of the 13th Feb. last, when BRAMWELL, B. said it had better be moved on Monday, when Martin, B. would be present. To be moved on Monday.

GLENNIE . THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT RAILWAY. - A rule nisi had been obtained calling on the plaintiff to show cause why the defendants should not be at liberty to add a demurrer to the pleadings to the plaintiff's claim of a mandamus.-M. Lloyd, for the plaintiff, showed cause; C. Pollock, Q. C. and Waddy, for defendants, supported the rule. Rule discharged.

NETHERCOTE AND ANOTHER. WILLIAMS.-Quain, Q. C., for the plaintiffs (the claimants), showed cause against the rule obtained herein on the part of defendant (the execution-creditor), for the payment out of court to him of 130, the value of the goods, which had been paid into court by the plaintiffs, on the ground that the plaintiffs had not proceeded to the trial of the interpleader issue directed by the Lord Chief Baron. -Mellish, Q C. with Me Inture for the defendant.-Upon the suggestion of the COURT, and by arrangement between the parties,

Rule discharged on the plaintiff's paying the costs of the day and of this motion, and giving peremptory undertaking to try at the next assizes.

Re GOLDRICK (an Attorney)-Littler moved, no cause being shown, to make the rule for an attachment herein absolute. Rule absolute, with costs.

MILNER AND ANOTHER. RAWLINS-This was an interpleader summons.-L. Kelly, for the defendant, moved for a rule for the payment out of court to the defendant of 351. 78. 1d., paid into court by the Sheriff of Warwickshire, on the ground of defendant having executed and registered a deed of arrangement under the B. A. 1861 previously to the money having been paid to the sheriff under the execution. The fi. fa, was lodged with the sheriff on the 29th Jan., and on 30th Jan, the sheriff levied at Birmingham: aud the sale was advertised for the 1st Feb. The officers were informed of the deed at the time of the levy, and that it would be registered. It was actually registered at two p.m. on 31st. Jau. On the evening of the 31st Jan. the defendant's attorneys, in order to induce the officer to withdraw, who refused otherwise to do so, gave an undertaking "to see the debt and costs paid." The sheriff withdrew, and on the 4th Feb. the defendant's attorneys sent a cheque for the amount, with a protest against defendant's liability in consequence of the recent decision of the Ex. in Rogers v. Roberts, 15 L. T Rep. N. S. 254; 36 L J. 41, Ex.: L. Rep, 2 Ex. 35; 15 W. R 340. He cited Young v. Roebuck, 5 L. T. Rep. N. S. 843; Cooper v. Chitty, and sect. 184 of B. A. 1849; and sects 192, 197, and 198 of B. A. 1861.Macnamara, contra, for plaintiffs, cited Boyle v. Blackstock, SL. T. Rep. N. S. 641; Atkinson v. Baunton, 1 Bing. N. C. 434 (judgment of Tindal, C. J., p. 455); Butcher v. Stewart, 11 M. & W. 857; 12 L. J., N. S, 39, Ex.; Re Tilleurd, 2 D. & L. 919; Hellings v. Jones, 10 Moo.-The COURT (Bramwell and Pigott, BB.) were of opinion that the rule should be made absolute. Rule absolute with costs. ANCILL . CRAWLEY AND ANOTHER. showed cause against, and L. Kelly supported, a rule to add a count to a declaration. Rule absolute on usual terms as to costs. BEAMAN TWEMLOW.-V. Lushington moved, on affidavits, for an injunction to restrain the defendant from practising as a medical practitioner within certain limits, contrary to an agreement of 18th May 1866. Rule nisi.

PIERCY AND ANOTHER. THE BRISTOL AND NORTH SOMERSET RAILWAY COMPANY-Littler, for plaintiffs, moved for writs of sei, fɑ. against certain shareholders.

Rule nisi.

WILLIAMS . THE SIDMOUTH HARBOUR AND RAILWAY COMPANY.-Barratt Jacques moved, no cause being shown, to make rules for a sci. fa. against certain shareholders alsolute. Stands over to Monday. FOSTER . FRITH-Holl moved to enlarge this rule to next term, with consent of Kemplay on the other side. Rule enlarged.

Monday, May 13.

TAYLOR . BAINES-C. Russell, for the plaintiff, showed cause against a rule obtained by the defendant to enter a nonsult herein pursuant to leave reserved at the trial by the learned assessor of the Passage Court at Liverpool. The action was by the plaintiff, whose ship was lying at anchor in the Mersey, near the entrance of the dock, against the defendant, whose ship, being inward bound, took the ground near the dock and drifted against and seriously injured the plaintiff's ship, the defendant's ship being at the time under the control of a licensed pilot. The jury found that there was no negligence on the part of any of the crew on board the defendant's ship, except that of the pilot. The learned assessor therefore directed a verdict to be entered for the plaintiff, with leave to move, and the question was whether or not it was compulsory on the masters and captains of vessels entering the Mersey to take a pilot on board The Acts of Parliament relating to the matter were the Mersey Docks, &c. Consolidation Act 1857-8 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 32), ss. 129 and 130, which was passed subsequently to the prior local Act which regulated these matters of 5 Geo. 4. It was contended for plaintiff that the master was not bound to take a pilot on board, and so defendant was liable in the action. The Attorney-General v. Cuse. 3 Pri. 302, warranted that proposition: (Carruthers v. Sidebotham, 4 M. & S. 77; The Anapolis, 9 V. Lush, 295.)-Mellish, Q. C. and Temple, contra for defendant, were not called on to argue.

Rule absolute to enter a nonsuit. WILLIAMS . THE SIDMOUTH HARBOUR AND RAILWAY COMPANY.-B. Jacques mentioned this case again, and moved that the rule for a sci. fa. against George Brake, C. J. Cornish, and Christopher Speare, shareholders in the company, should be made absolute, no cause being shown. Rule absolute.

Re CDLEY (an Attorney).-G. Tayler moved to make this rule absolute. It was granted in Hilary Term for the payment of 1401. pursuant to the attorney's undertaking. and had been enlarged to this term, and made returnable on Saturday last. Notice of the rule was served personally on the attorney on Monday last. Rule absolute.

NICHOLSON. POWER-Mellish, Q. C. and Learers, for the plaintiff, showed cause against a rule obtained by the defendant to vary an order of Martin, B., by allowing an equitable plea, which his Lordship had refused. It was an action on a policy of insurance on freight from Cuba to Swansea, and in addition to pleas 1, denying the contract, and, 2, that at the time of the insurance a material fact as to the risk was not disclosed, which pleas had been allowed, the defendant proposed to plead 3, as an equitable plea, "that he signed a slip in ignorance of a material

fact, which plaintiff knew and did not disclose that by the custom of London underwriters, of whom defendant was one, the signing the slip constituted an undertaking to subscribe a policy; that before he subscribed the policy the fact came to his knowledge, and he subscribed it merely in pursuance of the undertaking, and under protest that he was discharged from liability by reason of nondisclosure; that there was no consideration for the signing of the policy other than the consideration for which defendant signed the slip, viz, an agreement to pay the premium, and that the premium was never paid." They contended that, knowing it at the time, the defendant should have refused to sign.-Cohen, for defendant, was not called on, and the COURT allowed the plea.

