawing, in 
 pursuance of such inducement or procurement, shall 
 also be guilty of illegal payment. 
 
 Sect. 16. — (1.) No payment or contract for pay- 
 ment shall, for the purpose of promoting or pro- 
 curing the election of a candidate at any election, 
 be made on account of bands of music, torches, 
 flags, banners, cockades, ribbons, or other marks of 
 distinction. 
 
 (2.) Subject to such exception as may be allowed 
 in pursuance of this Act, if any payment or con- 
 tract for payment is made in contravention of this 
 section, either before, during, or after an election, 
 the person making such payment shall be guilty of 
 illegal payment, and any person being a party to 
 any su/;h contract or receiving su^h payment shall 
 also be guilty of illegal payment if he knew that 
 the same was made contrary to law. 
 
 Sect. 17. — (1.) No person shall, for tlie purpose of 
 promoting or procuring the election of a candidate 
 at any election, be engaged or employed for pay- 
 ment or promise of payment for any purpose or in 
 any capacity whatever, except for any purposes or 
 capacities mentioned in the first or seamd parts\of 
 the First Schedule to this Act, or except so far as 
 payment is authorized by the first or second parts 
 of the First Schedule to this Act. 
 
 (2.) Subject to such exception as may be allowed 
 in pursuance of this Act, if any person is engaged 
 or employed in contravention of this section, either 
 before, during, or after an election, the person 
 engaging or employing him shall be guilty of 
 illegal employment, and the person so engaged or 
 employed shall also be guilty of illegal employment 
 if lie knew that he was engaged or employed 
 contrary to laio. 
 
 Sect. IS. Every bill, placard, or poster having 
 reference to an election shall bear upon the face 
 thereof the name and address of the printer and 
 pnhlifher thereof; and any person printing, pub- 
 lishing, or posting, or causing to be printed, pub- 
 . lished, or posted any such bill, placard, or postei' 
 as aforesaid, which fails to bear upon the face 
 thereof the name and address of the printer and 
 publisher, shall, if lie is the candidate or the election 
 
•( 977 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 978 ) 
 
 I. PABIIAMENT— ELECTION— coniiijucd. 
 ■agent of tlie candidate, be guilty of an illegal 
 practice, and if he is not the candidate, or the 
 election agent of a candidate, shall he liable on 
 nummary convictiun to a fine not exceeding £100. 
 
 Sect. 19. Tlie provisions of this Act prohibiting 
 certain payments and contracts for payments, and 
 ■the payment of any sum, and the incurring of any 
 expense in excess of a certain maximum, shall not 
 ■affect the right of any creditor, who, when the 
 contract was made or the expense was incurred was 
 ignorant of the same being in contravention of this 
 Act. 
 
 Sect. 20. — (a.) Any premises on which the sale by 
 iwliolesale or retail of any intoxicating liquor is 
 authorized by a licence (whether the licence be for 
 ■consumption on or off the premises), or 
 
 (b.) Any premises where any intoxicating liquor 
 is sold, or is supplied to members of a club, society, 
 or association other than a permanent political 
 club, or 
 
 (c.) Any premises whereon refreshment of any 
 Tiind, whether food or drink, is ordinarily sold for 
 ■consumption on the premises, or 
 
 (d.) The premises of any public elementary school 
 or in receipt of an annual parliamentai'y grant, or 
 ■any part of any sutch premises, shall not be used as 
 a committee room for the purpose of promoting or 
 procuring tlie election of a candidate at an election, 
 <ind if any person hires or uses any such premises 
 ■or any part thereof for a committee room he shall 
 ■ be guilty of illegal hiring, and the person letting 
 such premises or part, if he knew it was intended 
 to use the same for a committee room, shall also be 
 guilty of illegal hiring : 
 
 Provided that nothing in this section shall apply 
 to any part of such premises which is ordinarily 
 let for the purpose of chambers or offices or tlie 
 holding of public meetings or of arbitrations, if 
 such part has a separate entrance and no direct 
 communication with any part of the premises on 
 which any intoxicating liquor or refreshment is 
 sold or supplied as aforesaid. 
 
 Sect. 21. — (1.) A person guilty of an offence of 
 illegal payment, employment or hiring shall, on 
 summary conviction, be liable to a fine not exceed- 
 ing £100. 
 
 (2.) A candidate or an election agent of a candi- 
 date who is personally guilty of an offence of illegal 
 payment, employment, or hiring shall be guilty of 
 an illegal practice. 
 
 Sect. 22. yfliere, upon the trial of an election 
 petition respecting an election for a county or 
 borough, the EUctio^i Court report that a candidate 
 ■at such election has been guilty by his agents of the 
 offence of treating and undue influence, and ille^gal 
 practice, or of any such offences in reference to such 
 election, and the Election Court further report that 
 the candidate has proved to the Court — 
 
 (a.) That no corrupt or illegal practice teas com- 
 mitted at such election by the candidate or 
 his election agent, and the offences men- 
 tioned in the said report were committed 
 contrary to the orders and witlmut the 
 sanction or connivance of su£h candidate or 
 his election agent ; and 
 
 (b.) Tliat such candidate and his election agent 
 took all reasonable means for preventing 
 the commission of corrupt and illegal 
 practices at such election; and 
 
 I. PAELIAMENX— ELECTION— coniinMed. 
 
 (o.) That the offences mentioned in the said 
 report were of a trivial, unimportant, and 
 limited character ; and 
 
 (d.) That in all other respects the election was 
 free from any corrupt or illegal practice 
 on the ]}art of such candidate and of his 
 agents. 
 
 Then the election of such candidate shall not by 
 reason of the offences mentioned in such report, be 
 void, nor shall tlie candidate be subject to any 
 incapacity under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 23. Where, on application made, it is shewn 
 to the High Court or to an Election Court by such 
 evidence as seems to the Court sufficient — 
 
 (a.) that any act or omission of a candidate at 
 any election, or of his election agent or of 
 any other agent or person, would by reason 
 of being a payment, engagement, employ- 
 ment, or contract in contravention of this 
 Act, or being the payment of a sum or the 
 incurring of expense in excess of any 
 maximum amount allowed by this Act, or of 
 otherwise being in contravention of any 
 of the provisions of this Act, be but for this 
 section an illegal practice, payment, em- 
 ployment, or hiring ; and 
 
 (b.) that such act or omission arose from inad- 
 vertence or from accidental miscalculation 
 or from some other reasonable cause of a 
 like nature, and in any case did not arise 
 from any want of good faith ; and 
 
 (o.) that such notice of the application has been 
 given in the county or borough for which 
 the election was held as to the Court seems 
 
 fit; 
 and under the circumstances it seems to tlie Court 
 to be just that the candidate and the said election 
 and other agent and person, or any of them, should 
 not be subject to any of tlie consequences under this 
 Act of the said act or omission, the Court may 
 make an order allowing such act or omission to be 
 an exception from the provisions of this Act which 
 would otherwise make the same an illegal practice, 
 payment, employment, or hiring, and thereupon such 
 candidate, agent, or person shall not be subject to 
 any of the consequences under this Act of the said 
 act or omission. 
 
 Corrupt Practices Prevention Acts.] By sect. 
 65 the enactments referred to in the Act as the 
 Corrupt Practices Prevention Acts are 17 ifc 18 Vict, 
 c. 102, 26 & 27 Vict. u. 29, 30 & 31 Vict c. 102, 
 31 & 32 Vict. c. 125, 35 & 36 Vict c. 32 {PaH TIL), 
 and 42 * 43 Vict c. 75. 
 
 Disqualification of Electors.] Sect. 36. Every 
 person guilty of a corrupt or illegal practice or 
 of illegal employment, payment, or hiring at an 
 election is prohibited from voting at such election, 
 and if any such person votes his vote shall be 
 void. 
 
 Sect. 37. Every person who, in consequence of 
 conviction or of the report of any Election Court or 
 Election Commissioners under this Act, or under the 
 Corrupt Practices (Municipal Elections) Act, 1872, 
 or under Part IV. of the Municipal Corporations 
 Act, 1882, or under any other Act for the time 
 being in force relating to corrupt practices at am 
 election for any public office, has become incapable 
 of voting at any election, whether a parliamentary 
 election or an election to any public office, is pro- 
 
( 979 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 '{ 980 ) 
 
 I. PABLIAMENT— ELECTIOK— oo«<OTi/ff(i. 
 
 Minted from voting at any such election, and his 
 rote shall be void. 
 
 Sect. 38 — (1.) Before a person, not being a party 
 to an election petition nor a candidate on behalf of 
 whom the seat is claimed by an election petition, is 
 reported by an Election Court, and before any 
 person is reported by Election Commissioners, to 
 have been guilty, at an election, of any corrupt or 
 illegal practice, the Court or Commissioners, as the 
 case may be, shall cause notice to be -given to ■ such 
 person, and if he appears in pursuance of the 
 notice, shall give him an opportunity of being heard, 
 by himself and of calling evidence in his defence to 
 shew why lie should- not be so reported. 
 
 (2.) Every person reported by Election Commis- 
 sioners to have been guilty at any election of any 
 corrupt or illegal practice may appeal against such 
 report to the next Court of oyer and terminer or 
 goal delivery held in and for the county or place in 
 which the offence is alleged to have been committed, 
 and'such Court Inay hear and determine the appeal ; 
 and subject to rules of Court such appeal may be 
 brought,- heard, and determined in like manner as 
 if (he Court were a Court of Quarter Sessions and 
 'the said Commissioners were a Court of summary 
 jurisdiction, and the person so reported had been 
 convicted by a Court of summary jurisdiction for 
 an offence under thif Act, and notice of every such 
 appeal shall be given to the Director of Public 
 Prosecutions in -the manner and within the tim& 
 directed by rules of Court, and subject to such rules 
 tlien within three -days after the appeal »« brought. 
 
 (3.) Where it appears to the Lord Chancellor 
 that appeals under this section are interfering or 
 are likely to interfere with the ordinary business 
 transacted before any Courts of oyer and terminer 
 or goal delivery, he may direct that the said appeals, 
 or any of them, shall he heard by the judges for 
 the time being on the rota for election petitions, and 
 in ■ such iase one of such judges shaU proceed to 
 the county or place' in which the off'ences are alleged 
 to have been committed, and shall there hear and 
 determine the appeals in like manner as if stieh 
 judge were a Court of oyer and terminer. 
 
 (4.) Tlie provisions of the Parliamentcvry Elec- 
 tions Act; 1868, with respect to the reception and 
 poioers of a^id attendance on an Election Court, 
 and to the expenses of an Election Court, and of re- 
 ceiving and accommodating an Election Court sliall 
 apply as if such Judge were an Election Court. 
 
 (3;) Every person who after tlie commencement 
 of this Act is reported by any Election Court or 
 Election Commissioners to have been guilty of any 
 corrupt or illegal practice at an election, shall, 
 lohether he obtained a certificate of indemnity or 
 not, be subject to tlie same incapacity as lie would 
 be subject to if he had at the date of such election 
 been convicted of the offence of which he is reported 
 to have been guilty ; Provided that a report of any 
 Election Commissioners inquiring into an election 
 for a county or borough shall not avoid the election 
 of any candidate who has been- declared by an 
 Election Court on the trial of a petition respecting 
 such election to have been duly elected at such 
 election, or render him incapable of sitting in the 
 Souse of Commons for the said county or borough 
 during the Parliament for which lie ims elected. 
 
 (6.) Where a person who is a justice of the peace 
 is reported by any Election Court or Election 
 
 I. PAELIAMEHT— ELECTION— coniiBued. :. 
 Commissioners to have been guilty of any corrupt 
 practice in reference to an election, whetlier he has 
 obtained a certificate of indemnity or not, it shall 
 be the duty of the Director of Puhlie Prosecutions to 
 report tlie ease to the Lord Sigh ClmneeUor of Great 
 Britain with such evidence as may have been given 
 as to such corrupt practice, and where any such 
 person acts as a justice of the peace by virtue of 
 his being f or having been, mayor to a borough, file 
 Lord Sigh Chancellor shall have the same power 
 to remove such person from being a justice of the 
 peace as if he was named in a commission of the 
 peace. 
 
 (7.) Where a person who is a barrister, or a 
 solicitor, or who belongs to any profession Hie ad- 
 mission to which is regulated by law, is reported by 
 any Election Court or Election Commissioners to 
 havebeen guilty of any corrupt praMee in reference 
 to an election, whether such person has obtained a 
 certificate of indemnity or not, it shall be the duty 
 of tlie Director of Public -Proseeutions to bring the 
 matter before the Inn of Court, Sigh Court, or 
 tribttnal having power to take cognizance of any 
 misconduct of such person in his profession, and 
 sueli Inn of Court, Sigh Court, or tribunal may 
 deal with suchperstm in like manner as if such 
 corrupt practice were miscond/nct by such person in 
 his profession. 
 
 (8.) With respect to a person holding a licence 
 or certificate wider the Licensing Acts {in this 
 section referred'-to as a licensed -persony the follow- 
 ing provisions shaU have effect: — 
 
 (a.) If it appears to the Court by which any 
 licensed person is convicted of the offence- of 
 bribery or treating, that such offence was 
 committed- on his licensed premises, the 
 Court sliall direct such conviction to be 
 entered in the proper register of licences. 
 (b.) If it appears to an Election Court or Election 
 Commissioners that a licensed person has 
 knowingly suffered any bribery or treating 
 in reference to any election to talte place 
 upon Ids licensed premises, such Court or 
 Commissioners isiil^ect to tlie provisions of 
 this Act as to a person having an oppor- 
 tunity of being heard by himself and pro- 
 ducing evidence before being reported) 
 shall report the same ; and whether such 
 person obtained a certificate of indemnity 
 or not it shall be the duty of the Director 
 of Public Prosecutions to bring such report 
 before fhelicensing justices fromwhomor on 
 whose certificate the license'dperson dbtained- 
 his licence, and such licen.iing justices shall 
 cause such report to be entered in tlie proper 
 register of licences : 
 (c.) Wliere an entry is made in the register 
 of licences of any such conviction of or 
 report respecting any licensed -person as 
 above in this section mentioned, it shall 
 be talcen into consideration by the licensing 
 justices in determining icliether they will or 
 will not grant to such person the renewal 
 of his licence or certificate, and may be a 
 ground, if tlie justices think fit, for refusing 
 such renewal. 
 (9.) Where the evidence sheicing any corrupt • 
 practice to hare been committed by a justice of 
 the peace, barrister, solicitor, or other professional 
 
( 981 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 982 ) 
 
 I. PAELIAMENT— ELECTIOK— co»«jtee(i. - ■ 
 
 pereon, or any licensed person, was given hefore 
 Election Commissioners, those Commissioners shall 
 report the case to the Director of Public Prosecu- 
 tions, with such information as is necessary or 
 proper for enabling him to act under this section. 
 
 (10.) This section shall apply to an Election- 
 Court under this Act, or under Part IV. of the 
 Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, and the expres- 
 sion election shall be construed accordingly. 
 
 Sect. 39. — (1.) The registration officer in every 
 county or borough shall annually make out a list 
 containing the names and descriptions of allpersons 
 who, tJtough otherwise qualified to vole at a parlia- 
 mentary election for such county or borough re- 
 spectively, are not capable of voting by reason of 
 having after the commencement of this Act been 
 found guilty of a corrupt or illegal practice on 
 conviction or by the report of any Election Court or 
 Election Commissioners whether under this Act, or 
 under Fart IV. of the Munirtipal Corporations Act, 
 ■ 1882, or under any other Act far the time being in 
 force relating to a parliamentary election or an 
 election to any public 'office; and such officer shall 
 state in the list (in this Act referred to as the 
 corrupt and illegal practices list), the offence of 
 which each person has been found guilty. ■ ' 
 
 (2.) For the, purpose of maWngout such list he 
 shall examine Hhe'.report of amy Election Court or 
 Election Commissioners who have respectively tried 
 an election ' petition or inquired' into an ' election 
 where the election (whether apdrliamentary election 
 or an election to any' public Office') was lield in any 
 of the following places ; that'is to say, 
 
 (a.) if he is the registration officer of a county, in 
 that county, or in any borough in that 
 county ; and 
 
 (b.) if he is the registration officer of a boroughj 
 in the county in which such borough is 
 situate, or m any borough in tliat county. ' 
 
 (3.) The registration officer sliall send the list to 
 the overseers of- every parish within his county or 
 borough, together with his precept, and the overseers 
 shall publish the list together with the list of voters 
 and skaU also, in the case of every person in the 
 corrupt and illegal practices list, omit his name 
 from the list of persons entitled to vote, or, as cir- 
 cumstances reqvirei add" objected " ' before -his name 
 in -the list- of claimants or copy of the register 
 published by them, in like manner as is required by 
 la/to in any other cases of disqualification, ■' 
 
 (4.) • Any person named in the corrupt and illegal 
 practices list may claim to have his name' emitted 
 therefrom, Omd any person entitled to object to any 
 list of voters for- the coiinty or borough may object to 
 the omission of the name of any person from such 
 list. S-uch claims and objections shall be sent in 
 within the same time and be dealt with in like 
 manner, and any 'sUeli objection shall be s&rved on 
 the person referred to therein in like manner, as 
 nearly as circumstances admit, as other claims and 
 objections under the enactments relating to the regis- 
 tration of parliamentary electors. 
 
 (5.) The' revising barrister shall determine' svdi 
 claims and objections 'and shall revise such list in 
 like manner, as nearly as circumstances admit, as in 
 the case of other claims and objections, and of amy 
 list of voters. 
 
 (6.) Where it appears to the revising barrister 
 that a person -not named in the cgrrupt- and- illegal 
 
 I. PASIIAMENT--EIEGTIOH— flonJmited. -- ■ - 
 practices list i» subject to -have his name inserted in 
 such list, lie shall (wliether an objection to the 
 omission of such name from the list lias or has not 
 been made, but) after giving such person an oppor- 
 tunity of making a statement to shew cause to the 
 contrary, insert his name in such list and expunge 
 his name from any list of voters. 
 
 (7.) A revising barrister in acting under this 
 section shall determine only whether u, person is 
 incapacitated by coriviction or by the'report of any 
 Election Court or Election Commissioners, -arid 
 sliall not determine whether a person has or has not 
 been guilty of any corrupt or illegal practice. 
 
 (8.) The corrupt and illegal practices list shali 
 be appended to the register of electors, and shall be 
 printed and published therewith wherever the same 
 is printed or published. '-'- ' 
 
 Election Agent and Expenses.] Sect:-2i: — (1.) 
 On or before the day of nomination- at an election^ 
 a person shall be named by or on behalf of each 
 candidate as Ms agent- for such election (in this Act 
 referredto-aS'the elecUon'-agent). '■ ' i', 
 
 (2.) A candidate may name himself' as election 
 agent, and thereupon shall, so far as circumstances 
 admit, be subject to the provisions of this Act both 
 as a candidate and as an election agenU and any 
 reference in this Act to an election agent shall be 
 construed to refer to the candidate acting in his 
 capacity of election agent. 
 
 (3.) -On- or hefore the day of nomination the 
 name and address of the election affent of each 
 candidate shall be declared in writing- by the 
 candidate or some other-person on his behalf to the 
 returning officer, and the returning ' officer shall 
 forthwith give public notice of' the name and 
 address of every election agent so declared. 
 
 (4.) One- deciion agent only shall be appointed 
 for each candidate, but the appointment^ whether 
 the election agent appointed be the candidate him- 
 self or not, may be revoked, and in the • event - of 
 such- revocation or his death, whether such event is 
 before, during, or after the election, then forthwith 
 another election agent sliall be appointed, and his 
 name and address declared in writing to the re- 
 turning - officer, who shall forthwith give public 
 notice of the same. 
 
 . Sect, 25. — (1.) In the case of the elections speci- 
 fied Ml that behalf in the First Schedule to this Act 
 an election agent of a candidate -may appoint the 
 number of deputies therein mentioned (iiihich de- 
 puties are in this Act referred to as sub-agents), to 
 act within different polling districts^ 
 
 (2.) As regards matters in a polling district the 
 election agent may act by the sub-agent far that 
 district, and anything done for the purposes of this 
 Act by or to the sub-agent in his district shall be 
 deemed to be done J>y or to the election agent, and 
 any act or default of a sub-agent which, if he were 
 the election, agent, would be an- illegal practice or 
 other offence against this Act,' shall he an illegal 
 practice and offence against this Act committed by 
 the sub-agent, and the sub-agent shall be liable to 
 punishment accordingly ; and, the candidate shall 
 suffer the like incapacity as if the said act or 
 default had been the act or default of the election 
 agent. 
 
 (3.) One clear day before the polling the election 
 agent shall declare in writing the name and address 
 of every sub-agent to the returning officer, and the 
 
( 983 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 984 ) 
 
 I. PABIIAMENT— ELECTION— conijnueii. 
 
 returning officer shall forthwith give public notice 
 ■of the name and address of every sub-agent so 
 declared. 
 
 (4.) The appointment of a sub-agent shall not be 
 vacated by the election agent who appointed him 
 ceasing to be election agent, but may be revolted by 
 the election agent f err the time being of the candidate, 
 and in tlie event of such revocation or of the death 
 of a sub-agent another sub-agent may be appointed, 
 and his name and address shall be forthwith de- 
 clared in loriting to the returning officer, who shall 
 forthwith give public notice of the same. 
 
 Sect. 26. — (1.) An election agent at an election 
 for a county or borough shall have within the 
 county or borough, or within any county of a citii 
 or town adjoining thereto, and a sub-agent shall 
 have within his district, or within any county of a 
 city or town adjoining thereto, an ojice or place 
 to which all claims, notices, writs, summonses, and 
 documents may be sent, and the address of such 
 office or place shall be declared at the same time as 
 tlie appointment of the said agent to the returning 
 officer, and shall be stated in the public notice of 
 ■the name of the agent. 
 
 (2.) Any claim, notice, writ, summons, or docu- 
 ment delivered at such office or place and addressed 
 to tlie election agent or sub-agent as the case may 
 ■be, shall be deemed to have been served on him, and 
 every such agent may in respect of any matter con- 
 nected with the election in which he is acting be sued 
 in any Court having jurisdiction in the county or 
 hcrough in which tlie said office or place is situate. 
 
 Sect. 27. — (1.) The election agent of a candidate 
 by himself or by his sub-agent shall appoint every 
 polling agent, clerk, and messenger employed for 
 payment on behalf of tlie candidate at an election, 
 and hire every committee room hired on behalf of 
 the candidate. 
 
 (2.) A contract ichereby any expenses are incurred 
 on account of or in respect of the conduct or manage- 
 ment of an election shall not be enforceable against 
 a candidate at such election unless made by the 
 candidate himself or by his election agent, either by 
 himself or by his sub-agent ; provided that the in- 
 ability under this section to enforce such contract 
 aga inst the candidate shall not relieve tlie candidate 
 from the consequences of any corrupt or illegal 
 practice having been committed by his agent. 
 
 Sect. 28. — (1.) Except as permitted by or in 
 pursuance of this Act, no payment and advanee or 
 deposit shall be made by a candidate at an election 
 or by any agent on behalf of the candidate or by 
 any other person at any time, whether before, during, 
 or after such election, in respect of any expenses 
 incurred on account of or in respect of the conduct 
 ■or management of such election, otherwise than by 
 or through the election agent of the candidate, 
 whetlier acting in person or by a siib-agent; and 
 all money provided by any person other than the 
 candidate for any expenses incurred on account of 
 or in respect of the conduct or management of the 
 election, whether as gift, loan, or advance, or de- 
 posit, shall be paid to the candidate or his election 
 ■agent and not otherwise : Provided that this section 
 sliall not be deemed to apply to a tender of security 
 to or any payment by the returning officer or to any 
 £um disbursed by any person out of his own money 
 for any small expense legally incurred by himself, 
 if such sum is net repaid to him. 
 
 I. PAELIAMENT— ELECTION— soniiBued. 
 
 (2:) A person who makes any payment, advance, 
 or deposit in contravention of this section, or pays 
 in contravention of this section any money so pro- 
 vided as aforesaid, shall be guilty of an il&gal 
 practice. 
 
 Sect. 29. — (1.) Every payment made by an elec- 
 tion agent, whether by himself or u. sub-agent, in 
 respect of any expenses incurred on account of or in 
 respect of the conduct or management of an election, 
 shall except where less than forty shillings be 
 vouched for by a bill stating the particulars and by 
 a receipt. 
 
 (2.) Every claim against a candidate at an 
 election, or his election agent in respect of any 
 expenses incurred on account of or in respect of tlie 
 conduct or management of sueh election which is 
 not sent in to the election agent within the time 
 limited by this Act shall be barred and shall not be 
 paid ; and subject to such exception as may be 
 allowed in pursuance of this Act, an election agent 
 who pays a claim in contravention of this enact- 
 ment shall be guilty of an illegal practice. 
 
 (3.) Except as by this Act permitted, the time 
 limited by this Act for sending in claims shall be 
 fourteen days after the day on which the candidates 
 returned are declared elected. 
 
 (4.) All expenses incurred, by or on behalf of a 
 candidate at an election, which are incurred on 
 account of or in respect of tlie conduct or manage- 
 ment of such election, shall be paid within tlie time 
 limited by this Act and not otherwise ; and subject 
 to such exception as may be allowed in pursuance of 
 this Act, an election agent who makes a payment in 
 contravention of this provision shall be guilty of an 
 illegal practice. 
 
 (5.) Except as by this Act permitted, the time 
 limited by this Act for the payment of such expenses 
 as aforesaid shall be twenty-eight days after the 
 day on which the candidates returned are declared 
 elected. 
 
 (6.) Wliere the Election Court reports that it has 
 been proved to such Court by a candidate that any 
 paijment made by an election agent in contravention 
 of this section was made without the sanction or 
 connivance of such candidate, the election of such 
 caTididate shall iiot be void, noi' shall he be subject 
 to any incapacity under this Act by reason only of 
 such paijment having been made in contravention of 
 this section. 
 
 (7.) If the election agent in the case of any claim 
 sent in to him within the time limited by this Act 
 disputes it, or refuses or fails to pay it within the 
 said period of twenty-eight days, such claim shall 
 be deemed to be a disputed claim. 
 
 (8.) The claimant may, if lie thinks fit, bring an 
 action for a disputed claim inany competent Court ; 
 and any sum paid by the candidate or his agent in 
 pursuance of the judgment or order of sudi Court 
 shall be deemed to be paid within tlie time limited 
 by this Act, and to be an exception from the pro- 
 visions of this Act requiring claims to be paid by 
 the election agent. 
 
 (9.) On cause shewn to tlie satisfaction of the 
 High Court, such Court on application by the 
 claimant or by the candidate or his election agent 
 may by order give leave for the payment by a 
 candidate or his election agent of a disputed claim, 
 or of a claim for any such expenses as aforesaid, 
 although sent in after the time in this section 
 
( 9S5 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 986 ) 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— con<ra«e(?. 
 
 mentioned for sending in claims, or although the 
 same was sent in to (he candidate and not to the 
 election agent. 
 
 (10.) Any sum specified in the order of leave 
 may he paid by the candidate or his election' agent, 
 and %ohen paid in pursuance of. such leave sliall he 
 deemed to he paid within the time limited hy this 
 Act. 
 
 Sect. 30. If any action is hrought in any com- 
 petent Court to recover a disputed claim against a 
 candidate at an election, or his election agent, in 
 respect of any expenses incurred on account or in 
 respect of the conduct or management of such elec- 
 tion, and the defendant admits his liability, hut 
 disputes the amount of the claim, the said amount 
 shall, unless the Court, on the application of the 
 plaintiff in the action, otherwise directs, he forth- 
 with referred for taxation to the master, official 
 referee, registrar, or other proper officer of (lie Court, 
 and the amount found due on such taxation shall 
 he the amount to he recovered in such action in re- 
 spect of such claim. 
 
 Sect. 31. — (1.) Tlie candidate at an deletion may 
 pay any personal expenses incurred hy him on 
 account of or in connexion with or incidental to 
 such election to an amount not exceeding one 
 hundred pounds, hut any further personal expenses 
 so incurred by him shall he paid hy his election 
 
 (2.) The candidate shall send to the election 
 agent within the time limited hy this Act for send- 
 ing in claims a written statement of the amount of 
 personal expenses paid as aforesaid hy such candi- 
 date. 
 
 (3.) Any person may, if so authorized in writing 
 hy the election agent of the candidate, pay any 
 necessary expenses for stationery, postage, telegrams, 
 and other petty expenses, to a total amount not ex- 
 ceeding that named in the authoi-ity, but any excess 
 above the total amount so named shall be paid by 
 the election agent. 
 
 (4.) A statement of the particulars of payments 
 made by any person so authorized shall he sent to 
 the election agent within the time limited hy this 
 Act for the sending in of claims, and shall he 
 vouched for hy a bill containing the receipt of that 
 person. 
 
 Sect. 32. — (1.) So far as circumstances admit, 
 this Act shall apply to a claim for his remuneration 
 hy an election agent and to the payment (hereof in 
 nice manner as if he were any other creditor, and 
 if any difference arises respecting the amount of 
 such claim the claim shall he a disputed claim 
 within the meaning of this Act, and he dealt with 
 accordingly. 
 
 (2.) The account of the charges claimed by the 
 returning officer in the ease of a candidate and 
 transmitted in pursuance of sect. 4 of the Parlia- 
 mentary Elections {Returning Officers) Act, 1875, 
 shall be transmitted within the time specified in the 
 said section to the election agent of (lie candidule. 
 and need not be transmitted to the candidate. 
 ' Sect. 33.— (1.) Within thirty-five days after tlie 
 day on which tlie candidates returned at an election 
 are declared elected, the election agent of every 
 candidate at that election shall transmit to the 
 returning officer a true return (in this Act referred 
 to as a return respecting election expenses'), in the 
 form set forth in the Second Scheduh to this Act or 
 
 I. PABLIAMENT— ELECTION— conKmiedl. 
 to the lilie effect, containing, as respects that candi- 
 date, — 
 (a.) A statement of all payments made by the 
 election agent, together with all the bills 
 and receipts (which hills and receipts are 
 in this Act included in the expression 
 " return respecting election expenses ") ; 
 (b.) A statement of tlie arfiount of personal ex- 
 penses, if any, paid by the candidate : 
 (o.) A statement of the sums paid to the return- 
 ing officer for his charges, or, if the amount; 
 is in dispute, of the sum claimed and the 
 amount disputed ; 
 (d.) A statement of all other disputed claims of 
 
 which the election agent is aware; 
 (e.) A statement of all the unpaid claims, if any,, 
 of which the election agent is aware, in 
 respect of which application lias been or is 
 about to be made to the High Court : 
 (f.) A statement of all money, securities, and 
 equivalent of money received by the election 
 agent from the candidate or any other 
 person for tlie purpose of expenses incurred 
 or to be incurred on account of or in 
 respect of the conduct or management of 
 the election, with a statement of (he name 
 of every person from whom the same may- 
 have been received. 
 (2.) The return so transmitted to the returning 
 officer shall be accompanied hy a declaration made 
 hy the election agent before a justice of the peace in 
 the form in the Second Schedule to this Act (which 
 declaration is in this Act referred to as a declara- 
 tion respecting election expenses). 
 
 (3.) Where the candidate has named, himself as 
 his election agent, a. statement of all money, 
 securities, and equivalent of money paid hy the 
 candidate shall be substituted in the return required 
 hy this section to he transmitted by the election 
 agent for the Mice statement of money, securities, 
 and equivalent of money received hy the election 
 agent from the candidate ; and tlie declaration by 
 an election agent respecting election expenses shall 
 he modified as specified in the Second Schedule to 
 this Act. 
 
 (4.) At tlie same time that tlie agent transmits 
 the said return, or within seven days afterwards, 
 the candidate shall transmit or cause to he, trans- 
 mitted to the returning officer a declaration made 
 by him before a justice of the peace, in the form in 
 the first part of the Second Schedule to this Act 
 (which declaration is in this Act referred to as a 
 declaration respecting election expenses). 
 
 (5.) If in the case of an election for any county 
 or borough the said return and declarations are not 
 transmitted before the expiration of the time limited 
 for the purpose, the candidate shall not after the 
 expiration of such time sit or vote in the Souse of 
 Commons as member for that county or borough 
 until either such return and declarations have been 
 transmitted, or until the date of the allowance of 
 such an authorized excuse for the failure to trans- 
 mit tlie same, as in this Act mentioned, and if 
 lie sits and votes in contravention of this enact- 
 ment he shall forfeit £100 for every day on which 
 he so sits or votes to any person who sues for the 
 same. 
 
 (6.) If without such authorized excuse as in this 
 Act mentioned, a candidate or an election agent 
 
( 987 ) 
 
 DIGEST' OF CASES. 
 
 I. PABLIAMEKT— ELECTION— coniJwMed. 
 Jails to comply with the requirements of this section,, 
 he slmll he guilty of an illegal practice. 
 
 (7.) . If any candidate or election agent knowingly 
 rnaJces the declaration required hy this section 
 falsely, he shall he guilty of an offence, and ore con- 
 viction thereof on indictment shall he liable to the 
 punishment for wilful and corrupt perjury ; such 
 offence shall also he deemed to he a corrupt practice 
 within the meaning of this Act. 
 
 (8.) Wliere the candidate is out of the United 
 Kingdom at' the time when- the return is so trans- 
 mitted to the returning officer, the declaration re- 
 quired hy this section may he made hy him within 
 fourteen days after his return to flie United 
 Kingdom, and in that case shall he forthwith 
 transmitted to the returning officer, hut tlte delay 
 herehy authorized in making such declaration shall 
 not exonerate tlie election agent from complying 
 /nth the provisions of tliU Act as to the return and 
 declaration respecting election cyyc-iiaiis. / 
 
 (9.) Wliere, after the date at which the return 
 respeclinxj election expenses is transmitted, leave is 
 given hy the High Court for any claims to he paid, 
 t]ie candidate or his f-h-ction agent shall, within 
 feven days after the payment thereof, transmit to 
 the returning officer a return of the sums paid in 
 pursuance of such leave accompanied hy a copy of 
 the order of the Court giving the leave, and in 
 default he shall he deemed to have failed to comph/ 
 ivith the requirements of this section without such 
 authorized excuse as in this Act mentioned. 
 
 Sect. Si.' — (1.) Where the return and deelaratiom 
 respecting election expenses of a candidate at an 
 election for a county or horough have not huen 
 transmitted as required '•»/ this Act, or being 
 transmitted contain some error or false statement, 
 then — 
 
 (a.) If the candidate applies to the High Court 
 or an Election Court and eliews thai the 
 failure to transmit such return and declara- 
 tions, or any of them, or any part thereof, 
 or any error or false statement therein, has 
 arisen hy reason of his illness, or of the 
 absence, death, illness, or misconduct of Ids 
 election agent or suh-agent, or of any cleric 
 or officer of such agent, or hy reason of 
 inadoertence or of any reasonable cause of a 
 like nature, and not hy reason of any want 
 of good faith on the part of the applicant, 
 or 
 (b.) If the election agent of the candidate applies 
 to the High Court or an Election Court and 
 shews that the failure to transmit the return 
 and declarations which he was required to 
 transmit, or any part thereof, or any error 
 or false statement tlterein, arose hy reason 
 of' his illness or of the death or illness of 
 any prior election agent of the candidate, 
 or of the absence, death, illness, or mis- 
 conduct of any sub-agent, clerk, or officer 
 of an election agent of the candidate, or hy 
 reason of inadvertence or of any reasonable 
 cause of a like nature, and not hy reason 
 of any want of good faiUi on tlie pari of 
 the applicant, 
 the Court may, after such notice of the application 
 in the said county or borough, and on production 
 of such evidence of the grounds stated in the 
 application, and of the good faith of the applied- 
 
 I, PAELIAMEMT— ELECTION— coreiJK«ed; ■ " 
 tion, and otlterwise, as to the Court seems fit, 'make 
 such order for allowing an amthorized excuse for 
 the failure to transmit such return and declaration, 
 or for an error or false statement in such return 
 and declaration, as to the Cov/rt seems just. 
 
 (2.) WJiere it appears to the Court that any 
 person being or having been election agent or suh- 
 agent lias refused or failed to make such return or 
 to supply such particulars as will enable the candi- 
 date and his election agent respectively to comply 
 loith the provisions of this Act as to the return and 
 declaration respecting election expenses, the Court 
 before making an order allowing the excuse as in 
 this section mentioned shall order such person to 
 attend before the Court, and on his attendance 
 shall, unless he shews cause to the contrary, order 
 him to make the retu/rn and declaration, or to 
 deliver a statement of the particulars required to 
 he contained in the return, as to the Court seems 
 just, and to make or deliver the same within such 
 time and to sueh person and in such manner as the 
 Court may direct, or may order him to be examined 
 with respect to such particulars, andmay in default 
 of compliance with any such order order him to 
 pay a fine not exceeding £500. 
 
 (3.) Tlie order may make tlte allowance con- 
 ditional upon the making of the return and dectaret- 
 tion in a modified form orwilhin an extended time, 
 and upon the compliance with such other terms as to 
 the Court seem hestcalculated for carrying into effect 
 the objects of this Act ; and an order allowing an 
 authorized excuse shall relieve the applicant for the 
 order from any liability or consequences under this 
 Act in respect of the matter excused by the order ; 
 and where it is proved hy the candidate to the 
 Court that any act or omission of the election agent 
 in relation to the return and declaration respecting 
 election expenses was vAtltout the sanction or con- 
 nivance of the candidate, and tluit the candidate 
 took all reasonable means for preventing such act or 
 omission. Hie Court shall relieve the candidate from 
 tlte consequences of such act or omission on the part 
 of his election agent. 
 
 (4.) Tlte date of the order, or if conditions and 
 terms are to he compilied with, the date at which 
 the applicant fully complied with them, is referred 
 to in this Act as the date of tlte allowance of tlie 
 excuse. 
 
 Sect. 35. — ( 1 .) Tlie returning officer at an election 
 within ten days after he receives from the election 
 agent of a candidate a return respecting election 
 expenses shall publish a summary of the return in 
 not less than tico newspapers circulating in the 
 county or borough for which tlie election was held, 
 accompanied hy a notice of the time and place at 
 which tlie return and declarations (including tlte 
 accompanying documents) can be inspected, and 
 may charge tlie candidate in respect of such publi- 
 cation, and the amount of such charge sliall he the 
 sum allowed hy tlie Parliamentary Elections (iJe- 
 turning Officers) Act, 1875. 
 
 (2.) The return and declarations (including the 
 accompanying documents) sent to tlie returning 
 officer hy an election agent shall he Icept at tlte office 
 of the returning officer, or some convenient place 
 appointed hy him, and shall at all leasonahle times 
 during tvoo years next after they are received by tlte 
 returning officer he open to inspection hy any person 
 on patjment of a fee of one shilling, and the return- 
 
( 980 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 990 ). 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— con<i«Keci. 
 ing offio&i-' s7mKon demand furnish eepies tMrsof^r 
 any part thereof at the price of twopence for every 
 seventy-two words. After the expiration of the 
 said, two years the returning officer may cause the 
 said return and declarations (including the accom- 
 panying documents) to he destroyed, or, 'if the 
 candidate or his election agent so require, shall' 
 return the same to the candidate. ■■ • , ■ 
 
 Polling Places.] Sect. 47.— (1.) Mvery comity 
 shall he divided into polling districts, a/iid a polling 
 place shall he assigned to eaeh district 'in such 
 manner that, so far as is reasonably ■ practicable, 
 every elector resident in the county shall have his 
 polling place within a di^ance not exceeding three 
 miles from his residence, so nevertheless that a 
 polling district iieed not in any case he constituted 
 containing Uss than one hundred electors. 
 
 (2.) In every county tlie loeal OMthority who have 
 power to divide that county into polling districts 
 shall from tiine to time divide the county into 
 polling districts, and assign polling places to tliose 
 districts, and alter tlwse districts and polling places 
 in such manner as may he necessary for the purpose 
 of carrying into effect this section. 
 
 (3.) The power of dividing a borough into 
 polling districts vested in a local authority by tlie 
 Representation of tlie People Act, 1867, and the 
 enactments amending the same, may be exercised 
 hy such local authority from time to time, and as 
 often as the authority think fit, and the said power 
 shall he deemed to include the power of altering 
 any polling district, and the said local autliority 
 sliall from time to time, where necessary for the 
 purpose of carrying this section into effect, divide 
 the borough into polling districts in such manner 
 that — 
 
 (a.) Every elector residetit in the borough, if 
 other than one hereinafter mentioned, sliall 
 he enabled to poll within a distance not 
 exceeding one mile from his residence, so 
 nevertheless that a polling district need not 
 he constituted containing less than 300 
 electors; and 
 (b.) Every elector resident in the boroughs of 
 ■ • East Retford, Shoreham, Gricklade, Much 
 Wenlocli, and Aylesbury, shall be enabled 
 to poll within a distance not exceeding 
 three miles from his residence, so iieverthe- 
 less that a polling district need not be con- 
 stituted containing less than 100 electors. 
 (4.) So much of sect 5 of the Ballot Act, 1872, 
 and the enactments amending the same as is in 
 force and is not repealed by this Act, sliall apply 
 as if the same were incorporated in this section. 
 
 (5.) The expenses incurred hy the heal autlwrity 
 of a county or borough under this or any other Act 
 in dividing their county or borough into polling 
 districts, and, in tlie ease of a county, assigning 
 polling places to such districts, a»cJ in altering 
 any such districts or polling places, shall he de- 
 frayed in like manner as if they were expenses 
 incurred hy tlie registration officer in tlie execution 
 of the enactments respecting the registration of 
 electors in such county or borough, and those enact- 
 ments, safar as is consistent with the tenor thereof, 
 shall apply accordingly. 
 
 Sect. 48; Where the nature of a county is such 
 that any electors residing therein are unal)le at an 
 election for such county to reach their polling place 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— con«iVt«ei. 
 witliout crossing the sea, or ahranch or ar^nthereof, 
 this Act sliall not prevent the provision of means 
 for conveying such electurs by sea to tlieir ■ polling 
 place, and the amount of payment for such means 
 of conveyance may he in addition to tlie maximum 
 amount of expenses allowed by this Act. 
 
 Sect. 49. Notwithstanding the provisions of the 
 Act 15 <t 16 Vict. c. 57, or any amendment thei^of, 
 in any case where, after the passing of this Act, any 
 Commissioners hove been appointed, on a joint 
 address of both Houses of ParliamAnt^ for 'the ■ 
 purpose of mailing inquiry into the existence of 
 corrupt practices in any election, the said Commis- 
 sioners shall not make atvy inquiries concerning any 
 election tliat shall have tahen place prior to the 
 passing of this Act, and no wit^iess called before 
 such Commissioners, or at any election petition after 
 tlie passing of this Act, sliall he liable to be aslied 
 or bound to answer any question for the purpose of 
 proving the commission of any corrupt practice at 
 or in relation to any election prior to tlie passing of 
 this Act ; Provided tliat nothing herein contained 
 shall affect any proceedings tliat shall be pending at 
 the time of such passing. 
 
 Procedure. &o.] Sect. 45. Wliere information is 
 given to the Director of Public Prosecutions that 
 any cmrupt ori illegal practices have prevailed in 
 reference to any election, it shall, he his duty, sub- 
 ject to tlie regulations under the Prosecution of 
 Offences Act, 18,79, to malce such inquiries and 
 institute such prosecutions as the drcumstatices of 
 the case appear to him to require. 
 
 Sect. 46. Wliere a person lias, either before or 
 after tlie commencement of this Act, become subject 
 to any incapacity under the Corrupt Practices 
 Prevention Acts or this Act by reason of a convicr 
 tion or of a report of any Election Court or Election 
 Commissioners, and any witness who gave evidence 
 against such incapacitated person vpon the pro- 
 ceeding for such conviction or report is convicted of 
 perjury in respect of that evidence, the incapaMtated 
 person may apply to the Sigh Court, and the 
 Court, if satisfied that tlie conviction or report so 
 far as respects such person was based upon perjury, 
 may order tliat such incapacity shall thencefoi-th. 
 cease, and the same shall cease accordingly. 
 
 Sect. 50. Where an indictment as defined by this 
 Act for any offence under tlie Corrupt Practices 
 Prevention Acts or this Act is instituted in the 
 High Court or is removed into the High Court by a 
 writ of certiorari issued at the instance of the 
 Attorney-General, and the Attorney-General sug- 
 gests on the part of the Crown that it is expedient 
 for tlie purposes of justice that tlie indictment, 
 should he tried in the Central Criminal Court, or 
 if a special jury is ordered, that it should be tried 
 before a Judge and jury at the Royal Courts of 
 Justice, the High Court may, if it thinks fit, order 
 that such indictment sliall be so tried upon such 
 terms as tlie Court may think just, and the High 
 Court may malce such orders as appear to ilie 
 Court necessary or proper for carrying into effect 
 tlie order for such triaL 
 
 Sect 51. — (1.) A proceeding against a person in 
 respect of tlie offence of a cmrupt or iUegalpraelice 
 or any other off'ence under the Corrupt Practices 
 Prevention Acts or this Act shall be commenced 
 within one year after the offence was committed, or 
 if it tvas committed in reference to an election with 
 
( 991 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 992 ) 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— coJiiimMetJ. 
 respect to which an inqidry is held by Election 
 Commissioners shall he commenced within one year 
 after the offence was committed, or within three 
 months after the report' of such commissioners is 
 made, whichever period last expires, so that it he 
 commenced within two years after the offence was 
 committed, and the time so limited hy this section 
 shall, in the case of any proceeding under the 
 Summary Jurisdiction Acts for any such offence, 
 whether before an Election Court or otherwise, be 
 substituted for any limitation of time contained in 
 the last-mentioned Acts. 
 
 (2.) For the purposes of this section the issue of a 
 summons, warrant, writ, or other process shall he 
 deemed to he a commencement of a proceeding, 
 where the service or execution of the same on or 
 against the alleged offender is prevented by the ab- 
 sconding or concealment or act of the alleged 
 offender, hut save as aforesaid the service or execu- 
 tion of the same on or against the alleged offender, 
 and not the issue thereof, shall he deemed to be the 
 commencement of the proceeding. 
 
 Sect. 52. Any person charged with a corrupt 
 practice may, if the circumstances warrant such 
 finding, be found guilty of an illegal practice 
 (which offence shall for that purpose he an indict- 
 able offence), and any person charged with an 
 illegal practice may he found guilty of that offence, 
 notwithstanding that the act constituting the offence 
 amounted to a corrupt practice, and a person 
 charged with illegal payment, employment, or 
 hiring, may he found guilty of that offence, not- 
 loithstanding that the act constituting the offence 
 amounted to a corrupt or illegal practice. 
 
 Sect. 53.— (1.) Sects. 10, 12, and 13 of the Cor- 
 rupt Practices Prevention Act, 1854, and sect. 6 of 
 the Corrupt Practices Prevention Act, 1863 (which 
 relate to prosecutions for bribery and other off'ences 
 under those Acts), shall extend to any prosecution 
 on indictment for the offence of any corrupt practice 
 within tlie meaning of this Act, and to any action 
 for any pecuniary forfeiture for an offence under 
 this Act, in like manner as if such offence were 
 bribery, within the meaning of those Acts, and such 
 indictment or action were the indictment or action 
 in those sections mentioned, and an order under the 
 said sect. 10 may he made on the defendant; hut 
 the Director of Public Prosecutions or any person 
 instituting any prosecution in his behalf or hy 
 direction of an Election Court shall not he deemed 
 to be a private prosecutor, nor required under the 
 said sections to give any security. 
 
 (2.) On any prosecution under this Act, whetlier 
 on indictment or summarily, and ivhether before an 
 Election Court or otherwise, and in any action for 
 tb pecuniary forfeiture under this Act, the person 
 prosecuted or sued, and the husband or wife of 
 such person, may, if he or she think fit, he exam- 
 ined as an ordinary witness in the case. 
 
 (3.) On any such prosecution or action as afore- 
 said it shall be sufficient to allege that the person 
 charged was guilty of an illegal practice, payment, 
 employment, or hiring within the meaning of this 
 Act, as the case may be, and the certificate of the 
 returning officer at an elecfimi that the election 
 mentioned in the certificate teas d-uly held, and that 
 the person named in the certificate ivas a candidate 
 at such election, shall be sitfficient evidence of the 
 facts therein stated. 
 
 I. PASLIAMENT— ELECTION— coniiraaetZ. 
 
 Sect. 54. — (1.) All offences under this Act punish- 
 able on summary conviction may be prosecuted in 
 manner provided hy the Summary Jurisdiction 
 Acts. 
 
 (2.) A person aggrieved by a conviction by a 
 Court of summary jurisdiction for an offence under 
 this Act may appeal in general or quarter sessions 
 against such conviction. 
 
 Sect. 55. — (1.) Except that nothing in this Act 
 shall authorize any appeal against a summary con- 
 viction hy an Election Court, the Summary Jurisdic- 
 tion Acts shall, so far as is consistent viith the 
 tenor thereof, apply to the prosecution of an offence 
 summarily before an Election Court, in like manner 
 as if it were an offence punishable only on summary 
 conviction, and accordingly the attendance of any 
 person may be enforced, tlie case heard and deter- 
 mined and any summary conviction by such Court 
 he carried into effect and enforced, and the costs 
 thereof paid, and the record thereof dealt ivith 
 under those Acts in like manner as if the Court 
 were a petty sessional Court for the county err place 
 in which such conviction took place. 
 
 (2.) The enactments relating to charges before 
 justices against persons for indictable offences 
 shall, so far as is consistent with the tenor tliereof, 
 apply to every case where an Election Court orders 
 a person to he prosecuted on indictment in like 
 manner as if the Court were a justice of the peace. 
 
 Sect. 56. — (1.) Subject to any Rules of Court, any 
 jurisdiction vested by this Act in the High Court 
 may, so far as it relates to indictments or other 
 criminal proceedings, be exercised by any Judge of 
 tlie Queen's Bench Division, and in other respects 
 may either be exercised by one of tlie Judges for the 
 time being on tlie rota for the trial of the election 
 petitions sitting either in Court or at chambers, or 
 may be exercised hy a Master of tlie Supreme 
 Court of Judicature in manner directed hy and 
 subject to an appeal to tlie said Judges ; 
 
 Provided that a Master shall not exercise juris- 
 diction in the case either of an order declaring any 
 act or omission to be an exemption from the pro- 
 visions of this Act with respect to illegal practices, 
 payments, employments, or hirings, or of an order 
 allowing an excuse in relation to a return or de- 
 claration respecting election expenses. 
 
 (2.) Mules of Court may from time to time be 
 made, revoked, and altered for the purposes of this 
 Act, and of the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, 
 and tlie Acts amending the same, by the same 
 authority by whom Pules of Court for procedure 
 and practice in the Supreme Court of Judicature 
 can for the time being be made. 
 
 Sect. 57.— (1.) The Director of Public Prosecu- 
 tions in performing any duty under this Act shall 
 act in accordance with the regulations under the 
 Prosecutions of Offences Act, 1879, and subject 
 tliereto in accordance with the directions (if any} 
 given to him hy the Attorney-General; and any 
 assistant or representative of the Director of Puhlio 
 Prosecutions in performing any duty under this 
 Act shall act in accordance with the said regulations 
 and directions, if any, and with tlie directions 
 given to him by the Director of Public Prosecu- 
 tions. 
 
 (2.) Subject to tlie provisions of this Act, the 
 costs of any prosecution or indictment for an 
 offence punishable under this Act, lohetlier by the 
 
( 993 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 994 ) 
 
 I. PAEUAMENT— EIiECTION— confOTMefi. 
 Director of Public Prosecutions or his representative 
 or by any other person, shall, so far as they are not 
 paid by the defendant, be paid in like manner as 
 costs in the case of a prosecution for felony are paid. 
 Sect. 58. — (1.) Where any costs or other sums 
 (not being costs of a prosecution or indictmenf) are, 
 tinder an order of an Election Court, or otherwise 
 under this Act, to be paid by a county or borough, 
 the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury shaU 
 pay those costs or sums, and obtain repayment of 
 Hie amount so paid, in Mice manner as if such costs 
 and sums were expenses of Election Commissioners 
 paid by them, and the Election Commission's 
 Expenses Acts, 1869 and 1871, shall apply accord- 
 ingly as if they were herein re-enacted and in 
 terms made applicable to the above mentioned costs 
 and sums. 
 
 (2.) Where any costs or other sums are, under 
 the order of an Election Court or otherwise under 
 this Act, to be paid by any person, those costs shall 
 be a simple contract debt due from such person to 
 the person or persons to whom they are to be paid, 
 and if payable to the Commissioners of Her 
 Majesty's Treasury shall be a debt to Her Majesty, 
 and in either case may be recovered accordingly. 
 
 Sect, 59. — (1.) A person who is called as a 
 witness respecting an election before any Election 
 Court shall not be excused from answering any 
 question relating to any offence at or connected 
 with sueh election on the ground that tM answer 
 thereto may criminate or tend to criminate himself 
 or on the ground of privilege. 
 Provided that : — 
 (a.) A witness who answers truly all questions 
 which he is required by the Election Court 
 to answer shall be entitled to receive a cer- 
 ficate of indemnity under the hand of a 
 member of the Court stating that such wit- 
 ness has so answered ; and 
 ^.) An answer by a person to a question put by 
 orbefore any Election Court shall not, except 
 in the case of any criminal proceeding for 
 perjury in respect of such evidence, be in 
 any proceeding, civil or criminal, admis- 
 sible in evidence against him. 
 (2.) Where a person has received such a certifi- 
 cate of indemnity in relation to an election, and 
 any legal proceeding is at any time instituted 
 against him for any offence under the Corrupt 
 Practices Prevention Acts or this Act committed 
 by him previously to the date of the certificate at or 
 in relation to the said election, the Court having 
 cognizance of the case shall on proof of the certifi- 
 cate stay the proceeding, and may in their discre- 
 tion award to the said person such costs as he may 
 have been put to in the proceeding. 
 
 (3.) Nothing in this section shall be taken to 
 relieve a person receiving a certificate of indemnity 
 from any incapacity under this Act or from any 
 proceeding to enforce such incapacity (otlier than a 
 criminal prosecution). 
 
 (4.) This section shall apply in tlie case of a 
 witness before any Election Commissioners, in like 
 manner as if the expression " Election Court " in 
 this section included Election Commissioners. 
 
 (5.) Where a solicitor or person lawfully acting 
 as agent for any party to an election petition 
 respecting any election for a county or borough has 
 not taken any part or been concerned in such 
 
 I. PAELIAMENT— ELECTION— ao?ife"nMerf. 
 dection, the Election Commissioners inquiring info 
 such election shall not be entitled to examine suah 
 solicitor or agent respecting matters which came In 
 his knowledge by reason only of his being concerned 
 as solicitor or agent for a party to such petition. 
 
 _ Sect. 60. An Election Court or Election Commis- 
 sioners, wlien reporting that certain persons have 
 been guilty of any corrupt or illegal j>ractice, shall 
 report whether those persons have or have not been 
 furnished with certificates of indemnity ; and such 
 report shall be laid before the Attorney-General 
 (accompanied in the case of the Commissioners with 
 the evidence on which such report was based) ivith 
 a view to his instituting or directing a prosecution 
 against such persons as have not received certificates 
 of indemnity, if the evidence should, in his opinion, 
 be sufficient to support a prosecution. 
 
 Sect. 61.— (1.) Sect 11 of the Ballot Act, 1872, 
 shall apply to a returning officer or presiding 
 officer or clerk who is guilty of any wilful misfeas- 
 ance or wilful act or omission in contravention of 
 this Act in like manner as if the same were in con- 
 travention of tlie Ballot Act, 1872. 
 
 (2.) Sect. 97 of the Parliamentary Registration 
 Act, 1843, shall apply to every registration officer 
 who is guilty of any wilful misfeasance or wilful 
 act of commission or omission contrary to this Act 
 in like manner as if the same were contrary to the 
 Parliamentary Begistration Act, 1843. 
 
 Sect. 62. — fl.) Any public notice required to be 
 given by the returning officer under this Act shall 
 be given in the manner in which he is directed by 
 the Balht Act, 1872, to give a public notice. 
 
 (2.) Where any summons, notice, or document is 
 required to be served on any person with reference 
 to any proceeding respecting an election for a 
 county or borough, whether for the purpose of 
 causing him to appear before the High Court or 
 any Election Court, or Election Commissioners, or 
 otherwise, or for the purpose of giving him an 
 opportunity of making a statement, or shewing 
 cause, or being heard by himself, before any Court 
 or Commissioners, for any purpose of this Act, such 
 summons, notice, or document may be served either 
 by delivering the same to such person, or by leaving 
 the same at, or sending the same by post by a 
 registered letter to, his last known place of abode in 
 the said county or borough, or if the proceeding is 
 before any Court or Commissioners, in such other 
 manner as the Court or Commissioners may direct, 
 and in proving such service by post it shall be suffi- 
 cient to prove tliat the letter was prepaid, properly 
 addressed, and registered with the post office. 
 
 (3.) In the form of notice of a parliamentary 
 election set forth in the Second Schedule to the 
 Ballot Act, 1872, the words "or any illegal 
 practice" shall be inserted after the words "or 
 other corrupt practices," and the words the " Go)-- 
 rupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 1883," 
 shall be inserted after the words " Corrupt Practices 
 Prevention Act, 1854." 
 
 Continuance.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59 
 continues the 46 & 47 Vict c. 51, until the 31 si of 
 December, 1886. •' 
 
 Kepeal.] The Acts 41 & 42 Vict c. 4 (Parlia- 
 mentary Elections Metropolis Act, 1878), and 
 47 & 48 Vict c. 34 (Elections Hours of Poll Aet 
 1884), were repealed on the ISth of November 1885* 
 by virtue of the 48 * 49 Vict c. 10. ' 
 
 2 K 
 
( 995 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 996 ) 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— co)iK/i«e^. 
 
 Hours of Poll.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict 'e. 10 
 (the Elections Hours of Foil Act, 1885) directs that 
 at every parliamentary or municipal election the 
 poll shall commence at 8 a.m., and he Icept open till 
 8 p.m. of the same day and no longer. It does not 
 apply to any university. 
 
 Leave of Absence.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict, 
 c. 56, declares the conditions on which an employer 
 may give leave of absence to employes to record 
 their votes at a parliamentary election. 
 
 1. • Expenses — Payment of Canvassers hy 
 
 Sub-Agent— IQ & 27 Viet. c. 29, s. 2.] It is un- 
 lawful for any election agent or sub-agent, except 
 the expense agent, to make payments on behalf 
 of the candidate even for current disbursements, 
 and such payments cannot be recovered from the 
 candidate. — An election sub-agent, who was a, 
 solicitor, employed canvassers for the work of the 
 election, and paid them out of his own moneys. 
 The expense agent Iiaving disallowed these pay- 
 ments the sub-agent brought an action against 
 the candidate in the district registry for the 
 money expended. The candidate obtained the 
 common order to tax the Plaintiffs account as a 
 solicitor's bill of costs, and then obtained an order 
 to stay farther proceedings in the action pending 
 the taxation. Ou the taxation the candidate 
 objected to the payments as illegal under the 
 2nd section of the Corrupt Practices Act, 1863 
 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 29) -.—Held (affirming the deci- 
 sion of Chitty, J.), that the payments were illegal ; 
 that although the sub-agent had an implied 
 authority to employ canvassers, he had no implied 
 authority to pay them, and therefore he could not 
 recover the amount expended from the candidate : 
 Held, also, that the candidate could take the 
 objection of illegality on the taxation of the bill 
 of costs. — ^Whether the order to stay proceedings 
 in the action pending the taxation was regular, 
 quasre. In re Pakkeb - - 21 Ch. D. 408 
 
 2. Oath of Allegiance — Claim to affirm — 
 
 Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866 (29 & 30 Vict, 
 c. W}— Promissory Oaths Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. 
 0. 72) — Evidence Further Amendment Act, 1869 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 68) — Evidence Amendment Act, 
 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. a. 49).] The Defendant was 
 sued under the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, 
 for a penalty for sitting and voting in the House 
 of Commons without having made and subscribed 
 the oath appointed by that Act, as amended by 
 the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868, to be taken by 
 members. Sect. 4 of the Act of 1866 provides 
 that "Quakers and every other person for the 
 time being by law permitted to make a solemn 
 aflSrmation or declaration instead of taking an 
 oath " may, instead of taking and subscribing the 
 oath, make an affirmation in the form given by 
 the Act. The Defendant pleaded that he was a 
 person who by reason of the Evidence Further 
 Amendment Act, 1869^ and the Evidence Amend- 
 ment Act, 1870, was by law permitted to make a 
 solemn affirmation, instead of taking an oath, be- 
 cause an oath would have no binding effect on his 
 conscience, and that he came within the exemption 
 of the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, and that 
 he had duly made an affirmation in conformity 
 with that Act before sitting and voting. On de- 
 murrer : — Held (by the Court of Appeal, Bram- 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT- ELECTION— coiiiTOMerf!. 
 well, Baggallay, and Lush, L.JJ., affirming the 
 judgment of Mathew, J.), that sect. 4 of the 
 Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, exempted only 
 persons having a general right to affirm ou all 
 occasions on which otherwise they would take an 
 oath, and that the defence was therefore bad, as 
 the Evidence Further Amendment Act, 1869, and 
 the Evidence Amendment Act, 1870, applied 
 only to persons called to give evidence as wit- 
 nesses. The Plaintiff replied that the Defendant 
 was a person who, by want of religious belief, 
 was not entitled by the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 
 1866, or the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868, to make 
 and subscribe a solemn affirmation. On demurrer : 
 — Held (by Mathew, J.), that the reply was bad, 
 as the statute contains contains no proviso that 
 none but persons of religious belief were or could 
 be entitled to the benefit of the exemption in 
 sect. 4 from taking the oath. Clakke v. Bead- 
 laugh - - - 7 Q. B. S. 38 
 [Reversed on another point - 8 App. Cas. 354] 
 See Penal Action. 2, 
 
 3. Oath of Allegiance — Disbelief in a 
 
 Supreme Beiiig — Oath not binding upon the 
 Person taking it as an Oath, but only as a Solemn 
 Promise — Perui.lty — Parliamentary Oaths Act, 
 1866 (29 & 30 Vict. c. 19), se. 3, 5— "Solemnly 
 and publicly made and subscribed " — Promissory 
 Oaths Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 72)— Evidence- 
 Journals of House of Commons — Practice of House 
 of Commons — Practice — Appeal — Information by 
 Attorney General to recover Penalty — " Criminal 
 Cause or Matter " — Trial at Bar — Motion for New 
 Trial on Ground of Misdirection and Misreception 
 of Evidence — Notice of Motion — Supreme Court of 
 judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Viet. c. 66), ss. 19, 
 47.] A member of parliament, who does not be- 
 lieve in the existence of a Supreme Being, and 
 upon whom an oath has no binding effect as an 
 oath but only as a solemn promise, is, owing to 
 his want of religious belief, incapable by law of 
 " making and subscribing " the oath of allegiance 
 appointed by the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, 
 S3. 1, 3, as amended by the Promissory Oaths Act, 
 1868; and if he takes his seat and votes as a 
 member, although he has gone through the form 
 of making and subscribing the oath appointed by 
 those statutes, he will be liable upon an informa- 
 tion at the suit of the Attorney General to the 
 penalty imposed by the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 
 1866, s. 5. — Omichund v. Barker (1 Atkyns, 21 ; 
 Willes, 538) followed and applied. — In order that 
 the oath of allegiance imposed upon members of 
 the House of Commons upon taking their seats 
 by the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, as amended 
 by the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868, may be 
 " solemnly and publicly made and subscribed ' ' 
 within the meaning of sect. 3 of the former statute, 
 it must be taken by a member with the assent of 
 the House according to the requirements of the 
 Standing Orders, and after he has been called 
 upon by the Speaker to be sworn. — Upon the trial 
 of an information at the suit of the Attorney 
 General against a member of the House of Com- 
 mons for voting without having taken the oath of 
 allegiance within the meaning of the Parliamen- 
 tary Oaths Act, 1866, as amended by the Pro- 
 missory Oaths Act, 1868, evidence of the practice 
 
( 997 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 998 ) 
 
 I. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION— conijimed;. 
 observed in the House of Oommons as to taking 
 the oath of allegiance is admissible for the pur- 
 pose of explaining the construction of those 
 statutes, and the journals of the House of Com- 
 mons are admissible as e\ idence for the purpose 
 of shewing, from the member's conduct as therein 
 recorded, that owing to his want of reUgious belief 
 he is by law incapable of taking an oath. — By- 
 Brett, M.E., aiid Liudley, L.J., Cotton, L.J., 
 doubting, an inforination at the suit of the Attor- 
 ney General to recover penalties under sect. 5 of 
 the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866, from a member 
 of Parliament for voting without having taken 
 the oath of allegiance required by that statute, as 
 amended by the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868, is 
 not a "criminal cause or matter" within the mean- 
 ing of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, s. 47, 
 and an appeal may be brought from any order or 
 judgment therein of the High Court to the Court 
 of Appeal :— By Brett, M.E., on the ground that 
 the information is in its nature a civil proceeding, 
 and, therefore, that an appeal lies under the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873, o. 19 :— 
 By Liudley, L.J., on the ground that even al- 
 though the information may be to some extent of 
 a criminal nature, nevertheless before the passing 
 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, 1873, 
 1875, an appeal would have lain under the Crown 
 Suits Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 104), ss. 31, 34, 
 35, from a decision of the Court of Exchequer to 
 the Court of Exchequer Chamber, and that the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Acts, 1873, 1875, do 
 not take away any right of appeal existing before 
 the passing of those statutes. — Senible, by Brett, 
 M.E., that even if the information could be re- 
 garded as a criminal proceeding, nevertheless an 
 appeal would lie, for by the Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1873, s. 47, the right of appeal is 
 taken away only in the case of indictments, of 
 criminal informations for indictable misdemeanors 
 filed in the Queen's Bench Division, and of crimi- 
 nal proceedings before justices. An appeal Kes 
 to the Court of Appeal from any order or judg- 
 ment made or given by the Queen's Bench Divi- 
 sion either during, or afterwards with respect to, 
 a trial at bar of a civil proceeding, and whether 
 or not the appeal is brought from a decision upon 
 a motion for a new trial on the ground of mis- 
 direction or wrongful reception of evidence ; but 
 the appeal must be brought on by notice of motion, 
 an ex parte application for a rule nisi to the 
 Court of Appeal being irregular. The Attoenet 
 General v. Bbadlaugh - 14 Q. B. D. 667 
 
 II. PAELIAMENT — ELECTION COMUIS- 
 SIONEBS. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vi^:t. e. 59, continues 82 & 33 
 Vict. c. 21, (he Corrupt Practices Commission Ex- 
 penses Act, 1869, as amended by.Si & 35 Viet, 
 c. 61, until the 31si of Decerribei, 1886. 
 
 1. Certificate to Witness — Mandamus — 
 
 Jurisdiction to hear Appeal — Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1873, s. 47 — Criminal Matter^ 
 Corrupt Practices Prevention Act (26 & 27 Viet. 
 e. 29), 8. 7.] Where the Commissioners appointed 
 to inquire into corrupt practices at a parliamen- 
 tary election have, with reference to a witness 
 before them on such inquiry, exercised their 
 judgment as to the right of such witness to receive 
 
 II. PARLIAMENT — ELECTION COMMIS- 
 SIOTU'ERS— continued. 
 
 their certificate under sect. 7 of the Corrupt Prac- 
 tices Prevention Act (26 & 27 Vict. o. 29), their 
 decision refusing such certificate is conclusive, 
 and cannot be reviewed by mandamus. — Beg. 
 V. Price (Law Eep, 6 Q. B. 411) dissented from. 
 —The decision of a Divisional Court discharg- 
 ing a rule for a mandamus to such Commis- 
 sioners to grant such certificate, which certificate 
 if given would, be a protection to the witness 
 against criminal proceedings for bribery, does not 
 relate to a criminal cause or matter, within the 
 meaning of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 
 1873, 8. 47, and the Court of Appeal is not there- 
 fore deprived of jorisdiction to hear an appeal 
 against such decision. The Qtjbest v. Holl 
 
 [7 Q, B. D. 676 
 
 III. PARLIAMENT— ELECTION PETITION. 
 
 The Act 46 <fe 47 Vict. c. 51 {Corrupt and lUegal 
 Practices Prevention Act, 1883), which continues in 
 force by virtue of the 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, until the 
 31st of December, 1886), enacts : 
 _ Sect. 40. — (1.) WJiere an election petition ques- 
 tions the return or the election upon an allegation 
 of an illegal practice, then notwithstanding any- 
 thing in the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, 
 such petition, so far as respects such illegal practice, . 
 may be presented within the time following ; (that 
 is to say,') 
 
 (a.) At any time before the expiration of fourteen 
 days after the day on which the returning' 
 officer receives the return and declarations 
 respecting election expenses by the member 
 to whose election the petition relates or his 
 election agent. 
 (b.) If the election petition specifically alleges a 
 payment of money, or some other act to^ 
 have been made or done since the said day 
 by the member, or an agent of the member^ 
 or with the privity of the member or his: 
 election agent in pursuance or in further- 
 ance of the illegal practice alleged in the 
 petition, the petition may be presented at 
 any time within twenty-eight days after 
 the date of such payment or other act. . 
 _ (2.) Any election petition presented within the 
 time limited by the Parliamentary Elections Act, 
 1868, may for the purpose of questioning the return 
 or the election upon an allegation of an illegal 
 practice be amended with the leave of the High 
 Court within the tims within which a petition 
 questioning the return upon the allegation of thai 
 illegal practice can under this section be presented. 
 (3.) This section shall apply in the case of an 
 offence relating to the return, and declarations 
 respecting election expenses, in like manner as if 
 it were an illegal practice, and also shall apply 
 notwithstanding that the act constituting the alleged 
 illegal practice amounted to a corrupt practice. 
 (4.) For the purposes of this section — 
 (a.) Where the return and declarations are re- 
 ceived on different days, the day on which 
 the last of them is received, and 
 (b.) Where there is an authorised ' excuse for 
 failing to maJce and transmit the return 
 and declarations respecting election ex- 
 penses, the date of the allowance of the 
 excuse, or if there was a failure as regards 
 2 K 2 
 
( 999 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 1000 ) 
 
 III. PABLIAMENT — ELECTION PETITION — 
 
 continued. 
 
 two or more of them, and the excuse was 
 
 allowed at different times, the date of the 
 
 allowance of the last excuse 
 
 shall he substituted for the day on which the return 
 
 and declarations are received hy the returning 
 
 officer. 
 
 (5.) For thexnirposes of this section, time sliallbe 
 reckoned in like manner as it is reckoned for the 
 purposes of the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868. 
 
 Sect. 41. — (1.) Before leave for the withdrawal 
 of an election petition is granted, there shaU he 
 produced affidavits by all the parties to the petition, 
 and their solicitors, and by the election agents of 
 all of the said parties who were candidates at the 
 election, but the High Court may oti cause shewn 
 dispense with the affidavit of any particular per- 
 son if it seems to the Court on special grounds to he 
 iust so to do. 
 
 (2.) Each affidavit shall state that, to the best of 
 the deponent's Icnoicledf/e and belief, no agreement 
 or terms of any kind whatsoever has or have been 
 made, and no undertaking has been entered into, in 
 relation to the withdrawal of the petition ; but if 
 any lawful agreement has been made with respect 
 to the withdrawal of the petition, the affidavit 
 shall set forth that agreement, and shall make the 
 foregoing statement subject to what appears from 
 the affidavit. 
 
 (3.) The affidavits of the applicant and his 
 solicitor shall further state the ground on which 
 the petition is sought to be withdraicn. 
 
 (4.) If any person makes any agreement or 
 terms, or enters into any undertaking, in relation 
 to the withdrawal of an election petition, and such 
 agreement, terms, or undertaking, is or are for the 
 withdrawal of the election petition in consideration 
 of any payment, or in consideration that the seat 
 shall at any time be vacated, or in consideration if 
 the withdrawal of any other election petition, or is 
 or are (whether lawful or unlawful) not mentioned 
 in the aforesaid affidavits, he shall be guilty of a 
 misdemeanor, and shall be liable on conviction on 
 indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceed- 
 ing twelve months, and to a fine not exceeding 
 £200. 
 
 (5.) Copies of the said affidavit shall be delivered 
 to the Director of Public Prosecutions a reasonable 
 time before the application for the u-ithdraioal is 
 heard, and the Court may hear the Director of 
 Public Prosecutions, or his assistant or other re- 
 presentative (appointed viith tlie approval of the 
 Attorney-General), in opposition to the allowance 
 of the withdrawal of the petition, and shall have 
 power to receive the evidence on oath of any person 
 or persons whose evidence the Director of Public 
 Prosecutions, or his assistant or other representa- 
 tive, may consider material. 
 
 (6.) Where in the opinion of the Court the pro- 
 posed withdrawal of a petition was the result of 
 any agreement, terms, or undertaking prohibited 
 by this section, the Court shall have the same power 
 with respect to the security as under sect. 35 of the 
 Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, where the 
 withdrawal is induced by a cmrupt consideration. 
 
 (7 ) In every case of the withdrawal of an elec- 
 tion petition the Court shall report to the Speaker 
 whether, in the opinion of such Court, the with- 
 drawal of such petition was the result of any agree- 
 
 Ill. PAELIAMENT — ELECTION PETITION — 
 
 continued, 
 ment, terms, and undertaking, or was in considera- 
 tion of any payment, or in consideration tliat the 
 seat should at any time be vacated, or in considera- 
 tion of the withdrawal of any other election peti- 
 tion, or for any other consideration, and if so, 
 shall state the circumstances attending tlie with- 
 drawal. 
 
 (8.) Where more than one solicitor is concerned 
 for the petitioner or respondent, whether as agent 
 for another solicitor or otherwise, the affidavit shall 
 be made by all such solicitors. 
 
 (9.) Where a person not a solicitor is lawfully 
 acting as agent in the case of an election petition, 
 that agent shall be deemed to be a solicitor for the 
 purpose of making an affidavit in pursuance of 
 this section. 
 
 Sect. 42. The trial of every election petition so 
 far as is practicable, consistently with the interests 
 of justice in respect of such trial, shall be continued 
 de die in diem on every lawful day until its con- 
 clusion, and in case the rota of Judges for the year 
 shall expire before the conclusion of the trial, or of 
 all the proceedings in relation or incidental to the 
 petition, the autfwrity of the said Judges shall con- 
 tinue for the purpose of the said trial and proceed- 
 ings. 
 
 Sect. 43. — (1.) On every tried of an election 
 petition the Director of Public Prosecutions shall 
 by himself or by his assistant, or by such represen- 
 tative as hereinafter mentioned, attend at the trial, 
 and it shall be the duty of such director to obey 
 any directions given to him by the Election Court 
 with respect to the summoning and examination of 
 any witness to give evidence on such trial, and 
 with respect to the prosecution by him of offenders, 
 and with respect to any person to whom notice is 
 given to attend with a view to report him as guilty 
 of any corrupt or illegal practice. 
 
 (2.) It shall also be the duty of such Director, 
 without any direction from the Election Court, if it 
 appears to him that any person is able to give 
 material evidence as to the subject of the trial, to 
 cause such person to attend the trial, and with the 
 leave of the Court to examine such person as a 
 witness. 
 
 (3.) It shall also be the duty of the said Director, 
 without any direction from the Election Court, if it 
 appears to him that any person who has not re- 
 ceived a certificate of indemnity has been guilty of 
 a corrupt or illegal practice, to prosecute such 
 person for the offence before the said Court, or if he 
 thinks it expedient in the interests of justice before 
 any otlier competent Court. 
 
 (4.) Where a person is prosecuted before an 
 Election Court for any corrupt or illegal practice 
 and such person appears before the Court, the Court 
 shall proceed to try him summarily for the said 
 offence, and such person, if convicted thereof upon 
 such trial, shall be subject to the same incapacities 
 as he is rendered subject to under this Act upon 
 conviction, whether on indictment or in any other 
 proceeding for the said offence ; and further, may 
 be adjudged by the Court, if the offence is a corrupt 
 practice, to be imprisoned, with or without hard 
 labour, for a term not exceeding six months, or to 
 pay a fine not exceeding £200, and if the offence is 
 an illegal practice, to pay such fine as is fixed by 
 this Act for the offence; 
 
( 1001 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1002 ) 
 
 III. PABLIAMENT— ELECTION PETITION — 
 
 eontinited. 
 
 Provided that, in the case of a corrupt practice, 
 the Court, before proceeding to try summarily any 
 person, shall give such person the option of being 
 tried by a jury. 
 
 (5.) Where a person is so prosecuted for any 
 such offence, and either he elects to be tried by a 
 jury or he does not appear before the Court, or the 
 Court thinks it in the interests of justice expedient 
 that he should be tried before some other Court, the 
 Court, if of opinion that the evidence is sufficient 
 to put the said person upon his trial for the offence, 
 shall order such person to he prosecuted on indict- 
 ment or before a Court of summary jurisdiction, as 
 the case may require, for the said offence ; and in 
 eitlier case may order him to be prosecuted before 
 such Court as may be named in the order ; and for 
 all purposes preliminary and of and incidental to 
 such prosecution the offence shall be deemed to have 
 been committed within the jurisdiction of the Court 
 so named. 
 (6.) Upon such order being made, 
 (a.) If the accused person is present before the 
 Court, and the offence is an indictable 
 offence, the Court sliall commit him to take 
 his trial, or cause him to give bail to 
 appear and take his trial for the said 
 offence; and 
 (b.) If the accused person is present before the 
 Court, and the offence is not an indictable 
 offence, the Court shall order him to be 
 brought before the Court of sumrnary juris- 
 diction before whom he is to be prosecuted, 
 or cause him to give bail to appear before 
 that Court; and 
 (o.) If the accused person is not present before 
 the Court, the Court shall as circumstances 
 require issue a summons for his attendance, 
 or a warrant to apprehend him and bring 
 him before a Court of summary jurisdic- 
 tion, and that Court, if the offence is an 
 indictable offence, shall, on proof only of 
 the summons or warrant and tlie identity 
 of the accused, commit him to take /lis 
 trial, or cause him to give bail to appear 
 and take his trial for the said offence, or if 
 the offence is punishable on summary con- 
 viction, shall proceed to hear the case, or if 
 such Court be not the Court before whom he 
 \ is directed to be prosecuted, shall order him 
 to be brought before that Court. 
 (7.) The Director of Public Prosecutions may 
 nominate, with theapprovalof the Attorney-General, 
 a barrister or solicitor of not less than ten yeari 
 standing to be his representative for the pu/rpose of 
 this section, and that representative shall receive 
 such remuneration as the Commissioners of Her 
 Majesty's Treasury may approve; there shall be 
 allowed to the Director and his assistant, or repre- 
 sentative, for the purposes of this section, such 
 allowance for expenses as the Commissioners of Her 
 Majesty's Treasury may approve. 
 
 (8.) The costs incurred in defraying the expenses 
 of the Director of Puhlio Prosecutions under this 
 section (including the remuneration of his represen- 
 tative) shall, in the first instance, be paid by the 
 Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, and so 
 far as they are not in the case of any prosecution 
 paid by the defendant shall be deemed to be expenses 
 
 III. PAELIAMENT — ELECTION PETITION — 
 
 continued, 
 of the Election Court ; but if for any reasonable 
 cause it seems just to the Court so to do, the Court 
 shall order all or part of the said costs to be repaid 
 to the Commissioners of Ser Majesty's Treasury by 
 the parties to the petition, or such of them as the 
 Court nuiy direct. 
 
 Sect. 44. — (1.) Where upon the trial of an elec- 
 tion petition respecting an election for a county or 
 borough, it appears to the Election Court that a 
 con-upt practice has not been proved to liave been 
 committed in reference to such election by or with 
 the knowledge and consent of the respondent to the 
 petition, and that such respondent took all reason- 
 able means to pi'event corrupt practices being com- 
 mitted on his belialf, the Court may make one or 
 more orders with respect to the payment either of 
 the whole or such part of the costs of the petition as 
 the Court may think right as follows : — 
 (a.) If it appears to the Court- that corrupt 
 practices extensively prevailed in reference 
 to tlie said election, the Court may order the 
 whole or part of the costs to be paid by the 
 county and borough ; and 
 (b.) If it appears to the Court that any person 
 or persons is or are proved, loliether by 
 .providing money or otherwise, to have been 
 extensively engaged in corrupt practices, or 
 to have encouraged or promoted extensive 
 corrupt practices in reference to such elec- 
 tion, the Court may, after giving such 
 person or persons an opportunity of being 
 heard by counsel or solicitor, and examin- 
 ing and cross-examining witnesses to shew 
 cause why the order should not be made, 
 order the whole or part of the costs to be 
 paid by that person, or those persons, or 
 any of them, and may order that if tlie 
 costs cannot be recovered from one or more 
 of such persons, they shall be paid by some 
 : other of such persons, or by either of the 
 parties to the petition. 
 (2.) Wliere any person appears to the Court to 
 have been guilty of the offence of a corrupt or 
 illegal practice, the Court may, after giving such 
 person aw opportunity of rndking a statement to 
 shew lohy the order should not be made, order the 
 whole or any part of the costs of or incidental to 
 any proceeding before the Court in relation to the 
 said offence or to tlie said person to he paid by the 
 said person. 
 
 (3.) The rules and regulations of the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature with respect to costs to he 
 allowed in actions, causes, and matters in the High 
 Court, shall, in principle, and so far as is practic- 
 able, apply to the costs of petitions and other pro- 
 ceedings under the Parliamentary Elections Act, 
 1868, and under this Act, and the taxing officer 
 shall not allow any costs, charges, or expenses on a 
 higher scale than would be allowed in any action, 
 cause, or matter, in the High Court on the higher 
 scale, as between solicitor and client. 
 \j4.nd see Sects. 45, 40, and 50-62 under Paelia- 
 JIENT — Eleotios".] 
 
 1. Inspection and Discovery — Parlia- 
 mentary Elections Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict c. 125), 
 ss. 2, 26— Rules of Michaelmas Term, 1868, r. 44.] 
 In a parliamentary election petition the Court or 
 
( 1003 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1004 ) 
 
 in. PABLIAMENT — ELECTION PETITION — 
 
 continued. 
 a Judge at Chambers haa no jurisdiction to make 
 orders against the sitting member for inspection 
 and discovery of documents. Moobe v. Kennakd 
 
 [10 Q. B, D. 290 
 2. Witness — Expenses — Certificate of Re- 
 gistrar — Taxation byMastei — 31 & 32 Vict. c. 125, 
 ss. 34, 41, and Bules.'] Although the amount of 
 the reasonable expenses to be paid to any witness 
 in an election petition may, under 31 & 32 Vict, 
 c. 125 (the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868), 
 s. 34, and rule 5, of its Additional General Eules, 
 January, 1875, be ascertained and certified by 
 the registrar, his certificate is not conclusive of 
 the amount as between the Petitioner and Ee- 
 spondent, but it is, as part of the general costs of 
 the petition, subject under sect. 41 to taxation 
 by a master, who must exercise his discretion on 
 the expenses certified. MoLaeen v. Home 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 477 
 
 IV. PARLIAMENT— FEANCHISE. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 3 [the Bepresentation 
 of the People Act, 1884), amends \the law relating 
 to the representation of the people of the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Household and Lodger Franchise.] — Sect. 2 
 establishes a uniform household franchise, and a 
 uniform lodger franchise in all counties and 
 boroughs throughout the United Kingdom. Every 
 man possessed of either of the above qualifications 
 in a county in England may be registered as a 
 voter for that county. 
 
 Sect. 3. Where a man inhabits a dwelling-house 
 by virtue of any office or employment, and it is not 
 inhabited by any person under whom lie serves, lie 
 is deemed as a tenant. 
 
 Prohibition of Multiplication of Votes.] Sect. 4 
 prohibits ; — 
 
 (1.) A man to vote in respect of a rent-charge, 
 except the owner ^of the whole of the tithe rent- 
 charge of a benefice to which an apportionment of 
 rent-charge shall have been made in respect of a 
 portion of tithes. 
 
 (2.) More than one of joint tenant or tenants in 
 common to vote fm same estate in land. Exceptions 
 for traders, descent, marriage, and some other 
 cases. 
 
 Assimilation of Occupation Qualification.] 
 Sect. 5. Every man occupying land in a county or 
 borough of a clear yearly value of not less than £10, 
 may vote at elections for such county or borough in 
 respect of such occupation. 
 
 Supplemental Provisions.] Sect. 6. A voter not 
 to vote for county in respect of occupation of pro- 
 perty in a borough. 
 
 Sect. 7. With respect to England : — 
 
 (1.) " Hoiisehold qualification " means the quali- 
 fication enacted by sect. 3 of 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102 
 (Representation of the People Act, 1867.) 
 
 (3.) " Lodger qualification," means tlie qualifi- 
 cation enacted by sect, 4 o/ 30 (fc 31 Vict. c. 102. 
 
 (6.) " County occupation franchise " means the 
 franchise enacted by sect. 6 of 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102. 
 
 (7.) " Borough occupation franchise," means the 
 franchise enacted by sect 27 of 2 & 3 Will. 4, c. 45. 
 
 Sect. 8. Enactments in Begistration Acts shall 
 with necessary variations extend to counties. 
 
 Sect. 9. — (2.) Duty of overseers to ascertain 
 
 IV. PAELIAMENT— FEANCHISE— coiifenttetZ. 
 
 whether any man other titan the owner or person 
 rated, is entitled to be registered as a voter in re- 
 spect of his being an inhaMtant occupier. 
 
 (8.) Where a man inhabits a dwelling-house by 
 virtue of office or employment and is deemed to be 
 an inhabitant occupier of such dwelling-house as a 
 tenant, and another person is rated, the rating of 
 the other person shall be deemed to be that of the 
 inhabitant occupier. So much of the 32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 41 and 41 & 42 Vict c. 26, and 42 & 43 Viet, 
 c. 10 as is mentioned in the first Schedule to this 
 Act shall apply to such inhabitant occupier, and in 
 construing such enactments the word " owner " shall 
 include a person rated as aforesaid. 
 
 (9.) A man who inhabits a dwelUng-hmse for 
 which through exemption no one is rated, shall not 
 thereby be disentitled to vote. 
 
 Sect. 10. A person who at the date of this Act is 
 registered to vote for a county or borough may be 
 registered in respect of his qualification as if this 
 Act had not passed. But if he is also qualified 
 under this Act he shall be registered under this 
 Act only. 
 
 This Act shall not confer vote on anyone subject 
 to a legal incapacity. 
 
 Sect. 11. This Act shall be construed as far as 
 consistent with other Acts being Representation of 
 the People Acts. 
 
 Sect. 12. The franchises conferred by this Act 
 are in substitution for the franchises conferred by 
 the enactments mentioned in the \st and 2nd parts 
 of the Second Schedule, and those enactments are 
 repealed to the extent in the said Schedule men- 
 tioned. 
 
 Sect. 13. Tlie Act came into operation on 1st 
 January, 1885. 
 
 Modification of the 30 & 31 Vict. o. 102 (Be- 
 presentation of the People Act, 1867).] In this 
 Act, the 31st December, shall be svhstituted for 5th 
 January, the 1st May for 1st June, and 20th May 
 for 20th June. Sect 6 of 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, is 
 
 Medical Belief.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict c. 46, 
 declares that medical relief at the expense of the 
 poor-rate shall not deprive a person of right to be 
 registered or to vote as a parliamentary voter. 
 
 (a.) BoRffOGH Vote. 
 1. Dwelling-house — Amendment of Des- 
 cription of Qualification under Parliamentary 
 and Municipal Begistration Act, 1878 (41 <fc 42 
 Vict c. 26), s. 28, sub-ss. 12, 13.] The Eespon- 
 dent had a sufficient qualification for the borough 
 franchise as the occupier of a dwelling-house 
 under the Bepresentation of the People Act, 1867, 
 s. 3, but not under the Eeform Act, 1832, s. 27, 
 the yearly value of the house being under £10. — 
 The Eespondent's quaUficatiou was described in 
 the list as "house." The Eespondent being 
 objected to, the revising barrister was of opinion 
 that such description was suiEcient, but he 
 amended it by adding the word " dwelling " to 
 the word " house," and retained the Eespondent's 
 name on the list:— JffeW (without determining 
 whether the description as it originally stood was 
 sufficient), that the case came within the pro- 
 visions of the Parliamentary and Municipal Ee- 
 gisti-ation Act, 1878, s. 28, sub-s. 12, and the 
 revising barrister had power to make the amend- 
 
( 1005 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1006 ) 
 
 IV. PAKLIAMEHT— FRANCHISE— oonMiJMetJ. 
 
 (a.) BoKOUGn YoTE— continued. 
 ment, and his deoisioa was therefore correct. 
 Friend v. Towers - - 10 Q, B. D. 87 
 
 2. Swelling-house — PaH of a House — ■ 
 
 Ocoapation as Lodger — 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, s. 61 — 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 26, s. 5.] Although by the Par- 
 liamentary and Municipal Eegistration Act, 1878 
 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 26), s. 5, the term " dwelling- 
 house " in the Eepresentation of the People Act, 
 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. o. 102), is to mean pait of a 
 house separately occupied, yet in order to be 
 entitled to the borough franchise as the occupier 
 of a dwelUng-house, the person must have an 
 occupation in respect of which he can be rated to 
 the relief of the poor, and therefore he is not 
 entitled to such dwelling-house franchise by reason 
 of the occupation of a part of a house if he occu- 
 pies such part as a lodger. — The tenant of two 
 rooms which he toot unfurnished at a weekly 
 rent, had the exclusive use of such rooms, and a 
 key of the outer door of the house. His landlord 
 had also a key of the outer door, and resided in 
 all the rest of the house, but supplied no atten- 
 dance or service to such tenant : — Held, that such 
 tenant occupied the rooms as a lodger, and con- 
 sequently that in respect of such occupation he 
 could not acquire the dwelling-house franchise 
 under the Eepresentation of the People Act, 1867. 
 — The tenant of two rooms which he took unfur- 
 nished at a weekly rent, had in common with the 
 other tenants of the house, which was wholly let 
 out on similar tenancies, the use of the passages, 
 staircase, street-door, and usual conveniences of 
 the house. The landlord and not the tenant was 
 rated, and the landlord did all repaii-s inside and 
 out, but he did not reside in the house, nor did 
 he, save as aforesaid, retain the control and 
 dominion over the house, or render any services 
 to any of the tenants : — Held, that such tenant 
 did not occupy the rooms as a lodger, but as an 
 occupying tenant under the Eepresentation of 
 the People Act, 1867, and that he could therefore 
 acquire the dwelling-house franchise in respect 
 of such occupation. Beadlet r. Baylis ; Moefee 
 K. Novis ; KiBBT V. BiPEEN - '8 Q. B. D. 19S 
 
 3. Dwelling-house — Part of a House — 
 
 Vacant Boom — Occupation as Householder or 
 JjodgerSO & 31 Vict. c. 102, ss. 3, 61—41 & 42 
 Vict. V. 26, s. 5.] The claimant of a borough 
 vote had during the qualifying period occupied 
 as sole tenant at a weeljly rent a room in a house, 
 which he furnished himself, as his residence. At 
 the commencement of the qualifying period all 
 the rooms in tlie house were similarly let off to 
 tenants as their residences, each tenant liaving a 
 iey to his room and a key of the front door. 
 During tlie qualifying period the tenant of one 
 of the other rooms relinquished his tenancy, and 
 gave up the key of his room and his front door 
 lioy to tbe landlord, who thereupon took the 
 usual steps to obtain a new tenant of the vacant 
 room. The landlord did not during any part of 
 the qualifying period reside in the house or any 
 part of it, either personally or by any servant, nor 
 did he exercise any control over it, except such 
 control, if any, as might by law be conferred on 
 him by reason of the vacating of the room, and 
 the delivery of the keys to him by the outgoing 
 
 IV. PASLIAMEHT— rSANCHISE— 01 
 
 (a.) Borough Vote — continued. 
 tenant as aforesaid : — Held, affirming the judg- 
 ment of the Queen's Bench Division, that the 
 claimant was entitled to the francliise as an in- 
 habitant occupier of a dwelling-house. Ancke- 
 TiLL V. Baths - - 10 ft. B. D. 577 
 
 4. ■ lodger — Declaration — Prima facie 
 
 Evidence — Bepresentation of the People Act, 1 867 
 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 102), s. i— Parliamentary and 
 Municipal Begistration Act, 1878 (41 <{; 42 Vict, 
 c. 26,) ss. 22, 23.] Sect. 23 of the Parliamentary 
 and Municipal Eegistration Act, 1878, which 
 enacts that in the case of a person claiming to 
 vote as a lodger thq declaration annexed to his 
 notice of claim shall, for the purposes of revision, 
 be prima facie evidence of his qualification, is 
 general, and applies to lodgers claiming for the 
 first time under sect. 4 of the Eepresentation of 
 the People Act, 1867, as well as to claims under 
 sect. 22 of the Parliamentary and Municipal 
 Eegistration Act, 1878, by lodgers retaining the 
 same lodgings in successive years. Nuth v. 
 Tamplin - - - 8 Q. B. D. 847 
 
 5. Practice — Notice of Objection— Descrip- 
 tion of List, where more than One — Parliamentary 
 and Muniaipal Registration Act, 1878 (41 <fc 42 
 Vict. c. 26), s. 28, svh-s. 2, and Sched. Form 1. 1, 2.] 
 A notice of objection given to overseers was as 
 follows : " I hereby give you notice that I object 
 to the name of W. B. being retained in the Block- 
 house list of persons. Division 1, entitled to vote 
 at the election of members to serve in parliament 
 for the parliamentary borough of W." There 
 were three lists of parliamentary voters for the 
 Blockhouse, viz. 1, — householders and occupiers. 
 2. freemen, — 3. lodgers. The first of these only 
 had divisions. The name of W. B. was on the 
 parliamentary list 1, Division 1, for the Block- 
 house : — Quaere, whether this notice was a suffi- 
 cient compliance with Form I. No. 1, in the 
 schedule to the Parliamentary and Municipal 
 Eegistration Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 26) :— 
 Held, that, if not, the inaccurate description of 
 the Ust was a " mistake " which the revising 
 banister had power to correct, under s. 28, sub-s. 2, 
 of the Act. BoLLEN v. Southall 15 Q. B. D. 461 
 
 6. Practice — Notice of Objection — Omis- 
 sion of Place of Abode of Objector — Mistdlce — 
 Power of Amendment — 41 & 42 Vict. a. 26, s. 28, 
 sub-s. 2.] An objector described himself in the 
 notice of objection as " on the list of parliamentary 
 voters for the parish of H," but omitted to insert 
 his place of abode. He was a solicitor practising 
 at H., was a clerk to the magistrates and coroner, 
 and had resided at H. all his life. It was ad- 
 mitted that the insertion of the words " of H." 
 would have sufficiently described the objector's 
 place of abode, and the revising barrister found 
 as a fact that no one had been misled or deceived 
 by the omission : — Held, that under the circum- 
 stances the omission was a " mistake " within the 
 meaning of 41 & 42 Vict. o. 26, s. 28, sub-s. 2, 
 which the revising barrister had power to amend. 
 Adams v. Bostook - - 8 Q. B. D, 259 
 
 7. Practice — Begistraiion of Voters — Lists 
 
 — Divisions of List — Parliamentary and Muni- 
 aipal Begistration Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict, c: 26), 
 
( 1007 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( lOOS ) 
 
 IV. PAELLiMENT— FRANCHISE— ooii/HiMed. 
 
 (n.) Borough Vote — coiitinue<l. 
 s. 15, suh-s. 2 ; s. 28. sub-f. 15 — Traiiofor of Xaiiies 
 — Objection to Qualification for oiif Francltine.'] 
 Sect. 15 of the Parliamentary and Municipal Be- 
 gistration Act, 1878, enacts that where the whole 
 or part of the area of a municipal horough is co- 
 extensive with or included in the area of a parlia- 
 mentary borough, the lists of parliamentary 
 voters shall, so far as practicable, be made out 
 and revised together ; and specifies the mode in 
 which overseers of parishes shall make out the 
 lists. By sub-sect. 2, where the parish is situate 
 wholly or partly both in the parliamentary 
 borough and the municipal borough, the lists 
 shall be made out in thi-ee divisions : Division I. 
 shall comprise the names of the persons entitled 
 both to be registered as parliamentary voters and 
 to be enrolled as burgesses : Division II. shall 
 comprise the names of the persons entitled to be 
 registered as parliamentary voters, but not to be 
 enrolled as burgesses : Division III. shall com- 
 prise the names of the persons entitled to be 
 enrolled as bui'gesses, but not to be registered as 
 parliamentary voters. By sect. 28, sub-sect. W. 
 where a list is made out in divisions, the revising 
 barrister shall place the name of any person in 
 the division in which it should appear according 
 to the result of the reyision, regard being had to 
 the title of the person to be on the list both as a 
 parliamentary voter and a burgess, or only in one 
 of those capacities, and shall expunge the name 
 from the other division (if any) in which it aji- 
 pears. — An objection in respect only of a voter's 
 qualification for the parliamentary franchise 
 having been taken to the retention of his name in 
 Division I., the revising barrister struck the name 
 off Division I. ; and was thereupon asked to place 
 it in Division III., but refused so to do unless 
 proof was given of a qualification entitling the 
 voter to be on the burgees roll: — Held, that the 
 decision of the revising hamster was right, and 
 that he was not hound, under sect. 28, sub.-sect. 15, 
 to plac« the name in Division III. Ghkenway v. 
 Baoheloe. Jacob's Case - 12 Q. B. D. 876 
 
 8. Fractice — Registration — Qualification 
 
 in List — Mistalie in Statement of — Correction — 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 26, s. 28, subs. 12.] The qualifi- 
 cation of a voter was stated in tlie third column 
 of the list to be " ofSces, successive occupation," 
 andin the fourth column "High Street and Charles 
 Street," whereas it was proved that during the 
 whole of the qualifying period he had occupied 
 one office only, namely, in High Street, and would 
 have had by reason of such occupation a good and 
 sufficient qualification. The misdescription was 
 an error of the overseers : — Beld, that the revising 
 barrister had power under 41 & 42 Vict. o. 26, s. 28, 
 to correct the mistake, and should have amended 
 the list by striking out the words " successive 
 occupation" and "Obarloa Street." Lvnoh v. 
 Wheatley 14 ft. B. D. 604 
 
 9. Practice — Itegistration — Itcrifinn of 
 
 List — Description of qualifying Property — Houses 
 in Succession — Omission of one — Mistalic — Amend- 
 ment— il <(• 42 Vict. c. 26, 8. 28.] The nature 
 of the qualification of a voter was described on 
 the parliinnentary list as " Dwelling houses in 
 succession," and the name and situation of the 
 
 IV. PARLIAMENT— FEANCHISE—<-oH((/iH«d. 
 
 (a.) BoROiniH Vote — continufd. 
 qualifying property were described in the fourth 
 column of the list as '■ 44, Oxford Sb'cet and 81, 
 Prospect Place, Cowiok Street." He had, in fact, 
 occupied three houses in succession during the 
 qualifying period, but the overseer by mistake 
 omitted to specify the third house, viz. 31, Pros- 
 pect Place, and the occupation of the two only as 
 they appeared on the list was insufiSoient to give 
 the vote. These fticts were proved before the i-e- 
 vising barrister, and he was asked to amend the 
 fourth column, and did so by striking out tho 
 figures " 44 " and " 34 " -.—Held, by Stephen and 
 Cave, JJ. (Lord Coleridge, C.J , dissenting), that 
 under 41 & 42 Vict. o. 26, s. 28, the revising bar- 
 rister had power to correct the mistidce, although 
 it should not have been corrected by striking out 
 the numbers, and that the list should be amended 
 by inserting " and 31 " after the words " Oxford 
 Street " in the fourth column of tlie list. Ford r. 
 Hoar - - - - 14 ft. B. D, 607 
 
 (6.) CocNTV Vote. 
 
 10. Practice — Notice of Objection — Omis- 
 sion of Date — I'arlianwntani licqistration Act, 
 1843 ((3 & 7 Vict. c. IS), s. 7.]" Wliere a notice of 
 objection to a pei-son on tho list of voters fer any 
 county is delivered to overeeers and is defective 
 imdcr tho Parliamentary Kegistration Act, 184:>, 
 s. 7, the defect is not cured by the publication by 
 tlie overseers, under sect. 8 of the name of tho 
 person objected to. — Tho omission of part of the 
 date from such a notice is a defect which invali- 
 dates it, and cannot bo amended. Freeman r. 
 Newman - - - 12 ft. B. D. 373 
 
 11. Rent - charge — Actual Possession 
 
 under 2 (t 3 H'm. 4, v. 45, 8. 26 — Statute of Uses, 
 27 Hen 8, c. lO.J A. being possessed of a rent- 
 charge issuing out of freehold lands, granted it 
 unto B., C, and D., and their heirs, to hold tho 
 same unto B., C, and D., and their heirs, to tho 
 use of A., B., C, and D., their heirs and assigua 
 for ever, in equal one-fourth shares as tenants iu 
 common : — Hid. that all the grantees took xmder 
 the Statute of Uses, and that by force of tho 
 statute and on the authority of lleclis v. lllaiu 
 (18 0. B. (N.S.) 90 ; 34 K J. (C.P.) 88), they 
 were from the date of the deed in actual posses- 
 sion of their shares of tho rent-charge within 
 soot. 26 of 2 <{; 8 Wm. 4, e. 45. LowcooK v. Over- 
 seers OF Brodghton - - 12 ft, B. D. 369 
 
 12. Rent-charge — For Life or Lives helow 
 
 valtm of £5 — Occupation — lieform Act, IS.'VJ 
 (2 * 3 Wm. 4, 0. 45), 8S. 18, 26.] tiy sect. 18 of tho 
 Keform Act, 1832, no person shall be entitled to 
 a county vote in respect of any freehold lands or 
 tenements of which he may bo seised for a life or 
 lives, except ho shall be " in tho actual and 
 bonft fide occupation of such lands or tenements," 
 or except the same shall be of the clear yearly 
 value of not less than £10 (reduced to £5 by a 
 subsequent Act):— Held, that a rent-eliarge for 
 life below the yearly value of £5, being inculpable 
 of occupation, was not within the exception in 
 sect. 18, ond therefore did not confer a county 
 vote. Druitt v. Overseers op Christohurou 
 
 [12 ft. B, D. 365 
 
( 1009 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1010 ) 
 
 V, PARIIAMENT— PEOCEDTJEE. 
 
 By U & 55 Vict. c. 68 (ihe Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1881), s. 14, tlie jurisdiction of 
 the High Court of Justice to decide questions of 
 law, upon appeal or otherwise, under the Act 6 & 7 
 Vict. c. 18, the County Voters Registration Act, 
 1865, the Parliamentary Elections Act, 1868, tte 
 Parliamentary and Municipal Begistration Act, 
 1878, or any of the said Acts, or any Act amending 
 the sawe respectively, shall be final and conclusive, 
 unless in any case it shall seem fit to the said High 
 Court to give special leave to appeal therefrom to 
 Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, whose decision in 
 such case shall he final and conclusive. 
 
 1. Privilege of House of Commons — In- 
 ternal Regulation of its own Procedure — Parlia- 
 mentary Oaths Act, 1 866 (29 & 30 Vict. c. 19).] The 
 House of Commons Is not subject to the control 
 of her Majesty's Courts in its administration of 
 that part of the statute law which has relation to 
 its inteimal procedure only. What is said or done 
 within its walls cannot be inquired into in a Court 
 of law. — A resolution of the House of Commons 
 cannot change the law of the land. But a Court 
 of law has no right to inquire into the propriety 
 of a resolution of the House restraining a member 
 from doing within the walls of the House itself 
 something which by the general law of the land 
 he had a right to do, viz., take the oath pre- 
 scribed by the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866 
 (29 & soviet, c. 19).— An action will not lie against 
 the Serjeant-at-Arms of the House of Commons 
 for excluding a member from the House in obedi- 
 ence to a resolution of the House directing him 
 tp do so ; nor will the Court grant an injunction 
 to restrain that officer from using necessary force 
 to carry out the order of the House. — The Plaintiff, 
 having been returned as member for the borough 
 of N., required the Speaker of the House of 
 Commons to call him to the table for the purpose 
 of taking the oath required by 29 & 30 Vict. c. 19. 
 In consequence of something which had transpired 
 on a former occasion the Speaker declined to do 
 so : and the House, upon motion, resolved " that 
 the Serjeant-at-Arms do exclude Mr. B. (the 
 Plaintift) from the House until he shall engage 
 not farther to disturb the proceedings of the 
 House." — In an action against the Serjeant-at- 
 Arms praying for an injunction to restrain him 
 from carrying out this resolution : —Held, that this 
 being a matter relating to the internal manage- 
 ment of the procedure of the House of Commons, 
 the Court of Queen's Bench had no power to 
 interfere. — Burdett v. Abbot (14 East, 1), and 
 Stockdale v. Hansard (9 Ad. & E. 1) commented 
 upon and approved. Bkadlaugh i: Gossett 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 271 
 
 VI. PABIIAMENT— EEGISTEATION. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. e. 15 (the Registration Act, 
 1885), assimilates the registration law of occupa- 
 tion voters in counties and boroughs. 
 
 Sect. 1. — (1.) Subject to this Act the registration 
 of occupation voters in parliamentary counties is to 
 be conducted the same as that of occupation voters 
 in parliamentary boroughs. The Parliamentary 
 Registration Act8(i.e.,6&7 Vict. c. 18, and il&i2 
 Vict. c. 26, and Acts amending them'), shall apply 
 to parliamentary counties as well as to parlia- 
 mentary boroughs. 
 
 VI, PAELIAKENT— EEGISTEATION— coil/*. 
 
 (2.) Subject to this Act sects. 9, 27, 28, and 29 of 
 the Parliamentary and Municipal Registration 
 Act, 1878, 41 & 42 Vict. c. 26, shall apply to the 
 registration of ownership voters in parliamentary 
 counties the same as that of occupation voters. 
 
 (3.) The modifications necessary to apply the 
 above Acts to the above purposes. 
 
 Sect. 2. Adaptation of above Acts as regards lists 
 of parliamentary county voters. 
 
 Sect. 3. — (1.) In parliamentary counties 'and 
 boroughs notices of claims and objections to he 
 given on or before 20th August. In Parliamentary 
 Registration Acts, 20th to he substituted fof 25th 
 August. 
 
 (2.) Overseers in parliamentary counties and 
 boroughs to publish lists before 25th August, and 
 to deliver to town clerk and clerk of peace the 
 papers mentioned in sects. 9 and 19 o/ 6 <fe 7 Vict, 
 c. 18. TJie 25th August to he substituted in Par- 
 liamentary Registration Acts for 29th August and 
 1st September. The first fourteen day s after 25tli 
 August to be substituted for first fourteen days of 
 September. 
 
 Sect. 4. — (1.) Court for revision of lists of voters 
 in parliamentary county may be held in same period 
 as for parliamentary borough. Seven days notice 
 of holding of court sufficient. 
 
 (2.) Declarations made under sect. 10 of 28 & 2d 
 Vict. c. 36, County Voters Registration Act, 1865, 
 to be transmitted to clerk of peace before 12th 
 September. 
 
 (3.) Evening sitting of revision Court in an 
 urban sanitary district of more than 10,000 inhabi- 
 tants. 
 
 (4.) The local authority for assigning polling 
 places may cause revision Court to he held in a 
 town outside the county near the polling district of 
 the parliamentary county. 
 
 (5.) (6.) (7.) (8.) directions for list of voters. 
 
 (9.) Substitution of neio provisions for parlia- 
 mentary counties in lieu of suh-sect. li of sect. 28 
 of 41 & 42 Vict. c. 26. 
 
 Sect. 5. Provision as to double entries in parlia- 
 mentary borough lists. 
 
 Municipal Boroughs.] Sect. 6. Saving as to 
 registration of burgesses and voters in parishes in 
 municipal horouglis. 
 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) Clerks of the peace and town clerks 
 to send their precepts to overseers within seven days 
 before the 15th April (except in 1885.) 
 
 (2.) an(Z(3.) Provisions loliere a parliamentary 
 county is co-extensive with a county quarter ses- 
 sional area. " 
 
 Sect. 8. Application of SO & 31 Vict. c. 102, s. 31, 
 to remuneration of clerk of the peace. 
 
 Sect. 9. Divided parishes. 
 
 Sect. 10. Special provisions as to voters under 
 sect. 3 of the Representation of the People Act, 
 1884. 
 
 Sect. 11. A voter in respect of £50 rental to be 
 registered as an " occupation voter," and not as an 
 ownership voter. 
 
 Sect. 12. The period of qualification for any 
 voter in a parliamentary county to be computed to 
 15th July instead of the last day of July. 
 
 Sect. 13. Constitution of polling districts by 
 Court of Quarter Sessions. 
 
 Sect. 14. Expenses incurred by quarter sessions 
 in constituting polling districts. 
 
( 1011 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 VI. PAELIAMENT— EEGISTEATION— conii. 
 
 Sect. 16. Information as to persons disqualified 
 by receipt of parochial relief to befurnislied to any 
 parliamentary voter by clerk of guardians on pay- 
 ment of fees allowed by 41 & 42 Vict. o. 26. 
 
 Sect. 18. The forms and instructions in 2nd and 
 3rd Schedules of this Act to be used. 
 
 Sect. 19. "Ownership voter" means a person 
 entitled to vote in respect of the ownership of pro- 
 perty whether freehold, leasehold, or copyhold. 
 
 " Fifty pounds rental voter " means a person 
 who on 6th December, 1884, ivas registered as a 
 mterfor a county under 2 <£ 3 Will. 4, c. 35, s. 20 
 {Reform Act, 1832), in respect of any tenement 
 for which he was liable to a yearly rent of not less 
 than £50, and who continues under 48 & 49 Vict, 
 e. 3 (flepresentation of the People Act, 1884), s. 10, 
 to be registered for such occupation. 
 
 " Occupation voter " means (1) as regards a 
 parliamentary county, a person entitled to vote in 
 respect of any qualification conferred by 48 & 49 
 Vict. c. 3, and (2) as regards a parliamentary 
 borough, a person entitled to vote in respect of any 
 qualification conferred by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 3, s. 5, 
 or of a household or a lodger qualification as 
 defined by that Act. 
 
 " Parliamentary county " means a county, or 
 division of a county, returning members of parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 " Court of county quarter sessions " means the 
 justices in general or quarter sessions for a county, 
 or for part of a county having a separate quarter 
 sessions, and includes the Isle of Ely. 
 
 Repeal.] Sect. 15. Mepeal of 2 & 3 Will. 4, 
 c. 45, s. 78. 
 
 Sect. 17. Repeal of 6 Vict. c. 18, s. 40, and 
 SclieduU A. ; 28 & 29 Vict. o. 36, ss. 4, 5, 12, and 
 Schedule A.; 30 & 31 Vict. c. 102, so much of 
 sect. 30 as relates to persons entitled to vote for a 
 county in respect of the occupation of premises 
 other titan lodgings ; 31 & 32 Vict. c. 58, ss. 17 
 and 19. 
 
 VII. PARLIAMENT — SEDISTEIBTITIOH OF 
 SEATS. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 23 (the Redistribution 
 of Seats Act, 1885) ; redistributes seats at parlia- 
 mentary elections, 
 
 Pabt I. 
 
 Boroughs.] Sect. 2. Certain parliamentary 
 boroughs cease, as boroughs, to return Tnembers. 
 Certain counties of cities and towns are included 
 in counties at large. 
 
 Sect. 3. Tlie parliamentary boroughs reported 
 for corrupt practices in 1880, cease to return 
 members. 
 
 Sect. 4. City of London to return only tioo Tnem- 
 bers, Certain parliamentary boroughs to return 
 only one member. 
 
 Sect. 5. Certain parliamentary boroughs to have 
 additional members. 
 
 Sect, 6. New boroughs. 
 
 Sect, 7. Alteration of boundaries of some 
 boroughs. 
 
 Sect. 8. Division of some parliamentary boroughs 
 into certain divisions. 
 
 Counties.] Sect. 9 (1.) Certain counties shall 
 return so many members, and for that purpose 
 shall be divided into the same number of divisions 
 as the number of members. 
 
 ( 1012 ) 
 BEDISTEIBTTTION OF 
 
 VII. PAELIAMENT 
 
 SEATS — continued. 
 
 (2.) Th^ names, contents, and boundaries of 
 these divisions specified. 
 
 (3.) Each division to be a separate constituency. 
 
 PaeT II. SCPPLEMENTAL PbOVISIOITS. 
 
 Sect. 10. Qualification by occupation (otherwise 
 than as lodger) of premises in immediate su/:ces- 
 sion in a divided borough. 
 
 Sect. 11. Provisions as to Warwick and Pem- 
 broke. 
 
 Sect. 12. Returning officers in new boroughs. 
 
 Sect. 13. Returning officers in boroughs divided 
 into divisions. 
 
 Sect. 14. Registration of freemen in divided 
 boroughs, and where to vote. 
 
 Voting of Election Agent and Others.] Sect. 15. 
 For the purposes of the schedule to 46 (£ 47 Vict, 
 c. 51 (Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention 
 Act, 1883), a parliamentary borough divided into 
 divisions shall be deemed one borough. 
 
 Place of Election.] Sect. 16 (1.) In the case of 
 a division of a county at large, the election to be in 
 such town in the said county, or in such county of 
 a city adjourning the said county, as the local 
 authority, or in default thereof, as the returning 
 officer, may determine. 
 
 (2.) In the case of a parliamentary borough, or 
 division thereof, the election to he in such room as 
 the returning officer may determine. 
 
 Sect. 17. Saving of rights of voters on change of 
 parliamentary area, if otherwise qualified. 
 
 Alteration of Parishes.] Sect. 18. Any consti- 
 tution of new parishes or alteration of boundaries 
 thereof, for poor law purposes, effected prior to 
 26<ft of March, 1885, and any incidental alteration 
 of the boundary of a county to have effect also in 
 parliamentary elections. 
 
 Sect. 18. Transitory provisions as to registers of 
 voter's. 
 
 Sect. 19. Boundaries of parliamentary boroughs 
 and divisions of same to be marked. 
 
 Sect, 21. Writs and other documents relating to 
 election or registration to be adapted to this Act, 
 and to 48 & 49 Vict. u. 3 (Representation of the 
 People Act, 1884). 
 
 Sect. 22. Existing election law to remain in 
 force subject to this Act. 
 
 Sect, 23. Definition of expressions in the Sche- 
 dules to this Act. 
 
 Sect, 24. Definition of expressions in Wms Act. 
 
 Pabt III. Disqualification of Voters foe 
 
 COEKIJPT PeaCTICES. 
 
 Sect. 27 repeals the following statute laws 
 (whereby certain persons were declared not to have 
 certain rights of voting), viz.: — 30 & 31 Vict, 
 c. 102, ss. 13, 14, 15, 16 ; 33 & 34 Vict, c, 21, ss. 2, 
 3, 4, 5 ; 33 * 34 Vict. c. 25 ; 33 & 34 Vict. c. 38, 
 ss. 2, 3, 4 ; 33 & 34 Vict. c. 54 ; 34 * 35 Vict. c. 77. 
 
 Sect. 28. Enactments concerning persons reported 
 for corrupt practices in certain boroughs by the 
 Commissioners in 1880. 
 
 Pakt IV. Accelekatiox of Eegisteation 
 IN 1885. 
 
 Sects. 29 to 34. Temporary provisions for 1885. 
 
( 1013 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1011 ) 
 
 Vn. PAKI.TATTKirr — BEDISTSIBPTIOK OF 
 
 SEATS — continued. 
 
 KeTisiiig Barristeis.] Order under 36 il- 37 Ftet 
 «, 70 (the BeriHng Barrister Aef^ 1S73), s. 3, rary- 
 ing nunii>er of revising barristers. Dated 9th Jutg. 
 18S5 - - - - I. G., 1885, S17S 
 
 P ART.T ATTEHT — Committee — PriTile?e of wit- 
 ness - - - 6 a."B. D. 307 
 See Defamation — PKiviLifiK. 4. 
 
 —— Perjury — ^Indictment — Information 
 
 [8 Q. B. S. S67 
 .See Cbtwtval Law — ErnjEstK. i. 
 
 ■ Special Act — Po'wer to charge interest npon 
 
 poor-rate — Opposition to bill by OTer- 
 seers— Osts - - 14 Q. B. S. 338 
 
 &e PooE I-AW — SIasagement. 
 
 FASLIAHEKT OF SOUXBIOH OF CAS ASA 
 
 [7 App. Gas. 178, 829 ; 9 App. Gas. 157 
 iSee OoiJosiAL IjAW — Casada — Dcoa- 
 mcQr. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 FASLIABCEinAEY DEPOSIT - 18 Ch. D. 155 
 vS« Bao.'wax Compast — ^Abasdoxmext. 
 1. 
 
 PAROL COBTKACT— Xot to be performed within 
 a year 7 0- B. B. 1S5 ; 11 Q. B. S. 183 
 See Feaob, Statute of. 1, 4. 
 
 Belatin^to land 7 Q. B. S. 174; 8 App. Gas. 
 
 iSee CoxTEACT — Yauditt. 4. [467 
 
 9 0- B. S. 315 ; 10 Q. B. D. 148 
 
 iire Frauds, Stattte of. 2, 3. 
 
 PAST OF HOUSE— Sotice to treat 27 Ch. D. 536 
 i^ft' Laxds Clatses Act — CoMPrLSOKT 
 PoWIBS. 7, 
 
 PAET PESFOBHAHCE— Parol contract relating 
 toland 7aB. B. 174; 8 App. Cas.467 
 
 it* OOSTRACT — YaIXDITT. 4. 
 
 • Faml contract relating to land 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 148 
 See Fratds, Statute of. 2. 
 
 ■ Parol contract not to be performed within 
 a year - - - 11 Q. B. S. 1S3 
 
 Ad FKAms, Stattte of. 1. 
 
 PARTIAL IHTEBEST — Contract to lease entirety 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 175 
 See Lasdlokd asd Tesast — Agkee- 
 
 UEXT. 3. 
 
 PASTICIPATIKG POLICT-HOIDEE. 
 
 5t* Cases nnder Compast — ^Lite Is- 
 STRASCE Compast. 2 — 5. 
 PARTICIPATIOH IH PROFITS 18 Ch. D. 698 : 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 460 
 
 Aw PaeTSEKSHIP — COSTBACT. 3, 4. 
 
 FABTICTTLARS — Admiralty— Damage to carat) 
 
 [7 P. D.ll7 
 Ae Pkactice — Admiraltt — Pleadkg. 
 
 1. 
 
 > Eccledastical law — Criminal suit lOP. 9. SO 
 
 Av Practice — Ecclestasticai.— Pab- 
 
 TICTXAES. 
 
 . Of breaches— Patent— Costs 29 Ch. S. 366 
 
 Ari Patext — ^Pkactice. 3. 
 
 Of demand 16 Ch. D. 13 ; 88 Ch. S. 119 
 
 At- PeACTICE — SCPBEME CoOtT — ^PaB- 
 
 tictlaes. 1, 3. 
 
 PARTICVLARS — oontinn^ 
 
 Of objectiona— Patent action 17 Ch. B. 137 ; 
 
 [28 Ch, B. 629; 89 Ch. B. S25 
 A« Patest — Practice. 1, 2, 4. 
 
 Of objections — Patent action '• 
 
 [26 Ch. B. 700 ; 10 App. Cas. 249 
 
 ^^iM PATOTT Y tTTn TTV. 1. 
 
 Of persons to whom slander was nttered 
 
 [18 Q. B. B. 94 
 A I- Practice — So>eemk Cocet — Pae- 
 
 TICTLAES. 2. 
 
 Probate - - 9 P. B. 23, 62 
 
 A e Practice^Peobate — Paehctlabs. 
 1,2. 
 
 PARTIES. 
 
 See Cases nnder Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Pabttes. 
 
 Action against &m - - 21 Ch. B. 484 
 
 iSe* Execttoe — Acnoxs. 2. 
 
 Action by some members of committee 
 
 against others - - 28 Ch. B. 426 
 
 Ae Chaettt — Management. 4. 
 
 ■ Change of parties — Adding parties. 
 
 See Cases nnder Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Chaxge op Parties. 
 
 Demurrer for want of - 19 Ch. B. 246 
 Ae Practice— Supreme CorsT — De- 
 murrer. 1. 
 
 ■DiTOHjeOonrt - 6P.B. 12; 7 P. B. 19; 
 
 [8 P. B. 217 
 Av Practice — Ditobgb — Parties. 1, 
 2,3. 
 
 - Ecclesiastical Commi^oners SO Ch. B. 308 
 
 Av EOOLESIASTICAI. OOMMISSIONEES. 
 
 - liberty to attend— Costs - 21 Ch. B. 830 
 
 <Stc PeACIICE — SuTEEilE CoUET — COSTS. 
 
 36. 
 
 - Partition suit— Sale - 16 Ch. B. 360 
 
 Av Pabtitiox Suit — Sale. 1. 
 
 - Partition snit — Sale — Testing order 
 
 [19 Ch. B. 646 
 
 Afi- Trustee Acts — ^Testixg Oedebs. 
 10. 
 
 - Kedemption snit — ^Trustees 6 App. Cas. 698 
 
 At Mortgage — Coxsoudatiox. 2. 
 -Third party. 
 
 See Cases nnder Pbacuck — Supreme 
 Couet — ^Thebd Party. 
 
 - Trustees and cestui qne trust 20 Ch. B. 611 
 
 Ac Texdob and Puechaske — Pubchase 
 
 WITHOUT XuTICE. 1. 
 
 PARTinOK SUIT:— 
 
 I. JUEISDICTIOX 
 
 IL Sat.k 
 
 Col. 
 1014 
 1015 
 
 L PARTITIOH SUIT— JTTRISBICTIOK. 
 
 1. Power of Sale — A decree for the par- 
 tition of property can be granted notwiihstiuiding 
 the existence of a power gi\Bn to trustees to sell 
 the property for the purpose of a divisian. Botd 
 c. AiLEX " - - - 84 Ch. B. 6^ 
 
 2. Trust for Sai»— Partition Act, 1S6S 
 
( 1015 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1016 ) 
 
 I. PARTITION SUIT— JUEISLICTION— cftfiW. 
 
 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 40), s. 4 — Ml Cestuis que trust sui 
 juris.'] A testator directed the trustees of his will 
 at such times and in such manner as they should 
 think fit to sell his copyhold estate, and to hold the 
 proceeds in trust for his widow for life, and after 
 her death for his children. He left six children, 
 all of whoid attained a vested interest and were 
 sui juris. — The widow and three children brought 
 an action for partition of the estate ; tlie other 
 children who were Defendants, demurred : — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Bacon, V.C.), that the 
 trustees had a. trust for sale, not a mere power ; 
 and that it was not put an end to by all the rever- 
 sioners attaining a vested interest ; and therefore 
 the Court had no jurisdiction to decree a partition 
 under the Partition Act. Biggs v. Peacock 
 
 [20Ch. D. 200; 22 Ch. D. 284 
 
 II. PAHTITION SUIT— SALE. 
 
 1. Absent Parties — Oi-der for Sale — Dis- 
 pensing with Service of Judgment — Partition Act, 
 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 17), s. 3~Form of Judg- 
 menf] In a partition action, the Court, in order- 
 ing a sale at the request of the parties to the 
 action, will not in the absence of the other parties 
 interested, preface the judgment order for sale 
 with an expression of its opinion that a sale is 
 more beneficial than a partition. — ^Form of judg- 
 ment order for sale in a partition action providing 
 that service of the judgment may be dispensed 
 with under sect. 3 of the Partition Act, 1876. 
 In re Hardiman. Pkagsell v. Batten 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 360 
 
 2. Disputed Title — Co-tenant in Common, 
 
 Mortgagee of Entirety — Australian Bankruptcy 
 ■ — Beal Estate in England — Will of Realty 
 ■ — Evidence.'] Where a tenant in common of a 
 freehold messuage subject to a mortgage in fee, 
 had procured the transfer of the mortgage to 
 himself and was in possession thereunder, his co- 
 tenant in common was held entitled in a partition 
 action to a sale of the property subject to the 
 mortgage. — Keal estate in England does not vest 
 in an assignee under a Victorian insolvency. — For 
 the purposes of the usual preliminary judgment 
 in a partition action letters testimonial of the 
 Supreme Court of the colony of Victoria, Probate 
 Jurisdiction, setting out the will verbatim, were 
 accepted as suflSoient proof of a will made in Vic- 
 toria of real estate in England. Waite v. Bingley 
 
 [21Ch.D. 674 
 
 3. Married Woman — Bequest for Sale — 
 
 Authority to act on her behalf — Bequest by Counsel 
 — Purchase-money — Conversion — Fund under 
 £200 — Election — Separate Examination — Parti- 
 tion Act, 1870 (39 & 40 V'ict. c. 17), s. 6.] In a 
 partition action, an order for sale of a married 
 woman's share of real estate when made with her 
 consent or at her request under sect. 6 of the 
 Partition Act, 1876, operates as a conversion of 
 such share into personal estate. — In a partition 
 action a request for sale on the part of a married 
 woman, under sect. 6 of the Partition Act, 1876, 
 should be made by a person specially authorized 
 to act on her behalf in the action : a request by 
 her counsel is not sufficient. — Crookes v. Whit- 
 worth (10 Ch. D. 289) not followed.— Where, in a 
 partition action, the share of a married woman in 
 
 II. PARTITION SUIT— SALE— con«JnitecZ. 
 the proceeds of sale of real estate is under £200, 
 the Court will order the same to be paid out to 
 her upon her separate receipt and upon an affi- 
 davit of no settlement, and will dispense with her 
 separate examination as to her election to take 
 the money as personal estate. — In re Sliaw (49 
 L. J. (Ch.) 213) not followed. Wallace v. 
 Greenwood - - 16 Ch. B. 362 
 
 4. Married Woman — Bequest for Sale 
 
 —Partition Act 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. e. 17), 8. 6.] 
 The request for sale in a partition action, when 
 made on behalf of a married woman, should be a 
 writing signed by her authorizing and requesting 
 her solicitor to instruct counsel to ask for a sale. 
 Grange v. White - 18 Ch. D. 612 
 
 5. Parties not sui juris — Sale out of 
 
 Court— Partition Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 68), 
 s. 8.] Where some of the parties beneficially 
 interested are not sui juris, and the trastees have 
 no power of sale under their trust deed, there 
 is no jurisdiction under the Partition Act, 1868, 
 s. 8, to order a sale out of Court. Stbtjgnell 
 V. Stkugnell - - 27 Ch. D. 258 
 
 6. Eeal Estate — Proceeds of Sale — Beal 
 
 and Personal Bepresentatives — Conversion — Par- 
 tition Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Viet. c. 40), s. 8— Leases 
 and Sales of Settled Estates Act, 1856 (19 * 20 Vict, 
 c. 120), ss. 2^-25— Settled Estates Act, 1877 (40 * 
 41 Vict. c. 18), ss. 34-36.] A decree for the sale 
 of real estate having been made in a partition 
 suit, the property was sold and the proceeds of 
 sale were paid into Court. Three of the persons 
 entitled to shares iu the property died intestate 
 before the money was distributed, leaving their 
 father their heir-at-law and sole next of kin. He 
 took out administration to each of them and then 
 died intestate : — Held, that the father took his 
 children's shares of the money as their heir-at- 
 law, but that he took them as money, and that oil 
 his death they passed to his personal representa- 
 tive, and not to his heir-at-law. Moedaunt v. 
 Benwell 19 Ch. D. S©2 
 
 PARTITION SUIT— Vesting order— Persons not 
 under disability - 19 Ch. D. 646 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 
 10. 
 
 PARTNERSHIP :— Col. 
 
 I. Contract 1016 
 
 II. Dissolution 1018 
 
 III. Liabilities 1019 
 
 I. PARTNERSHIP— CONTRACT. 
 
 1, Benefit of Third Party— iJig/ti to en- 
 force — Trust — Covenant topay Annuity for Benefit 
 of Widow of deceased Partner.] Articles of pait- 
 nership between two solicitors provided that the 
 partnership should be for the term of ten years 
 from the 1st of May, 1875, if both the partners 
 should so long live. The partnership was also 
 made determinable by notice. There was a 
 further provision that from the determination of 
 the partnership theretuing partner, his executors 
 or administrators, or the executors or administrar 
 tors, of the deceased partner, should be entitled 
 to receive out of the net profits of the partnership 
 business, during so much (if any) of the term of 
 five years from the 1st of May, 1880, as should 
 
( 1017 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1018 ) 
 
 I. PAETNERSHIP— CONTRACT— co«<m«ed. 
 remain after the determination of the partnership, 
 the yearly sum of £350, and during so much (if 
 any) of the term of five years from the 1st of May, 
 1885, as either the retiring partner, or a widow of 
 the retiring or deceased partner, should he living, 
 the yearly sum of £250, any sum which might 
 under this provision for the time being become 
 payable to the executors or administrators of a 
 deceased partner to be applied in such manner as 
 such partner should by deed or will direct for the 
 benefit of his widow and children, and in default 
 of such direction to be paid to such widow, if 
 living, for her own benefit. It was further pro- 
 vided that the annuity should, so far as legally 
 might be, be constituted a charge on the net 
 profits of the business. One of the partners died 
 in 1883, leaving a, widow, but without having 
 given any direction as to the application of the 
 annuity. By his will he appointed his widow his 
 universal legatee and sole executrix. He died 
 insolvent, and au action was brought by the cre- 
 ditor to administer his estate ; — Seld, by North, J., 
 and by the Court of Appeal, that the annuity did 
 not form part of the testator's estate, but that by 
 the articles a trust of it was created in favour of 
 the widow, and that she was entitled to it free 
 from the claims of the testator's creditors. In re 
 Flavell. Mueeat v. Flavell 25 Ch. D. 89 
 
 2. Deceased Partner's Share — Interest 
 
 thereon how paid — Construction of Articles.^ A 
 deed of partnership provided that in the event 
 of the death of any of the partners, and in the 
 event of the surviving partners electing to con- 
 tinue the business, the amount at the credit of 
 the deceased partner as at the last balance '* shall 
 be paid out to his representative by instalments 
 of equal amount at six, twelve, &c., up to sixty 
 months' date," "from the date of the surviving 
 partners declaring their election," " with interest 
 thereon from the date of the balance." — -The chief 
 partner, whose interest was about £394,340 in the 
 concern, died. The surviving partners having 
 elected to continue the business, sought to pay his 
 representative by ten equal instalments, with 
 interest on the amount of each instalment from 
 substantially the date of the death to the date of 
 payment. In a claim by a deceased partner's 
 representative that interest should be added to 
 each instalment on the balance of the capital sum 
 remaining unpaid at the date of the payment of 
 each such instalment ; thus reaping an advantage 
 of about £2365 from the earlier payment of the 
 larger sums of interest : — Held (Lord Watson dis- 
 senting), affirming the decision of the Court below, 
 that the interest to be paid with each instalment 
 was interest calculated upon the balance of the 
 capital sum unpaid at that date, and not interest 
 upon the amount of each instalment. Okk BwnfG 
 & Co. V. Oeb Ewms - - 8 App. Cas. 822 
 
 3. Participation in Profit and loss — Legal 
 
 Effects of Contract — Dissolution — Sale of Assets and 
 Goodwill'] The Plaintiff, having been a clerk in 
 the Defendant's firm, entered into a verbal agree- 
 ment with him for a share of profit and loss in 
 the proportion of one-fifth to the Plaintiff and 
 four-fifths to the Defendant, it being stipulated 
 that the building in which the business was 
 ■carried on should remain the property of the 
 
 I. PARTNERSHIP— CONTRACT— continued. 
 
 Defendant. The Plaintiff alleged that the agree- 
 ment was for a partnership, and claimed a disso- 
 lu^on and an account of assets. The Defendant 
 denied the partnership, and alleged that the 
 Plaintiff was only manager : — Held, that the 
 agreement for sharing profit and loss in certain 
 proportions conferred all the rights of partnership 
 inter se, subject to the stipulation as to the build- 
 ings remaining the property of one partner ; that 
 the Defendant could not maintain that the legal 
 effects of partnership should not follow such a 
 contract, and that the Plaintiff had a right to a 
 dissolution and sale of the assets of the partner- 
 ship, including the goodwill : - such sale to be 
 conducted by an independent firm of solicitors, 
 with power to either partner to bid. Pawset v. 
 AEMSTEONa - - - 18 Ch. D. 698 
 
 4. ■ Participation in Profit and Loss — 
 
 Receiver — Injunction] Although an agi'eement 
 for participation in profit and loss is prima facie 
 evidence of a "partnership between the contract- 
 ing parties as between themselves, yet the ques- 
 tion of pfctnership must in all cases depend 
 upon the intention of the parties as it appears on 
 the contract. — Byan agreement between the Plain- 
 tiff and the firm of H. & Co., the members of 
 which were the two Defendants, it was agreed 
 that for the part taken by the Plaintiff ia the 
 business, he should receive a fixed salary of £180, 
 and in addition should receive one-eighth share 
 of the net profits, and bear one-eighth share of 
 the losses, as shewn by the books when balanced ; 
 and the Plaintiff agreed to advance £1500 to the 
 business. The agreement was to be determined 
 on four months' notice on either side. The Plain- 
 tiff had been previously a clerk of the Defendants, 
 and he continued to perform similar duties after 
 the execution of the agreement, and was not in- 
 troduced to the customers as a member of the firm, 
 and did not sign the name of the firm to bills. 
 The Defendants being dissatisfied with the Plain- 
 tiff gave him notice to determine the agreement, 
 and excluded him from the place of business. 
 The Plaintiff brought an action for winding up 
 the partnership, and moved for an injunction and 
 receiver. Pearson, J., refused the motion, on the 
 terms of the Defendants paying £1500 into Court : 
 — Held, by the Court of Appeal (affirming the order 
 of Pearson, J.), that on the true construction of" 
 this agreement the Plaintiff was in the position of 
 a servant, and that there was no such partnership 
 between the Plaintiff and the Defendants as to 
 entitle the Plaintiff to an injunetion or receiver. — 
 Pawsey v. Armstrong (18 Ch. D. 698) questioned. 
 Walkbb v. Hiesoh - - 27 Ch, D. 460 
 
 II. PARTNERSHIP -DISSOLUTION. 
 
 1. Dissolution by Court — Date from 
 
 which Dissolution is ordered^— Terms of Dissolution.'] 
 In an action for dissolution of partnership on the 
 ground of disputes between the partners, where 
 there is no distinct breach of the partnership 
 articles, the dissolution will not be made retro- 
 spective, but will be ordered from the date of the 
 judgment. — Besch v. Frolich (1 Ph. 172) followed. 
 — The terms of dissolution in such a case as to 
 return of premium and other matters are within 
 the discretion of the Judge, and his conclusions 
 
( 1019 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1020 ) 
 
 II, PAETNEK8HIP— DISSOLUTION— COTiKnufY?. 
 will not bo intorCorod with by the Court of Apjioal 
 except on very suiBoient grounds. Lyon v. 
 TwEDDELL - - - - 17 Ch. D. 6B9 
 
 2. Dissolution by Court — Premium — 
 
 Order for Accounts being prosecuted — Summons for 
 Direction for a Return of Part of Premium.] 
 Where a Plaintiff, who entered into a partnership 
 for a long term of years and paid a premium, of 
 which in certain events, that did not happen, ho 
 was to have a proportion returned to him, obtained 
 judgment for a dissolution and an order for 
 accounts and inquiries, and after the accounts 
 had been prosecuted, asked, by summons, for a 
 direction that he was entitled to bo credited with 
 a sum aa for return of premium, the Court held, 
 that though it had the power to make an additioji 
 to the judgment, yet as the Plaintiff know all the 
 facts at the time when it was pronounced, liail 
 present to his mind the question whether he was 
 or not entitled to any such return, and came to 
 the conclusion that he was not, this was not a 
 case in whicli the relief asked for should be 
 granted, and dismissed the summons ^ith costs. 
 — In partnership cases relief is given by direct- 
 ing a return of premium as for partial failure of 
 the consideration, but such relief ought not to bo 
 granted without the leave of the Court, after 
 decree made declaring the partnership dissolved, 
 and directing the usual accounts to be taken ; and 
 leave ought not to be given unless the circum- 
 stances are such as would have authorized the 
 Court to give leave leave to bring a supplemental 
 action. Edmonds v. Eobinson 29 Ch. D. 170 
 
 8. Expulsion, of Partner — Injunction to 
 
 restrain expelled Partner from soliciting Customers 
 of old Firm.'^ A partner who had been expelled 
 under a provision in the articles of partnership, 
 and has been repaid his share of the capital, will 
 not bo restrained from caraying on the business 
 on his own account, and soliciting the old cus- 
 tomers of the firm. — Walker v. Mottram (I'J 
 Oh. X>. ^55) followed. Dawson v. Beeson 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 604 
 
 4. liability of retiring Partner — Election 
 
 to charge old or new Firm.} A firm of two partners 
 dissolved ; one retired and the other carried on the 
 business with a now partner under the same stylo. 
 A customer of the old firm sold and delivered 
 goods to the new iirm after the change but without 
 notice of it. After receiving notice he sued the 
 new firm for the price of the goods, and upon their 
 bankruptcy proved against their estate ; and after- 
 wards brought an action for the price against the 
 late partner: — Held, reversing the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal, that the liability of the late 
 partner was a liability by estoppel only, and not 
 jointly with the members of the now firm ; that 
 the customer might at his option have sued the 
 late partner or the members of the new firm, but 
 could not suo all throe together ; and that having 
 elected to suo the new firm ho could not after- 
 wards suo the late partner. Soaef v. Jabdine 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 348 
 
 Eights of partners under articles 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See Pabtnbiisiiii' — Contbaot. 3. [698 
 
 III. PAETNEESHIP— LIABILITIES. 
 
 Scope of Business — Firm of Solicitors — 
 
 III. PAETNEESHIP— LIABILITIES -coniinmd. 
 DepoHit of Bonds with one Partner — Liabilitu 
 of Firm.'] 'I'rastceH under a will deposited 
 certain bonds payable to briirer with P., a mom- 
 l)or of the firm of solifitors who wore acting for 
 the estate. His partners had no knowledge 
 of this, but lottors referring to the bonds wero 
 copied in the letter-book ol' tho firm and wore 
 charged for in > tho bill of costs of tho firm, 
 and tho bonds wore included in a «tatemont of 
 account which the firm made out for tho trustees. 
 P. paid some of tho interest of the bonds Ijy 
 cheques of the firm, but on ciich occasion re- 
 couped the firm by a cheque for the same amount 
 on his private account. P. misappropriated tho 
 bonds: — Held (reversing the judgment of Don- 
 man, J.), that tho cheques, letters, and entries 
 were too ambiguous to affect tho other partners 
 with aequiesoenco in P. having the custody of the 
 bonds as part of tho partnership business, and 
 that they could not bo held liable for thiir mis- 
 appropriation. — Ilarman v. Johnson ( '2 10. & B. fi 1 ) 
 and I<ja.rl of Dundonald v. Mastermdn (Law Eop. 
 7 Eq. 504) oonaidored. Oleatiieb v. Twisden 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 731 ; 28 Ch. D, 340 
 
 PAETNEESHIP— Action against firm— Executors 
 carrying on same business 21 Oh. D. 484 
 See BxEOUTOn — Actions. 2. 
 
 Action against firm — Judgment 9 ft, B. D. 
 
 [866; 14 ft. B, D. 103 
 
 See Pbaotiob— SurBEME Coubt — Pab- 
 
 TIES. 11, \T>. 
 
 Action against partner in name of firm 
 
 Site, Cases under Pbact'ioe — Supbemr 
 <!ouBT— Pauties. 10 — Hi. 
 
 AdmiiiiHtration action against cwtato of do- 
 
 cea.?ed partner - 26 Ch. D. 16 
 
 See Pbaotioe — SuriiKME Court — Con- 
 duct or Cause. 4. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Proof by executor of deceased 
 
 partner - - 14 ft, B, D. 394 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Pnoor. 20. 
 
 Bankruptcy- Proof by partner 16 Ch. D, 620 ; 
 
 [26Ch,D.606; 13 ft. B. D. 43 
 See Baxkbuitoy — PBOor. 18, 11), 21. 
 
 Bankrujitcy — Eiglit of solvent partner to 
 
 receive partnership assets 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 113 
 See Bankbuptoy — Eechiveb. G. 
 
 Bequest oC share of buainoss 19 Ch. D, 432 
 
 Sri; Will— SrjoAKiNG fiiom Death. 2. 
 
 Broach of trust by pnrtnor — Bankruptcy — ■ 
 
 Liability of co-partnor 11 ft. B. D. 861 
 
 Sec Bankbuptcy — DisonAEQB. 5. 
 
 Business oarrieil on by trustees of deceased 
 
 partner— Apportionment of loss 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 672 
 See Exeoutob^Administbation. 1. 
 
 Composition with creditors — Joint and sopa- 
 
 rate Hoenrity - - 19 Ch, D, 409 
 
 See Bankbuptcy— Pboteomsd TbansaO- 
 TION. 8. 
 
 Dissolution — Spoteli law - 6 App, Cas, 64 
 
 See SooTou Law — Pabtnebsiiii'. 
 
( 1021 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1022 ) 
 
 TASTSSKSSIP— continued. 
 
 Execntor of deceased partner — Costs — Ap- 
 
 See Peactice- 
 PEAU 31. 
 
 • Fraudulent pledge — 
 partner - 
 Sse Baskecptcy- 
 
 - 24 Ch. D 
 
 -SumBME COUBT 
 
 273 
 
 Ap- 
 
 Liability of innocent 
 
 25 Ch. D. 148 
 
 -Sbcueed Cbeditob. 6. 
 
 Lease of premises — Mortgage — Proof in 
 
 bankruptcy - - 19 Ch. D. 105 
 
 Se* Banehuptct — Secubed Cbeditob. 8. 
 
 Liquidation of one partner — Statement of 
 
 debts and aeaeta - - 21 CIl S. 594 
 
 See BAHKBtrPTCT — Ltqijidatios. 11. 
 
 Mortgage of share - - 30 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See MOBTGAGB — FOBECLOSTTKE. 12. 
 
 Participation in profits — ^Policy holders. 
 
 See Cases under Compajiy— Lite Ihscs- 
 
 ANCE COMPASY. 2 — 5. 
 
 Patent — Denying validity of patent — E^ 
 
 toppel 26 Ch. D. 700 ; 10 App. Cas. 249 
 See Patest — Validitt. 1. 
 
 Production of documents — Sealing up 
 
 entries - - - 25 Ch. D. 247 
 
 See Pbaoticb — Sdfbbhe Cocet— Pbo- 
 
 DCCnOS OP DOCDMENTS. 15. 
 
 Property — ^Power of executor to sell 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 138 
 See Vesbob axd Pdbchabee — Title. 7. 
 
 Bealty forming part of partnership assets — 
 
 Probate duty — Conversion 
 
 [IS Q,JBJ!L233 
 See Eevesi:b^Peobatb Duty. 2. 
 
 Satisfectionofbond - - 20 Ch. D. 81 
 
 See Setoclemest — SATispACTioy. 
 
 PASTY WALL — Cut through by contractor- 
 Liability of employer 9 Q. B. D. 441 ; 
 [8 App. Cas. 443 
 See Pbi>-c3ipal asv Agekt — Ped;cipai.'8 
 Liability. 1. 
 
 Metropolitan Buil<ling Act 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 112; 10 Q. B. D. 236 
 
 See Meteopolis — ^Bcildisg Acts. 1, 2. 
 
 PASSAGE, COTIBT OP— Leave to appeal 9 P. D. 12 
 See Peactice — Admiealty — Appeal. 1. 
 
 PASSEKGKR ACT, 1855. 
 
 See Ship — Meephast Shippisg Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 PASSEKGEE DUTY— Bailway— Sleeping accom- 
 modation - - 6 Q. B. D. 216 
 
 See Eailway Company — Pabsengee 
 
 DCTY. 
 
 — ^ Statute respecting. 
 
 See Bailwat Coiipaxy — Passzsgeb 
 Dlty — Statutes. 
 
 PASSEITGEB SHIPS. 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shifping Act — 
 Gazette. 
 
 PA8TUBE— Common of - - 17 Ch, D. 535 
 
 See Common 
 Common of— Inclosure - 20 Ch, L, 380 
 
 See Inclostbe. 3. 
 
 PATENT :— Col, 
 
 I. Statutes asd Gazette - 1022 
 
 IL Amesdhest - 1040 
 
 m -UglGSlIBJIT - 1041 
 
 IV. IxFJilXGEMEST - 1042 
 
 V. Pbacticx - - - 1044 
 
 VI. Peoloxgatios _ - - 1045 
 
 VIL Validity - - - 1046 
 
 I. PATEHT— STATUTES AHD GAZETTE. 
 The Act 46 <£ 47 Vict. c. 57, ». 113, Tepeals {inter 
 alia), 
 
 21 JameH 1, c. 3, 
 
 5 <fc 6 Wm. 4, c. 62, .. 11 
 :>&6 wm. 4, c. 83, 
 2 <£: 3 Vict. c. 67, 
 
 15 & 16 VM. .,. 83, 
 
 16 & 17 Vid. c. 5, 
 16 & 17 Vict. c. 11.5, 
 
 22 Viet. c. 13, 
 
 28 & 29 Vict. c. 3, 
 43 * 44 Vict. V. 10, 5. 5, 
 45 & 46 Vict. V. 72, «. 16, 
 amd consolidates and amende the law touching 
 letters patent for inventions. 
 
 Sect. 3. Act commenced on the 31st of Decem- 
 ber, 1883. 
 
 _ Sect. 46. " Patentee " means the person for the 
 time being entitled to the henefit of a patent. 
 
 " Invention " means any rnarmer of Tiew manu- 
 facture the subject of letters patent and grant of 
 privilege within sect. 6 of 21 James 1, c. 3 {the 
 Statute of Monopolies), and includes an alleged 
 invention. 
 
 Existing Patents.] /S'e«t. 45. — (1.) The provi- 
 sions of this Act relating to applications for patents 
 and proceedings thereon shall have effect in respect 
 only of applications made after {he commeneement 
 of this Act. 
 
 (2.) Every patent granted before the amimence- 
 ment of this Act, or on an application then pend- 
 ing, shall remain unaffected by the provisions of 
 this Act relating to patents binding the Crown, arid 
 to compulsory licenses. 
 
 (3.) In all other respects (including the amount 
 and time of payment of fees) this Ant shaU extend 
 to all patents granted before the commencement of 
 this Act, or on application then pending, in sub- 
 stitution for such enactments as would have applied 
 thereto if this Act had not been parsed. 
 
 (4.) All instruments relating to patents granted 
 before the commencement of this Act required to be 
 left or filed in the Great Seal Patent Office shall 
 be deemed to be so left or filed if left or filed before 
 or after the commencement of this Act in the 
 Patent Office. 
 
 Patekts. 
 
 Application for and Grant of Patent.] Sect. 4. 
 — (1.) Any person, whether a British subject or 
 'not, may make an application for a patent. 
 
 (2.) Two or more persons may make a joint ap- 
 plication for a pateiU, and a patent may be grwnted 
 to them jointly. 
 
 [Confirmed by i8 & i9 Vict. c. 63, «. 5.] 
 
 Sect. 5. — (1.) An application for a patent must 
 be made in the form set forth in (lie First Schedule 
 to this Act, or in such other form as Toay be from 
 time to time prescribed ; and must be left at, or sent 
 
( 1023 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 102t ) 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— co«ifZ. 
 by post to, the Patent Office in the prescribed 
 manner. 
 
 (2.) An application must contain a declaration 
 to the effect that the applicant is in possession of an 
 invention, whereof he, or in the case of a joint 
 application, one or more of the applicants, claims 
 or claim to be the true and first inventor or in- 
 ventors, and for ivhiclt he or they desires or desire 
 to obtain a patent ; and must be accompanied by 
 either a provisional or complete specification. 
 
 [The Act 48 * 49 Vict. c. 63, declares that this 
 declaration may either be a statutory declaration 
 or as otherwise prescribed.'] 
 
 (3.) A provisional specification must describe 
 the nature of the invention, and be acoompanied by 
 drawings, if required. 
 
 (4.) A complete specification, whether left on 
 application or subsequently, must particularly de- 
 scribe and ascertain the nature of the- invention, 
 and in what manner it is to be performed, and 
 must be accompanied by drawings, if required. 
 
 (5.) A specification, whether provisional or com- 
 plete, must commence with the title, and in the 
 ease of a complete specification mu^t end with a 
 distinct statement of the invention claimed. 
 
 Sect. 6. The Comptroller shall refer every appli- 
 cation to an examiner, who shall ascertain and 
 report to the Comptroller whether the nature of the 
 invention has been fairly described, and the appli- 
 cation, specification, arid drawings (if any) have 
 been prepared in the prescribed manner, and the 
 title sufficiently indicates the subject matter of the 
 invention. 
 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) If the examiner reports that the 
 nature of the invention is not fairly described, or 
 that the application specification or drawings has 
 not or have not been prepared in the prescribed 
 manner, or tliat the title does not sufficiently indi- 
 cate the subject matter of the invention, the Comp- 
 troller may require that the application specifica- 
 tion or drawings be amended before he proceeds 
 with the application. 
 
 (2.) Where the Comptroller requires an amend- 
 ment, the applicant may appeal from his decision 
 to the law officer. 
 
 (3.) The lato officer shall, if required, hear the 
 applicant and the Comptroller, and may make an 
 order determining wlietlier and subject to what con- 
 ditions, if any, the application shall be accepted. 
 
 (4.) Tlie Comptroller shall, when an application 
 has been accepted, gire notice thereof to the appli- 
 cant. 
 
 (5.) If after an application has been made, but 
 before a patent has been sealed, an application is 
 made, accompanied by a specification bearing the 
 same or a similar title, it sluill be the duty of the 
 examiner to repm-t to the Comptroller whether the 
 specification appears to him to comprise the same 
 invention, and if he reports in the affirmative, the 
 Comptroller shall give notice to the applicants that 
 he has so reported. 
 
 (6.) Whei-e the examiner reports in the affirma- 
 tive, the Comptroller may determine, subject to an 
 appeal to the law officer, whether the invention 
 comprised in both applications is the same, and if 
 so he may refuse to seal a patent on the application 
 of the second applicant 
 
 Sect. 8. — (1.) If the applicant does not leave a 
 complete specification ivith his application, he may 
 
 1, PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— rajiiii. 
 leave it at any subsequent time within nine months 
 from the date of application. 
 
 (2.) Unless a complete specification is left within 
 that time the application shall be deemed to be 
 abandoned. 
 
 [Amended by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 63.] 
 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) Where a complete specification is 
 left after a proeisiorml specification, lite Comp- 
 troller sliall refer both specifications to an examiner 
 for the purpose of ascertaining whether the complete 
 specification has been prepared in the prescribed 
 manner, and whether the invention particularly 
 described in the complete specification is substan- 
 tially the same as that which is described in the 
 provisional specification. 
 
 (2.) If the examiner reports that the conditions 
 hereinbefore contained have not been complied with, 
 the Comptroller may refuse to accept the complete 
 specification unless and until the same shall have 
 been amended to his satisfaction ; but any such re- 
 fusal shall be subject to appeal to the law offi/ier. 
 
 (3.) Tlie law officer shall, if required, hear the 
 applicant and the Comptroller, and may make an 
 order determining whether and subject to what 
 conditions, if any, the complete specification shall 
 be accepted. 
 
 (4.) Unless u, complete specification is accepted 
 within ticelve months from the date of application, 
 tlien (save in the case of an appeal having beerL 
 lodged against the refusal to accept) the applica- 
 tion shall, at the expiration of those twelve montlis, 
 become void. 
 
 (5.) Beporfs of examiners shall not in any case 
 be published or be open to public inspection, and 
 sliall not be liable to production or inspection in 
 any legal proceeding, other than an appeal ta the 
 law officer under this Act, unless the Court or 
 officer having power to order discovery in such 
 legal proceeding shall certify that such production 
 or inspection is desirable in tlie interests of justice, 
 and ought to be allowed. 
 
 [Amended by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 63.] 
 
 Sect. 10. On the acceptance of the complete 
 specification the Comptroller shall advertise the 
 acceptance ; and the application and specification 
 or specifications with the drawings (if any) shall 
 be open to public inspection. 
 
 Sect. 11. — (1.) Any person may at any time 
 loithin two months from the date of the advertise- 
 ment of the acceptance of a complete specification 
 give notice at the Patent Office of opposition to the 
 grant of the patent on the ground, of the applicant 
 having obtained the invention from him, or from a 
 person of whom lie is the legal representative, or on 
 the ground that the invention has been patented in 
 this country on an application of prior date, or on 
 the ground of an examiner having reported to the 
 Comptroller that tlie specification appears to him 
 to comprise the same invention as is comprised in a 
 specification bearing the same or a similar title and 
 accompanying a previous application, but on no 
 other ground. 
 
 (2.) Where such notice is given the Comptroller 
 shall give notice of the opposition to the applicant, 
 and shall, on the expiration of those two montlis, 
 after hearing the applicant and the person so 
 giving notice, if desirous of being heard, decide on 
 the case, but subject to appeal to the laiv officer. 
 
 (3.) The late officer shall, if required, hear the 
 
( 1025 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1026 ) 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— conio!. 
 applicant and any person so giving notice and 
 being, in the opinion of the law officer, entitled to 
 he heard in opposition to the grant, and shall 
 determine whether the grant ought or ought not to 
 he made. 
 
 (4.) The law offi,cer may, if lie thinJss fit, obtain 
 the assistance of an expert, who shall be paid such 
 remuneration as the law officer, with the consent of 
 the Treasury, shall appoint. 
 
 Sect. 12. — (1.) If there is no opposition, or, in 
 case of opposition, if the determination is in favour 
 of the grant of a patent, the Comptroller shall cause 
 a patent to be sealed with the seal of the Patent 
 C^ce. 
 
 (2.) A patent so sealed shall have the sams effect 
 as if it were sealed with the Great Seal of the 
 XJnited Kingdom. 
 
 (3.) A patent shall be sealed as soon as may be, 
 and not after the expiration of fifteen months from 
 the date of application except in the cases herein- 
 after mentioned, that is to say — 
 (a.) Where the seaZing is delayed by an appeal 
 to the law officer, or by opposition to the 
 grant of the patent, the patent may be 
 sealed at such time as the law officer may 
 direct. 
 (b.) If the person making the application dies 
 before the expiration of the fifteen months 
 aforesaid, the patent may be granted to his 
 legal representative and sealed at any time 
 within twelve months after the death of the 
 applicant. 
 [Amended by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 63.] 
 Sect. 13. Every patent shall be dated and sealed 
 as of the day of the application : Provided that no 
 proceedings shall be taken in respect of an infringe- 
 ment committed before the publication of the com- 
 plete specification : Provided also, that in case of 
 more than one application for a patent for the 
 same invention, the sealing of a patent on one of 
 those applications shall not prevent the sealing of a 
 patent on an earlier application. 
 
 Provisional Protection.] Sect. 14. Where an 
 application for a patent in respect of an invention 
 has been accepted, the invention may during the 
 period between the date of the application and the 
 date of sealing such patent be used and published 
 without prejudice to the patent to be granted for 
 the same ; and eueh protection from the conse- 
 guenaes of Mse and publication is in this Act 
 referred to as provisional protection. 
 
 Protection by Complete Specification.] Sect. 15. 
 After the acceptance of a complete specification and 
 until the date of sealing a patent in respect thereof, 
 or the expiration of the time for sealing, the appli- 
 cant shall have the like privileges and rights as if a 
 patent for the invention had been sealed on the 
 date of the acceptance of the complete specification ; 
 Provided that an applicant shall not be entitled to 
 institute any proceeding for infringement unless 
 and until a patent for the invention has been 
 granted to him. 
 
 Duration of Patent.] Sect. 16. Every patent 
 when sealed shall have effect throughout the United 
 Kingdom and the Isle of Man. 
 
 Sect. 17. The term limited in every patent for 
 the duration thereof shall be fourteen years from its 
 date. 
 (2.) But every patent eliall, notwithstanding any- 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— conit?. 
 thing therein or in this Act, cease if the patentee 
 fails to make the prescribed payments within the 
 prescribed times. 
 
 (3.) If, nevertheless, in any case, by accident 
 mistalce or inadvertence, a patentee fails to make 
 any prescribed payment within the prescribed time, 
 he may apply to the Comptroller for an enlargement 
 of the time for making that payment. 
 
 (4.) Thereupon the Comptroller shall, if satisfied 
 that the failure has arisen from any of the above- 
 mentioned causes, on receipt of the prescribed fee 
 for enlargement, not exceeding tern pounds, enlarge 
 the time aecordingly, subject to the following con- 
 ditions : 
 
 (a.) The time for making any payment shall not 
 in any case he enlarged for more than 
 three months. 
 
 (b.) If any proceeding shall he taken in respect 
 of an infringement of the patent committed 
 after a failure to ,make any payment within 
 the prescribed time, and before the enlarge- 
 ment thereof, the Court before which the 
 proceeding is proposed to he taken may, if 
 it shall think Jit, refuse to award or give 
 any damages in respect of such infringe- 
 ment. 
 
 Amendment of Specification.] Sect. 18.^1.) 
 An applicant or a patentee may, from time to time, 
 by request in writing left at the Patent Office, seek 
 leave to amend his specification, including drawings 
 forming part thereof, by way of disclaimer, cor- 
 rection, or explanation, stating the natv/re of such 
 amendment and his reasons for the same. ■ 
 
 (2.) The request and the nature of such proposed 
 amendment shall be advertised in the prescribed 
 manner, and at any time within one month from 
 its first advertisement any person may give notice 
 at the patent office of opposition to the amendment. 
 
 (3.) Where such notice is given the Comptroller 
 shall give notice of the opposition to the person 
 making the request, and shall hear and decide the 
 case subject to an appeal to the law officer. 
 
 (4.) The law officer shall, if required, hear the 
 person making the request and the person so giving 
 notice, and being in the opinion of the law offlair 
 entitled to be heard in opposition to the request, and 
 shall determine whether and subject to what con~ 
 ditions, if any, the amendment ought to be allowed. 
 
 (5.) Where no notice of opposition is given, oi- 
 the person so giving notice does not appear, the 
 Comptroller shall determine whether and subject to- 
 what conditions, if any, the amendment ought to be 
 allowed. 
 
 (6.) When leave to amend is refused by the 
 Comptroller, the person making the request may 
 appeal from his decision to the law officer. 
 
 (7.) The law officer shall, if required, hear the 
 person making the request and the Comptroller, and 
 may make an order determining whether, and 
 subject to what conditions, if any, the amendment 
 ought to he allowed. 
 
 (8.) No amendment shall be allowed that would 
 make the specification, as amended, claim an in- 
 vention substantially larger than or substantially 
 different from the invention claimed by the specifi- 
 cation as it stood before amendment. 
 
 (9.) Leave to amend shall be conclusive as to the 
 right of the party to make the amendment allowed, 
 exsept in case of fraiid; and the amendment shall 
 
 2 L 
 
( 1027 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1028 ) 
 
 I. PATEKT— STATTTTES AND GAZETTE— co»M. 
 in all Courts- and for all purposes be deemed to- 
 form part ofihe specification. 
 
 (10.) Tlie foregoing provisions of this section do 
 not apply when and so long as any action for 
 infringement or other , legal proceeding in relation 
 to a patent is pending. 
 
 Sect. 19. — (1.) In an action for infringement of 
 a patent, and in a proceeding for revocation of a 
 patent, the Court or a Judge may at any time 
 order tliat the patentee shall, siibject to such terms 
 as to costs and otherwise as the Court or a Judge 
 may impose, he at liberty to apply at the Patent 
 Office for leave to amend his specification by way 
 of disclaimer, and may direct that in the meantime 
 the trial or hearing of the action shall he post- 
 poned. 
 
 Sect. 20. Where an amendment by way of dis- 
 .claimer, correction, or explanation has been allowed 
 amder this Act, no damages shall be given in any 
 .action in respect of the use of the invention before 
 ■the disclaimer, correction or explanation, unless the 
 jpatentee establishes to the satisfaction of the Court 
 that his original claim was framed in good faith 
 ■ and with reasonable skill and Icnowledge. 
 
 Sect. 21. Every amendment of a specification 
 shall be advei-tised in the prescribed manner. 
 
 Compulsory Licenses.] Sect. 22. If on the 
 petition of any person interested it is proved to the 
 Board of Trade that by reason of the default of a 
 patentee to grant licenses cm reasonable terms ; 
 
 (a.) The patent is not being worhed in the United 
 Kingdom; or 
 
 ^b.) The reasonable requirements of the public 
 with respect to the invention cannot be 
 supplied ; . or 
 
 *(c.) Any person is prevented from worhing or 
 using to the best advantage an invention of 
 which lie is possessed ; 
 the Board may order the patentee to grant licenses 
 on such terms as to the amount of royalties, sequrity 
 for payment, or otherwise, as the Board, having 
 regard to the nature of the invention and the 
 circumstances of the case, may deem just, and any 
 such order may be enforced by mandamus. 
 
 Kegiater of Patents.] Sect. 23.— (1.) There 
 shall be Icept at the Patent Office a boolc called the 
 Begister of Patents, wherein shall be entered the 
 names and addresses of grantees of patents, notifi- 
 cations of assignments and of transmissions of 
 patents, of licenses under patents, and of amend- 
 ments, extensions, and revocations of patents, and 
 such other matters affecting the validity or pro- 
 prietorship of patents as may from time to time be 
 prescribed. 
 
 (2.) The register of patents shall be prima fade 
 evidence of any matters by this Act directed, or 
 authm-ized to be inserted therein. ' ' 
 
 (3.) Copies of deeds, licenses, and any other 
 documents affecting the proprietorship in ■ any 
 letters patent or in any license thereunder, must be 
 supplied to the Comptroller in the prescribed manner 
 for filing in the Patent Office. 
 
 Tees.] Sect. 24. — (1.) Tliere shall be paid in 
 respect of the several instruments described in the 
 Second Schedule to this Act, the fees in that 
 schedule mentioned, and tliere shall likewise be 
 paid, in respect of other matters under this part of 
 the A ct, such fees as may be from time to time, 
 with the mndion of the Treasury, prescribed- by 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE-iflonW. 
 the Board of Trade; and such fees shall be levied 
 and paid to the account of Her Majesty's Ex- 
 chequer in such manner as the Treasury may from 
 time to time direct. 
 
 (2.) The Board of Trade may from time to time, 
 if they think fit, with the consent of the Treasury, 
 reduce any of those fees. 
 
 Extension of Term of Patent.] Sect. 25.^ — (1.) 
 A patentee may, after advertising in manner 
 directed by any rules made under this section his 
 intention to do so, present a petition to Her Majesty 
 in Council, praying that his patent may be exiended 
 for a further term ; but such, petition must be pre- 
 vented at least six months before the time limited 
 for the expiration of the patent. 
 
 (2.) Any person may enter a caveat, addressed 
 to the Megistrar of the Council at the Council Office, 
 against the extension. 
 
 (3.) If Her Majesty shall be pleased to refer any 
 such petition to the Judicial Committee of the 
 Privy Council, the said Committee shall proceed to 
 consider the same, and the petitioner and any 
 person who has entered a caveat shall be entitled to 
 be heard by himself or by counsel on the petition. 
 
 (4.) the Judicial Committee shall, in consider- 
 ing tlieir decision, have regard to the nature and 
 merits of the invention in relation to the public, to 
 the profits -made by the patentee as such, and to aU 
 the circumstances of the case. 
 
 (5.) If the Judicial Committee report that the 
 patentee has been inadequately remunerated by his 
 patent, it shall be lawful for Her Majesty in 
 Council to extetid'the term of the patent for a 
 further term not exceeding seven, or in exceptional 
 ca SCI fourteen years ; Or to order the grant of a new 
 patent for the term thereiit mentioned, and contain- 
 ing any restrictions, tlonditions, and provisimis that 
 tlie Judicial Committee may think fit. 
 
 (6.) It shall be lawful for Her- Majesty in 
 Council to make, from tims to time, rules of pro- 
 cedure and pra^etice for' regulating proceedings on, 
 such petitions, and sviiject thereto such proceedings 
 shall be regulated according to the existing pro- 
 ceedings and -practice in patent matters of ffie 
 Judicial Committee. 
 
 (7.) The costs qf all parties of and incident to 
 such proceidi/n^ shall be in the discretion of the 
 Judicial Committee ; and the orders of the Com- 
 mittee respecting costs shall be enforceable as if 
 they were orders of a division of the High Court of 
 Justice. 
 
 Eevocation.] Sect.2e. — (1.) The proceeding by 
 scire facias to repeal a patent is liereby abolished., 
 
 (2.) Revocation of a patent may be obtained on 
 petition to the Court. 
 
 (3.) Every ground on which a patent might, at 
 the commencement of this Act, be repealed by scire 
 facias shall be available by way of defence to an 
 action of infringement and shaU also be a ground 
 of revocation. 
 
 (4.) A petition for revocation of a patent may 
 be presented by — 
 
 (a.) The Attorriey-General in England or Ire- 
 land, or the Lord Advocate of Scotland. 
 
 (b.) Any person authorized by tlie Attorney- 
 General in England or Ireland or the Lord 
 Advocate in Scotland. 
 
 (o.) Any person alleging that the patent was 
 obtained in fraud of his rightSi or of the 
 
( 1023 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1030 ) 
 
 t PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE-^«on.<(;. 
 " rights of any jyersen under or OirdugJi 
 
 • ' wiiom lis'dlaimsi" ■ '■ ■> ' ■> - 
 I'X'i'-) ■4"!/ person' alleging thai he,- or ariy person 
 
 J" under or through tohom he claiTm, teas the 
 true itiventor of' am/ imvenUon innludedi in 
 the claim, of the patentee. < 
 
 ^.y<Anlj person alleging'that he, or tmy person 
 
 ■ "*' •' under or through whom he claims' an 
 
 ■ ■ interest in any trade, business,- or manu- 
 facture, had ])ubliely manufactured, used, 
 or soldi withirv this reahn, before the date 
 •'■ ■ 'Of the patent, 'arvyihing- elaimed by tlie 
 
 ' patentee as his in/Uention. ' 
 ^(5.) The plaintiff must deliver with his petition 
 particulars of tlie objections on which lie means to 
 rely, and no evidence shall, except by leave o/ the 
 Court or ci Judge, be admitted in proof of any 
 objection of which the pwrticulars are not so de- 
 livered. ■ ' ' ■ ■ ■ 
 
 ; (6.). FartieularS' delivered may be from time to 
 time amended' by lea/ve -of the Cowt or a Judges 
 
 (7;) The defendant shall be entitled to begin, and 
 ■give- evidence in support of the patent^ and if the 
 plaintif gives evidence impeaching the validity of 
 tlie patent tlie defendant shall be entitled to reply.' 
 
 • (8i) Wliere a patent has been revolted^ on the 
 •ground of fraud, the Corriptrollermay, on the appli'- 
 rcation of the true inventor made in accordance 
 toith the provisions of this Act, grant to him,' a 
 patent in lieu Of andbearing the same date as the 
 date of revocation of the patent so revolted, but the 
 patent so granted shall cease on the expiration of 
 tlie term for which tlie revolted patent was granted. 
 
 Crown.] Sect. 27.-^1.) A patent shall have to 
 all intents' the lilee effect as against Her Majesty 
 the Queen, her heirs and successors, as it has 
 against a subject. 
 
 (2.) But the officers or authorities administering 
 any department of the service of the Crown may, 
 hy themselves, their agents, contractorSi or others^ at 
 any time after the applicaUmtj use the invention 
 for the service of the Croim on terms to bebefore 
 or after the use thereof agreed en'i with the ap- 
 proval of the Treasury, betiOeen those officers or 
 authorities and the patentee, or, in default of such 
 agreement, on such terms as may be settled by tlie 
 Treasury after hearing all parties interested. 
 
 Legal Proceedings.] Sect. 28. — (1.) In an 
 action- or proceeding for infringement'Or revocation 
 of a patent, the Court may, if it thinks Jit, and 
 shall, on the request of either of the parties to the 
 proceeding, call in the aid of an assessor specially 
 qualified, and' t/ry and- hear the case wholly or 
 partially with his assistance ; the action shall be 
 tried loithout a jury unless the Court shall other.- 
 wise direct. ■■.••"■■--.' 
 
 (2.) The Cov/rt of Appeal or the Judicial Com- 
 mittee of the Privy Council may, if they see fit, in 
 any proceeding hefo^e them respectively, call in the 
 aid of an assessor as aforesaid. 
 
 ■ (3.) The' rmameraticm, if any, to be paid to an 
 assessor under this section shall be determined by 
 ■the Coiirt or the Court of Appeal or Judicial Com- 
 mittee^ as the case may be, and be paid in the same 
 manner as the other eiipenses of the' execution of 
 tins- Act. ■ ■' 
 
 ^8ect 29. — (1.) In an action for infringement of 
 a patent the plaintiff' must -deliver with his state- 
 ment of claim, or by order of the Court or the 
 
 I.i'PATBiNT'i-^ftMLlCtTES AND GAZETTE— dO«M. 
 Judge, at-' miy- subsequent .time, poftioalei/n of the 
 breaches complained of . -- "-- >' '' '. " ' 
 
 (2.) The defendant must deliver' with Ms state- 
 ment of defence, or, by order of the. Court -m- a 
 Judge; at ■ any subsequent time,- particulars of any 
 objections on lohich he relies in- support thereof. 
 • (S.) If the defendant disputes the validity of the 
 patent, the particulars delivered by him must -state 
 on what grounds- he disputes it, and if one of those 
 grounds is want of novelty must state the time and 
 place of the previous- publication or user alleged 
 by him. ■ '■ - -■-,-■- 
 
 (4.) At the hearing no evidence shall, except by 
 leave of the Court or a judge, be admitted in proof 
 of any alleged infringement or objection of which 
 particulars are not -so delivered. 
 
 (5.) Particulars delivered may be from time to 
 time amended, by leave of the Court or .a Judge. 
 
 (6.) On taxation of costs regard shall be had to 
 the-particulars' delivered by-the plaintiff 'andby the 
 defendant^ and they respectively shall not be oMowed 
 any easts in respect of any- particular delivered by 
 them unless tlie same is certifiedby ihe^Gourt or a 
 Judge to have been proven or to have been reason- 
 able and proper, witlumt regard to the general costs 
 cf the case.-, ■ ; . 
 
 Sect. 30. In an action for -infringement of a 
 patent,- the Court or a Judge may, oji the applica- 
 tion of either party, make sueli -order for an injunc- 
 tion,'inspectiort or account, and impose such terms 
 and give such -directions respecting- the. same and 
 the praSeedings thereon as tlie Court or a Judge 
 may see jit.- • 
 
 Sect. 31. In an action for infringement of a 
 patent, the Court O)- a Judge may certify that the 
 validity of the patent came m questicm, ; and if the 
 Court or a Judge so certified, then in any subsequent 
 action for infringement, the plaintiff in that action 
 on obtaining a final order or jiidgment in- his 
 favour shall have his full costs-, charges, and 
 expenses as between solicitor and -dlient, wnless the 
 Court or Jtidge trying the -action certifies that he 
 ought not io have the same. ..--.■-■- 
 
 Sect. 32. Where any person claiming to be the 
 patentee of an invention by circulars; advertise- 
 ments, or otherwise threatens any other person with 
 any legal proceeding or liability in respect of any 
 alleged manufacture, use, sale^ or purchase of the 
 invention any persons or person aggrieved thereby 
 may bring an action agtiinst him, and may obtain 
 an injunction against the continuance of such 
 threats^ and may recover- such damage (if any) as 
 ■may home 'been sustained' thereby, if ilm alleged 
 manufacture, use, sale, or purchase to which the 
 threats related was not in .fact an infringement of 
 any legal rights of_ the persoii malting such threats : 
 Provided that this section shall not apply if the 
 person making such threats with due diligence 
 commences, and prosecutes an action for infringe- 
 ment of his patent.' 
 
 MiBeellaneoua.]- Sect, 33. Every patent may be 
 in the form in. the First •Schedule to this Act, and 
 shall be granted for one invehtidn-only,but ■may 
 •contain •more than one claim; but it shall not be 
 competent for any person in- an action or other pro- 
 ceeding to take any objection to a patent on the 
 ' groxmd that it comprises more than one invention. 
 
 Sect. 34._— (1.) If a person possessed of an i'ii- 
 vention dies without malting application for a 
 
 2 L 2 
 
( 1031 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1032 ) 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AHD GAZETTE— oobM. 
 
 patent for the invention, application may he made 
 by, and a patent for the invention granted to, his 
 legal representative. 
 
 (2.) Every such application must he made within 
 six months of the decease of such person, and must 
 contain a declaration hy the legal representative 
 that he helieves such person to he the true and first 
 inventor of the invention. 
 
 Sect. 35. A patent granted to the true and first 
 inventor shall not he invalidated hy an application 
 in fraud of him, or hy provisional protection ob- 
 tained thereon, or hy any use or piihlication of the 
 invention subsequent to that fraudulent application 
 during the period of provisional protecticm. 
 
 Sect. 36. A patentee may assign his patent for 
 any place in or part of the United Kingdom, or 
 Isle of Man, as effectually .as if the patent were 
 originally granted to extend to that place or part 
 only. 
 
 Sect. 37. If a patent is lost or destroyed, or its 
 non-production is accounted for the satisfaction of 
 the Comptroller, the Comptroller may at any time 
 cause a duplicate thereof to he sealed. 
 
 Sect. 38. The law officers may examine witnesses 
 on oath and administer oaths for that purpose 
 under this part of this Act, and may from time to 
 time mahe, alter, and rescind rules regulating re- 
 ferences and appeals to the law oficers and the 
 practice and procedure before them under this part 
 of this Act ; and in any proceeding before either of 
 the law officers under this part of this Act, the 
 law officer may order costs to be paid hy either 
 party, and any such order may he made a rule of 
 the Court. 
 
 Sect. 39. The exhibition of an invention at an 
 industrial or international exliihition, certified as 
 such by the Board of Trade, or the publication of 
 any description of the invention during the period 
 of the holding of the exhibition, or the use of the 
 invention for the purpose of the exhibition in the 
 place where the exhibition is held, or the use of the 
 invention during the period of the liolding of the 
 exhibition hy any person elsewhere, without tlie 
 privity or consent of the inventor, shall not pre- 
 judice the right of the inventor or his legal personal 
 representative to apply for and obtain provisional 
 protection and a patent in respect of tlie invention 
 or the validity of any patent granted on the appli- 
 cation, provided that both the following conditions 
 are complied with, narruely— 
 
 (a.) The exhibitor must, before exhibiting the 
 invention, give the Comptroller the pre- 
 scribed notice of his intention to do so; 
 and 
 
 (b.) The application for the patent must be made 
 before or within six months from the date 
 of the opening of the exhibition. 
 
 Sect. 40. — (1.) The Comptroller shall cause to he 
 issued periodically an illustrated journal of 
 patented inventions, as well as reports of patent 
 cases decided hy Courts of law, and any other in- 
 formation that the Comptroller may deem generally 
 useful or important. 
 
 (2.) Provision shall be made hy the Comptroller 
 for keeping on sale copies of such journal, and also 
 of all complete specifications of patents for the 
 time being in force, loith their accompanying 
 drawings, if any. 
 (3.) Tlie Comptroller shall continue, in such form 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— conW. 
 as he may deem expedient, the indexes wnd abridg- 
 ments of specifications hitherto published, and shall 
 from time to time prepare and publish such other 
 indexes, abridgments of specifications, catalogues, 
 and other works relating to inventions, as he WMif 
 see fit. 
 
 Sect. 41 transfers and vests the .control and 
 management of the existing Patent Museum and 
 contents to the Department of Science and Art. 
 
 Sect. 42 empowers the Department of Science 
 and Art to require a patentee to furnish them with 
 a model of his invention on payment to the patentee 
 of the cost of the manufacture of the model : the 
 amount to he settled, in case of dispute, hy the 
 Board of Trade. 
 
 Sect. 43. — (1.) A patent shall not prevent the 
 use of an invention for the purposes of the naviga- 
 tion of a foreign ship within the jurisdiction of any 
 of Her Majesty's Courts in the United Kingdom or 
 isle of Man, or the use of an invention in a foreign 
 vessel within that jurisdiction, provided it is not 
 used therein for or in connection with the marni- 
 faeture or preparation of anything intended to he 
 sold in or exported from the United Kingdom or 
 Isle of Man. 
 
 (2.) But this section shall not extend to vessels of 
 any foreign state of which the laws authorize sub- 
 jects of such foreign state, having patents or like 
 privileges for the exclusive use or exercise of inven- 
 tions within its territories, to prevent or interfere 
 with the use of such inventions in British vessels 
 while in the ports of such foreign state, or in the 
 waters within the jurisdiction of its Courts, where 
 such inventions are not so used for the manufacture 
 or preparation of anything intended to be sold in or 
 exported from, the territories of such foreign state. 
 
 Sect. 44. — (1.) Tlie inventor of any improvement 
 in instruments or munitions of war, his executors, 
 administrators, or assigns (who are in this section 
 comprised in the expression tlie inventor) may 
 {either for or ivithout valuable consideration) 
 assign to Ser Majesty's Principal Secretary of 
 State for the War Department (hereinafter referred 
 to as the Secretary of State), on behalf of Her 
 Majesty, all the benefit of the invention and of any 
 patent obtained or to he obtained for the same ; 
 and the Secretary of State may be a party to the 
 assignment. 
 
 (2.) The assignment shall effectually vest the 
 benefit of the invention and patent in the Secretary 
 of State for the time being on behalf of Her 
 Majesty, and all covenants and agreements therein 
 contained for keeping the invention secret and 
 otherviise shall be valid and effectual (notwith- 
 standing any want of valuable consideration), and 
 may be enforced accordingly by the Secretary of 
 State for the time being, 
 
 (3. J Where any such assignment has been made 
 to the Secretary of State, he may at any time 
 before the application for a patent for the inven- 
 tion, or before publication of the specification or 
 specifications, certify to the Comptroller his opinion 
 that, in the interest of the public service, the par- 
 ticulars of the invention and of the manner in 
 which it is to he performed should he kept secret. 
 
 (4.) If the Secretary of State so certifies, the 
 application and specification or specifications with 
 tlie drawings (if any), and any amendment of tlie 
 specification or specifications, and any copies of 
 
( 1033 . ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1034 ) 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— co«W. 
 mch doauments and drawings, shall, instead of 
 being left in the ordinary manner at the patent 
 office, he delivered to the Comptroller in a packet 
 sealed hy authority of the Secretary of State. 
 
 (5.) Sitah packet shall until the expiration of the 
 term or extended term during which a patent for 
 the invention may he in force, he kept sealed hy 
 fhe Comptroller, and shall not he opened save under 
 the authority of an order of the Secretary of State, 
 or of the law officers. 
 
 (6.) Such sealed packet shall he delivered at any 
 time during the continuance of the patent to any 
 person authorized hy writing under the hand of 
 the Secretary of State to receive the same, and shall 
 if returned to the Comptroller he again kept sealed 
 hyhim, 
 
 (7.) On fhe expiration of the term or extended 
 term of the patent, such sealed packet shall he de- 
 livered to any person authorized hy writing under 
 the hand of the Secretary of State to receive it. 
 
 (8.) Where the Secretary of State certifies as 
 aforesaid, after an application for a patent lias 
 heen left at the Patent Office, hut hefore the publica- 
 tion of the specification or specifications, the ap- 
 plication specification or specifications, with the 
 drawings (if any'), shall he forthwith placed in a 
 packet sealed hy authority of the Comptroller, and 
 such packet shall he subject to the foregoing provi- 
 sions respecting a packet sealed hy authority of the 
 Secretary of State. 
 
 (9.) No proceeding hy petition or otherwise shall 
 lie for revocation of a patent granted for an in- 
 vention in relation to which the Secretary of State 
 has certified as aforesaid. 
 
 (10.) No copy of any specification or other docu- 
 ment or drawing, hy this section required to he 
 placed in a sealed packet, shall in any manner 
 wliatever he pvMished or open to the inspection of 
 the public, hut save as in this section otherwise 
 directed, the provisions of this part of this Act 
 shaU apply in respect of any such invention and 
 patent as aforesaid. 
 
 (11.) The Secretary of State may, at any time 
 hy writing under his hand, waive the benefit of this 
 section with respect to any particular invention 
 and the specifications documents and drawings 
 shall he thenceforth kept and dealt with in the 
 ordinary way. 
 
 (12.) The communication of any invention for 
 any improvement in instruments or munitions of 
 war to the Secretary of State, or to any person or 
 persons authorized by him to investigate the same 
 or the merits thereof, shall not, nor shall anything 
 done for the purposes of the investigation, be 
 deemed use or publication of such invention so as 
 to prejudice fhe grant or validity of any patent for 
 the same. 
 
 Patent Opkece and Pbooeedings thebeat. 
 
 Sect. 82. — (1.) The Treasury may provide for 
 fhe purposes of this Act an office with all requisite 
 buildings and conveniences, which shall he called, 
 and is in this Act referred to as, fhe Patent Office. 
 
 (2.) Until a new Patent Office is provided, the 
 offices of the Commissioners of Patents for inven- 
 tions and for the registration of desigrls and trade- 
 marks existing at the commencement of this Act 
 shall he fhe Patent Office within the meaning of 
 this Act. 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— conid- 
 
 (3.) The Patent Office shall he under fhe imme- 
 diate control of an officer called the Comptroller 
 General of Patents, Designs, and Trade-marks, 
 who shall act under the superintendence and direc- 
 tion of the Board of Trade. 
 
 (4.) Any act or thing directed to he done hy or 
 to fhe Comptroller may, in his absence, be done by 
 or to any officer for the time being in that behalf 
 authorized hy fhe Board of Trade. 
 
 Sect. 83.— (1.) Tlie Board of Trade may at any 
 time after fhe passing of this Act, and from time to 
 time, subject to fhe approval of fhe Treasury, 
 appointthe Comptrolhr-Generalof Patents,I)esigns, 
 and Trade-marks, and so many examiners and 
 other officers and clerks, with such designations 
 and duties as the Board of Trade think fit, and 
 may from time to time remove any of those officers 
 and clerks. 
 
 (2.) The salaries of those officers and clerks shall 
 he appointed hy the Board of Trade, with the con- 
 currence of the Treasury, and the same and the 
 other expenses of the execution of this Act shall he 
 paid out of money provided hy Parliament. 
 
 Sect. 84. There shall be a seal for the Patent 
 Office, and impressions thereof shall he judicially 
 noticed and admitted in evidence. 
 
 Sect. 85. There shall not be entered in any 
 register kept under this Act, or he receivable by the 
 Comptroller, any notice of any trust expressed 
 implied or constructive. 
 
 Sect. 86. The Comptroller may refuse to grant a 
 patent for an invention, or to register a design or 
 trade-mark, of which the use would, in his opinion, 
 be contrary to law or morality. 
 
 Sect. 87. Where a person becomes entitled hy 
 assignment, transmission, or other operation of law 
 to a patent, or to the copyright in a registered 
 design, or to a registered trade-mark, the Comp- 
 troller shall on request, and on proof of title to his 
 satisfaction, cause the name of such person to be 
 entered as proprietor of the patent, copyright in 
 fhe design, or trade-mark, in the register of patents, 
 designs, or trade-marks, as the case may be. The 
 person for the time being entered in the register of 
 patents, designs, or trade-marks, as proprietor of a 
 patent, copyright in a design, or trade-mark, as 
 fhe case may be, shall, subject to any rights appear- 
 ing from such register to he vested in any other 
 person, have power absolutely to assign, grant 
 licenses as to, or otherwise deal with fhe same, and 
 to give effectual receipts for any consideration for 
 such assignment, license, or dealing. Provided 
 that any equities in respect of such patent, design, 
 or trade-mark may he enforced in like manner as 
 in respect of any other personal property. 
 
 Sect. 88. Every register kept under this Act shall 
 at all convenient times he open to the inspection of 
 the public, subject to such regulations as may he 
 prescribed; and certified copies, sealed with the 
 seal of the Patent Office, of any entry in any such 
 register shall be given to any person requiring the 
 same on payment of the prescribed fee. 
 
 Sect. 89. Printed or written cmies or extracts 
 purporting to be certified by the Comptroller and 
 sealed with fhe seal of the Patent Office of or from 
 patents, specifications, disclaimers, and other docu- 
 ments in the Patent Office, and of or from registers 
 and other books kept there, shall be admitted in 
 evidence in all Courts in Her Majesty's dominions 
 
( 1035 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1036 ) 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AlfD GAZETTE— conW. 
 and in all proceedings without further proof or 
 production of the originals. 
 
 Sect. 90. — (1.) The Court may on the application 
 of any person aggrieved by the omission without 
 suffloient cause of the name of any person from any 
 register kept under this Act, or hy any entry made 
 without sufficient cause in any such registe^'i make 
 such order for making, expunging, or varying the 
 entry, as the Court thinks fit ; or the Court may 
 refuse the application ; and in either case may 
 make such order with respect to the costs of the 
 proceedings as the Court thinks Jit. 
 
 (2.) Tlie Court may in any proceeding under 
 this section decide any question that it may be 
 necessary or expedient to decide for the rectifica- 
 tion of a register, and may direct an issue to he 
 tried for the decision of any question of fact, and 
 may award damages to the party aggrieved. 
 
 (3.) Any order of the Court rectifying a register 
 shall direct that due notice of the rectification be 
 given to the Comptroller. 
 
 Sect. 91. The Comptroller may, on request in 
 writing accompanied by the prescribed fee, — 
 
 (a.) Correct any clerical error in or in connexion 
 with an application for a patent, or for 
 registration of a design or trade-mark ; 
 or 
 
 (b.) Correct any clerical error in the name, style 
 or address of the registered proprietor of a 
 patent, design, or trade-mark. 
 
 (o.) Cancel the entry or part of the entry of a 
 trade-mark on tlie register : Provided that 
 tlie applicant accompanies his request by 
 a statutory declaration made by himself, 
 stating his name, address, and calling, and 
 tlmt lie is tlie person ivhose name appears 
 on the register as the proprietor of the said 
 trade-mark. 
 
 Sect. 92. — (1.) Tlie registered proprietor of any 
 registered trade-mark may apply to the Court for 
 leave to add to or alter such mark in any particu- 
 lar, not being an essential particular within the 
 meaning of this Act, and tlie Court may refuse or 
 grant leave on such terms as it may think fit. 
 
 (2.) Notice of any intended application to the 
 Court under this section shall be given to the 
 Comptroller by tlie applicant ; and tlie Comptroller 
 shall be entitled to be heard on the application. 
 
 (3.) If the Court grants leave, the Comptroller 
 shall, on proof thereof and on payment of the pre- 
 scribed fee, cause the register to be altered in con- 
 formity with tlie order of leave. 
 
 Sect. 93. If any person makes or causes to be 
 made a false entry in any register kept under this 
 Act, or a writing falsely purporting to be a copy of 
 an entry in any suchregister, or produces or tenders 
 or causes to be produced or tendered in evidence 
 any such writing, knowing the entry or writing to 
 be false, he sliall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 
 
 Sect. 94. Where any discretionary power is by 
 this Act given to the Comptroller, he sliall not exer- 
 cise that power adversely to the applicant for a 
 patent, or for amendment of a specification, or for 
 registration of a trade-mark or design, without (if 
 so required within the prescribed time by the appli- 
 cant) giving the applicant an opportunity of beitig 
 heard personally or hy his agent. 
 
 Sect. 95. The Comptroller may, in any case of 
 douht or difficulty arising in the administration of 
 
 I. PATEWT— STATUTES AHD GAZETTE— cenytT. 
 any of tlte provisions of this Act, apply to either 
 of the law cheers for directions in thematter. 
 
 Sect. 96. A certificate pwrporting to be under the- 
 hand of the Comptroller as to any entry, maitter, or 
 thing which he is authorized hy this Act, or any 
 general rules made thereunder, to malte or do,shall 
 be prima facie evidence of the entry having been 
 made, and of the contents thereof, and of the matter 
 or thing having been done or left undone. 
 
 Sect. 97. — (1) Any application, notice, or other 
 document authorized or required to be left, made, 
 or given at the Patent Office or to the Comptroller,, 
 or. to any other person under this Act, may he sent by 
 a prepaid letter through tlie post; and if so sent i 
 shall be deemed to have • been left, made, or given, 
 respectively at tlie time when the letter containingi 
 tlie same ivould be delivered in the ordinary course 
 of post. 
 
 (2.) In proving sucli service or sending, it< shall 
 be sufficient to prove that tlie letter was properly 
 addressed and put into tlie post. 
 
 Sect. 98. Whenever the last day, fixed by this Act, 
 or by any rule for the time being in force, for leaving 
 any document or paying any fee at the Patent 
 Office shall fall on Christmas -Day, Good Friday, 
 or on a Saturday or Sunday, or any day observed 
 as a holiday at tlie Bank of England, or any 
 day observed as a day of public fast or thanks- 
 giving, herein referred to as excluded days, it 
 shall be lawful to leave sueh document or to pay 
 such fee on tlie day next following such excluded 
 day or days if two or more of them occur consecu- 
 tively. 
 
 Sect. 99. If any person is by reason of infancy,, 
 lunacy, or other-inability, incapable of making amj: 
 declaration or doing anything required or permitted 
 hy this Act or by any rules made under tlie 
 authority , of this Act, tlien tlie guardian or com- 
 mittee (if any) of such incapable person, or if there 
 be none, any person appointed by any Court or 
 Judge possessing jurisdiction in respect of. the 
 property of incapable persons, upon the petition of 
 any person on behalf of such incapable person or 
 of any other person interested in the making such 
 declaration or doing such thing, may make such 
 declaration or a declaration as nearly correspond- 
 ing thereto as circumstances permit, and do such 
 thing in the name and on hehalf of such incapable 
 person, and all acts done by such substitute shall 
 for the purposes of this Act be as effectual as if 
 done by the person for whom he is substituted. 
 
 Sect. 100. Copies of all specifications, drawings, 
 and amendments left at the Patent Office after the 
 commencement of this Act, printed for and sealed 
 with tlie seal of the Patent Office, shall be trans- 
 mitted to tlie Edinburgh Museum of Science and 
 Art, and to the Enrolments Office of the Cliancery 
 Division in Ireland, and to the Rolls Office in the 
 Isle of Man, within twenty-one days after the same 
 shall respectively have been accepted or aVmced at 
 tlie Patent Office ; and certified copies, of or extracts 
 from any such documents shall be given to any 
 person requiring tlie same on payment of tjie pre- 
 scribed fee ; and any such copy or extract shall be 
 admitted in evidence in all Courts in Scotland and 
 Ireland and in the Isle of Man without further- 
 proof or production of the originals. 
 
 Sect. 101. — (1.) The Board of Trade may from 
 time to time make such general rules and do sitc/i 
 
( 1037 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 (- 1038 ) 
 
 I. PATEHT— STATUTES AND SAZETTE— oonic?. 
 things as they think expedient, Subjeot to the prti- 
 visiotis of this Act — • ■, < 
 
 (a) For regulating tlie practice of registration 
 
 under this Act : 
 (b.) For classifying goods, for the purposes of 
 designs and trade-marks ; > 
 
 ' (c.) For making or requiring duplicates of speci- 
 ficaiions,Mmendments, drawings, an:d other 
 documents : 
 < (d.) For securing and regulating the publishing 
 • ' and selling of copies, at such prices and in 
 
 such manner as the Board of Trade think 
 fit, of specifications, drawings,amendments, 
 and other docwments : , . ■ 
 
 (e.) For securing and regulating the making, 
 printing, publishing, and . selling of in' 
 dexes to, and abridgments of, specifications 
 and other documents in the Patent Office ; 
 and providing for the inspection of in- 
 dexes and, abridgments and other docu- 
 ments : 
 (f.) For regulating • (with the approval- of the 
 Treasury) the presentation of -copies of 
 Patent Office publications to patentees and 
 to pyilic ..authorities, bodies, and institu- 
 tiqrtiS , at home a/ad ahrpa^i, ,. . ,,, , . , , ,1 
 (g.) Oenerally for regulating, tfifi lousiness of the 
 Fatej^t Office, and all things by this Act 
 placec^, %nder. .the^ direction - or control of 
 the Comptroller, or of the, Boa,rd of Tr(ide, 
 (2.), Any of the forms in the First Schedule to 
 this Act may He. altered or amended by ruUs mode 
 by the Board as aforesaid. 
 
 .(3.) General rules may be Tna'de under this 
 section at anytime after the passing , of this Act, 
 but not so as to take effect before the commence- 
 ment of this Act, and shall (subjeetjts hereinafter 
 mentioned) be of the same effect as if they were 
 contained in this Apt, q-nd shall be judicially 
 noticed. 
 
 (4.) Any rules made in pursuance of this section 
 shall be laid before both Souses of Parliament, if 
 Parliament be in session at the time of making 
 thereof, or, if not, then as soon as practicable afte/r 
 flie beginning of the then next session of Parlia- 
 ment, and they shall also be advertised twice in the 
 official journal to be issued by the Comptroller. 
 
 (5.) If either Souse of Parliament, within the 
 next forty days after any rules have been so laid 
 before such Souse, resolve that, such rules or any of 
 them ought to be annulled, the same shall after the 
 date of such resolution be of no effect, without pre- 
 judice to the validity of anything done in the 
 meantime under smnh rules orruleorloflwmaking 
 of any new rules or rule. '- ■ - 
 
 Sect. 102. The Gbmptroller shall, before the \st 
 day of June in every lyeari cause a report respect- 
 iiig the execution by or v/nderhim of- this Ad to "be 
 laid before both Souses of Parliament, a/nd therein 
 shall include for the year, to which such report 
 relates, all general rules- made in that year under 
 or for the purposes of this Act, and an acooilmit of 
 aU fees, salaries, oMd allotoanoes, and other money 
 received and paid under this Act. - .->-'■ 
 
 ];NTEB1WTI0NAL -ANP .COLONIAL AeBANGEMENTS, 
 
 ■•-Sect. 103. — (1.) If Ser Majesty is pleased -to 
 make any arrangement with the Government or 
 Governments of Uny- foreigri state- or slates for 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— co»icZ. 
 rnutuaJ, protection- of inventions, designs,- and trade- 
 marks, or any of them, then any person who has 
 applied for protection for any invention, design^ or 
 trade-mark in any such state shall he entitled to a 
 patent for his-, invention or to- registration of Ms 
 design or tra,de-mark (as llie .case may be) under 
 this Act, in priority to other applicants ; ■ and such 
 patent or registration shall have the same date as 
 the [dateofthe application (see 48 & 49 Vick c. 63)] 
 in such foreign state. 
 
 Provided that his application is made, in the 
 case of a patent within seven months, and in the 
 case of a design or trade-mark- within four months, 
 from his applying for protection, in the foreign state 
 with which the arrofigement is in force. 
 
 Provided that nothing in this section contained 
 sImU entitle the patentee or proprietor of the design 
 or trade-mark to recover. damages for infringements 
 happening prior -to the date .of the a,ctual accept- 
 ance. of .-his. complete speoification, or the actual 
 registration of his design or trade-mark, in this 
 country, as the case mcf,y be. • 
 
 (2.) -The -publication in the United Kingdom, or 
 the Isle of Man during the respective periods afore- 
 said of any description- of tlie. invention, or the nse 
 therein during such periods of the invention, or the 
 pvhlication therein during such periods of a de- 
 scription or rcpresenta,tion of the design, or tlie use 
 therein during such periods of the trade-mark, shall 
 not invalidate tlie patent which may be granted for 
 the invention, or the registration of the design or 
 trade-mark. 
 
 (3.) The application for the grant of a patent, or 
 the registration of a design, or tlie registration of a 
 trade-mark under this section must be made in (he 
 same manner as an ordinary application under this 
 Act '..Provided that, intheaase of trade-marks, any 
 trade-mark the registration of .which has been duly 
 applied for in the country of origin may be regis- 
 tered under this Act : 
 
 (4.) The provisions of this section shall apply 
 only in tlie case of those foreign states with respect 
 to ichich Ser Majesty shall, fr&ni time to time hy 
 Order in Council declare them to be applicable, 
 and so long only in the case of . each state as the 
 Order in Council shall continue in force with 
 respect to that state. 
 
 Sect. 104. — (1.) Where it is made to appear to 
 Ser Majesty that the legislature of any British 
 possession has^ made satisfactory provision for the 
 protection of inventions, designs, -and trade-marks, 
 patented Or registered in this country, it shall be 
 lawful for Ser Majesty from time to time, by Order 
 in Council, to .apply the provisions of the-last pre- 
 ceding section, with such variations or additions, if 
 any, as to. Ser Majesty in Council jmay seem fit, to 
 such British' possession.- ', "'/ 
 
 (2.) An Order in Council under this Act shall, 
 frortp a date to be mentioned for the. purpose in the 
 Order, take effect as if its provisions had been con- 
 tained in this Act ; but. it , shall he lawiful for Ser 
 Majesty in Council to revoke any Order in Council 
 made under this Act. . ','- 
 
 Obtenoes against the Act. 
 
 iSecil'105.^-(l.) Any p^fsbn who represents thdt 
 any article sold by him is a patented article, when 
 no patent has 'Veen granted: for, the same,' or de- 
 scribes any design or trade-mark appUid' to -. any 
 
( 1039 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1040 ) 
 
 I. PATENT— STATUTES AND GAZETTE— confd. 
 article sold hy Mm as registered which is not so, 
 sIwM ie liable for every offence on summary con- 
 viction to a fine not exceeding five pounds. 
 
 (2.) A person shall he deemed, for the purposes 
 tf this enactment, to represent that an article is 
 •patented or a design or a trade-mark is registered, 
 if he sells the article with the word ''"patent," 
 ''patented'' "registered," or any word or words 
 expressing or implying that a patent or registra- 
 tion has been obtuinedfor the article stamped, en- 
 graved, or impressed on, or otherwise applied to, 
 the article. 
 
 Sect. 106. Any person who, without the authority 
 of Her Majesty, or any of the Soyal Family, or of 
 any government department, assumes or uses in 
 connection with any trade, business, calling, or 
 profession, the Soyal arms, or arms so nearly re- 
 sembling the same as to be calculated to deceive, in 
 such a manner as to be calculated to lead other 
 persons to believe that he is carrying on his trade, 
 business, calling, or profession by or under such 
 authority as aforesaid, shall be liable on summary 
 conviction to a fine not exceeding twenty pounds. 
 
 Geneeal. 
 
 Sects. 107-111 apply the Act to Scotland and 
 Ireland. 
 
 Sect. 112 extends the Act to the Isle of Man. 
 
 Sect. 113 repeals and savings for past operation 
 of repealed enactments, dc. 
 
 Sect. 114. Former registers to be deemed con- 
 tinued. 
 
 Sect. 115. Saving for existing rules. 
 
 Sect. 116. Saving for Royal Prerogative. 
 
 Sect. 117. General definitions. 
 
 The FmsT Sohedcle. 
 
 The Second Schedule. 
 
 Fees on Instruments for obtaining Patents, and 
 Menewal. 
 
 (a.) Tip to sealing. 
 
 £ s. d. £ s. d. 
 
 On application for provisional 
 protection . . .10 
 
 On filing complete specifica- 
 tion 3 
 
 4 
 
 On filing complete specification with 
 first application . • . .400 
 
 (b.) Further before end of four years from date 
 of patent. 
 
 . 50 
 
 On certificate of renewal 
 
 (c.) Further before end of seven years, or in the 
 case of patents granted after the commence- 
 ment of this Act, before the end of eight years 
 from date of patent. 
 
 On certificate of renewal . . . 100 
 
 Or in lieu of the fees of £50 and £100 the following 
 annual fees : — ■ 
 
 I. PATENT— STATirrES AND GAZETTE— confof. 
 
 Before the expiration of the — £ g. d. 
 
 Fourth year from the date of the patent 10 
 
 Fifth „ „ 10 
 
 Sixth „ „ 10 
 
 Seventh „ „ 10 
 
 Eighth „ „ 15 
 
 Ninth „ „ 15 
 
 Tenth „ „ 20 
 
 Eleventh „ „ 20 
 
 Twelfth „ „ 20 
 
 Thirteenth „ „ 20 
 
 Foreign States.] By Order in Council dated 
 i&th June, 1884, the provisions of seet. 103 of 
 Patents, Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 1883, 
 apply to : — 
 
 Belgium. Portugal. 
 
 Brazil. Salvador. 
 
 Ecuador Servia. 
 
 France. Spain. 
 
 Gruatemala. Switzerland. 
 
 Italy. Tunis. 
 
 Netherlands. [L, G., 1884 p. 2993 
 
 San Domingo.] By Order in Council, of 2,7th 
 January, 188.5, the Patents, Designs, and Trade- 
 marks Act, 1883, applies to San Domingo. 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 418 
 Queensland.] Ditto to Colony of Queensland. 
 Order in Council, llth Sept., 1885 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 4429 
 
 Koyal Arms.] Notice of Board of Green Cloth 
 
 that there is a penalty under 46 & 47 Vict. c. 57, 
 
 for improperly using the Boyal Arms. Dated 
 
 Feb. 19, 1884. - L. G., 1884, p. 887 
 
 II. PATENT— AMENDMENT. 
 
 1. ■ Clerical Error — Specification — Amend- 
 ment — Jurisdiction of the Master of the Bolls — 
 Patents, Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 1883 
 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 57), s. 18.] The 18th section of 
 tlie Patents, Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 
 1883, does not affect the jurisdiction of the 
 Master of the EoUs to allow an amendment in a 
 patent specification which has been filed under 
 sects. 27 and 28 of the Patent Law Amendment 
 Act, of 1852, or has otherwise become a record. 
 So long as it is in the Patent Office, and before 
 the patent is sealed, any one applying for amend- 
 ment must proceed under sect. 18 of the Act of 
 1883. In re Gaee's Patent 26 Ch. D. 105 
 
 2. Disclaimer — Patents, Designs, and 
 
 Trade-marks Act, 1883 (46 & ilVict. c. 57), ss. 18, 
 19 — Application for Leave to amend Specification 
 by way of Disclaimer — Appeal to the House of Lords 
 in Action relating to the Patent, after Application 
 for Leave to amend — " Action for Infringement " 
 — Pending Action — " Other Legal Proceeding " — 
 Revocation of Patent^ In an action for infringe- 
 ment of their patent, the Plaintiffs obtained a 
 judgment against the Defendants S. & H., but on 
 appeal, that judgment was reversed as against S., 
 but maintained as against H. (26 Ch. D. 700). The 
 Plaintiffs afterwards applied under the Patents, 
 Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. 
 0. 57), s. 18, for leave to amend their specifica- 
 tion by way of disclaimer, which application was 
 opposed by the Defendants. Subsequently, H. 
 
( 1041 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1042 ) 
 
 II. PATENT— AMENDMENT— oonfenued. 
 lodged an appeal in the House of Lords against 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal.) The Comp- 
 troller-General then declined to proceed with the 
 Plaintiffs' appUoation until the opinion of the 
 Court had been taken under sect. 19 of the Act, 
 as he doubted whether or not the appeal to the 
 House of Lords was a pending litigation within 
 sect. 18, sub-sect. 10 of the Act, and the Plain- 
 tiffs thereupon took out a summons that they 
 might be at liberty to disclaim : — Held, that the 
 words " other legal proceeding in relation to a 
 patent," in sect. 18, sub-sect. 10, refer to a pro- 
 ceeding for the revocation of a patent, and that 
 an " action for infringement .... pending'" 
 means an action before judgment, and that being so 
 there was no action for infringement or other legal 
 proceeding pending, and the summons was dis- 
 missed. Cropper v. Smith (No. 2) 28 Ch. D. 148 
 
 in. PATENT— ASSIGNMENT. 
 
 1. Principal and, Agent — Account — As- 
 
 »ignment hy Principal of Part of Interest to Third 
 Party — License to work Patent — Assignmeni of 
 Part of Boyalty.'] When an assignment is made 
 of a share of profits (arising, e.g., from the work- 
 ing of a patent by licensees), the assignee is entitled 
 to an account from the licensee, but the account 
 must be taken once for all in the presence of aU 
 the parties iaterested. The licensee is not bound 
 to account to the assignor and to each assignee of 
 a share separately. — ^And the assignee who asks 
 for an account must place himself in the position 
 of the assignor by offering to pay to the account- 
 ing party anything which may be due to him by 
 the assignor. — An account of profits will not be 
 directed if it is clear that no profits have been 
 made. Bergmann v. Macmillan 17 Ch. D. 423 
 
 2. Privity of Contract — Covenant run- 
 ning with Property.'] A patentee assigned letters 
 patent to A. and B., who covenanted with him 
 that they, their executors, administrators, and 
 assigns would use their best endeavours to intro- 
 duce the invention by granting licenses or work- 
 ing the patent or selling it, and that the patentee 
 should be entitled to receive £5 per cent, of all 
 net profits, whether arising from royalties, sale, or 
 otherwise, which should be received by A. and B. 
 or the survivor of them, or the executors or admin- 
 istrators of the survivor, their or his assigns, and 
 that an account of profits should be rendered 
 ■yearly to the patentee, and his share of profits 
 paid to him by A. and B. and the survivor of 
 Ihem, and the executors or administrators of such 
 survivor, their or his assigns, with a proviso that 
 after a sale had been made of the patent the in- 
 terest of the patentee in the profits should cease, 
 and a final account be come to. A. and B. had 
 taken the assignment with a view to forming a 
 company to work the patent. The company was 
 formed and the patent made over to them. The 
 patentee sued the company for an account of 
 profits. The company demurred, on the ground 
 that there was no privity between them and the 
 Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff's right, if any, was 
 against A. and B. only : — Seld, by Bacon, V.C, 
 and by the Court of Appeal, that the Plaintiff 
 could sue the company for an account of profits, 
 for that the stipulations of the assignment to A. 
 and B. amounted to a contract that the owners for 
 
 III. PATENT— ASSIGNMENT— ooniOTMsd. 
 
 the time being of the patent should [account for 
 and pay to the Plaintiff a share of profits unless 
 a sale within the meaning of the deed was effected, 
 and that no person taking the patent with notice 
 of this contract could refuse to give effect to it. 
 Werderman v. Sooibte Generale d'Eleoteicite 
 
 [19 Ch. S. 246 
 
 IV. PATENT— INFRINGEMENT. 
 
 1. — — • Chemical Process — Known, Chemical 
 Equivalents — Prodiuition of similar BesuUs.'] In 
 an action for infringement of a patent for pro- 
 ducing colouring matter for dyes the Defendant 
 alleged that in the manufacture of his dyes he 
 used a secret process entirely different from that 
 of the Plaintiffs, and he was allowed to decline 
 answering any questions in cross-examination 
 which would disclose his secret process. — In the 
 course of the arguments the Court being of 
 opinion that the patent was valid, gave the De- 
 fendant leave to state his secret process in camera. 
 The short-hand writer's notes, which would dis- 
 close the secret process, were ordered to be im- 
 pounded in Court, with liberty to apply : — Seld, 
 that where a patent is for a process arriving at a 
 known result any person may use another process 
 without its being an infringement ; but where the 
 patent is for a new result, coupled with an effectual 
 process, the patentee is protected from the use of 
 any other process for the same result. The Defen- 
 dant had not invented new materials but had used 
 the same materials and arrived at a similar result, 
 though by a process different from that of the 
 Plaintiffs and not known at the date of the patent, 
 and this was an infringement. Badisohe Anilin 
 TjND Soda Fabkik v. Levinstein 24 Ch. D. 166 
 
 2. Sale in England — Foreign Manufac- 
 
 facture — Slander of Title — Circular warning 
 against Infringement of Patent — Balance of Con- 
 venience.'] The Defendants, who were the owners 
 of patents in Belgium and England for an inven- 
 tion for making glass lamp globes, by a deed 
 executed in Belgium granted a licence to the 
 Plaintiffs to manufacture articles under their in- 
 vention in Belgium, but not elsewhere. The 
 deed contained a clause for submitting disputes 
 to arbitration. The Plaintiffs under this licence 
 manufactured articles in Belgium and sold them 
 in England. The Defendants issued a circular 
 warning persons engaged in the trade that the 
 importation and snle of articles made in foreign 
 countries under their invention, except by them- 
 selves, would be a violation of their patent. The 
 Plaintiffs brought an action to restrain the issue 
 of this circular until the matters in dispute had 
 been determined by arbitration. — Seld (affirming 
 the decision of Pearson, J.), that the grant of the 
 licence to use the patent in Belgium did not 
 imply permission to sell the manufactured article 
 in England in violation of the Defendants' 
 English patent.^5e«s v. TVillmott (Law Eep. 
 6 Ch. 239) distinguished. — Where a trade circular 
 is issued bona fide, an interim injunction will not 
 be granted to restrain it unless it is in violation 
 of some contract between the Plaintiff and Defen- 
 dant, however much the balance of convenience 
 may be in favour of granting. Societe Anontme 
 DBS Manufactures de Glaces v. Tilqhman's 
 Patent Sand Blast Company - 25 Ch. D. 1 
 
( 1043 )' 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1044 ) 
 
 rv. PATENT— IlfF»HI-GEMEra"-eoA-««etZ. -' 
 
 3' -^-^— Sale of component Parts.] Semble, 
 that an iajimotipn granted to restrain the sale 
 of a complete nuKihme, the subjeot of a patent, 
 ■will be violated 'by a sale of the component parts 
 of the machine in such a way that they can 
 easily be- put together by any one. United 
 TblephonbGompakt C.Dale 25 (Jh. D. 778 
 
 4. Slander of Title — Damages — Injunc- 
 tion.'] The holder, of a ^patent, the validity of 
 which is not impeached, who issues notices against 
 purehasiug certain articles alleging that they are 
 ipfringements of his patent and tlieatening legal 
 proceedings 'against "those who purchase them, is 
 nothabletto an action; for damages by the vendor 
 of -those articles for th&iiijtiry done -to the vendor's 
 trade by his issuing them, provided they are issued 
 bona fide in th&belief that the articles comp] ained 
 of are infringements o£ his patent.' > Nor is he 
 liable to be restrained by iitjunctioii, from con- 
 tinuing to issue them until, it is. proved, that they 
 are untrije, so that this further issutag them would 
 not be bonJ. fide. — Decision of Jessel, M,E., 
 affirmed. Halset .». Beotheehood 19 Gh. D. 386 
 
 8. Slander of Title-^TAnSai o/ Legal Pro- 
 
 ceedings — Injvnction — Patentee JOesigns, and 
 Trade-marks Act, 1883 (46 & 4:7 Vict. e. 57), s. 32.] 
 On motion under the Patents, Designs, and Trade- 
 marks Act,' 1883, s. 32,010 restraia.the publication 
 of advertisements warning the public that the in- 
 vention claimed by the applicant is an infringe-, 
 ment of patentirights claimed by the.advertisers, 
 and that all necessary proceedings wiU be taken 
 to protect such rights: should any attempt be 
 made to manufacture or supply the invention 
 claimed by the applicant, the. applicant, as a con- 
 dition precedent to obtaining an injunction, must 
 shew that there baa been no infringement on his 
 part. And if in opposition to the motion a case 
 of alleged infringement is raised by the respon- 
 dents' affidavits, an injunction will not be granted, 
 although the respondents decline to take legal 
 proceedings in respect of such alleged infringe- 
 ment against the applicant. Baenet v. United 
 Telephone Company - 28 Oh. D. 394 
 
 6. TTser — Importation and transshipment 
 
 of patented Article — Custom Souse Agents — 
 Foreign Manufacture.'] A patent was granted in 
 England for an invention rendering nitro-gly- 
 oerine less dangerous. Foreigners imported into 
 England to article compounded of nitro-glycerine 
 and other substances which they had manufac- 
 tured abroad according to the patent process. The 
 Eespondents, acting as Custom House agents for 
 theimportfirs, passed the article through the Cns- 
 -tom House,' and obtained permission (as required 
 by the Explosives Act, 1875) for landing it and 
 storing it in magazines belonging to the im- 
 porters ; — Betd, affirming the decision of the Court 
 of Appeal', that the Eespondents being only 
 Custom House agents for the importers, and not 
 tiiemselveS the importers, and having neither pos- 
 session of nor control over the goods, their acts 
 did not amount to an exercise or user of the 
 patent, and that no action could be maintained 
 against them for an .infringement of thcpatent, 
 Nobel's. Explosives Company v. Jones, Soott,& 
 Co. - - 17Ch. D. 721; 8App. Cas, 5 
 
 7, 'User — Importation and User of Ap- 
 
 IV. PATEHTr-r.IlIFEINGEffiEHT.-confe»t4«(J. i. 
 pa/ratusnmdeA'broad' according i to the Spedfieon 
 tion of an Miglish Patent — Infringement~T-IIser for 
 Experiment and ilnstruMen,] User-of a pirated 
 article for the purpose of experiment and instruc- 
 tion is user for advantage, and an infringement of 
 the patent.— The Defendant, an English electri- 
 cian, purehasedand imported from foreign manu- 
 facturers apparatus which if made here would 
 have infringed, the Plaintiffs' patent. ;. TheJDefen- 
 dant maintained that he had only purchased the 
 apparatus for examination and experiment by 
 himself and his pupils, as certain loyalty-paid in- 
 struments in his possession were too expensive to 
 be taken to. pieces ; and he iosisted that he had 
 never sold, and had never otherwise used, the apr 
 paratus : — Held, that such user lOf the pirated 
 apparatus by the Defendant was a user for advan- 
 tage and an infringement of the patent. United 
 Telephone Company v. Shaeples 29 Ch. D. 164 
 
 8. ' User — Non-destruction of infringing 
 
 Machines^] Defendants, a telephone company, 
 contracted with an American agent for the pur- 
 chase of a number of telephones. These machines, 
 known as Blake's transmitters, having been ac- 
 cordingly made in A,merica, were sent to this 
 country, and came into the possession of the 
 Defendants, who kept them unused in a ware- 
 house. The Blake transmitters were protected by 
 English and American patents. The Plaintiffe, 
 another telephone company, having in the mean- 
 time obtained an assignment of Blake's English 
 patent, brought an action for infringement, claim- 
 ing an injunction and delivery up of the machines. 
 Defendants dismantled the machines by taking 
 out the Blake elements, and kept the separate 
 parts stored in a warehouse : — Held, that the pos- 
 session of the machines by the Defendants was an 
 infringement of the Plaintiffe' patent rights ; and 
 injunction granted. — The Co-urt refused to order 
 the destruction or the delivery up of the infring- 
 ing machines. United Telephone Compa>"y v. 
 LoNBON AND Globe Telephone aud Mainte- 
 NANOE Company - 26 Ch. D. 766 
 
 V. PATENT— PEACTICE. 
 
 1. — — Amended Particulars of Objection — 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, s. il— Costs— Form of Order.] 
 In granting the Defendant in a patent action 
 after issue joined, and a day has been fixed for the 
 hearing, leave to amend his particuls^rs of objec- 
 tion, the Court wUl place the Plaintiff in the same 
 position as to discontinuing the action, or disclaim- 
 ing a portion of his invention, as he would have 
 been if the original particulars of objection had 
 contained the new instances of prior publication 
 proposed to be introduced by amendiQent ;' and 
 accordingly all costs incurred by the Plaintiff 
 subsequently to the delivery of the original par- 
 ticulars of objection -will be ordered to be paid to 
 him by the Defendant in case he elects, -within a 
 time fiixed by the order, to discontinue his action. 
 — Form of order. Edison Telephone Company 
 V. India Ecbbek Company. - 17 Ch. D. 137 
 
 2. Costs — Discretion — Patent Lain 
 
 Amendment Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 83)j s. 43 
 —Lord Cairns' Act (21 & 22 Vict. c. 27)— Sir J. 
 Holt's Act (25 (£26 Viet. c. 42).] In an action 
 in the Court .of the County Palatine to restrain 
 
( 1045 ) 
 
 V. PATENT— PRACTICE— contTOue*.' " 
 infringement of a patent the Defendanta delivered 
 particulars of objection. At the trial the Judge 
 held the patent invalid for an: objection appearing 
 on the face of it, and dismissed the action with 
 costs, stating his opinion that the Defendants 
 ought to have the costs of the witnesses brought 
 up to support their particulars of objection, though 
 they had not been called, as the Plaintiffs vir- 
 tually ,had been non-suited. On taxation the 
 Eegistrar disallowed these costs, but theVioe- 
 ChanceUor held that they must be allowed. The 
 Plantiffs appealed.— JTeM, that neither Lord 
 Cairns' Act,(21 & 22 Vict. c. 27) nor Sir J. Bolt's 
 Act (25 & 26 Vict. c. 42) made it obligatory on a 
 Court of Equity to follow the .rule as-t0:C03ta, of 
 particulars of objections laiddown by the Patent 
 Law Amendment Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict, c, 83), 
 a. 43, and that the rule which applied to Courts 
 having, no discretion as. to costs^ought not to be 
 fflllpwed by analogy by a. Court whiph has disore- 
 tion as tp costs; thati the, Vice-Chancellor , had 
 therefore power to give these costs, and thatjthey 
 must be . allowed. Paiujell v. Mort, LedreI/L, 
 &COMPAUT- -. ^: - 29Cli. D. 326 
 
 3. ^ Costs — Plaintiff succeseful on some 
 
 Issues and not on others — Certificate as to Validity 
 —15 * 16 Vict. c. 83, s. 43.] A patentee failed in 
 establishing the. validity, of his patent, but suc- 
 ceeded on the issue of infringement : — Held, that 
 the Plaintiff must pay the. general costs of the 
 action, but that the Defendant must pay the costs 
 occasioned by the issue of infringement, the one. 
 set of costs to-be set off against the other.: — a 
 oertiflcate under 15 & 16 Vict. o. 83, s. 43, that 
 the validity of a patent came in question in the 
 action cannot be obtained by the Defendant in an 
 action for infringement. Badisobe Anilin und 
 Soda Fabeik v. Levinstein - 24 Ch. D. 156 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 866 
 
 4. Interrogatories — Further Particulars 
 
 — Patent Law Amendment Act, 1852 (15 & 16 
 Vict. c. 83), s. 41 — ComTnon Law Procedure Act, 
 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. e. l25.] In a patent action 
 where the Plaintiff or Defendant, as the case 
 may be, makes out 3/ proper' case the Court has 
 jurisdiction to order dnferrogatories to be answered 
 notwithstanding the provision in the Patent Law 
 Amendment Act, 1852, for the delivery of parti^' 
 culars. — The Plaintiff is also entitled under the 
 41st section of the same Act to the names and 
 addresses of the persons by .whom 'prior user is 
 alleged to have been made as well as the places 
 where the prior user has takeii place. Birch v: 
 MaiBee - _ :- '- 22Ch, D. 629 
 
 5. . ■ Scientific Expert — Chemical Proeess.'\ 
 
 In an action to restrain the infringenient|' of a 
 patent, if there is, contradictory evidence on a 
 soientifio question, the Court is at liberty to 
 employ independent expert evidence to give ad- 
 vice upon whichthe Court may form its judgment. 
 Badisohb 'Anilin und Soda Fabbik d. Levinstein 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 156 
 
 VI. PATENT— PEOLOHGATION. , 
 
 X. Accounts of Foreign Profits — 46*47 
 
 Vict. c. 57, «. 25, cl. 4.] Se}d, that 46 & 47 
 yiot. ,c. 67, s. 25, cl. 4, does not alter the rules 
 adopted by the Judicial Committee. It is the 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES' 
 
 ( 1046 ) 
 
 VI. PATENT-^EOLONGATION— confi»tt6(J. l 
 duty ofaipatente© applying, for a prolongation to 
 produoeaccountsof all the profits received under 
 foreign patents in respect of his invention. In re 
 Newton's^ Patents - - 9App. Cas. 592 
 
 S. - — - English and Foreign Patents— i^orei^re 
 Patents ihoiild be stated in Petition— Ben'iwal of 
 English Patent although Foriign Pateiit Expired 
 — Duty of PateMie as to Ac'counts."] Where a 
 patentee, whether English orforeifen,'has obtainfea 
 ibVeign patents they should be stated" tti their 
 Lordships and the fullest information affbrded as 
 to the profits thereof. — An English patent may- 
 be renewed though a foreign one has been taken 
 outjand allowed to expire. ' A patentee should 
 preserve the clearest evidence of everything which 
 has bien paid and received on accoimt of the 
 patent. Whether or"notrhis remuneration has 
 been adequate, his -furnishing a satisfactory ac- 
 count is a cSndition precedent to his obtaining 
 an extension of his term. In re Adaie's Patent 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 176 
 
 3. - — Patents, Designs, and l^ade-marks Act, 
 1883 (ss. 25, 113) — Practice— Petition'.] Held, 
 that the enaotinents of 4e'& 47 Vict, c, 57, do not 
 affect any patent granted before the commence- 
 ment of the Act, nor any right or privilege which 
 had accrued to the patentee before or at the 
 commencement of the said Act, including the 
 privilege of applying for a renewal. In re 
 Brandon's Patent. Es parte Dott 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 689 
 
 4. Eights of the Crown — New Patent 
 
 limited in its Application,^ When a patent is 
 prolonged, if the invention is likely to be used by' 
 the Govemmeiit, it is usual to insert a condition 
 reserving, the rights of the Crown. In re Napibb's 
 Patent - ;, - - - 6 App. Cas. 174 
 
 VII. PATENT— VALIDITY. 
 
 1. Estoppel — Pa/rticulars of Objection de- 
 livered by one of two Partners in Action against 
 both— 15 & 16 Vict. e. 83, s. 41.], If a. patentee 
 becomes bankrupt, and his trustee in bankruptcy 
 assigns the patent the patentee is not estopped 
 from afterwards denying the validity of the pa- 
 tent, as against, the assignee. — So hdd, affirming 
 the decision of ,the Court of Appeal. — A patentee 
 having gone into liquidation his trustee in liqui- 
 dation assigned the patent. The patentee aifter- 
 wards Typnt into a trade partnership with S. The 
 assignees of the patent brought an action against 
 the patentee and S.,for an injunction and damages 
 for infringements of the patent alleged to have 
 Been committed in partnership. The defence 
 alleged the invH,lidity of the patent, and tlie De- 
 fendants delivered' particulars of objections, viz., 
 that the Defendants would deny the infringe- 
 ment, and that the Defendant S. would rely, on 
 their objections to the validity of;;l;he lett^x^ 
 patent on ijhe ground of want of n,ovelty and in- 
 sufScienoy of the speoiijcatipn,:^^.H'eH, reversing 
 the depisiou.of the;Cour);,pf Appealj that under 
 15 (St 16 Vict. c. 83, 8. 41, it was not necessary for 
 every one of two or more defendants defending in 
 the same interest, to deliver particulaisipfpljjeo-, 
 tions, and that the patentee was not, precluded! 
 from setting up at the trial the inyalidity of the 
 patent .on the '.ground of want of , novelty ajid 
 
( 1047 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1048 ) 
 
 Til. PATENT— VALIDITY— confe'nucd. 
 msufBciency of the specification. Smith v. Chop- 
 pee - - 26 Ch. D. 700 ; 10 App. Cas, 249 
 
 2. Novelty — Anticipation — Prior Publi- 
 cation — Book in Foreign Language — Validity — 
 Variation between Provisional and Complete Speci- 
 fication — Insufficiency of Provisional Specification 
 — Infringement — Use of Equivalent — Discovery 
 after Date of Patent — Practice — Certificate of 
 Proof of Breaches — Patent Law Amendment Act, 
 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 83), ss. 6, 43.] An instru- 
 ment wMch was alleged to be au anticipation of 
 an invention, patented in 1876, for improvements 
 in electric telephony and telephonic apparatus, 
 was described in a paper written in German in a 
 scientific journal, called the " Zeitschrift " of the 
 Germo-Austrian Telegraph Union, which was 
 published in Berlin, in 1862. The description 
 was illustrated by figures. A copy of the " Zeit- 
 schrift" was in the library of the Patent Office in 
 London, and another copy was in the library of 
 the institute of Civil Engineers in London, where 
 it was accessible to all the members, more than 
 3000 in number, and to friends introduced by 
 them. It was, however, entered in the catalogue 
 only under the head of " Journals," not under 
 the head of " Telephones," or " Telegraphs." A 
 telegraphic engineer gave evidence that, before 
 the date of the patent, he had seen the descrip- 
 tion in the " Zeitschrift," and that, though he 
 could not read German, yet, from his knowledge 
 of the technical words used, he was able, with the 
 assistance of the plates, to understand the sub- 
 stance of the invention : — Held, that there had 
 been a sufficient publication in England of the 
 prior invention before the date of the patent. — 
 But held, upon the facts, that the prior invention 
 was not an anticipation of the patented invention. 
 — A patent held void on the ground that the 
 nature of part of the invention described in and 
 claimed by the complete specification, had not 
 been sufficiently described in the provisional spe- 
 cification. — In a patent for "improvements in 
 instruments for controlling by sound the trans- 
 mission of electric currents, and the reproduction 
 of corresponding sounds at a distance," the 
 patentee claimed (1) "In an instrument for trans- 
 mitting electric impulses by sound a diaphragm 
 or tympan of mica, substantially as set forth; 
 (2) In an instrument for transmitting electric 
 impulses by sound, the combination with a dia- 
 phragm or tympan of electric tension regulators 
 substantially as hereinbefore described for vary- 
 ing the resistance in a closed circuit substantially 
 as set forth." The Plaintiffs, the owners of the 
 patent, in the instruments which they manufac- 
 tured and sold, used a diaphragm or tympan of 
 mica to receive the air vibrations produced by the 
 voice ; below this diaphragm and in its centre, 
 but of smaller size than it, was a cork, below the 
 cork was a piece of platina foil of the same size as 
 the cork, and in a cavity or box below the platina 
 was placed the substance which was used as a 
 tension regulator. The platina foil formed one 
 electrode and the bottom of the box the other, the 
 current of electricity passing from one to the other 
 through the tension regulator. The Plaintiffs 
 used for this purpose lampblack, artificially com- 
 pressed into a button. The Defendants made and 
 
 VII. PATENT— VALIDITY— coBfanuec?. 
 sold similar instruments, but they dispensed with 
 the mica diaphragm and the cork, the air vibra- 
 tions being in their instruments received directly 
 on the platina foil, below which was placed the 
 substance used as a tension regulator. The Defen- 
 dants employed loose particles of coke for this 
 purpose. At the date of the Plaintiff's patent it 
 was not known that the instrument would work 
 without the independent mica diaphragm; this 
 was a subsequent discovery. The Defendants 
 adduced evidence to shew that their instrument 
 would work equally well if the platina foil above 
 the tension regulator was removed and the air 
 vibrations were received directly on the particles 
 of coke : — Held, that in the Defendants' instru- 
 ment the platina foil acted as a diaphragm or 
 tympan, and that the Defendants had iniiinged 
 the Plaintiffs' patent. When, at the trial of an 
 action for the infringement of a patent, the Court 
 is of opinion that there has been an infringement 
 by the Defendant, but holds on a legal ground 
 that the patent is void, it will not give the Plain- 
 tiff a certificate, under sect. 43 of the Patent Law 
 Amendment Act, 1852, that breaches of the 
 patent by the Defendant have been proved. 
 United Telephone Company v. Haekison, Cox- 
 Walker, & Co. - - 21 Oh. D. 720 
 
 3. Novelty — Combination of existing In- 
 ventions^ The Plaintiff obtained in 1 874 a patent 
 for certain improvements in interlocking appa- 
 ratus for railway points and signals. Patents had 
 been previously obtained in 1870 and 1871 for in- 
 ventions of ai^paratus for similar purposes. In an 
 action for infringement of the Plaintiff's patent of 
 1874 by the Defendants it was admitted by the 
 Plaintiff's witnesses that, taking the two inven- 
 tions of 1870 and 1871 together, and discarding 
 all superfluous parts, every element of the patent 
 of 1874 was to be found in one or other of those 
 inventions ; and that no new result was obtained 
 by their combination in the patent of 1874 dif- 
 ferent from that which had been obtained by the 
 previous inventions, but it was contended for the 
 Plaintiff that the combination of the two inven- 
 tions of 1870 and 1871, effected by the Plaintiff's 
 invention of 1874, required such an exercise of 
 skill and ingenuity as to constitute the subject of 
 a valid patent. There was, however, evidence, 
 with which the Court was satisfied, to shew that 
 any person of ordinary skill and knowledge of the 
 subject, placing the two inventions of 1870 and 
 1871 side by side, could effect the combination of 
 the two in a maimer similar to that of the Plain- 
 tiff's invention without making any further expe- 
 riments or obtaining any further information : — 
 Held, that the Plaiatifi''s invention was not of 
 sufficient novelty to constitute the subject of a 
 valid patent. Saxbt v. Gloucesteb Waggon 
 Company - 7 Q. B. D. 306 
 
 4. Novelty — Prior User in British Colony 
 
 — License to use Invention in the United Kingdom.^ 
 The district of Katal is a British colony with a 
 separate Government, under a Governor appointed 
 by the Crown ; and a law has been passed by the 
 Legislative Council of Natal, providing for the 
 granting, in the colony, of patents for inventions : 
 — Held, that the validity of letters patent under 
 the Great Seal for license to use an invention in 
 
( 1049 } 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1050 ) 
 
 Vn. PATENT— VAIIDITY—cojiMnue(J. 
 the United Bangdom of Great Britain and Ireland, 
 the Ohannel Islands, and the Isle of Man, would 
 not be impeached by the fact, if proved, of prior 
 use of the invention in Natal. Kolls v. Isaacs 
 
 [19 Ch. I>. 268 
 
 5. Sufficiency of Specification — Utility — 
 
 Ambiguity — Chemical Process — Isomeric Sub- 
 stances] Two isomeric forms of a chemical pro- 
 duct N., called A. N. and B. N., were known to 
 exist at the date of Plaintiffs' patent, but one only 
 was known in commerce, the other being only 
 mentioned in scientific books. B. N. had only 
 been known for a few years, before which time, 
 and to some extent afterwards, A. N. had been 
 known as N. The Plaintiffs specification, which 
 was from its nature addressed to advanced students 
 of organic chemistry, mentioned N. as an import- 
 ant ftictor in his process, without stating whether 
 it was A. N. or B. N. — Held, by the Court of 
 Appeal (dissentiente Baggallay , L. J.), that the spe- 
 cification was insufficient for ambiguity.^ — ^When 
 the specification of a patent for a chemical process 
 applies equally to several isomeric substances, but 
 one only would produce a useful result, and it can 
 only be ascertained by experiment which that is, 
 the patent is invalid. — Observations on the neces- 
 sity of proof by the Plaintiff that the invention 
 has been worked, when the utility of the inven- 
 tion and the sufficiency of the specification are in 
 issue. Babische Anilin tjnd Soda Fabkik v. 
 Levinstein 24 Ch. D. 166 ; 29 Ch. D. 366 
 
 PATENT — Co-owners — Action by one 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 59 
 See 'Peacticb — Supreme Coukt — Par- 
 ties. 9. 
 
 Infringement — -Injunction - 26 Ch. D. 778 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 9. 
 Infringement — Proof for profits in bank- 
 ruptcy - - - 20 Ch. D. 780 
 See Bankruptcy — PEOor. 7. 
 
 Infringement— Scotch law 8 App. Cas. 873 
 
 See Scotch Law — Patent. 
 
 Statutory declaration for 
 
 See Kb VENUE — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 pateiotic fund. 
 
 The Act ii& 45 Viet. 0. 46 (the Patriotic Fund 
 Act, 1881) amends the Patriotic Fund Act, 1867. 
 
 PATJPEB — Discharge from casual ward, 
 
 See Poor Law— KeI/IEP — Statutes. 
 Metropolis — ^Poor Acts— /Stoteto. 
 
 Husband, maintenance of, by wife. 
 
 See Husband and Wife- Married Wo- 
 men's Propeety Act — Statutes. 
 
 — — Lunatic. 
 
 See Lunatic-^Jukisdiction — Statutes. 
 
 Lunatic— Maintenance 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 3. 
 
 Settlement — ^Eemoval. 
 
 See Oases under' Poob Law— Settle- 
 ment. 
 PAVING EXPENSES. 
 
 See Cases under Local GovERNMENTr— 
 Streets. 
 Metropolis — Managemeht Acts, 
 
 PAY AND PENSIONS. 
 
 See Army and Navy — Statutes. 
 PAY OFFICE OF SUPBEME COURT. 
 
 See OouET — Statutes. 
 " PAYABLE "—Vesting - - 17 Ch. D. 835 
 
 See Will — Vesting. 6. 
 PAYMENT — After bankruptcy notice — Promis- 
 sory note - 12 Q. B. D. 506 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy; 
 6. 
 
 Appropriation — Guarantee 25 Ch. D. 692 
 
 See Principal and SoEety — Discharge. 
 3. 
 
 Commencement of — Construction of statute 
 
 [6 App. Cas, 114 
 See Scotch Law — Bail way Company. 
 2. 
 
 Direction as to — ^Will — Inconsistency 
 
 See Will— Eepugnancy. [18 Ch. D. 17 
 
 Illegal, at municipal election. 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Election 
 — Statutes, 
 
 In exchange for bills of lading — Tender of 
 
 one bill only - 11 Q. B. D. 327 
 See Sale of Goods — Contract. 4. 
 — !— Interest on mortgage — Statute of Limita- 
 tions - 19 Ch. D. 639 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Realty. 
 5. 
 
 Mortgage debt — Notice to pay 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 372 
 See Moetga,ge — Eedeuption. 1. 
 
 On demand — ^Mortgagor in possession 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 283 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagor in Posses- 
 sion. 
 
 Wages in public-houses — Prohibition Act, 
 
 1883. 
 
 See Master and Servant — Wages — 
 Statutes. 
 PAYMENT INTO COUBT. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — ^Payment into Couet. 
 
 Action by remainderman - 21 Ch. D. 121 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 5. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act — Investment. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Purchase-money. 
 
 '■ Eedemption of mortgage — Bankruptcy of 
 
 mortgagor • - 28 Ch. D. 402 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance. 4. 
 
 Eestraining sale by mortgagee 
 
 [23 Ch, D. 690 
 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 3. 
 
 PAYMENT OUT OF COURT- Costs— Compulsory 
 
 purchase - 24 Ch. D. 669 
 
 See Peaotice— SuPEEME Couet — Costs 
 
 24. 
 
 Costs- Lands Clauses Act 21 Ch. D, 776 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs.' 5. 
 
 Fund of infant married woman 
 
 [16 Ch. D, 37e 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 2. 
 
C 1051 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1052 ) 
 
 PAYMENT OUT OT COVRT—eontinuM. . ' 
 
 . Lands Clauses Act; 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clatjses Act — 
 
 PUKOHASE-MONEY. 
 
 ~ — Lands Clauses Act — Practice in Chambers 
 ■ [30Cli. D. 541 
 See Cases under Pbaotioe — Sdpbeme 
 Court — Chambers^ 11 — -16. 
 
 . New Zealand— Probate in - 24 Ch. D. 177 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment OUT OE Court. 
 
 Settled Land Act 24 Ch. D. 662, 717 
 
 See Settled Laud Act — Trustees. 
 1,2. 
 
 Staying proceedings pending appeal 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 18 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Peooeedings. , 14. 
 
 Trustee Belief Act - 32 Ch. D. 635 
 
 See Trustee Belief Act. 1. 
 
 PEDIGEEE — Declaration by deceased parent — 
 Proof of birth - - 13 Q. B. D. 818 
 
 See EviDENOE I—' Declaration by De- 
 ceased Person: 2. 
 
 PEDLAE. 
 
 The Act 44 * i5'Viet.e.45 {(he Fedla-rs'Act, 
 1881) amends the Pedlars Act, 1871, 'a«d enacts 
 (sect. 2) tliat a pedlar's certificate granted under 
 the Pedlars Act, 1871, slwM during the time for 
 which it contimies in force autlwrize the personrto 
 iohom it «« granted to act as a pedlar within any 
 part of the United Kingdoin. 
 
 Selling petroleum. 
 
 See Petroleum — Statutes. 
 PEERAGE— Scotch law - 6 App. Cas. 489 ; 
 [10 App. Cas. 692, 763 
 
 See Scotch Law — PeeBagb. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 PENAL ACTION. 
 
 1. Limitation of Time — Common In- 
 former — Selling Silver Wares with Counterfeit 
 Marie— "Party grieved"— 7 & 8 Jict. c. 22, s. 3— 
 3 & 4 Will. 4, 0. 42, s. 3—31 Eliz,. c. 5.] An action 
 by an officer of one of the Companies of Goldsmiths 
 mentioned in 7 & 8 Vict. c. 22, for penalties under 
 sect. 3 of that Act, is not an action by a common 
 informer within 31 Eliz. c. 5, nor is it an action 
 by a " party grieved " within 3 & 4 "Will. 4, c. 42, 
 s. 3, and consequently can be brought more than 
 two years after the cause of action accrued :-^So 
 lield, reversing the judgment of the Queen's Bench 
 Division. Eobinson v. Cukbey 6 Q. B. D. 21 ; 
 
 [7Q. B. D. 465 
 
 2. Oath of Allegiance — Clairn to affirm 
 
 — Common Informer — Prerogative of Crown — 
 Parliamentary Oaths ^c«, , 1866 , (29 & 30 Vict, 
 c. 19), s. 5.] Where a penalty is created by 
 statute and nothing is said as to whp may recover 
 it, and it is not created for the benefit.of a party 
 grieved, and the offence is not against an indi- 
 vidual, it belongs to the Crown, and the Crown 
 alone can maintain a suit, for it- — To enable a, 
 common informer to maintain an aption for a 
 penalty created by statute, an interest in the 
 penalty must be given to him by express words 
 or by sufficient implication. — The penalty of £500, 
 " to be recovered by action in one of Her Ma- 
 
 TTSSAL ACTIOTSI— continued. 
 jesty's Superior Courts at Westmineter," whieh- is 
 imposed by the Parliamentary Oaths Act, 1866 
 (29; & 30 Vict. c. 19), s. 5, upon any Member of 
 the- House of Commons voting as such in the 
 House or sitting during any debate after the 
 Speaker has been chosen! without having made 
 and subscribed the oath thereby appointed, can-, 
 not be recovered in a.n action by a common in- 
 former, andean be suedfor only- by the Crown : — 
 So, heldi reversing th& decision of the Court of Ap- 
 peal (Lord Blackburn dissenting). Bbadlaugh 
 V. Clabke - 7 Q. B. D. 38; 8 App. Cas. 354 
 3. Remission — 22 Vict. c. 32 — LocaX Go- 
 vernment Acts — Officer interested in Contract leith 
 Lo'aal Authority — Public Health Act, 1S75 (38 & 
 39 Vict. c. 55), 8. 193.] Under 22 Vict. o. 32— 
 which enables the Crown to remit penalties im- 
 posed by statute on convicted offeuders — there 
 is no power to remit the penalty to which the 
 officers of local authorities areliabls under sect. 193 
 of the Public Health Act, 1875, for being in- 
 terested in any contract made with such local 
 authorities. Todd v. Eobinson 12Q.B. D.SSO 
 
 PENALTY. 
 
 — - Liquidated Damages — Breach of Contract 
 to pay a Sum certain^^Breach of several Stipula- 
 tions, of various importance — Forfeiture of Deposit 
 — Lien for Moneo) expended by Party who breaks 
 t]fs Contract,'] The Plaintiff entered, into a con- 
 tract with tlie Uefe:ndant, who was a builder, to 
 sell him an estate for £70,000, which was to be 
 expended by the Defendant in building on the 
 estate. The contract contained numerous provi- 
 sions, and amongst other things that a deposit of 
 £5000 should be paid by the Defendant into the 
 bankers to the joint account of the Plaintiff and 
 Defendant, of which £500 was to be paid on the 
 execution of the contract and the remainder 
 within seven months. If the Plaintiff could not 
 make a good title the deposit of the £500 was to 
 be returned, and the Plaintiff was to pay the 
 Defendant £5000 as liquidated damages. And if 
 the Defendant should commit a substantial breach 
 of the contract, either in not proceeding with due 
 diligence to carry out the works, or in failing to 
 perform any of the provisions of the contract, 
 then and in either of such events the deposit of 
 £5000 should be forfeited, and if it had not been 
 paid the Defendant should forfeit and pay to the 
 Plaintiff £5000 by way of liquidated damages, and 
 the agreement should be void and of no effect, 
 and the Plaintiff should regain possession of the 
 estate ; but credit was to be given to the Defen- 
 dant for all moneys actually expended ; and it 
 was provided that such breach should not be the 
 consequence of a misconstruction of the meaning 
 of any of the provisions of the contract. — The De- 
 fendant did not pay the £500 deposit, and alto- 
 gether failed in carrying out the contract, and the 
 Plaintiff brought an action to recovei- £5000 as 
 liquidated damages ■.-^Seld (affirming the decision 
 of Fry, J.), that the bonclition of forfeiture was 
 not intended to apply to the payment of the de- 
 posit of £500 which was to be paid on the execu- 
 tion of the contract, but to a substantial breach of 
 any of the subsequent stipulations^ and therefore 
 the £5000 was not be regarded as a penalty but 
 as liquidftted damages, the payment of which 
 
( 1053 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1054 ) 
 
 PEKALTY— ^xonfe'rwjed. 
 
 ■<»uld be enforced against the Defendant. Where 
 a contract contains a condition for payment of a 
 sum of money as liquidated damages for the breach 
 of stipulations of varied iittportanoe, none of which 
 is for payment of an aseerttiined sum of money, 
 the general rule is that the sum named is not to 
 be treated as a penalty, but as liquidated damages. 
 — But whether it would not be treated as a 
 penalty if one of the stipulations was of very 
 trivial importance : — Quiere. — ^Where there is St 
 condition for the forfeiture of a deposit for the 
 breach of various stipulations, even though some 
 of them may be very trivial, or for payment of a 
 fixed sum of money, the forfeiture WiU be enforced 
 and not treated as a penalty. — Astley v. Weldon 
 (2 B. & P. 316) ; Kemble v. Farren (6 Bing. 141) ; 
 Atkyns v. Kinnier (4 Ex. 776) ; Magee v. Lavell 
 (Law Kep. 9 C.P. 107) ; In re Newman (4 Ch. D. 
 724) ; and Betts v. Buroh (4 H. & N. 506), com- 
 mented on.^-Per Fry, J. : A man who enters into 
 a contract to expend a certain sum of money on 
 land, and after spending part of it declines to 
 perform the contract, has no lien on^ the land for, 
 the money which he has expended. Wallis v. 
 Smith - - - 21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 Action for — Criminal law 7 Q. B. D. 38, 465 ; 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 630; 8 App. Cas. 354 
 See Penal Action. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Action for — ^Interrogatories 10 Q. B. D. 459 
 
 See Pbaotice — Supreme Codbt— Intek- 
 
 EOaATOBIBS. 1. 
 
 Adulteration of food. 
 
 See Cases under Adulteration. 
 
 ■ Continuing offence - - 8 Q. B. B. 603 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Offences. 2. 
 
 Default of performance of condition 
 
 [16 Ch. B. 675 
 See Bankruptcy^ AcT' OF Bankruptcy. 
 22. 
 
 Parliamentary Oaths Act - 7 ft. B. D. 38 ; 
 
 [14 ft. B. B. 667 
 
 See Parliament — ^Election. 2, 3. 
 
 • Public Health Act. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Penalties — Statutes. 
 
 Unqualified person acting as solicitor 
 
 [9 ft. B. S. 1 ; 8 App. Cas. 407 
 See Solicitor — ^Unqualified. 4. 
 
 Vestry — Member interested in cbntract 
 
 [lift. B.B; 533 
 
 See Metropolis — ^Management Acts. 
 16. 
 
 PENANG— Law of - - 7 App. Cas. 172 
 See Colonial Law — Straits Settle- 
 ments. 1. 
 
 PENSEN'TE LITE — ^Assignment of cause of action 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 121 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Parties. 6. 
 
 PENBING BUSINESS — Eomuneration of solicitgr 
 
 [29 Ch. B. 608 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 24, 
 
 PENBING PBOCEEBINGS— Administration ac- 
 tion — ^Appointment .of new trustees 
 
 [24 Ch. B. 668 
 
 See -Settlement — Powers. 17. 
 
 Administration action — New practice — Ee- 
 
 ferenoe to Chambers - 25 Ch. B. 66 
 See PraOtioe — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 7. 
 
 Administration action — ^Sale under Settled 
 
 Land Act ' - - 30 Ch. B. 531 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Tenant for 
 Life. 1. 
 — ^ Costs of trustee — New and Old Eules of 
 Court - - 29 Ch. B. 495 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 6. 
 
 Default in pleading — New practice 
 
 [25 Ch, B. 68 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 2. 
 
 Final determination of controversy 
 
 [18 Ch. B. 644 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 
 CEIVER. 1. 
 Legal demand - ' - 21 Ch. B. 278 
 
 See WitiL— -Condition. 1. 
 
 Liquidation — Adjudication of bankruptcy 
 
 [24 Ch. B. 35 
 See Bankruptcy— Liquidation. 6. 
 
 Stay of action - - - 10 P. B. 141 
 
 /See Practice — Admiralty — Lis Alibi 
 Pendens. 2. 
 
 Patent — Action — Amendment of specifica- 
 tion of - - - 28 Ch. D. 148 
 See Patent— Amendment. 2. 
 
 Transfer to Supreme. Court — ^Insolvency 
 
 /See Insolvency. , [20 Ch. B. 637 
 
 — — Voluntary winding-up^-Transfer of shares 
 
 [25 Ch. B. 118 
 
 See Company — Shares —Transfer. 7. 
 
 PENSION. 
 
 Civil Service Pension.] The Act 44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 44 (the Superannuation Act, 1881) extendi the 
 Superarmaati(m Act , Amendment Act, 1873, to cer- 
 tain persons admitted into subordinate situations 
 in the departments of the-Postmaster General and 
 the Commissioners of Ser Majesty's Works and 
 Public Buildings. The Act 47 & 48 Vict. e. 57, 
 further extends the Superannuation Act Amend- 
 ment Act, 1873. 
 
 Commutation of Pensions.] OThe Act 45 & 46 
 Vict. c. 44, amends the Pensions Gommmtation Act, 
 1871, and empowers the Treasury to commute a 
 portion of a pension. 
 
 Indian officer — Sequestration 8 P. B. 163 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Sequestra- 
 tion. 
 
 — ;— I Judg? of colony^Bankruptcy 21 Ch. B. 85 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets, ', 13. 
 
 Retired incumbent - - 17 Ch. B. 1 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clergy. 3. 
 
 PEPPEKCOEN BENT— Eeceipt for 28 Ch. B. 661 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. B. 344 
 See Vendor and Purchasee— Title. 2 
 
( 1055 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1056 ) 
 
 PEE STIBPES — " According to the stocks " 
 
 See Will— Class. 1. [24 Ch. D, 664 
 
 PEECENTAGE — Kemuneration of solicitor 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 301 
 
 See SoLiciTOK — ^Bill of Costs. 19. 
 
 PEEllS OF THE SEAS 6 Q. B. D. 648 ; 7 App. 
 
 [Cas, 670 
 See Insurance, Mabinb— Policy. 2. 
 
 PEEIOD OF DISTEIBUTION — Erroneous refer- 
 ence to - 16 Ch. D. 212 
 
 See Will — Vesting. 7. 
 
 PEEJUEt — Commissioners to inquire into cor- 
 rupt practices — Indictment — Informa- 
 tion - - - 8 Q. B. D. 267 
 See Cbxhinal Law — Evidence. 4. 
 
 Sentence — Two counts - 6 App. Cas. 229 
 
 See Ceiminal Law — Peactice. 2. 
 
 PEEMANENT IMPEOVEMENTS— Capital or in- 
 come - 27 Ch. D. 196 
 
 See Settlement — Powees. 7. 
 
 Mortgagee in possession 21 Ch. D. 469 
 
 See Moktgaqe — ^Moetgagee in Posses- 
 sion^ 5. 
 PEEPETUITT — Covenant to reconvey 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 562 
 See Lands Clauses Act — SrPEEFLrors 
 Lands. 2. 
 
 Power of appointment 29 Ch. D. 521 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 172 
 See Power — Execution. 12, 18. 
 
 Power of re-entry - 25 Ch, D. 629 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 1. 
 
 Power of sale— Settlement - 19 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Settlement — Powees. 15. 
 
 Will — Construction. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Perpetuity. 
 
 PEESIAN lAW— Proof of - 6 P. D. 6 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 6. 
 
 " PEESON " — Meaning of — Notice of action 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 365 
 See Colonial Law — ^^'ICTORIA. 4. 
 PEESOK A6GEIEVED — Appeal in bankruptcy 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 518 
 See Bankeuptcy — ^Teustee. 7. 
 
 —^ Bankruptcy — Complaint against trustee 
 
 [16 Ch. B. 497 
 See Bankeuptcy — ^Receiver. 2. 
 
 Kecovery of penalty - 7 ft. B. D. 465 
 
 Ses Penal Action. 1. 
 
 Eegistration of trade-mark 25 Ch. D. 194 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 48 
 See Trade-mark — ^Eegistration. 14, 15. 
 
 PEESONa; DESIGNATa: - 25 Ch. D. 162 
 
 See Will — Class. 5. 
 
 PEESONAL ACTION— Dying with the person 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 484 ; 24 Ch. D. 439 ; 9 ft. B. D. 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Actions. 1, 2, 3. [110 
 
 PEESONAI OBLIGATION- Conveyance of herit- 
 able property 6 App. Cas. 295 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 3. 
 
 PEESONAL EEPEESENTATIVE— Power to dis- 
 pense with - 19 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 1. 
 
 PETITION— Adjudication of bankruptcy — ^Peti- 
 tioning creditor's debt 16Ch. D. 283; 
 [22 Ch. D. 132 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 1, 5. 
 
 Adjudication of bankruptcy — Offer to give 
 
 up security - 20 Ch. D. 289 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 8. 
 
 Adjudication of bankruptcy — Surety 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 44 
 See Principal and Surety — Contribu- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 Adjudication of bankruptcy — Trader 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 394 
 See Bankruptcy — Trader. 2. 
 
 Company — Reduction of capital — Sanction 
 
 of Comt 23 Ch. D. 542 ; 29 Ch. D. 683 
 See Company —Reduction of Capital. 
 3.4. 
 
 Liquidation 24 Ch. D. 35 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Liquidation. 6. 
 
 Re-transfer of stock — National Debt Com- 
 missioners - 25 Ch. D. 231 
 See National Debt Commissioners. 
 
 Settled Estates Act — Persons to present 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 238 
 See Settled Estates Act. 4. 
 
 Winding-up. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Winding-up 
 Order. 
 
 Winding-up — Inspection of documents 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 106 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 3. 
 
 Winding-up — Policy-holders 16 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Company — Life Insurance Com- 
 pany. 2. 
 
 Withdrawal of — Filing of second petition 
 
 [6 P. D. 10 
 See Practice — Divorce — Pleading. 2. 
 
 PETITION OF EIGHT— Canada 9 App. Cas. 745 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 7. 
 
 Natal — Jurisdiction - 6 App. Cas. 619 
 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 1. 
 
 PETEOLEUM. 
 
 The Acta & 45 Vict. e. 67 {Petroleum Sawhers 
 Act, 1881), s. 1, empowers any person who is 
 licensed in pvrsiiance of the Petroleum, Act, 1871, 
 to keep petroleum to which that Act applies, sub- 
 ject to the enactments for the time being in force 
 with respect to hawhers and pedlars, to hawk such 
 petroleum by himself or his servants. 
 
 Sect. 2 prescribes the regulations to be observed 
 in the hawking of petroleum. The Act to apply to 
 any petroleum other than that to which the Petro- 
 leum Act, 1871, applies while in any carriage used 
 for file hawking of petroleum to which the Petroleum 
 Act, 1871, applies. 
 
 Penalty for any contravention of tlie preserved 
 regulation. 
 
 Sect. 3 modifies the conditions annexed to licenses 
 granted under the Petroleum Act, 1881. 
 
( 1057 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1058 ) 
 
 r'ET'ROIi'EVTa.— continued. 
 
 Sect, i-empowers a constable to seize and detain 
 petroleum where he has reasonable cause to believe 
 a contravention of the Act is being committed. 
 
 Sect. 5 saves rights of municipal boroughs. 
 
 Sect. 6 defines the expressions "carriage" and 
 " hawker of petroleum." 
 
 PHARMACY ACTS. 
 
 Nux vomica.] Order in Council under the 
 Pharmacy Act, 1868, 31 & 32 Vict. v. 121, ». 2, de- 
 claring nux vomica and its preparations to be 
 poison. 2Sth of July, 1882 L, 0. 1882, p. 3514 
 
 Poison, Sale of ~ Label — Name and Ad- 
 dress of " Seller"— Pharmacy Act, 1868 (31 & 32 
 Vict. c. 12 1), s. 17.] The Pharmacy Act, 1868 
 (31 & 32 Vict. 0, 121), sect. 17, enacts that it shall 
 be unlawful to sell any poison unless the box, 
 bottle, vessel, wrapper, or cover in which such 
 poison is contained be distinctly labelled with the 
 name of the article and the word poison, and with 
 the name and address of the seller of the poison, 
 and any person selling poison otherwise shall 
 upon summary conviction be liable to a penalty, 
 and for the purposes of this section the person on 
 whose behalf any sale is made by any apprentice 
 or servant shall be deemed to be the seller. — The 
 Eespondent sold at his shop in Friar Street, Ox- 
 ford, a packet of poison labelled only, " W. Pater- 
 son, chemist and druggist, 3, Cowley Eoad, Ox- 
 ford" — the name and address of a registered 
 chemist who had supplied the poison to the Ee- 
 spondent, and paid him a commission on the sale : 
 — Seld, that the Eespondent was the " seller," 
 with whose name and address the packet should 
 have been labelled, and he was liable to a penalty 
 under sect. 17, which applies to the person keeping 
 the shop or conducting the business in which the 
 sale is made. Templeman v. Tbapfokd 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 397 
 PHOTOGBAPH— " Author '—Copyright 
 
 [11 Q, B. D. 627 
 
 See COFIEIGHT — ^PlCTUBES. 
 
 PHYSICIAN— Gift to— Fiduciary relation 
 
 See Gift. [8 ft. B. D. S87 
 
 PILOT— PILOTAGE. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Pilot. 
 
 PIAINTirr— Adding Plaintiff 17 Ch. D. 169 ; 
 [13 Ch. S. 66 ; 29 Ch. D. 190, 684 
 
 See Peactice — Supbeme Coubt— Pab- 
 TIBS. 1 — 4. 
 Death of— Eevivor - - 24 Ch. D. 126 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supeeme Coubt — 
 Change of Pabties. 7. 
 
 PLACE or ELECTIOHT- Parliament 
 
 See Paeliament — Eedisteibiitioii op 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 
 PLACES OF WOBKSHOP SITES AMENDMENT 
 ACT, 1882, 
 
 See Chuech Bdildins Acts — Statutes. 
 
 PLATE— Duty on. 
 
 See Kevenue — Customs — Statutes. 
 
 PLEADING — Action by freemen of borough — 
 Custom of borough - 21 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Municipal Coepobation — Pbo- 
 
 PEBTY. 
 
 PLEADING— oonJi'n ued. 
 
 Action on guarantee - 8 App. Cas. 765 
 
 See Peinoipal and Sueety — Dischaege. 
 1. 
 
 Admiralty Court. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Admiealtt 
 — Pleading. 
 
 — =- Amendment of— Supreme Court 
 
 See Oases under Peactice — Supeeme 
 CouET — Amendment. 
 
 Amendment of 16 Ch. D. 440; 19 Ch. D. 22 
 
 See Easement. 2. 
 
 Copyright action - 23 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See Copteight — Books. 3. 
 
 Divorce Court. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Divoece. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Courts. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Ecclesias- 
 tical. 
 
 Facts not stated — ^Libel — Justification 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 See Defamation — Libel. 2. 
 
 Probate Court — Embarreissing matter — Ap- 
 peal from chambers - 9 P. D. 68 
 See Peactice — Peobate — Pleading. 
 
 Slander 11 Q. B. D, 609 ; 6 App. Cas, 156 
 
 See Defamation — Slandee. 1, 2. 
 
 Striking out 26 Ch. D. 470, 778 ; 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 190 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Coubt — Steik- 
 iNG OUT Pleadings. 1. 2, 8. 
 
 Supplemental action against successors in 
 
 title - - 17 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Local Autho- 
 
 EITT. 13. 
 
 Supreme Court. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Supeeme. 
 Coubt. 
 PLEDGE — BUI of lading— Indorsement 
 
 [13 Q. B. D, 159 ; 10 App. Cas. 74 
 See Ship — Bill op Lading. 4. 
 
 Shares in company - - 26 Ch. D. 257" 
 
 See Company — Shaees — Teansfee. 1. 
 
 FLTTBALITIES. 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clebgy — 
 Statutes. 
 
 POACHING — Search by constable in highway 
 
 See Game. 2. [14 Q. B. D. 725 
 
 POISON— Sale— Pharmacy Act 8 Q. B. D. 397- 
 
 See Phabmact Acts. 
 
 Sale — Nux vomica. 
 
 See Phaemacy Acts — Gazette. 
 
 POLICE — Constable — ^Notice of action 
 
 See Constable. [14 Q. B. D. 720 
 
 Constable — In boroughs 
 
 See Municipal Cobpoeation — Consti- 
 tution — Statute 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50, 
 Pabts IX. and x. 
 
 Constable — Allowance — Attachment of debt 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 8 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Oouet — Gar- 
 nishee Oedebs. 10. 
 
 2 M 
 
( 1059 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( lOGO ) 
 
 POLICE ACTS. 
 
 See Metbopolis- 
 
 -PoLioE Acts— Statutes. 
 
 POLICE STATION— Income tax 10 Q. B. D. 267; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 61 
 
 See Revenue — Income Tax. 1. 
 
 POLICY OF INSirSANCE— Fire. 
 
 See Cases under Inbtjeanoe, Fire. 
 
 • Fire — Law of Canada 
 See Colonial Law- 
 3. 
 ■ Life. 
 
 - 7 App. Cas. 96 
 -Canada — Ontakio. 
 
 See Cases under Insueanoe, Life. 
 
 Life — Assignment — Payment in absence of 
 
 representatives of persons insured 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 534 
 See Peaotioe — Supeeme Couet — Par- 
 ties. 7. 
 
 Life — Covenant by surety to pay premiums 
 
 —Eight to securities 19 Ch. D. 615 
 
 See Peincipal and Sueett — Indemnity. 
 2. 
 
 Life — Husband — Settled to separate use — 
 
 Contract by wife - 23 Ch. D. 712 
 
 See Husband and 'VVifb — Separate 
 Estate. 7. 
 
 Life — MaiTied Women's Property Act — 
 
 Separate use - - 23 Ch. D. 525 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 236 
 See Husband and Wipe — Maeeied Wo- 
 men's Peopeety Acts. 4, 5. 
 
 Life — Notice of charge — Priority 
 
 [28 Ch, D. 674 
 See Mortgage — Peioeity. 13. 
 
 Life— Sureties 24 Ch. D. 709 
 
 See Principal and Sueett — Conteibu- 
 
 TION. 2. 
 
 Marine. 
 
 See Cases under Insurance, Marine. 
 
 POLICY-HOLDER- Participating— Contributoiy. 
 See Cases under Company — Life In- 
 surance Company. 
 
 POLL— Meeting of shareholders. 29 Ch. D. 159 
 See Company — BIanagement. 3. 
 
 Mimicipal election 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Election 
 ■ — Statutes. 
 
 Parliament — ^Houra of 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 Parliament — Leave of absence to employe's 
 
 See Parliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 POOE-LAW :— 
 
 I. Management 
 
 Col. 
 1060 
 
 ■ Eight to demand - 
 See Public Libeart. 
 
 8 Q. B. B, 459 
 
 Time for demanding 11 Q. B. D. 282 
 
 See Highway — Waywarden. 
 
 POLLING DISTEICTS 
 
 See Parliament — Eegistration — 
 Statutes. 
 
 POLLXTTION— Stream - - 20 Ch. D. 595 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 688 
 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 1, 5. 
 
 Underground water - 29 Ch, D. 116 
 
 See Water. 3. 
 
 II. Maintenance - - _ 1061 
 
 IIL Relief - - _ 1061 
 
 IV. Settlement (and Eemoval) 1062 
 
 (a.) Derivative Settlement. 
 (6.) Husband and Wife. 
 (e.) Residence. 
 L POOE LAW— MANAGEMENT. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Viet. c. 58 (tlie Divided Farishes 
 and Poor Law Amendment Act, 1882), amends the 
 Divided Farishes and Foor Law Act, 1876. 
 
 (a.) Divided Farishes. 
 
 Sect. 2. Detached parts of parishes to form part 
 of the parishes surrounding tliem. 
 
 Sect. 3. Provision for parishes not separately 
 maintaining highway. 
 
 Sect. 4. Detached parts with a population ex- 
 ceeding 300 may lie made separate parislies. 
 
 Sect. 5. Provision as to school districts. 
 
 Sect. 6 extends 39 <fc 40 Vict. c. 61, s. 5, to any 
 parish in a highway district. 
 
 Sect. 7. Interpretation of county. 
 
 (b.) Foor Law Amendment. 
 
 Sect. 8. Power to Local Government Board to alter 
 wards for the election of guardians in certain cases. 
 
 Sect. 9. Adjustment of liabilities in asylum dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 Sect. 10. Provision for separate rate. 
 
 Sect. 11. Adjustment of liabilities not to he re- 
 quired in certain cases. 
 
 Sect. 12. Mode of consent by guardians and 
 manager. 
 
 Sect. 13. As to maintenance and education of 
 pauper children by guardians of union. 
 
 Sect. 14. Repeal of enactments. 
 
 Register of Securities to be kept. 
 
 Register.] General Order of Local Government 
 Board of December Sth, 1882, under 45 & 46 Vict, 
 c. 58, s, 14, prescribing register of securities to be 
 hept by guardians - L. G. 1882, p. 6252 
 
 Expenses of Guardians.] The Act 46 <fc47 Vict. 
 c. 11 (^Poor Law Conferences Act, 1883), provides 
 for the expenses incurred by guardians of the poor 
 in relation to Poor Law Conferences. 
 
 Order of Septeniber 13, 1883, of Local Govern- 
 ment Board- empowering guardians of the poor 
 under the Foor Law Conferences Act, 1883, s. 2, to 
 pay the reasonable expenses incurred in attending 
 any conference under that section 
 
 [L. G. 1883, p. 4585 
 
 Election of Guardians.] General Order of 
 29ft of October, 1881, of the Local Government 
 Board altering the General Order of 1877 
 
 [L. G. 1881, p. 5356 
 
 ' Overseers of Parish — Bill in Parliament 
 
 affecting Parish — Opposition by Overseers — Costs 
 of Opposition.'] A private bill before Parliament 
 provided for the punctual payment of interest on 
 the share capital of the undertaking for which 
 authority was sought by declaring that the over- 
 seers of the parish in which the undertaking was 
 situated should, when required to do so, raise as 
 part of the poor-rate money for the payment of 
 such interest. The overseers, with the authority 
 of the vestry, successfully opposed the bill, and in 
 
( 1061 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1062 ) 
 
 I. POOB-lAW— MANAGEMENT— oojiiTOMec?. 
 
 60 doing incurred certstiii expenses wliioli were 
 not immoderate and were allowed by the audi- 
 tor : — Held, reversing the decision of the Queen's 
 Bench Division, that the overseers were entitled 
 ■to charge the expenses so incurred upon the poor- 
 late. The Qceen v. "White 11 Q. B. D. 309 ; 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 358 
 
 II. POOR-LAW— MAINTENANCE. 
 
 1. Married Woman — Rusband and Wife 
 
 — Non-liability of Sasband to maintain Adul- 
 terous Wife—il & 32 Vict. e. 122, s. 33.] A 
 husband is not liable to be ordered, under 31 & 82 
 Vict. c. 122, s. 33, to maintain a wife with whom 
 he has ceased to cohabit in consequence of her 
 adultery. Gullet v. Chaeman 7 Q. B. D. 89 
 
 2. Married Woman — Order upon Bus- 
 hand towards Cost of Belief— 31 & 32 Vict. c. 122, 
 e. 33.] It is not a condition precedent to tlie 
 power of justices under 31 & 32 "Vict. c. 122, s. 33, 
 to order the husband to pay for the maintenance 
 of his pauper wife, that the guardians should 
 have fixed the sum for her relief. Therefore, 
 although the guardians have not fixed any sum 
 for her future relief, but have given her a small 
 weekly sum, the justices may, under the 33rd 
 section, order the husband to pay for her mainte- 
 nance such weekly sum as, considering the condi- 
 tion of the husband and all the circumstances, may 
 tie proper, although it may exceed the amount of 
 "the relief previously given to her by the guardians. 
 — Decision, of the Queen's Bench Division reversed. 
 Dinning v. Socth Shields Union 12 Q. B, D. 61 ; 
 
 [13 a. B. D. 25 
 
 3. • Married Woman — Maintenance hy Re- 
 lations — Grandmother ■ — ■ Married Woman with 
 Separate Estate — iS Eliz. c. 2, s. 7 — Married 
 
 Women's Property Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 93), 
 ■s. 14.] A woman whose husband is alive is not 
 liable under the Poor Law Acts to contribute 
 to the support of her grandchildren, even though 
 she has separate estate and is able, indepen- 
 dently of her husband, to support them. Cole- 
 man V. Ovbkseees of Biemingham 6 Q,, B, D. 615 
 
 III. POOH LAW— EELIEP. 
 
 Allotments for the Poor.] The Act 45 & 46 
 Vict. c. 80 (the Allotments Extension Act, 1882) 
 extends the benefits of the Act 2 Will. 4, c. 42, to 
 all the irremovedble poor, and to all lands, whether 
 cultivated or uncultivated, held for the heriefit of 
 the poor as thereinafter described, and provides a 
 summary remedy for the recovery of arrears of 
 rent and of possession where tenant refuses to quit. 
 
 Discharge of Pauper.] The Act 45 & 46 Vict. 
 V. 36 (the Casual Poor Act, 1882), repeals sect. 5 
 of the Pauper Inmates Discharge and Hegulation 
 Act, 1871, and enacts (sect. 4) tliat a casual pauper 
 shall, not he entitled, to discharge himself from a 
 casual ward before 9 o'cloch in the morning of the 
 second day following his admission, nor before lie 
 lias performed the worh prescribed for Mm. 
 , Provision for case where u, casual pauper has 
 been admitted on more than one occasion into any 
 casual ward of the same union. 
 
 Sect.. 5. Person obtaining poor relief hy false 
 statement to.be dealt with as a dispr^rly person 
 wider, sect. 3 of 5 Oeo. 4, c. 83. 
 
 Local Government Board.] Begulaiions of 18ft 
 
 III. POOE-LAW— REIIEF- 
 
 Deoember, 1882, loith respect to casual paupers 
 under ^^ Pauper Inmates Discharge and Regula- 
 tion Act, 1871," and " Casual Poor Act, 1882 " 
 
 [I. 0. 1882, p. 6461 
 Casual Paupers.] Oeneral Order of Local 
 Government Board. Regulations of December 21, 
 1882, with respect to casual paupers 
 
 [L. G. 1882, p. 6520 
 
 IV.POOE-LAW— SETTLEMENT(andBEMOVAL) 
 
 (a.) Derivative Settlement. 
 
 1, Children — Divided Parishes and Poor 
 
 Law Amendment Act, 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61), 
 s. 35.] Where the settlement of a widowed 
 mother, as well as the settlement of her legitimate 
 children, who are unemancipated and under the 
 age of sixteen, has to be inquired into, the children 
 take the settlement of their widowed mother under 
 the first clause of sect. 35 of the Divided Parishes 
 and Poor Law Amendment Act 1876 (39 & 40 
 Viet. c. 61) and are not to be deemed to be settled 
 in the parish where they were born under the last 
 clause of that section, although it cannot be shewn 
 what settlement the children derived from their 
 widowed mother without inquiring into her deri- 
 vative settlement. — So held by Lindley and Ma- 
 thew, JJ. GuAEDiANs OF Hollingbouen Union v. 
 Guaedians of West Ham Union 6 Q. B. D. 580 
 
 2. Children — Divided Parishes Act, 1876 
 
 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61), s. 35 — Pauper above Sixteen.'] 
 Since 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61 (Divided Parishes Act, 
 1876), s. 35, enacting that " no person shall be 
 deemed to have;derived a settlement from any 
 other person, . . . except ... in the case of a 
 child under the age of sixteen, which child shall 
 take the settlement of its father ... up to that 
 age and shall retain the settlement so taken until 
 it shall acquire another," paupers who are above 
 the age of sixteen at the time of the inquiry as to 
 their settlement cannot take the settlement of 
 their father. The Queen v. Guaedians of St. 
 Maey, Islington - 15 ft. B. D. 95, 339 
 
 3. Children — Divided Parishes Act, 1876 
 
 (39 & 40 Viet. c. 61), s. 35.] Where neither the 
 father nor mother of a pauper child has acquired 
 a settlement in his or her own right, and after the 
 father has died the widowed mother has deserted 
 such child, who is under the age of sixteen, and 
 has not acquired a settlement for itself, such child 
 is by 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, s. 35, to be deemed to 
 be settled in the parish in which it was born, and 
 an order for its removal to a parish in which it 
 was not born but in which its father was born was 
 quashed, because, in that oase.it could not be shewn 
 what settlement such child derived from its father 
 or mother without inquiring into the derivative 
 settlement of sucli jiarent, which was prohibited 
 by that section. Guaedians of HEADnfGTON 
 Union v. Goabdians of St. Olate's Union 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 293 
 
 4. Children— Divided; Parislies Act (39 & 
 
 40 Vict. c. 61), S.35 — Widow arid Children — Birth 
 Settlement of Father^ Upon appeal against an 
 order for the removal of a widow and her childi'en, 
 it ajjpeared that the widow had. .acquired no 
 settlement since her husband's death. , Her hus- 
 band, the father of her children, was born in the 
 appellant parish, but never acquired a settlement 
 
 2 M 2 
 
( 10G3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( loei ) 
 
 IV. POOB lAW — SETTLEMENT (and EE- 
 MOVAL) — continued. 
 (a.) Dekivative Settlement — continued. 
 for himself and there was no evidence as to the 
 settlement of his parents: — Held, that under 39 &, 
 40 Vict. 0. 61, s. 35, the children took a settle- 
 ment from their father in the appellant parish, 
 and that the order for their removal was right. 
 Gtjabdians of Liverpool v. Overseers of Poet- 
 sea - 13 ft. B. D. 303 
 
 5. Illegitimate Child — Divided Parishes 
 
 Act, 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. v. 61), s. 35.] Under 
 the Divided Parishes Act, 1876 (39 _& 40 Vict. 
 c. 61), an illegitimate child nnder sixteen does 
 not take the settlement of its mother, where such 
 settlement has been derived from the mother's 
 father, but such child is remitted to its birth 
 settlement. The Queen v. Guakdians of Mary- 
 
 LEBONE - 13 ft. B. D. 15 
 
 6. Illegitimate ChUd under Sixteen — 39 & 
 
 40 Vict. c. 61, 8. 35.] Under 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, 
 s. 35, illegitimate children under sixteen do not 
 take the settlement of their mother where such 
 settlement has been derived from her marriage, 
 although the birth of the children and the mar- 
 riage of the mother were before the passing of the 
 Act. The Queen v. Guardians of Pobtsea 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 384 
 
 7, Wife and Children — Divided Parishes 
 
 Act, 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61), s. 35.] An 
 order for the removal of a pauper wife and her 
 three children, aged respectively five years, three 
 years, and one year, on the ground that the settle- 
 ment of her husband was the birth settlement of 
 his father within the union to which tlie removal 
 was made, having been made and appealed 
 against, the birth settlement of tlie husband's 
 father in such union was proved, but no other 
 settlement either of the husband or of his father 
 being set up, the order was quashed by an order 
 of the Court of quarter sessions and the Queen's 
 Bench Division confirmed such order of the ses- 
 sions: — Beld, affirming the decision of the 
 Queen's Bench Division, that evidence of the 
 settlement of the husband's father was inadmis- 
 sible, and could not be acted upon in making the 
 order of removal, as it went to prove the deriva- 
 tive settlement of the parent of the children con- 
 trary to sect. 35 of the Divided Parishes Act, 
 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61), and that consequently 
 the order of removal was rightly quashed. The 
 Queen v. Guardians of Bridgnorth 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 765 ; 11 ft. B. D. 314 
 
 (h.) Husband and Wife. 
 
 8. " Desertion" of Wife it/ her Husband — 
 
 Misconduct of Wife—ii & 25 Vict. c. 55, s. 3.] 
 By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 55, s. 3, " where a married 
 woman shall have been or shall be deserted by 
 her husband, and shall after his desertion reside 
 for three years in such a manner as would if she 
 were a widow render her exempt from removal, 
 she shall not be liable to be removed from the 
 parish where she shall be resident unless her 
 husband return to cohabit with her." — One night 
 in June, 1873, the pauper, a married woman, who 
 had been drinking at a public-house with a man 
 named 'Wyatt, with whom her husband reasonably 
 suspected her of too much intimacy, came home 
 
 IV. POOB LA'W — SETTLEMENT (and EE- 
 MOVAL — continued. 
 (6.) Husband and Wife — continued. 
 the worse for drink and found the door of her 
 husband's house locked. She forced her way in ; 
 and in the morning, after some words, her 
 husband threatened to lock her in. He then 
 went out to his work, and when he came back 
 he found his wife absent, and that part of his- 
 furniture and clothes had been carried away. 
 The pauper took a room elsewhere, and shortly 
 afterwards went away with 'Wyatt, with whom 
 she lived in adultery until his death in 1879. 
 After 'Wyatt's death, the pauper v?rote to her 
 husband asking him to receive her back. He 
 took no notice of her letter, and if she had gone 
 back to him he would not have received her. — 
 In August, 1881, she became chargeable to the 
 parish of Liverpool as a pauper lunatic, and an. 
 order of justices was made for her removal to her 
 husband's parish, which order was confirmed by 
 the quarter sessions. Upon appeal against the. 
 last-mentioned order. — Held, that the above facts. , 
 disclosed no reasonable evidence of desertion of 
 the wife by the husband, within the statute. — 
 Beg. V. Maidstone Union (5 Q. B. D. 31) distin- 
 guished. The Queen v. Cooeham Union 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 52a 
 
 9. Lunatic 'Wife — Removal of — Consent 
 
 of Husband— 25 & 26 Vict. c. Ill, s. 20— -Se^^ara- 
 tion of Husband and Wife.'] A wife having 
 become insane and chargeable to the union in. 
 which her husband dwelt, was taken from his 
 house to the workhouse of the union, and the 
 medical officer thereof certified, under 25 & 26 
 Vict. c. Ill, s. 20, that the lunatic was a proper 
 person to be kept in a workhouse. An order was 
 then made by justices for her removal alone to 
 another union containing her husband's last place 
 of settlement. The husband consented to the 
 removal order ; the wife was mentally incapable of 
 consent : — Held, that the order of removal made 
 under these circumstances did not contravene the 
 policy of the law with regard to the separation of 
 husband and wife, and was good. The Queen v. 
 Guakdians op Preston 11 ft. B. D. 113 
 
 (c.) Kesidence. 
 
 10. Children — Under Sixteen — Ei'idence.'] 
 
 Upon appeal to the quarter sessions from an 
 order of the justices adjudging that two pauper 
 children under sixteen years of age were settled 
 in a parish within the Holborn Union, in which 
 their father had a settlement at the time of his 
 death, it appeared that seven years Ijefore the 
 order the children, then under seven years old, 
 were on the death of their mother placed by their 
 father in the care of K. and his wife, who re- 
 sided at Chertsey within the Chertsey Union, 
 and lived with them from that time continuously 
 until they became chargeable. After they went 
 to Chertsey the children were visited by their 
 father on three occasions only, and then only for 
 a few hours 'at a time, but he made a weekly pay- 
 ment for their maintenance which was continued 
 to his death -.—Held, reversing the decision of the 
 Divisional Court, that there was evidence on 
 which the justices might find, as they must be 
 taken to have done, that the father had never 
 
( 1065 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1066 ; 
 
 3V. POOE LAW — SETTLEMENT (and EE- 
 SOVAL) — continued. 
 (c.) Eesidence — continued,. 
 given up the intention that his children should 
 return to him when he was in a position to re- 
 ceive them, and that therefore there was no ground 
 lor quashing the order of the justices. Guae- 
 
 DIA2tS OF HOLBOEN 11. GUABDIANS OF OhEKTSET 
 
 [14 a, B. D. 289; 15 Q. B. I). 76 
 
 11. •■ Illegitimate Child above Sixteen — 
 
 Idiot — Residence as part of Family — 24 & 25 Vict. 
 c. 55, s. 10 : 28 A 29 Vict. c. 79, s. 8 ; 39 <fc 40 
 ■Vict. c. 61, s. 34.] The pauper, an illegitimate 
 child, and an idiot from her birth, resided after 
 "the age of sixteen for more than three years con- 
 tinuously in P. with her mother and her mother's 
 husband, living as part of their family : — JSeld, 
 •that, notwithstauding the circumstances of her 
 residence, she had under the Divided Parishes 
 Act (39 & 40 Vict. c. 61), s. 34, acquired a settle- 
 ment in P. GuAKDiANS OF Salfokd v. Oveeseeks 
 OF Makchesteb - - - 10 ft. B. D. 172 
 
 12. Parish— ITnion— 39 & 40 Vict. e. 61, 
 
 e. 34.] A person resided in parish A. for a term 
 of three years which expired before the passing of 
 ■39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, in such manner and under 
 fluch circumstances in each of such years as would 
 render him ii'removeable. He then left parish A. 
 and went to reside in parish B. in the same union, 
 from which he continued irremoveable down to a 
 date subsequent to the passing of the said Act : — 
 JEeld, that he had not acquired a settlement in 
 parish A. under 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, s. 34. Gwab- 
 •BiANs OP Sundebland Union V. Oleek of the 
 Peace foe Sussex - - - 8 Q. B. D. 99 
 
 13. Parish — TTnion. — Divided Parishes and 
 
 3?ooT Law Amendment Act, 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. 
 c 61), 88. 34, 44.] " Parish " in sect. 34 of the 
 Divided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act, 
 1876 (39 & 40 Vict. u. 61), does not include 
 "' lonion." A pauper resided for more than three 
 jears in a union, residing continuously for more 
 .than two and less than three years of the period in 
 (One parish of the union and for more than one and 
 less than two years of the period in another parish 
 at the same union, in such manner and under 
 such circumstances, as would, in accordance with 
 ±he several statutes in that behalf, render her 
 irremoveable: — Weld, by Lindley and Mathew, 
 JJ., that such a residence did not constitute a 
 .settlement within sect. 34 of 39 & 40 Vict. u. 61. 
 Guabdians op Plomesgate Union v. Guaedians 
 -op West Ham Union - 6 ft. B. D. 676 
 
 14. Penitentiary — " Bond fide Charitable 
 
 €fift"— 54: Geo. 3, c. 170, s. 6—9 tS: 10 Vict. c. 66, 
 «. 1—39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, s. 34.] A pauper had 
 resided for upwards of three years in a building 
 in the parish of F., occupied as a home or refor- 
 matory for women. This home was supported by 
 money collected at church offertories without the 
 parish, and by annual subscriptions and donations 
 ■from persons resident in all parts of the kingdom 
 -the money being applied in providing for the 
 supervision, instruction, maintenance, and cloth- 
 ing of the inmates. The pauper during the whole 
 ierm paid no money for her maintenance and 
 ■clothing -.—Held, afarming the judgment of the 
 
 IV. POOR LAW — SETTLEMENT (and EE- 
 MOVAL) — continued. 
 (o.) Eesidence — eimtvnued. 
 Queen's Bench Division, that the money collected 
 for her maintenance in the home was a " bona 
 fide charitable gift," and that she had not been 
 maintained by a rate or subscription raised in a 
 parish in which she did not reside, within the 
 meaning of the proviso to 9 & 10 Vict. c. 66, s. 1, 
 and that she was irremoveable from and settled 
 within the parish of F., under 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, 
 s. 34. Guaedians op Fulham v. Guabdians of 
 Thanet -■ 6 ft. B. D. 610 ; 7 ft. B. D. 539 
 
 15. Eemoval, Order of, made without Cor- 
 roboration — Corroboration before Sessions on Appeal 
 — 39 & '40 Vict. c. 61, s. 34.] An order of removal 
 was made by justices in respect of an alleged 
 settlement under 39 & 40 Vict. u. 61, d. 34, which 
 provides that an order of removal in respect of a 
 settlement acquired under that section shall not 
 be made upon the evidence of the person to be 
 removed without such corroboration as the justices 
 or Court think sufficient. There was no corro- 
 borative evidence before the justices who made 
 the order. Upon appeal to the quarter sessions 
 against the order, the grounds of appeal were, 
 first, that the pauper had not acquired a settle- 
 ment under 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, s. 34 ; and, 
 secondly, that there was no corroborative evidence 
 before the justices who made the order of removal. 
 Corroborative evidence was tendered on behalf of 
 the Eespondeats at the sessions, and received by 
 the Court, who considered the same sufficient, but 
 quashed the order of removal on the ground that, 
 as a matter of laW upon the facts proved, the 
 pauper had not acquired a settlement under 
 39 & 40 Vict. c. 61, s. 34 -.—Held, that the sessions 
 were right in receiving the corroborative evidence, 
 but that (the case being governed by Reg. v. 
 Brampton Union (3 Q. B. D. 479)), they were 
 wrong in holding that the settlement was not 
 acquired, and that consequently the order of re- 
 moval must stand good. The Queen v. Guae- 
 dians OF Abebgayennt - - 6 ft. B. S. 31 
 
 16. Status of Irremoveability — Effect of 
 
 Break of Eesidence of Husband on Status of Wife 
 —9 & 10 Vict. c. 66, ». 1—11 & 12 Vict, c. Ill, 
 s. 1.] A husband who had acquired a status of 
 irremoveability in the P. union went to America 
 in January, 1880, intending to reside there, leav- 
 ing his wife and children resident in that union ; 
 there was no evidence of desertion. In March, 
 1880, he died in America : in May of the same 
 year the wife and children became chargeable to 
 the union. In April, 1881, an order was made by 
 justices removing the wife and children to Man- 
 chester, the husband's last place of settlement : — 
 Held, that the break of residence by the husband 
 was, in law, a break in the wife's residence, and 
 that the order of removal was good. The Queen v. 
 
 OVEBSEEES OF MANCHESTER - 8 ft. B. D. 60 
 
 FOOE LAW — Bond to guardians for collection of 
 rates —Negligence of overseers 
 
 [9 ft. B. S. 683 
 See Peincipal and Subety — Liability. 
 1. 
 
 Maintenance of lunatic 27 Ch. D. 710 
 
 See Lunatic— Maintenance. 3. 
 
( 1067 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1068 ) 
 
 POOE LAW — eontimied. 
 
 Settlement by residence — Constlnotive re- 
 sidence of children — Appeal — Case 
 stated under 12 & 13 Vict. o. 45, s. 11 
 
 [16 Q. B. D. 76 
 See Pkactioe — Supreme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. A. 
 
 POOE lAW CONFEBENCES ACT, 1883. 
 
 jSeePooE Law — Management — Statutes. 
 
 POOE-EATE :— Col. 
 
 I. Application _ _ _ 1067 
 
 II. Exemptions _ _ _ 1067 
 
 III. Guardians - - 1067 
 
 IV. Occupation _ _ _ io67 
 V. Pkocedure - - 1071 
 
 VI. Rateable Value - - 1073 
 
 VII. Eating op Owners - - 1075 
 
 I. POOE EATE— APPLICATION. 
 
 Eoman Catholic Clergyman — Ministra- 
 tions in Workhouse — jiuditor — Disallowance.^ By 
 a general order of the Poor Law Board, dated the 
 19th of August, 1867, it was provided that the 
 guardians might employ such persons as they 
 should deem requisite in or about the workhouse, 
 or workhouse premises, or on the land occupied for 
 the employment of the pauper inmates of the 
 workhouse, or otherwise in or about the relief of 
 the indoor poor, upon such terms and conditions as 
 should appear to them to be suitable : — Held, that, 
 under this order it was competent to the guardians 
 to appoint and pay a Eoman Catholic clergyman 
 to minister to the religious wants of the Eoman 
 Catholic inmates of the workhouse. The Queen 
 ■v. Haslehuest - - - 13 ft. B. D. 253 
 
 II. POOE-EATE— EXEMPTIONS. 
 
 Stock-in-trade.] The Act 3 & i Vict. c. 89, 
 which exempts stock-in-trade from poor-rates is 
 continued by the 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, until the 31st 
 of December, 1886. 
 
 III. POOE-EATE-GTJAEDIANS. 
 
 Salary — DiBquaUflcation of 6uardian~ 
 
 5 &e Vict. c. 57, s. \i— Clerk of Highway Board 
 — Clerk of School Board — Payment out of Funds 
 raised in a Poor-rate — 27 <t- 28 Vict. c. 101, s. 32 ; 
 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75.] The Act 5 & 6 Vict. o. 57, 
 s. 14, which enacts (that " no person receiving any 
 fixed salary . . . from the poor-rates in any parish 
 or union shall be capable of servingas a guardian 
 in such parish or, union" does not apply to the 
 clerk of a highway board or of a school board 
 whose salary is paid out of the highway or 
 school board fund which is a fund supplied from 
 moneys contributed by parishes in pursuance of 
 precepts ' issued under the Highway Act, 1864, 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. 101, or the Elementary Education 
 Act, 1870, 33 & 34 Vict. c. 75, respectively. The 
 Queen v. Eawlins. The Queen v. Dibbin 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 325 ; 16 ft. B. S. 382 
 
 IV. POOE-EATE— OCCUPATION. 
 
 The Act 45 * 46 Vict. c. 20, amends sect. 16 of 
 the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869, 
 and directs (sect. 3) that the payment of rates by 
 an outgoing occupier shall be proportionate to the 
 time of his occupation, notwithstanding lie may not 
 
 IV. POOE-EATE-^)CCtTPATION— co«W5i««(?. 
 
 be succeeded in his occupation lyy an " incoming 
 tenant. 
 
 Sect. 4. As to the publication of poor-rate where 
 there is no parish church. 
 
