UNDER THE PUMP.

-:0:

Chronology and Analysis of International Law. By WM. PERCY PAIN, LL.B., barrister-at-law. (Published by Digby and Long, 18, Bouveriestreet, Fleet-street, E.C.)-This book is the result of an idea somewhat

novel, and undoubtedly excellently conceived. The author's purpose has been to set forth in chronological

order some of the chief rules which govern, or have governed, the intercourse of States, and to refer them to the principles they embody or illustrate, that the work might subserve the purpose of ready reference, and also assist the student. It is in our opinion matter of regret that the volume is so condensed (eighty-six short pages), for it does not pretend to be a complete repertory, and indeed, though it contains a wonderful store of information, it fails in some not unimportant points. Where is Somerset's Case (1771)? Why is not the right to visit" as distinguished from the "right of search" referred to in mentioning the treaty between Great Britain and the United States of 1862? Where are

66

the case of James Napper Tandy (1795-8), and the cases of The International (1871), 3 Adm., and Eccl. 321; and The Gauntlet, 3 Adm. and Eccl. 381, 4 P.C. 184 (1872)? These points we have taken at random, and the later cases are no doubt of less importance, but the value of such a work depends largely on its being a fairly complete compendium. We are, however, unwilling to seem ungraciously hypercritical, and if we have thus pointed out defects, it has not been so much from an idea of their magnitude as from a sense of the great value the work would have if its small size were enlarged sufficiently to enable the completeness we have indicated to be attained. As it is, its good points are many, and its defects comparatively few.

Clerke and Brett's Conveyancing Acts. Third edition. By AUBREY ST. JOHN CLERKE, B.A., and THOMAS BRETT, LL.B., B.A., barristers-at-law. (Butterworths. 1889.)This volume deserves hearty commendation, for the work throughout is characterised by conciseness in arrangement, patient labour in research, and scholarly accuracy in compiling. All recent cases have been incorporated in the work, so far at least as our perusal has served as a test, their precise effect given, and, as the authors say, much in the nature of conjectural interpretation in the previous editions has now been replaced by the authority of express decision. The result is eminently satisfactory.

Tumbledown Farm. By ALAN MUIR. (London: Spencer Blackett and Hallam.)-It is rarely that we meet with a novel nowadays which inspires the healthy interest and affords the pleasure which accompanied the perusal of this clever and entertaining book. The author has a very distinct individuality of style, and his characterisation reminds us in a degree of Charles Dickens. Something of the Dickens whimsicality of conception and boldness of outline is noticeable in some of Alan Muir's creations, and there is also evident a pervading human sympathy with the victims of circumstances, and a contempt for pharisaical and Philistine respectability which also reminds one of the great dead novelist. As the author himself is scarcely successful in preserving the mystery which is at the root of the life-sorrow of his heroine, Vanity Hardware, we will not discount the enjoyment of readers of the novel by intimating more than that this beautiful wayward, brilliant girl, who lives at Tumbledown Farm with her very mysterious father, has a secret, and a terrible one, which eventually dashes the cup of happiness from her lips just as she is on the eve of marriage with one Willie Snow, a model of respectability, vacillation, and selfishness, who eventually marries an excellent but very "managing" young woman, and grows fat, prosperous, prosaic, and slovenly. The story of poor Vanity's life is ostensibly told by one Dr. Book, a delightful old chemist, full of shrewd sayings spiced with sly humour,

