which attorney shall subscribe his name as a witness to the due execution thereof." And a few years later, a rule was made in the Common Pleas, that the warrant of attorney should be read over; but this appears to have been disused. (Tidd, 595). Next, by a rule of all the courts, made in Hilary Term, 2 Will. 4, it was ordered, that "No warrant of attorney to confess judgment or cognovit actionem, given by any person in custody of a sheriff or other officer upon mesne process, shall be of any force, unless there be present some attorney on behalf of such person in custody, expressly named by him, and attending at his request, to inform him of the nature and effect of such warrant or cognovit before the same is executed, which attorney shall subscribe his name as a witness to the due execution thereof, and declare himself to be attorney for the defendant, and state that he subscribed as such attorney." liam Barton, attending at the execution hereof at his request, and expressly named by him," was held bad for the same reason as in the last case. And in this, Parke, B., concurred, giving up the doubt he had before entertained. In the next place, an attestation, "Signed, sealed, and delivered by the above-named W. Hasty, in the presence of me, John Ruff, the attorney of the said W. Hasty, expressly named by him in this behalf, who, as such attorney, hereunto subscribe my name," was held by Coleridge, J., in Knight v. Hasty, (12 Law Journ., Q. B., 293), to be sufficient, which is somewhat at variance with the former cases. The current of decisions, however, was brought back to its former state by Everard v. Poppleton, (13 Law Journ., Q. B., 1), where an attestation, as full and particular as any of the preceding, was held insufficient. From this review of the cases, our readers will see what sort of The alterations introduced by this rule were, that it attestation is now requisite. To us, as we before reincluded cognovits, which the old rules did not, and it marked, this excessive strictness seems of very doubtful required the attorney to declare himself to be the attur-advantage. Probably, in all the above cases, an honest ney of the defendant, and to state that he subscribed as creditor was made to suffer a grievous injury by the such. These had become necessary in consequence of instrument being set aside. We are bound, however, some decisions, which need not now be mentioned in conclusion, to say, that, if there be any blame, it more particularly. Finally, the above rule, with some attaches to the Legislature, and not to the judges, who, additions, was incorporated in the stat. 1 & 2 Vict. c. in this instance, have done no more than the act seemed 110, (sect. 9). The additions were, that the statute was imperatively to require. made to apply to all warrants of attorney and cognovits, and not merely to such as were given by prisoners in custody on mesne process, to which the rule was confined; and the declaration, that the witness was the attorney for the defendant, and that he subscribed as such, was required to be made in writing in the attestation; whereas, under the rule, it might have been made verbally at the time. Since this statute, there have been various decisions relating to it, too numerous to be here noticed, and which may be readily found in any book of practice. We therefore pass by these, and proceed briefly to mention some of recent date respecting the form of the attestation. In Poole v. Hobbs, (8 Dowl. P. C. 113), the attestation was, "Witness, George Edwards, defendant's attorney, named by him, and attending at his request;" and it was held bad, because it omitted to state also that he subscribed as such attorney. In Potter v. Nicholson, (8 Mee. & W. 294; 5 Jur. 511), the form of the attestation was, "Joseph Bamford, one of the attornies of her Majesty's Court of Exchequer of Pleas at Westminster, attending for the said William Nicholson, at his request, to, and did, inform him of the nature and effect of the above cognovit before the execution thereof by him." This was held to be insufficient, for the same reason as was given in the preceding case. In Elkington v. Holland, (9 Mee. & W. 659), "Signed, sealed, and delivered by J. A. in my presence, and I subscribe myself as attorney for the said J. A., expressly named by him to attest his execution of these presents," was held insufficient by Alderson, B., (Parke, B., dubitante). The reason given was, that it did not contain an express declaration by the