« AnteriorContinuar »
assigns; and she executes a bond during the coverture, dies before her without having reduced the fund into and survives her husband; it will not bind her property. possession. Hence, Lee y, Muggeridge, 1 Ves. & B. 118.
1. Where stock is bequeathed in trust for a person 9. Where stock is limited by will in trust for a per- for life, with remainder to a woman, who afterwards son for life, with remainder to a married woman; and marries, and a suit is instituted, the court will not take she and her husband join in assigning parts of the stock her consent to a transfer to a purchaser from her hus. to different purchasers for valuable consideration, and band and herself. Wade v. Saunders, 1 T. & R. 306. then the husband dies in the lifetime of the tenant for 2. But where personalty is bequeathed to a person life, leaving his wife surviving, who makes an assign- for life, with remainder to a feme for life, who afterment of another portion of the stock to one of the for- wards marries, and, with her husband, contracts to mer purchasers, by a deed indorsed on the former assign- sell her reversionary interest, and a bill is filed by them ment to him, and reciting that he was entitled to a for a specific performance, at the desire of the pure certain portion of the stock under the within-written chaser, in order that the consent of the wife may be indenture, and referring to the other assignments, and taken by the court, the court will take her consent de purporting to transfer the property subject to those as- bene esse, and decree a specific performance. (Heroitt signments; such deed does not operate as a confirma- v. Crowcher, before Lord Alvanley, and Woollands v. tion of the prior assignments. Honner v. Morton, 3 Croucher, before Sir W. Grant, 12 Ves. 174). In Boc Russ. 65.
v. Box, (2 Con. & L. 609), Sir E. Sugden, C., said, IV. Where a married woman has a reversionary in-“I do not quite understand the meaning of taking terest in personalty vested in trustees, and not bequeath- | her consent de bene esse, unless you treat it as a coned or settled to her separate use, a court of equity will tingent interest, and say that the consent was to operate not order it to be paid over to any other person, even if the fund ever fell into possession;" i. e. if the maron the application of the wife, unless, perhaps, under ried woman, who had only a life interest, survived the very special circumstances, where it appears to be greatly prior taker. But Mr. Roper, in his work on Husband for the benefit of the family in general, and where the and Wife, (2nd ed., p. 248), and Mr. Daniell, in his trustees fully concur in the application. Hence, Treatise on Chancery Practice, (Vol. 1, ed. 1, p. 165),
1. Where personalty is settled on the husband for and Sir T. Plumer, V. c., in Hornsby v. Lee, (2 Mad. 20); life; and, if he survives his wife, it is to go to him ab- | understand it to mean a consent taken so as not to solutely; but, if she survives, to her absolutely; and preclude the question as to her title by survivorship, in they file a bill, praying that the whole may be paid to the event of the wife being the survivor. And this the husband; the bill will be dismissed. (Seaman v. view would seem most to accord with the general tenor Drill, 10 Ves. 580). For, as the wife could not have of the judgment. assigned her interest to her husband, so neither will a And, where money was limited by a marriage settlecourt of equity order the money to be paid to him, and ment upon trust for the husband and wife successively thereby defeat the objects of a settlement by stripping for life, with remainder to their children as they or the wife of the provision made for her by the settle- the survivor should appoint, and, for want of appointment.
