No. 499-VOL. X. AUGUST 1, 1846. PRICE 18. **The following are the Names of the Gentlemen who favour THE JURIST with Reports of Cases argued and decided in the several Courts of Law and Equity: A. GORDON, Esq. of the Inner {^ Temple, Barrister at Law. { TENISON EDWARDS, Esq. of the The Lord Chancellor's f A. GORDON, Esq. of the Inner Master of the Rolls Court {G. Y. ROBSON, Esq. of the Inner Vice-Chancellor of England's Court Vice-Chancellor Knight Temple, Barrister at Law. (TENISON EDWARDS, Esq. of the LONDON, AUGUST 1, 1846. THE result following the execution of the sentence pronounced on a recent occasion by a court-martial, has excited so much public attention, that we think we may serve the cause of justice and truth by reminding our readers what is the real state of military law on the subject; for we observe that much misapprehension appears to exist as to the authority under which military punishments are inflicted, and in particular as to the power and responsibility of the officer commanding a regiment, in respect of the execution of sentence. Of course we shall not, in this Journal, enter into any discussion whether the infliction of corporal punishment in the army is or is not beneficial, but shall confine our observations to shewing what is the law upon the subject, and who are the persons responsible for the consequences of carrying it into effect. And, firstly, we must remind our readers, that, if there be one branch of law which is more entirely the creature of the Legislature, more dependent for its authority upon specific legislation than another, it is the law military under which the army is governed. There is no power inherent in the Crown, during time of peace, to create or to punish offences specially as military offences, within the United Kingdom. All offences peculiarly military are created, directly or indirectly, by the Mutiny Act, which, as every one knows, is an annual act; and, dehors the terms of that act, there is no such thing as an offence in a soldier, which would not be one at law. So, the authority to inflict particular punishments, either for offences peculiarly military, or for offences which, being military offences, are also civil offences, is given to the Crown by the Mutiny Act, and by nothing else; for, as it is emphatically recited in the preamble of that act, "the raising or keeping a standing army within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in time CC VOL. X. Vice-Chancellor Wigram's [ F. FISHER, Esq. of Lincoln's Court of Queen's Bench Queen's Bench Bail Court Court of Common Pleas, tion of Voters Act.. {G. of Inner Temple, Barrister at Law. (W. PATERSON, Esq. of Gray's Ecclesiastical and Admi- f J. P. DEANE, D.C.L. of Doctors' ralty Courts. Court of Review Commons. W. W. COOPER, Esq. of the Inner of peace, unless it be with the consent of Parliament, is against law;" so that the Crown has not only no power of its own to govern the army by any peculiar law, but cannot have an army at all, except by virtue of the Mutiny Act. The Mutiny Act designates the particular acts that shall constitute military crimes and offences in officers and soldiers, and the particular punishments-at least, the limits of the punishments-with which such crimes and offences shall be visited. Thus, in sect. 1, it designates very minutely the particular offences for which death may be inflicted; among which, it is needless to say that the act of striking a superior officer falls. In sect. 7 it designates the particular crimes for which the punishment is imprisonment not exceeding a given amount, or corporal punishment not extending to life or limb. In sect. 9 it designates other particular offences, for which certain other punishments, comprised within specified limits, are prescribed. Military crimes, therefore, as such, as well as the punishments annexed to them, are entirely the creation of the Legislature, by virtue of the Mutiny Act. the The authority of courts-martial is derived entirely Their jurisdiction rests neither from the same source. upon custom, nor upon usurpation, nor upon any arbitrary power, but entirely and exclusively upon Mutiny Act. By that act the several kinds of courtsmartial are defined; the mode of formation of each is described; and the power of each is described and defined. The following general features, however, run throughout the constitution of courts-martial, as will be collected from an examination of the various clauses of the Mutiny Act and the articles of war founded upon it, viz. firstly, that a court-martial is always convened by the authority or on the representation of the officer commanding in respect of the jurisdiction to which such court-martial refers itself, simply to see that the sentence of the court is carried into effect. If that sentence is too severe, and leads to results not intended, the persons responsible, if any, are