 1. Bookstalls on a Eailway Platform — 
 
 Exclusive Occupation— Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 67)— Licinde or Demise.'} 
 By indenture the South Western EaUway Com- 
 pany granted to S. & S. (therein called "the- 
 tenants ") for seven years " the sole and exclusive- 
 licence and privilege to vend, sell, lend, and 
 exhibit for sale and loan, newspapers, book^, 
 periodicals, stationery, &c., and such other like 
 articles required for the convenience of passengers 
 by railway as should be approved by the secre- 
 tary of the company, at all their stations," &o. ; 
 and also full liberty for the tenants, subject to 
 the approval of the engineer of the company, to- 
 erect and place bookstands, &c., on the platforms 
 for exhibiting and keeping their books, &c., and 
 to post and exhibit advertisements and placards 
 on the station walls; and also full and free 
 ingress and egress at all reasonable times for the 
 " tenants," their servants and agents, to and from 
 the several stations for the purposes of the grant. 
 The persons employed by S. & 8. were to be under 
 the control of ■ the station-master and liable to- 
 immediate removal from the station in case of in- 
 sobriety or misconduct. S. & S. were to pay the 
 company certain fixed monthly rents, aud also a 
 percentage (quarterly) on the gross amounts re- 
 ceived by S. & S. for the posting of the advertise- 
 ments, &c., — with a proviso that, in case the rent 
 or the quarterly payments should be in arrear for 
 fourteen days after notice, the same should be re- 
 coverable by the company, in addition to any other 
 remedies, " by distress as in the case of rent in 
 arrear." And it was provided that the " tenants " 
 should not vend or offer for sale, or exhibit or 
 publish, any books or advertisements or placards 
 of an indecent, immoral, or seditious character, 
 or which should be forbidden by the company ; 
 aud should abide by and observe the regulations 
 from time to time made by the company, touching 
 the placing on the platforms any of the necessary 
 bookstands ; and the company warranted to the 
 " tenants " " the quiet and peaceable enjoyment 
 and benefit thereby granted for the period and 
 upon the terms and stipulations and in manner 
 aforesaid." — S. & S. erected bookstands upon the 
 platforms at W. station, and had the exclusive 
 use of them ; and these bookstands were closed 
 at night with shutters, and were locked up, the 
 keys being kept by their servants. No rights of 
 ingress or egress to and from the station, or of 
 access to the the bookstands, were exercised by 
 S. & S., or their a.gents or servants, except under 
 the provisions and for the purposes of the inden- 
 ture. The company -nere assessed to the poor-rate 
 for the station generally ; — Held, that S. & S. had 
 no " exclusive occupation " of any portion of the 
 platforms, so as to render them liable to be rated 
 in respect of these boolistands. — Judgment of the 
 Queen's Bench Division affirmed. Smith v. 
 Lambeth Assessment Committee 
 
 [9 ft. B. S. 685; 10 ft. B. D. 327 
 
 2. Occupier ceasing to occupy — lAahilittj 
 
 to pay Bate — Beneficial Occupation — Bridge free 
 
( 1069 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1070 ) 
 
 IV. POOR-RATE— OCCUPATION— con<m»e(Z. 
 
 0/ Toll— 32 & 33 7ict.B. 41, s. 16.] An occupier 
 assessed in a poor-rate, but wko ceases to occupy 
 before the rate has been ■wholly discharged, is 
 not relieved by 32 & 33 Vict. c. 41, s. 16, from 
 liability to pay the whole rate, unless some one 
 succeeds or comes into the occupation ■who is 
 liable to pay a proportionate part of such rate, 
 and, semble, that such occupier remains liable 
 to the -whole rate until the name of some one 
 liable to be assessed is substituted for his in the 
 rate book. — The Metropolitan Board of Works 
 purchased Putney Bridge of the Fulham Bridge 
 Company, ■who transferred the bridge to the board 
 under the provisions of an Act of Parliament 
 ■which required the tolls in respect of the bridge 
 to cease, and enacted that the bridge should be 
 open free to the public and shoiild be maintained 
 by the board, the justices of Surrey paying an 
 annual sum to the board in discharge of the 
 liability of that county to maintain the bridge. 
 Before the transfer the Fulhanl Bridge Com- 
 pany received tolls for the passage over the bridge, 
 9.nd ■were duly assessed in the poor-rate in the 
 parish of Putney in respect of the bridge, and at 
 the time of the transfer there remained undis- 
 charged a rate for which the bridge company had 
 been so assessed, and ■which had been made by 
 the parish for a period extending beyond the 
 transfer : — Held, that the board had no beneficial 
 occupation of the bridge in respect of which they 
 were capable of being rated, and that therefore as 
 there was no succeeding occupier liable to be 
 rated the bridge company remained liable for the 
 ■whole rate. Habe v. CHnnoHWABDEsrs and Ovek- 
 SEEKs OF Putney - 7 Q. B. S. 223 
 
 3. Residence of Police Officer — Residence 
 
 when not part of the Police Station — Bateability 
 — Building for Public Purposes.'] A superinten- 
 dent of the police for a county police division had 
 as his quarters a house, which was rented for him 
 by the county authorities, and which he furnished ; 
 his rent was paid out of the police rates, and the 
 amount deducted from his salary as superinten- 
 dent. The house was liable to be examined and 
 its fitness reported by one of Her Majesty's in- 
 spectors, and to be used for purposes coaneoted 
 with the police force as the chief constable might 
 direct, but no room in it was specially set apart 
 for any other purpose than for the use of the 
 superintendent and his family. The house was a 
 quarter of a mile from the police station, within 
 a convenient distance of which it was necessary 
 that the superintendent should reside for the per- 
 formance of his duties ; and he was compelled to 
 live in it as long as it was rented for him by the 
 county authorities, but he was liable to be removed 
 from it at any time, and from one police division 
 to another : — Held, that such superintendent was 
 rateable to the poor rate in respect of such house 
 as his occupation was a beneficial one, and the 
 house, being no part of the police station, did not 
 come within the recognised heads of property 
 which is treated as Crown property. — The case of 
 Oamhier v. Overseers of Lydford (3 E. & B. 346 ; 
 23 L. J. (M.O.) 69) approved, Mabtin v. West 
 Dekby Assessment Committee 11 Q. B. D. 145 
 4. — '— Sale of Grass on "Laai^Bight of 
 Grazing.'] The Appellant was the owner of 
 
 IV. POOR-RATE— OCOTJPATION—conWnwed. 
 
 certain land, and such land being unlet, he sold 
 the grass upon it by auction. The conditions 
 of sale described the sale as a sale of grass for 
 a certain time, and set forth certain conditions 
 under which the purchasers were to be entitled to 
 turn cattle in to eat the grass. The conditions 
 also provided that the purchasers should dress 
 the dung, cut the thistles, and leave the fences in 
 good repair. It was a term of the sale that the 
 vendor should pay the rates and taxes. The Ap- 
 pellant was rated to the poor-rate in respect of 
 the land in question for a period coincident with 
 part of the period for which the grass was sold. 
 An application having been made to the justices 
 to enforce the rate against him : — Held, that there 
 was evidence that the Appellant was the occupier 
 of the land ; that the effect of the sale of the gi'ass 
 was not to put the purchasers in occupation of the 
 land, but merely to license them to gi'aze their 
 cattle thereon; and that, consequently, the Ap- 
 pellant was liable to be rated. MoGQ v. Oveb- 
 SEEKS 01' Yatton - - - 6 ft. B. D. 10 
 
 5. Telegraph Wires — Exclusive Occupa- 
 tion — Bateahle Subject under 43 Mi'- c. 2 — Licence 
 of Exclusive Use.] By agreement between a tele- 
 graph company and the Postmaster-General, the 
 latter covenanted with the company that he 
 would provide, and thenceforth during the con- 
 tinuance of the agreement keep appropriated and 
 maintain for the exclusive use of the company 
 certain telegraph wires, called in the agreement 
 " special wires," between the landing-place of a 
 foreign telegraphic cable near the Land's End 
 and an office of the company at Penzance, and 
 thence to their office in London, with the neces- 
 sary translators for working them, and a pneu- 
 matic tube; such wires, &c., to remain the pro- 
 perty of the Postmaster-General, — the Postmaster- 
 General to repair all accidental defects or inter- 
 ruptions to the working of the wires, &c., but to 
 be paid for making good any damage to the wires 
 occasioned by the neglect or default of the com- 
 pany or their servants ; the company not to use 
 the wires for the transmission of any except odr- 
 tain specified messages. And, in consideration of 
 the appropriation and maintenance by the Post- 
 master-General of the wires, translators, batteries, 
 and pneumatic tube, the company covenanted to 
 pay him certain rents ; and they also covenanted 
 not to part with the possession of the special 
 wires or any of them, or underlet or assign the 
 benefit of the agreement, without the consent of 
 the Postmaster-General ; and that, in the event 
 of their doing so, the Postmaster-General was to 
 be at liberty to determine the contract by notice : 
 and it was further provided that, upon the ex- 
 piration or determination of the agreement, it 
 should be lawful for the Postmaster-General to 
 resume the possession of the special wires, &c. 
 The telegraph posts remained the property of the 
 Postmaster-General, and carried between Pen- 
 zance and London several wires beyond those 
 appropriated to the use of the company : — Held, 
 — Lord Coleridge, C. J., doubting, — that this agree- 
 ment did not give the company such an exclusive 
 occupation of the special wires as to make them 
 rateable to the relief of the poor in respect thereof, 
 even in the parish where the special wires were 
 
( 1071 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1072 ) 
 
 IT. TOOR-'RATE—OCCVP&.TIO'S— continued. 
 
 the only wires aiBxed to the posts. Compagnie 
 FEAN9AISE Du Telegeaphie de Paris A New 
 York v. Penzance Union - 12 ft. B. D. 652 
 
 6. Telephone Company — Bateable Occu- 
 pation — ■ " Wayleaves " — Overhead Wires and 
 Apparatus attached to Boofs and Chimneys 0/ 
 Souses.'] A telephone company were possessed 
 of an exchange by means of which subscribers 
 could communicate by telephone with each other, 
 and also of wires and telephone apparatus un- 
 connected with the exchange for the use of per- 
 sons renting them. For the purpose of this 
 business they laid wires from their office to the 
 business premises of their subscribers, and also 
 erected wires for the use of those who rented 
 them. All these wires were overhead wires and 
 were carried from the office of the company to the 
 different premises, being supported and steadied 
 either by poles fixed in the ground, or by being 
 attached to the roofs, chimneys, or walls of some 
 of the buildings over which they passed. The 
 attachments were made in the case of a single 
 wire by an iron spike driven into the building, or 
 by a bolt screwed into the ridge, or by an iron 
 bracket naOed to the corner of the chimney to 
 which the wire was attached, or in the case of a 
 number of wires by means of standards or ridge- 
 saddles attached to the roofs of the buildings and 
 fastened by iron bolts or stays. The consent of 
 the owners or occupiers of the lands or buildings 
 was given by agreements in which the company 
 undertook to pay an annual rent and to remove 
 the wires and attachments, upon a certain notice. 
 The company had no key of the outside doors, 
 and could only obtain access to the roofs by the 
 permission of the occupiers : — Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Queen's Bench Division, that 
 upon these facts there was proof of an occupation 
 of land by the wires of the company, and that 
 they were rateable. Lancashire Telephone 
 Company v. verseers of Manchester 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 700 ; 14 Q. B. D. 267 
 
 V. POOE-EATE— PEOCEBTJEE. 
 
 1. Alteration of Yalue— Valuation {Metro- 
 polis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 07), s. il— Altera- 
 tion of Value of Hereditament during Tear — Pro- 
 visional List — Default by Overseers in sending 
 Provisional List — Discretion of Overseers.'] Where 
 a requisition is made to the overseers of a parish 
 to make and send to the assessment committee a 
 provisional list under sect. 47 of the Valuation (Me- 
 tropolis) Act, 1809, containing the gross and rate- 
 able value of an hereditament, on the ground tliat 
 the value has been increased or diminished during 
 the year, the overseers are not bound to comply 
 with the requisition if they are of opinion that no 
 such alteration in value has taken place, and a 
 mandamus will not be granted to compel them 
 to do so. The Queen v. St. Mary Magdalene, 
 Bermonbsey - 14 ft. B. D. 351 
 
 2, Amendment of Valuation List — Union 
 
 Assessment Committee Acts (25 & 26 Vict. c. 103), 
 s. 19: (27 & 28 Vict. c. 39), ■,-. I—" Notice of 
 objection in manner provided by 25 & 26 Vict, 
 c. 103, with respect to objections " — Omission to 
 give Notice of Meeting of Committee to Ooerseers.] 
 Under t!:e " Union Assessment Committee 
 
 V. POOB-BATE— PBOCEBTTBE — continued. 
 Amendment Act, 1864," 27 & 28 Vict. c. 39, s. 1, 
 — which enables the assessment committee to 
 hear objections against a valuation list approved 
 by the committee, and to amend such hat, " after 
 notice given at any time in the manner prescribed 
 by 25 & 26 Vict. c. 103, with respect to objec- 
 tions," — an amendment of the list is valid, al- 
 though no notice of the meeting of the committee 
 was given to the overseers of the parish to which 
 the list relates as required by 25 & 26 Vict. 
 0. 103, s. 19. The Qtteen v. Oveeseees op Lan- 
 GRivttLE. The Queen v. Oveeseees op Copping 
 Syke - -r - 14 a. B. D. 83 
 
 3. Appeal — Assessment Committee — 
 
 Failure to obtain Belief on Objection to Valuation 
 List — Appeal against second Bate — 27 & 28 Vict, 
 c. 39, s. 1.] A person who has once given to the 
 assessment committee notice of objection against 
 a valuation list and failed to obtain such relief as 
 he deems just, may appeal to quarter sessions 
 against any subsequent poor-rate made in con- 
 formity with the list, and 27 & 28 Vict. c. 39, s. 1, 
 does not make it a condition precedent of such 
 appeal that previously thereto he should repeat 
 his application to the committee for relief. The 
 Queen v. Justices of Denbighshibb 15 Q. B. D. 
 
 [451 
 
 4. Appeal — Case stated by Sessions — Costs 
 
 — Civil Proceeding — Bules of 1880, Order LXU., 
 r. 2.] Where a case is stated by sessions upon 
 appeal against a poor-rate, the proceeding is a 
 a civil proceeding on the Crown side of the 
 Queen's Bench Division, within the rules of 1880, 
 Order Lxn., rule 2, and the costs are in the dis- 
 cretion of the Court under Order lv. Clark v. 
 Fisherton-Angab 6 ft. B. D. 139 
 
 5. Appeal — Beasonable Time for giving 
 
 Notice of Appeal — Entry of Appeal — Next Sessions 
 — 17 Geo. 2, c. 38, s. 4.] A poor-rate for the parish 
 of L. was made and allowed on Saturday, the 
 20th of March, and published on the following 
 day, S. & Son, who are the occupiers of bookstalls 
 at certain railway stations in the parish, were in- 
 cluded in the rate. The quarter sessions next 
 after the publication of the rate were held on the 
 6th of April. A party desirous of appealing 
 against the rate would therefore, if bound by law 
 to bring his appeal to such April sessions, have 
 had to give notice of appeal upon the 22nd of 
 March, the day immediately succeeding that of 
 the publication of the rate, in accordance with 
 the provisions of 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45, s. 1, which 
 requires fourteen clear days' notice to be given 
 to the overseers. S. & Sou gave notice of appeal 
 against the rate on the 7th of June for the then 
 next sessions, which were held on the 5th of July. 
 The Court of quarter sessions refused to hear the 
 appeal ou the ground that it ought to have been 
 brought to the April sessions : — Held, that an 
 Appellant against a poor-rate is entitled to a 
 reasonable time, before giving notice of appeal, 
 to allow of his considering whether he shall 
 appeal, and the grounds on which his appeal 
 shall be based, and that one day is not a reason- 
 able time for that purpose ; and that consequently 
 B. & Son were not bound to give notice of appeal 
 for the April sessions. — Held, further, that under 
 
( 1073 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1074 ) 
 
 V. POOE-EATE— PBOCEDTJEE— coniinMedT. 
 
 the oircumstanoes they were act even bound to 
 enter and respite their appeal at the April ses- 
 eions. The Queen v. Justices or Surrey 
 
 [6 a. B. S. 100 
 
 6. Distress Warrant — Power of Justices 
 
 to delay Execution.'] Justices in issuing a distress 
 warrant for the recovery of poor-rates have no 
 power to order that there shall he any delay in 
 the execution of the warrant. The Queen v. 
 Handslet - - - 7 Q. B. S. 398 
 
 7. Notice — Publication — Extra-parochial 
 
 Places — Publication of Poor-rate in Parishes where 
 no Church or Chapel — 17 Geo. 2, c. 3, s. 1 — 7 Will, 
 i & 1 Vict. c. 45, s. 2—20 Vict. c. 19, s. 1.] By 
 17 Geo. 2, c. 3, s. 1, public notice of every rate 
 for the relief of the poor shall be given in the 
 parish church the next Sunday after the allowance 
 of the rate by the justices, " and no rate shall be 
 esteemed or reputed valid and sufficient so as to 
 collect or raise the same unless such notice shall 
 have been given ;" and by 7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. o. 45, 
 a written notice, to be affixed on the doors of all 
 the churches or chapels in the parish, is sub- 
 stituted for any notice theretofore by any law or 
 statute given in churches or chapels. By 20 Vict. 
 e. 19, s. 1, every extra-parochial place wherein no 
 rate is levied for the relief of the poor shall for all 
 purposes of assessment to the poor-rate and the 
 relief of the poor "be deemed a parish." — The 
 overseer of a parish which, before the passing of 
 20 Vict. c. 19, was an extra-parochial place, made 
 a rate for the relief of the poor, but did not pub- 
 lish any notice of the rate within the parish, iu 
 wliich there was no church or chapel : — Held, 
 that the rate could not be collected. The Queen 
 •w. DvoTT - - - 9 Q, B. D. 47 
 
 TI. POOE-EATE— EATEABIE VALUE. 
 
 1. Lighthouse— Merse)/ Docks and Har- 
 bour Board — Baiedbility of Lighthouse vested in 
 and under the Management of the Board — Tele- 
 graph Station and Premises — Bateable Value en- 
 hanced by reason of Neighbourhood — Merchant 
 Shipping Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104), ». 430.] 
 The Mersey Docks and Harbour Board were pos- 
 sessed of a tower used as a lighthouse and also as 
 a telegraph station, in respect of which they re- 
 ceived tolls from vessels using their docks or enter- 
 ing the port of Liverpool, which tolls were directed 
 by the statutes under which the board derived 
 their authority to be so fixed, that, with the other 
 receipts of the board applicable to conservancy 
 purposes, they should not be higher than were 
 necessary to meet the conservancy expenditure : 
 — Held, that, inasmuch as the tower was incapable 
 of profitable occupation, it was not rateable to the 
 relief of the poor. — Two dwelling-houses adjoining 
 the tower were used by the light-keepers, and if 
 not so used in connection with the lighthouse 
 might be let to tenants at a rent, and the rent 
 would be enhanced by the fact that they had been 
 built in the neighbourhood of the tower : — Held, 
 that the rateable value of the dwelling-houses 
 must be ascertained with reference to the fact, 
 that they had been built in the neighbourhood of 
 the tower, — By Lord Ooleridge, C. J., and Mathew, 
 J., sitting as judges of the Queen's Bench Divi- 
 sion, the lighthouses which are exempted from 
 
 VI. POOE-EATE— EATEABLE VALUE— cosW. 
 rating by sect. 430 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 
 1854 (17 & 18 Yiot. u. 104), are those only the 
 superintendence and management of which is by 
 sect. 389 vested in the Trinity House, the Commis- 
 sioners of Northern Lighthouses, and the Port of 
 Dublin Corporation, and not lighthouses under 
 the control and management of local authorities, 
 such as the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board. 
 Mersey Docks and Habboub Board v. Ovebseebs 
 OP Llaneilian - - - 14 Q. B. D. 770 
 
 2. Eefreshment B(oms — Bailway Station 
 
 — Bent reserved — Evidence of Actual Profits^ The 
 refreshment rooms upon a railway station having 
 been let to a contractor for a term of years ,at a 
 fixed annual rent, he appealed against a poor-rate 
 made upon him as occupier of the premises, and 
 at the hearing of the appeal sought to prove by 
 his own testimony and by his account books, 
 shewing the receipts and expenditure during the 
 past year in respect of the rel'reshment rooms, that 
 the business was carried on at a loss, and that the 
 rent reserved did not represent the true annual 
 value of the premises : — Held, that such evidence 
 ought to have been received as an element in 
 ascertaining the rateable value. — Beg. v. Guar- 
 dians of North Aylesford (37 J. P. 148) explained. 
 Clark v. Fisherton-Angae - 6 ft. B. D. 139 
 
 3. School — Public Elementary School — 
 
 Elementary Education Act, 1870 (33 <6 34 Viet, 
 c. 75).] A school board are rateable to the relief 
 of the poor in respect of a public elementary 
 school, whether they are owners or lessees of the 
 site thereof. West Bromwich School Board v. 
 Ovebseebs of West Bbomwioh 13 Q. B. D. 929 
 
 4. Sporting Eights — Woodland — Game 
 
 —Bating Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 54), «. 4, 
 suib-s. (a).] The Appellant was the owner and 
 occupier of certain woodlands in respect of which 
 he was rated to the poor-rate. He used the lands 
 in question as plantations and woods and exercised 
 the right of sporting over them. In the case of 
 each piece of land a certain amount per acre was 
 added to the rateable value of the land in respect 
 of such right of sporting : — Held, that the right 
 of sporting was properly taken into account in 
 estimating the rateable value of the land in its 
 natural and unimproved state. Eyton v. Over- 
 seers of Mold - - 6 ft, B. S. 13 
 
 5. Statutory Eestriotions — Bailway Com- 
 pany — Running Powers — Bent fixed by Special Act 
 — Private Act — Construction.'] A private Act of 
 Parliament will be construed more strictly than a 
 public one as regards provisions made by it for the 
 benefit of the persons who obtained it, but, when 
 once the true construction is ascertained, the efiect 
 of a private Act is the same as that of a public 
 Act. — The special Act which authorized the 
 making, of a railway by the C. company, provided 
 that the L. company should have the right to run 
 their traffic over a part of the line, on payment of 
 a fixed annual rent to the 0. company. The rent 
 was much less than the actual value of the traffic 
 passed over that part of the line by the L. Co. :— 
 Held, that the C. Company could not be rated 
 for poor-rate in respect of that traffic at a higher 
 sum than the fixed rent. Altbincham Union v. 
 Cheshibe Lines Committee - 15 ft, B. D, 597 
 
( 1075 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1076 ) 
 
 VII. POOE-EATE— EATING OF OWNEES. 
 
 Eent above £20 — " Sturges Bourne's Act," 
 
 59 Oeo. 3, c. 12, s. 19 — Wliether Owners rateable, 
 wliere Weekly Bent amounting to more than £20 by 
 the Year."] The owner of a house let " on any 
 agreement by which the rent ia reserved or made 
 payable at any shorter period than three months," 
 cannot be assessed to the poor-rates instead of 
 the actual occupier under Sturges Bourne's Act 
 (59 Geo. 3, c. 12), s. 19, if the rent is at a rate 
 which amounts to more than £20 by the year : — 
 So held, affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal. Assessment Committee op West Ham 
 Union v. Iles 8 Q. B. D. 69 ; 8 App. Cas. 386 
 
 POOE-EATE— Appeal— Case stated — 12 & 13 
 Vict. c. 45, c. 11 - 12 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 See Phactiob — Supreme Cotjrt — -Ap- 
 peal. 3. 
 
 Company in liquidation — • Occupation by 
 
 liquidator 23 Ch. B. 500; 28 Ch. D. 470, 
 See Company — Bates. 1, 2, 3. [474 
 
 POOE-EATE ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION 
 ACT AMENDMENT ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Poob-eate — Occupation — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 Metropolis— Valuation Act 13 Q. B. D. 364 
 
 See Metropolis — Valuation Acts. 
 POET. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health — Gazette. 
 Metropolis — Management Acts — 
 
 Gazette. 
 Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 POET SANITAEY ADTHOEITY. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 POETIONS - - - - 26 Ch. D. 363 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 2. 
 
 — — Appointment before required — Fraud 
 
 [21 Oh. D. 332 
 See Power — ^Execution. 3. 
 
 i Interest on — Irish estates — Rate allowed by 
 
 Court 23 Ch. D. 472 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 14. 
 
 Satisfaction — Double portions 20 Ch. D. 81 
 
 See Settlement — Satisfaction. 
 
 Vesting - 21 Ch. D. 806 
 
 See Will — Class. 6. 
 
 POSSESSION— Bill of sale— Apparent possession 
 [16 Ch, D. 668 ; 7 Q. B. D. 616 ; 
 [9 App. Cas. 653 
 ■ See Bill op Sale — Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Bill of sale— Unregistered 28 Ch. D. 682 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Eeqistration. 5. 
 
 — '— Engineer — Ship - 16 Ch. D. 604 
 
 SeeSuiF — Maritime Lien. 6. 
 
 Order for— Foreclosure 28 Ch. D. 413 
 
 , See Mortgage — Foreclosure. 19. 
 
 Eight to take — Railway company 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 25; 9 App. Cas. 480 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 4. 
 
 POSSESSION— corefe'naeii. 
 
 Taken by purchaser — ^Waiver of objections 
 
 to title - - - 23 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Vendor and Pdhohasee — Title. 9. 
 
 Writ of - - - 22 Ch. D, 281 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ 
 OP Possession. 
 
 POSSESSION MONET - 26 Ch. D. 605 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 11. 
 
 Levy for a sum above £50 9 ft. B. D. 43^ 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 4. 
 
 POST OFFICE. 
 
 Congo.] Treasury Warrant of 5th Nov., 1885, 
 relative to transmission of letters, postcards, and 
 newspapers between tlie United Kingdom and 
 Congo Free State - - L. G. 1885, p. 5134 
 
 Land.] The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 20, amends 
 tlie law with respect to the acquisition of land and 
 the execution of instruments for the purposes of the 
 Fast Office. 
 
 Money Orders.] Tlie Post Office Money Orders 
 Act (46 & 47 Vict. c. 58), 1883, amends the Post 
 Office Money Orders Acts, 1848 and 1880, and 
 extends the same to Her Majesty's Dominions out of 
 tlie United Kingdom. 
 
 Post Office regulations, 28th Jan., 1884, under 
 the Post Office Money Orders Acts, 1848 to 1883, 
 extending money orders to Gibraltar 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 847 
 
 Ditto (nth Dec, 1885), varying above regula- 
 tions, and arranging for the issue and payment in 
 Gibraltar, and in the United Kingdom and Con- 
 stantinople respectively, of postal money orders 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 6249 
 
 JSegulations under 46 & 47 Vict. c. 58, extending 
 money orders to British India (5th July, 1884), 
 Song Kong (llth July, 1884), and amending as to 
 Malta (] 2th Dec, 1884) L. G., 1884, pp. 3326, 
 
 [3486, 6013 
 
 Ditto to the Straits Settlements (1st April, 1885) 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 1746 
 
 Newspapers.] Tlie Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 19' 
 repeals, in part, sect. 6 of the Post Office Act, 1870, 
 and further regulates the transmission of news- 
 papers. 
 
 Parcels Post.] Tlie Act 45 * 46 Vict, c 74 
 (the Post Office Parcels Act, 18S2), amends the 
 Post Office Acts with respect to and provides for the 
 conveyance of parcels by post not exceeding seven 
 pounds in weight. . 
 
 Treasury warrant of 29ffi June, 1883, establishes 
 (lie parcel post in the United Kingdom 
 
 [L. G., 1883, p. 337» 
 
 Ditto of nth April, 1885, extends the same to 
 British India, Aden, and British Burmah 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 1856 
 
 Ditto of nth April, 1885, nquires a declaration! 
 for tlie Customs in the case of parcels sent under 
 last mentioned warrant. L. G., 1886, p. 1856 
 
 Ditto of Nov. 5th, 1885, establishing a ParceU 
 Post between tlie United Kingdom and Ceylon and 
 Lahuan; and between Ceylon and Labvan and 
 Malta and Gibraltar - - L. G., 1885, p. 5181 
 
 Ditto of Nov. 18th, 1885, Parcels Post between 
 the United Kingdom and Cape of Good Hope 
 
 [I. G,, 1885, p. 5305 
 
( 1077 ) 
 
 DIGEST- OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1078 ) 
 
 POST OYEifSE—^ntinuecL. 
 
 Ditto of \it Dec, 1885, Fdrceh Post between the 
 United iKingdmp and Leeward Islands 
 
 [L. G.y 188S, p. 6872 
 
 Ditto of 2nd Dec., 1885, Parcels JPost between the 
 Vrmted Kingdom and British Post Office, Constan- 
 Unople - _ - L. G,, 1885, p. 5986 
 
 Ditto of Wth Dec., 1885, Parcels Post between 
 the. United Kingdom and British Ouitma and 
 Cyprus - - -1.6., 1885, p. 6070 
 
 Ditto of 18th Dec.,' 18S5, Parcels Post between 
 the United Kingdo/tn and Germany 
 
 [L. a., 1885, p. 6194 
 
 Ditto of 19th Dec, 1885, Parcels Post between 
 the United Kingdom and Belgium 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 6197 
 
 Eeply Post Cards.] Tlie.Act ia & 46 Vict. 
 c. 2, authorizes the use of Beply Post Cards. 
 
 Act of 1884.]- The Act 47.* 48 Vict, c 76 (Post 
 Office Protection Act, ISSii), amends the law with 
 respect to the protection of the Post Office. This 
 Act is a Post Office Act within 7 Will, i&l Tict. 
 c. 36 (Post Office Offences Act, 1837). 
 
 Offitters.] Sect. 9 prohibits the obstruction of any 
 officer of the Post Office. , 
 
 , Sect. 10 directs ,the swrrender of clothing by an 
 officer of the Post Office on ceasing to be such officer. 
 A justice of tile peace may. issue a warrant to 
 enforce such surrender. 
 
 Telegrams.] Sect. 11 punishes any person who 
 forges or transmits a fictitious telegram, or who im- 
 properly divulges the purport of a telegram. 
 
 Prosecution.] Sect. 12 directs prosecution of 
 summary offences under this Act, or under the Post 
 Office Acts, to be under 42 & 43 Vict c, 49 (Sum- 
 mary Jurisdiction Act, 1879). [ Indictable offences 
 under this Act to be deemed to be indictable offences 
 within first schedule of the above Act of 1879. 
 
 Sect. 13 gives power io mitigate punishments. 
 
 Sect. 14. Sums recovered to be paid into Ex- 
 
 Supplemental.] Sect. 15 declares that any in- 
 strument may be executed for the Postmaster-Gene- 
 ral by a secretary. 
 
 By sect. 16 mo person shall be exempt by this Act 
 from being proceeded against otherwise,, but shall 
 not be punished twice for the same offence. 
 
 Sect. 19 defines meaning of 'expressions in this 
 Act and in 7 Will. 4 <fc 1 Vict c 36 (Posi Office 
 Offences Acts, 1837). 
 
 Sect. 20 defines meaning of expressions in this 
 Act' 
 
 Protection.] Sect. 3 prohibits the placing of 
 injurious substances, or. nuisance, in or against post 
 office letter boxes. 
 
 Sect. 4 prohibits the sending' by post of inflam- 
 mable or deleterious substances, n^oxious animals, or 
 indecent prints, words, &c See 3 <£ 4 Vict. u. 96, 
 s. 62. 
 
 Sect. 5 prohibits the affixing of placards, notices, 
 &c., on post offices or letter boxes. It also modifies 
 power under sect. 9 o/ 41 <£ 42 Vict. e. 26 {Parlia- 
 menia/ry and Municipal Begistration Act, 1878) of 
 fixing no.tieps, on a poet office. 
 
 Sect. 6 prohibits the imitation of stamps, enve- 
 lopes, forms, and marks of the Post Office, or of any 
 foreign or colonial post office. 
 
 Sect. 7 prohibits fictitious stamps of English 
 cbloiiial or foreign government. 
 
 POST OVTICE— continued. 
 
 Sect. 8 prohibits false notices as to reception of 
 letters or telegrams. f 
 
 Eepeali] Sect. Vl substitutes 32 (fc 33 Victlc: 18, 
 «. 1, in 41 & 42 Vict, c 76, for 31 4; 32 Vict c 119,. 
 s. 33. 
 
 Sect. 11 repeals part of'l. Will. 4l & 1 Vict. 
 c. 36, of 3 (fc.4 Vict c 96, of 38 & 39 Vict.]c:^2, of 
 42 & 43 Viot c. 49, 0/ 44 & 45 Vict a. W,.and of 
 44 & 45 Vict c 33. ■ 
 
 Letter Carriers.] New Regulations of Post- 
 master-General relative to employment .of "letter 
 carriers, 10th Feb., 1885 - 1. G., 1885; p. SSi 
 
 And see Telegraph— /Stotefes. 
 
 r Government annuities. 
 
 See Revence — OoLtEOTlON — Statutes. 
 Telegrams. 
 
 See T'ETJEQ^Ava— Statutes. 
 POST OFFICE PBOTECTJON ACT, 1884. 
 
 See Post Oefice — Statutes. 
 POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK— Investments in 
 
 stoois. 
 
 See ' National Debt Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 
 POST-NUPTIAL SETTIEMENT - 24 Ch. D. 597 
 
 See VoLUNTAET Conveyance. 3. 
 
 POUND — Tender of damages — Action for money 
 had and received II Q. B. D. 27& 
 
 See Distress Damage Feasant. 
 
 POUNDAGE— Sheriff's fees— " Costs of execution" 
 -r-Bankruptcy - 13 ft. B. D. 41& 
 
 S'ee,BANKRTipTOT — Costs. 6. 
 
 POWER:— Col. 
 
 I. EXECDTION - - - - 1078 
 
 (a.) Excessive Appointment. 
 (5.) Fraudulent Appointment. 
 (c.) Testamentary Appointment. 
 
 IE. Extinction - - 1088 
 
 I. POWER— EXECUTION. 
 
 (a.) Excessive Appointment. 
 
 1. Appointment to Next of Kin — Contin- 
 gent Exercise.'] An appointment to an object of a. 
 power for life with* remainder to Ms next of kin 
 -will take effect if at the death of the tenant for 
 life his next of kin are objects of the power. In re 
 CouLMAN. MuNBY V. Eoss 30 Ch. D. 186 
 
 2. Appointment to Second Set of Trustees 
 
 — Wilful Default'] Property was assigned ■ to^ 
 trustees on trust for S. for life, and after her 
 death to such of her issue as she should by will 
 appoint; the settlor and S. during their joint 
 lives, and the survivor, had a power of appoint- 
 ment of new trustees and discretion as to the in- 
 vestments, and the settlor had a power of revoca- 
 tion, which however he did not exercise. S. by 
 her will appointed to B. and N. the property as 
 trustees for her son. After her death the settlor 
 appointed L; and N. trustees of the settlenient, 
 and the property was transferred to them. The 
 son of S. died, and B. died. L. had allowed the 
 property to reniain in the hands of N., who had 
 made away with it. — The persons beneficially 
 entitled under the will of the son recovered judg- 
 ment for the property made away with against 
 
( 1079 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1080 ) 
 
 X POWEE— EXECUTION— confe'TiMet?. 
 
 (o.) ExoEssiTB Appointment — continued, 
 the executor of the son ou tlie ground of wilful 
 default. The executor brought an action against 
 L. for the property as having been lost by his 
 ■wilful default in allowing it to remain in the 
 hands of N. :—Held, that S. had power to appoint 
 the property to trustees for her son ; that as he 
 took the whole beneficial interest the trustees of 
 the settlement had no duties to perform except 
 to hand the property over to the surviving trustee 
 ■of the will ; that therefore N. was rightfully in 
 possession of the property, and L. was not liable 
 for having allowed it to remain in the hands of 
 N. — In re Poeock's Policy (Law Eep. 6 Ch. 445), 
 Ferrier v. Jay (Law Eep. 10 Eq. 550), and Bush 
 V. Aldam (Law Kep. 19 Eq. 16), observed upon. 
 ScoTNET V. LoMER - 29 Ch. D. 535 
 
 j[ Affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 380.] 
 
 (6.) Feaudhlent Appointment. 
 
 3. Appointment before required — Fraud 
 
 vn Power.'] B. P. W. having a power of charging 
 portions for younger children on real estate 
 under a settlement which gave him in the clear- 
 est terms power to fix the ages and times at 
 "which the portions should vest, and contained no 
 provision for raising portions in default of ap- 
 poiutment, and having three daughters aged nine, 
 seven, and one, appointed by deed in 1828 £10,000 
 (being the full amount he was entitled to charge) 
 for the portions of the daughters, to be a vested 
 interest in the three daughters respectively imme- 
 diately on the execution of the deed, the portions 
 to be paid to them at such times and in such pro- 
 portions as he should by deed or will appoint, and 
 in default of - appointment to be paid to them 
 share and share alike, at twenty-one or marriage, 
 if the same age or time should happen after his 
 decease, but if in his lifetime, then the payment 
 to be postponed till after his death, unless he 
 should -signify his consent in writing to their 
 being raised and paid in his lifetime ; mainte- 
 nance at £4 per cent, to be raised from his death, 
 and the deed contained a power of revocation. In 
 1832 he made by a deed a similar appointment by 
 way of confirmation of the former, the portions to 
 ■be vested immediately on the execution of the 
 ■deed. One daughter married and attained twenty- 
 -one, and in 1851 B. P. W. appointed £5000, part 
 ■of the £10,000, to her. The other two died infants 
 and spinsters, one in 1836, the other in 1845. 
 B. P. W. assigned to the Plaintiff for value in 
 1875 the £5000 appointed to the two deceased 
 daughters, and after his death the Plaintiff 
 brought this action to have it raised : — Seld (re- 
 versing the decision of Kay, J., who had dismissed 
 the action as against the owners of the settled 
 estate), that where a donee of a power of charging 
 portions on real estate has, under the terms of the 
 ^ower, clear authority to fix the times at which 
 portions shall vest, and appoints a portion to vest 
 immediately, there is no rule of law which pro- 
 hibits its being raised in the event of the child 
 •dying under twenty-one and unmaiTied, and that 
 the decision could not be supported on the ground 
 that the appointment, so far as it made the por- 
 tions vest immediately, was not withiu the power. — 
 Lord Hinchinhroke v. Seymour (1 Bro. 0. C. 395), 
 
 I. POWEE— EXECUTION— comf»»Mei. 
 
 (6.) Feacdiilent Appointment — continued. 
 considered and examined. — Held, also, that the 
 decision could not be supported ou the ground 
 that the appointment, so far as it made the por- 
 tions vest immediately, was a fraud on the power 
 as being made with a view to secure a benefit to 
 the appointor ; for that having regard to the fact 
 that if the father had died ■without making any 
 appointment, the children would have been un- 
 provided for, it was manifestly for the benefit of the 
 children that the father should make an appoint- 
 ment, and that as there was nothing to lead to the 
 conclusion that when the appointments were made 
 the children were likely to die young, and as in 
 the event of the early death of the appointor the 
 children might have derived a benefit from the 
 absolute vesting of their portions, there was no 
 ground for atfeributing to him an intention to 
 benefit himself by making the portions vest im- 
 mediately. — Seld, therefore, that the Plaintiff 
 was entitled to have the £5000 raised. Hentt v. 
 Weet - - leCh. D. 492; 81Ch. D. 332 
 
 4. Bargain by Appointor •with Appointee 
 
 — Valid Exercise by Will—Subsequent Fraud on 
 Power — Unattested Codicil — Wilh Act (1 Vict, 
 c. 26), ss. 9, 10—24 & 25 Vict. u. 114.] The donee 
 of a power of appointment amongst his children, 
 exercisable by deed or will, having one son and 
 one daughter, by will in 1862 made a valid ap- 
 pointment to the daughter of the whole fund sub- 
 ject to tlie power. By a French settlement, not 
 under seal, made in 1866, upon the marriage of 
 his daughter, he purported to appoint the whole 
 fund to her, reserving to himself the power of 
 disposing of a life interest in a portion of the 
 fund in favour of his second wife ; and by a holo- 
 graph codicil, dated in 1871, made in France, and 
 unattested, after reciting an arrangement made 
 when his daughter was married between himself, 
 his daughter, and her intended husband, that such 
 second wife should have such provision, he in 
 effect appointed that if his daughter and her hus- 
 band should carry out this arrangement they 
 should have the whole of the fund. This codicU 
 was admitted to probate under 24 & 25 Vict, 
 c. 114. — Beld, that though admitted to probate 
 the codicil was invalid as a testamentary exercise 
 of the power (sects. 9 and 10 of the Wills Act not 
 being repealed by 24 & 25 Vict. c. 114) and did 
 not revoke the appointment by will. — Held, also, 
 that the codicil could not be treated as a defective 
 attempt to exercise the power by deed which the 
 Court would aid. — Held, also, that the appoint- 
 ments by the settlement and codicil were frauds 
 upon the power. — Held, also," that the arrange- 
 ments made by the settlement and codicU in- 
 volved a threat to revoke the wiU if they were 
 not carried into effect, and that consequently the 
 will, being an ambulatory instrument, was vitiated 
 and became a fraud upon the power, although at 
 the date of its execution it was not open to objec- 
 tion. — Observations on Kennard v. Kennard (Law 
 Eep. 8 Ch. 227). In re Kiewan's Trusts 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 373 
 
 5. Bargain to settle appointed Property.] 
 
 Eeal estate was vested in trustees under a will, 
 upon trust as to one moiety to pay the rents to 
 
( 1081 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1082 ) 
 
 I. POWER— EXECUTION— comtojueci. 
 
 (6.) Pkaudulent Appointment — continued. 
 A. for life, and after Ms death to convey it to 
 and among his children who should attain twenty- 
 one, and if he had no such child then on the 
 trusts of the other moiety, and as to the other 
 moiety on similar trusts for B. and his chil- 
 dren. The -will empowered the trustees if they 
 should think fit to convey the shares of A. and 
 B., or either of them, to them in fee. In 1882 
 A. and B., the younger of whom was of the age of 
 sixty-two, and neither of whom had any child, 
 having incumbered their interests, and being 
 pressed by their mortgagees, applied to the trus- 
 tees to exercise the power of giving them their 
 shares of the estate in fee. An arrangement was 
 made between A. and B. and the trustees that 
 tlie trustees should, in exercise of their power, 
 convey the estate to A. and B., as tenants in 
 common in fee, and that, subject to such mort- 
 gages as should be approved by the trustees for 
 raising money to pay off the existing mortgages, 
 a part of the property should be settled upon 
 trusts which gave A. and B. respectively powers 
 of appointment in favour of their respective 
 children and remoter issue, and powers of jointur- 
 ing their wives. The trustees accordingly con- 
 veyed to A. and B., as tenants in common in fee, 
 and the re-settlement, which vested the equity of 
 redemption in new trustees, with a power of sale, 
 upon the trusts which had been araanged,. was 
 made by a deed which recited that the trustees 
 had exercised the power on condition that the 
 settlement should be made: — Held, on appeal, 
 that looking at all the circumstances of the case, 
 it was not shewn that the bargain for the re-settle- 
 ment induced the appointment, or that if the 
 bargain had not been entered into the appoint- 
 ment would not have been made, and that the 
 appointment and settlement were therefore valid, 
 and that the trustees of the settlement could 
 make a good title. In re Tukneb's Settled 
 Estates 28 Oh. D. 205 
 
 (o.) Testamentary Appointment. 
 
 6. General Power — Death of Appointee 
 
 lefore Testatrix — Beal Estate.'] A testator gave to 
 his mother a general testamentary power of ap- 
 pointment over real estate, provided that, should 
 his mother die without any will, then the estate 
 was to go to E. 0. The mother by will gave all 
 her real estate, including that over which she had 
 any power of appointment, to trustees in trust for 
 G. G., who died in her lifetime: — Held, by 
 Malins, V.C., that, the property being real estate, 
 the case was not governed by authorities having 
 reference solely to personal property; that the 
 mere circumstance of the testatrix making an 
 appointment which failed did not shew an inten- 
 tion to make the appointed estate part of her 
 general property, and that the estate went as in 
 default of appointment. — Seld, on appeal, that 
 for this purpose there was no distinction between 
 real and personal estate, and that the property 
 belonged to the trustees of the mother's will, sub- 
 ject to a resulting trust for her heir-at-law (if 
 anv') In re Van Hagan. Spbkling v. Eochfobt 
 
 ' [16 0h. D. 18 
 
 7. General Power — BeaCh of Appointee 
 
 I. POWEB— EXECUTION— cojifawited 
 
 (c.) Testamentakt Appointjient — continued, 
 hefore Appointor — Next of Kin of Appointor en- 
 titled — Bequest of Legacy for Life — Residitary 
 Gift.'] Testator by his will gave a sum of money 
 to his son M. upon trust to invest and to pay the 
 income unto his daughter A. for her separate use 
 for life, and after her death upon trust to pay the 
 pruicipal sum and interest unto such persons as A. 
 should by deed or will appoint, and in default of 
 appointment upon trust for M.'s own benefit. The 
 testator bequeathed to M. his residuary estate, 
 and appointed him sole executor. The money 
 was invested by M. upon mortgages, and the 
 income paid to A. till her death. A., who was 
 not seised or possessed of any other property, by 
 her will gave all her money and securities for 
 money, furniture, and all other her personal estate 
 and effects, and property, and all her real estate, 
 if any, unto her two sisters H. and C. in proportion, 
 i.e., one-third part of all her real estate and per- 
 sonal property and effects to^H., and two-thirds of 
 all her real and personal property and effects to 
 C. absolutely, and she appointed 0. sole executrix, 
 and charged her property and effects with the 
 payment of her debts and funeral and testamen- 
 tary expenses. C. died in 1868, and A. in 1880, 
 and H. was appointed administratrix of the will : 
 — Held, that the two thirds of the moneys, sub- 
 ject to the payment thereout of a proportion of 
 the debts, and funeral and testamentary expenses, 
 belonged to the next of kin of A., and not to M., 
 the residuary legatee. In re Iokemngill's Es- 
 tate. HiNSLET V. lOKEBINGILL - 17 Ch. D. 151 
 
 8. General or Special Power — " Devise " — 
 
 Wills Act (1 Viet. c. 26) — Power created before but 
 exercised after Act — -Void Appointment falling into 
 residuary Appointment] An instrument exer- 
 cising a special or general power of appointment 
 over property must be executed and construed 
 according to the rules for the time being appli- 
 cable to instruments of that kind, although 
 the power may have been created before, but 
 exercised after, an alteration in the law as to 
 the construction and mode of execution of such 
 instruments. — The word " devise '' in the Wills 
 Act includes in general a devise by way of ap- 
 pointment under a special or general power : con- 
 sequently, where a testator makes a will operating 
 as an exercise of a special or general power, a 
 devise of real estate by way of appointment which 
 fails or is void, falls, under sect. 25, into the 
 residuary devise (if any) by way of appointment;, 
 unless a contrary intention appears by the will. 
 Fbemb v. Clement - 18 Ch. D. 499 
 
 9. General Power — Donee unaware of 
 
 Power — Exercise of Power — Election— Approba- 
 tion and Meprobation.] A married woman being 
 (although unaware of it) the donee of a general 
 power of appointment by deed or will over policy 
 moneys payable upon her own death, concurred 
 with her husband in settling certain family estates 
 by an indenture which treated the policy moneys 
 as the husband's own property, and settled them 
 also. Her concurrence in the settlement was for 
 a purpose entirely unconnected with the policy 
 moneys, and under it she took a life interest in 
 remainder after _ her husband's death in the 
 estates, but no interest in the policy moneys. 
 
( 1083 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1081 ) 
 
 I. POWEE— EXECTJTIOir — continued. 
 
 (o.) Testamentabt Appointment — continued. 
 She survived her husband, leoeived in respect of 
 her life interest in the estates suras exceeding the 
 ■amount of the policy moneys, and died, having by 
 ■her will given all property over which she had 
 any disposing power to certain beneficiaries : — 
 Held, that by her will she had exercised her 
 general power so as to make the policy moneys 
 her own assets, and Held, also, that having taken 
 under the settlements, benefits exceeding the 
 value of the policy moneys, she could not by the 
 exercise of her power take the policy moneys out 
 •of the settlement, without making good to the 
 settlement beneficiaries an equal amount from 
 her own estate ; and accordingly that the policy 
 moneys must be paid to the settlement trustees. 
 ■ — Semble, The concurrence of the donee of the 
 power in the deed of settlement, for pui-poses un- 
 connected with the policy moneys subject to the 
 power, and in ignorance of the existence of the 
 power, could not operate as an exercise of the 
 power although the deed purported to pass the 
 •nolicv moneys. Geipfith-Bosoawen v. Soott 
 ^ [26C11. D.358 
 
 10. General Power — General Devise or 
 
 Bequest — Money liable to he invested in Land — 
 WiUs Act (1 Vict. c. 26), s. 27.] By a marriage 
 settlement executed in March, 1823, real estate 
 was conveyed to trustees in fee, to their use 
 during the life of the wife, on trust to pay the 
 rents to her for her life, and after her death to 
 such uses as the husband should by deed or 
 writing, to be by him executed and delivered in 
 the presence of and attested by two witnesses, 
 appoint, and, in default of appoiatment and 
 subject thereto, to the common dower uses in 
 favour of the husband. There was a power for 
 the trustees to sell the property with the consent 
 of the husband and wife during their joint lives, 
 and the money to arise from any sale was to be 
 laid out in the purchase of other land, to be 
 settled to the same uses, and untU the re-invest- 
 ment should be made the money was to be invested 
 in (inter alia) the public funds, and the income 
 was to be payable to the persons to whom the 
 lents of the land to be purchased would go. 
 During the joint lives of the husband and wife, 
 and before the date of the husband's will, tlie land 
 was sold, and the proceeds of the sale were in- 
 vested in New 3 per Cents, in the names of the 
 trustees. No purchase of land was ever made, 
 but the income of the stock was paid to the wife 
 during her life. In October, 184:4, the husband 
 made his will (which was signed by him and 
 sealed, and attested by two witnesses). The will 
 contained the following bequest : " 1 also give and 
 bequeath all the money and moneys that I die 
 possessed of, whether in the public funds or in 
 the care of W., or elsewhere, after my funeral 
 expenses are paid, unto the sole use and behoof of 
 my children hereinbefore named, sliare and share 
 alike." W. was one of the trustees of the will, 
 and at the time of the testator's deatli he had in 
 his hands some money belonging to the testator. 
 The testator had no money of his own in the 
 funds, nor had he any power of appointment other 
 than that contained in the settlement. The tes- 
 tator died on the 28th of December, 1851. His 
 
 I. POWEE — EXECUTION — continued. 
 
 (a.) Testamentabt Appointment— coTifo'nuetZ. 
 wife died on the 24th of October, 1881. After 
 her death the question arose whether the testator 
 had by his will exercised the power of appoint- 
 ment contained in the settlement, or whether the 
 sum of stock passed as unappointed to his heir- 
 at-law : — Held, that inasmuch as the wife had a 
 right to call for the reinvestment of the stock in 
 land, it must be considered as having been land 
 at the time of the testator's death, and that the 
 will did not operate as an exercise of the power 
 of appointment : — Held, consequently, tbat the 
 stock passed to the testator's heir-at-law. In re 
 Gbbavbs' Settlement Trusts - 23 Ch. D. 313 
 
 11. General Power — Married Woman — 
 
 Wi'H.] A testatrix devising property by will by 
 virtue of a power of appointment : — Held, upon 
 the construction of the will, to have made the pro- 
 perty her own, so that on the death of the devisee 
 in her lifetime the gift over in default of ap- 
 pointment did not take effect. — Hoare v. Osborne 
 (12 W. E. 661 ; 33 L. J. (Ch.) 586) disapproved. 
 
 WlLLOTJGHBY OSEOKNE V. HOLTOAKE 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 238 
 
 12. General Power — Married Woman — 
 
 Execution of Power — Ownership — Remoteness — 
 Testamentary Power.] A married woman exer- 
 cised a general testamentary power : — Held, that 
 time under the rule against perpetuities ran from 
 her death, and not from the date of the instru- 
 ment creating the j)ower. — In re Powell's Trusts 
 (39 L. J. (Ch.) 188) discussed and not followed. 
 Bous V. Jackson - - 29 Ch. D. 521 
 
 13. General Power — Bevocation by General 
 
 Clause in Subsequent Will.] A general clause in 
 a will revoking all former wills revokes' a prior 
 testamentary appointment. — In the Goods of 
 Merritt (1 Sw. & Tr. 112) and In the Goods of 
 Joys (4 Sw. & Tr. 214) considered. — A married 
 woman having a general power of appointment by 
 will over real estate executed a will appointing 
 the estate. After the death of her husband, she 
 made another will revoking all former wills and 
 containing a general devise and bequest of all her 
 real and personal estate. She afterwards made a 
 third win, also revoking all former wills and be- 
 queathing her personal estate, but not devising or 
 appointing her real estate. She had no real estate 
 except that subject to her power of appointment : 
 — Held (affirming the decision of the Master of 
 the EoUs), that the testamentary appointment 
 under the first will was revoked by the second 
 will, and the second will by the third, and that 
 the real estate went as in default of appointment. 
 SOTHESAN V. DENIN& - 20 Ch. D. 99 
 
 14. General Power — Settlement — Will — 
 
 Partial Invalidity — Appointment of Share of Trust 
 Fund — Contingent Interest — Postponed Enjoyment 
 of Capital — Intermediate iVicome.] Where a tes- 
 tator, having a power of appointment over per- 
 sonalty, appoints a share of the fund to an object 
 of the power upon the happening of a certain 
 event, the appointment carries with it all the 
 intermediate accretions to that share, whether in 
 the shape of income or otherwise. — Under a settle- 
 ment made on the second marriage of M., a widow, 
 a trust futid belonging to her was vested in a 
 
( 1085 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1086 ) 
 
 I, POWER— EXECUTION— co«M««e(i. 
 
 (o.) TestamentaBt Appointment — continued. 
 trustee upon trust for her three children, nomi- 
 natim, in such shares as she should by deed or 
 will appoint, and in default of appointment for 
 such three children equally. — By her will M. 
 appointed that the trustee of the settlement should 
 stand possessed of theitrust fund, as to one-thii-d 
 part thereof, upon trust to pay the income thereof 
 ±0 her son 0. (an object of the power) during his 
 life, or until anticipation ; and from and after his 
 death or the determination of his estate, upon 
 trust to pay the said one-third part to her grand- 
 son (not an object of the power) when he should 
 attain twenty-one; and in case he should die 
 before he should attain twenty-one, upon trust to 
 pay the said one-third part to her daughter S. 
 (an object of the power). — 0. survived the testa- 
 trix and died, the grandson being then an in- 
 fant: — Seld, that although the appointment to 
 the grandson was void, the appointment over to 
 S. was gbod, and that the income from C.'s death 
 of the one-third so appointed would pass with 
 the capital to S., if the grandson died under 
 twenty-one ; but that, if that event did not happen, 
 toth income and capital would pass under the 
 settlement as in default of appointment. Long v. 
 OVENDEN - - - 16 Ch. S. 691 
 
 15. General Power — Settlement — Beat 
 
 JSstate — Power of Sale — Direction to lay out 
 Money in Purchase of Land — Conversion — Me- 
 investment in Government Funds — Will — General 
 Bequest of Personal Estate — Exercise of Power of 
 Appointment — Wills Act, 1837 (1 Viet. c. 26), ss. 1, 
 27.] By A.'s marriage settlement, dated in 1832, 
 her father settled certain real estate to the use of 
 A. for life, and after her death, and in default of 
 issue of the marriage, to the use of such persons 
 as she should by will appoint, and in default of 
 appointment to the use of the person under whom 
 the Plaintifif claimed. The settlement contained 
 a power for the trustee to sell the real estate, 
 with a direction to lay out the proceeds, with 
 A.'s consent, in the purchase of othfer heredita- 
 ments to be settled to the like uses, with a power 
 of iuterim investment, with the like consent, in 
 Government securities. By his will dated in 
 1831, and confirmed, subject to the settlement, by 
 a codicil executed shortly after the settlement, 
 A.'s father devised the property, subject to the 
 settlement, and all other his real estate,'to the use 
 of A. for life, and in default of her having any 
 issue, to such uses as she should by will appoint. 
 — Some years afterwards, A.'s father and husband 
 tioth having died, and there having been no issue 
 of the marriage, the trustees of the settlement, at 
 A.'s request, sold all the settled real estate for a 
 sum of £24,226 2s. Od. consols, which they trans- 
 ferred to her. — A. died a widow in 1879, having 
 by her will, made shortly after the transfer to her 
 of the consols, after appointing executors and be- 
 queathing pecuniary legacies amounting to up- 
 wards of £30,000 bequeathed " all the residue of 
 my personal estate and effects whatsoever" to 
 two persons absolutely. The personal estate to 
 which A- ■was entitled at the date of her will and 
 of her death, independently of the consols, did 
 not amount to more than £6000 : — Held (affirming 
 the decision of Jessel, M.E,), that the general 
 
 I. POWEH— EXECUTION— conimaec?. 
 
 (e.) Testamentary Appointment — continued. 
 bequest of personal estate contained in A.'s will 
 operated as an execution of the powers of appoint- 
 ment over the real estate given to her by her 
 marriage settlement and by her father's will, and 
 passed the consols. ■ Chandleb v. Pooook 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 618 
 
 16. General Power — Settlement — Marriage 
 
 of Englishwoman with Foreigner — Domicil — SetUe- 
 ment in English Form — Separate Use— Power of 
 testamentary Disposition — Power of Appointment 
 hy " writing at any time hereafter " — Exercise hy 
 Will previously executed — Wills Act (1 Vict. c. 26), 
 ss. 24, 27.] On the ,20th of December, 1881, prior 
 to the marriage (solemnized in England) of a domi- 
 ciled Englishwoman (a widow) with a domiciled 
 Spaniard, real estate in England of the intended 
 wife was vested by her in a trustee in fee, to such 
 uses as the intended wife should by deed or will 
 appoint, and, subject thereto, to the use of the 
 intended wife, for her separate use. The settle- 
 ment was made with the approbation of the in- 
 tended husband, and the deed contained a state- 
 ment that this approbation was given ia conside. 
 ration of a renunciation the same day executed 
 by the intended wife of any rights which she 
 would otherwise have acquired by her marriage 
 in respect of the property of the intended hus- 
 band according to the law of Spaiu. The deed 
 also contained a declaration that it was to take 
 effect and be construed according to the law of 
 England. The marriage was solemnized on the 
 next day. On the 23rd of February, 1882, the 
 wife (being then domiciled in Spain) executed a 
 deed-poll, in accordance with the provisions of 
 the settlement, whereby she, in exercise of the 
 power given to her by the settlement, appointed 
 the real estate to the use of herself in fee for her 
 separate use. By another deed executed the 
 same day, to which the husband was a party, she, 
 with the consent of the husband, appointed and 
 conveyed, and the husband conveyed, the real 
 estate to the use of a trustee in fee, upon trust for 
 sale, and out of the proceeds of sale to pay certain 
 specified debts, and, subject thereto, in trust for 
 such person or persons as the wife " shall at any 
 time or times hereafter by any writing or writings 
 from time to time appoint," and, in default of 
 any appointment and subject thereto, in trust for 
 the wife absolutely for her separate use. Under 
 this deed the trustee sold the property, and out of 
 the proceeds of sale pbid the specified debts, and 
 there then remained a surplus in his hands. The 
 wife died in June, 1882, having by a will, exe- 
 cuted immediately after her marriage, and which 
 purported .to be made in exercise of the powers 
 reserved to her by her marriage settlement, and 
 of all other powers enabling her, directed, ap- 
 pointed, and declared that the real and personal 
 estate over which she had any disposing power at 
 the time of her death should 'be held and applied 
 in the payment of certain legacies and annuities, 
 and, subject thereto, she gave four-fifths of her 
 real and personal estate, in case she should leave 
 no children,, to her husband absolutely. And 
 she gave the remaining ohe-fifth of her property, 
 charged with the before-mentioned annuities and 
 legacies, to her brother and sisters, or to the 
 
■( 10S7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES 
 
 ( 1088 ) 
 
 I. POWEE— EXECUTION— confenuefJ. 
 
 (c.) Testamentaey Appointment —continued. 
 ohildxen per stirpes of such of them as should die 
 before her leaving children. The testatrix died 
 without issue. The husband survived her. Ac- 
 cording to the law of Spain under such circum- 
 stances two-thirds of her property belonged to her 
 father and mother, notwithstanding; that she had 
 left a wUI : — Held, that, whether the will was or 
 was not a good exercise of the power reserved by 
 the deed of February, 1882, it was a valid testa- 
 mentary disposition by virtue of the limitation in 
 default of appointment to the separate use of the 
 testatrix ; that it took effect according to English 
 law, and that the legatees named in it (including 
 the husband) were entitled to the benefits given 
 to them by it. — SemUe, that, on the authority of 
 Soyes V. CooTc (14 Oh. D. 53) the will was a valid 
 exercise of the power of appointment given by the 
 deed of February, 1882. In re Hernando. Her- 
 nando V. Sawtell - - 27 Ch. D. 284 
 
 17. Special Power — Appointment to Per- 
 sons not Objects of Power — Direction to pay Debts 
 of Appointor — Election.'] A testatrix had, under 
 the will of a brother who had predeceased her, a 
 power to appoint his property by will among his 
 nephews and nieces and the children or child of 
 deceased nephews and nieces. She, by her will, 
 gave all the real and personal estate of which she 
 might be seised or possessed at the time of her 
 death, or over which she might have any testa- 
 mentary power of disposition, to trustees, upon 
 trust for sale and conversion, and to stand pos- 
 sessed of the proceeds (which she described as 
 " my said trust funds ") upon trust to pay costs 
 and expenses and to pay her debts and funeral 
 expenses and certain pecuniary legacies, and 
 then upon trust as to two one-fourth parts of her 
 trust funds respectively for persons who were 
 objects of the power ; and upon trust as to the 
 other two one-fourth parts respectively for per- 
 sons who were not objects of the power. And 
 she declared that, in case of the failure of the 
 trusts thereinbefore declared of any of the one- 
 fourth parts of her trust funds, the one-fourth 
 part, or so much thereof of which the trusts should 
 fail, should be held upon the trusts thereinbefore 
 declared of the others or other of the fourth parts 
 of which the trusts should not fail : — Held, that 
 the testatrix had manifested an intention to exer- 
 cise the power, and that as to one moiety of the 
 brother's property the power was well exercised : — 
 Held; also, that as to the other moiety of the 
 brother's property, the appointment was invalid, 
 but that, by virtue of the gift "in case of the 
 failure of any of the trusts thereinbefore declared." 
 that moiety went to the persons to whom the first 
 moiety was well appointed, and that, consequently, 
 no case of election arose. In re Swinburne. 
 SwiNETONB V. Pitt - 27 Ch. D. 696 
 
 18. Special Power — Exercise hy Will — 
 
 Bequest of all Property over which Testator at the 
 Time of his Death should have " any beneficial 
 disposing power hy will" — Remoteness — Inter- 
 vention of Trustees.'] A testator, who had under 
 a settlement a power of appointment over lease- 
 hold and other personal estate among his children 
 or grandchildren or other issue, by his will, which 
 contained no reference to the power, gave " aU the 
 
 I. POWEE— EXECUTION— eoniinaed. 
 
 (c.) Testamentary Appointment — continued. 
 real and personal estate and effects whatsoever, 
 and wheresoever, whether in possession, reversion, 
 remainder, or expectancy, over which at the time 
 of my decease, I shall have any beneficial dis- 
 posing power by this my will " to trustees, upon 
 trusts partly for persons who were objects of the 
 power, and partly in excess of the power : — Hdd, 
 that the use of the word " beneficial" did not con- 
 clusively shew that the testator could not have 
 intended to exercise a power which he could not 
 exercise for his own benefit or the benefit of his 
 estate. — Ames v. Cadogan (12 Oh. D. 868) dis- 
 cussed. — There being, in the opinion of the Court, 
 upon the will taken as a whole, a sufBcient indi- 
 cation of an intention to exercise the power : — 
 Held, that the power was exercised by the will, 
 the trusts, so far as they were in excess of the 
 power, being inoperative. — The testator gave a 
 moiety of the property on trust for his daughters 
 who should survive him, and attain twenty-four, 
 in equal shares. The testator's youngest daughter 
 was more than three years old at the time of his 
 death : — Held, that the appointment was not void 
 for remoteness. — Held, also, that the appointed 
 fund ought to be retained by the trustees of the 
 settlement on the trusts of the wUl, so far as they 
 were valid. Von Bkockdoeff v. Malcolm 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 172 
 
 19. Special Power — Exercise by 'Will — 
 
 Intention.] If a testator manifests. an intention 
 to exercise by his will a special power of ap- 
 pointment, by reason of his making some gifts 
 of property which he describes as " my " property, 
 but the words of which gifts cannot be satisfied 
 unless they pass property subject to the power, 
 the Court will assume that he intended also to. 
 exercise the power in the case of other gifts in 
 the will which are capable of passing other pro- 
 perty subject to the power, although the words 
 of gift can be satisfied by means of property be- 
 longing to the testator himself. — A testator had 
 under a settlement a special power to appoint by 
 will two estates at B. and at S. respectively, and 
 also some shares in the B. Colliery. By his will 
 he made gifts of " my estate at B." and of "my 
 estate at S.," and he made another gift of " all 
 my share and interest in the B., H., and W. Col- 
 liery Companies." He had no property of his 
 own at either B. or S., but he had some shares of 
 his own in the B. Colliery : — Held, that the wUI 
 operated as an exercise of the power, not only as 
 regarded the estates at B. and S., but also as 
 regarded the settled shares in the B. Colliery. 
 i» re Wait. Workman «. Petgrave 30Ch. S. 617 
 
 II. POWEE— EXTDTCTION. 
 
 By 44 & 45 'Vict. c. 41 {Conveyancing Act, 1881), 
 sect. 52. — (1.) A person to tolwm any poicer, 
 whether coupled with an interest or not, is given, 
 may by deed release, or contract not to exercise, the 
 power. 
 
 (2.) The section applies to powers created by 
 iTistrwnents coming into operation before or after 
 the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Disclaimer by Trustee.] By 45 & 46 Yict. c. 39 
 {Conveyancing Act, 1882), sect. 6, — (1.) A person 
 to whom any power, whetlier coupled with an 
 
( 1089 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1090 ) 
 
 II. POWER— EXTINCTION— confmued. 
 interest or not, is given, may, Tyij deed, disclaim the 
 power ; and, after disclaimer, shall not he capable 
 of exereisiiig or joining in the exercise of the 
 power. 
 
 (2.) On such disclaimer, the power may he exer- 
 cised hy the other or others, or the survivors or 
 survivor of the others, of the persons to whom the 
 power is given, unless the contrary is expressed in 
 tlie instrument creating the power. 
 
 (3.) This section ^applies to powers created hy 
 instruments coming into operation eitlier hefore or 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 1. Alienation of Interest — Settlement — 
 
 Power to appoint New Trustees — Subsequent Exer- 
 cise of Power — Consent of Alienees.J A power to 
 appoint new trustees jnay be exercised by a tenant 
 for life, after aliening his interest. By a settle- 
 ment, property partly real and partly personal; 
 was conveyed to trnstees upon trust to provide 
 an annuity for A., a'widow, for life, and subject 
 thereto for B., her son, absolutely. The settle- 
 ment provided that B., during his life, and after 
 his death the trustees or trustee for the time 
 being, or the executors or administrators of the 
 last acting trustee, should have power to ap - 
 point new trustees, if necessary. B. mortgaged 
 his whole interest under the settlement, and the 
 real estate (subject to A.'s annuity) was sold by 
 the mortgagees to C. The personal estate was 
 not sold by the mortgagees : — Seld, that B., could 
 still exercise the power to appoint new trustees, 
 without the consent of C. Hardakeb v. Mook- 
 HousE - - - - 26 Ch. D. 417 
 
 2. Alienation of Interest — Will — Power of 
 
 Advancement — Corisent of Life Tenant — Banh- 
 Tuptcy of Life Tenant — Effect of.'] A testatrix 
 who died in 1884 gave a moiety of a trust fund to 
 trustees upon trust to pay the income to J. C. 
 dming his life, and after his death in trust for 
 W. J. (an infant), empowering the trustees .to 
 raise any part not exceeding one half of W. J.'s 
 share for his advancement, subject to the consent 
 in writing of J. C. during his life. — The trustees 
 were desirous of exercising the power, but J. C. 
 had become a bankrupt, and was still undis- 
 charged : — Meld, that J. C.'s power of consenting 
 to the advancement was not extinguished by his 
 bankruptcy, but could not be exiercised without 
 the sanction of his trustee in bankruptcy acting 
 under the direction of the Court of Bankruptcy. 
 In re Coopee. Coopee v. Slight 27 Ch. D. 566 
 POWEE— Appointment— Election 22 Ch. D. 556 
 
 See Election. 1. 
 Appointment — Exercise by trustee in liqui- 
 dation - - 29 Ch. D. 1005 
 See Bankktjptot — Tkustee. 11. 
 
 Appointment — ^Invalidity — Election 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 208 
 See Settlement — Constebction. 7. 
 
 Appointment— Will — Children of testator 
 
 See Will— Lapse. 2. [26 Ch. D. 266 
 
 Default of appointment - 24 Ch. D. 244 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 8. 
 
 Discretion of trustees — Interference of Court 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 671, 576, n. ; 29 Ch. D. 913 
 See Trustee — Powers. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 POWEE— con* inued. 
 
 Executor. 
 
 See BxECUTOE — Powers — Statutes. 
 
 Illusory — Law of Lower Canada 
 
 • [10 App. Cas. 653 
 iSee Colonial Law-^Canada — Quebec. 
 6. 
 
 Maintenance clause-^Settleinent 
 
 [22Ch. S. 521 
 
 See Settlement — ^Powebs. 5. 
 Of appointing new trustees. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Powers. 
 
 , 8—13. 
 Of appointing new trustees 23 Ch. D. 134, 138 
 
 See Trustee — ^Powebs. 1, 2. 
 Of bequeathing by will - 23 Ch. D. 238 
 
 jSee Customs Annuity Fund. 
 
 Of borrowing — Corporation 10 App. Cas. 354 
 
 See Corporation. , 2. 
 
 Of charging portions— Rate of interest 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 472 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 14. , 
 Of investment - -' 19 Ch. D. 64 
 
 See Friendly Society. 
 Of leasing. 
 
 jSee Cases under Settlement — Powers. 
 1—4. 
 Of. leasing by, mortgagor. , 
 
 ;See MoRTGAGE^PowBRS^-^ffafofes. 
 Of managing - - 27 Ch. D. 196, 553 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 6, 7. 
 
 Of mortgaging— Administrator 
 
 [16Ch. D. 877; 20Ch. D. 745 
 See Administrator — Powers. 2, 3. 
 
 Of pledging — Power of attorney 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 561 
 iSee Power of Attorney 1. 
 
 Of purchasing land — Settlement 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 255 
 
 fifee' Trustee —Indemnity. 2. 
 
 Of revocation 18 Ch. D. 668 ; 29 Ch. D. 212 
 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 4, 6. 
 
 Of revocation — Settlement 19 Ch. D. 47 : 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 742 
 
 See Settlement — Eevocation. 2. 
 
 Of sale-^Administration with will annexed 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 3 
 'See Administrator — ^With Will an- 
 nexed. 1. 
 
 Of sale— Administrator - 16 Ch. 49 
 
 See Administrator — Limited. 4. 
 
 Of sale — Charity Commissioners 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 173 
 
 See Charity — Commissioners. 9. 
 
 Of sale — Determination of — Separate estate 
 
 [18Ch.D.'429 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers! 8. 
 
 Of wis ^Executor - - 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 7. 
 
 Of sale — Mortgage. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Mortgage 
 — Powers. 
 
 2 N 
 
( 1091 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1092 ) 
 
 PCWEE — cmitinued. 
 
 Of sale — Mortgage — Abortive sale 
 
 [25 Ch. S. 636 
 See MoKTGAGE — Fokeclosuee. 3. 
 
 Of Bale — Mortgage — GamiBhee order — 
 
 Proceeds of sale 17 Ch. D. 269 
 
 See Pkactioe — Supkeme Coukt— Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 8. 
 
 Of Bale — Pledge — Shares in company 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 257 
 See Company — Shakes — Transfer. 1. 
 
 Of sale — Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Cases under Settled Land Act. 
 Of sale — Settlement. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — ^Powers. 
 15—18. 
 Of Bale — Trustee^Conveyancing Act, 1881. 
 
 See Trustee — Powers — Statutes. 
 
 Of sale— Will— Conversion 86 Ch. D. 601 
 
 See Will — Conversion. 
 
 POWER or ATTOENEY. 
 
 By a & 45 Vict. c. 41 (^Conveyancing j4c<,.1881), 
 sect. 46. — (1.) The donee of a power of attorney 
 may, if he thinks fit, execute or do any assurance, 
 instrument, or thing, in and with his own name 
 and signature and his own seal, where sealing is 
 required, by the authority of the donor of tlie power ; 
 and every assurance, instrument, and thing so 
 executed and done shall he as effectual in law, to 
 all intents, as if it had been executed or done by 
 the donee of the power in the nwine and ivith the 
 signature and seal of the donor thereof. 
 
 (2.) This section applies to powers of attorney 
 created by instruments executed either before or 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 47. — (1.) Any person making or doing any 
 paymt-nt or act, in good faith, in pursuance of a 
 power of attorney, shall not be liahle in respect of 
 the payment or act by reason that before the pay- 
 ment or act the donor of the power had died or 
 become lunatic, of unsound mind, or hankrupt, or 
 had revoked the power, if the fact of death, lunacy, 
 unsoundness of mind, bankruptcy, or revocation 
 was not at the time of the payment or act known 
 to the person making or doing the same. 
 
 (2.) But this section shall not affect any right 
 against the payee of any person interested in any 
 money so paid ; and that person shall liave the like 
 remedy against the payee as he would have had 
 against the payer if the payment had not been made 
 by him. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only to payments and 
 acts made and done after the commencement of this 
 Act— 31st of December, 1881. 
 
 Sect. 48. — (1.) An instrument creating a power 
 of attorney, its execution being verified by affidavit, 
 statutory declaration, or other sufficient evidence, 
 may, with the affidavit or declaration, if any, be 
 deposited in the Central Office of the Supreme Court 
 of Judicature. 
 
 (2.) A separate file of instruments so deposited 
 shall be kept, and any person may search that file, 
 and inspect every instrument so deposited, and an 
 office copy thereof shall be delivered out to him, on 
 request. 
 
 (3.) A copy of an instrument so deposited may 
 he presented at the office, and may be stamped or 
 
 POWER OF ATTORNEY— continued. 
 
 marked as an office copy, and when so stamped or 
 
 marked shall become and be an office copy. 
 
 (4.) An office copy of an instrument so deposited 
 shall without further proof be sufficient evidence of 
 the contents of the instrument and of the deposit 
 thereof in the Central Office. 
 
 (5.) General Mules may he made for purposes of 
 this section, regulating the practice of the Central 
 -Office, and prescribing, with the concurrence of the 
 Commissioners of Her iLajestiJs Treasury, the fees 
 to be taken therein. 
 
 (6) This section axipUes to instruments creating 
 powers of attorney executed either before or after 
 the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Act of 1882.] By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 {Convey- 
 ancing Act, 1882), Sect. 8. — (1.) If a power of 
 attorney given for valuable consideration is in the 
 instrument creating the power expressed to be irre- 
 vocable, then, in favour of a purchaser — 
 
 (i,) Tlie power shall not be revoked at any time, 
 either by anything dmie by the donee of the 
 power without the concurrence of the donee 
 of the power, or by death, marriage, lunaoy, 
 unsoundness of mind, or bankruptcy of the 
 donor of the power ; and 
 (ii.) Any act done at any time by the donee of 
 tlie power, in pursuance of the power, shall 
 be as valid as if anything done by the donor 
 of the power tcithout the concurrence of the 
 donee of the power, or tlie death, marriage, 
 lunacy, unsoundness of mind, or bankruptcy 
 of the donor of tlie power, had not been 
 done or happened ; and 
 (iii.) Neither the donee of the power nor the pur- 
 chaser shall at any time be prejudicially 
 affected by notice of anything done hy tlie 
 donor of tlie power, without the concurrence 
 of the donee of the power, or of the death, 
 marriage, lunacy, unsoundness of mind, or 
 bankruptcy of the donor of the power. 
 (2.) This section applies only to powers of 
 attorney created by iiistruments executed after tjie 
 commencement of this Act — 31sf of December. 
 1882. 
 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) J/ a power of attorney, whether 
 given for valuable consideration or not, is in the 
 instrument creating the power expressed to he irre- 
 vocable for a fixed time therein specified, not exceed- 
 ing one year from the date of the instrument, then, 
 in favour of a purchaser, — 
 
 (i.) Tlie power shall not be revolad, for and 
 during that fixed time, either by anything 
 done by the donor of the power loithout the 
 concurrence of the donee of the power, or 
 hy the death, marriage, lunacy, unsound- 
 ness of mind,orbanl:rnptcy of the donor of 
 the power ; and 
 (ii.) Any act done within that fixed time, by tlie 
 donee of the power, in pursuance of the 
 power, sliall he asvalid as if anything done 
 by the donor of tlie power without the con- 
 currence of the donee of tlie power, or the 
 death, marriage, lunacy, unsoundness of 
 mind, or bankruptcy of the donor of the 
 power, had not been done or happened; 
 and 
 (iii.) Neither the donee of the power, nor the pur- 
 ehuxcr, .-■/kiH at any time he prejudirially 
 affected by notice either during or after 
 
( 1093 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1094 ) 
 
 POWER OF AITO'RS^Y— continued. 
 
 that fixed time of anything done by the 
 donor of the power during iliat fixed time, 
 without the concurrence of the donee of the 
 power, or of the death, marriage, lunacy, 
 unsoundness of mind, or banhruptey of the 
 donor of the power within that fixed, time. 
 (2.) This section applies only to powers of attor- 
 iiey created by instruments executed after the com- 
 mencement of this Act. 
 
 Married Woman.] By 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41 (Con- 
 veyancing Act, 1881), sect. 40.— (1.) A married 
 woman, whether an infant or not, shall by virtue of 
 this Act have power, as if she were unmarried and 
 of full age, by deed, to appoint an attorney on her 
 belialf for the purpose of executing any deed or 
 doing any other act which she might herself execute 
 or do; and the provisions of this Act relating to 
 instruments creating powers of attorney shall apply 
 thereto. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to deeds executed 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 1. Power to pledge — Power to sell or 
 
 purclmse does not include Power to pledge.'] A 
 power of attoraey gave to the holders authority 
 " for the purposes aforesaid to sign for me and 
 in my name and on my behalf any and every 
 contract or agreement, acceptance, or other docu- 
 ment," the purposes aforesaid being " from time 
 to time to negotiate, make sale, dispose of, assign, 
 and transfer" Government promissory notes, and 
 " to contract for, purchase, and accept the trans- 
 fer " of the same : — Held, that upon the true 
 construction of this power the holders were autho- 
 rized to sell or purchase sucli notes, but not to 
 pledge them. — Bank of Bengal v. Macleod (5 
 Moore, Ind. Ap. 1 ; 7 Moore, P. C. 35) distin- 
 guished. JONMENJOY COONDOO V. WaTSON 
 
 [9 App. Cas, 561 
 
 2. Becital — Control of operative Part — 
 
 Complicity in Fraud — Notice.'] The operative 
 part of a power of attorney appointed X. and Y. 
 to be the attorneys of the Plaintiff without in 
 terms limiting the duration of their powers, but 
 it was preceded by a recital that the Plaintiff was 
 going abroad, and was desirous of appointiug 
 attorneys to act for him during his absence : — 
 Meld, that the recital controlled the generality of 
 the operative part of the instrument, and limited 
 the exercise of the powers of the attorneys to the 
 period of the Plaintiff's absence from this country. 
 ^-During the Plaintiff's absence from England, 
 and again after his return, X. and Y., without his 
 knowledge and purporting to act under tbe power, 
 which empowered them to borrow money on mort- 
 gage, borrowed moneys from a bank upon the 
 security of charges on the Plaintiff's property, 
 which moneys they afterwards misappropriated. 
 Upon the occasion of the first advance the power 
 was produced to the bankers and registered by 
 their clerk, but it was not examined by them, nor 
 were they aware that the Plaintiff was in England 
 when they made the second advance : — Held, that 
 the charge given during the Plaintiff's absence 
 was valid, and that the charge given after his 
 return was invalid. — The Plaintiff went abroad a 
 second time, and before going gave a fresh power 
 to X. and Y., by wbich, after refemng to the 
 former power, and reciting that he had been in 
 
 POWER OP ATTORNEY— eon«m«c(?. 
 England for a, short time, and was returning 
 abroad, he appointed X; and Y. his attorneys, 
 giving them power to borrow money for him with 
 or without giving security. During his second 
 absence, and without his knowledge, X. and Y., 
 who themselves had an overdrawn account with 
 the bankers, borrowed from them further moneys, 
 alleging that it was to enable them to make pay- 
 ments for the Plaintiff; and under the second 
 power of attorney they charged the Plaintiff's 
 property as a security for the loan, applying the 
 borrowed moneys in reduction of their own debt 
 to the bank. Upon this occasion the second 
 power was produced to the solicitor of the bank, 
 but he was unacquainted with the former trans- 
 actions, and neitlier the bankers nor any of their 
 clerks were aware that the Plaintiff had been in 
 England : — Held, that in order to make out that 
 the bank were so put upon inquiry as to in- 
 validate the transaction, the Plaintiffs must shew 
 that the recitals in the second power were seen 
 by some agent of theirs who knew of the previous 
 transactions, and would by these recitals have 
 been rendered suspicious of the good faith of X. 
 and Y. ; and consequently that there having been 
 no such notice or knowledge on the part of the 
 bank, wilful blindness could not be imputed to 
 them, and the last-mentioned charge was valid. 
 Danby v. Coutts & Co. - 29 Oh. D. 500 
 
 PRACTICE— ADMIRALTY :— Col. 
 
 I. Pbeliminary Act 1094 
 
 II. Sebvioe - - - 1094 
 
 III. Pleading - 1095 
 
 IV. Default - 1096 
 V. Counter-claim ]096 
 
 VI. ThikdPakty - - _ 1096 
 
 VII. Abeest of Ship - 109G 
 
 VIII. CONCUEHENT ACTIONS - 1097 
 
 IX. Evidence - - 1097 
 
 X. Pboduotion op Documents 1097 
 
 XI. Inspection of Pkopekty 1097 
 
 XII. Teial _ _ _ 1097 
 
 XIII. Appeal - - 1098 
 
 XrV. Limitation of Liability - 1098 
 
 XV. Appoetionmbnt of Damage 1099 
 
 XVI. Lis Alibi Pendens - 1100 
 
 XVII. Salvage - - - noi 
 
 XVIIL CosTi 1102 
 
 XIX. JUEISDICTION - - 1104 
 
 I. PRACTICE - 
 ACT. 
 
 -ADMIRALTY— PRELIMINARY 
 
 Amendment — Refusal to amend Prelimi- 
 nary Act.] The Court will refuse to allow a mis- 
 take in a preliminary act to be amended, even 
 though the application for an amendment be 
 made before the hearing of the suit and be 
 supported by affidavit. The " Mibanda " 
 
 [7 P. D, 185 
 II, PRACTICE— ADMIRALTY— SERVICE. 
 
 1. Warrant of Arrest— C% of London 
 
 Court— London {City) Small Debts Extension Act 
 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. Ixxvii.), s. li — Comity 
 Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 1868 (31 & 32 
 
 2 N 2 
 
( 1095 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1096 ) 
 
 II. PRACTICE — ADMIEAITY — SEE VICE — 
 
 continued. 
 Vict. c. 71, «. 23.)] A warrant of arrest in an 
 action in rem was issued from the City of London 
 Court directed to the high bailiff, and others, the 
 bailiffs thereof, but was, without authority from 
 the Court, served by a clerk in the high bailiff's 
 office : — Held, affirming the decision of the judge 
 of the City of London Court, that this was not 
 a proper service of the warrant. — Per Sir James 
 Hannen: "Any officer" mentioned in 31 & 32 
 Yict. c. 71, s. 23, means any officer duly authorized 
 by the Court. — Per Butt, J. : That it means 
 any officer whose ordinary duty it is to serve pro- 
 cesses, or one duly authorized so to do. The 
 " Palomaees " - - 10 P. D. 36 
 
 2. Writ in Personam — Incorrect Address 
 
 of Defendant — 'Refusal of Consolidation Order 
 before service of Writ.'] The Court will refuse to 
 consolidate cross actions of damage in personam 
 where there has been ho service of the writ in the 
 principal action. — A shipowner, residing and 
 carrying on business in Scotland, having been 
 described on the face of a writ of summons for 
 service within the jurisdiction sued out against 
 him in an action of damage in personam as " of 
 the city of London " applied before service of the 
 writ and after a cross action of damage in respect 
 of the same collision had been instituted on his 
 behalf that the ^vrit should be set aside. The 
 Court refused the motion. The "Helenslea." 
 The " Catalonia " 7 P. D. 57 
 
 3. Writ in Bern — Action by default — 
 
 Bulea of the Supreme Court, 1883, Order l.x., 
 rr. 11, 12 ; Order XIII., rr. 12, 13, Order Lxvil., 
 r. 14.] In an action in rem the wi'it of summons 
 was served in the manner provided by Order rs., 
 rule 12, no appearance was entered, and the action 
 came on for judgment by default under Order 
 XIII., rules 12, 18. The affidavit of service of 
 the writ was made by the solicitor's clerk who 
 bad served such writ : — Held, that seiTice of a 
 writ in rem by a solicitor or his clerk, and not by 
 the marshal or his substitute was a valid service, 
 and that the affidavit was sufficient. The " Solis " 
 
 [10 P. D. 62 
 
 III. PEACTICE—ADMIEALTY— PLEADING. 
 
 1. Damage to Cargo — Particulars.'] The 
 
 rule as to giving the opposite party particulars of 
 any general allegation in pleadings ought to be 
 the same in the Admiralty as in the Queen's 
 Bench Division. Where, therefore, in an action in 
 the Admiralty Division by cargo owners against 
 shipowners for delivery of cargo in a damaged 
 condition, the statement of claim alleged that the 
 damage was not occasioned by any of the ex- 
 cepted perils mentioned in the bill of lading 
 under which the cargo has been shipped, but was 
 occasioned by the defective condition of the vessel 
 or by the negligence or breach of duty of the 
 Defendants or their servants, it was lield by the 
 Court of Appeal (Lord Coleridge, C. J., and Brett 
 and Holker, L.JJ.), reversing the decision of Sir 
 Eobert Phillimore, that the Defendants were en- 
 titled to particulars of the defects rendering the 
 vessel not fit to cany the cargo. The " Kobt " 
 
 [7 P. D. 117 
 
 2, Salvage — Statement of Claim — Bules I 
 
 III. PEACTICE— ADMIEAITY- PIEADIKG — 
 
 continued. 
 
 of Supreme Court, 1883, Order xix., rr. 5, 7 
 
 Appendix C, Form No. 6.] A statement of claim, 
 in a salvage action was drawn in the Form No. G 
 of Appendix 0. to the Bules of the Supreme Court, . 
 1883; on motion by the Defendants under Order - 
 XIX., rule 7, for a further and better statement 
 of claim or particulars : — Held, that the Plaintiffs 
 must deliver a fuller statement of claim, and that 
 in salvage actions a fuUer foi-m than that given in 
 Appendix C, No. 6, should generally be followed. 
 The " Isis " - - - - 8 P. D. 227 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— ADKIEALTY— DEFATTLT. 
 
 Time — Order xili., rr. 12, 13.] In order 
 
 to obtain judgment by default of appearance in 
 an action in rem under Order xin., r. 12, the ten 
 days stated in Order xxi., r. 6, must elapse, and 
 a notice of trial under Order xxxvi., r. 11, must 
 be filed in the registry. The " Avenie " 
 
 [9 P. D. 84 
 
 V. PRACTICE — ADMIEALTY — COUNTEE - 
 CLAIM. 
 
 Security for Daniages — Foreign Govern- 
 ment— 2i & 25 Vict. c. 10, s. 34.] The Court 
 has jurisdiction by 24 & 25 "Vict. c. 10, s. 34, to 
 order a Plaintiff in an action for damage by col- 
 lision to give security for damages to a Defendant 
 who brings a counter-claim. The Court can exer- 
 cise this power when such Plaintiff is a foreign 
 sovereign whose ship cannot ba arrested. The. 
 " Neweattle " - 10 P. D. 33 
 
 VI. PEACTICE— ADMIEALTY— THIED PARTY. 
 
 Embarrassing Pleading— Tow and Tug — 
 
 Bules of Supreme Court, 1875, Order xyi., rr. 18, 
 21.] In an action for damage by collision brought 
 by a vessel at anchor against a vessel in tow of a. 
 tug, the owners of the tug were made third parties- 
 under Order xvi. rule 18, as the Defendants 
 claimed to be indemnified by the owners of the ■ 
 tug against the Plaintiff's claim on the ground 
 that the improper navigation, if any, was that, 
 of the tug. An application for directions under 
 Order xvi. rule 21 was subsequently made, and. 
 the Plaintiffs thereupon asked that the third 
 parties should be dismissed from the action on 
 the ground that the Plaintiffs would be embar- 
 rassed by the proceedings between the Defen- 
 dants and the third parties : — Held, that the 
 third parties must be dismissed, as under the 
 circumstances questions would probably arise- 
 between them and the Defendants by which the- 
 Plaintiffs might be embarrassed, as they were- 
 different from those upon which the action between 
 the Plaintiffs and Defendants would turn. The 
 "Bianca" - - 8 P. D. 91 
 
 VIL PEACTICE — ADMIEALTY - 
 SHIP. 
 
 -AEREST OF- 
 
 1. Restraint —Sai7 Bond — Foi-m.] In- 
 
 an action of restraint the bail bond should not be 
 given to pay what may be adjudged against the 
 Defendant in an action, but simply for the ap- 
 praised or agreed value of the Plaintiff's shares,, 
 in case the ship does not return to the particular 
 port named in the bond. The " Egbeet Dickin- 
 son" - - lOP, D. 15' 
 
 2. Vr&Tvaixt— Notice— Telegram.] Whea- 
 
( 1097 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1098 ) 
 
 TIL PEACTICE— ADMIEAITY— AEEEST OF 
 
 SHIF — continued. 
 the marshal sends by telegram to Us substitute 
 ■at an outport notice of the issue of a warrant, and 
 ■such substitute communicates it to the master of 
 the ship against which it is issued, it is u. con- 
 tempt of Court to move the sMp from the place 
 where it is lying. The " Sebaglio " ,10 P. D. 120 
 
 Tin. PEACTICE— ADMIEALTY— OONOTIREENT 
 
 ACTIONS. 
 
 Transfer of Action from Inferior Court 
 
 — Cross Action in Sigh Court — Plaintiffs.'] When 
 an action is transferred from an inferior Court 
 •and consolidated with a cross-action begun in the 
 .High Court, the plaintiffs in the action in the 
 dnferior Court will be placed in the position of 
 plaintiffs in the consohdated actions, if they began 
 the action in the inferior Court before the cross- 
 action in the High Court. The " Nevbb Despate " 
 
 [9 P. D. 34 
 
 [See also The " Cosmopolitan," 9 P. D. 35, n ; 
 and The "Bjokn," Ibid. 36, n.] 
 
 IX. PEACTICE— ADMIRALTY— EVIDENCE. 
 
 1. Admission by Master of Skip — 
 
 .Letter.'] A letter from the master of a ship to 
 her owners is admissible as evidence against them 
 in regard to the facts therein stated; but the 
 •opinion of the master in such a letter is not evi- 
 dence. The"Solway" - lOP. D, 137 
 
 3. Engineer's log.] In an action of 
 
 daniage the engineer's log is admissible as evi- 
 ■dence against the shipowner by whom the engi- 
 neer is employed. The " Eabl of Dumfeies " 
 
 [10 P. D. 31 
 
 X. PRACTICE — ADMIEALTY — PEODUCTION 
 OF DOCUMENTS. 
 
 DepoBitions before Eeceiver of Wreck — 
 
 JJisfiovery.] Depositions of the master and crew 
 ■ of a British ship, the B., in regard to a collision 
 had been taken by the Eeceiver of Wreck, and 
 the Board of Trade refused to give copies of 
 .such depositions to the owners of the P. in an 
 .action arising out of the collision between these 
 vessels. Copies had however been obtained for 
 the purpose of the action by the solicitors to the 
 ■owners of the, B., whose master and crew had 
 made the depositions. On motion by the owners 
 of the P. for leave to inspect and take copies of 
 the copies of the depositions in the possession of 
 rthe solicitors of the owners of the M. : — Held, that 
 these copies were privileged. The " Paleemo " 
 
 [9 P. D. 6 
 
 XI. PEACTICE — ADMIEALTY — INSPECTION 
 or PROPERTY. 
 
 Trinity Masters — 24 <fe 25 Vict. c. 10, 
 
 .«. 18.] Before the hearing of an action an applica- 
 tion was made under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 10, s. 18, by 
 i;he Plaintiffs, that two Trinity masters should 
 inspect the lights of the Defendants' ship : — Held, 
 that the application was premature and ought to 
 (be refused. The " Victoe Oovacevioh " 
 
 [10 P. D. 40 
 
 XII. PRACTICE— ADMIEALTY— TEIAL. 
 
 . Consequential Damage —. Tribunal to 
 
 •decide Question!] Although it is the usual practice 
 •of the Coui'tin collision cases to refer all questions 
 
 XIL PRACTICE — ADMIEALTY -- TEIAL — 
 
 continued. 
 involving the alnount of damages to the Eegis- 
 trar assisted by merchants, yet when consequen- 
 tial damages are claimed, it is in the discretion of 
 the Court to deal at the hearing of the action, 
 with the question whether such dainages are re- 
 coverable. The " Maid OF Kent " 6 P. D. 178 
 
 Xni. PRACTICE— ADMIRALTY— APPEAL. 
 
 1. Court of Passage-^ Leace to appeal — 
 
 County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 1868 
 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 11), ss. 26, il— County Courts 
 Act, 1875 (38 * 39 Viet. c. 50), s. S— Applica- 
 tion for Leave to adduce fresh Evidence.] Ap- 
 peals from County Courts may still be broui^ht 
 under the County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction 
 Act, 1868, ss. 26, 27, as well as under the County 
 Courts Act, 1875, s. 6. Leave to appeal was 
 granted after the expiration of ten days from the 
 trial when it was she^wn that no injustice would 
 be done to the other side — Application to adduce 
 fresh evidence on the appeal refused. The " Hum- 
 bee" - - - - 9 P. D. 12 
 
 2. Withdrawal of Appeal — Order lyul, 
 
 r. 6.^When a Respondent under Order lviii., 
 rule 6, has given notice that he will on the 
 hearing of an appeal contend that the decision 
 of the Court below should be varied, and the 
 Appellant subsequently withdraws his appeal, such 
 notice entitles the Bespondent to elect whether to 
 continue or withdraw his cross-appeal. If he 
 continues his cross-appeal the Appellant has the 
 right to give a cross notice that he will bring 
 forward his original contention on the hearing of 
 the Eespondent's appeal. The " BeeswinO " 
 
 [lOP.D. 18 
 
 XIV. PRACTICE— ADMIRALTY— LIMITATION 
 OF LIABILITY. 
 
 1. Collision — Merchant Shipping Act, 
 
 1862 (25 & 26 Viet. c. 63), s. 54.] Two" ships 
 V. and K. having come into collision, the owners 
 of the V. brought an action in rem in the Admi- 
 ralty Division against the owners of the K., who 
 counter-claimed, and both ships were held to 
 blame. The owners of the K. brought an action 
 in the Admiralty Division to limit their liability 
 under the Merchant Shipping Amendment Act, 
 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 63), s. 54, and paid the 
 amount of their liability into Court. The damage 
 to the V. was greater than that to the IS.., and 
 the fund in Court was not suflaoieut to satisfy 
 all the claims for which the owners of the K. 
 were answerable in damages : — Beld (Lord Bram- 
 well doubting) that the owners of the V. were 
 entitled to prove against the fund for a moiety 
 of their damage, less a moiety of the damage 
 sustained by the K., and to be paid in respect 
 of the balance due to them after such deduc- 
 tion, pari passu with the other claimants out 
 of such fund. — Chapman v. Royal Netherlands 
 Steam, Navigation Company (4 P. D. 157) over- 
 ruled. Stoomvaabt Maatsohappy Nedeeland 
 », Peninsulab and Oeiental Steam Navigation- 
 Company - - 7 App, Cas. 796 
 
 2- Collision — Improper Navigation — 25 & 
 
 26 Vicf. c. 63, s. 54, sub-s. 4.] The vpords " im- 
 proper navigatidn" in 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 54, 
 sub-s. 4, are not to be restricted to the' negligent 
 
( 1099 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1100 ) 
 
 XIV. PEACTICE—ADMIEALTY— LIMITATION 
 
 OF LIABIIITY — continmd. 
 navigation of a vessel by her master and crew, for 
 the statute includes all damage ■wrongfully done 
 by a ship to another whilst it is being navigated, 
 where the wrongful action is due to the negligence 
 of a person for whom the owner is responsible. 
 Therefore when a vessel, owing to the negligence 
 of a person onshore in overlooking the machinery, 
 steered so badly that she came into collision with 
 another vessel, and Butt, J., in an action for 
 limitation of liability gave a decree in her favour : 
 — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that such judg- 
 ment was right, and that the statute applied to 
 such a case. The "Waekwokth" 9 P. D. 20, 145 
 
 3. Deductions — Foreign Ship — Crew 
 
 Space— Merchant Shipping Act, 1854 (17 & 18 
 Vicf. 0. 104), 8. 21— Merchant Shipping Act. 1867 
 {30 * 31 Vict. c. 124), s. 9.] The owners of a 
 foreign ship with a closed-in space on the upper 
 deck solely appropriated to the berthing of the 
 crew, are entitled, in limiting their liability, to 
 deiluct such space under the Merchant Shipping 
 Act, 1854, s. 21, sub-s. 4, though the provisions 
 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1867, s. 9, have 
 not been complied with. — The Franconia (3 P. D. 
 164) explained. The "Palermo" 10 P. D. 21 
 
 4. Deductions— Tonjiage of Ship at Time 
 
 of Collision — Merchant Shipping Act, 1862 (25 & 
 26 Vict. c. 63), s. 54.] In a suit of limitation of 
 liability in respect of damage arising from a 
 collision, the shipowners claimed deductions on 
 account of screw space which appeared on the 
 register of their vessel at the time of their applica- 
 tion for a decree : — Held, that they were not 
 entitled to the benefit of any deductions not 
 appearing on tlie register in force at the time of 
 the collision. Tee " John MoIntyke " 
 
 [6 P. D. 200 
 
 5. Payment into Court — Wrongdoer — 
 
 Salvage — Cargo — Thames Conservancy — Powers 
 under Two Acts of Parliament.^ The payment 
 into Court of £8 a ton under 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, 
 s. 54, does not place the shipowner in the position 
 of a person who has not done wrong.- — The owner 
 of a ship sunk by a collision in the Thames 
 admitted it to be his fault, and paid into Court £8 
 a ton in a suit to limit his liability. The Thames 
 Conservators, having powers under the Removal 
 o f AVreoks Act, 1877, and the Thames Conservancy 
 Acts, raised the ship and delivered the ship and 
 cargo to the owner, he undertaking to pay the 
 expenses of raising. Part of the cargo was some 
 wool, which was damaged by being sunk : — Held, 
 that the shipowner was liound to deliver the 
 wool to the owner of the wool without claiming 
 from him, by way of contribution to salvage, any 
 part of the expenses of raising the ship and cargo. 
 — AVhere a public body has powers under two 
 Acts, it must be taken to have proceeded under 
 that which gave it the most advantages. Prehn 
 i). Bailey. The"Ettkick" 6 P. D. 127 
 
 XV. PRACTICE — ADMIRALTY— APPORTION- 
 MENT OF DAMAGE. 
 
 Collision — Infringement of the Bale with 
 
 respect to Lights— Merchant Shipping Act, 1873 
 (36 & 37 Vict. 0. 85), s. 17.] Where two ships 
 incurred damage in a collision and it was found 
 
 XV. PRACTICE — ADMIRALTY— APPORTION- 
 MENT OF DAIS.AG'E— continued. 
 
 that one of them was to blame for improper navi- 
 gation, and that the other had infringed the regu- 
 lations with respect to lights:— BeM, that in the 
 absenee of proof that such infiingement could not 
 possibly have contributed to the collision, the 
 damage must be divided according to the ordinary 
 rule of the Court of Admijalty. — Tlie Fanny M. 
 CuniU (Aspinall's Maritime Cases (X.S.) vol. 2, 
 p. 569) approved. China Merchants' Steam 
 Navigation CoiirANY v. Bignold. The "Ho- 
 OHtiNG." The " Lapwing " - 7 App. Cas. 612 
 
 XVI. PRACTICE — ADMIRALTY- LIS ALIBI 
 PENDENS. 
 
 1. Stay of Proceedings.] In an action of 
 
 damage in personam by the owners of the sliip G. 
 against the owners of the ship P. it appeared that 
 a cause of damage in rem relating to the same 
 collision had, prior to the proceedings in tliis 
 Court, been instituted by the owners of the P. 
 against the G. in a Vice- Admiralty Court abroad, 
 and was then pending. The Court, on the 
 application of the owners of the ship P., stayed 
 the proceedings in this Court until after the 
 hearing of the cause in the Vice- Admiralty Court 
 abroad. The " Peshawuk " - 8 P. D. 32 
 
 2. • Stay of Proceedings — Action in rem — 
 
 Sail.'] Tlie Plaintiffs, the owners of the German 
 vessel ,/., commenced an action in rem against the 
 Danish vessel C. in an Admiralty Court in Hol- 
 land, in respect of a collision on the high seas, 
 and the C. was arrested in this action. The 
 Plaiutiff's agent in Holland and the Dutch Court 
 allowed the C to be released on the underwriters 
 of the C. guaranteeing to the parties interested 
 to the amount of 175,000 gulden, for the com- 
 pensation which the C. might eventually have 
 to pay by legal decision in Holland. While 
 these proceedings were pending in Holland, the 
 Plaintiffs began an action in rem in England 
 in respect of the same collision, and the C. was 
 arrested in the English action. On a motion 
 by the Defendants tor the release of the 0. — 
 the Plaintiffs on such motion expressing their* 
 willingness to cease proceedings in Holland and 
 pay the costs — Sir James Hanneu held that the 
 C. ought to be released, as it was primS. facie 
 oppressive to institute an action in another Court 
 iu respect of the same subject-matter when there 
 was no evidence that the Court, iu which the 
 action was first brought, would not do full justice 
 to the Plaintiffs : — Held, on appeal, by Baggallay 
 and Fry, L.JJ., that the decision of Sir James 
 Hannen was right, for bail being the equivalent 
 of the ship, and it liaving been given in Holland, 
 an action in England against the ship should not 
 be allowed to proceed at the same time as the 
 Dutch action : — Held, also, that if the guarantee 
 given in Holland was not equivalent to bail, but 
 was a private agreement, the arrest of the ship in 
 England was against good faith : — Held, by Lord 
 Esher, M.R., that the decision of Sir James 
 Hannen was wrong, because though it was not 
 prima facie oppressive to institute an action in a 
 foreign and in an English Court in respect of the 
 same collision, it would be oppressive if bail were 
 given in both Coui'ts, but in this case the guarantee 
 not being equivalent to bail, the Plaintiffs had 
 
( 1101 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( U02 ) 
 
 XVI. PEACTICE — ADMIRALTY — LIS ALIBI 
 PENDENS— confinMctZ. 
 
 not so good a remedy in Holland (is in England, 
 and were therefore entitled to bring an action in 
 the English Admiralty Court. — McHemij v. Lewis 
 (22 Ch. D. 397) approved and applied. The 
 " Chkistiansborg " - - - 10 P.' D. 141 
 
 XVII. PRACTICE-ADMIRALTY— SALVAGE. 
 
 1. Admissions — Evidence — Order xxxii., 
 
 I. 1.] When tlie Defendant admits all the facts 
 pleaded in the statement of claim in a salvage 
 action, the Plaintiff will not be allowed to call 
 evidence except by permission of the Court, and 
 on special grounds. The " Hakdwiok " 9 P. D. 32 
 
 2. Agreement — Action hy Seamen.'] An 
 
 agreement was made between the masters of the 
 W. and the N., which was in need of assistance, 
 that the W. should tow the N. to Queenstown 
 for the sum of £200. There was no evidence 
 at the trial to shew that the master of the W. 
 consulted the officers and crew as to the terms 
 of the agreement. The service was duly per- 
 formed, and subsequently thirteen of the officers 
 and crew of the W. brought an action of sal- 
 vage against the N. The Defendants pleaded, 
 inter alia, that they had tendered £200 to tlie 
 owners of the W., but this sum was not paid into 
 Court : — Held, first, tliat a plea of tender without 
 a payment into Court was bad ; secondly, that tho 
 agreement must be upheld, and the £200 appor- 
 tioned amongst the owners and crew of the W. ; 
 thirdly, that when a fair salvage agreement has 
 been made in a bona fide manner by the masters 
 of the salving and the salved vessels the officers 
 and seamen of the salving ship ought not to bring 
 an action of salvage, and that the Plaintiffs must 
 therefore pay the costs of the action. The " Nas- 
 
 MTTH ■' 10 P. D. 41 
 
 3. Award — Apportionment.'] In a suit 
 
 instituted to recover salvage reward in respect of 
 services rendered in towing a disabled vessel 
 into safety, the Court awarded a total sum of 
 £1000, of which £3000 was apportioned to the 
 owners. The " Kenmuee Castle " 7 P. D. 47 
 
 4. • Bullion — Liahility to contribute in the 
 
 same Proportion as other Property?^ Where steam 
 tugs rendered salvage services by towing a sink- 
 ing vessel with passengers, cargo, and bullion on 
 board into safety, it was held that the bullion 
 was liable to contribute to the salvage reward in 
 proportion to its value rateably with the other 
 property salved. The '• LoNoroKD " 6 P. D. 60 
 
 5. Damages^Oommjssion for Bail — Sal- 
 
 vage Action.'] Commission paid for bail in a 
 salvage action will not be allowed as part of the 
 damages recoverable bj the salved vessel in an 
 action of damage. The " Bkitish Commekoe " 
 
 [9 P. D. 128 
 
 6. Damages — Ship — Arrest — Commission 
 
 on Bail Bond.] Commission on bail is not part 
 of the Defendant's costs in an action of salvage or 
 damage, but it may be recovered as damages from 
 the Plaintiff where the arrest of the vessel is made 
 maliciously, or with gross negligence. The •' CoL- 
 LINGROVB." The " NuMiDA " - 10 P. D. 158 
 
 7, Derelict — Abandonment of Derelict by 
 
 Salvors — Waiver of Salvage — Remuneration — ■ 
 
 XVII. PKACTICE—ADMIEALTY— SALVAGE— 
 
 continued. 
 Amount of Aa-ard:] The barque N. fell in with 
 the K. a derelict barque, in the Atlantic, and 
 put five hands on board of her who navigated hei- 
 for three days. The K. then fell in with the, 
 barque B., and the five bands on board of the K., 
 were, at their own request, taken on board the B. 
 The B. then sent some of her own crew on board 
 the K., and took her in tow, and towed her until 
 the tow-rope broke, when the vessels parted com- 
 pany, and the hands on board the K., with the 
 assistance of the L., a steamship which they after- 
 wards fell in with, brought the K. into Falmouth. 
 In suits instituted on behalf of the masters, 
 owners, and crews of the N., the B. and the L., 
 the Court held, that the master, owners, and 
 crew of the N. were not entitled to salvage reward, 
 but awarded salvage to the remaining Plaintiffs. 
 The "KiLLEENA " 6 P. D. 193 
 
 8. Misconduct of Salvors — Diminishing 
 
 amount of Reward.] Violent and overbearing 
 conduct bn the part of salvors, although it may 
 not amount to such wilful misconduct as to cause 
 an entire forfeiture of salvage reward, will yet 
 operate to induce the Court to diminish the 
 amount of the reward. The "Mabie" 7 P, D. 203 
 
 9, Tender — Adequate, hut illiberal Tender 
 
 — Costs.] In a case of salvage, in which the 
 Defendants pleaded a tender and payment into 
 Court of £300, the Court pmnoun.ced for the 
 tender and condemned the Defendants in costs up 
 to the time of payment into Court, but made no 
 order as to the costs incurred after that time. 
 The " Lotus " 7 P. D. 199 
 Contribution — Salvage — Shipowner paying 
 
 money into Court - - 6 P. D. 127 
 
 (See Practice — Admiralty— Limitation 
 
 OF Liability. 5. 
 
 Pleading— Statement of claim 8 P. D. 227 
 
 jSee Practice — Admiralty — Pleading. 
 
 2. 
 
 XVIII. PRACTICE-ADMIRALTY— COSTS. 
 
 1. Arrest — Baill] A ship was arrested, 
 
 and bail required for an exorbitant sum : — Held, 
 that the Plaintiffs must pay the costs and ex- 
 penses incurred by the Defendants in giving this 
 bail. The " George Gordon " 9 P. D. 46 
 
 2. Collision — Both Ships to blame.] 
 
 Where a collision has occurred between two 
 vessels, through the bad navigation of each of 
 them, the owners of the ships are not entitled to 
 the costs of any litigation arising out of the 
 collision. The " Hector " - 8 P. D. 218 
 
 3. Collision — Both Ships to blame — Costs 
 
 of Reference.] Where in an action of damage the 
 Defendant sets up a counter-claim relating to the 
 collision in respect of which the action is biought, 
 and both ships are held to blame, and a reference 
 is ordered to ascertain tlie amount of damage 
 sustained by each ship, each party is, as a general 
 rule, entitled to the costs of eatablishing his claim 
 before the Eegistrar, provided that not more than 
 one-fourth of his claim has been disallowed. The 
 "Mary" - - 7 P. D. 201 
 
 4. Compromise — Solicitors' Costs.] In an 
 
 Admiralty action for wages the Plauitiffs and 
 
( 1103 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1104 ) 
 
 XVIII. PEACTICE — ADMIEALTY — COSTS — 
 
 continued. 
 Defendants compromised the action by payment to 
 each of the Plaintiffs of a certain sum in discharge 
 of the claim and costs. The Plaintiffs left the 
 country without paying their solicitors' costs : — • 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, reversing the judg- 
 ment of Sir E. J. Phillimore, that as there was no 
 evidence that the parties had made the settlement 
 with the intention of depriving the Plaintiffs' 
 solicitors of their lien for their costs, the Defen- 
 dants ought not to be ordered to pay the Plain- 
 tiffs' taxed costs. — Brunsdon v. Allard (2 E. & E. 
 19), In re Sullivan v. Pearson, Ex parte Morrison 
 (L. E. 4 Q. B. 153) approved. The " Hope " 
 
 [8 P. D. 144 
 
 6. Higher and Lower Scale — BuUs 
 
 ef the Supreme Court, 1883, Order Lxv., r. 9, 
 App. N."] Costs on the higher scale will only be 
 granted when special grounds of urgency or im- 
 portance are shewn, as it was intended that the 
 lower scale should be the ordinary scale. — An 
 award of £2400 having been made in a salvage 
 action, an application under Order lxv., rule 9, 
 for costs on the higher scale was made to the 
 Court : — Held, that this was not a special ground 
 so as to take the case out of the ordinary rule. 
 The"Hokace" - - 9 P. D. 86 
 
 6. Printing — Order LXVL, r. 1 — Third 
 
 Counsel.'] The parties to an action between 
 the owners of the B. and the C. agreed that the 
 evidence taken in an action between the owners 
 of the A. and the C, and printed for the purpose of 
 an appeal, should be used in the action between 
 the B. and the C. The Plaintiffs paid the 
 solicitors of the A. for such prints, and charged 
 the sums so paid in addition to the regular charge 
 of Zd. per folio, as though the printing had been 
 done in this action, under Order lxvi., rule 7 : — 
 Held, on objection to the taxation, that the charge 
 of dd. per folio was not improper. — In an action 
 arising out of a collision where damage had been 
 done to the amount of £2000 : — Held, that the 
 charges of a third counsel should not be disallowed. 
 The '' Mammoth " - - 9 P. D. 126 
 
 7. Eeferenoe.] As by Order lxv., rule 1, 
 
 of the Eules of the Supreme Court, 1883, the 
 costs of all proceedings are in the discretion of 
 the Court, the general rule of practice in the 
 Admiralty Coxirt as to the costs of reference, 
 namely, that when more than a fourth is struck 
 off a claim, each party pays his own costs, and 
 when more than a third the claimant pays the other 
 party's costs, is wrong, and the Court must exercise 
 its discretion according to the circumstances of each 
 particular case. — The Empress Eugenie (Lush. 140) 
 overruled. The " Fkiedebeeg " - 10 P. D. 112 
 
 8, Tender— B«?es of Court, 1883, Order 
 
 LXY., rule 1.] The Defendant in an action for 
 salvage, after action brought, tendered and paid 
 into Court £200 in respect of the claim. The 
 Court upheld the tender. On an application by 
 the Defendants to be allowed the whole costs of 
 the action : — Held, that the discretion vested in 
 the Court by Order lxv., rule 1, ought to be 
 exercised in this case and in similar cases by 
 giving Plaintiffs the costs up to the date of pay- 
 ment into Court, and Defendants those subse- 
 quent to that event. But that this general rule 
 
 XVIII. PBACTICE — ADMIRALTY — COSTS — 
 
 mntinued. 
 would be departed from when salvors unreason- 
 ably refuse an offer made before suit: — Held, 
 further, that an offer of a sum in respect of salvage 
 services should not include any sum in respect of 
 the Plaintiff's costs. — The Thracian (3 A. & B. 
 504) not followed. The " William SYMiNGTOt! " 
 
 £10 P. D. 1 
 
 XIX. PEACTICE— ADMIEALTY — JUHISDIC- 
 TION. 
 
 1. Action in rem — Action under Lord 
 
 Cam-pbelVs Act (9 & 10 Vict. c. 9S)— Admiralty 
 Court Act, 1861 (24 <fc 25 Vict. a. 10), ss. 7, 35.] 
 The Admuralty Court Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict, 
 c. 10) which by sect. 7 gave the Court of Admi- 
 ralty "jurisdiction over any claim for damage 
 done by any ship," did not give jurisdiction over 
 claims for damages for loss of life under Lord 
 Campbell's Act (9 & 10 Vict. c. 93): and the 
 Admiralty Division cannot entertain an action in 
 rem for damages for loss of life under Lord Camp- 
 bell's Act : — So Jield affirming the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal.— T7ie Franconia (2 P. D. 163) 
 overruled. Sewaed v. " Vera Cedz." The 
 " Veea Ceuz " - 9 P. D. 96 ; 10 App. Cas. 69 
 
 2. Action in rem — Foreign Sliip — Board 
 
 of Trade— 17 & \9,Vict. c. 104, s. 512.] A refosal 
 by the Board of Trade to institute an inquiry 
 under 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 512, is not a condi- 
 tion precedent to an action in rem against a 
 foreign ship. The " Veea Csrz " (No. 1) 
 
 [9 P. D. 88 
 
 3. Previous Decision — Court of A'ppeal?^ 
 
 When the Court of Appeal is equally divided so 
 that the decision appealed against stands im- 
 reversed, the, result of the case in the Court of 
 Appeal affects the actual parties to the litiga- 
 tion only, and the Court, when a similar case is 
 brought before it, is not bound by the result of 
 the previous case. The " Veba Ceuz " (No. 2) 
 
 [9 P. D. 96 
 
 4. Transfer of Action after Judgment re- 
 covered — Pending Actions in High Court — Discre- 
 tion — County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 
 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 71), s. 6.] A foreign vessel 
 was under arrest in three actions of necessaries, 
 one in the City of London Court and the other two 
 in this Court, and after judgment pronounced in 
 the City of London Court was about to be sold by 
 the bailiff of that Court. In these circumstances 
 the Plaintiff in one of the actions in this Court 
 applied for an order to transfer the action in the 
 City of London Court to this Court, alleging that 
 a sale by the marshal would be to the benefit of 
 all parties. — The Court made the order, but 
 directed that it should be without prejudice to 
 any priorities claimed by the Plaintiff in the 
 action ordered to be transferred. The " Immaco- 
 lata Conoezione " - - 8 P. D. 34 
 
 8. Vice-Admiralty Jurisdiction — Suit hy 
 
 six Seamen for Wages and Compensation — Ordvrs 
 in Council (2 * 3 Will. 4, c. 51), s. 15— Merchant 
 Shipping Act, 1854, s. 189.] By au Order in 
 Council, sect. 15, passed in pursuance of 2 cfc 3 
 Will. 4, c. 51, the Vice-Admiridty Court has juris- 
 diction to entertain a suit brouglit by any number 
 of seamen not exceeding six, to recover their wages. 
 
( 1105 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1106 ) 
 
 :XIX. PRACTICE — ALMIBALTY — JTJEISDIC- 
 
 TION — continued. 
 The Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, sect. 189, 
 •does not take away such rigbt of suit so long as 
 the total aggregate amount claimed by such 
 seamen exceeds £50. — Where in a suit brought 
 by sis seamen in the Vice-Admiralty Court, the 
 -Judge found that a total amount of £203 19s. 8d. 
 was due to themi, partly for wages and partly for 
 wrongful dismissal; but that the amount diie to 
 •each was less than £50 :• — Held, that under the 
 ^bove rule and section the Judge was wrong in 
 dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction, and 
 rthat a decree for £203 19s. 8d. should be made. 
 Phillips v. Highlaku Kailwat CoJirANT. The 
 " Febbet " - - - 8 App. Cas. 329 
 
 6. Waters not part of High Seas — Doclts 
 
 —County Court — 3 & i Vict. c. 65, s. 6 — Ad~ 
 imiralty Courts Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 10), e. 7.] 
 -A collision occurred in a dock connected with the 
 Kiver Thames by channels provided with gates 
 and looks. An action was brought in a Cpunty 
 Court having Admiralty jurisdiction in, respect 
 -of damages arising out of the collision. On an 
 ^application for a prohibition: — Held, that the 
 claim was within the Admiralty Courts Act, 1861, 
 iS. 7, and that the County Court had jurisdiction. 
 The Queen v. The Judse of the City op Lon- 
 £DON COUET - - 8 Q. B. S. 609 
 
 PBACTICE— BANKETJPTCY. 
 
 See Oases under Bankbuptot. 
 JEACTICE— CENTEAL CBIMINAI COUET 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 479 
 
 See CouBT — ^Centbal Cbiminal Court. 
 PEACTICE— COUNTY COUET. 
 
 See Cases under County Coubt. 
 
 NOTICE— DIVOECE :— 
 
 
 Col. 
 
 I. Seevice - 
 
 - 
 
 - 1105 
 
 II. Parties - 
 
 - 
 
 - 1106 
 
 III. Pleading 
 
 - 
 
 1106 
 
 IV. Evidence 
 
 - 
 
 - 1106 
 
 V. Intebvention - 
 
 - 
 
 1107 
 
 VI. Alimony 
 
 - 
 
 - 1107 
 
 VII. Desebtiohi 
 
 - 
 
 1109 
 
 "VIII. Condonation 
 
 - 
 
 1109 
 
 IX. Misconduct op Petitioneb 1110 
 
 X. Delay - - - - lllO 
 
 XI. Decbbe - - - 1110 
 
 XII. Damages - - - 1111 
 
 XIII. Appeal - 1111 
 
 xrv. Nullity op Mabeiage 1112 
 
 XV. Kestittjtion OP Conjugal Eights 1113 
 
 XVI. Sepabation Deed - - llli 
 
 XVII. Settlements - 1115 
 
 .XVIII. Custody op Childben - 1118 
 
 XIX. Sequesteation - - - ms 
 
 XX. Costs - - 1118 
 
 I. PEACTICE— DIVOECE— SEEVICE. 
 
 Out of Jurisdiction — Bestitution of 
 
 Conjugal Bights — Service of Petition — Jurisdic- 
 tion.'] The Court has no power to allow service 
 .abroad of a petition for restitution of conjugal 
 .rights. Chichester «. Chichesteb 10 P. D. 186 
 
 II. PEACTICE— DIVOECE— PAETIES, 
 
 1. Alleged Adulteress.] In a suit by a 
 
 wife for dissolution of marriage, the Court, upon 
 application on behalf of the person with whom it 
 was alleged that the husband, had committed 
 adultery, directed that she be made a Kespoudent. 
 Bell v. Bell - - 8 P, D. 217 
 
 2. Co-Eespondents.] Ifa petition alleges 
 
 adulteiy with persons unknown the. order of the 
 Court must be obtained dispensing with making 
 them co-^Kespondents, notwithstanding that there 
 are already other co-iKespondents who have been 
 served with process.' Pent y v. Penty 7 P. D. 19 
 
 3. — p Lunatic Petitioner — Dissolution of Mar- 
 riage-^Committee.'] , The lunp,cy of a husband 
 or wife is not a bar to a. suit by the conimittep for 
 the dissolution of the lunatic's marriage.^-Suoh a 
 suit may be instituted by the committee of the 
 lunatic. Bakeb v. Bakeb - 6 P. D. 12 
 
 III. PEACTICE— DIVOECE— PLEADING. 
 
 1. • Affidavit verifying Petition.] A 
 
 petitioner in a. divorce suit Ijeing on militai-y 
 service, and unaljle to make the usual affidavit 
 verifying the petitipn, the Court allowed thij peti- 
 tion to be filed if verified' by the affidavit of his 
 solicitor, but ordered that the Petitioner's affidavit 
 should also be filed as soon as possiblp. Ex parte 
 Bbuce - - 8 P. D. 16 
 
 2. Desertion — Petition filed after. Deser- 
 tion for a few Months — Second Petition after 
 Desertion for Two Years.'] , A wife's petition for 
 dissolution of marriage by reason of cruelty and 
 adultery was, by leave of the Court, withdrawn, 
 and petition afterwards filed for dissolution of 
 marriage by reason of the samci^ultery audi also 
 by reason of desertion, for two years, which had 
 not accrued at the date of the first jietition. 
 Knapp v. Knapp - - 6 P. D. 10 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— DIVOECE— EVIDENCE. 
 
 1. Commission to examine Witnesses^- 
 
 Commission addressed to a Court which has ceased 
 to exist] In a divorce suit a commission to exa- 
 mine witnesses in India was issued addressed to 
 ■' The Judges of the Supreme Court at Calcutta, 
 or such person or persons as they or one of them 
 may depute." The Supreme Court at Calcutta 
 had been abolished in 1861, and all its powers 
 transferred to a new Court called "The High 
 Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal." 
 The witnesses were examined by a person de- 
 puted by a Judge of the High Court at Fort 
 William : — Held, affirming the decision of the 
 President, that tlie evidence was receivable, for 
 that the commission must be taken to be ad- 
 dressed to the Judges of the highest Court for the 
 time being at Calcutta. Wilson v. AVilson 
 
 [9 P. D. 8 
 
 2. Lunatic — Suittoperpettmte Testimony — 
 
 niegitinuiey — Bules of Court, 1883, Order xxxril., 
 r. 35.] A lunatic who had several children was 
 divoiced from his wife on the ground of the wife's 
 adultery. One of the wife's children born before 
 the divorce was alleged to be illegitimate, and 
 th^ committee presented a petition that proceed: 
 ings might be taken to perpetuate the testimony 
 of the illegitimacy : — Held, that the proper course 
 to pursue was for the Court to make a settlement 
 
( no7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1108 ) 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— DIVORCE— EVIDENCE— con«(J. 
 of some of the lunatic's property on his children, 
 and for the legitimate children to raise the ques- 
 tion of the right of the alleged illegitimate child 
 to participate, and then to bring an action to per- 
 petuate the testimony. In be Stoek 9 P. D. ISO 
 
 V. PEACTICE— DIVORCE— INTEEVENTION. 
 
 " Material Facts not brought before the 
 
 Court" — 2S & 24 Vict. u. 144, s. 7.] A wife 
 sued for dissolution of marriage on the ground 
 of adultery and crueliy. The husband alleged 
 that the wife had been guilty of adultery. At 
 the trial a decree nisi for dissolution was made. 
 The husband applied for a new trial on the 
 ground that fresh evidence had been discovered 
 to shew the wife's adultery before the decree 
 nisi, and filed affidavits alleging facts not tnown 
 at the trial which went to prove adultery. He 
 obtained a, rule nisi, but the rule was dis- 
 charged on ajgumeut. The husband appealed. 
 Immediately afterwards an uncle of the husband 
 entered an appearance as intervener, and filed 
 aifidavits which were substantially the same as 
 those used on the application for a new trial. 
 There was nothing to shew that he was acting on 
 behalf of or in collusion with the Respondent. The 
 wife moved to make the decree for dissolution 
 absolute. This was refused, but leave was given 
 her to move the Court to reject the intervention. 
 The husband abandoned his appeal from the re- 
 fusal of a new trial. After this the motion of the 
 wife to reject the intervention of the uncle was 
 heard by the President and refused. The wife 
 appealed : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the 
 Act 23 & 24 Vict. c. 144, s. 7, authorizes inter- 
 vention by any person where material facts have 
 not been brought before the Court, whether by 
 intention or through accident. — Whether where 
 the petitioner, after the decree nibi, is guilty of 
 conduct disentitling him or her to have the decree 
 made absolute, the right to intervene is confined 
 to the Queen's Proctor, gussre : — Held, that the 
 words " not brought before the Court," mean, not 
 brought before the Court at a time when the Court 
 can act upon them for the purpose of seeing 
 whether a decree nisi ought to be made, and that 
 the bringing them before the Court on an appli- 
 cation for a new trial is not bringing them before 
 the Court within the meaning of this clause, so as 
 to prevent an intervention. — Whether the rules as 
 to granting a new trial on the ground of fresh 
 evidence discovered shewing misconduct in the 
 petitioner are the same as in a case between ordi- 
 nary litigants, qusere. — ^Where a respondent is not 
 entitled to a new trial, intervention on the ground 
 of fresh evidence as to acts prior to the decree nisi 
 will not be allowed if the intervener is merely 
 acting on behalf of and in collusion with the Be- 
 spondent ; but the fact that he is a near relative 
 of the Respondent is no ground for rejecting the 
 intervention : — Held, therefore, that in the present 
 case, the facts alleged being undoubtedly material, 
 and tlie affidavits making a case which shewed 
 that there was ground for investigating them, tlie 
 intervention had rightly been allowed. Howakth 
 ■u. Howakth - - - 9 P. D. 218 
 
 VI. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— ALIMONY. 
 
 Pendente nte— Decree Nisi—W & 21 Vict. 
 
 VI. PEACXICE— DIVORCE— ALIMONY— co»i(J.. 
 c. 85, g. 32—23 & 24 Viet. e. 144, s. 7.] The Court 
 has power to order alimony pendente lite notwith- 
 standing a decree nisi has been made for dissolu- 
 tion of marriage. — Latham v. Latham (2 Sw. & 
 Tr. 298) overruled. Ellis v. Ellis 8 P. D. 188 
 
 2. Permanent Maintenance — Dissolution 
 
 of Marriage— W & 21 Vict. c. 85, 6. 82.] A 
 decree nisi for dissolution of marriage was made 
 against a wife on the 3rd of August, 1880, and 
 was made absolute in due course. The wife ap- 
 pealed, and her appeal was dismissed oq the 19th 
 of July, 1881. On the 30th of July she took out 
 a summons to have permanent maintenance- 
 allowed her. Owing to her absence abroad the 
 summons was not heard till December, 1882, when 
 the President dismissed it. The wife appealed : 
 Held, on appeal, that as the application to the 
 President was out of time, and he had exercised 
 a discretion under the special circumstances of 
 the case, the Court would not interfere with his 
 decision. — ^Vhether special circumbtances are re- 
 quired to induce the Court to give permanent 
 alimony to a wife against whom a decree for dis- 
 solution is made, and who has no means of sup- 
 port, qusere. Eobehtson v. Eoeeetson 8 P. D. 94 
 
 3. Permanent Maintenance — 20 & 21 
 
 Vict. c. 85, s. 32—29 & 30 Vict. c. 32,) s. 1— 
 Susband^s Property Abroad.^ The provisions of 
 2U & 21 Vict. c. 85, s. 32, respecting permanent 
 maintenance empower the Court to order a gross 
 or annual sum to he secured for the benefit of 
 the wife, but not to make a direct order on the 
 husband to pay a gross or annual or other period- 
 ical sum to the wife. — The qualification that the 
 maintenance is to be for the wife " dum sola et 
 casta vixerit" is not usually inserted in the order 
 but in the deed of security. — The provisions of 
 29 & 30 Vict. c. 32, respecting the payment of 
 monthly or weekly sums to the wife do not apply 
 to the case of a husband who has properly abroad 
 sufficient and available for a security : — Per 
 Jessel, M.R., an order for maintenance cannot be 
 made in the alternative for securing a gross or 
 annual sum of money, or else for the payment of 
 monthly or weekly sums by the husband. Medley 
 V. Meplet " - 7 P. D. 122 
 
 4. Permanent Maintenance — Lunatic's 
 
 Estate, Allowance out of — Assignment — 20 & 21 
 Vict. c. 85, s. 23.] On a decree for judicial separa- 
 tion an order was made for payment of £60 a year 
 to the wife as permanent alimony. The husband 
 was afterwards found lunatic by inquisition, and 
 by an order in Lunacy and Chancery the dividends 
 of a sum of stock to which he was entitled in a 
 Chancery suit were ordered to be carried to his 
 account in the Lunacy and £60 a year to be paid 
 out of them to his wife in respect of her alimony 
 till further order. The wife assigned the annuity 
 to a pm-chaser, who presented a petition in Lunacy 
 and in the suit to have the annuity paid to her — 
 Held, that the petition must be refused, on the 
 ground that whether the annuity was considered 
 as alimony, or as an allowance made to the wife 
 by the Court in Lunacy, it was not assignable. 
 In re RoBiNSON 27 Ch. D, 160 
 
 6. Permanent Maintenance — Weekly or 
 
 Monthly Payments — Variation — 29 (fc 30 fict. 
 
( 1109 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1110 ) 
 
 VI. PRACTICE— DIVOKCE— ALIMONY— conic?. 
 .;. ■62.'] The provisions of 29 & .30 Vict. c. 32, do 
 not apply exclusively to the case of a poor man, 
 and the Oourt may order sums of considerable 
 amount to be paid weekly or monthly as per- 
 manent maintenance, and may from time to time 
 modify the order. Jakdine v. Jabdme 
 
 [6 P. D. 213 
 
 Nullity of marriage - - 9 P. D. 80 
 
 See Pkaotice — ^DivonCE ^ Nullity of 
 Makuiage. 1. 
 
 VII. PRACTICE— DIVOEGE—DESEETION. 
 
 1. Adultery.] A husband in 1880 ceased 
 
 to reside ■with his wife on the pretence that his 
 business compelled him to be absent, but he sup- 
 plied her with necessaries and corresponded with 
 her and visited her occasionally, and a child was 
 bom in February, 1884. In January, 1884, the 
 wife discovered that he had for years been living 
 with another woman: — Held, that his conduct 
 did not amount to desertion for two years. — 
 Semhle, that desertion commenced from the time 
 when his wife discovered the adulteiy, and that 
 after a lapse of two years from that time she 
 would be entitled to. a dissolution of her marriage 
 Fakmee v. Fakmee - 9 P. D. 246 
 
 2. Desertion by VeHtionei — Agreement 
 
 to live separate.] A husband, without reasonable 
 excuse, obtained from his wife an agreement that 
 they should live apart from each other, which 
 they accordingly did, and she subsequently com- 
 mitted adultery ; — Held, that under the circum- 
 stances he had deserted her, and that a petition 
 by him for dissolution of the marriage must be 
 dismissed. Dagg v. Dagg - 7 P. D. 17 
 
 3. Desertion by Wife — Judicial Separa- 
 tion.] Judicial separation decreed byreason of 
 the wife's desertion of her husband for two years 
 and upwards without reasonable cause. Millae 
 o. Millae - 8 P. D. 187 
 
 VIII. PRACTICE— DIVOECE— CONDONATION. 
 
 1. Cruelty — Condonation hy Deed — Be- 
 
 vival by subsequent Adultery.] A husband had 
 been guilty of cruelty. He and his wife separated 
 under the provisions of a deed by which it was 
 agreed that no proceedings should be taken by 
 either party against the other in respect of any 
 cause of complaint which had arisen before the 
 date of the deed, and tbat every offence, if any, 
 committed by either party against the other 
 should be considered as condoned, and that in 
 any proceedings by either party against the other 
 in respect of any cause of complaint which might 
 thereafter arise, no offence committed by either 
 party before the deed should be pleaded or be ad- 
 missible in evidence: — Held, affirming the de- 
 cision of the President, that subsequent adulteiy 
 by the husband did not revive the wife's right to 
 complain of the cruelty committed before the 
 deed, so as to enable her to obtain a decree for 
 dissolution of the marriage. — Whether adultery 
 by a husband which has been condoned is a bar 
 to his obtaining a dissolution on the ground of 
 .subsequent adultery of the wife, qumre. Eose v 
 Rose 7 P. D. 225 ; 8 P. D. 98 
 
 2. Damages.] Oondonation of the wife's 
 
 adultery is no answer to the husband's claim for 
 
 VIII. PRACTICE- DIVORCE — CONDONATION 
 
 — continued. 
 damages against the co-Respondent. — Norris y. 
 Norris, Laioson and Mason (4 Sw. & Tr. 237 ; 
 30 L. J. (P. & M.) Ill) distinguished. Pomeko 
 V. Pomeeo 10 P. D. 174 
 
 3. Desertion — Revival.] A husband 
 
 having been guilty of desertion and adultery tho 
 wife forgave him and they returned to cohabita- 
 tion. He subsequently committed adultery : — 
 Held, that the subsequent adultery revived the 
 desertion, and that the wife was entitled to a dis- 
 solution of the marriage. Blandfoed v. Bland- 
 
 FOED - - - 8 P. D. 19 
 
 IX. PRACTICE- DIVORCE— MISCONDUCT OF 
 PETITIONER. 
 
 1. — —Adultery — Wife's Fetition — Decree 
 Nin — Discretion.] A husband obtained a decree 
 nisi by reason of his wife's adultery, but the 
 decree was rescinded, and his petition dismissed 
 by reason of liis cruelty and adultery. The parties 
 lived together again, and he committed other acts 
 of cruelty, and was also guilty of rape, when the 
 wife filed a petition for dissolution of the mar- 
 riage. The Court under the circumstances granted 
 the wife a decree nisi. Collins v. Colliks 
 
 [9 P. D. 231- 
 
 2. Conduct conducing to Adultery.] A 
 
 Petitioner and Respondent separated by mutual 
 consent shortly after the marriage, and only met 
 once afterwards. The Petitioner allowed her a 
 small sum for her support, and sixteen years after 
 the marriage discovered that she had committed 
 adultery : — Held, under the circumstances, that 
 the Petitioner had conduced to the adultery. 
 Petition dismissed. Hawkins v. Hawkins 
 
 [10 P. D. 177 
 
 3. Wilful Neglect — Imprisonment for 
 
 Criminal Offence.] Semble, that the conviction 
 of a wife for an offence against the criminal law 
 is no justification for refusing further cohabitation 
 with her, and that, if such refusal conduces to 
 her adultery, the Court will not grant her husband 
 a dissolution of his mairiage.- Williamson v. 
 VAilliamson - - - 7 P. D. 76 
 
 X. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— DELAY. 
 
 Poverty of Petitioner— Prew(Otts Decree 
 
 for Judicial Separation.] A husband in 1878 ob- 
 tained a judicial separation, and £50 damages 
 against the co-Bespondent, but he took no steps 
 to recover the damages. The wife continued to 
 cohabit with the co-Respondent, and in 1882 the 
 husband petitioned for a dissolution of his mar- 
 riage. The reason which he gave for the delay 
 and for not enforcing the claim for damages was 
 that he had no money, being only in receipt of 
 weekly wages, and that he hoped his wife would 
 come back and live with him : — Held, reversing 
 the decision of the President, that the delay was 
 not unreasonable, and that the Petitioner was en- 
 titled to a decree. Mason v. Mason 
 
 [7 P. D. 233 ; 8 P. D. 21 
 
 XI. PRACTICE— DIVORCE- DECREE. 
 
 1. - — -Bigamy of Petitioner.] A husband 
 believing that his wife was dead married again, 
 and subsequently discovered that his wife was 
 alive and had committed adultery : — Held, that, 
 
( 1111 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1112 ) 
 
 ^ XI. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— DECEEE—conM. 
 
 -notwithstanding the bigamy, he was entitled to a 
 dissolution of his mamage. Fkeegakd v. Fbee- 
 • GAED, CowPEK & Lucas - 8 P. D. 186 
 
 2. Maintenance — Bum Casta Clause.'] A 
 
 deed had been executed securing a maintenance 
 for the wife after the decree absolute. The deed 
 -did not contain a dum casta clause : — Held, that 
 the Court had no power to set aside the deed by 
 )creason that the wife was no longer chaste. Bbad- 
 iET V. Beadley 7 P. D. 237 
 
 3. Ee-marriage before Decree absolute.] 
 
 A. E. W. obtained in 1868 a decree nisi for disso- 
 ■lution of her marriage, and iu 1871, believing 
 that the decree had been made absolute, she mar- 
 .lied again. — The Court, the Queen's Proctor not 
 opposing, made the decree absolute. Wiokham 
 V. Wiokham - - 6 P. D. 11 
 
 XII. PEACTICE—DIVOECE— DAMAGES. 
 
 Payment into Court — Proceedings under 
 
 ilie Debtors Acf] The Court having ordered 
 <lamages to be paid into the registry, and proceed- 
 ings in default being impracticable, as there was 
 no one to institute them, the Court ordered the 
 damages to be paid to the Petitioner, he under- 
 taking to pay them into Court. Gtte v. Gyte 
 
 [10 P. D. 185 
 
 XIII. PEACTICE—DIVOECE— APPEAL. 
 
 By 44 & 45 Vict. c. 68 (the Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1881), s. 9, all appeals which, 
 under sect. 55 of 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, or under any 
 other Act, might he brought to the full Court estab- 
 lished by the said- first-mentioned Act, are to be 
 brought to Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, and not 
 ■to the said full Court. 
 
 The decision of the Court of Appeal on any 
 ■question arising under the Acts relating to divorce 
 
 ■ and matrimonial causes, or to the declaration of 
 legitimacy, is final, except where the decision cither 
 is upon the grant or refusal of a decree on a petition 
 
 Jor dissolution or nullity of marriage, or for a de- 
 claration of legitimacy, or is upon a question of law 
 on which the said Court of Appeal give leave to 
 appeal ; and, save as aforesaid, no appeal lies to 
 the House of Lords under the said Acts. 
 
 Subject to any order made by the House of Lm'ds 
 in accordance iijith the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 
 1876, every appeal to the House of Lords against 
 any such decision is to be brought within one month 
 
 ■ after the decision appealed against is pronounced 
 by the Court of Appeal if the House of Lords is 
 
 ■ then sitting, or, if not, within fourteen days after 
 the House of Lords next sits. 
 
 The section, so far as is consistent with flie tenor 
 thereof, is to be construed as one with the said 
 Acts. 
 
 Sect. 10. No appeal lies from an order absolute 
 for dissolution or nullity of marriage in favour of 
 any party who, having had time and opportunity 
 to appeal from the decree nisi on which such order 
 ■is founded; has not appealed therefrom. 
 
 And see Pbaotioe — Divorce — Eestitction 
 
 OF CoNJUQAL Eights — Statutes. 
 1. Time for appealing — Appeal from Deci- 
 sion of Court of Appeal in Cases from Probate and 
 Divorce Division — Divorce and Matrimonial Act, 
 1868 — Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876 — Judica- 
 ■ture Act, 1881.] Since the Judicature Act of 
 
 XIII. PRACTICE— DrVOECE—APPEAI—cofiR 
 1881, an appeal to the House of Lords in a matri- 
 monial cause (where an appeal lies) can only be 
 from a decision of the Court of Appeal ; and such 
 an appeal must be brought within one month 
 after the decision appealed against is pronounced 
 by the Court of Appeal, if the House Of Lords is 
 then sitting, or if not, within fourteen days after 
 the House of Lords next sits Cleaveb ». Clea- 
 VEB - - - 9 App. Cas. 631 
 
 2. Time for appealing — Application for 
 
 New Trial— 23 <fe 24 Vict. c. 144, «. 2.; 36 & 37 
 Vict. c. 66, s. IG ; 38 <£ 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 18 ; 
 44 <£ 45 Vict. c. 68, s. 9.] An appeal from a deci- 
 sion of a judge of the Probate Division granting 
 or refusing a new trial in the Divorce Court must 
 be made within fourteen days in accordance with 
 the Divorce Court Act, 1860 (23 & 24 Vict. c. 144), 
 6. 2. Ahieb v. Ahieb - 10 P. D. 110 
 
 XIV. PEACTICE — DIVOECE — milLITY OF 
 MAEEIAGE. 
 
 1. Alimony — Decree Nisi.'] In a suit for 
 
 nullity alimony continues payable after the decree 
 nisi until the decree is made absolute. S. falsely 
 CALLED B. v. B. - - 9 P. D. 80 
 
 2. Application by Eespondent to make De- 
 cree absolute.] The Court wiU not upon the appli- 
 cation of the Eespondent make a decree nisi 
 absolute for nullity of marriage by reason of 
 the impotence of the Eespondent. Halfen r. 
 
 BODWNGTON - 6 P. D. 13 
 
 3. Impotence — Delay — Sincenty.] At 
 
 the end of seven years' cohabitation a marriage 
 had not been consummated through the impotence 
 of the alleged husband. The alleged wife subse- 
 quently cohabited with another man, and upon 
 the alleged husband discovering her misconduct 
 she instituted a suit for nullity of marriage 
 against him and he a suit for dissolution of mar- 
 riage against her: — Held, that the proof of impo- 
 tence being clear her conduct did not shew such 
 a want of sincerity as to deprive her of her right 
 to have the marriage annulled. — When the impo- 
 tence is undoubted mere delay is not sufficient to 
 disentitle the injured party to relief. M. othee- 
 wisE D. u. D. - - 10 P. D. 76 
 
 4. Impotence — Possible Cure.] After a 
 
 partial cohabitation of two years and eight months 
 it appeared that the woman was impottnt, but 
 that she miglit probably be cured if she would 
 submit to an operation involving no great risk of 
 life. This she refused to do. The Court made 
 a decree nisi of nullity of marriage. L. v. L., 
 
 FALSELY CALLED W. - - 7 P. D. 16 
 
 5. Impotence — Suits for Nullity of Mar- 
 riage and Dissolution of Marriage— Cross-exami- 
 nation as to Adultery.] A suit had been in- 
 stituted for nullity of marriage by reason of 
 impotence, and a cross-suit for dissolution of mar- 
 riage by reason of adultery : — Held, that, in the 
 first suit, tlie petitioner in that suit might be 
 cross-e.xamined as to her improper intimacy with 
 the co-Eespondeut in the cross-suit. M. v. D. 
 
 [10 P. D. 175 
 
 6. Insanity.] The burden of shewing 
 
 that tlie Eespondent was insane at tlie time of the 
 marriage lies upon the party asserting it, and the 
 Court has to determine whether the Eespondent 
 
( 1113 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1114 ) 
 
 XIV. PBACTICE — DIVORCE — NULLITY OF 
 
 VLAHRIAai^— continued. 
 was capable of understanding the nature of the 
 contract, and the duties and respousibllltiea which 
 it creates, and was free from the influence of mor- 
 bid deluaiouB upon the subject. Ddbham v. Due- 
 ham. Hunter v. Edney, otherwise Hunter. 
 Cannon v. Smallet, otherwise Cannon 
 
 [10 P. D. 80 
 
 7. Interrogatories.] In a suit for nullity 
 
 of marriage the Court has power to order in- 
 terrogatories. Euston v. Smith (falsely called 
 Euston) ' - - 9 P. D. 87 
 
 8. Interrogatories — Jurisdiction of Di- 
 vorce Division — Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 
 1873 (36 ($; 37 Vict. c. 66), es. 16, i3— Interrogatories 
 necessarily criminating — Felony.^ In a suit for 
 nullity of marriage, the Court has Jiower to give 
 leave to administer interrogatories between the 
 parties to the suit; for suits of that kind were 
 foi-merly within the jurisdiction of the Ecclesias- 
 tical Courts, which had power to allow interroga- 
 tories to be administered between the parties, and 
 now all the jurisdiction of the Ecclesiastical Courts 
 as to suits for nullity of marriage (including 
 matters of practice and procedure) is vested in 
 tlie Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division. 
 And, farther, even if the power to allow interro- 
 gatories to be administered between the parties 
 did not otherwise exist, it would be conferred 
 upon the Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Divi- 
 sion by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 
 1873 ; for at the time of passing that statute the 
 Superior Courts of Common Law and the Court of 
 Chancery had power to allow interrogatories to be 
 administered between the parties to a suit ; and 
 by s. 16, all the jurisdiction of those Courts, in- 
 cluding the ministerial powers and authorities 
 incident thereto, was transferred to and vested in 
 the High Court of Justice, and by s. 23 the juris- 
 diction transferred to the High Court may (so far 
 as regards procedure and practice) be exercised in 
 the same manner, as itmiglit have been exercised 
 by any of the Courts whose jurisdiction has been 
 transferred. — Leave to administer interrogatories 
 ought not to be refused on the ground, that it is 
 plain from the nature ^of the case I that they must 
 necessarily criminate the party interrogated, who 
 cannot answer them , without admitting that he 
 has' been guilty of felony: he may, however, 
 decline to answer them. — Semble, that inasmuch 
 as proceedings for divorce and for other matri- 
 monial causes are excluded from the operation of 
 the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883, by Order 
 Lxvin., rule 1 (d), an application for leave to 
 administer inten'ogatories between the parties to 
 a suit ought not to be made to a registrar of the 
 Divorce Division ; but it ought to be made in the 
 first instance to one of the judges of the Court. 
 Harvey v. Lovekin - - 10 P. D. 122 
 
 9. Variation of Settlements.] A marriage 
 
 having been annulled, the Court ordered all the 
 property of the alleged wife to be reconveyed to 
 her freed from the trusts of the settlement upon 
 the alleged marriage. A. v. M. - 10 P. D. 178 
 
 XV. PRACTICE — DIVORCE — RESTITUTION 
 OE CONJUGAL RIGHTS. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 68 {the Matrimonial 
 
 XV. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— RESTITUTION OF' 
 
 CONJUGAL RIGHTS— coriitMMed. 
 Causes Act, 1884), declares that a decree far re- 
 stitution of conjugal rights shall not he enforced bijj 
 attachment. Where the application is ma^e py the 
 wife the Court may order that in the event of the 
 decree notbeing com,plied with the respondent shalll 
 make payme/nts as for alimony. This may i? 
 secured by a proper deed settled by one of the Con- 
 veyancing Counsel of tlie Court. 
 
 Sect. 3. Where the application is madiC by the ■ 
 husband the Court may order the property of the ■ 
 wife to he paid or settled for the benefit of tlie 
 petitioner and children of tlie marriage. 
 
 Sect. 4. Tlie Court may vary any order for pay- 
 ment. 
 
 Sect. 5. Non-compliance with the decree shall be 
 deemed desertion., and a suit for judicial separation 
 may be instituted. When any husband has also- 
 been guilty of adultery, the ihife may petition for 
 dissolution of marriage. 
 
 Sect. 6. Tlie Court may before final decree for 
 restitution of cortjugal rights, or after final decree 
 if not complied with, make orders with respect to- 
 custody and education of children. 
 
 1. Attachment — Sufficient Obedience.'] The 
 
 duty of the Court to issue an attachment for non- 
 obedience of a decree for restitution of conjugal 
 rights was the same sinqe the Divorce Acts as it 
 was before. — It was not a sufficient compliance by 
 a husband with a decree for restitution of conjugal 
 rights that he had provided his wife with a suit- 
 able establishment and sufficient income. W«l- ■ 
 DON V. Weldon - 9 P. D. 52 
 
 2. Contempt — Attachment — Payment of 
 
 Costs.] A Kespondent being in contempt for non- 
 obedienoe of an order for restitution of conj'ugal 
 rights, the petitioner applied for a writ of attach- 
 ment against him : — Held, that since the passing 
 of the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1884, the writ 
 could not be issued notwithstanding that the con- 
 tempt existed prior to that Act -.—Keld, also, that 
 the writ could not issue for non-payment of costs. 
 Application refused, "Weldon v. Weldon 
 
 [10 P. D. 72 
 
 Service — Out of jurisdiction - 10 P. D. 186 
 
 See Pkagtioe — Divorce— Service. 
 
 XVI. PBACTICE — DIVORCE — SEPARATION 
 DEED. 
 
 1. Agreement not to sue — Covenant by 
 
 Wife not to suffer Restitution of Conjugal Rights.'] 
 By a deed of separation between the husband, tlae 
 wife, and a trustee, containing a recital that the 
 husband and wife had agreed to live separate, the 
 husband covenanted with the trustee to pay the 
 wife £25 a year till their only child should attain 
 tweuty-one, or die under that age or become charge- - 
 able to the husband, and to allow her to enjoy all 
 her present and future property for her separate 
 use, and the trustee covenanted with the husband 
 to;indemnify him against tlie debts of the wife, 
 and that the wife should not take any proceedings 
 to compel him to live with her. The annuity was 
 paid untU the child died, a minor. The wife after 
 this presented her petition for the restitution of" 
 conjugal rights,' and the husband pleaded the 
 
 separation deed. Butt, J., dismissed the petition. 
 
 Held, that an agreement entered into by a wife- 
 
( 1115 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1116 ) 
 
 XVI. PRACTICE — DIVORCE — SEPAEATION 
 
 DEED — continued. 
 for valuable consideration, and without fraud or 
 ■duress, that she Avill not take proceedings to 
 compel her husband to return to cohabitation, is 
 a bar to such proceedings : — Held, also, that the 
 Tecital of the agreement to live separate, being 
 contained in a deed to which the wife was a party, 
 was evidence of a contract by her to allow her 
 husband to live separate from her. and that after 
 accepting benefits under the deed, she could not 
 be heeird to say that she had not contracted, 
 because the covenant not to sue was entered into 
 only by the trustee and not by her. — Marsliall v. 
 Marshall (5 P. D. 19) approved. Claek v. Clark 
 
 [10 P. D. 188 
 
 ■ Maintenance — Covenant not to sue for 
 
 2. 
 
 greater Allowance — Subsequent Adultery — Periaa- 
 nent Alimony.^ A husband having committed 
 adultery, disputes arose between him and his 
 wife which led to his committing acts of legal 
 cruelty. A separation deed was then executed, by 
 which he agreed to allow her £250 a year, and to 
 maintain the two youngest children, who were 
 not to be in her custody ; and she covenanted not 
 to take any proceedings to compel the husband 
 to allow her a larger amount of alimony. Sub- 
 sequently the husband committed adultery, and 
 the wife obtained a decree for judicial separation 
 and an order that she should have the custody of 
 the two youngest children. The husband had 
 since the" date of the separation deed become 
 wealthy, and the wife applied for aninquu-y as to 
 his means with a view to obtaining increased ali- 
 mony : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that in- 
 creased alimony could not be ordered, for that as 
 the Court had not, as it would have had in the 
 case of a decree for dissolution, power to alter the 
 separation deed, the covenant by the wife not to 
 sue for increased alimony was binding on her, 
 and must have effect given to it, the husband not 
 having, in the opinion of the Court, been guilty 
 of such misconduct as under the circumstances of 
 the case would disentitle him to claim the benefit 
 of the deed. Gandy v. Gandy - 7 P. D. 77, 168 
 
 3, Maintenance — Subsequent Adultery — 
 
 Further Maintenance.'] A wife, by a deed of sepa- 
 ration, agreed to accept certain suras as a pro- 
 vision for her support, and not to sue her husband 
 ibr any further maintenance. Subsequently having 
 discovered that he had been guilty of incestuous 
 adultery, she obtained a decree for dissolution of 
 the marriage : — Held, that notwithstanding the 
 deed, she was entitled to the usual order for per- 
 manent maintenance. Moiikall v. Mokkall 
 
 [6 P. D. 98 
 
 XVII. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— SETTLEMENTS. 
 1. Variation — Conduct of Parties — Dis- 
 cretion of Court — 22 & 23 Vict. c. 61, s. 5— 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 19, s. 3.] The fortune of a wife 
 was settled as to a part producing £950 a year 
 on the husband for life, then on the wife for 
 life ; as to. the residue producing £1200 a yciir 
 on the wife for life, then on the husband for 
 lil'e ; and after the decease of the survivor, in 
 default of children of the marriage, then as to the 
 whole property on such trusts as the wife should 
 'by will appoint, and in default of appointment to 
 
 XVII. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— SETTLEMENTS 
 
 — continued. 
 the husband absolutely. There was no child of 
 the marriage. The wife obtained a decree for 
 dissolution of the marriage on the ground of 
 adultery and cruelty. The husband had mort- 
 gaged his life interest for debts incurred in keep- 
 ing up the joint establishment, and alleged that 
 he had incurred other debts for the same purpose. 
 The President of the Divorce Court, upon the 
 wife's petition, made an order that the trustees of 
 the settlement should stand possessed of all the 
 funds upon the trusts which would be applicable 
 thereto if the husband were dead, and had died in 
 the lifetime of the wife, and free from the ultimate 
 trust in default of appointment, but subject to 
 the wife undertaking to pay the charges made by 
 the husband on the trust funds : — Held, on appeal, 
 that the order must be affirmed, with this varia- 
 tion, that an account should be taken of all debts 
 due from the husband incurred for the purpose of 
 the joint establishment, and that the wife must 
 undertake to pay them. — Though the power given 
 to the Court of varying settlements is not given 
 for the purpose of punishing the guilty party, but 
 of making due provision for the parties, their 
 conduct is to be taken into consideration in de- 
 termining what provisions ought to be made for 
 them respectively. — The Judge has an absolute 
 judicial discretion as to the provisions to be made 
 for the parties respectively out of settled property, 
 and the Court of Appeal will not interfere with 
 that discretion, unless there has been a clear mis- 
 carriage in its exercise. Wigxey v. Wigney 
 
 [7 P. D. 177 
 
 2. Variation — Covenant to pay Annuity.'] 
 
 The Court has power to vary a post-nuptial 
 settlement contained in a deed of separation by 
 reducing the amount of an annuity which the 
 husband had covenanted to pay. Jump v. Jump 
 
 [8 P. D. 159 
 
 3. Variation — Lis pendens — Uights of 
 
 Third Parties — Charge for Solicitor's Costs.] 
 Upon a petition for variation of settlements the 
 Court has power to make an order in favour of 
 the interest of third patties created before the 
 filing of that petition. — Until a decree has been 
 made for dissolution of a marriage, there is no lis 
 pendens with reference to the property included 
 in the marriage settlements. — Before a decree 
 nisi was made for dissolution of the marriage, the 
 Eespondent had charged his interest under the 
 marriage settlement with payment of his solicitor's 
 costs of suit : — Held, that, under the circum- 
 stances, the charge was valid and that the Ke- 
 spondent's interests could not be extinguished 
 without providing for this charge. Wigney r. 
 Wigney - 7 P. D. 228 
 
 4. Variation — ■ Petition ■ — Signature^ 
 
 A petition for variation of settlements must 
 usually be signed by the petitioner, but tlie Court 
 will, under special circumstances, allow his soli- 
 citor to sign it on his behalf. Boss r. Eoss 
 
 [7 P. D. 20 
 
 6. Variation — Power of Appointment — 
 
 Costs of Suit.] A marriiige had been dissolved 
 at the suit of the husband. By the marriage 
 settlements the wife had certain interests in her 
 
( 1117 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1118 ) 
 
 KVII. PRACTICE —DIVOECE— SETTLEMENTS 
 
 — continued. 
 
 husband's property, and had also power to ap- 
 point a portion of her own property for the benefit 
 of any husband she might marry after the death 
 of her late husband, and for the children of that 
 marriage.— She and her husband had at present 
 About £100 a year each, but she was entitled to 
 reversionary property of great value, and was 
 liable to pay the costs of the suit. — The Court 
 gave half of the wife's present and reversionary 
 income to the husband for himself and the two 
 children of the marriage, and — Seld, that her 
 interest in her husband's property must be extin- 
 guished, and that her powers of appointment in 
 favour of a future husband and children must not 
 take effect until after the death of her late hus- 
 band -.^Held, also, that in varying the settlements 
 the Court must not take into consideration in her 
 favom- that she has to pay the costs of the suit. 
 Noel v. Noel - - 10 P. D. 179 
 
 6. Variation — Pomer to deal with 
 
 Capital — 22 & 23 Vict. c. 61, «. 5— Appeal— 
 JDiscretioH of Judge — 00811.1 On a petition for 
 variation of a settlement the Judge refused to 
 give the wife, the petitioner, any part of the 
 capital of the fund-, which had been all settled by 
 the husband, although there were no children of 
 the marriage, or to order payment of the peti- 
 tioner's costs out of the funds. And he gave a 
 portion only of the income to the wife. — The 
 Court of Appeal affirmed the decision, holding 
 that althougii the Court had undoubted jurisdic- 
 tion to deal with the capital it was not for the. 
 benefit of the wife to give her any portion of it ; 
 and the Court refused to interfere with the dis- 
 cretion of the Judge as to tho amount of income 
 awarded to her. Poxsonby v. Ponsonby 
 
 [9 P. D. 58, 122 
 
 7. Variation — Power to appoint New 
 
 Trustee.'] In the variation of settlements the 
 Court has jurisdiction to extinguish a joint power 
 of appointment of new trustees. Oppenheim v. 
 Oppenheim and Eicotti 9 P. D. 60 
 
 8. ■ ■ Variation — Separation Deed — Power to 
 
 vary Settlements after Dissolution of Marriage — ■ 
 22 & 23 Vict. V. 61. ». 5.] In June, 1881, a deed 
 of separation was executed by which the husbp.nd 
 agreed to pay for the benefit of the wife £52 a year. 
 Shortly after the separation she committed adul- 
 tery, and iu November, 1882, a decree for dissolu- 
 tion of the marriage was made absolute. In 
 April, 1883, the husband obtained leave to pre- 
 sent a petition to vary the deed, on payment of 
 ;all aiTears up to that time. There were three 
 •children of the marriage who were living with 
 the husband. A petition having been presented, 
 the matter was referred to the registrar, who re- 
 ported that the wife had no means of support, 
 and that the husband's income was about £270 a 
 year. Butt, J., treated the case as one of alimony 
 ■depending mainly on the husband's means, Kncl 
 refused to vary the deed : — Held, on appeal, that 
 the case was not to be treated as one of alimony, 
 iut was one in which the Court had a discretion 
 as to the amount of allowance which ought to bo 
 made to the wife under all the circumstances ; 
 and that, having regard to the circumstances, 
 and the comluct of the wife iu the suit, the hus- 
 
 XVII. PRACTICE— DIVORCE —SETTLEMENTS 
 
 continued. 
 band ought to be allowed to retain one-half of the 
 allowance provided by the deed. Cliffokd v. 
 Clifford - 9 P. D. 76 
 
 Nullity of marriage — Eecoaveyance of pro- 
 perty - - 10 P. D. 178 
 See Practice — Divorce — Nullity of 
 Marriage. 9. 
 
 XVIII. PRACTICE— DIVORCE — CUSTODY OF 
 CHILDREN. 
 
 Maintenance — Security.'] Upon a decree 
 
 for judicial separation when the Court has ordered 
 a provision to be made for the children it has no 
 power to order also that the Eespondent shall 
 secure the payment. Hunt v. Hunt 8 P. D. 161 
 
 XIX. PRACTICE — DIVORCE — SEQUESTRA- 
 TION. 
 
 1. Indian Officer's Pension.] The pension 
 
 of an officer in the Indian army is not liable to 
 sequestration for payment of costs and perma- 
 nent maintenance. Birch v. Birch 8 P. D. 163 
 
 2. Previous Writ of Attachment — Personal 
 
 Service.] The Eespondent iu a suit for restitution 
 of conjugalrights was evading service of the decree, 
 and an order as to custody of children. 'The Court, 
 though she was not abroad, ordered a writ of 
 sequestration to issue, without a previous writ of 
 attachment or personal service of the decree or 
 order. Allen v. Allen - 10 P. D. 187 
 
 XX. PRACTICE— DIVORCE— COSTS. 
 
 1. Attachment of Debt — Judicature Act, 
 
 1873, s. 25, sub-s. 8.] Under sub-sect. 8 of sect. 25 
 of the Judicature Act, 1873, the Court of Divorce 
 has power to attach a debt due to a Eespondent 
 in order to compel obedience to an order of that 
 Court for payment of costs. Whittaker v. Whit- 
 taker • - - 7 P. D. 15 
 
 2. Respondent's Costs — Full Costs.] In 
 
 a divorce suit the usual order had been obtained 
 for securing the wife's costs of the hearing, and 
 there had been no appeal from that order and no 
 further costs were asked for at the hearing. Sub- 
 sequently the case of Hobertson v. Bobertson 
 (6 P. D. 119) was decided in the Court of Appeal, 
 and the Divorce Court was thereupon asked to 
 order payment of the wife's full costs. Applica- 
 tion refused. — In future, if in a divorce suit in 
 which a wife is found guilty the Court is asked to 
 order payment of her full costs, the Court will 
 postpone its decision until after her bill of costs 
 has been taxed. — The case of Robertson v. Bobert- 
 son (6 P. D. 119) referred to. Smith v. Smith 
 
 [7 P. D. 84 
 
 3. Security for Costs — Bankruptcy of 
 
 Petitioner.] In a petition for dissolution of mar- 
 riage, the husband, who was an uncertificated 
 bankrupt, claimed damages. Upon application 
 by the co-Eespondeut :— fleZd, that unless the 
 claim for damages was withdrawn the petitioner 
 must give security for the costs of tho action. 
 Smith v. Smith 7 p. j), 237 
 
 *■ Wife's Costs— Umit.] In a divorce 
 
 suit, the costs of the wife payable by the husband 
 are not limited to the amount paid into Court or 
 
( 1119 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1120 ) 
 
 XX. PHACTICE—DIVOECK— COSTS— coMKwMed. 
 secured by the husband for that purpose. — Order 
 of the Dirorce Court varied. Eobektson v. 
 Robertson 6 P. D. 119 
 
 Security— Attachment - 10 P. D. 183 
 
 See Abbest — Debtors' Act. 1. 
 
 PRACTICE— ECCLESIASTICAL:- Col. 
 I. Partioclars - 1119 
 II. Church Discipline Act - 1119 
 in. Public Worship Act - 1122 
 IV. Monition - 1123 
 V. Contempt - - - - 1124 
 "VI. Jurisdiction 1126 
 I. PRACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — PAETICU- 
 LABS. 
 Crimiiial Suit.] In a criminal suit con- 
 taining charges of misconduct against a clerk in 
 holy orders, an order was made after the close of 
 the pleadings that the promoter should give par- 
 ticulars of the charges. — Such particulars should 
 as a rule be applied for on the admission of articles. 
 Bishop of Salisbury v. Ottlet 10 P. D. 20 
 
 n. PRACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — CHURCH 
 DISCIPLINE ACT. 
 
 1. Contumacy — Continuous Offences 
 
 against Bitual — Deprivation ah officio et a bene- 
 fioio—3 & 4 Vict. c. 86.] The Official Principal 
 of the Coiu't of Arches has jurisdiction to deprive 
 ab oflScio et beneficio a clergyman in holy orders 
 holding a benefice in the province of Canterbury 
 who has been articled against in a criminal suit 
 in the Court of Arches by virtue of letters of re- 
 quest under the Church Discipline Act, and is in 
 such suit proved to have been guilty -within two 
 years of the institution of the sviit of contumacy, 
 of incorrigible disobedience to the Ordinary and 
 to the Canons of the Church, and of having failed 
 to observe the Book of Common Prayer. Combe 
 ■u. De la Beke - 6 P. D. 157 
 
 2. Contumacy — Significavit, Fower to 
 
 issue — Bequisition, Monition, and Inhibition, 
 Form of — Absence of Statements shewing Jurisdic- 
 tion— il & 38 Vict. u. 85, ss. 7, 9, 13, 16, 19— 
 Forms gieen by Mules and Orders of 1875, 1879, 
 of Statutory Authority — " Bules regulating Pro- 
 cedure " includes Forms of Proceedings — 127<7t 
 Canon not binding on Official Principal appointed 
 by Public Worship Begulation Act, 187i— Style 
 of Judge under Public Worshii) Begulcdion Art, 
 1874 — Bequirement as to Place of hearing Guuse 
 — Writ de Contumace Capiendo issued in Vaca- 
 tion and not brought into Court — Pettij Bag Act, 
 12 * 13 Vict. c. i09, s. 26.] A representation 
 under the Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874, 
 was made in July, 1878, by the churchwardens 
 of a parish to the bishop of the diocese, com- 
 plaining of the incumbent for certain illegal 
 practices in the conduct of Divine worship. The 
 bishop and archbishop being alternate patrons of 
 the benefice, the bishop of the diocese of E, was 
 appointed to act in the place of such bishop and 
 archbishop in the matter of the representation 
 under the 16th section of the above-mentioned 
 Act. The bishop of B. having considered the 
 representation sent a requisition to the Judge 
 under the Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874, 
 
 II. PRACTICE —ECCLESIASTICAL— CHURCH: 
 
 DISCIPLINE ACT — continued. 
 requiring him to hear the ease in London or 
 Westminster, or within the diocese. The requi- 
 sition followed as nearly as possible the form 
 given by the Rules and Orders of 1875, issued, 
 under the Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874. 
 It did not state that a copy of the representatioit 
 had been sent to the party complained of, or that 
 the parties had been required to state whether- 
 they would submit to the directions of the bishop 
 touching' the matter of the representation, as 
 provided for by sect. 9 of the Public Worship 
 Regulation Act, 1874. It stated, however, that 
 the parties had not stated within the prescribed 
 time that they were willing to submit to the- 
 directions of the bishop : — Held, by the QueenV 
 Bench Division, that the requisition under the 
 9th section of the Public Worship Regulation 
 Act must name the limits within which, under- 
 the section, the hearing is to take place, but need- 
 not name the particular place withm such limits — 
 that the requisition made by the bishop of E. 
 was valid, and that the form of it was sufficient 
 on the following grounds, first, that it sufficiently 
 shewed by necessary implication that the parties 
 had been required to state whether they were 
 willing to submit to the directions of the bishop ; 
 secondly, that it was not competent to the party- 
 complained of to object to the form of the requi- 
 sition to the Judge if all the facts essential to th& 
 jurisdiction in truth existed ; and thirdly, that the- 
 requisition was in substantial accordance with 
 the form given by the Rules and Orders. This 
 decision -was not questioned on appeal. — The 
 Judge imder the Public Worship Regulation Act 
 proceeded to hear the matter of the above-men- 
 tioned representation, and issued a monition com- 
 manding the incumbent complained of to abstain 
 from certain practices which he pronounced un- 
 lawful. The incuinbent disregarded such moni- 
 tion, and continued tlie said practices, whereupon 
 the Judge issued an inhibition inhibiting the in- 
 cumbent from the performance of Divine service 
 and the exercise of the cure of souls within the 
 diocese for three months, and thereafter until the 
 inhibition should be relaxed. The monition issued 
 while the Rules and Orders of 1875 (1 P. D. 1). 
 were in force, but the inhibition issued after the 
 amended Rules of 1879 (4 P. D. 250) had come 
 into force. In the monition the Judge was styled- 
 the official principal of the Arches Court of Can- 
 terbury (he having become such official prin- 
 cipal under the 7th section of the Act upon the- 
 resignation of the previous official principal), but 
 except in this respect the monition exactly fol- 
 lowed the form given by the Rules and Orders of 
 1875. The inhibition exactly followed the form 
 given by the Rules and Orders of 1879 : — Held,. 
 by the Queen s Bench Division, tliat, assuming 
 an official principal of the Arches Coiirt of Can- 
 terbury to be witliiu the 127th of the Canons 
 of 1603, 1604, the Judge under the Public Wor- 
 ship Regulation Act, 1874, was constituted by 
 the 7th section of that Act upon the happening" 
 of a vacancy ex officio official principal of the- 
 Arches Court of Canterbury, without any obliga- 
 tion to take the oaths and subscribe the articles 
 as required by that canon. This decision was not 
 questioned on appeal : — Held, also, by the Queen's^ 
 
( 1121 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1122 ) 
 
 TI. PRACTICE — ECCIESIASTICAI — CHTTKCH 
 
 SISCIFLIHE ACT — continued. 
 Bench. Division, that the Judge -was rightly de- 
 scrihed in the monition as official principal of the 
 Arches Court of Canterhury without setting forth 
 liow he became such official principal. This was 
 not questioned on appeal : — Held, by the Queen's 
 Bench Division and by the Court of Appeal, that 
 the power given by the Public Worship Eegula- 
 lation Act, 1874, s. 19, to make rules and orders 
 regulating the procedure under the Act, includes 
 ■the power to make foims, and that consequently 
 the forms given by the Eules and Orders of 1875 
 and 1879 are of statutory authority, and the 
 monition and inhibition, whether they would 
 have otherwise sufficiently shewn jurisdiction or 
 not, were valid as being in accordance with the 
 forms so given. — The incumbent disregarded the 
 inhibition, and continued to exercise the cure of 
 ■souls. The Judge then issued a siguificavit 
 against him for contempt. A writ de contumace 
 ■capiendo was thereupon issued from the Petty 
 Bag Office on the 29th of October, and recorded 
 in the Queen's Bench on the following day (the 
 ■Court not being then sitting), and delivered to 
 "the sheriiF. Under this writ the incumbent was 
 •arrested and lodged in prison: — Held, by the 
 Queen's Bench Division and by the Court of 
 Appeal, that the Judge under the Public WorshiiD 
 Regulation Act, 1874, is not the Judge of a new 
 ■Court constituted by the Act, but is the official 
 principal of the old Court of Arches, and bas all 
 the old powers of that Court, including the 
 power of signifying for contempt if his orders are 
 •disobeyed, and that as the Act does not contain 
 any special power of enforcing an inhibition issued 
 Tinder it, such inhibition can be enforced by signi- 
 ficavit under 53 Geo. 3, c. 127 : — Held, by the 
 ■Queen's Bench Division, that the provisions of 
 ■5 Eliz. c. 23, s. 2, incorporated by 53 Geo. 3, 
 ■c. 127, s. 1, that the writ de contumace capiendo, 
 when brought into the Court of Queen's Bench, 
 should there, in the presence of the justices, bo 
 ■opened and delivered of record to the sheriff, were 
 impliedly repealed by the 26th section of the Petty 
 Bag Act, 12 & 13 Vict. c. 109, and were not 
 [revived by the repeal of that section by 38 & 39 
 Tict. c. 66, and 42 & 43 Vict. c. 59 ; that tlie 
 writ was effectual, and that the incumbent was 
 lawfully arrested under it : — Held, on appeal, that 
 though the Petty Bag Act authorized the issuing 
 -of the writ in vacation, it did not rejDeal the 
 •enactment that the writ should be opened in the 
 Queen's Bench in the presence of the justices, 
 ;and that as it had only been brought into the 
 Crown Office at a time when the Judges were not 
 ^sitting, the requisitions of 53 Geo. 3, c, 127, had 
 not been complied with, and the incumbent was 
 entitled to be discharged from custody. — A moni- 
 tion commanded an incumbent, inter alin, to 
 labstain from wearing in the administration of the 
 Holy Communion the vestments known as an alb, 
 ;a chasuble, and a biretta, and from all practices 
 acts, matters, and things of the same or a like 
 nature to those thereinbefore particularly set 
 •forth, or any of them, or from unlawfully per- 
 mitting the same, or any of them. The inhibi- 
 tion stated that the incumbent had failed to -obey 
 the monition in regard to the matters therein 
 anentioned, and proceeded tospecify various acts, 
 
 II. PEACTICE .- ECCLESIASTICAL — CHUECH 
 
 DISCIPLINE kd— continued. 
 most of which were expressly forbidden by the 
 monition, and also that the incumbent had per- 
 mitted his curate to weai- at the Communion 
 Service certain unlawful ecclesiastical vestments) 
 to wit, a biretta and a stole, and it inhibited him 
 from officiating for three months, and thereafter 
 until the inhibition should be relaxed : — Held, 
 that it was within the jurisdiction of the Judge 
 to decide whether the wearing a stole was not an 
 unlawful act of the same or a like nature to those 
 mentioned in the monition ; that if he had decided 
 wrongly the case was one for appeal, and that 
 even if the Act gave no appeal in such a case, 
 there was no ground for saying that the Judge 
 had exceeded his jurisdiction. A prohibition to 
 restrain jDroceedings on the inhibition was there- 
 fore refused. — Whether the including among the 
 grounds of the inhibition an act not prohibited by 
 the monition along with acts which were so pro- 
 hibited would make the inhibition invalid — qusere. 
 Dale's Case. ■ Enkaght's Case 6 ft. B. D. 376 
 [And see Enkaght v. Lord Penzance (7 App. 
 
 Cas. 240). 
 Peaotioe — Ecclesiastical -^ Public 
 
 Worship Act. 1.] 
 
 3. ProMbition— 3 & 4 Vict. a. 86, «s. 3, 
 
 5, 7, 11, 13, 24 — Proceedings against Clerk in 
 Orders — Ilisjiop Fromoter of Suit — Power to ad- 
 judicate thereon — Interest — Costs.'] Under th6 
 Church Discipline Act, 1840 (3, & 4 Viet. c. 86), 
 which empowers a bishop to hear and determine 
 a charge against a clerk in orders of having com- 
 mitted an ecclesiastical offence, if the bishop be 
 not patron of any preferment held by the party 
 accused, the mere fact that the bishop is, by his 
 secretary, promoter of the suit does not, in the 
 absence of any personal interest or bias, disqualify 
 him from adjudicating upon the case. The 
 Queen v. Bishop op St. Albans 9 ft. B. D. 454 
 
 IIL PEACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — PUBLIC 
 WOESHIP ACT. 
 
 1. Monition — Vestments — Biretta — Stole 
 
 '—Inhibition — Jurisdiction — Prohibition — 37 & 38 
 Vict. e. 85.] A monition, precisely following a 
 judgment pronounced by the Judge under the 
 Public Worship Eegulation Act, 1874, admonished 
 a clerk to abstain for the future when officiating 
 in his church from doing each of certain speci- 
 fied acts, and (amongst them) from wearing the 
 vestments known as an alb, a chasuble, and 
 a biretta ; and from causing to be formed a pro- 
 cession at the commencement of Morning Service ; 
 and also "from all practices, acts, matters and 
 things of the same or a like nature to those 
 hereinbefore particularly set forth or any of 
 them, or from vmlawfully permitting the same 
 or any of them." — A subsequent inhibition, after 
 reciting the monition and the disobedience of the 
 clerk thereto in regard to several other matters, 
 recited bis disobedience in permitti-ng his curate 
 to wear a vestment known as a biretta and a 
 vestment known as a stole, and also in per- 
 mitting his curate to form a procession bet'ween 
 Morning Prayer and the Communion Service, 
 and for such his disobedience inhibited the clerk 
 from performing services for three months and 
 until relaxation. The clerk having apjjlied for 
 
 2 O 
 
( 1123 ) 
 
 PIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1124 ) 
 
 III. PEACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — PUBLIC 
 
 WOESHIP KCT— continued. 
 a writ of prohibition : — Held (affirming the deci- 
 sion of the Court of Appeal) tliat the Judge had 
 jurisdiction (subject to coirection on appeal) to 
 insert the alia similia clause in tlie monition. — 
 And that under sect. 13 of tlie Public Worship 
 Begulation Act, 1874, the Judge had jurisdiction 
 to determine whether the wearing of a stole, and 
 the forming a procession between Morning Prayer 
 and the Communion Services were practices, acts, 
 matters and things of the same or a liie nature to 
 those particularly set forth in the monition ; and 
 that if he had determined that question wrongly 
 it might be the subject of appeal — if an appeal 
 lies — ^but could not afford any ground for pro- 
 hibition. — And that even if the wearing of a stole 
 and the forming a procession between Morning 
 Prayer and the Communion Service were not 
 breaches of the monition, yet as it appeared on 
 the face of the inhibition that the clerk had com- 
 mitted several other acts of disobedience any one 
 of which would have justified an inhibition for the 
 full period, there was no excess of jurisdiction and 
 no ground for prohibition. Enragiit v. Lord 
 Penzance - 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 2. Promoter — Substitution, of succeeding 
 
 Churchwarden as Promoter of a Suit.'] There is 
 no power given by the Public Worship Begulation 
 Act, 1874, to substitute succeeding churchwardens 
 for a churchwarden who has instituted a suit for 
 acts committed during the time he was church- 
 warden. — Quiere, as to the effect upon a suit of 
 the churchwarden who instituted it ceasing to be 
 a churchwarden or a parishioner. Perkins v. 
 Enkaght. Hakris i;. Enbaght 7 P. D. 31, 161 
 
 IV. PEACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — MONI- 
 TION. 
 . ProMbition — Definitive Sentence — Subse- 
 quent Enforcement of tliA Monition.'] In 1874 a 
 suit was instituted by letters of request in the 
 Arches Court, according to the provisions of the 
 3 & 4 Vict. c. 86 (the Church Discipline Act) 
 against a clerk for unlawful practices in the per- 
 formance of divine service. A sentence of suspen- 
 sion ab officio for six weeks was pronounced against 
 him, and he was " monished " not to repeat the 
 practices. He did repeat them, and was again 
 admonislied. He continued to repeat them, was 
 twice summoned before the Court to answer, but 
 did not appear ; and in June, 1878, the Dean of 
 the Arches " pronounced, decreed, and declared " 
 that the acts alleged to have been done by the 
 clerk had been fully proved, " and that in so doing 
 lie had repeated the offences alleged against hini 
 in the articles exhibited against him in this suit," 
 and had thereby disobeyed and contravened the 
 monitions served upon him. " For which disobe- 
 dience the Judge did pronounce him to have been 
 guilty of contumacy. And for the conduct afore- 
 said the Judge did further decree and declare," 
 that he should be suspended ab officio etbeneficio 
 for three years : — Held, that this was a matter of 
 ecclesiastical procedure alone, and was not, there- 
 fore, tiic subject of a proceeding in prohibition. 
 The suspension was only a step in the proceedings 
 which had been regularly instituted in 1874, and 
 was in itself perfectly regular. — Per Lord Black- 
 burn : The temporal Court, proceeding in prohibi- 
 
 IV. PEACTICE — ECCLESIISTICAL — MONI- 
 TION — continued. 
 
 tion, is not bound by a decision of even the highest 
 Court of Appeal in ecclesiastical matters. — 
 Martin V. MaclconocMe (Law Bep. 3 P. C. 409) 
 and Hebbert v. Purchas (Law JRep. 4 P. C. 301> 
 approved. Mackonoohie v. Lord Penzance 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 424: 
 
 V. PEACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — CON- 
 TEMPT. 
 
 1. Appropriate Sentenos obligatory — 
 
 Court of Final Appeal mill not decide in the first 
 instance — Contumacy — New Suit for fresh Offences 
 whilst Sentence in a former Suit is not enforced.] 
 A Judge has no discretion, while finding a Defen- 
 dant guilty of ecclesia.stical offences, to absolve him. 
 fiomall ecclesiastical censui'e or punishment for 
 those offences, but should iironouuce that which, 
 he considers to be an appropriate sentence. — Case 
 remitted to the Court below for that purpose as, 
 except under peculiar circumstances, a Court of 
 final appeal ought not to decide any cause in the 
 first instance. — Although it may not be proper to 
 institute a new suit for the mere jiurpose of 
 punishing contumacy or disobedience to orders 
 pas-ed in a former suit, yet a new suit may be 
 brought for new substantial offences, and the 
 former disobedience be relied upon as a matter 
 of aggravation. An order having the force of a 
 definitive sentence may inflict canonical punish- 
 ment (such as deprivation, degradation, and ex- 
 communication) which cannot lawfully be in- 
 flicted for mere contumacy or contempt. Martin 
 ■V. Maokonochie 6 p. D. 87 ; 7 p. D. 94 
 
 2. Chancery Court of York — Contumacy^ 
 
 Writ de contumace capiendo — Mittimus — County 
 Palatine of Lancaster — Pubh'.c Worship Begula- 
 tion Act, 1874 (37 * 38 Vict. c. 85), ss. 7, 9, 13— 
 .5 Eliz. c. 23, ss. 2, 11—53 Geo. 3, v. 127, s. 1— 
 2 4 3 Will. 4, e. 93, s. l~Rules of Supreme- 
 Court, Order n., rule 8.] A representation having 
 been made against a cleik, rector of a parish 
 within the county palatine of Lancaster, in the 
 province of York, under the Public Worship Act, 
 1874, for offences against sect. 8 of that Act com- 
 mitted in the parish church, the bishop of the 
 diocese sent the matter to the Archbishop of York, 
 who sent a requisitiun to Lord Penzance— the 
 Judge appointed under the Act, who had since 
 the passing of the Act become official principal 
 of the Chancery Court of York — requiring him to 
 hear and determine the matter of tlie representa- 
 tion at any phice in London or Westminster, or 
 within the province of York or diocese of Man- 
 chester, as he might deem fit. The Judge heard 
 it at Westminster, and there pronounced judgment, 
 and issued a monition ordering the clerk to ab- 
 stain from the practices complained of. The clerk 
 having disobeyed the monition the Judge, sitting 
 at Westminster, issued uii inhibition inhibiting the 
 clerk for three months and thereafter until relaxa- 
 tion from performing any service of the church 
 within the diocese, and on his persisting iu his 
 disobedience, pronounced him contumacious and 
 issued a siguificavit under 53 Geo. 3, c. 127, s. 1. 
 The tenor of the siguificavit was sent by mittimus 
 from the Petty Bag Office to the Chancellor of the 
 county palatine of Lancaster. In accordance with 
 an order made by the Vice-Chancel lor of the 
 
( 1125 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1126 ) 
 
 V. PRACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — CON- 
 TEMPT — continued. 
 county palatine sitting at Lincoln's Inn a writ de 
 contumace capiendo was issued, under which the 
 clerk was arrested by the sheriif of Lancashire 
 and lodged in Lancaster Goal. On a motion for a 
 habeas corpvis : — Seld (affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal), that the matter so heard 
 before the Judge, as official principal of the Chan- 
 cery Court of York, was a cause cognizable in an 
 Ecclesiastical Court within the meaning of 53 
 Geo. 3, 0. 127, s. 1, and that the Judge had power 
 to pronounce the contumacy and issue the signi- 
 ficavit under that Act : — That the county palatine 
 being one of the exempt jurisdictions mentioned 
 in 5 Bliz. c. 23, s. 11, the procedure required by 
 that section as to the mittimus and the issue of 
 the writ de contumace capiendo was applicable 
 and was duly followed : — That the mittimus was 
 not one of the writs referred to in Order ii., rule 8, 
 of the Rules of the Supreme Court,, and was pro- 
 perly tested as in the name of the Queen by the 
 Master of the EoUs : — That under the Public 
 Worship Regulation Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 85), 
 s. 9, the Judge had power not merely to " hear " 
 but also to hear and determine the matter, and to 
 do all the acts which he did at Westminster : — 
 That all the proceedings were regular and there 
 was no ground for a habeas corpus. Gkeen v. 
 LoBD Penzance 7 Q. B. S. 273 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 3. Discharge — Application by Bishop of 
 
 Diocese for Discharge of Cleric in Custodij for 
 Contempt — Deprivation under Provisions of Statute 
 Law — Satisfaction of Contempt hy involuntary 
 Obedience — Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874 
 (37 * 38 Vict. c. 85), s. 13—53 Geo. 3, c. 127.] 
 At the hearing of the matter of a representation 
 made under the Public Worship Regulation Act 
 against the rector of a parish church in the diocese 
 of Manchester and province of York, the Official 
 Principal of the Chancery Court of York pro- 
 nounced that the Defendant when officiating in 
 the parisli church had committed certain offences 
 against ecclesiastical law, and on the 27th of 
 June, 1879, issued a monition admonishing him to 
 refrain from such offences for the future. The 
 Defendant failed to obey the monition, and the 
 Official Principal, in August, 1879, by an inhibi- 
 tion under the Public Worship Regulation Act, 
 inhibited him for three months, and, until the 
 inhibition had been relaxed, from performing the 
 services of the church or exercising the cure of 
 souls within the diocese of Manchester. Whilst 
 the inhibition was still in force the Defendant dis- 
 obeyed it by officiating in the parish church on 
 several occasions, and thereupon his contempt was 
 signified to the Queen in Chancery, and he was in 
 March, 1881, taken into custody under a writ de 
 contumace capiendo. In August, 1882, the De- 
 fendant still remained in custody irader the writ, 
 but, by the operation of the Public Worship Regu- 
 lation Act, ceased to be rector of the parish. The 
 Bishop of Manchester then applied to the Official 
 Principal for the discharge of the Defendant. 
 The application was neither supported by the 
 Defendant nor opposed by the complainants : — ■ 
 Beld, that the application was rightly made by 
 the bishop of Manchester : — Held, also, that the 
 Defendant had "satisfied his contempt" within 
 
 V. PEACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — CON- 
 TEMPT— continued, 
 the meaning of 53 Geo. 3, c. 127, and that a writ 
 of deliverance in the form prescribed by that statute 
 ought to issue for his discharge. Dean r. Gbeen 
 
 [8 P. D. 79 
 
 VL PEACTICE— ECCLESIASTICAL— JT7BI8DIC- 
 TIOH. 
 
 1. Seprivation — Church Discipline Act 
 
 (3 (fc 4 Vict. c. 86) — Offences against Ritual — Re- 
 signation of Benefice pending a Suit — Operation of 
 Sentence of Deprivation.'] The ordinary sentence 
 of deprivation in use in the Ecclesiastical Courts 
 is not limited to the particular preferment or bene- 
 fice stated in the articles to be held by the Respon- 
 dent, but extends to all ecclesiastical promotions 
 within the jurisdiction held by the Respondent 
 at the time that sentence is pronounced. — It is 
 contrary to the practice of the Court of Arches to 
 pronounce a sentence of perpetual suspension from 
 the performance of divine service against a Re- 
 spondent who holds a benefice of which the Court 
 has jurisdiction to deprive him. — The articles in 
 a criminal suit by letters of request under the 
 Church Discipline Act contained allegations 
 charging that the Respondent was perpetual 
 curate of the parish of A., in the diocese of London, 
 and that he had within two years of the institu- 
 tion of the suit committed repeated and aggra- 
 vated offences against the laws ecclesiastical in 
 matters of ritual whilst officiating in the perform- 
 ance of divine service in the parish church of A. 
 At the hearing of the suit the above-mentioned 
 allegations were held to be proved, and the Official 
 Principal, in his discretioir, condemned the Re- 
 spondent in costs, but refused to pronounce any 
 sentence of deprivation or canonical punishment. 
 The promoter appealed, and the appeal having 
 been allowed the Queen in Council remitted the 
 ciiuse, with an intimation that the Respondent 
 ought to be canonically punished. After the 
 cause had been so remitted, but before the terms 
 of the remission had been complied with, the 
 Respondent resigned the perpetual curacy of A. 
 and was instituted to the incumbency of P. in the 
 diocese of London. — -On the cause subsequently 
 coming on for sentence, the Official Principal of 
 the Court of Arches pronounced sentence depriv- 
 ing the Respondent of all ecclesiastical promo- 
 tions within the province of Canterbury of which 
 he was possessed when the sentence was pro- 
 nounced and of all the ecclesiastical emoluments 
 thereto belonging. Martin v. Maokonochib 
 (Third Sdit) - - - - 8 P. D. 191 
 
 2. Deprivation — Prohibition— House of 
 
 Lords — Palace of Westminster — Royal Peculiar 
 
 Royal Palace — Royal Residence — Church Disci- 
 pline Act, 1840 (3*4 Vict. c. 86).] A suit having 
 been brought against a clerk in the Court of 
 Arches, under the Church Discipline Act a 
 sentence of suspension for six months was pro- 
 nounced against him on the 9th of March, 1878, 
 but was made conditional on an affidavit bein'' 
 filed. Afterwards the affidavit was filed, and an 
 unconditional sentence was pronounced on the 
 
 23rd of March and served on the Defendant. A 
 
 fresh suit was instituted in 1880 for fresh offences 
 and also for contumacious disobedience to the sen- 
 tence of the 23rd of March, 1878. These offences 
 
 202' 
 
( 1127 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( H28 ) 
 
 VI. PRACTICE — ECCLESIASTICAL — JUEIS- 
 
 DICTION — continued. 
 being proved, the Defendant was sentenced to be 
 deprived of his benefice. This sentence was pro- 
 nounced by the Dean of Arches in Committee 
 Boom E of the House of Lords. — A motion for a 
 prohibition having been brought to restrain the 
 Coui't of Arches from enforcing the sentence : — 
 Held, first, that the sentence of the 9th of March 
 was an interlocutory order which did not end the 
 suit, and therefore the Court was not functus 
 officio when it pronounced the unconditional sen- 
 tence of suspension : — Secondly. That even if the 
 unconditional sentence had been void, the Court 
 would not have exceeded its jurisdiction in pass- 
 ing the sentence of deprivation, as there were 
 other offences proved which would have supported 
 it : — Thirdly. That the site of the old Palace 
 of Westminster is no longer a peculiar, but is 
 within the diocese of London and the jurisdiction 
 of the Court of Arches : — Fourthly. That the 
 new Palace of Westminster is not exempt from 
 the jurisdiction of the ordinary Civil and Eccle- 
 siastical Courts on the ground of privilege, inas- 
 much as it had ceased to be a royal residence : — 
 Wliether Committee Eoom E of the House of 
 Lords is within the precincts of the old Palace 
 of Westminster, cjusere. Combe v. De la Bere 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 316 
 
 County Palatine of Lancaster — Official Prin- 
 cipal of Chancery Court of York — Judge 
 appointed under Public Worship Regu- 
 lation Act — Contempt 7 Q. B. D. 273 ; 
 [6 App. Cas. 657 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Cox- 
 tempt. 2. 
 PEACTICE— LANCASTEE COTJET 24 Ch. D. 280 
 See CouET — Lancaster Coukt. 
 
 PEACTICE— MAYOE'S COTJET. 
 
 See Cases under Couet — Mayor's Court. 
 
 PEACTICE— PEIVY COUNCIL .— Col. 
 
 I. Jurisdiction - 1127 
 
 II. Leave to appeal 1127 
 
 I. PEACTICE— PEIVY COUNCIL— JUEISDIC- 
 TION. 
 
 Effect of Order of the Queen in Council — 
 
 Trustee's Liability for Costs.'] When a decision 
 of the Judicial Committee has been reported to 
 Her Majesty and has been sanctioned it becomes 
 the decree or order of the final Court of Appeal : 
 and it is the duty of every subordinate tribunal 
 to whom the order is addressed to carry it into 
 execution. — A trustee in banliruptcy can be made 
 personally liable for costs of a suit to which he is 
 a party, subject to the Court of Bankruptcy allow- 
 ing him to recoup himself out of the bankrupt 
 estate, if his conduct has been bona fide. Pitt.s 
 V. La Fontaine - - 6 App. Cas. 482 
 
 II. PEACTICE— PEIVY COUNCIL— LEAVE TO 
 APPEAL. 
 
 1. Criminal Case — Vcdidity of 43 Vict. 
 
 fi. 25 {Canada).'] The rule of the Judicial Com- 
 mittee is not to grant leave to appeal in criminal 
 cases except where some clear departure from the 
 requirements of justice is alleged to have taken 
 place.— fifeirf, tliat 34 & 85 Vict. c. 28, which 
 
 IL PEACTICE— PEIVY COUNCIL— LEAVE TO 
 
 APPEAL — contin ued. 
 authorizes the Parliament of Canada to provide 
 for "the administration, peace, order, and good 
 government of any territory not for the time being 
 included in any province" vests in that Par- 
 liament the utmost discretion of enactment for 
 the attainment of those objects. Accordingly 
 Canadian Act 43 Vict. c. 25, is intra vires the 
 legislature. — Sect. 76, sub-sect. 7, which pre- 
 scribes that fuU notes of evidence be taken is 
 literally complied with when those notes are 
 taken in shorthand. Eiel v. The Qubex 
 
 [10 App. CaB. 675 
 
 2. Importance of Case.] Their Lordships 
 
 will not advise Her Majesty to admit an appeal 
 from the Supreme Court of the Dominion of 
 Canada save where the case is of gravity, involv- 
 ing matter of public interest or some important 
 question of law, or affecting property of consider- 
 able amount, or where the case is otherwise of some 
 pubiic importance or of a very substantial charac- 
 ter. — Petition for special leave to appeal refused, 
 the case depending on a disputed matter of fact 
 whether there had been a gift or sale of certain 
 goods of the value of £1000. Prince v. Gagnox 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 103 
 
 3. Imprisonment — Importance of Case ] 
 
 No appeal lies as of right from a judgment of the 
 Court of Queen's Bench of Lower Canada in the 
 matter of a penalty of imprisonment. Special 
 leave was granted on the gi-ound of the importance 
 of the question at issue. Carter v. Molson 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 530 
 
 4. Issue of Fact.] Petition for special 
 
 leave to appeal in a case involving only an issue 
 of fact refused.— Such petition must state fuUy 
 but succinctly the grounds upon which it is 
 based; the record not being before their Lord- 
 ships until forwarded by the proper authorities. 
 Canada Central Eailwat Compaxt v. Murray 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 574 
 
 5. Misstatements.] The petition of special 
 
 leave to appeal in this case stated correctly two 
 valid grounds for granting the same; but con- 
 tained, misstatements of fact which affected the 
 third gi-ound relied upon by the Petitioner: — 
 Held, tl)at any such petition 'is liable at any time 
 to be rescinded with costs if it contains any mis- 
 statement or any concealment of facts which ought 
 to be disclosed. It appearing however that there 
 was in this case no intention to mislead, the ap- 
 peal was heard and allowed, but without costs.— 
 Itam Sabulc Base v. Mononiohini Dossee (Law Eep. 
 2 Ind. Ap, 81) approved. Mussooeie Bank v. 
 Eaynor - - 7 App. Cas. 321 
 
 Leave to appeal - - 8 App. Cas. 304 
 
 See Colonial Law — Jersey. 1. 
 
 PRACTICE— PEOBATE :— 
 
 I. Citation 
 
 II. Guardian - 
 
 III. Pleading 
 
 IV. Particulars 
 V. Evidence 
 
 ^'I. Trial 
 VII. Compromise 
 Till. Costs 
 
 Col. 
 1129 
 - 1129 
 1129 
 1129 
 1129 
 
 1130 
 1130 
 1130 
 
( 1129 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1130 ) 
 
 I. PEACTICK—PEOBATE— CITATION. 
 
 Bealty — Assignee — Leave to cite — 20 & 21 
 
 Vict. c. 77, s. 61.] In an action as to the validity 
 of a will--the Court will not order the assignee of 
 the heir-at-law- of tlie testatrix to be cited as a 
 person having or pretending interest in the real 
 estate affected by the will. Jones •». Jones 
 
 [7 P. D. 66 
 
 II. PEACTICE— PBOBATK— SrAEDIAN. 
 
 ■ Infant — Guardian ad litetn.l- When a 
 
 will is disputed by a gujjrdian ad litem on behalf 
 of infants, the Court of Probate has power to 
 inquire whether the suit is for their benefit 
 Pehoival v. Cboss • - - 7 P. D. 234 
 
 in. PBACTICE—PBOBATE— PLEADING. 
 
 Appeal direct from Chambers — Embar- 
 rassing Matter in Pleading — Rules of Supreme 
 Court, 1883, Order -V/A'., r. 27.] Appeals from 
 orders made in Chambers are to be subject to the 
 same rules in the Probate Division as in the Chan- 
 cery Division, and will not be entertained unless 
 the Judge gives leave to appeal direct, or certifies 
 that he does not require to bear further argument. 
 — The Plaintiff proppunded for probate a will of 
 September, 1880. A Defendant counter-claimed 
 to prove a will of May, 1881. The Plaintiff re- 
 plied (inter alia) that the testatrix was not of 
 sound mind when she executed the will of May, 
 1881, and (5), that if she did duly execute it when 
 of sound mind she duly revokpd it by a will of 
 June, 1881, executed when she was in a similar 
 state of mind: — Beld, by the President and by 
 the Court of Appeal, that clause 5 of the reply, 
 ought not to be struck out as embarrassing. In 
 re Smith. Eigg v. Hughes 9 P. D. 68 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— PBOBATE— PAETICULABS. 
 
 1. Incapacity.] In an action for probate 
 
 the Court will not order particulars to be given of 
 incapacity. Hankinson v. Babningham 9 P. D, 62 
 
 2. Undue Influence,] The Defendant 
 
 in a probate action alleged that the will had 
 been procured by tlie undue influence of the 
 Plaintiff " and others." The Plaintiff applied for 
 particulars of the names of the persons charged 
 with undue influence and particulars of the acts 
 of undue influence alleged, and the times when 
 and places where each of the acts was alleged to 
 have taken place. The President ordered the 
 Defendant to give the names of the persons 
 charged with undue influence, but refused to 
 order him to give particulars of the acts. The 
 Plaintiffappealed : — IIeld,hj the Court of Appeal, 
 that as it was admitted to have been the long 
 settled practice of the Probate Court, and subse- 
 quently of the Probate Division, not to require a 
 party alleging undue influence to give particulars 
 of the acts of undue influence, such practice 
 ought not now to be disturbed, and — Semble (per 
 Lindley and Fry, L. JJ.), that this rule of practice 
 was founded on good reason. Lobd Salisbuby v. 
 Nugent - - 9 P. D, 23 
 
 V. PEACTICE— PBOBATE— EVIDENCE. 
 
 1. Commission to examine Witness.] 
 
 Under sect. 26 of 20 & 21 Vict. c. 77, the Court 
 has power to order a commission to issue to 
 
 V. PEACTICE — PBOBATE — EVIDENCE — 
 
 continued. . . 
 
 examine a person as to her knowledge of a testa- 
 mentary paper. Banfield v. Pickabd 6 P. D. 33 
 
 2. — - Parol Evidence of Intention;] State- 
 ments of a testatrix, whether made before or after 
 the execution of the will, are admissible to shew 
 what papers constitute the will. Gould v. Lakes 
 
 [6 P. D. 1 
 
 VI. PEACTICE— PBOBATE— TBIAE. 
 
 Eight to Trial by Jury — .Probate ^ct, 
 
 1857 (20 & 21 Vict. c. 77), s. 35— General Orders 
 XXXVI., rr. 3, 26.] In an action by an executor to 
 establish a will, the heir-at-law was cited. The 
 Plaintiff gave notice of trial by jury. The action 
 was twice tried by a special jury, before Sir J. 
 Hannen, and in each case the jury disagreed and 
 were discharged. The Plaintiff having set iihe 
 action down for trial again before a special jury, 
 the Defendants applied for special directions as to 
 the further trial. Sir J. Haanen, the heir-at-law 
 appearing and not opposing, made an order that 
 the action should be tried by a Judge without a 
 jury. The Plaintiff appealed : — Held, that the 
 case was one where, under 20 & 21 • Yict. c. 77, 
 s. 35, as the heir-at-law did not ^sk for a jury, the 
 Judge could, before the Judicature Act, without 
 any consent, have ordered the action tp be tried 
 without a jury ; that a ch6ice of the inode of trial 
 under Order xxxvi., rule 3, did not exclude the 
 application of rule 26, and that the Judge there- 
 fore had. jurisdiction to make the or^er appealed 
 from i^-ileld, further, that though the order was 
 subject to appeal, the Court of Appeal would not 
 interfere with the discretion of the Judge except 
 in a strong case, and that there was no ground 
 for holding that his discretion had been wrongly 
 exercised. Buhgoine v. Mooedaff 8 P. D. 205 
 
 VII. PEACTICE— PBOBATE -COKPBOMISE. 
 
 Harried Women or Infants.] Semble, in 
 
 an action as to the validity of a will when terms of 
 compromise are agreed to by the parties Who are 
 sui juris, the Court of Probate will not make an 
 order binding married women or infants to the 
 terms of a compromise. Nobman v. Stkains 
 
 [6 P. D. 219 
 
 VIII. PEACTICE— PBOBATE— COSTS. 
 
 1. Administrator pending Suit — Receiver 
 
 pending Suit — Termination.'] The duties of an 
 administrator and receiver pending suit commence 
 from the date of the order of appointment, and if 
 the decree in the action is appealed from do not 
 cease until the appeal has been disposed of. Costs 
 of the administrator and receiver pending suit 
 and of his solicitor allowed from the date o/ the 
 appoiutment until the dismissal of the appeal. 
 Taylob v. Taylor - - 6 P. D. 29 
 
 2. Codicil proponiided by legatee— Cosis 
 
 as of Executor proving.] A legatee who has pro- 
 pounded a codicil and succeeded is entitled to the 
 same costs as an executor ijnder similar, circum- 
 stances. The Defendant, the executor of the will 
 of E. C, had proved the will only. The Plaintiffs 
 propounded a codicil. The Court having pro- 
 nounced for the codicil, condemned the Defendant 
 in costs, and gave the Plaintiffs also out of the 
 estate such sum nomine expensarum as would 
 
( 1131 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1132 ) 
 
 VIII. PRACTICE— PEOBATE— COSTS— co)i<(J. 
 
 cover the additional expenses. Wilkinson v. 
 COEFIELD - - - 6 P. D. 27 
 
 3. Proof in solemn Torm— Rules of 20th 
 
 .TuXy, 1862,' Rule 41 — Residuary Legatee under 
 prior Will.'] The rule and practice by which a 
 jiarty may compel proof of a will in solemn form, 
 without liability for costs, do not extend to a 
 jesiduary legatee under a prior will. Hockley v. 
 Wyatt - 7 P. D. 239 
 
 4. Security for Costs — Married Women.l 
 
 JIarried women suing as plaintiffs without their 
 husbands being joined : — Held, since the Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), 
 jiot liable to give security for costs. Thkelfall 
 /;. Wilson - - 8 P. D. 18 
 
 PEACTICI^— SUPEEME COURT :— 
 I. Writ 
 II. Service 
 
 III. Writ specially indorsed 
 
 IV. Parties 
 
 V. Next Friend 
 VI. Third Party - 
 VII. Change of Parties - 
 VIII. Conduct or Cause 
 IX. Defence 
 X. Counter-claim 
 XI. Eeply 
 XII. Payment into Court 
 
 XIII. Payment out of Court 
 
 XIV. Demurrer (and Point of Law) 
 XV. Particulars 
 
 XVI. Striking out Pleadings 
 XVII. Disoontinuanoe 
 XVIII. Staying Proceedings 
 (a.) General. 
 (6.) Concurrent Actions. 
 (o.) Pending Appeal. 
 XIX. Default 
 XX. Amendment 
 XXI. Interrogatories 
 (a.) General. 
 (6.) Privilege. 
 XXII. Production of Documents 
 (a.) General. 
 (6.) Privilege. 
 
 XXIII. Security foe Costs - 
 
 (a.) General. 
 (6.) Appeal. 
 (c.) Discovery. 
 
 XXIV. Inquiries and Accounts 
 XXV. Special Case - 
 
 XXVI. District Registry - 
 XXVII. Notice of Trial 
 XXVIII. Trial - - - 
 
 XXIX. Referee _ _ _ 
 
 XXX. Evidence 
 
 (a.) General. 
 (h.) Abroad. 
 (c.) De bene esse, 
 XXXI. New Trial - 
 
 Col. 
 1132 
 1133 
 1135 
 1136 
 1141 
 1142 
 1145 
 1147 
 1148 
 1149 
 1150 
 1151 
 1153 
 1153 
 ll.H 
 1155 
 1156 
 1156 
 
 1161 
 1163 
 1164 
 
 1171 
 
 1179 
 
 1182 
 1183 
 1184 
 1185 
 1185 
 1187 
 1189 
 
 1194 
 
 PEACTICE- 
 
 XXXII. 
 
 XXXIII. 
 
 XXXIV. 
 
 XXXV. 
 
 XXXVI. 
 
 xxxvn. 
 xxxvm. 
 
 XXXIX. 
 
 XL. 
 
 XLI. 
 
 XLII. 
 
 XLIII. 
 
 XLIV. 
 
 XLV. 
 
 XLVI. 
 XLVII. 
 
 XL VIII. 
 XLIX. 
 
 -SUPREME COVRT— continued. Col. 
 Motion for Judgment 1195 
 
 Judgment 1196 
 
 Sequestration - 1198 
 
 Attachment - 1198 
 
 Garnishee Orders - 1201 
 
 Charging Orders (and Stop 
 
 Orders) - 1204 
 
 Writ of Possession - - 1205 
 Transfer - 1205 
 
 Inspection op Property - 1206 
 Injunction - - 1206 
 
 Receiver _ _ _ 1209 
 
 Sale by Court 1212 
 
 Notice of Motion 1212 
 
 Chambers - 1213 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 (6.) Administration Summons. 
 (c.) Lands Clauses Act. 
 Costs 1217 
 
 Interpleader - 1230 
 
 (a.) Rules op Court, 1875. 
 (6.) Rules of Court, 1883. 
 Consent - 1233 
 
 Appeal 1233 
 
 (a.) General. , 
 (6.) For Costs, 
 (e.) Time for.Appe.\ling. 
 L. Jurisdiction - 1245 
 
 I. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— WRIT. 
 
 1. • Extension of Time — Indorsement on 
 
 Writ of Date of ScrHee — Rides of Court, 1875, 
 Order /x, r. 13 ; Order LVIL, r. 6.] Under nile 6 
 of Order Lvii. of Rules of Court, 1875, tlie Court 
 has power to extend the time fixed by rule 13 of 
 Order ix. for the making an indorsement on a 
 writ of the date of service. Hastings «. Hurley 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 2. Time from which Writ takes effect — 
 
 Day, Fractions of — WritrofSmtiinons issued on 
 the same day as Cause of Action accrued — Fiction 
 of Law — Distinction hettoeen original and judicial 
 Writ — Effect of Statute I-aw &vision Act, 1875, 
 on Farliamentary Oaths Act, 18t)6 (29 & 30 Vict, 
 c. 19), and Promissory Oaths Act, 1868 (31 (t 32 
 Vict. c. 72).] To issue a writ of summons is not a 
 judicial act, and the Court may inquire at what 
 period of the day it was issued. It appeared from 
 the statement of claim that the writ of summons 
 in the action was issued on the 2nd of July, and 
 that the cause of action arose on the same day, 
 but before the issue of the writ. The statement 
 of claim was demurred to on the ground that the 
 issuing of the writ was a judicial act, and must, 
 therefore, be presumed to have taken place at the 
 earliest moment of the day, before the cause of 
 action accrued : — Held, affirming the judgment 
 of the Queen's Bench Division, that the Court 
 could inquire whether or not the writ was in fact 
 issued after the cause of action accrued. — The 
 peuiil clauses of the Piirliamentary Oaths Act, 
 1866, are not repealed by the Statute Law Revi- 
 sion Act, 1875. Clarke v. Bradlaugh 
 
 [7Q. B. D. 161; 8 Q. B. D. 68 
 
( 1133 ) 
 
 PIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1131 ) 
 
 II. PEACTICE— SUPREME COURT— SERVICE. 
 
 1. Lunatic Defendant — Bminess carried 
 
 en in Name of Firm, — Service on Manager — Rules 
 of Court. 187.'), Order IX., rr. 5, 6, Ga— Order xiil., 
 r. 1.] The Defendant, who carried on business in 
 the name of a firm apparently consisting of more 
 than one person, was sued in her firm name ; the 
 writ was served at her place of business upon the 
 manager according to Order ix., r. 6a ; and judg- 
 ment signed in default of appearance. At the 
 time of the service of the writ she was of unsound 
 mind and confined in an asylum, but this was un- 
 known to the Plaintift' : — Held, that the judgment 
 must be set aside, as the writ ought to have and 
 had not been served under Order xiii., r. 1. 
 Fore Street Wabehocse Co. v. Durhant 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 471 
 
 2. Out of Jurisdiction — Action for Bent 
 
 of Land in England — Defendants domiciled or 
 ordinarily resident in Scotland — Mules of Court, 
 1883, Order XL, r. 1 (6), (e).] Older xi., r. 1, 
 does not enable the Court or a judge to allow 
 service out of the jurisdiction of a. writ in an 
 action for non-payment of rent due under a lease 
 of land in England against Defendants who are 
 domiciled or ordinarily resident in Scotland. 
 Agnew v. Usheb - - - 14 Q. B. D. 78 
 
 3. Out of Jurisdiction — Admissthilitij of 
 
 Evidence — Rules of Court, 1875, Order XL, rr. 1, 
 la, 8.] Where a Plaintiffhas obtained leave under 
 Order xi. to serve a writ out of the jurisdiction, 
 and the Defendant moves to discharge the order, 
 affidavits are admissible to contest the question 
 whether the cause of action arose within the 
 jurisdiction. — Great Australian Gold Mining 
 Company v. Martin (5 Ch. D. 1) overruled on this 
 point. — The sufficiency of the PlaintitTs affidavit 
 under Order xi., r. 3, considered. — [u cases where 
 the Defendant is resident in Scotland or Ireland, 
 the omission of the statement that he is a British 
 subject is not material. — Rule la, of Order xi., 
 giving a discretion to the Judge when the Defen- 
 dant resides in Scotland or Ireland, only relates 
 to actions on contracts and will not be applied 
 to other actions. Fowler v. Barstow 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 240 
 
 4. Out of Jurisdiction — Discretion of 
 
 Court — Rules of Court, 1883, Order XL, r. l.J 
 The Court will exercise discretion in allowing 
 or disallowing service out of the jurisdiction, and 
 in so doing will consider evidence as to the 
 merits. Sooiete Generale de Paris v. Dretfus 
 Brothers 29 Ch. D. 239 
 
 5. Out of Jurisdiction — Foreigner — Service 
 
 of Notice of Appointment of Receiver!] The Plain- 
 tiff having obtained judgment against the Defen- 
 dant, a foreigner resident out of the jurisdiction, 
 a summons was issued by leave of a Judge at 
 chambers calling on the Defendant to shew cause 
 why a receiver should not be appointed. On an 
 application for leave to serve this summons on the 
 Defendant out of the jurisdiction : — Held, that 
 there was no jurisdiction to gi'ant such leave. 
 Weldon v. Gocnod - 15 ft. B. D. 622 
 
 6. Out of Jurisdiction— £j6eZ — Injunction 
 
 : — Jurisdiction of Court — Rules of Court, 1883, 
 Order XL, r. 1 (/).] A writ of summons claim- 
 ing' an injunction to restrain the Defendant 
 
 II. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— SERVICE— 
 
 continued. 
 (resident out of the jurisdiction) from sending 
 libels to the Plaintiff (residini» within the juris- 
 diction) and publishing the same within the juris- 
 diction, and claiming also damages, may, by leave 
 of the Court, be issued and served upon the Defen- 
 dant, at least if it does not appear tliat the Defen- 
 dant never comes within the jurisdiction. — Judg- 
 ment of the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. 
 ToziER v. Hawkins 15 ft. B. D. 650, 680 
 
 7. Out of iTxrisiietion^Interpleader — 
 
 Rules of Court, 1883, Order Lvii.'] Where the 
 Plaintiffs sued for goods in the possession of the 
 Defendant, and it appeared that a foreigner resid- 
 ing out of the jurisdictinn claimed the right to the 
 same goods and would probably sue the Defendant 
 in respect of them, the -Court gave the Defendant 
 leave to serve an interpleader summons out of 
 the jurisdiction upon the foreigner. — The effect of 
 service out of the jurisdiction in such a case is to 
 give the foreigner notice of the proceedings within 
 the jurisdiction, so that he may appear and pro- 
 secute his claim, or, if he does not appear, so that 
 any future claim, prosecuted by him against the 
 Defendant in respect of the subject-matter of the 
 section within the jurisdiction may be barred. 
 Credits Gebundeuse v. "Van Weede 12 ft. B. D. 
 
 [171 
 
 8. Out of Jurisdiction — Leave to issue — 
 
 Leave to serve — Rules of Court, 1875, Orders II., 
 r. 4, and XL, rr. 1 and 3.] Applications for 
 leave to issue a writ for service out of the juris- 
 diction, and for leave to serve out of the jurisdiction 
 the writ when issued, should be made in Cham- 
 bers ; and such applications may be made either 
 simultaneously or separately. — Evidence is only 
 requisite upon the application for leave to serve. 
 If the applications are simultaneous, the affidavit 
 in support of the application for leave to serve 
 should be intituled in the matter of the intended 
 action, if separate in the action. — Statement of 
 the practice. — Young v. Brassey ij Ch. "D. 277) 
 not followed. Stigand v. Stigand 19 Ch. D. 460 
 
 9. Out of Jurisdiction — Old and New 
 
 Practice — Rules of Court, 1875, Order XL, r. 1.] 
 The old .practice as to service out of the jurisdic- 
 tion is no longer in force. No leave to serve a 
 Defendant out of the jurisdiction can bo givfu 
 except in the oases specified in Order xi., r. 1. 
 In re Eager. Eager v. .Idhnstone 22 Ch. D. 86 
 
 ', ■ 10. Out of Jurisdiction — Scotland and 
 
 Ireland — Action for Breach of Contract — Rules of 
 Court, 1883, Order xi.,rr. 1 (e) and 2— Defendant 
 domiciled or ordinarily resident in Scotland or 
 Ireland.'] There is no power to allow, service of a 
 writ out of the jurisdiction in actions for breach 
 of contract under Order xi., rule 1 (e), where the 
 Defendant is domiciled or ordinarily resident in 
 Scotland or Ireland. Lenders v. Anderson 
 
 [12 ft. B, D. 50 
 
 I!- Out of Jurisdiction — Slander uttered 
 
 Abroad—Special Damage within Jurisdiction — 
 " Act done "—Rules of Court, 1876, Order II., rule 4 
 —Order XL, rule 1.] On an application for leave 
 to issue a writ of summons for service out of the 
 jurisdiction, it appeared that the cause of action 
 was an alleged slander uttered abroad and fol- 
 
( 1135 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1136 ) 
 
 II. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— SEEVICE 
 
 — continued. 
 lowed by special damage in England : — Held, by 
 Denman and Wafkin Williams, JJ., that the 
 special damage in England was not an act done 
 within the jurisdiction, so as to give the Court 
 power to allow service of the writ out of the juris- 
 diction under Order xi., rule 1 ; Held, by the Court 
 of Appeal (BramweU, Brett, and Cotton, L.JJ.), 
 that the writ ought not to issue, for as it was not 
 shewn that the slander was intended to be trans- 
 mitted to England the special damage, if it was 
 the cause of action, was not the act of the person 
 who uttered the slander, or an act for which he 
 was responsible, so that there was no act done by 
 him within the jurisdiction within Order xi., rule 1. 
 Bkee v. Mabesoaux - - 7 Q. B. S. 434 
 Partner - - - 19 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — ^Par- 
 ties. 11. 
 Substituted— Solicitor - 26 Ch. D. 746 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 8. 
 Substituted— Solicitor - 9 ft. B. D. 598 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 6. 
 Third party notice - - 13 ft. B. D. 96 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Third 
 Party. 10. 
 
 III. PEACTICE — STTPEEME COTTET — WEIT 
 SPECIALLY INDOESED. 
 
 1. Demurrer — Bules of Court, 1875, 
 
 Order SXI., t. i — Objection on Ground of Insuffi- 
 ciency.'] A writ was specially indorsed, " The 
 Plaintiff's claim is against the Defendant as the 
 acceptor of a bill of exchange. The following are 
 particulars: — Bill of exchange for £180, dated 
 27th of March, 1882, drawn by C. upon and ac- 
 cepted by Defendant, payable three months after 
 da,te." — The Plaintiff having delivered a notice 
 under Order xxi., r. 4, that his claim was that 
 which appeared by the indorsement on the writ, 
 the Defendant demurred on the ground that the 
 statement was insufficient and disclosed no cause 
 of action: — Meld, that there was no ground of 
 demurrer, and that the Defendant's remedy, if 
 any, was to apply for a further statement under 
 the mle.—Eohertsmi v. Howard (3 C. P. D. 2S0) 
 disapproved. Fawcus v. Charlton 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 516 
 
 2. Foreign Judgment — JJwZes of Court, 
 
 1883, Order IJI., r. 6 — Order xir.'] In an action 
 upon a foreign judgment in which the writ of 
 summons has been specially indorsed under 
 Order xiv., the Plaintiff' may obtain an order em- 
 powering him to sign final judgment. — Hodsoll 
 v. Baxter (E. B. & E. 884) followed. Grant v. 
 Easton - - 13 ft. B. D. 302 
 
 3. Married 'Woman — Judgment against — - 
 
 Mules of Court, 1875, Order XIT., r. 1 — Farm of 
 Order.'] An order having been obtained under 
 Order xiv., r. 1, for leave to sign final judgment 
 against a married woman in an action for the 
 price of goods supplied to her during coverture : — 
 Held, that the order was wrongly made, inasmuch 
 as there can be no judgment against a married 
 woman personally in respect of such a claim. 
 
 DdRRANT v. ElCKETTS AND WlFE 8 ft. B. D. 177 
 
 III. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — -WEIT' 
 SPECIALLY nSIJiOB,ai3i— continued. 
 
 4. ■ Harried 'Woman — Judgment against 
 
 — Form of — Separate Eetate-^Bestrmnt on Antici- 
 pation — 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75, ss. 1, 19 — Bules of 
 Court, 1883, Order .\ir.] An order giving leave 
 to enter final judgment against a married woman 
 in respect of her separate estate by virtue of the 
 Married 'Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 & 46- 
 Vict. c. 75), ss. 1, 19, should state that execution is 
 to be limited to such separate estate as the Defen- 
 dant is not restrained from anticipating unless such 
 restraint exists under any settlement or agree- 
 ment for a settlement of her own property made 
 or entered into by herself. BursIll v. Tanner 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 691 
 
 5. Mortgage — Action against Mortgagor 
 
 for possession of Land — Tenancy created by Deed 
 of Mortgage — Special Indorsement of Writ — 
 Ruhs of Court, 1883, Order ill., r. 6 (/) — 
 Order .v/7.] The relationship of landlord and. 
 tenant may be created by a mortgage deed, and. 
 therefore, iu an action for recovery of land by- 
 mortgagees from a mortgagor in possession under- 
 a mortgage deed creating a tenancy between them,_ 
 the writ may be specially Indorsed under Order in.,, 
 rule 6 (f ), so that Order xiv. will apply, and final 
 judgment may be ordered. Daubuz v. Lavington: 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 347 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— PAETIES. 
 
 1. Adding Plaintiff — Change of Plaintiff' 
 
 —RiUes of Court, 1875, Order XVI., r. 13.] The 
 Court cannot substitute one Plaintiff for another- 
 under Eules of Court, 1875, Order xvi., r. 13, 
 except by the first Plaintiff's consent, and where 
 he admits that he has commenced his action, 
 improperly ; but iu a proper case the Court will 
 add a Plaintiff and give him the conduct of the 
 action. Emden v. Carte 17 Ch. D. 169 
 
 2. Adding Plaintiff — Consent — Hides of 
 
 Court, 1875, Order xri., r. 13.] The consent which. 
 Order xvi., r. 13 (Rules of Court, 1875), requires 
 to be given by a person whom it is proposed to add. 
 as Plaintiff need not be in writing ; it is sufiicient 
 if the solicitor for the existing Plaintiff states thair 
 he consents on behalf of the proposed new Plain- 
 tiff, the solicitor taking the ordinary responsibility 
 of using the Plaintiff's name. Cox v. James 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 65 
 
 3. Adding Plaintiff— JJ«Zes of Court, 1883, 
 
 Order XVI., r. 11.] In an action by a company, 
 lessees for a long term of eleven houses, of which 
 ten were unlet and in their possession when the- 
 writ was issued, and by their tenant of the re- 
 maining house as co-Plaintiff, for an injunction 
 and damages in respect of an alleged nuisance- 
 from noise ; the tenant, after delivery of the state- 
 ment of claim and notice of trial, refused to go on 
 with the action as co-Plaintiff. The other ten 
 houses Iiaving iu the meantime been let, the 
 Plaintiff company applied at the trial for leave to 
 amend by adding as co-Plaintift's two of the new 
 tenants, who consented to be added. — Application 
 granted as being within the discretion given by 
 Kules of the Supreme Court, 1883, Order xvi., 
 ride 11, of allowing the names of any parties, 
 whether plaintiffs or defendants — ^" whose pre- 
 sence before the Court may be necessary in order 
 
( 1137 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1138 ) 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— SUPREME COUET— PARTIES 
 
 — continued. 
 to enable the Court effectually and completely to 
 adjudicate upon and settle all the questions in- 
 volved in the cause or matter"' — to be added. 
 
 HOCSE PbOPEBT'!! AND INVESTMENT COMPANY V. 
 
 H. p. HoKSE Nail Company 29 Ch. D. 190 
 
 4. AidiagVlaiatiS— Rales of Court, 1883, 
 
 Order XTi., r. 11.] The tenant for life of a trust 
 fund brought an action ' against the trustees to 
 make them liable for an improper investment. 
 The trustees by their defence alleged that they 
 had made the investment in question at the re- 
 quest of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff thereupon 
 applied for leave to amend by adding as co-Plain- 
 tiif his son, who had a reversionary interest in the 
 fund, and Bacon, V.C., made an ol'der giving him 
 leave > — Held, on appeal, that the order must be 
 discharged, for that Order xvi., rule 1 1 does not 
 authorize the allowing a Plaintiff who has no 
 right to Sue, to amend by joining as co-Plaintiif 
 a person who has such right. Walcott*. Lyons 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 584 
 
 5. Adding Defendant — Executor — Sules 
 
 of Court, 1883, Order XYI., r. 11.] One of two 
 executors having absconded, the other executor 
 sued a mortgagor. The Court refused on the ap- 
 plication of the Defendant to add the abscond- 
 ing executor as Defendant. Dkage v. Haktqpp 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 414 
 
 6. Assignment of Cause of Action — 
 
 Change of Plaintiff — Amendment of Tide of Action 
 and of Pleadings — Bules of Court, 1875, Order 
 XTX., r. 13.] A trustee in bankruptcy commenced 
 an action to obtain a declaration that a, deed, 
 which purported to be an absolute conveyance of 
 real estate by the bankrupt, was in fact a mort- 
 gage, and to redeem such mortgage : and subse- 
 quently sold and assigned his interest in the sub- 
 ject-matter of the action to C, wlio claimed to 
 carry on the action in the name of the original 
 Plaintiff: — Held, on the application of the Defen- 
 dant, that C. was bound to amend the title of the 
 action so as to shew that he was the real Plaintiff, 
 and to introduce such averments in the statement 
 of claim as would disclose his title. Seeae v. 
 Lawson - - - - 16 Ch. D. 121 
 
 7. Assignment of Policy of Insurance — 
 
 Absence of Personal Bepresentative of Person in- 
 sured — 15 <fc 16 Vict. c. 86, 8. 44.] . In an action 
 by an equitable mortgagee of a policy of insur- 
 ance against the insurance company for payment 
 of the policy money the Court has jurisdiction 
 under the 44th section of the 15 & 16 Vict. o. 86, 
 to dispense with a legal personal representative 
 of the assured where none exists. — -In a case where 
 the mortgage debt was larger than the. policy 
 money, and the estate of tlie assured was insol- 
 vent : — Held (affirming the decision of the Master 
 of the Rolls), that the jurisdiction to dispense 
 with the personal representative was rightly exer- 
 cised. — The dicta of James and Cotton, L.JJ., in 
 Webster v. British Empire Mutual I/ife Insurance 
 Company (15 Oh. D. 169) cpmmented on. Cbk- 
 Tius V. .Caledonian Eike and Life Insurance 
 Company - - - - 19 Ch. D. 534 
 
 8. Bondholder of Railway Company — 
 
 Ilvles of Court, 1875* Order xri., r. 9.] The 
 
 IV. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— PARTIES^ 
 
 — continued,. ' - 
 
 Plaintiff, a bondholder of a railway company^, 
 sued " on behalf of himself and all the- bond- 
 holders of the company other than the Defen- 
 dant B.," but did not obtain an order under Order 
 XVI., rule 9i that B. should be sued as represent- 
 ing all bondholders who dissented from 1ii& 
 Plaintiff's claim. — One of the bondholders took 
 out a summons whereby he stated that neither 
 tlie Plaintiff nor the Defendant B. properly repre- 
 sented the interests of himself arid certain other 
 bondholders, and applied to be made a defendant : 
 — Held, that thei applicant was entitled to be made- 
 a defendant, to represent the bondholders being: 
 dissentient from the Plaintiff's view. Ebaseb ■!).. 
 Cooper, Hall & Co. - - 21 Ch. D. 718 
 
 9. — ■ — Co-owners of a Patent — Bight of one 
 Co-owrier to sue— Bules of Court, 1875, Order xri.y. 
 rr. 13, 14, 17.] One of several co-owners of a 
 patent has a right to sue alone for tho recovery of 
 profits due for the use of the patent. — An objec- 
 tion 'by a Defendant that other persons should 
 have been joined as Plaintiffs should be made 
 promptly, under Eules of Court, 1875, Order xvi., 
 rules 13 and 14, and maynot be postponed till the 
 hearing where no impediment exists to raising- 
 the objection at once. Sheehan v. Great Eastern 
 Railway Company - - 16 Ch. D. 69 
 
 lb, Partners — Action against Partners in 
 
 Nameof Firm — Appearance hy one Partner only — - 
 Judgment entered against Partner appearing instead 
 of against Firm — Application to issue Execution 
 against other Partner — Amendment of Judgment — 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Order XII., r. 12 ; Order XLII.,. 
 r. 8.] 'To a writ issued against E. & Co., and claim- 
 ing damages for libel, an appearance was entered 
 for " R. trading as R. & Co. tlie Defendant in this- 
 action." . The statement of claim was delivered 
 against " R. sued as R. & Co." and the proceedings- 
 continued in that form down to judgment. At the 
 trial by consent a verdict was found for the Plain- 
 tiff for 40s and judgment entered accordingly. 
 After issuing execution against R. the Plaintiff, 
 under the Rules in force before 1883, took out a 
 summons for liberty to amend the judgment (and 
 the pleadings if necessary) by striking the words 
 " R. sued as " from the title of the action ; to enter 
 judgment against R. & Co. so as to correspond with 
 the writ, and to issue execution against 0., on the- 
 ground that C. had been since discovered to be a 
 partner in the fii-m : — -JEfeZcJ, afBrming the decision, 
 of the Court of Appeal, that the proceedings 
 having been conducted against E. only, and judg- 
 ment having been signed by consent against him 
 alone, the judgment could not be converted into a 
 judgment against the firm. Munsteb v. Railton.. 
 Munstee v. Cox 10 ft. B. D. 475 ; 11 ft. B. D. 436 ; 
 [lOApp. Cas. 680 
 
 • 11. Partners — -Action against Partners^ 
 
 in rmme of Firm — Firm dissolved before Writ 
 issued — Service on one Member of Firm— Judg- 
 ment by • Default — Debtor's Summons against 
 Member not served with Writ — Bankruptcy Act 
 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 7— Bules of Court, 
 1875, Order IX., r. 6; Order XII., r. 12; Order 
 XYI., r. 10 ; Order XLii., r. 8.] Per Lord Sel- 
 borne, L.C. : Whether the provisions of Order 
 XVI., rule 10, that partners may be sued ioi 
 
( 1139 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( IHO ) 
 
 IV. PRACTICE— SUPEEME COURT— PARTIES 
 
 — continued 
 the name of their firm, applies, not only to a 
 partnership existing at the time when the writ 
 is issued, but also to a partnership dissolved 
 before the issue of the writ in respect of a 
 cause of action which arose during its existence, 
 qusere. — But, if it does, still judgment in the action 
 is not per se binding on any member of the dis- 
 solved firm who has not been served with the 
 writ as a partner, or has not admitted on the 
 pleadings that he is or has been adjudged to be a 
 partner. Leave ought not to be given to issue 
 execution on the judgment against such a person, 
 if he disputes his liability, without the previous 
 determination of the question of his liability ; nor 
 can a debtor's summons be properly issued against 
 him on the judgment per se. — Per Cotton, L J. : 
 Order xvi., rule 10, applies only to a partnership 
 existing at the time when tlie writ is issued. It 
 does not apply to a partnership dissolved before 
 the issue of the writ. — Per Brett, L.J. : Order xvi., 
 rule 10, authorizes the suing in the name of their 
 firm the members of a partnership dissolved before 
 the issue of the writ, in respect of a cause of action 
 which arose during the existence of the fiim, and 
 service of the writ on one of the former partners is, 
 under rule 6 of .Order ix., a good service on the 
 others ; and a judgment obtained after such a ser- 
 vice only is biniling on a former partner who has 
 not admitted that he is nor has been adjudged to 
 be a partner, so that a debtor's summons can pro- 
 perly issue on the judgment, though execution 
 cannot issue without the leave of the Court. — A 
 partnership conbisting of several members was 
 dissolved as to one of them on the 17th of De- 
 cember, and the business was thenceforth con- 
 tinued by the others under the old firm name, and 
 at the old place of business. On tlie ISth of 
 December a creditor of the old partnership, who 
 was ignorant of the dissolution, commenced an 
 action against the partners (suing them in the 
 firm name) in respect of the debt contracted before 
 the dissolution. Un the 21st of December the 
 writ was served personally on one of the continu- 
 ing partners. The retired partner was not served 
 in'any way. No appearance was enti red to the 
 writ, and on the 29th of December the Plaintifl' 
 signed judgment by default. Execution was 
 issued, but the sheriff found no goods of the 
 partnership upon which to levy. No application 
 was made under rule 8 of Order xlii. for leave to 
 issue execution against the retired partner. In 
 the following May, the retired partner having had 
 no previous notice of the action, the Plaintiff 
 served him with particulars of demand of the 
 judgment debt, and, he not having paid it, the 
 Plaintiff served him with a debtor's summons 
 founded on the judgment debt. He denied the 
 debt, and applied to the Bankruptcy Court to 
 dismiss the summons : — Held, by Lord Selborne, 
 L.C., and Cotton, L.J. (dissentiente Brett, L.J.), 
 that the judgment would not support the debtor's 
 summons, and that the summons must be dis- 
 missed. Ex parte Young. In re Youno 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 124 
 
 12. Partners — Action against Partners in 
 
 Name of Firm — Miglit to proceed against existing 
 Partners together with former Partner — Presump- 
 
 IV. PRACTICE— STJPSEME COURT— PARTIES 
 
 — continued, 
 tion as to Partners intended to be sued as Defen- 
 dants under Name of Firm — Judgment hy Default 
 — Eules of Court, 1875, Order XVI., r. 10; 
 Order XLII., r. 8.] The Plaintiffs having brought 
 an action and obtained judgment against the 
 firm of " H. & D.," applied .to a Judge uuder 
 Order xlii., rule 8, for leave to issue execution 
 against M. as being a member of the firm. It 
 appeared that the action was upon a bill of 
 exchange drawn by D. at a time when M. H. & D. 
 were partners in the firm of H. & D., but that 
 M. had retired from the partnership prior to the 
 issuing of the writ, and that the firm of H. & D. 
 then continued, but consisted of H. & D. only. 
 The bill was drawn without the Imowledge or 
 consent of M., and for a purpose unconnected with 
 the partnership . — Held, by Watkin Williams, J., 
 first, that under Order xvi., rule 10 — which 
 enables two or more persons being liable as 
 co-partners to be sued in the name of their firm 
 — the right to sue partners in the name of a firm 
 is not limited to the case of partners carrying 
 on business at the date of the writ ; secondly, 
 that it was a question of fact, having regard to 
 the circumstances and the proceedings sub- 
 sequent to the writ, whether the Plaintiff in- 
 tended to sue under the firm name those partners 
 only who were members of the firm at the com- 
 mencement of the action, or the same persons 
 together with any former partner. — Ex parte 
 Young (19 Ch. D. 124) considered. Davis r. 
 MoRKis - - 10 Q. B. D. 436 
 
 13. Partners — Action against Partners in 
 
 Name of Firm — Bales of Court, 1875, Order /.v.. 
 )•. 6, and Order XLII. r. 8.] Where the writ in an 
 action is issued against a partnership firm in the 
 name of the firm the judgment must be against 
 tlie firm, and it cannot be separately entered 
 against an individual member of the firm who has 
 made default in appearing to the action. Jackson 
 
 V. Litchfield - ■ [8 Q. B. D. 474 
 
 14. Partners — Action against Finn — 
 
 Service of ^Vrit on one Member of a Trading 
 Partnership — Appearance hy him only "as a 
 partner of the firm" — Rules of Court, 1SS3, 
 Order XII., r. 15.] A writ was issued ag;iinst a 
 trading partnership (unincorporated), and served 
 upon a member of the firm, who entered an ap- 
 pearance, " W. N., a partner of the firm of \V. T. 
 & Co." There was no service upon or appearance 
 by the otlier members of the firm : — Held, that 
 leave to sign j udgment against the firm for de- 
 fault of appearance could not be granted. — 
 Jaclcson v. Litchfield (8 Q. B. D. 474) followed. 
 Adam v. Towneiid 14 Q, B. D. 103 
 
 16. Partners — Judgment against Firm — 
 
 Action on Judgment — Execution — Pules of Court, 
 1875, Order XLll., r. 8.] Where judgment lias been 
 recovered against a partnership firm in the name 
 of flic firm, the I'laintifif may bring an uction on 
 the judgment against the individual members of the 
 firm, and is not confined to the remedy given by 
 Order xlii., rule 8, with respect to the issue of 
 execution. Clakk v. Cullen 9 Q. B. D. 355 
 
 16. Solicitors, for Purposes of Discovery or 
 
 Costs — Demurrer — Frivolous Action — Misjoinder 
 — Dismissal of Action — Pules of Court, 1883, 
 
( 1141 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1H2 ) 
 
 IV. PEACTICE— SUPREME COTIBT— PARTIES 
 
 — continued. 
 Order xxv., rr. 1, 3, 4; Order xrni., r. 1.] Order 
 XXV. of the Kules of 1883, although in form 
 abolisbing demurrers, has merely substituted 
 ■other modes of procedure by which the objects 
 of a demivrrer, so far as it served a beneficial 
 purpose in obtaining a speedy decision of the 
 point at issue, can now be attained. Where the 
 cause of action against one Defendant is totally 
 disconnected with that against the other De- 
 fendant, except so far as it arises out of an 
 incident in the same transaction, there is a 
 juisjoinder, and it is not the case contemplated 
 by Order xviii., rule 1. Solicitors who were 
 made parties with other Defendants to an action, 
 the statement of claim iii which shewed no 
 reasonable cause of action as against them: — 
 Seld, entitled under Order xxv., rule 4, to an 
 order dismissing the action as against them with 
 costs and striking their names out of the proceed- 
 in-rs. To make solicitors or others parties to an 
 action without seeking any relief ngainst them, 
 except payment of costs or discovery, is vexatious. 
 BCESTALL V. IJETFDS • - 26 Ch. D. 35 
 
 V. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — KEXT 
 FRIEKD. 
 
 • Infant.] Doubts having arisen as to 
 
 1. 
 
 the proper custody of an infant, a suit was com- 
 menced in her name for the administration of her 
 father's estate. A next friend was appointed who 
 was a friend of the Defendants, the executors and 
 trustees of the will, and guardians of the infant, 
 and accepted theoflSce at their request, and on an 
 indemnity from their father. The solicitors on 
 the record for the Plaintiff were the solicitors of 
 the executors. On an application in the name of 
 the infant by M., the husband of her paternal 
 aunt, as next friend pro hac vice, to remove the 
 next friend and substitute M. : — Held, reversing 
 the decision of Bacon, V.C, that although nothing 
 was allegpd against the character, circumstances, 
 or conduct nf the next friend, his connection 
 with the executors made him an improper person 
 "to act as next friend, and that he ought to be 
 removed and M. substituted. In re Bubgess. 
 BUKGESS V. BOTTOMLEY - 25 Ch. D. 243 
 
 2. Married Woman — Authority — Security 
 
 ■or Costn.'] An action was commenced in the 
 name of a married woman by her next friend 
 against her husband and the trustee of a separa- 
 tion deed to enforce payment tf an annuity under 
 the deed. The Defendants moved that the 
 action might be dismissed, or that the next 
 friend might be ordered to give security for 
 costs. This was supported by an affidavit of 
 the husband that he believed that his wife had 
 given no authority to commence the action. The 
 husband's solicitors joined in the affidavit, and 
 deposed to the facts tliat the next friend was 
 not a householder, and had no visible means of 
 paying the costs. The next friend replied by 
 affidavit that he had sufficient means to pay any 
 costs that he might be ordered to pay, but caid 
 jiothing as to his having authority from the mar- 
 ried woman to commence the action, and did not 
 produce any authority : — SelO,, by Bacon, V.C, 
 that the next friend of a married woman will not 
 be called upon to prove his authority on the 
 
 V. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — NEXT 
 FRIEND — continued. 
 
 mere allegation of a Defendant that he has no 
 authority : — Held, also, that the next friend could 
 not be ordered to give security for costs on the 
 ground that he was not a householder when lie 
 deposed that he had sufficient means to pay costs. 
 — Held, by tlie Court of Appeal, that the action 
 must be dismissed with costs, to be paid by the 
 solicitors of the next friend, as he, when chal- 
 lenged to shew his authority to commence the 
 action, did not shew any. Sohjott v, Sohjott 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 94 
 
 VI. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT— THIRD 
 PARTY. 
 
 1. Directions as to Mode of having 
 
 Questions in Action determined — Refusal of Court 
 to order one Trial — Dismissal of Third Party 
 from Action — Rules of Court, 1875, Order xvi., 
 rr. 18, 21.] The Plaiutifi' having sued for breach 
 of contract in respect of goods, the Defendants, 
 under the Eules of the Supreme Court, 1875, 
 Order xvi., r. 18, brought in as a third party P. 
 from whom they themselves had bought the goods. 
 The Defendants afterwards, under Order xvi., 
 rule 21, apphed for direotiops as to the mode of 
 having the questions in the action determined ; but 
 the Court refused to give any directions. The De- 
 fendants delivered a claim to the third party, who 
 in turn delivered to them a defence. 'The action, 
 having been tried between the Plaintiif and the 
 Defendants, the latter delivered a reply to the 
 third party, and gave notice of trial : — Held, that 
 the reply and notice of trial must be set aside, for 
 it must be taken that the action came to an end 
 as regarded the third party, when the Court 
 refused to give directions. Schneideb v. Batt 
 
 [8 a. B. D. 701 
 
 2. Directions as to Questions between De- 
 fendant and Third Party — Costs to be paid by 
 Third Party — Rules of Court, 1875, Order XYI., 
 rr. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21.] No questions can be 
 determined between a Defendant and a third 
 party brought into the action by the Defendant 
 unless an order be obtained under Order xvi., 
 rule 17, giving directions that such question shall 
 be determined. — The Court has power under Order 
 XVI., rule 21, to order the third party so brought 
 into the action to pay to the Plaintiff the costs 
 occasioned by his defence. Pilleb v. Eobebts 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 198 
 
 3. Directions — Summons fur — Appearance 
 
 — Judgment on — Judicature Act, 1873, 8. 24, svh- 
 s. 3— Judicature Act, 1875, s. ii:— Rules of Court, 
 1875, Order xvi., r. bi—Married Women's Pro- 
 perty Act, 1882, 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75, s. 1.] Under 
 Order xvi., rule 52, judgment against a third 
 party who has appeared pursuant to a third party 
 notice, but, at the hearing of an application by 
 the Defendant for directions, declines to state any 
 defence, may be ordered, if the Judge is not satis"- 
 fied that there is any question proper to be tried 
 as to the liability of the third party. The rule is 
 consistent with the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24, 
 sub-B. 8, and the Judicature Act, 1875, s. 24, and 
 is not ultrk vires. Such judgment under the rule 
 may, since the Married Women's Property Act, 
 1882, be ordered against a married woman, third 
 
( 1143 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( nil ) 
 
 VI. PEACTICE — STJPEEME COURT — THIRD 
 
 TARTY— continued. 
 party, as a feme sole, declaring her separate estate 
 chargeable even in respect of a liability created 
 before that Act. Gloucestebshihe Banking Com- 
 pany V. Phillips - - 12 Q. B. D. 533 
 
 4. Discretion of Court — Ex parte Appli- 
 cation — Rules of Court, 1875, Order XVI., rr. 18, 
 20, 21.] An application by the Defendant in an 
 action for leave to serve a third-party notice under 
 Order xvi., rule 18, ought to be made on notice to 
 the Plaintiff, and not ex parte. — In an action by a 
 company against its directors and others, seeking 
 to make the Defendants personally liable in re- 
 spect of certain dividends alleged to have been 
 improperly paid out of capital, the Defendants 
 applied under Order xvi., rule 18, for leave to 
 serve third party notices on all the shareholders 
 of the company, 450 in number, on the ground 
 that if they, the Defendants, were held liable, 
 they would have a right over against the share- 
 holders to recover from them the sums received by 
 them by way of dividend : — Held (atBrming the 
 decision of Hall, V.C.), that the granting of the 
 leave asked for would materially embarrass the 
 Plaintiffs in the conduct of their action, and 
 that, therefore, the Court in the exercise of its 
 discretion ought to refuse the application. Wye 
 Valley Bailway Company v. Hastes 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 489 
 
 5. Indemnity — Claim, for Indemnity from 
 
 co-Defendant — Rules of Court, 1883, Order xrj., 
 ■r. 55.] An action by a vendor against the pur- 
 chaser of a house and premises, and the auctioneer 
 who advertised and sold them, for specific perform- 
 ance of the contract or damages. The purchaser 
 stated that he was induced to purchase the pro- 
 perty in consequence of the advertisement in the 
 newspapers inserted by the auctioneer, represent- 
 ing that the purchase-moneys would be allowed 
 to remain on mortgage. The representation was 
 alleged to have been unauthorized, and the pur- 
 chaser applied by summons under Rules of 
 Supreme Court, 1883, Order xvi., rule 55, for leave 
 to serve his co-Defendant — the auctioneer — with 
 a notice claiming indemnity from liim against 
 the claim of the vendor.— JfeZcZ, that this was not 
 a case for indemnity within rule 55, and that the 
 summons must be dismissed. — I'ontifex v. Foord 
 (12 Q. B. D. 152) followed. Catton v. Bennett 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 161 
 
 6. Indemnity — Contribution — Bules of 
 
 Court, 1883, Order XYL, rr. 48, 52.] The Plaintiff 
 sued the Defendant for breacli of a covenant to 
 repair contained in a lease of a dwelling-house 
 for a term of twenty-one years from Michaelmas, 
 1861. The Defendant obtained leave to serve 
 and served a third party notice claiming contri- 
 bution or indemnity from a sub-lessee to whom 
 he had let the premises from IVIidsummer, 1869, 
 for the remainder of the original term less ten 
 days. The underlease contained a covenant to 
 repair, which was in terms precisely similar to 
 those of the covenant in the original lease, and for 
 breach of which the Defendant claimed relief 
 against the sub-lessee : — Held, that, inasmuch as 
 the terms of the covenant to repair must in each 
 case be construed with reference to the age and 
 character of the premises at the time of the 
 
 VI. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — THIRD- 
 PARTY — continued. 
 demise, the covenant in the underlease could not 
 be construed as a covenant to indemnify the- 
 Defendant against or to perform the covenant in 
 the original lease; that the Defendant's claim was 
 not one for contribution or indemnity from the 
 third party within Order xyi., rule 25, and that 
 therefore, ho directions as to trial could be given 
 under that rule. Pontipex v. Poobd 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 152 
 
 7. Indemnity — Embarrassing Pleading- 
 
 —Rides of Court, 1883, Order xvi., r. 48.] In 
 giving leave to a Defendant to serve notice of 
 claim for contribution or indemnity on a third 
 party, the Court will not consider whether the 
 claim is a valid one, but only whether the claim 
 is bona fide, and whether if established it will re- - 
 suit in contribution or indemnity. — The Plaintiff, 
 who was the owner of stock in a public company- 
 registered in her name, ascertained that it had 
 been transferred to F. by virtue, as she alleged, of 
 a forged transfer. She brought an action against 
 the company to have her name reinstated in the 
 books of the company. The company obtained 
 leave to serve F. with a claim for indemnity : — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, without deciding 
 that the claim for indemnity was valid, that 
 leave to sei-ve F. was rightly given. — Speller v. 
 Bristol Steam Navigation Company (13 Q. B. D. 
 96) distinguished. Oakshore v. Nokth Eastern 
 Railway Company - - 29 Ch. D. 344 
 
 8. Indemnity — Leave of Court or a Judge 
 
 — Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order xvi., 
 rr. 48, 55.] Under rule 55 of Order xvi., a Defen- 
 dant need not obtain the leave of the Court or a 
 Judge before issuing to a co-Defendant a notice 
 claiming contribution or indemnity from him. 
 But it will be open to the co-Defendant, after 
 he has been served with the notice, to move to 
 set aside the service. Towse ». Lovekidgb 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 76 
 
 9. Indemnity — Non-admission of Liability 
 
 — Application by Defendant for Directions — 
 Liberty to appear at Trial — Rules of Court, 1883, 
 Order XYI., r. 48.] Where in an action for damages- 
 in respect of alleged injury to the Plaintiffs' pre- 
 mises, the Defendant, claiming to be entitled to- 
 indemnity over against a person not a party to the 
 action, had served such person with a third-party 
 notice under Order xvi., rule 48, and he had ap- 
 peared thereto, the Court, upon a summons for 
 directions taken out by the Defendant, gave the 
 third party, who did not admit his liability, 
 liberty to appear at the trial of the action and 
 take such part as the Judge should direct, and be 
 bound by the result, and ordered the question' 
 of his liability to indemnify the Defendant to be 
 tried at the trial of the action but subsequent 
 thereto. — In case a third party served with notice 
 appears and admits his liability to indemnify, the 
 Court will give him leave to defend the action. — 
 Form of the order made. Coles v. Civil Sekvice 
 Supply Association - - 26 Ch. D. 629 
 
 10. Indemnity — Service out of Jurisdiction 
 
 —Rules of Court, 1883, Order XYI., r. 48 ; Order 
 XI., r. 1 (g).] Where a Defendant is not entitled, 
 to claim contribution against a person not a party 
 
( 1115 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1U6 ) 
 
 "TI. PEACTICE — STJEKEME COURT — THIRD 
 
 VARTY— continued. 
 to the action, he can only be entitled under 
 Order xvi., rule 48, to issue a third-party notice 
 to such person, where under a contract express 
 ■or implied he is entitled to indemnity over 
 •against him. — Therefore, where the Defendants 
 were sued for damages to the Plaintiffs' goods 
 while on hoard a vessel of the Defendants on a 
 ■certain voyage, by reason of the vessel being 
 not seaworthy for the voyage, it was held by 
 the Court of Appeal, that the Defendants were 
 "not entitled to a third-party notice under Order 
 XVI., rule 48, to the persons of whom the Defen- 
 dants had hired the vessel with a warranty that she 
 was tight, staunch, strong, and fitted for the ser- 
 vice. — By Order xi., rule 1, service out of the 
 jurisdiction of a . . . notice of a writ of summons 
 may be allowed by the Court or a Judge when- 
 ever ...(g) any person out of the jurisdiction 
 is a necessary or proper party to an action pro- 
 perly brought against some other person duly 
 served within the jurisdiction: — Beld (by the 
 Queen's Bench Division), that Order xi., rule 1 (g), 
 does not apply to service out of the jurisdiction of 
 a third-party notice on a third party domiciled or 
 ordinarily resident in Scotland. Spellek & Co. 
 ■!). BmsTOL Steam Navigation Company 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 96 
 
 Counter-claim by third party 28 Ch. D. 333 
 
 See Pbaotioe — ■ Sdpkemb Couet — 
 Countek-claim. 9. 
 
 TIL PRACTICE— STTPREME COTTET— CHANGE 
 OF PARTIES. 
 
 1. Bankruptcy of Defendant — Making 
 
 Trustee a Party to the Action — Bules of Court, 
 1875, Order L., r. 2.] After issue joined in an 
 .action by the indorsees against the acceptor of , a 
 bill of exchange, in which the defence was that 
 the Plaiiitiffs took the bill without value, and 
 .after notice that the Defendant had been de- 
 frauded of it, the Defendant who was a sole 
 Defendant, filed a petition in liquidation, and a 
 trustee was appointed. The Bankruptcy Court 
 refused to restrain the action, but restrained the 
 Plaintiffs from enforcing any judgment they 
 might obtain in the action either against the 
 property or person of the debtor, and the trustee 
 ■declined to admit the Plaintiff's claim: — Seld, 
 that the Bankruptcy Court was the proper Court 
 in which Plaintiffs ought to prove their debt, and 
 that there was no ground for making an order 
 under Order L., rule 2, that the trustee be made 
 a party to the action or be served with notice 
 thereof. Babteb v. DubeUx 7 Q. B. D. 413 
 
 2. Bankruptcy of Defendant — Trustee 
 
 adopting Bankrupt's Defence — Costs.^ An in- 
 terlocutory order for an injunction and receiver 
 having been made against the Defendants in an 
 action, they gave notice of appeal, and shortly 
 afterwards became bankrupt. An order was made 
 for carrying on the proceedings .against their 
 trustee. The trustee gave notice to the Plaintiff 
 that he should not proceed with the appeal. 
 Shortly after this the trustee entered an appear- 
 ance and called for a statement of claim. He 
 declined to undertake to pay the costs of the 
 appeal incurred by the Plaintiff before the notice 
 
 VII. PRACTICE— STTPEEME COURT— CHANGE 
 
 or PA'RTl'Ea— continued. 
 that the appeal would not be proceeded with, and 
 the appeal came on that the question as to the 
 costs miglit be decided: — Held, that the appeal 
 must he dismissed with costs to be paid, by the 
 trustee, for that having adopted the defence of 
 the bankrupts he had placed himself in their 
 position as to the whole of the action, and could 
 not rejecf part of the proceedings in it. Boene- 
 MAN V. Wilson 28 Ch, D. 68 
 
 3. Birth of Infant— iJuZes of Court, 1883, 
 
 Order .XVII., rr. i, 5-^Carrying on Proceedings — 
 Supplemental Action — Form of Order.'] Where 
 proc,eedings httve been taken in an action after 
 it has become defective by the birth of an infant 
 who is a necessary party thereto, the infant 
 should be made a party by the common order 
 under Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order xvii., 
 rule 4, to carry on proceedings between the con- 
 tinuing parties and such infant ; and the order 
 (as in Seton (page 1527, Form 3) ) should go on 
 to direct an inquiry whether any proceedings 
 affecting the interest of the infant have been 
 taken in the action since his birth, and if so, 
 whether it will be fit and proper and for the 
 benefit of the infant that he should be bound 
 thereby; and if so certified the infant to be 
 bound accordingly. — If such inquiry be answered 
 in the negative, the Plaintiff or person having 
 the conduct can still proceed by supplemental 
 action. Petee v. Thomas-Peteb 26 Ch, D. 181 
 
 4. Death of Party — Order of Reference- 
 Action for Tort— Death of Party hefore making of 
 Award — Maxim, " Actio personalis moritur cum 
 persona."'] The parties to an action for a, tort 
 agreed before trial to refer the matter in dispute 
 to an arbitrator. The order of reference contained 
 a clause that the arbitrator should publish his 
 award "ready to be delivered to the parties in 
 difference, or such of them as require the same (or 
 their respective personal representatives, if either 
 of the said parties die before the making of the 
 award)," After the hearing of the reference had 
 been concluded, but before the award was made, 
 the Plaintiff died. The arbitrator afterwards 
 published the award, and the executors of the 
 Plaintiff having proved his will, took up the 
 award : — Held, that the cause of action being in 
 tort died with the Plaintiff and did not pass to 
 his personal representatives by force of the clause 
 above mentioned, which in an action of tort was 
 inoperative, and that the executors were not 
 entitled to be substituted as Plaintiffs iu place of 
 their testator. Bowkee v. Evans 15 Q. B. D. S65 
 
 5. Death of Vaxty-Bevivor—Appeal- 
 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Order L.] A Defendant, P., 
 gave notice of appeal from a judgment, and set it 
 down. After this he died, and his executrix 
 obtained an order of course at the EoUs that the 
 appeal might be carried on and prosecuted by her 
 in like manner as it might have been carried on 
 and prosecuted by P. if he had not died.— Held, 
 that the order was sufficient, and that the exe^^ 
 cutrix was entitled to proceed with the appeal. 
 Eanson v. Patton - - 17 Ch, Df 767 
 
 6. Death of ratty— Revivor— Discretion 
 
 of Court — Suit abated for more than Twenty 
 
( 1147 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( IHa ) 
 
 VII. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— CHANGE 
 
 OF TA'RTIES— continued. 
 Years — Bules of Court, 1875, Oj-der X.] It is in 
 the discretion of the Conrt whether it will allow 
 an action which has become defective by the 
 death of a party or otherwise, to be revived. — 
 An administration suit in which a decree was 
 iunde by the Court of Chancery in the year 1833. 
 having become defective by the deaths of some 
 parties and the bankruptcy of another, and no 
 step having been taken in it for thirty-uine years, 
 an order of revivor was allowed for tlie purpose of 
 enabling a party to appeal from an order made in 
 the year 1 836 (in case the Court of Appeal should 
 give leave to appeal), the Court being of opinion 
 that no person had altered his position, or incurred 
 any liability, or suflfered any loss on the faith of 
 the order from which- it was desired to appeal. 
 CuKTis V. Sheffield 20 Ch. D. 398 
 
 7. Death of Party — Bevioor — Order of 
 
 Course — Person attending Proceedings — Rules of 
 Court, 1875, Order £.] A person served with 
 notice of an administration judgment, and having 
 obtained liberty to attend the proceedings under 
 it, is in the same position as a party to the action, 
 and is entitled to obtain an order of course to 
 revive the action on the death of the sole Plain- 
 tiff. — Delaney v. Delaney (27 Sol. J. 418) distin- 
 guished. — Dobson V. Faithwaite (30 Beav. 228) 
 followed. BuKSTALL V. Feabon 24 Ch. D. 126 
 
 Death of Defendant who has delivered 
 
 counter-claim — Revivor 21 Ch. D. 175 
 See Practice — Supkeme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 6. 
 
 VIII. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT — CON- 
 DUCT OF CAUSE. 
 
 1. Concurrent Suits — Banlcrupt Adminis- 
 trator — Beceiver.^ An action was commenced in 
 the Court of one of the Vice-Chancellora for the 
 administration of the estate of a testator, against 
 the administrator with the will annexed. The 
 administrator, being interested in that capacity 
 in the estate of another testator, commenced an 
 action for ihe administration of his estate in the 
 Court of a diiferent Vice- Chancellor, and then 
 became bankrupt. The Plaintiff in the first suit 
 moved in that suit that a receiver of the estate 
 might be appointed, and that the Plaintiff might 
 be permitted to prosecute the second action in 
 the name of the administrator : — Held, that the 
 Plaintiff was entitled to the order asked for, and 
 that it was properly made in that Court to which 
 the first action was attached. — In such a case it 
 is not the modem practice to permit the receiver 
 to carry on an action in the name of a bankrupt 
 executor or administrator. In re Hopkins. Dowd 
 V. Hawtin - - 19 Ch. D. 61 
 
 2. Concurrent Suits — Conduct of Pro- 
 ceedings — Stay of Proceedings — Lancaster Pala- 
 tine Court.'] A judgment creditor of the Defendant 
 brousiht an action in the Court of the County 
 Palatine of Lancaster to obtain a declaration 
 iliiit he had a charge upon certain lands of the 
 Defendant comprised in a certain deed of settle- 
 munt, and to carry into effect the trusts of the 
 settlement. He obtained judgment for a declara- 
 tion of his charge, and for adminiitration, inquiries. 
 
 VIII. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — CON- 
 DUCT OF CkVSZ— continued. 
 and a receiver. 'Afterwards one of the benefi- 
 ciaries under the settlement brought an action in 
 the High Court to carry into effect the trusts of 
 the settlement, and charging the trustees with a 
 breach of trust. Judgment was obtained and 
 inquiries directed, including one as to the breach 
 of trust : — Held, that the Plaintiff in the Palatine 
 action was not a stranger to the action in the- 
 High Court, and was entitled to the conduct of 
 that action ; and he undertaking to add the 
 inquiry as to the breach of trust to the inquiry 
 in the Palatine action, the Court stayed all pro- 
 ceedings in the action in the High Court. 
 TOWNSEND V. TOWNSEND - 23 Ch. D. 100 
 
 3. ■ Concurrent Suits — Lancaster Palatine 
 
 CouH.I The general rule that where two actions- 
 have been commenced for the administration of 
 the same estate the conduct of the proceedings, 
 will be given to the Plaintiff in the first action,, 
 although the decree in the second has been 
 obtained first, applies to actions commenced in 
 the Palatine Court of Lancaster, as well as to 
 those commenced in the High Court of Justice. 
 In considering whether the rule ought to be ap- 
 plied the Court will have regard to the special 
 circumstances, and will take into account the 
 amount of the interest of the Plaintiff in the 
 first action, and his object in bringing his action. 
 The fact of a plaintiff, being a stranger to the 
 family, who had bought up the reversionary 
 interests of some of the residuary legatees, heloL. 
 not a sufficient reason for not giving him the 
 conduct of the proceedings, although his purchase 
 of some of the shares was disputed on the ground 
 of inadequacy of consideration and undue influ- 
 ence. — The decision of Bacon, V.C., reversed. 
 In re Swibe. Mellor v. Swike 21 Ch. D. 647 
 
 4. First Action defective — Action by- 
 
 Joint Creditors for Administration of Separate 
 Estate of deceased Partner.'] A creditor of a 
 partnership firm brought an administration action 
 against the executor of a deceased partner. 
 Afterwards a separate creditor of the same partner 
 brought an administration action against the exe- 
 cutor and obtained judgment : — Held, on an. 
 application by the Plaintiff in the first action 
 for the conduct of the proceedings in the second 
 action, that a joint creditor of a firm could not 
 maintain a simple action for the administration: 
 of the estate of a deceased partner, and tlierefor& 
 that the first action was not properly constituted. 
 The application of the Plaintiff was consequently 
 refused. — Decision of Kay, J., afiSrmed. In re 
 MoEae. FoBSTER-i). Davis. Norden d. McEak 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 16 
 
 IX. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— DEFENCE. 
 
 Action for Recovery of land — Defence- 
 
 that Defendant is in possession of Land — Omission- 
 to deny Plaintiff's Title— Bides of Court, 1875, 
 Order xr.v., rr. 15, 17.] In an action for the re- 
 covery of land a defence simply alleging that the 
 Defendant is in possession thereof, operates as a 
 denial of the Plaintiffs title and requires him to- 
 prove the truth of the allegations in the claim. 
 Danford v. MoAnulty 6 Q. B. D. 645 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 466. 
 
( 1149 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1150 ) 
 
 X. PRACTICE— SirPEEME COTJBT— COUNTEE- 
 CLAIU. 
 
 r 1. Coimection with the original Cause — 
 
 Third Party — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24, svh-s. 3, 
 Mules of Court, 1875, Order xvi., r. 17.]' An 
 taction asking relief as in detinue was brought 
 against a sole Defendant who had seized goods 
 wliich B. had assigned to the Plaintiff under a 
 bill of sale. — The sole Defendant filed a state- 
 ment of defence and a counternjlaim impeaching 
 the bona fides of the Plaintiff's bill of sale, and 
 alleging a bill of sale by B. to himself, and by 
 such counter-claim claimed, (1) relief against the 
 Plaintiff, and (2) as against B. the money due 
 under the bill of sale from B to himself, and 
 damages for the alleged fraud. The counter-claim 
 against the Plaintiff was abandoned at the hear- 
 ing : — Held, tliat the relief a&ked by the Defendant 
 against B. was not a matter sufficiently " relating 
 to or connected with the original catise or matter " 
 to bo the subject of a claim under sect. 24 of the 
 Judicature Act, 1873. Baebek v. Blaieebo 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 473 
 
 2. Connection with the Original Cause — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Order ,v/x, r. 3 ; Order xxil., 
 r. 9; Ord^ xxYli., r. 1.] Order xix., rule 3, is 
 sutficiently general to allow a counter-claim by 
 way of defence whether or not it is connected 
 with or of the same character as the Plaintiff's 
 claiiii, and whether it sounds in damages or not. 
 — But the Court has a discretion to exclude a 
 coun fcer-olaim which may unduly delay the action. 
 Gkay v. Webb - - 21 Ch. D. 802 
 
 3. Counter-olaim against Non-party — 
 
 Service necessary hefore Defendant to Counter-claim 
 can appear — Rules of Court, 1875, Order xxii., 
 rr. 5, 6, 7.] A person not a party to an action, 
 when made a defendant to a counter-claim, is not 
 entitled to enter an appearance gratis. Fbaseb v. 
 Cooper Hali & Co. Waddell v. Peasee 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 685 
 
 4. Extent of Belief — Judicature Act, 
 
 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. e. 66), s. 24, svb-s. 3— Bules 
 of Court, 1875, Order xix., r. 3 ; Order xx., j. 1.] 
 Belief can be given on a counter-claim in respect 
 of a cause of action accrued to the Defendant 
 subsequently to the issue of the writ in the 
 original action. — Original Hartlepool Collieries 
 Company v. Gibb (5 Ch. D. 713) not followed.— 
 SemhU, that a counter-claim is an independent 
 action and not part of the original action, though 
 for cimvenience the two are tried together. — 
 Vavasseur v. Krupp (15 Ch. D. 474) questioned. 
 Beddall v. Maitland - - 17 Ch. D. 174 
 
 5. Eecovery of Land — Joinder of other 
 
 Cause of Action — Bules of Court, 1875, Orderxvii., 
 r. 2 ; Order xix., r. 3 ; Order xxil, r. 9— Judica- 
 ture Act, 1873 (36 * 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 24, sub-s. 3.] 
 The provision of rule 2 of Order xvii., that no 
 cause of action, except those specified in that 
 rule, shall, unless by leave of the Court, be joined 
 with an action for the recovery of land, applies to 
 a counter-claim, as well as to an original action. 
 — Order made to exclude a counter-claim, on the 
 ground that in it such a joinder of causes of action 
 had been made without the leave of the Court, 
 and that the fair trial of the action would be em- 
 barrassed. CoMPTON V. Preston 21 Ch. D. 138 
 
 X. PRACTICE— SUPREME COXTET- COTJNTEE- 
 CLAIU — continued, 
 
 6. Eevivor— J?«i!es of Court, 1875, Order 
 
 XIX., r. 3 ; Order t.] On the death of a Defen- 
 dant who has delivered a counter-claim, it is 
 necessary that his representatives, if they wish 
 to prosecute the counter-claim against the Plain- 
 tiff in the original action,- sliould obtain an order 
 of revivor against him. — An order of revivor of 
 the original action obtained by the Plaintiff 
 against them does not authorize them to prosecute 
 the counter-claim against him. Andeew v. 
 AiTKEN - - - - 21 Ch. D. 176 
 
 7. Set-off — Incumbents Resignation Act, 
 
 1871 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 44), s. lO.J To a claim in 
 an action brought to recover the arrears of a 
 pension due by virtue of the Incumbents Kesig- 
 nation Act, 1871, the Defendant by way of set-off 
 and counter-olaim, pleaded that a larger sum 
 than the amount of pension was' due to him from 
 the Plaintiff upon a judgment, and he claimed to 
 recover the balance : — Held, by Baggallay, and 
 Lush, L.JJ., that as there can be no set-off to a 
 pension created under the Incumbents Kesigna- 
 tion Act, 1871, the set-off and counter-claim 
 must be dismissed. — By Bramwell, L.J., that the 
 Plaintiff must have a judgment for the arrears of 
 the pension owing to him, but that the Defen- 
 dant was entitled to a separate and independent 
 judgment for tlie amoimt due under the set-off 
 and counter-claim. Gathebcole ». Smith 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 626 
 
 8. Set-off— JJmZcs of Court, 1875, Order 
 
 XIX., I. 3.] Rule 3 of Order xix., Bules of Court, 
 1875, was not intended to give rights against 
 third parties which did not exist before ; but it 
 is a rule of procedure designed to prevent the 
 necessity of bringing a cross-action in all oases 
 wlieie the oounter-chiim may conveniently be 
 tried iii the original action. In re Milan Team- 
 ways Company. Sx parte Theys 22 Ch. D. 122 
 
 9. Third-party— Co»»<cr-c2aim by Third 
 
 Party against Plaintiff — Bules of Court, 1888, 
 Order XVI., rr. 48, 52, 53 ; Order XIX., r. 3.] The 
 Court has no power to give a third party who 
 has been served with notice by a defendant under 
 Order xvi., r. 48, leave to file a counter-claim 
 against tlie original plaintiff. Eden v. Weaedale 
 Iron and Coal Company 28 Ch. D. 333 
 Costs — Claim and counter-claim. 
 
 See Cases under Pkactice — -Supbeme 
 
 Court — Costs. 10 — 13. 
 
 Counter-claim in reply - 8 Q. B. D. 428 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Eeply. 
 
 1. 
 
 Discontinuance of action 11 Q. B. B. 464 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 continuance. 
 
 XI. PEACTICE— STJPEEME COUET— EEPIY. 
 
 1. Counter-claim and Set-off in Eeply 
 
 Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24, sub-ss. 3, 7— Bules 
 of Court, 1875, Order xi.\'., rr. 3, 19 ; Order xx., 
 r. 1.] A Plaintiff may, in his reply to a counter- 
 claim of the Defendant, counter-claim in respect 
 of a cause of action accrued after the issue of the 
 writ, but arising at the same time and out of 
 the same transaction as the counter-claim of the 
 Defendant. Toke v. Andrews 8 Q, B. B, 428 
 
( 1151 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1152 ) 
 
 ■XI. PEACTICE— SUPREME COTJET— KEPI,Y— 
 continued. 
 
 2. Time — Delivery of Beply after Time 
 
 — Judgment on Admissions in Fleadings — Bides 
 
 •of Court, 1875, Order A'.r/J., r. 12 — Order XL., 
 r. 11.] The Plaintiff delivered his reply after 
 three weeks had elapsed from delivery of the 
 statement of defence, and subsequently the De- 
 fendant, treating the facts stated in the defence 
 as admitted, under Order xxix., rule 12, by reason 
 of the Plaintiff's failure to reply in time, gave 
 notice of motion for judgment imder Order XL., 
 
 .Tule 11 : — Keld, that, the reply having been actu- 
 ally delivered before the notice of motion was 
 given, the Defendant was not entitled to judg- 
 
 iment. Graves ii. Tekky 9 ft. B. D. 170 
 
 3. Time — • heave to deliver Reply after 
 
 Time—Bules of Court, 1875, Order xxiv., t". 1 ; 
 Order LTII., r. 6.] The time for delivering a 
 reply which would have expired on the 25th of 
 
 ■ July was extended to the 22ud of August, and 
 then to the 19th of September. On the 26tli of 
 September no reply having been delivered the 
 Defendant served notice of motion for judgment. 
 On the same day the Plaintiff, by leave of the 
 
 ■ Judge, served notice of motion for the following 
 day for leave to deliver a reply, and on the 27th 
 the Judge refused the Plaintiff's motion on the 
 ground of unexplained delay : — Seld, on appeal, 
 that the application ought to have been granted, 
 
 • on the terms of the Plaintiff's paying the costs of 
 it. Eaton v. Stober - - 22 Ch. D. 91 
 
 XII. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — PAY- 
 MENT INTO COURT. 
 
 1. Acceptance by Defendant — Discretion 
 
 ■of Court— Bules of Court, 1875, Order XXX.. rr.\,i 
 
 — Order hv., r. 1.] Order xxx. applies only to 
 an action which is strictly brought to recover a 
 debt or damages. — If an account is claimed the 
 order does not apply, and even if the Plaintiff 
 accepts in satisfaction of his whole cause of 
 action a sum paid into Court by the Defendant, 
 the Court has a discretion as to the costs. Nichols 
 V. Evens 22 Ch. D. 611 
 
 2. Admission — Evidence.'] Trust funds 
 
 onay be ordered to be brought into Coui-t by the 
 "trustee, an accounting party, upon admissions 
 contained in letters written before action brought 
 "that he has received the money, and a recital 
 to that effect contained in the settlement, his 
 execution of which as trustee has been proved, 
 although there is no formal admission in his 
 pleadings or affidavits that he has received and 
 holds the money. Hampden v. Wallis 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 251 
 
 3. Denial of Liability — Action for several 
 
 Breaches of Contract — Payment into Court in re- 
 spect of One Breach — Acceptance in Satisfaction 
 of all Demands — Bules of Court, 1883, Order 
 XXII., rr. 6, 7.] In an action for breach of 
 contract assigning two distinct breaolies, the 
 Defendants pleaded denying the breaches, and 
 alternatively paid money into Court with regard 
 to one of the breaches. The Plaintiffs gave 
 notice under Order xxii., r. 7, that they ac- 
 cepted the money paid into Court in full satis- 
 faction of the causes of action in the statement 
 
 ■ of claim : — Held, that the Plaintiffs were entitled, 
 
 XII. PEACTICE — SUPREME COURT — PAY- 
 MENT INTO COVRT— continued. 
 without proceeding to judgment, to their costs of 
 the action ; for by accepting the money paid into 
 Court in satisfaction of all their alleged causes of 
 action they had in effect discontinued or with- 
 drawn the action as to the breach, in respect of 
 which the money was not paid in. — Decision of 
 the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. MIl wraith 
 V. Green 13 ft. B. D. 897 ; 14 ft. B. D. 766 
 
 4. Denial of Liability — Bvles of Supreme 
 
 Court, 1875, Order XXX., r. 1 — Payment into 
 Court without admitting Liahility.'] Where the 
 Defendant succeeds at the trial on an issue on 
 money paid into Court under Order xxx., rule 1, 
 of the Kules of 1875, with a defence stating such 
 payment as an alternative defence to the action, 
 he is entitled to have judgment entered for him 
 in the action.— In an action for trespass in break- 
 ing and entering the Plaintiff's land, the Defen- 
 dants paid money into Court under Order xxx., 
 rule 1, of the Rules of 1875. and in their defence 
 denied the PlaintiiTs possession of tlie land, and 
 also stated that without admitting any kind of 
 liability the sum paid into Court was sufficient to 
 satisfy any damage which the Plaintiff might 
 have sustained in consequence of any acts of 
 theirs. The Plaintiff joined issue upon these 
 defences, but failed at the trial to establish any 
 damages exceeding the sum paid into Court, 
 though he succeeded on the other issue. The 
 Court of Appeal treated such defence of payment 
 into Court as an alternative payment, and as it 
 went to the whole cause of action: — Seld, re- 
 versing the decision of "Williams, J., that the 
 Defendants were entitled to judgment. Wheelee 
 V. United Telephone Company 13 ft. B. D. 697 
 
 {See also GorTAED v. Carr, 13 ft. B. D. 598, n.] 
 
 5. Investment of Money in Court — Ga^ 
 
 under Control of the Court — Money paid under 
 Lands Clauses Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. e. 18)— Law 
 of Property Act, 1860 (25 & 24 Vict. v. 38), s. 10— 
 General Order, Feb. 1, 1861.] Money paid into 
 Court under the Lands Clauses Act is "cash 
 under the control of the Court" withia the 
 meaning of the Act 23 & '2i Vict. c. 38, s. 10, and 
 the General Order of the 1st of February, 1861, 
 and may be invested in any of the securities 
 sanctioned by the Court. The expression "cash 
 under the control of the Court" means cash 
 standing in Court in any cause or matter. — In re 
 Boyd's Settled Estates (21 W. E. 667) overruled.— 
 Cash imder the control of the Court may be in- 
 vested in East India 3i per cent. Stock created 
 since the date of tlie General Order. Ex parte 
 St. John Baptist College, Oxford. In re 
 Metropolitan and District Eatlwats Act 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 93 
 
 6. Order to pay Plaintiff instead of pay- 
 ing into Court — Appeal— Service on Solicitor — 
 Continuance of Atithority of Solicitor.'] By order 
 on further consideration the Defendant was 
 ordered to pay money into Court, which was 
 then to be carried to the credit of an action for 
 administering the estate of a testator whose exe- 
 cutrix was the Plaintiff in the present action. 
 The Defendant went abroad without complyin" 
 with the order. On appeal the order was varied 
 by ordering the Defendant to pay the money to 
 
( 1153 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1154 ) 
 
 XII. PSACTICE — STJPEEJIE COURT — PAY- 
 MENT INTO COVRl— continued. 
 the Plaintiff, who was then to pay it into Court 
 in the administration action, such an order being 
 capable of being better enforced against the De- 
 fendant's property than the order as originally 
 framed. — The notice of appeal was served on the 
 Defendant's solicitors, who stated that they had 
 ceased to act for him, but they were stUl his 
 solicitors on the record : — Seld, that as the order 
 on further consideration had not been worked 
 out, they still represented him, and that service 
 of the notice on them was good service. — Whether 
 the solicitors on the record do not continue to 
 represent their client until the expiration of the 
 time allowed for appealing, quaere. Lady De la 
 Pole v. Dick - - - 39 Ch. D. 351 
 
 Xin. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — PAY- 
 MENT OUT OF COURT. 
 
 Probate — Petitioner entitled under Will 
 
 — New Zealand — English Probate necessary.'} A 
 Petitioner asked for payment out of Court of 
 money to which he was entitled under an appoint- 
 ment by will : — Held, that probate of the will In 
 the Supreme Court of New Zealand was not 
 sufficient for this Court to act upon, but the 
 will must be proved in England. Ex parte 
 LiMEHOUSB Board oi' Wokks. In re Vallanoe 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 177 
 — — Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Peaotioe — Supbeme 
 CocKT — Chambers. 11 — 16. 
 
 XIV. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— DEMUR- 
 RER (and POINT OF LAW). 
 
 1. Demurrer for want of Parties — Rules 
 
 of Court, 1875, Order xxriii., r. 1.] Under the 
 practice established by the Judicature Acts a 
 demurrer for want of parties will not lie. Wekder- 
 
 MAN 9. SOCIETE GeNEBALE d'ElECTRICITE 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 2. — ! — Form of General Demurrer— JJuZes of 
 Court, 1875, Order XXMII., r. 2.] The equity in 
 a statement of claim was not apparent, but had 
 to be collected from a long and complicated 
 series of facts. A Defendant put in a general 
 demurrer on the ground " that the facts alleged 
 do not shew any cause of action to which effect 
 can be given as against this Defendant " -.—Seld 
 (affirming the decision of Kay, J.), that notwith- 
 standing Order xxvni., rule 2, a demurrer in 
 this form was in such a case sufficient. Bidder 
 V. McLean - 20 Ch. D. 512 
 
 3. Point of law — Proceedings in lieu 
 
 of Demurrer — Disposal of Action — Mules of 
 Court, 1883, Order XXT., rr. 1, 2, 3.] An ac- 
 tion having been by the consent of the parties 
 set down for hearing under Rules of Supreme 
 Court, 1883, Order xxv., rule 2, upon a " point 
 of law" raised by the defence, and the point 
 having been decided In favour of the Defen- 
 dant, the Judge, as the decision substantially 
 disposed of the whole action, dismissed the action 
 under rule 3, and with costs, by analogy to the 
 former practice on demurrer. O'Brien v. Ttssen 
 
 [28 Ch, D, 372 
 
 4. Point of Law — Disposal of Action — 
 
 Bules of Court, 18g3, Order xxv., rr. 2, 3.] 
 
 XIV. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— DEMUR- 
 RER (and POINT OF ILKVf)— continued. 
 
 The decision of the Judge on a " point of law " 
 raised in an action under Rules of Supreme 
 Court, 1S83, Order xxv., rule 2, having substan- 
 tially disposed of the whole action, the action was, 
 under rule 2, disinisped with coats. Peroival v. 
 Dunn - - 29 Ch. D, 128 
 
 Cross-demurrers — Right to begin 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 38 
 See Pbaotiob — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 10. 
 
 Notice in lieu of claim 10 Q. B. D. 616 
 
 See Practice- Supreme Court — Writ 
 
 SPECIALLY INDORSED. 1. 
 
 XV. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — PARTI- 
 CULARS. 
 
 1. Claim for definite Sum.] Where a 
 
 Plaintiff claims to recover a definite sum made up 
 of a number of items he will be ordered to give 
 particulars of demand, though -he will not be 
 ordered to do so if he only claims an account. — 
 The Plaintiffs by their statement of claim alleged 
 that they and tlieir testator had paid sums of 
 money under a contraotofsuretysliip under which 
 tlie Defendant was also liable, and that, after 
 deducting contributions received from other 
 quarters, the balance paid by them was £16,233 ; 
 that the Defendant had paid nothing, and was 
 liable to pay to the Plaintiffs one half, of this 
 balance, and the Plaintiffs claimed payment of 
 £8116. The Defendant, before putting in his- 
 defence, applied for an order tbat the Plaintiffs 
 might give particulars of the sums making up- 
 the £lti,233. The application was refused by 
 Mr. Justice Pearson ■.—Held, on appeal, that, as 
 the Plaintiffs did not ask merely for an account,, 
 but claimed payment of a definite sum, they must 
 give particulars of demand. Bl ackie u. Osm aston 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 119 
 
 2. Defamation — Slander— Particulars of~ 
 
 Persons to whom Slander was uttered.} A state- 
 ment of claim alleged that T., " at the request . 
 and by the direction of the Defendant, falsely and 
 maliciously spoke and published of and concerning 
 the Plaintiff" certain slanderous words, which 
 were set out : — Held, that the Defendant was . 
 entitled to particulars of the persons to, whom 
 the words were uttered. Bradbury v. Coopbr 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 94 
 
 3. Equitable Claim.] The administratrix . 
 
 of A., by statement of claim in an action against 
 the administratrix of G., alleged that au ariange- 
 
 -menthad been made between A. and 6. that sums, 
 contributed by them for the purpose of being lent . 
 to or applied for the benefit of C, to enable him. 
 to carry on a litigation, should be treated as a. 
 joint transaction, and that as soon as C. had. 
 established his title to the property for which he 
 was suing, and could repay the advances made 
 him, the advances made by A. and G. should be 
 repaid out of the moneys recovered from him ; 
 that during the litigation A. advanced, in pur- 
 Btiance of this arrangement, sums amounting to 
 about £27,000 ; that the advances made to C. 
 were made through G. and in his name ; that the 
 Defendant had recovered a judgment against C. 
 for the advances to him, and that a sum had been 
 
 2 P 
 
( 1155 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1156 ) 
 
 XV. PEACTICE— STTPEEME COUET— PAETI- 
 CULAES — continued. 
 
 set apart in a suit in Chancery in satisfaction of 
 this judgment. The Plaintiff claimed that it might 
 be declared that the loans by G., in respect of 
 ■which the judgment was recovered, were frans- 
 actipns for the joint benefit of A. and G. as part- 
 ners, and to have the sums contributed by them 
 respectively ascertained; and asked that the 
 Plaintiff might be declared entitled to a share 
 in the benefit of the judgment, and in the fund 
 set aside to satisfy it. The Defendant, before 
 putting in a defence, applied for an account with 
 dates and items of the particulars of the £27,000 
 mentioned in the statement of claim, and Pol- 
 lock, B., made an order accordingly : — Held, on 
 appeal, that the action not being a mere legal 
 demand for an ascertained sum, but an equitable 
 claim for an amount to be ascertained by an ac- 
 count, the particulars asked for were not required 
 to enable the Defendant to frame her defence, 
 and that the Plaintiff ought not to be ordered to 
 furnish them. Augustdstus v. Nekinckx 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 13 
 
 XVI. PEACTICE — STTPEEME COTJET— STEIK- 
 ING OUT PLEADINGS. 
 
 1. Breach of Promise of Marriage — Spe- 
 cial Davitige — Matter of Aggravation — Averment 
 of— Rules of Court, 1875, Order xzx, r. i ; Order 
 XXYJI., r. 1 .] A statement of claim, after alleging 
 a promise by the Defendant to marry the Plain- 
 tiff, went on to allege in paragraph 4, that, " the 
 Plaintiff relying upon the said promise permitted 
 the Defendant to debauch and carnally know her, 
 ■whereby the Defendant infected her with a 
 -venereal disease." It tlien alleged a breach of 
 the said promise. An order having been made at 
 •chambers to strike out paragraph i of the claim : 
 — Held, reversing the decision of the Common 
 Pleas Division, that the order was wrongly made, 
 and upon two grounds ; first, that the facts 
 •alleged in the paragraph complained of, were 
 " material facts " within the meaning of Order 
 xrx., rule 4, and as such were properly plead- 
 able ; and secondly, that, even if they were not, 
 the Court had no power to strike the paragraph 
 out, the statements therein neither being scan- 
 ■dalous nor tending to prejudice or embarrass the 
 fair trial of the action -within the meaning of 
 ■Order xx"vii., rule 1. Millington v. Loeing 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 190 
 
 2. Covenants in a Lease — Statement of 
 
 Claim — Title to Reversion — Pleading tending to 
 embarrass — Rules of Court, 1883, Order XIX., 
 rr. 4, 27.] In an action upon covenants in an 
 •e.xpired lease, the Plaintiff stated the lease, that 
 the term had expired, that at its expiration the 
 Defendants were the assigns of the lease, and 
 liable to perform the lessee's covenants, that the 
 Plaintiff became, and at the expiration of tlie 
 term was entitled to the immediate reversion in 
 the demised property, subject only to the term 
 that he was and is entitled to enforce all the 
 lessee's covenants, and that the Defendants had 
 for eight years paid him rent : — Held, such plead- 
 ing -was insufficient, and that the Plaintiff ought 
 also to have shewn what the reversion was which 
 the lessor had, and how the Plaintiff derived Ids 
 title to that particular reversion. — Accordingly a 
 
 XVI. PEACTICE— SUPKEME COTTET— STEIK- 
 
 ING OUT PLEADINGS — emitinued. 
 statement of claim containing the statements so 
 held to be insufficient was ordered to be struck 
 out under Order xix., rule 27, as a pleading tend- 
 ing to embarrass the fair trial of the action. — 
 PMlipps V. PMlipps (4 Q. B. D. 127) followed. 
 Davis v. James - 26 Ch. D. 778 
 
 3. Prolixity — Affidavit — Rules of Court, 
 
 1883, Order xxxviii., r. 11; Order Lxv., r. 27, 
 sub-s. 20.] Although there is no rule of Court 
 specially giving power to the Court to take plead- 
 ings or affidavits off the file for prolixity, yet 
 the Court has an inherent power to do so in order 
 to prevent its records from being made the instru- 
 ments of oppression. Where however an affidavit 
 of docrunents was of oppressive length, but it 
 appeared to the Court that delay and expense 
 would be caused by filing a fresh one, the Court 
 permitted it to remain on the file but ordered the 
 party filing it to pay the costs of it. Hill v. 
 Haet-Davis 26 Ch. D. 470 
 
 Affidavit of documents — Prolixity 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 835 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Couet — Peo- 
 DUCTiON OE Documents. 1. 
 
 XVII. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— DISCON- 
 TINUANCE. 
 
 Counter-claim — • Rules of Court, 1875, 
 
 Order xix., r. 3; Order xxui., r. 1.] By dis- 
 continuing an action after a counter-claim has 
 been delivered, a Plaintiff cannot put an end to 
 it so as to prevent the Defendant from enforcing 
 against him the causes of action contained in the 
 counter-claim. — Yavasseur v. Kru-pp (15 Ch. D. 
 474) overruled. MoGowan v. Meddleton 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 464 
 
 XVIII. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— STAT- 
 ING PEOCEEDINGS. ' 
 
 (a.) Geneeal. 
 
 1. Bankruptcy of Plaintiff— JJe/asaZ of 
 
 Trustee to proceed with Action.'] Where the Plain- 
 tiff is adjudicated bankrupt after action brought 
 and his trustee declines to proceed with the 
 action, it may be stayed by an order in Chambers, 
 and the Defendant need not plead the bankruptcy 
 in bar. Waedee v. Satjndees 10 Q, B. D. 114 
 
 2. Payment of Costs — Interlocutory Pro- 
 ceeding — Order forPayment — Default of Payment.] 
 The Plaintiff obtained a verdict in an action, and 
 the Queen's Bench Division ha-ving refused to 
 grant a rule nisi for a new trial, the Defendant 
 obtained a rule absolute in the Court of Appeal. 
 By the rule the Plaintiff was ordered to pay the 
 costs of the applications, which he failed to do : — 
 Held by Mathew and Cave, JJ., that the Defen- 
 dant was not entitled to an order to stay the pro- 
 ceedings until the costs were paid. Moeton v. 
 Palmee - - 9 Q. B. D. 89 
 
 3. Probate of Will — Action hy Execu- 
 tors.'] A testatrix having indorsed and delivered 
 a bill of exchange to her bankers for collection at 
 maturity, died before the bill became due, and 
 her executors, before probate of the will was 
 granted, sued the bankers for a return of the bill 
 or its value. The Defendants were always will- 
 ing to pay over the proceeds of the bill to the 
 
( 1157 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1158 ) 
 
 XVni. PSACTICE— STTPEEME COTTET— STAY- 
 ING mOCEEDXSaa— continued, 
 (a.) Geneeal — continued. 
 Plaintiffs upon production of probate : — Held, that 
 •all proceedings in the action ought to be stayed 
 until the Plaintiffs obtained probate. — Webh v. 
 Adkins (14 C. B. 401 ; 23 L. J. (0. P.) 96) fol- 
 lowed. Tarn v. Commercial Banking Company 
 OF Sydney - - 12 Q. B. D. 294 
 
 4. Eeference to Arbitration^J?a47«;(»j/8 
 
 Passengers Assurance Company's Act, 1864 (27 & 
 28 Viat. c. cxxv-l By the Act regulating an in- 
 surance company it was provided that any ques- 
 tion arising under any policy should, if either the 
 -company or the assured or the representatives of 
 the assured required it, be referred to arbitration 
 under the Act, and it was provided that if a 
 policy-holder or his representatives commenced 
 any action a Judge might, on the application of the 
 company " upon being satisfied that no sufficient 
 Teason exists why the matter cannot be or ought 
 not to be referred to arbitration" stay proceed- 
 ings in the action. An action having been com- 
 menced by the representatives of the policy-holder 
 lo recover the sum assured, the company diaput- 
 
 ' ing their liability, the company obtained an order 
 to stay proceedings in the action in order that 
 "the dispute might be referred to arbitration: — 
 Seld, that the burden lay on the Plaintiffs to shew 
 that some sufficient reason existed why the dis- 
 pute should not be referred to arbitration, and 
 "not on the company to shew that no such reason 
 existed, and that as no such reason had been shewn 
 the order to stay proceedings was right. Hodgson 
 «. Eailway Passengers Assurance Company 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 188 
 
 (6.) OONOOKRENT ACTIONS. 
 