attesting witness of his being the attorney for the defendant; and, in this respect, the case goes further than the others, and introduces a very refined distinction. The case which followed was similar to it, Hibbert v. Barton, (10 Mee. & W. 678); in which an attestation, "Witnessed by me, William Pemberton, as the attorney of the said Wil Rebicw. A Practical Treatise on the Law of Trusts and Trustees. By THOMAS LEWIN, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister at Law. Second Edition. London, 8vo., pp. 920. [Maxwell.] On the appearance of the first edition of this work in 1838, we took occasion to speak of its plan and execution in terms of high praise, and its reputation is now so well established in Lincoln's Inn, that any further recommendation would be superfluous; and our principal object in recurring to the subject, is, to make better known to our country readers the exist ence and plan of a work which they will find to be an invaluable pilot through the difficulties and dangers of trusteeships and administrations. We say administrations, because, although, in the first instance, the duties and liabilities of trustees on the one hand, and of executors and administrators on the other, are somewhat different, the difference arises rather from the different nature of the affairs intrusted to them, than from any difference in the principles of the rules by which their conduct is expected to be governed; and, after his general administration is over, an executor or administrator, who, either under the directions of the will, or by arrangement with the parties beneficially interested, has any further duties to perform, is, to all intents and purposes, a trustee, and nothing more. Mr. Lewin has bestowed very great care and labour upon the second edition of what is evidently a favourite work; and has added not only the recent cases and statutes applicable to the matter contained in his first edition, but also many new heads, for which he before referred to other works, such as-Trusts for Payment of Debts-Trusts for Accumulation-Trustees' Receipts Renewals of Leases-Trusts implied on Purchases in the Names of third Persons-Bankruptcy of Trustees, &c. A brief summary of the contents of the work in its present state will best enable our readers to judge of its value. scent, and of assets. Chap. 23. The cestui que trust's relief against the failure of the trustee; and herein of tion of a trust by the court when there is no trustee, the trusts accompanying the estate, and of the execuand of the execution of discretionary trusts in such cases. Chap. 24. Rights of cestui que trust in prevention of a breach of trust; and herein of keeping up the number of trustees, of injunctions against trustees, and of laches. Chap. 25. Remedies of cestui que trust in of the Statute of Limitations, of presumptions, of the event of a breach of trust, of following the trust estate, charity. Chap. 26. Maxims of equity for sustaining the true character of the trust estate against the laches or tort of the trustee; as, that what ought to be done shall be considered as done, and herein of equitable shall not alter the nature of cestui que trust's estate, conversion and election; that the act of the trustee and herein of wrongful conversion in cases of lunacy, &c. Mr. Lewin revives the lapidary style of composition, for the purpose of dedicating his work to Sir E. Sugden, they been applied with more discrimination. But his in terms which would not have been too eulogistic, had choice of a patron derives a peculiar propriety from the character of his book, in which, while the author displays a copiousness, or rather fulness, of information with respect to the matter in hand, an acuteness and accuracy of appreciation of decisions, and a clearness himself might not be ashamed, he also betrays someand precision of language, of which Sir E. Sugden what of that want of tact or sagacity which has been so often exhibited in the conflict between his learned patron's expressed opinions on doubtful points, and the subsequent decisions of the courts, and that pertinacity which has betrayed him into some rather unbecoming attacks on the authority of those decisions after all expectation of their reversal has been at an end. For an example of the same fault in our author, though, we admit, not carried to such extremes, we may refer to his observations on the famous separate estate and restraint on anticipation question; a question which was in dubio