5 & 6, c. 50, s. 56. Husband and wife: acknowledgment of deed by the wife, affidavit Highways: nuisance c. 76. Municipal Corporation Act: watch-rate c. 83, s. 1. Letters patent: disclaimer 6 & 7, c. lxxv. s. 109. South Eastern Railway Act 7 WILLIAM IV. & 1 VICTORIA c. 88. County Constabulary 377 5 & 6, c. 45. Copyright 479 c. 116. Insolvent debtor: order of protection 182, 599 6 & 7, c. 18, ss. 7, 17. Registration of voters: notice of objection 25 c. 106, s. 3. c. 73, s. 37. Attorney: set-off of bill of costs 7 & 8, c. 96. Insolvent debtor: order of protection . c. 101. Order of affiliation: presumption of non-access 8 & 9, c. 16, s. 9. Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845: joint stock c. 17. Scotch c. 118, s. 27. c. 126, s. 17. 9 & 10, c. 70, s. 1. Void lease Enclosure Act: consent to enclosure c. 93. Lord Campbell's Act: negligence 10 & 11, c. 14, s. 13. Markets and Fairs Clauses Act, 1847 c. 15. Gasworks Clauses Act, 1847 c. 69. House of Commons Costs Taxation Act, 1847 11 & 12, c. 63. Public Health Act c. 112, s. 128. Commissioners of sewers: indemnity. 12 & 13, c. 106, s. 67. Bankrupt: trading s. 115. Bankrupt: concerted act of bankruptcy 13 & 14, c. 61, ss. 11, 12, 13. County Court: costs s. 14. County Court appeal 15, c. 1. Cheltenham Improvement Act . 15 & 16, c. 54, s. 4. County Court: costs 55, 62 855 VICTORIA (continued). 15 & 16, c. 76, ss. 35-39. Nonjoinder of parties PAGE 616 s. 116. Common Law Procedure Act, 1852: trial by proviso 812 8. 222. Common Law Procedure Act: amendment 16 & 17, c. xxviii. Wolverhampton Improvement Act, 1853 17, c. lxvii., s. 158. Burnley Improvement Act, 1854 17 & 18, c. 31. Railway Traffic Act c. xl. Wellington (Salop) Improvement Act c. 83, ss. 3, 5. Foreign bill: cancellation of stamp 616 637 246 787 545 566 c. 125, ss. 61, 64. Common Law Procedure Act, 1854: garnishment 863 18 & 19, c. 111. Bills of Lading Act c. 120, s. 96. Metropolis Local Management Act: highways c. cli. Wolverhampton New Waterworks Company's Act 19 & 20, c. 108, s. 30. 20 & 21, c. 43, s. 6. 21 & 22, c. cv. s. 25. Case from justices: amendment 842 192 461 421 518 n., 549 237, 240, 649 814 Llandaff and Canton District Markets Act, 1858: 22 & 23, c. lii. City Gas Light Company's Act CASES UPON APPEAL FROM DECISIONS OF REVISING BARRISTERS, ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, IN Michaelmas Cerm, XXV. VICTORIA. 1861. City of LONDON. WILLIAM ENDELL LUCKETT, Appellant; FREDERICK ROB. ERT GILDER, Respondent. Nov. 11. WILLIAM ENDELL LUCKETT, Appellant; WILLIAM VOLLER, Respondent. WILLIAM ENDELL LUCKETT, Appellant; JAMES GOLLOP, Respondent. The notice (under s. 62 of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18) of the appellant's intention to prosecute the appeal must, if possible, be served ten clear days before the first of the days appointed for hearing appeals, the proviso in s. 64 enabling the Court to postpone the hearing only applying where by reason of the lateness of the period at which the decision of the revising barrister took place there has not been reasonable time between that and the day of hearing for giving the notice. THESE were appeals from decisions of the revising barrister for the city of London. The cases were dated and signed by the revising barrister on the 11th of October. The cases so signed were duly lodged with the masters within the first four days of Michaelmas *Term, pursuant to the requirement of the 62d section of the 6 & 7 Vict. c. 18, together with the notice to them of the intention. of the appellant to prosecute the appeals: and the appellant on the 6th of November also gave a similar notice to each of the respond [*2 ents; but, inasmuch as "the day appointed for the hearing" of appeals in this term was the 11th of November, the last-mentioned notice was not a compliance with the 64th section of the statute, which requires a ten days' notice. Fawcett, for the appellant,--relying upon the following proviso in s. 64, "Provided always, that, if it shall appear to the said Court that there has not been reasonable time to give or send such notice in any case, it shall be lawful for the Court to postpone the hearing of the appeal in such case, as to the said Court shall seem meet,"-moved that the hearing of these appeals might be postponed until the 19th, which was a further day appointed by the Court for the hearing of registration appeals.-The 62d section enacts, "that every appellant who shall intend to prosecute his appeal shall, within the first four days in the Michaelmas Term next after the decision to which such appeal shall relate, transmit to the masters of the Court of Common Pleas the statement in writing so signed by the said revising barrister as aforesaid, and shall also therewith give or send a notice signed by him, stating therein his intention to prosecute the said appeal; and the said appellant shall also give or send a notice, signed by him, to the respondent in the said appeal, stating his said intention duly to prosecute such appeal in the said court." The directions contained in this section have all been duly complied with: but the difficulty arises from the 64th section, which enacts "that no appeal or matter *3] of appeal whatsoever shall in any case,-*except where the conduct and direction of the appeal, or of the answer thereto, shall have been given by order of the Court of Common Pieas, or of any Judge thereof, to any person,-be entertained or heard by the said Court, unless notice shall have been given by the appellant to the masters of the said Court at the time and in the manner hereinbefore mentioned; and no appeal shall be heard by the said Court in any case where the said respondent shall not appear, unless the said appellant shall prove that due notice of his intention to prosecute such appeal was given or sent to the said respondent ten days at least before the day appointed for the hearing of such appeal." [ERLE, C. J.-This matter has been considered upon several occasions; but the non-compliance with the 64th section has always been held fatal: see Norton, app., The Town Clerk of Salisbury, resp., 4 C. B. 32 (E. C. L. R. vol. 56), 1 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 538; Adey, app., Hill, resp., 4 C. B. 38, 1 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 542 n.; Pring, app., Estcourt, resp., 4 C. B. 73, 1 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 543; Clarke, app., Beaton, resp., 5 C. B. 76 (E. C. L. R. vol. 57); Aldworth, app., Dore, resp., 5 C. B. 87, 2 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 67.] In Pring, app., Estcourt, resp., no notice had been served upon the respondent at all. But, in Palmer, app., Allen, resp., 5 C. B. 5, 2 Lutw. Reg. Cas. 42, the court, acting under the proviso in s. 64, postponed the hearing. [KEATING, J.-There the decision of the revising barrister took place on the 30th of October, and the day appointed for the hearing of the appeals was the 11th of November. The requirement of the 64th section, therefore, could not be complied with, and consequently the Court thought the case fell within the proviso.] By the very terms of the 62d section both notices are to be given within the first four days of the term. [BYLES, J.-That is not the true grammatical |