LAW.-A Gentleman who served his Articles in the Coun try, and passed his Examination last Trinity Term, but has not DAVIDSON'S COMMON FORMS AND RECITALS. 1 vol. royal 8vo., price 10s. 6d. boards, been admitted, is desirous of obtaining a SITUATION under the Prin- COMMON FORMS in CONVEYANCING, including cipal in an Office either in Town or Country. The Salary required is SIR EDWARD SUGDEN'S DECISIONS. RECITALS, with Notes. By C. DAVIDSON, of the Middle Temple, Esq., Barrister at Law. A. Maxwell & Son, Law Publishers, 32, Bell-yard, Lincoln's-inn. RUFFHEAD'S STATUTES at LARGE, Magna Charta REPORTS of CASES argued and determined in the CHAN Reports, complete Series, East 16 vols., to all Adolphus & Bube, st vols, of CHANCERY during the Time of LORD CELLOR SUGDEN. By WILLIAM DRURY, Esq., Barrister at Law. Dublin: Hodges & Smith, 104, Grafton-street; and may be obtained through all the London Law Booksellers. SPENCE ON THE EQUITABLE JURISDICTION OF THE This day is published, in royal 8vo., vol. 1, price 11. 11s. 6d. boards, THE EQUITABLE JURISDICTION of the COURT of CHANCERY; comprising its Rise, Progress, and final Establishment; to which is prefixed, with a view to the Elucidation of the main Subject, a Concise Account of the Leading Doctrines of the Common Law, and of the Course of Procedure in the Courts of Common Law in regard to Civil Rights, with an attempt to trace them to their sources; and in which the various Alterations made by the Legislature down to the present day are noticed. By GEORGE SPENCE, Esq., one of her Majesty's Counsel. Stevens & Norton, 26 and 39, Bell-yard, Lincoln's Inn. LAW BOOKS PUBLISHED BY W. BENNING & CO., In royal 8vo., price 17. boards, PRECEDENTS in PLEADING; with copious Notes on to 6 & 7th Victoria, 34 vols., whole bound, 231. Queen's Bench 301. A fine Common Pleas Reports, Scott, 8 together 31 vols., 151. All the other Reports, and a large Stock of Prac tical and Elementary Works, at the lowest Price. William H. Bond, 8, Bell-yard, Temple-bar. BYTHEWOOD'S CONVEYANCING, by PARKER & STEWART, 9 vols.. £3 0 0 Nevile & Manning's Reports, 3rd to 6th Will. 4, 6 vols. 2.10 0 15 0 200 210 @ 900 Perry & Davison All the Reports, and a large Collection of Modern Books of Practice, at the lowest Price. William H. Bond, Law Bookseller, 8, Bell-yard, Temple-bar. LAW FIRE INSURANCE Pleading, Practice, and Evidence. By the late JOSEPH CHIT- ADAMS ON EJECTMENT. Fourth Edition. In royal 8vo., price 188. boards, Registered under the Act 7 & 8 Vict., cap. 110). THE RIGHT HON. THE EARL OF DEVON. RIGHT HON. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND. RICHARD RICHARDS, ESQ., M.P. A TREATISE on the PRINCIPLES and PRACTICE of the AC- (The denotes a Director of the Law Life, and the + a Director of: he In royal 8vo., price 11. 2s. boards, STEWART'S PRACTICE of CONVEYANCING. Vol. I. Part 1. Comprising every usual Deed, analytically and synthetically arranged. Third Edition. Part 1 contains a Collection of Common Forms, Purchase Deeds, Leases, and Annuity Deeds, including Select Precedents under the Copyhold Enfranchisement Act, (4 & 5 Vict. c. 35), and the Conveyancing Acts of 1845. By JAMES STEWART, of Lincoln's-inn, Esq., Barrister at Law, and HARRIS PRENDERGAST, of Lincoln'sinn, Esq. In royal 12mo., price 17. 4s. boards, In royal 8vo., 2 vols. Price 41. boards, This Work is divided into Six Books:-1. Of Persons capable of committing Crimes; of Principals and Accessaries, and of Indictable Offences. 2. Of Offences principally affecting the Government, the Public Peace, or the Public Rights. 3. Of Offences against the Persons of Individuals. 4. Of Offences against Property, Public or Private. 5. Of Offences which may affect the Persons of Individuals, or Property. 6. Of Evidence. And a Chronological Table of Statutes cited. In 3 vols. royal 8vo., price 41. 4s. boards, SIR EDMUND SAUNDERS'S REPORTS. The Sixth Edition. By standing destruction of Buildings by Fire, the Society will grant Insur EDWARD VAUGHAN WILLIAMS, Esq. ances on Rent, the amount being specified in the Policy. Premium, and the proportionate part only of the Annual Duty. Persons insured with this Society, and who may suffer loss, will receive their Indemnity without deduction or discount. No charge will be made for the Policy where the sum insured amounts to 3007. Attendance given at the Office of the Society daily from Nine till Four, where parties may obtain any further information respecting the E. BLAKE BEAL, Secretary. CRIMINAL LAW CASES. BY EDWARD W. COX, Terms on which Insurances may be effected. Esq., Barrister at Law. Part 4, price 5s., containing the most recent Cases. Parts 1, 2, 3, price 5s. each, may be had. Also, now ready, NEW PRACTICE CASES in