at the date of his first edition, and of which he warmly advocated what has proved to be the losing side. Now that the rule has been conclusively settled, with the concurrence of all the equity judges, and of a large majority, at least, of the profession, it might reasonably have been expected, that, in a practical work at least, any renewal of the discussion would have been avoided. In the course of his argument against the efficacy of trusts for separate use, and declarations against anticipation during future covertures, Mr. Lewin says, "But the principal objection is, that the exclusion of 'the marital rights would be a repugnancy to the estate itself; for where the feme is so absolutely the owner of the fund, that it may be paid into her own hands by the trustees, or may be assigned by her to a mere volun After an introductory sketch of the history of trusts before and after the Statute of Uses, Mr. Lewin proceeds to consider, in Chap. 1, the definition of a trust. Chap. 2. The different kinds of trusts, simple or special, ministerial or discretionary; coupled or not with an in-personal liabilities of trustees, and of redress in cases of terest or a power, lawful or unlawful, public or private. Chap. 3. The mode of declaring and proving trusts, in respect of the instrument; and herein of averments of trusts and the Statute of Frauds. Chap. 4. In what words a trust may be declared; and herein of the force of technical expressions, of the rule in Shelley's case, of executory trusts, and of indirect or implied trusts, and the effect of words precatory or recommendatory. Chap. 5. Who may be trustee, and of the proper number of trustees. Chap. 6. What consideration will sup; port a trust, and herein of defective appointments and assurances. Chap. 7. Of the object proposed by the trust, and herein of trusts for aliens, endowments of chapels, gifts "to the poor of a parish," trusts for accumulation, trusts for married women, and the effect of declaring unlawful trusts. Chap. 8. Creation of trusts by operation of law, or resulting trusts and constructive trusts. Chap. 9. Of disclaimer and acceptance of the trust. Chap. 10. What words will vest the legal estate in the trustee; what quantity of estate the trustee will take; with what legal incidents he will hold it; and what persons taking the legal estate will be bound by the trust. Chap. 11. The general properties of the office of trustee; such as, that the office, once accepted, cannot be renounced; the office cannot be delegated; co-trustees exercise a joint office, but, in public trusts, the majority binds; the office survives; the trustee is not liable for his co-trustee's acts; the trustee can gain no advantage from his office, &c. Chap. 12. The duties of trustees of personal chattels; of reduction into possession; as to the safe custody of the chattel; as to the proper investment of trust money; as to charging interest for improper retainer; and as to the distribution of the trust-fund, and releases. Chap. 13. Duties of trustees of renewable leaseholds. Chap. 14. Duties of trustees to preserve contingent remainders. Chap. 15. Duties and powers of trustees for sales, and herein of purchases by trustees. Chap. 16. Duties of trustees for payment of debts, and herein of composition deeds. Chap. 17. Duties of trustees for charities. Chap. 18. The powers of trustees: first, of their general powers, of their discretion, of cutting timber, appropriating lega-teer, or may become vested by bankruptcy or insolvency cies, allowing maintenance, releasing or compounding in her assignees, it is surely inconsistent to say, that debts, leasing, varying securities, &c.; and, secondly, 'the marriage shall not be a transfer of it to the husof their express or special powers, and of the exercise band-a -a purchaser for valuable consideration. If it be of such powers after a change in the number or iden- urged that an estate limited to such uses as A. shall aptity of trustees. Chap. 19. Of allowances to trustees, point, and subject thereto to A. in fee, is good; and, and herein of their costs of suit. Chap. 20. How a therefore, as a settlement to the separate use of a feme trustee may relinquish his office. Chap. 21. In what 'sole, is in fact a settlement to such uses as she, whether the estate of cestui que trust consists, and some of its covert or sole, shall appoint, and in default of appointincidents, such as his right to the possession, to vote, to ment, to her use absolutely, and