Tithes-Enjoyment of land without payment of tithes
for period prescribed by 2 & 3 Will. 4. c. 100, creates
valid and indefeasible exemption from payment of
tithes; and it is not necessary to prove legal origin
for such exemption. Act applies also to case of claim
of partial exemption on ground of non-payment of
tithes in respect only of some titheable matters;
although same lands have paid tithes of other
matters. Semble-Under same act, modus liable
to objection of rankness, but acted upon for period
prescribed by act, will constitute good exemption.
Salkeld v. Johnson, 493

Traversing Note-Defendant personally served with
subpoena to appear and answer took no step in suit
except serving plaintiff with notice of intention to
change his solicitors, and latter had some corre-
spondence with solicitors of plaintiff on proceedings,
but refused to give address of defendant or accept
service for him. Leave given to serve copy of travers-
ing note upon new solicitors. Wallis v. Darby, 216
Trust and Trustee-Trustees taken to be a corpora-
tion from the very constitution of their body, and
the powers conferred upon them by act of parlia-
ment. Newport Marsh Trustees, 49

In suit for appointment of new trustees occa-
sioned by refusal of surviving trustee to exercise
power of appointment, reference made to Master to
approve of proper persons. Exceptions to report
on ground that he had not regarded right of nomi-
nation given to surviving trustee by instrument
creating power, but not raising any objections to
fitness of persons nominated by Master, over-
ruled. Middleton v. Reay, 153

If decree at hearing does not provide for costs of
trustee, Court will not entertain petition in respect
thereof at hearing on further directions. Malins v.
Greenway, 154

Deed conveyed property to two trustees upon
trust to sell, and contained usual power of appoint-
ing new trustees, reserving to each of two parties to
deed, his executors, administrators, and assigns,
power of appointing from time to time one of such
new trustees. One of donees died without exer-
cising this power; and by will he appointed three
executors, but one of them renounced probate.
Appointment of new trustee by two acting executors
valid. Granville v. M'Neile, 164

Trustee of estates received proceeds and paid
them into a bank, where they remained many years:
suit instituted and receiver appointed of rents and
interest. Bank having failed, cestuis que trust, who
were infants, not to be prejudiced, and trustee liable
to refund money lost. Drever v. Maudesley, 273

Case in which receipt of one trustee no dis-
charge; and being intrusted with deeds for safe
custody not authorize one trustee to receive trust
money. Hall v. Franck, 362

Trustees, under power to invest money on good
security, invested on houses which proved insuffi-
cient in value; but their conduct was honest and un-
tainted with fraud or improper motive. Trustees not
liable to make deficiency good. Jones v. Lewis, 430

See Charity. Company. Devise. Power. Re-
ceipt. School. Settlement. Will.
Vacation, Official Attendance. See Orders of Decem-
ber 29, 1848, 503

Vendor and Purchaser-Parties interested in estate
sold for large sum of money asked that purchaser
might pay part of purchase-money into court with-
out prejudice to objections to title. Such order con-
trary to rule of court; and though rule not inflexible,
order refused even with consent of purchaser.
Ouseley v. Anstruther, 157

Conditions of sale stipulated that purchaser
should pay remainder of purchase-money, after
NEW SERIES, XVIII.—INDEX, Chanc. & Bankr.

deducting deposit, into court on or before 26th of
December 1845; but if he should fail in making
such payment, &c. then and from whatever cause
delay might have arisen, he should pay interest at
51. per cent. per annum on balance, from that day
until day of payment. Purchaser deposited balance
on 23rd of December with his bankers at 21. per
cent. per annum, and gave notice thereof to vendors.
Title not completed until August 1847, but pur-
chaser being satisfied with title, paid balance and
interest at 51. per cent. into court in July previously,
reserving question of his right to compensation for
loss of difference between interest at 24. and 57. per
cent., occasioned by delay of vendors. On petition,
vendors not liable to make compensation for such
loss. De Visme v. De Visme, 159

See Covenant.

