232 the bank failed, H. was indebted to the bank on his private overdrawn account. Held, that the bank had no lien over the shares for H's private indebtedness. McLaughlin v. Bank of Victoria, 54. -s. 36-Rectification of register --Discretion of judge-Justice of the case. A judgment in the County Court for £25 was obtained against B a clerk of Courts. Under the judg ment the bailiff seized and sold shares in the I. E. Company, of which B was the registered holder, and on which there was a liability for £900. Bhad immediately before this paid £25 to the company in respect of calls on the shares. The shares were purchased by G, a man of no means, for the sum of £1, which had been given to him for that purpose by W, a solicitor. The company refused to register a transfer from B to G. On an application under s. 36 of the Companies Act 1890 by G, for an order that the register of the company might be rectified Held by the Court (Madden, C.J., dissenting), affirming the decision of Williams, J., that there was sufficient evidence to warrant the judge in the exercise of the discretion conferred on him by that section, in saying that he was not "satisfied of the justice of the case," and upon that ground refusing the application. In re the Irrigable Estates Company, Limited, Gunter's case, 116. : -s. 82-Leave to bring action against a company in liquidationTerms-Where a wife had brought an action against a company and had recovered damages for injuries sustained by her, by reason of the negligence of the company and the husband subsequently sought to bring an action against the company for damages arising out of the injuries to the wife, the terms imposed by the Court on an application by the husband under s. 82 of the Companies Act 1890, were that the defendant company undertaking to admit liability, the action should be tried by a judge without a jury. De Alba r. The Freehold Investment and Banking Co. Ltd., 165. -ss. 82, 150-Distress-Seizure of goods not belonging to the company-Injunction-Where goods on the premises of a company, but not belonging to the company, are seized under a distress for rent due by the company; such distress does not come within the provisions of either sec. 82 or sec. 150, and the Court will not restrain the landlord from proceeding with such distress. In re the Erening Post Newspaper Coy. Ltd., 66. s. 129-Company-Voluntary winding-up - Dissolution- Liquidator's return to Registrar-GeneralInjunction-Jurisdiction. After the filing with the Registrar-General of the liquidator's final return pursuant to sec. 129 of the Companies Act 1890, the company is practically dead and the Court has no jurisdiction to restrain the company from being dissolved. So held, reversing the decision of Madden, C.J. John Birch and Coy. Ltd. v. The Patent Cork Pavement Coy. Ltd., 132, 209. -s. 145-Compromise-Sanction of Court to-Practice-Costs. Where a company is being wound up by or subject to the supervision of the Court, an application under s. 145 of the Companies Act 1890, must be supported by evidence as to the amount (if any) of costs agreed to be paid by the contributory. Such costs should in the first instance be paid to the liquidator. In re the Companies Act 1890, 1. -s. 243-Mining company-Forfeiture of shares-Time limited for bringing action-Ground of forfeiture --General meeting "Seven days' notice." - Section 243 of the Companies Act 1890, applies to all actions in respect of shares alleged to have been forfeited, no matter upon what ground the alleged forfeiture is said to be invalid. Several persons acted as directors of a mining company, but were disqualified from holding that position. Acting as directors they purported to make a call on all the shares. A. who held a number of shares, did not pay the call, and the shares were sold as having become forfeited. In an action brought by A., in respect of the shares, which was not begun until six months after the day appointed for the sale. Held, that the action was barred by sec. 243 of the Companies Act 1890. The articles of association of the company required that every general meeting should be convened by the manager by a seven days' notice, inserted twice in one newspaper published at B. Held, that both insertions must take place at least seven days before the meeting. Dalrymple v. Prince of Wales and Bonshaw United Coy. NoLiability, 168. -s. 369-Will-Trust to pay out of certain fund "any mortgages Discretion of executor -Priority Assets, insufficiency of-Life assurance-Policy moneys. rected his trustees A by will dito apply the moneys arising from any policy or policies of assurance on my life in or towards payment of any mortgages which may