then, though the sit on juries, &c., of his jus disponendi, and herein of equitable interest vest in the husband by the marriage, conveyances when trustee is infant, &c. Chap. 22. it will still be subject to the exercise of the power,― The properties of the cestui que trust's estate; of the the answer is, that any disposition by A., whether by doctrine of perfecting assignments by notice; of assign-grant suo motu, or by operation of law, would extinments of separate estate; of devises; of seisin and dis-guish the power; and so, if the feme, by the act of marseisin of a trust; of dower and curtesy; of the gift by marriage; of judgments against cestui que trust; of extents from the Crown; of forfeiture; of escheat; of de 6 6 riage, transfer over the whole interest to her husband, 'the assignment in law cannot be defeated by a subsequent exercise of the power; in other words, the oper #UNIST ation of the marriage works the destruction of the power. Again, if it be said that the feme sole and the feme covert are regarded as two distinct persons, (and 'there is no inconsistency in the feme sole having one estate, and the feme covert another), the question suggests itself, why, then, is the feme sole allowed a disposing power over the estate of the feme covert? Yet all admit that the feme, while sole, may, notwithstanding 'a clause against anticipation, claim the absolute interest 'so as to defeat the springing up of the separate use upon the marriage." In a subsequent passage, after citing a sentence from Lord Cottenham's judgment in Newland v. Paynter, (4 My. & C. 417), our author adds, "There appears evidently to have been a struggle in the mind of the court between the wish to support the separate use, (from a fear of the consequences of a different de'cision), and the difficulty of finding a principle upon 'which to maintain it." mitations, and the intention of which, thus expressed, is admitted to be legal? For this error, as we deem it, both in taste and judgment, Mr. Lewin makes ample amends in another page, by his remarks on the doctrine of the Vice-Chancellor of England in Jones v. Jones, (8 Sim. 683), of which he takes the same view as that advocated by a correspondent in p. 61 of our sixth volume. The learned judge, it will be remembered, pronounced an opinion, (and seemed to think he was deciding the point, which, however, did not arise upon the facts), that the rule first established in the cases of Dearle v. Hall and Loveridge v. Cooper, (3 Russ. 1, 30), requiring notice of assignments of equitable interests and choses in action to be given to the trustees or stakeholders of such interests, does not apply to equitable interests in real estate. The case has been generally received as an authority on the point, and the doctrine has been little questioned. Mr. Lewin thus shews the value both of the case and of the dictum: 6 6 We apprehend, that our author's reasoning is as ill founded in point of logic, as his first illustration in the passage cited above is in law. A general power of ap- "In the cases of choses in action these principles are pointment given to an unmarried woman, with a limita- now clearly established; but, between choses in action tion of the fee to her in default of appointment, might by and real estate, there is an observable distinction. In possibility not be held to enable her after marriage personal estate the purchaser knows the legal title is to prevent her husband's title by curtesy by an ap- 'outstanding in a third person, and is, therefore, bound pointment; not because the gift in law destroys the to give notice of his incumbrance; but, in lands, it often power, for the decision in Ray v. Pung, (5 B. & Ald. happens that the vendor professes to have the legal 561), on the converse case of dower, proves the con- ownership in himself, whereas it afterwards appears trary, but because it might be held that the power it was really vested in some stranger. If the purwas not intended to be exercised during coverture, al- 'chaser be not conusant of the outstanding legal esthough the rule is generally otherwise. (Gibbons v. tate, he cannot give notice of his interest, and thereMoulton, Finch, 347; Tomlinson v. Deighton, 1 P. Wms. 