To whom Articled, Assigned, &c.

John Tattersall Auckland

Robert Hillman

John Thompson; James Watkins

Thomas Acres Curtis

Francis Kearsey

Thomas Moseley; William Moseley Tayler

Edward Lane Swatman

Knowles King

Francis Gibbs Abell

John Hawley Edwards

George Brooke Nelson
John Peter Fearon

Baldwyn and Morgan

Alfred Goddard

Samuel Cotton

Alfred Grundy

George Furley; Stephen Charles Venour
John Edwin Marshall

Thomas George

Richard Armstead

Thomas Morris; John Fortescue

William Gibson

Richard Bowerman; William Sandys

Robert Christopher Parker

Philip Octavius Jervis ;
William Romaine Gregg
Timothy Tyrrell
Robert Wortley

Dixon Robinson

William Frogatt Robson

Christopher Robson; Charles Henry Edmands

Joshua Thomas

John Roger Rush

Charles Augustus Helm; Edwin Wilkins Field
John Thomas Tenney

William Charles Sole

William Grant Allison; Robert Swann

Edward Erskine Tustin

William George

John Mayhew; Ralph Darlington; Thos. Frederick

John Musgrave; Peter Wright

Arthur Bayley Markham

Inigo Gell; James Sowton

James Wheeler; Samuel Benjamin Merriman

Charles Druce; Rowland Nevitt Bennett

Profes. Lists.-Notes of Week.-Superior Courts: V. C. Kindersley.-V. C. Wood. 69

Metcalfe, Frederic Morehouse, Wisbeach.
May 9.

Page, George, Birmingham. May 19.
Page, William Sutton, Stroud. May 9.
Payn, William, Birmingham. April 25.
Pinniger, Henry William, Westbury. May 5.
Stevens, Richard, Witham. May 19.
Stevenson, John Mackeness, Northampton.
May 16.

PERPETUAL COMMISSIONER.

Appointed under the Fines and Recoveries' Act, with date when gazetted.

Simonds, Robert Withington, Winchester, in and for the City of Winchester, also in and for the County of Hants. May 12.

NOTES OF THE WEEK.

NEW MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT.

Henry Manners, Baron Waterpark, for the city of Lichfield, in the room of Thomas Geo. Anson (commonly called Viscount Anson) now Earl of Lichfield, called up to the House of Peers.

Frederick North, Esq., for Hastings, in the room of Musgrave Brisco, Esq., who has ac cepted the office of Steward of her Majesty's Chiltern Hundreds.

Sir Thomas Erskine Perry, Knight, for Henry Tufnell, who has accepted the office of Devonport, in the room of the Right Hon. Steward of her Majesty's Manor of Northstead.

LAW APPOINTMENTS.

Gillery Pigott, Esq., has been appointed Counsel to the Board of Inland Revenue, in the room of Thomas Phinn, Esq., M. P., appointed Counsel to the Admiralty and Judge Advocate of the Fleet.

COLONIAL LAW APPOINTMENTS.

The Queen has been pleased to appoint William Young, Esq., to be Attorney-General, and William A. Henry, Esq., to be SolicitorGeneral for the Province of Nova Scotia.From the London Gazette of May 23.

RECENT DECISIONS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS.

pauper

THIS was a petition for the payment to the petitioners of the expenses for the support of lunatic in an asylum, and of his wife and child, out of a fund in Court paid in under the 10 & 11 Vict. c. 96, to which he was entitled, and for a declaration that such fund was liable for the future maintenance. The fund had not been invested.

Tripp, in support, cited In re Upfull's Trust, 3 MN. & G. 281; Read v. Legard, 6 Exch. R. 636.

corpus

The Vice-Chancellor said, there was great difficulty with respect to applying the of a pauper's property for past expenses of maintenance, although the income might properly have been so applied, but upon the authorities cited the order would be made as asked.

A testator, by his will, dated in 1825, devised all his real estate of or to which he then was or at the time of his decease should be seised or entitled, or which he then had or thereafter should have power to dispose of or appoint by will, on certain trusts for his wife and children, and by a codicil in 1827, after reciting a contract for the purchase of an estate, he directed the same to be held on the trusts of the will. The estate was afterwards conveyed to him on the usual trusts to bar dower: Held, on special case, that as it was the testator's intention by his codicil to confirm his will, but the subsequent conveyance took the estate out of the codicil, and it passed to the eldest son as heir-at-law, the heir-at-law was put to his election to take under the will or such estate.