the members of the court-martial, or the Comman Secondly, that such authority to convene a courtmartial, is derived either under the warrant of the Crown, issued pursuant to the Mutiny Act, (sect. 5), or under the authority of the clauses of the act itself. Thirdly, that in no case can the officer by whose au-der in Chief, or other officer confirming the sentence; thority the court-martial is convened, be the president; but, in every court-martial except a general courtmartial, the president is appointed by the officer convening the court. And, fourthly, that no sentence of a court-martial can be lawfully executed until confirmed by the Crown, or the officer to whom, by the warrant of the Crown, or, in certain cases, by the clauses of the articles of war, the authority of the Crown is delegated. anybody in fact, except the commanding officer charged with the execution of the sentence, who is a mere instrument, having no power to vary it, and having the simple duty of seeing it carried into effect modo et formâ. We take it for granted that our readers will not impute to us, in consequence of the foregoing observations, any desire to support tyranny or cruelty, whether inflicted by military or by any other authority. It does not appear clearly by the Mutiny Act or by All that we desire to establish is, that the infliction of the articles of war, whether the officer to whom is punishment, pursuant to the sentence of a court-marentrusted the execution of the sentence, may or may tial, is entirely dependent for its legality upon an act of not be a member of the court-martial; but it is to be Parliament; that, therefore, while military men are collected, on the whole, that he cannot. It is not, to recollect that they owe their authority in such mathowever, very material, as far as his personal respon- lect, on the other hand, that, as a consequence, so long ters entirely to the civil power, civilians are to recolsibility is concerned, whether he may or may not be a as the terms of the act are complied with, the lawfulmember of the court; for the sentence is not his, but ness of military proceedings is unimpeachable; and the sentence of the court, and of the officer to whom that, in estimating the culpability of particular persons the confirmation, or refusal to confirm it, is entrusted; concerned in the issuing or executing a sentence of a and in no case but one would it be possible, we appre-discretion which the Mutiny Act and the articles of war court-martial, regard ought to be had to the extent of hend, for the same officer who executes the sentence to vest in such persons. be in any way concerned in the determining of such sentence. For in every case of a court-martial, except a regimental court-martial, the sentence must be confirmed by some officer not immediately commanding the regiment, but holding a higher command, and, therefore, not being the officer charged with the actual execution of the sentence; and, in the single case in which the commanding officer of the regiment might also be the officer having the duty of confirming or rejecting the sentence, it is expressly provided by the 79th article of war, that he shall not be a member of the court. 1. 2. Review. Common Forms in Conveyancing, including Recitals. By CHARLES DAVIDSON, Esq., of the Middle Temple, Barrister at Law. 8vo., pp. 231. [Maxwell.] A Bill, (as amended after Report), intituled “An Act to facilitate the Conveyance of Property." (Presented by the Lord Brougham and Vaux). Ordered to be printed 28th May, 1846. Dom. Proc., folio, pp. 100. but it is to be feared that the Hercules of law reform will not quell his hydra so easily as he seems to expect. Mr. Davidson deserves great credit for the gallantry with which he has entered the ring as champion for the It may be thought, indeed, that the provision here old conveyancing party, unappalled by Lord Brougham's referred to, of the articles of war, is meant to be ge- denunciations and the massive bill he wields with so neral; for, though the 79th article of war has reference much apparent ease and unconcern. We would gladly to a regimental court-martial only, the language respect-have pronounced a funeral oration on all the common ing the officer commanding a regiment is very large*, forms from which Mr. Davidson has made his selection, and seems, having regard to the somewhat loose manner in which the articles of war are drawn up, to be intended to apply to a general disability of the commanding officer to be a member of any court-martial; and this construction is strengthened by the cautious provisions that we have noticed, excluding the officer convening a court-martial from being the president. In practice, we believe the commanding officer of the regiment is never a member of the court-martial. But whether he is or not, the sentence is always, as we have seen, the sentence of the whole