« AnteriorContinuar »
No. 52, NEW SERIES.-Vol. I.
JANUARY 5, 1856.
Price, with Supplement, 28.
LONDON AND WESTMINSTER BANK.
PAID-UP CAPITAL, £1,000,000.
THE RIGHT HON. THE LORD MAYOR.
THOMAS FARNCOMB, Esq., Ald.
CHARLES GIBBES, Esq.
WILLIAM HAIGH, Esq.
GEORGE HANSON, Esq.
JOHN LEWIS RICARDO, Esq., M.P.
JOHN STEWART, Esq.
JOSHUA WALKER, Esq.
W. T. HENDERSON, Manager. WESTMINSTER BRANCH.
1, St. James's-square .....
J. W. WELDOX, Manager. BLOOMSBURY BRANCH .214, High Holborn
WILLIAM EwIxGS, Manager. SOUTHWARK BRANCH.. 3, Wellington-street, Borough
EDWARD KINGSFORD, Manager. EASTERN BRANCH. 87, High-street, Whitechapel
W. D. ASPERNE, Manager. ST. MARYLEBONE BRANCH. 4, Stratford-place, Oxford-street..
G. M. MITCHELL, Manager. TEMPLE BAR BRANCH .217, Strand
CHARLES WARD, Manager. Current Accounts are received on the same principles as those observed by the London Bankers. No Christmas Boxes or other gratuities are allowed to be taken by the Officers of the Bank. The Bank also takes the Agency of Joint-stock Banks, Private Bankers, and other parties residing at a distance. Cheques on Penny Stamps may be drawn from any place in the United Kingdom.
Strong Rooms are provided for the security of Deeds and other property lodged by the Customers of the Bank.
Sums from 101. to 1000l. are received on Deposit, at a rate of interest to be fixed at the time, and they are repayable upon demand, without Dotice. If withdrawn within a month no interest is allowed.
Sums of 10001. and upwards are also received on Deposit Receipts, upon such terms as may be agreed upon, with regard to the rate of interest, and the time of repayment. Parties may lodge money upon an Interest Account who have no Current Account, and those who have Current Accounts may transfer any portion of their Balance to an Interest Account.
The Rate of Interest allowed at present on Deposits of 5001. and upwards is Five per Cent. London, Nov. 9, 1855.
J. W. GILBART, General Manager. LAW.-A Gentleman, in the fourth year of his articles,
Just published, price 18., and web versed in Conveyancing, wishes for an ASSIGNMENT THE VALIDITY of a BEQUEST of MONEY to be to a respectable Firm in Town. References unexceptionable. Apply, EXPENDED in ERECTING BUILDINGS for a CHARITY, "Lex," Post Office, Shrewsbury.
upon a site to be proeured from other sources, considered with reference
to the Case of Trye v. The Corporation of Gloucester. By JOHN LAW.-WANTED, by a Gentleman, admitted in Michael. DARLING, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. mas Terın last, a SITUATION as CHANCERY, or CHANCERY
Stevens & Norton, 26, Bell-yard, Lincoln's-inn. 220 COXSEYANCING, CLERK, under the direction of the Principal; € as Assistant Chancery and Conveyancing Clerk in an Office of ex
Recently published, in 8vo., price 7s. 6d. boards, tensive practice. Address, F. R., Law Times Office, 29, Essex-street, A TREATISE on the ADMINISTRATION OF TRUST Sirand.
FUNDS UNDER the TRUSTEE RELIEF ACT. With an WANTED, in a Solicitor's Office in the West of England, Appendix, containing the Trustee Relief Act, the Act for the further where the Practice is principally Conveyancing, Management of
Relief of Trustees, the General Orders, and Forms of Proceedings. By
JOHN DARLING, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. Property, and Family Affairs, an experienced MANAGING CLERK. He must be a good conveyancer, have a knowledge of the Country Act) are very numerous, and justify a formal treatise in which the
“ The decisions already accumulated upon it (the Trustee Relief Practice of Equity and Common Law, and will be expected to see Clients in the occasional absence of the Principals. A Gentleman who
general results may be collected and classified. This good service Mr. has not been admitted would be preferred, though this condition would
Darling has performed with great ability, shewing himself skilful in the not be insisted on with one who would look to the engagement as per
art of discovering the points really decided, and he has produced a vomanent. Address, by letter, stating terms, qualifications, and references,
lume which will be very servieeable to practitioners in the Chancery
Courts."--Law Times. to C. S., Messrs. Vizard & Garnham, 55, Lincoln's-inn-fields.
