tickets or dock warrants, the possessor of the tickets or warrants is the ownerLucas v. Dorrien (1), Zwinger v. Samuda (2), Ridout v. Lloyd (3). Mr. Swanston, for the assignees, contended, that this assignment of the wines was a fraudulent preference, and that they were in the reputed ownership of the bankrupt. The petition merely states, that the warrants were "transferred"; but a transfer only is not sufficient, an indorsement is necessary, and also notice to the dock company, who are merely agents to the bankrupt; so much so, that till notice from the petitioners the wines were in transitu, and might have been stopped by the bankrupt. The court being of opinion that the word "transferred " was not of itself sufficient to enable them to decide the question, ordered the case to stand over for evidence, as to whether they were indorsed, &c. On the third of May, Thomas Coxhead, accountant to the wine department of the London Dock Company, was examined viva voce; his evidence was as follows: "I produce three wine warrants, lodged with me in January last; they are indorsed to Davenport and Leech. Fresh warrants were accordingly given. No previous notice was given of the transfer of these warrants. After such an indorsement, wines are delivered to any one bringing in such indorsed warrants; the coming in of the warrants being the first notice we have of the indorsement. When warrants so indorsed are brought in, we request the indorsee either to take the wine away, or request fresh warrants, by indorsing those brought in. When these warrants came in, I knew a commission had issued against Leech, but did not make any objection on that account; such not being our practice. The wines stood in our books in the name of Medley at the time of the bankruptcy; they would not have been delivered without Medley's indorsements; the warrants were the only authority for delivery of the wines, and no other authority from Medley would have been attended to. Mr. Swanston. When this case was heard before, the Court, conceiving that (1) 1 Mo. 29; S. C. 7 Taunt. 278. (2) 1 Mo. 12; S. C. 7 Taunt. 265. (3) 1 Mont. 103. the allegation in the petition, that the dock warrants had been "transferred." was not sufficient, ordered witnesses to be examined to discover the facts; which having been done, I submit that the allegation has not been supported, because there was no notice of the transfer before the bankruptcy, without which the transaction is not complete. The cases cited are far from being conclusive in favour of the petitioner. In Zwinger v. Samuda, the Court guarded against the inference, that mere delivery of warrants, without informing the wharfinger, would pass the property; in Lucas v. Dorrien there was actual notice; and Ridout v. Lloyd does not apply, because the bankrupt was a trustee. The dock company were the agents of the bankrupt, and as such bound to keep the wine for their principal, till he gave them notice that he had transferred the wines. It may be said that bills pass by indorsement only; that proves nothing here, for bills are only choses in action. The case of bills of lading does not affect this. The passing of the property in a ship, by delivery of the bill of lading, was always referred to the necessity of the case, as the goods must either pass by that mode, or not at all, the ship itself being at sea; but there is no such necessity in the case of wine in the docks, which may easily be delivered over. His Honour the CHIEF JUDGE.-The question is, whether the wines were or were not in the order and disposition of the bankrupt at the time of the act of bankruptcy. The affirmative has been maintained by the respondents, because, though the warrants were indorsed and delivered over, yet there was no notice to the dock company, and that such indorsement and delivery, without notice, are of no avail. The Court are not called upon to decide that point, for the assignees are not in a situation to raise that question. If, indeed, Medley had actually entered the transfer of the wines to Leech in the books of the dock company, the question might have been raised, but that was never done. The only evidence of the bankrupt being owner, was the warrants, and those were transferred to the petitioner before the bankruptcy, so that he divested himself of the ownership, by the same mode of transfer as that by which he came into possession of the property. If an indorsement alone was insufficient to transfer the property, then the wines never were the bankrupt's, as his only title was an indorsement made to him. His Honour SIR ALBERT PELL. The wine passed to Davenport and Co. the moment the bankrupt indorsed the warrants to them. Though the case now before the Court does not directly require that I should give an opinion on the point, yet, as it would be injurious to commerce if it were conceived that any doubts existed in the minds of the Judges, I will state that I would no more check the operation of dock warrants, than of bills of lading. I think the cases bear out that. His Honour SIR JOHN CROSs.Parol evidence has decided this question. Leech was never recognised as owner, in the books of the company. His Honour SIR GEORGE ROSE.-I concur in what has fallen from the Court. There seems no doubt, that the transfer of the dock warrants would have passed the wine, if Leech had remained solvent ; and I do not perceive that his insolvency makes any difference in that respect. The question is, was the wine in the reputed ownership of the bankrupt? The test of this is, did Leech desire to obtain false credit, through the possession of property not his own? He did not, as the wine did not stand in his name at the docks. Was it then in his "order and disposi tion"? It appears that at the docks, they would only attend to his indorsements; this controls his power of order and disposition. One circumstance only remains to remark: it is quite clear that we had no jurisdiction, unless the assignees had consented, as they have done, to our entertaining this case; otherwise, they might have insisted on putting the petitioner to an action of trover. The usual order was made, declaring the petitioners equitable mortgagees, and for a sale. Law Journal. 