페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

INSURANCE AGAINST ACCIDENTS. Somk time since we fully investigated the cases relating to insurance against accidents, embracing questions as to the meaning of the term accident. We have now before us an American case, decided in the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, which, without throwing much new light upon the subject, may be usefully considered. In this case the policy contained a clause that the company should not be liable for any injury happening to the assured by reason of his "wilfully and wantonly exposing himself to any unnecessary danger or peril." The fact was that the assured attempted to get on a train of cars after it had started—too common a practice in this country—fell, and was killed. The real question was, whether the negligence of the assured having contributed to the accident it could be called an accident at all within the meaning of the policy. Paine, J. most sensibly laid it down that whereas the definition of an accident is "an event that takes place without one's foresight or expectation; an event which proceeds from an unknown cause; or is an unusual effect of a known cause, and therefore j not expected," there is nothing in it that ex- | eludes the negligence of the assured as one of the elements contributing to produce the result. Our readers will remember the English cases, Theobald v. The Railway Passengers' Assurance Company, Sinclair v. The Maritime Passengers' Assurance Company, and Trevo v. The Railway Passengers' Assurance Company. In the first the accident giving rise to the action was held to be a railway accident, and no negligence was proved against the assured. In Sinclair's case a sunstroke was held not to be an accidental visitation. Whilst in Trew's case death by drowning was held to be accidental, the court saying, "We think it ought to be submitted to the jury to say whether the deceased died from the action of the water, or natural causes. If they are of the opinion that he died from the action of the water, causing asphyxia, that is a death from external violence within the meaning of the policy, whether he swam to a distance and had not strength enough to regain the shore, or on going into the water got out of his depth."

Looking at these cases, and the cited remarks of the Judges, Paine, J. came to the conclusion that the attempt to get upon the train did not constitute a "wilful and wanton exposure" of the assured to unnecessary danger. But there are peculiarities about this particular case which would make us reluctant to recognise it as a precedent. According to the learned Judge, the evidence showed that the train having once been to the platform, had backed so that the cars stood at some little distance from it; while it was waiting there the deceased was walking back and forth on the platform (of the depot). It came along, and while moving at a slow rate, or as fast as a man could walk, he attempted to get on, and by some means fell either under or by the side of the cars and was crushed to death. The deceased was in the regular prosecution of his business.

We need not pause to point out that there are different questions to be considered in actions against insurance companies, and in actions for damages for negligence on the part of a company. Negligence bringing about an accident might be held to be contributory where negligence is alleged against another party, but yet not relieve an insurer from his contract.

CASES

DIGEST OF SHIPPING LAW

From 1860 To 1864.
Edited by F. O. Crump, Esq., Bamster-at-Law.

(Continued/rom ]>oo«297.)
BILL OF SALE.

1. Purchaser of sharesLiability for expenses incurred before becoming owner.—A purchaser of shares in a ship is not liable for expenses incurred on behalf of the ship before the vendor became owner. The vendor contracted to purchase the shares in July, but did not oxecute the bill of sale until September. The transferee of his share was exempted from liability for any expenses incurred before the execution of the bill of sale: (Clwpmnn v. CallU, C. B., Feb. 8, 1861; 1 Mar. Law Cos. 37; 3 L. T. Bep. N. S. 890; 7 Jur. N. S. 995; 9 C. B., N. S., 769.)

2. Sale of barge to a minor—Purchaser's right of action against assignees of bankrupt owner for seizing and selling bargeMerchant Shipping Act 1854—-4cf 25 6; 26 Vict. c. 63.—The purchaser of a barge by bill of sale duly executed was unable to obtain a certificate of registry, aB he was under twenty-one years of age, and he continued in the

possession and use of the barge under the registry in the name of the former owner. The latter having become bankrupt, the purchaser was held to have a right of action against the assignees of the bankrupt for seizing and soiling the barge. Merchant Shipping Act, sect. 55; Act 25 & 26 Vict. o. 63, B. 3; The Liverpool Borough Bank v. Turner, in 1860, held not to apply: (Stapleton v. Haymen, Ac., C. E., Jan. 12, 1804; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 116; 9 L. T. Rep. N. S. 655; 33 L. J. 170.)

