ACCESS TO CHILDREN-VARIATION OF ORDER. [NOTE.-The reports of the Estate Exchange are officially After the verdict in a petition for dissolution

WITHDRAWAL OF QUEEN'S PROCTOR'S INTERVENTION-NEW TRIAL NOT MOVED FOR.-Where a decree nisi had been pronounced on the husband's petition, and the Queen's Proctor had interveued on information furnished by the wife, but had subsequently withdrawn his intervention, the court declined to suspend the decree absolute on the wife's application. Held, that if the wife were dissatisfied with the verdict, she By Messrs. RUSHWORTH, ABBOTT and Co. should have procured its review, not by setting Freehold business premises with residence, No. 416, Strand, the Queen's Proctor in motion, but by moving let on lease at 1107. per annum-sold for 40007. for a new trial: (Pattenden v. Pattenden, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 612. Div. & Matr.)

Freehold five acres of building land, situate at Winchmore- ALIMONY.-Where a decree nisi had been pro-
LIS PENDENS-DECREE NISI-CESSATION OF

PRACTICE-PROCEEDINGS AT LAW AND EQUITY-ELECTION-COSTS.-Where a plaintiff, after filing his bill, brought an action at law against the defendant in respect, not oniy of the subject-matter of the suit, but of matters not in- The court was occupied the whole of the day in volved in it, he was ordered to be put to his hearing the further arguments in this case, which election; and that if he should elect to proceed involved the question whether Mr. Osgood had in equity, he should be restrained from proceed- of the City Small Debts Court. The case has been properly removed from his office of registrar ing with so much of his action as related to the been repeatedly before the court, and has been JENKINS (William), Burrows Inn, Port Tennant, Swansea.

Brown-street, Manchester.

GARDINER (Mary Ann E.), 184 or 23, Portman-square, and
Brighton, March 1; Brackenbridge and Sons, 16, Bartlett's-
buildings, Holborn, solicitors.
GARROD (Lucy), 1, Fern-cottages, Grosvenor-road, Stockwell.
Feb. 26; Godwin and Pickett, solicitors, 3, King's Bench
walk, Temple._
HARGREAVES (John), Summer-hill, Pendleton, Lancaster,
gentleman. March 13; Cunliffe and Leaf, solicitors, 56,
HEMUS (Thomas H.), 50, Lower Grosvenor-street, London,
butler. Feb. 27; Hunter, Gwatkin, and Co., solicitors,
9, New-square, Lincoln's-inn.
JONES (John), Clock-house, Wandsworth, Surrey. April 1;
Travers Smith and Co., solicitors, 25, Throgmorton-street.
KERAKOOSE (Harapiet), 14, Horbury-crescent, Notting-hill,
merchant. June 24; Peacock and Goddard, 3, South-square,
Gray's-inn.
LONGLEY (Caroline), Harley-villa, Clifton, Gloucester. April
1; White, Borrett, and Co., solicitors, 6, Whitehall-place,
LOOSEMORE (Henry), Newport, Isle of Wight, Tailor, &c.
March 1; Eldridge and Son, solicitors, Newport, Isle of

London.

Wight.

LOWDEN (Albert), 3, Sussex-road, Southsea, gentleman.
W. B. Kidder, 19, John-street, Bedford-row.
O'NEALE (the very Rev. James Canon), 13, Grove-road, St.
John's Wood, Middlesex. Feb. 27; Norris and Sons, soli-
citors, 2, Bedford-row, London.
ORBELL (Jane), Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon. April 21;

mingham.

standing. Another inconvenience, much greater,
is that the recruiting of our sitting magistrates,
conseillers et juges, is made almost exclusively
from among that body of public prosecutors and
advocates which is called le Parquet, in contra-
distinction to the sitting judges. Therefore we
have not a sitting judge (except some rare in-
stances of men taken from the Bar, and never from
the first rank of the Bar) who has not been a
public prosecutor. This will help you to under-
stand why our sitting magistrates in criminal or
correctional trials are so fond of clever interroga-
tories and easy victories over confused prisoners.
It is but the power of habit, and the natural
temptation to be, when sitting on the bench, what
they were when standing at the bar.

