Birmingham Daily Post – Page 21

Birmingham Daily Post: Friday 21st November 1890

Notice is hereby given that the partnership heretofore subsisting between us, the undersigned William Wilson and Richards Stafford, carrying on business as hat manufacturers and merchants at the Britannia Works, Atherstone, in the county of Warwick, under the style or firm of “Wilson and Stafford,” has been dissolved by mutual consent as and from the 30^th day of November 1889. All debts due to and owing by the said late firm will be reduced and paid by Wison and Stafford (Limited) a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1862, who have acquired and will continue to carry on the business of the said firm: Dated this 17^th Day of November, 1892: William Wilson, Richard Stafford. Witnesses to the signatures of William Wilson and Richard Stafford – Hume C. Pinsent, Solicitor, Birmingham.

Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive

Birmingham Daily Post: Friday 21st November 1890

Notice is hereby given that the partnership heretofore subsisting between us, the undersigned William Wilson and Richard Stafford, carrying on business as Hat Manufacturers and Merchants, at the Britannia Works, Atherstone, in the County of Warwick, under the style or firm of “Wilson & Stafford” has been dissolved by mutual consent as and from the 30^th day of November, 1889 all debts due to and owing by the said late firm will be received and paid by Wilson and Stafford (Limited), a company incorporated under the Company’s Act, 1862, who have acquired and will continue to carry on the business of the said firm: Dated this 17^th day of November, 1890: William Wilson, Richard Stafford: Witness to the signatures of William Wilson and Richard Stafford: Hume C. Pinsent, Solicitor, Birmingham.

Referenced

GRO0435 Devonport: Hume Chancellor Pinsent: 1857 – 1920

Birmingham Daily Post: Thursday 20th November 1890

The City Council: Report of the General Purposes Committee: The General Purpose Committee have issued their report to the City Council upon various subjects which have been recently under their attention. … The Town Clerk has laid before the committee notices which he has received from Messrs. Smith Pinsent and Co., solicitors, on behalf of the Birmingham Electric Supply Company (Limited) … (Note) The draft of the proposed Provisional Order will be deposited at the office of the Board of Trade on or before the 21^st day of December next, and printed copies of the Draft provisional Order when applied for, and of the Provisional Order when made, will be furnished a the price of one shilling for each copy to all persons applying for the same, at the offices of Messrs. Field, Roscoe and Co., Solicitors, 36, Lincoln’s Inn Fields, in the Count of London, and at the offices of Messrs. Smith, Pinsent and Co., solicitors, 39 Waterloo Street, Birmingham, in the County of Warwick. … Dated this 20^th day of November 1890: Smith Pinsent & Co. 39 Waterloo Street, Birmingham, Solicitors for the Applicants and Proposed Undertakers.

Birmingham Daily Post: Saturday 15th November 1890

Birmingham County Court: Yesterday: Before Mr. Registrar Parry: … In. Re: D. Wilding, residing and lately carrying on business at 4, Cuckoo road, Nechells, baker: the Registrar made a receiving order. Messrs. Smith Pinsent and Co. are solicitors in the proceedings.

Birmingham Daily Post: Tuesday 28th October 1890

Mr. Lawson Tait v Councillor Fulford: Mr. Joseph Rowlands sends us the following copy of a letter addressed by him to Messrs. Smith, Pinsent and Co., in reply to their letter published in our columns yesterday: 27^th October, 1890: “Dear Sirs – Your letter of the 25^th instant has today been received by me. I think you should have sent it to me before publishing it in the newspapers. I should have thought it must have been apparent to you and your client that my letter to Mr. Tait was not written for publication. If it had been, it would have been written in very different terms. I wrote the letter on the 20^th instant, immediately after my interview with you. It did not pretend to convey to Mr. Tait a full account of the interview – only sufficient to guide him in his future conduct. With that letter the matter ended so far as I am concerned. Under these circumstances you will probably consider it to be a matter of little importance whether the letter contained an imperfect representation of the interview or otherwise. At the same time, if you desire it, I have no object to a full account being published: Yours truly, Joseph Rowlands” … On the same subject, Mr. Lawson Tait writes as follows … To the Editor of the Daily Post: “Sir – It is, of course, characteristically considerate of Mr. Fulford to refer me to my legal remedy if I feel aggrieved. Fortunately, I do not now feel much aggrieved, as my friends and advisers have pointed out that Mr. Fulford’s vulgar electioneering abuse constitutes no libel. …”