Waiver See Contempt.
Waste. See Injunction.
Will-Testator, after directing payment of debts, be-
queathed to wife his monies, plate, &c., and all
residue of personal estate, and directed wife to give
bond for securing payment of half the value of
said wines, plate, &c., but not mentioning residue of
his personal estate. Money payable on bond was
for benefit of nephews and nieces. Bond to be
given for half value of property only specifically
enumerated, and not for half value of general resi-
duary estate. Martin v. Welstead, 1

Testator, after specific bequest, gave to wife all
his property in the world for life, and after her de-
cease all his freehold and leasehold estates to his
sister B. and her heirs; and interest of funded and
other property between B. and S. for their respec-
tive lives, with remainders over. Testator then
declared that his wife should hold peaceable posses-
sion of his house, furniture, plate, linen and glass,
and all his property at East House and elsewhere
for life; and that no distribution of any part of his
property should take place until after her decease,
except for payment of debts, &c. Widow entitled to
enjoyment in specie of certain long annuities, part
of residue of testator's estate. House v. Way, 22

Upon construction of will, and on bill filed forty
years after testator's death by his children, against
personal representatives of deceased executors,
plaintiffs entitled to an account and inquiry as to all
property testator possessed at his death, and what
had become thereof, and what steps executors took
for purpose of recovering or receiving any part of
property which without their wilful default they
might have received. As to furniture and converted
debt, Master to have liberty to state special circum-
stances, and direction that if Master could not satis-
factorily take inquiry, he should be at liberty to
state circumstances that created difficulty. To au-
thorize executors in carrying on a trade, property of
testator which they hold in trust, there ought to be
most distinct and positive authority and direction
by will for that purpose. Kirkman v. Booth, 25

T. H. gave and bequeathed residue of his estate
to J. S. and his brother equally between them. J. S.
made his will and disposed of all effects due to him
from estate of T. H, amongst his nine children; and
subsequently executed deed of settlement, by which
certain sum should be considered as his share of
property of T. H, and said property conveyed to
such uses as J. S. should appoint. Under Will Act,
1 Vict. c. 26, will of J. S. good execution of power
limited in deed of settlement. Stillman v. Weedon, 46

Testatrix, by will, gave residue of real estate in
trust for her nephew for life, and, afterwards, for
his children; and subsequently purchased leasehold
property, and conveyed to trustee to such uses as

C

she should appoint. By codicil she appointed lease-
hold to her nephew, and afterwards purchased re-
version in fee of leaseholds, and conveyed to an-
other trustee to such uses as she should appoint.
She then made second codicil, whereby, in pursu-
ance of all powers in her vested, she revoked spe-
cific devise in her will, but expressed no intention
of affecting property subsequently purchased.-
Second codicil not a re-publication of will; and
leasehold and reversion in fee not pass under gift
of residue, but descended to heir-at-law. Jowett v.
Board, 53

Will (continued)-Testator, by will, gave residuary
personal estate to trustees, upon trust, to dispose of
same, or continue same, in or upon any parliamen-
tary stocks, or real securities, and to pay, &c. Consi-
derable part of testator's estate, consisting of London
Dock and Bank stock, and sewers bonds, was allowed
by trustees (testator's executors) to remain uncon-
verted for several years after testator's death, and
eventually loss accrued to estate from sale of Bank
stock and sewers bonds, but gain arose from sale of
London Dock stock. Certain turnpike road bonds,
part of testator's residuary estate, never converted
by trustees at all. Amount due on sewers bonds
secured by rates and assessments, which Commis-
sioners authorized by acts of parliament to levy,
and payment of amount due in respect of turnpike
road bonds secured on toll-houses and tolls payable
thereat. Neither sewers bonds nor road bonds real
securities within meaning of testator's will; loss
which arose on sale of sewers bonds and Bank
stock could not be set off against gain that arose
from sale of London Dock stock, and tenant for life
entitled to 31. per cent. per annum, and no more,
which would have been amount payable to him if
conversion made within one year from testator's
death. Robinson v. Robinson, 73

Testator bequeathed to his son all his gold and
silver plate, pictures, &c. to be held as heir-looms,
and directed his executors to make an inventory of
same. By codicil testator declared that in addition
to articles and things by his will made heir-looms,
certain other specified chattels should be considered
and taken to be heir-looms, and thereby gave and
bequeathed them to his executors as heir-looms in
his family, and directed his executors to make an
inventory of same. This a direct bequest of spe-
cified chattels, which vested absolutely in first
taker. Rowland v. Morgan, 78