 5. Burden of Proof — Order directing 
 
 ihat One of Two Gross Actions he stayed, and 
 ihat a Counter-claim he delivered in the other 
 — Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 
 
 Viet. 0. 66), s. 24, suh-s. 7.] When an order is 
 ■made under the Supreme Court of Judicature 
 Act, 1873, sect. 24, sub-sect. 7, to stay one of 
 "two cross actions between the same parties aris- 
 ing out of the same matter, the action brought 
 against the party on whom the burden of proof 
 lies ought to he stayed, and the action brought 
 by him ought to be allowed to proceed, the other 
 party to the litigation being at liberty to raise by 
 defence, set-off, and counter-claim, all questions 
 intended to be raised by him in the action which 
 is stayed. — In an action, commenced on the 28th 
 of November, 1881, the Plaintiffs, Messrs. T., 
 claimed £7000, the balance of the price of a 
 steamship built by them for the Defendants, a 
 railway company, and certain other sums as 
 extras; in a cross-action, commenced on the 
 ioth of November, 1881, the railway company 
 as Plaintiffs claimed a return of all the moneys 
 paid by them to Messrs. T. on account of the 
 uteamship and £15,000 damages, and in the alter- 
 native £50,000 damages. Upon the facts the 
 burden of proof lay upon the railway company. 
 The Queen's Bench Division ordered that the 
 action brought by the railway company should 
 be stayed, with liberty to raise their claim by 
 way of counter-claim in the action brought by 
 Messrs. T., on the ground that Messrs. T. had 
 
 XVIII. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COTTET— STAY- 
 ISQ r^OCEEDlSQa— continued. 
 (6.) OoNOURRBNT ACTIONS — continued. 
 been the first to commence legal proceedings : — 
 Held, reversing the decision of the Queen's Bench 
 Division, that as the burden of proof lay upon 
 the railway company, the action brought by the 
 railway company should be allowed to proceed, 
 Messrs. T. being at liberty to raise all questions 
 by counter-claim, and that the action brought by 
 Messrs. T. should he stayed. Thomson v. South 
 Eastern Railway Company. South Eastern 
 Railway Company v. Thomson 9 ft. B, D. 320 
 
 6. English and Eoreigu Actions — Two 
 
 Actions in this Country — Action in Foreign Coun- 
 try — Lis alihi pendens.'] When a Plaintiff sues a 
 Defendant for the same matter in two Courts in 
 this country, such a proceeding is primS, facie 
 vexatious, and the Court will generally, as of 
 course, put the Plaintiff to his election and stay 
 one of the suits. And the same principle applies 
 where one of the actions is in the Queen's Courts 
 in Scotland or Ireland, or any other part of the 
 Queen's dominions. Under the present practice 
 Lord Dillon v. Alvares (4 Vea. 357) cannot be 
 relied on as an authority. But if one of the 
 actions is in a foreign country where there are 
 different forms of procedure and different reme- 
 dies, there is no presumption that the multiplicity 
 of actions is vexatious, and a special case must 
 be made out to induce the Court to interfere. 
 The Court has, however, power to interfere in 
 such a ease under its general jurisdiction to re- 
 strain vexatious and oppressive litigation, and 
 will interfere in a proper case even before decree. 
 — ^Aud semhle. after a decree has been made in 
 one of the actions, the Court will be more willing 
 to exercise its jurisdiction. — Cox v. Mitchell (7 
 C. B. (N.S.) 55) considered. MoHenry v. Lewis 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 202 ; 22 Oh. D. 397 
 
 7. English and Foreign Actions — Elec- 
 tion.] An action was brought in this Court by 
 an English company against a firm of French 
 merchants for the delivery of the cargoes of certain 
 ships, or in the alternative for damages, and for 
 an injunction and receiver. — At the commence- 
 ment of the action the ships were in British 
 waters, but they had since been removed by the 
 direction of the Defendants to porta in France, and 
 the cargoes had been taken possession of by the 
 Defendants. Proceedings had been instituted by 
 the Plaintiffs in a French Court for recovery of 
 the cargoes. The English action comprised a 
 claim for the cargo of one ship which was not 
 claimed in the French action. — A motion on 
 behalf of the Defendants, that the Plaintiffs 
 might be ordered to elect whether they would 
 proceed with the English action or with the 
 French proceedings was refused. Peruvian 
 Guano Company ». Bockwoldt 23 Ch. D. 226 
 
 8. English and Eoreign Actions.] B., re- 
 sident in San Francisco, brought an action against 
 C. in England alleging that 0. had been B.'s 
 agent to purchase for him goods in England, that- 
 B. had recently discovered that 0. had in the 
 accounts rendered charged more for the goods than 
 he had paid for them, and asking for an account 
 against C. as agent. C, by his statement of defence 
 denied agency, alleged that he had as principal 
 
 2P 2 
 
( 1159 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1160 ) 
 
 XVIII. PRACTICE— STrPEEME COTTET— STAY- 
 IKG PBOCEEDINGS— conJiTOerf. 
 
 (6.) CoNOUBBENT ACTIONS — continued. 
 sold the goods to B., insisted on the accounts ren- 
 dered as settled accounts, and alleged that a large 
 balance was due, C. then commenced an action 
 ia San Francisco against B. to recover the amount 
 which he so alleged to be due. B. moved to restrain 
 this action : — Held, by Chitty, J., and by the 
 Court of Appeal, that the action ought not to be 
 restrained, for that there was no prim^ facie in- 
 ference that the bringing the action abroad, during 
 the pendency of an action in England in which 
 the matters in dispute could be determined, was 
 vexatious, since the course of procedure in San 
 Francisco might be such as to give advantages to 
 C. of which he was entitled to avail himself, and 
 that the burden lay on B. to prove that C.'s action 
 was vexatious, which he had failed to do. , Htman 
 V. Helm - - - 24 Ch. D. 631 
 
 9. Payment of Costs — Second Suit for 
 
 same Matter — Costs of former Suit.^ A bill for 
 an account of the personal estate of "W. J., an 
 
 • intestate, was filed by the legal personal repre- 
 sentative of B. B. against the personal repre- 
 sentatives of the deceased administrators of "W. J., 
 alleging that the administrators of W. J. had got 
 in the greater part of the estate, and that E. B. 
 was the sole next of kin. The suit was revived 
 in 1877 by M., a subsequent personal representa- 
 tive of B. B., against X. and Y., as representatives 
 of one of the administrators, and Z., as repre- 
 sentative of the others, and was ultimately dis- 
 missed in 1880 with costs as against all three 
 Defendants on the ground that the title of E. B. 
 as next of kin was not proved. After this M. 
 took out administration de bonis non to "W. J., 
 and brought his action as such administrator 
 against Z. for an account of the personal estate of 
 W. J. received by the administrators whom Z. 
 represented : — Held (affirming the decision of 
 Pearson, J.), that although M. formerly sued as 
 personal representative of E. B., and now sued as 
 personal representative of W. J., the action was 
 in substance a second proceeding for the same 
 matter under the same alleged title, and that 
 prooeeijings must be stayed until the costs of 
 the old suit had been paid. Martin v. Eael 
 Beai'Ohamp - 28 Ch. D. 12 
 
 10. Two Actions by Married 'Woman — 
 
 Next Friend — Costs in Former Action by a dif- 
 ferent Next Friend not paid!.] An action was 
 brought by a married woman by her next friend, 
 and an order was made that the next friend should 
 give security for costs on the ground of poverty. 
 That order not having been complied with the 
 action was dismissed with costs. Afterwards 
 the Plaintiff by a different next, friend brought 
 another action for the same purpose : — Beld (re- 
 versing the decision of Bacon, V.C.), that the 
 second action ought to be stayed till the costs 
 of the first action were paid. — Hind v. Whitmore 
 (2 K. & J. 458) not followed. Jure Payne. Ean- 
 DLE V. Payne 23 Ch, D. 288 
 
 (c.) Pending Appeal. 
 
 11. Action dismissed — Buhs of Court, 
 
 1875, Order LViiL, rr. 16, 17.] Where an action 
 has been dismissed with costs, an application to 
 
 XVIII. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COTJET— STAY- 
 ING PROCEEDINGS— confmaed. 
 (e.) Pending Appeal — continued. 
 stay proceedings for costs pending an appeal must 
 be made in the first instance to the Court below 
 and not to the Court of Appeal. — Wilson v. Church 
 (11 Ch. D. 576) explained. Otto v. Lindfoed 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 394 
 
 12. Appeal to Bouse of Lords — Stay of 
 
 Execution — No Special Grounds alleged.'] Ex- 
 ecution for costs pending an appeal from the 
 Court of Appeal to the House of "Lords will not 
 be stayed, unless evidence be adduced to shew 
 that the Respondent to the appeal will be unable 
 to repay the amount levied by execution, if the 
 Appellant be successful before the Honse of 
 Lords Bakkeb v. Laveey 14 Q. B. D. 769 
 
 13. — ^ — Costs of Sale and Eeinvestment — In- 
 terest^ An order was made by the Court of Ap- 
 peal directing a sum of Consols in Court to be 
 sold and the proceeds paid to B. Y. appealed to 
 the House of Lords and after sale but before pay- 
 ment out applied to stay proceedings pending the 
 appeal, asking to have the proceeds of the sale of 
 the fund reinvested and retained in Court : — Held, 
 that, as a condition of obtaining the order, Y. 
 must undertake that in case his appeal was un- 
 successful, he would make good the difference 
 between the income actually produced by the 
 fund and interest at £4 per cent, per annum, and 
 would also pay the costs of the sale and reinvest- 
 ment. Beeweb v. Yobke. Yokke v. Bbewee 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 669 
 
 14. Payment of Fund out of Court — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1883, Order LYIII., r. 16.] In the 
 absence of special circumstances it is not the 
 practice of the Court to retain in Court pending 
 an appeal a fund which has been ordered to be 
 paid out, because there is an appeal from the 
 order. — An order directing the payment of a fund 
 out of Court to the Plaintiff having been made 
 just before the commencement of the Long Vaca- 
 tion, and an appeal having been presented, a sus- 
 pension of the payment out was granted over the 
 Long Vacation, in order to enable the Appellant 
 to apply to the Court of Appeal. — Wilson v. 
 Church (12 Ch. D. 454) and Walhurn v. Ingilby 
 (1 My. & K. 79) considered. — On appeal, it being 
 shewn that the Plaintiff had been abroad for two 
 years, and that tbe applicant could not discover 
 his address, it was held that payment out ought 
 to be stayed if the applicant would give security 
 to pay to the Plaintiff interest at £4 per cent, on 
 the present value of the funds in Court, and to 
 make good to the Plaintiff, if the appeal was un- 
 successful, the difference between the highest 
 market price of the investments at any time before 
 the hearing of the appeal and their market price 
 on the day of the hearing of the appeal. Bbad- 
 FOED V. YoBNG. In re Faloonak's Tetjsts 
 
 [28 Ch. B. 18 
 
 15. — — Eefusal by Court below to stay — 
 Time within which Application m/iy 6e made to 
 Court of Appeal — Mules of Court, 1875, Order 
 LVIIL, rr. 16, 17.] In an action by patentees 
 judgment was given referring it to the official re- 
 feree to assess the damages occasioned to the Plain- 
 tiffs by the Defendants' infringement, and ordering 
 
( 1161 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, 
 
 ( 1162 )j 
 
 XVHL PRACTICE— SUPEEMECOUET^STAY- 
 ING PEOCEEDINGS— conKnued. 
 (c.) Pending AppeaiL — continued. 
 payment within tWenty-one days rfter service of 
 the report; The Defendants appealed, and set 
 down tbeir appeal on the 18th of April, and then 
 moved to stay proceedings under' the judgment 
 pending the appeal. This was Jefused by Chitty, J. 
 On the 25th of June, the ofiBoial referee made his 
 report, and on the 14th of July, laore than twenty- 
 one days after the above refusal, the Defendants 
 gave notice of motion before the Court of Appeal 
 that the time for payment of the damages might 
 be extended till after the, hearing of the appeal. 
 The Plaintiffs took the objection, that the applica- 
 tion, could not be made as an original motion, and 
 as an appeal motion was out of time : — Setd, that 
 Order Lviii., r. 16, gives concurrent jurisdiction to 
 the Court below and to the Court of Appeal as to 
 staying proceedings pending an appeal ; that 
 rule 17 does not take away any of the j urisdiotion 
 thus given to the Court of Appeal, but only re- 
 quires that it shall not be exercised till an appli- 
 cation has first been made to the Court below, and 
 that the applica,tLpn to the Court of Appeal to stay 
 proceedings when an order for that purpose has 
 been refused by thp Coijrt below, is not properly 
 an appeal motion, and need not be.brought within 
 twenty-one days from the refusal. — Attorney- 
 General V. Swansea Improvements q/nd Tramways 
 Company (9, Ch. D. 46) considered. Oeoppek v. 
 Smith - 24 Ch. D. 305 
 
 16. — — Trial of Issue of Fact — Appeal on 
 Question, of Law — Mules of Gourt, 1875, Order 
 LVIII., r. 16.] Where a question of law has been 
 decided oh demurrer, or on a preliminary objec- 
 tion, and an appeal has been brought, the Court 
 will not in general stay the trial of the issues of 
 fact pending the appeal. In re J. B. Palmee's 
 
 At>i>i mtnrrm.T Tin a.^ 'Pda 
 
 Application, 
 Act, 1875 
 
 In re Tbade-mabkS Begistkation 
 22 Ch. S. 88 
 
 XIX. PBACTICE — STJPKEME COTTET — DE- 
 FAULT. 
 
 1. Appeal — Rules of Court, 1883, Order 
 
 xxxvi., r. 33.] Although the Court of Appeal has 
 jurisdiction to hear a direct appeal from a judg- 
 ment by default, such' appeals will not be en- 
 couraged. The proper course for a party against 
 whom judgment has been given by default is to 
 apply to the Judge who heard the cause to set 
 aside the judgment and to re-hear the cause. Vint 
 V. HuDSPiTH - - 29 Ch, D. 322 
 
 2. Counter-claim — Motion for Judgment 
 
 — Rules of Court, 1883, Order xxili., r. 4; Order 
 XXTII., rr. 11, 121] Order xxni., rule 4, and 
 Order xxvii., rules 11, 12,- of the Eules of 1883, 
 apply when a motion for judgment in default of 
 pleading is ma,de after, although the default itself 
 was made before, they came into operation. — ^And 
 these rules apply to a case where a Defendant to 
 a counter-claim has made default in pleading to 
 it, and entitle the Plaintiff in the counter-claim 
 to move for judgment against the defaulting De- 
 fendant. Stbebt v. Ceump - 25 Ch. D. 68 
 
 3. Defence delivered after Time — Rules. 
 
 f^ Court, 1875, Order xxix., rr. Id, \i^-Rules of 
 Court, 1883, Order xxvil., 11, 15.] S. gave to 
 G. a charge upon' costs due from B. to. S. G. 
 
 XIX. PEACTICE — STJPEEME COUET — DE- 
 FAULT — continued. 
 brought his action against S. and B., asking for 
 an account and foreclosure against S., and that 
 B. might be ordered, to pay the amount of the 
 bill of costs, £359, into. Court. The time for de- 
 livering defence was enlarged from the 1st of 
 August to the 16th of August, 1882. No defence 
 having been delivered, notice of motion for judg- 
 ment was served on the 18th of November. On 
 the second of December B. took out a summons 
 for leave to deliver defence, which was dismissed 
 on the 6th. The defence which he proposed to 
 put in alleged that there were other dealings be- 
 tween B. and S., and that no substantial part of 
 the bill of costs was due, and moreover that B. 
 was going to have the bill taxed. On the 19th 
 of .February, 1883, the motion for judgment came 
 on for hearing. The Court refused to look at the 
 defence, and gave a judgment directing an ac- 
 count against S., and ordering B. to bring the 
 £359 into Court. B. appealed. — Meld, that on 
 motion for judgment for want of defence, if a de- 
 fence has been put in, though, irregularly, the 
 Court will not disregard it, but will see -syhether 
 it sets up grounds of defence which, if .proved, 
 will be material, and if so, will deal with the case 
 in such manner that justice can "be done ; and 
 that in the present case the order for bringing 
 the £359 into Court must be discharged,, and an 
 account directed of what was due from B. to S. in 
 respect of the bill of costs. Gibbinqs v. Strong 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 66 
 
 4. Defence delivered after Time — Rules 
 
 of Court, 1875, Order xxis., r. 10 — Amendment 
 of Notice of Motion hy Gourt of Appeal — Rules 
 of Court, 1883, Order LTiii., r. i.\, A Defen- 
 dant made default in putting in a statement 
 of defence under Order xxix., r. 10 (1875), and 
 the Plaintifl gave notice of motion for judgment 
 in default of defence. But before the motion 
 was heard the Defendant put in a statement of 
 defence: — Beld, that the statement of defence, 
 though put in after time, could not be trea-teias 
 a nullity, and that the Plaintiff was not entitled 
 to judgment in .default of defence. — But as the 
 statement of defence disclosed no real defence to 
 the action, the Court of Appeal ordered the notice 
 of motion to be, amended and judgment, to be 
 given for the Plaintiff on the admissions in the 
 statement of defence. Gill i)..W.oodmn 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 707 
 
 5. Dismissal for ■want of Prosecution — 
 
 Appeal from Order — -Power to enlarge Time — 
 Rules of Court, 1875, Order LVii., r. 6.] A Judge ■ 
 has jurisdiction under Order Lvn., rule 6, to en- 
 large the time for appealing against au order dis- 
 missing the action for want of prosecution, oven 
 after the order has taken effect and the action, 
 has therefore become dismissed ; and he has also 
 jurisdiction when he has so enlarged the time for 
 appealing to vary or amend the order dismissing 
 the action, and in the exercise of such jurisdiction 
 his discretion is not limited by any fixed or arbi- 
 trary rules. Caetbb v. Stobbs 6 ft, B. D. 116 
 
 6. Dismissal for -want of Prosecution — 
 
 Motion — Affidavit of Service.'] An order dismiss- 
 ing an action for want of prosecution was made 
 subject to production of an affidavit' of service, no 
 
( 1163 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1164 ) 
 
 XIX. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — DE- 
 EAULT — continued. 
 
 one appearing for the Plaintiff. Shortly after- 
 wards counsel appeared for the Plaintiff, but the 
 Judge refused to have the case argued. No affi- 
 davit of service was sworn or filed until after the 
 day on which the motion was made. The Registrar 
 drew up the order on production of an office copy 
 of an affidavit of service sworn and filed after that 
 day, omitting in the order the date of the affidavit. 
 It appears that since the passing of the Judica- 
 ture Acts the rule in Lord Milltown v. Stuart 
 (8 Sim. 34) had not been uniformly observed by 
 the Registrars : — Seld, that, assuming the draw- 
 ing up of the order on an affidavit sworn and filed 
 after the day on which the motion was made to 
 be irregular, the irregularity was not such that 
 the Court ought on that ground to discharge the 
 order. Seeak v. Webb - - 25 Ch. D. 84 
 
 7. Dismissal for want of Prosecution — 
 
 Notice of Trial given, hut Trial nof entered — Bules 
 of Court, 1883, Order xxxvi., rr. 12, 16.] A Plaia- 
 tiff gave notice of trial (in Middlesex) within the 
 six weeks limited by rule 12 of Order xxxvi. ; 
 but did not, as required by rule 16, enter the trial 
 within six days after the notice of trial was given. 
 The trial not having been entered : — fleW, that 
 the Defendant was entitled to move to dismiss for 
 want of prosecution, and an order dismissing the 
 action was accordingly made. Okick v. Hewlett 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 354 
 
 8. Eeply — Effect of non-delivery of Judg- 
 ment on Admissions in Pleadings — Counter-claim 
 — Rules of Court, IS?."), Order xxix., r. 12 ; Order 
 XL., r. 11.] The Plaintiff having made default in 
 delivery of reply to Defendant's statement of de- 
 fence and counter-claim : — The Court ordered 
 final judgment to be entered for the Defendant 
 in respect of both the claim and counter-claim 
 under Order xL., rule 11. Ltjmsden v. Winter 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 650 
 
 XX. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— AMEND- 
 MENT. 
 
 1. Embarrassing Statement of Claim — 
 
 Bight of Way — Rules of Court, 1875, Order XXVII., 
 r. 1.] In an action to restrain the obstruction of 
 an alleged private right of way, the Plaintiff ought 
 to shew in his statement of claim whether he 
 claims the right by prescription or by grant. — He 
 ought also to allege with reasonable certainty 
 the termini of the way and its course. — If the 
 Plaintiff omits to do this his statement of claim 
 is embarrassing, and the Court will order it to be 
 amended. Harris v. Jenkins - 22 Ch. D. 481 
 
 2. Foreclosure — Judgment not drawn 
 
 up and entered — Discovery of Puisne Mortga- 
 gees — Buks of Court, 1883, Order XVI., r. 11 — 
 Leave to amend hy adding Defendants.'] Where 
 judgment in a foreclosure action had been pro- 
 nounced, but had not been drawn up and entered, 
 and it was discovered that there were pusine 
 mortgagees, leave was given under Rules of 
 Supreme Court, 1883, Order xvi., rule 11, to 
 amend the writ and statement of claim by making 
 the puisne mortgagees Defendants. Keith v. 
 BtiTOHER - - - 26 Ch. D, 750 
 
 3. New Defence — Fraud of Solicitor — 
 
 Rehearing.] Where a solicitor has put in a 
 
 XX. PEACTICE— STJPEEME COURT— AMEND- 
 MENT — continued. 
 
 fraudulent defence for his client without the 
 knowledge of the client, making admissions on 
 which judgment was obtained against the client : 
 — Held, that the Court had jurisdiction to set 
 aside the judgment and permit the client to with- 
 draw the defence, and put in a fresh defence. 
 Williams v. Peeston - 20 Ch, D, 672 
 
 4. Qualifying Words.] In an action to- 
 
 restrain the removal of shingle from, and the 
 placing of bathing-machines upon, a part of the- 
 foreshore of the sea at M., the Plaintiff claimed 
 to be tenant in possession of the locus in quo 
 under a building agreement granted him by the 
 lord of the manor of M., who was tenant for life- 
 of the property under a settlement. By his state- 
 ment of defence the Defendant set up a forty 
 years' uninterrupted user and enjoyment of the 
 locus in quo by himself and his predecessors in 
 title for the purposes complained of, and denied 
 that the Plaintiff was or ever had been in posses- 
 sion of the locus in quo " save subject to the right 
 of the Defendant." At the trial. Fry, J., refused 
 the Defendant leave to amend his statement of 
 defence by strUdng out the qualifying words, so- 
 as to make his denial of the Plaintiff's possession 
 an unqualified one : — Held, on appeal, that the 
 amendment ought to have been allowed. — Cfold- 
 ing V. Wharton Saltworks Company (1 Q. B. D. 
 374) explained. Laird v. Beiggs 16 Ch. D. 440 ;. 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 22 
 
 5. Eecord of Trial — Power of Court of Ap- 
 peal to amend — Bules of Court, 1875, Order LVlii.,. 
 r. 5 : Lix. r. 2.] At the trial of an action the jury 
 found certain issues in favour of the Plaintiff, and 
 the Judge reserved judgment. The verdict was. 
 entered as a general verdict for the Plaintiff, but 
 the Judge notwithstanding the verdict gave judg- 
 ment for the Defendant. — On an appeal by the- 
 Plaintiff from the judgment, the Court of Appeal 
 amended the record by entering the verdict for 
 the Plaintiff on the issues only, and affirmed the- 
 judgment. Clack v. Wood - 9 Q. B. D. 276 
 
 Alteration in judgment— Accidental slip 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 827 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 8. 
 
 Special case - - 22 Ch. D. 495. 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Special Case. 1. 
 
 XXI. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— INTEE- 
 EOOATOEIES. 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 1. Action for Penalties — Rules of Courts 
 
 1875, Order xxxi., rr. 1, 12.] In an action for 
 penalties the Plaintiff is not entitled to adminis- 
 ter interrogatories or to discovery of documents- 
 under Order xxxi., that order not being intended 
 to give the right to discovery in cases where prior 
 to the Judicature Acts discovery was not obtain- 
 able. HuNNiNGS V. Williamson 10 Q. B. D. 459 
 
 2. Conyersations — Right of Way — Rule^ 
 
 of Court, 1875, Order xxxi., rr. 1, 10.] An action 
 was brought by the Attorney-General and a local 
 board to restrain the Defendant from building 
 across a public foothpath. The amended statement 
 
( 1165 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1166 ) 
 
 XXI. PRACTICE— STIPEEME COURT— INTER- 
 ViOOATO^l'ES— continued. 
 (a.) General — contirmed. 
 ■ of claim alleged that at a meeting of the board 
 held after the commencement of the action the 
 Defendant had attended and signed an agree- 
 ment for settling the action on certain terms, and 
 the Plaintiffs sought to enforce this agreement, 
 or, in the alternative, to restrain interference with 
 the footpath by virtue of their original title. The 
 Defendant, by his defence, denied the existence of 
 any public right of way over the ground. He 
 admitted the signature of the agreement, but 
 alleged that it was obtained by threats and pres- 
 sure after a long conversation and argument, and 
 without his having it read and explained to him. 
 The Plaintiffs delivered interrogatories as to the 
 existence of a public right of way over the land, 
 and as to what passed in the conversation at the 
 board meeting and at a conversation between the 
 Defendant and the Plaintiffs' solicitor before that 
 meeting. The Defendant declined to answer those 
 interrogatories, alleging that as to the right of 
 way he was not bound to answer as to a right 
 which he had denied by his pleadings ; and that 
 as to the conversations he ought not to be called 
 upon to answer till the Plaintiffs' solicitor had 
 been examined and cross-examined as to the 
 conversation : — Held, by Bacon, V.G., that the 
 Defendant having by the statement of defence 
 denied the existence of the right of way was 
 not bound to answer as to it; and that he was 
 not bound to answer as to the conversations, no 
 discovery being requisite as to facts which the 
 Plaintiffs had the means of establishing : — Held, 
 by the Court of Appeal, that the Defendant was 
 bound to answer as to the existence of the right 
 of way, for that one object of interrogatories is to 
 enable a party to obtain admissions from the other 
 party, and so to relieve him from the necessity 
 of adducing evidence : — Held, also, that as the 
 conversations were material on the issue whether 
 the agreement had been vmduly obtained, the 
 Defendant must answer as to them ; and that it 
 would not be right to allow him to delay answer- 
 ing until he saw what account another person 
 would give of what had taken place. — The right 
 of discovery as existing in the Court of Chancery 
 still exists, except so far as it is modified by the 
 Judicature Acts and the General Orders ; and a 
 party still has a right to exhibit interrogatories, 
 not only for the purpose of obtaining from the 
 opposite party information as to material facts 
 which are not within his own knowledge and are 
 within the knowledge of the opposite party, but 
 also for the purpose of obtaining from the oppo- 
 site party admissions which will make it unneces- 
 sary for liim to enter into evidence as to the facts 
 admitted. Attoeney-Genebal v. Gaskill 
 
 [20 Oh. D. 519 
 
 3. Denial of PlaintifPs Title — Bulea of 
 
 Court, 1875, Order XXJL, rr. 5, 19.] Where a 
 Defendant's answering an inteiTogatory cannot 
 help the Plaintiff to obtain a decree, but will 
 only be of use to him if he obtains a decree, the 
 Court has a discretion whether to oblige the De- 
 fendant to answer it before trial, and will not do 
 so where compelling such discovery would be 
 oppressive. — The Plaintiff alleged that G. had 
 
 XXI. PRACTICE— STIPEEME COURT— INTER- 
 EOGATOEIES— coreiiKwed. 
 (a.) General— -conMwtted.. 
 deposited money with the Defendant B. in trust 
 for S. and A. (both since deceased) successively , 
 for their lives, and then for the Plaintiff and 
 another person absolutely. That E. had em- 
 ployed it in trade and made large profits, and had 
 paid the interest to S. and A. for their lives, but 
 now refused to pay over the principal. E., by 
 his defence, admitted the deposit, but denied 
 the trust, and stated that he had only held the 
 money for G. to draw upon, and had many years 
 ago paid it away by G.'s directions; he denied 
 payment of interest to S. and A. The Plaintiff de- 
 livered, amongst others, interrogatories requiring 
 E. to set out (1) the dates and particulars of the 
 payments made by him out of the deposit sum ; 
 (,2) an account of the profits made by the employ- 
 ment of the money in trade ; (3) whether E. had 
 not paid to S. and A. quarterly sums by way of 
 interest on the moneys, and if not, then he was 
 asked whether he had not during some and what 
 years paid to S. and A. certain and what moneys, 
 and whether or not quarterly, or at some and 
 what dates and under what agreement, or for 
 what reason or. in respect of what matters; and 
 was required to set out an account of all moneys 
 paid by him since 1854 to S. and A., or either of 
 them.— B. filed an affidavit verifying his defence 
 and denying the trust, denying the payment of 
 any interest to S. or A. on the deposited sum, de- 
 nying the Plaintiff's title, and declining to make 
 any further answer. Fry, J., ordered E. to make 
 a further answer as to (1) and (3). E. appealed. — 
 Held, on appeal, that E. was not bound to answer 
 interrogatory 1, as an answer to it could not 
 furnish evidence to establish the alleged trust, 
 and could not be of any use to the Plaintiff except 
 by discrediting's B.'s evidence if he made errone- 
 ous statements as to the particulars of his pay- 
 ments, and that it would be oppressive to require 
 him to go through his books for a number of 
 years for that purpose: — Held, further, that E. 
 ought not to be compelled to answer as to the 
 profits, for that it would be oppressive to call 
 upon him to enter into a difficult account, which 
 could not help the Plaintiff to obtain a decree 
 and would be useless if a decree was not obtained : 
 — Held, that the third interrogatory was too wide, 
 as It extended to payments not connected with 
 the sums to which the action related, and that 
 the Plaintiff was not entitled to a full answer ; — 
 Held, further, by Jessel, M.K,, and Brett, L.J., 
 that as the Plaintiff had not in the Court below 
 asked for a qualified order but had insisted on a 
 full answer, the order for a further answer ought 
 simply to be discharged. — Dissentiente, Cotton, 
 L. J., who was of opinion that an order ought to 
 be made for a further answer to a limited extent. 
 Pabkeb v. Wells - - 18 Ch. D. 477 
 
 4, Ouardian ad litem : — " Farty " to 
 
 Action — Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict, 
 c. 66),' s. IQO—Bules of Court, 1875, Order XTiii.— 
 Order xxxi., r. 1.] A guardian ad litem is not 
 a party to the action within the meaning of Order 
 XXXI., rule 1, and therefore cannot be compelled 
 to answer interrogatories. Ingeam v. LIttlb 
 
 [11 a. B. D. 251 
 
( 1167 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1168 ) 
 
 XXI, PEACTICE— STTPEEME COURT— INTEE- 
 nOOATO^IES— continued. 
 (a.) Genekal — contimisd. 
 
 5. Knowledge of Ageni-^Senant of a 
 
 Person interrogated!] A party to a cause is 
 not excused from answering interrogatories rele- 
 velant to the question in issue on the ground 
 that they are as to matters which are not within 
 such party's own knowledge, but are only within 
 the knowledge of his agents or servants, if de- 
 rived iu the ordinary course of their employ- 
 ment ; and he is bound to obtain the information 
 from such agents or servants, unless he shew 
 that it would be unreasonable to require him to 
 do so, as that either such agents or servants 
 have left his employment, or it would occasion 
 unreasonable expense or an unreasonable amount 
 of detail or the like. Therefore in an action by 
 cargo owners against the owners of a ship, for a 
 loss alleged to have arisen from negligence in the 
 navigation of such ship by which she ran ashore 
 and was stranded, an answer by the Defendants 
 to interrogatories as to what was done by those 
 on board with regard to such navigation at the 
 time of the accident, which stated in substance 
 that the Defendants were not on board at the 
 time and had no knowledge or information re- 
 specting the matters inquired into, except as 
 appeared by the protest of which the Plaintiffs 
 had had inspection, was held insufficient, as it did 
 not appear that there was any difficulty in the 
 Defendants' obtaining the requii'ed information 
 from those who were in charge of the ship at the 
 ' time of the accident. Bolckow i;. Pishee 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 161 
 
 6. Knowledge of Agent.] In an action 
 
 by owners of water mills to restrain a canal com- 
 pany, who had statutory power to take water 
 from the river on which the Plaintiffs' mills were 
 situate, from wrongfully diminishing the qiiantity 
 of water in the river to the injury of the Plaintiffs, 
 the Defendants interrogated the Plaintiffs and 
 asked them to give a list of the days between 
 specified dates on which they alleged that the 
 working of their mills was interfered with by the 
 negligence of the Defendants. The Plaintilfs 
 answered that they were unable to specify the 
 particular days : — Held, that this answer was 
 sufficient, and that the Plaintiffs were not bound 
 to state whether they had made inquiries of their 
 agents, servants, and workmen. — BolcJcow v. 
 Fisher (10 Q. B. D. 161) distinguished. Bas- 
 BOTHAM V. Sheopshike IJnion Eailways and 
 Canal Company - 24 Ch. D. 110 
 
 7. Libel — Matters in Issue — ■ Rules of 
 
 Court, 1883, Order A'XXJ., ■/. 1 — ■ Comparison of 
 Handwriting^ In order to prove that the Defen- 
 dant was the writer of a libellous letter, he may 
 be interrogated as to whether or not he was the 
 writer of another letter addressed to a third per- 
 son, — as leading up to a matter in issue in the 
 cause, and therefore relevant. Jones v. Eiohaeds 
 
 [16 Q. B. D. 439 
 
 8. Plaintiff's Evidence.] B. and N., two 
 
 landowners in the parish of M., brought an action 
 for a declaration that a piece of land formed part 
 of M. Common, and to establish commonable rights 
 thereover, N, sued as owner in fee of a beerhouse 
 and three oottnges, and the Plaintiffs pleaded the 
 
 XXI, PEACTICE— SUPREME COUET— INTEE- 
 EOGATOEIES— coreitwaed. 
 (o.) GenbeaIt — continued. 
 exercise of the rights claimed from time imme- 
 morial. The Defendant was the lord of an ad- 
 jacent manor, and his defence was that the piece 
 of land never formed part of M, Common^ but was 
 common land forming part of his own manor ; 
 that if the Plaintiffs ever had any rights of com- 
 mon thereon such rights had been extinguished ; 
 that some of the rights claimed could only be 
 used in respect of ancient teoements, and that 
 the beerhouse and three cottages in respect of 
 which N. sued had no land held therewith. After 
 the defence had been delivered the Defendant ad- 
 ministered interrogatories to the Plaintiffs, asking 
 in effect : — 1. How long the Plaintiffs had been 
 owners or occupiers of their properties, and for 
 what estates, what was the tenure thereof, and 
 whether those lands were within the limits of any 
 and what actual or reputed manors, and whether 
 any such premises were ancient messuages, and 
 whether the beerhouse and three cottages had 
 any and what lands appurtenant thereto or held 
 therewith, 2ndly, Whether the Plaintiffs or 
 their predecessors in title, as proprietors or oc- 
 cupiers of any lands in M., or under any other 
 alleged title, had exercised the rights claimed 
 upon any and what parts of M, Common, or upon 
 any and what part of the piece of land in question. 
 3rdly, The Plaintiffs were asked to set forth 
 particulars of their exercise of such rights, and 
 whether they did so by any license or in considera- 
 tion of any and what payment. The Plaintiffs 
 objected to answer these interrogatories on the 
 ground that they related exclusively to their own 
 title and to the evidence they should adduce at 
 the hearing, — Upon a summons that the Plaintiff 
 might be ordered to make a sufficient answer: — 
 Seld, by Kay, J,, that the Plaintiff N. must 
 answer so much of the first interrogatory as 
 asked, whether the beerhouse and cottages had 
 any lands appurtenant thereto or held therewith 
 because he had not pleaded that they had, and 
 the Defendant had pleaded that they had not; 
 but that the rest of the interrogatories need not 
 be answered, because they were in effect dii-ected 
 to the discovery of the evidence by which the 
 Plaintiffs intended to prove their case at the hear- 
 ing, — Bade v. Jacobs (3 Ex.D, 335) and flojmojm 
 V. PostiU (Law Eep. 4 Ch. 673) explained. — 
 Lowndes v. Davies (6 Sim. 468) dissented from. — 
 On appeal by the Defendant the question was 
 left to the Judges of the Court of Appeal as arbi- 
 trators to settle what parts of the interrogatories 
 should be answered, and the Plaintiffs were 
 directed to answer further parts of them. Biddbe 
 V. Beidges - 29 Ch, D, 89 
 
 9, Plaintiff's Evidence — Infringement of 
 
 Trade-Name — .Accounts of Goods sold — Bules of 
 Court, 1875, Order xxxi.'] In an action to restrain 
 tlie Defendants from using a trade-name and from 
 selling their goods as the goods of the Plaintiffs, 
 the Defendants by counter-claim claimed the like 
 relief, and also an account of the goods sold by 
 the Plaintiffs as and for the goods of the Defen- 
 dants, and of the profits of such sale. Botli Plain- 
 tiffs and Defendants claimed to derive their title 
 under a partnersliip that had been dissolved in 
 
C 1169 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1170 )" 
 
 XXI. PRACTICE— SUPSEME COURT— INTER- 
 R06AT0RIES — continued. 
 (o.) Gbnekal — continued. 
 1861, and botli had since thafr time carried on 
 the same business. An interrogatory exhibited 
 by the Defendants required the Plaintiffs to set 
 forth the quantities of goods sold by them since 
 1861, distinguishing the quantities sold in each 
 year : — Held (affirming the decision of Bacon, 
 V.O.), that the inteiTogatory was not for the 
 ordinary purposes of discovery, but was directed 
 to the details of the Plaintiff's evidence, and was 
 rightly disallowed. — Saunders Y. Jones (7 Ch. D. 
 435) explained and discussed. Benbow v. Low 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 93 
 
 10. Recollection of Written Document.] 
 
 In an action for libel, one of the Plaintiff's 
 interrogatories required the Defendant to state 
 whether she had not written and sent letters 
 to a third person making certain defamatory 
 statements of the Plaintiff set out in the interro- 
 gatory, or statements to the same purport and 
 effect, and to set out as fully as she could what 
 her statements were. The Defendant answered 
 that to the best of her recollection and belief she 
 never wrote any letters making the statements set 
 out in the interrogatory, " or any of those exact 
 statements set out in the interrogatory," " or any 
 of those exact statements :" that she did write a 
 letter to the third person, but that she had no 
 copy of it, and was unable to recollect " with ex- 
 actness " what the statements contained in it 
 were : — Held, that the answer was sufficient. 
 Dalbtmple v. Leslie 8 Q. B. S. 5 
 
 H. Recovery of IiSaiA— Legal Title — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Ord& xxxn, r. 1.] In an 
 action for the recovery of land the Plaintiff is en- 
 titled to discovery as to all matters relevant to his 
 own and not to the Defendant's case.— In an action 
 for the recovery of land the Plaintiff claimed as as- 
 signee of co-heiresses of a deceased intestate owner 
 of the land, and the Defendant relied on his pos- 
 session and also set up the Statute of Limitations : 
 — Held, reversing the decision of the Court of 
 Appteal, that the Plaintiff was entitled to inter- 
 rogate the Defendant as to matters relevant to the 
 pedigree and heirship of his assignors and as to 
 alleged admissions by the Defendant that his pos- 
 session of the land was as trustee for the intestate 
 and her heirs, even though the Plaintiff might 
 have other means of proving the facts inquired 
 after ; and that the Defendant must answer the 
 interrogatories in substance subject to any privi- 
 lege against particular discovery which he might 
 be entitled to claim. — Held, also, that the Defen- 
 dant must file a proper affidavit of documents. 
 Ltell D. Kennedy 20Ch. S. 484; 8 App. Cas. 
 
 [217 
 (6.) PniviLEaE. 
 
 12. Attempt to falsify Claim for Privi- 
 lege — BuUs of Court, 1875, Order xxxi., rr. 9, 
 10, 23— Bules of Court, 1883, Order zxxi., rr. 10, 
 11, 24.] Where in an answer to interrogatories the 
 party interrogated declines to give certain infor- 
 mation on the ground of professional privilege, and 
 the privilege is properly claimed in law, the Court 
 will not require a further answer to be put in, 
 unless if is clearly satisfied, either from the nature 
 of the subject-matter for which privilege is 
 
 XXI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— INTER- 
 ROGATORIES— cojiimiiefi. 
 (6.) Privilege — continued. 
 claimed, or from statements in the answer itself, 
 or in documents so referred to as to become part 
 of the answer, that the claim for privilege cannot 
 possibly be substantiated. — The mere existence 
 of a reasonable suspicion which is sufficient to 
 justify the Court in requiring a further affidavit 
 of documents is not enough when a claim for pri- 
 vilege in an answer to intei-rogatories is sought to 
 be falsified. — The duty of the Court with reference 
 to answers to interrogatories is now regulated by 
 Order xxxi., rules 10, ll.and limited to consider- 
 ing the sufficiency or insufficiency of the answer, 
 i.e., whether the party interrogated has answered 
 that which he has no excuse for not answeri;ijg-^ 
 and only in the case of insufficiency can it require 
 a further answer : — Sernble (per Bowen, L.J.), 
 that an embarrassing answer to interrogatories 
 may be dealt with as insufficient. — A pa,riy inter- 
 rogated may, on a question of sufficiency, refer to 
 his whole affidavit in answer to interrogatories, 
 and is not restricted to the passages dealing with 
 any particular interrogatory, and all embarrass- 
 ment to the interrogating party is now obviated 
 by the provisions of Order xxxi., rule 24 ; but he 
 must not endeavour to import into an admission 
 matter which has no connection with the matter 
 admitted. — The Defendant K. in his answer to 
 interrogatories objected to disclose certain in- 
 formation asked for by the Plaintiff, L. on the 
 ground of professional privilege, which the Court 
 held properly claimed in law. L. sought by refer- 
 ence to certain admissions in the answer itself, 
 and from documents referred to in the interroga- 
 tories and answer, as well as from documents 
 scheduled to K.'s affidavit of documBhts, to shew 
 that the information sought was obtained under 
 circumstances which negatived the claim of privi- 
 lege, and sought a further answer : — Held (affirm- 
 ing Bacon, V.C), that no further answer should 
 be required, as the admissions in the answer and 
 in the documents referred to therein only raised a 
 case of suspicion at the most, which might be 
 capa,ble of explanation if K. were at liberty to 
 make an affidavit. — The Court declined to decide 
 how far, under the present practice, reference 
 could be made, as against the interrogated party, 
 to any document in possession not referred to in 
 his answer, but only scheduled to his affidavit of 
 documents. Lybll v. Kennedy - 27 Ch. D. 1 
 
 13. Belief founded on Privileged Com- 
 
 nmnications.] A party to an action cannot be 
 compelled to answer interrogatories asking as 
 to his knowledge, information, or belief with re- 
 gard to matters of fact, if he swears that he 
 has no knowledge or information with regard 
 to those matters except such as he has derived 
 from privileged coihmunications made to him by 
 his solicitors or their agents ; for since under 
 those circumstances his knowledge and informa- 
 tion are protected, so also is his belief when 
 derived solely from such communications. — The 
 Plaintiff having been interrogated as to his know- 
 ledge, information and belief upon matters rele- 
 vant to the Defendant's case answered that he had 
 no personal knowledge of any of the matters in- 
 quired into ; that such information as he had 
 
( 1171 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1172 ) 
 
 XXI. PEACTICE— SrPEEME COTJET— INTEE- 
 EOGATOBIES— coKtintted. 
 
 (6.) Peitilege — continued. 
 received in respect of those matters had been de- 
 rived from information procured by his solicitors 
 or their agents in and for the purpose of his own 
 case : — Reld^ affirming the decision of the Court 
 of Appeal, that the answer was sufficient. Lyell 
 i;. Kennedy (No. 2) 23 Ch. D. 387 ; 9 App. Cas. 81 
 
 14. Professional Confidence — Solicitor and 
 
 Client.'] The privilege from discovery resulting 
 from professional confidence does not extend to 
 facts communicated by the solicitor to the client 
 which cannot be the subject of a confidential com- 
 munioaition between them, even though such facts 
 have a relation to the case of the client in the 
 action. — A Plaintiff interrogated a Defendant as 
 to whether interviews and correspondence had not, 
 between certain dates, taken place between their 
 respective solicitors, and also between the Defen- 
 dant's solicitor and a third person, in reference to 
 an agreement the specific performance of which 
 it was the object of the action to enforce. — The 
 Defendant declined to answer the interrogatory, 
 Eo far as it related to communications between 
 his solicitor and other persons, on the ground that 
 he had no personal knowledge, and the only in- 
 formation he had was derived from confidential 
 communications between him and his solicitor in 
 reference to his defence in the action : — Held, that 
 he must make a further answer. Foakes v. 
 Webb - 28 Ch. D. 287 
 
 15. Publication of libel — Refusal to 
 
 answer — Incrimination.'] An objection to answer 
 interrogatories which is made by affidavit on the 
 ground of the tendency of the answer to criminate 
 the person interrogated may be valid, although 
 not expressed in any precise form of words, if, 
 from the nature of the question and the circum- 
 stances, such a tendency seems likely or probable. 
 In an action for libel the Defendant pleaded a 
 denial of the publication, and to interrogatories 
 asking him, in effect, whether he published the 
 libel he stated by his afBdavit in answer : " I 
 decline to answer all the interrogatories upon 
 the ground that my answer to them ' might ' 
 tend to criminate me." : — Held, that his answer 
 was sufficient. Lamb v. Munster 10 Q. B. D. 
 
 [110 
 
 Deposit— Discretion of Judge 13 Q. B. D. 326 
 
 See Pbactioe — SrPBEME Codet— Seou- 
 KiTY roR Costs. 13. 
 
 XXII. PEACTICE — STIPEEME COTIET — PSO- 
 DUCTION or DOCUMENTS. 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 1. Affidavit — Prolixity^ An affidavit as 
 
 to documents setting out a very large number of 
 letters instead of referring to them in bundles 
 properly identified, was ordered to be taken off 
 the file, the costs to be paid by the Defendants. 
 Walkee v. Poole - - 21 Ch. D. 836 
 
 2. Arbitrator — Order of Reference — Juris- 
 
 diction^Rules of Court, 1875, Ord. xxxi., r. 12— 
 " Matter in question in the action " — Liberty to 
 apply. Omission of.] An order was taken by con- 
 sent in an action referring the action and all 
 matters in diflerence to the award of an arbitrator 
 
 XXII. PEACTICE — STIPEEME COTJET — PEO- 
 DTJCTION OF DOCUMENTS— co»tt»Md. 
 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 named in the order. The order provided that the 
 parties should produce before the arbitrator all 
 documents in their or either of their custody or 
 power relating to the matter in difference ; alsa 
 that the party in whose favour the award should 
 be made should be at liberty, after the service of 
 a copy of the award on the other party, to apply 
 for final judgment in accordance with the award. 
 The Plaintiff having during the pendency of the 
 arbitration applied by summons in the action 
 under Rules of Court, 1875, Order xxxi., r. 12, for 
 an affidavit of documents, the application was dis- 
 missed on the ground, (1) That in consequence of 
 the order of reference the Court has no jurisdic- 
 tion to grant the application, not having before it 
 "any matter in question in the action" within 
 the meaning of the rule ; and (2) that under the 
 order the whole jurisdiction as to discovery was 
 in the hands of the arbitrator. — The rule that an 
 order of the Court carries with it " liberty to 
 apply," though not expressly reserved, only 
 applies where the order is one not of a final 
 character. Penrice v. Williams 23 Ch. D. 353 
 
 3. Documents held in Eight of another — 
 
 Company — Voluntary Winding-up — Liquidator 
 — Companies Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 89), 
 s. 155.] In an action on a promissory note, made 
 by the Defendant as security for the repayment 
 of moneys due to the Plaintiffs from a limited 
 company, the Defendant objected to produce docu- 
 ments relating to the matters in question in the 
 action, being the banker's pass-book and directors' 
 minute-book of the company, on the ground 
 that they were in his custody only as liquidator 
 in the voluntary winding-up of the company. 
 The company had been dissolved before the 
 application for the discovery of documents was 
 made, but no resolution had been passed under 
 the Companies Act, 1862, s. 155, for the disposal 
 of the documents belonging to it: — Held, that 
 the Plaintiffs were entitled to the inspection of 
 the documents, inasmuch as the Defendant had 
 them in his absolute control. — Decision of the 
 Queen's Bench Division affirmed. London and 
 Yorkshire Bank v. Cooper 15 ft, B. D. 7, 473 
 
 4. Husband and Wife^Jbimt Possession 
 
 — Affidavit as to Documents.] A husband and wife 
 sued as co-Plaintift's in respect of an alleged 
 breach of trust by the trustees of their marriage 
 settlement. The wife had a life estate for her 
 separate use, and sued without a next friend. 
 An order was made that the Plaintiffs should 
 file an affidavit stating " whether they or either 
 of them" had in the possession or power "of 
 them or either of them," any documents relating 
 to the matters in question. They filed an affi- 
 davit admitting the possession of various docu- 
 ments, which they scheduled, and going on to 
 say, " We have not now, and never had, in our 
 possession, custody, or power, or in the possession, 
 custody, or power of any other person or persons 
 on our behalf, any deed, &c., other than and 
 except the documents set forth in the said sche- 
 dule": — Held (reversing the decision of Bacon, 
 V.C), that the Plaintiffs must be oidered to file 
 a further and better affidavit, for that an affidavit 
 
( 1173 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1174 ) 
 
 XXII. PEACTICE — SUPREME COUET— PEO- 
 LUCTION or DOCVM£Sia— continued. 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 relating only to documenta in the joint custody 
 of the husband and wife did hot comply with the 
 order, and that the order was right in requiring 
 them to answer as to documents in the possession 
 of either of them. Fbndall v. O'Oonnell 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 899 
 
 5. Infant — Next Friend — Affidavit as to 
 
 Documents — Bules of Court, 1883, Order xxxi., 
 r. 12.] The Court refused either to order the 
 next friend of an infant Plaintiff to make an 
 affidavit as to documents, or stay the action till 
 he made such afBdavit. — Higginson v. Sail (10 
 Ch. D. 235) dissented from. Dyke v. Stephens 
 
 [30 Ch. D, 189 
 
 6. Interrogatory — Discovery of Docu- 
 ments — Sufficient Affidavifi After a Defendant 
 has made a sufficient affidavit of documents the 
 Plaintiif will not be allowed to administer to him 
 a general roving interrogatory as to documents in 
 his possession, the effect of which would be to 
 compel the Defendant to make a further affidavit 
 as to documents. — There may possibly be cases in 
 which, after a sufficient affidavit as to documents 
 has been made, the Court will allow the plaintiff to 
 deliver an interrogatory as to some specific docu- 
 ment or documents, but whether this shall be al- 
 lowed is amatter within the discretion of the Judge 
 in each particular case, and, though his decision 
 can be appealed from, the Court of Appeal will 
 not readfly reverse it. — Jones v. Monte Video Gas 
 Company (5 Q. B. D. 556) explained. Hail v. 
 Tetman, Hanbubt, & Co. - 29 Ch, D, 307 
 
 7. Joint Possession — Documents of Title.'] 
 
 In an action for the seizure of the goods of the 
 Plaintiff, which was justified by the Defendant 
 under an alleged power of distress in a mortgage 
 deed, the Defendant stated in his affidavit of 
 documents that he and one B., who was not 
 a party to the action, jointly had in their posses- 
 sion or power certain documents specified in a 
 schedule to such affidavit and that they were the 
 muniments of title of himself and the said B. as 
 mortgagees, and that he the Defendant objected 
 to their production : — Held, affirming the decision 
 of the Queen's Bench Division, that such affidavit 
 shewed sufficient reason for not making an order 
 for inspection of the documents. — Murray v. 
 Walter (Or. & Ph. 114) followed. Keabsley v. 
 Philips - 10 Q. B. D. 36, 465 
 
 8. " Material to any Matter in duestion " 
 
 — Mules of Court, 1875, Order xjjt/., r. 12.] 
 Documents are material to the matters in ques- 
 tion in the action within the meaning of Order 
 XXXI., rule 12, if it is not unreasonable to sup- 
 pose that they may contain information directly 
 or indirectly enabling the party seeking discovery 
 either to advance his own case, or to damage 
 the case of his adversary. — The Plaintift' com- 
 pany sued the Defendant company for breach 
 of contract ; the defence to the action was that 
 no contract had been concluded, and that only 
 negotiations had taken place between the parties. 
 The Defendants having obtained an order for an 
 affidavit of documents, the Plaintiffs set out, 
 amongst others, their minute-book, which referred 
 
 XXII. PEACTIOE — SUPEEME COTTET — PEO- 
 DTJCTION or DOCUMENTS— co»«maed. 
 (a.) Genebal — continued. 
 to certain documents and letters ; the entries aa 
 to these documents and letters were of a date 
 subsequent to the date of the alleged breach of 
 contract ; the documents and letters were not set 
 out by the Plaintiffs in. their affidavit. The- 
 Defendants claimed a further and better affidavit 
 from the Plaintiffs, setting out the documents and 
 letters above-mentioned, on the ground that thoy 
 might shew, that after the alleged breach the- 
 parties were still negotiating, and might tend to- 
 disprove the Plaintiffs' allegation that a contract 
 had been concluded -.—Beld, that the Plaintiffs- 
 were bound to make a further affidavit of docu- 
 ments. Oompagnie Finanoieee bt Commeeoiale. 
 Du Pacipique v. Peruvian Guano Co. 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 66. 
 
 9. Official Eeferee — Jurisdiction — Rule^ 
 
 of Court, 1875, Order xxxi., rr. 11, 18, 20 ; Order 
 XXXVI., r. 32.] The official referees have no 
 jurisdiction to make an order for the production 
 of documents, the proper course being to take out 
 a summons for the purpose in the Chambers of 
 the Judge to whom the action is attached. Dau- 
 viLLiEB V. Myees 17 Ch. D. 846- 
 
 10. Opening Settled Account — Allegations- 
 
 of Fraud — Mules of Court, 1883, Order xix., 
 r. 6; Order XXXL, rr. 12, 20.] The Plaintiffs 
 employed the Defendants to purchase goods, as- 
 their agents, at the lowest possible prices. The 
 Plaintiffs sued for an account, and in their state- 
 ment of claim alleged that the Defendants had 
 purchased goods at prices higher than the current 
 prices, and had secretly received from the vendors 
 allowances or commissions. The charges against 
 the Defendants were stated in general terms, no 
 particulars being mentioned. The Defendants, 
 denied the charges, and pleaded a settled account. 
 The Plaintiffs applied for production of docu- 
 ments: — Held, by Cotton, L.J., affirming the 
 decision of Bacon, V.C. (dissentiente. Fry, L.J.) 
 that the Plaintiffs were not bound to give par- 
 ticulars of fraud under Order xix., rule 6, before- 
 obtaining discovery of documents : — J3eM, by 
 Fry, L.J., that the allegations of fraud in the- 
 pleadings not being sufficient to enable the Plain- 
 tiffs to open a settled account, discovery ought to- 
 be refused until the allegations had been made 
 sufficient. Whyte v. Ahbens - 26 Ch. D. 717 
 
 11. Place of Production — Alteration of 
 
 Order.'] Where an order has been made for pro- 
 duction of documents at a particular place the 
 Judge, or his successor, may' at any time make a 
 fresh order appointing a different place if the cir- 
 cumstances render it advisable. And although 
 such an order may be appealed from, the Court 
 will not interfere with the Judge's discretion ex- 
 cept on some special grounds The common order 
 having been made for production of documents by 
 the Defendants at the solicitor's office in London, 
 the Judge, six months afterwards, made another 
 order that the documents should be produced at 
 Colchester. The documents consisted principally 
 of ancient charters and books of account belonging 
 to the corporation : — Held, hy the Court of Appeal, 
 that the order was right: but a direction was 
 added that the Plaintiffs should be at liberty to. 
 
( 1175 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1176 ) 
 
 XXII. PEACTICE— SUPREME COITET — PEO- 
 DUCTION or DOCUMENTS— eonWrmet?. 
 (o.) General — continued. 
 apply for the production of any documents which 
 might be more conveniently examined in London ; 
 and that the Defendants should undertake to pay 
 any additional costs caused by the alteration in 
 the place of production. Phestney v. Cobpoba- 
 
 TION OF COLCHESTEE 21 Ch. D. 376 
 
 12. Plaintiff's Documents — Action hrought 
 
 in the Name of Third Farties.'] Goods shipped 
 by E. & Co. having been lost at sea, the under- 
 writers, who had insured the cargo, paid K. & Co. 
 for a total loss, and then commenced an action 
 against the shipowners in the name of E. & Co. 
 to recover the value of the goods. An order 
 having been made by consent that the Plaintiffs 
 should make an afSdavit stating what documents 
 were in their possession relating to the matters 
 in question in the action, and a further order 
 having been made by the Master in Chambers 
 that both members of the firm of E. & Co. should 
 put in a further and better affidavit, the solicitor 
 of the underwriters deposed that the members 
 of the firm of E. & Co. were abroad, and would 
 not give any further discovery, and that the real 
 Plaintiffs had done all they could do to comply 
 with the order:: — Seld, reversing the decision 
 of the Queen's Bench Division, that the case 
 must be treated as if the nominal Plaintiffs on 
 the record were suing for their own benefit, and 
 that the making a further affidavit could not be 
 dispensed with. Wilson v. Eafpalovioh 
 
 [7 a. B. D. 553 
 
 13. Plaintiff's Documents — Documents 
 
 referred to in Pleadings — Rules of Court, 1875, 
 Order xxxi., rr. 14-17.] The Plaintiff by his 
 statement of claim referred to certain entries in his 
 own books, to two letters written to himself, and 
 to two letters written by himself. The Defendant 
 as soon as the statement of claim was delivered 
 applied for production of the books, of the letters 
 written to the Plaintiff, and of copies of the letters 
 written by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiffs solicitors 
 refused to produce any of them as the Defendant 
 had not delivered statement of defence. The De- 
 fendant then applied to the Court for production : 
 — Seld, by Chitty, J., that production ought not 
 to be ordered till a statement of defence had been 
 delivered. — Held, on appeal, that production must 
 bo ordered at once of documents referred to in the 
 pleadings unless some special reason against it 
 can be shewn, and that the Plaintiff must pro- 
 duce his books, with the usual liberty to seal up 
 the parts other than the entries, and must also 
 produce the letters written to himself, but that he 
 could not be ordered to produce copies of letters 
 written by himself, there being no reference to 
 such copies in the statement of claim. — Webster 
 V. Whewall (15 Ch. D. 120) observed upon. 
 Quilteb v. Heatlt - - 23 Ch. D. 42 
 
 14. Policy, Action on — Insurance — Marine 
 
 — Discovery of Ship's Papers — Form of Order — 
 Whether rightly made on all Persons interested — 
 Continuance of Practice in Force before Judica- 
 ture Aats — Rules of Court, 1875, Order XXXI., r. 11, 
 and Order Lx., A., r. 12.] In an action on a policy 
 of marine insurance, underwriters are entitled to 
 discovery of ship's papers, in accordance with the 
 
 XXII. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — PEO- 
 DUCTION OF DOCUMENTS— conimaed. 
 (a.) Genebal — continued. 
 practice in force before the Judicature Acts, with- 
 out an affidavit, and from all persons interested 
 in the proceedings. China Teanspacific Steam- 
 ship Company v. Commercial Union Asstobance 
 Company - 8 ft. B. D. 142 
 
 15. Sealing up Entries — Partnership 
 
 Books — Surviving Partner.'] The Defendant 
 and W. P. were partners. W. P. died and ap- 
 pointed the Defendant his executor. In an aetioil 
 by a person interested under W. P.'s wiU. against 
 the Defendant a decree was made for adminis- 
 tration of W. P.'s estate, and for taking accounts 
 of the partnership as between the Defendant as 
 sui'viving partner and W. P.'s estate. An order 
 having been made for the production ofthe part- 
 nership books by the Defendant, he claimed to seal 
 up such entries as related to his own private affairs : 
 — Held (affirming the decision of Chitty, J.), that 
 inasmuch as the Plaiutiff and Defendant were 
 both interested in the partnership property, the 
 Defendant was not entitled to the ordinary power 
 to seal up such entries as he might swear to be ir- 
 relevant to the matters at issue in the action, but 
 only to seal up entries which related to certain 
 specified private matters mentioned in the order. 
 In re Pickering. Picejibiks v. Pickering 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 247 
 
 16. Service — Attachment — Rules of Court, 
 
 1875, Order xxxi., r. 21.] In an action for the 
 specific performance of an agreement by the De- 
 fendant to sell two leasehold houses to the 
 Plaintiff, judgment for specific performance was 
 given, and an order was afterwards made that the 
 Defendant should within four days after service 
 of the order, produce to the Plaintiff " the ab- 
 stract, and at the same time produce upon oath 
 for inspection all deeds and writings in his pos- 
 session or power " relating to the property : — 
 Held, that under rule 21 of Order xxsi., service 
 of this order on the Defendant's solicitors was 
 sufficient service to found an application to attach 
 the Defendant for disobedience of the order. Joy 
 V. Hadley - 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 17. Title Deeds in Custody of Court.] In 
 
 an action of trespass to land brought against the 
 committee of a lunatic. whose title-deeds are in 
 the custody of the Court having jurisdiction in 
 Lunacy, an order on the Defendant for inspection 
 of the documents ought not to be made, as they 
 are not in his possession or control. Vivian k. 
 Little - - - - 11 ft. D. 370 
 
 (6.) Privilese. 
 
 18, Affidavit — Sufficiency — Rules of Court, 
 
 1875, Ord^ XXXI., rr. 11, 12.] The Defendants 
 in an affidavit of documents made pursuant to 
 Order xxsi., rule 12, stated as follows: — "We 
 have in our possession or power certain documents 
 numbered 101 to 110 inclusive, which are tied up 
 in a bundle marked with the letter A., and initialed 
 by the deponent " C. G. ; " the said documents 
 relate solely to the case of the Defendants and not 
 to the case of the Plaintiff, nor do they tend to 
 support it, and they do not, to the best of our 
 knowledge, information, and belief, contain any- 
 thing impeaching the case of the said Defendants, 
 
( 1177 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1178 ) 
 
 XXII. PRACTICE —SUPEEME COURT — PRO- 
 DTTCTION OF DOCUMENTS— conKnuccJ. 
 (5.) Pbivilegk — (Kmtiniied. 
 ■wherefore we object to produce tlie same, and say 
 they are privileged from production." A Judge 
 at Chambers and the Divisional Court (W. Wil- 
 liams, J., dissenting), refused to order, under 
 Order xxxi., rule 11, tie production of the docu- 
 ments which the Defendants so objected to pro- 
 duce : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the 
 affidavit sufficiently described such documents for 
 the purpose of identification, and that as the 
 affidavit was conclusive against the Plaintiff seek- 
 ing inspection, the Judge and the Divisional Court 
 rightly refused to order their production. Bewicke 
 V. Graham - - 7 ft. B. D. 400 
 
 19. Affidavit — Suficiency — Power of the 
 
 Cowrt to disregard the Affidavit as to the Nature 
 and Effect of the Documents.'] Although a Defen- 
 dant to an action swears that certain documents 
 which are in his possession and are material to 
 the matter in issue, form and support his own title, 
 and do not contain anything which could form or 
 support the Plaintiff's case, or impeach the de- 
 fence, the Court will not act on such oath (at least 
 in proceedings excepted by Order LXii. from the 
 rules uuder the Judicature Act, 1875), but will 
 order such documents to be produced, if from the 
 whole of the Defendant's answer or from the 
 description of the documents given by the Defen- 
 dant, the Court is reasonably certain that the 
 Defendant has erroneously represented or miscon- 
 ceived the nature of such documents. Attobnet- 
 Geneeai v. Emeksos - - 10 ft. B. D. 191 
 
 20. Affidavit -^ Sufficiency — Documents 
 
 referred to in Pleadings — Rules of Court, 1883, 
 Order XXXI.. r. 15.] Where a party claims privi- 
 lege against the production of documents on the 
 groimd that they supported his own title and do 
 not relate to that of Ms opponent, his affidavit 
 must be taken as conclusive, ilnless the Court can 
 see from the nature of the case or of the docu- 
 ments that the party has misunderstood the effect 
 of the documents.-^-^ftornej/- Genera? v. Mmerson 
 (10 Q. B. D. 191) distinguished. — The privilege 
 claimed for documents is not lost merely by their 
 being referred to in tlie pleadings. The penalty 
 for non-production is that they cannot afterwards 
 be used in evidence, the decision of Kay, J., 
 affirmed. Kobebts v. Oppenheim 36 Ch. D. 724 
 
 31. Attempt to falsify Claim for Privi- 
 lege -^jl^(iawi of Documents — Mules of Court, 
 1875, Order xxxi., r. ll-^Eules of Court, 1883, 
 Order xxxi., r. 14.] A waiver of privilege in 
 respect of some out of a larger number of docu- 
 ments for all of which privilege was originally 
 claimed does not preclude the party from still 
 asserting his claim of, privilege for the rest.^ 
 Although primS. facie privilege cannot be claimed 
 for copies of or. extracts from public records or 
 documents which are public! juris, a collection of 
 suck copies or extracts will be privileged when it 
 has been made or obtained by the professional 
 advisers of a party for his defence to the action, 
 and is the result of the professional knowledge, 
 research, and skill of those advisers. — The Defen- 
 dant K.'s solicitors had for the purposes of K.'s 
 defence in the action procured copies of and 
 extracta from certain entries in public registers, 
 
 XXII, PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT— PRO- 
 DUCTION OP DOCUMENTS— ccn^TOMed. 
 (6.) Privilege — continued. 
 and also photographs of certain tombstones and 
 houses to De taken, for which K'. in his affidavit 
 of documents claimed protection : — Seld (affirm- 
 ing Bacon, V.O.), that although mere copies of 
 unprivileged documents were themselves unprivi- 
 leged, the whole collection being the result of the 
 professional knowledge, skill, and research of his 
 solicitors, must be privileged— any disclosure of 
 the copies and photographs might afford a clue 
 to the view entertained by the solicitors of their 
 client's case. Lyell v. Kennedy 27 Ch. D. 1 
 
 23. •- PlaintiiFs Documents — Documents 
 
 privileged in Previous Action by Plaintiff against 
 Third Party— Rules of Court, 1883, Order xXxt, 
 rr. 12-14.] An order having been made for dis- 
 covery of documents by the Plaintiff in an action, 
 the Plaintiff stated on affidavit that, among other 
 documents relating to the matters in question in 
 the action, he had in his possession certain docu- 
 ments partially prepared by his solicitors in an 
 action previously brought by him against one D. (a 
 person other than the Defendant), for future use in 
 carrying on the said action, but which were, in fact, 
 never completed or used owing to such action not 
 proceeding in consequence of D.'s death, and that 
 the whole of the said documents were of a private 
 and confidential nature between counsel, solicitor, 
 and client : — Held, that the documents were privi- 
 leged from discovery in the action. — Bullock v. 
 Carry (3 Q. B. D. 356) followed. Peaeoe v. 
 Foster - - - 15 ft. B. D. 114 
 
 23. Notes of Proceedings in Arbitration 
 
 — Transcript^ The corporation of P. took com- 
 pulsorily some of R.'s land, and at an arbitration 
 to ascertain the sum to be paid, B. claimed a right 
 of way over other land to a river, and such alleged 
 right had to be considered in regard to the sum 
 to be assessed. — E. employed a shorthand writer 
 to take notes of the evidence and arguments, and 
 afterwards had them transcribed for his own pur- 
 poses. Subsequently he brought an action for a 
 mandatory injunction to compel the corporation to 
 remove materials which they had put on the land 
 over which he claimed the right of way. The 
 relevancy of the notes was admitted. On motion 
 by the corporation for the production of the tran- 
 script, E. objected on the ground that it was privi- 
 leged, as the notes were taken at his expense and 
 in anticipation of other proceedings against the 
 corporation : — • Held, that the transcript of the 
 notes was not privileged, and that it must be pro- 
 duced. Eawstonb v. Preston Cokpobation 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 116 
 
 34. Notes of Proceedings in previous Ac- 
 tion.] An action having been commenced to 
 determine whether the Defendant had or had not 
 executed a certain agreement, the Defendant, 
 while the action was pending, commenced an 
 action against other persons whom he charged 
 with a conspiracy to defraud him, and to utt,er 
 the agreement as binding upon him, knowing it 
 to be a forgery. After the commencement of the 
 second action, the Defendant caused shorthand 
 notes to be taken of the evidence, speeches, and 
 summing-up at the trial of the first action, as he 
 deposed for the purpose [" amongst others "], of 
 
( 1179 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1180 ) 
 
 XXII. PEACTICE — STJPEEME COUET— PRO- 
 DUCTION OF DOCUMENTS— cojitintted. 
 
 (6.) Privilege — continued. 
 his case in the second action: — Held, upon the 
 above facts, that the shorthand notes were pri- 
 vileged from inspection in the second action, and 
 that the aflBdavit need not shew that the notes 
 <^me into existence exclusively for the purposes 
 •of such action. Nohdojs" v. Dbfkies 
 
 [8 Q. B. D, 508 
 
 25. Opinions of Counsel — Meports of Suh- 
 
 Committees.'] Upon a summons by the Defendant 
 that the Plaintiffs — the corporation — might be 
 ordered to produce the documents comprised in 
 ■their affidavit or documents : — Beld, that opinions 
 ■of counsel with reference to these proceedings, 
 whether taken before or after the commencement 
 •of the action, were privileged ; and the fact that 
 the Defendant was a ratepayer and the opinions 
 might have been paid for out of the parish rates 
 •gave the Defendant no special claim to inspection ; 
 and also the minutes of the corporation and sub- 
 ■committces appointed by them to report con- 
 cerning matters connected with the litigation were 
 also privileged. Matoe and Corporation of 
 Bristol v. Cox 26 Ch. D. 678 
 
 26. Solicitors and Surveyors — Correspond- 
 ence.'] In an action for specific performance of a 
 Wilding contract to take on lease building land 
 from the Defendants, the Defendants sought to 
 protect from production letters which had passed 
 between their solicitors and their surveyors : — 
 Beld, by Bacon, y-C, that their letters were pri- 
 Tileged. — Held, on appeal, that the "Defendants 
 must produce the letters except such of them (if 
 any) as the Defendants should state by affidavit 
 to have been prepared confidentially after dispute 
 had arisen between the Plaintiff and the Defen- 
 dants, and for the purpose of obtaining informa- 
 tion, evidence, or legal advice with reference to 
 litigation existing or contemplated between the 
 parties to the action. Wheeler v. Le Mabchant 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 675 
 
 27. Trustee and Cestui que Trust — Corre- 
 spondence with Solicitors ante litem motam.'] In 
 an action by ceatuis que trust against their trus- 
 tees to compel them to make good a breach of 
 trust: — Held, that the trustees must produce 
 letters and copies of letters from and to their 
 solicitors in relation to matters in question in tlie 
 action ante litem motam. — Talbot v. Marshfield 
 (2 Dr. & Sm. 549) followed. In re Mason. Mason 
 V. Cattlet 22 Ch. D. 609 
 
 Beeovery of land by legal title 20 Ch. D. 484 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 217 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 
 E06AT0RIES. 11. 
 
 XXIII. PRACTICE— SUPREME COUET— SECU- 
 EITY FOE COSTS. 
 
 (o.) General. 
 
 1. Company Plaintiffs — Time for making 
 
 Application — Rules of Court, 1875, Order LY., 
 r. 2— Companies Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 89), 
 ■8. 69.] The old rule of the Court of Chancery, 
 that an application for security for the costs of an 
 action must be made promptly is inconsistent 
 with the provision of rule 2 of Order lv., that 
 
 XXIII. PEACTICE— SUPREME COUET— SECU- 
 RITY FOR COSTS — continued. 
 (o.) General — continued. 
 security for costs may be given " at such time or 
 times as the Court may direct," and must be 
 taken to have been abrogated. — Held, therefore, 
 that an application by a Defendant for security 
 for the costs of an action brought against him by 
 a limited company might be made after reply and 
 notice of trial. Ltdney and Wigpool Iron Ore 
 Company v. Bird - 23 Ch. D. 358 
 
 2. Counter-claim — Defendant out of 
 
 Jurisdiction.'] Where a claim and counter-claim 
 arise out of different matters, bo that the counter- 
 claim is really in the nature of a cross action, the 
 Defendant, if he is residing out of the jurisdiction, 
 may be required to give security for the Plaintiff's 
 costs of the counter-claim, and, if the only dispute 
 remaining arises on the counter-claim, it is beyond 
 doubt right that he should be so required. Stkes 
 V. Sacerdoti - - - 15 Q. B. D. 423 
 
 3. Interpleader by SiienSS— Defendant in 
 
 Issu^ liable to give Security for Costs^ In an 
 interpleader issue directed upon an application 
 by a sheriff, who has received a notice of a claim 
 to goods seized by him under a writ of fieri facias 
 in execution of a judgment, both the Plaintiff anji 
 the Defendant in the issue are really in the posi- 
 tion of the Plaintiffs in an ordinary action, and, 
 therefore, the Defendant in the interpleader issue 
 may be ordered to give security for costs in any 
 case in which a Plaintiff may be so ordered, and 
 the rule, thsit a Defendant cannot be compelled 
 to give security for costs, does not apply. — 'Wil- 
 liams V. Crosling (3 C. B. 957) followed. — Belmonte 
 v. Aynard (4 C. P. D. 221, 352) distinguished. 
 ToMLiNsoN V. Land and Finance Corporation 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 539 
 
 4. Married Woman suing separately — 
 
 Eules of Court, 1875, Order .xri., r. 8.] The rule 
 as to giving security for costs before a married 
 woman can be allowed to sue separately under 
 Order xvi., rule 8, is the same as in the ordinaiy 
 case of giving security for costs by an Appellant, 
 and therefore she is to give such security if she 
 has no available means to pay the costs if she 
 loses, but not where she has such means. Brown 
 V. North g q. b. D. 52 
 
 5. Married Woman suing withmtt Hus- 
 band or Next Friend— No Separate Estate— Secu- 
 rity for Costs of Action — Married Wmnen's Pro- 
 perty Act, 1882, s. 1, sub-s. 2— Rules of Couri, 
 1883, Order XTi., r. 16.] A married woman 
 being empowered by sect. 1, sub-sect. 2, of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882, to sue as 
 a feme sole, may sue without her husband 
 or a next friend, and cannot be ordered to give 
 security for the costs of the action, even although 
 she have at the time of action no separate estate, 
 and there be nothing upon which, if she fails, the 
 Defendant can issue available execution. In re 
 Isaac. Jacob ■». Isaac 30 Ch. D. 418 
 
 6. ■; Residence Abroad— Jbmt Plaintiffs, 
 
 one residing Abroad — Joint and Separate Claims 
 —Rules of Court, 1875, Order sri., r. 1.] An 
 action was brought against the Defendant as a 
 common carrier by two Plaintiffs, one residing 
 abro.id. The statement of claim alleged a con- 
 
( 1181 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1182 ) 
 
 XXIII. PEACTICE— STJPEEME COTJET— SECU- 
 EITY FOE COaTB— continued. 
 (o.) General — continued. 
 tract by the Defendant with the Plaintiffs jointly, 
 and in the alternative with each of the Plaintiffs 
 separately : — Held, that the Plaintiff residing 
 abroad could not be ordered to give security for 
 costs. D'HoBMDSGEE V. Gbey 10 Q. B. i. 13 
 
 7. Eesidenoe Abroad — One of Several 
 
 Plaintiffs coming within Jurisdiction, before Ap- 
 peal.l An action was brought by a mercantile firm, 
 all the members of which were in America, against 
 a firm at Manchester. The Defendants put in a 
 defence and counter-claim, and then applied to the 
 Judge for an order for the Plaintiffs to give security 
 for costs. The Plaintiffs filed an affidavit stating 
 that they with other persons carried on business 
 at Manchester, and that the firm there had assets 
 amounting to £2000. The Judge refused the 
 application. On the appeal the Plaintiffs pro- 
 duced an affidavit stating that since the order one 
 of the Plaintiffs had come to Manchester for the 
 purpose of carrying on the action : — Held, by the 
 Coiirt of Appeal, that the affidavit as to the pro- 
 perty of the Plaintiffs in England was ambiguous 
 and was not sufficient to support the order in the 
 Court below. — But held, that as one of the Plain- 
 tiffs had come to England since the order was 
 made, although for a temporary purpose, the De- 
 fendants were not entitled to security for costs, 
 and therefore the order must be affirmed. — Be- 
 dondo v. Chaytor <4 Q. B. D. 453) followed. 
 Ebbard v. Gassieb - 28 Ch. D. 232 
 
 8. Trustee of Bankrupt's Estate suing 
 
 in his Official Name — Insolvency — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52), s. &Z— Rules of 
 Gowrt, 1883, Order xvn., rr. 4, 5.] A trustee of 
 the property of a bankrupt brought an action 
 in his official name, his own name not being 
 mentioned. The Defendants moved for security 
 for costs on the ground of his insolvency, and 
 of his suing solely in his official name. Evi- 
 dence was given that he had been bankrupt ten 
 years previously, and had also compounded with 
 !his creditors four years before the action was 
 trought: — Held (affirming the decision of Pear- 
 son, J.), that the evidence of the insolvency of the 
 Plaintiff was insufficient; and that the fact of 
 his suing solely in his official name was not a 
 ground for ordering him to give security for costs. 
 — When a trustee in bankruptcy suing in his 
 official name is removed, and a new trustee ap- 
 pointed, the new trustee must obtain an order to 
 continue the action, and give notice thereof to the 
 other parties, under Order xvn., rr. 4, 5.— Whether 
 a trustee in bankruptcy suing in his official name 
 would, if insolvent, be ordered to give security for 
 costs, quxre. — DemUm v. Ashton (Law Eep. 4 Q. B. 
 590) questioned. Poolet's Trustee in Bank- 
 BUPTCY V. Whetbam - 28 Ch. D. 38 
 
 (6.) Appeal. 
 
 9. Delay in making Application — Appel- 
 lant out of Ju/risdietion.'] An application for 
 security for costs of an appeal must be made 
 promptly. As a general rule it is too late if it is 
 made when the appeal is in the paper for hearing. 
 But the Court will take into account special cir- 
 cumstance.s. Where a motion for security for 
 
 XXm. PEACTICE— STJPEEME COTJET— SECTJ- 
 EITY FOE COSTB^emtinued. 
 (6.) Appeal — contimud. 
 costs and the appeal came into the paper on the 
 same day, and it appeared that notice of appeal 
 had been given in the Long Vacation, and that 
 the motion for security had been delayed by 
 reason of the Court not having sat to hear such 
 applications on the usual day, the application 
 was granted. — Semhle, the Court will be more 
 strict in enforcing promptness where the appli- 
 cation is on the ground of poverty than where it 
 is on the ground of the Appellant being out of 
 the jurisdiction. In re Indian, Kingston, and 
 Sandhubst Mining Company 22 Ch. D. S3 
 
 10. Dismissal of Appeal — For want of 
 
 Security.'] Where an order has been made for the 
 Appellant to give security for the coats of an 
 appeal, if he does not give it within a reasonable 
 time, the Court will dismiss the appeal without 
 giving further time, unless there are extenuating 
 circumstances,— As a general rule a period of 
 three months is more than a reasonable time. 
 Washbuen and Moen Manufacturing Company 
 V. Patterson - - - 29 Ch. D. 48 
 
 11. Poverty of Appellant — Mules of Court, 
 
 1875, Order LViil., r. 15.] The fact that an Ap- 
 pellant would be unable through poverty to pay 
 the costs of the Kespondent if the appeal should 
 be unsuccessful is in itself sufficient ground for 
 requiring security for costs. Hablock v. Ash- 
 beery - - - 19 Ch. D. 84 
 
 12, Question of law — Secwrity.] There is 
 
 no general rule that an insolvent appellant will be 
 exempted from giving security for the costs of the 
 appeal because the case involves a question of 
 law which has not been previously considered by 
 a Court of Error. — Bourke v. White Moss Colliery 
 Company (1 C. P. D. 556) explained. Fabeee v. 
 Lacy, Hartland, & Co. - 28 Ch. D, 482 
 
 (c.) Discovery. 
 
 18. Discretion of J\iAge~Bules of Court, 
 
 1883, Order xxxi., rr. 25, 26.] A party to a cause 
 is not entitled to obtain as a matter of right an 
 order to administer interrogatories without making 
 a deposit under Eules of the Supreme Court, 
 Order XXXI., rules 25, 26, merely because the other 
 party consents to it. The Judge at Chambers has 
 upon an application of that kind a discretion, and 
 in the exercise of that discretion may order the 
 deposit to be made, notwithstanding that the 
 party to be interrogated is ready to dispense with 
 a deposit. Aste v. Stumore - 13 Q. B. D. 326 
 
 Next friend of married women 19 Ch. D. 94 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Next 
 Friend. 2. 
 
 XXIV. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — IN- 
 aUIEIES AND ACCOUNTS. 
 
 1. Administration Action — Preliminwry 
 
 Accounts and Inquiries — Bules of Court, 1883, 
 Order X7., r. 1 ; Order L7., r. 10.] A mortgagee 
 of shares of the proceeds of the residuary real and 
 personal estate of a testator who died in 1872 
 brought an action in 1884 for the administration 
 of the estate, alleging misapplication by one of the 
 trustees of moneys raised by mortgage of parts of 
 the real estate,, and advances to the same trustee 
 
( 1183 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1184 ) 
 
 XXIV. PRACTICE — SirPBEME COTJET — IS- 
 airiEIES AND ACOOVSTS—eonUnued. 
 
 of parts of the testator's estate on equitable mort- 
 gage. The Plaintiif applied under Order xv., 
 rule 1, for the common accounts and inquiries in 
 an administration suit, and also for inquiries as to 
 mortgages of the real estate and as to advances to 
 the trustees. Bacon, V.C, refused to make any 
 order : — Held, on appeal, that only common ac- 
 counts and inquiries could be directed on an 
 application under the rule, and not accounts and 
 inquiries the riglit to 'which depended on the 
 Plaintiff establishing a case for them at the hear- 
 ing, and that the special inquiries therefore could 
 not be directed. — Held further, that Order xv., 
 rule 1, must be read in connection with Order lv., 
 rule 10, which makes it not obligatory on the 
 Court to order a general administration, and that 
 the Vice-Chancellor was right in refusing the 
 common accounts and inquiries in a case where, 
 having regard to the period elapsed since the 
 testator's death, it was uncertain whether a general 
 administration order would be found at the hear- 
 ing to be desirable, and where, if the Plaintiff at 
 the hearing established a case of breach of trust, 
 accounts and inquiries would have to be directed, 
 going over in part the same ground as the common 
 accounts and inquiries. In re Gyhon. Allen v. 
 Tatlob - 29 Ch. D. 834 
 
 2. Foreclosure — Rules of Court, 1883, 
 
 Order xxxili., r. 2.] The Plaintiff, an equitable 
 mortga'gee, brought an action for foreclosure or 
 sale against several other mortgagees, insisting 
 that under the circumstances she was entitled to 
 priority over the Defendants. The alleged priority 
 of the Plaintiff to the Defendants depended on 
 questions of notice and fraud. On the application 
 of the Plaintiff, Kay, J., on summons under Order 
 xxxin., rule 2, made an order directing an inquiry 
 what were the respective priorities of the incum- 
 brances of the Plaintiff and the respective De- 
 fendants, and an account of what was due to the 
 incumbrancers respectively. One of the Defen- 
 dants appealed : — Seld, on appeal, that this' order 
 must be discharged, for that Order xxxin., rule 2, 
 was not intended to authorize the sending the 
 whole of the questions in a cause to be tried in 
 Chambers, but only to authorize the Court to 
 direct, before trial, accounts and inquiries which 
 would otherwise have been directed at the trial. 
 Gaknham v. Skippek - 29 Ch. D. 566 
 
 3. . Foreclosure — Rules of Supreme Court, 
 
 1883, Order xv., rr. 1, 2.] In foreclosure actions 
 where there is no preliminary question to be 
 tried, the Plaintiff may obtain, under Kules of 
 Supreme Court, 1883, Order XV., an order for an 
 account with all necessary inquiries, and the 
 usual directions as in a common foreclosure 
 judgment nisi. Such order should be applied 
 for by summons in Chambers and not by motion 
 in Court, and only the costs of a summons in 
 Chambers attended by counsel will be allowed. 
 SsiiTH V. Davies - 28 Ch, D. 650 
 
 [But see Blake v. Haevey, 29 Ch. D. 827] > 
 
 XXV. PEACTICE — STTPBEME C DUET — SPE- 
 CIAL CASE. 
 
 1. Amendment.] In an action for the 
 
 administration of the testator's, estate it was 
 
 XXV. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — SPE- 
 CIAL CASE — continued. 
 
 ordered that a special case should be stated 
 to obtain the opinion of the Court on the effect 
 of the codicil. The case made it appear that 
 the £3000 had been paid by the testator be- 
 fore the date of the codicil, and the declaration 
 made by the Court of Appeal and the consequent 
 inquiry went on this -footing, and referred only to 
 sums paid by him before the date of the codicil. 
 A certificate was made accordingly, and the 
 balance due from J. T. was found to be £453. 
 The £3000 had in fact been paid by the testator 
 after the date of the codicil, though he had been 
 called upon for payment before. No subsequent 
 order had been made giving, effect to the certifi- 
 cate. The executors on discovering the error 
 applied for leave to amend the special case, which 
 was refused by Kay, J., on the ground of want of 
 jurisdiction : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 the special case could not be amended. But that 
 where a special case is stated in an action, and a 
 decision given upon it under a mistake of fact, 
 the Court is not bound by that decision unless it 
 has been adopted by subsequent orders, but may 
 disregard it, direct the action to go on to trial, 
 and direct inquiries to ascertain the real facts. — 
 On the present occasion, the parties waiving all 
 technical objections, and the payment of the 
 £3000 after the date of the codicil being admitted, 
 the Court decided that the legacy must be re- 
 duced by £3453, it not being material whether 
 the £3000 was paid before or after the date of the 
 codicil. In re Taylor's Estate. Tomlin v. 
 XJnderhat - 22 Ch. D, 495 
 
 2, Form of Answers — Rides of Court, 
 
 1875, Order xxxir., r. I.] Where a special case 
 for the opinion of the Court is stated in an action 
 pursuant to the Kules of Court, 1875, Order 
 XXXIV., rule 1, and the answers to the special 
 case in fact dispose of the action, the proper 
 course is to take the answers in the shape of a 
 judgment, making declarations to the effect of 
 the answers, the action being, if necessary, set 
 down pro formS. for trial on motion for judgment. 
 Haebison v. Cornwall Minerals Bail way Com- 
 pany - 16 Ch. D. 66 
 
 Appeal from judgment 9 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 See Pkaotiob — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 19. 
 
 XXVI. PEACTICE — STIPEEME COTTET- DIS- 
 TEICT EEGISTEY. 
 
 Administration Action — Taxation — Tax- 
 ing Officer — District Registrar — Rules of Court, 
 1883, Order xxxv., r. 4 ; Order Lxr., ». 27, sub-s. 43 
 —Supreme Court Funds Rules, 1884, rr. 3, 11, 12, 
 98, 111.] The Court can, in its discretion, order 
 the taxation of costs in an administration action 
 commenced and prosecuted in a District Kegistry 
 to be made by the District Registrar. — The term 
 "Taxing Officer" in rules 3, 11, and 12 of 
 Supreme Court Funds Rules, 1SS4, these rules 
 being read in conjunction with Order lxt., rule 27, 
 sub-s. 43 of Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, in- 
 cludes " District Registrar," where the Court has 
 directed taxation to be made by that officer, and 
 the Paymaster is bound to act on the certificate 
 of taxation of a District Registrar, when the 
 
( 1185 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1186 ) 
 
 XXVI. PEACTICE — SUPREME COITRT — DIS- 
 
 THICT EEGISTEY— continued. 
 Court, in the exercise of its discretion, has directed 
 taxation in the District Registry. — The Court, 
 however, following Day t. Whittaker (6 Ch. D. 
 734), will not, except under very special circum- 
 stances, direct the costs ot an action commenced 
 in a District Registry to be taxed otherwise than 
 by a Taxing Master of the Chancery Division. 
 In re Wilson. Wilson v. Alltjsbe 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 XXVn. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — 
 NOTICE or TRIAL. 
 
 Right of Defendant to give — Abridgment 
 
 <^ Time — Mules of Court, 1883, Order xxsri., 
 r. 12; Order LXir., r. 7.] Order xxxvr.. r. 12, 
 provides that, if the Plaintiff does not within six 
 weeks after the close of the pleadings, or within 
 sach extended time as the Court or a Judge may 
 allow, give notice of trial, the Defendant may, 
 before notice of trial given by the Plaintiff, give 
 notice of trial, or may apply to the Court or Judge 
 to dismiss the action for want of prosecution — 
 Order lxiv., rule 7, provides that the Court or a 
 Judge shall have power to enlarge or abridge 
 the time appointed by the rules, or fixed by any 
 order enlarging time, for doing any act or taking 
 any proceeding, upon such terms (if any) as the 
 jnstice of the case may require : — Bdd, that the 
 period of six weeks mentioned in Order xxxvi., 
 Tule 12, is not a time appointed for doing any act 
 or taking any proceeding within Order Lxrv., 
 rule 7, and consequently that the Court could not 
 make an order giving the Defendant leave to give 
 notice of trial, if the Plaintiff did not give such 
 notice within a shorter period than six weeks from 
 the close of the pleadings. SAirerDERS v. Pawlev 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 234 
 
 XXVni. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — 
 TRIAL. 
 
 1. Administration Action — Allegations of 
 
 Fraud — Wilful Default — Reference to Chambers.'] 
 In an action for onfinary administration it is com- 
 petent for the Court to allow a case of wilful de- 
 fault, though not stated in the pleadings, to be 
 raised at any time during the action, but allega- 
 tions of fraud and wUfcd default ought not gene- 
 rally to be adjourned, but should be disposed of 
 at the hearing. Smith v. Abmitage 24 Ch. S. 727 
 
 2. Trial by Jury — Action assigned to Chan- 
 eery Division — OfficiaZ Referee — Judicature Act, 
 1873 (36 * 37 YicU c. 66), s. 51— Rules of Court, 
 188.% Order xxxri., r. 3.] An action, which falls 
 within one of the classes of actions ■which, by 
 sect. 34 of the Judicature Act, 1873, are specially 
 assigned to the Chancery Division, will not be 
 sent for trial by a jury unless it involves a simple 
 issue of fact, the determination of which will 
 decide the action. — If such an action depends- on 
 the detennination of mixed questions of law and 
 feet, it ought to be tried by a Judge without a 
 jury, and an order will be made for its trial by 
 the Judge of the Chancery Division to whom it 
 has been assigned, without a jury, even though 
 the Plaintiff has by his statement of claim pro- 
 posed a different venue. — ^The mere fact that the 
 action will be tried more quickly, is not a sufl- 
 cient reason for sending it to be tried at the 
 
 XXVIII. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — 
 
 TRIAL — con tinued. 
 Assizes. — It was not intended by the Judicature 
 Act that an ofScial referee should decide the issue 
 in an action ; he is only to ascertain the facts so 
 as to enable the Court to decide the issue. Cak- 
 dinall v. Cakdinall 25 Ch. D. 772 
 
 3- Trial by Jvaj— Action assigned to Chan- 
 cery Dioision — Joinder of Cause of Actum not so 
 assigned— Rules of Court, 1883, Order xxxri., 
 rr. 3, 6.] The Plaintiff commenced an action iu 
 the Chancery Division alleging that the Defen- 
 dant was trustee of a sum of £700 for her, and 
 claiming payment of that sum with interest, and, 
 if necessary, an account of profits made by the 
 Defendant by using it iu his business, and also 
 claiming the return of certain chattels, or their 
 value, and damages for their detention. The De- 
 fendant denied the trust, stated that the money 
 had been lent to him by the Plaintiff, and long 
 ago repaid, and denied that he ever had any 
 chattels of the Plaintiff in his possession. The 
 Plaintiff, after the defence had been put in, ap- 
 plied to have the issues of fact tried by a jury : — 
 Seld, by Pearson, J., and by the Court of Appeal, 
 that the action came within Order xxxvL, rule 3, 
 and not within rule 6 of the same Order. That 
 the action therefore was to be tried by a Judge 
 without a jury, unless it could be made out that 
 it was better to have it tried by jury, and that iu 
 the present case this was not shewn. Gardneb 
 t- Jay - _ _ 29 ch.'D. 50 
 
 4. Trial by Jvay-Discretion of Court to 
 
 direct Tried without a Jury— Rules of Court, 1875, 
 Order xxxvi., rr. 3, 26— Appeal from Discretion 
 of Judge.'] Either party to an action has an ab- 
 solute right under Order xxxvi., rule 3, to have 
 the action or the issues tried before a jury, with- 
 out assigning any reasons, unless it shall appear 
 to the Judge that there are special grounds ren- 
 dering it desirable to try the action before a 
 Judge without a jury; the onus in such cases 
 being on the party who desires it not to be tried 
 before a jury— Bacon, T.C, having made an 
 order under Order xxxvi., rule 26, that the is- 
 sues in an action should be tried before him- 
 self without a jury, on the ground that no suffi- 
 cient reason had been shewn for its being tried 
 by a jury -.-Held, on appeal, that the Judge 
 having placed the onus of proof on the wrong 
 party, had not exercised his discretion in accord" 
 ance with the rule, and the Court overruled his 
 decision. — Semble, even if the Judge exercises his 
 discretion in accordance with the rule his decision 
 is subject to appeal, though the Court will not 
 interfere with his discretion except in a very 
 strong case. — ^Where the whole case is a proper 
 one to be tried by a jury, it is the more conve- 
 nient practice to transfer the action altogether to 
 the Queen's Bench Division.— Btiston v. Tobin 
 (10 Ch. D. 558) commented on. In re Martin 
 Hunt v. Chambebs 20 Ch. D. 386 
 
 ^ ,*• TT "^^ ^^ Jury— Fofoer of Option- 
 Rules of Court, 1875, Order xxxvi., rr. 3, 26.] The 
 hearing of a motion for an injunction was (with 
 the consent of the Defendants), ordered to stand 
 to the hearing, -sfith liberty to either party to 
 apply to expedite the trial -.-Seld, that the De- 
 fendants by consenting to snch order were not 
 
 2Q 
 
( 1187 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1188 ) 
 
 XXVIII. PRACTICE — STTPEEME COTJET — 
 TRIAL — continued. 
 
 deprived of tlieir option to have the issues of fact 
 tried by a jury, although -the effect might be 
 to prevent the Plaintiffs froin having ■ the trial 
 expedited. Clahke v. Skipper - 21 Ch, D. 134 
 
 6. Venue — Change of Venue — Action as- 
 signed to Chancery Division — Mules of Court, 1883, 
 Order xxxri., r. 1.] Under Order xxxvi., rule 1, 
 a Plaintiff is entitled to lay the venue of an action 
 in any place that he pleases, although it is speci- 
 ally assigned to the Chancery Division, and has 
 been commenced in that Division. Philips v. 
 Beale - - 26 Ch. D. 621 
 
 7. Venue — Mode of Trial — RvHei of Court, 
 
 1883, Order Xixvi., r. 1.] The Plaintiff in an 
 action to set aside deeds on the ground of fraud, 
 named Cardigan as the place of trial in his state- 
 ment of claim. On motion by a Defendant before 
 issue joined, the Court ordered the action to be 
 tried in the Chancery Division without a jury, 
 and this decision was affirmed by the Court of 
 Appeal. Powell v. Cobb - 29 Ch. D. 486 
 
 XXIX. PRACTICE — STTPEEME COURT — RE- 
 FEREE. 
 
 1. Compulsory Reference — Official Beferee 
 
 — Judicature Act, 1873, ss. 56, 57 — Appeal from 
 Judicial Discretion in directing Trial before an 
 Official Beferee.'] The Court of Appeal has power 
 to review the order made by a Judge under 
 sect. 57 of the Judicature Act, 1873, who, having 
 jurisdiction to make such order, has in the exer- 
 cise of his discretion ordered the issues of fact in 
 an action to be tried by an official referee, on the 
 ground that they required prolonged examination 
 of documents and also scientiUc and local investi- 
 gation ; but the Court of Appeal, whose discretion 
 in such case is to be substituted for that of the 
 Judge, will not exercise such discretion except in 
 a strong case where it clearly thinks the Judge 
 has wrongly exercised his discretion, and that an 
 injustice has been done by the order he has so 
 made. — So lield by Brett and Holker, L.JJ. (Lord 
 Coleridge, O.J., doubting if the Court had juiis- 
 diction to review the discretion of the Judge). — 
 Semhle, per Brett, L. J., that the " prolonged ex- 
 amination of documents," intended by sect. 57 
 of the Judicature Act, 1873, is an examination 
 required to enable the Judge to leave questions 
 of fact to the jury ; and not an examination to 
 enable him to determine a question of legal right. 
 Ormebod v. Todmorden Mill Company 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 664 
 
 2. Eepprt — Form of — Official Beferee — 
 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873 (36 <£ 37 
 Vict. c. 66), ss, 56, 57.] A referee under the 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873, s. 57, is not 
 bound to give his reasons for his findings ; he may 
 simply find the affirmative or the negative of the 
 issues, and the issues in an action cannot be sent 
 back to him for re-trial or further consideration 
 merely on the ground that his report does not set 
 out the reasons for his findings. Miller v. Pilling 
 
 [9 d. B. D. 736 
 
 3. ■ Report — Motion for Judgment — Official 
 
 Beferee — Judicature Act, 1873, ss. 56, 57, 58 — 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Order xxxvi., r. 34.] In an 
 
 XXXX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT— BE- 
 FEREE —continued. 
 action for an account an order was made under 
 Order xxxirr. to take an account, without preju- 
 dice to the proceedings in the action generally 
 being carried on. By a subsequent order it was 
 directed that the accounts should be taken by 
 the official referee. The referee made a report, 
 finding a sum due from the Plaintiff. The Plain- 
 tiff moved that the report might be set aside and 
 the accounts remitted to the referee, and that he- 
 might be directed to state his reasons. The- 
 Defendant at the same time moved that the- 
 report might be confirmed and the Plaintiff 
 ordered to pay the sum found due. Kay, J., 
 refused both motions, holding that a motion tt> 
 confirm the report was unnecessary, that the 
 action ought to be set down for trial, and that the 
 Plaintiff could object to the report at the hear- 
 ing. The Defendant appealed -.—Held, by the 
 Court of Appeal, that the proper course was not 
 to set down the action for trial, but for the De- 
 fendant to move for judgment on the report, and 
 for the Plaintiff to move to set the report aside. 
 Both the orders of Kay, J., were discharged, and 
 the two motions remitted to him to be disposed of 
 on the merits : — Held, also, that the proviso as to 
 the order to take the accounts being without pre- 
 judice to the proceedings in the action generally 
 being carried on ought not to have been inserted. 
 Walker v. Bunkeel - - 22 Ch. D. 72^ 
 
 4. Report — Setting aside — Application. 
 
 where and within what Time made — Judicature 
 Act, 1873, ss. 56-58.] Application to set aside 
 the findings of a referee appointed under sect. 5T 
 of the Judicature Act, 1873, to try the issues of 
 fact in an action and report to the Judge making 
 the order of reference, must be made to a Divi- 
 sional Court and not to the Judge, as such findings 
 are by sect. 58 equivalent to the verdict of a jury 
 and can only be set aside by the Court. — Qtuere, 
 whether the time for making the application runs 
 from the time when the report is made to the 
 Judge. Cooke v. Newcastle and Gateshead 
 Water Company 10 ft. B. D. 332 
 
 5. Report — Setting aside — Application 
 
 within what Time and how made — Judicature 
 Act, 1873, ss. 5e-5S— Bules of Court, 1875, Order 
 xxxri., r. 34 — Order xxxix., r. 1 a — Order Liu., 
 rr. 2, 3,] Where on a reference under sect. 57 
 of the Judicatiu'e Act the unsuccessful party 
 desires to question the findings of the referee, the 
 proper course is to move the Court on notice 
 under Order lhl to the other party, and such a 
 motion need not be made within the time limited 
 by Order xxxix., rule 1a for moving for a new 
 trial in an action tried by a jui-y. Dyke v. Can- 
 nbll - - - - 11 ft. B. D. 180 
 
 6. Report — Varying Beport — Official Be- 
 feree — Further Consideration.'] Where, in an action 
 which has by the judgment been referred to the 
 official referee and in which further consideration 
 has been adjourned, either party desires to vary 
 the referee's report, he should serve the opposite 
 party with a notice of motion to vary, such notice 
 to bo given for the usual motion day. Tlie motion 
 will then be adjourned, as a matter of course, to 
 come on with the further consideration. Where 
 further consideration has not been adjourned, the 
 
( 1189 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1190 ) 
 
 XXIX. PBACTICE — SUPREME COUET— KE- 
 FEBEE — continued. 
 
 proceeding to vary may be either a motion or a 
 summons. Bcrkabd v. Calishbb - 19 Ch. D. 644 
 
 Order for production of documents 
 
 , [17Ch. D. 346 
 See Pkactice^Stipeeme Court — Pbo- 
 DUCTioN OF Documents. 9. 
 
 XXX. PBACTICE — SUPREME COUET— EVI- 
 DENCE. 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 1. Affidavit — Agreement to take Evidence 
 
 hij Affidavit — 'Examination of Witnesses de bene 
 esse— Rules of Court, 1S75, Order xxxvii., ■,: i ; 
 Order x.xxtjii.'] Where the parties to an action 
 agree under Order xxxvni. to take the evidence 
 in the action by affidavit, and either party subse- 
 quently finds himself unable to procure affidavit 
 evidence, either by reason of the reluctance of 
 some of his witnesses to make affidavits or other 
 good cause, his proper course is to take out a 
 summons for leave to be relieved from the agree- 
 ment, and the Court -will, in a proper case, make 
 an order that the reluctant witnesses be examined 
 viv§- voce at the trial, or, at the option of the 
 other party, discharge the agreement- and direct 
 all the evidence to be taken vivS. voce at the 
 trial. — Whenever a necessary witness is going 
 abroad, or is from Ulaess, age, or other infirmity 
 likely to be unable to attend the trial, an order 
 wUl be made under Order xxxvn., rule 4, for his 
 examination before an officer of the Court in the 
 presence of both parties. — A like order wUl be 
 made whenever it shall appear to the Court neces- 
 sary for the purposes of justice. Warner v. 
 Mosses - - - 16 Ch, D. 100 
 
 2. Affidavit — Cross-examinaticm — Pro- 
 duction of Deponent — Expenses — Bules of Court, 
 1883, Order xxxrii., r. 21 ; Order xxxviii., r. 28 
 —15 & 16 Yict. c. 86, ss. 38, 41.] The direction 
 in Order xxxvm., rule 28, of Rules of the Supreme 
 Court, 1883, that the party producing a deponent 
 for cross-examination shall not be entitled to de- 
 mand the expenses thereof in the first instance 
 from the party requiring such production, taken 
 in conjunction with Order xxxvii., rule 21, of the 
 same rules, which provides that evidence taken 
 subsequently to the hearing or trial of any cause 
 or matter shall be taken as nearly as may be in 
 the same manner as evidence taken at or with a 
 view to a trial, is not confined to the cross-exami- 
 nation of the deponent' before the Court at the 
 trial of the action, but applies also to a cross- 
 examination before the Chief Clerk in Chambers 
 or before an Examiner. Baokhouse v. Aloook 
 
 [28 Ch. S. 669 
 
 3. Affidavit — Gross-Examination — Ex- 
 penses of producing Affidavit Witness for Cross- 
 examination — Bules o/CoMi-t, 1875, Order xxxriil., 
 r. 4.] The provision in Eules of Court, 1875, 
 Order xxxvm., rule 4, that the pajty producing 
 deponents for cross-examination upon their affi- 
 davits shall not be entitled to demand the expenses 
 thereof in the first instance from the party re- 
 quiring such prodnction, is confined to a cross- 
 examination of the deponents before the Court at 
 the trial of the action, and does not apply to a 
 cross-examination on an afiidavit filed after decree 
 
 XXX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COUET — EVI- 
 DENCE — continued. 
 (a.) General — continued^ 
 for the purpose of proceedings in Chambers. — 
 Decision of Bacon, V.C., reversed. In re Knight. 
 Knight v. Gardner 24 Ch. D. 606 ; 25 Ch. D. 297 
 
 4. Affidavit — Gross-Examination — Ex- 
 penses of Deponent — Bules of Court, 1883, Order 
 xxxviL, rr. 9, 13, 20, 21 ; Order xxxvin., r. 28.] 
 Plaintiff after judgment in an administration 
 action having obtained an order for cross-exami- 
 nation of Defendant (the executor) upon his 
 affidavit, in answer to inquii-ies directed by the 
 judgment, denying' possession of any part of the 
 testator's estate. Defendant declined to attend 
 before the examiner until Plaintiff had paid his 
 expenses. Plaintiff having subsequently served 
 Defendant with a subpcena moved that he be 
 ordered to attend at his own expense: — Held, 
 that it was open to the Plaintiff to combine the 
 two methods of procedure, and that the Defen- 
 dant was bound to produce himself at his own 
 expense for cross-examination ; and further, that 
 regai-ding the Defendant as a deponent whose 
 attendance was required for cross-examination, 
 the penalty imposed by Order xxxvm., rule 28 of 
 having his affidavit rejected did not relieve himj 
 from the obligation to attend at his own expense. 
 In re Baker. Connbll v. Baker 29 Ch. D. 711 
 
 5. Affidavit — Oroas-Exrnnination-^With^- 
 
 drawal of Affidavit— 15 & 16 Viet. e. 86,-s. 40.],' 
 Where a person has made and filed afi affidavit 
 for the piu:pose of being used in a matter pending 
 before the Coui't, he cannot be exempted &om 
 cross-examination by the withdrawal of the affi- ■ 
 davit. — Clarice v. Law (2 K. & J. 28) approved 
 and held to be applicable where the person making 
 the affidavit is not a party to the proceedings. In 
 re Quartz Hill, &c., Compant. Ex parte Young < 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 642 
 
 6. Affidavit in Reply — Bules of Court, 
 
 1875, Order xxxrui., r. 3 — Cons. Ord. xxxiii., 
 r. 7.] Affidavits filed by a Plaintiff in reply will 
 not upon interlocutory motion be ordered to be 
 taken off the file upon an allegation by the De- 
 fendant that they are not confined to matters . 
 strictly in reply; though at the hearing, if it 
 should tm-n out to be so, the Court will not regard 
 them, or may give leave to the Defendant to ■ 
 answer them. Gilbert v. Comedy Opera Com- 
 pany - 16 Ch. D. 594 
 
 7. Witness — Action in Chancery Division 
 
 — Arbitrator — Compelling Attendance of Witneis 
 — Subpcena — 3 6s 4 Will. 4, c. 42, s. 40 — Judica- ■ 
 ture Act, 1873, ss. 3, 16.] An order may now be ■ 
 made on summons in the Chancery Division 
 under 3 & 4 Will. o.^42, ». 40, requiring the 
 attendance of a witness before an arbitrator ap-- 
 pointed in an action in that Division, and the 
 order will be directed to be served as an ordinary: 
 
 • subpoena. Clarbeough v. Toothill 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 787 
 
 8. "Witness— Bight to subpoena Witness — 
 
 Evidence after Decree — Leave of the Cowt — 
 Proceedings in Chambers — 15 & 16 Vict, c, 86 
 ss. 40, 41 — Bules of Court, 1875, Order xxxvii., 
 r. 4.] Any party may without leave of the Court 
 issue a subpcena for the examination of a witness 
 
 2 Q 2 
 
( 1191 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1192 ) 
 
 XXX, PKACTICE — SUPEEME COTTET — EVI- 
 DENCE — continued. 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 at any stage of an action; but the Court will 
 exercise a control oyer this privilege to prevent 
 its being oppressively used. In an action for the 
 redemption of a mortgafie the usual judgment 
 was obtained and the defendant, the mortgagee, 
 proceeded to vouch his accounts in Chambers. 
 The Plaintiffs subpoenaed a solicitor who had 
 acted for both parties in the mortgage transac- 
 tions, in order to examine him with respect to 
 the moneys received by him on account of both 
 parties : — Held, that the Plaintiff was entitled to 
 issue the subpcena and to examine the witness. 
 Eaymond v. Tapson - - 22 Ch. D. 430 
 
 (6.) Abeoad. 
 
 9. Affidavit — Foreign Country — Notary 
 
 Public— Consul— 15 & 16 Vict. c. 86, s. 22— Court 
 of Prolate Act, 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 95), s. 31 
 — Pules of Court, 1S83, Order sx.xruL, r. 6 ; 
 Older LxxiT., r. 2.] Before and after the Act 
 15 & 16 Vict. c. 86, affidavits sworn in foreign 
 parts out of Her Majesty dominions before a 
 notary public might be filed, and that practice 
 continued in force down to the time when the 
 Rules of the Supreme Court, 1883, came into 
 operation. — Held, that this practice is not abro- 
 gated by Order xxxviil., rule 6, and Order Lxxii.. 
 rule 2, of the Eules of 1888, and may be followed 
 at any rate in cases where the practice under the 
 Eules of 1883 would be very inconsistent. Cooke 
 V. WiLBY - - - 25 Ch. D. 769 
 
 10. Commission to Foreign Court — Wit- 
 ness resident Abroad — Pules of Court, 1875, Order 
 xxxrii., r. 4.] Upon an application for a com- 
 mission to take the evidence of a witness who is 
 abroad, the Court ought to be satisfied that the 
 applit-ation is made bonS, fide, and that the claim 
 in support of which the evidence is desired is 
 one which the Court ought to try, but it ought 
 not to go any further into the merits of the claim. 
 — In a case in which a claim was made under 
 very suspicious circumstances, and the Court was 
 of opinion that a person resident abroad, whose 
 evidence was desired in support of it, ought to 
 be subjected to a drastic cross-examination : — 
 Held, that a commission ought not to be issued 
 to a foreign Court for the examination of the 
 witness abroad, because it appeared that uuder 
 the procedure of that Court lie would not be 
 cross-examined in the ordinary way. In re Boyes. 
 GKoriON V. Ceoeton 20 Ch. D. 760 
 
 11. Commission to examine Plaintiff — 
 
 Pules of Court, 1875, Order .xxxrii., r. 4.] A 
 commission to examine the Plaintiff abroad was 
 applied for by the Plaintiff on the ground that 
 the state of his health was such that a voyage to 
 England would be dangerous to his life. The 
 Court refused the commission, holding that his 
 cross-examination before the English Court was 
 required in the interests of justice, and that he 
 had not proved the truth of his allegation that 
 •the voyage would be dangerous to his life. 
 Beedan v. Gkeekwood - 20 Ch. D. 764, n. 
 
 12. Commission to examine Witness — 
 
 Single Commissioner — Administration of Oath — 
 Pnhs of Court, April, 1880, Schedule, Form G. 
 
 XXX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COTTBT — EVI- 
 DENCE — amtinued. 
 (b.) Aeeoab — continued. 
 11.] When a single Commissioner is appointed 
 to take evidence abroad the commission should 
 authorize liim to administer the oath to himself. 
 Wilson v. De Coulon - - 22 Ch. D. 841 
 
 13. Commission to examine Witness — 
 
 Pules of Court, 1875, Order xxsvii., r. 4.] L. 
 granted to T. an exclusive licence to use in 
 England a certain patented invention for making 
 sugar. This invention was also patented in 
 America, and M., an American sugar manufac- 
 turer, had a licence for its use in the United 
 States. L. brought his action against T., to have 
 the licence rectified, alleging that the,real agree- 
 ment between the parties was that the licence 
 was not to interfere with the importation into 
 England of sugar made abroad under the patent. 
 The statement of claim alleged that M. had intro- 
 duced L. to T., and that the negotiations between 
 L. and T. had proceeded on the under.standlng 
 that sugar made abroad under the patent might 
 be imported ; but there was no allegation, nor did 
 it appear in evidence, that M. had taken part in 
 the negotiations. L. applied to have a com- 
 mission to examine M. in America : — Held, by 
 Chitty, J., that the application must be refused as 
 in Berdan v. Greenwood (20 Oh. D. 764, n.) for 
 that it was essential that M., an interested 
 witness, should be examined and cross-examined 
 orally before the Judge who tried the case. — Held, 
 by the Court of Appeal, that if it appeared that 
 the evidence of M. would be material, the com- 
 mission ought to be granted, there being nothing 
 to shew that M. was keeping out of the way to 
 avoid cross-examination ; and that Berdan v. 
 Greenwood turned on the fact that the Court was 
 convinced that the plaintiff there was so keeping 
 out of the way. — But, held, that on the materials 
 before the Court the commission was rightly 
 refused, there being nothing to shew that M. had 
 taken such part in the negotiations as to make 
 his evidence material. Tlie Court, however, as 
 an indulgence, gave the Plaintiff an opportunity 
 of adducing evidence to shew that M. could give 
 mateiial evidence. Langen v. Tate 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 622 
 
 14. Commission to examine Witness — 
 
 Rules of Court, 1883, Order xxxvn., r. 5.] If it 
 is shewn that there are material witnesses resident 
 abroad whom a party wishes to examine, a com- 
 mission to examine them abroad will be granted 
 if there is any reasonable ground for their not 
 coming here, unless a case is made shewing that 
 it is necessary for the purposes of justice that they 
 should be examined in England. Akmoue v. 
 Walkee - 25 Ch. D. 673 
 
 16. Commission to examine Witness — 
 
 PuUs of Court, 1883, Order x.xxrii., r. 5.] Where 
 it is sought to have a material witness examined 
 abroad, and the nature of the case is such that it 
 is important that he should be examined here, the 
 party asking to have him examined abroad must 
 shew clearly that ho cannot bring him to this 
 country to be examined at the trial. Lawson v. 
 Vaoium Beake Company 27 Ch. D. 137 
 
 16. 
 
 ■ Commission to examine Witness — 
 
( 1193 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1191 ) 
 
 XXX, PRACTICE — SUPREME COUET — EVI- 
 DENCE — continued. 
 (6i) Abboad — contimied. 
 Examination of Parties to the Suit — Bules of Court, 
 1875, Order xxxvii., r. i— Rules of Court, 1883, 
 Order xxxvil., r. 5.] A Plaintiff residing in 
 New Zealand brought an action for redemption 
 alleging himself to be the heir-at-law of a person 
 who had died intestate entitled to a remainder in 
 fee in the ec[uity of redemption which had fallen 
 into possession since his death. The Plaintiff's 
 case was that he had been long resident in New 
 Zealand and had had no communication with his 
 family since 1860, and had only been recently 
 informed of his title. The Defendant was a 
 person to whom the property had been sold by a 
 person whose elder brother the Plaintiff alleged 
 himself to" be. The Defendant did not dispute 
 the Plaintift's right to redeem if he was the person 
 he represented himself to be, but reijuired proof 
 of his identity. The Plaintiff applied for a com- 
 mission to examine himself, two persons named 
 and others residing in New Zealand. Mr. Justice 
 Kay made the order, and directed that the depo- 
 sitions might be given in evidence at the trial 
 " without prejudice to the right of the Defendant 
 to cross-examine the Plaintiff at the trial in the 
 presence of witnesses in England who can speak 
 to his identity." The Defendant appealed from 
 the order : — Beld, that there was jurisdiction to 
 appoint examiners for the examination of a party 
 to the cause as well as of a mere witness : — But, 
 lield, that the deposition of the Plaintiff ought 
 not to be admitted at the trial if the Defendant 
 required him to appear at the trial to be ex- 
 amined and cross-examined, it not being shewn 
 that there was any practical impossibility of his 
 attending: — Held, further, that the order need 
 not be confined to witnesses mentioned in it by 
 name, but that the Plaintiff must give notice to 
 the other side in New Zealand of the witnesses 
 he proposed to call. Nadin v. Bassett 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 21 
 (c) De bene esse. 
 
 17. Old Suit.] In 1815 some customary 
 
 tenants of a manor filed their bill on behalf of 
 themselves and all other the customary tenants 
 to establish their right to work minerals under 
 their tenements without the consent of the lord. 
 A commission was taken out in the same year to 
 examine certain old persons de bene esse, and 
 they were examined. After this the suit abated, 
 was revived, and answers were put in 1819, 
 after which nothing further was done. In 1871 
 a bill of the same nature was filed by customary 
 tenants, who, did not derive title under any of the 
 persons named as Plaintiffs in tlie suit of 1815. — • 
 Held, by Hall, V.C., and by the Court of Appeal, 
 that the evidence taken de bene esse in the 
 former suit was admissible on behalf of the Plain- 
 tiffs in the latter suit, the issue in the two suits 
 being the same, and there being privity of estate 
 between the parties to the two suits respectively. 
 
 IiLANOVEB V. HOMFBAT. PHILLIPS V. LlaNOVEE 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 284 
 
 18, Witness above seventy years of age 
 
 — Affidavit — Sufficiency of — Bules of Court, 
 1883, Order xxxrii., rr. 1-5 ; Order xxxviii., 
 r. 3.] The Court has jurisdiction on a proper 
 
 XXX. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT — EVI- 
 DENCE — continued. 
 
 (c.) De bene esse — continued. 
 occasion when it is "necessary for the pur- 
 pose of justice," to make an order for an exami- 
 nation de bene esse of witnesses upon an ex parte 
 application, the order being taken by the appli- 
 cant at his peril, and subject to the risk of being 
 discharged on sufficient grounds. An order was 
 made in Chambers on an ex parte application by 
 the Plaintiffs to examine de bene esse thirty 
 witnesses upon an affidavit of the Plaintiffs' soli- 
 citor merely stating that he was advised that they 
 were material witnesses — that they were all above 
 seventy years of age, and that he was advised and 
 believed that by reason of their age it was desir- 
 able that their examination should be taken 
 without delay. This order was discharged by 
 Kay, J., on motion in Court, mainly on the ground 
 that the affidavit was insufficient : — Held, by the 
 Court of Appeal (affirming Kay, J.), that the affi- 
 davit did not satisfy the requirements of Order 
 XXXVIII., rule 3, but leave was given to put in a 
 further affidavit stating what information had 
 been obtained, and what steps had been taken to 
 obtain such information as to tlie age of the dif- 
 ferent witnesses, and also stating generally the 
 facts which the particular witnesses were going 
 to depose to. Although the fact that a witness is 
 seventy years old is generally a good primS, facie 
 ground for an order for his examination de bene 
 esse, such a practice will not necessarily be applied 
 to an extraordinary case, e.g., where an order has 
 been made to examine thirty witnesses. On a 
 subsequent application made on a further affidavit 
 of the solicitor, in which he divided the witnesses 
 into four classes who were to depose to four 
 different heads of evidence, — ^The Court declined 
 to allow the examination de bene esse of ten of 
 the proposed witnesses who were between seventy 
 and seventy-five years old, without prejudice to a 
 subsequent application for leave to examine them 
 on grounds other than age, but allowed the other 
 twenty witnesses above seventy-five to be ex- 
 amined de bene esse upon the imdertaking of tte 
 Plaintiffs counsel to produce at the trial, if so 
 requested by the Defendant, any of such witnesses 
 who might be then aliTe. Bidder v. Bkidges 
 
 [26 Ch, D. 1 
 
 XXXI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT — NEW 
 TRIAL, 
 
 1. County Court — Action remitted for 
 
 Trial to County Court under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, «. 
 26— Bules of CmH, 1883, Order xxxix., r. 1— 
 Trial hefore Judge without Jury.'] In an action 
 remitted for trial to a County Court and tried by 
 the County Court Judge without a jury, an appli- 
 cation for a new trial must, under the Eules of 
 the Supreme Court, 1883, be made to the Divi- 
 sional Court. Swansea Co-opebative Boildinq 
 Society v. Da vies - - 12 Q, B, D. 21 
 
 2. County ZoTiit— Action remitted to the 
 
 County Court for Trial of Issues under 19 <{; 20 Viet, 
 c. 108, s. 26— Order xxxix. of the Bales of 1883 
 — Order hll., r. 1 — County Courts Act, 1875 (38 
 & 39 Vict. c. 50), 8. 6.] Kules 3 and 4 of Order 
 XXXIX., and Rule 1 of Order lii. (of 1883), 
 have no application to oases sent for trial to a 
 
( 1195 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1196 ) 
 
 XXXI. PRACTICE— SirPEEME COURT— NEW 
 TRIAL — continued. 
 
 County Court under 19 & 20 Viet. c. 108, s. 26 ; 
 applications for new trials, therefore, are still 
 regulated by the old practice. Pbitohabd v. 
 Pkitchabd - - 14 Q. B. D. 86 
 
 IBut see Rules of Court, December, 1885, 
 Order LIX., rr. 9-17.] 
 
 3. County Court — Improper Bejection of 
 
 Evidence — Bules of Court, 1883, Order XXXIX., r. 6 
 —County Courts Act, 1875(38 & 39 Vict. c. 50), s. 6.] 
 Order xxxix., rule 6, provides tha-t a new trial 
 shall not be granted on the ground (inter alia) of 
 the improper rejection of evidence, unless in the 
 opinion of the Court some substantial wrong or 
 miscarriage has been thereby occasioned in the 
 trial : — Held, that the above rule applies to a 
 motion in the High Court for a new trial in a 
 County Court action. Shapoott v. Chappell 
 
 [12 a. B. D. 88 
 
 4. Damages exoessive — Power of Court 
 
 to reduce Damages.l In a case where the Plaintiff 
 is entitled to substantial damages, and a verdict 
 for the Plaintiff cannot be impeached except on 
 the ground that the damages are excessive, the 
 Court has power to refuse a new trial, on the 
 Plaintiff alone, and without the Defendant, con- 
 senting to the damages being reduced to such an 
 amount as the Court ■would consider not excessive 
 had they been giveii by the jury. Belt v. Lawes 
 
 [18 Q. B. D. 356 
 
 5. Verdict against Evidence — Principle 
 
 on u-hich New Trial allowed.^ The question 
 whether a new trial should be granted on the 
 ground that the verdict was against the weight 
 of evidence, must depend upon whether the ver- 
 dict was such as reasonable men ought to have 
 given, and not upon whether the learned Judge 
 who tried the action was dissatisfied or not with 
 the verdict. Solomon v. Bitton 8 Q. B, D. 176 
 
 XXXII. PRACTICE- SUPREME COURT — MO- 
 TION FOR JUDGMENT. 
 
 1. Admissions in Pleadings — Admission 
 
 of Claim — Counter-claim — Bules of Court, 1875, 
 Order XIX., r. 3, Order XL., r. 11.] In an action 
 for a liquidated demand the Defendants pleaded 
 admitting the claim, but setting up a counter- 
 claim for unliquidated damages to a greater 
 amount. — The Com-t refused an application under 
 Order xl., r. 11, for an order to sign judgment for 
 tlie Plaintiffs upon the claim, and for payment of 
 •the amount thereof by the Defendants into Com-t 
 to abide the result of the action. Mehsey Steam- 
 ship Co. V. SuDTTLEWOBTH - 10 Q. B. D. 468 ; 
 
 [11 Q. B. D, 631 
 
 2. Admissions in Pleadings — Indorse- 
 ment on Writ — " Pleading" — Bules of Court, 1875, 
 Order //., r. 1 ; Order XL., r. IV— Judicature Act, 
 1873, s. 100.] The indorsement on a writ is not 
 a " pleading " so as to entitle a Plaintiff, without 
 the consent of the Defendant, to mov,e thereon for 
 an order on admissions in the pleadings under 
 Eules of Court, 1875, Order XL., r. 11, in a case 
 where the Defendant, admitting the Plaintiff's 
 claim, has given notice that he does not require 
 the delivery of a statement of claim. Wallis v. 
 Jaoksok - 23 Ch. D. 204 
 
 3. 
 
 • Admissions in Pleadings — Specific 
 
 XXXII. PRACTICE- SUPREME COURT- MO- 
 TION FOR JUDGMENT— contJnaetZ. 
 
 Performance — Bules of Court, 1875, Ord,er XL., 
 r. 1 1.] A plaintiff may move for judgment upon 
 admissions in the pleadings at any stage in the 
 action and notwithstanding that he has joined 
 issue on the defence and given notice of trial. 
 Bbown v. Pbabson - 21 Ch. D, 716 
 
 XXXIII. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — 
 JUDGMENT. 
 
 1. Action against Firm — Bules of Court, , 
 
 1875, Order JX., r. 6, and Order XLii., r. 8.] 
 Where the writ in an action is issued against a 
 partnership firm in the name of the firm the judg- 
 ment must be against the firm, and it cannot be 
 separately entered against an individual member 
 of the firm who has made default in appearing to 
 the action. Jackson «. Likjhfdeld 8 Q. B. D. 474 
 
 2. Action against Firm — Service of Writ 
 
 on one Memher of a Trading Partnership — Appear- 
 ance by him only " as a partner of the firm " — 
 Bules of Court, 1883, Order xii., r. 15.] A writ 
 was issued against a trading partnership (unin- 
 corporated), and served upon a member of the firm, 
 who entered an appearance, " W. N., a partner of 
 the firm of "W. T. & Co." There was no service 
 upon or appearance by the other members of the 
 firm : — Beld, that leave to sign judgment against 
 the firm for default of appearance could not be 
 granted.— Jac/sson v. Litchfield (8 Q. B. D. 474) 
 followed. Adam v. Towxend 14 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 3. Judgment against Firm — Action on 
 
 Judgment — Execution — Bules of Court, 1875, Order 
 XLII., r. 8.] Where judgment has been recovered 
 against a partnership firm in the name of the 
 firm, the Plaintiff may bring an action ou the 
 judgment against the individual members of the 
 firm, and is not confined to the remedy given by 
 Order XLn., rule 8, with respect to the issue of 
 execution. Clabk v. Cullen 9 ft. B. D. 358 
 
 4. No Proceeding for a Year — Notice — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1883, Order XIII., r. 3 ; Order LXir., 
 r. 13.] Where on default of appearance by the 
 Defendant the Plaintiff takes no step in the cause 
 for a year, Order exit., r.' 13, applies, and notice 
 is necessary before judgment can be signed. 
 Webstee v. Myeb - - 14 ft. B. D. 231 
 
 5. Setting aside Judgment — Application 
 
 iy a Person not party to the Becord — Judicature 
 Act, 1873, 8. 24, suh-s. 5— Bules of Court, 1883, 
 Order xxrii., r. 15.] If a person, who is not a 
 party to the record, seeks to set aside a judgment 
 by which he is injuriously affected, which the 
 Defendant in the action has allowed to go by 
 default, he ought by summons, taken out in the 
 name of the Defendant, or if not entitled to use 
 the Defendant's name, then taken out in his own 
 name, but in that case served on both the Plain- 
 tiff and the Defendant, to apply for leave to have 
 the judgment set aside, and to be allowed either 
 to defend the action on such terms of indemnify- 
 ing the Defendant as the Judge may consider 
 right, or to intervene in the action in the manner 
 pointed out by the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24, 
 sub-s. 5. Order -xxvii.,' rule 15, is designed to 
 enable judgments by default to be set ■ aside by 
 those who have or who can acquire a locus standi, 
 
( 1197 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1198 ) 
 
 XXXIII, PBACIICE — STJPEEME COURT — 
 
 JUDGMENT — continued. 
 and does not give a locus standi to those who 
 iave none. Jacques v. Haeeison 
 
 [12 Q. B, S. 136, 165 
 
 6. Varying Minutes — Order of Appeal 
 
 Court — Notice of Motion to vary.'] "Where any- 
 party ia dissatisfied with an order as settled by 
 the Registrar, and desires to bring the matter 
 before the Court, he must, whether the order be 
 an order of the Court of Appeal or of a Court of 
 &st instance, give notice of motion to vary the 
 minutes. Gbnebal Shake and Tbtjst Company 
 ®. "Wetlet Beick and Pottery Company 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 130 
 7. Varying Minutes — Production of Regis- 
 trar s Note.] On the hearing of a motion to vary 
 the minutes of an order the solicitor of the moving 
 party ought to produce a copy of the Registrar's 
 note of what took place when the order was made. 
 HoBiNSON V. Local Boaed op Baeton 
 
 [21 Ch. S. 621 
 
 8. Varying Otiei— Foreclosure Order — 
 
 Bides of Court, 1883, Order X7., r. 1 — Order 
 XXYIII,, r. 11.] The Plaintiffs in a foreclosure 
 action applied by summons under Order xv., rule 1, 
 for an account. The Chief Clerk pronounced the 
 usual order for an account and foreclosure. The 
 Defendants objected to the direction for foreclosure, 
 and the Plaintiffs assenting, the order was drawn 
 up for an account only, and was passed and entered 
 in that form. When the parties came before the 
 Chief Clerk to proceed with the account he ob- 
 jected to the order as not being the one he had 
 pronounced, and refused to proceed with the 
 Account. Subseq^uently the Registrar, at the in- 
 stance of the Chief Clerk, without any motion or 
 summons, altered the order by adding the usual 
 directions for foreclosure. The Defendants moved 
 lo strike out the additions. Kay, J., declined to do 
 «o, as he considered that the parties were not at 
 liberty to have an order drawn up, different from 
 the order pronounced, without applying to the 
 Court for the purpose ; but, being of opinion that 
 the addition had been irregularly made, he stayed 
 proceedings under the existing order, giving the 
 Plaintiffs liberty to apply for a fresh order for 
 .accounts and foreclosure. The Defendants ap- 
 pealed :— fleW, that assuming the order as passed 
 and entered to contain an error arising from an 
 accidental slip or omission, an alteration made in 
 it without any inotion or summons for the purpose 
 was irregular, and must be discharged, and that 
 the Plaintiffs must pay the costs, as they ought to 
 •have applied to the Judge when the Chief Clerk 
 refused to proceed with the accounts. — Whether 
 a foreclosure Order can be made under Order xv., 
 rule 1, as in Bmifk y.Davies (28 Ch. D. 650), 
 qaxre. — Whether there was jurisdiction to stay 
 proceedings under the order against the wish of the 
 Defendants, qusere. Blake v. Haevey 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 827 
 
 9. — Varying Order — Correcting Error — 
 
 Order passed and entered — Order not conformable 
 to what the Court intended.] An order of the 
 Court of Appeal was drawn up,! passed and en- 
 tered, ih such a form that it niight be contended 
 to decide questions which had not been before 
 the Coui't, and which it had not intended to de- 
 
 XXXIII. PBACTICE — SUPBEME COUBT — 
 JUDGMENT— continued. ' ' 
 
 cide: — Beld, that the Court had' jurisdiction to 
 alter the record of its order; so as to make it 
 conformable to the order which the Court had 
 pronounced, and the record was altered accord- 
 ingly, but as th6 applicant had not adopted the 
 usual and proper course of applying to vary the 
 minutes, he was ordered to paythe costs of the 
 application. In re Swibe. Melloe v. Swiee 
 
 [30 Ch.!): 239 
 
 Judgment against partnersliip — Action 
 
 against partn,ers in name of firm 
 See Cases under Pbaotioe — Sdpeeme 
 CouET — Pakties, iO — ^^15. 
 
 XXXIV. PRACTICE — SUPREME COUET— SE- 
 QUESTRATION. 
 
 1. Chose in Action — Bankers.] Where 
 
 a sequestration had been issued against A. :— 
 Seld, that A.'s balance ' at his bankers might be 
 attached under it, and that the Court had juris- 
 diction to order the bankers to verify and pay the 
 balance to the sequestration account. Miller v. 
 HuDDLESTONE - - 22 Ch. D. 233 
 
 2. Enforcing SSqnestration-^Z'iuprce Ac- 
 tion.] A co-Bespondent in a divorce action was 
 ordered to pay damages and costs, and a writ of 
 sequestration was issued by the Probate and Di- 
 vorce Division to enforce such order. He was 
 entitled to certain trust moneys which were being 
 administered in the Chancery action : — Held, that 
 the Court of: Chancery -had jurisdiction on motion 
 of the sequestrators in the Chancery action to 
 order the trust moneys to be paid to the seques- 
 trators. In re Sladb. Slade v. Htjlmb 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 653 
 
 3. Non-Payment of Costs — Uules of Court 
 
 of April, 1880 [Order XLVii., r. 2]—Bubpcena for 
 Costs — Cliambers.] On a motion the Court gave 
 leave in its discretion, under the Rules of Court 
 of April, 1880, to issue a sequestratioh for' the 
 payment of costs; — Where such application is 
 made in an action which is transferred for hearing 
 only to a Judge who dofeS not sit in Chambers, 
 it is properly made < to such ■ Judge : in Court, 
 otherwise' in ChamberSi Snow v, Boltok 
 
 [17Gh. D. 433 
 
 XXXV. PBACTICE — SUPREME COUBT^ATt 
 TACHMENT. 
 
 1. Defaulting Trustee — Debtors Act, 1869 
 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62), s. i— Debtors Act, 1878 
 (41 & 42 Vict, c: 54), s. 1.] On application for 
 an attachment against a defaulting trustee,, the 
 Court has jurisdiction to inquire into the ciijcum- 
 stances of the case, and where there has been lio 
 actual fraud or embezzlement, , but merely an 
 erroneous application of the trust fund, may refuse 
 the application for an attachment. — Barrett v. 
 Hammond (10 Ch'. D. 285J.:fplIpwed.— Jlfam's v. 
 Ingram (13 Ch. D. 338) distinguished. Holeoydb 
 V. Gaenett , - ; 20 Ch. D. 532 
 
 2. 1 Discharge of Prisoner — Custody' for 
 
 Contempt — Sheriffs-Debtors ^cJ, 1869 (32 cfc 33 
 Vict. c. 62), 8.. 4.]' ilifo orde* is necessary for the 
 discharge of a prisonea: in cuStpdy for Cohteibpt 
 under any of the dxceptibns Contained in sect. 4 
 of the Debtor's Act,'1869y where the; writ of 
 
( 1199 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1200. ) 
 
 XXXV. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COXIET— AT- 
 TACHMENT— continttcd. 
 attachment has appended to it a note in the 
 following terms : " Note. — This writ does not 
 authorize an imprisonment for any longer period 
 than one year." It is now the usual practice to 
 append the above note to all writs of attachment 
 issued under the above section. In re Edwakds. 
 Bkooke v. Edwabbs 21 Ch. D. 230 
 
 3. Indorsement on Order— Cons. Ord.sxiii. 
 
 r. 10.] On the 20th of May, 1881, an order was 
 made for the Defendants within seven days after 
 service, to file an affidavit as to documents. The 
 copy served had no such indorsement as is required 
 by Cons. Ord. xxiii. r. 10. The Defendants filed 
 successively three affidavits, which were succes- 
 sively held insufficient, and on the lOth of Feb- 
 ruary, 1882, filed a fourth. A summons was 
 taken out to consider its sufficiency, and on its 
 being attended on the 24:th of February, the De- 
 fendant's solicitor stated that the draft of a fur- 
 ther afiSdavit had been sent into the country, and 
 that the affidavit would be filed as soon as pos- 
 sible, and requested an adjournment. The Chief 
 Clerk refused to adjourn ; held the affidavit of 
 the lOth of February 'to be insufficient, and 
 ordered the Defendants to pay the costs. On the 
 25th the Plaintifi's served notice of motion for 
 attachment for the 3rd of March. On the 28th of 
 February the Defendants filed a further affidavit, 
 and on the first of March asked the Plaintiffs' 
 solicitors whether they proposed to withdraw their 
 notice of motion. The Plaintiffs' solicitors replied 
 that they did not, as their briefs had been de- 
 livered before the affidavit was filed, but that they 
 would consider any proposal the Defendants had 
 to make. The Defendant's solicitors wrote in 
 answer, making no offer to pay any costs, but say- 
 ing that they should deliver their briefs. North, J., 
 refused the motion with costs : — Held, on appeal, 
 that the Plaintiffs were right in giving their 
 notice of motion, and that as the Defendants had 
 made no offer to pay any costs, the Plaintiffs were 
 entitled to bring on their motion, and must have 
 the costs of it. Under the practice established by 
 the Judicature Acts, it is not necessary that the 
 copy of an order which is served should have the 
 indorsement required by Cons. Ord. xxiil., r. 10, 
 stating the consequences of failing to obey the 
 order. Thomas v. Palin - 21 Ch. D. 360 
 
 4. Indorsement on Order — Mvhs of 
 
 Court, 1883, Order XLI., r. 5 — Form' of Notice 
 of Motion for Attachment — • Order LII., r. 4.] 
 By order of the 28th of February, 1884, the 
 Defendant was directed to pay a sum into Comt 
 by the 13th of Marcli. This order not having 
 been served before the 13th of March, an order 
 was made on the 3rd of April enlarging the 
 time until four days after service of the two 
 orders. The Plaintiff served the two orders, in- 
 dorsing on the former the notice given in Order i. 
 of the 7th of January, 1870, but putting no in- 
 dorsement on the latter. The money not having 
 been paid in, the Plaintiff moved for an attach- 
 ment "for your default in obeying the orders 
 made herein on the 28th of February last and the 
 3rd of April last," supporting it by an affidavit 
 that the Defendant had not borrowed the order 
 for the purpose of paying in the money, nor given 
 
 XXXV. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COTJET— AT- 
 TACHMENT— coratinufid. 
 notice of having paid in the money : — Beld, thai 
 as the second order did not require the Defendant 
 to do any act, but only extended the time for 
 doing the act mentioned in the first order, it was 
 sufficient to indorse the first order only : — Heidi, 
 also, that the indorsement was sufficient in form, 
 for that although not in the words of the indorse- 
 ment given in the rules of 1883, Order xli., rule 5, 
 it was to the same effect: — Meld, also, that, 
 having regard to the nature of the orders, a notice 
 of motion to attach "for default in obeying" 
 them sufficiently stated the grounds of the appli- 
 cation within the meaning of Order lh., rule 4 : 
 —Held, also, that though the affidavit in support 
 of the application would probably have been held 
 insufficient to support an attachment, if the 
 motion had been heard on affidavit of service, the 
 defect was cured by the Defendant's appearing 
 and resisting the application on other grounds. 
 Teehekne v. Dale - 27 Ch. D. 66 
 
 5. Leave to issT^e — Judge at Chamhers, 
 
 Jurisdiction of — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 39 — Eules 
 of Court, 1883, Order XLIV., r. 2.] A Judge at 
 chambers has power to give leave to issue a writ 
 of attachment. — So held by Grove, J., and Hud.- 
 dleston, B., Day, J., dissenting. SAi.ii Kyebubs 
 V. PossANSKi [13 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 6. Order for Delivery up of Deeds — 
 
 Execution of Writ — Breaking open outer Door.'] 
 Where a writ of attachment has issued against 
 a party to an action for contempt of Court in 
 non-compliance with an order for the delivery 
 over of deeds and documents, the officer charged 
 with the execution of the writ may break open 
 the outer door of the house in order to execute it. 
 — Burdett v. Abbot (14 East, 1) and In re 
 Freston (11 Q. B. D. 545) discussed. Hauvet v. 
 Haevey - - 26 Ch. D. 644 
 
 7. Order for Discovery — Service — 
 
 Omission to serve Copy of Affidavit with Notice of 
 Motion — Rules of Court, 1883, Order JXJ/., r. 21 ; 
 Order zii., r. 4.] On giving a notice of motion 
 to commit a Defendant for contempt in disobey- 
 ing an order for discovery, the Plaintiffs omitted 
 to serve with the notice of motiou a. copy of an 
 affidavit which they stated in the notice that 
 they should read in support of the motion : — Held, 
 that rule 4 of Order lii. applied to such a notice 
 of motion, a'ld not only to a case in which a writ 
 of attachment would have issued under the old 
 Common Law practice, and that the notice of 
 motion was, therefore, ii-regular. — But held, that 
 the motion should not be at once dismissed, but 
 should be ordered to stand over until after the 
 hearing of a simunons by the Defendant for further 
 time to make the discovery. Litchfield v. Jones 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 64 
 
 8. Order for Production of Documents — 
 
 Service on Solicitor — Indorsement on Order — ■ 
 Mules of Court, 1883, Order aa.v/., rr. 21, 22, 23 ; 
 Order XLI., r. 5 ; Order LII., r. 4.] Order xll, 
 rule 5, which requires every order to bear an in- 
 dorsement warning the party bound by it of ths 
 consequences of disobedience, applies to an order 
 for discovery of documents of which service on 
 the solicitor is permitted. And a writ of attach- 
 ment cannot be issued against a person who 
 
( 1201 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1202 ) 
 
 XXXV. PRACTICE — STJPEEME COTJET — AT- 
 TACHMENT— conWnaed. 
 disobeys such an order unless the copy served on 
 his solicitor bore the required indorsement. — 
 A party whose solicitor was served with such an 
 order without the required indorsement took out 
 a summons for further time : — Held (dissentiente 
 Lindley, L.J.), that he did not thereby waive the 
 irregularity of the service. — The decision of 
 Chitty, J., reversed. — The affidavit in support of 
 a motion for attachment was uot served with the 
 notice of motion as it ought to have been under 
 Order m., rule 4, but was served two clear days 
 before the day named iu the notice of motion for 
 moving the Court : — Held, by Chitty, J., that this 
 was not such an irregularity as made the notice 
 invalid. Hampden v. Wallis 26 Ch. D. 746 
 
 9. Service — Non-service of Order — 
 
 Notice to Defendant.'] In order to justify the 
 committal of a defendant for breach of an io- 
 junction it is not necessary that the order grant- 
 ing the injunction should have been served upon 
 him if it is proved that he had notice of the 
 order aliunde, and knew that the plaintiff in- 
 tended to enforce it. — This rule is not limited to 
 cases in which a breach is conunitted before there 
 has been time for the plaintiff to get the order 
 drawn up and entered — James v. Downes (18 Ves. 
 522) and Vansandau v. Mose (2 Jao. & W. 264) 
 discussed and explained. Ukited Telephone 
 Company v. Dale - - 25 Ch. D. 778 
 
 Appeal from refusal to commit 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 493 
 See Peaotioe — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 1. 
 Removing goods from custody of sheriff- 
 Notice of motion necessary 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 335 
 See Peaotioe — Supreme Court — ^Notice 
 OF Motion. 1. 
 
 XXXVI. PRACTICE— STJPEEME COURT— GAR- 
 NISHEE ORDERS. 
 
 1. Debt — Default of Appearance — • 
 
 Unliquidated Claim — Bules of Court, 1883, Order 
 SLY., r. 1 — Assignment — Interpleader,'] A claim 
 on a fire policy having been made against an in- 
 surance company for unliquidated damages, the 
 Plaintiff, a judgment creditor of the assured for 
 £127, duly served an ex parte garnishee order, 
 under Order XLV., rule 1, on the company, attach- 
 ing aU debts owing or accruing from them to the 
 assured. The company did not appear to shew 
 cause against it, and the order was made abso- 
 lute. An award on the claim was afterwards 
 made of £248 due to the assured, who assigned 
 it to trustees for his creditors. The Plaintiff 
 demanded payment under his garnishee order 
 of £127 out of the sum payable by the company, 
 and threatened them with execution, and the 
 trustees olaimiag the £248, the company took 
 out an interpleader summons on which an order 
 was made directing the sum of £127 to be paid 
 into Court, and an issue to be tried as to whether 
 that sum was the property of the Plaintiff or the 
 trustees. — On appeal; — Held, that although no 
 attachable debt was in existence at the date of 
 the garnishee order, yet it, not having been set 
 aside, entitled the Plaintiff to issue execution for 
 
 XXXVI. PRACTICE— STJPEEME COXTET— GAR- 
 NISHEE OEDERS— cojiiimued. 
 £127, and that the interpleader order was wrong. 
 Randall v. Lithgow - 12 ft. B. D. 628 
 
 a. Debt — Conditional Debt — Bailway 
 
 Company — 'Verdict hy Jury — Statutory Contract — 
 Specific Performance — Purchase-m^ney—" Debt 
 due or accruing in hands of Garnishee "■ — Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, ss. 49, 50— Bules 
 of Court, 1875, Order xly., rr. 3, 8.] A " debt due 
 or accruing" to a judgment debtor and therefore 
 capable of being attached by a garnishee order 
 under Rules of Court, 1875, Order XL v., rule 3, 
 must he an absolute and not merely a conditional 
 debt. — Thus, where, after notice to treat by a 
 railway company to a landowner, the purchase- 
 money has been fixed by the verdict of a jury and 
 judgment of the sheriff under sects. 40 and 50 of 
 the Lands Clauses Act, the purchase-money cannot 
 be attached by a garnishee order nisi served upon 
 the company by a judgment creditor of the land- 
 owner after the verdict but before the execution 
 or tender of a conveyance ; for the proceedings 
 under the above sections do not of themselves 
 create an absolute debt due from the company to 
 the landowner, his rigbt to the purchase-money 
 beiag conditional upon the execution or tender 
 of a conveyance. — Accordingly in a case where 
 the landowner has brought an action and obtained 
 judgment against the company for specific per- 
 formance of the statutory contract : — Held, that 
 the purchase-money could not bo attached by 
 garnishee orders nisi served upon the company,, 
 some before and others after the commencement 
 of the action, notwithstanding that a good title 
 had been shewn ; nor even by a garnishee order 
 served after the execution of the conveyance whem 
 the money had been paid into Court by the com- 
 pany under the judgment, the money not being 
 " a debt in the hands " of the garnishee within, 
 rule 3 of Order XLV.^ — The provisions of rule 8 
 of Order XLV., as to payment or execution being, 
 a valid discharge to the garnishee, are inapplic- 
 able to a debt due to the judgment debtor that is 
 conditional only. Howell v. Metropolitan 
 District Railway Company 19 Ch. D, 508 
 
 3. Debt— Joint Debt.] The debt, legal or 
 
 equitable, owing by a garnishee to a judgment 
 debtor, which can be attached to answer the judg- 
 ment debt, must be a debt due to such judgment 
 debtor alone, and where it is only due to him 
 jointly with another person it cannot be so at- 
 tached. Maodonald v. Tacquah Gold Mines 
 Company - - - - 13 ft. B. D. 535 
 
 4. " Debt, legal or etiuitable " — Common 
 
 Law Procedure Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 125), 
 s. Gl— Bules of Court, 1883, Order XLV.] In July, 
 1882, the Plaintiff obtained a judgment against 
 W., for £574 in an action for breach of promise of 
 marriage commenced in August, 1881. In May, 
 1881, W. became entitled to a legacy of fSOft 
 under a will of which the Defendant was exe- 
 cutor. This legacy was iu hand and ready tO' 
 be paid over in October, 1881. On the Slat of 
 May, 1881, and before the legacy became actually 
 payable to W., he married; and on the 17th of 
 October, 1881, he by deed between himself of the 
 one part and the Deifeudant of the other part 
 assigned the £500 to the Defendant upon trust tt> 
 
( 1203 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1204 ) 
 
 XXXVI. PEACTICE— STTPEEME COITET— GAE- 
 
 NISHEE OEDEES— <!OK/i«t^. 
 invest the money and pay the annual income to his 
 ■wife for her separate use for life, and afterwards 
 upon other trusts. On the 4th of January, 1883, 
 the Plaintiff obtained an order under sect. 61 of 
 the Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, attaching 
 any sum or sums of money then in or which might 
 •come to the hands of the Defendant, to answer the 
 judgment recovered by her against W. — Upon an 
 issue directed to try whether on the 4th of Janu- 
 ary, 1883, there was a sum of money which the 
 Plaintiff was entitled, under Order xlv. (1883), 
 and under the Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, 
 to attach in the hands of the Defendant, to satisfy 
 the Plaintiff's judgment debt against W. ; — Seld 
 — by Williams, J., upon further consideration — 
 that, even assuming the settlement of October, 
 1881, to be impeachable, there was nothing in the 
 nature of a debt, either legal or equitable, due or 
 accruing due from the Defendant to AV. (the judg- 
 ment debtor) which could be attached to satisfy 
 the judgment-debt. Vyse v. Bbowu 
 
 [13 Q,. B. S. 199 
 
 5. " Debt owing " — Income from Trust 
 
 Fundr—Bnles of Court, 1875, Order XLV., r. 2.] A 
 judgment debtor was entitled for his life to the 
 income arising from a fund vested in trustees, 
 payable half-yearly in February and A ugust. Upon 
 application by the judgment creditor in Novem- 
 ber for a garnishee order attaching the debtor's 
 ehare of the income in the hands of the trustees, 
 it appeared that the last half-yearly payment had 
 been made, and that there was no money the 
 proceeds of the trust property in the hands of the 
 trustees : — Beld, affirming the decision of the 
 Queen's Bench Division, that there was no debt 
 ■" owing or accruing " at the time when the order 
 was applied for which could be attached under 
 Order xLV., rule 2. — Semble, that the proper course 
 for the judgment creditor to pursue was to apply 
 for the appointment of a receiver, under the practice 
 of the Chancery Division. Webb v. Stenton 
 
 [11 ft. B, D. 518 
 
 6. Examination of Judgment Debtor — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1875, Order .YLV., r. 1.] The ex- 
 amination of a judgment debtor under Rules of 
 Court, 1875, Order xlt., rule 1, touching the 
 debts due to him is intended to be a cross-ex- 
 amination of the strictest character, and the 
 ■debtor when vmder such an examination is bound 
 to answer all questions relevant to the subject- 
 matter, and cannot insist on the examination 
 being confined to the simple question " whether 
 any and what debts are due to him." Republic 
 OP Costa Rica v. Stkousberg - 16 Ch. D. 8 
 
 7. lapse of Six Tears — Garnishee Order 
 
 to pay — Bules of Court, 1883, Order xlil, rr. 6, 
 S, 22, 23 — Order XL r., r. 1 .] A garnishee against 
 whom proceedings under Order xlv. have been 
 duly taken, may be ordered to pay to a judgment 
 creditor a debt due from such garnishee to the 
 judgment debtor, although more than six years 
 have elapsed since the judgment. Fellows v. 
 Thoenton ^ - - 14 ft. B. D. 335 
 
 8, Mortgagor — Bight of Holder of Gar- 
 
 nieliee Order against Mortgaged Estate — Mulea of 
 Court, 1875, Order xlt., rr. 2, 3—27 & 28 Vict, 
 c. 112, a. 1.] M. mortgaged a leasehold to W., 
 
 XXXVI. PEACTICE— STIPEEME COTTET— GAE- 
 NISHEE OEDEES— conitnaed. 
 
 and then to B. A judgment creditor of B. ob- 
 tained a garnishee order against M. After this 
 W. sold the property under a power of sale, and 
 an action was brought to distribute the surplus 
 proceeds : — Held, by the Coiurt of Appeal (aflirm- 
 a decision of Bacon, V.-C), that the judgment 
 creditor had no claim against the surplus proceeds 
 of sale, for that a garnishee order has not the 
 effect of transferring the debt due from the gar- 
 nishee with the benefit of the securities for it, and 
 that to treat the garnishee order as affecting the 
 land before execution would conflict with the 
 provisions of 27 & 28 Vict. c. 112. Chatteeton 
 V. Watney - 16 Ch. D, 378 ; 17 COi. D. 289 
 
 9. Partnership Firm — Bules of Court, 1875, 
 
 Order XLT., r. 2.] A garnishee order cannot be 
 made under Order xiv., rule 2, attaching a debt 
 due from a partnership firm described by its part- 
 nership name. AValkee v, Rooeje 6 ft. B, D. 631 
 
 10. Superannuation AUowanee — Police 
 
 Constable — Bules of Court, 1883, Order xlv., t. 1 
 — " Debt owing or accruing " — Wages Attachment 
 Abolition Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 30).] A sum 
 already accrued due to a retired police constable 
 in respect of his superannuation allowance under 
 11 & 12 Vict. c. 14, may be attached in execution. 
 — Semble, the Wages Attachment Abolition Act, 
 1870, only applies to inferior Courts of record and 
 not to the High Court of Justice. Booth v. Teail 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 8 
 
 11. Trust Money — Attaching Debt under 
 
 Garnishee Order — Bules of Court, 1875, Order 
 XLV., rr. 6, 7.J A garnishee order nisi, obtained 
 by a judgment creditor to attach money owing to 
 the judgment debtor, ought not to be made abso- 
 lute if it be suggested, and tliere is reasonable 
 ground for so suggesting, that the money sought 
 to be attached is trust money, and not reaUy the 
 money of the judgment debtor, even though such 
 suggestion be not made by the garnishee, and the 
 case, therefore, is not within Order xlv., rules 6 
 and 7. If the fact suggested be disputed, the 
 proper order to make would be that the money 
 should be paid into Court to abide the event of 
 any inquiry, whether it be trust money or not. 
 RoBEKTS r. Death - 8 ft. B. D. 319 
 
 XXXVII. PEACTICE — SUPEEKE COTJET— 
 CHAEGIKG OEDEES (and STOP OSDEBSJ. 
 
 1. Charging Order — " Intrust for him" — 
 
 Stocli vested in Trustees for Judgment Debtor and 
 others — Interest determinable on Alienatioji — 
 Chargeable Interest — 1 it 2 Vict. c. 110, «. 14.] An 
 order was made under 1 & 2 Vict. c. 110, s. 14, 
 and 3 & 4 Vict. c. 82, charging a judgment 
 debtor's interest in the dividends on certain bank 
 stock. It appeared tliat by the terms of a will 
 certain property, including this stock, was be- 
 queathed to trustees on trust as to one moiety 
 thereof for the testatrix's niece, and as to the 
 other moiety in trust to pay the income thereof to 
 her nephew, the judgment debtor, for life, or 
 until he should attempt to alien or charge the 
 same. And upon his interest determining, there 
 were limitations over in favour of his wife for 
 life, and after her death in favour of his children, 
 with an idtimate remainder in the event of the 
 
( 1205 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1206 ) 
 
 XXXVII. PSACTICE — SUPBEME COURT — 
 CHAEGING OEDEBS (and STOP ORDEES)— 
 
 continiied. 
 failure of the preceding trusts to tlie judgment 
 debtor absolutely. At the time when the charging 
 order was made, there was a dividend on the stock 
 accrued due, but which the trustees had not yet 
 received from the bank : — Held, that the fact that 
 the stock stood in the name of the trustees in 
 trust, for another, besides the judgment debtor, did 
 not prevent its being stock " standing in the name 
 •of any .person in trust for him,' within the words 
 of 1 & 2 Vict. 0. 110, s. li.—Eeld, also that the 
 accrued dividend and the ultimate remainder to 
 the judgment debtor after failure of the preceding 
 trusts constituted a sufiScient chargeable Interest, 
 whatever might have been the case with regard 
 to the interest determinable on alienation, if that 
 had stood alone ; and that the order was therefore 
 rightly made, the trustees being responsible upon 
 its being made for the due application of the fimd 
 according to the legal effect of the order, what- 
 ever it might be. South Westebn Loan and 
 Discount Company v. Eobebtson 8 Q. B. D. 17 
 
 2. Charging Order — Judicatwe Act, 
 
 1873 (36 & Sljiot. c. 66), s. 24— BitZes of Court, 
 1883, Ord&rXLVi. r. 1 — Jurisdiction — Debtor 
 and Creditor — Company — Shares — Order for 
 Sale of Sliares suhjeet to Charging Order.'] The 
 Plaintiff having recovered judgment in an action, 
 obtained an order absolute under Order XLVi., 
 charging shares of the Defendant in a company 
 with the payment of the judgment debt and 
 interest, and then applied to the Court for an 
 order for sale of the shares : — Held, that sect. 24 
 of the Judicature Act, 1873, did not give the 
 Court jurisdiction to order the sale. Leggott v. 
 Western _ - - 12 Q. B. D. 287 
 
 3. ' Stop Order — Mortgagor — Fund in 
 
 Court — Priority— Notice.'] As against a stop 
 order obtained by an incumbrancer ilpou a fund in 
 Court in an administration suit, and in respect of 
 which orders have been made directing payment 
 of interest to the parties entitled, notice to the 
 trustees, though given by another incumbrancer 
 beiore the stop order was obtained, does not give 
 priority. Pinnook; v. Bailey 23 Ch. D. 497 
 
 XXXVIII. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT— 
 WBIT OF POSSESSION. 
 
 Mortgagee — Order for- Foreclosure abso- 
 lute — Action for Becovery of Land — Action for 
 the Becovery of the Possession of Land — Rules 
 .of Court, 1875, Order XYII., r. 2; Order XLIL, 
 r. 3.] A order for foreclosure absolute is not a 
 judgment for the recovery of the possession of 
 land within the meaning of Order xlii., rule 3, 
 of Eules of Court, 1875.^rHehce after foreclosure 
 absolute the Plaintiff is not entitled to a writ of 
 possession. Wood v. Wheateb 22 Ch. D. 281 
 
 XXXIX. PEACTICE — SUPREME COURT — 
 TRANSFER. 
 
 1. Fending LtAion^— "Winding up. of Com- 
 pany — Jurisdiction — Bmles of Cowrt, 1875, Order 
 LL, rr. 1, 2a.] When an order has been made by 
 a Judge of the Chancery Division for the winding- 
 up of a company under the Companies Acts, 1862 
 and 1867, the Judge in whose Court such wind- 
 
 XXXIX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — 
 
 TRANSFER — continued. 
 ing-up shall be pendihg has no jurisdiction under 
 Order li., rule 2a, to order the transfer to him of 
 an action pending against the company in another 
 Court of tile same Division : such a transfer can 
 only be made by the Lord Chancellor under 
 Order Li., rule 1. — In re Landore Siemetis Steel 
 Company (10 Ch. D. 489) not followed. In re 
 Madbas Ieeigation and Canal Company 
 
 [16 Ch. D, 702 
 
 2. Transfer to Chancery Division — 
 
 Vendor and Purchaser — Action for Beturn of 
 Deposit — Counterclaim for 'Specific Performance 
 —Bules of Court, 1883, Order XLix.,_ rr. 1, 3.] 
 In an action by purchaser of land against vendor 
 for return of deposit the Defendant counter- 
 claimed specific performance : — Held, that the 
 action ought to be transferred to the Chancery 
 Division. London Land Co. v. Habeis 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 540 
 Transfer to County Court— Interim jurisdic- 
 tion . - - 27Ch. D. 533 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Coubt — JuEis- 
 
 DIOTION. 3. 
 
 XL. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT -^INSPEC- 
 TION OF PROPERTY. 
 
 Authority to dig np Soil — Bules of 
 
 Court, 1883, Order L., r. 3.] Under rule 3 of 
 Order L. the Court has power to make an interlo- 
 cutory order before trial, giving liberty to a plain- 
 tiff to enter upon land belonging to the defendaiat, 
 and to excavate the soil thereof for the purposes 
 of inspection. — The decision in Ennor v. Barwell 
 (1 D. F. & J. 529) has no application to this rule. 
 LuMB V. Beaumont - 27 Ch. D. 356 
 
 Costs— 'Appeal for— Discretion of Court 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 467 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supbeme Coubt ^Ap- 
 peal. 29. 
 
 XLI. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — IN- 
 JUNCTION. 
 
 1. Illegal Act — IrCjwry to Public — B,ight of 
 
 Attorney- General to sue — Evidence of Injury — 
 Company — Excess of Statutory Powers — Cosis.] 
 When an illegal act is being committed, which 
 iU' its nature tends to the injury- of the public 
 (such as an interference with a public highway 
 or a navigable stream), the Attorney-General can 
 maintain an action on behalf of the public to 
 restrain the commission of the act, without ad- 
 ducing any evidence of actual injury to the public, 
 and in such a case an injunction will be granted 
 with costs, although no evidence of actual injury 
 is given. — Attorney-General v. Great Eastern 
 Bailway. Company (11 Ch, D. 449), Attornetj- 
 Generalv. Cocliermouth Local Board (Law Kep. 
 18 Eq. 172), and Attorney-General v. Ely, Had- 
 denham, and Sutton Bailway Compamj (Law Eep. 
 4 Ch. 194) Considered. AttobnbV-Geneeal v. 
 Shbewsbuby (Kingsland) Beidge Company 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 752 
 
 2. In lieu of Distringas — Injunction to 
 
 restrain Transfer of Stock — 5 & 6 Yict. c. 5, es. 4, 5 
 —BuUs of Court,. 1875, Order XLVl., rr.\2a, 4, 7, 
 10.] A notice having been served on the Bank 
 of England under rules 4 and 7 of Order xlvi., 
 
( 1207 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1208 ) 
 
 XLI. PEACIICE— SUPBEME COURT— INJUNC- 
 TION — continued. 
 to prevent the transfer of stock or the payment of 
 dividends thereon without notice to the persons 
 serving the notice, the bank gave notice to them 
 that an application had been made to the bank to 
 allow the transfer of stock and to pay the divi- 
 dends thereon, and that they should comply with 
 the application, unless au order of the Court 
 should be served on them within eight days. — A 
 motion was then made ex parte for an order to 
 restrain the bank from permitting the transfer or 
 paying the dividends. — Seld, that the proper 
 course was to grant an interim injunction over the 
 next regular motion day, and that notice of the 
 order must be served on the legal owners of the 
 stock. In re Blakslet's Trusts. 23 Ch. D. 549 
 3. Libel — Company — Interlocutory Appli- 
 cation — Privileged Communication — Common Law 
 Procedure Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 125), ss. 79, 
 82— Judicature Act, 1873 (Sa * 37 Vict. c. 66), 
 s. 25, siib-s. 8.] A solicitor, acting for some share- 
 holders in a company, printed and circulated, but 
 only among the shareholders, a circular contain- 
 ing very strong reflections on the mode in which 
 the company had been brought out, and on the 
 conduct of the promoters and directors, and pro- 
 posing a meeting of shareholders to take steps to 
 protect their interests. The company commenced 
 an action to restrain the further publication, and 
 applied for an interlocutory injunction, 'which was 
 granted by Bacon, V.-C. : — Held, on appeal that 
 the Court has jurisdiction to interfere on inter- 
 locutory application to restrain the publication of 
 a libel. — But held, that this jurisdiction is to be 
 exercised with great caution, and will not in 
 general be exercised unless the applicant satisfies 
 the Court that the statements in the document 
 complained of are untrue. — Held, further, that 
 still more caution is requisite where the document 
 in question is prima facie a privileged communi- 
 cation, so as not to be actionable unless express 
 malice is proved, the question of malice being one 
 which cannot conveniently be tried on interlocu- 
 tory application. — In the present case the Court 
 not being satisfied on the evidence that the state- 
 ments in the document were false or malicious, 
 the order for an injunction was discharged. 
 Quartz Hill Consolidated Gold MrNiUG Com- 
 pany V. Beall - 20 Ch. D. 501 
 
 4 Libel— Friendly Society— 38 & 39 Vict. 
 
 u. 60, s. 23.] A injunction can be granted to 
 restrain a libel likely to injure a friendly society 
 or joint stock company. — A member of a friendly 
 society issued to persons not members of the 
 society circulars containing inaccurate statements 
 as to the financial condition pf the society : — -Held, 
 that such circulars ought to be restrained by in- 
 junction. Hill v. Hart Davies 21 Ch. D. 798 
 
 5. Married Woman — Separate Estate — 
 
 General Engagements — Action by Creditor — 
 Injunction to restrain Dealing with Separate Es- 
 tate—Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), 
 s. 25, suh-s. 8.] In an action by a creditor to 
 enforce against the separate estate of a married 
 woman a general engagement entered into with 
 her on the credit of that estate, the Court will not, 
 before the creditor lias established his right by 
 obtaining a judgment, restrain the married woman 
 
 XLI. PRACTICE— STIPEEME COURT— INJUNC- 
 TION — continued. 
 from dealing with her separate estate. — ^Decision 
 of Malins, V.-C, reversed. Eobinson v. Pickeeins 
 [16 Ch. D, 371, 660 
 
 6. Protection of Property — Equitable 
 
 Mortgage — Ex parte Injunction to restrain part- 
 ing with Legal Estate.'] In an action by an equit- 
 able mortgagee for sale or foreclosure the Court 
 granted an interim injunction to restrain dealing 
 with the legal estate till the next motion day, on 
 an ex parte application by the Plaintiff; there 
 being ground for believing that the Defendants 
 intended to part with the legal estate pendente 
 lite. London and County Banking Company v. 
 Lewis - 21 Ch, D. 490 
 
 7. Trespass — Jurisdiction — Proceedings 
 
 before Justices.'] Where the Legislature has 
 pointed out a special tribunal for determining a 
 question, as a general rule no other Court ought 
 to restrain the proceedings before it ; but where 
 the question has come before another Court in 
 independent proceedings in which it is necessary 
 to decide the whole matter between the parties, 
 the Court may in such case restrain the proceed- 
 ings elsewhere by injunction in order to save 
 expenses. — A dispute having arisen between the 
 Defendants, who were a local authority, and the 
 Plaintiff about a drain which the Plaintiff had 
 interfered with, the Defendants gave notice to 
 the Plaintiff that they would enter on his land 
 and reinstate the drain ; but they afterwards 
 abandoned their intention, and instead took pro- 
 ceedings against him before the magistrate. The 
 Plaintiff then brought an action against the De- 
 fendants, claiming an injunction to restrain them 
 from trespassing on his land, and from proceeding 
 against him before the magistrate. In the state- 
 ment of claim the Plaintiff did not in terms allege 
 that the Defendants threatened and intended to 
 trespass on the land : — Held (aifirming the deci- 
 sion of Bacon, V.C.), that as no intention to 
 commit a trespass was proved or alleged, the 
 Plaintiff had not made out his case for an injunc- 
 tion against the trespass ; and that being so, the 
 Court had no jurisdiction to restrain the proceed- 
 ings before the magistrate. — Hedley v. JSates- 
 (13 Ch. D. 498) and Great Western. Railway 
 Company v. 'Waterford and Limerick Railway 
 Company (17 Ch. D. 493) explained. Stannabd 
 V. Yestry of Saint Giles, Camberwell 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 190 
 
 8. Undertaking as to Damages — Inquiry 
 
 as to Damages.] An injunction to restrain the 
 Defendant from building so as to prevent access 
 of light and air to the Plaintiff's windows was 
 granted ex parte on the 4th of November, 1879, 
 and on the 27th of November was continued until 
 the trial or further order, the Plaintiff giving the 
 usual undertaking as to damages. On the 18th 
 of February, 1880, the Court of Appeal discharged 
 the order. On the 11th of November, 1880, a 
 perpetual injunction as to access of air was 
 granted ; but on the 21st of June, 1881, the Court 
 of Appeal dismissed the action with costs. On 
 the 16th .of February, 1882, the Defendant gave 
 notice of motion for an inquiry as to damages 
 which was refused by Bacon, V.C. The only 
 damage alleged was that the Defendant had 
 
( 1209 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1210 ) 
 
 XII. PBACTICE— STJPKEME COTTET— INJUNC- 
 TION — continued. 
 agreed to let part of the property with the new 
 buildings to a tenant, and waa prevented from 
 carrying this out by the injunction preventing his 
 building. It was not proved, however, that 5iere 
 was any binding agreement to take a lease, nor 
 did it appear that the injunction interfered with 
 the erection of the buildings to such an extent as 
 would have entitled the intended tenant to throw 
 irp the agreement if binding : — Held, by the Court 
 of Appeal, that an inquiry as to damages ought 
 not to be granted. — Whether where an interlocu- 
 tory injunction has been wrongly granted, owing 
 to a mistake of law by the Judge, without any 
 misrepresentation, suppression, or other default 
 on the part of the Plaintiff, an inquiry as to 
 damages can be directed under the undertaking, 
 quxre. Jessel, M.K., and Cotton, L.J., differed, 
 and Brett, L.J., gave no opinion.— The Court is 
 not bound to grant an inquiry as to damages 
 whenever the Defendant has sustained some 
 damage by the granting the injunction ; but it 
 has a discretion, and may refuse any Inquiry if 
 the damage restrained is trivial or remote, or if 
 there has been great delay in making the appli- 
 cation. — The question considered at what time 
 the application for an inquiry as to damages ought 
 to be made : — Held, that, even if there had been 
 a binding agreement by the proposed tenant to 
 take a lease, and the injunction had so interfered 
 with the building as to entitle the tenant to be 
 off the bargain, damages ought not to be granted 
 in respect of it, for that damages must be confined 
 to the immediate natural consequences of the 
 injunction, under the circumstances which were 
 within the knowledge of the party obtaining the 
 injunction. Smith v. Dat - 21 Ch. D. 421 
 
 9. TTndertakiiig as to Damages — Inter- 
 locutory Injunction.'] Per Baggallay, Cotton, and 
 Lindley, L. JJ., where an interlocutory injunction 
 has been granted on the usual undertaking as to 
 damages, if it afterwards is established at the trial 
 that the plaintiff is not entitled to an injunction, 
 an inquiry as to damages may 1)6 directed, though 
 the plaintiff was not guilty of misrepresentation, 
 suppression, or other defaiit in obtaining the in- 
 junction. — Dictum of Jesael, M.R., in Smith v. 
 Day (21 Ch. D. 421) dissented from. Griffith 
 V. Blake - - - - 27 Ch. D. 474 
 
 Costs — Appeal for - - 29 Ch. D. 60 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supbbmb Oouet — Ap- 
 peal. 28. 
 
 Xin. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — EE- 
 CEIVEB. 
 
 1. After Final Judgment — Whether New 
 
 Action necessary — " Cause or Matter pending " — 
 Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24 — Bules of Court, 1875, 
 <J)rder XLII. — Bankruptcy — Execution Creditor — 
 Equitable Execution — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 71), s. 95, suh-s. 2; e. 125, stib-s. 5.] 
 Held, by the Master of the EoUs, that so long as 
 the final judgment in an action remains unsatis- 
 fied, the action is a " cause or matter pending " 
 within the meaning of sect. 24, aub-sect. 7, of the 
 Judicature Act, 1873, and that consequently, in 
 an action by a creditor against a debtor in which 
 the Plaintiff has obtained final judgment, the 
 
 XLII, PEACTICE — SUPEEME COTTET — EE- 
 
 CmVER— continued. 
 Court has power, under that sub-section in order 
 to satisfy the judgment, to grant equitable execu- 
 tion against the Defendant by appointing a re- 
 ceiver upon motion in that action, although the 
 writ may not have been indorsed with a claim 
 for a receiver; it being unnecessary in such a 
 case to bring another action for the purpose. — 
 S. recovered judgment for a debt against 0. 
 and issued an elegit. The sheriff returned 
 that the debtor had no lands which he could 
 seize. C. had leasehold property which was sub- 
 ject to mortgages. S. thereupon obtained the ap- 
 pointment of a receiver of the rents of the lease- 
 hold property without prejudice to the rights of 
 the prior incumbrancers. On the same day a 
 petition for adjudication in bankruptcy was filed 
 against C, and a receiver was appointed in bank- 
 ruptcy a few minutes before the appointment of 
 the receiver in the action. C. afterwards filed a 
 petition for liquidation ; the same receiver was 
 appointed in the liquidation as had been ap- 
 pointed in the bankruptcy, and resolutions were 
 passed for liquidation of his affairs by arrange- 
 ment. S. had not, until some days after tlie 
 appointment of his receiver, any notice that C. 
 had committed an act of bankruptcy, or that any 
 proceedings in bankruptcy were pending against 
 him : — Held, by the Master of the EoUa and by 
 the Court of Appeal, that as, at the time when S. 
 obtained equitable execution by the appointment 
 of a receiver, the property was legally though not 
 actually in the possession of the receiver ap- 
 pointed by the Court of Bankruptcy, the equit- 
 able execution was ineffectual, and was not pro- 
 tected by sect. 95, sub-sect. 2, of the Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869. Salt v. Coopbb 16 Ch. D. 544 
 
 2. Judgment Creditor — Application for 
 
 Beceiver — Elegit — Equity of .Redemption — Inter- 
 locutory Order — Judicature Act, 1873, g. 25, 
 subs. 8.] The words " interlocutory order " in 
 3. 25, sub-s. 8 of the Judicature Act, 1873, are 
 not confined in their meaning to an order made 
 between writ and final judgment, but mean an 
 order other than final judgment in an action, 
 whether such order be made before judgment or 
 after. — A creditor who had recovered judgment in 
 an action sued out a writ of elegit, to which writ 
 the sheriff returned that there were no goods or 
 lands of the debtor which he could deliver. It 
 appearing, however, that the debtor was entitled 
 to an equity of redemption of certain land, the 
 creditor, without commencing any fresh action for 
 the purpose, made an application to a Judge at 
 Chambers for the appointment of a receiver: — 
 Held, that such application was rightly made in 
 the original action, and that it was unnecessary to 
 commence a new action for the purpose. Smith 
 V. CowELL - - - 6 Q. B. S. 76 
 
 3. Judgment Cieditor^Defaulting Trus- 
 tee — Equitable Execution — Bules of Court, 1883, 
 Order XLII., rr. 4, 28 — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, 
 sub-s, 8 .] Under the general power to appoint 
 receivers given by the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, 
 aub-s. 8, and having regard to Eules of Supreme 
 Court, 1883, Order xLii., rules 4 and 28, the Court 
 has jurisdiction to enforce a judgment for payment 
 of money into Court by a defaulting trustee, by 
 
( 1211 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF cases; 
 
 ( 1212 ) 
 
 XIII. PEACTICE — SirPEEME COUET — KE- 
 
 CEITEB — continued. 
 tte appointment of a receiver of his equitable in- 
 terest in property in this country ; and order ac- 
 cordingly where, from the debtor being out of the 
 jurisdiction, service of a writ of attachment could 
 "not be effected. JrareCoNET. Coney i7. Bennett 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 399 
 
 4. Judgment Creditor — Equitable Execu- 
 tion — Debts and Sums of Money — Judgment Cre- 
 ditor—Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), 
 s. 25, sub-s. 8— Rules of Court, 1883, Order L., r. 6.] 
 Since the Judicature Acts the Court can granit 
 equitable execution by the appointment of a re- 
 ceiver at the instance of a judgment creditor 
 against debts and sums of money payable to the 
 judgment debtor to which garnishee proceedings 
 are not applicable. Westhead v. Eilet 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 413 
 
 5. Mortgage — Receiver and Manager — 
 
 Legal Mortgagee — Business — Hotel — Injunction — 
 Form of Order.'] A legal mortgagee of business 
 premises, such as an hotel, who is prevented by 
 the mortgagor from taking possession under the 
 mortgage, may obtain, upon an interlocutory ap- 
 plication, an order for the appointment of a re- 
 ceiver and manager, and an injunction restraining 
 the mortgagor from interfering with the manage- 
 ment of the business and the possession . of the 
 premises. — Form of order appointing a receiver 
 and manager, with an injunction. Truman & Co. 
 V. Eedqeave - - - 18 Ch. D. 547 
 
 6. Question of Title — Reference to Master 
 
 — Appeal — Supreme-Court of Judicature Act, 1873 
 (36 & 37 Vici. c. 66), ?. ii, sub-s. 7; s. 25, suh-s. 8.] 
 The Plaintiffjhavingobtained judgment, was by an 
 order made at Chambers appointed receiver of the 
 rents of some houses belonging to the Defendant ; 
 the order was made without prejudice to prior in- 
 cumbrances. G. having applied to discharge the 
 ordel: appointing the receiver on the gi-ound that 
 he was a second mortgagee under a deed executed 
 by the Defendant before the judgment in the 
 action, the Queen's Bench Division referred the 
 question as to the validity of G.'s mortgage to a 
 Master, who after hearing evidence reported that 
 the mortgage was a sham and had been executed 
 in order to defeat the Defendant's creditors. The 
 Queen's Bench Division declined to review the 
 evidence upon which the Master had acted, ac- 
 cepted his report as conclusive, and refused G.'s 
 application : — Beld, that inasmuch as the receiver 
 was appointed under an equitable jurisdiction now 
 vested in the Queen's Bench Division, the evi- 
 dence before the Master might have been re- 
 viewed; and the Court of Appeal being of 
 opinion on the evidence that the mortgage had. 
 been executed in good faith, discharged the order 
 made at Chambers, whereby the Plaintiff was 
 appointed receiver. Walmsley v. Mundy 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 807 
 
 7. Eestraining Eeoeiver appointed in 
 
 another Action — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24, 
 sub-ss. 5, 7.] A person who is prejudiced by the 
 conduct of a receiver appointed in an action by 
 way of equitable execution, ought not without 
 leave of the Court to commence a fresh action to 
 restrain the proceedings of the receiver, even 
 
 XIII. PEACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — EE- 
 
 CEIVEE — continued. 
 though the act complained of was beyond the 
 scope of the receiver's authority; but ought to 
 make an application for such relief as he is en- 
 titled to in the action in which the receiver was. 
 appointed. Seakle v. Choat - 25 Ch. D. 725 
 
 8. Eeversionary Interest — Judicature Act^ 
 
 1873, s. 25, su6-8. 8.] The Plaintiff, who had ob- 
 tained judgment against the Defendants, husbanci 
 and wife, was upon his application ex parte ap- 
 pointed receiver of the income of the wife's rever- 
 sionary interest under a will. Fuggle v. Bland 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 711 
 
 XLin. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COTTBT— SALE 
 BY COTTET. 
 
 Opening Biddings— 30 & 31 Vict. e. 48^ 
 
 s. 7 — Principle applicable to Private Contract.^ 
 In an administration suit an estate was ordered to 
 be sold by auction, but the reserved price not 
 having been reached, the sale by auction became 
 inoperative. A subsequent offer to purchase sub- 
 ject to the approval of the Court within ten days 
 was carried in before the Chief Clerk, who ap- 
 proved of the offer, and ordered the contract to be 
 carried out, whereupon the deposit was paid and 
 the abstract delivered. Before the order had 
 been passed and entered a much higher price was 
 offered. — Upon summons to vary the Chief Clerk's 
 certificate by setting aside the sale and directing- 
 the order for a larger amount to be accepted : — 
 Seld, that the certificate of the Chief Clerk, 
 although not passed and entered, was tantamount 
 to a confirmation of the contract ; and that thie 
 principle of the Act 30 & 31 Vict. o. 48, h. 7, by 
 which the old practice of opening biddings on a. 
 sale by auction was discontinued, except upon the 
 ground of fraud or improper conduct, applied 
 equally to a sale by private contract entered into 
 imder the sanction of the Court, and that such a 
 contract could not be discharged where no unfair- 
 ness existed. The Chief Clerk's certificate was 
 therefore confirmed. In re Baktlett. Newman 
 V. Hook - - - - 16 Ch. D. S& 
 
 XLIV. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COTJET— NOTICE 
 OF MOTION. 
 
 1. Attachment — Rules of Court, 1875, 
 
 Order XLIT., r. 2.J Under Order xliv., rule 2, 
 a motion for an attachment for removing goods 
 out of the custody of the sheriff can only be 
 made on notice. — Jupp v. Cooper (5 C. P. D. 26) 
 considered. Eynde v. Gould - 9 ft. B. D. 335 
 
 2. . Short Notice of Motion — Power of 
 
 Court to disregard Irregularities — Rules of Court, 
 1875, Order Llll., r. 4; Order Lis., r. 1.] Where 
 a party applies for special leave to serve short, 
 notice of motion he must distinctly state to the 
 Court that the notice applied for is short ; and 
 the same fact must distinctly appear on the face 
 or the notice served on the other party. — ^But in 
 a case where short notice of a motion had been 
 irregularly applied for and served, but the paa-ty 
 served had not been injured by the irregrdarity, 
 the Court exercised its discretion under Order Lix., 
 rule 1, and disregarded the irregularity and heard 
 the motion on the merits. Dawson •». Beeson 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 501 
 
( 1213 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1214 ) 
 
 XLV. PEACTICE— STJPKEME COXTET— CHAM- 
 BEBS. 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 1. Accounts ^- Adjournment of disputed 
 
 Items hefore the Judge — Costs.'] Where accounts 
 are beinw taken in Obambers before the Chief 
 Clerk, either party has a right to have an item 
 which has been foimd against him adjourned 
 before the Judge without taking out a summons 
 for that purpose; ' And where a question of prin- 
 ciple is involved in a particular item it may be 
 necessary to do this. But the ordinary practice 
 is to wait till the account is completed, and then 
 take the adjournment once for all before the 
 Judge. — -If a solicitor were to insist upon his 
 right to take particular items before the Judge in 
 an unreasonable manner, the Court ■ might make 
 him pay the costs personally. Upton ». Bbown 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 731 
 
 S, Accounts — Settled Account — Order for 
 
 Account not directing that Settled Account shall 
 not he disturbed^ By the rules of a benefit so- 
 ciety it was provided that the accounts should be 
 audited, and that after they had been audited and 
 signed by the auditors, the secretary and treasurer 
 should not be answerable for any mistakes, omis- 
 sions, or errors that might afterwards, be. proved 
 in them. An action for an account was com- 
 menced by two shareholders, on behalf of them- 
 selves and all other the shareholders, against the 
 secretary. No pleadings were delivered, and on 
 a motion for a receiver being made the Defendant 
 submitted to an order for an account of all nioneys 
 and property of the society come to his hands, 
 without any direction as to settled accounts. The 
 Defendant carried in a complete account, and the 
 Plaintiffs carried in a surcharge. The Defendant 
 then set up certain accounts which had been 
 audited under the rules, as vouching his account 
 for the period over which they extended. The 
 point was brought before the Judge, who was 
 stated to have expressed his opimon that the 
 audited accounts must be treated as conclusive. 
 The Plaintiffs then applied for a direction that in 
 taking the accounts the audited accounts might 
 be disregarded, on the ground that as the order 
 did not save the settled accounts, they could not 
 be attended to. The application was refused, and 
 the Plaintiffs appealed : — Seld, that the audited 
 accounts ought not to be disregarded, and that 
 the appeal must be dismissed ; but the dismissal 
 was prefaced by a statement of the opiuion of the 
 Court, that the Plaintiffs, in taking the accounts 
 under the order, were at liberty to impeach the 
 audited accounts for fraud. Holgate v. Shutt 
 
 [27 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 8. Chief Clerk's Certificate — Application 
 
 to vary — Bules of Court, 1883, Order ly., rr. 70, 
 71.] Oq an application upon the further con- 
 sideration of an stction for an extension of the 
 time, under rule 71 of Order Lv., for applying to 
 vary a finding in a Chief Clerk's certificate : — 
 Held, that the applicant should take out a sum- 
 mons for the purpose. In re Dove. Bouspield 
 V. Dove - 27 Ch. D. 687 
 
 4. , Judge at Chambers — Jurisdiction^ A 
 
 Judge at Westminster sitting, not in open Court, 
 but as a Judge at Chambers, has jurisdiction to 
 
 XLV. PEACTICE— SUPEEME COURT— CHAM- 
 BEES — continued. 
 (o.) General — continued. ■ 
 
 hear a summons referred to him by the Judge at 
 Chambers. Habtmont v. Foster 8 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 5. — — Motion to discharge Order — Time 
 viithin which such Motion may be brought — Judi- 
 cature Act, 1873, s. 50—Bules of Court, 1875, 
 Order lyiii., r. 15.] A motion to a Judge in 
 Court under the Judioatui;e Act, 1873, s. 50, to 
 discharge an order made by him in Chambers 
 may be made at any time within twenty-one days 
 from the drawing up of the order unless the order 
 is simply a refusal of an application, in which 
 case the twenty-one days must be reckoned from 
 the refusal. ' Heatley v. Newton 19 Ch. D. 326 
 
 6. - — Summons — Svhstituted Service — Party 
 to Action evading Service- — Solicitor — Charging 
 Order— W & 24 'Vict. c. 127, s. 28.] A sum of 
 money haviag been paid into Court for th^ bene- 
 fit of the Defendant, M., his solicitor, obtained a 
 charging order for costs, upon it under, 23 & 24 
 Vict. 0, 127, s. 28. The costs had been taxed ex 
 parte. M. then took out a summons to shew 
 cause why the sum of money paid into Court 
 should not be paid out to him in part satisfaction 
 of his taxed costs. This summons could not be 
 served upon the Defendant, who appeared to be 
 wilfully evading service of it. L. had acted for 
 ihe Defendant after M. had ceased to do so, and 
 H. had introduced the Defendant to M. : — Held^ 
 that substituted service of the summons should 
 be allowed, that a notice calling upon the Defen- 
 dant to appear in one month should be put up at 
 the master's ofBce, and served upon L. and H., 
 and advertised in the Times newspaper, and there- 
 upon, if the Defendant did not appear, an order 
 might be made on the summons. Hunt v. Austin. 
 Ex parte Mason - - 9 Q. B. D. 698 
 
 (6.) Administration Summons. 
 
 7. Action commenced before the 24th of 
 
 October, liiZ—Bules of Court, 1883. Order LY., 
 r. 10.] Rule 10 of Order lv. of the Eules of the 
 Supreme Court, 1883, applies to an administra- 
 tion action commenced before, but tried after, 
 those rules came into operation. — An order was 
 therefore made referring such an action to 
 Chambers to determine whether it was necessary 
 that a general administration of the estate should 
 be directed. In re Llewellyn. Lane v. Lane 
 
 [25 Ch, S. 66 
 
 8. Determination of Questions at issue — 
 
 Sules of Court, 1883, Order ly., r. 10.] Except 
 to the extent to which special provisions are 
 made by the rules, as, for instance, by Order 
 XV., the plaintiff in an action is not entitled to 
 take out a summons for the determination of the 
 questions which are at issue in the action, and 
 which will properly be decided at the trial. Borth- 
 wioK V. Eansfobd r- - 28 Ch. D. 79 
 
 9. Infants— i?Mfes of Court, 1883, Order 
 
 LT., rr. 3, 10.] Discussion of the principles on 
 which the Court will act in the exercise of its 
 discretion under Order lv., r. 10, whether or not 
 to make a general order for administration. In 
 re Wilson. Alexander v. Calder 28 Ch. D. 467 
 
 10. Infants- OcsiMj que trust — Besiduary 
 
 Legatee — Limited Accounts and Inquiries — Costs 
 
( 1215 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1216 ) 
 
 XLV. PRACTICE— STTPEEME COTTBT— CHAM- XLV. PRACTICE— STJPEEME COTTET— CHAM- 
 BERS — continued. BERS — eontimced. 
 
 (6.) Administration Summons — contimied. 
 — Rules of Court, 1883, Order LV., rr. 3, 4, 10 ; 
 Order Lxr., r. 1.] A party interested in the- 
 estate of a deceased person, even though that 
 party he an infant, is not entitled, as a matter of 
 couvse, to an administration judgment at the 
 expense of the estate. Having regard to Bules 
 of Supreme Court, 1883, Order lv., rule 10, a 
 party interested is only entitled to an adminis- 
 tration judgment where there are questions which 
 cannot be properly determined except by an ad- 
 ministration action; but the Court has power 
 under that rule to order a limited administration 
 ■only, that is, to direct particular accounts and in- 
 quiries, if it sees that the questions can thus be 
 properly determined, the object of the rule being 
 to prevent general administration except in case 
 of necessity ; and the Court, in the exercise of its 
 discretion as to costs under Order lxv., i-ule 1, 
 will order the Plaintiff — if an infant, then the 
 next friend — to pay the costs of any unnecessary 
 or improper administration proceedings. — Order 
 of Kay, J., varied.— 7n re Wilson (28 Oh. D. 457) 
 considered. In re Blake. Jones v. Blake 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 913 
 
 (c.) Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 H. Payment out of Court — Deposit in 
 
 'Court — Fund not exceeding £1000 — Petition or 
 Summons — -Mules of Court, 1883, Order ly., r. 2, 
 isub-ss. 2-7 — Railway Company — Payment out to 
 Tliird Person— Company' s Seal.'] The general 
 expressions of sub-sect. 2 of Order lv., rule 2 
 (Bules of Court, 1883), are not to be construed 
 as in any way qualified or modified by the 
 subsequent sub-sections. Therefore, an applica- 
 tion by a landowner and a railway company for 
 payment out of a sum not exceeding £1000 de- 
 posited in Court under sect. 85 of the Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, should be made 
 by summons in Chambers and not by petition. — 
 Any such summons asking for payment out to a 
 person on behalf of the company, should be sealed 
 with the company's seal, by analogy to the prac- 
 tice on petition. Ex parte Maidstone and A sh- 
 FOKD Railway Company. Ex parte Bala and 
 Festiniog Railway Company - 25 Ch. D. 168 
 
 12. Payment out of Court — Money paid 
 
 in under Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 
 —Sum under £1000 — Ruhs of Court, 1883, 
 Order LV., r. 2, sub-ss. 2, 6, 7.] An application 
 for the payment or transfer out of Court to a per- 
 son absolutely entitled of a fund of less amount 
 than £1000 paid into Court under the Lands 
 Clauses Act is governed by sub-sect. 2 of rule 2 
 of Order lv., and ought now to be made by sum- 
 mons in Chambers. In re Calton's Will 
 
 [25 Ch. B. 240 
 
 13. Payment out of Court — Petition or 
 
 Summons — Fund exceeding £1000 — Mules of 
 Court, 1883, Order Lr., r. 2, sub-s. 1.] Free- 
 hold hereditaments in the city of London, to a 
 moiety of which A. B. was entitled after the 
 death of a tenant for life, subject to four life an- 
 nuities of £50 payable from the death of the 
 tenant for life, were taken by the Metropolitan 
 Board of Works, and the money paid into Court 
 
 (c.) Lands Clauses Act — continued., 
 under the Lands Clauses Act, 1845. In 1866 an 
 order was made on petition, whereby a sum of 
 £7000 was ordered to be invested to provide for 
 the annuities when they should become payable, 
 and the balance of a moiety of the fund, after 
 providing for the tenant for life's interest, was 
 directed to be paid to A. B. In 1868 one of the 
 expectant annuitants died ; in 1869 the tenant for 
 life died and in 1870 another order was made on 
 petition, whereby a sum of stock which would 
 have been suflScient to pay an annuity of £50, 
 was ordered to be transferred to A. B. — A second 
 annuitant having died in May, 1883, A. B. claimed 
 a sum of £1666 13s. id. Consols, being so much of 
 the residue of the investment of £7000 as had 
 sufficed to provide for the second annuity of £50. 
 — Seld, that the orders of the Court in 1866 and 
 1870, amounted "to an order declaring the rights 
 of" A. B. within the meaning of sub-sect. 1 of 
 rule 2 of Order lv. of 1883 ; and that the appli- 
 cation ought to be by summons. — The generality 
 of sub-sect. 1 of rule 2 of Order lt. is not cut 
 down or qualified by sub-sect, 7 or any of the sub- 
 sections of rule 2 following sub-sect. 1. In re 
 Bbandeam - 25 Ch. D. 366 
 
 14. Payment out of Court — Petition or 
 
 Summons — Sum not exceeding £1000 — Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 — Mules of Court, 
 1883, Order lt., r. 2, sub-s. 2.] An application 
 for payment out of Court to a person absolutely 
 entitled of a sum of cash not exceeding £1000 
 paid in under the Lands Clauses Consolidation 
 Act, 1845, is rightly made by summons, not by 
 petition. In re Madgwick 25 Ch. D. 371 
 
 15. Payment out of Court — Me-invest- 
 
 ment of Moneys — Summons — Judicature Ads, 
 1873, ss. 16, 24, 73 ; 1875, s. 17 ; Appellate Juris- 
 diction Act, 1876, 8. 17 ; Judicature Act, 1881, 
 s. 19 — 18 <fc ]9 Vict. c. 134, s. 16 — JJuZes of 
 Court, 1883, Order LT., r. 2, sub-s. 7, not ultra 
 vires.] The 16th section of the Despatch of 
 Business, Court of Chancery, Act (18 & 19 Vict, 
 c. 134), giving power to the Lord Chancellor, with 
 the advice and assistance of the Master of the 
 Bolls and the Vice-Chancellors, or any two of 
 them, to make general orders as to the business 
 to be disposed of in Chambers, has not been re- 
 pealed either expressly or by implication; and 
 the effect of the 76th section of the Judicature 
 Act of 1873 was to substitute three Judges of the 
 High Court of Justice for the three Vice-Chan- 
 cellors mentioned in such 16th section. Accord- 
 ingly such power may now be properly exercised 
 by the Lord Chancellor, with the advice and 
 assistance of the Master of the Rolls, and any two 
 Judges of the High Court of Justice, and the fact 
 that the Rule Committee who framed the Rules of 
 the Supreme Court, 1883, comprised other Judges 
 as well as these, does not invalidate the exercise 
 of the power. Therefore it appearing from the 
 reference in Order lv., rule 2, sub-sect. 7, to the 
 14th of August, 1855, the date on which the De- 
 spatch of Business, Court of Chancery Act, re- 
 ceived the royal assent, that the Rule Committee 
 intended to act under the powers conferred by 
 that Act, the order contained in such sub-section 
 
( 1217 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1218 ) 
 
 IIV. PRACTICE— SUPREME COTJET— CHAM- 
 BERS — continued. 
 (c.) Lands Olauses Act — continued. 
 is not ultrk vires, and in accordance therewith all 
 applications for interim and permanent inyest- 
 menta and for payment of dividends under the 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and any 
 other Act passed before the 14th of August, 1855, 
 whereby the purchase-money of any property sold 
 is directed to be paid into Court, must be made 
 upon summons at Chambers. Mx parte Mastob op 
 LoNBON - - - • 25 Ch. D. 884 
 
 16. Payment out of Court — Permanent 
 
 Investment — Settled Land Act, 1882, «. 25 (iv.) — 
 Bules of Cowt, 1883, Order LV., r. 2, sub-r. 7.] 
 In applications for payment out of Court and ia- 
 vestment under the Settled Lsmd Act, 1882, of 
 funds in Court representing the purchase-money 
 of lauds taken under the provisions of the Lands 
 Clauses Act, 1845, the Court has a discretion 
 under the Eules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order 
 Lxx., rule 1, and, where an application by petition 
 is cheaper and more expefitious than by sum- 
 mons, will not disallow the costs of a petition, 
 although the proceeding falls within the Eules of 
 Supreme Court, 1883, Order LV., r. 2, sub-r. 7, 
 as business to be transacted in Chambers. — In 
 such cases, however, the option of proceeding by 
 petition or summons is at the applicant's risk. 
 In re Bethleheh and Bbidewell Hospitais 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 541 
 
 Counsel — Solicitor and client — Taxation 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 54 
 See Peaotioe — Stjpbeme Cotiet — Costs. 
 18. 
 XLVI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— COSTS. 
 
 1. Abandoned Appeal.] On the 20th of 
 
 December, 1880, C. gave notice of appeal, but did 
 not set it down. On the 11th of January he sent 
 a letter withdrawing his notice of appeal. On the 
 next day the solicitor for the Eespondents wrote 
 to C. saying that he had delivered briefs, and that 
 unless C. would undertake to pay the Eespondents' 
 costs of the appeal the usual proceeding would be 
 taken to enforce payment of them. C. did not 
 answer this letter. The Eespondents then moved 
 that the appeal might be dismissed, and that C. 
 might be ordered to pay the costs of the appeal 
 and of this application, and an order was made 
 accordingly. Ohaelton v. Chablton 
 
 [16 Ch. O. 273 
 
 2. Abandoned Motion — Discontinuance of 
 
 Action — Taxation — Incomplete — Affidavits or 
 Pleadings.'] Statement of practice as to taxation 
 of costs of an abandoned motion, or on discon- 
 tinuance of action. Harbison v. Letjtneh 
 
 [16 Ch, S. 559 
 
 3. Admissions Tietween co-Defendants — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1883, Order xxxu., r. 2.] Ad- 
 missions between oo- Defendants under Eules of 
 Supreme Court, 1883, Order xxxn., r. 2, to which 
 the Plaintiff is not a party, cannot be entered as 
 evidence against the Plaintiff, and therefore can- 
 not be included in an order for taxation and 
 payment of the general costs of the action. Dodds 
 e. TuKE - - 25Ch. D. 617 
 
 4. Affidavit of Increase.] Upon sum- 
 mons to review the taxation of costs, the Court 
 
 XLVI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 refused to direct the Taxing Master to adopt the 
 practice in the Queen's Bench Division of requir- 
 ing the solicitor to make an " affidavit of increase," 
 since evidence could be obtained without such 
 affidavit of all matters necessary for the infor- 
 mation of the Taxing Master. But the Court de- 
 clined to lay down any rule that such affidavit of 
 increase should in no case be required. Smith v. 
 Day - - - - - 16 Ch. D. 726 
 
 5. Amendment of Pleadings,] An amend- 
 ment to the pleadings made at the trial by the 
 Cojirt, mere motu, in order to raise the real point 
 at issue, is no ground for departing from the usual 
 rule as to the costs of the action. Nottage v. 
 Jackson - - - 11 ft, B. D. 627 
 
 6. Appeal — Note of Judgment of Court 
 
 hdow.] A decision on the construction of a will 
 was reversed on appeal, but the Court, on the 
 ground that it was not furnished with any infor- 
 mation as to the reasons given by the Judge for 
 his decision, refused to make any order as to the 
 costs of the appeal. In re MoConnell. Saun- 
 ders V. McConnell - ' 29 Ch. D. 76 
 
 7. Apportionment — Cross-Notice of Appeal 
 
 —Bules of Court, 1875, Order LYill., r. 6.] A 
 Eespondent who has given cross-notice of appeal 
 under Order Lvm., rule 6, is in the same position 
 as to costs as if he had presented a cross-appeal. — 
 Where there were two Eespondents to an appeal, 
 one of whom gave cross-notice of appeal affecting 
 his co-Eespondent, the Court made an apportion- 
 ment of the costs of the appeal. Habbison v. 
 
 COENWALL MiNBEALS EaiLWAT CoMPANT 
 
 [18 Ch, S. 3S4 
 
 8, Apportionment — Notice Try Bespondent 
 
 to vary Order — Bules of Court, 1875, Order LViil., 
 r. 6.] In an action for redemption of a mortgage 
 vested in the Defendant E. as a trustee for the 
 Defendant C, who was in possession, D. set up 
 the case that he was not in possession by virtue 
 of the mortgage, but under a lease. The Court 
 decided that he was in possegsion as mortgagee, 
 and made a decree on that footing, but without 
 rests. The Defendants appealed. The Plaintiff 
 gave notice that at the hearing of the appeal he 
 should ask to have the decree varied by directing 
 the account to be taken with rests. The Court of 
 Appeal held that the decree was right in treating 
 D. as mortgagee in possession, but refused to 
 direct rests : — Seld, that as the case was one 
 where the costs could not have been materially 
 increased by the notice, the costs ought not to be 
 apportioned as in Harrison v. Cornwall Minerals 
 Bailway Company (18 Oh. D. 334), but that the 
 Defendants should have £5 for their costs iaci- 
 dental to the notice. Eobinson v. Dbakes 
 
 [23 Ch, B, 98 
 
 9. Apportionment — Plaintiff succeeding 
 
 upon one Item out of three of his Claim — Appor- 
 tionment of Costs under Special Order.'] The 
 Plaintiff sued for three items of a claim for work 
 done, and recovered a sum in respect of one of 
 such items only. By an order of the Court it was 
 ordered " that the Plaintiff recover against the 
 Defendants" that sum, "and such costs as one of 
 
 2 R 
 
( 1219 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, 
 
 ( 1220 ) 
 
 XLVI. PEACTICE— SUESEME COURT— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 the Maatei-s may flndthat'heliasirightlyiiietirred 
 in recovering the above ^ amount,- and' tliat. the 
 Defendants recover against thePIaintiff such costs 
 as they have rightly incurred in defending them- 
 selves on those points on which,, they have 
 succeeded, to Be^also taxed." — On taxation the 
 Master allowed the Plaintiff the general costs of 
 the cause, disallowing only those which, applied 
 exclusively to the- parts of his claim on which .he - 
 failed ; and he allowed the Defendants such costs 
 only as were incurred by them by reason of the 
 two items of claim which they 'successfully re- . 
 sisted : — Seld, reversing the decision of the 
 Queen's Bench Division, that the Master had 
 construed the order rightly, and had taxed the 
 costs on the right pl-iuciple. Spabbow v. Hill 
 
 [7 Q. B. S. 362 ; 8 Q. B. S. 479 
 
 10. Claim and Counter-daim-^Cosis where' 
 
 both succedd, — A'pportixmment of Cosis.] When 
 the Plaintiff's claim and the Defendant's countej?-- 
 claim have both been successful, the Plaintiff, 
 in the absence of any special directions to the 
 contrary, is entitled to the general costs of the 
 action, notwithstanding that the result -of the 
 litigation is in favour of the Defendant. There 
 will be no apportionment of such costs as would 
 have been duplicated had the counter-claim been 
 the subject of an independent action, but the 
 Plaintiif is not to recover as costs of the action 
 any costs fairly attributable to the counter-claim. 
 The decision of Chitty, J., aflSrmed. In re 
 Beown. Ward v. Mobse t 23 Ch. D. 377 
 
 11. Claim and CounterTClaim — Costs of the 
 
 Cause — Judgment — Certificate of Assopiate.'] The 
 Plaintiff claimed to recover commission due to 
 him from the Defendants on an agreement. The 
 Defendants denied the claim, and claimed by 
 way of counter-claim £230 Os. 9d. for goods sold. 
 The jury found a verdict for the Plaintiff on the 
 claim for £114: 17s. 6(J., and a verdict for the 
 Defendants on the cOunter-Claim for £230 Os. Od. 
 The judgment entered was " that the Plaintiff 
 recover against the Defendants £ ■ for his costs 
 of suit," and " that'the Defendants recover-against 
 the Plaintiff £115 3s. 3d. on the counter-claim and 
 £ for their costs of the counter-claim " \- — Held, 
 reversing the decision of Pollock, B., that on tax- 
 ing the costs according to the judgment the 
 Plaintiff and not the Defendants was entitled to 
 the costs of the cause. — Semble, per Brett, L.j;, 
 that where there is a claim 'with issileson it ahd 
 a counter-claim (which is hot a set-off but is in 
 the nature of a cross-action) with issues on it, and 
 the Plaintiff succeeds oh the claim; 'and the De- 
 fendant succeeds on such counter-claim, the taxa- 
 tion, if not otherwise- ordered, should be by ta:xing 
 the claim as if it and its issues were ah action, 
 and by taxing the counter-claim as if it and its 
 issues were also an action, and the allocatur for 
 costs should be givenfor the balance infavour of 
 the party in whose favour is such balance ; the 
 Master on such taxation dividing items which aa'e 
 common to both actions, Baines v. Bbomley 
 
 ; [6Q. B. D. 197, 691 
 
 12. — - Claim and ' Counter-claim ^- Judg- 
 ment, Form of — Rules of Court, 1875, Order LV., 
 r. 1.] The Plaintiff's claim being for the balance 
 
 XLVI. PRACTICE — SUPBEME COUKT— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 of the contract price-of work done, after giving 
 credit for money paid on account, the Defendants 
 by way of set-off and counter-claim claimed iu 
 respect of the inferiority and defective character 
 of the work. The action beting referred for trial 
 to an official Teferee. he found by his report that 
 a balance of £32 ISs. Sd. remained due to the 
 Plaintiff on his, claim , in respect of the contract 
 price of the work, and that £34 10s. 6d. was due 
 to the Defendants on their counter-claim : — Held,. 
 that the proper judgment on these findings was. 
 that the Defendants ijo recover the balance of 
 £1 12s., and the costs of. the auction, on the ground, 
 either that the inferiority of the work, though 
 pleaded by way of counter-claim in form, in reality 
 amounted to a defence, or that, even if the Plaintiff 
 were technically entitled "by the findings to the 
 costs of the action, the Court ought to interfere 
 under Order LV., rule 1, and give the costs to the 
 Defendants, who had substantially succeeded iis 
 tie action. Lowe v. Holme - 10 Q. B. D. 286 
 
 13. Cl^m and Ceuuter-claim — Debt — 
 
 Arbitration — -Order of Reference — " Costs of cause^ 
 reference, and award, shall abide the event" — 
 Award — Entry of Judgment— Costs where the 
 Plaintiff succeeds on Claim, omd the Defendant 
 on Counter-claim — Costs of Issuss found in favour 
 of Fm'ty, against whom Judgment in Action i» 
 entered."] A Plaintiff having claimed for goods 
 sold and delivered,- and for commission, and the 
 Defendants having counter-claimed for moneys 
 collected by the Plaintiff on the Defendants' ac- 
 count and for work and labour, the action was 
 referred to an arbitrator under an order of refer- 
 ence whereby " the costs of the cause, and the costs 
 of the reference and award shall abide the event." 
 The arbitrator found the issues on the claim in 
 fa-vour of the Plaintiff, and awarded him a sum of 
 money in respect thereof, and found the issues on 
 the pounter-claini in favour of the Defendants, and 
 awarded to them a sum of money in respect 
 thereof. After deducting the sum found for the 
 Plaintiff from the sum found for the Defendants, a 
 balance of £97 -was due to the Defendants : — Held, 
 that the word " event " in the order of reference 
 must be cohstrued distrlbutlvely, and that judg- 
 nifent must be entered for the Defendants, who 
 were entitled to the costs of the action, reference, 
 and award, but that the Plaintiff was entitled to 
 the costs of the issues found In his favour. — Baines 
 V. Bromley (6 Q. B. D. 691) explained. Ltjnd v. 
 Campbell - - 14 Q. B. D. 821 
 
 14. Co-Defendants — Contribution?^ Where 
 
 co-Defendants are decreed to pay the costs of an 
 action, one co-Defendant cannot, by an Indepen- 
 dent proceeding, obtain contribution in respect 
 of such costs against the other. Deaesley r. 
 MrDDLEWEEK - - - 18 Ch. D. 236 
 
 16. Co-Defendants^Pai/meni to one An- 
 other.^- In cases where under the old practice in 
 Chancery the Court would have ordered the 
 Plaintiff to p^y the costs of one Defendant and 
 have tbcm over against another Defendant, an 
 order will now be made at once for the one Defen- 
 dant to pay them to the other. Ktidow v. Great 
 Sbitain Mutual Life Assurance Society 
 
 [17 Ch. I>. 600 
 
( 1221 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1222 ) 
 
 XIVI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 
 _ . 16. Copies of Pleadings on Interlocutory 
 
 Application — Bules of Supreme Court (Costs), 
 4-ugust, 1875, r. 26.] An order had been made 
 by the Court of Appeal on the application of the 
 Defendants direc^ting part' of an afSdavit to be 
 struck out as scandalous and giving the Defen- 
 dants the costs of the .apphoation. Among the 
 items in the bill of costs of the Defendants were 
 charges for four copies of the pleadings, one for 
 the use of counsel and three for the use of the 
 Judges of the Com-t of Appeal. The Taxing 
 Master, without enteriug into the consideration of 
 the question whether the copies were necessary 
 for the purpose of the application, disallowed them 
 on the ground that it wag the general rule not to 
 allow the costs of copies of pleadings on an inter- 
 locutory application :— Held, by the Court, of 
 AppWdl, that no such general rule as was alleged 
 to exist in the Taxing Masters' office could be'' 
 sustained: that' it was the duty of the Taxing' 
 Master, under the Etiles of the Supreine Court 
 (Costs), rule 26, to consider in each case whether 
 the copies were "neyfessary or proper for the 
 attainment of justice," and that as the oopies'in 
 the present case were nedessary for the hearing of 
 the application,' the costs of them must be allowed. 
 Wabnbk v. Mosses - - - 19 Ch, D. 72 
 
 17. Costs by way of T^enaltj— Appeal fc^ 
 
 Costs.J The Judge,. at the trial of' an action in 
 which there was a claim and counter-claim, tjiink- 
 ing fcoth .parties in the wrong, dismissed, the 
 action without costs, and also dismissed the 
 counter-claim with costs, but ordered that if the 
 costs of the counter-claim should not amount to 
 half the whole costs of the action the Defendant 
 should pay the differenceio the Plaintiff: — Held, 
 that the order as to costs was irregular, inasmuch 
 as, after 'dismissing the action without costs, it 
 imposed part of the costs of the action upon the 
 Defendant by way of penalty ; but that in sub- 
 stance the order was within the discretion of the 
 Judge, as it amounted to dismissing the claim 
 and counter-claim and directing the Defendant 
 to pay half the whole costs of the abtion. "Will- 
 MOTT V. Bakbeb - - 17 Ch. D. 772 
 
 18. Counsel at Chambers— SoKciior and 
 
 Client — Taxation — Special Allowances — Bules 
 of Cowrt (Oogts)i 1875, Special Allowances, Rule 14.] 
 The Supreme Court Rules, Special Allowances, 
 rule 14, tha,t " as to counsel attending at Judge's 
 Cliambers no costs thereof sljall in any case be 
 allowed unless the , Judge certifies it i to be a 
 proper case for counsel to attend" applies to 
 taxation of costs between solicitor and client as 
 well as between party and party. In re Chapman 
 [9 a. B. D. 254; lOQ. B. D. 54 
 
 19- County Govxt — Action of Contract 
 
 which could not have been brought in, County Court 
 —Judgnmnt for.Sum'lwt exceeding £50— Bules of 
 Court, 1883, Order Lxr., r. 12.] By Order Lxv., 
 rule 12, in actions founded on contract in which 
 the Plaintiff recovers by judgment or otherwise a 
 sum (exclusive of costs) not exceeding £50, he 
 shall; be. entitled to no tiore costs than he would, 
 have been entitled to had he brought his action 
 in a County Court, unless the Court or a Judge 
 otherwise orders : — ttetd, that this rule does not 
 
 XIVI, PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT- COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 apply to actions, which could not have been 
 brought in a County Court. Saywood «. Ckoss 
 
 [14Q. B. D. 53 
 
 20. County Court — Aition remitted for 
 
 Trial to County -Court — Bules of Court, 1883, 
 Order LXV., rr. 1, 4.] By Order lxv., rule 1 
 (Rules' oif the Supreme Court, 18,83) the costs of, 
 and.iucident to^ proceedipgs in the Supreme Court 
 are' to be in the discretion of the Court or Judge, 
 subject to a proviso where an action is tried with 
 a jury. By riile 4 of the same Order, where an 
 action is ordered to be tried in a County Court 
 under iS & 20'Tict. 6. 108, s. 26, the costs of the 
 action are subject to these rules to follow the 
 event, unless by the Registrar's certificate of the 
 result of the trial, it appears that the County 
 Court Judge was of opinion that the question 
 ought to be referred to a Judge of the High 
 Court, in which case no costs are to be recovered 
 unless ordered by the Court or a Judge. — Where 
 an action has been ordered to be tried ii) a County 
 Coiurf under 19 & 20 Vict. c. 108, s. 26, and has 
 been so tiled there, the High Court retains its 
 power under Order lxv., rule 1; of dealing with 
 the costs of the action, notwithstanding rule 4 
 of that order, arid the absence in the Registrar's 
 certificate of any expression of opinion by the 
 County Court Judge as provided for by that 
 rule. Ement v. Sandes - - 14 ft. B. D. 6 
 
 21. CotUity Cowtir— Admiralty Jurisdic- 
 tion' Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. ll)—Bules of 
 Cowrt, 1875, Order LT., rule 1.] Sect. 9 of the 
 County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, 1868, 
 which enacts that persons taking proceedihgs in a 
 superior Court, which they might niider sect. 3 of 
 that Act have taken in a County Court, 'shall not 
 be entitled to costs, unless tne Judge before whom 
 the cause was tried shall' certify that it was n. 
 proper cause to be tried in a superibr Court, is in- 
 consistent with and repealed by Order lv., rule 1, 
 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1875. 'Tekant 
 V. Ellis - 6 ft. B. D. 46 
 
 22. Cross-examination — Affidavit — Ex- 
 penses of producing Affidavit Witness for Cross- 
 examination ^ Bules of GouH, ISJ.5,' Order 
 xxxviu., r. 4.] The provision in Rules of Court, 
 1875, Order xxxvin., rule 4, that the party pro- 
 ducing deponents for cross-examination upon their 
 affidavits shall not be entitled to demand the ex- 
 penses thereof in the first instance from the party 
 requiring such production, is confined to a cross- 
 examination of the deponents before the Court at 
 the trial of the action, and does not apply, to a 
 cross-examination on an affidavit filed after decree 
 for the purpose of proceedings in Chambers. — ■ 
 Decision of Bacon, V.C., reversed. In re Knight. 
 Kniqht v. Gabdner 24 Ch. D. 606 ; 25 Ch. D. 297 
 
 ,23. Defendant — WithdrawOtl of Defence 
 
 — Common Law Procedure Act, 1852, s. 205 — 
 Bules of Court, 1^15, Order xxTfi., r. 1.] Leave 
 was given to one of two Defendants in an action 
 of ej.eotment to , withdraw his defence on the, 
 terms of his paying to the Plaintiffs their costs of 
 the action, " so far as they were occasioned by 
 the said defei;c.e of the said Defendant " : — Held, 
 that the only costs which such Defendant was 
 liable to pay under this order were the increased 
 
 2 R 2 
 
( 1223 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1224 ) 
 
 XLVI. PSACTICE— SUPEEME COUET— COSTS 
 
 co3ts occasioned by such Defendant having de- 
 fended the action; and that he was not liable to 
 pay an apportioned part of the Plaintiffs' general 
 costs. Keal and Peesonal Advance Company v. 
 McCarthy - - 18 Ch. D. 362 
 
 24. Discretion of Court — Payment out of 
 
 Court — Company — Compulsory Purchase of Land 
 — Owner under Disability — Butes of Court, 1875, 
 Order ir.] When the purchase-money of land, 
 taken by a company under compulsory powers 
 conferred on them by a special Act passed before 
 the Judicature Act, has been paid into Court 
 by reason of the disability of the person entitled 
 to the land, the Court has, under the general dis- 
 cretion as to costs given to it by Order lv., 
 power to order the company to pay the costs of a 
 petition for payment of the money out to a person 
 absolutely entitled, even though the special Act 
 contains no provision to that effect. — Ex parte 
 Mercers' Company (10 Ch. D. 481) followed. In re 
 Lee and Hemingway - 24 Ch. D. 669 
 
 25. Dismissal for want of Prosecution — 
 
 Mules of Court, 1883, Order LXY., r. 1.] The 
 costs of the Defendant where an action is dis- 
 missed for want of prosecution are now in the 
 discretion of the Judge. Snelling v. Pulling 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 86 
 
 26. Entering Cause for Trial — Order as to 
 
 Supreme Court Fees, 1884, Schedule 52 — Fee for 
 " entering cause or matter for trial or hearing " — 
 Rule ordering Justice to hear Application for Swm- 
 mons."] Under the Order as to Supreme Court Fees, 
 1884, Schedule 52— which directs that a fee of £2 
 shall be paid " on entering or setting down, or re- 
 entering or re-setting down an appeal to the Court 
 of Appeal, or a cause or matter for trial or hearing 
 in any Court in London or Middlesex, or at any 
 assizes " — such fee is payable though the matter 
 for hearing does not arise in an action, as in the 
 case of a rule nisi against a justice under 11 & 12 
 Vict. c. 44, s. 5. Ex parte Hasker 14 ft. B. D. 82 
 
 27. Executor of defaulting Executor — 
 
 Defendant appearing in two Capacities — Appor- 
 tionment of Costs.'] Where an action was brought 
 for the administration of a testator's estate against 
 the executor of a defaulting executor,' whose es- 
 tate was iusolvent : — Held, that the Defendant 
 being before the Court in a double capacity should 
 have his costs of taking the accounts of the 
 original testator's estate and half the rest of the 
 costs of the action out of the estate. — Palmer v. 
 Jones (43 L. J. (Ch.) 349) and Kitto v. Luke (28 
 W. E. 411) followed. In re G-kiffiths. Grif- 
 fiths V. Lewis - - 26 Ch. D. 466 
 
 28. TormS. pauperis — Taxation of Plain- 
 tiff's Costs — Remuneration for Solicitor and Fees 
 for Counsel — Rules of Court, 1883, Order xvi., 
 rr. 24, 25, 26, 27, 81.] Under the Eules of the 
 Supreme Court, 1883, Order xvi., rr. 24, 25, 26, 
 27, 31, u, successful Plaintiff in an action in 
 forma pauperis tried before a Judge and jury is 
 entitled upon taxation as against the Defendant 
 to costs out of pocket only, and cannot be allowed 
 anything for remuneration to hia solicitor or fees 
 to counsel. Oakson v. Piokebsgill 
 
 [14 Q. B, D. 859 
 
 XLVI. PEACTICE— SUPEEHE COUET— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 
 29. Higher or Lower Scale — Injunction — 
 
 " Injury to Property " — Trespass."] In Order vi., 
 rule 2, of the Eules of the Supreme Court (Costs) 
 which allows costs on the higher scale in actions — ■ 
 for special injunctions to restrain the commission 
 or continuance of waste, nuisances, breaches of 
 covenant, injuries to property, &c. — ^the "injury 
 to property" must be a substantial physical 
 injury, and does not include a trespass upon land 
 without injury to the soil, though of a perma- 
 nent character and committed in the assertion of 
 title.— Chapman v. Midland Railway Company 
 (5 Q. B. D. 167, 431) discussed. Goodhand v. 
 AYSCOnGH - 10 ft. B. D. 71 
 
 30. Higher or Lower Scale — Rules of the 
 
 Supreme Court {Costs), August, 1875, Order vi., 
 rr. 1, 3.] An appeal will lie from a decision by 
 a Judge under Eules of the Supreme Court 
 (Costs), August, 1875, Order Ti., rule 3, as to 
 the taxation of costs on the higher or lower 
 scale ; but where he has exercised his discre- 
 tion the Court of Appeal wiU not interfere 
 unless he has proceeded on a wrong principle or 
 made a manifest slip. — An action for the recovery 
 of large estates, the statement of claim in which 
 set up a ease of concealed fraud to avoid the 
 operation of the Statutes of Limitation, was dis- 
 missed withopt costs. The Taxing Master in 
 taxing the costs of the Plaintiff as between the 
 solicitor and a person who had guaranteed their 
 payment taxed them on the lower scale as coming 
 within Order vi., rule 1, and Bacon, V.C, affirmed 
 his decision : — Seld, that the fact of the issue of 
 fraud being raised was not a sufficient reason for 
 directing the costs to be taxed on the higher scale, 
 but that, to take the case out of the general rule 
 that the costs of an action for the recovery of land 
 are to be taxed on the lower scale, the solicitor 
 must shew that the case was one requiring extra 
 skill or labour. In re Terrell 22 Ch. D. 473 
 
 31. Higher or Lower Scale — Rules of 
 
 Supreme Court (Costs), Order VI., rr. 2, 3.] The 
 Plaintiff brought an action for damages for au 
 alleged trespass under a claim of right, and prayed 
 an injunction to restrain the Defendant from a re- 
 petition of it. The issue was one ot considerable 
 importance as between the parties, and involved a 
 lengthened and expensive inquiry into the title of 
 property which had been in the possession of the 
 Plaintiff's family for more than three centuries. 
 Upon the trial (without a jury) the Plaintiff ob- 
 tained judgment for nominal damages : — flisZtJ, not 
 a case in which the Court, in the exercise of its 
 discretion under Order vi., rule 3, Eules of the 
 Supreme Com't (Costs) would order the costs to be 
 taxed upon the higher scale. — Semiile, that Order 
 VI., rule 3, of the Eules of the Supreme Court 
 (Costs) allowing costs upon the " higher scale " is 
 not limited to costs in actions brought in the 
 Chancery Division of the High Court, but gives 
 the Common Law Divisions a discretionary power 
 to order costs to be taxed upon the higher scale, 
 even though the cause of action involves no equit- 
 able element, Duke of Norfolk v. Arbdthnot 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 279 
 
 32. Higher or Lower Scale— Rules of Su- 
 preme Court {Costs), August, 1875, Order Yl.] In 
 
( 1225 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1226 ) 
 
 XIVI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— COSTS 
 
 — continued, 
 an action, -whicli. was dismissed with costs, to 
 cancel an allotment of shares on the ground of 
 fraudulent misrepresentation and suppression of 
 material facts by the directors; to recover the 
 amount paid upon the shares, and to be indem- 
 nified against the remaining balance — the fact 
 that the pecuniary amount at issue was £110 
 only, and that the Plaintiff in issuing the writ 
 had certified for the lower scale of costs, does not 
 affect the discretion given to the Court by Rules 
 of Supreme Court (Costs), August,' 1875, Order vi., 
 rule 3, to direct the costs payable by Plaintiff to 
 be taxed on the higher and not on the lower scale. 
 Habkison v. Leutseb - 24 Ch. D. 594 
 
 33. Inquiry as to Damages.] "When an 
 
 injunction is granted to restrain the commit- 
 ting of a nvdsance, and an inquii-y as to damages 
 is directed in Chambers, though the Plaintiff is 
 entitled to the general costs of the action, the 
 costs of the inquiry wOl be reserved in order that 
 the Judge may have complete control over them, 
 and be able to see that they are not unreasonably 
 exaggerated. Slack v. Midland Bail way Com- 
 PAUT - 16 Ch. D. 81 
 
 34. Interrogatories — Insufficient Answers 
 
 — Viva voce Examination — Costs — Order for Pay- 
 ment " in any Event " — Jurisdiction of Master — 
 Mules of Court, 1875, Order xxxi., r. 10 — Order 
 LIV., r. 2 — Order LT., r. 1.] "Where, in consequence 
 of the party interrogated answeiing insufficiently, 
 an order was made by the Master for his examina- 
 tion vivS, voce before a special examiner : — Held, 
 that there was power under Order xxxi., rule 10, 
 and Order lv., rule 1, or the general practice of 
 the Court, to make it a term of the order that the 
 costs of, and occasioned by, the application should 
 be paid by the party interrogated " in any event." 
 VicABT V. Gebat Noethebn Eailwat Company 
 
 [9 Q. B, D. 168 
 
 35. Harried Woman — Action hy Executrix 
 
 and her Suiband — Sanlcruptcy of Husband — Dis- 
 missal of Action with, Costs — Liability of Husband 
 for the Costs— Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), S. 31.] A feme coverte sued as executrix, 
 and (the action being brought before the Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882, came into operation) 
 her husband was joined as co -Plaintiff. After 
 the action was set down, but before trial, the 
 husband filed a liquidation petition, and obtained 
 his discharge thereunder. "When the action 
 came on for trial the Plaintiffs did not appear, 
 and the action was dismissed with costs ; — Held 
 (affirming the judgment'of Pollock, B., for Pear- 
 son, J.), that the husband, who had no beneficial 
 interest which could pass to the trustee under 
 his liquidation, having allowed the action (which 
 was a oontiouing action after his liquidation) to 
 come on for trial, was liable for the costs. — Semble, 
 per Lindley, L.J. : — A possibility of having to 
 pay costs is not a debt provable in bankruptcy, 
 though it may in some cases be a " contingent 
 liability." Vint v. Hudspith - 30 Ch. D. 24 
 
 36. Parties having liberty to attend.] 
 
 Mere liberty to attend the proceedings under an 
 administration judgment does not entitle the 
 parties having the liberty to the costs of their 
 attendance in Chambers as a matter of course. 
 
 XLVI. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 In order to entitle such parties to such costs the 
 order giving the liberty to attend should expressly 
 provide that they are to be entitled thereto. 
 Day v. Batty - - 21 Ch. D. 830 
 
 37, Perusal of Exhibits — Affidavits — 
 
 Special Order — Bules of Court (Costs), August, 
 1875, Order VI., Schedule, "Perusals."] Order 
 made that the Taxing Master should be at 
 liberty to allow a special charge for the perusal of 
 exhibits to affidavits, the amount thereof (if any) 
 to be in his discretion. In re De Eosaz. Eymer 
 v. De Eosaz 24 Ch. D. 684 
 
 38, Production and Inspection — Counsel's 
 
 Fees and Befreshers.] "When an order is made in 
 an action in the Chancery Division for the produc- 
 tion of documents at the office of the producing 
 party's solicitor, that party, if ultimately success- 
 ful in the action, is not entitled, as between party 
 and party, to his solicitor's costs of the produc- 
 tion, nor to his own costs of inspecting the docu- 
 ments of the other party. — When the trial of an 
 action commences bu one day and is concluded on 
 the next next day, refreshers to counsel will not 
 be allowed unless the trial occupied in the whole 
 more than one day's sittings, i.e., six hours. — The 
 Taxing Master's decision as to the amount of 
 counsel's fees will not be interfered with unless 
 a gross mistake is made. BaowN v. Sewell 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 617 
 
 39, Purchase of land — Beinvestment of 
 
 Money — Redemption of Land Tax — Private. Act 
 — Bules of Court, 1875, Order LY. — Discretion 
 of Court.'] A company purchased lands under a 
 private Act of Parliament, which provided that 
 tlie company should pay the costs of reinvestment 
 of purchase-money in "lands, tenements, and 
 hereditaments " : — Held, that the costs of rein- 
 vestment in the redemption of land tax must be 
 paid by the company. — The purchase-money 
 having amounted to £125,000, the Court did not 
 consider six applications for reinvestment, still 
 leaving £38,440 uninvested, to be unreasonable. — 
 The Court has now, under the Judicature Act, 
 1875, and Order LV. of Eules of Court, 1875, a 
 discretion as to directing payment of costs where 
 a provision as to costs is omitted in any public or 
 private Act. Ex parte Hospital op St. Katha- 
 EINE - - 17 Ch, D, 378 
 
 40, Reference — Consent— Costs to abide 
 
 the Event— County Courts Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict, 
 c. 142), s. 5.] By an order made by consent of 
 the parties, an action on a building contract was 
 referred to an arbitrator to ascertain the amount, 
 if any, due from the Defendant to the Plaintiff, 
 '' the costs of the action, reference, and award, to 
 abide the event." The arbitrator found the sum 
 due to the Plaintiff was £19 2s. Td. upon which 
 an order was made for judgment for the Plaintiff 
 for that sum, without costs : — Held, that the 
 Plaintiff had recovered in the action by judgment 
 a sum not exceeding £20, and that he was there- 
 fore deprived of his costs of the action by the 
 County Courts Act, 1867 (30 & 31 "Vict, c. 142), 
 s. 5, unless he got a certificate or order for costs 
 under that section. — Jones v. Jones (7 C. B. (N.S.) 
 832) overruled. Feegusson v. Davison 
 
 [8 Q, B. D, 470 
 
( 1227 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1228 ) 
 
 XrVI, PBACTICE— STJPEEME COXTET— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 
 41. — ■ — Reference — Costs to abide " Event " 
 — General Award in favour of Defendant on Coun- 
 ter-claim — Meference hacli to find Specific Issues.'] 
 The Plaintiff, who had built two houses foi! the 
 Defendant at a contract price of £1135, sued for 
 £169 16s., the balance of the price, and for other 
 small items. — The Defendant raised various de- 
 fences, and also counter-claimed £1200 for penal- 
 ties for delay and for damages arising from bad 
 •work. The pleadings went as far as surrejoinder, 
 after which the cause, with all matters in differ- 
 ence, was referred to an architect as arbitrator, 
 upon the terms, inter alia, that the costs of action, 
 reference, and award, should follow the event, 
 unless the arbitrator should otherwise order. The 
 arbitrator by an award, silent as to costs, awarded 
 £3 2s. ad. to the Defendant in respect of the 
 action and matters in difference : — Held, affirm- 
 ing the judgment of the Queen's Bench Division, 
 that the word " event " ought to be construed 
 distributively, and the award remitted to the 
 arbitrator to find specific issues. Ellis v. Desilva 
 
 [6 ft. B, D. 521 
 
 42. Reference — Costs to abide Event — 
 
 " Event " construed distributively.'] An action and 
 all matters in difference were referred, the costs 
 of the cause, reference, and award to abide the 
 event : — Held, on the authority of EUis v. Desilva 
 (6 Q. B. D. 521), that the word " event" must be 
 construed distributively ; and that consequently, 
 upon an award by which the arbitrator decided 
 in the Plaintiff's favour upon the claim in the 
 action, but in the Defendant's favour upon a matter 
 in difference not raised in the action, the Plaintiff 
 was entitled to the costs of the action and the 
 Defendant to the costs of the matter on which he 
 had succeeded. — Gribble v. Buchanan (18 0. B. 
 691 ; 26 L. J. (O.P.) 24) not followed. Hawke v. 
 Bbeab - - - 14 ft. B. D. 8'41 
 
 43. Set-oS— Rules of Court, 1883, Order 
 
 Lxr., r. 27, sub-s. 21.] Under sub-sect. 21 of 
 rule 27 of Order lxv, of the Knles of the Supreme 
 Court, 1883, costs which a party is ordeired to pay 
 personally may be set off against costs which he 
 is entitled to receive out of a fund in Court. Bat- 
 ten V. 'Wedgwood Coal and Ikon Company 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 44. Set-off for Damages or Costs — Soli- 
 citor's Lien — Cross Judgments in Separate Actions 
 —Rules of Court, 1883, Order LXr., r. 14.] The 
 Court upon an application to set off cross judg- 
 ments in distinct actions are entitled, notwith- 
 standing Order lxv., r. 14, to order that the set- 
 off shall be siibject to the lien for costs of the 
 solicitor of the opposite party — ^for assuming that 
 rule 14 applies to a set-off in distinct actions, it 
 leaves the Court a discretion to allow the set- 
 off, either subject to or notwithstanding the solici- 
 tor's lien, and if it has no application the Court 
 have the same discretion by the practice previous 
 to Eeg. Hil. Term, 1863, r. 63, which, siuce the 
 repeal of that rule by the new rules, is revived. 
 Edwakds v. Hope - - 14 ft. B. D. 922 
 
 46. ^-^- Short-hand Notes — Evidence.] The 
 rule is now well settled that the costs of short- 
 hand writer's notes of evidence will not be allowed 
 on taxation unless a direction to that effect has 
 
 XLVI. PBACTICE— SUPREME COTTBT— COSTS 
 
 — continued. 
 been inserted in the order ; for which special ap- 
 plication must be made at the hearing. And 
 such a direction will only be inserted in excep- 
 tional cases, the Judge's notes, supplemented by 
 those of counsel, being in general a sufScient 
 record of the evidence. Babl dBS'laWaek v. 
 Miles - - 19 Ch. D. 80 
 
 46. Short-hand 'Sotes—;Evidence at Trial 
 
 — Special Direction.] It is competent to the 
 Court to make an order for the ajlowauce, on 
 taxation between party and party, of the expense 
 of the short-hand notes of the evidence given at 
 the trial, as part of the costs of a rule for a new 
 trial on the ground that the verdict was against 
 the weight of evidence, in a case where ffom the 
 nature and extent of the evidence it is manifest 
 that the matter could not have been properly 
 disposed of without their aid. Watson v. Gbeat 
 Westben Eail WAY Company 6 ft. B. S. 163 
 
 47. Solicitor— De/encZani in Person — Costs 
 
 as Solicitor — Taxation.] Where an action is 
 brought against a solicitor who defends it in 
 person and obtains judgment, he is entitled upon 
 taxation to the same coats as if he had employed 
 a solicitor, except in respect of items wMch the 
 fact of his acting directly renders unnecessary. — 
 Judgment of the Queen's Eench Division affirmed. 
 London Scottish Benefit Society v. Chokley. 
 [12 ft. B. 0. 462; 13 ft. B. S. 872 
 
 48. Third Party — Jurisdiction of Court 
 
 to order to pay Plaintiff's Costs — Appeal as to 
 Costs — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 24, sub-s. 3, and 
 s. 49 — Rules of Court, 1875, Order ly. — Contract 
 of sub-Tenant to perform Covenants of head-Lease, 
 whether Contract of Indemnity.] The High Court 
 has jurisdiction to order a third party to pay to 
 an unsuccessful Defendant the costs payable by 
 such Defendant to the Plaintiff. — Per Brett and 
 Cotton, L.JJ. : The contract of a sub-tenajit to 
 perform the covenants of the head-lease is a con- 
 tract of indemnity. — The Plaintiff let to the De- 
 fendant a house, for twenty-one years with option 
 to determine the lease at the end of seven or 
 fourteen, by deed containing covenants by the 
 Defendant to repair and paint and leave in repair. 
 The Defendant, after having occupied for five 
 years, sublet the house to H. for the remainder of 
 the first seven years by a writing with a clause, 
 that "the letting should be subject in all respects 
 to the terms of the existing lease and the cove- 
 nants and stipulations contained therein." At 
 tbe end of the seven years, the Defendant having 
 determined the lease in the exercise of his option, 
 the Plaintiff claimed from the Defendant, and 
 the Defendant claimed from H., the amount at 
 which dilapidations had been assessed by the 
 Plaintiff's surveyor. H. declined to pay or to give 
 the Defendant an indemnity, or to take any re- 
 sponsibility in the matter. The Plaintiff sued 
 the Defendaht, who brought in H, as third party. 
 The issues, as between the Plaintiff and the De- 
 fendant, and the Defendant and H., were referred 
 separately to an official referee, who reported that 
 the sum claimed by the Plaintiff was due from 
 the Defendant to the Plaintiff, and that a similar 
 sum was due from H. to the Defendant. — A Divi- 
 sional Court (Lord Coleridge, C. J., and Field, J.), 
 
( 1229 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1230 ) 
 
 XLVL PEACTICE— SUPREME COTJBT— COSTS 
 
 — continued, 
 on adopting the second report, ordered. H. to 
 pay all- costs as between the , Plaintiff and the 
 Defendant: — Held, hy the Oourt of Appeal 
 (Jesael, M.E., Brett and Cotton, L.J J.), that these 
 ■were costs within the discretion of the High 
 Court, and therefore that this order was not ap: 
 pealable ; and by Brett and Cotton, L.JJ., that 
 H-'s qontract was a contract of indemnity, under 
 ■which the Defejidant was entitled tp recover from 
 H. aU the costs of an action by the Plaintiff 
 against the Defendant reasonably defended. 
 HOENBT V. Caedwbll - - 8 Q. B. S, 329 
 
 49. — — Trial by J-ory ■ — Nonsuit — Costs of 
 Issues upon which Plaintiff has heen nonsuited — 
 Mules of Court, 1875, Order LV., r. 1 — Procedure 
 where Ambiguity in Judgment as to Costs."] In an 
 action tried by a jury where the Plaintiff succeeds 
 upon some issues but is nonsuited upon others, 
 and no order is made as to costs, the' Defendant, 
 is entitled under Order lt., rule 1, to the costs of 
 the issues upon which the Plaintiff was nonsuited. 
 — Where there is an ambiguity in the terms of a 
 judgment with respect to costs, and the Master in 
 ■consequence refuses to tax the costs of one of the 
 parties, the proper course is to apply for a direc- 
 tion to the Judge who tried the cause, and not to 
 appeal against the Master's decision. Abbott v. 
 Andbews - - - - 8 Q. B. D. 648 
 
 80. Trial by Jwq—Bules of Court, 1883, 
 
 Order Lxr., r. 1 — Jurisdiction of Judge to malee 
 Order as to Costs—" Good Cause " — Appeal — Ac- 
 tion for Recovery of Land — Separate Issues — Taxa- 
 tion, of Costs in such Action.'] Where an action is 
 , tried with a jury the Judge before ■whom it is tried 
 has no jurisdiction under Order lxt., rule 1, to 
 ihake an order by which the costs will not follow 
 the event unless there exist " good cause " within 
 the meaning of that rule, and consequently there 
 is an appeal with respect to the existence of the 
 facts necessary to give the Judge jurisdiction to 
 make such order. — To be " good cause " within 
 that rule there must be facts shewing that it 
 would be more just not to allow the costs to 
 follow the event, as, for example, oppression or 
 misconduct of either of the parties by which 
 ■costs have been unnecessarily inoreased.^The 
 fact that the action is for the recovery' of several 
 closes of laud, that the only defence is that the 
 defendant is in possession, and that the verdict 
 is for the plaintiff for some only of the closes 
 olaimed, does not .by itself constitute '.' good 
 cause" within Order Lxv., rule 1, since the vpr- 
 dict in such a case is distributive, and the costs, 
 if properly taxed, would be as on a finding by the 
 jury on separate issues. Jones ». Cubling 
 
 [13ft.B, D. 263 
 
 Appeal for. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Scpbeme 
 CotiBT — Appeal. 24 — 33. 
 
 — T Appeal for— Interpleader 8 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 ,See Pkaotice — Stipbeme CopET— Inteb- 
 
 PLEADEB. 1. 
 
 " Successful party deprived of costs 7 Q. B. S. 
 
 [641 
 
 -,;,,.. , See PBAcnoE — Supeeme Couet — ^Ap- 
 peal. 39. 
 
 XL VII. PRACTICE — SUPEEME COUET — IN- 
 TEEFLEADEE. 
 
 (a.) Roles of Codet, 1875. 
 
 1. Appeal — Costs— Judicature Act,. 1873, 
 
 s. id— Order I., r. 2.] Order i., rule. 2, which 
 preserves the procedure and practice under the 
 Interpleader Acts in actions in the High Court, 
 does not contradict sect. 49 of the Judicature Act, 
 1873, which enacts that no order of a Judge, of 
 the High Court as to costs only, phall be subject 
 to appeal without leave of such Judge ; and such 
 enactment applies to a Judge's order in inter- 
 pleader as well as in other proceedings. Haet- 
 MONT V. FOSTEE 8 Q. B. D. 82 
 
 2. Jurisdiction of Judge^Trjai withqut 
 
 Jury—l & 2 Will. 4, e. 58— Order I., r. 2— Order 
 XXXVI., rr. 2 and 3.] An interpleader issue can- 
 not be tried by a Judge without a jury in pursu- 
 ance of a notice of that mode of trial, under Order 
 XXXVI., rules 2 and 3. Hamltn v. Betteley 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 63 
 
 3. Summary Decision — Beference hy Judge 
 
 at Chambers to the Court — Appeal — Common Law 
 Procedure Act, 1860 (23 & 24 Vict. c. 126), «s. 14, 
 17.] A Judge at Chambers refen'ed an inter- 
 jjleader summons to a. Divisional Court. The 
 Court barred the claimant and decided the case 
 without ordering an interpleader issue: — Held, 
 that such a decision was given in exercise of the 
 summary jurisdiction of a Court or Judge under 
 the Common Law Procedure Act, 1860 (23 & 24 
 Vict. c. 126), s. 14, and was therefore final apd 
 without appeal. Tuekee».Beidgett 9Q, B.S. 55 
 
 (6.) EuLES OF Court, 1883. 
 
 4. Appeal — Applioatioh for New Trial-^ 
 
 Court of Appeal.] tinder the Eules of 1883, 
 Order Lvii., rule 11, where an interpleader issue 
 has been tried by a jury, and judgment given 
 according to their finding by the presiding' Judge, 
 application for a new trial must be made to the 
 Oomt of Appeal and not to the Divisional Court. 
 Boestall v. Betant - - 12 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 5. Appeal — Judge finally disposing of 
 
 whole Matter — Supreme Court of Judicaiime Act, 
 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. \%— Order XL., 
 r. 5; Order LriL, r. 13.] When an interpleader 
 issue has been tried by a Judge and a jury, and 
 upon the finding of the jury the Judge has, under 
 Order LVII., r. 13, pronounced judgment disposing 
 of the whole matter of the interpleader proceed- 
 ings, but has given leave to appeal, a party to the 
 issue who is dissatisfied with both the finding of 
 the jury and the judgment of the Judge, may 
 appeal under, Order xL., r. 5, to a Divisional Court 
 of, the. Queen's Bench Divisioii, and under the 
 Supreme, Court of Judicature Act, 1873, s. 19, 
 
 . from that Court to the Court of Appeal. — Semile, 
 that B.urstall v. Bryant (12 Q. B. D. 103) was 
 wrongly decided. Eobinson v. Tuokeb 
 
 [14 Q. B. D, 371 
 
 6. Appeals— iSummorj/ Decision at Cham- 
 
 hers ■^- Appeal from Queen's Bench Division to 
 Court of Appeal-rCommon Law Procedure Act, 
 1860 (23 <fc 24 Vict. c. 126), s. n — AppeUate 
 
 -Jurisdiction Act, 1876 (33- & 40 Vict. ,c. .59), 
 8. 20— Order LTII., rr. 8, 11.] By the combined 
 operation of the Common Law Procedure Act, 
 ■1860, sect. 17, and, of the Appellate .Jurisdiction 
 
( 1231 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 1232 ) 
 
 XLVII. PRACTICE — SXrPEEME COUET — IN- 
 TERFL^A.'D'ER—aonlinued. 
 
 (6.) EuLES OF CouBT, 1883 — continued. 
 Act, 1876, sect. 20, no appeal lies to the Court 
 of Appeal from a deoisioii of the Queen's Bench 
 Division upon an appeal from the summary deci- 
 sion at Chambers of an interpleader summons, and 
 r. 11 of the Kules of the Supreme Court, 1883, 
 Order LVii., does not confer any power to give 
 leave to appeal. Wateehouse v. Gilbeet 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 569 
 
 7. ■ Appeal — Trial of Issue — Judgment 
 
 of Judge on Trial.'] Where it is sought to im- 
 peach the judgment of a Judge on the trial of 
 an interpleader issue with respect only to the find- 
 ing of the facts or the ruling of the law, and not 
 with respect to the final disposal of the whole 
 matter of the interpleader proceedings, an appeal 
 will lie from such judgment under sect. 19 of the 
 Judicature Act, 1873, as it will from any other 
 judgment or order of a Judge. Dawson v. Fox 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 377 
 
 8. Indemnity to Stakeholder — Objection 
 
 hy Claimant indemnifying to Interpleader Issue — 
 Order LTii., r. 2 (6).] The objection that a stake- 
 holder has, by merely taking an indemnity from 
 one of two rival claimants to property in his 
 hands, disentitled himself to relief under the 
 Interpleader Acts because he has identified him- 
 self with and must be taken to " collude " with 
 the claimant who gave the indemnity, cannot be 
 raised by that claimant himself, and the decisions 
 in Tucker v. Morris (1 Cr. & M. 73) and Belcher 
 V. Smith (9 Bing. 82) do not apply. Thompson 
 V. Weight - 13 Q. B. D. 632 
 
 9. Power of Master to award Costs — 
 
 Order Lir., r. 12 (i.)— Order Lvji., rr, 5, 9, 10, 15 
 — Order barring Claimant — Costs of Defendant 
 in Action as distinct from those in Interpleader 
 Proceedings — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 49.] tinder 
 the Rules of 1883, Order Liv., rule 12 (i), limiting 
 the power of the Master to award costs other than 
 those of any proceeding before him or those speci- 
 ally authorized — the Master in making an order 
 barring the claimant upon an interpleader sum- 
 mons under Order Lvn., when the applicant is 
 a defendant, has no power under rule 1 5 to make 
 it a term of the order that the plaintiff shall pay 
 the costs of the defendant in the original action, 
 apart from those in the interpleader proceedings, 
 and an order to this effect is, notwithstanding 
 36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, s. 49, subject to appeal. 
 Hansen v. Maddox - 12 ft. B. D. 100 
 
 10. Sale — Receiver and Manager — Judica- 
 ture Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-s. 8 — Order lyii., r. 15.] 
 An interpleader issue being ordered to try the 
 right to goods seized in execution, the Court or a 
 Judge may, under the Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, 
 sub-s. 8, and Order Lvii., rule 15, order that, 
 instead of a sale by the sheriff, a receiver and 
 manager of the property be appointed. Howell 
 ■V. Dawbon - - 13 Q. B. D. 67 
 
 11. Sheriff — Possession Money — Sheriff's 
 
 Fees—1 & 2 Will, i, c. 58, s. 6; 23 * 24 Vict, 
 c. 126, ss. 13, 14, 17.] On the 17th of Feb- 
 ruary, 1881, the sheriff seized goods under an 
 elegit against D. for £72, and interest, and costs. 
 W. claimed the goods as his. On the 19th of 
 
 XLVII. PEACTICE — StJPEEME COUET — IN- 
 TEEPLEADEEr— coniintted. 
 (i.) EuLES OF CoTTET, 1883 — continued,. 
 February the sheriff took out an interpleader 
 summons. On the 15th of July an order was 
 made for the sheriff to withdraw on W. giving 
 security, in default of security the sheriff was 
 ordered to sell the goods and pay the net pro- 
 ceeds into Court. Security was not given, and 
 on the 12th of August the sheriff paid £52, the 
 net proceeds of the goods, into Court. On the 
 21st of June, 1882, Chitty, J., made an order that 
 W. should be barred, that the fund in Court 
 should be paid to the execution creditor, and that 
 W. should pay to the execution creditor and the 
 sheriff their costs of the interpleader summons, 
 including in the costs of the Aeriff his posses- 
 sion money caused by W.'s claim. The sheriff, 
 not being satisfied that W. could pay him, ap- 
 pealed, asking that his possession money might 
 be paid out of the fund in Court in priority to the 
 claim of the execution creditor. In the meantime 
 the money had been paid to the Plaintiff: — BeUk, 
 by Cotton and Bowen, L.JJ. (dissentiente. Fry, 
 L.J.), that 23 & 24 Vict. c. 126, s. 17, making a 
 summary decision under the Act final and con- 
 clusive against " the parties," did not make it 
 final against the sheriff, and that he could ap- 
 peal : — Held, by the whole Court, that where an 
 interpleader has been directed on the application 
 of the sheriff, and the claim of the third party 
 fails, the strict form of order upon which the 
 sheriff is entitled to insist, is to direct the exe- 
 cution creditor to pay the sheriff's charges of the 
 interpleader, with a remedy over to the execution 
 creditor against the third party, though it is a 
 common form of order simply to order the third 
 party to pay them to the sheriff. Smith v. 
 Daelow ■ - 26 Ch. D. 605 
 
 12. Sheriff — Proceeds or Value of Goods 
 
 taken in Execution — Money paid to Sheriff under 
 Protest — Order LYII., r. 1 (6) — Trespass on Land 
 of Person other than Execution Debtor — Pro- 
 tection to Sheriff against Action for Trespass.'] 
 Where the sheriff seized goods under a fi. fa. 
 and a person other than the person against 
 whom the process issued claimed the goods and 
 paid out the sheriff under protest : — Seld, that 
 the money so paid to the sheriff under protest 
 was the proceeds of goods taken in execution 
 within the meaning of Order ltii., rule 1 (6), 
 and that therefore the sheriff was entitled to inter- 
 plead ia respect thereof. — By the Court, — Where 
 the sheriff in the execution of a fi. fa. enters the 
 premises of a person other than the execution 
 debtor and there seizes goods believing erro- 
 neously that such goods belong to the execution 
 debtor, the sheriff may, upon interpleader pro- 
 ceedings, bo protected against an action for tres- 
 pass to the land as well as against an action for 
 seizure of the goods, if no substantial grievance 
 has been done to the person whose premises are 
 wrongfully entered. — Hollier v. Laurie (3 C. B. 
 334) discussed, and Winter \. Bartholomew (11 Ex. 
 704; 25 L. J. (Ex.) 62) approved. Smith v. 
 Ceitchfield - - - 14 ft, B. D. 873 
 
 Service out of the jurisdiction 12 ft. B. D. 171 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — See- 
 
( 1233 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1234 > 
 
 XLVm. PBACTICE— SUPREME COURT— CON- 
 SENT. 
 
 Facts not mentioned to Court — With- 
 drawal of Consent.'] . An action was brought 
 against a local board to restrain them from pull- 
 ing down certain houses of the Plaintiff's and for 
 damages. On a motion for an injunction coming 
 on, the Defendants' counsel by the authority of 
 his clients, consented to an order for a perpetual 
 injunction with costs, and an inquiry as to 
 damages, and such order was taken by consent 
 ■without opening the case to the Court. Before 
 the order had been passed, the Defendants 
 formally withdrew their consent, and the Re- 
 gistrar thereupon declined to pass the order 
 without the direction of the Court. The Plain- 
 tiff moved that he might be directed to proceed 
 to perfect the order. The Defendants alleged 
 that their instructions to consent had been given 
 under a misapprehension, but did not enter into 
 any evidence in support of that allegation : — 
 JSeld, by Pearson, J., that up to the time of a 
 consent order being passed, any party can with- 
 draw his consent, except where he consents to a 
 decree of the Court after the ease has been before 
 the Judge, and that the application must be re- 
 fused : — Meld, on appeal, that where counsel by 
 the authority of their clients consent to an order, 
 the clients cannot arbitrarily withdraw such 
 consent, and that the Registrar must be directed 
 to proceed to perfect the order, without prejudice 
 to any application which the Defendants might 
 make to the Court below to be relieved from 
 their consent, on the ground of mistake or sur- 
 prise or for other sufficient reason. Habvet «. 
 Ckotdon Union Rubal Sanitary Authoritt 
 
 [26 Cb. D. 249 
 
 XIIX. PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT — AP- 
 PEAL. 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 1. Attachment — Refusal to commit for 
 
 Contempt — Discretion of Judge — Bight to appeal.] 
 Where a Judge has refused to commit for con- 
 tempt, an appeal lies from such refusal, although 
 where that refusal has been simply an exercise 
 of judicial discretion, the Court of Appeal, while 
 entertaining an appeal, will be slow to alter the 
 decision of the Court below. — Ashworth v. Outram 
 (5 Ch. D. 943) must not be treated as laying down 
 a general rule that no appeal lies from a refusal 
 to commit. Jabmain v. Chatterton 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 493 
 
 2. Case stated by Arbitrator — Interlocu- 
 tory or Final Order.] An arbitrator, under an 
 order of reference, stated a case for the opinion of 
 the Court, which provided that, if the opinion of 
 the Court should be one way the case was to be 
 referred back to the arbitrator ; if the other way 
 judgment was to be entered for the Defendant 
 with costs. A Divisional Court decided in favonr 
 of the Plaintiffs, and referred the case back to 
 the arbitrator. The Defendant appealed : — Held, 
 f rst, that an appeal could be brought from the 
 order; secondly, that it was a final order, and 
 that the appeal must be entered in the general 
 and not in the interlocutory list. — Collins v. 
 Vestry of Faddington (5 Q. B. D. 368) dibtin- 
 guished. Shubeook v. TurNELL 9 Q. S. D, 621 
 
 XLIX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT— AP- 
 PEAIi — continued, 
 (a.) General — continued. ' 
 
 3. Case stated by Judge's Order — Poor- 
 rate — 12 & 13 Vict. e. 45, s. 11 — Supreme Court 
 of Judicature Act, 1873 (36 * 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 19.] 
 An appeal will lie to the Court of Appeal from 
 the decision of the Queen's Bench Division upon 
 a case stated under 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45, s. 11, in 
 an appeal against a poor-rate ; for the decision of 
 the, Queen's Bench Division is an " order " within 
 the meaning of the Supreme Court of Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 19. Corporation oe Peterbobough 
 V. Overseers op Wilsthorpe 12 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 4. Case stated by Judge's Order — Foor 
 
 Law — 12 <fc 13 VioL. c. 45, s. 11 — Supreme 
 Court of Judicature Actj 1873, ss. 19, 45.] An 
 appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from the de- 
 cision of the Divisional Court upon a case stated 
 under 12 & 13 Vict. o. 45, s. 11, on an appeal from 
 an order of the justices to the quarter sessions, 
 it not being a decision _of the. Divisional Court 
 on an appeal from petty or quarter sessions within 
 the meaning of sect. 45 of the Judicature Act, 
 1873, and it being an •' order " within sect. 19 of 
 that Act. Guardians op Holborn v. Guardians 
 OP Chertset - - 16 Q. B. D. 76 
 
 6. Case stated by Quarter Sessions for 
 
 Opinion of Queen's Bench Division — Appeal to the 
 Court of Appeal — Leave to appeal when necessary 
 —Judicature Act, 1873 (36 <£ 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 45.] 
 Where the Queen's Bench Division in the exercise 
 of its original common law jurisdiction affirms or 
 quashes an order of sessions, an appeal lies to the 
 Court of Appea,! although no leave to appeal be 
 given. The Queen v. Savin 6 Q. B. D. 309 
 
 6. County Court — -Action remitted to 
 
 County Court— County Courts Act, 1867 (30 & 31 
 Vict. c. 142), s. 10— Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 
 Vict. c. 66), 8. 45.] Where a cause has been 
 remitted for trial before a County Court under 
 sect. 10 of the County Courts Act, 1867 (30 & 31 
 Vict. o. 142), it becomes a County Court cause, 
 and the determination of a Divisional Court, on 
 appeal from the decision of the County Court 
 Judge, is within sect. 45 of the Judicature Act, 
 1873, and therefore final, unless special leave to 
 appeal be given. Bowles v. Drake 
 
 [8 a. B. D. 325 
 
 7. County Comt— County Courts Act, 1875 
 
 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 50), s. 6— Rules of Supreme Court, 
 1883, Orders xxxix. and Lll.] An appeal from 
 the decision of a County Court Judge should be 
 by motion ex parte in the first instance under the 
 County Courts Act, ] 875, s. 6, and not by giving 
 notice of motion under Order xxxix., rule 3. 
 Shapcott V. Chappell (12 Q. B. D. 58) questioned. 
 Mathews v. Ovey 13 Q. B. D. 403 
 
 IBut see Rules of Supreme Court, December, 1886, 
 rr. 9-17.] 
 
 8. Criminal Matter — Jurisdiction — 
 
 Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 
 Vict. a. 66), s. il-Fublio Health Act, 1875 (38 & 
 39 Vict. c. 55), ss. 92, 94.] An order was made 
 by justices directing the Defendant to fill up an 
 ash-pit, so as to bs no longer a nuisance. The 
 Queen's Bench Division made absolute an order 
 for a certiorari to quash this order, on the ground 
 
( 1235 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1236 ) 
 
 XlilXr PRACTICE — STIPEEmE COUKT — AP- 
 
 FEAIL— continued, 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 that it was not warranted by tlie Public Healtb 
 Act,' 1875, ss. 9i, S6:—Held, that the order of 
 the justices was made in a " criminal cause or 
 matter" within the meaning of the Supreme 
 Court of Judicature Act, 1873, s. 47, and that an 
 appeal from the judgment of the Queen's Bench 
 Division could not be entertained. — Mellor v. 
 Denhdm (5 Q. B. D. 467) followed. The Queen 
 V. Whitohukoh - - 7 Q. B. D. 534 
 
 9. Criminal Matter — Jurisdiction — Bail 
 
 —36 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 19, 47.] A prisoner 
 applied for bail to a Divisional Court of the 
 Queen's Bench Division but was refused; he 
 then appealed to the Court of Appeal -.—Held, 
 that the decision of the Divisional Court was a 
 judgment of the High Court in a criminal matter, 
 and therefore that the Court of Appeal had no 
 jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The Queen 
 V. PooTE - - - - 10 ft. B. D. 378 
 
 10. Cross-demurrers^ Bight to begin.'] 
 
 Where there are cross appeals ou cross demurrers 
 before the Court of Appeal, and the burden of 
 proof lies on the JDefendant, so that if he fails in 
 his appeal the cross appeal becomes immaterial, 
 the Defendant will be entitled to begin. Clabke 
 V. Bbadlaugh - - 7 Q. B. D. 38 
 
 11. - — Cross Notice — Notice by Respondent 
 to ash for Variation — Bules of Court,- 1875, Order 
 LYili., r. 6.] A Eespondent who seeks to have 
 an order varied on a point in which the Appel- 
 lant has no interest, cannot proceed by notice 
 under Kules of Court, 1875, Order LViii., rule 6, 
 but must give notice of appeal. In re Cavan- 
 deh's Trusts - - 16 Ch. D. 270 
 
 12. Death of Appellant — Revivor by Exe- 
 cutor.'] A Defendant, P., gave notice of appeal 
 from a judgment, and set it down. After this he 
 died, and his executrix obtained an order of 
 course at the EoUs that the appeal might be 
 carried on and prosecuted by her in like manner 
 as it might have been carried on and prosecuted 
 by P. if he had not died. — Held, that the order 
 was sufficient, and that the executrix was entitled 
 to proceed with the appeal. Eanson v. Patton 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 767 
 
 13. Election Petition — Corrupt Practices 
 
 Prevention Act (26 & 27 Vict. c. 29), s. 7 — 
 Certificate to Witness — Mandamus — Jurisdiction 
 to 'hear Appeal — Supreme Court of Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. il— Criminal Matter.] Where the 
 Commissioners appointed to inquire into corrupt 
 practices at a parliamentary election have, with 
 reference to a witness before them on such in- 
 quiry, exercised their judgment as to the right of 
 such witness to receive their certificate under 
 sect. 7 of Corrupt Practices Prevention Act (26 & 
 27 Vict. u. 29), their decision refusing such certi- 
 ficate is conclusive, and cannot be reviewed by 
 mandamus.— iJeg". v. Price (Law Kep. 6 Q. B. 
 411) dissented from. — The decision of a Divi- 
 sional Court discharging a mle for a mandamus 
 to such Commissioners to grant such certificate, 
 which certificate if given would be a protection 
 to the witness against criminal proceedings for 
 bribery, does not relate to a criminal cause or 
 
 XLIX. PRACTICE- SUPREME COTTRT — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (a.) General — continued, 
 matter, within the meaning of the Supreme Court 
 of Judicature Act, 1873, s. 47, and the Court of 
 Appeal is not therefore deprived of jurisdiction 
 to hear an appeal against such decision. The 
 Queen v. Holl - - 7 Q. B. S. 575 
 
 14. Fresh Evidence — Claim in Adminis- 
 tration Action — Order, whether interlocutory 
 or final — Bules of Court, 1883 — Order ltiii., 
 rr. i, 15.] Although an order made on a sum- 
 mons by a creditor in an administration action is 
 considered as if interlocutory for the purpose of 
 determining the time within which an appeal must 
 be brought, for other purposes it is a final order, 
 and therefore fresh evidence cannot be given on 
 the appeal without the special leave of the Court. 
 In re Compton. Norton v. Common 27 Ch. D, 392 
 
 15. One of several Plaintiffe.] Two of 
 
 the three trustees of a settlement brought an 
 action to have the trusts administered under the 
 direction of the Court. Malins, V.C, dismissed 
 the action with costs. One of the Plaintiffs 
 having declined to concur in an appeal, the other 
 appealed alone. — The Court of Appeal held that 
 such an appeal was regular, and must be allowed 
 to proceed ; and, being of opinion that a sufficient 
 ground had been shewn for asking the direction 
 of the Court, a decree for administration of the 
 trusts was made. Beckett v. Attwood 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 64 
 
 16. Person not a Party — Leave to appeal.] 
 
 Leave to a person interested in, but not a party to 
 an action, to appeal from an order, may be ob- 
 tained by ex parte application to the Court of 
 Appeal. JrereMABKHAM. Mabkham v. Maskham 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 1 
 
 17. Person not a Party — Representative 
 
 Suit — Person represented by the Plaintiff.] In an 
 action commenced by a bondholder on behalf of 
 himself and all other bondholders, the Plaintiff 
 obtained an order for a receiver. One of the 
 bondholders represented by the Plaintiff, being 
 dissatisfied with the order, applied for leave to 
 appeal : — -Held, that the order having been made 
 in favour of the class to which the applicant be- 
 longed, and having been obtained by the Plain- 
 tiff, who represented him in the action, he could 
 not appeal against it. — Semble, the proper course 
 for the dissentient shareholder to pursue was to 
 apply to the Court below to be made a Defendant 
 to the action. Watson v. Cave (No. 1) 
 
 [17 Ch, D. 19 
 
 18. Person not a Party — Setting aside 
 
 Judgment obtained by Collusion — Bules of Court, 
 1883, Order XVI., r. 40.] D., the residuary legatee 
 of Mrs. Y., brought her action for administration 
 of Mrs. Y.'sestate against E., the surviving execu- 
 tor. Mrs. Y. had been the siu-viving executrix 
 of lier husband. V., one of the residuary legatees 
 of the husband, shortly afterwards, brought her 
 action against E. as sole Defendant, for adminis- 
 tration of the husband's estate, alleging breaches 
 of trust by Mrs. Y., and asking administration of 
 her estate if E., as her representative, did not 
 admit assets to pay what should be found due 
 from her estate to the husband's estate. Ou the 
 
( 1287 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1238 ) 
 
 XIIX. PEACTICE^ SUPREME COURT— AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 28th of February, 1885, V. moved for judgment. 
 There was no eyidence before the Court that Mrs. 
 Y. -was indebted to her husband's estate, or that 
 ehe had been guilty of wilful neglect and default. 
 E.,. by his; counsel, admitted that she was so in- 
 debted, and he submitted to a judgment directing 
 an account of personal estate of the husband which 
 she had received, or but for her wilful neglect or 
 default might have reoeivedj with an inquiry as to 
 balances in her hands, and directing administra- 
 tion, of her estate. It appeared that', from infor- 
 mation E. had received, he felt sure that Mrsj Y. 
 would be found a debtor to her husband's estate, 
 and that wilful default would be established 
 against her, and that it was not advisable to in- 
 cur the expense of contesting, thege points at the 
 hearing. D., on the, 26th of June, 1885, moved 
 before Pearson, J., under Order xvi., r. 40, to 
 discharge or vary the judgment' of Febr,uary, 1885. 
 This motion was refused on the, ground that D. 
 had not been served with the judgment: D. ap- 
 pealed from this refusal and also appUed for le9.ve 
 to appeal from the judgment ; — Held, ihat leave 
 cannot be given to a residuary legatee to appeal 
 from a decree made against the exeentor at the 
 suit of a creditor, as the executor completely re- 
 presents the estate for the purposes of such a suit, 
 and the residuary legatee could not be made a 
 party to the suit, and, the case is quite different 
 from one where leave to appeal is applied for by 
 a person who, though not according to the pre- 
 sent practice a necessary party to the suit, would 
 have been a proper party to it ■.—Held, further, 
 that the appUcation of June, 1885, to vary the 
 judgment was not supported by Order xVi., r. 40, 
 ' the case not falling within that rule, which only 
 applies to cases where service of an order is neces- 
 sary in order to make it binding, whereas here 
 the order was binding without service, and. D. 
 was not' a ptop^r person to be served: — Held, 
 further, that 'although JB. might h^ve acted in- 
 judiciously in snbmrtting in February, 1885, to 
 an order which went further than any order 
 that ctoiild' have been made adversely on the 
 materials before the Court, the order could not be 
 discharged unless the Court was satisfied that E. 
 had ''submitted to it frauduleptly in .collusion 
 with v., and in this case .the Court was satisfied 
 that E. had acted bona fide. In re Youngs. Dog- 
 6ETT V. Eevbtt. In ' re Youngs. V'ollum v. 
 Eevett - - - - 30 Ch. D. 421 
 
 19. Special Gase^Appeal by Pwrty not 
 
 appearing at Mea^iiig.'] 'Whether a party to a 
 special case who does not appear at the hearing 
 before the Divisional Court can appeal from the 
 jMgment, quxre. Allum v. Dickenson 
 
 [9 9. B. D. 632 
 
 20. — '—, Summons heard in Chambers.] A 
 party desiring to appeal from an order made by 
 the Judge m Chambers on a summons which has 
 not been anjouriied 'into Court for argument or 
 judgment, should move in Court, on notice, to 
 discharge the order,, so as to afford the Judge an 
 opportunity of stating, for the informatibn, of the 
 Court of Appeal, his reasons for his decision. 
 fioLLOwAT V. Cheston - - 19 Ch, D, S16 
 
 XMX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT —AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 21. Summons heard in Chambers. — Desire 
 
 to ' appeal — Motion for Certificate of Judged 
 ■Where, on a summons heard- in Chambers, an 
 order has been made by the Judge and not ad- 
 journed into Court, and there is a desire to appeal 
 against it, the proper course is not to move in 
 Court, on notice^ to discharge the order, or for a 
 certificate that the Judge does not desire it to be 
 reheard, but to make an application in Chambers. 
 —Holloway v. Cheston (19 Ch. D; 516) not fol- 
 lowed. J)i re Bctler's 'Wharp Company. An- 
 derson V. Sutler's 'Whahe Costpant 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 131 
 
 22, Summons, Oiriginatijig— JJismissaZ of 
 
 —Time for appealing ^Bules of Court, 1883, 
 Order i., r. 1 ; Order n., r. 1 ; Order LV., r. 3 ; 
 Order LVlir., r. 15; Order LXXL, r. 1— Judicature 
 Act, 1873, «. 100.] An originating sainmons 
 taken out under Order LV., r. 8, is a civil pro- 
 ceeding commenced otherwise than by writ in 
 manner prescribed by a Eule of Court, and is 
 consequently an action within the definition of 
 that word in sect. 100 of the Judicature Act, 
 1873. Therefore an order made upon such a 
 summons is appealable at any time within one 
 year from its date. In re Fawsitt. GalLaNd «. 
 Burton - - - 30 Ch, D. 231 
 
 23. 'Withdrawal of Appeal — Bevoqation 
 
 of Withdravial.'] The Defendant, in an action 
 having given notice of appeal against an order, 
 ■syrote to the Plaintiff saying that he proposed ito 
 withdraw his appeal, and asking for his consent 
 to his doing so. T,he Plaintiff at once consented 
 to.the withdrawal. Two days afterwards the De- 
 fendajit wrote to say that he was under misappre- 
 hension as to a material fact, and intended to go 
 on with the appeal. No step was taken by .either 
 side to remove the appeal from the list of app.eals, 
 and both parties filed affidavits in support of their 
 case : — Held, that the Defendant had no power, to 
 revoke his withdrawal of the appeal, and that the 
 appeal could not be heard. 'Watson v. Cave 
 (No. 2) - - - '- 17Ch. D, 23 
 
 (6) Appeal tor Costs. 
 
 24. Administration Action— JE!ccc«io>;-7- 
 
 Besiduary Legatee — Bules of Court, 1875, Order 
 LV., r. 1 — Supreme Court of Judicature, Act, 
 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 49.] A married 
 woman, who was one of the executors of a testator 
 and also tenant for life of the residue, filed a bill 
 for' administration of the estate. Upon the ac- 
 counts being taken it turned out the residuary 
 estate was insufficient for payment of debts and 
 costs, and that it would be neecssary to resort to 
 specifically bequeathed property. Malins, V.C, 
 on further consideration, refused to give the 
 Plaintiff any costs of the suit, and ordered, the 
 next friend to pay the costs of taking an account 
 of what, if anything, was due from ' another of the 
 executors on an account current between him and 
 the testator. The Plaintiff appealed : — Held, 
 that as a residuary legatee or executoi^ filing a 
 bill for administration is entitled to costs out of 
 the estate unless some special grounds are shewn 
 for depriving him of them, the costs in question 
 
( 1239 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1240 ) 
 
 XLIX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — AP- 
 PEAL — continued, 
 (h.) Appeal foe Costs — continued. 
 were_ not costs in the discretion of tlie Conrt 
 within the meaning of the Supreme Court of Judi- 
 cature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 49, and 
 that an appeal would lie. Faeeow v. Austin 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 58 
 
 25. Administration Action — Trustee — 
 
 Judicature Act, 1873, s. id— Rules of Court, 1875, 
 Order ly.'] The right of a trustee to his costs, 
 like that of a mortgagee, is a matter of contract, 
 and is not in the discretion of the Judge ; although 
 he may be deprived of them for misconduct. — 
 Therefore the costs of a trustee are not within 
 sect. 49 of the Judicature Act, 1873, and an 
 appeal may be brought from a decision in respect 
 oWh.em.—CotUrellM.Strattm (Law Eep.8 Ch. 295) 
 an'd Farrow v. Austin (18 Ch. D. 58) followed. 
 In re Hoskins (6 Ch. D. 281) disapproved. — The 
 mere fact that a trustee denies that he is indebted 
 to the estate, and on taking the accounts turns 
 out to be indebted, is no reason for depriving 
 him of his costs. Tubnee v. Hancock 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 303 
 
 26. Administration Action — Residuary 
 
 Legatee — Rules of Court, 1883, Order LXF., r. 1 
 — Pending Cause — Rules of Court, 1875, Order 
 LY., r. 1.] Order Lxv., r. 1, of the Rules of 
 the Supreme Court, 1883, directing that the costs 
 of all proceedings in the Supreme Court, includ- 
 ing the administration of estates and trusts shall 
 be in the discretion of the Court or a Judge, ap- 
 plies in the case of causes and matters pending on 
 the 24th of October, 1883, when those rules came 
 into operation, only to tie costs of proceedings 
 taken on and after that day ; and the costs in- 
 curred in proceedings taken in such causes and 
 matters before that day, although not adjudicated 
 upon until afterwards, are not within that rule. — 
 In an action for administration by one of several 
 residuary legatees, all the proceedings except 
 those on subsequent further consideration were 
 taken before Order lxv., r. 1, came into operation, 
 though the costs were not adjudicated upon until 
 the order on further consideration which was made 
 afterwards : — Beld, that an appeal would lie as to 
 the costs of such prior, though not as to the costs of 
 such subsequent proceedings. — Farroio v. Austin 
 (18 Ch. D. 58) followed. In re McClellan. 
 MoClellan v. McClellan 29 Ch. D. 495 
 
 27. Dismissal for want of Prosecution — 
 
 4*5 Anne, c. 3, s. 23—42 & 43 Vict. c. 59, 
 «s, 2, 4 — Repeal with Qualification — Rules of 
 Court, 1883, Order LX\.,r. 1 — Discretion of Judge 
 as to Costs.2 The statutable right of a defendant 
 to the costs of an action in the Chancery Division 
 which had been dismissed for want of prosecu- 
 tion was repealed by 42 & 43 Vict. e. 59, which 
 repeals so much of 4 & 5 Anne, c. 3, as gives 
 such costs, and though the practice in accordance 
 with such statutable right, and as regulated by 
 Order xxxiii, rule 10, of the Chancery Consolida- 
 tion Orders of 1860, was preserved Ijy sect. 4 of 
 42 & 43 Vict. c. 59, yet Order lxv., rule 1, of 
 the Eules of 1883 has changed such practice, so 
 that the costs of a defendant where such action 
 has been dismissed for want of prosecution are 
 now in the discretion of the Judge, and there- 
 
 XLIX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (6.) Appeal fob Costs — continued. 
 fore his order as to such costs is by sect. 49 of 
 the Judicature Act, 1873, not subject to appeal. 
 Snelling v. PuLLiffG - 29 Ch. D. 85 
 
 28. Injunction — Order for Costs alone — 
 
 Bules of Court, 1883, Order lxy., r. 1.] Where 
 the jurisdiction of a Judge to inflict costs on a 
 party arises from his being guilty of breach of an 
 injunction or other misconduct, an appeal lies as 
 to costs, although the Judge makes no order 
 except that the party shall pay costs. — Witt v. 
 Corcoran (2 Ch. D. 69) followed. Stevens e. 
 Metbopolitan Dibteict Eailwat Company 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 60 
 
 29. Inspection of Property — Discretion of 
 
 Court— Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), 
 s. 49— Rules of Court, 1875, Ord£r LH., r. 3.] An 
 order was made in Chambers for the inspection 
 of the Defendant's property, the costs of the 
 inspection to be paid by the Plaintiff: — Seld, 
 that under Order Ln, rule 3, the Judge had a 
 discretion to order the Plaintiff to pay the costs, 
 and the order being made in his discretion the 
 Plaintiff had no right without leave to appeal from 
 it. Mitchell v. Uaelet Main Collieet Com- 
 pany 10 a. B. D. 457 
 
 30. Mortgage Suit — Costs of Appeal cm 
 
 Gross Notice — Priority of Charge — Gazetting Re- 
 tirement of Officer.'] After receipt by the army 
 agents of the money payable to an oflicer on his 
 retirement continual notices of charges on the 
 money were given to the army agents by each of 
 the three assignees. One of the assignees brought 
 an action against the two others, claiming priority 
 over them: — Held, by Bacon, V.C, that the 
 notices given before the retirement was gazetted 
 were of no avail, and that of the two assignees 
 who gave notice on the day after the retirement 
 was gazetted the Defendant ^whose security was 
 prior in date had priority over the Plaintiff and 
 over the other Defendant, and that the costs of the 
 action were to be paid out of the fund. — The De- 
 fendant who had obtained priority appealed as to 
 the costs, and the other Defendant gave notice of 
 cross-appeal on the merits : — Held, that an appeal 
 would lie from the order as to costs. Order as to 
 priority affirmed, but the costs of action ordered 
 to be added to the securities. Appellant's costs 
 of appeal to be paid in moieties by the Eespon- 
 dents. Johnstone v. Cox - 19 Ch. D. 17 
 
 31. Partnership Suit — Costs of Unsuc- 
 cessful Claim — Rules of Court, 1875, Order ly., 
 r. 1.] By articles of partnership between three 
 partners, on the death of any partner the sur- 
 vivors were entitled to take his share at a valua- 
 tion. One of the partners having died, his 
 executrix brought her action to have it declared 
 that the goodwill was to be included in the 
 valuation, and to have the value of the deceased 
 partner's share in the assets ascertained. A 
 decree was made declaring that the goodwill 
 must be valued as part of the assets, and directing 
 accounts. The Chief Clerk made his general 
 certificate, finding (inter alia) that two specified 
 leaseholds belonging to the partnership were of 
 no value. The Plaintiff took out a summons to 
 
( 1211 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1242 ) 
 
 XLIX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (J.) Appeal foe Coais — continued. 
 vary the certificate by estimating these lease- 
 holds as worth a considerable sum. The summons 
 was adjourned into Court, and Bacon, V.C., re- 
 fused to vary the certificate, but ordered the 
 costs of both parties to be paid out of the estate. 
 The Defendants appealed : — Held, that the case 
 did not come within the rule in Foster v. Great 
 Western Railway Company (8 Q. B. D. 25, 515) 
 that the Court cannot make a successful defen- 
 dant pay the costs of a plaintiff who has wholly 
 failed ; but that it was within the discretion of 
 the Court to order all costs reasrtnably incurred 
 in ascertaining the fund to be paid out of the 
 fund, and that an appeal would not lie. Butcher 
 v. Pooler - - - - 24 Ch. D. 273 
 
 32. Solicitor — Order on Solicitor person- 
 ally to pay Costs — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 49.] 
 Am order that the costs of an application at Cham- 
 bers on behalf of a client shall be paid by his 
 solicitor personally cannot be costs left to the dis- 
 cretion of the Court within s. 49 of the Judicature 
 Act, 1873, unless the solicitor ha^ been guilty of 
 misconduct or neghgence, and, therefore, an 
 aj)peal lies from such order without leave as to 
 whether there has been such misconduct or negli- 
 gence. — Decision of the Queen's Bench Division 
 reversed. In re Bradford 
 
 [11 a. B. S. 373 ; IS Q.. B. S. 635 
 
 33. Special Leave — Discretion of Judge 
 
 —Judicature Act, 1873, s. 49.] Where an appeal 
 from an order as to costs which are left by law 
 to the discretion of the Judge is brought by leave 
 of the Judge under the 49th section of the Judi- 
 cature Act, 1873, the Court of Appeal wUl still 
 have regard to the discretion of the Judge, and 
 will not overrule his order unless there has been 
 a. disregard of principle or misapprehension of 
 facts. In re Gilbert. Gilbert v. Hudlestone 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 549 
 
 (c.) Time for appealing. 
 
 34. Decree declaring Future Rights.] A 
 
 testator gave after the death of his wife, a legacy 
 to his son E. S. for life and after his death to his 
 children, and if he died without issue it was to be 
 ■divided among the testator's " surviving chil- 
 dren." Six other legacies were given in a similar 
 way. All the seven children survived the tes- 
 tator. A suit for administration was instituted to 
 which all were parties. In 1836 an order on 
 further consideration was made, at whicli time 
 six of the children were living, and it was de- 
 clared, that on the death of the widow, E. S. 
 would become entitled to the interest on the 
 legacy for life, that on his death it would be divi- 
 sible among his children then living, but if he 
 died without leaving issue, then among the chil- 
 dren of the testator who were living at the testa- 
 tor's decease. The testator's widow died in 1838, 
 and E. S. died in 1881 without ever having had a 
 child. At this time one child only of the testator 
 was living, and he applied for leave to appeal 
 against the order of 1836, on the 'ground that it 
 was irregular in making a prospective declaration 
 as to future rights : — JSeld, that leave to appeal 
 ■ought not to be granted, the fact that a deolara- 
 
 XLIX. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (o.) Time for appealing — continued. 
 tion was made as to future rights being no suffi- 
 cient reason for giving such leave in a case where 
 all parties who could in any event be interested 
 were before the Court and adult when the decla- 
 ration was made. — Brandon v. Brandon (7 D. M. 
 & G. 365) and Walmsley v. Foxliall (ID. J. * S. 
 451) considered and distinguished. — Observations 
 on the change of opinion in the Legislature and 
 the Judges as to the period during which orders 
 should be appealable. Curtis v. Sheffield 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 1 
 
 35. Extension of Time — Final Order — 
 
 Buks of Court, 1875, Order lviil, rr. 9, 15.] A 
 petition having been presented for payment out of 
 Court of a fund paid in under the Lands Clauses 
 Act as the purchase-money of a devised estate, 
 the Court, on the 18th of June, made an order 
 declaring the construction of the will and direct- 
 ing inquiries as to the persons interested. An 
 application was made on behalf of some of the 
 parties who were resident in America to extend 
 the time for appealing to four weeks from the 8th 
 of July, in order to allow time for the persons 
 acting for them under a power of attorney to con- 
 sult them as to appealing : — Held, that, as the 
 order was a final one, the case, though within the 
 letter was not within the spirit of rule 9, the' 
 Eules of Court, 1875, Order lviil, requiring an 
 appeal to be brought within twenty-one days, 
 and that the extension of time ought to be granted. 
 In re Leonard Jacques - - 18 Ch. D. 392 
 
 36. Extension of Time — Informal Notice 
 
 of Appeal — Letters to Solicitors of Bespondent — 
 Accident or Mistalte — Bules of Court, 1875, 
 Order lviil, rr. 3, 15 — Costs of Bespondent not 
 served with Notice of Appeal.'] A petition for 
 winding up a company having been dismissed, 
 the Petitioner's solicitors wrote a letter to the 
 company's solicitor urging him to get the order 
 drawn up, adding, " as we are advised and intend 
 to give notice of appeal." No formal notice of 
 appeal was given till more than twenty-one days 
 had elapsed from the dismissal of the petition, 
 when the Petitioner gave a supplemental notice 
 of appeal : — Weld, that the 'letter could not be 
 treated as an informal notice of appeal, and - 
 therefore the appeal was too late. — Little's Case 
 (8 Ch. D. 806) considered and distinguished. — 
 Held, also, that there was no such mistake or 
 accident as would justify the Court in extending 
 the time for appeal. — Mistake by Appellant may 
 be a ground for extending the time for appeal 
 without misconduct by Respondent. — Observa- 
 tions of James and Baggallay, L.jj., in In re 
 Blyfh and Young (13 Ch. D. 416) upon McAndrew 
 V. BarJeer (7 Ch. D. 701) respecting the grounds 
 for extension of time for appeal, approved. — An 
 Appellant ought to serve notice of appeal on all 
 parties who will be affected by the order of the 
 Court of Appeal, and if a party who would be so 
 affected is not served, he may appear without 
 service and obtain his costs. And this rule ap- 
 plies although the appeal fails through irregularity 
 and never comes on to ba heard. In re New 
 Callao - - - - 22 Ch. D. 484 
 
 37. Extension oi Time— Special Grounds 
 
( 1243 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1244 ) 
 
 XLIX. PEACTICE — SUPREME COUET — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (c.) Time fob appealing — continued. 
 — Company — Order on Winding-up Petition — 
 Bvles of Court, 1875, Order ltiii., r. 15 — 
 La,ncaslkr Court — Power of Behearing — Trans- 
 fer of Shares to escape Liability.'] The share- 
 holders in a company passed an extraordinary 
 resolution to wind np the company voluntarily, 
 but the resolution was void, the majority of mem- 
 bers who voted not being entitled to vote. A cre- 
 ditor filed a petition in the Chancery Court of the 
 Duchy of Lancaster for a supervision order or for 
 a compulsory winding-up order, and as the Court 
 and the Petitioner were ignorant of the fact that 
 the resolution was invalid, a supervision order was 
 made^ Five months afterwards the Petitioner 
 discovered the invalidity of the resolution, aud 
 then moved before the Vice-Chancellor that the 
 sli^ervision order might be discharged, aud a com- 
 pulsory winding-up order made. This motion 
 having been refused by the Vice-Chancellor on 
 the ground of want of jurisdiction to rehear the 
 petition, the Petitioner appealed from the refusal 
 of the motion, and also applied to the Court of 
 Appeal for leave to appeal against the original 
 order notwithstanding the lapse of time. — The 
 application for leave to appeal was opposed by the 
 executors of a previous member who had trans- 
 ferred their testator's shares to escape liability 
 less than twelve months before the presenting 
 of the original petition, but more than twelve 
 months before the case came before the Court of 
 Appeal on the ground that if an order was now 
 made on the origioal petition they would be made 
 liable under the 38th section of the Companies 
 Act, 1862 : — Held, that leave to appeal, notwith- 
 standing the lapse of time, ought to be given, the 
 mistake as to the validity of the resolution form- 
 ing a special ground for the application, and the 
 Eespondents having no equity to resist it. — Ob- 
 servations on 'the principle on which the Court 
 grants extension of time for appeal. — In re New 
 Gallao (22 Ch. D. 484) approved. — Senible, the 
 Vice-Chaucellor had no power to rehear the peti- 
 tion himself. In re Manchestee Economic Build- 
 ing Society - - - 24 Ch. D. 488 
 
 38, Extension of Time— Special Orounds 
 
 ■ — Bevivoi Discretion of the Court — Mules of 
 
 Court, 1883, Order xviL, r. 4.] By a marriage 
 settlement the property of the wife was vested in 
 trustees upon trust for the wife, for her separate 
 use, and in ease there should be no issue (which 
 event happened) for the wife, her executors, ad- 
 ministrators, and assigns, if she survived her hus- 
 band, but if she died in his lifetime then for the 
 husband foi; his life, and subject thereto for such 
 persons as should be of the wife's own kindred as 
 she should by wiU appoint, and in default of ap- 
 pointment for such persons as would be entitled 
 under the Statutes of Distribution, in case she 
 had died intestate and unmarried. — The marriage 
 was dissolved in 1871, and in 1872 the wife, in a , 
 suit instituted by her against her late husband 
 and the trustees of the settlement, obtained a de- 
 cree that she was absolutely entitled to the pro- 
 perty comprised in the settlement, — By her will 
 dated in 1877, the wife disposed of the property 
 as if it was her own absolutely, and died in 1881, 
 
 XLIX. PEACTICE — SUPEEUE COUET — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 
 (c.) Time foe appealing — continued. 
 in the lifetime of her late husband : — Held, in the 
 absence of special circumstances, that the next of 
 kin of the wife were not now entitled to an order 
 to revive the suit or to carry on proceedings 
 therein for the mere purpose of appealing against 
 the decree of 1872. Fussell v. Dowdin& 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 237 
 
 39. Interlocutory Order — Appeal from 
 
 Order of Judge at Trial depriving successful Party ■ 
 of Costs — Jurisdiction of Divisional Court.] At 
 the trial of an action the jury found for the Plain- 
 tiffs for a sum exceeding the amount which the 
 Defendants had paid into Court ; the Judge there- 
 upon gave judgment for the Plaintiffs without 
 costs. The High Court of Justice afterward* , 
 made an order that the Plaintiffs should have 
 their costs. The Defendants applied to the Court 
 of Appeal to annul the order of the High Court 
 after the time had elapsed for appealing kgainSt 
 an interlocutory order: — Held, that the order of 
 the High Court was made on an appeal frotn a 
 final judgment, and that the application to the 
 Court of Appeal was not too late; hut ^Held, 
 that the High Court had no jurisdiction to enter- 
 tain an appeal from a final judgment, and that 
 the order giving the Plaintiffs their costs must 
 be annulled. Maesden v. Lancashiee and Yoek- 
 shiee Eailwat Company 7 Q. B. D. 641 
 
 40. Order in Winding-up and in an Action 
 
 — Bules of Court, 1875, Order LTIII., r. 9.] An 
 action was brought by a debenture holder of a com- 
 pany on behalf of himself and the other debenture 
 holders to enforce their securities. After this an 
 order was made for winding up the company.- An 
 arrangement was proposed for the mailing over 
 th6 undertaking to the Secretary of State for India 
 on certain terms, and an order Was made in the 
 winding-up and in the «,ctibn sanctioning the ar- 
 rangement and declaring that no moneys payable 
 by the Secretary of State to the stockholders and 
 debenture holders of the company under the ar- 
 rangement should be treated as assets of the com- 
 pany. An unsecured creditor of the company who 
 did not know of this order at the time when it 
 was made, applied after a lapse of more than 
 twenty-one days ft-om his receiving a copy of the 
 order, but within the time for appealing from a 
 final order in an action, fpi' leave to appeal against 
 it : — Held, that as the applicant had no such inte- 
 rest that he could have been a party to the action 
 the order must, as regarded him, be treated as an 
 order made only in the winding-up, that Order 
 Lvm., T. 9,. applied, and ,that he was out of time. 
 In re Madkas Ibeigation and Canal Company. 
 Wood v. Madeas Ieeiqation and Canal Com- 
 pany - 28 Ch, D. 248 
 
 41. Eefusal of Application forming part 
 
 of Judgment — Application at Trial for Leave to 
 amend Pleadings — Bules. of Court, 1875, Order 
 L'rin., r. 15.] When at the trial of an action an 
 application for lejave to amend the pleadings is 
 refused, the refusall fofms part of -the judgment, 
 and it ia unnecessary to appeal separately from 
 it; but on an appeal from the judgment the Court 
 of Appeal has power, if it thinks fit, to give leave 
 to amend. It is contrary to the practice to insert 
 
( 1245 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1246 ) 
 
 XLIX. PKACTICE— SUPREME COITRT — AP- 
 PEAL — continued. 
 (o.) Time poe appealing — continued. 
 in the judgment as drawn up any mention of the 
 refusal of leave to amend. Laibd v. Bbiggs 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 663 
 
 42. • Refusal of Application — Declaration 
 
 as to Bights — Rules of Court, 1875, Order LVii., 
 r. 8 {April, 1880), LYiil., r. 15.] When an order 
 refusing an application contains a declaration or 
 expression of opinion of the Judge as to the rights 
 of the parties, it is not a mere refusal of the ap- 
 plication so as to oblige an appeal to be brought 
 within twenty-one days from the date of the refusal 
 under Order LVin., rule 15. In re Clay and 
 Tetley - ■- - 16 Ch. D. 3 
 
 43. Refusal of Application— C/oim of 
 
 Creditor under Administration Judginent — Rules 
 of Court, 1875, Order ltiii., r. 15.] Where a cre- 
 ditor has brought in a claim in answer to adver- 
 tisements for creditors issued under a judgment 
 for administration, and that claim is disalldwed, 
 such disallowance is a refusal within the meaning 
 of Order Lvm., rule 15, and an appeal can be 
 brought from it without any order being drawn 
 up. In re Clagett. Poedham v. Clagett 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 134 
 44. Refusal of Application — Special Direc- 
 tion as to Costs — Bules of Court, 1883, Order Lnil., 
 r. 15.] Where an application to a Judge is refused, 
 and the Judge adds special directions as to the 
 payment of the costs, that is a refusal of the a'ppli- 
 catioi within the meaniiig of Order Lvin., rule 15, 
 and the time for appeal runs froin the date of the 
 refusal not from the drawing up of the order. 
 In re Smith. Hoopee ii. Smith 26 Ch. D. 614 
 
 Appeal from judgment by default 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 322; 6 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 1, 5. 
 Interpleader. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Interpleadbe. 1, 3 — 7. 
 
 I, PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— JURISDiC- 
 TION. 
 
 • 1. Chancery Division — Becalling Probate 
 
 —Judicature Act, 1873, ss. 16, 34, 36 — Judicature 
 Act, 1875, s. 11.] Though the Chancery Divi- 
 sion may have jurisdiction to recall the probate of 
 a will, it ought not as a general rule to exercise 
 that jurisdiction, even if the estate of the testator 
 is in Court in a proceeding in that Division. — 
 Finney v. Sunt (6 Ch. D. 98) followed. Brad- 
 POBD V. TouNG - - 26 Ch. D. 666 
 
 2. Subject-matter below £10 — Chamoery 
 
 Action— Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), 
 ss. 16, 25, 34.] An action in the High Court, 
 claiming relief which, before the Judicature Act, 
 could have been given only by the Court Of" 
 Chancery, cannot now be maintained if the sub- 
 ject-matter is below £10 in' value. — The old rule 
 of the Court of Chancery in this respect still 
 remains in foroe. WssTBURV-oir-SEVEEiq" Eural 
 Sanitabt Authority v. Meeedith 30 Ch, D. 387 
 
 3. Transfer to County Court — TlcLinUff 
 
 failing to proceed — Jurisdiction of Superior Court 
 -Counttj Courts Act, 1867, ss. 7, 8, 10— County 
 
 L. PRACTICE — SUPREME COURT — JURIS- 
 DICTION— continued. 
 Court Bules, 1875, Order XX. r. 1 — Judicature 
 Act, 1873, s. 67.] Where an order has been made 
 for the transfer of a Chancery action to a County 
 Court under sect. 8 of the County Courts Act, 
 1867, the Superior Court retains its jurisdiction 
 in the action until the transfer has been com- 
 pleted by all necessary steps being taken for that 
 purpose. Datid v. Howe 27 Ch. D. 633 
 
 Transfer — Winding-up of cpmpanv 
 
 [16Ch.D. 702 
 See;PEACTioE— Supreme Court — Teans- 
 FEE, 1. 
 
 PRACTICE— SUPREME COURT— Abortive exe- 
 cution — Possession money 6 Q. B. D. 171 
 See Shebipp.' 2.' 
 
 Action sent for ti'ial to County'Court — Un- 
 liquidated damages - 10 Q, B. D. 11 
 See County Coubt — JuEiSDicTioif. 8. 
 
 Action to prove will and discharge protec- 
 tion order - 6 P. D. 54 
 See Peobate^-Maeeied Woman. 3. 
 
 Adding Plaintiffv-TruBtee inbankruptoy 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 768 
 See Bankeuptcy — ^TJNfiisciiAEGED Bank- 
 eupt. 4. 
 
 Admiiiistraition! action. ■ '' 
 
 S^ Cases undei^ Executory — Actions. 
 
 Administration order-^Disputed debt 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 291 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 10. 
 
 Admissions between co-Defendants 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 617 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 6. 
 
 Amendment - 
 
 See Easement. 2. 
 
 Amendment-^Adding Plaintiifs 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 67 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separation 
 ■Deed. . 2. 
 
 Appeal for costs - - 18 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 5. 
 
 Appeal for costs - - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Puechasee— Purchase 
 ' without Notice. 1. '' 
 — —Appeal for costs - 23 Ch, D, 378 
 
 S^e VOLUNTABY CONVEYANCE. 5. 
 
 Appeal for costs — Appeal by liquidator 
 
 - Se,e,C0MPANY— QosTS. 1. [21 Ch. D. 381 
 Appeal— Election petition 6 Q,. B. D. 323 
 
 SeeMuNICIPAL OOEPOEATION — ELECTION. 
 
 3. 
 
 Appeal— Ei^ht to raise new point 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 419 
 
 See Bill op Salb^Pobmalities. 18. 
 
 -; — Appointment of guardian - 19 Ch. D. 451 
 
 .See Inpant— Wahd-Op Court. 1. 
 
 Arbitration — ^Motion to set aside award 
 
 [19 Ch,D. 68 
 
 See Aebiteation — Awabd. 3.,, 
 Arbitration — Subniissibn - 19 Ch. D. 56 
 
 See Aebiteation — Submission. 3. 
 
 - 19 Ch. D. 23 
 
( 12i7 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 1248 ) 
 
 PKACTICE— SUPREME COTJS,T—contimi,ed. 
 
 Assignment of debt — Mortgage 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 626 ; 12 ft. B. D. 347 
 
 See Assignment of Debt. 2, 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Bank- 
 
 KUPTOY. 
 
 Case stated by justices — Eemitted for 
 
 amendment— Costs 13 Q. B. D. 680 
 
 See Justices — Pbaotioe. 1. 
 
 Case stated by sessions — Costs 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 139 
 
 See POOK-KATE — Peooeduee i. 
 
 Charging order — Solicitor's lien for costs. 
 
 See Cases under Solioitob — Lien. 
 
 Contempt of Court — Committal 
 
 gee Contempt of Couet. [17 Ch. D. 49 
 
 Costs — Action in name of company 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 1 
 See Company — Dieeotob's Appoint- 
 ment. 1. 
 Costs — Amendment of pleadings 11 ft. B, D. 
 
 See COPTBIGHT — PlOTHEES. [627 
 
 Costs— County Couit action 18 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See County Couet — Costs. 3. 
 
 Costs— Interpleader— Sheriff 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Foemalities. 6. 
 
 Costs — Land Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Costs. 
 