but always rich in kindly feeling; and a certain Miss Millicent Hervey, to whom is credited whatever of grace or refinement-and there is much of both-may be found in the pages. These two, a quaintly-matched pair, discuss, in curiously unconventional fashion, the various characters in the story, something in the style of the "chorus" in the old Greek plays. The idea is a novel and rather a daring one, but so well carried out that it adds to the pleasure of the reader. The first of the two volumes in which the story is published is the more interesting. In it we have Vanity Hardware in all her gloriously beautiful wayward womanhood, full of potential good and evil, yearning for the right, yet knit by indis. soluble bonds to crime, an animated mystery whose charm is all her own, and whose misfortunes are due to an untoward destiny. The story of her wooing by vacillating Willie Snow is admirably told, and there are many passages full of comedy and pathos, balanced with a delicate hand. Nor are stronger scenes lacking, the escape of a murderer-burglar by burning down a house and consuming himself with it being painted with genuine dramatic force. In the second volume the reader is introduced to a totally different set of characters, people in society, and these are sufficiently well drawn to speak favourably for the author's versatility. But the real interest of the book lies in the pages in which figure the heroine and her mysterious father, weak Willie Snow, sensible Nancy Steele, the scandal-mongering old maid, charming old Dr. Book, and Gracious Me, the drunken and disreputable spy. Dialogue and characterisation throughout are excellent, and we shall be surprised if "Tumbledown Farm" does not obtain a wide popularity. It is positively refreshing in its deliberate departure from all the orthodox cut and dried rules of fiction, and we congratulate the author upon his courage in striking out a line for himself, and upon the resultant success.

Mr. Smith: a Part of his Life. By L. B. WALFORD. (Same publishers.)-We congratulate Messrs. Spencer Blackett and Hallam upon the excellent edition which they have issued of this clever book, and the reading public upon being able to obtain so capital an edition of Mrs. Walford's novels for half-a-crown. The multiplication of cheap fiction of the best kind is one of the healthiest of the signs of public taste and of a surety "Mr. Smith" is so remarkable a work that it would not be flattery to call it brilliant. Mrs. Walford's stories are always charming, full of humour and tenderness, reflecting faithfully the many facets of this curious life of ours, but beneath the glittering surface runs an undercurrent of wise thought and even philosophy, which is never prosy yet ever present; never obtrusive yet never lacking. Many of our readers will be familiar with "Mr. Smith "; their hearts will have glowed with generous admiration of the simple, humbleminded, manly, humdrum, middle-aged hero, so prosaic externally, so full of hidden chivalry and romance; and few men probably have not ranked themselves among the champions of lovely, daring, motherless Helen Tolleton, a sort of innocent Becky Sharp, whose flirtations, audacious and even perilous as they were, had not steeled her heart or blinded her eyes to the appreciation of the single-minded devotion of an honest man. Mrs. Walford's story abounds in comedy of the best type, but side by side with it runs much pure pathos, much shrewd observation of men and women; and in every page there is an amount of goodnatured tolerance which takes the sting out of many a shaft of epigrammatic satire. The three Tolleton girls, cleverly contrasted in character; the Hunts, with their plans for catching Mr. Smith for their uncomely daughter Maria; lazy old Mr. Tolleton; the fascinating Captain Wellwood; careless, debonair Lord Sauffreton and his chic little wife; the scoundrelly Colonel Aytoun, model coward and libertine-all are vivid studies of interesting people, and the book is crammed from end to end with smart things. The consummate art of the author is shown by the delicacy with which she skims over the thinnest of ice; for " Mr. Smith," while full of piquancy and dealing with dangerous incidents now and then, does not contain a single word or thought to which the most rampant prude or purist could object. In a word, the story is admirably told, brimful of interest and excitement, and so smartly written that it can be read again and again without exhausting its power of entertainment. "Mr. Smith" has unquestionably added

to the already high reputation gained by Mrs. Walford, who is quite in the front rank of contemporary novelists.

By Mrs.