“A very carefully-written work on the important enactments above LAW LECTURES at the INCORPORATED LAW specified." - Stevemagazioria
Stevens & Norton, 26, Bell-yard, Lincoln's-inn. sumed by Mr. HUMPHRY, on Equity and Bankruptcy, Monday, Jan. 7. LAW FIRE INSURANCE SOCIETY:-Offices, Nos. 5 Mr. BAGGALLAY, on Conveyancing, Friday, Jan. 11.
and 6, Chancery-lane, London.-Subscribed Capita!, £5,000,000. Mr. KERR, on Common Law and Criminal Law, Monday, Jan. 14.
The Right Hon. the Earl of Devon.
The Right Hon. thc Lord Chief Baron.
The Right Hon. Sir J. L. Knight Bruce, Lord Justice.
The Right Hon. Sir John Dodson, Dean of the Arches, &c. Sanımıry of Acts of last Session-Commercial and General In- William Baker, Esq., late Master in Chancery. for:dation-County Courts-Law-Banking-Police-Post Office-Par- Richard Richards, Esq., Master in Chancery. liamentary-Stamp Duties--Taxes; and a variety of other information.
Insurances expiring at Christmas should be renewed within fifteen Revised to October 20, 1855.
days thereafter, at the Offices the Society, or with any of its Agents PRICES.
throughout the country. Ruled with blue lines, with or without Money Columns, 8vo. edi
This Society holds itself responsible under the Fire Policy for any dation, containing a week at an opening
mage done by explosion of gas. E. BLAKE BEAL, Secretary. Ruled with blue lines, containing half a page for each day
4 0 Raled with blue lines, containing a page for each day
THE LAW LIBRARY OF S. C. DENISON, ESQ. Diary and Calendar only, cloth.
16 MR. HODGSON will SELL by AUCTION, at his New London: J. Sullivan, 22, Chancery-lane.
Rooms, the corner of Fleet-street and Chancery-lane, on FRI. This day is published, in 8vo., pp. 1142, price 11. 11s. 6d. in cloth,
DAY, Jan. 11, at half-past 12, the valuable LAW LIBRARY of S. C.
Denison, Esq., containing a complete Set of Ruff head's Statutes at BROOM'S COMMENTARIES. -COMMENTARIES on Large, from Magna Charta, to the present time, 40 vols.; Howell's
the COMMON LAW, designed as Introductory to its Study. By State Trials, 34 vols.; Harrison's Digest, 1756 to 1843, 4 vols.; Bacon's HERBERT BROOM, M. A., Barrister at Law, Reader in Common Abridgment, 8 vols.; Comyn's Digest, 8 vols.; Viner's Abridgment, Lax to the Inns of Court, Author of " A Selection of Legal Maxims," &c. 80 pols.; and many other useful Books of Reference. Also a Series of
Wm. Maxwell, 32, Bell-yard, Lincoln's-inn, London; J. H. Parker & the Common-law Reports, in good condition.
To be viewed, and catalogues sent on application,
GAZETTES.-Friday, Dec. 28.
tioner, Jan. 21 at 1, London.-- James Howarth, Ashton.
under-Lyne, Lancashire, linendraper, Jan. 18 at 12, Man: BANKRUPTS.
chester. - Thomas Deans, Blackburn, Lancashire, draper JOSEPH FARMAN, Portobello-terrace, Notting-bill, builder, 1 Feb, 1 at 12, Manchester.-Francis Robinson, Masbrough, Jan. 10 at half-past 11, and Feb. 4 at 12, London: Off. i Yorkshire, contractor, Jan. 19 at 10, Sheffield.-Willian Ass. Johnson ; Sol. Woodbridge, 8, Clifford's-inn.- Pet. f. Thomas Staniforth, Sheffield, cutlery manufacturer, Jan. 19 Dec. 22.
at 10, Sheffield.-George Milnes, Sheffield, brickmaker, Jan. GEORGE FREDERIC CRAGGS, Cobourg-row, Old Kent-19. at 10, Sheffield.- James Davies, Cradley-heath, Stafford. road, late of Basinghall-street, wholesale fancy stationer, shire, plumber, Jan. 24 at half-past 12, Birmingham.