Birmingham Daily Post: Monday 27th October 1890

The Case of Tait v Fulford: With reference to the letter from Mr. Lawson Tait enclosing one by Messrs. Rowlands and Co., which appeared in our columns on Saturday, Messrs. Smith, Pinsent, and Co., send us the following copy of a letter addressed by them to Mr. Lawson Tait’s solicitors: – “39, Waterloo Street, Birmingham, 25^th October, 1890: To Messrs. Rowlands and Co.: Dear Sirs, – Fulford v Tait: Your report to your client, Mr. Lawson Tait, published in today’s Daily Post, is imperfect and inaccurate. Your Mr. Joseph Rowlands called on us on the 20^th inst. said the writ had been issued in his absence, and that on this return he had told your client that there was no ground of action, and desired us therefore to return the copyright. This we did on the 21^st inst, and you wrote to us on the 22^nd that you had cancelled our undertaking to enter appearance. Unless, therefore, you have been acting without instructions, we are at a loss to understand Mr. Tait’s statement on the 24^th inst.“that he had no knowledge that the writ in this case had been withdrawn.” Your withdrawal of the action was unsolicited and unconditional and no promise of any communication from Mr. Fulford was given. The publication of a personal expression of opinion is not a matter of general interest; but in our future professional relations it can only have one effect, which we shall very much regret. Your client’s action compels us to send a copy of this letter for publication to the editor of the Post: – Yours, Smith, Pinsent and Co.”. Councillor Fulford writes as follows to the Birmingham Daily Post: – “I have read the letter in which Mr. Joseph Rowlands, writing to Mr. Lawson Tait, repeats what purports to be the substance of a private conversation between himself and Mr. Pinsent, my solicitor, upon the subject of the writ for libel issued by Mr. Tait. It is not usual among gentlemen to repeat or use for public or professional purposes remarks made in the course of private conversation, but I presume, from Mr. Rowlands’s action, that he does not think that this consideration is applicable to him. This however, is of no interest to me, and I leave Mr. Pinsent to say whether Mr. Rowlands’s statements are accurate so far as they refer to himself. I now simply desire to say that no proposals for withdrawal of the writ by arrangement were made by me, or by my authority, and that I have always, as I do now, referred Mr. Tait to his legal remedy if he felt aggrieved. – Yours truly, H.C. Fulford: Augustus Road, October 25^th, 1890”

Referenced

GRO0435 Devonport: Hume Chancellor Pinsent: 1857 – 1920

Birmingham Daily Post: Thursday 31st July 1890

Mrs. Anne Chesshire, Deceased: To close the trust estate: For sale by Private Contract, at a very low reserve, the compact and desirable Leasehold Manufacturing Premises, 48 Bartholomew Street, Birmingham, with warehouse, stabling, dwelling house and offices, together with the steam engine, boiler, shafting etc. now let at £60 per annum. Not having been disposed of at the auction on the 22^nd July is for sale by Private Contract: Possession at Christmas next. Apply to Messrs. Smith, Pinsent and Co., Solicitors, 39 Waterloo Street, or to Messrs. Chesshire, Gibson, Son and Fowler, Auctioneers, and Surveyors, 93 New Street, Birmingham. …

[see also Birmingham Daily Post: Thursday 7^th August 1890]

Birmingham Daily Post: Wednesday 30th July 1890

Office-Boy Wanted: Apply, by letter only, Smith, Pinsent and Co., 39 Waterloo Street.

[see also: Birmingham Daily Post: Thursday 31^st July 1890]

Birmingham Daily Post: Saturday 26th July 1890

Edwards, Son & Bigwood have received instructions to sell, by auction … Lot 3: (by direction of owner): Freehold Cromwell Street, Nechells: The well-built house No. 129 Cromwell Street (close to Rocky Lane), let to Mr. Weaver, at 6s per week: The accommodation comprise two bed rooms, attic, parlour, kitchen, scullery, partly covered paved yard and garden: Quantity of land 190 square yards: For further particulars … as to Lot 3, to Messrs. Smith, Pinsent and Co. Solicitors, 39 Waterloo Street …

Birmingham Daily Post: Saturday 19th July 1890

Freehold Properties: comprising the fully licensed Public House known as “The Crown and Anchor”, situated at the corner of Livery Street and Northwood Street … AND ALSO … Freehold and Leasehold Properties belonging to the estate of Mr. William Howes (10 Lots in Small Heath and Balsall Heath area) … AND ALSO … Freehold property in Moseley Street and leasehold villa residences in Warwick Road, Great, nears Sparkhill … For further particulars … Apply to Messrs. Smith, Pinsent and Co., Solicitors, Waterloo Street …

[see also Birmingham Daily Post: Thursday 17^th July 1890]