BIDDER v. CHADWICK.

Rule absolute.

REG. . GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, er parte WILSHER-J. Russell moved for a rule nisi to quash a return to a writ of mandamus issued on the 16th Feb. last, commanding the defendants to summon a jury to assess the compensation payable for lands taken by them under their compulsory powers, on the ground that the plaintiffs could neither traverse the return nor demur to it. After describing Wilsher's interest the writ showed the company's default, and they made a return to it, saying that Wilsher is not a party "enabled" by the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, to sell or release the land in question; also that he is not injuriously affected, and that the company had three years during which they could give notice to treat, which three years had not expired. They had, however, actually given the plaintiff notice, and none of the averments which the company's return to the writ of mandamns impliedly traversed, had been made by the Rule nisi. plaintiff.

SAFFERY. WILKINSON.-Kemp moved for a rule to show cause why defendant, a debtor arranging under a deed, should not be discharged out of custody under a ments had been complied with, and that the defendant had nevertheless been arrested. Rule nisi, returnable on Monday. HEALTH.-Harrington

REG. T. ALDERSHOT BOARD OF moved for a rule to show cause why a writ should not issue commanding a new election of certain members of this board. One of these officers had been elected at a meeting at which he acted as chairman. This had clearly made his own election bad, and he had therefore retired; but as it was feared that the circumstance might throw a doubt on the validity of the other elections, all the members of the board were anxious to have the writ, to prevent further inconvenience. The affidavits showed that if the rule were granted nisi there would be no cause shown. Rule absolute.

Rule enlarged to next term on payment of costs. PELL. THE NORTHAMPTON AND BANBURY RAILWAY COMPANY.-Bulwer, Q. C., for the defendants, moved to rescind an order of Martin, B. Defendants contracted with one Shrimpton to construct a line of railway, and amongst other things it was agreed that he should bring on the de-fi. fa. The affidavits showed that the statutory requirefendants' premises all necessary plant and materials, and that the defendants should have a lien on them; and it was also agreed that the defendants would advance, from time to time, to Shrimpton to the amount of two-thirds of the value of the plant. In May 1866 Shrimpton became a bankrupt, and inspectors were appointed. Defendants took possession of the plant, and in Aug. 1866 plaintiff obtained judgment against defendants for 20914, for which fi. fa. was issued and the sheriff seized the plant and materials in question; but upon notice by defendants of their claim under Shrimpton's contract, he interpleaded, and an issue was directed to try whether the sheriff was entitled to the goods as against plaintiff. Plaintiff and Shrimpton then came to an understanding, and Martin, B. made an order directing the officer of the court to pay out half the amount of the sale to plaintiff, and the residue to Shrimpton, and thereby the defendants lost their lien. [BRAMWELL, B.: Are you not entitled to sue the sheriff?] He sold under the order of the judge. [BRAMWELL, B.: Are you bound by that, not being parties to it?] We are content that plaintiff should have the whole, as it would go in discharge of his judgmentdebt, but Shrimpton is not entitled to a penny of it.KELLY, C. B: You may have your rule, and you should take care to arrest the money in the agent's hands. Rule to show cause. WILLIAMS . THE SIDMOUTH HARBOUR AND RAILWAY COMPANY-Barnard appeared to show cause against a rule obtained by II. Malthers for a scire facias against a Mr. Webber, a shareholder in the company, and asked that the rule might be enlarged; but, as he had no affidavit, the COURT refused to hear him.

NEW TRIAL PAPER.

BURT . RYDALL-In this action of trover for farming stock to the value of 15, in which, at the trial before Martin, B., the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, although the learned judge summed up strongly in favour of the defendant.-Manisty.Q. C. and Lopes showed cause against, and Pearce supported, a rule for a new trial on evidence. Bones v. Foster, 2 H. & N. 779, was cited. the ground of the verdict being against the weight of

KNOWLES v. PRATT-Abbott moved for a rule to show cause why an attachment should not issue against the defendant for not answering interrogatories administered to him under a judge's order. Interlocutory judgment had been obtained, and the interrogatories had been afterwards administered by leave of a judge; but defendant refused to answer. Rule nisi.

BRARY . STEPHENS.-Giffard, Q. C. applied to enlarge till next term a rule calling on defendant to show cause why he should not be brought up for judgment on a conviction for obstructing a navigable river.-Bowen, for the prosecution offered no opposition. Rule enlarged.

Coxe. KERSLARE.—Kerslake ". Cox.-F. Russell showed cause against a rule obtained by Cole, Q. C. to set aside an award on the grounds of want of finality, inconsistency, and excess of jurisdiction. - Cole, Q. C. in support of the rule. (To be reported.) Rule discharged with costs.

REG. . DOLBIN AND OTHERS (Justices), ex parte WILLIAM FAULKNER-Marriott showed cause against a rule obained by Francis, calling on these justices to show teause why a certiorari should not issue to quash an affiliation order made by them. In doing so, he took a preliminary objection that the application for a certiorari came too late. The order was made July 20, 1866, but the certiorari was not moved for till Jan. 29, 1867. This was beyond the six months limited by 13 Geo. 2, c. 18, s. 5, and therefore no certiorari could be granted. The COURT held the objection fatal, and

Rule absolute for a new trial on payment of costs. MAITLAND e. THICKNESSE-Temple, Q. C. and Crompton for plaintiff; Baylis for defendant. Rule enlarged to next term. SPECIAL PAPER. WRIGHT & CHAPPELL AND BEALE.-This part-heard case was resumed, and Brown, Q. C replied.-The COURT were of opinion there had been a breach of covenant, but that the 15007 was in the nature of a penalty and not of liqui-sory powers. dated damages. They therefore gave

Rule discharged with costs. REG. . THE METROPOLITAN RAILWAY COMPANY, ex parte HARDING.- Barnard moved, on affidavits of service to make a rule absolute, directing defendants to issue their warrant to the Sheriff of Middlesex to summon a jury to assess compensation for lands taken under defendants' compulRule absolute. Interlocutory judgment for the plaintiff; the amount of SAMUELS-Barnard made a similar application in this REG. . THE GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ex parte damages to be assessed by a jury. case; Bridgman, for the company, consented.

NEW TRIAL PAPER.

SCHOLES r. CLAPPERTON.—In this case, which was an action against defendant for inducing the plaintiff, by false and fraudulent representations, to purchase the goodwill of a public-house at Liverpool, at a price far beyond its value, in which the jury gave a verdict for plaintiff for 150,-E. James, Q. C. and Macrory, for the plaintiff, showed cause against, and Temple, Q. C. and Holker, for the defendant, supported a rule for a new trial on the grounds of surprise and the discovery of new evidence contained in the

affidavits.

