The  land  was,  however,  advertized  for  sale,  the  period  of  advertisement
being  shortened  by  the  judge,  and  was  sold  to  F.  S.,  under  instructions
from  the  general  body  of  creditors  at  first  refused  to  convey  to  P.,  but  sub-
sequently conveyed  upon  an  order  being  obtained  from  the  judge  directing
him  to  do  so.
It  was  held  by  the  Court  of  Appeal  for  Ontario  (12  Ont.  App.  E.  298)
affirming  the  decision  of  the  C.  P.  Div.,  (9  Ont.  B.  89),  that  the  sale  was  not
one  subject  to  the  control  of  the  general  body  of  creditors,  and  therefore  the
restrictions  of  sec.  75  of  the  Act  were  inapplicable  and  the  sale  was  valid.
Further,  that  the  defendant  failed  to  estabUsh  his  claim  of  title  by  possession.
On  appeal  the  Supreme  Court  of  Canada,  Held,  that  the  judgment  of
the  court  below  should  be  affirmed.
Appeal  dismissed  with  costs.
Herbert  t.  DonoTan.— 9th  April,  18S6.
9.  Title  by— ntatute  of  I.imltations— Possession  of  tenant  of  owner  of  life

estate  as  against  remainderman.