ment, among the children equally; and, in case that 2. And where a married woman has a reversionary | both the husband and wife should die without children, interest in stock in court under a settlement, subject to or that the children should die under twenty-one, then a life interest of another person, and not settled to her in trust for the wife, her executors, administrators, or Separate use, the court will not order such stock to be assigns; and, if she should die without issue, then, as to transferred to the tenant for life, on the application of part, in trust for such person as she should appoint; the husband and wife. Box v. Box, 2 Con. & L. 605. and, as to another part, to the husband; and as to the
3. But where personalty is limited by a marriage rest, in trust for the husband for life, and then in trust settlement in trust for the husband for life, with re- for such persons as she should appoint; and, her husmainder in trust for the wife for life, with remainder band being in distress, she made an assignment and in trust for such persons as the survivor shall appoint, I appointment; and a bill was filed to have her conand the husband and wife appoint the property to the sent taken, and to establish the assignment and appointhusband; and, on a bill being filed against the trus- ment, subject to the claims of the husband and wife for tees to carry this appointment into execution, and to life, and the right of the children; the money was hare the settlement cancelled, they state in their an- ordered to be paid into court for the contingent trusts swer that they are desirous that the prayer of the of the settlement, and the conveyance, with the wife's bill should be complied with, as being for the benefit of consent, was established. Guise v. Small, 1 Anst. 277. the family, and the wife consents in court; the court There is, indeed, a decision in Howard v. Damiani, will, under very special circumstances, make the decree (2 Jac. & Walk. 458, n.), that, where a fund vested in accordingly. (Macarmic v. Buller, 1 Cox, 357). In this trustees is given to a woman who afterwards marries, case, the husband had been appointed governor of Cape to be paid to her after the death of another person who Breton; and, in Sperling v. Rochfort, (8 Ves. 174), Lord has a life interest in the fund, and such tenant for life Eldon, C., said he was counsel in the case of Macarmic purchases the married woman's reversionary interest 5. Buller, and that the husband could not have taken from her husband, the court, on the consent of the the appointment without the use of the money. wife, will order the trustees to pay over the fund to
There is also a case of Butler v. Duncomb, (2 Vern. the tenant for life. But this decision must be regarded 762), in which a married woman was entitled to a as overruled by many of the cases previously noticed. portion raisable by means of a term out of real estate, VI. Where a married woman is entitled to a reverafter the death of the tenant for life, and no interest sionary interest in a fund in court, subject to a life inwas payable for it in the meantime, and the court, terest in another person, who is not her husband, and with the consent of the wife, decreed that the husband such person surrenders his life interest to the married (who was a considerable tradesman) might dispose of woman, the court will take the consent of the married a moiety of the portion. But this case must be regarded woman to a payment of the fund to her husband, and as overruled.
order payment to him accordingly; because the interest V. A court of equity will not establish a contract for of the married woman has ceased to be reversionary. the sale of the reversionary interest of a married woo Lachton v. Adams, 5 Law Journ., N. S., C., 382. man in personalty, not bequeathed or settled for her. In this case the Vice-Chancellor made the order separate use, except subject and without prejudice to on an ex parte application. Mr. G. Richards, after the her right to avoid such contract in case her husband / rising of the Vice-Chancellor, applied to the Lord Chan- . cellor to take the consent of the married woman for the Sir Thomas Plumer observes in the passage already payment. The Lord Chancellor (Lord Cottenham) said, quoted) the husband “ has only the right to reduce the life estate had merged, and the interest of the mar- it into possession, if it be in a state capable of being ried woman was no longer reversionary. He therefore so reduced.” took her consent, and made the order. 16.
| Admitting, then, this case to have been rightly de VII. Where a sum is limited by will in trust for a mar cided, as, for the foregoing reasons, the writer conceives ried woman, by way of remainder after a life interest in it was, it does not clash with the decisions previously another person who is not her husband, without being noticed. limited for her separate use, and the money is paid by But, according to the case of Ellis v. Atkinson, (3 the trustee to the husband, with his wife's consent, Bro. Č. C. 563), where personal property is limited by on his undertaking to pay the interest to the tenant a settlement in trust for the separate use of the wife for life; in such case, if the wife files a bill for the sum during the joint lives of herself and her husband, with so paid over, it will be dismissed, because, by means of remainder, in case she shall survive him, in trust for herthe payment of the fund itself to the husband, it self, her executors or administrators; but, in case sbe becomes completely reduced into possession by him. shall die in his lifetime, upon such trusts as she shall Doswell v. Earle, 12 Ves. 473.
by deed or will appoint; and, in default of appointment, In this case, it was argued for the executors of the in trust for her executors or administrators; and she trustee and executrix, who paid over the money, and appoints that her husband shall receive the interest for the executors of the husband, that the wife con- during their joint lives, and that, in case she shall die sented to the payment at the time, and acquiesced in it in his lifetime, the property shall, after her decease, be for nine years after her husband's death. But the de- in trust for him, his executors, administrators, and cision, for which no grounds are stated in the judgment, assigns; and she (“ so far as she is in law or equity could not have been justly founded on these circum- capable of so doing”) assigns the same to her busband, stances. The mere consent of the wife during covert- his executors, administrators, and assigns; in such case, ure was a nullity; and, as to her subsequent acquies-on a bill filed for the purpose, the court will direct the cence, she merely postponed proceeding until the death trustees to assign the property to the husband. of the tenant for life, until her own right of possession Now, if this case was rightly decided, it serves to accrued ; and it would not seem reasonable that she support the decisions in Lachton v. Adams and Creed v. should have been under the necessity of involving her-Perry. The writer conceives, however, that it was self in a Chancery suit respecting the money while her wrongly decided; and he thinks so, for the same rego interest in it was yet future in point of enjoyment, and sons for which he believes that the conflicting case of when she might die before any present right of im- Richards v. Chambers was rightly decided, and be mediate enjoyment accrued. (See Honnor v. Morton, cause the assignment made by the wife, which is the 3 Russ. 65).