Jan. 10 at 1, and Feb. 5 at 1, London : Off. Ass. Edwards; To be granted, unless an Appeal be duly entered. Sol. Young. 12, Warwick-square.—Pet. f. Dec. 27.
Henry William Brown, St. Albans, Hertfordshire, innMOSS DAVIDS, Middle-row, Holborn, milliner, Jan. 8 at keeper.--Henry Hill, High-street, Hampstead, builder.
half-past 2, and Feb. 12 at 12, London: Off. Ass. Lee; Elizabeth Mary Muller, Castle-street East, Oxford-street, Sol. Moss, 23, Moorgate-street.- Pet. f. Dec. 24.
picture dealer.-William Hackett, Oxford, gas engineer.JOHN GRIMWOOD PERKINS, Warnford-court, Throg- John Minter, Orchard-crescent, Caledonian-road, Islington, morton-street, stockbroker, (lately trading with John Grim. ship owner.--- Israel Cowan and Mark Braham, High-street, wood Perkins the elder, deceased, under the firm of J. Aldgate, waterproof clothing manufacturers. — John Field, G. Perkins & Son), Jan. 11 at half-past 12, and Feb. 8 at 1, Burnham, Westgate, Norfolk, draper.-Wm. Henry Good London : Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sol. Chidley, 19, Gresham- burn Mason, Brighton, printseller. -John Fairbrother, Hertstreet.-Pet. f. Dec. 24.
ford, brewer. - Wm. Canute Bodley, Exeter, iron founder.WILLIAM EDMONDS, Kidderminster, hosier, Jan. 11 Wm. Clarke, Altrincham, Cheshire, joiner.—Thomas Allen
and Feb. 1 at 11, Birmingham : Off. Ass. Bittleston ; Sols. and Thomas Cuthbert Cockson, Manchester, Italian ware. Boycott, Kidderminster; Motteram & Knight, Birming- housemen.
ham.-Pet. d. Dec. 22. THOMAS JOHNS, Dowlais, Merthyr Tydvil, Glamorgan.
TUESDAY, Jan. 1. shire, shopkeeper, Jan. 14 and Feb. 12 at 11, Bristol : off. Ass. Acraman; Sols. Henderson & Co., Bristol ; Pet. f.
BANKRUPTS. Dec. 15.
WILLIAM ELSAM, Heyford and Rugbrook, NorthamptonMEETINGS.
shire, ironstone master, (lately trading with Henry Boothby Thomas Spence, Maryland Point, Stratford, Essex, market Elsam at Bombay, and lately also at Bishopsgate-street gardener, Jan. 2 at half-past 2, London, pr. d.-John rner, Within, as merchants, under the firm of William & Henry Uckfield, Sussex, grocer, Jan. 16 at 2, London, pr. d.- John Elsam ; lately also in partnership with H. B. Elsam and Bake, Cambridge-terrace, Barnsbury-park, and Caledonian- with Edward Elsam, at Liverpool, as merchants, under the road, Islington, contractor, Jan. 9 at 12, London, last ex.- firm of Elsam, Brothers; also late in partnership with W. Taylor, Gloucester, hardware dealer, Jan. 24 at 11, Bristol, William Elsam, since deceased, as colour manufacturers, at aud. ac. -J. Rushton, Carlisle, plasterer, Jan. 15 at half-past Stanhope-wharf, Camden-town), Jan. 11 at 1, and Feb. 15 11, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, aud. ac. - Thomas Lumsden, South at 11, London: Off. Ass. Nicholson ; Sols. Lawrance & Co., Shields, shipbuilder, Jan. 18 at 1, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, aud. 14, Old Jewry-chambers.—Pet. f. Dec. 29. ac.; Jan. 22 at 11, div.-Joseph Grave, Manchester, ware. ROWLAND HILL BLACKER, Ludgate-street, importer houseman, Jan. 8 at 12, Manchester, aud. ac.—Thos. Hunter, of foreign silk goods, Jan. 11 at ll, and Feb. 8 at 12, Liverpool, joiner, Jan. 9 at 11, Liverpool, aud. ac.- John London: Off. Ass. Bell; Sols. Mardon & Prichard, NewBatters, Tokenhouse-yard, shipowner, Jan. 22 at 12, London, gate-street. - Pet. f. Dec. 21. div.-Wm. Grant, Brighton, newsvender, Jan. 18 at half-past| LEONARD LAIDMAN, Chancery-lane, and Wentworth. 1, London, div.