do so, he cannot obtain costs, though duly qualified as an attorney in all other respects. (3 Y. & J. 24.)—Humphreys v. Harvey, 1 Bing N. C. 61.

BAIL.

1. (Payment into Court in lieu of.) Where money has been paid into Court in lieu of bail, the plaintiff on moving to have it paid out is entitled to the costs of the application (in C. P. as well as in K. B.)—Freeman v. Paganini, 4 Moo. & S. 165.

2. (Setting aside proceedings on bail-bond.) In the Exchequer, it is not necessary that an affidavit to ground a motion for setting aside proceedings on a bail-bond on payment of costs, should show that the defendant has a good defence on the merits, or on whose behalf the application is made.Bourne v. Walker, 2 C. & M. 338; 4 Tyr. 121.

BANKRUPTCY.

1. (Act of Bankruptcy.) The execution of a deed whereby a trader conveys his whole property to the use of some of his creditors, is a sufficient act of bankruptcy to sustain a commission, though the deed was executed by himself alone, and was not proved to have been acted on, or to have passed out of his hands. (4 B. & A. 382.)—Botcherley v. Lancaster, 1 Ad. & E. 77; 3 N. & M. 383.

2. (Order and disposition.-Jus Tertii.) B. having mortgaged to A. certain leasehold coal-mines and barges, &c, afterwards demised the mines and assigned the barges to C. They were subsequently seized and sold by a canal company in satisfaction of tolls claimed by them. C., after the seizure and sale, committed an act of bankruptcy, on which a commission issued within two months of the seizure. In trover by A. against the canal company to recover the value of the barges and coals taken in them: Held, that the company could not set up the title of the assignees under the 6 G. 4, c. 16, s. 72, even supposing the property to have passed to the assignees under that section: Held also, that to entitle the assignees under s. 72, it is not sufficient to show that the goods were in the order and disposition of the bankrupt with the consent of a party who was permitted by the true owner to deal with them as his own, (e. g. with the consent of a mortgagor,) but that the consent must move directly from the true owner to the bankrupt.-Fraser v. Swansea Canal Navigation Company, 3 N. & M. 391.

3. (Personal liability of assignee.) Assumpsit. The first count stated that plaintiff had lawfully distrained for rent on the effects of L., against whom a fiat had been issued, and of whose estate defendant claimed to be assignee, and had put a person in possession thereof; and that in consideration that plaintiff, at defendant's request, would withdraw the person so put in possession, defendant, claiming to be assignee as aforesaid, undertook that the rent should be paid to the plaintiff out of the produce of the sale of the same effects: Averment, that plaintiff did withdraw the person from possession, and defendant took possession; but though a reasonable time for sale of the effects and for such payment had elapsed, defendant had not paid the said sum to the plaintiff': Plea, that before the making of

defendant's promise, a fiat was issued against L., under which he was found a bankrupt, and defendant was appointed his assignee; that defendant was only interested as such assignee in procuring the distress to be withdrawn, and that after the making of the promise declared on, and before a reasonable time had elapsed for the sale of the effects, the fiat was duly superseded, and defendant was unable afterwards to sell the effects and pay the plaintiff out of the produce, whereof he gave the plaintiff notice; whereby the defendant was discharged from performing the promise in the declaration: Held, on demurrer, that the defendant's promise was unqualified, and that the plaintiff, having relinquished his rights in consequence of it, was entitled to recover. Semble, that the plea was bad for not disclosing that the defendant had not sold before the fiat was superseded.-Stephens v. Pell, 4 Tyr. 6.

4. (Retrospective operation of Bankrupt Act.-Where money had and received lies by assignees.) The 6 G. 4, c. 16, s. 127, is retrospective, and applies to a case where the discharge by insolvency, or the certificate under the first commission, was prior to the passing of the act. (See ante, p. 75.)

A. was discharged under an insolvent act in 1815, and in 1830 obtained his certificate under a commission of bankruptcy issued in 1829, under which he did not pay 15s. in the pound. In 1832 he opened an account and made a deposit with the Bank of England: Held, that the assignees under the commission might recover the amount of such deposit in an action of money had and received against the Bank.-Elston v. Braddick, 2 C. & M. 435; 4 Tyr. 123.

5. (Staying proceedings on bankruptcy.) The plaintiff in an action being liable to the defendant for the costs of a nonsuit, issued a fiat of bankruptcy against the defendant. The Court refused to stay the defendant's proceedings in the action.-Eicke v. Nokes, 1 Bing. N. C. 69.

And see EVIDENCE, 5; HUSBAND AND WIFE, 3; LEASE, 2.

