in submitting his motion last Friday, Mr. Wilkinson read an affix davit sworn by Mr. A. M. Preston, who stated that since September 13, 1920, he had received no communication of any kind from Mr. Levinson, except one letter, of the 20th of that month, from Yokohama. He did not know and was not able to ascertain his present address, and it had not been possible to forward to him the material papers. Mr. Preston added that he had been informed and believed that on or before January 12, Mr. Levin-son's wife was fully informed of the nature and effect of the order of November 95, 1920. Mr. Wilkinson submitted it was right that. for the good order and prestige of the Court, the name of William Strafford Levinson should be struck off the roll.
His Lordship—Why have no steps been taken earlier, considering that! the original order was made in 1920?
Mr. Wilkinson replied that his going on leave had had a great deal to do with it. Also he understood that certain action had been taken by the Inns of Court to which Mr. Levinson belonged, and it seemed right in the circumstances that there should be a certain amount of delay. No one had been prejudiced, and it was now certain that no application had been, or would be, made to the Court by the person concerned.
His Lordship observed that W. S. Levinson had had a chance of coming before the Court and showing reason why he should not be finally struck off. He had not done so. There was evidence before the Court that the nature of the order had been brought to the notice of his wife and presumably to Levinson himself. 'f -he was wrong there was time for him to deal with tha matter by way of appeal. All his Lordship could do now was to say that, more than six months having elapsed since the order was made, William Strafford Levinson would be struck off the roll of the Court.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.