- Richard Wm. Glode Douglass, Woodcote, lodge, Coborn New-road, Bow, law stationer, Jan. 10 at stage-coach proprietor, Jan. 18 at half-past 11, London, div. hall-past 12, and Feb. 14 at 12, London : Of. Ass. Bell; - Charles Kelly, High-street, Kensington, and Baker-street, Sols. Philpot & Greenhill, 49, Gracechurch-street.—Pet. f. Portman-square, auctioneer, Jan. 18 at half.past 12, London, Dec. 29. div.-Wm. Batley, Northampton, engineer, Jan. 18 at 1, Lon. WILLIAM WIGGINS, Hawley Mills, near Dartford, Kent, don, div.--Israel Cowan and Mark Braham, Aldgate High- and St. Paul's Churchyard, London, paper manufacturer, street, waterproof clothing manufacturers, Jan. 18 at half-past Jan. 11 at 2, and Feb. 15 at 1, London: Off. Ass. Whit11, London, div.-Jas. Purdy and W. Thos. Purdy, King's more; Sol. Spicer, 5, Staple-inn, Holborn.-Pet. f. Dec. 27. Lynn, Norfolk, builders, Jan. 18 at 11, London, div.--Henry JAMES HARRISON, London, commission agent, Jan. 9 at Wm. Brown, St. Albans, Hertfordshire, innkeeper, Jan. 18 2, and Feb. 12 at 12, London : Off. Ass. Graham ; Sols. at half-past 11, London, div.-J. Willox, Broadway, West- Parrott & Co., Macclesfield ; Parkinson, 9, Argyll.street, minster, cheesemonger, Jan. 18 at 11, London, div.- Arthur Regent-street.---Pet. f. Dec. 26. Cooling and H. Marcham, London-wall, soap makers, Jan. 18 GEORGE WAGNER, late of North Audley-street, and now at 12, London, div.-Wm. Hackett, Oxford, gas engineer, of Bernard-street, Russell-square, auctioneer, Jan. 8 at Jan. 18 at 12, London, div.-Wm. Osler, Earl.st., Finsbury- half-past 1, and Feb. 12 at half-past 12, London: Of. Ass. square, cab proprietor, Jan. 18 at 1, London, div.-John Stansfeld; Sol. Tucker, 25, Clement's-lane, City.-Pet. f. Bronson, Liverpool, hosier, Jan. 18 at 11, Liverpool, div.- Dec. 31. Wm. Wilkinson Rawling, Samuel Rawling, and J. Rawling, WILLIAM SEAGER WHITE, Handsworth, Staffordshire, Manchester, curriers, Jan. 25 at 12, Manchester, div.-Thos. chemist, Jan. 14 and Feb. 6 at half-past 10, Birmingham : Deans, Blackburn, Lancashire, draper, Feb. 1 at 12, Manches- Of. Ass. Christie ; Sol. Robinson, Birmingham.-Pet. d. ter, div.-Thomas Younger the elder, Sunderland, builder, Dec. 29. Jan. 24 at half-past 11, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, div.-Stephen JOSEPH NOKES, Birmingham, glass cutter, Jan. 14 and Carlton, Darlington, Durham, coach manufacturer, Jan. 25 at Feb. 6 at half-past 10, Birmingham : Off. Ass. Whitmore; half-past 11, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, div. - John Augutus Sols. Smith, and East, Birmingham.-Pet. d. Dec. 29. Noel, South Shields, wine merchant, Jan. 24 at 12, Newcastle. GEORGE TAYLOR, Derby, silk manufacturer, (carrying upon-Tyne, fin. div.-Sampson Langdale, John Eyton, and on business und the style or firm of William Taylor & Masta Joscelin Cooke, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, merchants, Sons), Jan. 15 and Feb. 12 at balf-past 10, Nottingham : Jan. 24 at half-past 11, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, fin. div.- John Off. Ass. Harris ; Sols. Dannicliff, Derby : Motteram & Mills, New Bank, near Halifax, Yorkshire, ironfounder, Knight, Birmingham; Crowder & Co., London.-Pet. d. Jan. 18 at 11, Leeds, div.-Jonas Smith, Low Moor, York Dec. 19. shire, worsted spinner, Jan. 18 at 11, Leeds, div.-J. Allan BAXTER BARKER, York, innkeeper, Jan. 17 and Feb. 15 and John Sinclair Couzens, Huddersfield, woollen-cloth mer. at 11, Leeds : Off. Ass. Young; Sols. Bond & Barwick, chants, Jan. 18 at 11, Leeds, div:
Leeds.-Pet. d. and f. Dec. 31.