be existing over any property belonging to me at the time of my death." A died, leaving liabilities largely exceeding his assets. executrix received £1,500 on policies His on his life, and paid that sum to B in part payment of a mortgage debt owing by A to B. In an action against the executrix and B, by another mortgagee of A, on behalf of himself and other mortgagees of A: Held, that of this sum of £1,500, £1,000 which, by reason of s. 369 of the Companies Act 1890, was not assets for the payment of A's debts, was subject to the trust created by the will, and that the trust was one in favour of all mortgagees amongst whom the £1,000 must be distributed rateably. Held, further, that any mortgagee who had a right to participate and was excluded, was entitled to compel B to repay the amount he had been overpaid. Mercantile Bank of Australia Limited v. Lewis and another, 93, 202. s. 385 “Undertaking " Guarantee Covenant A trustee company, which, under its special Act, was authorised to act as a trustee and do all acts and duties pertaining to the position of a trustee, was trustee of a certain marriage settlement, and as such was the registered proprietor of certain land, which was mortgaged to A. Held, that notwithstanding s. 385 of the Companies Act 1890, the company might lawfully covenant to pay the principal and interest of the mortgage. The word "undertaking 29 in s. 395 does not mean a contract or covenant, but something ejusdem generis with business or trade. Young and others v. Union Trustee Co. of Australia Ltd., 16. Complaint on Oath-See Justices Act 1890. Gleeson v. Boardman, 153. Non-service of Justices Act 1890. Shamrock BrewSee ing &c., Cay., v. Schomann, 5. Composition with Creditors -See Insolvency Act 1890. Charsley, 130. Compromise-See Companies Act 1890. Re Condonation-Verification of Plea -See Marriage Act 1890. Belton -See Marriage Act 1890. Taylor v. Taylor, 148. Consideration for Lien on Crops-See Instruments Act 1890. Consolidating Acts-See Police Bennett v. Baker, 149. Offences Act 1890. Dalley v. Harding, 175. Conspiracy- Combination in restraint of trade-Trade Unions Act 1890 (No. 1147), ss. 3, 4. The right of bringing a civil action in respect of such conspiracy, as at common law was unlawful as being in restraint of trade, has not been taken away by the Trade Unions Act 1890, ss. 3, 4. One of the objects of an association was to keep up the retail selling prices of liquor. The association entered into an agreement with the Brewers' Club, which embraced the majority of the breweries doing business in Melbourne, that the brewers should not supply certain liquor to grocers, who sold at less than specified prices and that the association should furnish the Brewers' Club from time to time with complete lists of grocers who complied with that condition and of those who did not. The plaintiff did not join the association, but said he was willing to adopt the association's prices so long as everybody else did the same. He subsequently discovered that some members of the association were selling liquor at less than the specified prices, and he thereupon reduced his own price in order to keep his custom. In consequence of this, the association, in January 1892, caused the Brewers' Club to place him on the list of those who were not to be supplied. In October, 1892, the plaintiff informed the Brewers' Club that he was prepared to adopt the association's pricelist as to certain liquors, and the brewers resumed their supplies in spite of a protest from the association, which desired that the plaintiff should first join their body. In October, 1893, the association caused the plaintiff's name to be placed on the list of those who were not to be supplied. Held, that an action for conspiracy would lie against the members of the association. Beesley, 59. Contempt-See Justices Act 1890. Miller v. Lennie, 208. Continuing Guarantee Guarantee. Mercantile Bank v. Weigall, 192. Taff's v. -- See Contract-Solicitor and Client Moneys deposited for investmentMortgages in client's name Oral agreement Judgment for part of claim without prejudice to remainder. The plaintiff had paid money to her solicitor for investment, he paying her 7 per cent. on the amount in his hands. Some of the moneys so advanced were invested on mortgages, such mortgages being taken in the client's name. No time was fixed for the termination of the agreement between the solicitor and client, and it was not reduced into writing, but, according to the finding of the Court on the facts, the arrangement was that the plaintiff was to get 7 per cent. interest on all money which the firm might receive on her account, no matter how it was