court, and subject to the rejection of some person who can in no case whatever be a member of the court. The sentence having been passed and confirmed, is, therefore, the sentence of the law, which the officer charged with its execution has no power whatever to annul or vary: he is wholly irresponsible, whatever may be the propriety or impropriety of the law itself. His duty is "No sentence shall be executed until the commanding officer (who is in no case to be a member of the court-martial) or the governor of the garrison shall have confirmed the same.' The design and utility of Mr. Davidson's book cannot be better expressed than in his own language:-"This work is strictly what it purports to be, a collection of 'the common forms used by conveyancers. It contains no special forms, and is intended simply to render the preparation of certain drafts, of frequent occurrence as far as possible mechanical, and to facilitate the mechanical part of the business. For this purpose, the forms of frequent use are repeated in extenso for 'several different kinds of property, and for several 'transactions which are nearly akin. The variations in each case are slight, but the saving of time and trouble will be found to be considerable, because, by this means, any person, however ignorant and unskilful, if directed to the forms needed, and furnished 'with the names to be substituted for the words in italics, will produce a clause requiring little or no alteration, while, if the forms be adapted only generally to the business in hand, it will occupy a good deal of the time of a skilled person to get it into proper shape. For instance, if it be required to adapt the 'forms in a mortgage to one person to the case of a mortgage to several persons, it will be found that 'considerable time and labour is expended in a mere 'mechanical operation, which is altogether avoided by having a form literally adapted to the case. The 'principle may be carried much farther than it is in 'the present work, especially in the forms of wills and 'settlements; but the author trusts that the following 'forms will, to some extent, afford the draftsman the 'mechanical assistance referred to." In short, the book is intended to give us that in print which most conveyancers possess and use, in a more or less perfect shape, in manuscript. The forms are very well selected, and conveniently arranged. The only drawback from the utility of the collection is its meagreness. The book is very thin, and by doubling its bulk its value might have been increased in a much greater ratio. It would then have contained many forms of very frequent occurrence, for which we now look in vain; such as the clauses and covenants in town leases, farming leases and mining leases, partnership deeds, appointments of new trustees, transfers of mortgages, partition deeds, releases, &c. Clauses of this kind would have been much more useful than the four forms of "Trusts of terms assigned to attend the inheritance," to which Mr. Davidson has appended only this laconic intimation:-"These forms are rarely needed since the stat. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 112; but there are cases in which terms will still have to be assigned." Without denying the possibility of an effectual assignment of a term in trust to attend the inheritance, under any circumstances, we believe we may safely assert that such a thing is extremely unlikely to happen, and even that an assignment of a term, simply upon trust to attend, (the only case for which Mr. Davidson's forms are adapted), is absolutely impossible. Even in those classes of common forms to which the collection is confined, namely, Purchase-deeds, Mortgages, Settlements, and Wills, many deficiencies are observable. Thus, among the forms in wills, we find a general devise of real estate, of whatsoever tenure, in trust for sale, but no form for enabling trustees to sell and give a title to copy holds without being first admitted themselves;-no provision for apportionment in the forms for creating rent-charges; but, on the contrary, a very absurd proviso, (p. 150), that the Apportionment Act shall not apply to certain rent-charges which could never fall within its operation. Again, among the few testamentary forms, we find none of the ordinary trusts for the benefit of relations and their issue, provisions for survivorship and substitution, &c. To the rival formulare of Lord Brougham, Mr. Davidson, in his preface, alludes in no friendly spirit. "The subject of a reform of the shape of assurances now engages so much attention that it may be proper to add, that, in the author's opinion, conveyancers ought to be enabled, by legislative enactment, to dispense with many of the following forms. At present, however, there is little prospect of this being effectuated; the steps lately taken have not been of any use, and there seems