BENEFICE.

(Charge on.) A composition with a clergyman, in consideration that his future income may be received by a trustee and applied in liquidation of his debts, after providing for a curate, is void under 13 Eliz. c. 20. (2 B. & Ad. 328; 1 B. & Ad. 673.)—Alchin v. Hopkins, 1 Bing. N. C. 99. BILL OF EXCHANGE.

1. (Notice of dishonour.) To prove the due notice of dishonour of a bill, a letter written by the drawer to the holder six days after it became due, referring to the bill, and stating "that he fully expected it would have been paid," and that he had already taken up 1007. of return bills of the acceptor, and requesting a forbearance of hostile proceedings on account of the bill, was given in evidence: Held, that it was properly left to the jury to say, whether they could infer from the letter that notice of dishonour had been sent on the proper day; and the jury having found for the plaintiffs, the Court refused to disturb the verdict.—Booth v. Jacobs, 3 N. & M. 351.

2. (Indorsement made in France.) By the law of France an indorsement in blank does not transfer any property in a bill of exchange: Held, that the holder of a bill drawn in France, and indorsed there in blank, cannot recover against the acceptor in the courts of this country. (1 B. & Ad, 284; 10 B. & C. 903.)-Trimbey v. Vignier, 1 Bing. N. C. 151.

3. (Notice of dishonour.) A letter from the holder to the indorser of a bill, threatening legal proceedings unless the bill be paid, does not amount to notice of the dishonour of the bill by the acceptor. (4 B. & C. 339.)— Solarte v. Palmer, (in the House of Lords,) 1 Bing. N. C. 194.

4. (Personal liability of drawer on another's account.) A broker at N. shipped a cargo of coals, and drew a bill on the consignees in favour of the vendors. The bill being returned by the drawees on account of the shortness of the date, the vendors, by the broker's directions, drew another bill at a longer date. It was taken to the broker's counting-house for signature, but he having left the town in consequence of embarrassments, the defendant (his brother), who had come there to investigate his affairs, at the vendors' request and for their convenience, signed the bill generally: Held, that he was personally liable as drawer. (5 M. & S. 345; 2 Str. 955.)-Sowerby v. Butcher, 2 C. & M. 368.

5. (Title of indorsee of lost or stolen bill.) To an action by an indorsee for value of a bill which has been stolen or lost, it is no defence that the bill was taken by him under circumstances which "ought to have excited the suspicion of a prudent and careful man." Nothing short of gross negligence will impeach his title. (See Backhouse v. Harrison, ante, p. 165.)— * Crook v. Jadis, 3 N. & M. 257.

BILL OF EXCEPTIONS.

Where exceptions are improperly taken, as where they are placed on the record after the finding of the jury, the Court of Error can give no judgment on them.-Armstrong v. Lewis, 4 Moo. & Sc. 1; 2 C. & M. 274.

CANAL ACT.

A Canal Act gave the company tolls for all goods carried along the canal, which tolls, if not paid on demand, they were empowered to recover by action; or they might seize the goods or other things in respect whereof the rates ought to have been paid, and the boat or other vessel laden therewith, and detain the same until payment of such rates and all arrears; and if such goods were not redeemed within seven days after the taking, the same were to be appraised and sold as in case of a distress: Held, first, that this clause did not authorise the seizure of goods which had been landed; secondly, that it did not empower the company to sell the boats.→→ Fraser v. Swansea Canal Navigation Company, 3 N. & M. 391.

CARRIERS' ACT.

A looking glass, exceeding the value of 10l., was packed up in a case and sent to a carrier's office to be conveyed to the house of S. near Lymington. The proper notice was affixed in the office, pursuant to the stat. 11 G. 4 and 1 W. 4, c. 68, s. 2. The words "looking glass," and "keep this side

upwards," were written on the case, but no express declaration was made of the nature and value of the goods, nor any increased rate of carriage paid or tendered. The parcel was conveyed from Lymington to S.'s house on a brewer's truck, (that being the usual mode of conveyance of parcels in that part of the country,) on which it could not be placed in the manner directed, and the glass when unpacked was found to be broken: Held, that the carrier was not liable for the damage.

The act extends to all the articles enumerated in sect. 1, although not within the words of the preamble, an article of great value in small com

66

pass."-Owen v. Burnett, 2 C. & M. 353; 4 Tyr. 133.

CERTIORARI.-See SESSIONS.

CHARTER-PARTY.