Baby's Grandmother. WALFORD. (Same publishers.)-In the same edition as Mr. Smith" is included inter alia this earlier novel from the same brilliant pen. It is superfluous in referring to this new edition of a book, which all the world has read with delight, to do more than remind our readers very briefly of the irresistible fascinations of Lady Matilda, the "Grandmother," who is at thirty-seven so much more dashing, beautiful, and vivacious than her prim daughter Lotta, and whose wit, audacity, and heart of gold make her one of the most charming creations of modern fiction. Lady Matilda is so essentially a man's woman that it speaks eloquently for the author's creative powers that she should have sprung from the brain of a lady novelist. Nor are plain, unassuming Lord Overton; handsome, weak-minded Teddy Lessingham; old-womanish Robert Hanbury; the brilliant barrister Whewell; and the mysterious, sombre Challoner, less able characterisations; and, as is invariably the case in Mrs. Walford's stories, the dialogue is brilliant, humorous, yet never forced. The author has mastered the ars celare artem,

for no one ever talked half as well as her people, and yet. it is all done without apparent effort or the slightest taint of artificiality. There are also in this book the touch of tragedy and the broad sympathetic humanity so characteristic of the author, and we can heartily commend the new edition of "Baby's Grandmother" to our readers as containing "infinite riches" of wit and wisdom, of tenderness and badinage, of comedy and tragedy, "in a little room."

TO THE EDITOR OF "PUMP Court." SIR,-May we trespass on your kindness by asking the aid of your valuable medium in making known the circumstances of the collapse which has befallen this venerable sanctuary?

The enclosed leaflet will give you a statement of the necessities of our case. If you will favour us by an editorial notice you will help us considerably. We feel sure you will have thousands of sympathetic readers, if only from the fact that our tabernacle covers the remains of the author of that hymn of Christendom, now almost immortalised-" Rock of Ages," and was built by the famous preacher, George Whitefield, of a hundred years ago. For the sake of evangelical religion we trust you will consider us in your well-known and appreciated journal. I am, yours faithfully,

J. JACKSON WRAY, Pastor. Tottenham-court-road, London, W., 26th July, 1889.

THE HANSARD PUBLISHING UNION, LIMITED. AN extraordinary general meeting of the shareholders of this company was held at the Cannon-street Hotel on Tuesday, the 20th inst., to confirm the subjoined resolution, which was passed at the extraordinary general meeting of the company held on the 29th ult. :-"That the capital of the company be increased to £500,000 by the creation of 7,500 new ordinary shares of £10 each, and 5,000 new preference shares of £10 each; and that the holders of such new preference shares shall, subject to the provisions in the articles of association of the company contained, with reference to the formation of a reserve fund and the payment of interim dividends, be entitled pari passu with the holders of the 20,000 preference shares in the capital of the company already created, to a cumulative preferential divi dend of 8 per cent. per annum on the amount for the time being paid up, or credited as paid up, on the preference shares

held by them respectively; and that the directors be, and they are hereby, authorised to issue all or any of such new preference and ordinary shares accordingly."

The chair was taken by Alderman Sír HENRY ISAACS.

Mr. A. EDMUND EDWARDS (the secretary) read the notice convening the meeting, and also the resolution to be proposed, as given above.

The CHAIRMAN, in moving the adoption of the resolution, said: Well, gentlemen, we are met here to-day in conformity with the statute, which regulates our proceedings as a limited liability company, in order that you may confirm the resolution passed at such meeting. It is not necessary, and further, it is unusual, to make observations at a meeting such as this, convened for a purely formal purpose. I now call on the secretary or one of the directors to move the resolution in question.

Mr. KEGAN PAUL: Gentlemen, I have much pleasure in moving the resolution which you have just heard read. Mr. SENNITT: I have much pleasure in seconding the reso lution.

The resolution was carried unanimously.

The CHAIRMAN: Gentlemen-I should say, ladies and gentlemen-I am much obliged to you for your attendance this afternoon.

The proceedings then terminated.

It is a great testimony to the confidence that the share

holders have in the directors, that such an important proposition should have been adopted nem. con., and without the slightest shadow of dissent. The shareholders showed their sense in trusting to the guidance of those who had so skilfully piloted them in the past. We understand that the money asked for was forthcoming three times over.

MR. JUSTICE STEPHEN.

