The re [This is part of a complete list now being extracted for the LAW TIMES from the advertisements that have appeared in the newspapers during the present century. ference, with the date and place of each advertisement, cannot be stated here without subjecting the paragraph to duty. But the figures refer to a corresponding entry in a book kept at the LAW TIMES OFFICE, where these particulars are preserved, and which will be communicated to any applicant. To prevent impertinent curiosity, a fee of half-a-crown for each inquiry must be paid to the publisher, or if by letter, postage stamps to that amount inclosed.] 741. RELATIONS and NEXT OF KIN of WM. ANDREW PRICE, Esq. MARY WARBURTON, LUCY BONEL, ELEANOR BOYDE, JOHN MCCLUIR, formerly in the marine service, and ROBERT GORING, formerly of Bombay, marine, all of whom died in India. Something to their advantage. 742. JOHN RICHARD JONES, brother of MAEY PENELOPE JONES, deceased, and who formerly carried on the business of oilman, at 6, Edgware-road, Paddington, and who left there in 1822. Something to advantage. 743. WIDOW or CHILDREN of JOSIAH HARDING, solicitor, late of Old City Chambers, Bishopsgate-Street. Something to advantage. 744. MARY ANNE SPITTY, formerly of Brentwood, Essex, who left England about 1914 or 1815. Something to advantage. 745. NEXT OF KIN of WM. CONNING, son of the marriage of Wm. Conning, of Glasserton, Wigtonshire, and Ellen McClellan, who is supposed to have died in London nearly sixty years ago. Something to advantage. 746. HEIR-AT-LAW and NEXT OF KIN of GARLEFF KOSTER, a lunatic, formerly of Gluckstatt, in Germany, afterwards of the City of London, merchant, and now of Pembroke-house, Hackney, Middlesex. THE following circular has at least the merit of cool effrontery. A Sham Lawyer formally applies to the Profession for employment in his vocation : TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION. Begs to offer his services to those Solicitors and Attorneys whose clients may instruct them to recover debts and demands not exceeding 201. As the Act (9 & 10 Vict. c. 92) allows no costs to the attorney where the claim is not more than 40s.and only 10s. for his fee and costs where the debt or damage does not exceed 51. and only 15s. in any case within the summary jurisdiction given by this Act, it must be obvious that gentlemen of the Profession cannot attend to the necessary preliminary steps in the county courts without inflicting comparatively heavy charges upon their clients, or foregoing their proper remuneration. In such cases R. G. IBBETT proposes (on being allowed the usual commission on the collection of debts) to undertake the conduct of them up to the hearing, without charge, so as to require the Attorney's attendance only on the trial-actual disbursements to be repaid. By this arrangement, the client will be saved from expense, and the Attorney be paid for his trouble. JOHNSON'S CHAMBERS, In the rear of 167, Flect-street. The next is a printed notice issuing from a Sham Lawyer at Bath. The words " near the boast so large a business at the close of the first twelve months of its existence. But this is not the only gratifying feature of this Society. In the establishment of such a business the preliminary expenses are always large, and usually they are enormous: compared with the costs incurred in the formation of any other company, those of the Solicitors' Assurance Office have been the merest trifle. It appears that the entire cost of forming the Society, of fitting up premises, furnish. ing, printing, advertising, framing all the tables, the legal expenses of the deed of settlement, and registering, do not amount to 3,000l.!! The Promoters placed in the hands of the directors the Society completely formed, with sufficient shares taken and deposits paid to begin business, at a cost of less tion of companies it is considered a very moderate than four hundred pounds! In the usual formaoutlay, if the expenses, previous to the actual commencement of business, are within ten thousand pounds! It has been supposed by some persons that, in accordance with the usual arrangement in the formation of similar societies, the Promoters of this were paid for the time and labour expended and expenses hazarded by them in the formation of the Society. the usual arrangement was not asked by the ProBut it ought to be known that in this instance moters nor offered by the Directors, and that the Promoters have neither demanded nor received a single farthing, directly or indirectly, for the labour bestowed and money hazarded by them in the formation of the Society. And it is but justice that the Profession should know what was the amount of that labour and risk so gratuitously encountered. The plan of the Society was wholly our own. It was proposed and formed by ourselves alone, without aid in the toil or contribution to the cost from any quarter. It occupied three months of hard work, day and night, during which we composed upwards of thirty prospectuses and other papers relating to it; made up, addressed, and issued thirty 747. RELATIONS OF NEXT OF KIN of GEORGE HUDSON, of Police Station," are in prominent letters, pro- / thousand circulars, and wrote more than seven hun Arrell, Wigan, gardener, deceased. Something to advantage. sentatives. 748. WIDOW of RICHARD CULLEN, who died in Lincolnshire in 1834. Something to advantage. 749. NEXT OF KIN of ROBERT MITFORD, late of Upper George-street, Montague-square, Middlesex, esq. who died at Paris, April 21, 1836, or their personal repre750. NEXT OF KIN of WM. JOHNSON, formerly of Stokesley, Yorkshire, then of Galley Quay, Thames-street, the time of his decease (April 1, 1812), of Mitcham, London, wharfinger; then of Kemworth, Herts, and at Surrey, esq.; or the NEXT OF KIN of REBECCA AMELIA WHITE, his daughter, who died in October 1837. bably by way of a hint. 751. CHILDREN of the Brothers and Sisters of WILLIAM (To be continued weeky.) Three numbers of the new volume of PRACTICE CASES have been published, and the Advertisements from the Country should be accompanied fourth is now passing through the press; so For every additional Ten Words. 