Testator gave annuity to servant, and directed
that funds constituting annuity, after death of an-
nuitant, be transferred to his two cousins, or sur-
vivor or survivors of them in equal shares: cousins
died before annuitant. Representative of survivor
entitled to fund, and not residuary legatee. Antro-
bus v. Hodgson, 93

Testator made specific devise of real estate, and
devised residue of his real and personal estate to
trustees, upon trust, to pay his wife annuity of 201.
&c. He then empowered trustees to lease any lands
which they might hold on trusts of will. Testator
at his death entitled to freehold estates, which had
been conveyed to uses to bar dower in his favour,
and some copyhold estates. Widow put to her elec-
tion between annuity and her free bench out of
copyhold estates. Grayson v. Deakin, 114

Testator gave certain real and personal estate
to trustees, for payment of his debts, and speci-
fically gave several portions of his real and per-
sonal estate to different parties "freed from his
debts," and also bequeathed his residuary personal
estate "freed from his debts. One of devised
estates subject to mortgage. Funds primarily ap-
plicable being insufficient to discharge all debts,
property which passed under residuary clause next

fund to be resorted to for that purpose; and devisee
of mortgaged estate declared to be entitled to have
mortgage paid off out of residuary estate. Brooke v.
Warwick, 137

Testator, by will, gave 1,000l. to his sister for
her or for her children's sole use and benefit for ever.
By codicil he recited he was desirous of making
further bequests in relation to his sister and her
family; and then gave, amongst other benefits, fur-
ther sum of 1,000l. to trustees to pay dividends to
his sister for life, and then for her children.-The
1,000l. bequeathed by will given absolutely to tes-
tator's sister. Chipchase v. Simpson, 145

Testator gave and bequeathed all his real and
personal estate to trustees upon trust to convey,
assure and divide same unto and amongst all his
children in equal shares, as tenants in common,
on their respectively attaining twenty-one; and in
case of decease of any or either of his said children
without issue under that age, or before they should
acquire vested interests therein, then trustees were
to convey, assure, pay and divide shares of children
so dying to survivors. Testator's childen, on attain-
ing twenty-one, acquired absolute vested interests
in real and personal estate. Wheable v. Withers, 156

Testatrix made following bequest:-" to the
three children of B. 5001. each." At date of will
and at her death there were nine children of B.
Evidence tendered to effect that at time when B.
had three children testatrix had made will contain-
ing same bequest; that when B. had six children
she had made another will containing same bequest;
that when B. had nine children she had made an-
other will, containing same bequest (will in question
being fourth will), and that she at all four times,
knew numbers of B's children. Assuming evidence
admissible, each of the nine children entitled to
legacy of 5001. Daniell v. Daniell, 157

Testator bequeathed residuary estate to trustees,
upon trust to provide fund (subsequently to sink
into residue) for payment of annuities, and then to
pay income to his children and grandchild for life;
and after decease of either of them, upon trust to
pay and transfer share of party dying, in principal,
amongst all and every child and children of party
dying, and if but one, to such one child. Gift to
trustees, followed by trusts directing payment and
transfer of capital, gave immediate vested interests
to children of tenants for life living at decease of
testator, and shares of two of children who sur-
vived testator, but died in life of tenant for life,
passed to their legal personal representatives. Sal-
mon v. Green, 166

Testator gave to trustees all his leasehold estates,
and residue of his monies, chattels, funds, railroad
shares, securities for money and other personal
estate and effects, on trust, to convert into money
all such parts as should not consist of government
securities, stocks, funds, or railroad shares, and
apply monies arising therefrom for benefit of his
wife and children, and after death of his wife if
there should be no children, testator directed his
real estate to be sold, and money arising therefrom,
and also money arising from residuary personal estate
and effects, to be held upon certain trusts mentioned
in his will. Railroad shares passed in gift over after
death of widow. Surtees v. Hopkinson, 188

Gift, by will, to A. for life, and after her death
for her surviving brothers and sisters. Some of A's
brothers and sisters died before testator, and some
died after, in lifetime of A.-Brothers and sisters liv-
ing at death of A. alone entitled. Davies v. Thorns, 212