'fore cannot be held to have forfeited his right by 149). And, in fact, Sir E. Sugden has argued this very having neglected a precaution that was impossible. question, and shewn that a general power, without re- The doctrine of notice, therefore, can only apply to ferring to coverture, may be exercised after marriage so 'real estate when the purchaser is bound to advert to the as to defeat the husband's interest; (1 Treat. on Powers, fact that the legal estate is in a trustee." After stating 194); but surely Mr. Lewin himself, when the point is the facts, and the decision in Jones v. Jones, Mr. Lewin plainly put to him, will not contend for a moment that proceeds: "A contrary determination would certainly a power of appointment expressly given to be exercised have been a great hardship, for J. Jones conceivby A., whether sole or covert, will not be exercisable by her ed he was purchasing not an equitable but a legal during coverture, although she happens to take an estate interest. The first mortgage had been suppressed, and in default of appointment. In considering a matter of it was impossible for him to give any notice, as he which the very existence depends on considerations of was not aware that the legal interest was outstanding. policy and convenience, technical reasoning, we had However, the argument of the Vice-Chancellor asalmost said quibbling, such as that resorted to by the sumes that the principle of Dearle v. Hall and Lovesupporters of the dicta in Massey v. Parker, &c., and ridge v. Cooper nust be confined altogether to choses adopted by our author, is quite inapplicable; but even in action, and is not, in any case, to be applied to real when tried by this severe test, the doctrine of Tullett v. 'estate. This, however, to the full extent, has not yet Armstrong appears to us to be quite unobjectionable. 'been decided, and is a doctrine, which, it is subThe notion of separate estate and the restraint on anti-mitted, would render any dealings with equitable incipation being once admitted, is there any foundation 'terests extremely dangerous. Thus, A. is entitled to for denying effect to such a trust as the following?- an equitable interest, of which the legal estate is in "Upon such trusts as A. at any time during discover- B., upon trusts requiring B. to retain possession of the ❝ture shall appoint, and subject to any such appoint- title-deeds, and not to part with the legal estate. A. ment, upon trust for A. until she shall marry, and conveys his interest to C., who makes no inquiries also during any and every discoverture which shall ' about incumbrances, and gives no notice to the trus'follow any and every coverture of hers; and in case 'tee. A. afterwards, fraudulently concealing the preshe shall marry at any time or times, then during such 'vious assurance, conveys the same interest to D., who her coverture or respective covertures, in trust for her 'makes inquiries of the trustee respecting incumbrances, for her separate use without anticipation:" or this: ' and gives him notice of his own charge. If, notwith"In trust for A. for her own absolute use and benefit; standing these precautions, D. should be postponed to but in case she shall marry without previously exe- C., who had priority in point of time, it is clear that 'cuting any declaration in writing under her hand to no equitable interest could ever be purchased with the contrary, then in trust for B. for his absolute use safety." and benefit;" and, therefore, this, "In trust for A. for her own absolute use and benefit; but in case she shall marry without previously executing any declar 'ation in writing under hand to the contrary, in trust for her during such marriage for her separate use without anticipation?" The validity and efficacy of these trusts being undeniable, and the form of declaring a trust being perfectly immaterial, how can it be said that any principle stands in the way of giving effect to the ordinary trusts for future separate and inalienable use, which express the intention as plainly as the above li APPOINTMENT.-The Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas has appointed John G. W. Bousall, Solicitor, of Machynlleth, a Perpetual Commissioner for taking the Acknowledgments of Deeds to be executed by married Women. MASTER IN CHANCERY.-The Lord Chancellor has appointed George Hamilton Verity, of Bridgend, Glamorganshire, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. Jan. 6. London Gazettes. TUESDAY, JANUARY 16. BANKRUPTS. at 11, div.-Geo. Sharland, Exeter, wine merchant, Feb. 8 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter, aud. ac.- -George Brinsmead, Bideford, Devonshire, retailer of flour, Feb. 7 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter, aud. ac.; Feb. 8 at 11, div.