Cur, adr, vult.; and meantime to consult the learned judge.

Re KENYON.-Mr. Kenyon, who had been a plaintiff in an action of ejectment in the Court of C. P. at Lancaster, in person applied to the court for a rule to set aside an order of Lush, J. setting aside a judgment in that action. He said that Martin, B. had previously made an order in his favour.-MARTIN, B.: I made no order at all.

Application refused.

The Court was now adjourned to next term, with the usual proclamation by Mr. Morgan, the head usher.

BAIL COURT.

Reported by FRANCIS TURNER, Esq., Barrister-at-Law.

BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.
EASTER TERM 1867.

Thursday, May 9.

(Before MELLOR and LUSH, JJ)

HARPER AND UNDERWOOD THE JUDGE OF THE CITY SMALL DEBTS COURT.-Torr moved for a rule for a mandamus commanding the judge of the City Small Debts Court to show cause why he should not settle and sign a case for appeal from a decree made by him while acting as Judge in Equity, under 28 & 29 Vict. c. 99 (the County Courts Equitable Jurisdiction Act). Sect. 4 gave to the City Small Debts Court "the like jurisdiction, powers, and authorities, in all respects' as a County Court in matters of equitable jurisdiction; but sect. 18 (which gives an appeal in certain cases from the decisions of the County Court judges) did not mention the judge of the City Court, who consequently thought he was not bound to state a case, and with this construction of the Act, Stuart, V.C. had agreed. It was now contended that the 4th and 18th sections should be read together, and that therefore suitors in the City Court had the same remedies "in all respects 31 as those in the County Courts. Rule nisi.

Rule absolute. Er parte WILLIAM NEWTON WILSON, re AN ATTORNEYH. James moved for a rule calling on an attorney of the court to show cause why he should not pay over 581 odd received by him on account of Mr. Wilson, and also why he should not answer matters contained in affidavits. [MELLOR, J.: It is too late in term for you to have a rule on second point.] The attorney had received the money, and after making divers excuses, admited that he had received it, but he had nevertheless failed to pay it over. Rule nisi for payment of money only.

FISHER . COX.-II. James showed cause against a rule obtained by Mellor, calling on the plaintiff to show cause why a writ should not be set aside as having been irregularly resealed. The original writ in an action had been issued Nov. 20, 1556, and regularly resealed till May 13, 1858. It was then resealed on Nov. 13, 1858, and on a subsequent occasion. by an order of Wightman, J., it was The again resealed two days after it had run out. question was whether this would cure the defect, and so make the writ good, or whether the writ having been once allowed to run out, all subsequent resealings were bad notwithstanding.- Mellor in support of rule. (To be reported.) Rule absolute without costs.

REG. T. THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT RAILWAY. — W. G. Harrison moved, on affidavits of service, to make absolute a rule calling on the defendants to pay for lands taken under their compulsory powers. Rule absolute. REG. v. METROPOLITAN RAILWAY, ex parte ALLOWAY.Thomas made a similar application. Rule absolute.

Friday, May 10. WILLIAMS. STEAR.-Joyce (Bridgman with him) showed cause against a rule obtained by Thomas, to enter a verdict for the defendant, on the ground that the plaintiff had, before action, accepted a sum of money in payment of his demand. The declaration was on the money counts, and the defendant pleaded—(1) never indebted; (2) judgment recovered; (3) set-off. There had been a previous action between the parties in which the defendant had sued the plaintiff in respect of the set-off he now pleaded: -the now plaintiff paid 11. 10s. into court, whereupon the now defendant withdrew from the action. This was no

estoppel, the plaintiff never having admitted the claim for which the defendant sued him.-Thomas in support of the rule, urged that the 30s, was accepted as being, with the set-off, a settlement of cross-demands (To be reported.) Rule discharged.

REG. . GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ex parte EDWARDS-Keane, Q. C. moved to make absolute a rule for a mandamus against the company for land taken under

n 200Auusex, and the how submitted ystay when, as in this The sauce of the we, arged that the poca, fatal notice should be Oscdined from appearing in To be reported.) 200g (506) and costs into warise, rule to be discharged. BOL TAX DISTRICP RAILWAY COMPANY, er enger moved on the usual affidavits, to 06.luce for the defendants to take up an A pot of ads taken by them under compulsory Rile absolute URAL BASEBRN RAILWAY COMPANY, er parte THE LONDON-Danach moved, on the usual antito make a rule absolute to compel the defendants die tyd tward Rule absolute.

TALLLLT AND SAINSBURY . THE GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY Lopes moved for a rule calling on the mas mais to show cause why the award in this case should not be sent back to the arbitrator. The plaintiffs were carriers by the Kennett and Avon Canal, of which the defendants were proprietors. There were cross-actions on the money counts, the plaintiffs suing to recover tolls paid in excess; the defendants to recover tolls unpaid. 191 Jan. 1, 1865, the defendants had charged a mileage vato for carriage of the plaintiffs' goods by canal. On this it was now conceded that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover 2307, After that date the defendants charged a through rate, and they were consequently entitled to recover two sums of 2104 and 987. The arbitrator had, however, omitted to take account of this last item-Mellor, J., being a party interested, took no part in the case.

Rule nisi.

Re AND - (Attorneys).-Kemplay showed cause against a rule obtained by H. Matthews calling on these attorneys to show cause why they should not give effect to au undertaking to give up certain documents. The applicants had been concerned for the vendee of an estate, and the attorneys had acted for the vendor. A death had taken place in their firm, and in the consequent interruption of business, one deed had not been handed over, and a second had not been duly stamped. There was, perhaps, technical default, but no intentional wrongdoing, and the undertaking had now in effect been fulfilled. Therefore, though the rule could not be resisted, he hoped it would be without costs.-II. Mattheirs, in support of rule, objected. There had been correspondence and considerable delay before moving, therefore the ordinary rule should not be departed from.

Rule absolute, with costs. Ex parte SHEPHERD, re AN ATTORNEY.-H. James applied to enlarge this rule till next term, on the ground that the attorney had not, at present, materials for making affidavits, Enlarged accordingly.

ROBERTS . HUMBERSTONE DOCK COMPANY.-F. Russell moved to set aside an award made in this cause, on the grounds (1) that the award was not final; (2) that two matters were referred to the arbitrator, and he had only made an award on one. Rule nisi.

REG. . THE SURREY AND SUSSEX JUNCTION RAILWAY, er parte POWELL-J. C. Mathew moved for a rule calling on the defendants to show cause why they should not take up an award made in respect of lands taken under their compulsory powers. Rule nisi. REG. r. THE DEVON AND SOMERSET RAILWAY COMPANY, ex parte SLESSON.-J. C. Mathew made a similar application in this case. Rule nisi. Re MAYOR (app) . HARDING (resp)- Kenealy showed cause against a rule obtained by M Mahon, to strike a cause out of the list, on the ground that the requirements of 20 & 21 Vict. c. 43, 3, had not been complied with. -MMahon in support of the rule.-It appeared that, under the circumstances, literal compliance with the statute was impossible. (To be reported.) Rule discharged.