Testator gave and bequeathed all his personal
estate and effects to his daughter, same to be always
considered as vested in her, upon her attaining
twenty-one, and to be subject to her disposition

thereof; and further directed that in case his
daughter should happen to depart this life without
attaining twenty-one, or without disposing by her
will of property bequeathed to her, then same to be
subject to disposition by will of his wife. Testator's
daughter married under twenty-one, and by mar-
riage articles husband covenanted to settle all pro-
perty left her by testator upon his wife and himself
for life, and then for benefit of children of marriage.
Daughter took property not absolutely but for life
only, with power to dispose of it by will, and hus-
band not having reduced it into possession, articles
not binding upon wife. Borton v. Borton, 219

Testator directed estate to be purchased by
executors, and to be made hereditary and settled
upon his constituted heir, and then appointed his
nephew his heir and successor, and desired that
estate be settled upon him, to descend to his heirs
and successors in direct male line, and in case
of his nephew dying without issue, estate to de-
volve upon his brother, his heirs and successors in
direct male line. Nephew not to take as tenant
in tail in possession, but estate to be settled upon
him for life, with remainder to his sons in tail male,
and afterwards to next taker and his sons in like
manner. Shelton v. Watson, 223

Where contradictory clauses in will, last clause
to controul first. Under direction of testator to
trustees to get in debts and invest in Government
securities, money in friendly societies need not
be immediately converted for purpose of investment
in Government securities. Marks v. Solomon, 234

Case in which settled estates not well devised by
testatrix to uses of husband's will, but fell into and
formed part of residuary estate. Culshav. Cheese, 269

Testator, by will, directed his debts, &c. to be
paid, and then gave, devised, and bequeathed all
and every his estate and effects, whatsoever and
wheresoever, to his wife M. A. C. for her sole sepa-
rate use and benefit; and further gave, willed, and
directed that, at her death, whatever remained of
his said estate and effects should go to the persons
therein named. M. A. C. not absolutely entitled
to testator's property. Constable v. Bull, 302

Bequest to A. and B. of fund upon trust to invest
on security, and to apply interest on principal for
benefit of C, in such way as A. and B, should think
fit, during life of C, and so that A. and B. should
have entire power over fund to dispose of principal
and interest, or any part thereof, or to withhold
same as they should think fit, without being ac-
countable to C. or any other person; and on death
of C, in case said sum or any part thereof should be
undisposed of, to stand possessed thereof on trusts
therein mentioned. A. and B. paid income to C. dur-
ing their lives, and died, leaving C. surviving. C. abso-
lutely entitled to capital. Gude v. Worthington, 303

Testator directed trustees to erect mansion house
and suitable offices fit for residence of owner of his
estates (worth about 15,000l. per annum), on some
convenient spot. Under this direction, trustees
empowered to lay out garden and pleasure grounds
around mansion, in addition to house and offices,
in such manner as Master should direct. Lombe v.
Stoughton, 400

Testator bequeathed to A. all and singular his
ready money, money in funds, furniture, &c., and
all other his property in and about his house, ex-
cept securities for money. He then gave rest and
residue of his estate on trusts therein mentioned.
Testator at his death entitled to dividends on stock
in 31. per cent, reduced annuities, and 34. per cent.
annuities belonging to him, which had accrued due
during his life, but had not been received by him.
Dividends did not pass under words "ready money"
or "money in funds." May v. Grave, 401

Testator bequeathed all dividends or interest of
all his money in funds, and of all other his personal
property to A. for life. Testator at death entitled
to dividends on stock, which accrued due during
his life, but had not been received by him. Divi-
dends not pass under words "dividends of his money
in funds," but formed part of general personal estate.
Shore v. Weekly, 403

Power of sale, in will, construed as power to sell
real estate, and conversion of whole estate into
personalty. Bequest to "each of my twelve first
cousins," construed to vest immediately on death of
testator, as if all had been named; division post-
poned till death of tenant for life. Devesting of
interest and taking by way of substitution. Burrell
v. Baskerfeild, 422