THIS was a special case under the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 35. The testator, by his will, dated in July, 1825, devised all his real estates of or to which he then was, or at the time of his decease should be, seised or entitled, or which he then or thereafter should have power to dispose of or appoint by will, upon the trusts therein mentioned for his wife and children. By a subsequent codicil, after reciting a contract entered into in November, 1827, for the purchase of freehold property at Stockwell, he declared that it should be held by his execu

70

Superior Courts: V. C. Wood.-Queen's Bench.

tors and trustees on the same trusts as declared by the will as to the real estate therein comprised, and the estate was afterwards conveyed to the testator to the usual uses to bar dower. On the death of the testator in September, 1832, the eldest son entered into possession of the property at Stockwell, in accordance with the opinion of the late Mr. Preston that the subsequent conveyance revoked the codicil. The youngest child attained the age of 21 in September, 1851, and this special case was stated, the eldest son being defendant, and the other children plaintiff's.

W. H. Terrell for the plaintiffs; Rolt and A. Smith for the defendant.

The Vice-Chancellor said, it was the intention of the testator, by his codicil, to confirm the arrangements of his will. The subsequent conveyance, however, had taken the estate at Stockwell out of the codicil, and was an estate of which the testator died seised. There must, therefore, be a declaration for the heir to elect whether he would take it and abandon his interest under the will, or convey the estate and accept under the will.

Court of Queen's Bench.
O'Toole v. Brown and others. May 3, 1854.
WILL. CONSTRUCTION. 66
-

ESTATE AND
EFFECTS OF WHAT KIND SOEVER.".
REAL ESTATE.

Cur, ad. vult.

authority: Held, that the defendants' right of stoppage in transitu was gone. In this case it appeared that the defendants had stopped in transitu a cargo of corn purchased of them, and which had not been paid for, and that the bill of lading had been transferred to the plaintiffs with the defendants' authority before such stoppage, for a valuable consideration.

Cur. ad. vult.

The Court said, that as the defendants being unpaid vendors had prima facie a right of stoppage in transitu, it laid on the plaintiffs to show such right was gone. A bill of lading would not pass by delivery for a valuable consideration, like a bill of exchange, without regard to who made the transfer, but it was necessary to show it came into the plaintiffs' hands before the stoppage, with the defendants' authority. As it appeared from the evidence, therefore, that the defendants had so authorised the transfer, the plaintiffs were entitled to judg

ment.

Regina v. Jervis. May 4, 1854.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES' ACT.-APPOINT-
MENT OF POLICE SUPERINTENDENTS AS
INSPECTORS.-CERTIORARI.

Quære, whether the appointment as inspectors
of weights and measures in certain districts
of a company under the 5 & 6 W ́m. 4, c.
63, of two superintendents of police is valid,
although without salary, under the 2 & 3
Vict. c. 93, s. 10.

But a rule was made absolute, with costs, to quash a certiorari to bring up such order of appointment, a certiorari being taken away by the 36th section of the 5 & 6 Wm. 4, c. 63.

THIS was a rule nisi to quash a certiorari which had been granted to bring up two orders by the sessions for the county of Suffolk under the 5 & 6 Wm. 4, c. 63, appointing two superintendents of police as inspectors of weights and measures in certain districts of the county, but without salary, and directing the days on which they should attend with the standards.

The Court said, that the word " "estate" was sufficient to pass real estate unless there was something in the will to show that it was used in a less extensive sense. Here, however, the trusts were applicable to real as well as to personal estate, and indicated no preference for By the Rural Police Act, 2 & 3 Vict. c. 93, the eldest son, but that all the children should s. 10, it is enacted, that "all chief and other be placed on an equal footing. It was con- constables appointed under this Act shall be tended that the absence of the word "devise" restrained from employing themselves in any showed the testator's intention to die intestate office or employment for hire or gain other as to his real estate, but the words used, "give than in the execution of their duties under this and bequeath," were quite sufficient, and the Act." presumed intention was rebutted by the addition of the words "of what kind soever. The

defendants were therefore entitled to judgment.
Gurney and others v. Behrend and others.
May 3, 1854.

BILL OF LADING, TRANSFER OF.-RIGHT OF
UNPAID VENDORS TO STOP IN TRANSITU.

A bill of lading of a cargo of corn purchased
of the defendants, but not paid for, had
been transferred to the plaintiffs for a va-
luable consideration with the defendants'

Worlledge showed cause, and referred to the 17th section of the 5 & 6 Wm. 4, c. 63, which "shall

enacted that the justices of the peace

direct what reasonable remuneration shall be paid to such inspectors for the discharge of such duties as they shall have been ordered by such justices or magistrates as aforesaid to perform."

Power and Couch in support, on the ground that the certiorari was taken away by the 36th section of the Act.

The Court accordingly made the rule absolute, with costs.

Superior Courts: Queen's Bench.-Exchequer.