Now, do not fancy that the main ambition of our Parquet members is to become a judge as soon as possible. Quite the reverse. Among them to be made a judge too soon-in other words, to sit prematurely is a disgrace, as you will understand Margetts and Son, solicitors, Huntingdon. easily when I sketch what we call here the career PALMER (Arthur H.), Weston-super-Mare, attorney-at-law. of a magistrate. When a youth is destined to that March 31; King and Plummer, solicitors, 5, Exchangecareer, he is as soon as possible attached to the buildings, Bristol. PIGOTT (Charles S.), Warrior-square-terrace, and Hollington, Parquet of his provincial town, and then he has, St. Leonard's-on-Sea. May 1; Walker and Martineau, solias we say here," the foot in the stirrup." The citors, 13, King's-road, Gray's-inn. RAINBOW (Elizabeth Ann), 1, Viera-cottages, Hammersmith future judge is then tested by his chiefs is some March 11: Inman and Co., solicitors, Hay Hill-house, Bath. minor causes, and becomes in times substitut, or RAWLINS (Fanny E., 67, Finchley New-road, St. John's. one of those Avocats-Généraux who surround the wood. March 1; Shepheard and Son, 78, Coleman-street, London. Procureur-Général in our courts of appeal. Now, SMITH (Bassett), The Mount, Gravelly-hill, Birmingham. if he is raised by official preferment to the rank of March 1; E. Wignall, solicitor, 10, Brook-street, Bir- Avocat-Général he has got fairly into what they SMITH Mary Ann), 80, Church street, Camberwell. March call, in their judicial slang, la grande carrière. It 1; Blakeley and Beswick, solicitors, 10, Bedford-row. means that he will not be ordered to sit as a judge, STALWORTH Thomas), Rushwick, St. John, Worcester, expect as a First President of a provincial court merchant. Feb. 25; W. N. Marcy, solicitor, Bewdley. STEPHENSON (Frank H.), 12, Cork-street Burlington-gardens. or a member of our Cour de Cassation. But if he Feb. 27; Beaumont, Thompson, and Co., solicitors, 23, Lin- receives the fatal order to sit as a simple conseiller coln's-inn-fields. TROTTER (George). Stockton, Durham, agent. May 20; in a court of appeal or still lower, it is what they Newby, Richmond, and Watson, solicitors, Stockton. call la petite carrière, and it is considered a public WALKER (Joseph), Broad-street, Bath, chymist. March 1; disgrace. Thus, to be made a judge too soon is to H. A. Mande, solicitor. 3 and 1, Great Winchester-street- have a kind of adverse judgment passed by the WESCOMB (Jane), Thrumpton Hall, Nottingham, Feb. 15; executive power, which is the sovereign dispenser Dangerfield and Fraser, solicitors, 26, Craven-street, of judicial dignities. This curious state of things WILLIAMS Harriett), The Grange, Biggleswade. March 16; will be made clearer by an amusing quotation Harford and Taylor, solicitors, 5, Furnival's-inn, London. from the memoirs of a magistrate still living. M. WILSON (William), 3, Cambridge-square, Hyde-park. 18; Fearon, Clabon, and Co., solicitors, 21, Great George-d'Aigny has himself narrated with the utmost street, Westminster. candour what a disgrace has fallen unjustly upon WHEELER (John), Long Compton, Warwick, baker. March 1; him. He was an Avocat-Général at the Court of Tilsley and Wilkins, solicitors, Chipping Norton, Oxon. Lyons, and thus might believe himself fairly on his way to the great carriere-all the more because he had reason to hope, as he says himself, that he was lucky in his prosecutions. He

buildings, E.C.

Charing-cross.

THE BENCH AND THE BAR.

PROSECUTIONS, PROSECUTORS, AND
JUDGES IN FRANCE.

Just now so much is being written and talked about the necessity for a public prosecutor, for more efficient organisation for the repression of crime, and a better administration of the law for its detection and punishment, that the following interesting account of the criminal judicature in France by a Parisian correspondent of the Times will be read with profit:-

The Seguier affair and the discussions about it have again directed the attention of many persons to our judicial organisation, and especially to our Ministère Public, of which M. Seguier was a member. As I have heard and read many times on your side of the Channel that a public officer is wanted in your courts of justice and that you envy us such a blessing, perhaps you will be interested to know what long experience has taught us about the value of the institution. That we want a Ministère Public for the detection and prosecution of ordinary crime is admitted here, and rightly, by all parties. We could not do in France without it, and the system of private prosecutions instead of public ones in criminal matters could never be practised here, nor even understood. The right given by law to the party who has suffered by the crime to join in the public prosecution under the name of partie civile is seldom claimed here, so strong is the inclination to leave entirely whatever concerns criminal prosecutions in official hands. Necessary as it is for such reasons, the existence of our Ministère Public is not, however free from certain inconveniences which experience has brought to light. The Ministère Public in each one of our appeal courts is represented by a Procureur-Général, and by a Procureur-Impérial in minor courts. But these law officers are surrounded by a staff of advocates who under the name of avocats généraue or substituts, are wholly severed from the Bar, and enlisted for life in the public service. The first result of that practice is that you do not see here, in criminal prosecutions, barristers speaking now for the accused and now for the prosecution. Once enlisted in one of those two contending armies, a barrister is bound for life to see and convict guilt in every case, or, on the contrary, to support and protect innocence even in the most doubtful circumstances. You can easily imagine how quickly and surely that habit of mind becomes second nature, and how good sense, and even good faith, give way under that perpetual and exclusive strain of the under

says:

In criminal matters I had not one acquittal, and I
had even got convictions for capital offences.
However, a certain day, in a beautiful spring, when
coming back from a delightful walk on the flowery bank
of the Saône, I heard from a friend the startling, the
incredible fact that I was made a conseiller at
the Court of Lyons.
At least, everybody was
pitying me, and I was overwhelmed with marks of
comforting sympathy.
lamentation you must bear in mink that a con-
Really to feel the instructive earnestness of that
seiller is theoretically superior to the members of
the Parquet who stand and plead before him. But
the truth must carry all before it, and M. d'Aigny
is sure to be understood and even condoled with
by everybody when he adds, with a kind of poetical
sadness,