-Samuel Butler, Wm. Butler, and James Butler, JAMES PIGGOTT, jun., Richmond, Surrey, cabinet maker Birmingham, iron founders, Feb. 10 at 12, District Court of and upholsterer, Jan. 26 at 11, and March 1 at 12, Court Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac.; Feb. 12 at 12, div.-C. of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Alsager; Sols. Brown Timmis, Stone, Staffordshire, flint grinder, Feb. 7 at half-past & Co., Commercial-chambers, Mincing-lane.-Fiat dated 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac.— Thomas Thomas, Leintwardine, Herefordshire, miller, Feb. 6 MOSES JAMES DYKE, Romsey, Hampshire, innkeeper, at half-past 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, Jan. 23 at half-past 1, and Feb. 22 at 11, Court of Bank- aud. ac.-John Marshall, Birchin-lane, London, merchant, ruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Graham; Sols. Curteis, Rom- Feb. 6 at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-J. sey; Bower & Co., 46, Chancery-lane.-Fiat dated Jan. 9. W. Dyer, Colchester, Essex, plumber, Feb. 6 at half-past 2, WILLIAM BROMLEY, Gray's-inn-square, Gray's-inn, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-Thos. Hewit Jackson, Middlesex, scrivener, Jan. 26 and Feb. 29 at 11, Court of Sheffield, Yorkshire, glass cutter, Feb. 7 at 11, District Court Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Turquand; Sols. Wilde & of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac.; Feb. 9 at 11, div.- Thomas Co., College-hill.-Fiat dated Jan. 8. W. Wilson, Barnsley, Yorkshire, linen manufacturer, Feb. 13 CHARLES STEWART SWEENY, Albion-place, Hyde- at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac.; Feb. park-square, Middlesex, apothecary and dealer in medicine, 15 at 11, div.-Charles Pearsall, Anderton, Cheshire, boiler Jan. 26 at 2, and Feb. 27 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, Lon-maker, Feb. 8 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchesdon: Off. Ass. Follett; Sol. Mawe, New Bridge-street.Fiat dated Jan. 15. ter, div. CERTIFICATES Day of Meeting. John Russell Spencer, Halstead, Essex, tanner, Feb. 8 at HENRY SLEISINGER and JOSEPH SLEISINGER, To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on the Cateaton-street, London, warehousemen and importers of toys, Jan. 30 at 2, and Feb. 23 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Edwards; Sol. Spyer, 30, Broad-street-3, Court of Bankruptcy, London.—Christopher Leaf, Woodbuildings, City.-Fiat dated Jan. 11. street, Cheapside, London, warehouseman, Feb. 13 at halfEDWARD HODSON, Thrapston, Northamptonshire, linen past 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London. - Thomas Wright, draper, Jan. 23 at half-past 11, and Feb. 28 at 1, Court of Blackmore-street, Clare-market, Middlesex, cheesemonger, Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Johnson; Sol. Sole, Feb. 8 at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London. - Robt. Aldermanbury, London.-Fiat dated Jan. 2. Hale, Margate, Kent, bookseller, Feb. 6 at 11, Court of BankWILLIAM BAKER, Lower Grosvenor-street, Bond-street, ruptcy, London.-Rich. T. Milbanke, Burwood-place, EdgeMiddlesex, surgeon and apothecary, Jan. 24 and Feb. 28 at ware-road, Middlesex, surgeon, Feb. 7 at 11, Court of Bank12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Johnson; ruptcy, London. - Thomas Martin, Pavement, Moorfields, Sol. Lloyd, Great James-street, Bedford-row.-Fiat dated London, victualler, Feb. 6 at half-past 2, Court of BankruptJan. 9. cy, London.-John Mallett, Hadley, Middlesex, miller, Feb. JOHN CHAMBERLAIN KNILL, Gloucester, tailor, 7 at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-George Z. baker, and confectioner, Jan. 31 at half-past 1, and Feb. 27 White, Southampton, stone mason, Feb. 6 at 2. Court of Bankat 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol: Off. Ass. ruptcy, London.-John Webster, Sheffield, newspaper proHutton; Sol. Smallridge, Gloucester.-Fiat dated Dec. 30. prietor, Feb. 7 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds.GEORGE PHILLIPS, Leicester, innkeeper, Jan. 27 at 11, Moses Rapheal and Aaron Nathan, Kingston-upon-Hull, siland Feb. 24 at half-past 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, versmiths, Feb. 6 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds. Birmingham Off. Ass. Bittleston; Sol. Henderson, Man- -Thomas Bastow, sen., Joseph Jackson, and Thos. Bastow, sell-street, Goodman's-fields, London.