Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

proceeding to alter the law, the public should at least have a clear conception of what it really is. Now, when, what is called in political rather than legal language, the law of primogeniture is discussed, the very general idea is, that it is some law compelling the descent of land to the eldest son; and because people see that nearly all the great estates in the country do go, on the death of the father, to the eldest son, they have an idea that at any rate, as regards the estates of the nobility, such devolution is the compulsory act of the law. Every lawyer knows of course, and, were it not from the hope that these pages may occasionally stray into the hands of some democratic layman, we should not here repeat, that the descent of land to the eldest son, by law, is the exception; that it only takes place where the owners have not by contract made other arrangements; that every owner of unsettled and unfettered land may do what he likes with it give it to his youngest son, or to his youngest daughter, or to all of them, if he pleases; that the devolution to the eldest son, so constantly seen in great estates, is entirely the work of the parties by contract and arrangement; and that, so far from land being obliged to go to the eldest son for ever and ever, no land can be fettered for more than a given and not very long period.

The question is, as we have said, one of convenience; and then the consideration is, whether the law, being such that the owner of land can, if he thinks fit, dispose of it among all his children, or settle it on the eldest son, with such qualifications as he likes, or let it descend to him if he likes-the consideration is, we say, whether, with regard to this kind of property, the doctrine of laissez faire is not as applicable as it is to commercial property.

Great landowners are not obliged to keep their estates undivided, but they almost always do so. The inference is, that they prefer that course of succession; and why should they not, if they find or think that a convenient arrangement of property, be left so to deal with it? We assume, of course, that a part of the proposition to abolish the existing law of descent is to substitute some compulsory partition, analogous to that required by the French law; for if all that is done is to repeal the law of descent to the eldest son, and substitute an equal division by descent, not interfering with the power of settling by deed or will, such a change would be quite idle-the result would be simply a few more wills and settlements. The tendency of owners of considerable estates in this country is obviously to keep them together. They will do so if not prevented; and they will only tie up their estates more frequently by settlement, if they know that by leaving them to descend according to law, they will be split and severed.

THE STATUTE-LAW COMMISSION.

MR. BellendeN KER has recently made a second report on the proceedings of the Board for the Revision of the Statute Law, in which he has reproduced rather more in detail the views sketched out in his first report; and as the Lord Chancellor seems to be satisfied with Mr. Ker's proceedings and plan, and has announced the preparation by the board of a series of bills, it will be important to see what the results really are which have been arrived at by the board, or rather by the chief commissioner, whose views are by no means coincident in all points with those of his colleagues.

The processes for consideration are-1. The revision of the statutes, to ascertain what are repealed or obsolete, and what in force. 2. The digestion of their contents, not as a legislative measure, but as affording the basis of legislation. 3. The preparation of consolidated and amended statutes, based on such a digest.

A revision of the statutes, Mr. Ker thinks, is demanded by many who do not know very clearly what they are asking. The real statute-book-the rolls of Parliament-are an historical collection, containing the laws of past ages as well as the existing laws; and to which, of course, it is no reproach that it is what it is and pretends to be. The printed editions of the Statutes at Large, as they are called, contain much that is useless for practical purposes; but they are private speculations, and Mr. Ker thinks that such publications should be left to private enterprise-on the general laissez faire principle now so much in fashion. Unauthorised by Parliament, a Government compilation, professing to shew the statutes in force, would have no peculiar value; and here we agree with Mr. Ker, but we think he is talking quite beside the purpose when he says, that an edition enacted by Parliament, declaring both affirmatively and negatively that those, and those only, are the statutes now in force, is quite impracticable, and would be of little use if it could be done. No doubt that would be so if the work were to stop there; but, as we shall have occasion to shew presently, such a revision of the statutes is, in our opinion, the essential and only practical basis of a thorough amendment of our statutes. For the same reason, we can see no pertinency in the distinction taken by Mr. Ker between expired and repealed acts. It is illogical to repeal an expired act; but who proposes to do so? All that is wanted is an authoritative declaration that such and no other statutory enactments are for the time being in force.

With respect to digestion, Mr. Ker observes, that though that is with every draftsman a necessary preliminary process to consolidation, "it does not follow that it is desirable actually to make a complete digest of the existing law, merely as an intermediate stage, before commencing the final process of consolidation, which is the only one really important, because it is the only one which really implies any improvement of the existing law; for the revision of the statutes, as already observed, implies only a publication, not authenticated, (except in the limited sense of a repeal of obsolete and doubtful statutes); a digest also implies only a publi cation; while I apprehend that your Lordship's great and immediate object is, to be provided with materials for direct legislative action towards the improvement of the statute law."