3. Registration.—The registration of an assignment of an agreement for the purchase of a Bhip ia not required under the Bills of Sale Act (17 & 18 Vict. c. 36): (Swainston v. Clay, C. A. Ch., April 22 and June 11, 1863; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 343; 8 L. T. Rep. N. S. 563; 9 Jur. N. S. 401; 32 L. J. 338, 503 j 4 Giff. 187.)

BOTTOMRY.

Ixdex To cosTairrs.

Admiralty Court, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7.

Admiralty Court Act, 6.

Advance of Freight not attachable, 4.

Adrances for Necessaries reimbursed by Lloyd's
Association not entitled to Priority, 6.

Agency Commission. 1, 7.

Arrest of Ship according to Foreign Law for Necessaries, 7.

AuytMtu, The, 7.

Bonaparte, The, 2,5.

Campbell v. Thomson, 4.

Cartro, 4.

Commission, 1, 7.

Cotutancia, The, 8.

Costs, 7.

Custom, 7. *

Disbursements (ordinary and extraordinary i distinguished, 4.

Duncan v. Blnton, 2.

Evidence, 2.

Foreign Law, 7, 10.

Freight (Advance of), 4.

Freight—In case of Transshipment, and Goueral
Average—Lieu—Priority, 8.

General Average—Lien, 8.

Glascott v. Lang, 2.

Gratitudiiw, The, 2.

Lien for Freight of Cargo transshipped, and General
Average, 8.

For Value of Cargo sold, 4.

Maritime Law (General), 5.

Master's Claim for Wages and Advances, 3.

Merchant Shipping Act, 3.

Necessaries, 6, 7.

North Star, The, 8.

Oriental, The, 2.

Priority of Payment, 3,6.

Registrar and Merchants, 7.

Transshipment, 5, 8.

Validity of Bond, 2.

TiUUa, The, 7.

Wages, 3.

1. Agency commission on value of ship and cargoCustomScrutiny of accountsPractice of Admiralty CourtSuit in default.—Bond given at Elsinore for ■133/. with 15 per cent, premium. Ship bound for Londonderry. Agenoy commission charged on value of ship and cargo, including an undefined amount for commission on advances reduced by the court to an allowance of 50/. No reason assigned or custom alleged in favour of a commission on value being charged. Practice of court not to scrutinise accounts too rigidly. In default of the appearance of the owners the ship is the real defendant: [The Fortuna, A. C. Ireland 1861: 1 Mar. Law Cas. 123.)

2. Communication with ownersof cargoValulity of bond—The Gratitndine, The Bonaparte, The Oriental, Glascott v. Lang—ii't'idenee of master as to execution of bottomry bond on ship, freight, and curgo, where the bond is impeached by the owners of cargo.—A French ship was laden at St. Marc, in the island of Hayti, for a voyage to Liverpool, with a carjro consisting of 630 logs of mahogany, thirty bales of cotton, and twenty-fivo tons of logwood. She sailed from Hayti in Oct. 1860, sustained considerable damage at sea, and on 3rd Nov. put into Horta, a port in Fayal. The master communicated with the shipowners but received no answer; and not being able to obtain funds on personal credit of the shipowneis to liquidate the expenses of tho repairs necessary to enable tho ship to proceed on her voyage, he, on 14th Deo. and on 2nd and 10th March 1861, with the sanction of the vice-consul of France, executed bottomry bonds on ship, freight, and cargo. Notice was not given to the owners of the cargo. All probability forbade the court to assumo that the communication with Hayti was either certain or rapid. A letter to Liverpool conld not have been dispatched sooner than the end of November, and on answer could not have been received sooner than early in Feb. 1861. Tho port of Horta being exposed to the W.S.W. winds, the ship could not have remained during that time with any degroe of safety, exposed to tho certain consequences of a winter, without any attompt to repair the ship or protect the cargo. Whilo detained, the vessel came into collision with another ship; and in the month of January there were only throo days when the state of the weather allowed the

| repairs to be carried on. Tho ship left Horta

I in the beginning of the month of March, and

arrived at Liverpool on the 25th of that month.