MR. JUSTICE STEPHEN will probably go down to posterity, not so much as an able counsel, or as a deliberate and painstaking judge, but rather as a codifier, historian, and teacher of English law. Also as a vigorous and distinctive personality.

He

Sir James Fitz-James Stephen was born on the 3rd of March, 1829, at Kensington Gore, London, the eldest son of the Right Honourable Sir James Stephen, K.C.B. was educated at Eton and at Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took the M.A. degree in 1856. He had already, in 1854, taken the LL.B. degree at London University, at the same time carrying off the scholarship for the Principles of Legislation (Mr. Grant Duff coming second), and dividing with another the honours of Conveyancing. In the same year (1854) he was also called to the bar at the Inner Temple. He went the Midland Circuit. In 1859 he was made Recorder of Newark, a post which he held for ten years, till his departure to India in 1869. In the preceding year (1868) he took silk, and was elected a bencher of his Inn. For about two years and a half (1869-72) he was Legal Member of the Council of the Governor General of India. On his return he was appointed counsel to Cambridge University, an office he retained till his elevation to the bench in 1879. For about four years (1875-79) he was professor of Common Law to the Inns of Court. On the 1st of January, 1877, he had been created a K.C.S.I., and in 1878 he received from Oxford the honorary and most honourable degree of D.C.L. In 1879 he was appointed a Justice of the Exchequer Division of the High Court of Justice; and in the same year he became a Justice of the Queen's Bench Division. He has never sat in Parliament; but he unsuccessfully contested Harwich in 1865 and Dundee in 1873.

As a barrister, Mr. Fitz-James Stephen was probably best known in appeal cases before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council; especially after his return from his short sojourn in India. If not so brilliant and versatile as some of his compeers, Mr. Fitz-James Stephen was always learned and impressive-a powerful defender and a dangerous opponent.

When Mr. Fitz-James Stephen went to India in 1869

as Legal Member of the Legislative Council at Calcutta, he had already made a reputation as an authority on the Criminal Law. In the course of his official duties in India, his attention was strongly directed, from a legislative point of view, to this subject, and particularly to the codification of the Criminal Law. Among other labours, he drew and carried through the Legislative Council the Code of Criminal Procedure, Act X. of 1872, which, with some slight alterations and variations, was re-enacted and extended to the High Courts by Act X. of 1882. We may also specify the Indian Marriages Bill, which Mr. Fitz-James Stephen carried just before his return home in 1872. The completeness, lucidity, and accuracy of his many and important Bills earned the admiration of all impartial minds; and it was fully admitted that in the short space of two years and a half he had " conferred solid and enduring benefits on India which it falls to the lot of few men to achieve in a life long service." This short spell of Indian service was a period of striking achievement, fruitful of beneficent results to a numberless population.

Α like distinction marks Mr. Fitz-James Stephen's tenure of the professorship of Common Law to the Inns of Court. "He had none of the diffuseness and wordy uncertainty of ordinary professors," is the just criticism of an independent hearer. Fortunately the substance of, at any rate, a considerable portion of his lectures has been published, to the great advantage of multitudes that did not hear the liv

ing voice. In his last lecture, delivered to a large and enthusiastic audience of barristers as well as of students, Sir James expatiated on the study of the Common Law. He had hoped, he said, to go with his students through all the component parts of the Common Law in the same way as he had already dealt with the subjects of "Criminal Law" and "Evidence." It is much be regretted that even a judgeship should have called him away

to

This volume may really be regarded as the first edition of "A History of the Criminal Law of England," published twenty years later in three volumes. In 1873 or 1874 the author found himself "hampered at every page" in the preparation of a second edition of the "General View," through the absence of any authoritative statement of the law to which he could refer. With the purpose of filling the vacant space, he wrote his "Digest of the Criminal Law," which was published in 1877, and contained a systematic statement of the law of crimes and punishments. A companion volume to this he next produced (in collaboration with his eldest son), being a "Digest of the Law of Criminal Procedure," which was published in 1883, contemporaneously with the history.