No doubt the Lord Chancellor would be glad to have some result to shew as soon as possible; but we apprehend that he would more gladly submit to labour in obscurity for a few years, if he could thereby insure the permanent amendment, not merely of our present statute law, but of our legislative practice. Let us see if anything tending to this result is proposed. Mr. Ker

says:

"Having thus stated my reasons for not recommending certain measures, I now proceed to state what are the measures which I do recommend; and, after the best consideration that I have been able to give to the subject, I think the course most feasible and most practically conducive to the desired result of an improved state of the statute law is the gradual consolidation, or, as I would rather call it, the re-writing of the statute law-combining, of course, with such consolidation or re-writing all such improvements of the law as can be suggested; in short, continuing a process which has for a long period been applied to isolated subjects, and in a desultory way-always, however, with the most marked advantage-but more rapidly, more carefully, and in a more uniform manner, and with more particular regard to the clear abrogation of all the previous statute law on the same subject. As fast as this process is performed, with reference to any branch of the law which is the subject of a group of statutes, the two other processes mentioned by your Lordship's me

morandum will have been effectually performed also -that is, a digest will have been actually or virtually made, and, in the course of framing the act, used and become unnecessary, and all the uncertainties which could be noticed on a revision will have been cleared up. Perhaps the foregoing proposal may appear no great matter to those who have been expecting something new and great and comprehensive, which was to relieve the public at once of those thirty-nine quarto volumes, and all the other annoyances of which complaints are so common. My answer to any one who should express any such disappointment would be, that it is something to have ascertained clearly that there is nothing new or great or comprehensive to be done. Vague language, both in speaking of the inconvenience of the present state of the law, and of the remedies to be brought to it, has been one, and not the least, of the causes which have hitherto deterred practical and moderate men from attempting to effect improvements; and if I have proved that the old and known course is also the best, if not the only course that admits of being practically pursued, I have at any rate proved something which was not universally felt or admitted before."

In support of this proposal, Mr. Ker observes-first, that it is useless to propose any work which is not of such a nature and in such a form that it can hope to pass through Parliament, according to its present constitution and usages; secondly, that a scientific analysis of the law would not afford facilities either to the public for reference and use, or to the Legislature for appeal; that to keep rights and remedies distinct, as has been suggested, the whole law must be recast; and gradual amendment, in the way proposed by Mr. Ker, would be impracticable. But this last remark is not, we presume, offered as an argument in favour of Mr. Ker's plan.

"The law," says Mr. Ker, "must be in such a form that it may be altered by isolated bills in any particular, and by bills which may be themselves discussed, altered, partially abandoned in their progress through the House, &c.; and any classification so abstract that the results of such alterations or abandonments in the course of debate could not be seen with tolerable clearness and ease, would be an obstruction to the course of business, and bills would be passed in defiance of such a classification. I imagine that those who advocate any such classification as I have alluded to unconsciously reserve to themselves a power of treating all new acts of Parliament merely as resolutions or instructions from which they themselves are to make the necessary alterations in their statutory code. It is obvious that nothing of this kind is practicable without an entire change in the mode of passing bills; and the arrangement of the law must therefore be such that the laws passed by future Parliaments, in the way in which we know they will and must be passed, whether well or ill drawn, will not be absolutely incapable of amalgamating with the old."

Mr. Ker must be speaking ironically when he deprecates a classification "so abstract that the result of alterations or abandonments in the course of debate could not be seen with tolerable clearness and ease." If obscurity and difficulty, instead of clearness and facility, were the incidents of classification, the present practice of passing bills and amendments, of which neither the framers nor the legislators see the results, must surely be a good preparation for legislating on a classified statute-book.

We find it difficult to reconcile Mr. Ker's denial of the practicability of a consolidation of the whole of our statute law at once with his recognition of the complete success of a similar experiment in America. The state of the statute law and the constitution and usages of the Legislature of New York, at the time when the revised statutes of New York were passed, were not so

widely different from those now existing as to allow of a consolidation which would be impracticable in the one state, being readily effected in the other. Mr. Ker says in his first report, that "the state of New York, having long felt the necessity of a revision of their statutes, which were in a great degree similar to those in this country, a commission was issued, and a very successful revision and consolidation of the statutes was effected. . . . The whole revised statutes, containing the reports of the commissioners, is printed in three moderate-sized octavo volumes;" and the same thing has been done in the state of Massachusetts. Whether the New York commissioners performed their task well or ill, and whether experience has shewn, or will shew, that they acted wisely, when "in numerous instances they reduced the rules of the common law to a text, and inserted them in their proper place in connexion with the statutory provisions on the subject to which they relate," is not material to the present question. The examples of New York and Massachusetts prove that the consolidation of the whole statute law of a country may be effected consistently with the forms and usages of a constitutional legislature.