Whitmore v. Horne. May 5, 1854.
ACTION FOR BREACH OF COVENANT
ON SALE OF

INSTRUCT
BUSINESS.

APPRENTICE

TO

The defendant, after having covenanted by a deed of apprenticeship to instruct the plaintiff in the business of a chemist, &c., sold the business to another person: Held, overruling a demurrer to the declaration in an action to recover damages for breach of the covenant, that the covenant was a personal one and could not be fulfilled by procuring the plaintiff to be instructed by the successor in the business.

THIS was an action to recover damages for the breach of a covenant in a deed of apprenticeship whereby the defendant covenanted to instruct the plaintiff in the business of a chemist, druggist, and dentist-the defendant having disabled himself by the sale of his business.

71

the money was necessarily payable, and therefore was not prejudiced by the omission of the words, and the plaintiff was therefore entitled to judgment.

Burchfield v. Moore. May 5, 6, 1854. BILL OF EXCHANGE.-ACTION BY INDORSEE

AGAINST ACCEPTOR. -MATERIAL ALTE

RATION.-DISCHARGE OF ACCEPTOR.

To an action by the indorsee against the acceptor of a bill of exchange, the defendant pleaded that the words "payable at the Bull Inn, Aldgate," had been added after acceptance, without his knowledge or consent: Held a material alteration, and on demurrer to the replication that the bill had been indorsed to the plaintiff for value before it became due, and without notice of the alteration, judgment for the defendant. To this action by the indorsee against the acceptor of a bill of exchange, the defendant pleaded that it had been altered in a material particular since acceptance. The case now came on upon a demurrer to a replication that the bill had been endorsed to the plaintiff for I value before it became due and without notice The Court (without calling on Brett for the of the alteration. It appeared that the words plaintiff) said, that the contract was founded on" payable at the Bull Inn, Aldgate," had been the personal confidence in the defendant's skill and character, and that a breach was committed by the sale, and the plaintiff was therefore entitled to judgment.

Milward appeared in support of a demurrer to this declaration on the ground that the covenant was not personal and would be fulfilled by his causing the plaintiff to be instructed by his successor.

Mudd v. Fagg. May 5, 1854.

added without the defendant's knowledge.
Holland, for the defendant, in support of the
demurrer; Bovill for the plaintiff, contrà.
Cur. ad. vult.

The Court said, that if the words added had been in the defendant's handwriting, there

COMMON LAW PROCEDURE ACT.-COUNT IN would still have been a general acceptance, but

DECLARATION ON ACCOUNT STATED.
OMISSION OF WORDS MONEY PAYABLE."
-DEMURRER.

as they were added without his consent they "constituted a material alteration and varied the contract between the parties to the bill, and had ceased to be the accepted bill, and the The bill therefore discharged the acceptor. plaintiff as indorsee was in no better position than the indorser. The defendant was entitled to judgment.

A count in a declaration followed the 6th form in Schedule B. to the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, on an account stated, but omitted the words " money payable," directed by form 1, to precede money counts: A demurrer to the count was overruled upon the authority of s. 91 of the Act.

THIS was a demurrer to a count in the declaration following the 6th form in Schedule B. to the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, which is as follows:-"Money found to be due from the defendant to the plaintiff on accounts stated between them."

M. Lloyd in support, on the ground of the omission in the declaration of the words "money_payable," referring to Form 1 in Sched. B., which is as follows:-" Money payable by the defendant to the plaintiff for these words money payable, &c., should precede money counts like i to 14, but need only be inserted in the first] goods bargained and sold by the plaintiff to the defendant."

Raymond, contrà, was not called on.
The Court, after referring to s. 91 of the
Act,' said, that in this case the defendant knew

'Which enacts, that "the forms contained in the Schedule B. to this Act annexed shall

Court of Exchequer.

Chaplin v. Levy. May 1, 1854.

CITY OF LONDON SMALL DEBTS' ACT.-
CERTIFICATE FOR COSTS WHERE VER-
DICT ABOVE 201.

Held, that the certificate for costs under the
15 & 16 Vict. c. lxxvii., in an action where
the plaintiff recovers a verdict above 201.,
need not be given forthwith.

THIS was a motion for a rule nisi to set aside a verdict of Erle, J., for the plaintiff's costs in an action where he had recovered a verdict above 201.

be sufficient, and those and the like forms may be used, with such modifications as may be necessary to meet the facts of the case; but nothing herein contained shall render it erroneous or irregular to depart from the letter of such forms, so long as the substance is expressed without prolixity."

72

Superior Courts: Court of Exchequer.

Bagley, in support, cited Reedie v. London and North Western Railway Company, 4 Exch. R. 244; Knight v. Fox, 5 Exch. R. 721; Peachey v. Rowland, 13 Com. B. 182; Cuthbertson v. Parsons, 12 Com. B. 304.