0 0 dred private letters. Besides this toil, we hazarded an expenditure of nearly 4007. in printing, postage, advertising, clerks, stationery, &c., every farthing of which would have been our own individual loss had not the Society proved successful. For this not a sixpence has been received in any tained of any kind. shape, nor has any personal advantage been ob As the Promoter, we of course selected the Directors, and in the first instance, out of the twelve, one only was in any manner connected with us, and three only had been previously even known to us. The rest were entire strangers. It is the privilege of the Promoters of such a Society to appoint the officers. Even of this we did not avail ourselves to the extent we might have done, and which is usually done. One only of all of them was proposed by us; the rest were strangers. Nor in any other respect has the slightest personal advantage accrued to us from the formation of the Society. They who joined after it was formed, and the risk ended, have enjoyed equal advantages with an order upon the Agent in Town, or a Post-office that the first part, containing the cases of with us who bore all the burden and incurred all order (payable at 180 Strand) for the amount. N.B.-For Scale for Estate Advertisements, see JOURNAL | Hilary Term, will be completed by the com OF PROPERTY. To Readers and Correspondents. We cannot insert, or notice in any way, any communication that is sent to us anonymously; but those who choose to address us in confidence will find their confidence respected. NEITHER CAN WE UNDERTAKE TO RETURN ANY MANUSCRIPTS WHATEVER. Mr. LAMB, of Reading, has suggested that attorneys intending to practise as advocates in the County Courts, should make the circuit of the courts, as do counsel, and devote themselves exclusively to the practice. There can be no professional objection to this; and advocacy is so entirely a business of itself, requiring certain natural qualifications, combined with experience, and a habit of seizing points rapidly, that it must necessarily be confined to the few possessing those qualifications. "F.W.T." (Wallingford), A. Z. is an old offender, and has been repeatedly exposed in these pages. A multitude of sham-lawyer advertisements and circulars are unavoidably postponed. "Vox" advocates the appointment of a distinct county clerk in each court town. We quite agree with him that it would be the most desirable course. Mr. N. GEDGE will see that the judgment of the Lord Chanhis client from all imputation, appears in our Equity cellor in Lander v. Parr, which exonerates Mr. Gedge and Reports of this day. mencement of Easter Term. THE FIRST ANNUAL MEETING OF THE SOLICITORS' ASSURANCE SOCIETY. LAST week we were unable to do more than brieflygress of the Society. to direct attention to the report of the first year's proceedings of this Institution, deferring comment for more leisure. We proceed now to discharge the duty which on this occasion peculiarly belongs to the LAW TIMES, as the parent of the Society. The statement of the year's proceedings is an ample vindication of the soundness of the principles upon which the Society was founded, and justifies the hopes of success, then deemed somewhat extravagant, in which we had ventured to indulge. Every promise made to the Profession by the Promoters has been amply fulfilled. The first year has produced no less than 313 proposals for assurance, for the aggregate sum of 178,8641. Already the annual revenue from preOffice established within the last twenty years could miums alone is 3,4567. No other Life Assurance It is estimated that nearly one half of the whole life assurance business of the country is transacted through the solicitors. There is not a solicitor in England who might not, with very little exertion among his friends and clients, effect three policies in a year. The shareholders of the Society already comprise upwards of 500 members of the Profession. If, then, each of these would (as he might with ease), bring to the office but three policies in a year, there is provided at once a business of 1,500 policies effected by any office in Great Britain. annually-a larger business, we believe, than is MARRIAGES. late T. Dewhurst, March 30, at Preston. Friday, April 2. Colombie, D. E. scrivener, Assignees, April 17.—Cunningham, S. sawyer, last exam. passed. But this is a very small measure of the capacities Thursday, April 1. of this Society. Nearly 5,000 shares are yet to be CHARNLEYS, W. esq. solicitor, to Emmana, widow of the Hamlin, R. tailor, last exam. May 3.-Hatch, F. iron plate Greig and Co. timber merchants, last exam. passed.allotted. These ought to add at least 200 more DENTON, H. R. esq. barrister-at-law, of the Middle Temple, worker, last exam. passed. solicitors to the list of proprietors. If these were to bring each his three policies yearly-the total produced by the members alone would be 2,100. And what do 2,100 policies represent? Estimated at the same ratio of value as the business actually done during the first year, they would yield the return of an annual insurance to the amount of no less than 1,176,0007., and an annual addition of revenue to the amount of 34,650!.! But there is another element of prosperity which has not been enough regarded, and which requires explanation, because not at once apparent. Every member of the Profession has an equal personal interest in this office with the actual proprietors. It offers its advantages to all who choose to partake of them. Its profits are not, as in all other offices, confined to the proprietors alone, but are shared with any solicitor transacting his business with it. Hence it offers a means by which the members of the Profession may in fact secure to themselves permanent and growing annuities, which will be independent of the changes and accidents of their profession. The calculation is simple; it may be thus shewn: to Constance Macdonald, eldest daughter of the late DUPPA, Baldwin Duppa, esq. of Hollingborne-house, and aged 29. LUCAS, II. F. esq. solicitor, at Westgate, Louth, March 28, SIDEBOTTOM, A. R. esq. of Sloane-street, and Lincoln's- DIVIDENDS. Bankrupts Estates. Oficial Assignees are given, to whom apply for the chester.-Dodgson and Co. ironmongers, first joint, 6s. 8d. Insolvents' Estates. Badger, T. tailor, Sheffield, first, 4s. 6d. Hope, Leeds. To Trustees for the benefit of Creditors. Battye, W.ironmonger, Courtney-ter. Kingsland, Feb. 4. Trusts. G. Fowler, iron monger, Red Lion-st. Clerkenwell, and F. Dalton, grocer, Carlton-pl. West, Hackney. Sol. Yardley, Stoke Newington. Greenlay, T. bootmaker, Bradford, March 6. Trusts. T. Hawkesworth, currier, Leeds, J. White, dealer in leather, Bradford, and E. Stead, dealer in leather, Leeds. Sol. Hick, Leeds.-Hill, C. grocer, Southampton, March 15. Trusts. T. Fitt, grocer, and J. I. Bray, grocer, both of Southampton. Sols. Messrs. Linklater, Leadenhall-st.-Jarvis, C. cheesemonger, Cannon-st.rd. March 29. Trust. A. J. Larking, wholesale cheesemonger, Whitechapel. Sol. Cattlin, Ely-pl.-Kynman, R. farmer, Belton, Feb. 22. Trusts. J. Allison, shipowner, same place. Sol. Dawson, Epworth.