Page images
[ocr errors]


There may be points as to marriage settlements, &c., stolen or otherwise fraudulently obtained his knowthe fortune of the wife, the probable loss to the hus- ledge of the invention from any other British subband; the undersheriff's deputy either leaves the case ject, it is every day's practice that his application

for a patent will be refused, and on these groundsentirely to the jury, as suggested by the counsel, or

first, that he does not support by the facts the alleperhaps damages the defendant a little more, if it be gation of his petition to the Crown; his petition possible. The jury may ask a question or two, whe- I to the Crown, and his affidavits in support of it, ther the House of Lords will be more ready to grant a , stating that he is the true and first inventor; so that divorce if they give heavy damages than if they give if he is not, he deceives the Crown by a false reprelight, and other equally irrelevant and improper ques. Statute of Monopolies, according to the construction

sentation, besides not being within the exception of the tions, which, however, are often answered so as to swell put on that statute in reference to what constitutes the amount assessed; and thus led, prejudiced, and biased the true inventor. Secondly, that he is committing a entirely to the plaintiff's side, the amount of damages fraud on another of the Queen's subjects, who is the given by them is in many instances enormously dispro- person really entitled to a patent, if he desires it. portionate to the real injury. We have no hesitation in

But when a person applies for a patent for a foreign saying, that in cases of this sort thousands are sometimes invention the same principles do not apply. The ground

assigned in the old cases for granting letters-patent for awarded where the proper amount would be as many inventions not the invention of the applicant, but comhundreds. In other actions—trover, trespass, actions municated from foreign countries, is, that the object of ex contractu, with special damage-equally difficult the exception in the Statute of Monopolies was to ens questions arise. (See Hadley and Others v. Baxendale, courage the introduction of new inventions within this 18 Jur., part 1, p. 358). Then, again, it is not always first discovered here, or first brought here; the policy

realm, and that therefore it was immaterial whether easy to determine what amount of evidence should and of the law was to get them for the improvement of the should not be given after judgment by default *.

It is true, that under special circumstances, by leave manufactures of this country; or, to use the quaint lanof the court or a judge, the writ of inquiry may be exe

guage of the leading case on the subject, (Edgeberry v. cuted before a judge of one of the superior courts, and of new manufactures within this realm; and if they be

“ the statute of James speaks

Stephens, 2 Salk. 446), the jury, by like permission, may be summoned from

new here, it is within the statute, which was intended the special jury book; but in practice such an applica- to encourage new devices useful to the kingdom; and tion is rarely made, and would be but seldom granted. Whether learned by travel or study, it is the same thing." The defendant who suffers judgment by default is gee Accordingly the importer has always been held the innerally without professional assistance, and therefore is ventor within the meaning of the statute ; but then he not aware that he has even the chance of having his must apprise the Crown of the true character in which case considered before a better tribunal. Our remarks, of course, apply also to the sheriff's of the affidavit in support of it, for a patent for an in

he applies. Accordingly the form of application, and jurisdiction in the assessment of compensation under vention imported from abroad, differs from the applicathe Railways and Lands Clauses Acts, when many question of an inventor: the inventor alleges, as we have tions of importance and difficulty have to be decided, observed, that he is the first or true inventor, or that as to taking into consideration the goodwill of a busi- he hath invented; the importer alleges that he has,“ in ness, tenants' fixtures, improvements, the chance of a beneficial renewal of a lease, &c. (See Rex v. The consequence of a communication from a certain foreigner Liverpool and Manchester Railway Company, 4 Ad. & All that seems, therefore, necessary to support the alle

residing abroad, become possessed of an invention," &c. El. 650 ; Corrigall v. The London and Blackwall Rail- gation on which he is required to ground his applicaway Company, 5 Man. & G. 219; Atk. Shff

. Law, 175. et tion, is the fact of his being in possession, and by reason seq., 2nd ed.)' On these occasions, however, both parties of a communication from a foreigner residing abroad, are generally fully represented, and therefore there is and nothing is said about the mode of acquisition. That, not so great an opportunity for injustice as in cases of however, would leave untouched the broad question, assessment after judgment by default.

whether the Crown of this country is intended by the

statute to take notice of the equitable rights of an alien A QUESTION of some novelty and difficulty was raised residing abroad, so as to refuse & patent to a British in a case recently before the Lord Chancellor,on an oppo- subject whose possession of the invention is obtained

a sition to the sealing of a patent for an invention obtained by a fraud committed on such alien in a foreign

jurisdiction. by a communication from a foreigner-viz. whether, if

If the question were to be treated on broad consideit be alleged or shewn that the applicant obtained the rations of universal law, we apprehend the conclusion invention by fraud committed abroad, either actual or would be, that the Crown cannot be intended to reconstructive, upon the inventor, the Lord Chancellor cognise fraud in any shape, and that it would be will, on behalf of the Crown, look at that circumstance contrary to the law of nations that one State should in reference to granting or withholding the patent. In subjects of another; at any rate, assuming it to be a

encourage, for its own benefit, fraud committed on the the case to which we refer the point did not call for friendly State. But the question is much narrowed by adjudication, because the Court was of opinion that the language of the statute, and the construction put there was no fraud on the part of the applicant. It upon it by the Courts—a construction which seems to remains therefore still an open question, which turns ignore entirely everything beyond the fact of importa