only thing that distinguishes this case from Richards v. VIII. Where stock is limited by way of remainder Chambers in point of circumstances, was a mere nullity, for a woman who afterwards marries, and the tenant and therefore does not constitute any material distinofor life, who is not her husband, agrees to surrender the tion between this case and Richards v. Chambers. He life interest in such manner as that the same may be may add, however, that, as this case of Ellis v. Atkinmerged and extinguished, so as to reduce the interest of son is so clearly distinguishable from Lachton v. Adams, the married woman into possession, so that the stock Creed v. Perry, Wilson v.Oldham, and Doswell v. Earle, may be transferred to the husband, but the trustees the opinion he entertains that it was wrongly decided, refuse to join in the arrangement except under the in- and that there were no grounds for directing the trusdemity of the court; in such case, on a bill being filed tees to assign the property to the husband, does not in for the purpose, the court will order such arrange the slightest degree militate against his opinion of the ment to be carried into effect. This was done by the soundness of the decisions in those other cases. He Vice-Chancellor of England in Creed v. Perry, (2 Eq. believes that Ellis v. Atkinson is to be classed with Rep. 42). And an arrangement of the same kind was Atkins v. Darbury, Butler v. Duncomb, and Howard v. established by the same learned judge in the case of Dumiani, which would seem to favour the notion, that Wilson v. Oldham, March 5, 1841, cited by Mr. Lewin the reversionary interest of a married woman in perin his work on Trusts, (2nd ed., 296), which was a case sonal property can be in all respects effectually disposed of an amicable suit, instituted by the advice of the late of, without any preliminary steps to accelerate it, espe Mr. Jacob; who, as Mr. Lewin states, wrote an opinion, cially if the wife consents in court,-a notion which we that, if the tenant for life, who was not the husband of have seen is now completely exploded. the feme, assigned his interest to her, the effect would X. Where personalty is limited by will in trust for be to convert her interest into an immediate right to a person for life, with remainder in trust for a daughthe fund in possession.
ter, who marries, and the tenant for life makes a gift of IX. But where personal property is limited by mar- the life interest to the daughter's husband, the court riage settlement in trust for the sole and separate use will not transfer the property in court to the husband, of the wife for life; and, if she survives her husband, it even with the wife's consent. Pickard v. Roberts, 3 is to be absolutely hers; and, if she dies in his lifetime, Mad. 384. it is to go to such persons as she shall appoint; and, in In this case, also, there is no change of the reverdefault of appointment, to her executors and admini-sionary interest into an interest in possession; for, & strators; and she executes an appointment in his favour, the husband has no interest analogous to an estate in and then she and her husband apply to the Court of remainder in such property, but only the right to reChancery for a transfer of the property in court to duce the reversionary interest into possession when in them, such an application will not be granted. (Richards a state capable of being so reduced, he has nothing in v. Chambers, 10 Ves. 580). For in this case there is which the life interest could merge. And hence this no conversion of the reversionary interest into an in- decision does not conflict with the cases of Doswell . terest in possession by merger of the prior life interest. Earle, Lachton v. Adams, Creed v. Perry, and Wilson . The appointment over the reversionary interest is only | Oldham, any more than the case of Richards v. Chanto take effect in an event yet in contingency, and that bers clashes with them. event is the event of his surviving her; so that the re- XI. Where personalty is limited by deed in trast for versionary interest could not be said to be vested in the & person for life, with remainder in trust for his wife husband by force of the appointment: nor could it be for life, with remainder to such of her children as she vested in him by force of his marital right; for (as I shall appoint, and, in default of appointment, in trust for such children; and she makes an appointment of making an effectual disposition of the property even as part to one child, and joins with the husband in as- against herself. Again, the act of the wife in joining signing their respective life interests to that child; the in the deed whereby the life interest was surrendered court will not take her consent, and compel the trus- was a mere nullity. And, as to the voluntary assigntees to pay over the money to such child. Fraser v. ment by the husband of her reversionary interest, it Baillie, 1 Bro. C. C. 618.