 Costs— Member of vestry 23 Ch. D. 60 
 
 See Metropolis — ^Management Acts. 
 15. 
 ■ Costs — Previous application 25 Ch. D. 182 
 See Wateecouese. 4. 
 
 Costs, Security for — Action remitted to 
 
 County Court - - 13 ft. B. D. 835 
 
 See County Couet — Peactioe. 4. 
 
 Costs— Settled Land Act - 25 Ch. D. 651 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Pueohase- 
 
 MONEY. 3. 
 
 Costs— Shorthand notes 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Foemalities. 6. 
 
 Costs — Solicitor and client — Taxation 
 
 See Cases under Solioitoe — Bill of 
 Costs. 
 
 Costs — Trade-mark — Infringement 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 231 
 See Tbade-maek — ^Inpeinqement. 2. 
 
 Costs — Trustees. 
 
 See Cases under Teustee — Costs and 
 Ohaeges. 
 
 Costs — Winding up of company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Costs. 
 
 Costs — Winding-up of company 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 600 
 See Company — Uneegisteeed Company. 
 7. 
 
 Court of Appeal — Authority of previous 
 
 decision - - - 9 P. D. 96 
 
 See Peactioe — Admiealty — Jueisdic- 
 TION, 3. 
 
 PRACTICE- STTPEEME COTJET- 
 
 Court of Appeal — Order striking solicitor 
 
 off the rolls— Appeal 12 ft. B. D. 148 
 
 See Solioitoe — Misconduct. 1. 
 Criminal law — Jersey - 8 App. Cas. 304 
 
 See Colonial Law — Jeesey. 1. 
 
 Decree — Dissolution of partnership 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Paetnbeship — Dissolution. 1. 
 Ejectment — Writ of possession — Expiration 
 
 of Plaintiff's title - 15 ft. B. D. 294 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant— Ee-entey. 
 3. 
 Elegit — Bankruptcy — Seizure but not 
 
 delivery of goods - 12 ft. B. D. 224 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Secueed Cbeditoe. 
 10. 
 Evidence. 
 
 See Cases under Evidence, and Peactioe 
 — SuPEEME Couet — Evidence. 
 Foreclosure. 
 
 See Cases under Moetgage — Foee- 
 
 CLOSUEE. 
 
 Habeas corpus — Party to motion 
 
 ;See Habeas Coepus. [15 ft. B. D. 471 
 
 Husband, action by, against wife — Separate 
 
 estate .. - - 14 ft. B. D. 831 
 
 iSee Husband and Wife — Makbied 
 Women's Peopeety Acts. 9. 
 
 Infant — Carrying fund to separate account 
 
 —Ward of Court - - 25 Ch. D. 56 
 
 See Infant — Waed op Coubt. 2. 
 
 Infants Custody Act — Appeal 16 Ch. D. 115 
 
 See Infant — Custody. 2. 
 
 Injunction — Light 24 Ch. D. 282 
 
 See Light — Obsteuction. 1. 
 
 Injunction — Sale by mortgagee 24 Ch. D. 289 
 
 See Moetgage — Powebs. 4. 
 
 Injunction — Winding-up petition 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 555 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 9. 
 
 Inspection of books of company 28 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Company — Keconsteuction. 
 
 Interpleader — Bankruptcy 19 Ch. D. 216 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Appeal. 1. 
 Interpleader — Power to enter judgment 
 
 without ordering new trial 9 ft. B. D. 837 ; 
 [10 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Sep abate Es- 
 tate. 6. 
 Interrogatories — Winding-up of company 
 
 See Company — Evidence. 1. [16Ch, D. 68 
 Judgment of nonsuit in County Court — Bar 
 
 to action in Superior Court 7 ft. B. D. 329 
 
 See County Couet — Pbactice. 3. 
 Judgment recovered — Separate actions in 
 
 respect of same cause of action. 
 
 See Judgment. 5. [14 ft. B. D. 141 
 Justices of the Peace. 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Justices 
 — Peactioe. 
 
 Lancaster Court — Service out of jurisdiction 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 280 
 
 See Couet — Lancastee Coukt. 
 
( 1249 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1250 ) 
 
 PEACTICE— STJPREMi: COVRT— continued. 
 
 Landlord and tenant — Agreement to appoint 
 
 valuers— Rule of Court 15 Q. B. D. 426 
 See Arbitkation — Submission. 4. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Costs. 
 
 Legal demand — ^Pending litigation 
 
 See Will— Condition. 1. [21 Ch. D. 278 
 
 Lunacy. 
 
 See Cases under Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 
 
 Mandamus — Central Criminal Court 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 479 
 See Court — Central Criminal Court. 
 
 Mandamus — ^Return of unconditional com- 
 pliance - - - 14 Q. B, D. 13 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 
 Married Women's Propei-ty Act. 
 
 See Cases under Husband and Wipe — 
 Married Women's Property Acts. 
 
 Mayor's Court. 
 
 See Cases under Court — ^Mayor's Court. 
 
 Nautical assessors — Duty of — County 
 
 Coiut - - 6 P. D. 84 
 
 See County Court — Practice. 2. 
 
 Parties — Claim against glebe land 
 
 [20 Ch, S, 208 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioners. 
 
 Partition suit. 
 
 See Cases under Partition Suit. 
 
 Partnership — Judgment against firm 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 124 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 16. 
 
 Patent action. 
 
 See Cases under Patent — Practice. 
 
 Patent — Notice not to sell patented article 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 386 
 
 See Patent — Infringement. 4. 
 
 Patent — Particulars of objection — Amend- 
 ment - 26 Ch. D. 700 
 See Patent— Validity. 1. 
 
 Patent — Prolongation. 
 
 See Cases under Patent — Prolonga- 
 tion. 
 
 Production of documents — ^Deceased lunatic 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 673 
 
 See Lunatic — ^Deceased Lunatic. 
 
 Production of documents — Winding-up 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 714 
 See Company — Liquidator. 1. 
 
 Railway Commissioners — Power to state 
 
 case - - 15 ft. B. D. 505 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Regulation Acts. 4. 
 
 Res judicata — Order on petition — " Till 
 
 further order " - - 22 Ch. D. 182 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 5. 
 
 Security for costs — Appeal from winding-up 
 
 See Company— Appeal. [23 Ch. D. 370 
 
 Security for costs— Winding-up petition 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 457 
 See Company— Winding-up Order. 14. 
 
 PEACTICE— SUPREME COVRT— continmd. 
 
 Settled Estates Act. 
 
 See Cases under Settled Estates Acts. 
 
 Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Cases under Settled Land Act. 
 
 Solicitor — Unqualified practitioner — Attach- 
 ment—Contempt 8 ft. B. D. 187 ; 
 [15 ft. B. D. 348 
 
 See Solicitor— Unqualified. 1, 2. 
 
 Solicitors' Remuneration Act 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Bill of 
 Costs. 18—25. 
 
 Stop order — Mortgage — Priority 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 786 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 10. 
 Trustee Acts. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Acts. 
 Trustee Belief Act. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Relief Act. 
 
 Variance between rales of . Common Law 
 
 and Admiralty Courts — Collision 
 
 [10 ft B. D. 521 
 See Ship — Bill of Lading. 1. 
 
 Witness not within jurisdiction of Court — 
 
 Subpoena [12 ft. B. D. 39 
 
 See Evidence— Witness. 1. 
 
 .Wreck Commissioner — Shipping casualty — 
 
 Appeal— Evidence— Costs 6 P. D. 182 
 See Ship — ^Merchant Shipping Acts. 8. 
 
 Writ specially indorsed — Action for arrears 
 
 of alimony - - 13 ft. B. D. 865 
 
 See Action. 1. 
 
 PEECATOEY TETTST - - 27Ch. D. 394; 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 321 
 See Will — Precatory 'Trust. 1, 2. 
 PEECOGNITIONS— Admissibility of 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 489 
 See Scotch Law — ^Husband and Wife. 
 3. 
 PEE-EMPTION — Crown 
 public purposes 
 See Colonial 
 Wales. 1. 
 
 Right of 
 
 See London — Commissioners of Sewers. 
 
 Eight of— Superfluous lands 20 Ch. D. 418 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — -Superfluous 
 
 Lands. 1. 
 
 PEEEEEENCE SHAEES— Alteration in rights— 
 
 Ultrk vires act - 30 Ch. D. 376 
 
 See Company — Memorandum and 
 
 Articles. 1. 
 
 Building society - - 23 Ch. D. 440 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas, 519 
 See Building Society. 9. 
 
 Dividend out of profits — Reserved fund 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 344 
 See Company — ^Dividend. 4. 
 PEEFEEENTIAL DEBT— Bankruptcy 
 
 [26 Ch, D. 693 
 See Bankruptcy — Preferential Debts. 
 
 Winding-up of company. 
 
 See Company — Preferential Debts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 2 S 
 
 lands — Dedication to 
 6 App. Cas. 636 
 
 Law — New South 
 
 28 Ch, S. 486 
 
( 1251 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1252 ) 
 
 PEEFEEENTIAL B'EST— continued. 
 
 winding-up of company - 16 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Company — Pbefebential Debts. 
 PEELIMINAEY ACCOTTNTS— Order for 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 566, 834 
 See Pkactiob — Supreme Cotjet — In- 
 quiries AND Accounts, 1, 2. 
 PEEMITJM — Articled clerk — Death of solicitor 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 409 
 See SoLioiTOH — Articled Clerk. 
 
 Fire insurance — Payment out of rents — 
 
 Eight to money - - 23 Ch. D. 188 
 
 See Insurance, Fire. 2. 
 
 Life insurance — Payment by stranger 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 5S2 
 See Insurance, Life — Assignment. 
 
 Partnership— Eeturn of - 29 Ch. D. 170 
 
 See Partnership — Dissolution. 2. 
 
 28 Ch. S. 643 
 
 PEESCEIPTION — eoiitinued. 
 
 Liability by frontager to repair sea wall — . 
 
 Extraordinary violence of sea 
 
 PEEEOGATIVE OF CEOWN 
 
 See Crown. 
 - - 7 Q. B. S. 38 ; 8 App. Cas. 354 
 
 See Penal Action. 2. 
 PEESCEIPTION. 
 
 1. Eight of Way — Prescription Act (2 ifc 3 
 
 Wm. 4, c. 71), ss. 2, 4, 5, 6 — Sight to use Way for 
 the removal of Timber — User at long Intervals — 
 *' Enjoyment for full period of Twenty Years."^ 
 In an action where a right of way was claimed 
 under the Prescription Act (2 & 3 Wm. 4, o. 71), 
 in respect of twenty years' user as of right it ap- 
 
 "peared that the way had only been used by the 
 party claiming it — the Defendant — for the re- 
 moval of wood upon an adjoining close. The 
 ■wood was cut upon this close at intervals of 
 
 .•seyeral years ; the last cutting having been in the 
 year before the action was commenced, the one 
 •next previous twelve years before, and the next at 
 
 . another interval of twelve years. Between these 
 "intervals the road was occasionally stopped up, 
 but the Defendant used it as often as he wished 
 ■while the wood was being cut : — Held, that there 
 had not been an uninterrupted enjoyment of the 
 way for twenty years within the meaning of the 
 Prescription Act, which did not apply to so 
 discontinuous an easement as that claimed. — 
 Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. 
 HoLLiNS V. Verney 11 Q. B. D. 716 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 304 
 2. Eight of Way — Prescription Act,2& 
 
 . 3 Wm. 4, V. 71, s. 8 — Forty Tears' Enjoyment — 
 Memainderman — " Reversion expectant " on Term 
 
 . of Life or Tears.} Where a right of way is 
 claimed by virtue of forty years' enjoyment under 
 the Prescription Act, 2 & 3 Wm. 4, c. 71 ; the 
 period during which the servient tenement has 
 been vested in a tenant for life, with remninder in 
 fee, cannot be deducted from the period of fdrty 
 years' enjoyment — for the remainderman is not 
 
 ■ " a person entitled to the reversion expectant on 
 
 ■ a term " within s. 8. Symons v. Leaker 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 629 
 
 Common^Estovers - - 17 Ch. D. 635 
 
 See Common. 
 
 Easement - - 19 Ch. D. 22 
 
 See Easement. 2. 
 
 . Fishery 7 Q. B. D. 106 ; 7 App. Cas. 633 ; 
 
 See Fishery. 1, 3. [8 App. Cas. 135 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 561 
 . D. 462; 24Gh.D.l 
 
 3,4. 
 
 14 a. B. S. 
 
 245 
 
 See Sea Wall 
 
 — Light - 19 Ch. 
 
 See Light — Title. 
 : Market 
 
 See Market. 8. 
 -- — Scotch law— Highway 10 App. Cas. 378 
 
 See Scotch Law — Highway. 2. 
 Support of house 
 
 See Cases under Support. 
 
 Use of water — Eoman-Dutch law 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 336 
 
 See Colonial XjAW— Cape of Good 
 Hope. 4. 
 Watercourse — Unity of possession 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Watercourse. 5. [391 
 
 PEESENTATION OF CHEQUE— Laches 
 
 See Banker— Cheque. 1. [8 Q. B. D. 288 
 
 PEESENTATION TO CHTJECH — ConsoUdated 
 benefice — Quare impedit 15 Q. B. D. 432 
 See Advowson. 2. 
 PEESSUEE — Fraudulent preference 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 580 
 See Bankruptcy — Fraudulent Prefer- 
 ence. 4. 
 PRESIIMPTION — Ademption of legacy 
 
 See Will— Ademption. [28 Ch. D. 552 
 
 Continuance of cohabitation between hus- 
 
 band and wife - 11 Q. B. D. 118 
 
 See Criminal Law — Bigamy. 2. 
 Duration of life - - 6 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Criminal Law — ^Bigamy. 1. 
 Lost grant - - - 14 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Market. 3. 
 Marriage — Law of Ceylon 6 App. Cas. 364 
 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 3. 
 Purchase by conservators of river 
 
 See EivEE. [6 App. Cas. 686 
 Woman past childbearing 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Evidence — ^Presumption. 
 
 PEETENCED TITLE— Purchase of 
 
 [9 ft. BD. 128; 15 ft. B. S. 491 
 
 See Eight of Entry. 1, 2. 
 
 PEEVENTION OF CEIME. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Practice — Statutes. 
 PEIMOGENITUEE — Law of Malta —Construc- 
 tion of deed - 7 App. Cas. 166 ; 
 [8 App. Cas. 106 
 See Colonial Law— Malta. 1, 2. 
 
 .366 
 
 .245 
 
 PEINCIPAL AND AGENT :— 
 
 I. Agent's Authority 
 II. Agent's Liability 
 III. Peincipal's Liability 
 
 Col. 
 1252 
 1253 
 1257 
 
 I. PEINCIPAL AND AGENT— AGENT'S A1TTH0- 
 EITY. 
 1. Vendor and Purchaser — Misrepresenta- 
 tion by Vendor's Agent — Specific Performance 
 refused.2 An agent, Commissioned by a vendor to 
 find a purchaser, lias authority to describe the 
 property, and to state any fact or circumstance 
 which may affect the value, ao as to bind the 
 
( 1253 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1254 ) 
 
 I. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT— AGENT'S ATTTHO- 
 
 EITY — continued. , , . 
 
 vendor,; and if an agent so commissioned, makes 
 a false statement as to the desoTJption or value 
 (tiiough not instructed so to do), which the pur- 
 chaser is led to believe, and upon which he relies, 
 the vendor cannot recover in an action for, specific 
 performance. — -A surveyor was employed by the 
 ■owner of a leasehold house to find a purchaser. 
 He represented to the Defendant that another 
 person, H., was ready to buy the property for 
 £700, and that if the Defendant were to give £50 
 more, he would make a clear profit of 7 per cent. ; 
 that H. had further offered to rent the property 
 at £300, or the ground floor only at £200. The 
 Defendant, relying on the above representations 
 and others, which were unauthorized by the 
 vendor, and untrue, contracted to purchase for 
 £750 ; but afterwards, finding out the falsehood, 
 lefused to complete. — The vendor himself also 
 made a misleading statement to the purchaser : — 
 Held (independently of the statement made by 
 the vendor himself), that the false statements 
 made by the agent, being within his authority, 
 were sufficient to vitiate the contract ; and specific 
 performance refused. Mtolens v. Millbk 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 194 
 
 2. Warranty of Authority — Liability of 
 
 Agent — Measure of Damages — Contract to take 
 Shares — Winding-up — Summons hy lAgui'dator.'] 
 L. instructed his brokers to apply for fifty shares 
 at £1 each in a company which he named. They 
 by mistake applied for and obtained an allotment 
 to L. in another company. L. repudiated the 
 shares, but his name was placed on the register. 
 The company had at that time a very large 
 number of shares unallotted, and in the opinion 
 of the Court the shares were unsaleable in the 
 market. The company was soon afterwards wound 
 up, and the name of L. was removed on his 
 application from the list of contributorles. The 
 official liquidator then claimed £50 from the 
 brokers by way of damages for their misrepresen- 
 tation of authority :—jHeZd, that the general rule 
 as to measure of damages for breach of warranty 
 of authority was applicable; that the liquidator 
 was entitled to recover from the brokers the 
 amount which the company had lost by losing the 
 contract with L. ; and that as L. was solvent and 
 the shares unsaleable in the market, that loss was 
 represented by the whole sum of £50 payable for 
 the shares. In re National Coffee Palace 
 Company. Ex •parte Panmube 24 Ch. D. 367 
 
 II. PEINCIPAL AND AGENT— AGENT'S LIA- 
 BIIITY. 
 
 1. Agent for Purchase — Sale of Agent's 
 
 own Property to Principal — Non-disclosure — 
 Rescission of Contract^Aocount of Profit made by 
 AgentrrCompany — ; Winding-up — Director — Mis- 
 feasance—Companies Act, 18ti2 (25 & 26 Vict. 
 c. 89), s. 165.] In 1871 certain coal areas were 
 purchased for £5500 by six persons, of whom F. 
 was one, and were vested in G. as a trustee for 
 them without disqlpsing the trust. In 1873 a 
 company was formed for the purpose of purchasing 
 these areas and other property. F. was one of the 
 directors, and as such he concurred in effecting a 
 purchase by the company from G. for £12,000 
 
 II. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT — AGENT'S LIA- 
 BILITY — continued'. 
 cash, and £30,000 in fully paid-up shaie^ without 
 disclosing the fact tl;at F. was a part owner. In 
 1875 the company was ordered to be wound up. 
 In 1878 a meeting of contributories was called, at 
 which two rival schemes were brought forward, 
 one for repudiating the purchase of the coal areas, 
 the other for adopting the purchase and selling 
 the property. The latter scheme was adopted, 
 and was confirmed by the Court. The liquidator 
 accordingly sold the property, but at a heavy loss. 
 A contributory then took out a summons under 
 sect. 165 of the Companies Act, 1862, to make F. 
 liable for misfeasance as a director in allowing the 
 company's seal to be affixed to the agreement for 
 purchase by the company. Mr. Justice Pearson 
 dismissed the summons, holding that though the 
 company would have been entitled to rescind the 
 contract, yet as rescission had become impossible 
 no relief could be given against F. ; that as F. 
 when he acquired his interest in the property was 
 not a trustee for the company, he could not be 
 treated as having purchased on behalf of the com- 
 pany at the price he gave, and therefore was not 
 chargeable with the difference between the price 
 at which he bought and the price paid by the 
 company, and that he could not be charged with 
 the difference between the price paid by the com- 
 pany and the value of the property when the 
 comjpany bought it, as this would be making a 
 new contract between the parties : — ■ Held, by 
 Cotton and Fry, L.JJ., dissentiente Bowen, L.J., 
 that this decision was right. Iji re Cape Bketok 
 Company - - 26 Ch. D. 321 ; 29 Ch. D. 795 
 
 2. Broker signing as Principal — " Broker " 
 
 — Sale of Goods — ArMtration — Ai^cird — Jurisdic- 
 tion of Arbitrator — " Dispute arising on this Con- 
 tract."'] By a contract in writing, the Defendants 
 " sold to " the Plaintiffs a cargo of cotton seed cake 
 of a specified quality. . The contract contained a 
 clause that " should any of the above goods turn 
 out not equal to quality specified, they are to be 
 taken at an allowance, which allowance together 
 with any dispute arising on this ccintract is to be 
 settled by a,rbitration." The Defendants signed 
 the contract with the addition of the word 
 " brokers," and were acting as agents. Some 
 time after the contract was signed, the Defend- 
 ants named their principals. The cargo proved 
 to be of inferior quality, and an arbitration 
 (which the Plaintiffs did not attend) to determine 
 the liability of the Defendants was held; the 
 arbitrators decided by their award that the De- 
 fendants were not liable, inasmuch as a custom 
 existed" that a broker upon naming his principals 
 ceased to be liable on the contract. At the trial 
 of the action, the jury found that the alleged 
 custom did not exist : — Held, first, that the De- 
 fendants were personally liable on the contract : 
 secondly, by Brett, ,M.R., and Bowen, L.J., Fry, 
 L.J., dissenting, that the Defendants were not 
 relieved from liability by the award, inasmuch 
 as the arbitrators had exceeded thejr jurisdiction. 
 Hdtcheson & Co. V. Eaton & Son 13 Q. B. D. 861 
 
 3. Foreign Commission Agent— Goods 
 
 consigned not of Description ordered — Measure of 
 Damages.'] The Plaintiff, a merchant in London 
 gave orders to the Defendants, commission agents 
 
 2 S 2 
 
( 1255 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1256 ) 
 
 II. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT— AGENT'S LIA- 
 BILITY — continued. 
 in Hong Kong, to purchase for him a quantity of 
 a certain kind of opium. No such opium could 
 then be obtained at Hong Kong, but instead of 
 informing the Plaintiff of this fact, the Defen- 
 dants by mistake informed him that they could 
 procure it, and they purcliaeed and shipped to 
 the Plaintiff opium which they erroneously sup- 
 posed to be such as was ordered, but which was 
 really of an inferior description : — Held, that the 
 relation between the Plaintiff and Defendants 
 was not that of vendor and purchaser but of prin- 
 cipal and agent, and that therefore the true 
 measure of damages which the Plaintiff was 
 entitled to recover was not the difference between 
 the value of the opium ordered and that shipped, 
 but the loss actually sustained by the Plaintiff 
 in consequence of the opium not being of the 
 description ordered. Cassaboglotj v. Gibb 
 
 [9 Q. B. B. 220 ; 11 Q. B. D. 797 
 
 4. -^— Solicitor — Money received hy peti- 
 tioning Creditor's Solicitor from Debtor during 
 pendency of Bankrupt Petition^ and paid over to 
 petitioning Creditor.^ Pending the hearing of a 
 bankruptcy petition, and with notice of the act of 
 bankruptcy on which it was founded, the solicitor 
 of the petitioning creditor, as his agent, received 
 from the debtor various sums of money as con- 
 sideration for successive adjournments of the 
 hearing of the petition, and these sums he paid 
 over, or accounted for, to his client (the petition- 
 ing creditor). Afterwards an adjudication was 
 made on the petition: — Held, that the solicitor 
 having received the money with notice of the act 
 of bankruptcy to which the title of the trustee 
 related back, the payment by him was a wrongful 
 act, and he was liable to repay the money to tlie 
 trustee, and was not discharged by the payment 
 to his own principal. Ex parte Edwards. In re 
 Chapman - - - 13 Q. B. D. 747 
 
 5, Undisclosed Principal — Consignor and 
 
 Consignee — Sub-Contract — Privity of Contract — 
 Might to follow Goods or Proceeds— Trustee.'] The 
 Plaintiffs, who were landowners in New Zealand, 
 were in the habit of shipping wheat from New 
 Zealand to England for sale on the London 
 market, taking bills of lading which made the 
 wheat deliverable to themselves in London, and 
 indorsing these bills to M. & T., merchants and 
 factors at Glasgow, with instructions to sell the 
 wheat in London. M. & T. havmg no house or 
 agency in London were themselves in the habit 
 of indorsing these bills of lading to the Defen- 
 dants, who were comfactors and brokers in Lou- 
 don, for the purpose of their selling there the 
 wheat. When any sales were effected, M. & T. 
 delivered account sales to the Plaintiffs in the 
 usual form, deducting a del credere commission 
 of £3 per cent., while the terms upon which the 
 Defendants were employed by M. & T. were 
 different, being a factorage of £2 per cent, and 
 not a del credere commission. The indorsement 
 of the bills of lading by the Phdntiffii to M. k T. 
 and by M. & T. to the Defendants, was in each 
 case only for the purpose of selling the wheat 
 and without the intention of passing any pro- 
 perty in it. The Plaintiffs knew that the sales 
 effected for them by M. & '1'. in London were 
 
 II. PEINCIPAL AND AGENT— AGENT'S LIA- 
 BILITY — continued. 
 made by brokers employed by M. & T., but the 
 Plaintiffs were in no way parties to the particular 
 contracts of sale, nor were their names disclosed 
 upon them. The Defendants effected sales of 
 certain cargoes of wheat which had been so con- 
 signed for sale by the Plaintiffs in the above 
 mode, and paid the proceeds into their own ac- 
 count with their bankers, and from time to time 
 made remittances to M. & T. on account of them ; 
 but upon reference to the Defendants' books of 
 account the proceeds of the particular cargoes 
 could be separated and identified. — M. & T. car- 
 ried on a business at Leith as well as at Glasgow, 
 and they employed the Defendants in respect of 
 both, and when they stopped payment, which 
 they did, they were indebted to the Defendants- 
 upon the Leith account but not on the Glasgow 
 account. — The Plaintiffs having brought an action 
 against the Defendants for the net balance of the 
 proceeds of the said cargoes of wheat after deduc- 
 ting the remittances made to M. & T in respect 
 thereof but without giving credit due to them 
 from M. & T. on other transactions, the jury found 
 at the trial, first, that the Plaintiffs did not, 
 through their agents, employ the Defendants to 
 sell and account for the proceeds of the wheat ; 
 secondly, that the Defendants knew, or had reason 
 to believe, that M. & T. were acting in the sales as 
 agents for a third person : — Held, reversing the 
 judgment of Field, J., that the Plaintiffs were not 
 entitled to recover, as there was no privity of con- 
 tract between them and the Defendants, and the 
 Defendants did not stand in any fiduciary cha- 
 racter towards the Plaintiffs so as to entitle the 
 latter to follow the proceeds of their property in 
 the Defendants' hands, and as whatever right the 
 Plaintiffs might have had as owners to claim the 
 wheat before it had been sold, they had no right, 
 after such sale, to the proceeds, without giving 
 credit for the sum due to the Defendants from 
 M. & T. on their general account. New Zealand 
 
 AND ACSTKALIAN LAND COMPANY V. WaTSON 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 374 
 
 6. Tlndisclosed Principal — Provision in 
 
 bought and sold Notes for Settlement of Disputes 
 by Brohers — Custom of Trade making BroJcers 
 personally liable — Evidence of — Admissibility.'] A 
 written contract made by brokers on behalf of un- 
 disclosed principals for the snle of hides provided 
 that " if any diffei enoe or dispute shall arise under 
 this contract it is hereby mutually agreed between 
 the sellers and buyers that the same shall be 
 settled by the selling brokers, whose decision in 
 writing shall be final and binding on both sellers 
 and buyers." — In an action against the brokers 
 in respect of inferior hides delivered under the 
 contract, the buyers made a claim for the breach 
 against the brokers as principals by custom of the 
 trade : — Held, that evidence of a custom of the 
 trade that a broker who does not disclose his 
 principal is personally responsible for the perform- 
 ance of the contract and liable for the breach was 
 rightly rejected, as such custom was inconsistent 
 with the arbitration clause, which would, if the 
 custom were incorporated, make the brokers judges 
 in their own cause. Barbow v. Dystek 
 
 [13 Q. B, D. 635 
 
( 1257 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1258 ) 
 
 III. PBIHCIPAL AND AGENT — PEINCIPAI'S 
 LIABILITY. 
 
 1. Coatractor — Party Wall — Liability of 
 
 'adjoining Landow^iers.'] The Appellant and Re- 
 spondent were owners of adjoining houses between 
 ■which was a party-wall, the property of both. The 
 Appellant's house also adjoined B.'s house and 
 between them was a party-wall. The Appellant 
 employed a builder to pull down his house and 
 rabuild it on a plan whio'a involved the tying 
 together of the new house and the party- wall 
 between it and the Respondent's house, so that 
 if one fell the other would be damaged. In the 
 ■course of the rebuilding the builder's workmen 
 in fixing a staircase, negligently and without 
 *he knowledge of the Appellant, cut into the 
 party-wall between the Appellant's house and 
 B.'s house, in consequence of which the Ap- 
 pellant's house fell, and the fall dragged over 
 the party-wall between it and the Respondent's 
 house and injured tlie Respondent's house. The 
 cutting into the party-wall was not authorized 
 by the contract between the Appellant and his 
 builder : — Held, affirming the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal, that the law cast a duty upon 
 the Appellant to see that reasonable care and skill 
 were exercised in those operations whicli involved 
 a use of the party-wall belonging to himself and 
 tho Respondent, exposing it to the risk above- 
 mentioned ; and that the Appellant could not get 
 rid of responsibility by delegating the performance 
 to a third person ; and was liable to the Respon- 
 dent for the injury to his house. — Bower v. Peate 
 (1 Q. B. D. 321) commented on. Pekoival v. 
 HrGHES 9 Q. B. S, 441 ; 8 App. Cas. 443 
 
 2. Discharge of Principal — Mode of 
 
 dealing with Agent — Delay — Ship's Husband.'] 
 In order to discharge a principal from his liability 
 for a debt contracted by his agent the principal 
 must shew that the creditor has himself misled 
 Jiim into supposing that he has elected to give 
 exclusive credit to the agent, and that the prin- 
 cipal has been prejudiced by that supposition. 
 3Iere delay in enforcing payment from the agent 
 will not be sufficient for the purpose. — The Plain- 
 tiff sold stores for a ship to T., who was ship's 
 husband and managing owner. The Defendant 
 ■was part owner of the ship, and was also in- 
 terested jointly with T. in the adventure for 
 which the ship was being fitted out. The Plain- 
 tiff applied to T. for payment, but did not obtain 
 it. Three months after the goods were supplied, 
 and again two years afier that, the Defendant 
 settled accounts with T. and gave him credit for 
 the price of the goods, supposing that they liad 
 been paid for. More than three years after the 
 goods had been supplied, T. having become bank- 
 lupt, the Plaintiff for the first time applied for 
 payment to the Defendant and brought liis action 
 for the debt : — Held, that there had been no such 
 conduct on the part of the Plaintiff as would dis- 
 charge the Defendant from his liability. — Irvine 
 V. Watson (5 Q. B. D. 102), Heald v. Kenworthy 
 (10 Ex. 745), and Smethurst v. Mitchell (28 L. J. 
 <Q. B.) 241) contidered. Davison v. Donaldson 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 623 
 
 3. Employment of Agent to bet — Im- 
 plied Authority to pay Bet — When Authority is 
 irremeable— S & 9 Vict. «. 109, s. 18.] The em- 
 
 III. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT — PRINCIPAL'S 
 
 LIABILITY — continued. 
 ployment of an agent to make a bet in his own 
 name on behalf of his principal may imply an 
 authority to pay the bet if lost, and on the 
 making of the bet that authority may become 
 irrevocable. — So held, by Bowen and Fry, L.JJ., 
 Brett, M.R., dissenting. — Judgment of Haw- 
 kins, J., afSrmed. Read v. Andebson 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 100; 13 Q. B. D. 779 
 
 4. Stock Exchange — Usage of — 30 & 31 
 
 Vict. f. 29, s. 1 — Omission to specify Numbers — 
 Brokers' Right to Indemnity.'] The Defendant 
 employed the Plaintiffs, who were stockbrokers on 
 the Stock Exchange, to buy shares in a joint stock 
 banking company. He had on many previous 
 occasions employed the Plaintiffs to buy similar 
 shares, and on none of those occasions did the 
 contract or advice note forwarded to him specify 
 the distinguishing numbers of the shares pur- 
 chased. The Plaintiffs purchased the shares from 
 a jobber on the Stock Exchange in the usual way, 
 and forwarded to the Defendant a contract note in 
 the usual form, stating that the contract was made 
 subject to the rules and regulations of the Stock 
 Exchange. The contract was not made with re- 
 ference to any distinguishing numbers of the 
 shares, nor did the . contract note specify any 
 numbers. It is not the practice on the Stock Ex- 
 change to specify the numbers of the shares in 
 dealing in bank shares. The Defendant before 
 the settling-day wrote to the Plaintiffs repudiating 
 the contract, on the ground that the numbers of 
 the shares were not specified pursuant to 30 & 31 
 Vict. c. 29, s. 1. Notwithstanding such repudia- 
 tion, the Plaintiffs completed the contract and 
 paid for the shares. By the rules of the Stock 
 Exchange the committee only recognise the mem- 
 bers of the Stock Exchange as the parties to con- 
 tracts, and if a member does not carry out a con- 
 tract ho may be declared a defaulter and expelled 
 from the Stock Exchange, and " no application, 
 which has for its object to annul any bargain on 
 the Stock Exchange, shall be entertained by the 
 committee unless upon an allegation of fraud or 
 wilful misrepresentation." — The plaintiffs sued 
 the Defendant to recover the price of the shares 
 paid by them: — Held, by Mathew, J., on the 
 authority of Mead v. Anderson (13 Q. B. D. 779), 
 that the Plaintiffs were entitled to recover. Sey- 
 MOUK V. Bbidge - 14 Q. B. D. 460 
 
 5. Stock Exchange — Usage of — Banlc 
 
 Shares, Contract for Sale of — Failure to specify 
 Numbers of Shares— ZO & 31 Vict. c. 29, s. 1— 
 Broilers' Might to Indemnity.] The Defendant in- 
 structed the Plaintiffs, who were stockbrokers at 
 Bristol, to purchase for him shares in a joint stock 
 banking company on the Stock Exchange. The 
 Plaintiffs gave directions accordingly to their 
 London agents, brokers on the Stock Exchange, 
 who purchased the shares from jobbers on the 
 Stock Exchange in the usual way, without having 
 in the contract distinguishing numbers of the 
 shares, it not. being the "practice on the London 
 Stock Exchange tn specify the numbers or other- 
 wise to comply with 30 & 31 Vict. c. 29 (Leeman's 
 Act), s. 1. By the Rules of such Stock Exchange 
 it is provided that the Stock Exchange shall not 
 recognise in its dealings any other persons than 
 
( 1259 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1260 ) 
 
 in. PRINCIPAL AND AGENT— PBINCIPAL'S 
 
 llABILITY— continued. 
 its own members, such members, if they do not 
 carry out contracts, being liable to be expelled 
 from the Stock Exchange, and that no applica- 
 tion to annul a contract shall be entertained by 
 the committee of the Stock Exchange unless upon 
 a specific allegation of fraud, or wilfiil misrepre- 
 sentation. Before the settling day the Defendant 
 repudiated the contract, but the committee of the 
 Stock Exchange refused to annul the contract, 
 and therefore the Plaintiffs completed it, and paid 
 the price of the shares. The Defendant was igno- 
 rant of the usage of the London Stock Exchange 
 with regard to dealings in shares cpf banking com- 
 panies, and did not know that the purchasing 
 broker was by such usage bound to perform a 
 contract for the purchase of banking shares, 
 though void at law under Leeman's Act : — Held, 
 affirming the decision of Grove, J., that the Plain- 
 tiffs were not entitled to recover from the De- 
 fendant the money paid by them as the price of 
 the shares, since the usage of the Stock Exchange 
 to disregard Leeman's Act, and to recognise as 
 valid a contract which was made contrary to that 
 Act, was unreasonable as against strangers who 
 did not know it, and therefore was not binding on 
 the Defendant. Peeet v. Barnett 
 
 [14 a. B. 1).467; 15 Q. B. D. 388 
 
 6. ITndiselosed Principal — Frivitij of Con- 
 tract between Principal and Consignee — Money had 
 and received — Notice or Knowledge — Set-off — 
 Factors Act (6 Geo. 4, c. 94), s. 1.] Merchants in 
 London, upon the instruction of shipping agents 
 at Havannah with respect to a cargo of tobacco to 
 be consigned to the London merchants and after 
 receiving the shipping documents, effected policies 
 of marine insurance in the ordinary form on behalf 
 and for the benefit of all parties whom it might 
 concern. The Havannah agents shipped and con- 
 signed the tobacco in their own names, but were 
 in fact acting as commission agents for Havannah 
 merchants to whom the tobacco belonged; and 
 the London merchants before effecting the policies 
 had notice that the Havannah agents had an un- 
 named principal. A total loss having occurred 
 the London merchants received the policy moneys, 
 but before receipt had notice that the moneys 
 were claimed by the Havannah principals : — Held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court of Appeal, that 
 an action lay by tbe Havannah principals against 
 the London merchiints for the policy moneys ; that 
 the London merchants were not entitled to a lien 
 upon the moneys lor the balance of their general 
 account with the Havannah agents, and could not 
 in that action set ofl' their claim to that balance, 
 or set off anything except the premium, stamps 
 and commission in respect of the insurance. — 
 Held also by Lord Blackburn, that the case fell 
 within the Factors Act (6 Geo. 4, c. 94), s. 1. — 
 Sed qusere by Lord FitzGerald. BIaspons v. Mil- 
 deed - 9 Q. B, D. 630 ; 8 App, Cas. 874 
 
 7. Wagering — ^grent hetting for Prin- 
 cipal — Action for the Money received — 8 & 9 Vict. 
 c. 109, 8. 18.] The Plaintiff employed the De- 
 fendant for a commission to make bets for him 
 on horses. The Defendant accordingly made 
 such bets, and he received the winnings from 
 the persons with whom he had so betted. In an 
 
 III. PRINCIPAL 4.ND AGENT— PBINCIPAL'S 
 
 LIABILITY — continued. 
 action by the Plaintiff for the amount which the 
 Defendant had so received: — Held, that 8 & 9 
 Vict. 0. 109, s. 18, which makes null and void all 
 contracts by way of wagering, did not apply to 
 the contract between the Plaintiff and Defendant, 
 and that, therefore, notwithstanding that statute, 
 the Plaintiff was entitled to recover in respect of 
 the bets which had been so paid to the Defen- 
 dant.— .Bej/er V. Adams (26 L. J. (Ch.) 841) over- 
 ruled. Beidgee v. Savage - 15 Q. B. D. 36a 
 
 PRINCIPAL AND AGENT— Agent for sale— Duty 
 on pm-ohase-money - 8 App. Cas. 309 
 See Colonial Law — Cape of Good 
 Hope. 3. 
 
 Authority to receive mortgage debts 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 24» 
 See Solicitor — Authority. 
 
 Commission agent — Goods bought for foreign 
 
 principal — Stoppage in transitu 
 
 [IS Q. B. B. 39 
 See Sale of Goods — Lien. 4. 
 
 Commission on sale, subject to title being 
 
 approved by solicitor - 9 Q. B. D. 276 
 See Condition. 2. 
 
 Committee of voluntary fund 28 Ch. D. 428 
 
 See Charity — Management. 4. 
 
 Company — Share certificate issued by secre- 
 tary 13 ft. B. D. lOS 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 2. 
 
 Contractor: — Support of adjacent soil 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 281 ; 6 App. Cas. 74& 
 .See Support. 2, 3. 
 
 Factor— Lien 24 Ch. D. 64 ; 25 Ch. D. 31 ; 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 630 ; 8 App. Cas. 874 ; 
 See Factor. 1, 2, 3. [10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 Liability of agent - 24 Ch. D. 339 
 
 See Bakkeuptcy — Assets. 9. 
 
 Power of attorney 9 App. Cas. 561 
 
 See PowEE OF Attorney. 1. 
 
 Privity of contract — Shipowners — Charterer 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 120> 
 See Colonial Law — Queessland. 
 
 Eight to follow trust funds — Bankruptcy 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 264 
 See Bankeuptoy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 7. 
 
 Securities for bills of exchange 29 Ch. D. 81S 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Securities foe. 
 4. 
 
 Ship's necessaries — Managing owner — 
 
 Authority 6 Q. B. D. 93 
 
 See Ship — Owners. 2. 
 
 — — Statement by agent — Evidence 
 
 [22Ch.D.69S 
 
 See Evidence — Geneeal. 4. 
 
 Warranty of authority — Building society 
 
 [6Q. B.D. 696 
 
 See Building Society. 10. 
 
 Wife— Liability of husband 6 App. Cas. 24. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Liability 
 of Husband. 
 
( 1261 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 12G2 ) 
 
 PEINCIPAL AND STTEETY:— 
 
 I. CONTKAOT - 
 II. OONTEIBUTION 
 
 III. Discharge 
 
 IV. Indemnity 
 V. Liability '- 
 
 Col. 
 1261 
 1262 
 1262 
 1263 
 1265 
 
 I. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY— CONTRACT. 
 
 ■ Guarantee — Construction — Determina- 
 tion—Death of Guarantor — Contract for Benefit of 
 Third Party — Bight to sue — Measure of Damages 
 — Trustee.'] In May, 1863, a father on the occasion 
 of the admission of his' son as an underwriting 
 member of Lloyd's, addressed to the managing 
 committee of that body a letter, by which he held 
 himself responsible for all hi.q son's engagements 
 in that capacity. Lloyd's was tlien a volun- 
 tary association, governed by certain by-laws, 
 under whicli a, person once admitted a member 
 could not be excluded from membership except 
 in the event of his bankruptcy or insolvency. 
 The association consisted of underwriting mem- 
 bers, non-underwriting members, and subscribers. 
 The practice of the underwriting members was to 
 underwrite policies of marine insurance for the 
 benefit of various owners of property, both mem- 
 bers of the association and outsiders, but the 
 policies with outsiders could only be etfected 
 through the agency of insurance brokers who were 
 either members of or subscribers to the associa- 
 tion. The association as such incurred no liability 
 on the policies underwritten by its members. In 
 1871 the Society was incorporated by Act of 
 Parliament, all the rights of the committee on 
 behalf of the members being vested by tlie Act in 
 the corporation. In 1876 tlie father die I, and 
 notice of his death was shortly afterwards given 
 to Lloyd's. In 1878 the son became banki-upt, 
 and thereupon ceased to be a member of Lloyd's : 
 — Held, by the Court of Appeal, affirming the 
 decision of Fry, J. : — (1.) 'That the guarantee 
 was not determined by the death of the father 
 or by the notice of it, but that his estate 
 was liable in respect of engagements contracted 
 by the son after his death : — (2.) That the 
 guarantee extended to all engagements con- 
 tracted by the son as an underwriting mem- 
 ber of Lloyd's, whether with members or with 
 outsiders: — (3.) That the committee of Lloyd's 
 and the corporation of Lloyd's as their successors, 
 were trustees of the benefit of the guarantee for 
 all the persons, whether members or outsiders, 
 with whom the son had contracted engagements 
 as an underwriting member, and that the corpo- 
 ration could maintain an action to enforce the 
 guarantee against the father's estate for the 
 benefit of all those persons ; on the ground, as to 
 the outsiders, that the brokers, through whom 
 the son's engagements with them were con- 
 tracted, were trustees for their principals of the 
 right which they themselves had to call on their 
 own agents, Lloyd's, to enforce the guarantee for 
 their benefit. — A guarantee the consideration for 
 which is given once for all, cannot be determined 
 by the guarantor, and does not cease on his death. 
 — ^Whether a guarantee for future advances, 
 which the party guaranteed i's not bound to 
 make, is not determinable by the guarantor, and 
 whether it does not cease on notice of his death, 
 quxre. Lloyd's v. Hakpek - 16 Ch. D. 290 
 
 IL PRINCIPALAND SURETY— CONTRIBUTION. 
 
 1. Co-Sureties — Bankruptcy' petition — 
 
 ■Petitioning Creditor's pebf] A' ' SUrety is not 
 entitled to call upon his co-sUrety foi? contribution 
 until he has paid more than his proportion of the 
 debt due to the principal creditor, even though 
 the co-surety has not been required by tlife creditor 
 to pay anything, provided that the co-surety has 
 not been released by the creditor. — Davies v. Srnn- 
 phreys (6 M. & W. 153) followed. — Crayth'orne v. 
 Swinhume (14 Ves. 160) discussed. Ex parte 
 Snowdon. In re Snowdon 17 Ch. D. 44 
 
 2. Co-Sureties — Promissory Notes for 
 
 Mon-ys horrowed — Action against one Surety — 
 Payment of Debt — Policies effected on Life of 
 Principal Debtor — Assignme^it of Policies after 
 Assured's Death to Surety's Fatlier who had paid 
 the Premiums — Bight to Policy Moneys.] C. being 
 indebted to D., four of his friends joined him 
 in signing and giving four promissory notes to 
 secure the payment to D., of thS sum of £13;000 
 find interest. D. etfected three policies on the 
 life of C. for, in the aggregate. £10,000.— In 1867, 
 Lord H. of B., one of the co-sureties, haviilg beeiu 
 sued by D. on the notes, paid, witli the assistance 
 of his father, the Earl of E., the £13,000 and 
 interest by a mortgage of estates which were 
 settled upon the Earl for life with remainder to 
 Lord H. of E. ; and the Earl having paid the pre- 
 miums and kept the policies on foot, in September, 
 1871, shortly after the death of C. obtained an 
 assignment from D. of the policies and received 
 the £10,000 from the insurance office. — A. another 
 of the four sureties died. His estate, which was 
 stated to be insolvent, was being administered by 
 the Court, and Lord H. of E. brought in a claim 
 against it for contribution in respect of the sum 
 paid to D. on the notes : — Held, that, under all the 
 circumstances of the case. Lord H. of E. and his 
 father, the Earl, must be treated as one person, 
 and that the claim for contribution would be 
 allowed, but only after Lord H. of E. had brought 
 into account, as a set-off, the moneys which were 
 received on the three policies assigned to the Earl, 
 credit being first given for the premiums and other 
 moneys which had been paid in reference to the 
 transaction. In re Arcedeokne. Atkins v. Ae- 
 CEDECKNE - - - 24 Ch. D. 709 
 
 3. Co-Sureties — Security given by prin- 
 cipal Debtor to one co-Surety^ A surety, who 
 has obtained from the principal debtor a counter- 
 security for the liability which lie has under- 
 taken, is bound to bring into hotolipot, for the 
 benefit of his co-sureties, whatever he receives 
 from that source, even though he consented to be 
 a surety only upon the terms of having the secu- 
 rity, and the co-sureties were, when they entered 
 into the contraet of suretyship, ignorant of his 
 agreement for security. — The American cases 
 Miller v. Sawyer (30 Vermont, 412) and Hall v. 
 Bobinson (8 Iredell, 56) followed. Steel v. 
 Dixon - - 17 Ch. D. 835 
 
 IIL PRINCIPAL AND SURETY— DISCHARGE. 
 
 1. Co-Sureties in Severalty— Belease — 
 
 Pleading.] Where two or more sureties contract 
 severally the creditor does not break the contract 
 with one of them by releasing the other. The 
 contract remaining entire, the surety in order to 
 
( 1263 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1261 ) 
 
 in. PRINCIPAL AND SITEETy— DISCHARGE 
 
 — continued. 
 escape liability must shew an existing right to 
 contribution from his co-stirety which lias been 
 taken away or injuriously affected by his release. 
 — Held, in an action upon a guarantee, that a 
 plea to the effect that M. was the Defendant's 
 co-surety, and had been released in consideration 
 of a new guarantee given to the Plaintiff, con- 
 stituted no defence : the plea nowhere averring 
 or implying that the liability was joint, or that 
 the Defendant became surety on the faith of M.'s 
 co-suretyship, or that any right of contribution 
 had arisen against M. which had been taken 
 away or injuriously affected, or that the Defen- 
 dant had suffered any damage or injury by the 
 substitution described. Wakd v. National Bank 
 OF New Zealand 8 App. Cas. 7S6 
 
 2, Death of Co-Surety — Joint and Several 
 
 continuing Guarantee — Liability of surviving Co- 
 surety^ The death of one of the co-sureties 
 undei- a joint and several continuing guarantee 
 does not by itself determine the future liability 
 of the surviving co-surety. — Claim, that by a 
 bond G. and H., as principals, and the Defendant 
 and W., since deceS/Sed, as sureties, became jointly 
 and severally bound to the Plaintiffs, subject to a 
 condition that if the obligors should repay to the 
 obligees all sums of money to be by them 
 advanced to G. and H., so that the Defendant 
 and W. should not be responsible for more than 
 £250, the bond should become void : that W. died 
 before action : that after his death the Plaintiffs 
 made advances to G . and H. : that G. and H. 
 liquidated their affairs by arrangement pursuant 
 to the Bankruptcy Act, 1869 : that more than 
 £250 was owing from them to the Plaintiffs. — 
 Defence, that shortly after the decease of W. the 
 Plaintiffs had notice of the existence of his will, 
 and that executors thereunder had proved it : — 
 Eeld, upon demurrer, that the defence was bad. 
 Beckett v. Addyman 9 Q. B. D. 783 
 
 3, Laches — Acceptance of Bill of Ex- 
 change in Blanl: — Omission to fill up Drawer's 
 Name after Death of Acceptor.'] A debtor gave 
 his creditor a bill of exchange accepted by himself, 
 but with the drawer's name left blank. The Plain- 
 tiff at the same time, as a surety, deposited with 
 thecreditor certificates of stock in a joint stock 
 company as collateral security for the debt. — The 
 debtor died without the creditor having filled in 
 the name of the drawer, and his estate was in- 
 solvent. — The bill was never presented for pay- 
 ment, nor was notice given to the Plaintiff of its 
 non-payment : — Held, that the creditor had not 
 discharged the Plaintiff from his suretyship by 
 his omission to fill up the drawer's name and to 
 give notice of the non-payment of the bill to the 
 Plaintiff. Carter v. White 26 Oh. D. 666 
 
 IV. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY— INDEMNITY. 
 
 1. Indorser of Bill of Exchange — Surety 
 
 — Securities.] The acceptor of a hill of ex- 
 change knows that, by his acceptance, he does 
 an act which will make him liable to indemnify 
 any indorser of it who may afterwards pay it. 
 The indorser is a surety for the payment to the 
 holder, and having paid it, is entitled to the 
 benefit of any securities to cover it deposited 
 
 IV. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY— INDEMNITY 
 
 — continued. 
 with the holder by the acceptor. — He is so 
 entitled whether at the time of his indorsement 
 he knew, or did not know, of the deposit of those 
 securities. — The surety's right in this respect in 
 no way depends on contract, but is the result of 
 the equity of indemnification attendant on the 
 suretyship. — S. 0. K., one of the partners of 
 S. E. & Sons, in December, 1874, deposited with 
 the N. & S. W. Bank the title deeds of two of his 
 own freehold properties, and signed a memoran- 
 dum acknowledging them to be deposited as 
 securities for what the N. & S. W. Bank might 
 advance to the firm in the way of discounts. — In 
 November, 1875, D. & Co. sold to E. & Sons a 
 cargo of com to be paid for in cash. Cash was 
 paid only for part. E. & Sons offered a biU of 
 exchange for the rest, which was declined- 
 
 D. & Co. were customers of the N. & S. W. Bank. 
 
 E. & Sons said if D. & Co. would inquiie of those 
 bankers they would find it would be all right 
 with the E. bills. The bank manager refused to 
 discount the bill without the indorsement of 
 D. & Co., but said that he believed D. & Co. 
 would incur no more than a nominal liability 
 by putting their names on the bill. D. & Co. 
 thereupon consented to take the bill, indorsed it 
 in the ordinary way, and it was discounted by the 
 bunk and carried to their credit. In January, 
 1876, E. & Sons stopped payment. The bill 
 became due in Febjuary, and was dishonoured. 
 D. & Co., who then became acquainted with the 
 fact that securities had been deposited with the 
 bankers to cover advances on E. & Son's bills, 
 brought an action against the N. & S. W. Bank 
 to have the benefit, so far as they would go, of 
 the securities deposited in December, 1874, claim- 
 ing to be sureties to the bankers for what was due 
 upon the bill. — Held, that D. & Co. were sureties 
 on the bill, and that as such they were entitled 
 to the benefit of these securities. Duncan, Fox 
 
 & Co. V. NOBTH AND SODTH WALES BaNK 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 1 
 
 2. Mortgage of Premises and Policy — 
 
 Proviso for Redemption — Surety, Covenant by, to 
 pay Interest and Premiums — Siibsequent Advances 
 by Mortgagee — Payment of Interest and Premiums 
 by Surety — Eight of Surety to a Transfer of the 
 Securities.'] In December, 1854, S. assigned 
 certain premises and a policy of assurance to 
 secure the repayment of a sum of £200 advanced 
 to him by W., and interest. The proviso for re- 
 demption was that on payment of the money W. 
 would re-assign the premises and policy unto S., 
 his executors, admiuistrators, or assigns, or as he 
 or they should direct. F. by the same inden- 
 ture, as surety, covenanted, for himself only, 
 with W. thnt while the £200 or any part should 
 remain owing he would pay the interest and pre- 
 miums, and he also assigned a policy on his own 
 life, and covenanted to pay the premiums. W. 
 at four different periods between May, 1856, and 
 May, 1866, advanced moneys amounting to £530 
 to S. on the security of the same premises. S. 
 made default in the payment of interest. W. died 
 in 1878, and his executors made a demand upon F. 
 for all arrears, which he paid, and he also paid 
 the premiums ou the policy of S. : — Seld, that F. 
 
( 1265 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1266 ) 
 
 IV. PEINCIPAL AND SURETY— INDEMNITY 
 — continiied. 
 
 was entitled to have a transfer of all the securities 
 on payment of what was due upon the mortgage of 
 December, 185i.— Williams v. Owen (13 Sim. 597) 
 not followed. Newton v. Chorlton (10 Hare, 646) 
 followed. PoBBES V. Jackson - 19 Ch. D. 615 
 
 V. PEINCIPAL AND SUBETY— LIABILITY. 
 
 1- Bond to Oaardians — Collection of Rates 
 
 — Overseers.'] The Defendant as surety gave a 
 bond to the guardians of the poor for the M. Union 
 conditioned for the due discharge by C. of his 
 duties as collector of poor-rates for the parish of N. 
 C absconded, having embezzled part of the rates 
 and allowed others to be lost by not applying for 
 them. The guardians sued the Defendant for the 
 loss. The Defendant admitted his liability as to 
 the sums embezzled, but disputed his- liability as 
 to the sums lost by C.'s negligence, on the ground 
 that the loss would not have occurred if 0. had 
 been called upon to account as he ought to have 
 been. It appeared that no negligence could be 
 imputed to the guardians, but there appeared 
 some ground to believe that if the overseers of 
 the parish of N. had discharged their statutory 
 duties with reasonable care the loss would not 
 have occurred •.—Meld, affirming the decision of 
 Watkin Williams, J., that the Plaintiffs were en- 
 titled to recover from the Defendants the moneys 
 lost through failure of C. to collect them, for that 
 there had been no negligence on the part of the 
 Plaintiffs, and they were not answerable for the 
 negligence of the overseers. Guakdians op Mans- 
 field Union d. Weight - 9 Q. B. D. 683 
 
 2. Guarantee of Account at Bank — Debtor 
 
 and Creditor — Death of Surety — Appropriation of 
 Payments.] S. guaranteed the account of T. at a 
 bank by two guarantees, one for £150, the other 
 for £400. By the terms of the guarantees the 
 surety guaranteed to the bank " the repayment 
 of all moneys which shall at any time be due 
 from " the customer " to you on the general 
 balance of his account with you ;" the guarantee 
 was moreover to be '■ a continuing guarantee to 
 the extent at any one time of" the sums respec- 
 tively named, and was not to be considered as 
 wholly or partially satisfied by the payment at 
 any time of any sums diie on such general 
 balance; and any indulgence granted by ^e 
 bank was not to prejudice the guarantee. — S. 
 having died, leaving T. and another exeoators, 
 the bank on receiving notice of his death, without 
 any communication with the executors beyond 
 what would appear in T.'s pass-book, closed T.'s 
 account, which was overdrawn, and opened a new 
 account with him, in which they did not debit 
 him with the amount of the overdraft, but debited 
 him with interest on the same; and continued the 
 account until he went into liquidation, when it 
 also was overdrawn : — Held, by Bacon, V.O., that 
 payments in after the death of the surety went in 
 discharge of the overdraft, alike on the terms of 
 guarantee, and on the principle of Clayton's Case 
 (1 Mer. 572, 605), and that, as the amount of such 
 payments exceeded the overdraft, the bank were 
 not entitled to prove against the estate of the 
 father-in-law.-^J?eM, on appeal, that there was no 
 contract express "or implied which obliged the 
 debtor and creditor to appropriate to the old over- 
 
 V. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY— LIABILITY— 
 
 continued. 
 draft the payments made by the debtor after the 
 determination of the guarantee, and that the bank 
 were entitled to prove against the estate of S. for 
 the amount of the old overdraft less the amount 
 of the dividend which they had received on it in 
 the liquidation. In re Sheeby. London and 
 County Banking Company v. Terry 
 
 [25 Ch, D. 692 
 
 3. Judgment against Principal — Evidence 
 
 Liability of Surety.] In the absence of special 
 agreement ajudgment oranaward against a princi- 
 pal debtor is not binding on the surety, and is not 
 evidence against him in an action against him by 
 the creditor, but the surety is entitled to have 
 the liability proved as against him in the same 
 way as against the principal debtor. — The Ameri- 
 can case Douglass v. Sowland (24 Wendell, 35) 
 followed. Ex parte Young. In re Kitchen 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 668 
 PEINCIPAL AND SURETY— Liability of surety 
 — Proof in bankruptcy ■ 17 Ch, D. 98 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 11. 
 
 Liability of surety — ^Debt due to principal 
 
 See Set-oi?f. 2. [6 ft. B, D, 640 
 
 FEINTING — Evidence in previous action — Costs 
 
 [9 P. p, 126 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 6. 
 
 FEIOBITY — Administration action — Secured cre- 
 ditors - 20 Ch. D, 546 
 See Executor — Actions. 20. 
 
 Administration action — Unregistered judg- 
 ment - - 21 Ch. D. 189 
 See ExECDTOE — Actions. 6. 
 
 Assignment of chose in action — Notice 
 
 [18 Ch, D. 381 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 Contemporaneous deeds - 21 Ch. D. 762 
 
 See Deed. 1. 
 
 Contribution — Indorsers of promissory note 
 
 [8 App, Cas, 733 
 See Bill of Exchange — Liability of 
 Parties. 
 
 Costs in winding-up — ^Liquidator — Litiga- 
 tion ■ 23 Ch. D. 511 ; 27 Ch, D. 33 
 See Company— Costs. 2, 3. 
 
 Debentures 16 Ch. D, 411 ; 18 Ch, D. 334 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 317 ; 8 App. Cas, 780 
 See Company — Debentures. 1, 6, 7. 
 
 Judgment 29 Ch. D. 627 
 
 See Judgment. 4. 
 
 Legacies - 17 Ch. D. 798 
 
 See Will — ^Priority of Legacies. 
 
 Lunatic — Maintenance — Claims of creditors 
 
 [23 Ch. D, 677 
 
 See Lunatic — Maintenance. 2. 
 Material men — ^Wages 9 P, D. 37 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 5. 
 Mortgages. 
 
 See Cases under Mortgage — Priority. 
 
 Mortgage — Creditors' deed - 29 Ch, D. 746 
 
 See Creditors' Deed. 
 
 Mortgage — Middlesex registry 
 
 See Kegistry Acts, [29 Ch, D, 702 
 
( 1267 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1268 ) 
 
 PEIORITY— coraimzted. , 
 
 Mortgage — Money entrusted to solicitor 
 
 , [19Ch. D. 207 
 
 See SoLiciTOB — Liabilities. 3. 
 
 Mortgage to building sooietv 
 
 [28 Ch. D, 298, 398 
 
 See BuiiiDiNG Society. 12, 13. 
 Mortgage— Eenewable lease 29 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 4. 
 
 Mortgage of shares — Lien of company 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Shahes — Thanbfer. 3. 
 Patent— Publication 21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 2. 
 Patent— User - 19 Ch. D. 268 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 4. 
 Shares held in trust — ^Lien of company on 
 
 shares - - - 21 Ch. D. 302 
 
 See Company — Member's Liability. 3. 
 Stop order - 23 Ch. D. 497 
 
 SeePEAcncE — Sufeeme CornT — Chabg- 
 ING Orders. 3. 
 Winding-up of company — Directors' fees 
 
 See Company— Peooe. 1. [30Ch.D.629 
 PEISON. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 64 {the Central 
 Criminal Court Prisons Act, 1881) applies the 
 ruleimade under sect. 24 of the Prisons Act, 1877 
 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 21) to the Central Criminal Court 
 District. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Yict. c. 51, remoi;es doubts as 
 to the powers of the Secretary of State in relation 
 to the altering, enlarging, rebuilding, and iuildimi 
 of prisons and appropriating any building for a 
 prison under the Prison Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Yict. 
 C.21). 
 
 Eepeal.] Sect. 2 (5) repeals sects. 23 to 29 
 inclusive of the Prison Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. 
 V. 126). 
 
 Prison Charity.] By 45 <fc 46 Vict. c. 65 {the 
 Prisons Charity Act, 1882), s. 2, the Charity Com- 
 missioners may, on the application of the Secretary 
 of State, make an order for the establishment of a 
 scheme for the administration of a prison charity. 
 The expression "prison charity " means a charity 
 the endowment of which or part of the endowment 
 of which is applicable for the benefit of any pri- 
 soners, or for any purpose connected with any 
 prisoners or prison, whether the prisoners be con- 
 fined in or the prison be a common gaol, house of 
 correction, or other place of confinement. 
 
 1. ■ Governor — Superannuation — Compen- 
 sation Allowance— SpecialMinute— Superannuation 
 Act 1859 (22 Vict. c. 26) ss. 2, 4, 1— Prison Act 
 1877 (40 & 41 Yict. c. 21) s. 36.— At the time when 
 the Prison Act 1877 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 21) came 
 into force C. was the governor of a prison which 
 by that Act was transferred to the Home Secre- 
 tary. Up to that time the county justices had 
 been the, prison authority. Soon after the Act 
 came into force C. retired, and the Lords Com- 
 missioners of the Treasury awarded him an 
 annuity calculated upon ^jths of his salary and 
 emoluMents, or 5'jth per annum for thirty -eight 
 years ; viz. IJths for his twenty-three years of 
 actual service under the county justices ; with 
 ^gths added for ten years because he had retired 
 
 FBISOB' — continued. 
 
 for the purpose of facilitating improvements in 
 the organisation of the prison department ; and 
 Ijths added for five years under sect. 4 of the 
 Superannuation Act 1859 (22 Vict. c. 26). The 
 Commissioners apportioned |gths of the annuity 
 to be paid by- the county justices out of the 
 county rates, leaving the JJths to be paid out of 
 grants provided by Parliament. C. was under 
 sixty years of age, and wns not incapacitated by 
 illness or otherwise. The Commissioners did not 
 make or lay before Parliament a special minute 
 within the meaning of sect. 7 of the Superannua- 
 tion Act 1859 :—Eeld, affirming the decision of 
 the Court of Appeal, that the provision in sect. 7 
 of the Superannuation Act, 1859 as to a special 
 minute was directory only ; that the Commission- 
 ers had power to make the award under the 
 Prison Act 1877, s. 36, and the Superannuation 
 Act 1859, ss. 2. 4, and 7 ; and that the county 
 justices were liable for the proportion charged 
 upon them. Justices op Middlesex v. The 
 Queen - 11 Q. B. D. 656 ; 9 App. Cas. 757 
 
 2. Maintenance of Prisoners — Committal 
 
 to Prison — Expenses of conveying to Prison — 
 Prison Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 21), ss. 4, 57.] 
 The expenses of conveying to prison persons 
 who are committed to prison either for punish- 
 ment or to take their trial and are unable to 
 pay those expenses are "expenses incurred in 
 respect of the maintenance of prisoners," within 
 sects. 4 and 57 of the Prison Act, 1877 (40 & 41 
 Vict. c. 21), and those sections ti-ansfer the lia- 
 bility for such expenses from county rates to 
 moneys provided by Parliament. Mullins v. 
 Teeasueee of the County oe Sueeey 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 156; 7 App. Cas. 1 
 
 3. Purchase of Land — Land bought for 
 
 the purpose of rendering Prison more commodious 
 or safe — Prison Commissioners — Prison Act, 1865 
 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 126), ss. 4, 5, 8, 23, ■O^Prisoti 
 Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Yict. c. 21), ss. 5, iS, 60— Evi- 
 dence — Sale of Land — Intention of Parties to Con- 
 veyance.'] In 1867 the justices of the county of 
 M. bought land covered with houses subject to 
 leases for long terms, several years of which re- 
 mained unexpired. The land and the houses 
 were conveyed to the clerk of the peace for the 
 county, " upon trust for Justices of the county of 
 SI., for the purposes of the Prison Act, 1865, and 
 upon or for no other trust, intent, or purpose 
 whatsoever." The land and houses were never 
 used as part of the prisou. An action having 
 been brought to try whether the reversion iu the 
 land and houses was in the Prison Commissionei-s 
 or the justices, the Defendant proposed to adduce 
 as evidence the minutes of the proceedings of the 
 justices in order to shew that the land had been 
 bouglit for the purpose of rendering the prison 
 more commodious or safe : — Held, that the rever- 
 sion in the land and the houses standing thereon 
 had passed to the Prison Commissioners by virtue 
 of the Prison Act, 1877.— Per Jessel, M.B., that 
 the conveyance having been executed, the minutes 
 of the proceedings of the justices were inadmis- 
 sible as evidence shewing the purpose for which 
 the land and the houses had been bought. Prison 
 Commissionees v. Cleex of the Peace foe Mid- 
 dlesex - - 9 ft. B. D. 806 
 
( 1200 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES, 
 
 ( 1270 ■ ) 
 
 FBISOKEB — Expense of Conveying to prison 
 
 [6 Q. B. D.'l56 ; 7 App. Cas. 1 
 See Pkison. 2. 
 
 Habeas corpus - - - 15 Q. B. D. 471 
 
 See Habeas Cokpus. 
 PEIVATE IMPROVEMENT EXPENSES 
 
 [17 Ch. D, 782 
 See Local Goternment — Streets. 8. 
 PEIVILEOE — Annexed to heritable property 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 295 
 See Scotch Law — Hebitable Peo- 
 
 PEKTY. 3. 
 
 Criminating interrogatories — Divorce 
 
 [10 P. D. 122 
 See Practice — Divokce — Ncluty of 
 Marriage, 8. 
 
 Interrogatories. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Intekeogatories. 12 — 15. 
 
 Libel. 
 
 See Cases imder Defamation — Privi- 
 lege. 
 
 Libel— Injunction - - 20 Ch, D. 501 ; 
 
 [31 Ch. D. 798 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 3, 4. 
 
 Production of documents. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Production of Documents. 
 18—27. 
 
 Solicitor — Evidence - 18 Ch, D. 30 
 
 See Evidence — Witness. 3. 
 
 Witness — ^Answer tending to criminate 
 
 [20 Ch, D,. 294 
 See Evidence — Witness. 2. 
 PKIVITY OF CONTRACT - 19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 2. 
 
 - ' - 24 Ch. D. 54 ; 10 App. Cas. 617 
 
 See Factor. 1. 
 
 PRIVY COUNCIL. 
 
 Judicial Committee.] The Act 44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 3 (the Judicial Committee Act, 1881) provides 
 that Lords Justices of Appeal, if members of Her 
 Majesty's Frivy Council in England, shall he 
 members of the Judicial Committee of the Privy 
 Council. 
 
 Practice. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Privy 
 Council. 
 PRIZE riGHT— Aiding and abetting 
 
 [8 Q. B. S. 534 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Person. 7. 
 
 PROBATE :— Cid. 
 
 I. EXECDTION _ _ _ 1269 
 
 n. Grant - 1270 
 
 III. Knowledge of Contents 1272 
 
 IV. Married Woman - - 1273 
 I. PROBATE— EXECUTION. 
 
 1. Acknowledgment of Signature — Tes- 
 
 tator's Signature not seen hy Attesting Witnesses — ■ 
 Wills Act, 1837 (1 Vict. c. 26), s. 9.] To constitute 
 a sufficient acknowledgment, within sect 9 of the 
 Wills Act, the witnesses must at the time of the 
 acknowledgment see, or have the opportunity of 
 
 I. PROBATE— -EXECUTION— coninswd:. 
 ■ seeing, the signature of the tbstator,' and if such 
 be not the case it is immaterial whether the sig- 
 nature be, in fact, there at the time of attestation, 
 or whether the testator say that the paper to be 
 attested is his will, or that his signature is inside 
 the Tpapei. ^Hudson v. Parker (1 Robert. 14) fol- 
 lowed.— Gw47?jm V. Owillim (3 Sw. & Tr. 200) 
 and Beclcet v. Bowe (^Law Hep. 2 P. & M. 1) disap- 
 proved. In the Goods of Gunstan. Blake v. 
 Blake- - - 7 P. D. 102 
 
 2. Alterations.] The clause appointing 
 
 executors was written partly on the second and 
 partly on the third side Of a will. Subsequently 
 the testator altered the clause, but his signature 
 and those of the attesting witnesses appeared 
 opposite only to the alterations which were made 
 on the second side. The Court granted probate 
 of all the alterations. In the Goods of Wilkin- 
 son - 6 P. D. 100 
 
 3. Duplicate — ■ Mista1te.ll An intended 
 
 will was written in duplicate, one copy of which 
 was signed only by the deceased and the other 
 only by the attesting witnesses: — Ileld, that 
 neither paper was entitled to probate. In the 
 Goods of Hatton - - 6 P. D. 204 
 
 4. Evidence of attesting Witnesses.] In 
 
 1878 the testator, who was a good man of 
 business but not a lawyer, wrote a holograph 
 codicil upon the same paper as a will which he 
 had made in 1868, and wrote at the end of it an 
 attestation clause adapting that at the end of the 
 will to the case of a codicil. He called the nurse 
 into the schoolroom, and asked her and the 
 nursery-governess to " sign this paper." There 
 was evidence that he took his own pen into the 
 room. Both witnesses signed. At the trial, which 
 took place between four and five years afterwards, 
 the codicil was produced bearing the testator's 
 signature, and both the attesting witnesses were 
 examined. ' The governess deposed that she had 
 designedly abstained from looking at any of the 
 writing on the paper, and the nurse it appeared 
 had been very nervous. Neitlier of them could 
 say anything as to what writing was on the paper, 
 nor as -to whether the testator's signature-was 
 there when they signed, and both said that they 
 did not see him sign. The President pronounced 
 for the validity of thoi codicil : — Held, by Earl of 
 Selborne, L.O., that the reasonable conclusion was, 
 that the codicil was signed by the testator in the 
 presence of the witnesses : — Held, by Cotton, L.J., 
 that on the evidence he should have come to the 
 contrary conclusion.but that the finding of the Pre- 
 sident, who had seen and heard the witnesses, ought 
 not to be reversed : — Held, by Fry, L,J., that as the 
 codicil ex facie appeared to be properly executed, 
 and the presumption omnia rite esse acta was 
 strengthened by the conduct of the testator,which 
 shewed an anxious, and intelligent desire to do 
 everything regularly, that presumption was not 
 rebutted by the evidence of the witnesses, who 
 appeared to have been nervous aiid confused on 
 the occasion of the attestation,, and whoso recollec- 
 tion of what took place was evidently imperfect, 
 Wright v. Sanderson - - 9 P. D. 149 
 
 II. PROBATE— GRANT. 
 
 1. Alien — English Form- 
 
 -Execution- 
 
( 1271 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1272 ) 
 
 II. PEOBATE— GEANT— coniMiMerf. 
 
 24 <fe 25 Vict. c. lU— Naturalization Act, 1870.] 
 A will of a foreigner executed abroad according 
 to the formalities required by the English law is 
 invalid, notwithstanding the provisions of 21 & 
 
 25 Viet. c. 114, and the Naturalization Act, 1870. 
 In the Goods of Von Bdseok 6 P. D. 211 
 
 2. A\ieji~Execuiion—24: &15 Vict. c. 114 
 
 —Naturalization Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 14).] A 
 will made by an alien who was domiciled abroad at 
 the time of making her will and of her death, and 
 executed according to the forms required by Eng- 
 lish law, but not in manner required by the law 
 of the country of her domicil, is not entitled to 
 probate, though her domicil of origin was Eng- 
 lish — ^Decision of Sir J. Hannen affirmed. Bloxa.m 
 V. Pavkb 8 P. D. 101 ; 9 P. D, 130 
 
 3. Conditional.] A testator, being about to 
 
 travel, made his will, which contained the follow- 
 ing words:—" On leaving this station for T. and 
 M., in case of my death on the way, know all men 
 this is a memorandum of my last will and testa- 
 ment : " — Meld, that the will was not contingent 
 upon his death before arriving at T. or M. Will 
 admitted to probate. In the Goods of Matd 
 
 [6 P. D. 17 
 
 4. Domicil — Will — Construction of Will 
 
 expressed in Terms of Foreign Law.] The fact 
 that probate of a will has been granted by an 
 English Court is not conclusive that the testator 
 was domiciled in England. — If a domiciled Eng- 
 lishman makes a will expressed in the technical 
 terms of the law of a foreign country, so as to 
 manifest an intention that it should operate 
 according to that law, the meaning of the will 
 must be ascertained by the foreign law, and then 
 an equivalent effect must be given to the will in 
 'England.— Studd v. Coolc (8 App. Cas. 577) dis- 
 cussed. Beadfokd v. Young - 26 Ch. D. 666 
 
 5. Equitable Conversion— iJtgAi to Pro- 
 hate — Property — Probate and Legacy Duty.'] 
 Where freehold property is, by the doctrine of 
 equitable conversion, to 'be considered as person- 
 alty, it is liable to probate and legacy duty, and 
 a will disposing of it is entitled to probate. In 
 THE Goods of Gunn - 9 P. D. 242 
 
 6. Executor according to the Tenor.] A 
 
 testator by his will said, "I appoint E. H. P. 
 and J. E. W.," but did not state in what capacity 
 he appointed them. He also bequeathed legacies 
 to " each of my executors,'' and gave to his " said 
 executors " the residue of his property, with cer- 
 tain directions as to it. The Court held, upon 
 motion, that by the words of the will K. H. P. 
 and J. E. W. were appointed executors, and granted 
 probate to them accordingly. In the Goods of 
 Bbadlet - - 8 P. D. 215 
 
 7. Foreign Law— Soyal Family of Russia 
 
 — Will and Codicils superseded — Probate of Acte 
 Befinitif — Certificate of Ambassador.] By the 
 law of Russia no will or codicil of a deceased 
 member of the Eoyal Family has any effect as 
 such, but the deceased's property is distributed 
 according to an acte definitif decreed by the other 
 members of the family and confirmed by the 
 Emperor. Probate of the acte definitif granted 
 notwithstanding the execution of a will and codi- 
 cils. — The law of a foreign country is sufficiently 
 
 II. PROBATE— GEANT—coniinued. 
 proved by the certificate of the ambassador for 
 that country. In the Goods of Pbince Olden- 
 BCEG 9 P. D. 234 
 
 8. Foreign Probate — Probate of Codicil.] 
 
 If a will has been proved abroad, probate of the 
 codicils, if any, must be granted by the Court 
 which granted probate of the will. In the Goods 
 OF MiLLEB 8 P. D. 167 
 
 9. Foreign Will — English and Spanish 
 
 Wills — Probate of English Will only.] A testator 
 made a will in England which disposed only of 
 English property. Subsequently he made abroad 
 another will which disposed of property abroad 
 and cancelled all previous dispositions. The Court, 
 with the consent of all the parties interested, 
 ordered probate of the English will only, and 
 allowed the foreign will to be delivered out of 
 the registry for probate abroad. In the Goods 
 OF Smart 9 p. D. 64 
 
 10. Mistake — Inconsistent Attestation 
 
 Clause.] In an attestation clause of a third codicil 
 it was stated by mistake that the first codicil was 
 cancelled : — Held, that an attestation clause forms 
 no part of a codicil, and that therefore the first 
 codicil must be admitted to probate. In the 
 Goods of Atkinson - 8 P. D. 165 
 
 11. Omission of Paragraph — Words in- 
 troduced without Instructions — Amendment of 
 Probate.] There is no difference between the 
 words which a testator himself uses in drawing 
 up his will, and the words which are bona fide 
 used by one whom he trusts to draw it up for him. 
 The Court in either case must take the words as 
 it finds them, and therefore AeZd that the Plaintiff, 
 the natural daughter, was not entitled to have 
 probate amended by omitting the words "from 
 and after the decease of iny said wife without 
 leaving issue of our said marriage," on the ground 
 that the draughtsman introduced them without 
 reason or special directions, and that the effect of 
 the same had not been intelligently appreciated 
 by the testator. — Where a portion of a will has 
 been introduced through fraud or perhaps inad- 
 vertence, it may be rejected and probate granted 
 of the remainder, if the two are severable. But 
 where the rejection of part alters the sense of the 
 remainder, quaere, whether there is a valid will 
 within the meaning of 7 Will. 4 & 1 Viet. c. 26, 
 s. 9. Ehodes v. Erodes 7 App. Cas. 192 
 
 III. PROBATE- KNOWLEDGE OF CONTENTS. 
 — — Capacity — Memory.] If a testatrix has 
 
 given instructions for her will, and it is prepared 
 in accordance with them, the Will will be valid 
 though at the time of execution the testatrix merely 
 recollects that she has given those instructions but 
 believes tbat the will which she is executing is in 
 accordance with them. Pakker v. Felgate and 
 Tilly - - 8 P. D. 171 
 
 IV. PROBATE— MABKIED WOMAN. 
 
 1. Husband's Assent.] A will was made 
 
 by a married woman who appointed her husband 
 one of the executors. He assented to the making 
 of the will, and after her deati expressed his in- 
 tention to take probate, but died before doing so : 
 — Held, that he had assented to the probate. In 
 the Goods of Coopek 6 P. D. 34 
 
 2. ■ Husband's Assent— 20 * 21 Vict. c. 77, 
 
( 1273 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1274 ) 
 
 IV. PEOBATE— MASEIED "WOVlAS—eontd. 
 
 s. 73.] A married woman having been appointed 
 sole executrix and universal legatee, her husband 
 objected to her taking probate. Tlie Court, uhder 
 sect. 73 of 20 & 21 Vict. c. 77, made the grant to 
 her attorney : — Qumre, whether a husband has an 
 absolute right to object to his wife's taking pro- 
 bate of a will of which she is executrix. Olbkke 
 
 V. Clebke 6 P. D. 103 
 
 3. Protection Order — Wife's Lifetime- 
 Action to prove Will and to discharge Order.'] 
 An application to discharge a protection order is 
 not limited to the lifetime of the married woman. 
 — A claim to pronounce against the validity of 
 the will of a married woman who had obtained a 
 protection order, and a counter-claim to discharge 
 the protection urder, may be included in the same 
 action. Mcdge v. Adams 6 P. D. 54 
 
 4. Bealty — Appointment of Executors — 
 
 Probate — Jurisdiction — Judicature Acts.'] A will 
 of a married woman made during coverture, under 
 a power and disposing of real property only, is not 
 entitled to probate, though there is an appoint- 
 ment of executors.— The Judicature Acts do not 
 alter the jurisdiction of the Oourt of Probate in 
 non-contentious matters. In the Goods oy Tom- 
 LDfSON - _ - 6 P. D. 209 
 
 6. Sealty — Appointment of Executor — 
 
 Arrears of Bent personalty — Bight to Probate.] 
 A married woman having a power of appointment 
 over real property executed the power in favour 
 of herself. She afterwards made her will, by 
 which she directed (amongst other things) that a 
 portion of the property should be sold to pay 
 legacies and to erect a memorial window. She 
 also appointed an executor. There were arrears 
 of rent due at the time of her death and subse- 
 quently: — Held, that as she possessed the pro- 
 perty as separate estate, and had appointed an 
 executor and directed him to pay the legacies, &o., 
 and as the arrears of rent were part of her personal 
 estate, the will was entitled to probate. Bbown- 
 KiGG V. Pike 7 P. D. 61 
 
 PBOBATE — Action by executor before probate — 
 Stay of proceedings - 12 Q. B. D. 294 
 See Peaotiob — Supreme Oouet — ^Stat- 
 UTG Pkooebdings. 8. 
 
 Domicil— Abandonment 29 Ch. D. 617 
 
 See Domicil. 1. 
 
 Domicil— Estoppel - 29 Ch. D. 268 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 4. 
 
 New Zealand — Payment out of Court 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 177 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — Pay- 
 ment OUT OF Oouet. 
 
 Obtaining by unqualified person 
 
 [9 a. B. D. 1 ; 8 App. Cas. 407 
 See Solicitor — Unqualified. 4. 
 
 Revocation of ■ 21 Ch. D, 681 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 7. 
 
 Eevocation— Jurisdiction of Chancery Divi- 
 sion - - 9 P. D. 210 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 1. 
 
 Bevocation— Jurisdiction of Chancery Divi- 
 sion - - - 26 Ch. D. 656 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— Jubis- 
 
 DIOTION. 1. 
 
 VB.OBA.T'E— continued. 
 
 ■ Unattested will made abroad 25 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Power — Execution. 4. 
 
 Where necessary. 
 
 See Revenue — Probate Duty — Statutes. 
 
 Will of real estate in Victoria 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 
 PROBATE DUTY. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Revenue 
 — Probate Duty. 
 
 Application for return- Mandamus — Com- 
 missioners of Inland Revenue 
 See Mandamus. 2. [12 Q. B. D. 461 
 
 Law of Victoria - 8 App. Cas. 82 
 
 See Colonial Law — Victoria. 3. 
 
 PKOCTOS— Unqualified person— Penalty 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 1 ; 8 App. Cas. 40T 
 
 See Solicitor — Unqualified. 4. 
 
 PBOCTTBATION. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Oouet — Production of Documents. 
 
 Acknowledgment of right 25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Vendor and Purchases — Title 
 Deeds. 
 
 Costs of - 16 Ch. D. 517 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 38. 
 
 Depositions before receiver of wreck 9 P. D. 6 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty -— Peodcc- 
 tion of Documents. 
 Solicitor's lien - - 23 Ch, D. 169 
 
 See Solicitor — Lien. 8. 
 Title deeds. 
 
 See Title Deeds — Statutes. 
 Winding-up— OflScial liquidator 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Company — Liquidator. 1. [711 
 PROFESSIONAL WITNESS— Expenses 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 831 
 
 See Evidence — ^Witness. 4. 
 
 PROFIT A PRENDRE— Fishery. 
 
 See Cases under Fishery. 
 PROFITS— Account of - 17 Ch. D. 423 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 1. 
 Business — Assignment of — Bankruptcy 
 
 „ „ [22Ch. D.782 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 6. 
 
 Business settled on successive tenants for 
 
 life - - 26 Ch. D. 588 
 
 See Tenant for Life. 
 
 Foreign patent — Prolongation — Accounts 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 176 ; 9 App. Cas. 692 
 
 See Patent — Prolongation. 1, 2. 
 Income tax. 
 
 See Oases under Revenue — Income Tax. 
 Made by agent - 29 Ch. D. 795 
 
 See Principal and Agent— Agent's 
 Liability. 1. 
 
 Mine— Income tax - 6 App. Cas. 315 
 
 See Scotch Law — Revenue. 
 
 Participation in - - 18 Ch. D. 698 
 
 See Paetnekship — Conteaot. 3, 
 
( 1275 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 127G ) 
 
 PE OFITS — continued. 
 
 Participation in — Policy-holder. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Life In- 
 SUEANCE Company. 
 
 Payment of dividend out of 16 Ch. D. 344 
 
 ;See Company— Dividend. 4. 
 
 Proof in bankruptcy — Infringement of 
 
 patent - - 20 Ch. D. 780 
 
 See Bankeuftoy— PPlOOf. 7. 
 
 Trade carried on by executors 36 Ch. D. 42 
 
 See Exeohtoe — Administeation. 4. 
 Trespasser — Action surviving against exe- 
 cutors - 24 Ch. D. 439 
 See Teespass. 1. 
 PEOHIBITION. 
 
 Jurisdiction — Inferior Court — Salford 
 
 Hundred Court of Record Act, 1868 (31 & 32 
 Viet. c. cxxx.), s. 7.] Sect. 7 of the Salford 
 Hundred Court of Record Act, 1868, enacts that 
 " no defendant shall he permitted to object to the 
 jurisdiction of the Court otherwise than by special 
 plea, and, if the want of jurisdiction be not so 
 pleaded, the Court shall have jurisdiction for all 
 purposes": — Seld, that the Defendant, against 
 whom judgment had been recovered in the Salford 
 Hundred Court, he not having pleaded to the 
 jurisdiction, could not have a writ of prohibition 
 on the ground of -want of jurisdiction, inasmuch 
 as the above-mentioned section under the circum- 
 stances conferied jurisdiction on the Salford Hun- 
 dred Court. — Oram v. Brearey (2 Ex. D. 346) over- 
 ruled. Chadwick 11. Ball - 14 Q. B, D. 856 
 
 Appeal - 8 Q. B. D. 9 
 
 See County Coubt — Peaotioe. 5. 
 
 Demurrer - 6 Q. B. D. 586 
 
 See Eailway Company — Railways 
 Regulation Acts. 5. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Court - 6 App. Cas. 424 
 
 See Phaotice — Ecclesiastical — Moni- 
 tion. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Court - 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 &ePEA0TicE — Ecclesiastical — Public 
 WoESHip Act, 1. 
 
 Ecclesiastical Court - 22 Ch. D. 316 
 
 See Peaotioe — Ecclesiastical — Jukis- 
 diction. 2. 
 
 Local Government Board 10 Q. B. D. 309 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Steeets. 9. 
 
 Mayor's Court — Jurisdiction — Cause of 
 
 action arising wholly or in part within 
 city of London - 14 Q. B. D. 1 
 
 See Court — Mayoe's Couet. 4. 
 
 Eailway company — Arbitration 
 
 [17Ch. D.493 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Regulation Acts. 1. 
 PROLIXITY— AfSdavit of documents 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 836 
 See Peactioe— SuPEEMB Couet — Peo- 
 DucTiON OP Documents. 1. 
 
 AfSdavit-Taking off the file 26 Ch, D. 470 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Steik- 
 ING OUT Pleadings. 3. 
 PKOIONGATION OF PATENT. 
 
 See Cases under Patent — 'Pkolonga- 
 
 ' TION. 
 
 PEOMISSOEY NOTE — Banker— Bank Charter 
 Act, 1834— Penalties 12 Q. B. D. 606 
 See Bankee —Notes. . 
 
 Conditional payment^Bankruptey notice 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 506 
 Bee Bankeuptoy — Act of Bankbuptoy. 
 6. 
 — Joint note— Sureties — Contribution 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 709 
 See Peincipal and Subety — Conteibu- 
 
 TION. 2. 
 
 Liability of parties - 8 App. Cas. 733 
 
 See Bill of Exchange — Liability of 
 Paeties. 
 
 Statutory enactments respecting. 
 
 See Bill op Exchange — Statutes.' 
 
 PEOMOTEE OP COMPAHT— Contract by 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 125 
 See Company — Contract. 2. 
 
 Contract by — Costs of formation of com- 
 pany - - 26 Ch. D. 103 
 
 See COMPANY^FOEMATION. 
 
 - — — Fiduciary relation — Secret profit 17 Ch. D. 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoop. 22. [122 
 
 Misrepresentation by - 20 Ch. D. 27 : 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 187 
 iSee Company — Prospectus. 1. 
 
 Qualification of director - 27 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Company — Director's Qualifica- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 Railway company — Deposit 28 Ch. D, 653 
 
 See Railway Company — Abandonment. 
 3. 
 
 PEOOP OF DEBTS— Administration of estate 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 343; 18 Ch. D. 370 ; 
 [20 Ch. D. 545 
 
 See Executoe — Actions. . 19, 20, 21. 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Proof. 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883— Stotefes. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Amendment of 14 Q. B. D. 121 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Ckeditoe. 
 12. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Breach of covenant 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Disteess. 5. [410 
 
 Bankruptcy — Rejection of — Appeal — 
 
 Notice of motion - 14 ft. B. D. 385 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 14. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Secured creditor 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 106 ; 8 App. Cas, 606 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 7,8. 
 
 Winding-up of company 17 Ch. D. 337 ; 
 
 [28Ch. D. 634; 30 Ch. D. 629 
 
 See Company — Proof. 1, 2, 3. 
 Winding-up of company 18 Ch. D. 587 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 2. 
 Winding-up — Secured creditor 16 Ch. D, 590 
 
 See Company — Secured Cbeditor. 2. 
 
 PEOPEETY— Bankrupt. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Assets. 
 
 Dead body - - - 20 Ch. D. 659 
 
 ■ See Executor — Powees. 3. 
 
( 1277 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1278 ) 
 
 PBOPEETY— conimufid. 
 Infant 
 
 See Cases under Infant — Property. 
 Lunatic. ' 
 
 See Cases under Lunatic — Property. 
 
 Passing of — Indorsement of bill of lading 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 159 ; 10 App, Cas. 74 
 See Ship — Bill of Lading. 4. 
 
 Eailway company - - 6 Q. B. S. 36 ; 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 424; 13 Q. B. S. 320 
 
 See Eailway Compant — Property. 1, 
 2,3. 
 Eecovered — Solioitoi's lien 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Lien. 1 — 7. 
 PEOSECTTTION — Expenses before magistrate. 
 
 See Justices — Practice — Statutes. 
 PEOSPECTUS. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Prospectus. 
 PEOTECTED TEANSACTIQH— Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Pro- 
 tected Transaction, 
 Equitable execution - 16 Ch. D. 544 
 
 jSee Practice — Supreme Court — Ee- 
 
 CEIVER. 1. 
 
 "Winding-up - - - 28 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See C041PANY— Proof. 3. 
 PEOTECTION OF ESTATE— Costs incurred by 
 
 tenant for life - 16 Ch. D. 587, 588, n. 
 
 See Trustee Belief Act. 4, 5. 
 Settled estates. 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Statutes. 
 PEOTECTION OF POST-OFFICES AND LETTEES. 
 
 iSee Post-office — Statutes. 
 PEOTECTION OF PEOPEETY — Practice — In- 
 
 JTjuotion - 21 Ch. D. 490 
 
 See Peaotioe— Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 6. 
 
 PEOTECTOE OF SETTLEMENT— Estate tail- 
 Appointment by settlor 16 Ch. D. 176 
 See Tenant in Tail. 2. 
 
 Lunacy - 20 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Lunatic — Property. 3. 
 
 PEOVIDENT NOMINATIONS AND SMALL IN- 
 TESTACIES ACT, 1883. 
 See Friendly SociBTY^/Sto/wies. 
 
 PEOVISIONAL SPECIFICATION- Patent 
 
 See Patent— Validity. 2. [21 Ch. D. 720 
 
 PEOXIMATE CAUSE— Negligence 11 Q. B. D. 776 
 See Estoppel- — Conduct. 3. 
 
 PEOXY — General meeting of shareholders 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 14 
 6'ee Company— Management. 4. 
 
 PUBLIC BODY— Nuisance by - 20 Ch. D. 595; 
 [22 Ch. D. 221 ; 23 Ch. D. 767 
 jSee Nuisance — Ebmedies. 4, 5, 6. 
 
 Nuisance by - - 29 Ch. D. 39 
 
 See. Nuisance— Definition. 
 
 PUBLIC laEALTH ACTS. 
 
 ,See Cases and Statutes under Local 
 Government. 
 
 PUBLIC-HOUSE. 
 
 jSee Cases and Statutes under Inn. 
 
 Covenant not to keep - 16 Ch. D. 645, 718 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 6, 7. 
 
 PUBLIC-HOUSE— ooniMmed. " 
 
 Covenant not to sell land fbr 19 Ch. D. 268 
 
 See CovEiTANT — EUnning with Land. 1. 
 
 Covenant to buy beer of landlord 
 
 [18 Ch, D. 199 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 8. 
 
 Goodwill - - - 16Ch,D, 226 
 
 See Banbuptoy— ^Distress. 2. 
 PUBLIC LIBEAEY. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 37 {the Public Libra- 
 ries Act, 1884), amends the Public Libraries Act, 
 1855, and gives power to establish a library, 
 museum, or school of art in connection with any 
 other of such institutions. 
 
 Meeting of Eatepayers — Poll — Public 
 
 Libraries Act, 1855 (18 * 19 Vict. c. 70), s. 6— 
 Public Libraries Amendment Act (England and 
 Scotland), 1866 (29 & 30 Vict. c. 114), ss. 5, 7— 
 Public Libraries Amendment Act, 1877 (40 d 41 
 Vict. V. 54), s. 1.1 A meeting of ratepayers was 
 summoned for the purpose of determining whether 
 the provisions of the Public Libraries Act should 
 be adopted in the Defendants' district,, A chair- 
 man having been chosen, the resolution to adopt 
 the Acts was carried upon a show of hands ; a 
 poll was demanded, but the chairman refused to 
 grant it. The Defendants declined to put in 
 force the Acts : — Held, that the right to demand 
 a poll existed by the Common Law, and had not 
 been taken away by nny of the provisions con- 
 tained in the Public Libraries Acts, and that the 
 Defendants could not be compelled lay mandamus 
 to carry out the Acts. The Queen v. Wim- 
 bledon Local Board 8 Q, B, D, 459 
 
 PUBLIC OFFICER- Suit against 6 App, Cas. 619 
 
 See Colonial Law — Natal. 1. 
 
 PUBLIC POLICY 7 Q.. B, D, 548 ; 15 ft, B. D. 561 
 
 See Contract — Validity. 1, 2. 
 PUBLIC PEOSECUTOE. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Practice — Statutes. 
 PUBLIC EECEEATION— Land for— Power to 
 
 make road over - 6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law — Highway. 1. 
 
 PUBLIC EEGISTEE— Jersey - 8 App, Cas, 542 
 
 See Colonial Law^ Jersey. 2, 
 PUBLIC WOESHIP ACT. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Ecclesiasti- 
 cal — Public Worship Act. 
 
 PUBLICATION— Drama— Copyright 21 Ch, D. 
 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 3. [232 
 Lecture- Copyriglit - 26 Ch, D. 374 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 2. 
 
 Libel- - llft.B. D. 43 
 
 See Defamation — ^Privilege. 3. 
 Patent - 21 Ch, D, 720 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 2. 
 PUBLICI JUEIS— Trade-mark— Eegistratiou 
 
 [26 ;Ch, D. 409 
 
 See Trade-mark— Eegisthation. 16. 
 PUBLISHES — Eegistration of copyright 
 
 See Copyright— Books 3. [23 Ch. D. 727 
 PUECHASE-MONEY— Advanced by trustee 
 
 [22 Ch, D, 255 
 
 See Trustee- Inpemnity. 2. 
 
( 1279 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1280 ) 
 
 PTTECHASE-MOKEY— conimaed. 
 
 Application of — Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Oases under Settled Land Act — 
 
 PUECHASE-MONEY. 
 
 Autiiority to receive - 24 Ch. D. 387 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 892 
 See Vendor and Pubchaser — Oonvey- 
 ANOE. 5, 6. 
 
 Devise of estate — Ademption 30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 See Will — Woedb. 
 
 Duty on 8 App. Cas. 309 
 
 ^ee Colonial Law — Oape of Good 
 Hope. 3. 
 
 Interest on - - 27 Ch. D. 856 
 
 /See Vendor and Pdrchaseb — Oondi- 
 TioNS OF Sale. 10. 
 
 Interest on — Lands Olauses Act 
 
 [18 Ch. S. 146 
 See Lands Olauses Acts — Cqmpulsoet 
 Powers. 5. 
 
 Interest on — Payment by mistake 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 691 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 2. 
 Land in foreign country — Parties in Eng- 
 land - - 23Ch. D. 743 
 See Jurisdiction. 1. 
 
 PTJECHASE-MOKEY— confJjiMCfZ. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act — Investment. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Purchase-money. 
 
 Leasehold for lives — Settled Estates Act 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 624 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 3. 
 
 Mortgaged estate — Second mortgagee 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 984 
 See Mortgage — Eedemption. 5. 
 
 . Eeinvestment — Private Act — Costs 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 378 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 39. 
 
 Vendorslien for - - 21 Ch. D. 243 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 601 
 Sec Vendor AND Purchaser — Lien. 1,2. 
 PTTECHASE WITHOUT NOTICE 20 Ch. D. 611 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Pur- 
 chase without Notice. 1. 
 
 Conveyance obtained by undue influence 
 
 See Undue Influence. [18 Ch. D. 188 
 
 Debentures— Estoppel - 24 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 3. 
 
 Negligence— Priority 29 Ch. D. 725 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 9. 
 
 Q. 
 
 QTTALIFICATION- Director 25 Ch. D. 283 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Company — Dibbotoe's Qualifca- 
 tions. 1, 2. 
 
 QTTANTUM MEEtTIT- Barrister— Law of Que- 
 bec - - - 9 App. Cas. 745 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 7. 
 
 QUAEE IMPEDIT— Consolidated benefice— Eight 
 of presentation 16 ft, B. D. 432 
 
 See Advowson. 2. 
 
 Eefusal of bishop to institute clerk — Offences 
 
 against ecclesiastical law 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 404 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Bishop. 
 
 ftUAETEE SESSIONS - - 8 ft, B. D. 686 
 
 See Sessions. 
 
 ftlTEBEC— Law of. 
 
 See Oases under Colonial Law — 
 Canada — Quebec, 
 
 ftUEEN'S BENCH— Canada - 6 App. Cas, 644 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Ontario. 
 1. 
 ftUESTION OF TITLE. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeied 
 Women's Property Acts — Statutes. 
 ftTTIA TIMET ACTION— Pollution of stream 
 
 [28 Ch, D, 68S 
 See Nuisance — Bemedies. 1. 
 
 Trustee— Indemnity 22 Ch. D. 561 
 
 See Trustee — Indemnity. 3. 
 » ftUICftTJID PIANTATUE SOLO SOLO CEDIT." 
 [7 ft, B, D, 298 ; 8 App, Cas, 195 
 See Mine — Woekino. 1. 
 ftTJIT EENT— Eedemption of. 
 
 See Eent-chaege — Statutes. 
 ftUOETIM- Directors of company 23 Ch, D, 413 
 See Company — Shares — Allotment. 3. 
 
 Local board - - 30 Ch. D. 350 
 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 thority. 15. 
 
( 1281 ), 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1282 ) 
 
 E. 
 
 HAIIWAY — Bookstands on platform— Poor-rate 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 327 
 See Poor-bate— Occupation. 1. 
 
 Bridge over — Paving expenses 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 412 ; 8 App. Cas. 687 
 See Metkopolis— Management Acts. 
 12. 
 
 Construction. 
 
 See Railway Company — Constitution 
 — Gazette. 
 
 Penalty for travelling with intent to avoid 
 
 Tiavment of fare — Justices — Procedure 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 161 
 See Justices — Peactice. 4. 
 
 Transfer of— Canada 7 App. Cas. 178 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Domi- 
 nion. 1. 
 
 :eailway commissionees. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Eailway 
 
 Company — Railways Regulation 
 
 Acts. 
 
 SAILWAT COMPANY:— Col. 
 
 I. Abandonment - - - 1281 
 
 II. By-laws _ _ _ 1283 
 
 III. Constitution - 1283 
 
 IV. Liabilities - 1284 
 V. Passengeb Duty - - 1285 
 
 VI. Passbngeu's Luggage - 1286 
 
 VII. Peopeety 1287 
 
 Till. Railways Clauses Act 1287 
 
 IX. Railways Regulation Acts 1293 
 
 X. Teapfic Management - 1296 
 
 Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 1. EAILWAY COMPANY— ABANDONMENT. 
 
 1. Parliamentary Deposit — Judgment 
 
 Creditor— Undertaking— Receiver — Unpaid Calls 
 —Baaway Companies Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. 
 «. 127), 88. 4, 31, 35— Abandonment of Bailways 
 Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict. c. 114).] A railway 
 company which has never commenced to acquire 
 the lands or construct the railways authorized by 
 their Act is not an "undertaking," within the 
 meaning of sect. 4 of the Railways Companies 
 Act, 1867, of which a receiver can be appointed 
 under that section.— ySemftZe, the powers of a re- 
 •ceiver appointed under the above section do not 
 ■extend to getting in unpaid calls. In re Bieming- 
 HAM AND Lichfield Junction Railway Company 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 155 
 
 2. Parliamentary Deposit — Landowner — 
 
 Diminution of Value of Land — Measure of 
 Damages.'] A railway company being about to 
 apply for an Act of Parliament for making an 
 extension line, assented to P., an owner of land 
 over which the line was intended to pass, com- 
 mencing tlie Une over his own land. F. a^oord- 
 in^ly made an embankment over his land, and 
 
 I. EAILWAY COMPANY — ABANDONMENT— 
 
 conthiued. 
 was paid for the work by the company. After a 
 considerable part of the work on P.'s land had 
 been done the company obtained their Act giving 
 power to construct the railway in the proposed 
 line. The Act contained a proviso that if the new 
 line were not opened for traffic within five years 
 the parliamentary deposit should be applied to- 
 wards compensating landowners or otlier persons 
 whose land had been interfered with or rendered 
 less valuable "by the commencement, construc- 
 tion or abandonment of the railway." The ex- 
 tension railway was not completed within five 
 years, but no warrant of abandonment was obtained 
 under the Railways Abandonment Act. A fresh 
 Act was passed authorizing a petition for wind- 
 ing up the company and the sale of the under- 
 taking by the official liquidator. — A petition 
 having been presented by F.'s mortgagees and the 
 trustee in his liquidation for the application of 
 the parliamentary deposit in compensation for the 
 injury done to his estate by the commencement, 
 construction, or abandonment of the works : — 
 Held, that the undertaking was abandoned within 
 the meaning of the Act ; — That the words " com- 
 mencement, construction, or abandonment," must 
 be read disjunctively ; — That P., having com- 
 menced the works on his own laud before the 
 company had obtained their Act, on the specula- 
 tion that they would obtain power to construct 
 the railway, the Petitioners had no claim for com- 
 pensation for injury to the estate by the com- 
 mencement or construction of the railway; but 
 they had a claim for compensation for injury done 
 by the abandonment of the railway : — That the 
 measure of injury must be determined by com- 
 paring the value of the estate immediately before 
 with its value immediately after the abandon- 
 ment. — Whether the words " commencement of 
 the railway " must be coniined to its commence- 
 ment by the company under its parliamentary 
 powers, or would include its commencement in 
 anticipation of such powers, qusere. — Held, also 
 that mortgagees of the landowner might be per- 
 sons entitled to claim compensation under the 
 Act. In re Potteeies, Sheewsbuey, and Noeth 
 Wales Railway Company 25 Ch. D. 251 
 
 3. Parliamentary Deposit — Promoters 
 
 and Parliamentary Agents.] Under the usual 
 provision, in an Act incorporating a railway com- 
 pany, that in the event of the undertaking being 
 abortive the parliamentary deposit shall either 
 be forfeited to the Crown, or, in the discretion of 
 the Court, be wholly or in part applied, as part 
 of the assets of the company, for the benefit 
 of the creditors thereof, the Court will not apply 
 the deposit for the benefit of all the creditors 
 without distinction as to the nature and merit of 
 their claims ; and, accordingly the promoters and 
 the parliamentary agents claiming in respect of 
 costs incurred in obtaining the Act, or in relation 
 to ^he promotion of the company, not being 
 
 2 T 
 
( 1283 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1284 ) 
 
 I. RAILWAY COMPANY — ABANDONMENT— 
 
 continued. 
 " meritoi-ious creditors" (In re Lowestoft, Tar- 
 mouth, and Southwold Tramways Company (6 
 Ch. D. 484)), will not be admitted to share in 
 the distribution of the fund. In re Bikshngham 
 AND Lichfield Junction Eailwat Company 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 652 
 
 II. EAILWAY COMPANY— BY-LAWS. 
 
 Validity and Construction — 8 & S'Vict. 
 
 ,:. 20, ss. 103, 109.] By a by-law of a raUway 
 company " any person travelliag without special 
 permission of some duly authorized servant of the 
 company, in a" carriage or by a train of a class 
 superior to that for which his ticket was issued, 
 is hereby subject to a penalty not exceeding 40s., 
 and shall, in addition, be liable to pay his fare 
 according to the class of carriage in which he is 
 travelling from the station where the train origin- 
 ally started, unless he shews that he had no in- 
 tention to defraud." The Defendant, with the 
 intention of defrauding the company, travelled in 
 a carriage of a superior class to that for which his 
 ticket was issued, and having been charged under 
 the by-law was convicted in a penalty of 10s. and 
 costs : — Held, that the by-law was illegal and void, 
 for assuming that it could be divided after the 
 words " penalty of 40s." and that each part was 
 capable of being enforced apart from the other, 
 the first part was repugnant to 8 & 9 Vict. c. 20, 
 s. 103, which makes a fraudulent intention the 
 gist of the offence of travelling without having 
 paid the fare, and that, if taken as a whole and 
 indivisible, it was unreasonable according to 
 Watson V. London and Brighton Bailway Com- 
 pany (4 C. P. D. 118), and Saunders v. South 
 Eastern Bailway Company (5 Q. B. D. 456) : — 
 Meld, further, that the conviction must be quashed, 
 for it was founded upon the by-law, and could not 
 be upheld as disclosing an oiience under 8 & 9 Vict. 
 0. 20, 3. 103. Dyson v. London and North 
 Western Eailway Company 7 Q. B. D. 32 
 
 III. EAILWAY COMPANY— CONSTITUTION. 
 
 Railways Construction Facilities Act, 1864.] 
 Uule made hy Board of Trade under sect. 64 of 
 this Act with respect to application for a certificate 
 for promoters. Sept. ifh, 1883 L. G., 1883, p. '4361 
 
 1. Borrowing Powers — Sale and Siring 
 
 of Boiling Stock — Ultra vires act — 30 & 31 Vict, 
 c. 127, s. 4 — Bights of Debenture Solders.'] A 
 Eailway Company being in want of money, and 
 being advised that they had no power to borrow, 
 sold part of their rolling-stock to a Wagon Com- 
 pany for £30,000, at the same time making a con- 
 tract with the Wagon Company for the hire of the 
 same rolling-stock at a rent which would repay the 
 £30,000 with interest in five years, and then for 
 its re-purchase at a nominal price. At the same 
 time three of the du-eotors guaranteed to the 
 Wagon Company the payment of the rent. — The 
 Wagon Company brought an action against the 
 Eailway Company and the sureties for non-pay- 
 ment of rent due. — Kay, J., having held that the 
 transaction was void as against the Eailway Com- 
 pany, but could be enforced against the sureties : 
 — Seld, by the Court of Appeal, that the trans- 
 action was not a borrowing of money, but a bona 
 fide sale and hiring of the rolling-stock, and was 
 
 III. EAILWAY COMPANY— CONSTITUTION— 
 
 continued. 
 valid both against the Bailway Company and the 
 sureties. — Observations on the riglits of deben- 
 ture holders over the rolling stock of a railway 
 company. Yokkshiee Eailway Wagon Company 
 V. Macluke 19 Ch. D. 478 ; 21 Ch. D. 309 
 
 IV. BAILWAY COMPANY— LIABILITIES. 
 
 1. Cattle Station — Nuisance — Additional 
 
 Lands.'] A railway company were by their Act 
 authorized, among other things, to carry cattle, 
 and were also authorized to purchase by agree- 
 ment (in addition to the lands which they were 
 empowered to purchase compulsorily) any lands 
 not exceeding in the whole fifty acres, in such 
 places as should be deemed eligible, for the pur- 
 pose of providing additional station yards, &c., for 
 receiving, loading, or keeping any cattle or any 
 goods, &c., conveyed or intended to be conveyed 
 by the railway, and for making convenient ways 
 thereto, or for any other purposes connected with 
 the undertaking which the company should judge 
 requisite; and they were empowered to sell the 
 additional lands, and to purchase in lieu thereof 
 other lands which they should deem more eligible 
 for their additional purposes, and afterwards to 
 sell the same as aforesaid, and so from time to 
 time. The company bought under this power a 
 piece of land adjoining one of their stations and 
 used it as a cattle dock. The noise of the cattle 
 and drovers was a nuisance to the occupiers of 
 certain houses near the station, and they brought 
 an action to restrain the company from continuing 
 the nuisance: — Held (afSrming the decision of 
 North, J.), that the Plaintiflfs were entitled to .an 
 injunction, for that there was nothing in the Act; 
 which by necessary implication authorized the 
 creation of a nuisance on the additional lands. 
 Tkcman v. Londox, Brighton, and South Coast 
 Eailway Company 25 Ch. D. 423 ; 29 Ch. D. 89 
 [Reversed by the House of Lords, llApp. Cas.45.3 
 
 2. "Detention" — Reduced Bate — Condi- 
 tions — Wrongful Beftisal to deliver at end of 
 Transit — Mistalce as to wliether Carriage was paid.^ 
 The Plaintiff delivered cattle, carriage prepaid, to 
 the Defendant railway company for carriage on 
 the terms of signed conditions whereby, in con- 
 sideration of an alternative reduced rate, it was 
 agreed that the company were " not to be liable 
 in respect of any loss or detention of or injury t» 
 the said animals, or any of them, in the receivmg, 
 forwarding, or delivery thereof, except upon proof 
 that such loss, detention, or injury, arose from the 
 wilful misconduct of the company or its servants." 
 — The cattle were carried; but, on application 
 made for them by the Plaintiff, the Defendants, 
 in consequence of their clerk having negligently 
 omitted to enter the cattle on the consignment 
 note as " carriage paid," refused to deliver them, 
 and alleged that the carriage was not paid. The 
 cattle were kept exposed to the weather until the 
 next day, when the mistake having been ascer- 
 tained, they were delivered. They were damaged 
 by the exposure. In an action for damages by 
 reason of wrongful detention and negligence : — 
 Held, that the withholding of the cattle, under a, 
 groundless claim to retain them, at the end of the 
 transit, was not " detention " witliin the coudi- 
 
( 1285 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES.- 
 
 ( 1286 ) 
 
 IV. EAILWAY COMPANY — LIABILITIES — 
 
 contintted. 
 tions, and the company were therefore liable. 
 
 GOBDON V. GUEAT WESTERN EaILWAY COMPANY 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 44 
 3. Power to underpin Buildings — Adjoin- 
 ing Lands — Retaining Wall of Bailwaij — Wall 
 hmlt with double Object.'] A railway company had 
 power to underpin or strengthen buildings on 
 lands adjoining their line. They carried their 
 line in a deep cutting close beside a building be- 
 longing to. the Plaintiffs, and having given the 
 . required notice that they intended to underpin 
 this building, they made a wall of concrete to 
 support the Plaintiffs' building, part of the thick- 
 ness of which was under the Plaintiffs' building, 
 and part on the company's land, the whole wall 
 forming the retaining wall of the railway cutting : 
 — Held (reversing the decision of Chitty, J.), that 
 the fact that the concrete wall was also the retain- 
 ing wall of the railway did not make it the less 
 an "underpinning" within the meaning of the 
 Act; and therefore that the company had not 
 acted beyond their powers in making the wall on 
 the Plaintiffs' land. Stevens v. Metropolitan 
 District Railway Company 29 Ch. D. 60 
 
 V. EAILWAY COMPANY— PASSENGEE DUTY. 
 
 The Act 46 & 47 Vict. u. 34, arnends the law re- 
 lating to Railway Passenger Duty, and amends 
 and consolidates the law relating to the Conveyance 
 of the Queen's Forces by Railway. 
 
 Sect.' 1. Act to be dted as the Cheap Trains Act, 
 1883. 
 
 ■ By sect. 2 fares not exceeding the rate of a 
 penny are exempt from duty ; but fares for return 
 or periodical tickets are exempt from duty only 
 where the ordinary fare for the single journey does 
 not exceed that rate. 
 
 Duty i« payable at the rate of two per cent.on fares 
 exceeding the rate of one penny a mile for conveyance 
 between railway stations within one urban district 
 certified so to be in manner provided in the section. 
 
 Where the Board of Trade are satisfied that any 
 two or more railway stations are within an area 
 which has a continuous urban os distinguished 
 from a rural or suburban character, and contains a 
 population of not less than 100,000 inhabitants, the 
 Board of Trade may certify that those stations are 
 within one urban district for4he purposes of the Act. 
 
 Power to Board of Trade at any time to rescind 
 or vary any certificate given under the section. 
 
 Seat. 3 provides for proper third-class accommo- 
 dation and workmen's trains. 
 
 Sect. 4. Provision as to special mileage and etxr 
 ceptional charges. - 
 
 Sect. 5. Proviso as to fractions of miles. 
 
 Sect. 6 provides' for the conveyance at reduced 
 rates of the Queenh Forces om amy occasion of 
 public service. 
 
 Sect. 7 amends sections 4 and 7 of the Aet 5 <fe 6 
 Vict. c. 79. 
 
 Sect. 8. Definitions. 
 
 Sect, 9. Commencement of Act — 1st Oct. 1883. 
 
 Sect. 10 repeals — ■ 
 
 5 <fe 6 Vict. a. 55, s. 20. 
 
 7*8 Vict c. 85, ss. 6—10, and s. 12. 
 
 16 & 17 Vict. u. 69, s. 18. 
 
 21 & 22 Vict. c. 15, ss. 1 and 2. 
 
 26 A 27. Fici. 0. 33, e. 14. 
 
 V. RAILWAY COMPANY— PASSZNGEB DUTY 
 
 — continued. 
 
 Duty upon Sums charged to cover Duty 
 
 — Conveyance of Passengers — Duty upon Sum 
 charged for Sleeping Accommodation — ^5 & 6 Vict, 
 c. 79, 8. 2.] By the 2nd section of 5 & 6 Viet. o. 79, 
 and the schedule to that Act, a duty at the rate 
 of 5 per cent, is made payable upon all sums re- 
 ceived or charged for the hire, fare, or convey- 
 ance of passengers conveyed for hire upon any 
 railway. The Defendants, by a local Act, were 
 prohibited from charging to their passengers 
 more than certain specified sums per mile, which 
 sums were to include all expenses incidental to 
 their conveyance, except government duty. The 
 Defendants, in addition to the Sum charged by 
 them to their passengers for conveyance, charged 
 to and received from such passengers a further 
 sum at the rate of 5 per cent, on the former, to 
 cover the government duty. The Crown claimed 
 duty on the latter sum as well as on the former : — 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Exchequer 
 Division, that the Crown was entitled to duty on 
 the whole amount received from tlie passengers, 
 even though such amount should exceed the 
 maximum charge for conveyance fixed by the 
 local Act. — The Defendants attached to certain 
 of their night trains sleeping carriages for the 
 accommodation of such of their first-class pas- 
 sengers as might choose to avail themselves of it. 
 For the use of these carriages such passengers 
 were charged an extra sum in addition to the 
 ordinary first-class fare. In addition to couches 
 with pillows, sheets, and blankets, each carriage 
 contained a lavatory, water-closet, and other con- 
 veniences. Passengers using such carriages were 
 not disturbed during the night by demands for 
 their tickets ; and if they arrived at their destina- 
 tion in the middle of the night the carriage was 
 put into a siding, and the passengers allowed to 
 remain in their beds untilthe morning. A special 
 servant was employed to wait upon them, call 
 them in the morning, and bring' them hot water. 
 The Crown claimed duty upon the sums charged 
 to passengers for the accommodation provided in*, 
 the sleeping carriages :—H"eZ(J, aflSrminij the de- 
 cision of the Exchequer Division, that such ac- 
 commodation was incidental to the conveyance of 
 the passengers, and that the Crown was entitled 
 to the duty claimed. Attorney- General v. 
 London and North Western Railway ' Com- 
 pany 6 ft. B. D. 216 
 
 VI. EAILWAY COMPANY— PASSENGEE'S LUG- 
 GAGE. 
 
 1. Delivery to Passenger — Termination of 
 
 Compam/'s Bisk.] The Plaintiff arrived at a 
 station on the Defendants' railway with her lug- 
 gage contained in two boxes which were taken 
 from the luggage-van by a porter in the employ 
 of the company. The porter asked the Plaintiff' 
 if he should engage a cab for her. In reply shft 
 said she would walk to her destination, and would 
 leave her luggage at the station for a short time, 
 and send for it. The porter said : " All right ; 
 I'll put them on one side and take care of them ;'' 
 Thereupon the Plaintiff quitted the station leav- 
 ing her boxes in the custody of the porter. One 
 of them was lost -.—Heidi that the transaction 
 amounted to a delivery of the lu^'gage'by the 
 
 2 T 2 
 
( 1287 ), 
 
 DIGEST OK CASES. 
 
 ( 1288 ) 
 
 VI. EAILWAY COMPAST— PASSENGER'S LtTG- 
 GAOE — continued. 
 
 company to the Plaintiff, and a re-delivery of it 
 by her to the porter as her agent to take care of, 
 and that consequently the company were not 
 responsible for the loss. — Patscheider v. Great 
 Western By. Co. (3 Ex. D. 153) distinguished. 
 HoDKiNSON V. London and Noeth Western 
 Railway Company - 14 Q. B. D. 228 
 
 VII. EAILWAY COMPANY— PEOPEKTT. 
 
 1. Dock Company — Railway ancillary to 
 
 Docks — " Company" — Mailway Companies Act, 
 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 127), ss. 3, 4.] The protec- 
 tion against seizure in execution afforded by the 
 Bail way Companies Act, 1867, ss. 3, 4, applies to 
 the railway plant of every company constituted by 
 a statute for the purpose of constructing or work- 
 ing a railway, even although the railway is merely 
 a subordinate and ancillary part of the under- 
 taking authorized by the statute. — By two local 
 statutes a company was authorized to construct a 
 wet dock, a lock forming an entrance to the dock, 
 and two short railways, each about half a mile 
 long, to connect the dock with other railways. 
 The Plaintiffs had lent money to the company 
 upon mortgage-debentures. The Defendants were 
 creditors of the company, and having obtained 
 judgment seized in execution certain railway plant 
 Ijelonging to it. The Plaintiffs having brought an 
 action for an injunction to prevent the Defendants 
 from realizing their execution: — Held, that the 
 4ock company was a " company " within the Eail- 
 way Companies Act, 1867, sect. 3, and that the rail- 
 way plant belonging to it was protected from 
 rfieizuro by sect. 4. Great Northern Eailway 
 
 Company v. Tahourdin 13 Q. B. D. 320 
 
 2. Execution — Judgment Creditor — Fro- 
 
 4ection of Moiling Stocic and Plant — Railway 
 
 Companies Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 127), ss. 4, 
 2Z.'] The protection from seizure in execution by 
 a judgment creditor, giveo by the Railway Com- 
 panies Act, 1867, s. 4, to the rolling stock and 
 plant of a railway, after such railway is open for 
 -public trafSc, continues although the railway is 
 afterwards closed for traffic. Midland V/aggon 
 Company v. Potteries, Shrewsbury, and North 
 Wales Eailway Company 6 Q. B. D. 36 
 
 3. Land required for Undertaking — 
 
 Lands Clauses Act, 184.5 (8*9 Vict. e. 18), s. 127)— 
 Adverse Possession — Statutes of Limitation, 3 4 4 
 Will. 4, 0. 27, s. 7 ; 37 (£ 38 Vict. c. 57, s. 1— Evi- 
 dence.'] The mere fact that land of a railway 
 company is required for the purposes of their 
 undertaking, aud is not superfluous land, does 
 not prevent an occupier who has exclusive ad- 
 verse possession for twelve years becoming thereby 
 ■entitled to the land under the Statutes of Limita- 
 tions. BoBBETT V. South Eastern Eailway 
 •Company 9 ft. B. D. 424 
 
 VIII. EAILWAY COMPANY — EAILWAYS 
 CLAUSES ACT. 
 
 1, Accommodation Works — Compulsory 
 
 Powers — Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 
 (8 &9Viet. 0. 20), ss. 15, 16, 68— Discretion of Com- 
 pany as to the most convenient Mode of doing the 
 Works.'] Lands required by a railway company 
 for accommodation works are lands required for 
 the purposes of " the undertaking " or " of the 
 
 VIII. EAILWAY COMPANY — EAILWAYS 
 
 CLAUSES ACT — continued. 
 railway." — Every work which a railway company 
 is empowered to do, not merely what it is com- 
 pelled to do, is a purpose of the undertaking. — 
 The word " necessary " in the 68th section of the 
 Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, refers 
 to the obligation to make good the interruption, 
 and does not confine the company to any par- 
 ticular mode of doing the woiks. Where there 
 are several modes of doing the works, the com- 
 pany, acting under the advice of their engineer, 
 are the sole judges which mode should be 
 adopted ; but if they do not act bona fide the 
 Court will interfere. — A railway company having 
 intersected the lands of two adjoining land- 
 owners, A. and B., by an embankment, proposed 
 to connect the severed portions of A .'s land by an 
 arch through the embankment, and to give B. a 
 right of way through the same arch, which they 
 proposed to connect with his land by an occupa- 
 tion road carried through A.'s land. The strip 
 of A.'s land proposed to be taken for this road 
 was included in the lands delineated. A. ob- 
 jected to this arrangement as being beyond the 
 powers of the company : — Held (reversing the 
 decision of Kay, J.), that the company had power 
 to take the strip of land compulsorily for the 
 proposed purpose. Wilkinson v. Hull, &o., 
 Eailway and Dock Company - 20 Ch. D. 323 
 
 2. Carrier— 8 & 9 Vict. c. 20, s. 90—" Pass- 
 ing only over the same Portion of the Line" — 
 ■' Under the like circumstances " — " In favour of or 
 against any particular Person" — Unequal ToUs — 
 Oroup Rates — Undue Preference — Railway and 
 Canal Traffic Act, 1854(17 * 18 Viet. c. 31), ss. 2, 
 3, 6 — Action for Breach of Railway and Canal 
 Traffic Act, 1854, whether maintainable.] No 
 action will lie in respect of any breach of the 
 provisions of the Eailway and Canal Traffic 
 Act, 1854, s. 2. — Judgment of the Queen's 
 Bench Division as to this point affirmed. — A 
 railway company carried coals eastwards to 
 various towns from a group of collieries situate 
 at different points along their line, and charged 
 one uniform set of rates in respect of the 
 carriage to all the collieries comprised in the 
 group. In an action for overcharges by the 
 owners of the colliery lying furthest eastwards : — 
 Held, that inasmuch as the terminus of the 
 transit over the company's line differed with 
 respect to each colliery comprised in the group, 
 the company had not contravened the provisions 
 of the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, 
 s. 90, and therefore were not liable in the action. 
 — Judgment of the Queens Bench Division as 
 to this point reversed. — A railway company 
 carried coal from certain collieries, including 
 the D. colliery, situate in the Y. coalfield, to 
 the port of G., where a line of steamers called 
 which traded to the West Indies; in order to 
 introduce the coal carried by them to the West 
 Indian market, the railway company agreed to 
 allow B. 8d. per ton in respect of all coal shipped 
 on board the steamers in order to be carried to 
 the West Indies. The railway company agreed 
 also to allow B. Gd. per ton upon all coal shipped 
 for certain ports, in view of the anticipated ad- 
 vantage to themselves by the increased tonnage 
 
( 1289 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1290 ) 
 
 Vni. RAILWAY COMPANY, — RAILWAYS 
 
 CLAUSES ACT— continued. 
 ' to be carried over their line. The owners of the 
 D. colliery also sent coals over the line of the 
 railway company to the same port of G., but not 
 for shipment to the West Indies or to the ports 
 above-mentioned, and claimed to recover from the 
 railway company overcharges in respect of the 
 coal thus sent by them, on the ground of the 
 allowances of 8d. per ton and Gd. per ton made 
 to B. : — Held, as to the coals carried by the rail- 
 way company for B. from the Y. coalfield other 
 than those coming from the D. colliery, that the 
 termini of the transit from the collieries being 
 different, the owners of the D. colliery could not 
 recover for overcharges: — Held, as to the coals 
 carried by the railway company for B. coming 
 from the D. colliery, on the authority of Great 
 Western By. Co. v. SuUon (Law Eep. 4 H. L. 226), 
 and London and North Western By. Co. v. Ever- 
 shed (S App. Gas. 1029), that the railway com- 
 pany, by making the allowances of 8d. per ton and 
 6d. per ton, had contravened the EaUways Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845, s. 90, but that the owners 
 of the D. colliery had not proved any damage by 
 reason of the allowances to B., and therefore 
 could not recover from the railway company for 
 overcharges. — A railway company were carriers 
 of coal for B. and J., who were coal merchants, 
 to G. The trucks with the coals intended for 
 them upon the arrival at G. were taken direct to 
 their yards, and it cost the railway company less 
 to deliver the trucks straight into the yards of B. 
 and J., than to keep the trucks in the goods-yard 
 of the company until the trucks should be un- 
 loaded. The railway company thereupon allowed 
 B. sometimes 2d. and sometimes 6d. per ton, and 
 J. id. per ton. B. and J. obtained coals from 
 many collieries situate upon the line of the rail- 
 way company, and the railway company, as might 
 be convenient to them, returned the trucks of B. 
 and J. to any colliery with which they had deal- 
 ings. It was cheaper for the railway company to 
 be at liberty to send the trucks at their pleasure 
 to any colliery with which B. and J. had dealings 
 than to be compelled to return them to a par- 
 ticular colliery, and therefore th,ey allowed B. and 
 J. a rebate of 2 per cent, upon their respective 
 nett debits. The saving to the railway company 
 did not adequately represent the allowances of 
 Gd. or id. per ton, or the rebate of 2 per cent. 
 The owners of a colliery also sent their coals 
 along the line of the railway company to G., but 
 their trucks were kept in the goods-yards of the 
 railway company until they were unloaded, and 
 after being unloaded were returned straight to 
 the coUieiy. The owners of the colliery having 
 claimed to recover from the railway company for 
 overcharges in respect of the allowance of 6d., 2d., 
 and id. per ton, and of the rebate of 2 per cent. : — 
 Held, that the railway company carried for B. 
 and J. under circumstances different from those 
 under which they carried for the owners of the 
 colliery, and that the latter were not entitled to 
 recover in respect of the alleged overcharges. 
 Manchesteh, Sheffield, and Lincolnshike 
 Kailwat Company v. Dbnaby Main Collieet 
 Company 13 Q. B. D. 674 ; 14 Q. B. D. 209 
 
 [Affirmed in part, reversed in part, by the House 
 of Lords.] 
 
 VIII. RAILWAY COMPANY — RAILWAYS 
 CLAUSES AC'S— continued. 
 
 3. Liability to fence — Adjoining Lands 
 
 — Bailways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 <fc 9 
 Vict. c. 20), 8. 68 — Injury to Cattle — Owner re- 
 leasing Bight to Accommodation Works — Bights of 
 Occupier.} The Plaintiff in 1846 became tenant 
 from year to year of land belonging to one G. 
 In 1847 the Defendants, a 'railway company, 
 acquired part of the land in the exercise of their 
 statutory powers, and by arrangement with G. 
 paid him compensation in lieu of all accommoda- 
 tion works, including the right to have his land 
 fenced from the railway, G. releasing the De- 
 fendants from their statutory obligation in that 
 respect. The Defendants, however, made a fence 
 of posts and rails between the land so occupied 
 by the Plaintiff and a ditch in the Defendants' 
 land adjoining the railway, and they planted a 
 hedge on the side of the ditch nearest the rail- 
 way itself, suflcient to prevent animals from 
 straying thereon. They, hpwever, neglected to 
 keep up the . posts and rails, and in consequence 
 of their neglect to do so a cow belonging to the 
 Plaintiff, in 1879, whilst the Plaintiff so continued 
 in the occupation of the land under the original 
 tenancy which had never been determined, fell 
 into the ditch and was killed -.—Weld, affirming 
 the decision of the Common Pleas Division, that 
 the Defendants were liable for the loss of the cow, 
 for that their arrangement with the owner did 
 not exonerate them from their liability under the 
 Railways Clauses Act, 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. o. 20), 
 s. 68, to maintain the fence for the benefit of the 
 occupier, and so as to prevent his cattle from 
 straying from his land. Coeby ». Gkeat 
 Western Railway Company - 6 Q. B. D. 237 ; 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 322 
 
 4. Mines — Compulsory Purchase — ■Bub- 
 sequent Purchase of Minerals under Lands pre- 
 viously acquired — " Expressly purchased " — 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 (fe 9 
 Vict. a. 18), ss. 6, 16, et seq. — Bailways Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 <fe 9 Vict. c. 20), 
 ss. 6, 77, 78, 79.] A railway company having 
 the usual power to purchase lands under its 
 special Act, has, by virtue of the 6th section 
 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, power also to 
 purchase the minerals under those lands com- 
 pulsorily at any time before the expiration of 
 the time limited for the exercise of its compul- 
 sory powers, if it should deem it advisable 
 
 That power is not taken away by the 77th and 
 following sections of the Railways Clauses Act, 
 1845, which are for the benefit not of the mine 
 owner but of the company, and only exempt the 
 company from the obligation of buying the mine- 
 rals at once together with the surface lands. — 
 The words " expressly purchased " in the 77th 
 section are not to be confined to " purchased by 
 agreement." There is no distinction between the 
 severance of ownership vertically, that is, of the 
 siu'face lands from the mines beneath, and the 
 severance of ownership laterally by the taking by 
 successive purchases of surface lands from the 
 same landowner. So a railway compuny having 
 already acquired surface lands may subsequently 
 purchase compulsorily the minerals under those 
 lands. — The opinion of the company's engineer, if 
 
( 1291 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1292 ) 
 
 VIII. RAILWAY COMPANY — EAILWAYS 
 
 CIiAXrSES ACT— continued. 
 bona fide, is the only evidence required by tbe 
 Court as to the necessity or propriety of any pur- 
 chase, and the onus of proving want of bona fides 
 rests upon the party opposing the purchase: — 
 Injunction granted against the company by Hall 
 V.C, discharged. Ebbington v. Metropolitan 
 DisTEicT Railway Company 19 Ch. D. 559 
 
 6. ~ nines — Minerals — Clay — Conveyance 
 
 —Hailways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 <{; 9 
 Vict. c. 20), »■. 77.] The word "mines" in the 
 77th section of the Railways Clauses Act, 1845, 
 includes minerals whether got by underground or 
 by open workings ; and therefore a bed of clay, on 
 which the railway had been made, was as a mine 
 excepted out of the conveyance of the land to the 
 railway company, and might, unless the company 
 were willing to make compensation to the land- 
 owner, be dug and worked by him. Midland 
 Railway Company v. Hatjnohwood Beiok and 
 Tile Company - 20 Ch. D. 652 
 
 6. nines — Bight of Owner to work Mines 
 
 — Minerals under or near Bailway — Mineral 
 Mstate intersected by Bailway — Bailways Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845 (8*9 Vict. c. 20), 
 ss. 77-82.] Sect. 80 of the Railways Clauses Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845, applies to minerals lying 
 more than forty yards from a line of railway, and 
 enables the owner of minerals, whose access to 
 them is cut off, by reason of a railway company 
 having purchased from him the minerals lying 
 under their line of railway, or within forty yards 
 from it, to tunnel under the railway for the pur- 
 pose of working his minerals which are on the 
 other side of it. And this power extends, not 
 only to minerals in the ordinary sense of the 
 word, but also to such a substance as clay, which 
 is usually worked from the surface. — And by 
 sect. 81 the mineral owner is entitled to be com- 
 pensated by the company for any additional 
 expense caused by his having to work the min- 
 erals in this way. — The Defendant was the owner 
 of tlie minerals lying in and under a triangular 
 piece of laud, which was completely surrounded 
 by three lines of railway belonging to the Plain- 
 tilfs, and also of the minerals lying under certain 
 portions of those three lines. The company had 
 pui-chased the surface of the triangular piece of 
 land, and also the surface of the land on which 
 those parts of the three lines were constructed. 
 The minerals in and under the lands so purchased 
 were not in the first instance purchased by the 
 company. The Defendant, in April, 1885, gave 
 the company notice, under sect, 78 of the Kail- 
 ways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, of his in- 
 tention to work the minerals belonging to him in 
 and under the triangular piece of land, and also 
 under the lines of railway. The company gave 
 the Defendant notice that they were willing to 
 make compensation for the minerals under the 
 lines of railway, and arbitrators were appointed to 
 assess the compensation. The Defendant , then 
 gave tlie company notice that he intended to 
 work the minerals in and under the triangular 
 piece of land, and for that purpose to enter upon 
 and across the line of railway : — Hdd, that such 
 a mode of working would be a trespass, and that 
 the Defendant must be restrained from working 
 
 VIII. EAIIWAY COMPANY — BAILWAYS 
 
 CLATTSES ACT — continued. 
 in that way, but that he would be entitled to 
 tunnel under the railway in order to work the 
 minerals in and under the triangular piece of 
 land, and that the company must compensate him 
 for the extra expense of so working. Midland 
 Railway Company v. Miles - 80 Ch. D. 634 
 
 7. Mines — Bight of Support to Surface 
 
 Land — Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 
 (8 <fe 9 Vict. c. 20), ss. 77, 78, 79.] In 1865 the 
 owner of land demised the minerals under it to the 
 Defendant for a term of years, and in 1867 such 
 owner conveyed the surface of the land to a rail- 
 way company under the compulsory powers of the 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, which was 
 incorporated with the company's special Act, and 
 some years afterwards the company sold part of 
 such land as superfluous land to persons who 
 ultimately sold it to the Plaintiff. The railway 
 company never purchased the minerals or made 
 compensation to the Defendant as such lessee 
 under the powers conferred on them by the Rail- 
 ways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, and the 
 Defendant worked the mines in the usual manner 
 of working in the district, and by so doing caused 
 a subsidence which damaged some houses erected 
 by the Plaintiff upon the land. — -In an action 
 against the Defendant for working the mines 
 without leaving a sufficient support for the Plain- 
 tiff's land: — Held, that the Defendant had not 
 interfered with any right of the Plaintiff, who 
 could have no greater right than the railway 
 company from whom he derived his title, and that 
 upon the construction of sects. 77, 78, and 79 of 
 the Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, if 
 a railway company has exercised the option it has 
 under that Act of purchasing land under their 
 compulsory powers without the mines and mine- 
 rals thereunder, the owner, lessee, or occupier of 
 such mines and minerals has a right to work the 
 same without regard to whether such working 
 will let down the surface, provided the working 
 is according to the usual way in the district. 
 PouNTNEY V. Clayton - - 11 Q. B. D. 820 
 
 8. Siding — Bight to use — Landovmer — 
 
 Branch Bailway — Benewing Junction — Board of 
 Trade Order — Interlocking and Signalling Appa- 
 ratus — Idahility of Landowner — Bemoving Junc- 
 tion — Injunction — Begulation of Bailways— S <fe 4 
 Vict. c. 97, s. 5—5 & 6 Vict. c. 55, ss. 4, 6, l^i— Bail- 
 ways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, s. 76.] The 
 Plaintiff, and his predecessors in title, as owners 
 of land adjoining a single line of railway, had 
 ever since the year 1861 used a junction siding 
 connecting the railway with a foundry on their 
 land, the siding being the only access to the 
 foundry. The Defendants, the railway company, 
 having doubled their line, the Board of Trade, 
 acting on the report of their inspector and as a 
 condition for certifying the line to be fit for traffic, 
 required the company either to provide the junc- 
 tion of the siding with the modern and improved 
 system of interlocking and signalling apparatus, 
 or to remove the junction, which was of an old- 
 fashioned description. The company then called 
 upon the Plaiatiff to execute the work or pay the 
 costs of it, but this the Plaintiff declined to do, 
 whereupon the company took up the junction 
 
( 1293 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 i( 1294 ) 
 
 VIII. EAILWAT COMPANY — RAILWAYS 
 CLAirSES ACT — continued. 
 
 points : — Beld, by Bacon, V.O., that the Plaintiff 
 kad, under sect. 76 of the Eailways Clauses Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845, a statutory right to the uae 
 of his siding in conuectiou with the company's 
 railway, the company's parliamentary powers 
 being subject to that right ; and an injunction 
 was therefore granted restraining the company 
 from continuing to prevent communication be- 
 tween his siding and the railway, and compelling 
 the company to restore the junction. — Powell 
 Duffryn Steam Coal Compantj v. Taff Vale Bail- 
 way Company (Law Eep. 9 Ch. 331) distinguished. 
 — Rdd, on appeal, that as the Plaintiff's predeces- 
 sors in title had acquired a perpetual right to use 
 the siding under a clause as to sidings in an old 
 local Act for malsing a tramway, which had since 
 been converted into the railway of the Defen- 
 dants, and the subsequent Acts contained savins 
 clauses sufficient to protect all rights acquired by 
 the Plaintiff' under the old Act, the case did not 
 depend on the Railways Clauses Act, and that 
 the Plaintiff retained the right acquired under 
 the old Act to use the siding without contributing 
 to the expense of the new apparatus, such Act 
 containing nothing to oblige the Plaintiff to make 
 or pay for the interlocking apparatus. — Beld, also, 
 that if the case had turned on the 76th section of 
 the Eailways Clauses Act, the Court would not 
 have decided the question whether the Plaintiff 
 was bound to pay for the interlocking apparatus,- 
 without first ascertaining what, in the year 1845, 
 was included in the terms " offset plates " and 
 ■" switches " used in that section. 'W'oodktji'f v. 
 Brecon and Mebthye Tydfil Junction Rail- 
 way Company 28 Ch. D, 190 
 
 IX. EAILWAY COMPANY— EAILWAYS EE- 
 GTTLATION ACTS. 
 
 Eailway Commissioners.] The Act 48 & 49 
 Vict. c. 59, continues the Regulation of Railways 
 Acts, 1873 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 48), until the 'ilst of 
 December, 1886. 
 
 1. Arbitration — Reference to Railway 
 
 Commissioners — Jurisdiction of Railway Commis- 
 sioners—Regulation of Railways Act, 1873 (36 & 37 
 Vict. c. 48), s. 8 — Injunotion^Prohibition.^ Two 
 railway companies were empowered by a special 
 Act to enter into a working agreement, but no 
 provision was made respecting arbitration. The 
 agreement made under this Act contained a, 
 clause providing that any difference between the 
 companies should be determined by arbitration 
 in accordance with the provisions of the Eailway 
 Arbitration Act, 1859. Differences having arisen, 
 one of the companies called upon the Eailway 
 Commissioners to decide the differences under 
 the 8th section of the Eegulation of Eailways 
 Act, 1873. — The other company accordingly issued 
 a writ for an injunction against the first company, 
 which was amended by making the Eailway 
 Commissioners parties, and asking for a prohibi- 
 tion: — Held (reversing the decision of Jessel, 
 M.E.), that the ! Eailway Commissioners had no 
 jurisdiction to undertake the arbitration, and a 
 prohibition was issued accordingly. — The clause 
 in the 88th section of the Eegulation of Eailways 
 Act, 1873, which enables one party to apply for 
 the arbitration of the Eailway Commissioners, 
 
 IX. EAILWAY COMPANY— EAILWAYS EEGU- 
 
 LATIOK ACTS— continued. 
 " where any difference between railway companies 
 is, under the provisions of any general or special 
 Act, required or authorized to be referred to arbi- 
 tration," does not apply to all cases in which the 
 agreement under which the difference has arisen 
 has been jnade under the provisions of a general 
 or special Act, but only to cases in which the 
 specific difference has been required or authorized 
 by a general or special Act to be referred to arbi- 
 tration. — Stolees Bay Railway and Pier Company 
 V. London and South Western Railway Company 
 (2 Nev. & Mac. 143) and Portpatridc Railway 
 Company v. Caledonian Railway Company (3 Nev. 
 & Mac. 189) disapproved. Great Western Rail- 
 way Company v. Wateeford and Limerick 
 iiAiLWAY Company - - 17 Ch. D. 493 
 
 3. CostS' — Railway Commissioners — Suc- 
 cessful Defendant not liable to be ordered to pay 
 unsuccessful Applicant's. Costs — Regulation of Rail- 
 ways Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 48), s. 28— 
 Rules of Supreme Court, 1875, Order £F.] The 
 Eailway Commissioners have no jurisdictiou under 
 the Eegulation of Railways Act, 1873, s. 28, to 
 order a railway company, in whose favour they 
 have decided upon an application to them against 
 such cotapany, to pay costs to the unsuccessful 
 applicant. — Judgment of the Queen's Bench 
 Division reversed. Foster v. Great Western 
 Railway Company - 8 Q. B. D. 25, 515 
 
 3. Excessive Charges — Conveyance of 
 
 Passengers by Railway — Neglect to afford "Reason- 
 able Facilities" — Jurisdiction of Railway Commis- 
 sioners — Regulation of Railways Act, 1873 (36 <fe 37 
 Vict. c. 48) — Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854 
 (17 & 18 Vict. 0. 31), s. 2.] The mere fact that 
 railway companies make charges for the convey- 
 ance of passengers in excess of those authorized 
 by their special Acts, but without any undue 
 preference, is not a breach of their obligation 
 under 17 & 18 Vict. c. 31, s. 2, to " afford accord- 
 ing to their respective powers all reasonable 
 facilities for the receiving and forwarding and 
 delivering of traffic upon and from the ^veral 
 ra.Uways and canals belonging to or worked by 
 such companies respectively and for the return of 
 carriages, trucks, boats, and otiier vehicles." Anci 
 the Eailway Commissioners have no jurisdictiou 
 to grant an injunction to restra,in the making of 
 such excessive charges. — Semble, per Brett, L.J., 
 and Cotton, L.J., that if the overcharges were of 
 such an amount and of such a nature that they 
 had the effect, or it could be presumed that they 
 were made with the intention, of, preventing the 
 use by passenger.s of particular trains and stations, 
 the Commissioners might have jurisdiction to 
 entertain a complaint in respect of them as being 
 a refusal of '' facilities " within the meaning of 
 17 & 18 Vict. c. 31, s.,2. Great Western Eail- 
 way Company v. Eailway Commissioners 
 
 [7 ft. B. D, 182 
 
 4. Excessive Charges — Eailway Com- 
 missioners — Terminal Charges — Stations, Sidings, 
 &c. — Services incidental to the Business of ,a 
 Carrier — Special Case — Power to state — 36 & ,37 
 Vict c. 48, ss. 15, 26—26 & 27 Vict c. caxpiii., 
 s. 51.] On the hearing of an application made 
 under the Eegulation of Railways Act, 1873 
 
( 1295 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1296 ) 
 
 IX. EAILWAY COMPANY— EAILWAYS REGU- 
 LATION ACTS— continued. 
 (36 & 37 Vict. 0. 48), s. 15, the Railway Com- 
 missioners have power to state a special case 
 for the opinion of the High Court. — By the 
 London, Brighton, and South Coast Eailway 
 Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. ccxviii.), ». 51 : 
 " The maximum rates of charges to be made by 
 the company for the conveyance of animals and 
 goods, including the tolls for the use of their 
 railways and waggons or trucks and for locomo- 
 tive power, and every other expense incidental to 
 such conveyance (except a reasonable sum for 
 loading, covering, and unloading the goods at 
 any terminal station of such goods, and for de- 
 livery and collection, and any other services inci- 
 dental to the duty or business of a carrier, where 
 such services or any of them are or is performed 
 by the company), shall not exceed " certain sums 
 prescribed : — Held, that station accommodation, 
 the use of sidings, weighing, checking, clerkage, 
 watching, and labelling, provided and performed 
 by the company in respect of goiids traffic carried 
 by them as carriers, may be, and prirna facie are 
 " services incidental to the duty or business of a 
 carrier " within s. 51 ; whether they are so in any 
 particular case is a question of fact for the Eail- 
 way Commissioners to decide, and, if found by 
 them to be so, such services may be the subject of 
 a separate reasonable charge in addition to the 
 rates prescribed. Hall & Co. v. London, 
 Brighton, and South Coast Railway Com- 
 pany - 15 Q. B. D. 505 
 
 5. Jurisdiction of Eailway Commissioners 
 
 — Demurrer — Regulation of Railways Act, 1873 
 (36 & 37 Vict. c. iH)— Railway and Canal Traffic 
 Act, 1854 (17 (fc 18 Vict. c. 31).] The Eailway 
 Commissioners, to whom has been transferred the 
 jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas under 
 the Eailway and Canal TraflSc Act, 1851 (17 & 18 
 Vict. c. 31), have under that Act jurisdiction 1o 
 hear and determine a complaint against a railway 
 company of not, according to its powers, affording 
 all reasonable facilities for receiving, forwarding, 
 and delivering passengers and other traffic at and 
 from any of its stations which are used by the 
 company for such passengers or other traffic ; and 
 although the commissioners have no jurisdiction 
 to order (he company to make a new railway 
 station, or to order any particular works, or other- 
 wise to interfere with the discretion of the com- 
 pany in the mode of performing its obligation to 
 afford such facilities, according to its powers, for 
 the receiving, forwarding, and delivering of the 
 traffic, yet they have jurisdiction to order such 
 facilities, even if their doing so would necessitate 
 tlie making by the company of some structural 
 alteration of such station. — If the Eailway Com- 
 missioners act beyond their powers, prohibition 
 will lie, notwithstanding the power of the Court 
 of Common Pleas over railways under 17 & 18 
 Vict. 0. 31, was transferred to such commissioners 
 by 36 & 37 Vict. c. 48. — In a declaration in pro- 
 hibition by a railway company against the Eail- 
 way Commissioners it appeared that a complaint, 
 under the Eailway and Canal Traffic Act, 1854, 
 had been made to the commissioners against the 
 company, and that the commissioners proposed to 
 order certain things to be done by the company 
 
 IX. EAILWAY COMPANY— EAILWAYS EEGir- 
 
 LATION ACTS — continued. 
 in respect of such complaint, and that the com- 
 pany denied the jurisdiction of the commissionejs 
 to hear and determine the complaint or any part 
 of it, and prayed for a writ to prohibit the com- 
 missioners " from further proceeding in any wa.y 
 touching the premises before them." — The Court, 
 being of opinion that the commissioners had juris- 
 diction over the general matter of the complaint, 
 and that they had jurisdiction to order some of 
 the things they proposed ordering, though not to 
 order the others : — Held (Brett, L.J., dissenting), 
 that a general demurrer by the commissioners 
 to the whole declaration should be allowed. 
 South Eastern Eailway Company v. Eailway 
 Commissioners and Mayor of Hastings 
 
 [6 Q. B. S. 586 
 6. Through Traffic — Facilities for for- 
 warding — Through Rate — Intermediate Railway 
 Company, whether entitled to require through Rate 
 for Traffic to and from Termini off their own Line 
 — Regulation of Railways Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict, 
 c. 48 j, s. ll.J By sect. 2 of the Eailway and Canal 
 Traffic Act, 1854, every railway company shall 
 affiird all reasonable facilities for the receiving, 
 forwarding, and delivering of traffic upon its rail- 
 way whether belonging to or worked by such 
 company, and by sect. 14 of the Eegulation of 
 EaUways Act, 1876, the facilities to be so affiarded 
 are declared to be and shall include " the due and 
 reasonable receiving, forwarding, and delivering- 
 by every railway company, at the request of any 
 other such company, of through traffic to and 
 from the railway of any other such company a± 
 through rates." The Central Wales Eailway 
 Company applied to the Eailway Commissioners 
 for an order under sect. 11 allowing through rates- 
 in respect of the traffic in certain goods betweea 
 Chester and .Haverfordwest, the route claimed 
 being from Chester, over lines owned or worked 
 by the London and North Western Eailway Com- 
 pany, and over the applicants' own line, which 
 was worked by the same company under an agree- 
 ment with the applicants, and thence to Havei-- 
 fordwest over the Great AVestern Company's line, 
 which was worked and owned exclusively by that 
 company, and vice vers^ from Haverfordwest to 
 Chester. The applicants had no rolling stock, 
 and did not work their railway, but maintained 
 and managed their line, and collected, forwarded, 
 and delivered their own traffic, the whole of the- 
 staff at their stations being employed and paid 
 by them, and subject to their orders : — Held, thai 
 the traffic was " through traffic to and from " the 
 applicants' railway, and that the applicants wei-p 
 a railway company entitled to request a through, 
 rate in respect of such traffic, within the meaning 
 of sect. 11, and therefore that the Eailway Com' 
 missioners had jurisdiction to make the order. 
 Great Western Eailway Company v. Central 
 Wales Eailway Company 10 Q. B, D. 231 
 
 X. EAILWAY COMPANY— TEAFFIC MANAGE- 
 MENT. 
 
 1. Carrier — Railway and Canal Traffic- 
 
 Act, 1854 (17 * 18 Vict. c. 31), s. 1— Alternative 
 Rates— Special Condition^ A fish merchant de- 
 livered fish to a railway company to carry upon a. 
 signed contract relieving the company as to all 
 
( 1297 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1298 ) 
 
 X. RAILWAY COMPANY— TRAFFIC MANAGE- 
 
 UENT — continued. 
 flsh delivered by him " from all liability for loss 
 or damage by delay in transit or from -whatever 
 other cause arl-ing," in consideration of the rates 
 being one-fifth lower than where no such under- 
 taking was granted: the contract to endure for 
 five years. The servants of the company accepted 
 the fish, although from pressure of business they 
 could not carry it in time for the intended 
 market, and the fish lost the market : — Held, 
 reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal, 
 that upon the facts the merchant had a bona fide 
 option to send fish at a reasonable rate with lia- 
 bility on the company as common carriers, or at 
 the lower rate upon the terms of the contract; 
 that the contract was in point of fact just and 
 reasonable within the Eailway and Canal Trafiic 
 Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. 31), s. 7, and covered 
 the delay ; and that the company were not liable 
 for the loss. Beown v. Manohestbb, Sheffield, 
 
 AND LiNOOLNSHIEE RAILWAY COMPANY 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 230 ; 10 Q. B. S. 350 ; 8 App. Cas. 703 
 
 2. Contract — Ultra Vires — Charge for 
 
 Weighing Goods carried hy Railway Company.'] 
 A railway company carried coals on their line for 
 the Defendants, who were coal merchants, and 
 delivered them at the Defendants' wharf which 
 adjoined a siding at one of the company's stations, 
 and they allowed the Defendants, in consideration 
 of paying a specified reasonable charge, to weigh 
 out the coals to customers by a machine belong- 
 ing to the company pleiced in the station yard. 
 The company had no express statutory power to 
 make charges foj: the use of their weighing 
 machines : — Held, that the charges were not ultra 
 vires, and the company could maintain an action 
 to recover them from the Defendants. London 
 AND North Westekn Eailway Company v. Pkice 
 
 [11 Q. B. S. 485 
 
 3. Mileage Charges — Lvmp Charges- 
 Statute — Bepeal hy Tmplication — Government 
 Duty — " Tolls " — Omission to put Milestones — 
 Hallways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, o. 95.] 
 The W. Company by their original Act were 
 
 ■authorized to charge reasonable rates for the con- 
 veyance of passengers. By a subsequent Act the 
 company were empowered to extend their line, 
 and to charge a lump sum for carrying passengers 
 over that extension. A third and later Act 
 allowed the W. Company to amalgamate with 
 another company, provided that they reduced 
 their charges to the same scale as that of the 
 other company. That scale was one penny a 
 mile for eafh third-class passenger. The Plaintiff 
 travelled over the line of the W. Company wilh a 
 third-class ticket, and was charged as his fare at 
 more than the rate of one penny a mile. In the 
 course of his journey he travelled over the exten- 
 sion. The W. Company also charged the Plaintiff 
 with the Government duty : — Held, that the W, 
 Company were not entitled to charge the Plaintiff 
 more than one penny per mile, but that they were 
 entitled to charge him with the Government duty. 
 — ^By one of the clauses in an Act relating to the 
 W. Company they were forbidden to take tolls, 
 unless milestones were maintained along the line ; 
 and another Act relating to the W. Company in- 
 
 .oorporated the EaUways Clauses Consolidation 
 
 X. RAILWAY COMPANY— TRAFFIC MANAGE- 
 MENT — continued. 
 Act, 1845, which, in sect. 95, contains a similar 
 provision: — Held, that the word "tolls" related 
 to tolls properly so called, and .did not extend to 
 charges for carrying passengers in the company'.^, 
 own carriages. Brown v. Great Western Eail- 
 way Company 9 Q. B. D, 744 
 
 RAILWAYCOMPANY— Abandonment— Costs 
 
 [28 Ch. D, 237 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs 6. 
 
 Canada — Power to levy tolls 8 App. Cas. 723 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Domi- 
 nion. 4. 
 
 Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act — ^Move- 
 ment into proscribed district 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 629 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) 
 Act. 
 
 ■ Negligence — Charge or control of points 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 208 
 See Master and Servant — Master's- 
 Liability. 17. 
 
 Negligence^Delivery order — Estoppel 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 776 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 3. 
 
 Negligence — -Level crossing 12 ft. B. D. 70 
 
 See Negligence — Evidence. 3. 
 
 Power of general meeting 23 Ch. D. 654 ;. 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Company — Management. 2, 5. 
 
 Purchase of lands. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act- 
 Compulsory Powers. 
 
 Purchase of land- 
 
 of railway 
 See Way. 2. 
 
 Eunuing powers — Fixed rent — Eateability 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 691 
 See Poor-rate — Eateable Value, 5. 
 
 Scotch law. 
 
 See Cases under Scotch Law — Eailway 
 Company. 
 
 Superfluous lands. 
 
 See Oases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Superfluous Lands. 
 
 West Australia — Compensation 
 
 [? App. Cas. 142: 
 See Colonial Law— West Australia. 
 2. 
 RAILWAY CONSTRTTCTION FACILITIES ACT, 
 1864. 
 
 See Eailway Company — Constitution 
 — Gazette. 
 RAPE. 
 
 See Criminal Law— Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 Girl between twelve and thirteen 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 74 
 See Criminal Law — Offences AGAiNsr 
 Women. 
 RATEABLE VALTTE. 
 
 See Cases under Poor-rate — ^Eateable 
 Value. 
 
 -Eight of way — Purposes- 
 26 Ch. D. 434 
 
( 1299 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1300 ) 
 
 BATES — Borough — Municipal election — Ex- 
 penses of Court 9 Q. B. D. 494 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Election. 
 1. 
 
 Company in liquidation — Occupation by 
 
 liquidator - 23 Ch. D. 500 ; 28 Ch. D. 
 See Company— Bates. 1, 2, 3. [470, 474 
 
 Highway 13 Q. B. D. 946 
 
 See Local Government — Kates. 1. 
 
 Mortgage of— Mortmain 22 Ch. D. 202 
 
 See Chaeity — Moktmain. 4. 
 
 Order to levy — Sealing — Issue of order 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 328 
 
 See Metkopolis — Management Acts. 8. 
 
 Owner rated instead of occupier — Tenements 
 
 whether occupied or unoccupied 
 
 [8 Q. B. S. 486 
 
 See Local Government — Rates. 2. 
 Parish — Winding-up of company — Appor- 
 tionment - - 19 Ch. D. 640 
 
 See Appoetionment. 2. 
 Procedm-e for recovery of. 
 
 See Justices — Peaotice — Bates — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 Poor-rates. 
 
 See Cases under Poor-rate. 
 
 Waterworks company — " Bateable value " 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 337 ; 9 App. Cas. 49 
 
 See Waterworks Company — ■ Watee- 
 eate. 3. 
 BATIFICATION— Contract by promoter 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Company — Contracts. 2. [125 
 VUA vires act - 26 Ch. D, 107 
 
 See Company — Memorandum and Ar- 
 ticles. 3. 
 EEAL AND PEKSONAL ESTATE— Administra- 
 tion action — Apportionment of costs 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 552 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 11. 
 Fire insurance — Eight to money 
 
 See Insurance, Fire. 2. [23 Ch. D. 188 
 Larch trees 28 Ch. D. 220; 30 Ch, D. 485 
 
 See Timber. 1, 2. 
 HEAL AND PEESONAI REPRESENTATIVES— 
 
 Partition suit — Proceeds of sale 
 
 [19 Ch, D. 302 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 6. 
 Option of purchasing freehold 27 Ch. D, 394 
 
 See Lease — Landlord and Tenant. 16. 
 
 REAL ESTATE. 
 
 The statute 47 & 48 Vict, c. 71, s. 4, extends the 
 law of escheat to any estate or interest, whether legal 
 or equitable in any incorporeal hereditament, and 
 to any equitable estate or interest in any corporeal 
 hereditaments. 
 
 By sect. 5 (1) the High Court of Justice or the 
 Court of Chancery of Lancaster may with consent 
 of Attorney-General, notwithstanding that no office 
 has been found and no commission issued, order a 
 sale of any land or legal or equitable interest of 
 the Crown, the same to he disposed of under 39 & 40 
 Vict. c. 18. 
 
 (2.) 15 & IG Vict. c. 55, s. 1, to apply to such 
 sale as if to the property of a subject. 
 
 By sect. 6 a Treasury warrant may loaive rights 
 
 12. 
 28 Ch. D. 66 
 
 .182 
 
 REAL 'ES'iKT'S— continued. 
 
 of Crown in certain cases where a person dies 
 
 without an heir, and intestate in respect of real 
 
 estate. 
 
 By sect. 7 the offices of the Duchy of Lancaster 
 are substituted for the ordinary offices of the 
 Crown in matters appertaining to that Duchy. 
 See also Administrator. 
 
 Assets — ^Eight of retainer — Heir-at-law 
 
 See Ketainer. [27 Ch, D, 478 
 
 Contract by wife to assign to husband — 
 
 Heir-at-law - 9 ft. B. D. 576 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wipe's Real 
 Estate. 6. 
 
 Cultivation of - 27 Ch. D. 553 
 
 See Settlement — Management. 6. 
 
 Debt payable out of 19 Ch. D. 156 
 
 See Charity — Mortmain 2. 
 
 Descended — Costs of administration action 
 
 [28 Ch, D. 159 
 
 See Executor — ^Actions. 
 Devise by will — Leaseholds 
 
 See Will— Words. 16. 
 Equitable assets — Eetainer 18 Ch. D. 
 
 See Executor — Betainee. 7. 
 
 Infant — Power of Court to mortgage 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 786 
 
 See Infant — Peopeety. 1. 
 
 Power of appointment — Failure by death of 
 
 appointee 16 Ch, D, 18 
 
 See Power — Execution. 6. 
 
 Will — Married woman — Probate Division — 
 
 Jurisdiction — Appoinlment of executors 
 [6 P, D. 209 
 See Peoeate — Maeeied Woman. 4. 
 
 Will— Probate - - 9 P. D. 242 
 
 See Peobate — Grant. 5. 
 
 REAL SECURITY— Turnpike road bonds 
 
 See Will— Words. 17. [30 Ch. D. 227 
 
 REASONABLE AND PROBABLE CAUSE— MaU- 
 
 cious prosecution. 
 
 See Cases under Malicious Peoseoution. 
 
 REASONABLENESS OF CHARGES — Eailway 
 tolls — Canada 8 App. Cas. 723 
 
 See Colonial Law — Cujada — Domi- 
 nion. 4. 
 
 RECEIPT IN DEED— Effect of. 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 Mortgage debt — Building society 
 
 [28 Ch, O. 298 
 
 See Building Society. 12. 
 
 RECEIVER— Abandoned railway 18 Ch. D. 165 
 See Railway Company — Abandonment. 
 1. 
 
 Appointment — Efioct on right of retainer 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 604 
 See Executor — Eetainee. 2. 
 
 Balance due from — Debt of record 
 
 [18 Ch. D, 296 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Personal 
 Actions. 11. 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptoy — Eeoeivee. 
 
( 1301 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ,( 1302 ) 
 
 EECEIVEE — continued. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Contract in Ms own name 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 470 
 See Bankruptcy — Jubisdiction. 5. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Eight to complain of trustee 
 
 [16 Ch, D. 601 
 
 See Bankhuptcy — Appeal. 9. 
 
 Bankmptoy — Ship — Engineer's lien 
 
 [16 Ch. s. eoi 
 
 See Ship — ^Makitime Lien. 6. 
 
 Conduct of action — Bankrupt executor 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 61 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Supkeme Court — Con- 
 duct OF Cause. 1. 
 
 Interpleader — ^Practice - 13 Q. B. S. 67 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Inter- 
 pleader. 10. 
 Leaselxolds — Repairs — Indemnity to trus- 
 tees - 16 Ch. D. 723 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 9. 
 
 Manager of company — Action by debenture 
 
 holder '- 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 6. 
 
 Mortgage — Conveyancing Act, 1881 
 
 [25 Ch. S. 238 
 See Mortgage — ^Foreclosure. 20. 
 
 Mortgagee — Appointment by. 
 
 See Mortgage — Powers — Statutes. 
 
 Official — Power to sell bankrupt's property 
 
 [15 Q. B. D, 196 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Receiver. 11. 
 
 Official — Report as to composition or scheme 
 
 of arrangement — How far primS, facie 
 evidence 15 Q. B. D. 213 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Scheme of Arrange- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Settled Estates Act - - 24 Ch. D. 238 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 4. 
 
 Supreme Court — Practice. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 'Court — Receiver. 
 BKCEIVISG OBDEB— Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Oases under Bankruptcy — Re- 
 ceiver. 4^10. 
 EECEIVING STOLEN GOODS— Evidence— Guilty 
 
 knowledge - - 12 ft. B. D. 522 
 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 6. 
 
 EECITAl— Construction of general wprds 
 
 See Advowson. 1. [30 Ch. D. 298 
 
 Deed more than twenty years old 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 11 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions OF Sale. 4. 
 Implied covenant - - 18 Ch. D. 354 
 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 7. 
 Mistake in— Will ■ - 22 Ch. D. 495 
 
 See Will — Mistake. 2. 
 Notice of trust - - 24 Ch. D. 720 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 4. 
 Power of attorney 29 Ch. D. 500 
 
 See Power of Attorney. 2. 
 
 BECONSTBtrCTIOH OF COMPANY— Arbitration 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 820 
 
 See Company^Reconstruotion. 
 EECONVETANCE — Mortgage- Right of mort- 
 gagor to call for assignment 20 Ch. D. 
 See Mortgage — Redemption. 2. [724 
 
 Mortgage to building society — Priority 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 398 
 See Building Society. 13. 
 
 Unstamped deed — Compulsory purchase 
 
 [24 Ch. S. 119 
 See Revenue — ^Stamps. 5. 
 BECOBD — Transcript of — Irish inquisition 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 269 
 See Lunatic — Jurisdiction. 1. 
 
 BECOBD OFFICE. 
 
 Bules under 40 & 41 Vict. c. 55 (the Public 
 Record Office Act, 1877), for the disposal of value- 
 less documents of public offices. Dated August lltli, 
 1883 - - - L. G., 1883, p. 2921 
 
 BECOVEBY OF lAND— Action for— Interroga- 
 tories 20 Ch, D. 484 ; 8 App. Cas. 217 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 11. 
 
 Action for— Pleading 6 Q. B. D. 645 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 456 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fence. 
 
 Action for— Writ of possession 22 Ch, D. 281 
 
 See Practice — ^Supeeme Court- — Writ 
 OF Possession. 
 
 Joinder of causes of action — Counter-claim 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 138 
 See Practice — Supreme Court ■ — 
 Counter-claim. 5. 
 
 EECTEFICATION— Disentailing deed 29 Ch, D. 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 1. [133 
 
 - — - Lease - - 28 Ch. D, 255 
 
 See Mistake. 4. 
 Register of shares - - 24 Ch, D. 149 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 6. 
 
 Register of trade-marks - 37 Ch. D. 646 
 
 [89 Ch. D. 551 
 
 See Trade-mark — Registration. - 2, 3. 
 Voluntary settlement - 29 Ch. D. 212 
 
 See Voluntary Settlement. 4. 
 BEDEUFTION. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 Mortgage — Consolidation. 
 Mortgage— Redemption, 
 
 Mortgage payable by instalments' 32 Ch.-D, 
 
 See Mortgage — Contract. 10. [649 
 
 Mortgage — Period of— Foreclosure action. 
 
 See Cases under Mortgage — Fore- 
 closure. 
 
 Mortgage — Statute of Limitations 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 104, 132 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Realty. 
 6,7. 
 
 Rent-charges and quit-ren,ts. 
 
 See Rent-charge — Statutes. 
 
 Second mortgage— Extinguishment of first 
 
 mortgage - - 24 Ch, D. 618 
 
 See Mortgage — Priority. 1. 
 
( 1303 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1304 ) 
 
 EEDISTEIBUTIOK OF SEATS ACT, 1885. 
 
 See Pakltament — Eedistkibution op 
 Seats— /Sfatetes. 
 
 EEDTTCTION OF CAPITAL. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Keduotion 
 OF Capital. 
 
 EEDTTCTION OF CONTRACTS— Scheme for— In- 
 
 suianoe company 16 Ch. D. 246 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 351 
 
 See Company — -Life Insceanoe Com- 
 pany. 6. 
 EEDUCTION OF DEBT— Conditional agreement 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 676 
 
 See Bankktiftcy — Act of Bankeuptcy. 
 22. 
 
 EEDTTCTION OF INTEREST— Proviso for 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 53 
 
 See Moetgage — Mobtgagbe in Posses- 
 sion. 3. 
 EEDTTCTION OF PROOF— Bankruptcy 17 Ch. D. 
 See Bankbuptcy — Pkoof. 11. [98 
 
 EE-ENTEY — Action to recocer possession 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 410 
 See Bankkuptcy — Distbess. 5. 
 
 Power of. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Landlord 
 AND Tenant — Ee-entby. 
 
 Power of— Remoteness - 25 Ch. D. 629 
 
 (SeeVENDOB AND PCBCHASEE — CONDITIONS 
 
 OF Sale. 
 REFEEEE— Official— Report. 
 
 See Cases under PE.iOTiOE — Supeeme 
 Couut — Kefeeee. 
 EEFEEENCE— Amount due to Plaintiff— Law of 
 Mauritius - - 8 App. Cas. 296 
 
 See Colonial Law — Maueitiits. 1. 
 
 ^— By consent — Married Women's Property 
 Act - 27 Ch. D. 632 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Maeeibd 
 Women's Peopeety Act. 14. 
 
 Costs— Discretion of Court 10 P. D. 112 
 
 See Peaotice — Admiealty— Costs. 7. 
 
 Order of reference — Death of party before 
 
 making of award 16 Q. B. D. 665 
 
 See Peactioe — Supbeme Couet — 
 Change op Paeties. 4. 
 
 To arbitration — Clauses in contract — Revo- 
 cation of authority 12 Q. B. D. 310 
 See Abbitbation — Submission. 2. 
 
 To letters — Ambiguity - 8 App. Cas. 863 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 1. 
 
 EEFRESHEES— Counsel's fees 16 Ch. D. 617 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Costs. 
 38. 
 EEFUSAI OF APPIICATION— Time for appeal 
 [16 Ch. S. 3, 663 ; 20 Ch. D. 134; 
 [26 Ch. D, 614 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Coukt — Ap- 
 peal. 41 — 44. 
 REGISTER — REGISTRATION— Baptism— Evi- 
 dence of birth - 29 Ch. D. 985 
 See Evidence — Declaeation by De- 
 ceased Person. 
 
 EEGISTEE— EEGISTEATION— conJjn«e(Z. 
 
 Bill of sale. 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Bill of 
 Sale. 
 
 BUI of sale - - 16 Ch. H. 522 
 
 See Building Conteact. 2. 
 
 Bill of sale 26 Ch. D. 338 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Act op Bankbuptcy. 
 5. 
 
 Births and deaths. 
 
 See Registbation of Bieths ani> 
 Deaths — Statutes. 
 
 Building for religious worship 21 Ch. D. 51S 
 
 See Chaeity — Commissionebs. 3. 
 
 Company — Unregistered company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — TJneegis- 
 TEEED Company. 
 
 Contract for paid-up shares 18 Ch. D. 587 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 2. 
 
 Copyright- Book 18 Ch. D. 76 ; 23 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 3, 5. 
 
 Copyright — Newspaper 17 Ch. Dv 708 
 
 See CoPYEiGHT — Newspapers. 
 
 Copyright — Newspapers. 
 
 See Copyright — Newspapers — Statutes. 
 
 Copyright of designs 27 Ch. D. 260 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 24 
 Bee Copyright — Designs. 1, 2. 
 
 Jersey - - 8 App. Cas. 642 
 
 See Colonial Law — Jeeset. 2. 
 
 Judgment — Protection to executor 21 Ch. D. 
 
 See ExECUTOB— Actions. 6. [IBS 
 
 Judgment — Omission to register 
 
 See Judgment. 4. [29 Ch. D. 527 
 
 Marriage — Memorandum made by rector — 
 
 Evidence - - 10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 2. 
 
 Middlesex registry - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 
 Middlesex registry 29 Ch. D. 702 
 
 See Registry Acts. 
 
 Parliament — Acceleration in 1885. 
 
 See Parliament — Redistribution op 
 Seats — Statutes. 
 
 Rectification of - 24 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. G. 
 
 Resolution for composition. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Composi- 
 tion. 
 
 ■ Ship 7 App. Cas. 12T 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts. 7. 
 
 South Australia - - 8 App. Cas. 314 
 
 See Colonial Law — South Austealia. 
 
 ■ Trade-mark. 
 
 See Cases under Teade-makk — Regis- 
 tbation. 
 
 Transfer of shares - - 28 Ch. D. 363 ; 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 436 ; 14 Q. B. S. 882 
 See Company — Shaees — Transfer. 4, 
 5,6. 
 
 Voters for Parliament. 
 
 See Cases under Parliament — Fran- 
 chise. 
 
( 1305 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES.. 
 
 ( 130G ); 
 
 TIESISTEB— EEGISTKATION— co?iM?j»e(J. 
 
 Yorkshire registry • 26 Ch. D. 501 
 
 See "Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
 BEGISTKAB — Bankruptcy — Approval of compo- 
 sition or scheme of arrangement — ^Dis- 
 cretion - - IS ft. B. D. 213 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Scheme of Aekange- 
 
 MENT. 2. 
 
 Bankruptcy— Discretion 16 Ch. D, 283 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 1. 
 
 County Court^Notice of appeal 19 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 6. [169 
 
 Note of— Varying minutes 21 Ch. D. 621 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 7. 
 
 Ship — Bottomry — Eegistrar and merchants 
 
 [9 P. D. 177 
 See Ship — Maritimb Lien. 2. 
 
 KBGISTEATION act, 1885. 
 
 See Parliament — Rbgistbation — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 begisteation of bieths and deaths. 
 
 The Burial and Begistration Acts (^Doubls Be- 
 mooal) Act, 1881—44 & 45 Vict. a. 2-^sect. 1, 
 enads: Nothing in the 11 th section of the Burial 
 Laws Amendment Act, 1880, shall have, or he 
 deemed in law to have had, the effect of repealing, 
 or in any manner altering, any of the provisions 
 contained in the Vlfh section of the Births and 
 Deaths Begistration Act, 1874, in any case what- 
 ever, save and except only the case of a hurial 
 under the Burial Laics Amendment Act, 1880. 
 
 EEGISTET ACTS. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 54 (Yorkshire Begis- 
 tries Act, 1884) consolidates and amends the law 
 relating to the Begistration of Deeds and other 
 matters affecting lands and hereditaments within 
 the North, East, and West Bidings of Yorkshire, 
 and town of Kingston-wpon^SuU. 
 Sect. 3. Interpretation clause. 
 Sect. 4. All assurances made after commence- 
 ment of this Act (Ist January, 1885), and all wills 
 of any testators dying after that date, affecting 
 ■ lands within above limits may he registered. 
 
 Sect. 5. The registration of any assurance, will, 
 or other instru/ment under this Act, shall he effected 
 in the following manner : 
 
 (].) There shall be presented for enrolment in 
 the register — 
 (a.) In the case of deeds, wills or other assur- 
 ances which may be registered under this 
 Act, except private Acts of Parliament 
 or memoranda of charge, or affidavits 
 of vesting under any Act of Parliament, 
 a memorial thereof prepared in accord- 
 ance with the provisions of this Act, and 
 any rules made therewnder, or such deed, 
 will or other assurance as aforesaid, at 
 full length at the option of the person 
 registering the same ; 
 ■(b.) In the case of a private Act of Parlia- 
 ment, a Queen's Printer's copy of such 
 Act, or a memorial thereof prepared in 
 accordance with the provisions of this 
 Act, and any rules made the/reimder ; 
 (c.) In the ease of any memorandum of charge, 
 
 EEGISTBY KCtS— continued. 
 
 caveat, notice, or affidavit which may be . 
 registered under this Act, such memo- 
 randum, caveat, notice or affidavit at 
 full length ; 
 (2.) Immediately on receipt of any instrument 
 or memorial thereof presented for enrol- 
 ment in the register, an entry sliall he made 
 in a hooh of reference to he kept for that 
 purpose setting forth — 
 (a.) The date of the instrument. 
 (b.) (1.) In the ease of a deed, the names of 
 the parties. 
 (2.) In the case of a will, the name of 
 
 the testator. 
 (3.) In the case of an order of Court or 
 certificate of appointment of trustee 
 in bankruptcy, the title of the cause 
 or matter wherein the same purports 
 to be made, and the names of the 
 parties thereto, if any. 
 (4.) In the case of a private Act of 
 
 Parliament the title of the Act. 
 (5.) In the case of an order of the Land 
 Commissioners, the name of the land- 
 owner whose lands are charged. 
 (6.) In the case of an award of the Land 
 Commissioners, the names of the 
 persons in whose favour the award 
 is made. 
 (7.) In the case of a memorandum, of 
 charge, the name of the landowner 
 whose lands are charged. 
 (8.) In the case of a caveat, the names 
 of the persons by and in whose 
 favour the same is given. 
 (9.) In the case of a notice of a will, the 
 names of the testator, and of the 
 person by whom such notice is given. 
 (10.) In the case of an affidavit of in- 
 testacy, the names of the deceased 
 and of the deponent. 
 (11.) In the case of an affidavit of vesting, 
 the title of the Act of Parliament 
 wnder which such vesting has been 
 effected, and the name of the de- 
 ponent. 
 (c.) The names of all the parishes in which 
 the lands affected by such instrument are 
 situate. 
 (d.) The volume, page, and numiber of the re- 
 gister where such instrument or memorial 
 thereof is, or is intended to be enrolled. 
 (e.) The date, how, and minute when such 
 instrument or memorial thereof was re 
 ceived at the office for the pu/rpose of re- 
 
 And upon such entry being duly made, such in- 
 strument shall be deemed to have been registered 
 under this Act, and the date, hour, and minute so 
 entered as aforesaid shall he deemed for all pur- 
 poses to he the date of registration, provided thai if 
 such entry be duly made in respect of part only of 
 the lands affected by any such instrument, such in- 
 strument shall as to the lands with respect to which 
 such entry has been duly made, but not as to the 
 residue of the lands affected thereby, be deemed to 
 have been registered under this Act: Provided that 
 if such instrument shall afterwards be registered as 
 to the omitted lands, a note of sUeh registration 
 
( 1307 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES, 
 
 ( 1308 ) 
 
 REGISTEY ACTS— eontinaed. 
 and of the date thereof shall be mad-e in the hooh of 
 reference, and such registration shall thenceforth be 
 valid and effectual as to such omitted lands. 
 
 (3.) ^s soon as conveniently may be after the 
 presentation of any instrument or memorial thereof 
 for emvlment in the register, such instrument or 
 memorial thereof shall be duly enrolled in the re- 
 gister and the volume, page, and number of the 
 register where the same is so enrolled, shall 
 correspond with the entry made or to be made in 
 th^ book of reference relating to such instrument, 
 and an entry shall be made in the margin of the 
 register opposite any instrument or memorial 
 thereof so enrolled of the date of registration. 
 
 • Sect. 6 prescribes the regulation to which 
 memorials of (1) deeds, (2) wills, (3) orders or 
 certificates, (4) private Acts, (5) awards, (6) orders 
 of Land Commissioners shall be subject. 
 
 Sect. 7 prescribes regulations for a memorandum 
 of lien or charge. 
 
 Sect. 8. Originals of deeds, &c., to be produced. 
 
 Sect. 9. Indorsement of registrar to be made on 
 every deed, &c., produced. 
 
 Sect. 10 repealed by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 26, which 
 enacts in lieu of the repealed provisions, new rules 
 for registering a caveat with respect to lands in 
 above limits. 
 
 Sect. 11 enables a person claiming an interest 
 under a will, if unable to register the will within 
 six months after death of testator, to register u. 
 notice of the will. 
 
 Sect. 12. A person claiming as heir or through 
 intestacy may register an affidavit of intestacy. 
 
 Sect. 13. Where lands are vested by payment, &c., 
 under an Act, an affidavit of such vesting may be 
 
 Sect. 14. Assurances are entitled to priority 
 according to dates of registration and not according 
 to their respective dates. Every will [entitled to 
 be (48 & 49 Vict. o. 26)] registered under this Act to 
 have priority according to the date of the death of the 
 testator if the date of registration thereof be within, 
 or [under this Act to be deemed, to be within, a 
 period of six months after the death of the testator, 
 or according to the date of registration thereof, if 
 such date of registration be not within, or under 
 this Act to be deemed to be within, such period of 
 six months. Where dates of registration of assur- 
 ances or wills are identical, the Act does not inter- 
 fere with the priorities. Priorities given by this 
 Act have no effect in cases of actual fraud. 
 
 Sect. 15. Bepealed by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 26. 
 
 Sect. 16. No priority or protection simll be given 
 by reason of any interest within the limits of this 
 Act being tacked to any legal or other estate, except 
 where any interest has existed prior to this Act. 
 
 Sect. 17. The rights of purchasers to relief shall 
 be the same as those of the persons through whom 
 they may claim.. 
 
 Sect. 18. The registrar shall register all assur- 
 ances, &c. The rules of priority of instruments 
 delivered through the post. 
 
 Sect. 19. Searches may be made and copies taken 
 by any person. 
 
 Sed. 20. Any person may require an official 
 search to be made. 
 
 Sect. 21. Certificate of such Search receivable in 
 evidence. 
 
 Sect. 22. Certified copies to be given. 
 
 EEGISTET A.CTS— continued. 
 
 Sect. 23. Solicitor, trustee, or person in fiduciary 
 position not to be answerable for error in certificate 
 or copy from the register. 
 
 Sect. 24. Pages of register to be numbered and 
 signed. 
 
 Sect. 25. Any person claiming interest may apply 
 to the Chancery Division of the High Court for an 
 order that the register, or rules under this Act, be 
 rectified, or that any certificate err deed be can- 
 celled, &C. ;■■;• •! Vr „ 
 
 This jurisdiction of Chancery Division may be 
 exercised at Chambers. The Lord Chancellor may 
 make rules for carrying out this section. Bight of 
 appeal from any such order is given. 
 
 Sect. 26. Statutory receipts, where required. 
 
 Sect. 27. Stamp duty. 
 
 Sect. 28. The Act does not extend to copyhold 
 hereditaments, nor to lease not exceeding twenty-one 
 years, nor to assignment thereof accompanied by 
 actual possession from the making of lease or 
 assignment. 
 
 Sect. 29. Shares in companies, &c., not affected 
 by the Act. 
 
 Sect. 30. Crown land not affected by the Act. 
 
 Register Offices.] Sect. 31. Offices wliere to be 
 situated. 
 
 Sect. 32. Judicial notice to be taken of seal, and 
 of registrar's signature. 
 
 Sect. 33. Offices and property of registry vested 
 in clerk of the peace. 
 
 Sect. 34. County authority may purchase land, 
 &c., for the registry and may build and repair 
 same. 
 
 Sect. 35. Subject to tlie provisions of this Act, 
 the county authority may from time to time make, 
 and when made may rescind, amend, or add to, 
 rules in respect to all or any of ' Hie following 
 matters : 
 
 (1.) Tlie form of the register and the mx>de irt 
 which tlie same is to be made and kept : 
 
 (2.) The preparation and keeping at the register 
 office^ of any books and indexes, and the 
 entries to be made therein for the purpose 
 of effecting any registration : ' 
 
 (3.) Tlie mode in which registration is to be con- 
 ducted : 
 
 (4.) The making of entries in the register where 
 any mortgage, lien, or ejiarge with reference 
 to which any instrument has been registered 
 under this Act has been satisfied or dis- 
 charged : 
 
 (5.) The forms of memorials, certificates, and 
 other instruments to be prepared for the 
 purposes of this Act : 
 
 (6.) 2746 making of searches and the giving of 
 
 (7.) The fees to be taken by the registrar where 
 suehfees^ are not paid to and retained by 
 an existing registrar for his own use : 
 
 (8.) Tlie custody of the register and other docu- 
 ments connected with the business of regis- 
 tration : 
 
 (9.) The transrnission by post of applications for 
 registration and for search, and of regis- 
 tered documents and certificates of regis- 
 tration and search ; 
 (10.) Generally in relation to any matters, 
 whethei- similar or not to those above 
 mentioned, as to iJohich it may be expedient 
 
( 1309 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1310 ) 
 
 EEGISTEY ACTS— cmdinued. 
 
 to make rules for carrying into effect the 
 dbjeois of this Act : 
 Provided that no such rules shall have any force 
 or effect wnZess and until they have heen confirmed 
 hy the Lord Chancellor and published in such 
 manner as he may direct, and that a copy thereof 
 shall be laid before both Mouses of Parliament 
 within fourteen, days after the confirmation thereof 
 if Parliament be then sitting, or if Parliament be 
 not then sitting, within fourteen ' days after the 
 next meeting thereof. 
 
 Any rules made, confirmed, and published in 
 pursuance of this Act shall be deemed to be within 
 the powers conferred by this Act, and shall be of 
 the same force as if enacted in this Act, and shall 
 be judicially noticed. 
 
 Sect. 36. Existing registrars to be the first regis- 
 trars under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 37. Appointment of officers. 
 Sects. 38 and 39. Fees to be taken in registry. 
 Sects. 40 and 41. Application of fees and ac- 
 counts. 
 
 Sect. 42. Expenses to be defrayed out of county 
 rate and be considered to be within meaning of 
 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50. 
 
 Sect. 43. Begistering of memorials, &c., where 
 assurances made, or testators died, before [the 
 passing (amended by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 4)] of this 
 Act. 
 
 Sect. 44. Books,' &c., connected with the old 
 registries. 
 
 Sect. 45. Copies of old registers. 
 Sect. 46. Frauds by registrar punished as mis- 
 demeanor, by imprisonment, with or without hard 
 labour, not exceeding two years. 
 
 Sect. 47. Making a false affidavit punishable as 
 perjury. 
 
 Sect. 48. An affidavit under this Act may be 
 sworn before Convmissioners to Administer Oaths, 
 and out of Great Britain and Ireland may be 
 sworn before a magistrate of the country, certified 
 to be such by a British consul or by a notary public. 
 Sect. 49. Wlien and so soon as the right of ap- 
 pointment of the registrar under this Act is vested 
 in and has been exercised hy the county authority, 
 the following provisions shall have effect ; 
 
 (a.) Every action which may be brought by any 
 person to recover damxiges for or by reason 
 of any loss or damage occasioned by any 
 'neglect, omission, mistalce, or misfeasance 
 of the registrar or any person employed in 
 the register office in connection with the 
 husiness of such office shall be brought 
 ■ against the registrar as the nominal de- 
 fendant by his name of office, and no such 
 action shall abate by reason of the death or 
 removal from office of any such registrar ; 
 ' (b.) A writ or process shall not be sued out 
 against or served on the registrar for any- 
 thing done or intended to be done or omitted 
 to be done under the provisions of this Act 
 until the expiration of one month after 
 notice in writing has been served on such 
 registrar, clearly stating^ the cause of action 
 and the names and place of abode of the 
 intended plaintiff and of his solicitor or 
 agent in the cause : 
 ,(o.) The registrar, with the consent of the county 
 authority, may enter into and conclude a 
 
 EEGISTEY ACTS— continued. 
 
 compromise with any body or person claim- 
 ing a right of action against him under 
 this section, or may agree with such body 
 or person that any question relating to 
 sueh right of action should be referred to 
 arbitration : 
 (d.) All damages, costs, and expenses payable hy 
 the registrar in respect of any such action, 
 compromise, or arbitration as in this section 
 above mentioned shall be paid by him out 
 of moneys to be provided hy the county 
 authority, and the country authority shall 
 provide all moneys which may be necessary 
 in that behalf. 
 Sect. 50. No matter or thing done and no con- 
 tract entered into by any county auilwrity, and no 
 matter or tiling done by any member of any such 
 authority, or by any officer of such authority, or 
 other person whomsoever appointed by and acting 
 under the direction of such authority, shall, if the 
 matter or thing were done or the contract were 
 entered into bona fide for the purpose of executing 
 this Act, subject them or any of them personally to 
 any action, liability, claim, or demand whatso- 
 ever,. and any expense incurred by any such county 
 authority, member, officer, or other person acting as 
 last aforesaid shall be paid by the county authority : 
 Provided that nothing in this section shall 
 exempt any member of any county authority from 
 liability to be surcharged with the amount of any 
 payment which may be disallowed by the auditor 
 in the accounts of such authority, and which such 
 member authorized or joined in authorizing. 
 
 Repeal.] Sect. 51. Repeal of Acts 2 & 3 Anne, 
 c. 4, 6 Anne, 6c. 20 and 62, 8 Geo. 2, e. 6. 
 
 Amendment.] This Act is amended by 48 * 49 
 Vict. cc. 4 and 26 respectively. 
 
 — — Middlesex Eegistry Act — Mortga^ie — 
 Share in Proceeds of Sale of— Priority^-! Anne, 
 c. 20), s. 1 — Notice to Trustees — Eguitable Execu- 
 tion.'] The local Registry Acts are intended to 
 apply only to dealings at law or in equity -with 
 the laud itself. Accordingly an incumbrancer 
 upon a share in the proceeds of real estate in 
 Middlesex devised in trust for sale obtains no 
 priority over other incumbrancers on such share 
 by registering his mortgage deed, and the priori- 
 ties of Bubh inctambrancers rank according to the 
 dates of their respective notices to the trustees. — 
 Malcolm \. Gharlesworth (1 Keen, 36) approved. 
 — Although formal notice to the trustee , of the 
 proceeds of real estate devised in trust for sale or 
 of a chose in action, of an incumbrance thereupon 
 does not give priority over an earlier incumbrauce 
 of which the trustee'inay have obtained teidental 
 notice, the converse proposition that mdumbrances 
 are to rank not in the order of notices given by 
 the incumbrancers but of accidental knowledge 
 
 obtained by the trustees, does not hold good. A 
 
 judgment creditor cannot, by giving notice to the 
 trustee, put himself in a better position than the 
 judgment debtor; and a. judgment creditor who 
 has obtained equitable execution by the appoint- 
 ment of a receiver subject to existing incum- 
 brances was held to have obtained no priority by 
 giviiig notice of the appointment to the trustee of 
 the judgment debtor. Arden v. Arden 
 
 ' [29Ch. D, 70a 
 
C 1311 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1312 ) 
 
 EEGISTEY ACTS— continued. 
 
 Middlesex - - - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 fe Vendor and Pueohaseb — Ptirohase 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 
 Yorkshire - 26 Ch. D. 501 
 
 See Vendor and Pcechaseh — Lien. 2. 
 
 EEGTTIATION OF THE FOBCES ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Akmt — Statutes. 
 
 :eeguiations foe peeventing coilisions 
 
 AT SEA, 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Naviqation. 
 
 8—26. 
 And Ship — Navigation — Gazette. 
 HE-HEAEING— Bankruptcy - 22 Ch. D. 529 
 See Baneeuptot — Appeal. 5. 
 
 Fraud of solicitor - 20 Ch. D. 672 
 
 See Practice — Supkeme Coubt — 
 Amendment. 3. 
 
 Lancaster Court — Jurisdiction 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 488 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Oouet — Ap- 
 peal. 37. 
 HE-INLOESEMENT— Circuity of action 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 636 
 See Bill of Exchange — Tkansfeb. 
 
 EE-INSTTEANCE — Constructive total loss — 
 Notice of abandonment 15 Q. B. D. 11 
 See Insueance, Maeine — Loss, Total. 
 
 EE-INVESTMENT— Money in Court— Petition or 
 summons - - 25 Ch. D. 384 
 
 See Peactice — Scpeeme Coubt — Cham- 
 bees. 15. 
 JKELATION OF TITIE— Trustee in bankruptcy. 
 See Oases under Bankeuptot — Assets. 
 6—11. 
 HELATIONS OF LUNATIC— Allowance to 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 297 
 See Lunatic — Peopeety. 2. 
 HEIEASE OF SITEETY - - 9 Q. B. D. 783 ; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 666 ; 8 App. Cas. 755 
 See Peinoipal and Surety — Dis- 
 charge. 1, 2, 3. 
 EELIGIOrS EDUCATION— Infant 21 Ch.D. 817; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 82 
 See Infant — Education. 2, 3. 
 
 RELIGIOUS WOESHIP— Kegistration of building 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 513 
 
 See Chaeity — Commisbioners. 3. 
 
 EELINCIUISHMENT OF DEBT— Condition 
 
 See Will- Condition. 8. [21 Ch. D. 431 
 
 REMAINDEEMAN — Easement— Prescription- 
 Forty years' enjoyment — Eeversion ex- 
 pectant on term of life or years 
 See Peesceiption. 2. [15 Q, B. D. 629 
 
 HEMOTENESS— Appointment - 29 Ch. D. 521 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 172 
 See PowEE — Execution. 12, 18. 
 
 Covenant to re-convey 20 Ch. D. 562 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Supeefluous 
 Lands. 2. 
 
 Damage. 
 
 See Cases under Damages — Eemoteness. 
 Power of sale— Settlement 19 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Settlement- PowEES. 15. 
 
 EEMOTENESS- co)iiin«e(Z. 
 
 Will — Construction. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Peepbtuity. 
 EEMOVAL OF PAUPEE. 
 
 See Cases under Pooe Law — Settle- 
 ment. 
 EEMUNEEATION— Agent— Commission on sale 
 of land - 9 Q. B. D. 276 
 
 See Condition. 2. 
 
 Barrister — Law of Quebec 9 App. Cas. 745 
 
 See Colonial Law— Canada— Quebec. 
 7. 
 
 Directors — ^Power of general meeting 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 654 
 See Company— Management. 4. 
 
 Solicitors' Remuneration Act. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Bill or 
 Costs. 18—25. 
 EENEWABLE LEASE. 
 
 See Cases under Leasehold — ^Eenew- 
 able Lease. 
 
 Charity scheme - 20 Ch. D. 516 
 
 See Chaeity — Management 1. 
 EENEWAL OF LEASE— Covenant 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 238 ; 22 Ch. D, 640 ; 
 [9 App. Cas. 844 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 
 12, 13, 14. 
 
 Executor^Mortgage for his own debts 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 93 
 See Executor — Administration. 3. 
 EENEWAL OF PATENT. 
 
 See Cases under Patent — Peolonga- 
 
 TION. 
 
 EENEWAL OF EEGISTEATION— Bill of sale 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 136 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 6. 
 
 EENT — Apportionment — Assignment of rever- 
 sion - - 10 ft. B. D. 48 
 See Landloed and Tenant^Assign- 
 
 MENT. 2. 
 
 Distress after bankruptcy. 
 
 See Oases under Bankruptcy — Dis- 
 tress. 
 
 Distress — Winding-up of company. 
 
 See Oases under Company — Distress. 
 
 Gas company — Money due from consumer 
 
 — How far preferential debt — Bank- 
 ruptcy - 13 ft. B. D. 758 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 1. 
 
 Mortgagee in possession 18 Ch. D. 449 
 
 See MoETGAGE — Powers. 6. 
 
 Payable in advance — Distress 21 Ch. D. 9 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Agree- 
 ment. 4. 
 
 Peppercorn rent 30 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 2. 
 
 EENT-CHAEGE. 
 
 ByU&i5 Tict. cil (Conveyancing Aot,l881X: 
 Sect. 44. — (1.) Where a person is entitled to re- 
 ceive out of any land, or out of the income of any 
 land, any annual sum, payable half-yearly or 
 otherwise, whether cjiarged on the land or on the 
 income of the land, and whether by way of rent- 
 charge or otherwise, not leing rent incident to a 
 
( 1313 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1314 ) 
 
 'R'EST-CK&.'RGtE— continued, 
 reversion, then, subject and without prejudice to all 
 estates, interests, and rights having priority to the 
 annual sum, the person entitled to receive the same 
 shall have such remedies for recovering and com- 
 pelling payment of the same as are described in this 
 section as far as those remedies might have been 
 conferred by the instrument under which the annual 
 sum arises, but not further. 
 
 ■ (2.) If at any time the annual sum or any part 
 thereof is unpaid for twenty-one days next after the 
 . time appointed for any payment in respect thereof, 
 the person entitled to receive the annual sum may 
 enter into and distrain on tjie land charged or any 
 part thereof, and dispose according to law of any 
 distress found, to the intent that thereby or otherwise 
 the annual sum and all arrears thereof, and aU 
 costs and expenses occasioned by non-payment there- 
 of, may he fully paid. 
 
 (3.) If at any time the annual sum or any part 
 thereof is unpaid- for forty days next after the time 
 appointed for any payment in respect thereof, then, 
 although no legal demand has been made for pay- 
 ment thereof, the person entitled to receive the 
 annual sum may enter into possession of and hold 
 Hie land cliarged or any part thereof, and take the 
 income thereof, until thereby or otherwise the annual 
 sum and all arrears thereof due at the time of his 
 entry, or afterwards becoming due during his con- 
 tinuance in possession, and all costs and expenses 
 occasioned by non-payment of the annual sum, are 
 fully paid; and such possession when taken shall be 
 without impeachment of waste. 
 
 (4.) In the like case the person entitled to the 
 annual charge, whether taking possession or not, 
 may also by deed demise the land charged, or any 
 part thereof, to a trustee for a term of years, with or 
 without impeachment ofioaste, on trust, by mortgage, 
 or sale, or demise, for all or any part of the term, 
 of the land charged, or of any part thereof, or by 
 receipt of the income thereof, or by all or any of 
 fliose means, or by any other reasonable means, to 
 raise and pay the annual sum and all arrears 
 thereof due or to become due, and all costs and 
 expenses occasioned by non-payment of the annual 
 sum, or incurred in compelling or obtaining pay- 
 ment thereof, or otherwise relating thereto, including 
 the costs of the preparation and execution of the 
 deed of demise, and the costs of the execution of the 
 trusts of that deed ; and the surplus, if any, of the 
 money raised, or of the income received under the 
 trusts of that deed, shall be paid to the person for 
 the time being entitled to the land therein comprised 
 in reversion immediately expectant on the term there- 
 by created. 
 
 (5.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the instrument 
 under which the annual sum arises, and shall have 
 effect subject to the terms of that instrument and to 
 the provisions therein contained. 
 
 (6.) This section applies only where that instru- 
 ment comes into operation after the commencement 
 ■of the Act — 31sf December, 1881. 
 
 Sect. 45. — (1.) Where there is a quit-rent, chief 
 rent, rent-charge, or other annual sum issuing out 
 of land (in this section referred to as the rent), the 
 Copyhold Commissioners shall at any time,, on the 
 requisition of the owner of the land, or of any person 
 interested therein, certify the amount of money in 
 consideration whereof the rent may be redeemed. 
 
 EENT-CHAEGE — continued. 
 
 (2.) Where the person entitled to the rent is abso- 
 lutely entitled thereto in fee simple in possession, or 
 is empowered to dispose thereof absolutely, or to give 
 an absolute discharge for the capital value thereof, 
 the owner of the land, or any person interested 
 therein, may, after serving one month's notice on the 
 person entitled to the rent, pay or tender to that 
 person the amount certified by the Commissioners. 
 
 (3.) On proof to the Commissioners that payment 
 or tender has been so made, they shall certify that 
 the rent is redeemed under this Act ; and that 
 certificate shall be final and conclusive and the 
 land shall be thereby absolutely freed and discharged 
 from the rent. 
 
 (4.) Every requisition under this section shall 
 be in writing ; and every certificate under this 
 section shall be in writing, sealed with the seal of 
 of the Commissioners. 
 
 (5.) This section does not apply to tithe rent- 
 charge, or to a rent reserved on a sale or lease, or to 
 a rent made payable under « grant or license for 
 building purposes, or to any sum or payment issuing 
 out of land not being perpetual. 
 
 (6.) This section applies to rents payable at, or 
 created after, the commencement of this Act. 
 
 (7.) This section does not extend to Ireland. 
 
 Apportionment — Belease of Part of the 
 
 Hereditaments— 22 & 23 Vict. o. 35, s. 10.] The 
 effect of 22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, s. 10, is that where 
 the owner of land, which is subject to a rent- 
 charge, sells and conveys such land in separate 
 portions to different persons, and the person en- 
 titled to the rent-charge joins in the convey- 
 ance of one only of such portions and releases 
 it from the rent-charge, without tlje concurrence 
 of the person to whom the other portion has been 
 conveyed, the whole of such rent-charge is not 
 extinguished, but only a proportionate part of it 
 can be recovered from the person to whom the 
 unreleased portion was conveyed. Booth v. Smith 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 318 
 
 Assignee of land — Liability on covenant 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 403 ; 22 Ch. D. 218 
 See OovENANT — Running with Land. 
 2,3. 
 
 Land drainage company — Glebe lands 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 208 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioners. 
 
 Land drainage company — Glebe lands 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 203 
 See Lands Clal'ses Act — Pdkohase- 
 
 MONEY. 6. 
 Tithes - - -. - 30 Ch. D. 84 
 
 See Tithes. 
 Tithes — Eedemption of. 
 
 See Tithe Kent-chakge — Statutes. 
 Vote for Parliament 12 Q. B. D. 365, 369 
 
 See Pakliament — Feakchisb. 11, 12. 
 
 EENTS AND PROFITS— Application of, during 
 minority — Settled Land Act 24 Ch. D. 129 
 See Settled Land Act — Teustees. 6. 
 
 Portions payable out of - 23 Ch. D. 473 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 14. 
 RENUNCIATION— Executor - 16 Ch. D, 3 
 
 See Administratok — With Will an- 
 nexed. 1. 
 
 2 U 
 
( 1315 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1316 ) 
 
 EE-OPENING BANKRUPTCY 20 Cli. D. 308 
 
 See Bankkuetoy — Undisohaeged Bank- 
 
 EDPT. 1. 
 
 REPAIRS— Highway. 
 
 See Cases under Highway — Eepaie. 
 
 House — Tenancy in common 15 Q. B. D. 60 
 
 See Tenant in Common. 
 
 Infant's estate - 21 Cli. D. 786 
 
 See Infamt — Peopektt. 1. 
 
 Investment of purchase-money — Lands 
 
 Clauses Act - 21 Ch. D. 228 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — ^Purchase- 
 money. 7. 
 
 Leaseholds— Duty of trustees 16 Ch. D. 723 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 9. 
 
 Pipes — Easement 25 Ch. D. 182 
 
 See Watercourse. 3. 
 
 Power to lease — Repairing lease 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 251 
 See Settlement — ^Powers. 3. 
 
 Power to mortgage for — Administrator 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 745 
 See Administkatok — Powers. 3. 
 REPEALED STATUTE— Bills of Sale Act 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 409 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Dispo- 
 sition. 3. 
 
 Interval before repeal 23 Ch. D. 440 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 619 
 See Buildinq Society. 9. 
 REPLY. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Eeply. 
 REPLY POST-CARDS, 
 
 See Post-Office — Statutes. 
 
 REPORT— Official referee. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Eeperee. 
 
 Sub-committee- Privilege - 26 Ch. D. 678 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 25. 
 
 REPRESENTATION— Dramatic entertainment 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 102 ; 13 Q. B. D. 843 
 
 See Copyright — Dramatic. 1, 2. 
 
 REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACTS. 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise — Statutes. 
 
 REPRESENTATIVE SUIT— Appeal by person re- 
 presented by Plaintiff 17 Ch. D. 19 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 17. 
 
 Costs - - 18 Ch. D, 530 
 
 See Company— Costs. 4. 
 REPUDIATION — Conti-act for shares 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 413 
 
 See Company — Shares — Allotment. 3. 
 
 REPUGNANCY— Will 18 Ch. D. 17 
 
 See Will— Eepugnancy. 
 
 Conditional limitation - 21 Ch. D. 838 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 792, 801 
 See Will— Condition. 2, 3, 5. 
 REPUTED OWNERSHIP- Bankruptcy, 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Order 
 AND Disposition. 
 
 REPUTED OWNERSHIP— €0»iim«e(?. 
 
 Chattels comprised in lease — Disclaimer 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 341 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 4. 
 
 REQUISITIONS— Time for sending in 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 465 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 8. 
 
 RES JUDICATA. 
 
 See Cases under Estoppel — Judgment. 
 
 Discovery of fresh evidence 28 Ch. D. 516 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners. 
 
 Summary proceeding before justices 
 
 [6 Q. B, D. 300 
 See Local Government-— Streets. 1. 
 RESCISSION OF CONTRACT 29 Ch. D, 795 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 1. 
 
 Misrepresentation 20 Ch. D. L 
 
 See False Representation. 1. 
 
 Sale of goods 7 ft. B, D, 92 ; 9 Q. B. D. 648 : 
 
 [9 App. Cas, 434 
 
 See Sale op Goods — Rescission. 1, 2. 
 
 Sale of land 22 Ch, D, 105 ; 29 Ch, D. 661 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser ^ Ee- 
 SOISSION. 1, 2. 
 
 Sale of land — Conditions of sale. 
 
 See Cases under Vendor and Purchaseb 
 — Conditions of Sale. 6 — 11. 
 
 To take shares - - 29 Ch, D, 42L 
 
 See Company — Shares — Axlotment. 1. 
 
 Vendor's lien - 24 Ch. D. 94. 
 
 See Will— Exoneration. 3. 
 RESERVATION OF MINERALS 21 Ch, D, 18 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 50S 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom of 
 Country. 
 
 Scotch law - - lOApp. Cae. 81S 
 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 1. 
 
 RESERVATION OF EIGHT OF WAY— Absolute 
 conveyance 24 Ch. D. 572 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Agree- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 Settled Land Act — Power of trustees 
 
 [24 Ch. D, 129 
 See Settled Land Act— Trustees. 6. 
 
 RESERVE FORCES ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Army — Statutes. 
 
 RESERVE FUND— Profits of company 
 
 [16 Ch. D, 344 
 
 See Oompant: — Dividends. 4. 
 
 RESERVOIR— Escape of water 7 App. Cas. 694 
 
 See Scotch Law — Statutory Duty. 
 
 RESIDENCE — Debtor — Debtor!s summons — 
 Jurisdiction - 16 Ch. D. 484 
 
 See Bankruptcy — -Act of Bankruptcy. 
 14. 
 
 Debtor— Out of jm-isdiction 25 Ch, D. 500 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 26. 
 
 ' Devise of house — Forfeiture for non-resi- 
 dence - - 25 Ch, D. 605 
 
 See Will — Condition. 6. 
 
( 1317 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 13l8 ) 
 
 RESIDENCE — continued. 
 
 Domicil. 
 
 Bee Cases under DOMicn.. 
 
 Pauper. 
 
 See Cases under Poor Law — Settle- 
 ment. 
 
 Statement of— Bill of sale 31 Ch. D. 871 ; 
 
 [22Ch.D. 136: lOQ. B. D. 90 
 See Bill of Sale— Fobmalitibs. 5, 6, 7. 
 
 EESmUAEY GIFT. 
 
 See Cases under Will — Eesiduaey 
 
 GlTT. 
 
 Exception from residue — ^Void bequest 
 
 See Will— Lapse. 7. [23 Ch, D. 218 
 
 Separate use - - 19 Ch. D. 277 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separate 
 Estate. 13. 
 
 SpeoiBo legacy - - 20Ch, D. 676; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 812 
 See Will — Specific Legacy. 
 
 Void appointment - 18 Ch. D. 499 
 
 See Power — Execution. 8. 
 
 BESIDUARY LEGATEE — Costs as between soli- 
 citor and client - 26 Ch. D. 179 
 See Executor — Actions. 14. 
 
 KESIDUE — Legacy payable out of — Interim in- 
 come - 25 Ch. D. 743 
 See Will — Intekim Income. 3. 
 
 BESIGKATION — Corporate office — Power to 
 withdraw resignation 14 Q. B. D. 908 
 
 See Municipal Corporation — Eesigna- 
 
 TION. 
 
 BESOLUTIOIf — Altering memorandum of asso- 
 ciation - - 30 Ch. D. 376 
 See Company — ^Memorandum and Ar- 
 ticles. 1. 
 Creditors — Bankruptcy — ^Direction as to ad- 
 ministration - 21 Ch. D. 397 
 See Bankruptcy-Trustee. 1. 
 
 Creditors — ^For composition. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Compo- 
 sition. 1 — 8. 
 
 Creditors — For liquidation. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Liquida- 
 tion. 6 — 9. 
 
 Voluntary wiuding-up — Appointment of 
 
 liquidator - 26 Ch. D. 70 
 
 See Company— Voluntary Winding-up. 
 2. 
 
 RESTITUTIO IN INTEGRUM- Scotch law 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 547 
 See Scotch Law — Public Rights. 
 RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS 
 
 [9 P. D. 52 ; 10 P. D. 72 
 See Practice — Divorce — Bestitction 
 OF Conjugal Rights, 1, 2. 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Restitution 
 OF Conjugal Eights — Statutes. 
 
 Agreement by wife not to sue 10 P. D, 188 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Separation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 Service of petition— Jurisdiction 
 
 [10 P. D, 186 
 See Practice — Divorce— Service. 
 
 RESTITUTION OF GOOD^— Sale of stolen beasts 
 in market overt — Claim by purchaser 
 against owner for cost of keeping 
 
 [8 a. B, D. 109 
 See Sale of Goods— Contract. 2. 
 
 RESTRAINT OF MARRIAGE— Covenant not to 
 revoke will - - 23 Ch, B, 285 
 
 ;See Covenant — Validity. 
 
 Restriction of marriage with domestic ser- 
 vant 16 Ch. D, 188 
 See Will — Condition. 10. 
 
 RESTRAINT OF SHIP — Bail bond— Form — 
 Value of Plaintiff's shares 10 P. D, 18 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Arrest of 
 Ship. 1. 
 
 RESTRAINT OF TRADE— Covenant in lease. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant 
 — Lease. 4 — 8. 
 
 Scotch law - - 7 App, Cas. 427 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Pro- 
 perty. 1. 
 
 RESTRAINT ON ALIENATION 26 Ch, D, 801 
 See Will — Repugnancy. 
 
 RESTRAINT ON ANTICIPATION 18 Ch. D. 531 
 See Settlement — Future Property. 2.. 
 
 See Cases under Husband and Wife — 
 Separate Estate. 8 — 15. 
 Election - 27 Ch. D. 606 ; 28 Ch, D, 124. . 
 
 See Election. 5, 6. 
 Perpetuity - - - 17 Ch. D, 368. 
 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 6. 
 
 ■ When removeable. 
 
 See Husband and Wifb- 
 Estate — Statutes. 
 
 - Separate 
 
 RESTRICTIONS IN FEU CHARTER 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 427 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Pro- - 
 
 PERTY. 1. 
 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT 
 
 Conveyance settled by Judge 21 Ch. D, 466 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- - 
 
 ANCE. 1. 
 
 In lease. 
 
 See Cases under Landlord and Tenant ■ 
 
 — Lease. 2 — 8. 
 
 Objection to title 17 Ch, D, 353 ; 21 Ch, D, 95 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser- Title^ 
 
 3,6. 
 RETAINER. 
 
 Heir-at-Law— iZeaJ Estate~3 & i Will. 4 
 
 0. 104— ffiwde Palmer's Act (82 & 33 Vict. c. 46).] 
 An heir-at-law or devisee has no right of retainer 
 either out of the proceeds of sale of real estate' 
 or out of rents received by him, for a debt due 
 to him on simple contract from the testator or 
 intestate. Such right of retainer arises only 
 where the creditor is a person liable to be sued 
 at law for debts of the same nature owing by 
 the testator or intestate, so that other creditors 
 might gain priority over him if he had not a right 
 to retain, and therefore an heir or devisee, as h» 
 cannot be sued at law for simple contract debts 
 has no right of retainer for them.~Semble, that 
 notwithstanding Hinde Palmer's Act (32 & 33Vict 
 c. 46), an heir-at-law or devisee where the estates" 
 are not charged with debts, may retain a debt to 
 
 2 U 2 
 
( 1319 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1320 ) 
 
 EETAINEH — continued. 
 
 which he is entitled by specialty in which the 
 heirs are bound. — Ferguson v. Gibson (Law Eep. 
 14 Eq. 379) considered. In re Illidge. David- 
 son V. Illidge - 24 Ch. D. 654; 27 Ch. D. 478 
 Executor. 
 
 See Cases under Executor — Retainee. 
 EETAINEE OF SOLICITOR 26 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See SoLiciTOK — Eetainek. 
 EETAINING WALL— Eailway cutting 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 60 
 
 /See Eailway Company — Ltabilities. 1. 
 
 BETIEEMENT— Directors 17 Ch, D. 373 
 
 See Company — Pbospeotus. 2. 
 
 Incumbent — Incumbents' Eesignation Act 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Ecolesiastioal Law — Clekgy. 3. 
 
 Shareholder — Cost-book company 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 52 
 
 See Company— CosT-EOOK Company. 4. 
 Trustee - - 27 Ch. D. 333 
 
 See Settlement — Poweks. 9. 
 
 EETTTEN TO MANDAMTrS— Pleading 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. [14 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 BETUENING OFFICEE— Municipal corporation 
 —Election - 6 Q. B. D. 323 
 
 See Municipal Cospokation — Elec- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 Parliament — Election. 
 
 See Pakliament — Election — Statutes. 
 
 EEVENUE : Col. 
 
 I. Collection (and Management) 1319 
 
 II. Customs - - - 1320 
 
 III. Excise - - - - 1321 
 
 JV. House Duty 1323 
 
 V. Income Tax 132i 
 
 TI. Legacy Duty 1329 
 
 Til. Probate Duty 1330 
 
 Till. Stamps - 1331 
 
 IX. Succession Duty 1840 
 
 I. EEVENUE — COLLECTION (and MANAGE- 
 MENT.) 
 
 Buildings.] The Act 44 * 45 Vict. c. 10, pro- 
 vides for the transfer of property held for the use 
 and service of the Inland Bevenue to the Com- 
 missioners of Her Majesty's Works and Public 
 Buildings. 
 
 Taxes.] Sy 45 & 46 Vict. a. 72, s. 7, the words 
 " and all sucii orders shall be final and conclusive 
 on all parties " in, sub-sect, (b), the words " of the 
 High Court " after the word " orders " in sub- 
 sect, (d), and sub-sect, (e), in sect. 59 of the Taxes 
 Munagement Act, 1880, are repealed. 
 
 Act of 1883.] TIte Act 46 * 47 Vict. c. 55 {Re- 
 venue Act, 1883), amends the laio relating to Inland 
 lievenue. 
 
 Sett. 12 extends sect. 26 of the Taxes Manage- 
 ment Act, 1880, as to places of meeting of Land 
 Tax Commissioners. 
 
 Sect. 13 extends sect. 88 of the Taxes Manage- 
 ment Act, 1883, as to cases in which the jtirisd id ion 
 vested in Board of Inland Bevenue by that section 
 mail be exercised. 
 
 Sect. 14 removes doti-bts as to construction and 
 
 I. EEVENUE — COLLECTION (and MANAGE- 
 MENT) — continued. 
 
 application of ss. 90 and 97 of the Taxes 3Ianage- 
 ment Act, 1880. 
 
 Act of 1884.] Tlie Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 62 (Be- 
 venue Act, 1884), s. 7, amends the Taxes Manage- 
 ment Act, 1880, and explains s. 90 of the same. 
 
 Post Office.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 62, s. 13, 
 amends 16 & 17 Vict. u. 45, 27 & 28 Vict. c. 43, 
 and 35 & 36 Vict. v. 67, with respect to claims on 
 the Fast Office for granting Government annuities. 
 
 Touchers.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. v. 62, ». 14, 
 amends 29 & 30 Vict. c. 39, with respect to what 
 constitutes a voucher in the case of certain payments 
 out of money granted for army and navy services. 
 
 II. EEVENUE— CUSTOMS. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12 (the Customs and 
 Inland lievenue Act, 1881). 
 
 Sect. 3 alters the Customs duties on beer. 
 
 Sect. 4 provides for drawbacks on the exporta- 
 tion of imported beer. 
 
 Sect. 5. Provisions as to importation of beer. 
 
 Sect. 6. Beer imported may be exported. 
 
 Sect. 7. Alteration of duties on spirits imported. 
 
 Sect. 8. Mode of testing in cases of obscuration. 
 
 Sect. 9. Time and place for landing goods in- 
 wards. 
 
 Sect. 10. Time and places for landing and ship- 
 ping coastwise. 
 
 Sect. 11. As to delivery of specifications for free 
 goods six days after clearance, except salmon. 
 
 Sect. 12. Persons may be searched if officers have 
 reason to suspect smuggled goods are concealed 
 upon them. Bescuing goods. Bescuing persons. 
 Assaulting or obstructing officers. Attempting the 
 foregoing offences. Penalty. 
 
 Sect. 13 incorporates sects. 5-12, both inclusive, 
 with the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876. 
 
 Sect. 48 repeals 30 & 31 Vict. c. 28, ss. 5, 6. and 
 Schedule E ; 32 * 83 Vict. c. 103, ss. 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 
 and 11; 39 & 40 Vict. e. 35, part of Schedule; 
 and 89 & 40 Vict. c. 36 (Customs Consolidation 
 Act, 1876), ss. 48, 110, 143, 144, and 147. 
 
 Act of 1882.] The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 72, amends 
 the laws relating to Customs and Inland Bevenue. 
 
 Sect. 2. Upon revocation of approval of Cus- 
 toms warehouse goods to be cleared or removed. 
 
 Sect. 3. Salaries and superannuation allowances 
 of officers not to be subject to execution or attach- 
 ment under any process. 
 
 Sect. 4. Bepealed by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 51. 
 
 Sect. 5 amends sect. 9 o/ 43 * 44 Vict. c. 24. 
 
 Sect. 6. Person charged with an offence against 
 sect. 4: of 23 & 24 Vict. c. 90, may he convicted of 
 an offence afjainst sect. 7 of 33 & 34 Vict. c. 57. 
 
 Sect. 7 re-enacts sect. 60 of 43 Geo. 3, c. 161. 
 
 Act of 1883.] The Act 46 A 47 Vict. c. 55 (the 
 Berenue Act, 1883), amends the Customs Consoli- 
 dation Act (39 it- 40 Virt. c. 36), 1S76. 
 
 Sect. 2 amends sect. 42 of 39 <t- 40 Vict. c. 36. 
 
 Sect. 3. Foreign spirits racked into casks, not'less 
 than nine gallons, may be exported. 
 
 ^ect. i provides for recovery of penalties wilder 
 Customs Acts where judgment has been obtained in, 
 a superior Court. 
 
 Ki-ernfion may be issued both against the person 
 and the real and personal property of the vartv 
 in default. 'r j j ^ » 
 
 Sect. 5. Vessel arriving at. port to come qiiickly 
 
( 1321 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1322 ) 
 
 II. REVENUE— CTISTOMS—conimucd. 
 
 to place of unloading and hring to at the stations 
 for hoarding officers. Penalty for neglect £20. 
 
 Sect. 6. Accommodation for custom officers to he 
 provided on hoard. Penalty £20. 
 
 Sect. 7. If seals upon stores inwards he hrohen or 
 the stores secretly conveyed away, master to forfeit 
 £20. 
 
 Sect. 8 amends sect. 230 of 39 & 40 Vict. o. 36. 
 
 Sect. 9 extends the word "ship" in 39 & 40 
 Vict. c. 38, to seorfishing hoats. 
 
 Sect. 11. Act to he construed as one with 39 & 40 
 Vict. c. 36. 
 
 Sect. 19. BepeaU in paH 39 & 40 Viet. e. 36. 
 
 Act of 1884.] The Act 47 * 48 Vict. c. 62 {tU 
 Bevemte Act, 1884), enacts sect. 2 — (1.) That vessels 
 with inward cargo for more than one port may 
 convey certain goods coastwise. (2.) Repeals part 
 of sect. 142 of 39 & 40 Vict. c. 36 {Omtams Con- 
 solidation Act, 1876). 
 
 Sect. 3. Tlie master or owner is to deliver a 
 manifest of goods shipped, and in the case of 
 steamships a certificate of the coal to he used on 
 hoard. 
 
 The sect. Ill of 39 & 40 Vict. v. 86 (the Customs 
 Consolidation Act, 1876), is repealed. 
 
 Sect. 5. Constructicm of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 8 amends ss. 4 and 11, and Schedule B. of 
 30 & 31 Viet. 0. 23. 
 
 Plate.] Sy 46 & 47 Vict. v. 55 (the Revenue Act, 
 1883), «. 10, provision is made for securing with 
 more certainty the marking of all gold and silver 
 plate of standard quality imported into Great 
 Britain or Ireland to be sold, exchanged, or exposed 
 for sale; and. also for allowing the exportation 
 of imported plate of coarser alloy than the said 
 respective standards. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. e. 62, s. 4, exempts certain 
 oriental plate from assay in the United Kingdom, 
 hut subject to tlie payment of customs duties. 
 
 Act of 1885.] The Act of 48 & 49 Vict. c. 51, 
 s. 2, continues duties on tea. 
 
 III. EEVENUE— EXCISE. 7 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12 (the Customs and 
 Inland Revenue Act, 1881). 
 
 Sect. 14 grants a duty on brewer's licence where 
 annual value of the house exceeds £10 and does not 
 exceed £15. 
 
 Sect. 15 allows deductions and exemptions from 
 duty with regard to brewers other than brewers for 
 sale. 
 
 Sect. 16 repealed by 48 & 49 Vict. c. 51. 
 
 Sect. 17. Provisions as to warehousing foreign 
 wine in an excise warehouse. 
 
 Sect. 18. Goods liable to duty of custom or excise 
 may he warehoused in a custom or excise ware- 
 house. 
 
 Sect. 48 repeals 23 * 24 Vict. c. 129, ss. 2 and 
 3 ; 32 <fe 33 Vict. c. 103, ss. 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, and 11. 
 
 Chicory and Coffee.] The Act 45 cSc 46 Vict. 
 V. 41, repeals tlie customs and excise duties on 
 vegetable matters (other than chicory) applicable to 
 the uses of chicory and coffee and imposes a duty 
 on substances intended to serve as imitations or 
 substitutes for chicory or coffee. 
 
 Act of 1883.] The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 10, grants 
 certain duties of Customs and Inland Revenue, 
 alters other duties, and amends the law relating to 
 Customs and Inland Revenue. \ 
 
 III, EEVENTJE— EXCISE— coniinued. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to be cited as the Customs and Inland 
 Revenue Act, 1883. 
 
 Sect. 2 continues duties on tea. 
 
 Sect. 3. All explosives as defined by the Explosives 
 Act, 1875, and the Explosive Substances Act, 1883, 
 to he deemed restricted goods within 39 & 40 Vict. 
 c. 36. 
 
 Sect. 4 alters date of expiration of game licences. 
 
 Sect. 5. Game licences may he talten out for 14 
 
 Sect. 6 alters date of expiration of gun licences. 
 
 Sect. 7 extends the expression "carriage" in 
 subsection 6 of sect. 19 of 32 & 33 Vict. c. 14. 
 to any vehicle drawn or propelled upon a road 
 or tramway, or elsewhere than upon a railway, by 
 steam or electricity, or any other mechanical 
 power. 
 
 Act of 1884.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. v. 25 (Cus- 
 toms and Inland Revenue Act, 1884). 
 
 Sect. 2 continues duties on tea. 
 
 Sect. 3 fixes duty on licence for hackney carriage 
 at fifteen shillings. 
 
 Sect. 4 reduces duties on carnages commenced 
 to be used on or after 1st October in any year. 
 
 Tobacco on Railways.] Tlie Act 47 & 48 Vict, 
 c. 62 (tlie Revenue Act, 1884), s. 12, declares it to 
 he lawful for any railway company to obtain licences 
 from the Inland Revenue to sell tobacco and snwjT 
 in railway carriages. Any railway company deal- 
 ing in tobacco or snuff without a licence is liable 
 to a fine of £50. 
 
 Act of 1885.] Tlie Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 51 (Cus- 
 toms and Inland Revenue Act, 1885), amendsdhe 
 laws relating to Inland Revenue. 
 
 Sect. 3 regulates allowances on British spirits 
 exported or used in warehouse. 
 
 Sect. 4 extends term " beer " in 43 & 44 Vict, 
 c. 20, and in Excise Licence Acts. 
 
 Sect. 5. Duty for private brewers' licence. 
 
 Sect. 6 amends 43 & 44 Vict. v. 20, s. 20, as to 
 worts. 
 
 Sect. 7. Sugar store to he entered by brewer for 
 sale, and accounts of sugar to be kept. 
 
 Sect. 8. Prohibition against adulteration of beer 
 hy brewers for sale, and dealers and retailers of 
 heer. 
 
 Sect. 9. Provision as to penalties. 
 
 Eepeal.] Sect. 10 repeals 56 Geo. 3, c. 58 ; 
 sect, i of 23 & 24 Vict. c. 129 ; sect. 20 of 25 & 26 
 Vict. c. 22 ; sect. 12 of 27 & 28 Vict. c. 12 ; sect. 12 
 o/28 & 29 Vict. c. 98; sect. 16 o/44 <6 45 Vict, 
 c. 12 ; sect. 4 o/ 45 <£ 46 Vict. v. 72. 
 
 Beer — Brewer other than a Brewer for 
 
 Sale — Exemption from Duty — Annual Vdlus 
 of Mouse occupied not exceeding £10 — Inland 
 Revenue Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 20) s. 33, 
 suh-s. 3.] By the Inland Eevenue Act, 1880, 
 s. 33, sub-s. 3, if the annual value of the house 
 occupied by a brewer other than a brewer for 
 sale does not exceed £10, the beer brewed by 
 him shall not be charged with duty. The Ee- 
 spondent brewed beer (not for sale) in a house 
 occupied by him of an annual value not exceed- 
 ing £10, and he occupied, as a residence, another 
 house which was of greater annual value than 
 £10 : — ffeld, that the exemption from duty did 
 not apply to the beer so brewed. Tippett v 
 Haet - - - 10 ft, B. D, 483 
 
.( 1323 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 X 1324 ) 
 
 IV. REVENUE— HOUSE DUTY :— 
 
 The Statute 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12 ^Customs and 
 Inland Revenue Act, 1881) — Sect. 24 interprets 
 the meaning of " servant " and " other person " in 
 exemption from inhabited house duty under the 
 Customs and Inland Bevenue Act, 1878, s. 13, 
 sub-s. 2. 
 
 1. Dwelling-house let in Tenements — • 
 
 House, Definition of — 41 & 42 Vict. c. 15, s. 13 — 
 Necessity of structural Severance — Occupation of 
 Fart by Landlord— 51 Geo. 3, c. 25.] The statute 
 41 & 42 Vict. 0. 15, s. 13, sub-s. I, provides that, 
 when any house being one property shall be 
 divided into and let in different tenements, and 
 any of such tenements are occupied solely for 
 the purposes of any trade or business, or of 
 any profession or calling by which the occupier 
 seeks a livelihood or profit, or are unoccupied, 
 the person chargeable as occupier of the house 
 shall be at liberty to give notice in writing at 
 any time during the year of assessment to the 
 surveyor of taxes stating therein the facts, and 
 after the receipt of such notice by the surveyor 
 the Commissioners acting in the execution of 
 the Acts relating to the inhabited house duties 
 shall, upon proof of the facts to their satisfaction, 
 grant relief from the amount of duty charged 
 in the assessment, so as to confine the same 
 to the duty on the value according to which the 
 house should, in their opinion, have been assessed 
 if it had been a house comprising only the tene- 
 ments other than such as are occupied as aforesaid 
 or are unoccupied : — Held, that the provisions of 
 the sub-section only apply in cases where the 
 house is divided into different tenements struc- 
 turally severed from each other, as for instance in 
 the case of flats and sets of chambers. — Where a 
 part on the ground iloor and basement of a build- 
 ing was severed from tlie rest of the building by 
 a party-wall, and, had its own separate entrance, 
 there being no communication between it and the 
 rest of the building, and the part so separated 
 was used wholly for the purposes of a bank : — 
 Held, that such part of the premises constituted a 
 separate house, and being used solely for business 
 purposes was exempt from inhabited house duty. 
 — SembU, per Hawkins, J., that, when a house is 
 substantially within the words of the sub-section 
 above referred to as being a house structurally 
 divided into and let in different tenements, the 
 mere fact that the landlord occupied one of such 
 tenements forming a small portion of the wliole, 
 would not disentitle him to the relief given by 
 the sub-section. Chapman v. Eotal Bank of 
 Scotland - - 7 ft. B. D. 136 
 
 2. DweUing-hoDse let in Tenements — 
 
 41 & 42 Vict. c. 15, s. 13.] By 41 & 42 Vict. o. 15, 
 s. 13,where any house being one property is divided 
 into and let in different tenements, and any of 
 such tenements are occupied solely for the pur- 
 pose of any trade or business or of any profession 
 or calling, by which the occupier seeks a liveli- 
 hood or profit, or are unoccupied, inhabited house 
 duty is to be assessed as if the house comprised 
 only the tenements other than those so occupied 
 as aforesaid, or unoccupied ; and a house or 
 tenement occupied solely as aforesaid is exempt, 
 although a servant or other person may dwell in 
 such house or tenement for the protection thereof. 
 
 IV. KEVENUE— HOUSE DUTY — continued. 
 — A house had one entrance into the street, and 
 the rooms in it opened on a hall, passages, and 
 staircase, common to all the tenants. Some of the 
 rooms on the ground floor were occupied by the 
 landlords, the Appellants, as offices, and tlie re- 
 mainder, and the rooms on the first floor, were let 
 to tenants who occupied them as offices. The 
 rooms on the second floor were occupied partly by 
 tenants who resided, and the remainder by a care- 
 taker and his wife, who acted as servants to the 
 residents and cleaned the several portions occu- 
 pied by the Appellants as offices or let off. The 
 Appellants claimed relief from being assessed on 
 the portions used as offices : — Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Queen's Bench Division, that the 
 portions so used were not exempt, as the exemp- 
 tion applies to houses let in separate and distinct 
 tenements each complete in itself, and not to 
 rooms in a house. Yokkshibe Fiee and Life 
 Insdbanoe Compant v. Clayton 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 657 ; 8 ft. B, D. 421 
 
 3. Exemption — ■" Servant or other Person " 
 
 —32 & 33 Vict. c. 14, s. 11.] The Eespondent 
 was a hop-merchant, and was possessed of certain 
 houses having an internal communication through- 
 out, and used for the purp5ses of his trade. K. 
 lived in the houses in order to take care of them, 
 but he was a clerk in the Respondent's employ 
 at a salary of £150 a year, and he resided in the 
 houses together with his wife, children, and 
 servant : — Held, that K. was not " a servant or 
 other person " within the meaning of 32 & 33 
 Vict. c. 14, s. 11, and that the Eespondent was 
 not exempt from inhabited house duty in respect 
 of the houses. Yewens v. Noakes 6 ft. B. D. 530 
 
 4. Exemption — " Servant or other Ferson " 
 
 —41 & 42 Vict. e. 15, s. 13, paH 2.] The Eespou- 
 dents, wholesale clothiers, were possessed of pre- 
 mises the whole of which were used as warehouses 
 and counting-houses, except a sitting-room and 
 bedroom on the top storey occupied by their 
 cashier, who had a salary of £200 a year, and who 
 slept on the premises solely as caretaker and for 
 their protection, this being considered as part of 
 his duty : — Held, that the Income Tax Commis- 
 sioners were warranted in finding that the cashier 
 was " a servant or otlier person " within 41 & 42 
 Vict. c. 15, s. 13, part 2, and that the premises 
 were accordingly exempt from house duty. — 
 Yewens v. Noakes (6 Q. B. D. 530) explained. 
 Eolfe v. Hyde - 6 ft. B. D. 673 
 
 8. Exemption — " Servant or other Ferson '' 
 
 — Caretalcer — Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. v. 15), s. 13, sub-s. 2— Cus- 
 toms and Inland Bevenue Act, 1881 (44 & 45 
 Vict. c. 12), o. 24.] A female caretaker resided 
 on premises, and it was a contiition of her employ- 
 ment that her son, who was a clerk employed 
 elsewhere, should sleep on the premises for their 
 better protection ; — Held, that tlie premises were 
 not exempt from inhabited house duty under 
 41 & 42 Vict. u. 15, s. 13, sub-s. 2. Wegiiellin v. 
 Watall - 14 ft. B. D. 838 
 
 V. BEVENUE— INCOME-TAX. 
 
 Act of 1881.] By 44 <fe 45 Vict. c. 12 (the 
 Customs and Inland Bevenue Act, 1881), s. 23, the 
 particulars of the property assessed, etc., are to be 
 
( 1325 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1326 ) 
 
 T. REVENUE— INCOME TAX— continued, 
 inserted in the collector's receipt wlien they have 
 not heen stated in the demand note. 
 
 Customs Act of 1884.] By the 47 & 48 Viet. 
 <i. 25 {Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1884), 
 s. 7 (1) if any dividends, (fee., payable half-yearly 
 or quarterly shall have become due in the course 
 <if the year commencing 6th of April, 1 884, and 
 shall liave been paid to any person prior to the pass- 
 ing of this Act, without deduction of income tax, 
 ■such tax may he added to the assessment on the next 
 half-yearly or quarterly payment. (2.) A similar 
 .enactment for rent or other annual payment. 
 
 Revenue Act of 1884.] By the Act 47 & 48 Vict. 
 ■c. 62 (the Bevenue Act, 1884), s. 6, the poor law 
 parishes in England, under 32 & 33 Vict. a. 67, 
 elsewhere than in the city of London, shall be 
 parishes far purposes of income tax and inhabited 
 liouse duties. The union or grouping of parishes 
 under 43 & 44 Vict. u. 19, shall be subject to this 
 ■section. 
 
 Income Tax Act of 1885.] The Act 48 & 49 
 Vict. c. 1, grants to her Majesty additional rates of 
 income tax. 
 
 Customs Act, 1885.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 51 
 {the Customs and Inland Bevenue Act, 1885). 
 
 Sect. 22 grants duties of income tax. 
 
 Sect. 23. Application of provisions of Income 
 Tax AcU. 
 
 Sect. 24. Provisions as to duty on dividends, (fee, 
 paid prior to the passing of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 25. Allowances to assessors and collectors. 
 
 Foreign and Colonial Dividends.] Sect. 26. 
 The following enactments, viz., sect. 96 of 5 & 6 
 Vict. c. 35, sect. 2 of 5 & e Vict. a. 80, sect. 10 of 
 16 <fe 17 Vict. o. 34, and sect. 36 of 24 & 25 Vict. 
 c. 91, being enacimients to secure payment of income 
 tax upon dividends of foreign and colonial securi- 
 ties, are to be read as if among the persons en- 
 trusted with payment of dividends, were (a.) any 
 hanker; (b.) any person who obtains payment of 
 •dividends for another elsewhere than in the United 
 Kingdom ; (c) any dealer in coupons payable out 
 of the United Kingdom. 
 
 A person entrusted with payment of dividends 
 o,nd causing income tax to he paid, is entitled to a 
 remuneration of not less than 3d. in the pound of 
 the amovmi paid, as may be fixed by the Treasury. 
 
 1886.] Sect. 27. Income Tax Acts to apply to 
 ^duties granted for 1886. 
 
 1. Assize Courts — Police Stations — 5 & 6 
 
 Vict. c. 35—16 & 17 Vict. e. 34, Schedules A 
 •and B.'] The justices of a county in the due 
 exercise of statutory powers erected assize courts 
 •with the usual rooms and ofBces, and a county 
 police station with the usual ofSoes and accom- 
 modation for constables living there and for 
 prisoners. The land on which they were built 
 was conveyed under 21 & 22 Vict. v. 92, to 
 the clerk of the peace to hold to him and his 
 successors for ever upon trust for the construction 
 of a police station and otherwise for such uses as 
 the county justices should from time to time order. 
 The buildings formed one block and were used for 
 the administration of justice and for police pur- 
 poses. Parts of the buildings were also used for 
 holding county and committee meetings and 
 various other occasional purposes, but no rent 
 ©r profit was received or made in respect of the 
 buildings or any part of tliem : — Held, affirming 
 
 V, REVENUE- INCOME TASi— continued. 
 the judgment of the Court of Appeal, that income 
 tax was not payable in respect of the buildings 
 under Scheds. A or B of 5 (fc 6 Vict. c. 35, and 
 16 & 17 Viot. c. 34. — Clerk v. Dumfries Commis- 
 sioners of Supply (7 Court Sess. Gas. 4th Series, 
 1157) disapproved. Ooomber v. Justices op the 
 County of Bbkks 9 Q, B. D. 17 ; 10 ft. B. D. 
 [267; 9 App. Cas. 61 
 
 2. Burial Board — Application of Surplus 
 
 Income in aid of Poor-rate — " Profit " — 5 & 6 
 Vict. c. 35, 8. 60; 15 & 16 Vict. c. 85, s. 22.] 
 A burial board was constituted under 15 & 16 
 Vict. 0. 85, and in pursuance of the Act a burial 
 ground was provided with money charged upon 
 the poor-rate of the parish, and the surplus over 
 expenditure of the income derived from the fees 
 charged by the board was regularly applied in 
 aid of the poor-rate : — Held, that the board were 
 liable to be assessed to the income tax in re- 
 spect of such surplus, inasmuch as the provision 
 requiring it to be applied in aid of the poor- 
 rate did not prevent it from being a " profit " 
 within 5 (& 6 Viot. c. 35, s. 60. Paddington 
 Burial Boaed v. Commissionebs oi' Inland Ee- 
 VENUE - 13 a. B. D. 9 
 
 3. Coal Mines — Partnership— Incorpora- 
 tion of — Succession — Diminution of Profits from 
 Extraordinary Depression of Trade — • " Specific 
 Cause "■ — 5 ife 6 Vict. c. 35, s. 60, Scheds. A and D — 
 Rules — 29 & 30 Vict. a. 36, 8. 8.] A partnership, 
 after working csertain coal mines for more than 
 five years, was on the 2l8t of December, 1875, 
 incorporated as a limited company, and sold to 
 the company the assets, subject to the liabili- 
 ties, of the partnership. The partners became 
 hoMers of all the shares in the limited com- 
 pany according to their interests. After the 
 3rd of August, 1876, changes took place in 
 the shareholders. The company, being assessed 
 by the Income Tax Commissioners to the in- 
 come tax under 5 & 6 Vict. c. 35, Sehed. D, 
 for the year ending the 5th of April, 1877, on 
 an average of the five preceding years, appealed, 
 and contended that they were only to pay on a 
 computation for one year on the average of the 
 profits from the 21st of December, 1875, the date 
 of the incorporation. — The Commissioners stated 
 a case in which they 'found that " the profits and 
 gains of the Appellants' business had fallen short 
 since the 2l3t of December, 1875," from the fol- 
 lowing specific causes, viz., "the extraordinary 
 depression in the iron and coal trades whereby 
 the Appellants were unable to sell either so 
 large a quantity of their coals as they had for- 
 merly been enabled to do, or to obtain anything 
 like so good a price for such coals." Figures 
 shewing that the annual profits had fallen short 
 by one-half were set but : — Held, that Sched. A, 
 rule 4, clause 6, which jjresoribes that if it shall 
 appear that the account required by the rules 
 " cannot be made out by reason of the possession 
 or interest of the party to be charged thereon 
 having commenced within the time for which the 
 account is directed to be made out, the profits of 
 one year shall be estimated in proportion to the 
 profits received- within the time elapsed since the 
 commencement of such possession or interest," did 
 not apply. — That the business was a "trade . . . 
 adventure or concern," within Sched. D, rule 1, of 
 
( 1327 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1328 ) 
 
 V. REVENUE— INCOME TAX— continued. 
 the rules for ascertaining the duties to be charged 
 thereon, and was not within the terms of the pro- 
 viso " set up and commenced " witliin the period 
 of three years. — That the company was a new 
 association carrying on an old concern ; and had 
 " succeeded " to it within clause 4 of the third set 
 of Eules in Sched. D, but that, since such succes- 
 sion, the profits had fallen short from a " specific 
 cause " within the exception in that clause. — And 
 that the sixth case of the said rules applied, and 
 under it the computation should be made " on the 
 amount of the full value of the profits and gains 
 received annually," i.e., for the current year. Ey- 
 HOPE Coal Company v. Foyer 7 Q. B. D. 485 
 
 4. Coal Mines — Royalties — Dead Bent — 
 
 Deductions from Gross Profits — Provision for re- 
 couping Dead Bents out of Royalties. Effect of — 
 5 <fe 6 Vict. u. 35, s. 60 (Sched. A), r. 3 ; Sect. 100 
 (Sched. D)— 29 & 30 Vict. c. 36, s. 8.] By an 
 agreement for lease of coal mines for a term 
 of years from March, 1874, the lessees agreed 
 to pay a dead rent for the mines, and royalties 
 at specified rates per ton on all coal worked ; 
 the dead rent to be recoupable out of royalties 
 during the first sixteen years of the term — the 
 effect being, that the lessor received on account 
 of his share of the profits of the concern not less 
 than a fixed annual sum ; so that when his share 
 of the royalties did not amount to the fixed sum 
 he received that sum ; but when his share of the 
 royalties exceeded the fixed sum he received that 
 sum only until the lessees had been reimbursed 
 the excess paid to the lessor when his share of the 
 royalties did not amount to the fixed sum. The 
 lessees worked the mines for the first time in 
 October, 1880, having paid the dead rent, less in- 
 come-tax, to the lessor up to that year. Upon an 
 assessment to the income tax, made upon the 
 lessees under Schedule D, for the year 1881-2, it 
 appeared that the lessor's share of the royalties 
 for that year had exceeded the dead rent by the 
 sum of £1477 : — Held, that, in estimating the pro- 
 fits of the concern for the particular year for the 
 purpose of being assessed under the Income Tax 
 Acts, the lessees were not entitled to deduct the 
 £1477 from their gross profits. Broughton Coal 
 Company v. Kirepatrick 14 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 5. Company — Debenture Coupons payable 
 
 Abroad — Deduction from Tax of Sums pat/able 
 Abroad— 5 & 6 Vict. c. 35, ss. 100, 102, 159, <«; 
 Sched. D,'] An English company carrying on 
 their business in Alexandria where their gains 
 and profits were earned were held to be properly 
 assessed to the income tax in respect of the 
 whole of the profits of the concern, without 
 any deduction on account of the interest on the 
 debenture bonds of the company paid to the 
 holders of such bonds in Alexandria ; there being 
 nothing in sects. 102 and 159 of the Income Tax 
 Act (5 & 6 Viet. c. 35) to limit rule 4 in sect. 100, 
 which states that " no deduction shall be made 
 on account of any annual interest or any annuity 
 or other annual payment payable out of such 
 profits or gains." Alexandria Water Company 
 V. MrsGRAVE - 11 Q, B. D. 174 
 
 6. Corporation appropriated by Statute 
 
 to certain Purposes — 5 & 6 Vict. c. 35, s. 60, 
 Sched. A. No. 111.1 A corporation was constituted 
 for the management of the Mersey Dock estate 
 
 V, REVENUE— INCOME TAX— continued. 
 by an Act which provided that the moneys to 
 be received by them from their dock dues and 
 other sources of revenue should be applied in pay- 
 ment of expenses, interest upon debts, constructicn 
 of works and management of the estate ; and that 
 the surplus should be applied to a sinking fund 
 for the extinguishment of the principal of the 
 debts ; and that after such extinguishment the 
 rates should be reduced; and that except as 
 aforesaid the moneys should not be applied for 
 any other purpose whatsoever ; and that nothing 
 should affect their liability to parochial or local 
 rates : — Held, affirming the decision of the Com-t 
 of Appeal, that under the Income Tax Acts the 
 corporation was liable to income tax in respect of 
 the surplus though applicable to the above-named 
 piu-poses only. Mersey Dooe;s and Harbour 
 Board v. Ltjoas - 8 App. Gas. SSI 
 
 7. Foreign Corporation — Dividends to 
 
 Shareholders in tlie United Kingdom — Dividends 
 intrusted to Agents for Payment — 16 <t 17 Vict, 
 e. 34, s. 10.] A foreign company carrying on 
 business and earning profits abroad, had an 
 agency in London which conducted a branch 
 and earned profits. The dividends of the com- 
 pany were payable, at the option of the share- 
 holders, abroad or by the London agency. In a 
 particular year the London agency earned an 
 amount of profits which enabled them to pay all 
 the dividends demanded of them in that year 
 without requiring or obtaining any remittance 
 from the company abroad. The London agency 
 were assessed to income tax under Sched. D on 
 the profits earned in the United Kingdom on an 
 average of the three preceding years, the amount 
 on which they were so assessed being less than 
 the amount actually earned by them in that year. 
 They further made a return under 16 & 17 Vict, 
 c. 34, s. 10, that no interest, dividends, or other 
 annual payments payable out of or in respect of 
 the stock, funds, or shares of the company had 
 been intrusted to them for payment in the United 
 Kingdom, and appealed against an assessment of 
 the Commissioners whereby they were assessed in 
 respect of the dividends paid by them : — Held, 
 affirming the judgment of the Exchequer Division, 
 that the London agency were intrusted with the 
 payment of dividends in the United Kingdom, 
 within the meaning of 16 & 17 Vict. c. 34, s. 10, 
 and that they were liable to be assessed on the 
 full amount of the dividends they so paid in the 
 year, but that since the dividends were payable 
 out of the general earnings of the company, con- 
 sisting of profits made partly in the United 
 Kingdom and partly elsewhere, and the Loudon 
 agency had already been assessed to income tax. 
 on the former under Sched. D, they ought not 
 to be further assessed under 16 .S: 17 Vict. c. 34, 
 s. 10, and pay income tax in respect of that 
 portion of the dividends which represented profits 
 arising out of the United Kingdom. Gilbertson 
 V. Fbrgusson - 7 Q. B. D. 562 
 
 8. Eoreign Telegfraph Company — Marine 
 
 Cables — Exercising Trade in England — Messages 
 forwarded from England to remote Parts of the 
 World— le <& 17 Vict. c. 34 ; 5 <t 6 Vict. c. 35.] 
 The Appellants, a foreign company dondciled 
 in Copenhagen, had three marine cables in con- 
 nection with Aberdeen and Newcastle, commu- 
 
( 1329 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1330 ) 
 
 V. EEVENTJE— INCOME 1AX— continued. 
 nicating with the telegraph lines of the Post 
 Office in the Unitsd Kingdom. They had also 
 "worli-rooms with clerks in London, Newcastle, 
 and Aberdeen. Messages from this country were 
 forwarded over the lines of tbe Post Office and 
 the cables of the Appellants to Denmark, and 
 thence by their wires and the wires of foreign 
 governments to Russia, China, Japan, and India. 
 The total charges paid for transmitting such 
 messages were collected by the Post Office, and, 
 after deducting their dues, handed to the Appel- 
 lants, who retained the amount due to them for 
 the transmission of messages over their cables 
 and lines, and paid the residue to the various 
 governments and companies respectively entitled 
 to it. No profits were made by the Appellants 
 from the transmission of messages over the land 
 lines in the United Kingdom : — Held, affirming 
 the decision of the Queen's Bench Division, that 
 the Appellants must be taken to exercise a trade 
 in the United Kingdom under 16 & 17 "Vict. c. 34, 
 s. 2, Sohed. D, and that they were chargeable to 
 income tax on the balance of profits or gains from 
 their receipts in this country from the transmis- 
 sion of messages. Eriohsen v. Last 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 12 ; 8 Q. B. D. 414 
 9. Insurance Company — "Annual Pro- 
 fits or Gains" — Sums paid as Bonuses to par- 
 ticipating Policy-holders — Dividend — 5 & 6 Vict, 
 c. 35, s. 54.] A life insurance company issued 
 " participating policies " at an increased premium, 
 according to the terms of which at the end of each 
 quinquennial period " the gross profits " of such 
 policies were thus dealt with : two-thirds were 
 returned by way of bonus or abatement of pre- 
 miums to the holders of such policies then in 
 force : the remaining third went to the company, 
 who bore the whole expenses of the business, the 
 portion remaining after payment of expenses con- 
 stituting the only profit available for division 
 among the shareholders : — Held, reversing the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal, by Lords Black- 
 burn and FitzG-erald, Lord Bramwell dissenting, 
 that the two-thirds returned to the policy-holders 
 were "annual profits or gains" and assessable 
 to income tax. Last v. London Assurance Cor- 
 poration - 12 Q. B. D. 389 ; 14 Q. B. D. 239 ; 
 [10 App. Gas. 438 
 
 VI. REVENUE— LEGACY DUTY. 
 
 By the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 
 (44 & 45 Viet. c. 12), s. 41, where the ad valorem 
 duty has been paid on the affidavit or account, in 
 conformily with the Act, in respect of any legacy, 
 residue, or share of residue payable out of or con- 
 sisting of any estate, the duty at the rate of £1 per 
 cent, imposed by the Act 55 Geo. 3, e. 184, is not 
 
 [See also, infra. Revenue — Stamps — Statutes.'] 
 Sect. 42. Subject to the relief from legacy duty 
 given by sect. 13 of the Customs and Inland 
 Bevenue Act, 1880, every pecuniary legacy or resi- 
 due, or share of residue under the will or intestacy 
 of a person dying on or after the 1st day of June, 
 1881, although not of an amount or value of £20, 
 shall be chargeable to the duties imposed by the 
 said Act 55 Geo. 3, u. 184, as mddified by this Act. 
 Sect. 43 confers a discretionary power upon the 
 Commissioners of Inland Bevenue, upon the appli- 
 
 VI. REVENUE— LEGACY JiVTY— continued, 
 cation of the person acting in the execution of the 
 will of any deceased person, and upon the delivery 
 to them of an account shewing the amount of the 
 estate and effects in respect whereof legacy duty is: 
 payable, together with the names err description of 
 the class of persons entitled thereto and every part 
 thereof, in possession or expectancy, and their de- 
 grees of consanguinity to the testator, to compounS 
 the amount of the duty shewn by such account. 
 
 If the Commissioners are of opinion that an ap- 
 plication should receive the assent of any person, 
 they shall refuse to entertain the application until 
 such assent shall have been given. 
 
 1. Valuation of Property — Executor — 
 
 "Property which shall not be reduced into Monep" 
 —36 Geo. 3, c. 52, ss. 6, 22.] By 36 Geo. 3, e. 52, 
 s. 6, legacy duty shall be paid by the person 
 taking the burden of the execution of the will 
 upon delivery or payment of the residue of any 
 personal estate to the person entitled, and by 
 sect. 22, where the residue shall consist of " pro- 
 perty; which shall not be reduced into money," 
 the executor may set a value thereon, and the 
 Commissioners of the Inland Bevenue may ac- 
 cept duty'upon that value. Shortly after the 
 death of a testatrix her executor brought into, 
 the Inland Revenue Office the residuary account 
 of her property, in which a value was set upon 
 certain pictm-es and other personal property not 
 reduced into money, and the Commissioners ac- 
 cepted duty upon that value. Subsequently— the 
 residuary legatee and the executor having always 
 intended that the pictures should be sold in the 
 course of the administration — the executor sold 
 them for a sum greatly in excess of the value 
 upon which duty had been paid, and accounted to 
 the residuary legatee for the proceeds: — Held, 
 that the provisions of sect. 22 apply to property 
 which shall not be reduced into money during 
 the course of the administration by the executor, 
 and not merely to property which shall not have 
 been reduced into money when the residuary ac- 
 count is brought in ; that the pictures, &o., there- 
 fore did not satisfy the description insect. 22, and 
 that the Crown were entitled to duty under sect. 6 
 upon the amount paid to the legatee. Attorney- 
 General V. Daedier - - 11 Q. B. D. 16. 
 
 VII. REVENUE— PROBATE DUTY. 
 
 By 44 & 43 Vict. c. 12 (the Customs and In- 
 land Bevenue Act, 1881), s. 27, the following duties 
 are charged and made payable on and after the 
 1st day of June, 1881, on the affidavit to be re- 
 quired and received from the person applying for 
 the probate or letters of administration in England^ 
 that is to say 
 Where the estate and Duty, 
 
 effects for or in respect At the rate of £1 for 
 
 of which the probate or every full sum of £50 
 
 letters of administration and for any frac- 
 
 is or are to be granted, tional part of £5(^ 
 
 exclusive of what the over any multiple of 
 
 deceased shall have been £50. 
 
 possessed of or entitled 
 
 to as trustee, and not 
 
 beneficially, shall be 
 
 above the value of £100 
 
 and not above the value 
 
 of £500. 
 
( 1331 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1332 ) 
 
 Til. REVEKUE— PROBATE DUTY— conMmucd!. 
 
 Duty, 
 Where such estate and At the rate of 25s. for 
 effects shall he above the every full sum of £50 
 value of £500, and not and for any frac- 
 ahove the value of tional part of £50 
 £1000, over any multiple of 
 
 £50. 
 Where such estate and At the rate of £3 for 
 effects shall lie above the every full sum, of 
 value of £1000. £100, and for any 
 
 fractional part of 
 £100 over any multi- 
 ple of £100. 
 Sect. 28. In the case of a person dying domiciled 
 in any part of the United Kingdom, it shall he 
 lawful for the person applying for the probate or 
 letters of administration to state in Ms affidavit the 
 fact of such domicil, and to deliver therewith or 
 annex thereto a schedule of the debts due from the 
 deceased to persons resident in the United King- 
 dom,, and the funeral expenses, and in that case for 
 the purpose of the charge of duty on the affidavit 
 the aggregate amount of the debts and funeral 
 expenses appearing in the schedule shall he de- 
 dusCted from the value of the estate and effects as 
 specified in the account delivered with or annexed 
 to the affidavit. 
 
 Debts to be deducted under this power are to he 
 debts due and owing from the deceased and pay- 
 able by law out of any part of the estate and effects 
 comprised in the affidavit, and are not to include 
 voluntary debts expressed to be payable mi the 
 death of the deceased, or payable under any instru- 
 ment which shall not have been bona fide delivered to 
 the donee tliereof three months before the death of 
 deceased, or debts in respect whereof any real 
 estate may be primarily liable, or a re-imbursement 
 may be capable of being claimed from any real 
 estate of the deceased or from any other estate or 
 person. Funeral expenses to be deducted under 
 this power are to include only such expe^ises as are 
 allowable as reasonable funeral expenses according 
 to law. 
 
 Sect. 29. Tlie affidavit must extend to the verifi- 
 cation of the account of the estate and effects, or to 
 the verification of such account and the schedule of 
 deihts and funeral expenses, as the case may he, and 
 must he in the prescribed form. 
 
 Sect.^ 30. Every grant of probate or letters of 
 administration must bear a certificate in writing 
 under the hand of the proper officer of the Court, 
 shewing that the affidavit has been delivered, and 
 that such affidavit, if liable to stamp duty, was duly 
 stamped, and stating the amount of the gross value 
 of the estate and effects as shewn by the account. 
 
 Sect. 31. If at any time after the grant of pro- 
 hate or letters of administration, and during the 
 administration of the estate, the value mentioned 
 in the certificate of the officer of the Court shall be 
 found to exceed the true value of the personal estate 
 and effects of the deceased, or if at any time within 
 three years after the grant, or within such further 
 period as the Commissioners of Inland lievenue 
 may allow, it shall appear that no amount or an 
 insufficient amount was deducted on account of 
 debts cind funeral expenses, it shall he lawful for 
 the said Commissioners, upon proof of the facts to 
 their satisfaction, to return the amount of stamp 
 duty which shall have been overpaid. 
 
 VII. EEVENTTE— PSOBATE 'DTSTi— continued. 
 
 Certificate of authorized officer of Inland lievenue 
 in such case substituted for certificate of the officer 
 of the Court. 
 
 Sect. 32. If at any time it shall be discovered 
 that the personal estate and effects of the deceased 
 were at the time of tlie grant of probate or letters 
 of administration of greater value than tlie value 
 mentioned in the eertificate, or that any deduction 
 for debts or funeral expenses was made erroneously, 
 the person acting in the administration of such 
 estate and effects shall, within six months after the 
 discovery, deliver a further affidavit with an ac- 
 count to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, 
 duly stamped for the amount which with the duty 
 (if any) previously paid on an affidavit in respect 
 of such estate and effects, shall be sufficient to cover 
 the duty chargeable according to the true value 
 thereof, and shall at the same time pay to the said 
 Commissioners interest upon such amount at the 
 rate of £5 per cent, per annum from the date of 
 the grant, or from such subsequent date as the said 
 Commissioners may in the circumstances think 
 proper. 
 
 Certificate of authorized officer of Inland Bevenue 
 substituted in such cases for certificate of the officer 
 of tlie Court. 
 
 Sect, 33. (1.) Where the whole personal estate 
 and effects of any person dying on or after the 1st 
 day of June, 1881 (inclusive of property by law 
 made such personal estate and effects for the pur- 
 pose of tlie charge of duty, and any personal estate 
 and effects situate out of the United Kingdom), 
 without any deduction for debts or funeral ex- 
 penses, shall not exceed the value of £300, it shall 
 be lawful for the person intending to apply for 
 probate or letters of administration to deliver to 
 tlie proper officer of tlie Court or to any officer of 
 Inland lievenue duly appointed for the purpose a 
 notice in writing in the prescribed form setting 
 forth the particulars of such estate and effects, and 
 such furtlier particulars as may require to , he 
 stated therein, and to deposit with him the sum of 
 15s. for fees of Court and expenses, and also in 
 case the estate and effects sliall exceed the valu,e of 
 £100, the further sum of 30s. for stamp duty. 
 
 (2.) If the officer lias good reason to believe that 
 the whole personal estate and effects of the deceased 
 exceeds the value of £300, he shall refuse to accept 
 the notice and deposit until he is satisfied of the 
 true value thereof. 
 
 (3.) As to the form of notice. 
 
 (4.) Empowers officas of Inland Revenue to 
 administer all necessary oaths or affirmations, and 
 to attest administration bonds. 
 
 (5.) Where tlie estate and effects shall exceed the 
 value of £100 the stamp duty payable on the affi- 
 davit shall be the fixed duty of 30s. and no more. 
 
 Sect. 34 applies to Scotland. 
 
 [As to compensation to officers for loss of fees 
 under the two preceding sections, see 45 & 46 Vict, 
 c. 72, s. 12. 
 
 Sect. 35. Wliere representation Tms been obtained 
 in conformity with either of tlie two preceding 
 sections, and it shall he at any time afterwards 
 discovered tliat the whole personal estate and effects 
 of the deceased were of a value exceeding £300, 
 then a sum, equal to the stamp duty payable on an 
 affidavit in respect of the true value of such estate 
 and effects shaU be a debt due to Her Majesty from 
 
( 1333 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1334 ) 
 
 Til. REVENUE— PEOBATE HVTY—cantinued. 
 the person acting in the administraiion of such 
 estate and effects, and no allowanae shall he made 
 in respect of the sums deposited m paid hy Mm, 
 nor shall the relief afforded by the next succeeding 
 section he claimed or allowed hy reason of the 
 deposit or payment of any sum. 
 
 Sect. 36. The payment of the sum of 30s. for 
 the fixed duty on the affidavit in conformity with the 
 Act shall he deemed to be in full satisfaction of 
 any claim to legacy or succession duty in respect 
 of the estate and effects to which such affidavit 
 relates. 
 
 Sect: 37 empowers the Commissioners at any time 
 and from time to time within, three years after 
 the grant of probate or letters of administration, 
 as they may think necessary, to require the person 
 acting in the administration of the estate and 
 effects of any deceased person to furnish such ex- 
 planations, and to produce such documentary or 
 other evidence respecting the contents of or parti- 
 culars verified hy the affidavit as the case may seem 
 to {hem to require. 
 
 Sect. 40. If any person who ought to obtain 
 probate or letters of administration or deliver a 
 further affidavit shall neglect to do so within the 
 period prescribed by law far the purpose, he shall 
 be liable to pay to Ser Majesty double the amount 
 of duty cliargeable, and the same shall be a debt 
 due from him to the Orown, and be recoverable by 
 any of the ways and means noio in force for the 
 recovery of probate duty. 
 
 Act of 1884.] By the Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 62 
 (^the Bevenue Act, 1884), s. 11, notwithstanding any 
 local or private Act, probate, or letters Of adm.inis- 
 t ration, or confirmation, from a Court of the United 
 Kingdom is necessary to constitute title to assets 
 situated therein. Saving as to certain insurances 
 with grant of representation from India or the 
 colonies, and under some other circumstances. 
 
 1. Iitmatic — Accumulations of Personal 
 
 Estate — Investment in Mealty — Conversion.'] The 
 committees of a lunatic acting under the ordera 
 of the Lords Justices of Appeal sittiug in Lunacy 
 invested the accumulations of the personal estate 
 of the lunatic in the purchase of land. The con- 
 veyances to the committees contained, in con- 
 formity with such orders, declarations that the 
 land purchased should to all intents and purposes 
 be considered as part of the personal estate of the 
 lunatic, but contained no ti'ust for sale: — Held, 
 that on the death of the lunatic the value of the 
 investment was personal estate liable to probate 
 duty. Attobney-Genebal v. Maequess of Ailes- 
 BUEY - . 14 ft. B. D. 895 
 
 [Eeversed Tiy the Court of Appeal, 16 ft. B. D. 408.] 
 
 2. Eealty — Partnership Assets — Conver- 
 
 Mon.] The shares of partners in realty forming 
 part of the partnership property must be regarded 
 as personal estate in the absence of any binding 
 agreement between the partners to the contraiy ; 
 and probate duty is payable on a deceased part- 
 ner's share in such realty u'respective of the ques- 
 tion whether or not there is in the event any 
 actual conversion into personalty.^ — Oustance v. 
 JBradshaw (4 Hare, 315) diseussedA-Judgment of 
 Queen's Bench Division affirmed. Attoknet- 
 General v. Hubbuck - 10 ft. B. D. 488 ; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D, 275 
 
 VIII. EEVENTTE— STAMPS. 
 
 The Customs and Inland Hevenue Act, 1881 
 (44 & 45 Vict. u. 12) repeals {sect. 48) the Act 
 3 <fc 4 Vict. c. 96; amends {sect. 44) sects. 16, 117 
 {sub-sect. 2), and 119 of the Stamp Act, 1870; and 
 provides {sect. 47) that on and after the 1st day of 
 June, 1881, any stamp duties of one penny which 
 may legally be denoted hy adhesive stamps not 
 appropriated by any word or words on the face of 
 them to any particular description of instrument 
 may be denoted by adhesive penny postage stamps ; 
 and on and after that date postage duties may he 
 paid by the use of penny adhesive stamps not 
 appropriated by any word or words on the face of 
 them to postage duty or to any particular descrip- 
 tion of instrument. 
 
 By 45 & 46 Vict, c, 72, s. 13, any stamp duties 
 of an amount not exceeding 2s. 6d. which may 
 legally be denoted hy adhesive stamps not appro- 
 priated by any word or words on the face of them 
 to any particular description of instrument, and 
 any postage duties to the like amount, may he 
 denoted by the same adhesive stamps. 
 
 With a view to exhaust any adhesive postage 
 stamps denoting an amount not exceeding 2s. Qd. 
 which may have been unissued or unused, such 
 stamps to a proper amount may be used to denote 
 any stamp duties of an amount not exceeding 
 2s. 6d., which may legally he denoted by adhesive 
 stamps not appropriated by any word or words on 
 the face of tliem to any particular description of 
 instrument. 
 
 Sect. 14. Where two or more adhesive stamps 
 are used to denote a stamp duty upon an instru- 
 ment, such instrument is not to be deemed duly 
 stamped unless the person upon whom the duty of 
 cancellation is by law imposed cancels each and 
 every stamp hy writing on or across the same his 
 name or initials, or the name or initials of his firm, 
 together with the tru,e date of his so writing, so 
 tliat both or all and every of the stamps may be 
 effectually cancelled and rendered incapable of 
 being used for any other instrument, or for any 
 postal purpose, or unless it is otherwise proved that 
 the stamps appearing on the instrv/ment were affixed 
 thereto at the proper time. 
 
 Penalty for contravening the section. 
 
 Sect. 15 extends interpretation of sect. 25 of the 
 Stamp Act, 1870, to any letter or cover within 
 sect. 23 of the Post Office Duties Act, 1840, and 
 any postal packet and the cover thereof which 
 is a letter or cover within the Post Office Act, 
 1875. 
 
 Sect. 16. The stamp duties granted in respect of 
 letters patent for inventions, and on the certificate 
 of registration of a design, to be deemed public 
 office fees and not stamp duties. 
 
 Sect. 17. Provision for composition fm- stamp 
 duty on certain Canadian Oovemment stock. 
 
 Accounts, Duties on.] By 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12 
 {the Customs and Inland Bevenue Act, 1881) 
 sect. 38 (1) stamp duties at the like rates as are hy 
 the Act charged on affidavits are chM-ged and made 
 payable on accounts. 
 
 (2.) The personal or moveable property to he in- 
 cluded in an account shall be property of the 
 following descriptions, viz. ; — ■ 
 
 (a.) Any property taken as a donatio mortis 
 causa made hy any person dying on or 
 after the 1st day of June, 1881,, or taken 
 
( 1335 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1336 ) 
 
 VIII. EEVENTTE— STAMPS— conKn«e(7. 
 
 under a voluntary disposition made hy any 
 person so dying purporting to operate as 
 an immediate gift inter vivos whether hy 
 way of transfer, delivery, declaratimi of 
 trust, or otherwise, which shall not have been 
 hond fide made three months before the 
 death of the deceased. 
 fb.) Any property which u. person dying on or 
 after such day having been absolutely en- 
 titled thereto has voluntarily caused or 
 may voluntarily cause to be transferred to 
 or vested in himself, and any otlier person 
 jointly, whether by disposition or otherwise, 
 so that the beneficial interest therein or in 
 some part thereof passes or accrues by 
 survivorship on his death to such other 
 person. 
 (o.) Any property passing under any past or 
 future voluntary settlement made by any 
 person dying on or after such day hy deed 
 or any other instrument not taking effect 
 as a will whereby an interest in such pro- 
 perty for life or any other period deter- 
 minable by reference to death is reserved 
 either expressly or hy implication to the 
 settlor or whereby the settlor may have re- 
 served to himself the right by the exercise 
 of any power to restore to himself or to 
 reclaim the absolute interest in such pro- 
 perty. 
 (3.) Where an account delivered duly stamped 
 comprises property passing under a voluntary 
 settlement, and upon the production of tlie settle- 
 ment it shall appear that the stamp duty of 5s. per 
 centum has been paid thereon according to the 
 amount or value of the property so passing or any 
 part thereof, the amount of such stamp duty shall 
 he returned to the person delivering the account. 
 I's Sect. 39. Every person who as beneficiary, 
 trustee, or otherwise, acquires possession, or as- 
 sumes the management of any personal or m^vedble 
 property of a description to be included in an 
 account according to the preceding section, shall 
 upon retaining the same for his own use or distri- 
 buting or disposing thereof, and in any case within 
 six calendar months after the death of the deceased, 
 deliver to the Commissioners of Inland Bevenue 
 a full and true account verified hy oath of such 
 property duly stamped as required by this Act. 
 Any offioer authorized by the Commissioners for the 
 purpose may administer the oath. 
 
 Sect. 40. If any person who is required to de- 
 liver such an account as aforesaid shall neglect to 
 do so within the period prescribed by law for the 
 purpose, he shall be liahle to pay Her Majesty 
 double the amount of duty chargeable, and the 
 same shall be a debt due from Mm to the Crown, 
 and he recoverable by any of the ways or means 
 now in force for the recovery of legacy or succession 
 
 County Stoct.] By sect. 45 where the justices 
 of any county, liberty, riding, parts, or divisions 
 of a county, shall he empowered by any Act of 
 Parliament to create " county stock, the transfers 
 of such stock shall be chargeable with stamp duty 
 as if they were transfers of the debenture stock of a 
 company or corporation. 
 
 Patent.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 62, s. 9, 
 exempts from stamp duty of Stamp Act, 1870, any 
 
 VIII. BEVENTJE— STAMPS — continued, 
 statutory declaration forming part of an applica- 
 tion for a patent. 
 
 Mortgage.] The Revenue Act (46 & 47 Vict. s. 
 55), 1883, «. 15, enacts— 
 
 In lieu of the stamp duty now payable under 
 the Stamp Act, 1870, there shall be charged upon 
 mortgage, hond, debenture, covenant and foreign 
 security of any kind — 
 
 Being a security for the payment or re- 
 payment of money not exceeding £10 . 3cZ. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict e. 51 (the Customs and 
 Inland Bevenue Act, 1885% provides : — • 
 
 Securities to Bearer.] Sect. 21. In lieu of the 
 stamp duties payable upon any security for monetf 
 hearing date or signed or offered for subscription 
 after the passing of this Act, and given to a sub- 
 scriber in respect of a loan raised by any company 
 or corporation, and transferable by delivery, and 
 upon a foreign security bearing date or signed, or 
 offered for subscription, after tlie passing of this 
 Act, and transferable by delivery, there shall be 
 charged a duty at the rate of one shilling for every 
 ten pounds, and also for any fractional part of ten 
 pounds of the money thereby secured. 
 
 And in lieu of any other stamp duties there shall 
 be charged upon any such security given in substi- 
 tution for a like security, duly stamped in con- 
 formity with the law in force at the time when such 
 last mentioned security became suiiject to duty, a 
 duty at the rate of sixpence for every twenty pounds, 
 and also for any fractional part of twenty pounds 
 of the money thereby secured. 
 
 The term "foreign security " shall not include a 
 security hy or on behalf of any Colonial Govern- 
 ment, but shall otherwise have the meaning assigned 
 to it hy 34 & 35 Vict. c. 4, and shall also include a 
 security which, though originally issued to the 
 holder out of the United Kingdom, is offered hy 
 him for subscription, and given or delivered to a 
 subscriber in the United Kingdom. 
 
 And see sect. 26 of this Act under head Ketentje. 
 — Income Tax — Statutes. 
 
 Solicitor.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict c. 62, s. 10» 
 amends the Stamp Act, 1870, s. 59, and renders it 
 unnecessary for a person hy law authorized to act 
 as solicitor of a public department without ad- 
 mission, or officer under Mm, to take out a stamped 
 certificate. 
 
 Stock Certificate to Bearer.] By the Act 44 4 
 45 Vict c. 12, s. 46 (1) Every " stock certificate 
 to bearer " which shall after the passing of the J.C* 
 (3rd! of June, 1881) be issued under the provisions 
 of the Local Authorities Loans Act, 1875, or of 
 any other Act authorizing the creation of debenture 
 stock, county stock, corporation stock, munieipai 
 stock, or funded debt, by whatever name known, 
 sliall be charged with the stamp duty of 7s. 6d. for 
 every full sum of £100, and also for any fraction less 
 than £100, or over and above £100, or a multiple 
 o/£100, of the nominal amount of thestock described 
 in the certificate. 
 
 (2.) Where the holder of any stock certificate to 
 bearer so issued shall have been entered on the 
 register of the local authority as the owner of the 
 share of stock described in the certificate, such 
 certificate shall be forthwith cancelled so as to be 
 incapable of being re-issued to any person. 
 
 (3.) The foregoing charge of stamp duty shaU 
 not be applicable ichere a composition has been 
 
( 1337 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1338 ) 
 
 VIII. REVENUE— STAMPS- 
 paid under the provisions of the 53rd section of 
 the Inland Revenue Act, 1880, for the stamp duty 
 cm transfers of the stocit described in the certificate. 
 Superannuation Annuity.] By 45 & 46 Vict. 
 c. 72, s. 8, tlie stamp duty on any grants or contract 
 for the payment of a superannuation annuity is — 
 Gd. for every full sum of £5, and also for 
 any fraction less than £5, or over and 
 above £5, or a multiple of £5 of the 
 annuity. 
 Sect. 9. No stamp duty is chargeable upon — 
 Draft or order drawn upon any banker in 
 the United Kingdom by an officer of a 
 public department of the State for the pay- 
 ment of money out of a public account. 
 Receipt given by an officer of a public depart- 
 ment of the State for money paid by way 
 of imprest or advance, or in adjustment of 
 an account, where he derives no personal 
 benefit therefrom. 
 The Act iS & 49 Vict. c. 51 (the Customs and 
 Inland Revenue Act), 1885, provides ; — 
 
 Duty on Property of Bodies corporate and un- 
 incorporate.] Sect. 1. Certain property by reason 
 of being vested in bodies corporate or unincorporate, 
 escapes liability to probate, legacy, or succession 
 duties, it is therefore enacted that there shall be 
 levied and paid to Her Majesty in respect of all 
 real and personal property which shall have be- 
 longed to or being vested in any body corporate or 
 unincorporate during the yearly period ending on 
 the 5th day of April, 1885, or during any subse- 
 quent yearly period ending on the same day in any 
 year, a duty at the rate of £5 per centum upon the 
 annual value, income or profits of such property 
 accrued to such hody corporate or unincorporate in 
 the same yearly period, after deducting therefrom 
 all necessary outgoings, including the receiver's re- 
 muneration, and costs, charges and expenses pro- 
 perly incurred in the management of such property. 
 Subject to exemption from such duty in favour of 
 property of the descriptions following (that is to 
 my):— 
 
 (1.) Property vested in or under the control or 
 management of " The Commissioners of WorJcs and 
 Public Buildings " or " The Commissioners of 
 Woods and Forests," or any department of Govern- 
 sment. 
 
 (2.) Property which, or the income of profits 
 whereof, shall be legally appropriated and applied 
 for the benefit of the public at large or of any 
 ■county, shire, horough, or place, or the ratepayers 
 or inhabitants thereof, or in any manner expressly 
 prescribed by Act of Parliament. 
 
 (3.) Property which, or the income or profits 
 whereof, shall be legally appropriated and applied 
 for any purpose connected with any religious per- 
 suasion, or for any charitable purpose, or for the 
 promotion of education, literature, science, or the 
 Jine arts. 
 
 (4.) Property of any friendly society or savings 
 ianlt established according to Act of Parliament. 
 
 (5.) Property helonging to or constituting the 
 •capital of a body corporate or unincorporate estab- 
 lished for any trade or business, or being the pro- 
 perty of a body whose capital stock is so divided 
 and held as to be liable to be charged to legacy duty 
 ■or succession duty. 
 {6.) Property acquired hy or with funds volutt- 
 
 VIII. BEVENTTE— STAMPS— conimuefi. 
 tarily contributed to any body corporate or unin- 
 corporate within a period of thirty years immedi- 
 ately preceding. 
 
 (7.) Property acquired by any hody corporate or 
 unincorporate within a period of thirty years im- 
 mediately preceding where legacy duty or succession 
 duty shall have been paid upon the acquisition 
 thereof. 
 
 Sect. 12. In the construction and for the purposes 
 of this part of this Act, — 
 
 The term " body unincorporate " includes every 
 unincorporated company, fellowship, society, asso- 
 ciation, and trustee, or nu/mber of trustees, to or in 
 whom, respectively any real or personal property 
 shall belong in such manner, or be vested upon such 
 permarKnt trusts, that the same shall not be liable 
 to legacy duty or succession duty, 
 
 The term "accountable officer" means every 
 chamberlain, treasurer, bursar, receiver, secretary, 
 or other officer, trustee, or member of a body cor- 
 porate or unincorporate by whom the annual income 
 or profits of property in respect whereof duty is 
 chargeable under this Act shall be received, or in 
 whose possession or under whose control the same 
 shall be. 
 
 Sect. 13. The duty hereby imposed shall be con- 
 sidered as a stamp duty, and shall be under the care 
 and management of the Commissioners of Inland 
 Revenue hereinafter called the Commissioners, who 
 by themselves and their officers shall have the same 
 powers and authorities for the collection, recovery, 
 and management thereof as are vested in them for 
 the collection, recovery, and management of the 
 succession duty, and shall have all other powers 
 and authorities requisite for carrying this part of 
 this Act into execution. 
 
 Sect. 14. The duty hereby imposed shall be a first 
 charge on all the property in respect whereof the 
 same shall be payable while such property shall re- 
 main in the possession or under the control of the 
 body corporate or unincorporate chargeable with 
 such duty, or of any party or parties acquiring the 
 same, with notice of any such duty being in arrear, 
 and every such body corporate or unincorporate, 
 and every accountable officer, shall, to the full ex- 
 tent thereof, be answerable to Her Majesty for the 
 payment of the duty charged thereon. 
 
 Sect. 15. Return of property to be made to the 
 Commissioners. 
 
 Sect. 16. Power for persons answerable to retain 
 moneys for payment of duty. 
 
 Sect. 17. Power to Commissioners to assess duty 
 according to accounts rendered or to obtain other 
 accounts. 
 
 Sect. 18. Penalty for not making retmns and foj' 
 non-payment of duty. 
 
 _ Sect. 19. Application of enactments as to succes- 
 sion duty to this part of the Act. 
 
 Sect. 20. In administration of property chalrge- 
 able under this Act, the Court shall provide for 
 payment of duty. 
 
 !■ Charterparty — ;S'fo7np Act, 1870.] A 
 
 charterparty executed entirely abroad aud stamped 
 ■within two mouths after it has been received in 
 this country can be received in evidence, since it 
 falls within the provisions of 38 & 34 Vict. c. 97, 
 s. 15, and not of sects. 67 and 68 of that Act The 
 " Belfokt " - - . - 9 P, D. 215 
 
( 1339 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 13iO ) 
 
 VIII. EEVENUE— STAMPS— coniinued. 
 
 2. Debenture — Promissory-note — 33 & 34 
 
 Vict. c. 97, 6. 18, and Sehed. — "Debenture" — 
 Joint Stock Company.'] An instrument issued 
 by a company incorporated under the Joint Stock 
 Companies Acts, 1856 and 1862, purporting upon 
 the face of it to be a " debenture," with coupons 
 for the payment of interest half-yearly attached 
 to it, and containing an engagement on the part 
 of the company to pay " the amount of this in- 
 denture " to A. B. or order on a given day, with 
 interest at .') per cent, is under the Stamp Act, 
 1870, chargeable with a debenture-stamp at 2s. 6J., 
 and not with a promissory-note stamp. Bkitish 
 India Steam Navigation Company v. Commis- 
 sioners OE Inland Revenue 7 ft. B. D. 165 
 
 3. Mortgage Tieei— Vendor and Pur- 
 
 cliaser — Ad valorem Stamp — Stamp Act, 1870.] A 
 ten shilling deed stamp on a mortgage deed is 
 insufficient ; therefore a purchaser is entitled, on 
 a contract for sale with a mortgagor, to require 
 the mortgage deed, where so stamped, to be 
 stamped before completion to the full ad valorem 
 duty at the vendor's expense, notwithstanding 
 that the mortgagee may have consented to join 
 in conveyance. Whiting to Loomeb 17 Ch. D. 10 
 
 4. Settlement by Court.] An order of the 
 
 Court making a settlement should bear the usual 
 settlement stamp. In re Gowan. Gowan v. 
 Gowan - 17 Ch. D. 778 
 
 5. Unstamped Deed — Vendor and Fur- 
 chaser — Title — Compulsory Purchase — Payment 
 into Court — Costs of Petition — Lands Clames Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845 (S&d Vict. c. 18), ss. 75, 80, 
 82.] A freehold land society in 1871 purchased 
 some land in Epping Forest, which was conveyed 
 to them in fee. They conveyed it in allotments 
 to various members of the society who respectively 
 paid for then- allotments. Afterwards the Epping 
 Forest Act, 1878, was passed, and it provided that 
 the land (together with other lands) should be 
 thrown open to the public, certain compensation, 
 the amount of which was to be ascertained by 
 an arbitrator, beiug paid by the Conservators 
 appointed by the Act to the owner of the soil of 
 any land thrown open. With the Act were incor- 
 porated the provisions of the Lands Clauses Act, 
 1845, with respect to the purchase-money or com- 
 pensation coming to parties having limited in- 
 terests, or prevented from treating, or not making 
 title, and with respect to the conveyances of lands. 
 After the passing of the Act the land society re- 
 purchased the allotments from the allottees, re- 
 paying them their purchase-moneys. The allot- 
 tees reoonveyed the plots to the trustees of the 
 society, the reconveyances being indorsed on the 
 original conveyances, but the reconveyances were 
 not stamped within the proper time after execu- 
 tion. The arbitrator determined the amount of 
 compensation to be paid by the Conservators to 
 the society, and the society furnished an abstract 
 of title to the Conservators. The Conservators 
 made no objection to the title, except that the 
 reconveyances ought to be stamped, and they 
 required the society to have them stamped at 
 their own expense. The society declined to do 
 this, but offered that the allottees should join with 
 the trustees of the society in a conveyance to the 
 Conservators. The Conservators would not accept 
 
 VIII. REVENUE— STAMPS— co»iJntte<^. 
 
 this offer, but paid the compensation money into 
 Court, and, under sect. 75 of the Lands Clauses 
 Act, executed a deed-poll vesting the land in 
 themselves in fee. The society petitioned for 
 payment of the money to them : — Held, that it was ■ 
 not necessary that the reconveyances should b& 
 stamped; that the Conservators ought to have 
 been satisfied with the conveyance offered them 
 by the society ; and that the Conservators must 
 pay the costs of the petition. — Whiting to Loomes 
 (14 Ch. D. 822 ; 17 Ch. D. 10) distinguished. Ex 
 parte Bikkbeck Freehold Land Society 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 119 
 
 IX. REVENUE -SUCCESSION DUTY. 
 
 Sy the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 
 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 12), s. 41, where the ad valorem 
 duty has been paid on the affidavit or account, in, 
 conformity with the Act, in respect of any succes- 
 sion to property, the duty at the rate of £1 per 
 cent, imposed by the Act 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, is not 
 payable. 
 
 1. Appointment under General Power — 
 
 Predecessor — Legacy Duty — Succession Duty Acf^ 
 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. V. 51), ss. 2, 18—36 Geo. 3, 
 c. 52, s. 18.] In cases of appointments by 
 donees of general powers which fall within sect. 'A 
 and do not fall within sect. 4 of the Succession 
 Duty Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), the canon 
 of construction adopted in In re Barker (7 H. 
 & N. 109 ; 30 L. J. (Ex.) 401) and Charlton v. 
 Attorney -General (4 App. Cas. 427) is to be 
 applied whether the power be joint or sole, and 
 the appointees must be held to derive their in- 
 terest from the donor of the power as "prede- 
 cessor," and not from the donee. — Testator, in 
 1826, bequeathed personalty in trust for his 
 daughter for life, and afterwards (in the event; 
 which happened) for such persons as she should 
 by deed appoint, and in default of appointment 
 for her nest of kin. Testator died before th& 
 coming into operation of the Succession Duty 
 Act, 1853, and legacy duty at 1 per cent. was. 
 paid upon the whole absolute interest of the 
 trust fund. After that Act came into operation 
 the daughter, by deed, appointed the trust fund 
 to her sister's daughters :^fl"eM, by Grove and 
 Lindley, JJ., that, as owing to the date of the 
 testators death sect. 4 did not apply, the ap- 
 pointees derived their interest from tlieir grand- 
 father, the testator, as predecessor, within sect. 2, 
 and not from their aunt, the appointor, and that 
 succession duty was therefore payable on tlieir 
 succession at the death of the appointor at 1 and 
 not at 3 per cent. : — Seld, also, that the payment 
 of legacy duty under 36 Geo. 3, c. 52, s. IS, did 
 not exempt the appointees from succession duty, 
 since their succession did not come within the 
 exemption granted by sect. 18 of the Succession 
 Duty Act, 1853, to persons already charged with 
 legacy duty " in respect of the same acquisition 
 of the same property." Attornev-General v. 
 MiTpHELL - - - - 6 Q. B. D. 548 
 
 2. Illegitimate Children —Pi-oceeds of 
 
 Heal Estate in Court— Petition by Natural Cliil- 
 dren of an Englishman domiciled in Home — 
 Status— Succession Duty Act, 1853 (16 ct 17 Vid. 
 c. 51), s. 10,] J. A., a native of Cumbciland, 
 
( 1341 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1342 ) 
 
 IX. EEVENUE— SUCCESSION HVTY—oontd. 
 ■went about forty years before his death in 1877 to 
 reside in Rome, and there acqiiked a Eoman or 
 Italian domioil. He cohabited with an Italian 
 ■woman, by ■whom he had fonr children, sons, all 
 bom in Eome prior to 1862. The parents were 
 never married. J. A. inherited real estate in 
 England. By his will, made in English form, 
 he gave all his real estate whether in Italy or 
 England to his four children, nominatim. The 
 will was not valid in regard to his personal estate 
 in Eome, but as he had acknowledged his natural 
 children in his lifetime they were allowed to 
 succeed to that estate as heredes ab intestato. 
 The real estate in England was sold and the 
 proceeds paid into Court: — On petition by the 
 children for distribution of the fund, held, that 
 their status was that of strangers in blood to the 
 testator, and that tlie Crown was entitled to be 
 paid 10 per cent, duty under the Succession Duty 
 Act, 1853. Atkinson v. Anderson 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 100 
 
 3. Letters of Administration — Meversion 
 
 — Cesser of Succession Duty — Succession Duty 
 Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), s. 10— Customs 
 and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 12), 68. 27, 41.] A. died intestate and without 
 having been married. He was entitled to an 
 interest in reversion expectant on his father's 
 death, in a settled fund. The father, to whom 
 letters of administration of A.'s estate were 
 granted, paid 3 per cent, administration duty 
 under sect. 27 of the Customs and Inland Eevenue 
 Act, 1881, upon the estimated value of A.'s estate, 
 including the above reversionary interest : — Seld, 
 that the father was^ exempted by sect. 41 of the 
 same Act from paying duty at £1 per cent, in 
 respect of A.'s succession to his father, under 
 sect. 10 of the Succession Duty Act, 1853. In re 
 Hatgaeth's Teosts 22 Ch. D. 645 
 
 4. - — - Predecessor — Settlement — BesettUment 
 — Succession Duty Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), 
 s. 2.] A lunatic was tenant in tail in possession 
 of land with remainder to his younger brother 
 E. and his sister D. successively in tail. E. 
 converted his estate tail into a base fee in re- 
 mainder, and mortgaged his interest to secure a 
 debt of £124,000 which was more than the fee 
 simple value of the land, so that he had no bene- 
 ficial interest in the equity of redemption. His 
 sister D. married, and by her marriage settle- 
 ment made before such marriage her estate in 
 remainder was settled to the use of herself for 
 life, with remainder to the use of the first and 
 other sons of such marriage. The Defendant was 
 the only son of that marriage. Eor the benefit of 
 all parties a family arrangement was made with 
 the consent of the Lord Chancellor (as protector 
 and in lieu of the lunatic under 3 & 4 Will. 4, 
 c. 74, s. 33), in pursuance of which E. and his 
 sister D. and the mortgagees all joined in deeds 
 of settlement, whereby the land was conveyed to 
 trustees in fee simple, subject to the estate tail of 
 the lunatic, but discharged from the mortgage 
 and from the equity of redemption of E. upon 
 trust after the determination of the lunatic's 
 estate to raise £37,000 by sale or mortgage, and 
 to pay that sum to the mortgagees, and subject 
 thereto to hold the land to the use of D. for life' 
 
 IX. EEVENTTE— STTCCESSION DVTI—eonid. 
 with remainder to her sons successively in tail. 
 This arrangement was carried out, and upon the 
 death of the lunatic D.- became tenant for life in 
 possession and upon her death the Defendant, as 
 her son, became tenant in tail in possession : — 
 Seld, that the Defendant derived his interest as 
 successor from his mother D. and not from his 
 uncle E. as predecessor, under the Succession 
 Duty Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), s. 2, and 
 was therefore liable to duty at £1 per cent., and 
 not at £3 per cent. Attoenet-Geneeal v. 
 DowLiNG - - 6 Q. B. D. 17'/ 
 
 8. Sale under Settled Estates Act, 1877 
 
 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 18), s. 22 — Succession Duty 
 Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), ss. 39, 41, 42— 
 Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. 
 c. 78.] The effect of a sale by the Court under 
 the powers conferred by the Settled Estates Act, 
 1877, of any settled estates, is, by the operation 
 of the 22nd section of that Act, to revoke the 
 uses of the settlement ; and by the operation of 
 the 42nd section of the Succession Duty Act, 
 1853, the duty is shifted from the land sold to 
 the purchase-money or its investments, and the 
 land in the hands of the purchaser is freed from 
 the succession duty. In re Waeneb's Settled 
 Estates. "Waenbb to Steel - 17 Ch. D. 711 
 
 6. Settlement — Meservation of Interest to 
 
 Settlor — Alternative Conditions of Succession — 
 Succession at a fixed Time or on Death of Settlor — 
 Succession Duty Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), 
 ss. 2, 5, 10, 32.] A settlor, by deed containing 
 no power of revocation, settled personal property 
 upon trust for himself for a term of four years, if 
 he should so long live, and at the end of the 
 term, or at his death, whichever should first 
 happen, upon trust for other persons. Before 
 the end of the term the settlor died, and the 
 persons entitled in remainder came into posses- 
 sion of the settled property : — Held, by the Court 
 of Appeal (Jessel, M.R., Brett and Cotton, L.J J.), 
 that as the succession actually took effect on the 
 death of the settlor, succession duty was payable 
 on the whole of the fund, and not merely on the 
 income of it for the period between the death of 
 the settlor and the end of the term. Attobney- 
 Geneeal v. Noyes - 8 Q. B. D. 125 
 
 EEVENUE— Canadian law— Duty on exhibits 
 
 on T ^ [10 App. Cas. 141 
 
 See Colonial Law— Canada, Quebec. 4. 
 
 Cape of Good Hope— Duty on purchase- 
 money - - - 8 App. Cas. 309 
 See Colonial Law — Cape of Good 
 Hope. 3. 
 
 Commissioners of Inland Eevenue — Man- 
 damus - 12 Q, B. D. 461 
 See Mandamus. 2. 
 
 Scotch law - - 6 App. Cas. 315 
 
 See Scotch La^w — Eevenue. 
 
 KEVEESION — Action by assignee of reversion 
 
 „ .,. [9 Q. B. D. 366 
 
 bee Landloed and Tenant— Assign- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 Appointment of receiver 11 Q, B. D. 711 
 
 See Peactioe — SuPEEME Coue't-^Ee- 
 
 CEIVEE. 8. 
 
DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1343 ) 
 
 'RWrERSlOV— continued. 
 
 ■ Injury to— Trespass - 20 Ch. D. 589 
 
 See NmsANOB — ^Remedies. 2. 
 
 Owner of— Prescription — Tenant at will 
 
 See Easement. 2. [19 Ch. D. 22 
 
 Married woman 18 Ch. D. 106 ; 25 Ch. D. 620 
 
 See Husband and "Wifb — Wife's Ke- 
 VEESION. 1, 2. 
 
 Married Women's Property Act 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 604; 29 Ch. D. 127 
 See Husband and Wife — Mabeied 
 Women's Peopektt Acts. 7, 8. 
 
 Succession duty - - 22 Ch. D. 545 
 
 See Revenue— Succession Duty. 3. 
 
 Temporary nuisance to — Injunction 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 589 
 
 See Nuisance — ^Eemedibs. 2. 
 
 EEVISION or VOTES. 
 
 See Parliament — Eegistkation — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 EEVIVOE— Appeal - - 17 Ch. D. 767 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Coubt — 
 Chanse oe Paeties. 5. 
 
 Appeal - - 27Ch.D.237 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — Ap- 
 peal. 38. 
 
 Counter-claim - 21 Ch. D. 175 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — 
 
 COUNTBE-CLAIM. 6. 
 
 Death of sole Plaintiff— Person attending 
 
 proceedings - 24 Ch. D. 126 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Couet — 
 Change of Paeties. 7. 
 
 Discretion of Court 20 Ch. D. 398 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Court — 
 Change of Pasties. 6. 
 
 EEVOCATION — Marriage settlement— Children 
 of prior marriage 9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 &e Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 5. 
 
 Marriage settlement - 20 Ch. D. 742 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 191 
 See Settlement — Ee vocation. 1, 2. 
 
 Power of — ^Voluntary settlement 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 668 ; 29 Ch. D. 212 
 See Voluntary Convetance. 4, 6. 
 
 Probate — Jurisdiction of Chancery Divi- 
 sion - - 26 Ch. D. 656 
 See Pbaotioe — Supreme Court — Juris- 
 diction. 1. 
 
 Probate — Jurisdiction of Chancery Division 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 1. [9 P. D, 210 
 
 , Will 23Ch.D.337; 8 P. D. 169; 9 P. D. 237 
 
 See Will — Eevooation. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 "^ill — Appointment — General clause of 
 
 revocation 20 Ch. D. 99 
 
 See Power — Execution. 13. 
 
 'Withdrawal of appeal 17 Ch. D. 23 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubt — Ap- 
 peal. 23. 
 