The only upon the principle on which letters-patent for invention into, and novelty in this country.

authority of which we have any knowledge, if it tions are granted or refused.

can be called authority, is the case of Sir Thomas When a party comes forward as himself the in- Lombe, who in 1718 obtained a patent in this country ventor, there can be no doubt or difficulty. If he for bringing here from Sardinia the invention of certain has, in fact, instead of being himself the true inventor, silk machines, of which it was notorious that he had

obtained his knowledge by disguising himself as a * See The Banbury Union Guardians v. Robinson (7 Jur., workman, and so obtaining access to the Italian manupart 1, p. 599) and Cooper v. Blick, (2 Q. B. 915).

factory, and secretly and fraudulently, as regarded the



Italian manufacturers, making plans and models of the Thirdly, tradesmen will grant improvident credit, machinery; yet for this importation he was after- and the labouring classes especially are willing to accept wards rewarded by Parliament by a considerable grant it. But what was the position of the labouring man of money. Now, as Parliament must have been well before the county courts system permitted the payment aware that the communication from a foreigner was in of a debt by instalments? If he suspended his dealings, fact a fraud on that foreigner, by making a grant (which or did not pay what his creditor (not the judge) thought Parliament in such matters does in a quasi-judicial to be enough out of his earnings towards his debt, his capacity) it recognised the claim of the importer for home was destroyed, all his goods were sold, he was the importation simply, without reference to the mode sent to prison, and the wife and children were sent to in which the knowledge was obtained.

the work house. This is no exaggeration, and some That much weight would be given to such a prece- parliamentary returns, moved for many years since by dent at this day is not, however, probable; and the Mr. D. W. Harvey and others, shew the cruel system question, if ever it actually again arises, will have, we that then existed. I have been again and again told conceive, to be determined on principle.

that the present system (though abused by some tradesThe principal argument against the exercise of any men, who think it saves the necessity of all inquiry jurisdiction in the matter would be, that the Crown by themselves, and justifies improvident credit) precannot take cognisance of a fraud committed against a serves the hope of a labouring man to get out of his person not its subject, and out of its jurisdiction; that difficulties, and keeps his heart strong and unbroken.” the cognisance of such fraud belongs to the foreign Moreover, the public are interested in the opinions of State and its tribunals. But, on the other hand, there debtors as well as of creditors. are many foreign rights of which the Courts of this

Fourthly, the public see what the amount of the country take notice-at least, when the foreigner or his instalment is, and how it is measured, namely, by assignee brings them here. Besides, the question is not ascertaining what the wages and sources of subsistence merely whether the Crown will notice the fraud on the of the debtor are. The judge is not in these cases “softforeigner, with reference to the foreigner's rights, but hearted.” He knows he has the charge of a new inwhether it will exercise a prerogative, exercised ex stitution, and that the favourable opinions entertained mero motu, in favour of a party guilty of a fraud in towards him are to be carried to the credit of the respect of the very subject of the grant which he seeks. institution committed to him and to his supervision,

The question, which is not at all unlikely to arise and that what he does has the jury of a large commuagain, is not free from great difficulty.

nity to criticise, not in one, but actually in thousands

of similar recurring cases. He cannot be corruptly Correspondence.

“soft-hearted,” unless incompetent for his office, for his own mind must be governed by a tolerably unerring

guide when he knows the usual price of labour in the THE COUNTY COURTS.

district in which he acts. Certainly, in the far majority TO THE EDITOR OF THE JURIST."

of cases I have heard, both debtor and creditor agree on SIR-I once entertained the opinion of your cor- the amount of the instalment ordered to be paid. respondent “T.,” (ante, p. 143), namely, that the orders Fifthly, I think the fees too high, but the county for payment of debts by instalments in the county courts courts are still by far the cheapest courts in all defended were objectionable. I am convinced by experience actions; and I affirm that, as respects all defended that I was in error.