-Phillips, J. grocer, Hertford, March 15. Trusts. J. Bishop, Philpot-lane, and H. Simkin, Leadenhall-st. wholesale grocers. Sols. Messrs. Linklater, Leadenhall-st. In this, as in the best existing offices, no less than eighty per cent. of the entire profits are divided among the assured. The remainder is divided equally between the shareholders and the solicitors bringing the business, apportioned upon the amount of premiums which they have severally paid. And this is in addition to the usual commission. If therefore, a solicitor, desirous of securing for him- CURWOOD, MR.We are sorry to learn the sudden death of Hull, T. May, jun. farmer, Belton, and R. Lambert, farmer, self a permanent annuity, were to make an effort to procure assurances, and could obtain but six a year, (and there are few who could not accomplish more than that,) his annuity would grow thus Say that his commission is five per cent. and his share of the profits five per cent. The first year would give him an annuity of 107.; the second, of 20.; the third, of 307., and it would go on increasing at the rate of 107. yearly, so that at the end of twenty years he might count on something like 2007. a year as a clear addition to his income from this source alone. And in this we have taken a low estimate of profits. With the increase of business the profits will increase, and by so much the greater will be the benefits that will accrue to those who bring the business, and thus create those profits, as well as to the assured. From this it will be seen that the principle upon which the Solicitors' Assurance Office is based, is capable of indefinite extension, and that there is no limit to the benefits it may be made to confer on the Profession. And these will be shared by the public. for inasmuch as the assured obtain in this precisely the same large share of the profits as is secured to them by the best of the existing offices, it is obvious that the increase of profits resulting from the increase of business will go in great part to them, and that thus persons insuring in the olicitors' Office will obtain advantages, from its very constitution, which cannot be procured elsewhere in any proprietary office. It was as a boon to the Profession that the Solicitors' Assurance Office was planned, and only as such that it has been supported here. Had it been merely a private enterprise for private gain, it would never have received notice in these columns; for only to professional and not to private interests does our duty extend, and to that do we strictly limit ourselves. NOTICES OF NEW LAW BOOKS. IN our notice of Mr. CoOTE's excellent work on the Practice of the Ecclesiastical Courts, we remarked the absence of a Table of Cases and of Contents, so necessary to afford ready access to the various subjects treated of. In consequence of that suggestion, the author has supplied the defect, and in the most complete manner. BIRTHS, MARRIACES, AND DEATHS. [The charge for the insertion of the above is 5s.] BIRTHS. FORBES.-March 26, at Portsoy, the wife of Mr. Forbes, solicitor, of a daughter. TUCKER.-March 26, at Prince's-square, Plymouth, the wife of H. Tucker, esq. of a son. Mr. Curwood, for many years past a member of the bar. JOURNAL OF PROPERTY. THE following scale of charges, reduced more than one-third, has been adopted for Advertisements of Estates for Sale, &c. exceeding 10 lines in length: 5s. For the first 70 words . THE MONEY MARKET. Gazette, April 6 Boyden, E. and C. milliners, Norwich, Feb. 26. Trust. J. Wright, warehouseman, St. Paul's-church-yard. Sol. Parker, St. Paul's-church-yard.-Hooper, E. innkeeper, St. Leonard's-on-the-Sea, March 24. Trusts. C. Burfield, brewer, Hastings, and J. Carey, builder, St. Leonard's-onthe-Sea. Sol. Young, Battle.-Pearce, B. R. clothier, Reading, March 9. Trusts. G. Howes, warehouseman, St. ditch. Sol. Jones, Sise-lane.-Wright, W. builder, RichPaul's-church-yard, and J. R. Bousfield, clothier, Houndsauctioneer, Moorgate-st. Sol. Tanner, New Basinghall-st. mond-ter. Holland-rd. Brixton. Trust. W. H. Roberts, Bankrupts. DATE OF FIAT AND PETITIONING CREDITORS' NAMES. BARLOW, JOHN, sen. and GILL, JAMES, hop factors, Cal- BIRRELL, ANDREW, vinegar manufacturer, Salford, Lancastershire, April 12 and May 11, at eleven, Liverpool, Comi. Perry; Cazenove, off. ass.; Johnson and Co. Temple, and Snowball, Liverpool, sols. Date of fiat, March 29. Bankrupt's own petition. COOK, HENRY JAMES, linendraper, Hedge-row, Islington, April 12, at half-past one, May 17, at eleven, Basinghallstreet, Com. Shepherd; Graham, off. ass.; Hardwicke and Co. Weaver's-hall, sols. Date of fiat, March 30. J. Bradbury, J. Greatorex, and R. Beal, warehousemen, Aldermanbury, pet. crs. JEBB, JOHN, grocer and publican, Stanwardine-in-the fields, Baschurch, Shropshire, April 8, and May 1, at twelve, Birmingham, Com. Daniell; Valpy, off. ass.; Mottram and Knowles, Birmingham, sols. Date of fiat, March 25. Bankrupt's own petition. 21 21 21 21 21 21 JONES, HENRY, oil and colourman, Grosvenor-row, Pimlico, .. 57 58 58 58 59 58) 91 94 94 95 94 95 86 86 86 86 84 THE GAZETTES. AMOUNT OF DIVIDENDS DECLARED. Monday, March 29. Neep, W. carpenter, last exam. passed.-Palmer, H. J. Tuesday, March 30. Daniels, A. merchant, last exam. passed.-Fitzgerald, J. Wednesday, March 31. and of Smith-street, King's-road, Chelsea, April 9, at two, May 14, at eleven, Basinghall-st. Com. Fane; Whitmore, off. ass.; Shaw, Fish-street-hill, sol. Date of fiat, March 26. G. Terrell and W. G. Watson, oilmen, 133, Fenchurch-street, pet. crs. JONES, GEORGE, victualler, late of Rough-hills, Bilston, Staffordshire, April 13 and May 4, at twelve, Birmingham, Com. Balguy; Whitmore, off. ass.; Barsteet, Birmingham, sol. Date of fiat, March 22. F. Clements, hopmerchant, Birmingham, pet. cr. MACOUN, ROBERT, cotton spinner, Bolton, Lancashire, PRICE, JOHN JONES, tanner and currier, Builth, Breconshire, Gazette, April 6. CARTWRIGHT, JOHN, iron founder, Shrewsbury, April 14 SYMES, THOMAS, scrivener, Bridgwater, April 20 and May Meetings at Basingħall-street. Gazette, April 2. Partnerships Bissolved. Gazette, March 30. Austen, J. and Irons, C. H. linen drapers, Oxford-st. and Thayer-st. March 13.-Blagrove, C. F. and Rust, R. suppliers of music, Albany-st. and Margaret-st. March 26. Breffit, E. Winterbottom, J. and Walker, S. glass bottle and Walker.-Chadwick, J. and W. lime burners, Liverpool, manufacturers, Castleford, March 25. Debts paid by Breffit Dec. 31. Debts paid by W. Chadwick.-Coggan, H. D. and Jones, R. hotpressers, Bread-street-hill, March 29,-Cox, J. and Drake, I. scribblers, Leeds, Jan. 1. Debts paid by Cox. Croker, N. D. and Stowe, R. coal dealers, Bridgewater, March 25.-Escombe, R. and Sidebotham, S. coal merchants, Harp-lane, Tower-street, and elsewhere, Dec. 31.