fraudulent conveyance, gift, delivery, or transfer of any of his real or personal estate (notice the difference between the language of the Acts of 1849 and 1861); in each of these cases where the debtor is not a trader, a copy of the petition must be served, with an endorsement as to the time of the debtor's appearance thereon; 4. Lying in prison in the case of a trader for fourteen days, and of a non-trader for two calendar months after arrest, commitment, or attachment for debt, or non-payment of money, or after any detainer for debt on an arrest for any cause; if being summoned he fails to offer a sufficient security for the debt or debts in respect of which he is imprisoned; 5. If, having been arrested, committed, or detained for debt, he escape out of prison or custody; 6. Filing a declaration of insolvency, that is, of inability to meet engagements; 7. Filing a petition and adjudication of insolvency or bankruptcy in any of her Majesty's dominions, colonies, or dependencies; 8. Not paying, securing, compounding, or not appearing, after service of a judgment debtor summons issued at the end of one week from the judgment in the case of a trader, and of one month in the case of a non-trader, in respect of a debt amounting to £50, exclusive of costs; 9. Not paying or securing the money pursuant to a decree or order of a court of equity, bankruptcy, or lunacy, or compounding for it, in the case of a trader within seven days (in the case of a non-trader within two calendar months) after service of the peremptory order, or the day fixed thereby for payment (which last happens), and on non-payment, securing, or compounding, or non-appearance after a judgment debtor summons sued out at the end of such seven days.

III. State some of the acts of bankruptcy which are equally applicable to all debtors, whether traders or non-traders (ss. 67, 70, 71, of Act of 1849, and ss. 70, 73, 75, 85, 73 of Act of 1861).

ANS.-An answer will be found under Question No. II.

-

IV. How is an act of bankruptcy obtained against a trader having privilege of Parliament? [Bankruptcy Act, 1849]. ANS. By the Act of 1849, s. 77 (besides the other ordinary acts of bankruptcy), a member of Parliament, if a trader, may become bankrupt if any creditor to the requisite amount files an affidavit, in any Court of Record at Westminster, of the truth of the debt, and of the debtor being, as he believes, a trader, and thereupon sues out a writ of summons against such trader, and, within one month after personal service, he does not pay, secure, or compound for the debt to the satisfaction of the creditor, or enter into a bond with two sureties to pay such sum as shall be recovered in such action, with costs, and also enter an appearance to such action (1 Exam. Chron. p. 238; ante, p. 60).

V. When, and in what manner, can a debtor show cause against an adjudication of bankruptcy? [See 104, Bankruptcy Act, 1849].

ANS.-Before advertisement of adjudication, a duplicate thereof must be served on the bankrupt personally, or by leaving at his usual or last-known place of abode or business; and he is allowed seven days, or such extended time, not exceeding fourteen days in the whole, as the Court thinks fit, to dispute the adjudication; but if, within such time, no cause be shown to the satisfaction of the Court for annulling the adjudication, the same is forthwith advertised in the London Gazette (see Exam. Quest., E. T., 1860, p. 109, No. VII.).

VI. State at what time, and by whom, creditors' assignees are chosen.

ANS.-The creditors' assignees are chosen at the first meeting of creditors, or an adjournment thereof, by the majority in value of the creditors who have proved debts (Act of 1861, s. 116; 1 Exam. Chron. 216).

VII. State some of the rights and duties of creditors' assignees. [Sec. 127, Bankruptcy Act, 1861.]

ANS.-The section referred to enacts that the creditors' assignee shall manage, and, except as herein provided, realise and recover the estate belonging to the bankrupt, wherever situated, and convert the same into money; and he shall pay all moneys not necessarily retained for current expenses, all Exchequer bills, India bonds, and other public securities, and all bills, notes, and negotiable instruments belonging to the estate forthwith upon receipt thereof into the Bank of England, to the account of the accountant in bankruptcy, unless in the case of any adjudication in a country district there shall be no branch of the Bank of England in the locality, and then into such bank as the Court shall direct to the credit of an account to be opened in such bank by such assignee in his official character.

VIII. State the mode in which a change may be effected from bankruptcy to arrangement at the option of creditors, under sec. 110 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1861.

ANS. By the Act of 1861, s. 110, if at any meeting of creditors a proposal be made by or on behalf of the bankrupt, which a major part in value of the creditors then present deem should be accepted; or if it appear to the majority in value of the creditors present to be desirable, on any ground, to resolve that no further proceedings be taken in the bankruptcy, they may so resolve, and the meeting is then to stand adjourned for fourteen days, for notice to be given to

every creditor by the assignee. If, at the adjourned meeting, a majority in number, representing three-fourths in value of the creditors present, so resolve, the proceedings in bankruptcy are to be suspended, and the property administered in such manner as such majority shall direct. As to a change under the 185th and following sections of the Act, see ante, p. 128, No. X.

IX. The like under sections 185, 186, and 187 of the same statute.

ANS.-This is fully answered, ante, p. 128.

X. State the conditions upon which trust deeds for the benefit of creditors, composition and inspectorship deeds are valid, and effectual, and binding on all creditors of the debtor, under the Bankruptcy Act, 1861.

ANS.-This question is fully answered, ante, p. 129, No. XI.