1 No opposition to the bottomry bonds was offered

on the part of the shipowner. The transaction was in no degree to the benefit of the ship and it was to the disadvantage of the cargo. Bonda pronounced valid against the cargo with costs. Dr. Lushington in commenting upon and explaining the cases of theBoii'ijinrfe, 8 Moo. P. C.C.-WO3 W. Rob. 303; 7 Notes of Cas. 22; see Digest of Maritime Law Cases, 1837 to 1!W0, No. 259Glascott v. Lnng,2 Phil]. 310; 11 Jnr. 179,643; 16 L. J., N. S., 323n, Ch: 3 Myl. 4 Cr. 463: and tho Oriental, 7 Moo. P. C. C.409; 3 W. Rob. 254; 14 Jur. 336; 7 Notes of Cas. 476, said that the case of Glascott v. Lang, decided in 1847, was not noticed either in the Oriental or the Bonnpnrte, and it was his confident belief that the important case was not known to the Judicial Committee at the time, and Lord Cottenham was perfectly right ii his observations as to the absence of previooa authority, but the Judicial Committee teing a court of the last resort, and the court of appeal, he was bound to adopt the rule prescribed by them regarding the necessity of endeavouring to communicate with the owners of the cargo; the decision, however, was not applicable to the present case. At the same time he remarked that if the ship were a British ship, Ok owners of the cargo might, as decided in Dunen v. Benson, recover the (excess of) expenses to which they may be put through the hypothecation of the cargo. He adverted to the difficulties [a depicted by Lord Stowell in the cose of the Gra/itudine) that may arise from a master being compelled to communicate with the owners of the ship and the shippers and consignees of the cargo, who may give different instructions; and he observed that the Admiralty Court is in the constant habit of considering not only the technical rules, but all the circumstances, in order to protect tho owners of ship and cargo from the unjustifiable imposition of a bottomry bond, to afford Joe facility for the security of the lender on bottomry in oases of necessity, and to advance the mercantile interests not of England merely, bat of til the countries engaged in commerce: (The w'lin-r, A. O, March 12 and 18,1862; 1 Mar. Law Cat. 214.)

3. PriorityWages of seamen and master— Claim of bondholder.—The captain of a ship being. himself liable for seamen's wages cannot, under the 191st section of the Merchant Shipping Act, claim to be paid rateably with them either a respect of wages or of advanoes by him on account of wages where the proceeds of a ship sold at tha instance of a bottomry bondholder are only snfr oient to pay the seamen's wages. The seamea have a prior claim to the bondholder, and the captain has also a right to his wages in priority to the bondholder where the bottomry bond does not stipulate that the master shall be personally liable for the amount of the bond: (The Saiacia, A. C Nov. 11,1862; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 261; 7 L. T. Bep. N. S. 440; 9 Jur. N. S. 27; 32 L. J. 41.)

4. Advance of freight—Claim for cargo soli '■* pay expenses—Lien—Disbursemrnrs—Campbell •-. Thompson.—In accordance with the StoaJsTs (Swa. 267), advance of freight made after the data of a bottomry bond, but according to the tonus of a charter-party entered into before that date » not attachable by the bondholder. The proprietor of a cargo sold in the course of a voyage to pay expenses has a claim against the shipowner, but no lien for the value of the cargo sold, upon the amount of freight due upon other portions of toe cargo. Campbell v. Thompson, 1 Stark. 290, considered to be in error. What is an advance ol freight under a special stipulation in a charterparty, considered. Ordinary and extraordinary disbursements distinguished; extraordinary disbursements being described as expenses not included within tho terms of the charter party: {Tit Saluda, A. C. Nov. 25 and Deo. IS. 1862; 1 Mar Law. Cos. 322; 8 L. T. Eep. N. S. 91; S L. J. 43.)

5. Law governing such questionsMaster com municating with owners of cargoThe Bompcr)' —Tho Admiralty Court, in questions of bottomry is guided by principles of general maritime la* unless other law bo distinctly pleaded and proia as the governing law. The master of a "s-c driven into port in distress is not bound to trans ship cargo. It is generally tho duty of the nuwiej to communicate, or attempt to communicate, witl owners of cargo before hypothecating it. Case o T/te Bonaparte, 8 Moo, P. C. C. 460, folly a poimded. Bond held invalid against cargo. Th amount of tho bond exceeded the value of shi| and freight by 1392/., and the cargo had sold W only 895/.: {Tlte Hu mburq, A. C. March 24 and S 1863; 1 Ma-. Law Cos. 327; 8 L. T. Kep- X- s 175; 9 Jur. N. S. 445; 32 L. J. 161.)