And here may be noted an interesting episode in

the history of Codi. fication. When Sir James Stephen had completed his "Digest of the Criminal Law," he saw that a little alteration would shape it into a draft Penal Code, and accordingly communicated this view to the late Lord Cairns (then Lord Chancellor) and to the late Lord Justice Holker (then Attorney-General). These great authorities approved the idea, and under their direction Sir James drew the draft Criminal Code of 1878, including both the definitions of indictable offences and a system

1878.

of criminal procedure. This Sir John Holker brought forward in the ensuing Session, but although it was favourably received, was crushed out by pressure of other measures. A commission, however, was issued to Lord Blackburn, Mr. Justice Barry, Lord Justice Lush, and Sir James Stephen, to inquire into, and consider, and report upon the Draft Code of The Commission sat daily, with few intermissions, from November, 1878, to May, 1879, a period of five months, the Report being signed on June 12th. By way of appendix to the Report, the Draft Code was given as revised by the Commissioners, and Sir James Stephen was able to say, "I did not discover, in the course of the searching discussions of every detail of the subject which took place, any serious error or omission in the 'Digest' upon which both measures were founded." The Code was at once introduced into Parliament, but too late to be carried through. Next year (1880) there was a change of Ministry. In 1882 the Criminal Procedure part of the Code was mentioned in the Queen's Speech as a Government measure, but once more it had to give way before business of greater emergency.

from such an important undertaking. He took occasion to recommend in general terms a useful plan of study, and set forth the advantages to be derived from a proper study of the law. These lectures form one of the very few bright episodes in the recent history of legal education in England.

It remains to speak of Sir James's important contributions to legal literature. As early as 1863 he had published "A General View of the Criminal Law of England." "This volume," he daringly said, "is intended neither for practical use nor for an introduction to professional study. Its object is to give an account of the general scope, tendency, and design of an important part of our institutions, of which surely none can have a greater moral significance, or be more closely connected with broad principles of morality and politics, than those by which men rightfully, deliberately, and in cold blood kill, enslave, and otherwise torment their fellow-creatures.'

نے

In 1862 appeared "Essays by a Barrister," being a re print of articles contributed to the Saturday Review; and in 1873, "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity," the substance of which had previously been published in the columns of the Pall Mall Gazette.

In 1855 Mr. Fitz-James Stephen married Mary Richardson, daughter of the late Rev. John William Cunningham, vicar of Harrow-on-the-Hill.

PUMP COURT.

tinction between law and fact. The prisoner is arraigned; he is alleged to have done this or that; and before the

EDITORIAL, ADVERTISEMENT, AND PUBLISHING OFFICES, 33, Exeter Street, Strand, W.C.

AUGUST 21, 1889.

Pro Lege.

TRIAL BY PLEBISCITE.

THE readiest, simplest, and most economical mode of administering justice is presented to us in Wyoming and Colorado. A trapper riding across a wild has struck a patch of hemlock forest, on the edge of which there is a group of ponies. The ponies have sought the shade of the trees, and make no show of leaving it on his approach. He dismounts, and is struck with the appearance of one of the ponies. It would form a good exchange for his own panting, limping brute. He examines it closely for brand or mark of ownership, and he discovers none. Without hesitation he then puts his bridle on its head and his saddle upon its back. Later on he ties up in front of a saloon in Shanty City, and entering, calls for a drink. Meanwhile the tied-up horse is receiving the attention of one street loafer after another, until a fairsized crowd has assembled. The horse, says the first street loafer, is a stolen one, and the man in whose possession it is is a horse-thief. Forthwith the fair-sized crowd press into the saloon, and constitute themselves into a committee of free-born and naturalised American citizens. The trapper protests that he was never in these parts before, and narrates the circumstances of the "swap" of horses. A vote is taken, and he being voted guilty by a majority of those present, is straightway taken outside, and hanged to the sign-post. Why not? Of what use the tomfoolery of judges and juries when decisions may be reached without them? There is, indeed, the highest authority for the assertion that the commonsense of the many is more unerring than the wisdom of the few. The trial by plébiscite of Mrs. Maybrick is of the Colorado and Wyoming stamp. In flesh and blood it sets up our modern Demos, with long pipe and pint of beer before him, to repudiate jury trial as humbug, and to jeer at evidence as coloured by the judge. Where angels would fear to tread, he stamps in hobnail boots and clogs; and that men of education should be found backing him is but a confirmation of Carlyle's judgment, that men are mostly fools. We tinker at our jurisprudence, that with increase of knowledge its foundations may be broadened and its superstructure still more humanised. To countenance its overthrow by hobnails and clogs implies either disgraceful devilment or crass ignorance of the issues which again are wildly raised.