I folded my wings for ever, and, wrapped in that
judicial gown which was to be my shroud, I went to
sit on the bench along with my new colleagues.
Is it not heartrending?

eyes and free criticisms of constitutional government. Now, after eighteen years of a different system, all the inconveniences of a magistracy recruited from the Parquets and subjected to preferment at will are felt so universally that the same orators who, in 1848, defended it stubbornly against any reform, would be the first to advocate a reconstruction according to the well-known necessities of free government. There are many lessons like this which the Second Empire has taught us, but not cheaply nor harmlessly enough to be entitled to our gratitude.

MR. COMMISSIONER KERR AND THE

CORPORATION.

Mr. C. Robinson, pursuant to notice, rose to move a resolution in effect to refer the consideration of all outstanding references and matters in question relating to the office and duties of the Judge of the City of London Court to a special committee, with power to confer with the judge, in order, if possible, to promote an equitable arrangement of all such matters, and to report to the court their opinion thereon forthwith.

At the outset a proposition was made to have the subject considered with closed doors, and without the presence of "strangers," but it was almost unanimously rejected.

Mr. Robinson said there had been influences at work which had barred a settlement of the matters in dispute, and he believed his motion would either have the effect of terminating the dispute in some amicable manner or of eliciting an expression of opinion that it was not susceptible of settlement. Replying to a question as to what were the influences to which he had referred, he said they were influences which had been brought to bear on the court on both sides of the question, and they were and had been intensified in the committee over which he had the honour to preside. and by which the questions in dispute had been long under consideration.

Mr. H. Gover reminded the court that an Act of Parliament was passed affecting the Sheriff's Court about a year and a half ago, and was referred to the officers' and clerks committee for consideration. A claim under that Act was made by Mr. Commissioner Kerr, as judge of the City of London Court, to receive the fees of that court in addition to the salary paid him by the corporation. It was rather a nice question, and the committee were directed to take the opinion of counsel upon it. They took the opinion of the then Attorney and Solicitor General, and of Mr. Mellish and Mr. Archibald, who advised the court that the judge

had no claim to those fees. The officers' and clerks' committee brought up a report recommending that the judge should receive no fees whatever, and only his salary, and it was referred to the court to fix that salary. Six or seven months had since committee. As to influence he did not know who elapsed and no report had been presented by that exercised it; but he knew that one gentleman very much interested in the matter was in the habit of calling upon members of the court, and expressing his views, and obtaining, perhaps, their sympathy. They ought to avoid appointing a committee amenable to such influences; but if they only appointed a committee of seven, as was proposed, those influences were likely to have great weight. Besides, the matters in dispute ought to be settled forthwith. He therefore moved as an amendment that the officers' and clerks' committee be instructed to report at the next meeting of the court on the reference that had been made to them in July last.

Fancy now our Opposition papers upholding, for the sake of discussion, the theory of the independence of our Parquets even in matters of political prosecutions. The truth is that the organisation of our Ministère Public, already proved to be incon- The amendment was seconded by Mr. T. S. venient in criminal and civil matters, is sadly defi- Richards, who complained that the matter had cient for purposes of political prosecution. An been before the court for four years without any honest Avocat-Général may certainly be always in result, and that, with the exception of Mr Lowman earnest in the prosecution of crime, but it is Taylor and another member, all the members of the absurd to suppose that he can maintain a per- proposed committee were pledged to Mr. Commispetual conformity of political opinion with the sioner Kerr's side of the question. He referred to Executive, especially if the salutary result of the great efforts that had been made in season and Parliamentary Government brings on not unfre- out of season to unduly influence the previous comquent changes of Ministry and public policy.mittee, and, remarking that "minor est quam serThere are, therefore, many reasons why French-vus, dominus qui servos timet," expressed his conmen who care for free institutions and good tempt for members of the court who, in his opinion, administration of justice should study that impor- had made themselves subservient to their own tant subject, and see what reforms can be officers. safely introduced into a system so deficient and so difficult to reconcile with public welfare as well as with judicial dignity. One cannot avoid feeling that a great change has been brought about by the Second Empire on that point in the minds of many public men, who could not be induced before to wish for any reform, however slight it might be, in our judicial institutions. When our Constituent Assembly was sitting in 1848, and also in the following years, many propositions were made to set our judicial organisation in better harmony with the action of a free constitution. But all those attempts, even the most moderate, failed before the strong Conservative feeling which the fear of Socialism had developed among us, and also because no great faults could then be justly imputed to our magistrates, accus. tomed till then to live and judge under the jealous

Deputy Jones wanted to see some mode adopted by which this painful matter might be settled. He made no reflections on the committee. He had no doubt they had dealt with the question with the greatest anxiety to do justice to both parties, but after four years they had failed to do so, and he desired to see it remitted to a special committee as was proposed, by whom it would be promptly dealt with.

