MAINTENANCE OF LUNATIC-Pauper Lunatic | METROPOLITAN COMMONS ACT, 1866—contd,
in Colony-Maintenance-Wife's Separate Estate of this stipulation, memorialised the Inclosure
-Colonial Statute-Master in Lunacy - Accrued Commissioners to prepare and certify a scheme of
and Future Dividends.] The accrued dividends local management; and the Commissioners (on
on a fund settled to the separate use of a married the suggestion of the Board) published a scheme,
woman, who had been for many years an inmate whereby it was proposed to give the board power
of a pauper lunatic asylum in the colony of Vic- to sell or let on building leases a small outlying
toria, Australia, were ordered to be paid to the portion of the common, for the purpose of recoup-
Colonial Master in Lunacy towards the payment ing to the board their expenses of and attending
of expenses incurred for past maintenance; and the inclosure. Upon bill to restrain the board
the future dividends on the same fund were
from promoting the scheme, or any scheme iucon-
ordered to be paid to the same Master in Lunacy, sistent with the stipulation:-Held, that the
he being, on the construction of the Colonial Board of Works were bound by the stipulation in
Statute, the committee of the lunatic's estate. In the conveyance by the Plaintiff :-Held, further,
re BAKER'S TRUSTS
168 that the Plaintiff's right, under the stipulation,
MANOR-Waste--Sale to Board of Works-Power to sue in equity was not affected by the circum-
to sell or let -
574 stance that the scheme, in order to become opera-
tive, must be submitted to Parliament; and in-
junction granted as prayed. TELFORD v. METRO-
POLITAN BOARD OF WORKS
MINERALS-Reservation of

See METROPOLITAN COMMONS ACT,
MARRIAGE—Undue publication of banns

-

369

See UNDUE PUBLICATION OF BANNS.
MARSHALLING-Principal and Surety - Mar-
shalling Securities.] A. having effected policies
upon his own life with an assurance office, mort-
gaged them to the office as a security for successive
loans. In one of these mortgages B. became
surety for repayment of the amount borrowed. A.
subsequently became bankrupt, and B. was com-
pelled as surety to pay part of the debt.-Upon
A's death-Held, as against A.'s assignee in
bankruptcy, that B. was entitled to marshal the
securities so as to obtain repayment out of the
balance of the several policy moneys of the amount
which he had been compelled as surety to pay:
-Held, also, that a payment to B. by 4.'s wife,
out of the income of her separate estate, to reim-
burse him for the loss he had sustained, was not
a payment on account of or as agent of A., so as
to set free the policies pro tanto from B's claim.
HEYMAN . DUBOIS
158

MEMORANDUM-Subscriber of

228

See SUBSCRIBER OF MEMORANDUM.
METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS-Local
Management scheme-Power to sell or
let common land
574

-

574

408, 634
See CONFIRMATION OF SALES ACT. 1, 2.
MISDESCRIPTION-Name of applicant for shares
See APPLICATION FOR SHARES. [566
MISREPRESENTATION-Prospectus of company

[79

See MISREPRESENTATION IN PROSPECTUS.
MISREPRESENTATION IN PROSPECTUS-Com-
pany-Concealment of Material Fact-Liability of
Directors-Rights of Allottee of Shares—Rights of
Transferee-Delay.] Directors of a company is-
suing a prospectus are bound to disclose every
material fact; and if they do not they will be
held liable to indemnify any person who takes
shares from the company on the faith of the pro-
spectus against any loss which may be occasioned
to him by reason of such concealment, even
although they may have believed that the con-
cealment will be beneficial to the persons induced
to take shares.-A fact which, if disclosed, would
have so discredited the company as to prevent its
formation, is a material fact within the meaning
of the foregoing proposition.-The estate of a
deceased director is liable in equity in respect of
such indemnity to the same extent as the director
would have been if living.-A transferce of shares
has no greater right to be indemnified by the
directors in respect of their misconduct in issuing
a prospectus than the original allottee would have