Crime is constantly being committed, and the purpose of an assize is a gaol delivery. For such gaol delivery judges receive commission from the Crown, that they may interpret and enforce the law, and juries are empannelled that they may determine about the facts; hence the dis

the testimony lest any portion of it should be forgotten, but not before he who has appeared for the Crown and he who has appeared for the prisoner has done the same thing. The most is made of every point by both, but especially by the latter, before, it may be said, the judge has a word to say. All the evidence that the prosecution is going to give, and all the witnesses it is going to call, are known weeks and weeks beforehand to the defence, that they may arrange to meet it; while they are at liberty to play dark meantime, and to spring evidence on the prosecution at the last moment, which has not had a similar opportunity to prepare to meet and parry it; and extraordinary, not to say scandalous assumption, when the judge speaks, in this Maybrick case, he colours or he keeps back something, as if everything had not previously been before the Court; he influences the judgment of the jury, so as to make the verdict his own, as if from the instant of their being sworn to the instant of the deliverance of their verdict they were inhabiting an atmosphere of influences and emotions. That the insolence-no other word can be used-of playing upon the words, colouring and suppression, have succeeded in their purpose of arousing ignorance, prejudice, and sentiment the proofs are manifold; petitions abound for reprieve and pardon, and disputation on each and every point is as bitter as upon the Irish question. Yet no fairer trial ever took place in England. The jury, drawn from a wide area and from the somewhat radical tradesman class, determined on the fact, and the judge pronounced the sentence of the law; and thereupon the commission of assize closed, the judge resuming his other functions and the jurors returning to their occupations. To find fault. now with either becomes an outrage; they alone had the persons and the testimony before them, and they alone acted under responsibility. To say now that Mrs. Maybrick was tried for one offence and condemned for another, is equivalent in force to the assertion that the moon is made of green cheese.

The record being closed, by the condemnation of Mrs. Maybrick, and judge and jury being dispersed, how stands the Crown in relation to the case, and how would the judgment against Mrs. Maybrick be affected, were Parliament to suspend its standing orders, for the passage of a bill for appeals in criminal cases? A Court of Criminal Appeal, consisting of judges, would be called upon to determine questions of law and fact. Those of law would not override fact; no conceivable point of misdirection by the judge can be discovered to set aside the finding of the jury that Maybrick was poisoned by his wife. Disposing of the points of law, the Court of Criminal Appeal, after considering the judge's notes, would call for the new facts brought to light since the conviction. Where are they in this Maybrick case, that the finding of the jury may be quashed? There are no new facts with the remotest bearing on the case, and in the circumstance it would be incumbent on the Court of Criminal Appeal to confirm the sentence. Since the conviction we may have had more conflict of opinion among medical men and experts, but what Court of Appeal could undertake to say that the jury ought to have believed one side, instead of the other, or that they ought to have doubted where they believed? The case was submitted to them, for them, and them alone, to say which side they believed; and what Court of trained judges would venture to say that there was not ample material on which to found a belief such as the jury stated? Otherwise, are you not transferring the trial of fact from jury to judge? Take care, Demos, what you are doing; you are going perilously near to cutting your own throat, only in your innocence you don't know it. It would be an ill day for this country when juries and the power that juries possess are done away with. You wrested your liberties with some struggle from the Crown. Are you going to hand them back again to its judges? It is not a Court of Criminal Appeal that you want, so don't use terms the import of which you know not, and mislead yourself by false analogies. It is a Court of Mercy you want, not a Court of Justice. We ought, however, first to ask ourselves whether a Court of Judges would serve your merciful intent better than the present means at your disposal. In any case we agree