Mr. Lindsay urged that it was desirable to put an end at once and for ever to a state of things which was disgraceful to both parties. Much to his vexation, he had been thrice waited upon by the judge himself, who gave him a report to read of the previous committee, which, he said, he should not assent to. There was no question that the judge was entitled to something, but there was no necessity to send the matter to any other com

committee than the usual one, especially as now, on the reconstitution of the committee, eleven fresh members were about to be placed upon it.

Mr. Bedford supported the original motion, remarking that the court was utterly tired of the subject, which he said had become a public scandal. They boasted of the privilege they had of appointing their own judges, but they must take care how they exercised it. The last motion before the committee was for authority to defend an action at law brought against the corporation. They seemed to be wading further and further into the mire, and he would vote for the motion, desiring to see the matter submitted to seven unbiassed men, who would do their duty in reference to it conscientiously and fearlessly.

Mr. H. Lowman Taylor believed there was but one earnest desire among them, that all the matters in dispute should be set at rest as early as possible; and if any plan could be devised for arriving at such a result there would be a general feeling of satisfaction; but all the efforts to settle it were made on their side alone. He would tell them how they could settle it, and very speedily, and that was simply by making every concession to the judge. (A laugh.) But that was not the right course to pursue. The judge took his view of the matter, and it was natural that he should. He (Mr Taylor) was one of those who sought for peace, and that for the honour and character of the corporation as well as of the judge. They had all a very good opinion of Commissioner Kerr's abilities, and every important officer elected by the corporation ought to live in their esteem. He warned the court not hastily to adopt the motion for referring the matter to a small committee. Mr. Robinson, the proposer, was notoriously one of Mr. Kerr's supporters, and now wanted to be chairman of the small committee he had proposed, among whom probably there might be three on one side and three on the other, he as chairman giving a casting vote in favour of the commissioner.

Mr. Symonds suggested the possibility of submitting the question by mutual agreement between the court and the commissioner to the arbitrament of some authority to whom both would be disposed

to bow.

Mr Lawley was anxious the court should uphold the dignity attaching to its power to appoint the judge, and argued that a speedy settlement of the disputes was more likely to be arrived at in a small than a large committee.

Deputy Elliott thought that the business ought to be continued before the committee by whom it had been under investigation for two years and a-half. There was a much more ready and summary mode of reconciling all these difficulties. It was admitted that the existing state of things was disreputable to the Corporation of London. It was more than that: it brought disrepute upon the administration of justice (hear, hear), and weakened the moral force of their courts over the public mind. And what was the cause of that? The committee were disposed to do what was a very common thing in this world, but a very improper thing that was, they were disposed to compromise the matter. (Hear, hear.) Instead of referring the subject to a new committee the court should stand on its own dignity and say that it be an instruction to the existing committee that if an adjustment of the difficulties could not be easily and quickly arrived at they should consider the best means by which the Corporation of London could be relieved of this judge. (Cheers.) Mr. Bontems thought they were all agreed that the existing state of things should be put an end to. That was absolutely necessary not only for the credit of the judge but for the sake of their own corporate funds. For a long time two of the ablest officers of the corporation, Commissioner Kerr being one, had been fighting against each other in a court of law, and very likely in the end the corporation would have to pay the expenses of both sides. They could have no wish but to do full justice to the judge. He (Mr. Bontems), having confidence in his ability, had held various interviews with him. (An ironical cheer.) He went to him with no intention of sacrificing the interests of the corporation or his own indepen

dence. The result of his communication with the judge was that he (Mr. Bontems) believed that if the court were to appoint a small committee with power to settle the question without going back to the court the commissioner would be willing to concur in the settlement of it in that way.

Mr. De Jersey argued that it was a scandal where employers and employed could not act together in harmony. That state of things had existed for years between the corporation and Commissioner Kerr. For one, he would sacrifice a good deal, though not his judgment or opinions, to bring this matter to a conclusion. The present committee were thoroughly sick of it. The court must see that they did not compromise the dignity which a public body ought never to sacrifice. God forbid they should desire to do injustice to the judge, but, on the other hand, let them do justice,

which was even handed, to themselves. It was
not a question of salary alone. There were other
questions that must be settled, and once for all.
If they had the conscientious opinion of a com-
mittee of seven or eight on the matters in dispute,
and that was confirmed by the court, let the judge
stand or fall by it. If the judge did not accept
that, he would accept his own condemnation in the
eyes of that court and of the community at large.
(Cheers.)

The discussion was continued by Mr Elias Davis,
Mr. M George, Mr. Finlay, Mr. Hora, Deputy Fry,
Mr. Lusher, Mr. Pedler, and others, and in the
result the motion of Mr. Robinson was carried on
a show of hands, and the subject was referred to
a committee of nine of the principal members of
the court, of whom five were to be a quorum.

M.P., and Mr. W. T. S. Daniel, Q. C. Serjeant'sinn-Mr. Serjt. O'Brien, Mr. Serjt. Pulling, Middle Temple-Mr. T. W. Greene, Q.C., Mr. John Gray, Q.C. Inner Temple-Mr. Wm. Forsyth, Q.C., Mr. H. Warwick Cole, Q.C. Gray's-inn-Mr. J. A. Russell, Q.C., and Mr. James Barstow. Incorcorporated Law Society-Mr. W. Strickland Cookson and Mr. William Williams.