could not pass that reversionary interest to the trustee In this case, again, there is no change of the rever- in such a way as to lead to the merger of the life insionary interest into an interest in possession; for the terest surrendered to the trustee. We have seen that assignment by the wife is a nullity, and, for the rea- the husband has only the right to reduce the chose in sons given with reference to the above case of Pickard action into possession when in a state capable of being 1. Roberts and the case of Bean v. Sykes, (mentioned so reduced; and by a voluntary assignment no more infra), the husband's assignment is incapable of passing would pass to the assignee in any event than the husthe wife's reversionary interest so as to subject it to the band himself possessed at the time of the assignment. operation of merger.
And the truth is, that the decree in Bean v. Sykes only It was not attempted, indeed, to support the appli amounted to an authority to the original trustee to cation in this case on the ground of merger. The prayer transfer the fund to the new trustees, and cannot proof the bill was, that the consent of the wife might be perly be regarded as determining the question as to the taken in the nature of a fine at common law of real general power of making an effectual disposition of the property. And Baron Eyre objected, that it did not reversionary interest of a married woman. occur to him that the court had authorised the departure with the property of the wife, by examining her in
(To be concluded next week with Part II, comprising the ge.
neral result of the cases, with some reasons in support of the nature of a fine at law. And, as to the same point,
the practicability of dealing with reversionary interests of Sir John Leach, V.C., remarked, in Pickard v. Roberts,
married women by means of acceleration). that a wife, by her consent in a court of equity, can only part with that interest which is a creature of a court of equity, the right which she has in a court of Equity to claim & provision by way of settlement on
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH. herself and children, out of that property which the husband at law would take in possession in her right." And in Richards v. Chambers, Sir W. Grant, M. R., Lord Denman, C. J., delivered the judgment of the observed, “ This case is not like those in which the
court in the following cases : husband' has a right to the trust property of his wife, subject only to an [equitable] obligation to make some
June 9.-Cocker o. Musgrove--Rule absolute for new trial. provision for her before he reduces it into possession.
June 12.-Lowe o. Penn-Rule absolute for new trial. When the wife, upon examination, consents to relin
Brown v. Deakin-Rule refused. Rule nisi for quish that equity, it is not by virtue of a disposing
leave to amend the plea. power in her, or by the intervention of the court, that
Weiss v. Lumley-Judgment to be set aside on
striking out the last plea. the property passes to the husband. His marital right
Maple v. Green--Rule refused. is allowed to operate unobstructed by the equity which
Reg. o. The Great North of England Railway the wife does not oppose to it. The equity being out of
Company-Verdict for the Crown on the first the way, the right stands unqualified, and upon that
four counts to remain undisturbed. the court decrees; but here is no pretence of right on the part of the husband.” (10 Ves. 687).
While we have seen that the case of Fraser v. Baillie does not clash with the cases of Doswell v. Earle, Lach
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. ton V. Adams, Creed v. Perry, and Wilson v. Oldham, and while the writer believes there is no case which
TRINITY TERM.-9 VICTORIÆ.—June 10. really does conflict with them, he is not aware that there are any other cases in favour of the doctrine which
This Court will, on Monday, the 6th day of July they support. There is, indeed, another case (Bean v. Sykes) which
next, hold a sitting, and will proceed to give judghas been brought forward in support of the doctrine, that
ment in certain of the matters standing over for the
consideration of the Court. the reversionary interests of married women in personal
N. C. TINDAL. property may be effectually dealt with, but which, the writer submits, is not to be relied on to that extent. According to this case, where personal property GENTLEMEN CALLED TO THE BAR. is bequeathed upon trust for a person for life, with remainder to a woman who afterwards marries, and her husband assigns her reversionary interest to a trustee, The following Gentlemen have been admitted to the upon certain trusts, and afterwards, by a deed, in which degree of Barrister at Law:the wife joins, the prior interest is surrendered by the tenant for life to such trustee, for the purpose of merging LINCOLN'S INN, June 9.-Edward Shaw Mount, Esq.: it, the latter thereby becomes entitled in possession to Hercules Henry G. M'Donnell, Esq.; Charles Browne the property upon the trust of the deed of assignment Esq.; Edward Lamb Sabin, Esq.; William Beckett to him, and a court of equity will direct the trustee Turner, Esq.; William Percival Pickering, Esq. under the will to pay it over to him accordingly. (Bean V. Sykes, reported 2 Hayes' Conv., 6th ed., p. 640).