that it is desirable that the burthen of granting or withholding mercy should be removed from the shoulders of one man, on whom pressure social, pressure political, pressure on a soft heart, emotional pressure, pressure of all sorts and on every side may be brought to bear. But remember, never pressure to hang, but pressure to abstain from hanging. What do you propose to substitute for this? Instead of one man-sometimes with reason disciplined to control the heart, oftener with more heart than head, in both cases absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by yielding to the pressure for pardoning-you would have several men, all with reason trained to the highest unemotional pitch (so far as the performance of their duties is concerned), with divided responsibility, so that a stern decision affects no one individually. No pressure of any sort possible here. Seeing the force of this reasoning, you may hope to avoid it by not making this Court of Mercy in substitution of, but preliminary to, the Court of Mercy you already have in Crown and Minister. But stop a little, and think whether the Home Secretary would, after your Court of Mercy of first instance had decided adversely, be likely to interfere. The adverse decision would cut away all the considerations which beforetime would influence him to pardon, would give him strength and support where he might otherwise have yielded to weakness. Let us point out to you another error which you have all along been making. The present arrangement, which gives the Crown, on the advice of the Home Secretary, the prerogative of pardon, was not originally intended as a Court of Mercy, but as a Court of Justice. It is the word "pardon" that misled you. The word was used in order to comply with forms, and to avoid arousing your aforetime jealousy of the Crown's interfering in any way with trials or the administration of justice. The commission to the judge has expired, the authority of the particular jury who tried the case is at an end, never to be revived again. Even if conceivably you could get together the same men at the same time, they would constitute but a new jury with new authority and new oath. Yet after sentence some new fact transpires, which shows the person to be innocent. How was this to be met? Could you, would you, grant the Crown the power to reverse the verdict of your jury, and while they said guilty permit the Crown to say not guilty, or vice versa? Not you, Demos; even in the days when you were but in swaddling-clothes you knew better than this. You feared where you might be landed if you allowed the Crown such a power. But what then? Was a person subsequently proved to be innocent to be punished because of the want of a machinery to set wrong right? No; and so the Crown had the prerogative of pardon, of free pardon, or of mitigation. It is not within the scope of this article to suggest that with its free pardon the Crown ought to have had the right of civil restitution. When you have leisure, Demos, think this over. It is a blot. But now you know that although the word pardon was used, it was not a Court of Mercy you intended or understood. Now let us go a step further. Why do you wish this Court of Mercy? Shall we tell you? You don't care much about this proposed Court of Mercy for other cases than murder. You don't like hanging, that is to say, capital punishment, and you would be glad to get rid of it if you dared. You are afraid to do away with it. So you would like a Court of Mercy composed of seven or eight lawyers, to have the power to say that this ugly man may be hanged, but that pretty woman shall be reprieved. And this is what it comes to. Only make up your mind which tribunal is more likely to grant what you wish: a tribunal, no member of which, either you or, for the matter of that, the Crown could displace, even if he had waxed deaf or age had rendered him too pervious or too impervious to female charms to suit your judgment or a tribunal the active member of which (the Home Secretary) you have it in your power to displace, either with or without his Government. When you have made up your mind as to what you want, PUMP COURT Will contribute its quantum of effort to aid you in getting it. Only, we again remind you to be careful to analyse exactly what it is you want, else you will have a repetition of King Log and King Stork. On the facts at present a Court of Criminal Appeal would assiga Mrs. Maybrick to the gallows of a surety; whereas under the existing system it is matter of speculation whether Mrs. Maybrick may not be reprieved, if not wholly set free.