 TiTOHT OF ACTION— Covenant — Stranger 
 
 "■ [30 Ch. D. 67 
 
 See Husband and Wipe— Separation 
 Deed. 2. 
 
 EIGHT OF COMMON - 20 Ch. D. 753 
 
 See Copyhold— Custom. 1. 
 
 ( 1344 ) 
 
 EIGHT OF ENTEY. 
 
 1, Title to land — " Pretenced i Title '' — 
 
 Buying of — Forfeiture — 32 Sen. 8, c. 9, «. 2; 
 8 (fe 9 Vict. c. 106, ». G—KnowUdge of Buyer.'] In 
 an action for a forfeiture under 82 Hen. 8, c. 9, 
 s. 2, against the buyer of a right of entry, since 
 8 cSc 9 Vict. c. 106, e. 6, the onus is upon the Plain- 
 tiff to prove not only that the title purchased was 
 bad, but also that the buyer knew that it was 
 " pretenced,'' i.e. fictitious, or bad in fact. The 
 mere fact that the right purchased was barred by 
 the Statute of Limitations at the time of the pur- 
 chase does not necessarily render the title "pre- 
 tenced " within the meaning of the 32 Hen. 8, 
 c. 9. Kennedy v. Lyell - 15 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 2. Validity of Grant— 32 Hen. 8, u. 9, 
 
 s. 2 — 8 cfe 9 Yict. e. 106, s. 6 — Measure of 
 Damages — Sale of Land — Covenants for Title 
 and quiet Enjoyment.'] Although 32 Hen. 8, 
 c. 9, s. 2, cannot be said to have been repealed 
 by 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106, s. 6, nevertheless since 
 the passing of the latter statute a grant of lands 
 to which the grantor has a title existing in fact, 
 but of which he has never been in possession, 
 and on which he is entitled only to a right of 
 entry, will be valid, even although at the time of 
 the grant a litigation is pending as to the title to 
 the lands. — A. sought to recover by ejectment 
 certain lands ; the person in possession, amongst 
 other defences, alleged that one-fourth share 
 thereof belonged to B., who had never been in 
 possession. Thereupon A., for the sum of £10, 
 took from B. a conveyance dated the 4th of July, 
 1 877, of his share, containing covenants for title 
 and quiet enjoyment. The actual value of B.'s 
 share was £500. A. then recovered possession of 
 the lands. Before the date of the conveyance B. 
 had been bankrupt, and after A. had recovered 
 possession of the lands, B.'s trustees in bank- 
 ruptcy recovered possession from A. of the one- 
 fourth share which had been conveyed by B. to 
 A. In an action by A. against B. for damages 
 for breach of the covenants for title and quiet 
 enjoyment : — Held, that the conveyance to A. 
 from B. -was not rendered void by 32 Hen. 8, c. 9, 
 s. 2. — Held, also, that A. was entitled to recover 
 from B. the sum of £500 as damages. Jenkins v. 
 Jones - - - 9 Q. B. D. 128 
 
 EIGHT OF WAT 
 See Way. 
 
 EIOT. 
 
 Action against Hundred — Damage to 
 
 Houses—Larceny therefrom by Rioters — Felonious 
 Demolition — Intention to destroy — Evidence — 
 Compensation from Hundred — 7 dc 8 Oeo. 4, c. 31, 
 8. 2 ; 24 (fe 25 Vict. c. 97, ss. 11, 12.] A house 
 damaged by rioters is not "feloniously demo- 
 lished wholly or in part" so as to entitle the 
 person damnified to compensation from the Hun- 
 dred under 7,& 8 Geo. 4, u. 31, s. 2, unless the 
 rioters when attacking tlie house had an inten- 
 tion wholly to destroy it. — During an election 
 riot, and before the Eiot Act was read, the 
 rioters attacked many houses, broke the windows 
 and damaged the walls by throwing stones, and 
 stole tobacco from a iiouse so damaged : — Held, 
 that there was no evidence of felonious demo- 
 lition for which the Hundred was liable to 
 
 18 Ch. D. 616 ; 26 Ch. D. 434 
 
 1,2. 
 
( 1345 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1346 ) 
 
 BIOT — continued. 
 
 compensate the persons damnified. Drake v. 
 
 FooTiTT. Dkake v. Hankin - 7 ft. B. D. 201 
 
 BIPAEIAN OWNEE— Canadian law 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 170 
 
 See Colonial Law-Canada— Quebec. 8. 
 Eight to use water - 27 Ch. D. 122 ; 
 
 See Wateboouese. 1, 2. [11 ft. B. D. 155 
 Eiver — Towing path 6 App. Cas. 686 
 
 See EiVBB. 
 
 Eoman-Dutch law — Prescription 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 336 
 
 See Colonial Law — Cape oe Good 
 Hope. 4. 
 Scotch law — ^Clyde navigation 6 App. Cas. 
 
 See Scotch Law — jBiver. [273 
 
 EISK— Marine insurance - 7 ft. B. D. 456 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Risk. 
 
 ErVEE. 
 
 Thames.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 76 {the 
 Thames Preservation Act, 1885), preserves the 
 River Thames above Teddington Loch for purposes 
 of puhlic recreation, regulates the phasure traffic 
 thereon, and enables Conservators to make by-laws 
 for the purposes mentioned in this Act, in addition 
 to the powers of making by-laws already possessed 
 hy them under earlier statutes. 
 
 Locks on the Thames.] Order in Council of 
 3rd May, 1882, under 41 & 42 Vict. u. ccxvi., s. 35, 
 amends by-law No. 2 in the Sules and By-laws 
 for the Regulation of the Navigation of the River 
 Thames, allowed by Her Majesty in Council, on 
 the nth day of May, 1879 L. G., 1882, p. 2129 
 
 Boat-races on the Thames.] Order in Council 
 of \9ih March, 1883, revokes certain by-laws of 
 l\th Nov., 1869, and llth March, 1875, and pro- 
 mdes that any vessel being on the River Thames 
 between Cricklade in the county of Wilts and 
 Yantlet Greek in the county of Kent on the occasion 
 of any boat-race, regatta, public procession or 
 launch of any vessel, oi- on any other occasion when 
 large crowds assevfible thereon, shall not pass thereon 
 so as to obstruct, impede or interfere with the boat- 
 race, regatta, procession or launch, or endanger the 
 safety of persons assembling on the river or prevent 
 the maintenance of order thereon, and the master of 
 every such vessel on any such occasion as aforesaid 
 shall observe the directions of the officer of the 
 Conservators engaged in superintending the execu- 
 tion of this by-law, and if any such master fails in 
 any respect to comply with the requirements of this 
 by-laio or does anything in contravention thereof, 
 he shall be deemed guilty of an offence against this 
 by-law, and shall for every such offence be liable to 
 a penalty of not exceeding £5 L. G., 1883, p. 1626 
 
 And see Fishery Acts — -Thames By-laws. 
 
 Lee Navigation — Towing Path — Evi- 
 dence of Ownership — Presumption — Onus Pro- 
 iandi.l Provisions in different Acts of Parlia- 
 ment appointed Conservators of a river navigation, 
 and gave them full powers to do what was neces- 
 sary for carrying the object of the Acts into 
 effect, including powers to purchase land and 
 levy tolls. The Conservators executed the powers 
 uf the Acts so far as related to the improvement 
 of the river navigation, and the making of towing- 
 paths — and they levied tolls. There was no evi- 
 
 EIVEB — continued. 
 
 dence that they had actually purchased any of 
 the land that lay along the course of the navigar 
 tion, and had been used to form the towing-paths: 
 — Held, that, as the Acts might be carried into 
 effect without purchasing, the burden of proof lay 
 on the Conservators to shew that they had pur- 
 chased ; and since they had failed to shew it, 
 though they were entitled to an injunction to 
 prevent any owner of adjoining laud from so 
 using the towing-paths as to obstruct in any way 
 their free use for the purposes of the navigation, 
 they were not entitled to be treated as owners of 
 the soil of the towing-paths. Conservators or 
 THE EiVEB Lee Navigation v. Button 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 685 
 Eight of fishery. 
 
 See Cases under Fishery. 
 " Tributary"— Salmon fishery 10 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Fishery Acts. 1. [131 
 
 EGAD — Power of magistrates to make 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Highway. 1. 
 Eepair of. 
 
 See Cases under Highway — ^Eepair, 
 EOADS AND BEIDGES ACT— Scotland 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 881 
 
 See Scotch Law — Highway. 3. 
 
 EOLLEE — Steam roller — Eepair of highway — 
 Injury to gas pipes 15 ft. B. D. 1 
 
 See Gas Company. 
 
 EOILING STOCK— Eail way— Execution 
 
 [6 ft. B. S. 36 
 See Railway Company — Pboperty. 2. 
 
 Sale and hire of — Fictitious sale — Ultrk 
 
 vires - - 21 Oh. D. 309 
 
 See Railway Company — Constitu- 
 tion. 
 EOMAN-STTTCH LAW - 6 App. Cas. 364 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 571 
 See Colonial Law — Ceylon. 3, 4. 
 
 - - - 10 App. Cas. 336 
 
 See Colonial Law — Cape op Good 
 Hope. 4. 
 
 EOYAL PECUIIAB— Ecclesiastical jurisdiction 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 316 
 
 See Praotiob— Eoolesiastioal — Juris- 
 diction. 2. 
 EOYAI EESIDENCE— Ecclesiastical jurisdiction 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 316 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Juris- 
 diction. 2. 
 
 EOYAL SOCIETY— Purchase of land— Consent of 
 
 Charity Commissioners 17 Ch. D. 407 
 
 *'ee Charity — Commissioners. 6. 
 
 EOYAL WAEEANT— Booty of war 7 App. Cas. 
 
 See Booty op War. [619 
 
 EOYALTY— Assignment of part of 17 Ch, D. 423 
 
 See Patent — Assignment. 1. 
 ETJLE or COUET— Award - 19 Ch. D. 56 
 
 See Abbiteation — Submission. 3. 
 EULES FOE PEEVENTING COLLISIONS AT 
 SEA 
 
 See Cases and Gazette under Ship 
 
 Navigation. 
 
 2 X 
 
( 13i7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1348 ) 
 
 EULES OF BUILDING SOCIETY. 
 
 See Cases under Building Society. 
 
 ETTIES or CLUB— Validity - 17 Ct. D. 615 
 
 See Club. 
 
 EULES OF MUTUAL LOAN SOCIETY 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 425, n. 
 See Company — Disteibution of Assets. 
 1. 
 EULES OF STOCK EXCHANGE - 20 Ch. D. 356 
 See Stock Exchange. 2. 
 
 EULES OF THE 8UPEEME COUET. 1876— 
 Order I., r. 3 9 ft. B. D. 337 ; 10 App. Cas, 1 
 
 See Husband and "Wife — Separate Es- 
 tate. 6. 
 . — - 6 a. B. 3). 63 ; 8 Q. B. D 82 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Intee- 
 
 PLEADEK. 1, 2. 
 
 Order II.. r. 1 - - 23 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Mo- 
 tion foe Judgment. 2. 
 
 r. 4 - 19 Ch. D. 460 
 
 See Peactice— Supeeme Couet— See- 
 TICE. 8. 
 
 7 Q. B. D. 434 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — See- 
 TICE. 11. 
 
 r. 8 7 ft. B. D. 273 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 See Peactice — Ecclesiastical ■ — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 
 Order III., r. 8 - - 20 Ch. D. 638 
 
 See ExECUTOK— Actions. 8. 
 
 Order IX., rr. 5, 6, 6a 10 ft. B. D. 471 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — See- 
 
 TICE. 1. 
 
 r. 6 - 19 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Peactice — Supheme Couet — Pas- 
 ties. 11. 
 
 8 ft. B, D. 474 
 
 -Supeeme Court — Judg- 
 
 EULES OF THE SUPEEME COUET, lili—contd. 
 — Order XVI., r. 1 10 Q. B. D. IS 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity FOR Costs. 6. 
 
 r. 7 - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 
 6 App. Cas. 698 
 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation, 2. 
 
 r. 8 - 6 ft. B. D. 122 
 
 See Husband and Wepe — ^Wife's Eeal 
 Estate. 1. 
 
 - 9 ft. B. D. 52 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Sectj- 
 RiTT FOR Costs. 4. 
 
 -_r. 9 - 21Ch. D. 718 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pas- 
 ties. 8. 
 
 r. 10 19 Oh. D. 124 ; 10 ft. B. D. 436 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 12. 
 
 r. 13 - - 17Ch.D. 768 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Undischarged Bank- 
 rupt. 4. 
 
 - - - 19 Ch. D. 55 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Par- 
 ties. 2. 
 
 . - - - 21 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See Will — Condition. 1. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 121 ; 17 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court ^ 
 Change of Parties. 1, 6. 
 
 - 16 Ch. D, 734 
 
 -Supreme Court — Writ. 
 
 7 ft. B. D. 434 
 
 -Supreme Court- Ser- 
 
 See Practice 
 
 MENT. 1. 
 
 • r. 13 
 
 See Practice- 
 1. 
 ■ Order XI., r. 1 
 See Practice- 
 vice. 11. 
 
 rr. 1, 3 19 Ch. D. 460 ; 20 Ch. D. 240 ; 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 86 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — See- 
 vice. 3, 8, 9. 
 
 - Order XII., r. 12 19 Ch. D. 124 ; 1 1 ft. B. D. 
 
 [435 I 10 App. Cas. 680 
 
 See Peactice— Supreme Couet — Par- 
 ties. 10, 11. 
 
 - - — r 12a - - 21 Ch. D. 484 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 2. 
 
 10 ft. B. D. 471 
 
 -Supreme Court — Ser- 
 
 - Order XIH., i. 1 
 
 See Practice- 
 vice. 1. 
 ■ Order XIV., r. 1 8 ft. B. D. 177 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Weit 
 
 SPECIALLY INDORSED, 3. 
 
 - 16 Ch. D. 69 
 
 Supreme Court — 
 
 ■ Order XV., r. 1 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 
 
 20 Ch. D. 538 
 
 8. 
 
 rr. 13, 14, 17 
 
 See Practice - 
 Parties. 9. 
 
 r. 17 - 19 Ch. D. 473 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 1. 
 
 rr. 17, 18. 19, 20, 21 16 Ch. D. 489 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 198 ; 8 ft. B. D. 701 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — Third 
 Party. 1, 2, 4. 
 
 • rr. 18, 21 - 8 P. D. 91 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Third 
 Party. 
 Order XVII., r. 2 - - 21 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Practice — Supbejie Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 5. 
 
 ■ Order XVIII. - 11 ft. B. D. 251 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories, i. 
 
 ■ Order XIX., r. 3. 
 
 See Cases -under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Counter-claim. 
 
 - - 25 Ch. D. 687 
 
 See Company — Set-off. 1. 
 
 - - 11 ft. B. D. 631 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — Mo- 
 tion FOR Judgment. 1. 
 
 - 11 ft. B. D. 464 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 continuance. 
 
 rr. 3, 19 8 ft. B. D. 428 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Keply. 1. 
 
( 1349 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1350 ) 
 
 ETTLES OF THE STTPEEME COTJET, 1615— cmtd. 
 Order XIX., r. 4 - - 6Q. B. D. 190 
 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Coukt — Strik- 
 ing OCT Pleadings. 1. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 491 
 
 See Defamation — Libel. 2. 
 
 rr. 6, 7 - 8 P. D. 227 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Plead- 
 ing. 2. 
 
 rr. 16, 17 6 ft. B. D. 645 ; 8 App. Cas. 456 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— De- 
 pence. 
 
 Order XX., r. 1 -' 17 Cli. D. 174 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court^Coun- 
 ter-claim. 4. 
 
 - 8 a. B, D. 428 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Eeplt. 1. 
 
 Order XXI., r. 4 - - 10 ft, B. D. 516 
 
 See Pbactice^Sbpreme Court — Writ 
 
 SPECIALLY indorsed. 1. 
 
 rr. 11, 12 - 7 ft. B.D. 400 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Peo- 
 duotion op Documents. 18. 
 
 Order XXII., r. 9 - 21 Ch. D. 138, 802 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 2, 5. 
 
 Order XXHI., r. 1 - - 18 Oh. D. 362 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Costs. 23. 
 - 11 ft. B. D. 464 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 continuance. 
 
 - 22 Ch. D. 91 
 
 Supreme Court — 
 
 - Order XXIT.rr.l 
 
 See Practice 
 Beplt. 3. 
 
 - Order XXVII., r. 1 - 6 ft. B. D. 190 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Strik- 
 ing out Pleadings. 1. 
 
 - - 21 Ch, D. 802 
 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 2. 
 
 - - 22 Ch, D, 481 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment. 1. 
 
 r. 2 17 Ch. D, 721 ; 8 App. Cas. 5 
 
 See Patent — Inpeingement. 6. 
 
 - Order XXVIII., r. 1 19 Ch. D. 246 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 murrer. 1. 
 
 r. 2 - - - 20 Ch. D. 812 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 murrer. 2. 
 ■ Order XXIX., rr. 10, 14 25 Ch. D. 707 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 66 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 3, 4. 
 
 r. 12 - 8 ft. B. D. 650 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 8. 
 
 - - 9 ft, B. D. 170 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Eeply. 2. 
 
 RULES OF THESUPEEMECOUET, 1875— conW. 
 
 Order XXX., rr. 1, 4 - 22 Ch. D. 611 ; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 597 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment into Court. 1, 4. 
 
 • Order XXXI., rr. 1-10. 
 
 See Cases under Practice - 
 Court — Ikterrogatoeies. 
 
 ■ Supreme 
 
 — rr. 1, 4 
 
 See CoMPANY- 
 
 -EVIDENCE. 
 
 16 Ch, B. 58 
 1. 
 
 rr. 9, 10, 11, 23 - 27 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 12. 
 r. 10 - - 9 ft. B. D. 168 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 
 Costs. 34. 
 
 rr, 11-18, 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 
 Court — Production of Documents. 
 
 r. 12 lOft. B.D. 459 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Codrt — In- 
 terrogatories. I. 
 
 r, 19 - - 18:Ch. D. 477 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- - 
 tersogatoribs. 2. 
 
 r. 21 - - 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 See Peactice-=-Supreme [ Court — Pro- 
 DuoTioN OP Documents. 16. 
 
 - Order XXXII., r. 1 - 9 P. D. 32 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Salvage. 
 1. 
 
 - Order XXXIII. - 21 Ch. D. 757 
 
 See ExEcuTOE — Actions. 9. 
 
 - Order XXXIV., r. 1 - - 16 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Spe- ■ 
 ciAL Case. 2. 
 
 - Order XXXV., rr. la, 4 - 20 Ch. D, 538 
 
 See ExECUTOE — Actions. 8. 
 
 rr. 3, 26 - 20 Ch, D, 365 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Trial. 
 1. 
 
 - Order XXXVI., rr. 2, 3 - Oft. B. D. 63 
 
 See Practice — Supeeme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 2. 
 
 rr. 3, 26 - 21 Ch, D, 134 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Telal., 
 5. 
 
 rr. 3, 26 - - ■ 8 P. D. 205 
 
 See Practice — Probate — Trlal. 
 
 r. 32 - - - 17 Ch, D. 346- 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 9. 
 
 r. 34 22 Ch, D, 722 ; 11 ft, B, D. 180 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Ee- 
 
 PERBE. 3, 5. 
 
 - Order XXXVII., r. 4. 
 
 See Cases under Practice- Supreme 
 Court — Evidence. 
 
 - Order XXXVIII., r. 1 - 16 Ch. D. lOO 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— Evi- 
 dence. 1. ,, .^ 
 
 ^""'i o 16Ch,D, 694 
 
 bee Practice— Supreme! Court— Evi- 
 dence. 6. 
 
 2X2 
 
( 1351 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1352 ) 
 
 EUIES or THESTTPREMECOTTET, 1875— conid. 
 Order XXXVIII., r. 4 25 Ch. D. 297 
 
 See Pkactice — Sdpeeme Coukt — Evi- 
 dence. 3. 
 
 Order XXXIX., r la 11 Q. B. D. 180 
 
 /See Pbaotice — Supkeme Court — Ke- 
 
 FEBEB. 5. 
 
 Order XI., r. 10 - - 10 a. B. D. 504 
 
 See Court — Mayor's Court. 3. 
 9 Q. B. D. 337 ; 10 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate Es- 
 tate. 6. 
 r. 11. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Motion for Judgment. 
 
 9 a. B. D. 170 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Eeplt. 
 2. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 650 
 
 See Practice — Sitpreme Court — De- 
 
 fault. 8. 
 
 ■ Order XLH. 
 
 See Practice - 
 
 CEITER. 1. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 544 
 
 -Supreme Court — Ee- 
 
 r. 3 22 Ch. D. 281 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Writ of Possession. 
 
 r. 5 - 7 a. B. D. 623 
 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 5. 
 
 r. 8, 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Parties. 10—13, 15. 
 
 - Order XLIV., r. 2 - 9 Q. B. D. 335 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Notice 
 OF Motion. 1. 
 
 - Order XLV., r. 1 16 Ch. D. 8 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 6. 
 
 - 11 Q. B. D. 27 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Separate 
 Estate. 9. 
 
 rr. 2, 3 17 Ch, D. 269 ; 6 Q. B. D. 631 ; 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 518 
 ;See Practice — Supreme Court —Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 5, 8, 9. 
 
 rr. 3, 8 - - 19 Ch. D. 608 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 2. 
 
 rr. 6, 7 8 Q. B. D. 319 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 11. 
 
 - Order XLVI., rr. 2a, 4, 7, 10 23 Ch. D. 649 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 2. 
 
 - Order XLVII., r. 2 17 Ch. D. 433 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Se- 
 questration. 3. 
 
 - Order L. - - 21 Ch. D. 484 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 2. 
 
 r. 1 17 Ch. D. 767 ; 20 Ch. D. 398 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 126 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 5, 6, 7. 
 
 ETJIES OF THE SUPEEME COUET, 1875— conM. 
 Order L., r. 2 7 Q. B. D. 413 
 
 See Practice — - Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 1. 
 
 Order LI., r. 1, 2 (a) - - 16 Ch, D, 702 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trans- 
 fer. 1. 
 
 Order LII., r, 3 10 Q. B. D. 457 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 29. 
 
 Order LIH., rr. 2, 3 - 11 Q, B. D. 180 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Be- 
 
 FEREE. 5. 
 
 r. 4 - 22 Ch. D. 604 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Notice 
 OP Motion. 2. 
 Order irv,, r. 2 - 9 Q. B. D. 168 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 34. 
 
 Order LV., i. 1. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Costs. 
 
 18 Ch, D. 58 ; 20 Ch. D. 803 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 495 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 24, 25, 26. 
 
 - - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment into Court. 1. 
 
 8 Q. B. D. 515 
 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways Ee- 
 GULATioN Acts. 2. 
 
 r. 2 - 23 Ch. D. 358 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity for Costs. 1. 
 
 Order LVII., r. 6 - 16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ. 
 1. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 91 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Eeply. 
 3. 
 
 6 Q. B. D. 116 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 5. 
 
 r. 8 - 16 Ch. D. 3 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 42. 
 — Order LVIII,, rr. 3, 15 22 Ch. D. 484 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 36. 
 
 r. 5 - - 9 Q. B. D. 276 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment. 5. 
 
 ; 9 Q. B. D. 672 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entey. 
 6. 
 
 r, 6 - - 16 Ch. D. 270 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 11. 
 
 23 Ch. D. 98 ; 18 Ch. D. 334 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 7,8. 
 
( 1353 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1354 ) 
 
 ETJLES OF THE SUPREME COURT, WTS—contd. 
 Order LVIII., r. 9 16 Ch. D. 801 
 
 See Bankrtiptct — Appeal. 9. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 392 ; 23 Ch, D. 248 
 
 See Pkactioe — Scpkeme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 35, 40. 
 
 r. 15. 
 
 See Cases under Peactice — Supeeme 
 Court — Appeal. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 5. 
 
 - 19 Ch. D. 326 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 5. 
 
 rr. 16, 17 18 Ch, D. 394; 22 Ch, D, 88 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D, 305 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 11, 15, 16. 
 
 Order LIX., r, 1 - 22 Ch, D, 504 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Notice 
 OP Motion. 2. 
 
 r. 2 - - 9 ft. B, D. 276 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment. 5. 
 
 Order LXa., r. 12 8 ft, B. D, 142 
 
 See Practice — ^Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction of Documents. 14. 
 
 Order IXII., r. 2 - 6 ft. B. D, 139 
 
 See Poor-rate— Procedure. 4. 
 
 Sched. App, G. 11 22 Ch. D, 841 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 12. 
 RULES OF THE SUPEEME COURT (Costs), 
 August, 1875, Order VI,, rr, 1, 3 
 
 [22 Ch, D, 473; 24 Ch, D. 594 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 30, 32. 
 
 rr. 2, 3 6 ft. B, D. 279; 10 ft. B, D, 71 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 29, 31. 
 
 r. 26 - - 19 Ch, D, 72 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs, 
 16. 
 
 rr, 30, 32 - 8 ft, B. D. 479 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 9. 
 
 Sched, r, 17 - - 21 Ch, D, 855 
 
 See Trustee Kblief Act. 2. 
 
 Sched, r. 27 - 24 Ch. D. 684 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 37. 
 EUIES OF THE SUPREME COURT, 1883, Order I,, 
 r, 1 30 Ch. D, 231 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 22. 
 
 Order II,, r. 1 - 30 Ch, D, 231 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 22. 
 
 Order m., r. 6 (f) - 13 ft, B. D, 302, 347 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Writ 
 specially indorsed, 2, 5. 
 
 Order IX,, rr. 11, 12 10 P, D, 62 
 
 See Peactioe — Admiralty — Service. 3. 
 
 Order XI., r. 1 (h) (e) 14 ft. B. D. 78 
 
 See Praotice^Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 2. 
 
 RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT, 1883— conM. 
 Order XI., rr, 1 (e), and 2 - 12 ft, B. D. 60 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 10. 
 
 r. 1 (0 16 ft, B, D. 680 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 6. 
 
 r, 1 (g) - - 13 ft, B. D, 96 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Third 
 Party. 10. 
 
 Order XII,, r, 16 - - 14 ft, B. D, 103 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Order XIII,, r. 3 - 14 ft. B. D, 231 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 4. 
 
 — rr, 12, 13 - - - 9 P. D, 84 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Default. 
 
 rr, 12, 13 10 P, D, 62 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Service. 3 
 
 Order XIV, 13 ft, B, D, 302, 347, 691 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ 
 SPECIALLY indorsed. 2, 4, 5. 
 
 - - 13 ft. B. D. 855 
 
 See Action. 1. 
 
 Order XV., r. 1 28 Ch, D, 650 ; 29 Ch, D. 834 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inqui- 
 ries AND Accounts, 1, 3. 
 
 Order XVI,, r, 2 30 Ch, D, 57 
 
 See Husband and Wife^ Separation 
 Deed. 2. 
 
 r, 11 28 Ch, D, 414 ; 29 Ch, D, 
 
 [190, 584 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Parties. 2, 3, 5. 
 
 25 Ch, D, 750 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment, 2. 
 
 r, 16 - - 30 Ch. D, 418 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Se- 
 cuRiiY FOR Costs. 5. 
 
 rr, 24, 25, 26, 31 - 14 ft, B, D. 859 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 28. 
 
 r. 40 - 30 Ch. D, 421 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 18. 
 
 rr. 48, 55. 
 
 See Cases under Practice— Supreme 
 Court — Third Party. 
 
 Order XVII., r. 4 - 27 Ch. D. 237 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 28. 
 
 rr, 4, 5 - 28 Ch, D, 38 
 
 See Practice — ^Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity for Costs. 8. 
 
 - 26 Ch, D. 181 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 3. 
 
 Order XVIII., r, 1 - - 26 Ch. D. 35 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Par- 
 ties. 16. 
 
 Order XIX,, r. 3 - 28 Ch. D, 333 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 9, 
 
( 1355 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1356 ) 
 
 25 Ch. D. 68 
 
 OOUET De- 
 
 28 Ch. D. 372 
 
 26 Ch. D. 35 
 
 OOUBT 
 
 ETTIES OF THE SUPREME COTJET, 1883— conid. 
 
 Order XIX., r. 3 9 Q. B. D. 648 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 434 
 See Sale of Goods— Eesoission. 2. 
 
 rr. 4, 27 - 26 Cb.. D. 778 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supkeme Court — 
 Steikins out Pleadings. 2. 
 
 . . r, 27 - - 9 P. D. 68 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Pkobate — Pleading. 
 
 r. 6 - - 26 Ch D. 717 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Pko- 
 DUOTioN OP Documents. 10. 
 
 Order XXII., rr, 6, 7 14 Q. B. D. 766 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment INTO Court. 3. 
 
 Order XXIII,, r. 4 - 
 
 See Practice — Supreme 
 
 FAULT. 2. 
 
 Order XXV., rr. 1, 2, 3 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 murrer. 3. 
 
 rr. 1, 3, 4 
 
 See Practice — Supreme 
 Parties. 16. 
 
 rr. 2, 3 - - 29 Ch. D. 128 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 murrer. 4. 
 
 r. 4 - 10 App. Cas. 210 
 
 See Champerty. 2. 
 
 Order XXVII., rr. 11, 12 - 25 Ch. D. 68 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 2, 3. 
 
 r. 15 - 12 Q. B. D. 166 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Judg- 
 ment. 5. 
 
 Order XXXI., r. 1 - 15 ft. B. D. 439 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 rogatories. 7. 
 
 . rr. 10, 11, 14, 24 - 27 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Intee- 
 
 BOGATORIES. 12. 
 
 IT. 12-14 16 ft. B.D. 114; 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 189 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 5, 22. 
 
 rr. 12, 20 - 26 Ch. D. 717 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 10. 
 
 r. 16 - - 26 Ch. D. 724 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction OF Documents. 20. 
 
 rr. 21, 22, 23 26Ch. D. 64j 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 746 
 See Practice — ■ Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 7, 8. 
 
 ■ rr. 25, 26 - 13 ft. B. D. 826 
 
 See Practice — ■ Supreme Coukt^— Se- 
 curity for Costs. 13. 
 
 ■ Order XXXII., r. 2 - - 25 Ch. D. 617 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 3. 
 
 Order XXXIII., r. 2 - 29 Ch. D. 866 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 quiries AND AeCOUKTS. 2. 
 
 EULES OF THE STTPBEME COTJET, 1883— conM. 
 Order XXXV., r. 4 - 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Dis- 
 trict Eegistey. 
 
 Order XXXVI., r. 1 - 26 Ch. D. 621 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 486 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 6,7. 
 
 r, 3 25 Ch. D. 772 ; 29 Ch. D. 50 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 2,3. 
 
 r. 6 - - 29 Ch. D. 50 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 3. 
 
 r. 12 - - - 14 ft. B. D. 234 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Notice 
 of Trial. 
 
 rr. 12, 16 - 27 Ch. D. 364 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 7. 
 
 r. 33 - - 29 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 1. 
 
 Order XXXVII., r. 1-5 25 Ch. D. 21, 673 ; 
 
 [26Ch. D. 1; 27Ch.D. 137 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Evi- 
 dence. 14, 15, 16, 18. 
 
 r. 21 - - 28 Ch. D. 669 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Evi- 
 dence. 2. 
 r. 35 - 9 P. D. 120 
 
 See Practice — ^Divorce — ^Evidence. 2. 
 
 — Order XXXVni., r. 3 - 26 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Evi- 
 dence. 18. 
 
 r. 6 - - - 25 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Coubi>— Evi- 
 dence. 9. 
 
 rr. 9, 13, 20, 21 29 Ch. D. 711 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 4. 
 
 r. 11 - - - 26Ch. D. 470 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Strik- 
 ing out Pleadings. 3. 
 
 r. 28 28 Ch. D. 669 ; 29 Ch. D. 711 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 2, 4. 
 
 — Order XXXIX. - 18 ft. B. D. 403 
 See Practice— Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 7. 
 
 r. 1 - 12 ft. B, D. 21 ; 14 ft. B. D. 55 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — -New 
 Trial. 1, 2. 
 
 r. 6 - - 12 ft. B. D. 68 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — New 
 Trial. 3. 
 
 — Order XL., r. 6 14 ft. B. D. 871 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 5. 
 
 — Order XII., r. 5 26 Ch. D. 746 ; 27 Ch. D. 66 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^At- 
 tachment, i, 8. 
 
 — Order XLII., rr. 6, 8, 22, 23 14 ft. B. D. 336 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 7. 
 
( 1357 ) 
 
 DIGKST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1358 ) 
 
 BUIES OF THE SUPREME COUET, 1888— cojiM. 
 Order XLII., r. 23 - 13 Q. B. D. 479 
 
 See Bankbcetoy — ^AcT or Bankkuptoy. 
 8. 
 -^ Order XLII., rr. 4, 28 - 29 Ch. D, 399 
 
 See Pkagtioe — Supreme Couet — Ee- 
 
 CEIVER. 3. 
 
 Order XLIV., r. 2 - 13 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 5. 
 
 Order XLV., r. 1 12 ft. B. D. 525 ; 18 ft. B. D. 
 
 [199 ; 14 ft. B. D. 336 
 
 See Pkaotioe— Supreme Court— Gab- 
 nishee Orders. 1, 4, 7. 
 
 Order XLVI., r. 1 - 12 ft. B. D. 287 
 
 SeePBAOTicE— Supreme Court — Chaeg- 
 iNO Orders. 2. 
 
 Order XLIX., rr. 1, 3 - 13 ft. B. D. 540 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— Trans- 
 fer. 2. 
 
 Order L., r. 3 - - 27 Ch. D. 356 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ik- 
 sPEOTiotf OF Property. 
 
 r. 6 - - 26 Ch. D. 413 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Ee- 
 
 CEIVER. 4. 
 
 Order in. - 13 ft. B. D. 403 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 7. 
 
 . r. 1 - - 14 ft. B. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — New 
 Trial. 2. 
 
 r. 4 25 Ch. D. 64 ; 26 Ch. D. 746 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 4, 7, 8. 
 
 Order LIH., r. 9 - 14 ft. B. D. 13 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 
 Order IIV., r. 12 - - 12 ft. B. D. 100 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Inter- 
 pleader. 9. 
 
 Order IV., i-. 2, sub-a. 1 25 Ch. D. 366 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 13. 
 
 r. 2, sub-ss. 2, 6, 7. 
 
 See Cases under Practice— Supreme 
 Court — Chambers. 11 — 16. 
 
 sub-s. 8, 18 - 28 Ch. D. 529 
 
 See Trustee Acts — ^Vesting Obdees. 2. 
 
 sub-r. 7 - - 30 Ch. D. 541 
 
 See Practice— -Supreme Court — ^Pay- 
 ment out op Court. 
 
 r. 3 - - 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Practice — Supeemb ;Court — Ap- 
 peal. 22. 
 
 rr. 3, 10 - 25 Ch. D. 66; 28 Ch. D. 
 
 [79,467; 29Ch. D. 913 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 eebs. 7 — 10. 
 
 rr. 70, 71 - - 27 Ch. D. 687 
 
 See PRAcricE— Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 3. 
 
 RULES OF THE SUPHEME COUET, 1883— comW. 
 
 Order LV., r. 10 30 Ch. D. 291 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 10. 
 
 Order LVII. - - 12 ft. B. D. 171 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 TIOE. 7. 
 
 r. 1 (6) 14 ft. B. D. 873 
 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 12. 
 
 r. 2 (6) 13 ft. B. D. 632 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 8. 
 
 rr. 6, 9, 10, 16 12 ft. B. D. 100 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 9. 
 r. 11 - 12 ft. B. D. 103 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 4. 
 
 r. 13 - - - 14 ft. B. D. 371 
 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 5. 
 r. 15 - - - 13 ft. B. D. 67 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^Inter- 
 pleader. 10. 
 
 Order LTIII., r. 4 - - 25 Ch. D. 707 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — De- 
 fault. 4. 
 
 rr. 4, 16 26 Ch. D. 614 ; 27 Ch. D. 
 
 [392; 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Practice — SupjtEaE Court — Ap- 
 peal. 14, 22, 44. 
 
 r. 6 - - - 10 P. D. 18 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty— Appeal. 2. 
 
 r. 15 - 14 ft. B. D. 121 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Secueed Creditob. 
 12. 
 
 r. 16 - 28 Ch. D. 18 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Stay- 
 ing Proceedings. 14. 
 
 Order LXIV., i. 7 - 14 ft. B. D. 234 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Notice 
 of Teial. 
 
 r. 13 14 ft. B. D. 231 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Couet — Judg- 
 ment. 4. 
 
 Order LXV., r. 1 29 Ch. D. 85, 495 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — ^Ap- 
 peal. 26, 27. 
 
 - - 26 Ch. D. 82 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 8. 
 - 10 P. D. 1, 112 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 7, 8. 
 - 29 Ch. D. 913 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 10. 
 
 rr. 1, 4 - - - 14 ft. B. D. 6 
 
 See Peactioe — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 20. 
 
 rr. 8, 9 - - - 25 Ch. D. 661 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Purchase- 
 Money. 3. 
 
 r- 9. App. ». - - 9 P. D. 86 
 
 See Peactioe— Admiralty— Costs. 5. 
 
( 1359 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1360 ) 
 
 BiriES OF THE STTPEEMZ COUET, 1883— conitJ. 
 Order LXV., r. 12 - 14 ft. B. D. 53 
 
 »?!=<; Pkactice — SupKEiiE Coubt^Costs. 
 19. 
 
 r. 14 - - - 14 ft. B. D. 922 
 
 See Pbactice — SrPBEiiE Couet — Costs. 
 44. 
 
 r. 27, snb-s. 20 - 26 Ch. D. 470 
 
 See Practice — Scpkeme Couet — Stkik- 
 DfG OUT Pleadings. 3. 
 
 r. 27, sub-s. 21 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 »?fe Pkactice — Supkeme Couet — Costs. 
 43. 
 
 r. 27, subs. 43 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 See Pkactice — Supreme Couet — Dis- 
 
 TEICT KeGISTET. 
 
 Order LXVL, r. 7 - 9 P. D. 126 
 
 &e Peactice— Admibaltt — Costs. 6. 
 Order IXVn., r. 14 10 P. D. 62 
 
 i^ce Practice — Admiealtt — Service. 3. 
 Order LXVin., r. 1 - 14 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 Order LXX., r. 1 - 30 Ch. D. 541 
 
 See Practice — Supbejie Couet— Pat- 
 mest out of Coui'.T. 
 
 ETJLES OF THE SUPEEME COTTET, 1883 — contd. 
 Order LXX., r. 2 15 Q. B. D. 680 
 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Couet — Ser- 
 vice. 6. 
 
 Order LXXI., r. 1 - 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Pbactice — Supbejie Court — Ap- 
 peal. 22. 
 
 Order LXXII., r. 2 - 25 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 
 DESCE. 9. 
 
 14 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 See Mandamus. 1. 
 
 ETTLES OF SUPEEME COTTET— FTTNl) EUIES, 
 1884, rr. 3, 11, 12, 98, 111 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 Set Practice — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 trict Registry. 
 
 ETTLES TJNDEE SOLICITOES EEMTINEBATION 
 
 ACT, r. 2 (a) (6) (c) Sched. I., Part 2 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 608 
 
 iSee Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 24. 
 
 r. 4, Sched. I., Part L, r. 11 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 790 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 25. 
 
( 1361 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1362 ) 
 
 s. 
 
 SAILIITG RULES. 
 
 See Oases under 
 Ship— Navigation. 8—26. 
 Ship — Navigation — Gazette. 
 
 Action in rem — Oontributory negligence 
 
 [9 P. S. 96 ; 10 App. Cas. 59 
 See Pbactice — Admiealty — Jueisdic- 
 
 TION. 1. 
 
 ST. LAWBENCE— Navigation— Policy of insur- 
 ance - 9 App. Cas. 345' 
 See Insukanoe, Mabine — Policy. 9. 
 
 SALABY — Bankruptcy — Voluntary allowance 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 70 
 See Bankeuptoy — Assets. 14. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Judge of colony 21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 13. 
 
 SALE— Assets of partnership - 18 Ch. D. 698 
 
 See Paetnership — Contract. 3. 
 By agent to principal - 29 Ch. D. 795 
 
 See Pbinoipal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 1. 
 By auction - 29 Ch. D. 790 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 25. 
 By auctioneer — Eight to proceeds 19 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bailment. [86 
 
 By Court - 16 Ch. D. 561 
 
 See Practice — ^Supreme Court — Sale 
 BY Court. 
 
 By Court - 21 Ch. D. 466 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Convey- 
 ance. 1. 
 By Court — Leave to Defendant's solicitor to 
 
 bid - - 27 Ch, D. 302 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities, 6. 
 By Court — Misrepresentation 27 Ch. D. 4.34 
 
 See False Kepeesentation. 2. 
 By mortgagee. 
 
 See Cases under. Mortgage — Powers. 
 By solicitor — Fiduciary relation 16 Ch. D. 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities. 7. [393 
 
 Glebe land — Land drainage company 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 208 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Commissioners. 
 Goods. 
 
 See Cases under Sale op Goods. 
 Goodwill 19 Ch. D. 355 ; 27 Ch. D. 145 
 
 See Goodwill. 2, 3. 
 Infant's property - - 16 Ch. D. 161 
 
 See Infant — Peopbety. 2. 
 
 Infant's property — Settled Land Act 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 552 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Disabilities. 
 1. 
 Land. 
 
 See Cases under Vendoe and Pue- 
 
 CHASEE. 
 
 Land — Charity- 
 
 See Charity 
 
 -Royal Society 17Ch.D.407 
 
 -COMMISSIONEBS. 6. 
 
 SALE — continued. 
 
 Leaseholds— Administrator 27 Ch. D, 220 
 
 See Administbatoe — Geant. 8. 
 
 Medical practice 20 Ch. D. 70& 
 
 See Specific Peeformanoe. 4. 
 
 Mortgaged estate — Second mortgagee 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 954 
 See Mortgage — Eedemption. 5. 
 
 Order for— Conversion 25 Ch. D. 735' 
 
 See Executor — ^Actions. 4. 
 
 Order for — Mortgage — ^Foreclosure 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 463 ; 22 Ch. D. 235 
 See MoETGAGE — Foeeolosuee; 21, 22. 
 
 Order for — ^Mortgage — Eedemption action 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 169 
 See MoETGAGE — Eedemption. 4. 
 
 Partition suit. 
 
 See Cases under Partition Suit — Sale. 
 
 Partition suit— Trust for sale 22 Ch. D. 284 
 
 See Paetition Suit — Jubisdiction. 2. 
 
 Partition suit— Vesting order 19 Ch. D. 646 
 
 See Trustee Acts — -Vesting Orders. 10. 
 
 Boiling stock — Eailway company 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 478 
 See Eailway Company — Constitution. 
 
 Salvage — Costs — Tender after action 
 
 [10 P. D. 1 
 See Peaoticb — Admiralty— Costs. 8. 
 
 Salvage money — Winding-up of company — 
 
 Eunning contract - 30 Ch. D. 216 
 See Company — Contracts. 4. 
 
 Settled Estates Act - 21 Ch. D. 41, 123 
 
 See Settled Estates Acts. 1, 5. 
 
 Settled Estates Act — Succession duty 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 711 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 5. 
 
 Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Settled 
 Land Act. 
 Settled Land Act — Remuneration of solici- 
 tor - - 24 Ch. D. 608 
 See Solicitor — Bill or Costs. 18. 
 
 Ship — Disagreement between co-owners 
 
 See Ship- OwNEES. 1. [10 P. D. 4 
 
 Ship — Wreck — Authority of master 
 
 See Ship— Master. 1. [16 Ch. D. 574 
 
 SALE OF GOODS :— 
 I. Contract - 
 II. Lies 
 III. Rescission - 
 
 Col. 
 1362 
 1364 
 1366 
 
 I. SALE or GOODS— CONTEACT. 
 
 1. Manufacturer — Implied Contract that 
 
 Goods are of Manufacturer's make — Evidence — 
 Custom.'] On the sale of goods by a manufac- 
 turer of such goods, who is not otherwise a dealer 
 in them, there is, in the absence of any usage in 
 the particular trade or as regards the particular 
 
( 1363 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1364 ) 
 
 I. SAIE OF GOODS— CO'ST^ACT— continued. 
 
 goods to supply goods of other makers, an im- 
 plied contract that the goods shall be those of 
 the manufacturer's own make. — The Plaintiffs, 
 who were manufacturers but not dealers in iron, 
 by a written contract, on the margin of which 
 was their trade-mark (a crown with their initials), 
 contracted to sell to the Defendants, who thereby 
 contracted to buy of the Plaintiffs, 2000 tons of 
 ship-plates of the quality known as " Crown," to 
 pass Lloyd's survey to be delivered monthly, at 
 the Defendants' shipyard. The contract contained 
 a strike clause by which the supply of the iron 
 contracted for might be suspended during tlie 
 continuance of any strike of workmen; but it had 
 no express stipulation that the plates should bo of 
 the Plaintiffs' manufacture. Before the contract 
 was completed the Plaintiffs closed their works, 
 and proposed to complete the contract by delivery 
 of ship-plates of the quality mentioned in the 
 contract made by another firm. The Defendants 
 having refused to accept these, the Plaintiffs sued 
 them for breach of contract. — At the trial the 
 Defendants tendered evidence to shew that in the 
 iron trade there is a custom that, under a contract 
 between a manufacturer of iron plates and a cus- 
 tomer for the supply of them, the seller must, in 
 the absence of stipulation to the contrary, supply 
 plates of Ms own make, and that the purchaser 
 is entitled to reject other plates if tendered though 
 of the quality contracted for. The learned Judge 
 at the trial rejected this evidence, and gave judg- 
 ment for the Plaintiffs : — Held, that such evidence 
 was improperly rejected. — Held, also, by Brett 
 and Cotton, L.JJ. (Bramwell, L.J., dissenting), 
 that without such evidence the Defendants were 
 entitled to succeed, as tlie contract implied that 
 the plates to be supplied should be of the manu- 
 facture of the Plaintiffs, and that therefore the 
 Plaintiffs could not require the Defendants to 
 accept plates not of their own manufacture even 
 though of the quality contracted for and as 
 good as those made by the Plaintiffs themselves. 
 Johnson v. Katltok 7 Q. B. D. 438 
 
 2. • • Market overt — Felony — Sale of stolen 
 
 Beasts — Conviction of Thief^Mestitution — Claim 
 by Purchaser against Owner for Cost of heeding 
 the Beasts,'] The bon4 fide purchaser of stolen 
 beasts sold in market overt, cannot, in answer to 
 a claim for them by the original owner after the 
 conviction of tlie thief, counter-claim for the cost 
 of their keep while the beasts were in the pos- 
 session of the purchaser, for they were his own 
 property until, on the conviction, the property 
 revested in the original owner. Walker v. 
 Matthews - - 8 Q. B. D. 109 
 
 3. Statute of Frauds (29 Car. 2, c. 3), s. 17 
 
 — Acceptance — Act recognising the Contract^ It is 
 not necessary in order to satisfythe requirements 
 of the 17th section of the Statute of Frauds that 
 there should be an absolute acceptance of goods: 
 there is sufficient eviilence of an acceptance of 
 goods within the section where upon delivery of 
 the goods the purchaser has received them and 
 done any act in relation thereto recognising the 
 existence of a contract for the purchase of them 
 by him,tliough he subsequently refuses the goods. 
 So, where there was a sale of wheat by sample, 
 and the purchaser, having received a number of 
 
 I. SALE OF GOODS— CONTEACT—con^iJwed. 
 sacks of wheat delivered under the contract into 
 his premises, opened the backs and examined 
 their contents to see if they were equal to sample, 
 but immediately after so doing gave notice to the 
 seller that he refused the wheat as not being 
 equal to sample : — Held, that there was evidence 
 of an acceptance. — Kibble v. Gough (38 L. T. 
 (N.S.) 204) followed.— iJtc/tard v. Moore (38 L. T. 
 (N.S.) 841) discussed. Page v. Morgan 
 
 [15 a B. D. 228 
 
 4. Tender of Bill of lading — 5tB of 
 
 Lading drawn in Sets of Three — Tender of Two 
 only— Time when Tender to be made — Bight of 
 Vendee to reject.'] Where by the terms of the 
 contract of sale of goods to be shipped payment 
 is to be made in exchange for bills of lading of 
 each shipment the purchaser is bound to pay 
 when a duly indorsed bill of lading, effectual to 
 pass the property in the goods, is tendered to 
 him, although the bill of lading be drawn in 
 triplicate, and all the three are not then tendered 
 or accounted for ; and, if he refuses to accept and 
 pay, he does so at his own risk as to whether it 
 may turn out to be the fact or not that the bill of 
 lading tendered was an effectual one, or whether 
 there was another of the set which liad been so 
 dealt with as to defeat the title of the pivrchaser 
 as indorsee of the one tendered. — Per Brett, M.K., 
 the seller of such goods should make every 
 reasonable exertion to forward the bills of lading 
 to the purchaser as soon as possible after the 
 shipment, but there is no implied condition in 
 such a contract that the bills of lading shall be 
 delivered to the purchaser in time for him to send 
 them forward so as to be at the port of delivery, 
 either before the arrival of the vessel with tlie 
 goods or before charges are incui-red there in 
 respect of them. Sandebs v. Maclean 
 
 [11 a. B. D. 327 
 
 II. SALE OF GOODa— LIEN. 
 
 1. Stoppage in transitu — Bill of Lading, 
 
 Indorsement of- — Sub-sale.'] The purchaser of 
 goods (shipped by the vendor) consigned them 
 abroad, and indorsed the bill of lading to a bank 
 as security for an advance. Afterwards and 
 before the arrival of the ship the consignees 
 sold the goods "to arrive " to sub-purchasers, to 
 whom they were delivered. The purchaser having 
 become bankrupt, the unpaid vendor gave notice 
 to the master, after the sub-sales but before de- 
 livery and before payment of the freight, to stop 
 the goods in transitu. The consignees remitted 
 the proceeds of the sub-sales to the bank, who 
 after repaying themselves their advance handed 
 to the trustee of the bankrupt the balance, which 
 was less than the original purchase-money: — • 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Court of Ap- 
 peal, that the principles established by In re 
 Westzinthus (5 B. & Ad. 817) and Spalding v. 
 Itudlng (6 Beav. 376 ; 12 L. J. (Ch.) 503) were 
 applicable ; that the right of stoppage in transitu 
 was not at an end when the notice was given; 
 and that the vendor was entitled to the balance 
 after satisfaction of the bank's claim. Kemp v. 
 Falk - - _ 7 App. Cas. 673 
 
 2. Stoppage in transitu — Notice to Coti- 
 
 signees to hold Proceeds of Goods.] The Plaintiffs 
 
( 13Go ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 136C ) 
 
 II. SALE OF GOODS— LIEN— confMraed. 
 were the holders for value of bills dra^Yn on a 
 Liverpool firm, tlie goods having been shipped by 
 B. at New York to a firm at Pernambuco, and the 
 bills of lading being also sent to that firm. — On 
 the 10 th of June, 1879, the Liverpool firm stopped 
 payment, and on the same day B. telegraphed to 
 the Pemambuoo firm as follows : " Having pledged 
 documents and shipments (naming the vessel) 
 hold proceeds for P. & Co. (tlie Plaintiffs)." The 
 ship arrived on tiie Hth of June, but the bills of 
 lading had been previously delivered to the pur- 
 chasers of the goods. — The bills having been dis- 
 honoured by the Liverpool firm, the Plaintiffs 
 brought an action against the Pernambuco firm 
 claiming to have the bills paid out of the proceeds 
 of the goods as having been specifioaliy appro- 
 priated to meet the bills, and also relying on the 
 telegram as having stopped the goods in transitu : 
 SeM, that the telegram to the Pernambuco firm 
 was not effectual to stop the goods in transitu. — 
 Qusere, whether under any circumstances a notice 
 to stop goods in transitu can be effectual, if ad- 
 dressed to the consignees only, and not to the 
 owner or master of the ship wbich carries them. 
 Phelps, Stokes & Co. v. Combek 29 Ch. D. 813 
 
 3. Stoppage in transitu — Termination of 
 
 Transit — VUeriorand Subsequent Transit — Goods 
 stopped in Possession of Forwarding Agent of 
 Vendee.'] When goods have been sent by an un- 
 paid vendor through a carrier to a forwarding 
 agent, who has been appointed by the vendee, and 
 who receives the necessary orders from the vendee 
 and not from the vendor, the transit of the goods 
 upon reaching the hands of the forwarding agent 
 is at an end and the right to stop in transitu is 
 lost, even although the goods may have been in- 
 tended to be sent to an ulterior and subsequent 
 destination. — L. bought certain goods of W. at 
 Bolton, saying nothing as to the place of deli- 
 very. L. afterwards arranged with M. that the 
 goods should be sent by steamer from Garston to 
 Eouen. L. then instructed W. to send the goods 
 to M. at Garston. W. accordingly despatched the 
 goods by railway. The railway company gave 
 notice to M. of the arrival of the goods, and further 
 gave notice that they would hold the goods as 
 warehousemen. L. then filed a petition for the 
 liquidation of his affairs by arrangement ; he had 
 not paid W. for the goods. W. thereupon stopped 
 the delivery of the goods, and M. returned them 
 to him. The trustee in liquidation of L. having 
 brought an action against M. & W. to recover 
 the value of the goods : — Held, that the transit 
 of the goods had ceased when the goods reached 
 Garston and came into the possession of M., as 
 forwarding agent for L., that the right to stop in 
 transitu was then at an end, and that the trustee 
 was entitled to recover the value of the goods. 
 Kendal v. Marshall, Stevens & Co. 
 
 [11 a. B. D. 356 
 
 4. Stoppage in transitu — Termination of 
 
 Transit — Destination — Goods bougM by Commis- 
 sion Agent in England for Foreign Principal — 
 Bankruptcy of Agent.'] A commission agent in 
 London was employed by merchants at Kingston, 
 Jamaica, to buy goods for them in England. He 
 ordered the goods of the manufacturers " for tliis 
 mark,'' there being in the margin of the letter 
 
 II. SALE OF QOOHS—JJES— continued. 
 which gave the order a mark consisting of two 
 letters, with " Kingston, Jamaica," added. The 
 manufacturers knew from previous dealings that 
 this mark had been used by the Jamaica fii-m. 
 The goods were to be paid for by six months' bills 
 drawn by the manufacturers on the commission 
 agent and accepted by him. On the 11th of Sep- 
 tember the commission agent wrote to the manu- 
 facturers, telling them to pack the goods and mark 
 them with the mark previously mentioned, and to 
 forward them to specified shipping agents at. 
 Southampton, for shipment by a particular ship, 
 " advising them with particulars for clearance." 
 On the 13th of September the manufacturers sent 
 the invoice of the goods to the commission agent, 
 telling him that they had that day forwarded the 
 goods by railway to the [shipping agents "with 
 the usual particulars for clearance." The same 
 day the manufacturers wrote to the shipping 
 agents, sending them the particulars of the goods, 
 and adding, " which please forward as directed." 
 The particulars described the goods as marked 
 with the letters originally given by the commis- 
 sion agent, and the words " Kingston, Jamaica," 
 and numbered with specified numbers, but the 
 columns for " consignee " and " destination " were 
 left in blank. The cost of the carriage to South- 
 ampton was paid by the manufacturers. On the 
 14th of September the commission agent sent to 
 the shipping agents particulars of the goods, 
 giving the name of the Jamaica firm as consig- 
 nees, and stating the destination of the goods to 
 be Kingston, Jamaica. The goods were shipped 
 on board the vessel, the bills of lading de- 
 scribing the commission agent as consignor, and 
 the Jamaica firm as consignees. After the ship 
 had sailed, but before her arrival at Jamaica, the 
 commission agent stopped payment, and the 
 manufacturers, who had not been paid for the 
 goods, gave notice to the shipowners to stop them 
 in transitu : — Held, that, as between the commis- 
 sion agent and the manufacturers, the transit was 
 at an end when the goods arrived at Southampton, 
 and that the notice to stop was given too late. — 
 Ex parte Watson (5 Ch. D. 35), distinguished 
 Ex parte Miles. In re Isaacs - 15 ft. B. D. 39 
 
 III. SALE OF GOODS— BESCISSION. 
 
 1, Instalments — Failure as to one Instal- 
 ment—Bight to cancel Contract.] The Defendant 
 in October, 1879, sold to the Plaintiff, and the 
 Plaintiff bought of the Defendant, 2000 tons of 
 pig iron at 428. a ton, to be delivered to the Plain- 
 tiff free on board at maker's wharf, at Middles- 
 borough, "in November, 1879, or equally over 
 November, December, and January next, at 6d. 
 per ton extra." — The Plaintiff faUed to take de- 
 livery of any of the iron in November, but claimed 
 to have delivery of one-third of the iron in De- 
 cember and one-third in January. The Defendant 
 refused to deliver these two-thirds, and gave notice 
 that he considered that the contract was cancelled 
 by the Plaintiff's breach to take any iron in 
 November : — Held, in an action by the Plaintiff 
 for damages, in respect of the Defendant's refusal 
 (Brett, L.J., dissenting), that by the Plaintiff's 
 failure to take one-third of the iron in November, 
 the Defendant was justified in refusing to deliver 
 the other two-thirds afterwards. — The decision in 
 
( 1367 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1368 ) 
 
 in. SALE OF GOODS— HESCISSI0N—con<inuec7. 
 Soare v. Bennie (5 H. & N. 19) held to be right by 
 Bramwell and Baggallay, L.JJ., and wrons by 
 Brett, L.J. Honck v. Muller - 7 ft. B. D. 92 
 
 2. Instalments — Winding-up of Company 
 
 — Set-off of unliquidated Damages against Claim 
 of Company in Winding-up — Counterclaim — Judi- 
 cature Act, 1875 (88 & 39 Vict. c.77),«. 10— Order 
 SIX. r. 3.] The Kespondents bought from the Ap- 
 pellant company 5000 tons of steel of the company's 
 make, to be delivered 1000 tons monthly, commenc- 
 ing January, 1881, payment within three days after 
 receipt of shipping dociuneuts. In January the 
 company delivered part only of that month's in- 
 stalment, and in the beginning of February made 
 a further delivery. On the 2nd of February, 
 shortly before payment for these deliveries became 
 due, a petition was presented to wind up the 
 company. The Eespondents bona fide, under the 
 erroneous advice of their solicitor that they could 
 not without leave of the Court safely pay pending 
 the petition, objected to make the payments then 
 due unless the company obtained the sanction of 
 the Court, which tLey asked the company to 
 obtain. On the 10th of February the company 
 informed the Eespondents that tliey should con- 
 sider the refusal to pay as a breach of contract, 
 releasing the company from any fm-ther obliga- 
 tions. On the 15th of February an order was 
 made to wind up the company by the Court. A 
 correspondence ensued between the Eespondents 
 and the liquidator, in which the Eespondents 
 claimed damages for failure to deliver the January 
 instalment, and a right to deduct those damages 
 from any payments then due ; aud said that they 
 always had been and still were ready to accept 
 such deliveries and make such payments as ought 
 to be accepted and made under the contract, sub- 
 ject to the right of set-off. The liquidator made 
 no further deliveries, and brought an action in 
 the name of the company for the price of the 
 steel delivered. The Eespondents counter-claimed 
 for damages for non-delivery : — jffeM, affirming 
 the decision of the Court of Appeal, that, upon 
 the true construction of the contract, payment for 
 a previous delivery was not a condition precedent 
 to the right to claim the next delivery ; that the 
 Eespondents had not, by postponing payment 
 under erroneous advice, acted so as to shew an 
 intention to repudiate the contract, or so as to 
 release the company from further performance. — 
 That sect. 10 of the Judicature Act, 1875, im- 
 ported into the winding-up of companies the rules 
 as to set-off in bankruptcy; that the Eespon- 
 dents were entitled, after the winding-up order 
 was made, to set off damages for non-delivery 
 against the payments due from them, and to 
 coimter-claim for damages in this action, Mekset 
 Steel and Iron Company d. Natlor, Benzon 
 & Co. 9 ft. B. D. 648 ; 9 App. Cas, 434 
 
 SALE OF GOODS— Bill of lading— Title of first 
 indorsee 6 ft. B. D. 476 ; 7 App. Cas. 691 
 See Trover. 
 
 Breach of contract — Measure of damages 
 
 [16 ft. B, D. 86 
 See .Damages- Contract. 2. 
 
 Contract not to sell— Injunction 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Specific Performance. 3. [836 
 
 SALE OF GOODS — continued. 
 
 Passing of property — Groods free on boards 
 
 Insurable interest 12 ft. B. D. 864 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 263 
 
 See Insubakce, Mabine — iNSntABLE Ik- 
 TEEEST. 
 
 Prevention of performance of condition 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 251 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods, 1. 
 
 Sale note — Signature bv broker — Liability 
 
 [13 ft. B, D. 635, 861 
 See Principal Am) Agent — .-Vgents 
 LlABIUTT. 2, 6. 
 
 Unfinished article — Bankruptcy 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 588 
 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods. 2. 
 SALMON FISHERY ACTS — Inspectors under. 
 
 See Fishery Acts — Statutes. 
 
 SALVAGE. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 Ship — Salvage. 
 
 Practice — Admikaltt — Sal- 
 vage. 
 
 Assistance rendered by pilot — ^Eemunera- 
 
 tiou - - 7 ft. B.D. 129 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. S. 
 
 Damages — Commission for bail — Salvage 
 
 action 9 P. D. 128 
 
 See Damages — Eemoteness. 2. 
 
 Marine insurance - - 9 ft. B. D. 633 ; 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 333 
 
 See Insvr.ance, Marine — Salvage. 
 
 Pa)Tnent of premiums of life policy 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 652 
 
 See Insurance, Life — Assignment. 1. 
 
 Pleading— Statement of claim 8 P. D. 227 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Pleading. 
 2 
 
 Practice — Costs on the higher scale 
 
 [9 P. D. 86 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 5. 
 
 Wrongdoer— Cargo 6 P. D. 127 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Limitation 
 OF Liability. 5. 
 
 SALVAGE MOKEY— Contract with company 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 216 
 
 See Company — Contracts, i. 
 
 SAMPLE — Adulteration - 
 
 See Adulteration. 
 
 - Oft. B.D. 17; 
 i. 5. [9 ft. B. D. 172 
 
 SANCTION OF COTIET— Petition for— Company 
 — Eeduction of capital 23 Ch. D. 642 
 See Company — Eeduction op Capital. 
 3. 
 
 SATISFACTION.— Accord and satisfaction 
 
 [9 ft. B. D. 37 ; 11 ft. B. D. 221 ; 
 [9 App. Cas. 605 
 
 See Accord and Satisfaction. 1, 2. 
 
 Mortgage - 22 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Trusts. 
 3. 
 Payment into Court - 22 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Peactice — Supkejie Court — Pay- 
 ment INTO Court. 1. 
 
( 1369 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1370 ) 
 
 SAVINGS BANK ACTS. 
 
 See Friendly Society— Statutes. 
 
 SCHEME FOB CHABITT. 
 
 See Oases under Chabitt — Manage- 
 ment. 
 
 Ohuroh BuUding Acts - 21 Oh. D. 213 
 
 See Ohuech Buildino Acts. 
 
 SCHEME FOB ENDOWED SCHOOL 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 91, 463 ; 10 App. Cas. 301 
 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 SCHEME OF ABEANGEMENT — Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptoy — ^Annul- 
 ment. 2 — 6. 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 See Bankboptoy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 18S^— Statutes. 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883 13 Q. B, D, 426, 438 ; 
 
 [16 Q. B, T>. 213 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Scheme of Abeanqb- 
 
 MENT. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 SCHOOL— Endowed - 7 App. Cas. 91, 463 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 304 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 SCHOOL BOABD— Action to recover fees— Implied 
 contract - - 12 Q. B. D. 678 
 
 See Element AEY Education Acts — 
 Fees. 2. 
 Attendance order. 
 
 See Cases under Elementaey Educa- 
 tion Acts — Attendance. 
 
 Clerk — Disqualification as guardian of 
 
 parish or union 16 Q. B. D. 382 
 
 See POOB-EATE — GUABDIANS. 
 
 Contract not under seal — Appointment of 
 
 architect — Minutes of board 14 Q. B. D, 
 See CoEPOEATiON. 3. [500 
 
 Home lessons — Unlawful detention of scholar 
 
 [13 Q. B, D. 226 
 
 See Blementaby Education Acts — 
 Home Lessons. 
 
 Non-payment of fees for tuition — Penalty 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 416 
 See Elementaby Education Acts — At- 
 tendance. 7. 
 
 Poor-rate- Eateability - 13 Q, B. D. 929 
 
 See PooB-BATE — Eateable Value. 3. 
 
 SCHOOL OF ABT. 
 
 See Public Libeaey- 
 
 ■Statutes. 
 
 SCOPE OP BUSINESS— Solicitor— Partnership 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 340 
 
 See Paetnebship — Liabilities. 
 
 SCOTCH ASSETS — Administration action in Eng- 
 land 22 Ch. D. 456 ; 9 App. Cas, 34 
 See Executor — Actions. 16. 
 
 SCOTCH CHABITT— Application for scheme 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 827 
 
 See Chaeity — Management. 2. 
 
 SCOTCH DIVOECE— Validity— English wife 
 
 [6 F. D. 35 ; 8 App. Cas. 43 
 See Husband and Wipe — Divorce. 
 
 SCOTCH LAW :— Col. 
 
 I. Bankeuptcy - - 1370 
 
 II. Bill op Exchange 1371 
 
 III. Building Society - 1374 
 
 IV. Conveyance - 1374 
 V. Entail - - 1376 
 
 VI. Habboub - - 1377 
 
 VII. Hbeitable Pbopebty 1379 
 
 Vin. Highway - - 1384 
 
 IX. Husband AND Wipe - 1388 
 
 X. JUEISDICTION - 1392 
 
 XI. Landlord and Tenant - 1393 
 
 XII. Mine . _ _ 1394 
 
 XIII. KuiSANCB - - 1395 
 
 XIV. Paetnebship - - 1395 
 XV. Patent - - 1396 
 
 XVI. Peebagb - 1396 
 
 XVII. Public Bights - - 1396 
 
 XVIII. Railway Company - 1397 
 
 XIX. Eevenue - 1401 
 
 XX. EivBB - - 1402 
 
 XXI. Sale op Goods - 1402 
 
 XXII. Statutory Duty - - 1403 
 
 XXni. Teustee - - 1404 
 
 XXIV. Will - - - 1405 
 
 XXV, Pbaotice - 1405 
 
 I. SCOTCH LAW— BANKEUPTCY. 
 
 Notour Batilcruptey — Statutes 19 & 20 
 
 Vict. c. 79 ; 43 (6 44 Vict. 0. Sir-Sequestration 
 — Cordingent Debt — Banltruptay (Scotland) Act, 
 1856, 88. 14, 31.] The Debtors (Scotland) Act, 
 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 34). s. 6, enacts that in 
 any case in which, under the provisions of this 
 Act, imprisonment is rendered incompetent, notour 
 bankruptcy shall be constituted by insolvency, 
 concurring with a duly executed charge for pay- 
 ment followed by the expiry of the days of 
 charge without payment, or where a charge is 
 not necessary or not competent, by insolvency 
 concurring with an extracted decree for pay- 
 ment, followed by the lapse of the days inter- 
 vening prior to execution without payment having 
 been made.— The Court of Session decerned A. 
 to pay to B., with an execution of charge thereon 
 indorsed, dated the 8th of June, 1883. The days 
 of charge on the said decree expired on the 14th 
 of June, 1883, and payment had not been then 
 made ; but on the 13th of June A. intimated to 
 B. that he had appealed to this House against 
 the decree, and on the 20th of June the usual 
 order of semce in the said appeal granted on the 
 
 18th of June was duly served on B. : Seld, 
 
 affirming the decision of the Court below, that 
 there was no notour bankruptcy under the statute 
 which could not be affected by the appeal.— By 
 letters 0. agreed that any advances he made to 
 A. on I O. U.s should not be an obligation 
 against A. upon which he could sue A., or use 
 diligence against him, but that they should until 
 final adjustment of a joint adventure be retained 
 as vouchers of the current account, « upon which 
 I cannot sue you or use diligence for them ao-ainst 
 you. A. became notour bankrupt, and the 
 petitioning creditor, in a petition for sequestra- 
 
( 1371 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1372 ) 
 
 I. SCOTCH LA.'W—'B&.'SKUVVTCY— continued. 
 tion founded on the debt forming the balance of 
 the accounts current, which he vouched by the 
 
 I. 0. U.S. : — Seld, affirming the decision of the 
 Court below, that the debtor having become 
 notour bankrupt, C. was not barred by the agree- 
 ment from applying for sequestration. — Per Lord 
 Watson : — A contingent debt within the meaning 
 of sect. 14 of the statute of 1856 is a debt which 
 has no existence now, but will only emerge and 
 become due upon the occurrence of some future 
 event. Fleming v. Yeaman 9 App. Cas, 966 
 
 II, SCOTCH LAW— BILL OF EXCHANGE. 
 
 1. . ■ Cheque — Negotiability — Countermand 
 
 of Drawer — Onerous Indorsee — Findings of the 
 Court of Session on Appeal from, Sheriff's Court — 
 Judicature Act of Scotland, 1825 (6 Geo. i, c. 120), 
 s. 40— Bills of Exchange Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. 
 c. 61, 68. 3, 73.] A banter's draft or cheque is 
 substantially a bill of exchange, attended with 
 many, though not all of the privileges of such ; 
 and both in England and Scotland it is as much a 
 negotiable instrument ; consequently, the holder, 
 to whom the property in it has been transferred 
 for value, either by delivery, or by indorsation, is 
 entitled to sue upon it if npon due presentation it 
 is not paid. — Per Lord Blackburn : The defini- 
 tion given in sect. 3 of the Bills of Exchange Act, 
 1882, embraces in it a cheque : and that Act is 
 declaratory of the prior law. — On a Saturday A. 
 granted a cheque on his account with the Bank 
 of S. for, inter alia, £250, crossed blank in favour 
 of B. On the same day B. indorsed the cheque, 
 and paid it into tlie Bank of C, of which he was 
 a customer. The Bank of C. immediately on re- 
 ceipt of the cheque carried the amount to B.'s 
 credit, and thus reduced a debit balance stand- 
 ing against him. On the Monday following A. 
 stopped payment of the cheque at the Bank of 
 S., consequently when the Bank of C. presented 
 it, payment was refused. The Bank of G. sued A. 
 in the Sheriffs Court for the amount. On appeal, 
 the Court of Session found that the cheque was 
 granted to B. to reduce the balance at his debit 
 with the Bank of C. ; that A. agreed the clieque 
 should be so used ; and that in pm'suance of that 
 agreement the cheque was indorsed to the Bank 
 of C. and given to them as cash, and the contents 
 being put to B.'s credit the balance at his debit 
 was thereby reduced : — Held, that in accordance 
 with Maclcay v. Diah (6 App. Cas. 251) : statute 
 1825, 8. 40, this House was limited to the findings 
 of the Court of Session and the record ; that the 
 findings in fact were distinct, intelligible, and 
 within the record ; that it followed from them as 
 a matter of law that the Bank of C. were onerous 
 holders of tlie cheque, and therefore the Bank of 
 S. not having paid the cheque on demand, the 
 Court below was right in holding that A. was 
 liable.— CiiiTis v. Misa (1876, Law Hep. 10 Ex. 
 153; 1 App. Cas. 554) commented on. — De la 
 Chaumette v. Banlc of England (1829, 9 B. & C. 
 208) explained. Dicta of the Judges in Macdonald 
 V. ITnion Bank (1864, 2 Court Sess. Cas. 3rd 
 Series, 963) approved. M'Lean v. Clydesdale 
 Banking Company - 9 App. Cas. 95 
 
 2. Forgery — Estoppel — Conduct — Silence 
 
 — Adoption of Signature.'] A person who knows 
 that a bank is relying upon his forged signature 
 
 II. SCOTCH LAW — BILL OF EXCHANGE — 
 
 continued. 
 to a bill, cannot lie by and not divulge the fact 
 until he sees that the position of the bank is altered 
 for the worse. But there is no principle on which 
 his mere silence for a fortnight from the time when 
 he first knew of the forgery, during which the 
 position of the bank was in no way altered or pre- 
 judiced, can be held to be an admission or adop- 
 tion of liability, or an estoppel. The names of A. 
 and B. appeared on a bill as drawers and indorsers 
 to the B, L. Co. The B. L. Co.'s Inverness bank 
 discounted it for C, who signed it ms acceptor. 
 Tliey had had no previous dealings with A. or B. 
 Being dishonoured when due, notice to that efiect 
 was sent to A. and B., and received late on a 
 Saturday, but they did not communicate with the 
 bank. On the fol lowing Monday, being the 14th 
 of April, C. brought to the B. L. Co. a blank bill 
 with A. and B.'s names as drawers and indorsers, 
 apparently in the same handwriting as the previous 
 bill. It was agreed to accept it as a renewal of 
 the previous bill but for a less amount, the differ- 
 ence being paid in cash by C. Three days before 
 it was due, notice was sent to A. and B., and 
 again when it was dishonoured, and then through 
 the B. ly. Co.'s law agent. A fortnight after the 
 first notice the B. L. Co. were informed for the first 
 time that A. and B.'s signatures were forgeries, and 
 that they declined to pay the amount in the bill. 
 A. alleged that he called on C. on the 14th of April 
 about the first bill, tliat C. admitted that he had 
 forged his name, handed him the bill, and solemnly 
 assured him that it had been taken up by cash ; 
 and so assured he did not think it necessary to 
 communicate with the bank. He admitted that on 
 that day he drank with C. and borrowed £4 of him. 
 He denied positively any knowledge of the second 
 bill until he received the bank notices. C. was 
 convicted of the forgery. The B. L. Co. charged 
 A. with payment of the bill on the ground that he 
 had either authorized the use of his name, or had 
 subsequently adopted, and accredited the bill, and 
 therefore was estopped from denying his liability : 
 Held, reversing the decision of tlie Court below, 
 that on the facts proved A. had neither autho- 
 rized nor assented to the use of his name : nor did 
 the circumstances of the case raise any estoppel 
 against him.— Dictum of Parke, B., as to estoppel 
 in Freeman v. Cooke (2 Ex. 654), approved of. 
 M'Kenzie v. British Linen CosirANY 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 82 
 
 3. Securities for — Bankruptcy — Lien — 
 
 Bills accepted against Goods — Bankruptcy of both 
 Drawer and Acceptor during Curreruy ofBUls^Eng- 
 lish Rule of Ex parte Waring (19 Ves. 345 ; 2 Rose, 
 182) inconsistent with Scotch Bankruptcy System.l 
 Eule of the English bankruptcy system fixed by 
 Ex parte Waring (19 Ves. 345 ; 2 Rose, 182), and 
 as extended in subsequent oases, has not been 
 adopted in Scotland and is inconsistent with 
 Scotch bankruptcy law. — In Scotch practice where 
 B.^ accepts bills drawn by A. against goods left in 
 B.'s hands as security, if bothbecome bankrupt, 
 the bill-holder can rank on the estate of each for 
 the amount of the bills to the effect of recover- 
 ing full payment, but B.'s estate is entitled to 
 be indemnified for any dividends which his estate 
 may be required to pay in respect of the bills, A.'s 
 
( 1373 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1374 ) 
 
 11. SCOTCH LAW — Bill, OF EXCHANGE — 
 
 cinitinuedt 
 estate having a right to the balance of the prooeerla 
 of the goods, after such indemnity has been given. 
 — By agreement between A. and B., the Jatter 
 undertook to employ his works iu heckling and 
 spinning yarns at a specific rate. By the 8th 
 article of the agreement it was provided that all 
 material and yarn at B.'s works should continue 
 to be the sole property of A., subject only to the 
 lien of B. for the cost of manufacture and for ad- 
 vances made by him, or other debts due to him by 
 A. By the 9th article B. became bound to give 
 his acceptances for a sum not exceeding thi-ee- 
 fourths of the value of the raw material and yam 
 held by him on A.'s account, and should bo en- 
 titled to " a right of lien or retention of goods to 
 a value sufficient to cover such acceptances." — 
 Both A. and B. became bankrupt. At the date 
 of the bankruptcy B. was liable as acceptor on 
 bills drawn by A. to the amount of £16,000, and 
 he held goods belonging to A. (since sold fur 
 £4025 14s. 2d!.), on which he had a right of lieu 
 or retention to indemnify him from that liability. 
 The holders of the bills claimed to have the wliole 
 proceeds applied, iu the first place iu payment of 
 the bills, as far as they would extend, so as to ro 
 duoe their amount of proof against the two estates 
 to about £12,000 instead of £16,000, relying upon 
 the English case olExparte Wariiig (19 Ves. 345 ; 
 2 Rose, 182) — B.'s trustees maintained that the 
 bill-holders must continue to rank on both bank- 
 rupt estates for the full amount of the bills, and 
 claimed that all dividends paid by them to the 
 bill-holders out of B.'s estate should be repaid to 
 them from the fund in medio : — Seld, affirming 
 the decision of the Court below, that in view of the 
 agreement, and in accordance with the principles 
 on which the bankruptcy laws have hitherto been 
 administered by the Courts of Scotland, B.'s trus- 
 tees were entitled to the fund in medio, in order 
 that they mighfapply it towards their relief from 
 the payments which they were liable to make in 
 the shape of dividends to the holders of the bills ; 
 (2.) That the balance of the fund, if any, was pay- 
 able to A.'s trustee : — Held, also, if the security 
 were sufficient to cover the whole amount of the 
 acceptances, the rule of JEx parte Waring might 
 be the most convenient practicable way of giving 
 effect to the contract between the drawers and 
 acceptors, but where the securities are insufficient, 
 the rule confers a benefit on the bill-holders to 
 which they are not entitled, at the expense of the 
 acceptors, which was inequitable, nor could it be 
 reconciled with the reasons of Lord Eldon's judg- 
 ment in Exparte Waring. — Per Lord Selbome, L.C. : 
 Assuming that the positive rule of administration 
 which has been accepted as the law in England 
 since the rule of Mx parte Waring was made, must 
 be understood in accordance with the determina- 
 tion in Pflwles v. Sargreavet (3 D. M. & G. 453), 
 still so far as it is a positive rule, and not the ne- 
 cessary result of equitable principles, it cannot be 
 held to be of force in Scotland, merely because it 
 is so in England. — And : The reasons assigned by 
 Lord Cranworth in Fowles v. Hargreaves (3 D. M. 
 & G. 453) to justify the extension of Ex parte 
 Waring to the case of a deficient security are un- 
 satisfactory if applied to such a contract as this, 
 and appear to overlook the fact that, when the 
 
 n. SCOTCH LAW — BILL OP EXCHANGE — 
 
 contijiued. 
 whole benefit of a deficient security is given to 
 the bill-holder, the estatq of the bankrupt nc- 
 ceptor may lose some part of the indemnity, to 
 which by the contract he is entitled. Eoyal 
 Bank op Scotland v. Commercial Bank op 
 Scotland. 7 App, Cas. 366 
 
 III. SCOTCH LAW— BirilDING SOCIETY. 
 
 1. Bond of Corroboration — Ultra vires.] 
 
 A building society advanced in 1876 to A., a 
 member, £1000. A. disponed in security an ex 
 facie absolute disposition of certain subjects, 
 which were already heavily burdened by prior 
 mortgages. In 1879 A.'s estates were seques- 
 trated, and the directors of the society, in order 
 to prevent a sale of the subjects at an alleged 
 loss, granted B. a bond of corroboration guaran- 
 teeing the payment of his prior mortgage. — In 
 1882 an order for the voluntary winding-up of the 
 society was made, and the liquidators instituted 
 this action concluding for reduction of the bond 
 of corroboration granted to B. as being ultra vires 
 of the directors and in violation of the rules and 
 constitution of the society : — Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Court below, that the bond was 
 ultra vires, being a transaction not authorized by 
 the rules, and not incidental to the conduct of the 
 society's business. Small v. Smith 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 119 
 
 IV. SCOTCH LAW— CONVEYANCE. 
 
 1. Construction — Heritage — Mid-supe- 
 riority — Meaning of Clause ''All other lands 
 and otliers," following and concluding a Specific 
 Enumeration and Description of Separate Subjects 
 — Wlien Reference to prior Letters to control 
 Language of Dispositive Clause not allowed — 
 Anibiguitij.J According to the Law of Scotland 
 the execution of a formal conveyance, even when 
 it expressly bears to be an implement of a pre- 
 vious contract, supersedes that contract in toto, 
 and the conveyance thenceforth becomes the 
 sole measure of the rights and liabilities of the 
 contracting parties ; and a reference to an ante- 
 cedent agreement is not warranted either by the 
 fact that the subjects conveyed are described iu 
 general , terms in the dispositive clause of the 
 deed, or by the fact that, in .the narrative, of the 
 deed, the parties are represented as having agreed 
 upon certain points, which were presumably 
 matters of stipulation, iu any written agreement 
 which preceded its execution. Although sub- 
 sidiary clauses of a deed may be legifimately 
 referred to for the purpose of solving any ambi- 
 guity which is raised by the terms of the dis- 
 positive clause, yet if the terms of the disposi- 
 tive clause are per se sufficient to give a right, 
 they cannot be controlled by a reference to the 
 other clauses of the disposition. Where one of a 
 set of heads in the dispositive clause of a disposi- 
 tion is expressed in general terms and concludes a 
 specific enumeration and description of separate 
 subjects, prima facie, and unless the contrary ap- 
 pear, it must bo presumed that it was merely 
 intended to carry rights ejusdem generis with 
 those previously described and disponed A com- 
 pleted disposition, dated 1879, and made inter alia 
 by A. in favour of B. of certain superiorities pro- 
 ceeded on the narrative that it was granted in 
 
( 1375 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1376 ) 
 
 IV. SCOTCH LAW— CONVEYANCE— confmwefJ. 
 consideration of an agreement between the parties. 
 It conveyed to B. the dominium directum of 
 separate parcels of land by five clauses. Of the 
 land described in four the dominium utile had 
 been conveyed by A. and his predecessors at 
 various dates before 1873 out and out to the G. 
 and S. W. Eailway Company. None of these 
 conveyances was of the nature of -a feu right, and 
 no mid-superiority was thereby created, and con- 
 sequently tlie railway company held the lands 
 tljereby disponed (sect. 126 Lands Glauses Con- 
 solidation (Scotland) Act, 1845), under those who 
 were the immediate superiors at the dates of the 
 several conveyances in their favour. The 5th 
 clause was, inter alia, in these terms : " And all 
 other lands and others in the county of Ayr, pai-ts 
 of the said estates of Balloohmyle, .... and have 
 been disponed by me," &c., to the said G. and S. W. 
 Eailway Company. In 1878 A. had disponed an 
 acre of land to the same railway for a reservoir, 
 together with the servitude right of conveying 
 water from it by means of pipes through his in- 
 tervening lands to the railway station. That deed 
 declares that the said acre of land and servitude 
 are to be holden of the disponer in feu farm fee 
 and heritage for ever ; and the lands thus feued 
 are described as parts of " all and whole the lands 
 and tenandry of BaUochmyle and others, b'jing 
 the lands and others particularly described in a 
 writ of clare constat granted by A. in favour of 
 himself in 1861." In 1863 A. had completed his 
 title as superior underthe Crown of "all and whole 
 the lands and tenandry of BaUochmyle." In 1864 
 he made up a feudal title to the dominium utile of 
 these lands by obtaining from himself, as hi.^ own 
 immediate superior, the writ of dare referred to. 
 The.se several estatesof superiority and fee remain 
 vested in A. under separate titles. The effect, 
 therefore, of the feu disposition of 1878 was to split 
 the dominium utile of the acre of groimd and its ac- 
 companying servitude rights, as vested in A. by 
 the writ of 1864, into two estates ; one an estate of 
 fee belonging to the railway company, and the 
 other a subordinate (yet independent) estate of 
 superiority, belonging to A., interposed between 
 his vassal's estate of fte and his own estate of 
 superiority under the Crown. B., under the above 
 oth clause, claimed the mid-superiority of the acre 
 of ground feued in 1878 to the railway company. 
 \. adduced proof to shew tliat the land in question 
 was misdescribed in the deed of 1878, that it did 
 not " belong to the lands and tenandry of BaUoch- 
 myle," but was part and parcel of other lands ; he 
 also sought to refer to previous letters to shew 
 what the contract was : — Held, afiirming the judg- 
 ment of the Court below, but not on the same 
 reasoning, that the evidence was not sufficient to 
 discredit the description of the lands, the onus 
 probandi being on A. ; that there was not in the 
 dispositive clause any ambiguity of expression 
 such as to necessitate or justify a reference to the 
 other clauses of the deed or to the previous letters 
 for aid in its interpretation ; but the terras of that 
 clause did not sustain the claim made by B. Lee 
 V. Alexandbe - - 8 App. Cas. 853 
 
 2. Constmotion — Similar restrictive Con- 
 
 ditiom appearing in Feu Charters from Common 
 Superior — What necessary to give each Feuar a 
 
 IV. SCOTCH LAW— CONVEYANCE— confa'-'iaed. 
 
 Title to enforce them — Suing with anotlier Person's 
 Consent and Concurrence — Strangers to the Action 
 — Practice — Amendment of the Becord — 31 & 32 
 Yict. c. 100, s. 29.] It is settled by a series of deci- 
 sions in tbe law of Scotland that where it appears 
 that the restrictions in a feu contract are entered 
 into for the benefit of other feus, either already 
 existing, or to be created by the superior thereafter, 
 the restrictions may be enforced by each co-feuar 
 as far as his interest is concerned. But the fact of 
 several feuara of neighbouring plots of buUding 
 land in the same street, holding from a common 
 superior, does not, by itself, entitle one of those 
 feuars to claim the benefit of restrictions contained 
 in the feu contract of another, unless some mutu- 
 ality and community of rights and obligations is 
 otherwise established between them, which can 
 only be done by express stipulations in their re- 
 spective contracts with the sTaperior, or by reason- 
 able implication from reference in both contracts 
 to a common plan or scheme of building, or by 
 mutual agreement between the feuars themselves. 
 — A.'s author was a party to a feu contract of a 
 piece of land upon which a house was already built, 
 and he was t iken bound not to build any other 
 buildings on the said piece of land except offices. 
 The adjoining pieces of land were feued off, some 
 being taken not to build and others having that 
 right. It was not indicated in A.'s feu that the 
 restrictions were imposed for the benefit of the 
 co-feuars, beyond the facts that the feus were all 
 given out nearly at the same time ; that some of 
 the conditions inserted in the feus are similar to 
 each other ; and that the houses being buCt in 
 a hquare, produce a considerable degree of uni- 
 formity. — S. and C, proprietors of a neighbouring 
 feu, sought to prevent A. building a carriage 
 show room on the ground intervening between 
 his house and the street of the square, and raLjed 
 an interdict with the " consent and concurrence " 
 of the superior ; there was no condescendence or 
 pleas in law for the superior : — PCeld, reversing 
 the decision of the Court below (1), that the 
 restrictive conditions as to building in A.'s feu 
 contract wa.s not in any sense jus quiBsitum 
 tertio ; and (2), that the superior was not a party 
 complainant in tbe action for }iis own separate 
 interfc.it ; and therefore B. and C. being strangers 
 to A.'s contract, A. ought to have been assoilzied 
 from the action. — Persons who have no title in 
 their own persons to raise and iusiat in an action, 
 cannot have tlie right to sue, where nil, validated 
 by the consent and concurrence of the party to 
 whom alone such right or title of action belong.— 
 
 B. and C, owners of an adjoining fcu, raised an 
 action with "consent and concurrence" of the 
 common superior to enforce building restrictions 
 contained in A.'s feu contract : — Held, that B. and 
 
 C. were strangers to the action, and therefore had 
 no title to sue.— See remarks of Lord Watson as 
 to the qucition of the importation of new parties 
 into the suit under the Court of Sessions Act, 
 ISG.j (31 & 32 Met. c. 100). Hislop v. Leckie 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 660 
 
 V. SCOTCH LAW— ENTAIL. 
 
 — — Trust to make strict Entail— DegiznaWon 
 to TTcirs Khatsocrcr — Construction of.J A. in his 
 fiaal general tettlfctnent dated 1853, revoking all 
 
( 1377 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1378 ) 
 
 V. SCOTCH LAW— 'ESTAIJ,— continued. 
 prior deeds bo far as inconsistent therewith, con- 
 veyed his whole estates to ti-ustees with directions 
 to execute a deed of strict entail of his lands " to 
 and in fayour of B. and his heirs whatsoever, whom 
 failing; to and in favour of 0. and his heirs what- 
 soever," whom failing to persons thereafter to be 
 nominated by him (the truster), always exclud- 
 ing heirs portioners, and failing such nomination, 
 then to "my own heirs whatsoever and their 
 assignees ;" but declaring that any member of a 
 family in possession of the entailed estate of M. 
 should be excluded ; and also the descendants of 
 the body of his sister Charlotte. B. and 0. were 
 A.'s natural sons. C. predeceased A., unmarried. 
 A. died without executing any deed of nomina- 
 tion of fresh heirs. His trustees executed, in 
 1859, a deed in the form of an entail conveying 
 the estates to B., exactly in terms of the destina- 
 tion in A.'s deed, leaving out C. B. treated the 
 estates as fee-simple, and left them iq certain 
 •directions on his death without issue. — Thereupon 
 the heir-at-law of A. (his brother's son) raised an 
 Action against A.'s trustees and others concluding 
 for reduction of the deed of 1859, and all subse- 
 -quent writs, on the ground, inter alia, that the 
 directions as to entailing the estates contained in 
 his uncle's settlements had not been carried out 
 by the trustees in respect that the said deed was 
 not a valid entail under the Act of 1685 ; and for 
 a declaration that the trustees are bound to exe- 
 tute a new deed of entail in favour of himself as 
 institute and of several other descendants of A.'s 
 hrother and sisters as substitute heirs of entail : 
 or alternatively, assuming the deed of 1859 was 
 executed in terms of the truster's intentions, to 
 have it found that it was an effectual entail, and 
 that he was entitled to succeed as heir of entail 
 next in succession to B. He relied on the various 
 prior deeds and settlements, which he contended 
 should be read along with the deed of 1853, which 
 if done, made it clear that A.'s intention was to 
 limit the class of heirs whatsoever of B. to heirs 
 of the body, and also by the term " my own heirs 
 whatsoever," he intended to designate his nearest 
 heir of line and the heirs of the body of such heir, 
 "whom failing his own heirs whatsoever : — Seld, 
 affirming the decision of the Court below, that the 
 <leed of entail of 1859 had been executed in con- 
 formity with the terms of A.'s final trust, the 
 terms of which were clear and unambiguous. 
 That the Pursuer had failed to establish that he 
 ■either possessed or was entitled to claim the 
 character of an heir of provision and tailzie under 
 the entail directed by the trust deed of 1853 : 
 that the only ulterior destination being to the 
 truster's own ''heirs whatsoever and assignees" 
 the entail came to an end in the person of B., and 
 he could dispose of the estates as he pleased. 
 That it was competent to read all the prior deeds 
 to see how far any of them were to receive effect, 
 along with his final trust settlement — but not 
 competent to use them to put a construction on 
 words bearing a clear and well understood tech- 
 nical meaning and which they do not bear if the 
 deed be construed by itself. Goedon v. Gobdon 
 
 [7 App. Gas. 713 
 
 VI. SCOTCH LAW— HARBOUE. 
 
 1, Compulsory Fnrohase of Land — Har- 
 
 VI. SCOTCH LAW— HAEBOinSl — continued, 
 hour Trustees — Powers under Special Act — Com- 
 pensation — Invalidity of Agreement purporting to 
 restrain Powers over Land taken — Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation (Scotland) Act, 1845, ss. 48 and 61.] 
 Where the Legislature confers powers on any 
 body, whether one which is seeking to make a 
 profit for shareholders, or one acting solely for 
 the public good, to take lands compulsorily for a 
 particular purpose, it is on the ground that the 
 using of that land for that purpose will be for 
 the public good ; and a contract purporting to 
 bind such a body and their successors not to use 
 those powers is void. Harbour trustees, consti- 
 tuted for the management and improvement of 
 a public harbour by a special Act, which incor- 
 porated the Lands Clauses Consolidation (Scot- 
 land) Act, 1845, were empowered to take lands 
 scheduled (which included that part of O.'s land 
 having an unrestricted frontage to the liarbour) for 
 the undertaking. While the question of compen- 
 sation to O. for his land was before the arbiter the 
 trustees lodged a minute agreeing that the con- 
 veyance should restrict their use of the ground 
 taken so as not to interfere with the access from 
 the remaining property of O. to the harbour. To 
 this minute 0. did not assent. The arbiter found 
 £4900 payable by the trustees as compensation 
 for an unrestricted use, or £2786 if it were com- 
 petent for the trustees to bind themselves and 
 their successors by the above-mentioned minute. 
 0. raised an action for declarator of an absolute 
 purchase and unrestricted right in the subject, 
 and for payment of the larger sum: — JSeld. 
 affirming the decision of the Court below, that 
 the trustees had power under their special Act, 
 now or at any future time, to make erections on 
 the piece of ground taken, which would effectually 
 destroy the frontage of O.'s remaining property to 
 the harbour ; secondly, that it was not competent 
 to the ti-ustees to dispense with future exercise of 
 their powers by themselves and their successors. — 
 Per Lord Blackburn : If the trustees could bind 
 themselves and their successors by the agreement, 
 and that agreement would prevent O.'s land 
 from being injuriously affected, O., by refusing 
 his assent, could not get compensation for the 
 injury lie might have prevented. Atb Haeboub 
 Trustees v. Oswald - 8 App. Cas. 623 
 
 2. ^ Dues leviable — Timber floated in 
 
 Chains — Usage and contemporanea expositio — 
 Clyde Navigation Consolidation Act, 1868 (21 & 
 22 Vict. c. cxlix.), ss. 98, 99, Sahed. JI.] Where 
 a statute gave trustees appointed for the im- 
 provement of a navigable river and harbour 
 power to charge dues on all timber " shipped or 
 unshipped within the harbour or river": — Held, 
 that, to attach a tow-rope to a log of timber or a 
 number of logs loosely connected at one of the 
 ends for the purpose of towing them, is not to 
 "ship" those logs, and that to oast off the tow- 
 rope is not to '• unship " them. — Qv£ry, whether 
 a raft of logs so constructed as to be capable of 
 being navigated can be said to be " unshipped " 
 when on reaching its destination it is taken to 
 pieces and landed.— By an Act dated 1770, the 
 Clyde trustees had power to charge rates on " all 
 timber or wood either carried in boats or other 
 vessels, or floated in and upon the said Biver 
 
 2 Y 
 
( 1379 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1380 ) 
 
 VI. SCOTCH LAW—RKRBOVR—couUnued..^ 
 Clyde within those points aforesaid" (that is 
 above Dumbuclf). By a statute in 1840 the Clyde 
 trustees' jurisdiction was extended down the 
 river to Newark Castle, and the duties were im- 
 posed by that Act on " all goods carried or con- 
 veyed on the river." By the statute in force at 
 present, dated 1858, 8,11 the prior Acts are totally 
 repealed. By sect. 75 the limits of the river are to 
 include the whole channel or waterway forming 
 the harbour, and the whole works within certain 
 given limits, and the whole lands acquired for 
 the purposes of such works, or occupied by the 
 trustees in connection with the navigation of the 
 said river. By sect. 98 it is enacted that the 
 trustees are to have power to levy on goods 
 " shipped or unshipped " in tbe river or harbour 
 the rates specified in the first and second columns 
 of part 1 of Schedule H. Schedule H. is headed 
 " Rates on goods conveyed upon or shipped or 
 unshipped in the river or harbour." In 1876 the 
 trustees under their Act of 1858 sought to levy 
 rates on timber in logs, which were taken out of 
 the vessels importing them from abroad outside 
 the jurisdiction of the trustees, and then floated 
 or towed chained together over the old, shallow 
 channel of the river, to storing ponds situate 
 within the trustees' jurisdiction. In a note for 
 suspension and interdict at the instance of the 
 owners : — Held, affirming the decision of the Court 
 below, that the word "river"' as it occurs in 
 sect. 98 comprehended the whole waters of the 
 Clyde, within the limits defined in sect. 75, and 
 cannot be restricted to those portions of the 
 channel which have been artificially deepened ; 
 but that the statute of 1858 confers no authority 
 on the trustees to levy rates on timber towed in 
 the manner mentioned. — See Lords Blackburn 
 (p. 670) and Watson (p. 673) as to the value of 
 contemporanea expositio of an Act so late as 1858. 
 Trustees ow Clyde Navigation v. Laird 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 658 
 
 VII, SCOTCH lAW— HERITABLE PROPERTY. 
 Teu Duties — Superior and Vassal — Be- 
 
 strictions in Feu Charter not to sell or retail any 
 kind of Malt Liquor in Houses erected on the Feu 
 — Belevancy — Interest.'] A restriction in a feu 
 charter, purporting to bind not only the original 
 contracting feuar and his heirs, but also liis 
 assignee or any tenant or possessor of the houses 
 to be erected on the feu, and power to enforce 
 or dispense with it, is given not to the disponcr 
 or his heirs, but to the superior for the time 
 being; the restriction, unless repugnant to the 
 nature of the estate taken by the feuar or to 
 public policy, is a condition of the feu, and runs 
 with the land against singular successors. — In all 
 cases of restrictive conditions in a feu charter, 
 the superior must have power to enforce them, or 
 to dispense with them according to his own will 
 or not, whether the charter is so expressed or not, 
 unless the benefit of them and the right to enforce 
 them are communicated to other feuars, — A re- 
 straint against carrying on the trade of a publican 
 is as good in law, and as capable of running with 
 the land, as a restraint against carrying on any 
 other business; and the fact that restrictions are 
 placed by statute upon the freedom of that parti- 
 cular trade constitutes no reason why a private 
 
 VIL SCOTCH lAW — HERITABLE PROPERTY 
 
 continued, 
 contract to prevent it from being carried ob, with- 
 out the consent ofthe superior, should: be held in- 
 valid or contrary to -law. — Feu rights of land in 
 Grangemouth, a town of 5000 inhabitants, con- 
 tained restrictions against retailing malt or spiri- 
 tuous liquors, or allowing the same to be sold or 
 retailed within the buildings erected on the 
 feus without the superior's permission. The 
 superior sought an interdict to prohibit the De- 
 fenders, the feuars, from continuing to sell any 
 kind of malt or spirituous liquors, &c., alleging 
 that the whole of the town was built on ground 
 held of him as superior ; that he was proprietor 
 of certain houses in the heart of the town at a 
 rental of £750 ; that he had still a large extent 
 of ground in and adjacent to the town available 
 for feuing, and that his mansion-house was within 
 half a mile of the town ; and that these proper- 
 ties w>ere damaged by the existence of so many 
 public-houses. "The Defenders pleaded no interest 
 to sue the action, acquiescence, and prescriptive 
 use. On the question of relevancy: — Held, re- 
 versing the decision of the Court below, first, 
 that the restrictions sought to be imposed were 
 not personal, or inconsistent with public policy, 
 nor repugnant to the Pursuer's estate, they relat- 
 ing to the use and employment of buildings 
 erected on the land; secondly, that the interest 
 to sue (he action was connected with patrimonial 
 rights, and that the superior's case, as shewn on 
 the record, was sufficient to entitle him to the 
 relief which he prayed : — Held, also, that it was 
 the j)lain intention ofthe contracting parties that 
 the superior should determine, whether there 
 are to be public-houSes upon any of the feus, and 
 if so, their number and position, and accordingly 
 the superior in gi'anting his license to certain 
 feuars to sell liquor was in no sense departing 
 from or waiving the prohibition. But it was a 
 different question in all or some of the eases, 
 whether the Pursuer might not be seeking to 
 enforce the restrictions under circumstances, or 
 in a manner, which ought to deprive him of the 
 assistance of the Court, there being facts averred, 
 from which, if proved or admitted, it might be 
 legally inferred that successive superiors had so 
 acquiesced in the feuars' use of their premises for 
 the sale of liquor that the prohibition must be 
 held to have been unconditionally discharged. 
 But the record leaving it open to the superior to 
 adduce evidence which might give a different 
 colour to these facts, the parties must proceed to 
 proof before the questions of acquiescence and 
 waiver, and prescriptive use, could be decided. — 
 Per Lord Watson : Though Tailors of Aherdmn 
 V. Coutts (1 Eob. App. Cas. 296) does determine, 
 that the superior caimot enforce a restriction on 
 property, unless he has some legitimate interest ; 
 that case does not lay down the doctrine, that an 
 action at the superior's instance, which merely 
 sets forth the condition of his feu right and its 
 violation by the vassal must be dismissed as irre- 
 levant, because the Pursuer has failed td allege 
 interest. The vassal in consenting to be bound 
 by the restriction concedes the interest of the 
 superior, and therefore the onus is upon the 
 vassal, who is pleading a release from his con- 
 tract, to prove that any legitimate interest which 
 
( 1381 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1382 ) 
 
 VII. SCOTCH LAW— HEEITABEE PEOPIRTT 
 
 — continued. 
 the Pursuer may originally have had in maintain- 
 ing the restriction has ceased to exist.— Tailors of 
 Aberdeen v. Coutis (1 Rob. App. Gas. 296) followed. 
 Eael of Zetland v. Hislop 7 App. Cas. 427 
 
 3. Liferent and Fiar — TTnworhed Coal 
 
 Mines — Liferenlrix not entitled to Profits though 
 opened during her Life — Testator's Intention — 
 Trusts ^Scotland) Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 97), 
 8. 2, sub-s. 3.] A testator directed his trustees to 
 pay to his -wife " the whole annual produce and 
 rents of the residue of his estates both heritable 
 and moveable." Coal and iron mines were leased 
 by the testator before his death. His trustees 
 afterwards leased others. In a question whether 
 the wife was entitled to the rents of those opened 
 after the testator's death : — Held, affirming tlie 
 decision of the Court below, that in law she was 
 not entitled ; and that there was nothing in the 
 trust deed which shewed that she was to have 
 such a benefit :— Also, the Trusts (Scotland) Act 
 of 1867 was merely an Act to facilitate adminis- 
 tration without disturbing the interests of the 
 beneficiaries under the trust, i.e., it enables trus- 
 tees who also have the testator's authority to let 
 minerals, to let them for the customary period 
 instead of a lease for an uncertain period, namely, 
 a tenancy for life. — Whether the power to let 
 minerals on long leases under sub-sect. 3, sect. 2, 
 of the Act includes a power to open up and let 
 new. mineral fields not decided. Campbell ij. 
 Wakdlaw 8 App. Cas. 641 
 
 3. Personal and Eeal Property — Privileges 
 
 stipulated for in Conveyance of Heritable Subjects 
 — Jus quiesitum tertio — Theatre.'] Trustees act- 
 ing for the shareholders or rentallers of a theatre 
 called the Queen's Theatre and Opera House, 
 who had obtained a feu right to the site, granted 
 in 1858 a disposition of the ground and buildings 
 to one J. B., subject, inter alia, to the real burden 
 of a perpetual annuity of £2 per share to each 
 rentaller of the said Queen's Theatre and Opera 
 House, and to the successors or assignees of 
 them; and it was further declared that each of 
 the said rentallers, or the assignee or successors 
 of such, should at all time be entitled, inter alia, 
 to free admission to the auditorium of the said 
 Queen's Theatre and Opera House ; also declaring 
 that J. B. should not convert the said theatre to 
 any other use ; and that he should keep it open 
 for performance six months in each year. There 
 was no stipulation as to insurance of the theatre 
 or as to the rebuilding of it in case of destruction 
 by fire or otherwise. — In 1865 the theatre was 
 entirely destroyed by fire, and was rebuilt by 
 J. B.'s trustee and called by another name. — In 
 1875 it was again entirely burnt down and again 
 rebuilt.— From 1865 to 1879 the theatre, under 
 the new name, was twice sold, but in each case 
 the conveyance was granted subject to the " real 
 burdens, conditions, provisions, declarations, and 
 others," specified in the original disposition of 
 1858, and especially under the burden of pay- 
 ment of the annuities, to the rentallers, and of 
 allowing " these parties the privileges to which 
 , ithey are entitled." Tlie privilege of free admis- 
 . sion was enjoyed by. the rentallers for fourteen 
 years after the destruction of the first theatre. 
 
 VII. SCOTCH LAW— HERITABLE PEOPEETY 
 
 — continued. 
 But in 1879 disputes arose as to the validity 
 of the rentallers' right to, inter alia, the privilege 
 of free admission. The trustees maintained that 
 the rentallers were entitled under the disposition 
 of 1858 and the succeeding conveyances to the 
 same privileges in the new theatre which they 
 had in the first : — Held, aifirming the decision of 
 the Court below, that the privileges conferred on 
 the rentallers by the originali dispositions — otter 
 than the payment of the annuities, which was 
 constituted a real burden — rested only on the 
 personal obligation of the original disponee, and 
 were confined to the theatre then in existence ; 
 and that the subsequent deeds to which the 
 rentallers were not parties, were not intended to, 
 and did not, confer on them any new right. 
 Scott «. Howard 6 App. Cas. 295 
 
 4, Succession — English Will devising 
 
 English and Scotch Lands in tail male. Effect as 
 to Scotch Heritage — Construction — Intention of 
 Testator — Titles to Land Consolidation (Scotland} 
 Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 101), ss. 19, 20;] Where 
 a testator, in a foreign will, expresses himself in 
 technical language of the place where made 
 and where he is domiciled, to obtain the inten- 
 tion the technical terms must be interpreted by 
 the meaning put on them in the system of law 
 from which they are borrowed. — By the common 
 law of Scotland the actual intention of the maker 
 of any validly executed settlement of moveables 
 received effect when duly ascertained; and now 
 by the Titles to Land Consolidation (Scotland," 
 Act, 1868, the Scotch law — which would pre- 
 viously have rejected as inoperative a foreign 
 will dealing with Scotch lands not executed with 
 all the required formalities; and not expressed 
 in appropriate terms of de presenti conveyance — 
 must, so far as may be practicable with the prin- 
 ciples of that law, give effect to the intention as. 
 expressed in the will, just the same as if it dealt . 
 with moveables and not heritage. The technical, 
 rule Of Scotch law applicable to moveable and 
 immoveable property, that a gift or devise to a., 
 parent in liferent, and after his death to his un- 
 born or unnamed children in fee, confers a fee ■ 
 on the parent and a spes sucoessionis only on the 
 children — (^Frog's Creditors, Mor. 4262) — is ex- 
 cluded by anything in the gift itself, shewing ■ 
 beyond doubt that the intention was to give ■ 
 nothing more than a life interest to the parent. 
 A testator, domiciled in England, who died pos- 
 sessed of lands in England and Scotland, left a 
 will executed according to the forms of English 
 law, by which he devised all his lands as con- 
 sisted of " freehold of inheritance" to the use of 
 his eldest son, E. F. S., and his assigns for hia 
 life " without impeachment of waste," and after 
 the death of E. F. S. to the use of the first and 
 every other son of E. F. S. successively, accord- 
 ing to their respective seniorities in tail male, 
 with remainders over. Under a subsequent claiise , 
 E. F. S. took as residuary legatee all propel'ty 
 not otherwise disposed of. Subsequent to 'the' 
 date of the will children were born to E. F. S. 
 He claimed the Scotch estate as vested in him. 
 absolutely, or alternatively that the estate be- 
 longed to him as residuary legatee or as heir-at- 
 
 2 Y 2 
 
( 1383 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1384 ) 
 
 VII. SCOTCH LAW— HERITABLE PEOPEETY 
 
 — continued. 
 law. This claim was opposed on behalf of his 
 infant children : — Held, affirming the decision of 
 the Court below, that under the statute of 1868 
 the law of Scotland must, so far as practicable, 
 give effect to the intention of the testator, as 
 gathered from the whole context interpreted by 
 English law; and (2) that undoubtedly the in- 
 tention of the testator was that E. F. S. should 
 take a life interest only ; and that of the fee the 
 Scotch estates should go to the eldest son of 
 E. F. S., and the others nominated. (3) That 
 the intention, so far as the separate destination of 
 the liferent and fee of the estate, could be carried 
 out substantially without mconsistency with the 
 practice or policy of the law of Scotland, — 
 the rule being valeat quantum valere potest. 
 (4) That a registrable title fell to be made up in 
 accordance with such intention; but that the 
 technical way in which effect might be given to 
 the intention by the Scotch law was immaterial. 
 —See Lord Watson as to the non-vesting of the 
 beneficial fee until the death of the lifereuter, 
 p. 602. Studd v. Cook 8 App. Cas. 577 
 
 6. Superior and Vassal — Irritancy 6b 
 
 non solutum canonem — Statute 1597, c. 250 — 
 Extinction of Sub-feu held under defaulting Vassal 
 — Bight of Sub-feuar to purge the Irritancy.'] An 
 action of declarator of tinsel of a feu ob non 
 solutum canonem is an irredeemable adjudication 
 of the feu in favour of the superior ; but the sub- 
 feuar can protect himself from eviction by paying 
 the superior's full preferable debt, and when he 
 does so he has a claim of relief pro rata against 
 all the owners of the land on which the debt is 
 charged. — It is provided by the Scotch Statute 
 1597, c. 250, that the vassal shall lose the feu of 
 his lands by his failure to pay the feu duty for 
 two years together, in like manner as if an irritant 
 clause to that effect had existed in his feu con- 
 tract. — By feu contract A. disponed in feu farm 
 to B. and C. five acres of building land, with an 
 annual reddendo of £480. The contract of feu 
 contained the express declaration " that in case 
 at any time two years' feu duty shall be fully 
 resting, owing and unpaid together, then this 
 present feu right, and all that may follow hereon, 
 shall, in the option of the superior, become void 
 and null. B. and C. divided the lands between 
 tliem, and each granted, inter alia, sub-feus 
 (narrating in the deeds conveying the land the 
 above-mentioned feu contract) of portions of the 
 five acres to D. and E. respectively. — Upwards of 
 four years' feu duties became due. A. raised an 
 action of declarator of irritancy ob non solutum 
 canonem. D. and E. contended that the irritancy 
 must be confined to the mid-superiorities created 
 by B. and C. and had no effect on the portions of 
 land sub-fued on their tendering the sub-feu duty 
 reserved on each : — Held, reversing the decision 
 appealed from, but affirming Gassels v. Lamb 
 (12 Court Sess. Cas. 4th Series, 722), that the 
 superior's right was not merely a charge upon the 
 mid-superiorities, but a right to annul the charter 
 of his feuars and all sub-feus made by them, to 
 the effect of resuming the full beneficial possession 
 of the lands feued. — Held, also, that the circum- 
 stances did not warrant the conclusion that the 
 
 VII. SCOTCH LiW— HEEITABIE PEOPEETY 
 
 — continued. 
 superior had consented to the sub-infeudation. 
 San deman ■». Scottish Pbopebtt Society 
 
 [10 App. CaE. 553 
 
 VIII. SCOTCH LAW— HIGHWAY. 
 
 1. Power of Magistrates in the exercise of 
 
 Administration to make Road over Land held for 
 Public Recreation — Constitution of new Bights and 
 Burdens — Alienation of Solum — Costs — Alteration 
 of Interlocutor.'] Magistrates for a burgh held 
 the links from time immemorial for behoof of the 
 inhabitants, and, inter alia, subject to the obliga- 
 tion of preserving the same for the purposes of 
 the game of golf and for the recreation and amuse- 
 ment of the inhabitants. They had from time to 
 time exercised powers of administration and 
 management over the links, such as the letting 
 of the pasturage, the regulation of bleaching 
 clothes on the links, the construction of a sloping 
 walk, and the levelling and filling up other por- 
 tions of the ground. The magistrates proposed 
 to make a macadamised road along the outside 
 boundary of the links, where that boundary ad- 
 joins certain feus let off by them in 1820, which 
 feus are no longer, in point of law, part of the 
 links. — P., an inhabitant of the burgh and mem- 
 ber of the principal golfing club there, and others, 
 the Appellants, sought by note of suspension and 
 interdict to restrain the magistrates either from 
 making the road or from permitting any road to 
 be used in that place for wheel traffic •.—Held, 
 substantially affirming the decision of the Judges 
 of the Court below, but altering their interlocutor, 
 that the evidence proved that the proposed road 
 would have no substantial interference with the 
 obligation of golfing, &c., and that the road might 
 be reconciled with its due observance; but that 
 it was inconsistent with that obligation for the 
 magistrates to alienate any part of the solum of 
 the ground in question, or to abdicate their ex- 
 isting powers of administration either by grant- 
 ing private easements to particular individuals, 
 or, having made the road, to create a public 
 easement by dedicating it to the public. — Held, 
 also that the Eespondents were not entitled to 
 their costs in the appeal on the grounds that the 
 alteration made in the interlocutor of the Court 
 below was wanted to give complete security to 
 the interests represented by the Appellants ; and 
 because the attitude of both sets of Eespondents 
 before action brought was such as to justify the 
 institution of some action for the purpose of ob- 
 taining the declarations now obtained. Patek- 
 soN V. Pkovost, &c., of St. Andrews 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 833 
 
 2. Prescription — Non-user for a long Pe- 
 riod — Presumption — Scotch Law.] According to 
 the law of Scotland, the constitution of a public 
 right of way does not depend on any legal fiction, 
 but upon the fact of user by the public as matter 
 of right, continuously and without interruption 
 for forty years.— And the amount of user must be 
 such as rnight have been reasonably expected, if 
 the road in dispute had been an undoubted public 
 highway. — Also, the user must be a user of the 
 whole road as a means of passage from one ter- 
 minus to the other, and must not be such a user 
 
( 1385 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1386 ) 
 
 Vin. SCOTCH LAW— ■BIQKWAY— continued. 
 as can be reasonably ascribed either to private 
 servitude rights or to the license of the proprietor. 
 — The continued exclusion of the public from the 
 use of an alleged public road for thirty-seven 
 years v?ill not, per se, destroy a pre-existent right 
 of public way. unless it is maintained for the 
 prescriptive period of forty years, but it is strong 
 evidence that no such public right ever existed. 
 — Observations on the difference of English law. 
 Mass v. Brodie - 10 App, Cas. 378 
 
 3. Eoads and Bridges (Scotland) Act, 
 
 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. v. 51), «s. 4, 5, 6, 7, and 37— 
 Construction of. 2 The trustees of the W. S. bridge, 
 which spans the Eiver Dee and connects the 
 counties of Kincardine and Aberdeen, sought to 
 have it found that the local Acts 10 Geo. 4, c. 43, 
 and 23 Vict. c. 26, being the W. S. Bridge and 
 Koad Acts — ^had ceased to be of force and effect 
 within the county of Kincardine (that county 
 having adopted the Roads and Brid ges Act, 1 878) : 
 That the trustees have ceased to be under any 
 obligation as regards the management or mainten- 
 ance of the bridge or road, and that the Defenders, 
 the county road trustees of Kincardine, and the 
 commissioners of supply of the county of Aberdeen, 
 ^ are bound to maintain and keep in proper repair 
 the bridge and road : and further, that the trus- 
 tees have ceased to be liable for the debts incurred 
 by them as trustees. By the local Act, of 1865 
 tolls were abolished in the county of Aberdeen ; 
 but from its provisions the burgh was excluded. 
 The Aberdeenshire portion of the road and part of 
 the bridge are within the burgh boun(k,ry. — The 
 county of Aberdeen has not adopted the Act of 
 1878, and the commissioners of supply of that 
 CQunty deny any liability iu respect to the main- 
 tenance, &c., of the bridge and road. — Held, re- 
 versing the interlocutors of the Court below, that 
 the true effect of the Eoads and Bridges Act, 1878, 
 in the circumstances, was to continue in force the 
 local Acts so far as the powers and duties thereby 
 imposed on the trustees for the management, &c., 
 of that part of the bridge and road which is within 
 the county and parliamentary burgh of Aberdeen, 
 together with the powers of demanding and taking 
 • tolls within the county and burgh conferred by 
 such Acts so long as the Roads and Bridges Act, 
 1878, shall not be in force therein : that the 
 liability of the trustees to the debts incurred under 
 the local Acts had now ceased and fallen severally 
 upon the Defenders : that the commissioners of 
 supply are entitled to receive from the W. S. 
 bridge and road trustees all surplus of income 
 accruing to them from tolls exacted on the bridge 
 and road within the county and parliamentary 
 burgh of Aberdeen, after providing for the ex- 
 penses of management, &o., and on doing so, are 
 entitled to be relieved by them from the propor- 
 tion of the debts belonging under the Eoads and 
 Bridges Act, 1878, to the couuty and parliamen- 
 tary burgh of Aberdeen ; and that as regards that 
 part of the bridge and roads within the county of 
 Kincardine, the local Acts had ceased to be in 
 force : and the road trustees of that county are 
 bound to maintain and keep in repair that part 
 of the bridge and road. Commissionebs of Supply 
 OP COTJNTY or Abekdeen v. Mokice 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 881 
 
 IX. SCOTCH LAW— HUSBAND AND WIFE. 
 
 1. Divorce — Wife's Adultery — Condona- 
 tion — Subsequent acts of Misconduct — -Doctrine 
 of Canon Law — Non-revival of condoned Adul- 
 tery in Scotch ■ Law — Weight of English Di- 
 vorce Cases.'] By the law of Scotland full con- 
 donation of adultery (remission expressly or by 
 implication in full knowledge of the acts for- 
 given), followed by cohabitation as man and wife, 
 is a remissio injurise absolute and unconditional, 
 and affords an absolute bar to any action of 
 divorce founded on the condoned acts of adultery. 
 Nor can condonation of adultery — cohabitation 
 following — be made conditional by any arrange- 
 ment between the spouses. — Although the con- 
 doned adultery cannot be founded on, condonation 
 does not extinguish the guilty acts entirely, and 
 they may be proved so far as they tend to throw 
 light upon charges of adultery posterior to the 
 condonation. — A wife confessed to several acts of 
 adultery with B. Her husband forgave her and 
 resumed cohabitation on the alleged condition 
 that she should not speak or hold any communi- 
 cation with E. again. Subsequently she met E. 
 by appointment several times under suspicious 
 circumstances ; but, admittedly, no act of adul- 
 tery could be proved. The husband sued for a 
 dissolution of the marriage on the ground that 
 the condoned adultery was revived by the wife's 
 subsequent conduct : — Held (affirming the deci- 
 sion of the Court below), that to obtain a divorce 
 he must prove adultery subsequent to the con- 
 donation, and no less. — The doctrine laid down 
 in Durant v. Durant (1 Hagg. Ecc. Eep. at 
 p. 761) not approved without qualification.^ 
 Dent v. Dent (34 L. J. (P. M. & Ad.) 118 ; 4 Sw. 
 & Tr. at p. 106). Direction of Lord Penzance to 
 the jury questioned on principle ; and that case 
 distinguished from Blandford v. Blandford 
 (8 P. D. 19), adultery reviving desertion. — Per 
 Lord Blackburn : The doctrine of revival of 
 adultery as a ground on which a divorce has been 
 granted is to be strongly objected to as varying 
 the status of married persons. On principle, a 
 reconciliation being entered into with full know- 
 ledge of the guilt and with free and deliberate 
 intention to forgive it, where that reconciliation 
 is followed by living together as man and wife, 
 the status of the couple ought to be the same 
 and not more precarious than if there was a new 
 marriage. — Per Lord Blackburn : Assuming it to 
 be now established English law that any matri- 
 monial offence, though forgiven, may be revived 
 by any other matrimonial offence of which the 
 Courts take cognizance, it is very modern law, 
 and not so obviously just and expedient that this 
 House ought to infer that it either was or ought 
 to have been introduced into the law of Scotland. 
 — See Lord Watson's opinion (p. 257), for the 
 terms of a remission of adultery which wovdd not 
 constitute plena oondonatio in the law of Scot- 
 land. Collins v. Collins 9 App. Cas. 205 
 
 2. Uarriage — Evidence — Certificate and 
 
 Relative Affidavit— Admissible Evidence — Legiti- 
 mation of Children by subsequent Marriage — Mar- 
 riage on Death-bed — Succession to Real Estate.] 
 Where a marriage is proved to have been solem- 
 nized de factollS years ago by people who intended 
 that it should be a good marriage, and it is done bona 
 
( 1387 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1388 ) 
 
 IX. SCOTCH lAW — HUSBAND AND WIFE — 
 
 continued. 
 fide and openly, the maxim omnia rite acta pvse- 
 sumuntur applies. — The marriage of a domiciled 
 Scotchman legitimates his children- born previous 
 to the marriage, and the children's right to suc- 
 ceed to his heritable estate is not prejudiced by 
 the marriage taking place on death-bed. — By the 
 law of Scotland statements of a deceased person 
 in relation to facts, which must presumably have 
 been within his personal knowledge, and to which, 
 if alive, he could have been examined as a wit- 
 ness, may after his death be received as secondary 
 evidence through the medium of writing, or 
 through the medium of a living person who heard 
 the statement. Where, therefore, a member of 
 the family writes a note in a manuscript book to 
 the effect that he has sent original letters to a 
 certain person, and they cannot be found, the 
 copies of such letters, the handwriting, and that 
 the copies were from original letters being proved, 
 the note, and the copies of tlie letters, are evi- 
 dence of the truth of the statements within the 
 writer's personal knowledge, and appearing to be 
 so by the letters themselves. — So also a statement, 
 whether oral or written, is not vitiated if made 
 with a purpose, where the object was an obvious 
 and legitimate one and one supporting and not 
 discrediting the presumption of truth. But the 
 statement of a dece.ised person is not admissible 
 as evidence when its terms, or the circumstances 
 in which it was made, are such as to beget a 
 reasonable suspicion either that the statement was 
 not in accordance with the truth, or that it was a 
 coloured or one-sided version of the truth ; and 
 this rule should be applied with greater strictness 
 in criminal cases : Magistrates of Aberdeen v. 
 More (1813. Hume's Dec. 502); Geils v. Geils 
 (1855. 17 Oourt Sess. Caa. 2nd Series, 397) ; Gor- 
 don V. Grant (13 Ibid. 1) ; Madeline Smith (1857. 
 2 Irving's Justiciary Kep. 653) ; Macdanald v. 
 Union Bank (1864. 2 Court Sess. Cas. 3rd Series, 
 963), examined. — A minute of date 1749, from an 
 original unsigned minute book, produced from the 
 proper custody and kept in accordance with a 
 charier of a society, is admissible evidence. — A 
 memorandum in a register of a church by its de- 
 ceased rector made about 108 years ago, though 
 not a contemporaneous entry made in the regular 
 course of the register, is admissible ss evidence, 
 and goes to prove that the rector did the things 
 stated in the memorandum. — A change of domicil 
 must be «■ residence sine animo revertendi. A 
 temporary residence for the purposes of health, 
 travel, or business does not change the domieil. 
 Also, (1) every presumption is to be made in 
 favour of the original domicil ; (2) no change can 
 occur without an actual residence in a new place ; 
 and (3) no new domicil can be obtained without 
 a clear intention of abandoning the old. — A., then 
 ill of the malady of which he died, and two 
 days before his death, was married in 1772 in 
 New York to B. by 0., an ordained clergyman of 
 the Church of England, then assistant minister of 
 Trinity Church, New York. There was produced, 
 inter alia, in support of the marriage from the 
 custody of the family a certificate signed by C, 
 that he had married A. and B. according to the 
 rites of the Church of England as by law estab- 
 lished, and an affidavit, signed by the mayor of 
 
 IX. SCOTCH LA'W — HUSBAND AND ■WIFE— 
 
 continued. 
 New York, to the effect that 0. had made an oath 
 of tlie truth of the statements in the certificate ; 
 a will of date anterior to tlie marriage, by which 
 A. left all his property to B. and the children 
 then bom ; copies of letters shewing that one of 
 the executors wrote to his co-executor in England, 
 a brother of A., stating that he was a witness to 
 the ceremony of marriage ; that B. signed herself 
 in A.'s surname ; that the children were recog- 
 nised and taken care of by members ofthefiamily 
 as A.'s children; and also War Ofiice records 
 shewing that B. received a pension as A.'s widow : 
 — Held, that there was ample proof of a legal 
 maiTiage.^ — Per Lord Blackburn : When Eng- 
 lish settlers go out to a colony and settle there 
 they carry with them, so far as may be applicable 
 to their purpose, all the immunities and privileges 
 of the law of England as the law of England was 
 at that time. Laudeedale Peerage Case 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 3. Marriage — Habit and repute — Mutual 
 
 Consent de prxsenti before Witnesses — Evidence — 
 Admissibility of Statement not on Oath of deceased 
 Person — Statements post litem tnotam — Statutes 
 15 * 16 Vict. c. 27; 16 & 17 Viet. c. 20; and 
 37 & 38 Vict. c. 64 — Precognitions — Admissibility 
 o/.] The law of Scotland accepts the continued 
 cohabitation of a man and woman as spouses, 
 coupled with the general repute of their being 
 married persons, as complete evidence of their 
 having deliberately consented to marry ; but in 
 order to sustain that inference theii' cohabitation 
 must be within the realm of Scotland. — Cohabi- 
 tation outside Scotland will not constitute mar- 
 riage, although it may be competently founded 
 on, either as corroborative evidence of a ceremony 
 in Scotland, or as evidence that a ceremony proved 
 to have taken place in Scotland was truly in- 
 tended by the parties as a present interchange of 
 matrimonial consent. — A. alleged that she was 
 lawfully married to B. by interchange of mutual 
 consent de prsesenti before witnesses in 1844 in 
 Scotland, and that having remained in Scotland 
 for about a month, B. and she cohabited at divers 
 places in England as husband and wife, and that 
 a son now living was born of the marriage in 1863. 
 — Between 1844 and 1849, vrhen B. deserted A., 
 three daughters were born, one of whom B. re- 
 gistered as legitimate. In 1851 B. married 0. at 
 a parish church in England and had children. 
 A. was informed of this marriage shortly after its 
 celebi-ation, but took no steps to have the validity 
 of the averred irregular Scotch marriage of 1844, 
 or the nullity of the marriage of 1851, judicially 
 declared, untU 1880. The alleged witnesses to 
 A.'s marriage were admitted now to be dead, but 
 they were alive in 1853, when they might have 
 been judicially examined in an action brought 
 against B. for the board and lodging of A. : — 
 Meld, that the evidence completely disproved the 
 allegation of a marriage between A. and B. — B. 
 married 0. in facie ecclesiffi in 1851, had issue, 
 and died in 1872. In an attempt by A. to set up 
 a previous irregular Scotch marriage, a witness 
 gave evidence that B. told him repeatedly after 
 1851 that A. was his wife and not C. : — Held, that 
 such evidence was not admissible. — Effect of the 
 
( 1389 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1390 ) 
 
 IX, SCOTCH LAW— HTTSBAiro AND WIFE— 
 
 contimied. 
 
 statute 37 & 38 Vict. o. 64 (1874) lield not neces- 
 sary to decide.— In an attempt on the part of A. 
 to set up an irregular marriage according to the 
 law of Scotland between herself and B., statements 
 prepared by D., the Plaintiff, in an action against 
 B. as the alleged husband of A. for A.'s board 
 and lodging ; which statement was signed — and 
 in one case con-ected by interlineations — by de- 
 ceased persons who, if alive, would have been 
 competent witnesses, were sought to be used as 
 ■evidence : — Seld, that they were not admissible. 
 Dtsakt Peebage Case - 6 App. Cas. 489 
 
 4. Marriage — Sahib and Repute — Deela- 
 
 tration of Deceased Person — Statements Post litem 
 Motam.] The general rule of the law of Scotland 
 is that hearsay of a deceased person -who, if alive, 
 would have been a competent witness, is admissible 
 evidence ; but if the fact, to which the deceased 
 testified, was such as he could not have had any 
 special means of knowledge it is not receivable ; 
 and this applies to written as well as oral state- 
 ments. — Deliberate statements made by deceased 
 members of a family, who, if alive, could have been 
 competent witnesses, ai'e generally admissible — but 
 a statement by one member of a family that B., 
 another member, did a certain act, which act, if 
 done at all, was done before the deceased narrator's 
 birth, and there being nothing to shew what 
 were his grounds of knowledge, and the fact not 
 otherwise being proved, is not evidence that the 
 particular act was done by any . one ; and though 
 the statement cannot be altogether rejected, yet it 
 can only be received as mere family tradition : — 
 When a person leaves his native place and goes to 
 another place to pursue a claim to an estate or 
 title of nobUity, and on his return tells certain 
 persons what was said to him by persons connected 
 with the family while so pursuing his inquiries ; 
 these statements are not admissible evidence. — 
 Kule laid down in Dysart Case (6 App. Cas. p. 507) 
 followed. LovAT Peebage Case 10 App. Cas. 763 
 
 5. Marriage Contract — Provision to Chil- 
 dren of prior Marriage — Bule of Law — Inten- 
 tion of Trustei — Trust — Irrevocaiility.'] The 
 geheral rule of law is that the Courts will not 
 enforce a marriage settlement in favour of stranger 
 volunteers who are not parties to the contract, 
 on the ground that they are hot within the con- 
 sideration of the marriage. But when the per- 
 sons who are within the consideration of the 
 marriage take only on terms which admit to a 
 participation with them others who would not 
 otherwise be within the consideration, then, not 
 the matrimonial consideration, but the considera- 
 tion of the mutual contract extend to and com- 
 prehend them. — Where in an ante-nuptial cou- 
 iract of marriage, the intention of the owner of 
 the property, a widow with children, was to 
 make the children of the prior marriage and 
 those procreated of the second marriage a single 
 ■class, the members of which class were to take 
 equally among them, subject to a power of appor- 
 tioriment, it is incorisistent with this intention to 
 hold that some of the children take vested inte- 
 rests, as they come into exist;eince, and that others 
 take nothing except subject to a testamentary 
 power : and in such a case the vested interest of 
 
 IX. SCOTCH lAW — HTISBAND AND WIFE — 
 
 coiitirmed. 
 the children of the earlier marriage is not con- 
 tingent on there being children of the second 
 marriagej ifor the effect and operation of the deed 
 must be determined at the time it was executed. 
 — A widow, possessed of certain heritable and 
 movable property, who had children alive by her 
 first husband, by deed before her second marriage, 
 to which her husband was a party, conveyed her 
 property to trustees for behoof of herself "in 
 liferent for her liferent alimentary use of the 
 annual proceeds thej:eof allenarly and seclusive 
 of the jus mariti of" her husband, "and not 
 affectab'le by his or her debts or deeds or by the 
 diligence of their creditors, and for beljoof of the 
 children procreated or to be procreated of " her 
 body, "in such proportions and on such terms 
 and conditions as she might appoint by a writing 
 under her hand, which failing, equally among 
 them share and share alike," &c., " in fee." The 
 trustees entered into possession, and applied the 
 income for the behoof of the wife. She died 
 without issue by the second marriage, leaving 
 testamentary deeds by which she cut down one 
 of the children's interest to a sum much less than 
 he would have taken under an equal division of 
 her estate. He raised this action for declarator 
 of his right to an equal share of her estate ; and 
 the sole question now for decision was whether 
 the marriage contract was revocable ; — Held, re- 
 versing the decision of the Court below, that the 
 provision of the marriage contract in favour of 
 the children of the prior marriage was irrevo- 
 cable. Maokie v. HEEBEBTSoif 9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 6. Married Women's Property (Scotland) 
 
 Act — Succession to Personalty— ii & 45 Vict. c. 21 
 — Applicability of Sect. 6 to Marriages entered 
 into before the Act.'] The 6th section of the 
 Married Women's Property ^Scotland) Act, 1881, 
 enacts, " After the passing of this Act the hus- 
 band of any woman who may die domiciled in 
 Scotland shall take by operation of law the same 
 share and interest in her moveable estate which 
 is taken by a widow in her deceased husband's . 
 moveable estate, according to the law and practice 
 of Scotland, and subject always to the same rules 
 of law in relation to tlie nature and amount of 
 suoli share and interest, and the exclusion, dis- 
 charge, or satisfaction thereof, as the case may 
 be." — A woman, married before the passing of the 
 above cited Act, succeeded to moveable property, 
 some before and some after the date of the Act, 
 which was settled upon her for her personal use,- . 
 and free from the jus mariti of her husband. She 
 died, without issue, intestate, and domiciled in 
 Scotland. In a cbiim by A., her husband, against 
 her executrix : — Held, affirming the decision of 
 the Court below, that sect. 6- of the Married 
 Women's Property (Scotland) Act, 1881, applies 
 to marriages entered into before the passing of 
 that Act as well as to those contracted after that 
 date ; and that, therefore, A. was entitled in ac- 
 cordance with that section to half his wife's per- 
 sonal estate. — Also, that sub-sect. 2 of' sect. 8 
 applies only to the preceding sections. Pater- 
 so:j v. Poe - 8 App. Cas. 678 
 
 7. Nullity of Maxtiage— Impotence of the 
 
 Man — Want of Sincerity as a Bar to the Action — 
 
( 1391 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1392 ) 
 
 IX. SCOTCH LAW— HUSBAND AND WIFE— 
 
 continued. 
 Canon Law — Triennial Cohabitation.'] In a suit 
 for nullity of marriage on the ground of impo- 
 tency, there may be facta and circumstances 
 proved, which so plainly imply on the part of the 
 complaining spouse a recognition of the existence 
 and Talidity of the marriage, as to render it most 
 inequitable, and contrary to public policy, that he 
 or she should be permitted to go on to challenge 
 it with effect: but the doctrine, designated as the 
 " doctrine of want of sincerity " in an action of 
 tliis kind, has been too much extended in recent 
 English decisions, and that doctrine, apart from 
 " approbate " and " reprobate," has never been 
 recognised by the law of Scotland. — Delay in 
 raising a suit of nullity on the ground of impo- 
 tency is a material element in the investigation 
 of a case which upon the facts is doubtful ; but 
 there is no definite or absolute bar nrising from 
 it. The Canon Law rule of triennial coliabi- 
 tation has not been recognised in England beyond 
 this point, that where a husband or a wife seeks 
 a decree of nullity on the ground of propter im- 
 potentiam, if there is no more evidence than 
 that they have for a period of three years lived 
 together in the same house and with ordinary 
 opportunities of intercourse, and it is clearly 
 proved there has been no consummation, then 
 if that is the whole state of the evidence, in- 
 ability on the part of the one or of the other 
 will be presumed. On the other hand, the pre- 
 sumption to be drawn from non-consummation 
 during a period of three years or more cohabita- 
 tion, is capable, by evidence sufBcient for the pur- 
 pose, of being rebutted. But every case need not 
 be fortified with the presumption ; for although 
 no presumption can be raised from tlie absence of 
 consummation within a less period than three 
 years, yet positive evidence may be given, from 
 which the same inference of inability may be 
 drawn. See Lord Watson's opinion (p..l98), that 
 to this extent the Court of Session would not 
 hesitate to adopt the rule. — G. and M. were mar- 
 ried in 1877. They slept in the same bed for 
 about nineteen months, but during only two 
 months and a half of that time did G., the hus- 
 band, make any attempt to consummate the mar- 
 riage. He desisted on account, he alleged, of his 
 wife's increasing coldness and repugnance to him. 
 It was admitted that the marriage had never 
 been consummated. In 1879 the parties finally 
 separated, the wife living on her own income with 
 her relations, the husband not giving anything 
 towards her support. In 1882 the wife gave birth 
 to a child of which G. was not the father. G. in- 
 stituted an action for divorce which M. defended, 
 and she then raised this action of declarator of 
 nullity of marriage on the ground of G.'s impo- 
 tence. G. denied his impotence. He was per- 
 sonally examined, and the medical evidence was 
 that no malformation was apparent from his ap- 
 pearance: — Held, afiirming the decision of the 
 Court below, that M. was not barred personali 
 exceptione from insisting in this action ; and that 
 G.'s impotence had been proved. G. v. M. 
 
 [10 App. Cas. in 
 
 Divorce — English marriage - 6 P. D. 36 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 43 
 See HcsEAKD and Wife — Divorce. 
 
 X. SCOTCH LAW— JTJEISDICTION. 
 
 Administration — Estate of domiciled 
 
 Scotch Testator— Jurisdiction, Conflict of— Trust 
 Funds partly in Scotland partly in England — 
 Power of Scotch Courts to sequestrate Estate and 
 appoint Judicial Factor — Forum conveniens — 
 Confirmation and Probate Act (21 & 22 Vict. c. 56), 
 8. 12— Treaty of Union, 1706 (6 Anne, c. 11), ort. 
 19.] A resi<lent and domiciled Scotchman died 
 leaving a trust disposition and settlement ap- 
 pointing six trustees ; three were resident in Scot- 
 land, one being a Scotch member of parliament 
 resided in Scotland when parliament was not 
 sitting, and the other two were resident in Eng- 
 land. The truster had a very large amount of 
 personalty in Scotland as well as heritable estate ,- 
 and a trifling amount of personal estate only ia 
 England. The trustees proved the trust deed in 
 Scotland, and were confirmed as executors. They 
 then had the Scotch probate sealed in accordance- 
 with 21 & 22 Vict. c. 56, s. 12, and thus became 
 the personal representatives in England. They 
 removed all but a small portion of the personalty 
 in England into Scotland. A person resident itt 
 England, who was entitled to a share of a large 
 legacy, and also to a share of the residue, brought 
 an action in England to administer the estate. 
 The trustees were served and entered an appear- 
 ance. The Plaintiff, an infant, in the English 
 action moved for judgment for administration of 
 the whole estate, and on the 29th of November, 
 1882, the Court of Appeal granted the order. 
 The trustees loJged an appeal to this House. In. 
 June, 1883, the trustees cairied certain accounts- 
 into Chambers in the English action. On the 
 5th of July, 1883, four of the residuary legatees- 
 commenced this action in Scotland against the? 
 trustees for, inter alia, declarator that the trustees, 
 were bound to administer the estate in Scotland, 
 subject to the Scotch law and under the authority 
 and jurisdiction of the Scottish Courts alone: and 
 that they were not entitled to place the estate- 
 under the control of tlie English Court or any 
 other foreign tribunal furth of Scotland, and for 
 interdict ; or, alternatively, to the conclusion for 
 interdict for the removal of the trustees, foE 
 sequestration of the estate, the appointment of a 
 judicial factor and for interdict until the estate 
 should be vested in the judicial factor. On the 
 30th of November, 1883, this House affirmed the 
 order of the Court of Appeal. On the 29th of 
 February, 1884, the Court of Session granted an 
 interlocutor finding in terms of the declaratory 
 conclusions of the summons : sequestrating the 
 estate, appointing a judicial factor and interdict- 
 ing the trustees from removing any title deeds, 
 &c. from Scotland, or accounting to any one other- 
 wise than the judicial factor.— On appeal taken 
 by order of the Court of Chancery in England : — 
 Held, that the decerniture in terms of tlie declara- 
 tory conclusions of the summons, which iu effect 
 affirms the exclusive competency of the Scottish 
 jurisdiction, was not supported by statute nor 
 authority ; and, therefore, that part of the prin- 
 cipal interlocutor and that part of the interdict 
 relating to accounting must be reversed ; but tlie 
 remaining portion of the principal interlocutor 
 and the others appealed from must be affirmed, 
 because the Scotch Courts had (i) full jurisdic- 
 tion to sequestrate the estate iu Scotland — the 
 
( 1393 ) 
 
 BIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( .1394 ; 
 
 X. SCOTCH LA.W—JTr&lSmcnOTSt— continued. 
 persons of the trustees and the trust property 
 being there — and to appoint a judicial factor; 
 and (2), because in-the circumstances and on the 
 undertaking given as to the infant Plaintiff be- 
 coming a party to the Scotch administration, a 
 prima facie case of convenience in favour of a 
 judicial administration in Scotland had been 
 made out. — Lord Cottenham in Preston v. Mel- 
 ville (2 Rob. App. ] 07) explained, and Lord West- 
 bury in Enohin v. Wylie (10 H. L. C. 13) dis- 
 sented from. Ewingb.ObbEwing 10 App. Gas. 453 
 
 XI. SCOTCH LAW— lANDLOED AND TENANT. 
 Construction of Agreement— flbZojrayi 
 
 Writing — Agreement between Tenant and Land- 
 lord, written from the latter s Dictation.'] Tenants 
 of quarries situated about three miles from their 
 works, who were accustomed to convey the stones 
 from the quarries to Ihe works by carts, entered 
 into an agreement with their landlord to construct 
 a tramway from the quarry to the works, to run, 
 inter alia, "by the end of the policy" of the land- 
 lord: and they further agreed to compensate 
 the farm tenants along the line for any damage 
 done to their farms during the currency of their 
 leases. The landlord agreed, inter alia, to give 
 gratuitously the land required for the tramway. 
 Outside the policy groimd there was a private 
 road the property of the landlord, which, before it 
 reached the tenant's works, ran through another 
 tenant's stone pavement yard. This was the only 
 practical route outside the policy for the tram- 
 way : and it was alleged that the only obstacle to 
 laying it along that road was that the other 
 tenant might refuse to allow it being laid on that 
 part passing through his yard, but for this there 
 were no termini habiles. — The tenants claimed 
 that the landlord was bound to give them the 
 use and possession of land for the purpose of the 
 tramway, and that either (1) "within and by 
 the end of the policy," or (2) " in any other place 
 as suitable or convenient for them in every re- 
 spect" : — Seld, reversing the decision of the Court 
 below, that under the agreement the stipulation 
 was that the tramway should pass outside the 
 walls which enclose the policy of the landlord ; 
 and that by agreeing to give gratuitously the 
 lands required, the landlord merely undertook to 
 give the tenants such rights as were vested in 
 him, leaving them (with the power to use his 
 name) to settle with any persons who might have 
 a right or interest entitling them to object to the 
 formation of the tramway. — A landlord entered 
 into an agreement with a tenant the terms of 
 which were dictated by the landlord to a person 
 who acted as his factor. The agreement was then 
 handed unsigned to the tenant, who was present. 
 The factor's name did not appear in the agree- 
 ment, nor had he any authority to make the 
 agreement for the landlord. Subsequently the 
 tenant resiled from the agreement : — Held, affirm- 
 ing the decision of the Court below, that the 
 writing was not a valid holograph writ, and there- 
 fore the tenant could resile from it. — ^Lord Watson 
 doubted whether the document would be valid 
 even if the factor had been the sole negotiator 
 acting in the landlord's absence and by his 
 instructions. Sikclaib v. Caithness Flagstone 
 QUAEETINQ COMPANT - - 6 App. Cas. 340 
 
 XII. SCOTCH LAW— MINE. 
 
 1. Beservation — "Disposition of Land» 
 
 with a Seservation of the " Liberty of working the 
 Coal" — Bight of Property retained.'] Where the 
 owner conveys lands to a singular successor or 
 other person, reserving the " liberty of working 
 the coal " in those lands, he must be taken to have 
 reserved the estate of coal (unless there are clear 
 words in the deed qualifying that right of pro- 
 perty) with which he stands vested by infeftment 
 at the date of the conveyance. Ddke of Hamilton 
 V. DuNLOP - - 10 App. Cas. 813 
 
 8. Support — Inherent Bight of the Surface 
 
 Owner to necessary Support — Express Obligation to- 
 pay Compensation for Damage done by " the fore- 
 said Operations : " Meaning of — Constriiction of 
 Titles.] If the owner of a piece of land sells the 
 surface and reserves the minerals below it, with 
 power to get them, he must, if he intends to have 
 the power of destroying or letting down the surface 
 by subsidence in getting them, frame his power 
 in such language that the Ciourt may be able to 
 say from the titles that such was clearly the 
 intention of the parties. — A. was the owner of 
 500 acres of land. He, in 1800, feued the whole 
 coal, &c., thereinto B with full power to work and 
 win the same, and for that pui^pose to set down pits, 
 &c., but expressly providing that B. should not be 
 at liberty to sink pits, or break the surface of the 
 land lying on the north of a certain line : with full 
 power, however, to work the coal there, provided 
 it was done from pits situate on the south of the 
 line, without breaking the surface of the land on 
 the north ; but for the " whole damage and injury- 
 occasioned by the foresaid operations," A. and his 
 successors " shall be completely paid and indem- 
 nified by" by B. In 1801 A., by disposition and 
 sale, conveyed to C.'s predecessor all his right 
 and title in a parcel of land situate on the north 
 of the line, reserving to himself and his feuars- 
 the liberty to take the coal, substantially in the 
 terms given above, and providing that the persons, 
 carrying on these operations were to be liable to 
 C.'s predecessor " for the whole damage thereby 
 occasioned : " declaring that the rules contained 
 in the above feu right should be the rule of settle- 
 ment between C.'s predecessor and B. In 1799' 
 A. had feued to another predecessor of C. a parcel 
 of land contiguous to the above and also to the 
 north of the line, under reservation of the mine- 
 rals, and with liberty to work the same " so aa 
 not to break the surface of the said lands or 
 injure the springs therein upon payment to'' C.'s 
 predecessors "any damage that may be occa- 
 sioned to the said lands by the working of the 
 minerals." B. claimed an absolute right to work 
 out the whole of the coal, under the obligation ■ 
 to pay C. a money compensation for any damage 
 done to the surface : — SeM, affirming the decision 
 of the Court below, that there was nothing in the 
 titles of the parties which had the effect of taking 
 away or derogating from the common law right 
 of the owner of the surface to insist that the 
 owner of the minerals shall leave sufficient sup- 
 ports to sustain the surface uninjured ; and that 
 the provision as to payment of compensation 
 clearly meant payment of compensation for dam- 
 age done by accident or negligence. — The rule 
 established in Bowbotham v. Wilson (8 H. L. Cas. 
 
( 1395 ) 
 
 DiaEST OP GASES. 
 
 ( 1396 ) 
 
 XII. SCOTCH LAW— MINE— conimued. 
 
 348) and Andrew v. Buchanan (Law Eep. 2 H. L., 
 So. 286) cited. — Aspden v. Seddon (Law Kep. 
 10 Oh. App. 394) approved but distinguished. 
 Dixon v. White - 8 App. Caa. 833 
 
 XIII. SCOTCH LAW— NUISANCE, 
 
 Calcining — Damage to Flanfation — In- 
 terdict — Distance fixed.'] The Shotts Iron Com- 
 pany possessed valuable mining leases of the irou 
 ore under the estate of, inter alia, Penicuik, 
 under the condition not to calcine within a 
 certain area. They calcined beyond this area, 
 but near to the boundary of the lands of Glen- 
 corse. The calcining was carried on in open 
 bings eight- feet high. — The proprietor of Glen- 
 corse on the ground, inter alia, that his orna- 
 mental plantations were being destroyed by the 
 fumes from the bings, raised an action concluding 
 for interdict against the company calcining 
 within two miles of his estate : — Seld, affirming 
 the decision of the Court below — but altering the 
 terms of the interlocutor pronounced — that, the 
 Glencorse plantations had been injured by the 
 calcining, and that the Pursuer was entitled to 
 interdict to prevent the company from carrying 
 on their calcining within one mile of his lands, 
 in the same manner hitherto pursued by them, 
 or in any other manner whereby noxious vapours 
 may be caused to pass over the Pursuer's lands, 
 or any part thereof, to the damage or injury of 
 his plantations or estate. Shott's Iron Company 
 ». Inclis - 7 App. Cas. 618 
 
 XIV. SCOTCH LAW— PAETNERSHIP. 
 
 Retirement — -Assignment hy one Partner 
 
 of Ais whole Interest to another.] A prosperous 
 partnership came to consist of three partners, 
 A., B., and C, having equal shares. The con- 
 tract of co-partnership contained, inter alia, a 
 clause that it should not be in the power of any 
 of the partners to assign all or any part of their 
 shares or interest in the capital, stock, or profits 
 of the concern to any person or persons, or give 
 them a right to inspect the company's books, or 
 to interfere in any way with the business ; and 
 should any such assignation be granted the same 
 was declared of no effect as far as regards the 
 company. There was also a clause that on the 
 retirement of -• partner the remaining partners 
 should have power to buy his interest at the 
 amount standing to his credit at the last balance. 
 A. entered into an agreement by which he sold 
 to B. his whole interest. A.'s name remained on 
 the books, and he signed all deeds relating to 
 the business till his death seven years after. 0. 
 was not till then informed of the agreement. He 
 then claimed to participate on the grounds of 
 (1) an alleged mandate to B. to purchase for the 
 company A.'s interest ; (2) that the agreement 
 could only be legally made under the contract of 
 co-partnership with liis consent ; and (3) that B. 
 had secretly acquired a benefit for himself within 
 the scope of the partnership business : — Held, 
 affirming the decision of the Court below, that in 
 point of fact no agreement had been made be- 
 tween B. and 0. to the effect that B. was to buy 
 A.'s interest for the partnership. And in respect 
 to the articles of co- partuersliip they, did not 
 prevent the agreement being made, and otherwise 
 
 XIV. SCOTCH LAW— PAETNKESHIP— coniii. 
 
 it was perfectly legal. Therefore C. was not 
 entitled to any benefit under it. Cassels v. 
 Stewakt 6 App. Cas. 64 
 
 XV. SCOTCH LAW— PATENT. 
 
 Infringement.] Decision of the Court of 
 
 Session, Scotland, granting an interdict to re- 
 strain infringement of patent affirmed. Olippens 
 Oil Company v. Henderson - 8 App. Cas. 873 
 
 XVI. SCOTCH LAW— PEERAGE. 
 
 1. Dysart Peerage — Held, that William 
 
 John Manners had made out, and established, 
 his right to the dignities of Earl of Dysart and 
 Lord Huntingtower in the peerage of Scotland. 
 Dysabt Peerage Case - 6 App. Cas. 489 
 
 2. — Lauderdale Peerage — Held, that Major 
 Frederick Henry Maitland had made out his 
 claim to the Earldom of Lauderdale and the 
 other honours connected therewith in the Peerage 
 of Scotland. Lauderdale Peerage Case 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 692 
 
 3. Lovat Peerage — Evidence — Family 
 
 Repute — Statements Post litem Motam.] Held, 
 that John Eraser of Carnarvonshire, mining 
 engineer, had no right to the title, dignity and 
 lionour of the Barony of Lovat in the Peerage of 
 Scotland. Lovat Peerage Case 10 App. Cas. 763 
 
 XVII. SCOTCH LAW— PUBLIC EIGHTS. 
 
 Burgh — Common Good of Burgh — En- 
 croachment by Magistrates on Burgh Property — 
 Equitable Jurisdiction of Court of Session where 
 restitutio in integrum impossible or attended with 
 unreasonable Loss — Actio Popularis — Res Noviter 
 — Interdict — Necessary Proceedings — Costs.] A 
 superior Court, having equitable jurisdiction, has 
 a discretioii in exceptional cases to withhold from 
 parties applying for it that remedy to which, in 
 ordinary circumstances, they would be entitled as 
 a matter of course. But to justify the exercise of 
 such a discretionary power, there must be some 
 very cogent reason. — A. suing, not as owner of 
 the soil, nor as the proprietor of a dominant 
 tenement, but as one of the community, applied 
 for suspension and interdict on the 4th of May, 
 1878, against magistrates of a burgh, who were 
 also police commissioners, building municipal 
 stables on a piece of ground vested in them for 
 the common use and enjoyment of the commu- 
 nity. No interim interdict was granted, and the 
 magistrates, who had accepted contracts for the 
 work, went on building, and before the interdict 
 sought was granted, on the 19th of June, 1879, 
 the stables were completed at a cost to the com- 
 munity of about £1900. Thereupon in March, 
 1880, A. raised this action, concluding for, inter 
 alia, a declaration that the ground in question 
 was vested in the magistrates in perpetuity for 
 the use and enjoyment of the inhabitants, and 
 that they had no right as police commissioners to 
 build thereon ; and that they ought to be ordered 
 to remove the stables. The magistrates offered 
 to dedicate to the use of the inhabitants in lieu 
 of the site of the stables another piece of ground 
 which they had acquired by feu charter dated 
 December, 1880 : — Held, agreeing with the judg- 
 rnent of the Court below, that in the peculiar 
 circumstances of this case and on the considera- 
 
( 1397 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES.' 
 
 ( 1398 ) 
 
 XVII, SCOTCH LAW— PUBLIC EIGHTS— conW. 
 tions (1) that the community of the burgh had 
 an interest on both sides of the present litiga- 
 tion; and (2) that the tender of a substituted 
 piece of ground was res noyiter, affecting the 
 relations of the parties which had emerged since 
 the date of the final judgment of interdict, it was 
 not too late for the Court to exercise its discre- 
 tionary power, aud to refuse the remedy which 
 A. asked so far as the removal of the stables 
 was demanded. — Seld, reversing interlocutor of 
 the Court below, that A. was entitled to a decla- 
 ratory decree affirming the right of the com- 
 munity in the ground in question ; and to the 
 action being kept in Court until the substituted 
 ground had been dedicated in perpetuity to the uses 
 of the inhabitants ; and hie action being necessary 
 for the vindication of the community's rights, he 
 was entitled to his whole expenses in the Court 
 below and in this House. — Per Lord Watson : 
 Were A. seeking to enforce the decree which he 
 holds in his own private right and interest, the 
 considerations of inconvenience and pecuniary 
 loss, arising from the position in which the 
 magistrates have placed themselves, by their own 
 acts, would not afford a relevant answer to his 
 demand in the present action. — Maenair v. Cath- 
 cart (Morr. Die. 12,832); Sanderson v. Geddes 
 <1 Court Sess. Cas. 4th Series, 1198); Begg v. 
 Jack (8 Court Sess. Cas. 4th Series, 35), ap- 
 proved, as authorities in favour of the equitable 
 jurisdiction of the Court; but see Lord Watson 
 as to his disapproval of the result at which the 
 Court arrived in Begg v. Jack. Gbahame v. 
 Swan - _ _ ^ App. Cas. 647 
 
 XVIII. SCOTCH LAW— RAILWAY COMPANY. 
 1. ■ Construction of Act — Broken Bridge 
 
 in navigable River — Removal of Debris to Satisfac- 
 tion of Board of Trade, Meaning of -^Construction 
 of Statv,te:i The North British Railway (New Tay 
 Bridge) Act, 1881, gave the North British Eailway 
 authority to erect a new bridge over the Tay a little 
 higher up the river than one blown down on the 
 28th of December, 1879. Sect. 21 of this Act 
 provided, "The company shall abandon and cause 
 to be disused as a railway so much of the North. 
 British Eailway as lies between the respective 
 points of junction therewith of railway No. 1 and 
 railway No. 2 ; and shall remove the ruins and 
 debris of the old bridge, and all obstructions inter- 
 fering vrith the navigation caused by the old 
 bridge, to the satisfaction of the Board of Trade." 
 The magistrates of Perth, whose jurisdiction ex- 
 tends down the river to within about three miles 
 of the old bridge, raised an action for declarator 
 and implement : — Held, (1) that the special Act 
 imposed an absolute obligafibn to remove the whole 
 mins and debris of the old bridge : and sect. 21 
 did not give the Board of Trade a discretionary 
 power to dispense with the performance of any 
 part of this obligation ; and it followed that the 
 Respondents had an interest to obtain a declarator 
 as to the extent of the obligation ; but (2), dissent- 
 ing from the judgment of the Court below, the 
 obHgation did not become immediately prestable ; 
 and (3) the import of the expression " to the satis- 
 faction of the Board of Trade " was, that though 
 not bound to submit their' plans of removal, inr 
 eluding the time and manner, yet, as a matter of 
 
 XVIII. SCOTCH LAW— EAILWAY COMPANY— 
 
 continued. 
 prudence, the company ought to do so ; (4) that 
 in th6 circumstances it would be inexpedient, 
 though hardly incompetent, to do more now than 
 simply ordain the company to remove the whole 
 ruins and debris in terms of sect. 21, for to order 
 the removal "forthwith" might unduly hamper 
 the discretion of the Board of Trade ; and if the 
 company were guilty of undue delay in applying 
 to the Board of Trade ; or if 'they should proceed 
 at their own hand so as to cause obstruction to 
 navigation ; or if after obtaining the sanction ' of 
 the Board of Trade to some scheme of removal, 
 they failed to properly' execute it, or any condi- 
 tions attached, the Eespondents, on application to 
 the CoTurt, had an effective remedy. North 
 British Eailway CoMPAiTsr v. Loed Pkovost of 
 Pbkth - - - 10 App. Cas. 579 
 
 2. Construction of Act — Statute 42 & 43 
 
 Vicl.e.clv.jSS.^S (Local)— Commencement of Pay- 
 ment^ The Caledonian Eailway Company for 
 thirteen years up to July, 1879. had been pro- 
 prietors of the D. and A. Eailway, and had 
 incurred certain liabilities in respect to payment 
 of dividends to preference and ordinary share- 
 holders of the D. & A. line. The preamble of 
 the North British Eailway (D. and A. Joint Line) 
 passed July, 1879 (42 & 43 Vict. c. civ.), set forth 
 that it was expedient that the Caledonian and 
 Norlh British Companies should have equal 
 rights and powers, and be subject to equal lia- 
 bilities over and with respect to the U. & A. 
 line. Sect. 3 provided that on and after the 1st 
 of February, 1880, called the "vesting period," 
 all interest which the Caledonian possessed 
 should be transferred to the Caledonian and 
 North British jointly and in equal proportions 
 in manner hereinafter provided by the Act. 
 Sect. 6 provided that the consideration for the 
 transfer of the joint line shall be as follows: 
 " (1.) From and after the vesting period the 
 company (the North British) shall pay to the 
 Caledonian Eailway Company half-yearly on the 
 Ist of March and 1st of September in each year 
 a sum equal to one-half of the aggregate of thp 
 following half-yearly payments for which the 
 Caledonian Eailway Company are now liable in 
 respect of theu' acquisition of the D. and A. 
 Eailway." The Caledonian Eailway Company, 
 claimed that under this section there was a half- 
 yearly payment amounting to £5903, 15s. due on 
 the 1st of March, 1880 -.—Held, affirming the 
 decision of the Court below, that the liability to 
 make payment in 1880 did not arise till Septem- 
 ber, the time of payment applicable to the first 
 six months following the 1st of February, 1880. 
 — Per Lord Selborne, L.C : The more literal 
 construetion of a section of a statute ought not 
 to prevail if it is opposed to the intentions of the' 
 Legislature as apparent by the Statute; and if 
 the words are sufficiently flexible to admit of some 
 other construction by which that intention will ' 
 be better effectuated. Caledonian' Eailway 
 Company v. North British Eailway Company 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 114 
 
 3, ^ Contract to stop all Passenger Trains — : 
 
 Construction of F.&ti , Contract^ By feu contract,, 
 dated 1863, between A., the proprietor of land 
 
( 1399 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1400 ) 
 
 XVIII. SCOTCH LAW— EAILWAY COMPANY 
 
 — continued. 
 through which a railway was authorized to run, 
 and the railway company, it was provided that the 
 company should be bound to erect on a piece of 
 ground conveyed to them by A. at a nominal feu 
 rent, " a station for passengers and goods tra- 
 velling by the said" railway, "at which all 
 passenger trains shall regularly stop," to be 
 called Crathes Station. — The station was erected. 
 Subsequently certain trains were run, namely 
 
 (1) excursion trains at low fares to certain places 
 on the line, but not to Crathes Station. They 
 were advertised by special handbills, and were 
 not included in the time-tables except in error ; 
 
 (2) trains called the Queen's messenger trains, 
 run by arrangement with the Home OfBce, who 
 paid the railway company a subsidy ; (3) trains 
 called the Post OfBce trains, run by arrangement 
 with the Post Office, who also paid a subsidy. 
 The Queen's messenger trains and the Post 
 Office trains only ran during Her Majesty's stay 
 at Balmoral ; but they were advertised in the 
 railway company's time-table, and through pas- 
 sengers were allowed to travel by them. They 
 stopped at Crathes by signal, but did not stop 
 regularly for setting down or taking up passen- 
 gers. There was no contract with the Home 
 Office or Post Office that they should not do so. — 
 A. sought declarator that all trains, including the 
 above, except only such as might be hired for an 
 individual or individuals for his or their exclu- 
 sive use, should regularly stop : — Held, reversing 
 the decision of the Court below, that the trains 
 called the Queen's messenger trains, and the 
 Post Office trains, fell within the terms of the 
 contract ; but, agreeing with the decision of the 
 Court below, that the excursion trains in the 
 circumstances materially differed from ordinary 
 passenger trains and did not come within the 
 obligation. Buknett v. Gkeat Nokth of Soot- 
 land Railway Company 10 App, Cas. 147 
 
 4. land injuriously affected — Compensa- 
 tion — Bailways Clauses Consolidation (^Scotland) 
 Act, 1845 (8 <£ 9 Vict. c. 33), s. 6, and Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation (Scotland) Act, 1845 (8 (fc 9 
 Vict. c. 19) — Agreement that Claim should Tiot he 
 barred hy reason of no Land being taken — Conflict- 
 ing Decisions of Mouse of Lords.'] The 6th sec- 
 tion of the Scotch Railways Clauses Act of 1845 
 (similar in the English Act), provides, inter alia, 
 that the railway company " shall make to the 
 owners and occupiers of, and all other parties 
 interested in, any lands taken .... or injuri- 
 ously affected by the construction thereof, full 
 compensation for the value of the lands so taken, 
 and for all damage sustained by such owners," 
 &c. And it then cites the Lands Clauses Conso- 
 lidation (Scotland) Act, 1845, as the machinery 
 by which compensation is to be adjudged. — In 
 order to found a claim for compensation under 
 this section, some special or peculiar damage 
 must be done to the lands by reason of the con- 
 struction of the works, which diminishes the 
 value of the lands, which damage would have 
 been the subject of an action at law before the 
 statute. — Where, therefore, an access to private 
 property by a public highway or private way is 
 interfered with by the construction of the works, 
 
 XVIII. SCOTCH lAW— EAILWAY COMPANY 
 
 ■ — continued. 
 and the value of the property, . iiTespective of 
 any particular use which may be made of it, is 
 so dependent upon the existence of that access 
 as to be substantially diminished by its obstruc- 
 tion, then the owner is entitled to compensation 
 for such interference. — But no compensation is 
 given for damages if the thing done was one for 
 which, if done without any statutory power, no 
 action could have been maintained ; nor when a 
 right of action, which would have existed if the 
 works had not been authorized by statute, would 
 have been merely personal. Nor when damage 
 arises, not out of the execution, but only out of 
 the subsequent use of the works. Nor for the 
 loss of trade or custom by reason of a work not 
 otherwise affecting the house in or upon which 
 the trade has been carried on. — Trustees were 
 possessed of a spinning mill ninety yards from 
 an important main thoroughfare in Glasgow, 
 having parallel accesses on tlie level from two 
 sides of the mill to the thoroughfare. — A railway 
 company under their special Act cut off entirely 
 one access, substitutiug therefor a deviated road 
 over a bridge with steep gradients. And the 
 other access they diverted and made less con- 
 venient. But none of the operations were carried 
 on ex adverse the premises. When the Bill was 
 before Parliament the trustees were induced to 
 withdraw their opposition in consideration of an 
 agreement, by which the company undertook, 
 that in the event of the land of the trustees and 
 of others being injuriously affected by the con- 
 struction of any of the works proposed by the 
 Bill, their claim to compensation should not be 
 barred by reason of the company not taking part 
 of their land. The trustees claimed compensa- 
 tion for the diminished value of their premises 
 by reason of the detour and gradients : — Seld, 
 affirming the decision of the Court below, that 
 though the agreement gave no right to compen- 
 sation, the trustees were entitled to it under the 
 Railways and Lands Clauses Consolidation (Scot- 
 land) Acts, 1845.— Per Lord Selborne, L.C. : The 
 obstruction of access to a private property by a 
 
 Eublic road need not be ex adverse, but it must 
 e proximate and not remote or indefinite to 
 entitle the owner of that properly to compensa- 
 tion for the loss of it. — And — It is a question 
 whether a mere change of gradient alone would 
 be a proper subject for compensation. — Metropo- 
 litan Board of Works v. McCarthy (Law Rep. 
 7 H. L. 243) held imdistinguishable.— TAe Cale- 
 donian Railway Company v. Ogilvy (2 Macq. 229) 
 explained ; and distinguished. — Chamberlain v. 
 West End of London Bailway Company (2 B. & S. 
 605), and Beckett v. Midland Bailway Company 
 (Law Rep. 3 C. P. 82) approved. — Bichet v. Metro- 
 politan Railway Company (Law Rep. 2 H. L. 175) 
 examined. — Per Lord Selborne, L.C : It is the 
 duty of this House to maintain as far as possible 
 the authority of all former decisions of this House; 
 and although later decisions may have interpreted 
 and limited the application of earlier, they ought 
 not (without some unavoidable necessity) to be 
 treated as conflicting. — And — All the above deci- 
 sions of this House appear to be capable of being 
 explained and justified upon consistent princi- 
 ples. — See remarks of Lord Blackburn, as to the 
 
( 1401 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 1402 ) 
 
 XVIII. SCOTCH LAW— RAILWAY COMPANY— 
 
 continued. 
 cases of Ogilvy and McCarthy not being recon- 
 cilable, pp. 294, 302. Caledonian Kailway 
 Company v. Walker's Tbustees 7 App. Cas. 259 
 
 6. Land injuriously affected — Superior 
 
 and Vassal — Construction of Feu Contract — -Inter- 
 dict to restrain Action for Compensation — Hail- 
 toays Clauses Consolidation (^Scotland) Act, 1845, 
 s. 6 — Exercise of reserved Powers ; what not equi- 
 valent to."] In January, 1872, A.'s predecessor in 
 title obtained by feu contract from a superior a 
 building lot situated at the south side of an 
 estate. With the contract was incorporated a 
 plan which shewed the whole estate divided into 
 feuing lots with several streets running east and 
 west ; and one street twenty-four feet wide con- 
 necting the turnpike road on the north to an- 
 other road on the south, and forming one side of 
 A.'s feu. The lot was disponed " together with 
 free ish and entry thereto by the streets laid down 
 on the said plan, but in so far only as the same 
 may be opened and not altered in virtue of the 
 reserved power after mentioned." The reserved 
 power was, that " the superior should have full 
 power and liberty to vary and alter the said plan 
 or streets or roads thereon in so far as regards the 
 ground not already feued." In July, 1872, a 
 railway company gave the superior statutory 
 notice that they intended to take a strip of ground 
 running from east to west through the estate. In 
 1877 they executed the works and, inter alia, cut 
 off all access for carriages by the street marked 
 on the plan running from south to north, twenty- 
 four feet wide. None of A.'s land was taken. In 
 an action by the railway company for interdict 
 against A. taking further proceedings in a claim 
 for compensation in respect that his lands were 
 injuriously affected, under sect. 6 of the Eailway 
 Clauses (Scotland) Act, 1845 : — Held, affirming 
 the decision of the Court below (Earl of Selborae, 
 L.C, doubting), that A. was not entitled to com- 
 pensation, because, 1, the access in question had 
 not been " opened " in tlie sense meant in his feu 
 contract before the statutory notice , and 2, there 
 was no obligation in the feu contract cast upon 
 the superior to pursue his feuing scheme, and 
 give the feuars at some future time access along 
 any of the roads or streets marked on the plan 
 Also — when there is an implied obligation by the 
 superior to prosecute his feuing scheme for the 
 benefit of the feuars, the feuars have a vested 
 interest de future in the roads and streets shewn 
 on the feuing plan, sufficient to sustain a claim 
 for compensation under the Railways Clauses 
 Consolidation (Scotland) Act, 1845. The com- 
 pulsory taking by a railway company, under 
 their statutory powers, of part of a superior's 
 estate, cannot be regarded as equivalent, either 
 in fact or law, to an exercise of a power reserved 
 by the superior himself. — Solway Railway Com- 
 pany V. Jackson (1 Ct. Sess. Cas. 4th Series, 831) 
 affirmed. — Benderson v. Nimmo and Colquhoun 
 (2 Ibid. 2nd Series, 869) and Crawford v. Field 
 (2 Ibid. 4th Series, 20) distinguished. Fleming 
 V. Newport Eailway Company 8 App. Cas, 365 
 
 XIX. SCOTCH LAW— REVENUE. 
 
 Income Tax — Coal Mines — Exhaustion of 
 
 Pits — Deductions from Gross Profits — Statutes 5 <$; 6 
 
 XIX. SCOTCH LAW— REVENUE— con^ijiMei. 
 Vict. c. 35, ss. 100 (Bule3^ and 159 ; 29 dc 30 Vict. 
 c. 36, s. 8.] A tenant of minerals, though he may 
 be under a constant vanishing expense in sinking 
 new pits as the old ones become exhausted, is not 
 entitled, in computing the profits for assessment 
 of income tax, to deduct from the gross profits a 
 sum estimated as representing the amount of 
 capital expended in making bores and sinking 
 pits, which have been exhausted by the year's 
 working. — See Lord Penzance's opinion as to the 
 method of taxation intended by the Legislature 
 to be applicable to mines. — Knowles v. McAdam 
 (3 Ex. D. 23) held wrongly decided. Coltness 
 Iron Company v. Black - 6 App, Cas. 315 
 
 XX. SCOTCH LAW— RIVER. 
 
 Thadlyie— Right of the Clyde Trustees to 
 
 dredge Foreshore, the Property of the Riparian 
 Proprietor — Clyde Navigation Consolidation Act 
 (21 & 22 Vict. c. cxlix.), ss. 76, 84.] The Clyde 
 Navigation Trustees, being empowered by sects. 76 
 and 84 of 21 & 22 Vict. o. cxlix.), to dredge the bed 
 of the Elver Clyde to a depth of seventeen feet, 
 cannot be interdicted from dredging ground which 
 has been declared the property of the riparian 
 owner, subject to any right which the public may 
 have over it, and subject also to any rights con- 
 ferred on the trustees by their Acts of Parliament. 
 — Held, so, affirming the decision of the Court 
 below, but without prejudice to the question of 
 their liability to subsequent compensation for 
 damage. Lord Blantyre v. Clyde Navisation 
 Trustees 6 App. Cas. 273 
 
 XXI. SCOTCH LAW— SALE OF GOODS. 
 
 !■ Condition Precedent — Implement of 
 
 Condition prevented— Remedy.'] If, in the case of 
 a contract of sale and delivery, which makes ac- 
 ceptance of the thing sold and payment of the 
 price conditional on a certain thing being done by 
 the seller, the buyer prevents the possibility of 
 the seller fulfilling the condition, the contract is 
 to be taken as satisfied. — By a written contract A. 
 agreed to buy of B. a digging machine, if it ful- 
 filled certain conditions, one of which was that it 
 should be capable of excavating a given quantity 
 of clay in a fixed time on a " properly opened-up 
 face" at the C. railway cutting. The machine 
 failed at another cutting to excavate the required 
 quantity, and on its being removed to the " C." 
 cutting and tried at a face not a " properly opened- 
 up" one, and breaking down, after a few days 
 work, A. refused to give it any further trial or to 
 pay the price of the machine -.—Held, affirming 
 the decision of the Court below, that B. was en- 
 titled to a decree against A. for payment of the 
 price of the machine. Maokay v. Dick 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 251 
 
 2. Non-Delivery before Sequestration — 
 
 Article in Course of Completion — Unfinished Ship 
 — Bankruptcy — Security — Mercantile Law 
 Amendment {Scotland) Act, 1856 (19 & 20 Vict, 
 c. 60), s. 1.] By the law of Scotland there must 
 be delivery to give effect to a contract of sale, 
 but the Mercantile Law Amendment (Scotland) 
 Act for the express purpose of assimilating the 
 law of Scotland to that of England on such 
 points, enacts : " Where goods have been sold 
 but the same have not been delivered to the pur- 
 
( 1403 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1404 ) 
 
 XXI. SCOTCH LAW— SALE OF GOODS— conM. 
 chaser, and have been allowed to remain in the 
 custody of the seller, it shall not be competent for 
 any creditor of such seller after the date of such 
 sale to attach such goods as belong to the seller 
 by any diligence or process of law, including se- 
 questration, to the effect of preventing the pur- 
 chaser or others in his right from enforcing the 
 delivery of the same." — B. & C, by verbal com- 
 muning, agreed to make advances to A. on the 
 security of a ship he had nearly completed build- 
 ing on his dwn account, provided A. entered into 
 an absolute contract of sale of the vessel. An un- 
 qualified contract of sale was completed by which 
 
 A. agreed to complete and deliver to B. & C. the 
 vessel, for a price to be paid in two instalments, 
 with power to B. & 0., in the event of A. failing 
 to complete the contract, to enter into possession 
 of the vessel and complete it, or sell it. — In » 
 correspondence between A. and B. & C. and a 
 shipbroker and others subsequent to the contract, 
 and for the purpose of getting a purchaser for the 
 vessel, the ship was called A.'s ship ; but no letters 
 were written to any persons who were induced by 
 their means to deal with the ship upon the footing 
 of its being the property of A. — From the date of 
 the contract B. & C. gave, by cheques at various 
 dates, advances to A., taking a receipt on account 
 of the purchase of the ship ; at the same time bills 
 for like amounts were accepted by A. The ad- 
 vances equalled the full price of the ship. Before 
 it was completed or delivered A.'s estate was se- 
 questrated. The bills accepted by A. were paid by 
 
 B. & G. In a question between A.'s trustee and 
 B. & C. : — Seld, (1) affirming the decision of the 
 Court below, that there was here a bonS, fide sale 
 in fact and intent unaccompanied by delivery, and 
 — whether security was the object or not — every 
 condition of the statute was fulfilled ; (2) that no 
 reputation of ownership had been created in the 
 seller A. Therefore B. & C. had a right to the 
 ship — Held, (hat where there is an absolute bona 
 fide contract of sale of an article, which is not de- 
 livered before the bankruptcy of the seller, the 
 right of the buyer under the contract to have de- 
 livery cannot be defeated by proof that the char- 
 acter of buyer had been conferred on him merely 
 for the purpose of his having a security for money 
 intended to be advanced by him. M'Bain v. 
 Wallace & Co. - 6 App, 688 
 
 XXII. SCOTCH lAW— STATUTORY DUTY. 
 Waterworks Act — Damage to Lands hy 
 
 extraordinary Flood — Escape of Water from Meser- 
 iioir — Liability of Water Commissioners — Vam^- 
 num fatale — KirJicaldy and Dysart Waterworks 
 Act, 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. cxxxix.X ss. 43, 49.] 
 By the 43rd section cjf the Kirkaldy and Dysart 
 Waterworks Act, 1867, it was provided that tlie 
 commissioners under the Act " should be bound to 
 make good to the Countess of Eothes and her 
 heirs, &c., all damages which may be occasioned to 
 her or themj by reason of, or in consequence of 
 any bursting, -or flow, or escape of water from any 
 reservou-, or acqueduct, or pipe, or other work 
 connected therewith" which may be constructed 
 by the commissioners. The Countess is proprietrix 
 of lands situated below the site of one of the 
 reservoirs, and during an extraordinary rainfall a 
 great quantity of water was continuously dis- 
 
 XXII. SCOTCH LAW — STATUTOEY DUTY — 
 
 continued. 
 charged from the reservoir, through a waste weir 
 into the watercourse of a bum, and did much 
 damage to the Countess's lands. She claimed 
 compensation. There was no failure or insuffici- 
 ency of the works and no negligence : — Seld, 
 reversing the decision of the Court below (Lord 
 Blackburn dissenting), that on the construction of 
 the above clause the Countess was entitled to 
 compensation for damage by flood waters from the 
 reservoir, no matter how caused. — Per Lord 
 Watson : Statutory provisions, such as here, in a 
 local and personal Act must be regarded as a 
 contract between the parties, whether made by 
 their mutual agreement, or forced on them by the 
 legislature. Countess of Kothes v. Kikkoaldy 
 
 AND DrSART WaTERWOEKS COMMISSIONERS 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 694 
 
 XXIIL SCOTCH LAW— TEUSTEE. 
 
 Severance of Funds — Investment for 
 
 Behoof of Distinct Parties — Indemnity of Trustees 
 for Liability incurred^ A testatrix directed her 
 trustees to pay the interest or annual rent of 
 £2000 to Mrs. A. during her life and after her 
 death to divide that sum among her children; 
 and to pay the interest or annual rent of a 
 similar amount to Mrs. B. in life-rent, with 
 the fee to her children. — The trustees were em- 
 powered by the deed to realize, or to continue to 
 "hold any or all of such shares or stocks" as 
 might belong to the testatrix at her decease, 
 should they consider it advisable or expedient to 
 do so, without any personal responsibility for loss, 
 if any, thereby sustained ; " with power also " to 
 lend or place out on such securities, heritable or 
 moveable, as they shall consider advantageous, 
 the foresaid legacies of £2000 and £2000 respec- 
 tively, the securities to be conceived in favour of 
 my trustees, and that for the purposes of this 
 trust and no otherwise." — The testatrix at her 
 death held £850 stock of a unlimited bank. The 
 trustee, at the desire of Mrs. A. and without con- 
 sulting Mrs. B., set £200 of this stock aside as 
 part of the fund appropriated to Mrs, A., and 
 realized the remainder. They afterwards on the 
 narrative of the purposes of the trust deed, and of 
 the sums invested for the two specific legacies 
 of £2000, and that they had paid the residue, re- 
 ceived their discharge from Mi-s. A. and Mrs. B. 
 Statements and separate accounts of interest on 
 the investments allocated to each were sent half- 
 yearly to Mrs. A. and Mrs. B. AH the invest- 
 ments stood in the names of the testatrix's trus- 
 tees. — The bank became insolvent, and calls were 
 made upon the trustees in respect of the £200 
 stock. They sought to indemnify themselves for 
 payment of the calls out of the whole trust estate. 
 Mrs. B. objected to any portion of her legacy 
 being taken : — Held, reversing the decision of the 
 Court below, that the trustees had the power to 
 sever and had severed the two legacies, and had 
 placed them in separate investments for behoof 
 of the respective beneficiaries, and therefore the 
 trustees had no right to relief from the investments 
 allotted to Mrs. B. and her family for liabilities 
 incurred on those allotted to Mrs. A. and her 
 family.— JFa; parte Garland (10 Ves. 110) followed. 
 Feasbr v. Mtjrdock - 6 App. Cas 865 
 
( 1405 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 (. 1406 ) 
 
 XXIV. SCOTCH lAW— WIIAv 
 
 ■■'• Ambiguity — Molograph Domment, signed 
 
 and headed '» Notes- of intended Settlement."'} In 
 
 ' itheiepositories of the deceased who left no. other 
 'testameaatary instrument was' found a holograph 
 
 iii-writingy signed and ■ dated and complete in its 
 testamentary provisions; but headed "Notes of 
 intended settlement by'" the deceased. The proof 
 allowed threw no light on the intentions of the 
 
 ■ ■ deceased : — Held, affirming the decision of the 
 Court below that the document was the last will 
 and settlement' of the dijceased. — Per Lord 
 ■Watson: A mere ambiguity oceuring in the de- 
 •igcriptive title written by the testator cannot 
 qualify the terms or destroy* the validity of the 
 • document which it professes to describe, when the 
 legal character and ■effect of the document taken 
 by itself are not doubtful. Such an ambiguity 
 will justify inquiry ; but should the parties lead 
 no proof, or should the proof adduced by them be 
 iciGonolusive, the document must receive eifeot 
 according to its tenor and substance. Whyte v. 
 PoLLOK - - - - 7 App. Cas. 400 
 
 XXV. SCOTCH LAW— PEACTICE. 
 
 1. Appeal — Bankruptcy.^ Where an 
 
 appeal involves a question of the Appellant's 
 status, the House, will allow it to be proceeded 
 with notwithstanding , the bankruptcy of the 
 Appellant. G.v.'M.. - 10 App. Cas. 171 
 
 2. Appeal — Findings of Fact — Judicature 
 
 Act 0/ Scotland, 18.25^(6 Geo. 4, e. 120), s. 40— 
 Cases commenced in Sheriff's Court — Bemit to 
 Court below^PrpQf.} . The 40th section of the 
 Judicature Act of Scotland, 1825, enacts, inter 
 alia, that the judgment in cases commenced in 
 the Sheriff's Court shall be subject to appeal to 
 the House of Lords only so far as the same de- 
 pends on, or is affected by, matters of law ; but 
 shall, in so fa,r as relates to the facts, be held to 
 have the, force and effect of a special verdict of 
 the jury, finally and conclusively fixing the 
 spveral facts specified in thie interlocutor. — In 
 " appears falling within the scope of this section, 
 the House of Lords has no concern with the proof 
 which has been led in the Sheriffs Court. When 
 it can be shewn that the Court of Session has not 
 exhausted the issue before it, and that there are 
 material;. questions of fact left undetermined, a 
 remit will be. made to the Court below to pro- 
 nounce findings upon these questions, but that 
 can only be shewn by a reference to the record, 
 and not to the proof. And if the questions are 
 not raised.by the record, no remit will be made. 
 Maokay t). Dick - - 6 App. Cas. 351 
 
 3. Appeal — Findings of Fad — Sheriff's 
 
 Court — ■■ Competency of Appeal under sect. 40, 
 6 Geo. 4, c. 120 — Issue, raised in the Pleadings — 
 Ship ^Acceptance of Abandonment — Matter of 
 Law er Fact.'] The 40th section of 6 Geo. 4, c. 120, 
 iproYides : " When in causes commenced in any of 
 the cotirts of the sheriffs, or of the magistrates of 
 burghs, or other inferior courts, matter of fact 
 sh^ll be disputed, and a proof shall be allowed 
 and taken according to the present practice, the 
 Coju-t of Session shallj in reviewing the judgment 
 prdieeding on such proof, distinctly specify in 
 their' hiterlocutor the several facts material to the 
 case- which they find to be established by the 
 proof, and express how far their judgment proceeds 
 
 XXV. SCOTCH lAW— PBACTICE— coreiwiMe^. 
 on the matters of fact so found, or on matter of law, 
 and the several points of law which they mean to 
 decide ; and the judgment on the cause thus pro- 
 nounced shall be subject to appeal to the House 
 of Lords, in so far only as the same depends on or 
 is affected by matter of law." — A. raised an action 
 in the Sheriff's Court against B. for £50, the sum 
 payable by him as underwriter on a policy of 
 insurance on A.'s vessel the Krishna. On the 
 23rd of May the vessel was driven on a sandy 
 beach on the West Court pi India, during a vio- 
 lent storm. Soon afterwards the usual monsoon 
 commenced and lasted till October. On the 7th 
 of June A., on hearing from the master that it 
 was impossible to save the ship, gave notice of 
 abandonment to the underwriters; which they 
 refused to accept. On the 1st of October A. raised 
 this action averring that the vessel had become 
 a wreck, and in his ameilded pleadings he set 
 ' out that the underwriters had taken possession of 
 the vessel on the 15th of October and had floated 
 her on the 16th of November, and taken her to 
 Bombay and had docked her and executed certain 
 repairs and that thus the undeswriters had ac- 
 cepted the abandonment. — The underwriters 
 alleged that they only took possession of the 
 vessel as salvors, that no repairs were done except 
 for the safety of the ship, and that A. was in- 
 formed of all they were doing, and to the last it 
 was intimated to A. that the vessel was lying at 
 Bombay at his risk. — The pourt of Session foimd, 
 inter alia, " that the underwriters did not accept 
 the abandonment : that there was on the 7th of 
 June and continued thereafter to be a reasonable 
 prospect of the ship being got off the sandy shore 
 on which she lay without greater expense than a 
 prudent uninsured owner would reasonably incur," 
 therefore that there was not at that date a con- 
 structive total loss of the ship. — A. contended on 
 the question of the competency of his appeal 
 (1) that the finding that the underwriters did not 
 accept the abandonment, was a matter of mixed 
 law and fact ; (2), that the findirigs of fact were 
 incomplete and ought to be rectified on remit: — 
 Held, applying the rule of Machayy. Diclt (6 App. 
 Cas. 251) that the Court had decided the issue 
 submitted to them, an issue of fact and not of 
 law; namely, that the underwriters did not ac- 
 cept the abandonment, and accordingly their find- 
 ing was not open to impeachment under sect. 40 
 of 6 Geo. 4, 0. 120 ; and (2), that looking at the 
 controversy raised by the record, the findings in 
 fact were reasonably complete. — Per Lord Pen- 
 zance: The question whether the underwriters 
 .accept the abandonment or not is a question of 
 fact; but the circumstances of the case inay be 
 such, that a jury may be told as a matter of law, 
 that if they think the underwriters have done 
 certain acts which are consistent only with their 
 having accepted the abandonment, then they 
 ought to find that the abandonment has been 
 accepted. — Kemarks, whether in Scotland opn- 
 -strijctive total loss is to be taken from the date of 
 notice of abandonment, or from the date of com- 
 mencement of action. Shepheed v. Hendekson 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 49 
 
 Amendment of record 6 App. Cia.s. 560 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 2. 
 
( 1407 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1408 ) 
 
 XXV. SCOTCH LAW— PKACTICE— scrfinMed. 
 
 Evidence - 6 App. Cas. 489 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 692, 763 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 2, 3, 4. 
 SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION— Subsequent bank- 
 ruptcy in England 82 Oh. D. 816 
 See Bankkuptcy — Adjudication. 4. 
 SCOTCH WILL — Scotch assets — Administration 
 action ia England 22 Ch. D. 456 I 
 [9 App. Cas. 34 
 See ExEOUTOE — Actions. 16. 
 SCOTLAND — Service of bastardy summons in 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 261 ; 10 App. Cas. 45 
 See Bastardy. 6. 
 
 Service of writ 12 ft. B. D. 50 ; 14 ft. B. D. 78 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. I). 240 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Coukt — See- 
 vice. 2, -3, 10. 
 
 "Will proved in — Assets in Scotland and 
 
 England 6 P. D. 19 
 
 See Administratoe — Geant. 4. 
 SEA riSHEBIES. 
 
 See FiSHEET Acts — Statutes. 
 
 Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts — 
 Statutea. 
 SEA WALI. 
 
 liability to repair — Frontager — Fre- 
 
 scription — Extraordinary Violence of the Sea — 
 Act of God — Sewers, Commissioners of, Order hy, 
 to repair Sea Wall, Effect of — Land Drainage Act, 
 18U1 (24 * 25 Vict c. 133), s. 33 — Disqualifi- 
 cation of Commissioners hy reason of Interest — 
 23 Ben. 8, c. 5 ; 13 Eliz. c. 9.] The extent of the 
 liability of a frontager to repair a sea wall, 
 whether arising by tenure, prescription, or cus- 
 tom, can only be ascertained by usage. — J. A. 
 was a frontager in a level on the Essex shore 
 of the Thames under the jurisdiction of Com- 
 missioners of Sewers. An ancient sea wall pro- 
 tected the level against incursions of the sea. 
 There was evidence proving a prescriptive lia- 
 bility on the part of the frontagers in the level to 
 maintain and repair this sea wall. A portion of 
 the sea wall in front of J. A.'s land was destroyed 
 T^y an extraordinary storm and high tide. The 
 wall was previously in good repair, and in a 
 proper condition to resist the ordinary action of 
 the sea: — Held, on the authority of Keighhys 
 Case (10 Eep. 139) and J}, v. Commissioners of 
 Sewers for Somerset (8 T. E. 312), that, in the 
 absence of evidence sufiScient to shew that the 
 prescriptive liability of the frontagers extended 
 to the repair of damage occasioned by extra- 
 ordinary violence of the sea J. A. was not liable 
 to repair the damage thus occasioned to the wall 
 at his own expense, but the expense of so doing 
 must fall on the whole of the level. — By sect. 33 of 
 the Land Drainage Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict, 
 c. 133), it is provided that commissioners of 
 sewers acting within their jurisdiction may, 
 without the presentment of a jury, maJre any 
 order in respect of the execution of any work, 
 the levying of any rate, or doing any act which 
 they might but for this section have made with 
 sucli presentment, subject to a proviso that any 
 person aggrieved by any such order may appeal 
 therefrom to the quarter sessions. — Orders were 
 
 SEA WAll — continued. 
 
 made by the Commissioners of Sewers upon J. A. 
 to execute repairs to the sea wall rendered neces- 
 sary by the aforesaid extraordinary storm and 
 higli tide. Among the commissioners making the 
 orders were two persons who were interested in 
 lands in the level, liable to be rated to a general 
 rate : — Held, by the Queen's Bench Division, 
 that these oi'ders had, by virtue of the above- 
 mentioned section, the same eftect as if made on 
 the presentment of a jury, and that therefore so 
 long as they stood they had the effect of adjudica- 
 tions against J. A. rendering him liable to do such 
 repairs to the wall:— But held, also, by the 
 Queen's Bench Division and the Court of Appeal, 
 that such orders must be quashed on certiorari on 
 the ground that two of the commissioners making 
 them were interested parties. The Queen v. 
 
 COMMISSIONEES OP SeWEBS FOR FOBBING 
 
 [14 ft. B. O. 561 
 
 SEAL — Company — Lands Glauses Act — Sum- 
 mons in Chambers 25 Ch. D. 168 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Court— Cham- 
 BEBS. 11. 
 
 Contract not under — ^Local board. 
 
 See Cases under Local Goveenment — 
 Local Authobitt. 1 — 4. 
 
 Contract not under — School Board 
 
 See Cobpobation. 3. [14 ft. B. D. 500 
 
 SEALING UP ENTEIES 25 Ch. D. 247 
 
 See Pbactice — Supeeme Couet — 
 Production OF Documents. 15. 
 SEAMAN— Neglect to join ship 11 ft. B. D. 225 
 See Ship — Seamen. 
 
 Wages and rating. 
 
 See Ship — Mbbchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 
 Wages— Priority of lien 8 P. D. 129 ; 9 P. D. 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 3, 5. [37 
 SEARCH — For incumbrances. 
 
 See Vendor and Puechasee — Title — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Women detained for immoral purposes. 
 
 See Cblminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 SEAWORTHINESS— Warranty 10 P. D. 103 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 13. 
 
 SECOND COUSINS— Will— Construction 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 262; 19 Ch. D. 201 
 
 See Will — Words. 5, 6. 
 
 SECOND MORTGAGEE— Eight of redemption 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 618 
 
 See Mortgage — Prioeity. 1. 
 
 Sale — ^Eight to balance of purchase-money 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 954 
 
 See MoBTGAGB — Eedbmption. 5. 
 SECRET TRUST— Mortmain 28 Ch. D. 372 
 
 See Charity — Mortmain. 6. 
 SECURED CREDITOR— Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Secured 
 Creditor. 
 Bankruptcy - 26 Ch. D. 716 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Mutual Dbalinqs. 4. 
 Composition - - - 16 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 1. 
 
(. 1409 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1410 ) 
 
 SECTJRED CSEDITOE— coniinued. 
 
 Proof in administration suit 18 Ch. D. 370 
 
 See Executor — Actions. 21. 
 
 "VVinding-up-Proof - 16 Ch. D. 337, 590 
 
 See Company — Secured Creditor. 1, 2. 
 SECUEITY— Bill of sale— Order and disposition 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 210 
 See Baxkruptot — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 Debtor's summons - - 22 Oh, D. 312 
 
 See Baukkuptot — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 18. 
 
 For bills of exchange. 
 
 See Cases under Bill of Exchange — 
 Securities for. 
 - — ^ For bills of exchange — Indorser 
 
 [6 App, Cas. 1 
 See Principal and Surety — Indem- 
 nity. 1. 
 
 For bills of exchange — Scotch law 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 366 
 See Scotch Law — ^Bill op Exchange. 3. 
 
 For costs. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court— Security foe Costs. 
 
 For costs — ^Divorce — Attachment 10 P. D. 
 
 See Areest — ^Debtors Act. 2. [183 
 
 For costs — Next friend of married woman 
 
 [19 Ch. S. 94 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Nex* 
 Friend. 2. 
 For costs — Eemission of action to County- 
 Court - - 13 ft. 3. D. 835 
 See County Court — Practice. 4. 
 
 For costs — Winding-up petition 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 457 
 See Company — ^Winding-up Order. 14. 
 
 For costs — Winding-up — ^Appeal 
 
 See Company— Appeal. [23 Ch. D. 370 
 
 For damages — Collision — Counter-claim 
 
 [10 P. D. 33 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Counter- 
 claim. 
 
 Innkeeper — Lien - 23 Ch. D. 380 
 
 See Inn — Innkeeper. 2. 
 — Insufficient — Liability of trustees 
 
 [23 Ch. S. 483 ; 29 Ch. S. 889 ; 
 [30 Ch. D. 490 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 3, 4, 5. 
 
 One of two co-sureties - 17 Ch. D. 825 
 
 See Principal and Surety— Contbibu- 
 tion. 3. 
 
 Eight of surety to - 19 Ch. D. 616 
 
 SeePRiNciPAL and Surety — Indemnity. 
 2. 
 
 Valuation of— Proof in bankruptcy 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 105 ; 13 ft. B. D. 128 ; 
 [14 ft. B. D. 121 ; 8 App. Cas. 606 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 7, 8, 11, 12. 
 BEIZUEE WITHOUT SALE 17 Ch. D. 839 
 
 See Baskruptcy— Protected Transac- 
 tion. 3. 
 SENTENCE— Ecclesiastical law— Process to en- 
 force - - 6 App. Cas. 424 
 See Practice— Ecolbslastioal— MoNi- 
 
 ■JION. 
 
 SEPARATE ESTATE Or WIFE. 
 
 See Cases under Husband and AVife — , 
 Separate Estate. 
 
 Bequest to husband and wife ^ Married 
 
 Women's Property Act 27 Ch. D, 166 
 See Will— Joint Tenancy. 
 
 Charge on — Interim injunction 
 
 ^ [16 Ch. D. 660 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court '— In-, 
 junction. 5. 
 
 Covenant to settle after-acquired property 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 384, 531 ; 22 Ch. D. 275 ; 
 [24 Ch. D. 195 
 See Settlement — Future Property., 
 2, 7, 9, 10. 
 
 Deed of separation — ^Married woman 
 
 [8 P. D. 16 
 See Administrator — Married Woman. 
 2. 
 
 Election - 27 Ch, D. 606 ; 28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Election. 5, 6. 
 
 Married Women's Property Act. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Husband 
 AND Wife— Married Women's Pro- 
 perty Acts. 
 
 Partnership— Marshalling of securities 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 148 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 6. 
 
 Policy etfected under Married Women's Pro.. 
 
 pertyAct - 23 Ch. D. 625 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married Wo- 
 men's Property Act. 5. 
 
 Post-nuptial settlement - 24 Ch. D. 597 
 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 3. 
 
 Power of testamentary disposition 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 284 
 See Power — Execution. 16. 
 Sale of, under Lands Clauses Act — Dis- 
 ability - - 18 Ch. D, 429 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 8. 
 
 Taxation of costs - ' 24 Ch. D. 405 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 9. 
 SEPARATE EXAMINATION— Married woman 
 
 [16 Ch. S. 362^ 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 3. 
 SEPARATE USE — ^Will — Constraction 
 
 [17Ch. D. 794; 24 Ch. D. 703 
 Sie Will — ^Separate Use. 1, 2. 
 
 Will — Eestraint on anticipation 
 
 See Will— Perpetuity. 6. [17Ch.D.36& 
 
 SEPARATION DEED. 
 
 See Cases under. Husband and Wipe — 
 Separation Deed. 
 
 Variation — Dissolution of marriage 9 P. D. 76 
 
 See Practice — Divorce— Settlements. 
 8. 
 SEftUESTEATION — Evasion of service 
 
 [10 P. D. 187 
 See Practice — Divorce — Sequestra- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 Injunction to restrain — Bankruptcy , 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 665 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Pkocbedings 
 1. 
 
 2 Z 
 
( 1«1 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1412 ) 
 
 SEftUESTEATION— con^mwerf. 
 
 . Pension Of Indian officer - 8 P, D. 163 
 
 See Peactice — Divokce — Seqdestea- 
 
 TION. 1. 
 
 Practice — Supreme Court 17 Ch. D. 433 ; 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 653 ; 22 Ch. S. 233 
 
 See Practice — Supkeme Couet — Se- 
 
 QUESTKATION. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 • Eepairs done by sequestrator — Objection to 
 
 accounts — Dilapidations to glebe build- 
 ings - - 15 Q. B. D. 222 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Dilapida- 
 tions. 
 
 . Scotch bankruptcy 9 App. Cas. 966 
 
 See Scotch Law — Bankeuptcy. 
 
 Scotch bankruptcy - 6 App. Caa. 588 
 
 See Scotch Law— Sale op Goods. 2. 
 
 Scotch bankruptcy — Subsequent bankruptcy 
 
 in England - 23 Ch. D. 816 
 
 See Bankedptct — Adjudication. 4. 
 SERVANT. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 appp.entice. 
 Mastee and Seevant. 
 
 Knowledge of — Interrogatories 
 
 [10 Q. B. D, 161 ; 24 Ch. D. 110 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — Intes- 
 bosatoeies. 5, 6. 
 
 Marriage with — Condition forbidding 
 
 See Will— Condition. 10. [16 Ch. D. 188 
 SEEVICE— Affidavit of - 26 Ch. D. 84 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — De- 
 fault. 6. 
 
 Appeal in bankruptcy - 20 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Liquidation. 7. 
 
 Attachment— Solicitor - 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 See Peactice— Supeeme Couet — Pro- 
 duction op Documents. 16. 
 
 Bastardy summons — Scotland 
 
 [12 Q,. B. D. 261 ; 10 App. Cae. 45 
 See Bastaedt. 6. 
 
 Debtor's summons - 25 (Jh. D. 112, 336 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 19, 20. 
 
 Evasion of — Writ of sequestration 
 
 [10 P. D. 187 
 See Practice — Divoeoe — Sequestra- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 Injunction — Committal for breach 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 778 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — At- 
 tachment. 9. 
 
 • Judgment — Partition suit - 16 Ch. D. 360 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 1. 
 ^— - Lunatic — Business carried on in name of 
 firm 10 ft. B. D. 471 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 1. 
 
 Motion for attachment— Copy of affidavit 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 64 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 7. 
 
 • Notice of appeal — Solicitor vrho has ceased 
 
 to act - - - 29 Ch. D. 351 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pay- 
 ment INTO CouKT. 6. 
 
 SEEVICE — continued. 
 
 Notice— Shareholder 24 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company — Prospectus. 6. 
 
 Notice to determine lease 15 ft. B. D. 256 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Ee-entey. 
 9. 
 
 Notice to treat - 30 Ch. D. 553 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsoey 
 Powers. 6. 
 
 Order of magistrate - 27 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Metropolis — Managejient Acts. 3. 
 
 Out of jurisdiction. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supeeme 
 CduBT — Service. 2 — 11. 
 
 Out of jurisdiction — Interpleader 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 171 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ser- 
 vice. 7. 
 
 Out of jurisdiction — Lancaster Court 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 280 
 See Court — Lancaster Couet. 
 
 Out of jurisdiction — Eestitution of conjugal 
 
 rights— Petition 10 P. L. 186 
 
 See Peactice — Divorce — Seevice. 
 
 Out of jurisdiction — Third-party notice 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 96 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Couet — Third 
 Paety. 10. 
 
 Partner, in action against firm 19 Ch. D. 124 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Court — Pae- 
 ties. 11. 
 
 Process. 
 
 See Justice op the Peace — Peactice 
 — Statutes. 
 
 Substituted— Notice of appeal 24 Ch. D. 364 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 3. 
 
 Substituted, on solicitor- Attachment 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 746 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — At-_ 
 
 TACHMENT. 8. 
 
 Summons— Settled Land Act 27 Ch. D. 179 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Restrictions. 
 1. 
 - — Warrant of arrest— City of London Court 
 
 [10 P. D. 36 
 See Peactice — Admiralty — Service. 1. 
 
 Writ- Admiralty - 10 P. D. 62 
 
 See Practice — ^Admiealty — Seevice. 3. 
 SESSIONS. 
 
 Case stated — Quarter Sessions — 12 & 13 
 
 Vict. t. 45, s. 11 — Agreement for Entry of Judg- 
 ment according to the Opinion of the Court.'] A 
 case stated for the opinion of the Queen's Bench 
 Division, under sect. 11 of 12 & 13 Vict. c. 45, 
 should contain a statement of the agreement of 
 the parties that judgment in conformity with the 
 decision of the Court may be entered at Quarter 
 Sessions in the manner provided by the section. 
 Corporation of Peteeboeough e. Oveeseers of 
 Thcelby - - - 8 ft. B. D. 586 
 
 Appeal — Metropolis Local Management 
 
 Acts— Order for demolition 9 ft. B. D. 41 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 1. 
 Appeal against order of removal — Corrobora- 
 tive evidence - 6 ft. B. D. 31 
 See PooK Law — Settlement, 15. 
 
( 1113 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1414 ) 
 
 SESSIONS — continued. 
 
 Appeal iigamst rate — Time for giving notice 
 
 of appeal - - 6 Q. B. D. 100 
 
 See PooB-RATE— Pbooedubb. 5. 
 
 Case stated — Practice — -Civil proceeding 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 139 
 See Poor-bate — Proobduub. 4. 
 
 Case stated — Queen's Benchi Division — 
 
 Leave to appeal 6 Q. B. D. 309 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Supkemb Codet — Ap- 
 peal. 5. 
 
 SET-OFF. 
 
 1. Army Agents — Banker's Lien — Value 
 
 of Commission.'] K., an officer in the army, mort- 
 gaged to E., to secure £5000, all moneys which 
 should be realized by sale of his commission. In 
 December, 1877, K. obtained leave to retire from 
 the army, and his commission was valued at 
 £3000, which on the 6th of December, 1877, was 
 paid by the Paymaster-General to C. & Co., the 
 army agents of tlie regiment, and was carried to 
 the deposit account kept by C. & Co. with the 
 Army Purchase Commissioners, there to remain 
 till K.'s retirement wa? gazetted. K. kept an 
 account current with C. & Co. as his bankers, 
 which was overdrawn to the amount of £647. K.'s 
 retirement was gazetted on the evening of the 
 ISth of December, and as soon as C. & Co.'s office 
 opened on the 19th, K. Rave them notice of his 
 security. E. having claimed payment of the 
 £3000, C. & Co. claimed to retain out of it the 
 £647 -.—Seld, by Bacon, V.C, that C. & Co. re- 
 ceived the £3000 as K.'s bankers, and had a 
 banker's lien upon it for the balance due to them, 
 and were therefore entitled to retain the £647.^ 
 Held, on appeal, that as soon as K.'s retirement 
 was gazetted the £3000 became money had and 
 received by C. & Co. for his use, and for which he 
 could have brought an action at law ; that they 
 had a right to set off the balance due lo them 
 against this demand ; that this set-off was equally 
 available against E,, of whose security C. & Go. 
 had no notice until after their right to set oif had 
 arisen ; and that, therefore, independently of any 
 question of banker's lien, C. & Co. were entitled 
 to retain the £647. Eoxbtjkghe v. Cox 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 520 
 
 2, Surety — Debt due to Principal.'] Ac- 
 tion on a covenant to pay all Jiabilifiea which 
 the Plaintiff might incur under a deed of as- 
 signment made between the Plaintiff and other 
 parties. The Defendant pleaded that the cove- 
 nant was the joint and several covenant of him- 
 self and one Wilson, and that, before action the 
 Plaintiff was indebted to "Wilson in an amount 
 exceeding the PlaintiiFs claim against the Defen- 
 dant ; and that Wilson had assigned the Plaintiff's 
 debt to himself and the Defendant in equal shares 
 as tenants in common. As to one half of the 
 Plaintiff's claim the Defendant claimed to set off 
 one-half of the debt so assigned, and as to the 
 other half, the Defendant said that he was en- 
 titled to be exonerated by his co-surety Wilson, 
 and to call upon him to contribute in equal shares 
 to the payment of the Plaintiff's claim, and was 
 entitled to set off the share remaining vested in 
 Wilson against this part of the Plaintiff's claim : — 
 Held, by Watkin Williams and Mathew, JJ., that 
 
 SET-OFF — continued. 
 
 the defence was no answer to the Plaintiff's claim. 
 Bowyeae v. Pawson - 6 Q. B. D. 840 
 
 3. Trustees, Debtors to Estate — Bank- 
 ruptcy of Trustee — Costs — Bankruptcy Act, 1869 J . 
 Crombie and Storer were two trustees of an estate 
 administered by the Court. Crombie became 
 bankrupt after 18C9. A balance of £896 was' 
 found due from Crombie to the estate, and a 
 balance of £745 was found due from the estate to 
 the two trustees jointly •.—Held, that the debt due 
 from the estate 'to the two trustees could not be' 
 set off against the debt due from one ; that the 
 Plaintiff's were entitled to an inquiry what part 
 of the £745 found due. to the two trustees was, 
 as between the two, due to Crombie the bank-- 
 rupt, but as that inquiry was not asked for, and 
 as there was evidence shewing that all the 
 money was in fact due to Storer, the debt so duo 
 must be paid to him. The insolvent trustee 
 being indebted to the estate and the solvent 
 trustee not being responsible for that debt,; and 
 the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, having made a debt 
 arising from £t breach of trust to continue not- 
 withstanding the bankruptcy : — Held, that a 
 reference be directed to the Taxing-Master to 
 apportion the costs of the trustees appearing by 
 the same solicitor, and that the costs of the 
 solvent trustee be paid out of the estate, and the 
 costs apportioned as the costs of the insolvent 
 trustee be set off against the amount found due 
 from him to .' the estate. — Whether under this 
 direction the whole of the common costs of the 
 two trastees would be allowed to the solvent 
 trustee or divided, must depend on the settled 
 practice of the Taxiiig-Master's office. McEwan 
 V. Crombie - - - - 25 Ch, D. 178 
 
 Bankruptcy— Mutual dealings. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Mutual 
 Dealings. 
 ■ — - Bankruptcy - - - 22 Ch. D. 586 
 
 See ExEODTOE— Actions. 18. 
 
 Between Crown and subject 9 App. Cas. 571 
 
 See,. Colonial Law — Ceylon. 4. 
 
 Company^Contract — Winding-up. [30 Ch. 
 
 See CosB'ANX— Contracts. 4. [D. 216 
 — TT Company — Winding-up ^ 28 Ch. D. 687 ; 
 
 [8 ft. B, D. 179 
 See Company — Set-ope. 1, 2. 
 
 . Company— Winding-up - 27 Ch. D. 322 
 
 See Company— Dibeotob's Qualifica- 
 tion. 2. ■ , 
 
 Company — ^Winding-up - 9 ft. B. D. 648 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 434 
 See Sale op Goods — Eesoission. 2. 
 
 Damages and costs — Solicitors lien 
 
 [14 ft, B. D. 922 
 See Pbaotioe — Supreme Coubt— ^Costs. 
 44. 
 
 Executor-TT-Costs in probate suit — Legacies 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 300 
 See ExEOCTOp — Eetaineb. 5. 
 
 Landlord and tenant — Breaches of covenant 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 410 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 5. 
 
 Law of Jersey - - 9 App. Cas. 726 
 
 See Colonial Law — Jersey. 3. 
 2 Z 2 
 
( 1415 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1416 ) 
 
 SET-OFF — continued. 
 
 Misappropriation of money by directors 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 519 
 See Company — Diebctok's Liability. 5. 
 
 Pension of retired clerk 17 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Ecclesiastical Law — Clekgy. 3. 
 
 Pleading -Counter-claim 22 Ch. D. 122 ; 
 
 [7 Q. B. D. 626 
 See Peaotioe — Supkeme Coubt — 
 
 COUNTEB-OLAIM. 7, 8. 
 
 Pleading — Counter-claim — Eeply 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 428 
 /SeePKAOTioE — Sdpbeme Coubt — Keply. 
 1. 
 
 Undisclosed principal 9 ft. B, D. 630 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 874 
 See Peinoipal and Agent — Peinoipal's 
 Liability. 6. 
 
 SETTING ASIDE AWARD 19 Ch. D. 68; 6 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Abbiteation — -Awakd. 2, 3. [67 
 
 SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT— Collusion 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 421 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Coukt — Ap- 
 peal. 18. 
 
 SETTING ASIDE SETTLEMENT 18 Ch. D. 668 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 278 
 
 See Voluntaey Conveyance. 5, 6. 
 
 SETTLED ACCOTTNT - 6 App. Cas. 181 
 
 See Moetgage — Conteact. 11. 
 Audit— Building society - 28 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Building Society. 3. 
 Impeaching accounts 27 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 See Pbactioe — Supbeme Coubt — 
 Cbambees. 2. 
 Opening of - 26 Ch. D. 717 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbeme Coubt — Pbo- 
 
 DUOTION OP DOODMENTS. 10. 
 
 SETTLED ESTATE— Fire insurance 23 Ch. D. 188 
 See Insubanoe, Fibe. 2. 
 
 SETTLED ESTATES ACTS. 
 
 1. Irregular Order— 40 & 41 Vict. c. 18 
 
 — Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881 
 (44 * 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 10—Protectimi of Fur- 
 chaser under Order.^ An order for sale under 
 the Settled Estates Act, 1877, contained a direc- 
 tion dispensing with the concurrence or consent 
 of tlie persons entitled, whether beneficially or 
 otherwise, to any estate or interest subsequent 
 to a certain estate tail, without naming them. 
 The purchaser objected to the title on the ground 
 that the order on the face of it was irregular : — 
 Seld, by Hall, V,C., that under the special cir- 
 cumstances of the case it was unnecessary for the 
 parties whose concurrence was dispensed with 
 to be named in the order : — Held, by the Court of 
 Appeal, that under the 70th section of the Con- 
 veyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, the 
 purchaser would in any event have a good title — 
 that section being applicable whether the objec- 
 tion to the order appears on the face of it or not, 
 and that the purchaser must complete. In re Hall 
 Dare's Conteact - 21 Ch. D. 41 
 
 2. Married Woman — Petition for Confir- 
 mation of Contract for Sale — Settled Estates Act, 
 1877 (.40 & 41 Vict. c. 18), s. 50— Consent of Married 
 
 SETTLED ESTATES ACTS — continued. 
 Woman — Examination — Married Women! s Pro-, 
 perty Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), ss. 1, 2.] 
 Notwithstanding the provisions of sect. 50 of the 
 Settled Estates Act, 1877, that when a married 
 woman consents to an application to the Court' 
 under the Act, she is to be examined apart from 
 her husband as to her consent, such an examina- 
 tion is not now necessary in the case of a woman 
 who has married since the commencement of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882. Eiddell 
 V. Eebington - - - 26 Ch. D. 220 
 
 3. Married Woman — Separate Examina- 
 tion—Settled Estates Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 
 18), «. 50 — Married Women's Property Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 75), s. 1.] In the case of a 
 woman married before the commencement of the 
 Married Women's Property Act, 1882, sect. 1 of 
 the Act applies only as to property acquired by 
 her after the commencement of the Act. — There- 
 fore, if such a woman is a petitioner, or a Eespon- 
 dent to a petition, under the Settled Estates Act. 
 1877, relating to property her interest in wliich 
 was acquired before the commencement of the 
 Act of 1882, she must be examined separately, as 
 provided by sect. 50 of the Act of 1877. In re 
 Habbis' Settled Estates - 28 Ch. D. 171 
 
 4. No Beneficial Owner — 40 & 41 Vict. v. 
 
 18, ss. 4, 13, 23, ie— Legal Estate — Trustees — 
 Persons to present Petition — Seceiver.^ Where 
 an estate is vested in trustees and there is not for 
 the time being any beneficial owner of the rent* 
 and profits, the trustees are persons who may, 
 under the 23rd section of the Settled Estates Act, 
 1877, apply to the Court by petition in a summary 
 way to exercise the powers conferred by the Act. 
 — Wolley V. Jenkins (23 Beav. 53) discussed. 
 Vine v. Ealeigh - - 24 Ch. D. 238 
 
 8. Sale out of Court-^0 * 41 Vict. c. 18. 
 
 s. 16.] The Court has no jurisdiction to direct a 
 sale under the Settled Estates Act, 1877, to be 
 conducted out of Court. — In re Adams' Settled 
 Estates (9 Oh. D. 116) not followed. In re Hae- 
 vey's Settled Estate - - 21 Ch. D. 123 
 Conversion - - 19 Ch. D. 302 
 
 See Paetition Suit— Sale. 6. 
 Leaseholds for lives - 18 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable IjEase. 3. 
 Sale under — Succession duty 17 Ch. D. 711 
 
 See Eevenue — Succession Duty. 5. 
 
 SETTLED LAND ACT:— Col. 
 
 I. Statutes - - 1417 
 
 II. Definitions - - 1440 
 
 III. Disabilities - - 1443 
 
 I'V. Pubchase-money - - 1443 
 
 V. Eesteiotions - 1445 
 
 "VI. Tenant foe Life (and Limi- 
 ted Owneb) 
 VII. Tbustees 
 
 1446 
 1447 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES. 
 
 The Act 45 * 46 Vict. c. 88 {the Settled Land 
 Act, 1882), which cams into operation on the 31st 
 of Becember, 1882, repeals (sect. 64)— 
 23 * 24 Vict. c. 145, Parti 1 and 4, 
 27 & 28 Vict. c. 114, ss. 17, 18, and part of 21, 
 40 & 41 Vict. c. 18, s. 17, 
 
( 1417 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1118 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— oonW. 
 
 and facilitates sales, leases, and oilier dispositions 
 of settled land, and promotes the execution of im- 
 provements thereon. 
 
 1. Definitions. 
 
 2. Powers of tenant for life.' 
 
 3. Investment of capital moneys. 
 
 4. Improvement of settled estates. 
 
 5. Protection of settled estates. 
 
 6. Trustees. 
 
 7. Limited owners. 
 
 8. Settlements hj way of trust for sale. 
 
 9. Procedure — Land Commissioners. 
 
 1. Definitions. 
 Sect. 2 defines (^amongst other things'), " a settle- 
 ment for the purposes of the Act," to be any deed, 
 will, agreement for a settlement, or other agreement, 
 covenant to surrender, copy of Court roll. Act of 
 Parliament, or other instrument, or any number of 
 instruments, whether made or passed before or 
 after, or partly before and partly after the com- 
 mencement of the Act, under or by virtue of which 
 instrument or instruments any land, or any estate 
 ■or interest in land, stands for the time being limited 
 to or in trust for any persons by way of succession. 
 An estate or interest in remainder or reversion 
 not disposed of by a settlement, and reverting to the 
 settlor or descending to the testator's heir, is for the 
 purposes of the Act an estate or interest coming to 
 the settlor or heir under or by virtue of the settle- 
 ment and comprised in the subject of the settle- 
 ment. 
 
 , " Settled land " for the purposes of the Act, to be 
 land, and any estate or interest therein, which is 
 the suTy'ect of a settlement. 
 
 The determination of the question whether land 
 is settled land, for the purposes of the Act, or not, 
 is governed by the state of facts, and the limitations 
 of tlie settlement, at the time of the settlement taking 
 effect. 
 
 " The tenant for life " of settled land for the 
 purposes of the Act, to be the person who is for the 
 time being, under a settlement, beneficially entitled 
 to possession of settled land, for his life. 
 
 If, in any case, there are two or more persons so 
 entitled as tenants in com/mon, or as joint. tenants, 
 or for other concurrent estates or interests, they 
 tog ether constitute the tenant for life for purposes 
 of the Act. 
 
 A person being tenant for life within the fore- 
 going definitions shall be deemed to be such notwith- 
 standing that, under the settlement or otherwise, 
 the settled land, or his estate or interest therein, 
 is incumbered or charged in any manner or to any 
 extent. 
 
 " Trustees " of a settlement for the purposes of 
 the Act to be the persons, if any, who are for the 
 time being, v/nder a settlement, trwtees with power 
 of sale of settled land, or with, power of consent to 
 or approval of the exercise of such a power of sale, 
 or if under a settlement there are no such trustees, 
 then the persons, if any, for the time being, who are 
 by the settlement declared to be trustees thereof for 
 purposes of the Act. 
 
 " Capital money " arising under the Act to be 
 capital money arising under the Act, and receivable 
 for the trusts and purposes of the settlement. 
 
 " Person " includes corporation. 
 
 The Act 47 & 48 Vict. c. 18, s. 8, for the purposes 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conM. . 
 of the Act of 1882, defines the estate of a tenant by 
 the curtesy to be an estate arising under a settlement 
 made by his wife. 
 
 Infants — Married Women — Lunatics.] By the 
 Act 45 & 46 Vict. o. 38, s. 59, where a person who 
 is in his own right seised of or entitled in posses- 
 sion to land is an infant, then for the purposes of 
 this Act the land is settled land, and the infant 
 shall be deemed tenant for life thereof. 
 
 Sect. 60. Where a tenant for life, or a person 
 having the powers of a tenant for life under this 
 Act, is an infant, or an infant would, if he were 
 of full age, be a tenant for life, or have the powers 
 of a tenant for life under this Act, the powers of a 
 tenant for life under this Act may be exercised on 
 his behalf by the trustees of the settlement, and if 
 there are none, then by such person and in such 
 manner as the Court, on the application of a testa- 
 mentary or other guardian, or next friend of the 
 infant, either generally or in a particular instance, 
 order. 
 
 Sect. 61. — (1.) The foregoing provisions of this 
 Act do not apply in the case of a married woman. 
 (2.) Where a married woman who, if she had 
 not been u married woman, would have been a 
 tenant for life or would have had the powers of a 
 tenant for life under the foregoing provisions of 
 this Act, is entitled for her separate use, or is 
 entitled under any statute, passed or to be passed, 
 for her separate property, or as a feme sole, then 
 she, without her husband, shall have the powers of 
 a tenant for life under this Act. 
 
 (3.) Where she is entitled otherwise than as 
 aforesaid, then she and her husband together shall 
 have the power of a tenant for life under this Act. 
 (4.) The provisions of this Act referring to a 
 tenant for life and a settlement and settled land 
 shall extend to the married woman without her 
 husband, or to her and her husband together, as the 
 case may require, and to the instrument under 
 which her estate or interest arises, and to the land 
 therein comprised. 
 
 (5.) Tlie married woman may execute, make, 
 and do all deeds, instruments, and things necessary 
 or proper for giving effect to the provisions of this 
 section. 
 
 (6.) A restraint on anticipation in the settle- 
 ment shall not prevent the exercise by her of any 
 power under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 62. Where a tenant for life, or a person 
 having the powers of a tenant for life under this 
 Act, is 14 lunatic, so found by inquisition, the 
 committee of his estate may, in his name and on 
 his behalf, under an order of the Lord Chancellor, 
 or other person intrusted by virtue of the Queen's 
 Sign Manual with the care and commitment of the 
 custody of the persons and estates of lunatics, exer- 
 cise the powers of a tenant for life u/nder this Act ; 
 and the order may be made on the petition of any 
 person interested in the settled land, or of the com- 
 mittee of the estate. 
 
 2. PowEKS OF Tenant eob Life. 
 Contracts.] Sect 31.— (1.) A tenant for li/e^ 
 (i.) May contract to make any sale, exchange, 
 partition, mortgage, or charge ; and 
 (ii.) May vary or rescind, with or without con- 
 sideration, the contract, in the like cases 
 and manner in which, if he were absolute 
 
( 1419 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1420 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT-^STATITTES— amW. 
 
 owner of the settled land, he might lawfully 
 vary or rescind the same^ l)ut so that the 
 contract as varied he in conformiUj with 
 this Act ; and any such consideration, if 
 paid in money, sliall he capital money 
 arising under this Act ; and 
 (iii.) May contract to malce any lease ; and in 
 making the lease truiy vary the terms, with 
 or without consideration, hut so that the 
 lease he in conformity with this Act ; and 
 (iv.) May accept a surrender of a contract for a 
 Uase, in like manner and on the like terms 
 in and on which lie might accept a sur- 
 render of a lease ; and thereupon may 
 make a new or other contract, or new or 
 other contracts, for or relative to a lease or 
 leases, in like manner and on the lilce terms 
 in and on which he might make a new or 
 other lease, or new or other leases, where a 
 lease had. been granted ; and 
 (y.) May enter into a contract for or relating to 
 the execution of any improvement autho- 
 rized by this Act, and may vary or rescind 
 the some ; and 
 (yi.) May, in any other case, enter into a contract 
 to do any act for carrying into effect any 
 of the purposes of this Act, and may vary 
 or rescind the same. 
 (2.) Every contract shall be binding on and shall 
 enure for the benefit of the settled land, and shall 
 he 'enforceable against and by every successor in 
 title for the time being of the tenant for life, and 
 may he carried into effect by any such successor ; 
 hut so that it may be varied or rescinded by any 
 such successor, in the like case and manner, if any, 
 as if it had been made by himself. 
 
 (3.) Tlie Court may, on the application of the 
 tenant for life, or of any such su^ccessor, or of any 
 person interested in any contract, give directioTis 
 respecting the enforcing, carrying into effect, vary- 
 ing, or rescinding thereof. 
 
 (4.) Any preliminary contract under this Act for 
 or relating to a lease shall not form part of the 
 title or evidence of the title of any person to the 
 lease, or to the benefit thereof. 
 
 Heirlooms.] Sect. 37. — (1.) Where personal 
 chattels are settled on trust so as to devolve with 
 land until a, tenant in tail by purchase is horn or 
 attains the age of twenty-one years, or so as other- 
 toise to vest in some person becoming entitled to an 
 estate of freehold of inheritance in the land, a 
 tenant for life of tlie land may seU the chattels or 
 any of them. 
 
 (2.) The money arising hy the sale shall be capital 
 money arising wider this Act, and shall be paid, 
 invested, or applied, and otlierwise dealt, with in 
 Uke. manner in all respects as by this Act directed 
 with respect to other capital money arising under 
 tlvis Act, or may be invested in the purchase of 
 other chatteU, of the same or any other nature, 
 which, when purchased, shall he settled and held on 
 the same trusts, and shall devolve in the same 
 manner as tlie chattels sold. 
 
 (3.) A sale or purchase of chattels under this 
 section shall not be made without an order of the 
 Court. 
 
 Leases and Sales, &c.] Sect. 6. A tenant for 
 life may lease the settled land, or any part thereof, 
 or any easement, right, or privilege of any kind, ' 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATITTES— conW. 
 over or in relation to tlie same, for any purpose 
 whatever, whether involving waste or not, for any 
 term not exceeding — ■ 
 (i.) In case of u. building lease, ninety-nine 
 
 (ii.) In case of a mining lease, sixty years : 
 (iii.) In case of any other lease, twenty-one 
 years. 
 Sect. 7. — (1.) Every lease shall be hy deed, and 
 be made to take effect in possession not later than 
 twelve months after its date. 
 
 (2.) Every lease shall reserve the best rent that 
 can reasonably he obtained, regard being liad to 
 any fine taken, and to any money laid out or to be 
 laid out for tlie benefit of the settled land, and 
 generally to tlie circumstances of tlie case. 
 
 (3.) Every lease shall contain a covenant by the 
 lessee for payment of tlie rent, and a condition of 
 re-entry on the rent not being paid within a time 
 therein specified not exceeding thirty days. 
 
 (4.) A counterpart of every lease shall be executed 
 hy the lessee and delivered to the tenant for life ; 
 of which execution and delivery tlie execvHon of 
 the lease by the tenant for life shall he sufficient 
 evidence. 
 
 (5.) A statement, contained in a lease or in an 
 indorsement thereon, signed by the tenant for life, 
 respecting any matter of fact or of calculation 
 under this Act in relation to the lease, sliall, in 
 favour of the lessee and of those claiming under 
 him, he sufficient evidence of the matter stated. 
 
 Sect. 8. — (1.) Every building lease shall be made 
 partly in consideration of the lessee, or some per- 
 son hy whose direction the lease is granted, or some 
 other person, having erected, or agreeing to erect, 
 buildings, new or additional, or having improved 
 or repaired, or agreeing to improve or repair, 
 buildings, or having executed, or agreeing to execute, 
 on the land leased, an improvement auHiorized by 
 this Act, for or in connection with building pur- 
 poses. 
 
 (2.) A peppercorn rent or a nominal or other 
 rent less than the rent ultimately payable, may he 
 made payable for the first five years or any less 
 part of the term. 
 
 (3.) Where the land is contracted to be leased ii> 
 lots, the entire amount of rent to be ultimately 
 payable may be apportioned among the lots in any 
 manner ; save that— 
 
 (i.) The annual rent reserved by any lease sliall 
 
 not he less than ten shillings ; and 
 (ii.) The total amounts of the rents reserved on 
 all leases for the time being granted shall 
 not be less than the total amount of the 
 rents which, in order that the leases may 
 he in conformity with this Act, ought to 
 be reserved in respect of the whole land 
 for tlie time being leased ; and 
 (iii.) The rent reserved hy any lease sliall tio* 
 exceed one fifth part of the full annual 
 value of the land comprised in that leaio 
 with the buildings thereon when com- 
 puted. 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) In a mining lease — 
 (i.) The rent may he made to be ascertainable by 
 or to* vary according to the acreage 
 worked, or by or according to the quan- 
 tities of any mineral or substance gotten, 
 made mercliantable, converted, carried 
 
( 1421 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1422 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED lAND ACT— STATUTES— conM. 
 
 awofy, or disposed of, in or from the 
 settled land, or amj other land, or hy or 
 according to any facilities given in that 
 hehalf; and 
 (ii;) A fixed or minimum rent may be made 
 payable with or without power for the 
 lessee in case the rent, according to acre- 
 age or quantity, in any specified period 
 does not produce an amount equal to the 
 fixed or minimum rent, to make up the 
 deficiency in any subsequent specified 
 period free of rent other than the fixed or 
 minimum rent. 
 (2.) A lease may be made partly in consideration 
 of the lessee having executed, or his agreeing to 
 execute, on the land leased, an improvement 
 authorized by this Act, for or in connection with 
 mining purposes. 
 
 Sect. 10. — (^1.) Where it is shewn to the Court 
 with respect to the district in which any settled 
 land is situate, either — 
 
 ' (i.) That it is the custom for land therein tobe 
 ■ ■ leased or granted for building or mining 
 
 purposes for a longer term or on other 
 conditions than the term or conditions 
 specified in that behalf in this Act, or in 
 perpetuity ; or ■ 
 (ii.) That it is difficult to mdlce leases or grants 
 for building or mining purposes of land 
 therein, except for a longer term or on 
 other conditions than the term and con- 
 ditions specified in that behalf in this 
 Act, or except in perpetuity ; 
 the Court may, if it thinks fit, authorize generally 
 the tenant for life to make from time to time leases 
 or grants of or affecting the settled land in that 
 district, or parts thereof, for any term or in per- 
 petuity, at fee-farm or other rents, secured by con- 
 dition of re-entry, or otherwise, as in tlie order of 
 the Court expressed, or may, if it thinltsfit, author- 
 ize the tenant for life to make any such lease or 
 grant in any particular case. 
 
 (2.) Thereupon the tenant for life, and subject 
 to any direction in the order of the Court to the 
 contrary, each of his successors in title being a 
 tenant for life, or having the powers of a tenant 
 for life wilder this Act, may malce in any case, or in 
 the particular case, a lease or grant of or affecting 
 the settled land, or part thereof, in conformity with 
 the order. 
 
 ' Sect. 11. Under a mining lease, whether the 
 mines or minerals leased are already opened or in 
 work or not, unless a contrary intention is expressed 
 in the settlement, there shall be from time to time 
 set aside, as capital money arising under this Act, 
 part of the rent as follows, namely, — where the 
 tenant for life is impeachable for waste in respect 
 of minerals, three fourth parts of the rent, and 
 otherwise one fourth part thereof, and in every 
 such case the residue of the rent shaU go as rents 
 and profits. ■ 
 
 Sect. 12. The leasing p&wer of a tenant for life 
 
 extends to the making of — 
 
 (i.) A lease for giving effect to a contract entered 
 
 into by any of his predecessors in title for 
 
 making a lease, which, if made by the 
 
 predecessor, would have been binding on 
 
 ■ the successors in title ; and 
 
 (ii.) A.lease for givingeffect to a covenant of 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATirTES--con«(i. ' 
 
 renewal, performance whereof could be 
 enforced against the owner for the time 
 being of the settled land ; and 
 (ill.) A lease for confirming, as far as may be, a 
 previous lease, being void or voidable; 
 but so that every lease, as and when con- 
 firmed, shall be such a lease as might at 
 tlie da:te of the original lease have been 
 lawfully granted, under this Act, or 
 otlierwise, as the case riiay require. 
 Sect. 13. — (1.) A tenant for life may accept, with 
 or witlumt consideration, a surrender of any lease 
 of settled land, whether made under this Act or 
 not, in respect of the whole land leased, or any 
 part thereof with or without an Cxeeption of all or 
 any of the mines and minerals therein, or in respect 
 of mines and minerals, or any of them. 
 
 (2.) On a surrender of a lease in respect of part 
 only of the land or mines and minerals leased, the 
 rent may be apportioned. 
 
 (3.) On a surrender, tenant for life may make 
 of the land or mines and minerals' surrendered, or 
 of any part thereof, a new or other lease, or new or 
 other leases in lots. , 
 
 (4.) A new Or otlier lease may comprise ad- 
 ditional land or mines and minerals, and may 
 reserve any apportioned or other rent, 
 
 (5.) On a surrender, and the making of a new or 
 otMr' lease, whether for the same or for any ea- 
 tendid or other term, and whether or not subject to 
 the same or to any covenants, provisions, or con- 
 ditions,' the value of the lessee's interest in the 
 lease surrendered may be taken into account in the 
 determination of the amount of the rent to be 
 reserved, and of any fine to be taken, and of the 
 nature of the covenants, provisions, and conditions 
 to be inserted in the new Or other lease. 
 
 (6.) 'Every new or other lease shall lie in con- 
 formity with this Act. 
 
 Sect. 3. A tenant for life— 
 (i.) MaiJ sell the settled land, or any part thereof, 
 or any easemeiit, right, or privilege of any 
 kind, over or in relation to the same ; and 
 (ii.) Where tlie settlement comprises a manor — 
 may sell the seigniory of dny freehold land 
 within the manor, or the freehold and in- 
 heritance of any copyhold or customary 
 land, parcel of the manor, with or without 
 any exception or reservation of all or any 
 mines or minerals, or of any rights or 
 powers relative to mining purposes, so as 
 in every case to effect an enfranchiserrient ; 
 and 
 (iii.) May make an exchange of the settled land, 
 or any part thereof, for oiher land, in- 
 cluding an exchange in consideration of 
 money paid for eqvMity of exchange ; and 
 (iv.) Where the settlement comprises an un- 
 divided share in land. Or, under the settle- 
 ment, the settled land has come to be held 
 in . undivided shares, — may concur ' in 
 making partition df the entirety, including 
 a partition in consideration of money paid 
 for equality of partition. 
 Sect. 4. — (1.) Every sale shall be made at the 
 best price that can reasonably be obtained. 
 
 (2.) Every exchange and every partition shall be 
 made for the best consideration in land or in land 
 and money that can reasonably be obtained. 
 
( 1123 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1124 ) 
 
 I. SETTIED LAND ACT— STATUTES— co«W. 
 
 (3.) A sale may he made in one Jot or in several 
 lots, and either by auction or by private contract. 
 
 (1.) On a sale the tenant for life may fix reserve 
 biddings and Tiuy in at an auction. 
 
 (5.) A sale, exchange, or partition may be made 
 subject to any stipulations respecting title, or evi- 
 dence of title, or other things. 
 
 (6.) On a sale, exchange, or partition, any re- 
 striction or reservation with respect to building on 
 or other user of land, or with respect to mines and 
 minerals, or with respect to or for the purpose of 
 the more beneficial working thereof, or with respect 
 to any other thing, may be imposed or reserved and 
 made binding, as far as the law permits, by cove- 
 nant, condition, or otherwise, on tlie tenant for life 
 and the settled land, or any part thereof, or on the 
 other party and any land sold or given in excliange 
 or on partition to him. 
 
 (7.) An enfranchisement may be made with or 
 without a re-grant of any right of common or otlier 
 right, easement, or privilege theretofore appendant 
 or appurtenant to or held or enjoyed with the land 
 enfranchised, or reputed so to be. 
 
 (8.) Settled land in England shall not be given 
 in exchange for land out of England. 
 
 Sect. 5. Where on a sale, exchange, or partition 
 there is an incumbrance affecting land sold or given 
 in exchange or on partition, the tenant for life, 
 with the consent of the incumbrancer, may charge 
 that incumbrance on any other part of the settled 
 land, whether already charged therewith or not, in 
 exoneration of the part sold or so given, and, by 
 conveyance of the fee simple, or other estate or 
 interest the subject of the settlement, or by creation 
 of a term of years in the settled land, or otherwise, 
 make provision accordingly. 
 
 Completion of Sale, Lease, dc."] Sect. 20 — (1.) 
 On a sale, excliange, partition, lease, mortgage, or 
 charge, the tenant for life may, as regards land 
 sold, given in exchange or on partition, leased, 
 mortgaged, or charged or intended so to be, includ- 
 ing copylwld or customary or leasehold land vested 
 in trustees, or as regards easements or other 
 rights or privileges sold or leased, or intended so to 
 be, convey or create the same by deed, for the estate 
 or interest the subject of the settlement, or for any 
 less estate or interest, to the uses and in the manner 
 requisite for giving effect to the sale, excliange, 
 partition, lease, mortgage, or charge. 
 
 (2.) Such a deed, to the extent, and in the 
 manner to and in which it is expressed or intended 
 to operate and can operate under this Act, is 
 effectual to pass the land conveyed, or the easements, 
 rights, or privileges created, discharged from all 
 the limitations, powers, and provisions of the settle- 
 ment, and from all estates, interests, and charges 
 subsisting or to arise thereunder, but subject to and 
 with the exception of — 
 
 (i.) All estates, interests, and charges having 
 
 priority to the settlement ; and 
 (ii.) All such other, if any, estates, interests, and 
 charges as have been conveyed or created 
 for securing money actually raised at the 
 date of the deed ; and 
 (iii.) All leases and grants at fee-farm rents or 
 otherwise, and all grants of easements, 
 rights of common, or otlier rights or privi- 
 leges granted or made for value in money 
 or moucy^s woiih, or agreed so to be, before 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— comid. 
 
 the date of the deed, by tlie tenant for life, 
 
 or by any of his predecessors in title, or by 
 
 any trustees for him or tliem, under the 
 
 settlement, or under any statutory power, or 
 
 being otherwise binding on flie successors in 
 
 title of the tenant for life. 
 
 (3.) In case of a deed relating to copyhold or 
 
 customary land it is sufficient that the deed be 
 
 eritered on the Court rolls of the manor, and the 
 
 steward is hereby required on production to him of 
 
 the deed to make the proper entry; and on that 
 
 production, and on payment of customary fines, 
 
 fees, and other dues or payments, any person whose 
 
 title iinder the deed requires to be perfected by 
 
 admittance shall be admitted accordingly ; but if 
 
 the steward so requires there shall also be produced 
 
 to him so much of the settlement as may be necessary 
 
 to shew the title of the person executing the deed ; 
 
 and the same may, if the steward thinks fit, be also 
 
 entered on the Court rolls. 
 
 Copyholds.'] Sect. 11. — (1.) A tenant for life 
 may grant to a tenant of copyhold or customary 
 land, parcel of a manor comprised in the settlement, 
 a licence to make any such lease of tJiat land, or of 
 a specified part thereof, as the tenant for life is by 
 this Act empowered to make of freehold land. 
 
 (2.) The licence may fix the annual value where- 
 on fines, fees, or other customary payments are to 
 be assessed, or tlie amount of those fines, fees, or 
 payments. 
 
 (3.) The licence shall be entered on the Court 
 rolls of the manor, of which entry a certificate in 
 writing of the steward shall be sufficient evidence. 
 
 Mansion and Farlc] Sect. 15. Notwithstand- 
 ing anything in this Act the principal mansion- 
 house on any settled land, and the demesnes there- 
 of, and other lands usually occupied therewith, shall 
 not be sold or leased by tlie tenant for life, without 
 the consent of the trustee of the settlement, or an 
 order of the Court. 
 
 Mortgage for Equality Money, <to.] Sect. 18. 
 Where money is required for enfranchisement, or 
 for equality of excliange or partition, the tenant 
 for life may raise the same on mortgage of tlie 
 settled land, or of any part thereof, by conveyance 
 of the fee simple, or other estate or interest the 
 subject of the settlement, or by creation of a term of 
 years in the settled land, or otherwise, and the 
 money raised shall be capital money arising under 
 this Act. 
 
 Streets and Open Spaces.] Sect. 16. On or in 
 connection with a sale or grant for building pur- 
 poses, or a building lease, the tenant for life, for 
 the general benefit of tlie residents on the settled 
 land or on any part thereof, — 
 
 (i.) May cause or require any par^ of tlie settled 
 land to be appropriated and laid out for 
 streets, roads, paths, squares, gardens, or 
 other open spaces, for the use, gratuitously 
 or on payment, of the public or of indi- 
 viduals, with sewers, drains, watercourses, 
 fencing, paving, or other works necessary 
 or proper in connexion therewith ; and 
 (ii.) May provide that the parts so appropriated 
 shall be conveyed to or vested in the 
 trustees of the settlement, or other trustees, 
 or any company or public body, on trusts 
 or subject to provisions for securing the 
 continued appropriation thereof to the 
 
( 1425 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1426 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LANS ACT— STATUTES— conM. 
 
 purposes aforesaid, and the continued 
 repair or maintenance of streets and 
 other places and works aforesaid, with or 
 without provision for appointment of new 
 trustees when required ; and 
 (iii.) May execute any general or other deed 
 necessary or proper for giving effect to 
 the provisions of this section (which deed 
 may be iiirolled in the Central Office of 
 the Supreme Court of Judicature), and 
 thereby declare the mode, terms, and con- 
 ditions of tlie appropriation, and the 
 manner in which and Hie persons by whom 
 the benefit thereof is to be enjoyed, and the 
 nature and extent of tlie privileges and 
 conveniences granted. 
 Surface and Minerals Apart."] Sect. 17. — (1.) 
 A sale, excliange, partition, or mining lease, may 
 he made either of land, with or without an excep- 
 tion or reservation of all or any tf the mines and 
 minerals therein, or of any mines and minerals, 
 and in any such case with or without a grant or 
 reservation of powers of working, wayleaves or 
 rights of way, rights of water and drainage, and 
 other powers, easements, rights, and privileges for 
 or incident to or connected with mining purposes, 
 in relation to tlie settled land, or any part thereof, 
 or any other land. 
 
 (2.) An exchange or partition may be made 
 subject to and in consideration of the reservation 
 of an undivided share in mines or minerals. 
 
 Undivided Shares.] Sect, 19. Where the settled 
 land comprises an undivided share in land, or, 
 under the settlement, the settled land has come 
 to be held in v/ndivided shares, the tenant for 
 life of an undivided share may join or concur, in 
 any manner and to any extent necessary or proper 
 for any purpose of this Act, with any person 
 entitled to or having power or right of disposition 
 of or over another undivided share. 
 
 Waste.] Sect. 35 — (1.) Where a tenant for life 
 is impeoAihable for waste in respect of timber, and 
 there is on the settled land timber ripe and fit for 
 cutting, the tenant for life, on obtaining the consent 
 of the trustee of the settlement or an order of the 
 Court, may cut and sell that timber, or any part 
 thereof. 
 
 (2.) Three fourth parts of the net proceeds of 
 the sale shall be set aside as and be capital money 
 arising under this Act, and the other fourth part 
 shall go as rents and profits. 
 
 Eestrictions, Savings, and General Provisions.] 
 Sect. 50. — (1.) The powers under this Act of a 
 tenant for life are not capable of assignment or 
 release, and do not pass to a person as being, by 
 operation of law or otherwise, an assignee of a 
 tenant for life, and remain exercisable by tlie 
 tenant for life after and notwithstanding any 
 assignment, by operation of law or otherwise, of 
 his estate or interest under the settlement. 
 
 (2.) A contract by a tenant for life not to exer- 
 cise any of his powers under this Act is void. 
 
 (3.) But this section shall operate without pre- 
 judice to the rights of any person being an assignee 
 for value of the • estate or interest of the tenant 
 for life; and in that case the assignee's rights 
 shall not be affected without his consent, except 
 that, unless the assignee is actually in possession of 
 the settled land or part thereof, his consent shall 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— co»W. ." 
 
 not be requisite for the making of leases thereof to 
 the tenant for life, provided the leases are made at 
 the best rent that can reasonably be obtained, with- 
 out fine, and in other respects are in conformity 
 loith this Act. 
 
 (4.) This section extends to assignments made 
 or coming into operation before or after and to acts 
 done before or after the commencement of this Act ; 
 and in this section assignment includes assignment 
 by way of mortgage, and any partial or qualified 
 assignment, and any charge or incumbrance ; and 
 assignee has a meaning corresponding with that of 
 assignment ' . 
 
 Sect. 51— (1.) If in a settlement, will, assurance, 
 or other instrument executed or made before or 
 after, or partly before and partly after, the com- 
 mencement of this Act a provision is inserted pur- 
 porting or attempting, by way of direction, de- 
 claration, or otherwise, to forbid a tenant for life 
 to exercise any power under this Act, or attempt- 
 ing, or tending, or intended, by a limitation, gift, 
 or disposition over of settled land, or by a limita- 
 tion, gift, or disposition of other real or any per- 
 sonal property, or by tlie imposition of any condi- 
 tion, or by forfeiture, or in any other manner 
 whatever, to prohibit or prevent him from exercis- 
 ing, or to induce him to abstain from exercising, 
 or to put him into a position inconsistent with his 
 exercising, any power under this Act, that provi- 
 sion, as far as it purports, or attempts, or tends, 
 or is intended to have, or would or might liave, 
 the operation aforesaid, shall be deemed to be 
 void. 
 
 (2.) For the purposes of this section an estate or 
 interest limited to continue so long only as a 
 person abstains from exercising any power shall be 
 and take effect as an estate or interest to continue 
 -for the period for which it would continue if that 
 person were to abstain from exercising the power, 
 discharged from liability to determination or cesser 
 by or on his exercising the same. 
 
 Sect. 52. Notwithstanding anything in a settle- 
 ment, the exercise by tlie tenant for life of Q,ny 
 power under this Act shall not occasion a forfeiture. 
 
 Sect. 53. A tenant f&r life shall, in exercising 
 any power under this Act, have regard to the 
 interest of all parties entitled under the settlement, 
 and shall, in relation to the exercise thereof by 
 him, be deemed to be in the position and to have 
 the duties and liabilities of a trustee for those 
 parties. 
 
 Sect 54. On a sale, exchange, partition, lease, 
 mortgage, or charge, a purchaser, lessee, mortgagee, 
 or otlier person dealing in good faith with a tenant 
 for life shall, as against all parties entitled under 
 ■ the settlement, be conclusively taken to have given 
 the best price, consideration, or rent, as the case 
 may require, that could reasonably be obtained by 
 the tenant for life, and to have complied with all 
 the requisitions of this Act. 
 
 Sect, 55 — (1.) Powers and authorities conferred 
 by this Act on a tenant for life or trustees or the 
 Court or the Land Commissioners are exercisable 
 from time to time. 
 
 (2.) Where a power of sale, enfranchisement, 
 exchange, partition, leasing, mortgaging, charging, 
 or other power is exercised by a tenant for life, 
 or by the trustees of a settlement, he and they 
 may respectively execute, make, and do all deeds. 
 
( 1427 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1428 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conM. 
 
 instruments, and things necessary or proper in 
 their behalf. 
 
 (3.) Where any provision in this Act refers to 
 sale, purchase, exchange, partition, leasing or other 
 dealing, or to any power, consent, payment, receipt, 
 deed, assurance, contract, expenses, act or trans- 
 action, the same shall he construed to extend only 
 (unless it is otherwise expressed^ to sales, pur- 
 chases, exchanges, partitions, leasings, dealings, 
 powers, consents, payments, receipts, deeds, assur- 
 ances, contracts, expenses, acts, and transactions 
 under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 56. — (1.) Nothing in this Act shall talce 
 away, abridge, or prejudicially affect any power 
 for the time being subsisting under a settlement, or 
 by statute or otherwise, exercisable by a tenant 
 for life, or by trustees with his consent, or on his 
 request, or by his direction or otherwise ; and the 
 powers given by this Act are cumulative. 
 
 (2.) But in cases of conflict between the provi- 
 sions of a settlement and the provisions of this 
 Act, relative to any matter in respect wliereof the 
 tenant for life exercises or contracts or intends to 
 exercise any power under this Act, the provisions 
 of this Act shall prevail; and, accordingly, not- 
 withstanding anything in the settlement, the con- 
 sent of the tenant for life shall, by virtue of this 
 Act, be necessary to the exercise by the trustees of 
 the settlement or other person of any power con- 
 ferred by the settlement exerdseable for any pur- 
 pose provided for in this Act. 
 
 (3.) If a question arises, or a dotibt is enter- 
 tained, respecting any matter within this section, 
 the Court may, on the application of the trustees 
 of the settlement, or of the tenant for life, or of 
 any other person interested, give its decision, 
 opinion, advice or direction then'con. 
 
 Sect. 57. — (1.) Nothing in this Act rhall pre- 
 clude a settlor from conferring on the tenant for 
 life, or the trustees of the settlement, any powers 
 additional to or larger than those conferred by this 
 Act. 
 
 (2.) Any additional or larger powers so con- 
 ferred shall, as far as may be, notwithstanding 
 anything in this Act, operate and be exercisable in 
 the like manner, and with all the like incidents, 
 effects, and consequences, ae if they were conferred 
 by this Act, unless a contrary intention is expressed 
 in the settlement. 
 
 3. Investment of Capital Monet. 
 
 Sect. 21. Capital money arising under this Act, 
 subject to payment of claims properly payable 
 thereout, and to application thereof for any special 
 authorized object for which the same was raised, 
 shall, when received, be invested or otherwise ap- 
 plied wholly in one, or partly in one and partly 
 in another or others, of the following modes 
 (namely) : — 
 
 (i.) In investment on government securities, or 
 on other securities on which the trustees of 
 the settlement are by the settlement or by 
 law authorized to invest trust money of 
 the settlement, or on the security of the 
 bonds, mortgages, or debentures, or in the 
 purchase of the debenture stock of any 
 railway company in Great Britain w 
 Ireland incorporated by special Act of 
 FarUamenf, and having for ten years next 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES — contd. 
 
 before the date of the investment paid a 
 dividend on its ordinary stock or shares, 
 with power to vary the investment into or 
 for any other such securities : 
 (ii.) In discharge, purchase, or redemption of 
 incumbrances affecting the inheritance of 
 the settled land, or other the wlwle estate 
 the subject of the settlement, or of land 
 tax, rentcharge in lieu of tithe. Crown 
 rent, chief rent, or quit rent, charged on 
 or payable out of the settled land : 
 (iii.) In payment for any improvement authorized 
 
 by this Act : 
 (iv.) In payment for equality of exchange or 
 
 partition of settled land : 
 (v.) In purchase of the seigniory of any part of 
 the settled land, being freehold land, or in 
 purchase of the fee simple of any part 
 of the settled land, being copyhold or 
 customary land ; 
 (vi.) In purchase of the reversion or freehold in 
 fee of any part of the settled land, being 
 leasehold land held for years, or life, or 
 years determinable on life : 
 (vii.) In purchase of land in fee simple, or of 
 copyhold or customary land, or of lease- 
 hold land held for sixty years or more 
 unexpired at the time of purchase, subject 
 or not to any exception or reservation of 
 or in respect of mines or minerals therein, 
 or of or in respect of rights or powers 
 relative to the working of mines or minerals 
 therein, or in other land : 
 (viii.) In purchase, either in fee simple, or for a 
 term of sixty years or more, of mines and 
 minerals convenient to be held or worked 
 with the settled land, or of any easement, 
 right, or privilege convenient to be held 
 with the settled land for mining or other 
 purposes : 
 (ix.) In payment to any person becoming abso- 
 lutely entitled or empowered to give an 
 absolute discharge : 
 (x.) In payment of costs, charges, a7id expenses 
 of or incidental to the exerdfc of any of 
 the powers, or the execution of any of the 
 provisions, of this Act : 
 (xi.) In any other mode in which money pro- 
 duced by tlie exercise of a power of sale in 
 the settlement is applicable thereunder. 
 Sect. 22.— (1.) Capital money arising under this 
 Act shall, in order to its being invested or applied 
 as aforesaid, be paid either to the trustees of the 
 settlement or into Court, at the option of the tenant 
 for life, and shall be invested or applied by tlie 
 trustees, or under the direction of the Court, as the 
 case may be, accordingly. 
 
 (2.) The investment or other application by the 
 trustees shall be made according to the direction of 
 the tenant for life, and in default thereof, accord- 
 ing to the discretion of the trustees, but in the last- 
 mentioned case subject to any consent required or 
 direction given by the settlement with respect to 
 the investment or other application by the trustees 
 of trust money of the settlement ; and any investr 
 ment'shall be in the names or under the control of 
 the trustees. 
 
 (3.) The investment or other application under 
 the direction of the Court shall be made on the 
 
( 1429 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1430 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conid. 
 
 application of the tenant for life, or of the 
 trimtees. 
 
 (4.) Any investment or other application shall 
 not during the life of the tenant for life he altered 
 without his consent. 
 
 (5.) Capital mone^j arising under this Act while 
 remxiiriing uninvested or unapplied, and securities 
 on which an investment of any such capital money 
 is made, shall, for all purposes of disposition, 
 transmission, and devolution, be considered as land, 
 and the same shall he held for and go to the same 
 persons successively, in the same manner and for 
 and on the same estates,, interests, and trusts, as 
 the land wherefrom the money arises woidd, if not 
 disposed of, have been held and have gone, undeh 
 the settlement. 
 
 (6.) The income of those securities shall he paid 
 or applied as the income of that land, if not dis- 
 posed ,of, would have been payable or applicable 
 under the settlement. 
 
 (7.) Tliase securities may he converted into 
 money, which sliall he capital money arising under 
 this Act. 
 
 Sect. 23. Capital money arising under this Act 
 from settled land in England shall not he applied 
 in the purchase of land out of England, vmless the 
 settlement expressly authorizes the same. 
 
 Sect. 24. — (1.) Land acquired by purchase or in 
 exchange, or on partition, sliall he made subject to 
 ■Hie settlement in manner directed in this section. 
 
 (2.) Freehold land shall he conveyed to the uses, 
 on the trusts, and subject to the powers and pro- 
 visions which, under the settlement, or by reason of 
 the exercise of any power of charging therein con- 
 tained, are subsisting with respect to tlie settled 
 land, or as near thereto as circumstances permit, 
 but not so as to increase or multiply charges or 
 powers o/ charging. 
 
 C3.) Copyhold, customary, or leasehold land shall 
 he conveyed to and vested in the trustees of the 
 settlement on trusts -and subject to powers and pro- 
 visions corresponding, as nearly as the law and 
 circumstances permit, with the uses, trusts, powers, 
 and provisions to on and subject to which freehold 
 land is to be conveyed as aforesaid ; so nevertheless 
 that, th^ beneficial interest in land held by lease for 
 years sliall not vest absolutely in a person who is by 
 the settlement made by purchase tenant in tail, or 
 in tail male, or in tail female, and who dies under 
 the age of twenty-one years, but shall, on the death 
 of that person under that age, go as freeluM land 
 conveyed as aforesaid would go. 
 
 '■ (4.) Land acquired as aforesaid may he made a 
 MibeUtuted seeierity for any charge in respect of 
 money actually raised, and remaining unpaid, 
 from which the settled land, or any part thereof, or 
 any. undivided share therein, has heretofore been 
 released on the occasion and in order to the com- 
 pletion, of a sale, exchange, or partition. 
 
 (5.), Where a charge does not affect the whole of 
 the settled land, then the land acquired shall not 
 be .subjected, thereto, unless the land is acquired 
 either.by purchase with money arising from sale of 
 land which was before the sale subject to the charge, 
 or by an excliange or .partition of land which, or an 
 undivided share wherein, was before the exchange 
 or partition sutgect to the charge, 
 
 ■ (6.) On land being so acquired, any person who, 
 by the direction of tlie tenant for life, so conveys the 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT^STATUTES— coraM. 
 land as to subject it to any charge, is not concerned 
 to inqiiire whether or not it is proper that the land 
 should be subjected to the charge. 
 
 (7.) The provisions of this section referring to 
 land extend and apply, as far as may he, to mines 
 and minerals, and to easements, rights, and privi- 
 leges over and in relation to land. 
 
 Sect. 32. Wliere, under an Act incorporating or 
 applying, wholly or in part, the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Acts, 184."), 1860, and 1869, or under 
 the Settled Estates Act, 1877, or under any other 
 Act, public, local, personal, or private, money is at 
 the commencement of this Act in Court, or is after- 
 wards paid into Court, and is liable to he laid out 
 in the purchase of land to he made subject to a settle- 
 ment, then, in addition to any mode of dealing there- 
 with authorized by the Act under which the money 
 is in Court, that money may he invested or applied 
 as capital money arising under this Act, on the like 
 terms, if any, respecting costs and other things, as 
 nearly as circumstances admit, and (iiotwithstand- 
 ing anything in this Act) according to the same 
 procedure, as if the modes of investment or appli- 
 cation authorized by this Act were authorized by 
 the Act under which the money is inCourt. 
 
 Sect. 83. Where, under a settlement, money is in 
 tlie hands of trustees, and is liable to be laid out in 
 the purchase of land to he made subject, to the 
 settlement, then in addition to such powers of deal- 
 ing therewith as tlie trustees have independently of 
 this Act, they may, at the option of the tenant for 
 life,, invest or apply the same as capital money 
 arising under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 34. Where capital money arising under 
 this Act is purchase-money paid in respect of a 
 lease for years, or life, or years determinable on 
 life, or in respect of any other estate or interest in 
 land less than tlie fee simple, or in respect of a 
 reversion dependent on any such lease, estate, or 
 interest, the trustees of the settlement or the Court, 
 as the case may he, and in the case of the Court on 
 the application of any party interested in tliat 
 money, may, notwithstanding anything in this Act, 
 require and cause tlie same to be laid out, invested, 
 accumulated, and paid in such manner as, in the 
 judgment of the trustees or of the Court, as the case 
 may he, will give to the parties interested in that 
 money the like benefit therefrom as they might law- 
 fully have had from the lease, estate, interest, or 
 reversion in respect whereof the money was paid, or 
 as near thereto as may be. 
 
 4. Impkovements op Settled Estates. 
 Sect. 25. Improvements authorized by this Act 
 are the malting or.the execution on, or in connexion 
 until, and for the benefit of settled land, of any of 
 the following works, or of any works for any of the 
 following purposes, and any operation incident to 
 or necessary or proper in the execution of any of 
 those works, or necessary or proper for. carrying 
 into effect any of those purposes, or for securing 
 the full benefit of amy of those works or purposes 
 ^namely) : 
 
 (i.) Drainage, including the straightening, 
 widening, or deepening of drains, streams, 
 and watercourses : 
 (ii.) Irrigation; warping: 
 (iii.) Drains, pipes, and machinery for supply 
 and distribution of sewage as manure : 
 
( 14S1 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( li32 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— cojifo!. 
 
 (iv.) Emhanhinij or weiring from a river or 
 
 lahe, or from the sea, or a tidal water . 
 (v.) Groynes ; sea walls ; defences against 
 tvater : 
 
 (vi.) Inclosing; straightening of fences ; re- 
 division of fields : 
 
 (vii.) Bedamation ; dry warping : 
 <^viii.) Farm roads ; private roads ; roads or 
 streets in villages or towns : 
 
 (ix.) Clearing ; trenching ; planting : 
 (x.) Cottages for labourers, farm servants, and 
 artisans, employed on the settled land or 
 not: 
 
 (xi.) Farmhouses, offices, and outbuildings, and 
 other buildings for farm purposes : 
 
 (xii.) Saw-mills, scutch-mills, and other mills, 
 water-wheels, engine-houses, and hilns, 
 lohich will increase the value of the settled 
 land for agricultural purposes or as wood- 
 land or otlierwise : 
 (xiii.) Seservoirs, tanks, conduits, watercourses, 
 pipes, wells, ponds, shafts, dams, weirs, 
 sluices, and other works and machinery 
 for supply and distribution of water for 
 agricultural, manufacturing, or other 
 purposes, or for domestic or other con- 
 sumption ; 
 (xiv,) Tramways; railways; canals; docks: 
 
 (xv.) Jetties, piers, and landing places on rivers, 
 lakes, the sea, or tidal waters, for faci- 
 litating transport of persons and of 
 agricultural stock and produce, and of 
 manure and other things required for 
 agricultural purposes, and of minerals, 
 and of things required for mining pmr- 
 
 (xvi.) Markets and market-places : 
 (xvii.) Streets, roads, paths, squares, gardens, or 
 other open spaces for the use, gratuitously 
 or on payment, of the public or of indi- 
 viduals, or for dedication to the public, 
 the same being necessary or proper in 
 connection with the conversion of land 
 into building land : 
 (xviii.) Sewers, drains, watercourses, pipe-making, 
 fencing, paving, brick-making, tile- 
 making, and other works necessary or 
 proper in connection with any of tlie 
 objects aforesaid : 
 (xix.) Trial pits for mines, and other preliminary 
 works necessary or proper in connection 
 with developm&iit of mines : 
 (xx.) lieconstructian, enlargement, or improve- 
 ment of any of those works. 
 Sect. 26. — (1.) Where the tenant for life is 
 desirous that capital money arising under this Act 
 shall be applied in or towards payment for an im- 
 jirooement authorized by this Act, he may submit 
 for approval to the trustees of the settlement, or to 
 the Court, as the case may require, a scheme for the 
 execution of the improvement, shelving the proposed 
 expenditure thereon. 
 
 (2.) Where the capital money to be expended is 
 in the hands of trmtees, then, after u, scheme is 
 approved by them, the trustees may apply that 
 tuuney in or towards payment for the whole or part 
 of any ivork or operation comprised in the im- 
 provement, on — 
 (i.) A certificate of the Land Commissioners 
 
 I, SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— Konfcl. 
 
 certifiying that the work or operation, or 
 some specified part thereof, has been 
 properly executed, and what amount is 
 properly payable by the trustees in respect 
 thereof, which certificate shall be conclusive 
 in favour of the trustees as an authority 
 and discharge for any payment made by 
 them in pursuance thereof ; or on 
 (ii.) A like certificate of a competent engineer or 
 able practical surveyor nominated by the 
 trustees and approved by the Commissioners 
 or by the Court, which certificate shall be 
 conclusive as aforesaid ; or on 
 (iii.) An order of the Court directing or authoriz- 
 ing the trustees to so apply a specified 
 portion of the capital money. 
 (3) Where the capital money to be expended is 
 ill Court, then, after a scheme is approved by the 
 Court, the Court may, if it thinlcs fit, on a report 
 or certificate of the Commissioner or of a competent 
 engineer or able practical surveyor approved by the 
 Court, or on such other evidence as the Court thinks 
 sufficient, make such order and give such directions 
 as it thinks fit for the application of that money, 
 or any part thereof, in or towards payment for the 
 whole or part of any work or operation comprised 
 in the improvement. 
 
 Sect. 27. Tlie tenant for life may join or concur 
 with any other person interested in executing any 
 improvement authorized by this Act, or in contri- 
 buting to the cost thereof. 
 
 Sect. 28. — (1.) The tenant for life and each of 
 his successors in title having, under the settlement, 
 a limited estate or interest only in the settled land, 
 shall during such period, if any, as the Land Com- 
 missioners by certificate in any case prescribe, 
 maintain and repair, at his own expense, every 
 improvement executed under the foregoing pro- 
 visions of this Act, and where a building or work 
 in its nature insurable against damage by fire is 
 comprised in tlie improvement, shall insure and 
 keep insured tlie same, at his own expense, in such 
 amount, if any, as the Commissioners by certificate 
 in any case prescribe. 
 
 (2.) The tenant for life or any of his successors 
 as aforesaid, shall not cut down or knowingly pre- 
 mit to be cut down, except in proper thinning, any 
 trees planted as an improvement under the fore- 
 going provision's of this A ct. 
 
 (3.) The tenant for life and each of his suc- 
 cessors as aforesaid, shall from time to time if 
 required by the Commissioners, on or without tlie 
 suggestion of any person having, under tlie settle- 
 ment, any estate or interest in the settled land in 
 possession, remainder, or otherwise, report to the 
 Commissioners the state of eve^'y improvement 
 executed under this Act, and the fact and particu- 
 lars of fire insurance, if any, 
 
 (4.) Tlie Commission) rs may vary any certificate 
 made by them under this section, in such manner 
 or to such extent as circumstances appear to them 
 to require, hut not so as to increase the liabilities 
 of the tenant for life, or any of his successors as 
 aforesaid. 
 
 (5.) If the tenant for life, or any of his successors 
 as aforesaid fail in any respect to comply with the 
 requisitions of this section, or does any act in con- 
 travention thereof, any person havintj under the 
 I settlement, any estate or interest in the settled land 
 
( 1433 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1434 ) 
 
 r. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conM. 
 in poisession, remainder, or reversion, shall have a 
 right of action, in respect of that default or act, 
 against the tenant for life ; and the estate of the 
 tenant for life, after his death, nhall he liable to 
 wake good to the persons entitled under the settle- 
 ment any damages occasioned hy that default or 
 aet. 
 
 Execution and Eepair of Improvements.] Sect. 
 29. The tenant for life, and each of his successors 
 in title having, under the settlement, a limited 
 estate or interest only in the settled land, a7id all 
 persons employed hy or under contract with the 
 tenant for life, or any such successor, may from 
 time to time enter on Che settled land, and wUhout 
 impeachment of waste hy any remainderman or 
 reversioner, thereon execute any improvement 
 authorized hy this Act, or inspect, maintain, and 
 repair the same, and, for the purposes thereof, on 
 the settled land, do, make, and use all acts, works, 
 and conveniences proper for the execution, main- 
 tenance, repair, and use thereof, and get and work 
 freestone, limestone, clay, sand, and other sub- 
 stances, and make tramways and other ways, and 
 burn and make hricles, tiles, and other things, and 
 out down and use timber and other trees not planted 
 or left standing for shelter or ornament. 
 
 Improvement of Land Act, 1864.] Sect. 30. 
 The enumeration of improvements contained in 
 %ect. 9 of the Improvement of Land Act, 1864, is 
 hereby extended so as to comprise, subject and 
 according to the provisions of that Act, hut only as 
 regards applications made to the Land Commis- 
 sioners after the commencement of this Act, all 
 improvements authorized by this Act. 
 
 5. Peoteotion of Settled Estates. 
 
 Sect. 36. The Court may, if it thinks fit, approve 
 of any action, defence, petition to Parliament, 
 parliamentary opposition, or other proceeding taken 
 or proposed to he taken for protection of settled 
 land, or of any action or proceeding taken or pro- 
 posed to he taken for recovery of land, being, or 
 alleged to he, subject to a settlement, and may 
 direct that any costs, charges, or expenses incurred 
 yr to be incurred in relation thereto, or any part 
 'hereof, be paid out of property subject to the settle- 
 ment. 
 
 6. Trustees. 
 
 Sect. 38. — (1). If at any time there are no 
 'trustees of a settlement within the definition in this 
 ict, or where in any other case it is expedient, for 
 ourposes of this Act, that new trustees of a settle- 
 ment be appointed, the Court may, if it thinks fit, 
 )ra the application of the tenant for life or of any 
 tther person having under the settlement an estate 
 w interest in the settled land, in possession, re- 
 nainder, or oflierwise, or, in the case of an infant, 
 f his testamentary or other guardian, or next 
 riend, appoint fit persons to he trustees under the 
 ettlementfor purposes of this Act. 
 
 (2.) The person so appointed, and the survivors 
 md survivor of them, while continuing to be trustees 
 r trustee, and, until the appointment of new 
 rustees, tlte personal representatives or representa- 
 ive for the time being of the last surviving or con- 
 inuing trustee, shall, for the purposes of this Act, 
 ecoms and he the trustees or trustee of the settle- 
 lent. 
 Sect. 39. — (1.) Notwithstanding anything in this ' 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conit?. 
 Act capital money arising under this Aet shall not 
 be paid to fewer than two persons as trustees of a 
 settlement, unless the settlement authorizes the re- 
 ceipt of capital trust money of the settlement hy one 
 trustee. 
 
 (2.) Subject thereto, the provisions of this Act 
 referring to the trustees of a settlement apply to the 
 surviving or continuing trustees or trustee of the 
 settlement for the time being. 
 
 Sect. 40. The receipt in writing of the trustees of 
 a settlement, or where one trustee is empowered to 
 act, of one trustee, or of the personal representatives 
 or representative of the last surviving or continuing 
 trustee, for any money or securities, paid or trans- 
 ferred to the trustees, trustee, representatives, or 
 representative, as the case may he, effectually dis- 
 charges tlie payer or transferor therefrom, and 
 from being bound to see to the application or being 
 answerable for any loss or misapplication thereof, 
 and, in case of a mortgagee or other person ad- 
 vancing money, from being concerned to see that 
 any money advanced hy him is wanted for any 
 purpose of this Act, or that no more than is wanted 
 is raised. 
 
 Sect. 41. Each person who is for the time being 
 trustee of a settlement is answerable for wliat he 
 actually receives only, notwithstanding his signing 
 any receipt for conformity, and in respect of his 
 own acts, receipts, and defaults only, and is not 
 answerable in respect of those of any other trustee, 
 or of any banker, broker, or other person, or for the 
 insufficiency or deficiency of any securities, or for 
 any loss not happening through his own wilful 
 default. 
 
 Sect. 42. The trustees of a settlement, or any of 
 them, are not liable for giving any consent, or for 
 not making, bringing, taking, or doing any such 
 application, action, proceeding, or thing, as they 
 might make, bring, take, or do; and in case of 
 purchase of land with capital money arising under 
 this Act, or of an exchange, partition, or lease, are 
 not liable for adopting any contract made hy the 
 tenant for life, or bound to inquire as to the pro- 
 priety of the purchase, exchange, partition, or lease, 
 or answerable as regards any price, consideration, 
 or fine, and are not liable to see to or answerable 
 for the investigation of the title, or answerable for 
 a conveyance of land, if the conveyance purports to 
 convey the land in the proper mode, or liable in 
 respect of purchase-money paid hy them hy direc- 
 tion of the tenant for life to any person joining in 
 the conveyance as a conveying party, or as giving a, 
 receipt for the purchase-money, or in any other 
 character, or in respect of any other money paid hy 
 them by direction of the tenant for life on the pur- 
 chase, exchange, partition, or lease. 
 
 Sect. 43. The trustees of a settlement may reim- 
 burse themselves or pay and discharge out of the 
 trust property all expenses properly incurred by 
 them. 
 
 Sect. 44. If at any time a difference arises he- 
 between a tenant for life and the trustees of the 
 settlement, respecting the exercise of any of the 
 powers of this Act, or respecting any matter relating 
 thereto, the Court may, on the application of either 
 party, give such directions respecting tlie matter in 
 difference, and respecting the costs of the appliaa^ 
 tion, as the Court thinks At. 
 Sect. 45.— (1.) A tenant for life when intending 
 
( 1435 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 143G ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conici. 
 
 to make a sale, exchange, partition, lease, mortgage, 
 or charge, shall give notice of his intention in that 
 behalf to each of the trustees of the settUment, by 
 posting registered letters, containing the notice, 
 addressed to the trustees, severally, each at his usual 
 or last known place of abode in the United King- 
 dom, and shall give like notice to the solicitor for 
 the trustees, if any such solicitor is known to the 
 tenant for life, by posting a registered letter, con- 
 tiiining the notice, addressed to the solicitor at his 
 place of business in the United Kingdom, every 
 letter under this section being posted not less than 
 one month before the making by the tenant for life 
 of the sale, exchange, partition, lease, mm'tgage, or 
 charge, or of a contract for the same. 
 
 (2.) Provided that at the date of notice given 
 the number of trustees shall not- be less than two, 
 unless a contrary intention is expressed in the 
 settlement. 
 
 (3.) A person dealing in good faith with the 
 tenant for life is iwt concerned to iiuiuire respect- 
 ing the giving of any such notice as is required by 
 this section. 
 
 Notice.] Tlie Act 47 * 48 Vid. c. 18, ss. 5 and 6, 
 modifies th'e above reqidrements as to notice. ■ 
 
 7. Limited Owners. 
 Sect. 58 of the Act -l.i & 46 Vict. c. 38.— (1.) Each 
 person as follows shall, when the estate or interest 
 of each of them is in possession, have the i^owers 
 of a tenant for life under this Act, as if each of 
 them were a tenant for life as defined in this Act 
 (namely) : 
 
 (i.) A tenant in tail, including a tenant in tail 
 who is by Act of Parliament restrained 
 from barring or defeating his estate tail, 
 and although the reversion is in the Crown, 
 and so that the exercise by him of his 
 powers under this Act sliall bind the Crown, 
 but not including such a tenant in tail 
 where the land whereof he is so restrained 
 toas purchased with money provided by 
 Parliament in consideration of public ser- 
 vices : 
 (ii.) A tenant in fee simple, with an executory 
 limitation, gift, or disposition over, on 
 failure of his issue, or in any other event : 
 (iii.) A person entitled to a base fee, although 
 the reversion is in the Crown, and so that 
 the exercise by him of his powers under this 
 Act shall bind the Crmcn : 
 (iv.) A tenant for years determinable on life, not 
 
 holding merely under a lease at o. rent : 
 (v.) A tenant for the life of another, not holding 
 
 merely under a. lease at a rent : 
 (vi.) A tenant for his own or any other life, or 
 for years determiuMble on life, whose estate 
 is liable to cease in any event during that 
 life, whether by expiration of the estate, or 
 by conditional limitation, or othencise, or 
 to be defeated by an executory limitation, 
 gift, or disposition over, or is subject to a 
 trust for accumulation of income for pay- 
 ment of debts or other purpose : 
 (vii.) A tenant in tail after possibility of issue 
 
 extinct : 
 (viii.) A tenant by the curtesy : 
 (is.) A person entitled to the income of land 
 under a trust or direction for payment 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATTTTES— coraM. 
 
 thereof to him during his own or any otlier 
 life, whether subject to expenses of manage- 
 ment or not, or until sale of the land, or 
 until forfeiture of his interest therein on 
 bankruptcy or other event. 
 (2.) In every such case, the provisions of this 
 Act referring to a tenant for life, either as con- 
 ferring powers ore him or otherwise, and to a settle- 
 ment, and to settled land shall extend to each of the 
 persons aforesaid, and to the instrument under 
 which his estate or interest arises, and to the land 
 tlierein comprised. 
 
 (3.) In any such case any reference in this Act 
 to death as regards a tenant for life, shall, wliere 
 necessary, be deemed to refer to the determination 
 by death or otherwise of such estate or interest as 
 last aforesaid. 
 
 8. Settlement by tvat of Trusts foe Sale. 
 
 Sect. G3. — (1.) Any land, or any estate or interest 
 in land, which under or by virtue of any deed, 
 will, or agreement, covenant to surrender, copy of 
 Court roll. Act of Parliament, or other instrument 
 or any number of instruments, whether made or 
 passed before or after, or partly before and partly 
 after, the commencement of this Act, is siibject to a 
 trust or direction for sale of tltat land, estate, or 
 interest, and for the application or disposal of tlie 
 money to arise from the sale, or the income of that 
 money, or the income of tlie land until sale, or any 
 part of that money or income, for the benefit of any 
 person for his life, or any other limited period, or 
 for the benefit of two or more persons concurrently 
 for any limited period, and whether absolutely, or 
 subject to a trust for accumulation of income for 
 payment of debts or otlier purpose, or to any other 
 restriction, shall be deemed to be settled land, and 
 the instrument nr instriiments under ichich the trust 
 arises shall be deemed to be a settlement ; and the 
 person for the time being beneficially entitled to the 
 income of the land, estate, or interest afore-^aid 
 until sale, lohether absolutely or subject as afore- 
 said, shall be deemed to he tenant for life tliereof ; 
 or if two or more persons are so entitled con- 
 currently, then those persons sliall be deemecL to 
 constitute together the tenant for life thereof; and 
 the persons, if any, loho are for the time being 
 ur.der the settlement trustees for sale of tlie settled 
 land, or having power of consent to, or approral of, 
 or control over the sale, or if under the settlement 
 there are no su^h trustees, then the persons, if any, 
 fm' the time being, who are by the settlement de- 
 clared to be trustees tliereof for purposes of this 
 Act are for purposes of this Act trustees of the 
 settlement. 
 
 (2.) In every such case the provisions of this Act 
 referring to a tenant for life, and to a settlement, 
 and to settled land, shall extend to the person or 
 persons aforesaid, and to the instrument or instru- 
 ments under ichich his or their estate or interest 
 arises, and to the land therein comprised, subject 
 and except as in this section provided (that is to 
 say) : 
 
 (i.) Any reference in this Act to the predecessors 
 or Successors in title of the tenant for life, 
 or to the remaindermen, or reversioners or 
 otlier persons interested in the settled land, 
 shall be deemed to refer to the persons in- 
 terested in sziccession or otherwise in the 
 
( 1437 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1438 ) 
 
 L SETTLED lAND ACT— STATTJTSS— cotedT. 
 
 money to arise frmn sale of the land, or the 
 income of that money, or the income of the 
 land, until sale (as the case may require), 
 (il.) Capital money arising under this Act from 
 the settled land shall not he applied in the 
 purchase of land unless such application 
 is autliorized by the settlement in the case 
 of capital money arising thereunder from 
 sales or other dispositions of the settled 
 land, but may, in addition to any other 
 mode of application authorized by this Act, 
 be applied in any mode in which capital 
 money arising under the settlement from 
 any such sale or other disposition is applic- 
 able thereunder, subject to any consent 
 required or direction given by the settle- 
 ment with respect to the application of 
 trust money of the settlement. 
 
 (iii.) Capital money arising under this Act from 
 the settled land aTid the securities in which 
 the same is invested, shall not for any pur- 
 pose of disposition, transmission, or devolu- 
 tion, be considered as land unless the same 
 would, if arising under the settlement from 
 a sale or disposition of the settled land, 
 have been so considered, and the same sTiall 
 be lield in trust for and shall go to the 
 same persons successively in the same 
 manner, and for and on the same estates, 
 interests, and trusts as the same would 
 liave gone and been held if arising under 
 the settlement from a sale or disposition of 
 the settled land, and the income of such 
 capital money and securities shall be paid 
 or applied accordingly. 
 Eestrictions.] The Act 47 & 48 Vict. v. 18, s. 7, 
 
 enacts that these powers shall only be exercised by 
 
 leave of the Court, and makes other provisions with 
 
 regard to them. 
 
 9, Pbooedure. — ^Land Commissioners. 
 
 Sect. 46 of the Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 38.— (1.) All 
 matters iMthin the jurisdiction of the Court under 
 this Act shall, subject to the Act regulating the 
 Court, be assigt^ed to the Chancery Division of the 
 Court. 
 
 (2.) Payment of money into Court effectually 
 exonerates therefrom the person malting the pay-, 
 ment, 
 
 (3.) Every application to the Court shall be by 
 petition, or by summons at Chambers. 
 
 (4.) On an application .by the trustees of a 
 settlement notice shall be served in the first instance 
 on the tenant for life." 
 
 (5.) On an application notice shall be served on 
 such persons, if any, as the Court things fit. 
 
 (6.) The Court shall have full power and dis- 
 cretion to make such order as it thinks fit respecting 
 the costs, charges, or expenses of all or any of the 
 parties to any application, and may, if it thinks 
 at, order that all or any of those costs, charges, or 
 expenses be paid out of property subject to the 
 settlement. 
 
 (7.) General Bules for purposes of this Act shall 
 be deemed Bules of Court within sect. 17 of the 
 Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, as altered by 
 s6ct.- 19 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 
 1881, and may be made accordingly. 
 
 (8.) Tlie powers of the Court may, as regards 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— conW. 
 
 land in the County Palatine of Lancaster, be exer- 
 cised also by' the Court of Chancery of the County 
 Palatine; and Hides for regulating proceedings in 
 that Court shall, be from time to time made by the 
 Chancellor, of the Duchy of Lo,ncaster. with the 
 advice and consent of a Judge of the High Court 
 acting in the Chancery Division, and of the Vice- 
 Chanoellor of the County Palatine. 
 
 (9.) General Mules, and Bules for the Coy,rt of 
 Chancery of the County Palatine, may be made at . 
 any time after the passing of this Act, to take effect 
 on or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 (10.) Tlie powers of the Court may, as regards 
 land not exceeding in capital value £500, or in 
 annual rateable value £30, and, as regards capital 
 money arising under this Act, and securities in 
 which the same is invested, not exceeding in amount 
 or value £500, and as regards personal chattels 
 settled or to be settled, as in this Act mentioned, 
 not exceeding in value £500, be exercised by any 
 County Court within the district wliereof is situate 
 any part of the land which is to be dealt with in 
 the Court, m' from which the capital money to be 
 dealt with in the Court arises under this Act, or in 
 connexion with which the personal chattels to be 
 dealt with in the Court are settled. 
 
 (47.) Where the Court directs that any costs, 
 charges, or expenses be paid out of property subject 
 to a settlement, the same shall, subject and accord- 
 ing to the directions of the Court, be raised and 
 paid out of capital money arising under this Act, 
 or other money liable to be laid out in the.purchase 
 of land to be made subject to the settlement, or out 
 of investments representing such money, or out of 
 income. of any such money or investments, or out of 
 any accumulations of income of land, money, or 
 investments, or by means of a sale of part of the 
 settled land in respect whereof the costs, charges, or 
 expenses are incurred, or of otiier settled land com- 
 prised in the same settlement and subject to the 
 same limitations, or by means of a mortgage of the 
 settled land or any part thereof, to be made by such 
 person as the Court directs, and either by convey- 
 ance of the fee simple or other estate or interest the 
 subject of the settlement, or by creation of a term, 
 or otherwise, or by means of a charge on the settled 
 land or any part thereof, or partly in one of those 
 modes and partly in another or otherjs, or in any 
 such other mode as the Court thinks fit. 
 
 Laud Commissioners.] Sect. 48. — (1.) The 
 Commissioners now bearing the three several styles 
 of the Inclosure Commissioners for England and 
 Wales, and the Copyhold Commissioners, and the 
 Tithe Commissioners for England and Wales, shall, 
 by virtue of this Act, become and shall be styled 
 tlie Land Commissioners for England. 
 
 (2.) The Land Commissioners shall cause one 
 seal to be made with their style as given by this 
 Act, and in the execution arid discharge of any 
 power or duty under any Act relating to the three 
 several bodies of Commissioners aforesaid, they 
 shall adopt and use the seal and style of the Land 
 Commissioners for England and no other. 
 
 (3.) Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this 
 section shall be construed as altering in any respect 
 the powers, authorities, or duties of the Land Com- 
 missioners, or as affecting in respect of appoint- 
 ment, salary, pension, or otherwise any of those 
 Commissioners, in office at the passing of this Act, 
 
( 14S9 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1440 ) 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATUTES— corafd 
 or any assistant Commissioner, secretary, or other 
 officer or person then in office or employed under 
 them. 
 
 (4.) All Acts of Parliament, judgments, decrees, 
 or orders of any Court, awards, deeds, and other 
 documents, passed or made before the commence- 
 ment of this Act, shall he read and have effect as 
 if the Land Commissioners were therein mentioned 
 instead of one or more of the three several bodies 
 of Commissioners aforesaid. 
 
 (5.) All acts, matters, and things commenced by 
 or under the authority of any one or more of the 
 three several bodies of Commissioners aforesaid 
 before the commeneement of this Act, and not then 
 completed, shall and may be carried on and com- 
 pleted by or under the authority of the Land Com- 
 missioners ; and the Land Commissioners for the 
 purpose of prosecuting, or defending, and carrying 
 on any action, suit or proceeding pending at the 
 commencement of this Act, shidl come into the place 
 of any one or more, as the case m,ay require, of the 
 three several bodies of Commissioners aforesaid. 
 
 (6.) The Land Commissioners shall, by virtue of 
 this Act, have, for the purposes of any Act, public, 
 local, personal, or private, passed or to be parsed, 
 making provisions for the execution of improve- 
 ments on settled land, all such powers and autlw- 
 rities as they have for the purposes of the Improve- 
 ment of Land Act, 1864, and the provisions of the 
 last mentioned Act relating to their proceedings 
 and inquiries, and to authentication of instru- 
 ments, and to declarations, statements, notices, 
 applications, forms, security for expenses, inspec- 
 tions, and examinations, shall extend and apply, 
 as far as the nature and circumstances of the case 
 admit, to acts and proceedings done or taken by or 
 in relation to the Land Commissioners under any 
 Act malting provision as last aforesaid ; and the 
 provisions of any Act relating to fees or to security 
 for costs to be taken in respect of the business 
 transacted under the Acts administered by the 
 three several bodies of Commissioners aforesaid 
 shall extend and apply to the business transacted 
 by or under the direction of the Land Commis- 
 sioners under any Act, public, local, personal, or 
 private, passed or to be passed, by which any power 
 or duty is conferred or imposed on them. 
 
 Sect. 49. — (l.) Every certificate and report ap- 
 proved and made by the Land Commissioners under 
 this Act shall be filed in their office. 
 
 (2.) An office copy of any certificate or report as 
 filed shall be delivered out of their office to any 
 person requiring the same, on payment of the 
 proper fee, and shall be sufficient evidence of the 
 certificate or report whereof it purports to be a 
 copy. 
 
 (4.) Land of whatever tenure acquired under 
 this Act by purchase or in exchange, or on parti- 
 tion, shall be conveyed to and vested in the trustees 
 of the settlement, on the trusts and subject to the 
 powers and provisions which, under the settlement 
 or by reason of the exercise of any power of ap- 
 pointment or charging therein contained, are sub- 
 sisting with respect to the settled land, or loould be 
 so subsisting if the same had not been sold, or as 
 near thereto as circumstance permit, hut so as not 
 to increase or multiply charges or powers of 
 charging. 
 
 Buildings for "Working Classes.] The Act 
 
 I. SETTLED LAND ACT— STATTTTES- co»M. 
 
 48 & 49 Viet. c. 72, e. 11, amends the Settled Land 
 Act, 1882, ivith regard to any sale, exchange, or 
 lease of land for buildings for the working classes. 
 
 II. SETTLED LAND ACT— DEFINITIONS. 
 
 1. Limited Owner — Contingency of at- 
 taining Twenty-one — Executory Limitations — In- 
 fant — Appointment of Trustee— -iS & 46 Vid. c. 38, 
 s. 58, sub-s 1, cl. (ii.).] Certain estates were de- 
 vised to the use of the testator's wife and G. T., 
 upon trust to pay the net rents and income of the 
 estates to the wife for the maintenance, educa- 
 cation, and benefit of the testator's sou until he 
 should attain twenty-one, and without being 
 liable to account to the trustees or to the sou for 
 the same ; and upon the son's attaining twenty- 
 one, then upon trust for him absolutely : but if 
 he should die under twenty-one without leaving 
 issue, then upon trust to permit the wife to receive 
 such rents and income for her life, and after her 
 death upon the trusts therein mentioned : — Held-, 
 under the Settled Land Act, 1882, s. 58, sub-s. 2, 
 that the infant son had the powers of a tenant for 
 life, being tenant in fee simple with an executory 
 limitation over in case of dying under twenty-one 
 without issue. The trustees of the will appointed 
 trustees for the purposes of the Act. In re Mokgan 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 114 
 
 2. - — ■ Limited Owner — Conditional Life 
 Estate — 45 & 46 Vict. c. 38, ss. 51, 58, sub-s. 1, cl. vi. 
 — Person having Powers of Tenant or Life — In- 
 validity of Condition — Application of Proceeds of 
 Sale of Estate.'] A testator devised his B. estate to 
 the use of his son, " so long as he sliall reside 
 in my present dwelling-house, or upon some part 
 of my B. estate, for not less than three months in 
 each year after he shall become entitled to the 
 actual possession thereof;'" and, after the death 
 of the son, provided that he should have complied 
 with the condition, to such uses for the beneiit of 
 his children as he should by will appoint ; and, 
 in default of such appointment, or, if he should 
 fail in compliance witli the above condition, on 
 the determination of his estate therein, to the 
 use of trustees, on trust for sale and distribution 
 of the proceeds of sale among the son's children : — 
 Held, that the son had the powers of a tenant for 
 life under the Settled Land Act, and could sell 
 the estate, and that, notwithstanding the condi- 
 tion as to residence, he would, by virtue of 
 sect. 51 of tlie Act, be entitled to the income of 
 the proceeds of sale during his life. In re Paget's 
 Settled Estates - 30 Ch. D. 161 
 
 3. • Limited Owner — Settled Land .4ci,18S2 
 
 (45 (fc 46 Vict. c. 38), s. 58, sub-ss. 1, cl («».), (vi.)— 
 Leasehold Interest — Estate determinalde with 
 Lease.'] A testator who had granted a lease of a 
 house for a term of thirty-one years from the 25th 
 of March, 1859, at a rent of £50 a year, by his will, 
 dated the 20th of June, 1866, devised his freehold 
 interest in such house to trustees upon trust to 
 permit his wife to receive the rent for her own 
 benefit " during the remainder of the term granted 
 by the said lease if she should so long live " and 
 in case she should die " before the expiration of 
 the term created by such lease " then he gave and 
 devised the house to the children of his brother 
 ill fee, and he directed that if his wife should 
 " liappen to live after the expiration of the term 
 
( Hll ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1442 ) 
 
 :i. SETTLED LAND ACT — DEFINITIONS — 
 
 contintted. 
 ireated by such lease " then the trustees should 
 sell the house, and out of the income from the in- 
 ?estment of the proceeds pay £50 a year to his 
 wife during her life, and subject thereto he gave 
 the residue of the proceeds for his brother's chil- 
 Jren. The testator died in 1866, and the question 
 beiug raised whether his widow could, under the 
 Settled Laud Act, 1882, accept a surrender of 
 such lease and grant a new lease of the house for 
 I term of twenty-one years from the 25th of De- 
 3emher, 1883, at an increased rent : — Held (affirm- 
 ing the decision of Pearson, J.), that the widow 
 ifas not a person under sect. 58 of that Act en- 
 iitled to the powers of a tenant for life and was 
 therefore not able to accept a surrender and make 
 a. new lease of the house In re Hazle's Settled 
 Estates - 26 Ch. D. 428 ; 29 Ch. D. 78 
 
 ' ■ 4. Limited Owner — Settled Land Act, 
 
 1882 (45 * 46 Vict. o. 38), s. 2, sub-ss. 5, 7, 10, 
 il. (i.) ; s. 58, subs. 1, cl. (ix.) — Power of Sale — 
 ' Person entitled to the income of land."^ Subject 
 :o a term for raising certain sums, freehold estates 
 irere devised to the use of trustees during the life 
 )f A.'s children and issue. The trustees of the 
 ife estate were directed to enter into possession of 
 md manage the property, pay outgoings, keep 
 iown the interest on incumbrauces, and during 
 Sl.'s life pay out of the residue an annuity of 
 £400 to the person next entitled in remainder, 
 lud pay the ultimate residue to A. The estates 
 ifere so heavily encumbered that after payment 
 )f outgoings and interest there was not enough 
 :o pay the annuity of £400. A. therefore had 
 ■eoeived nothing, and there was no prospect of 
 lis receiving anything for many years:— fleW, 
 [affirming the decision of Bacon, V.C.), that A. was 
 I person entitled to the income of land under a 
 trust or direction for payment thereof to him 
 luring his life, subject to expenses of management 
 within the meaning of the Settled Land Act, 
 L882, sect. 58, sub-sect. 1, clause (ix.), and therefore 
 possessed the power of selling given by the Act to 
 ;enants for life. In re Jones - 24 Ch. D. 583 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 736 
 
 5. — - limited Owner— 45 & 46 Vict. c. 38, 
 1. 2, svib-s. 5 ; s. 56, sub-s. 2, s. 58, siib-s. 1, cl. 
 [ix.) — Tenant for Life.'] Testator by will, dated 
 ;he 8th of August, 1883, limited an estate to 
 ;he use of trustees for a term of 1300 years, 
 md subject thereto to his second son H. S. for 
 ife, with remainders over in strict settlement. 
 The trusts of the term were to raise portions, 
 o pay annuities, H. S. himself being one of 
 he annuitants, and to apply the residue as a 
 linking fund to pay off mortgage debts and other 
 iharges. The income of the estate was about 
 i26,000 a year, and the amoimt of the charges 
 ibout £175,000. It was estimated that the trusts 
 if the term would require from fifteen to twenty 
 'ears for their fulfilment. The testator directed 
 hat the trustees should "during the continuance 
 f the last mentioned trusts " enter into and hold 
 lossession of the rents and profits of the estate, 
 and not deliver the same to any person benefi- 
 ially interested in any part thereof," and manage 
 he estate as therein mentioned. Very full powers 
 f management were given to the trustees, and 
 
 II. SETTLED LAND ACT —DEFINITIONS — 
 
 continued. 
 the testator provided that when all the trusts of 
 the term should have been fully paid and satisfied 
 the term should cease. He moreover gave to the 
 trustees such other powers over the estate as were 
 given to a tenant for life in possession by the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882 -.—Held, that H. S. was 
 not a mere annuitant, but was tenant for life, or 
 a person having the powers of a tenant for life, of 
 the estate within the meaning of sect. 58, sub- 
 sect. 1, cl. (ix.) of the Settled La'nd Act, 1882, 
 and that his consent was necessary under sect. 56, 
 sub-sect. 2, to the effectual exercise by the trustees 
 of the powers of sale and enfranchisement con- 
 tained in the will. In re Glithekoe Estate 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 878 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch, D. 135.] 
 