In this case the reversionary interest was assigned by the husband to the trustee above mentioned, upon MASTERS IN CHANCERY.The Lord Chancellor has trust, in default of appointment, for the separate use of appointed the following gentlemen Masters Extraordithe wife. But the effect of the transaction could not nary in the high Court of Chancery :-John Phillips, have depended on the assignment to her separate use; of Hastings, Sussex; John Richard Wood, of Woodfor, if that were the case, it would only be necessary bridge, Suffolk; Henry Peake, of Sleaford, Lincolnfor a husband to assign his wife's reversionary interest shire; Alexander Blucher Smith, of Melksham, Wiltto ber separate use, in order to give her the power of I shire.
Durham, wine merchants, June 30 at half.past 10, District
at balf.past 1), div. sep. est. S. Pilling.—John Bulmer, Har. TUESDAY, JUNE 9.
tlepool, Durham, merchant, June 30 at half past 11, District BANKRUPTS.
Court of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, aud. ac.-- John
Thompson, Sunderland, Durham, chain manufacturer, June JOHN WRIGHT, Oxford-street, Middlesex, draggist and
30 at half-past 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Newcastle. manufacturing chymist, (trading under the firm of John
upon Tyne, aud. ac.; July 2 at balf-past 12, fin. div.-Chas. Wright & Co.), June 16 at 2, and July 21 at 12, Court of
Scott, Newcastle-under-Lyme, Staffordshire, currier, July 2 Bankruptcy, London : Off. Ass. Alsager; Sols. Tilson &
at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. &c. Squance, Coleman-street.-Fiat dated May 27.
and pr. d.-Jos. Ankerett, Walsall, Staffordshire, grocer, July JOHN GISBORNE, Coleman-street, London, merchant, I 2 at 1. District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac.dealer and chapman, June 17 and July 30 at 12, Court of
John Rowles, Leicester, worsted manufacturer, June 30 at 10, Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Follett ; Sols. Marten &
District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac, and dir, Co., 31, Commercial Sale-rooms, Mincing.lane. - Fiat
-Wm. W. Sanderson, Great Russell-street, Covent-garden, dated June 3.
Middlesex, baker, June 30 at half-past 12, Court of Bank. JESSE SMITH, Wellington-street, Newington-causeway,
ruptcy, London, div.-John C. Adams, Basinghall-street, Surrey, cheesemonger, dealer and chapman, June 17 and
London, woollen warehouseman, June 30 at half.past 11, July 14 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass.
Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-Jas. Mann, Norwich, Groom ; Sol. Pullen, Basinghall-street, City.-Fiat dated
| woolstapler, June 30 at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, June 6.
London, div.-Thos. Streeter, High-street, Camden-town, EDWARD WEEKS, King's-road, Chelsea, Middlesex, hot
Middlesex, draper, June 30 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, house builder, dealer and chapman, June 18 at half.past 12,
London, div.--Hen. Turner, Theobald's-road, Bedford-row, and July 20 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass.
Middlesex, cowkeeper, June 30 at half-past 12, Court of Bank. Turquand; Sol. Letts, Bartlett's buildings. - Fiat dated
ruptcy, London, div.-John C. Chambers, Ipsley, WarwickMay 7. JOHN RICHARD MISKIN, Chatham, Kent, tea dealer, | Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac. and div.
shire, needle manufacturer, July 4 at 12, District Court of grocer, British wine merchant, dealer and chapman, June is at half-past 11, and July 20 at half past 12, Court of
CERTIFICATES. Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Turquand; Sol. Butler,
To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on the Tooley-street.- Fiat dated June 4.
Day of Meeting. FRANCIS FREEMAN PHILLIPS, Bristol, coach maker, John Kirkup, Rotherhithe, Surrey, coal merchant, June 30
dealer and chapman, June 22 and July 21 at 11, District at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.- Jas. Wilson, Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol : Off. Ass. Acraman; Sol. Woolwich, Kent, and Bury-street, Chelsea, Middlesex, cabinet Biggs, Bristol.-- Fiat dated June 5.
maker, June 30 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London. Jonas JOHN CHILD, Wakefield, Yorkshire, grocer, dealer and Tebbutt, Cambridge, auctioneer, July 8 at 11, Court of Bank.