actions above 201. (for the appeals test these), the system First, cases have several times been removed into my does work well. courts by actions on the judgment of the superior Sixthly, as respects the “prandial, choreal, comitial, courts, for the sole purpose that the plaintiffs might and ecclesiastical predilections” of the county court obtain the payment of their debts by instalments. judges, and “their incomes being effaced by their outWithout payment by instalments, the plaintiffs had no goings,” surely your correspondent can only recognise chance of payment; for if they imprisoned their debtors, some single acquaintance of his own in this terrible the Insolvent Court would have deprived them of the charge. I have certainly rarely visited in my circuit, best chance of payment.

and in its largest town I have not dined in any private Secondly, when the defendant is not a labourer, or a house, yet in that town I have no reason whatever to poor man ordained priest, and the debt is on a bill complain of disrespect. As respects, also, the behaof exchange or a promissory note, or of large amount, viour of parties in court, I know that the decorum of or the defendant is about to remove from the district, I my court is never disturbed until gentlemen of the bar my rule is—and I believe it to be that of very many appear, who commence their displays by assuming they other county court judges—to order immediate payment are not required to be themselves decorous. of the whole debt and costs, unless, which often happens Lastly, if a commission were issued to inquire into even in these cases, the plaintiff requests the order to the mistakes of the judges of the superior courts, new be payment by instalments. But in these cases, if the trials arising out of their errors, compromises because party cannot pay, and comes up on a judgment sum- final decisions are too expensive, references to arbitramons, (the fees for which are too high), then the law tors because the judge dislikes a long cause, and every governs the duty of the judge. (County Courts Act, plaintiff and defendant were invited to tell his grievances, ss. 99, 100). The order must then be made, if there be and circulars were sent to all the attornies of the kingno misconduct, after an inquiry into the means and dom to relate the grievances of their clients, and the ability of the party to pay; and if he cannot pay the results were contrasted with the results of the present whole sum at once, (the plaintiff having had every inquiry respecting county courts, I have no doubt there opportunity to levy an execution under the original would be an unanimous verdict that the county court order), then it is the duty of the judge to vary the work far better than the superior courts. original order, and to make the debt payable by such

A COUNTY COURT JUDGE. instalments as are within the means of the defendant to pay. Why should the public be burthened with

RECEIPT STAMPS. the maintenance in prison of such a debtor, and why should courts of law aid the gratification and anger of a

TO THE EDITOR OF “THE JURIST." creditor? The plaintiff gets by these means an almost Sir, I find it stated among notices to correspondents certain security for the payment of his debt, and within a newspaper of wide circulation, that “it was someout this order he would have none.

time since settled by official authority, that the receipts

[ocr errors]


of money for charitable institutions require a stamp | Bryan Bryan, Esq.; Patrick M'Gregor Robertson, Esq.; under the new Stamp Act.” Understanding that by | Alfred Augustus James, Esq.; Edwin Ward, Esq.; the term “receipts of money for charitable institutions Wm. Hepworth Dixon, Esq.; Henry Watson, Esq.; is meant receipts for voluntary contributions, it seems John Airey, Esq.; Charles Pontifex, Esq.; John Jas. to me desirable that this settlement of the question Heath, Esq.; Henry Charles Taylor, Esq.; the Hon. should not be acquiesced in.

Francis Dudley Stuart; Wm. George Granville VerThe words in stat. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 59, are, “receipt non, Esq.; Thomas Bell, Esq.; Philip H. Le Breton, or discharge given for or upon the payment of any Esq.; Jonathan Darby, Esq. ; and Joseph Augustus money amounting to two pounds or upwards.” These Yorke, Esq. are the very same words as are used in stat. 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, sched., part 1; the only difference is, that in the

London Gazettes. earlier statute there is a declaration that "any note, memorandum, or writing whatever given to any person for or upon the payment of money, whereby any sum

FRIDAY, APRIL 28. . of money, debt, or demand therein specified shall be

BANKRUPTS. expressed or acknowledged to have been paid, settled, EDWARD GROUND, Levrington Parsondrore, Cam. balanced, or otherwise discharged or satisfied, .... shall bridgeshire, grocer, draper, dealer and chapman, May 5 at be deemed to be a receipt for a sum of money of equal

half-past 12, and June 9 at half-past 1, Court of Bank. amount with the sum, debt, or demand so expressed or

raptcy, London: Off. Ass. Whitmore; Sols. Watson, Wis. acknowledged to have been paid, &c., and shall be · bech, Cambridgeshire ; Jenkins & Abbott, 8, New.inn.charged with a 'uty accordingly.” In Tomkins v. Ashby, EDWIN ALFRED THEOBALD, Bath, stationer, dealer

Petition filed April 27. (6 B. & Cr. 541, 542), Lord Tenterden said, “ All these

and chapman, May 8 and June 8 at 1, Court of Bank. words in port that something formerly due has been

ruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Johnson ; Sols. Messrs. Link. discharged ;” and he held that a memorandum acknow

later, 17, Sise-lane, London.- Petition filed April 25. ledging that A. B. had left a sum of money in the STEPHEN THWAITES, Hastings, Sussex, grocer, dealer hands of C. D. was not within the act.

