TABLE OF CASES.

Pearson, Q.C., for the appellants, some of the testator's grand-L. J. GIFFARD.

children.

In re PHENE'S TRUSTS.

Jan. 14.

Shapter, Q.C., and Vincent, Hardy, Q.C., and J. T. Humphry, Presumption of Death after Seven Years-Presumption as to Time in support of the decision.

THEIR LORDSHIPS, without calling for a reply, reversed the decision, discharged the order directing payment to the children, and made a declaration that the children were not at present indefeasibly entitled, but that their interests were still liable to be defeated by the gifts over.

Solicitors: R. Metcalfe; Bell, Brodrick, & Gray.

of Death within that Period.

This was an appeal petition from an order of Vice-Chancellor James (Weekly Notes, 1869, p. 217).

Bristowe, Q.C., and Everitt, for the appellant.

Amphlett, Q.C., and Bagshaw, in support of the order.

G. O. Edwards, Langworthy, and C. J. Hill, for other parties. HIS LORDSHIP held that there was no presumption of law as to the period within the seven years at which Nicholas Phené Mill died; that when he died was a matter of fact to be proved by evidence, and that the burden of proof was on his representative to shew that he survived the testator, and that the representative had failed to do this. Therefore, as the representative

Novation of Debt-Amalgamation of Companies-Winding-up of had declined any further inquiry, an order must be made ac

unregistered Company.

This was an appeal from an order of Vice-Chancellor James, ordering the above-mentioned company to be wound up (Weekly Notes, 1869, p. 239).

cording to the prayer of the petition of appeal for payment to
the other residuary legatees.
Solicitors: A. E. Briant; Fielder & Sumner; Geaussent ; M.
Pope.

The Family Endowment Society was formed in 1835, and was never registered under the Companies Act, 1862, but was regulated by a public Act of Parliament, which provided that the L. J. GIFFARD. persons whose names should be last memorialised by inrolment in Chancery as directors of the society should, until the memorialising of their successors, continue liable to all proceedings. In 1849 and 1850 the petitioner, General Pott, bought two annuities of the society.

In 1861 the business of the society and "all its money, property, credit, and effects," were sold and transferred to the Albert Life Assurance Company, by which the annuities were paid till it was ordered to be wound up by an order made in 1869. This petition was then presented for an order to wind up the Family Endowment Society under the Companies Act, 1862.

The Vice-Chancellor held, 1st, that the petitioner had not agreed to accept the security of the Albert Company, and still remained a creditor of the Family Eudowment Society; and, 2ndly, that the Family Endowment Society was a company capable of being wound up under the Companies Act, 1862, although it had been formally dissolved before the passing of that Act. His Honour, therefore, made an order to wind up the company.

Some of the shareholders who had opposed the petition appealed from the order.

Sir R. Palmer, Q.C., Higgins, and the Hon. W. Bethell, for the appellants.

Amphlett, Q.C., and Kekewich, for other shareholders in the

company.

Fry, Q.C., and Westlake, for the petitioners.

This was an appeal from an order of Vice-Chancellor James, dissolving an injunction which he had previously granted to restrain the publication and sale of a work in the course of preparation by the defendants, entitled "The Handbook, or Manufacturers' and Exporters' Directory."

The plaintiff was the proprietor of the "Business Directory of London," and had filed a bill against the defendants charging them with using slips cut from his directory in canvassing for the new publication, and also with copying these slips in preparing their work for the press.

The defendants admitted having at first used such cuttings in canvassing and obtaining information, but stated that, as soon as the case of Morris v. Ashbee (Law Rep. 7 Eq. 34) had been decided, they had forbidden the canvassers to use any of such slips and they denied that they had copied, or intended to copy, any part of the plaintiff's directory.

Morgan, Q. C., and Cozens-Hardy, for the plaintiff, who appealed.

Kay, Q.C., and Hunter, for the defendants.

THE LORD JUSTICE GIFFARD said that, considering the conflict of evidence, it was impossible at this stage of the cause to grant an injunction. It was a mistake to suppose that persons in the defendants' position might not use the plaintiff's directory in guiding them to the residences of the persons whom they

THEIR LORDSHIPS agreed with the Vice-Chancellor on both wished to canvass. The defendants denied having done more points, and dismissed the appeal with costs.

Solicitors: Maynard & Co.; Freshfields; Clayton & Sons.

than that; if they had, it would be proved at the hearing. The new work had not yet been published; and if it were now pub

lished, and the plaintiff found that it was open to the charges | M. R.
which he brought against it, he could obtain an injunction at
The appeal must be dismissed with costs.
Solicitors: Williams & James; J. Perry.

once.

HEALEY. CHICHESTER AND MIDHURST RAILWAY COMPANY.

Judgment against Railway Company-Execution against Share holders-Form of Order-8 Vict. c. 16, s. 36.

This was a vendors' suit for specific performance.

By the order made on further consideration, the defendants, the railway company, were ordered to pay to the plaintiffs the sum of 23,5161. 2s. 8d., together with interest and the costs of the suit.