invested, and that they were to collect the money for her, and undertake the investment of it from time to time and do all work necessary in connection with this duty without further charge than the excess, if any, which the firm might obtain beyond the 7 per cent. Held, that upon the termination of the contract the plaintiff was not entitled to reject the then existing mortgages and demand from the defendant and his firm the amount then owing upon them, but that she was bound to take over the mortgages at the amount then owing by the mortgagors. It is the duty of a solicitor when entering into a contract of this nature with a client to reduce its terms into writing, and explain them clearly to the client, and so to keep the books of his firm that no doubt as to the terms of the contract can subsequently arise. The plaintiff by her writ claimed (inter alia) all necessary accounts and enquiries as to moneys received by the defendant for investment, and also damages for negligence. The Court ordered an account to be taken without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to bring a fresh action for negligence. Craig v. Roberts, 2. -For storage of goods-Goods "required to be stored-Goods "due for storage"-Rights and liabilities of contractor. An agreement was made between the Victorian Railways Commissioners and A, whereby, in consideration that the Commissioners appointed A to cart and store wheat and other agricultural produce, A agreed (1) that he would within halfan-hour of being so required, supply vehicles and remove all wheat, &c., not exceeding 3,000 bags per diem arriving by railway, required by the corporation or the overseer to be removed carted and stored or "which may be due for storage"; (2) that he would forthwith, on removing the same, pay all freight or other charges due to the Commissioners for the carriage &c. of "any wheat or other agricultural produce or required to be removed carted or stored or due for storage"; (3) that in the event of A, one half-an-hour after request, failing to remove any wheat, &., " required to be removed, carted and stored or due for storage within 24 hours after request or after the same becoming due for storage" the wheat, &c., might be removed and stored by the Commissioners at A's expense. Held, (1) that A was given the sole right to cart and store wheat &c. (2) That A was entitled to remove and store 66 goods due for storage" without any request or notification by the Conimissioners. McCulloch Carrying Company v. Victorian Railways Commissioners, 203. Contrary Intention--See Real Property Act 1890. Blackburn v. Miller, 177. Contributories, Rectification of List of See Companies Act 1890. In re the Mercantile Bank of Australia, Exparte Bagley, 89, 105. Conveyance with intent to defeat or delay CreditorsSee Insolvency Act 1890. Wootton v. Stoffers, 10. Corroboration-See Marriage Act 1890. Stokes v. Roughan, 34 Costs against solicitor fomenting Litigation-See Soli -See Marriage Act 1890. Jonas v. Jonas, 201. Court, Meaning of-See Insolvency Act 1890. In re Cohen, 106. Creditor-Application by, for Administration See Practice (Probate). Re Milne, 68. -Notice to, out of Jurisdiction -See Insolvency Act 1896. Re Charsley, 130. Creditors-Assignment for benefit of-See Justices Act 1890. Foster Brewing Coy., Ltd. v. Youl, 183. -Settlement to Defeat See Transfer of Land Act 1890. Rowe v. Equity Trustees Coy. &c., Ltd., 194. claim -- Costs - Where a creditor's claim fails, he may be ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings, though he is not a party to the suit. Huon and others v. Dougharty and others Exparte Bank of Australasia, 33. Summons, form of, where Executor of unsound mind. In Will of Barthold, 157. Creek, River or Stream-See Fisheries Act 1890. Steele v. Osholdstone, 152. Crimes Act 1890 (No. 1079) s. 23Abandonment of child-When person who abandons owes no duty to child. A person who actually abandons, or takes an active part in the abandonment of a child, and who is no relation of the child and owes it no duty of protection, may be guilty of the offence of abandoning within section 23 of the Crimes Act 1890. Reg. v. White, L.R. I.C.C.R., 311, distinguished. Reg. v. Koebcke, 27. s. 52-Abduction of girl under the age of sixteen-Possession of father Evidence. A girl under sixteen years of age living with her father and mother, was sent While on a message by the latter. she was walking in a public street the prisoner induced her to go with him some distance; he then tried to induce her to go into a brothel with him, and took her by the The girl shook off his hand, and refused to go into the house. arm. Held, that there was evidence from which the