VOL. VIII.

A GOOD story of Lord Westbury, illustrating his perfect self-confidence-not to call it anything worse-seems to be omitted from the numerous anecdotes mentioned in the

recently-published Life. He had differed with his junior in a case as to the line of argument to be taken before the Court. Bethell, of course, took his own way, but received little or no encouragement from the Vice-Chancellor before whom he was pleading. His junior, from behind, entreated him, as a last resource, to try him with his point, which eventually was done, and with evidently instantaneous success. Bethell turned calmly round to his junior and remarked, with biting sarcasm, "The silly old man actually takes your point!"

ANOTHER Story of his brutality and rudeness to his juniors is left out. At a consultation, a junior, who evidently did not know the character of his leader, ventured to remark that the case was not such an easy win for their side as it appeared to be to Bethell; for there were some arguments for the other side. Bethell asked what they were, and, thus encouraged, the stuffsman enlarged at some length on what could be said for the other side. His leader tied up his papers, and listened without any interruption till his junior had finished, when he remarked: "So that's what can be said on the other side. All I can say is, what fools they must be on the other side!" And turning on his heel, walked out.

MR. JUSTICE GRANTHAM has at present a small crowd of yelping curs at his heels, who accuse him of slander from the bench, of contempt of Court, and other terrible crimes. And all this because he used his position of power authoritatively to declare the very solid and well-grounded opinion that some newspapers are given to gossipy, smart and libellous statements; and that in the particular case before him he believed what a certain witness had said in the box. The independence of the bench is a fundamental principle of our jurisprudence and procedure.

THE learned judge has just given a very good decision which rather knocks on the head an ancient fiction: that when snow is being thrown off a building, the proper legal

No. 108.

motto is caveat perambulator. Henceforth the maxim to be observed is, "let the thrower beware." It is his duty, if he desire to escape heavy damages, to warn passengers.

CAPTAIN O'SHEA's legal origin is probably not known. His father was an attorney in Ireland. The captain is the husband of Mrs. O'Shea, who is a niece of the late Lord Hatherley. The intimacy between Mr. Parnell and the captain is a thing that wants some explanation. The "Uncrowned King" used to be a frequent recipient of Mrs. O'Shea's hospitality at Eltham, where his face is familiar and well known. It appears Captain O'Shea resides in town now; he dates his letters, at least, from some Westminster Chambers.

THE Correspondent of the Manchester Examiner says: Mr. Matthews, Q.C., the Home Secretary, was born in Ceylon, where his father was Advocate Fiscal from 1817 to 1828, when he died there, leaving his son Henry, an infant two years old. Mr. Matthews was not born a Roman Catholic, but became a convert to that faith.

DR. JAMES BRYCE, M.P., the Inns of Court Professor of Roman Law, who goes to winter a few weeks in India, is not betaking himself abroad for his health's sake, as was said. We shall hear more of his mission by-and-bye. Dr. Bryce has addressed a letter of encouragement to the promoters of a magazine which is to appear in a few days, and which has for its object the rallying of the people of Armenia to regain their ancient independence.

WE hear that Mr. Murphy, Q.C., whose shooting-box is at Loch Shin, where Sir Richard Webster was his guest this summer, is not likely to take the place for another season. The Sabbatarian prejudices of the aborigines of the district have abated nothing of their impertinent interferences with the learned counsel's enjoyment of that day of rest.

THERE are examiners and examiners. The recent Bar examination showed this. We hear that during the viva in one of the subjects, one examiner kept up such a constant hectoring of the candidates as seriously to interfere with the comfort of those within earshot, who were treated to such observations as "You have no business to think, you should know"-not an original remark, but cribbed from that entertaining treatise "Whist or Bumble-puppy." This sort of thing should cease at once and for ever. We shall give names if we hear of this sort of conduct again.

MR. JUSTICE H. S. CUNNINGHAM, Puisne Judge of the High Court of Calcutta, has resigned, and is coming home to enjoy the autumn of life. His departure from India will be a source of regret, for he was considered a good judge in every way. He is still in the prime of life, having been called to the Bar in 1859, and he may be expected to continue to augment his already considerable literary reputation.