1. By charter-party of October 20th, 1822, defendant agreed to go in ballast from Portsmouth to St. Michael's, and bring back a cargo of fruit direct to London. The charterer was to be allowed thirty-five running days for loading and unloading, to commence on the 1st of December then next; and if the vessel did not arrive at St. Michael's by the 31st January, 1833, the charterer was to be at liberty to rescind the charter-party: Held, that the defendant was bound to proceed at once to St. Michael's, and was not at liberty to make an intermediate voyage for his own purposes, although he arrived after all at St. Michael's before the 31st of January, 1833.— M'Andrew v. Adams, 1 Bing. N. C. 29.

2. It was agreed by charter-party that the vessel should proceed to the East Indies, and there load a full and complete cargo; the fore-cabin to be filled with light goods; freight 47. 15s. per ton of 20 cwt. for sugar, coffee, and rice; and for pepper, at 18 cwt. to the ton; 100 tons of rice or sugar to be shipped previous to any other part of the loading, to ballast the vessel: Held, that the owner was bound to furnish what further ballast was necessary, and that the freighter, after shipping the 100 tons of rice or sugar, was at liberty to complete the cargo with light goods. (4 Campb. 103; Abbott on Sh. 287.)—Irving v. Clegg, 1 Bing. N. C. 53.

And see AMENdment, 2.

CHURCHWARDEN.

1. (Authority of, to order repairs.) A churchwarden has no authority to pledge the credit of his co-churchwardens for repairs to the church; and if he orders such repairs without their knowledge, he is liable individually. -Northwaite v. Bennett, 2 C. & M. 316.

2. (Election of.) A meeting for the election of churchwardens took place in the parish church, in pursuance of a notice which stated that the meeting would be held there, and that in case a poll was demanded the meeting would be adjourned to the Town Hall. A poll was demanded, whereupon the chairman adjourned the meeting to the Town Hall, although a majority of the voters present objected to such adjournment: Held, that he had a right so to do.

But the right of adjourning business in progress at a meeting is vested

in the persons assembled, and not in the chairman. (2 Str. 1045.)—The King v. Archdeacon of Chester, 3 N. & M. 413.

CONDITION.-See HUSBAND AND WIFE, 4.

CONTRACT.

(Whether joint or several.) By memorandum of agreement between the trustees of a turnpike road and A., the trustees agreed to let, and A. to take, the tolls for a year at a certain rent; and A. and B., A. as renter of the tolls, and B. as his surety, severally promised the trustees that A. should pay the rent at the times appointed and perform the conditions annexed to the agreement: Held, that the contract was several, and not joint, that the trustees could not sue the parties jointly for arrears of the rent. (10 B. & C. 410; 1 B. & C. 682.)—Lee v. Nixon, 1 Ad. & E. 201. CONTRACT OF SALE. (Repudiation of, for fraud.) If a party be induced to buy an article by

fraudulent misrepresentations of the seller respecting it, and after discovering the fraud continue to deal with the article as his own, he cannot recover back the money from the seller. Nor is the right of repudiation revived by the subsequent discovery of another incident in the same fraud. -Campbell v. Fleming, 1 Ad. & E. 40.

CORPORATION.

The judgment of the K. B. in Henley v. Mayor of Lyme Regis, 3 B. & Ad. 77, (L. M. vol. 2, p. 85, and vol. 8, p. 457,) was affirmed in the House of Lords.-Mayor of Lyme Regis v. Henley, 1 Bing. N. C. 222.

COSTS.-See WRIT OF TRIAL ACT, 2.

COVENANT.

Covenant not to carry on upon certain premises the business of a common brewer, or retailer of beer: Held, that carrying on the business of a retail brewer was no breach of the covenant. (5 G. 4, c. 54, s. 6.)-Simons v Farren, 1 Bing. N. C. 126.

DEBTOR AND CREDITOR.

1. A. and B. gave their joint and several promissory note to secure a separate debt due from each of them. The creditor subsequently executed a release to A.: Held, that though this release discharged both as to the note, it did not prevent the creditor from recovering the separate debt of B. on the account stated.-Cocks v. Nash, 4 Moo. & Sc. 162. 2. (Composition deed.) By agreement between the plaintiffs, together with other creditors, and the defendant, the defendant agreed to pay a composition of 15s. in the pound by two instalments; and a surety, in consideration of the creditors agreeing to discharge the defendant from all debts and demands on receiving such composition, agreed to pay a sum of money in part discharge of the first instalment, and to accept a bill of exchange drawn by the defendant in part payment of the second; the creditors agreeing" to exonerate and discharge the defendant on payment of the said 15s. in the pound." It was agreed, also, that several bills of exchange