ISAAC FIRTH, Manchester, victualler, Jan. 11 and Feb. 1 To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on or
at 12, Manchester : Off. Ass. Hernaman ; Sols. Potter & before the Day of Meeting.
Wood, Manchester. Pet. f. Dec. 21.
CONTENTS. London Gazettes
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. Leading Article
By G. J. P. Smith and W. B. Brett, Barristers at Law. Copyright
523 Tanner 0. The South Wales Railway Company.Common-law Sittings Papers and Cause Lists for Hi.
(Railways Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, lary Term..
sect. 53-Interference with road-Conversion of Public Prosecutors..
525 road into railway-Action for special damage).. 1215
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
By W. PATERSON and W. Mills, Barristers at Law.
Grant v. Guinness.-(Bribery Act, 17 & 18 Vict. By T. EDWARDS, Barrister at Law.
c. 102, 88. 16, 31--Agent to receive election bills
-Agent for election expenses - Personal expenses Pennell v. Smith.-(Annuity deed- Return of consi
of candidate–Subscriptions to charilies)
1217 deration-53 Geo. 3, c. 141-Jurisdiction) 1213
By A. WADDILOVE, D. C. L.
In the Goods of Thomas Osborne.-(Foreign will, By H. C. Jones, Barrister at Law.
The law of the country in which the will was made Band o. Fardell.--(Duty of trustees to invest in 31.
1220 per Cents.--Discretionary power as to invest
Ewens v. Franklin.-(Will-Attestation of signament) 1214 ture of testator),
those statutes; but it has been said to be otherwise if
the company is unincorporated, or the land not vested in LONDON, JANUARY 5, 1856.
trustees. (See Bligh v. Brent, 2 Y. & C. 268—Chelsea
waterworks-Statute of Frauds; Watson v. Spratley, The tendency of modern times to free capital devoted 10 Exch. 222-Shares in a mine-Statute of Frauds; to trade from the restraints imposed by the law upon March v. The Attorney-General, 5 Beav. 433; 6 Jur., land has been most frequently exemplified in that pecu- part 1, p. 829, S.C.–Policies of insurance; Sparling v. liar property in trading corporations and joint-stock Parker, 9 Beav. 450; 10 Jur., part 1, p. 448, S.C.companies known by the name of “shares.” The Gas-light and Dock Companies-Mortmain; Hilton v. question has arisen in this form—whether shares in Giraud, Id. 459, note; 1 De G. & S. 103; 13 Jur., sach corporation or company, when land forms a part 1, p. 323, S. C.— The London Dock and West India portion of its stock, are impressed with the charac. Dock Companies-Mortmain; Walker v. Milne, 11 ter of realty, and subject to its incidents, or are to Beav. 507; 13 Jur., part 1, p. 933, S. C.-Dock and be regarded as mere rights to a certain proportion of Canal Company-Mortiain; Myers v. Perigal, 11 C. B. personalty in the shape of profits accruing from the 90; 16 Jur., part 1, p. 21; S.C., in Chancery, 2 De G., joint stock, of whatever it may consist ?
Mac., & G. 599; 17 Jur., part 1, p. 145-Joint-stock In some instances the act of Parliament incorporating bank-Mortmain; and Ashton v. Lord Langdale, 15 the company, or otherwise providing for its operations, Jur., part 1, p. 868-Banking company–Railway scrip expressly declares that the shares shall be deemed per- -Debentures-Mortmain). sonal estate, and then no further question arises upon This distinction, however, was denied by the Master the point. (Bradley v. Holdsworth, 3 M. & W. 422 ; of the Rolls in the recent case of Ware v. Cumberlege, Thompson v. Thompson, 1 Coll. 381). But, in the ab- (1 Jur., N. S., part 1, p. 745), in which that learned sence of such legislative declaration, it becomes a judge held, that shares in the Grand Junction Watermatter of some nicety to determine the exact position works Company, incorporated by statute, were within of the property in question.