NEW PALACE OF JUSTICE.-The strenuous efforts made by the Times to obtain a favourable reconsideration of the site for our new Palace of Justice are beginning to tell on society and on the Profession. We predict success. It is no secret that the the new Commissioner of Public Works supports the change of site from Carey-street to Thames-bank, and we are glad to report that a practical dffiiculty standing in the way of that exchange-the apparent impossibility of finding room for a repository of wills on the preferential site has been overcome by the discovery that we have plenty of room for a wills repository on the Rolls estate in Chancery-lane. The Government and the public are now of one mind: the Legal Profession is divided, but the better opinion is gaining ground in the Inns of Court, and we cannot pretend to doubt that the new Palace of Justice will be built on the noblest site in the world.-Athenæum.

CALLS TO THE BAR. INNER TEMPLE.-The undermentioned gentlemen have been called to the Bar by the Hon. Society of the Inner Temple : Ewing Pye Colquhoun, Esq., B.A., Cambridge; John Storer, Esq., B.A., Cambridge; Amherst Daniel Tyssen, Esq., B.A., Oxford; Godfrey Wheeler, Esq., B.A., Cambridge; Charles Yates Fell, Esq., B.A, Oxford; Montagu William Edward Dobbs, Esq., B.A., Cambridge; Thomas Milnes Colmore, Esq., At the Rolls Chamber an application was made B.A., Oxford; Francis Carleton Reeves, Esq., in the case of Brougham v. Cauvin. The late B.A., Dublin; John Henry Augustus Schneider, Lord Brougham engaged the literary services of Esq., B.A., Cambridge; Alfred Whitaker, Esq., Dr. Cauvin in arranging his correspondence for B.A., Cambridge; James Ralph Hall, Esq., B.A., publication. A dispute occurred about the remuOxford; Richard Durnford, Esq., B.A., Cam-neration, and his Lordship commenced a suit to bridge; Mackenzie Dalzell Edwin Stuart Chal- get possession of his documents, on which Dr. mers, Esq., B.A., Oxford; John Mountney Lely, Cauvin claimed a lien. After the death of Lord Esq., M.A., Oxford; and Joseph Maghull Yates, Brougham the present Lord Brougham continued Esq., B.A., Cambridge. the proceedings, and the matter was referred to Mr. Church, the chief clerk, to ascertain the amount to be paid. The parties had attended before him, and evidence was adduced on both sides. For the defendant a large sum was claimed, and on the part of Lord, Brougham it was denied that the defendant was entitled to anything like the amount. The matter stood over for further evidence, and the present application was to refer the case to the Master of the Rolls to take his opinion as to the mode of ascertaining the amount. The chief clerk granted the application.

MIDDLE TEMPLE.-The undermentioned gentlemen have been called to the Degree of the Utter Bar by the Hon. Society of the Middle Temple:-Cornelius Marshall Warmington, Esq., of the London University, and Hume Scholar of University College, London; holder of the Exhibition in Jurisprudence, Civil and International Law, in July 1868, and of the Studentship in Michaelmas Term 1868, awarded by the Council of Legal Education; William Comer Petheram, Esq.; John Francis Popham, Esq., B.A., Trinity College, Dublin, and of Downing College, Cambsidge; Charles Whitlaw, Esq., of Christ Church, Oxford; Philip Boyle Abraham, Esq., LL.B., Lawrence, Esq., LL.B., Trinity Hall, Cambridge; Trinity College, Cambridge; Alfred Tristram Henry Frederic Lionnet, Esq.; Charles Henry Spitta, Esq.; Charles Stewart-Dakyns, Esq.; Falkiner Sandes Collis, Esq., B.A., Trinity College, Dublin; Edward Blair Michell, Esq., B.A., Magdalen College, Oxford; Alan Stewart, Esq., B.A., Christ Church, Oxford; Allan Holmes, Esq., B.A., Queen's College, Oxford; Henry Powell, Esq., of the University of London; Walter Arthur Copinger, Esq.; Pierce Egan, jun., Esq., B.A., University of London; Robert Owen Moulsdale, Esq., J.P., B.A., and late Scholar of Queen's College, Oxford; Edward Jessel, Esq., B.A., University of London; Archibald Morrison, Esq., M.A., LL.D., of Glasgow; Robert Charles Jay, Esq.; Nawab Syad Asghar Ali Khan Bahadoor; Nawab Syad Ahmud Ali; James Thomas Anderson, Esq., Member of the Faculty of Advocates, and of the College of Justice,