jury might find that the prisoner took the girl out of the possession of her father. Reg. v. Jenkins, 178. s. 307-Criminal law-Receiv. ing stolen property-Identification of property Knowledge of receiver. The prisoner was charged on presentment upon two counts-(1) Breaking into a certain store and stealing there from certain goods. (2) Receiving those goods knowing that they were stolen. The prisoner was found guilty on the second count. Held, that to support the verdict it was sufficient to prove that the goods were stolen from the store in question, and that the prisoner knew that the goods received by her were stolen, but that it was not necessary to prove that the prisoner knew the goods received by her were those stolen from that store. Reg. v. Angus, 205. Criminal Law-See Crimes Act, 1890. Reg. v. Angus, 205. Criticism on Public Acts of a Public Man See Libel. Speight v. Syme, 71. Crops, Lien on-Consideration--See Instruments Act 1890. Bennett v. Baker, 149. Cruelty provoked by Acts of violence of petitioner--See Marriage Act 1890. Belton v. Belton, 142. Habitual-See Marriage Act 1890. Chaplin v. Chaplin, 218. Customer and Banker-See Guarantee. Mercantile Bank Weigall, 192. V. Customs and Excise Duties Act 1890 (No. 1082), s. 133-StillMeaning of. Possession of an entire still is not essential for a conviction under the Customs and Excise Duties Act 1890, s. 133. Evidence of possession of part of a distilling apparatus is sufficient. McGregor v. Christie, 141. Damages, measure of-See Land. Cox v. Mayor, &c. of Essendon, 7; Adam v. Town of Brunswick, 66. Damages for Wrongful Dismissal-See Public Service Act 1800. Mattingley v. The Queen, 143. 171. Dancing Saloon-See Licensing Act 1890. Walshe v. Bedwell, 35. Debenture-The deposit receipt of a building society is not a debenture. Allen v. Tills, 84. Debt, Attachment of-See Justices Act 1890. Foster Brewing Co. Ltd. v. Youl, 183. -Attachment of. See Practice. Declarations, effect of-See Medical Act 1890. In re Lamsey, 125. Dedication of Road--See Local Government Act 1890. Shire of Tambo, 223. Howlett v. Delay-See Marriage Act 1890. Taylor v. Taylor, 148. Delusions-See Practice (Probate). In will of Matthews, 39. Demurrer--See Practice. Henderson v. Thorne, 193. General-See Practice. Attorney-General v. Blackwell, 150. Departure-See Practice. Ienderson v. Thorne, 193. Desertion, Petitioner's conduct contributing to See Marriage Act 1890. Bilton v. Belton, 142. -Meaning of-See Marriage Act 1890. Taylor v. Taylor, 148. -See Marriage Act 1890. Langlands v. Langlands, 44; Synnot v. Synnot, 127. - Disclaimer, Sufficiency of See Distress-See Companies Act 1890. -See Marriage Act 1890. Rules 1885, rr. 28, 37, 136— Condonation-Connivance Particulars-Affidavit-The Court has no power to order the respondent in divorce proceedings to verify the particulars given under the pleas of condonation and connivance. Carr v. Carr, 114. Domicil-See Marriage Act 1890. Corbett v. Adamson, 17. Drainage, Discharge of, on to Land See Land. Cox v. Mayor &c., of Essendon, 7. Drunkenness, See Habitual Marriage Act 1890. Chaplin v. Chaplin, 218. Duplicity-See Justices Act 1890. Education Department-See Public Service Act 1890. Mattingley v. The Queen, 143, 171. Ejectment See Landlord and Tenant Act 1890. Trustees Executors &c. Coy. v. De Faro, 21. -Warrant of-See Landlord and Tenant Act 1890. Markett v. Shields, 38; Cleverdon v. Townsend, 69. 13 Elizabeth, c.5 -See Insolvency Act 1890. Wootton v. Stoffers, 10. -See Transfer of Land Act 1890. Rowe v. The Equity Trusters Executors, &c. Coy. Ltd., 194. Emoluments -See Public Service Act 1890. Bristow v. The Queen, 147, 171. Engine, Fixed - See Fisheries Act 1890. Steele v. Osboldstone, 152. Equitable Claims -See Instruments Act 1890. Anderson v. Carter, 49. Equitable Interests On See Transfer of Land Act 1890. Rowe v. Equity Trustees &c. Coy. Ltd., 194. Estoppel-Res judicata - Identity of subject matter - Evidence of Time for proving the plea. The procedure in the Warden's Court does not allow a plea of res judicata to be disposed of until the complainant has closed his case. Summers v. Cooper, 5 V.L.R. (M.) 52 distinguished. the 25th April, 1894, A, B and C, were summoned in the Warden's Court for unlawful interference with a mining tenement, and the case was dismissed. On the 11th May 1894, A, B, C and D were summoned by the same complainant to establish his claim to the same tenement, and the complainant sought to have it determined that he was entitled to the sum of sixty pounds in the nature of mesne profits and damages. Before the complainant's case was closed the Warden intimated that the matter was res judicata and that the action