the Mortmain Act. In delivering judgment his Honor In equity, realty held for the purposes of trade has said, “I think that the distinction cannot be supuniformly been treated as personalty, with reference ported which has been attempted to be drawn between to matters of title, of account, and the like, arising the cases of land held by an association of individuals among the partners themselves, or those who have and an incorporated company-namely, that the fact agreed to become partners in the undertaking. (Phil- of the incorporation alters the nature of the interest lips v. Phillips, 1 My. & K. 649; Townsend v. Devaynes, of the shareholders, and makes the holding no longer Id. 662, note (6); Fereday v. Wightwick, 1 Russ. & M. obnoxious to the provisions of the Mortmain Act. This 45; Story v. Lord Windsor, 2 Atk. 630; Jefferys v. seems to me so fine and delicate a distinction as to be Smith, 1 J. & W. 298; Crawshay v. Maule, 1 Swanst. likely to lead to serious difficulties. It is one of tire 495; Curling v. Flight, 6 Hare, 41; S. C., 2 Ph.613). greatest evils to create distinctions of this kind, while
But with regard to the Statutes of Frauds and of the best exposition of the law will be always found in Mortmain, when it has become necessary to decide laying down broad and general principles. I doubt whether shares in a trading co-partnership holding land also whether such a distinction as this can be supported as a part of its stock-in-trade are an “interest in land" by reason. The distinction is of a very singular chawithin their enactments, this distinction has been drawn racter; it is, that the members do not hold the land in in many cases, both at law and in equity-that if the their individual character, but among them in their company be incorporated, or if the land be vested in corporate character; and thus, under the shadow of a trustees for the purpose of making profit therefrom, name, it is attempted to be made out that what they and of dividing the profit among the shareholders, the really possess in their corporate name is something shares of the individual members in such company do different from what they would possess in their indivinot represent an interest in land so as to come within 1 dual character. The view which I have always taken of this class of cases is, that where the substance of perty, not obvious to the ordinary apprehension of the an undertaking is dealing with land, then, whether shareholders themselves; and therefore, whatever doubt incorporated or not, the company falls within the there might be if the question were res integra, and to provision of the statute. In the case of a banking be now decided for the first time, I am glad to think it company a distinction is fairly drawn, as its busi- is, as it appears to me, settled by decision. The case of ness does not necessarily involve a dealing with land. Myers v. Perigal had the sanction first of the Court of I express no opinion as to Myers v. Perigal, which Common Pleas, and afterwards of Lord St. Leonards in does not govern the present case. In the present state this court. That authority seems to me to decide the of the authorities, I am very much disposed to de- question of the shares now in dispute. In Myers v. cide according to my own view of the law. . Perigal there was no charter or act of Parliament*. In many cases, where testators have given their pro- The company in that case was a mere self-constiperty to charities to the exclusion of their families, tuted joint-stock company. By the terms of the deed I have been disposed to think that no public ad- of partnership they were to be at liberty to purvantage would be gained by relaxing the provisions chase land; and it was found as a fact that their of the Mortmain Act; and accordingly, where there property consisted of (amongst other things) certain has been no clause in the acts of Parliament incorpo- freehold and copyhold hereditaments, and money rating canal and water companies, providing that the due on mortgage of freehold, copyhold, and leaseshares shall be personal estate, which altogether varies hold hereditaments. There it was held, after long the case, I have held tliat the shares in such companies and able arguments in both courts, that the shares are obnoxious to the provisions of the statute, and ought were not interests in land, and therefore not within to be treated as such.” The case, however, of Ware tlie 9 Geo. 2, c. 86. By that authority I feel bound, v. Cumberlege must be taken to be overruled, and the according as it does with a great number of previous distinction between corporate and unincorporated com- cases, and with, as I believe, the general understanding panies to be again set up by the Lord Chancellor in of the community. If that be the law as to the shares Edwards v. Hall, (1 Jur., N. S., part 1, p. 1189), af- in a company not incorporated by charter or act of firming the decision of Sir W. P. Wood, V.C., that Parliament, it must be so as to the shares in companies shares in canal, waterworks, and gas companies (as which are so incorporated, and where the lands are well as Bank stock and arrears of rent) are not within held by the corporation itself, being a body, in theory the Statute of Mortmain if the companies be incor- at least, distinct from the shareholders of which it is porated, although they hold land for the purposes of composed. I do not feel called on to review or discuss their business, “It has long been settled,” said the the previous cases. I consider the question to have Lord Chancellor on this occasion, “that money se- neither the right nor the inclination to depart.”