SCOTCH LAW REFORM,-The Solicitor-General, on Monday, delivered an address on law amendment to the members of the Scottish Society for burgh, in which he advocated certain legal reforms. promoting the Amendment of the Law, at EdinHe recommended a change in the form of process in the Court of Session in all simple cases by shortening the statements required to be made by the pursuers and defenders. He was in favour of retaining the first and second divisions of the Court of Session and the Lords Ordinaries, but gave it as his impression that it would be an improvement if the whole Ordinary Judges took the duty of Outer and Inner Houses in rotation. He was opposed to a diminution in the number of judges. pressing an opinion on the question of double As to the Sheriff Courts, without ex sheriffships, the Solicitor-General suggests that the Sheriff's Courts should exist only for causes of inferior importance. assimilation of the laws of Scotland and England He also advocated the in relation to marriage and legitimacy, succession and wills, and the solemnities of deeds. He con LINCOLN'S-INN. The undermentioned gentle- cluded by referring to the necessity for an alter men have been called to the degree of Barris-ation in the law of entail and the law of teinds. ter-at-Law, by the Hon. Society of Lincoln's-inn :

Scotland.

George Sangster Green, Esq., Exhibitioner,
General Examination, Inns of Court, Trinity
Term, 1868; William, Jacob Birk, Esq.; Jeffery
Edwards, Esq., B.A., Cambridge: Robert Dawson
Mayne, Esq., B.A., Oxford; Ferdinand Ribton,
Esq., Cambridge; Joseph Barnes, Boyle, Esq.;
Dublin: Leighton Hope-Edwardes, Esq., B.A.,
Cambridge; John William Bund Willis-Bund,
Esq., M.A. and LL.B., Cambridge: James Copley
Moyle, Esq.,; Matthew George Pengree, Esq.;
James Simson, Esq., Edinburgh; Charles Gilbert
Master, Esq.; and John William Reid, Esq.

GRAY'S-INN.-At the recent pension, Michael
Law, B.A., Trinity College, Dublin, the second
son of Michael Law, of No. 8, Great Denmark-
street, in the city and county of Dublin, Esq.,
was called to the degree of Barrister-at-Law by
the Hon. Society of Gray's-inn.

On Monday, on the occasion of celebrating 'Grand-day," the Society of the Middle Temple entertained Mr. Reverdy Johnson as its principal guest.

The attendance was unusually large. When the American Minister passed up the hall in the procession of the benchers and their guests he was received with enthusiastic cheering. As is the custom on such occasions, the only toast was "The Queen.'

LAW REPORTING.-The following are the memhers appointed to represent the several Inns of Court and the Incorporated Law Society upon the council. Lincoln's-inn-Sir Roundell Palmer, Q.C.

REPORTING OF THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE

LAW COURTS COMMISSION.-After a long deliberation. the Home Office, acting on the instigation of the Stationery Office, has resolved not to permit the printing of any portion of the evidence before the Royal Commissioners on Scotch Law, until the whole is printed in a blue-book at the close of the inquiry. The reason for this decision is, that the publication from time to time of the evidence, selected or abridged, would "spoil the sale" of the blue-book to be issued some months hence. The real effects will be that, the matter having been withdrawn from public attention, the public will never read, much less buy; that the newspapers will be rid of much unreadable reading: that the Commission, already looked on with little interest and no favour, will fade away out of sight and memory.-Scotsman.

ANECDOTE OF M. BERRYER.-In a letter to a cident in the career of Napoleon III. which, if his contemporary, Mr. C. L. Gruneisen explains an instory is correct, has been the subject of much unfounded comment. Addressing the court before which he was tried for the Boulogne invasion, Prince Louis Napoleon said: "I represent a principle, a cause, and a defeat. The principle is the sovereignty of the people; the cause is that of the Empire; the defeat is that of Waterloo. The principle-you have recognised it; the cause -you have served it; the defeat-you would venge it." This has often been cited as an illus tration of the Prince's Corsican spirit and vindictive feeling towards England. According to Mr.

Gruneisen, however, the allusion to Waterloo did not originate with the Prince, but was put into his month by his advocate, M. Berryer, to whom it was suggested by a casual remark of an English friend, who was with him when revising the Prince's draft of his speech the night before the trial. When M. Berryer read the passage about the "principle and the cause" which the Prince represented, the Englishman hinted that he represented something else, and that was a defeat-Waterloo. C'est le mot, c'est le mot," exclaimed Berryer, and so the sentence was completed. It may be inferred that the Englishman was no other than Mr. Gruneisen, who, being then Paris correspondent of the Post, obtained a copy of the speech from the Prince's counsel before it was delivered and dispatched it across the Channel by pigeon-express, so that it was published the next day in London-a feat that made much talk in those days.

MAGISTRATE AND PARISH
LAWYER.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH..
Saturday, Jan. 23.

(Sittings in Banco, before the LORD CHIEF
JUSTICE, and HANNEN and HAYES, JJ.)
The court were occupied the whole day with the
case relating to the rival claims to the office of
clerk of the peace of the county of Kent, which,
it will be seen, has at last been decided.

REG. v. RUSSELL.

