Re SPOTTEN & Company, ex parte THE PROVINCIAL BANK

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 05 June 1877
• Date: 05 June 1877
• Court: Chancery Division (Ireland)

Bankruptcy.

IN RE SPOTTEN & Co., EX PARTE THE PROVINCIAL BANK.

Rushforth v. HadfieldENR 6 East, 518.

Rushforth v. HadfieldENR 7 East, 224.

Savill v. BarchardENR 4 Esp. 53.

Green v. FarmerENR 4 Burr. 2214.

Plaice v. AllcockENR 4 F. & F. 1074.

Ex parte DeezeENR 1 Atk. 228.

Ex parte Watkins, in re CoustonELR L. R. 8 Ch. App. 520.

Ex parte Vaux, in re CoustonELR L. R. 9 Ch. App. 602.

Rusforth v. HadfieldENR 6 East, 523.

Ex parte Watkins, in re CoustonELR L. R. 8 Ch. App. 144, 520.

Ex parte Vaux, in re CoustonELR L. R. 9 Ch. App. 602.

Plaice v. AlcockENR 4 F. & F. 1074.

General lien — Evidence of — Bleachers, dyers, and finishers of linen goods.

412 THE IRISH REPORTS. Bankruptcy. IN RE SPOTTEN & Co., Ex PARTE THE PROVINOTAT, 1877. BANK. May 18, 23. General lien-Evidence of-Bleachers, dyers, and finishers of linen goods. June 5. A right of general lien can only be established either by contract express or necessarily implied, or by custom; and such a custom in a particular trade is not established by mere evidence of the popular opinion of the members of that trade that a right of general lien was or ought to be a privilege of their trade. THE facts are sufficiently set forth in the judgment of the Court. Mr. W. D. Andrews, Q. C. (with Mr. William Dodd), for the Assignees, cited Cross on Lien, 15, 16 ; Rushforth v. Hadfield (1) ; Busliforth v. Hadfield (2). Mr. Carton, Q. C. (with him Mr. R. Murray), contra, for the Provincial Bank, relied upon Squill v. Barchard (3) ; Green v. Farmer (4) ; Plaice v. Allcock (5) ; Ex parte Deeze (6) ; Ex parte Watkins, in re Couston (7); Ex parte Vaux, in re Couston (8). MILLER, J. :- Before stating the matters directly in controversy, a few facts about which there is no dispute may be thus briefly stated. Shortly before the 7th of December, 1875, the firm of Spotten & Co. stopped payment, and on that day they presented their petition for arrangement. Previously to that, 1397 pieces of linen belonging to the firm had been sent to Daniel Kerk, who was a dyer and finisher near Ballymena, and had acted, and was then acting, exclusively in that capacity for Spotten & Co. alone, at a salary, along with certain rates agreed upon between them. No (1) 6 East, 518. (5) 4 F. & F. 1074. (2) 7 East, 224. (6) 1 Atk. 228. (3) 4 Esp. 53. (7) L. R. 8 Ch. App. 520. (4) 4 Burr. 2214. (8) L. R. 9 Ch. App. 602. VOL. XI.] EQUITY SERIES. 413 portion of those pieces had been finished out by Kerk at the time Bankruptcy. of the failure, but they were afterwards dyed and finished. It has 1877. not been disputed that Kerk would have been entitled to a parti- In re SPOTTEN cular lien upon those pieces of linen against Spotten & Co., or the & Co. assignees as representing them, for all his legitimate charges according to his agreement with Spotten & Co. for the dyeing and finishing those pieces of linen, and that he might have retained the possession of those pieces until that his particular lien had been discharged ; and, if there had been nothing else before the Court, the assignees, as now representing Spotten & Co., would be entitled to recover possession of those pieces of linen upon the payment by them to Kerk-of his charges for dyeing and furnishing those pieces alone. But at the time of the failure, the Provincial Bank of Ireland were the holders as...