AN INDEX TO THE PRINCIPAL MATTERS CONTAINED IN THIS VOLUME. ACQUIESCENCE. A railway company gave the usual notice to a tenant for life of settled estates that they required a portion of the estates for their line, and afterwards made an offer for the fee-simple. The solicitor of the tenant for life accepted the offer, stipulating that interest at 57. per cent should be paid from the time of the company taking possession, and proposing that, as the title was well known, the company should be satisfied without the production of the deeds. To this the company objected, and proposed to pay the money into a banker's in the names of the respective solicitors pending the investigation of the title. The tenant for life's solicitor thereupon suggested that, as the money must be paid into Court, it had better be so at once. The company thereupon paid the money into Court to the account of the Railway Act only, and communicated to the tenant for life's solicitor that they had paid the money into Court under the 69th section of the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act. The solicitor for the tenant for life thereupon reminded them that interest at 51. per cent would continue to be payable till the purchase was completed. To this the company's solicitor returned no answer, and, although several other communications passed between the solicitors respecting the purchase, the company's solicitor did not, till a year afterwards, express any objection to the payment of interest. The money remained uninvested during the whole of that period. Held, that the company had acquiesced in the vendor's view of the case, and were bound to pay interest up to the investment. - Ex parte The Earl of Hardwicke, 297. * See BILL OF REVIEW. CONTRIBUTORY, 3. INJUNCTION, 2, 3. ACTION. See REPUTED OWNERSHIP. ACT OF BANKRUPTCY. See ARRANGING DEBTOR. DEMAND. ACT OF PARLIAMENT. See PUBLIC COMPANY. ACKNOWLEDGMENT. See LIMITATIONS. ADJOURNMENT. See ADJUDICATION, 2. * 820 PARTICULARS OF ADJUDICATION. 1. Where a bankrupt does not contest the validity of an adjudication of his bankruptcy before a commissioner within the period prescribed by the 104th section of the Act 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, for showing cause against such adjudication, the commissioner has, after that period, no authority to entertain an application to review the adjudication, either under that section, or under the 233d section. - Ex parte Carter, 212. 2. In the phrase "such extended time not exceeding fourteen days in the whole," in the 104th section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act, the words "such extended time" mean "such further time," and the time is to be reckoned exclusively of the original seven days. The provisions of the section do not preclude the commissioner from adjourning the hearing on showing cause, when it has commenced within the proper time. Ex parte Castelli, 437. ADMINISTRATION. See ANNULLING, 1. BANKRUPTCY. 1. Where a person had at his death, and when letters of administration were granted, bona notabilia in one diocese only, the subsequent payment of a portion of them into the Court of Chancery does not render a prerogative probate necessary to obtain payment out of Court. * 821 Where therefore an intestate was, at his death, entitled to legacies under two wills which had been proved in the Consistory Court of Chester, in which diocese the executors and trustees of both wills were also living at the death of the intestate, and letters of administration to the intestate, who died abroad, were granted by the same Court, and afterwards the trustees of one of the wills paid the money into the Court of Chancery under the Trustees Relief Act, it was held that the diocesan letters of administration were sufficient to authorize the administrator to receive the money out of Court. — Re Knowles, 60. 2. The personal estate of an intestate consisted of a reversionary share in the proceeds of trust property, which at her death was unsold, and situate within the jurisdiction of an Archdeaconry Court. Administration was not taken out to her till after the reversion had fallen into possession; the trust property had been sold, and the intestate's share had been paid into the Court of Chancery under the Trustees Relief Act. Letters of administration were then granted by the Archdeaconry Court. Held, that they were sufficient to entitle the administrator to payment of the share out of Court, and that a prerogative administration was not requisite. Re Spencer, 311. AGENT. See CONSIGNEE. AGREEMENT. See CHAMPERTY. FRAUD. INJUNCTION, 1. RAILWAY COM- ANNULLING. 1. Under the new Bankrupt Act, as under the former law, it is not sufficient ground for annulling an adjudication that its legal validity may be subject to doubt. Ex parte Bower, 468. 