 6. Limited Owner — Tenant for Life — 
 
 Persons having Powers of Tenant for Life — Discre- 
 tionary Trust far Application of Income during Life 
 — For/eitureinEventof Bankruptcy — Settled Land 
 Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 38), s. 2, sub-ss. 5, 6, 10, 
 cl. i. 51, 58, sub-s. 1, els. vi. ix.] The words " en- 
 titled to possession of settled land for his life," as 
 used in sub-sect; 5 of sect. 2 of the Settled Land 
 Act, 1882, mean entitled "in possession" as dis- 
 tinguished from entitled " in reversion," and the 
 words in sub-sect. 6, " two or more persons so 
 entitled as tenants in common, or as joint ten- 
 ants," mean entitled " for life." — A testator 
 devised real estate to the use of trustees in fee 
 during the life of his son, on trust to receive the 
 rents, and after payment of costs and outgoings, 
 to hold the residue of the rents upon the trusts 
 thereinafter mentioned. And after the death of 
 iihe son, to the use of his first and other sons 
 successively in tail male, with remainders over. 
 And the testator directed that his trustees should 
 during the life of the son pay and apply the 
 residue of the rents which should during his life 
 become payable to them in such manner in all 
 respects as they should think best for the main- 
 tenance, or otherwise for the benefit of the son 
 and of his wife and his child and children, or for the 
 benefit of any one or more of them, and so that, 
 in case the son should at any time assign, charge, 
 or attempt to anticipate his interest under the 
 will, or should do any act whereby, either directly 
 or by operation of law, he would, if absolutely 
 entitled to such interest, be deprived, or liable to 
 be deprived, of the benefit or enjoyment thereof, 
 then the trust thereinbefore declared in his favour 
 should absolutely cease, and the rents should 
 thenceforth during his life be applied by the 
 trustees, either for the maintenance, support, or 
 benefit of the son, or for such other purposes and in 
 such manner in all respects as the trustees should 
 in their absolute discretion think fit. There being 
 no children of the sou and he not having forfeited 
 his interest under the will : — Held, that he and his 
 wife did not togjether constitute a tenant for life of 
 the estate by virtue of sub-sect. 6 of sect. 2 of the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882, and that they had not, 
 by virtue of sect. 58, the powers of a tenant for 
 life under the Act. In re Atkinsoit. Atkinson 
 V. Betjoe - - - 30 Ch. D. 605 
 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal.] 
 
 7. Settlement— 45 * 46 Viet. c. 38, s 2 
 
 3 A 
 
( 1443 ) 
 
 DIGEST or CASES. 
 
 ( 1444 ) 
 
 II. SETTLED LAND ACT —DEFINITIONS — 
 
 continued, 
 subs. 1 — Original and derivative Settlements.'] 
 When a complete settlement of land has been 
 made, and derivative settlements have been after- 
 wards made by persons -who take interests (not 
 yet in possession) under the original settlement, 
 the original settlement alone is the settlement 
 for the purposes of the Settled Land Act. In re 
 Knowles' Settled Estates 27 Ch. D. 707 
 
 III. SETTLED LAND ACT— DISABILITIES. 
 
 1- Infant — Trustees — Sale out of Court 
 
 Settled Land Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 38), 
 ss. 3, 59, 60.] In appointing trustees under the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882, to sell an infant's estate 
 (S3. 3, 59, 60), the Court has jurisdiction to 
 authorize the sale to be made out of Court. In re 
 Price. Leighton v. Price 27 Ch. D. 552 
 
 2. 'Laas.tic— Notice to Trustees — Sale by 
 
 Tenant for ii/e— 45 * 46 Vict. c. 38, s. 45— &nc- 
 tion of Court of Lunacy.'] The committee of a 
 lunatic tenant for life cannot give a vahd notice 
 under sect. 45 unless he has previously obtained 
 authority from the Court of Lunacy to do so. In 
 re Bay's Setted Estates 25 Ch. D. 464 
 
 IV. SETTLED LAND ACT— PTOCHASE-MONEY. 
 
 1. Improvements — Heirlooms — Tower of 
 
 Tenant for Life to sell — Leave of the Court — 
 Settled Land Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. a. 38), 
 s. 21, svh-s. vii. ; s. 25, svh-ss. i., iii., x., xi., xiii. ; 
 s. 37— Settled Land Act, 1884 (47 * 48 Vict, 
 c. 18), s. 7.] A tenant for life under a settle- 
 ment containing a discretionary trust for sale 
 of the settled estates, and also a i:ower to sell 
 certain settled heirlooms, asked leave of the Court 
 under sect. 37 of the Settled Land Act, 1882, 
 that he might be authorized to sell part of the 
 settled estates, and also a specified portion of 
 the heirlooms ; that the money might be paid to 
 the trustees, and that such part as might be neces- 
 sary might be applied by them in paying for 
 certain improvements, consisting of (1) a larger 
 and better supply of water to a mansion-house ; 
 (2) a new and improved system of drainage of the 
 mansion-house ; (3) rebuilding of the stables, 
 which were out of repair ; (4) the building of an 
 agent's house ; and (5) the building of two cot- 
 tages. — The trustees submitted that the proposed 
 improvements (except the cottages) were not 
 within the 25th section of the Act of 18S2 ; and, 
 that even if they were the Court would not super- 
 sede the power of the trustees by giving leave to 
 the tenant for life to sell either the estate or the 
 heirlooms :^-IIeld, that the proposed outlay was 
 all within sect. 25 of the Settled Land Act, 1882 ; 
 and would have been authorized without the 
 statute ; and leave given to the tenant for life to 
 sell both the settled estates and' the heirlooms, 
 and for the application of the proceeds as prayed. 
 In re Houghton Estate 30 Ch. D. 102 
 
 2. Income— 45 <St 46 Vict. o. 38, s. 34— 
 
 Lands Glauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 ife 9 Vict. 
 0. 18), 8. 74 — Purchase-money of Lands subsequent 
 to beneficial Lease — Tenant for Life and Bemain- 
 derman — Application of Income.] Sect. 34 of the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882, and 74of the Lands Clauses 
 Consolidation Act, 1845, are similar enactments, 
 so that where the facts are similar decisions on 
 
 IV. SETTLED LAND ACT— PUECHASE-MONEY 
 
 — continued. 
 sect. 74 are authorities on sect. 34.— As between 
 tenant for life and remainderman, where lands 
 subject to a beneficial lease are sold under the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882, the tenant for life will, 
 during the unexpired period of the term, be 
 entitled to so much only of the income of the 
 invested purchase-moneys as equals the rents 
 under the lease, and the rest of that moome must 
 be accumulated and invested for the benefit of the 
 inheritance until the date when the lease would 
 have expired.— J» re Mettes Estate (Law Kep. 
 7 Eq. 72), In re Wootton's Estate (Law Eep. 1 Eq. 
 589), and In re Wilkes' Estate (16 Ch. D. 597) 
 approved. Cottbell v. Cottbell 28 Ch. D. 628 
 a. Incumbrances — Discharge of Incum- 
 brances affecting part of Estate — Settled Land Act, 
 1882 (45 <£ 46 Vict.c. 38), ss. 21, 51, 53, 56.] A 
 settlement of land was made in 1853 by a private 
 Act of Parliament. By this Act the estates were 
 vested in the trustees the reby appointed, upon trust 
 by sale or mortgage thereof to raise money for the 
 purpose of discharging certain incumbrances and 
 liabilities. The Act provided that the trustees 
 might from time to time absolutely sell and dis- 
 pose of all or any part of the estates mentioned 
 in a schedule, provided that the trustees should 
 not sell any of the lands situate in the parishes 
 of C. and H., unless it should be absolutely neces- 
 sry for the purposes of the Act to do so, and in 
 case of such necessity should not sell any of those 
 lands until all the rest of the estates were sold. 
 —After the Settled Land Act, 1882, had come 
 into operation the tenant for life entered into a 
 contract to sell some of the lands situate in the 
 parishes of C. andH. The whole of the rest of the 
 estates had not then been sold :—fleW, that under 
 sub-sect. 2 of sect. 21 of the Settled Land Act, 
 the purchase-money could be applied in discharg- 
 ing a mortgage which affected part of the land 
 sold and another mortgage which affected another 
 part of the settled estate, and that it was not 
 necessary that the other mortgage should be one 
 affecting the whole of the settled estates. In re 
 Ghavtor's Settled Estate Act 25 Ch. D. 651 
 
 4. Incumbrances — 45 & 46 Vict. c. 38, 
 
 ss. 21, sub-s. ii., 37, 53— Heirlooms— Sale— Appli- 
 cation of Proceeds — Discharge of Incujnbrances.] 
 The money arising by the sale, on the application 
 of the tenant for life with the sanction of the 
 Court, of chattels treated in a settlement as heir- 
 looms, and so far as the rules of law and equity 
 would permit annexed to the settled freehold land, 
 may be applied in the discharge of incumbrances 
 affecting the inheritance of settled land, without 
 keeping such incumbrances on foot for the benefit 
 of the infant remainderman in whom the heir- 
 looms would, if unsold, have vested absolutely on 
 his attaining twenty-one. In re Duke of Makl- 
 eoeough's Settlement. Duke op MablbosOugh 
 
 V. Mabjokibanks - - - 30 Ch. D. 127 
 
 [Affirmed by the Conit of Appeal.] 
 
 6. Incumbrances — 45 & 46 Vict c. 38, 
 
 ss. 21, 25, 26, 53 — Land Drainage Cliarges — Zm- 
 provement of Land Act, 1864 (27 & 28 Vict. c. 114), 
 ss. 49, 51, 66.] Where a tenant for life of settled 
 land has prior to the Settled Land Act, 1882, 
 created charges for land drainage and improve- 
 
( 14-15 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1446 ) 
 
 IV. SETTIED LAND ACT— PXTECHASE-MONEY 
 
 —continued. 
 ments under the Improvement of Land Act, 
 1864, and other Acts, which were repayable by 
 instalments, he will not be entitled under the 
 Settled Land Act, s. 21, sub-s. 2. to have these 
 charges paid out of the capital of the settled 
 ■estates so as to relieve him frnm the payment of 
 . the instulraents. Trustees who purchase such 
 •charges will hold them upon trust to receive the 
 instalments payable by the tenant for life, and 
 to treat them as capital. The decision of 
 Pearson, J., afSrmed. In re Knatohbull's 
 Settled Estate 87 Ch. D. 349 ; 29 Ch. D. 588 
 
 6. — Investment — Gliarity — Settled Land 
 Act, 1882 (45 * 46 Vict. c. 38), ss. 21, 32.] Lands 
 belonging absolutely to a charity were taken by a 
 public body, and the purchase-money paid into 
 Court under the Lands Clauses Act : — Held, that 
 the purchase-money could be dealt with under 
 ■the provisions of the £2nd section of the Settled 
 Land Act, 1882, as " money liable to be laid out 
 in the purchase of land to be made subject to a 
 settlement." In re Byron's Chakity 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 171 
 
 7. Investment — Debenture Stock — Peti- 
 
 tionfor Advice — Will — Money to he laid out in the 
 purchase of Land to he settled in Strict Settlement 
 —Settled Land Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 38), 
 ^s. 2 (1), 21, 22 (2), (4), 33, 44, 51, 56 (2).] 
 Where under a will money is bequeathed to 
 trustees in trust to lay it out in the purchase of 
 land, to be settled in strict settlement, the trustees 
 may invest it in debenture stock in accordance 
 with the provisions of sect. 21 of the Settled 
 Land Act, 1882. In re Mackenzie's Trusts 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 750 
 
 V. SETTLED LAND ACT— BESTEICTIONS, 
 
 1. Mansion-house — Heirlooms — Tenant 
 
 for Life— Sale— Settled Land Act, 1882 (45 & 46 
 Vict. c. 38), ss. 3, 15, 37 — Practice — Service.'] A 
 testator bequeathed to his trustees certain articles 
 as heirlooms to be annexed to his mansion-house 
 and held in trust for the person for the time 
 being entitled to the mansion-house under the 
 equitable limitations thereinafter contained ; and 
 he devised his mansion-house and estate, com- 
 prising about 360 acres, to the trustees upon 
 trust for his son for life, with equitable remain- 
 ders over in strict settlement for the benefit of 
 the son's issue : and the testator directed that 
 his mansion-house and certain lands thereto 
 belonging, comprising about thirty acres, and 
 described on a plan indorsed on the will, should 
 be kept up as a place of residence for the person 
 for the time being entitled to the possession 
 thereof under his will, and that the heirlooms 
 should at all times be kept in the mansion-house. 
 Powers were given to the trustees to let, sell, or 
 exchange any part of the settled estate except 
 the mansion-house and lands described on the 
 plan. — The testator's sou, the tenant for life, 
 being desirous of selling the whole estate under 
 the powers of tlie Settled Land Act, 1882, applied 
 to the Court under sect. 15 for leave to sell the 
 excepted mansion-house and lands, on the groiind 
 that, owing to ill-health and permanent residence 
 elsewhere, he was unable to reside in the man- 
 
 V. SETTLED LAND ACT — EESTEICTIONS — 
 
 continued. 
 sion-house, and also that inasmuch as the estate 
 was in proximity to a large town, the bulk of the 
 estate could not be sold advantageously without 
 the mansion-house and adjoining lands. The 
 summons did not ask for the sale of or contain 
 any reference to the heirlooms : — Held, that, on 
 the evidence, the ease was a proper one for a sale 
 of the mansion-house and adjoining lands, but 
 that leave for sale would not be granted without 
 some direction as to the disposal of the heirlooms. 
 — The summons was then amended, with the 
 consent of the trustees, by asking for leave to sell 
 the heirlooms also, under sect. 37 of the Settled 
 Land Act, 1882, by reference to an inventory 
 verified by affidavit, wheieupon an order was 
 made for the sale of the heirlooms with liberty for 
 tlie tenant for life to bid at such sale. — Service of 
 the summons on the children of the tenant for 
 life was dispensed with, their interests being 
 sufSciently represented by the trustees, who had 
 been served, In re Beown's 'Will 27 Ch. D, 179 
 
 2. Title of Dignity — Heirlooms — Incorpo- 
 real Hereditament — Land — Heirlooms devolving 
 with Dignity — Sale of Heirlooms — Settled Land 
 Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. o. 38), s. 2, suh-s. 10, 
 ss. 37, 5?,— Statute De Donis (13 Ed. 1)— Statute 
 Westminster Second.] A dignity or title of honour, 
 as an incorporeal hereditament, is " land " 
 within the meaning of the 37th section of the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882. — 'When a dignity is 
 limited to the heirs of the body, then although 
 no place be named in the creation of the title, the 
 dignity is within the statute De Donis, and de- 
 scendible as an estate tail, and the patent does not 
 create a fee simple conditional. — There is no 
 difference in these respects between a baronetcy 
 and other descendible dignities. The resolution 
 reported 12 Eep. 81, held to be overruled. — The 
 Settled Land Act, 1883, does not enable a limited 
 owner to sell any property which, when vested in a 
 tenant in fee simple, is by law inalienable. In re 
 Sib J. Eivett-Carnao's 'Will 30 Ch, D. 136 
 
 VI. SETTLED LAND ACT— TENANT FOE LIFE 
 (and LIMITED 0"WNEE). 
 
 1. Sale Pendency of Administration 
 
 Action — 45 & 46 Vict. c. 38, s. 3.] The pendency 
 of an action by tenant for life in which a decree 
 has been made for execution of the trusts of a. 
 settlement, does not prevent him from exercising 
 his power of sale under the Settled Land Act, 
 1882, without the sanction of the Court. Cakdigan 
 v. CuBzoN-HowE - - 30 Ch. D. S31 
 
 2. Sale — Private Act authorizing Trus- 
 tees to sell — Restriction, on Exercise — Power of 
 Tenant for Life to sell — Settled Land Act, 1882 
 (45 & 46 Vict. V. 38), ss. 21, 51, 53, 56.] A 
 settlement of land was made in 1853 by a 
 private Act of Parliament. By this Act the 
 estates were vested in the trustees thereby ap- 
 pointed, upon trust by sale or mortgage thereof to 
 raise money for the purpose of discharging certain 
 incumbrances and liabilities. The Act provided 
 that the trustees might from time to time abso- 
 lutely sell and dispose of all or any part of the 
 estates mentioned in a schedule, provided that the 
 trustees should not sell any of the lands situate 
 
 3 A 2 
 
( 1447 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASKS. 
 
 ( 1448 ) 
 
 VI. SETTLED lAND ACT— TENANT FOE LIFE 
 (and LIMITED OWTHYR)— continued. 
 
 in the parishes of 0. and H., unless it should be 
 absolutely necessary for the purpose of the Act to 
 do so, and in case of such necessity should not 
 sell any of those lands until all the rest of the 
 estates were sold. — After the Settled Land Act, 
 1882, had come into operation the tenant for life 
 entered into a contract to sell some of the lands 
 situate in the parishes of 0. and H. The whole 
 of tlie rest of the estates had not then been sold : 
 — Held, that the power of sale conferred on the 
 tenant for life by the Settled Land Act was an 
 absolute power over and above that given to the 
 trustees by the private Act, and that lie was there- 
 fore entitled to sell free from the restriction im- 
 posed by the private Act on the trustees. In 
 re Chaytob's Settled Estate Act 25 Cfh. D. 651 
 
 3. Sale — Trust for Sale hy Trustees after 
 
 Death of Tenant for Life — Tower of Tenant for 
 Life to sell the Fee Simple— i5 & 46 Vict. c. 38, 
 «. 45 — Will made in 1834 — Sale of Property by 
 the Reversioner in 1880 — Notice under sect. 45 
 by Tenant for Life to Trustees of Settlement.'] 
 J. W., by liis will, devised an estate to trustees 
 upon trust to receive and pay the rents to his 
 grandson for life, and after his decease to sell and 
 ' to stand possessed of the moneys for all the grand- 
 son's children. The tenant for life was upwards 
 of seventy years of age, and a widower. He had 
 one child only, a daughter, and she and her hus- 
 band in July, 1880, contracted to sell her rever- 
 sion in the estate of the Piaintiflf. The Settled 
 Land Act (45 & 46 Vict, c 38) came into operation 
 in January, 1883, and the tenant for life at the 
 end of that month advertised the estate for sale 
 under the powers of the Act. The Plaintiif 
 brought an action for an injunction to restrain 
 the tenant for life from selling ; and to restrain 
 the other Defendants, devises of the legal estate 
 under the will of the survivor of trustees of 
 J. W.'s will appointed by the Court, from exe- 
 cuting any assurance of the estate, and on motion 
 for that purpose : — Held, that the tenant for life 
 had power under the Act to sell the fee simple 
 and inheritance of the property if he should com- 
 ply with the provisions of the Act ; but held also 
 tliat there were no trustees to whom he could 
 under sect. 45, give notice ; and an injunction was 
 granted to restrain him from selling until trustees 
 had been properly appointed for the purposes of 
 the Act. — Held, also, that the Plaintiff was en- 
 titled to be served with any summons for the ap- 
 pointment of new trustees, and (the Plaintiff 
 objecting) that the Defendant's solicitor ought 
 not to be appointed. Wheelwright v. Walker 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 762 
 
 VII. SETTLED LAND ACT— TRUSTEES. 
 
 1, Appointment — Payment of Money out 
 
 of Court.'] Where a testator's daughter was bene- 
 ficial tenant for life of a fund paid into Court 
 upon the compulsory purchase of the testator's 
 property, the daughter being one of the two trus- 
 tees of the will, and both trustees being desirous 
 of resigning their trusts ; and there being no 
 power of sale in the will. — The Court appointed 
 two new trustees of the settlement effected by the 
 will for the purposes of the Settled Land Act, 
 1882, and ordered the fund to be paid out to such 
 
 Vn. SETTLED LAND ACT— TETJSTEES- coniA 
 trustees, to be held by them upon the trusts of the 
 wUl. In re Weight's Tkusts - 24 Ch. D 662 
 
 2. Appointment — Payment of Money out 
 
 of Court.] A testator devised freehold property 
 to trustees in trust for his grandson for life, and 
 then for his issue in tail. There were four trus- 
 tees of the will, and the testator's grandson was 
 one of such trustees. The will contained no 
 power of sale. Shortly after the testator's death 
 a portion of the property comijrised in the will 
 was purchased by a railway company under their 
 powers, and the money was paid into Court. — 
 Upon petition for payment of the money out of 
 Court, an order was made appointing three of the 
 trustees of the will, omitting the testator's grand- 
 son (the tenant for life), to be trustees of the 
 settlement effected by the will for the purposes of 
 the Settled Land Act, 1882 : and the fund was 
 ordered to be paid out to such three trustees to be 
 held by them upon the trusts of the will. — And it 
 appearing that the trustees of the will had ad- 
 vanced a large sum of money on mortgage includ- 
 ing, by anticipation, a sum of money equivalent 
 to the fund in Court — It was ordered that the 
 three trustees appointed by the Court be at 
 liberty to pay the fund to the four trustees of the 
 will upon the execution by them of a declaration 
 of trust in favour of the three trustees of so much 
 of the principal sum secured by the mortgage as 
 should be equivalent to the proceeds of the fund 
 ordered to be paid out of Court. In re Haeeop's. 
 Trusts. 24 Ch. D. 717 
 
 3. Appointment— .BekfaYes.] The Court; 
 
 will not in general appoint as trustees of a settle- 
 ment for the purposes of the Act two persons who 
 are near relatives to each other. There ought tO' 
 be two independent trustees. In re Knowles' 
 Settled Estates - - 27 Ch, D. 707 
 
 4. Appointment— Soiicif or /or t/ie Tenant 
 
 for Ufe—i5 & 46 Vict. c. 38, s. 38.] A testator 
 devised his real estate to the use of G. & W. in 
 fee upon trusts in strict settlement, and be- 
 queathed to them his residuary personal estate 
 upon trust to invest it in the purchase of land to 
 be conveyed to them upon the same trusts. The- 
 will contained no power of sale. W. was the 
 family solicitor, a person of good position and 
 high character, and after the death of the testator 
 he acted as solicitor lo the trustees and also to- 
 the tenant for life. The tenant for life being de- 
 sirous of selling part of the estates under the- 
 powers of the Settled Land Act, applied to the 
 Coi\rt to appoint G. and W. trastees for the pur- 
 poses of the Act -.—Held (afBrmingthe decision of 
 Kay, J.), that W. ought not to be appointed, for 
 that although he was in all other respects a most 
 proper person, his being solicitor to the tenant for 
 life, made him unsuitable for an office the duties- 
 of which required him to check the proceedings- 
 of the tenant for life. In re Kemp's Settled 
 Estates 34. ch. D. 485 
 
 5. Notice to Trustees — Sale or Lease by- 
 Tenant for Life— Settled Land Act, 1882 (45 & 46 
 'Fict. c. 38), 6. 45.] The notice, to be given, under 
 sect. 45 of the Settled Land Act, 1882, by the 
 tenant for life of settled land to the trustees of 
 the setUement for the purposes of tho Act, when- 
 he IS intending to make a sale or lease, must be — 
 
( 1449 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1450 ) 
 
 Til. SETTLED LAKD ACT— TRUSTEES— conid. 
 not a merely general notice of an intention to sell 
 or lease all or any part of the estate at any time 
 after the expiration of one month from the date 
 of the notice as and when a proper opportunity 
 shall from time to time occur — ^but a notice of a 
 specific sale or lease which is contemplated at 
 the time when tlie notice is given. In re Bay's 
 Settled Estates - - 25 Ch, D. 464 
 
 6. Powers of leasing, sale and exchange 
 
 —45 & 46 Vict. c. 38, ss. 2, 3, 6, 11, 17, 25, 33, 56, 
 60 — Infant Tenant in Tail — Mining Leases — Sur- 
 face Land apart from Mines — Application of 
 Bents — Proceeds of Sale — Conflict hetween Settle- 
 ment and Act."] Upon a summons under the 
 Settled Land Act to obtain the opinion and direc- 
 tion of the Court as to the effect of the Act upon 
 certain clauses in a settlement where an infant 
 tenant in tail was entitled to possession, the follow- 
 ing questions were decided : — 1. The settlement 
 gave the trustees power during the minority of any 
 person entitled to possession to receive and apply 
 rents and profits in management of estate and 
 maintenance of infant, and to accumulate and 
 apply the surplus in paying off charges or in pur- 
 chase of real estate to be settled to the same uses : 
 — Held, that the rents and profits received by the 
 trustees during the minority were to be treated in 
 manner directed by the settlement and without 
 regard to the Act. — 2. Power in the settlement to 
 the trustees with the consent of the tenant for life, 
 if of age, and if not, of his guardians, to sell or 
 exchange : — Held, that this power was exercisable 
 by the trustees during the minority at the request 
 and by the direction of the guardians of the infant 
 ienant in tail. — 3. Power in the settlement for 
 the guardians during minority to grant leases for 
 twenty-one years, building leases for ninety-nine 
 years, and mining leases for sixty years : — Held, 
 that this power was exercisable during minority 
 by the guardians with the consent of the trustees ; 
 —4. Held, that the rents derived from mining 
 leases were to be applied by the trustees in 
 manner directed by the settlement as coming 
 within the term " contrary intention " expressed 
 in the 11th section of the Act. — 5. Held, that 
 there being no power in the settlement to sell 
 surface land apart from minerals the trustees 
 icould exercise that power under sect. 17 of the 
 Act; and this being an execution of a statutory 
 power, the consent of the guardians would not be 
 necessary. In re Duke op Newcastle's Estates 
 
 [24 Ch. D, 129 
 
 7. Power of Sale — Settled Land Act, 1882 
 
 (45 & 46 Viet. <;. 38), ss. 2 (8), 38, 39, 45 (2).] By 
 settlement (a), executed upon the marriage of A. 
 and B., it was declared that the trustees C. and 
 M. should stand possessed of money, upon trust 
 that they and the survivor of them, his executors, 
 administrators, and assigns, should continue the 
 money on the present investments, or with the 
 consent in writing, of A. and B. or the survivor, 
 and after the death of the survivor then of the 
 proper authority of such trustees or trustee to sell 
 !ind transfer the securities and lay out and invest 
 the proceeds, with power from time to time with 
 such consent as aforesaid to vary the securities. 
 All after-acquired property, both real and per- 
 sonal, to be assured and settled upon the same 
 
 VII. SETTLED LAND ACT— TEUSTEES— conJd. 
 trusts, &c., as the principal sum. Power to appoint 
 new trustees, and to maintain, enlarge, or diminish 
 the original number : every new trustee to have 
 the power, &c., of the trustee in whose place 
 he was appointed. — By settlement (6), executed 
 upon the marriage of C. and D. (the sister of B.), 
 it was declared that the trustees M. & N. should 
 stand possessed of money upon trust to continue 
 the same upon its then present security, or with 
 the consent in wi-itingof C. and D. or the survivor, 
 and after the death of the survivor, of the proper 
 authority of such trustees or trustee to call in the 
 said principal money and again lay out the same 
 in their or his names or name upon the securities 
 therein mentioned, with power for the trustees or 
 trustee for the time being with such consent or 
 at such discretion as aforesaid to alter, vary, and 
 transpose the stocks, funds, or investments to be 
 from time to time made under the authority of 
 the aforesaid power in any other stoclis, &o., of 
 the nature or description contemplated by the 
 trust for investment. Covenant to settle after- 
 acquired property similar in terms to that in 
 settlement (a). — M. had died and three new 
 trustees of settlement (a) had been appointed by 
 A. and B. N". .was the solo present trustee of 
 settlement (V). — Real estate had descended 
 during their coverture upon B. and D. as co- 
 heiresses in undivided moieties. A contract for 
 the sale of this Teal estate having been entered 
 into by A. and B. and 0. and D. as vendors : — 
 Held, upon summons under the Vendor and Pur- 
 chaser Act, 1874, that under the express power 
 contained in settlement (a), and the implied 
 power in settlement (6), the existing trustees of 
 both settlements had full power within the mean- 
 ing of the Settled Land Act, 1882, s. 2 (8), to act 
 as trustees under the Act, and that it was not 
 necessary to apply to the Court under the Settled 
 Land Act, 1882, s. 38, for the appointment of new 
 trustees for the purposes of the Act. In re Gae- 
 
 KETT OeME and HaRGBEAVES' CONTRACT 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 595 
 
 8. — . — Trust for Sale — Consent of Bene- 
 ficiaries — 45 * 46 Vict. s. 38, o. 63.] In determin- 
 ing whether land vested in trustees on an abso- 
 lute trust for sale is subject to the provisions of 
 sect. 63 of the Settled Land Act, 1882, the Court 
 must look simply at the instrument which created 
 the trust, and if at the time when a contract for 
 sale is entered into by the trustees, there is no 
 person who, by virtue of the provisions of that in- 
 strument, is entitled to the income of the money 
 arising from the sale, or of the land until sale, for 
 his life, or any other limited period, sect. 63 does 
 not apply, but the trustees can exercise the trust 
 for sale just as they could have done prior to the 
 passing of the Act. In re Eakle and Websteb's 
 Contract - 24 Ch. D. 144 
 
 9. Trust for Sale — Order of the Court 
 
 for Sale — Concurrence of Tenant for Life not re- 
 quired— 4:5 & 46 Vict. c. 38, ss. 56, 63.] A 
 testator devised all his real and personal estate 
 to trustees upon trust after the death of his wife 
 absolutely to sell the whole of his property in 
 such manner as they should think fit, and to pay 
 one fourteenth part of the proceeds to each of his 
 fourteen children at twenty-one or marriage, with 
 
( 1151 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1452 ) 
 
 VII. SETTLED LAND ACT— TEITSTEES— corfd!. 
 further provisions under whioli Ms daughters' 
 shares were settled on them for life with re- 
 mainders over. — A suit having been instituted for 
 the administration of the estate, and the wife 
 being dead, an order was made in the suit for sale 
 of part of the estate by the trustees : — Held, that 
 the concurrence of the children constituting the 
 tenant for life under the Settled Land Act, 1882, 
 was not necessary upon the sale by the trustees ; 
 but even if such concurrence would be necessary 
 the order of the Court was sufficient to enable 
 the trustees to sell without joining the fourteen 
 children or any of them in the conveyance to the 
 purchaser. Tatlok v. Ponoia - 26 Ch. D. 646 
 SETTLED LAND ACT — Appointment of trustees 
 
 —Pending action 24 Ch. D. 568 
 
 See Settlement — ^Powebs. 17. 
 Payment out of Court 30 Ch. D. 541 
 
 See Pkaotice — Suphemb ConET — Pay- 
 ment OUT OF COUBT. 
 
 Sale under — Remuneration of solicitor 
 
 [24 Ch. B. 608 
 
 See SoLioiTOE — Bill of Costs. 18. 
 
 SETTLEMENT:— Col. 
 
 I. Articles- - 1451 
 
 II. CONSTKIOTION - 1452 
 
 III. Equity to Settlement - 1456 
 
 IV. Future Property - 145G 
 V. Powers - 1461 
 
 VI. Eevocation - 1469 
 
 VII. Satisfaction - 1470 
 
 By Divorce Court. 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Settlemexts. 
 By Will. 
 
 See Will. 
 Fraudulent. 
 
 See Fraudulent Conveyance. 
 Settled Estates Act. 
 
 See Settled Estates Acts. 
 . Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Settled Land Act. 
 Voluntary. 
 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 
 I. SETTLEMENT— ARTICLES. 
 
 1. Marriage — Promise to settle — Subse- 
 quent Settlement — Lapse of Time.'] The father of 
 a lady wrote to her intended husband that he and 
 his wife had determined to settle on theirdaughter 
 £2000, and that in addition she would have 
 £2000 on her mother's death, and at least as 
 much on her father's death. Eleven months 
 afterwards the marriage took place ; and on that 
 occasion a formal agreement for a settlement of 
 £2000 was executed, the letter not being in any 
 way referred to. The mother died sixteen years 
 and the father died twenty-five years after the 
 marriage. The husband then claimed from the 
 father's estate £4000 under the promises con- 
 tained in the letter : — Held, that the letter had, 
 under the circumstances, been superseded by the 
 agreement for a settlement, and claim disallowed. 
 Inje Badoook. Kingdon v. Tagert 17 Ch. D. 361 
 
 2. Marriage— Promise hy Letter to make 
 
 a Setllcment .1 Shortly before a marriage the in- 
 
 I. SETTLEMENT — ABTICIES — oontinued. 
 tended husband, at the request of a friend of the 
 lady, wrote a letter to the lady promising to 
 settle her property, which was reversionary. At 
 the same time negotiations as to a settlement 
 were going on between the respective solicitors : 
 but the marriage took place without any settle- 
 ment being executed : — Held,, that this was a 
 valid agreement for a settlement ; and a settle- 
 ment ill the usual form was ordered to be executed. 
 ViBET V. ViRET - - 17 Ch. D. 365, n 
 
 II. SETTLEMENT— CONSTimCTION. 
 
 1. Covenant for Payment of Money " Tree 
 
 from all Deductions " — Whether Succession Duty 
 or Legacy Duty payable — Succession Duty Act 
 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), 6S. 1, 42, ii— Legacy Duty 
 Act (36 Geo. 3, c. 52), s. 6.] By a post-nuptial 
 settlement the settlor, the wife's father, cove- 
 nanted with the trustees for payment to them 
 during his life, or within twelve calendar months 
 after his death, of the sum of £10,000, " free from 
 all deductions whatsoever," and an aimuity of 
 £200 in the meantime. On the death of the 
 settlor his executor paid the full £10,000 to the 
 trustees : — Held, that succession duty on the 
 £10,000 was payable by the trustees and not by 
 executor. In re Higglns. Day v. Tubnell 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 697 
 [AfSrmed by the Court of Appeal, 81 Ch. D. 142.2 
 
 2. " Eldest Son" — Portions for Younger 
 
 Children — Younger becoming the elder Son — M$tate» 
 sold under paramount Title, and also under Incum- 
 bered Estates Act to pay off Incumbrances.] By a 
 marriage settlement an estate was settled on th& 
 wife and the husband successively for life, with 
 remainder to trustees for a term of 600 years, and 
 subject thereto to the first and other sons in tail. 
 Other estates were settled free from the portions 
 term, but subject to prior charges which entirely 
 absorbed them. The trusts of the term were if 
 there should be any child or children of the hus- 
 band and wife other than or besides an eldest or 
 only son, who by viitue of the limitations should 
 for the time being be entitled to the hereditaments 
 and premises, to raise for the portions of such 
 child or children other than or besides such eldest 
 or only son, £5000, to be vested in such of them 
 as the husband and wife, or the survivor, should 
 appoint, and in default of appointment equally. 
 There were three children of the marriage, two 
 sons and a daughter. In 1S41 the estate was sold, 
 under a paramount title, and produced a sum of 
 about £2400. In 1841 the eldest son died an 
 infant. In 1882 the surviving tenant for life died 
 and the portions became payable. There had 
 been no appointment. The younger son who 
 had become the elder and had attained twenty- 
 one claimed to take a share with his sister of the 
 £2400 -.—Held, that the efieot of the settlement 
 was to give £5000 to the sister as a first charge 
 on the estate, and the rest of the estate to the 
 brother, and whether the value of the residue 
 were more or less than the portion, or as in this 
 case, nothing at all, the brother had no right to 
 claim any share in the prior charge. Eeid v. 
 HoABE - - - 26 Ch, D. 363 
 
 3. " Eldest or only Son."] Sir C. D. 
 
 (who died in 1?57), by deed in 1852, appointed a 
 
( 1453 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1454 ) 
 
 II, SETTLEMENT— CONSTBTTCTION—coBtd. 
 
 fund to trustees in trust for his daughter Lady 
 W. for life, and after her death in trust for the 
 child or all the children, " except an eldest or 
 only son," if more than one, of Lady W., who 
 should attain twenty-one or marry ; and failing 
 such trusts then over. Lady W. died in 1883, 
 having had four children only, viz., Thomas, 
 her eldest born son, who attained twenty-one in 
 January, 1869, and died in April following. Sir 
 F. W., who attained twenty-one in 1880, Helena, 
 who attained twenty-one in 1865, and Edith, who 
 died in infancy, in 1864 ; so that the fund vested 
 in Helena (subject to let in other children) in the 
 lifetime of the eldest born son, and before he 
 attained twenty-one. At the date of the deed 
 certain estates stood limited under a settlement, 
 to which Sir 0. D. was a party, to the xise of Sir 
 T. "W. (the husband of Lady W.) for life with 
 remainder to the use of the first and other sons of 
 Sir T. and Lady W., in tail male. In March, 
 1869, Sir T. W. and his son Thomas, disentailed 
 the estates, and limited them to the appointees 
 of both, or of the survivor. The joint power was 
 not exercised; but after the death of Thomas, 
 Sir T. W. by will appointed the estates to Sir 
 F. W. for life, with remainder to his sons in tail 
 male. Upon Lady W.'s deatli Sir F. W. claimed 
 half the fund, and Helena, the whole of it : — 
 Seld, that, if the expression " eldest or only son," 
 was to be read as referring to a sou entitled under 
 a settlement to settled estates, the time for ascer- 
 taining the excluded son would be the time for 
 distributing the younger children's portions ; but 
 that if that expression was to be read according 
 to its natural meaning, the time of vesting would 
 be the time for exclusion : — Held, also, that the 
 words an " eldest or only son " primS. fucie mean an 
 individual, and that as there was an eldest son in 
 existence when the provision vested in Helena, the 
 clause of exclusion applied to him, and its operation 
 was exhausted, so that any other son who attained 
 twenty-one was entitled to take. And held, ac- 
 cordingly, that Sir F. W. was entitled to one half 
 of ;the inuii.— Mathews v. Paul (3 Sw. 328) 
 observed upon. Domvile v. Winnington 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 382 
 
 4. Eorfeiture — Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy 
 
 Act, 18G9, 8. 126 — Composition.'] Presentation by 
 a firm of a petition for liquidation under the Bank- 
 ruptcy Act, 1869, followed by acceptance by the 
 creditors of a composition, operates as a forfeiture 
 of an interest limited in 1862 to the use of A., 
 who was a member of the firm, during his life, 
 " or until he should be outlawed or declared bank- 
 rupt, or become an insolvent within the meaning 
 of some Act of Parliament for the relief of in- 
 solvent debtors." Nixon v. Vebky 29 Ch. D. 196 
 
 5. Forfeiture — Bankruptcy — Tenant for 
 
 Life amd in Remainder — Insolvency in New 
 South Wales—Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 <fe33 Vict. 
 0. 71), 8. 74.] In 1838 a settlement of real 
 estate in England was made, and thereby the 
 trustees were to pay the rents and profits to S. L. 
 for life or until he should commit an act of bank- 
 ruptcy, or commit amy act, or any event should 
 occur, whereby the rents, if settled absolutely upon 
 or in trust for him, should be forfeited to or be- 
 come vested in any other person whomsoever, and 
 
 II. SETTLEMENT— OONSTEirCTIOK—confd. 
 
 there was a gift over upon the happening of any 
 such event. S. L. in 1875 was residing in New 
 South Wales, and was adjudged insolvent by the 
 Court of the colony, the Act of the colony vesting 
 all property of the insolvent " wheresoever the 
 same might be known or found " in the Oommis- 
 sioner therein mentioned. On summons taken 
 out by S. L. under the Settled Land Act of 1882, 
 to have trustees appointed : — Seld, that in con- 
 sequence of the insolyency in New South AVales, 
 the property had become forfeited and had gone 
 over to those in remainder. In re Levy's Tkusts 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 119 
 
 6. Forfeiture — Bankruptcy — Discharge 
 
 of Bankrupt — ■ Life Estate ■ — ■ Beassignment of 
 Estate.'] Under the trusts of a marriage settle- 
 ment a life interest in property brought into 
 settlement by the wife was given, after her death, 
 to the husband, but the trust iu his favour was 
 to cease in the event of his banki-uptcy or liqui- 
 dation and there was a gift over on that event. 
 In August, 1881, he filed a liquidation petition 
 under which, in October, 1881, a. trustee of his 
 property was appointed. In January, 1883, he 
 obtained a discharge. In April, 1884, the wife 
 died. In March, 1885, the trustees assigned for 
 value to the debtor all the property belonging to 
 hitn at the commencement of the liquidation and 
 devolving on him subsequently, up to the date of 
 the discharge, other than that which had been 
 already received by the trustee. The liquidation 
 was never formally closed, but the trustee had 
 never made any claim to the income of the settled 
 fund : — Held, that, inasmuch as, before the re- 
 assignment by the trustee to the debtor, income 
 had become due to him, which, but for the for- 
 feiture clause, the trustee might have received, 
 the forfeiture had taken eifeot. — White v. Chitty 
 (Law Kep. 1 Eq. 372), Lloyd v. Lloyd (Law Eep. 
 2 Eq. 722j, and Ancona v. Waddell (10 Ch. D. 
 157) distinguished. Eobektson v. Kichaedsokt 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 623 
 
 7. Power of Appointment— " Jssae " — 
 
 Invalid Appointment hy Will— Election.] There 
 is no inflexible rule that if the word " issue " is 
 evidently used in one clause of a settlement as 
 meaning " children " only, it must be construed 
 in the same sense in every other clause. A 
 marriage settlement contained a power for the 
 wife to appoint by will among the issue of the 
 marriage, and, in default of appointment, the 
 trust fund was to be in trust for the issue of the 
 marriage, if more than one in equal shares, the 
 son or sons at twenty-one, and the daughter or 
 daughters at twenty-one or marriage ; and, in case 
 there should be but one child issue of the mar- 
 riage, or, if more than one, all but one should die 
 without having become entitled, then in trust for 
 such only or surviving child ; and in case there 
 should not be any issue of the marriage, or all such 
 issue should die without having become entitled, 
 then upon other trusts:— BeM, that the word 
 " issue " in the power of appointment must be 
 construed in the strict technical sense, and that 
 an appointment by the wife to the children of a 
 deceased son was valid. The wife appointed 
 another part of the fund on trust for another 
 living son for his lite, with remainder to his child 
 
( 1455 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1456 ) 
 
 II. SETTLEMENT— CONSTETTCTIOK—co»i<(^. 
 or children who should attain twenty-one, if more 
 than one in equal shares. The testatrix also 
 bequeathed property of her own to the persons 
 who were entitled in default of appointment. 
 It was admitted that the appointment to the 
 children of the living son was void for remote- 
 ness : — Seld, that, the appointment being ex facie 
 void, the will must be read as if the appointment 
 had not been contained in it, and that the persons 
 entitled in default of appointment were not bound 
 to elect between the interest which they took in 
 that way, and the benefits given to them by the 
 testatrix out of lier own property. In re Wakeen's 
 Tkusts - 26 Ch. D. 208 
 
 8. Power of Appointment — Trust for 
 
 Children — Default of Appointment — Class when to 
 he ascertained.'] By a settlement dated in May, 
 1833, a leasehold house was assigned to trustees 
 upon trust for A. for life, and after her decease 
 for B., her husband, for life, and after the decease 
 of the survivor of A. and B. upon ti'ust to assign 
 the premises vmto and amongst such of the chil- 
 dren of A. and B. then living in such manner, 
 shares, times, and proportions as A. and B. jointly, 
 or the survivor of them separately, should by any 
 writing appoint, and in case there should be no 
 such child or children, tliea upon trust for C. for 
 life, and after his decease upon trust to assign the 
 premises unto and amongst such of his children, 
 and in such manner, shares, times, and propor- 
 tions, as he should by any writing appoint. — A. 
 died in 1876 without leaving issue. B. died in 
 1880. 0. died in 1863 without having exercised 
 the power of appointment, having had ten chil- 
 dren, of whom three died before him, two after 
 and before the death of A., and one after the 
 death of A. and before that of B. : — Held, that 
 all the children of C. took as tenants in common 
 in equal shares. Wilson v. Duqtjid 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 344 
 
 9. Vested Interest — Marriage Settlement 
 
 — " Payable " meaning " vested " — Shares " to be 
 paid" at twenty-one — Gift over on Death before 
 Share "payable."] By a marriage settlement 
 lands were conveyed upon trust for husband and 
 wife successively for life, and after the death of 
 the survivor, " to levy out of the said lands and 
 premises .... the sum of £3000 .... to be divided 
 to and among all the children of the said intended 
 marriage, save and except such child and children 
 as under the limitations aforesaid shall succeed to 
 the enjoyment of the lands and premises hereby 
 conveyed .... in equal shares and proportions as 
 tenants in common and not as joint tenants, the 
 share of such child or children as shall be a son 
 or sons to be paid to him or them upon his or 
 their respectively arriving at the full age of 
 twenty-one years, and the share or shares of such 
 of them as shall be daughters to be paid upon 
 their respectively arriving at their full age of 
 twenty-one years, or day or days of marriage, 
 whichever shall first happen : Provided always 
 that such marriage during minority shall be had 
 by and with the consent and approbation of" the 
 parents " or the survivor of them : with interest 
 for the same by way of maintenance at the rate of 
 £6 by the hundred to be computed from the day 
 of the death of the survivor of" the parents: 
 
 II. SETTLEMENT— COKSTETTCTIOK—eomW. 
 
 " with benefit of survivorship to the survivors or 
 survivor of such children if any of such children 
 shall die before his, her, or their share or shares 
 shall become payable unmarried and without 
 leaving issue as aforesaid, it being the true intent 
 and meaning of these presents that none of the 
 children of the said intended marriage, who under 
 the limitations herein contained shall become en- 
 titled to an estate in possession in any part of the 
 lands and premises hereby conveyed .... shall 
 be entitled to any part of" the said sum. — A son 
 attained twenty-one and died in the lifetime of 
 his father: — Heldr, affirming the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal in Ireland, that there being no 
 words indicating a clear intention to postpone the 
 vesting of children's portions till the death of the 
 survivor of the parents, the rule laid down in 
 Emperor v. Eolfe (1 Ves. Sen. 208) applied, and 
 the son took a vested interest in his portion on 
 attaining twenty-one. Wakefield v. Maffet 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 422 
 
 III. SETTLEMENT— EftTTITT TO SETTLEMENT. 
 
 1. Form of Settlement — Joint Power of 
 
 Appointment among Children — Stamp.'] In 
 settling a fund in pursuance of a will by which 
 the fund was bequeathed to a man until marriage 
 and then to be settled on his wife and children, 
 the Court inserted a power for the husband and 
 wife jointly by deed, and for the survivor by 
 deed or will, to appoint among the children. — 
 Observations on Oliver v. Oliver (10 Ch. D. 765). 
 — Form of judgment settling a fund. — An order 
 of the Court making a settlement should bear 
 the usual settlement stamp. In re Gowan. 
 Gowan v. Gowan - 17 Ch. D. 778 
 
 2. Infant — Consent — JVaiver of Equity.] 
 
 A fund in Court belonging to an infant married 
 woman will not be paid out to her husband, as 
 she cannot waive her equity to a settlement. — In 
 re D'Angibau (15 Ch. D. 228) noticed. Shipwat 
 V. Ball - 16 Ch. D. 376 
 
 3. Whole Fund — Desertion by Htisband.] 
 
 A husband entitled to leaseholds in right of his 
 wife, deserted her and their children, and for eight 
 years contributed nothing towards her or their 
 support, except the rents of the leaseholds. Dur- 
 ing the desertion the leaseholds were sold by the 
 wife for £250 to a purchaser, who expended the 
 greater part of the proceeds upon the maintenance 
 of the wife and children. In an action by the 
 husband against the wife and the purchaser to 
 set aside the sale and recover the leaseholds or the 
 proceeds : — Held, that, under her equity to a 
 settlement, the wife was entitled to have the entire 
 proceeds of the sale secured to herself, and such 
 proceeds having practically been expended for her 
 benefit, the action must be dismissed with costs. 
 BoxALL V. BoxALL 27 Ch. D. 220 
 
 IV. SETTLEMENT— FUTURE PROPEETY. 
 
 1. Estate Tail — Seal and Personal Pro- 
 perty of which Wife " should become seised or pos- 
 sessed of or entitled to."] A marriage settlement 
 contained an agreement and declaration by the 
 parties that, if the wife then was, or if, during 
 the coverture, she, or the husband in her right, 
 should become seised or possessed of or entitled 
 to any real or personal property (of a specified 
 
( 1457 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1458 ) 
 
 IV, SETTIEMENT — FUTURE PEOPEETY — 
 
 (xmtirmed. 
 
 value) for any estate or interest whatsoever, in 
 possession, reversion, remainder, or expectancy, 
 then and in every such case, the husband and 
 wife, and all necessary parties, should, as soon as 
 circumstances would admit, convey, assign, and 
 assure the said real and personal property to, or 
 otherwise cause the same to be vested in, the 
 trustees of the settlement, upon the trusts thereof. 
 — Held, that an estate tail in possession to which 
 the wife became entitled during the coverture 
 was not bound by this agreement, and that she 
 could not be compelled either to execute a disen- 
 tailing deed, and to convey the estate in fee thus 
 acquired by her to the trustees, or to execute a 
 conveyance of the property to the trustees, so 
 that they could by enrolling the deed acquire an 
 estate in fee simple. — Seld, that the agreement 
 extended only to the wife's estate or interest in the 
 property acquired by her, and that it was im- 
 possible that she could convey an estate tail to 
 tile trustees. Hilbees v. PAEKiNSOiir 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 200 
 
 2. Infant — Restraint on Application — 
 
 Existing Property — Voidable Covenant — Blee- 
 tirni.'] An agreement by husband and wife, in 
 an ante-nuptial settlement for the settlement by 
 the husband and wife of the wife's after-acquired 
 property, is a covenant by the wife as well by 
 the husband, whether the wife is a minor or of 
 full age. If the wife is a minor, and the cove- 
 nant is for her benefit, it is voidable only and not 
 void, and is binding upon all property comingto her 
 during the coverture for her separate use, without 
 a res&aint on anticipation, until she avoids or 
 disaffirms the covenant as to such property ; for 
 she may, after attaining twenty-one, and during 
 the coverture, elect whether the covenant shall 
 be binding on her separate estate or not, such 
 right of election being a necessary consequence of 
 a married woman's power to dispose of, without 
 her husband's consent, property settled to her 
 separate use : but — inasmuch as a contract by a 
 married woman, while under coverture, affecting 
 her separate property binds only her then existing 
 separate property, and not separate property 
 which she may thereafter acquire {Pike v. Fitz- 
 gibbon, 17 Ch. D. 454) — the wife, in electing to 
 confirm the covenant, thereby binds only that 
 separate property to which she is entitled at the 
 date of the confirmation, and not that to which 
 she may subsequently become entitled during the 
 coverture. — Senible, the doctrine of election or com- 
 pensation does not apply in the case of a married 
 woman entitled for her separate use with a re- 
 straint on anticipation. — Willougkhy v. Middleton 
 (2 J. & H. 344) questioned on this point. — -By an 
 ante-nuptial settlement, dated in 1856, the lady 
 being then a minor, after reciting that she would 
 be entitled on attaining twenty-one to a share of 
 her deceased father's estate, and the intention to 
 settle the same, it was agreed and declared be- 
 tween the parties thereto, and the husband cove- 
 nanted with the trustees, that the husband and 
 wife and all other necessary parties would, as 
 soon as the wife attained twenty-one, convey the 
 share to the trustees upon trust for the wife 
 daring her life for her separate use without 
 
 IV. SETTLEMENT — FUTUEE PEOPEETY — 
 
 continued. 
 power of anticipation, and after her death for the 
 husband till bankruptcy or alienation, with re- 
 mainder for the issue of the marriage. And it 
 was further agreed and declared that if the wife 
 then was, or if at any time or times during the 
 coverture she or her husband in her right should 
 become seised or possessed of or entitled to any 
 real or personal property for any estate or interest 
 whatsoever, then and in every such case the hus- 
 band and wife and all other necessary parties 
 should assure the same to the trustees upon the 
 trusts thereinbefore declared. The settlement 
 contained a power for the trustees, at the request 
 of the wife, to lend any of the trust fands to the 
 husband on his personal security. — The wife at- 
 tained twenty-one in 1857, and in 1858 she and 
 her husband, in pursuance of the covenant in that 
 behalf in the settlement, conveyed her share of 
 her father's estate to the trustees of the settle- 
 ment. — In 1863, upon the death of a brother, the 
 wife became entitled under his will to certain 
 funds thereby bequeathed to her for her separate 
 use. These funds, and also funds arising from 
 her share of her father's estate, were, with the 
 assent of the wife, j'aid to the trustees of the 
 settlement, and by them lent, at her request, to 
 the husband on his personal security. In 1880 
 the wife became entitled under the will of her 
 mother to a sum of £4000, and a share of her 
 residuary estate thereby bequeathed respectively 
 to her for her separate use : — Seld, that the wife 
 could elect to retain the £4000 and share of resi- 
 due for her separate use unbound by the covenant 
 for the settlement of her after-acquired property. 
 Smith v. Lucas 18 Ch. D, 631 
 
 3. Infant — Deed acknowledged by Wife 
 
 after full age — Confirmation of Settlement — 
 JElection by Married Woman — Wife of Unsound 
 Mind — Jurisdiction of Court to elect for.'] By 
 a marriage settlement made ia .Tanuary, 1874, 
 the wife being an infant, personal property 
 derived under her father's marriage settlement 
 was assigned by the husband and wife to trustees 
 upon the usual trusts. There was a covenant by 
 the husband that he and his wife would so soon as 
 she should attain the age of twenty-one years con- 
 vey and assign real and personal property to which 
 she was entitled under the will of her father ; 
 and it was provided that if the wife should refuse 
 or neglect to do so it should be lawful for the 
 trustees to accumulate any part of the income 
 payable to her for the other persons interested 
 imder the settlement. There was an agreement 
 to settle the wife's after-acquired personal pro- 
 perty. The wife, on the 13th of April, 1874, a 
 week after she attained the age of twenty-one, 
 and her husband executed a deed, which she ac- 
 knowledged, by which she assigned all the per- 
 sonal property expressed to be assigned by the 
 settlement which had not become vested in pos- 
 session, and conveyed property punported to be 
 conveyed by the settlement upon the trusts there- 
 of. — At the date of the settlement she was con- 
 tingently entitled to a reversionary interest in 
 personal estate, but it was not actually assigned 
 by the deed of confirmation because it did not 
 come within the provisions of Sir R. Malin's Act, 
 
( 1459 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 14G0 ) 
 
 IV. SETTIEMEHTT — FUTITilE PEOPEHTY — 
 
 continued. 
 
 20 & 21 Vict. c. 57. It fell into possession, and 
 it was by the direction of the -wife and her hus- 
 band invested in the names of the trustees. The 
 husband had died, and the wife had become of 
 imeound mind, but not so found by inquisition. 
 On summons by the infant children, by their next 
 friend : — Held, following the oases of Barrow y. 
 Barrow (i K. & J. 409) and Smith v. Lucas 
 (18 Ch. D. 531), that the wife could during her 
 coverture elect to confii-m the settlement, and that 
 she had by her acta elected. — The wife having 
 become of unsound mind, if she had not elected the 
 Court would have made an election on her behalf, 
 it having jurisdiction to bind the equitable in- 
 terests of lunatics, not so found by inquisition, 
 when it appears to be for their benefit. — Jones v. 
 Lhyd (Law Eep. 18 Eq. 265) followed. Wilder 
 
 V. PiQOTT - - 22 Ch. D. 263 
 
 4, Judicial Separation — " Feme Sole " — 
 
 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, ss. 7, 21, 25, 26.] A 
 married woman, subsequently to obtaining a 
 decree of judicial separation from her husband, 
 became absolutely entitled to certain sums of 
 siock-.—Held, that under 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, 
 s. 25, the stock belonged to her as if she were a 
 feme sole, and was not included in a covenant in 
 her marriage settlement to settle all property 
 which she or her husband in her right might 
 acquire "during the coverture." Dawes v. 
 Cketkb - - 30 Ch. D. 600 
 
 6. life Annuities.] By an ante-nuptial 
 
 settlement made in 1870 the intended husband 
 and wife respectively covenanted with the trustees 
 that all the estate, property, and effects, real or 
 personal, of or to which the wife, or the husband 
 in her right, should at any time during the cover- 
 ture become seised, possessed, or entitled, should 
 be assured and settled, as regarded personal 
 estate, upon trust, as to such part thereof as should 
 not consist of money or authorized investments, 
 or of interest determinable on the death of the 
 wife, upon trust to convert it, and to invest the 
 proceeds, and such part of the estate as should 
 consist of money, upon such investments as therein, 
 mentioned, and dm'ing the joint lives of hus- 
 band and wife pay " the interest, dividends, and 
 annual proceeds thereof" to them in equal shares, 
 the share of the wife to be for her separate use 
 without power of anticipation. By a deed of the 
 same date the wife's father covenanted with the 
 trustees to pay to them an annuity of £500 to be 
 applied by them upon trusts corresponding with 
 those of the income of the personal property men- 
 tioned in the covenant. In 1874 the wife's father 
 bought up the husband's interest in this annuity, 
 and assigned it to trustees for the wife's separate 
 use with no restraint on anticipation : — Seld 
 (affirming the decision of Pollock, B.), that the 
 covenant to settle included life annuities given to 
 the wife, that the share assigned by the wife's 
 father in the annuity of £500 was bound by the 
 covenant, and that during the joint lives of the 
 husband and wife, three-fourths of the annuity 
 belonged to the wife for her separate use with a 
 restraint on anticipation, and the remaining fourth 
 to the trustee of the husband, who had become 
 bankrupt, and that persons to whom the wife had 
 
 IV. SETTIEMENT — FUTUBE PEOPEETT — 
 
 continued. 
 mortgaged the interest assigned in 1874 took 
 nothing. Where a covenant has been entered into 
 for settlement of the future property of a married 
 woman, and a gift is afterwards made to her of 
 such a nature as to come within the terms of the 
 covenant, no expression of the iutentiou of the 
 donor that it shall not be settled will exclude it 
 from the operation of the covenant. — In re Main- 
 waring' s Settlement (Law Bep. 2 Eq. 487) observed 
 
 upon. SCHOLFIELD V. SPOONEB - 26 Ch. D. 94 
 
 6. Property before Marriage — Covenant tO' 
 
 settle Property to wMeh Wife or Husband in her 
 right " shall become entitled."'] In a settlement 
 made before marriage there was a covenant to 
 settle upon certain trusts all real and personal 
 property to which the wife or the husband " in 
 her right at any time during her now intended 
 coverture shall become entitled (except jewels 
 and ' certain other articles " which it is hereby 
 declared shall belong to " the wife " for her 
 separate use)." The trusts included a power of 
 sale, the moneys arising from the sale to be held 
 upon the trusts declared concerning such part of 
 the personal estate of or to which the wife " now 
 is or she or " the husband " in her right shall 
 become possessed or entitled as aforesaid " : — 
 Held, affirming the decision of the Court of Ap- 
 peal, tbat on the true construction of the covenant, 
 read in conjunction with the context, it included 
 property to which the wife was entitled before 
 marriage ; and therefore that jewels given to the 
 wife before marriage were within the exception 
 and belonged to the wife for her separate nse- 
 WiLLiAMS V. Mekciee 9 Q. B. D. 337 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 1 
 
 7. • ■ Separate Estate.] By a marriage 
 
 settlement, after a recital tbat on the treaty for 
 the marriage it was agreed that all real and per- 
 sonal property which during the coverture should 
 devolve upon or vest in the wife or the husband 
 in her right to the value of £200 at any one time 
 should be settled upon the trusts thereinafter 
 declared, it was witnessed that it was thereby 
 agreed and declared between and by the parties 
 thereto, and the hxisband thereby covenanted with 
 the trustees that if at any time during the coverture 
 any real or personal estate should devolve on or 
 vest in the wife or the husband in her right to the 
 amount in value of £200 at any one time, the 
 husband would make, do, and execute, or cause 
 and procure to be made, done, and executed, and 
 join and concur in making, doing, and executing 
 all such conveyances, &c., as would effectually 
 vest such real and personal estate in the trustees 
 upon the trusts therein declared. After the mar- 
 riage the deed was executed by the wife's mother, 
 under which, during the coverture, a sum exceed- 
 ing £200 became payable to the wife for her 
 separate use : — Held, by Fry, J., that this sum 
 was within the covenant, and must be settled. — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, that as the opera- 
 tive part of the deed was dear, the recital could 
 not control it — that as the operative part of the 
 deed only related to acts to be done by the hus- 
 band, the agreement and declaration between and 
 by the parties that those acts should be done did 
 not import a covenant by any other party that 
 
( 1461 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1462 ) 
 
 IV. SETTLEMENT — FUTTJSE PKOPEETY — 
 
 continued. 
 they should be done, and that there v as, there- 
 fore, no covenant by any one but the husband — 
 that the covenant by him could not be held to 
 relate to property over which he had no power 
 and in which he had no interest — and that the 
 wife therefore was not bound to bring into settle- 
 ment property given to her separate use. Dawes 
 ■u. Tkedwell - 18 Ch. D. 354 
 
 8. Separate Estate — Covenant to settle 
 
 future Property except Siich as should ie otherwise 
 settled — Will — Legacy to Wife for Separate Use.'] 
 A marriage settlement, in which the wife's pro- 
 perty was vested in trustees for her separate use 
 without power of anticipation, contained a cove- 
 nant by the husband and wife that if at any time 
 during the joint lives of them any further portion, 
 fortune, or estate should come to or devolve upon 
 either' of them by or under any will, or otherwise, 
 they would effectually settle the same (exo'ept such 
 future portion, fortune, or estate as should be 
 otherwise settled previously to the same devolv- 
 ing as aforesaid) upon the trusts of the settle- 
 ment : — Held, that a gift of a legacy to the wife 
 for her own sole and separate use, free from the 
 debts, control, and engagements of her husband, 
 was excluded from tlie operation of the covenant. 
 KtNE V. Kane . - 16 Ch. D. 207 
 
 9. ■ ■ Separate Estate — Property to separate 
 
 use excepted — Married Women's Property Act, 1882 
 (45 * 46 Vict. c. 15), ss. 5, \9— Settlement not 
 affected by Act.l A marriage settlement made in 
 1862 contained an agreement for the settlement 
 of any future acquired property of the wife to a 
 specified amount (except interests settled and 
 limited to her separate use). The wife after the 
 commencement of the Married Women's Pro- 
 perty Act, 1882, became entitled absolutely to a 
 bequest above the specified amount, without any 
 limitation as to separate use : — Held, that by the 
 19th section of the above Act the marriage settle- 
 ment was exempted from the 5th and other sec- 
 tions ; and that the bequest to the wife came 
 within the covenant to settle future acquired pro- 
 perty and must be dealt with as if the Act had 
 never been passed. In re Stonob's Tbusts 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 195 
 
 10. Separate Estate — Will — Legacy to 
 
 Wife for Separate Use.'] By an ante-nuptial 
 settlement the husband and wife covenanted with 
 the trustees to settle all property to which the wife 
 then was or during the coverture she or her hus- 
 band in her right should become entitled by 
 devise, bequest, or otherwise ''for any estate 
 or interest whatsoever." — During the coverture 
 the wife's father died, having by his will devised 
 and bequeathed a moiety of his residuary real 
 and personal estate to her " for her separate use, 
 independently of any husband." — Held, that the 
 moiety was bound by the covenant. — In re Main- 
 waring's Settlement (Law Eep. 2 Eq. 487) not 
 followed. In re Allndtt. Pott v. Brasses 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 275 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT— POWERS. 
 
 1. Leasing — Charge on Inheritance — 
 
 Tenant for lAfe — Mortgagor and Mortgagee — Con- 
 eolidation — Coal Workings — Bemoval of Pillars 
 — Injunction:'} A testator-devised his real estates 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT— POWERS— conMnMsd. 
 
 in strict settlement, making M. first tenant for 
 life, without impeachment of waste, and, after 
 giving to male tenants for life powers to jointure 
 their wives and provide portions for younger 
 children, proceeded to authorize the tenants for 
 life when in possession and the guardians of in- 
 fant tenants for life in possession to demise any 
 parts of the estates, except the mansion-house, for 
 any term not exceeding twenty-one years at the 
 best rent without fine or premium. He then em- 
 powered such tenants for life and guardians to 
 grant any lease or leases of any mines or collieries 
 or of any parcels of land for the purpose of dig- 
 ging for, winning, or gaining minerals or coal in 
 any part of his estates " for such term or number 
 of years, and under and subject to such rents or 
 reservations and agreements, as to such tenant for 
 life or guardian or guardians shall seem reason- 
 able and proper," and also to grant buUding or 
 repairing leases for any term not exceeding 
 ninety-nine years without any fine or premium. 
 In 1843, M., the tenant for life, by a deed reciting 
 the leasing power, in consideration of £6000 paid 
 to him by C., demised the mines included in a 
 mining lease made by the testator to E. in 1829, 
 which would expii'e in 1848, to C. for ninety-nine 
 years at a peppercorn rent, subject to redemption 
 on payment of £6000 and interest. The deed 
 contained an appointment of a receiver of the 
 rents and royalties payable by the present and 
 future tenants, and did not oblige C. to work the 
 mines ; but the tenant for life covenanted to 
 grant, or concur in granting, such further leases 
 as C. should require: — Held, by Bacon, V.-O., 
 and by the Court of Appeal, that this deed was a 
 valid exercise of the power of leasing mines, and 
 created a good legal mortgage for an absolute 
 term of ninety-nine years. — By a deed of April, 
 1850, reciting the will and the power of leasing 
 ■mines, and that M. was indebted io S. P. & B. in 
 £60,000 and that it had been agreed that S. P. 
 & B. should pay what was due on the mortgage 
 of 1843, and take a transfer of that security, and 
 that for securing to S. P. & B. the payment of the 
 debt due to them from M. and any other moneys 
 they might advance to him, it had been agreed 
 that suoli further mortgage as thereinafter con- 
 tained should be made ; the mortgage debt of 
 £60,000 was assigned to S. P. & B., and the term 
 was also assigned to them subject to the existing 
 equity of redemption, and M. granted his life 
 estate to J. C. as a trustee for S. P. & B. It was 
 declared that the collieries and property assigned 
 to S. P. & B. should be subject to the proviso for 
 redemption thereinafter contained. There fol- 
 lowed a proviso for redemption of all the mort- 
 gaged property on payment of £67,000, being the 
 aggregate of the £60,000 and the moneys secured 
 by the mortgage of 1843 : — Held, by Bacon, V.-O., 
 and by the Court of Appeal, that the £60,000 was 
 effectually charged on the ninety-nine years term 
 as well as on the life interest, for that this deed 
 was a good exercise of the leasing power by vary- 
 ing the proviso for redemption in the deed of 
 1843, and that even if it were a defective exercise 
 of that power the defect was one which a Court of 
 Equity would make good.— The lease of 1829 
 contained covenants by the lessee to leave suffi- 
 cient pillars of coal to support the roof, and these 
 
( 14G3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( llGl ) 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT— POWERS— corfM«ei. 
 
 covenants were embodied by reference in the 
 mortgage of. 1843. In May, 1850, M. granted to 
 J, 0. as a trustee for S. P. & B. an ordinary 
 mining lease for forty years, subject to a dead 
 rent and royalties, which contained a covenant by 
 the lessee not to remove pillars without the con- 
 sent of M. or his assigns, or other the persons 
 entitled to the colliery. M. after this conveyed 
 absolutely all his interest ia the property to the 
 trustees of his eldest son, who had become en- 
 titled in fee in remainder. Afterwards J. C, with 
 the concurrence of the parties claiming under 
 S. P. & B., granted an underlease to L. & S. 
 authorizing them to remove some of the pillars, 
 which they proceeded to do, alleging that J. C. 
 and the persons claiming under S. V. & B. were 
 the persons entitled to consent: — Seld, that 
 during the continuance of the lease of May, 1850, 
 the pillars could not he worked without the con- 
 sent of the assigns of M., who became such after 
 the execution of that deed, and that such working 
 must be restrained at the suit of the son's trustees. 
 — But, held, that if M. should survive the expira- 
 tion of the lease of May, 1850, the parties claim- 
 ing under the deed of April, 1850, as assigns of 
 M.'s life estate, could during the remainder of 
 M.'s life effectually consent to the removal of the 
 pillars by persons interested under the deed of 
 1843. MosTYN V. Lancaster. Taylor v. Mostyn 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 683 
 
 2. Leasing — Infant Remainderman — 
 
 Tenant for Life — Trustees — Effectuating Prede- 
 cessor's Contract for Lease.'] By a will devising 
 real estate in strict settlement powers of granting 
 building leases were given to any tenant for life 
 and to trustees during the minority of any tenant 
 in tail. The tenant for life, in pursuance of his 
 power enterdd into a contract to grant a building 
 lease, but died without having executed a lease, 
 and was succeeded by an infant tenant in tail : — 
 Eeld, that the trustees had power to effectuate 
 the contract of the tenant for life by executing a 
 lease. Davis v. Harford 22 Ch. D. 128 
 
 3. Leasing — Repairing Lease — Tenant 
 
 to do necessary Repairs.'] A settlement of house 
 property gave power to the trustees to demise 
 or agree to demise all or any of the messuages 
 ■" to any person or persons who shall improve 
 or repair the same, or covenant or agree to 
 improve or repair the same, or shall expend or 
 agree to expend such sum or sums of money in 
 improvements tliereof respectively as shall be 
 thought adequate for the interests therein respec- 
 tively." The trustees agreed to let a house on the 
 tertos of a letter by which the tenant undertook 
 "to do necessary repairs " : — 7/eH, by Oliitty, J., 
 that the agreement did not satisfy the terms of 
 the power, and thnt specific performance of it 
 could not be decreed at the suit of the trustees. — 
 Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the agreement 
 imposed upon the tenant the burden of doing all 
 repairs which were requisite during the term, and 
 that it satisfied the requisitions of the power. — 
 Doe V. TVithers (2 B. & Ad. 896) doubted. Tkus- 
 COTT V. Diamond Rook Boring Company 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 251 
 
 4. Leasing — tVill — Building Leases — 
 
 Ordinary Leases — Invalid Lease — Deviation from 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT — TO'W'ERS— continued. 
 Terms of Power — Contract for Grant of valid 
 Lease under 12 & 13 Vict, a. 26 — Option to 
 purchase.] A testator by his will devised and 
 bequeathed freehold and leasehold lands upon 
 trusts, and empowered the trustees to contract 
 for leases thereof with or without optional powers 
 of purchase in the lessees, and to grant leases 
 thereof either for building or other purposes, so 
 that no lease of the site of a building should be 
 made for more than ninety-nine years, and no 
 lease for any other purpose for more than twenty- 
 one years, and so that while leases for twenty-one 
 years were to be at the best rents which could be 
 obtained, building leases might be at a rent to 
 increase progressively. After the testator's death 
 the trustees granted to A. B. a lease of part of the 
 freehold and leasehold lands of the tes-tator for 
 thirty-flve years, with an option to purchase 
 during the first twenty-one years of the term, 
 and at an increasing rent as to the freehold part, 
 by an indenture which recited that they had 
 power to grant building leases, but contained no 
 covenant to build, though it contained covenants 
 to repair, amend, and keep, and to insure all mes- 
 suages erected or to be erected on the land de- 
 mised. — A. B. exercised his option to purchase as 
 to a leasehold portion of the demised property, 
 which was duly assigned to him, and he after- 
 wards sold and assigned part of those leaseholds 
 to C. D. C. D. contracted to sell to a purchaser, 
 and in order to avoid any question as to the 
 validity of the lease by the trustees, a memo- 
 randum was indorsed upon it signed by A. B. 
 and the trustees declaring that pursuant to the 
 Act 12 & 13 Vict. c. 26, the lease should be con- 
 sidered in equity as a contract for the grant of a 
 valid lease for twenty-one years. The purchaser, 
 however, took the objection that the lease was 
 invalid. — Upon a summons taken out under the 
 Vendor and Purchaser Act of 1874 : — Held, that 
 the lease though intended to be a building lease 
 was invalid as such, owing to the absence of any 
 covenant to build, and that being bad as a build- 
 ing lease under the power it could not by the 
 operation of 12 & 13 Vict. c. 26, be turned into a 
 contract for the grant of a valid lease of a kind 
 diiferent from that which it was originally in- 
 tended to be ; moreover, that even if it could by 
 this means be turned into an ordinary lease, it 
 would be bad as such, inasmuch as the rent 
 reserved on the freehold part was an increasing 
 rent, which was not authorized by the power to 
 grant ordinary leases : — Held, also, that as there 
 was no power to grant an option to purchase 
 otherwise than in a valid lease under the power, 
 and the lease granted was invalid, the option to 
 purchase must fall with the lease. Hallett to 
 Martin - - 24 Ch. D, 624 
 
 6. Maintenance — Power or Ti-ust — 
 
 Direction to apply the whole or part of Income 
 "for or towards maintenance" — Right of Father 
 to claim Application of Income to Maintenance.] 
 By a marriage settlement certain personal pro- 
 perty was settled upon trust for the wife for life, 
 and after her death for the children ; and it was 
 declared that the trustees should after the death 
 of the wife apply the whole or such part as the 
 trustees should think fit of the aimual income of 
 
( 1465 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1466 ) 
 
 V. SETTIEMENT— POWERS— comWnueii. 
 the expectant share of any child for or towards 
 the maintenance of such child. The trustees after 
 the death of the wife paid the whole Income of 
 the trust fund to the husband during the infancy 
 of the child of the marriage without exercising 
 any discretion as to its application to his mainte- 
 tenanoe : — Held (affirming the decision of Bacon, 
 V.C), that there was no absolute trust to apply 
 the income to the maintenance of the children, 
 but a discretionary trust equivalent to a power ; 
 and that as the trustees had not exercised any 
 discretion, the estate of the husband must be held 
 liable to repay the whole amount of the Income 
 received. — Bansome v. Burgess (Law Eep. 3 Eq. 
 773) disapproved. — Mundy v. Earl Howe (4 Bro. 
 C, C. 224) commented on. "Wilson v. Turner 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 521 
 
 6. Management — Cultivation of Farm — 
 
 Avestment of Personal Estate to cultivate Real 
 [state.'] The trustees of real and residuary per- 
 mal estebtejdgsised and bequeathed in trust for 
 A ^MProe, with cemainder to his children, who 
 w ere infants (there' being no investment clause in 
 tl le will) were authorized to advance to the tenant 
 f( ir life part of the residuary personal estate for 
 t' le purpose of stocking and cultivating a farm 
 fi )rming part of the real estate, on ^evidence that 
 t he outlay would be to the advantage of the infant 
 rteniaindermen. In re Household. Household 
 4). Household - - 27 Ch. D. 553 
 
 ' 7. Management — Permanent Improve- 
 
 t ments — Tenant for Life — Trusts of Minority Term 
 j — Option to Trustees to pay Charges out of Income 
 I or Capital — Incidence of Charges paid for out of 
 r Income during Minority.] By a deed, executed two 
 years before his will, a testator devised estates in 
 Glamorganshire, which comprised a canal, harbour 
 and docks at Cardiff, and also estates in the 
 counties of Bedford, Herts, and Durham, to A., 
 B., and C, upon trust out of rents and profits and 
 sums to be raised by sale or mortgage, to pay ex- 
 penses, salaries, mortgage debts, and the residue 
 to the settlor. He empowered the trustees to 
 enlarge, improve and make additional works at 
 Cardiff, and to manage the estates, with powers 
 of leasing, sale and mortgage. — By his will, dated 
 two months before the birth of his first son, the 
 testator devised the Glamorganshire estates (ex- 
 cept Cardiff Castle, park, and lands adjoining) to 
 B. and C. and their heirs for a term of 1500 years, 
 and subject thereto to the use of his first son for 
 life, remainder to his first and other sons in tail 
 male. The trusts of the 1500 years terra were de- 
 . clared to be, after payment out of income of certain 
 annuities, of a specified sum for certain repairs, 
 " by mortgaging or otherwise disposing of the 
 term ... or by, with and out of the rents, issues 
 and profits of the same hereditaments ... or by 
 one ... or all of the aforesaid ways and means, 
 or by any other reasonable ways and means " to 
 raise moneys sufficient for the above purposes, 
 and with the moneys to arise from the sale of the 
 estates in Bedford, Herts, and Durham, to satisfy 
 the trusts of such sale. The trustees of the term 
 were empowered to manage and improve the here- 
 ditaments comprised in the term in the same 
 manner as the trustees of the deed. — Testator 
 then directed that, during the minority of a tenant 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT— POWEBS—con<OTtted!. 
 for life of the Glamorganshire estates, D. and A. 
 should enter into possession and receipt of the 
 rents and profits of the same hereditaments, and 
 thereout keep down the interest on mortgages, 
 and maintain mansion-houses and grounds, and 
 pay the surplus to the trustees of the 1500 years 
 term for the purposes thereof, and "subject 
 thereto, and after the trusts of the said term of 
 1500 years shall be fully performed or satisfied " 
 apply any annual sum they might think proper 
 for the maintenance of the minor, and invest the 
 surplus and accumulate the income for his benefit 
 on attaining majority. — The trusts of the proceeds 
 of the sale of the Bedford, Herts, and Durham 
 estates were declared to be : 1. to pay debts, in- 
 cluding mortgage debts on the Glamorganshire 
 estates; and 2. to purchase lands to be settled as 
 before. — Six months after the birth of his first 
 son, testator died, and during the minority the 
 trustees of the 1500 years term laid out upwards of 
 £1,000,000 in enlarging and improving the canal, 
 docks, and harbour, and in other works. This 
 sum was largely paid out of income : — Held, that 
 the expenditure was a charge on the corpus of 
 the estates comprised in the term. In re Marquess 
 OF Bute. Marquess of Bute v. Eyder 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 196 
 
 8. New Trustees — " Continuing " Trus- 
 tees-— 2^ & 24 Vict. e. 145, s. 27.] A trustee who 
 has made up his mind to retire, may be a " con- 
 tinuing" trustee, until he has executed the deed 
 appointing new trustees.^ — Decision in Travis v. 
 Illingworth (2 Dr. & Sm. 344, 346) to the con- 
 trary, not followed. — By a settlement in 1867 
 (Lord Cranworth's Act having been passed in 
 1860), it was declared that it should be lawful for 
 "the surviving or continuing trustees, in the 
 event of any trustees declining to act, to discharge 
 sucii trustees, and to appoint any new trustees ; 
 and it was provided that nothing should authorize 
 the discharge of the only continuing trustees 
 without the substitution of others. Of three 
 original trustees, one having died, the other two, 
 by deed in 1 874, after reciting that they them- 
 selves' " declined to act " and " desired to" be dis- 
 charged," and had " determined to appoint " three 
 other persons to be trustees, " in exercise of the 
 power for this purijose vested in them " by the 
 settlement, appointed the three persons " to be 
 trustees in the place of" themselves and the de- 
 ceased trustee respectively : — Held, that the 
 appointment was good. In re Glenny anD' 
 Hartley 25 ch. D. 6X1 
 
 9. New Trustees— Cojifenuiftgr Trustee— 
 
 Betirement of Trustee— Validity of Appointment 
 by continuing Trustee— Exercise of Power after 
 Judgment for Administration of Trusts — Approval 
 of Court — Solicitor of continuing Trustee.] ■ When 
 a power of appointing new trustees authorizes the 
 continuing trustee or trustees to appoint a new 
 trustee or trustees in the place of a trustee or 
 trustees becoming unwilling to act, an appoint- 
 ment by a sole continuing trustee, in the place of 
 a trustee who desires to retire, is valid; it is 
 not necessary that the retiring trustee should 
 join in making the appointment.— In re Qlennv 
 and Hartley (25 Oh. D. 611) commented om and 
 dicta of Bacon, V.C, dissented from Travis 
 
( 1467 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1468 ) 
 
 T. SETTLEMENT— POWEKS—conHnaecZ. 
 V. niingworth (2 Dr. & Sm. 344) approved and 
 followed. — On the retirement of one of two trus- 
 teea of a will, the continuing trastee, who was 
 the solicitor to the trustees, appointed his son, 
 who was his partner in his business, to be a new 
 trustee. The trusts of the will were being ad- 
 ministered by the Court : — Held, that, without 
 any reference to the personal fitness of the son, 
 by reason of his position the appointment was 
 one which the Court ought not to approve, though 
 it would not have been invalid if the Court had 
 not been administering the trusts. In re Norkis. 
 Allen v. Noreis 27 Ch. D. 333 
 
 10. New Trustees — Continuing Trustee — 
 
 Trustees appointed by Court — Conveyancing and 
 Law of Property Act, 1881 (44 * 4.5 Vict. o. 41), 
 «s. 31, 33.] A settlement of real estate of which 
 there were four trustees, provided that if the trus- 
 tees thereby appointed " or any future trustee or 
 trustees to be appointed in the place of them or 
 any of them as hereinafter mentioned " should die 
 or be desirous of being discharged, &c., it should 
 be lawful for " the surviving or continuing trus- 
 tee or trustees for the time being," with the 
 consent of the tenant for life or in tail for the 
 time being entitled in possession, to appoint a 
 new trustee or new trustees in the place of the 
 trustee or trustees so dying, &c. In 1872, four 
 new trustees were appointed under the Trustee 
 Act, 1850, in the place of two deceased and two 
 retiring trustees. After this a decree was made 
 for carrying the trusts of the settlement into 
 execution. Two of the trustees of 1872 being 
 dead, and another desiring to retire, the Plaintift', 
 who was an infant tenant in tail in possession, 
 look out a summons to appoint new trustees, W. 
 the continuing trustee took out a summons asking 
 .that he might be at liberty to appoint new trustees. 
 A reference to chambers being directed, W. pro- 
 posed new trustees whom the Court considered to 
 be proper persons, but to whom all the persons 
 beneficially interested objected : — Held (affirming 
 the decision of Pearson, J.), that the persons nomi- 
 nated by W. must be appointed, though the tenant 
 in tail in possession did not consent, for that as 
 the power in the settlement only applied to filling 
 up vacancies in the number of original trustees, 
 or trustees appointed under the power, it had 
 come to an end when new trustees were ap- 
 pointed by the Court in 1872, and that the fetter 
 imposed by the settlement on the exercise of that 
 power did not apply to the new power given to 
 the continuing trustee by the Conveyancing and 
 Law of Property Act, 1881, which enabled him 
 to fill up vacancies in a body of trustees not 
 coming within the scope of the power in the 
 settlement. Cecil v. Langdon - 28 Ch. D. 1 
 
 H. New Trustees — Executor of sole 
 
 Trustee — Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 
 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 31.] Tlie power of 
 appointing new trustees given by sect. 31 of the 
 Conveyancing Act, 1881, to "the personal repre- 
 sentatives of the last surviving or continuing 
 trustee " includes the case of an executor of a sole 
 trustee. In re Shafto's Tktists . 29 Ch, D. 247 
 
 12. New Trustees — One in place of two — 
 
 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145.] The power of appointing 
 new trustees given by sect. 27 of the Act 23 & 24 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT— POWEES — continued. 
 Vict. c. 145, authorizes a retiring trustee, one of 
 two originally Appointed, to appoint a single 
 trustee in place of himself, the other original 
 trustee having previously disclaimed without 
 acting. West of England and South Wales 
 DiSTEiOT Bank v. Mbech 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 13. New Trustees — Trustee remaining 
 
 Abroad for more than Twelve Months — Person to 
 exercise Power — Conveyancing and Law of Pro- 
 perty Act, 1881 (44 * 45 Vict. c. 41), ». ^1— Settle- 
 ment executed before Act.'] A settlement executed 
 in 1878 contained no express power to appoint 
 new trustees, but there was a declaration that the 
 husband and wife during their joint lives, and 
 the survivor of them during his or her life, 
 " shall have power to appoint new trustees or a 
 new trustee for this settlement." There was no 
 express reference to the power of appointing new 
 trustees conferred by sect. 27 of Lord Cranwortih's 
 Act, which was then in force : — Held, that afjter 
 the commencement of the Conveyancing A ct, 
 1881, the husband and wife were the proper p er- 
 sons to exercise the power confeiTed by sect.'' 31 
 of that Act of appointing a new trustee in pli ice 
 of one of the trustees who had remained out of 
 the United Kingdom for more than twelve montms, 
 though sect. 27 of Lord Cranworth's Act did ilot 
 provide for, and the parties when they execut45d 
 the settlement probably did not contemplate, ttjio 
 occurrence of a vacancy in that event. In re 
 Walkek and Hughes' Contract 24 Ch. D. 698 
 
 14. Portions — Interest on Portion» 
 
 charged on Land in Ireland — Sight of Donee of\ 
 Poicer to fix Bate of Interest — Portions payable 
 out of "rents and profits."'} By a settlement 
 made in England on the marriage of D. certain ; 
 real estates in Ireland were limited to trustees 
 for 1000 years, upon trust by mortgaging the said 
 estates, or out of the rents and profits thereof, to 
 raise £15,000, to be divided among the younger 
 children of the marriage as D. should appoint. 
 D. appointed the whole of the portions among his 
 children, appointing £4000 to his daughter, to be 
 raised at certain specified times, with interest in 
 the meantime at 5 per cent. The trustees being 
 unable to raise the portions by mortgage, an 
 action was brought to carry the trusts into effect : 
 — Held (reversing the decision of Pearson, J.), 
 that D. having only a power of distributing the 
 portions and not of charging them, had no power 
 to fix the rate of interest ; but that the laud being 
 in Ireland 5 per cent, was the proper rate to be 
 fixed by the Court. — Leiois v. Freke (2 Ves. 507) 
 and Toung v. Lord Waterparlc (13 Sim. 199) dis- 
 tinguished. — Held, also, that under the terms of 
 the settlement the trustees of the term had right 
 to apply the rents ^ud profits first in payment 
 of the interest, and secondly in reduction of the 
 capital. Balfouk v. Cooper - 23 Ch. D. 472 
 
 15. Sale — Duration — Determination — 
 
 Intention of Settlor — Remoteness-I A power 
 given to the trustees of a settlement or will to sell 
 land comprised in it can be exercised by them 
 after the property has, under the trusts, become 
 absolutely vested in persons who are sui juris, if 
 on the construction of the instrument it appears 
 to be the intention of the settlor or testator that 
 it should be then exercised, provided that tie 
 
( 1469 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1470 ) 
 
 V. SETTLEMENT— FOWEES—con<in«e(J. 
 
 ■ power in its creation was not obnoxious to the 
 rule against perpetuities, and that the cestui que 
 trustent have not put an end to the trusts by 
 
 -electing to take the property as it stands. In re 
 Cotton's Tkustees and the School Board fob 
 London - 19 Ch. D. 624 
 
 16. Sale — Extinction — Disentailing Deed.'] 
 
 An estate was devised to uses to secure certain 
 annuities, and subject thereto iu strict settle- 
 ment,with power for trustees to sell at the request 
 of the tenant for life under the wUl. The estate 
 was disentailed and resettled (the existing life 
 estate being postponed to certain charges and the 
 powers of the will being expressed to be kept 
 aUve) : — JSeld, that the trustees for sale and the 
 tenant for life could make a good title. In re 
 Weight's Tbustees and Mabshall 28 Ch. D. 93 
 
 17. Sale — Tenant for Life — Settled Land 
 
 Act, 1882 (45 * 46 Vict. c. 38), ss. 3, 53—^^- 
 ^ointment of New Trustee — Pending Action.'] 
 Independently of the cumulative powers of sale 
 given to tenants for life by the Settled Land Act, 
 1882, the tenant for life, and the trustees under a 
 ■will which gives them power to sell the estate at 
 the request and by the direction of the person or 
 persons for the time being entitled to the actual 
 freehold of the devised property, will not be re- 
 strained from selling the estate at the request 
 and for the benefit of the tenant for life on merely 
 speculative evidence adduced by the remainder- 
 man objecting to an immediate sale, of an ex- 
 pected future increase in the value of the property 
 from the development of coal mines, and the con- 
 struction of a railway through the estate. Thomas 
 «. Williams - - 34 Ch. D. 558 
 
 18. — '■ — Sale — Trust exercisable without Con- 
 sent of Cestuis que Trust] Eeal property was 
 vested in trustees upon trust at the request of 
 A. and B. and the survivor, and after their 
 death at discretion, to sell and hold the proceeds 
 upon trust for A. and B. successively for life, and 
 then for the children equally. After the deaths 
 of A. and B. there were three adult children: — 
 Held, that the trust for sale was not spent, but 
 was exercisable by the trustees without the con- 
 currence of the beneficiaries. In re Tweedie and 
 Miles - 27 Ch. D. 315 
 
 TI. SETTLEMENT— EEVOCATION. 
 
 1. Non-solemnization of Marriage.] By 
 
 a, settlement executed in 1877, in consideration 
 of a thea intended marriage, it was declared that 
 a sum of stock, the property of the intended wife, 
 which had been transferred by her two trustees, 
 should be held by them on trust for the benefit of 
 the intended wife, the intended husband, and the 
 issue of the intended marriage. The marriage 
 was not solemnized, but the parties cohabited 
 without marriage, and three children were bom. 
 In 1883 an action was brought by the father and 
 mother against the trustees of the settlement, to 
 obtaiii a transfer of the firnd to the mother : — 
 Held, that the contract to marry had been abso- 
 lutely put an end to, and that the Court could 
 order the stock to be tranferred to the lady. 
 EssEKY V. Oowlakd - 26 Ch. D. 191 
 
 2. VolunteerB — Wife's Property — Gift to 
 
 Next of Kin of 'Wife in Default of Wife's Assign- 
 
 VL SETTLEMENT— EEVOCATIGN—conKnuefZ. 
 ment by Will — Power of Bevocation.] By a 
 marriage settlement the wife's property was 
 settled, after life estates in the husband and wife 
 and in default of children, in the event of the wife 
 surviving, on her, and in the event of the hus- 
 band surviving, as the wife should by will 
 appoint, and in default, on her next bf kin, ex- 
 cluding the husband : — Held (affirming the deci- 
 sion of Fry, J.), that the trust in favour of the 
 next of kin could not be revoked, and that 
 although there was no possibility of issue, the 
 husband and wife together were not entitled to 
 the corpus of the settled fund. — Paul v. Paul 
 (15 Ch. D. 580) overruled. Paul v. Paul 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 47 ; 20 Ch. D. 742 
 
 Vn. SETTLEMENT— SATISEACTION. 
 
 Double Portions — Bond — Articles of 
 
 PartnersMp.] L. bound himself by bond to pay 
 to his reputed son £10,000 on a certain day tour 
 years later. A few weeks before the day of pay- 
 ment he took his son into partnership, and it was 
 provided in the articles that the capital should 
 consist of £37,500 to be brought in by L., of 
 which £19,000 should be considered as belonging 
 to his son. He also assigned to his son the lease 
 of the premises on which the business was carried 
 on. L. died without having paid any part of the 
 £10,000 secured by the bond: — Held, in a suit 
 for the administration of L.'s estate (affirming the 
 decision of Fry, J.), that the rule against double 
 portions applied ; and that the benefit given to 
 the son under the partnership articles must be 
 taken in satisfaction of the sum due tmder the 
 bond. — Holmes v. Holmes (1 Bro. C. C. 555) and 
 Bengough v. Walker (15 Ves. 507) considered. 
 In re Lawes. Lawbs v. Lawes 20 Ch. D. 81 
 
 SETTLEMENT— Accumulations 25 Ch. D. 729 ; 
 See Accumulations. 1, 2. [30 Ch. D. 649 
 
 • ■ Covenant to settle — Severance of joint 
 
 tenancy - - 28 Ch. D. 416 
 
 See Joint Tenant. 1. 
 
 Derivative — Settled Land Act 27 Ch. D. 707 
 
 ■ See Settled Land Act — ^Definitions. 
 7. 
 
 Discretion of trustees — Interference of 
 
 Court - 21 Ch. D. 571, 576, n. ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 913 
 See Trustee — Powers. 4, 5, 6, 
 
 Female infant — Covenant to settle 
 
 See Election. 6. [28 Ch. D. 124 
 
 Fraudulent — 13 Eliz. c. 5 20 Ch. D. 389 ; 
 
 [22Ch. D. 74; 27 Ch. D. 523 
 See Fraudulent Conveyance. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Notice of — Negligence of solicitor 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Solicitor — Liabilities, 2. [437 
 Power of appoiatment. 
 
 See Cases under Power — Execution. 
 Power to appoint new trustees 26 Ch, D. 417 
 
 See Power — ^Extinction. 1. 
 
 Scotch law — Children of prior marriage 
 
 ^ [9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 bee Scotch Law— Husband and Wipe. 
 5. 
 
 Share of residue - - 30 Ch. D. 234 
 
 See Will — Lapse. 9. 
 
( 1171 ,) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1472 ) 
 
 SETTLEMENT— conimMeti. 
 
 Timber — Larch trees — Windfalls 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 220; 30 Cli, 485 
 See TiMBEtt. 1, 2. 
 
 Variation of. 
 
 See Oases under Peaotice — Divokce — 
 Settlements. 
 
 Variation of — Nullity of marriage 10 P. D. 
 
 [178 
 See Peaotice — Ditoeoe — Nullity op 
 Makriaqe. 9. 
 
 Void under Bankruptcy Act 19 Ch. D. 588 ; 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 682 
 See Bankkuptot — ^Void Settlement. 
 1,2. 
 
 "Ward of Court 25 Ch. D. 482 
 
 See Infant — Settlement. 
 SETTLEMENT OF POOE. 
 
 See Cases under Poor Law — Settle- 
 ment. 
 SETTLING DAY— Appointment of 20 Ch. D. 356 
 See Stock Exchange. 2. 
 
 SEVEBANOE — Compulsory powers of vestry — 
 Part of building 30 Ch. D. 642 
 
 See Meteopolis— Management Acts. 
 10. 
 
 From soil - - - 30 Ch. D. 485 
 
 See Timber. 2. 
 
 ■ Joint tenancy 17 Ch. D. 388 ; 38 Ch. D. 416 
 
 See Joint Tenant. 1, 2. 
 
 SEWAGE— Nuisance by local board 22 Ch. D. 221 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 4. 
 
 SEWEE — Accumulation of water — ^Negligence- 
 Liability of Metropolitan Board of 
 Works - 7 a. B, D. 418 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 4. 
 
 Obligation to support — Local Government 
 
 Acts 8 Q. B. D. 86 
 
 See Local Government — Sewers. 1. 
 
 Power to make branch drains — Metropolis 
 
 Manageinent Acts - 16 Q. B. D. 652 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 14. 
 
 Eight of access to — Obstruction — Compen- 
 sation - 15 Q. B. D. 572 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 4. 
 
 Support of. 
 
 See Local Government — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 Vesting in local authority 28 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Local Government — Sewers. 2. 
 
 SEWEEING AND PAVING— Expenses— Justices 
 — Jurisdiction — Appeal to Local Govern- 
 ment Board - 12 Q. B. D. 142 
 See Local Government — Practice. 2. 
 
 New street. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 Local Government — Streets. 
 Meteopolis — Management Acts. 
 
 SE WEES BOAED— Arbitration— Judge of County 
 Court - 9 Q. B. D. 723 
 
 See County Codbt — Jurisdiction. 6. 
 
 SHADE — Lopping trees, &c., to avert. 
 
 See Highway — Eepaie — Statutes. 
 
 SHANGHAI — A pore of registry. 
 
 See Ship — Meeohant Shipping Acts^ 
 Gazette. 
 
 Registrar for. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts^ 
 Gazette. 
 SHAEE of PAETNEESHIP— Assignment of 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 64 
 See Scotch Law — Paetneeship. 
 
 Deceased partner — Proof 16 Ch, D. 620 
 
 See Bankeuptct — ^Proop. 18. 
 
 SHAEEHOLDEE— Cost-book company 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 660 ; 23 Ch. D. 52 
 
 See Company — Cost-book Company. 2, i. 
 
 Majority of shareholders 20 Ch, D. 151 
 
 See Company — -Winding-tjp Oedee. 5. 
 
 Married woman - 18 Ch. D. 581 
 
 See Company — Contexbutoey. 1. 
 
 Meeting of shareholders 23 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Co-mpany — Dieectoe's Appoint- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Meeting of shareholders - 23 Ch. D. 14 ; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 320 
 See Company — Management. 4, 5. 
 
 Preference - - 16 Ch. D. 344 
 
 See Company — Dividends. 4. 
 
 Removal of name - - 17 Ch. D. 373 
 
 See Company — Pkospeotus. 2. 
 
 ■ Service of notice on - - 24 Ch. D. 149 
 
 See Company— Peospectus. 6. 
 SHAEES— Allotment of. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Shakes — 
 Allotment. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Order and disposition 
 
 [30 Ch. D, 261 
 See Bankeuptoy — Ordee and Disposi- 
 tion. 11. 
 
 Contract to take — Agent's authority 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 367 
 See Peincipal and Agent — Agent's 
 Authority. 2. 
 
 Indemnity against calls — Trustee 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 561 
 See Tedstee — Indemnity. 3. 
 
 Issue of, - 23 Ch. D. 545, n. ; 30 Ch. D. 158 
 
 See Company — Shares — Issue. 1, 2. 
 
 Not issued - - 17 Ch. D. 715 
 
 See Company — Director's Authority. 
 2. 
 
 Pledge of— Blank transfer - 26 Ch. D. 257 
 
 See Company — Shares — Teansfer. 1. 
 
 Power to company to purchase 17 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Company — Reduction of Capital. 
 1. 
 
 Preference — Building society 23 Ch. D. 440 ; 
 
 [9 App, Cas, 519 
 See Building Society. 9. 
 
 Preference— Rights of shareholders 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 376 
 See Company^Memoeandum and Arti- 
 
 TICLES. 1, 
 
 Purchase by company of its own shares 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 268 
 See Company — Reduction op Capital. 
 2, 
 
( 11'3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1474 ) 
 
 SHARES — continued. 
 
 Transfer. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Shares — 
 Tkansfbk. 
 SHELLEY'S CASE— Rule in - 9 ft. B. D. 643 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 890 
 See Will — Estate in Realty. 2, 3. 
 
 SHEBIFF. 
 
 1. Duty of Sheriff — Seizure in Execution — 
 
 Equity of Redemption — Common Law Procedure 
 Act, I860 (23 & -ii Vict. c. 126), s. 13.] Where 
 goods seized in execution by a sheriff under a 
 i.. fa. hav'e been previously assigned by the execu- 
 tion debtor to a third person as security for a debt, 
 the sheriff is not bound to interplead and thereby 
 -enable proceedings to be taken for an order to sell 
 being made by a Judge under sect. 13 of the Com- 
 mon Law Procedure Act, 1860, but is at liberty to 
 withdraw, though the value of the goods seized 
 •exceed the sum secured by the bill of sale, and 
 the execution debtor therefore has an equity of 
 redemption which is valuable. Scarlett v. 
 Hanson - - - 12 Q. B. D. 213 
 
 2. Possession Money — Sheriff's Officer — 
 
 Abortive Execution — Who liable to pay.'] The 
 solicitors of a judgment creditor, in the course of 
 their duty as such solicitors, lodged a writ of fi. fa. 
 at the office of the sheriff, with a request for exe- 
 cution, giving however no instructions as to the 
 selection of any particular bailiff. The sheriff 
 ■employed one of his ofSeers to execute the writ, 
 which the officer thereupon proceeded to do. On 
 an action being brought by such sheriff's officer 
 •against the solicitors of the judgment creditor to 
 recover Ids fees for executing the writ: — Held 
 (affirming the judgment of Bowen, J.), that the 
 solicitors were not liable to pay the fees ; that the 
 law, apart from a contract to pay tliem (express or 
 implied), cast no such liability upon them ; and 
 that, from the mere fact that they in the ordinary 
 -course of their duty lodged the writ at the sheriffs 
 office for execution, no such contract could be im- 
 plied.— ilfai/fterj/ V. Mansfield (9 Q. B. 754) fol- 
 lowed. — Brewer v. Jones (10 Ex. 655) dissented 
 from RoYLE v. Busby - 6 Q. B. D. 171 
 
 3. Wrongful Seizure — Execution Creditor 
 
 — Liability for wrongful Seizure under Fi. fa. — 
 Implied Authority of Solicitor — Direction to levy 
 on particular Goods.'] Whether a seizure of par- 
 "tioular goods under a fi. fa. was directed by the 
 execution creditor, so as to make him liable for 
 the act of the sheriff, is a question of fact. — It is 
 not within the scope of the implied authority of 
 the solicitor of a judgment creditor issuing a fl. fa. 
 to direct the sheriff to seize particular goods. — 
 ■Jarmain v. Hooper (6 Man. & G. 827) distin- 
 guished. Smith v. Keal 9 Q. B. D. 340 
 
 4. — — Wrongful Seizure — Fi. fa. — Injunc- 
 tion — Costs.'] Under a writ of fl. fa. against a son, 
 the sheriff seized goods of his father, in whose 
 house the son lived. The son had in fact no 
 ■^oods there, except some wearing apparel. The 
 writ was indorsed with a statement that the son 
 lived at a certain address, which was in fact the 
 father's .house, though tlie indorsement did not 
 state this. The father gave verbal notice to the 
 bailiff that he claimed 1;he goods, and the next 
 'day the sheriff issued aa interpleader summons. 
 
 SHERIFF — continued. 
 
 Meanwhile the father had commenced an action 
 against .the sheriff alone, claiming an injunction 
 to restrain him from remainiag in possession, and 
 Hall, V.C, without requiring notice to be given 
 to the execution creditor, granted the injunction. 
 The sheriff appealed, and meanwhile the execu- 
 tion creditor, on the hearing of the interpleader 
 summons, had admitted that the goods seized 
 were the father's. No misconduct on the part of 
 the sheriff was proved,: — Held, that the action was 
 premature ; that the father ought to have waited 
 to see the result of tTie interpleader proceedings ; 
 and that he must bear his own costs of the motion 
 for the injunction in both ■ Courts : — Held, also, 
 tliat the Vice - Chancellor ought not to have 
 granted the injunction without hearing jthe execu- 
 tion creditor, who should have been made a party 
 to the action, or at any rate served with notice of 
 it. HiLLiARD V. Hanson 21 Ch. D. 69 
 
 Forcible entry— Attachment 26 Ch. D. 644 
 
 See Pkaotioe — Supreme Court — At- 
 tachment. 6. 
 
 Interpleader — Action of trespass — Protec- 
 tion - - - l4 ft. B. D. 873 
 See Practioe — Supreme Court — Inter- 
 pleader. 12. 
 
 Interpleader— Costs - 22 Ch. D. 136 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Formalities. 6. 
 
 Interpleader— Sheriffs fees 26 Ch. D. 6C5 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— Inter- 
 pleader. 11. 
 
 'Notice of bankruptcy petition — Sale. 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 430; 14 ft, B. S. 966 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 1, 2. 
 
 Notice of bankruptcy petition — Sale under 
 
 execution 15 ft. B. D. 48 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Protected Transac- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Notice of -winding-up order 16 Ch. D. 337 
 
 See Company — Secured Creditor. 1 . 
 
 Possession of — Apparent possession 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 668 
 See Bill oe Sale — Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 2. 
 
 Poundage — Costs of execution 
 
 [13 ft. B. S. 415 
 See Bankruptcy — Costs. 6. 
 
 Removing goods from sheriff's custody — At- 
 tachment - 9 ft. B. D. 335 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court— Notice 
 OP Motion. 1. 
 
 Sale under execution — Application ex parte 
 
 to sell by private contract 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 162 
 See Bankruptcy — Secured Creditor. 
 9. 
 
 Sale under execution — Fixed machinery — ■ 
 
 Law of Lower Canada 10 App. Cas. 643 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 1. 
 SHERIFF'S COURT— Scotland 6 App, Cas, 351 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods. 1. 
 
 Sootlaud — Practice — Appeal 7 App, Cas, 49 
 
 See Scotch Law — Practice. 3. 
 3 B 
 
( 1475 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1476 ) 
 
 SHIP:— Col. 
 
 I. Bill of Lading - - 1475 
 
 II, Chakteepakty - - - 1476 
 
 III. Freight - - - - 1484 
 
 IV. General Average - 1485 
 v. Makitime Lien - 1486 
 
 VL Mastek - - 1488 
 
 VII. Merchant Shipping Acts 1489 
 
 Vin. Navigation - 1498 
 
 IX. Owners - ^ - - 1512 
 
 X. Pilot - - - - 1513 
 
 XI. Salvage - - - 1516 
 
 XII. Seamen - - 1520 
 
 I. SHIP— BILL OF LADING. 
 
 1. Exceptions — Collision helween Two 
 
 Ships helonging to the same Chimer — Negligence 
 of Master and Crew — Action of Tort — Variance 
 between Mules of Admiralty Court and Courts of 
 Common Law — Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 
 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, suh-s. 9.] The 
 Plaintiffs shipped goods on board the Defendants 
 vessel, the Crown Prince, under a bill of lading, 
 which contained exceptions of, among other 
 things, " collision," and " accidents, loss, or 
 damage, from any act, neglect, or default what- 
 soever of the pilots, master, or mariners, or other 
 servants of the company, in navigating the ship." 
 In the course of the voyage the Crown Prince 
 came into collision with another vessel of the De- 
 fendants, the Atjeh. The Plaintiffs' goods were 
 in consequence lost. The collision was due to 
 negligence, for which the Atjeh was mainly in 
 fault; but the Crown Prince also was in some 
 degree to blame : — Seld., 1hat the Defendants had 
 not committed a breach of the contract created by 
 the bill of lading, and that no action could be 
 maintained against them on the ground of failure 
 to perform the undertaking therein contained to 
 carry the goods safely upon the voyage. — Per 
 Brett, L.J. : No stipulation on the part of the 
 Defendants could be implied as to the conduct of 
 those on board the Atjeh, and althoiigh the negli- 
 gence of the Atjeh was not within the exceptions, 
 nevertheless it was not within the contract created 
 by the bill of lading :— Per Baggallay and Lind- 
 ley, L.J J. : — The exception '' collision," although 
 it did not cover the negligence of the Crown 
 Prince, covered the negligence of the Atjeh, and 
 the Defendants were expressly relieved fi-om lia- 
 bility for the negligence of the Crown Prince by 
 the other exceptions in the bill of lading : — Seld, 
 further, that the Defendants were liable in tort 
 for the negligence of tliose engaged in navigating 
 the Atjeh, but that the amount payable by the 
 Defendants must be limited to one half of the loss 
 sustained by the Plaintiffs, pursuant to the Su- 
 preme Court of Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, 
 sub-3. 9. Chartered Mercantile Bank of India 
 V. Netherlands India Steam Navigation Co. 
 [9 ft. B. D. 118 ; 10 ft. B. D. 521 
 
 2. Exceptions — Matters occurring during 
 
 the Voyage — Breach of Obligation to provide rea- 
 sonably jit Ship — Clause limiting Liability of Ship- 
 owners, Scope of.'] The Plaintiff shipped certain 
 cattle on board the Defendants' ship for carriage 
 from London to New York under a bill of lading 
 
 I. SHIP— BILL OF LADING— c 
 
 which provided as follows : — " These animals; 
 being in sole cliarge of shipper's sei-vants, it is 
 hereby expressly agreed that the shipowners, or- 
 their agents or servants, are, as respects these 
 animals, in no way responsible either for their 
 escape from the steamer or for accidents, disease,, 
 or mortality, and that under no circumstances 
 shall they be held liable for more than £5 for each, 
 of the animals." The ship had on her previous- 
 voyage carried cattle suffering from foot and 
 mouth disease. Some of the cattle shipped under 
 the bill of lading were during the voyage infeetedi 
 with that disease, owing to the negligence of the 
 Defendants' servants in not cleansing and disin- 
 fecting the ship before receiving the Plaintiff's 
 cattle on board and signing the bill of lading,, 
 and the Plaintiff in consequence suffered damage 
 amounting to more than £5 for each of the said 
 cattle: — Seld, that the provision in the bill of 
 lading limiting liability to £5 for each of the cattle 
 did not apply to damage occasioned by the Defen- 
 dants not providing a ship reasonably fit for the- 
 purposes of the carriage of the cattle which they 
 had contracted to carry. Tattersall v. Na- 
 tional Steamship Company 12 ft. B. D. 297 
 
 3. • Exceptions — Perils of the Sea — Colli- 
 sion — Negligence.'] A collision between two ves- 
 sels brought about by the negligence of either of 
 them, without the waves or wind or difficulty of 
 navigation contributing to the accident, is not " a 
 peril of the sea " within the terms of that excep- 
 tion in a bill of lading. Woodley v. Michell 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 47.' 
 
 4. Indorsement — " Passing of Property "' 
 
 in Goods shipped — Indorsement by way of Pledge 
 —Bills of Lading Act (18 * 19 Vid. c. Ill), s. 1.]' 
 The mere indorsement and delivery of a bill of' 
 lading by way of pledge for a loan does not pass 
 " the property in the goods " to the indorsee, so as 
 to transfer to him all liabilities in respect of the 
 goods within the meaning of the Bills of Lading 
 Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. Ill), s. 1.— Goods were 
 shipped to a foreign port under bills of lading 
 making the goods deliverable to the shipper or- 
 assigns. After the goods had arrived and been- 
 warehoused the shipper indorsed the bills of 
 lading in blank and deposited them with the in- 
 dorsees as security for a loan. The indorsees 
 never took possession of or dealt with the goods : — 
 Seld, reversing the judgment of the Court of Ap- 
 peal, and restoring the judgment of Field, J., that 
 " the property " in the goods did not " pass " to 
 the 'indorsees within the meaning of the Bills of 
 Lading Act so as to make them liable in an action- 
 by the shipo-svner for the freight, Sewell «. 
 BuEDiOK - 10 ft. B. D. 363 ; 13 ft. B. D. 159 ;, 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 74 
 
 II. SHIP— CHAETEKPABTY, 
 
 1. Bill of Lading — Freight— Incorpora- 
 tion of Conditions of Chartevparty in Bill of 
 Lading — Lien.] A oharterparty contained a stipu- 
 lation in the usual form for payment of freigh-t at 
 the rate of £1 lis. 3d. per ton ; it a;lso contained 
 a clause that the shipowner should have "an abso- 
 lute lien on the cargo for freight, dead freight, 
 demurrage, lighterage ot port of discharge, and 
 average ; " and a further clause that the captaiit 
 was to sign bills of lading at any rate of freight ;; 
 
( 11V7 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1478 ) 
 
 II. SHIP— CHAETERPARTY— conh'iJJiec?. 
 " but should the total freight as per bills of lading 
 be under the amount estimated to be earned by 
 this charter, the captain to demand payment of 
 any difference in advance." Certain goods were 
 I put on board the chartered ship, and were made 
 deliverable to the Plaintiffs (who were not the 
 charterers) by a bill of lading, whereby freight 
 was made payable at 22s. 6c?. per ton ; the bill of 
 lading contained also a clause, whereby it was 
 provided that extra expenses should be borne by 
 the receivers and " other conditions as per charter- 
 party." Upon the arrival of the ship at the port 
 of discharge the Defendant, who was the ship- 
 owner, claimed and compelled payment of freight 
 at the rate mentioned in the charterparty. The 
 Plaintiffs having sued to recover back the differ- 
 ence between tlie freight as specified in the char- 
 terparty and the freight as specified in the bill of 
 lading: — Held, that tlie bill of lading did not 
 incorporate the stipulation in the charterparty as 
 to the payment of freight, that no right of lien 
 existed for the freight mentioned in the charter- 
 party, and that the Plaintiffs were entitled to 
 delivery of the goods upon payment of the freight 
 specified in the bill of lading. Gaedner v. Tkeoh- 
 MAMN - 15 a. B. D. 154 
 
 2. Construction — Demurrage - 
 
 Quay Berth as ordered by Charterer.'] By a 
 charterparty it was agreed that the Plaintiff's 
 vessel after loading a certain cargo should pro- 
 ceed "to London or Tyne dock to such ready 
 quay berth as ordered by the charterers," " demur- 
 rage to be at the rate of £30 per running day," in 
 no case unless in berth before noon were the lay 
 days to count before the day following that on 
 wbioh the vessel was in berth, and the captain or 
 owners were to have an absolute lien on the cargo 
 for all freight and demurrage in respect thereof. — 
 The vessel was ordered by the charterers to a 
 certain Loudon dock, but when the vessel arrived 
 at such dock ,there was no quay berth ready for 
 her, and she was consequently detained one day 
 beyond the time required for discharging her had 
 she been able to have got alongside a quay berth 
 on her arrival in the dock: — Held, on the con- 
 struction of this charterpai'ty, that the charterers 
 were bound to name such a quay berth as was 
 ready, and that for the detention caused by the 
 charterers neglecting to do bo the Plaintiffs were 
 entitled to a lien on the cargo for demurrage, the 
 damage for the detention being sufficiently in the 
 nature of demurrage to come within the demur- 
 rage clause. Haeeis and Dixon v. Mabocs 
 Jacobs & Co. - 15 Q. B. D. 847 
 
 3. Construction — Final sailing from last 
 
 Fortr—" Port " — FreigU.'] By terms of a charter- 
 party the owners were entitled to an advance of 
 one-third of the freight within eight days " from 
 final sailing of the vessel from her last port in 
 United Kuigdom." The vessel was loaded at 
 ■ Penarth Dock, and was towed by a steara-tug 
 seven or eight miles, bringing her out about three 
 miles into, the Bristol Channel. She there cast 
 anchor, as the weather was threatening. While 
 she was lying at anchor a storm broke her cable, 
 and she ultimately ran ashore on Penarth beach, 
 and the cargo was spoiled, The vessel had never 
 been beyond the limits of the port of Cardiff a s 
 
 II. SHIP— CHARTERPARTY— oon«»«e(i. 
 defined for fiscal purposes, but she had left what, 
 for commercial purposes, is considered the port, 
 and had been out at sea. She went ashore within 
 the limits o( the port in its commercial sense. The 
 owners sued for one-third of the freight, and the 
 charterers resisted the claim on the ground that 
 the vessel had never sailed from her last port in 
 the United Kingdom : — Held, affirming the deci- 
 sion of Lopes, J., that the word "port" must be 
 taken in its ordinary commercial sense, and that 
 as the vessel had got out to sea without any in- 
 tention of returning, she must be taken to have 
 finally sailed from her last port, that her being 
 driven back into it by the weather made no dif- 
 ference, and that the one-third of the freight was 
 payable. Pkioe v. Livingstone 9 Q. B. D. 679 
 
 4. Construction^JVnaZ sailing of Ship 
 
 from last Port— Freight — ^- Port."] The word 
 " port " in a charterparty is to be understood in its 
 popular, or business, or commercial sense ; it does 
 not in such a document necessarily mean the 
 port as defined for revenue or pilotage purposes. — 
 Tests for determining the business meaning of the 
 word "port" considered. — A charterparty pro- 
 vided that a ship should load a cargo of coals at 
 Cardiff, and then proceed to Bombay, the freight 
 to be paid two-thirds in cash " ten days after the 
 final sailing of the vessel from her last port in 
 Great Britain," and the remainder in cash on 
 delivery of the cargo. The ship loaded the coals 
 in the ]3ute Docks, at Cardiff, and, having cleared 
 at the Custom House, started on her voyage to 
 Bombay. She proceeded down the artificial 
 channel leading from the docks to the Eiver Taff, 
 and, when about 300 yards beyond the junction 
 of the channel with the river, she came into colli- 
 sion with a steamer, and was so much injiu'ed 
 that she, was compelled to return the next day to 
 the docks for repairs : — Held, that at the time of 
 the collision the ship was not outside the limits of 
 the port, in the popular, business, or commercial 
 sense of the word; that, consequently, she had 
 not finally sailed from her last port ; and that no 
 freight was payable. Sailing-ship "Gaeston" 
 Co. v. HicKiE 15 Q. B. D. 680 
 
 5. Delay iu discharging — Discharge in 
 
 Doelc as ordered " if sufficient water."] A char- 
 terparty provided that the ship should load with a 
 cargo and proceed therewith to a port "to dis- 
 charge in a dock as ordered on arriving. if suffi- 
 cient water, or so near thereto as she may safely 
 get always afloat" : — Held, that the ship was only 
 bound to discharge in the dock named if there was 
 sufficient water there at the time the order was 
 given. Allen v. Coltart 11 ft. B. D. 788 
 
 6. Delay in discharging — Docks — De- 
 murrage — Charterer's Duties.] A charterparty 
 for a ship to sail to " London Surrey Commercial 
 Docks " is not satisfied by the ship arriving at the 
 gate of the docks but not entering into the docks. 
 There is no established custom in the port of 
 London by which the charterer of a timber-loaded 
 ship is bound to secure for the vessel, on its arrival 
 in the river, and ia close contiguity to the docks 
 named, the authority to enter into the docks. The 
 charterparty was to " London Surrey Commercial 
 Docks, or as near thereto as she may safely get, 
 and lie always afloat." As the docks were full 
 
 3 B 2 
 
( 1479 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1480 ) 
 
 II. SUIT— CS&RTERTARTY— continued. 
 
 the ship could not be given a discharging berth, 
 and the dock manager tlierefore refused it entrance 
 into the docljs. Both parties having named these 
 docks in the chaiterparty, this refusal of the dock 
 authorities was held not to be the fault of eitlier 
 party. The cause of the delay as to being ad- 
 milted into the docks was immaterial ; the length 
 of the delay was material. The charterer would 
 not name any other docks to which the ship might 
 be taken. The ship's master therefore took it to 
 the Deptford Buoys(the nearest place to the Surrey 
 Commercial Docks where it could lie in safety 
 afloat) and there discharged the cargo by lighters 
 carrying the timber into the Surrey Commercial 
 Docks, where it was afterwards sorted and put in 
 order on the wharf: — HcJd, that under the cir- 
 cumstances existing in this case, the delay in dis- 
 charging the cargo was to be attributed to the 
 charterer, who therefore became liable to demur- 
 rage, and to the charges for unloading. The con- 
 tract in the charterparty as to demurrage was 
 this : The cargo was to be supplied as fast as it 
 could be taken on board, " and to be received at 
 jjort of discharge as fast as steamer can deliver as 
 above . . . and ten days demurrage over and above 
 tlie said laying days " [there were no laying days 
 mentioned in the charterparty] " at £30 per day 
 payable day by day, it being agreed that for the 
 payment of all freight, dead freight, and demur- 
 rage, the owner shall have absolute charge and 
 lien on the said cargo . . .'' " The cargo to be 
 brought to and taken from alongside the ship at 
 merchants' risk and expense." The ship did not 
 fulfil the engagement in the charterijarty to pro- 
 ceed to the Sm-rey Commercial Docks by merely 
 going to the gates of the docks, but when it had 
 fulfilled the alternative to go as near thereto as it 
 could safely get, the charterer was bound to take 
 the cargo from alongside at his lisk and expense. 
 The shipowner was not bound to wait for an un- 
 reasonable period, until the dock authorities 
 should be able to assign the ship a discharging 
 berth in the docks. When that difficulty arose 
 about the ship being admitted into the Surrey 
 Commercial Docks, and the cliarterer would not 
 name any other docks or place where the vessel 
 might be unloaded, the shipowner gave notice to 
 tlie charterer of the discharge of the cargo by 
 lighters, aud on taking the timber into the docks, 
 gave notice to the dock authorities that it was 
 delivered there subject to the claim for freight, 
 demurrage, and delivery charges : — Seld, that he 
 was warranted in so doing. Dahl v. Nelson 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 38 
 
 7. Demurrage — Cesser Clause — Bill of 
 
 Lading — Incorporation of Conditions of Charier- 
 party in Bill of Lading.'] A charterparty con- 
 tained stipulations in the usual form for payment 
 of freight and demurrage, and also a stipulation 
 that " as this charterparty is entered into by the 
 charterers on account of another party, their 
 liability ceases as soon as the cargo is on board, 
 the vessel holding a lien upon the cargo for freight 
 and demurrage." Tlie charterers having placed 
 the cargo on board at the port of loading, a bill of 
 lading was signed whereby the goods were made 
 deliverable to themselves at the port of discharge, 
 " they paying freight, and all other conditions as 
 
 II. SHIP— CHAETEEPAKTT— eon«TO«ec?. 
 per charterparty." In an action by the shipowner 
 against them, as consignees of the cargo, for 
 demurrage in respect of delay at the port of dis- 
 charge : — Held, that the cesser clause in the 
 charterparty must be rejected as inapplicable in 
 reading the bill of lading which incorporated aU 
 the conditions of the charterparty applicable to 
 tl] e reception of the goods at the port of discharge, 
 and therefore that the Plaintiff was mtitled to 
 maintain the action. — Judgment of the Queen's 
 Bench Division affirmi d. (jullischenj!. Stewart 
 Bkothers - H ft. B. D. 186; 13 ft. B. D. 317 
 
 8. Demurrage — Customary Manner of 
 
 Loading — Detention by Frosf] By the terms of a 
 charterparty the ship was to proceed to Cardiff, 
 East Bute Dock, and there load in the customary 
 manner from the agents of the freighters a cargo 
 of rail iron, the cargo to be loaJed as fast as ship 
 could take on board and stow within the customary 
 working hours of the port, commencing when ship 
 was in berth and rendy to load, " detention by 
 frost, floods, &c., not to be reckoned as lay days." 
 At Cardiff there are two docks, the East Bute Dock 
 and the West Bute Dock, connected by a canal, 
 and the West Bute Dock is connected by a junc- 
 tion canal with the Glamorganshire Canal. The 
 shipowner, when the charterparty was made, did 
 not know who were the freighters' agents at 
 Cardiff. There were about six manufacturers of 
 rail iron there, and all of them (with the excep- 
 tion of the freighters' agents) had wharves in the 
 East or West Bute Dock. The agents' wharf was 
 on the Glamorganshire Canal, nearly opposite 
 the junction canal, and their rail iron was loaded 
 on ships berthed in the East Bute Dock by 
 means of lighters passing down the junction canal, 
 through the West Bute Dock, and from thence 
 through the connecting canal to the East Bute 
 Dock. The other manufacturers loaded ships in 
 the East Bute Dock, either from the quay or by 
 lighters coming from their wharves. — The ship 
 on arrival was berthed in the East Bute Dock, 
 and the loading was commenced, but if was 
 delayed afterwards for sixteen days by frost, 
 which covered with ice the junction canal, from 
 the agents' wharf to the West Bute Dock, and 
 prevented there the passage of the lighters, 
 though the water in the docks was not frozen :— 
 Held, reversing the decision of Pollock, B., that 
 the exception in the charterparty with respect to 
 detention by frost did not apply to relieve the 
 freighters from liability for demurrage, as the 
 lighters with the cargo for the ship had not got 
 within the limits of the East Bute Dock where 
 the ship was to be loaded, before the detention 
 by frost had happened. Kay v. Field 
 
 [8 ft. B, D. 594 ; 10 ft. B. D. 241 
 
 9; Demurrage—" Frost preventing load- 
 ing."] By a charterparty a ship was to proceed 
 to Cardiff, East Bute Dock, and there load in 
 the customary manner from the agents of the 
 freighters a cargo of iron, " Cargo to be supplied 
 
 as fast as steamer can receive Time to 
 
 commence from the vessel being ready to load 
 and unload and ten days on demurrage^ over and 
 above the said lay days, at £40 per day. (Except 
 m case of liauds striking work, or frosts or floods, 
 or any other unavoidable accidents preventing 
 
( 1481 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1482 ) 
 
 II. SHIP— CHAETERPABTY— conWiiaeo!. 
 
 the loarling . . . . ; in which case owners to have 
 the option of employing the steamer in some short 
 voyage trade until receipt of written notice from 
 chaiteiers that they are ready to resume employ- 
 ment without delay to the ship.)" — The ship 
 arrived at the East Bute Dock and loaded part of 
 her cargo. A frost then set in and made a canal 
 which communicated with the dock impassable, 
 so that the remainder of the cargo which was 
 ready at a wharf on the canal could not for several 
 days be brought in lighters to the dock. The 
 cargo could not have been brought into the dock 
 by carting or otherwise at any reasonable expense. 
 The dock itself was not frozen over and if the 
 cargo had been in the dock the loading might 
 have proceeded : — Held, aiBrraing the decision of 
 tlie Court of Appeal, that the frost did not " pre- 
 vent the loading" witliin the meaning of the 
 exception. Grant & Oo. v. Oovekdale, Todd 
 & Co. 8 ft. B. D. 600 ; 11 Q. B. D. 643 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 470 
 
 10. Demurrage — Lay Days — Usual 
 
 Place of Discliarge — Custom to lighten Vessel 
 at Entrance to Fort before proceeding to Place 
 of Discharge.'] By charterparty it was agi-eed 
 that the Plaintift's' steamship should proceed 
 to Oronstadt and load a cargo of wheat and 
 therewith proceed to a port in the English or 
 Bristol channel as ordered, " or so near thereto as 
 she may safely get at all times of tide and always 
 afloat, and deliver the same. Eight running days, 
 Sundays excepted, to be allowed the merchants, 
 if the ship be not sooner dispatched, for loading 
 and discharging the steamer, and ten days on 
 demurrage if required over and above the laying 
 days at £25 per day." The steamer arrived at 
 Oronstadt, occupied six running days in loading 
 a cargo of 4325 quarters of wheat, and was ordered 
 to Gloucester, Bristol Channel,' for discliarge. 
 She arrived at Sharpness Dock in the Bristol 
 Channel on the 13th of November. Sharpness 
 Dock is within the port of Gloucester, and about 
 seventeen miles from the basin within the city 
 of Gloucester where grain cargoes are usually 
 discharged if the burthen of the ship will admit. 
 The steamer was ready to commence the discharge 
 of her cargo on the 13th, but could not get nearer 
 to Gloucester than Sharpness until part of her 
 cargo was first discharged at Sharpness. On the 
 14th and 15th of November the consignees dis- 
 charged into lighters 1585 quarters of the cargo, 
 and then required the master to take the steamer 
 through the canal to a place of discharge within 
 the basin at Gloucester. The master proceeded, 
 and arrived in the basin on the 17th. On the 
 18th the residue of the cargo was discharged and 
 the vessel returned to Sharpness, wliere she 
 arrived on the 19th. In an action for demurrage 
 evidence was given of a custom of the port of 
 Gloucester, according to which the usual place of 
 discharging grain cargoes was at the basin within 
 the city, and when vessels with grain cargoes 
 destined for Gloucester were of too heavy a 
 burthen to come up the canal they were lightened 
 at Sharpness, and during the discharge at Sharp- 
 ness of so much of tlie cargo as it was necessary 
 to discharge in order to enable the vessel to pro- 
 ceed by the canal to Gloucester Basin the lay 
 
 II. SHIP— CHABTEEPAETY— coniOTijed. 
 days counted, but the time occupied by cominp; 
 up tlie canal to discharge at Gloucester Basin and 
 by returning to Sharpness was not counted : — 
 Held, first, that the custom was reasonable, as the 
 eft'ect of it was not to detain the ship longer than 
 if she had been wholly discharged at Sharpness ; 
 secondly, that it was not inconsistent with the 
 express provision in the charterparty as to running 
 days, for the proper inference from the facts was 
 that the discharge of the vessel except for the 
 purpose of lightening her did not commence 
 until she arrived within Gloucester Basin. That, 
 therefore the time occupied by the vessel in going 
 from Sharpness to the basin and in returning to 
 Sharpness ought to be excluded from the lay days, 
 and the Plaintiffs were entitled to one day's de- 
 murrage only. — Caffarini v. Walker (Ir. Eep. 
 9 C. L. 431 ; Ir. Eep. 10 C. L. 250) and Mcintosh 
 V. Sinclair (Ir. Eep. 11 0. L. 456) considered. 
 Nielsen v. Wait 14 ft. B. D. 616 
 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 16 Q. B. D. 67.] 
 
 11. . ■ Demurrage — Completion of Voyage — 
 
 Charterer's Option to order Ship to one of several 
 Places in Dock — Discharge of Cargo.'] By the 
 terms of a charterparty the ship was to load from 
 the charterers' agents at Cardiif a cargo of coals, 
 " and therewith proceed to Dieppe and deliver the 
 same alongside consignee's or railway wharf, or 
 into lighters, or any vessel or wharf where she may 
 safely deliver, as ordered, cargo to be loaded and 
 discharged in forty-eight running hours, &c. 
 Demurrage over and above the said lying time 
 at 10s. per hour." The ship arrived in the dock 
 at Dieppe, and was ordered to discharge at the 
 railway wharf, but in consequence of all the dis- 
 charging berths being occupied, she was not 
 berthed at the railway wharf until twenty-four 
 hours after her arrival in the dock. In an action 
 by shipowner against charterers for demurrage : 
 — Held, that the voyage was not completed, and 
 the lying time did not commence under the 
 charterparty until the ship was berthed at the 
 railway wharf, and therefore that the Defendants 
 were not liable to pay demurrage for delay in 
 respect of the period which elapsed between the 
 ship's arrival in the dock at Dieppe and her being 
 berthed at the railway wharf — Jjavies v. Me Veagh 
 (4 Ex. D. 265) considered. Murphy ■». Coffin 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 87 
 
 12. Demurrage — Loading and unloading 
 
 at fixed daily Mate — Bight to include whole Time 
 occupied in Loading and Unloading.] By charter- 
 party between the Plaintiff and the Defendants it 
 was agreed that the Plaintiff's ship should proceed 
 to Bilbao and-there load a full and complete, or 
 part, cargo of iron ore, and deliver the same at 
 Middlesborough. " 400/500 tons per working 
 day (Sundays and holidays excepted) to be 
 allowed the charterers for loading, and 300 dis- 
 charging, all demurrage over and above the said 
 days at the rate of 2s. per horn- for every 100 tons 
 cargo. The lay days to commence day after 
 arrival, and being ready to load or discharge 
 respectively. The captain to have a lien on the 
 cargo for freight or demurrage." " If the ship is 
 loaded at other than Portugalette or Lucana 
 shipping staithes, the loading and discharging to 
 be at the rate of 300 tons per working day."— The 
 
( 1483 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( USi ) 
 
 II. SHIP— CHABTERPAKTY— cojif/nued. 
 vessel having loaded at a place other than those 
 last mentioned at a rate less than 300 tons per 
 ■working day, proceeded to Middlesborough, where 
 she discharged her cargo at n higher rate per 
 day : — Meld, that, in calculating the demurrage, 
 the days for loading and unloading must be kept 
 separate, and that the charterers had no right to 
 sdd together the -whole number of days occupied 
 in loading and miloading for the purpose of ascer- 
 taining the average amount of work done on each 
 day. Marshat.t, v. Bolokow, Vaughan, & Co. 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 231 
 
 18. Demunage — Fort of unloading — " At 
 
 all times of tide and always afloat."^ A ship was 
 chartered to unload at S. or ■' so near thereto as 
 she may safely get at all times of tide and always 
 afloat," and for "delay in unloading the cliarterers 
 were to pay demm'rage. — The state of the tide pre- 
 vented the ship from reaching S. for fom- days after 
 she arrived at the nearest point where she was able 
 to float : — Held, that, according to the terms of the 
 charterparty this was a sufficient arrival of the 
 ship at S. to found a claim for demurrage. 
 HoBSLEY V. Price 11 ft. B. D. 244 
 
 14. " Excepted Dangers " — Option to can- 
 cel for iion-arrical at Loading Port.} By a 
 charterparty of a steamship it was agreed that 
 she should go to "three safe loading places" 
 between two named ports and there load from the 
 charterers a cargo of oranges and being so loaded 
 proceed to London . . . and deliver the same 
 pursuant to bills of lading .... (the act of God 
 .... and all dangers of the seas, rivers, and 
 steam navigation of what nature and kind soever 
 during the said voyage always excepted), and the 
 charterers thereby promised to load the cargo, 
 and stipulated, after a provision for working and 
 lay days, that " should the steamer not be arrived 
 at first loading port free of pratique and ready to 
 load on or before the loth of December next, 
 charterers have the option of cancelling or con- 
 iirming this charterparty." — By dangers of the 
 seas, the steamer, although arrived at the first 
 loading port, was not free of pratique and ready 
 to load on the loth of Decembei-, aud tlie char- 
 terers therefore cancelled the charterparty. At 
 tbe trial of an action against them for not loading 
 the cargo, the judge left to the jury the disputed 
 question whether the port was a " safe loading 
 place," but being asked by them for his opinion 
 thereon, gave it, and they found in the affirma- 
 tive : — Seld, (1) that this expression of opinion 
 was under the circumstances no misdirection ; 
 (2) that the excepted dangers clause applied only 
 to the voyage, and not to the clause giving the 
 option to cancel the charterparty if the ship was 
 not ready to load on tlie day fixed, aud therefore 
 the cancellation was justified. Smith v. Dart & 
 Son - 14 Q. B. D. 105 
 
 16. Managing Owner — Co-oufnership — 
 
 Commission.] A vessel was chartered for twelve 
 months, and dming the currency of the charter 
 the charterers made default in certain payments 
 and the charter lapsed. The vessel was rechar- 
 tored by a voyage charter from Iv. to England 
 During the performance of this voyage the De- 
 fendant purchased a share iu this vessel : — Held, 
 on objection to the registrar's report in a co- 
 
 II. SHIP — CHAETEEPAETT — continued. 
 ownership action, that the Defendant was not 
 liable to bear any of the losses occasioned by the 
 time charter -.—Held, also, that a part owner being 
 the manager of a ship, is entitled to remuneration 
 for his services, but that there is no fixed rate ap- 
 plicable. The "Meredith" - 10 P. D. 69 
 
 16. " Safe Port, or as near thereunto as 
 
 she can safely get, and alicays lay and discharge 
 afloat" — Bights of Parties lohen Sliip is unable 
 to lie afloat in Fort of Discharge icithout being 
 lightened— Eridtnce of Custom of Port.;\ "Where a 
 vessel is chartered to proceed with cargo to a 
 " safe port .... as ordered, or as near thereunto 
 as she can safely get, and always lay aud discharge 
 afloat," the master is not bound to discharge at a 
 port where she cannot, by reason of her draught 
 of water, " always lie and discharge afloat " with- 
 out being lightened, even if she can be lightened 
 with reasonable dispatch and tafety in the imme- 
 diate vicinity of the port or in the port itself. 
 A vessel was chartered to proceed with a cargo 
 of grain from Baltimore to Falmouth for orders, 
 •• tlience to a safe port in the United Kingdom as 
 ordered, or as near thereunto as she could safely 
 get, and always lay and discharge afloat." The 
 vessel was ordered to Lowestoft. Her draught of 
 water when loaded was such that she could not 
 lie afloat in Lowestoft Harbour without discharg- 
 ing a portion of her cargo, but the discharge of 
 cargo might have been carried on with reasonable 
 safety in Lowestoft Roads. The consignee oflTered 
 at his own expense to lighten tlie vessel in the 
 roods, but the master refused to proceed to Lowes- 
 toft to discharge, and went to Harwich as the 
 nearest safe port, and there discharged the cargo : 
 — Held, reversing the decision uf Sir E. Phillimore, 
 that the consignee could not recover damages 
 against the shipowner for the refusal of the master 
 to discharge at Lowestoft. Held, also, that evi- 
 dence that it was the custom of the port of 
 Lowestoft for vessels to be lightened in the roads 
 before proceeding into the harbour was not admis- 
 sible. The -Alhambra" - 6 P. D. 68 
 
 III. SHIP— FEEIGHT. 
 
 1. Collision — Sum in the yature of 
 
 Freight — Bill of Lading — Bight of Action.'] A 
 ship A. and her cargo belonged to the same 
 o\\Tiers, and the Plaintiffs advanced £1000 as a 
 loan to such owners, and received as secm'ity, in 
 conformity with the agreement made between 
 them aud the borrowers, the bill of lading, on 
 which the master indoi-sed a receipt for £1000 as 
 advanced freight, and also a policy of insurance 
 on advanced freight. Ship ,1. was lost through 
 a colUsion with the Defendants' vessel, whose 
 negligence was admitted. It was proved that the 
 ditterence between the value of the cargo at the 
 poit of destination and at the jwrt of loading 
 would have considerably exceeded £1000. In an 
 action bv the holders of the bill of lading for 
 £1000 against the Defendants' ship:— Held, that 
 the Plaintiffs were entitled to recover the sum, 
 though it was not, strictly speaking, advanced 
 freight, but a prospective increase in tbe value of 
 the cargo, but that the insurers were subrogated 
 to the rights of the Plaintiffs. — A sum in respect 
 of disbursements for ship A. on her voyage and 
 wages paid in advance had been awarded to the 
 
( 1485 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1486 ) 
 
 "in. SHIP— rBEIGHT— eo»«t»«e(i. 
 ■owners of the A. by the registrar and merchants: 
 Held, further, that this was no bar to the Plain- 
 ■tiifs' right to recover in this aetiou. The 
 -" Thyatiba " - 8 P. D, 158 
 
 3. Derelict — Right to Freight after Aban- 
 donment of Ship.'] By tlie abandonment of a ship 
 by its crew during a voyage, without any intention 
 to retake possession, a right is given to tlie owner 
 of cargo on board to treat the contract of affreight- 
 ment as at an. end. — A ship witli a cargo of resin 
 in barrels, on a voyage from America to Botter- 
 dam, was, owing to the perils of the sea, aban- 
 doned by her crew off the American coast. She 
 was afterwards saved by another vessel, and 
 brought with her cargo by the salvors into a port 
 in England, and there arrested in an action for 
 salvage by her salvors. Before the shipowner had 
 released the ship or cargo, the owners of the cargo 
 ;applied for and obtained from the Admiralty 
 Court an order for the release of the cargo to 
 them without jjayment of any freight, upon theii- 
 :giving bail to the salvors : — Held, that the cargo 
 owners were entitled to treat the contrai-t of 
 ■affreightment as at an end, and that therefore the 
 ■order of the Admiralty was rightly made. The 
 ■"CiTo" ■ - 7P.D.a 
 
 Final sailing from last port — Eight to 
 
 freight 9 Q. B. D. 679; IS Q. B. D. 580 
 
 See Ship — Chaktebpartt. 3, 4. 
 
 IT. SHIP— GENERAL AVERAGE. 
 
 1. Deck Cargo.] The Plaintiffs shipped 
 
 ■certain cattle as a deck cargo on board the Defen- 
 dants' vessel : during, the voyage a storm arose, 
 and owing to stress of weather the master jet- 
 tisoned the deck cargo by throwing the cattle 
 overboard. The act of jettison was proper and 
 necessary on the part of the master for the safety 
 
 •of the Defendants' vessel : — Held, that the Plain- 
 tiffs could not recover from the Defendants a 
 general average contribution for the loss of tl)e 
 cattle. — Johnson v. Chapman (19 C. B. (N.S. ) 563 ; 
 
 -35 L. J. (C.P.) 23) commented on. Wright v. 
 
 .Maewood. Gordon v. Maewood 7 Q. B. D. 62 
 
 2. Deck Cargo — Charterparty — ' At Mer- 
 chant's rislc."] It was stipulated in a charterparty 
 ithat the "ship should be provided with a deck 
 '<!argo if required at full freight, but at merchant's 
 risk" : — Held, reversing the decision of the Queen's 
 ;Benoh Division, that the words " at merchant's 
 risk " did not exclude the right of the charterers 
 I to general average contribution from the ship- 
 ■ owners in respect of deck cargo, shipped by the 
 charterers, and necessarily jettisoned to save the 
 ship and the rest of the cargo. Burton v. English 
 [10 Q. B. D. 426 ; 12 Q. B. D. 218 
 
 3. Liability of Cargo — General Average 
 
 Contribution.'] When ship and cargo are in peril, 
 the fact that the shipowners liave by the act of 
 ."the master become bound to pay and have paid a 
 sum cf money for preservation of ship and cargo, 
 
 :and that the master in so binding them pursued a 
 reasouable course under the circumstances, is not 
 
 ■couclubive that the whole sum was chargeable to 
 
 , general average so as to bind the cargo owners to 
 pay their proportion. — The decision of the Court 
 
 •of Appeal reversed and a new trial ordered on the 
 
 ,IV. SHIP— GENERAL AVERAGE- contiiwci. 
 ground that the question of the amount charge- 
 able to general average ought to have been sub- 
 mitted to the jury. Anderson v. Ocean Steam- 
 ship Company 13 ft. B. D. 651 ; 10 App. Cas. 107 
 
 4. Reshipping Cargo — Expenses of Ship 
 
 leaving Port of Befuge.'] A ship on a voyage 
 having sprung a dangerous leak, the captain, 
 acting justifiably for the safety of the whole .ad- 
 venture, put into a port of refuge to repair. In 
 port the cargo was reasonably, and with a view to 
 the common safety of ship, cargo and freight, 
 landed in order to repair the ship. The ship was 
 repaired, the cargo reloaded and the voyage com- 
 pleted : — Held, affirming the decision of the Court 
 of Appeal, that the cargo owners were not charge- 
 able with a general average contribution in respect 
 of the expenses of reshipping the cargo. — Alwood 
 V. SeUar (4 Q. B. D. 342; 5 Q. B. D. 286) dis- 
 cussed. SvENDSEN V. Wallace 11 ft. B. D. 616 ; 
 [13 ft. B. D. 69 ; 10 App. Cas. 404 
 
 5. Ship on Fire — Water poured upon 
 
 Cargo — Termination of Maritime Adventure — 
 Arrival of Ship at Port of Destination — Cargo 
 remaining on Board.'] To pour water upon the 
 cargo pursuant to the master's orders for the pur- 
 pose of extinguishing a fire which has broken out 
 in a ship's hold, is a general average act, and if 
 the cargo is thereby injured, the owner is entitled 
 to a contribution. — Whilst" the cargo remains on 
 board a ship after her arrival at the port of desti- 
 nation, the maritime adventure is not terminated 
 so as to absolve the owners of the cargo and the 
 ship from mutual rights and liabilities. — The De^^ 
 fendants were the owners of the H., which having 
 arrived at her port of destination at the eijd of a 
 voyage, unloaded about 1300 tons of her cargo ; 
 about 100 tons remained on board. Whilst she 
 was lying at a wharf, a fire broke out in her hold, 
 and in order to extinguish it her master caused 
 water to be poured into her, whereby some goods, 
 forming part of the cargo and belonging to the 
 Plaintiffs, were damaged. The H. might have 
 been scuttled and raised again ; but if the fire 
 had not been extingnished, she would have been 
 in peril of partial destruction : — Held, that the 
 Defendants were liable to contribute by way of 
 general average for the damage done to the 
 Plaintiffs' goods. Whiteckoss Wire and Iron 
 Company v. Savill - 8 ft. B. D. 653 
 
 V. SHIP— MARITIME LIEN. 
 
 1. -Bottomry — Necessaries — Foreign 'Vessel 
 
 -3&i Vict. c. 65, 8. 6—24 & 25 Vict. c. 10, «. 5— 
 Bottomry Bond.] A foreign vessel was in an 
 English port, and the owner, being temporarily in 
 England and in want of funds for the purchase 
 of necessaries, made an agreement with the Plain- 
 tiffs by which, in consideration of their advancing 
 him by cash or acceptance £600 for necessaries 
 supplied to and for the use of the vessel, he 
 thereby undertook to return them the amount so 
 advanced with interest and all charges on the 
 return of the vessel from her voyage. And the 
 Plaintiffs were thereby authorized " to cover the 
 amount advanced the owner by insurance on ship, 
 &o., out and home at owner's cost."— In an action 
 in rem for necessaries in respect of the amount so 
 
( 1487 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1488 ) 
 
 V. SHIP— MAEITIME LIEN — continued. 
 advanced : — Helcl, by the Court of Appeal (Bowen 
 and Fry, L.JJ., Brett, M.R., doubting), first, that 
 this agreement was not equivalent to a bottomry 
 bond ; secondly (by the whole Court) that there 
 was no lien for necessaries ; for that before 3 & 4 
 Yict. u. 65, s. 6, there was no maritime lien on a 
 foreign ship for necessnries supplied to her, that 
 that section did not give any maritime lien but 
 only a right to seize tlie ship on the institution of 
 an action, and therefore that the Plaintiffs were 
 not entitled to recover against the vessel. — Judg- 
 ment of Sir J. Hannen reversed. — The Ella A. 
 Chirk (Br. & L. 32) overruled.— I7ie Two Ellens 
 (Law Hep. 4 P. 0. 161) explained. The "Hein- 
 mcH Bjokn " - ■ 8 P. D. 151 ; 10 P. D. 44 
 
 [Affirmed by the House of lords.] 
 
 2. Bottomry — Necessaries — Seference to 
 
 JRer/istrar and Merchants.'] To constitute a valid 
 bottomry bond tlie money must be required for the 
 necessities of the ship, and the authority of the 
 master to borrow money on bottomry is based on 
 surli necessity. Eeasonable inqiiiiies by a lender 
 may be evidence of his bona fides, but will not 
 make a bond valid in j-espect of the several items 
 for which it is given to the full extent of such 
 items unless they are actually and entirely neces- 
 sary: — Held, therefore, by the Court of Appeal, 
 that the decision of Butt, J., was right, whereby 
 he upheld the finding of the registrar and mer- 
 chants who reduced the amount payable under a 
 bond given by the master to a banker at St. 
 Michaels, in respect of the charges for goods sup- 
 plied, commissions, and premium. — Tlie Prince of 
 Saxe Cohurg (3 Moo. P. C. 1) explained. The 
 "Pontida" - - 9P. D. 102, 177 
 
 3. Damages — Wages — Friority of Liens.'] 
 
 The maritime lien for damages, arising out of 
 damage done by a foreign vessel in a collision for 
 •which she is to blame, takes precedence of the 
 maritime lien of the seamen for wages earned by 
 them since the collision on board such vessel. 
 The " Elin " - 8 P. D. 39, 129 
 
 4. Dishursements — Admiralty Court Act, 
 
 1861 (24*25 Yict. c. 10), .s. W~Liahil ityin re.tpect 
 of .Judgment recovered in Action on Bill of Exchange 
 drawn hy Master and dishonoured.] In April and 
 May, 1880, the master of a steamship obtained at 
 a British colonial port cotds for the ship, and paid 
 for them by bills of exchange drawn on the char- 
 terers of the ship. The bills were dishonoured by 
 the charterers, and in August, 1880, the master 
 was served with a writ in an action brought to re- 
 cover the amount of the bills. Judgment in this 
 action was recovered against the master in July, 
 1881. In October, 1881, the sitamship was sold, 
 and the master in November, 1882, instituted an 
 action of disbursements against her and herfreight. 
 The pui chasers appeared and put in bail. At the 
 hearing of the action the judgment recovered 
 against the Plaintiff in August, 1881, remained 
 still in force and unsatisfied, and the Plaintiff 
 claimed to recover as a disbursement the amount 
 for wliich ho was liable under it : — Held, that the 
 liability of the Plaintiff to satisfy the judgment 
 against him must be conaidei'ed as a disbursement 
 in respect of which a maritime lien existed under 
 the 10th section of the Admiralty Court Act, 
 1861 : — Held, also, that the right to enforce such 
 
 V. SHIP— MAEITIME 'LIE'S— continued. 
 
 lien had not been lost by any want of reasonable 
 diligence on the part of the Plaintiff, and that his 
 claim must be pronounced for. The "Faibpokt" 
 
 [8 P. D. 4» 
 
 5. Material Men — 'Wages — Priority — 
 
 Lien — Costs.] When a fund, by a sale of a ship, 
 is placed in Court by one set of claimants, so as 
 to be available for other claimants, the former are 
 entitled to their costs up to and inclusive of the 
 sale, though they do not rank first in respect of 
 their actual claim. — Mariners have priority of 
 wages over persons with a possessory common 
 law 1 ien up to the time of the beginning of such 
 lien, and they are entitled to subsistence money 
 from the time they leave the ship to the time they 
 retui-n home : this and the expenses of the joumey 
 home, and the costs of the action, rank with their 
 prior wages. The " Immacolata Coxoezione " 
 
 [9 P. D. 3T 
 
 6. Necessaries — Artificer's Lien on Ship 
 
 — Contract to talce Bills in Payment — Possession 
 — Negotiation of Acceptance.] Engineers con- 
 tracted with the debtor, the owner of a barge, to 
 supply steam machinery to the vessel, at the 
 docks of a dock company, for the price of £1050, 
 to be paid by approved bills ; one at three 
 months for £260 when the boiler and engine 
 should be placed in the vessel, one at three 
 months for £260, and one at six months for £530, 
 when the vessel should have made a trial trip. 
 The vessel having been taken to the docks, was 
 there entered in the name of one of the engineers ; 
 and whilst shipwrights and other agents of the 
 debtor were occasionally or constantly on board, 
 the vessel remained in the possession of the 
 engineers till the boat was ready to make a trial 
 trip. In the interim the engineers had been paid 
 £360, partly in cash, and partly by tlie debtor's 
 acceptance, whicli they discounted. On the day 
 appointed for the trial trip the debtor filed a 
 liquidation petition, and a receiver took posses- 
 sion of the vessel. A few days afterwards th& 
 debtor's acceptance was dishonoured : — Held^ 
 that the lien of the engineers for the unpaid price 
 for the machinery and their labour was not 
 affected by their having agreed to take bills in 
 payment, nor by the nature of the possession, nor 
 by their having discounted the debtor's accept- 
 ance. Ex parte Willocghbt. In re Westlake 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 604 
 
 7. ■ Necessaries — Vice-Admiraliy Juris- 
 diction— 2G A- 27 Vict. c. 24, s. 10, sub-s. 10.] 
 No maritime lien attaches to a ship in respect of 
 coals or other necessaries supplied to it. — Vice- 
 Admiralty Courts have not (apart from statute) 
 more than the ordinary Admiralty jurisdiction, 
 i.e., as it existed befoie 3 & 4 Yict. c. 65, enlarged 
 it. The Vice-Admiralty Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict, 
 c. 24), s. 10, sub-s. 10, does not create a maritime 
 lien with respect to necessaiies supplied within 
 the possession. Laws v. Smiih. The " Eio Tinto " 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 356 
 
 VI. SHIP— MASTER. 
 
 1. ■ • Sale — 'n'reck — Necessity.] On the 
 
 19th of April an Austrian sliip with a valuable 
 cargo on board ran upoii a rock on the eastern 
 side of Algoa Bay, distant fifty miles by sea 
 and about eighty by land from Port Elizabeth. 
 
( 1489 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1490 ) 
 
 VI. SHIP— MASTEE— conMjMiei. 
 
 The Austrian coqsuI at Port Elizabeth came to 
 the spot, and there being no hope of getting the 
 vessel off, he advised the master to sell her with 
 the cargo. The master accordingly advertised 
 the ship and cargo for sale, and they were sold in 
 one lot by auction on the 30th of April for £9500, 
 after » brisk competition. The purchaser got 
 some part of the cargo out of the wreck, but on 
 the 19th of June the ship went to pieces with the 
 rest of the cargo on hoard. The owners of the 
 cargo having abandoned it to the underwriters as a 
 total loss, the underwriters iiled their bill to have 
 the goods which had been brought to land de- 
 livered to them as not having been effectually 
 sold. The master had not gone to Port Elizabeth, 
 nor endeavoured to procure funds to enable him 
 to save the cargo ; nor had he made any effort to 
 induce any persons to undertake the salvage of 
 the cargo. Several witnesses at Port Elizabeth 
 deposed tliat in their opinion no person could 
 have been induced to undertake the salvage ; 
 others gave their opinion that offers to save the 
 cargo could have been obtained if a large per- 
 centage of tlie net proceeds had been offered. 
 There was a good deal of evidence to shew that, 
 in the opinion of persons on the spot, the course 
 which had been adopted of selling ihe wreck and 
 cargo was the most advisable one in the interest 
 of all parties concerned : — Meld, by the Court of 
 Appeal (affirming the decision of the Master of 
 the EoUs), that no such necessity was proved to 
 have existed as would make the juaster the agent 
 of the owners of the cargo to effect a sale ; that 
 the sale was void; and that the Plaintiffs were 
 entitled to tbe cargo saved, subject to a proper 
 allowance for salvage and other expenses. At- 
 lantic Mutual Iksueanoe Company v. Huth 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 474 
 
 2. Was^s— Misconduct — Mortgage^ A 
 
 mortgagee took possession of a ship by putting a 
 man on board and giving notice to the master. The 
 latter, by order of the mortgagor, took the vessel 
 to sea with the man in possession on board. In 
 an action by the master for wages, and for com- 
 pensation for wrongful dismissal, the registrar 
 awarded him a sum as compensation, being the 
 amount of wages payable for two months after 
 the mortgagee took possession : — IIeld,on appeal, 
 that the master had been guilty of misconduct in 
 taking the vessel to sea, and could not as against 
 the mortgagee be properly awarded any sum as 
 compensation for %\ rongful dismissal. The "Faik- 
 POKT " - 10 P. D. 13 
 
 VII. SHIP— MEECHANT SHIPPING ACTS. 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. c. 55 {the Merchant Ship- 
 ping Expenses Act, 1882), repeals 40 & 41 Vict, 
 c. 44, amends the Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 
 and 1876 and certain other enactments, provides 
 for the adjustment of the receipts and expenditure 
 under the Merchant Shipping Acts hetween the 
 Mercantile Marine Fund and moneys provided by 
 Parliament, and also amends the law with respect 
 to Expenses of Prosecutions for Offences committed 
 at Sea. 
 
 Colonial Courts of Inquiry.] The Act 45 & 46 
 Vict. c. 76, amends the Merchant Shipping Acts, 
 1854 to 1880, with respect to inquiries held in 
 British possessions abroad into charges of incom- 
 
 VII. SHIP — MEECHANT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued, 
 petency or misconduct on the part of masters, 
 mates, or engineers of ships, or into shipwrecks or 
 other casualties afccting ships. 
 
 Act of 1883.]" The Act 46 & 47 Vict. c. 41, 
 {Merchant Shipping Fishing Boats Act, 1883) 
 amends the Merchant Shipping Acts, 1854 to 1880, 
 with respect to fishing vessels and apprenticeship 
 to the sea fishing service and otherwise. 
 
 Part I. Fishing Boats and the Sea Fishins 
 Service. 
 
 Sect. 3. Application of first part of this Act, and- 
 definitions. 
 
 Apprenticeship, to -the Sea Fishing Service, and 
 agreements with boys under 16 with respect to such 
 service. 
 
 Sect. 4. Apprenticeship indentures and agree- 
 ments with boys under 16 how to be entered into. 
 
 Sect. 5. Indentures of apprenticeship and agree- 
 ments to contain provisions set forth in 2nd Schedule, 
 otherwise to be void. 
 
 Sect. 6. Limits of age for lads employed in sea. 
 
 Sect. 7. Penalty on persons receiving money for 
 binding apprentice. 
 
 Sect. 8. Indentures and agreements with boys to 
 be void if not entered into before a superintendent 
 of mercantile marine. 
 
 Sect. 9. Penalty for talcing boy to sea under void 
 indenture or agreement, and pmvers of superinten- 
 dent in such case. 
 
 Sect. 10. Power of mercantile marine superinten- 
 dents to enforce indentures or agreements. 
 
 Sect. 11. Shipping masters to assist in binding 
 apprentices and malcing agreements, and to be 
 under the control of the Board of Trade. 
 
 Sect. 12. Guardian and overseers of the poor to 
 apprentice in conformity with this Act. 
 
 ASKEEMENTS WITH SeAMEN. 
 
 Sect. 13. Agreements to be made with seamen 
 containing certain particulars, 
 
 Sect. 14. Manner of entering into agreements. 
 
 Sect. 15. Special engagements may be made for 
 several fishing boats belonging to the same owners, 
 and owners may enter into agreem,ents instead of 
 
 Sect. 16. Fishing boats making sliort voyages 
 may have running agree/meats. 
 
 Sect. 17. Engagement and discharge of seamen- 
 pending a running agreement. 
 
 Sect- 18. Definition of '^ voyage" of afishingboaf. 
 
 Sect. 19. Reports of u fishing boat's crew on a 
 voyage to be made. 
 
 Sect. 20. Penalty for shipping seamen without 
 agreement duly executed. 
 
 Sect. 21. Changes in crew to be reported. 
 
 Sect. 22. Alterations, &e., in agreements to be 
 void unless attested. 
 
 Sect. 23. Penalty for falsifying or delivering, 
 false copy of an agreement. 
 
 Wages and Disohakges of Seamen. 
 
 Sect. 24. Skipper to deliver account of wages. 
 
 Sect. 25. Seamen to have inspection of owner's 
 accounts and books relating to catch. 
 
 Sect. 26. Skipper to give seamen certificate of 
 discharge. 
 
( 14P1 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1492 ) 
 
 VII. SHIP — MEECHAKT SHIPPING ACTS— 
 
 c(»itinued. 
 
 Sect. 27. Seamen discharged wiiliout fault to re- 
 cover compensation in same manner as wages. 
 
 Discipline. 
 
 Sect. 28, Offences of seamen and a23prentices, 
 and tJieir punishments. Desertion. Neglect or rC' 
 Jusal to join or proceed to sea, and absence with- 
 out leave. Quitting boat before it is in security. 
 Disobedience and neglect of duty. Continuous 
 disobedience or neglect of duty. Assaults. Com- 
 binations to disobey or neglect duty. Damage to 
 ioat, or stores, or cargo, and embezzlement. 
 ■Smuggling. 
 
 Sect. 29. Questions of forfeiture may be decided 
 in suits for wages 
 
 Sect. 30. Sow things forfeited are to be disposed 
 ■of. 
 
 Sect. 31. Deserters and others may be sent back 
 
 • to their boats. 
 
 Sect. 32. Sow seaman and apprentices deserting, 
 . or neglecting or refusing to join or proceed to sea, 
 or absent without leave, or guilty of disobedience en- 
 ineglect of duty, may be dealt with. 
 
 Sect. 33. Notice by seaman that he intends to 
 ■absent himself from his ship and effect thereof. 
 
 Sect. 34. Sow wages are to accrue and to be 
 <ialculated. Forfeiture of iDliole if voyage oi' trip 
 shorter than the period of forfeiture. 
 
 Sect. o5. Facilities for proving desertion so far 
 ■■as concerns forfeiture of vmges. 
 
 •Oektiticates to Skippers and Second Hands. 
 
 Sect. 36. Certificates for fishing boats heretofore 
 -granted to be deemed to hare been granted under 
 17 (fc 18 Vict. c. 104 (Part III). 
 
 Sect. 37. Power of Board of Trade to issue cer- 
 
 ■ iificates for fishing boats. 
 
 Sect. 38. Availability of certificates referred to 
 -in this Act. 
 
 Sect. 39. Provisions in the Mercliant Shipping 
 -Acts to apxjly to certificates referred to in this Act. 
 
 Sect. 40. Certificates of service to be given to cer- 
 tain skippers offishiruj boats. 
 
 Sect. 41. Soardof Trade may establish aregisier 
 .of certificates. Copy or extract from register or 
 register of shipping at any port to be evidence. 
 
 Sect. 42. No fishing boat to proceed to sea with- 
 out duly certified skipper and penalty for so doing. 
 
 Enactments relating to Deaths, Injuries, 
 Punishments, Ill-Teeatment and Casualties. 
 
 Sect. 43. Skipper of fishing boat to record cases 
 
 • of death, injury, or ill-treatment. 
 
 Sect. 44. Skippers to make special reports of 
 death injuries, ill-treatment, punishment, and 
 
 ■ casualties. 
 
 Sect. 45. Inquiry into cause of death, injury, ill- 
 
 ■ treatment, punishment, or casualty. 
 
 -Disputes between SKirrEEs ob Owner^ and 
 Seamen. 
 
 Sect. 46. Superintendent of Mercantile Marine 
 Office to decide disputes between seamen and owners 
 and masters. 
 
 Sect. 47. Masters and others to produce documents 
 .to superintendent of Mercantile Marine Office, and 
 do give evidence. 
 
 VII. SHIP — MEECHAHT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 
 Part II. Miscellaneous. 
 
 Sect. 48. Seamen's lodging-houses. 
 
 Sect. 49. Declaration of the meaning of 17 & 18 
 Vict. c. 104, s. 109. 
 
 Sect. 50. Incorporation of Fart I. of 17 & 18 
 Vict. c. 104. 
 
 Sect. 51. Legal proceedings in cases of offences. 
 
 Sect. 52. Fishing tenders to be traivlers. 
 
 Sect. 53. Vessels engaged in certain fisheries to 
 be deemed to be foreign going ships. 
 
 Sect. 54, 17 4 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 243, and s. 35 of 
 this Act not to take away remedy for breach of 
 contract. 
 
 Sect. 55. Mepieal of enactments and saving. 
 
 Passenger Ships.] Notice by Board of Trade of 
 9th June, 1882, under the Passengers Act, 1855, 
 and the Passengers Act Amendment Act, 1863, 
 varying the declared length of voyage to certain 
 places for certain passenger ships 
 
 [L. 6., 1882, p. 2739 
 Passengers Act, 1885, s. 71, new form of pas- 
 senger^s contract ticket prescribed by Board of 
 Trade. Order of Vdth July, 1883 
 
 [L. G., 1883, p. 3588 
 
 Shanghai.] Order in Council of 22nd May, 
 
 1883, providing for the appointment of a Registrar 
 
 for Shanghai, a port of registry under the Merchant 
 
 Shipping Act, 1873 (36 * 37 Vict.) c. 85, s. 29 
 
 [L. G., 1883, p. 2790 
 Unlawfully entcvingForeign Ship within British 
 Jurisdiction.] The following Orders in Council 
 apply sect. 5 of the Act 43 & 44 Vict. c. 16 {Mer- 
 chant Seamen Payment of Wages and Bating Act, 
 ]SSO), to tlte foreign sltipis hereinafter mentioned. 
 This section provides that v:here a ship is about 
 to arrive, is arriving, or has arrived at the end of 
 her voyage every person not being in Ser Majesty^ s 
 service, or not being duly authorized toho : — 
 (a.) Goes on board the ship ivithoui the permission 
 of the master before the seamen luufulhj 
 leave the ship at the end of their engage- 
 ment or are discharged (whichever- last 
 happens) or, 
 (h.) Being on hoard the ship remains there after 
 being warned to leave by the inaster, or by 
 a pfolice officer, or by any officer of the 
 Board of Trade or of the Customs, shall 
 for every such offence be liable on summary 
 conviction to a fine not exceeding] t-wenty 
 p>ounds, or at the discretion of the Court to 
 imprisonment for any term iwt exceeding 
 six months, and the master of the ship or 
 any officer of the Board of Trade may take 
 liini info custody, ami deliver him up forth- 
 wiih to a constable to be taken before a 
 Court or magistrate capable of tailing 
 cogni~ance of the offence and dealt with 
 according to lau- ; 
 And is furtlnr provided, sect. 6, that whenever it 
 is made ^> appear that any foreign country has 
 provided that unauthorized persons going on board 
 of British ships tntdcr similar circumstances shall 
 be subject to similar 2:)rovisions as above; and that 
 such foreign country is desirous ihcd the said 
 section shall apply to ships of such foreign country 
 within British jurisdiction, an Order in Council 
 may declare that the 2>rovisions of sect. 5 shall 
 
( U93 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1494 ) 
 
 "Vn. SHIP — MEBCHAHT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 continued. 
 
 • apply to the ships of such foreign country as if they 
 were British ships. 
 
 The Order in Council of October Ylth, 1884, 
 
 ■ applies sect. 5 of this Act to the ships of Austro- 
 Mungary - - 1. G., 1884, p. 4580 
 
 ' Tlie Order in, Council of May 22nd, 1883, applies 
 the same section to American ships L. G., 1883, 
 
 [p. Z789 
 The Order in Council of Nov. 30th, 1882, applies 
 
 ■ tlie same section to German ships L. G., 1888, 
 
 [p. 6139 
 , The Order in Council of March 2nd, 1881, 
 
 • applies the same section to ships of Italy 
 
 [L. G., 1881, p. 990 
 The Order in Council of Oct. 25th, 1881, applies 
 . the same section to Sweden and Norway 
 
 [L. G., 1881, p. 6294 
 
 Measurement of Tonnage.] The following 
 
 Orders in Council apply the rules made under 
 
 .25 & 26 Vict. c. 63 (tlie Merchant Shipping Act 
 
 Amendinent Act, 1862), s. 60, to the merchant ships 
 
 • of tlie foreign countries hereinafter mentioned. 
 
 Order in Council of 19th March, 1883, relative 
 io the measurement of the tonnage of merchant 
 ships of the United States of America I. G., 1883, 
 
 [p. 1681 
 
 Order in Council of 11th Oct., 1884, relative to 
 the measurement of the tonnage of Belgian mer- 
 
 ■ chant ships - — - 1. G., 1884, p. 4680 
 
 Order in Council of 20th April, 1883, relative 
 
 - to the measurement of the tonnage of merchant 
 
 ships of Denmark - - L. G., 1883, p. 2164 
 
 Oi-der in Council of lith Feb., 1883, relative to 
 the measurement of the tonnage of steam ships of 
 Italy - - - I. G., 1883, p. 910 
 
 Order in Council of 21th January, 1885, relative 
 
 to the measurement of tlie tohnage of Japanese 
 
 -ships- - - I. G., 1885, p. 473 
 
 Order in Council of 2nd Feb., 1884, relative to 
 the measurement of the tonnage of merchant sailing 
 
 ■ ships of the United Kingdom of Norway 
 
 [I. G., 1884, p. 627 
 Order in Council of 18th Aug., 1882, relative to 
 the measurement of tlie tonnage of Swedish mer- 
 chant ships - L, G., 1882, p. 3906 
 Certificate of Competency — Colonial.] Orders 
 in Council made in pursuance of'A2 & 33 Vict, ell 
 
 ■ (the Merchant Shipping (Colonial) Act, 1869), s. 8, 
 which enacts, thai where the Legislature of any 
 British possession provides for the examination of 
 and grant of certificates of competency to persons 
 intending to act as masters, mates, or engineers on 
 hoard British ships, and the Board of Trade 
 reports to Her Majesty that they are satisfied that 
 
 ■ the examinatimis are so conducted as to be equally 
 efficient as the examinatimis for the same purpose 
 in the United Kingdom tinder the Acts relating to 
 inerchant shipping, and that the certificates are 
 
 ■ granted, on such principles as to shew the like quali- 
 , fiaations and competency as those granted under the 
 
 said Acts, and are liable to be forfeited for the like 
 reasons, and in tlie like manner, it shall be lawful 
 . for Her Majesty by Order in Council, — 
 
 1. To declare that the said certificates shall be of 
 the same force as if they had been granted under 
 the said Acts. 
 
 2.. To declare that all or any of the provisions of 
 
 ■ tlie said Acts which relate to certificates of compe- 
 
 VII. SHIP — MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued, 
 tency granted under those Acts shall apply (o the 
 certificates referred to in the said Order. 
 
 3. To impose such conditiotis and to make such 
 regulations with respect to the said certificates and 
 to the use, issue, deUvery, cancellation, and suspen- 
 sion thereof as to Her Majesty may seem fit, and to 
 impose penalties not exceeding fifty pounds for the 
 breach of such conditions and regulations. 
 
 The Order in Council of June 29ft, 1882, de- 
 clares the efficiency, in the different degrees therein 
 stated, of certificates of competency of the following 
 British possessions : — 
 
 Canada. 
 
 Malta and its Dependencies. 
 
 Victoria. 
 
 New Zealand. 
 
 New South Wales. 
 
 South Austrcdia. 
 
 Tasmania. 
 
 Bengal. 
 
 Newfoundland. . 
 
 Bombay. 
 
 Queensland. I. G., 1882, p. 3085 
 
 The Order in Council of Dec. 31st, 1883, de- 
 clares with regard to the efficiency of certificates of 
 competency granted by Hong Kong 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 186 
 Certificate of Survey — Colonial.] Orders in 
 Council made in pursuance of 39 i6-40 Vict, c. 80, 
 (the Merchant Shipping Act, 18T6), s. 17, which en- 
 acts that, when the legislature of any British pos- 
 session provides for the survey of and grant of 
 certificates for passenger steamers, and the Board 
 of Trade report to Her Majesty that tliey are satis- 
 fied that the certificates are to tlie lilce effect, and 
 are granted after alike survey, and in such manner 
 as to be equally efficient with tlie certificates granted 
 for the same purpose in tlie United Kingdom under 
 the Acts relating to merchant shipping, it shall be 
 lawful for Her Majesty by Order in Council to de- 
 clare the efficiency of such certificates, or impose 
 conditions on the same, 
 
 Order in Council of 26th June, 1884, referring 
 to certificates of survey granted by Bombay 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 2994 
 
 Ditto of lltli October, 1884, as to same granted 
 
 by Bengal - - - [I. G., 1884,_p. 4679 
 
 Lightliouses.] Order in Council of 12th Dec, 
 
 1885, under 17 & 18 Vict. o. 104, s. 410, that every 
 
 ship, British or foreign, deriving benefit from the 
 
 light vessel at Skulmartin Beef, County Down, shall 
 
 pay certain tolls to the officers authorized in tlitd 
 
 behalf - - L. G., 1885, p. 6039 
 
 Order in Council of 12th Dec, 1885, under 
 
 17 (1- 18- Vict, c 104, s. 410, that every ship, British 
 or foreign, deriving benefit from the light vessel off 
 the Middle Cross Sand, near' Yarmouth, shall pay 
 certain tolls to Corporation of Trinity House 
 
 [L. G., 1886, p. 6039 
 Order in Council of 12th, Dec. 1885, umder 
 
 18 (fc 19 Vict. c. 91, s. 2, that tolls shall cease to he 
 levied on ships for the lighthouse on Cape Race, 
 Colony of Newfoundland L. G., 1885, p,'6129 
 
 1. Detention of British Ship—" Unfit to 
 
 proceed to Sea without serious Danger to Human 
 Life "— " Reasonable and Probable Cause for Pro- 
 visional Detention of Ship " — Merchant Shipping 
 
( 1495 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1496 ) 
 
 YII. SHIP — MERCHANT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 Act, 1876 (39 * 40 Vict. c. 80), ss. 6, 10.] The 
 Plaintiff was the owner of a British ship named 
 the L., which was at the British port of S., and 
 was intended to be employed in the foreign cattle 
 trade. Certain surveyors of the Board of Trade 
 reported in doubtful terms that owing to her un- 
 usual proportions the L. was an unsafe sljip. The 
 Board of Trade thereupon ordered the L. to be 
 provisionally detained. A court of survey was 
 held as to the condition of the L., and the mem- 
 bers thereof reported that tlie L. was not unsafe, 
 and that she ouglit not to have been detained. 
 The L. was accordingly released. The Plaintiif 
 then brought an action against the secretary of 
 the Board of Trade to recover compensation for 
 the loss to him by reason of the provisional de- 
 ' tention. At the trial it was admitted that tlie L. 
 was a safe ship. The Judge in substance directed 
 the jury to consider whether it was reasonable in 
 the Board of Trade to detain the L. for survey 
 without a direct affirmation by their surveyors that 
 in their opinion she was' unsafe : — Held, a mis- 
 direction, for the proper question to be left to the 
 jury was whether the facts with regard to the L. 
 as she lay at S., which would have been apparent 
 to a person of ordinary skill on examining iier and 
 inquiring about her, would have given him reason- 
 able and probable cause to suspect her safety and 
 to detain her for survey and inquiry. Thompson 
 V. Fakbek - - - 9 ft. B. D. 372 
 
 2. ■ Duty of Master — Investigation — Ship- 
 
 ping Casualty — Appeal — Merchant Shipping Act, 
 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104), ss. 242, 432—" Wrong- 
 ful act or default " — Fresh Evidence on Appeal — 
 
 Costs.'] On a shipping casualty appeal where it 
 is desired to adduced fresh evidence at the hear- 
 ing of the appeal, application for leave to do so 
 should be made to the Court of Appeal by motion 
 prior to the hearing of the appeal. — An error of 
 judgment on the jDart of the master of a vessel at 
 a moment of great difficulty and danger does not 
 amount to a wrongful act or default, within the 
 meaning of the 242ud section of the Merchant 
 Shipping Act, 1854, so as to justify the suspension 
 or cancellation of the master's certificate. — On a 
 successful appeal the Board of Trade having ap- 
 peared in support of the decision appealed from 
 were directed to pay the costs of the appeal. T'he 
 " Famenoth " 7 P. D. 207 
 
 3. ■ • Duty of Owner — Engaging or supply- 
 ing Seamen or Apprentices — Merchant Shipping 
 Act, 1854 (17 * 18 Vict. c. 104), s. 147, sub-s. 1.] 
 By sect. 147, sub-sect. 1, of the Merchant Ship- 
 ping Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. e. 104), if any per- 
 son not licensed by the Board of Trade other than 
 " the owner or master or mate of a ship, or some 
 person who is bona fide the servant and in the 
 constant employ of the owner, or a shipping 
 master duly appointed as aforesaid, engages or 
 supplies any seaman or apprentice to be entered 
 on board any ship in the United Kingdom," he 
 incurs a penalty. — Tlie Respondent having bona 
 fide contracted to purchase one sixty-fourth share 
 in a British ship from P., who, though not regis- 
 tered as the owner, had the full possession and 
 control of the ship under a contract to purchase 
 the sixty-four shares, supplied an apprentice to P., 
 
 VII. SHIP — MEECHANT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 who engaged the apprentice for the ship : — Seld,. 
 that the Eespondent was an " owner " within the 
 meaning of the exemption, since though not a 
 registered owner he had a contract enforceable in 
 Equity for the purchase of a share in the .ship. 
 Hughes v. SriHERLAxn - 7 ft. B. D. 160 
 
 4. Duty of Owner — Failure of Cargo- 
 
 Owner to talce Goods— Bill of Lading— Merchant 
 Shipping Amendment Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict, 
 c. 63), s. 67 — Notice] When goods are landed 
 under sub-sect. 6, 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 67, sub- 
 sect. 7, does not apply, for the latter refers only to 
 tlie discharging of cargo overside, and not to the- 
 landing of it for the purposes of assortment on 
 the wharf, and the written notice referred to in 
 sub-sect. 7 applies, therefore, to cases arising- 
 under that sub-section only. — It is the duty of the 
 owner of the goods who receives either a written 
 or verbal notice that he can have them to take them 
 away within a reasonable time, and that whether 
 sub-sect. 6 or 7 applies to the case. — Jfotice to the 
 lightermen employed by the owner of the goods 
 is notice to the owner himself — A ship arrived 
 in dock with a general cargo on the 12th of De- 
 cember, and began to unload on the quay on the- 
 13th. The Plaintiffs (owners of some of the 
 goods) sent a lighterman and barge to receive 
 their portion of the cargo on the 13th. It wa» 
 not then ready. On the 14th the lighterman 
 again attended but could obtain no information. 
 On the 14th the firm of lightermen wrote to the 
 Defendants (the shipowners), stating they had 
 made application for the goods and enclosing a 
 notice requiring twentj'-four hours' notice of the- 
 Defendants' readiness to deliver the goods, and 
 stating that they would not be responsible for 
 any landing charges. On the 15th the landing o-f 
 the cargo was completed, and the lighterman was- 
 that day verbally informed he could have the 
 goods on the morning of the 16th. He did not 
 attend, and the goods were not taken away till 
 the 29th. The Plaintiffs paid the dock charges 
 under protest, and brought an action to recover 
 them back : — Held, that they could not recover 
 them. The " Clan Maodonald " - 8 P. D. 17& 
 
 5. Duty of Owner — In vestigation — Appeal 
 
 — Shipping Casualties Investigations Act, 1879 
 (42 & 43 Vict. V. 72), s. 2.] A shipowner, who 
 has appeared as a party at the hearing of an in- 
 vestigation under the Merchant Shipping Acts 
 into the circumstances attending the loss of a 
 ship owned by him, has no right of appeal, not- 
 withstanding that the tribunal investigating the 
 case has given a decision suspending the certifi- 
 cate of the master of the ship, and condemning 
 the shipowner in costs. — The Wreck Commis- 
 sioner, having been requested to hold an investi- 
 gation into the loss and abandonment of a British 
 ship, found that tlie loss of the ship was due to 
 certain improper ballast taken on board her at an 
 English port having Ijoen converted into mud by 
 mixture with the water made by her during the 
 voyage, and so choking the pumps that they 
 could not be used, whereby the ship foundered, 
 and for these wrongful acts and defaults sus- 
 pended the certificate of the master of the ship 
 for three months. The master appealed. The 
 
( 1497 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1498 ) 
 
 VII. SHIP — MEECHANT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 Probate, Divorce, and Admiralty Division being 
 of opinion tliat the evidence before the Wreck 
 Commissioner established that the master had 
 ■authority from his owner to provide ballast for the 
 vessel without restriction as to the price, and had 
 been aware of the character of the ballast which 
 ■she had taken on board, and that the carrying of 
 such balla.st contributed to her loss, dismissed the 
 appeal with costs. The " Golden Sea" 
 
 [7 P. D. 194 
 
 6. Duty of Owner — Penalty — Action for 
 
 Breach of Statutory Duty — Merchant Shipping 
 Act. 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. a. 104), s. 172— Refusal 
 to give Certifi-cate of discharge to Seaman.'] An 
 action will not lie for the refusal to give to a sea- 
 man the certificate of discharge directed to be 
 given by the 172nd section of the Merchant Ship- 
 ping Act, 1854, the only remedy for such refusal 
 being the penalty provided by that section. Val- 
 LANOE V. Falle - - 13 Q. B. D, 109 
 
 7. Registration of British Ship — Sale by 
 
 Licitation — Traiisfer — Mercliant Shipping Act, 
 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104), ss. 55, 58.] The 
 transfer of a British ship is governed by the ex- 
 press provisions of the Merchant Shipping Acts, 
 which make a clear distinction between the legal 
 estate and mere beneficial interests therein : — Seld, 
 that a sale by licitation of a British ship (or of a 
 share therein) without a conveyance by bill of 
 sale did not create such an interest in the pur- 
 chasers as rendered it compulsory on the Eegis- 
 trar. under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, to 
 register them as owners, and that the Eegistrar 
 was right in refusing so to do, and to erase from 
 his books the inscriptions contained in the register 
 against the ship in the names of the mortgagees. 
 — Held, also, that a purchaser under a judicial 
 sale, of a beneficial interest in a British ship is 
 not entitled tobe registered as owner of it. There 
 is no provision in the Merchant Shipping Acts 
 which authorizes the Eegistrar to erase entries ot 
 mortgages. In case of their having been duly 
 discharged, an entry to that effect may be made 
 under sect. 68 of the Act of 1854. Chasteauneup 
 <v. Oapeyeon 7 App. Cas. 127 
 
 8. Wreck Commissioner — Shipping Casu- 
 alty — Appeal — Shipping Casualties Investigations 
 Act, 1879 (42 * 43 Vict. c. 72), s. 2— Materials 
 on which Appeal heard — Practice — Evidence of 
 Experts not admissible on Questions of Nautical 
 Slcill and Knowledge — Costs.'] Although the 
 Wreck Commissioner, or other authority, holding 
 a formal investigation into a shipping casualty 
 under the Merchant Shipping Acts, must, if he 
 deals with the certificate of a master or certified 
 officer, give his decision in open Court, yet he may, 
 subsequently in his report to the Board of Trade, 
 state reasons for his decision not mentioned by hira 
 at the time when the judgment was delivered. — In 
 appeals under the Shipping Casualties Investiga- 
 tions Act, 1879, the Court of Appeal will not 
 permit witnesses to be called to give evidence 
 on questions of nautical knowledge and skill. — 
 Where, on an appeal under the Shipping Casual- 
 ties Investigations Act, 1879, the decision of the 
 Wreck Commissioner, suspending the certificate 
 of a master, was affirmed, but the Court of Appeal 
 
 VII. SHIP— MEECHANT SHIPPING ACTS — 
 
 continued. 
 recommended that the Board of Trade should 
 shorten the time for which the certificate had 
 been suspended, the parties to the appeal were 
 left to bear their own costs of the appeal. The 
 "Kestebl" - - - 6P, D. 182 
 
 Neglect of seaman to join ship 11 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Ship — Seamen. [225 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION. 
 
 Eegulations poe Peeventinq Collisions at 
 Sea, undee the Meeohant Shipping Act 
 Amendment Act, 1862, 25 & 26 ViOT. o. 6 -i, 
 ss. 57, 58. 
 
 Order in Council of 26& August. 1881, suspends 
 until 1st September, 1882, article 10 of the Regula- 
 tions of 1879, for preventing collisions at sea (for 
 ships of countries mentioned in the 2nd Schedule of 
 the Regulations, whether within British jurisdiction 
 or nof), and continuesin force in licit thereof articled 
 of the Regulations of 1863 - 1. G., 1881, p. 4531 
 
 Order in Council of 18th August, 1882, extends 
 the above until 1st September, 1883 
 
 [L. G., 1882, p. 3907 
 
 Order in Council of 23rd August, 1883, further 
 extends the above until 1st March, 1884 
 
 [L. G., 1883, p. 4211 
 
 Ditto 2nd February, 3884, further extends to 
 1st September, 1884 - I. G., 1884, p. 682 
 
 Order in Council of 11th August, 1884, substi- 
 tutes the following regulations in lieu of the Regula- 
 tions of 1 879, so far as regards British ships and 
 boats, and to take effect from 1st Septernber, 1884 
 
 Art. 1 . In the following rules every steamship 
 which is under sail and not under steam is to be 
 considered a sailing ship; and every steamship 
 which is under steam, whether under sail or not, is 
 to be considered a ship under steam. 
 
 Rules concerning Lights. 
 Art. 2. The lights mentioned in the following 
 
 Articles, numbered 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and no 
 
 others, shall be carried in all weathers, from sunset 
 
 to sunrise. 
 
 Art. 3. A seagoing steamship when under way 
 
 shall carry — ■ 
 
 (a.) On or in front of the forem,ast, at a height 
 above the hull of not less than 2() feet, and if 
 the breadth of tlie ship exceeds 20 feet then 
 at a lieight above the hull not less than such 
 breadth, a bright white light, so constructed 
 as to show an uniform and unbi-oken light 
 over an arc of the lim-izon of 20 points of 
 the compass, so fixed as to throw the light 
 10 points on each side of the ship, viz., 
 from right ahead to tioo' points abaft the 
 beam on either side, and of such a charac- 
 ter as to be visible on a dark night, with a 
 clear atmosphere, at a distance of at least 
 five miles. 
 (b.) On the starboard side a green light so con- 
 structed as to shew an uniform and un- 
 broken light over an arc of tlie horizon of 
 10 points of the com/pass, so fixed as to 
 throw the light from right ahead to two 
 points abaft the beam on the starboard side, 
 and of such a character as to be visible on a 
 
( 1499 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1500 ) 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— con<f««ed. 
 
 darli night, with a clear atmosphere, at a 
 distance of at least two miles. 
 (o.) On the port side a red light, so constructed 
 as to shew an uniform and unbroken light 
 over an arc of the horizon 0/ 10 points of 
 the compass, so fixed as to throw the light 
 from right ahead to two points abaft the 
 beam on the port side, and of such a charac- 
 ter as to be visible on a darh night, with a 
 clear atmosphere, at a distance of at least 
 two miles. 
 (d.) The said green and red side lights shall he 
 fitted with inboard screens projecting at 
 least i feet forward from the light, so as to 
 prevent these lights from being seen across 
 the how. 
 Art. 4. A steamship, when towing another ship, 
 shall, in addition to her side lights, carry two 
 bright white lights in a vertical line one over the 
 other, not less than 3 feet apart, so as to distin- 
 guish her from other steamships. Each of these 
 lights shall he of the same construction and charac- 
 ter, and shall be carried in the sam^ position, as 
 the white light which other steamships are rerjidred 
 to carry. 
 
 Art. 5 (a.) A ship, whether a steamship or a 
 sailing ship, which from any accident is not under 
 command, shall at night carry, in the same position 
 as the ivhite light lohich steamships are required 
 to carry, and, if a steamship, in place of that light, 
 three red lights in globular lanterns, each not less 
 than 10 inches in diameter, in a vertical line one 
 over the other, not less than three feet apart, and of 
 such a character as to be visible on a dark night 
 loith a clear atmosphere at a distance of at least 
 two miles; and shall by day carry in a vertical 
 line one over the other, not less than 3 feet apart, 
 ■in front of but not lower than her foremast head, 
 three black balls or sliapes, each 2 feet in diameter. 
 (b.) A ship, %vhether a steamship or a sailing 
 ship, empJoyed in laying or in picking up a tele- 
 graph cable, shall at night carry in the same position 
 as the lohite light which steamsliiijs are required to 
 carry, and, if a steamship, in place of that light, 
 three lights in globular lanterns each not less than 
 10 incites in diameter, in a vertical line over one 
 another, not less than 6 feet apart ; the highest and 
 lowest of these lights shall he red, and the middle 
 light shall be irhite, and they shall he of such a 
 character that the red lights shall be visible at the 
 same distance as the lohite light. By day she shall 
 carry in a vertical line one over the other not less 
 than six feet apart, in front of but not lower than 
 her foremast head, three shapes not less than 2 feet 
 in diameter, of which the top and bottom shall he 
 globular in shape and red in colour, and the middle 
 one diamond in shape and white. 
 
 (c.) The shi23s referred to in this Article, lohen 
 not making any way through the water, shall not 
 carry the side lights, hut when making ivay shall 
 carry them. 
 
 (d.) The lights and sluqjes required to he shewn 
 by this Article are to be taken hy other ships as 
 signals that the ship shelving them is not under 
 command, and cannot therefore get out of the loay. 
 The signals to be made by ships in distress and re- 
 quiring assistance are contained, in Article 27. 
 
 Art. 6. A sailing ship under way, orheing towed, 
 shall carry the same lights as are pivvided by 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— conifewe^. 
 
 Article 3 for a steamship under way, with the ex- 
 ception of the white light, lohich slie shall never- 
 carry. 
 
 Art. 7. Wlienever, as in the case of small vessels 
 duiing had iveather, the green and red side lights 
 cannot be fixed, these lights shall he kept on deck, 
 on their respective sides of the vessel, ready for use ,- 
 and shcdl, on the approach of or to other vessels, he 
 exhibited on their respective sides in sufficient time 
 to prevent collision, in such manner as to make 
 them most visible, and so that the green light shall 
 not be seen on the port side noj' the red light on the 
 starboard side. 
 
 To make the use of these portable lights more 
 certain and easy, the lanterns containing them 
 shcdl each be painted outside with the colour of the 
 light they respectively contain, and shall he pro- 
 vided with proper screens. 
 
 Art. 8. A ship, whether a steamship or a sailing- 
 ship, when at anchm; shcdl carry, where it can best 
 be seen, but at a height not exceeding W feet above 
 the hull, a white light, in a globular lantern of not 
 less than 8 inches in diameter, and so constructed' 
 as to slieio a clear uniform and unbroken light 
 visible cdl round the horizon, at a distance of at 
 least one mile. 
 
 Art. 9. A pilot vessel, when engaged on Tier 
 station on pilotage duty, shall not carry the lights. 
 required for other vessels, hut shall carry a white 
 light at the masthead, rinihle all round the horizon,, 
 and shall cdso exhibit a flare-up light or flare-up 
 lights at short intervals, which shcdl never exceed' 
 Ufteen minutes. 
 
 A pilot vessel, when not engaged on her station 
 on pilotage duty, shall carry lights similar to those 
 of other ships. 
 
 Art. 10. Open boats and fishing vessels of less 
 than 20 tons net registered tonnage, when under way 
 and when not having their nets, trawls, dredges, 
 or lines in the irater, shall not he obliged to carryi 
 the coloured side lights ; but every such boat and 
 vessel shall in lieu thereof have ready at hand »■ 
 lantern ivith a green glass on the one side and a 
 red glass on the other side, and on approaching tO' 
 or being approached hy another vessel such lantern 
 shall be exhibited in sufficient time to prevent colli- 
 sion, so that the green light shall not be seen on the 
 port side nor the red light on the starboard side. 
 
 The following portion of this article applies only 
 to fishing vessels and boats lohen in the sea off the 
 coast of Europe lying north of Cape Finisterre :^— 
 (a.) All fishing vessels arid fishhig boats of 20' 
 tons net registered tonnage, or upwards, 
 when under way and when not required hy 
 the following regulations in th is article to- 
 carry and shew the lights therein named, 
 shall carry and shew the same lights as 
 other vessels under toay. 
 (b.) All vessels when engaged in fishing with 
 drift nets shall exhibit two white lights 
 from any part of the vessel where they can 
 be best see«. Such lights shall he placed so' 
 that the vertical distance between them 
 shall be not less than 6 feet and not more 
 than 10 feet ; and so that the horizontal 
 distance between them measured in a line 
 with the keel of the vessel shall be not less 
 than 5 feet and not more than 10 feet. The 
 loioer of these ttco lights shall be the more 
 
( 1501 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1502 ) 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATIOH— COTiimttecZ. 
 
 forward, and hoth of them slmll he of such 
 a character, and contained in lanterns of 
 such construction as to shew all round the 
 horizon, on a darh night with a clear 
 atmosphere, for a distance of not less than 
 three miles. 
 
 (c.) A vessel employed in line fishing tvith her 
 lines out shall carry the same lights as a 
 vessel when engaged in fishing with drift 
 nets. 
 
 (d.) If a vessel when fishing becomes stationary 
 in consequence of her gear getting fast to a 
 rock or other c^structlon, she shall shew 
 the light and make the fog signal for a 
 vessel at anclior. 
 
 (e.) Fishing vessels and open hoats may at any 
 time use afiare-up in addition to the lights 
 which they are hy this article required to 
 carry and shew. All flare-up lights ex- 
 hibited by a vessel when trawling, dredging, 
 or fishing with any hind of drag net shall 
 be shewn at the after part of the vessel, 
 eoxepting that, if the vessel is hanging by 
 the stern to her trawl, dredge, or drag net, 
 they shall be exhibited from the bow. 
 
 (f.) Eoery fishing vessel and every open boat 
 when at anchor between sunset and sunrise 
 shall exhibit a lohite light visible all round 
 the horizon at a distance of at least one 
 mile. 
 
 (g.) In fog, mist, or falling siiow, a drift net 
 vessel attached to her nets and a vessel 
 when trawling, dredging, or fishing with 
 any hind of drag net, and a vessel em- 
 ployed in line fishing with her lines out, 
 shall at intervals of not more than two 
 minutes mahe a blast with her fog horn 
 and ring her bell alternately. 
 
 Art. 11. A ship which is being overtalcen hy 
 another shall shew from her stern to such last- 
 mentioned ship a white light or a flare-iip light. 
 
 Sound Signals for Fog, &o. 
 Ah. 12. A steamship shall be provided with a 
 steam whistle or other efficient steam sound signal, 
 so placed that the sound may not be intercepted by 
 any obstructions, and with an efficient fog horn to 
 be sounded by a bellows or other mechanical means, 
 and also with an efficient bell.* A sailing ship 
 shall he provided with a similar fog horn and bell. 
 In fog, mist, or falling snoio, whether by day or 
 night, the signals described in this article shall be 
 used as follows ; that is to say, — 
 (a.) A steamship under way shall mahe with 
 her steam whistle, or other steam sound 
 signal, at intervals of not more than two 
 minutes, a prolonged blast. 
 (b.) A sailing ship under way shall mahe with 
 her fog horn, at intervals of not more than 
 two minutes, when on the starboard taolc 
 one blast, when on the port taclc two blasts 
 in succession, and when with the wind 
 abaft the beam three blasts in succession. 
 (?..) A steamship and a sailing ship, lohen not 
 under way, shall at intervals of not more 
 than two minutes I'ing the bell. 
 
 ' * Tnall cases where the regulati(ms require a hell to be 
 •used, a d/ntm will 6e substituted on board Turkish vessels. 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— confa»«ec?. 
 
 Speed of Ships to be moderate in Fog, &e. 
 
 Art. 13. Every ship, wjiether a sailing ship or 
 steam ship, shall in a fog, mist, or falling snow, go^ 
 at a moderate speed. 
 
 Steering and Sailing Bules. 
 
 Art. 14. WJien two sailing ships are approach- 
 ing one another, so as to involve risk of collision, 
 'one of them shall Iceep out of the way of the other ■ 
 as follows, viz. : 
 
 (a.) A ship which is running free shall keep out ' 
 of the way of a ship which is close-hauled. . 
 (b.) A ship which is close-hauled on the port 
 tacit shall Iceep out of the way of a ship- 
 which is close-liauled on the starboard tack. 
 (o.) Wlien both are running free with the wind 
 on different sides, the ship which has the 
 wind on the port side shall Iceep out of the 
 way of the other. 
 (d.) When both are running free ivith the wind 
 on the same side, the ship which is to wind- 
 ward shall keep out of the way of the ship- 
 which is to leeward. 
 (e.) A ship which has the wind aft shall keep 
 
 out of the ivay of the other ship. 
 Ai't. 15. If two ships under steam are meeting 
 end on, or nearly end on, so as to involve risk of ' 
 collision, each shall alter her course to starboard, so 
 that each may pass on the port side of the other. 
 This Article only applies to cases where ships are 
 meeting end on, or nearly end on, in such a 
 manner as to involve risk of collision, and 
 does not apply to two ships which must, if 
 both keep on their respective courses, pass 
 clear of each other. 
 The only cases to which it does apply are, when 
 each of the two ships is end on, or nearly 
 end on, to the other ; in other words, to cases 
 in which, by day, each ship sees the masts of ' 
 the other in a line, or nearly in a line, loiih 
 her own ; and by night, to cases in which 
 each ship is in such a position as to see both 
 the side lights of the other. 
 It does not apply by day, to cases in which a ship ■ 
 sees another ahead crossing lier own course ; ■ 
 or by night to cases where the red light of one 
 ship is opposed to the red light of the other, 
 or where the green light of one ship is opposed 
 to the green light of the other, or where a red " 
 ligltt without a green light, or a green light 
 without a red light, is seen ahead, or where 
 both green and red lights are seen anywhere 
 but ahead,. 
 Art. 16. If two ships under steam are crossing, . 
 so as to involve risk of collision, the ship which has 
 the other on her oivn starboard side shall keep out 
 of the ivay of the other. 
 
 Art. 17. If two ships, one of which is a sailing 
 ship and the other a steamship, are proceeding in 
 such directions as to involve risk of collision, the 
 steamship shall Iceep out of the way of the sailing 
 ship. 
 
 Art. 18. Every steamship, when approaching 
 another ship, so as to involve risk of collision, shall 
 slacken her speed or stop and reverse, if necessary. 
 Art. 19. In taking any course authorized or re- 
 quired by these regulations, a steamship under - 
 way may indicate that course to any other ship ■ 
 
( 1503 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1504 ) 
 
 Tin. SHIP— NAVIGATION— coreiimieJ. 
 
 which she has in sight hy the following signals o» 
 her steam whistle, viz. : — 
 
 One short hlast to mean '■ I am directing my 
 course to starboard." 
 
 Two short blasts to mean "I am directing my 
 course to port." 
 
 Three short blasts to mean " lam going full speed 
 astern.'' 
 
 The use of these signals is optional, but if tliey 
 are used the course nf the ship must he in accord- 
 ance with the signal made. 
 
 Art. 20. Notwith>-tanding anything contained in 
 any preceding Article, every ship, whether a sailing 
 ship or a steamship, overtaking any other shall 
 Iteep out of the loay of the overtalcen ship. 
 
 Art. 21. In narrow channels every steamship 
 shall, lohen it is safe and practicable, Ireep to that 
 side of the fainoay or mid-channel which lies on 
 the starboard- side of such ship. 
 
 Art. 22. Where by the above rules one of two 
 ships is to Iceep out of the way, the other shall heep 
 her course. 
 
 Art. 23. In obeying and construing these rides 
 due regard shall be had to cdl dangers of naviga- 
 tion, and to any special circumst-anees which may 
 render a departure from the above rules necessary 
 in order to avoid immediate danger. 
 
 No Ship, under any circumstances, to neglect 
 proper Precautions. 
 
 Art. 24. Nothing in these rules shall exonerate 
 any ship, or the oioner, or master, or crew thereof, 
 from the consequences of any neglect to carry lights 
 or signals, or of any neglect to l:eep a proper look- 
 out, or of the neglect of any precaution u-hich may 
 be required by the ordinary practice of seamen, or 
 by the special circumstances of the case. 
 
 Reservation of Rules for Harbours and 
 Inland Navigation. 
 
 Art. 25. Nothing in these rules shall interfere 
 with the operation of a special rule duly made hy 
 local authority, relative to the navigation of any 
 harbour, river, or inland navigation. 
 
 Special Lights for Sc^uadrons and Convoys. 
 
 Alt. 26. Nothing in these rules shall interfere 
 icith the operation of any special rules made by the 
 Oovermnent of any nation with respect to ad- 
 ditional station and signal lights for two or more 
 ships of loar or for ships sailing binder convoy. 
 
 Art. 27. When a ship is in distress and requires 
 assistance from other ships or from the shore, the 
 following shall be the signals to be used or dis- 
 played by her, either together or separately, that is 
 4o say : — 
 
 In the daytime — 
 
 1. A gun find at interv(ds of about a minute; 
 
 2. The International Code signal of distress 
 
 indicated by N C; 
 
 3. The distant signid, consisting of a square 
 
 flag, having either above or below it a 
 hall, or anything resembling a ball. 
 At night — 
 
 1. A gun fired at intervals of about a minute ; 
 
 2. Flitines on the ship (as from a burning tar 
 
 barrel, oil barrel, (tc.) ; 
 •3 Rockets or shells, throwing stars of any 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— coniintsed. 
 
 colour or description, fired one at a time, 
 at short intervals. 
 
 [L. G., 1884, p. 3818 
 
 Modification of above Regulations as regards 
 British fishing vessels — steam or sailing — trawling 
 off the coast of Europe lying north of Cape Finis- 
 terre. Order in Council, 30th Dec., 1884 
 
 [L. G., 1885, p. 4 
 
 Further modifications of abcyve Regulations as 
 regards British sailing fishing vessels trawlinxj and 
 silicate as above. Order in Council, 2ith June, 
 1885 - - - - I. G., 1885, p. 2988 
 
 Order in Council of 30th Dec., 1884, applying 
 the Regulations of 11th August, 1884, to tlte ships of 
 Crreece, Portugal, and Italy, whether ivithin British 
 jurisdiction or not - - L. G., 1885, p. 1 
 
 Order in Council of 19th May, 1885, applying 
 the regulations of lift August, 1884, to the ships of 
 Norway and Sweden, and Brazil, whether within 
 British jurisdiction or not L. G., 1885, p. 2334 
 
 Order in Council of 9th Sept., 1884, applying the 
 Regulations to the ships of France, whether within 
 British jurisdiction or not L. G., 1884, p. 4116 
 
 Order in Council of 9th July, 1885, applying the 
 Regulations to the ships of Turkey, whether within 
 British jurisdiction or not L. Q., 1885, p. 3233 
 
 Order in Council of 17th Sept., 1885, applying 
 the Regulations to the shipis of Chili, whether within 
 British jurisdiction or not L. G., 1885, p. 4430 
 
 1. Consequential loss — Collision — Damage 
 
 — Registrar and Merchants — Loss of Fishing — 
 Evidence.'] A French fishing brig of 142 tons, 
 employed in the cod fishery oif the^banks of New- 
 foundland, came into collision on the 6th of July, 
 1881, with an Italian barque, and in consequence 
 of tlie collision was compelled to put into port for 
 repairs, but, her repairs having been completed, 
 returned to the fishing ground before the close of 
 the fishing season. In an action of damage in- 
 stituted on behalf of the owners of the bvig against 
 the barque, the Court pronounced the barque 
 solely to blame for the collision, and referred the 
 question of damages to the registrar and mer- 
 chants. At the reference the Plaintiffs claimed 
 £1200 for demurrage of their vessel from the date 
 of the collision to the 26tli of August, 1881, the 
 date of her return to the fishing ground, and of 
 the amount so claimed, the registrar, by his 
 report, allowed the Plaintiffs £880 as the loss sus- 
 tained by the interruption of their fishing. The 
 Defendants moved the Court in objection to the 
 report : — Held, that the motion must be dismissed. 
 The " EisoLUTO " 8 P. D. 109 
 
 2. Contributory Negligence — Collision— 
 
 Negligence by Complaining Vessel.'] Where there 
 has been a departvue from an important rule of 
 navigation, if the absence of due observance of 
 the rule can by any possibility have contributed to 
 the accident, then the paity in default cannot be 
 excused. — Where the lights of the complaining 
 vessel were not properly burning, and were not 
 visible on board the otlier vessel, held, that in the 
 absence of proof that this latter was also to blame, 
 the suit must be dismissed. Emkkt v. Cichebo. 
 The " AnKLOw " 9 App. Cas. 186 
 
 3' Damages — Collision — Cargo — Re-ship- 
 ment— Use of Damaged Cargo.] Plaintiffs' cargo of 
 coals on board the K. was damaged by a collisiou 
 
( 1505 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1506 ) 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— confanweiJ. 
 at C, the port of loading, and had to be unloaded. 
 It was ultimately reshipped and carried on to 
 B., and used by the Plaintiffs in smithies, though 
 it was not purchased for this purpose. The ship- 
 owner was not willing to ship a fresh cargo ex- 
 cept on fresh terms, and the Plaintiffs did not 
 ascertain what those terms were. On a reference 
 as to damages, in an action between the owners of 
 the coal and the owners of the vessel with which 
 the K. came into collision, the assistant registrar 
 decided that the Plaintiffs were only entitled to 
 recover the difference between the value of sound 
 and damaged coal at tlie port of loading, and that 
 if the value was that at the poi-t of destination it 
 must be taken to be the value of smithy coal. On 
 objection to this report : — Seld, that the shipowner 
 had a right to insist on carrying on the same 
 cargo ; that it appearing that lie had been willing 
 to take a fresh cargo on fresh terms, it was the 
 duty of the Plaintiffs to have ascertained what 
 those terms were, so as to diminish the loss as 
 much as possible, before comparing the loss on 
 the damaged cargo at B., and that from the sale 
 of it at C, and sliipping a fresh one : — Held, also, 
 that the coal having been used for a particular 
 purpose, was not a reason for estimating its value 
 at that of coal ordinarily used for such purpose. 
 The " Blenheim " - 10 P. D. 167 
 
 4. Danube Commission Eules, Eule 84, 
 
 Chapter II. — Collision — Negligence.'] Under 
 Eule 34, Chapter II. of the Danube Commission 
 Eules, vessels going down the Danube should keep 
 to the right bank. — Where a vessel going down the 
 the Danube, when there was a fog and approaching 
 night, went to the left bank, held, that, according to 
 the ti'ue construction of the rule, that was neglect of 
 duty ; and that such negligence was the cause of 
 a collision which occurred with a vessel coming up, 
 although the absence of lights on the latter vessel 
 might have partly contributed to the accident. 
 BnssiAN S.S. " YouKKi " v Bhitish S.S. " Spear- 
 man " - 10 App. Cas. 276 
 
 5. Evidence of Negligence — Steam-steer- 
 ing Gear.] A steamship fitted with a patent 
 steam-steering gear ran into a vessel at anchor in 
 the Thames, owing to the steering gear suddenly 
 not acting ; every effort was unavailingly made 
 to avoid the collision. A few days before, on 
 the previous voyage of the same steamship, the 
 same apparatus hnd similarly refused to act, but 
 no cause for it so doing could be seen on examina- 
 tion. Large numbers of the gears were in use 
 on steamers. In an action of damage :— Held, 
 first, that the Defendants were not liable for 
 damage caused by the use of this apparatus with- 
 out negligence. Secondly, that the use of this ap- 
 paratus on the Thames after it had acted wrongly 
 on a previous occasion, was evidence of negligence, 
 and that the Defendants were liable for the damage 
 caused thereby. The " European " 10 P. D. 99 
 
 6. Launch — Ditty of Vessels anchored in 
 
 Track of Launch — Compulsory Pilotage — Mersey 
 Doclci Consolidation Act, 1858 (21 * 22 Viet, 
 c. xciL), s. 139 — Meaning of " Proceed to Sea."] 
 A barque was at anchor in the Mersey in the way 
 of the C'., a vessel about to be launched. The 
 launch was delayed as long as was prudent, but 
 the barque not haying been got out of the way 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— coniiJiued. 
 in time was struck by the C. in coming off the 
 ways and both vessels were damaged. Eeason- 
 able notice liad been given of the launch, and 
 a steam-tug had been sent by those superintend- 
 ing the launch to tow the barque out of danger, 
 and would have done so in time to have prevented 
 the collision but for the obstinacy of those on 
 board the barque : — HeW, tliat the barque was 
 alone to blame for the collision. — The barque had 
 been towed out of dock into the river the previous 
 day in order that she might proceed to sea before 
 daybreak on the morning on which the collision 
 happened. But an accident having happened to 
 the mainyard of the barque she was unable to pro- 
 ceed to sea as intended, and at the time of the 
 collision was waiting in the river to have repairs 
 executed. She had on board of her a duly licensed 
 Mersey pilot : — Held, that she was not at the time 
 of the collision proceeding to sea within the mean- 
 ing of the Mersey Docks Consolidation Act, 1858, 
 s. 139, and that the pilot on board her was not at 
 the time employed by compulsion of law. — Bodri- 
 gues V. Melhuish (10 Ex. 110; followed. The 
 " Caohapool " 7 P. D. 217 
 
 7. ' Launch — Duty of Tugs in the Mersey.] 
 
 Persons in charge of a launch are bound to take 
 the utmost precautions to avoid injiury to passing 
 vessels, such precautions being in the circum- 
 stances no more than reasonable. It is their duty 
 to have a tug in attendance on a launch in the 
 Mersey, decorated so as to indicate that a launch 
 is imminent, and, if necessary, to warn approaching 
 vessels. The " George Eoper " - 8 P. D. 119 
 
 8. Sailing Eules, Art. 2 — -Humber Rules 
 
 — Stem Light — Compulsory Pilotage — 25 & 26 
 Vict. 0. 63, s. 32—36 & 37 Vict.' o. 85, s. 17.] 
 The S. in charge of a tug was dropping stern 
 foremost up the Humber with the tide, and was 
 eventually brought athwart the tide to go into 
 dock. The B. was exhibiting, in addition to the 
 mast head and side lights, a white light from the 
 main peak shewing astern, wliioh had been placed 
 there by order of the pilot who was by compul- 
 sion of law in charge of the B. The Eules for 
 the Navigation of the Eiver Humber, made 
 by Order in Council in pursuance of 25 & 26 
 Vict. u. 63, s. 32, incorporate the Eegulations for 
 Preventing Collisions at Sea. The E. coming 
 down the Humber and the B. came into col- 
 lision. At the hearing it was admitted that the 
 E. was to blame : — Held, that the B. was also 
 to blame, for that as tlie Humber Eules were 
 within the purview of 36 & 37 Vict. o. 85, s. 17, 
 there had been, by the exhibition of a stern light, 
 a breach of a statutoiy regulation, namely, of 
 art. 2, which it was impossible to say might not 
 have contributed to the collision, and there was 
 no circumstance to make a departure from the 
 regulation necessary : — Held, also, that the light 
 having been exhibited by order of the pilot, did 
 not exempt the owner of the B. from liability, as 
 the master should not have permitted an infringe- 
 ment of the regulations. The " Eipon " 
 
 [10 P. D. 65 
 
 9. Sailing Eules, Arts. 2 and 11.] A ship 
 
 shewed a flare-up light to a steamer approaching 
 on her starboard side : — Held, not an infringement 
 of arts. 2 and 11, as such light was not calculated 
 
 3 C 
 
( 1507 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1508 ) 
 
 Vin. SHIP— NAVIGATION— eontJntjefi!. 
 
 hi' the circumstances to mislead the approaching 
 
 vessel. The " Mebchant Peince " 10 P. D. 139 
 
 10. Sailing Rules, Arts. 3, 10, and 1863, 
 
 Art. 9 — Collision — Order in Gouncil, March 24, 
 1880^-36 & 37 Vict. c. 85, s. 17.] A steam traw- 
 ler, whilst engaged in trawling at the rate of 2J 
 Icnotsan hour through the water and 4 J knots an 
 J lOur over the ground, carrying a single white light, 
 wa* run down by the D. ; it being admitted that 
 the D. was to blame,, the question arose whether 
 the trawler was not also to blame for not carrying 
 side lights : — fleW, by Butt, J., that the trawler 
 was also to blame, since she was a vessel under 
 Avay, and therefore subject to art. 3 of the 
 Eegulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 
 1880, and not to art. 9 of the Eegulations for 
 Preventing Collisions at Sea, 18G3, substituted 
 by Order in Council, 1880, for Art. 10 of the Re- 
 gulations of 1880. — Seld, by the Court of Appeal, 
 that the decision of Butt, J., ^Vas right, but on the 
 ground that though the trawler was one of a class 
 of vessels within art, 9 of the Regulations of 1SG3, 
 she, in order to be " stationary " Avithin the mean- 
 ing of that article, was bound not to go faster 
 than was necessary to keep her.-clf under com- 
 mand whilst fishing, and that as her speed was 
 greater than was necessary for so doing, she was, 
 at the time of the collision, within art. b of the 
 Regulations of 1880. The"Ddnelm" 9 P. D. 164 
 
 11. . — — SaiLing Eules, Arts. 5. 6 — Inevitahle 
 Accident — Costs — Infringement of Regulations for 
 Preventing Collisions at Sea — Merchant Shipping 
 Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict. c. 85,) s. 17.] A sailing 
 ship in a gale drove from her anchors across a sand, 
 and her rudder was so damaged as to render the 
 ship unmanageable ; in this condition she came 
 into collision after sunset with a brig at anchor. 
 At the time of the collision the ship had her anchor 
 light exhibited and no other light. In an action 
 of damage by the owners of the brig against the 
 ship it was held that the collision was occasioned 
 by inevitable accident, and that the ship in the 
 circumstances of the case was not to be deemed in 
 fault for not carrying side lights or the three red 
 lights prescribed by Article 5 of the Regulations 
 for Preventing Collisions at Sea, and that the suit 
 ought to be dismissed without costs. The " Buok- 
 HURST " - 6 P. D. 152 
 
 12. Sailing Rules, Art. 11.] A ship does 
 
 not, by carrying a fixed white binnacle light in 
 such a position as to be reflected astern, comply 
 with the provisions of the eleventh article of the 
 Eegulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 
 which provides that a ship which is being over- 
 taken by another, shall shew from her stern to 
 such last mentioned ship a white light or a flare- 
 up light. The " Beeadalbahe" ■ 7 P, D. 186 
 
 13. Sailing Rules, Art. 11 — Speed.'] A 
 
 smack with her trawl down had a globular white 
 light exhibited from her weather crosstree par- 
 tially hidden from overtaking vessels by her sails, 
 and did not exhibit any other white lighter flare- 
 up to an overtaking steamer : — Held, that this was 
 an infringement of art. 11. — The steamer being 
 in the North Sea, and the weather fine and clear, 
 though the night was dark, was proceeding at 
 the rate of eight to nine knots an hour : — Held, 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— ranii/nteJ. 
 
 that she was not, under the circumstances, goipg . 
 at too high a rate of speed. The " Pacific " 
 
 [9 P. D. 124 
 
 14. Bailing Eules, Arts. 12, 13, 18 — 
 
 Merchant Shipping Act, 1873 (36 (£37 Viet. c. 85), 
 s. 17 — Pog.] A barque, provided only with a fog- 
 horn, sounded by means of the breath, came into 
 collision, during a fog, with a steamship. The fog- 
 horn was duly sounded before the collision, and 
 was heard by those on board the steamship, and 
 those on board the steamship neglected, for some 
 time after they heard the fog-horn, to stop or re- 
 verse the engines. The steamship was held to 
 blame. The barque was held to be deemed in 
 fault for not using a fog-horn, to be sounded 
 by mechanical means, as required by Article 12 
 of the Regulations for Preventing Collisions at 
 Sea, 1879. — The circumstance that the barque 
 left port a few days before the regulations came 
 into force was held not to afford any valid excuse 
 tor the neglect of those in charge of her to furnish 
 her with a fog-horn, to be sounded by mechanical 
 means, they well knomng, before she left port, 
 that the regulations would come into force in a 
 few day.", and there being no evidence to shew 
 that they could not obtain a fog-horn, according 
 to the regulations, before she left port. The 
 " Love Bikd " - 6 P. D. 80 
 
 15. Sailing Eules, Arts. 12 (V), IZ—Fog.] 
 
 A collision happened between the steamship I. 
 and the barque Z. in a fog. It was proved that 
 the I. had reduced her speed so far as was pos- 
 sible without stopping her way altogether : — Held, 
 that she had not infringed article 13 of the Eegu- 
 lations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. — It was 
 further proved that the Z. was proceeding at more 
 than four knots an hour : — Held, an infringement 
 of article 13, for the term " moderate speed " 
 means that a vessel is to reduce her speed so far 
 as she can consistently with keeping steerage 
 way. — It was further proved that a fog-horn was 
 blown on the Z. but not heard on the I. i—HcW, 
 that this was not prima facie evidence of negli-- 
 gence of those on the I. The " Zadoe." 9 P. D. 114 
 
 16. Sailing Eules, Art. IZ—Fog.'] The 
 
 term "moderate speed" used in Art. iS of the 
 Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea is a 
 relative term, depending upon the ciroumst£inces. 
 — 'When a saUing ship was going in a dense fog at 
 a speed greater than was enough to keep her under 
 control -.—Held, that she had infringed Art. 13. 
 The " Beta " - 9 P. D. 134 
 
 17. Sailing Rules, Arts. 13, IS, 20 — 
 
 Fog— Duty of Steamship.'] It is the duty of those 
 who have chai-ge of a steamship in motion dm-ing 
 a dense fog, on first hearing the whistle of a 
 steamship iii such close proximity to them that 
 risk of collision between the two vessels is in- 
 volved, to bring their vessel immediately to a 
 standstill on the water, and not execute auv 
 manosuvre with their helm until they have de- 
 finitely ascertained the position and coui'se of the 
 other ship. The " Kieby Hall " - 8 P. D. 71 
 
 18. Sailing Eules, Arts. 13, 18— .Fog.] A 
 
 steamship the D. in a dense fog off Ushant pro- 
 ceeding at slow speed heard a whistle about three 
 points on her starboard bow; the whistle was 
 
( 1509 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1510 ) 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— confjnaed. 
 'repeated several times and answered by the D. In 
 about ii quarter of an hour from the first souud of 
 the whistle the steamship E. appeared about a 
 llength from the D. crossing from starboard to 
 port. The engines of tlie D. -were reversed full 
 speed but a collision occurred. Butt, J., having 
 iheld both ships to blame, the owners of the D. 
 appealed : — Held, by the Court of Appeal (affirm- 
 ing the decision of Butt, J.), that the D. was also 
 to blame, for she should have been brought to as 
 ■complete a standstill as possible, without getting 
 out of command, at an early period after the first 
 sound of the whistle, and should have also stoppcil 
 -and reversed sooner. — Per Brett, M.E. : Under 
 •art. 13 (1) '' a moderate speed " — in a river or 
 narrow channel — means that a vessel shall be 
 brought nearly to a standstill, whether the whistle 
 •or fog-horn of another vessel is heard or not, but 
 'in the open sea the article need not be so strictly 
 •construed, unless a whistle or fog-liorn is heard. — 
 Under art. 18 (2) as soon as it is perceived by 
 those on a steamer in a dense fog that a vessel is 
 ■coming substantially nearer, the steamer should 
 stop and reverse. — Senible, though art. 18 does not 
 apply to a sailing ship, yet she ought in similar 
 "Ca'cumstances to take off sail so as to come to as 
 -complete a standstill as passible, without getting 
 ■ out of command. The " Dordogne" 10 P. D. 6 
 
 19. Sailing Rules, 1880, Arts. 16, 20— 
 
 Oi-ossimtf Sldps.^ When a vessel is at the same 
 "time overtaking and crossing the course of another 
 vessel, slie is to be deemed an overtaking, and not 
 a crossing ship under Art. 16, and is bound there- 
 fore to obey the directions of Art. 20, and keep 
 -out of the way of the other vessel. The " Seaton" 
 
 [9 P. D. 1 
 
 20. Sailing Rules, Arts, 16, 18, 22— Ci-oss- 
 
 .ing S/iips.] The .3.. and B. were crossing within 
 "the meaning of Art. 16, and it was the duty of the 
 A. to keep out of the way of the B., but she did 
 not do so. The B. when from a quarter to half 
 a mile distant slackened her speed and continued 
 with slackened speed to within 300 yards of the ^., 
 rand then stopped and reversed, but not in time io 
 prevent a collision : — Held, on appeal, that the B. 
 .miist be .held, for not stopping and reversing 
 sooner, to blame as well as the A. Arts. 16 and 
 18 are intended to be applicable according to the 
 ■circumstances as they would present themselves 
 rto the mind of a prudent sailor, and come into force 
 before the risk of collision is fixed and deter- 
 mined. — Held, also, that the word "course" in 
 Art. 22, refers to the direction of the vessel's head 
 and not to her speed — Per Brett, M.E. : If the 
 -Judge of the Court below differs from his asses- 
 sors, he is bound to decide in accordance with his 
 ■own opinion. The " Bebtl " - 9 P. D. 4, 137 
 
 21. Sailing Eules, Art. 18 — Damage — 
 
 Hqual Negligence.'] In accordance with the 18th 
 ■sailing rule, under Order in Council, 14th of 
 August, 1879, it is the duty of those in charge of a 
 steamship in motion, when they perceive that a 
 Tisk of collision is involved, to reverse their engines 
 ■and bring their ship to a standstill on the water. — 
 -A collision occurred between the steamship A. and 
 the steamship B. TJie evidence was most con- 
 itrmlictory. It was, however, satisfactorily proved 
 ithat although the crew of the ship B. had been 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— coitimueii. 
 until a few minutes before the collision engaged 
 in getting the anchors on board in^ shipshape 
 order, and that the captain had left the deck 
 when he ought to have been there, yet that when 
 it was perceived, the two vessels were approach- , 
 ing in such a manner as to involve risk of 
 collision the engines were reversed, and the ship 
 stopped. On board the ship A. everything was 
 proved to have been in good order at the time of 
 the collision. But her captain did not stop his 
 engines until almost the moment of collision, and 
 consequently the ship A. cut into tlie ship B. to 
 the water's edge iT-Held, reversing the decision 
 of the Court below, that there was fault on both 
 sides, contributing to the damage and loss which 
 had. been suffered, and therefore neither were 
 entitled to costs. Maclaren p. Cohpagnie Fran- 
 9AISE DE Navigation; A Vapeur 9 App. Cas. 640 
 
 22. Sailing Rules, Art. 18 — Frohajfility of 
 
 Bislc.'] The S. and the C. were approaching each 
 other at night on opposite courses, so as to pass 
 starboard to starboard. The master of the G. saw 
 tlie green and white lights of the S., somewhat 
 more than a quarter of a mile distant, coming into 
 line. This indicated a probability that the .S". 
 was porting, which would cause a risk of colli- 
 sion ; soon after the red light of the S. was seen. 
 The engines of the C. had been previously stopped, 
 but the master did not reverse her engines till 
 the red light of the S. was seen ; the vessels soon 
 after cilme into collision : — Held, that the G. was 
 to blame for infringing art. 18 of the Regulations 
 for Preventing Collisions at Sea, because as there 
 was a probability of risk of collision when the 
 master of the C. saw the green and white lights 
 of the S. coming into line, he should, being aware 
 of such probability, have then reversed the engines 
 of the C. The " Stanmore " - 10 P. D. 134 
 
 23. ■ Sailing Rules, Art. IS— Fog.] A 
 
 steamer heard a whistle on her port bow in a 
 dense fog, and it was repeated, shewing that the 
 ves6el from which it was sounded was approaching 
 and was in her vicinity : — Held, that under such 
 circumstances it is a general rule of conduct 
 that there is a necessity to stop and reverse, and 
 tjiat she had disobeyed Art. 18 by not so doing. 
 The " John MoIntyre " - - 9 P. D. 135 
 
 24. Sailing Rules, Art. 18 — Standing 
 
 hy.] The E. H., after a collision with the M., 
 burnt rockets and blue lights as signals of dis- 
 tress, but the M. did not, as she might have 
 done, reply to these signals : — Held, a breach of 
 the statutory duty of rendering assistance under 
 36 & 37 Viet. c. 85, s. 16, and that the M. was 
 therefore to be deemed to blame. The E. H. did 
 not stop and reverse under Article IS as soon as 
 she might have done : — Held, that she was also to 
 blame, but that instantaneous compliance with 
 Art, 18 is not necessary. The " Emmt Haase" 
 
 [9 P. D. 81 
 
 25. Sailing Rules, Arts. 18, 23.] ' A 
 
 steamer, the G., saw a green light at some dis- 
 tance and starboarded her helm ; soon after the 
 port side of the B., without a red light, came 
 into view, so close that the only chance of avoid- 
 ing a collision was for the G. to continue at 
 full speed ahead and starboard her helm, which 
 she did. The B. struck the Q. on her starboard 
 
 3 C 2 
 
( 1511 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1512 ) 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— coniinMei. 
 side: — Held, tliat the B. was alone to blame for 
 the collision, and that Art. 18 of the Eegulations 
 did not apply under the circumstances to the (?., 
 and that Art. 23 was applicable. — The Khedive 
 (5 App. Ca9. 876) explained. The " Benakes " 
 
 [9 P. D. 16 
 
 36. Sailing Eules, Art. 21 — Narrow 
 
 Channel — Collision.'] The Sti'ait of Messina is a 
 narrow channel within the meaning of Art. 21 of 
 the Admiralty Eegulations for Preventing Colli- 
 sions at Sea ; as to what particular width or length 
 will constitute a narrow channel, quaire — Held, 
 that the A. L. by infringing the said article occa- 
 sioned tte collision which aiterwards happened, 
 and failed to establish that the B. by anything 
 which she did contributed to it or could in any 
 way have avoided it. — Held, that the S.'s helm 
 having been put hard aportin a way which if suc- 
 cessful would have put her on such a course as 
 would have determined the risk of collision, the 
 duty of reversing her engines did not arise till it 
 was discovered that the vessel, owing to the action 
 of ii current, was not obeying her helm. Scicluna 
 V. Stevenson. The " Rhondda " 8 App. Cas. 649 
 
 27. Tees Conservancy Eegulations — 
 
 " Maximum Speed of Siz Miles per Hour."'] The 
 22nd clause of the by-laws of the river Tees, 
 which provides that no steamship shall be navi- 
 gated on any part of the river Tees at a higher 
 rate of speed than sis miles per hour, is to be con- 
 strued as prohibiting a steamsliip proceeding 
 against the tide being navigated at a greater 
 speed tlian six miles per hour over the ground. 
 The " K. L. Alston- " 7 P. D. 49 ; 8 P. D. 5 
 
 28. Thames Rules — Negligence — Contri- 
 
 hutorij Negligence — Damages — Infringement of 
 Thames By-laws — Cause of Action,] A dumb 
 barge, by the negligent navigation of those in 
 charge of her, was suffered to come into contact 
 with a schooner moored to a mooring buoy in the 
 river Thames. The schooner had her anchor hang- 
 ing over her bow with tire stock above water, con- 
 trary to the Thames by-laws. The anchor made a 
 hole in the barge and caused damage to her cargo. 
 But for the improper position of the anchor neither 
 the barge nor her cargo would have received any 
 damage. In an action of damage by the owners 
 of the barge against the schooner : — Held, revers- 
 ing the decision of the Admiralty Court, that 
 both vessels were to blame, and that therefore the 
 owners of the barge were entitled to half the 
 damage sustained. The " Makgaket " 6 P. D. 76 
 
 29. Thames Eules, r. 14 — Collision — 
 
 Merchant Shipping Act, 1873(36 (6 37 Vict. c. 85), 
 s. 17.] A steamer having stojjped but not 
 having, as she should have done, reversed imme- 
 diately before a collision, though the Court found 
 as a fact that her not having done so did not affect 
 the collision, and having thus infringed rule 14 of 
 the Thames Rules : — Held, that she was never- 
 theless not to blame, for the Thames Rules do not 
 fall within the operation of sect. 17 of the Merchant 
 Shipping Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Viet. c. 85). The 
 •'Haeton" - 9 P. D. 44 
 
 30. Thanies Eules, r. 22, 23 — Coming to 
 
 Po'nts — Porting.] The 22nd and 23rd rules for 
 the navigation of the Thames are not inconsistent, 
 
 VIII. SHIP— NAVIGATION— oon««nu;i. 
 and the intention is that when the 23rd rule (as- 
 to passing a point) applies, the case for the 22nd 
 (as to porting) shall not arise, but if the case does- 
 arise the rule will apply. A steam vessel coming- 
 down the Thames against tide to a point on the 
 noith shore, and being nearer to mid-channel than 
 to the north shore, eased, and then seeing danger 
 of collision with a vessel coming up with tide, 
 starboarded and reversed. The other vessel was 
 coming up with the tide also near the north shore 
 and rounded the point under a port helm ; seeing 
 the other vessel, she ported hard, and stopped, but 
 a collision occurred ; — Held, that under the cir- 
 cumstances the 22nd rule applied, and that the 
 vessel which had starboarded was to blame. By 
 •lessel, M.R., and Brett, LJ. (Cotton, L. J., doubt- 
 ing), that under the 23rd rule the vessel navi- 
 gating against tide is to wait until she has beea 
 passed by the other vessel, and not merely until, 
 the other vessel has jjassed the point. The 
 " Libra ' 6 P. D. 139 
 
 31. Thames Eules, r. 23 ~ Collision — 
 
 Negligence — Contributory Negligence.] . Rule 23 
 of the Thames Eules is not confined to the seaward 
 side of "a line drawn from Blackwall Point to 
 Bow Creek.''— The order of the Court of Appeal 
 reversed and the order of Butt, .J., restored, on 
 the ground tliat even assuming 'but without de- 
 ciding) that the construotiou put by the Court 
 of Appeal upon rule 23 was correct and that the 
 Clan Sinclair had transgressed that rule, yet such 
 transgression was not the cause of the collision ; 
 that ordinary care on the part of the Margaret 
 would have enabled her to avoid the collision,, 
 and that she alone was to blame. Catzek r. Cae- 
 EON Cohpaxy (The " Maegaeet ") 8 P. D. 126 ; 
 
 [9 P. D. 47 ; 9 App. Cas. 873 
 
 32. Towage — Condition of Contract ex- 
 empting Tug Oiciifii-s from Liability — Negligence 
 of Tug 3Iasler.] Tile master of a steam tug who- 
 had contracted to tow a iishing smack out of the 
 harbour of Great Yarmouth to sea on the terms 
 thr.t his owners should not be liable for damage 
 arising from any negligence or defaxdt of them- 
 selves or their servants after the towage had been 
 in part performed, took in tow in addition to the 
 smack six other vessels, and in consequence was 
 unable to keep the fishing smack in her course, 
 so tliat she went aground and was lost. By hav- 
 ing more than six vessels in tow at once the 
 master of the tug disobeyed a regulation made by 
 the harbour-master of Great Yarmouth under sta- 
 tutory authority :—fl"e?d, that the loss of the 
 smack was occasioned by the negligence of the 
 master of the tug, but that the owners were pro- 
 tected from liability by the terms of the towage 
 contract. The " United Seevice " 
 
 [8 P. D. 56 ; 9 P. D. 3 
 
 IX. SHIP— OWNEES. 
 
 !• Co-ownership— 5aZe— 24 & 25 Hrf. 
 
 c. 10, 8. 8.] The Court will not exercise the power 
 of sale conferred on it by 24 & 25 Vict. c. 10, s. S (2), 
 by ordering the sale of a ship, unless a part owner 
 — \yhether he be the owner of a minority or 
 majority of shares — makes out a very strong case. 
 Continued and embittered disagreements between 
 two part owners were held not to constitute suffi.- 
 
( 1513 ) 
 
 DiaEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 15U ) 
 
 IX. SBIV—OWSERS— continued. 
 
 ■eient reason for the interference of the Court. 
 
 The " Marion " 10 P. D. 4 
 
 2. Managing Owner — Entry on Eeghtcr 
 
 <is — Aicthority to hind other Owners — Ship's Neces- 
 saries.'] W. was the registered owner of certain 
 ishares in a ship, and had been entered on the re- 
 gister as managing owner. The Defendant sub- 
 sequently became the registered owner of other 
 shares in the ship. The Defendant was not aware 
 in fact that W. was so registered as mauiiging 
 ■owner. W. sent the ship on a voyage without the 
 Defendant's knowledge, and contrary to the terms 
 ■of an agreement made between them. Tlie De- 
 fendant did not participate in tlie adventure, and 
 had previously informed W. that he did not intend 
 to navigate tlie ship or take any part in her man- 
 agement. The Plaintiffs supplied necessaries 
 for the ship previous to such voyage, upon the 
 order of W. without the knowledge or consent of 
 the Defendant. The Plaintiffs, before supplying 
 the goods, consulted the register, and found the 
 Defendant's name entered therein as part owner 
 of the ship : — Held, by Bowen, J., that the fact 
 . that the Defendant had allowed the entry on the 
 jegister describing W. ns managing owner to 
 remain unaltered did not per se amount to a 
 liolding out of W. as his agent, so as to render the 
 Defendant liable for the necessaries supplied by 
 the Plaintiffs, and that inasmuch as W. had not 
 in fact authority to bind the Defendant, the 
 Plaintiffs could not recover against the Defen- 
 dant for such necessaries. Fbazeb & Co » Cuth- 
 J3EETS0N - - - 6 Q. B. D. 93 
 
 X SHIP— PILOT. 
 
 1. Compulsory Pilotage — Collision with 
 
 ■ Pier — Non-liability of Shipowners for Negligence 
 of Pilot in charge by Compulsion of Law — Har- 
 bours, Docks, and Piers Clauses Act, 1847 (10 & 11 
 Vict. c. 27), s. li—New Brighton Pier Act, 1861 (27 
 <£• 28 Vict. c. cclxvii.), ss. 2, 39 — Merchant Shipping 
 Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104), s. 388.] The 74th 
 ■section of the Harbours, Docks, and Piers Clauses 
 Act, 1847, which Act is incorporated with the New 
 Brighton Pier Act, 1864, save and so far as any 
 of the clauses and provisions of the two Acts are 
 inconsistent, declares that the owner of every 
 vessel shall be answerable to the undertakers of 
 overy pier to which the Harbours Docks and 
 Piers Clauses Act, 1847, is applied, for any dam- 
 age done to such pier, but provides that nothing 
 therein contained sliall extend to impose any lia- 
 bility for such damage upon the owner of any 
 vessel where such vessel shall at the time when 
 -such damage is caused be in charge of a duly 
 licensed pilot whom such owner or master is bound 
 by law to employ. By the 39th section of the New 
 Brighton Pier Act, 1864, it is enacted that if any. 
 person having the care of any ship shall wilfully 
 or carelessly cause, permit, or suffer any damage 
 ■or injury to be done to the New Brighton Pier 
 then and in every such case the owners of every 
 such ship shall be answerable and liable to make 
 satisfaction to the New Brighton Pier Company 
 for all such damage or injury. A steamship 
 came into collision with and did damage to the 
 •New Brighton Pier, and to recover for the damage 
 so done the New Brighton Pier Company brought 
 an action against the steamship. The owners of I 
 
 X. save— 'BltOT— continued. 
 the steamship alleged in their statement of defence 
 that at the time the damage was done the steam- 
 ship was in charge of a pilot employed by compul- 
 sion of law ; tliat the collision was not caused or 
 contributed to by the negligence of the Defen- 
 dants or any other persons than the pilot of the 
 steamship, and that the damage was not permitted 
 or suffered by any persons having the care of 
 the .sttamship within the mianing of the New 
 Brighton Pier Act, 1S64. The Plaintiffs demurred 
 to these allegations in the statement of defence : 
 — Held, that the provisions of the New Brighton 
 Pier Act, 1864, did not preclude the Defendants 
 from setting up the defence of compulsory pilot- 
 age and that the demurrer must be overruled. 
 The " Clan Gordon " 7 P. D. 190 
 
 2. Compulsory Pilotage — Damage — 25 & 
 
 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 41.] The word " loading" in 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63, s. 41, does not refer to the 
 taking on board of cargo only. Therefore when a 
 steamer anchored in Dartmouth Harbour and took 
 on board twenty tons of coal for the purposes of 
 the voyage, and was bound from a place out of 
 the outport district to a destination also out of 
 it:— Held, that she was not exempt from the 
 obligation to employ a pilot. The " Winston " 
 [8 P, D. 176 ; 9 P. D. 86 
 
 3. Compulsory Pilotage— Damage — Hull 
 
 Pilot Act (2 <fe 3 Wm. 4, c. cv.)— Default of Piht.'] 
 A collision occurred in the Humber Dock, Hull, 
 between a fly-boat and a foreign schooner bound 
 to the Prince's Dock. The schooner was in 
 charge of a duly licensed Humber pilot who had 
 taken over the charge of the schooner while she 
 was moored at a pier in the Humber from the 
 pilot who had brought her in from sea. One sum 
 was paid for the services of the two pilots : — 
 Held, that the schooner was in charge of a pilot 
 whose employment was compulsory by law. The 
 damage was done by the fluke of the schooner's 
 anchor piercing the side of the fly-boat. The 
 Court found that there was no want of care in the 
 crew in lowering the anchor. The other allega- 
 tions against the schooner were that the anchor 
 was improperly slung ; that she came too fast up 
 the dock and without a check rope : — Held, that 
 the damage was caused by the fault of the pilot 
 in the course of his duty. The " Kigbobgs Minde " 
 
 [8 P, D. 132 
 
 4. Compulsory Pilotage — Damage — Mea- 
 sure of Damages.] Where a collision has occurred 
 between two vessels through the bad navigation 
 of each of them, and where one of the vessels, by 
 compulsion of law, has had on board a pilot whose 
 default has contributed to the accident, the owner 
 of that vessel is entitled to recover a moiety of 
 the damage suitaiued by her without any deduc- 
 tion on account of the damage sustained by the 
 other. The '• Hector " 8 P. D. 218 
 
 5. Compulsory Pilotage — London Trinity 
 
 House District — Foreign Vessels carrying. Pas- 
 sengers from London to Hamburg — Pilotage Act, 
 1825 (6 Geo. 4, c. 125), s. 59— Pilotage Amend- 
 ment Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 129), s. 21— Order 
 in Council, February ISth, 1854 — Merchant Ship- 
 ping Act, 1854 (17 * 18 Vict. c. 104), ss. 35.S, 870, 
 376, 388 — Harbours and Passing Tolls Act, 1861 
 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 47), s. 10.] Sections 353 and 
 
( 1515 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 151G ) 
 
 X. SHIP — Vlltfl-^ontinued. 
 
 376 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, render 
 foreign vessels trading with cargo and passengers 
 from the port of London to ports between Boulogne 
 and the Baltic subject to compulsory pilotage on 
 their outward passages between London and 
 Gravesend, unless their masters or mates liave 
 pilotage certificates from tlie London Trinity 
 House ; and the operation of these sections, so far 
 as such vessels are concerned, is not affected either 
 by tlie Order in Council of February 18th, 1854, 
 or by the provisions contained in the Harbours 
 and Passing Tolls Act, 1861. — The Sanna (Law 
 Rep. 1 A. & E. 283) followed. The " Vesta " 
 
 [7 P. D. 240 
 
 6. Compulsory Pilotage — Pilot eompul- 
 
 sorily taJcen on Board hut not compulsorily in 
 Oliarge— Liahility of Sliipo^oner for Collision in 
 Suez Canal solely caused by Negligence of Suez 
 Canal Company's Pilot.^ Where a collision in 
 the Suez Canal has been cailsed by the negli- 
 gence of a Suez Canal Company's pilot compul- 
 sorily taken on board the wrongdoing ship, the 
 owner of siich ship is not exempt from liability 
 for the damage arising out of the collision. — The 
 effect of the Regulations for the Navigation of 
 the Suez Caijal is to constitute a pilot taken on 
 board a sljip traversing the canal the adviser of 
 the master, and to leave the control of the navi- 
 gation of the ship solely with the master. The 
 " Guy Manneking " - - 7 P. D. 52, 132 
 
 7. Compulsory Pilotage — Sea Damage — 
 
 Steam-tug.'] Where a vessel is under the charge of 
 a licensed pilot, tin." employment of whom is com- 
 pulsory, and is, at the same time, in tow of a steam- 
 tug, the latter is bound to obey the orders of tlie 
 pilot. In case of a mischief occurring to the vessel, 
 occasioned directly by the conduct of the steam- 
 tug, the tug (which had not noticed the pilot's 
 signal), cannot in an action brought by the owners 
 of the vessel for damage, si t up, as a legal de- 
 fence, contributory negligence, upon the ground 
 that if the pilot, when the mischief was about to 
 happen, had himself done a certain thing, the 
 mischief might possibly have been avoided, — 
 Mand v. Ross (The Julia) (Lush. 231 ; 14 Moo. 
 P. C. 210; commented on, and approved. Spaight 
 v. Tedoastle 6 App. Cas. 217 
 
 8. Salvage — Eemuneration.'] 'SVlienapilot 
 
 has assisted in navigating a vessel from a dan- 
 gerous situation to a safe anchorage, the test 
 whether he is entitled to be remunerated for sal- 
 vage services, is not, on the one hand, whether 
 the vessel was at the time of succour in distress, 
 or, on the other hand, whether she was then 
 damaged ; but the test is whether the risk attend- 
 ing the services to the vessel was such that the 
 pilot could not be reasonably expected to perform 
 them for the ordinary pilot's fees, or even for ex- 
 traordinary pilotage reward. — A vessel was, 
 during a heavy storm, being driven to leeward 
 towards dangerous sands : her captain was igno- 
 rant of the locality, and her loss appeared almost 
 inevitable : some pilots, seeing her danger, put off' 
 to sea at the peril of their lives in order to assist 
 lier ; they were unable to board her by reason of 
 the height of the sea ; but by preceding her and 
 signalling to her, they guided her to a safe 
 anchorage. The vessel had sustained no damage : 
 
 X. SHIP — PILOT — continued. 
 
 —Held, that the pilots were entitled to be remu- 
 nerated for salvage services. Akerblok v. Pbice. 
 
 [7 Q. B. D, 129 
 
 XI. SHIP— SALVAGE. 
 
 1. Agreement — Cargo — Liability of Ship- 
 owner — Average Bond.'] The G. fell in with the 
 R. which was in distress. The following agree- 
 ment was signed by the two captains : " At my 
 request the captain of the G. wUl tow my ship 
 the R. to St. Nazaire, that being the nearest 
 port, for repairs. . The matter of compensation to 
 be left to arbitrators at home." The G. towed the 
 B. safely to St. Nazaire. The B. discharged her 
 cargo at Dunkirk, and an average bond in the 
 usual form was taken from the consignees of the- 
 cargo. The owners of the G. brought an action 
 for salvage of the ship and freight against the J?.,. 
 and were awarded salvage. 'They also brought 
 an action in France for the salvage of the cargo- 
 against the cargo owners, but failed in it. They 
 then brought this action in personam against the 
 owners of the R. to recover salvage in respect of 
 the services to the cargo or, in the alternative,, 
 damages from the Defendants, for not taking a. 
 proper bond to secure salvage from the cargo 
 owners : — Held, that the Defendants were not pri- 
 marily liable to pay salvage in respect of the 
 cargo, that they had not bound themselves by the 
 above agreement to do so, and that it -was not. 
 their dnty to obtain a bond from the cargo owners- 
 for the proportion of any salvage which might be- 
 due. The " Eaisey " - 10 P. D. 114 
 
 2. Agreement — Life Salvage — No Res 
 
 saved — Right of Salvors to bring Action — Validity- 
 of Salvage Agreement.] A steamship was requested, 
 by another steamship in distress to stand by her- 
 An agreement was accordingly made between the 
 two masters for a fixed sum that the sound vessel 
 would remain by the damaged one till she was inn 
 a safe position to get to port. The sound vessel, 
 remained by the damaged one until the latter 
 was about to sink, when she took her crew on 
 board, and the damaged steamer immediately 
 afterwards sank. The owners, master, and ci-ew 
 of the salving ship brought an action for life- 
 salvage: — Held, that as no res was saved the 
 action would not lie either as a salvage action 
 simply or on the agreement. — Observations of 
 Brett, M.R., as to the implied authority of ship- 
 masters to enter into salvage agreements. The. 
 " Renpor " - - - 8 P. D. 115 
 
 3. Amount — Apportionment — Derelict.'], 
 
 The master of a Norwegian brig bound to Cardiff,, 
 with a crew of nine men, fell in, in the North Sea,, 
 between Heligoland and the Dogger Bank, with 
 a derelict vessel in a very crippled condition, and 
 put his mate and two of hia crew on board her.. 
 The mate and the two men on board the derelict, 
 shortly after they had boarded her, fearing that 
 she was about to founder, endeavoured to leave 
 her, but their boat was swamped, and one of the 
 men drifted astern, and was picked up by a fish- 
 ing smack. The mate and the other hand suc- 
 ceeded in bringing the derelict safely into the 
 English Channel, and within three miles of 
 Dungeness ; she was then taken in tow by a steam- 
 ship and towed to the entrance of Dover Harbour^ 
 within which she was subsequently placed io. 
 
( 1517 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1518 
 
 XI. SHIP— SALVAGE— corafe'miecJ. 
 safety. — ^Actions of salvage were instituted by tlie 
 owners, master, and crew of tlie brig, and by the 
 owners, master, and crew of the steamship against 
 the derelict vessel and her cargo, and the Court 
 awarded a moiety of the value of the property 
 proceeded against, and apportioned three-fifths 
 of the amount to the owners, master, and crew of 
 the brig. The " Livietta " - 8 P. D. 24 
 
 4. Amount — Damage to Salvor.'] Where 
 
 the property saved is ample, losses voluntarily 
 incurred by the salvor should be transferred to 
 the owner of the property saved, and in addition 
 the salvor should receive a compensation for his 
 exertions and for the risk he runs of not receiving 
 any compensation in the event of his services 
 proving ineffectual. —The losses should be ascer- 
 tained with precision where practicable, but in 
 that case the salvage remimeration added thereto 
 should be fixed on a more moderate scale than 
 where the losses cannot be fixed with precision. — 
 "Where a Judge had awarded £3500 for losses and 
 £5000 for remuneration (the property saved being 
 £67,000) -.—Held, that a total of £6000 was suffi- 
 cient. BiED V. GiBB. The " De Bat " 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 559 
 
 5. Amount — Damage to Salvor — JSvi- 
 
 dence."] In an action of salvage in which the 
 value of the salving steamer was £85,000 and of her 
 cargo and freight £104,047, and of the salved 
 steamer £90,000 and of her cargo and freight 
 £89,535, the Court awarded £4500 to the owners, 
 £500 to the master, and £1500 to the crew. During 
 the hearing the owners tendered evidence of the 
 particular injuries to their steamer, caused by the 
 performance of the services, of the costs of the 
 repairs and of the pecuniary loss caused by the 
 detention of their steamer whilst such repairs 
 were being executed. Butt, J., refused to receive 
 this evidence or to refer it to the registrar and 
 merchants to assess the amount of such costs, and 
 losses. — On appeal from this decision: — Held, — 
 Per Brett, M.K. : That the Judge of the Admi- 
 ralty Court is not bound ex debito justitiae to 
 admit such evidence or to decree in terms that 
 a specific and ascertained amount shall be paid 
 to salvors in respect of damages or costs caused 
 by rendering salvage services, for he is not bound 
 always to award a sum sufficient to indemnify a 
 salvor. But the Judge may in his discretion 
 receive such evidence, and may, if it be proper 
 render the circumstances, include an amount in 
 respect of damages in his award. Having regard 
 to the large value in the present case, the decree 
 should be varied by awarding £1000 to the ship- 
 owners for the actual services rendered, and by 
 referring the costs of repairs to, and of the deten- 
 tion of, the salvor's steamer to be ascertained by 
 the registrar and merchants, unless the Appel- 
 lants were willing that the decree of the Court 
 below should stand. — ^Per Baggallay and Lind- 
 ley, L.JJ, : Where salvage services have occa- 
 sioned salvors serious pecuniary loss, and where 
 the value of the ship and cargo saved is ample 
 not only to defray loss sustained by a salvor, in 
 addition to a proper sum for the master and crew, 
 but also to leave a substantial surplus for the 
 owner of the property saved, the salvor should be 
 remunerated where possible with a sum sufficient 
 
 XI. SHIP — SALVAGE — eontirmed. 
 to reward him for the risk and labour and to 
 cover damages and expenses incurred through 
 rendering the service, and evidence of the 
 damages and expenses ought to be received by 
 the Judge, so that they may be ascertained with 
 precision. The present case should be determined 
 as stated by Brett, M.E.— r/»e De Bay (8 App. 
 Cas. 559) considered. The " City op Chester" 
 
 [9 P. D. 182 
 
 6. Amount — Evidence — Loss of Earnings 
 
 hj and Damage to Salving Ship,'} In an action for 
 salvage, evidence of the loss of earnings by and 
 of the costs of repairing damage done to the 
 salving vessel in consequence of rendering salvage 
 services is admissible. But these sums are to be 
 regarded as elements for consideration in estimat- 
 ing the amount of the salvage reward, but are 
 not to be obnsidered as fixed amounts to.be 
 awarded to the salvors in respect of these matters. 
 THE"SnNNisiDE" - - - 8P. D. 137 
 
 7. Amount — Bule of Court of Appeal in 
 
 Salvage Appeals."] Where a salvage award is 
 appealed against the Court of Appeal adheres 
 to the rule laid down in the Privy Council, and 
 will not alter the sum unless it has been given 
 on wrong principles, or with a misapprehension 
 of the facts, or it is exorbitant and out of reason. 
 — £6000 was awarded for services rendered to 
 a steamer which had run aground on a. reef in 
 the Eed Sea, nearly five iniles from Suez, and 
 which, owing to the heavy sea and the nature of 
 her position, was in imminent peril. The services 
 were rendered at much peril to the salving ship. — ■ 
 The Court of Appeal refused to alter this award. 
 The " Lancaster" 8 P. D. 65 ; 9 P. D. 14 
 
 8. Appeal from Justices — Jurisdiction — 
 
 Merchant Shipping Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. 
 c. 104), ss. 2, 458, ieO— Meaning of "Ship or 
 Boat stranded or otherwise in distress on the 
 Shore of any Sea or Tidal Water."] Justices 
 awarded salvage in respect of services rendered 
 to a hopper barge, which had been found adrifl; 
 without any person on board of her in the Wash 
 about three miles from Boston. The barge was 
 not furnished with any means by which she could 
 be propelled, and was used for dredging purposes : 
 — Seld, that the barge was a " ship in distress on 
 the shore of a sea or tidal water" within the 
 meaning of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854, 
 s. 458, and that the justices had jurisdiction to 
 award salvage. — The Leda (Sw. 40) followed. 
 The "Mao" - - - 7P. D.,38, 126 
 
 9. ■ • Costs — Success — Ahandonment.] The 
 
 V. fell in with the C, shewing signals of distress, 
 with her propeller shaft broken, about thirty 
 miles out of her usual course from America ta 
 England, and took her in tow. After the V. had 
 towed the C. from 8.10 p.m. to 7.45 a.m. the 
 hawser broke, and owing to the danger to the 
 cattle on board the V. would not take the C- agaia 
 in tow. By the services of the V. the C. wn« 
 brought ten to fourteen miles nearer her proper 
 track, and towed eighty-fiVe miles on her course, 
 and thus brought into greater comparative safety. 
 The C. subsequently arrived safely at Queens- 
 town: — Held, that the V. was entitled to some 
 salvage reward, and she was accordingly awarded 
 
( 1519 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1520 ) 
 
 XI. SHIP— SALVAGE— conJt/ivcd. 
 £200— Held, also, that the Plaintiffii were entitled 
 to the general costs of the action, but not to those 
 of a special issue as to damage to machinery on 
 which they had failed. The " Camellia " 
 
 [9 P. D. 27 
 
 10. Misconduct of Salvors — Counter- 
 claim.'] The master and crew of the 1'., a vessel in 
 distress, got on board the K., a steamer standing 
 by her, The mate and two of the oiew of tJie K. 
 afterwards went on boird the Y. but refused to 
 take her master back with them. The mate sub- 
 sequently also refused the services (if a steam- 
 tu;;, and finally having fiom want of local know- 
 ledge anchored the Y. in an insecure place, she 
 began to drift, was forsaken by the salvors, and 
 sank. She "was subsequently raised by her owners 
 at considerable expense. In an action for salvage 
 the owners of the Y. denied that a reward was 
 <iue, and counter-claimed for damages: — Held, 
 that the mate was guilty of misconduct in refusing 
 to take the master of tlie Y. oi^ board of her, and 
 to engage the services of the tug; but that if the 
 Y. had been ultimately saved such misconduct 
 would have worked a partial forfeiture of the 
 reward only : — Held, further, that as the loss 
 arising from the misconduct of the salvors was 
 probably equal to that from which the Y. was 
 lirst rescued, no salvage reward was due. — 
 Counter-claim for damages dismissed. The " Yan- 
 Yean " - 8 P. D. 147 
 
 11. Priority of Claims — Foreign Consul — 
 
 Fayments of Viaticum — Solicitor — 23 & 24 Vict, 
 c. 127, s. 28.] Salvage actions were brought 
 against an Italian vessel, and she was sold by 
 order of the Court. After the salvors had been 
 remunerated, the balance of the fund in Court 
 was insutiicienb to satisfy the costs of I he solicitors 
 who had appeared in the above actions for the 
 jjarties interested in the ship, and who sought to 
 enforce their claim for such costs by virtue of 
 23 & 24 Vict. u. 127, s, 28, as well as the claim of 
 the Italian consul in respect of the expenses of 
 sending the crew back to Italy. It was proved 
 that by the law of Italy such expenses and the 
 keep of the master and crew ranked next to the 
 salvage payments : — Held, that the claim of the 
 Italian consul had priority to that of the solicitors. 
 The " LiviETTA " 8 P. D. 209 
 
 12. Service to two Vessels — Constructive 
 
 Acceptance of Salvage Service.'] Where two vessels 
 are in collision and are entangled together in a 
 position dangerous to both, salvors who, by tow- 
 ing one of the ves.-els clear, free both vessels from 
 danger, are entitled to recover salvage reward 
 from the owners of both vessels. — A screw steam- 
 ship drifted, duiing a gale of wind, across the 
 bjws of a ship at anchor in the Mersey, and with 
 her propeller caught the anchor chains of the ship, 
 and the two vessels were held together in a posi- 
 tion dangerous to both. A steam-tug went to 
 the assistance of the ship, and held her whilst her 
 chains were slipped and towed her clear of the 
 steamship : — Held, that the owners, master, and 
 crew of the tug were entitled to recover salvage 
 lewardfrom the owners of the steamship. The 
 " VANDycK ' 7 p. B. 42 
 
 13. Ships belonging to same Owners — 
 
 XI. SHIP — SALVAGE— cojiJinwei. 
 
 Warranty of Seawortliiness—Bill of Lading— Ex- 
 ceptions — " Dangers and accidents of the seas."] A 
 steamship laden with cargo became disabled at sea 
 in consequence of the breaking of her crank shaft. 
 Such breakage was caused by a latent defect in the 
 shaft, arising from a flaw in the welding, which it 
 was impossible to discover. Her cargo was shipped 
 under bills of lading whicli contained among the 
 excepted perils " all and every the dangers and 
 accidents of the seas and of navigation of what- 
 soever nature or kind." Another vessel belong- 
 ing to the same owners towed the disabled vessel 
 to a place of safety. In an action of salvage 
 brought by the owners, master, and crew of the 
 salving vessel against the owners of cargo on the 
 salved ship: — Held, that the master and crew 
 were entitled to salvage, but that the owners were 
 not, for that there was an implied warranty by 
 them that the vessel was seawoi-thy at the begin- 
 ning of the voyage : — Held, also, tliat the excep- 
 tions in the bill of lading had no application to a 
 vessel not seaworthy at the time of sailing, and 
 that the Defendants were entitled to judgment on 
 their counter-claim for the salvage awarded to 
 the master and crew. The " Glenfruin " 
 
 [10 P. D. 103 
 
 Assistance rendered by pilot 7 ft. B. B. 129 
 
 See Shlp — Pilot. 8. 
 
 XII. SHIP— SEAMEN. 
 
 Neglect to join Ship — Merchant Shipping 
 
 Act (17 & 18 Vict. c. 104), s. 2i3— Summary Pro- 
 ceeding before Justices — Exclusion of Civil Re- 
 medy — Employers and Workmen Act (iS <t39 Vict, 
 c. 90), s. 4.] -The Merchant Shipping Act, 1854 
 (17 & 18 Yiot. c. 104), s. 243— which enables a 
 seaman who neglects without reasonable cause to 
 join his ship to be punished upon proceedings be- 
 fore a court of sunmiary jurisdiction with impri- 
 sonment and forfeiture of part of his wages — by 
 implication takes away any other remedy against 
 the seaman for the breach of contract, and the 
 shipowner caunot, where the amount which he 
 claims does not exceed £10, take proceedings for 
 the recovery of damages under the Employers and 
 Woikmen Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 90), s. 4. 
 Gkeat K orthern Steamship Fishing Compaxy v. 
 Edgehill 11 ft. B. D. 225 
 
 SHIP — Arrest— Bail for exorbitant sum — Costs 
 
 [9 P, B. 46 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Costs. 1. 
 
 Arrest — Notice — Kemoval — Contempt 
 
 [10 P. B. 120 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Arrest of 
 Ship. 2. 
 
 Carriage of goods — Liability of shipowner 
 
 — Admission by master — Evidence 
 
 [10 P. B. 137 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Evidence. 
 1. 
 
 County Court — Admiralty jurisdiction — 
 
 Goods carried on ship 
 
 [7 P. B. 247 ; 12 ft. B. B. 115 
 See County Covet — Jurisdiction. 2, 3. 
 
 Discovery of ship's ptipers 8 ft. B. B. 142 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction 01' DoCUJIkNTS. 14. 
 
( 1521 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1522 ) 
 
 SHIP — continued. 
 
 Insurance. 
 
 See Cases under Insurance, Maeine. 
 
 Jurisdiction of Adnilralty Division. 
 
 See Cases under Pbaoticb^Admikalty 
 — Jurisdiction. 
 Larceny from British ship in foreign port 
 
 See Jurisdiction. 2. [10 Q. B. D. 76 
 
 Malicious arrest — Commission on bail bond 
 
 —Damages - - 10 P. D. 168 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Salvage. 
 6'. 
 
 Maritime lien — Jurisdiction - 6 P. S. 106 
 
 See Foreign Judgment. 2. 
 
 18 Ch. D. 354 
 
 Statute op — Trusts. 
 
 Mortgage of - 
 
 See Limitations, 
 2. 
 
 Order given by harbour master — Liability 
 
 of harbour commissioners 10 P. D. 131 
 See Negligence — Liability. 10. 
 
 Owner domiciled in Great Britain — Neces- 
 saries—County Court 6 ft. B. D. 165 
 See County Court — Jurisdiction. 1. 
 
 Owner — Limitation of liability. 
 
 See Cases under Peaotice — Admiralty 
 — Limitation op Liability. 
 
 Owner — Privity of contract — Charterer 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 120 
 See Colonial Law — Queensland. 
 
 Ke-insuranoe — Voyage over when policy 
 
 effected - 7 Q. B. D, 456 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Eisk. 
 
 — Unfinished— Sale of - 6 App. Cas. 588 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods. 2. 
 
 SHIPBTTILDIKG CONTEACT— Validity 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 510 
 
 See Contract — Validity. 3. 
 
 SHIP'S HUSBAND — Discharge of, principal by 
 mode of dealing with agent — Delay 
 
 [9 Q,. B. D. 623 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 2. 
 
 SHOOTING, EIGHT OF — Overstocking land with 
 game — Injury to crops 15 Q. B. D. 258 
 
 See Game. 1. 
 
 Statute of Frauds - 9 Q. B. D. 315 
 
 See Feauus, Statute op. 3. 
 
 Woodlands— Poor-rate - 6 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 See Poor-rate — Rateable Value. 4. 
 
 SHOET NOTICE OF MOTION 22 Ch. D. S04 
 
 See Practice — Suj-ebme Court — Notice 
 op Motion. 2. 
 
 SHOETHAND NOTES— Costs of 19 Ch. D, 80 ; 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 163 
 
 See Peactice — Supeeme Oouet — Costs. 
 45, 46. 
 
 Costs of-^Taxation — Solicitor and client 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 207 
 See Solicitor— Bills op Costs. 13. 
 
 ■ Meeting of creditors - 20 Ch. D. 281 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Composition. 3. 
 
 SHOETHAND NOTES— eon/ maetJ. 
 
 Evidence - - - 29 Ch. D. 448 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 2. 
 
 Production of— Privilege 30 <3h. D. 116 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Pro- 
 duction op Documents. 23. 
 
 Publication of lecture - 26 Ch. D. 374 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 2. 
 SIAH — Order in Council 
 
 See Jurisdiction — Gazette. 
 SIDING — EaUway — Eights of landowner 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 190 
 See Railway Company — Eailways 
 Clauses Act. 8. 
 SIGNATITEE- Acknowledgment of— Will 
 
 [7 P. D. 103 
 See Peobate — Execution. 1. 
 
 Forged documents — Estoppel 
 
 [13 ft. B. D, 103 ; 6 App, Cas. 82 
 See Estoppel — Conduct. 1, 2. 
 SIGNIFICAVIT— Writ of - 6 ft. B. D. 376 
 
 See Peactice — Ecclesiastical — 
 Church Discipline Act. 2. 
 
 SIMILAEITY— Trade-mark— Eegistration 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 505 
 
 See Trade-mark — Eegistration. 13. 
 
 SIMPLE CONTEACT DEBT— Retainer by heir-at- 
 law - - 27 Ch, D. 478 
 See Eetainbr. 
 
 SITE FOE PLACES OF WOESHIP, 
 
 See Chuech Building AoTi — Statutes. 
 SLANDEE. 
 
 Sec Cases under Depamaticn — Slandee . 
 
 Judicial proceedings — Advocate 
 
 [11 ft. B. D, 588 
 
 See Defamation — Peivilege. 2. 
 
 Law of New South Wales — Costs 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 279 
 See Colonial Law— New South Wales. 
 3. 
 
 Witness— House of Commons — Privilege 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 307 
 See Defamation — Peivilege. 4. 
 
 SLANDEE OF TITLE — Notice against purchas- 
 ing patented articles - 19 Ch, D. 386 
 
 See Patent — Infringement. 4. 
 
 SLATE MINES (GUNPOWDEE) ACT, 1882. 
 
 See Mine — Mines Regulation Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 SMALL BANKEUPTCIES. 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1SS3— Statutes. 
 SOIL — Alienation of — Land for public recreation 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 833 
 See Scotch Law — Highway. I. 
 " SOLE USE AND DISPOSAL "—Will— Construc- 
 tion - 17 Ch. D. 794 
 See Will — Separate Use. 2. 
 
 SOLICITING CTTSTOMEES- Partners 
 
 [22 Ch, D, 504 
 
 See Partnership — Dissolution. 3. 
 
 ■ Sale of goodwill 
 See Goodwill. 
 
 - 19 Ch. D. 355 ; 
 
 2, 3. [27 Ch. D. 145 
 
( 1523 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1524 ) 
 
 SOLICITOE:— 
 
 Ool. 
 
 I. Akticled Cleek 
 
 1523 
 
 II. Adthokity 
 
 - 1523 
 
 III. Bill or Costs - 
 
 - 1524 
 
 (a.) Genekal. 
 
 
 (6.) Eemttnebatiox Act. 
 
 
 IV. Cebtiitoate 
 
 - 1534 
 
 T. Liabilities 
 
 1534 
 
 VI. Lien 
 
 1538 
 
 VII. Misconduct 
 
 1542 
 
 VIII. Eetainek 
 
 1542 
 
 IX. IjNQUALiriED 
 
 1543 
 
 I. SOLICIXOE— AHTICIED CLERK. 
 
 1. Return of Premium.] A solicitor -v/ho 
 
 had received u, premium on taking an articled 
 clerk died dming the term of the articles : — 
 Held, that Ms estate was not liable for the return 
 of any part of the premium. Eerns v. Cakr 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 409 
 
 II. SOIICITOR— AUTHORITY. 
 
 ■ Agency — Authority of Solicitor to receive 
 
 Mortgage Money — Possession by Solicitor of Trans- 
 fer Deed executed hy Client.'] G. and H. were 
 mortgagees for £1000 on property of S. Their 
 solicitors, D. & P., who had the deeds in their 
 custody, applied to the Defendant, who was also 
 a client of theirs, saying that tliey helieved he 
 had £1000 to invest on mortgage, and that G. 
 and H. wauted £1000 on a transfer of S.'s moit- 
 gage. The Defendant inspected the property, 
 and being satisfied, he, on the 19th of June, 187S, 
 sent the £1000 to D. & P., who gave him a 
 receipt for it. In July, D. & P. fiaudulently in- 
 duced G. and H. to execute a deed of transfer to 
 the Defendant with a receipt indorsed, which deed 
 they stated to G. and H. to be a deed of reconvey- 
 ance to S. on his paying off the mortgage. D. & 
 P. shortly afterwards handed this deed with the 
 title deeds to the Defendant, and went on paying 
 him inteVest as if they had received it from S. 
 who was in fact paying his interest to the agents 
 of G. and H. G. and H. made no inquiry as to 
 the mortgage, and this went on till 1883, when D. 
 & P. hecame bankrupts, and the £1000 received 
 from the Defendant, which had never been handed 
 over to G. and H., was lost. G. and H. then 
 "brought their action against the Defendant, 
 asserting a right against the property in tUe 
 nature of an unpaid vendor's lien : — Seld, by the 
 Vice-Chancellor of the county palatine that on 
 the evidence in the case D. & P. had authority to 
 receive mortgage money on behalf of the Plain- 
 tiffs, and must he taken to have received the 
 £1000 on their behalf, and that the action must be 
 dismissed. — On appeal, Cotton, L.J., expressed 
 great doubt (the other Judges giving no opinion 
 on the point) whether D. & P., assuming them to 
 have authority to receive mortgage money on be- 
 half of the Plaintiff's, could be taken ever to have, 
 in fact, received this £1000 on their behalf. — But 
 held, by the Com't of Appeal, that the decision 
 must be affirmed on the ground that as the Plain- 
 tiffs by the deed of transfer and receipt which 
 they handed to D. & P. enabled them to represent 
 to the Defendant that the £1000 which he had 
 previously handed to D. & P. had come to the 
 
 II. S0LICTI0^—&V1K01B,ITY— continued. 
 hands of the Plaintiffs, they had raised a counter 
 equity which prevented their claiming a vendor's- 
 lien, though this would not have been the case- 
 if (D. & P. having no authority to receive money 
 for the Plaintiffs) the Defendant had paid the 
 £1000 to D. & P. at tlie time when the deeds were 
 delivered to him, since he would then have known 
 that the Plaintiffs had not received the money. — 
 JCx parte Swinlanhs {11 Ch. D. 525) distinguished.. 
 Gohdon v. James - - 30 Ch. D. 249 
 
 III. SOLICITOR— BILL OF COSTS. 
 
 Solicitors' Eemuneration.] The Act 44 & 45- 
 Vict. c. 44 (the Solicitors Remuneration Act, 1881^ 
 provides for the making of General Orders to pre- 
 scribe and regulate the remuneration of solicitors 
 in respect of conveyancing and other non-conten- 
 tious bu^ness. 
 
 Sect. 5. Any General Order under the Act mat/ 
 authorize and regulate the talcing by a solicitor 
 from his client of security for future remuneration,, 
 to be ascertained by taxation or othermse, and the 
 allowance of interest. 
 
 Sect. 7. As long as any General Order under 
 the Act is in operation tlie taxation of bill of costs 
 is to be regulated thereby. 
 
 By sect. 8 (1) it is competent for a solicitor, 
 with respect to any business to which the provisions 
 of the Act relates, whether any General Order- 
 under the Act is in operation or not, to make an 
 agreement loith his client, and for a client to make 
 an agreement with his solicitor, before or after or 
 in the course of the transaction of any such busi- 
 ness, for the remuneration of the solicitor to such 
 amount and in such manner as the solicitor and 
 client think fit, either by a gross sum, or by com- 
 mission or percentage, or by salary, or otherwise ;: 
 and it is competent for tlie solicitor to accept from 
 tlie client, and for the client to give to the solicitor, - 
 remuneration accordingly. 
 
 (2.) The agreement must be in writing, signed, 
 by the person to be bound thereby w by his agent 
 in that behalf. 
 
 (3.) The agreement may, if the soUdtor and tlie 
 client think fit, he made on tlie terms that the 
 amount of the remuneration therein stipulated for- 
 either shall include or shall not include all or any 
 disbursements made by the solicitor in respect of 
 searches, plans, travelling, stamps, fees, or other 
 matter's. 
 
 (4.) The agreement may be sued and recovered 
 on or impeached or set aside in the like mamier 
 and on the like grounds as an agreement not relat- 
 ing to tlie remuneration of a solicitor; and if, 
 under any order for taxation of costs, such agree- 
 ment being relied on by the solicitor shall be ob- 
 jected to by the client as unfair or unreasonahle,. 
 the taxing master or officer of the Court may 
 inquire into the facts, and certify the same to tlie 
 Court; and if, upon such certificate, it shall ap- 
 pear to the Court or Judge that just cause has been 
 shewn either for cancelling the agreement, or for 
 reducing the amount payable under the same, the 
 Court or Judge has power to order such cancella- 
 tion or reduction, and to give all such directions 
 necessary or proper for tlie purpose of can-ying 
 such order into effect, or othenoise conseguentiaZ- 
 thereon, as to the Court or Judge may seem fit. 
 
 Sect. 9. The Attorneys and Solicitors Act, 1870,. 
 
( 1525 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASKS. 
 
 ( 152G ) 
 
 III. SOLICITOB— BILL OF COSTS— omtinued. 
 does not apply to any bu^ness to which this Act 
 
 (a.) General. 
 
 1. After Payment — Order fm' Delivery of 
 
 Bill after Payment— 6 & 1 Vict. c. 73, s. 41.] 
 AVliere twelve calendar months have elapsed since 
 payment of a solicitor's bill of costs by his client, 
 such bill, although not signed by the solicitor, is 
 prohibited by 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, s. 41, from being 
 referred to taxation. In re Sdtton & Elliott 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 377 
 
 2. After Payment — " Special Circum- 
 stances " — Solicitors Act, 1843 (6*7 Vict. c. 73), 
 s. 41.] Mortgagees for £2000 -were proceeding 
 to sell the mortgaged estates. On the ] st of Sep- 
 tember, S., the mortgagor's solicitor, -wrote to B., 
 tlie mortgagees solicitor, informing him that he 
 had found a transferee, and proposing to complete 
 the transfer on the 3rd. B. wrote lacls: proposing 
 the 10th for completion, and afterwards postponed 
 the appointment to the 13th. His bill of costs, 
 which amounted with surveyor's charges to more 
 than £450, was received by S. on tlie 9th. On 
 that day S. wrote to B., saying that the bill of 
 costs appeared excessive, and would require to be 
 carefully gone into, but did not propose to post- 
 pone the completion. On the 12th S. took with 
 him a written protest against the bill, and had 
 two interviews with B., at which arrangements 
 were made for completion. S. did not mention 
 the subject of costs at either interview, but de- 
 posed that he had intended to do so at a third 
 appointment on the same day, which B. did not 
 keep. On the 13th the parties met, the transfer 
 was completed, and the bill of costs paid, B. re- 
 fusing to part with the deeds unless it was paid. 
 S. delivered his written protest, and it appeared 
 that B. expressed willingDCSs to reconsider his 
 bill if any item were shewn to be erroneous, but 
 said nothing to the effect that it was to be treated 
 as oj)eu to taxation. The mortgagor applied for 
 taxation, alleging pressure and overcharge, but 
 not referring to any specitio items of overcharge. 
 Bacon, V.C, made an order for taxation, and B. 
 appealed : — Held, by Cotton and Fry, L. JJ. (dis- 
 sentiente Bowen, L. J.), that the order for taxation 
 must be discharged, for that as the s-hortness of 
 the interval between the delivery of the bill and 
 the time fixed for completion did not arise from 
 any act of the mortgagee's solicitor, but was 
 owing only to the desire of the mortgagor for 
 speedy completion, there was no pressure such as 
 to justify taxation, though the case would have 
 been otherwise if the mortgagee had been pressing 
 ■for an early settlement : — Held, by Bowen, L.J., 
 that the Solicitors Act, 1843, sect. 41, authorizes 
 taxation after payment where there ore special 
 circumstances which, in the opinion of the Judge, 
 require the same ; that there is no inilexible rule 
 that the special circumstances must be pressure 
 with overcharge, or overcharge so gross as to 
 amoxmt to fraud ; and that in the present case, as 
 the parties did not at completion treat the bill as 
 finally settled, and B. had taken advantage of the 
 inconvenience which a postponement of the settle- 
 ment would have occasioned to the mortgagor, 
 there were special circumstances justifying taxa- 
 tion:— fleZd, by Bowen, L.J., that where a bill is 
 
 III. SOLICITOB— BILL OF COSTS-^continued. 
 
 (a.) General — continued, ' 
 
 so large as to be redolent of overcharge it is not 
 nece.ssary that specific items of overcharge should- 
 be pointed out -.—HeU, by Fry, L.J., that though, 
 the bill appeared excessive, the Court could not 
 treat overcharge as shewn, unless specific items 
 were pointed out on which it could exercise its 
 judgment. In re Boycott - 29 Ch. D, 571 
 
 3. Agency Charges — Country Solicitor 
 
 and London Agent — Charge for Counsel's Fee- 
 not yet paid.'] London solicitors acted as agents 
 in London for a country solicitor during the 
 years 1877 to 1884 inclusive. The agency was- 
 terminated in 1884. During the period of the 
 agency the London agents delivered to the country 
 solicitor, generally once a year but sometimes- 
 oftener, detailed bills of the charges which they 
 olaiimed against him in each of the actions or 
 other matters in which they had acted for him. 
 They also delivered to him a cash account for 
 each year, in which he was credited with alli 
 payments made by him to them, and all moneys- 
 received by them on his behalf, and was debited 
 with all payments made by them to him or oa 
 his behalf, and with the gross amounts of the 
 several bills of charges which had been deli- 
 vered. The balance appearing to be due from 
 him on each account but the last, was carried on. 
 to the next account. Some of the actions con- 
 tinued during several years, and one of them 
 {Hhodes v. Jenkins) continued during the whole 
 period of the agency, and was not then con- 
 cluded. After the close of the agency the country 
 solicitor claimed a taxation of the whole of the- 
 bills : — Held, by Pearson, J,, that only those bills 
 which had been delivered within twelve months 
 could be faxed, and that the earlier bills must be- 
 treated as having been settled in account and thus- 
 paid. — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that the- 
 bills of costs in Ehodes v. Jenlcins (to which the 
 appeal was limited), notwithstanding the fact 
 that all the costs in it had not yet been taxed,, 
 being in fact separate bills, could not be treated as- 
 one continuous bill, at the option of the country 
 solicitor. — The London agents had charged the- 
 country solicitor with fees to counsel which had 
 not yet been paid, but the country solicitor had 
 not supplied them with sufficient funds to pay 
 the fees : — Held, by Pearson, J., that this charge 
 was not a circumstance sufficient to justify a 
 taxation. In re Nelson, Son, & Hastings 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 1 
 
 4. Assignee — Costs — Taxation — 6 & 7' 
 
 Vict. c. 73, 6. 37.] Whether an assignee of costs- 
 due to a solicitor is such an " assignee " of the- 
 soliuitor as is, under sect. 37 of the Act 6 & 7 
 Vict. o. 73, entitled to obtain a taxation of the- 
 costs, qusere. — But if an assignee of costs can 
 obtain a taxation, he cannot obtain an order of 
 course to tax one bill of costs out of several, even 
 if that bill only has been assigned to him. Ani 
 order to tax one bill out of several alone can only 
 be obtained by means of a special application. In 
 re Ward - - 28 Ch. D, 719- 
 
 6. Asivgaee— Solicitors Act, lUiS (6*7 
 
 Vict. c. 78), s. ST— Signature— Jvdicature Act, 
 1873 (36&'67 Vict. c. 66), s. 25, sub-s. 6.} A 
 solicitor assigned his bill of costs and the right 
 
( 1527 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1528 ) 
 
 IIL SOIICITOE— BILE OF COSTa— continued. 
 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 "to recover on it, and the assignee gave notice of 
 the assignment and delivered the bill to the party 
 to be charged inclosed in a letter signed by him- 
 ■self. After the expiration of a month he brought 
 •an action in his own name on the bill of costs : — 
 Seld, that the Plaintiff was an assignee within 
 ■sect. 37 of the Solicitors' Act, 1843, and was 
 •entitled to maintain the action. Ingle v. 
 M'CoTCHAN - - 12 ft. B. D. 618 
 
 6. Costs of Taxation — Offer hy Solicitor 
 
 to reduce tlie Amount — Certifying special Circum- 
 stances— 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, s. 87.] C, a soli- 
 citor, sent in to executors a bill of costs for £83, 
 writing at the foot, " say £78," and the £78 was 
 paid. The residuary legatee obtained an order 
 io tax the bill, which was taxed at £66, being 
 more than five-sixths of £78, but less than five- 
 •sixths of £83. The residuary legatee objected 
 to certain items as excessive, and the Taxing 
 Master considered that they were excessive ; but 
 lield, that, as the executors had autliorized them 
 ■nud admitted their liability to pay them, the 
 residuary legatee could not have them reduced : — 
 Held, by Chitty, J., that the Taxing Master was 
 right in allowing these items ; that the bill must 
 be treated as a bill for £78, from which less than 
 one-sixth had been taxed off, and that the solicitor 
 was entitled to the costs of the reference. — P., a 
 •solicitor, delivered a bill for £362, but stated that 
 he would only claim £320, and the £320 only was 
 entered in the cash account which he delivered 
 io his clients. The clients obtained an order for 
 taxation. The Taxing Master ta-sed the bill at 
 £280, being more than five-sixths of £320, but 
 less than five-sixths of £362, and certified that ho 
 had allowed the solicitor the costs of the refer- 
 ence, as he considered that since he had never 
 ■claimed more than £320, the difference of £4:2 
 between this sum and the amount of the whole 
 loill, ought to be deducted from tiie sums taxed 
 •off, thus reducing them to £40, which was less 
 than a sixth of the sum he had claimed -.—Held, 
 by Pearson, J., that the solicitor must pay the 
 ■costs of the reference. — Held, on appeal, that in 
 C.'s Case, the bill delivered, within the meaning 
 •of 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, a. 37, was a bill for £83, and 
 that, as more than oue-sixth had been taxed off, 
 the solicitor must, according to that section, pay 
 the costs of the reference; the cas-j not coming 
 within tlie provLso giving the Court a discretion 
 where special circumstances are certified. — Held. 
 in P.'s Case, that special circumstances were certi- 
 fied, so as to give the Court a discreliun as to the 
 costs of the reference, but that tlie special circum- 
 .stauces were not such as to induce the Court to 
 depart from the general rule that the costs of the 
 Joference should follow the event of the taxation, 
 •and that in this case also, more than one-sixth 
 liaving been taxed off the £362, the solicitor must 
 pay the costs of the reference. In re Cakthew. 
 In re Paull - 27 Ch. D. 485 
 
 1- Delivery of Bin ~ Condition— Witli- 
 
 ■drawal — Delivery of Second Bill — Taxation, 
 Common Order/or— Practice— Solicitors Act (6 & 7 
 Vict.c. 73), s. 37.] A solicitor may, when send- 
 ing in his bill of costs to his client, reserve 
 to himself the right to withdraw or alter it on 
 
 III. SOLICITOE— BILL OF COSTS— continued. 
 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 condition, provided the condition is fully and 
 clearly stated to the client : but if the solicitor 
 has sent in his bill without any condition, or with 
 a condition which lie could not fairly impose, 
 he cannot afterwards withdraw it or send in an 
 amended bill. — A firm of solicitors, on being 
 pressed by their clients to send in their bill of 
 costs, delivered a bill accompanied by a letter 
 saying that there were certain charges which, 
 owing to haste, had not been included in the bill, 
 but that they were willing to accept a stated sum 
 in full discharge, though if such sum was not 
 paid within eight days, they reserved to them- 
 selves the right to witlidraw the bill and deliver 
 another. The clients, however, insisting on being 
 furnished with the particulars of further charges, 
 the solicitors wrote withdrawing the bill. The 
 clients then obtained a common order for taxa- 
 tion of that bill, and for delivery and taxation of 
 a further bill. — On motion by the solicitors, Bacon, 
 V.C., discharged the common order on the groimd 
 that no bill had been " delivered" within the mean- 
 ing of sect. 37 of the Solicitors Act, 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73 ; 
 but ordered the solicitors to deliver a bill within 
 fourteen days, such bill to be taxed. — The soli- 
 citors, in pursuance of that order, delivered a 
 second bill, but of a considerably less amount than 
 the first, whereupon the clients appealed to re- 
 verse tliat order and to have it declared that the 
 bill to be taxed was that first delivered : —Held, 
 by Cotton and Lindley, L.JJ., discharging the 
 last-mentioned order, that the first bill was con- 
 ditional, but that the condition was one which a 
 solicitor could not impose on his client, and that 
 theiefoie the original common order for taxation 
 must stand. — Held, also, that the clients should 
 under the circumstances, instead of obtaining the 
 common order to tax, have obtained a special 
 order on petition raising the question as to the 
 right of the solicitors to withdraw their bill : they 
 were therefore allowed no costs of the proceedings 
 in the Court below, but only the costs of the 
 appeal. In re Thompson 30 Ch. D. 441 
 
 8. Journeys — Practire — Taxation of Costs 
 
 — Country Solicito) — Journeys to London.'] Upon 
 a summons by a solicitor for an order directing 
 the Taxing Master to review his taxation of a bill 
 of costs : — Held, that tlie journeys of a country 
 solicitor to town to attend counsel and otherwise 
 to conduct the proceedings in an action ought to 
 be allowed, where the solicitor had authority from 
 his client to make these charges ; but tliat such 
 journeys to town ought not to be allowed simply 
 on the principle that the country solicitor would 
 probably be better acquainted with the subject- 
 matter than his London agent. — In re Foster 
 (8 Ch. D. 598) dissented from. In re Stoeek 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 189 
 
 9. ■ Married Woman — Ecceii-er — Taxation 
 
 of Solicitor's Bill — Solicitors Act (6 (fc 7 Vict, 
 c. 73), s. 43 — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 25, sub-s. 8.] 
 M., a married woman, by her next friend, applied 
 to tax the bill of coits of her solicitor incurred in 
 a suit relating to her separate estate. After the 
 Taxing Master's certificate had been filed, an 
 order was made on the application of the solicitor 
 directing an Inquiry of wuat M.'s separate estate 
 
( 1529 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1530 ) 
 
 III. SOLICITOR— BILL OF COSTS— continued. 
 
 (o.) General — continued. 
 consisted at the date of the filing of the certificate 
 capable of being reached by the judgment and 
 execution of the Court, and appointing a person 
 to receive it until tlie amount found due on taxa- 
 tion was paid : — Held, that this order was proper, 
 and tliat it was not necessary to take separate 
 proceedings by action to enforce the demand 
 against the separate estate. In re Peace & 
 Waller - 24 Ch. D. 405 
 
 10. Mortgage — Taxation — Mortgagor and 
 
 Mortgagee — Trustee — Profit Costs.'] Where one 
 of a body of mortgagees is a solicitor and acts as 
 such in enforcing the mortgage security, he is 
 entitled to cliarge profit costs against the mort- 
 gagor, whether the mortgagees are trustees or 
 not. — If in such a case the mortgagor, in apply- 
 ing for an order to tax the bill of the solicitor- 
 mortgagee, desires to raise the objection to profit 
 costs, he sliould state his objection in his petition 
 tor taxation. Jn re Donaldson 27 Oh. D. 544 
 
 11. Negligence — Taxation — Power of 
 
 Taxing Master to disallow Items caused hy Negli- 
 gence.} The Taxing Master in taxing a bill of 
 costs between a solicitor and his client has ppwer 
 ti) disallow the costs of proceedings in an action 
 conducted by the solicitor which were occasioned 
 by the negligence or ignorance of the solicitor. 
 But if the negligence goes to the loss of the 
 whole action, he ought not to disallow them, but 
 to leave the client to bring an action for negli- 
 gence against the solicitor. In re Massey & 
 Carey 26 Ch. D. 459 
 
 12. Past Costs — Ex parte Order for Taxa- 
 tion — Motion to discharge — Parol Agreement to 
 pay a Lump Swm — Attorneys and Solicitors Act, 
 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 28), s. 4.] Since the 
 Attorneys and Solicitors Act, 1870, a verbal 
 agreement by a client to pay his solicitor a lump 
 sum in discharge of past costs is not binding on 
 the client. In re Kussell, Son, & Scott 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 114 
 
 13. Shorthand Notes — Solicitor and Client 
 
 -—Taxation.'] Where a solicitor proposes to incur 
 imusual expense in the course of an action, such 
 as taking shorthand notes of the evidence or pro- 
 curing the attendance of experts and scientific 
 witnesses, it is his duty to point out to his client 
 that such expense might not be allowed on taxa- 
 tion as between party and party, and might there- 
 fore have to be borne by the client whatever 
 might be the result of the trial. Therefore, where 
 the Solicitor had omitted such duty, he was not 
 allowed on taxation as between solicitor and client 
 the cost of shorthand notes of the evidence, al- 
 though the client authorized him to employ a 
 shomliand writer to take such notes and used and 
 otherwise availed himself of them after they had 
 been so taken. In re Blyth & Fanshawb 
 
 [10 a. B. D. 207 
 
 14. Third Counsel — Costs of Third Counsel 
 
 on Appeal] The rule laid down in In re Blyth 
 and Fanthawe (10 Q. B. D. 207) applies to the 
 costs of employing a third counsel on the hearing 
 of an appeal, the expense being an unusual one. — 
 Therefore, even if a solicitor has obtained, his 
 Ghent's sanction to the employment of a third 
 
 III. SOLICITOB— Bill or COSTS— continued. 
 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 counsel on an appeal, the costs will not be alloweii 
 on taxation between solicitor and client, unless the 
 solicitor has also explained to the client that the 
 costs will probably not be allowed as between 
 party and party, and that, even if he succeeds on 
 his appeal, he may have to pay the costs of the- 
 third counsel himself. — Deoijon of Divisional 
 Court afiirmed. In re Broad and Broad 
 
 [IS Q. B. D. 252, 420 
 15. Trustee of WiR— Authority hy Tes- 
 tator to charge for iion-professicmal Business.] A 
 testiitor by his will authorized any trustee thereof 
 who migiit be a solicitor to make the usual pro- 
 fessional or other proper and reasonable charges, 
 for all business, done and time expended in relation 
 to tlie trusts of the will, wlietlier such business 
 was usually within the business of a solicitor or 
 not. On tlie further consideration of an action for 
 the administration of the testator's estate an order 
 was made for the taxation of the costs, charges, 
 and expenses of the trustees, aijd it was directed 
 that the Taxing Master sliould have regard to the 
 (erms of the will as to the costs of the trustees : — 
 Held, that the Taxing Master had power to allow 
 to a trustee who was a solicitor the proper charges, 
 for business not strictly of a professional nature 
 transacted by him in relation to the trust estate. 
 In re Ames. Ames v. Taylor 25 Ch. D. 72 
 
 16. Trustee of Will — Executor — Direction 
 
 Professional Charges — Construction.] A testatrix 
 by her will appointed her solicitor (who prepared 
 her will) one of her two executors and trustees, 
 and, stating that it was her desire that he should 
 continue to act as solicitor in relation to her 
 property and aifairs, and should " make the 
 usual professional charges," expressly directed that 
 notwithstanding his acceptance of the oiEce of 
 trustee and executor he should be entitled to- 
 make the same professional charges and to receive 
 the same pecuniary emoluments and remuneration 
 for all business done by him, and all attendances, 
 time, and trouble given and bestowed by him in 
 or about the execution of the trusts and powers of 
 the will, and the management and administra- 
 tion of the trust estate, real or personal, as if he, 
 not being himself a trustee or executor, wer& 
 employed by the trustee or executor. Under this- 
 direction the solicitor-executor delivered bills of 
 costs which included charges for all business done 
 by him, whether such business was sti'ictly pro- 
 fessional or could have been transacted by a lay 
 
 executor without the assistance of a solicitor : 
 
 Held, that all items which were not of a strictly 
 
 professional character ought to be disallowed. 
 
 In re Ames (25 Ch. D. 72) distinguished. In re- 
 Chapple. Newton v. Chapman 27 Ch. D. 584 
 
 17. Undertaking to pay Costs— Party 
 
 and Party — Taxation— Attorneys and Solicitors' 
 Act (6 * 7 Viet. e. 78), s. 88.] A creditor's peti- 
 tion to wind up a company having been with- 
 drawn on payment of the debt, the solicitors for 
 the company undertook by letter with tlie peti- 
 tioning creditor's solicitors "to pay all proper 
 costs and charges incidental to and recoverable 
 under such petition, such costs, in case of dif- 
 ference, to be taxed."— The amount of the costs 
 not being agreed upon, the company obtained,. 
 
( 1531 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1532 ) 
 
 IIL SOLICITOSr— BILL OF 00515— continued. 
 
 (a.) General — continued. 
 ' ex parte, an order to tax under tlie third party- 
 clause (sect. 38) of the Attorneys and Solicitors 
 Act, and served it on the solicitors of the peti- 
 tioning creditors : — Held, on motion to discharge 
 the order, that the undertaking was a personal 
 imdertakiiig to pay the costs, such costs being 
 -costs as between party and party ; that the 38th 
 section of the Act had reference only to the tax- 
 ation of costs as between solicitor and client ; 
 that the order, therefore, was irregular, and must 
 bs discharged with costs to be paid by the com- 
 pany. — Be Hartley (30 Beav. 620) considered and 
 • explained. In re Geukd y, Kekshaw, & Co. 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 108 
 (6.) Eemdneration Act. 
 