all the COURTS. Parts 1 to 4, price Pemberton Row, Gough Square, in the Parish of St. Bride, in the City Printed by WALTER M'DOWALL, PRINTER, residing at No. 4, of London, at his Printing Office, situate No. 5, Pemberton Row aforesaid; and Published at No. 3, CHANCERY LANE, in the Parish of St. Dunstan in the West, in the City of London, by HENRY SWEET, LAW BOOKSELLER and PUBLISHER, residing at No. 11, John Street, Bedford Row, in the County of Middlesex. Saturday, July 4, 1846. No. 496-VOL. X. JULY 11, 1846. PRICE 18. The following are the Names of the Gentlemen who favour THE JURIST with Reports of Cases argued and {A. Gople,N; Fig. of the Inner Vice-Chancellor Wigram's (F. En, BR, Best La Lincoln's Temple, Barrister TENISON EDWARDS, Esq. of the {TENner Temple, Barrister at Law. The Lord Chancellor's [A. GORDON; Fist of the Inner Court Master of the Rolls Court Vice-Chancellor of England's Court Vice-Chancellor Knight Temple, Barisrter at Law. G. Y. ROBSON, Esq. of the Inner { Temple, Barrister at Law. (TENISON EDWARDS, Esq. of the { Inner Temple, and LONDON, JULY 11, 1846. Court Court of Queen's Bench Inn, Barrister at Law. { [A. Gray's Queen's Bench Bail Court Court of Common Pleas, .... Inn, Barrister at Law. D. POWER, Esq. of Lincoln's (W. PATERSON, Esq. of Gray's { Ecclesiastical and Admi- f J. P. DEANE, D.C.L. of Doctors' ........ ralty Courts Commons. {W. COOPER, of the Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. tion to the Court of Review for the same purpose, praying in the alternative, that the commissioner might be ordered to stay any declaration of dividend till the hearing of the cause in equity. On this petition the Court of Review made no order, expressing, however, an opinion that the commissioner ought not to pay any dividends until the plaintiffs should have had an opportunity of making an application to the Court of Chancery. Thereupon, a supplemental bill was filed, and a motion made for an injunction to restrain the assignees from paying any dividends until the hearing of the cause, or further order. SOME important cases have lately been decided upon the jurisdiction of equity, which we think we cannot deal with better, than by simply collecting and stating them to our readers. The first class of these cases has reference to the jurisdiction of the court to interfere, in matters apparently properly cognisable in bankruptcy. In Thompson v. Derham and Thompson v. Goodman, (1 Hare, 358), the extent of the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery to interfere in the distribution of a bankrupt's estate directed by the Court of BankThe Vice-Chancellor, Sir James Wigram, appears to ruptcy, was defined. The material facts of the case were these: William Hinde, one of several partners, died have inclined strongly to the opinion, that the court had in January, 1839, leaving large property in the part- no jurisdiction to interfere to prevent the creditors from nership concern, and appointing some of his co-part- taking advantage of the adjudication of a court of comners co-executors of his will with other persons not in petent jurisdiction to distribute the bankrupt's estate, the business. The executors allowed the whole of such and refused the motion; and, on appeal, the Lord Chanproperty to remain in the business, contrary to the cellor also refused to interfere. The question of the juristrusts of the will. In December, 1839, the surviving diction of the court to interfere, where by interfering it partners became bankrupt. In May, 1840, a bill was may impeach the decision of a court of concurrent jurisfiled by the persons claiming under the will of Wil-diction, was elaborately discussed by his Honor. The reliam Hinde, for administering the trusts of such will, and the assignees of the bankrupts were made parties, and against them it prayed, that the plaintiff might have a lien upon the partnership property for what should be found due to the estate of William Hinde from the partnership; and, among other things, that the assignees might set apart, out of the assets, a sum to answer the debt due to William Hinde's estate, or that the plaintiffs might be authorised to enter a claim for the amount. Pending the suit, the commissioner acting under the fiat, was about to declare a dividend: the plaintiffs in the equity suit applied to the court for leave to enter a claim, and to have a fund set apart to answer it, both of which applications the commissioner refused. The plaintiffs then presented a petiVOL. X. Z sult of the whole judgment, which is as guarded as it is elaborate, seems to be the limited proposition, that the Court of Chancery ought not, either on the ground of its general jurisdiction over trusts