and chapman, May 6 at half-past 1, and June 17 at hall. This decision of Lord Tenterden shews that the duty past 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London : Off. Ass. Pennell; under the earlier statute applies only to receipts for the Sols. Messrs. Linklater, 17, Sise-lane, London.-Petition payment of money due, which, in a legal sense, cannot dated April 21. be affirmed of a voluntary contribution any more than JOHN THOMAS HOLLOWAY, late of Lawrence-lane, of the deposit of a sum of money. No argument in

London, but now residing at Arthur-terrace, Victoria-road, favour of the imposition of the duty can be founded on

Stoke Newington, Middlesex, silk agent, May 6 at 2, and tbe omission of the declaration in the recent statute,

June 17 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. which in express terms confines the duty to receipts on

Nicholsou ; Sol. Baylis, 22, Redcross-street.-Petition dated

April 27. the payment of money; that is, of money due under a

WILLIAM CLIFT, Ulting, Essex, cattle and sheep saleslegal obligation to pay it. But the preamble of the

man, May 12 at 2, and June 6 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, recent statute, and sect. 2, which repeals the former London: Off. Ass. Lee; Sols. Crick, Maldon, Esses ; Constamp duties and imposes the new duty, shew that it dell, 7, Copthall-court, London.-Petition filed April 19. was not intended to include instruments in respect of JOHN DUCKER, Bilston, Staffordshire, and Warwick, rail. which stamp duty was not before payable.

way contractor, dealer in railway materials, and beerseller, For these reasons I think that the Courts would hold dealer and chapman, May 29 at 10, District Court of that a receipt for a voluntary contribution to a charita- Bankruptcy, Birmingbam : Off. Ass. Whitmore ; 'Sol. East, ble institution is not liable to duty under stat. 16 & 17 Birmingham.- Petition dated Feb. 18. Vict. c. 59.

JAMES WATTS, Birmingham, tobacconist, May 11 and G. J. PHILIP SMITH.

June 8 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: Temple, April, 1854.

Of. Ass. Whitmore; Sol. East, Birmingham.- Petition

dated March 14.


and hatter, May 10 and June 13 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol: Off. Ass. Hutton ; Sols. Jones, Glou

cester ; Abbot & Lucas, Bristol.- Petition filed April 24. The following gentlemen have been called to the de- JOSEPH J. WELLS, Coventry, haberdasher, May 11 and gree of Barrister at Law:

June 8 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham: LINCOLN'S INN.--Jasper Kenrick Peck, Esq.; John Off. Ass. Christie ; Sol. Goddard, 28, King-street, Cheap Hutton Taylor, Esq., M. A.; Geo. Pemberton, Esq., side, London.--Petition dated April 22. B. A.; Herbert Crichton Stuart, Esq., B. A.; Francis BEN PEARSON, Golcar, near Huddersfield, Yorkshire, Barchard, jun., Esq., M.A.; W. Worsley Knox, Esq., cloth maker, dealer and chapman, May 29 at balf-past 12, B.A.; Charles Herbert Smith, Esq., M. A.; Charles

and June 20 at 11, District Court of "Bankruptcy, Leeds: Mahon Tyndall, Esq., M. A.; Cyrus Slater, Esq., B. A.;

Off. Ass. Hope; Sols. Brook & Co., Huddersfield ; Bond Chas. Meaburn Tatham, Esq., M. A.; Thos. Prothero, WILLIAM TREBILCOCK, Plymouth, Devonshire, boot

& Barwick, Leeds.--Petition dated April 19. Esq.; Randolph Henry Crewe, Esq., M.A.; William Charles Wilks, Esq.

and shoe maker, dealer and chapman, May 8 and June 12

at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Plymouth : Off. Ass. MIDDLE TEMPLE.—Hubert Lewis, Esq., Precedence

Hirtzel; Sol. Elworthy, Plymouth.- Petition filed April 24. Certificate of Honour, Council of Legal Education, B. A., JESSE JOYCE, Bolton-le-Moors, Lancashire, bookseller, Emanuel, Cam.; Rowland Whitehall Kenyon, Esq., dealer and chapman, May 10 and 31 at 12, District Court M. A., St. John's, Cam.; Abercromby Robert Dick, of Bankruptcy, Manchester : Off. Ass. Pott; Sols. Bag. Esq., Advocate Scots Bar; John Turner Hopwood, Esq., shaw & Sons, Manchester; Freeman & Bothamley, 39, Trinity, Oxford; Henry Edward Daniels, Esq., late of Coleman-street, London.-Petition filed April 21. Queen's, Oxford; Fred. Benjamin D'Elwood Ramadge, CHARLES DOVE, Chorlton-upon-Medlock, Manchester, Esq., B. A., Fellow of Caius, Cam.; John Kirke, Esq.;

builder, May 9 and 29 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Wm. Thomas Greenhow, Esq., B. A., Lond. Univ.;