-Esling, W. C. and J. Banham, March 6.-Hadley, T. R. and Drake, H. linen drapers, Woolwich, March 25.-Haslam, J. and Paddy, W. drapers, Southampton-row, March 27. Debts paid by Paddv.-Janion, E. and Rider, M. boarding school T. ship brokers, Liverpool, March 27.-Milnes, J. and Arkwright, J. grocers, Blackburn, March 26. Debts paid by Arkwright.-Morgan, W. and Batte, O. porter dealers, Bilston, March 25. Debts paid by Batte.-Read, W. and Hoggins, R. S. wine merchants, Duke-street, St. James's, March 29. Debts paid by Read.-Rubbins, I. and Harrison, T. millers, Gedney, Oct. 11, 1845.-Scandrett, E. and Tudge, G. plumbers, Worcester, March 25.-Smith, T. and Chapman, J. soda water manufacturers, York, Jan. 1. Debts paid by Smith.-Tilbury, J. sen. and jun. and Clarke F. coach builders, New-rd. March 27.-Warren, T. and Fowler, C. pawnbrokers, Old-st-rd. March 29.-Whiteside, W. and Powell, M. D. tailors, Liverpool, March 27. Gazette, April 2. Barnes, R. ironmonger, Hammersmith, April 23, at half-proprietors, Welshpool, March 18.-Monie, C. and Hudson, past eleven, aud.-Barlett, C. merchant, Southampton, April 16, at eleven (adj. March 5), final div.-Bond, J. and Morgan, E. shawl manufacturers and furriers, 25, Oxford-st. April 23, at two, joint div.-Boorman, J. L. silversmith, Gravesend, April 23, at eleven, aud.-Bower, T. bookseller, Strand, April 14, at half-past eleven, to choose assignees. Brewer, H. draper, Great Waltham, April 15, at twelve (adj. March 13), last exam.-Gale, J. sen. and Gale, J. jun. ropemakers and paint and colour manufacturers, Love-lane, Shadwell, April 23, at twelve, div.-Gillett, T. warehouseman, Gutter-lane, April 28, at half-past-one, aud.-Humby, J. C. boot and shoe manufacturer, 102, Blackfriars-road, and Church-lane, Northampton, April 23, at eleven, div.-Johnson J. grocer, Chelmsford, April 23, at eleven, aud.-Kirkpatrick, J. banker, Newport, Isle of Wight, April 23, at one, div.Mabson, G. M. potato dealer, Whitechapel, April 23, at eleven, aud.-Payne, J. H. beer retailer, High-st. Camberwell, April 23, at one, aud.-Redwood, E. jun. china dealer, Windmill-st. Lambeth, April 15, at two, last exam.-Seppings, E. victualler, Cromer, April 13, at twelve (adj. March 5), last exam.Sharp and Sharp, stonemasons, Commercial-road, April 13, at twelve (adj. March 2), last exam.-Shelton, L. shoe dealer, Hitchen, April 23, at half-past eleven, aud.-Ufford, J. G. common brewer, Highbury Brewery, Holloway, April 23, at half-past twelve, div.-Wilson, J. P. builder, Maiden-lane, April 23, at eleven, aud. MEETINGS FOR ALLOWANCE OF CERTIFICATES. Goodwin, C. plaster merchant, Great Guildford-st. April 22, at half-past eleven.-Hallett and Parker, drapers, Dockhead and Minories, April 26, at two. Jungmichel, C. merchant, Austin-friars, April 28, at twelve.-Neep, W. carpenter, Colchester, April 26, at half-past one.-Newstead, T. draper, Norwich, April 23, at twelve.-Parsons, J. baker, Medway-st. and Horseferry-road, April 23, at twelve. Payne, J. H. victualler, High-st. Camberwell, April 23, at one.-Payne, G. D. tailor, Saville-row, April 23, at eleven. Rule, J. veterinary surgeon, April 23, at one. Gazette, April 6. PETITIONS TO BE HEARD IN THE COUNTRY. From the Gazette of Friday, April 9. Markins, E. victualler, Upper Holloway.-Blackford, T. ADVERTISEMENTS. OLICITORS' AND GENERAL LIFE 57, Chancery-lane, London. Arnold, G. and T. silversmiths, High-st. Shoreditch, So Lindop.-Marrow. P. and W. J. and Worthington, W. J. Axford, E. milliner, St. John's Wood-terrace. April 27, at one.-Flaxman, J. S. tailor, Ludgate-st. April 28, at twelve. -Hatch, F. iron-plate worker, St. John's-sq. April 28, at two. Meetings in the Country. Insolvents Petitioning the Courts of Bankruptcy. PETITIONS TO BE HEARD AT BASINGHALL STREET. Chantler, G. pianoforte hammer coverer, Compton-st. Brunswick sq. April 22, at eleven.-Driver, W. attorney, Old Weston-st. Southwark, April 3, at twelve.-Hall, J. carman, West Ham, April 22, at half-past eleven.-Milner, J. commission agent, Holborn-hill, April 22, at eleven. PETITIONS TO BE HEARD IN THE COUNTRY. Aston, W. maltster, Lapley, April 3, at eleven, Birming ham, to choose new assignees.-Rigmaiden, E. wine and Clark, T. horn manufacturer, Birmingham, April 7, at spirit dealer, Liverpool, April 23, at eleven, Liverpool, div.- eleven, Birmingham.-Hake, R. butcher, Plymouth, April Smith, W. innkeeper and victualler, Abergavenny, Mon-8, at one, Exeter.-Pearse, W. watchmaker, Axminster, mouthshire, April 27, at eleven, Bristol, to aud. and April April 7, at eleven, Exeter.-Williams, T. clicker, Kidder29, at eleven, div.-Walker, W. silkman, Nottingham, April minster, April 7, at eleven, Birmingham. 23, at eleven, Nottingham, aud. MEETINGS FOR ALLOWANCE OF CERTIFICATES. Clemson, W. victualler, Dawley-green, April 27, at eleven, Birmingham.-Langridge, H. stay manufacturer, Liverpool, April 23, at twelve, Liverpool.-Lewis, J. butcher, Dawleygreen, April 27, at eleven, Birmingham.-Vaughan, J. M. builder, Bristol, April 27, at eleven, Bristol. Gazette, April 6. Bickerton, W. timber merchant and sawyer, Kingstonupon-Hull, April 27, at ten, Hull, aud. and first div.-Bur MEETINGS IN THE COUNTRY. Gazette, April 2. PETITIONS TO BE HEARD AT BASINGHALL- Banyard, J. saddler, Debenham, April 21, at eleven. Buckwell, G. brewer, Keymer-st. near Ditchingley, April 15, surance. Capital of ONE MILLION STERLING. Whilst perfect security is thus given, the number and character of the Shareholders (consisting of nearly 500 Members of the Legal Profession), will command a large amount of Gusiness, and consequent advantages will arise to the Assured. Tables of Premiums have been prepared expressly for this nearest approximation to the real law of mortality. Office, by F. G. P. NEISON, Esq. F.L.S., calculated on the These Tables will be found to afford peculiar encouragement to the assurance of young lives. They embrace participating and non-participating scales. In the participating class, the Assured will be entitled to have four-fifths of the profits divided amongst them periodically, either by way of addition to the amount assured, or in diminution of premium, as the parties may elect. No deduction will be made from such profits for interest of capital. or for a guarantee fund. The Premiums may be paid half-yearly or annually, or by a single payment. Assurances may be effected through any respectable Solicitor, or by writing to the Secretary. The Directors meet on Thursdays at Two o'clock; but Assurances may be effected on any day, by applying between where Prospectuses and all other requisite information may the hours of Ten and Four, at the Offices of the Society, CHARLES JOHN GILL, Secretary. be obtained. 