could not be entertained. Held, that it was too soon at that stage to interfere, and that the case must go down to be reheard. Sawtell v. Gay, 48. -See Companies Act 1890. Bundoora Park Estate Coy. r. Fisher, 107. Evidence, Corroborative--See Marriage Act 1890. Stokes v. Roughan, 34. in Reply-See Justices Act 1890. Deasy v. Wilson, 37. Execution of Will-See Wills Act 1890. In the Will of Lennox, 19. -See Companies Act 1890. In re the Evening Post Newspaper Coy., Ltd., 66. Executor, Discretion of See Companies Act 1890. Mercantile Bank . Lewis and another, 93, 202. of Unsound Mind-See Practice (Probate). In Will of Barthold, 157. Executors-See Practice (Probate). Executors Company's Act Amendment Act (No. 842) s. 7. Trustee company-Remuneration -Commission Estimated capital value of estate to be estimated at time of testator's death. Under sec. 7 of the Executors Company's Act Amendment Act the Trustees Executors and Agency Co., Limited, when appointed executor of a will, is entitled to a commission of 2 per cent. on the estimated value of the testator's estate committed to its charge, and that capital value is to be estimated at the time of the death of the testator. Trustees Executors &c. Coy. v. Hicks, 52. Exoneration-See Real Property Act 1890. Blackburn v. Miller, 177. Extras-See Arbitration. Higgins v. Board of Land and Works, 158. Fair comment-See Libel. Speight v. Syme, 71. Father, Taking unmarried girl out of possession of See Crimes Act 1890. Reg. v. Jenkins, 178. Execution unsatisfied by members of Firm-See Insolvency Act 1890. Re De Beer Monte and Co., 16. against Surety-See Practice. Bank of Australasia v. Mercantile Finance &c. Coy., 57. Fenced Land-See Local Government Act 1890. Howlett v. Shire of Tumbo, 223. Final judgment-See Practice. Firm, Judgment against-See Insolvency Act 1890. Re De Beer Monte and Co., 160. Fisheries Act 1890 (No. 1093), ss. 3, 15- Fixed engine" for puroses of catching fish-Creek on private land-Bed of creek vested in owner. In section 15 of the Fisheries Act 1890 the words " river, creek or stream" do not include a stream running through private property, and the bed of which is vested in the owner of that property. Semble, a "fixed engine" within section 3 of the Fisheries Act 1890 means some engine fixed to the earth for destroying fish in large quantities and does not include a fishing rod stuck into the ground with a line and hooks attached. Steele v. Osboldstone, 152. Fixed Engine-See Fisheries Act 1890. Steele v. Osboldstone, 152. Fomenting Litigation Solicitor. In re Kerang Times Publishing Coy., 163. See Full Court, Reserving questions for -See Marriage Act 1890. Corbett r. Adamson, 17. See Gaming House, Common Justices Act 1890. Gleeson v. Boardman, 153. Gardens, Management of See Boroughs Statute (No. 359). Barnes v. Bremner, 207. Garnishee Order-See Justices Act 1890. Foster Brewing Coy., Ltd. v. Youl, 183. -See Practice. General costs of Action- See Practice. Speight v. Symr, 85. Demurrer-See Practice. Attorney-General v. Blackwell, 150. Gift by client to Solicitor-See Solicitor and Client. O'Hra v. Black, 119. Construction Continuing guarantee Consideration Banker and Customer-Separate accounts, Union of. A was a customer of a bank and was indebted to it on his overdrawn current account. By an instrument in writing dated the 23rd September, 1886, B, in consideration of the Lank at her request permitting A to further overdraw his private account current with the said bank to the further amount and extent of £1,000 sterling guaranteed "the repayment to the said bank of the said further sum of £1,000 or any part thereof advanced by the said bank to A" on and after that date with interest. On the 24th September, 1886, a second account was opened at the bank on which A operated as an overdrawn current account, while continuing the first account; on the 3rd January, 1889, the two accounts were combined. In an action on the guarantee by the bank against the administrator of B:-Held that the consideration for the guarantee was the agreement to allow an overdraft, and not the overdraft itself; that the guarantee was a continuing one, and not limited to a specific sum of £1000; that it was immaterial that the particular overdraft existing at the date had been paid off in whole or in part, and that the bank could recover the whole amount up to £1,000, due on the combined overdraft. Mercantile Bank of Australia, Ltd. v. Weigall, 192. Girl, Taking unmarried, out of pos- Guarantor, Release of- See Guar session of her father-See Crimes Act 1890. Reg. v. Jenkins, 178. Good Cause for depriving the plaintiff of the General costs of the action See Practice. Speight v. Syme, 