REG. e. JUSTICES OF STAFFORDSHIRE, er parte DAVIS.-H. Matthews showed cause against a rule for a certiorari to remove a conviction into court for the purpose of being quashed. The case turned upon the construction of several Acts of Parliament.-Grights in support of rule. Rule discharged without costs. Saturday, May 11.

Re ROBINSON'S BANKRUPTCY. - Woollett moved for a rule calling on Mr. Graham, the official assignee, to show cause why the bankrupt should not be discharged out of custody. Pending proceedings, a ca. sa. had been issued against the bankrupt, which, however, was never enforced. While this ca. sa. was out, a second ca, sa. had been issued without the authority of the assignees, and upon such second ca sa the bankrupt has been arrested. Rule nisi

Re AN ATTORNEY.-Underhill moved to make absolute a rule for an attachment against an attorney of this court.Griffits, for the attorney, could not resist. Rule absolute.

BRANDON v. FURNESS-Murphy moved for a rule to show cause why an attachment should not issue against the defendant for non-compliance with an order to allow the plaintiff to inspect the consents to a composition-deed, pursuant to an order of Cockburn, C. J.-The defendant had made an affidavit saying that the assents were not now in his custody or control, but in that of the solicitor to the trustees under the deed. The order, however, had not been appealed against. Rule nisi.

footwe showed cause against a rule Hutche damages to one-fourth the 10 ury found The defendant was ur, three of whom were named stopped at an hotel kept by the plaintiff. wide surveying for the Hoylake Extension Hady. The defendant and his friends had some time, they had their meals, &c. towhen they were going away, the defendant ur bill, and paid 107. on account, telling >apply for the balance to a Mr. Pearcy, whom ainuff had previously known; but whom, as he sa 1, he was unwilling to trust. The defence set up at rial was, that Pearcy was liable. the present contenon that the defendant was only liable for what he had mroseif had, and not for the whole, as head of the party. -Fullarton in support of the rule. When the rule nisi was moved, the Court suggested that the facts showed a separate liability, and that it would be well for the defendant to make an offer of one-fourth. But the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Rule discharged. REG. GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ex parte A BANKRUPT.-Cleasby, Q. C., showed cause against a rule, calling on the defendants to pay a sum of 18,000 for land taken under compulsory powers-Pollock, Q. C. said that since he obtained the rule, the plaintiff had become bankrupt and Murphy, for assignees, opposed any application by which the moneys in question would be paid into the bankrupt's hands Under these circumstances Pollock, Q. C. felt he could not support his rule. Rule discharged. REG. r. MAYOR AND CORPORATION OF LONDON.-Keane, Q. C. (W. G Harrison with him) showed cause against a rule obtained by Mellish, Q. C., calling on the Lord Mayor to issue his writ to assess compensation for lands taken under compulsory powers. A technical objection was raised, but withdrawn by defendants, and consequently

Rule absolute.

REG. . BAGSHAWE, er parte DAVIES-Grifits showed cause against a rule, calling on the defendant, Judge of the County Court of Carmarthenshire, to show cause why a mandamus should not issue, commanding him to hear and determine a certain matter in bankruptcy. The bankrupt had been before the judge in January, when the hearing of the cause was adjourned till Feb. 1, his Honour thinking that one of the requirements of the County Court rules as to notice had not been complied with. On the 28th Jan., three days before the adjourned hearing this rule was obtained. There had been no refusal to hear, and therefore no mandamus could issue.-Woollett, in support of the rule, urged that, under the circumstances, the adjournment amounted to a refusal to hear.-The COURT, however, negatived this.—(To be reported)

Rule discharged with costs.

REG. v. JOSEPHS AND OTHERS (Justices of Brecon), e parte PRITCHARD.-Giffard, QC. showed cause against a rule obtained by H. James against the conviction of the defendant for fishing in private waters, on the ground that the defendant had set up a claim of title, which the justices treated as merely colourable. In this, on facts stated, it was submitted that the justices were right.-H. James contra. Rule discharged.

WRIGHT. SOLOMON-Murphy showed cause against a rule obtained by Philbrick for a new trial, on the ground that the case had been tried when the defendant, his counsel, and attorney, were absent through inadvertence. Defendant had ordered the goods and given a bill for them in the name of a firm, and only after the bill became due set up the defence that he was not the principal debtor, but his clerk. The defendant had been sued in other actions for debts contracted under similar circumstances. -Harrington, in support of the rule.-The facts stated in the affidavits on the other side cannot be tried here. The defendant had paid the costs of the day; had brought 1007, into court, and had given security for the remainder. And he had sworn affidavits explaining the statements of the plaintiff.

Rule absolute on payment of the plaintiff's costs in the former action within ten days, otherwise to be discharged, Plaintiff to have the option of renue, and power to change it if necessary.

REG. GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.-McIntyre stated that the company had obeyed the mandamus for which a rule had been obtained in this case, therefore Rule discharged.

LAMPSON & HEATHER.-W. G. Harrison moved to make a rule absolute, no cause being shown. Rule absolute.

MAYO 2. ALBON.-Thompson moved for a rule to attach the defendant for not answering interrogatories served in the cause Feb. 20; on the defendant personally April 13; order to answer in ten days made April 26; search made, May 9.

Rule nisi.

NISI PRIUS. Reported by JOHN KINGHORN and JOHN SHORtt, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law.

BUSINESS OF THE WEEK.

EASTER TERM 1867.
COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
(Before MELLOR, J. and Common Juries.)
Tuesday, May 14.

BRIGHT. BAILEY-Action for slandering the plaintiff, a commercial traveller, by imputing some acts of dishonesty. Plea, not guilty.-Seymour, Q. C. and Warton for the plaintiff; Huddleston, Q. C. and Francis for the de¡ fendant A juror withdrawn, and a stet processus entered. HOCKEY V. JENNINGS.-Action to recover compensation for injuries received in consequence of the defendant driving a cart against plaintiff's eart, and afterwards assaulting plaintiff. Plea, not guilty.-Lawrence for the plaintiff; Gough for the defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff'; damages 17. 11s. 6d. SOLOMAN v. MORRIS.-Action on two bills of exchange for 301. each. Plea, that did not necept the bills.-Joyce for the plaintiff. Verdict for the plaintiff. BOYD . PROFAZE-Action for breaking and entering plaintiff's house, and throwing rubbish into his garden, and assaulting plaintiff, &c. Pleas, not guilty, and that defendant was possessed of a wall and did what was complained of in repairing the wall, &c.-Sir G. Honyman, Q.C. and McIntyre for the plaintiff; Pearce aud E. T. Smith for defendant. Part heard.

(Before COCKBURN, C. J. and Common Juries.) PATTISON. BALE-BALE . PATTISON.-Cross-actions.