57, Chancery-lane. BED FEATHERS PURIFIED BY STEAM Mixed perfectly sweet, and free from dust. VICKERS'S CINCER BRANDY. 29, at twelve, cotton spinners, Middleton, Lancashire, April 29, at twelve, Manchester, to aud. and April 30, at twelve, at eleven.-Dale, W. sen. boot-maker, London-wall, April div.-Durden, E. manufacturing chemist, Standish, May 6, 15, at eleven.-Dale, W. jun. boot-maker, London-wall, at eleven, Bristol, aud.-Gostick, D. grocer, Keighley, April April 15, at eleven.-Day, W. baker, Great Bardfield, April 28, at eleven, Leeds, aud.-Grimes, M. saddler, Cheltenham, 13, at twelve.-Dyer, J. in no trade, Surrey-st. Strand, April 27, at twelve, Bristol, aud.-Handley, W. saddler, April 14, at eleven.-Hadler, T. sen. coach smith, Gravesend, Birmingham, May 4, at eleven, Birmingham, aud.-Hanna- April 15, at eleven.-Jones, W. jun. carpenter, Sheppertonford, P. A. bookseller and stationer, High-st. Exeter, April pl. Islington, April 15, at eleven.-Kohler, W. lithographic 28, at eleven, Exeter, to and. and April 29, at one, div.-printer, Rathbone-pl. April 13, at twelve.-Lewis, T. furPrior, J. tailor, St. Blazey, Cornwall, April 28, at eleven, niture broker, High-st. Peckham, April 13, at half-pust ele- AFTER the most acute medical research, it is Exeter, to aud. and April 29, at one, div.-Smith, J. inn- ven.-Nash, C. clerk, Wigmore-st. April 13, at half-past keeper, Gloucester, May 4, at eleven, Bristol, aud.-Wright, twelve.-Pennington, H. box maker, Beech-st. April, 13, at J. I. B. druggist, Liverpool, April 27, at twelve, Liverpool, half-past twelve.-Prince, G. out of business, Shirley, April to aud. and April 30, at twelve, div. 13, at half-past eleven.-Prior, C. fish cutter, Great YarMEETINGS FOR ALLOWANCE OF CERTIFICATES. mouth, April 13, at half-past twelve.-Richards, H. attorney, Bailey, J. joiner, Stalybridge, April 29, at twelve, Man- fessor of music, Chelmsford, April 13, at twelve.-Simons, Milton-st. Dorset-sq. April 22, at twelve.-Rippon, T. prochester.-Hall, J. victualler, Carlisle, April 29, at eleven, W. builder, Whittaker-st. Pimlico, April 22, at twelve. Newcastle.-Hance, J. W. architectural ornament manuWedge, C. linen draper, Sun-st. April 13, at eleven.-West, T. in no occupation, Shaftesbury-st. Hoxton New Town, that Ginger is one of the most which we are acquainted; but it was for the British distiller to discover acceptable to the palate, while it should be no less efficacious as a the mode of so combining its active properties, as to produce a liqueur remedy. At the BOROUGH MARKET DISTILLERY, the manufac ture of this article receives the most scrupulous attention: it will be found eminently useful in spasmodic affections, and for whatever purpose stimulants are required, there are none more wholesome than GERETTE is especially adapted for the ladies; and the CURACAO VICKERS'S GINGER BRANDY, the well-known ORANGE GINPUNCH, and LIQUEUR GENEVA, continue to hold pre-eminent position, and may be obtained of all the Spirit Merchants in the Kingdom. BOROUGH MARKET DISTILLERY, LONDON, Nov. 12, 1845, and Aug. 1, 1846. DAVENPORT v. BISHOPP. Marriage contract — Consideration - Limitation to collaterals Mutual covenants by intended husband and wife with each other and with trustees. Where upon a marriage the husband and wife covenanted with each other and with trustees that all niece. In this case, which was an appeal from part of the decree of Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce, the question was as to the extent to which the consideration of marriage extends to collateral limitations contained in marriage articles. to the use of her niece Mary Lucas, her heirs, execu- There was no appointment made by Mrs. Daven- into for a valuable consideration, namely, the marriage between the parties. There is no reason, therefore, why the Court should not give effect to the covenant with S. Davenport by decreeing a specific performance. I think it is immaterial in this case that M. Lucas was no party to the consideration. The case of Sutton v. Chetwynd was relied upon in The bill was filed by S. Davenport against the heir- the argument for the appellant; there the covenant at-law of his late wife to compel a conveyance of the was between Lady Bath and the trustees only. There real estates so devised according to the covenant in was no consideration moving from them or from Sir the articles, including the limitation to Mary Lucas, Richard Sutton. With respect to Sir James Pultewho was then dead, but whose heir-at-law was a party ney, he merely consented to the settlement. Lady to the suit. The Vice-Chancellor decreed performance Bath did not covenant with him. In the present case of the articles accordingly. The defendant, the heir- the parties to the consideration, viz. the marriage, at-law of Mrs. Davenport, appealed against that part mutually and in express terms covenanted with each of the decree which related to the real estates. other as well as with the trustees. Instances were Tinney, Cooper, and Metcalfe, for the appellant, cited of marriage settlements which were, as to some contended that the heir-at-law of Mary Lucas being of the limitations, considered to be voluntary, and a mere volunteer, the contract would not be performed were set aside in favour of purchasers. But this is so far as related to the limitation to Mary Lucas. not the case of a purchaser, and it is unnecessary, That equity would not enforce a voluntary covenant, therefore, to consider how far those cases are, in they cited and referred to, Johnson v. Legard, Turn. other respects, distinguishable from the present. In & R. 281; Clayton v. The Earl of Wilton, 6 Mau. & Goring v. Nash, Lord Hardwicke observed, "The S. 67, n.; Pulvertoft v. Pulvertoft, 18 Ves. 84; 3 strict measure which governs the Court in a question Sugd. Vend. & P. 289; Cotterell v. Horner, 7 Jur. between persons who come to carry articles into exe544; Sutton v. Chetwynd, 3 Mer. 249; Rowe v. Mercution and purchasers, is not the rule of this Court ton, 2 Wils. 356; Vernon v. Vernon, 2 P. Wms. 594; (between families); for, between families, the Court Osgood v. Strode, 2 P. Wms. 245; Goring v. Nash, have considered whether a superior or inferior equity 3 Atk. 186; Stephens v. Trueman, 1 Ves. sen. 73; arises on the part of the person who comes for speEllison v. Ellison, 6 Ves. 656; 2 Roper on Hus. & cific performance." It is one consideration, he adds, Wife, 73; Hale v. Lambe, 2 Eden, 292; Stapleton v. how far the Court will support agreements of this Stapleton, 1 Atk. 2; Bellingham v. Lowther, 1 Ch. kind against relations in a family, and another against Cas. 243; Fazakerly v. Robinson, Pre. Ch.; Ward v. purchasers and creditors. As far as S. Davenport Aubrey, 8 Sim. 571; Jefferys v. Jefferys, Cr. & Ph. himself is concerned, it is not disputed that a specific 138; Roberts on Voluntary Conveyances, 616; Emery performance must be decreed; but the Court being in v. Wase, 8 Ves. 505; Martin v. Mitchell, 2 Jac. & possession of the cause will not divide the covenant Walk. 214; Morris v. Stephenson, 7 Ves. 475; and decree, and specific performance in favour of the Williamson v. Coddington, 1 Ves. sen. 514; Garrard plaintiff as to part, and send him to law as to the rev. Lord Lauderdale, 2 Russ. & Myl. 452; Colyear v. sidue. Lord Hardwicke, in the same case of Goring Mulgrave, 2 Keen. 81; Sloan v. Cadogan, Sugd. Vind. v. Nash, observed, that where marriage articles have app.; 1 Shep. Touch. c. 4, p. 71; Doe v. Pitcher, been decreed at all, they have been carried into exe6 Taunt. 