GOLD SHARE TRANSFERS.

WHAT about gold share transfers? Is there, or is there not, delivery of what is known as "stock"; or is the game one of puts and calls, contangoes and backwardations? We must press these questions, because a high percentage of the South African gold mines are reputed to be fraudulent, and because things which were worth nothing yesterday are worth £20 to-day. Let us put a case. The Hen and Chickens Gold Mine has been floated in Johannesburg, and the ten thousand shares have been applied for on the spot, and are firm on the Johannesburg Exchange at five premium. To deal here in the shares the shares should be held here, but the Hen and Chickens shares are held in Johannesburg. How are shares to be delivered to a buyer here in London? "Easy enough," the boomer will respond; there is the cable, and there is responsibility in Johannesburg. The response is not satisfactory; it is merely plausible. Assume that the Hen and Chickens is a fraud, or that it is a claim on which Kaffir niggers have sunk a shaft, but only to find a blank draw; and in either case there could be no conceivable obstacle in the entire share capital, in paper, being sent over, and a good delivery of the same made at the next Stock Exchange settlement. On the contrary, take the case of the Betsey Jane Ward Gold Mining Company, Limited, whose £1 shares on the Johannesburg Exchange can only be bought at £100; and gold being now sent to the surface in bucketfuls, the quotation is likely to be advanced to £1,000. Where conceivably in Johannesburg is the fool to be found who by cable will give a London option in Betsey Jane Wards; or, who having given such option, can be depended upon for delivery? We will say nothing of the expense of intelligible telegrams to and from Johannesburg, nor of the remedy one would have in Johannesburg for the delivery of shares which, bought for £100, are now worth £1,000. Further, we will merely mention the time difficulty; our business hours find the Johannesburg dealers in bed, as their business hours find us in bed. There is a great deal in this bed difficulty when taken in connection with the undoubted convenience of the submarine cable. It keeps us and Johannesburg at cross purposes, and opens a wide door for abuse in the matter of quotation. Between the situation of Johannesburg and New York there is no parallel. In London there is the New York arbitrageur, and in New York there is the London arbitrageur; both responsible, both in a position to make good delivery. Where is the Johannesburg arbitrageur? He has no existence. All that Johannesburg can show to-day in London is fifty bona fide Betsey Jane Ward shares in one man's safe, and a hundred in another. Those holders are in a position to make good delivery of their respective holdings, no more. Practically, for share dealings, Johannesburg might as well be in the moon as in South Africa. There are no shares behind the Kaffir dealings. An attractive gamble South African gold shares may be, and indeed are, and that is all that can be said of them.

With these remarks before them, persons who usually are sober-minded should know what they are about. All is not gold that glitters. There are gold mines and gold mines. A leaden shilling does not become a silver one because an accidental circumstance has placed it in the purse of Baron Rothschild; and the shares of South African gold mines, inherently bad, do not become good from the fact of their being dealt in on the Kaffir Circus of the Stock Exchange. What commands a Stock Exchange quotation is not the goodness of a gold mine, but the goodness of an allotment, which, if a trick, has not as yet been found out. What if South African gold mines be for the most part tricks, but only to be found out somewhat later on? Great would be the consternation, intense the disappointment, incalculable the suffering. Mr. K. ff. Bellairs is responsible for some as damaging statements as could be ventured upon. Where, the other day he asked, is a particular South African gold mine? the implication being that it is unknown in South Africa. But it may be said that such is only a tradesmanlike method of commending one's own wares. We prefer to confine ourselves to the fact, and to ask, first, how much gold has been sent to South Africa? second, how much gold has been received from South Africa? and third, whether some of the gold sent to South Africa has been used to salt some of the gold mines? Gold