no tendency to proceed in the right way. The persons who have taken charge of the reform of conveyancing law, though many of them of great ability and various learning, are none of them conveyancers of experience; and, however able a man 'may be, he cannot do otherwise than fail when he at'tempts to reform an art which he has not practised." perience, and have not practised the art? Let us see if this is so: "An Act to simplify the Transfer of Property" (7 & 8 Vict. c. 76) was, if report speaks true, prepared by John Hodgson, Esq., Q. C. The next step in arrear, "An Act to amend the Law of Real Property," (8 & 9 Vict. c. 106), is the avowed work of William Hayes, J. H. Christie, and J. Bellenden Ker, Esquires. The substance of "An Act to render the Assignment of satisfied Terms unnecessary," (8 & 9 Vict. c. 112), was obtained by Lord Brougham from Charles Davidson, Esq., after that gentleman had submitted his work "to the revision of a learned friend of great eminence as a conveyancer." (Davidson's Concise Precedents, p. 72). Lastly, as we learn from the third annual report of the Council of the Society for promoting the amendment of the law, the two acts of the last session, for shortening conveyances and leases, and the bill before us, originated with those members of that learned and meritorious body who form its committee on the Law of Property; and the chairman of that committee is Samuel Duckworth, Esq., Master in Chancery. The truth is, that the successful amendment of any time-worn social machinery requires the co-operation of many qualifications which are seldom united in the same individual, and which, distributed among several, cannot easily be brought together and concentrated with effect upon a given object. And, though the conveyancer is, or ought to be, the most shifty of the children of the law, yet his professional habits are not well fitted for the training of an accomplished reformer. To recognise in a general principle only the fruitful parent of an infinite variety of deformed but powerful and tyrannous dwarfs called "exceptions and qualifications," (the fruit of a polygamous intercourse with sophistry, pedantry, ignorance, error, and expediency); to seek on all doubtful points, not the true rule, but a course consistent, if possible, with the worse as well as the "better opinion;" to ask, at every turn, not "Is this right?" but," What will the Profession, what will an unlearned judge, or an ignorant or timid practitioner, or a captious purchaser, say to this?" ever to consider private interest as paramount to public convenience; to abet his client in roasting his own eggs in the embers of his neighbour's house; daily to read, compose, write, and comment upon countless folios of the most barbarous, tautologous, and absurd jargon; in short, on every occasion systematically to eschew enlarged and general views, and to bestow equal consideration on form and substance, custom and reason; these are habits which must entirely disqualify any ordinary capacity for the successful development of solid and comprehensive scheme of reform. Whateve may be the cause, certain it is, that, at present, the law owes no great debt to the conveyancers on the score of amendment. We have on former occasions stated our objections to the principle of Lord Brougham's parliamentary forms. The secret of his lordship's failure lies in the ignorance of the nature of the disease which he has undertaken to cure. The prolixity of conveyancers' language is a cause of great mischief; but the progressive stamp on the deed, and the progressive fee on the draft, which, as they are the first and most obvious of its fruits, are those which alone have attracted Lord Brougham's attention, constitute but a small part of the mischief, and We quite concur in this censure on the recent at- might, if it were desirable, be effectually remedied by tempts at conveyancing reform, but we must protest a new tariff of stamps and fees. But the ambiguities against the attempt to shift the blame from the con- and errors which increase in a direct ratio with the proveyancers. It is to conveyancers that we chiefly owe the lixity of language, the wasting of learned time in drawabsurdities and abuses of the existing system, and it is ing, settling, and repeatedly perusing, scanning, and on conveyancers alone that the discredit, such as it is, scrutinising folios of superfluous words, the perplexing of the recent abortive attempts at reform must rest. of unlearned brains with intricacies, not of fact, comThe persons who have taken charge of the reform of pact, or law, but of mere words, the labour of coconveyancing law are none of them conveyancers of ex-pyists, and the disgust of every one; these are evils which are perpetually recurring long after the first grievance of the fees and stamps paid on the birth of the parchment monster has been