The defendant in the first action had hired a horse from the plaintiff, and was riding it between London and Deptford, when he came into collision with a van and injured the horse; and it was for that injury that the first action was brought. In the second the hirer of the horse brought an action for the injuries he received, he alleging that the horse shied, and so caused the accident, and that the plaintiff (Pattison) warranted it not to shy. - Ribton for the plaintiff in the first action, defendant in second: Parry, Serjt. for the defendant in first, for plaintiff in second Settled. WEBSTER T. COLLINS.-Action to recover damages for injuries to a van, sustained in consequence of defendant's negligence in driving a van. Plea, not guilty.-Pearce for the plaintiff; Kemp for the defendant. Verdict for the defendant.

action.

Thursday, May 16.

SHACKLETON r. OAKES.-Action to recover the amount of a bill of costs. Plea, never indebted. — Manisty, Q.C. and Hannay for the plaintiff; Huddleston, Q.C. and Day for the defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff.

TURLAND T. SMITH.-Action to recover the hire of certain harness let to the defendant by the plaintiff, and to recover its value or a return of it. Pleas, denying the hiring, &c. -H. James for the plaintiff; Murphy and Lush for the defendant.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
(Before WILLES, J. and Common Juries.)
Thursday, May 9.

SNOOK ". WYAT.-This was an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, and for injuries done to his cart.-Prentice, Q C. and White for the plaintiff; Atkinson, Serit for the defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff for 211. ELLICOTT. THOMAS AND ANOTHER -This was an action for an illegal distress.-Pearce and E. P. Wood for the plaintiff; Barron and Talfourd Salter for the defendants. Part heard. Friday, May 10. ELLICOTT . THOMAS AND ANOTHER. Concluded Verdict for the defendants. COLE . SMITH AND WIFE.-An action for slander on the part of the wife. Plea, not guilty.-E. P. Wood for the plaintiff; O'Prien, Serjt. for the defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff, damages one farthing.
Saturday, May 11.

RICHARDS T. LAWRENCE AND ANOTHER-This was an action for negligence in a sheriff's officer.-Joyce for the plaintiff; Day for the defendant.

A juror was withdrawn. BURGE . CROSBIE-This was an action for false imprisonment on a charge of stealing the defendant's purse at the Polytechnic Institution.- Parry, Serjt. and Joyce for the plaintiff no one appeared for the defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff, damages 1007. SHOOLBRED AND OTHERS . BAKER-An action to recover the price of goods sold to the defendant's wife. Plea, never indebted.-Parry, Serit. and Oppenheim for the plaintiff; O'Brien, Serit, and Yorke for the defendant

Verdict for plaintiff for the amount claimed, with leave to defendant to move.

MERRIMAN AND ANOTHER 7. MILLS-This was an action to recover the amount of an attorney's bill-Huddleston, Q.C. and McDonald for the plaintiff; Joyce for the defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff, subject to taxation. The Court did not sit on Monday.

Tuesday, May 14.

(Before BOVILL, C.J. and Common Juries.) FRAY C. OWENS.-This was an action against an attorney's widow for detinue of documents alleged to have been in plaintiff; Joyce for the defendant. the possession of her deceased husband.-Inderwick for the

Verdict for the defendant. SUTTON r. PLUMRIDGE-Seymour, Q. C. and Straight for the plaintiff; Coleridge, Q. C. and Mathew for the defendant. On account of the illness of the defendant an arrangement was come to by which the case was

Postponed till defendant should be able to attend as a witness.

WAY BURKE AND ANOTHER-This was an action for work and labour done, for goods bargained and sold, &c. Plea never indebted-Huddleston, Q. C. and Francis for the plaintiff; Honyman, Q. C. and Mathew for the defendant. Verdict for the defendant.

LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY U. WEST. -This was an action of ejectment to recover possession of a messuage and tenement in the parish of Fulham-Russell for the plaintiff; Hill for the defendant. The question being purely one of law, by consent

A verdict was entered for the plaintiff with leave to defen

dant to move.

BROOKFIELD v. SERLE.-An action to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff's pony and cart from the negli gence of defendant's servant. - Daly and Nasmyth for the plaintiff; Prentice, Q. C. and H. T. Atkinson for the defendant. Verdict for the defendant. Wednesday, May 15.

(Before BOVILL, C.J. and Common Juries.) RYAN. THOMPSON.-This was an action for illegal distress.-Keane, Q. C. and Foard for the plaintiff; Talfourd Salter for the defendant.

Verdict for plaintiff for 51. 58., with leave to defendant to

for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. Pleas, not guilty; that notice of action was not given to defendant; and a justification that defendant had reasonable and probable cause for charging the plaintiff. - Seymour, Q. C., Macrae Moir, and McDonald for the plaintiff; Keane, Q. C. and Houston for the defendants.

Verdict for the plaintiff for 30%

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
(Before CHANNELL, B. and Common Juries.)
Thursday, May 9.

GWYNNE v. BALDWIN-Action for a malicious arrest arising out of a transaction about a cheque drawn by procuration.-T. Atkinson, Serjt. and Barnard for the plaintiff; Huddleston, Q. C. and Joyce for defendant. Referred.

DRAKE V GILBERT.-Action to recover damages for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. Pleas, not guilty, &c.-Butler Rigby and Pearce for the plaintiff; Keane, Q. C. and L Smith for defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff (subject to points reserved);
damages 351,
Friday, May 10.

WARD. WORSTER-Action to recover damages from the defendant for evicting plaintiff from certain premises held by him. Pleas, not guilty, leave and licence, &c.Pearce for the plaintiff; Philbrick for the defendant.

Verdict for the plaintiff; damages 151. This finished the sittings during term in this court.

BAIL COURT.

(Before MELLOR, J. and Common Juries.)
Wednesday, May 8.

STRINGFIELD. LANEZZARI.-Action on a bill of exchange. Pleas traversing the making, &c-Torr and L. Kelly for plaintiff Pearce for the defendant.- (To be reported.)

Verdict for the plaintiff. Dolwin v. AttenboROUGH.-Action for false imprisonment. Pleas, not guilty, and accord and satisfaction, &c. -Besley for the plaintiff; Huddleston, Q.C. for the defendant. Verdict for the plaintiff; damages one shilling. This finished the sittings during term in this court.

COURT OF ADMIRALTY. Reported by HENRY F. PURCELL, Esq., Barrister-at-Law.

Wednesday, May 8.

THE MENTOR AND THE KEN.-Damage.-This was a crosscause arising from a collision in Yarmouth Roads, on the night of the 10th Dec. last. The Mentor belonged to Seaham, the Ken to Hartlepool.-The COURT decided that the Ken was solely to blame. Judgment accordingly,

Thursday, May 9.

THE RICHARD THE MARIA.-This was a collision crosscause. The Richard belongs to the port of Hull, the Maria's owner is of Uleaborg, in Finland. The Richard was moored to the Vittoria Jetty at Hull, on the afternoon of the 5th Jan. last, when the Maria, which was in charge of a licensed Humber pilot, while being towed by a tug not sufficiently powerful, fell against the Richard; there was a heavy gale at the time. She was again blown against the Kichard the following morning.-The COURT decided that the pilot of the Maria was solely to blame for the collision. The question of compulsory pilotage to be argued.

