of an appeal from one court to another of an entirely different character, which was the present case. The Court of Common Pleas almost invariably gave costs of successful appeals from the decisions of County Court judges. He cited Powell v. Lovegrove (8 De G. M. & G. 367), Collins v. Burton (4 De G. & J. 612, 619), Leidemann v. Schultz (14 C. B., 38, 52), Schrode v. Ward (13 C. B., N. S. 417).

The Chief Judge was of opinion that he was entirely bound by the decision of the Lords Justices in the case of Denney v. Hancock. It was certainly a hard case that when an appellant obtained a decision in his favour, and had all along been pursuing a justifiable litigation, he should not be allowed the costs of the appeal: but the decision in the case referred to was plain and unmistakeable, and he must adhere to it until it was altered or overruled. He should not, therefore, order

Mr. Little's clients to pay costs. (July 17, 1871.)

As to costs on withdrawal of appeal, see Ex p. Coker, re Bland, 6 L. J. Notes of Cases, 180.

In a case in which the registrar of a County Court refused to transfer certain proceedings under a liquidation resolution, on the ground that the proper stamps had not been affixed, the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury allowed the costs of the registrar's appearance on such appeal. (MS. note.)

The costs of double sittings will not be allowed in public meetings. (In re Chisholm, 1 Fonb. N. R. 50, re Woolsey, ib.) A solicitor, employed to collect certain outstanding debts received from a debtor a cheque for 381. 1s., payable to the order of his client, and credited his client in account with the amount as against costs to a larger sum. Before the cheque was indorsed the client filed a petition for liquidation by arrangement, under which a trustee was appointed and a resolution to liquidate by arrangement passed. The client having declined to indorse the cheque, the solicitor applied to the Court for an order to compel him or the trustee to do so. Held, that although the solicitor had a lien upon the cheque for his costs, yet that the Court of Bankruptcy had no power to compel the client to endorse the cheque. (Ex p. Sparham, re Gordon, 17 S. J. 228.)

As to priorities of costs in cases where bankruptcy follows upon liquidation, Ex p. Page, re Springall (25 L. T. 716), was an appeal from the registrar of the Norwich County Court, respecting the order in which the costs of liquidation and

bankruptcy were to be paid. Springall, a grocer, residing in Norwich, filed his petition for liquidation about the month of June, 1871, but the creditors at the first meeting failed to pass the necessary resolution, and shortly afterwards Green and Wright, two of the creditors, filed a petition in bankruptcy against the debtor, the act of bankruptcy being the petition in liquidation.

Next day Mr. Isaac Page, the father-in-law of Springall, filed a second petition against him in bankruptcy, founded upon an admission of insolvency by the debtor, upon which the debtor was adjudicated bankrupt. The registrar of the County Court decided the costs of the parties to the liquidation and bankruptcy were to be paid in the following order :

Receiver in liquidation, first; receiver in bankruptcy, second; the costs of the trustee and his solicitor, third; the costs of Green and Wright on their petition, fourth; the costs of Page, on his petition, on which adjudication was pronounced, fifth.

Against this decision Mr. Page appealed.

The Chief Judge ordered that the trustee is in the first place to deduct from the amount in his hands the actual disbursements for realisation; the remainder which forms the net proceeds of the estate referred to in the 31st Rule, is to be distributed in the following manner :

Receiver's charges under the petition for liquidation, first; receiver's charges in bankruptcy, second; solicitor's cost of the liquidation, third; the costs of the petitioning creditor in the bankruptcy, fourth; the trustee's and his solicitor's costs in the bankruptcy, fifth; the costs of Messrs. Green and Wright, of the petition filed by them and not proceeded with, sixth.

Re Plumley and Medlicott, was an application under the 126th section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1869, by the solicitor acting for creditors under a deed of composition, that the debtor should be committed to prison for a contempt in not complying with an order directing him to pay the costs of the composition deed.

The Chief Judge said that the 126th section did not extend to costs incurred in a composition, but referred only to money actually payable as part of the composition. The power to enforce the present order would fall within the scope of the general power of the court, but the present application was

wrong in form. 211.)

The application must be refused. (54 L. T.

·

The tariff of charges in the London Gazette are as follows:Notice is hereby given, that, by Order of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury, on and after the 1st of July next, payment for advertisements to be inserted in the London Gazette will not be received in money, as hitherto, but only in stamps. Such advertisements will be charged for according to the number of words they actually contain, and must be written upon ruled and stamped forms which have been prepared for this purpose, and which may be obtained of the firms undermentioned.

SCALE OF CHARGES.

ORDINARY ADVERTISEMENTS (FORMS NOS. 1 AND 2).

with 58. added for every additional 50 words or under. Table or Tabular Matter at the rate of £4 per page.

BANKRUPTCY, INSOLVENCY, AND COUNTY COURTS.

10s. each advertisement, if in the form sanctioned by the Act or Rules, otherwise at the same rate as ordinary advertisements.

As the Act does not provide for advertisements of more

than 30 lines, all above 30 lines will be charged for at the rate of 58. for every 5 lines or under.

The above scale applies to advertisements received before 2 o'clock on the day previous to publication. All advertisements received after that time must have additional stamps attached, as follows::

As to the application of the deposits in the hands of the late Messengers of the Court, General Rule, 13th Feb. 1871, directed as follows:

Messengers' deposits. It is ordered as follows, viz.—

1. That all sums now in the hands of the several messengers of the Court, or which may hereafter be received by them in any matter of bankruptcy as deposits applicable to the payment of their fees and disbursements as such messengers, shall be forthwith paid over by them to the Bank of England to the credit of the accountant in bankruptcy, and carried to the account in the books of the said accountant, intituled "The Account of Messengers' Deposits," there to remain subject to the order of the Court.

2. That each of the said messengers shall as soon as
may be make out, in triplicate, an alphabetical list
of the several estates in respect of which such de-
posits have been made with him, in the following
form, and shewing the undermentioned particulars,
viz. :—

MESSENGER'S DEPOSITS.

Statement of all deposits made with A. B., a messenger of the Court of Bankruptcy which are now remaining in deposit.

Such list to include all sums now in deposit whether in the hands of the messenger or already paid over to the said

account.

3. That the said lists shall be signed by the respective
messengers, and one copy thereof filed with the
accountant in bankruptcy, one with the official assig-
nee, and the third retained by the messenger, and
from time to time as further sums accrue supple-
mentary lists shall be made out and filed quarterly.

Column for references as to any payment hereafter made.