The Sun.
London, England, 1868-06-12 00:00:00

LAW AND POLICE.

BARNED'S BANKING COMPANY AND OTHERS. —Before the
Lord Justices of Appeal, the cases of Barned's Banking
Company and the Xeres Wine Shipping Company were
heard. The first was an appeal from the Master of the
Rolls, and the second from Vice-Chancellor Malins, and
they were heard together, as they involved the same legal
question, viz., whether when a company is being wound
up under The Companies Act, 1862, a creditor who holds
security for his debt is entitled to prove against the estate
of the company for the whole amount of his debt (by analogy
to the rule observed in the Court of Chancery in administra-
tion suits), or whether such a creditor can (as in bankruptcy)
only prove fur the balance of his debt after deducting the
amount realised from his security. In the first case
Messrs. C. W. Kellock and Co., of Liverpool, were credi-
tors of Barned's Banking Company in respect of certain
bills which they had accepted for the Banking Company
upon their guarantee to retire the bills when due. Cer-
tain ships were assigned to Kellock and Co. by way of
security, and they were afterwards sold. The Master of the
Rolls Allowed Kellock and Co. to prove for the whole amount
of their debt, and from this decision the official liquida-
tors appealed. In the second case the Alliance Bank were
creditors of the Xeres Wine Shipping Company, and
held some wine warrants as security for their debt ; and
they sold the wine comprised in these warrants. Under
these circumstances Vice-Chancellor Malins allowed
them to prove for the balance only of their debt, after de-
ducting what was realised by the sale of the wine. From
this ch. c'sion the Alliance Bank appealed. Lord Justice
Wood said that the practice of the Court of Chancery
had been settled for many years that a mortgagee was en-
titled to stand on his security and realise it at such times
as he thought best, and also pursue all his other remedies.
The order of the Master of the Rolls was affirmed, and
that of the Vice-Chancellor overruled.
LILLYWHITE'S SCORING SHEETS.—Before Vice-Chan-
cellor Malins a motion was made in the cause of Page v.
Wisden to restrain the defendant from publishing " Lilly-
white's Registered Scoring Cricketing Sheet," the copy-
right of which was purchased by the plaintiff. It was
alleged that the defendants realised £3OO per annum profit
from the sale of the sheets. For the defendants the offence
was denied. The Vice-Chancellor directed the motion to
stand over until the next seal, when the defendants might
attend, and he hoped that their counsel would advise them
to undertake not to sell any other scoring-sheets than those
purchased of the l laintiff.
TILE CORONERSHIP OF MIDDLESEX.—In the Court of
Queen's Bench a motion was made on behalf of Dr.
Diplock to compel the justices of Middlesex to pay him
his salary for the quarter, and to reimburse him for pay-
ments out of pocket. The magistrates refused, as there
was a quo warranto out against Dr. D:plock. Mr. Justice
Blackburn said he tl ought the county would be tole-
rably safe in paying Mr. Diplock the necessary expenses,
whatever might be the case as to the salary. Rule nisi
granted.
AN INCUMBENT AND HIS SALARY.—The Case of Lloyd
v. Burrup, which was a "special c,ase," was tried before
the Court of Exchequer. The action was brought by the
plaintiff, the incumbent of St. Mary's, Kennington,
against the present churchwardens, to recover two quarters'
salary. The questions raised were whether the incumbent
was entitled to be paid the deficiency of pew-rent in the
defendants' hands on account of the half-year ending at
Michaehnas, 1867, out of the pew-rents received for the
service of the half-year ending at Lady Day, 1868, and
whether the present churchwardens could be made liable
for any sums not actually applied to the payment of the
incumbent by the late churchwardens. The court took
time to consider its judgment.

THE AFFAIRS OF THE LONDON, CHATHAM, AND
DOVER.—Before Vice-Chancellor Stuart, the cases of
Waterlow v. Sharp and Gardner v. Sharp came on for
hearing. These causes carne oNtvieun one of the ponasummons taken
~ut on behalf of William registeredlll.'rc
Jublic officers of the Loud, n and County Banking
pany, for an crder directing that the said banking cm.
cm'
pany might be admitted to the benefit of the indentureo
of
January 19, 1867, in the decree in the above causes men.
tinned, as creditors of the London, Chatham, and Dover
Railway Company, for the principal sum of £65,480 78.7 d. ,
with interest ti.ereon at the rate of £5 percent. per annum
from April 15, 1867, until payment thereof. The deed of
January 19, 1867, was executed by the railway company,
under the powers of their recent Act, for the benefit of
their general creditors. The sum of £65,480 7s. 7d. repre-
sented the overdrawn balance of their account with the
Lomb n and Cot n' y Bank. The Vice-Chancellor made
an orOer, giving the London and County Banking Com-
pany the benefit of the in lenture in question, with leave
to go in and prove, as creditors made it, for so much as
they could chew was, on a proper transaction of banking
business, due to them from the railway company, as their
---
curs'Annere. , - •