See METROPOLITAN COMMONS ACT.
METROPOLITAN COMMONS ACT, 1866—(29 & 30
Vict. c. 122) - Vendor and Purchaser — Metro-
politan Board of Works-Inclosure Commissioners
-Local Management Scheme Powers of Board
to sell or lease Part of a Metropolitan Common-had; and if the allottee would have been debarred
Application to Parliament Injunction.] After
the passing of the Metropolitan Commons Act,
1866, the Plaintiff, a part owner, and the other
co-owners, of a manor, the waste of which became,
under the above statute, a metropolitan common
with the Board of Works as its local authority,
sold and conveyed the manor (with the knowledge
of the Board), for a sum of £10,200, to two trustees,
who afterwards sold and conveyed the same to the
Board of Works. By the former conveyance, the
Plaintiff (being the owner of house property near
the common) stipulated that if, within five years
from the date of the deed, the common should not
be inclosed and dedicated to the public, having
no part of it sold or let on building-leases, he
(the Plaintiff) should re-purchase his share of the
Manor on giving the same price for it as he was
then receiving. The Board of Works, with notice

of his remedy against the directors by laches, con-
donation, or otherwise, the transferee is also de-
barred of remedy.-Any person seeking relief
against directors of a company in respect of mis-
conduct in issuing a prospectus is bound to come
promptly for relief.—In July, 1865, the directors
of a company formed to take over the business of
a firm which they knew to be insolvent, issued a
prospectus in which the fact of such insolvency
was withheld from the public. If the fact had
been disclosed the company would not have been
formed. The directors withheld the fact, honestly
believing that the speculation on which they were
about to embark would be successful.-In October
and December, 1865, the Plaintiff, on the faith of
the prospectus, bought in the market shares which
had originally been allotted to a partner in the in-
solvent firm.-In May, 1866, the company stopped

EQ. VOL. XIII.]

INDEX.

655

79

MORTGAGE BY EXECUTOR-continued.

555

MISREPRESENTATION IN PROSPECTUS--cont.
payment, and was afterwards wound up, and the executor for the purpose of obtaining the loan:
the Plaintiff after considerable litigation was set--Held, upon bill filed by the society against a pur-
tled on the list of contributories, and was compelled chaser under the power of sale, for specific per-
to pay large sums in respect of calls.-In March, formance, that the executor might legally effect a
1868, the Plaintiff filed the bill in this suit, seek- mortgage with power of sale and with the inci-
ing to be indemnified in respect of his losses by the dents of a building society mortgage on advanced
surviving directors, and the estate of a deceased shares. CRUIKSHANK v. DUFFIN
director:-Held, that if he had been an original
allottee and had come in due time, he would have MORTGAGE OF REVERSION-Bill by Mortgagee
been entitled to such indemnity; but that he was for Administration of Testator's Estate-Payment
debarred of his remedy on the ground, first, that by Surety of Principal and Interest due, and Costs
he was in no better position than the allottee from
-Six Months' Interest disallowed-Costs.] W. S.
whom he bought, and, secondly, that he had come
in 1855, mortgaged a reversionary interest to which
too late for relief. PEEK v. GURNEY
he was entitled under his father's will, and died in
March, 1869, intestate, and there was no legal
MISTAKE IN CONVEYANCE-Vendor and Pur-personal representative.-The Plaintiff, the mort-
chaser-Suit to rectify Conveyance-Mistake-Op-gagee, having filed a bill for the administration of
tion to set aside Transaction.] The conveyance
made in 1866, upon a sale of land by S. to B.,
contained a reservation to S. of minerals. Four
years subsequently B. filed a bill against S.,
alleging that the reservation was inserted in the
conveyance under a mistake common to both par-
ties, and recently discovered by him, and praying
for the rectification of the conveyance by the
omission of it.-S. put in an answer denying the
mistake and claiming the benefit of the reserva-
tion; and afterwards died before he could be
cross-examined:-Held, that although, in the
opinion of the Court, a mistake common to both
parties had been made, of which S. sought to take
an improper advantage, yet a simple decree for
rectification could not be made after the lapse of
time and against the oath of one of the parties;
but that the Defendants, the representatives of S.,
were entitled to the option of having the convey-
ance rectified, or the whole transaction set aside;
and in the event of the Plaintiff not choosing to
accept the latter alternative, the bill must be dis-
missed without costs. BLOOMER v. SPITTLE 427
MORTGAGE-Agreement for-Specific perform-