 18, Conducting Sale — Settled Land Act, 
 
 1882 — Sale by Tenant for Life — General Order of 
 August, 1882 — Solicitor's Remuneration in respect 
 ■ of Business connected tvith Sales — Auctiont'n-'s 
 Charges.'] Settled property which had been put up 
 for sale by auction by the tenant for life under the 
 Settled Land Act, 1882, but withdrawn for want 
 of any sufficient oifer, having been sold by private 
 •contract on the same day : — Held, on summons by 
 the trustees for tlie decision of the Court, that 
 ■one charge, according to the scale set out in 
 Part I. of Schedule 1 of the General Order under 
 the Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881, was pay- 
 able out of the purchase-money to the tenant 
 for life's solicitor for conducting tlie sale, in- 
 cluding the conditions of sale, and one charge 
 for deducing the title and completing the con- 
 veyance, including the preparation of the con- 
 tract ; and that the costs of the concurrence in the 
 sale by the mortgagees of the tenant for life, and 
 
 ■a proper sum for the auctioneer's charges, wore 
 -also payable out of the purchase-money. In re 
 Beck. In re Caktington Estate 24 Ch. D. 608 
 
 19. Conveyancing — Charges for Pressure 
 
 — Taxation — General Order, August, 1882 (44 ifc 
 45 Vict. c. 44) — Percentage.'] A tenant having 
 an option of purchase of the fee at a given 23rice 
 
 ■on the terms of his payiug all the vendor's costs, 
 gave notice in December, 1882, of his exercise of 
 the option, and stated that he should not require 
 an abstract of title. The time for completion 
 was the 25th of March, 1883, but it was arranged 
 for tlie tenant's convenience that the completion 
 
 . should be six weeks earlier, and that the pro- 
 perty should be conveyed in two lots. He sent 
 
 . his draft conveyances for perusal before the end 
 of December. On the 2nd of February, 1883, 
 
 : the vendor's solicitors sent in their bill of costs, 
 
 'in which they cliarged 30s. jjer cent, on tlie 
 purchase-money of each lot, considering that this 
 "was the proper charge under Schedule I. to the 
 general rules under the Solicitors' Eemuneration 
 Act, 1881, which provides that amount of re- 
 
 . muueration to a vendor's solicitor " for deducing 
 title to freehold, copyhold, or leasehold property, 
 
 . and perusing and completing conveyance (includ- 
 ing preparation of contract or conditions of sale, 
 if any)." The purchaser's solicitors objected to 
 these charges, but the vendor's solicitors refused 
 to allow completion unless they were paid, and on 
 
 .the 14th of February the purchaser paid them 
 
 -under protest, and completed the purchase. After 
 
 III. SOLICITOa— BILL OF COSTS— continued. 
 
 (6.) Eejiunebation Act — continued. 
 this he applied for taxation of the bill : — Held, 
 by Bacon, V.C., that an order must be made for 
 taxation of the bill with a direction that the 
 taxation should be on the old system prevailing 
 before the Solicitors' Eemuneration Act, 1881 : — 
 Held, on appeal, that the case was governed by 
 the new Eules, but that the bill was framed oil 
 an eiToneous footing, for that the ad valorem re- 
 muneration authorized by Schedule I. was charge- 
 able only where the whole of the business in re- 
 spect of which it was imposed, viz., the deducing 
 title and perusing and completing conveyance, 
 was done ; tliat here, as there was no deducing of 
 title, but only perusal and completion of the con- 
 veyances, Schedule I. did not apply, but that 
 under the General Order, rule 2 (c), the solicitor's 
 remuneration was to be regulated by the old 
 system as modified by Schedule II. — But lield, 
 that, having regard to the dates, there was no 
 pressure, and that there was no overcharge 
 amounting to fraud, and that there were there- 
 fore no special circumstances to authorize taxa- 
 tion after payment. In re Lacy & Son 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 301 
 
 20. Conveyancing — Perusing Abstracts — 
 
 Taxation — Solicitors' Bemuneration Act, 1881 
 (44 <£■ 45 IHct. c. 44) — General Order, August, 
 1882, Sclied. II.] Upon the construction of 
 Sched. II. of the General Order (containing scales 
 of charges) made in pursuance of the Solicitors' 
 Eemuneration Act, 1881, abstracts of title are 
 not included in the words " deeds, wills, and other 
 docuinents," the charge for perusing which is 
 therein fixed at Is. per folio ; but the old scale of 
 6s. 8d. for perusal of every three brief sheets of 
 eight folios each remains unaltered. In re Pakkek 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 199 
 
 21. Conveyancing — Suit for Administra- 
 tion — Taxation of Costs — Solicitors' Remuneration 
 Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. U)— General Order, 
 August, 1882, r. 2 — Costs for Conveyancing Busi- 
 ness in an Action.] Solicitors who transact con- 
 veyancing business in an action will, under the 
 Solicitors' Eemuneration Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. 
 e. 44), and the General Order of August, 1882 
 (W. N. (1882) pt. II. p. 358), be allowed taxed 
 costs and charges for such business, according to 
 the scales set forth in the schedules to the General 
 Order. — The proper construction of the language 
 of sect. 2 of the Solicitors' Eemuneration Act, 
 1881, is that it refers to conveyancing matters 
 which take place in an action as well as to those 
 out of Court, and that the exception is only from 
 " other business " not being conveyancing busi- 
 ness ; and accordingly where the Taxing Master 
 had disallowed certain charges made for convey- 
 ancing business in an action, and under the scales 
 of charges contaiucd in the schedules to the 
 General Order of August, 1882, he was directed 
 to review his taxation. Stanford v. Egberts 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 166 
 
 22. Lands Clauses Act (8 <fc 9 Vicf 
 
 c. 18), Sale under — Eeinvestment of Proceeds — 
 Costs — Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881 (44 * 
 45 Vict. c. 44) — General Order, August, 1882, 
 '■■2, Sched. I., pt. 1. r. U ~ Scale Charqes.'] 
 Money arising from the sale of land belonging 
 
( 1533 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1534 ) 
 
 HI. SOLICITOS— BILL OJP COSTS— coiiKrwcd. 
 
 (6.) Eemcnekation Act— continued. 
 "to a corporation, and taken by a railway company 
 under their statutiiry powers, was reinvested in 
 land under tJie direction of the Court. The soli- 
 -citoT of the corporation cliarged tlie ad valorem 
 -scale fee prescribed by the rules under the Soli- 
 citors' Eemuneration Act, 1881, Schedule I.. 
 Part I., " for investigating title and preparing and 
 completing conveyance" : — Held (affirming the 
 •decision of Chitty, J.), that the exception in 
 Schedule I., Part I., rule 11, which provides tha.t 
 the scale shall not apply in case of sales under 
 ^;he Lauds Clauses Act, or any other private or 
 public Act under which the vendor's charges are 
 paid by the pilrchaser, was not applicable to 
 the case. — Held, also (approving the decision of 
 Eay, J., in Stanford v. Roberts (26 Ch. D. 155), 
 that the words of rule 2 " not being business in 
 :any action or transacted in any Coui't or in the 
 chambers of any Judge or Master," apply only to 
 the " other business " mentioned immediately 
 before, i.e., to business not being conveyancing 
 business, and do not exclude from the scale con- 
 veyancing business done under the direction of 
 ' -the. Court— HeicJ, also, that as the purchaser's 
 •solicitor had had to do all the things which he 
 would have had to do in a purchase not under 
 -the direction of the Court, the case was not taken 
 •out of the scale by the fact that, in a purchase 
 under the direction of the Court, he did not incur 
 as much responsibility as in a private purchase : — 
 Seld, therefore, that the scale fee was properly 
 ■chargeable. In re Mekohant Tatloks' Com- 
 pany - - - 29 Ch. D. 209 ; 30 Ch. D. 28 
 
 23. Non-professional Work — Taxation of 
 
 jBill—Mx parte Order — Special Agreement — Soli- 
 ■citors' Eemuneration Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 44), s. 8.] Where an agreenxeut has been, 
 made for the remuneration of a , solicitor, and the 
 .solicitor alleges that the remuneration was for 
 non-professional work, the person chargeable can- 
 not obtain the common ex parte order for the 
 •delivery and taxation of the bill of costs. The 
 Solicitors' Bemuneration Act, 1881, s. 8, has made 
 no difference in the practice in this respect. In 
 tcIndeewiok - r 25Ch.D.279 
 
 34. Pending Business — Negotiations for 
 
 Jjease— Solicitors' Bemuneration Act, 1881 (44 & 
 45 Vict. c. 44), s. 7 — General Order, August, 
 1882, T. 2 (a), (6), (c); Sched. I., Fart II.A 
 BTegotiations for a lease were carried on through 
 -the lessor's solicitor for two years before the 
 rules under the Solicitors' Eemuneration Act, 
 1881, came into operation. After they came into 
 •operation terms were come to, and a lease exe- 
 cuted. The solicitor in his bill charged for the 
 negotisttions, and also charged the amount fixed 
 (by Sched. I., Part II., to the mles, as remu- 
 mei-ation " for preparing, settling, and completing 
 lease aind counterpart." The - Taxing Master 
 •disaUowed all the items for negotiations, and 
 Mr, Justice Chitty aifirmed his decision. The 
 ..BoUcitor appealed -.—HeU, by the Court of Ap- 
 peal, that though the business had been com- 
 menced before the rules came into operation, the 
 i;axation must be conducted according to the 
 rules, the solicitor not having declared his elec- 
 iibn t» the contrary.— Whether he might on the 
 
 III. SOLICITOR— BILL OF COSTS^continued. 
 
 (b.) EEMnNERATiON AoT — continued. 
 rules coming into operation have effectually de- 
 clared such election, qumre. — Held, further, that 
 having regard to rule 2, the aniount fixed by 
 Sched. I., Part II.. included the charges for nego- 
 tiations, and that the appeal must be dismissed. 
 In re Field - - 29 Ch. D. 608 
 
 25. Sale by Auction — General Order 
 
 under Solicitors' Remuneration Act, 1881, r, 4 ; 
 Sched. I., Part I.,r. 11 — Comm/ission to Auctioneer^ 
 Property of a lunatic in Lancashire was put up 
 for sale by auction under an order in lunacy, but 
 was not sold. The solicitor charged £16 12s. 6d. 
 remuneration according to the scale in the order 
 under the Solicitors' Eemuneration Act, 1881, on 
 £8300, the amount of the reserved prices. He 
 also paid the auctioneer £5 5s., which was allowed 
 against the estate, and the surveyor's bill of 
 £40 3s. was allowed at £31 10s. against the estate, 
 but the Taxing Master disallowed the £16 12s. 6'!., 
 and only allowed £2 2s. for instructing the auc- 
 tioneer and surveyor, and £3 3s. for particulars, &c. 
 His reasons were, first, that the solicitor had not 
 in fact conducted the sale, the auctioneer and 
 surveyor having done most of the work, and been 
 paid by the client ; and, secondly, that the scale 
 did not apply, for that a commission had been 
 paid to tlie auctioneer by the client within the 
 meaning of rule 11 to Part I. of Sched. I. to the 
 General Order. — Held, hy the Court of Appeal, 
 that as the bill of the sui'veyor contained charges 
 for various things which it was the duty of the 
 person conducting the sale to do, the solicitor had 
 not done the whole of tlie work for which the 
 ad valorem remuneration was provided, and the 
 scale did not apply. — ^Semible, also, that the case 
 was taken out of rule 4 by the specific provision 
 of rale 11 to Part I. of Sched. I. to the Order, 
 which provides that the scale for conducting a 
 sale by auction shall apply only in cases where no 
 commission is paid by the client to an auctioneer. 
 In re Wilson - 29 Ch, D. 790 
 
 IV. SOLICITOR— CERTIFICATE. 
 
 Certificate — 40 tfc 41 Vict. t. 25, s. 23, 
 
 and Sched. JJ.] Where a solicitor has neglected 
 for a whole year to renew his certificate, the 
 Master of the EoUs alone has power to order the 
 registrar of certificates (the Incorporated Law 
 Society) to grant him a certificate for the current 
 year. — ^The right of a solicitor who has neglected 
 to renew his certificate to apply for a fresh one is 
 not a " right acquired or accrued " within 40 & 41, 
 Vict. c. 25, B. 23, Proviso (B.) In re Chafeeks 
 
 [IS ft. B. D. 467 
 
 V. SOLICITOR— LIABILITIES, 
 
 1. Acting against Former Client— Iit- 
 
 junctiori.'] Held, by Hall, V.C, that the jurisdic- 
 tion to restrain a solicitor from acting, for the 
 antagonist of his former client is founded upon 
 the principle that a man ought to be restrained 
 from doing any act contrary to the duty he owes 
 to another ; and that it will be exercised at the 
 instance of the former client irrespective of the 
 question whether the Solicitor was discharged by 
 him. or had discharged himself, whenever the 
 transaction in reference to which the injunction 
 is sought so flows out of or is connected with 
 
( 1535 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1536 ) 
 
 V. SOIICITOE — LIABILITIES — continued. 
 that in which the solicitor was formerly retained 
 that the same matter of dispute may probably 
 arise. — Hutchins v. Hutchins { 1 Hogaii, 315) and 
 Blcigs V. Head (Saus»e & Scully, 335) approved 
 and adopted. — On appeal, the injunction granted 
 by the Vioe-ChanceHor was disapproved and dis- 
 solved by consent, the solicitor undertaking not 
 to disclose his client's secrets. Little v. Kings- 
 ■WOOD COLLIEKIES COMPANY 20 Ch. D. 733 
 
 2. Constructive Trust — Notice of Settle- 
 ment — Sales.'] A settlement of land in Wales, the 
 property of the husband, was executed shortly 
 after a marriage, which took place in India. The 
 husband and wife went to reside in Wales, and the 
 husband employed a solicitor there to make his 
 will aud to sell part of the land, the solicitor con- 
 cluding from the statement of the husband that 
 there had not been any mariiage settlement. The 
 husband died leaving liis widow trustee and exe- 
 cutrix, and directing liis debts to be paid out of 
 his estate. The widow employed the same soli- 
 citor to sell other part of the land, and the solicitor 
 received the purchase moneys and applied them in 
 payment of the debts of the husband. The deed 
 of settlement had been in the possession of the 
 wife, hut had been by her given to the husband. 
 There was no evidence as to what had become of 
 it, but after the sales had been made a copy was 
 found. The solicitor had concluded from what he 
 was told by the husband that there bad been no 
 settlement, and though, before all the sales were 
 completed, his clerk had been told by the wife 
 that there had been a settlement, the solicitor 
 continued to believe that there had been none. — 
 An action was brought by the children of Ihe 
 marriage, entitled under the settlement, claiming 
 to recover from the solicitor the money which had 
 so passed through his hands : — Held, that under 
 the circumstances, although the solicitor might 
 have been negligent in that character, he could 
 not be held to have had such notice of the settle- 
 ment as to be treated as constructively a trustee, 
 and therefore liable for the money which had 
 passed through his hands. — Notice to raise a con- 
 structive trust is diiferent from notice to an actual 
 trustee.— Coi/ioi/ V. Sydenham (2 Bro. C. G. 391) 
 discussed. Williams v. Williams 17 Ch, D. 437 
 
 3. Constructive Trust — Solicitor receiving 
 
 money to invest on a Specified Security — Legal 
 Estate — Taelcing — Priority.'] The owner of n 
 copyhold, which was subject to a mortgage by 
 conditional surrender for £350, made by a former 
 owner, instructed S., his solicitor, to procure him, 
 on the security of the property, a loan of £550, 
 out of which the old mortgage was to be paid oft'. 
 S., in July, 1876, obtained the money from the 
 Plaintiff, who w as also his client. In July, 1877, 
 S. took a security for £700 on the property in his 
 own name, the mortgagee assigning the old mort- 
 gage debt, and the mortgagor covenanting to sm'- 
 render. The old mortgagee was paid by a cheque 
 drawn by S. on B. & Co., his bankers. S.'s account 
 was already overdrawn, but on the same day he 
 applied to them for leave further to overdraw, 
 which was granted on his depositing with them 
 the security for £700, and the cheque when pre- 
 sented was honoured. B. & Co. had no notice of 
 the Plaintiffs claim. Some time after this S. put 
 
 V. SOLICITOE— LIABILITIES— con«»ttedr. 
 his account in credit, but it shortly afterwards 
 became again overdrawn. S. handed over some- 
 of the other muniments of title to the Plaintiff. 
 The Plaintiff commenced his action to establish 
 his right to rank as incumbrancer for £550 in 
 jjriority to B. & Co. After this, B. & Co. pro- 
 cured the old mortgagee to be admitted under 
 the old conditional surrender, and to surrender to 
 them : — Held, by Malins, V.C, that after the 
 account of S. with B. & Co. had once been put 
 ill credit, their security must, as against other 
 incumbrances on the property, be taken to have 
 been discharged, and that the Plaintiff was en- 
 titled to priority over B. & Co. — B. & Co. appealed, 
 asking for priority over the Plaintiff to the exetut 
 of the old mortgage which had been paid off with 
 their money : — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 S., having received money from the Plaintiff for 
 the pm'pose of being invested on a mortgage of 
 specified property, and having taken a security on 
 that property in his own name, was a trustee of 
 that security for the Plaintiff to the extent of the 
 money received from him, and that this equitable 
 title must prevail against the deposit with B. & Co., 
 aud that the £350 mortgage could not be set up- 
 against the Plaintiff .- — Held, also, that B. & Co. 
 did not acquire priority by having got the legal 
 estate, for that an equitable incumbrancer cannot, 
 after receiving notice of a prior iucumbrance, 
 obtain piiority over it by getting in a legal estate 
 from a bare trustee. Hakpham r. Shacklock 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 207 
 
 4. Contempt of Court — Attachment — Pri- 
 vilege—Police Court— Deltors Act, 1869 (32 & 
 33 Vict. c. 62), s. 4, sub-s. i — Debtors Act, 
 1878 (41 * 42 Vict. c. 54), s. 1.] Disobedience 
 by a solicitor to an order of Court made agEiinst 
 him as an officer of the Coui't is a contempt of a 
 criminal nature, and an attachment granted to 
 enforce compliance with the order of Court is pro- 
 cess of a punitive and disciplinary character; and 
 tlierefore no privilege from arrest exists or can be 
 claimed against the execution of the attachment. 
 — Privilege from arrest for contempt of Court, 
 where it otherwise exists, can be claimed in re- 
 spect of attendance as an advocate at a police- 
 court as well as at any other Court, although the 
 proceedings at the police court consist merely of a 
 preliminary inquiry on a charge of felony. — P. 
 was a solicitor, and an order was made at chambers, 
 that he should deliver up certain documents and 
 should pay tlie sum of £10 and certain costs. 
 This order was made against F. as an officer of 
 the Court. F. delivered up the documents, but he 
 did not pay the sum of £10 or the costs. An 
 order for the attachment of F. for contempt of 
 Court was thereupon made at Chambers. F. then 
 paid the sum of £10, but he did not pay the costs. 
 He was arrested under the attachment, whilst he 
 was on his return to his offices from u metropoli- 
 tan police court, where he had been as advocate 
 attending to defend certain persons at a prelimi- 
 naiy inquiry on a charge of treason-felony; — 
 Held, that he was not entitled to be discharged 
 from custody on the ground of piivilege from 
 arrest, the attachment having been granted for a 
 contempt of a criminal nature. In re Fbeston 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 645 
 
( 1537 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1538 ) 
 
 T. SOIICITOB— LIABILITIES— conMnaeiZ. 
 
 6. Contempt of Court — Attachment — 
 
 Order for Payment of Money — Punitive and 
 Disciplinary Procese.'] A solicitor received on 
 behalf of a client a sum of £339, which he paid 
 into his account with his own bankers and dealt 
 with as his own money. He afterwards forwarded 
 to his client a sum of £100, and refused to pay 
 the balance, on the ground that he had a claim 
 against an agent whom his client had employed 
 to communicate with him. Application having 
 been made to the Queen's Bench Division to 
 compel the solicitor to pay the money, the matter 
 was referred to a Master, who reported that the 
 balance was due from the solicitor to liis client. 
 An order was made by the Queen's Bench Divi- 
 sion, and also a subsequent order was made at 
 Chambers, that the solicitor should pay the 
 balance claimed to his client. These orders not 
 having been complied with, an order for the 
 attachment of the solicitor was made by a Judge 
 at Chambers : — Held, that the orders for the pay- 
 ment of the balance claimed were not merely in 
 the nature of civil process, but were orders made 
 against the solicitor as an officer of the Court, and 
 that the attachment was properly granted. — In re 
 Ball (Law Eep. 8 C. P. 104) explained. — In re 
 Freston (11 Q. B. D. 545) followed. In re Dud- 
 let - - 12 Q. B. S. 44 
 
 6. Fiduciary Belation — Duty to disclose 
 
 Facts — Solicitor in Administration Action — Leave 
 to hid at Sale.'] In an administration action part 
 of the property of the testator was ordered to be 
 put up for sale by auction, and leave was given 
 to the solicitor for the Defendant (the executor) 
 to bid at the sale, which was to be conducted by 
 the Plaintiffs' solicitors independently of him. 
 At the auction the property was not sold, and the 
 Court afterwards sanctioned a contract for its sale 
 to the Defendant's solicitor and another person : 
 — Held, that the effect of the order giving leave 
 to the solicitor to bid and of the subsequent ap- 
 proval of the contract was entirely to put an end 
 to the fiduciary relation in which he formerly 
 stood, and to place him in the position of a mere 
 stranger, and that consequently he was under no 
 obligation to disclose to the Court any facts within 
 his knowledge affecting the value of the pro- 
 perty. BoswELL V. CoAKS - 23 Ch. D. 302 
 [Beversed on other grounds by Court of Appeal, 
 27 Ch. D. 424.] 
 
 7. Improper Sale — Measure of Damage — 
 
 Costs as between Solieitor and Client.] The De- 
 fendant (who was the Plaintiff's solicitor) impro- 
 perly sold the Plaintiff's property without giving 
 him notice of the sale, and a decree was made 
 against the solicitor directing him to pay damages 
 and costs : — Held, that the damages ought to in- 
 clude the difference between the Plaintiff's soli- 
 citor and client costs and the party and party 
 costs which he could get under tbe order for costs. 
 OooKBUEN V. Edwabds - 16 Ch. D, 393 
 
 8. Summary Jurisdiction — Liability of 
 
 'Town Agent of Country Solicitor to pay to Client 
 amount of Debt received in an Action.] The 
 town agent of the solicitor of the Plaintiff, in an 
 action in which judgment had been recovered 
 for a debt, refused to pay over to the Plaintiff the 
 amount of the debt which had been received by 
 
 V. SOLICITOB— LIABILITIES— contOTJied. 
 
 him from the sheriff under a writ of fi. fa., on the 
 ground that he was entitled to retain such amount 
 for a debt due to him from the country solicitor 
 of equal amount. — The country solicitor had no 
 lien on such amount against his client, the Plain- 
 tiff: — Held, affirming the decision of the Queen's 
 Bench Division, that the Court in the exercise of 
 its summary jurisdiction over its own ofSoers 
 would order the town agent to pay over the 
 amount of the debt to the Plaintiff. — In such a 
 case the Coui-t will exercise its summary jurisdic- 
 tion, although there be no fraud imputed to the 
 town agent. Ex parte Edwakds 
 
 [7 Q. E. D. 165 ; S Q. B. S. 262 
 
 VI. SOLICITOE— LIEN. 
 
 1. Charging Order — " Property recovered 
 
 or preserved"— 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 28.] An 
 undischarged bankrupt, without the knowledge 
 of the trustee in his bankruptcy, brought an 
 action, claiming (inter alia) remuneration for 
 services rendered by him as an architect to the 
 Defendant, and damages for wrongful dismissal. 
 The Defendant, without admitting any legal lia- 
 bility to the Plaintiff, paid £360 into Court. The 
 Plaintiff took out a summons to have the money 
 paid out to him, but before the summons was 
 heard the action came to the knowledge of the 
 trustee, and he obtained an order joining him as 
 co-Plaintiff in the action, on the ground that the 
 remuneration and damages claimed were his pro- 
 perty. The bankrupt's solicitor then applied for 
 a charging order on the £360 in respect of his 
 costs, charges, and expenses of or in reference 
 to the action : — Held (reversing the decision of 
 Fry, J.), that the bankrupt's solicitor was en- 
 titled to a charging order for his costs up to the 
 time of the intervention of the trustee. — When 
 the Court makes an order under the Solicitors' 
 Act (23 & 24 Vict. o. 127), s. 28, declaring a soli- 
 eitor entitled to a charge upon the property re- 
 covered or preserved in an action, it is the duty 
 of the Judge to limit the order to costs properly 
 incurred in recovering or preserving the property. 
 — Money paid into Court by a Defendant, although 
 accompanied by a defence denying legal liability, 
 may be taken out of Court by the Plaintiff; and 
 is, therefore, property " recovered or preserved " 
 within the 28th section of the Solicitors' Act. — 
 Berdan v. Qreenwood (3 Ex. D. 251) followed. 
 Emden v. Oabte - - 19 Ch. D. 311 
 
 2. Charging Order— 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, 
 
 s. 28 — Property recovered or preserved — Property 
 of Person not employing the Solicitor — Property of 
 Infant.] The charge declared in pursuance of the 
 28th section of the Solicitors Act, 1860, on the 
 property recovered or preserved in favour of the 
 solicitor employed is in the nature of salvage, and 
 may be made on the interest of persons who did 
 not employ the solicitor and who were not parties 
 to the suit, if they adopt the benefit obtained in 
 the suit. — It makes no difference that the persons 
 whose interests are charged are infants, but the 
 Court will not make the order until the infants 
 have an opportunity of being heard on it. — P. 
 and Y. were trustees under the will of G. P. 
 misapplied some of the trust funds and died. The 
 suit of M. V. P. was brought for the administration 
 of P.'s estate, and a proof was carried in by Y. on 
 
 8 D 
 
( 1539 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1540 ) 
 
 VI. SOLICITOE — LIEN — eontinued. 
 behalf of the trust in respect of the breaches of 
 trust by P. Afterwards the action of G. v. Y. 
 was brought by some of the cestuis que trust 
 under G.'s will to establish the liability of Y. and 
 to appoint new trustees, in which a small dividend 
 was recovered from Y.'s estate. The solicitor who 
 acted for the Plaintiffs in G. v. Y. applied for a 
 charging order for his costs on the dividend 
 recovered from P.'s and Y.'s estates, which was 
 opposed by the new trustees on behalf of the 
 infant cestuis que trust : — Held, that the solicitor 
 was entitled to a charge upon the dividend re- 
 covered in the action from Y.'s estate as against 
 the infant cestui que trust, but not on the divi- 
 dend recovered from P.'s estate, as it was not re- 
 covered in the action. Gkeer v. Young 
 
 [24 Ch. S. 545 
 
 3, Charging Order — " Property recovered 
 
 or preserved " — Jurisdiction of Judge at Chambers 
 —23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. W— Judicature Act, 
 1873 (36 & 37 Viet. c. 66), s. 39.] The Defen- 
 dant having paid money into Court in the action, 
 the Plaintiff's solicitor declined to proceed with 
 the action, except on terms to which the Plaintiff 
 would not assent. Thereupon the Plaintiff re- 
 tained fresh solicitors and obtained an order for a 
 change of solicitors. After the order was made 
 the solicitor obtained a Judge's order at Chambers 
 charging the money in Court with his costs in the 
 action : — Seld, by Grove and Lindley, JJ., 1, that 
 when an action is pending a Judge at Chambers 
 has jurisdiction to make such an order; 2, that 
 the money in Court was " property recovered or 
 preserved" within 23 & 24 Vict, c 127, s. 28; 
 
 3, that the order was valid though the Plaintiff's 
 solicitor had ceased to be such when it was made ; 
 
 4, that though he had discharged himself from 
 the position of Plaintiff's solicitor, yet as he had 
 not done so wrongfully or improperly the order 
 was right. Clover v. Adams - 6 Q. B. D. 622 
 
 4. Charging Order — Property recovered — ■ 
 
 Garnishee Summons — Priority — 23 & 24 Vict, 
 c. 127, s. 28.] The proceeds of a fi. fa., issued on 
 behalf of tlie successful Plaintiff in an action, were 
 attached in the hands of the sheriff by a garnishee 
 summons from a County Court to answer a judg- 
 ment obtained against the Plaintiff in that Court. 
 The Plaintiff's solicitor in the action, who had re- 
 ceived notice of the service of the garnishee sum- 
 mons, subsequently obtained an order under 23 & 24 
 Vict. c. 127, s. 28, charging the fund recovered 
 with costs of the action remaining due to him : — 
 Seld, that such order was rightly made, and the 
 solicitor's claim was entitled to priority over 
 the claim of the judgment creditor of the Plain- 
 tiff' under the garnishee summons. — Decision of 
 the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. Dallow v. 
 Gabkold. Ex parte Adams 13 Q, B. D. 543 ; 
 
 [14 Q. B. D, 543 
 
 5. Charging Order — • Property recovered 
 
 — Money paid into Court of Bankruptcy by Plain- 
 tiff — Application by Plaintiff's Solicitor — 23 & 24 
 Vict. c. 127, s. 28.] An action having been brought 
 to recover a sum of £727. C, one of the Defen- 
 dants, counter-claimed against the Plaintiff for 
 the sum of £700, C. presented also a petition in 
 bankruptcy against the Plaintiff, who was ordered 
 to bring into Court a sum of £300. The action 
 
 VI. SOLICITOR,— UXS— continued. 
 and the proceedings in bankruptcy ultimately 
 were referred to an arbitrator, who, by his award, 
 found that the Plaintiff was entitled to judgment 
 in the action for £157, that no debt was due from, 
 the Plaintiff to C, and that the sum of £300 must, 
 be paid to the Plaintiff out of the Court of 3ank- 
 ruptoy. The Plaintiff's solicitors having applied! 
 to the Queen's Bench Division for a charging^ 
 order on the sum of £300 for their costs in the 
 action : — Seld, that they were not entitled to an 
 order. PrEBSON v. Knutsfoed Estates Company 
 
 [13 Q. B. S. 666 
 
 6. Charging Order — Properly " recovered 
 
 or preserved" — Solicitor discharged before Trial 
 —23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 28.] A solicitor, 
 through whose instrumentality property has been 
 recovered or preserved in an action, is entitled, 
 under the 28th section of the Attorneys and 
 Solicitors Act, 1860, to » declaration of charge- 
 upon such property, although his client may hav& 
 discharged him before the trial of the action. — 
 In such a, case his charge will be subject to the 
 lien for costs of the client's solicitor for the tim& 
 being. — Money paid into Court as a security for 
 the costs of a party to an action is not in case by 
 the success of the party it becomes repayable to 
 him, property " preserved " in the action within 
 the meaning of the Act. In re Wadswokth. 
 Ehodes v. Sugden 29 Ch. D. 617 
 
 7. Charging Order— 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, 
 
 s. 28 — Time for raising Costs.} A decree for 
 administration of a testator's estate was made at 
 the suit of an infant who was entitled to a con- 
 tingent reversionary share in the estate. K. was 
 solicitor for the Plaintiff and for J. and A., two 
 of the persons entitled to the other shares. After 
 decree he ceased to be solicitor for these parties, 
 and obtained an order directing taxation of his. 
 costs as their solicitor in the action, including 
 the costs of the application, and charging their 
 shares in the estate with the payment of such 
 costs, with liberty to apply to have them raised. 
 He now, the cause not yet having been heard for 
 further consideration, applied to have the costs 
 raised by a sale of the shares charged: — Seld, 
 affirming the decision of Bacon, V.C., that the 
 application was premature, and that no order 
 ought to be made for raising the costs until the 
 cause was heard for further consideration. In re 
 Geeen. Geeen v. Gkeen - 26 Ch. D. 16 
 
 8. Lien on Seeds — Change of Solicitor — 
 
 Administration Action.'] The solicitor for the 
 parties to an administration action will not, on a 
 change of solicitor, be allowed to assert his lien for 
 costs on papers in his possession in such a way as 
 to embarrass the proceedings in the action. — On 
 the contrary, he must produce the papers when 
 they are required for the carrying on of the pro- 
 ceedings. In re Boughton. Boughton v. Bough- 
 ton - - - - 23 Ch. D. 169 
 
 9. Lien on Seeds — Change of Solicitor in 
 
 Action.'] In a suit instituted by a debenture-holder 
 of a company, on behalf of himself and the other 
 debenture-holders, against the company the origi- 
 nal Plaintiff became bankrupt in the course of the 
 proceedings, and another debenture-holder was 
 substituted for him as Plaintiff. — An order was 
 made that the solicitors of the first Plaintiff 
 
( 1541 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1542 ) 
 
 VI. SOIICITOR— LIEN— conWnwed. 
 should, without prejudice to their lien (if any) 
 deliver up to the solicitor of the second Plaintiff 
 all documents in their possession relating to the 
 conduct and prosecution of the suit : — Hdd, that 
 the solicitors of the first Plaintiff had no lien on 
 the documents which could entitle them to priority 
 in respect of their costs. Batten v. Wedgwood 
 Coal and Ihon Co. - - 28 Ch. D. 317 
 
 10. Lien on Deeds — Deeds deposited hy 
 
 Mortgagee with Solicitor — Subsequent Employment 
 of Solicitor by Mortgagor.'] A mortgage deed and 
 the title deeds to the mortgaged property were 
 deposited by the mortgagees with their solicitors 
 for safe custody. Afterwards the mortgagor in- 
 structed the same solicitors to sell the property, 
 and they employed an auctioneer for the purpose, 
 and made use of the deeds in preparing particulars 
 and conditions of sale. The property was put up 
 for sale, but was not sold. The mortgagor then 
 filed a liquidation petition, and the trustee con- 
 tracted to sell the mortgaged property : — Held, 
 that the solicitors had no lien on the deeds as 
 against the trustee in respect of their costs of the 
 abortive sale. Ex parte Pullek. In re Long 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 617 
 
 11. Lien on Seeds — Summary Jurisdic- 
 tion — Delivery of Documents.] The Court will 
 not summarily order a solicitor to deliver up a 
 deed to his client unless it be clearly shewn not 
 only that the solicitor has no lien upon it, but 
 that he is holding it for the applicant alone, and 
 as his solicitor. Ex parte Cobeldiok 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 149 
 
 12. Lien on Deeds — Winding-up.] An 
 
 order having been made for winding up a com- 
 pany, applications were made by the official liqui- 
 dator against B., a solicitor employed by the 
 company before the winding-up, that B. might be 
 ordered to deliver up the following documents : 
 1. The share register and minute book, which 
 were in B.'s hands before the commencement of 
 the winding-up ; 2 Other documents which came 
 to B.'s hands after the presentation of the wind- 
 ing-up petition, but before the winding-up order ; 
 3. Documents relating to allotments of shares 
 which had come to B.'s hands before the presen- 
 tation of the petition. B. resisted the applications 
 on the ground that he claimed a lien. Mr. Justice 
 Chitty ordered that all the documents should be 
 delivered to the liquidator subject to the lien, if 
 any, of B. : — Seld, on appeal, that the order was 
 right as regarded the share register and minute 
 book, for that the directors had no power to create 
 any lien on them which could interfere with their 
 being, used for the purposes of the company : — 
 Held, also, that the order was right as to class 2 ; 
 for that a solicitor could not assert agaiast docu- 
 ments which came to his hands pending the wind- 
 ing-up any such lien as would interfere with the 
 prosecution of the winding-up. — But held, that 
 the order for delivery of class 3 must be dis- 
 charged, for that the winding-up order could not 
 defeat any valid lien existing at the time when 
 the winding-up petition was presented. — Selaney 
 V. Ffrench (Law Kep. 8 Ch. 918) and Boughton v. 
 Boughton (23 Ch. D. 169) distinguished. Jn re 
 Capital Fiee Insueanoe Association 
 
 [24 Ch. D, 408 
 
 VII. SOLICITOB— MISCONDTTCT. 
 
 1. Appeal — Order strileing off the Bolls — 
 
 Summary Jurisdiction — Judicature Act, 1873, 8. 
 47.] When the High Court makes an order order- 
 ing a solicitor to be struck off the rolls for mis- 
 conduct, it does so in exercise of a disciplinary 
 jurisdiction over its own officers, and not of a 
 jurisdiction in any criminal cause or matter within 
 the meaning of sect. 47 of the Judicature Act, 
 1873, and therefore an appeal lies from such order 
 to the Court of Appeal. In re Haedwiok 
 
 [12 Q. B. D. 148 
 
 2. Court of Appeal — Striking off the 
 
 Boll — Jurisdiction.] From the evidence given 
 by a solicitor in an action in the Court of the 
 County Palatine of Lancaster he appeared to have 
 been guilty of gross misconduct in his character of 
 solicitor as to one of the mortgages to which the 
 action related. The Plaintiffs in the action having 
 appealed, the conduct of the solicitor came under 
 the consideration of the Court of Appeal, who 
 directed the official solicitor to take proceedings. 
 The official solicitor accordingly moved in the 
 Court of Appeal for an order calling on the 
 solicitor to explain his conduct, or that he might 
 be struck off the roll : — Held, that the Court of 
 Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the applica- 
 tion, although not brought before them by way of 
 appeal. The solicitor had not taken out his cer- 
 tijficate for several years, and did not take any 
 notice of the application. The Court, under the 
 special circumstances of the case, did not think 
 fit to strike him off the roll or suspend him, but 
 made an order restraining him from applying to 
 renew his certificate without- the leave of the 
 Court. In re Whitehead - 28 Ch. D. 614 
 
 VIII. SOLICITOE— EETAINEE. 
 
 Authority to issue Writ.] A retainer 
 
 to a country solicitor does not justify an action 
 in which his London agents are the solicitors 
 on the record. — A., an illiterate woman, being 
 desirous of knowing whether there was any 
 balance coming to her, as administratrix of C, her 
 deceased husband, out of the proceeds of a sale by 
 the mortgagee of property mortgaged by C, gave 
 to B., a country solicitor (who had recovered judg- 
 ment iu an action against her, as administratrix, 
 for a debt due to him from her deceased husband) 
 this written retainer : " I hereby authorize you to 
 act as my solicitor in the administration of my 
 late husband's estate, and authorize you to inves- 
 tigate the accounts of the mortgagee, and take 
 such steps as you may think proper in the matter 
 on my behalf." — A writ was subsequently issued 
 by a London firm of solicitors in the names of A. 
 and B., as Plaintiffs, claiming an account of the 
 proceeds of sale of the mortgaged property and; 
 payment of the balance, the claim by A. being, 
 " as legal representative of C." by B. " as a cre- 
 ditor of C. who had obtained judgment against 
 A., and had obtained execution by the appoint- 
 ment of a receiver of the balance due from C." 
 
 Upon motion by A. that her name might be 
 struck out of the writ, as having been issued 
 without her knowledge and without any autho- 
 rity on her part: — Held, that the retainer was 
 not sufficient to justify the issue of the writ ; but 
 whether sufficient or not, it was a retainer to B., 
 
 3 D 2 
 
( 1543 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1544 ) 
 
 VIII, SOLICITOE— EETAINEE— conimtted. 
 
 and did not authorize the London firm to issue 
 the writ in the name of A. as her solicitors. 
 Wrat v. Kemp - - - 26 Ch. D. 169 
 
 IX. SOLICITOK— TTNaUALIFIED. 
 
 1. Attachment — Acting as a Solicitor in 
 
 the Name of a qualified Solicitor — 6 & 7 Vict. 
 c. 73, «. 2 ; 23 (fc 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 26.] An un- 
 qualified person who acts as a solicitor commits 
 an offence against 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, s. 2, though 
 he acts in the name and with the consent of a 
 duly qualified solicitor. — H. who had carried on 
 the business of an accountant, arranged with 
 C, who had been admitted as a solicitor, that 
 ho should use H.'s offices, and any business H. 
 had he was to allow C. to attend to, H. to share 
 in the profits, but in what proportion was not 
 settled, — or, according to H.'s version of the ar- 
 rangement, H. was to be paid, as a commission, 
 one half-share of profits after deductina; all ex- 
 penses, including rent of ofBces, and was to 
 find money and clerk to carry on the business. 
 Pursuant to this arrangement, H., sometimes with 
 0. and sometimes alone, transacted various matters 
 which it was alone competent to a solicitor to 
 transact, generally using the name of 0. & Co., 
 but sometimes not, and not always with the know- 
 ledge or express sanction of C. : — Seld, by tlie 
 Court of Appeal, affirming the Queen's Bench 
 Division, that H. had been guilty of a contempt 
 of Cora't, and that an attachment must issue 
 against him. Aberokombie v. Jokdan" 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 187 
 
 2. Attachment — Acting as a Solicitor — 
 
 6*7 Vict. c. 73, s. 2—23 & 24 Viot. c. 127, s. 26.] 
 Every person who acts as a solicitor contrary to 
 sect. 2 of 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, is liable to attachment 
 for contempt of Court under 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, 
 o. 26, whether he so acts in the name of any other 
 person or in his own name, unless such person 
 be duly qualified. — Although the Court will 
 generally adopt the findings of the master as to 
 such conduct, his report id not conclusive. In re 
 Simmons 16 Q. B. D. 348 
 
 3. Practising — Certificate — Stamp — 
 
 Attendance of Country Solicitor at a Taxation in 
 London— 3S & 34 Vict. c. 97, s. 59— Schedule.'] 
 By 33 & 34 Vict. c. 97, s. 59, every person who 
 "acts or practises" in any Court as a solicitor 
 without having in force at the time a duly stamped 
 certificate shall forfeit £50, and shall be incapable 
 of maintaining any action or suit for the recovery 
 of any fee on account of any act or proceeding 
 done or taken by him in any such capacity. By 
 the schedule the certificate if such person " prac- 
 tises or carries on his business" within ten miles 
 from the General Post Oflice of the City of London 
 ia of a certain amount, and if he practises or 
 carries on his business beyond the above-men- 
 tioned limits, is of a less amount. A solicitor, 
 with a country certificate, and whose offices were 
 at Birmingham, came up on a retainer and 
 attended the taxation of a bill of costs within the 
 ten miles radius -.—Held, that he did not, by this 
 one transaction, act or practise in London within 
 the meaning of the statute. In re Hoeton 
 
 4_ Proctor— 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, s. 2—23 & 24 
 
 IX. SOIICITOE— UNQUALIFIED— conJraaei. 
 Vict. c. 127, 8. 26— Legal Practitioners Act, 1877 
 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 62), ss. 2, 3—BuUs of Probate 
 Division.'] Law stationers, not qualified as soli- 
 citors or proctors, were accustomed upon the in- 
 struction and in the names of London or country 
 solicitors, to take to the Registry of the Probate 
 Division original wills and the engrossments 
 thereof, with the proper affida\it8, and if these 
 were in order, to fetch away the probate ; if any 
 question arose as to the sufficiency of the docu- 
 ments the stationers communicated it to the soli- 
 citors. All the charges between soUoitor and 
 client were made by the solicitors, and the sta- 
 tioners charged the solicitors for their clerk's 
 time only -.-Seld, affirming the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal, that the stationers had not acted 
 as solicitors or proctors, and were not liable to the 
 penalties imposed by 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 26. 
 Law SociBTy v. "Wateelow. Law Society v. 
 Skinner 9 Q. B. D. 1 ; 8 App. Cas. 407 
 
 SOIICITOE— Adopting Conveyancing Act— Pro- 
 tection of. 
 See Conveyancing Act, l^Sl. —Statutes. 
 
 Appointment as trustee 24 Ch. D. 485 
 
 See Settled Land Act— Tkustees. 4. 
 
 Appointment by testator— Duty of trustees 
 
 to continue - 19 Ch. D. 518 
 
 See Will — Teustees. 3. 
 
 Authority- Payment of costs personally 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 94 
 See Peaotioe— SuPEEME Couet — Next 
 Feiend. 2. 
 
 Authority to direct sheriff to seize particular 
 
 goods- Liability of execution creditor 
 SeeSHEElFF. 3. [9 ft. B. D. 340 
 Authority to receive purchase-money — Con- 
 veyancing Act, 1881 24 Ch. D. 387 
 See Vesdob and Pueohasek- Convey- 
 ance. 5. 
 
 Clerk— Scope of authority 6 ft, B, D. 318 
 
 See Negligence — ^Liability. 11. 
 
 Client— Counsel at Chambers- Taxation 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 54 
 See Practice— Soteeme Couet — Costs. 
 18. 
 Client — Substituted service on solicitor- 
 Practice - 9 ft, B. D. 598 
 See Practice — Swpeeme Coitet — Cham- 
 bers. 6. 
 
 22 Ch, D. 604 
 2. 
 
 Constructive notice — Equitable mortgage 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 178 
 See Mortgage- CoNTEACT. 9. 
 
 Costs— Defending action in person 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 872 
 See Peactice— SrpEEME Couet — Costs. 
 47. 
 
 Costs in County Cornet - 18 Ch. D. 521 ; 
 
 [6Q. B, D. 607; 9 ft. B, D, 408 
 See County Court — Costs. 1, 2. 3, 
 
 Costs in County Court. 
 
 See County Couet — Costs — Statutes. 
 
 Explanation by— Bill of sale 21 Ch, D. 543 
 
 See Bill of Sale — Formalities. 23. 
 
 Conflict of interest and duty 
 
 See Executor — ^Eetaineb. 
 
( 1545 ) 
 
 SOLICIWR— continued. 
 
 Fraud in conduct of aotiou- 
 
 . DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( .1546 ) 
 
 -New defence 
 [20 Cli. D. 672 
 See Peaowcb — Supkemb Court — 
 Amendment. 3. 
 
 Joint retainer by two defendants 
 
 [18 Ch. D, 516 
 See ExECBTOB — Actions. 10. 
 
 Law of Victoria— Order to deliver bill 
 
 [lOApp. Cas. 300 
 See Colonial Law — Viotoeia. 5. 
 —^ Liability — Scope of business — Deposit of 
 bonds - - - 28 Ch. D. 340 
 
 See Paetnebship — Liabilities. 
 ■— Lien — Setting off damages and costs 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 922 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Couet — Costs. 
 44. 
 
 ■^— Money paid by debtor to his solicitor to 
 oppose petition— Adjudication— Title of 
 trustee - - - 15 ft. B. D. 616 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 8. 
 
 <— Mortgage by client to solicitor — Breach of 
 duty - 18 Ch. D. 449; 24 Ch. D. 289 
 See Mortgage — Powers. 4, 6. 
 
 — — Order on solicitor to pay costs personally — 
 Appeal - - - 15 Q. B. D. 635 
 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Coubt — ^Ap- 
 peal. 32. 
 
 Petitioning creditor — Payment to client with 
 
 notice of act of bankruptcy 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 747 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 7. 
 
 Privilege - - - 18 Ch. D. 30 
 
 See Evidence — Witness. 3. 
 
 Privilege — Professional confidence 
 
 [28 Ch, D. 287 
 See Pbactice— Supreme Court — Inteb- 
 rogatobies. 14. 
 
 Privileged communication — Criminal law 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 153 
 See Criminal Law — Evidence. 5. 
 — - Promoters of company — -Claim against com- 
 pany - - - 25 Ch. S. 103 
 See Company — Fobmation. 
 — ^ Eight of audience — Bankruptcy — Appeal 
 from County Court - 15 ft. B. D. 169 
 See Bankbuptcy— Staying Pboceed- 
 
 INGS. 3. 
 
 — — Eight of audience — Bankruptcy — Examina- 
 tion of debtor 15 ft. B. D. 54 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Examination. 1. 
 
 Salvage — Payment of viaticum — Priority of 
 
 claim - - 8 P. D, 209 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 11. 
 
 Service on, after he has ceased to act 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 351 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Coubt — Pay- 
 ment into Coubt. 6. 
 
 Service on — Attachment - 22 Ch. D. 571 
 
 See Peaotice— Supbeme Coubt — Pro- 
 duction OP Documents. 16. 
 
 Solicitor of trustee in bankruptcy — Costs 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 685 ; 15 ft. B. D. 340 
 See Bankeuptcy— Costs. 1, 3. 
 
 SOJjICITO'R— continued. 
 
 To public department — Certificate. 
 
 See Ebvenue— Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 Trustee — Appointment of new trustee 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 333 
 See Settlement — Powebs. 9. 
 
 Victoria, Law of — Order to deliver bill 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 300 
 .See Colonial Law — Victoria. 5. 
 
 SOIICITOES REMUNERATION ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under Solioitob 
 — Bill oe Costs. 
 
 SOUTH AFRICA- Church of 7 App. Cas. 484 
 See Colonial Law — Cape op Good 
 Hope. 1. 
 
 SPANISH LAW- Trinidad. 10 App. Cas. 312 
 
 See Colonial Law — Tbinidad. 
 
 SPECIAL ACT — Compulsory purchase — Costs 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 669 
 See Pbactice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 24. 
 
 Power under — Harbour trustees 8 App. Cas. 
 
 See Scotch Law — Harbour 1. [623 
 
 SPECLiL CASE— Amendment 22 Ch. D. 495 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Spe- 
 cial Case. 1. 
 
 Disposing of action — Form of answers — 
 
 Judgment - 16 Ch. D. 66 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Spe- 
 cial Case. 2. 
 
 SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES — Taxation after 
 payment - - 29 Ch. D. 571 
 
 See Solioitob — Bill oe Costs. 2. 
 
 SFECI&.L REFEREE - - 20 Ch. S. 351 
 
 See Company — Life Insurance Com- 
 pany. 6. 
 
 SPECIALTY DEBT. 
 
 Breach of Trust — Devastavit — Covenant — 
 
 Waiver — Laches.'] There is no rule in equity any 
 more than at law, that the mere non-suing by a 
 specialty creditor for any period within the statu- 
 tory limit of twenty years is such negligence as 
 deprives him of the right of requiring payment 
 of the specialty debt. — -S. covenanted with B. 
 for immediate payment of a sum of money in ex- 
 oneration of B., and in substitution for a similar 
 sum which B. was liable to pay within six months 
 of his death. — S. died without having paid, or 
 been called on to pay that sum, leaving property 
 amply sufficient to meet it, but her executor, in- 
 stead of providing out of her estate funds to meet 
 the liability on her covenant, left her estate, con- 
 sisting entirely of shares in a bank, which after- 
 wards failed, unconverted. The investment in 
 bank shares was authorized by the will of S. : — 
 Held (reversing the decision of Kay, J.), that the 
 executors of B. were entitled, after a lapse of ISJ 
 years, to enforce that covenant against the estate 
 of S., and that the executor of S., having com- 
 mitted a devastavit in not converting the shares 
 to provide for payment of the debt, was liable to 
 make good the amount for which his testatrix 
 was so liable under her covenant. In re Bakeb. 
 Collins v. Ehodes. In re Seaman. Ehodes v. 
 Wish - - 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
( 1547 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1518 ) 
 
 SPECIALTY H'ESH— continued. 
 
 Retainer — Heir-at-law or devisee 
 
 See Eetainek. [27 Ch, D. 478 
 
 SPECIFIC DEVISE— After-acquired property 
 
 [30 Ch. b. 50 
 
 See Will — Spbakins fkom Death. 3. 
 SPECIFIC LEGACY - - 20 Ch. D. 676 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 812 
 
 See Will — Specific Legacy. 
 Ademption of - - 22 Ch. D. 622 
 
 See Will — ^Ademption. 
 Disclaimer of - 23 Ch. D. 573 
 
 See Will— DiscLAHHEE. 1. 
 
 SPECIFIC PEBFORMANCE. 
 
 1. Agreement in several Documents — 
 
 Failure to prove one of the Documents — Literary 
 Worh — Misstatement as to Authorship — Fraud on 
 Public.'] The Plaintiifs claimed the specific per- 
 formance of an agreement for the composition of 
 a literary work by the Defendant, alleging that 
 the agreement was contained in three written 
 documents. At the trial the first and third of 
 the documents were proved ; the second was not 
 produced, nor was any evidence given of its 
 contents. The Defendant, by his statement of 
 defence, denied that he had agreed with the 
 Plaintiffs, as alleged by them, with reference to 
 the second document : — Held, that the Plaintiffs 
 were not entitled to specific performance of the 
 agreement contained in the first and third docu- 
 ments, or to damages for the breach of it. The 
 Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant had agreed 
 that his name should not appear on the title-page 
 of the work as the author of it ; the Defendant 
 alleged that it was part of the agreement that his 
 name should so appear. The Plaintiffs proposed 
 to publish the book with a title-page, stating that 
 it was " Edited by K. (assisted by M. (the De- 
 fendant)") K. was known as having published 
 other books of a similar description, and had 
 allowed the Plaintiffs to make use of his name, 
 but he had taken no part whatever in the com- 
 pilation: — Held, that the proposed title-page 
 would be a fraud on the public, and that on this 
 ground also the Plaintiffs were disentitled to 
 relief. Post v. Maksh - - 16 Ch, D. 395 
 
 2. Alternative Claim — Amendment of 
 
 Pleadings.'] The Plaintiff by hia statement of 
 claim claimed specific performance of a contract 
 by which he agreed to sell and the Defendant 
 agreed to purchase the lease, goodwill, fixtures 
 and stock-in-trade of a business; the Plaintiff 
 alleging that he was and always had been able 
 and willing to perform the contract, but that the 
 Defendant refused to perform the same. The 
 statement of claim in the alternative claimed 
 £100 as liquidated damages fixed by the contract 
 for the refusal to perform the contract. The 
 statement of defence alleged false representations 
 by the Plaintiff as to the character of the business, 
 and denied that the Plaintiff was able and willing 
 to perform the contract. The Plaintiff, after the 
 close of the pleadings, gave notice to the Defen- 
 dant that, unless the Defendant completed the 
 purchase within a week, he should re-sell the 
 business, which he accordingly did. No amend- 
 ment of the pleadings was then asked for by the 
 Plaintiff, and the action went on to trial. At the 
 
 SPECIFIC PEBFORMANCE — continued. 
 trial before Bacon, V.C., the Plaintiff's counsel, 
 admitting that the claim for specific performance 
 must be abandoned, sought to recover the £100 
 as liquidated damages. He did not apply for any 
 amendment of the pleadings. The Vice-Chan- 
 cellor dismissed the action on the ground that the 
 claim for specific performance failing through the 
 Plaintiff's own act the alternative claim for 
 damages must fall also : — Seld, on appeal, afBrm- 
 ing the decision of Bacon, V.C., that, in the 
 absence of any amendment of the pleadings (which 
 ought not at that stageof the action to be allowed)", 
 the action must be treated as one for specific per- 
 formance with a claim for damages in the alter- 
 native as a substitute for specific performance, 
 according to the practice existing before the Judi- 
 cature Act in the Court of Chancery, and that the 
 Plaintiff, having by his own act rendered specific 
 performance impossible, was not in such action 
 entitled to damages. Hipqkave v. Case 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 356 
 
 3. Chattels — Injunction.] A contract for 
 
 the sale of chattels to the Plaintiff contained an 
 express negative stipulation not to sell to any 
 other mani^acturer. The Court granted an in- 
 junction to restrain the breach of the negative 
 stipulation although the contract was one of 
 which specific performance would not have been 
 granted. — Wolverhampton and Walsall Railway 
 Company v. London and North Western Mailway 
 Company (Law Rep. 16 Eq. 433) considered. 
 DoNNELL V. Bennett 22 Ch. D. 835 
 
 4. Sale of Medical Practice — Stipulation 
 
 for Personal Introduction — Agreement hy Letter-^ 
 Reference to formal Contract — Statute of Frauds.] 
 The Plaintiff wishing to sell a medical practice 
 with the lease of the house where it was carried 
 on, placed it on the books of a medical agent. 
 This led to negotiations with the Defendant. The 
 premiums asked for the practice and for the lease 
 were stated in a letter from the agent to the De- 
 fendant, but no time for completing the purchase 
 was mentioned. The Defendant replied in a 
 letter to the agent accepting the terms offered, 
 and adding that he should be ready to pay the 
 deposit money "on receipt of corrected agree- 
 ment," and at the same time he wrote to the 
 PlaintiEf personally, also accepting the terms 
 offered, and adding, " I shall trust to you to give 
 me the best introduction you can during three 
 months and afterwards, if necessary." The 
 Plaintiff replied, thanking the Defendant fOr 
 acceding to his terms and saying that " it would 
 be his aim as well as his duty to give him an 
 effectual introduction to his patients." A formal 
 agreement was drawn up but never signed, and 
 alter some further correspondence the Defen- 
 dant refused to complete the purchase: — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Bacon, V.C), that inas- 
 much as the time for the commencement of the 
 purchase was left uncertain, and the stipulation 
 as to the three months' introduction was not 
 agreed to, and as the parties contemplated a 
 formal agreement, there was no binding contract 
 between the parties, and the action was dis- 
 missed. — ^Whether the Court can enforce specific 
 performance of a contract to sell a medical prac- 
 tice — Quiere. ^Iay v. Thomson 20 Ch. D. 706 
 
( 1549 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1550 ) 
 
 SPECIFIC PEErOEMANCE— oonMmMed. 
 
 Agreement for lease - 19 Ch. D, 175, 233 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Agkee- 
 MENT. 1, 3. 
 Agreement for sale of land. 
 
 See Oases under Vendok and Pcb- 
 
 CSASER. 
 
 Oonnter-olaim — Action to recover deposit — 
 
 Transfer to Ohancery Division 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 540 
 
 See Pkactioe — Supreme Ooubt — Tbans- 
 
 FEK. 2. 
 
 Covenant — Alteration of property 
 
 See OovENAKT— Bkeaoh. [28 Ch. D. 103 
 
 Covenant to renew lease - 32 Ch. D. 640 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 13. 
 
 Doubtful title - - 18 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 Misrepresentation - - 20 Ch, D. 1 
 
 See False Representation. 1. 
 
 Misrepresentation by vendor's agent 
 
 [22 Ch, D, 194 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Authority. 1. 
 
 Separation deed - 18 Ch. D. 670 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separation 
 Deed. 1. 
 
 SPECIFICATION— Amendment 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 105 ; 28 Ch. S. 149 
 
 See Patent — Amendment. 1, 2. 
 Sufficiency - 21 Ch. D. 720 ; 29 Ch. D. 366 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 2, 5. 
 
 iflPIEITS— Duty on. 
 
 See Revenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 
 SFOETINO — Overstocking land with game — In- 
 jury to crops - 15 Q,, B. D. 268 
 See Game. 1. 
 
 Poor-rate— Woodlands - 6 Q. B. D. 13 
 
 See Poor-rate — Rateable Value. 4. 
 
 Statute of Frauds 9 Q, B. D. 315 
 
 See Frauds, Statute op. 8. 
 
 STAUF. 
 
 See Oases and Statutes under Revenue 
 — Stamps. 
 
 Acting or practising as solicitor 8 Q,. B. D. 
 
 See Solicitor — Unqualified. 3. [434 
 
 Fictitious. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 Law of Penang - 7 App. Cas. 172 
 
 See Colonial Law — Straits Settle- 
 ments. 1. 
 
 Registration of resolutions for liquidation — 
 
 Return of duty - 20 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquidation. 7. 
 
 Settlement by Court - 17 Ch, D. 778 
 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 SIANlfABIES COVET. 
 
 See Oases under Company — Cost-book 
 
 Company. 
 STATEMENT OF CIAIK — Embarrassing plead- 
 ing - - 26 Ch. D. 778 
 See Practice — Supreme Oouet — 
 
 Striking out Pleadings. 2. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CLMK— continued. 
 
 Embarrassing pleading 22 Ch. D. 481 
 
 See Practice— Supreme Court— Amend- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CONSIDEEATION— Bill of sale. 
 See Cases under Bill op Sale— For- 
 malities. 15 — 26. 
 
 Judgment debt — Debtor's summons 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 629 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 5. 
 
 STATEMENT OF DEBTS AND ASSETS — Com- 
 pounding debtor - 16 Ch. D. 131 ; 
 [20 Ch. D. 281 ; 23 Ch. D. 706 
 See Bankruptcy— Composition. 3, 9, 10. 
 
 Liquidation 16 Ch. D. 513 ; 21 Ch. D. 694 ; 
 
 [88 Ch. D. 338 
 See Bankruptcy— Liquidation. 10, 11, 
 12. 
 
 STATEMENT OF DEFENCE— Action for recovery 
 of land 6 ft. B. D. 645 ; 8 App. Cas. 466 
 See Practice^ — Supreme Court — De- 
 fence. 
 
 STATUS OF MAEBIED WOMAN. 
 
 See Husband and Wife— Married Wo- 
 men's Property Acts — Statutes. 
 
 STATUTE. 
 
 Marginal Notes.] The marginal notes to 
 
 the sections of an Act of Parliament are not tb'^e 
 
 taken as part of the Act. — Dictum in In re Venour's 
 
 Settled Estates (2 Ch. D. 522, 525) coneoted. 
 
 Sutton v. Sutton - - - 22 Ch. D. 811 
 
 Commencement of - 8 ft. B, Drir9 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 5. 
 
 Construction - - - 17 Ch. D. 746 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Disclaimer. 15. 
 
 Construction — Public and private Act of 
 
 Parliament 15 ft. B.D. 597 
 
 See Poor-rate — Rateable Value. _ 5. 
 
 Divided into headings - 9 App. Cas. 365 
 
 See Colonial Law — ^Victoria. 4. 
 
 Repeal by implication - 11 ft. B. D. 120 
 
 See Court — Mayor's Court. 2. 
 
 Summary proceeding before justices — Ex- 
 clusive of civil remedy 11 ft, B. D. 226 
 See Ship — Seamen. 
 
 STATUTE OF FEATJDS. 
 
 See Frauds, Statute of. 
 
 STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of. 
 
 STATUTES SPECIALLY EEFEEEED TO IN THIS 
 DIGEST. 
 See Table op Statutes (ante, p. oxliii). 
 
 STATUTOEY CHAEGE— Execution of works-by 
 company - - - 16 Ch. D, 411 
 
 See Company — Debentures. 7. 
 
 STATUTOEY CONTEACT— Attachment of pur- 
 chase-money - - 19 Ch. D. 608 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Gar- 
 nishee Orders. 2. 
 
 STATUTOEY DUTY— Local and personal Act 
 
 [7 App, Cas, 694 
 See Scotch Law — Statutory Duty. 
 
 Penalty — Refusal to give certificate of. dis- 
 cbarge to seaman 13 ft. B. D. 109 
 See Ship^Merchant Shipping Acts. 6. 
 
( 1551 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1552 ) 
 
 STATUTOBY FORM— Mortgage. 
 
 See Mortgage — Statdtoby Form — 
 Statutes. 
 
 STATUTOHY POWERS— Excess of 21 Ch. D. 752 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 
 STATUTORY RECEIPT- Mortgage to building 
 society - 26 Ch. D. 273 ; 28 Ch. D. 298 
 See Building Society. 34. 
 STATUTORY RIGHTS— Waiver of— Charter 
 
 [22 Ch, D. 287 ; 25 Ch. D. 611 ; 
 
 See Market. 1, 2. [9 App. Cas. 927 
 
 STAYING PROCEEDINGS— Action pending for 
 
 same cause of action 10 P. D. 141 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Lis Alibi 
 
 Pendens. 2. 
 
 Bankruptcy 16 Ch. D. 665 ; 13 ft. B. D. 235 ; 
 
 [15 Q. B. D. 169 
 See Bankruptcy — Staying Proceed- 
 ings. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy 16 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 1. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Debtor's summons 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 675 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 22. 
 
 County Court — Trial in Superior Court 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 905 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 11. 
 '— Supreme Court. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Staying Proceedings. 
 
 Supreme Court - - 19 Ch. D. 826 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 5. 
 -— Supreme Court — Concurrent actions 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 647 ; 23 Ch. D. 100 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Con- 
 duct OP Cause. 2, 3. 
 — — Supreme Court — Winding-up petition 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 210 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Order. 10. 
 
 STEAM-TUG— Duty to obey pilot 6 App. Cas. 217 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 7. 
 STOCK — Certificate to bearer. 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 I Conversion of. 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners — 
 Statutes. 
 
 ■ Petition to transfer - - 28 Ch. D. 516 
 
 See National Debt Commissioners. 
 
 Transfer of— Notice to retain 23 Ch. D. 549 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 2. 
 
 . Vesting order — Standing in name of testator 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 635 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Order. 11. 
 STOCK-IN-TRADE — Exempt from poor-rate. 
 
 See Poor-rate — Exemptions — Statutes. 
 STOCKBROKER— Bankruptcy 22 Ch. D. 132 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Adjudication. 2. 
 
 EmDloyment of, by trustee — Loss of fund 
 
 " [22 Ch. D. 727 ; 9 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Trustee— Liabilities. 2. 
 
 STOCKBROKER — continued. 
 
 Member of committee — Appointment of 
 
 settling day. - - 20 Ch. D. 356 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 2. 
 
 Sale of bank shares — Negligence 
 
 See Stock Exchange. 1. [9 ft. B. D. 546 
 
 STOCK EXCHANGE. 
 
 1. Sale of Shares — Name of Shareholder — 
 
 30 & 31 Vict. c. 29, s. 1— Custom of Stock Exchange.'^, 
 The Defendant, a stockbroker, who had under- 
 taken to sell shares of a joint stock bank for the 
 Plaintiff, a shareholder, sold them to a jobber on 
 the Stock Exchange and sent an advice note of 
 such sale to the Plaintiff, but in accordance with, 
 the custom of the Stock Exchange, the bought 
 and sold notes between the Defendant and the 
 jobber omitted to state the name of the registered 
 proprietor of the shares as required by 30 & 31 Vict, 
 c. 29, s. 1, by reason of which the contract for sate 
 was void, and the bank having stopped, and an 
 order for its winding-up having been made before 
 the day on which the jobber was entitled to name 
 the person willing to be the purchaser, the con- 
 tract for sale was repudiated, and the Plaintiff 
 remained the holder of the shares : — Held, that 
 the Defendant had committed a breach of duty in 
 not making a. valid contract for sale, notwith- 
 standing the custom of the Stock Exchange to 
 disregard the said statute, as such custom was 
 both imreasonable and illegal, and that for such 
 breach of duty the Plaintiff was entitled to re- 
 cover from the Defendant by way of damages the 
 price at which the shares had been sold. Neilsok 
 V. James - - 9 Q. B. D. 64fi 
 
 2. Settling Day — Mules of London Stock 
 
 Exchange — A'ppointment of Settling Day obtained 
 htj Fraud — Defaulter — Private Administration of 
 Assets Jjy Official Assignee — Member of Committee- 
 — Disqualification by reason of Interest.'] By on& 
 of the rules of the London Stock Exchange bar- 
 gains in the shares of a new company are contin- 
 gent on the appointment of a special settling day 
 by the committee : — Held, that, if the appointment 
 of a settling day has been obtained by fraud, the; 
 validity of contracts in relation to the shares of 
 the company, entered into by persons who werb 
 not actors in or parties to the fraud, is unaffected. 
 — A member of the committee of the Stock Ex- 
 change who takes part in the appointment of a 
 settling day is not in so doing acting in a judicial 
 capacity, and is not, therefore, disqualified from 
 acting by reason of his having a personal interest 
 in tlie matter. — A creditor of a defaulter on the; 
 Stock Exchange who has taken the benefit of the 
 private distribution of Stock Exchange assets, 
 made by the official assignee of the Stock Ex- 
 change under its rules, is not precluded from' 
 afterwards taking ordinary legal proceedings for 
 the recovery of his debt, though he must give 
 credit for what he has received from the official 
 assignee. Ex parte Ward. In re Ward 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 366 
 
 Usage — Principal and agent — Shares in 
 
 banking company - 14Q. B. D. 460; 
 [15 Q. B, D. 388 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's. 
 Liability. 4, 5. 
 
( 1553 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1554 ) 
 
 STOLE - - _ _ 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Public 
 Worship Act. 1. 
 
 STOIEH GOODS— Receiving— Guilty knowledge 
 —Evidence - - 12 ft, B, D. 522 
 
 See Obiminal Law — Evidence, 6. 
 
 STOP OBD£B — Mortgage — Priority 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 686; 29 Oh. D. 786 
 
 See Mortgage- Priority. 10, 11. 
 Priority - 23 Ch. D. 497 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Charg- 
 ing Orders. 3. 
 Priority— Notice - - 18 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 STOPPAGE IK TBANSITir. 
 
 See Cases under Sale of Goods — Lien. 
 
 STEAITS SETTIEMENTS - 7 App. Cas. 172 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 761 
 See Colonial Law — Straits Settle- 
 ments. 1, 2. 
 
 STEATiriED raONSTONE MINES (GTJN- 
 POWDEK) ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Mine — Mines Eegulation Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 STREET— Dedication to public - 29 Ch. D. 750 
 See Highway — Dedication. 
 
 Definition 10 ft. B. D. 394 ; 13 ft. B. D. 184 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 364 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 2, 10. 
 
 Expense of sewering and paving — Formation 
 
 and width. 
 
 See Cases under 
 
 Local Government — Streets. 
 Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 —— Limits of metropolitan. 
 
 See Metropolis — Police Acts — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
 ' Repair — Use of steam roller 15 ft. B. D. 1 
 
 See Gas Company. 
 
 STRIKE — Begging for assistance — Vagrancy 
 
 See Vagrant Acts. 3. [12 ft. B. D. 306 
 
 SIEIKING OFF EOLIS - 12 ft. B. D. 148 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Solicitor — Misconduct. 1, 2. 
 
 STEIKING OUT PIEADINGS 26 Ch. D. 470, 778 ; 
 
 [6 ft. B. D. 190 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Strik- 
 ing out Pleadings. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 BUB-FEXr- Held under defaulting vassal 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 553 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Pro- 
 perty. 5. 
 
 SUBMARINE TELEGEAFH. 
 
 See Telegraph— Stoiafee. 
 SUBMISSION — Revocation — No agreement to 
 make submission a rule of Court 
 
 [12 ft. B. S. 310 
 
 See Arbitration — Submission. 2. 
 
 8UB-M0BTGAGE — Improper investment 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 490 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 5. 
 
 SUBP(ENA— Arbitration — Witness out of juris- 
 diction of Court - 12 ft, B, D. 39 
 
 See Evidence — Witness. 1. 
 
 Witness before arbitrator 17 Ch. D. 787 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 7. 
 
 SUBROGATION— Insurance, Fire — Sale — Fire 
 before completion — Eight to insurance 
 money - - - 11 ft. B. D. 380 
 
 See Insurance — Fire. 4. 
 
 Insurance, Marine — Constructive total loss 
 
 Collision — Recovery of damages 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 706 
 See Insurance, Marine — Policy. 7. 
 
 SUB-SALE — Stoppage in transitu 7 App. Cas, 573 
 
 See Sale of Goods — Lien. 1. 
 
 Vendor's lien for unpaid purchase-money 
 
 [26 Ch, D. 601 
 See Vendor and Purchases — Lien. 2. 
 
 SUBSCEIBEB OF MEMORANDUM 25 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Company— Director's Qualitioa- 
 
 TION. 1. 
 
 SUBSIDENCE — Action for, after compensation 
 for previous subsidence 14 ft. B, D, 125 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Personal 
 Actions. 2. 
 
 SUBSTITUTED SERVICE— Debtor's summons 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 33g 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 20. 
 
 Solicitor— Summons 9 ft, B. D. 698 
 
 See Peaotice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 6. 
 
 Notice of appeal - - 24 Ch. D, 364 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 3. 
 
 SUBSTITUTIONAL GIFT - 17Ch, D. 788; 
 
 [23 Ch, D, 737 
 
 See Will — Substitutional Gift. 1, 2. 
 
 - - - 18Ch, D, 441 
 
 See Will — Perpetuity. 4. 
 
 - _ . _ l9Ch.D. 470 
 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 3. 
 
 - - - 26 Ch. D. 212 
 
 See Will — Words. 10. 
 
 SUCCESSION — Personalty — Married Women's 
 Property Act (Scotland) 8 App. Cas. 678 
 See Scotch Law — Husband and Wife. 
 6. 
 
 Real estate — Scotch law - 8 App. Cas. 577 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Property. 
 4. 
 
 SUCCESSION DUTY. 
 
 See Cases under Revenue — Succession 
 Duty. 
 
 Covenant to pay money free from all deduc- 
 tions - - - 29 Ch. D. 697 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 1. 
 
 Customs Inland Revenue Act, 1881. 
 
 See Revenue — Succession Duty — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 
( 1555 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1556 ) 
 
 SUEZ CANAL— Negligence of pilot 7 P. D. 132 
 See Ship— Pilot. 6. 
 
 SUING AND LABOimiNG CLAUSE— Be-insvir- 
 ance — Constructive total loss — Notice of 
 abandonment - - IS Q. B. D. 11 
 
 See Insukanoe, Mabinb — Loss, Total. 
 
 SULPHATE OF AMMONIA WORKS. 
 
 See Local Goveknment — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 SULPHURIC ACID WOEKS. 
 
 See Local Goveknment — Public 
 Health Acts — Statutes. 
 
 SUMMARY JURISDICTION ACTS. 
 
 See Justices — Practice — Statutes. 
 
 SUMMONS — Amendment — Foreclosure — • Ac- 
 counts - - - 25 Ch. D. 48 
 See Mortgage — Fokeclosuee. 1. 
 
 Bastardy — Service in Scotland 
 
 [12 Q. B. D, 261 ; 10 App. Cas. 45 
 See Bastakdt. 6. 
 
 Jurisdiction on— Infant - 19 Ch. D. 305 
 
 See Infant — Maintenance. 3. 
 
 Order on — Whether final or interlocutory 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 392 
 See Practice — Scpbemb Court — Ap- 
 peal. 14. 
 
 ■ Originating— Appeal - 30 Ch. D. 231 
 
 , See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 
 peal. 22. 
 
 Practice in Chambers. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Chambers. 
 
 Substituted service on solicitor 9 Q. B. D. 698 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 6. 
 
 SUNDAY— Closing public-house 8 Q. B. D. 119 ; 
 See Inn— Offences. 5, 6. [11 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 SUNDAY OBSERVANCE. 
 
 The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 59, continues the Sun- 
 day Observance Prosecution Act, 1871 (34 & 35 
 Vict. c. 87) until the Slst of December, 1886. 
 
 SUPERANNUATION— Governor of prison 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 656 ; 9 App. Cas. 757 
 
 See Prison. 1. 
 
 SUPERANNUATION ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Fe^sios— Statutes. 
 
 SUPERFLUOUS LANDS— Lands Clauses Act. 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 95 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 6. 
 
 See Cases under Lands Clauses Act — 
 Superfluous Lands. 
 
 SUPERIOR AND VASSAL - 7 App. Cas. 427 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 553 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Peopeety. 
 1,5. 
 
 Compensation - - 8 App. Cas. 266 
 
 See Scotch Law — Rail way Company. 5. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTAL ACTION - 26 Ch. D. 181 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 3. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTAL ACTIOTX— continued. 
 
 Nuisance— District Board 17 Ch. D. 686 
 
 See Local Government — Local Autho- 
 rity. 13. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTAL DEED. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 SUPPORT. 
 
 1. Implied Grant.] The corporation of 
 
 L. put up a piece of land for sale in lots, the in- 
 terest acquired by each purchaser being a right 
 to a lease of the lot purchased by him, and he 
 being bound to build upon the lot according to 
 plans to be approved by the corporation. None 
 of the lots were sold, and in July, 1868, the Plain- 
 tiff agreed for the purchase of one of the lots by 
 private contract, subject to the original conditions. 
 He furnished plans shewing a foundation 10 feet 
 9 inches deep ; but finding the subsoil unsafe he 
 laid his foundation at a depth of 8 feet 3 inches, 
 to the knowledge of the corporation, whose officer 
 inspected the operations and made no objections. 
 In June, 1869, the Plaintiff's house was carried 
 to the joists of the ground floor. In August, 
 1869, the Defendant purchased from the corpora- 
 tion the adjoining lot. In October, 1869, when 
 the Plaintiff's house was nearly finished the cor- 
 poration granted him his lease. After this the 
 Defendant got his lease, and in 1881, wishing to 
 carry his foundations lower than those of the 
 Plaintiff, excavated to a considerably greater 
 depth and endangered the foundations of the 
 Plaintiff's house: — Held (affirming the decision 
 of the Vice-Chancellor of Lancaster), that the 
 Plaintiff was entitled to restrain the Defendant 
 from excavating so as to let down the Plaintiff's 
 house, for that there was not enough in the special 
 circumstances of the case to take away the right 
 of support from the adjoining lauds of the grantor 
 which is implied in a grant of land for tlie pur- 
 pose of building. — How the case would have 
 stood if the grants to the Plaintiff and the DefeQ- 
 dant had been contemporaneous, or if the right of 
 support claimed would have prevented the corpo- 
 ration from building in a reasonable way on the 
 adjoining lot, quasre. Eigby v. Bennett 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 559 
 
 2. Prescription — Ancient Buildings — 
 
 Rebuilding Tenement — Damage to Neighbour's 
 Vault — Estate of Ecclesiastical Corporation — Pre- 
 scription Act — Owner and Contractor jointly re- 
 sponsible.'] Where ancient buildings belonging to 
 different owners adjoin each other there is a right 
 of support from the building as well as from the 
 land ; and this right of support can be claimed 
 under tho provisions of the Prescription Act (2 & 3 
 Will. 4, 0. 71). The mere fact that the support is 
 derived from property which belongs to an eccle- 
 siastical corporation does not prevent the right of 
 support being acquired under the Act. But the 
 enjoyment of right must have been open and not 
 surreptitious to come within the provisions of the 
 Act. Damage having been done by the wrongful 
 acts of a contractor or his workmen, employed 
 under a contmct and specification, to a neigh- 
 bour's vault, it was held, imder the circumstances, 
 that both the employer and contractor were liable 
 
( 1557 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1558 ) 
 
 SUPPORT— conKjMieii. 
 
 for it, and judgment was given for the Plaintiff, 
 ■with costs_ against both Defendants. Lbmaitee 
 V. Davis - - - - 19 Ch, D. 281 
 
 3. Prescription— fibase — Adjoining Soil 
 
 —Prescription Act (2 ife 3 Will, i, o. 71), a. 2 
 — Principal and Agent or Contractor — LiaMlity 
 of Principal for Acts of Contractor.'] A right to 
 lateral support from adjoining land may be ao- 
 qxiired by twenty years' uninterrupted enjoyment 
 for a building proved to have been newly built, 
 or altered so as to increase the lateral pressure, at 
 *he beginning of that time ; and it is so acquired 
 if the enjoyment is peaceable and without decep- 
 tion or concealment and so open that it must 
 be known that some support is being enjoyed by 
 the building. — Semhle, per Lord Selborne, L.C. : 
 Such a right of support is an easement within 
 the meaning of the Prescription Act, 2 & 3 Will. 
 4, c. 71, s. 2. Two dwelling-houses adjoined, 
 built independently, but each on the extremity 
 •of its owner's soil and having lateral support 
 from the soil on which the other rested. This 
 having continued for much more than twenty 
 yeaj-s, one of the houses (the Plaintiffs') was, in 
 18i9, converted into a coach factory, the internal 
 walls being removed and girders inserted into a 
 , fitaok of brickwork in such away as to throw much 
 more lateral pressure than before upon the soil 
 under the adjoining house. The conversion was 
 made openly, and without deception or conceal- 
 ment. More than twenty years after the conver- 
 sion the owners of the adjoining house employed 
 a contractor to pull down their house and exca- 
 vate, the contractor being bound to shore up 
 adjoining buildings and make good all damage. 
 The contractor employed a sub-contractor upon 
 similar terms. The house was pulled down, and 
 ■the soil under it excavated to a depth of several 
 feet, and the Plaintiffs' stack being deprived of 
 the lateral support of the adjacent soil sank and 
 fell, bringing down with it most of the factory : — 
 Held, that the Plaintiffs had acquired a right of 
 support for their factory by the twenty years' en- 
 joyment, and could sue the owners of the adjoining 
 house and the contractor for the injury. — Bower 
 V. Peate (1 Q. B. D. 321) approved. Daltok v. 
 Angbs - - - 6 App. Cas. 740 
 
 4. Prescription — Enjoyment as of Bight.'] 
 
 In 1856 A. built on a wall belonging to B., the 
 rest of the building being on land laid out by B. 
 for a street. By a deed made in 1864, A. cove- 
 nanted with B. that A. would on three months' 
 notice macadamise the street and keep it in 
 repair. This deed was recited in another deed 
 made between A. and B. in 1877, in which the 
 proposed street was referred to. The street was 
 never made, and the design had been abandoned : 
 — Seld, that A.'s enjoyment of support from the 
 wall was not as of right, and that no easement 
 was acquired. — Dalton v. Angus (6 App. Oas. 
 740) discussed. Tone v. Pkeston 34 Ch. D. 739 
 
 Action for subsidence — Compensation for 
 
 previous subsidence — Limitation 
 
 [14 a. B. D. 128 
 
 See Limitations, Statute oe — Personal 
 Actions. 2. 
 
 SUPPORT— e( 
 
 Houses abutting on hirfiway— Subsidence 
 
 [6 Q. B. D. 264 
 See LooAL Government — Compensa- 
 tion. 8. 
 
 Mine — Clause in lease - 23 Ch. D. 81 ; 
 
 ,See Mine— Lease. 1,2. [6 App. Cas. 460 
 
 Mine — ^Inclosure Act — Manorial rights 
 
 [10 Q. B. D. 547 ; 9 App. Cas, 286 
 See Inolosure. 1. 
 
 Mine— Scotch law - 8 App, Cas, 833 
 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 2. 
 
 Party-wall-^Contraotor's work 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 441 ; 8 App. Cas. 443 
 See Pbincipal and Agent— Peinoipaij'.s 
 Liability. 1. 
 
 ' Surface — Mine — Eailway company 
 
 [11 Q. B, D, 820 
 See Kailwat Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 7. 
 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA— Jurisdiction 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 644 
 See Colonial Law— Canada— Ontario. 
 1. 
 SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE ACT, 1881. 
 See Court — Statutes. 
 
 Municipal Cobpokation— Sfatuies. 
 Parliament — Statutes. 
 Practice — Divoboe — Appeal — Sta- 
 tutes. 
 SUPREME COURT OE JUDICATURE ACT, 1884. 
 
 See Court — Statutes. 
 SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (FUNDS, 
 &c.) ACT, 1883. 
 See Court — Statutes. 
 SURCHARGE — Mortgagee in possession 
 
 [30 Ch. D 336 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 4. 
 
 SURETY. 
 
 See Cases under Principal and Surety. 
 Administration bond - - 10 P. D. 196 
 
 See Administrator — Grant. 2. 
 Bail in criminal case — Indemnity — ^Actidn 
 
 to recover deposit — Illegality 15 Q. B. D. 
 
 See Contract — Validity. 2. [661 
 Bond by— Mortgage 30 Ch, D. 291 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 10. 
 Composition - - 16 Ch. D. 605 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Annulment. 4. 
 
 Guarantee society — Probate action 
 
 [7 P, D, 235 
 
 See Administratoh — Limited. 7. 
 SURFACE— Mine— Clause in lease 23 Ch, D. 81 ; 
 
 See Mine— Lease. 1,2. [6 App, Cas. 460 
 Support of. 
 
 See Cases under Support. 
 Support of— -Scotch law - 8 App. Cas. 833 
 
 See Scotch Law — Mine. 2. 
 
 Support — Mine — Eailway company 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 820 
 
 See Eailway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 7. 
 
( 1559 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( .1560 ) 
 
 STJEPIiTTS IHCOUE — Ecclesiastical Commissioners 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 596 
 
 See Chabitt — Commissioneks. 1. 
 SITBBENDEB 07 LEASE— Infant 39 Ch. S. S18 
 
 See Infant — Pkopebtt. 3. 
 
 STJETEY— Colonial certificate of. 
 
 See Ship^Merohakt SHTPPme Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 StraVEYOE— Certificate of— Evidence of title 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 344 
 See Vendor and Pubohaser — Title. 2. 
 
 SUEVIVOE — Death of child before testator, 
 leaving issue - - 22 Ch. S. 663 
 
 See Will — Lapse, 5. 
 
 Will— Construction - 19 Ch. D. 186 ; 
 
 ;SeeWiLL— SuEvrvoE. 1,2. [29Ch,D.839 
 
 Will — Death without issue — Woman past 
 
 childbearing - 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Evidence — Peesumption. 
 
 ST7BVIV0ESHIP— Husband and wife— Joint in- 
 vestments - - 28 Ch. D. 705 
 See Husband and Witb — Sepaeate Es- 
 tate. 4. 
 
 Husband — Wife's reversionary interest in 
 
 term - - - 25 Ch, D. 620 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Wife's Eevek- 
 
 SION. 1. 
 SUSPENDING OEDEE— Certificate of conformity 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 687 
 See Bankbuptoy — ^Dischakge. 2. 
 SWINE — Nuisance — Dwelling-house — By-law 
 
 [12 Q,. B. D. 617 
 See Local Govebnment — By-laws. 
 
 Nuisance — Keeping near dwelling-house 
 
 [8 Q, B. S. 97 
 
 See Local Government — Offences. 3. 
 
 syNOD— Lower Canada - 7 App. Cas. 136 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 
 3. 
 
( 1561 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1562 ) 
 
 TACKING— Mortgage — Priorities — Receipt by 
 trustees of buUdiag society 
 
 [12 Q. B. L. 423 
 See Mortgage — Priobity. 2. 
 
 Mortgage— Priority - 19 Ch. D. 207 
 
 See Solicitor— -Liabilities. 3. 
 TATENHILL EECTOET. 
 
 See BooLESiASTioAL CoMMissiONEES — Statutes. 
 TAXATION OF COSTS— County Court. 
 
 See Cases under County Court — Costs. 
 
 District registry - 27 Ch. D. 242 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Dis- 
 trict Registry. 
 
 Solicitor and client — Bill of costs. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Bill op 
 Costs. 
 — — Solicitor and client— Bill of costs — ^After 
 payment — Lands Clauses Act 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 167 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 2. 
 
 Supreme Court. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Costs. 
 TEES — Conservancy regulations — Damage 
 
 See Ship— Navigation. 27. [8 P. D. 5 
 TELEGRAPH. 
 
 Post Office.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict. c. 58, re- 
 peals sect 15 of 31 <fe 32 Vict. c. 100 (the Telegraph 
 Act, 1868), and provides for sixpenny telegrams. 
 Sect. 23 of the latter Act to apply to regulations 
 made under this Act. 
 
 Sect. 4. This Act to extend to the Isle of Man and 
 Channel Islands. 
 
 Sect. 1. This Act to be read with the Telegraphs 
 Acts, 1863 to 1878, and to he a Fast Office Act, 
 within the Post Office (Offences) Act, 1837 (1 Vict. 
 cZS). 
 
 Telegrams.] Regulations of lOfft August, 1885, 
 for Inland Telegrams - I. G. 1888, p. 44S0 
 Submarine Cable.] The Act 48 & 49 Vict c. 49, 
 <xirries into effect the International Convention of 
 March Hth, 1884, between Great Britain, Germany, 
 the Argentine Confederation, Austria, Belgium, 
 Brazils, Costa Mica, DenmarTc, Dominican Be- 
 puhlie, Spain, United States of America, Columbia, 
 France, Guatemala, Greece, Italy, Turliey, Holland, 
 Duchy of Luxemburg, Persia, Portugal, Boumania, 
 Russia, Salvador, Servia, Sweden and Norway, 
 Uruguay. The Convention applies (outside ter- 
 ritorial waters) to submarine cables landed on the 
 territories, colonies, or possessions of the Powers, 
 hut does not apply to the following British colonies, 
 viz. : Canada, Newfoundland, Cape, Natal, New 
 South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Tasmania, 
 South Australia, Western Australia, New Zealand. 
 They are at liberty however to accede to the Con- 
 (oention hereafter. 
 
 Sect. 2. The above-named Convention is part of 
 this Act. 
 
 Sect. 3. Punishment for any person who within 
 or (being a subject of Her Majesty) without Her 
 
 fEL'&GB.tS'K— continued. 
 
 Majesty's dominions unlawfully or by culpable 
 
 negligence breaks or injures a submarine cable. 
 
 Sect. 4. Repairing breakage or injury. 
 
 Sect. 5. Application of certain enactments of 
 25 & 26 Vict. c. 63 (the Merchant Shipping Act, 
 1862), and of sect. 6 o/ 46 <{; 47 Vict c. 22 (Sea 
 Fisheries Act, 1883) to this Act for purposes of 
 lights, signals and fishing vessels. 
 
 Sect. 6. (1.) A commander of a British or foreign 
 ship of war may exercise the powers conferred hy 
 the Convention. 
 
 (2.) Punishment for obstructing such officers. 
 
 (3.) (4.) and (5.) Actions and proceedings against 
 such officers. 
 
 Legal Procedure.] Sect. 7. Incorporation of 
 Part X. ofn & 18 Vict c. 104 (Merchant Shipping 
 Act, 1854) vnth this Act. 
 
 Sect. 8. (1.), (2.), (3.). Admissibility of docu- 
 ments drawn up under the Convention in civil or 
 criminal proceedings. 
 
 (4.) Forgery of signature of officer. 
 
 Sect 9. The master of a vessel by which an offence 
 has been committed is primS. facie liable. 
 
 Sect. 10. Provisions of this Act to be in addition 
 to, and not in derogation of, other British laws. 
 
 Sect. 11. This Act applies to the whole of Her 
 Majesty's dominions and to the Admiralty. 
 
 Seat. 12. Definitions. 
 
 Sect. 13. This Act comes into force on date pub- 
 lished in " London Gazette " and ends when the 
 Convention ceases to be binding on Great Britain. 
 
 It had not come into force on the 1st January, 
 1886. 
 
 Address — Trade-name - 30 Ch. D. 156 
 
 See Trade-name. 1. 
 
 Fictitious telegrams. 
 
 See Post Office — Statutes. 
 
 Eateability of wires - 12 Q. B. D. 552 
 
 See Poor-rate — Occupation. 5. 
 
 TELEGRAPH COMPANY. 
 
 Postmaster General — Telephone — Tele- 
 graph Acts, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict c. 112), «. 3 ; 1868 
 (31 * 32 Vict c. 110); and 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 73), ss. 3, 4, 5, 6.] Edison's telephone, for which 
 patents were granted in 1877 and 1878, consists 
 of a transmitter, a wii'e, and a receiver. When 
 sounds are spoken into the transmitter, electric 
 currents of varying intensity pass along the wire, 
 so that corresponding or equivalent sounds are 
 heard at the receiver, and two persons at a dis- 
 tance can thus converse with one another. A 
 company leased these telephones to subscribers at 
 yearly rents which produced a profit to the com- 
 pany, and arranged the wires so that subscribers 
 could converse with one another when put into 
 
 communication by a servant, of the company : 
 
 Held, that Edison's telephone was a " telegraph " 
 within the meaning of the Telegraph Acts, 1863 
 and 1869, although the telephone was not in- 
 vented or contemplated in 1869. — Held, also, that 
 a conversation through the telephone was a 
 
( 1563 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1564 ) 
 
 TELEGEAPH COT/LVATin— continued. 
 " message," or at all events " a communication 
 transmitted by a telegraph," and therefore a " tele- 
 gram" within the meaning of those Acts; and 
 that since the company made a profit out of the 
 rents, conversations held by subscribers through 
 their telephones were infringements of the exclu- 
 sive privilege of transmitting telegrams granted 
 to the Postmaster-General by the Act of 1869, 
 and were not within the exceptions mentioned in 
 sect. 5. Attoeney-Genebal v. Edison Tele- 
 phone Company op London - 6 Q. B. D. 244 
 TELEGEAPHT— Book of words— Copyright 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 637 
 
 See COPYBIGHT^BOOKS. i. 
 
 TELEPHONE — Company — Eateable occupation — 
 Wayleaves 14 Q. B. D. 267 
 
 See PoOK-RATE — Occupation. 6. 
 
 Eights of Postmaster-General 6 Q, B, D. 244 
 
 See Telegkaph Company. 
 
 Wire extending across street — Trespass — 
 
 Eights of vestry or district board 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 904 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 7. 
 TEMPOEAEY NUISAHCE— Reversioner 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 589 
 See Nuisance — Remedies. 2. 
 TENANT AT 'WILL— Attornment clause in mort- 
 gage - 21 Ch. D. 442 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 4. 
 
 Mortgagor — Satisfied mortgagee 
 
 [22 Ch, D. 614 
 See Limitations, Statute or — Trusts. 
 3. 
 TENANT POE LIPE, 
 
 Settlement of Business — Successive 
 
 Tenants for Life — Loss during First Tenanaij for 
 Idfe — Profit during Second Tenancy for Life — 
 Apportionment of Loss between Persons interested.'] 
 In an action to execute the trusts of a settle- 
 ment, by wliich (inter alia) a business was as- 
 signed to trustees on trust for successive tenants 
 for life and remainderman, a receiver and manager 
 was appointed to carry on the business. During 
 the life of the first tenant for life the business was 
 carried on by the receiver at a loss ; during the 
 life of the second tenant for life profits were 
 earned : — Beld, that the loss must be made good 
 out of the subsequent profits, and not out of 
 capital. TJpTON v. Brown - 26 Ch. B. 588 
 
 Apportionment — Income of legacy 
 
 See Apportionment. 1. [18 Ch, D, 160 
 
 Building contract by - 19 Ch, D. 22 
 
 See Easement, 2. 
 
 Consent bv — Assignment of life estate 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 683 
 See Settlement — Powers. 1. 
 
 Contract for lease - 22 Ch. D. 128 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 2. 
 
 Costs incurred for protection of estate 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 687 
 See Trustee Belief Act. 4. 
 
 Custody of deeds - - 26 Ch. D. 31 
 
 See Title Deeds. 
 
 Leaseholds — Duty of trustee — Bepairs — 
 
 Covenant - - 16 Ch, D. 723 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 9. 
 
 TENANT FOE 'LIS'Z— continued. 
 
 Lunacy — Allowance to tenant in remainder 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 320 
 See Lunatic — ^Peopertt. 3. 
 
 Mortgage to be paid off out of accumula- 
 tions — Eights of tenant for life 
 See Accumulations. 1. [30 Ch. D. 649 
 
 Mortgaged estate — Keeping down interest 
 
 [30 Ch, D. 614 
 See "Will — ^Disclaimer. 2. 
 
 Order to redeem — Assignment to third 
 
 party - - - 26 Ch. D. 567 
 
 See Mortgage — Eedemptios. 3. 
 
 Ordinary outgoings - - 28 Ch. D, 431 
 
 See Will — ^Words. 14. 
 
 Permanent improvements 27 Ch. D, 19ft 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 7. 
 
 Power of leasing mines — Mortgage 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 58» 
 See Settlement — Powers. 1. 
 
 Power of sale — Settlement — Injunction 
 
 [24 Ch. S, 56» 
 See Settlement — Powers. 17. 
 
 Powers of sale and leasing under Settled 
 
 Land Act. 
 See Cases and Statutes under Settled 
 Land Act. 
 
 Power to consent to advancement — Bank- 
 
 mptoy 27 Ch. D. 565 
 
 See Power — Extinction. 2. 
 Protector of settlement— Death of protector 
 
 appointed by settlor 16 Ch. D, 176 
 
 See Tenant in Tail. 2. 
 
 Purchase-money under Lauds Clauses Act 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 597 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — ^Pdrchase- 
 
 MONEY. 2. 
 
 Remaindermen — Apportionment 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 67^ 
 See Executor — Administration. 1. 
 
 Remainderman — ^Bonus 29 Ch. D, 635 
 
 See Company — ^Dividends. 1. 
 
 Renewable leaseholds — Purchase of rever- 
 
 sion - 26 Ch. D. 690 ; 29 Ch. D. 673 
 See Leasehold — Renewable IiEase, 
 1,2. 
 
 Sale under Lands Clauses Act 18 Ch, D, 146 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 5. 
 
 TENANT FEOM TEAE TO YEAE 16 Ch. D. 274 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress. 2. 
 
 Assignment - 9 Q. B. D. 368 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 Notice to quit. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant— Yearly 
 Tenant — Statutes. 
 
 TENANT IN COMMON. 
 
 Use and Occupation — Contribution — 
 
 Tenants in Common of a Bouse — Landlord and Te- 
 nant — Tenant by Sufferance — Ordinary Sepairs.'} 
 Where one tenant in common has by lease demised 
 his interest to his co-tenant in common, if the 
 tenant in common who was lessee continues 
 in occupation as tenant at sufferance after the 
 
( 1565 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1566 ) 
 
 TENANT IN COMMON— coniintjed 
 expiration of the lease, he will be liable in an action 
 for use and occupation at the suit of his co-tenant 
 in common who was lessor. — One tenant in com- 
 mon of a house who expends money on ordinary 
 repairs has no right of action against his co- 
 tenant for contribution. — Judgment of Pollock, B., 
 affirmed. Leigh v. DicEESOfr 12 Q,, B. D, 194 ; 
 
 [15 a. B. TO. 30 
 . — - Joint tenant - - 21 Ch. D. 352 
 
 See Power — ^Execution. 3. 
 
 Partition suit - - 21 Ch. S. 674 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 
 " Share and share alike " - 21 Ch. D. 811 
 
 See Will — Olass. 2. 
 
 TENANT IN TAIL 
 
 1. Disentailing Deed — Enrolment — Settle- 
 ment — Mistake — Reetification — Jurisdiction — 
 .Fines and Recoveries Act (3 <{; 4 Will. 4, c. 74), 
 ss. 40, 47.] Having regard to sects. 40 and 47 of 
 the Pines and Kecoveries Act (3 & 4 Will. 4, 
 c. 74), the Court has no jurisdiction to rectify, on 
 the ground of mistake, a deed which has been en- 
 rolled as a disentailing assurance under the Act, 
 although the rectification asked is not in the dis- 
 entailing part of the deed, but in a re-settlement 
 added to it, which might have been effected by a 
 separate unenrolled deed. — A testator, who died 
 in 1836, devised his estates, subject to a prior 
 limitation to A. for life, to the use of B. for life, 
 with remainder to the use of " the first and other 
 sons of B. in tail," with remainders over. In 
 1878, by a deed enrolled as a disentailing as- 
 surance under the Fines and Eecoveries Act 
 (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 74), B., and 0. his then only son, 
 with the consent of A. as protector of the settle- 
 ment, conveyed the estates subject to A.'s life 
 estate, but discharged from B.'s life estate and 
 C.'s estate tail in remainder under the will, to the 
 use of B. for life, with remainder to the use of C. 
 in tail, with remainder to uses in favour of the 
 Defendant and his issue. — It appeared to have 
 been the intention of the parties to this re-settle- 
 ment to preserve therein the Hmitatioa in the will 
 to " the first and other sons of B. in tail," but 
 shortly after the death, in 1880, of C, a bachelor, 
 B. being still living, it was discovered that this 
 hmitation had been omitted, and that conse- 
 quently the limitations over in favour of the De- 
 fendant and his issue took effect to the exclusion 
 or B.'s future issue, if any. — In an action by A. 
 and B. against the Defendant, who was an infant, 
 to have the deed of 1878 rectified by the insertion, 
 next after C.'s estate tail, of a limitation to B.'s 
 "second and other sons in tail : " — Held, that by 
 sect. 47 of the above Act the Court was prohibited, 
 in such a case, from exercising its ordinary juris- 
 diction as to the rectification of mistakes in deeds 
 Hall-Dabe v. Hall-Dabb - 29 Ch. D. 133 
 [Reversed by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 251.] 
 
 2. — — Disentailing Deed — Protector of 
 ment-^Truetees — Death — Tenant for Life — 3 & 4 
 Will. 4, c. 74, 8. 22.] The trustees of the real 
 estate under a will were appointed also protectors 
 of the estates tail created by the will. They all 
 died, and new trustees of the real estate were ap- 
 pointed by the Court : — Held, that the tenant for 
 
 TENANT IN TAIL— continued. 
 life had become protector of the settlement, and 
 that he and the first tenant in tail could convey. 
 Clakke v. Chamberlin - 16 Ch. D. 178 
 
 •.— Fire insurance — Bight to policy-money 
 
 See Insurance, Pibe. 2. [23 Ch. D. 188 
 Heirlooms— Vesting - 24 Ch. D, 102 
 
 See Will — Heibloom. 1. 
 
 Infant — Powers of trustees — Settled Land 
 
 Act - - - 24 Ch. D. 129 
 
 See Settled Land Act — Trustees. 6. 
 Lunacy- Allowance - - 20 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Lunatic — Peopebtt. 3. 
 TENANT or MANOE— Eights of common 
 
 See Inclosueb; 3. [20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 TENANT PUB ATTTEE VIE 18 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Leasehold — Eenewable Lease. 3. 
 TENDENCY TO DECEIVE 18 Ch. D. 395 ; 8 App. 
 
 See Trade Name. 3. [Cas. 315 
 
 TENDER — After action — Costs — Salvage suit 
 
 [10 P. D. 1 
 
 See Practice— Admiralty — Costs. 8. 
 Bill of lading in exchange for payment- 
 Bills of lading drawn in sets 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 327 
 
 See Sale of Goods — Contract 4. 
 Costs- Trustee - 21 Ch. D. 855 
 
 See Trustee Belief Act. 2. 
 
 Salvage — Plea — Payment into Court 
 
 [10 P. D. 41 
 
 iSse Practice — Admibalty — Salvage. 2. 
 TERMINAL CHARGES — Eailway — Stations, 
 
 sidings, &c. - - 15 Q. B. D. 505 
 
 See Eailway Company — Eailways Ee- 
 GULATION Acts. 4. 
 TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY 6 App. Cas. 143 
 
 See Colonial Law — Honduras. 
 TESTAMENTARY POWER. 
 
 See Cases under Poweb — Execution, 
 8—19. 
 THAMES— Fishery bye-laws. 
 
 See PiSHEBY Acts — Gazette. 
 Preservation of. 
 
 See EiVER — Statutes. 
 Eules for navigation — Infringement. 
 
 See Cases under Ship — Navigation. 
 28—31. 
 
 THEATRE, 
 
 Licence — Having or Tceeping a House for 
 
 the Public Performance of Stage Plays — 6 & 7 Vict. 
 c. 68, s. 2.] The Appellant was the owner and oc- 
 cupier of a building which he gratuitously allowed 
 to be used on a few occasions for the performance 
 of stage plays, to which the public were admitted 
 on payment, for the benefit of a charity. The 
 Appellant had no licence for the pelformanoe of 
 stage plays in such building : — Held, that he was 
 rightly convicted, of having or keeping a house 
 for the public performance of stage plays without 
 a licence, under 6 & 7 Vict. u. 68, s. 2. Shelley 
 V. Betbell - - — 12 Q. B. D. 11 
 
 Free admission — Eeal burden 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 295 
 See Scotch Law — Heritable Pro- 
 perty. 3. 
 
( 1567 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1568 ) 
 
 8 App. Cas. 135 
 
 THEATJLE— continued. 
 
 Eight of representing di-amatic piece — Place 
 
 of entertainment 11 Q,. B. S. 102 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 843 
 
 See CoPTEiGHT — Dramatic. 1, 2. 
 THIED COUNSEL— Appeal— Costs 15 ft. B. D. 420 
 
 See SoLioiTOK — Bill of Costs. 14. 
 THIED PAETY— Claim against. 
 
 See Cases under Pbaoticb — Supeeme 
 CoTJBT — Third Party. 
 
 Contract to perform covenants in head lease 
 
 —Indemnity - 8 Q. B. D. 329 
 
 See Pbaotioe — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 48. 
 
 Damage by collision - - 8 P. D. 91 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Third 
 Party. 
 
 Entry of appearance 23 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Coun- 
 ter-claim. 3. 
 
 Right to compel action against — Nuisance 
 
 [23 Ch. D, 767 
 See Nuisance — Eemedies. 6. 
 
 TIDAL EIVEE— Fishery 
 
 See Fishery. 1. , 
 
 TIEECE OPPOSITION — Law of Mauritius — 
 Award - - 8 App. Cas. 296 
 
 See Colonial Law — Mauritus. 1. 
 
 TIMBEE. 
 
 1. Windfalls — Larch JVecs.] An estate 
 
 which comprised larch plantations was settled 
 as personalty by the medium of trustees for sale. 
 The trustees had power to pay all outgoings, and 
 to determine what part of the property was corpus 
 and what income. A large number of trees were 
 blown down by exti'aordinary gales, and the plan- 
 tations were so much injured that it became 
 necessary to clear and replant the ground. — The 
 income from the plantations was derived from 
 thinnings, and varied considerably according to 
 the age of the trees. The trees blown down were 
 about thu-ty-five years old, and in ordinary course 
 ■would have come to full maturity in fitfteen or 
 twenty years, and they would then have been cut 
 down and the ground cleared and replanted : — 
 Held, the proceeds of the sale of the larch trees 
 blown down and felled by reason of the gales did 
 not belong to the equitable tenant for life, but 
 must be invested by the trustees. But the Court, 
 having regard to the average income which would 
 have been derived from the plantations if no gales 
 had occurred, fixed an annual sum to be paid to 
 the tenant for life out of the income, and, if neces- 
 sary, the capital of the invested fund ; subject to 
 the right of the trustees to have recourse to the 
 fund in order to replant the plantations. In re 
 Harrison's Trusts. Harrison v. Harrison 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 220 
 
 2. Windfalls — Larch Trees — Real and 
 
 Personal Estate — Tenant for Life.'] A testator 
 devised estates upon which there were planta- 
 tions of larch trees. At the time of his death a 
 great number of the larch trees had been more or 
 less blown down by extraordinary gales. — It was 
 held by Pearson, J., that as between the devisees 
 and the executors of the testator the trees which 
 had been blown down to such an extent that they 
 
 TIMBEE — continued. 
 
 could not grow as trees usually grow were severed 
 and belonged to the executors, and that the trees 
 which were merely lifted but would have to be 
 cut for the proper cultivation of the pla.ntations 
 belonged to the devisees : — But, held, by the Court 
 of Appeal, in allowing an appeal, that, having 
 regard to the maxim "quicquid plantatur solo, 
 solo cedit," the principle applicable was that if a 
 tree was attached to the soil it was real estate, and 
 if severed, personalty ; that the life and manner 
 of growth of any particular tree was no test of its 
 attachment to the soO, and that the degree of 
 attachment or severance was a question of fiiot in 
 the case of each particular tree. In re Ainslie. 
 SwiNBURN V. Ainslie 28 Ch. D. 89 ; 30 Ch. D. 485 
 Floats — Harbour dues - 8 App. Cas. 658 
 
 See Scotch Law — Harbour. 2. 
 Eight to float down stream 9 App. Cas. 392 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — On- 
 tario. 5. 
 Timber limits - 9 App. Cas. 150 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 9. 
 TIME — Appeal — ^Application to stay proceedings 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 305 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Stay- 
 iNa Proceedings. 15. 
 Appeal in bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Appeal. 
 6—9. 
 Appeal — Practice — Supreme Court. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Appeal. 34 — 44. 
 
 Appeal — Probate and Divorce Division 
 
 [10 P. D. 110 ; 9 App. Cas. 631 
 
 See Practice — Divorce — Appeal. 1, 2. 
 
 Application for security for costs 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 358 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Secu- 
 rity FOR Costs. 1. 
 
 Appointment of trustee in liquidation 
 
 [24 Ch. D, 353 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Liquldation. 4. 
 
 Computation of — Notice of meeting of 
 
 shareholders - 29 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Company — Eeduction of Capital. 
 5. 
 
 Delivery of reply - - 22 Ch. D. 91 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Eeply. 3. 
 
 Extension of — Appeal. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — ^Appeal. 35 — 38. 
 
 Extension of — Appeal from order in Cham- 
 bers - - 6 a. B. D. 116 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — ^De- 
 fault. 5. 
 
 Extension of— Indorsement of writ 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 734 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ. 
 1. 
 
 Motion to discharge order in Chambers 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 326 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 5. 
 
< 1569 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 1570 ) 
 
 TIME — continued. 
 
 Keheaiing in bankruptcy - 22 Ch. D, 529 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 5. 
 
 Sending in requisitions 29 Ch. D. 465 
 
 See Vendor AND Pdrohasee — Title. 8. 
 
 • Writ tating effect — Fraction of day 
 
 [8 Q. B, S, 63 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ. 
 
 2. 
 
 TIME POIICY — Average under 3 per cent. — 
 
 Adding losses - 14 Q. B. B. 555 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Policy. 8. 
 
 Negative words 9 App. Cas. 345 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Policy. 9. 
 TITHES. 
 
 Redemption.] By the Act 48 * 49 Vict. c. 32, 
 tlie provisions of certain Acts respecting the re- 
 tdemption of rent-charge (^except as otherwise pro- 
 sided by this Act") are extended to all corn-rents, 
 rent-charges, and money payments payable out of 
 lands by virtue of any Act of Parliament in lieu of 
 tithes. 
 
 Arrears — Not recoverable by Sale — Tithes 
 
 Commutation Act(fi &1 Willi, o. 71), s. 67.] By 
 the 67th section of the Tithes Commutation Act 
 (6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 71) the sum thenceforth pay- 
 able in lieu of tithes is declared to be "in the 
 nature of a rent-charge issuing out of the lands 
 charged therewith." — Lands in respect of which 
 ■a tithe rent-charge was payable having become 
 unproductive, and the remedy by distress and 
 entry having become ineffectual: — Held, that 
 the sum payable in lieu of tithes is not by the 
 statute rendered a charge on the inheritance ; 
 and that the owner of tbe rent-charge was not 
 entitled to claim a sale of the lands in order to 
 recover the arrears of his rent-charge. Bailey v. 
 Badham - 30 Ch. D. 84 
 Payment under mistake — Delay in reclaim- 
 ing - - 6 a. B. D. 234 
 See Mistake. 3. 
 
 Statute of Limitations - 10 App. Cas. 14 
 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Kealty. 
 8. 
 TITLE— Sale of land. 
 
 See Cases and Statutes under 
 Vendor and Purchases — Title. 
 Vendor and Purchaser — Conditions 
 of Sale. 
 
 Sale of land — Defects in — Notice 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 661 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Rescis- 
 sion. 1. 
 TITLE DEEBS. 
 By 44 & 45 Vict. e. 41 (Gonveyanaing Act, 1881). 
 Sect. 9. — (1.) Where a person retains possession 
 of documents, and gives to another an acknowledg- 
 ment in writing of the right of that other to pro- 
 ■ditction of those documents, and to delivery of copies 
 thereof (in this section called an aeknowledgment), 
 that acknowledgment shall have effect as in this 
 ■section provided. 
 
 (2.) An acknowledgment shall bind the documents 
 to which it relates in the possession or under the 
 control of the person who retains them, and in the 
 possession or under the control of every other person 
 having possession or control thereof ffom time to 
 time, but shall bind each individual possessor or 
 
 TITLE DEEBS— ooii<miie(7. 
 
 person as long only as he has possession or control 
 thereof ; and every person so having possession or 
 control from time to time shall be bound specifically 
 to perform the obligations imposed under this section 
 by an acknowledgment, unless prevented from so 
 doing by fire or other inevitable accident. 
 
 (3.) The obligations imposed under this section 
 by an acknowledgment are to be performed from 
 time to time at the request in writing of the person 
 to whom an acknowledgment is given, or of any 
 person, not being u, lessee at a rent, having or 
 claiming any estate, interest, or right through or 
 under that person, or otherwise becoming through 
 or under that person interested in or affected by the 
 terms of any document to which the acknowledgment 
 
 (4.) The obligations imposed under this section 
 by an acknowledgment are — ' 
 (i.) An obligation to produce the documents or 
 any of them at all reasonable times for the 
 purpose of inspection, and of comparison 
 with abstracts or copies thereof, by the 
 person entitled to request production or by 
 any one by him authorized in writing; 
 and 
 (ii.) An obligation to produce the documents or 
 any of them at any trial, hearing, or ex- 
 amination in any Court, or in the execution 
 of any commission, or elsewhere in the 
 United Kingdom,on any occasion on which 
 produetion may properly be required, for 
 proving or supporting the title or claim of 
 the person entitled to request production, 
 or for any other purpose relative to thai 
 title or claim ; and 
 (iii.) An obligation to deliver to the person en- 
 titled to request the same true copies or 
 extracts attested or unattested, of or 
 from the documents or any of them. 
 (5.) All costs and expenses of or incidental to 
 tlie specific performance of any obligation imposed 
 under this section by an acknowledgment shall be 
 paid by the person requesting performance. 
 
 (6.) An acknowledgment shall not confer any 
 right to damages for loss or destruction of, or 
 injury to, the documents to which it relates, from 
 whatever cause arising. 
 
 (7.) Any person claiming to be entitled to the 
 benefit of an acknowledgment may apply to the 
 Court for an order directing the production of the 
 documents to which it relates, or any of them, or the 
 delivery of copies of or extracts from those documents 
 or any of them to him ; or some person on his be- 
 half; and the Court may, if it thinks fit, order 
 production, or production and delivery accordingly, 
 and may give directions respecting tlie time, place, 
 terms, and mode of production and delivery, and 
 may make such order as it thinks fit respecting tlie 
 costs of the application or any other matter connected 
 with the application. 
 
 (8.) An acknowledgment shall by virtue of this 
 Act satisfy any liability to give a covenant for 
 production and delivery of copies of or extracts 
 from documents. 
 
 (9.) Where a person retains possession of docu- 
 ments and gives to another an undertaking in 
 writing for safe custody thereof, that undertaking 
 shall impose on the person giving it, and on every 
 person having possession or control of the documents 
 
 3 E 
 
( 1571 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1572 ) 
 
 TITLE DEEDS — continued. 
 
 from time to time, hut on each individual possessor 
 or personam long only as he lias possession or control 
 thereof, an obligation to Jceep the documents safe, 
 whole, uncancelled, and undefaced, unless pre- 
 vented from so doing by fire or other inevitable 
 accident. 
 
 (10.) Any person claiming to be entitled to the 
 benefit of such an undertalang may apply to the 
 Court to assess damages for any loss, destruction 
 of, or injury to the documents or any of them, and 
 the Court may, if it thinlcs fit, direct an inquiry 
 respecting the amount of damages and order the 
 payment thereof by the person litMe, and may make 
 such order as it thinlcs fit respecting tjie costs of the 
 application, or any other matter cojmeeted with 
 the application. 
 
 (11.) An undertaking for safe custody of docu- 
 ments shall by virtue of this Act satisfy any lia- 
 bility to give a covenant for safe custody of docu- 
 ments. 
 
 (12.) The rights conferred by an acknowledgment 
 or an undertaking under {his section shall be in 
 addition to all such other rights relative to the 
 production, or inspection, or the obtaining of copies 
 of documents as are not, by virtue of this Act, 
 satisfied by the giving of the acknowledgment or 
 imdertaking, and shall have effect subject to the 
 terms of the acknowledgment and undertaking, 
 and to any provisions therein contained. 
 
 {13.) This section applies only if and as far 
 as a contrary intention is not expressed in the 
 acknowledgment or undertaking. 
 
 (14.) This section applies only to an acknowledg- 
 ment or undertaking given, or a liability respecting 
 documents incurred, after the commencement of 
 this Act — 31st December i 881. 
 
 Custody of — Trustee in Bankruptcy- — 
 
 Life Estate of Bankrupt's Wife.2 The trustee in 
 bankruptcy of a husband, wliose ■wife is legal 
 tenant for life of land (not to her separate use) 
 has no absolute right to the custody of the title 
 deeds of the land during the coverture, but the 
 Court has a discretion as to the custody. — In a 
 case in which there was evidence that a bank- 
 rupt's wife was about to apply to the Divorce 
 Court for the dissolution of the marriage:— 
 Held, that the title deeds of land, of which she 
 was legal tenant for life, ought not to be delivered 
 to the trustee in the bankruptcy, but ought to 
 be retained in Court, where the County Court 
 Judge had, upon the trustee's application for de- 
 livery to him. ordered them to be deposited. — Per 
 Cotton, L.J. : Whether, under ordinary circum- 
 stances, an assignee from a husband of his right 
 to receive during the coverture the rents of land 
 of which his wife is legal tenant for life, is en- 
 titled as a matter of course to the custody of the 
 title deeds. Quiere. Ex parts KoGBES. In re 
 Ptatt - - 26 Ch. D. 81 
 
 Inspection by mortgagee. 
 
 See Mortgage — Kedemption — Statutes. 
 
 Not in vendor's possession — Costs 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 42 
 See Vendob and Pueohaser— Title. 1. 
 
 Order to deliver up — Purchaser without 
 
 notice - 20 Ch, D. 611 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 WITHOUT Notice. 1. 
 
 TITLE SEEDS — continued. 
 
 Order to give up — Equitable mortgagee 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 93 
 See Executor — Administration. 3. 
 
 Possession of— Priority. 
 
 See Cases under Mortgage — ^Priority. 
 5—9. 
 
 Eight to retain - - 30 Ch. D. 396 
 
 See MoETGAG? — Contkact. ■ 8. 
 
 Solicitor's lieu on. 
 
 See Gases under Solicitor — Lien. 8 — 12. 
 
 TITLE OF ACTION— Amendment— Assignment 
 
 pendente lite - - 16 Ch. D, 121 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 
 Parties. 6. 
 
 TITLE OF BOOK— Copyright 18 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Copyright — Books. 5. 
 TITLE OF DIGNITY— Heirlooms 30 Ch. D. 136 
 See Settled Land Act — ^Restrictions. 
 2. 
 TOBACCO. 
 
 See Revenue — Excise — Statutes. 
 TOLLS — Power to levy — Canadian railway 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 72K 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Domi- 
 nion. 4. 
 
 Railway company — Inequality — Undue 
 
 preference - 14 ft. B. D. 209 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. ; 2. 
 TOLZET COURT OF BRISTOL. 
 See Court — Gazette. 
 TONNAGfE— Measurement of. 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts — 
 Gazette. 
 TORT — Abatement of action by death of Plaintiff 
 — Order of refereuce 15 ft, B. D. 565 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change op Parties. 4. 
 TOWAGE — Condition of contract exempting owner 
 of tug from liability - - 9 P. D. 3 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. .S2. 
 
 Damage to ship - 6 App. Cas. .217 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 7. 
 TOWING-PATH - 6 App. Cas. 685 
 
 See River. 
 TRADE — Bankruptcy — Farming and market- 
 gardening for pleasure 14 ft. B. D. 950 
 See Bankruptcy — -Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 9. 
 
 Carried on by executors - 18 Ch. D. 93.; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 19, 42 
 See Executor — Administration. 2, 3, 4. 
 
 Carried on by trustee - 26 Ch. D. 245 
 
 See Trustee — Powers. 3. 
 
 • Carried on by trustee in bankruptcy 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 35 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 2. 
 
 TRADE OR BUSINESS— Covenant not to exercise 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 71, 81, n. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 
 
 4.5. 
 
 TRADE-MARK :— Col. 
 
 I. Infrii?gement - - 1573 
 
 II. Registration - - - 157s 
 
( 1573 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1574 ) 
 
 I. TEADE-MARK— INFEINGEMENT. 
 
 !• Injunctioa — Tendency io mislead.'] No 
 
 trader has a right to use a trade-mark so nearly 
 resembliiig that of another trader as to be cal- 
 culated to mislead incautious purchasers. — The 
 use of such a trade-mark may be restrained by 
 injunction, although no purchaser has actually 
 -been misled; for the very life of a trade-mark 
 depends upon the promptitude with which it is 
 vindicated .^So AeZa!, affirming the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal, Johhston v. Okr Ewing 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 219 
 
 3. Innocent Consignee — User — Costs.'] 
 
 The Defendant, who was a china manufacturer, 
 purchased abroad for his own private use a large 
 number of cigars which w'ere consigned to him at 
 the docks here in oases bearing a spurious brand, 
 purporting to be that of the Plaintiffs, who were 
 cigar manufacturers. The Defendant was hot 
 aware that the brand was spurious, nor, exoej)t 
 from seeing it on the invoice, that any Such brand 
 was in use. Immediately upon the Plaintiffs 
 issuing their writ and serving the Defendant with 
 notice of motion for an injunction to restrain him 
 from selling the cigars, the Defendant stated 
 that he had no intention of selling the cigars, 
 and offered all the relief asked for by the writ, 
 and afterwards at the motion agreed to an under- 
 taking in the terms of the writ, the question of 
 costs being reserved : — Held, that the Defendant 
 must pay all the costs of the action. XJpmann v. 
 FoBESTEE - - 24 Ch. D. 231 
 
 II. TEADE-MABK— BEGISTKATION. 
 
 The Act of 1883, 46 * 47 Vict. a. 57, a. 113, re- 
 peals (inter alia) the Trade-marks Begistration 
 Acts, 1875, 1876 and 1877, and consolidates and 
 amends the law relating to the registration of 
 Trade-marks. 
 
 Eegistration.J Sect. 62. — (1.) The Comptroller 
 may on application by or on hehalf of any person 
 •claiming to be the proprietor of a trade-mark 
 register the trad-e-mark. 
 
 (2.) The application must be made in the form 
 set forth in the first schedule to this Act, or in such 
 other form as may be from time to tims prescribed, 
 and must be left at, or sent by post to, the Patent 
 Office in the prescribed manner. 
 
 (3.) The application must be accompanied by the 
 prescribed number of representations of the trade- 
 mark, and must state the particular goods or classes 
 of goods in connexion ■ with which the applicant 
 desires the trade-mark to be registered. 
 
 (4.) The Comptroller may, if he thinks fit, refuse 
 to register a trade-mark, but any such refusal shall 
 he sikiject to appeal to the Board of Trade, who 
 shall, if required, hear the applicant and the Comp- 
 ' troller, and may make an order determining whither 
 and svkject io what conditions, if amy, registration 
 is to be permitted. 
 
 (5.) The Board of Trade may, however, if it 
 appears expedient, refer the appeal to the Court; 
 mid in that event the Court shall have jwisdiation 
 io hear and determine the appeal akd may make 
 such order as aforesaid. 
 
 Sect. 63. Where registration of a trade-mark 
 has not been or shall not be completed within twelve 
 . months from the date of the application, by reason 
 of default on the part of the applicant, the applica- 
 tion shall be deemed to be abandoned. 
 
 II. TEADE-MAEK— BEGISTEATION^conW. 
 
 Sect. 64. — (1.) For the purposes of this Act, a 
 trade^-^mark must consist of or contain at least one 
 of the following essential particulars : 
 
 (a.) A name of an individvlal or firm printed, 
 impressed, or woven in some particular 
 and distinctive manner ; or 
 
 (6.) A written signature or copy of a written 
 signature of the individual or firm ap- 
 plying for registration thereof as a trade- 
 mark ; or 
 
 (o.) A distinctive device, mark, b'i'and, heading, 
 label, ticket, or fancy word or words not 
 in common use. • '■ • 
 
 (2.) There may be added to any one or mote 
 of these particulars any letters words or figures, or 
 combination of letters words or figures, or any of 
 them. ' 
 
 (3.) Provided that any special and distinctite 
 word or words, letter, figure, or combination of letters 
 or figures or of letters and figures used as afrade 
 mark before the 13ft day of August, 1875, may be 
 registered as a trade-mark under this part of this 
 Act. 
 
 Sect. 65. A trade-mark must be registered for 
 particular goods or classes of goods. 
 
 Sect. 66. 'WTien a person claiming to be the 
 proprietor of several trade-marks whichi vliile 
 resembling each other in the material particula'fs 
 thereof, yet differ in respect of (a) thestaUment 
 of the goods for which they are respectively used or 
 proposed to be used, or (6) statements of numbers, 
 or (fi) statements of price, or (d) statements of 
 quality, or (e) statetnents of names of places, seeks 
 to register such trade-marks they may be registered 
 as a series in one registration. A series of t)'ade- 
 marks shall be assignable and transmissible only 
 as a whole, but for all other purposes each of the 
 trade-marks composing a series shall be deemed 
 and treated as registered separately. 
 
 Sect. 67. A trade-mark may be registered in any 
 colour, and such registration shall (subject to the 
 provisions of this Act) confer on the registered 
 owner the exclusive right to use the same in that or 
 any other colour. 
 
 Sect. 68. Every application for registration of a 
 trade-mark under this part of this Act shall as soon 
 as may he after its receipt be advertised by the 
 Comptroller. 
 
 Sect. 69. — (1 .) Any person may within two months 
 of the first advertisement of the application, give 
 notice in duplicate at the Patent Office of opposition 
 to registration of the trade-mark, and the Comp- 
 troller shall send one copy of such notice to the 
 applicant. 
 
 (2.) Within . two months after receipt of such 
 notice or such further time as the Comptroller may 
 allow, the applicant may send to the Comptroller a 
 counter-statement in duplicate of the grounds on 
 which he relies for his application, and if he does 
 not do so, shall be deemed to have abandoned his 
 application. 
 
 (3.) If the applicant sends such counter-state- 
 ment the Comptroller shall furriish a copy thereof 
 to the person who gave itotice' of opposition and 
 shall require him to give security in such manner 
 and to such amount as the Comptroller may require 
 for such costs as may be awarded in' respect of 
 such opposition ; and if such security is not given 
 within fourteen days after such requirement was 
 
 3 E 2 
 
( 1575 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1576 ) 
 
 II. TEADE-MAEK— EEGISTEATION— coiiM. 
 
 made or such further time as the Comptroller 
 may allow, the opposition he deemed to he with- 
 drawn. 
 
 (4.) If the person who gave notice of opposition 
 duly gave stich security as aforesaid the Comp- 
 troller shall inform the applicant thereof in writing, 
 and thereupon the case shall he deemed to stand for 
 the determination of the Court. 
 
 Sect. 70. A trade-marlc when registered shall he 
 assigned and transmitted only in connexion tvith 
 the goodwill of the business concerned in the par- 
 ticular goods or classes of goods for which it has 
 heen registered and shall he determinable with 
 that goodwill. 
 
 Sect. 71. Where each of several persons claims 
 to he registered as proprietor of the same trade 
 mark, the Comptroller may refuse to register any of 
 them until their rights have heen determined ac- 
 cording to law, and the Comptroller may himself 
 submit or require the claimants to submit their rights 
 to the Court. 
 
 Sect. 72. — (1.) Except where the Courthas decided 
 that two or more persons are entitled to he registered 
 as proprietors of the same trade-marh, the Comp- 
 troller shall not register in respect of the same goods 
 or description of goods a trade-mark identical with 
 one already on the register with respect to such goods 
 or description of goods. 
 
 (2.) The Comptroller shall not register with respect 
 to the same goods or description of goods a trade- 
 mark so nearly resembling a trade-mark already on 
 the register with respect to such goods or description 
 of goods as to be calculated to deceive. 
 
 Sect. 73. It shall not be lawful to register as part 
 of or in combination with a trade-mark any words 
 the exclusive use of which would by reason of their 
 being calculated to deceive or otherwise, he deemed 
 disentitled to protection in a Court of justice, or any 
 scandalous design. 
 
 Sect. 74. (1.) Nothing in this Act shall he con- 
 strued to prevent the Gmnptroller entering on the 
 the register, in the prescribed manner, and subject 
 to the prescribed conditions, as an addition to any 
 trade-mark — 
 
 (a.) In the case of an application for registra- 
 tion of a trade-mark used before the 13th 
 day of August, 1875, 
 Any distinctive device, mark, brand, heading, 
 label, ticket, letter, word, or figure, or 
 combination of letters, words, or figures, 
 though the same is common to the trade 
 in the goods with respect to which the 
 application is made ; 
 (b,)*Jn the case of an application for registration 
 of a trade-mark not used before the 13ft 
 day of August, 1875, 
 Any distinctive loord or combination of 
 words, though the same is common to tlie 
 trade in the goods with respect to which 
 the application is made ; 
 (2.) The applicant for entry of any such common 
 particular or particulars must, hmoever^ disclaim in 
 his application any right to the exclusive use of the 
 same, and a copy of the disclaimer shall be entered 
 on the register. 
 
 (3.) Any device, mark, brand, heading, label, 
 ticket, letter, iwrd, figure, or comhiiiation of letters, 
 words, or figures, which was or jrere, before the 13th 
 day of August, 1875, publicly used by more than 
 
 II. TEADE-ffiAEK— EEGISTEATION- contd. 
 three persons on the same or a similar description 
 of goods shall, for the purposes of this section, be 
 deemed common to the trade in such goods. 
 
 Effects of Registration.] Sect. 75. Registration 
 of a trade-mark shall be deemed to be equivalent to 
 public use of the trade-mark. 
 
 Sect. 76. The registration of a person as pro- 
 prietor of a trade-mark shall he prima facie evidence 
 of his right to the exclusive use of the trade-mark, 
 and shall, after the expiration of five years from 
 the date of the registration, be conclusive evidence of 
 his right to the exclusive use of the trade-mark, 
 subject to the provisions of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 77. A person shall not be entitled to insti- 
 tute any proceeding to prevent or to recover damages 
 for the infringement of a trade-mark, unless in 
 the case of a trade-mark capable of being registered 
 under this Act, it has heen registered in pursuance 
 of this Act, or of an enactment repealed by this Act, 
 or in the case of any other trade-mark in use before 
 the 13th of August, 1875, registration thereof under 
 this part of this Act, or of an enactment repealed 
 by this Act, has been refused. The Comptroller 
 may on request, and on payment of the prescribed 
 fee, grant a certificate that such registration has 
 been refused. 
 
 Register of Trade-marks.] Sect. 78. Tliere shall 
 he kept at the Patent Office a hook called the Begis- 
 ter of Trade Marks, wherein shall be entered the 
 names and addresses of proprietors of registered 
 trade-marks, notifications of assignments and of 
 transmissions of trade-marks, and such other matters 
 as may be from time, to time prescribed. 
 
 Sect. 79. — (1.) At a time not being less than two 
 months nor more than three months before the expi- 
 ration of fourteen years from the date of the regis- 
 tration of a trade-mark, the Comptroller shall send 
 notice to the registered proprietor that the trade- 
 mark will be removed from the register unless the 
 proprietor pays to the Comptroller before the expira- 
 tion of such fourteen years (naming the date at 
 which the same will expire") the prescribed fee ; and 
 if such fee be not previously paid, he shall at the 
 expiration of one month from the date of the giving 
 of the first notice send a second notice to the same 
 effect. 
 
 (2.) If suclifee be not paid before flie expiration 
 of such fourteen years the Comptroller may after the 
 end of three montlis from the expiration of such 
 fourteen years remove the mark from tJie register, 
 and so from time to time at the expiration of emery 
 'period of fourteen years. 
 
 (3.) If before the expiration of the said three 
 months the registered proprietor pays the said fee, 
 togetlier with the additional prescribed fee, the 
 Comptroller may without removing such trade-mark 
 from the register accept the said fee as if it had 
 been paid before the expiration of the said fourteen 
 years. 
 
 (4.) Wltere after the said three months a trade- 
 mark has been removed from the register for non- 
 payment of the prescribed fee, the Comptroller may, 
 if satisfied that it is just so to do, restore such trade- 
 mark to the register on payment of the prescribed 
 additional fee. 
 
 (5.) Where a trade-mark has been removed from 
 the register for non-payment of the fee or otherwise, 
 such trade-mark shall nevertheless for the purposes 
 of any application for registration during the five 
 
( 1577 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1578 ) 
 
 n. TRADE-MAEK— RKQISTEATION— conid!. 
 
 years next after the date of such removal he deemed 
 to le a trade-mark which is already registered. 
 
 Fees.] Sect. 80. There shall he paid in respect 
 of applications and registration and other matters 
 under this part of this Act, such fees as may be 
 from time to time, with the sanction of the Treasury, 
 prescyribed hy the Board of Trade; and such fees 
 shaU be levied and paid to the account of Ber 
 Majesty's Exchequer in such manner as the Treasury 
 may from time to time direct. 
 
 Sect. 81. Provisions as to registration by Cutlers' 
 Company of Sheffield marks. 
 
 Seats. 82 — 102 provide for the constitution of 
 the Patent Office and the proceedings therein, in- 
 cluding the rectification and alteration of the 
 register. 
 
 Sect. 103 relates to International and Colonial 
 arrangements. 
 
 Sect. 105 as to offences against the Act. 
 [_See also Patent — Statutes.] 
 
 1. Cancelling of Registration — Lapse of 
 
 Five Years — " Distinctive Words " — Registration 
 of Mark not authorized to be registered — Trade- 
 marks Segistration Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 91), 
 ss. 3, 5, 10.] P. registered " braided fixed stars " as 
 a trade-mark for matolies, alleging that he had 
 used it as a trade-mark before the passing of the 
 Act. He also at the same time registered a label 
 enveloping the boxes in which his matches were 
 sold, which contained the words " braided fixed 
 stars " in two places so as to be conspicuous on 
 each side of the boxes, but also contaiaed a number 
 of other words. It was shewn that at the time 
 when P. introduced the term "braided fixed stars" 
 the term " fixed stars " was known in the trade as 
 denoting a particular class of fusees, and that he 
 had just bought a patent for enveloping the stems 
 of fusees with wire by means of a braiding 
 machine. This patent expired in August,' 1881. 
 It appeared from the evidence that P. had not 
 before the Act used " braided fixed stars " sepa- 
 rately as a trade-mark, or otherwise .than as a, 
 part of the above-mentioned label. In October, 
 1881, an application was made by a rival trader to 
 expunge the registration : — Held, that the regis- 
 tration must be expunged, for that to entitle P. 
 to register these words as a trade-mark he must 
 before the Act have used them as such alone, and 
 not merely in conjunction with other words. — ■ 
 Held, further, that if they had been so used alone 
 they ought not to have been registered, for that 
 they were only words properly descriptive of the 
 patented article, and that P. had no exclusive 
 right to their use after the patent had expired. 
 In re J. B. Palmer's Tbade-maek 81 Ch. D. 47 ; 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 504 
 
 2. Cancelling of Registration — Lapse of 
 
 Five Years — Patents, Designs, and Trade-Marks 
 Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 57), ss. 76, 90, 113.] 
 The right to the exclusive use of a trade-mark, 
 after the expiration of five years from the date of 
 registration, given by the Trade-marks Act, 1883, 
 s. 76, is subject to and controlled by sect. 90, 
 and therefore any person who considers himself 
 aggrieved by any entry made in the register 
 without sufficient cause is not precluded by the 
 expiration of five years from the date of such 
 registration from shewing that the mark ought 
 
 II. TRADE-MARK— REGISTRATION— coiiW. 
 not to have been registered. In re Lloyd and 
 Sons' Tbade-jiark. Lloyd v. Bottom ley 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 646 
 
 3. Cancelling of Registration — Lapse of 
 
 Five Years— Label — Indefeasible Title—" Common 
 to the Trade"— ''Three Marks Rule"— Patents, 
 Designs, and Trade-marks Act, 1883(46 <fe 47 Vict. 
 c. 57), 88. 74, 76, 90.] The registration of a mark 
 as a trade-mark and the lapse of five years do not, 
 under sect. 76 of the Trade-marks Act, 1883 
 confer on the person who has made the registra- 
 tion an indefeasible title to the use of the mark 
 as a trade-mark if, by reason of its being at the 
 time of registration in common use in the trade, 
 it ought not to have been registered. — The lapse 
 of five years cannot make good a registration 
 which was in its inception invalid. — A trade-mark 
 which was originally improperly registered ought, 
 even after the lapse of five years, to be removed 
 from the register, because the registration might 
 enable the person who has made it to commit a 
 fraud. — Held, that a mark which had been re- 
 gistered as a trade-mark, was, at the time of 
 registration, " common to the trade " because 
 similar (though not in each case identical) marks 
 were then in use by more than three persons 
 engaged in the same trade, although in some of 
 the oases the mark was not actually placed on 
 the goods, but was only used on bill-heads, trade 
 circulars, advertisements, or show-cards. In re 
 Weagg's Tkadb-mark - 29 Ch. D. 551 
 
 4. ■ Cancelling of Registration — New Name 
 
 for New Article-Improper Registration — Injunc- 
 tion — " Heading " — " Distinctive Word " — trade- 
 marks Registration Act, 1875 (38 *39 Viot. c. 91), 
 ss. 3, 5, 10.] L. & B. invented in 1873 a process for 
 making a certain description of lubricating oil 
 which they called " Valvoline," and in that year 
 registered in America as their trade-mark, the word 
 accompanied by a device. In August, 1 877, they 
 registered the same trade-mark in England, and in 
 February, 1878, registered the word " Valvoline " 
 alone as their trade-mark. After this mark had 
 been five years on the register they commenced 
 an action against W. to restrain him from selling 
 under the name of Valvoline any oil not made by 
 the Plaiutiffs. W. moved to rectify the register 
 by striking out the trade-mark " Valvoline." The 
 Court came to the conclusion on the evidence tliat 
 L. & E. had not used " Valvoline " alone as a 
 trade-mark, either in America or England before 
 the passing of the Trade-marks Registration Act, 
 187*5, but only in conjunction with a device, and 
 that " Valvoline " was a word invented to describe 
 the particular class of oil at the same time'as the 
 process was invented, and was used as a descrip- 
 tive term for that particular kind of oil. Tlie 
 process was not the subject of a patent : —Held, 
 that where a person seeks to remove a trade-mark 
 from the register the onus is upon him to shew 
 that it ought to be removed, but though his own 
 evidence may be insufficient for the purpose, the 
 onus is discharged if it appears from the evidence 
 of the owner of the mark that it ought not to be 
 on the register. — Whether a word used alone as a 
 trade-mark in a foreign country before the pass- 
 ing of the Trade-marks Act, 1875, can be regis- 
 tered under the Act if it has not been so used in 
 
( 1579 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1580 ) 
 
 II. TEADE-MARK— EEGISTEATION— coB<(J. 
 
 this country, qusere : — Held, further, that a single 
 word cannot be registered under the Act, on the 
 ground that it was used as a " heading," unless it 
 was so used before the passing of the Act : — Held, 
 therefore, affirming the decision of Pearson, J., 
 that the trade-mark " Valvoline " must be removed 
 from the register. — If a person wlio invents a new 
 process for making a new article invents at the 
 same time a new name for describing such article, 
 and the article comes to be known by that name 
 only, he cannot afterwards, when everybody is at 
 liberty to make that article, claim a monopoly in 
 the name : — Held, therefore, affirming the decision 
 of Pearson, J., that the Defendants were not by 
 using the name " Valvoline," which was the only 
 name by which the substance in question was 
 known, infringing any rights of the Plaintiffs, or 
 representing their goods as made by the Plain- 
 tiffs, and that the fact that the Plaintiffs had in 
 consequence of the registration enjoyed a practical 
 monopoly of the name lor five years did not, as the 
 name had been improperly put in the register, 
 give them any better right than they would other- 
 wise have had. — Per Fry, L.J., semble, a " special 
 and distinctive " word within the meaning of the 
 Act, must be a word intended to distinguish 
 articles manufactured by one person from similar 
 articles manufactured by other persons, and not a 
 word merely descriptive of the articles themselves. 
 In re Leonakd & Ellis's Tkade-mabk. Leonakd 
 & Ellis v. Wells - 26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 6. Distinctive Letters — Name of Firm — 
 
 Fancy Words not in Common Use — Identical Label 
 —Power of Comptroller — Sanction of Court — Be- 
 fusal to register.'] An application was made for an 
 order upon the Comptroller of Trade-marks to re- 
 gister a mark having the words " Price's Patent 
 Candle Company " in common letters round the 
 upper border and " National Sperm " in the centre, 
 with the address of the company round the lower 
 border. The Comptroller refused to register the 
 mark, on the ground that there was a mark so 
 nearly resembling this, already on the register, as 
 to be calculated to deceive, and also because it was 
 not a distinctive label within the terms of the 
 Patents Act, 1883 : — H'eM,that the name of the firm 
 printed in common letters not being distinctive, 
 and the words " National Sperm " not being fancy 
 words " not in common use," the label did not 
 fulfil the requirements of the Patents, Designs, 
 and Trade-marks Act, 1883, s. 64 : — Held, also, 
 that the Comptroller would be justified in refusing 
 to register a label so nearly resembling another 
 label already on the register as to be calculated to 
 deceive, until the opinion of the Court should 
 have been obtained authorizing him to do so. 
 In re Price's Patent Candle Company 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 681 
 
 . 6. Fancy Word — Patents, Designs and 
 
 Trade-marks Act, 1883 (46 * 47 Vict. c. 57), s. 64, 
 snh-s. (1) (c).] The word " Alpine," and words of 
 such class, although words in common use and not 
 strictly fancy words, may, when applied to arti- 
 cles such as woollen and cotton goods, be regis- 
 tered as a trade-mark, as they are, if not " fancy 
 words," at least fanciful words when applied to 
 such goods, and so fall within sect. 64, sub-sect. 
 (1) (c), of the Patents, Designs and Trade-marks 
 
 II. TEADE-MABK— EE6ISTEATI0N— confeZ. 
 Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 57). In re Tbade- 
 MABK" Alpine" - - - 29 Ch. D. 877 
 
 7. - — ■ Length of adverse User — Fraudulent 
 Commencement — Continuing Misrepresentation — 
 Foreign Proprietor.'] Mere length of adverse 
 user will not of itself make a mark which was 
 originally a trade-mark publici juris, where such 
 user was originally fraudulent and is still cal- 
 culated to deceive, but it throws upon the trader 
 claiming an exclusive right to the mark the 
 onus of proving such original fraud and con- 
 tinuing misrepresentation, and the longer the 
 user the stronger must be the evidence.^-TJpon 
 this principle au application to register under the 
 Trade-marks Acts in combination with the name 
 of the applicants, a foreign trade-mark which 
 had been used by the applicants and by thirty 
 other firms in this country in combination with 
 their own respective names or with some device 
 for fifty years, was refused upon the opposition 
 of the foreign proprietor of the mark who had 
 only recently discovered such user. The owners 
 of ironworks at Leufsta, in Sweden, had, in 1718, 
 registered in Sweden, as a trade-mark, the 
 letter L within a circle (called in the trade the 
 Hoop L), and their iron so marked had acquired 
 a high reputation, particularly for manufacture 
 into blister steel. By Swedish law all bar iron 
 must be stamped with a duly registered mark 
 before it is exported, and, from the year 1835 the 
 Leufsta iron was exported to England marked 
 with the hoop L in combination either with the 
 name of the English consignee, or with the word 
 " Leufsta," or with both. In 1878 the Hoop L 
 was registered in England by the Leufsta owners 
 as a trade-mark both alone and in combination 
 with the word " Leufsta." — In 18S2 the B. Com- 
 pany, a firm of English steel manufacturers, 
 applied to register under the Trade-marks Acts 
 the Hoop L in combination with the words " B. 
 Company, Warranted," and produced evidence to 
 shew that for fifty yeai-s they and thirty other 
 firms had used the Hoop L in combination with 
 a name or with a device upon all blister steel 
 manufactured from Swedish iron, whether Leufsta 
 iron or not, cutting off from inferior iron its dis- 
 tinctive stamp and substituting the Hoop L. — 
 The Leufsta owners opposed the application, and 
 proved that this adverse user was not discovered 
 by them untU 1881 : — Held, that the Hoop L 
 mark had not become publici juris, and that the 
 application to register it must be dismissed with 
 costs. In re Hbaton's Tkade-mabk 27 Ch. D. 670 
 
 8. Limitation of User — Application Ex 
 
 parte — Trade-marks Bules, 1883, r. 32.] Objec- 
 tions having been raised by the owner of a regis- 
 tered trade-mark to the proposed registration of 
 another trade-mark for use in connection with 
 goods included in classes for which the first mark 
 was used, but no formal opposition having been 
 lodged to the application for registration, an 
 agreement was entered into between the regis- 
 tered owner and the applicant that no formal 
 opposition should be lodged ; that the applicant 
 sliould use his mark in connection only with 
 goods actually exported to certain specified coun- 
 tries; and that he would, in connection with, the 
 registration, cause a note of this restriction oa the. 
 
( 1581 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1582 ) 
 
 II. TEADE-MAEK— EEGISTEATION— oonid 
 
 use of his trade-mark to be entered on the re- 
 gister. Upon an ex parte application by the 
 applicant, in pursuance of this agreement, the 
 ■Court directed the Comptroller of Trade'-marks 
 to enter such a note on the register. In re 
 Keep's Tbade-mahk 26 Ch. D. 187 
 
 9. ' Limitation of User — Entry of Under- 
 taking on Register — Patents, Designs and Trade- 
 marhs Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 57), s. 85.] 
 The entry, on the register of two simOar trade- 
 marks in the same class, of a note that the 
 use of the marks registered is restricted by an 
 agreement between the respective owners (the 
 ■effect of which is not stated) is irregular, and con- 
 trary to the provisions of the Patents, Designs and 
 Trade-marks Act, 1883 ; but, following In re Ba- 
 hone & Co. (Seb. Dig. 395), a note of the mutual 
 undertakings not to use the marks except in a 
 certain manner and within specified districts may 
 be entered on the register. In re Mitchell & 
 Co.'s Tbade-makk. in re Houghton & Hael- 
 hikk's Tkade-makk - 28 Ch. D. 666 
 
 10. -- — Limitation of TJser — Registration for 
 part of a Glass — Registration of New Marie for 
 other Goods in same Class — Limited Registration — 
 Trade-harks Registration Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. 
 «. 91), s. G— Trade-mark Rules, 1876, rr. 17, 19.] 
 A new mark may be registered for some of the 
 goods in a class, even though an old mark of a 
 ■similai kind has been already registered for other 
 ^oods in the same class, provided that the goods 
 and the trades of the proprietors are sufficiently 
 distinct for no confusion to take place. In re 
 P. Bbaet & Co.'s Application. In re Shbopshibe 
 Ieon Company's Teade-maeks - 21 Ch. D. 223 
 
 11. limitation of User — Registration for 
 
 .entire Class of Goods — Five Years' Registration — 
 User for part of Class only — Exclusive Title for 
 Mitire Class — Assignment — Goodwill — Infringe- 
 ment — Rectification of Register — IdmitationtoFart 
 ■of Class — Trade-marks Registration Act, 1875, ss. 2, 
 3, 4, 5, 10 — Trade-marks Registration Ameiid/ment 
 Act, 1876, s. 1.] An assignee of the goodwill of 
 ■a business with the right to a trade-mark which 
 has been registered by the assignor under the 
 Trade-marks Eegistration Act, 1875, in respect of 
 ■an entire class, but of which the articles dealt 
 with in such business form part only, is not en- 
 titled to the exclusive user of the trade-mark for 
 the entire class, but only for the particular arti- 
 cles in connection with which it is actually used, 
 •even though the trade-mark may have been on 
 the register for five years. — Sects. 3 and 4 of the 
 Trade-marks Registration Act, 1875, do not confer 
 on the first or subsequent registered proprietor of 
 a.trade-mark who has been on the register for five 
 years the absolute right to the exclusive use of 
 lis trade-mark as against all the world : the in- 
 tention- of tjje, sections is merely to afford him 
 ■assistance in,.pfinging an .action for infriiigenient 
 by dispensing with th^e .necessity of his adducing 
 evidence in that action of exclusive user ; ai^d ,the 
 sections are no bar to an, application under seci. 5 
 to rectify the register ph the ground that the 
 trade-mark is improperly on the register or should 
 he- restricted to certain goods. — Semhle, it is not 
 the intention of the Act that a man registering a 
 trade-mark for an entire class, and yet only using 
 
 II. TEADE-MAEK^EEBISTEATION— conM. . . 
 
 it for one description of goods in that class, shall 
 be able to claim for himself the exclusive right to 
 use it for every description of goods in tbat class. 
 If he desires to extend his business and apply his 
 trade-mark to a new description of goods in the 
 class, he should have his trade-mark registered, 
 in respect of those goods. — Quasre, whether a man 
 can claim the exclusive use of a registered trade- 
 mark not in actual use in connection with par- 
 ticular goods at the time of registration.^In 1883i 
 E. purchased and took an assignmentof the good- 
 will of the business of an iron merchant and 
 manufacturer, and also of the right to a trade- 
 mark, consisting of a device of Neptune holding 
 a trident with the word " Neptune " added, which 
 had been registered by the assignor in 1878, under 
 the Trade-marks Registration Acts, 1875 and 1870, 
 tor the whole of Class 5, described in the Trade- 
 marks Journal as " unwrought and partly wrought 
 metals used in manufacture," E. duly getting 
 himself registered as proprietor of the trade-mark. 
 The only business actually carried on by E. and 
 his assignor was and had been that of a manufac- 
 turer of iron sheets. In 1880 D. registered a 
 trade-mark bearing the word " Neptune " for 
 " steel wire and iron wire " in Class 5, his busi- 
 ness consisting solely of the manufacture aiid 
 sale of wire. In 1884 E. brought an action against 
 D. for infringement on the ground of the alleged 
 similarity of D.'s trade-mark. D. then applied 
 by summons under sect. 5 of the Act of 1875 to 
 have the register rectified by limiting B.'s trade- 
 mark to the articles in Class 5 other than steel 
 and iron wire :■ — Seld, in the action, reversing 
 A. L. Smith, J., that inasmuch as the goods sold 
 by E. and D. were entirely distinct, E. was not 
 entitled to an injunction; — Held, also, upon the 
 summons (affirming Bacon, V.C., with a variation), 
 that, notwithstanding the five years' registration 
 of E.'s trade-mark for the whole of Class 5, his 
 trade-mark must be limited to those articles in 
 the class' in connection with which it was being 
 actually used, namely, iron sheets. EdWabds v. 
 Dennis. In re Edwaeds' Teade-maek 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 454 
 
 12. — ^ Non-user — Abandonment.'] In order 
 to deprive a manufacturer of his right to a trade- 
 mark, the use of which has been practically given 
 up for a period of five years, mere discontinuance 
 of user for lack of demand, though coupled with 
 non-registration, and non-assertion of any right, is 
 not enough, there must be evidence of distinct in- : 
 tention to abandon. — In 1874, A., a German soap ■ 
 manufacturer, adopted a trade-mark for a parti- 
 cular kind of soap, which for about two years was 
 manufactured and sent to this country in large 
 quantities for exportation to Australia, but from 
 1876 until 1882' the manufacture and sale of soap 
 thus marked fell off, until it practically ceased, aad 
 the existence of the particular mark was in May, 
 1882, forgotten by A.— In 1880, B., a manufac- 
 turer of soap in the same pai't of Germany^' 
 adopted, in complete ignorance of A.'s mark, a 
 precisely similar mark for soap sent to this 
 country for exportation to Aiistralio, and in 
 August, 1880, he registered his mark under the 
 Trade-marks Acts in this country. — In July, 1882, 
 after the commencement of proceedings by B. to 
 
( 1583 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1584 ) 
 
 II. TEADE-MAEK— KEGISTEATION— confeJ. 
 
 restrain aa infringement of his registered trade- 
 mark by A., A. applied for registration of his 
 mark of 1874.— Upon application (1) by B. to 
 restrain the infringement of his trade-mark ; 
 
 (2) by A. to have his trade-mark registered ; 
 
 (3) by A. to have B.'s trade-mark removed from 
 tbe register ■.—Held (1), that mere non-user by A. 
 of his mark between 1876 and 1882, although 
 coupled vfith non-registration, did not, having 
 regard to the fact that he had not ceased to carry 
 on his business, and had not broken up the 
 mould, and that a number indicating soap thus 
 marked -was retained on hisi price lists, did not 
 amouat to an abandonment by A. of the mark, 
 so as to give B. any exclusive right to his regis- 
 tered mark. — (2) That the existence upon the 
 register of B.'s mark did not prevent the Court 
 from granting leave for the registration of A.'s 
 mark. — (3) That previous bonS, fide registration 
 of B.'s mark in ignorance of any claim by A., fol- 
 lowed by large dealings under that mark, pre- 
 vented A., after the lapse of two years, from 
 getting B.'s mark expunged from the register. 
 MousoN & Co. V. BoEHM - - 26 Ch. D. 398 
 
 13. Old Mark — Similarity — Patents, De- 
 signs, and Trade-marlcs Act, 1883 (46 * 47 Vict, 
 c. 57), s. 62.] An application made in November, 
 1884, by an American firm of oil manufacturers 
 for the registration under the Act of 1883 of a 
 trade-mark for illuminating oils, which mark had 
 been used by them in America since 1872, and 
 had been known in England as the " "White Rose " 
 mark prior to 1875, was refused by the Comptroller 
 upon the ground that there had been on the re- 
 gister since 1878 a similar mark for illuminating 
 oils called the " Rosaline " mark, of whicli an 
 English firm were the proprietors : — Held, that 
 although there was enougb similarity between the 
 two marks to render it possible for the public to 
 mistake the one for the other, yet as the " White 
 Kose " was to all intents and purposes an old 
 mark, it ought to be admitted to registration. In 
 re "White Rose" Trade-makk 30 Ch. D. 505 
 
 14. Person aggrieved — Person not 
 
 carrying on Business in England — Trade-marlcs 
 Registration Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 91), 
 s. 5.] R. & Co. registered a trade-mark for 
 brandy in England. M. & Co,, who carried on 
 business at Madras, but neither carried it on 
 nor intended to carry it on in England, applied 
 to rectify the register by striking out the name of 
 R. & Co. and substituting that of M. & Co. as 
 owners of the ti-ade-mark, alleging that they, 
 M. & Co., were the owners of the trade-mark, and 
 had instructed R. & Co. to register it in the name 
 of M. & Co., instead of which R. & Co. had regis- 
 tered it in their own name. — Held, by Pearson, J., 
 that as M. & Co. neither used nor intended to use 
 the trade-mark in England they were not entitled 
 to registration of it in England, and could not be 
 persons aggrieved within the meaning of the 
 Trade-marks Act, 1875, sect. 5, and that on this 
 ground the application must be refused without 
 entering on the merits. — Held, on appeal, that 
 assuming M. & Co. to have no right to register 
 the trade-mark in England, it did not follow as 
 a necessary consequence that they could not bo 
 aggrieved by its being registered here in the name 
 
 II, TEADE-MAEK— EEGISTEATIOIT— COTjfdf. 
 of another person, and that the case must be dealt 
 with on the merits. — Whether in order to entitle 
 a person to have a trade-mark registered, he must 
 be carrying on or intending to carry on business 
 in England, qumre. In re RiviIike's Teade-makk 
 
 [26 Ch. B. 4& 
 
 15, Person aggrieved — Trade - marTcs 
 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 91), r. 33— Proprietor 
 of Trade-mark not carrying on Business.'} The 
 owner of a patent for a washing machine called 
 the " Home-washer," which had been exclusively 
 manufactured by a licensee upon payment of a 
 royalty, registered " The Home-washer " as his 
 trade-mark, a, year before the expiration of the 
 patent, and claimed the exclusive use of that 
 name. The patentee had not carried on any trade 
 connected with the manufacture of these machines- 
 for a year and nine months after the patent had 
 expired. The licensee moved under the 23rd of 
 the rules foamed under the Trade-marks Act to- 
 have the trade-mark expunged from the register :, 
 — Held, that the licensee, who had been the sole 
 manufacturer of the machines, was a person 
 aggrieved within the terms of the 33rd rule, and 
 that the patentee not having been engaged in 
 any business concerning the goods within the 
 same class for more than one year, was not en- 
 titled to retain his trade-mark. Semlle, that the 
 name of a patented article which has become 
 known in the trade is not a fitting trade-mark, 
 after the expiration of the patent, since it would 
 have the eifect of extending the patent beyond its 
 legal limit. In re Ralph's Teade-maek. R.axPH 
 V. Taylor - 25 Ch. D. 194= 
 
 16. Words PuhUci Juris — Trade-marks- 
 
 Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. o. 91), ss. 6, 10.] A 
 term which by judicial decision has become open 
 to the trade as the proper description of an article- 
 made in accordance with the recipe of the original 
 inventor, and is therefore publici juris, cannot be 
 registered as a trade-mark either alone or in com- 
 bination with a portrait of the original inventor ; 
 and such portrait is not a suflSoiently " distinctiv& 
 device " within the Trade-marks Act, 1875, s, 10,. 
 to be capable of registration as a trade-mark per 
 se. In re Anderson's Trade-maek 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 40» 
 
 TEADE-MAEK EULES, 1876, rr. IT, 19 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 22S 
 
 See Trade-mark — Registration. 10. 
 
 — 1883, r. 32 - 26 Ch. D. 
 
 See Teade-maek — Remsteation. i 
 
 187 
 
 TEADE NAME. 
 
 1. Jurisdiction — Injunction — Telegraphic 
 
 Address.'] The short address "Street, London," 
 was used for many years in sending telegrams- 
 from abroad to Street & Co. of Cornhill. A bank 
 adopted by arrangement with the Post Office the 
 phrase " Street, London," as a cypher address for 
 telegi-ams from abroad to themselves : — Held, thak 
 the Court had no jurisdiction to restrain the bank 
 from using such cypher address. Street v. Union 
 Bank of Spain and England 80 Ch. D. 15ff 
 
 2. Mortgagee — User of Name.'] The 
 
 mortgagee of stock-in-trade and goodwill, and of 
 the right to use a name, never having used thet 
 
( 1585 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1586 ) 
 
 TEADE ISAlllE— continued. 
 name and not intending to use the name, cannot 
 obtain an injunction to restrain persons claiming 
 under the mortgagor from using the name. 
 Beazlet v. Soabes 22 Ch. S. 660 
 
 3, Eeferenoe to Rival's Name — User of 
 
 Name — Tendeticy to deceive.'] A trader has a 
 right to make and sell machines similar in form 
 and construction to those made and sold by a rival 
 trader, and in describing and advertising his own 
 machines to refer to his rival's machines and his 
 rival's name, provided he does this in such a way 
 as to obviate any reasonable possibility of mis- 
 understanding or deception. Singek Manufao- 
 TUEiNG CoMPAuy V. LooG - 18 Ch. D. 395 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 15 
 TEADE UNION. 
 
 Contract — Direct Enforcement — Trade 
 
 Unims Act, 1871 (3i & 35 Vict. c. 31), ss. 2, 3, 4.] 
 By the Trade Unions Act, 1871, sect. 4, it is 
 provided that nothing in the Act shall enable the 
 Court to entertain any legal proceeding instituted 
 with the object of directly enforcing an agreement 
 for the application of the funds of a trade union 
 to provide benefits to its members. — The Plain- 
 tiffs, members of a trade union within the Act, 
 sought for an injunction to restrain other mem- 
 bers from applying the funds in a manner con- 
 trary to an agreement to provide benefits ,to 
 members : — Held, that such an injunction would 
 not be a direct enforcement of the alleged agree- 
 ment and that the Court might entertain the pro- 
 ceeding. Wolfe v. Matthews 21 Ch. D. 194 
 
 Sums not exceeding £100. 
 
 See Fbiendly Socibty — Statutes. 
 TEADEE — Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy— Tbadeb. 
 Bankruptcy — Business carried on by re- 
 ceiver 11 a. B. D. 241 
 See Bakkbtjptcy — Assets. 5. 
 
 Defeating and delaying creditors 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 500 
 See Bakkbuptoy — Act op Banke-uptoy. 
 26. 
 
 Voluntary settlement by 19 Ch, D. 588 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Void Settlement. 
 
 1. 
 
 TEAFFIC— Highway — Extraordinary expenses 
 
 — Excessive weight - 6 ft. B. D. 206 ; 
 
 [8 ft. B. S, 59, 466 
 
 See Highway — Eepaib. 8, 9, 10. 
 
 Hallway company. 
 
 See Cases under Railway Company — 
 Tbappic Management. 
 Eailway company — Tolls — Undue prefer- 
 ence - - 14 ft. B.D. 209 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 2. 
 
 TEAMWAT— Law of New South Wales 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 720 
 See Colonial Law— New South Wales. 
 5. 
 TEAMWAY COMPANY. 
 
 1, Flange Wheels — Tramways Act, 1870 
 
 (33 & 34 Vict. e. 78), s. 54:— User of Wheels sub- 
 stantially flanged.y Sect. 54 of the Tramways 
 Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict, c 78), prohibits the 
 
 TEAMWAY COWBASY— continued. 
 user of the tramway by unlicensed persons with 
 carriages " having flange-wheels or other wheels 
 suitable only to run on the rail of such tram- 
 way." The Appellant, an omnibus proprietor, 
 attached to his vehicle a lever witli arms having 
 a small revolving disc or roller which tlie driver 
 might drop into the groove of the rail at the 
 lower side of each fore-wheel when on the tram- 
 way, such discs operating when down as a flange 
 at the point of contact with the rails, but when 
 withdrawn by means of the lever leaving the 
 vehicle free to travel over any part of the road : 
 —Held, that this contrivance (though no obstruc- 
 tion to the tramway) was within the prohibition 
 of the statute. Cottam p. Guest 6 ft. B. D. 70 
 
 2. Eepair of Eoad — Tramways Act, 1870 
 
 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 78), ss. 28, 29, 55— Contract with 
 Boad Aufliority— Transfer of Liability.'] Where 
 a tramway company enters into a contract with 
 the road authority under 33 & 34 Vict. c. 78, s. 29, 
 whereby the road authority undertakes the repair 
 of the portion of tlie road upon which the tram- 
 way is laid, the liability for damage occasioned by 
 the non-repair of that part of the road, which, 
 would but for such contract be cast by sect. 28- 
 upon the tramway company, is transferred to the 
 road authority. Howitt ». Nottingham and Dis- 
 tbiot Tkamways Company 12 ft. B. D. 16 
 
 TEANSCEIPT OF EECOES — Irish inquisition 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 269 
 
 See Lunatic — Jueisdiotion. 
 TEANSFEE— Action - 16Ch. D. 702; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 540 
 See Peactice — Supreme Coubt — 
 Teanspee. 1, 2. 
 
 Action- County Court - 27 Ch. D. 533 
 
 See Pbactioe — ^Supeeme Couet— Jueis- 
 diotion. 3. 
 
 Action — Inferior Court — Action pending in 
 
 High Court - - 8 P. D. 34 
 
 See Pbactioe — Admiealty — Jueisdio- 
 tion. 4. 
 
 Action — Inferior Court — Cross action in 
 
 High Court 9 P, D. 34 
 
 See Peactice — Admibalty — Conoub- 
 eent Actions. 
 
 Administration of estate of deceased debtor 
 
 — Transfer to Bankruptcy Court 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 562; 15 ft. B. D. 159; 
 [29 Ch. D. 23& 
 See Bankbuptcy — Deceased Debtor. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Bankruptcy proceedings — County Court 
 
 [13 ft. B, S. 484 ; 15 ft. B. D. 335 
 See Bankeuptoy — Teansfeb. 1, 2. 
 
 Debentures, - - - 24 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Company — Debentcbbs. 3. 
 
 Liquidation proceedings - 19 Ch. D. 367 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Liquidation. 13. 
 
 Mortgage. 
 
 See Mobt(jagb — Redemption — Statutes, 
 
 Mortgage — Equitable — Deposit 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 396 
 See Mortgage — Contbact. 8. 
 
 Mortgage— Notice - - 16 Ch. D. 178 
 
 See MoETSAGB— Contract. 9, 
 
( 1587 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1588 ) 
 
 7App. Cos. 178 
 Law — Canada — Do- 
 
 TEANSFEE,— conM»ae(J, 
 
 Eailway— Canada 
 
 See Colonial 
 MINION. 1. 
 
 Shares. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Shakes — 
 Teansfer. 
 ■— Ship - 7 App. Cas. 127 
 
 See Ship — Mekohant Shipping Acts. 7. 
 
 Stock — National Debt Commissioners 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 231 
 See National Debt Commissioneks. 
 
 Stock — Injunction to restrain 23 Ch. D. 549 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supeeme Couet — In- 
 junction. 2. 
 
 Stock — Into joint names - 27 Ch, D. 341 
 
 See Advancement. 2. 
 TBANSSHIPHENT— Foreign manufactm-e 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 721 ; 8 App. Cas. S 
 See Patent — Infeingement. 6. 
 
 TEESPASS. 
 
 1. Actio personalis moritnr cnm persona 
 
 — Benefit received by IVespassei:'] By the decree 
 in 1870 it was declared that H. and F. and the 
 «state of their deceased partner were liable to the 
 Plaintiffs for minerals taken by them under the 
 Plaintiffs' farm, and that H. & F. were liable to 
 compensate the Plaintiffs for user of all roads and 
 passages under the farm, and inquiries were 
 directed — 1. As to the quantity of minerals taken 
 and the value. 2. "What quantities of minerals 
 had been carried by the Defendants through the 
 roads or passages under the farm. 3. "What upon 
 the result of the second inquiry ought to be paid 
 by the Defendants as way leave for the user of the 
 roads and passages. 4. Whether the farm, and 
 the mineral property of the Plaintiffs under it, 
 had sustained any and what damage by reason of 
 the way in which the Defendants had worked 
 under the farm. Pending these inquiries F. died, 
 and his executrix moved to stay proceedings under 
 the second, third, and fourth inquiries r—JeZd, by 
 Pearson, J., that the fourth inquiry must be 
 stayed, but that as the estate of P. had derived 
 profit from the trespasses to which the second and 
 third inquiries related, it was liable after his death, 
 and that these inquiries must be prosecuted : — 
 Beld, on appeal by Cotton and Bowen, L. JJ., dis- 
 sentiente Baggallay. L.J., that proceedings under 
 the second and third inquiries must also be stayed, 
 for that, apart from cases of breach of contract, a 
 lemedy for a wrongful act done by ja deceased 
 person- cannot be pursued against his estate, un- 
 less property or the proceeds or value of property 
 fcelonging to another person have been appro- 
 priated by the deceased person and added to his 
 estate. Philips v. Homfeat - 24 Ch. D. 439 
 
 2. ■ Injuiy by Cattle — Entry of Ox into 
 
 Shop adjoining. Street — Absence of Negligence — 
 Ziability.} An ox belonging to the Defendant 
 and while being driven by his servants through 
 the streets of a country town entered the Plain- 
 tiff's shop, which adjoined the street, through the 
 open doorway and damaged his goods. No negli- 
 gence on the part of the persons in charge of tlie 
 ■ox was proved: — Seld, that the Defendant was 
 not liable. Tillett v. "Wabd 10 a. B. D. 17 
 
 TEESPASS — continued. 
 
 Injunction to restrain - 20 Ch. D. 190 
 
 See Peaotioe — Supbemb Codet — In- 
 junction. 7. 
 
 Injury to reversion - 20 Ch, D. 589 
 
 See NtiisANCE — Eemedies. 2. 
 TEIAl. 
 
 See Cases under Pbaotice — Sdpeeme 
 Cotibt — Teial. 
 
 Notice of— Abridgment of time 14 Q. B. D. 234 
 
 See Peacticb — Sdpseme Couet; — Notice 
 OF Teial. 
 
 TEIAL OF LTTNATICS ACT, 1883. 
 
 See L/UNATic— Ceiminal — Statutes. 
 
 TEICYCLE— Steam power— Locomotive — ^High- 
 way - - 7 ft. B. D. 313 
 
 See Highway — Locomotive. 
 
 TEINITY MASTEE— Inspection of lights— Col- 
 lision - - 10 P. D. 40 
 See Peactice — Admibalty — ^Inspection 
 
 OF PeOPEETY. 
 
 TEOVEE. 
 
 Bill of lading — Sale of Goods — Mer- 
 chant Shipping Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. e. 63), 
 ss. 66-78 — Warehouseman, Liability of — Conver- 
 sion."] "When goods are shipped under a bill of 
 lading drawn in parts, to be delivered to the con- 
 signee " or his assigns, the one of which bills 
 being accomplished, the others to stand void," the 
 master, or the warehouseman who has the custody 
 of the goods under the Merchant Shipping Act, 
 1862, ss. 66-78, is justified in delivering to the 
 consignee on production of one part, although 
 there has been a prior indorsement for value to 
 the holder of another part ; provided the delivery 
 be bonS, fide and without notice or knowledge of 
 such prior indorsement. . — Goods having been 
 shipped for London consigned to C. & Co. the 
 shipmaster signed a set of three bills of lading 
 marked "Fii-st," "Second," and "Third," re- 
 spectively, making the goods deliverable to 0. & 
 Co., or their assigns, freight payable in London, 
 the one of the bills being accomplished, the 
 others to stand void. During the voyage 0. & 
 Co. indorsed the bill of lading marked " Fust" to 
 a bank in consideration of a loan. Upon the 
 arrival of the ship at London the goods were 
 landed and placed in the custody of a dock com- 
 pany in their warehouses ; the master lodgiagwith 
 them notice under the Merchant Shipping Act, 
 1862, sect. 68, &c., to detain the cargo until the 
 freight should be paid. C. & Co, then produced 
 to the dock company the bill of lading marked 
 " Second " unindorsed, and the dock company 
 entered 0. & Co. in their books as proprietors of 
 the goods. The atop for freight being afterwards 
 removed, the dock company bonS. fide and with- 
 out notice or knowledge of the bank's claim 
 delivered the goods to other persons upon delivery 
 orders signed by C. & Co. : — Meld, affirming the 
 decision of the Court of Appeal, that the dock 
 company had not been guilty of a conversion, and 
 that the bank could not maiutaia any action 
 against them. — Fearon v. Bowers (1 H. Bl. 364) 
 reflected on. Glyn Mills, Cueeie & Co. v. Bast 
 AND "West India Dock Company 6 ft. B. D. 475 ; 
 
 [7 App. Cas, 691 
 
( 1589 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1590 ). 
 
 TBUST— Bequest .on indefinite tiust 
 
 See Will— Teustees. 2. [26 Ch. D. 631 
 
 Breach of — ^Making good by trustee 
 
 [17 Ch. B. 58 
 See Bakkkuptot — Fraudulent Pke- 
 
 FERENOB. 1. 
 
 Breach of-:-Trustee'a liability. 
 
 See Cases under Tbustee — ^Liabilities. 
 
 Declaration of - - 17 Ch, D. 416 
 
 See VoLUNTAET Conveyance. 1. 
 
 Discretioniiry 21 Ch. D. 332 
 
 See Power — Execution. 3. 
 
 For maintenance — Settlement 22 Ch. D. 521 
 
 See Settlement^Powbrs. 5. 
 
 •1 For payment of debts— Exoneration of per- 
 sonalty - - - 28 Ch. D. 446 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 9. 
 
 For sale— Charge of debts 20 Ch. D. 465 ; 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 See Vendor and Pdeohaber — Title. 7, 
 8. 
 
 For sale — Consent of cestui que trust 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 315 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 18. 
 
 For sale — ^Discretion- — Interference of Court. 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 913 
 See_ Practice — Supreme Court — Cham- 
 bers. 10. 
 
 -" For sale— Partition suit - 22 Ch. D. 284 
 
 See Partition Suit — Jurisdiction. 2. 
 
 For sale^Settled Laud Act 24 Ch. D. 144 ; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 646 
 See Settled Land Act — Trustees. 8, 9. 
 
 For sale — Will — ^Power to postpone 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 42 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 4. 
 
 Notice of - 24 Ch. D. 720 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser— Title. 4. 
 
 Solicitor 17 Ch. D. 437 ; 19 Ch, D. 20.7 
 
 See SoLiciTOK— Liabilities. 2, 3. 
 
 -T-^ To make strict entail - 7 App. Cas, 713 
 See Scotch Law — Entail. 
 
 Transfer into joint names - 27 Oh. D. 341 
 
 See Advancement. 2. 
 
 TBTTST ESTATE— Charge on— Creditor 
 
 See Trustee— Powers. 3. [26 Ch, D. 245 
 
 • Devolution of. 
 
 See Will — Trust Estates — Statutes. 
 
 — Indemnity of trustees - 22 Ch. D. 255, 561 
 
 See Trustee — Indemnity. 2, 3. 
 
 Ketainer of income — Expenses of action 
 
 [25 Ch, D, 710 
 
 ■ See Trustee — Costs and Charges. 6; 
 
 TBUSTEE:- 
 
 
 
 Col. 
 
 I. Appointment 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 1590 
 
 II. Costs AND Charges 
 
 - 
 
 - 1591 
 
 ill. Indemnity 
 
 - 
 
 
 - 1594 
 
 ., , IV. Liabilities 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 1595 
 
 ■ . V. Powers 
 
 
 - 
 
 - 1601 
 
 VI. Ketikement 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 - 1603 
 
 I. TETJSTEE- APPOINTMENT. i 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41 (Conveyancing^ Act, 
 1881) enacts — 
 
 Sect. 31. — (1.) Where a trustee, either originalor 
 substituted, and whether appointed iy a Court or 
 otherwise, is dead, or remains out of the United 
 Kingdom for more than twelve months, or desires 
 to he discharged from the trusts or powers reposed 
 in or conferred on him, or refuses or is unfit to act 
 therein, or is incapable of acting therein, then the 
 person or persons nominated for (hispurpose by the 
 instrument, if any, creating the trust,- or if there is 
 no such person, or no such person able and vjilling 
 to act, then the surviving or continuing trustees or 
 trustee for the time being, or the personal represent 
 tatives of the last surviving or continuing trustee,- 
 may, by writing, appoint another person or other 
 persons to be a trustee or trustees in the place of the 
 trustee dead, remaining out of the United Kingdom, 
 desiring to be discharged, refusing or being unfit, 
 or being incapable, as aforesaid. 
 
 (2.) Oh an appointment of a new trustee, file 
 number of trustees may be increased. 
 
 (3.) On an appointment of a new trustee, it sliall 
 not be obligatory to appoint more than one new 
 trustee, where only one trustee was originally ap- 
 pointed, or to fill up the original number of trustees, 
 where more than two trustees were originally ap- 
 pointed; but, except where only one trustee was 
 originally appointed, a trustee shall not be dis- 
 charged under this section from his trust unless 
 there will be at least two trustees to perform the 
 trust. 
 
 (4.) On an appointment of a neio trustee any 
 assurance or thing requisite for vesting the trust 
 property, or any part thereof, jointly in the persons 
 who are the trustees, shall be executed or done. 
 
 (5.) Every neio trustee so appointed, as well 
 before as after all the trust property becomes by law, 
 or by assurance, or otherwise, vested in him, shall 
 have the same powers, authorities, and discretions, 
 and may in all respects act, as if he had been 
 origirmlly appointed a trustee by the instrument, if 
 any, creating the trust. 
 
 (6.) The provisions qf this section relative to a 
 trustee who is dead include the case of a perion 
 nominated trustee in a will but dying before the 
 testator ; and those relative to a continuing trustee 
 include a refusing or retiring trustee, if willing to 
 act in the execution of the provisiolis of this section. 
 
 (7.) This section applies only if and as' far a,s a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the instrument, 
 if- any, creating - the trust, and shall have effect 
 subject to the terms of that instrument and to any 
 provisions therein contained. 
 
 (8.) This section applies to trusts created either 
 before or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 33. — (1.) Every trustee appointed by the 
 Court of Chancery, or by the Chancery Division of 
 the Court, or by any other Court of competent 
 jurisdiction, shall, as well before as after the trust 
 property becomes by law, or hy assurance, or other- 
 wise, vested in him, have the same powers, autho- 
 rities, and discretions, and may in all respects actt 
 as if he had been originally appointed a trustee by 
 the instrument, if any, creating the trust. 
 
 (2.) This section applies to appointments made 
 either before or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Vesting of Trust Property.] Sect 34'.— (1.) 
 Where a deed by which a mew trustee is appointed 
 
( 1591 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1592 ) 
 
 I. TBTJSTEE— APPOISTMENT— eojifOTMed. 
 
 to perform any trust contains a declaration hy the 
 appointer to the effect that any eslale or interest in 
 any land subject to the trust, or in any chattel so 
 subject, or the right to recover and receive any debt 
 or other thing in action sn subject shall vest in the 
 persons who by virtue of the deed become and are 
 the trustees for performing the trust, the declara- 
 tion shall, without any conveyance or assignment, 
 operate to vest in those persons, as joint tenants, 
 and for the purposes of the trust, tliat estate, in- 
 terest, or right. 
 
 (2.) Applies to retiring trustees. 
 
 (3.) This section does not extend to any legal 
 estate or interest in copyhold or customary land, or 
 to land conveyed hy way of mortgage for securing 
 money subject to the trust, or to any such share, 
 stoclc, annuity or property as is only transferable 
 in boohs liept by a company or other body, or in 
 manr.er prescribed by or under Act of Parliament. 
 
 (4.) i'pr purposes of registration of the deed in 
 any registry, the person or persons making the 
 declaration shall be deemed the conveying party or 
 parties, and the conveyance shall be deemed to be 
 made by him or them under a power conferred by 
 this Act. 
 
 (5.) TJiis section applies only to deeds executed 
 after the commencement of the Act — 31st Dec. 1881 , 
 
 Separate Trustees.] By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 
 (Conveyancing Act, 1882) — Sect. 5. — (1.) On an 
 appointment of new trustees, a separate set of 
 trustees may be appointed for any part of the trust 
 property held on trusts distinct from those relating 
 to any other part or parts of the trust property ; or, 
 if only one trustee was originally appointed, then 
 one separate trustee may be so appointed for the 
 first-mentioned part. 
 
 (2.) This section applies to trusts created either 
 before or after the commencement of the Act. — 31sf 
 Dec. 1882. 
 
 II, TEUSTEE— COSTS AND CHARGES. 
 
 1. Defaulting Trustee — Bankruptcy — 
 
 Cosis.] Where the trustee of a settlement became 
 bankrupt shortly after the commencement of an 
 action for the execution of the trusts, and an 
 order was made for payment by him into Court of 
 a sum of money certified to be due from him to 
 the estate, he was held entitled to his costs of the 
 action, though he was not to receive them untU 
 he had made good his default. — Bowyer v. Oriffiii 
 (Law Eep. 9 Eq. 340) considered. Lewis v. 
 Tbabk - 21 Oh. D. 862 
 
 2. . ■ Defaulting Trustee — Bankruptcy of — 
 
 Executor — Costs of Trustee subsequent to Bank- 
 ruptcy—Bankruptcy Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, 
 c. 71), «. 49.] In an administration action one 
 Defendant was an executor. He was a defaulting 
 trustee under a settlement. After the action was 
 commenced he was adjudicated bankrupt, and a 
 trustee in bankruptcy was appointed and made a 
 Defendant : — Held, that the defaulting trustee 
 was entitled to be paid his costs incurred after his 
 bankruptcy. — Bowyer v. Chifjin (Law Eep. 9 Eq. 
 340) followed. Clare v. Clakb 21 Ch, D. 865 
 
 3. Defaulting Trustee — Bankruptcy — 
 
 Executor— Bankruptcy Act, 1869, s. 49.] Where, 
 after the commencement of' an administration 
 action against a defaulting executor or trustee, he 
 
 II. TETTSTEE— COSTS AND CHAEGES— conic?, 
 becomes bankrupt, and, under sect. 49 of th& 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1869, his debt remains undis- 
 charged by the bankruptcy, he is not entitled to 
 be paid any of his costs of the action, whether in- 
 curred before or after the bankruptcy, until he has 
 made good his default. — But where the debt of 
 the defaulting executor or trustee has been dis- 
 charged by his bankruptcy — as where the bank- 
 ruptcy has taken place prior to tlie Bankruptcy 
 Act, 1869;. or where, after the bankniplcy, his 
 debt remaining undischarged, he renders services 
 in the action in his character of executor or trustee, 
 he is entitled to be paid his costs incurred subse- 
 quently to his bankruptcy, thoxigh his prior costs 
 must be set off against his debt. — Lewis v. Trask 
 (21 Ch. D. 862) followed.— CZare v. Clare (21 Ch. 
 D. 865) not followed. In re Basham. Hasnat 
 V. Basham - 23 Ch. D. 195 
 
 4. . Defaulting Trustee — Co-Trustee not in- 
 debted — Bankruptcy of Trustee^ There were two 
 trustees of an estate administered by the Court. 
 One trustee was indebted to the estate and be- 
 came banki'upt. The other trustee, who was 
 solvent, was not indebted to the estate: — Held, 
 that a reference be directed to the Taxing Master 
 to apportion the costs of the trustees appearing 
 by the same solicitor, and that the costs of the 
 solvent trustee be paid out of the estate, and the 
 costs apportioned as the costs of the insolvent 
 trustee be set off against the amount found due 
 from him to the estate. — Whether under this, 
 direction the whole of the conunon costs of the 
 two trustees would be allowed to the solvent 
 trustee or divided, must depend on the settled 
 practice of the Taxing Master's ofBce. MoBwan 
 V. Ckombie - 25 Ch. D. 175 
 
 5. Expenses of Actions — Betainer of In- 
 come.'] The trustees of a freehold estate of which 
 the Plaintiff was equitable tenant for life under a 
 will, brought actions under the advice of counsel 
 agrtinst two persons for interfering with the pro- 
 perty, and compromised them before trial. The 
 Plaintiff had no notice of the proceedings, but 
 had some time previously warned the trustees on 
 the occasion of an injury done by persons other 
 than the Defendants to these actions, that he 
 should hold them liable if they did not take all. 
 necessary steps to protect the property. In De- 
 cember, 1881, the Plaintiff applied to the trustees 
 for the rents accrued since May, ISSO. The 
 trustees' solicitor answered stating the amount of 
 the rents received, and saying that it was less, 
 than the costs incurred by the trustees in the 
 action, and that they were out of pocket. A cor- 
 respondence ensued, in the course of which the 
 trustees expressed their willingness to concur in 
 any arrangement for raising the costs out of the 
 estate, but the Plaintiff insisted on having the 
 rents paid to him irrespective of any arrange- 
 ment for raising tlie costs, and brought his action 
 to enforce payment. The Vice-Chancellor of the 
 Lancaster Coui-t made an order declaring that as 
 the actions were brought without the knowledge 
 or consent of the Plaintiff, the costs were not 
 chargeable against the income. And the Court 
 "being of opinion that tlie actions were com- 
 menced under the advice of counsel," ordered the 
 trustees' costs of them to be raised and paid out 
 
( 1593 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1591 ) 
 
 II. TRUSTEE— COSTS AHD CHARGES— co?jW. 
 ■6f the estate, but ordered the trustees to pay tlie 
 Plaintiff Ms costs of the present action up to the 
 hearing. The Plaintiff appealed against tho di- 
 rection to raise the costs of the former actions 
 out of the estate, and the trustees from the order 
 as to the costs of the present action. — Held, on 
 appeal that the direction to raise the costs of the 
 trustees of the old actions out of the estate ought 
 to be affirmed, for that the actions appeared to 
 have been brought bon^ fide and to have been 
 beneficial to the estate, but that the reason given 
 in the decree for allowing them ought to be 
 varied, as that result did not necessarily follow 
 from their having been commenced under the 
 advice of counsel. But held, that the order on 
 the trustees to pay costs must be reversed, and 
 directions given for raising their costs of this 
 action out of the estate, for that the costs of 
 trustees properly incurred in the administration 
 of the trust are a first charge on both the capital 
 and income of the trust estate, and that the 
 trustees were not bound to part with the income 
 till their costs had been otherwise provided for, 
 and they therefore had been guilty of no miscon- 
 duct. Stott v. Milke - " 25 Ch. D. 710 
 
 6. : Insufficient Estate — ■Friority.'] If, in 
 
 action by oestuis que trust under a creditors' trust 
 deed against their trustees for accounts, and to 
 have the rights of the parties ascertained, the 
 ■costs of all parties are ordered to be paid out of 
 the trust fund, and it appears probable that the 
 fund will not be sufficient for payment of all the 
 costs in full, the trustees are entitled to a direc- 
 tion for payment of their co.^ts, charges, and ex- 
 penses in priority to the costs of all other parties. 
 DoDDS V. TuKE - - 25 Ch. D. 617 
 
 7, ■ Litigation between Trustees — Goats 
 
 between Solicitor and Client.'] One of two execu- 
 tors and trustees commenced an action against 
 the other for the administration of the estate, 
 and a decree was made. There was no allegation 
 •of any misconduct on the part of the Defendant. 
 On the action coming on for further considera- 
 tion, Mr. Justice Kay gave the Plaintiff his costs 
 as between solicitor and client, but gave the De- 
 fendant costs only as between party and party, 
 holding that two sets of costs as between solicitor 
 and client ought not to be allowed to the trusr 
 tees : — Seld, on appeal, that a trustee is entitled 
 to costs as between solicitor and client in an ad- 
 ministration action, unless a case of misconduct 
 is made out against him, and that the Defendant 
 must have costs as between solicitor and client. 
 In re Love. Hill v. SpnEGEON 29 Ch. D. 348 
 
 8. Obstruction to Cestui que Trust— iZe- 
 
 fusal of Bepresentative of deceased Trustee to 
 appoint new Trustees — OonveyaTiaing and Law of 
 Property Act, 1881 (4i & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 31— 
 Rules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order Lxv., r. 1— 
 Jurisdiction to order Bespondent to pay costs on 
 Petition under Trustee Act, 1850.] The executors 
 ■of the sole executor of a deceased sole trustee 
 whose sole executor had never acted in the trust, 
 were applied to in April, 1883, to take steps to 
 ■enable the tenant for life of a small sum of stock 
 standing in the name of the deceased trustee 
 to receive the dividends. In May, 1883, the exe- 
 •outors handed to the sdicitor.of the tenant for ' 
 
 II. TRUSTEE— COSTS AND CHAR(JE3— coiiicf. 
 life the probate of their testator's will, that he 
 might produce it at the Bank of England, which 
 he did. After some correspondence, in the course 
 of which the executors asked for evidence of the 
 title of the cestuis que trust, which did not ap- 
 pear to have been produced, the solicitor of the 
 tenant for life about the end of May sent a power 
 of attorney to be executed by the executors to 
 enable her to receive the dividends. The execu- 
 tors did not execute or return the power. In 
 July the solicitor of the tenant for life applied to 
 the executors to appoint new trustees under the 
 Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, to 
 which the executors replied, stating their igno- 
 rance of. the title of the cestuis que trust. Ulti- 
 mately, in November, 1883, the cestuis que trust 
 presented a petition for the appointment of new 
 trustees and a vestingorder: — Meld, by Pearson, J., 
 that the representative of a deceased trustee is 
 not bound at the request of the cestuis que trust 
 to exercise the power of appointing new trustees 
 given by the Conveyancing and Law of Property 
 Act, 1881 ; and that the refusal to do so was not 
 a sufficient reason for ordering the executors to 
 pay the costs of a petition for the appointment of 
 new trustees : — But held by Pearson, J., that the 
 conduct of the executors, who on the materials 
 before him appeared to have accepted the trust 
 by taking a transfer of the stock into their own 
 names, had been vexatious, and that they must 
 pay the costs which would have been occasioned 
 by a petition simply asking for payment of divi- 
 dends to the tenant for life, and that they could 
 not be allowed any costs out of the fund. — The 
 executors appealed : — Seld, that an objection that 
 this was an appeal for costs only was not sustain- 
 able : — Held, also, that as the cestuis que trust 
 had not taken proper steps to satisfy the execu- 
 tors as to their title, the executors had not been 
 guilty of any such misconduct as is necessary to 
 deprive a trustee of his right to costs out of the 
 trust fund, and that they must have their costs 
 below, but that as the Court of Appeal was not 
 satisfied with their conduct they ought to have 
 no costs of their appeal. — Whether under the Judi- 
 cature Acts and the Orders of 1883, Order lxv., 
 rule 1, the Court has jurisdiction to order a respon- 
 dent to a petition under the Trustee Act, 1850, to 
 pay costs, qumre. In re Sabah Knight's Will 
 
 [26 Ch. S. 82 
 
 III. TRUSTEE— INDEMNITY. 
 
 1. Concuirence of Cestui que Trust — 
 
 Married Woman.'] Where a cestui que trust, who 
 is party to a breach of trust, is a married woman, 
 and the trustees claim a right of retainer against 
 her life interest in the settled funds to indemnify 
 them against their breach of trust, they are bound 
 to shew that she acted for herself in the breach of 
 trust, and was fully informed of the state of the 
 case. Sawybb v. Sawtek - 28 Ch. D. 596 
 
 2. ■ Purchase of Land — Advance by Trustee 
 
 of Part of Purchase^money — Lien.] tinder a mar- 
 riage settlement the trustees were empowered at 
 the request of the husband and wife to invest 
 the trust fund in the purchase of real estate, and 
 to re-sell the same. In exercise of this power 
 the trustees, at the request of the husband and 
 wife, bought certain real estate at a price which 
 
( :595 -) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1596 ) 
 
 III, TRUSTEE— INDEMNITY— eonMnwecJ. 
 exceeded the whole of the trust fund, the hus- 
 band promising to provide the balance out of his 
 own moneys. The husband could not fulfil his 
 promise, and 0. P., one of the trustees, at the 
 request of the husband and wife, borrowed the 
 sum necessary to complete the purchase from a 
 bank, and deposited with them the title deeds of 
 the estate. — 0. P. died, and the husband was 
 unable to repay the loan. — In an action brought 
 by the bank for an account and the realization of 
 their security, and for administration of C. P.'s 
 estate : — Held, that the trust estate was entitled 
 to a first charge upon the real estate purchased 
 for the full amount of the trust fund ; that sub- 
 ject to such charge the estate of C. P. was en- 
 titled to be indemnified out of such real estate for 
 the amount borrowed by him, and actually in- 
 vested in or about the purchase, and to enforce 
 .such indemnity by sale of such real estate with- 
 out the consent of the husband and wife : the 
 bank being entitled to stand in the place of C. P. 
 as against the trust estate for the amount due to 
 them. In re Pumfbey. 'Woboestee City and 
 County Banking Company v. Blick 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 255 
 
 3. Shares in Company — Indemnity against 
 
 Future Liability — Quia Timet Action.'] A trustee 
 held shares in a company on trust for an adult 
 cestui que trust. He had applied for them at 
 the request of the cestui que trust, who paid the 
 money due to the company on the application and 
 .allotment. The trustee executed a transfer of the 
 shares to the cestui que trust, and the latter sent 
 it to the company for registration, but the direc- 
 tors refused to register it, and when an order was 
 made to wind up the company the name of tlie 
 trustee remained on the company's register as the 
 holder of the shares. No further call had been 
 made on them. The trustee brought an action 
 against the cestui que trust, claiming an indem- 
 nity against liability on the shares. There was no 
 evidence to shew whether calls were likely to be 
 made in the winding-up : — Held, that the action 
 was a mere quia timet one, and that it was pre- 
 mature and could not be maintained. — Lord Bane- 
 laugh V. Sayes (1 Vem. 189) not followed. 
 Hughes-Hallett v. Indian Mammoth Gold 
 Mines Company - 22 Ch. D. 661 
 
 IV. TKUSTEE— LIABIIITIES. 
 
 1. Employment of Agent — Loss by In- 
 solvency of Agent — Onus probandi.'] A common 
 order having been made for the administration of 
 a testator's estate, the district registrar by his 
 certificate found the outstanding personal estate 
 to consist in part of book debts amouhting nomi- 
 nally to £291, as to £113 part of which he certi- 
 fied that it represented a portion of book debts 
 whicli the executors had employed H. to collect, 
 and for which H. had not accounted, and had 
 claimed to deduct £55 for remuneration, but that 
 £25 was enough. The certificate went on to 
 say that H. had gone into liquidation, and that 
 no part of the £113 was likely to be recovered. 
 No appUcatiou was made to vaiy this certificate. 
 It appeared that H. had collected in all £168, 
 had paid to the executors in April, May, and 
 June, 1880, sums amounting in all to £55, and 
 had gone on collecting without making any 
 
 IV. TRaSTEE— LIABILITIES— contotaeiJ. 
 further payment to the executors till July, 1881, 
 when a receiver was appointed in the action, but 
 it did not appear when he became insolvent nor 
 at what times the moneys received came to his 
 hands. The action having come on for further 
 consideration -.—Held, by Ghitty, J., that the exe- 
 cutors having received the £113 by their agent 
 must be charged with it, less the £25 which the 
 Registrar had held to be the proper amount of 
 remuneration to the a,gent for collectiog: — Held, 
 on appeal, that this decision must be reversed, 
 for that where an executor or trustee employs an 
 agent to collect money under cii-cumstances which 
 make such employment proper, and the money 
 collected is lost by the agent's insolvency, the 
 burden of proof is not on the executor to shew 
 that the loss was not attributable to his own 
 default, but on the persons seeking to charge him 
 to prove that it was. In re Beieb. Bbieb v. 
 BvisoN - - 26 Ch. D. 238 
 
 2. Employment of Broker — Cestui que 
 
 Trust — ■Liability of Trustee for Trust Moneys lost 
 through Broker.] A trustee investing trust funds 
 is justified in employing a broker to procure 
 securities authorized by the trust and in paying 
 the purchase-money to the broker, if he follows the 
 usual and regular course of business adopted by 
 ordinary prudent men in making such invest- 
 ments. — A broker employed by a trustee to buy 
 securities of municipal corporations authorized by 
 the trust, gave the trustee a bought-note which 
 purported to be subject to the rules of the London 
 Stock Exchange and obtained the purchase-money 
 from the trustee upon the representation that it 
 was payable the next day, which was the next ac- 
 count day on the London Exchange. The broker 
 never procured the securities but appropriated the 
 money to his own use and finally became insolvent. 
 Some of the securities were procurable only from 
 the corporations direct and were not bought and 
 sold in the market, and there was evidence that the 
 form of the bought-note would have suggested to 
 some experts that the loans were to be direct to 
 the corporations ; but (as the House held on the 
 facts) there was nothing calculated to excite 
 suspicion in the mind of the trustee or of an 
 ordinary prudent man of business ; and such pay- 
 ment to a broker was in accordance with the 
 usual course of business in piu-ohases on the 
 London Exchange : — Held, aflSrming the decision 
 of the Court of Appeal (Lord PitzGerald doubt- 
 ing), that the trustee was not liable to the cestnis 
 quo trust for the loss of the trust funds.— Semite, 
 by the Earl of Selborne, L.C., that if the broker 
 had represented to the trustee that the contracts 
 were with the corporations for loans direct to 
 them from the trustee he would not have been 
 justified in paying the money to the broker, for 
 which in such a case there would have been no 
 moral necessity or suifieient practical reason. 
 Speight v. Gaunt 22 Ch, D. 727 ; 9 App. Cas. 1 
 
 3. Improvident Investment — Mortgage — 
 
 Advance on Valuation made on behalf of Vendor of 
 Mortgagor — Failure of Security— Advance to more 
 than Two-thirds of Estimated Value — Liability of 
 TrrnUes.] In May, 1870, F. and G., the trustees 
 of a will, one of whom, F., was an experienced 
 farmer, and the other, G., a solicitor, advanced a 
 
( 1597 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1598 ) 
 
 IV. TETJSTEE— LIABILITIES— con««»itecZ, 
 sum of £24:00, part of the trust estate, along -with 
 another sum of £2600, not part of the estate, 
 making together £5000, at £4 per cent., on the 
 security of a freehold farm, which in 1868 had 
 been sold to the mortgagor, who was farming that 
 -and neighbouring land on a peculiar system of 
 husbandry. The trustees had power to advance on 
 contributory mortgages. In 1868 the farm had 
 been valued on behalf of the vendors, of whom G. 
 was one, and also the solicitor, at £6895. This 
 valuation was communicated to F. at the time of 
 the jnortgage ; and no other, valuation was made. 
 Interest was paid in full, but irregularly, down to 
 November, 1877, since which time the farm, which 
 was situated on clay soU, in. a wet situation, had 
 become unsaleable and unlettable, owing to un- 
 favourable seasons, and had yielded no income. 
 The mortgagor became insolvent. — Upon claim by 
 the cestui que tnjst against F. and the executors of 
 G. to be declared entitled to payment of the £2400 
 and interest since November, l877:^fleM, not- 
 withstanding that no valuation was used at the 
 jdate of the mortgage other than the valuation 
 made on behalf of the vendors at the time of the 
 sale to the mortgagor ; that G., the trustee, was 
 himself one, and solicitor of the others, of the 
 vendors to the mortgagor ; and that the sum ad- 
 vanced was ihore than two-thirds of the estimated 
 value of the farm — that the trustees were not 
 liable to make good the deficient security. — The 
 test of liability always is, whether or not the 
 trustees have acted as pi^xident men would have 
 acted in dealing with their own. property .^The 
 " two-thirds " rule is not enforceable with exact 
 strictness. In re Godfrey. Godfbey v. Faulknek 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 483 
 
 4. Improvident Investment — Mortgage 
 
 on House Property — Employment of Agents- 
 Valuation by Mortgagor's, Surveyor^Seleetion of 
 . Valuer — Negligence— Liability of Trustees.'] . The 
 rule that trustees, acting according to the ordi- 
 nary course of business, and employing agents 
 as prudent men of business would do on their 
 own behalf, are not liable for the default of the 
 agent so employed, is subject to the limitation 
 that the agent must not be employed out of the 
 ordinary scope of his business. — Trustees em- 
 powered to invest on mortgage lent under the 
 advice of their solicitors a sum of £5000 upon 
 mortgage of a freehold house and grounds at 
 Liverpool, valued to them at fi'om £7000 to £8000. 
 The trustees did not exercise their own judgment 
 as to the choice of a valuer, but accepted the 
 suggestion of their solicitors that a London sur- 
 veyor who had introduced' the security to them, 
 and was in fact the agent of the mortgagor with a 
 jeouniary interest in the coinpletion of the mort- 
 gage, should value the property for the trustees, 
 and they acted upon the report of this valuer, 
 which was of ah inflated character. — The mort- 
 gagor afterwards became bankrupt, and the pro- 
 perty would not realize the sum advanced : — Held, 
 that the trustees Vere jointly and severally liable 
 to replace the sum advanced, Tvith interest at 4 
 per cent, from the date of the loan. Fet v. 
 Tapson 28 Ch. D. 268 
 
 ..,, 6,- Improvident Investment — Sub-mort- 
 gage — Building Estate — Speculative Security — 
 
 IV. TRUSTEE— LIABILITIES— con««i«rf. 
 Separate Mortgages — Breach of Trust — transfer 
 of Securities — Executors — Waiver — Adoption and 
 Acquiescence.'] Under a settlement S. was tenant 
 for life with an ultimate trust, in default of children 
 (which happened), forhev testamentary appointees. 
 The trustees, having power to invest on leasehold 
 securities, invested the trust funds, with S.'s 
 consent, on, separate sub -mortgages of leasehold 
 liouses, unfinished and unlet, on a building estate 
 of which the roads and drainage were in a defec- 
 tive condition. The investment was made with- 
 out an independent , or reliable valuation, and 
 more than half the value of the house was lent on 
 each sub-mortgage. S. died, having by will dis- 
 posed of the trust funds and appointed executors. 
 The executors, ' with the sanction of the Chief 
 Clerk in an action establishing S.'s testamentary 
 appointment, had the sub-mortgages transferred 
 to them by the trustees, and subsequently, finding 
 them an insufficient security, brought an action 
 against the trustees to make, ,. them personally 
 liable for the deficiency : — Held, that, although 
 the sub-mortgages were not improper investments 
 in point of form, the trustees, having invested the 
 trust funds on insufScient security of a speculative 
 character, and without proper precautions, must 
 make good the loss ; and that the executors, having 
 taken the transfers in ignorance of the circum- 
 stances attending the investment, were not bound 
 by adoption or acquiescence. Smethubst v. 
 Hastings - - - - 30 Ch. S. 49» 
 
 6. Improvident Investment — Uncontrolled 
 
 Discretion.] A testator directed that his trustees, 
 should invest the moneys coming to their hands in 
 respect of his estate in their names or under their 
 control in siich mode or modes of investment as 
 they in their uncontrolled discretion should think 
 fit. Before the commencement of an action to 
 administer the testator's estate, the trustees (who 
 were also executors) . invested moneys forming 
 part of it in the purchase of bonds of a foreign 
 Government, bonds of a colonial railway company, 
 and shares of a bank on which there was a further 
 liability. The Chief Clerk, in taking the aeoouhts 
 of the testator's estate, disallowed the trastees the 
 sums which they had eixpended in the purchase 
 of these bonds and shares. The shares in the 
 bank had been previously sold at a profit ■.—Held^ 
 that, though the investments in question ought 
 not to be retained by the trustees, yet, as they had 
 acted bonS, fide, and no loss had resulted to the 
 trust estate, they ought not to be disallowed the 
 sums which they had laid out in making the 
 investments. In re Bkown. Beown v. Beown 
 
 [29 Ch. B. 88» 
 
 7. - — Interest, Rate ot— Breach of Trust — 
 Accumulation Clause — Compound Interest.] The 
 trustee of a will held a fund upon trust (after the 
 determination of a previous life interest) to trans- 
 fer and pay the same to a child when and as he 
 should attain twenty-one, with a proviso that in 
 case the child should be under age at the deter- 
 mination of the life interest the income of thefund 
 or any part thereof slwuld or might be applied for 
 or towards his maintenance, education and ad- 
 vancement, and the surplus, if any, should accxx- 
 jnulate to and .become part of the fund. — After the 
 child attained twenty-one (the life interest having 
 
( 1599 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1600 ) 
 
 IV. TEUSTEE— LIABILITIES— conim«ed. 
 Tveviously determined), the trustee retained the 
 fund -without making any arrangement with the 
 ■child or explaining to him his righia -.—Held, 
 that the trustee must be taken to have continued 
 to hold the fund after the child attained twenty- 
 one upon the same trusts and with the same 
 obligations to accumulate as before, and that he 
 was liable to account for the fund with com- 
 ■'pound interest. — Wilson v. Fealce (3 Jur. (N.S.) 
 155) distinguished. — Amiss v. Ball (3 Jur. (N.S.) 
 •584) observed upon. — Part of the fund had been 
 invested at 5 per cent, or other rates of interest 
 upon authorized securities, and the rest of it bad 
 been either improperly invested or had not been 
 kept separate from the trustee's own moneys: — 
 Held, that as to so much of the fund as had been 
 invested at 5 per cent, or any other rate upon 
 ■authorized securities interest must be calculated 
 at the rate actually yielded ; that the rest of the 
 fund must be treated as having been in the 
 trustee's hands uninvested, and that under the 
 circumstances he must be charged with interest 
 thereon calculated at 4 per cent. only. In re 
 JEjimet's Estate. Emmet v. Emmet 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 142 
 
 8. Lapse of Time — Waiver — Stale De- 
 mand.'] A cestui que trust who with knowledge 
 -that his trustee has committed a breach of trust 
 -obtains from him a part only of that to which he 
 is entitled, does not thereby waive his right to 
 £uch further relief as he may be able to obtain 
 unless an intention so to do can be clearly in- 
 ferred from the surrounding circumstances. — In 
 .November, 1860, an order was made in a suit for 
 administering the trusts of the will of J, C, to 
 TvMch H. C, a former trustee, was Defendant, 
 ^directing her to pay into Court a sum of money 
 in respect of breaches of trust committed in 1843 
 and 1845, the amount of which had been ascer- 
 tained by the Chief Clerk in the suit. H. C. 
 went abioad, and substituted service of the order 
 was made upon her. By the order on further 
 consideration in 1863, H. 0. appearing by counsel, 
 ■certain sums of money to which she was entitled, 
 and her life interest under the testator's will, ■were 
 ordered to be impounded and paid over to " the 
 account of H. C. funds applicable for the repay- 
 ment of trust funds misappropriated," and an 
 inquiry was directed as to what steps should be 
 taken to obtain restitution of the funds. Certain 
 other orders were made in the suit, but no per- 
 sonal order was made on H. C. for payment of the 
 amount of her defalcations, nor any steps taken 
 .against her, although she returned to England in 
 1870, ■where she remained till her death in 1880, 
 and her residence was known to the then trustees 
 of the will and some of the cestuis que trust. On 
 her death the surviving trustee of the will of J. C. 
 brought this action against her executors, claim- 
 in"' the administration of her real and personal 
 estate on behalf of himself and all other the cre- 
 ditors, alleging himself a creditor in respect of the 
 unpaid balance of the sum representing the breach 
 
 of trust. At the date of tbe institution of the 
 
 action several beneficiaries under J. C.'s will were 
 infants i—HeZd (reversing the decision of Fry, J.), 
 that the action was not an attempt to enforce a 
 stale demind, and that tlie cestuis que trust must 
 
 IV, TEirSTEE— IIABILITIES— confanaefi. 
 not be taken to have elected to abandon their 
 claim against her and to rest content -with im- 
 pounding her life interest : — That, there being a 
 debt due from H. C. at her death to the estate of 
 J. C. and the trusts of his will not being com- 
 pleted, the surviving trustee was the proper per- 
 son to bring the action, and that the cestuis que 
 trust need not be parties : — Although as between 
 the cestui que trust and a stranger the claim of the 
 cestui que trust is barred by lapse of time operat- 
 ing against his trustee, lapse of time is no bar 
 as between cestui que trust and trustee. In re 
 Ceoss. Hakston v. Tekison - 20 Ch. D. 109 
 
 9. Leaseholds — Tenant for Life and Be- 
 
 mainderman — Repairs — Ee-ceiverJ] When lease- 
 hold houses are vested in trustees on behalf of a 
 tenant for life and remaindermen, it is the duty of 
 the trnstees to keep the property free from the 
 risk of forfeiture by a breach of the covenants of 
 the lease, and they are entitled to have the rents 
 applied in keeping the houses in a proper state of 
 repair. — The trustees are not bound to be content 
 with the setting apart of a sum of money in the 
 joint names of themselves and the tenant for life 
 as an indemnity against the consequences of a 
 breach of the covenants of the lease, but are en- 
 titled to require the covenants to be specifically 
 performed. — When a tenant for life of leasehold 
 houses is allowed by the trustees to receive the 
 rents, and the houses are not kept in a proper 
 state of repair according to the covenants of the 
 lease, the Com-t will, at the instance of one of the 
 trustees, appoint a receiver of the rents, for the 
 purpose of enforcing the proper repair of the 
 houses. In re Fowler. Fowlek v. Odell 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 723 
 
 10. Second Set of Trustees — Persons en- 
 titled to possession of the Fund.] Property was 
 assigned to trustees on ti-ust for S. for life, and 
 after her death to such of her issue as she should 
 by will appoint ; the settlor and S. during their 
 joint lives, and the survivor, had a power of ap- 
 pointment of new trustees and discretion as to the 
 investments, and the settlor bad >■ power of revo- 
 cation, which however he did not exercise. S. by 
 her will appointed to B. and N. the property as 
 trustees for her son. After her death the settlor 
 appointed L. and N. trustees of the settlement, 
 and the property was transferred to them. The 
 son of S. died, and B. died. L. had allowed the 
 property to remain in the hands of K, who had 
 made away with it. — The persons beneficially en- 
 titled under the will of the son recovered judg- 
 ment for the property made away with against 
 the executor of the son on the ground of wilful 
 default. The executor brought an action against 
 L. for the property as halving been lost by his 
 wilful default in allowing it to remain in the 
 hands of N. : — Held, that S. had power to appoint 
 the property to trustees for her son; that as he 
 took the whole beneficial interest the trustees of 
 the settlement had no duties to perform except to 
 hand the property over to the surviving trustee 
 of the will ; that therefore N. was rightfully in 
 possession of the property, and L. was not liable 
 for having allowed it to remain in the hands of 
 N. — In re Pococh's Policy (Law Kep. 6 Ch. 445), 
 Ferrier v. Jay (Law Eep. 10 Eq. 550), and Bmk 
 
( 1601 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1602 ) 
 
 IV. TRTJSTEE— LIABILITIES— coniijwetZ. 
 
 V. Aldam (Law Kep. 19 Eq. 16), observed upon. — 
 Beld, that as the persons entitled under the will 
 of the son of S. had chosen to proceed and recover 
 against his executor, the executor could recover 
 again from the trustee of tlie settlement if he had 
 been guilty of wilful default. Sootney v. Lomek 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 536 
 [Affirmed on different grounds by the Court of 
 Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 380.] 
 
 V. TETTSTEE— POWEES. 
 
 27te Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41 (^Conveyancing Act, 
 1881) enacts — 
 
 Sect. 35. — (1.) Wliere a trust for sale orapower 
 of sale of property is vested in trustees, tliey may 
 sell or concur with any other person in selling all or 
 any part of the property, either subject to prior 
 charges or not and either together or in lots, hy 
 public auction or by private contract, subject to any 
 sueh conditions respecting title or evidence of title, 
 or other matter as the trustees think fit, with power 
 to vary any contract for sale, and to buy in at 
 any auction, or to rescind any contract for sale, 
 and to re-sell, without being answerable for any 
 loss. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in tlie instrument 
 creating the trust or power, and shall have effect 
 snbject to the terms of that instrument and to the 
 provisions therein contained. 
 
 (3.) This section applies to trusts created either 
 before or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 87.— (1.) An executor may pay or allow any 
 debt or claim on any evidence that he thinks suf- 
 
 (2.) An executor or two or more trustees acting 
 together, or a sole acting trustee where, by tlie instru- 
 ment, if any, creating the trust, a sole trustee is 
 authorized to execute the trusts and powers thereof, 
 may, if and as he or they think fit, accept any 
 composition, or any security real or personal for 
 any debt, or for any property, real or personal, 
 claimed, and may allow any time for payment of 
 any debt, and may compromise, compound, abandon, 
 submit to arbitration, or otherwise settle any debt, 
 account, claim, or thing whatever relating to the 
 testator's estate, or to the trust, and for any of 
 those purposes may enter into, give, execute,^ a,nd do 
 such agreements, instruments of composition or 
 arrangement, releases, and oilier things, as to him or 
 them seem expedient, without being responsible for 
 any loss occasioned by any act or thing so done by 
 him or them in yood faith, 
 
 (3.) As regards trustees, this section applies only 
 if and as far as a contrary intention is not ex- 
 pressed in the instrument, if any, creating the trust, 
 and shall have effect subject to the terms of that 
 instrument and to the provisions therein contained. 
 
 (4.) This section applies to executorships and 
 trusts constituted or created either before or after the 
 commencement of this Act. 
 
 Sect. 38.— (1.) Where a power or trust is given 
 to or vested in two or more executors or trustees 
 jointly, then, unless the contrary is expressed in the 
 instrument, if any, creating the power or trust, the 
 same may he exercised or performed^ hy the survivor 
 or survivors of them for the time being. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only to executorships 
 and trusts constituted after or created by instru- 
 
 V. TEirSTEE — POWEES — continued. 
 
 ments coming into operation after the commencement 
 
 of the ActH-aist Dec. 1881. 
 
 1. To appoint new Trustees — Exercise of 
 
 Power after Decree for Administration of Trusts.] 
 A decree for the administration of the trusts of a 
 will directed " that some proper person be ap- 
 pointed " a trustee of the will in the place of a 
 deceased trustee. The power of appointing new 
 trustees was given by the will to the surviving 
 trustee, who was the Defendant. The Plaintiff 
 took out a summons to have A. B. appointed 
 trustee, and the Defendant a summons to have 
 C. D. appointed. The summonses were adjourned 
 into Coui't, and Bacon, V.O., appointed the nominee 
 of the Plaintiff: — Held, on appeal, that the decree 
 did not take away from the Defendant the power 
 of appointing new trustees, though after decree 
 he could only exercise it subject to the super- 
 vision of the Court ; that if he nominated a fit 
 and proper person such person must be ap- 
 pointed, and the Court would not appoint some 
 one else on the ground that such other person 
 was in the opinion of the Court more eligible, 
 and that if he nominated a person whom the 
 Court did not approve the Court would not 
 itself make the choice, but would call on him 
 to make a fresh nomination : — Held, therefore, 
 that the appointment of A. B. must be dis- 
 charged. — Middleton v. Beay (7 Hare, 106) dis- 
 tinguished. In re Gabd. Eastwood v. Clabk 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 134 
 
 2. To appoint new Trustees — Power to 
 
 appoint one in place of two — 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, 
 s. 27.] The power of appointing new trustees- 
 given by sect. 27 of the Act 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, 
 authorizes a retiring trustee, one of two originally 
 appointed, to appoint a single trustee in place of 
 himself, the other original trustee having pre- 
 viously disclaimed without acting. West of 
 England and South Wales Distkict Bank v.. 
 MuROH - 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 3. To carry on Business -^ Advances — 
 
 Charge of Trustee — Bight of Creditor against 
 Trust Funds!] By a marriage settlement a luna- 
 tic asylum was assigned to trustees on trust at 
 the request of the husband and wife to sell and 
 stand possessed of the proceeds of the sale for 
 the benefit of the wife and children ; but the 
 trustees were to allow the husband to carry on 
 the business of the asylum without paying any 
 rent, but paying certain premiums and other 
 moneys. The husband became bankrupt, and 
 thereupon the surviving trustee of the settlement, 
 entered into possession of the asylum and carried 
 on the business until the asylum was sold for a. 
 large sum of money. A tradesman had supplied. 
 the trustee with goods for the use of the asylum,, 
 and brought an action claiming payment out of 
 the trust funds of the settlement : — Held, that, 
 whether the trustee would or not have been 
 entitled to be indemnified for moneys advanced, 
 by him for the purposes of the asylum, the trades- 
 man had no right to recover his debt out of the 
 trust funds, no special part of the estate having 
 
 been appropriated for carrying on the asylum. 
 
 Ex parte Garland (10 Ves. 110) considered. 
 Stkiokland v. Symons 22 Ch. D. 666 • 
 
 [26 Ch. D, 245 
 8 E 
 
( 1603 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1604 ) 
 
 V. TRUSTEE— POWEBS—coniinued. 
 
 4' To manage Estate— SpecioZ Power of 
 
 leasing Mansion-house — Discretion of Trustees.^ 
 A testator gave to his trustees a special power of 
 leasing at their absolute discretion ; which formed 
 part of a spebial scheme of management of his 
 mansion-house and estate for a limited period : — 
 Held, in a suit for the execution of the trusts of 
 the will that the Court would compel the trustees 
 to exercise the power of leasing. Tempest v. 
 LoKU Camots - 21 Ch. D. 576, u. 
 
 6. To purohase Eeal Estate — Power of 
 
 mortgaging — Jurisdiction of Court to interfere 
 with Discretion of Trustees.'] Where absolute 
 discretion has been given to trustees as to the 
 exercise of a power the Court will not compel 
 them to exercise it, but if they propose to exercise 
 it, the Court will see that they do not exercise it 
 improperly or unreasonably.— Where the power is 
 coupled with a trust or duty the Court will en- 
 force the proper and timely exercise of the power, 
 but will not interfere with the discretion of the 
 trustees as to the particular time or manner of 
 their bona fide exercise of it. — A testator gave 
 his trustees a power to be exercised at their abso- 
 lute discretion of selling real estates, witli a de- 
 claration that the proceeds should be applied, at 
 the like discretion, in the purohase of other real 
 .estates. He also gave them power at their abso- 
 ;,lute discretion to raise money by mortgage for 
 the purchase of real estates. A suit having been 
 instituted for the execution of the trusts of the 
 will, and a sum of money, the proceeds of the 
 .sale of real estate, having been paid into Court, 
 one of the trustees proposed to purchase a large 
 
 • estate and to apply the fund in Court in part 
 payment of the purchase-money, and to raise the 
 remainder of the purchase-money by mortgage of 
 the purchased estate. The other trustee refused 
 to concur in tlie purchase : — Held ( afl&rming the 
 
 . decree of Chitty, J.), that the Court could not 
 control the dissentient trustee in the exercise of 
 his discretion in refusing to make the purchase, 
 
 • or in refusing to exercise his power of raising 
 money by mortgage for the proposed purpose. 
 Tempest v. Lobd Camoys 21 Ch. B. 571 
 
 6. To sell Eeal Estate — Power to post- 
 pone Sale — Discretion of Trustees."] Where real 
 estate is devised to trustees in trust for sale, with 
 rft discretionary power to postpone the sale, the 
 Court will not interfere with a bona fide exercise 
 ■■of their discretion as to the time and mode of sale. 
 In re Biake. Jones v. Blake 29 Ch. D. 913 
 
 TI. TRUSTEE— RETIREMEHT. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. v. 41 (^Conveyancing Act, 
 1881) enacts— 
 
 Sect. 32. — (1.) Where there are more than two 
 trustees, if one of them declares tlmt he is desirous 
 of being discharged from the trust, and if his co- 
 trustees and such other person, if any, as is em- 
 powered to appoint trustees, hy deed consent to the 
 discharge of the trustee, and to the vesting in the 
 co-trustees alone of the trust property, then the 
 trustee desirous of heing discharged shall be deemed 
 to have retired from the trust, and shall, by the. deed, 
 be discharged therefrom under this Acl, without any 
 new trustee being appointed in his place. 
 
 (2.) Any assurance or thing requisite for vesting 
 
 VI. TRUSTEE— RETIREMENT— ooni&ued. 
 
 the trust property in the continuing trustees alone 
 
 sliall be executed or done. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the instrur- 
 ment, if any, creating the trust, and shall have 
 effect subject to the terms of that instrument and to 
 any provisions therein contained. 
 
 (4.) This section applies to trusts created either 
 before or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 Vesting of Trust Property.] Sect. 34. — (2.) Where 
 a deed by which a retiring trustee is discharged 
 under this Act contains such a declaration as is in 
 this section mentioned (see sect. 34. (1)) 6y the re- 
 tiring and continuing trustees, and by the other 
 person, if any, empowered to appoint trustees, that 
 declaration shall, without any conveyance or assign- 
 ment operate, to vest in the continuing trustees alone 
 as joint tenants, and for the purposes of the trust, 
 the estate, interest, or right to which the declaration 
 relates. 
 
 Sub-sects. 3, 4 and 5 apply to the retirement of 
 a trustee as well as to the appointment of a new 
 trustee. 
 
 [See Trustee — ^ApporuTMENT — Statutes.] 
 
 TRUSTEE — Admission to copyholds — ^Escheat 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 298 
 
 See Copyhold — Suheendeb — Admit- 
 
 T.ABrCE. 3. 
 
 Adopting Conveyancing Act, 1881 — ^Pro- 
 tection of. 
 See CoNVEYAiioiNa Aot, 1881 — Statutes. 
 
 Appointment of — Settled Land Act. 
 
 See Settled Land Act— Statutes. 
 And Cases under Settled Laud Act — 
 Trustees. 1 — 4. 
 
 Appointment of — Trustee Act. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Acts — ^New 
 Trustees. 
 
 Bankruptcy — Petitioning creditor — Joining 
 
 equitable owner of debt 14 Q. B. D. 184 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankkdptcy Peti- 
 tion. 6. 
 
 Bare trustee — Vendor and Purchaser Act 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 693 
 See Vendor and Pubohaser — Convey- 
 ance. 3. 
 
 Costs of— Appeal - 20 Ch. D. 803 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. S. 496 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — ^Ap- 
 peal. 25, 26. 
 
 Costs of— Appeal - - 19Ch.D.888 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Void Settlement. 1. 
 
 Costs of — Appeal — Setting aside settlement 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 278 
 See Voluntary Conveyance. 5. 
 
 Costs of — Solicitor trustee of will 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 72 ; 27 Ch. D, 684 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 15, 16. 
 
 Costs of— Trustee Belief Act 21 Ch. D. 866 
 
 See Trustee Relief Act. 2. 
 
 Creditor's deed — Liability to account — 
 
 Bankruptcy 14 Q. B. D. 25 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 3. 
 
 Defaulting— Debtors' Aot - 20 Ch. D. 532 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — At- 
 tachment. 1. 
 
( 1605 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1606 ) 
 
 TRVSTEE— continued. 
 
 Devolution of trust estiite. 
 
 See Will — Tbust Estates- 
 
 -Statutes. 
 
 . Disclaimer by. 
 
 See PowEE — ExTiNOTios — Statutes. 
 
 Discretion — Maintenance of infant 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 921 
 
 Bee Infant — Maintenance. 7. 
 
 Discretion— Power of sale 29 Ch. D. 913 
 
 See Pkactioe — Stjpkeme Coubt — -Oham- 
 
 BEBS. 10. 
 
 Discretion of— Sale of estate 16 Ch, D. 161 
 
 See Infant — Propebtt. 2. 
 
 Duty of — Appointment of solicitor 
 
 See Will— Trustees. 3. [19 Ch. D. 518 
 
 Estate of - - 21 Ch. D. 790 
 
 See Will — Teustees. 1. 
 
 Liability of— Severance of trust funds — 
 
 Investment 6 App. Cas. 855 
 
 See Scotch Law — Tbustee. 
 
 Mortgage in name of — Consolidation 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 117 
 See MoBTGAGE — Consolidation. 1. 
 
 Mortgage to— Priority - 28 Ch. D. 674 
 
 Bee MoBTGAGE — -PEiOBiTr. 13. 
 
 Negligence — Inquiry for title deeds 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 221 
 
 See MoBTGAGE — ^Peiobitt. 8. 
 
 New trustees — Appointment under Trustee 
 
 Acts. 
 
 Bee Cases under 
 
 Trustee Acts — New Tecstees. 
 
 Trustee Acts— Vesting Oeders. 
 
 New trustees — Appointment — Settlement in 
 
 Divorce Court - - 9 P. D. 60 
 
 Bee Practice — Divorce — Settlements. 
 7. 
 
 New trustees — Appointment — Power in 
 
 settlement. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Powers. 
 8—13. 
 
 Notice to one trustee - 22 Ch. D. 640 
 
 6'ee Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 13. 
 
 Notice to — Sale imder Settled Land Act 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 752 
 Bee Settled Land Act — Tenant foe 
 Life. 3. 
 
 ■ Permanent repairs — Expense of 21 Ch. D. 228 
 
 ;Sfee Lands Clauses Act — Pubchase- 
 
 MONET. 7. 
 
 Power of sale — Lands Clauses Act 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 100 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Pubchase- 
 
 MONEY. 3. 
 
 Power of sale — Settled Land Act. 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 595 
 See Settled Land Act — Trustees. 7. 
 
 Powers in settlement. 
 
 See Cases under Settlement — Powers. 
 Beceiver under Court— Statute of Limita- 
 tions 18 Ch. D. 296 
 See Limitations, Statute op — Per- 
 sonal Actions. 11. 
 
 9 App. Cas. 371 
 
 • Cape of Good 
 
 TEtrSTEE — continued. 
 
 Removal of 
 
 See Colonial Law - 
 Hope. 2. 
 
 Representation of cestui que trust 
 
 [6 App, Cas. 698 
 See Mortgage — Consolidation. 2. 
 
 Reputed ownership — Rigbt to follow money 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 264 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 7. 
 
 Right to follow moneys-Principal and agent 
 
 [7 Q. B, D, 374 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 5. 
 
 Sale by — Depreciatory conditions of sale 
 
 [28 Ch, D. 586 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Condi- 
 tions op Sale. 1. 
 
 Sale by, under Lands Clauses Act 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 146, 429 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 8. 
 
 Settled Estates Act— Petition 24 Ch. D. 238 
 
 See Settled Estates Act. 4. 
 
 Shareholders — Lien of company on shares 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 302 
 
 Bee Company — Member's Liability. 3. 
 Wilful default - - 29 Ch. D. 536 
 
 See Power — ^Execution. 2. 
 
 TEUSTEE IN BANKETJPTCY. 
 
 Bee Cases under Bankruptcy — Trustee. 
 
 Bankruptcy Act, 1883. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Bankruptcy Act, 
 1883— Statutes. 
 
 Continuance of action 28 Ch. D. 53 
 
 Bee Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Change of Parties. 2. 
 
 Costs and charges of - 22' Ch. D. 436 ; 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 266 
 See Bankbui'toy — Annulment. 1, 3. 
 
 Costs of — Appearance in action 20 Ch. D. 780 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Peoop. 7. 
 
 Custody of title deeds — Wife's estate 
 
 See Title Deeds. [26 Ch, D, 31 
 
 Disclaimer. 
 
 See Cases under Bankbuptcy — Dis- 
 claimer. 
 
 Estate of — ^Notice of assignment of chose in 
 
 action - 18 Ch. D, 381 
 
 Bee Bankbuptcy — Assets. 15. 
 
 Improper conduct — Costs - 20 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Costs. 1. 
 
 Liability for costs 6 App, Cas. 482 
 
 See Pkactice — Privy Council — Jueis- 
 
 DICTION. 
 
 New trustee — Refusal to prosecute appeal 
 
 „ ^ [16Ch, D, 110 
 
 See Bankbuptcy — Appeal. 2. 
 
 Relation back of title. 
 
 Bee Cases under Bankbuptcy — ^Assets. 
 6 — 11. 
 
 Right to proceeds of sale— Bailment 
 
 Bee Bailment. [ig ch, D, 86 
 
 3 F 2 
 
( 1607 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 C 1608 ) 
 
 TETTSTEE IN 'BA'SKRTITICY— continued. 
 
 Security for costs — Official name 
 
 [28 Ch. D, 38 
 See Pkactioe — Supreme Court — Seod- 
 EiTY FOK Costs. 8. 
 
 Vesting of property — Pension of retired 
 
 Judge 21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Bankbuptct — -Assets, 13. 
 
 TRUSTEE IN LIQUIDATION— Appointment 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 353 
 
 See Bankeuptov — Liquidation, i. 
 
 Exercise of power of appointment 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1005 
 
 See Bankhuptcy— Trustee. 11. 
 Eemoval of - - 14 ft. B. D. 177 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Trustee. 8. 
 Shareholder in company 28 Ch. D. 363 
 
 See Company — Shares — Transfer. 5. 
 
 TRUSTEE ACTS :— 
 
 I. New Trustees 
 II. Vesting Orders 
 
 Col. 
 1607 
 1608 
 
 I. TRUSTEE ACTS— NEW TRUSTEES. 
 
 1. Deceased Lunatic — Appointment of New 
 
 Trustee after Death of Lunatic — Trustee Extension 
 Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 55), s. Q— Affidavit- 
 Description of Deponent as a " Genfleman,."2 The 
 Court sitting in lunacy, has power under the 
 9th section of the Trustee Extension Act, 1852, 
 to appoiut new trustees of the will of a deceased 
 lunatic, where the trustees appointed by the 
 lunatic have died in his lifetime, for the purpose 
 of getting rid of the funds standing in Court to 
 the credit of the lunacy. — It is not sufficient to 
 describe a person making an affidavit of the 
 fitness of a new trustee merely as a " gentleman." 
 In re Obde 24 Ch. D. 271 
 
 2. "Incapable to act" — Personal Inca- 
 pacity — Appointment of new Trustee — "Expe- 
 dient "—Trustee Act, 1850, s. 32.] The Court has 
 jurisdiction, under sect. 32 of the Trustee Act, 
 1850, to appoint a new trustee in the place of a 
 trustee who has become incapable — as, for in- 
 stance, through age and infii-mity — of acting in 
 the trusts. — A will contained a power for the 
 trustees or the survivors of them to appoint a new 
 trustee in the place of any trustee who should 
 be "incapable to act." One of the surviving 
 trustees, the testator's widow, having become, 
 through age and infirmity, incapable of acting in 
 the trusts, or of concurring in the appointment 
 of a new trustee, or in a transfer of the trust 
 estate: — The Court appjinted a new trustee in 
 her place and made a vesting order. In re 
 Lemann's Teusts - 22 Ch. D. 633 
 
 3. No Trustee appointed by 'WiHl— Inter- 
 pretation Clause — Appointment of Trustee to per- 
 form Duties incident to Office of Executor.'] Where 
 a testator had, by his will, left all his property to 
 his wife for life, and appointed her his sole exe- 
 cutrix, and had also left legacies of considerable 
 amount to be paid after her death, but had not 
 constituted any persons trustees thereof: — Held, 
 upon petition intituled in an administration action 
 commenced for the purpose and in the Trustee 
 Act, 1850, that upon the retirement of the widow 
 the Court had jurisdiction under the Trustee Act, 
 
 I. TRUSTEE ACTS— NEW TRUSTEES— eowtii. 
 1850, to appoint in her place a trustee or trustees 
 to perform the duties incident to the office of an 
 executor. In re Moore. McAlpine v. Moore 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 778 
 
 4. Reappointment of existing Trustees 
 
 in the place of existing Trustees and a Lunatie 
 Trustee— Trustee Act, 1850, s. 32.] Where one of 
 several trustees is of unsound mind, the Court 
 will not reappoint the other trustees as trustees- 
 in the place of themselves and the lunatic trustee, 
 for the purpose of excluding the lunatic trustee- 
 from the tnist; but a new trustee must be- 
 appointed in his place. — In re Harford's Trusts 
 (13 Ch. D. 135) not foUowed. In re Aston 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 2L7 
 
 5. Re-appointment of existing Trustees a/r 
 
 sole Trustees in place of themselves and a bankrupt 
 and absconding Trustee — Trustee Act, 1850(13 <fe 1-1- 
 Vict. c. 60, ss. 32, 34.] It is the settled practice of 
 tlie Court under the Trustee Acts, when there is a 
 continuing trust, not simply to remove or discharge- 
 a trustee, without appointing a new trustee in his 
 place, by appointing the remaining trustees to be 
 sole trustees in place of themselves and him. And, 
 though the Court will deviate from this rule and 
 make such an appointment if the trustees have no 
 duty to perform but to distribute a fund which is 
 immediately divisible, it will adhere to the ordi- 
 nary rule if there is a continuing trust as regards 
 even a relatively small part of the trust fund. In 
 re Lame's Trusts - 28 Ch, D. 77 
 
 6. Separate Trustees of distinct Part of 
 
 Trust Property — Conveyancing Act, 1882 (45 & 46- 
 Vict. c. 39), s. 5.] Appointment made of new 
 trustees to act in conjunction with a sole contin a- 
 ing trustee of a will in relation to a distinct part 
 of the trust property. In re Paine's Trusts 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 7Z5 
 
 II. TRUSTEE ACTS— VESTING ORDERS. 
 
 1. Amending Order — Death of Sole 
 
 Trustee intestate — Vesting Order — Conveyancing 
 and Law of Property Act, 1881, s. 30.] Upon 
 the death of a sole surviving trustee intestate, 
 the Court made an order for the appointment of 
 new trustees, and ordered certain lands forming 
 part of the estate to vest in the new trustees " for 
 the estate therein now vested in the heir-at-law of 
 the deceased trustee." After the order had been 
 passed and entered administration was taken out 
 to the estate of the deceased trustee. Upott 
 motion that the order of the Court might be- 
 altered by substituting the legal personal repre- 
 sentative for the heir-at-law of the intestate 
 trustee in accordance with sect. 30 of the Con- 
 veyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, the- 
 Court made a new order, that notwithstanding 
 the previous order, the land should vest in fhe- 
 new trustees " for all the estate therein now 
 vested in the legal personal representative" of 
 the deceased trustee. In re Filling's Trusts 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 432 
 
 2. Chambers, Business ia.— Appointment of 
 
 new Trustees — Petition — Vesting Order in Cham- 
 bers — Transfer of Stock — Jurisdiction — Trustee 
 Act, 1850, ss. 2, 32, 35, iO— Trustee Extension Act, 
 1852, 6. 6 — Master in Chancery Abolition Act, 
 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 80), ss. 11, 26, 27— Despatch 
 
( 1609 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1610 ) 
 
 U. TRUSTEE ACTS— VESTING ORDERS— cojiM. 
 ■of Business Act, 1855 (18 * 19 Vict. c. 134), s, 16— 
 Cons. Ord. xxxv.,r. 1 — Judicature Act, 1873, s. 16 
 — Bules of Supreme Court, 1883, Order Lr., r. 2 
 (S), (18) — Statute Law Mevision and Civil Pro- 
 cedure Act, 1883, s. 5.] On a petition for the 
 appointment of new- trustees and a vesting order, 
 an order was made in Court on the 28tli of June, 
 1684, that two or more proper persons should be 
 ■appointed trustees, and that an inquiry should be 
 made of what the trust funds consisted : and the 
 parties were to be at liberty to apply in Chambers 
 for an orcler to vest the trust property in the new 
 trustees when appointed. On the 22nd of July, 
 ibefore any certificate as to the trust funds had 
 been made, an order was made in Chambers 
 appointing new trustees, and directing that the 
 ffight to call for a transfer of, and to transfer into 
 their own names, certain sums of stock specified 
 an the order "may" vest in the new trustees. 
 This order mentioned, but did not recite, the order 
 of the 28th of June. The Bank of England re- 
 fused to act on it, and Bacon, V.C, on the 28th 
 ■of November, made an order directing them to do 
 .so. The bank appealed : — ffeld, that, the matter 
 ihaving been properly brought before the Court on 
 petition, the Judge had power under the provi- 
 sions of the Masters Abolition Act, 1852 (15 & 1 6 
 Vict. c. 80), to dispose in Chambers of such parts 
 of the matters brought before him on the petition 
 as he thought could be more conveniently disposed 
 of in Chambers than in Court, and that there was 
 therefore jurisdiction to make tlie order of the 
 22iid of July. — Frodsham v. Frodsham (15 Ch. D. 
 317) distinguished. — But held, that the order was 
 so irregular in form that the bank were justified 
 in declining to act upon it, they being entitled to 
 require a vesting order to be in such a form as to 
 shew th&t the statutory requirements have been 
 satisfied. — Statement of the recitals which ought 
 to be contained in a vesting order made in 
 Ohambers under the Trustee Act. In re Tweedy 
 
 [88 Ch. D. 529 
 
 3. • Coparceners — " Seised jointly " — Trus- 
 tee Act, 1850 (13 & 14 Vict. c. 60), ». 10.] 
 The words "seised jointly" in sect. 10 of the 
 Ti-ustee Act, 1850, are not limited strictly to a 
 legal joint tenancy, but are used in the widest 
 sense, and they include the case of land vested 
 in coparceners, one of whom is out of the juris- 
 diction of the Court. — In re Tempter's Trusts (4 
 N. E. 494) and McMurray v. Spicer (Law Eep. 
 5 Eq. 527) considered. In re GkeenWoou's 
 Tbusts • - a7Cli.D.359 
 
 4. Copyholds — Dying without an Heir — 
 
 Petition hy Person absolutely entitled — Trustee 
 Aft, 1850 (13 & 14 Vict. c. 60), so. 15, 28.] The 
 sole trustee of copyholds held in trust for A. B. 
 absolutely having died intestate and without an 
 ieir, A. B. presented a petition under the Trustee 
 Act, 1850, asking that the property might be 
 vested in himself: — Beld, that the Court had 
 jurisdiction to make the order under the com- 
 bined operation of sects. 15 and 28 of the Act. 
 In re Godfrey's Trusts 23 Ch. D. 205 
 
 5. Isiiaat— Stock in Name of Infant and 
 
 another to which Infant was entitled— Trustee Ex- 
 iension Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Viet. c. 55), s. 3.] 
 Where stock to which an infant was beneficially 
 
 II. TEirSTEE ACTS— VESTING ORDERS— oonW. 
 entitled had been invested in the joint names of 
 himself and another person : — Seld, that the 
 Court had jurisdiction under the 3rd section of 
 the Trustee Extension Act, 1852, to make an 
 order vesting in such other person the right to 
 transfer such stock. In re Harwood 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 536 
 
 6. Lunatic Trustee— 13 & 14 Vict. e. 60, 
 
 s. 3.] A trustee of property held in trust for 
 A. B. absolutely having become lunatic, A. B. 
 presented a petition asking that the property 
 might be vested in himself: — Held, that such 
 an order ought not to be made, but that a new 
 trustee ought to be appointed and the property 
 vested in him. In re Holland. In re Howarth's 
 Trusts 16 Ch. D. 672 
 
 7. Lunatic Trustee — 13 * 14 Vict. c. 60, 
 
 s. 5.] When one of several trustees of stock 
 becomes lunatic or of unsound mind, the Court, 
 although it may have jurisdiction under sect. 5 of 
 the Trustee Act, 1850, to make an order vesting 
 the right to transfer the stock solely in the co- 
 trustees, will not do so, but a new trustee in the 
 place of the lunatic must be appointed before a 
 vesting order will be made. In re Nash 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 503 
 
 8. lunatic Trustee — Trustee Act, 1850, 
 
 6. 5 — Order vesting Right to Stoch in the other 
 Trustees.'] One of three trustees of a sum of 
 stock had been found lunatic. The fund having 
 become divisible, a petition intituled both in 
 Lunacy and in Chancery was presented for the 
 appointment of a new trustee and a vesting 
 order: — Held, that the appointment of a new 
 trustee was unnecessary, and that the petition 
 ought to be intituled in Lunacy only. Order 
 made vesting the right to call for a transfer of 
 and to transfer the stock in the two trustees who 
 were not under disability. — In re Nash (16 Ch. D. 
 503) not iollowed. In re Watson 19 Ch. D. 384 
 
 9. Lunatic Trustee — Order vesting Bight 
 
 to deal with the Trust Fund in the Trustees of 
 Sound Mind.] Although, where one of the 
 trustees of a trust fund becomes lunatic, the Court 
 will not in general vest the right to deal with 
 the trust funds in the trustees of sound mind, 
 but will require a new trustee to be appointed in 
 the place of the lunatic, an order vesting the 
 right to the fund in the trustees of sound mind 
 will be made where the fund is immediately 
 divisible. In re Maktyn, a Lunatic. In re 
 Toutt's Will - 26 Ch. D. 745 
 
 10. Partition Action — Sale — Parties not 
 
 under Disability — Appointing Person to convey — 
 Partition Acts, 1868 and 1876 — Trustee Extension 
 Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. u. 55), s. 1.] Sect. 1 of 
 the Trustee Extension Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict, 
 c. 55), applies to sales under the Partition Acts, 
 1868 and 1876, and is not limited to cases of 
 persons under disability. Beckett v. Sutton 
 
 [19 Ch, D. 646 
 
 11. Stock standing in the Name of Tes- 
 tator — One of several Executors a Lunatic — 
 Trustee Act, 1850, s. 5.] Where one of three exe- 
 cutors of the surviving executor of a testator was 
 of unsound mind an order was made under the 
 6tli section of the Trustee Act, 1850, giving the 
 
( 1611 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1612 ) 
 
 II. TEUSTEE ACTS— VESTING ORDERS— conW. 
 
 right to tiunsfer a sum of stock belonging to the 
 estate of the original testator, although the stock 
 still remained standing in the nai. e of the ori- 
 ginal testator. In re Waoher iiZ Ch. D. 636 
 
 12. Trustees of Stock refusins; to transfer 
 
 —•'Sole" Trustee— Trustee Act, 1860, ss. 2, 23.] 
 Having regard to the interpretation clause (sect. 2) 
 of the Trustee Act, 1850, the expression " sole 
 trustee" in the Act includes all trustees who are 
 jointly entitled. Consequently, where two trustees 
 of stock refused to transfer it to two new trustees 
 duly appointed under a power : — Held, that the 
 Court had jurisdiction under the 23rd section to 
 make an order vesting the stock in the new 
 trustees. In re Hyatt's Teusts 21 Ch. D. 846 
 TETJSTEE ACTS— Costs 26 Ch. D. 82 
 
 See Trustee — Costs and Chaeges. 8. 
 
 TRUSTEE RELIEF ACT. 
 
 1. Adjournment into Chamhers — Payment 
 
 out of Court — Jurisdiction — Trustee Relief Act, 
 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 96), s. i—MasUrs Aboli- 
 tion Act, 1852 (15 * 16 Vict. c. 80), ss. 26, 27— 
 .Despatch of Business Act, 1855 (18 & 19 Vict, 
 c. 134), ». 16— Cons. Ord. xxxr., r. 1.] A trust 
 fund having been paid into Court under the 
 Trustee Relief Act by the trustee of a will, a 
 petition was presented by parties interested for 
 an inquiry as to the persons entitled and for pay- 
 ment out to the persons found entitled under 
 that inquiry. Upon the petition coming on for 
 hearing an order was made directing the inquiry, 
 and adjourning the further hearing of the peti- 
 tion into Chambers : — Held, that the proceeding 
 having been properly commenced by petition 
 under sect. 2 of the Trustee Belief Act, the 
 Court had jurisdiction, under sect. 27 of the 
 Masters Abolition Act, 1852 (15 & 16 Vict. c. 80), 
 to adjourn the petition into Chambers. — Frodsham 
 v. Frodsham (15 Ch. D. 317) distinguished. In 
 re Moate's Tedst - 22 Ch. D. 635 
 
 2. Costs of Trustee — Payment out of 
 
 Court— 10 & 11 Vict. c. 96— Tender of 42e.— 
 Costs of Appearance — Mules of Court, 1875 (^Costs'), 
 Sphed. r. 17.] Trustees who are Respondents to 
 a petition under the Trustee Relief Act for pay- 
 ment of a fund out of Court, and have been 
 tendered and have accepted 42s. for their costs 
 under Rules of Court, 1875 (Costs) Sched. rule 17, 
 are not, as a general rule, entitled to their costs 
 of appearance on the petition. In re Sl'tton 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 856 
 
 3. Lunacy — Payment out of Court — 
 
 Jurisdiction.'] Where a person who has been 
 found lunatic is entitled to a fund which has been 
 paid into Court under the Trustee Relief Act, a 
 
 TRUSTEE RELIEF AC1— continued. 
 petition may be presented in Chancery under the 
 Trustee Belief Act and in Lunacy, and the 
 Court has jurisdiction to make an immediate 
 order for the transfer of the fund to the account 
 of the lunatic. In re Tate - 20 Ch. D. 135 
 
 4. Petition for advice of Court — Costs of 
 
 Protecting Estate — Costs of Tenant for Life per- 
 mitted to be paid out of Proceeds of Sale of Part 
 of the Estate— Trustee Belief Act (22 <fe 23 Vict, 
 c. 35), s. 30.] Where proceedings have been in- 
 stituted (though without the preliminary sanction 
 of the Court), whether by claim in an action, or 
 by defence to an action, for the protection of a 
 settled estate, the Court will, if it sees fit, give 
 permission to the trustees to apply the proceeds 
 of the sale of a portion of the estate in defray- 
 ing the costs already incurred, and which must 
 necessarily be incurred, by the tenant for life, in 
 instituting such proceedings. Ex parte Eael 
 De la Waee's Estate - 16 Ch. D. 587 
 
 5. Petition for advice of Court — Costs of 
 
 protecting Estate — I'rustees — 22 tic 23 Vict. c. 35, 
 s. 30.] On a petition presented by trustees of 
 settled estate for the advice of the Court, the 
 Court permitted them to apply certain funds not 
 exceeding £3000 in payment of the costs of liti- 
 gation for the protection of the estate. In re 
 LoED RivEEs' Estate - 16 Ch. D. 888, n. 
 
 TUNIS— Order in Council 
 
 See JuEiSDiOTiON — Gazette. 
 
 TURNPIKE ACTS. 
 
 The Act 45 & 46 Vict. u. 52, «. 8, contirmes the 
 liaMlity of any individual or corporation to repair, 
 &c., a turnpike road, notwithstanding the expira- 
 tion of the trust, where such lidbilittj was created 
 hy any contract or obligation not expressly mads 
 determinable on the happening of that event. 
 
 The Act 4 (J; 5 Vict. c. 59, which makes highway 
 rates applicable in certain case.s to the repair of 
 turnpike roads, is continued by the Act 48 & 4^ 
 Vict. c. 59, until the 31st of December, 1886. 
 
 The 48 & 49 Vid. c. 37 {the Annual Turnpike 
 Acts Continuance Act, 1885), continues certain 
 Turnpike Acts, and repeals others. 
 
 TURNPIKE BONDS— Real security SO Ch. D. 22T 
 See Will — Words. 17. 
 
 TURNPIKE DEBENTURES — Law of Upper 
 Canada - 7 App. Cas. 473 
 
 See Colonial Law— Canada — Quebec. 
 10. 
 
 TURNPIKE ROAD — Repair of — Distumpiked 
 road. 
 See Cases under HiGHW.^y — Repaie. 1 — 7^ 
 
( J(U3 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1«H ) 
 
 ULTRA VIEES ACT— Acquiescence 26 Ch. D. 107 
 See Company — Memobakdum and Arti- 
 cles. 3. 
 
 Alteration of memorandum of association 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 376 
 See Company — Memorandum and Arti- 
 cles. 1. 
 
 Application of funds of company 
 
 ■ [24 Ch. D. 611 
 See Company — Dieector's Acthokity. 
 1. 
 
 Building society — Bond of corroboration 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 119 
 See Scotch Law — Building Society. 
 
 Building society — Borrowing powers. 
 
 See Cases under Bdildlng Society. 5 — 
 10. 
 
 Call-J-Forfeiture - - 16 Ch. D. 681 
 
 ■ See Company — Director's Atjthobity. 
 3. 
 Canadian law — Powers of provincial Legis- 
 lature - 10 App. Cas, 141 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 4. 
 
 ConTeyance of superfluous lands 
 
 [20 Ch. S. 418, 562 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Supeefluous 
 Lands. 1, 2. 
 
 Corporation - 10 App. Cas. 354 
 
 See Cobpoeation. 2. 
 
 Issue of shares at a discount — ^Keduction of 
 
 capital - - 23 Ch. D. 545, n. 
 
 See Company — Shares — Issue. 1. 
 
 - — Local board - - - 27 Ch. D. 665 
 
 See Local Government — Local Au- 
 thority. 14. 
 
 ■ Mortgage by directors 17 Ch. D. 715 
 
 See Company — Dieector's Authority. 
 2. 
 
 Public injury - - 21 Ch. D. 752 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 1. 
 
 Purchase of shares by company 17 Ch. D. 76 
 
 See Company — Keduction op Capital. 1. 
 
 ■ Sale and hire of rolling stock 21 Ch. D. 309 
 
 See Kail way Company— Constitution. 
 
 UHPIBE— Appointment of. 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Statutes. 
 TIKCKBTAINTY — ^Limitation of heirlooms 
 
 See Will— Heirloom 4. [23 Ch. D. 158 
 WUl— Gift over of such part of legacy as had 
 
 not been paid 18 Ch. D. 218 
 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 2. 
 UNCLAIMED DIVIDENDS. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Statutes. 
 UNDEEGROUND WATEE— Pollution 
 
 See Water. 3.' [29 Ch. D. 115 
 
 TTNDEELEASE-Administrator— Power to grant 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 236 
 
 See Administeatoe — Powers. 1. 
 
 Covenants of lease 30 Ch. D. 404 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 3. 
 
 ITWDEETAKING- As to damages 21 Ch. D. 421 ; 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 474 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — In- 
 junction. 8, 9. 
 
 As to damages — Keoeiver in bankruptcy 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 644 
 See Bankruptcy — Eeceiver. 1. 
 
 As to user of trade-mark 28 Ch. D. 666 
 
 See Tbade-mauk — Registration. 9. 
 UNDERTAKING OF COMPANY— Railway com- 
 
 l)auy — Eeceiver - - 18 Ch. D. 155 
 
 See Railway Company — Abandonment. 
 1. 
 UNDEEPINNING BUILDINGS • 29 Ch. D. 60 
 
 See Railway Company — Liabilities. 3. 
 UNDEEVALUE— Sale by mortgagee 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 220 
 
 See Mortgage— Powers. 5. 
 UNDEEWOOD— Waste of manor— Rightof tenants 
 
 See Inolosuee. 3. [20 Ch. D. 380 
 
 UNDEEWEITEE— Total loss— Sale of wreck 
 
 See Ship— Master. 1. [16 Ch. D. 474 
 UNDISCHARGED BANKRUPT. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Undis- 
 charged Bankrupt. 
 
 UNDISCLOSED PRINCIPAL 29 Ch. D. 795 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 635 
 
 See Principal and Agent — ^ Agent's 
 Liability. 1, 6. 
 - 9 Q. B. D. 530 ; 8 App. Cas. 874 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Principal's 
 Liability. 6. 
 
 UNDUE INFLUENCE. 
 
 Father and Child — ■ Deed executed hy 
 
 Child in favour of Father — Onus Prohandi — Pur- 
 chaser for Value without Notice.'] When a deed ' 
 conferring a benefit on a father is executed by a 
 child who is not emancipated from the father's 
 control, if the deed is subsequently impeached by 
 the child, the onus is on the father to shew that 
 the child had independent advice, and that he 
 executed the deed with full knowledge of its con- 
 tents, and with a free intention of gfviug the 
 fatlier the benefit conferred by it. If this onus be 
 not discharged the deed will be set aside. — This 
 onus extends to a volunteer claiming through the 
 father, and to any person taking with notice of 
 the circumstances which raise the equity, but not 
 further. — If a solicitor purports to act in the 
 transaction on behalf of tlie child, a purchaser for 
 value is entitled to assume that he has given the 
 child proper advice even though he be also acting 
 as the father's solicitor. — Tliere is no absolute 
 rule that in such a transaction the father and the 
 
( 1615 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1616 ) 
 
 UNDUE 1J!-FLVESC:E— continued. 
 
 child must be advised by different solicitors. 
 
 Bainbrigge v. Browne - 18 Ch. D. 188 
 
 Gift by infant - 19 Ch. D. 603 
 
 See Infant— Acts. 
 
 UNFINISHED ARTICLE— Sale of— Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 588 
 See Scotch Law — Sale of Goods. 2. 
 
 UNITY OF PERSON— Gift to husband and wife 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 166 
 See Will — Joint Tenancy. 
 
 UNITY OF POSSESSION— Prescription 
 
 See Watercourse. 5. [17 Ch. D. 391 
 
 Eight of way — " Occupied and enioyed " 
 
 See Way. 2. [26 Ch. D. 434 
 
 UNLIQUIDATED DAMAGES — Proof in bank- 
 ruptcy 17 Ch. D. 122 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 22. 
 
 "UNMAERIED"— Construction of will 16 Ch. D. 
 [715; 26Ch. D. 675 
 See Will— Words. 18, 19. 
 
 " Sole and unmarried " - 24 Ch. D. 703 
 
 See Will — Separate Use. 1 
 
 UNQUALIFIED PERSON— Acting as solicitor- 
 Penalty. 
 
 See Cases under Solicitor — Unquali- 
 fied. 
 
 . Medical practitioner 29 Ch. D. 596 
 
 See Medical Practitioner. 
 
 UNREGISTERED BILL OF SALE 16 Ch. D. 668 
 See Bill or Sale — Apparent Posses- 
 sion. 2. 
 
 See Cases under Bill of Sale — Regis- 
 tration. 
 
 Administration of estate of deceased person 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 217 
 See Executor — Actions. 17. 
 UNREGISTERED COMPANY. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Unregis- 
 tered Company. 
 UNREGISTERED DEED— South Australia 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 314 
 See Colonial Law — South Australia. 
 UNREGISTERED WILL— Middlesex registry 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 611 
 iSee Vendor and Purchaser — Purchase 
 without Notice. 1. 
 UNSOUND MIND. 
 
 See Cases under Lunatic. 
 
 Person of — Power of Court to elect for 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 263 
 See Settlement— Future Peoperty. 3. 
 
 Person of — Trustee Act — Appointment of 
 
 new trustee 23 Ch. D. 217 ; 24 Ch. D. 271 
 See Trustee Acts • — New Trustees. 
 l.i. 
 
 Person of — Trustee — ^Vestiug order. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Acts — Vest- 
 ing Orders. G— 9, 11. 
 
 UNSTAMPED DEED — Re-conveyance — Compul- 
 sory purchase - - 24 Ch. D. 119 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps. 5. 
 
 URBAN AUTHORITY— By-law 21 Ch. D. 621 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 798 
 See Local Government — Steeets. 4. 
 
 Contract- with. 
 
 See Cases under Local Government — 
 Local Authority. 1 — 8. 
 
 16 Ch. D. 449 
 
 -Managejient Acts. 
 
 URINAL — Nuisance 
 
 See Metropolis - 
 6. 
 
 USAGE — Bought and sold notes — Liability of 
 brokers — Admissibility of evidence 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 635 
 
 See Principal and Agent — Agent's 
 Liability. 6. 
 
 • Harbour dues 
 
 See Scotch Law- 
 
 - 8 App. Cas. 658 
 -Hareooe. 2. 
 
 Presumption of lost grant 14 Q. B. D. 245 
 
 See Market. 2. 
 
 Stock Exchange — Principal and agent — 
 
 Shares in banking companv 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 460 ; 15 Q. B. D. 388 
 See Pkincii'AL and Agext — Peincipal's 
 Liability. 4, 5. 
 
 Trade— Hiring furniture 18Ch. D. 30; 
 
 [23 Ch D. 261 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 4, 5. 
 
 Trade — Implied contract between manufac- 
 turer and customer - 7 Q. B. D. 438 
 See Sale op Goods — Contract. 1. 
 
 USE AND OCCUPATION — Lease by tenant in 
 common to co -tenant — Holding over 
 
 [15 Q. B. S. 60 
 
 See Tenant in Common. 
 
 Mortgagee in possession 21 Ch. D. 469 
 
 See Mortgage — Mortgagee in Posses- 
 sion. 5. 
 
 USER— Fishery 7Q. B. D. 106; 7 App. Cas. 633 ; 
 See Fishery. 1, 3. [8 App. Cas. 135 
 
 Patent - 17 Ch. D. 721 ; 26 Ch. D. 766 ; 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 164; 8 App. Cas. 6 
 
 See Patent — Infringement. 6, 7, 8. 
 
 ■ Trade-mark 24 Ch. D. 231 
 
 See Trade-mark — Infringement. 2. 
 
 ■ Trade-mark— Length of time 27 Ch. D. 670 
 
 See Teawe-maek — Registration. 7. 
 
 Trade-mark — Limitation of — Registration of 
 
 trade-mark 21 Ch. D. 223 ; 26 Ci. D. 187 ; 
 [28 Ch. D. 666 ; 30 Ch. D. 464 
 
 See Tbade-maek— Registration. 8 — 11. 
 
 ■ Trade name 
 
 See Trade Name. 2. 
 
 22 Ch. D. 660 
 
 UTILITY— Patent - - 29 Ch, D. 366 
 
 See Patent — Validity. 5. 
 
( 1617 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1618 ) 
 
 V. 
 
 VACANT LAND— General line of buildings 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 362 
 See Meteopolis — ^Management Acts. 3. 
 VACATING EE6ISTRATI0N— Composition 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 438 
 See Bankedptoy — Composition. 8. 
 
 TrEide-niark. 
 
 See Cases under Trade-mabk — Rbgis- 
 
 THATION. 1 — 4. 
 
 VAGEANT ACTS. 
 
 1. Frequenting a Putlic Thoroughfare 
 
 — Intent to commit a Felony — Vagrant Act (5 Geo. 4, 
 e. 83), «. 4.] A man who frequents a public 
 street, having in his mind the intent to commit 
 a felony when and wheresoever opportunity- 
 arises, is liable to the penalties of the Vagrant 
 Act, 5 Geo. 4, c. 83, o. 4, even though no oppor- 
 tunity should arise, and may be committed as a 
 rogUB and vagabond, if the justices are satisfied 
 on sufficient evidence, first, that he frequented 
 the street, and secondly, that he did so with 
 intent to commit a felony. The overt act, or the 
 attempt to carry out the intent, is not an essential 
 part of the offence against the Act. — The Appel- 
 lant was found and apprehended by two constables 
 at about two o'clock in the morning in a public 
 thoroughfare called Victoria Road, having in his 
 possession a portion of a brass pump which ap- 
 peared to have been wrenched off from the con- 
 tinuation-pipe. Being stopped and questioned as to 
 how he became possessed of it and whither he was 
 taking it, he gave au account which proved to be 
 false, and also a false name and address. Being 
 charged before two justices on suspicion of having 
 stolen the pump, and the proof failing, he was then 
 charged under 5 Geo. 4, c. 83, s. 4, with frequent- 
 ing the street in question with intent to commit 
 a felony ; and on proof that he was an associate 
 of thieves, and had four years before been con- 
 victed and sentenced to imprisonment for felony, 
 — although there was no proof that he had ever 
 before been seen in the street in question, or that 
 the pump had been stolen, he was convicted as a 
 rogue and vagabond under the 4th section of the 
 Vagrant Act, for " frequenting the public thorough- 
 fare with intent to commit a felony," and sen- 
 tenced to be imprisoned : — Seld, that the evidence 
 did not warrant the conviction, inasmuch as it did 
 not shew a frequenting of Victoria Eoad with intent 
 to commit a felony. Clabk. v. The Qdeen 
 
 [14 Q. B. S. 92 
 
 2. Ganmig — Vagrant Act Amendment 
 
 Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Viot. v. 38), «. 3—" Open and 
 public Flace to which the Public have or are per- 
 mitted to have Access " — Bailway Carriage.'] The 
 Vagrant Act Amendment Act, 1873 (36 & 37 Vict, 
 c. 38), s. 3, imposes a penalty upon " every person 
 playing or betting by way of wagering or gaming 
 in any street, road, liighway, or other open and 
 public place, or in any open place to which the 
 public have or are permitted to have access at or 
 with any coin, card, &c., used as an instrument or 
 
 VAGKANT ACTS— continued. 
 means of such wagering or gaming, at any game 
 or pretended game of chance " : — Beld, that a 
 railway carriage while travelling on its journey is 
 within the definition of "an open and public 
 place to which the public have or are permitted 
 to have access " in the section. Langrish v. 
 Abcheb - 10 Q,. B, S. 44 
 
 Wandering abroad to beg — Vagrant 
 
 Geo. 4, t. 83), s. ,3 — Idle and disorderly 
 
 — Colliers " on strike."] Colliers " on 
 strike " who were householders in a colliery dis- 
 trict, and had wives and families, went from house 
 to house in a. street of. a town four miles distant 
 with a waggon inscribed " Children's Bread 
 Waggon," and begged for assistance in money or 
 kind, 'they were not disorderly. Having been 
 convicted under the Vagrant Act (5 Geo. 4, c. 83), 
 s. 3, which enacts that every person wandering 
 abroad in any public highway to beg or gather 
 alms shall be deemed an idle and disorderly 
 person ; — Held, that, as it was not their h.abit and 
 mode of life to wander abroad and beg, they were 
 not within the meaning of the Act, and the con- 
 viction was wrong. Pointon v. Hill 
 
 [12 Q. B. B. 306 
 VALIDITY— Contract. 
 
 See Cases under Contkaot — Validity. 
 
 Covenant — Restraint of marriage 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 285 
 
 See Covenant — Validity. 
 Patent. 
 
 See Cases under Patent — Validity. 
 Trade-mark. 
 
 See Cases under Teade-mabk -Regis- 
 tbation. 
 VALUATION— Crops— Incoming tenant 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 769 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 15. 
 
 Landlord and tenant— Agreement to appoint 
 
 valuers— Rule of Court 15 Q. B. D. 426 
 See Abbitkation — Submission. 4. 
 
 Lands Clauses Act — Appointment of trustee 
 
 as valuer - - 18 Ch. D. 429 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 8. 
 
 Security— Bankmptcy 26 Ch. D. 716 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Mutual Dealings. 4. 
 
 Security— Bankruptcy 19 Ch. D, 394 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 289 ; 14 Q, B. D. 121 
 See Bankruptcy — Seoi;bed Ceeditob. 
 3, 5, 12. 
 
 Security — Liability of trustees 
 
 [23Ch. D. 483; 28 Oh. D. 268 
 See Tbustee — Liabilities. 3, 4. 
 VALUATION LIST. 
 
 See Metropolis — Valuation Acts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 r Alterations - - 18 Q. B. D. 364 
 
 See Metropolis — Valuation Acts. 
 
( 1619 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1620 ) 
 
 ■VALUATION LIST — continued. 
 
 Assessment committee — Failure to obtain 
 
 relief - 15 Q. B. D. 451 
 
 See PoOE-BATE — Pkocedube. 2. 
 
 Metropolis — Discretion of overseers 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 351 
 
 See POOK-KATE — PnOCEDUKE. 1. 
 
 Power to amend omission to give notice of 
 
 meeting of assessment committee 
 
 [14 Q, B. S. 83 
 See Poon-BATE — Pboceduke. 3. 
 
 VALUED POLICY 6 Q. B. D. 633 ; 7 App. Cas. 333 
 See Insueanoe, Mabine — Salvage. 
 
 VAEIANCE — Articles and memorandum 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 349 
 See Company — Memobandum akd Ab- 
 TICLES. 2. 
 
 Complete and provisional specifications 
 
 [21 Oh. D. 720 
 See Patent — Validitt. 2. 
 
 VARYING MINUTES— Motion for 20 Ch. D. 130 ; 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 621 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Cooet — Judg- 
 ment. 6, _7. 
 VASSAL— Defaulting - 10 App. Cas. 553 
 
 See Scotch Law — Heeitable Peo- 
 PBETT. 5. 
 
 VENDOR AND PURCHASER:— Col. 
 
 I. Agbeembnt _ - - 1619 
 
 II. Compensation 1621 
 
 III. Conditions of Sale - - 1621 
 
 IV. Conveyance _ _ - 1629 
 
 V. Deposit 1632 
 
 VI. Feaud 1633 
 
 VII. Lien 1634 
 
 VIII. Purchase without Notice 1635 
 
 IX. Rescission 1637 
 
 X. Title 1638 
 
 XI. Title Deeds - 1644 
 
 I. VENDOR AND PURCHASER— AGEEEMENT. 
 
 1. Reservation — Absolute Conveyance,'] 
 
 In June, 1870, an' agreement was entered into 
 by a railway company for the purchase, at a price 
 named, of land for the purpose of carrying a road 
 over the line at an incline, and the agreement 
 contained a proviso that the vendor, &c., should 
 have a right of access to other lands belonging to 
 bim by and over any of the slopes which the 
 company might arrange on their intended works, 
 and through, over and upon any occupation roads 
 which they might from adjacent to the said lands. 
 This agreement was executed by the secretary of 
 the company, but was not under seal. — ^Possession 
 was taken by the company, and a bridge was 
 constructed over the line which was reached by 
 a road carried over the land purcliased at a steep 
 incline. In April, 1871, the land, with all ways, 
 rights of pre-emption, and other rights, members, 
 easements, and appurtenances, was, in considera- 
 tion of the price named in the agreement, which 
 was stated to include the value of the mines and 
 also all right of pre-emption and compensation for 
 damage sustained by vendor in the execution of 
 the works, conveyed to the company, without 
 
 I. VENDOR AND PURCHASEE— AGREEMENT 
 
 — continued. 
 reserving any right of access to the vendor or in 
 any way referring to the proviso contained in the 
 agreement of June, 1870 : — Eeld, in an action by 
 the vendor to restrain the company from obstruc- 
 ting, by fences and retaining walls rendered ne- 
 cessary by a widening of the road, the right of 
 access stipulated for by the proviso in the pre- 
 liminary agreement, but not claiming a rectifica- 
 tion of the subsequent conveyance, that as the 
 vendor by the terms of the conveyance had abso- 
 lutely conveyed to the company every interest 
 which he possessed in the land, any right of access 
 previously stipulated for was thereby absolutely 
 extinguished. Teebay v. Manchestee, Shef- 
 field, AND LlNCOLNSHIEE EADuWAY COMPANY 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 572 
 
 2, Statute of Frauds — Description of Pro- 
 perty.'] A house and premises were put up for 
 sale by auction under conditions of sale which 
 did not contain any description of what was sold, 
 but were so expressed that it could be inferred 
 from them that the subject of sale was real estate. 
 A. Shardlow became the purchaser. After the 
 sale, the auctioneer signed and gave to him the 
 following memorandum at the foot of the con- 
 ditions : " The property duly sold to A. Shardlow, 
 Butcher, Piuxton, and deposit paid at close of 
 sale," and at the same time signed and gave to 
 him the following receipt : " Pinxton, March 29, 
 1880. Eeceived of Mr. A Shardlow the sum of 
 £21 as deposit on property purchased at £420 at 
 Sun Inn, Pinxton, on the above date. Mr. G. 
 Cotterell, owner : " — Held, reversing the decision 
 of Kay, J., that the receipt, memorandum, and 
 conditions contained a sufficiently definite de- 
 scription of the property sold to enable the Court 
 to receive parol evidence of what the property 
 consisted, and that the Statute of Frauds was no 
 defence to an action by the purchaser for specific 
 performance. — Held, by Jessel, M.K., and Bag- 
 gallay, L.J., that the receipt alone without the 
 memorandum and conditions was a memorandum 
 suificient to satisfy the requirement of the statute. 
 Shaedlow v. Cotteeell 18 Ch. D. 280 ; 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 90 
 
 3, Statute of Frauds — Two Documents 
 
 referring to same parol Contract of Sale — Suffi- 
 cient Memorandum — Specific Performatice.] Two 
 or more documents which do not refer to each 
 other, but do refer to the same parol contract, 
 and which, when taken together, contain all 
 the terms of the parol contract, may together 
 constitute a sufScient memorandum within the 
 Statute of Frauds.— On the 22nd of September, 
 1882, the Defendant verbally agreed with the 
 Plaintiff to sell her share in certain property for 
 £200, and signed and gave to him tiie following 
 receipt : " Sept. 22nd, 1882. Received of J. Studds 
 one pound of my share in the Barrett's Grove 
 property the sum of two hundred pounds." No 
 time was fixed for completion, and no abstract 
 was delivered, and on the 19tli of March, 1883, 
 the Defendant wrote t» Plaintiff: " Mr. Studds,— 
 Sir,— If the balance of £199 on account of the 
 purchase of my share of the property be not paid 
 on or before the 22nd instant I shall consider the 
 agreement (made 22nd of September, 1882) not 
 
( 1621 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1622 ) 
 
 I. VENDOR AND PUECHASEE— AGEEEHENT 
 
 — continued. 
 any longer binding " : — Seld, that the word 
 "balance" in the letter sufficiently referred to 
 the receipt to enable the two documents to be 
 read together, and that they constituted a suf- 
 ficient memorandum within the Statute of Frauds, 
 sect, 4: — Held, also, that even if the word 
 " balance " was not sufficient to connect the two 
 documents, yet that as they both referred to the 
 same parol contract, all the terms of which were 
 contained in one or other of them, they could be 
 read together, and together constituted a good 
 memorandum within the statute. Studds v. 
 Watson - - - 28 Ch. D. 305 
 
 n. TENDOE AND PITECHASEE — COMPENSA- 
 TION. 
 
 1. Claim after Completion— Fafee Bepre- 
 
 smiation, Action for. Moral Fraud essential to — 
 Sale of Land — Compensation for Misdescription.'] 
 In an action for damages for a misrepresentation 
 with reference to the subject-matter of a contract, 
 in the absence of any breach of contract or war- 
 ranty, fraud Is an essential element of the cause 
 of action. — There is no such thing as " legal " 
 fraud in the absence of moral fraud.^ — A vendor 
 of real property, during the negotiations for the 
 sale, made a representation to the purohaiser, bonS. 
 fide, and believing it to be true, that the pieces 
 of land sold contained three acres, whereas in truth 
 they contained a less quantity.' After completion 
 of the contract and execution of the conveyance, 
 the purchaser sought to recover compensation 
 from the vendor for the false representation : — 
 Held, that, after completion, such compensation 
 could not be recovered unless there had been 
 fraud or the breach of some contract or warranty 
 contained in the conveyance, and, therefore, the 
 action would not lie. Jolepfe v. Bakeb 
 
 [11 Q. B. D. 255 
 
 2. Discover^ after Completion — Misde- 
 scription in Farticulars of Sale.] The Plaintiff 
 purchased at a sale by auction certain property 
 belonging to the Defendant described in the par- 
 ticulars of sale as producing a net annual rental 
 of £39, and one of the conditions of sale was, " if 
 any error, misstatement, or omission in the par- 
 ticulars be discovered, the same shall not annul 
 the sale but compensation shall be allowed by 
 the vendor or purchaser as the case may require." 
 After the conveyance (without any covenants) had 
 been executed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, 
 it was discovered by the Plaintiff that the rental 
 of £39 was a gross rental, the net rental being 
 considerably less : — Held, that, notwithstanding 
 the error was not discovered until after the con- 
 veyance, the Plaintiff was entitled to compensa- 
 tion under the conditions of sale. — Cann v. Cann 
 (3 Sim. 447) and Bos v. Helsham (Law Eep. 
 2 Ex. 72) followed.— ilfansoji v. Thacker (7 Ch. 
 D. 620), Besley v. Besley (9 Ch. D. 103), and 
 Alien V. Bichardson (13 Ch. D. 524) dissented 
 from. Palmee v. Johnson 12 Q,. B. D. 32 ; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 351 
 
 III. VENDOEANDPTTECHASES— CONDITIONS 
 
 OF SALE, 
 
 By 44 & 45 Vict. c. 41 (Conveyancing Act, 1881), 
 s. 2, the word "property," unless a contrary inten- 
 
 III. VENDOH AND PUECHASEE— CONDITIONS 
 
 OF SALE — continued. 
 tioH appears in the Act, includes real and personal 
 property, and any estate or interest in any property, 
 real or personal, and any debt, and any thing in 
 action, and any other right or interest. 
 
 " Land," unless a contrary intention appears, 
 includes land of any tenure, and tenements and 
 liereditaments, corporeal or incorporeal, and houses 
 and other buildings, also an undivided share in land. 
 
 "Furchaser," unless a contrary intention appears, 
 includes a lessee or mortgagee, and an intending 
 purchaser, lessee, or mortgagee, or other person, ' 
 who, for valuable consideration, takes or deals for 
 any property ; and purchase, unless a contrary in- 
 tention appears, has a meaning corresponding with 
 that of purchaser ; but sale means only a sale pro- 
 perly so called. 
 
 Sect. 3. — (1.) Under a contract to sell and assign 
 a term of years derived out of a leasehold interest 
 in land, the intended assign shall not have the righi 
 to call for the title to the leasehold reversion. 
 
 (2.) Where land of copyhold or customary tenure 
 has been converted into freehold by enfranchisement, 
 then, under a contract to sell and convey the free- 
 hold, the purchaser shall not have the right to call 
 for the title to malce the enfranchisement. 
 
 (3.) A purchaser of any property shall not require 
 the production, or any abstract or copy, of any 
 deed, will, or other document, dated or made before 
 the time prescribed by law, or stipulated for com- 
 mencement of the title, even though the same creates 
 a power subsequently exercised by an instrument 
 abstracted in tlie abstract furnished to the pur- 
 chaser; nor shall he require any information, or 
 malce any requisition, objection, or inquiry with 
 respect to any such deed, will, or document, or the 
 title prior to that time, notwithstanding that any 
 such deed, will, or other document, or that prior 
 title, is recited, covenanted to be produced, or 
 noticed, and lie shall assume, unless the contrary 
 appears, that the recitals, contained in the ab- 
 stracted instruments, of any deed, mil, or other 
 document forming part of that prior title, are 
 correct, and give all the material contents of the 
 deed, will, or other document so recited, and that 
 every document so recited was duly executed by all 
 necessary parties, and perfected, if and as required, 
 by fine, recovery, acknowledgment, inrolment, or 
 otherwise. 
 
 (4.) Where land sold is held by lease (not in- 
 cluding under-lease), the purchaser shall assume, 
 unless the contrary appears, that the lease was duly 
 granted : and, on production of tlie receipt for the 
 last payment due for rent under the lease before the 
 date of actual completion of the purchase, he shall 
 assume, unless the contrary appears, that all the 
 covenants and provisions of the lease have been duly 
 performed and observed up to the date of actual 
 completion of the purcliase. 
 
 (5.) Wliere land, sold is held by under-lease, the 
 purchaser shall assume, unless the contrary appears, 
 that the under-lease and every superior lease were 
 duly granted ; and, on production of the receipt for 
 tlie last payment due for rent under the under-lease 
 before the date of actual completion of the purchase, 
 he shall assume, unless the contrary appears, that 
 all the covenants and provisions of the under-lease 
 have been duly performed and observed up to the 
 date of actual completion of the purchase, and 
 
( 1623 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1621 ) 
 
 III. VENDOR AND PUECHASEE— CONDITIONS 
 
 or SALE — continued, 
 further that all rent due under every superior lease, 
 and all the covenants and provisions of every supe- 
 rior lease, have lieen paid and duly performed and 
 observed up to that date. 
 
 (6.) On a sale of any property, the expenses of 
 the produjCtion and inspection of all Acts of Far- 
 liament, inclosure awards, recoi-ds, proceedings of 
 <:ourts, court rolls, deeds, wills, probates, letters of 
 administration, and other documents, not in the 
 vendor's possession, and the expenses of all journeys 
 incidental to such production or inspection, and 
 the expenses of searching for, procuring, making, 
 verifying, and producing all certificates, declara- 
 tions, evidences, and information not in the vendor^ 
 possession, and all attested, stamped, office, or other 
 <iopies or abstracts of, or extracts from, any Acts of 
 Parliament or other documents aforesaid, not in 
 tlie vendor's possession, if any such production, in- 
 spection, journey, search, procuring, making, or 
 verifying is required by a purchaser, either for 
 verification of the abstract, or for any oilier purpose, 
 shall be borne by the purchaser who requires the 
 same ; and where the vendor retains possession of 
 any document, the expenses of making any copy 
 thereof, attested or unattested, which a purchaser 
 requires to be delivered to him, shall be borne by 
 that purchaser. 
 
 (7.) On a sale of any property in lots, u, pur- 
 ■chaser of two or more lots, held wholly or partly 
 under the same title, shall not have a right to mor-e 
 than one abstract of the common title, except at his 
 own expense. 
 
 (8.) This section applies only to titles and pur- 
 chasers on sales properly so called, notwitlistanding 
 any interpretation in this Act. 
 
 (9.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the contract 
 of sale, and shall have effect subject to the tei-ms of 
 the contract and to the provisions therein contained. 
 
 (10.) This section applies only to sales made 
 after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 (II.) Nothing in this section shall be construed 
 as binding a purchaser to complete his purchase in 
 any case wliere, on a contract made independently 
 of this section, and containing stipulations similar 
 to the provisions of this section, or any of them, 
 specific performance of the contract would not be 
 enforced against him by the Court. 
 
 Sect. 13. — (1.) On a contract to grant a lease for 
 a term of years to be derived out of a leasehold in- 
 terest, with a leasehold reversion, the intended lessee 
 shall not have the right to call for the title to that 
 reversion. 
 
 (2.) This section applies only if and as far as a 
 contrary intention is not expressed in the contract, 
 and shall have effect subject to the terms of the 
 contract and to the provisions therein contained. 
 
 By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 {Conveyancing Act, 1882) 
 — Sect. 4. — (1.) Where a lease is made under a 
 power contained in a settlement, will. Act of Par- 
 liament, or other instrument, any preliminary 
 contract for or relating to the lease shall not, for 
 the purpose of the deduction of title to an intended 
 assign, form part of the title, or evidence of the 
 title, to tile lease. 
 
 (2.) This section applies to leases made either 
 before or after the commencement of the Act. 
 
 !• Depreciatory Conditions— /Sa?e by Trus- 
 
 III. VENDOE AND P0ECHASEE— CONDITIONS 
 
 OF SALE — continued, 
 tees.'] Trustees for sale under a will put up for sale 
 by auction certain lands in numerous small lots, 
 with conditions providing (inter alia) that the title 
 should commence with the conveyance to the 
 testator ten years . before ; that every recital in 
 any abstracted document should be conclusive 
 evidence of the fact stated; and that the lots 
 were sold "subject to the existing tenancies, re- 
 strictive covenants, and all easements and quit- 
 rents (if any) affectins the same ;" and that the 
 purchasers were to indemnify the vendors against 
 the breach of any restrictive covenants contained 
 in the abstracted muniments of title. The sale 
 was made also subject to certain general condi- 
 tions restricting the occupation of the land. The 
 abstracted documents contained no other restric- 
 tive covenants than those comprised in the general 
 conditions; and the vendors stated that they 
 knew of no other restrictive covenants, and of no 
 existing tenancies, easements or quit-rents affect- 
 ing the property : — Held, that the condition as to 
 existing tenancies and restrictive covenants was 
 depreciatory, and that the objection was a good 
 defence to an action for specific performance by 
 the tni-stees against a purchaser. — But, senible, 
 the condition limiting the title to ten years, 
 having regard to the number and smallness of 
 the lots, was not unreasonable. Ddnn v. Flood 
 [25 Ch. D. 629 ; 28 Ch. D. 686 
 
 2. Interest — Mistake — Repayment — Sum- 
 mons — Jurisdiction — Vendor and Purchaser Act, 
 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 78), s. 9.] A purchaser 
 wlio has, under his contract, erroneously paid the 
 vendor interest on the purchase-money cannot 
 recover it by summons under sect. 9 of the Vendor 
 and Purchaser Act, 1874, but must proceed by 
 action in the ordinary way. In re Young & 
 Habston's Conteact - 29 Ch. D. 691 
 
 [Question left undecided by the Court of Appeal, 
 31 Ch. D. 681.] 
 
 3. Leaseholds — Performance of Covenants 
 
 — Specific Performance.] A leasehold public- 
 house was told subject to a condition that the 
 production of the last receipt for rent paid should 
 be taken as conclusive evidence of the due per- 
 formance of the lessee's covenants or the waiver 
 of any breaches up to the time of completion, 
 whether the lessor should be cognizant of such 
 breaches or not. The lease contained a covenant 
 to use the premises for the business of a public- 
 house only, and not to permit any other trade 
 to be carried on on any part of the premises 
 without the lessor's written consent. The par- 
 ticulars on which the contract of purchase was 
 indorsed shewed that parts of the premises were 
 underlet to persons who carried on other trades 
 there. From the answers to objections to title it 
 appeared that the lessors had received rent with 
 knowledge of the underlettings, and the last 
 receipt for rent was produced. Specific perform- 
 ance of the contract having been decreed and a 
 reference as to title directed by an order which 
 was not appealed from : — Held (affirming the de- 
 cision of the Court of Appeal) that whether the 
 breach of covenant was or was not a continuing 
 breach such as to render the purchaser liable to 
 be ejected after the completion of the purchase, 
 
( 1625 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1626 ) 
 
 in. VENDOR AND PUECHASEE— COHDITIOKS 
 
 OE SALE— contirmed. 
 and whether this would or would not have fur- 
 nished a valid reason for not decreeing specific 
 performance, the vendor had made a good title in 
 accordance with the contract, which the purchaser 
 was bound to accept, the decree for specific per- 
 formance having been made and not appealed 
 from. Lawbie v. Lees - 7 App. Cas. 19 
 
 4. Misleadinir Condition — Limited Title 
 
 — Volmntary Deed — Evidence — Becital in Deed 
 more than Twenty Tears Old — Vendor and Pur- 
 chaser Act, 1874 {S7 & 38 Vict. e. 78), s. 2.] A 
 contract entered into in 1882 for the sale of free- 
 hold estate provided that the title should com- 
 mence " with an indenture dated the 18th of 
 October, 1845," and made between persons whose 
 names were mentioned, and that the earlier title 
 should not be investigated or objected to. From 
 the abstract of title delivered by the vendors to 
 the purchaser it appeared that the deed of 1845 
 was a conveyance by a person, who purported to 
 be the absolute owner, of freehold and leasehold 
 property to trustees, on trust for himself for life, 
 and after his death on trust to sell the property, 
 and to hold the proceeds of sale on the trusts 
 declared by a deed of even date. An express 
 power was reserved to the grantor to revoke the 
 trusts. The deed was a voluntary one, except 
 for the consideration which resulted from the 
 liability assumed by the trustees in respect of 
 the leaseholds : — Held, by Fry, J., and by the 
 Court of Appeal, that, inasmuch as the fact that 
 the deed of 1845 was a voluntary one, would 
 influence the purchaser in determining whether 
 he woTild agree to accept a title commencing 
 within forty years, the vendors ought to have 
 stated in the condition of sale the nature of the 
 deed: that the omission to state this rendered 
 the condition a misleading one; and that the 
 purchaser was not bound by the contract to 
 accept a title commeiicing with that deed. — By a 
 deed executed in 1858 (after the death of the 
 settlor) the trustees conveyed the property to a 
 purchaser for value. This deed contained a re- 
 cital of the deed of 1845, and a recital that the 
 trustees " in pursuance of the trust for sale con- 
 ferred on them " by that deed had caused the 
 property to be put up for sale : — Held, by Fry, J., 
 that by virtue of sect. 2 of the Vendor and Pur- 
 chaser Act, 1874, this recital, not being shewn to 
 be inaccurate, was conclusive evidence that the 
 deed of 1845 had not been revoked either by an 
 exercise by the settlor of the power of revocation, 
 or by a sale of the property by him for value 
 during his lifetime, In re MaBsh and Eabl 
 Gbanville - 24 Ch. D. 11 
 
 5. Misleading Condition — Statement in 
 
 Auction Boom, — Specie Performance refused.'] A 
 dwelling-house and offices were put up for sale 
 by public auction, under a printed condition in a 
 common form, that the lot was sold subject to 
 any existing rights and easements of whatever 
 nature — and the printed particulars made no 
 mention of any easement, or of any claim to an 
 easement. As the result of evidence, it appeared 
 that the house was subject to an easement be- 
 longing to the owner of a neighbouring tenement 
 to use the kitchen for particular purposes, and that 
 
 III. VEKTDOE AND PUECHASEE— CONDITIONS 
 
 OF SALE — continued. 
 the vendor's solicitor knew of the rumoured exist- 
 ence of some such easement, but forbore to make 
 inquiries. No grant of an easement appeared 
 from the abstract, and its existence was, in fact, 
 disputed on the pleadings. In the auction room, 
 the Plaintiff's solicitor said he had heard of some 
 such claim, but had no definite information about 
 it, and the auctioneer, in hearing of the Plain- 
 tiff's solicitor, on being questioned, told the audi- 
 ence that they might dismiss the subject of the 
 rumoured claims from their minds, as nobody 
 would probably ever hear of them again i—Heldy 
 that the conditions were misleading, and the- 
 statements in the auction room insufficient, and 
 specific performance of the contract refused. 
 Heywood v. Mallalied - 26 Ch. D. 35T 
 
 6. Eight to rescind — Discharge of In- 
 cumbrances on Sale — Conveyancing and Law of 
 Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. <,. 41), s. 5.} 
 The Court will not, under the power given to it 
 by sect. 5 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, compel 
 a vendor of land to pay money into Court for the 
 purpose of discharging an incumbrance upon the 
 land, when the result of so doing would be to in- 
 flict a great hardship on him, as, for instance, if 
 the incumbrance is a perpetual rent-charge, and 
 the sum necessary to procure its discharge would 
 far exceed the amount of the purchase-money 
 payable to the vendor. — A railway company con- 
 tracted to sell some superfluous land " free from 
 incumbrances," for £868. The contract provided 
 that, if the purchaser should decline to waive any 
 valid objection to the title, the company might at 
 any time rescind the contract, without paying (he 
 purchaser any costs or compensation. The ab- 
 stract of title shewed that the land was subject 
 to a perpetual rent-charge of £63 issuing out of 
 it, this being the consideration for which the 
 company had purchased it under their statutory 
 powers, for the making of a railway, which, by a 
 subsequent Act, they were authorized to aban- 
 don. — The purchaser required the company to 
 procure the release of the land from the rent- 
 charge. This they declined to do, but offered to 
 indemnify him against it. He declined to waive 
 his requisition: — Held, that the company were 
 entitled to rescind the contract under the condi- 
 tion, and that they were not bound to apply to the 
 Court, under sect. 5 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881,, 
 to declare the land freed from the rent-charge, or 
 to take any other steps to procure the release of 
 the rent-charge. In re Geeat Noktheen Rail- 
 way Company and Sandekson - 25 Ch. D. 788 
 
 7. Eight to rescmi.— Misrepresentation.'}, 
 
 The particulars of sale of a freehold property de- 
 scribed the garden as " inclosed by a rustic wall 
 with tradesmen's side entrance." The wall did 
 not form part of the property, and the tradesmen's- 
 side entrance was used on sufferance. This was 
 known to the vendor, but not disclosed to the 
 purchaser. The conditions of sale provided that 
 mistakes or errors in the description of particulars 
 should not annul the sale, but that compensatioa 
 should be given -.—Held, that it was not a case for 
 compensation, and that the purchaser was entitled 
 to have the contract rescinded. Bbewee v. Beown. 
 
 [28 Ch, D, 306' 
 
( 1627 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1628 ) 
 
 IIL VEOTJOR AND PUECHASEK— CONDITIONS 
 OF SALE — continued. 
 
 8, Eight to rescind — Non-disclosure of 
 
 Restrictive Covenants — Conditions of Sale pre- 
 Htiding Objections as to Omissions in Contract, 
 Effect of — Conveyancing Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict, 
 c. 41), s. 3, suh-ss. 3, 11.] The owner iu fee of 
 land sold and conveyed it, during the years 
 1865, 1866, and 1867, in thirteen lots to dif- 
 ferent purchasers, each lot being subject to cove- 
 nants entered into by the purchasers restricting 
 the use of the land as u brickyard and in other 
 lespects. The Defendant subsequently became 
 the purchaser of Lot 11, but the deed of con- 
 veyance to him did not contain the restrictive 
 covenants. In 1882, the Plaintiffs, a company 
 for manufacturing bricks, contracted to purchase 
 Lot 11 from the Defendant under conditions of 
 sale which stated that the property -was sold sub- 
 ject to any matter or thing affecting the same, 
 "whether disclosed at the time of sale or not ; and 
 provided that any error or omission in the parti- 
 culars should not annul the sale, nor entitle tlie 
 purchaser to compensation. The existence of the 
 restrictive covenants was not mentioned in the 
 contract, but during the negotiations the Defend- 
 ant stated that there were covenants restricting 
 the use of the land as a brickyard, but his solici- 
 tor, who was present, and to whom the Plaintiffs' 
 solicitor applied for information, stated that he 
 was not aware of any such covenants. Tlie Plain- 
 tiffs paid a deposit upon the purchase-money, and 
 having subsequently discovered that there were 
 restrictive covenants, claimed to rescind their 
 contract and sued the Defendant to recover the 
 amount of the deposit : — Held, that the Plaintiffs, 
 if their contract with the Defendant were carried' 
 out, would be bound by the restrictive covenants, 
 and that the owners of the other twelve lots pur- 
 chased from the original vendor would be entitled 
 to enforce those covenants against the Plaintiffs : 
 that the Plaintiffs were not precluded by the 
 terms of the conditions of sale, nor by s. 3, sub-s. 3, 
 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, from refusing to 
 complete the pm'chase, and that they were there- 
 fore entitled to recover the amount of the deposit. 
 KoTTiNGHAM Patent Bkick and Tile Company 
 ^. BcTLEK - - 15 Q. B. D. 261 
 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal.] 
 
 9. ■ Eight to rescind — Objection to Con- 
 veyance — Specific Performance.'] Trustees of a 
 will put up land for sale, subject to a condition 
 that, if any objection or requisition as to (inter 
 aha) title, or abstract, or conveyance should be 
 insisted on, and the vendors should be unable or 
 unwilling to remove or comply therewith, they 
 should be at liberty to annul the sale. The ab- 
 stract delivered to the purchaser shewed that the 
 conveyance to the vendor's testator was of the land, 
 together with a wall on tlie east side of it, " which 
 wall is to be ever hereafter repaired and kept in 
 fepair " by the testator, his heirs, and assigns. 
 This obligation was not mentioned in the particu- 
 lars and conditions of sale, and the purchaser did 
 not know of it until the delivery of the abstract. 
 He accepted the title, and tendered to the vendors 
 the draft of a conveyance to himself of the land 
 with the wall, omitting all reference to the obliga- 
 ti )n to repair the wall. The vendor's solicitors 
 
 III. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE— CONDITIONS 
 
 OF SALE — continued. 
 added the words " subject to and with the liability 
 for ever to repair the wall" by the jiurchaser, his 
 heirs and assigns. The purchaser would not agree 
 to the addition, and the vendors thereupon gave 
 notice to rescind the contract. The purchaser 
 then brought an action for specific performance 
 of the contract, claiming the right to a. con- 
 veyance without the additional words : — Seld, 
 that, if the obligation to repair the wall ran with 
 the laud, it was immaterial whether it was men- 
 tioned in the conveyance or not, because the 
 purchaser would be bound by it in either case ; 
 but that, if it did not run with the land, the 
 vendors, not having mentioned it in the particu- 
 lars of sale, could not impose it on the purchaser. 
 Consequently, the vendors were not entitled to 
 rescind the contract. — Semble, that a condition of 
 sale giving the vendor a right to rescind the con- 
 tract, in the event of his being unable or unwilling 
 to comply with a purchaser's requisition as to 
 conveyance, is not in general a proper condition. 
 Habdman v. Child - 28 Ch. D. 712 
 
 10. Eight to rescind — Purchase-money — 
 
 Deposit — Separate Account — Interest.'] On a 
 sale of a freehold house by auction one of the 
 conditions of sale provided that " all objections 
 and requisitions in respect of the title, or the 
 abstract, or particulars, or anything appearing 
 therein respectively shall be sent to tlie ven- 
 dors' solicitors within fourteen days from the 
 delivery of the abstract, and all objections and 
 requisitions not sent in within that time shall be 
 considered to be waived. If any objection or 
 requisition shall be made and insisted on, which 
 the vendors shall be unable or unwilling to 
 remove or comply with, the vendors shall be at 
 liberty by notice in writing to rescind the sale." 
 The purchaser accepted the vendors' title as 
 shewn by the abstract and sent them a draft con- 
 veyance for approval. The vendors then requhed 
 that the conveyance should be taken subject to 
 certain " covenants, conditions, and restrictions," 
 the nature of which they did not explain, but 
 which, they alleged, were contained in a deed 
 recited iu an abstracted deed forming the com- 
 mencement of title. As the abstract did not shew 
 the existence of any such covenants, conditions, 
 or restrictions, and as the conveyance to the ven- 
 dors' immediate predecessor iu title did not in 
 any way refer to them, the purchaser declined to 
 take a conveyance subject to them without, at all 
 events, being first informed of their nature, where- 
 upon the vendors wrote purporting to rescind the 
 contract: — Held, upon a summons by the pur- 
 chaser under the Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, 
 that the vendors had no power to rescind, and 
 that the purchaser was entitled to a conveyance 
 without the insertion of the words required by 
 the vendors.— Another condition of sale provided' 
 for payment of a deposit and for the completion 
 of the purchase on a certain day ; and that " if 
 from any cause whatever," the purchase should 
 not be completed on that day the purchaser 
 should pay interest at 5 per cent, per annum on 
 the remainder of his purchase-money until com- 
 pletion. After receiving the vendors' notice of 
 rescission the purchaser, on the day fixed for 
 
( 1629 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1630 ) 
 
 III. VENDOR AND PTJECHASEE— CONDITIONS 
 
 OF SALE — continued. 
 completion, placed the balance of Iter purchase- 
 money to a separate account on deposit with a 
 bank at 2J per cent, interest, and gave notice of 
 tlie deposit to tlie vendors : — Held, that the pur- 
 chaser could not, under the circumstances, be 
 required to pay, on actual completion, higher 
 interest than that allowed by the bank. In re 
 MOHCKTON AND GiLZEAN - 27 Ch. D. 856 
 
 11. Eight to rescind — Withdrawal of 06- 
 
 jeotions.} Land was contracted to be sold under 
 a condition that " if the purchaser shall take any 
 objiection or make any requisition " as to the title 
 which the vendor " is unable or unwilling to re- 
 move or comply ipfith,'' the vendor, might rescind 
 the contract. The purchasers made requisitions 
 with several of which the vendor, for reasons 
 stated, "declined to comply." The purchasers 
 insisted on their requisitions, and the vendor 
 served the purchasers with notice to rescind. — 
 The purchasers, in reply, denied the vendor's 
 right to rescind, withdrew , their requisitions, and 
 stated that they were willing to complete : — Held 
 (afBrming the decision of Bacon, V.C), that the 
 contract had been duly rescinded In re Dames 
 AND Wood - 27 Ch. D. 172 ; 29 Ch. D. 626 
 
 IV. VENDOR AND PTJECHASEE — CONVEY- 
 ANCE. 
 
 Death of Vendor.] The Act U & 45 Vict. c. 41 
 {Conveyancing Act, 1881) enacts, s. 4 — (1.) Wliere 
 at the death of any person there is subsisting a con- 
 tract, enfoirceahle against Ms heir or devisee, for 
 the sale of the fee simple or other freehold interest, 
 descendible to his heirs general, in any land, his 
 personal representatives shall, hy virtue of (his Act, 
 have power to convey tlie land for all the estate and 
 interest vested in him at his death, in any manner 
 proper for giving effect to the contract. 
 