forgotten, and which the adoption of Lord Brougham's scheme would rather aggravate than lighten. The tendency of present practice is gradually to shorten and simplify the language of deeds, to the manifest improvement of its accuracy and perspicuity. Lord Brougham proposes to revive and perpetuate a style which is already obsolete, with the additional annoyances incident to a complicated system of references and interpolations, the mixture of styles, and the use of words in one line in the ordinary sense, and in the next in the parliamentary sense. It is absurd to expect that more than an inconsiderable fraction of the number of judges, counsel, and solicitors, who would have to put a construction on these instruments, could ever become so familiar with the contents of the statute as to see their way without having actually before them the long clauses therein embalmed, whenever they are referred to; so that the measure would practically entail on the Profession a grievous addition to their present labours, for which additional labour, by the express provisions of this very bill, their clients are to pay a proportional remuneration. Nothing can be more unjust than the imputation of interested motives with which Lord Brougham retaliates upon the solicitors who have refused to adopt his short forms. It is their prudence, and not their cu pidity, that is alarmed. "It is one (and not the least) evil of this kind of legislation," says an able member of that body, "that it misleads people as to the true nature and character of the evil to be contended against. Were I anxious to maintain my profession at the expense of the public, I should desire nothing more heartily than the multiplication of acts of Parliament of the kind. They would sow a prolific seed of doubt and litigation: they would create a diversion precisely in that direction which would best suit our own selfish interests. Every session would breed some new code of legal grammar-some legislative dictionary of legal science, until, in a short time, we should almost have destroyed the power of words themselves to effectuate their true end, of expressing clear and definite ideas. Besides this, mere prolixity in deeds is not the evil of which the public complain: it is but one symptom of the evil, and that comparatively slight. The bill of costs, indeed, does include charges proportional to the length of deeds, but it includes a great deal more; and, in most, if not all cases, the quantum of costs is determined more by the integrity, and conscience of the practitioner, in the general conduct of business, than by the mere rule of the length of deeds. In fact, the length of deeds would, by any forced legislative attempt to alter their phraseology, become an utterly unimportant item. Any one conversant with the practice of conveyancing knows, that, even were their length forced by some legislative act into the compass of a nutshell, the bill of costs may be made to swell in other directions beyond the reach of Parliament*." pro If an instrument expresses its meaning by the shortest and plainest expressions that ordinary language affords, it will be as short as any one can reasonably desire, very little longer, and far more intelligible and convenient for reference, than the result of any scheme of legal algebra or stenography that has yet been posed. The only way in which the Legislature can usefully interfere in this matter is by giving to practitioners some strong inducement to study conciseness; and this the proposed measure does not do; for the provision, that the Master, in taxing a conveyancing bill, *"A Letter to Lord Worsley on the Burthens affecting Real Property, arising from the present State of the Law; with Reasons in favour of a General Registry of Titles. By Henry Sewell, Esq." H. Butterworth. 1846. may consider the labour and skill employed, is confined to charges for conveyances drawn under the act; and these, we venture to predict, will not be numerous. Holding these opinions as to the principle of the bill, we cannot be expected to enter into any criticism of its details. If it pass, it will probably become like its predecessors,-a dead letter; unless, which is not very probable, the clause as to allowance of professional charges operate in terrorem upon those members of the profession who may stand in need of such a rod. For our readers' information, we extract the following "TABLE OF FORMS CONTAINED IN THE SCHEDULE. CONVEYANCES OF REALTY: Conveyance under a Power, 1 to 5. Covenant to surrender Copyholds, 10, 11. Assignment of Policies of Insurance, 17. Power of Attorney to get in Debts, 20. Limitation of Rent-charge, 22, 23. Trusts of Term for raising Pin-money, 30 to 35. 