« ElőzőTovább »
Entered according to the Act of Congress in the year eighteen hundred and forty-seven
BY BANKS, GOULD & co.
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Southern District of New York.
LORD LYNDHURST, LORD CHANCELLOR.
LORD LANGDALE, MASTER OF THE Rolls.
SIR LANCELOT SHADWELL, VICE-CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND.
SIR JAMES LEWIS KNIGHT BRUCE, )
» Vice-Chancellors. SIR JAMES WIGRAM,
SIR WILLIAM W. FOLLETT, 7
| Attorneys General. SIR FREDERICK THESIGER,
SIR FREDERICK THESIGER, )...
In Hilary Vacation, 1845, Mr. Serjeant Manning received a patent of precedence, and William Lee, John BILLINGSLEY Parry, and William Page WOOD, Esquires, were appointed Queen's Counsel.
In Easter Term, 1845, Mr. Serjeant CHANNELL received a patent of precedence, and LEBBEUS Charles Humfrey, Russell GURNEY, George Medd Butt, and ABRAHAM HAYWARD, Esquires, were appointed Queen's Counsel.
In Trinity Vacation, 1845, SIR WILLIAM WEBB FOLLETT, Her Majesty's Attorney General, died : and thereupon Sir FREDERICK THEsiger, Her Majesty's Solicitor General, was appointed Attorney General, and Fitzroy Kelly, Esquire, one of Her Majesty's Counsel, was appointed Her Majesty's Solicitor General, and shortly afterwards received the honor of Knighthood.
In the same Vacation, Mr. Serjeant Shee received a patent of precedence : Montagu CHAMBERS, Esquire, was appointed Queen’s Counsel, and Robert ALLEN, Esquire, was called to the degree of Serjeant at Law.
In Michaelmas Vacation, 1845, EDWIN SANDYS Bain, and CHARLES Wilkins, Esquires, were called to the degree of Serjeants at Law.
NOTE BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.
Since the earlier part of the present volume was put to press, the second volume of Sandford's Chancery Reports has been published, containing some important decisions relative to the simulation of trade marks, in which the principle laid down in the case of Croft v. Day, 7 Beav. 84, and the cases there cited, was fully recognized ; and it was held that aliens were entitled to the protection of the court equally with citizens. See Coats v. Holbrook, decided by Assistant Vice-Chancellor Sandford, 2 Sand. Ch. Rep. 586 ; Taylor v. Carpenter, by Mr. Chuncellor Walworth, affirmed on appeal by the Court of Errors, id. 603, 611; and Partridge v. Menck, decided by ViceChancellor Sandsord, and affirmed on appeal by Chancellor Walworth, id. 622, 625. Mr. Sandford, in connection with the cases referred to, has introduced a recent decision of Lord Cottenham, in relation to the same subject, Spottiswoode v. Clark, Dec. 11, 1846, id. 628, taken from 10 London Jurist, 1043. The case is reported without essential variation, 2 Phillips, 154, which has but recently come to the notice of the Editor. The principle adopted by Lord Cottenham in that case was briefly this,-that where irremediable injury would be done to the defendant by granting an injunction, as in the case before him, which was a controversy between the publishers of two rival Alma. nacks for the year 1847, and the legal right was doubtful, the court would only interfere by directing the defendant to keep an account, the plaintiff to be at liberty to bring an action. The principle as to trade marks, was distinctly recognized.
The Editor, since the body of the volume was printed, bas been enabled to make these further addenda :
Bunnett v. Foster, 7 Beay. 540, was affirmed by Lord Cottenham, 5th December, 1846, 2 Phillips, 161.
The Skinners Company v. The Irish Society, 7 Bèav. 593, was affirmed by the House of Lords, 12 CI. & Fin. 425.
Page 237, n. 4, line 2 from bottom, for “endeavors throw," read “ endeavors to throw.” Page 364, n. 2, line 1, for “ 4 B. 379,” read " 4 Beav. 379."