the signature of one of the partners is to be deemed sufficient, and in the latter case, the petition is to be signed by the person presenting the same on behalf of the person so abroad."] 2. (Impertinence.) A petition to refer an affidavit for impertinence should be presented before the original petition is heard, and must be signed by the person scandalized.-Exp. Pelham in mre. Pelham, 209. PROOF. 1. (Dividend.) If a creditor omits to prove at the final dividend, he may be permitted to prove afterwards, leaving undisturbed any payments already made, and putting those creditors not paid in the same situation as if he had proved originally.—Exp. Day and Cooper in mre. Fenton, 212. 2. (Partner.) A person who applied to take the benefit of the insolvent act, but paid the detaining creditor's debt and was liberated, was held not to be insolvent within the rule that proof cannot be made against the separate estate, if there is a solvent partner. There ought to be a judicial declaration of insolvency. (Exp. Janson, Buck. 229.) The 62nd section of the bankrupt act applies only to partnerships subsisting at the time of the bankruptcy.-Exp. Morris in mre. Desormeaux, 218, 3. (Distinct firms.) Where one member of a firm carrying on business on his separate account supplies goods to the firm, his assignees are entitled to prove for the debt, but not so for money advanced. (Exp. Sillitoe, 1 G. & J. 383; Exp. Adams, 1 Rose, 306; Exp. Johns, Cook 345; Exp. Castell, 2 G. & J. 126.)—Exp. Cook in mre. Petherbridge, 228. REPUTED OWNERSHIP. 1. If one of four partners die, and the survivors obtain securities as a compromise for a debt due to the four, and become bankrupts, the securities are by reputed ownership distributable among the creditors of the three.-Exp. Taylor, in mre. Campbell, 240. 2. If four partners purchase goods on account of themselves and two other firms, and they remain in the possession of one of those two up to the time of the bankruptcy of the four, they do not pass to the assignees of the four. (Exp. Flyn, 1 Atk. 187.)— Ibid. 3. If goods are consigned abroad by a firm, and are returned after the death of one member, and lie in the docks at the time of the bankruptcy of the firm, and the bill of lading is sent to the holder of a bill of exchange dishonoured by the firm, and is in his hands at the time of the bankruptcy of the survivors; neither the goods, nor the bill of lading, are in the reputed ownership of the survivors.—Ibid. 4. Goods in the hands of an agent who claims a lien, are not in the reputed ownership of the principal.-(Greening v. Clarke, 4 B. & C. 316.)—Ibid. 5. If one member of a firm possessed of a mortgage of a real estates dies, and the survivors continue in possession, it is not in their reputed ownership. (Ryal v. Rolle, 1 Atk. 165; Jones v. Gibbons, 9 Ves. 407; Exp. Vauxhall Bridge, 1 G. & J. 106.)—Ibid. [See the 6 Geo. 4. c. 16. s. 72. as to property in the possession, order, or disposition, of a bankrupt at the time of his bankruptcy.] SERVANTS. 1. The workmen of a coachmaker who worked by the piece, and received a specific sum for each particular job, the master finding all the materials, and where there is no hiring for any specific time, are not servants within the meaning of the 6 Geo. 4. c. 16. s. 48; and are therefore not entitled under a commission to the payment of the amount due to them for the last six months of their service. (Chilcot v. Bromley, 12 Ves. 114.)