the father's estate, was, on behalf of a surety of
the mortgagor, paid the principal and interest due
ou the mortgage security and a sum for costs of
suit.-On motion to dismiss the bill:-Held, that
the Plaintiff was not entitled to six months' in-
terest in lieu of notice, but that he was entitled to
the costs of the motion, as he had been paid off in
176
a summary way. LETTS v. HUTCHINS
MOTION-Reserved till the hearing-Fresh evi-
dence

-

401

See MOTION RESERVED TILL THE HEAR-
ING.

Reserved till the hearing-Costs

See COSTS IN THE CAUSE.

-

MOTION RESERVED TILL THE HEARING

53

Practice-15 & 16 Vict. c. 86, s. 40-Ord. of
Feb. 5th, 1861, r. xix.-Affidavit-Order-Cross-
examination-Costs.] Where a motion is ordered
to stand on certain terms till the hearing of the
cause, no new evidence can be filed by the parties
on the motion, which must be dealt with at the
hearing in the manner in which it was originally
brought on; and if the motion stands over in
consequence of an affidavit of the Defendant, the
See AGREEMENT FOR MORTGAGE.
motion is not "a matter depending in" or "a
Copyholds-Vesting order-Trustee Act 26 proceeding before" the Court, which entitles the
See TRUSTEE ACTS. 1.

ance

76

Executor-Building society-Power of sale
See MORTGAGE BY EXECUTOR. [555
Mortgagee in possession-Sale with reserva-
tion of minerals
634

See CONFIRMATION OF SALES ACT. 2.
Policy of insurance-Surety-Marshalling

-

Plaintiff to cross-examine the Defendant on his
affidavit; even although the Plaintiff may have
given notice that he is going to use it at the
hearing of the cause.- Where the Court orders a
motion to stand till the hearing of the cause, it
simply reserves to itself the power of dealing
with the costs of it differently from the costs in
the cause. SINGER v. AUDSLEY
401
[158
327 MUTUAL INSURANCE SOCIETY-Policy-
Stamp.] B. & Co., by letter, authorized the
176 managers of a mutual marine insurance associa-
tion to insure a ship with the association, and
undertook to abide by the rules and regulations
thereof. By the rules, each insurer became liable
to contribute to the losses of any other insurer in
certain proportions. In pursuance of the authority
given by B. & Co., a duly stamped policy was
issued to them, which, however, contained no
reference to the rules:-Held, that the letter,
although not stamped, was admissible in evidence,
and that B. & Co. were contributories.-Smith's
Case (Law Rep. 4 Ch. 611) distinguished. In
re ALBERT AVERAGE ASSOCIATION. BLYTH & Co.'s
CASE
529

327

493

ORDER AND DISPOSITION—Bankruptcy-Notice
-Policy of Insurance.] Previous to his marriage
C. insured his life in two offices for two sums of
£500 each, and by his marriage settlement cove-
5. Practice-Payment out of Proceeds of
nanted to insure his life for not less than £2000. | Sale—31 & 32 Vict. c. 40, s. 3.] The Court will not

Motion reserved till the hearing-Fresh REAL AND PERSONAL ESTATE--Charge of legacy

See COSTS UNDER LANDS CLAUSES ACT. 2.
REMOTENESS-Devise of Estates for Life-Term
of 500 Years-Devise of Estates in Tail-Trusts
to raise a Sum of Money-Demurrer.] A testator
in 1803 devised estates to his eldest son R. for
life, with remainders to his grandson R. for life;
to trustees to preserve contingent estates: to
other trustees for 500 years upon certain trusts;
to the first and other sons of his grandson R. in
77 tail male; and in default of issue, to the second
and other sons of his son R. in tail male; and in
default of issue to his son N. for life; to the same
trustees to preserve contingent estates; to the first
and other sons of N. in tail male; with remainders

56
394 REPRESENTATIVE—Death of accounting trustee
[139