Friday, May 10.

THE LORD CARDIGAN.-Damage.-This was a collision cause. On the morning of the 1st Jan. last, the steamship Lord Cardigan ran into and sunk the fishing smack Flora in the Humber; one man was drowned.-The CoURT held the Lord Cardigan solely to blame.

Judgment accordingly. Saturday, May 11.

THE LORD PROTECTOR-This was a sitting for the examination of some of the plaintiff's witnesses in this case. Monday, May 13.

THE CORINGA.- Damage.-This was a collision cause. The ferry steamer Mayflower, which plies between Liverpool, Seacombe, and New Brighton, on the 14th Jan. last ran into the steamship Coringa, which was moored in the Mersey. There was a dense fog at the time, and plaintiffs alleged that the Coringa was solely to blame for the accident, for not keeping her bell ringing according to the statutory rule. Conflicting evidence was given; the witnesses for the defence all swore that the bell was kept constantly ringing, and no interval of more than three minutes ever took place.--Brett and R. G. Williams for plaintiffs; Dr. Deane, Q. C. and Butt for defendants.-The COURT decided in favour of defendants.

Suit dismissed with costs. Tuesday, May 14.

THE UNITY.-This was a mortgage suit. The ship had been sold, and the proceeds were in the registry.-Wood Hill, on the part of the mortgagee, moved that the money should be paid out to him; the master of the ship, who had instituted a claim for wages and disbursements, having agreed to withdraw it, on payment of 667, to avoid litigation, the proceeds of the ship being smallThe learned JUDGE said he could not mix the two suits together. He was sorry he could not do so, as the matter was so small; he would, however, pronounce for the mortgage.

THE BRITISH QUEEN. Salvage.-This was a case of distribution of salvage, it had been before the court some time since. This vessel had been salved by the Sahara, which was the property of the Anglo-Egyptian Steam Company, a sum of 10107, had been agreed on for the salvage services, and paid over, 2101. into the hands of Messra. Bateson, solicitors, and 800 to Messrs. Chappell and Dutton, who were agents for the Anglo-Egyptian Company and the ship's husbands. Before paying it to their principals, Messrs. Chapell and Dutton failed. The AngloEgyptian Company thereupon disputed their liability to make good the share of salvage falling to the master and crew, which had not reached their hands.-Butt now, on the part of the master and crew, asked the court to sanction a compromise which had been offered by the Anglo-Egyptian Company, to the effect that they would give 200 to be added to the 210. in Messrs. Bateson's hands for the benefit of the master and crew, and withdraw all their own claims. The sanction of the court was necessary, inasmuch as it was impossible to get the consont of the sailors, who were scattered about in various directions. It was manifestly for their benefit to take

the compromise and prevent money being frittered away in legal expenses, The learned JUDGE: I fear I am stretching my jurisdiction too far, yet I sanction this arrangement: the captain to get 1007. 168. 6d.; the crew according to their rating.

THE L. W. YOUNG.-This was a cause of necessaries which had been adjourned for further affidavits. It was now further adjourned till a detailed account was laid before the court.

THE SEA KING.-This was a cause of mortgage. The court had pronounced for the claim. The mortgage was for 23334, on 48-64th shares in this ship. The defendant's share was now in the registry, amounting to 2281-Dr. Tristram applied that this should be paid out in part satisfaction-V. Lushington asked that certain sums which had been paid for some necessary repairs by the assignees of the defendant should be deducted.—Dr. Tristram opposed.-The learned JUDGE ordered the money to be paid, but refused the application on the part of the assignees.

THE EDWARD OLIVER.-This was a bottomry case. A bottomry bond had been given on ship and cargo: the vessel was sold, and the proceeds in court. An appearance had been put in by the owners of the cargo, who had consented to the validity of the bond-Clarkson now applied that it should be paid, principal, maritime premium, and interest.-The learned JUDGE pronounced for the bond, but should be satisfied as to the priorities before the order for payment.

THE CITY OF ANTWERP.-Cross-actions have been instituted between this vessel and the barque Farourite.-Butt moved for leave to inspect the log of the Favourite and the protest-Dr. Twiss, Q. C. objected, the preliminary act of the City of Antwerp not yet being filed. It was ultimately arranged that both sides should at once proceed to file their preliminary acts and petitions, the inspection as prayed for to be then permitted.

is a Portuguese vessel. On the 14th April she was in the THE OVARENSE.-This was a salvage suit. The Orarense Channel, and having shown a signal of distress, the lugger Earl of Zetland came up, and being told that the Ocarense wanted a pilot capable of taking her into Bremen, the lugger agreed for 17. to search for one, and put one of her crew on board the Ovarense. It was afterwards discovered that the cargo of the Ovarense, which consisted of tobacco, was on fire, and she immediately bore off towards the Downs at full speed. The lugger seeing this followed her. Her captain was taken subsequently into Deal by the lugger, to consult the Portuguese consul, Mr. Hammond, and that gentleman having advised that she should be taken into Ramsgate and a survey made, an agreement was made that one of the crew of the lugger should pilot her there for 15. On returning on board the Orarense, there was a great deal of smoke from the cargo of the Orarense, and the captain got the assistance of four of the lugger's crew to get her into Ramsgate. The defence was that the agreement was not merely for pilotage, but generally to take her into Ramsgate.-The COURT decided that the agreements were good as far as they went, and should therefore stand, but that in both cases additional services had been rendered, though not of a very important nature. He should therefore give 501. in addition to the 161. which had been paid into court-Brett, Q. C. and Clarkson for plaintiffs; Sir R. Phillimore, Q. C. and Dr. Twiss, Q C. for defendants.

To surrender at the Bankrupta' Court, Basinghall-street. ARNOLD, ANN MARIA. spinster, nurse, Tottenham. Pet. Mav 4. Reg. Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Taylor, Church-row, Upper-st, Islington. Sur. May 27

BRAED, RICHARD, jun,, manufacturer of artificial leather, North-rd, Clapham-park, and Cannon-st. Pet. May 3. Rez. Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol, Snell, George-st, Mansion-house. Sur. May 27 COOPER, ASTLEY AUGUSTUS CHARLES, doctor of medicine, Wilton Pet. April 30 O. A. Edwards. Sols. Lawless and Co., Gracechurchst. Sur. May 27

COULING, PETER, out of business, Wootton, near Basingstoke. Pet. May 2. Reg. Pepys. O. A. Graham. Sol. Pittman, Guildhallchambers Sur. May 30

