The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1848-11-07 00:00:00

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Nov. 4.

(Sittings in Banco, before Lord Chief Justice WILDE,
Mr. Justice CoLTmAN, Mr. Justice MAULE, and Mr.

Justice WILLIAMS.)
WITSON (PUBLIC OFFICER OF THE LIVERPOOL BANKING
COMPANY) V. ST. JOHN'S EQUITABLE LOAN SOCIETY.
In this case Mr. WARREN, at the suggestion of one of
the learned Judges, made at chambers, moved for leave
to enter an appearance for the defendants.
The circumstances under which the application was
made were these :—The loan► society had recently become
insolvent, owing the banking company nearly £5OO, and
the Banking Company, by their public officer, had issued
a writ to recover that sum ; and in the present case the
question was how that writ was to be served. It appeared
that the loan society had been completely registered under
the Joint Stock Companies' Registration Act (7 and 8
Victoria, c. 110), but in that act there was no provision
made for the service of any writ or process upon the ser-
vants of a company registered within its provisions. The
affidavits on which the learned counsel moved stated that
a person named John Molloy was a director of the society
and president of the directors, and had so returned
himself to the proper officer under the Joint-Stock
Companies Registration Act, and that William Thomas
Picard was returned as the secretary of the society ;
that attempts had been made to serve Picard with
the writ as an officer of the society, but on enquiry being
made it turned out that he had removed from the
place of business of the society and from his private resi-
dence, and, it was believed, had gone to America, and
that the business of the society was no longer carried on.
Under these circumstances the writ had been served upon
Mr. John Molloy and upon other directors of the society,
and also upon the attorney to the society, but no one had
appeared. The Joint Stock Companies' Registration Act
constituted a company completely registered under its pro-
visions into a corporation ; and the Uniformity of Process
Act (2 and 3 William IV., c. 30), by its 18th section,
enacted that every writ of summons " issued against a cor-
poration aggregate may be served on the mayor or other
head officer, or on the town-clerk, clerk, treasurer, or se-
cretary of such corporation." The secretary could not be
served, he having absconded; and he submitted to their
lordships that Mr. Molloy came within the terms of the
18th section of the Uniformity of Process Act as " head
officer" of the corporation, he having returned himself as
president of the directors. He had been served with a
copy of the writ, and his application was to be allowed to
enter an appearance for the society. The only case at all
in point was " Walton v. the Universal Salvage Company,"
4 ll: and L. 558.

The LORD GRIEF JUSTICE.—Why do you not enter an
appearance without applying to the court?
Mr. WARREN.—The officer will not enter an appear-
ance without an affidavit that a copy of the writ was served
upon the " head officer," and the process-server could not
swear that Mr. Molloy was the " head officer."
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE.—Then how can the court
decide it ? You may take your rule to show cause serving
the rule on Molloy and the other directors.
Rule nisi granted.