-Fiat dated Dec. 29. jun., Birmingham, common brewers, Feb. 9 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham.-John Smalley, Sneinton, Nottinghamshire, iron founder, Feb. 9 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham. MEETINGS. Samuel Partridge, Birmingham, tea dealer, Jan. 31 at 2, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, last ex.- Chas. Willsmer, Tillingham, near Maldon, draper, Feb. 6 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Ed. Austen, Walmer, Kent, grocer, Feb. 6 at half-past 2, Court of Bankruptey, London, aud. ac.-Thos. Creek, Cambridge, tailor, Feb. 6 at half-past 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.; Feb. 8 at 1, div.-W. Benj. Gough, Newport Pagnell, Buckinghamshire, grocer, Feb. 7 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.—Cornelius Chapman, High-street, Croydon, Surrey, stationer, Feb. 7 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, and. ac.-Ambrose Mason, Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, coach proprietor, Feb. 6 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Geo. Lawes, Southampton, tailor, Feb. 7 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Adam W. Lowman and Thos. 8. Lowman, East Cheap, London, cheesemongers, Feb. 7 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac. and div.-Wm. Pickford and Henry G. Clapton, Back-hall, Bristol, warehousemen, Feb. 9 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol, aud. ac.-William Shepherd, jun., Iron Acton, Gloucestershire, miller, Feb. 9 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol, aud. ac.; Feb. 12 at 11, div.-Wm. Hen. Turner and Thomas B. Turner, Blackburn, Lancashire, cotton spinners, Feb. 7 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac.; Feb. 8 at 12, div.-T. Johnson, Liverpool, printer, Feb. 6 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, aud. ac.; Feb. 9 at 11, div.-Thos. Jas. Whidborne, Liverpool, chemist, Feb. 6 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, aud. ac. - John Linskill, Bridlington, Yorkshire, schoolmaster, Feb. 8 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac. - Matthew Willock, Huddersfield, Yorkshire, merchant, Feb. 7 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac.; Feb. 9 at 11, div.-Wm. Smithson, Thirsk, Yorkshire, linen draper, Feb. 7 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac.; Feb. 9 To be allowed by the Court of Review in Bankruptcy, unless FIATS ANNulled. John Kidd, Kendal, Westmoreland, grocer.-J. Harwood and Fred. Harwood, Fenchurch-street, London, stationers. PARTNERSHIP Dissolved. Thos. Thompson and J. W. Thompson, Lancaster, attornies and solicitors. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. Alexander Mackay. Musselburgh, merchant.-John Cairns, Kippendavie, near Dunblane, Perthshire, farmer. William Brown, Troon, merchant.-Chas. Blair, Alloa, farmer. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. Edward Casement, West-street, Neckinger, Bermondsey, Sur- Chas. Fred. Krafft, Edgeware-road, St. Mary-le-bone, Mid- T. Pearson, jun., Toxteth-park, near Liverpool, coal dealer. Wm. Angel King, Lower Queen-street, Rotherhithe, Surrey, Jane Senior, widow, Thornhill Lees, Thornhill, Yorkshire, beerseller. Sheffield, edge-tool grinder.-Joseph South, Sheffield, tableknife forger. -- Geo. Saville, jun., Sheffield, dancing master.Jas. Duke, Sheffield, spring-knife cutler. - Wm. Moorhouse, Sheffield, brick maker.-Thomas Moorhouse, Sheffield, brick maker.-Job Dalton, Sheffield, machine spring manufacturer. Montague Barnett, Swan-street, Minories, Whitechapel, Mid- ston-upon-Hull, Yorkshire, fishmonger.- Wm. S. Cawkwell, dlesex, watch maker. William Hollis, Sussex-terrace, Old Brompton, Kensington, James S. Hulme, Duke-street, Bloomsbury-sq., St. George, William Thomas Ashton, Sherrard-street, Golden-sq., Mid- William Hughes, Took's-court, Cursitor-street, Chancery- Mary Brook, Cromwell Bottom, Halifax, Yorkshire, grocer. George Saller, Tipton, Staffordshire, boatman. INSOLVENT DEBTORS. The following Assignees have been appointed. Further Par- Hen. Hepworth, Sheffield, scale spring maker.- Sim. Salt, Sheffield, cutler.-S. Richmond, Sheffield, paper case maker. -Wm. Cooke, Sheffield, out of business. - Hannah Greaves, widow, Sheffield, eating-house keeper.-Thos. Haigh, KingSheffield, bricklayer.-W. Whitfield, Sheffield, cowkeeper.Hugh Kirk, Sheffield-park, spring knife cutler.-Sam. Wood, Sheffield, knife hafter.