This was a quo warranto against Mr. Francis Russell, who for two or three years past has held the office of clerk of the peace for the county of Kent, to establish his claim to that office. He set up that the previous holder of the office, Mr. Wildes, had been convicted before the court of quarter sessions of having misdemeaned himself in his office, and had been deprived of his office for that offence. This was denied, and the facts had been set forth at length in a special verdict, and have been more than once stated in our columns. The question was, whether Mr. Wildes had wilfully refused to obey an order of the court to register a certain order. In fact, he had never recorded it, representing that he considered it irregular; and the point was, whether he had gone beyond mere remonstrance. This, of course, depended on all the circumstances of the case which had been before the court of quarter sessions, and were now brought before this court on the special verdict. Mellish (with him Archibald), was heard at great length on behalf of Mr. Russell.

M. Chambers (with him Gates), was heard in reply on behalf of Mr. Wildes.

The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, at the close of the

arguments, said the court felt themselves in a position at once to give judgment, and proceeded accordingly to pronounce that judgment. There were, he said, two great questions, first, whether the court could enter into the question of the misconduct; and next, whether, if so, there was adequate evidence of it. Now upon the first question the clear and lucid argument of Mr. Mellish had satisfied them that the court of quarter sessions had jurisdiction to enter into the alleged misdemeanor. Then arose the question whether, supposing it proved, it amounted to a sufficient cause for removal from the office. And he could not doubt that it did. The clerk of the peace might be justified in remonstrating or bringing his objections before the court; but, if having done that, he persisted in wilful disobedience to the order, all subordination would be at an end if such conduct was to be allowed. There would, therefore, be a sufficient cause of removal if a wilful refusal was proved. Then came the question whether it was so proved. But first, there was this most important question, whether this court could enter into that question, seeing that there had been a judgment of the court of quarter And the court considered that they could not enter into it, for the court of quarter sessions having jurisdiction to enter into it had entered into it, and had lawfully determined it. They had heard evidence, they had determined upon the charge, and this court could not, according to established principles, overrule their decisions. And the Lord Chief Justice added, for himself, that after the most careful consideration of the case, he could come to no other conclusion than that Mr. Wildes, from whatever cause-be it from anger or from obstinacy-did wilfully refuse to enter the order. And there was this awkward circumstance, that the matter was one in which he had been personally interested, and this very likely might have caused some irritation in his mind. Be that as it may, however, although at first his language up to a certain period might have been explained as amounting merely to remonstrance, after that time it assumed a different character and amounted to wilful refusal. The written remonstrance he had addressed to the

sessions.

CONVEYANCER.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. MORTGAGE BY A TRUSTEE IN BREACH OF TRUST-PRIORITY.-B., sole trustee of a fund in settlement, sold it, and invested the proceeds in a mortgage to himself of real estate. He deposited the mortgage and the other title deeds with C. to secure a loan to himself, but gave him no notice of the trusts. The cestui que trusts were held to have a priority of claim over the C., and the title deeds were ordered to be delivered up to them: (Newton v. Newton, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 588, L. JJ.)

court might have been doubtful, but on its REAL PROPERTY LAWYER AND
being read in court, and on his being asked
by Lord Romney, "Do you still persist in refu-
sing to enter the order?" he answered, "I do ;"
and the answer was without qualification. What
made it clearer was that there was a resolution
that it be referred to the Finance Committee to
consider the refusal of Mr. Wildes to register the
order. It was his duty as clerk of the peace to
record that resolution, and yet he did not explain
or retract the "refusal" it alleged. The natural,
the irresistible conclusion was, that he intended a
wilful refusal. That being so, there could be no
doubt that it was a wilful refusal, and that it was
a misdemeanor which justified his removal from
the office. Whether, after the eleven years of Mr.
Wilde's service, and after his subsequently ex-
pressing his submission, it would have been well
to excuse his offence, this court could not, of
course, consider. It was enough to say that there
was sufficient evidence of a legal offence which
would justify the removal. Upon both grounds,
therefore, the court came to the clear conclusion
that they were bound to give judgment for the
defendant, Mr. Russell.
HANNEN, J. said he entirely concurred in the
judgment and upon both the grounds stated.
HAYES, J. also said he quite agreed in the reasons
so clearly stated by the Lord Chief Justice.
Judgment for the defendant, Mr. Russell-that
is, that he retain his office.

BOROUGH OF NEW WINDSOR.-The quarter sessions for this borough will be holden on Feb. 8. Allan McLean Stenner, Esq., recorder; Henry Darvill, Esq., clerk of the peace. Ten days' notice of appeal is required.

The convict Bisgrove has been transferred from the Taunton county prison to the Government lunatic asylum, Broadmoor.

The statement which has been published in several papers that Mr. William Roupell had been liberated from prison in consequence of the state of his health is authoritatively contradicted. Mr. Roupell is still in prison, but is in a very bad state of health, and a memorial on his behalf has been presented to the Home Secretary, which is now under consideration.

THE DEATH OF SIR RICHARD MAYNE MESSAGE FROM THE QUEEN.-General Grey has, by command of Her Majesty the Queen, addressed the following message to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Right Hon. H. A. Bruce-"The Queen desires me to say how grieved and concerned she is to hear of Sir R. Mayne's death. Notwithstanding the attacks lately made upon him, Her Majesty believes him to have been a most efficient head of the police, and to have discharged the duties of his important situation most ably and satisfactorily in very difficult times." By gracious permission of Her Majesty, Capt Labalmondiere, Acting Commissioner of Police, has officially made known to the force under his command the terms of sympathy in which she has been pleased to express herself in reference to their late chief.