THE will of the late Lord Sackville, which contained some handsome bequests for the benefit of the Queen's Maids of Honour, is to be contested. The interested parties declare that the old gentleman was not so clear as he ought to have been in the upper story.

EVERY firm that has occasion to send out large quantities of circulars must bless Mr. Sloper for his admirable system of perforating stamps with its name, and so protect them from the wholesale theft to which they are otherwise exposed. When fifty or sixty pounds of halfpenny stamps have to be affixed, it goes without saying that the temptation to pocket the stamps is great to the class of people sometimes employed; and the evil done goes beyond the value of the stamps, for the firm in addition lose the advantage they contemplated of advertising their wares and remain in the blissful but mistaken belief that all their circulars have been posted. Mr. Sloper's system renders useless the object for the fraudulent removal of stamps; (2) It is a prevention against misappropriation of the stamps; (3) It prevents the sale of the stamps so marked.

SOME of Mr. Munton's statements and statistics, at the Newcastle Meeting of Lawyers, were anything but encouraging to the wigged branch of the profession. He pointed out that there are some 14,000 solicitors in the country, some 8,000 barristers (a little more than half of them in practice), and that only about 4,000 actions are tried before the High Court every year-giving on an average about one case to every barrister. This is misleading by an involuntary suppressio veri. Supplementary propositions may be put forth, to the encouragement of juniors in general. 1. Even if there were only one case to every barrister, it is the rule rather than the exception that there are several, if not many, counsel in every case, and every case has counsel for each side. 2. The High Court is in London; how many counsel are localised in Liverpool, Manchester, and other big towns? 3. Of Chancery side counsel, what proportion never go into Court at all? ViceChancellor Bacon made a magnificent income as a conveyancer without ever going into Court, and we could mention one or two such men of our own acquaintance in the present generation. 4. A large number of causes in the County Courts are argued by counsel. How many County Courts are there in London? How many actions are conducted by counsel in them. 5. How many tutors, lecturers, and coaches in the two Universities of Oxford and Cambridge have chambers in the Temple, where upon inquisition the usual verdict is non est? The Bar is not such a desperate thing after all. We don't think the Inns of Court need yet awhile go into voluntary liquidation and divide the spoil.

THE written address which the President of the Society, Mr. B. J. Lake, read at Newcastle, at the recent congress there, contains the following reference to the Law Society Club," and the facilities of friendly intercourse afforded by the club, which, since the foundation of the society, has formed an essential part of its constitution, and to which members of the society are, as such, eligible without any other formality than payment of a very moderate entrance fee and subscriptions," &c. Evidently the President, Mr. B. J. Lake, who took a very active part in the serious conflicts which have arisen in regard to this club, seems to have forgotten all about those conflicts. How can he say the existing club has formed an essential part of the society since the foundation of the society? the old Law Club was dissolved on December 31, 1884, and at that time an action against the society, alleging that the club was an illegal institution, was standing for trial in the Chancery Division, and Mr. Lake was engaged with other members of the council in arranging the terms of the settlement of that

action. The existing Law Club only came into existence on January 1, 1885; so that this club of which Mr. Lake speaks is not four years old, and Mr. Lake supported a proposal that outsiders, who are not members of the profession, should be elected members of the club, and which resulted in a second Chancery action against the society. Does not Mr. Lake know that the existence of this exclusive club, numbering about 200 members, has always been like the old club-a source of much irritation to the members of the society, and prevents many solicitors joining the society?

AN interesting dinner took place on Thursday evening at the Grosvenor Hotel, Southsea, being given by the Mayor of Portsmouth (A. Addison, Esq.) to his colleagues of the legal profession. of the legal profession. This was a return compliment, a dinner in Mr. Addison's honour having been given by his brother solicitors on his being elected to the Mayoralty. The Mayor presided at the gathering, which composed from thirty to thirty-five guests. In the course of the evening Mr. R. W. Ford, one of the oldest and most respected members of the legal profession in Portsmouth, was presented with an oil painting of himself, the work of Mr. J. Carter. The presentation was made by the Mayor on behalf of the subscribing solicitors, and was suitably acknowledged by Mr. Ford.