been settled by Myers v. Perigal, from which I have cured by a mortgage of land is land within the mean- There is still a very important question remaining, ing of the statute; and on very intelligible grounds. which cannot he said to have been expressly decided, .... So as to money charged on land. . . . . But the namely, whether shares in a trading company holding question now for decision is, as to the shares in incor- land for the purposes of its trade, the company not porated companies. In these cases there is always of being incorporated, and the land not being vested in
trustees, constitute an interest in land within the necessity some land vested in the company, in the Statutes of Mortmain or the Statute of Frauds? We concerns of which the shareholder is interested; and propose to discuss this branch of the subject upon a what I have to say is, whether a share in such a future occasion. company is an estate or interest in land. These words, estate or interest in land,' are words of a very exten- Mr. Baros PARKE.—The Profession will be gratified sive import, and it is not a matter of surprise that to learn that this eminent judge has been elevated to
the from their vague generality they have given rise to some contrariety of decision. Now, I cannot disguise The Lord Chancellor has appointed Thomas Wrake
COMMISSIONER TO ADMINISTER Oaths in CHANCERY.fr myself, that if the point were now to be de- Ratcliff
, Gent., of Dean Colet llouse, Stepney, Middlecided for the first time, there are (so, at least, it seems sex, to be a London Commissioner to administer oaths to me) forcible arguments in favour of the proposition in the High Court of Chancery. that shares of this description are interests in land.. The Commissioners in Lunacy have (with the approThe share derives, in many cases, its original, if not its bation of the Lord Chancellor) appointed John Forster, only, value from the use of land. In the case of incor- Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law, to be their porated companies, if all the shares should become con
Secretary, on the resignation of R. W. S. Lutwidge,
Esq., appointed a Commissioner. centrated in one shareholder, (I put an extreme case
Death OF THE COUxty Court JUDGE FOR LEICESTERcertainly, though not an impossible one), that share- sire.- We liave to announce the death of J. D. Bur. holder would at once become absolute owner of the naby, Esq., Barrister-at-Law, and Judge of the Leiceswhole property of the company, including the land. tershire County Court. He died at Torquay on the Why, then, it may be asked, while he is the owner of 29th ult., after a few days' illness. some only of the shares, is he not the owner of a pro
* " Shares in a banking company, where the shareholders portional part of it ? On the other hand, every one were entitled to the profits only, and the real estate was vested naust feel, that in contending that such shares are in- in trustees, were beld not to be within the Mortmain Acts, terests in land, he is attributing to them a quality first by the Court of Common Pleas in Myers r. Perigal, and which no kind of authority ever understands them to v. Spratley, 10 Esch. 245). The learned baron distinguished
confirmed by Lord St. Leonards." (Per Parke, B., in Watson possess. Such a conclusion must be arrived at, if at all, this case from ordinary partnerships upon the fact of the land by refined reasoning on the legal qualities of such pro-1 being vested in trustees.
COMMON-LAW SITTINGS, IN AND AFTER that letters sent to the editor of a paper for insertion
HILARY TERM, 1856. do not become, even for the time, his property, but that the writer may, if he alter his intention, claim
Court of Queen's Bench. them back again before publication.