Mr. Ker says "I have requested Mr. Rogers to draw up a paper containing a statement of the several groups of statutes which relate to the same subject, and which he conceives may be properly embodied in separate consolidation acts. This statement, although it is not of course to be considered as complete, is very useful, as shewing the present state of the statute-book, and the probable advantage which would arise from the process of consolidation. This paper is subjoined, and I think will shew the great and accurate knowledge possessed by Mr. Rogers of the whole contents of the statute-book. Another paper, on the consolidation or revision of the statutes relating to property, entering into greater detail than the nature of Mr. Rogers's paper admits of, is in course of preparation by myself and Mr. Brickdale, and will be presented to your Lordship with my next report."

The paper by Mr. Rogers is a kind of index to the general acts, without the references, but stating the number of acts on each subject, arranged alphabetically, in subdivisions, under the following general heads :"The Crown and Parliament,” “ Finance," "Public Economy," "Rights of Private Persons," "Persons under Disabilities," ""Administration of Civil Justice," "Criminal Law,' ""Administration of Criminal Justice," and "Religion."

Mr. Rogers calls this table "An Analysis of the Public General Acts." It has no claim to that title. Analysis, in relation to the subject in hand, means a pulling to pieces for the purpose of re-arrangement, and a systematic re-arrangement of the results. Here is neither a pulling to pieces nor a re-arrangement. The subjects of the various acts are taken in the concrete, as they have been taken by the Legislature, and indexed. Systematic arrangement in such a proceeding was impossible. Accordingly we find "Education, Science, and the Fine Arts," a subdivision of the head "Public Economy;" while there is, widely removed in the table, a distinct head of "Religion.' The latter head includes the subjects of Dissent, Tithes, and Leases of Church Lands; while Heresy and Roman Catholic Relief are placed under "Criminal Law;" the Land Tax under "Finance;" County Rates under "Public Economy;" and Alienation under "Rights of Private Persons." Again: the Customs, the Post-office, &c. are subdivisions of "Finance;" but Offences against the Customs and Post-office Laws are classed under "Criminal Law." With respect to debtor and creditor, we find Benefit Building Societies, Industrial and Provident Institutions, Insurance and Joint stock Companies, under "Public Economy;" Fraudulent Assurances and Mortgages under "Rights relating to

we

Real Property;" Bills of Exchange, Bonds, Contracts, Debts, and Usury, under "Rights relating to Personal Property;" Bankruptcy under "Persons under Disability" and Insolvent Debtors and Judgments under "Administration of Civil Justice." It is not on such a classification as this that any plan for the permanent improvement of the statute law can be founded. If we had nothing to deal with but the existing statutes, the arrangement, bad as it is, might be tolerable. But as the moral perceptions and requirements of a nation are continually changing, and the law is being continually altered in accordance with them”, must provide for development as well as present arrangement. The bankrupt law was consolidated after a fashion by the stat. 6 Geo. 4, c. 16, but no provision was made for its future amendment on any systematic plan; and the consequence was, that, in a short time, successive amending and altering statutes again reduced the bankrupt laws to such a state of confusion, that even the wretched "Bankrupt-law Consolidation Act, 1849," was accepted as an improvement. No provision can be made for the systematic revision of any consolidation act that is not part of a previously settled and complete arrangement of the law; for in classification, though we begin with particulars, we must from them ascend to generals, and then come back to details before any two particulars can be rightly placed with regard to each other.