-

Testator gave charitable legacy, which he di-
rected to be raised and paid out of such part of his
personal estate as he could by law charge with pay-
ment of same. Testator's general personal estate
more than sufficient for payment of his debts, funeral
and testamentary expenses and legacies; but pure
personalty insufficient for these purposes. Cha-
ritable legacy ought to abate in proportion which
pure personalty bore to general personalty. Robin-
son v. Geldart, 454

Testator bequeathed 1,000l. to trustees, upon
trust for son A. for life, with remainder to children
of A. He gave residue of estate and effects to trus-
tees, upon trust, for all his children in equal shares,
and heirs of their respective bodies; and then added
in parenthesis: "except as to my son A. and his
children, whose share, in consequence of the 1,000 1.
set apart for him and them as aforesaid, shall be
rated at 1,000l. less than that of any other child."
Will then declared that in case of failure of issue of
any child, share of him or her whose issue should
fail should be held on trusts therein mentioned.
Words in parenthesis not cut down A.'s interest in
residue to life estate; and words "failure of issue"
not made by 29th section of Wills Act to mean
failure of issue at death of A. Green v. Green, 465

Direction to pay to indefinite class "when and
as" they attained certain age, not prevent any from
becoming entitled. Intention of testator, as col-
lected from other parts of will, to give children
of son and daughter immediate vested interests.
Harrison v. Grimwood, 485

Testator gave residuary estate in certain portions
between two grand-daughters and four grandsons.
He afterwards drew a line through material parts
of bequest, and by marginal note stated that one
grandson being dead and other three provided for,
he intended to bequeath 1,000l. to each of his
grandsons, and residue between two grand-daugh-
First bequest cancelled, and grand-daughters
entitled to whole fund, subject to three legacies of
1,000l. In re Ravenscroft, 501

ters.

See Baron and Feme. Devise. Legacy.
Winding-up Act. See Company. Lien. Railway.
Witness-Order of course after publication, to examine
witnesses as to credit of witness examined in cause,
regular. If under such order witnesses examined
as to matters in issue in cause, Court, on application,
would order depositions to be suppressed. Russel v.
Atkinson, 2 Dick. 532, approved. Penny v. Watts, 108

Common order giving leave to examine a party
need not be served on opposite party. In examina-
tion of witnesses before Commissioners, party not
bound to give list of names to opposite side. De-
positions not suppressed on ground of irregularity
at instance of party who knew of irregularity at
time of examination, but did not take objection
until long after he had seen depositions. Smith v.
Pincombe, 211

Charges of partiality and misconduct not being

established against Commissioner, order to suppress
whole of depositions taken by him refused; but
leave given to examine and cross-examine witnesses
viva voce in Master's office on disputed parts of
depositions. Dobson v. Land, 240
Witness (continued)-Notice of motion by one of
several defendants that deposition of witness

examined by plaintiff be suppressed ought to be
served on other defendants. Barnett v. Papineau, 466
See Administration of Estate.
Words "Survivor or survivors." Antrobus v. Hodg
son, 93

"Whatever remains," meaning of, in will. Con-
stable v. Bull, 302

Act of Bankruptcy-Alleged act of bankruptcy being
denial to creditors, evidenced by statement that
inquiry made at his place of business and house-
keeper denied all knowledge of him. On petition
to annul fiat on ground of no act of bankruptcy it
was stated he had carried on business in partner-
ship until July 1848, that fiat issued in January
1849, that there was an entry in diary kept at
place of business that letters for him were to be
forwarded to district post-office in London, that
he lived near and might have been found by in-
quiries at post-office. Fiat annulled. Ex parte
Addison re Hooper, 13

Adjudication-After adjudication, advertisement pre-
pared, but omitted by accident to be inserted in
London Gazette. Commissioner declared to be at
liberty to appoint fresh days of surrender, and
cause advertisement to be inserted in Gazette, but
without prejudice to question of its validity. In re
Stringer, 1

Affidavit-Petition and affidavits in support filed
under incorrect title; and petition amended.
Affidavits taken off file, title amended and affi-
davits resworn and put on file. Ex parte Burton
re Harvey, 17

Amendment. See Fiat.