chapman, June 23 and July 13 at 11, District Court of ruptcy, London.-Fred, John Ableit and Wm. Hen. Ablett, Bankruptcy, Leeds : Off. Ass. Freeman; Sols. Brown, / High Holborn, Middlesex, drapers, June 30 at 2, Court of
Wakefield, Piddey, Temple, London.-Fiat dated May 30. Bankruptcy, London.-Benjamin M. Ryder, Kingston-uponJOHN SCOTT, Sheffield, flour dealer, dealer and chapman, Hull, grocer, July 1 at 11, Town-hall, Kingston-upon-Hill.June 26 and July 10 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Benj. Sayle, Sheffield, and Tinsley-park, Rotherham, York.
f. Ass. Freeman ; Sols. Chambers, Sheffield; shire, iron master, July 3 at 11, Cutlers'-hall, Sheffield.Tattershall, Great James-street, Bedford-row, London. Hen. Hall, Smalesmouth, Greystead, Northumberland, cattle Fiat dated June 2.
dealer, June 30 at half-past 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, FREDERICK SLY, Truro, Cornwall, currier, June 18 at Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
1, and July 15 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter : To be allowed by the Court of Review in Bankruptcy, unless Off. Ass. Hirtzel; Sols. Bennallack, Truro; Stogdon, Cause be shewn to the contrary on or before June 30. Exeter; Bourdillon & Sons, Great Winchester-street, Lon.
Geo. Williams, Bristol, watch maker.-Rich. Goodridge, don.-Fiat dated May 25.
Exeter, baker.-Jos. Johns, Grosvenor-street West, Pimlico, CHARLES GALLIMORE, Birmingham, pearl button and
Middlesex, cook.-Eliz. Rolph and Thos. Rolph, Shepherd'sstud maker, June 19 and July 14 at 10, District Court of
court, Upper Brook-st., Grosvenor-sq., Middlesex, builders. Bankruptcy, Birmingham : Off. Ass. Valpy; Sol. Wright,
-James Rob. Ellis, Houndsditch, London, brass founder.Birmingham.-- Fiat dated June 5.
Gilbert Brown, Shiffnal, Shropshire, banker.
Scotch SEQUESTRATIONS. Charles Collins, Kidderminster, and King William-street Jas. R. Nicoll and Thos. Nicoll, Dundee, iron merchants. and Adelaide-place, London, yarn and commission agent, June
-Hugh and Wm. Brown, Glasgow, stock and share brokers. 19 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, last ex.-Wm. John
INSOLVENT DEBTORS Haddan, Tottenham, Middlesex, brewer, June 19 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, last ex.-John Walker Ellis, Law. Who hare filed their Petitions in the Court of Bankruptcy, rence-lane, Cheapside, London, cloth merchant, June 26 at 2, and have obtained an Interim Order for Protection from Court of Bankruptcy, London, last ex. - Richard Lewis, Process.
-Edge, Gloucestershire, woollen manufacturer, John Reed, Brick-lane, Bethnal-green, Middlesex, corn June 23 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol, last ex. dealer, June 25 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Joks -James Wallace, Durham, Sunderland, grocer, June 19 at Dixon, Ponder's-end, Middlesex, out of business, June 25 at half-past 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon- 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-J. Bugg, Hoxton OldTyne, last ex.; June 30 at 12, aud. ac. ; July 2 at half past town, St. Leonard, Shoreditch, Middlesex, grocer, June 25 at 10, div.-Wm. Miller, Manchester, manufacturer, June 19 at half.past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.--Ch. Gardiner, 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, last ex.-Jas. Gibson-street, Waterloo-road, Lambeth, Surrey, tailor, June Featherstone and Robert Kirkpatrick, Manchester, iron 25 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Wm. H. founders, June 20 at half past 10, District Court of Bank. Williams, Brighton, Sussex, gentleman, June 25 at 11, Court ruptcy, Manchester, last ex. Robert Kirkpatrick.John Tud. of Bankruptcy, London.-Wm. Brown, Earl-street, London denham, Pickering-place, Bayswater, Middlesex, builder, road, Southwark, Surrey, coach smith, June 25 at 12, Court June 30 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac. of Bankruptcy, London.-W. Wyndham Hughes, Borrowash, Thomas Cooper, New Bond-street, Middlesex, umbrella ma. Ockbrook, Derbyshire, surveyor, June 25 at 1, Court of nufacturer, July 3 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. Bankruptcy, London. --- Juan Macdonald, Cork-street, Buro ac.- John Harford and Wm. W. Davies, Bristol, and Sir. lington-gardens, Middlesex, gentleman, June 25 at 11, Court howy, Monmouthshire, iron masters, July 3 at 11, District of Bankruptcy, London.-James Merrifield, Field-cottage, Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol, aud. ac.; July 9 at 11, div. Cornwall.place, Holloway, Middlesex, clerk to the commis. sep. est. J. Halford.—Thos. Williams, Bristol, licensed vic- sioners for the commutation of tithes in England and Wales, tualler, July 9 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol, June 25 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Anne Trott, aud. ac.-Sydney Pilling and Rob. G. Watson, Gateshead, I Sparrows Herne, Bushey, Hertfordshire, grocer, June 25 at 11,
Court of Bankruptcy, London.-T. Brown, Irthlingborough, Court-house, DURRAM, (County), June 22, at 10.