Mr. Ker's scheme of a succession of consolidation acts, on subjects taken at random from the " Analysis" of Mr. Rogers, would indeed furnish perpetual employment to a permanent board of commissioners, but it would not redeem the Lord Chancellor's promise, nor answer the just expectations of the Profession. Such a work might go on for ever, without in the least tending to a rational arrangement of the subjects of legislation. It has been shown by Mr. Coode, and may be assumed as an axiom, that the only way to prevent the statute law, once arranged, from getting into confusion, is to have the entire codex or statute-book perpetually under revision by the Legislature. Whenever an alteration is made, it must be made by the way of elision and substitution— the old matter must be erased, the new put into its place. It is impossible to do this until the whole matter has been arranged on such a system as to leave no room for doubt as to the proper and exact place for every provision, however minute-a system like that adopted by Mr. Coode in preparing the digest of the poor laws, of which he says, "It contains about 7400 articles. In reducing them to the systematic order and expression here recommended, I may be allowed to say, that, anomalous and absurd as a great part of the matter is, there was in no instance the least occasion for doubt or difficulty as to either the order of any article, or its expression. In digesting, a few years ago, into 873 articles, the heterogeneous matter known as the Penal or Criminal Law, there was no more occasion of doubt or difficulty." For example, it has been thought fit at various times to require certain solemnities to particular contracts, or acts affecting private rights; and the result has been a great diversity of statutory requisitions, without any common principle to justify that diversity. Some contracts and some acknowledgments of right must be in writing, signed by the principal only; others may be signed by the principal or his agent. The old Copyright Acts required licenses to be in writing, attested by two witnesses, but were silent as to assignments. Alienations for charitable purposes must be by indenture, attested by two witnesses, and inrolled. Alienations by tenants in tail must be inrolled. The assignment of ships is subject to peculiar regulations: registration is required for the

*See Professor Foster's recent and very able work, Elements of Jurisprudence, Lecture 6.

protection of purchasers in some cases, not in others. Certain warrants of attorney are void, unless executed and attested in a special manner. Consents to judges' orders, having the same effect, are under no such statutory restriction. The object of each of these provisions is either the protection of the actor from inadvertence or fraud, the publication of the act, or the preservation of evidence of it; and in a well-devised (and therefore well-arranged) statute-book they would all be found together, and not scattered here and there, as Mr. Rogers would have them, under such heads as "Contracts relating to Lands," "Contracts relating to Goods," "Copyright," """Patents," "Ships," "Mortmain,' "Limitations," "Fines and Recoveries," Judgments," "Wills," &c. The consequence of putting the statute-book into systematic order, and keeping it so, would be, that every amendment of the law, instead of being partial, as it now invariably is, would be necessarily extended and adopted to the full extent of the principle involved in it.

66

For these reasons we utterly dissent from Mr. Ker's proposal, and deny his assertion that a more scientific plan would fail in practice. Whether the present commissioners, or any of them, are or is competent to devise and carry into effect a rational and complete arrangement of the statute law, is a question with which we have nothing to do; but we are quite certain that the task is not beyond the power of any lawyer who has been trained to habits of accurate analysis, and that when it is performed the result will be far more intelligible to the Legislature and to the public than any consolidation bill that has yet been prepared or is likely to be prepared on Mr. Ker's plan. Let the Government only offer a prize of 1000l., and the prospect of a commissionership, for the best analysis of the existing statute law, and we will promise them the agreeable dilemma of having to choose between a dozen analyses, all undeniably sufficient and complete, identical in every essential-differing only in unimportant particulars of terminology and style. The thing is as easy and certain as any operation in the mathematics.

London Gazettes.

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 10. BANKRUPTS.

GEORGE COODE, late of Haydock Lodge, Winwick, Lancashire, proprietor of a lunatic asylum, and boarding and lodging house keeper, and New Oxford-street, and now of Victoria street, Westminster, Middlesex, patent irrigator and hose manufacturer, Feb. 21 at half-past 1, and March 28 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Graham; Sols. Hill & Matthews, 1, Bury-court, St. Mary-axe.— Petition filed Nov. 19.

WILLIAM TOOVEY ASHFIELD, Church-street, Lambeth, Surrey, lithographic and copper-plate printer, trader, dealer and chapman, Feb. 22 at half-past 2, and March 21 at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Graham; Sol. Moss, 23, Moorgate-street, City. - Petition filed Feb. 8.

JOHN COX, formerly of New-road, Lower-road, Rother hithe, then of Wimbledon-park-road, Wandsworth, then of Mansel Villas, Wimbledon, and lately of Bridgefield Villa, Wandsworth, and now a prisoner in the Queen's Prison, Surrey, builder, dealer and chapman, (formerly in partner. ship with John Foster, carrying on the business of builders at New-road, Lower-road, Rotherhithe, under the style or firm of Foster & Cox), Feb. 17 and March 24 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Cannan; Sol. Wilson, 16, Gresham-street, London.-Petition dated Feb. 8. RICHARD GEORGE DIAMOND, Newton Abbott, Devonshire, stationer and publisher, dealer and chapman, Feb. 21 and March 14 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter: Off. Ass. Hirtzel; Sol. Stogdon, Exeter.-Petition filed Feb. 2.