85. Good Faith, Meaning of--See InWootton solvency Act 1890. Stoffers, 10. Goods, Storage of-See Contract. McCulloch Carrying Coy. v. Victorian Railways Commissioners, 203. Guarantee-Liability of guarantor -Right of creditor to part with securities of debtor-Change of securities -Release of guarantor — Time for valuing securities. A guaranteed B's overdraft at a bank up to a certain amount, and B at the same time deposited two lots of shares with the bank as security for the overdraft. The bank subsequently, and without A's knowledge, returned one lot of shares to B, and allowed B to substitute other shares for the second lot. Held, that A was released pro tanto by the surrender of the securities, and that the bank could not set-off against the value of the second lot of shares surrendered, the value of the substituted shares. Held, further, that the value of the shares surrendered should be assessed as at the date of the surrender. Bank of Victoria v. Smith, 92. antee. Bank of Victoria v. Smith, 92. Habitual Drunkenness and Cruelty-See Marriage Act 1890. Chaplin v. Chaplin, 218. Health Act 1890 (No. 1098) ss. 3, 234, 235, 304-"Owner"-Person for the time being entitled to receive the rent of the land-Mortgagor and mortgagee-Attornment. A. transferred certain land of which she was the registered proprietor under the "Trausfer of Land Act 1890," to the defendant, and the defendant was thereupon registered as proprietor. Concurrently with the transfer A. executed an indenture of mortgage by way of defeasance, whereby she conveyed the fee simple to the defendant subject to a proviso for redemption, and under the terms of the deed she became tenant at will to the defendant. A. made default in payment and gave up possession to the defendHeld, that the defendant was the person for the time being entitled to receive the rent of the land, or who would be entitled to receive the same if the land were let at a rent within the meaning of s. 3 of the Health Act 1890. The Mayor, Councillors, and Burgesses of the Town of Port Mel bourne v. The Permanent Savings Building Society of Port Melbourne, 64. ant. -s. 35 By-law-Ultrâ viresMunicipal corporation Manner of cleansing of earth closets-License by corporation. A by-law made by a municipal corporation prohibiting the removing of pans from earth closets except by persons duly authorised and licensed in that behalf by the corporation, is not a by-law regulating the times and manner of cleansing, emptying or managing of earth closets within the meaning of s. 35 of the Health Act 1890 and is ultra vires. Gomm v. Bennett, 223. -s. 221-" Suffering or permitting" a nuisance-Nuisance caused by act of servant-No knowledge on part of master. Filth had on three occasions been allowed to accumulate on the floor of the defendant's closet. This nuisance was on each occasion caused by the act of defendant's servant. On the first two occasions complaint was made to another servant of defendant, and on one of these occasions the servant communicated the complaint to the defendant. The defendant did not know of the nuisance occurring on the third occasion. Held, that the nuisance occurred by the carelessness and negligence of the master, and that he was therefore rightly convicted under s. 221 of the Health Act 1890 of suffering or permitting excreta and urine to accumu late on the floor of his closet whereby a nuisance was caused. Semble, where the nuisance is caused by a servant acting within the scope of her duties the knowledge of the servant should be imputed to her master, and on this ground the master is rightly convicted. Martin v. McGinnis, 96. Highway, Proclaimed-See Local Government Act 1890. Hodgson v. Henderson, 9. Husband and Wife-See Marriage Act 1890. Identification of Stolen Property-See Crimes Act 1890. Reg. v. Angus, 205. Impressed Stamp-See Stamps Preacher v. Edgerton. 28. Infringement-See Patents Act Act 1890. 1890. Injunction to restrain a Company being Dissolved -See Companies Act 1890. Birch and Coy. Ltd. v. Patent Cork Pave ment Coy, Ltd.. 132, 209. to restraiu Threats-See Patents Act 1890. Errington v. Krone, 215. Injury to tenant-See Negligence. De Alba v. Freehold Investment and Banking Coy., 136. Insolvency --Ante-nuptial settlement-Marriage part of a trick to defraud creditors-Fraud of intended wife-Burden of proof. In an action by a trustee in insolvency to set aside a marriage settlement made by the insolvent, as being a fraud on the creditors, the burden of proving that the wife was a party to the fraud is upon the trustee, but as all the facts concerning the settlement are within the knowledge of the insolvent and the wife, a very slight degree of evidence will be sufficient to discharge the burden, and to place upon the wife the onus of proving the absence of fraud. Michael v. Thompson, 124. Insolvency Act 1890, ss. 4. 