Gainsbro', for the purpose of considering certain proposals, LAST week a meeting of Churchmen was held at emanating from Archdeacon Denison, with reference to the proceedings in Ecclesiastical Courts. Sir Charles Anderson presided. The meeting, after discussing the proposals of the Church Association, with reference to the St. Paul's reredos, and the prosecution of the Bishop of Lincoln, resolved to send a deputation from the rural deanery to the meeting to be held in London next month, at which delegates from all parts of the kingdom, and representing every school of thought in the Church, are to discuss the advisability of discouraging further legal disputings in ecclesiastical matters.

Ar the Spalding Petty Sessions last week Thomas Brannan was charged with assaulting James Brannan, his brother. Mr. Perceval, one of the advocates attending the Court, informed the bench that he had fallen into an error with respect to these two men. He said the complainant first called upon him and engaged his services. Next day the defendant also called, but the two men, being very much alike, he thought they were the same, and took a fee from defendant. He did not discover his mistake until arriving at the Court and seeing the two men together. Both now claimed his services, and he thought the best way to get out of the difficulty was by withdrawing altogether from the case, which he did, much to the amusement of the Court.

THE following letter has been received by Mr. Frederick Broadbridge, of the firm of Broadbridge and Neild, Liverpool, from the Solicitor-General :-"Royal Courts of Justice, October 26th, 1888. Dear Sir,-There is no foundation whatever for the statement that the Government intend to introduce a measure for the fusion of the two branches of our profession; and should such a bill be introduced by a private member, I believe the members of the Government would be entirely free to take their own course with regard to it. You are quite at liberty to make public use of this statement; and, indeed, I should be glad that the misapprehension to which you allude should be corrected.-I am, dear sir, faithfully yours, EDWARD Clarke.”

ON Monday morning, at 2.30, an alarm was given in the Inner Temple by a messenger, who perceived flames breakout from a building adjoining the Hall. Two hoses were at once carried up No. 7, Fig-tree-court, and a ladder thrown across to the burning building. As soon as the second hose was got into play the flames began to abate, and what seemed likely to prove a calamity was averted by the energy and promptitude of the firemen on the spot. The jingling of bells was heard in Middle Temple-lane and

King's Bench-walk; but by this time the firemen were breaking in by the basement into the kitchen, where the fire had originated. Thanks are due to the energy of the Temple Amateur Fire Brigade, among whom were Mr. Houghton, Mr. Bayliss, and Mr. Nevill Geary. Some of these gentlemen, strangely enough, had been practising within a few yards of the scene of the fire on Sunday morning during church time.

Ar a meeting of the judges of the Queen's Bench Division, held on Wednesday, it was decided by their lordships not to avail themselves of the offer of the Lord Chancellor to appoint two Royal Commissioners of Assize for the ensuing autumn circuits in place of Justices Day and Smith, who are engaged on the Parnell Commission, and consequently Justices Wills and Grantham have been selected to go on the Northern Circuit instead. The circuits chosen by the judges are: North-Eastern Circuit, Baron Pollock;

Oxford, Mr. Justice Field; Western, Mr. Justice Stephen; South-Eastern, Mr. Justice Mathew; Midland, Mr. Justice Cave; Northern, Justices Wills and Grantham; and North and South Wales, Mr. Justice Charles. Prisoners only will be tried, except at Manchester and Liverpool, where civil causes will also be taken.

DURING the hearing of an action for slander, which opened on Saturday and occupied the Court on Monday, the attention of Mr. Justice Stephen was attracted by a juror who appeared to be reading a newspaper. ship asked the juror what he was doing with the paper, but received no immediate answer, and then inquired pointedly whether he was reading it. The juror repled, "No." The learned judge then warned jurors that if they should be found reading a newspaper while on duty in the jury box during the hearing of a case they would be heavily fined.

UNDER THE PUMP.