—Exp. Grellier, in mre. Macneil, 264, (reversing the decision of the Vice Chancellor in this case; 1 M. & M. 95; · L. M. Vol. II. p. 203.) 2. Weekly labourers and workmen, employed by a builder as excavators and bricklayers, are not servants within the act. Exp. Craufort in mre. Streather, 270. Shareholders in a steam packet are not traders; the act not mentioning carriers of any description.-Exp. Wiswould in mre. Wiswould, 263. SURPLUS. See PARTNER. SURRENDER. See COMMISSION, 1, 5. TAXATION. If the assignees neglect to have a solicitor's bill taxed by the commissioners, the bankrupt may, after having settled with his creditors, apply to the general jurisdiction of the Court in order to tax the bill.Exp. Bayley in mre. Broom, 208. TRUSTEE. Where upon the bankruptcy of a trustee one person is entitled to the whole trust estate, the Court will upon petition, with the consent of the assignees, order the bankrupt to transfer and deliver it to such person without a new trustee, under the 79th section of the act.— Exp Hancox in mre. Cavenagh, 247. Andrews v. Thornton, 8 Bing. 64.. Anthony v. Rees, 2 C. & J. 75 Arnell v. Bean, 8 Bing. 87 ..... ..... Att. Gen. v. Jackson, 2 C. & J. 101.... Balne v. Hutton, 2 C. & J. 19. Bowser v. Austen, 2 C. & J. 45. ...... ..... .Evidence, 1 .Practice, 49 Doe dem. Golden y. Lakeman, 2 B. & Adol. 30.... Doe v. Duckett v. Williams, 1 Tyr. 502; 1 C. & J. 510.. Edensor v. Hoffman, 2 C. & J. 141 Elwood v. Pearce, 8 Bing. 83... Edwards v. Broxon, 2 C. & J. 19.. Farebrother v. Worsley, 1 Tyr. 224; 1 C. & J. 549... Fenton v. Warre, 2 C. & J. 54 ..... Harris v. Drewe, 2 B. & Adol. 164. Hawkes v. Dunn, 1 Tyr. 418; 1 C. & J. 519.... Hitchcock v. Badham, 2 C. & J. 129.. Hodgkinson v. Whalley, 2 C. & J. 86.......... Humphrys v. Pratt, 2 D. & C. 288 Irving v. Richardson, 2 B. & Adol. 198.... · Jones v. Clarke, 1 C. & J. 447............. Kennet v. Milbank, 8 Bing.38....... King, demandant, v. Gibson, deforciant, 8 Bing. 4.... Kingston-upon-Hull Dock Co. v. Browne, 2 B. & Adol. 43....Kingston-upon-Hull Levy v. Baillie, 4 M. & P. 208.. Ling's Bail, 4 M. & P. 516.... Lloyd v. Ashby, 2 B. & Adol. 23.. Limitations, Stat. of, 1 ....Fine, 2 .Insurance, 4 Practice, 12 Bill of Exch. Markham and Bayley, 8 Bing. 18. Mason v. Clarke, 1 C. & J. 411.... .... Fine, 3 .Practice, 5 ... Pawlett v. Corporation of Stafford, 1 C. & J. 400. Power v. Eason, 8 Bing. 23. .... Price v. Thomas, 2 B. & Adol. 218. Reeves v. Hucker, 2 C. & J. 44...... Rex in aid of Hollis v. Bingham, 2 C. & J. 130. v. Chelmsford Navigation Company, 2 B. & Adol. 14.... v. Horner, 2 B. & Adol. 150..... v. Inhab. of Aldstone, 2 B. & Adol. 207 v. Inhabitants of St. John Delpike, 2 B. & Adol. 226... v. Inhabitants of Sedgely, 2 B. & Adol. 65. v. Inhabitants of Queenborough, 2 B. & Adol. 219.. v. Inhabitants of Enderry, 2 B. & Adol. 205. v. Marsh, 1 C. & J. 406. .... v. Wrangham, 1 Tyr. 383; 1 C. & J. 408. Ricketts v. Lewis, 1C. & J. 11.......... Risdale v. Kelly, 1 Tyr. 387; 1 C. & J. 410. Roberts v. Wright, 1 C. & J.547.. Roe d. Durant v. Doe, 4 M. & P. 531. Scruton v. Dawson, 8 Bing. 28. .... Practice, 28 Insolvent, 3 .Stamp, 2 .Practice, 7, 8 ..Extent in aid ....Mandamus, 3 ......Poor Rate, 2 ... .Mandamus, 1 ..Guardians of Poor |