359; Greenwood v. The Bishop of London, cution even as to collaterals, and not carried into exe5 Taunt. 727. cution in part only. I think, therefore, the judgment must be affirmed. Bethell and Amphlett, for the heir-at-law of Mary Lucas, contended that upon a contract of marriage the articles were to be enforced entirely, including all the limitations to collaterals. They commented on and distinguished many of the above-mentioned cases; and cited and referred to Newstead v. Searles, 1 Atk. 264; Ithell v. Beane, 1 Ves. sen. 215; Edwards v. Warwick, 2 P. Wms. 171; 1 Bos. & Pull. 101; Clayton v. Winton, 3 Mad. 302, n.; Ellis v. Nimmo, Llo. & Goo. 333. Russell and Randell, for the plaintiff. Tinney, in reply, referred also to Ward v. Audland, JUDGMENT. Friday, March 5. CHAMBERS v. SMITH. Practice-Executors accounts-Costs of defending an action-Form of deeree. Where executors had persisted in resisting the payment of a surgeon's bill against their testator, some items of which were apparently unusually high, although advised by their solicitor not to incur the hazard of an action, and had ultimately sustained a verdict for nearly the whole amount of the bill, the expenses incurred in defending the action were disallowed. Form of decree on referring the accounts of executors to the Master to take an account. A decree irregular in point of form ought not to be allowed to stand upon considerations of expense to the parties in the cause from selling it right, inasmuch as it will tend to mislead other suitors. the costs of the suit to that time, so far as such costs have been increased by evidence upon either of those subjects. And that the taxation of such costs should be reserved. In other respects there was the common decree in an administration suit. August 1, 1846.-The LORD CHANCELLOR (Lord the real personal estate which might devolve upon the Lyndhurst).-Upon the treaty for a marriage between wife during coverture should be settled upon the wife Samuel Davenport and Eleanora Roberts, it was, by for life to her separate use, with remainder as she the deeds then executed, among other things agreed This was an appeal against a part of the decree of should appoint, and in default of appointment to the by and between S. Davenport and E. Roberts, and Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce, which was to the husband for life, then to the issue of the marriage in each of them covenanted and agreed with the trus- following effect:-That the defendants, the executors, tail, and in default of issue to M. L. the wife's tees, that if the said E. Roberts should thereafter, should be allowed the sum of 51. struck off the surniece in fee, the wife having died without having during the coverture, become entitled to any property, geon's demand of 751. 16s. on account of their costs; made any appointment and without issue, the hus-real or personal, by any devise, gift, bequest, or other and that they should have no other costs, charges, or band filed a bill against the wife's heir-at law to wise, such property should be conveyed to trustees, expenses on either side in respect of the action; and compel a specific performance of the articles, and it so that the same should be limited to such purposes as that if the said defendants should claim to be allowed was held that the contract must be carried into exe- the said E. Roberts should by deed or will appoint; any other costs, charges, and expenses in respect of cution entirely including the limitation in fee to the and in default of appointment to the sole and sepa- such demand, the Master, in considering such rate use of E. Roberts for life, and after her decease claim, was to have regard to the question of how to the use of S. Davenport for life, with remainder far they were reasonably and properly incurred; to the child or children of E. Roberts; if there should and that the said defendants were not to be be no such child or children, or descendant of any allowed any costs of the suit to that time, so far such child or children living at the death of the sur-as the suit related to the said demand of 751. 16s. or vivor of S. Davenport, then to the use of her niece to the said action, and are to pay to the plaintiffs The settlement dated Dec. 22, 1818, made upon the Mary Lucas, her heirs and assigns, for ever. M. marriage of Samuel Davenport and Eleanor Roberts, Lucas was the daughter of Mrs. Bishopp, the sister contained a covenant" by and between the said S. of E. Roberts, afterwards E. Davenport. She died Davenport and E. Roberts, and each of them did for unmarried in 1823. In 1818, Nedham Cheselden, an himself and herself, &c. covenant and agree, and to uncle of Mrs. Davenport, and of her sister Mrs. and with the trustees of the settlement, that if the said Bishopp, devised certain estates to trustees to the The bill was filed by persons beneficially interested marriage should take effect and the said E. Roberts use of his wife for life, with remainder to the use of under the will of a testator named Chambers, against should at any time or times during the said intended Mary Bishopp, his niece, for life, with remainder to his executors, praying an account of his estate, and coverture become seised or possessed of or entitled to M. Lucas, her daughter by a former husband, for for due administration. The testator resided at Bridany property, either real or personal, by any devise, life, with remainder to his own right heirs under the port, Dorsetshire, and having been for two years gift, or bequest in her favour or otherwise, such pro- decree. Mrs. Davenport and Mrs. Bishopp were his before his death afflicted with several complicated perty should within six months after she should be- co-heiresses. Mr. Davenport died in 1839; Mrs. diseases, was attended for twenty-two months by come so seised or possessed thereof or entitled there- Bishopp survived her, and was her heiress-at-law. Mr. Tucker, a medical practitioner of Bridport. unto respectively, be granted, conveyed, assigned, Mrs. Davenport never exercised the power of appoint- After the testator's death, Mr. Tucker sent in his and released, or otherwise assured to the said trustees, ment given to her by the settlement. The bill was bill, amounting to 751. 