Court-house, CARDIGAN, (County), June 25, at 10. June 16 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol.-Wm.
John Maurice Davies, Esq., Aberystwith, Llanbudarn. Robinson, Hart's-hill, Dudley, Worcestershire, out of busiDess, June 16 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birming
fawr, Cardiganshire, shareholder in certain lead mines called ham. - Wm. Woodward the younger, Nottingham, out of bu.
The Bishop's Mines. siness, June 23 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birming
Court-house, Ipswich, Suffolk, June 25, at 10. ham.- Wm. Rolinson, Hart's-hill, Dudley, Worcestershire, Edmund Miller, Halesforth, Suffolk, out of employ. out of business, June 16 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Court-house, CHELMSFORD, Essex, June 23, at 10. Birmingham-John Davies, St. Mary, Haverfordwest, grazier,
Thos. Warner, Stratford, grocer.Hereziah Everitt, Brad. June 18 at half.past 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol.
field, out of business. -Henry Wm. Hayes, Exeter, out of business, June 18 at 1,
Court-house, CARMARTHEN, (County), June 24, at 10. District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter.-Rodolph S. Zamoiski, Exeter, inventor and seller of the royal magnetic belt, June 17
Eliza David, widow, Llanelly, out of business.-James at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter.-Wm. Kiddle,
Brabyn, Sea-side, Llanelly, master mariner.-David Pendry, Charles-street, Blackfriars-road, Surrey, commission agent,
Llaneqwad, farmer. June 25 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London.—John Thomas, Court-house, NewCASTLE-UPON-Tyne, Northumberland, Merthyr Tydhl, Glamorganshire, grocer, June 25 at 12, Dis
June 24, at 10. trict Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol.-J. Hill, Upcott-village, Arthur Shanks, North Shields, innkeeper. Culmstock, Devonshire, farmer, June 16 at 11, District Court
rict Court Court-house, NEWCASTLE-UPON-Tyne, (Town), June 24, of Bankruptcy, Exeter.-Joseph Butterworth, Lozells, near
at 10. Birmingham, out of business, June 17 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham.- Wm. Manton, Birmingham, out
Jas. Harper, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tailor.–Felix Trainor, of business, June 10 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bir.
Newcastle-upon-Tyne, licensed hawker. Wm. Errington, mingham.-Rich. Jones, Ty Cerrig, Llangwin, Denbighshire,
Gateshead, Durham, out of business.-George Robson, New
castle-upon-Tyne, out of business.-- Alex. Geekie, North out of business, June 16 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, |
Elswick-mill, Westgate, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, tea dealer. Liverpool.- Jos. Ibbs, Liverpool, inspector of the Liverpool dispensaries, June 16 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy,
Christopher Ibberson, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, book-keeper. Liverpool. -- Georye Marsden, Eland, Yorkshire, weaver, June
INSOLVENT DEBTORS' DIVIDENDS, 18 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds.--Antoine F. John Coppard, New-town, Worthing, labourer : 48. 10d. Charles Stuhlmann the younger, Leeds, Yorkshire, professor (making with former dividends in the pound.-G. Jasper of the German language, June 18 at 11, District Court of Wright, Church-st., Hampton, Middlesex, attorney's clerk : Bankruptcy, Leeds. - Benjamin Clarkson, Thornhill, near 3s. 9d. in the pound.—John Dunn, Wigmore-st., CavendishDersbury, Yorkshire, tailor, June 18 at 11, District Court of square, Middlesex, dentist : 1s. 6d. in the pound.--Joseph Bankraptcy, Leeds.- Edw. Pearce, Scarborough, Yorkshire, Edward Bolton, Pleasant-place, Holloway, Middlesex, porkhatter, June 18 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds. man : ls. Id. in the pound.-Anthony Vachee, Upper Nor. Saturday, June 6.
folk-st., Cambridge-road, Mile-end, Middlesex, clerk in the
Custom-bouse : ls. lld, in the pound.-Hen. Croly, Dovor, The following Assigners have been appointed. Further Par.
