PAUPER. See COSTS, 2.

PLEADING.

(Matters in issue.) A court of appeal will not readily listen to an objection that certain documents relied upon to prove certain facts are inadmissible on the ground of such documents not being in issue, where such objection was not made below and no injustice appears to have been done. Per L. C.—Sir C. Halkett v. Nisbet's Trustees and others, 53.

PRACTICE.

1. (Preliminary pleas-Right of appeal.) In a reduction, the defender pleaded certain pleas which he designated preliminary. A record was ordered to be made up on these pleas, on which the defender reclaimed, when the Court (on the ground that the defences pleaded as preliminary were the only defences pleadable in causa on which it might be necessary to make up a record) adhered. The record was then prepared, and the defender repeated his former pleas, but without again designating them as preliminary. The ordinary "repelled the dilatory defences" reserving a question arising out of these pleas to be discussed with the defences on the merits. On reclaiming, the Court adhered: Held, that an appeal against the judgment was competent without leave of the Court.Clyne's Trustees v. Clyne, 72.

2. (Interim execution.) The directing interim execution is in the discretion of the Court of Session, and no appeal against an interim order can stay the process.-S. C.

3. (Jury trial.) In an action in which the main question in dispute was whether a party had intromitted with his father's effects, the Lord Ordinary found, 1st. That further investigation was necessary; and, 2nd. That no sufficient cause was assigned for departing from the general rule for ascertaining disputed questions of fact, and therefore remitted the cause to the jury roll. On reclaiming, the Court refused the desire of the note as incompetent; Quoad ultra, of consent recalled the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary, hoc statu, in so far as it contained findings in the cause, and remitted to proceed as shall be just. An application was then made to re-transmit the cause to the Ordinary Roll of the Court of Session, which was refused. On reclaiming, the interlocutor refusing was re-called, and the Court remitted to the Lord Ordinary to re-transmit the cause to his Lordship's Court of Session Roll, and to order a proof by commission. The House of Lords reversed the judgment, but on the ground that the Lord Ordinary was right in directing a trial by jury as the question was one which it is fit and proper so to try.

Semble, an interlocutor of a Lord Ordinary directing trial by jury, cannot properly be the subject of a reclaiming note to the Inner House, or of an appeal to the House of Lords.-Montgomerie v. Boswell, 136,

4. (Appeal.) Whether when appealing against a judgment of the Court of Session it is competent to include in the appeal interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary in the cause which have not been previously made the subject of a reclaiming note, quære?-Clyne's Trustees v. Dunnet, 29.

PRESUMPTION. See COMPETITION.

QUO WARRANTO. See CITY OF LONDON.

1. (Breach of-Notice of-Discharge of diligences of inhibition and arrestment.) A trustee without the concurrence of his co-trustee joined with one of the cestui que trust in disposing of part of the subject of the trust to the agent for the trust, in security for certain advances made by the agent, but not for the purposes or within the scope of the trust: Held, that it was incompetent for the trustees, without special power in that behalf, and wholly incompetent for one of them acting alone, so to pledge the trust estate; and that no third party cognizant of the terms of the trust could be held to have made the advances on the faith of the trust estate; and that diligences of inhibition and arrestment obtained in respect of such disposition were properly recalled and discharged without caution or consignation.-Stuart v. Carnegie, 192.

And see FRAUD.

WARRANDICE.

(Entail-Augmentation of teinds-Liability of heir.) Sir John Wedderburn of Gosford, having sold the lordship of Innerwick, with the parsonage and vicarage tiends thereof, warranted the teinds from future augmentations; Sir Peter, the son of Sir John, made up titles to him by service as heir of line, and with his wife executed mutual taillies of their respective estates, but without the statutory fetters against alienation and debts; under these taillies Charles Wedderburn, his second son, became heir of provision in Gosford, and grantee under a general disposition with express burden of debts; and Pitfirrane, the property of the wife, was settled on the eldest son: on the death of Charles, Sir John, his son, made up his title by general service to him, as nearest heir male of line, of taillie and provision, and succeeded to the estate of Gosford and the other property comprised in the general disposition, and sold part of the estates; at a subsequent period he became infeft of the lands of Pitfirrane and surrendered Gosford to his younger brother Henry, who took on himself the obligations to which Sir John was subject, on the bankruptcy of of Henry, a sum of money was claimed and allowed to Sir John in respect of these obligations. The appellant was served heir of line taillie and provision to Sir John, his father: Held, affirming the judgment of the Court of Session, that the appellant was liable to the obligation of the warrandice entered into by his ancestor.--Sir Charles Halkett v. Nisbett's Trustees, 53.

v. Blackfriars Bridge (Manchester) Company, 1 P. & D. 603 Poor Rate, 2 v. Bush, 1 P. & D. 586

V. Hungerford Market Company, exp. Palmer, 1 P. & D. 492

Highway Act Hungerford Market Act. Settlement, 2 Borough Rate

Poor Rate, 1

v. Northwich, Savings' Bank, Trustees of, 1 P. & D. 615 Savings Bank Act v. Outwell, Inhabitants of, 1 P. & D. 610

Order of Removal

Bayley v. Dennett, Y. & C. 459

v. Todd, Bea. 95 Blake v. White, Y. & C. 434 Booth v. Booth, Bea. 125 Brookes v. Burt, Bea. 106

..

Maintenance (Destitution of parents.)

..

Costs (Defect of parties); Evidence, 2 (Adding parties); Husband and wife, 2 (Wife's legacy.) Practice, 5 (Sale under decree.) Execution of decrees (Order for costs.) Evidence, 1 (Costs); Trustees (Liability of probate.) Parties, 1 (Trustee of term), 6 (Tenants in common); Practice, 5 (Parties abroad.) Practice in the Exchequer, 6 (Enlarging publication.)

Brunt v. Wardle, Y. & C. 503