Company Precedents. Fourth Edition. By Francis Beaufort Palmer, of the Inner Temple, assisted by Charles Macnaghten, of Lincoln's Inn, Barristers-at-Law. (Stevens and Sons.) We referred briefly to this edition shortly after its publication, but deferred for a time more detailed criticism. Our language was then the language of praise, and, after careful examination, we not only do not recede from our then commendation, but would rather add to it. The Precedents are numerous, and, as far as we have examined them, most carefully prepared. But the work goes further, and points out clearly not only the various expedients of Company Law, but also, tersely and clearly, their comparative value and diverse effect. In addition, we have introductory notes, shortly summarising

points of law on which a practitioner requires easilyaccessible information. In these notes, more than once, the authors have given us vigorous and two-sided argumentative comments on questions which as yet can hardly be considered settled. We notice, as an instance of accurate application of legal principles, p. 380: "Query, whether it might not be said that Tailby v. Official Receiver, 18 Q.B.D., 25, was decided under a misapprehension of the doctrines of Equity ?" We think, from the context, it is clear that the authors' observations point to the ground on which that decision was subsequently overruled in the House of Lords. The fact of the reversal on appeal is noted in the addenda, and it will be remembered that the test of invalidity on the ground of vagueness laid down was, whether when the after-acquired property came into existence it could be predicated of it that it fell within the general words of the assignment, see PUMP COURT, p. 271. On page 8, Swire v. Francis, 3 App. Cas., 106, might have been cited with advantage. We agree with the authors on the question of the liability of a corporation for the fraud of its agents as laid down by Willes, J., in Barwick v. English Joint Stock Banking Co., L. R. 2 Ex., 259, and we also concur in their opinion that such liability cannot be limited as suggested by Lord Cranworth in Addie v. Western Bank

of Scotland, 9 H. L. C., 711, to the extent its funds have profited by those frauds. But if the principles enunciated in Barwick's case, still sometimes subjected to adverse comment, were overruled, we are still prepared to contend that the corporation could not keep profits resulting from the fraud and traceable, in their hands. In other words we affirm the general liability; but, if that be disaffirmed, we still deny that the corporation could retain the profits of its agent's fraud. On page 22, dealing with the liability of promoters and others in a fiduciary position, making improper profits, to account therefor with interest, we may mention the cases of In re Englefield Colliery Co., 8 Ch. D., 388, and In re Anglo-Indian and Colonial Industrial Institution, Times Law Reports, August 9 last, in which interest at 5 per cent. was ordered to be paid. Reg. v. Registrar of Joint Stock Companies is reported 21 Q. B. D., 131. On page 131 the list of "cases of ultra vires" is somewhat meagre, and to the list of "cases of ultra vires" P. 132, the important case of Henderson v. Bank of Australasia, for which see PUMP COURT, p. 251, will have to be added. On p. 214, dealing with a transfer to an infant, the Infants Relief Act, 1874, and the need for evidence

of a new promise as distinguished from ratification, it must be remembered that the question for a jury in such a case has now been formulated by the Court of Appeal in Holmes v. Brierley, PUMP COURT, p. 194 :-Was what was said and done intended to be a new promise, or to merely ratify the old one? With reference to the liability of a Company refusing, after registration of a forged transfer, to register the real proprietor (p. 215), see the recent case of Barton v. North Staffordshire Railway Company, 38 Ch. D., 458. On p. 390, 46 and 47 Vict., c. 55, s. 15 has been forgotten, the duty on a "mortgage bond debenture or covenant being the only or principal primary security for payment, &c.," of money not exceeding £10 was, by that Act, fixed at 3d., the minimum charge under the Stamp Act, 1870, being 8d. for any sum not exceeding £25. On p. 437, citing Leslie v. French, 23 Ch. D., 552, the more recent case of Falcke v. Scottish Imperial Insurance Company, 34 Ch. D., should also have been given. The decision of the House of Lords in Westminster Fire Office v. Glasgow Provident Investment Society, PUMP COURT, p. 261, will be interesting to read in conjunction with the remarks on p. 446, clause 7, and p. 447, clause 9. On p. 500 it is stated, "that a director cannot be made liable" in an action of deceit "unless it can be proved that he made the misrepresentations knowing them to be false, or recklessly:" this undoubtedly was the general understanding until the decision in Peek v. Derry, 37 Ch. D., 541; but the effect of that case, correctly given by the authors on pp. 53 and 54, is that the directors are liable, "where the misrepresentation relied on was made without reasonable grounds for believing it to be true." It will be understood that we make these observations in no spirit of depreciation. "Lindley" and "Buckley," are standard works on Company Law, while the notes in "Palmer," useful as they are, are a mapeрyou to the main purpose of the work—the purpose of furnishing forms and precedents. The provinces are different. But apart from the value of the forms "Palmer's Company Precedents" contains much varied practical information which will elsewhere be sought in vain. It has won for itself a well-deserved place on the lawyer's shelves. The Whewell Lectures on International Law. By Henry Sumner Maine, K.C.S.I. (John Murray, London).-Sir Henry Maine's executors have done well to publish these lectures. It cannot be said that this posthumous volume will have the same value and influence as the works of the author in his own province have had for the past quarter of a century; but there is in his treatment of the present subject the same patient method of examination, the same charm of deliberation and clear insight and exposition which characterised all his former writings. Here he has, within the compass of twelve lectures, epitomised practically the whole ground of International Law, or as the learned author, with reference to the inaccuracy of that term, himself expresses it, "of such portions of the International system as appear to be reasonably settled." In this respect the present work contrasts most favourably with the ponderous treatises of the pioneers of International Law, which, however necessary for the establishing of some body of rules on the subject, have certainly exercised a deterrent effect upon