Manchester : Off. Ass. Fraser; Sols. Slater, Manchester ; Philip Meadows Martineau, Esq., LL.B., Lond. Univ.;

Staniland & Co., Bouverie-street, London.-Petition filed Robert Patten Adams, Esq.; and Edward Matthew | JOHN HAYWORTH, Haywood, Lancashire, plumber and

March 24. Fenwick, Esq.

glazier, dealer and chapman, May 12 and Jone 2 at 12, INNER TEMPLE.—John Edward Palmer, Esq. ; Wm.

District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester : Off. Ass. Her Rainy, Esq.; Mathias Calthrow Turner, Esq.; Geo.

naman ; Sol. Dodge, Liverpool.-Petition filed April 15.

[ocr errors]


at 11, County Court of Yorkshire, at Pocklington.-Robert Richard Geo. Beesley, Manchester, cotton spinner, May 12 Orford Sargent, Halton, Hastings, Sussex, cordwainer, May at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, last ex.

15 at 11, County Court of Sussex, at Hastings. Wm. Houghton, Kennington Oval, Lambeth, Surrey, licensed The following Persons, who, on their several Petitions filed in victaaller, May 16 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. the Court, have obtained Interim Orders for Protection ac.-Wm. John Watson, Upper Holloway, Middlesex. builder, from Process, are required to appear in Court as herein. May 23 at half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. afler mentioned, at the Court-house, in Portugal-street, ac. - Thomas Colyer, High Holborn, Middlesex, licensed vic- Lincoln's Inn, as follows, to be examined and dealt with tualler, May 11 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac. according to the Statute:-- Francis Paul Becker, Stationers' Hall-court, Paternoster

May 12 at 10, before the Chief COMMISSIONER. row, London, engraver, May 19 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy,

Daniel S. Merry, Church.street, St. John, Hackney, Mid. London, aud. ac. - Wm. Cluff Hulme, High-st., Putney, Sur. dlesex, shoemaker.—Georye W. C. During, Gerrard-street, rey, grocer, May 19 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, Soho-square, Middlesex, working jeweller. sud. ac. - Charles John Darkin Campbell, College-st., Camden-town, and John-st., Adelphi, Middlesex, and Bolton-ter

May 15 at 11, before the COMMISSIONER.

Alexander P. Barile, e Harrison-Street, Gray’s-inn-road, race, Edward-st., Walworth, Surrey, builder, May 16 at 11,

Middlesex, carpenter. Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.—Edw. Emerson and Barnabas Fenwick, Stella, Durliam, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne, The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before ironfounders, May 10 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, the Court, in Portugal-street, to be examined and dealt Newcastle-upon-Tyne, aud. ac. sep. est. of Barnabas Fenwick. with according to the Statute :--Thomas Evans, Manchester, ironmonger, May 8 at 12, May 12 at 10, before Mr. Commissioner MURPHY. District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac.-Wm. Samuel Wood Graves, Warwick-street, Pimlico, and St. Hesketh, Blackburn, Lancashire, cotton manufacturer, May 10 James's-square, Middlesex, gentleman. at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac.- May 13 at 11, before Mr. Commissioner Phillips. Edmund Smith the younger, Swinton, Lancashire, coal owner, Joseph Bland, Chertsey, Surrey, out of business.- Catherine May 9 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. Mary Ladewig, Margaret-terrace, Harrow-road, Paddington, ac. -- Augustus Pickett, Brighton, Sussex, brick maker, May 25 Middlesex, confectioner.-M. Merigan, Daly’s-place, Southat half-past 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.--Edward street, Isleworth, Middlesex, out of business. Ablewhite, Mortimer-st., Cavendish-square, Middlesex, coach

May 15 at 11, before the Chier COMMISSIONER. builder, May 23 at hall-past 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.- James Windeyer Leroty. Wilden, Worcestershire, tersea, Surrey, in no business.—Matthew Bromhead, Leather

Letitia E. Prescott, widow, Oak-place, Bridge-road, BatWilliam Henry Partridge, Birmingham, Warwickshire, and lane, Holborn, Middlesex, butcher. Edmund Leuty, Stourport, Worcestershire, tin-plate workers, May 17 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham,

May 15 at 11, before Mr. Commissioner PHILLIPS. div. joint est., and div. sep. ests. of James Windeyer Lewly

James Gordon, Jewry-street, Aldgate, London, teacher of and Edmund Levly.-Philip Jones, Llangattock, Monmouth. mathematics. --William Thomas Lambert, Jermyn-street, St. shire, banker, May 25 at 11, (and not May 19, as advertised James's, Middlesex, patent medicine vendor.- George Wigin the London Gazette of April 14), District Court of Bank- glesworth, Friendly-place, Old Kent-road, Surrey, tobac

conist. ruptcy, Bristol, div. CERTIFICATES.