6. 'Necessaries supplied to foreign ship rcinv'Wrw oy Lloyd's AssociationJurisdiction—PriorityA foreign ship was bound from -the Mauritius tthis country, and while she was in the East bot tomry bonds were executed. Afterwards she pn into Malaga, where expenses were incurred to repairs and refitting, and for discharging and re shipping cargo. These expenses for neecssarw were reimbursed by the secretary of Lloyds Asm cistion. On arriving in this country proceedings were instituted by the bondholder, and the ship was sold. It was held that Lloyd's Association could not make a claim as having supplied necesurie.-i; anil that neither under 3 & 4 Vict. c. 65, nor under the 4th or 5th section of The Admiralty Court Act 1861, has the Admiralty Court jurisdiction to[entertain a claim for necessaries supplied to a foreign ship at a foreign port. Bottomry bond entitled to priority of payment: (The India, A. C. March 26,1863 ; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 390; 9 Jnr. N. S. 117 j 9 L. T. Eep. N. S. 234; 32 L. J. 185.)

7. Advanceson personal creditValidity of bond —Aveney—CommissionCustom.—Advances made to tfaip on personal credit cannot, when the ship maj be arrested, be converted into a bottomry transaction. But if the advances are made under an agreement for bottomry, the bond is valid though granted long afterwards. The law of all or nearly all foreign oountries sanctions the arrest of ship for advances, and renders any bottomry bond therefore valid; but in this country the foreign law sanctioning arrest can be pleaded only as evidence to support the presumption that the advances were intended to be made on the security of the ship: The Augusta, 1 Dod. 283, and TJie Vihilia, 1 W. Bob. 1, oited u authorities to this effect. The value of ship and cargo does not altogether depend upon the custom of the place where the bond was ."ir.-n: bat the custom of such a charge being made is to be considered in ascertaining whether the charge is fair. With respect to the commissions, the court will not be bound by the custom of any place. A plea as to the fairness of the charges is admissible, but the party failing in proof will be condemned in costs: {The Laurel, A. C.Nov. 3 and 10, 1863; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 405: 3 L. T. Rep. N. S. 457; 33 L. J. 17.)

3. Lien General average Bottomry Transifopramf.—Lien on cargo for freight on transshipping and forwarding it to its destination, and for general average, was held to have priority to a bottomry bond. A ship called the Oalam, bound from Hayti to Europe, calling at Falmouth for orders, put into the port of Angra in Teroeira aider average, and was there condemned. The carp) was transshipped into a vessel called the Mery Jane, and the erpenses were secured by a bottomry or respondentia bond on the cargo payable at Falmouth. The Mam Jane was wrecked at Scilly, and the owners settled with their underwriters for a total loss of that ship and her freight. The cargo was ordered to Hamburg, but *as arrested in the Admiralty Court by the bottomry bondholder, and brought to London, where it was sold. The underwriters on freight per Mary taw. did not abandon their right to forward the carp) to its destination. It was held, reversing the judirment of the Admiralty Court, that there was a lien for freight and for general average per lf"ry Jane upon the proceeds of the cargo in preference to the bottomry bond. The Constancia, t W. Rob. 287. and the Korth Star, 1 Lush. 45, as to the Admiralty Court not having jurisdiction in questions of general average, or in claims for loss on cargo sold to pay expenses, considered not applicable to the present case. The expense of transshipping and forwarding the cargo of the Saiam was in the nature of a salvage charge whereby the cargo was rendered available for the bottomry bondholder or anyone else. Suits in the Admiralty Court or at common law ore made in the name of the master (or owner) as trustee for the underwriters whore his claim has been satisfied by them : (Cleary v. Macandrew, Cargo ex ftifam, J. C. P. C. Dec. 9, 1863; 1 Mar. Law Cas. «fl; 9L. T. Eep. N. S. 550; 10 Jur. N. S. 477; 33L. J. 97.)

BREACH OF CONTRACT.

INDEX TO CONTENTS.

Canro—Loss on value by freights rising, 1.

Sale, 2.

Receiving goods on board, 4.

Charterer's liability, 1.

Construction of letter, 3.