Graham

DEVILE, WILLIAM, market gardener, Hell's Hole, near Tunbridge
Wells. Pet May 2. Reg. Pepys. O. A. Graham, Sols. Sole, Turner,
and Co., Aldermanbury, agents for Cripps, Tunbridge Wells. Sur.
May 30
EDWARDS, MATTHIAS HOOPER, jeweller, Luton. Pet. May 2. Reg.
Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Sismey, Serjeants'-inn, Fleet-st.
Sur. May 27
FLEISCHHACKER, MORRIS, and SALLINGER, LOUIS, picture-frame
manufacturers, Greenwich. Pet. May 2. Reg. Pepys. O. A.
Sol. Goatley, Row-st, Covent-gdn. Sur. May 30
GLITSENSTEIN, wine agent, Gower-st Pet. May 2. Reg. Murray.
O. A. Parkyns. Sol, Fereday. Bedford-row. Sur. May 27
HURREN JOHN, builder, Acton-st. Gray's inn-rd. Pet. May 2. O. A.
Edwards. Sol. Harrison. Basinghall-st. Sur. May 29
JOHNSON, ARABELLA, spinster, no occupation, Surrey-st, Strand. Pet.
May 2. O. A. Edwards. Sols. Nichols and Clark, Cook's-ct,
JONES, EBENEZER, and JONES, JOSEPH CHARLES, engineers, Rath-
bone-pl, Oxford st. Pet. April 25. Reg. Roche. O. A. Parkyns.
Sol Angell, Guildhall-yd. Sur May 27
LOCK, JOHN SMITH, hat manufacturer, City-rd, Islington Pet. May ?.
Reg Pepys. O. A. Graham. Sol. Webster, Basinghall-st. Sur.
May 30
NOREIS, RICHARD JOHNSON, baker, Westbourne-grove, Bayswater.
Pet. April 27. O. A. Edwards. Sol. Cooke, King-st, Cheapside.
Sur. June 5
RATCLIFF, JOSEPH, grocer. Essex-st, Saint Peter's-st, Islington. Pet.
May 2. Reg. Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Pittman, Guildhall-
chambers. Basinghall-st. Sur. May 27

Lincoln's-inn. Sur. May 29

RICHARDS, FREDERICK AUGUSTUS GIBBS, proprietor of clay works,
Windsor, and clerk in Admiralty, Somerset house. Pet. April 30.
O A. Edwards. Sol. Hewitt, Nicholas-la. Sur June 5
SAMUEL, HENRY, clothier. East India dock-rd, Poplar. Pet. May 2.
Reg. Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Solomon, Finsbury-pl. Sur.

May 27
SHOTT. GEORGE JOHN, out of business. Chapman-rd, Whitepost-la.
Pet May 1. Reg. Brougham. O. A. Edwards. Sol. Hicks, Cole-
man-st. Sur May 29

TOMPSON, JOHN, manager to a dairyman, Russell-ct, Drury-la. Pet. May 1. Reg. Brougham. O. A. Edwards. Sol. Pittman, Guildhall-chambers, Basinghall-st. Sur. May 29

WIGG, GEORGE, milliner. Saint Mathias-rd, Islington. Pet. May 4. Reg. Brougham. O. A. Edwards. Sol. Parkes, Beaufort-bidgs, Strand. Sur, June 5

WILLIAMSON, JOHN AUSTIN, corndealer, Blackman-st, Southwark. Pet. May 3. Reg. Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Holmes, Fenchurch-st. Su. May 27

WILLIS. FREDE-ICK THOMAS, warehouseman, Pownall-rd. Dalston. Pet May 2. Rez. Pepys O. A. Granam. Sols. Worthington and Co., Milk-st. Sur. May 30

To Surrender in the Country,

ALLARD, MAURICE, saddler, Tewkesbury. Pet. May 3. Reg. Wilde.
O A. Acraman. Sol. Taynton, Gloucester. Sur. May 17
ATKINSON, JOSEPH, out of business, Rock-ferry. Pet. May 4. O. A.
Turner. Sol. Nordon, Liverpool Sur. May 21
BARNES GEOKOK ANTHONY, mail cart contractor, Scole. Pet. May 3.
Reg. & O. A. Chenery. Sol. Chittock, Norwich. Sur. May 21
BOWDEN, WILLIAM. farmer, Perranarworthal. Pet. May 4. Reg. &
O A. Tilly. Sol, Holloway, Redruth. Sur. May 18
BRITTAIN, JOSEPH. saddler, Great Wyrley. Pet. May 4. O. A.
Clarke. Sol. Ebsworth, Wednesbury. Sur. May 2

BROUGHTON. HENKY, and BROUGHTON, JAMES HARTLEY, curriers, Birstal. Pet. April 26. O. A. Young. Sols. Ibberson, Dewsbury; and Bond and Barwick, Leeds Sur. May 20

BROWN, CHARLES HIOMAS, grocer, Gloucester. Pet. May 1. Reg. &
O. A. Wilton. Sol Taynton, Gloucester. Sur. May 18
BROWNING RICHARD, coaldealer, Southampton. Pet May 2. Reg.
& O. A. Thorndike. So. Lobb, Southampton. Sur. May 22
CLARK, THOMAS, innkeeper, West Stockwith. Pet. May 1. Reg. &
O. A. Burton. Sol. B'adon, Gainsborough. Sur. May 21
COOTER, GEORGE, out of business, Pulborough, Pet. May 3. Reg. &
O. A. Medwin. Sol. Rawlinson. Horsham. Sur. May 20
CRATCHLEY, JESSE. general dealer, Bartonsham. Pet. April 23. Reg.
& O. A. Robinson. Sols. Garrold and Meadows, Hereford. Sur.
May 13

DENIAL, JOHN, steel manufacturer, Sheffield. Pet. May 2. O. A.
Young. Sol. Fernell, Sheffield. Sur. June 5

DOYLE. SAMUEL, master mariner, Liverpool. Pet. April 30. O. A.
Turner. Sol. Turner, Liverpool, Sur, May 20

EVANS, THOMAS, draper, Blackburn. Pet. April 26. Reg Macrae.
O. A. Morgan. 8ols. Grundy and Coulson, Manchester. Sur. May 17
FELLOWS, NOAH, and NASH, STEPHEN. iron manufacturers, North-
field. Pet. May 2. Rez Hill. O. A. Kinnear. Sols. Messrs. War-
mington, Dudley; and Messrs. Morgan, Birmingham. Sur. May 23
FOX. JAMES RICHARD, life assurance agent, Dinder. Pet. April 30.
Reg. & O. A. Lovell. Sols. Hobbs and Seal. Sur. May 18
GLASSCOCK, ROBERT, jun., no occupation, March, Isle of Ely. Pet.
April 16. Reg. & O. A. Ingledew. Sol. Joel, Newcastle. Sur.
May 20
GORDON, JOHN, ale merchant, Leeds. Pet. April 16. Reg. & O. A.
Marshall. 8ol. Harle, Leeds, Sur. May 23
GRAINEY, MARY JANE, widow, grocer, Plymouth. Pet. May 2. Reg.
& O. A. Pearce. Sol, Robin, Portsmouth. Sur. May 20
HARDING. SAMUEL, grocer. Monks Coppenhall. Pet. April 30. Reg.
& O. A. Broughton. Sol. Cooke, Crewe. Sur. May 16
HARPER, THOMAS. newspaper proprietor, Cheltenham. Pet. May 1.
Reg. & O. A. Gale. Sol, Skipper, Cheltenham. Sur. May 20
HEATLEY, JAMES. plumber, Whitehaven. Pet. April 27. Reg. Gib-
son. O. A. Laidman. Sols. Hoyle, Shipley, and Hoyle, Newcastle.
Sur. May 17
JAMES. WILLIAM. out of business, Poyntz Pool, Bristol. Pet. May 3.
Reg. & O. A. Harley and Gibbs, Sol Almar. Sur. May 17
JUBB, WILLIAM, innkeeper, Little Corringham. Pet. May 1. Reg. &
O. A. Burton. Sol. Bladon, Gainsborough, Sur. May 21
KIRBY, ROBERT, wholesale druggist, Hull, Pet. May 4.
Stephen. O. A. Young. Sols. Bell and Leak, Huil. Sur. May 22
MALLARD, JOHN, paymaster R. N., Tynemouth. Pet. April 25. Reg.
Gibson. O. A. Laidman. Sols. Tialey, Adamson, and Adamson,
North Shields. Sur. May 1