or otherwise, to interfere by injunction to restrain a distribution of that which is admitted to be a bankrupt's property, when such distribution is made pursuant to the orders of the court to which the Legislature has expressly given jurisdiction to distribute bankrupts' estates. And it is not to be inferred that Thompson v. Derham decides anything upon the general question, whether the Court of Chancery has in no case jurisdiction to interfere in matters over which the Court of Bankruptcy may also have jurisdiction. The next class of cases relates to the jurisdiction of NEWSE equity to interfere by way of restraining proceedings at law; and under this head it has been decided, that the Interpleader Acts, (1 & 2 Will. 4, c. 58, and 1 & 2 Vict. c. 45), apply only to cases where the opposite claims made, depend upon purely legal rights, and not to cases where one of the claims, although not sustainable at law, may have an equity to support it. In such cases an injunction will be granted to restrain the prosecution of proceedings at law under the Interpleader Act, even though those proceedings are taken under an order made by one of the common-law judges. This was decided in Langton v. Horton, where the defendant Bernie had assigned to the plaintiff a ship then on her voyage, and her prospective cargo. On the ship coming home, the plaintiff, by a messenger, took possession of her, and shortly afterwards the sheriff seized the ship and cargo under a writ sued out by the defendant Horton, a judgment creditor of Bernie. The sheriff having notice of the plaintiff's claim, summoned the opposing claimants to go before one of the judges, under the Interpleader Act. This was done, and the judge directed an issue. It did not appear that the judge was informed of the terms of the issue, or had his attention called to the circumstance of the demands of both claimants not being purely legal; and it was clear that the parties then both thought that their demands were purely legal. The plaintiff afterwards, conceiving his claim to be equitable, filed his bill for a declaration of his rights, and for an injunction to stay the levying of the amount of the execution, and to restrain the prosecution of the order under the Interpleader Act. Lord Langdale, M. R., held, that the court had authority to grant such an injunction. (Langton v. Horton, 3 Beav. 464). The plaintiff paying into court sufficient to answer the defendant's demand, the ship and cargo were ordered to be delivered up to him, and the proceedings on the issue were stayed. It has also been held, that, although in all matters of fraud, equity has a concurrent jurisdiction with all other courts, yet where the case is of a compound nature, so that it may be one of legal fraud, with respect to which a court of law can do complete justice, as well as equitable fraud, or it may turn out to be one of purely equitable fraud, the court will not at once restrain proceedings at law, but will allow the proceedings at law to go on, to try the legal fraud, reserving to the court of equity, if it shall turn out that there is no legal fraud, the further inquiry, whether there is such fraud as equity only can notice and deal with. (Clarke v. Manning, 7 Beav. 162). The third head under which these cases upon jurisdiction may be classed, is that of interfering with the functions of a special tribunal constituted by an act of Parliament for a special purpose. By the act of Parliament incorporating a canal company, after giving the company the usual powers to take land, it was declared, that, in order to fix the price which was to be paid by the company for any lands which they should require, in case the company and the owners should not agree as to the amount of purchase-money, commissioners were ap pointed, who were to call a meeting, upon being requested to do so either by the company or by the owners of the land; and if either of the parties refused to submit to the decision of the commissioners, they were empowered to issue a warrant to the sheriff to impanel a jury to assess the amount of compensation to be paid by the company; and it was declared that the verdict of the jury should be conclusive, and should not be removed by certiorari or other process whatever, into any of the courts of record at Westminster or any other court. There was a subsequent clause, under which the company was authorised to treat with the owner of any coal-works, whose workings should, in the opinion of the company, be dangerous to the canal, for all such coal, &c. as the company might think it requisite should be left for the security of the canal; and if the company and the coal-owner or worker could not agree as to the amount of