Annuity-In consideration of 500l. paid by A. to B,
B. gave bond to A. for 500l. conditioned to be void
on payment of annuity of 60l. to A. for life; and
B. deposited with A. title-deeds of real estate be-
longing to B, with written memorandum. Bond
inrolled, but not memorandum. B. became bank-
rupt. Petition for sale of mortgaged property, and
application of purchase-money to his claim, dis-
missed with costs. Ex parte Miller re Swann, 9
Assignee-Acting as solicitor to fiat (see Costs). In re
Newton, 1

Bankrupt-Person liable to be. See Builder. And
see Costs. Surrender.

Bankrupt's Property. See Annuity. Order and
Disposition. Sale.

Builder-Barrister, who took lease of three pieces of
building ground, and at his own expense erected
thereon upwards of two hundred houses, which he
let as opportunity offered, but did not buy and sell
building materials for profit, and was not a builder
in sense of being ready to build houses for any one
who would give him an order, and did not intend
generally to embark in other building speculations,
not a builder within meaning of bankrupt laws,
and fiat annulled. Ex parte Stewart re Stewart, 14
Costs-Solicitor, appointed sole assignee, acted as
such and as solicitor to fiat for many years, and was
paid his costs as solicitor. Upon petition of bank-
rupt, accounts ordered to be reviewed with refer-
ence to union of characters of assignee and soli-
citor, upon ground of public policy. In re Newton, 1
40s. allowed to bankrupt for costs of appearing
on petition presented by cestui que trust for liberty
to prove against estate of bankrupt defaulting
trustee, in prison for contempt for not obeying
order for payment of money made by Court of
Chancery in suit instituted against him for breach
of trust; bankrupt having appeared, and applied for
discharge. Ex parte Ryland re Croudson, 9

Shares deposited by A. with B. a banker, to
secure purchase-money of shares, but no written
memorandum given. A. became bankrupt. B.
presented petition for sale of shares and liberty to
prove for difference supported by affidavit that it
was not custom in course of business to require
written memorandum under such circumstances.
B. entitled to costs, as in case of mortgage with
written memorandum. Ex parte Moss re Da-
vies, 17

Mortgagee of bankrupt's estate presenting peti-
tion for liberty to bid not entitled to costs of
petition. Ex parte Smith re Field, 17
Fiat-Amendment of, after it has been opened, by
alteration of Christian name of bankrupt, refused.
In re Chambers, 17.

Annulling. See Act of Bankruptcy. Builder.
Fixtures. See Order and Disposition.
Mortgage. See Annuity. Costs.

Order and Disposition-Worsted-dyer, by deed, mort-
gaged fixtures used by him in his business, in house
occupied by him as tenant, and which he had right
to remove. He continued in possession of fixtures
after mortgage, and was in possession at time of
his bankruptcy. Petition by B. to have benefit of
his security, dismissed with costs, upon his declin-
ing to file bill in equity to have question tried. Ex
parte Sykes re Clarke, 16

Proof-A. lent B. 7501., and B. and C. as his surety,
by bond dated 16th of June 1847, became bound to
pay premiums of policy of assurance deposited with
A, and also to pay A. 750l., by instalments, with in-
terest: condition that if B. or C. should become bank-
rupt, they should, at option of A, give additional
security, or pay principal and interest due. B, and
D. his partner, by separate deed covenanted to in-
demnify C. in respect of bond. On 26th of October
1847 B. and D, became bankrupt, and on 17th of
January 1848 C. paid principal and interest. Proof
against bankrupt's estate for principal not admis-
sible. Ex parte Mayer re Mayer, 4

Voluntary and substituted bond admitted to
proof, although when bond given debts of bank-
rupt (a banker) considerably exceeded his assets,
and so continued for several years; there not being
any suggestion of fraud either by obligor or obligee.
Ex parte Berry, 19 Ves. 218, observed upon. Ex
parte Hookings re Gundry, 11

Sale-Mortgaged estate belonging to bankrupt, bought
at sale by auction by mortgagee, who had liberty
to bid, for 5001. Application to open biddings at
7507. on grounds that title embarrassed at time of
sale, and that Commissioner had stated biddings
might be opened, granted. Ex parte Lee re Hig-
gonson, 6