The following Prisoners are ordered to be brought up before To be allowed, unless Cause be sheron to the contrary on or

a Judge of the County Court, to be examined and dealt before the Day of Meeting.

with according to the Statute :William Kidston and Filmer Kidston, North-street, Sidney.

At the County Court of Durham, at DURHAM, May 12. street, Mile-end, and Liverpool.street, Bishopsgate, Mid- Gilesgate, twine manufacturer.- George Salmon, Gilesgate,

John Hall, Gilesgate, out of business.--Edmund Ebdy, diesex, furniture dealers, May 23 at 11, Court of Bank out of business. ruptcy, London.- Joseph Rove, Colchester, Essex, baker, May 23 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Francis Paul

At the County Court of Lancashire, at LANCASTER, Becker, Stationers' Hall-court, Paternoster-row, London, en.

May 12 at 12. graver, May 19 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London.- John

John Preston, Blackburn, cut looker. -Wm. Whiteley, Huxlable, Frome, Selwood, Somersetshire, silversmith, May Colne, out of business.

John Whitehead, Manchester, iron. 22 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bristol.-J. Frater, monger.-— Nathaniel Whewell, Oswaldtwistle, near Black. Manchester, brewer, May 22 at 12, District Court of Bank? burn, grocer.-James Thorley, Manchester, mechanic.-B. ruptcy, Manchester.-Richard Brownlow, Manchester, starch Brown, Deansgate, Bolton-le-Moors, licensed victualler. – manufacturer, May 19 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, John Marshall, Chorlton-upon-Medlock, Manchester, out of Manchester.

Joseph Parry, Liverpool, bricklayer, May 22 business.-William Richardson, Manchester, baker. - James at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool. - Edwin Shaw, Broad, Preston, pig dealer. - Joseph M*Knight, Salford, out Birmingham, pocket-book maker, June 5 at 10, District Court of business.—John Hulm, Kirkdale, Liverpool, out of business. of Bankruptcy, Birmingham.- Augustus Rizzi, Leeds, York.

George Rankin, Naas, Kildare, Ireland, grocer. - John shire, looking-glass manufacturer, May 29 at 12, District Court Speakman, Bolton-le-Moors, fish hawker.-John M'Carthy, of Bankruptcy, Leeds.

Manchester, grocer.-Christopher Bibby, Over Darwen, pat

ten maker.- Wm. Chadwick, Manchester, out of business.To be granted, unless an Appeal be duly entered.

Thomas Pickles, Lea, near Preston, licensed victualler. John Pointon, Monka Coppenball, Chesbire, innkeeper.- Henry Atharley, Manchester, out of business.—John Stout, John Salter, Backchurch-lane, Whitechapel

, and Ratcliffe- Toxteth-park, Liverpool, dealer in ale.- Thomas Higham, highway, Middlesex, yeast merchant.-W. Outram, Stockton- Longsight, Manchester, out of business.-Wm. Upton, Manupon-Tees, Durham, timber merchant.-J. Clegg, Liverpool, chester, out of business.- James Wilson, Blackburn, fish. licensed victualler.-Edmund Smith the younger, Swinton, inonger. - Thomas Billington, Preston, out of business.Lancashire, coal owner.

Joseph Woodhouse, Manchester, grocer.-William Radcliffe, Scotch SEQUESTRATION.

Oldham, assistant to a woollen rag dealer.-John Wilson, George Gunn, Glasgow, carriage hirer.

Manchester, clothes dealer... Spencer, Salford, Clitheroe,

out of business.-John Heath, Gorton-brook, near Manchester, INSOLVENT DEBTORS

beerseller. ~ John Hirst, Great Bolton, Bolton-le-Moors, Who have filed their Petitions in the Court of Bankruptcy, joiner.-William Smalley, Burnley, out of business.- James and hare obtained an Interim Order for Protection from Bamber, Preston, out of business.-Hugh Fulton, Rusholme, Process.

near Manchester, out of business. Wm. Codling, Castleacre, Norfolk, general-shop keeper,

At the County Court of Somersetshire, at TAUNTON, May 10 at 3, County Court of Norfolk, at King's Lynn.

May 15. Charles Morgan, Clodock, Herefordshire, farming bailiff

, May

John Hedges, Baltonsborough, near Glastonbury, innkeeper. 18 at 10, County Court of Herefordshire, at Hereford.John At the County Court of Sussex, at Lewes, May 16. Harrison, Pocklington, Yorkshire, licensed hawker, May 27 Henry Page, Heathfield and Framfield, miller.