 (2.) A conveyance made under this section shall 
 not affect the beneficial rights of any person claiTU- 
 ing under any testamentary disposition or as heir 
 or next of kin of a testator or intestate. 
 
 (3.) This section applies only in cases of death 
 after the commencement of this Act — 31si December, 
 1881. 
 
 Discharge of Incumbrances.] Sect. 2. " Incum- 
 brance ' includes a mortgage in fee or for a less 
 estate, and a trust for securing money, and a 
 lien, and a charge of a portion, annuity, or other 
 capital or annual sum ; and " incumbrancer " has 
 a meaning corresponding with that of incumbrance, 
 and includes every person entitled to the benefit of 
 an incumbrance, or to require payment or discharge 
 tliereof. 
 
 Sect. 5. — (1.) Where land subject to any incum- 
 brance, whether immediately payable or not, is sold 
 by the Court, or out of Court, the Court may, if it 
 thinks fit, on the application of any party to the 
 sale, direct or allow payment in Court, in case of 
 an annual sum charged on the land, or of a capital 
 sum charged on a determinable interest in the land, 
 of such amount as, when invested in Government 
 securities, the Court considers will be sufficient, ly 
 means of tlbc dividends thereof, to keep down or 
 otherwise provide for that charge, and in any other 
 case of capital money charged on the land, of the 
 amount sufficient to meet the incumbrance and any 
 interest due thereon ; but in either case there shall 
 
 IV. VENDOE AND PTJECHASEE— CONVEY- 
 ANCE — continued, 
 also be paid into Court sueh additional amount 
 as the Court considers will be sufficient to meet the 
 contingency of further costs, expenses, and interest, 
 and amy other contingency, except depreciation of 
 investments, not exceeding one tenth part of the 
 original amount to he paid in, unless the Court for 
 special reason thinks fit to require a larger addi- 
 tional amount. 
 
 (2.) Tliereupon the Court may, if it thinks fit, 
 and either after or without any notice to the incum- 
 brancer, as the Court thinks fit, declare the land to 
 he freed from the incumbrance, and make any order 
 for conveyance, or vesting order, proper for giving 
 effect to the sale, and give directions for tlie reten- 
 tion and investment of the money in Court. , 
 
 (3.) After notice served upon the person interested 
 in or entitled to the m^ney or fund in Court, the 
 Court may direct payment or transfer thereof, to 
 the person entitled to receive or give a discharge 
 for the same, and generally may give directions 
 respecting tlie application or distribution of the 
 capital or income thereof. 
 
 (4.) This section applies to sales not completed 
 at the commencement of tlie Act, and to sales there- 
 after made. 
 
 Execution of Purchase Deed.] Sect. 8. — (1.) On 
 sale, tlie purchaser shall not be entitled to require 
 that the conveyance to him be executed in his pre- 
 sence, or in that of his solicitor, as such ; hut shall 
 be entitled to have, at Ms own cost, the execution of 
 the conveyance attested hy some person appointed 
 by him, who may if he thinks fit be his solicitor. 
 
 1. Covenant — Sale hy Court — Restricted 
 
 Covenant — Qualifying Proviso — ■ Appeal from 
 Form settled hy Judge!] In a sale by the Court 
 the particulars of sale contained certain reserva- 
 tions and stipulations as to the property, and one 
 of the conditions of sale provided that the con- 
 veyances should contain covenants by the pur- 
 chasers for securing the liabilities and rights under 
 such reseiTations and stipulations, the form of 
 such covenants, in case of dispute, to be settled by 
 the Judge.' — A dispute having arisen betweea a 
 purchaser and a vendor concerning the form of the 
 covenant, the Judge settled the covenant, adding 
 a proviso that if the purchaser assigned his pur- 
 chase, and the assignee eni;ered into a similar 
 covenant, the purchaser should be freed from 
 further liability : — Held, that the vendor was en- 
 titled to an unqualified covenant, and that the 
 proviso must be struck out. — The order of a Judge 
 settling the form of a conveyance is subject to 
 appeal. Pollock v. Babbits 21 Ch, D, 466 
 
 2. Covenant for quiet Enjoyment — De- 
 cree in Equity a Disturbance in Possession^ In 
 a conveyance of land by the Defendant to the 
 Plaintiff the Defendant covenanted for title and 
 quiet enjoyment notwithstanding any act or thing 
 done or suffered by him or by any of his ancestors 
 or predecessors in title.- After the conveyance a 
 decree was made in a suit in Chancery in which 
 the Plaintiff, though not a party, was represented 
 as being one of a class of persons against whom 
 the suit was brought, and by the decree the land 
 so conveyed by the Defendant was declared to be 
 subject to a general right of common over it : — 
 Held,, that the decree alone, without any entry or 
 
( 1631 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1632 ) 
 
 IV. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE— COKVET- 
 
 AITCE — continued. 
 actual disturbance of tte Plaintiff in his posses- 
 sion, was no breach of the Defendant's covenant 
 for quiet enjoyment : — Held, also, that the Court, 
 in the absence of evidence of a grant of such right 
 of common by some predecessor in title of the De- 
 fenda.nt, would not infer that there must have 
 been such grant so as to be a breach of his cove- 
 nant for title within the meaning of the covenant. 
 HowAED V. Maitland - 11 Q. B. D. 695 
 
 3. Married Woman — Trust for Sale — 
 
 " Bare Trustee " — Administration Action — Order 
 for Sale — Conveyance — Acknowledgment — Fines 
 and Becoveries Act (3 & i Will, i, c. 74), ss. 77, 
 79— Vendm- and Purchaser Act, 1874 (37 * 38 
 Vict. c. 78), a. 6.] A testator devised his real 
 estate to trustees for sale, who were married 
 women, one of them having married before and 
 the other after the Married Women's Property 
 Act, 1882. Both of them also took beneficial in- 
 terests in the proceeds of sale. Under the judg- 
 ment in an action for the administration of the 
 testator's estate, part of the real estate was sold by 
 the trustees, the puarchaser paying his purchase- 
 money into Court : — Held, that the married 
 women were " bare trustees " within sect. 6 of the 
 Vendor and Purchaser Act, 1874, and that the 
 conveyance to the purchaser did not require the 
 concurrence of the husbands, or acknowledgment 
 under ihe Fines and Kecoveries Act. In re 
 DocwEA. DoowKA V. Faith - 29 Ch. D. 693 
 
 4. ■ Payment of Purchase-money — Pay- 
 ment into Court — Conveyancing and Law of Pro- 
 perty Act, 1881 (44 * 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 5.] A 
 mortgage deed gave the mortgagee an option to 
 purchase in case the debt was not paid on a day 
 named. The trustees in bankruptcy of the mort- 
 gagors sold the mortgaged property. A part of 
 the purchase-money was deposited to provide 
 against the mortgage. Pending proceedings on 
 the part of the trustees to set aside the mortgage 
 on the ground of fraudulent preference, an order 
 was made that the money deposited should be 
 paid into Court, and on such further sum being 
 paid in as would cover the principal and interest 
 due, and 10 per cent, extra, the property should 
 vest in the purchaser. Milfoed Haven Eailwat 
 AND Estate Company v. Mowatt. In re Lake & 
 Tatlob'b Mortgage. Spaik v. Mowatt 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 402 
 
 5. Payment of Purchase-money — Sale hy 
 
 Trustees — Authority to Solicitor to receive Pur- 
 chase-money — Breach of Trust — Conveyancing and 
 Law of Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), 
 .«. 56.] The 56th section of the Conveyancing 
 Act, 1881, does not authorize vendors who are 
 trustees with a power of sale to require the pur- 
 chaser to pay the purchase-money to their soli- 
 citor on production of the deed of conveyance 
 duly executed in cases where before the Act they 
 could not have required the purchaser to pay the 
 purchase-money to their solicitor under a special 
 authority.— Trustees of real estate with a power 
 to sell and give receipts, sold the estate. The 
 purchasers required that the vendors should 
 attend in person to receive the purchase-money, 
 or should authorize the purchaser to pay it into 
 a bank to the joint account of the vendors. The 
 
 IV. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE — CONVEY- 
 VANCE — continue. 
 
 vendors insisted that the money should be paid 
 to their solicitor on his producing the conveyance 
 duly executed. They gave no special reason why 
 the money should be paid to the solioitor, but 
 relied on the 56th section of the Conveyancing 
 Act, 1881. A summons having been taken out 
 under the Vendor and Purchaser Act : — Held 
 (disseutiente Baggallay, L.J.), that the 56th sec- 
 tion had no application, and that the purchasers 
 had a right to insist on their requisition. — The 
 decision of Kay, J., reversed. In re Bellamy 
 AND Metbopolitan Boabd of Wobks 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 387 
 
 6. Payment of Purchase-money — Sale of 
 
 Beat Estate In/ Trustees — Bequisition hy Purchasers 
 that all the Trustees should attend to receive Pur- 
 clmse-moneys, or direct payment into a Bank.'] 
 Trustees of real estate sold parts of it to the Metro- 
 politan Board of Works, and they sent in a requi- 
 sition that the vendors should attend personally to 
 receive the purchase-moneys, or direct the moneys 
 to be paid to their joint account at a bank. One 
 or more of the trustees resided in the country. 
 On summonses taken out under the Vendor and 
 Pmchaser Act, 1874, by the board : — Mdd, that the 
 requisition must be complied with by the trustees, 
 and that they must pay the costs of the applica- 
 tion. — In re Bellamy and Metropolitan Board of 
 Works (24 Ch. D. 387) followed. In re Floweb 
 AND Metbopolitan Boaed of Works 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 592 
 
 V. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE— DEPOSIT. 
 
 1. Possessory Title — Lartd over Bailway 
 
 Arch — Vltra vires Sale hy Bailway Company to 
 Vendor — Sale of Possessory Title only — Forfeiture 
 of Deposit on refusal to complete.'] The Defendant 
 purchased from a railway company land over a 
 tunnel, which, not being " superfluous," the com- 
 pany had no power to sell, and the Plaintiff con- 
 tracted to pxirchase the land from the Defendant 
 as freehold building land. One of the conditions 
 of sale was that the title should commence with 
 the conveyance from the company ; another, that 
 the purchaser should not require the production 
 of, or investigate or make any objection or requi- 
 sition in respect of, such conveyance ; and another, 
 that the purchaser should] send his objections, if 
 any, to the title within seven days from the de- 
 livery of the abstract. The Plaintiff declined to 
 complete after the expiration of the seven days, 
 and sued for the deposit : — Held, by the Court of 
 Appeal (Jessel, M.R., and Brett and Cotton, L.JJ.) 
 reversing the decision of Lindley, J., that the de- 
 posit could not be recovered. Eosenberg v. Cook 
 
 [8 Q. B. D. 162 
 
 2. Purchaser's Failure to complete.] On 
 
 a sale of real estate the purchaser paid £500, 
 which was stated in the contract to be paid 
 " as a deposit, and in part payment of the pur- 
 chase-money." The contract provided that the 
 purchase should be completed on a day named, 
 and that if the purchaser should fail to comply 
 with the agreement the vendor should be at 
 liberty to re-sell and to recover any deficiency in 
 price as liquidated damages. The purchaser 
 was not ready with his purchase-money, aiid, 
 
( 1633 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1634 ) 
 
 V. VENDOR AND PUECHASEE -DEPOSIT — 
 
 continued. 
 after repeated delays, the vendor re-sold tlae 
 property for the same price. — The original pur- 
 chaser having brought an action for specific per- 
 formance, it was held by the Court of Appeal, 
 afBrming the decision of Kay, J., that the pur- 
 chaser had lost by his delay his right to enforce 
 specific performance :—fle?(i, also, that the de- 
 posit, although to be taken as part payment if 
 the contract was completed, was also a guarantee 
 for the performance of the contract, and that the 
 Plaintiff, having failed to perform his contract 
 within a reasonable time, had no right to a return 
 of the deposit.— PaZmej- r. Temple (9 Ad. & E. 
 508) distiaguished. Howe v. Smith 27 Ch. D. 89 
 
 3. Purchaser's Knowledge of Defect of 
 
 Tiile—BigM to rescind.] T. agreed to sell to C. 
 certain freehold houses, and to make a good 
 marketable title. On investigation of the title it 
 appeared that the houses were part of a property 
 which had been sold by a building society in lots, 
 subject to stringent restrictive covenants which 
 were admitted to make the title not a marketable 
 one. T. having declined to procure a release of 
 the covenants, C. brought an action to recover 
 back his deposit. T. adduced evidence that C. 
 knew of the restriction at the time of the contract, 
 and the jury found that he did : — Held, affirming 
 the decision of Lopes, J., that this evidence could 
 not be adtnitted to modify the terms of the express 
 contract, and that the Plaintitf was entitled to re- 
 cover. — Fdrebrother v. Gibson (1 De G-. & J. 
 602) and Leyland v. lUingworth (2 De G. P. & 
 J. 248) distinguished. Cato v. Thompson 
 
 [9 Q. B. D. 616 
 
 4. Vendor's right to follow the Money — 
 
 Forfeiture for Non-completion — Payment by Bank- 
 rupt in'Fraud of Creditors.] A bankrupt having 
 disposed of his goods in fraud of his creditors, 
 opened an account in a bank with the proceeds, 
 and having entered into a contract for the purchase 
 of land in an assumed name, paid a deposit to the 
 Defendant,the auctioneer, by a cheque drawn upon 
 the bank. The vendor and the Defendant acted 
 bon8,fide and without notice of the bankruptcy or 
 of the fraudulent conduct of the bankrupt : — Held, 
 that the bankrupt's trustee was not entitled to 
 recover the deposit from the Defendant so as to 
 prevent it from being forfeited to the vendor upon 
 the non-completion of the contract. Collins v. 
 Stimson - 11 ft, B. D. 142 
 
 VI. VENDOE AND PUECHASEIU-rEATrD. 
 
 1. Fiduciary Eelation — Executor — Pur- 
 chase of Testator's Estate by an Executor who has 
 not proved — Suit to set aside Sale.'] Held, that a 
 sale is not to be avoided merely because when 
 entered upon the purchaser has the power to become 
 trustee of the property purchased, as for instance 
 by proving the will which relates thereto, though 
 in point of fact he never does become such. Such 
 a purchaser is under no disability, and in order 
 to avoid such sale it must be shewn that he in 
 fact used his power in such a way as to render it 
 inequitable that the sale should be upheld. Clabk 
 V. Claek - - 9 App. Cas. 733 
 
 2. Misrepresentation.] The Plaintiifs put 
 
 up an hotel for sale on the 4th of August, 1882, 
 
 VI. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE — FEAUD — 
 
 continued. 
 stating in the particulars that it was let to " P. (a 
 most desirable tenant), at a rental of £400 for an 
 unexpired term of 27i years." The L. Co. sent 
 M., their secretary, to inspect the property. M. 
 reported that P., from the business he was doing, 
 could hardly pay the rent, and that the town in 
 which it was situate seemed to be in the last stage 
 of decay. The directors on receiving this report, 
 directed M. to bid up to £5000. M. went and 
 bought for £4700. Before completion, P. went 
 into liquidation, and the L. Co. refused to com- 
 plete. The Plaintiffs sued for specific perform- 
 ance. It was proved that on the 1st of May, 
 1882, the Lady Day quarter's rent was wholly 
 unpaid ; that a distress was then threatened, and 
 that P. paid £30 on the 6th of May, £40 on the 
 13th of June, and the remaining £30 shortly be- 
 fore the auction, and that no part of the quarter's 
 rent due at Midsummer had been paid. The 
 chairman of the company was orally examined, 
 and deposed most positively, that the company 
 would not have bought but for the representation 
 in the particulars that P. was a most desirable 
 tenant. Mr. Justice Denman held that there was 
 a material misrepresentation, and that the con- 
 tract had been entered into in reliance upon it. • 
 His Lordship accordingly dismissed the action, 
 and on a counter-claim by the Defendants, re- 
 scinded the contract. — Held, on appeal, that the 
 description of P. as a most desirable tenant was 
 not a mere expression of opinion, but contained 
 an implied assertion that the vendors knew of no 
 facts leading to the conclusion that he was not ; 
 that the circumstances relating to the Lady Day 
 rent shewed that he was not a desirable tenant ; 
 and that there was a misrepresentation : — Held, 
 also, that, as the positive testimony of the chair- 
 man, that but for this representation the company- 
 would not have bought, was not shaken on cross- 
 es^amination, and was believed by the Judge who- 
 saw and heard the witness, the Court of Appeal 
 would not disturb the finding that the representa- 
 tion had induced the company to enter into the 
 contract, and that the appeal must be dismissed. 
 Smith v. Land and House Pkopertt Cokpoba- 
 TioN - 28 Ch. D. 7 
 
 VII. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE— LIEN. 
 
 1. Money expended on Land — Befusal to 
 
 perform Contract.] A man who enters into a con- 
 tract to expend a certain sum of money on land, 
 and after spending part of it declines to perform 
 the contract, has no lien on the land for the 
 money which he has expended. Wallis v. Smith 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 243 
 
 2, Waiver of Lien — Vendor's Lien for 
 
 unpaid Purchase-money — Land in Register County 
 — West Biding Registry Act (2 <fc 3 Anne, c. 4)— - 
 Svb-Purchaser — Notice.] A vendor of land in a 
 register county, part of whose purchase-money 
 remains unpaid, is under no obligation l^o register 
 a memorial of the vendor's lien, but is entitled to- 
 rely on his equitable lieu against sub-purchasers . 
 who have notice of it actual or constructive. — A 
 purchaser of land in a register county is bound to . 
 inquire for and examine the deeds and documents 
 memorials of which are registered. — Land be- 
 longing to the trustees of a charity, situated ia 
 
 3 a 
 
( 1635 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1636 ) 
 
 VII. VENDOR AND PITECHASEE — LIEN — 
 
 continued, 
 the West Hiding of Yorkshire, was sold by the 
 trustees to R. & W., who were estate agents, and 
 bought the land with the intention of selling it 
 in lots for building purposes. Part of the pur- 
 chase-money remained unpaid, and the vendors 
 retained the deed of conveyance in their posses- 
 sion, but at the request of the purchasers, the 
 vendors' solicitor registered a memorial of it in 
 the West Riding registry. The vendors took no 
 written security for their unpaid purchase-money, 
 but relied on their equitable lien. R. & W. sold 
 the land again in lots. — P., one of the sub-pur- 
 chasers, who took a mortgage on a small lot, 
 made no inquiries himself, but left it, as he said, 
 to R. & W. to " manage the whole business " 
 for him, and they prepared the conveyance to 
 him. — ^The original vendors having brought an 
 action to enforce their lien for the unpaid pur- 
 chase-money against some of the sub-purchasers : 
 — Held, that there was no obligation on the 
 original vendors to register a memorial of the 
 vendor's lien. Whether the neglect of the sub- 
 purchasers to search the register and inquire for 
 the deed affected them with constructive notice 
 
 -of the Plaintiffs' lien, qusere. — But the Court 
 being convinced on the evidence that the vendors 
 knew that R. & W. wanted the deed of convey- 
 
 =ance registered for the purpose of selling, and 
 that they did sell, the land in lots, and that by 
 iheir conduct in registering the deed they had 
 led the sub-purchasers to believe that R. & W. had 
 power to dispose of the land as absolute owners : 
 — Held, that the vendors had waived their lien and 
 eould not enforce it against the sub-purchasers. 
 — Senible, the fact of P. having left R. & W. to 
 manage the business for him was not in itself 
 
 . sufficient to affect him with their knowledge of 
 ^he lien. Kettlewell v. Watson 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 685 ; 26 Ch. D. 501 
 
 VIII. VENDOB AND PTJECHASEE— PITECHASE 
 WITHOUT NOTICE. 
 
 , By i5& 46 Viet. e. 39 (^Conveyancing Act, 1882), 
 s. 8. — (1.) A purchaser shall not be prejudicially 
 .affected hy notice of any instrument, fact, or thing, 
 .unless — 
 
 {i.) It is within his own hnowledge, or would 
 have come to his knowledge if such in- 
 quiries and inspections had been made as 
 ought reasonably to have been made by 
 him; or 
 (ii.) In the same transactions with respect to 
 which a question of notice to the purchaser 
 arises, it lias come to the knowledge of his 
 counsel, as such, or of his solicitor, or other 
 agent, as such, or would have come to the 
 knowledge of his solicitor, or other agent, 
 as such, if such inquiries and inspections 
 had been made as ought reasonably to have 
 been made by the solicitor or other agent. 
 (2.) This section shall not exempt a purchaser 
 from any liability under, or any obligation to 
 perform or observe, any covenant, condition, provi- 
 sion, or restriction contained in any instrument 
 under which his title is derived mediately or im- 
 mediately; and such liability or obligation may be 
 enforced in the same manner and fo the same 
 extent as if this section had not been enacted. 
 
 VIII. VENDOE AND PTTECHASEE— PTJSCHASE 
 
 WITHOUT NOTICE — continued. 
 
 (3.) A purclmser shall not by reason of anything 
 in this section be affected by notice in any ease 
 where he would not have been so affected if this 
 section had not been enacted. 
 
 (4.) This section applies to purchases made either 
 before or after the commencement of the Act, 3lst 
 December, 1882 ; save that, where an action is 
 pending at the commencement of the Act, the rights 
 of the parties shall not be affected by this section. 
 
 1. Forged Deed — Fraud — Personation — 
 
 Purchaser for Value without Notice — Middlesex 
 Registry Act (7 Anrie, c. 20) — Unregistered Will 
 — Conveyance by Seir-at-law — Order for delivery 
 up of Title Deeds^Execution of Deed^Presump- 
 tion of Knowledge of Contents — Costs, Appeal for 
 — Parties — Trustee and Cestui que Trust — Judi- 
 cature Act, 1878, s. 49 — Rules of Court, 1875, 
 Order XTI., r. 1— Order LV.'] A son who was 
 heir-at-law to his father, who was one of the 
 executors and trustees of his father's will, though 
 he had not proved the wiU, and whose Christian 
 names and description were identical with those 
 of his father, after his father's death, executed 
 mortgages of freehold and leasehold property of 
 the father and applied the mortgage money to 
 his own purposes. He handed over the title 
 deeds to the mortgagees. The transaction took 
 place without the knowledge of his mother and 
 sister, who were co-trustees and co-executrixes 
 with him, and who had proved the will. The 
 will had not been registered in the Middlesex 
 Registry, though the property was situate in that 
 county. The mortgage deeds were registered. 
 They purported to be executed by the absolute 
 owner of the property, and the solicitor who 
 acted for both parties believed the son to be the 
 absolute owner. The son told him nothing about 
 the father's will. The solicitor searehed the 
 Middlesex Registry. The son took a beneficial 
 interest under the trusts of the father's will. 
 After the son's death the fraud was discovered, 
 and the mother and sister, as trustees of the 
 father's will, brought an action against the mort- 
 gagees, claiming a declaration that the mortgages 
 were void against them, and delivery up of the 
 title deeds. The other beneficiaries under the 
 will were made Defendants : — 3eld (by Kay, J., 
 and the. Court of Appeal), that the son in exe- 
 cuting the mortgage deeds was personating his 
 father ; that the deeds were forgeries and passed 
 nothing to the mortgagees, except tlie son's bene- 
 ficial interest under the father's will ; and that 
 the mortgagees could obtain no title by virtue 
 of the Middlesex Registry Act -.—Seld, also, that 
 the mortgagees must deliver up the title deeds to 
 the Plaintiffs -.—Seld. by Kay, J., that the mort- 
 gagees must pay the Plaintiff's costs of the action, 
 and also the costs of the co-Defendants -.—Beld, 
 by the Court of Appeal, that, inasmuch as, by 
 virtue of rule 7 of Order xvi., trustees may sue on 
 behalf of their cestuis que trust, the beneficiaries 
 ought not to have been made parties to the action. 
 Consequently, the order that the mortgagees 
 should pay their costs, could be appealed from, 
 and that order was discharged, — Since the Judi- 
 cature Act the Chancery Division has jurisdiction 
 on the application of the legal owner of title 
 
( 1637 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1638 ) 
 
 VIII. VENDOR AND PUECHASEB—PTTECHASE 
 , WITHOTIT THOTIC^— continued. 
 
 deeda to order them to be delivered up by a pur- 
 chaser for value without notice. — McLeod v. 
 Drummond (14 Ves. 353; 17 Ves. 152) distin- 
 guished. — Per Lindley, L.J. : The sou could 
 have been convicted of forgery by reason of his 
 •executing the mortgage deeds. — Per Jessel, M.K. : 
 In the absence of evidence to the contrary there 
 is a legal presumption that a man knows the 
 contents Of a deed which he executes. In re 
 CooPBB. Cooper v. Veset - 20 Ch. D. 611 
 
 2. Married Woman — Notice of Settlement.'] 
 
 When a married woman executes a mortgage 
 there is no obligation on the mortgagee to inquire 
 whether a settlement was made on her marriage. 
 Lloyd's Banking Co. v. Jones - 29 Ch, D. 221 
 
 IX. VENDOE AND PUEOHASEE— EESCISSION 
 1. Notice of Defects of Title — Repudia- 
 tion hy Purchaser — Licence to assign,] A railway 
 company agreed to demise to E. for building pur- 
 poses certain lands which they had acquired 
 imder their compulsory powers. E. was restrained 
 from assigning without licence. The property 
 had formerly belonged to a building society, which 
 had sold it in lots, each purchaser entering into 
 restrictive covenants for the benefit of the owners 
 of the other lots, and the conveyance to the com- 
 pany was expressly made subject to these cove- 
 naats. B. agreed to sell his interest under the 
 contract to K. E. at the time of the contract 
 knew of the restrictive covenants, but believed 
 that the compulsory purchase by the railway com- 
 pany had extinguished tliem. B. did not know 
 of their existence. E.'s solicitors having dis- 
 covered the existence of the covenants objected to 
 the title. E.'s solicitors replied that the com- 
 pulsory purchase had extinguished them. E. 
 then refused to proceed with the purchase. E. 
 brought a bill for specific performance, but hav- 
 ing afterwards resumed possession, and built, in 
 order to avoid a forfeiture, the action came on as 
 an action for damages. E. had never obtained a 
 licence to assign : — Held, by Kay, J., that as E. 
 had not either at the time of the repudiation of 
 the contract by the Defendant, or subsequently, 
 obtained a licence to assign, he never was in a 
 position to perform his part of the contract, and 
 therefore could not recover damages. Semble, 
 also, that E. had not such knowledge that the 
 property was still subject to the covenants as to 
 debar him from requiring a title free from them. 
 — Seld, on appeal, that E. was entitled to object 
 to the title on the ground of the restrictive cove- 
 nants, for that in order to take a case out of the 
 general rule that a purchaser is entitled to require 
 a good title, it must be shewn that at the time of 
 the contract he knew that a good title could not 
 be made, and that here such knowledge was not 
 shewn, as E. believed that' the covenants had 
 been extinguished. — Semble, that E.'s objection 
 on the ground that a licence to assign had not 
 been obtained was not valid, inasmuch as he had 
 repudiated the contract before the time had ar- 
 rived at which it was necessary for the vendor to 
 produce a licence. Ellis v. Eogebs 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 661 
 
 2. - — Voidable lease.] A vendor contracted I 
 
 IX. VENDOE AND PURCHASEE— EESCISSION 
 
 — continued. 
 to sell and a purchaser to purchase an agreement 
 for a lease. The purchaser afterwards repudiated 
 the contract. — At the date of the agreement, and 
 of the repudiation, the agreement to lease was 
 voidable at the will of a third party, but the third 
 party took no steps to avoid the agreement, but 
 was willing to confirm it on certain conditions : — 
 Held, that the purchaser was entitled to repudiate 
 the contract. Bbeweb v. Beoadwood 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 105 
 
 Eight to rescind under conditions of sale. 
 
 See Cases under Venuoh and Pue- 
 CHASEB — Conditions of Sale. 6 — 11. 
 
 X. VENDOE AND PUECHASEE— TITLE. 
 
 Orders of Court.] By 44 & 45 Viet. c. 41 {Con- 
 veyancing Act, 1881), 8. 70. — (1.) An order of the 
 Court under any statutory or other jurisdiction 
 shall not as against a purchaser he invalidated on 
 the ground of want of jurisdiction, or want of any 
 concurrence, consent, notice, or service, whether the 
 purchaser has notice of any such want or not. 
 
 (2.) This section applies to leases and sales made 
 unAer the Settled Estates Act, 1877. 
 
 (3.) This section applies to all orders made 
 before commencement of the Act, except any order 
 which had been set aside, or questioned in a pend- 
 ing suit. 
 
 Searches.] By 45 & 46 Vict. c. 39 (Conveyanc- 
 ing Act, 1882)— 
 
 Sect. 2. — (1.) Where any person requires, for 
 purposes of this section, search to be made in the 
 Central Office of the Supreme Court of Judicature 
 for entries of judgments, deeds, or other matters or 
 documents, whereof entries are required or allowed 
 to he made in that office hy any Act described in 
 Part I. of the First Schedule to the Conveyancing 
 Act of 1881, or hy any other Act, he may deliver in 
 the office a requisition in that behalf, referring to 
 this section. 
 
 (2.) Thereupon the proper officer shall diligently 
 malce the search required, and shall make and file 
 in the office a certificate setting forth the result there- 
 of; arid office copies of that certificate shall he issued 
 on requisition, and an office copy sliall he evidence 
 of the certificate. 
 
 (3.) In favour of a purchaser, as against persons 
 interested under or in respect of judgments, deeds 
 or other matters or documents, whereof entries are 
 required or allowed as aforesaid, the certificate, 
 according to the tenor thereof, shall be conclusive, 
 affirmatively or negatively, as the case may be. 
 
 (4.) Every requisition under this section shall be 
 in writing, signed by the person mdlcing the same, 
 specifying the name against which he desires search 
 to be made, or in relation to which he requires an 
 office copy certificate of result of search, and other 
 suffijsient particulars ; and the person making any 
 such requisition shall not he entitled to a search, or 
 an office copy certificate, until he has satisfied the 
 proper officer that the same is required for thepw- 
 poses of this section. 
 
 (5.) General Bules shall he made for purposes of 
 this section, prescribing forms and contents of re- 
 quisitions and certificates, and regulating the 
 practice of the office, and prescribing, with the 
 concurrence of the Commissioners of Her Majesty's 
 Treasury, the fees to he taken therein; which Bules 
 
 3 G 2 
 
( 1639 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1640 ) 
 
 X. VENDOR AND PTTECHASER— TITLE— conid. 
 
 shall be deemed Rules of Court within section seven- 
 teen of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876, as 
 altered by section nineteen of the Supreme Court of 
 Judicature Act, 1881, and may be made, at any 
 time after the passing of this Act, to take effect on 
 or after the commencement of this Act. 
 
 (6.) If any officer, cleric, or person employed in 
 tlie office commits, or is party or privy to, any act 
 of fraud or collusion, or is wilfully negligent in the 
 making of or otherwise in relation to any certifi- 
 cate or office copy under this section, he shall be 
 guilty of a misdemeanor. 
 
 (7.) Nothing in this section or in any rule made 
 thereunder shall talce away, abridge, or prejudicially 
 affect any right which any person may have inde- 
 pendently of this section to make any search in the 
 office; and every saoh search may be made as if 
 this section or any such rule had not been enacted 
 or made. 
 
 (8.) Where a solicitor obtains an office copy 
 certificate of result or search under this section, he 
 shall not be answerable in respect of any loss that 
 may arise from error in the certificate. 
 
 (9.) Wliere the solicitor is acting for trustees, 
 executors, agents, or other persons in a fiduciary 
 position, those persons also shall not be so ansicer- 
 able. 
 
 (10.) Where such persons obtain such an office 
 copy without a solicitor, they shall also be pro- 
 tected in like manner. 
 
 (11.) Nothing in this section applies to deeds 
 enrolled under the Fines and Recoveries Act, or 
 under any other Act, or under any statutory rule. 
 
 (12.) This section does not extend to Ireland. 
 
 1. Expense of Abstract — Deed not in 
 
 Vendor's Possession — Expense of making — Con- 
 veyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881 (44: & 
 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 3, sub-s. 6.] A vendor ia 
 bound at hia own expense to produce to the pur- 
 chaser a proper abstract of title, either for the 
 statutory period of forty years, or for such other 
 period as may be agreed upon, and sect. 3, sub- 
 sect. 6, of the Conveyancing Act, 1881, is not in- 
 tended to interfere ■with the performance by the 
 vendor of that duty, but proceeds on the assump- 
 tion that the vendor has produced such an 
 abstract. — Therefore on an open contract the 
 vendor must bear the expense of procuring and 
 making an abstract of any deed forming part of 
 the forty years' title, although such deed be not 
 in his possession.' — The word " abstract " in that 
 sub-section is to be distinguished from the 
 " abstract " of title to which the purchaser is 
 entitled ; and a purchaser cannot be said to 
 " require an abstract of a particular deed," merely 
 because he requires an abstract of title for the 
 prescribed length of time, which involves the 
 abstracting of that deed. — Decision of Pearson, J., 
 reversed. In re Johnson and Tustdj 28 Ch. D. 
 [84 ; 30 Ch. D. 42 
 
 2. leasehold — Evidence of performance of 
 
 Covenant — Conveyancing and Law of Property 
 Act, 1881 (44 <fc 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 3, sub-ss. 4, 6 
 — Peppercorn Benf] The Conveyancing and Law 
 of Property Act, 1881, a. 3, sub-s. 4, does not 
 ^Pply to a peppercorn rent so as by production of 
 a receipt for a peppercorn to relieve the vendors 
 of a building lease from the obligation of shewing 
 
 X. VENDOR AND PTIECHASEE— TITLE— conM.. 
 
 that the covenants v?ith their lessor (to finish the 
 
 house within months to the satisfaction of 
 
 the lessor's surveyor) have been duly performed- 
 and observed. — The certificate of the lessor's sur- 
 veyor that the house has been finished to his- 
 satisfaotion is not a " certificate " or " evidence "' 
 within sect. 3, sub-sect. 6, the expense of obtain- 
 ing which must be borne by the purchaser, but tu 
 part of the title itself. Decision of Chitty, J., 
 afiirmed. In re Moody and Yates' Oonthact 
 [28 Ch. D. 661 ; 80 Ch. D. 344 
 
 3. Leasehold — Restrictive Covenant — 
 
 Constructive Notice — Lessor's Title — Vendor araff 
 Purchaser Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 78), ». a 
 sub-s. 1.] A purchaser or lessees having notice of' 
 a deed forming part of the chain of title of Ms- 
 vendor or lessor, has constructive notice of the 
 contents of such deed, and is not protected fronn 
 the consequences of not looking at the deed, even 
 by the most express representation on the part 
 of the vendor or lessor that it contains no restric- 
 tive covenants, nor anything in any way affecting 
 the title. — The rule that a lessee has constructive- 
 notice of his lessor's title has not been altered by- 
 sect. 2, sub-sect 1, of the Vendor and PTirchaser 
 Act, 1874, but a lessee is now in the same posi- 
 tion with regard to notice as if he had, before the- 
 Act, stipulated not to inquire into his lessor's- 
 title.— Wilson v. BaH (Law Eep. 1 Ch. t463> 
 observed upon. Patman v. Hakland 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 353 
 
 4. Notice of Trust — Objections to Title — 
 
 Recitals in Deed."] In 1840 property was mort- 
 gaged to W. in fee, there being nothing in tlie- 
 mortgage deed to shew that he was not the bene- 
 iicial owner of the mortgage money. He died in.' 
 1842, having by his will devised and bequeathed 
 his real and personal estate to three trustees (of 
 whom his wile was one), on trusts for the benefit 
 of his wife and children, and having appointed 
 the same three persons executors. He also de- 
 vised and bequeathed his trust and mortgage 
 estates to the same three persons, subject to tlie- 
 trusts and equities affecting the same respec- 
 tively. The widow alone proved the will, and. 
 alone acted as trustee. The other two trustees, 
 disclaimed the trusts. In 1854 the widow ob- 
 tained a decree absolute foreclosing the mortgage; 
 In 1865 she, by a deed indorsed on the mortgage- 
 deed, conveyed the property, without receiving: 
 any pecuniary consideratirai for it, to K., C, and 
 B., in fee, as joint tenants at law and in equity. 
 The conveyance contained a recital that the tes- 
 tator held the mortgage money on an account 
 under which K., C, and B. were then solely enti- 
 tled thereto, as was thereby acknowledged, whei-e- 
 by the widow, as trustee under the testator's will, 
 was trustee only of the property for K., C, and 
 B., and they had requested her to convey it tc 
 them. On a subsequent sale of the property by 
 persons who had purchased it from K., C, and B,,. 
 the purchasers required evidence of the truth of 
 the recital in the deed of 1865 that K., 0., and B. 
 were entitled to the mortgage money. And, 
 assuming that the testator was a trustee of the 
 mortgage money, the purchasers required the 
 vendors to shew that the property sold was com- 
 prised in the trust ; that K., C, and B. were duly 
 
( 1641 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1642 ) 
 
 X. VENDOR AND PUBCHASER— TITLE— conitJ. 
 appointed to succeed the testator in the trust ; 
 and that they had an effectual power of sale and 
 of giving a receipt for the purchase-money : — 
 Beld, that it would be contrary to the practice of 
 tlie Court to go behind a recital evidently framed 
 for the purpose of keeping notice of trusts off the 
 conveyance ; that the req[ui8itions need not be 
 answered ; and that a good title had been shewn 
 by the vendors. In re Hakman and Uxbkidge 
 
 .AND ElOKMANSWOKTH RAILWAY COMPANY 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 720 
 
 5. Order of Court — Irregularity — Frotec- 
 
 •tion of Purchaser — Conveyancing and Law of 
 Property Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 41), s. 70— 
 SettUd Estates Act, 1877 (40 & 41 Vict. c. 18).] 
 An order for sale under the Settled Estates Act, 
 1877, contained a direction dispensing with the 
 concurrence or consent of the persons entitled, 
 whether beneficially or otherwise, to any estate or 
 interest subsequent to a certain estate tail, with- 
 'Out naming them. The purchaser objected to the 
 title on the ground that the order on the face of 
 dt was irregular : — Meld, by Hall, T.C., that under 
 the special circumstances of the case it was un- 
 necessary for the parties whose concurrence was 
 dispensed with to be named in the order : — Meld, 
 by the Court of Appeal, that under the 70th 
 .section of the Couveyaucuig and Law of Property 
 Act, 1881, the purchaser would in any event have 
 a good title— that section being applicable whether 
 the objection to the order appears on face of 
 it or not, and that the purchaser must complete. 
 In re Hall Dabe's Conteaot - 21 Ch. D. 41 
 
 6. Eestrictlve Covenant — Railway Com- 
 pany — Superfluous Lands— Lands Clauses Con- 
 solidation Act, 1845 (8 <£: 9 Vict. c. 18), ss. 127, 128.] 
 Upon delivery of the abstract by a vendor who 
 Jiad contracted to deduce a good title in fee 
 simple, it appeared that one of his predecessors 
 had covenanted in his purchase deed not to use 
 Ae property (which was a semi-detached villa 
 standing on an eighth of an acre in a residential 
 neighbourhood) or any part of it for the purpose 
 of gasworks or a public-house : — Held, that this 
 was such a restriction upon the user and enjoy- 
 ment of the property as to constitute a fatal ob- 
 jection to tlie title. — A railway oompauy selling 
 its superfluous land is at liberty to impose such 
 restriolive conditions upon the use and enjoyment 
 of the land as may most conduce to their ad- 
 ■vanfage as vendors, and there is nothing in the 
 Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, to de- 
 prive them in this respect of the rights of ordi- 
 nary vendors. In re Higgins and Hitchman's 
 Contract - - 21 Ch. D. 95 
 
 7. Trust for Sale — Will — Charge of 
 
 Debts — Partnership Property — Power of Executor 
 to sell.'^ A testator, who carried on business in 
 partnership with his brother, by his will, dated 
 the 23rd of November, 1861, directed payment of 
 his debts, and, after bequeathing specific and 
 pecuniary legacies, he devised and bequeathed 
 all his real and leasehold and personal estate to 
 trustees, upon trust for sale and conversion into 
 money, and to hold the proceeds of sale on cer- 
 tain trusts. In 1872 the brother and the testa- 
 tor's widow, who was then the sole trustee and 
 
 X. VENDOR AND PURCHASER— TITLE— conirf. 
 executrix of the will, joined in selling and con- 
 veying real estate, of which the brother and the 
 testator had been tenants in common, and which 
 was in fact partnership property, to a limited 
 company who purchased the business. The pur- 
 chase-money was to be paid partly in cash and 
 partly in fully paid-up shares and debentures of 
 the company. At the same time an arrangement 
 was made for the handing over of the whole pur- 
 chase-money to the bankers of the partnership, to 
 whom the partnership was largely indebted, and 
 whose debt was secured by mortgages of the 
 partnership property, in satisfaction of the debt 
 due to the bankers, the bankers undertaking to 
 pay the other creditors of the partnership, and 
 handing back to the executrix a sum of cash and 
 some of the debentures, and providing certain 
 other benefits for the brother. The conveyance 
 of the real estate to the company contained a 
 recital that the brother and the widow were 
 entitled to the property in equal undivided 
 moieties, and the widow purported to convey 
 as trustee of her husband's will, but it was not 
 stated in the deed that she was his executrix or 
 that the property was partnership property. — On 
 a subsequent sale of the property by the company, 
 the purchaser objected that the sale by the widow 
 was not authorized by the trust for sale, the con- 
 sideration not being entirely paid in money : — 
 Held, that the arrangement aa to the disposition 
 of tlie purchase-money received from the com- 
 pany amounted to a compromise by the widow 
 with the creditors and with the surviving partner 
 into which it was competent to her as executrix 
 to enter under sect. 30 of the Act 23 & 24 Vict. 
 c. 145 : — And held, on the authority of Career v. 
 Cartwright (Law Eep. 7 H. L. 731), that this 
 being so, and the real estate being partnership 
 property which the widow, as executrix, was 
 entitled to sell, and inasmuch as she, as trustee, 
 had the legal estate, and as executrix was the 
 proper person to receive the purchase-money, the 
 i«ile to the company was a valid one and their 
 title good. ■Westx)p England and South Wales 
 DisTKiCT Bank v. Murch 23 Ch. D. 138 
 
 8. Trust to pay or permit to receive — 
 
 Charge of Debts — Devise to Executors — Inquiry as 
 to Existence of Debts — Requisitions — Objection to 
 Root of Title not too late though stipulated Time 
 expired."] A testator directed that his debts should 
 be paid by his executrix and executor thereinafter 
 named. He then devised all his freehold and 
 copyhold estates to his wife and son, and be- 
 queathed to them his leaseholds and other per- 
 sonal estate and declared that his real and per- 
 sonal estates were devised and bequeathed to 
 them "upon trust to pay the rents, issues, and 
 profits, and the interest, dividends, and income of 
 my said real and personal estates unto or permit 
 the same to be received by my said wife during 
 her life," and after her decease to raise and pay 
 certain legacies to other pei sons which were to be 
 treated as vested from his decease, and as to all 
 the rest, residue and remainder of his real and 
 personal estates after the death of his wife he 
 devised and bequeathed the same to his said son, 
 his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, 
 according to the natures and qualities thereof, 
 
( 1643 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1P44 ) 
 
 X. VENDOE AND PTJECHASEB— TITLE— <!0»«(i. 
 and empowered him to postpone payment of the 
 legacies for two years from the widow's death, 
 the legacies to carry interest from her death. 
 The widow and son were appointed executors. 
 The testator died in May, 1871, and the will was 
 proved by the executors. In June, 1881, the 
 widow and son put up for sale part of the free- 
 hold estate, under conditions of sale providing 
 that requisitions must be delivered within ten 
 days from the delivery of the abstract ; time to be 
 of the essence of the contract. The purchaser 
 made a requisition that the legatees must release 
 the estate from their legacies. The vendors re- 
 fused to procure their concurrence, on the ground 
 that the real estates were charged with debts, and 
 that the vendors could sell discharged from the 
 legacies. The purchaser then asked whether any 
 debts remained unpaid. The vendors declined 
 to answer the question, and the point was then 
 raised, after the time for sending in requisitions 
 had expired, whether any charge of debts was 
 created. The vendors persisting in their refusal 
 to answer the question whether any debts remained 
 unpaid, the purchaser took out a summons to have 
 it declared that no charge of debts was created by 
 the will, and if it was, then that the vendors were 
 bound to answer the inquuy as to debts. — Held, 
 by Kay, J., that as the purchaser's objection went 
 to the question whether the vendors had any 
 power to sell he was not precluded by the condi- 
 tions from raising it. — Meld, further that as the 
 real estate was not devised to the executors in 
 trust for other persons, nor devised to them bene- 
 ficially in such a way as to give them equal bene- 
 ficial interests, the question whether the direction 
 to them to pay debts charged the real estate with 
 debts was too doubtful for the title to be forced 
 on the purchaser. — Held, on appeal, that the legal 
 estate in the real property was not limited to the 
 widow for life with remainder to the son, but was 
 vested in the two as joint tenants in fee. — Doe 
 V. Biggs (2 Taunt. 109) distinguished.. — Held, 
 further that as the executors took the whole legal 
 fee as joint tenants, the direction to them to pay 
 debts charged the real estate with debts, though 
 they took unequal beneficial interests in it. — 
 Held, further that where executors in whom the 
 legal fee is vested are selling real estate charged 
 with debts, a purchaser is not bound or entitled 
 to inquire whether debts remain unpaid unless 
 twenty years have elapsed from the testator's 
 decease. In re Tanqueeay-Willatjme and 
 Landau - - _ 20 Ch. D. 465 
 
 9. Waiver of Objections — Possession taken 
 
 hy Purchaser lefore Completion — Notice of Defects 
 of Title — Distinction between removeable and irre- 
 moveable Defects.'] If a contract for the sale of 
 land is silent as to the title which is to be shewn 
 by the vendor, the legal implication that the 
 purchaser is entitled to a good title may be re- 
 butted by evidence that, before the execution of 
 the contract, the purchaser had notice of defects 
 in the vendor's title.— But, it the contract ex- 
 pressly provides that a good title shall be shewn 
 the purchaser is entitled to insist on a good title, 
 notwithstanding that before the execution of the 
 contract he had notice of defects in the vendor's 
 title. — If the contract contains no stipulation as 
 
 X. VENDOE AND PTJECHASEK— TITLE— conW. 
 to possession being taken by the purchaser before 
 completion, and he takes possession with know- 
 ledge that there are defects in the title which the 
 vendor cannot remove, the taking possession 
 amounts to ii, waiver of the purchaser's right to 
 require the removal of those defects, or to re- 
 pudiate his contract. If, on the other hand, the 
 defects are removeable by the vendor, the taking; 
 of possession does not amount to such a waiver. 
 In, re Gloag and Miller's Conteaot 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 320 
 
 XI. VENDOR AND PUECHASEE — TITLE 
 DEEDS. 
 
 — Copyholds — Enfranchisement — Acknow- 
 ledgment of Bight to produce Documents — Lands 
 Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 <fe 9 Vict. c. 18), 
 s. 96 — Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 
 1881 (44 * 45 Vict. o. 41), s. 3, sub-s. 2, «. 9.]; 
 Copyhold land having been taken by a corpora- 
 tion under the powers of the Lands Clauses Act, 
 and a draft conveyance ti-om the copyholder 
 being in the course of settlement, the corporation 
 applied to the lord of the manor under sect. 96, 
 for enfranchisement upon certain terms, which 
 were agreed to. In settling the draft enfran- 
 chisement deed, the corporation claimed to have 
 from the lord and his trustee to uses an acknow- 
 ledgment of the right of the corporation to pro- 
 duction of the documents of title to the manor, 
 and of the Court rolls, relating to the heredita- 
 ments enfranchised, and to delivery of copies- 
 thereof, and, also from both, an undertaking for 
 the safe custody of the same : — Held, that the 
 corporation were entitled to no more than an 
 acknowledgment by the lord and his trustee of 
 the right of the corporation to the production of 
 the documents of title to the manor, and of the 
 Court rolls, so far as tliey related to the heredita- 
 ments enfranchised, and to delivery of copies 
 thereof; and an undertaking by the lord alone 
 for safe custody. — ^Whether the corporation were 
 entitled to so much as the above, qusere. In re 
 Agg-Gakdneb - - - 25 Ch. D. 600 
 
 VENDOE AND PUECHASES— Action to recover 
 deposit — Counter-claim for specific per- 
 formance — Transfer to Chancery Civi- 
 vision - 13 ft. B. D. 540 
 
 S'eePEAOTICE — SUPHEME CoUKT — TeAKS- 
 EEE. 2. 
 
 Attachment of purchase-money 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 508 
 See Peaotice — Stipkejie Cotjet — Gas- 
 
 NISHEE OeDEBS. 2. 
 
 Conditions of sale — Approval of title 
 
 See Condition. 2. [9 ft. B. D. 27& 
 
 Conveyance — Execution by attorney 
 
 See PoWEB OF Attoeney — Statutes. 
 
 Doubtful title 18 Ch. D. 381 
 
 See Bankkdptot — Assets. 15. 
 
 Evidence — ^Intention of parties to convey- 
 ance - - 9 ft. B. D. 606 
 See Phison. 3. 
 
 Fire insurance — Fire after contract 
 
 [18Ch. D. 1; 11 ft. B.D. 380 
 
 See Insurance, Fiee. 3, 4. 
 
( 1645 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1646 ) 
 
 TENBOE AND PTmCHASEB— conWnueiJ. 
 
 Interest on purchase-money 18 Ch. D. 146 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — CoMPrLSOBT 
 
 POWEBS. 6. 
 Misrepresentation - - 27 Ch. D, 424 
 
 ' See False Eepeesbntation. 2. 
 
 Misrepresentation by vendor's agent 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 194 
 See Pbincipal and Agent — Authority. 
 1. 
 
 Mortgage— Eoreclosure— Priorities 
 
 [12 Q,. B. D. 423 
 
 See MoETGAGE — Pkioeitt. 2. 
 Mortgage deed— Stamp - 17 Ch. D. 10 
 
 See Eetenue — Stasips. 3. 
 
 Purchase by City ward— Consent of Charity 
 
 Commissioners - 24 Ch. D. 687, 691 
 See Chaeity — Commissioners. 7, 8. 
 
 Purchaser without notice 18 Ch. D. 188 
 
 See Undue Influence. 
 
 Purchaser without notice - 18 Ch. D. 93 
 
 See Executor — Administration. 3. 
 
 Eight of entry — Sale of — Forfeiture 
 
 [9 Q. B. S. 128 ; 15 Q. B. D. 491 
 See EiQHT OP Entry. 1, 2. 
 
 Sale of two tenements contemporaneously — 
 
 Easements - - 16 Ch. S. 365 
 
 See Light — Title. 6. 
 
 Sale under Settled Estates Act — Irregu- 
 larity - 21 Ch. D. 41 
 See Settled Estates Acts. 1. 
 
 Title — Legal estate in executors 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 190 
 See Will — Estate in Realty. 1. 
 
 Title — Long term — Enlargement into fee 
 
 [29 Ch. D. 1007, 1009 (n.) 
 See Leasehold — Long Terms. 1, 2. 
 
 Title— Trust for sale 27 Ch. D. 315 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 18. ' 
 
 Title— Unstamped deed - 24 Ch, D, 119 
 
 See Eevenub — Stamps. 5. 
 
 Vendor's lieu — Deposit of deeds with 
 
 banker - - - 6 App. Cas. 722 
 
 See Banker — Lien. 
 
 p— — Vendor's lien — Devise of estate — Locke 
 King's Act 24 Ch. D. 94 
 
 See Will — Exoneration. 3. 
 
 Vendor's lien — Limited owner — Company's 
 
 power of taking land - 16 Ch, D. 411 
 See Company — Debentures. 7. 
 
 VENUE — Action assigned to Chancery Division 
 [26 Ch. D. 621 ; ^ Ch. D. 486 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trial. 
 6,7. 
 
 False pretences — Letter forwarded to place 
 
 out of jurisdiction - 12 Q. B. S. 23 
 See Criminal Law — Practice. 4. 
 
 VEESICT — Compensation for taking land 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 614 
 
 See Labourers' Dwellings Acts. 2. 
 
 VESTED INTEBESI — Endowed Schools Act 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 91, 463 
 See Endowed Schools Act. 2, 3. 
 
 VESTING— Heirlooms - - 24 Ch. D. 102 
 
 See Will — Heirloom. 1. 
 
 Legacy.' , 
 
 iSee Cases under Will — Vesting. 
 
 Legacy — Grift over on death before final 
 
 division - - 18 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 1. 
 
 " Payable "—Settlement 10 App. Cas, 422 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 9. 
 
 ■ Portions 
 
 See WiLL- 
 
 -Class. 6. 
 
 21 Ch. D. 806 
 
 Property of borough — Local board 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 176 
 
 See Local Government Acts — Local 
 Authority. 9. 
 
 VESTING ORDER- Trustee Acts. 
 
 See Cases under Trustee Acts— Vest- 
 ing Orders. 
 
 VESTMENTS - - - 7 App. Cas. 240 
 
 See Practice— Ecclesiastical — Public 
 Worship Act. 1. 
 
 VESTRY — Action against vestrymen for improper 
 expenditure of rates — Costs 23 Ch. D. 60 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 15. 
 
 -Liability 9 Q. B. D. 
 [451; 16Ch. D. 449 
 
 -Management Acts. 
 
 Highway — Jfuisance- 
 
 See Metbopolis- 
 5,6. 
 
 Qualification of vestryman — ^Eating — Occu- 
 pation - IS Q. B, D. 82 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 
 17. 
 
 VETERINARY SURGEON. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. c. 62, amends the law 
 relating to Yeterinary Surgeons. 
 
 Sect. 1. Act to he cited as the Veterinary Sur- 
 geons Act, 1881. 
 
 Sect. 2. Definitions and interpretations. 
 
 Sect. 3. Fromsions as to register of veterinary 
 
 Sect. i. Provision for examination of students m 
 Scotland. 
 
 Sect. 5. Power to registrar to correct the register. 
 
 Sect. 6. Empoioers council of the Royal College 
 of Veterinary Surgeons to remove names from the 
 register. 
 
 Sect. 7. Empowers the council to restore names to 
 the register. 
 
 Sect. 8. Proceedings for removal or restoration 
 of names. 
 
 Sect. 9. Copy of register to ie evidence of regis- 
 tration. 
 
 Sect. 10. Notice of death of practitioners to be 
 sent by registrar of deaths. 
 
 Sect. 11. Penalty on obtaining registration by 
 false representation. 
 
 Sect. 12. Penalty for wilful falsification of 
 register. 
 
 Sect. 13. Provisions for registration of colonial 
 or foreign practitioners with recognised diploma. 
 
 Sect. 14. Confirmation of charter of Boyal Col- 
 lege of Veterinary _ Surgeons. 
 
( 1647 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1648 ) 
 
 VETEEINAEY SVnOIiOS^eontinued. 
 
 Sect. 15. Title of existing veterinary surgeons to 
 he registered in college. 
 
 Sect, 16. Penalty on false representation as to 
 membership of college. 
 
 Sect. 17. Penalty on misrepresentation after 1883 
 as to qualification to practise, and incapacity to 
 recover fee, &c. 
 
 Sect. 18. Exercise of powers of Privy Council. 
 
 Sect. 19. Fines and imprisonment to be recovered 
 and imposed sunvmarily. 
 
 Sect. 20. Saving rights of the Boyal College of 
 Veterinary Surgeons. 
 
 VICE-ADMIEALTY COURT— Jurisdiction 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 356 
 
 See Ship — Maeitime Lien. 7. 
 
 8 App. Cas. 329 
 
 - AOMIBALTr JtlKISDlO- 
 
 See Phactice - 
 
 TION. 5. 
 
 VICTOEIA— Bankruptcy in— Will proved in 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Paetition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 
 ■ Law of 
 
 See Colonial Law- 
 
 - 9 App. Cas. 365 
 
 -ViCTOEIA. 4. 
 
 VIS nAJOE — Contract governed by lex loci — 
 War - 12 a. B. D. 589 
 
 See Conflict of Latvs. 1. 
 
 VISITOE— Lunatic— Order for access 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 26 
 
 See LtTNATio — Inquisition. 1. 
 
 VOLUNTAEY AllOWANCE— Banknipt 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 70 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Assets. 14. 
 
 VOLUHTAEY CONVEYANCE. 
 
 1. Gift of rumitnre by letters — No De- 
 claration of Trust— Subsequent Will of Husband- 
 Wife not entitled to the Gift.'] A husband, by 
 three letters written and signed by him and handed 
 to his wife, gave her furniture and other articles 
 for her sole and absolute use. He afterwards made 
 his will, bequeathing certain legacies and making 
 other dispositions of his property, and giving the 
 residue of it to trustees in truot for his wife for 
 life with remainder to six nieces absolutely. The 
 furniture and other articles were at the time of 
 the husband's death in the house which had been 
 occupied by him and liis wife, aud the whole had 
 been used by tliem in the ordinary way : — Held, 
 that the furniture, &c., formed part of the^ hus- 
 band's eat&ie.—Baddeley v. Baddeley (9 Ch. D 
 113) and Fox v. Hawlcs (13 Ch. D. 822) observed 
 upon, and Milroy v. Lord (4 D. F. & J. 264) 
 followed. In re Beeton's Estate. Beeton v. 
 WooLLVEN - - - 17 Ch. D. 416 
 
 2. Mortgagor — Sale by Mortgagees under 
 
 Power—Title to Surplus.'] A. B. having mort- 
 gaged estates in fee simple, subsequently made a 
 voluntary settlement of the same estates and all 
 his interest therein to grantees to uses to hold, 
 subject to the mortgage and to a power of raising 
 a sura of money for himself, to the use of himself 
 for life with remainder to his first and other sons 
 in tail, with remainders over. — The mortgagee 
 afterwards sold the estates under the power of sale I 
 
 VOLUNTAEY COWTEYKSCE— continued. 
 in the mortgage, and after retainer of his debt 
 and costs paid the balance of the sale moneys 
 into Court uuder the Trustee Belief Act. Upon 
 a petition for payment out A. B. contended tliat 
 the sale had destroyed the voluntary settlement, 
 and that the persons claiming thereunder had no 
 equity against the sale moneys, which must be 
 ti'eated as if the sale had been made by A. B. 
 himself : — Held, that the voluntary settlement was 
 a complete disposition by the settlor of the pro- 
 ceeds of the sale of the estate in case the prior 
 mortgagee should exercise his power, and that 
 the volunteers under the settlement were entitled 
 as against the settlor to the fund in Court. In re 
 Walhampton Estate 26 Ch. D. 391 
 
 3. Post-nuptial Settlement — Conveyance 
 
 by Husband and Wife of Wife's Separate Free- 
 holds, and Demise by Husband of Wife's Separate 
 Leaseholds — Subsequent Mortgage by Husband 
 and Wife — Settlement held voluntary and void 
 as against Mortgagee — 27 Eliz. c. 4, 8. 1.] A 
 married woman, having become entitled under a 
 will to freehold and leasehold property for her 
 sole and separate use, joined her husband in 
 making a settlement, whereby the husband and 
 wife conveyed the freeholds, and the husband 
 alone demised the leaseholds, subject to the annual 
 payment of a shilling, if demanded, to trustees, 
 upon trust for the yriie for her separate use for 
 life, remainder to the husband for life, remainder 
 for the children (if any), with ultimate remainder 
 to the wife absolutely. Two years afterwards the 
 husband and wife (there being no children of the 
 marriage) made a mortgage of the property : — 
 Held, that the conveyance by the husband, 
 though binding on the estate by the curtesy 
 which he would have had in his wife's freeholds 
 if there had been issue, in the absence of any 
 conveyance by her was not sufScient to raise a 
 consideration moving from the husband; and 
 that the settlement was voluntary and void under 
 the statute as against the mortgagee. Shuemur 
 V. Sedgwick. Ckossfield v. Shuemue 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 597 
 
 4. Eectiflcation — Power of Sevocation.] 
 
 By a voluntary settlement property was assigned 
 to trustees in trust for the settlor for life, re- 
 mainder for any wife he might marry for life, with 
 remainders to his issue, and in detault or failure 
 of issue in trust for his paternal next of kin :^ 
 Held, that though a settlement was proper to be 
 made, and though the settlor understood the 
 terms of this settlement, yet as his attention was 
 not drawn to the fact that he might have had a 
 power of disposition over the property in default 
 or failure olrissue.such a power ought to be given, 
 and the settlement must be rectified accordingly. 
 James v. Couchman 29 Ch. D. 212 
 
 6. Setting aside — Grounds for setting 
 
 aside — Improper Clauses — Trustee — Appeal for 
 Costs.] Whore an action is brought by the settlor 
 against the trustees to set aside a voluntary 
 settlement, the Court will not consider the pro- 
 priety or impropriety of the clauses, except as 
 evidence that the settlor did not understand what 
 he was doing; the only question being whether 
 the settlor understood what he was doing and its 
 effect on Ms position with regard to the property. 
 
( 1649 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1650 ) 
 
 TOLUNTABY CONVEYANCE— conii««6d. 
 — Per Cotton, L.J. : But quiere whether this ap- 
 plies to oases in which there are persons claiming 
 adversely to the settlor. — ^Where a settlement is 
 set aside the trustee has no claim to his costs as 
 a matter of right, there being no contract in exist- 
 ence ; and, therefore, if costs are given against 
 him he has no right of appeal. Duttok v. 
 Thompson - - - 23 Ch. D. 278 
 
 6. Setting aside — Onus — Power of Bevo- 
 
 caMon.'] When a voluntary deed is impeached 
 the onus of supporting it does not necessarily rest 
 upon those who set it up. Nor is a voluntary 
 deed of settlement voidable by the settlor merely 
 because it does not contain a power of r evocation 
 Henry v. Abm^teong - - 18 Ch. D. 668 
 
 Bankruptcy 19 Ch. D. 588 ; 15 Q. B. D. 682 
 
 See Bankeuptcy — Void Settlement. 
 1,2. 
 
 Commencement of — Title - 24 Ch. D. 11 
 
 See Vendob and Pubohaser — Condi- 
 tions OP Sale. 4. 
 
 Duties on — Accounts under. 
 
 See Revenue — Stamps — Statutes. 
 
 VOITTNTAEY SUBSCRIPTIONS — Committee — 
 Action by some against others 
 
 [28 Oh. D, 426 
 See Chabity — ^Management. 4. 
 
 VOITTNTAEY WINDING-tJP— Distress 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 280 
 
 See Company — Distebss. 3. 
 Poor-rates - - 23 Ch. D. 600 
 
 See Company — Kates. 1. 
 Eesolution for 26 Ch. D. 70 ; 29 Ch. D. 159 
 
 See Company— VoLUNTABY Winding-up. 
 1,2. 
 VOLUNTEER— Military. 
 
 See Aemy and Navy — Gazette. 
 Next of kin — Marriage settlement — Default 
 
 of appointment ■ - 20 Ch, D. 742 
 
 See Settlement — ^Eevooation. 2. 
 
 Settlement — Children of prior marriage 
 
 [9 App. Cas. 303 
 
 See Scotch Law— Husband and Wife. 
 5. 
 VOTE— Municipal. 
 
 See Municipal Coepobation— Election 
 — Statutes. 
 Parliament — Employe— Time to record. 
 
 See Paeliament — ^Election — Statutes. 
 Parliament — Multiplication of votes. 
 
 See Pabliament — Fbanohise — Statutes. 
 
 - 13 Q. B. S. 388 
 
 Cobpoeation — Elec- 
 
 VOTINO PAPER 
 
 See Municipal 
 
 TION. 9. 
 
 VOUCHEES — Army and navy service. 
 
 See Kevenue — Collection — Statutes. 
 
( 1651 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1652 ) 
 
 w. 
 
 WAGEB— Agent betting for principal 13 ft. B. D. 
 [779 ; IS Q. B. D. 363 
 
 See Pbinoipal and Agent — ^PBiNaEPAL's 
 
 LlABILITT. 3, 7. 
 
 WAGES— Action for — Master of ship — Mortgage 
 of ship — ^Misconduct 10 P. D. 13 
 
 See Ship — Master. 2. 
 
 Foreign ship — Jurisdiction - 8 P. D. 121 
 
 See JuBisDiOTiON. 3. 
 
 Material men — Priority — Lien — Costs. 
 
 [9 P. D. 37 
 See Ship — ^Maeitime Lien. 5. 
 
 Payment in public-houses prohibited. 
 
 See Master and Servant — ^Wages — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Preferential debt— Bankruptcy 26 Ch. D. 393 
 
 See Bankbuptct — ^Peefebential Debts. 
 
 Preferential debt — Winding-up 
 
 [16 Ch. D. 373 
 See Company — ^Peeferbntial Debts. 
 
 Preferential debt — Winding-up — Statute 
 
 respecting. 
 
 See CoMPAKTY — ^Preferential Debts — 
 Statutes. 
 
 Seamen 8 App. Cas. 329 
 
 See Practice— Admiralty — Jurisdic- 
 tion. 5. 
 
 Seamen— Priority of lien 8 P. D. 129 
 
 See Ship — Maritime Lien. 3. 
 
 WAIVER— Breach of trust - 20 Ch. D. 109 
 
 See Trustee — Liabilities. 8. 
 
 Devastavit— Lapse of time - 20 Ch. D. 230 
 
 See Specialty Debt. 
 
 Infant— Equity to settlement 16 Ch. D. 376 
 
 See Settlement — Equity to Settle- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 Objection to title - 23 Ch. D. 320 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Title. 8, 
 
 Penalty 16 Ch. D. 675 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 22. 
 
 Statutory rights — Charter - 25 Ch. D. 611 ; 
 
 See Market. 2. [9 App. Cas. 927 
 
 Vendor's lien - - 26 Ch. D. 601 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
 WARD OF COTTET 19 Ch. D. 451 ; 25 Ch. D. 56 ; 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 186 
 See Infant — Ward of Court. 1, 2, 3. 
 
 — ^ Access to mother — ^Years of discretion 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 317 
 See Infant — Education. 1. 
 
 Custody — Covenant in separation deed 
 
 [28 Ch. D. 606 
 See Husband and Wife — Separation 
 Deed. 5. 
 
 Settlement - 25 Ch. D. 482 
 
 See Infant — Settlement. 
 
 WAEEHOUSEMAN — Breach of contract — Da- 
 mages - 7 a. B. D. 510 
 
 See Damages — ^Remoteness. 5. 
 
 Liability of 6 ft. B. D. 476 ; 7 App. Cas. 591 
 
 See Trover. 
 
 WARRANT OF AEREST—Admiralty— Notice- 
 Telegram 10 P. D. 120 
 See Feactioe — Admiralty — Arrest op 
 Ship. 2. 
 
 WAERAITT OF DISTRESS, Service of. 
 
 See Justice op the Peace — ^Peactice — 
 Statutes. 
 
 WARRANTY — Answers to queries of life insur- 
 ance company 9 App. Cas. 671 
 See Insurance, Life — ^Policy. 3. 
 
 Written warranty — Adulteration — Sale of 
 
 Food and Drugs Act, 1875 12 Q. B. D. 97 
 
 See Adulteration. 1. 
 WASTE— Tenant 21 Ch. D. 18 ; 8 App. Cas. 508 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Custom 
 OF Country. 
 WATER. 
 
 1. Nuisance — Flood — Adjoining Land- 
 owners — Liability for sending Water on adjoining 
 Lands."] By reason of an unprecedented r^nfaU a 
 quantity of water was accumulated against one of 
 the sides of the Defendants' railway embankment, 
 to such an extent as to endanger the embankment, 
 when in order to protect their embankment, the 
 Defendants cut trenches in it by which the water 
 flowed through, and went ultimately on to the land 
 of the Plaintiff, which was on the opposite side of 
 the embankment and at a lower level, and flooded 
 and injured it to a greater extent than it would 
 have done had the trenches not been cut. In an 
 action for damages for such injury the jury found 
 that the cutting of the trenches vi'as reasonably 
 necessary for the protection of the Defendants' 
 property, and that it was not done negligently : — 
 Held, that though the Defendants had not brought 
 the water on their land, they had no right to protect 
 their property by transferring the mischief from 
 their own land to that of the Plaintiff, and that 
 they were therefore liable. Whalley v. Lanca- 
 shire and Yorkshire Railway Company 
 
 [13 d, B. D. 131 
 
 2. Nuisanoe — JPercolaiionofWat-eir.'] De- 
 fendant allowed water to collect in his cellar and 
 to percolate into the Plaintiff's cellar. — Hdd, that 
 this was a wrong within the decision of Fletcher 
 V. Eylands (Law Rep. 3 H. L. 330), and that the 
 Plaintiff was entitled to damages. Snow v. White- 
 head - - 27 Ch. D. 588 
 
 3. Nuisance — Underground Water— Pol- 
 lution of Well — Injunction.'] No one has a right 
 to use his own land in such a way as to be a nuisance 
 to his neighbour, and therefore if a man puts filth 
 or poisonous matter on his land, he must take care 
 that it does not escape so as to poison water which 
 his neighbour has a right to use, although his 
 neighbour may have no property in such water at 
 
( 1653 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1654 ) 
 
 "WtJITSl,— continued. 
 
 the time it is fouled. The Plaintiff and Defendant 
 were adjoining landowners, and had each a deep 
 well on his own land, the Plaintiffs land being at a 
 lower level than the Defendant's. The Defendant 
 turned sewage from his house into his well, and 
 thus polluted the water that percolated underground 
 from the Defendant's to the Plaintiff's land, and 
 .consequently the water which came into the Plain- 
 tiff's well from such percolating water when he 
 used his well by pumping, came adulterated with 
 the sewage from the Defendant's well; — Held 
 (reversing the decision of Mr. Justice Pearson), 
 that the Plaintiff had a right of action against the 
 Defendant for so polluting the source of supply, 
 although until the Plaintiff had appropriated it, he 
 had no property in the percolating water under his 
 land, and although he appropriated such water by 
 the artificial means of pumping. Ballakd v. Tom- 
 UNSON 26 Ch. D. 194 ; 29 Ch. D. 118 
 Damage from — Extraordinary flood — ^Liabi- 
 lity of Water Commissioners 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 694 
 See Scotch Law — Statutohy Dtitt. 
 — ■- Larceny - - - 11 Q. B. D. 21 
 
 See Ckiminal Law — ^Larceny. 5. 
 
 Eight to accumulation - 9 App. Cas. 170 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — Quebec. 
 8. 
 
 Right to use of. 
 
 See Cases under Wateecoubse. 
 
 Supply of. 
 
 See Cases under Watbewoeks Compant. 
 — ' — Supply to house — Notice to owner to obtain 
 
 supply — Power to charge rates. 
 
 [13 Q, B. S. 215 
 
 See LocAi Govebnment — Eates. 3. 
 WATEBCOVBSE. 
 
 1. Abstraction of Water by non-riparian 
 
 Owner — Riparian Owner — Absence of Damage — 
 Bight of Actionr-rlnjunction — Bights of riparian 
 Owner in artificial Stream.^ The owner of land 
 not abutting on a river with the license of a 
 riparian owner took water from the river, and 
 after using it for cooling certain apparatus returned 
 it to the river unpolluted and undiminished: — 
 JSeld (affirming the decision of Pollock, B.), that a 
 lower riparian owner could not obtain an injunc- 
 tion against the landowner so taking the water, 
 or against the riparian owner through whose land 
 it was taken. — Observations on the rights which 
 can be acquired by a riparian owner in an artificial 
 stream. Kbnsit u. Great Bastebn Eailway 
 Company - 23 Ch. D, 666; 27 Ch. D. 122 
 
 2, Diversion of Stream — Alteration of 
 
 Natural Flow — Actionby Biparian Owner — Grant 
 to non-Biparian Landowner.'] A riparian owner 
 cannot, except as against himself, confer on one 
 who is not a riparian owner any right to use the 
 water of the stream, and any user by a non-riparian 
 proprietor, even under a grant from a riparian 
 owner, is wrongful, if it sensibly affects the flow of 
 the water by the lands of other riparian proprietors. 
 — Stockport Waterworks Company v. Potter (3 H. 
 & C. 300) approved. Obmbeod v. Todmoeden 
 Joint Stock Mill Company - 11 Q. B. D. 155 
 
 3. Obstrnction of Access — Conduit — 
 
 - Previous Application — Costs,'] The 
 
 WATEECOTTESE— co)j<Jm«e(J. 
 
 owners of a house had had for many years a supply 
 of water by pipes passing through the adjoining 
 land under circumstances which in the view of the 
 Court created an easement. The owner of part of 
 the adjoining land proceeded to buUd a house over 
 part of the line of pipes : — Held, that the owners of 
 the house had a right to go on the adjoining land 
 and repair the pipes when necessary, and that by 
 building the house their means of access to the 
 pipes would be materially interfered with and ren- 
 dered more expensive; and an injunction was 
 granted to restrain the building of the house. — The 
 fact that an action has been brought without a. 
 previous application to the Defendant does not pre- 
 vent the Plaintiff from getting his costs of the 
 action. Goodhaet v. Hyett 25 Ch. D. 182 
 
 4. Obstruction of Access — Sewer — In- 
 junction.] The owner of land through which a 
 sewer ran, made an agreement that he would not 
 set up any buUdings so as to prevent reasonable 
 access to the sewer. A subsequent owner of the 
 land built a stable over the sewer : — Held, in an 
 action by a local board, that there was no ground 
 for a mandatory injunction to remove the building. 
 Sandgate Local Board v. Leney 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 183, n. 
 
 5. Presoription— Un«% of Possession.] 
 
 By deed in 1791 A. obtained a demise from B. of 
 an underground goit or drain to be then constructed 
 in B.'s land for the purpose of conducting water 
 from A.'s mill so long as an annual rent of £2 2s. 
 should be paid by A. to B. — In 1836 the demise of 
 1791 was put an end to, and liberty was given to 
 A., who was at that time yearly tenant from B. of 
 the land through which the goit ran, to chaiige the 
 goit or drain of 1791, and to substitute a new cut 
 for conducting pure and clean water at the like rent 
 of £2 2s. — The new cut was made and used for 
 pure water, and the old goit (as the Plaintiff 
 alleged) continued to be used for foul water. — In 
 
 1866 the land through which the goits ran was 
 sold to C, and in 1867 A.'s yearly tenancy of the 
 land was determined. — ^In an action by A. in'1879 
 to restrain C. from interfering with his use of the 
 old goit, to which he claimed title by prescription 
 from alleged open and uninterrupted use and en- 
 joyment thereof from 1836 : — Held, that until 
 
 1867 A. could not acquire an easement in the 
 land of which he was yearly tenant, distinct from 
 the use and enjoyment of such land, as against B. 
 his landlord, and accordingly that, assuming the 
 open and uninterrupted user from 1836 to have 
 been proved, he had failed to establish any title by 
 prescription as against C. OAtbam: v. Maude 
 
 [17 Ch, D. 391 
 
 Prescription — Eomau-Dutch Law 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 336 
 See Colonial Law — Cape op Good 
 Hope. 4. 
 
 WATEE-EATE. 
 
 See Cases under Waterworks Company 
 — Watee-eate. 
 
 Covenant to pay rates - 13 Q. B. D. 202 
 
 Bee Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 11. 
 
 WATEEWOEKS CLATTSES ACT. 
 
 See Statutes and Cases under Water- 
 works Company. 
 
( 1655 ) 
 
 •WATEEWOEKS COMPANY :- 
 
 I. Supply of Water 
 II. Watee-kate - 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1656 ) 
 
 Col. 
 1655 
 1657 
 
 I. WATEEWOEKS COMPAHY — SUPPLY OF 
 WATEE. 
 
 1. Cutting off Supply — Injunction — 
 
 Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847 (10 * 11 Vict, 
 c. 17), s. 68— Jurisdiction.} Although the statu- 
 tory remedy provided by sect. 68 of the Water- 
 works Clauses Act, 1847, for the settlement by 
 two justices of disputes as to the annual value of 
 a tenement supplied with water, and the special 
 remedy by penalties given by sect. 43 against a 
 company for withholding water, have not ousted 
 the general jui'isdiction to restrain the company by 
 injunction from cutting off the supply of water 
 pending proceedings for settling a dispute as to 
 value, such injunction will not be granted on the 
 application of an owner or occupier who will not 
 undertake to commence proceedings with due speed 
 before the justices under sect. 68. Hatwaed v. 
 East London Wateewoeks Company 28 Ch. D. 
 
 [138 
 
 2. Measurement — Meter, Ohligation to 
 
 provide — Cutting off Supply — Waterworks Clauses 
 Act, 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 93), ss. 14, 16— 
 Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847 (10 <fe 11 Vict. 
 c. 17), ss. 43, 74 — Failure to pay or tender 
 Mate in Advance.} The special Act of a water 
 company provided for the supply of water to the 
 inhabitants of the district for " family use " at 
 certain rates calculated on the rental of the house 
 supplied. The Act contained further provisions 
 for the supply of water for schools, manufactories, 
 (fee, &c., and for other purposes than family con- 
 sumption, and for baths, &c., and for the purposes 
 of any trade or business whatsoever at certain rates 
 per thousand gallons. ■ The supply of water under 
 these latter provisions having been held obligatory 
 upon the company unless prevented by causes 
 beyond their control : — Seld, that, there being no 
 provision in the special Act throwing upon the 
 consumer the obligation of providing a meter to 
 measure the water supplied for the purposes of a 
 bath, no such obligation could be implied from the 
 14th section of the Waterworks Clauses Act, 1863, 
 incorporated with the special Act, which section 
 provides that where the undertakers are authorized 
 by the special Act to supply water by measure 
 they may let for hire to any consumer of water so 
 supplied any meter or instrument for measuring 
 the quantity of water supplied. The occupier of a 
 house within the district of the above-mentioned 
 company had a bath connected by means of a pipe 
 with the house cistern, to which water was con- 
 veyed from the company's mains for " family use." 
 The company required him to put up a meter for 
 the purpose of measuring the water used for the 
 bath, but he refused to do so. He had paid to the 
 company in advance the proper amount in respect 
 of the water supply " for family use " for the 
 quarter ending the 29th of September, but had not 
 paid or tendered any sum in respect of the water 
 supply to the bath during such period. The com- 
 pany in consequence of his refusal to put up a 
 meter or disconnect the bath, cut off the communi- 
 cation pipe from their mam to his house upon the 
 20th of September. On the 29th of September, 
 having cut off the pipe connecting the cistern with 
 
 I. WATEEWOEKS COMPANY— SUPPLY OF 
 
 WATEE — continued. 
 the bath, but not the waste or outlet pipe from 
 the bath, he gave notice to the company of what 
 he had done, and paid to the company in advance 
 the proper amount for the supply of water for 
 " family use " during the ensuing quarter, but did 
 not restore the communication pipe between the 
 company's mains and his cistern. The company 
 refused to restore the supply on the ground that 
 he had not cut off the waste-pipe from the bath, 
 which he refused to do. The supply of water was 
 not renewed till the 4th of November, when the 
 company restored the communication pipe under 
 protest: — Held, that the company were not en- 
 titled to insist on the consumer's providing a meter, 
 but that they were not liable to a penalty under 
 the Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, s. 43, for not 
 supplying water during the period between the 
 20th and the 29th of September, inasmuch as no 
 payment or tender in respect of the water supply 
 to the bath for such period had been made. But 
 held that the company were liable to a penalty 
 in respect of the period subsequent to the 29th of 
 September : that they had no right to refuse the 
 supply of water after that date, and that they 
 were not justified in cutting off the supply, and 
 were, therefore, not entitled to require the con- 
 sumer to renew the communication. Sheffield 
 Wateewoeks Company v. Caktee 8 Q. B. D. 638 
 
 3. Measurement — Private Baths — Meters 
 
 supplied by Consumer.} The Sheffield Water- 
 works Company claimed a declaration that they 
 were not bound under their Acts of Parliament to 
 supply water for private baths except upon the 
 terms of the consumer providing at his own ex- 
 pense a meter or other automatic self-registering 
 instrument for the accurate measurement of the 
 water used. The Defendant alleged that it was 
 for the company who supplied the water to 
 measm-e the quantity to be paid for : — Hdd, upon 
 the construction of the various Acts under which 
 the proceedings of the company were regulated, 
 that it was not correct to treat the company as 
 supplying the water to the consumer, but it was 
 the consumer who was entitled to draw off from 
 the main what water he required, and to fix 
 pipes and apparatus at his own expense for the 
 purpose of measuring the water so taken by him ; 
 and such measurement could only be effected by 
 some sufficient automatic self-registering meter or 
 other instrument, or in some other equally accurate 
 mode. Sheffield Wateewoeks Company v. 
 Bingham - 25 Ch. D. 448 
 
 4. Private Baths.] Eeld, on the con- 
 struction of the Sheffield Waterworks Company's 
 Act that they have a right to make an extra 
 charge for private baths. Sheffield Wateewoeks 
 Company v. J. E. Bingham 26 Ch. D. 446, n. 
 
 5. Pnblio Purposes — Workhouse — Water- 
 works Clauses Act, 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 17), 
 ss. 37-48.] By a special Act, incorporating the 
 Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, a waterworks com- 
 pany were bound at the request of the owner or 
 occupier of any house to supply such person with 
 water for domestic purposes at a minimum rate, 
 to be increased if such house should be occupied 
 by more than one family, and the Act further 
 provided that a supply of water for domestic pur- 
 
( 1657 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1658 ) 
 
 I. WATERWORKS COMPANY — STJPPIY OF 
 
 WATER— cojiiinjicd. 
 poses should not include a supply of water for 
 baths, washhouses, or public purposes. The Water- 
 works Clauses Act, 1817, deals with the supply of 
 water for cleansing sewers and drains, cleansing 
 and watering the streets, supplying any public 
 pumps, baths, or washhouses, and imposes a penalty 
 for neglect to supply water " for the public pur- 
 poses aforesaid": — HeM (by Lord Coleridge, C.J., 
 PoUock, B., and Manisty, J.), that a workhouse 
 was a house of which the guardians were owners, 
 and the company were bound to supply them with 
 water for domestic purposes, such supply not being 
 a supply " for public purposes " within the meaning 
 of the special Act or of the Waterworks Clauses Act, 
 1847, and that for the purposes of the special Act 
 the inmates of the workhouse were to be treated 
 as one family and the rate assessed accordingly. 
 LisKEABD Union v. Liskeard Waterworks Com- 
 pany - 7 ft. B. D. 505 
 
 6. " Pure and Wholesome " Water — 
 
 Contamination from Leaden Pipes — Deleterious 
 Effect on Consumer — Waterworks Clauses Act, 
 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 17), s. 35— Special Act 
 (32 & 33 Vict. c. cx.y] The Defendants were 
 empowered by a speciid Act (32 & 33 Vict. c. ex.) 
 incorporating the Waterworks Clauses Act of 1847 
 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 17), with the exception of certain 
 provisions, to supply water for domestic use within 
 the limits and from the sources described in their 
 Act. — By sect. 66 of the special Act the Defendants 
 were entitled to prescribe the material to be used 
 for service-pipes by persons supplied with water, 
 and by by-laws the Defendants prescribed that the 
 material might be either lead or cast-iron. Leaden 
 service-pipes were, upon the application of the 
 landlord of the Plaintifi's house and of the Plain- 
 tiff, laid down by the Defendants from their mains 
 to the house at the expense of the landlord and 
 the Plaintiff. The service-pipes when laid be- 
 longed to the consumer of the water supplied 
 through them. — ^By the Waterworks Clauses Act, 
 1847, s. 35, "the undertakers shall provide and 
 keep in the pipes to be laid down by them a 
 supply of pure and wholesome water sufficient for 
 the domestic use of all the inhabitants of the town 
 or district within the limits of the special Act, 
 who shall be entitled to demand a supply, and 
 shall be willing to pay water-rate for the same." 
 Water which was pure and wholesome in the 
 mains of the Defendants, was supplied by them 
 to the Plaintiff, but in its passage from the mains 
 through the service-pipes it was contaminated by 
 the lead, and he, using the water, suffered from 
 lead-poisoning. He sued the Defendants for in- 
 juries sustained from impure and unwholesome 
 water: — Held, that he had no cause of action. — 
 Judgment of Mathew, J., affirmed. ' Milnes v. 
 Mayor, &o., op Huddbrsfield 10 ft. B. D. 124; 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 443 
 
 II. WATERWORKS COMPANY— WATER-RATE. 
 
 Waterworks Clauses Act.] The Act 48 & 49 
 Vict. c. 34, declares the meaning of the words " the 
 anmial value of the tenement supplied with water " 
 in sect. 68 of 10 <& 11 Vict. c. 17 {WaterworTcs 
 Clauses Act, 1847). 
 
 1, Annual Valne — Water Mate to le cal- 
 culated on " BateableValue"—Waterwor]cs Clauses 
 
 II. WATERWORKS COMPANY— WATER-HATE 
 
 — continued. 
 Act, 1847 (10 (fc 11 Vict. o. 17), s. 68.] By the special 
 Act of a water company, which incorporated the 
 Waterworks Clauses Act, 1847, save so far as the 
 clauses or provisions thereof were expressly varied 
 or excepted, the company were obliged to supply 
 water to the occupiers of dwelling houses for domes- 
 tic purposes at a rate not exceeding £6 per cent, 
 per annum upon the annual " rack rent or value " 
 of the premises supplied. It was further provided 
 in a subsequent section of the Act that the rate 
 should be " payable according to the annual value 
 at which the premises were from time to time 
 assessed to the poor-rate if the same were so assessed, 
 or if not according to the net annual value of the 
 premises." — ^Bythe 68th section of the Waterworks 
 Clauses Act, 1847, "the water-rates, except as 
 hereinafter and in the special Act mentioned, shall 
 be payable according to the annual value of the 
 tenements supplied with water " : — Held, that the 
 water rate charged by the company must be calcu- 
 lated on the " rateable value " not on the " gross 
 estimated rental" of the premises supplied with 
 water. Warrington Waterworks Company ■». 
 LoNGSHAW 9 ft. B. D. 145 
 
 2. Annual Value — Annual Bent, how to- 
 be estimated — " Voids " — Owner compounding for 
 Bates — Bepairs and Insurance.] It was provided 
 by a Water Act that the charge to be made for the 
 supply of water for domestic use should be at a rate 
 varying according to the " annual rent " of the pre- 
 mises supplied. — The Appellant was the owner of 
 certain houses supplied with water by the Eespon- 
 dents under the Act. The houses were let at weekly 
 rents, the Appellant paying all rates charged there- 
 on, and also for all repairs and insurances in respect 
 thereof. He was allowed, as an owner, under 32 
 & 33 Vict. c. 41, s. 4 (the Poor-rate Assessment and 
 Collection Act, 1869), a deduction of .SO per cent, 
 from the full amount of the poor-rate which an 
 occupier if rated would have paid. — The Respon- 
 dents charged the Appellant with water-rates cal- 
 culated on the following basis : they multiplied the- 
 weekly rents by fifty-two and deducted from the 
 amount so arrived at the actual sums paid by the- 
 Appellant for rates, and then charged the water- 
 rates upon the balance : — Seld, that, in order t» 
 arrive at the " annual rent " upon which the water- 
 rate was to be computed, an allowance should he- 
 made in respect of " voids," i.e., houses lying vacant 
 from time to time ; and that the actual amount of 
 the poor-rates and other rates paid by the Appellant 
 was rightly deducted, but that the Appellant was 
 not entitled to deduct the full amount of the rates 
 which an occupier if rated would have paid ; nor 
 the amount which he paid for repairs and insm-- 
 ances. — Meaning of the terms " annual rent " and 
 " annual value " discussed. — Ddbbs v. Grand Junc- 
 tion Waterworks Co. (10 Q. B. D. 337) followed- 
 Smith v. Mayor, &c., op Birmingham 
 
 ril ft. B. D. 195 
 [Bvi see next ease.'] 
 
 3. Annual Value — Net annual or rate- 
 able Value.] A water company by a special Act 
 of 1826 were compellable to supply water to cer- 
 tain dwelling-houses in the metropolis for domes- 
 tic purposes at certain rates per cent, per annum 
 payable "according to the actual amount of the 
 
( 1659 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1660 ) 
 
 II. WATERWOEKS COMPANY— WATEE-EATE 
 
 ■ — continued. 
 rent where the same can he ascertained, and where 
 the same cannot be ascertained according to the 
 actual amount or annual value upon which the 
 assessment to the poor's-rate is computed in the 
 parish or district where the house is situated." — 
 By a special Act of 1852 the company were com- 
 pellable to furnish the water " where the annual 
 value of the dwelling-house or other place supplied 
 shall not exceed £200 at a rate per cent, per annum 
 on such value not exceeding £4 ; and where such 
 annual value shall exceed £200, at a rate per cent, 
 per annum on such value not exceeding £3." — The 
 occupier of one of the houses was lessee for a long 
 term at a ground rent, and paid no rent except the 
 ground rent : — Held, reversing the decision of the 
 Court of Appeal, that whether the later Act re- 
 pealed the provisions of the former or not the case 
 must be dealt with under the later Act ; and that 
 the words " annual value " in the later Act meant 
 "net annual value" as defined in the Parochial 
 Assessments Act, 1836 (6 & 7 Will. 4., c. 96), s. 1. 
 — Held, also, that "annual value" had the same 
 meaning in the earlier as in the later Act. — Colmll 
 V. Wood (2 C. B 210) commented on. DoBBS v. 
 Grand Junction Watekwokks Company 9 Q. B. D. 
 [151 ; 10 Q. B. D. 337 ; 9 App. Cas. 49 
 
 4. Annual Value — Supply for Domestic 
 
 Purposes — ■ Premises used as a Public-honse — 
 Licence — Premium.'] By the special Act of a 
 water company it was provided that water should 
 be supplied for domestic purposes by the company 
 at a rate per cent, upon the annual value of the 
 dwelling-house or other place supplied, that a sup- 
 ply of water for domestic purposes should not 
 include a supply of water for, among other things, 
 any trade or manufacture or business requiring an 
 extra supply of water, and that the company might 
 fm-nish water for other than domestic pm-poses on 
 such terms as might be agreed on between the 
 company and the consumer. — The company sup- 
 plied water for domestic purposes to a house occu- 
 pied as a licensed public-house. The company 
 contended that the annual value of the premises 
 as a licensed public-house should be taken as the 
 basis of the water-rate payable in respect of such 
 supply, and that therefore the fact of the premises 
 being licensed, and a premiimi which had been 
 paid for the lease of the premises as a public-house, 
 ought to be taken into consideration in fixing the 
 value. The occupier contended that such water- 
 rate should be based upon the value of the premises 
 for domestic purposes only •.—Held, that the con- 
 tention of the company was correct. West Middle- 
 sex Waterworks v. Coleman. Coleman v. West 
 Middlesex Waterworks - 14 Q. B. D. 529 
 
 5. Annual Value — " Water - rate " — 
 
 " Annual Rack-rent or Value " — " Gross sum as- 
 sessed to the Poor-rate " — Bristol Waterworlcs Acts, 
 1862 and 1865 — Pleasure Garden attached to and 
 occupied with a Dwelling-house — Extra Charge 
 for " a pipe and tap or other apparatus " used in 
 the garden.] Sect. 68 of the Bristol Waterworks 
 Act, 1862, enacts that the company shall furnish to 
 every occupier of a private dwelling-house within 
 their limits a sufficient supply of water tor the 
 domestic use of such occupier, at certain annual 
 rents or rates according to the " annual rack-rent 
 
 II, WATEEWOEKS COMPANY— WATEE-EATE 
 
 —continued. 
 
 or value of the premises so supplied " — such supply 
 (by sect. 71) not to include, among other things, a 
 supply of water " for watering gardens by means 
 of a tap, tube, pipe, or other such like apparatus ;" 
 and sect. 32 of the Bristol Waterworks Amendment 
 Act, 1865, enacts that " if any dispute shall arise 
 as to the amount of the annual rent or value of any 
 dwelling-house or premises supplied with water by 
 the company, such dispute shaU be decided by two 
 justices : provided that the amount of the annual 
 rack-rent or value to be fixed by such justices shall 
 not be less than the gross sum assessed to the poor- 
 rate, or less than the rent actually paid for such 
 dwelling-house or premises." A dweUing-house 
 and garden in the occupation of the owner were 
 assessed to the poor-rate as follows : — " Gross esti- 
 mated rental, £240 ; rateable value, £204." It was 
 proved that the value of the house without the 
 garden would be 10 per cent, less, and that the 
 owner contracted to pay and did pay £1 Ig. annnaUy 
 for the watering by means of a pipe and tap in the 
 garden which surrounded the dweUing-house and 
 was occupied and assessed therewith. — Held, upon 
 a case stated by the justices, that the words " gross 
 sum assessed to the poor-rate" meant the "gross 
 estimated rental," and not " rateable or net value ;" 
 and that the water-rent was chargeable upon the 
 gross estimated rental of " the premises," including 
 the pleasure-garden occupied with the house, and 
 not merely upon the dweUing-house itself, the 
 extra charge for the garden supply being for using 
 a pipe and tap. Bristol Waterworks Company 
 V. Uren - - 15 Q. B. D. 637 
 
 6. Eeoovery of Arrears — Distress— West 
 
 Middlesex Waterworlcs Acts (46 Geo. 3, «. cucix. ; 
 50 Geo. 3, c. cxxxii. ; 15 & 16 Vict, c clix.'). — Water- 
 works Clauses Consolidation Act, 1847 (10 & 11 
 Vict. c. 17) — Effect of, upon the Compan'^s special 
 Acts.] By an Act of 46 Geo. 3, c. cxix. s. 57, the 
 West Middlesex Waterworks Company were to 
 supply water to the occupiers of premises in certain 
 parishes, they paying to the company such rates 
 or sums of money for such water as should be 
 mutitaUy agreed upon hetween them, and, in default 
 of payment, power was given to the company to 
 issue their warrants for the recovery of arrears by 
 distress and sale of the consumer*s goods. By a 
 subsequent Act of 50 Geo. 3, c. cxxxii. s. 13, it 
 was provided that the company should not alienate 
 their powers, but only take and demand " such 
 sums as should be reasonahle " for the water sup- 
 plied under the provisions of that Act ; and by 15 
 & 16 Vict. c. clix. (passed in 1852), which recited 
 the earlier Acts of the company, it was provided 
 that, "except as by this Act expressly provided, this 
 Act or anything therein contained shall not repeal, 
 alter, interpret, or in any manner affect any of the 
 provisions in force at the commencement of this 
 Act of the recited Acts or any of them ; and, 
 except only so far as is requisite for the execution 
 of this Act, all those provisions, and aU powers 
 thereby respectively created, conferred, or saved, 
 shall be and continue as valid and effectual as if 
 this Act had not passed": — Held, that the effect 
 of s. 13 of 50 Geo. 3, c. cxxxii. was merely to 
 alter the mode of ascertaining the amount of the 
 rate, but not the mode of enforcing payment of 
 
( 1661 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1662 ) 
 
 II. WATEEWOEKS COMPANY— WATEB-EATE 
 
 — continued. 
 arrears ; and thiit the power of distress given to the 
 company by s. 57 of the Act of 46 Geo. 3 was not 
 (either expressly or. by implication) taken away by 
 the Act of 50 Geo. 3, or by any of the provisions 
 of the "Waterworks Clauses Consolidation Act, 
 184:7; but that such power of distress was ex- 
 pressly preserved to the company by sect. 48 of 15 & 
 16 Vict. u. clix. — Held, also, that the company 
 were not responsible for an assault committed by 
 the broker or his assistant when executing the 
 warrant. Kiohaeds v. West Midulesex Wateb- 
 WOKKS COMPAUT - 15 Q. B. D. 660 
 
 •WATEEWOEKS COMPANY— Supply of water- 
 Larceny - •- - 11 Q, B. D. 21 
 See Criminal Law — Lakoeny. 5. 
 
 Water-rate — Covenant by lessor to pay rates 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 202 
 ,See Landlokd AOT) Tenant — Lease. 11. 
 WAY. 
 
 1. TTnity of possession — Owner of two 
 
 Tenements — Grant of one Tenement " together with 
 all Ways now used and enjoyed therewith.''^ A 
 grant by the owner of two tenements of one of 
 them, " together with all ways now used or enjoyed 
 therewith,'' will pass to the grantee a right of way 
 over a clearly defined path constructed over the 
 other tenement, and at the date of the grant actu- 
 ally used for the purposes of the tenement which 
 is gi-auted, even though the path did not exist 
 prior to the unity of possession. — Thomson v. Water- 
 low (Law Eep. 6 Eq. 36) and Langley v. Hammond 
 (Law Bep. 3 Ex. 161), so far as they are contrary 
 to this view, must be taken to have been overruled 
 by Watts v. Kelson (Law Eep. 6 Ch. 166) and 
 Kay V. Oxley (Law Eep. 10 Q. B. 360). Baek- 
 SHiBE V. Gkubb - 18 Ch. D. 616 
 
 2. Unity of possession — Bight occupied 
 
 or enjoyed as "parcel or msmber " of the Tenement 
 
 granted — Purchase hy Bailway Company — User 
 
 for Purposes of Bailway.'] A railway company 
 
 purchased, under the powers of their Act, a piece 
 
 of land on which was a stable. By the conveyance 
 
 to the company the premises were granted together 
 
 with all " rights, members, and appurtenances to 
 
 the hereditaments belonging or occupied or enjoyed 
 
 as part, parcel, or member thereof." The vendor 
 
 had many years previously made a private road from 
 
 the highway to the stable over his own land for 
 
 his own convenience and had used it ever since. 
 
 The soil of this road was not conveyed to the 
 
 company and no express mention of it was made 
 
 in the conveyance. The Plaintiff refused to allow 
 
 the company to use the road : — Held (affirming the 
 
 judgment of Chitty, J.), first, that notwithstanding 
 
 the unity of possession of the stables and the private 
 
 road at the date of the conveyance to the company, 
 
 a right of way passed to the company under the 
 
 general words in the conveyance. — Kay v. Oxley 
 
 (Law Rep. 10 Q. B. 360) and Watts v. Kelson (Law 
 
 Eep. 6 Ch. 166) followed.— Secondly, that the fact 
 
 of the stable having been purchased by a railway 
 
 company for the purposes of their undertaking did 
 
 not preclude them from claiming the right of way 
 
 so long as they used the premises as a stable ; which 
 
 they might lawfully do till such time as they were 
 
 required for the special /purposes of the railway, or 
 
 were sold as superfluous land. — Whether the rail- 
 
 WAY — continued. 
 
 way company would be entitled to claun the right 
 of way after they had ceased to use the premises 
 as a stable, and had converted them to some pur- 
 pose connected with the railway— Qjtare. Baylet 
 V. Geeat Western Bailway Company 
 
 [26 Ch. B. 434 
 
 Pleading — Statement of course and termini 
 
 [22 Ch. B. 481 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — 
 Amendment. 1. 
 Bight of — Prescription — ^Porty years' enjoy- 
 ment — Bemainderman — " Beversion ex- 
 pectant on term of life or years " 
 See Pbbsceiption. 2. [15 Q. B. B. 629 
 Eeservation of, in agreement, not in convey- 
 ance - - - 24 Ch. B. 572 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — ^Agree- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 User at intervals — Twenty years' enjoyment 
 
 as of right - 13 Q. B. B. 304 
 
 See Prescription. 1. 
 WAYWAEBEN— Meetmg for election— Demand 
 of poU - - 11 Q, B. B. 282 
 
 See Highway — Waywarden. 
 WEIGHTS ANB MEiSTJEES. 
 
 Weights and Measures Act, 1878.] Orders in 
 
 council regulating the fees to he paid to inspectors 
 
 MaylSth,\f!,Sl - - 1. G., 1881, p. 2618 
 
 Altering the fees hitherto taken by inspectors 
 
 Nov. 29th, 1881 - L. G., 1881, p. 6533 
 
 Belative to fees. Aug. 18th, 1882 I. G., 1882, 
 
 . [p, 3905 
 
 Increasing the fees payable to inspectors. June 
 
 2eth, 1884 - L. G., 1884, p. 2993 
 
 Defining the amount of errors to be tolerated in 
 
 local standards when verified by the Board of 
 
 Trade. June 29th, 1882 - I. G., 1882, p, 3055 
 
 Denominations of Standards. Aug 23rd, 1883 
 
 [L, G., 1883, p. 4211 
 
 WELL— Pollution of - 29 Ch. B. 115 
 
 See Water. 3. 
 WEST AUSTEALIA— Law of 9 App. Cas. 142 
 See Colonial Law — West Australia. 2. 
 WEST EIBING EEGISTEY - 26 Ch. B. 501 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 WESTMINSTEE, PALACE Or — Ecclesiastical 
 jurisdiction - - 22 Ch. B. 316 
 
 See Practice — ^Ecclesiastical — Juris- 
 diction. 2. 
 
 WHAEriNGEE—Warraut— Indorsement 
 
 [28 Ch. B. 682 
 See Bill of Sale^Eegistbation. 5. 
 WHITE LEAB FACTOEY. 
 
 See Factory Acrs—Statutes. 
 WIBOW — Annuity to — Voidable marriage 
 
 [25 Ch. B. 685 
 See Will — Condition. 11. 
 
 WIFE. 
 
 See Cases under Husband and Wife • 
 and Practice — Divorce. ' 
 Invalid marriage — Legacy to widow 
 
 See Will — Mistake. 2. [22 Ch, B. 697 
 WILB BIEBS PEOTECTION ACT, 1881. 
 
 See Birds Protection Act— Statutes. 
 
( 1663 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1664 ) 
 
 WILFTJI DEFATILT— Executor— Administration 
 action - - 24 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See PfiACTIOE — SCPKEME COUBT — TkIAL. 
 1. 
 
 Executor— Order for account 20 Ch. D. 838 
 
 See ExECUTOK — Actions. 8. 
 
 WILL :— Col. 
 
 I. Absolute Gut - - 1663 
 
 II. Ademption - - 1664 
 
 in. Ambiguitt - - 1664 
 
 IV. Annuity _ - - 1664 
 
 V. Attesting Witness - - 1664 
 
 VI. Charge oe Debts - - 1665 
 
 VII. Childken - - 1666 
 
 VIII. Class - - - 1666 
 
 IX. Condition. - - - 1668 
 
 X. Contingent Eemaindbr - 1673 
 
 XI. Conversion - 1673 
 
 XII. Cross Eemainders. - - 1673 
 
 Xin. Death coupled with Contin- 
 
 GENOT 1674 
 
 XIV. Disclaimeb - 1675 
 
 XV. Estate in Realty - - 1676 
 
 XVI. Executors - - - 1677 
 XVn. Exoneration - - - 1678 
 
 XVIII. Heirloom - - 1679 
 
 XIX. Incorporated Documents - 1682 
 
 XX. Interim Income - - 1682 
 
 XXI. JornT Tenancy - - ' 1683 
 
 XXII. Lapse - 1683 
 
 XXIII. Mistake - - 1685 
 
 XXIV. Perpetuity - - 1687 
 XXV. Precatory Trust - 1690 
 
 XXVI. Priority of Legacies - 1691 
 
 XXVII. Eepugnancy - - 1691 
 
 XXVIII. Residuary Gift - 1692 
 
 XXIX. Revocation - - 1693 
 
 XXX. Satisfaction - - 1694 
 
 XXXI. Separate Use - - 1695 
 
 XXXII. Speaking from Death - 1696 
 
 XXXIII. Specific Legacy - - 1697 
 
 XXXIV. Substitutional Gift - 1698 
 XXXV. Survivor . _ - 1698 
 
 XXXVL Trust Estates - - 1699 
 
 XXXVII. Trustees - . - 1699 
 
 XXXVni. Vesting _ - _ 1700 
 
 XXXIX. Words _ - - 1703 
 
 I. WILL— ABSOLUTE GIFT. 
 
 1, Interest.] Under a gift by A. to his wife 
 
 of £10,000 " afterwards to go to the understated 
 residuary legatee E.": — Meld, that the legacy of 
 £10,000 was given to the wife ahsolutely, but that 
 interest upon such legacy did not begin to run 
 until after one year from the testator's death. In 
 re Percy. Percy v. Percy. 24 Ch. D. 616 
 
 2, Survivor — Life Estate — Intestacy. 2 The 
 
 will of S. C. after bequeathing her property to 
 A. C. and J. C, continued thus, " in case of the 
 demise of either the said A. C. or J. 0., I do 
 hereby bequeath the same ... to the survivor for 
 her sole use and benefit during her or their natural 
 
 I. WILL — ABSOLUTE GIFT — continued. 
 lifetime": — Held, that the residue was not dis- 
 posed of, and that A. 0. and J. C. took only as- 
 tenants for life. Watson v. Watson 7 P. D. 1(V 
 
 II. WILL— ADEMPTION. 
 
 Lunatic Testator — Lunacy Jv/risdiction. 
 
 — Specific Bequest — Order for Sale — Separate 
 Account — Lunacy Begulation Act, 1853 (16 & IT 
 Vict. c. 70), es. 118, 119.] A testator made a 
 specific bequest of stock in the G. railway com- 
 pany. After the date of his will he was found 
 a lunatic. Under an order in the lunacy, the stock 
 was sold and the proceeds were invested in a sum 
 of consols, which was carried to the credit of the 
 lunatic to an account intituled "Proceeds of the 
 sale of stock in the 6. railway company." — In an 
 action for the administration of the testator's estate : 
 — Held, that the specific legacy was adeemed by 
 the sale in the lunacy, and that the consols therefore 
 fell into the residue. — Observations on Jones v. 
 Green (Law Bep. 5 Eq. 555) and In re Leemin^ 
 (3 D. F. & J. 43). In re Freer. Freer v. Fbesj 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 622 
 
 Piu:chase-money of estate sold 30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 See Will — ^Words. 9. 
 
 Satisfaction by advance in lifetime of testator 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 701 ; 28 Ch. D. 5S2; 15 ft. B. D. 
 See Will— Satisfaction. 1, 2, 3. [300 
 
 III. WILL— AMBIGUITY. 
 
 Extrinsio Evidence — Misdescription.^ A 
 
 testator appointed William McC. of Canonbuiyv 
 an executor. The only persons at all answering 
 the description were Thomas McC. and WiUiani 
 Abraham McC. : — Seld, that parol evidence was 
 admissible to prove which person was intended by 
 the testator. Probate granted to Thomas McC. 
 In the Goods of Brake 6 P. D. 217 
 
 IV. WILL— ANNUITY. 
 
 1. Charge on Income or Corpus — Con- 
 tinuing Charge.'] A testator directed his trustees 
 to pay an annuity out of the rents and profits of a 
 trust estate by half-yearly payments, and he be- 
 queathed the remainder of such rents and income 
 in trust for his sister for life, with remainder to her 
 children : — Held, that the annuity was a con,- 
 tinuiug charge on the rents and profits. — Stelfox v. 
 Sugden (Job. 234) considered. Wormald v~ 
 MuzEEN - 17 Ch. D. 167 
 
 2. For Life or Perpetual,] A testatrix 
 
 bequeathed an annuity payable out of the rental 
 of certain hereditaments to her sister C. for life, 
 with remainder for life to certain persons, and on 
 their deaths the testatrix directed her executors 
 to pay the annuity out of the said rental to the 
 surviving children of B. : — Held, that the children 
 of B. took the annuity for their lives only. — Evans 
 
 V. Walker (3 Ch. D. 211) not followed. Blight 
 V. Hartnoll - - 19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 V. WILL— ATTESTING WITNESS. 
 
 Marriage of Devisee, after Attestation, tc 
 
 attesting Witness — 1 Vict. c. 26, s 15.] Under 
 the Wills Act (1 Vict. u. 26), s. 15, the. marriage, 
 after attestation of a will, of a devisee to the 
 attesting witness, does not affect the, validity of 
 the devise. Thorpe v. Bestwick 6 Q, B, D. 311 
 
( 1665 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1666 ) 
 
 VI. WILL— CHARGE OF DEBTS. 
 
 Legal Estate — Direction to Executors to 
 
 pay Debts — Devise to Executors — -Inquiry as to 
 Existence of Debts — Trust to pay or permit to 
 receive — Requisitions — Objection to Boot of Title 
 iiot too late though stipulated Time expired.^ A 
 testator directed that his debts should be paid by 
 his executrix and executor thereinafter named. 
 He then devised all his freehold and copyhold 
 estates to his wife and son, and bequeathed to them 
 his leaseholds and other personal estate and de- 
 clared that his real and personal estates were de- 
 vised and bequeathed to them " upon trust to pay 
 the rents, issues, and profits, and the interest, 
 dividends, and income of my said real and personal 
 estates unto or permit the same to be received by 
 my said wife during her life," and after her de- 
 cease to raise and pay certain legacies to other 
 persons which were to be treated as vested from 
 his decease, and as to all the rest, residue and 
 remainder of his real and personal estates after the 
 death of his wife he devised and bequeathed the 
 same to his said son, his heirs, executors, adminis- 
 trators, and assigns, according to the natures and 
 qualities thereof, and empowered him to postpone 
 payment of the legacies for two years from the 
 widow's death, the legacies to carry interest from 
 her death. The widow and sou were appointed 
 executors. The testator died in May, 1871, and 
 the will was proved by the executors. In June, 
 1881, the widow and son put up for sale part of 
 the freehold estate, under conditions of sale pro- 
 viding that requisitions must be delivered within 
 ten days from the delivery of the abstract ; time 
 to be of the essence of the contract. The pur- 
 chaser made a requisition that the legatees must 
 release the estate from their legacies. The vendors 
 refused to procure their concurrence, on the ground 
 that the real estates were charged with debts, and 
 that the vendors could sell tocharged from the 
 legacies. The purchaser then asked whether any 
 debts remained unpaid. The vendors declined 
 to answer the question, and the point was then 
 raised, after the time for sending in requisitions 
 had expired, whether any charge of debts was 
 created. The vendors persisting in their refusal 
 to answer the question whether any debts remained 
 unpaid, the purchaser took out a summons to have 
 it declared that no charge of debts was created by 
 the wUl, and if it was, then that the vendors were 
 bound to answer the inquiry as to debts. — Held, 
 by Kay, J., that as the purchaser's objection went 
 to the question whether the vendors had any 
 power to sell he was not precluded by the conditions 
 from raising it. — Seld, further, that as the real 
 estate was not devised to the executors in trust for 
 other persons, nor devised to them beneficially in 
 such a way as to give them equal beneficial interests, 
 the question whether the direction to them to pay 
 debts charged the real estate with debts was too 
 doubtful for the title to be forced on the purchaser. 
 — Seld, on appeal, that the legal estate in the real 
 property was not limited to the widow for life with 
 remainder to the son, but was vested in the two 
 as joint tenants in fee. — Doe v. Biggs (2 Taunt. 
 109) distinguished. — Held, further that as the 
 executors took the whole legal fee as joint tenants, 
 the direction to them to pay debts charged the real 
 estate with debts, though they took unequal bene- 
 ficial interests in it. — Held, further that where 
 
 VI. "WILL— CHARGE OF 'DEBTS— contimied, 
 executors in whom the legal fee is vested are 
 selling real estate charged with debts, a purchaser 
 is not bound or entitled to inquire whether debts 
 remain unpaid unless twenty years have elapsed 
 from the testator's decease. In re Tanquebay- 
 WiLLAUME AND Landau - 20 Ch. D. 466 
 
 VII. WILL— CHILDREN. 
 
 1. Illegitimate Child — Gift to Children 
 
 of deceased Person.'] A testatrix bequeathed to 
 A., " the eldest daughter of my deceased daughter 
 S., my gold watch.'' And she bequeathed other 
 property to trustees "in trust for such of the 
 children of my said deceased daughter S. who shall 
 attain twenty-one, absolutely, equally share and 
 share alike, the shares of such of them as shall be 
 daughters to be for their sole and separate use." S. 
 had two legitimate children, a son and a daughter, 
 and she had also an illegitimate daughter, who was 
 the person spoken of in the wUl as " A., the eldest 
 daughter of S.": — Held, that there was a sufficient 
 indication of an intention that A. should be included 
 in the description of " the children of S." In re 
 Humphries. Smith v. Millidge 24 Ch. D. 691 
 
 2. Illegitimate Child — Class of Children.'] 
 
 Testator by his will bequeathed to M. B. B., 
 "daughter of my nephew J. B.," £200; and to 
 T. B., "son of the said J. B.," £100. He directed 
 his trustees to stand possessed of his residue upon 
 trust for " all and every the children and child " of 
 B. C. and J. B. respectively. By a codicil testator 
 revoked the bequest of £200 " to my great-niece," 
 M. B. B., and the bequest of £100 " to my great- 
 nephew," T. B., and instead thereof bequeathed to 
 M. B. B., £100 ; to T. B., £100 ; and to A. B., 
 " another daughter of my nephew J. B.," £100. — 
 M. B. B. was illegitimate; T. B. and A. B. were 
 legitimate;^ — Held, that M. B. B. was sufficiently 
 indicated as one of the persons who was to partici-- 
 pate in the residue. — Megson v. Hindle (15 Ch. D. 
 198) distinguished. In re Bbton. Drummond v. 
 Leigh - - - - 30 Ch. D. 110 
 
 VIII. WILL— CLASS. 
 
 1. " According to the Stocks."] A testa- 
 tor gave the income of a trust fund to his wife for 
 her life, and subject thereto the fund was to be held 
 in trust for such of his cousins (the children of , 
 four deceased aunts and two deceased uncles of 
 the testator named in the wiU) living at the de- 
 termination of the wife's life interest, and such 
 issue then living (if any) of his said cousins then 
 dead as, either before or after the determination 
 of such life interest, should attain twenty-one, or 
 should die under twenty-one leaving issue living 
 at his, her, or their death, to take (if more than 
 one) in a course of distribution according to the 
 stocks, and not according to the number of in- 
 dividuals. At the time of the death of the tenant 
 for life there were living one cousin of the testator- 
 ( a child of one of the uncles named in the wiU) , 
 and children and other issue of fifteen deceased 
 cousins (children of the other uncle and of the four- 
 aunts named in the will) : — Held, that the words 
 " according to the stocks " applied to the descend- 
 ants of cousins, and not to the cousins themselves, 
 and that the fund was divisible into sixteen shares. 
 — Robinson v. Shepherd (4 D. J. & S. 129) pre- 
 ferred to Gibson v. Fisher (Law Eep. 5 Eq. 51). 
 In re Wilson. Parker v. Winder 24 Ch, D. 66* 
 
 3 H 
 
(' 1667 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1668 ) 
 
 Villi "WILL— Ct^aS— continued. 
 
 2. Gift to F. H. S. and E. S. share and 
 
 stare alike, "and after the decease of the said 
 F. H. S. and B. S. to their Children share and 
 share alike, and to their Heirs for OTer."] A testa- 
 trix bequeathed personalty in trust for A. B. for 
 life, and after his decease for his issue, and on 
 failure of his issue to F. H. S. and E. S. share and 
 share alike, " and after the decease of the said 
 F. S. H. and R. S. to their children share and share 
 
 . alike, and to their heirs for ever." P. H. S. died 
 without having had issue, E. S. survived him and 
 died leaving children, and A. B., who survived them 
 both, died without issue. — Upon a petition hy the 
 children of E. S. for payment out of a portion of 
 the trust fund which was in Court : — Held, that, 
 upon the authorities, the bequest must be construed 
 as a gift after the respective deaths of F. H. S. and 
 
 E. S. to their respective children, and that there 
 having been an absolute gift to each of them in the 
 ftrst, instance only cut down in favour of his children, 
 in the event which happened the fund was divisi- 
 ble in moieties between the representatives of 
 
 F. H. S. and the children of E. S. In re Hdt- 
 chinson's Teusts 21 Ch. D. 811 
 
 3. - — Gift to the Children of J. D. and E. A. 
 to he vested Legacies at Testator's Death — Death of 
 li. A. before Testator — Children of B. A. not en- 
 titled^-Besiduary Legatee living at Death entitled."] 
 Testator gave to trustees all his estates upon tnist to 
 sell, and directed that the proceeds of sale should be 
 part of his personal estate and be subject to the dis- 
 positions concerning his residuary estate, and after 
 giving legacies — one to E. A., and another to the 
 children of J. D. — he gave the residue unto and 
 equally amongst all the children of his brother-in- 
 law, J. D., and the said E. A., and directed that the 
 same should be vested legacies at the time of his 
 decease. E. A. died before the testator, leaving 
 children living at the testator's death. Three chil- 
 r.dren of J. D. were living at the testator's death : — 
 Held, that E. A. would, if living, have taken a share 
 of the residue and not his children, and that, as he 
 died before the testator, the .share which he would 
 have taken belonged to the three surviving residu- 
 ary legatees, not as a class with E. A., but under 
 the special terms of this will. In re Feathek- 
 stone's Trusts 22 Ch. D. Ill 
 
 4. NextofKin " by virtue of the Statutes " 
 
 of Distribution — Time of ascertaining Class — Arti- 
 ficial Class — Tenants for Life.'] Where a testator 
 gives property in trust for the benefit of the per- 
 sons who at a time subsequent to his own death 
 shall by virtue of the Statutes of Distribution be 
 his next of kin, the class is an artificial class to 
 be ascertained on the hypothesis that the testator 
 lives up to and dies at the subsequent period of 
 time. Stubge and the Gkeat Westeen Eail- 
 WAT Company ■ 19 Ch. D. 444 
 
 5, Personae designatSB — Gift to Indivi- 
 
 ■duals or to a Class.] Bequest of residue " In trust 
 for my son George, my daughters Lydia, Mary Ann, 
 Alice, and Frances, and such of my child or 
 ■children, if any, hereafter to be born as shall attain 
 the age of twenty-one years or many, in equal 
 shares as tenants in common, but subject, as to the 
 share of any daughter, whether now living or a 
 child hereafter to be born, to the trusts following — " 
 the share of " such daughter " being settled. The 
 
 Vni. WllL— CLASS— continued. 
 testator had six children only, the five named and 
 one other, all of whom had attained twenty-one at 
 the date of the will. Of the named chUdren two 
 died in the testator's lifetime without issue, and 
 three survived him -.—Held, that the five named 
 children took as a class and not as individuals, and 
 that the whole residue was divisible among the 
 three who survived the testator. — Be Stanhope's 
 Trusts (27 Beav. 201) followed. In re Jaokbon. 
 Shiees v. Ashwoeth 25 Ch. D. 162 
 
 6. Portions — Period of Vesting — 'Varia- 
 tion between Words of Oift and 'Words of Gift 
 over.] The rule that the Court will lean to a con- 
 struction which will give portions to aU of a class 
 of children who may live to require them is not 
 confined to settlements, but extends also to wUls. 
 —Jackson V. Dover (2 H. & M. 209) followed. In 
 re Knowles. Nottage v. Bdxton 21 Ch. D. 806 
 
 IX. Will— CONDITIOK. 
 
 1. Forfeiture on Alienation — Acceleration 
 
 of subsequent Limitations — Want of Parties — Suit 
 in Equity for Legal Demand pending at Com- 
 mencement of Judicature Act — Judicature Act, 
 1873, s. 22— Bules of Court, 1875, Order XVI. r. 13.] 
 Specified freeholds and leaseholds were given by 
 will to trustees upon trust to permit the rents to be 
 received by H. for life, and after his death to con- 
 vey to his children on their attaining twenty-one, 
 with a proviso that if H. charged or incumbered the 
 property, the gift to him should be absolutely for- 
 feited, and that in such case the gift in favour of 
 his children should at once take effect, and be acted 
 upon by the trustees as thereinbefore directed. H. 
 by a memorandum in writing, in 1869, charged his 
 life estate iu favour of W. W. shortly afterwards, 
 on hearing of the clause of forfeiture, and before 
 he had taken any benefit under the charge, repu- 
 diated the security and obtained another security 
 from H. In 1874 the trustee of the will, by leave 
 of the Court in an administration suit, filed a bill 
 against persons who were in possession of the pro- 
 perty under a title derived from a lessee of H., to 
 make them account for the rents. H. had no 
 children. — Held, by Fry, J., and by the Court of 
 Appeal, that the memorandum of charge produced 
 a forfeiture of the life interest of H., although W. 
 had never claimed any benefit thereunder, and had 
 afterwards disclaimed it, and although H. had no 
 children, so that there were no pereons to take 
 under the gift over. — Held, by the Court of Appeal, 
 that though the claim of the Plaintiff was a purely 
 legal demand in respect of which a bill in equity 
 could not formerly have been maintained, a decree 
 could be made after the Judicature Acts came into 
 operation, inasmuch as sect. 22 of the Act of ■ 1873 
 provides that the Court shall have the same juris- 
 diction in pending suits as if they had been com- 
 menced in the High Court of Justice. Huest «. 
 Huest - 21 Oh. D. 278 
 
 2. Forfeiture on Alienation — Bepugnanmj 
 
 — Devise in Fee.] A condition in absolute re- 
 straint of alienation aimexed to a devise in fee, 
 even though its operation is limited to a particular 
 time, e.g., to the life of another living person, is 
 void in law as being repugnant to the nature of an 
 estate in fee. — In re Macleay (Law Eep. 20 Eq. 
 186) commented on. — Large's Case (2 Leon. 82 ; 
 
( 1669 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1670 ) 
 
 IX. WILL— CONDITION 
 
 3 Leon. 182) explained. — A testator devised an 
 estate to his son in fee, provided always that if the 
 son, his heirs or devisees, or any pereon claiming 
 through or under him or them, should desire to sell 
 the estate, or any part or parts thereof, in the life- 
 time of the testator's wife, she should have the 
 option to purchase the same at the price of £3000 
 for the whole, and at a proportionate price for any 
 part or parts thereof, and the same should accord- 
 ingly he first offered to her at such price or pro- 
 portionate price or prices. The real selling value 
 ■of the estate was, at the date of the will and at the 
 time of the testator's death, £15,000 : — Seld, that 
 the proviso amounted to an absolute restraint on 
 alienation during the life of the testator's widow ; 
 that it was void in law ; and that the son was en- 
 titled to sell the estate as he pleased, without first 
 lOSering it to the widow at the price named in the 
 will. In re Rosheb. Eoshee v. Kosher 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 801 
 
 3. Forfeiture on Bankruptcy — Fee-simple 
 
 Estate — Condition — Conditional Limitation — JJe- 
 pugnancy.'\ A testator devised a freehold estate to 
 Tthe use of his daughter, " her heirs and assigns," 
 for her separate use, " suhject, nevertheless, to the 
 proviso hereinafter contained for determining her 
 estate and interesit in the event therein, mentioned." 
 In a subsequent part of the will was a proviso that 
 in case his said daughter should at any time be 
 ■declared a, bankrupt, then and thenceforth the 
 devise thereinbefore made to her should be void, 
 and the premises should thenceforth go, remain and 
 be to the use of her children: — 'Held, that the 
 devise did not operate as a conditional limitation, 
 and that the condition in the proviso was void for 
 repugnancy; and accordingly that the daughter 
 was entitled to the property for an absolute estate 
 in fee simple. In re Maohu 21 Ch. D. 838 
 
 4. Forfeiture on Bankruptcy — lAfe Estate 
 
 determinable on Bankruptcy — Gift over to Children 
 — Time for ascertaining Class — Canons of Con- 
 struction.^ A testator gave a fund to trustees 
 upon trust to pay the income to his son during his 
 life, and after his death to pay and divide the fund 
 equally among all the children which the son might 
 have, as and when they should respectively attain 
 twenty-one ; and if the son should have no child 
 •who should attain twenty-one, the fund was to sink 
 into the residue of the testator's estate. There was 
 a proviso that if the son should be adjudicated 
 bankrupt the fund and the income thereof should 
 thenceforth immediately go and be payable or ap- 
 plicable to or for the benefit of the child or chil- 
 dren of the son " in the same manner as if he was 
 'naturally dead " or in default of such child or chil- 
 dren should sink into the residue. After the death 
 of the testator the son was adjudicated a bankrupt. 
 At the date of the adjudication he had two children ; 
 other children were born to him afterwards : — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Pearson, J.), that the 
 children bom after the adjudication were entitled 
 to share in the fund subject to the contingency of 
 their attaining twenty-one. — Observations upon the 
 force of canons of construction. In re Bedson's 
 Trusts - 25 Ch. D. 458 ; 28 Ch. D. 523 
 
 5. Forfeiture— Name Clause— -fee Simple 
 
 Estate— Bepugnancy.] A testatrix, who died in 
 1832,'Settled .her freehold estate upon her grand- 
 
 IX. Win— CONDITION— con«Jn«e(J. 
 children, a share becoming vested in one of them, 
 Lucy, in fee simple in possession; and the will 
 contained a proviso that any person becoming 
 entitled in possession to the estate should, within 
 one year thereafter, take and use the name of Jones, 
 and that in case any such person should refuse or 
 neglect to use the name of Jones within one year, 
 then the estate limited to him or her should be void, 
 and should first go to her niece, Catherine Jones, 
 since deceased, for her life, and after her decease to 
 the person or persons next in remainder under the 
 trusts of the will, in the same manner as if the 
 person so refusing were dead. Lucy was twice 
 married, and neither she nor either of her husbands 
 ever took the name of Jones : — Held, that the gift 
 being in fee simple, and there being necessarily no 
 person entitled to remainder, the name clause was 
 void, and that there had consequently been no for- 
 feiture by Lucy. Musqrave v. Brooke 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 792 
 
 6. Forfeiture for non-Eesidenoe — Devise 
 
 of House and Grounds — -What will amount to Resi- 
 dence!] Testator devised a'messuage and heredita- 
 ments in the country to the use of his son G. for 
 life, " provided as a sine qug, non " that he " within 
 six calendar months after my decease shall enter 
 upon and take actual possession of " the messuages 
 and hereditaments " as and for his residence and 
 place of abode ; " and *' shall as such tenant for life 
 thereinafter during his life continue to reside in or 
 upon the same capital messuage for at least six 
 calendar mouths (but not necessarily consecutively) 
 in every year." After G.'s death " or his failing to 
 take such possession as aforesaid and to reside in " 
 the house, testator devised the same to G.'s first 
 and other sons in tail male. G. entered and took 
 possession within six months after the testator's 
 decease ; but as to residence, during the year fol- 
 lowing the expiration of six months, he was in the 
 house for eighteen days only ; and from the 1st of 
 January to the 28th of December in the year fol- 
 lowing the date of such expiration, for no more 
 than twenty-four days. He had, however, placed 
 the house in charge of a staff of servants, he had 
 paid the rates, he had kept horses and poultry in 
 the stables and on the grounds, and his son, who 
 was at college near, had stayed at the house on an 
 average on every alternate Saturday till Monday : 
 — Held, that no forfeiture of G.'s life estate had 
 takenplace. In re MoiR. Warner v. Moir 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 605 
 
 7, Option to purchase — Interest not trans- 
 missible to Executors of Person to whom Option is 
 given.} A testator devised and bequeathed certain 
 real and personal property, including an hotel, to 
 trustees upon trust to pay out of the rents, issues, 
 and income thereof, annuities to his widow and 
 sister, and during their lives and the life of the 
 survivor to divide the residue of the rents, issues, 
 and income equally between his four children ; 
 and after the decease of the survivor of his wife 
 and sister he declared that his son should have the 
 option of purchasing the hotel at the price of 
 £10,000, such sum to fall into testator's residuary 
 personal estate; but if the son should decline to 
 purchase the hotel at that price within six mouths 
 after the decease of the survivor of the testator's 
 wife and sister, he directed that bis trustees should 
 
 3 H 2 
 
( 1671 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1672 ) 
 
 IX. 'WILL— CONDITIOM'— coraiimwe^. 
 sell the hotel, and that the moneys arising from 
 the sale thereof should fall into his residuary per- 
 sonal estate. The son died very soon after his 
 father, the testator, also leaving a will whereby he 
 appointed executors. The testator's wife and sister 
 heiog also dead: — Held, that the option to pur- 
 chase the hotel was a right personal to the son, 
 and could not be exercised after his death by his 
 executors. In re CocsiNS. Alexander v. Cross 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 203 
 
 8. Eelinquishment of Debt — Beath of De- 
 visee before Testator.'] A testator devised land at 
 M. to his son E. in fee, on the expresg condition 
 that E., his executors or administrators, should, 
 within three months after the testator's death, re- 
 linquish aU claim to a sum of £3400 due to him by 
 the testator. And he devised other land to trustees, 
 on trust for sale, and to stand possessed of the 
 proceeds of sale, after payment of the deficiency 
 (if any) of his residuary personal estate to pay his 
 debts as thereinafter mentioned, on trust for his 
 wife for her life, with remainder in trust for some 
 grandchildren. And he devised all other his real es- 
 tate not thereinbefore disposed of to his sons J. and 
 E. in fee, in equal shares. And, after making some 
 specific bequests of personal estate, he bequeathed 
 the residue of his personal estate to trustees upon 
 trust for conversion, and to stand possessed of the 
 proceeds upon trust to pay his debts (except the 
 debt of £3400 due to E. and two other specified 
 debts), and on trust to retain the surplus for the 
 benefit of his sons J. and E. in equal shares. But, 
 in case his residuary personal estate should be in- 
 sufficient to pay his debts (except as aforesaid), he 
 directed that the deficiency should be paid out of 
 the proceeds of the sale of the real estate which 
 he had directed to be sold. E. died before the 
 testator without issue : — Meld (affirming the deci- 
 sion of Fry, J.), that the condition bound the 
 land at M. notwithstanding the lapse of the de- 
 vise, and that the debt of £3400 must be dis- 
 charged out of it. In re Kiek. Kibk v. Kikk 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 431 
 
 9. Eestraint of Uarriage — Marriage with 
 
 Consent — Guardians.'] A testator appointed his 
 wife sole guardian of his infant children, and be- 
 queathed a legacy to each of his daughters on her 
 attaining twenty-one or marrying with the consent 
 of her " guardian or guardians," which should first 
 happen. He gave the residue to his wife for life, 
 and, after her death, gave a further legacy to each 
 daughter who should attain twenty-one or marry 
 with the consent " of her guardian or guardians." 
 He empowered the trastees during the minority of 
 the daughters, to pay the income of their con- 
 tingent legacies to his wife for their maintenance 
 and education, and, in case of her decease, em- 
 powered them to apply so much of the income of 
 the contingent legacies as they might think fit for 
 the maintenance of the infant daughters presump- 
 tively entitled thereto, with power to pay it to the 
 guardian or guardians of the daughters for that 
 purpose. After the death of the wife, a daughter 
 married under twenty-one without the consent of 
 any guardian or guardians, there being none, and 
 died shortly afterwards, under the age of twenty- 
 one years •.—•Held, by Fry J., and by the Court of 
 Appeal, that the condition was not complied with. 
 
 IX. WILI— CONDITION— coniiniteiZ. 
 and that the daughter took no vested interest in 
 the legacies — ^the condition not being made inopera- 
 tive by there being no guardians, since guardians 
 could have been appointed by the Court, and the 
 testator, on the language of his will, must be taken 
 to have contemplated such an appointment. — By 
 the testator's marriage settlement the trust funds; 
 after the death of the husband and wife, were to be 
 held in trust for such children as, being a son or 
 sons, attained twenty-one, or, being a daughter or 
 daughters, attained that age or married with the 
 consent of their parents or guardians : — Held, by 
 Fry, J., and by the Court of Appeal, that the same 
 rule applied to this gift, and that the daughter 
 took no vested interest : — Held, by the Court of 
 Appeal, that the consent of a guardian appointed 
 by the infant herself would not have satisfied the 
 condition. In re Beown's Will. In re Bbown's 
 Settlement - - - , 18 Ch. D. 61 
 
 10. Bestraint of Marriage — Restriction 
 
 confined to the case of Marriage with a Domestic 
 Servant — Condition valid.] Testatrix devised reat 
 estate to her father for life, remainder to her 
 brother for life, remainder to his first and other 
 sons in tail, with remainders over. She then be- 
 queathed the proceeds of her residuary personalty 
 in trust for her brother absolutely. But, she 
 declared, if her brother should thereafter, whether 
 he should at the time be in possession as tenant 
 for life or not, marry a domestic servant, or a person 
 who had been a domestic servant, then the devises 
 and bequests in favour of her brother and issue 
 should be null and void, and in lieu thereof, she 
 devised her real estate to the use of the Plaintiffs^ 
 and declared that the personalty was to be held 
 and enjoyed with a specific part of the realty. — 
 The father survived the testatrix and died. There- 
 upon the brother became entitled to the realty as 
 tenant for life in possession. Afterwards, the 
 brother married a person who at the time of her' 
 marriage was, and had previously been, a domestic 
 servant : — Held, that the condition was valid, and 
 that the real estate passed to the Plaintifi. JEionsR- 
 V. Turner - 16 Ch. D. 188 
 
 11. Widowhood-— JJesfratnf of Marriage — 
 
 Annuity to Wife " so long as she shaU continue my 
 Widow and unmarried" — Voidable Marriage — 
 Substitutionary Oift.] A testator, after giving a, 
 legacy of £200 to his wife, directed his trustees 
 " in addition thereto to pay to my said wife, so long 
 as she shall continue my widow and unmarried, an 
 annuity of £300, or otherwise in lieu and in sub- 
 stitution of the said annuity, at the option of my 
 said wife if she shall prefer it, a legacy of £2000.'' 
 After the date of the will tlie marriage was de- 
 clared null by the Divorce Court in a suit brought 
 by the wife against the testator. After this the 
 testator died leaving the lady surviving. Fry, J., 
 held that she was entitled to the legacy of £200,. 
 but was not entitled either to the annuity or the 
 £2000. She appealed from this decision so far 
 as it was unfavom-able to her: — Held, that al- 
 though if the lady had been the testator's wife at 
 his decease, the words " shall continue my widow 
 and unmarried," might have been in substance the 
 same as " shall continue unmarried," the reference 
 to widowhood could not on that ground be treated 
 as surplusage, but was the principal part of the 
 
( 1673 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES, 
 
 ( im ) 
 
 IX. WILL— CONDITION— coniimMec?. 
 ■condition, and that as the lady did not at the testa- 
 .tor's death fill the position of the testator's widow, 
 she could not take the annuity. — Held, further that 
 .she could not take the £2000, for that an option to 
 take a legacy instead of an annuity could not exist 
 if there was no right to take the annuity ; and, 
 moreover, that a gift by way of substitution for 
 another is subject to the same conditions as the 
 ■original gift. — Bishton v. Gohb (5 My. & Cr. 145 
 doubted). In re Boddington. Boddington v. 
 Clairat - 23 Ch. D. 597 ; 26 Ch. D. 685 
 
 X. -WILL— CONTINGENT REMAINDER. 
 
 1. Executory Devise — lAfe Estate — Devise 
 
 io such Children of Tenant for Life " as either iefore 
 w after her decease " should attain twenty-one or 
 •marry. ^ A testatrix devised a freehold estate to her 
 granddaught-er E . during her life, and from and after 
 'her death to such of her children living at her death 
 " as either before or after her decease " should, 
 being males, attain twenty-one, or, being females, 
 attain that age or marry, in fee simple as tenants 
 in common : and if there should be no such child, 
 then over. E. survived the testatrix, and died 
 leaving seven children, of whom five had attained 
 twenty-one at the time of her death, and two, a 
 son and a daughter, were infants, the daughter 
 being also a spinster : — Seld, that the five children 
 took vested interests liable to open to let in the two 
 other children on their fulfilling the conditions of 
 the wiU. — Brachenbury v. CHbbons (2 Ch. D. 417) 
 not followed. In re Lechmeke & Lloyd 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 524 
 
 2. Ezecntory Devise — Gift for Life — Gift 
 
 io Children living at the time of the Decease of 
 Tenant for Life or thereafter to be born.'] Testator 
 gave an estate to his wife Elizabeth and her assigns 
 for her life, and after her decease unto aU and every 
 the lawful children of his son William living at 
 the time of the decease of his wife Elizabeth or 
 thereafter to be born, in equal shares as tenants in 
 common : — Seld, that this was an executory devise, 
 and tbat the children bom after the death of the 
 tenant for life were entitled to share equally with 
 those born before her death. — Brachenbury v. Gib- 
 hons (2 Ch. D. 417) and In re Lechmere and Lloyd 
 <18 Ch. D. 524) observed upon. Miles v. Jaevis 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 633 
 
 XI. Will— CONVERSION. 
 
 Conversion imperative — Power of Sale dis- 
 
 ■cretionary.l A testator gave an annuity to his wife, 
 •and he gave and bequeathed to his seven children 
 all his real and personal estate after deducting the 
 .said annuity ; and after his wife's decease the 
 annuity, together with all rents, interests, dividends 
 and profits arising from his estate, to be divided 
 between his seven children equally; and he 
 ■dii-ected his executors to sell and convert into 
 money his furniture, lands, houses, tenements, and 
 other property whenever it should appear to their 
 satisfaction that such sale would be for the benefit 
 of his children, and all the money arising firom the 
 sale to be invested for the benefit of his children : — 
 Seld, that the direction to convert was imperative, 
 and operated from the death of the testator. In re 
 Eaw. Morris v. Griffiths 26 Ch. D. 601 
 
 XIL WILL— CROSS REMAINDERS. 
 
 Construction — Cross Executory Limita- 
 tions — Implication — Original and accruing 
 
 XIL WILL— CROSS REMAINDERS— conii'nMerf. 
 
 Shares.] A will contained a trust of real and 
 personal property during the lives of five children 
 and the survivor to divide the income into fiv6 
 parts, and pay one-fifth to each, if living, or if dead 
 to their respective children or issue, the latter taking 
 equally between themselves in classes the one-fifth 
 share which their parent if living would have taken. 
 And if any one of the five children died without 
 leaving children or issue, or if such issue failed 
 during the period, the share of such children or issue 
 to belong to the others of the testator's children and 
 their issue in the same way as original shares. This 
 clause to apply to accruing as well as original shares, 
 and upon the death of the last surviving child the 
 capital to testator's grandchildren in classes, per 
 stii'pes. — One child died leaving children. One of 
 the grandchildren died, leaving one child, Lucia, 
 who died unmarried before the period had expired : 
 — Seld, upon a special case to determine what be- 
 came of Lucia's share of income — that she' took 
 only a life interest, and that on her death her share 
 went equally among her uncles and aunts and their 
 issue per stu-pes, cross limitations being implied to 
 effect this. — Rules deducible from the authorities : 
 — 1. Cross executory limitations in the case of per- 
 sonal estate, like cross-remainders of real estate, 
 are only implied to fill up a hiatus in the limitations 
 which seems from the context to have been unin- 
 tentional. — 2. They cannot be implied — as cross- 
 remainders could not — to divest an interest given 
 by the will. — 3. The existence of other cross-limita- 
 tions between different persons does not prevent 
 implication.— 4. But where such express cross- 
 limitations are in favour of the persons to whom 
 the implied cross-remainders would convey the 
 property, that circumstance is of weight in deter- 
 mining the intention. In re Hudson. Hudson 
 V. Hudson - - - 20 Ch. D. 406 
 
 XIII. WILL— DEATH COUPLED WITH CON- 
 TINGENCY. 
 
 1, Before final Division— Gift over in 
 
 case Legatee should die before "final division" 
 of Estate.] A testator gave the residue of his 
 estate equally between four persons, and gave the 
 shares over to the children of the legatees in case 
 the legatees respectively should die before the 
 " final division " of his estate. Two of the legatees 
 died more than a year after the death of the 
 testator. The estate had not then been fuUy 
 realized and distributed ; — Seld, that the " final 
 division " of the estate meant the period of a year 
 from the death of the testator, and that the shares 
 of the deceased legatees had not gone over. — John- 
 son V. Crooh (12 Ch. D. 639) approved. In re 
 WiLKiNS. Spencer v. Duckworth 18 Ch. D. 634 
 
 2. Before Pajment — Uncertainty — Gift 
 
 over of Legacy or so much thereof as shall 
 not have been paid to or received by Legatee — 
 Words — Paid to or received by.] A gift over of a 
 legacy or so much thereof as should not have beeh 
 paid to or received by the legatee : — Seld, not to 
 be void for uncertainty, on the ground that the 
 words referred, not to the time of actual payment 
 or receipt, but to the time when it was the duty of 
 the executors to pay the legacy. — In re Arrow- 
 smith's Trusts (29 L. J. (Ch.) 774 ; 2 D. F. & J 
 474) approved and followed. — Sutchin v. Man- 
 nington (1 Ves. 366) and Martin v. Martin (Law 
 
( 1675 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1676 ) 
 
 XIII. WILI— DEATH COUPLED WITH CON- 
 TINGENCY— conimued. 
 
 Eep. 2 Eq. 404) distinguished. — Bubh v. Fadwiek 
 (13 Ch. D. 517) disapproved. — Johnson v. Crook 
 (12 Ch. D. 639) approved. In re Chastou. 
 Chaston v. Seago - 18 Ch. D. 218 
 
 3. leaving a Family — Death between Date 
 
 of Will and Death of Testator — Substitutional 
 (}ift.~\ A testator bequeathed his residuary per- 
 sonalty to trustees in trust for the children of L., to 
 be divided equally between them, and directed that 
 " in case of the decease of either of them leaving 
 a family, then such share as the parents would 
 have taken shall be equally divided amongst the 
 children of such deceased parents " : — Held, that 
 " decease " meant decease during the testator's life 
 — that the children of L. who survived the tes- 
 tator took absolutely — and that the childi-en of 
 one child of L., who died between the date of the 
 will and the death of the testator, took the share 
 which this parent would have taken. In re Hat- 
 WAED. Ceeeet ■». LiNGWOOD 19 Ch. D. 470 
 
 4. Leaving Children — Gift of Property 
 
 to Trustees to -pay Debts and Annuities, and 
 to convey, &c.. Residue to Son ahsolutehj — Death 
 of Son leaving Children, Trustees to convey to 
 them absolutely — Death of Son in Testatrix's Life- 
 time, without leaving Children, Gift over — Son 
 survived Testatrix, and entitled absolutely.'] Tes- 
 tatrix gave all her real and personal estate to 
 trustees in trust to pay all her debts, &c., and 
 certain annuities, and then as to the residue of her 
 estate directed them to convey, assign, or otherwise 
 assure the same unto and to the use of her son, his 
 heirs, executors, &c., absolutely. And if her sou 
 should marry, and should die leaving children who 
 should live to attain the age of twenty-one years, 
 the trustees were to convey, &c., the residue to such 
 children equally, as tenants in common absolutely, 
 but if her son should die in her lifetime without 
 leaving children or a child surviving, then the 
 trustees were to convey, fie, the residue to the 
 persons named for their absolute use and benefit. 
 The son married after the date of the will in the 
 lifetime of the testatrix, survived the testatrix, and 
 had children living. — Held, that death leaving 
 children meant death in the lifetime of the testa- 
 trix, and that that not having happened, the son 
 became, subject to the payment of debts and 
 annuities, entitled absolutely to the residue. In re 
 LuDDY. Peabd v. Mokton - 26 Ch. D. 394 
 
 XIV. WILL— DISCLAIMEE. 
 
 1. Onerous Legacies.] When by a will 
 
 two distinct legacies are bequeathed to the same 
 person, one of them being onerous and the other 
 beneficial, prima facie the legatee is entitled to dis- 
 claun the onerous legacy and to take the other. — 
 If, however, onerous property and beneficial pro- 
 perty are included in the same gift, prima facie 
 the legatee cannot disclauu the onerous and accept 
 the beneficial ; he must take the whole gift or none 
 of it. — But this prima, facie rule may be rebutted if 
 the will manifests a sufficient intention of the 
 testator to the contrary. — Green v. Britten (42 L. J. 
 (Ch.) 187) followed. Gcthrie v. Walkond 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 873 
 
 2. Onerous Property — Mortgaged House.l 
 
 A testator devised and bequeathed a freehold house 
 
 XIV. WILL— mSCLAIKEn— continued. 
 and the furniture and effects therein on trust for 
 A. and B. for life. The house was subject to a 
 mortgage for more than its value •.—Held, that A^ 
 and B. were entitled to the use of the furniture 
 without keeping down the interest on the mort- 
 Syer v. Gladstone 30 Ch. D. 614 
 
 XV. WILL— ESTATE IN REALTY. 
 
 1. Legal Estate in Executors — Vendor 
 
 and Purchaser Act, 1874 — Interest commensurate 
 with Objects of Will.'] A testator, after directing 
 his debts to be paid, and setting apart certain sums 
 to provide annuities for his two sons, devised and 
 bequeathed all his real and personal estate to his- 
 wife and his four daughters, to be equally divided 
 between them: — Provided as follows — ^that the- 
 share of his wife should be divided after her death 
 between his four daughters or the survivors and 
 their children : and the testator appointed his wife 
 and T. Davies, his executors, to act jointly in carry- 
 ing out all the intentions of his will, and to invest 
 his daughters' shares for their benefit and the benefit 
 of their children. — Held, upon an application under 
 the Vendor and Purchaser Act, that the legal estate 
 in the freeholds was vested in the executors who 
 eould make a good title to a purchaser. Davies 
 to Jones and Evans - 24 Ch. D. 190 
 
 2. ■ Eule in Shelley's Case— " Estate" — 
 
 " Child or Children " — " Dying without Jsstie.'J 
 By a wiU made in 1820 the testatrix said "I 
 give and devise unto my eldest son Thomas all 
 my real and freehold estate and aU leases and. 
 leasehold premises now in my possession (subject 
 to the payment of the rents and the performance 
 of the covenants mentioned in the said inden- 
 tures of leases) dm-ing the teiiu of his natural life, 
 and after his decease to his legitimate child or 
 children (if there be any) ; but if he dies without 
 issue my will is it may go unto my other son 
 WUliam during the term of his natural life, and 
 afterwards to his legitimate child or children (if 
 any) : but if he should likewise die without issue 
 my will is it may go to my daughter Mary and to 
 her heii-s and assigns for ever." — The will then gave- 
 legacies to the second son and the daughters, with 
 provisions for the daughters, to be paid in the first 
 instance by Thomas, but to be repaid in pai-t or in 
 whole to him in certain events by his successor in. 
 the estate. Thomas died without issue. — Held, 
 by Earl Cairns and Lords Blackburn and Fitz- 
 Gerald, affirming the decision of the Court of 
 Appeal, that reading the whole will together 
 Thomas took an estate tail in the realty. — Contra,, 
 by the Earl of Selbome, L.C., and Lord Bram- 
 well, that Thomas took an estate for life, with 
 remainder to his children (if any) in fee as pur- 
 chasers. BowEN V. Lewis 9 App. Cas. 890 
 
 3. Rule in Shelley's Case — " Issue and 
 
 their Heirs " — Gift over on Death witliout leaving 
 Children— Estate for Life or Estate Tail.] The 
 owner of land devised it to his eldest son L. " for 
 life, and after his decease to his lawful issue and 
 their heii-s for ever, if any," and " if he should die 
 without leaving any children born in wedlock " 
 then to the testator's son E. and his heirs : — Held,. 
 affirming the decision of Cave, J., that the devise 
 gave a life estate only to L., and not an estate tail. 
 Morgan v. Thojias 8 Q, B. D. 676 ; 9 Q, B. D. 64& 
 
.( 1677 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1678 ) 
 
 XV. WILL— ESTATE IN EEAITY— cowttntted 
 
 4. ■- Words of Futurity— ProOTSo—" Shall 
 
 he 'born in my lifetime" construed as Words of 
 futurity.'] The testator devised an estate to his 
 six grandsons (of whom the Appellant was one) 
 ■ " during their respective lives, in equal shares as 
 tenants in common, and as to the respective shares 
 therein of each of them, my said grandsons, after 
 his decease, to the use of his first and every other 
 son successively, according to seniority of birth in 
 tail male, and on failure of the issue male of any 
 one or more of my said grandsons, then and so often 
 as the same shall happen, I give and devise as well 
 the share or respective shares originally limited to 
 the grandson whose issue shall so fail, as the share 
 or respective shares which by virtue of this present 
 clause shall have become vested in him or them, or 
 his or their issue male, .to the use of the other or 
 others of my said grandsons during his or their 
 life, or respective lives, as tenants in common. 
 And after the decease of such last-mentioned 
 grandsons, then I give and devise the share or 
 shares lastly hereinbefore limited to him, to his first 
 and every other son successively according to 
 seniority of birth in tail male ; and if there shall 
 be a failure of such issue of all my said grandsons 
 but one of them, I give and devise the entirety of 
 all the said estates to the use of such only grand- 
 son for his life, and after his decease to the use of 
 his and every other son successively according to 
 , their seniorities in tail male.'' By a proviso at the 
 end of the will the testator directed — " Provided 
 always, that if any person whom I have made 
 tenant in tail male of my said estate shall be born 
 in my lifetime, then and in such case I revoke the 
 devise so made to him. In lieu thereof I give and 
 devise the hereditaments comprised in such devise 
 and appointment to the use of the same person 
 respectively for the term of his or her natural life, 
 and after his or her decease, to the use of his or her 
 first and every other son successively according to 
 their respective seniorities in tail male." Two out 
 of the six grandsons died without issue. The 
 eldest son of the Appellant was bom before the 
 date of the wiU, and by a disentailing deed executed 
 after the testator's death conveyed to the Appellant 
 his share and interest in the said estate in fee. In 
 a suit for declaration of title and consequent relief : 
 — Held, that the Appellant was entitled to an 
 estate in fee simple in one fourth part of the 
 hereditaments and premises, the subject of the suit. 
 The words of the proviso must be construed in 
 their grammatical sense, and be taken to mean a 
 tenant in tail male born after the date of the will, 
 and therefore not to include the eldest son of the 
 Appellant. The words " shall be bom in my life- 
 time," in the absence of any context to explain 
 them, are to be taken as words of futurity. Con- 
 sequently the gift of an estate tail to the AppeBant's 
 eldest son, who was bom before the date of the 
 will, was not revoked. Gibbons v. Gibbons 
 
 rS Add. Cas. 471 
 XVI. WILL— EXECUTORS. '- "^ 
 
 Gift annexed to Of&ce — Bebuttal of Pre- 
 sumption — Parol Evidence.'] The mere fact that 
 the gift of the legacy precedes the appointment 
 of the legatee as executor — or that the legacies to 
 several persons appointed executors differ either 
 in their amount or subject-matter — ^is not enough 
 •by itself to rebut the presumption, that a legacy 
 
 XVI, WILL— EXECUTORS— coraimMefJ. 
 
 given to a ' person who is appointed executor is 
 annexed to the office. — Jewis v. Lawrence (Law 
 Rep. 8 Bq. 345) questioned. — Wildes v. Davies 
 (1 Sm. & Gift. 475 ; 22 L. J. (Ch.) 497) explained. 
 — ^Per Cotton, L.J. (dubitante. Fry, L.J.) ; — Parol 
 evidence is admissible to rebut this, as well as any 
 other, presumption. In re Appleton, Bahbbk v. 
 Tebbit ■ ■ - 29 Ch. D. 893 
 
 XVII. WILL— EXONERATION. 
 
 1. ' ■ Lapsed Bequest— Charge of Debts and 
 
 Legacies — Mortmain Act] Where a testator, 
 having bequeathed his personal estate, exonerates 
 it from debts and legacies, which he charges on real 
 estate, and part of the bequest lapses or faUs under 
 the Mortmain Act, the exemption does not extend 
 to the lapsed portion. A testatrix devised her real 
 estate to tmstees in trust for sale, and directed 
 them, out of the proceeds, to pay her funeral and 
 testamentary expenses, debts, legacies, and duties ; 
 and she directed her trustees to sell her leaseholds, 
 and to apply the proceeds in payment of so much 
 of her debts, &c., as the proceeds of her real estate 
 should be insufficient to pay ; and she bequeathed 
 all her personal estate to a charity. Part of the 
 personal estate consisted of a mortgage debt, as to 
 which the bequest failed and lapsed to the Crown, 
 there being no next of kin : — Meld, that the debts, 
 expenses, legacies, and duties were chargeable, 
 first, on the impure personalty ; secondly, on the 
 real estate ; and thirdly, on the leaseholds. 
 KiLFOKD V. Blaney - - 29 Ch. D. 145 
 
 [Varied by Court of Appeal, 31 Oh. D. 86.] 
 
 2. Mixed Fund — Mortgaged Estates — 
 
 Payment pro rata — Loclce King's Act (17 & 18 
 'P'ict. c. 113).] A testator, by will made in 1866, 
 after specifically disposing of certain parts of his 
 property and giving certain real estate to his wife 
 during widowhood, gave the rest and residue of his 
 real and personal estate to trustees upon trust to 
 convert the same into money and thereout pay his 
 debts, including debts due on mortgage of the 
 property given to his wife during widowhood, and 
 his funeral and testamentary expenses, and the 
 costs of proving and executing his will. He 
 directed his trustees to pay the income of the fund 
 to his wife during widowhood, and after her death 
 or second marriage he gave so much of the fund as 
 consisted of pure personalty to charitable purposes, 
 and bequeathed the rest of it to his wife. In a 
 subsequent part of his will he appointed executors, 
 and gave a legacy to each of them who accepted 
 the trusts. At his death part of the residuary real 
 estate was subject to mortgages : — Held, by Fry, J., 
 that the executor's legacies were charged on the 
 real estate, and that as there was a mixed fimd 
 they must be paid pro rata out of the different 
 parts of it. — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 the legacies were charged on the real estate, but 
 only in aid of the personalty, the principle of pro 
 rata, payment only applying to payments which 
 the testator had expressly directed to be made out 
 of the mixed fund. — Held, by the Court of Appeal 
 (affirming the decision of Pry, J.), that the will 
 did not indicate any such " contrary intention " as to 
 exclude the mortgages on the residuary real estate 
 from the operation of Locke King's Act, and that 
 they must be paid out of the proceeds of the mort- 
 gaged* estate. Elliott v. Deabslby 16 Ch. D. 322 
 
( ICTO ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1680 ) 
 
 XVII. WILI— EXONEEATIOK— confe»«ed. 
 
 3. Realty contracted to be purcliased — 
 
 Unpaid Purchase-money — Vendor's Lien — Bights 
 of Devisees — Compromise — Besaission of Con- 
 tract — Locke King's Acts Amendment Act (40 
 & 41 Vict. c. 34).] A testator who had con- 
 tracted to purchase real estate, and paid the 
 deposit money, hy will made in 1881, specifically 
 devised such real estate to his daughter for life, 
 with remainder to her children, without shewing 
 any intention that the purchase-money should be 
 paid out of his personal estate ; and he died with- 
 out having disposed of his personal estate ; which 
 was rather less in amount than the unpaid pur- 
 chase-money, and without having completed the 
 purchase or paid any further part of the purchase- 
 money. — After his death an action hy the vendor 
 against the executor and trustee of the will for 
 specific performance of the contract was compro- 
 mised hy the Defendant thereto, and the contract 
 was put an end to upon the terms that the vendor 
 .should retain the deposit money and have his 
 costs ; and this compromise was confirmed by the 
 Court by an order made by consent in an adminis- 
 tration action in the presence of the tenant for 
 life of the real estate and the trustee, all the 
 remaindermen being infants. — Upon the further 
 consideration of the administration action, the 
 devisees contended that they were entitled to so 
 much of the personal estate as was equivalent to 
 the unpaid purchase-money, upon the ground that 
 the purchase was a conversion by the testator of 
 his personal estate to that extent, and that Locke 
 King's Acts had not altered the law in that 
 respect: — Held, that there was a vendor's lien, 
 and that Locke King's Acts Amendment Act 
 applied ; that accordingly all the devisees were 
 entitled to was the real estate charged with the 
 unpaid purchase-money, and therefore on the 
 facts to nothing; but held, moreover, that the 
 order of compromise would be fatal to their claim, 
 if otherwise good. In re Cookokoft. Bhoadbent 
 V. Gkotes 24 Ch. B. 94 
 
 House mortgaged for more than its value 
 
 [30 Ch. S. 614 
 See Will — Disolaimek. 2. 
 
 XVIII. WILL— HEIELOOM. 
 
 1. Contingent future Interest — Trans- 
 
 inissibility — Tenant in Tail — Personal Estate — 
 Vesting.'] A testator by his will directed that his 
 books and plate should be considered as heirlooms 
 and should pass with his real estate in the same 
 manner as if they were an estate of inheritance at 
 Common Law, and should so continue annexed to 
 his said real estate as long as the law would peimit, 
 to be inherited by the several persons who should 
 succeed thereto ; and he devised and bequeathed all 
 his real and residuaiy personal estates to trustees 
 upon trust for K. C. for life, and after the decease 
 of E. C. for his first and other sons successively in 
 taQ male, and in default of such issue upon trust 
 for Henry C, the eldest son of J. C, for life, and 
 after his decease for his first and other sons suc- 
 cessively in tail male, and in default of such issue 
 upon trust for "the next eldest son of the said 
 J. C. who shall survive the said Henry C." for life, 
 and after his decease upon trust for " the first and 
 other sons of the body of the said next eldest 
 son of the said J. C. who shall survive the said 
 
 XVIII. WILL— HEIELOOM— coniinticJ. 
 
 Henry C." successively in tail male, and in default 
 of such issue upon trust for his, the testator's, own 
 right heirs. E. C. and Henry C. died without 
 having married. J. C. died in testator's lifetime. 
 George was the next eldest son of J. C, who sur- 
 vived Henry. F. J. C. was the eldest son of 
 George, and the first tenant in tail under the 
 settlement, and he died an infant in the lifetime 
 of E. C. and of. Henry C. : — Held, that notwith- 
 standing the death of F. J. C. before it could be 
 known whether his father would survive Henry C, 
 or whether there would be any issue male either of 
 E. 0. or Henry C, the heirlooms and residuary 
 personalty Tested absolutely in the legal personal 
 representative of F. J. C. — Hogg v. Jones (32 Beav. 
 45) distinguished. In re Cbesswbll. Paekin v. 
 Ckesswell - - - - 24 Ch. D. 102 
 
 2. Reference to Deei of Entail — Non- 
 existence of Deed — Non-failure of Gift.] Testator 
 bequeathed a collection of books, manuscripts, and 
 pictures to his executors to hold as heirlooms, and 
 suffer the same to be used and enjoyed by the 
 person who for the time being under the limitations 
 of " a certain deed of entail bearing date the 
 day of shall be entitled to the possession of " 
 
 M. House. — At the testator's death there was no 
 such deed of entail as described in the will in 
 existence, and the testator was entitled to the 
 house absolutely in fee simple: — Held, that the 
 collection belonged to the heir-at-law of the testar 
 tor, as the person entitled in possession to M. House. 
 In re Marquess of Bute. Marquess op Bute v. 
 Eyder - 27 Ch. D. 196 
 
 3. " Successors " — Codicil — Plate — 
 
 Leasehold House — " To A. and his successors 
 to be enjoyed with and to go with the title " 
 — Painting — Statuary and China—" To A. and 
 his successors, to he held' and settled as lieirlooms 
 and to go with the title " — Absolute Interest — ■ 
 Executory Trust — Settlement — Contents of Houses- 
 Jewellery at Banhers — Legacies — Pecuniary — 
 Specific — '^ All Legacies to he paid free of legacy 
 duty "—Legacy Duty.'] A testatrix by a codicil to 
 her will bequeathed to A. C, sixth Eail of E. and to 
 his successors, all her plate, and also gave, devised, 
 and bequeathed a leasehold house to him and " to 
 his successors and to be enjoyed with and to go 
 with the title," and as to all her household furniture, 
 paintings, books, china, and the whole contents of 
 her house, she bequeathed the same to her trustees 
 and executors upon trust that they should in the 
 first place " select and set aside a collection of the 
 best paintings, statuary, and china for the said 
 Earl of E., and his successors, to be held and settled 
 as heirlooms, and to go with the title," and she 
 authorized them to give to the said Earl or his 
 successors any articles of furniture which they 
 should think fit, and as to all the rest and residue 
 of the contents of her house upon trust for her 
 trustees to select presents for her friends, and 
 directed them to present any portion of the residue 
 of the contents of her house to her cousins if they 
 should think fit, or to sell the same, and the 
 moneys so received to form part of her residuary 
 personal estate, and she directed all the legacies 
 left by her will and codicil to be paid free of 
 legacy duty. The testatrix died possessed of 
 considerable personal estate, which comprised 
 
( 1681 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1682 ) 
 
 XVIII. WILL— HEIRLOOM— comftiiMeiZ. 
 
 •amongst other things a number of articles of 
 jewellery which were at her death in a box at her 
 banker's, which jewellery had been bequeathed to 
 her. It was proved that it had been the practice 
 of the testatrix and also of the former owner to 
 send such box for safe custody to the bankers when 
 they respectively were away from London : — Held, 
 first, that the plate and leasehold house passed to 
 .the sixth Earl absolutely ; the words " to be enjoyed 
 with and go with the title" not being sufficient 
 in themselves to create an executory trust or to 
 «ut down the interest to a life estate. — Montagu 
 ■V. Lord Iruihiquin (23 "W. R. 592) discussed. — 
 Secondly, that the gift to the trustees of the whole 
 contents of the house upon trust to " select and set 
 aside a collection of the best paintings, statuary, 
 and china, for the said Earl of E. and his suc- 
 cessors, to be held and settled as heirlooms and to 
 •go with the title " was a clear direction to settle 
 and created an executory trust, and a settlement 
 "was directed (to be settled in Chambers) giving a 
 life interest to the sixth Earl with remainder to the 
 ■next heir to the Earldom for his life. Thirdly, 
 that the box of jewellery passed to the trustees as 
 part of the contents of the house, that being the 
 locality to which the property ought to be ascribed, 
 although jewellery is merely for personal use and 
 is not appropriated to a house. Lastly, that imder 
 the words " all the legacies left by my will and 
 codicil to be paid free of legacy duty," the legacy 
 duty was to be paid out of the estate on all 
 legacies as well pecuniary as specific, the word 
 "paid" not being sufficient under the circum- 
 stances to cut down the direction to pecuniary 
 legacies only. — Andey v. Cotton (16 L. J. (Ch.) 
 •55) discussed and followed. In re Johnston. 
 CooKEEELL V. Earl OP EssEX - 26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 4. Unceitainty — Trust— Validity — Con- 
 
 ■diUon suhiequent.~\ When a trust is created to 
 secure the devolution of chattels as heirlooms, any 
 limitations which are to take effect by way of 
 postponement or defeazance of an absolute in- 
 terest are subject to all the rules which govern 
 the validity of conditions subsequent. — Such 
 limitations, therefore, must be certain, not only 
 in expression, but also in operation, and it is 
 essential to their validity that it should be capable 
 of ascertaiimient at any given moment of time, 
 whether the limitation has or has not taken effect. 
 — A testator, who was a peer, bequeathed chattels 
 "to trustees, upon trust to permit and suffer the 
 same to go and be held and enjoyed with the 
 title, so far as the rules of law and equity would 
 admit, by the person who for the time being should 
 be actually possessed of the title, in the nature of 
 lieirlooms, and so that no person in existence at 
 the time of the testator's decease, or born in due 
 time afterwards, and afterwards coming to the 
 title, should have any other than a life interest in 
 the same, and so that no person should acquire an 
 absolute interest in the same till the expiration of 
 twenty-one years after the decease of all such 
 persons as should be in existence at the time of 
 .the testator's decease and afterwards attaining the 
 title : — Steld, that the latter clause of the limita- 
 tions was void for uncertainty in operation, and 
 that the first person born after the death of the 
 testator who attained the title acquired an absolute 
 
 XVIII. WILL— HEIBLOOm— £oreWn«e(^. 
 
 interest in the chattels, notwithstanding that there 
 was stUl living a person who was alive at the time 
 of the testator's death, and who was capable of 
 inheriting the title. In re Viscount Exmowth. 
 VisoouNT ExMOUTH V. Pbaed 23 Ch. D. 168 
 
 XIX. WILL— INCOEPOEATED DOCUMENTS. 
 
 1. Codicil. Semble, a document containing 
 
 the words, " This is the third codicil to my will," is 
 not incorporated in a codicil of subsequent date by 
 the words, " This is a fourth codicil to my will." 
 Stookil v. Punshon - 6 P. D. 9 
 
 2. Codicil — Will of Married Woman.'] 
 
 S. M. H. while a married woman made a will 
 which was invalid. Afterwards, when a widow, 
 she executed a document beginning with the 
 words, " this is a codicil to the last will and testa- 
 ment of me." The codicil was written on the 
 same paper as the will and immediately after it, 
 and it was proved that she had made no other 
 will : — Held, that the will was incorporated in 
 the codicil. Probate granted of both documents. 
 In the Goods of Hbathoote 6 P. D. 30 
 
 3. Codicil. A testator in a codicil re- 
 ferred to one gift as being contained in a list of 
 gifts which he had previously deposited with his 
 brother : — Held, under the circumstances, that the 
 whole list was incorporated by the reference in 
 the codicil. In the Goods of Daniell 8 P. D. 14 
 
 XX. WILL— INTEEIM INCOME. 
 
 1. Contingent Gift.] The interim income 
 
 subject to the interim burden of a contingent 
 specific legacy until the happening of the contin- 
 gency falls into the residue of the testator's estate, 
 or goes to his next of kin, as the case may be. 
 Gdthkie v. Walkond - 28 Ch. D. 573 
 
 2. Contingent Gift — Beal and Per- 
 sonal Estate — Bight to interim Income till 
 happening of Contingency.'] A testator devised 
 his residuary real estate to trustees, on trust to pay 
 the rents to his wife for her life, and upon her 
 death to apply the rents for the maintenance of 
 his daughter and to accumulate the surplus; and on 
 the daughter attaining twenty-one to pay to her 
 the accumulations and the future income for her 
 life, and upon her death on trust to convey the 
 residuary real estate unto and equally between all 
 and every her chUd and children who should live 
 to attain twenty-one, as tenants in common in fee. 
 But in case his daughter should die without leaving 
 any child or children who should attain twenty- 
 one, then on trust to convey the residuary real 
 estate to such person or persons as the daughter 
 should by deed or will appoint. And by another 
 clause the testator bequeathed his residuary per- 
 sonal estate to the same persons as trustees, on the 
 same trusts as those declared of the real estate 
 except the clause as to maintenance and accumu- 
 lation. — The will contained no disposition of the 
 income of the realty or the personalty during the 
 suspense of vesting. — The daughter sm'vived the 
 testator and his wife, and died leaving an only 
 daughter, who was an infant. The testator's 
 daughter had, by her will, exercised the power of 
 appointment in favour of ■ other persons, in the 
 event of her leaving no child who should live to 
 attain a vested interest under the trusts of her 
 father's will: — Held, that the testator had in 
 
( 1683 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1684 ) 
 
 XX. WILL— INTEEIM ISCOWE— continued. 
 effect mixed up the whole of his property in one 
 mass, and that the rule in Qrenery v. Fitzgerald 
 (Jac. 468) applied, and that consequently the 
 interim rents of the real estate, until the happen- 
 ing of the contingency, as well as the interim 
 income of the personalty, must be accumulated, 
 and foUow the destination of the corpus. In re 
 DuMBLE. Williams ■y. Murbell 23 Ch. D. 360 
 
 3. Contingent Legacy payable out of 
 
 Besidue — Best of Besidue payable first — Gift of 
 " rest " of Besiduary Estate — Severance for Con- 
 venience of Estate.'] A testator by will, after 
 giving his real and personal estate upon trust for 
 sale and conversion and payment of debts and 
 legacies, directed the trustees to stand possessed of 
 the residue of the trust moneys upon trust, in the 
 first place, to pay thereout £1500 to be equally 
 divided between such of six legatees whom he 
 named as should be alive at the death of A. B. ; 
 such shares to be paid to them respectively on 
 attaining twenty-one or marriage. "And as to 
 the rest of his residuary estate " upon trust for 
 X. Y. A. B. and the six legatees all survived the 
 testator and were still living. The trustees having 
 set apart and invested £1500 to meet the legacy, 
 X. Y., the six legatees, and the next of kin of the 
 testator, all claimed ta be entitled to the income 
 thereof during the life of A. B. : — Held, that such 
 income passed under the gift of the rest of the 
 testator's residuary estate, and that X. Y. was 
 entitled thereto during the life of A. B. Where a 
 contingent deferred legacy has been severed from 
 the general estate of a testator, such severance will 
 not entitle the legatee to interim interest thereon 
 unless the severance has been necessitated by some- 
 thing connected- with the legacy itself. In re 
 Judkin's Tbustb ■ 25 Ch. D. 743 
 
 XXI. WILL— JOINT TENANCY. 
 
 Gift to Husband and Wife and Third 
 
 'BevBon— Unity of Person of Husband and Wife — 
 Separate Use — Married Women's Property Act, 
 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. e. 75), ss. 1, 5.] A testatrix, 
 by her will, dated in 1880, gave her residuary per- 
 sonal estate " to C. J. M., and J. H. and E. his 
 wife," to and for their own use and benefit 
 absolutely, and appointed C. J. M., and J. H. and 
 E. H. his wife, her executors. — The testatrix died 
 in 1883, after the commencement of the Married 
 Women's Property Act, 1882. J. H. and B. H. 
 were married in 1864. — Held (reversing the 
 decision of Chitty, J.), that as the will was made 
 before the Married Women's Property Act came 
 into operation, it must be construed in accordance 
 with the law at that time, and that the three 
 residuary legatees were entitled to the personal 
 estate as joint tenants, C. J. M. taking one moiety, 
 and J. H. and E. H., his wife, taking the other 
 moiety between them, J. H. in his own right, and 
 his wife for her separate use. How the Court 
 would have construed the gift if the will had been 
 made after the MaiTied Women's Property Act, 
 1882, came into operation, qumre. In re Mabch. 
 Mandee v. Haeeis 24 Ch. D. 222 ; 27 Ch. D. 166 
 
 XXII. WILL— LAPSE. 
 
 1. Appointment — Failure of Appointment, 
 
 1 Vict. c. 26, s. 25.] The word " devise " in the Wills 
 Act includes in general a devise by way of ap- 
 
 XXII. WILL — lATSE— continued. 
 pointment under a special or general power : con- 
 sequently where a testator maies a will operating 
 as an exercise of a special or general power, a 
 devise of real estate by way of appointment which 
 fails and is void, falls under sect. 25 into the' 
 residuary devise, if any, by way of appointment, 
 unless a contrary intention appears by the wiU. 
 Feeme v. Clement 18 Ch. D. 499 
 
 2. Child of Testator — Special Power of 
 
 Appointment — Death of Appointee in Lifetime of 
 Testator—Wills Act (1 Vict. c. 26), s. 33.] The 
 33rd section of the Wills Act, which enacts that a 
 devise or bequest to a child of the testator who dies 
 in the lifetime of the testator leaving issue shall 
 not lapse does not apply to an appointment under a 
 special power. — Freme v. Clement (18 Ch. D. 499) 
 disapproved. Holylaud v. Lewin 26 Ch. D. 266 
 
 8. Child of Testator — Death of Child in 
 
 Lifetime of Father — Devise by Child to Fatlier — ■ 
 Lapse— Wills Act (1 Vict c. 26), s. 33.] A father 
 by his will devised a freehold house to a son, and 
 his residuary real estate to trustees in trust for 
 other persons. The son died in his father's life- 
 time leaving issue living at his father's death, and 
 having by his will devised all his resil estate to his 
 father ; — Held, that as under the 33rd section of 
 the Wills Act, the son must be deemed to have 
 survived the father, the property passed to the son 
 absolutely under his father's will, and became 
 subject to testamentary disposition by the son : — , 
 But that as by the will of the son the property 
 was devised to his father, the devise by the son 
 failed, and his heir-at-law was entitled to the pro- 
 perty. In re Henslee. Jones v. Hesslee 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 613 
 
 4. Contingent Legacy.] A. testatrix gave 
 
 the residue of her estate equally between a number 
 of persons whom she named, and such of the 
 children of J. G-, as were living at the date of her 
 will. J. G. had died before the date of the will 
 and had left no children : — Held, that- there was 
 no lapse of the share given to the children of J. G., 
 but that the whole residue was divisible among the 
 other persons named. — Be Hornby (7 W. E. 729) 
 followed. In re Spiller. Spillee v. Madge 
 
 [18 Ch. D. 614 
 
 5. "Death"— Gift over.] A testator left 
 
 legacies to three persons, and if any of them died 
 their share was to go to the others. One of the 
 legatees and the testator died at the same instant : 
 — Held, that "death" must, according to the 
 ordinary rule, mean death in the testator's lifetime, 
 and that the legacy of the legatee so dying became 
 part of the residue. Elliott v. Smith 
 
 [22Ch. D. 236 
 
 6. Direction to block up a House for 
 
 Twenty Years — Intestacy — WilU Act (I Viet. c> 
 26), «. 3.] Testatrix devised a freehold house, 
 yard, garden, and out-buildings, to trustees and 
 their heirs, upon trust to block up all the rooms of 
 the house (except fom- rooms in which she directed 
 that a housekeeper and his wife should be placed in 
 occupation), and the coach-house, for twenty years ; 
 and subject thereto upon trust for a devisee in fee. 
 She directed her trustees to visit the house, and 
 premises once in every three montlis to see that the 
 trusts were effectually carried out, and declared 
 
( 1685 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP OASES. 
 
 ( 1686 ) 
 
 XXII. VriLL—LABSE— continued. 
 that if any trustee should neglect or refuse to carry 
 out the trusts aforesaid, any real or personal estate 
 given or intended to he given to him by the will 
 should go to the persons therein named, absolutely. 
 ■Held, liat there was an intestacy as to the twenty 
 years' term in the house, yard, garden, and out- 
 bmldiugs. Bkown ■». Btikdett - 21 Ch. D. 667 
 
 7. Exception from Residue — Void Bequest 
 
 of excepted Property — Excepted Property held to 
 pass hy Besidvary Giff] A testatrix gave to 
 C. H. all her personal property except ^a certain 
 wharf which she bequeathed to other persons 
 charged with certain debts and annuities. The 
 bequest of the whai'f failed for remoteness : — Held 
 (affirming the decision of Fry, J,), that the wharf fell 
 into the residue, and belonged to C. H. — Waimman 
 V. Field (Kay, 507) distinguished. Blight v. 
 Habtnoll - 23 Ch. D. 218 
 
 8. Settlement of Share — Bequest to 
 
 DaugMer to be subject if she sii/rvived Testator to 
 the Trusts of her Settlement — Death of Daughter in 
 Testator^s Lifetime leamng Issue living at his 
 Deathr— Wills Act (1 Vict. c. 26), s. 33.] A testa- 
 tor gave his residuary personal estate to his children 
 in equal shares, and directed that the share of his 
 daughter Mrs. B., if she survived him, should be 
 subject to the trusts of her marriage settlement 
 and paid to the trustees thereof. Mrs. B. died in 
 the testator's lifetime, but left children surviving 
 him: Her husband having taken out administra- 
 tion to her he claimed her share: — Held, that 
 under section 33 of the Wills Act (1 Vict. c. 26), 
 Mrs. B. must for all the purposes of the will be 
 taken to have survived the testator, and that the 
 share must be paid to the trustees of the marriage 
 settlement and not the administrator. In re Hone's 
 TirasTS - - 22 Ch. D. 663 
 
 9. Settlement of Share — Bequest of Share 
 
 of Besidueto a Woman — Death of Legatee in Testa- 
 tor's Lifetime.^ A testator bequeathed the residue 
 of his estate to trustees upon trust for a nephew 
 and three nieces equally between them, and in case 
 any or either of them should die under twenty-one 
 then he directed that the share or shares of him, 
 her, or them so dying, whether original or accruing, 
 should go to the others or other of them, and if 
 more than one in equal shares : " Provided and I 
 declare that my trustees or trustee shaU retain the 
 share of each of my nieces of and in the said trust 
 moneys upon the trusts following." Then followed 
 trusts for the niece for life for her separate use, and 
 after her decease as to the capital upon trust as she 
 should by will appoint, and in default of appoint- 
 ment upon trust for her children who being sons 
 should attain twenty-one, or being daughters attain 
 that age or marry, and in default of such issue upon 
 trust for such persons as should be next of kin to 
 her at her decease. One of the nieces married and 
 died before the testator, leaving a child who sur- 
 vived him : — Held (affirming the decision of Pear- 
 son, J.), that the share of the deceased niece had 
 lapsed, and that, there was an intestacy as to it. 
 In re Egberts. Tablbton v. Bbtiton 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 346 ; 30 Ch. D. 234 
 
 XXni. WILL— MISTAKE. 
 
 1. Blank in Will — Right of Court to hole 
 
 at Original Will.'] A testatrix in making her will 
 
 XXIII. WILL— MISTAKE— confe'nucd. 
 used a law stationer's form, which was partly in 
 print, blanks being left in it which were to be 
 filled up by the person who made use of it. After 
 directing that her debts and funeral and testa- 
 mentary expenses should be paid by her executrix 
 thereinafter named, the testatrix gave all her pro- 
 perty both real and personal " unto 
 to and for her own use and benefit absolutely, and 
 I nominate, constitute, and appoint my niece 
 Catherine HeUard to be executrix of this my last 
 will and testament ": — Held, by Kay, J., and by 
 the Court of Appeal, that there was an effectual 
 gift of the residue to Catherine Hellard. — Per 
 Lord Esher, M.E., and Baggallay, L.J. :— For the 
 purpose of construiag a will the Court is entitled 
 to look at the original will as. well as at the pro- 
 bate copy. In re Hakbibon. Tubneb v. Hbllaed 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 390 
 
 2. Erroneous Statement of Fact.] A 
 
 testator gave a legacy of £7000 in trust for his 
 daughter, the wife of J. T., and her children, and 
 after reciting that he had given a bond for £3000 
 for J. T. he directed that what should remain due 
 on the bond at his death should be paid out of the 
 legacy. By a codicil made about a year afterwards 
 he recited that he had paid the £3000 and other 
 sums for which he was bound for J. T. to an 
 amount exceeding £5000 in the whole, and directed 
 that if J. T. should not before his death have re- 
 paid to him £5000 at least, the sum of £5000 
 should be taken in part payment of the £7000, and 
 to that extent he revoked , the legacy : It was 
 admitted that J. T. had not' repaid the £5000, 
 but the legatees disputed the fact that the testator 
 had paid so much as £5000 for J. T. : — Held, 
 by Hall, V.C., that the legacy must be reduced by 
 £5000, for that the legatees could not dispute the 
 statements made by the testator as to the payments 
 made by him. — Held, by the Court of Appeal, that 
 the legacy must be reduced only by the amount 
 remaining unrepaid of sums advanced by the tes- 
 tator for J. T., and that an account must be 
 directed. — In re Aird's Estate (12 Ch. D. 291) not 
 followed. In re Tatloe's . Estate. Tomlin v. 
 Undeehay - - - 22 Ch. D. 495 
 
 3. Manifest Incongruity — Clerical Error 
 
 in Description — Correction by Reference to Con- 
 text."] A clerical error may be corrected where, if 
 uncorrected, it makes the will, absurd, and the 
 proper correction can be gathered from the context. 
 — A testator devised an estate called Lea Knowl to 
 trustees upon trusts for the benefit of his daughter 
 W., her husband and children, and empowered his 
 trustees, at the request of his daughter W., to sell 
 the estate and stand possessed of the sale moneys 
 upon the trusts thereinbefore declared ''' concerning 
 the said Lea Knowl estate hereby devised, as to 
 such and so many of them as shall at the time of 
 sale have been existing undetermined and capable 
 of taking effect." He then devised an estate called 
 Croxton to trustees upon similar trusts for the 
 benefit of his daughter C., her husband and children, 
 and empowered his trustees, at the request of his 
 daughter C, to sell the last-mentioned devised 
 hereditaments and stand possessed of the sale 
 moneys, " in trust for such person and persons, and 
 for such estates, ends, intents and purposes, powers, 
 provisoes, and conditions as are hereinbefore 
 
( 1687 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1688 ) 
 
 XXIII. VflLL—HIST&KE— continued. 
 limited, expressed, and declared, of and concerning 
 the said Lea Knowl estate hereby devised, as to 
 such and so many of them as shall at the time of 
 sale have been existing undetermined and capable 
 of taking effect " : — Beld, that the words, " the said 
 Lea Knowl estate," in the trust of the moneys to 
 arise from the sale of the Croxton estate had been 
 inserted in the will through an obvious error : that 
 to read the words, "the said Lea Knowl estate," 
 literally and grammatically, would be making the 
 will lead to a manifest absurdity or incongruity, 
 and that the will must be read as if the words, 
 "the said Oroxton estate," were inserted in the 
 place of the words, " the said Lea Knowl estate," 
 in the trusts of the moneys to arise from the sale of 
 the Croxton estate. In re Nokthen's Estate. 
 Salt«. Ptm - 28.Ch.D.153 
 
 4. Eeference to Codicil — Itevival — Bevo- 
 
 cation.^ A testator made a wUl, and afterwards 
 another, which by implication revoked the former 
 will. Subsequently, by the terms of a duly exe- 
 cuted codicil, he, by mistake, referred to the former 
 instead of the later will : — Held, that the codicil by 
 its language, revived the former will, and that as 
 the later will was not revoked by the codicU all 
 three documents must be admitted to probate. In 
 THE Goods of Stedham. In the Goods of Dyke 
 
 [6 P. D. 205, 207 
 
 5. Words introduced without the Know- 
 ledge of the Testator,] A testator, in the instruc- 
 tions for his will, directed that all his B shares 
 should be given to his nephews, but the word 
 " forty," was inserted several times in the will 
 before the word " shares," and the will was executed 
 with that word repeated several times before 
 the word " shares." The jury found that the 
 word " forty " was introduced by mistake, that the 
 clauses including the word were never read over to 
 the testator, and that he only approved of the will 
 upon the supposition that all his B shares were 
 given to his nephews, and thereupon the Court 
 ordered the word " forty," wherever it occurred in 
 the will, to be struck out. Mokeell v. Mokkell 
 
 [7 P. D. 68 
 
 Erroneous reference to previous gift 
 
 See Will— Vesting. 7. [16 Ch. D. 112 
 
 Gift to wife during widowhood — ^Void mar- 
 
 riage - 25 Ch. D. 685 
 
 See Will — Condition. 11. 
 
 XXIV. WILL— PERPETUITY. 
 
 1. Ascertainment of Class — Divisible 
 
 Gift — Gift to Children of A. who should attain 
 Twenttj-one — Period for ascertaining Gla^s — Prior 
 Trust for Accumulation of Income.'] Devise of 
 real estate to trustees in fee, upon trust for J. 
 for life, and after his death upon trust for his 
 children who should attain twenty-one, and the 
 issue of any child who should die under twenty-one 
 leaving issue who should attain that age ; but, in 
 ease there should be no child, nor the issue of any 
 child of J. who should attain twenty-one, the pro- 
 perty was to be held on trust for the child or 
 children of R. who should respectively attain 
 twenty-one, if more than one in .equal shares. 
 Provided always, that the rents of the trust premises 
 should, during the term of twenty vcars from the 
 day next before the day of the testator's death, be 
 
 XXIV. WILL— PEBPETTTITY— co»<i»a«(Z. 
 accumulated by way of compound interest, and the 
 accumulated fund should be held in trust for the 
 child, if only one, or all the children equally, if 
 more than one, of K. who should attain twenty-one. 
 J. died without ever having a cMld. E. had six 
 children who attained twenty-one. The youngest 
 of them was bom after the eldest had attained 
 twenty-one, but before the end of the period of 
 accimiulation : — Held, that the gift over to the 
 children of E. was divisible into two distinct alter- 
 native gifts, viz.. (1) a gift over in the event of 
 there never being any child of J. ; (2) a gift over 
 in the event of no child or issue of any child of J. 
 attaining twenty-one; and that consequently the 
 first alternative was not too remote, and the gift 
 over was in the events which had happened good. 
 — Evers v. Challis (7 H. L. C. 531) explained. — 
 Stuart V. Coekerell (Law Eep. 5 Ch. 713) dis- 
 tinguished. — Held, also, that all the children of K. 
 who were bom during the period of accumulation, 
 and who attained twenty-one, were entitled under 
 the gift over. Watson v. Yoxing 28 Ch. D. 436 
 
 2. ■ Ascertainment of Class within pre- 
 scribed Period.'] The rule against perpetuities re- 
 quires that not only the extreme limit of the class 
 of persons who may take, but the actual persons 
 who are to take, should be ascertained within the 
 prescribed period. — A testatrix directed property 
 to be sold at a period beyond the limit prescribed 
 by the rule against perpetuities and the proceeds to 
 be divided between such of her grandchildren living 
 at the time of the sale in such proportions as testa- 
 trix's sister should by will appoint : — Held, that an 
 appointment made by a will of the sister before the 
 sale was a bad exercise of the power : — Held, also, 
 that as the class of grandchildren living at the time 
 of the sale could not be ascertained within the pre- 
 scribed limit, the gift was void for remoteness not- 
 withstanding that the entire class of grandchildren 
 must be ascertained within the prescribed limit. 
 Blight v. Haetnoll 19 Ch. D. 294 
 
 3. Contingent Bemainder — Executory 
 
 Devise — Life Estate — Equitable Estate^Atiaining 
 Twenty-five — Name and Arms — Possession.] A 
 testator devised and bequeathed real and personal 
 estate to trustees upon trust to pay the income to 
 his wife during her life, and after her decease, if 
 H. was then living, to retain the rents of the 
 realty to their own use during his life, and to pay 
 him the income of the personalty during his life, 
 and after his death upon trust to convey and trans- 
 fer the real and personal estate to such son of M. 
 as should first attain the age of twenty-five years, 
 upon condition that such son of M. as should he- 
 come entitled to any property under the will 
 should, within two years after he should so become 
 entitled, take the name and arms of the testator. 
 At the testator's decease M. was living and had 
 no son who had attained tweuty-five, but his 
 eldest son attained that age dming the lives of 
 the widow and H. This son died in the lifetime 
 of H. without having taken the name and arms of 
 the testator :—fleM, by Malins, V.C., that al- 
 though the limitation of the personal estate to 
 the first son of M. who should attain the age of 
 tn-enty-fiv^ was void for remoteness, the direction 
 to convey the real estate to him gave him a con- 
 tingent remainder which was not void for remote- 
 
( 1689 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1690 ) 
 
 XXIV. Will— PEBPETTJITY— con<i««ed. 
 ness, although his estate was only equitable, the 
 doctrine of contingent remainders being applicable 
 to equitable as well as to legal estates ; that he 
 was not bound to take the name and arms of the 
 testator until his estate came into possession, and 
 that the real estate derolved upon his heir. — 
 Held, on appeal, that the limitation to such son 
 of M. as should first attain the age of twenty-five 
 years could not, as in Biley v. Garnett (3 De G. & 
 Sm. 629), be treated as intended to give an imme- 
 diately Tested interest liable to be divested on 
 death under twenty-five, but was a limitation con- 
 tingent on the son's attaining the age of twenty- 
 five years : — Held, also, that when the legal estate 
 in fee is vested in trustees under the instrument 
 which creates the beneficial limitations, the feudal 
 rule by which a contingent remainder fails, if it 
 does not vest before the determination of the par- 
 ticular estate, does not apply, and that the limita- 
 tion to such son of M. as should attain twenty- 
 five years, assuming it to have been an equitable 
 remainder, would still have been void for remote- 
 ness : — Held, also, that the direction to the trustees 
 to convey on the death of H. did not create a con- 
 tingent equitable remainder, but was an executory 
 devise. Abbiss v. Bukney. In re Finch 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 211 
 
 4. Gift to Class — Substitution.] A testa- 
 tor directed his trustees, after the death of the 
 longest liver of his son, his daughter, and any 
 widow whom the son might leave, to sell his 
 real estate and to stand possessed of the proceeds 
 and of the rents and profits until sale, upon 
 trust to pay and apply them " unto and equally 
 amongst all and every the child and children of 
 my son W. and daughter M. share and share alike, 
 and the lawful issue of such of them as may be 
 then dead leaving issue, such issue to be entitled to 
 no more than their parent or respective parents 
 would have been if living." He directed that if 
 his daughter's son then living should die without 
 leaving issue, or leaving issue, all of them should 
 die under age and unmarried, the trustees should 
 pay the share which would have been payable to 
 him under the above trusts to the children of J. ; 
 and, that if the testator's son died without leaving 
 issue, or all of them died under age and unmarried, 
 the trustees should pay the share which would have 
 been payable to them under the trusts aforesaid to 
 the children of J. and M. The heir-at-law claimed 
 the corpus as undisposed of, on the ground that the 
 disposition of the proceeds of sale was void for 
 remoteness as being a gift to a class not ascertain- 
 able till at or after the death of the son's widow, 
 who might be a person unborn at the testator's 
 death : — Held, that the gift was not a gift to such 
 children of the son and daughter as should be living 
 at the period of distribution and the issue of such 
 of them as should be then dead, but a gift to all the 
 children of the son and daughter, with a gift over 
 by way of substitution of the shares of such of them 
 as might die before the period of distribution leav- 
 ing issue — that when the gift over of any share was 
 void for remoteness the original gift remained un- 
 affected — and that the . heir-at-Uw had no title. 
 GooDiER V. Johnson - - 18 Ch. D. 441 
 
 5. Gift to Descendants bearing a par- 
 ticular Name — Life Estate to Unborn Persons.'] 
 
 XXW. WILL— PEEPETTJITY— eojiKmted 
 The testatrix. Miss B., had a brother, a widower 
 advanced in life, who had assumed the name of 
 B. G., and had two children, one a bachelor of un- 
 sound mind, the other a daughter. By her will 
 she bequeathed a fund to trustees in trust to pay 
 the income to her brother for life, then to his son 
 for life, and from and after the decease of both of 
 them, upon trust to pay the income " for life unto 
 any immediate or direct descendants of my said- 
 brother or nephew who shall bear the name of B. G. 
 only, and from and after his or her decease, or in 
 case of failure of any such immediate or direct 
 descendant of my said brother or nephew who shall 
 bear the name of E. G. only," upon trust for certain 
 specified charitable societies. There was a clause 
 for determining the interests of any descendants 
 who after becoming entitled to the receipt of the 
 income should abandon the name of E. G. Before 
 the death of the nephew, a sou bom after the death 
 of the testatrix, of the daughter of the testatrix's 
 brother, assumed by royal license the name of B. G., 
 and at the decease of the survivor of the brother 
 and nephew there was no other descendant of either 
 of them who bore that name : — Held, by Hall, V.C, 
 that the trusts subsequent to the life interests of the 
 brother and nephew were void for remoteness, and 
 that on the determination of those interests the 
 fund fell into the residue. — Held, on appeal, that 
 the limitations after the life interests were not void 
 for remoteness: — Hdd, that the limitation to 
 descendants was a gift for life to descendants living 
 at the determination of the life interests and bear- 
 ing the name of E. G. as joint tenants -.—Held, that 
 the gift was not, as in Leigh v. Leigh (15 Ves. 92), 
 confined to persons entitled to the name of E.. G. by 
 birth, and that the brother's grandson, as he bore 
 the name of E. G. at the determination of the 
 life interests, was entitled for life, and that on his 
 decease the gift to the charities would take effect. 
 In re Egberts. Eepington d. Bobebts-Gawen 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 520 
 
 6. Bestraint on Anticipation — Daughter^ 
 
 Share — Bule against Perpetuities.] A testator 
 gave his property to trustees to pay the income to 
 two persons for life, and after the death of the sur- 
 vivor to divide the capital between the children of 
 A. B. and C. D., two females, the shares of sons to 
 be paid on their attaining twenty-one, and the 
 shares of daughters to be invested and the interest 
 paid to such daughters for life for their separate 
 use without power of anticipation, and on their 
 deaths the capital to go as the daughters should by 
 will appoint. A. B. was dead at the date of the 
 will, and C. D. was sixty years of age, and therefore 
 past child-bearing : — Held, that if the children of 
 A. B. and C. D. had not necessarily been lives in 
 esse at the date of the will, the restraint on antici- 
 pation in respect of the daughters' shares would 
 have been bad, as infringing the rule against per- 
 petuities ; but as A. B. was dead and 0. D. past 
 child-bearing, all the children were lives in esse,, 
 and the restraint on alienation was valid. Cooper 
 
 J). LaBOOHE - - _ 17 01j J) ggg 
 
 XXV. WILI— PRECATOEY TBTTST. 
 
 1- "Peeling confident."] A testator 
 
 gave to his widow the whole of his real and per- 
 sonal property " feeling confident that she will act 
 justly to our children in dividing the same when. 
 
( 1691 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1692 ) 
 
 XXV. WILL— PEECATOEY TIELVST— continued. 
 no longer required by her " : — Held, that the widow 
 took an absolute interest, and that the doctrine of 
 precatory trusts did not apply. MussooKiE Baj^k 
 V. Eatnok - 7 App. Cas. 321 
 
 2. "In full confidence."] A testator 
 
 gave all his real and personal estate unto and to 
 the absolute use of his wife, her heirs, executors, 
 administrators, and assigns, "in fuU confidence 
 that she would do what was right as to the dis- 
 posal thereof between his children, either in lier 
 lifetime or by will after her decease " : — Held 
 (afErming the decision of Pearson, J.), that under 
 these words the widow took an absolute interest in 
 the property, unfettered by any trust in favour of 
 the children. In re Adams and the Kensington 
 Vestby 24 Ch. D. 199 ; 27 Ch. D. 394 
 
 XXVI. WILL— PEIOEITT OF LEGACIES. 
 
 Legacy to Wife.] A testator gave to 
 
 his wife aU his furniture and effects together with 
 the sum of £500 to be paid to her immediately 
 after his decease. — He also directed his trustees to 
 raise out of his estate the sums of £12,000 and 
 £5000, and invest the same and pay the interest 
 of the £12,000 to his wife during her life, and the 
 interest of the £5000 to his brother and sisters 
 during their lives, and after the death of his wife, 
 brother, and sisters, those sums were to fall into 
 the residue of bis estate. He then gave his brother 
 and sisters legacies of £6000 and £2000, and gave 
 other smaller legacies. — His estate proved insuffi- 
 cient for the payment in full of all the legacies : — 
 Held, that the legacy of £500 to the wife had 
 priority over aU the other pecuniary legacies : — Held, 
 that the legacies of £12,000 and £5000 had priority 
 over the other legacies. — Blower v. Morrett (2 Ves. 
 Sen. 420) dissented from. In re Hakdt. Wells 
 V. BoKwiOK - - 17 Ch. D. 798 
 
 XXVII. WILL— EEPUGNANCY. 
 
 Direction as to Time of Payment — Incon- 
 sistent Clause.'] A testator gave to his wife so long 
 as she should continue his widow and until all his 
 four daughters by his former wife should attain 
 twenty-one or die under twenty-one, an annuity 
 of £800, and a further annuity of £100 in respect 
 of each of such daughters who should for the time 
 being be under twenty-one, such annuities to be 
 employed by her in maintaining herself and his 
 said daughters, and in educatmg the daughtei-s. 
 After all his four daughters had attained twenty- 
 one or died he bequeathed to his wife during widow- 
 hood £600 a year, and after her future marriage 
 £200 a year. And if he should have any childi'en 
 by his then wife, he bequeathed to his wife in 
 respect of each of such children who should for the 
 time being be under twenty-one a further annuity 
 of £150, to commence after all his said four 
 daughters should have attained twenty-one or died, 
 to be applied by his wife in maintaining and 
 educating such children, and to be paid by equal 
 half-yearly payments, the first of such payments 
 to be made at the expiration of six calendar months 
 from his decease. He gave his residuary estate 
 among such of his children by both wives as being 
 sons should attain twenty-one, or being daughter 
 attain that age or marry, in equal shares, subject 
 to a provision for making the share of each child 
 by the second wife exceed the share of a child by 
 
 XXVII. WILL— EEPXTGNANCY— co»*m«ecJ. 
 the former wife by £3000. There was the usual 
 clause of maintenance, subject to a proviso that 
 the power of giving maintenance should not be 
 exercised as to any child while the annuity be- 
 queathed to his wife in respect of such child was 
 payable, unless the trustees thought the aminity 
 insufficient. At the testator's death several of the 
 .daughters by the fiist wife were under twenty-one. 
 — Held, by Jessel,M.E., that the annuities of £150 
 became payable from the testat-ors death, and 
 were not postponed tUl all the daughters by the 
 first wife had attained tm-enty-one or died, on the 
 ground that, having regard to the scope of the will, 
 the former of the two inconsistent clauses was to 
 be rejected rather than the latter, independently 
 of the rule that of two inconsistent clauses in a 
 will the latter is to be preferred. — Held, on appeal, 
 that this was not a case of two inconsistent gifts, 
 but of a gift of something to arise at a future time 
 with a subsequent direction as to the time of pay- 
 ment which was inconsistent with the terms of the 
 original gift, and that such subsequent direction 
 could not enlarge the gift, but must be rejected 
 as inconsistent with it : — Held, that evidence that 
 the latter of the two clauses was left in the will 
 by mistake, and contrary to the testator's express 
 instructions, was not admissible. In re Bywater. 
 Bywateb v. Claeke - - 18 Ch. D. 17 
 Condition in restraint of alienation 26 Ch. D. 
 
 See Will— CoxDiTioif. 2. [801 
 
 XXVIII. WILL— EESIDTTAEY GIFT. 
 
 1. " Everything I am possessed of." — " I 
 
 give and devise " — " Residuary Legatee " — No 
 Ileal Estate at Date of Will or Codicil — After-ac- 
 quired Seal Estate — Residuary Devisee — Intestacy 
 as to Meal Estate — -Vendor and Purcluxser Act, 
 1874.] A testatrix, by her wUl, dated in 1854, 
 gave as follows : " I commit to paper my wishes 
 respecting the disposal of my property. . . .Every- 
 thing I am possessed of I leave to my sister for her 
 life; after her decease I give and devise as here 
 annexed." Then followed a number of legacies, 
 and the will proceeded : " My two nephews, 
 H. H M. and E. P. M., I leave my executors, and 
 the latter residuary legatee after the demise of my 
 sister." — She also executed a codicil, but she had no 
 real estate either at the date of the will or codicil. 
 She afterwards purchased some freehold property, 
 which she held at her death. — F. P. M. contracted 
 for the sale of part of the real estate as absolute 
 owner, and an objection having been taken by 
 the purchaser that he had no title : — Held, that 
 there was not sufficient context in the will to 
 enable the Coui't to read the words "residuary 
 legatee" as "residuary devisee," and that con- 
 sequently, the real estate did not pass to F. P. M. 
 — Hughes v. Fritchard (6 Ch. D. 24) distinguished. 
 In re Methuen and Blose's Contract 16 Ch. D. 
 
 [696 
 
 2. "Fall into residue" — Direction that 
 
 Share " shall fall into residue.^] A testator be- 
 queathed the residue of his personal estate to his 
 wife for life, and after her death to his sister and 
 three brothers in equal shares ; but directed that 
 in the event of his sister dying utmiarried in his 
 wife's lifetune (which happened) '• her one-fourth 
 should fall into the residue " : — Held, that tliere 
 was no intestacy aS^-to the sister's one-fourth, but 
 
( 1693 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 { 1694 ) 
 
 XXVni. WILL— EESIDTJAEY QUI— continued. 
 that the whole residue was, on the widow's death, 
 divisible in thirds between three otter legatees. — 
 Mmmhle v. Shore (7 Hare, 247 ; 1 H. & M. 550, n.), 
 Lightfoot v. Bwstall (1 H. & M. 546), and Graw- 
 iliaw V. Crawsliaw (14 Ch. D 817) considered. 
 In re Ehoades. Lane v. Ehoades 29 Ch. D. 142 
 
 3. " Money " — " All the rest of my money 
 
 However invested."^ A testatrix, by her will, after 
 giving a. pecuniary legacy and bequeathing furni- 
 ture, leaseholds, and dock shares, gave " all the rest 
 of her money however invested" to her nephew 
 E. J. F. " under deduction of £50 to be paid to each, 
 of her executors." She then gave a number of speci- 
 fied articles, such as ornaments, -plate, pictures, and 
 house linen, to various other nephews and nieces, 
 and appointed executors : — Heldj that the gift to 
 E. 3. F. was a general residuary gift, and included 
 the fumitiire, leaseholds, and dock shares, the 
 bequest of which had lapsed. In re Peingle. 
 Walkek v. Stewakt - - 17 Ch. D. 819 
 
 4. " Money of which I am possessed."] 
 
 In construing a will no absolute technical meaning 
 should be given of such a word as " money," the 
 meaning of which must depend upon the context, 
 if any, and such surrounding circumstances as the 
 Court can take into consideration. A testatrix who 
 was possessed of cash, securities, leaseholds, furni- 
 ture, and effects, by her will, made in expectation 
 of her death, which occurred two days after its 
 date, gave " one half of the money of which I am 
 possessed to H., and the remainder equally between 
 O. and S., and after them to their chUdi-en": — • 
 Held, that the word "money" passed all the_ per- 
 sonal estate. In re Cabogait. Cadogan v. 
 Falagi - 25 Ch. D. 164 
 
 5. "Money, Eesidue of."] A testator 
 
 bequeathed " the whole residue of money " to 
 A. H. W., " excepting such things as the under- 
 mentioned," &c. : — Seld, that the words were suffi- 
 cient to pass the residue. In the Goods of White 
 
 [7 P. D. 65 
 
 6. " Money, Stocks, Funds, or other Secu- 
 rities."] A gift of "such money, stocks, funds, 
 or other securities, not hereafter specifically devised, 
 as I may die possessed of," does not constitute a 
 gift of residue. In the Goods of Aston 
 
 [6 P. D. 203 
 XXIX. WILL— EEVOCATIOK, 
 
 1. Codicil.] T. M. B. having executed 
 
 a codicil at the foot of his wiU cut off his signature 
 to the will. Upon proof that he thereby intended 
 to revoke the codicil the Court held that the codicil 
 was also revoked. In the Goods of Bleckley 
 
 [8 P. D. 169 
 
 2, Codicil — Confirmation of Will by Codi- 
 cil referring to Will iy Date — Implied Bevocation 
 of Intermediate Codicil.'] A testator by wiH gave 
 legacies to three of his daughters, and devised and 
 bequeathed his residnary real and personal estate 
 upon trusts for his wife and children. — By a first 
 codicil in 1878 he revoked one of the legacies in 
 his will and increased another, and concluded' " in 
 all other respects I confirm tks said wiU." — By a 
 second codicil after reciting that he was desirous 
 of altering the residuaiy devise contained in his 
 will, he made a specific devise, and in all other 
 it-aspects confirmed his will. . He afterwards made 
 
 XXIX. WILL— EEVOCATION— conijmtjed. 
 
 a third codicil, by which, after referring to his will 
 by date and reciting a promise to that effect, he 
 directed his trustees to grant an underlease of a 
 house [to his daughter-in-law, and gave his wife 
 a pecuniary legacy in addition to the benefit she 
 derived under his said wiU, and concluded " in all 
 other respects I confhm my said will except as 
 altered by a certain codicil made thereto in 1878, 
 whereby I revoked a legacy to my daughter Mary " : 
 — Held, that the words of confirmation in the first 
 and third codicils were to be read as meaning that 
 the testator did not intend to alter his general tes- 
 tamentary dispositions further than in the specific 
 way mentioned in those codicils ; and that the 
 devise in the second codicil being clear, no inten- 
 tion to revoke it had been shewn with sufficient 
 clearness to enable the Court to reject that devise. 
 Follett v. Pettman ■ 23 Ch. D. 337 
 
 3. Evidence — Bevocation h 
 
 Will — Admissibility of Memorandum.'] A tes- 
 tator made a will in 1864 appointing his Tvife sole 
 executrix, and duly executed another document 
 in 1877. There was no evidence of the contents 
 of the second document except that after its execu- 
 tion the testator said, " I have made a will altering 
 my affairs, and I have taken care of Ellen, and 
 there wiU be something for Eoby," and except a 
 memorandum at the foot of the will as follows : 
 " This will is now useless, a new wiU having been 
 made in October 1877, upon my wife telling me 
 she was sorry she had ever seen me," &c. : — Held, 
 that in the absence of proof of an alteration of 
 executrix or a revocatory clause or disposition 
 wholly inconsistent with the first will, that will 
 was not revoked, and was therefore entitled to 
 probate. — Quiere, whether the memorandum was 
 admissible in evidence to shew an intention to 
 revoke the first wUl. Helliek v. Hellibr 
 
 [9 P. D. 237 
 XXX. WILL— SATISrACTION. 
 
 1. Advance by Parent to Child — Debt due 
 
 to Testator, whether released by Will — Bequest of 
 Besidue on Trust to pay Income to Widow, and 
 subject thereto for equal Distribution among Chil- 
 dren — Clause providing that Advances made 
 to Children shall be brought into Hotchpot.] A 
 testator had advanced by way of loan to the de- 
 fendant, one of his children, a sum of £2000, 
 upon which sum interest was paid during the 
 testator's lifetime. The testator, by his will, de- 
 vised and bequeathed all his property, both real 
 and personal, to trustees on tnist to permit his 
 widow to receive the income actually produced by 
 such property, howsoever constituted or invested, 
 during widowhood, and subject thereto on trust 
 for his child, if only one, or all his children equally 
 if more than one, who being a son or sons should 
 attain the age of twenty-one years, or being a 
 daughter or daughters should attain that age or 
 marry. The will contained a proviso that any 
 advances made by the testator to any child or to 
 the husband of any child in his lifetime together 
 with interest on such advances, as charged against 
 such child or her husband in his private, memo- 
 randum book in his own handwriting, should, 
 according to the amount thereof, be taken in fuU 
 or in part satisfaction of his or her share in the 
 testator's property, unless the testator., should 
 
( 1695 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1696 ) 
 
 XXX. "WILL— 8AT:18TA.C1I0T!1— continued. 
 otherwise declare by -writing under his hand. The 
 sum advanced to the Defendant was charged 
 against him in the testator's memorandum book, 
 and such book contained an entry as follows: 
 " This is the memorandum book named in my 
 wiU as containing the advances made by me to 
 my children or their husbands to be taken in 
 satisfaction of their respective shares in my estate": 
 —Beld, by Brett, M.R, and Lindley, L.J., Cotton, 
 L.J., dissenting, that the testator's widow was en- 
 titled to receive from the Defendant during her 
 life, as part of the annual income given to her by 
 the win, interest on the said sum of £2000. — 
 Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division affirmed. 
 LiMPUs V. Arnold 13 Q. B. D. 246 ; 15 Q. B. D. 300 
 
 2. Hotchpot — Gift of Besidue to Widow 
 
 for Life, with Bemainder to Children — Advances 
 — Interest.'] A testator gave his residuary estate 
 to his widow for life, with remainder to his children 
 equally, with a proviso, in the common form, for 
 bringing into hotchpot aU sums advanced to any 
 of them by him during his lifetime. The testator 
 made advances to some of his children. In dis- 
 tributing the residuary estate among the children 
 after the death of the widow: — Held, that the 
 advanced children must bring their advances into 
 hotchpot, with interest at i per cent, per annum 
 up to the distribution of the estate ; such interest 
 to be computed from the death of the widow, and 
 ,not from the date of the respective advances or 
 from the death of the testator. In re Eees. Rees 
 V. Geoege - 17 Ch. D. 701 
 
 8. Moral Obligation other than Parental.'] 
 
 The doctrine of ademption of legacies founded on 
 parental or gttasi-parental relation applies also to 
 cases where a moral obligation other than parental 
 or guosi-parental is recognised in the will, though 
 without reference to any special application of the 
 money. — A testatrix by her will bequeathed to a 
 niece of her deceased husband £500 with these 
 words, " according to the wish of my late beloved 
 husband," and she afterwards in her lifetime paid 
 £300 to such legatee, with a contemporaneous 
 entry in her diary that such payment was a " legacy 
 from " the legatee's " imcle John " : — Held, that 
 the presumption was that such legacy was adeemed 
 to the extent of £300, and that such presimiption 
 of ademption pro tanto only was not displaced by 
 evidence that more than a year before the £300 
 was given the testatrix had said, that the legatee 
 when then asked by the testatrix whether she 
 would rather receive £300 down than a larger sum 
 after the testatrix's death, had replied that she 
 would prefer the £300 down. In re Pollock. 
 Pollock v. Woeeail. 28 Ch. D. 662 
 
 XXXI. WILL— SEPARATE USE. 
 
 1. " Sole and TTnmarried."] A testatrix 
 
 by her will made in 1860, bequeathed a fund to 
 trustees, on trust to pay the income to her husband 
 for his life, and on his death to divide the fund 
 into four equal parts, and, as to one of the parts, 
 " upon trust to pay the same to J. H., spinster, if 
 she be then sole and umnairied, but, if she be then 
 married,'' the testatrix directed her trustees to pay 
 the income of the fourth part to J. H. for her life, 
 for her separate use, and Mter her death to hold it 
 on trust for her children. In June, 1878, the 
 testatrix died, and her husband died in April, 1883. 
 
 XXXI. "WILL— SEPAEATE USE— conKnueif. 
 
 In April, 1861, J. H. married, and in November, 
 1878, a decree absolute was made for the disso- 
 lution of her marriage. There were three children 
 of the marriage. J. H. did not marry again: — 
 Held, that the words "then sole and uimiarried" 
 meant " not having a husband " at the time of the 
 death of the tenant for life, and that, in the events 
 which had happened, J. H. was absolutely entitled 
 to the one-fourth share. In re Lesingham's 
 Tkusts 24 Ch. D. 703 
 
 2. " Sole use and dispoBaL"] A legacy 
 
 given to a married woman for her " sole use and 
 disposal " vests in her as separate estate. Blakb 
 V. Dawes - - - - 17 Ch. D. 794 
 
 Restraint on anticipation — ^Perpetuity 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 368 
 See Will— Peepetoity. 6. 
 
 XXXII. WILL— SPEAKING EEOM DEATH. 
 
 1. Curtesy — Devise to Married Daughter 
 
 — Death of Devisee in Lifetime of Testator — Wills 
 Act (7 Will. 4 4 1 Vict. e. 26), ss. 3, 33— Seisin- 
 Hiisiand.] A testator died in 1875, having by 
 his wm, dated in 1872, devised a freehold estate 
 to his daughter (the Plaintiff's wife), her heirs and 
 assigns, for her separate use. — The daughter died 
 in 1874, in the lifetime of the testator, leaving an 
 only child, who was her heiress at law. — The 
 Plaintiff claimed to be entitled for his life as 
 tenant by the curtesy. — Held, upon demurrer, that 
 the Plaintiff was entitled for his life to the property 
 devised by the testator as tenant by the curtesy.. 
 Eageb v. Fhrnivall - 17 Ch. D. 115 
 
 2'. Income of Share of Partnership Busi- 
 ness — Subsequent Acquisition of the entire Business 
 — WiUs Act, «s. 23, 24.] The testator, WUliam 
 BusseU, by a wiU, dated in 1857, after reciting 
 that he was carrying on business as an iron manu- 
 facturer in partnership with his two brothers, be- 
 queathed all his share and interest of and in the 
 partnership business, and of and in the real and 
 personal estate employed or invested therein, and 
 of and in the partnership debts, securities, and 
 moneys to which he might be entitled at his 
 decease, to trustees, upon trust to continue the 
 business during his wife's life, and to pay to her 
 a sum equal to half the amount drawn out by the 
 two other partners. The wife had a discretion to 
 discontinue the business, and in case the business 
 should be discontinued testator directed the trustees 
 to get in the share then appertaining to his estate 
 in " the said co-partnership trade or business," and, 
 after making good to the wife " one full third 
 shai'e of the profits," invest the same, and pay the 
 income to his wife for life. After the death of the 
 wife, he directed the trustees out of the profits of 
 his said share and interest in the business, if con- 
 tinued, and out of the trust fund, if the business 
 should have been discontinued, to pay certain pe- 
 cuniary legacies, and subject thereto to hold the 
 fund in trust for A. B. — Testator died in 1881. 
 After the date of the wUl, he acquired the shares^ 
 of his two brothers in the partnership and caiTied 
 on the business still under the firm of " Kussell 
 Brothers," as sole owner, until his death. A. B- 
 died in the testator's lifetime. The widow had 
 not discontinued the business: — Held, that the 
 will operated upon the whole of the testator's 
 
( 1697 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1698 ) 
 
 XXXn. WILL— SPEAKING TEOM DEATH— 
 
 contitMed. 
 interest in the business at his death, and that the 
 widow took the whole of the income for her life. 
 In re Eussell. Eussell v. Ohbll 19 Ch. D. 432 
 3 " In their present state " — Specific De- 
 vise of " my cottage and all my land at S." " in their 
 present state " — Residuary Devise — Subsequent 
 Contract to purchase a House and Land at S. — 
 Wills Act, 1837 (1 Vict. c. 26), s. 24.] A. devised 
 to G. for life, " my cottage and all my land at S.," 
 subject to the stipulation (among others) that the 
 plantations, heather, and furze be all preserved '■ in 
 their present state," and devised " all other, my 
 freehold manor, messuages, lands, and real estate 
 whatsoever and wheresoever" to trustees upon 
 trust for sale. At the date of his will A. had a 
 small cottage with twenty-two acres of rough 
 land held with it, and he subsequently contracted 
 to purchase from G. a house of considerable size 
 with gardens aad land comprising ten acres closely 
 adjoining the cottage and land. The contract 
 was not completed at his death: — Held, that a 
 contrary intention within the meaning of the 
 24th section of the Wills Act was not shewn with 
 sufficient clearness, but that, construing the wiU 
 as if it had been made on the day of the testator's 
 death, having regard to the circumstances at that 
 ■date and to the residuary devise, the specific devise 
 more aptly referred to the cottage and rough land, 
 and did not carry the after-acquired property. — 
 The words "all my land at S." would, if used 
 alone, have been sufficient to cany the after- 
 acquired land with the house standing upon it; 
 but upon the authority of Ewer v. Hayden (Cro. 
 Eliz. 476, 658), by force of the context the word 
 " land " must be taken as confined to lands in 
 contradistinction from buildings. — Decision of Kay, 
 J., reversed. — Sembk, per Lindley, L.J. : Sect. 24 
 of the "Wills Act, which provides that a wiU shall 
 speak as to the real and personal estate comprised 
 in it (i.e., the will) from the day of, the testator's 
 death, leaves open the question whether a particular 
 property passes by the specific or the residuary 
 devise. In re Poetal and Lamb 27 Ch. D. 600 ; 
 
 [30 Ch. J>, 50 
 
 xxxni. WILL— sPEOinc legacy. 
 
 " All personal estate " — Besiduary Be- 
 
 quesf] A testator by his wiU, after directing his 
 •executors to pay all 'his just debts and funeral 
 and testamentary expenses, and giving pecimiary 
 legacies to individuals and to charities, gave aU his 
 personal estate and effects of which he should die 
 possessed, and which should not consist of money 
 or securities for money, to E. A. Robertson abso- 
 lutely. And he gave and devised all the rest, 
 residue and remainder of his estate, both real and 
 personal, to his executors upon certain trusts ; all 
 the legacies to be free of legacy duty ; the legacies 
 for charitable purposes to be paid exclusively out 
 of such part of his personal estate as might law- 
 fully be appropriated to such purposes and prefer- 
 ably to any other payment thereout : — Held, affirm- 
 ing the decision of the Court of Appeal, that the 
 •legacy to E. A. Robertson was not specific, and 
 not exempt from the payment of the pecuniary 
 legacies. In re Ovey. Beoadbent v. Baekow. 
 EoBEETSON V. BrOadbent - 30 Ch. D. 676 ; 
 
 [8 App. Cas. 812 
 
 XXXIV, WILL— SUBSTITUTIONAL GIFT. 
 1. Gift to Children of deceased ChUd, 
 
 " or in event of decease to their descendants " — 
 Child of one of the Class who predeceased M. nut 
 entitled to share.} Testator by wiU bequeathed 
 all his share in an estate in Barbadoes " to all the 
 children of "his dear departed wife's sister M; H. M., 
 " or in event of decease to their descendants share 
 and share alike." M. H. M. had six children, of 
 whom five were living at the date of the will and 
 at the death of the testator, and one had died 
 prior to the date of the will leaving issue an only 
 daughter -.—Held, following the decision in Chris- 
 topherson v. Naylar (1 Mer. 320), that the issue of 
 the child of M. H. M. who was dead at the date 
 of the will, was not entitled to a share of the 
 propertv, but that it went to the five children 
 of M. H. M. who survived the testator. In re 
 Webstee's Estate. Widgen v. Mello 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 737 
 
 2. Issue of Child dead when the Will 
 
 was made.] A testatrix by her will gave a sum 
 of money to trustees on trust, after the death of 
 the widow of a cousin, for the children of the 
 cousin, share and share alike; provided that in 
 case of any of the children dying in the lifetime 
 of the testatrix leaving issue, such issue should 
 take the share to which their parent would have 
 been entitled if living.— One of the children was 
 dead when the will was made, and a codicil shewed 
 that the testatrix was aware of this : — Held, that 
 the issue of that child took a share in the money. — 
 In re Potter's Trust (Law Bep. 8 Bq. 52) followed. 
 In re Lucas's Will 17 Ch. D. 788 
 
 Remoteness 
 
 See Will — Peepetdity. 
 
 18 Ch. S. 441 
 
 4. 
 
 XXXV. WILL— SURVIVOR. 
 
 1. " Other or others " — Gift to Children 
 
 for Life vjith Bemainder to their ChildrerC — Dying 
 without Children— " Survivor or Survivors" not 
 construed "other or others."'} Testator gave by 
 will, made in 1834, the residue of his estate to 
 trustees to pay the income, after the death of his 
 wife, unto such of his four named children as 
 should be living at the decease of his wife, during 
 their lives; and after the decease of any one or 
 more of such children who should leave children 
 he gave the share, whether original or accruing, of 
 the one so dying in trust for his or her children : 
 and, in the event of any one of his children dying 
 without leaving children who should attain the 
 age of twenty-one years, then he gave the share, 
 whether original or accruing, of such of them so 
 dying in trust for the survivor or survivors of his 
 said children during their lives, and after their 
 deaths for their respective children, and their heirs, 
 executors, and administrators. There was no gift 
 over. The four children of the testator survived 
 the widow. One • child • died leaving two children 
 who attained the age of twenty-one years, and the 
 other three children died without issue: — Held, 
 that the words "survivor or survivors" must be 
 so read., and not as " other or others." In r^ 
 Hoenee's Estate. Pomfeet v. Geaham 
 
 [19 Ch. D. 186 
 
 2. " Other or others '' — " Swrviving."} A 
 
 testator devised to each of his children an estate for 
 the life of that child, with remainder to the children 
 
 3 I 
 
( 1099 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1700 ) 
 
 XXXV, WILL— aVKVIVOBr— continued. 
 
 of that child, and in case any or either of the 
 testator's children should die without leaving any 
 child or children him, her or them surviving, then 
 the testator devised the estates to which their 
 child or childi-eu respectively would have heen 
 entitled under his will, if living, to his, the testator's, 
 surviving children for their respective natural lives, 
 and after their deceases respectively he gave their 
 respective shares to their respective children, their 
 heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns. There 
 was no gift over on the death of all the testator's 
 children without leaving children. C, one of the 
 testator's children, died without leaving issue. 
 Some of the other children were then living ; others 
 had died leaving children of theirs then living : — 
 Seld, that the word " surviving " was to be read in 
 its proper sense, and that the children of those 
 children of the testator who had predeceased C, 
 took no interest in the estate of which C. was 
 tenant for life. — The fact that the original shares 
 are all settled by the will, and that the shares which 
 the " survivors " take in the share of a child who 
 dies without issue, are settled in the same way as 
 their original shares, is not by itself sufficient to 
 shew that " survivors " is used otherwise than in its 
 proper sense. In re Benn. Benn v. BejiTN 
 
 [a9Ch. D. 839 
 
 XXXVI, WIIL— TEUST ESTATES. 
 
 The Act 44 & 45 Vict. v. 41 (Conveyancing Act, 
 1881) enacts — 
 
 Sect. 30. — (1.) Where an estate or interest of in- 
 heritance, or limited to the heir as special occupant, 
 in any tenements or hereditaments, corporeal or 
 incorporeal, is vested on any trust, or by way of 
 mortgage in any person solely, the same shall, on 
 his death, notwithstanding any testamentary dis- 
 position, devolve to and hecome vested in his per- 
 sonal representatives or representative from time to 
 time, in like manner as if the same were a chattel 
 real vesting in them or him ; and accordingly all 
 the Wee powers, for one only of several joint per- 
 sonal representatives, as well as for a single personal 
 representative, and for all the 'personal representa- 
 tives together to dispose of and otherwise deal with 
 the same, shall belong to the deceased's personal 
 representatives or representative from time to time, 
 with all the like incidents, hut subject to all the like 
 rights, equities, and obligations, as if the same 
 were a chattel real vesting in them or him ; and, 
 for the purposes of this section, the personal repre- 
 sentatives for the time being, of the deceased, shall 
 be deemed in law his heirs and assigns, within the 
 meaning of all trusts and powers. 
 
 (2.) Section 4 of the Vendor and Furcliaser Act, 
 
 1874, and section 48 of the Land Transfer Act, 
 
 1875, are hereby repealed. 
 
 (3.) This section, including the repeals therein, 
 applies only in cases of death after the commence- 
 ment of the Act — 3l8< Dec. 1881. 
 
 XXXVII, WILI— TRtrSTEES. 
 
 1, Extent of Estate — Direction to pay 
 
 Debts — Contingent Bemainder — Failure of par- 
 ticular Estate.'] A testator, by his will made in 
 1838, directed his debts to be paid. And he de- 
 vised specific real estate to four persons (whom he 
 afterwards named as his executors), their heirs and 
 assigns, upon trust and for the intents and purposes 
 thereinafter mentioned, viz., upon trust during the 
 
 XXXVII. "WILL— TRVST^^S— continued. 
 minority of his daughter D. to receive the rents- 
 and apply the same for her benefit till she should 
 attain twenty-one, and, on her attaining twenty- 
 one, to pay to or permit and suffer her to receive 
 the rents during her life for her separate use, 
 without power of anticipation. And, from and 
 after her death, upon trust for, and the testator 
 thereby gave and devised the property to the issue 
 children or child of the daughter who should live 
 to attain twenty-one, in equal shares, if more than 
 one, and to their respective heirs and assigns, with 
 remainders over. Aid, after making other specific 
 devises and bequests, the testator devised and 
 bequeathed the residue of his estate and effects 
 (subject to and charged with the payment of his 
 debts) to one of his trustees absolutely, for his own 
 use and benefit. The daughter D survived the 
 testator, and she afterwards married and had three 
 children, but she died before any of them had 
 attained twenty-one : — Beld, that, by reason of the 
 direction that the testator's debts should be paid, 
 the trustees took the whole legal estate in fee 
 simple in the specifically devised estate, and con- 
 sequently that the contingent remainder to the 
 children of the daughter had not failed by reason- 
 of the determination of her life estate before the 
 happening of the contingency. — Festing v. Allen 
 (12 M. & W. 279) distinguished.— Crcatore v. 
 Creaton (3 Sm. & Giff. 386) followed. Maeshau, 
 V. Glngell - - 21 Ch. D. 790 
 
 2. Indefinite Tmst — Communication of 
 
 Object of Trust to Trustee after Testator's Death.'] 
 A. B. instructed his solicitor to prepare for him 
 a will leaving all his property to the solicitor 
 himself absolutely, but to be held and disposed 
 of by him according to written directions to he 
 subsequently given, and a -will was prepared and 
 executed accordingly under which the solicitor was 
 universal legatee and sole executor. — ISo such di- 
 rections were however given to the solicitor by 
 the -testator in his lifetime, but after his death an 
 unattested paper was found by which the testator 
 stated his wish that X. Y. should have all his 
 property except a small sum of money which he 
 gave to the solicitor. The solicitor claimed no 
 beneficial interest in the testator's property, except 
 to the extent of his legacy, and claimed to hold 
 the rest of the property as trustee for X. Y. : — 
 Seld, that as the testator had not in his own life- 
 time coimmmicated to the solicitor the object of 
 the trust no valid trust in favour of X. Y. had 
 been constituted, and accordingly that the solicitor 
 held the property as trustee for the next of kin 
 of the testator. In re Botes. Botes v. Carkitt 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 531 
 
 3. Solicitor to Trust Estate.] A direction 
 
 in a will appointing a particular person solicitor 
 to the trust estate imposes no trust or duty on the 
 trustees of the will to continue such person their 
 solicitor in the management and affairs of the 
 estate. Foster v. Elslet - 19 Ch. D. 518 
 
 XXXVIII. WILL— VESTING. 
 
 1. " From and after the Decease of my 
 
 Wife."] Words are to be construed according to 
 their plain ordinary meaning, unless the context 
 shews them to have been used ifi a different sense, 
 or unless the rule, if acted on, would lead to some 
 
( 1701 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1702 ) 
 
 XXXVIII. WILL— VESTING— continued 
 manifest absnrdity or incongruity. A testator 
 must not be presumed to intend an absurdity, 
 .nevertheless if shewn by the context, or by the 
 whole will to have so intended, the intention, if 
 not illegal, must be carried out. — ^A testator after 
 making certain dispositions in favour of his wife, 
 and others, directed that from and after the decease 
 of his wife without leaving issue of his marriage, his 
 trustees should stand possessed of all the undisposed 
 of residue of his real and personal estate in trust 
 for his natural daughter for the term of her natural 
 life, with further provision in case of her death or 
 marriage.— It appeared that there was no issue of 
 the marriage, that the testator's widow was still 
 living, and that the natural daughter was still 
 unmarried. — Held, from an examination of the 
 whole will, that, according to the intention therein 
 appearing, the vesting in the natural daughter's 
 estate was not postponed till after the death of the 
 widow. — " From and after the decease of my said 
 wife" must be construed as referring only to 
 property in which the widow took an interest 
 terminable at her death. — Qusere, if the case arose 
 whether they might be construed as referring also 
 to property in which the widow's interest failed 
 during her life. Rhodes v. Ehodes 
 
 [7 App. Cas. 192 
 
 2, Income until Marriage — Capital at the 
 
 Time of Marriage.'] A testatrix by her wUl, after 
 specific bequests of bonds, gave all the rest of her 
 stocks and shares upon trust to pay the income to 
 6. until his marriage, and at the time of his marriage 
 to hand over the stocks and shares to him : — Held, 
 that G. took a vested interest under the gift, and, 
 being of age, was entitled to have the stocks and 
 shares comprised therein transferred to him, although 
 he had not married. — Batsford v. Kebhel (3 Ves. 
 363) distinguished.— Z« re Bunn (16 Oh. D. 247) 
 and Yize v. Stoney (2 D. & Wal. 659 ; S. C. 1 D & 
 War. 337) observed upon. In re Weey. Stuakt 
 V. Weey - - - 30 Ch. D. 807 
 
 3. Interim Trust for Maintenance — 
 
 Gift at Twenty-one — Besiduary Gift to Class — 
 Interest whether vested or contingent.'] A testa- 
 trix gave her residuary real and personal estate 
 to trustees in trust for sale and conversion and 
 investment of the proceeds, and to hold the in- 
 vestments upon trust to pay the income thereof, 
 " or such part thereof as her said trustees " should 
 " from time to time deem expedient," in or towards 
 the maintenance and education of her children 
 until they should attain their respective ages of 
 twenty-one years ; and from and immediately after 
 their attaining their respective ages of twenty-one 
 years, then upon trust to pay and transfer the 
 capital to her said children in equal shares, and to 
 settle each daughter's " share whether original or 
 accruing "; and the testatrix empowered her trustees 
 to dispose of any competent part, not exceeding 
 one-half, of " the presumptive share of any of her 
 children," for their advancement in life. — The 
 testatrix left three children, of whom two attained 
 twenty-one, and the third died an infant : — Held, 
 that the infant did not take a vested interest in 
 his one-third share of the residuary estate of the 
 testatrix.— .FoK v. Fox (Law Eep. 19 Bq. 286) 
 distineuished. In re Parkbb. Babkeb v. Baekeb 
 ^ [I6Ch. D. 44 
 
 XXXVIII. WILL— VESTISG— continued. 
 
 4, Interim Trust for Maintenance — Gift 
 
 over on Assignmevi—Life Interest — Bemainder — 
 Absolute Interest.'] A testatrix by her will ap- 
 pointed two-fifths of certain property to trustees 
 upon trust to pay the income to her son until he 
 should attain the age of forty years, and then to 
 hold the same in trust for her son his executors 
 and administrators ; provided that in case her son 
 should assign his share in the property, then the 
 aforesaid bequests should be void, and the two- 
 fifths should be held upon the trusts declared as to 
 the other three-fifths. The son died before he 
 attained the age of forty without having assigned : 
 — Held, that the two-fifths vested in trust for the 
 son absolutely so as to pass by his will. Sootney 
 V. LoMEB - . - 29 Ch. D. 534 
 
 [Affirmed by the Court of Appeal, 31 Ch. D. 380.] 
 
 6. Interim Trust for Maintenance — JJe- 
 
 siduary Gift to Individual — Gift at Thirty — 
 Interest whether vested or contingent] A testator 
 bequeathed his residuary personal estate to trustees 
 in trust for conversion and investment, and to pay 
 the income to B. for his maintenance and until he 
 should attain the age of thirty; and upon his 
 attaining that age to pay or transfer the capital to 
 him absolutely. B. survived the testator and died 
 under thirty : — Held, that B. took a vested interest. 
 In re BuNN. Isaacson v. Webstee 16 Ch. D. 4T 
 
 6. " Payable."] A testator by his wiU, 
 
 bequeathed an annuity to his daughter, and directed 
 that after her death the trustees should hold £2000, 
 part of the fund set apart to secure the annuity, , 
 upon trust to pay and divide the same unto and 
 equally between the child and children of the 
 daughter as and when they should respectively 
 attain twenty-one, and, in case any of the children- 
 should die before their shares should become " pay- 
 able as aforesaid " without leaving issue, the share 
 or shares of him, her, or them so dying should be 
 paid to the survivor or survivors of them, equally if 
 more than one, and, if but one, the whole to that 
 one, with power for the trustees, during the re- 
 spective minorities of the children, to apply the 
 income of his, her, or their expectant share or 
 shares towards his, her, or their maintenance and 
 education. And if all such children should die- ■ 
 under twenty-one, without lea-ving issue, the fund 
 income was given over : — Held, that the children's, 
 absolutely vested at twenty-one, and were not 
 divested by subsequent death without issue in the 
 lifetime of their mother. Paeteidge v. Baylis 
 
 [17 Ch. D. 835. 
 
 7. "Period of Distribution" — Erroneous- 
 
 Beference.] A testator gave the interest arising 
 from a sum of stock to V. D., which interest he 
 was to enjoy along with his wife, M. D., during 
 their respective lives, but in the event of either 
 dying and the survivor marrying again, then the, 
 capital to be divided, share and share alike, between 
 their children ; an arrangement ultimately to take 
 place at the death of their parents, should neither 
 marry again. The testator then directed that the 
 money should not be removed from the English 
 funds during the lifetime of V. D. and M.D., not 
 until the period arrived " for its distribution (after- 
 their death) among their children surviving, share 
 and share alike " : — Held (affirming the decision of 
 Jessel, M.R.), that the interests of the children 
 
 3 I 2 
 
( 1703 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1701 ) 
 
 XXXVIII. ■Will.— YESTISG— continued. 
 
 were not contingent on their surviving their 
 parents, the concluding words not being sufficient 
 to render the previously vested gift contingent. 
 In re Duke. Hannah v. DrKE - 16 Ch. D. 112 
 
 XXXIX. WILL— -WORDS. 
 
 1. Clear annual Income vritliout " Deduc- 
 tion for the legacy tax, or any other matter, cause. 
 or thing tohatever " — Annuity held free of Income 
 Tax^ Testator directed trustees to stand possessed 
 of residuary real and personal estate upon trust to 
 pay thereout to his wife, during her life, such an 
 annual sum as, together with the income of a 
 settled fund of £10,000, should produce to her " a 
 clear annual income of £1500." He gave several 
 legacies and annuities, and towards the end of his 
 wUl declared that " no deduction shall be made 
 from any of the legacies given by this my wUl, or 
 to be given by any codicil thereto, for legacy tax 
 or any other matter, cause, or thing whatever." — 
 An administration suit having been brought, an 
 -order was made in 1861 that the trustees of the 
 will should repay to the widow certain sums which 
 had been deducted from her annuity by mistake 
 for succession duty, and that they should pay her 
 tmtil further order an aimuity of £1500 free of all 
 deductions except income tax ; but no express 
 declaration of her rights was made. This order 
 was acted upon until 1882, when a petition was 
 presented by the widow asking that the income 
 tax which had been deducted might be paid to her, 
 and that in future her annuity might be paid free 
 of income tax : — Held, by Bacon, V.C., that the 
 widow was entitled to receive from the trustees a 
 clear annuity of £1500, without any deduction 
 therefrom on account of income tax: — But held, 
 by the Court of Appeal, discharging the order of 
 Bacon, V.C., that the order of 1861 amounted to a 
 declaration of the right of the widow to receive 
 the annuity free of all deductions except in- 
 come tax, notwithstanding the words " until 
 further order," and that the matter was res judi- 
 cata and could not now be reconsidered. — Quxre, 
 whether, if the matter had not been res judicata, 
 the decision of the Vice-Chancellor was correct. 
 Peareth v. Mabkiott - 22 Oh. D. 182 
 
 2. " Clear yearly sums," "free from all 
 
 deductions" — Income Tax deducted by Trustees — 
 Annuitant entitled to Payment of all Sutiis de- 
 ducted.'] A. B., in 1846, gave to his wife annuities 
 or clear yearly sums for her life " free from all 
 deductions in respect of any present or future taxes, 
 charges, assessments, or impositions, or other matter, 
 cause, or thing, whatsoever," and directed the trus- 
 tees to appropriate and invest a sufficient part of 
 his personal estate as a fund for the purpose of 
 paying them. The trustees, acting upon the ad- 
 vice of counsel, deducted from all the payments 
 to the widow the income tax: — Held, that the 
 widow was entitled to be paid the annuities in 
 full, free from any deduction ; and also entitled to 
 be paid all the sums which had been deducted. — 
 Lord Lovat v. Duchess of Leeds (2 Dr. & Sm. 62) 
 followed. In re Bannekman's Estate. Bannek- 
 3IAN V. Young 21 Ch. D. 106 
 
 3- -; "Clear yearly sum "—" Free from all 
 
 deductions and abatements whatsoever " — Annui- 
 tant to pay Income Tax.} Testator declared that 
 his trustees should stand possessed of his resi- 
 
 XXXIX. WILL— WOUHS— continued. 
 duary estate and directed them ont of the income 
 to pay to his wife " the clear yearly sum of £600 " 
 for life if she should remain his widow, but if she 
 should marry again an annuity of £100 in lieu of 
 the annuity of £600, " the said annuities of £600 
 and £100, as the case may be, to be paid free 
 from aU deductions and abatements whatsoever." 
 By a codicil an annuity of £1000 was given in lieu 
 of £600 : — Held, that the annuity was not given 
 free from income tax. Gleatow v. Leetham 
 
 [22 Ch. S. 269 
 
 4. Cousina — First and Second CouHns — 
 
 Gift over — Death hefore Payment of any Legacy^ 
 Testator bequeathed the residue of the proceeds of 
 sale of his real and personal estates upon trust, 
 after the deaths of his wife and sister, to be equally 
 divided amongst all such of his first and second 
 cousins, including his reputed cousin A. B. and his 
 children, or reputed cMldren, and the children 
 of his reputed cousin S. G. deceased as should be 
 then living, and if A. B. should be then dead, the 
 share to which he would have been entitled, if 
 then living, should be divided amongst his then 
 surviving children. And by a codicil, the testator 
 gave a legacy out of the same proceeds of sale " to 
 each of my cousins J. B. and G. C," in addition 
 to any sum to which they might he entitled under 
 his will, and directed that if any or either of his 
 first or second cousins should die before the pay- 
 ment of any sum or share thereby or by his will 
 directed to be paid to him or her, such sum or 
 share should be equally divided among his or her 
 wife or husband and children or child, if any, and 
 if none should be paid to his or her next of kin. 
 The testator had not, either at the date of his will, 
 or at his death, any second cousin, but at the time 
 of his death he had both first cousins and first 
 cousins once removed, and also first cousins twice 
 removed. A. B. and S. G., if they had been legiti- 
 mate, would have been the testator's first cousins, 
 and J. B. and G. C. were his first cousins once 
 removed : — Held, that the first cousins once removed 
 and their chUdren were included in the gift: — 
 Held, also, that the gift over on death hefore pay- 
 ment was to be construed as before becoming 
 entitled to payment. Wiles v. Bannistee 
 
 [30 CL D. 512 
 
 5. " Cousins "— " Second Cmisins."] A 
 
 testator gave one-third of his property to his first 
 cousins and two-thirds to his second cousins. At 
 his death he left first cousins, second cousins, and 
 children and grandchildren of first cousins: — 
 Held (affirming the decision of the Master of the 
 Eolls), that the term " second cousins " did not in- 
 clude children or grandchildren of first cousins. 
 In re Paekee. Bentham v. Wilson 17 Ch. D. 262 
 
 6. '•Cousins" — " Second Cousins" — First 
 
 Cousins once renwved.~} A testator, after giving 
 to h s sister a life interest in the whole of his 
 property, devised and bequeathed the same after 
 her death upon trust for sale, and to divide the 
 proceeds amongst " my second cousins.'' — The tes- 
 tator had no " second cousins " either at the date of 
 his will or at his death, or any bom afterwards : — 
 Held, that first cousins once removed were entitled. 
 —Slade v Fooks (9 Sim. 386) followed. In re 
 BoKNEE. TrcKEE V. Good - 19 Ch. D. 201 
 
( 1705 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1706 ) 
 
 XXXIX. WILL— -WOEDS— coniCTuet?. 
 
 7. "Mebt"— Locality— Domioa.'] A tes- 
 tator resident in England at the time of his death 
 bequeathed to his son " all his estate and effects in 
 Mauritius." At the time of his death the purchase- 
 money of real estate in Mauritius sold by him to 
 persons residing in that island was due to him. 
 He was not domiciled in Mauritius : — Held, that 
 this debt was included in the bequest of his pro- 
 perty in Mauritius. Gcthkie v. Waleond 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 673 
 
 8. "Farming Stock"— Growing Crops.'] 
 
 A testatrix, after devising all her real estate to A., 
 gave all the " farming stock, goods, chattels and 
 effects in and about " one of her farms forming 
 part of her real estate, to B. : and she gave the 
 residue of her personal estate to other persons : — 
 Beld, that all crops growing on the farm at the 
 testatrix's death passed to B. — Vaisey v. Ueynolds 
 (5 Buss. 12) disapproved of. In re Koose. Evans 
 V. "Williamson - 17 Ch. D. 696 
 
 9. " Furniture, Goods, and Chattels " — 
 
 Ejusdem Generis — Gift of " all my interest in C. 
 Estate " — Purchase-money — Mixing with 'Money 
 at Sanlcers — Deposit — Ademption.'] A testator, 
 after bequeathing pecuniary legacies, directed them 
 " to be paid from such part of my personal estate 
 as shall consist of money at my bankers or in 
 the 3 per cent, consols." And after directing that 
 the whole of his income should be devoted to the 
 comfort and maintenance of his wife, and that she 
 should have the use of his residence, he desired 
 " that the furniture, goods, and chattels be not sold 
 during my wife's lifetime, but at her decease be 
 divided among the executors." And after the 
 death of his wife he bequeathed to M. " all my 
 interest in the C. estate." Prior to the date of the 
 wiU, the 0. estate, which had been appointed by 
 will by the testator's wife to him absolutely, was 
 taken by the M. Board of Works, the purchase- 
 money being paid into Court. Subsequently the 
 wife died, and administration with her will an- 
 nexed was taken out by the testator, who then 
 conveyed the C. estate to the Board, and obtained 
 payment out to himself of the purchase-money, 
 which he placed with his bankers partly on de- 
 posit and partly to his general account with his 
 other moneys, from time to time drawing on that 
 general account. At his death there stood to his 
 credit at his bankers the sum on deposit and a 
 balance on his general account : — Seld, (1), apply- 
 ing the rule ejusdem genei'is, that the gift of 
 " fm-niture, goods, and chattels," passed only such 
 furniture, &c., as, on the house being let furnished, 
 would go with the occupation of the house, and not 
 such articles as jewellery, guns, pistols, tricycles, 
 and scientific instruments ; (2), that the gift of " all 
 my interest in the- C. estate," had been adeemed 
 and did not pass the money on deposit or any part 
 of the balance at the bankers. — Clark v. Brown 
 (2 Sm. & Giff.,524) not followed.— Moore v. Moore 
 (29 Beav. 496) distinguished. Manton v. Taeois 
 
 [30 Ch. D. 92 
 
 10. " Heirs " — Gift of real and personal 
 
 Estate together— Svhstitution.] A testator gave, 
 devised, and bequeathed to his wife all his pro- 
 perty, real or personal, on trust for herself for her 
 life, and after her death the whole of his property 
 was to be equally divided among all his children. 
 
 XXXIX. 'WILL— WO^nS— continued. 
 
 " or such of them as may be then surviving, or their 
 heirs." The testator had five children, all of whom 
 survived him. Of these children two daughters 
 died before the wife, leaving children : — Held, that 
 the word "heirs" had a twofold meaning, viz., 
 heir-at-law as regarded the real estate and next of 
 kin as regarded the personalty : — Held, also, that 
 the property was divisible in fifths, — each surviving 
 child of the testator taking one-fifth, and the heir- 
 at-law and next of kin of each deceased daughter 
 taking between them (according to the nature of 
 the estate) one -fifth share. — Wingfieldv. 'Wingjidd' 
 (9 Ch. D. 658) foUoweA.— Smith v. Butcher (10 
 Ch. D. 113) distinguished. Keay v. Boulton 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 212 
 
 11. " Husband " — Divorce.] A testator 
 
 devised property to his daughter for life, and after 
 her death in trast for " any husband with whom 
 she might intermaiTy, if he should sm-vive her, for 
 his life." — The daughter married the Defendant, 
 and was divorced from him on his petition, and he 
 married again and survived her : — Held, that the 
 Defendant was entitled to the property devised for 
 his life. BuLLMOEE v. Wtntek 22 Ch. D. 619 
 
 12. " Nephews and Nieces " — Consan- 
 guinity or affinity.] A testator devised freehold 
 property to be divided between the children of his 
 sister-in-law and A. and B., and "my niece M." 
 (the last-named three devisees being nieces of his 
 deceased wife). He gave other real property to 
 trustees upon trust for sale, and to pay the income 
 of the proceeds of sale amongst '■ all my nephevs's 
 and nieces," for their lives and the life of the sur- 
 vivors of them, and bequeathed the capital to the 
 survivor, and he gave other real property unto 
 " all my said nephews and nieces " as tenants in 
 common, and he gave his residuary j-ealty upon 
 trust to pay the income to " all my said nephews 
 and nieces " for their lives and the life of the 
 survivor, and then devised such residue to the 
 survivor, and bequeathed his residuary personal 
 estate equally amongst "all my nephews and 
 nieces": — Held, that the circumstances of the 
 testator having given property to his wife's nieces, 
 and even having called one of them his niece, was 
 not sufiBcient to include any of his wife's nephews 
 and nieces in the subsequent gifts to all his 
 nephews and nieces : and those only who were 
 related by consanguinity were entitled to take. — - 
 Grant v. Grant (Law Eep. 5 C. P. 380, 727) dis- 
 sented from. Merrill v. Morton 17 Ch. D. 382 
 
 13. " Nephews " — Construction — " Great 
 
 Nephews, the Sons of his deceased Nephew T. G. A.^ 
 — Legitimacy — Domicil.] A bequest of personalty 
 in an English will to the children of a foreigner 
 must be construed to mean to his legitimate 
 children, and by international law as recognised 
 in this country those children are legitimate whose 
 legitimacy is established by the law of their 
 father's domicil. Accordingly where a testator be- 
 queathed personalty to his " great nephews the 
 sons of his deceased nephew T. &. A." and T. G. A. 
 was domiciled in Guernsey : — Held, that a son of 
 T. G. A. born before wedlock, but legitimated 
 according to the law of Guernsey by the subse- 
 quent marriage of T. G. A. with that son's mother, 
 was entitled to share with the sons of T. G. A 
 born after the marriage in the testator's bequest. 
 
( 1707 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1708 ) 
 
 XXXIX. WILL— VronjiS— continued. 
 
 — Observations on In re Goodman's Trusts (17 
 Ch. D. 266) and JBoyes v. Bedale (1 H. & M. 798). 
 In re Axdros. Andkos v. Andeos 
 
 [24 Ch. D. 637 
 
 14. "Ordinary Outgoings" — Tenant for Life 
 
 — Apportionment — Metropolis Local Management 
 Act, 1855 (18 * 19 Vict. e. 120), s. IS— Metropolis 
 Local Management Act, 1862 (25 * 26 Vict. c. 102), 
 ss. 96, 97.] A testator gave freehold and lease- 
 hold houses, bonds, and consols on trust to pay 
 the income after deducting ordinary outgoings to 
 his widow for life : — Held, that the tenant for life 
 must bear the cost of drainage work required to 
 be done to one of the leasehold houses by the 
 vestry under the Metropolis Local Management 
 Act, 1855, s. 73. In re Ceawley. Aoton v. 
 Ceawlet. 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 15. " Paid free of legacy duty,"] A 
 
 testatrix gave several specific and pecuniary lega- 
 cies, and directed that aU her legacies should be 
 " paid free of legacy duty." — Held, that under the 
 words "all the legacies left by my wUl and codicil 
 to be paid free of legacy duty," the legacy duty 
 was to be paid out of the estate on all legacies as 
 well pecuniary as specific, the word •• paid " not 
 being sufficient under the circumstances to cut 
 down the direction to pecuniary legacies only. — 
 Ansley v. Cotton (16 L. J. (Ch.) 55) discussed and 
 followed. In re Johnston. Cookebell v. Eael 
 OF Essex - 26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 16. "Real estates wheresoever situate' 
 
 Personal Estate — Leasehold for Years — Wills Act 
 (1 Vict. c. 26), 6. 26.] A testator by his will, dated 
 in 1870, declared that his trustees should stand 
 possessed of and interested in the annual income 
 and proceeds of his real and personal estate in trust 
 to pay an annuity to his wife, and after her decease 
 he declared and directed that his trustees should 
 stand possessed of and interested in his real and 
 personal estate upon the trusts and for the intents 
 and purpose following, that is to say, " as to my 
 real estates wheresoever situate (the Victoria Park 
 Cemetery in the parish of St. Matthew, Bethnal 
 Green, excepted) " in trust to pay the annual 
 rents and proceeds thereof to two children as 
 therein mentioned, " and as to my freehold estate 
 called the Victoria Park Cemetery, and my per- 
 sonal estate wheresoever situated, upon trust to 
 pay the dividends, interest and annual proceeds 
 thereof," to his five daughters in equal proportions. 
 — The personal estate comprised certain leaseholds 
 for years. — Held, that according to the true con- 
 struction of the 26th section of the WUls Act 
 (1 Vict. c. 26) the leaseholds for years did not pass 
 under the gift of the real estates. — Wilson v. Eden 
 ai Beav. 237 ; 5 Ex. 752 ; 14 Beav. 317 ; IS Q. B. 
 -174 ; 16 Beav. 153) discussed ; Turner v. Turner 
 (21 L. J. (Ch.) 843) and Gully v. Davis (Law 
 Kep. 10 Eq. 562) discussed and distinguished. 
 Butler v. Butlee - 28 Ch, D. 66 
 
 17. Heal Security — Construction — Turn- 
 pike Eoad Bonds.'] Specific bequest of all moneys, 
 stocks, funds, shares, and other securities, " except 
 mortgages on real and leasehold security " : — Held, 
 that mortgages of turnpike road toUs, and mort- 
 gages of turnpike road toUs and toll-houses, were 
 not mortgages on real security, and did not come 
 
 XXXIX. "WILL— W0m)8— continued. 
 
 within the exception in the bequest. Cavendish v. 
 Cavendish - 24 Ch. D. 685 ; 30 Ch. D, 227 
 
 18. " tlniiiarried."] Property was given 
 
 by wUl to trustees in trust for A. for life, " but if 
 he should die unmarried," to be equally divided 
 between the children of B. At the date of the 
 will A. was a bachelor, and at the time of his death 
 he was a widower : — Held, that in the absence of 
 context shewing a contrary intention the word 
 " unmarried " must be construed according to its 
 ordinary or primary meaning as " never having 
 been married," and therefore that the gift to the 
 children of B. did not take effect. Daletmple v. 
 Hall - 16 Ch. D. 715 
 
 19. " Unmarried."] Although the word 
 
 " unmarried " is one of flexible meaning, and may 
 mean either " never having been married," or " not 
 having a husband " at the time when a gift is to 
 take effect, the former is the primary or natural 
 meaning, and, in the absence of any context 
 shewing a different intention, the word will be so 
 construed. In re Sergeant. Meetens v. "Wallet 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 575 
 
 "Money." 
 
 See Cases under Will — Eesidue. 3 — 6. 
 
 WILL — Action before probate — Stay of proceed- 
 ings - 12 ft. B. B. 294 
 
 See Peactioe — Supreme ConsT — Stat- 
 ing Peooeedings. 3. 
 
 — — Appointment. 
 
 See Cases under Powee — Execution. 
 8—19. 
 
 Apportionment of dividends 26 Ch. D. 795 
 
 See Apportionment. 3. 
 
 ■ Charge of deljts — Administration with will 
 
 annexed - 16 Ch. D. 3 
 
 See Administkatob — With Will an- 
 nexed. 1. 
 
 Charitable legacy. 
 
 See Cases under Chaeitt — Moetmain. 
 
 — Contingent gift to infant — Maintenance 
 [26 Ch. D. 426 ; 29 Ch. D. 331 
 
 See Infant — Maintenance. 4, 6. 
 
 — Covenant not to revoke - 23 Ch. D. 285 
 See Covenant — Validity. 
 
 — Direction as to disposition of dead body 
 SeeExECUTOE — Powkes. 3 [20Ch.S. 659 
 
 — Election - - - 22 Ch. D. 565 
 
 See Election. 1. 
 
 — Execution — Alien 6 P. D. 211 ; 9 P. D. 130 
 
 See Probate — Geant. 1, 2. 
 
 — Execution — Attesting witnesses — Evidence 
 
 [9 P. D. 149 
 
 See Peobate — Execution. 4. 
 
 — Foreign law and foreigner — Will executed 
 abroad according to English law 6 P, D, 6 
 See Administeator — Limited. 6 
 
 — Foreign law — Construction 26 Ch. D. 656 
 See Probate — Grant. 4. 
 
 — Forgery — Actions in Probate and Chancery 
 Divisions 9 P. D. 210 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 1. 
 
( 1709 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF OASES. 
 
 ( 1710 ) 
 
 WILL — continued. 
 
 — Grift to separate use — Covenant to settle 
 
 after-acquired property 
 See Cases under Setxlement — Future 
 Peopekty. 7 — 10. 
 Married -woman — Testamentary appoint- 
 ment - _ aacii.D, 238 
 
 See Power — Execution. 11. 
 Power of leasing 2.4 Ch. D. 624 
 
 See Settlement — Powers, i. 
 
 Promise to devise interest in land by will 
 
 [10 Q. B. S. 148 
 
 See Frauds, Statute of. 2. 
 
 — Proved in Scotland 6 P. D. 19 
 
 See Administrator — Grant. 4. 
 Proved in Victoria - - 21 Ch. D. 674 
 
 See Partition Suit — Sale. 2. 
 • Power to consent to advancement 27 Ch. D. 
 
 See Power — Extinction. 2. [565 
 
 •— Realty — Appointment of executors 
 
 [6 P. D. 209 ; 7 P. D. 61 
 
 See Probate— Married Woman. 4, 5. 
 — — Revocation — Testamentary appointment 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 99 
 
 See Power — Execution. 13. 
 Scotch will - 7 App. Cas, 400 
 
 See Scotch Law — Will. 
 
 Scotch will - 8 App. Cas. 577 
 
 See Scotch Law — • Heritable Pro- 
 perty. 4. 
 
 Survivor - - 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Evidence — -Presumption. 
 ■■ Trustees — Appointment of new after decree 
 See Trustee — Powers. 1. [23 Ch. D. 134 
 
 • Unregistered — Middlesex Registry Acts 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 611 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Pur- 
 chase without Notice 1. 
 
 TVINDFALLS— Larch trees - 28 Ch. D. 220 ; 
 See Timber. 1, 2. [30 Ch. D, 485 
 
 WINDING-rP. 
 
 See Cases under Company. 
 
 -^ — Building society, 
 
 See Cases under Building Society. 
 
 •— Company — ^ Balance order — "Final judg- 
 ment" 13Q. B. D. 4'i6 
 
 - See Bankruptcy — Act of Bankruptcy. 
 
 7. 
 
 ■• Lease to company — Clause of re-entry 
 
 [20 Ch. D. 260 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Re-entry. 
 8. 
 
 • Lien of solicitor of company on documents 
 
 See Solicitor— Lien. 12. [24 Ch. D, 408 
 
 Life insurance company. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Life Insur- 
 ance Company. 
 
 . Pending action— Transfer 16 Ch. D. 663 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Trans- 
 fer. 1. 
 — . Petition— Order on — Appeal 16 Ch. D. 663 ; 
 [23 Ch. D. 248 ; 24 Ch. D. 488 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 37, 40, 41. 
 
 WINDOW— Entry hy, to distrain 15 Q. B. D. 312 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Distress. 2- 
 
 WITHDEAWAL—Affidavit— Bankruptcy 
 
 [20 Ch. D, 126 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Evidence. 1. 
 
 Affidavit — Cross-examination 21 Ch. D. 642 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 5. 
 
 Appeal - - 17 Ch. D. 23 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 23. 
 
 Bill of costs 30 Ch. D. 441 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill of Costs. 7. 
 
 Consent 26 Ch. D. 249 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Con- 
 sent. 
 
 Defence— Costs - 18 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 23. 
 
 Members of company 24 Ch. D. 421, 425, n. ; 
 
 [28 Ch. S. 559 ; 10 App. Cas. 33 
 See Company — Distribution op Assets. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Members of company — Building society. 
 
 [24 Ch, D. 421 ; 8 App. Cas. 235 ; 10 App. 
 
 See BuiLDiNO Society. 14, 15. [Cas. 33 
 WITNESS. 
 
 See Cases under Evidence — ^Witness. 
 Aged^ — Evidence de bene esse 26 Ch. D. 1 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — -Evi- 
 DENOE 18. 
 
 Attendance before arbitrator 17 Ch. D. 787 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 7. 
 
 Bankruptcy. 
 
 See Cases under Bankruptcy — Evi- 
 dence. 
 
 « 
 
 Costs — Cross-examination 26 Ch, D. 297 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 
 Cross-examination — Expenses 26 Ch. D. 297 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 3. 
 
 Examination abroad. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Supreme 
 Court — Evidence. 9 — 16. 
 
 Examination de bene esse - 16 Ch. D. 100 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 1. 
 Expenses — Certificate of Registrar — Taxa- 
 tion by Master - 7 Q. B. B. 477 
 See Parliament — Election Petition. 2. 
 
 Husband for wife, and vice versa. 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married 
 Women's Property Acts — Statutes. 
 
 Husband or wife of accused — Offences against 
 
 women. 
 
 See Criminal Law — Offences against 
 Women — Statutes. 
 
 Lunacy — Medical witnesses 18 Ch. D. 26 
 
 See Lunatic— Inquisition. 1. 
 
 Right to subpoena — Leave of Court 
 
 [22 Ch. D. 430 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Evi- 
 dence. 8. 
 
( 1711 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1712 ) 
 
 WITNESS — continued. 
 
 Voluntary attendance — Eef usal to give evi- 
 dence — Power of justices to commit 
 See Bastabdy. 7. [14 «. B. D. 364 
 
 Winding-up. 
 
 See Cases under Company — Evidence. 
 
 WOMAN PAST CHILDBEAEING 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Evidence — Peesumption. 
 
 WOODS AND FOEESTS. 
 
 See Ckown Lands — Statutes. 
 
 WOED — Registration of, as trade-mark 
 
 [84 Ch. D. 504 ; 26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 See Tkade-makk — Eegistkation. 1, 4. 
 WOBDS — " According to the stocks " 
 
 See Will— Class. 1. [24 Ch. D. 664 
 " Act or practice " - - S ft. B. D. 434 
 
 See Solicitor — XJnqualtpied. 3. 
 
 ■ " Adjoining or abutting on " 9 Q. B. D. 183 ; 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 849 
 
 See Local Goveenment — Streets. 6, 7. 
 " All my land at S." 30 Ch. D. 50 
 
 See Will — Speaking from Death. 3. 
 " All other lands and others " 8 App. Cap. 853 
 
 See Scotch Law — Conveyance. 1. 
 •• AH the rest of my money " 17 Ch. D. 819 
 
 See Will — Eesiduaby Gift. 3. 
 .^^ " All ways now used and enjoyed " 
 
 See Way. 1. [18 Ch. D. 616 
 " Allowance " - 14 Q. B. D. 735 
 
 See Local Government — Local Ab- 
 
 TflOEITY. 5. 
 
 " Annual profits or gains " 14 Q. B. D. 239 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 438 
 See Eevenue — Inoojie Tax. 9. 
 
 " Annual value." 
 
 See Cases under Waterworks Company 
 — Water-eate. • 
 
 " Assignee " - 28 Ch. D. 719 
 
 See Solicitor — Bill op Costs. 4. 
 
 " At all times of tide and always afloat " 
 
 [11 ft. B. D. 244 
 See Ship — Charterpaety. 13. 
 
 " At merchant's risk '' - 12 ft. B. D. 218 
 
 See Ship — General Average. 2. 
 
 " Author " 11 ft. B. D. 627 
 
 See Copyright — Pictures. 
 
 " Available for adjudication " 21 Ch. D. 605 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Protected Teansac- 
 tion. 2. 
 
 " Beer-house " 16 Ch. D. 718 
 
 See Landloed and Tenant — Lease. 7. 
 
 " Bona fide charitable gift " 7 ft. B. D. 639 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 14. 
 
 " By virtue of Statute of Distributions " 
 
 See Will— Class. 4. [19 Ch. D. 444 
 
 " Capital not called up " 17 Ch. D. 716 
 
 See Company — Dieectob's Atithoeity. 
 2. 
 
 " Capture and seizure " 9 ft. B. D. 463 ; 
 
 [10 ft B. D. 432 ; 8 App. Cas. 393 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Policy. 3, 4. 
 
 " Carry out bread for sale in and from any 
 
 cart " — " Carry out or deliver any bread " 
 See Baker. 1. [14 ft. B. D. 110 
 
 WORDS — continued. 
 
 " Cause or matter pending " 16 Ch. D. 544- 
 
 See Peactice — Supreme Couet — Ee- 
 
 CEIVBE. 1. 
 
 " Cause shewn " 14 ft. B. D. 177 
 
 See Bankbuptct— Teustee. 8. 
 
 " Causing, directing, or permitting " 
 
 [12 ft. B. D. 629 
 
 See Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 
 " Charge or control " 12 ft. B. D. 208 
 
 See Master and Seevant — Mabtee's- 
 Liability. 17. 
 " Child or children " - 9 App. Cas. 890 
 
 See Will — Estate in Eealty. 2. 
 " Clear annual income without deduction " 
 
 ;See Will— WoBDS. 1. [22 Ch. D. 182 
 " Clear yearly sum " - 21 Ch. D. 105 ; 
 
 iSee Will— WoBDS. 2,3. [22 Ch. D. 226- 
 " Common to the trade " 29 Ch. D. 551 
 
 See Teade-maek — ^Eegistration. 3. 
 " Commonly understood " - 15 ft. B. D. 273 
 
 See Municipal Coepoeation — Election. 
 6. 
 " Concerned or interested in any bargain or 
 
 contract " 14 ft. B. D. 735, 739 
 
 jSee Local Government — Local Autho- 
 eity. 5, 6. 
 " Continuing trustees " - 25 Ch. D. 611 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 8. 
 " Contract " 17 Ch. D. 122 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 22. 
 " Contrary intention " 26 Ch. D. 426 
 
 See Infant — Maintenance. 4. 
 " Costs of reference " 9 ft. B. D. 434 
 
 See Arbitration — Costs. 
 " Cottage and land " 30 Ch. D. 50 
 
 See Will — Speaking from Death. 3. 
 " Course " - 9 P. D. 137 
 
 See Ship^— Navigation. 20. 
 " Cousins " 17 Ch. D. 262 ; 19 Ch. D. 201 ; 30 
 
 See Will— Words. 4, 5, 6. [Ch. D. 612- 
 
 " Criminal cause or matter " 7 ft. B. D. 534 ; 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 378 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Ap- 
 peal. 8, 9. 
 " Criminal cause or matter '' 14 ft. B. D. 667 
 
 See Parliament — Election. 3. 
 " Dangere and accidents of the seas '' 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 13. [10 P. D. 
 " Death" - 22 Ch. D. 
 
 See Will — ^Lapse. 5. 
 "Debt." 
 
 ;See Cases under Practice — Supremk 
 Court — Garnishee Orders. 
 " Debt incurred by fraud " 17 Ch. D. 
 
 See Bankruptcy- — Proof. 22. 
 "Debt or liability" - 15 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 3. 
 " Decision " - - 10 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Local Government — Streets. 
 " Desertion " 9 ft. B. D. 
 
 See Poor Law — Settlement. 8. 
 
 " Devise " 18 Oh. D. 
 
 Six Power — Execution. 8. 
 
 103 
 236 
 
 122. 
 
 ,239 
 
 ,309 
 9. 
 522- 
 
 .499 
 
( 1713 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1714 ) 
 
 WORDS — continued. 
 
 " Devise "— " Bequest " - 26 Ch. D. 266 
 
 See VfTLL — Lapse. 2. 
 " Discovert " - - 15 Q. B. D. 667 
 
 See Husband and Wife — Married 
 Women's Property Acts. 1. 
 
 " Distinctive words " - 24 Ch. D. 604 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 See Trade-mark — Registration. 1, 4. 
 " Domestic animals " - 12 ft. B. D. 66 
 
 See Cruelty to Animals. 
 " Duly attested ' - - 8 ft, B. D. Ill 
 
 See Bill op Sale — Formalities. 2. 
 
 " Dwelling-house " 8 ft. B. D, 195 ; 
 
 [10 ft. B. D. 87, 677 
 
 See Parliament — Franchise. 1, 2, 3. 
 " Dying intestate " ■ 29 Ch. D. 964 
 
 See LmiTATioss, Statute op — Legacy. 
 "Dying without issue" - 9 App. Cas. 890 
 
 See Will— Estate in Eealty. 2. 
 « Eldest or only son " - 26 Ch. D. 382 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 3. 
 "Eldest son" - - 26 Ch. D. 363 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 2. 
 " Employed in the mine" 14 ft. B. D. 592 
 
 See Mine — Mines Begulation Acts. 
 
 " Entering a cause or matter for trial or 
 
 hearing " - 14 ft. B. D. 82 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 26. 
 "Estate" - 9 App. Cas. 890 
 
 See Will — Estate m Realty. 2. 
 " Estate and effects " 22 Ch, D. 573 
 
 5fee Will— Words. 7. 
 " Estate or interest in land '' 9 App. Cas. 699 
 
 See Colonial Law — New Zealand. 2. 
 
 " Event " 6 ft. B. D. 521 ; 8 ft. B. D. 470 ; 
 
 [14 ft. B.D. 821, 841 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 13, 40, 41, 42. 
 •■' Everything I am possessed of " 16 Ch. D. 696 
 
 &eWiLL — Residuary GiPT. 1. 
 
 " Excessive weight " 6 ft. B. D. 206 ; 
 
 [8 ft. B. B. 69, 466 
 
 See Highway — ^Repair. 8, 9, 10. 
 "Expedient" - - 22 Ch. D. 633 
 
 See Trustee Acts — New Trustees. 2. 
 " Ejipressly purchased " - 19 Ch. D. 659 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways 
 Clauses Act. 1. 
 
 " Extraordinarv expenses " 6 ft. B. D. 206 ; 
 
 [8 ft. B. D. 59, 466 
 
 See Highway — Repair. 8, 9, 10. 
 " Extraordinary resolution." 16 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Composition. 1. 
 
 « Extraordinary traffic " 8 ft. B. D. 59 
 
 See Highway — Repair. 10. 
 
 " Facilities " - 7 ft. B. D. 182 
 
 See Railway Company — Railways Re- 
 gulation Acts. '3. 
 
 " Factors servants or assigns '' 15 ft. B. D. 11 
 
 See Insurance, Marine — Loss, Total. 
 
 « Fair price " - - 15 ft. B. D. 457 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Distress. 1. 
 
 ■WORDS— continued. 
 
 " Fall into residue '' - - 29 Ch. D. 142 
 
 See Will — Residuary Gipt. 2. 
 
 " Farming stock " - 17 Ch. D. 696 
 
 See Will — Words. 8. 
 
 " Final division " - 18 Ch. D. 634 
 
 See Will — Death coupled with Con- 
 tingency. 1. 
 
 " Final judgment." 
 
 See Cases imder Bankruptcy — Act of 
 Bankruptcy. 7 — 11. 
 
 " For and on behalf " 13 ft. B. D. 360 
 
 See Company — Director's Liability. 1 . 
 
 " Foresaid operation " - 8 App. Cas. 833" 
 
 See Scotch Law — ^Mine. 2. 
 
 " Forfeited " - 30 Ch. D. 119 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 5. 
 
 " Formal defect or irregularity " 25 Ch. D. 112 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Act op Bankruptcy. 
 19. 
 
 "Forthwith" 19 Ch. D, 169 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Appeal. 6. 
 
 " Free from all deductions " - 29 Ch, D, 697 • 
 
 See Settlement — Construction. 1. 
 
 " Free from all deductions " 21 Ch. D. 105 
 
 See Will — Words. 2. 
 
 " Free from capture and seizure " 9 ft. B. D. 
 
 [463; 10 ft. B. D. 432; 8 App. Cas, 393 
 See Insurance, Marine — Policy. 3, 4. • 
 
 " Free of legacy duty " - 26 Ch. D, 638 
 
 See Will — Words. 15. 
 
 " Free on board " - - 12 ft. B. D. 564 r 
 
 [10 App, Cas, 263 
 See Insurance, Marine — Insurable 
 Interest. 
 
 "Freight and all other conditions as per 
 
 charterparty " - 13 ft, B, D. 317 . 
 
 See Ship — Charterparty. 7. 
 
 " Frequenting " - - 14 ft. B, D, 92 
 
 See Vagrant Acts. 1. 
 
 " From and after the decease of my wife." 
 
 5ee Will — Vesting. 1. [7 App. Cas, 192 
 
 " Fronting, adjoining, or abutting " 
 
 [14 ft, B. D. 849 
 See Local Government — Streets, 7. 
 
 " Frost preventing loading " 11 ft. B. D. 643 ; 
 
 [9 App. Cas, 470 
 See Ship — Charterparty. 9. 
 
 " Furniture, goods, and chattels " 30 Ch, D, 92. 
 
 See Will— Words. 9. 
 
 " General line of buildings" 13 ft. B, D. 878 ; 
 
 [10 App, Cas. 229 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 2. 
 
 " Good cause " - 13 ft, B, D, 263 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Costs. 
 50. 
 
 " Grant " 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 " Gross sum assessed to the poor-rate " 
 
 [15 ft. B. D. 637 
 See Waterworks Company — Water- 
 rate. 5. 
 
 " Half-year's notice " - 15 ft, B, D, 501 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^Yearly 
 Tenant. 
 
( 1715 ) 
 
 DiaEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1716 ) 
 
 WORDS — continued. 
 
 « Heading " _ _ 26 Ch. D. 288 
 
 See Tbade-maek — Eegisteation. 4. 
 
 " Heirs " - 25 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Will — Woeds. 10. 
 
 - " Heirs and successors " - 8 App. Cas. 751 
 
 See CoLOKiAii Law — Steaits Settle- 
 ments. 2. 
 
 "Held shares" - 21 Ch. D. 849 
 
 See Company — Winding-up Oedee. 13. 
 
 " House " - 27 Ch. D. 536 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsoet 
 
 POWEES. 7. 
 
 " Husband " _ _ 22 Ch. D. 619 
 
 See Will — Woeds. 11. 
 
 " In their present state " 30 Ch. D. 60 
 
 See Will — Speaking eeom Death. 3. 
 
 " Incapable to act " 22 Ch. D. 633 
 
 See Teustee Acts — New Teustees. 2. 
 
 " Income " - 6 App. Cas. 373 
 
 See Colonial Law — Canada — New 
 Beunswiok. 
 
 ■ " Income " 17 Ch. B. 70 ; 21 Ch. D. 85 ; 
 
 [14 Q. B. D. 301 
 See Bankeuptoy — Assets. 12, 13, 14. 
 
 - " Injury to property " - 10 ft. B. D. 71 
 
 See Peactioe — Supeeme Court — Costs. 
 29. 
 
 ' " Injuriously affected " 14 ft. B. D. 747, 753 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compensa- 
 tion. 2, 3. 
 
 ' " Interlocutory order 6 ft, B. D. 75 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Couet — Ee- 
 
 CEITEE. 2. 
 
 " Issue " - 12 ft. B. D. 606 
 
 See Bankee — Notes. 
 
 " Issue and their heirs " - 9 ft. B. D. 643 
 
 See Will — Estate in Eealtt. 3. 
 
 ■ " Just and equitable " 20 Ch. D. 151, 169 
 
 See Company — Windinq-up Order. 4, 5. 
 
 " Land " 22 Ch. D. 677 ; 9 App. Cas. 787 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsoby 
 Powers. 3. 
 
 " Land burdened with onerous covenants " 
 
 [14 ft. B. S. 956 
 See Bankeuptoy — ^Disclaimee. 19. 
 
 "Loading" - - - 9 P. D. 85 
 
 See Ship — Pilot. 2. 
 
 ■ " Lodger " - 9 ft. B. D. 246 ; 12 ft. B. D. 4 ; 
 
 [13 ft. B. D. 179 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lodgee. 
 1, 2, 3. 
 
 ' " Material facts not brought before the Court " 
 
 [9 P. D. 218 
 See Peaotice — Divoeoe — Inteevention. 
 
 " Matter in question in the action " 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 363 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Court — Pro- 
 duction of Documents. 2. 
 
 "Means to pay" - 9 ft. B. D. 178; 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 697 
 bee Arrest — Debtors Act. 4, 5. 
 
 "Milk" - - - 14Q, B. D. 193 
 
 See Adulteration. 2. 
 
 'WO'S.'Di— continued. 
 
 " Mistake " - - 15 ft, B. D. 461 
 
 See Paellament — Feanchjbe. 5. 
 " Moderate speed " 9 P. D. H4, 134 
 
 See Ship— Navigation. 15, 16. 
 —— " Molestation " - - 14 ft. B. D. 792 
 
 See Husband and Wipe — Separation 
 Deed. 3. 
 " Money " - - - 28 Ch. D. 464 
 
 See Charity — Gift to. 1. 
 
 "Money"- - 6 P.D.203; 7 P. D. 65 
 
 See Will — Eesiduary Gift. 5, 6. 
 
 " Money of which I am possessed " 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 154 
 
 See Will — Eesiduaey Gift. 4. 
 " Money value " 29 Ch. D. 1007, 1009, n. 
 
 See Leasehold — Long Terms. 1, 2. 
 " Mutual credits and dealings." 
 
 See Cases under Bankeuptcy— Mutual 
 Dealings. 
 " My own heirs whatsoever " 7 App. Cas. 713 
 
 See Scotch Law — Entail. 
 
 "Nature, substance, and quality" 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 193, 845 
 
 See Adulteeation. 2, 3. 
 "New street" 21 Ch. D. 621 ; 8 App. Cas. 798 
 
 See Local Goyeenment — Streets. 4. 
 " Now paid " - - 14 ft. B. D. 43 
 
 See Bill op Sale — ^Fobmalities. 13. 
 
 " Nuisance or injurious to health " 
 
 [8 ft. B. D. 97 ; 10 ft. B. D. 138 
 
 See Local Goyeenment — OpptNCES. 1,3. 
 
 - " Objection made " 
 See Inn — ^Licence. 
 
 9. 
 
 14 ft. B. S. 584 
 10 ft. B. D. 44 
 
 " Open and public place " 
 
 See Vageant Acts. 2. 
 "Order" - - - 16 ft. B. D. 76 
 
 See Peaotice — Supeeme Court — 
 Appeal. 4. 
 
 " Ordinary outgoings " - 28 Ch. D. 431 
 
 See Will — ^Words. 14. 
 " Owner " - - 13 ft. B. D. 211 
 
 See Meteopolis — Management Acts. 13. 
 " Owner " - - 7 ft. B. L. 160 
 
 See Ship — Meechant Shipping Acts. 3. 
 " Parish " - - - 6 ft. B. D. 676 
 
 See PooE Law — Settlement. 13. 
 "Party" - - 16ft.B.D.54 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Examination. 1. 
 " Party " - - n q. b, j). 251 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Inter- 
 rogatories. 4. 
 
 " Party grieved " - - 7 ft. B. D. 468 
 
 See Penal Action. 1. 
 
 "^T'n!, ~ - - 15 ft. B.D. 662 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 14. 
 
 " Payable " - 17 qi. d. 836 
 
 See Will — Vesting. 6. 
 
 " ^T'^o " 10 App. Cas. 422 
 
 bee bETTLEMENT — CONSTRUCTION. 9. 
 
 " Pending action " - 28 Ch. D. 148 
 
 See Patent — ^Amendment. 2. 
 
( 1717 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1718 ) 
 
 VrO'RliS— continued. 
 
 " Pending matter " - 20 Ch. D. 637 
 
 See Insolvency. 
 
 " Person aggrieved" - 16 Ch, D. 497 
 
 See Bankhuptoy — Eeceivee. 2. 
 
 " Person aggrieved " - 17 Ch. D. 518 
 
 See Bankeitptcy — Tbustee. 7. 
 
 " Person aggrieved " - 25 Ch. D. 194 ; 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 48 
 See Trabe-makk — Eegisteation. 14, 15. 
 
 " Person entitled to the income of land" 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 736 
 See Settled Land Act — Definitions. 4. 
 
 " Place used for betting " 8 Q. B. D. 275 ; 
 
 [13a.B.D. 377; 14 ft. B.D. 588 
 See Gaming. 4, 6, 7. 
 
 " Pleading " - 23 Ch. D. 204 
 
 See Pbactioe — Scpeeme Court — Motion 
 FOB Judgment. 2. 
 
 " Port " -■ 9 ft. B, D. 679 ; 15 ft. B. D. 580 
 
 See Ship — Chaetebpaett. 3, 4. 
 
 "Practising" - - 8 ft. B. D. 434 
 
 See SoLicrroE — Unqualified. 3. 
 
 " Present right to receive " 29 Ch. D. 964 
 
 See Limitations, Statute of — Legacy. 
 
 " Pretenced rights or titles " 15 ft. B. D. 491 
 
 See Eight of Entby. 1. 
 
 " Proceed to sea " - 7 P. D. 217 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 6. 
 
 " Professional charges " 27 Ch. D. 584 
 
 See SoLiciTOB — Bill of Costs. 16. 
 
 " Profits or gains " 14 ft. B. D. 239; 10 App. 
 
 /See Ebvenue — Income Tax. 9. [Cas. 438 
 
 "Property" - - 21 Ch. D. 85 
 
 See Bankbuptoy — Assets. 13. 
 
 "Property " - 14 ft. B. D. 966 
 
 See Bankeuptoy — Disolaimee. 19. 
 
 " Property recovered or preserved." 
 
 See Cases under Solioitoe — ^Libn. 1 — 7. 
 
 • " Provided the funds permit " 24 Ch. D. 421 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas, 33 
 See Building Society. 15. 
 
 • " Public purposes " - - 7 ft. B. D. 505 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Supply of 
 Water. 5. 
 
 "Publisher" - ■, 23 Ch. D. 727 
 
 See Copyright — ^Books. 3. 
 
 " Pure and wholesome water " 12 ft. B. D. 443 
 
 See Wateewoeks Company — Supply of 
 Watbe. 6. 
 
 : " Eailway " _ _ 10 ft. B, D. 358 
 
 See Master and Servant — Master's 
 Liability. 19. 
 
 " Eailway company " - 26 Ch. D. 527 
 
 See Company — UKeegisteeed Company. 
 9. 
 
 ' " Eash and hazardous speculations " 
 
 [14 ft, B, S. 936 
 See Bankeuptoy — ^Discharge. 4. 
 
 r " Eeal estate wheresoever situate " 
 
 See Will— Words. 16. [28 Ch. D. 66 
 
 • " Eeal or personal property" 8 ft. B. D. 283 
 
 See Criminal Law — Malicious Injury 
 Prop e bty. 
 
 "WORDS— continued. 
 — — " Eeal security ' 
 
 See Will — Words. 17. 
 
 30 Ch, D, 227 
 
 " Eesiduary legatee " - 16 Ch. D. 698 
 
 See Will — Eesiduary Gift. 1. 
 
 ■ " Eeveraion expectant " 
 See Prescription. 
 
 15 ft, B, D. 629 
 
 " Eight acquired or accrued " 15 ft. B. D, 467 
 
 See Solicitor — CERTiFioATEi 
 
 "Eight occupied and enjoyed" 86 Ch, S,434 
 
 See Way. 2. 
 
 " Safe port or as near thereunto as she can 
 
 safely get" - _ -- 6 P. D. 68 
 
 See Ship — Charterparty. 16. 
 
 " Salary or income " - 17 Ch, D, 70 ; 
 
 [21 Ch, D, 85 ; 14 ft. B, D, 301 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 12, 13, 14. 
 
 8 ft, B, B. 373 
 
 ■ Sale by retail " - 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 2. 
 
 'Second cousins " - 
 See Will — Words. 
 
 5,6. 
 
 ■ •' Seised jointly " 
 
 17 Ch. D. 262 ; 
 [19 Ch. D. 201 
 
 27 Ch, D, 359 
 
 See Teustbe Acts — Vesting Oedebs 3. 
 
 " Seised or possessed or entitled to " 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 200 
 See Settlement — Futuee Peopeety. 1. 
 
 "SeUer"' 
 
 i Pharmacy Acts. 
 
 8 ft. B, D, 397. 
 
 " Servant or other person" 6 ft. B, D, 530, 
 
 [673 ; 14 ft, B, B, 838 
 
 See Ebvenue — House Duty. 8, 4, 5. 
 
 " Services incidental to the duty or business 
 
 of a carrier " - 15 ft. B. D. 505 
 
 See Eailway Company — ^Eailways Ee- 
 gulation Acts. 4. 
 
 " Settlement of property " 15 ft. B. D. 682 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Void Settlement. 2. 
 
 "Sewer" - 28 Ch. D. 283 
 
 See Local Goveenment — SbwiJes. 2. 
 
 " ShaU be bom in my lifetime " 6 App. Cas- 
 
 See Will — -Estate in Eealty. I. [471 
 
 " Shall become entitled " - 9 ft. B. D, 337 ; 
 
 [10 App. Cas. 1 
 
 See Settlement— P'uture Property. 6. 
 
 " Sheriff" - - - 15 ft. B. D. 48 
 
 See Bankeuptcy^Peotected Teansao- 
 
 TION. 6. 
 
 " Ship or boat in distress on shore of sea or 
 
 • tidal water" - 7 P. D. 126 
 
 See Ship — Salvage. 8. 
 "Site" - - - 14ft. B,D, 479 
 
 See Metropolis — Building Acts. 3. 
 " Situate in parish of D." - 30 Ch. D. 298 
 
 See Advowson. 1. 
 " Six months' notice ' 
 
 See Landlord and 
 Tenant. 
 " Sole and unmarried ' 
 
 See Will — Separate Use. 1. 
 " Sole trustee " - - 21 Ch. D. 846 
 
 See Trustee Acts — Vesting Orders. 12. 
 
 15 ft. B. D. 501 
 
 Tenant — ^Yearly 
 
 24 Ch, S. 703 
 
( 1719 ) 
 
 DIGEST OP CASES. 
 
 ( 1720 ) 
 
 WOBSS — continued. 
 
 " Sole use and disposal" - 17 Cli. D. 794 
 
 See Win — Separate Use. 2. 
 
 " SolemnlT and publicly made and subscribed" 
 
 [14 ft. B. D. 667 
 See Pakliament — ^Election. 3. 
 
 "Stationary" - - - 9 P. D. 164 
 
 See Ship — Navigation. 10. 
 
 "Street" - - - 10Q.B.D.394; 
 
 [13 Q. B. D. 184 ; 10 App. Cas. 364 
 
 See Local Govebnment — Streets. 2, 
 10. 
 " Street " 13 Q. B. D. 904 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 7. 
 
 " Subject as aforesaid " - 15 Q. B. D. 70 
 
 See Highway — Repair. 7. 
 
 " Subsequent action " 8 Q. B. D. 380 
 
 See Husband and "Wipe — Married Wo- 
 men's Phopertt Acts. 3. 
 
 " Successors " - 26 Ch. D. 538 
 
 See Will — Hebbloom. 8. 
 
 • " Suffering judicial proceedings " 
 
 [25 Ch. D. 311 
 See Bankruptcy — Fraudulent Pre- 
 ference. 6. 
 
 " Sufficient cause " - 15 Q. B. D. 399 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Eeoeiver. 8. 
 
 " Sum previously offered " 12 Q. B. S. 481 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Costs. 7. 
 
 " Sunday" - 11 Q. B. D. 71 
 
 See Inn — Offences. 6. 
 
 " Surviving " — " Survivor " 19 Ch. D. 186 ; 
 
 See Will— SuKviTOK. 1, 2. [29 Ch. D. 839 
 
 " Survivor " - - 18 Ch. D. 213 
 
 See Evidence — Presumption. 
 
 " Take " 22 Ch. D. 142 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act — Compulsory 
 Powers. 1. 
 
 ' Taking land " 
 
 See Lands Clauses Act- 
 
 28 Ch. D. 237 
 
 -Costs. 6. 
 
 " Temperate " - 9 App. Cas. 671 
 
 See Insurance, Life — Policy. 3. 
 
 " Title to be approved by my solicitor " 
 
 See Condition. 2. [9 Q. B. D. 276 
 
 " Tolls " - - 9 ft. B. D. 744 
 
 See Eailway Company — Traffic Man- 
 agement. 3. 
 
 " Trade or business " - 14 Q B. D. 950 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 9. 
 
 " Trade or business " — • Covenant not to 
 
 exercise 27 Ch. D. 71, 81, n. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Lease. 
 4,5.- 
 " Trader " - H Q. B. D. 241 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Assets. 5. 
 " Tributary " - 10 Q. B. D. 131 
 
 See Fishery Acts. 1. 
 " True copy " - - 21 Ch. D. 871 
 
 See Bankruptcy— Order and Disposi- 
 tion. 1. 
 
 " Unliquidated damages " 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Proof. 
 
 WOBBS — continued. 
 
 " Uncertain rent " 21 Ch. D. 440 
 
 See Bankruptcy — ^Distress. 4. 
 
 " Union " - - 6 ft. B. D. 576 
 
 iSee Poor Law — Settlement. 13. 
 
 17 Ch. D. 123 
 22. 
 
 -— " Unmarried " 16 Ch. D. 716 ; 26 Ch. D. 575 
 ,See Will— Words. 18, 19. 
 
 " Until further order " 22 Ch. D. 182 
 
 See Estoppel — Judgment. 5. 
 
 " Visible means " - 13 Q. B. D. 835 
 
 See County Court — Practice. 4. 
 
 " Voids " - 11 ft. B. p. 19* 
 
 See Waterworks Company — Water- 
 rate. 2. 
 
 " Widow and unmarried " 25 Ch. D. 68& 
 
 See Will — Condition. 11. 
 
 "Workman" 6 Q. B. D. 182; 13 ft. B.D. 618" 
 
 See Master and Servant — ^Remedies. 
 2,3. 
 
 " Wrongful act or default " - 7 P. D. 207 
 
 See Ship — ^Merchant Shipping Acts. 2. 
 
 WOEDS OF LIMITATION. 
 
 See Deed — Statutes. 
 
 WOEKMAN— Wages— Preferential debt 
 
 [26 Ch. D. 693 
 See Bankbuptoy — Preferential Debt. 
 
 WOEKING OF MINE - 7 App. Cas. 4a 
 
 See Mine — Working. 2. 
 
 Consent to remove pillars 23 Ch. D. 58$ 
 
 See Settlement — Powers. 1. 
 
 WEECK— Saleby master 16 Ch. D. 474 
 
 See Ship — Master. 1. 
 
 WEECK COMMISSIONEES— Appeal 
 
 [6P. D. 182; 7P. D. 194,207 
 
 See Ship — Merchant Shipping Acts. 2, 
 5,8. 
 
 WEIT — Authority to issue 26 Ch. D. 169 
 
 See Solicitor — Retainer. 
 
 De contumace capiendo — Significavit 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 273 ; 6 App. Cas. 65T 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 
 Fieri facias — ^Wrongful seizure 21 Ch. D. 69 ; 
 
 See Sheriff. 3, 4. [9 ft. B. D. 340 
 In personam — Incorrect address of Defen- 
 dant 7P. D. 57 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Servioe. 2. 
 
 Indorsement on — Motions on admissions 
 
 [23 Ch. D. 204 
 &e Practice — Supreme Court — Motion? 
 
 FOR JUDG5IEXT. 2. 
 
 Indorsement — Time of making 16 Ch. D. 734 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Writ; 
 1. 
 
 Inquiry as to lunacy — Trial by judge of High 
 
 Court - 27 Ch. D. 116 
 
 See Lunatic — Inquisith.n. 2. 
 
 Of possession - 22 Ch. D. 281 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Wkit 
 op Possession. 
 
( 1721 ) 
 
 DIGEST OF CASES. 
 
 ( 1722 ) 
 
 yi'&Ti—Bontinued. 
 — — Service. 
 
 See Cases under Practice — Stipeeme 
 Court — Service. 
 
 Service — Admiralty — Marshal 10 P. D. 62 
 
 See Practice — Admiralty — Service. S. 
 
 — — Service on partnership — Appearance of one 
 member only - 14 Q. B. D. 103 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Judg- 
 ment. 2. 
 
 ' Special indorsement — Power to sign final 
 
 judgment under Order xiv. — ^Foreign 
 judgment - 13 Q. B. D. 302 
 
 See Practice — Supreme Court — Whit 
 specially indorsed. 2. 
 
 "WRIT— continued. 
 
 Time of taking effect — Fraction of day 
 
 [8 Q, B. D, 63 
 See Practice — Supreme Couet — Writ. 
 2. 
 
 WEITTEN AGEEEMENT— Agency— Scotch law 
 
 [6 App. Cas. 340 
 See Scotch Law — Landlord and 
 Tenant. 
 
 WEITTEN OBSEB — Police Magistrate 
 
 [27 Ch. D. 362 
 
 See Metropolis — Management Acts. 3. 
 
 ■WRONGFTTL SEIZTTEE — Fieri facias 
 
 [21 Ch. D. 69 ; 9 Q. B. S. 340 
 
 See Sheriff. 3, 4. 
 
 Y. 
 
 YEABLY BESTS — Administration of estate- 
 Conversion - - 24 Ch. D. 643 
 See Executor — Administration. 6. 
 
 YEABLY TENANT— Assignment 9 Q. B. D. 366 
 See Landlord and Tenant — Assign- 
 ment. 1. 
 
 Distress— Bankruptcy - 16 Ch, D, 274 
 
 See Bankruptcy — Distress 3. 
 
 Notice to quit. 
 
 See Landlord and Tenant — ^Yearly 
 Tenant — Statutes. 
 
 YEAES or DISCEETION — Infant— Access to 
 mother - 24 Ch. D. 317 
 
 See Infant — Education. 1. 
 
 YOBK — Province of — Jurisdiction 
 
 [7 ft. B. D. 273 ; 6 App. Cas. 657 
 
 See Practice — Ecclesiastical — Con- 
 tempt. 2. 
 
 YOEESHIEE BEOISTEY - 26 Ch. D. 601 
 
 See Vendor and Purchaser — Lien. 2. 
 
 • Act of 1884. 
 
 See Registry Acts- 
 
 -Staiutes. 
 
 YOUNGEE SON— Becoming eldest 26 Ch, D. 363 
 See Settlement — Construction. 2. 
 
 YOUNGEST SON — Customary heir — Copyholds 
 
 See Copyhold— Custom, 2. [18 Ch, D, 165 
 
 z. 
 
 ZANZIBAB — Order in Council. See Jurisdiction — Gazette. 
 
LOXDOK : 
 
 rEINTED BY WILLIAJI CLOWES AND SONf, LIMITED, 
 
 .STAUfOBD STBEET AHD CHABING CBOSS,