XI. State when, and how, creditors may prove their debts. ANS. By the Act of 1861, s. 144, creditors may prove their debts by delivering or sending through the post, before the appointment of the creditors' assignee, to the official assignee, and afterwards to the creditors' assignee, a statement of the debt and of the account (if any) between the creditor and the bankrupt, with a declaration, signed by the creditor, appended thereto, that such statement is a full, true, and complete statement of account between the parties, and the debt claimed is justly due. Corporations may

prove by an agent, who must, in his declaration, declare that he is such agent, and is authorised to prove. By s. 146 creditors may also prove by deposition in Court, or in chambers, or before a registrar, at any meeting of creditors elsewhere than in Court, or by affidavit on their own oath, or that of some person in their employ having personal knowledge of the debt.

XII. What rights have joint creditors under a petition for adjudication against one member of a partnership firm?

ANS.-By s. 140 of the Act of 1849, if one of the partners of a firm become bankrupt, joint creditors of the firm may prove against the separate estate of the bankrupt for the purpose only of voting in the choice of assignees, and of being heard against the allowance of the certificate, but they are not admitted to receive dividends until all the separate creditors have received the full amount of their respective debts (Exam. Quest. pp. 29, 143).

XIII. Give some account of the law of order and disposition. [Sec. 126, Bankruptcy Law Consolidation Act, 1849.].

ANS. By s. 125, if any bankrupt, at the time he becomes bank

rupt (that is, at the time of the act of bankruptcy on a creditor's petition) shall, by the consent and permission of the true owner thereof, have in his possession, order, or disposition, any goods or chattels whereof he was reputed owner, or whereof he had taken upon him the sale, alteration, or disposition as owner, the Court shall have power to order the same to be sold and disposed of for the benefit of the creditors under the bankruptcy. To bring a case within this section, the property must consist of goods and chattels ; fixtures, even tenants', are not within it; and shares in companies seised of real estate (unless by the Act constituting the company they are to be deemed personal estate) are not within it. All choses in action, as bonds, bills, debts, policies, and the like, are within the Act, and where they are assigned, notice should be at once given to the debtor or party charged, as until such notice they are held to remain within the reputed ownership of the assignor. If goods in the possession of the bankrupt have been demanded by the true owner, and required to be delivered up to him before the bankruptcy, they are no longer in the bankrupt's possession "with the consent of the true owner," and so are out of the statute (1 Exam. Chron. 240).

XIV. State some of the rules to be observed by the Court in granting or withholding orders of discharge.

ANS. This is fully answered, ante, p. 130, No. XIII.

XV. Name some of the offences in respect of which a bankrupt shall be liable to be indicted under the Bankruptcy Act, 1861, and the nature and extent of the punishment.

ANS. This is answered, ante, p. 131, No. XV.

DYING WITHOUT ISSUE.

(Ante, p. 99.)

As one of Mr. Brighten's correspondents on this point, I certainly must dissent from the conclusion at which he has arrived in your paper for May. In stating the case at p. xi., after quoting the words of the devise, your correspondent says:-"Formerly" (i.e., prior to 1st January, 1838, the 7 Will. IV. & 1 Vic. c. 26 came into operation) "such a devise would have been construed to comprise descendants of every degree existing at any distance of time," and then proceeds to recite part of the 29th section of the Act just named as bearing on the point. Surely your correspondent knows that, as the will was dated in 1826, no section of that Act would in the least affect

the question. The will must be construed according to the law as it stood previously to the Act; so that, in point of fact, your correspondent has admitted that A. takes an estate tail, but now attempts to place a different meaning on his question.

The established rule of construction with regard to wills not coming within the operation of the Act already mentioned is, that in all cases where a testator has used expressions denoting a failure of issue, if there be nothing in the context requiring a different construction, such expressions shall be held to refer to a general failure of issue, and not a failure of issue at any particular period. In the case of Pells v. Brown, the words "if he died without issue" were evidently enough not used indefinitely, but with reference to a certain contingency, namely, to Thomas Brown's dying without issue living (so in the reports) William his brother. Thomas Brown might possibly survive William, or he might leave issue living at the time of his decease living William-in either of which events it was perfectly apparent that the intention of the testator was that William should never enjoy. In Doe dem. Barnfield v. Wetton the devisor is plainly as possible referred to a failure of issue at a stated period, namely, at the death of S. S. Mr. Brighten's premises, I think, do not support his conclusion. In the two named cases cited by him the respective testators clearly meant a failure of issue at a particular time, and therefore the limitations over might well be construed as executory devises. I do not see how they could have used words more distinctly denoting their intention. But in the present case there is not the slightest evidence of intention to be formed that would for a moment justify the inference that the testator referred to a failure of issue at any particular time, and consequently the old settled mode of construction must prevail. I contend that A. takes an estate tail by implication, and that he can make a good title to the fee simple to a purchaser only by perfecting an assurance under the provisions of the Fines and Recoveries Act (3 & 4 Will. IV., c. 74.) Mr. Brighten asks about the rule in Shelley's case. It has no application to the present point.

If any of your correspondents hold a different opinion on the above case I shall be very glad to receive their objections. J. T. SARGENT.

P. S. Since writing the above I have, with some little difficulty, seen a report of the case of Doe v. Sparrow. I find it to be a devise of the residue of real and personal estate (subject to the payment of debts and legacies) to the testator's son and daughter, their heirs and assigns for ever, as tenants in common, and not as joint tenants ; but in case of the death of either, leaving child or children, the