[ocr errors]


Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-Charles Pollard, Wel. BANKRUPTS.

lington-street North, Strand, Middlesex, licensed victualler, GEORGE FREDERICK ROSSITER, London-wall, Lon- May 26 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.- Robert

don, wholesale clothier, dealer and chapman, May 13 at 12, F. Cooper, Three Colt-street, Limehouse, Middlesex, colour. and June 16 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off: Ass. div.-Joseph Dunthorn, Broadwall, Christchurch, Blackfriars."

man, May 23 at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London, Whitmore ; Sols. Messrs. Harrison, 5, Walbrook, City. road. Surrey, corn dealer, May 23 at half.past 12. Court of

Petition filed April 27.
CHARLES COWDERY, Coventry-street, Haymarket, and Bankruptcy, London, div.-G. Stewart Amsinck, Frederick.

Hanworth-road, Hounslow, Isleworth, Middlesex, coffee street, Hampstead-road, Middlesex, common brewer, May 23 house keeper and oyster dealer, dealer and chapman, May ston, St. Albans, Hertfordshire, licensed victualler, May 24 at

at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.- Job Eggle. 12 at half-past 12, and June 16 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.---Jas. Dauncy, Coaley London: Of. Ass. Cannan ; Sols. Bridger & Collins, 37, Mills, near Uley, Gloucestershire, woollen manufacturer, May

King William-street, City.-Petition filed April 28. THOMAS HARRIS, West Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, 23 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy. London, fin. div.-George chair manufacturer, May 9 at half-past 1, and May 31 at 1; lington-gardens, Middlesex, scrivener, May 25 at 11, Court of

Whitehead, Fleet-st., London, printer, and Boyle-street, Bur. Court of Bankruptcy, London : Off. Ass. Stansfeld; Sol. Bankruptcy, London, div.- Robert Smith, Gravesend, Kent,

Cordwell, 20, Old Fish-street. - Petition filed April 25. DAVID HOLDEN the younger, Horsham, Sussex, iron. bricklayer, May 23 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div. monger, dealer and chapman, May 10 at 2, and June 14 at

- Patrick Cruickshank, John Melville, and William Faunt. 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Off. Ass. Graham ; Sol. leroy Street, Austin-friars, London, merchants, May 23 at Jones, 9, Quality-court, Chancery-lane. — Petition' filed 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div. sep. est. of John Mel

ville.- William Miller Anderson, Foley-place, St. MaryleApril 25. JOHN ROGER PURSSELL, Ludgate-hill, London, and London, div.-W. Barnes, Hungerford, Berkshire, auctioneer


bone, Middlesex, surgeon, May 25 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, Regent-street, Pall-mall, Middlesex, biscuit baker and confectioner, dealer and chapman, May 12 at half-past 1, and May 26 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-T. Wil. June 13 at 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London: Of. Ass. kinson, Cambridge-wharf, Wilton-road, Pimlico, and GrosEdwards ; Sol. Broughton, 4, Falcon-square, London.- 26 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, div.-Wm. Potter

, venor-street, Eaton-square, Middlesex, coal merchant, May Petition filed April 27. WILLIAM MATTOCK, Liverpool, four and provision 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, div.-J. Pointon,

Birkenhead, Cheshire, and Liverpool, merchant, May 24 at dealer, May 8 and June 2 at 12, District Court of Bank. Monks Coppenhall, Cheshire, innkeeper, May 23 at 11, District ruptcy, Liverpool: Off. Ass. Bird; Sols. Lowndes & Co., Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool, div.

Liverpool.- Petition filed April 22.

CERTIFICATES. shire, printer, bookseller, and stationer, May 15 and June 7 To be allowed, unless Cause be shewn to the contrary on or at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool : Off. Ass.

before the Day of Meeting. Cazenove; Sol. Forshaw, Liverpool. - Petition filed April 27. Edward Cahan and James Vicat the younger, Strand, MidNICHOLAS KENNEDY, Shudehill, Manchester, ivory dlesex, tailors, June 1 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London.

turner, dealer and chapman, May 12 and June 2 at 12, V. H. Gay, Blackfriars-road, Surrey, and Strand, Middlesex, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester : Off. Ass. Her tailor, May 24 at half past 12, Court of Bankruptcy, London. naman; Sols. Unwin, Sheffield ; Sale & Co., Manchester.- - Thomas C. Millington, Maldon, Essex, chemist, May 24 Petition filed April 19.

at half-past 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-F. Bhear, MEETINGS.