Edgar for the respondent.

The Court said, that in accordance with the decision of Reedie v. London and North Western Railway Company, there must be a new trial, with costs.

By the City Small Debts' Act, 15 & 16 Vict. employed a contractor to execute the works, c. lxxvii., s. 119, it is enacted, that "if any and had not interfered in the mode of executaction shall be commenced after the com- ing the contract. On the trial before Manning, mencement of this Act in any of her Majesty's S. L., the jury were directed that the defendant Superior Courts of Record, for any cause was liable for the negligent excavation and for "for which a plaint might have been entered the carrying away the bricks, and the plaintiff in the Court holden under the provisions of obtained a verdict of 201. damages, and 31. for this Act, and a verdict shall be found for the the bricks, whereupon this appeal was preplaintiff for a sum not more than 50l, if the sented. said action is founded on contract," "the plaintiff shall have judgment to recover such sum only and no costs,' "unless the Judge who shall try the cause shall certify on the back of the record that the action was fit to be brought in such Superior Court;" and by s. 120, that "if in any action commenced after the passing of this Act in any of her Majesty's Superior Courts of Record," &c., "the plaintiff shall recover a sum less than 201.," &c., "the plaintiff shall have judgment to recover such sum only, and no costs," &c.; "provided always (s. 121), that if the plaintiff shall, in any such action as aforesaid, recover a sum less than the sum in that behalf herein before mentioned, by verdict, and the Judge or other presiding officer before whom such verdict shall be obtained, shall forthwith certify on the back of the record that it appeared to him at the trial that the cause of action was one for which a plaint could not have been entered in the Sheriff's Court, or that it appeared to him at the trial that there was a sufficient reason for bringing the said action in the Court in which the said action was brought, the plaintiff in such case shall have the same judgment to recover his costs that he would have had if this Act had not passed.

Pulling in support, on the ground that the certificate should have been given forthwith. Cur. ad. vult.

The Court said, that as it appeared from the Act that, although in cases under 207. the certificate must be given forthwith, in cases above that sum the Judge might give it at his leisure, the rule would be refused.

Nichols v. Gayford. May 3, 1854.

APPEAL FROM COUNTY

COURT. — ACTION AGAINST OWNER OF ADJOINING LAND

FOR NEGLIGENCE IN EXCAVATING.

CONTRACTOR.

The plaintiff obtained a verdict in the County Court in an action against the owner of land adjoining his house for negligently excavating his ground so that the plaintiff's wall, &c., had fallen, although it appeared the defendant had employed a contractor to execute the works, and had not interfered in the mode of executing the contract: On appeal, a new trial was ordered with costs. THIS was an action in the Whitechapel County Court against the owner of land adjoining the plaintiff's house for negligently excavating his ground so that the plaintiff's wall, &c., had fallen down, and also to recover for certain bricks carried away from the plaintiff's premises. It appeared that the defendant had

Rowberry v. Morgan. May 10, 1854.

COMMON LAW PROCEDURE ACT.-ISSUE OF
FI. FA. ON NON-APPEARANCE TO WRIT
SPECIALLY INDORSED.

The time for pleading in an action commenced
by writ specially indorsed under the 15 &
16 Vict. c. 76, s. 25, expired on Feb. 18, and
the extra eight days under s. 27 on the
26th, which fell on a Sunday. The plain-
tiff signed judgment and issued execution
on the 27th: A rule was discharged, with
costs, to set aside the execution and all
subsequent proceedings.

THIS was a rule nisi obtained on April 25 last, to set aside, with costs, a writ of fi. fa. and all subsequent proceedings, on the ground of irregularity. It appeared that the time within which the defendant was to appear expired on Feb. 18 last, and the extra eight days on the 26th, which fell on a Sunday. The plaintiff signed judgment on the Monday morning, and issued a fi. fa. thereon.

By the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 76, s. 27, it is enacted, that "in case of non-appearance by the defendant where the writ of summons is endorsed in the special form hereinbefore provided, it shall and may be lawful for the plaintiff" "at once to sign final judgment,"" and the plaintiff may upon such judgment issue execution at the expiration of eight days from the last day for appearance, and not before;" and the 174th rule of Hilary Term, 1853, directs that "in all cases in which any particular number of days, not expressed to be clear days, is prescribed by the rules or practice of the Courts, the same shall be reckoned exclusively of the first day, and inclusively of the last day, unless the last day shall happen to fall on a Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday, or a day appointed for a public fast or thanksgiving, in which case the time shall be reckoned exclusively of that day also."

Willes showed cause against the rule, which was supported by Huddleston.

The Court said, that the rule must be discharged, with costs.