JOSEPH CARTER, Gloucester, scrivener, bill broker, dealer
and chapman, Feb. 27 and March 27 at 11, District Court
of Bankruptcy, Bristol: Off. Ass. Hutton; Sols. Bevan &
Girling, Bristol.-Petition filed Feb. 8.
ROBERT HAMMOND, Ripon, builder, dealer and chap-
man, Feb. 23 and March 24 at 11, District Court of Bank-
ruptcy, Leeds: Off. Ass. Young; Sols. Barr & Nelson,
Leeds; Hindle, Ripon. -- Petition dated Feb. 7.
JOHN ROBERT GIBSON, Waterloo, near Liverpool, inn-
keeper, victualler, dealer and chapman, Feb. 22 and March
16 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool: Off.
Ass. Turner; Sol. Hinde, Liverpool.-Petition filed Feb. 6.
JOSEPH ELLIS, Ardwick, near Manchester, joiner and
builder, Feb. 23 and March 16 at 12, District Court of
Bankruptcy, Manchester: Off. Ass. Pott; Sol. Blair, Man-
chester.-Petition filed Jan. 31.
THOMAS WORSLEY, Macclesfield, Cheshire, clog and
patten maker, dealer and chapman, Feb. 24 and March 17
at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester: Off. Ass.
Pott; Sols. Neild, Manchester; Hodgson, Birmingham;
Sole & Co., 68, Aldermanbury, London.-Petition filed
Jan. 23.

MEETINGS.

March 3 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds.-Joseph
Greenwood, Spring Head, Keighley, Yorkshire, woolstapler,
March 3 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds.

To be granted, unless an Appeal be duly entered. James Bohn, St. James's-st., Middlesex, bookseller.-John Ready, Holywell-st., Shoreditch, Middlesex, oilman.-Robert Jeffery, Upper North-place, Gray's-inn-road, Middlesex, coachmaker. John Hunter, Hove, Sussex, cowkeeper.-E. Cox, Great Queen-st., Lincoln's-inn-fields, Middlesex, plane manufacturer.— Geo. Bolton, Albany-st., Regent's-park, Middlesex, coach maker.-John Roberts, Tividale, Worcestershire, wire drawer.-Henry Bolt, Birmingham, silversmith. FIAT ANNUlled.

James Spencer Gorely, Ewell, Surrey, farmer.
PARTNERSHIP Dissolved.
Wm. Taunton and Chas. John Blount, Worcester, attor-
nies-at-law and solicitors.

[blocks in formation]

Who have filed their Petitions in the Court of Bankruptcy, and have obtained an Interim Order for Protection from Process.

