ΤΟ

ACCOUNT.
See PROFITS.

ADEMPTION OF LEGACY.

See PORTION, 2.

AGREEMENT.
See RAILWAY, 1, 2.

ADMISSION.

See PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS.

ALLOWANCES.

See RECEIVer.

AMENDMENT.

The irregular amendment of a bill
is not a ground for taking it off
the file, if the record can be re-
stored to the state in which it was
before the amendment was made;
but if, in effecting such irregular
amendment, a new engrossment

has been made, such new engross-
ment may be ordered to be taken
off the file.

An application, by a number of
relators named in an information,
to strike out the names of several
of themselves, will not be granted,
even though the Defendants will
not be prejudiced; unless it ap-
pears, either that, without the
alteration, justice will not be done,
or that the suit cannot be so con-
veniently prosecuted if the alter-
ation be not made. Attorney-
General v. Cooper.
Page 258

See PLEADING, 4, 5.
TRUST.

ANNUITY.

A freehold estate worth 100%. a year
was devised in trust for the tes-
tator's daughter, a married woman,
for her separate use for life; with
3G 4 remain-

Municipal Corporation Regulation
Act,) of trustees of property lately
held by a corporation upon charit-
able trusts, persons who are mem-
bers of the new corporation are
not ineligible as trustees, even al-
though the corporation may have
formerly set up a claim to the
property in opposition to the
charity.

A person's name had been sub-
mitted to the Master as a new
trustee, and he had been approved
by the Master, but without any
affidavit of his respectability. Such
an affidavit was afterwards pro-
duced to the Lord Chancellor,
and no objection to his respect-
ability was made:

Held, that there was no ground
for referring the question of his
appointment back to the Master.
In the Matter of the Ludlow
Charities.
Page 262

proceedings should be stayed for
twelve months; and this arrange-
ment was embodied in an order
made upon the application of the
Defendant, and by consent of the
nominal Plaintiff, but without the
concurrence of the attorney. A
petition was afterwards presented
by the attorney, praying that the
order might be discharged for
irregularity, and that the attorney
might be at liberty to prosecute
the suit without the interference
of the nominal Plaintiff: Held,
that no part of the prayer of this
petition could be granted.

Semble, a supplemental bill
should have been the course
adopted instead of a petition.
Pentland v. Quarrington. Page 249
See BANKRUPTcy, 1.

BANKRUPTCY.

1. The institution of a suit under
sect. 88. of the Bankrupt Act,
6 G. 4. c. 16., may be authorised
by creditors present by attorney
as effectually as by creditors pre-
sent in person. Bannatyne v.

Leader.
379
2. The official assignee of a bank-
rupt's estate filed a bill against
the respective personal represent-
atives of two successive assignees,
for an account and payment of
monies which, having formed part
of the bankrupt's assets, were
lying in the hands of the as-
signees at the time of their re-

spective

spective deaths, and were never
afterwards accounted for. The
monies consisted, partly of un-
claimed dividends, partly of sums
set apart to answer unsubstan-
tiated claims, and partly of undi-
vided surplus. Both the assignees
died before the passing of the
6 G. 4. c. 16. The bill was filed
in 1834, and in the following year
the 5 & 6 W. 4. c. 29. was passed,
by which the 110th section of the
former act was repealed, and the
unclaimed dividends of a bank-
rupt's estate were devoted to
certain public purposes therein
specified: Held, that the official
assignee was competent to main-
tain such a suit, and that the
particular creditors to whom the
unclaimed dividends had been al-
lotted, and the Attorney-General,
were not necessary parties to it.
Green v. Weston.
Page 385

See ARTICLEd Clerk.

BOTTOMRY BOND.

The Court possesses, and will exer-
cise, jurisdiction over a bottomry
bond in a case of fraud; and will,
for that purpose, restrain pro-
ceedings upon the bond in the
Admiralty Court by injunction.

It is not necessary, for the
purpose of supporting an inter-
locutory injunction of that kind,
that the Court should find a case
which would entitle the Plaintiff
to relief at all events; it is suffi-
cient if the Court finds, upon the
evidence then before it, a case

which makes the transaction a
proper subject of investigation in
a court of equity.

After long acquiescence under
such an order, the Court will not
readily entertain an application
for dissolving it. Glascott v. Lang.
Page 451

BREACH OF TRUST.

1. The executors of a deceased
trustee, having admitted the re-
ceipt of assets, which would have
been sufficient to satisfy a par-
ticular breach of trust committed
by their testator, besides his other
debts, held chargeable with the
loss occasioned by such breach
of trust, although they had paid
all his debts of which they had
any knowledge out of the assets,
and had distributed the whole
surplus among his residuary lega-
tees many years before, and at a
time when they had no notice of
the breach of trust, or of any
claim in respect of it. Knatchbull
v. Fearnhead.
2. In 1806, a husband at Calcutta

122

being desirous of making a pro-
vision for his wife and the issue
of the marriage, entered into a
bond to A. for payment to him of
10,000%.; and he, at the same time,
conveyed an estate in the East
Indies to A., upon trust to sell it,
and to raise the 10,000l., or so
much of it as the estate would
produce and it was provided by
the deed of conveyance, that as
soon as A., his executors, &c.
should have realised the net and

clear