In Term. Another flaw, it is believed, has been found in the
LONDON. Copyright Act. If our Courts of law shall rule according to the letter of the international convention-and Ist sitting .. Monday, Jan. 14
2nd sitting.. Monday we do not see how they can avoid such ruling -a mode 3rd sitting.. Monday
1st sitting, Friday .. Jan. 18
28 2nd sitting, Friday of evasion has been discovered which will enable Ame
For undefended causes only. ricans, as well as all other aliens, to secure a copyright for their works in this country. An experiment, having
After Term. for its object to unsettle the law once more, is being Friday .... Feb. 1 | Friday ..... Feb. 15 made in the case of an Italian, Signor Ruffini, author
The Court will sit at ten o'clock every day. of “ Lorenzo Benoni” and “Doctor Antonio," two tales
The causes in the list for each of the above sitting days in written in English, and intended chiefly for circulation term, if not disposed of on those days, will be tried by adin England. Anticipating for Doctor Antonio," which journment on the days following each of such sitting days. has just appeared, a popularity equal to that which attended “ Lorenzo Benoni,” Signor. Ruffini's pub
Court of Common Pleas. lishers, Messrs. Constable & Co., of Edinburgh, were led to look into the state of the law. They found
In Term. that though the English law alone offered no sécurity, the French law of copyright, taken in connexion with Wednesday. Jan. 16 | Friday
Jan. 18 the international copyright convention between France Wednesday
25 and England, seemed to furnish it. Mr. Burke, in his
After Term. “Analysis of the Copyright Laws,” says—“ According Friday
Feb. 1 | Monday
.... Feb. Il to the la v of France, a French subject does not injure The Court sit during and after term at ten o'clock. his copyright by publishing his work first in a foreign The causes in the list for each of the above sitting days in country. It matters not where that publication has term, if not disposed of on those days, will be tried by adjourn. taken place, the copyright forth with accrues in France, ment on the days following each of such sitting days. and on the necessary deposit being effected, its infringement may be proceeded against in the French courts. Moreover, a foreigner publishing in France will enjoy
Grchequer of Pleas. the same copyright as a native, and this whether he has
In Term. preriously published in his own or any other country or not." Then comes the pleasantry. By the first article ist sitting, Monday.. Jan. 14 of the International Convention of 1852 it is provided 2nd sitting, Monday
1st sitting, Friday Jan. 18 that the “authors of works of literature and art, to 3rd sitting, Monday 28 | 2nd sitting, Friday
25 whom the laws of either of the two countries do now
Feb. 11. tories of the other of such countries, for the same term The Court will sit during and after term at ten o'clock. and to the same extent as the authors of works of the The Court will sit in Middlesex, at Nisi Prius, in term, by same nature, if published in such other country, would adjournment from day to day, until the causes entered for the therein be entitled to exercise such right; so that the re- respective Middlesex Sittings are disposed of. pnblication or piracy in either country of any work of
in each of the London Sittings during term there will be literature or art published in the other shall be dealt two days for the trial of causes. with in the same manner as the republication or piracy of a work of the same nature first published in such other country.” Here the text is clear. Publication COMMON-LAW CAUSE LISTS, HILARY TERM, in France confers copyright in that country, and the
1856. holder of such copyright in France becomes, in virtue of the convention of 1852, entitled to copyright in
Court of Queen's Bench. England! Let Signor Ruffini or Mr. Prescott first
NEW TRIALS publish in Paris; he may then come to London, and Offer Mr. Murray or Mr. Bentley a legal monopoly of REMAINING UNDETERMINED AT THE END OF THE SIT. his works. Such, at least, is the new reading of the
TINGS AFTER MICHAELMAS TERM, 1855. law which has been acted on in Signor Ruffini's case. Lond.-Reg. o. Hancock (Pt. / York-Hope v. Hayley & ors. His “Doctor Antonio" was published first in Paris (in heard)
Sterriker v. Fariell English) by Galignani, all the formalities required by Fray o. Potter Durham-Hawkins o. Turzill the French law being complied with; and thus, it is Glamorg:- Tenison v. O'Brien Northumberland-Duxfield v. supposed, no copies of the work can be published in Derby-Reg. o. Pegg
Bell Great Britain except those issued by the Edinburgh Surrey-Burton v. Tannabill Liv'pool-Rourke o. Short publishers. Of course, the convention with France Salop-Beeston o. Weate
De Oleaga 0. De
Meaurio never contemplated the admission of Americans to its Gloucester-Jeffries o. Great benefits; still, an American holding a French copy- Cornwall-Broad . Sloggatt
Western Railway Co.
Clarke right (which he can easily hold) becomes, quoad copy- Somerset-Bryant 0. Andrews Leake o. Young right, a Frenchman, and is entitled, on the above in York-Ackroyd v. Gill
Tried during Term. terpretation, to the protection of the convention. Here
Crowther v. Appleby Midd.-Mare v. Charles is another and most powerful argument in favour of a Brown v. Ackroyd Lond.-Pittman v. Verity. revision of the law of copyright, as well as of the conventions to which it has given rise.-Athenæum.