intending students. On the ground of its brevity and comprehensiveness, the present book will commend itself, not only to the student of law but also to those whose interest in such matters is not professional, and perhaps for that reason all the more keen. After treating of the origin and sources of International Law, its authority and sanction, State sovereignty and territorial rights, he devotes two lectures of special interest to the Mitigation of War and its Modern Laws. Here conspicuously, as throughout all the lectures, we see evidence of a desire to conform to the humane injunction placed on the occupant of the Whewell Chair by its founder-to aim at spreading such knowledge and such rules as would tend to diminish the evils of, and finally extinguish, war among the nations. The concluding chapter is a very practical one on the Proposals to Abate War. Here he deals with the question of International Arbitration, and the possibility of a judicial proceeding taking the place of a fight. He clearly points out the defect that any such arbitration is unlike the arbitration resorted to in individual disputes. A civil arbitrator, as a rule, is an eminent specialist, who has probably acquired a celebrity for just and wise adjudication, whereas "the current of opinion in our day runs distinctly against the assumption of any exceptional knowledge for the solution of great political and international questions." The difference is well and frankly expressed. It is a difficulty and a defect which the promoters of arbitration have fairly to face. Our present experience and observation will make most of us agree that war is too ancient and too great an evil to be cured by any one isolated panacea. What all can help to do is to foster among citizens and among nations a law-abiding sentiment, and a deference to the broad ethical basis of all law, international or municipal. Books received:

The Annual Practise, 1888-9. (Maxwell and Son.) Ryde and Thomas on Local Government. (Butterworths). Hastings on Fraud and Misrepresentation. (Wm. Clowes and Sons.) Joint Stock Companies' Handy Book. (Richard Jordan.)

IS LLOYD'S ON THE "DOWN GRADE?"

(Continued from page 16.)

THE intimate connection which very many Lloyd's underwriters have with the Stock Exchange has again and again been demonstrated by appearances at thirty-three Carey Street, W.C. Some have not travelled so far beyond the City limits, but their affairs have been nevertheless made public, even when private arrangements seemed better for all concerned. În one glaring instance of incumbent liquidation, the amount owing to a Stock Broker had to be expressed in tens of thousands of pounds. The gentleman referred to was certainly in a large way of business, and his brokerage and underwriting accounts together must have produced about five thousand pounds per annum ; yet this exceedingly comfortable income was not sufficient to prevent so enormous a development of the speculative mania. It may have been that the fundamental idea of underwriting, which is plainly speculation-or, to use a harsher term, gambling-gave the fatal impetus.

News of the suspension of a large man of business travels quickly and gains in importance as people examine the many probabilities in which, on a recurrence of the disaster to others, they may be concerned. A large speculative account on the Stock Exchange shows a neglect of the legitimate; nothing being more conducive to monopolising a man's thought, time, and even rest, that the fitful fever generated in the purlieus of Capel Court. A leading man in any sphere has his imitators, and this fact has now been well implanted in the minds of those who falsely imagined that Lloyd's was only a room where Insurance Policies were issued and shipping news collected and disseminated.

A traffic in so-called "honour policies," whereon overdue vessels are speculated with, is attaining large dimensions, encouraged, unfortunately, by members of the august Committee. These documents deal with purely mythical interest, are not of value in a Court of Law, and can therefore be