THE RELIEF OF VAGRANTS.-An important circular has been issued by the Poor Law Board to various unions throughout the country, drawing the attention of the guardians to the existing system of relieving vagrants, and suggesting several reforms. In order to distinguish between professional tramps and those whose real destitution gives them a claim to relief, the board suggests that the name and occupation of each applicant, with the place whence he comes, and the place whither he is going, be recorded in a book of reference; that the applicant should forthwith (except when ill) be put in a bath; that as far as practicable he should be lodged in a separate cell; and that the performance of a sufficient task should be required before he set out in the morning. For reasons which the recent publication of tramps' opinions as to the relative comfort of certain workhouses make manifest the board point out the advantage of providing a uniform scale of diet and task work in the casual wards throughout the country. With a view to the attainment of such uniformity, the board append to the circular a scale of food and work which they submit for the consideration of the several boards of guardians, and ask for an expression of opinion as to its desirability. The scale proposes to give for breakfast to male tramps above fifteen years of age either 6oz. or 8oz. of bread (at the discretion of the guardians), and one pint of gruel; women to have an equal quantity of gruel, but only 5oz. of bread. In return for this food and lodging male tramps will be required to break from 1cwt. to 3cwt. of stone, or to pick 1lb. of oakum, and women to pick lb. of oakum or to perform such other task as the guardians may deem more suitable, and the board may sanction. The board intimates that when the answers from the various unions have been received and considered, an order embodying these suggestions, or such modifications of them as may seem desirable, will be issued.

LANDLORD AND TENANT-UNDER TENANTNOTICE TO QUIT-DELIVERY OF POSSESSION.A tenant who holds under a parol demise is bound to deliver up to his landlord absolute possession of the premises demised, at the expiration of his term; and is responsible in damages to the landlord where his under-tenant holds over without his consent. A tenant's under-tenant held over without the tenant's consent, and notwithstanding a notice to quit served on him by the tenant, and the landlord brought an action of ejectment to recover possession of the premises from the under-tenant: Held, that the landlord was entitled to recover from the tenant

the costs of this action of ejectment, as well as the amount of a quarter's rent of the premises of which he had been deprived by the wrongful holding over of the under-tenant: (Henderson v. Squire, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 601, Q. B.)

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. WINDING-UP REMUNERATION OF LIQUIThis is to be governed by the "Regulation of the Court of May 1868" It is not to be estimated by a percentage on the assets realised, but by the scale as promulgated by the court: (Re The Agra and Masterman's Bank, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 519. V.C.G.)

-

WINDING-UP PROOF OVERDRAWN BANKING ACCOUNT.-The articles of association prohibited the directors from contracting any loan beyond 500l. without the consent of the company by special resolution. The company having overdrawn its banking account, one of the directors drew bills to the amount of 1122, which were accepted by another director, and discounted by the bank. The proceeds were expended in liquidating the overdrawn account and for the purpose of the company. This was held not to be "a loan I within the meaning of the articles, and that the bankers were entitled to prove for the amount: (Re The Cefn Cilcen Mining Company, 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 593.

-.

OF

WINDING-UP CONTRIBUTORY LAPSE TIME.-B. was an original director, and signed the memorandum of association. Shares were allotted to him, and he paid-up the full amount. Other shares were transferred to him by his father, and subsequently he sold all the shares. Afterwards there was a fresh issue of shares at a premium, called C. shares. The memorandum of association had provided for the issues of such shares, and the signataries thereby agreed each to take twenty of such new shares. B. did not accept them, nor were they in fact allotted to him. He was held, nevertheless, to be a 19 L. T. Rep. N. S. 599. V. C. Giffard.) contributory in respect of them: (Tooth's case,

RESPONSIBILITY OF RAILWAY COMPANIES.A question as to the responsibility of railway companies as carriers has just been decided at the Civil Tribunal of Paris. M. Say, sugar refiner, had sent in February last a sum of 12.150f. in banknotes by the Northern line to M. Martine, of Ham (Somme), in payment of certain merchandise. The bag which had contained the money was duly delivered, but on its being opened the contents were found to have disappeared. A suit now being brought to recover the above-mentioned sum from the company, the defendants pleaded Art. 105 of the Commercial Code, which says:-"The reception of the object transported and the payment of the cost of conveyance precludes all action against the carrier." The Tribunal, however, decided that the clause in question was not applicable in the present instance, as the seam of the bag had been opened on the way, and had been sewed up again so skilfully that M. Martine could not possibly have seen from its outward appearance that it had been tampered with. A verdict against the railway company was consequently given.

any County Court should have Admiralty jurisdic. said representation into consideration, is pleased, of potatoes by the defendant's cows and pigs,

The County Court of Gloucestershire holden at Dursley, Gloucester, and interpleader, and what must a plaintiff show by his