Solicitor to Fiat. See Costs.
Statute-53 Geo. 3. c. 141, 9

6 Geo. 4. c. 16. ss. 52, 56, 4
5 & 6 Vict. c. 122. s. 23, 1

Surrender-Petition by assignees for discharge of
order for liberty to surrender obtained upon peti-
tion of bankrupt stating facts which from subse-
quent statement to Commissioner appeared to be
untrue, dismissed with costs. Ex parte Pennell re
Turner, 7

IN

Adams v. London and Blackwall
Railway Company, 357
Albert, Prince v. Strange, 120
Andrew v. Andrew, 222
Anonymous, 229
Antrobus v. Hodgson, 93
Apps, ex parte, 409
Arnold v. Arnold, 90
Ashurst v. Mill, 129
Atcheson v. Atcheson, 230
Attorney General v. Blair, 275
v. Corporation of London,

-

314, 339

v. Lucas, 100
- v. Marsh, 272

v. Shield, 176

v. Southampton, Guar-
dians of Poor of, 393
Bagshaw v. Eastern Union Rail-
way Company, 193
Bainbrigge v. Baddeley, 385
Barber, ex parte, 242, 245
Barnett v. Papineau, 466
Bass, ex parte, 245
Beardmer v.

the London and

South-Western Railway, 432
Belke's Charity, in re, 152
Benyon v. Nettlefold, 445

Blackmore v. Smith, 271

Blagrove v. Hancock, 20

Blundell v. Stanley, 300
Borton v. Borton, 219
Brooke v. Earl of Warwick,
137

Brown v. Brown, 388
Burrell v. Baskerfeild, 422
Carr v. Henderson, 39

Castelli v. Cook, 148

Cawthorne, in re, 116

Chalk v. Raine, 472
Chamberlain v. Thacker, 489

Chester and Crewe Railway Com-
pany, in re, 418

Davenport v. Davenport, 163
Davies v. Thorns, 212

De Visme v. De Visme, 159
Dobson v. Land, 240
Dodson v. Powell, 237
Dover and Deal Railway Com-

pany, ex parte, 182
Drever v. Mawdesley, 273
Edge v. Duke, 183

Emerson v. Emerson, 50
Evans v. Davies, 180
Farwell v. Seale, 189
Fenwick, ex parte, 112
Fisher v. Price, 235
Fitch v. Rochfort, 458
Fletcher v. Moore, 384
Follett v. Jefferys, 389
Foster v. Eddy, 151

-v. Foster, 356
Fussell v. Elwin, 349
Gaunt v. Johnson, 45
Glaholm, ex parte, 147
Glover v. Hall, 305
Gordon v. Hope, 228
- v. Whieldon, 5
Goring v. Howard, 105
Grace v. Webb, 13
Graham v. Maxwell, 225

Grand Junction Canal Company
v. Dimes, 365, 419
Granville v. Betts, 32

v. M'Neile, 164

NEW SERIES, XVIII.-INDEX, Chanc. & Bankr.

Grayson v. Deakin, 114
Greedy v. Lavender, 62
Green v. Green, 465
Gude v. Worthington, 303
Hall v. Franck, 362
Hardey v. Green, 480
Hardy v. Dartnell, 467
Harris v. Hamlyn, 403
Harrison v. Grimwood, 485
Hart v. Tulk, 162, 336
Harwood, in re, 116
Hawthorne, ex parte, 179
Hayes, ex parte, 441

Henderson v. Kennicott, 40
Hepworth v. Heslop, 352

Herne Bay Pier Company, in re,
71

Heywood v. Grazebrook, 303
Hirst v. Tolson, 308
Holder v. Durbin, 479
Holmes v. Crispe, 439
House v. Way, 22

Humphrey v. Geary, 488
Hunter v. Nockolds, 407
Hutton v. London and South-
Western Railway Company,

345

India and Australia Mail Steam
Packet Company, in re, 390
Innes v. Sayer, 274

Jackson v. the North Wales Rail-
way Company, 91
Jones v. Lewis, 430
Jowett v. Board, 53
Katsch v. Schenck, 386
Kennaway v. Tripp, 298
Kennedy v. Lewis, 455
Kenny v. Beavan, 64
King v. Smith, 43
Kirkman v. Booth, 25

Kitchener v. Kitchener, 152

Lewes, in re, 153

Lombe v. Stoughton, 400

D