MARTIN moved to re-admit an attorney who had already An attorney

been re-admitted of the Court of Queen's Bench. Some doubt existed, he said, whether the statutes 1 Vict. c. 56, s. 4, & 2 Vict. c. 45, s. 3, which spoke only of persons who had been "duly admitted attorneys" of one Court, applied to the case of an attorney seeking to be re-admitted.

who has been re-admitted in one of the superior courts is

entitled, under

the stat. 1 & 2

Vict. c. 45, s. 3,

to practise in any of the

others, on signing the roll

ALDERSON, B.-Surely a re-admitted attorney is an ad- thereof. mitted attorney.

Lord ABINGER, C. B., and PARKE, B., concurred; and the motion was therefore held to be unnecessary.

VOL. V.

B

M. W.

Exch. of Pleas, 1839.

PITCHFORD and Another v. DAVIS.

A project hav- DEBT for goods sold and delivered, work done and

ing been formed

for the establishment of a

Company for the manufactory of

sugar

from beet-root,

a prospectus

was issued, stat ing the proposed

capital to consist of 10,000

shares of 251. The di

each.

rectors began their works, and entered into

contracts re

and manu

factured and sold some

sugar; but only a small portion of the proposed capital was

raised, and only

materials found and provided, and on an account stated. Plea, nunquam indebitatus.

At the trial before Lord Abinger, C. B., at the London Sittings after Hilary Term, it appeared that in the early part of the year 1836, a project was formed for the establishment of a Company under the name of "The United Kingdom Beet-root Sugar Association," and prospectuses The di- were issued, stating the proposed capital to be in 10,000 shares of 251. each, and the names of the directors were announced. In the month of April in that year, the specting them, defendant applied for shares, which were accordingly allotted to him, and he paid the deposit on them in June following. In the course of the summer, the Company commenced building their works with the defendant's knowledge, and shortly afterwards a call was declared and 1,400 out of the paid. The goods for which the action was brought consisted of certain quantities of charcoal and lump alum, which were supplied by the plaintiffs to the directors, on the order of the Secretary, for the use of the Company, in December 1836, and January 1837; and in 1837 sugar, to the value of 5007., had been made and sold. The defendant was not shewn to have interfered in the management of the concern, but he was proved to have been on one occasion at the manufactory, and to have said that he understood the nature of the works, and the mode of manufacturing sugar. The plaintiffs' counsel contended that, under these circumstances, the defendant was a partner in a trading company, and a part-owner of the goods supplied, and as such was liable in this action.-It was proved on cross-examination of the plaintiffs' witnesses, that only a small part of the proposed capital had been raised, and that not more than 1,400 out of the 10,000

10,000 shares were taken:Held, that a subscriber, who had taken

shares and paid a deposit on them, was not liable upon such contracts of the directors, without proof that he knew and assented to their proceeding on the smaller capital, or expressly author

ized the making

of the contract.