To enforce this order the plaintiffs issued a writ of fi. fa., and recovered the sum of 867. 3s. 6., after payment of expenses; and the sheriff returned nulla bona beyond this. They then issued an elegit, and recovered lands of the annual value of 271. 8s. 9d.

The plaintiffs now applied, under s. 36 of the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, for leave to issue execution against the London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company, who are shareholders of the Chichester and Midhurst Railway Company, and have not fully paid up their shares.

Eddis, Q.C., and Jason Smith, for the plaintiffs. Fry, Q.C., for the Brighton Railway Company, contended that execution ought not to be ordered to issue immediately, but that proceedings in the nature of scire facias ought to be taken, so as to allow the company an opportunity of disputing the validity of the order.

THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS ordered execution to issue as asked, unless the Brighton Company should shew cause to the contrary on or before the second seal after Term. The costs of this application would abide the event.

Solicitors: E. Fuller; Baxter, Rose, Norton, & Co.

Company-Manager—Termination of Engagement—Compensation. By the articles of association of the London and Scottish Bank, William Hugh Logan was appointed managing director of the company's affairs in Scotland upon the terms therein specified, and it was also provided as follows:-" In the event of the said William Hugh Logan being at any time deprived or removed from his office for any other cause than gross misconduct, the directors shall pay to him, as compensation for loss of office, a sum equal to three years' salary, at the rate of salary which, on the quarter-day last preceding such termination of his engagement, shall be payable to him, such sum to be paid within one month from the time of his removal."

The company was ordered to be wound up, and Logan now claimed to be entitled to prove against the company for three years' salary at the rate payable to him on the quarter-day immediately preceding the commencement of the winding-up. Roxburgh, Q.C., and Locock Webb, for Logan.

Sir R. Baggallay, Q.C., and Lawson, for the official liquidator. THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS held that the applicant was entitled to prove.

Solicitors: Lawrance, Plows, & Boyer; Redpath & Holdsworth.

Solicitor and Client-Payment of Balance due from SolicitorWrit of Attachment-32 & 33 Vict. c. 62, s. 4. Upon the taxation, under the common order for that purpose, of a bill of costs delivered by G. R. Rush, a solicitor, to his client, from the solicitor to the client. The solicitor was ordered to G. C. S. Durant, a balance of upwards of 27,000l. was found due pay this balance to the client, but failed to do so.

F. H. Colt now applied for leave to issue a writ of attachment against him, stating that a difficulty had been raised at the Office of Records and Writs by reason of the recent Statute abolishing imprisonment for debt (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62); but he submitted that this was a case of "default by an attorney or solicitor in payment of a sum of money, when ordered to pay the same, in his character of an officer of the Court making the order" (s. 4, subs. 4), and that consequently he was entitled to issue the writ.

THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS held that there was nothing in the Act to prevent the writ from being issued. Solicitors: Langley & Gilbon.

This was a suit by the plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all other the freehold and copyhold tenants of the manor of Berkhamstead, against the lord of the manor, for the purpose of obtaining a declaration that they are entitled to rights of pasture M. R. and other commonable rights in respect of their tenancies over Berkhamstead Common, a portion of which the late Earl Brownlow had begun to inclose.

It appeared that the manor of Berkhamstead formerly belonged to the Duchy of Cornwall, and that between 1631 and 1650 an attempt was made by the Prince of Wales to inclose an almost identical portion of the common.

Three legal questions were discussed: (1) On whom lay the burden of proof that sufficient common would be left to satisfy the commonable rights of the tenants? (2) Whether a survey made of the manor while it formed part of the lands of the Duchy of Cornwall was admissible as evidence of the extent and customs of the manor without the commission on which the survey was founded being produced? (3) Whether a suit on behalf of all the tenants of the manor could be maintained?

Sir R. Palmer, Q.C., Joshua Williams, Q.C., and Whately, for the plaintiff.

Sir R. Baggallay, Q.C., Charles Hall, and Darby, for the defendant.

THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS decided in favour of the plaintiff. Solicitors: Fawcett, Horne, & Hunter; Nicholl, Burnett, & Newinan.

In re NORWEGIAN CHARCOAL IRON COMPANY.
MITCHELL'S CASE.

Jan. 17.

Winding-up-Contributory-Infant Transferee-Transfer to

escape Liability.

The Norwegian Charcoal Iron Company was registered in 1862. On the 16th of August, 1865, James Mitchell, being the registered owner of 100 shares in the company, transferred 80 of them, for a nominal consideration, into the name of Frederick Henry Vandyke, an infant and a person of no means, being a clerk in the office of Mitchell's broker. Vandyke deposed that this transfer was made for the purpose of enabling Mitchell to escape liability, and upon a promise by Mitchell that in a short time the shares would be taken out of his (Vandyke's) name. Mitchell died on the 29th of May, 1866.

The

Vandyke attained the age of 21 on the 13th of September, 1866. The company began to be wound up in July, 1868. shares standing in Vandyke's name were forfeited for non-payment of calls on the 22nd of June, 1868.

A list of contributories liable as past members was now being prepared; and two summonses were taken out, one by Vandyke, the other by the liquidator, asking that Mitchell's executors