a further plea for want of parties to the amended bill will not be allowed, unless the necessity for adding such parties arises from the amendments. Rawlins v. Dalton, Y. & C. 447. PORTIONS. (Ademption—Principles as to.) The doctrine of ademption of portions, given by will, by subsequent advancement, does not apply to those cases where the original portion consists of an interest in real estate, and in all cases of ademption it is requisite that both portions should be similar in kind, definite in amount, and certain in enjoyment. Davys v. Boucher, Y. & C. 397. PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS. (On motion by defendant.) Where, in a suit for an account and an injunction, founded on an allegation of error and fraud in the accounts rendered by defendant, the plaintiff, by his bill, stated that a report had been made by an accountant, which, he said, the defendant ought to inspect and explain; it was ordered, on motion by the defendant before answers, that he should have one month's time to answer from the time of notice being given him that the said report had been left with the plaintiff's clerk in court for inspection; but an order for the defendant to inspect other documents relating to the accounts not denied to be in possession of the plaintiff, was refused. Shepherd v Morris, Bea. 175.

2. (Privileged communication.) In a suit to impeach the validity of a charge upon a living, on the ground that it had been taken in trust for the bishop of the diocese, upon whom the act of parliament under which the charge was made imposed a trust in regard to it, such suit being brought against the son of the bishop, to whom the charge had been transferred by his father: He'd, that a correspondence between the bishop, who was then deceased, and his solicitor, and a case submitted on his behalf to counsel, as to the validity of the charge, some years before the institution of the present suit, and also a correspondence in contemplation of the present suit between the defendant and the solicitor of the late bishop, who was not the solicitor of the defendant, were not privileged.

Distinction between the knowledge of the solicitor and the knowledge of the client. Greenlaw v. King, Bea. 137.

RECEIVER. (Poundage.) After a receiver had been appointed in an administration suit, money belonging to the estate was, with the consent of the parties owing it, who were insurance companies, ordered to be paid directly into court, without passing through the hands of the receiver, and to the exclusion of his right to poundage. Haigh v. Grattan, Bea. 201. SEPARATE USE. (Future coverture-Anticipation clause.) A

devise and bequest in trust for an unmarried woman, to her separate use, and so that she should not be able to aliene: Held, effectual upon any subsequent marriage, both as to the separate use and the restraint upon anticipation.

A proviso in restraint of alienation, though in general terms, following a gift to the separate use of an unmarried woman, was construed as intending to be confined to the period of any subsequent coverture, and was held to operate to that extent. Tullett v. Armstrong, Bea. 1. (An appeal against the decision is pending.)

Dixon v. Dixon, Bea. 40.

2. (Settlement by wife.) By settlement made on the first marriage of a woman, property to which she was entitled in reversion was settled in trust for her to her separate use, exclusive of her then intended husband, or any other husband. Her first husband died, and she married again: Held, that the trust for her separate use still attached. SALE UNDER DECREE. (Delay of purchaser.) Where the purchaser under a decree had been guilty of delay, a re-sale was ordered, unless he paid the money into court by a given day, and in the event of a re-sale, it was also ordered that he should make good the loss, if any, and pay the costs on all proceedings. Gray v. Gray, Bea. 199. See Smith's Chan. Prac. 205.

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. (Compensation-Increase in value

since contract.) Where, after a protracted suit, specific performance was decreed, the conveyance to be dated at the time when a good title was first shown, an increase in the value of the estate, which had arisen from the dropping in of lives between that time and the time previous to it, when the vendor

had been ready to convey, was considered a subject of compen. sation, but the principle upon which the increase in value should be computed, which the Court observed to be a question of difficulty, was not settled at the hearing. Townsend v. Champernowne, Y. & C. 505.

2. (Costs Time of title shown-Date of conveyance.) Where, by the Master's report, which was confirmed, it appeared that the plaintiff had a good title at the commencement of the suit, but that he did not show a good title till about two years before the Master's report: Held, that though a specific performance was decreed, the defendant was entitled to the general costs of the suit; but that he should pay the costs of discussing certain additional points referred to the Master, as to which he failed, and that, as to the costs in the Master's office generally, each party should pay his own, the defendant having taken many insufficient objections. The date of the conveyance was ordered to be on the day on which a good title was reported to be shown. S. C.