-John Senior, Sheffield, fender maker. |—Hen. Trown, Sheffield, pearl worker.—Fran. Wilks, Sheffield, butcher.-Thos. Wilkinson, Sheffield, hair dresser.-H. Tindall, Sheffield, hair dresser.-W. Mirfin, Handsworth, collier. Court-house, READING, Berkshire, Feb. 8 at 10. dener.- Wm. Brangwin, Littlewick-green, White Waltham, Rob. Ruby, Langley-marsh, Buckinghamshire, market garMaidenhead, Berkshire, out of business. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' DIVIDENDS. Thos. Dove, Rochester, surgeon, Jan. 23, Acworth's, Rochester: 4s. 3d. in the pound.-Wm. Wyatt, Kingsland-road, Middlesex, licensed victualler, Jan. 24, Dimmock & Burbey's, Sise-lane, London: 104d. in the pound.-Chas. J. Tolman, Hooker's-court, Nicholas-lane, Lombard-st., tailor, Jan. 23, Allen & Nicol's, 88, Queen-street, Cheapside: 28. 04d. in the pound. MEETING. John B. Holloway, sen., Trafalgar-road, Greenwich, china dealer, Jan. 30 at 11, Court-house, Portugal-street, Lincoln'sinn-fields, pr. d. FRIDAY, JANUARY 19. JOHN REAVELEY, Hammond's-wharf, Queenhithe, London, paper commission agent, Jan. 26 at 1, and March 5 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Green; Sol. Cooper, Old Cavendish-street.-Fiat dated Jan. 16. WILLIAM BEARUP, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, joiner and builder, Jan. 26 at 12, and March 12 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Off. Ass. Baker; WILLIAM LEWIS, jun., Axbridge, Somersetshire, baker Sol. Lambert, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.-Fiat dated Jan. 8. and corn factor, Feb. 2 at 2, and March 1 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol: Off. Ass. Hutton; Sols. THOMAS BENTLEY, Eccleston, Lancashire, calico printer, Bobins & Co., Wells, Somersetshire.-Fiat dated Jan. 11. Feb. 1 at 12, and Feb. 29 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool: Off. Ass. Turner; Sols. Evans, Liverpool; Alcock & Dixon, Burnley; E. & R. W. Bennett, Manchester.-Fiat dated Jan. 6. MEETINGS. - John Casson, Liverpool, corn merchant, Feb. 2 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, pr. d. Chas. Roberts, St. Helen's, Lancashire, corn factor, Jan. 31 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, ch. ass.- John Levett, Rowley Regis, Staffordshire, farmer, Feb. 1 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, ch. ass.-Ed. Beck, Tiverton, Devonshire, cabinet maker, Feb. 15 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter, last ex.-Richard Lewin, Northampton, The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before leather seller, Feb. 13 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Jas. Smith, Darenth, Kent, carpenter, Feb. 13 at the Court, in Portugal-st., on Thursday, Feb. 8, at 9. 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-John Bates, Edw. Williams, Leicester-sq., Middlesex, shopman to linen Three Colt-street, Limehouse, Middlesex, grocer, Feb. 13 at drapers.-Hen. J. F. Etheridge, East Harding-street, Fetterlane, Fleet-street, London, victualler.-Henry Foulkes, Sey- Leeds, Yorkshire, licensed victualler, Feb. 12 at 11, District 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-John Clapham, mour-place, Camden-town, Middlesex, lath render. - Samuel Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac; Feb. 14 at 11, fin. Smith, Stafford-place, Pimlico, Middlesex, waiter.-Jon. W. div.-James Pope and Jos. Beech, Manchester, brush makers, W. Barker, Hampstead-road, Middlesex, piano-forte maker. Feb. 12 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. -Geo. Hinves, Park-place, Highgate, Middlesex, out of business.-Rob. Smith, Billericay, Essex, shoe dealer.-Char- shire, farmer, Feb. 9 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birac.; Feb. 19 at 1, div.-Benj. Gardner, Leigh, Worcesterlotte Davis, York-street, Hackney-road, Middlesex, school-mingham, aud. ac.-Geo. Leeson, Birmingham, factor, Feb. mistress.-Hen. Wm. Parkes, Theobald's-road, Red Lion-sq., Middlesex, patent lock manufacturer. 10 at half-past 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac.-Rob. T. Abbott and Alf. T. Tebbitt, Birmingham, Court-house, SHEFFIELD, Yorkshire, Feb. 7 at 10. wholesale tea dealers, Feb. 12 at half-past 12, District Court Jos Parkin, Morrisfield, scissor smith.-Thomas Hardy, of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud. ac.; Feb. 15 at half-past Sheffield, cutler.-Jas. Brown, Sheffield, slater.-R. Mirfin, | 11, div.-Chas. Willsmer, Tillingham, near Maldon, Essex, |