92. Power to cut Timber, 98. Power to work Mines, 94. Power of Enfranchisement, 95. Power of partitioning, 96, 97. Power of Sale and Exchange, 98 to 100. Trust for Investment, 101 to 108. Trust for Accumulation, 109 to 111. Proviso for marshalling Powers, 112. SETTLEMENT OF LEASEHOLDS, 113 to 117. SETTLEMENT BY WAY OF CONVEYANCE IN TRUST FOR SALE, 118. SETTLEMENTS AND WILLS OF PERSONALTY: Trusts for Husband and Wife, 119, 120. Power to appoint new Trustees, 133 to 136. SETTLEMENTS: Covenants to settle future Property, 139 to 145. WILLS: Provision for annual Payments, 153. Power to compromise Claims, 154. Provisoes for Redemption, 156, 157. Attornment by the Mortgagor, 180. Provision for Change of Partners in Mortgages to Power to the Mortgagor to lease, 196, 197. MORTGAGE OF REVERSIONARY INTEREST IN STOCK. MORTGAGE OF POLICY OF ASSURANCE: Trust of the Policy, 198. Covenant to keep up the Insurance, 199. MORTGAGE BY WAY OF FURTHER CHarge, 201. Assignment of the Mortgage Debt, 202, 203. RECONVEYANCE OF MORTGAGED PROPERTY, 204 to 206. COVENANTS FOR TITLE OF REALTY: In Purchase-deeds and Settlements of Freeholds and Copyholds, 207 to 210. In Purchase-deeds and Settlements of Leaseholds, 211, 212. In Mortgages of Freeholds and Copyholds, 213 to 216. In Mortgages of Leaseholds, 217 to 219. COVENANTS FOR TITLE OF PERSONALTY: On the Assignment of a Policy of Assurance, 220 to 224. London Gazettes. TUESDAY, JULY 28. BANKRUPTS. FRANCIS BARBER KETTLE, Brighton, Sussex, horsedealer, dealer and chapman, Aug. 4 at 12, and Sept. 4 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sols. Staniland & Long, Bouverie-street. Fiat dated July 23. WALTER M'DOWALL and RALPH BROWN, Pemberton-row, Gough-square, London, printers, dealers and chapmen, Aug. 4 at half-past 12, and Sept. 4 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sols. Holme & Co., New Inn.-Fiat dated July 23. FARQUHAR MACQUEEN, Macao, a Portuguese settlement in China, merchant, (trading in partnership with Alexander Macdonald, at 102, Leadenhall-street, London, under the firm of Farquhar Macqueen & Company), Aug. 5 and Sept. 26 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Follett; Sol. Ashurst, Cheapside.-Fiat dated July 20. CHARLES BURROWS, East Stonehouse, and JOHN GLIDDON, Plymouth, Devonshire, beer brewers, (trading under the firm of Burrows & Gliddon, at Plymouth), Aug. 11 and Sept. 8 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter Off. Ass. Hernaman; Sols. Little & Woolcombe Devonport; Stogdon, Exeter; Makinson & Co., Temple. -Fiat dated July 16. JAMES EVANS, Bristol, and Weston-super-Mare, Somersetshire, silk mercer, dealer and chapman, (trading in copartnership with Samuel Evans, at Bristol, as silk mercers), Aug. 11 and Sept. 8 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol Off. Ass. Acraman; Sols. Savery & Co., Bristol. -Fiat dated July 23. JOHN CARLISLE, West Derby, Lancashire, builder and mason, Aug. 7 and Sept. 4 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool: Off. Ass. Turner; Sols. Davies, Liverpool; Rogerson, Lincoln's-inn-fields.—Fiat dated July 21. JOHN SMITH CHADWICK, Manchester, calico printer, dealer and chapman, Aug. 12 and Sept. 2 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester: Öff. Ass. Pott; Sols. Blair, Manchester; Johnson & Co., Temple, London.Fiat dated July 24. EDWARD JAMES INCHLEY, Drayton, Leicestershire, corn dealer, dealer and chapman, Aug. 15 and Sept. 10 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sols. Rawlins, Market Harborough; James, Birmingham.-Fiat dated July 18. WILLIAM INCHLEY, Drayton, Leicestershire, coal dealer, dealer and chapman, Aug. 15 and Sept. 10 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Bittleston; Sols. Rawlins, Market Harborough; James, Birmingham. -Fiat dated July 8. JAMES COATES, Leominster, Herefordshire, tailor and grazier, dealer and chapman, Aug. 8 at 1, and Sept. 8 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sols. Woodhouse, Leominster; Bartleet, Birmingham.-Fiat dated July 23. ALFRED WILLIAM JOHN MASON, Edgbaston, Warwickshire, builder, dealer and chapman, Aug. 7 at half-past 10, and Sept. 1 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Christie; Sols. A. and T. S. Ryland, Birmingham.-Fiat dated July 21. THOMAS SMALL SMITH, Wednesbury, Staffordshire, carpenter, joiner, and cabinet maker, Aug. 7 and Sept. 1 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Christie; Sol. Walker, Wolverhampton. Fiat dated THOMAS CHARLES FLETCHER, Nottingham, glass July 16. dealer, and salt and chymical manure merchant, Aug. 7 and Sept. 1 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass. Valpy; Sols. Brown, Nottingham; Smith, Birmingham.-Fiat dated July 18. WILLIAM GEORGE WALE TAYLER, Tywardreath, Cornwall, surgeon and apothecary, dealer and chapman, Aug. 12 and Sept. 9 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter Off. Ass. Hirtzell; Sols. Coodes & Shilson, St. Austel, Cornwall; Stogdon, Exeter.-Fiat dated July 27. MEETINGS. Joseph Timmins, Caynham, near Ludlow, Shropshire, brick |