164 LIGHTS. A TABLE OF LIGHTS, &c., the Duties for which are payable to the Corporation of Trinity House, London, with the Rate of Duty for each. Haisbro' Shore Lowestoff Sunk-1 2 Light Houses 1 Floating Light} 2.Light Houses 1 Floating Light CHANNEL LIGHTS, (No. 2). Forelands Goodwin per ton. d. 14 One half farthing One half farthing One half farthing One half farthing & 1s. per Vessel One half farthing Beachy Head Owers Needles Portland Caskets Lizard Scilly 1 Light House 1 Floating Light {2 ditto at Hurst }} 2 Light Houses 18. per Vessel No. 1. East Coast.-These Duties are payable once for the whole voyage out and home, whether coastwise or over-sea; but a single passage subjects a vessel to the full duties; except for the Spurn Floating Light, to which Foreign Vessels and British over-sea Traders are chargeable only when they actually enter the Humber; but the Duties are then payable for each time of passing. Coasters and Colliers pay for each time of passing that light coastwise if laden, but not otherwise. No. 2. Channel Lights.-These Duties are payable for each time of passing. South No. 3. Bristol and St. George's Channels.-The Duties for the Lundy, Nash, Milford, and South Stack Lights are payable for each time of passing: but those for the Lundy only on vessels entering or navigating within the Bristol Channel. Bardsey Light.-Foreign Vessels and British over-sea Traders pay once only for the voyage out and home; Coasters and Colliers, coastwise, each time of passing, if laden, but not otherwise. Flatholm Light.-The above Duties are payable for each time of passing by Vessels entering or navigating within the Bristol Channel; but Coasters between the Land's End and St. David's Head, (market-boats and fishing vessels excepted,) pay one shilling per vessel. Stack Lights.-British or Irish Ships and Vessels to or from Liverpool, Chester, and Ports to the northward thereof, to any other Ports to the northward of the Calf of Man (at the South part of the Isle of Man), or to the eastward of Holyhead, with all other Vessels bound to or from Liverpool and Ports adjacent, to any other Ports whatsoever, sailing in or out of the North Channel, viz. " by Fairhead, on the coast of Ireland, and the Mull of Cantire, on the coast of Scotland," are not subject to pay the Duties to the said Light. This exemption, however, is confined and restricted to Ships and Vessels of the United Kingdom navigating within the limits above described. N. B. By the term, " each time of passing," is to be understood once for the outward, and once for the inward passage. PART V. EUROPE. BRITISH POSSESSIONS. c. 59. How the trade of colo Ir shall be lawful for His Majesty, by and with the advice of His 3 & 4 W. 4, Privy Council, by any orders in council to be issued from time to time, to give such directions and make such regulations touching the trade and commerce to and from any British possessions on or near the con- regulate tinent of Europe, or within the Mediterranean Sea, or in Africa, or nies, § 81. within the limits of the East India Company's charter (excepting the possessions of the said company), as to His Majesty in council shall appear most expedient and salutary, any thing in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding; and if any goods be imported or exported in any manner contrary to such order of His Majesty in council, the same shall be forfeited, together with the ship importing or exporting the same. ISLE OF MAN. PRINCIPAL PORTS-DOUGLAS, PEEL, Ramsey, Import du There shall be paid unto His Majesty the several duties of customs, 3 & 4 W. 4, as the same are respectively set forth herein, upon importation into c. 60. the Isle of Man of the several goods, according to the quantity or ties, § 2. value thereof, and so in proportion for any greater or less quantity or value of the same; viz. A TABLE of the Duties of Customs payable on Goods, Wares, and COALS, from the United Kingdom COFFEE, the duties of consumption in the United Kingdom not having been paid thereon, the lb. HEMP, the cwt. HOPS, from the United Kingdom, the lb. IRON, from foreign parts, the 100l. value SPIRITS; viz. RUM OF THE BRITISH PLANTATIONS, not SUGAR, MUSCAVADO, the cwt. ส s. d. Free. 004 Certain goods in any ship from any place. nial goods, FRENCH, the tun of 252 gallons any other sort, the tun of 252 gallons WOOD, from foreign parts; viz. DEAL BOARDS, the 100l. value GOODS, imported from the United Kingdom, and enti- imported from the United Kingdom, and not imported from any place from whence such EXEMPTIONS. 010 016 16 0 0 12 0 0 10 0 0 . 10 0 0 500 2 10 0 15 0 0 Except the several goods following, and which are to be imported into the Isle of Man DUTY FREE; (that is to say,) Flax, Flax Seed, Raw or Brown Linen Yarn, Wood Ashes, Weed Ashes, Flesh of all sorts; also Corn, Grain, or Meal of all sorts, when importable; any of which goods may be imported into the said Isle from any place in any ship. Britishgoods. Any sort of White or Brown Linen Cloth, Hemp, Hemp Seed, Horses, British goods to appear No goods shall be entered in the Isle of Man as being the growth, upon cock- produce, or manufacture of the United Kingdom, or as being imported thence, except such goods as shall appear upon the cockets of the ets, § 3. |