Wm. H. Dee, Cambridge, plumber, Feb. 21 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, pr. d.-James H. Gibbons, Wood-st., Cheapside, London, straw hat warehouseman, Feb. 22 at 1, J. Longhurst, Sunninghill, Berkshire, innkeeper, March 1 Court of Bankruptcy, London, last ex.-Charles C. Hamilton, at 12, County Court of Surrey, at Chertsey.-Jas. Cox, MacLittle Queen-street, Lincoln's-inn-fields, Middlesex, iron- clesfield, Cheshire, fishmonger, March 2 at 11, County Court monger, Feb. 21 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, Lon. of Cheshire, at Macclesfield.-John Goldthorpe, Macclesfield, don, last ex.-John Collins, Beccles, Suffolk, plumber, Feb. Cheshire, draper, March 2 at 11, County Court of Cheshire, 20 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Frederick at Macclesfield.-John Luck Overy, Rye, Sussex, out of F. Cobb, Dover, Kent, grocer, Feb. 22 at 1, Court of Bank- business, Feb. 27 at 12, County Court of Sussex, at Rye.ruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Wm. W. Bonney and Thomas F. Elizabeth Wilson, widow, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, Beales, William-street, Knightsbridge, Middlesex, wine merbaker, Feb. 22 at 10, County Court of Worcestershire, at chants, Feb. 22 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac. Kidderminster.-John H. Payn, Canterbury, Kent, out of -Albert Hardwick, Windsor, Berkshire, linendraper, Feb. business, Feb. 14 at 11, County Court of Kent, at Canter28 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.; March 7 bury.- Wm. Spence, Northampton, stationer, March 8 at 11, at 2, div.-Thomas Speed the elder, Liverpool, butcher, Feb. County Court of Northamptonshire, at Northampton.-Wm. 24 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, aud. ac. Webb, York, joiner, Feb. 27 at 10, County Court of York-John Meredith, Tattenhall, Cheshire, maltster, Feb. 24 at shire, at York.-Jonas Smith, Norwich, shoemaker, Feb. 24 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, aud. ac.; March at 10, County Court of Norfolk, at Norwich.-Daniel Cocks, 3 at 11, div.-William Fawcett, Liverpool, merchant. Feb. Catton, Norfolk, publican, Feb. 24 at 10, County Court of 23 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, aud. ac.Norfolk, at Norwich.-Jacob Shimman, Great Yarmouth, Joshua Taylor, Manchester, power-loom cloth manufacturer, Norfolk, dealer in tea, Feb. 28 at 10, County Court of NorFeb. 22 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, fork, at Great Yarmouth.-John Baker, Hay, Brecknockshire, aud. ac.-Richard Jackson and Richard Yale, Leeds, York. innkeeper, March 3 at 11, County Court of Brecknockshire, at shire, engineers, Feb. 23 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Hay.-John Walker, Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, baker, Feb. Leeds, aud. ac.— -Thos. Avison, Leeds, Yorkshire, stone mer20 at 10, County Court of Suffolk, at Bury St. Edmund's.chant, Feb. 23 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, Rev. Wm. R. Browne, Kingston, clerk, Feb. 24 at 11, County aud. ac.-James Ibbetson, Bradford, Yorkshire, bookseller, Court of Hampshire, at Portsmouth.-R. Yeates, Swansea, Feb. 23 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac. Glamorganshire, out of business, Feb. 14 at 10, County Court -John Henry Whitfield and Francis Lyth, York, builders, of Glamorganshire, at Swansea.-Benjamin Pugh, Old Hill, March 6 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. Rowley, Staffordshire, beer retailer, Feb. 24 at 9, County ac.; at half-past 11, div.-George Field, Bond-court, Wal- Court of Worcestershire, at Dudley.-John H. Davies the brook, London, packer, March 3 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, younger, Bridgend, Glamorganshire, assistant grocer, Feb. 15 London, div.-Isaac Unwin, Poland-st., Oxford-st., Middle- at 10, County Court of Glamorganshire, at Bridgend.-Thos. sex, builder, March 3 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, Coates, County Prison of Gloucester, turnkey, Feb. 28 at 10, div.-Alfred Dawson, Charles-st., Mile-end New-town, Mid-County Court of Gloucestershire, at Gloucester.-E. Jackson, dlesex, engineer, March 3 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, Lon- Gloucester, licensed victualler, Feb. 28 at 10, County Court don, div.-Charles Lowe Meates, Conduit-street, Hanover- of Gloucestershire, at Gloucester.-James Husbands, Huntsquare, Middlesex, grocer, March 4 at 11, Court of Bank-ley, Gloucestershire, surgeon's assistant, Feb. 28 at 10, County ruptcy, London, div.-Thos. Linnell, Gresham-street, Lon- Court of Gloucestershire, at Gloucester. don, commission agent, March 4 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-Wm. Abram Cogar, Newgatest., London, and Quadrant, Regent-street, Middlesex, shoe dealer, March 4 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.Robert Pace the elder, Liverpool, shipowner, March 6 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, fin. div.-Richard Foster Breed and William Eccleston, Liverpool, merchants, March 3 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, div. -J. German Harrison, Liverpool, dealer in locks, March 3 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, div.-Joseph Wood Ackroyd, Bradford, Yorkshire, worsted spinner, March 3 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, div. CERTIFICATES.

To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on or before the Day of Meeting.

The following Persons, who, on their several Petitions filed in the Court, have obtained Interim Orders for Protection from Process, are required to appear in Court as hereinafter mentioned, at the Court-house, in Portugal-street, Lincoln's Inn, as follows, to be examined and dealt with according to the Statute:

Feb. 24 at 10, before the CHIEF COMMISSIONER. Middlesex, wheelwright.-Thomas Lane, Kent-street, SouthChas. J. Ascott, Tryphena-place, Bow-common, Bromley, wark, Surrey, eating-house keeper.

Feb. 25 at 11, before Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS.
Wm. H. C. Adams, Quickset-row, New-road, Middlesex,
tailor.-Edwin Johnson, Albany-street, Regent's-park, Mid-
dlesex, out of business.-Robert D. Christmas, London-road,
Southwark, Surrey, surgeon.

Feb. 27 at 10, before the CHIEF COMMISSIOner.
Wm. W. Baker, Circassian-place, Ealing, Middlesex, out

Samuel Buckley, Macclesfield, Cheshire, miller, March 3 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester.-Jonathan Roebuck, Austonley, Yorkshire, woollen-cloth manufacturer,' of business.