16s. to the executors, and they, or unto such other person or persons as the said E. filed by S. Davenport, and prayed that Mrs. Bishopp, deeming some of the charges extravagant, directed Roberts should appoint, so that the same should be as the heiress-at-law of Mrs. Davenport, might be their attorney to make inquiries upon the subject, limited to such uses, &c. as E. Roberts (notwith- decreed specifically to perform the covenant contained with a view to resist payment. After the attorney standing her coverture) should by deed or will appoint, in the settlement as to the estate devised by the will had made such inquiries, he stated that charges for and for want of and until such appointment to the of N. Cheselden so as to vest one moiety thereof, visits were not usually made by other medical men to use of E. Roberts for life to her separate use, and subject to the life interest of Mrs. Bishopp, in the patients residing in the town, but advised the execu after her decease to the use of the said S. Davenport surviving trustee to the uses expressed in the settle-tors to pay the amount rather than incur the risk of and his assigns for life, and after his decease for the ment. In this case there was an expressed covenant an action. One of the executors, however, said that, use of all the children of E. Roberts, absolutely in between E. Roberts, afterwards Mrs. Davenport, and as an honest man, he could not pay on behalf of equal shares as tenants in common; but if there should her intended husband; and with the trustees, that another a demand which, on his own behalf, he would be no children or child or descendants of any such any estate which might come to her during her cover- have resisted, and therefore refused to pay it, though children or child living at the decease of the sur-ture should be conveyed to trustees to the uses ex- the adult plaintiffs in this suit gave the executors vivor of them, E. Roberts and S. Davenport, then pressed in the settlement. This covenant was entered notice that they would not run the risk of defending VOL. IX. No. 211. an action. Mr. Tucker having brought an action, obtained a verdict for 701. 16s. the executors having paid 521. into court. The costs paid by the executors to Mr. Tucker in that action, together with their own costs in collecting evidence and defending the action, amounted to 2501. In this suit the plaintiffs had entered into evidence to prove the impropriety of the executor's defence to that action. Russell and Hargreave, for the executors, the appellants, contended that they were not only justified, but bound to resist the charges made by Mr. Tucker, which were exorbitant, and such as were not made by other medical practitioners of the town. He had abstained from sending in his bill to the testator, though often requested so to do. They read evidence for the defendants in this suit. Rolt and J. D. Chambers, for the plaintiffs, said that the executors were not-justified in risking in the defence of an action for 231. more than one-half of the testator's estate, which did not much exceed 4001. That the notice by the cestui que trust, and the advice given by their own solicitors, made such a course of proceeding altogether indefensible. It was no excuse for a trustee to say that he acted as he would have done in his own case, for it might in a great measure depend upon his temper, his circumstances, or other accident. He must not exhibit obstinacy at the expense of the estate. There was no pretence that the executors would have incurred any risk in paying the surgeon's demand, for all the adult plaintiffs had required them so to do. They cited and mentioned Morgan v. Allan, 8 Adol. & Ell.; Penfold v. Bush, before Vice-Chancellor Wigram; Ellis v. Ellis, 1 Russell, 358; Massey v. Banner, 1 Jac. & Walker, 241; Campbell v. Mackay, 1 Myl. & Cr. The will gave the executors more than ordinary authority, and fully justified them in paying this demand. Hargreave, in reply.—The executors were bound to inquire, and did inquire into the charges, and found that they were unusual and extravagant. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Mr. Tucker himself says he charged higher than was usual on account of the difficulty of the case. Still, after that inquiry, the attorney advised the executors to pay the demand. Hargreave. The executors paid into court the full amount of the just demand, and the resistance to the further part was founded upon the opinion of the medical men of the town. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-It very rarely happens that the costs incurred in the successful defence of an action do not exceed the costs which the defeated party is obliged to pay. It is a very unfortunate case, and it is to be regretted that the executors did not act upon the advice given to them by their solicitor, of which there was no reason for doubting the propriety. That advice, together with the intimation they received from the adult cestuis que trusts, ought to have made these defendants hesitate before they allowed such an action to be brought. It is proved and admitted that some of the items of the surgeon's bill were too high, and that it was not usual in that place for medical practitioners to charge for visits. Where a medical person is called in and no special agreement is made as to the scale of charges, it is to be inferred that the scale usual according to the ordinary course of practice in that place will be adhered to, and he attends upon that implied agreement. In administering an estate, the executors, when they deem it expedient to resist exorbitant demands, ought to consider that, they succeeded in an action, there would be extra costs beyond the costs they could recover from the opposite party, and that in this case there was an extreme probability that such extra costs would exceed the difference between the sum demanded and the sum admitted to be due. They should also have considered the chance of not succeeding. Under all these circumstances, and considering the advice they received from their solicitor, it was unreasonable that they should have allowed the action to have gone on, and incurred the expense of defending it. The verdict was for 701. 