Reg.

MATCHETT. JOHN, jun.. labourer, Kirtley. Pet April 30, Reg. &
O A. Chater. Sol. Archer. Lowestoft, Sur. May 20
PENNO, JAMES, miller Roche. Pet May 3. O. A. Carrick. Sols
Wallis, Bodmin; and Sanders and Burch, Exeter. Sur. May 17
PLOWDEN, WILLIAM, inspector of works, Liverpool. Pet May 3.
Reg. & O. A. Hime. Sol Grocott, Liverpool Sur. May 21
POOL, JOHN, saddler, Wolverhampton. Pet. April 3. Reg. & O. A.
Brown. Sol, Barrow, Wolverhampton, Sur, May 16
RABY, WILLIAM EDWARD, printer, Northwood. Pet. May 4. Reg. &
O. A. Challinor. Sols. Doyle and Edwards, Verulam bidgs, Gray's-
inn. Sur. May 18

ROBERTS, JOHN EDWARD, printer. Chesterfield. Pet. May 4. O. A.
Young Sol. Hopkinson, Chesterfield; and Broomhead, Sheffield.
Sur. June 5

ROSE, ALFRED, builder, Hollington. Pet. May 3. Reg. & O. A. Young. Sol. Shorter, Hastings. Sur. May 18

SHERZINGER, JOSEPH, jeweller, Axminster. Pet. April 27. O. A. Carrick. Sols Dommett and Canning. Chard; aud Messrs. Daw Exeter. Sur. May 17

STEVENS, DANIEL, mail cart driver. Willingdon. Pet. May 2. Reg.
& O. A. Blaker. Sol. Mills, Brighton. Sur. May 22
TAYLOR, JAMES, millwright. Rochdale. Pet. May 2. Reg. & O. A.
Woods. Sols, Messrs. Standring, Rochdale. Sur. May 21
THACKWRAY. WILLIAM, manager to a corn miller, Saviletown, bear
Dewsbury. Pet May 3, Reg. & O. A. Nelson. Sols. Messrs. Chad-
wick, Dewsbury. Sur. May 17

WALTON, ANTHONY, miner. Stanhope. Pet. May 4. Reg Gibson.
O. A. Laidman. Sol. Hutchinson, Stanhope. Sur. May 24
WEBB, WILLIAM, brassfounder, Smethwick. Pet. Ma; 3. Reg. Hill.
O. A Kinnear. Sois. James and Griffin, Birmingham. Sur. May 28
WESTWOOD, DAVID, potato dealer. Rowley Regis, Pet. May 1. Reg.
& O. A. Walker. Sol. Jopham, Westbromwich, Sur. May 17
WOOD, EDWARD THOMAS, manager of print works. Wheelton. Pet.
May 4. Reg Mac ae. O. A. Morgan. Sols. Higson, Robinson,
and Higson, Manchester. Sur. May 23

Gazette, May 10.

To surrender at the Bankrupts' Court, Basinghall-st. BAYNES, GEORGE, late farmer, Saint Laurenco. Essex. Pet. May 4 Reg. Pepys. O A. Graham. Sols, Storey, King's-rd, Bedford-row for Freeman, Maldon, sur. May 30 BRUNSWICK, NATANT, and BRUNSWICK, MYRTHIL, cabinet-manufacturers, Newman-st, Oxford-st Pet. May 3. Reg. Pepys. O. A. Graham. Sol, Braham, Furnival's-inn. Sur. May 30

BURLS. WILLAM, keeper of the Gladstone dining-halls, New-cut, Lambeth. Pet. May 6. Reg Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Dobie, Basinghall-st. Sur. May 27

DAY, SAMUEL, commercial clerk, Lower Park-rd, Peckham. Pet. May 6. Hyg. Murray. O. A. l'arkyns. Sol. Brown, Weavers'-ball, Basinghall-st Sur. May 27

DENNIS, BOSOM, farmer, Edgefield. Pet. May 6. Reg. Pepys. 0. A. Graham. o's. Treberne and Co., Bargevard-chambers, Bucklersbury, for Emerson, Norwich. Sur. May 30

DORE RICHARD. barman, College-st, Chelsea. Pet. May 7. O. A Edwards sol. Thomas, Fulham. Sur. June 5

EDEN, GEORGE, out of business, Huntingdon-st, Kings'and-rd. Pet. May 4. O. A. Edwards, Sol. Wood, Poultry, Sur. June 5 ELLIOTT, JACOB, builder. Hounslow. Pet. May 2. Reg. Roche. O. A. Parkyns. Sol. Dobie, Basinghall-st. Sur. May 29

FARMER, ALFRED WILLIAM, no occupation, Fenham-rd, Peckham.
Pet May Reg Pepys O. A. Graham. Sol. Spicer, Staple-inn.
Sur. May 30

FLAVELL WILLIAM, timber bender, Parker-st, Drary-la. Pet. May 7.
O. A. Edwards. Sols, Messrs. Lewis Ely-pl. Sur. June 5
FOGG, EDWIN JOSEPH EDMISTON. lithographic draughtsman, East-st,
Old Kent-rd Pet. May 8. Reg. Roche. O. A. Parkyns. Sol.
Sherwood, Bell yd. Doctors' commons. Sur. May 29
GILSON, THOMAS JOHN, ironmonger, Hounslow. Pet. May 3. O. A.
dward Sol. Mount. Sise la. Sur. May 29
GREEN. JOHN, boot and shoe maker, Brackley. Pet. May 6. Reg.
Murray. O. A. Parkyns, Sol. Hanslip, Great James-st, Bedford-
row. Sur. May 27

BATFIELD, HENRY WILLIAM. tailor, Walworth-rd. Pet. May 7.
Reg. Murray. O. A. Parkyns. Bols. Worthington and Plunkett,
Milk-st. Sur. May 27