The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before the Court, in Portugal-street, to be examined and dealt with according to the Statute:

Register and Record Office of Seamen: 48. 1d. (making 10s. 44d.) in the pound.- David Wingfield, Rascombe, near Stroud, Gloucestershire, lieutenant on half-pay: 1s. 5d. in the pound.

Apply at the Provisional Assignees' Office, Portugal-street,

Feb. 24 at 11, before the CHIEF COMMISSIONER. Humphrey Stevenson, Maria-street, Pearson-street, Kingsland road, Middlesex, linendraper.—Samuel Knight, Fore- | Lincoln's-inn-fields, London, between the hours of 11 and 3. street, London, cheesemonger.-John 1. J. English, Strand, Middlesex, captain in her Majesty's 1st West India Regiment of Infantry, on full pay.-W. Granger, Mount-pleasant, Clerkenwell, Middlesex, out of business.-Emanuel Winsor, Pyrcroft, Chertsey, Surrey, fellmonger.

Feb. 24 at 10, before Mr. Commissioner MURPHY. P. E. Chappuis, Liverpool-street, Bishopsgate, London, manager to a patent daylight reflector manufacturer.-R. Axtens, Barnsbury-street, Islington, Middlesex, cheesemonger.-G. Soper, Great Guildford-street, Holland-st., Blackfriars, Surrey, linendraper.-Thomas Beesley, Bay-street, Mayfield-road, Dalston, Middlesex, accountant's clerk.-G. W. Tye, Branchplace, Hoxton Old-town, Middlesex, out of business.- Wm. Henry Howe, New Park-street, Southwark, Surrey, lodginghouse keeper.

Feb. 25 at 11, before Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS. James Ball, Lambeth-hill, Thames-st., London, stationer. -P. S. Miskin, Charlwood-street, Vauxhall-road, Westminster, Middlesex, clerk to a carman.-S. Holmes, Broadway, Ludgate-hill, London, eating-house keeper.

Feb. 27 at 11, before the CHIEF COMMISSIONER. Sydney John Spyer, Bedford-place, Russell-square, Middlesex, clerk to a merchant.

The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before a Judge of the County Court, to be examined and dealt with according to the Statute :

At the County Court of Gloucestershire, at GLOUCESTER, Feb. 28.

Thomas Blunn, Clifford Chambers, saddler.

At the County Court of Yorkshire, at YORK, Feb. 27. William Dickinson, Pontefract, joiner.-Frank Beatson, Sheffield, brass turner.-John Thorpe, Sheffield, out of business.- -William Wigglesworth, Bradford, hairdresser.-John Leake, Balkholme, near Howden, nail-bag manufacturer.Wm. Thornton, Bolton, near Huddersfield, whiting manufacturer.- George Turner, Lidgate, near Holmfirth, out of business.-G. Grest, Middlesbrough-on-Tees, licensed victualler. -Henry Weatherill, York, out of business.-Thomas Tate Smith, New Malton, licensed retailer of ale.

March 1, at the same Place.

Thomas Midgley, Thornton, near Bradford, woolcomber.John Richard Jessop, Halifax, cabinet maker.-John Greenwood, Briggate, Leeds, out of business.- Charles Butterfield, Kirkgate, Leeds, out of business.-James Alexander Black, Wakefield, attorney-at-law.-David Toyne, Sheffield, butcher. -John Hewitt, Sheepscar, near Leeds, out of business.Edward Rodley, Morley, near Leeds, cloth manufacturer.Hiram Moulson, Little Horton-lane, near Bradford, stonemason.-John Cockcroft, Bradford, out of business.-Joseph Temple, Leeds, out of business. - Matthew Gaunt, Dewsbury, out of business.—John Wainwright, York, out of business. -Edwin Bancroft, Sheffield, bookkeeper.-John Cockfield, Kirby, Ravensworth, near Richmond, farmer.-Peter Hansen, Middlesbrough-on-Tees, mariner.-John Fawcett, Huddersfield, currier.-Joseph Smith, Sheffield, out of business.Joseph Lightowler, Knottingley, near Ferrybridge, lime burner. Bridget Connor, York, out of business.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS' DIVIDENDS. Solomon Harvey, saddler, Old Church-street, Paddington, Middlesex, schoolmaster: 18. 3d. in the pound.-John H. Marshall, Great Winchester-street, London, chief engineer in the Royal Navy: 38. 3d. in the pound.-Frederick Holder, Arundel street, Coventry-street, Haymarket, Middlesex, lieutenant in the British Army: 114d. in the pound.-R. Gillow, Liverpool, currier: 28. 14d. in the pound.-Joseph Searle, Brentwood, Essex, attorney-at-law: 84d. in the pound.-John Gaskell, St. Helen's, Lancashire, provision dealer: 18. 8d. in the pound.-Jeremiah Whittington, Landport, Portsea, Hampshire, baker: 18. 74d. in the pound.--Frederick W. L. Stockdale, Manor-place, Walworth, Surrey, author: 38. ld. (making 188.) in the pound.-John P. Cooper, Bilston, Staffordshire, chemist: 18. 74d. in the pound.-Richard Lewis, Trafalgar-square, Stepney, Middlesex, clerk in the General