18, 154 and rr. 140 and 148-Corporation - Fraud Cancelling resolution District. The Court of Insolvency has power to cancel resolutions under 8. 154 of the Insolvency Act 1890, on the ground of fraud. The omission to disclose in the schedule dealings, and property and debts correctly, is fraud. In re Cromie, 24. -ss. 4, 31, 45-Order nisi for sequestration-Misdescription-Jurisdiction-"The Court," meaning of -Amendment-Waiver of objection. An order nisi obtained in the Supreme Court for the sequestration of the estate was, on the face of it, made returnable before the Court." By the Insolvency Act 1890, s.4:-" In the construction of this Act unless it be otherwise expressly provided, or unless the subject or context requires a different construction Court' shall mean the Court of Insolvency." Held, that the defect was fatal, and could not be amended by the Court, and was not waived by the fact of the respondent having filed a notice of his intention to rely on a special defence. In re Cohen, 106. -s. 21-Local Government Act 1890 (No. 1112) ss. 9, 522-Insolvency -Petitioning creditor Municipal corporation-A debtor may be made insolvent on the petition of a munici pal corporation. In re Pitson; Exparte Shire of Huntly, 9. -s. 31-Omission of material statement from order nisi-Validity of document. The effect of section 31 of the Insolvency Act 1890, is that none of the documents therein mentioned should be invalid by reason of any omission no matter what that omission might be, provided that the respondent could be protected from any possible injustice. An order nisi purported to set out an act of insolvency within s. 37 (VIII.) of the Insolvency Act 1890, but omitted to state that the execution was returned unsatisfied. Held, that under s. 31 of the Act, the order nisi was not invalidated by such omission. Re Field, 162. under s. 71, must be tested by his knowledge of the surrounding circumstances, of the debtor's intentions, and the consequences of his acts. Although he may pursue the debtor to judgment, he must not with his eyes open to the consequences get so much of the debtor's property assigned to him, as must necessarily delay other creditors. For the purpose of proving the creditor's intention and knowledge, evidence of his subsequent conduct is admissible. A. and B. in consideration of an antecedent debt, made a conveyance of book debts to the defendant under such circumstances as to amount to an act of insolvency under the Insolvency Act 1890, s. 37, (2). Before its execution, the defendant was aware that A. and B. were in embarrassed circumstances, but he purposely abstained from making further enquiries as to their position. He himself swore that, in answer to his enquiries, A. told him that they had no other debts to speak of, although one C. had made a claim for £1,000, which they would not recognise in any shape. After the execution of the conveyance, A., the defendant and his solicitor exerted themselves to stave off C's claim as long as they could with the intention of preventing the conveyance to the defendant being a fraudulent preference under s. 73. Held, that the conveyance was not a dealing in good faith within s. 74, (3), and, therefore, was void under s. 71, against the trustees in A. and B's insolvency. Wootton r. Stoffers, 10. -s. 37 (V.)-Act of Insolvency Partnership Trading name Judgment against firm- Execution unsatisfied by members. A and B carried on business under a trading name. A judgment was obtained by C against them in their trading name for a trading debt, and execution issued against them under that trading name, was levied by seizure, and the process had not been satisfied. Held, that this was an act of insolvency within section 37 (V.) of the Insolvency Act 1890, on the part of A and B. Re De Beer Monte & Co., 160. -ss. 40, 123-Costs of petitioning creditor-Payment by trusteeCosts of solicitor to trustee-Priority. The trustee in an insolvent estate received, on behalf of the estate, certain money, which on the motion of the trustee, had been ordered to be paid by A to the trustee. B acted as solicitor for the trustee on this motion. Held, that the petitioning creditor was, under s. 40 of the Insolvency Act 1890, entitled out of the amount so received by the trustee, to be paid his costs of the petition, in priority to the costs of B, in respect of the motion. In re Stiles, 209. -s. 77-Action for accountsInsolvency of defendant- Stay of proceedings-An action for accounts is not such an action as comes within |