George-yard, Lombard-street, London, hotel keeper, May 24 Geo. Havelock and Matthew B. Robson, Monkwearmouth,

at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-J. Kingston, Reading, Durham, shipbuilders, May 19 at half-past 11, District Court Berkshire, draper, May 24 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, Lon. of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, last ex.Thos. Teb- don.--- Henry Meadows, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, butt, Manchester, merchant, May 26 at 12, District Court of druggist, May 23 at 1, Court of Bankruptcy, London.-Ste. Bankruptcy, Manchester, last ex.-Thos. J. Burton, Baker phen Carlton, Darlington, Durham, coach manufacturer, May J. Gabb, and Fred. R. Cruchley, Wigmore-street, Cavendish. 30 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. square, Middlesex, church furnishers, May 25 at 12, Court of - Joseph Munden the elder, Netherbury, Dorsetshire, flax Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-George Jones, Baker-street, spinner, May 23 at 1, District Court of Bankruptcy, Exeter

. Lloyd-square, St. James's, Clerkenwell, Middlesex, manufac

- Wm. Hart, Chester, banker, May 24 at 12, District Court turing jeweller, May 25 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, London, of Bankruptcy, Manchester. — Thomas M'Kenna, Belfast, aud. ac.

- Mary Browne and John Read Browne, Middle-row Antrim, Ireland, and Manchester, draper, May 26 at 12, DisSouth, Knightsbridge, Middlesex, cutters, May trict Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester.—William Billinge, 25 at 2, Court of Bankruptcy, London, aud. ac.-Henry Rainbill, Prescott, Lancashire, stonemason, May 24 at 11, Johnson, Turnwheel-lane, Cannon-street, London, and Thames District Court of Bankruptcy, Liverpool.- Edwin Shaw, BirDitton, Surrey, machinist, May 26 at 11, Court of Bankruptcy, mingham, pocket-book maker, June 5 at 10, District Court of London, aud. ac.--R. Hutchinson, Monkwearmouth Shore, Bankruptcy, Birmingham.- John Hunter, Fazeley, StaffordDurham, shipbuilder, May 23 at half-past 11, District Court shire, tape manufacturer, June 5 at 10, District Court of of Bankruptcy, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, aud. ac. ; May 26 at Bankruptcy, Birmingham.-- Charles Leake, Crowland, Lin12, div.-Jos. Grave, Manchester, warehouseman, May 17 at colnshire, grocer, May 26 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud. ac. ; May Nottingham.- Isaac Steane, Coventry, Warwickshire, ribbon 24 at 12, div.-J. Bennett, Manchester, licensed victualler, manufacturer, June 8 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, May 18 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, Birmingham.-Joseph Horne, Leeds, Yorkshire, dyer, May aud. ac.-William Chesworth, Manchester, merchant, May 26 at 11, District Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds.—Ě. Michel18 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Manchester, aud.

8on, Manchester, woollen merchant, May 26 at 11, District ac.; May 25 at 12, div.–Mary Fouracre, Wigan, Lancashire, Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds.

Isaac Blackburn and Wm. S. innkeeper, May 18 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Man. Stiebel, Leeds, Yorkshire, ironfounders, May 26 at 11, Dis. chester, aud. ac. -Jas. Windeyer Lewty, Wilden, Worcester- trict Court of Bankruptcy, Leeds. - Thomas Staniforth, Shef. shire, William Henry Partridge, Birmingham, and Edmund field, Yorkshire, joiner, May 27 at 10, District Court of BankLewty, Stourport, Worcestershire, tin-plate workers, May ruptcy, Sheffield. 16 at 10, District Court of Bankruptcy, Birmingham, aud.

To be granted, unless an Appeal be duly entered. ac.-J. Bough, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, carpet manu. L. D. Shields, Lime-street, London, merchant.—Henry H. facturer, May 30 at 12, District Court of Bankruptcy, Bir- Wood, Bognor, Sussex, victualler.—Thomas Young, Sundermingham, aud. ac. – Tottenham Lee, Wakefield, Yorkshire, land, Durham, shipowner. -John Rodway, Gloucester, ricworsted yarn manufacturer, June 1 at 11, District Court of tualler.-Joseph Watson, Liverpool, broker.— James Scolle Bankruptcy, Leeds, aud. ac.; June 2 at 11, div.-Rebecca Riley, Liverpool, commission merchant.-R. Milner, DonAllen, Alfreton, Derbyshire, innkeeper, May 27 at 10, District caster, Yorkshire, hatter.—Edward B. Green, Bilston, StafCourt of Bankruptcy, Sheffield, aud. ac. —

:-Allan Stewart Hay, fordshire, ironmonger. -Henry Green, Birmingham, button Old Broad-street, London, shipowner, May 26 at half-past 11, I manufacturer.—Thomas Ballinger, Birmingham, confectioner.

« PreviousContinue »