compensation, then it was to be settled by a jury, according to the clause already cited. In the case before the court, a dispute had arisen between the plaintiffs and the defendant, not merely as to the amount of compensation that the defendant, who was the lessee of a coal-work, was entitled to, but on the question whether he was entitled to any compensation at all; and the defendant having brought the matter before commissioners, pursuant, as he alleged, to the act, the plaintiffs filed their bill, to have it declared that he was not entitled to any compensation, and to restrain him from proceeding to take any steps for the purpose of ascertaining the amount of such compensation. The court held, that the defendant was entitled to compensation, and that being so, was clearly of opinion that the plaintiffs had no equity, upon an allegation that the tribunal appointed by the Legislature was not competent to decide the questions submitted to it, to withdraw the inquiry from such tribunal. (Barnsley Canal Company v. Twibill, M. R., 7 Beav. 19, affirmed on appeal by the Lord Chancellor). And, lastly, we will refer to a case upon the jurisdiction to interfere to restrain acts in the nature of trespass. Generally speaking, equity will not interfere by way of injunction in cases of trespass, unless the trespass is of such a nature as to destroy the property in question. But it does not follow that equity will not exercise any interference at all, because the case is one of pure trespass. Thus, in a very recent case, where the question between the parties arose as to the title to a ship, the claim of the plaintiff rested upon his having purchased the ship in a colonial port from the captain, who sold it because it was disabled, and because he could not procure any person to repair it, or to advance money to repair it, upon the security of a bottomry bond. The claim of the defendants, the original owners, rested upon the allegation that the captain had no power to sell the ship, and that his sale did not take the legal title out of them. The circumstances brought before the court on a motion for an injunction were, that the plaintiff, having bought and repaired the ship, brought it home, and was in the actual possession of it, when the defendants sent men on board to take possession on their behalf. The court said the right of the plaintiff (if any) was purely a legal right, and treated the case (on that point) as one of pure trespass, and, therefore, would not grant an injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with the ship or her cargo, nor to prevent the captain from proceeding in an action on a bill of exchange given by the plaintiff for the price of the ship. But the court thought that it might, if it were necessary, take possession of the ship, to preserve her for the benefit of the party who should appear ultimately to be entitled; and that it ought to put the legal right in a course of speedy trial. The order ultimately made appears to have been, that the defendants should bring trover for the ship; no receiver or manager appointed; and liberty to each party to apply to obtain the possession or the use of the ship, such party giving security to deal with her as the court should direct. This was, in effect, regulating the trial of the legal right, and taking possession of the ship by the court pending the trial of such right. (Ridgway v. Roberts, 4 Hare, 106). And semble, that, under the circumstances of this case, the plaintiff having a sort of title, that is, claiming under the defendants' agent, who, whether he had actually made a good title or not, had clearly power under some circumstances to make a good title, if it had been shewn that the defendants were about to destroy the ship, or otherwise to deal with it in a way for which damages would not be an adequate compensation, the court would have power to grant an injunction. On this point, the dictum of the court strictly followed the analogy furnished by the cases upon trespass, where the trespass goes the length of taking away the substance of the estate. London Gazettes. TUESDAY, JULY 7. BANKRUPTS. BENJAMIN KENT, Rosherville, Kent, out of business, ALFRED REED and SAMUEL JOHN POWELL, Tot- JAMES SORBY, Sheffield, Yorkshire, scrivener, lead merchant, smelter of lead ore, dealer and chapman, July 24 and Aug. 7 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds: Off. Ass. Freeman; Sols. Wake, Sheffield; Walter & Pemberton, Symond's Inn, London.-Fiat dated June 27. SAMUEL GRIFFITHS, Wolverhampton, Staffordshire, wholesale druggist, dealer and chapman, July 7 and Aug. 14 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Valpy; Sol. Brown, Bilston.