WILL. (Construction-Books.) The manuscript note-book of Dr. Willis, made during his attendance on George III., held to pass by his will under the general description of all his books in a particular residence where such note-book was found. Willis v. Curtois, Bea. 189.

2. (Construction—General clause- Survivor.) Where there were different bequests to different classes of children, followed by a general clause that the shares of all such legatees as died under twenty-three should go over to the survivor and survivors, such clause was construed distributively as to each class, and the word "survivor" was taken in its usual sense. Cromeck v. Lumb, Y. & C. 565.

3. Construction-Husband and wife.) Where there was a bequest of 300l. to A. and his wife for their own use and benefit, followed by a direction that if A. should be indebted to the testator at the time of his death, the debt should be deducted from the legacy, and A. died in the lifetime of the testator, owing to him 2501. which remained unpaid at the testator's death: Held,

1

that the wife was entitled to the whole of the 3007. Davies v. Elmes, Bea. 131.

4. (Construction-Locality of subject-Personal ornaments.) A testator having three places of residence at A., B., and C., after having devised to his nephew his messuages at A., next bequeathed to him his house at B., which was leasehold, and the will then proceeded, "and I also give to my said nephew all my carriages, horses, implements, and my live and dead stock, and chattels in and about the said house and premises, and also my household goods and furniture, pictures, plate, linen, china, liquors of all sorts and brewing vessels, and likewise my watches and personal ornaments:" Held, that the household goods in each of the three residences passed by this bequest.

Quære whether a bust passed under the above words, and what is the meaning of "personal ornament." Willis v. Curtois, Bea. 189.

5. (Construction-Remoteness.) A bequest of a residue to a class of children, some of them unborn at the death of the testator, followed by a clause that the shares should not be payable till the children attained twenty-three; and by another general clause that all legacies in the will should be vested in each of the legatees at twenty-three; and also that the shares and legacies of such as died under that age should go over to the survivor: Held void for remoteness. Croneck v. Lumb, Y. & C. 565.

BANKRUPTCY.

Selections from 1 Montagu & Chitty, Part 1; and 3 Deacon, Part 3. AGENT. (Common agent-Appropriation-Special case.) Where a debtor and a creditor have employed the same agent, a remittance by the debtor to such agent, for the purpose of being paid over to the creditor, must be so applied by the agent or his assignee, even though the estate of the agent has a claim against

the remitting party; and upon this principle, where a Belgian house had, through the agency of the bankrupts, consigned to a house in China goods for which the latter house remitted bills to the bankrupts, who were also their agents, which they directed to be appropriated, as well as the balance of a previous remittance, in payment of the Belgian house, to whom they also sent at the same time, through the bankrupts, a letter announcing the appropriation, the date of such letter and of the last remittance from China being subsequent to the date of the fiat: It was held by the lord chancellor, upon a special case, affirming the judgment of the court of review, that the bills, as also the balances on the previous account, must be handed over to the Belgian house. Re Douglas, Mont. & Ch. 1.

BANKRUPT TRUSTEE. (Dividends.) Bankrupt trustee not allowed to receive dividends on the trust fund, though the sum was only 2001. and the parties consented. Exp. Strettell re Raikes, Mont & Ch. 165.

PRINCIPAL AND SURETY. (Interested assignee.) Where the principal and surety had concurred in an equitable mortgage to the creditor of an estate, in which each of them had an interest, and both principal and surety afterwards became bankrupt, and the creditor was appointed assignee of the surety, and presented a petition for sale of the estate, such an order was refused, till a quasi assignee should be appointed to protect the interests of the surety and his creditors in the matter. Exp. Haines, re Barnett, Mont. & Ch. 32.

2. (Proof by surety.) Where a party accepted bills for the accommodation of the bankrupt, which the latter redeposited with his bankers as a security for the floating balance due to them from him, and the bankers proved for the whole of such balance, and the acceptor of the bills then paid such bills in full: Held, that he was not entitled to receive back from the bankers the dividends received by them in respect of the amount due on the bills, but was only entitled to stand in their place as to future dividends on that sum. (Exp. Brunskill, 4 Dea. & Ch. 442.) Exp. Holmes, re Garner, Dea. 662.