Kent, captain in her Majesty's army : ls. 2 d. in the pound. ticulars may be learned at the Office, in Portugal-st., Lin.
--Jos. Parker, Herefordshire, appraiser : 18. 9 d. in the Colu's-inn-fields, on giving the Number of the Case.
pound.-Philip Solomon, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, hardwareJohn Gardiner Rix, Norwich, bricklayer, No. 54,758 C.; | man : ls. 44d, in the pound. Richard Coaks, assignee.- George Thos. Elgie, Astey's-row,
Apply at the Provisional Assignee's Office, Portugal-street, Lower-road, Islington, Middlesex, attorney at law, No.
Lincoln's-inn-fields, between the hours of 10 and 1. 53,025 T.; Wm. Green, assignee.
Saturday, June 6.
FRIDAY, June 12. the Estates and Effects of the following Persons :
BANKRUPTS. (On their own Petitions).
| JOHN COMPTON HILL, Reading, Berkshire, grocer and Wm. Young Torckler, Brook-st., Hanover-square, Middle
tea dealer, (trading under the style or firm of Hill & Co.), 88I, out of employ: in the Debtors Prison for London and
June 22 and July 27 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Middlesex.-jas. Daly, Star-court, Newton-st., High Hol
Off, Ass. Turquand ; Sols. Lewis & Lewis, Ely-place, Hol. born, Middlesex, out of business : in the Debtors Prison for
born.-Fiat dated June 10. London and Middlesex.- Francis Wyse, Uxbridge-gardens,
| JOHN WYATT, Ockham, Surrey, common brewer, coal Bayswater, Middlesex, clerk in the General Registrar's Office,
merchant, dealer and chapman, June 23 at 11, and July 21 Somerset-house, Strand : in the Debtors Prison for London
at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Follett; and Middlesex. - Chas. Haddon, Old-st., St. Luke's, Mid.
Sol. Walker, 3, South-square, Gray's Inn.- Fiat dated dlesex, gold beater: in the Debtors Frison for London and
June 11. Sliddlesex. —John Wakehan Edwards, Green-st., Stepney, I CHARLES BENNS, Winchester. Southampton, miller and Middlesex, surgeon : in the Debtors Prison for London and
corn dealer, June 23 at 2, and July 14 at half-past 2, Middlesex.—Thos. Aldridge, Deansgate, Bolton-le-Moors,
Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Edwards; Sols. Lancashire, lieutenant in her Majesty's 8th Regiment of Foot:
Pain, Whitechurch, Hants ; Gedge, George-street, Mansionin the Gaol of Lancaster.--J. Hamer, Lancaster, quarryman: 1
house, London.-Fiat dated May 30. in the Gaol of Lancaster.-Jos. Pimbley, Pell Brook, Hor- | WILLIAM HART, Whitechapel High-street. Middlesex. hat wich, near Bolton-le-Moors, Lancashire, retail dealer in ale: | in the Gaol of Lancaster.
manufacturer, June 23 at half-past 2, and July 14 at 11,
Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Edwards; Sol. The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before Rawlings, Romford, Essex, and 5, Crosby-ball-chambers,
the Court, in Portugal-st., on Tuesday, June 23, at 9. Bishopsgate-street. within.-Fiat dated June 10. James Turpin, Hindon-st., Pimlico, Middlesex, green CHARLES FOX, Kingston-upon-Holl, victualler and tavern grocer. --Geo. Langridge Williams, Hartland-terrace, Kent keeper, dealer and chapman, June 24 and July 15 at 11, ish-town, Middlesex, brick maker.-W. Whaley the younger, District Court of Bankruptcy, Kingston-upon-Hull: Off. Rahere-st., Goswell-road, St. Luke's, Middlesex, builder. - Ass. Kynaston ; Sols. Wells & Smith, Kingston-uponRob. Ed. Gay, Prospect-place, Maida-hill, Paddington, Mid Hull; Tilson & Co., 29, Coleman-st., London. --Fiat dated
June 4, . . . . .