-Fiat dated June 25. JOSEPH WARD, Clayton-heights, Bradford, Yorkshire, worsted stuff manufacturer, dealer and chapman, July 20 and Aug. 11 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds: Off. Ass. Young; Sols. Wavell, Halifax; Courtenay, Leeds; Gregory & Co., 1, Bedford-row, London. Fiat dated June 30. - WILLIAM GRIBBON, Leeds, Yorkshire, dealer in glass and THOMAS BEILBY and WILLIAM KABERRY, Leeds, WILLIAM SUDLOW, Liverpool, warehouse-keeper, wharf- JOHN BARTON, Birkenhead, Cheshire, stone mason and ROBERT BAKER, Christchurch, Monmouthshire, farmer MEETINGS. Thos. Showell, Ludgate-st., Ludgate-hill, London, tailor, July 22 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, last ex.-John Dailey and Alfred Inskipp, Long-lane, Bermondsey, Surrey, leather manufacturers, July 21 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, last ex.-Jas. Stuttard, Manchester, cotton spinner, July 13 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, last ex..—Fred. Plank, Plymouth, Devonshire, perfumer, July 28 at 11, div.-J. Livingston and T. Brittain, Manchester, plumbers, July 30 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac. and fin. div.-J. Robinson, Salford, Lancashire, millwright, July 28 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac.; July 29 at 12, div.-Thomas Findley, Manchester, plasterer, July 28 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac.; July 29 at 12, div.-Geo. Russell, Birmingham, merchant, July 28 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac.-John Clarke, Rich. Mitchell, Joseph Philips, and Thos. Smith, Leicester, bankers, July 28 at halfpast 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac. sep. est. Thos. Smith.-Jos. Ankrett, Walsall, Staffordshire, grocer, July 30 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, fin. div.-Geo. Watson, Gateshead, Durham, bookseller, July 31 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, div. ROBERT ARTHUR FITZHARDINGE KINGSCOTE, Sandgate, Kent, (lately carrying on business at Nicholas-11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter, aud. ac.; July 29 at lane, Lombard-street, London, with Alexander Beattie, Fran. Macnaghten, and Atkinson Wilkin, as merchants, under the style or firm of Beattie & Co.), July 15 at 11, and Aug. 21 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Graham; Sols. Beddome & Weir, Nicholas-lane, London.-Fiat dated July 6. HENRY WOODTHORPE, Aveley, Essex, grocer, dealer and chapman, July 17 at 12, and Aug. 21 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Turquand; Sol. Catlin, Ely-place, Holborn.-Fiat dated July 1. JOHN FARRER, Curtain-road, Shoreditch, Middlesex, cabinet manufacturer, July 14 at 11, and Aug. 22 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Groom; Sol. Taylor, Moorgate-street, City.-Fiat dated July 3. WHEATLEY KIRK, Salford, Lancashire, (lately carrying on business at Leeds, Yorkshire, under the style or firm of Wheatley Kirk & Co.), stock and share broker, dealer and chapman, July 18 and Aug. 7 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester: Off. Ass. Hobson; Sols. Atkinson & Co., Manchester; Abbott, Charlotte-st., London.Fiat dated July 1. CERTIFICATES. To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on or before the Day of Meeting. Jas. Whitelaw and Thos. Whitelaw, Lichfield-street, Soho, and Store-st., Bedford-sq., Middlesex, builders, July 28 at 2, Saturday, July 4. the Estates and Effects of the following Persons: (On their own Petitions). Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Rob. Nelson, Great Portlandstreet, Middlesex, hotel keeper, July 29 at 11, Court of Bank-Orders have been made, vesting in the Provisional Assignee ruptcy, London.-Wm. Darnborough, Richmond, Surrey, tailor, July 29 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Wm. John Haddan, Tottenham, Middlesex, brewer, July 29 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London. Robert Smith, Sussex- John Howlett, Salmon's-lane, Limehouse, Middlesex, liplace, Tottenham-court-road, Middlesex, cabinet maker, July censed dealer in beer: in the Debtors Prison for London and 29 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Wm. Bucknell Middlesex.-Peter Parent, Air-street, Piccadilly, Middlesex, Lemon, North-end, Croydon, Surrey, ironmonger, July 28 at tailor in the Debtors Prison for London and Middlesex.— 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Alex. Beattie and Fran- Wm. James Cockerill, York-road, Lambeth, Surrey, clerk to cis Macnaghten, Nicholas-lane, Lombard-st., London, mera railway company: in the Debtors Prison for London and chants, July 29 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Thos. Middlesex.. - George Marston Newman, New-street-mews, Fidgen, Liverpool, shoe manufacturer, July 28 at 11, District Dorset-square, Middlesex, horse dealer: in the Debtors Prison Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool.-John Cooke, Cheltenham, for London and Middlesex.- Walter Banfield, RichmondGloucestershire, auctioneer, July 31 at 12, District Court of grove, Barnsbury-road, Islington, Middlesex, tailor: in the Bankruptcy, Bristol.-John Cadogan the younger, Brecon, Debtors Prison for London and Middlesex.—James D. Baring, stay warehouseman, July 31 at 11, District Court of Bank- Rupert-street, Haymarket, Middlesex, gentleman: in the ruptcy, Bristol.-Peter Rhodes, Manchester, cotton spinner, Queen's Prison.-Elizabeth Bartlett, Abbotsbury, DorsetJuly 29 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester.- shire, widow: in the Gaol of Dorchester.-John Keenan, LiWm. Fox and Jas. Fox, Manchester, oil and colourmen, verpool, agent: in the Gaol of Lancaster.-Wm. Finnimore, July 30 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester.- Oreston, Plymstock, Devonshire, master mariner: in the Gaol John Hayes, Newton, Manchester, manufacturing chemist, of St. Thomas the Apostle.-John Maunder, Bideford, DeJuly 31 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester.-vonshire, innkeeper: in the Gaol of St. Thomas the Apostle. David Thomson, Stanley Spring Bleach Works, Walmersley--Isaac Hartley, Hallas-bridge, near Bingsley, Yorkshire, -Shuttleworth, Bury, Lancashire, bleacher, July 30 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester. cum Frederick Hymer Pearce, Pleasant-place, Clapham, out of business, July 23 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-W. Parbury Hughes, Park-lane, Liverpool-road, St. Mary, Islington, Middlesex, out of business, July 23 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Geo. Gingell, Chatham, Kent, beershopkeeper, July 16 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.Jos. Scaplehorn, Cambridge, out of business, July 23 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Henry Cowper, Rochester, Kent, secretary of the Grand London and Dublin Approximation Railway Company, July 30 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-John Eden Spalding, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly, Middlesex, July 14 at 3, Court of Bankruptcy, London. — Jas. Davis, Charlotte-st. West, Chalk-road, St. Mary, Islington, Middlesex, compositor, July 13 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Wm. John Lorkin, Hayfield-place, Mileend-road, Middlesex, shoemaker, July 13 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-John Lowe, Charlotte-st., Portlandplace, Upper Mary-le-bone-street, Middlesex, cook, July 11 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London. Saturday, July 4. The following Assignees have been appointed. Further Particulars may be learned at the Office, in Portugal-st., Lincoln's-inn-fields, on giving the Number of the Case. Michael Coleman, Drury-lane, Middlesex, tailor, No. 58,147 T.; John Hatton, assignee.-Wm. Smith Stredder, Tranmere, near Birkenhead, Cheshire, builder, No. 67,121 C.; John Edwards, assignee.-John Lumley, Aldborough, Yorkshire, farm bailiff, No. 67,352 C.; Thomas Price, assignee.-Joseph Sugden, North Bierley, near Bradford, Yorkslire, farmer, No. 67,440 C.; Esther Pollard, assignee.Joseph Scott, Leeds, Yorkshire, shopman to a clock maker, No. 67,441 C.; Lyon Samuel, assignee.-H. E. G. Teasdale, Seaham-harbour, Durham, grocer, No. 67,457 C.; Richard Appleton and Wm. Ramshaw, assignees.-Rich. Shepherd, Clayton-heights, near Bradford, Yorkshire, stuff manufacturer, No. 67,461 C.; A. Green, Thos. Kershaw, and James Kershaw, assignees. worsted spinner: in the Gaol of York.-Eliz. Bradbury, The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before July 22, at the same hour and place. end Old-town, Middlesex, provision merchant.-C. Thorpe Roger Robson, Jeffery's-terrace, Bridge-street East, Milethe younger, Weymouth-street, New Kent-road, Surrey, shoe maker. Court-house, LEICESTER, (County), July 22, at 10. Edward Jas. Inchley, Drayton, out of business.-William Inchley, Drayton, out of business.-John Garner, Leicester, hosier. Court-house, COVENTRY, (City), July 23, at 10. Wm. Jester the younger, Birmingham, victualler. Court-house, BEAUMARIS, Anglesey, July 21, at 10. John Hughes Ellis, Cefrnysgwydd, out of business. Court-house, BODMIN, Cornwall, July 21, at 10. Jane Treleven, Luxilion, widow, grocer. MEETING. Robert Ellis, Bryniau, Dyserth, Flintshire, miner, July 22 at 12, Horne's, Denbigh, sp. affairs. FRIDAY, JULY 10. BANKRUPTS. ALFRED BARLEY, March, Cambridgeshire, draper, grocer PHILIP FLOOD PAGE and PHILIP NORRIS PAGE, |