16s. and that sum, at all events, having been paid by the defendants, must be allowed them in their accounts, and they must also be allowed the 51. struck off the surgeon's bill. But then it appears that a great part of the expense in this suit was incurred by reason of the plaintiff having given evidence with reference to the medical bill; and such witnesses having been first examined by the plaintiffs, necessarily led to the production of counter evidence on the part of the defendants. All this should have formed the subject of inquiry before the Master. The special decree was occasioned by the evidence introduced by the plaintiff. But the decree makes the defendants pay the costs of all this irregularity on the part of the plaintiffs. The difficulty is, how to set this decree right without putting these parties to a great and useless expense. But it is better to put the decree into regular form, even though it may operate hardly upon the parties in this case, for such irregular decrees always lead to more expense. It is not right to sanction such a decree as this, for other suitors may be misled by it, in suits against executors, to go into evidence upon any item of their accounts, for the purpose of shewing that payments have been made improperly. The declaration, therefore, will be, instead of requiring the defendants to pay the costs as regards the demand of 751. 16s. I Saturday, March 27. suitors. | The LORD CHANCELLOR.-The rule of the Court, and which ought to be adhered to, is that there cannot be a rehearing of a rehearing unless under very special circumstances shewing irregularity upon the face of the decree. This case is one of great difficulty, for the original suit appears to have been heard five different times, and received different decisions by different judges. Without at all expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, I cannot see why the case should now be reheard before me, and possibly add another conflicting judgment to the five already pronounced. Fifteen years' delay have taken place, and I shall be interfering with the business of the Court to the exclusion of other suitors by having it re-argued; and even when I have given judgment, which might not satisfy both parties, the case would possibly go to the House of Lords. This was how the matter stood with respect to the first suit; and in addition the decree of Lord Brougham in that case was perfectly regular. It is not, however, so easy to explain the decree in the supplemental cause; that decree simply reversed the one made by the Court below, without substituting anything in its place; this is certainly inoperative, and amounted to mere striking out the decree, so that in point of fact there is now no decree at all; this must have arisen from some inadvertency. Possibly the learned judge thought that the supplemental suit was only a carrying on of the equity in the original suit, but then the bill ought to have been dismissed. The decree therefore in the second cause is a slip, and I do not think that for such an oversight the parties ought to be driven to the House of Lords. At the same time I do not see that I shall be doing much good by rehearing the supplemental suit, if the parties at the same time appeal in the original suit to the House of Lords. Stuart said the parties would be perfectly satisfied to have the supplemental cause reheard. Practice Stuart and Lovat, in support of the petition, urged The LORD CHANCELLOR inquired the reason why The LORD CHANCELLOR then granted permission to that effect. Parker asked for the costs of the application. The LORD CHANCELLOR.-Certainly after fifteen years they must pay for such an indulgence. COURT. Friday and Saturday, March 12 and 13. Certain estates were conveyed to trustees in strict set- The facts The bill praying for an injunction to restrain the defendant, Sir John Morris, from felling or cutting down any timber or other trees standing upon the property of Clasemont, in Glamorganshire, or the lands belonging or adjoining thereto, and which were planted or left standing, or growing there, by Sir J. Morris, deceased, for the ornament, protection, or shelter of the mansion-house at Clasemont, and from cutting down any other ornamental timber, was filed on the 29th of January, 1847, by the plaintiff, John A. Morris, the son of the defendant, and several affidavits in support of the injunction were filed. of the case were as follows:-By indentures of the 8th of June, 1819, the manors, messuages, lands, and other hereditaments of Sir J. Morris, deceased, including the estates of Clasemont, were conveyed and assured by the said Sir J. Morris, deceased, unto trustees, to the use of the said Sir J. Morris, deceased, for his natural life, remainder to the use of the said trustees, for a term of 1,000 years; and from and after the end, or sooner determination thereof, and in the mean time subject thereto to the use of the said trustees, for and during the natural life of his son, the defendant, without impeachment of or for any manner of waste, provided the same were committed or suffered with the privity and assent of the defendant upon trust, to preserve contingent Parker and Glasse, contrà, said that there were no remainders. And upon further trust to permit and special circumstances in the case to warrant the ap- suffer the defendant during his life to receive and take plication. The merits of the case could not be taken the rents, &c. of the said manors and other bereditainto account, for that would, in fact, be a rehearing ments for his own use and benefit; and from and imof the appeal. There must be something irregular mediately after the decease of the defendant to the upon the face of the decrees to justify the granting of use of the plaintiff, who was the eldest son of defenda second rehearing, which did not exist in the presentant, and his assigns for the term of his life, without case. It was not even attempted to be argued that impeachment of or for any manner of waste with rethere was any irregularity in the decree made in the mainders over. There were also contained in the original suit, and therefore that must stand; and as same deed certain powers for the tenant for life for the main point in issue between the parties, whether the time being to demise or lease any of the said the Jamaica accounts were binding, had been there hereditaments to any person or persons who should decided, the supplemental suit became of very sub- be willing to improve the same by erecting or building ordinate importance, and could not justify the re- thereon any new house or houses, &c. The defendopening of litigation after so long a delay. ant, Sir J. Morris, now the tenant for life, had Stuart, in reply. some time since pulled down the mansion-house at |