[From the Dublin Gazette of Jan. 20, 1854.] COURT FOR RELIEF OF INSOLVENT DEBTORS IN IRELAND.

The following Prisoner is ordered to be brought up before the Court, in Dublin, Feb. 25 at 11, to be dealt with according to the Statute:

Arthur John Robinson, Annesfield, otherwise Belough, Roscommon, brewer.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14.

BANKRUPTS.

WASHINGTON YARROLL and THOMAS HALLAM, High-street, Borough, Surrey, (lately of Fleet-street, London), tailors, dealers and chapmen, Feb. 22 and April 5 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Nicholson; Sols. Messrs. J. & J. H. Linklater, 17, Sise-lane, London. -Petition dated Feb. 8.

BIRCHAM ALPE, Duke-street, Manchester-square, Middlesex, milliner and dealer in Berlin wool, dealer and chapman, Feb. 20 and April 5 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Nicholson; Sols. Messrs. J. & J. H. Linklater, 17, Sise-lane, London.-Petition dated Jan. 27. GEORGE BROOKS, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, tailor, builder, dealer and chapman, Feb. 25 at 11, and March 31 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sols. Foreman, Tunbridge Wells; Richardson & Talbot, 47, Bed. ford-row.-Petition dated Feb. 9.

JAMES HEATHWAITE, King-street, Covent-garden, Mid-
dlesex, cheesemonger, dealer and chapman, Feb. 24 and
March 27 at half- past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London:
Off. Ass. Cannan; Sols. Ashurst & Son, 6, Old Jewry,
London.-Petition dated Jan. 25.
ALEXANDER STUART, Queen's-road West, Chelsea,
Middlesex, grocer and cheesemonger, dealer and chapman,
Feb. 23 at 11, and March 30 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy,
London: Off. Ass. Bell; Sol. Fitch, Union-street, South-
wark. Petition filed Feb. 8.
FREDERICK JAMES WEST, London-terrace, Hackney-
road, Middlesex, draper, dealer and chapman, Feb. 24 and
March 28 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass.
Lee; Sol. Jones, 15, Sise-lane, Bucklersbury, London.-
Petition filed Feb. 11.
THOMAS BALLINGER, Birmingham, confectioner and
baker, dealer and chapman, Feb. 23 and March 22 at 12,
District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Off. Ass.
Whitmore; Sol. Hodgson, Birmingham.-Petition dated
Feb. 9.
JAMES GIBNEY, Nottingham, currier and leather seller,
Feb. 24 and March 17 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy,
Nottingham Off. Ass. Harris; Sol. Coope, Nottingham,
-Petition dated Feb. 8.

:

CHARLES LEAKE, Crowland, Lincolnshire, grocer, draper, dealer and chapman, Feb. 24 and March 17 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Nottingham: Off. Ass. Harris; Sols. Bray & Bridges, Birmingham; Hill & Matthews, St. Mary-axe, London.-Petition dated Feb. 4. ISAAC DEWHIRST, Halifax, Yorkshire, late a worsted spinner, now a commission agent, dealer and chapman, Feb. 27 and March 28 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds: Off. Ass. Hope; Sols. Rudd & Kenny, Halifax; Bond & Barwick, Leeds.-Petition dated Feb. 7. RICHARD GEORGE BEESLEY, Manchester, cotton spinner, cotton twist and weft dealer, yarn merchant, cotton thread and yarn dealer, agent and commission dealer, Feb. 24 and March 17 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester: Off. Ass. Pott; Sols. Atkinsons & Last, Manchester.--Petition filed Feb. 2.

JOSEPH GRAVE, Manchester, warehouseman, dealer and chapman, Feb. 28 and March 28 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester: Off. Ass. Fraser; Sols. J. & W. Norris, Manchester; Norris & Allen, Bedford-row, Lon- › don.-Petition filed Feb. 7.

[ocr errors]
« ZurückWeiter »