2. A petition to annul an adjudication may be presented by a creditor to the commissioner, and it is sufficient if he appeal from the commissioner's decision upon it, within twenty-one days, although much more time may have elapsed since the adjudication. The circumstance that an order to annul will leave unimpeached an assignment of all the bankrupt's effects to the creditor applying for the annulling order is not sufficient ground for refusing to annul an adjudication unsupported by the legal requisites. - Ex parte Bean, 486. See ADJUDICATION, 1. PARTICULARS OF Demand. ANSWER. See LIMITATIONS. APPEAL. PRODUCTION. 1. On an appeal from part of a decree the whole case is open to the respondents. Watts v. Symes, 240. 2. Where the Court below has by decree given substantial relief against a defendant, with costs against him personally, it is competent to the Court of Appeal* affirming the decree as to the relief, to vary it * 822 as to the costs; but to render this course correct, there ought to be a judicial dissent as to the costs, strong, clear, and undoubting. nell v. Sprye, 660. - Rey 3. The time of the commissioner signing and delivering out an order, and not the time of his pronouncing it, is its true date with reference to an appeal. Ex parte Heslop, 477. - 4. Where the Court concurred in opinion upon the effect of the evidence as it stood, and only differed upon the question whether the appellant should have an opportunity of proceeding at law, held that the appeal ought to be dismissed with costs. Re Clarke, 43. See ANNULLING, 2. ASSIGNEES. CERTIFICATE, 3. Costs, 1, 2. APPOINTMENT. See Trustee, 4. ARBITRATION. See INJUNCTION, 2. ARRANGING DEBTOR. An order under the arrangement clauses of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act, granting protection till a day certain, and not till further order, is irregular; and where a trader has obtained an order ex parte in that form, it affords no protection against a summons under the 78th section of the Act. ·Ex parte Bowers, 460. ASSETS. See MARSHALLING. ASSIGNEES. The removal of assignees is a matter within the discretion of the commissioner, with which the Appellate Court will not interfere merely because it doubts whether it would have acted as the commissioner has done. Therefore, where the commissioner gave the assignees time to consider whether they would remove solicitors whom they had appointed, and who were related to the bankrupt, or would themselves retire, and the assignees declined to do either, and the commissioner removed the assignees, the Court dismissed, with costs, an appeal from the commissioner's decision. — Ex parte Bates, 452. See REPUTED OWNERSHIP. ASSIGNMENT. * An agreement between a debtor and a creditor that the debt owing shall be paid out of a specific fund coming to the debtor, or an order given by a debtor to his creditor upon a person owing money, or holding funds belonging to the giver of the order, directing such person to pay such funds to the creditor, will operate as an equitable assignment of such debt or funds. 823 A railway company was indebted to A., their engineer, who was greatly indebted to his banker. The latter having pressed for payment or security, A., by letter to the solicitors of the company, authorized them to receive the money due to him from the railway company, and requested them to pay it to the banker. The solicitors, by letter, promised the banker to pay him such money on receiving it. Held, that this did not amount to an equitable assignment of the debt. 753. See ANNULLING, 2. ATTENDANCE. See WINDING-UP ACTS. ATTORNEY. See TAXATION, 2. - Rodick v. Gandell, BANKER. See FRIENDLY SOCIETY. BANKRUPTCY. A creditor is not entitled to inspect the proceedings for the purpose of enabling him to impeach the validity of the adjudication.- Ex parte Rimell, 491. See ADJUDICATION, 1, 2. ANNULLING, 1. APPEAL, 3. ARRANGING DEBTOR. ASSIGNEES. CERTIFICATE, 1, 2, 3, 4. COMMISSIONER. FRAUDULENT DEED, 2. FRIENDLY SOCIETY. PARTICULARS OF DEMAND. PROTECTION. REPUTED OWNERSHIP. BIDDING. See WINDING-UP ACTS. BILL. See PLEADING, 1, 2. BILL OF REVIEW. The plaintiff, in a cross suit, in which, as well as in the original suit, a decree had been made against him, with costs, moved for a further production of documents, which had been, as he alleged, withheld from him by reason of untrue statements in the answer, and for leave to file a supplemental bill in the nature of a bill of review. The motion, as regarded the documents, was refused, with costs; but, by consent, leave was given to file a supplemental bill, on the plaintiff depositing 501. The supplemental bill was filed, and, pending the hearing of the appeal in the original suit, the defendants moved that all proceedings against them for want of answer in it might be stayed till after the plaintiff had paid the costs of the motion (for non-payment of which he was in contempt), or otherwise that the time for answering might be enlarged. *The time was enlarged for four weeks, without prejudice to an application to stay proceedings. After the original decree had been affirmed, with costs, the defendants moved that all proceedings in the * 824 |