Freight, 1.

Guarantee to soil—Forfeiture, 3.

Insurance, Sufficiency of, 2.

HtMrharter, 1.

Renunciation of nirreement, 4.

Sale of cargo free ou board, 2.

Shipping documents, 2.

1. ConsfrHcd'on of letterRefusal to accept bill win for las* on re-chartcrCharter-party.—Ship chrtered from Taganros at 60s. per ton. Contract */.th a London firm to re-charter her on speculation. When she loaded at Taganros, freights had ""len to 40s. a ton. Goods were shipped by the ^charterers on their own account. Charterers Wd liable for the loss on value of cargo by being *pped at 60s. instead of 40s.: (Yeames, $c. v. ««4ray, ire., C. B. Jan. 23, 1861; 1 Mar. Law Cas. «: 3L. T. Rep. N. S. 855.)

'- Sale of cargo free on board, including freight *w insuranceSufficiency of insuranceWliether "^'Juli cover freight.—A contract in respect of 'cargoof wheat contained the clause "payment ■^sh in London in exchange for usual shipping

documents." The amount of the provisional invoice, less freight, was 36242. One of the shipping documents was a valid policy for 3600J., and it was held that the policy was of sufficient amount. The value of the cargo for the purpose of insurance is to be taken with reference to the port of shipment, not that of discharge. It was further decided that it was a question for the jury whether the policy tendered was a shipping document within the contract: (Tamuaco and others y. Lucas and others, Q. B. May 4, 1861; E. C. June 19, 1862; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 66, 231; 7 Jur. N. S. 1100; 1 B. A S. 185; 30 L. J., N. S., 234; 6 L. T. Rep. N. S. 697; 31 L. J. 296, in error.)

3. Sailing of shipShipment of packages.—Construction of letter undertaking to ship by the Warrior Queen, guaranteeing "that she sails not later than the first week in July, or forfeit 2s. 6d. per ton, 300 or 400 packages of goods." Held, that this meant to forfeit 2s. 6t{. not only if the vessel did not sail within the time specified, but also if the stipulated number of packages were not shipped, or at all events that the clause referred to the non-shipment of packages. The clause considered exceedingly ambiguous: (Heugh v. Escombe, Court of Ex. Jan. 16 and 17, 1861; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 79.)

4. Contract to receive goods on boardRepudiation of agreement.—Where before the time for performing the contract arrives, the party who has made a promise expressly renounces the agreement, the other, not being in fault, may in his option treat the renunciation as a breach of contract: (The Danube and Black Sea Railway and Kusteiuljie Company y.Xenos, C. B. Nov. 21,1861; 1 Mar. Law Cas. 172.)

JUDICIAL STATISTICS, 1868. COMMON LAW COURTS. (Continued from page 352.)

In the following summary the totals of the proceedings in the chambers of the six judges of each court are given for 1868 under each head of proceedings for all the chambers :—

Summonses 57,531

Common orders 47,992

Speci.il orders _. 18,119

Certificates, special cases, special verdicts, fiats,

Ac 2042

Affidavits, affirmations, Ac 17,511

Affidavits filed 24,797

Approbations for taking affidavits or special boil 559

Acknowledgments by married women 299

Office copies (nnmber of folios) 13,985

Recognisances 175

Writs of error —

Bail. 24

Committals —

Exhibits before judge 4881

Producing judge's notes 70

Bills of exceptions signed by judge 1

Attendance in any court on subpoena —

Attendance as a commissioner to take affidavits. 8

Reports on private bills 1

Attendances by counsel (each side) 5877

Appointment of commissioners 704

Admissions 467

Summons and order to try issue before sheriff... 40

Byelaws, allowances —

Other proceedings 4

Court Of Exchequer, Revenue Side. The proceedings at the sittings in Banco of the Court of Exchequer in the year 1868, relating to business on the revenue side of the Cuurt, are shown in a return furnished by the Queen's Remembrancer, and were as follows, viz..— Motions in court, 8. Do. (without argument, 114, touching legacy and

succession. Special cases, 3 (2 judtrment against the Crown, and

1 judgment for the Crown). Demurrer, 1 (withdrawn by consent. Special case to

be stated). Cause in equity by English information, 1 (argument

occupied three days. Adjourned for judgment). Couit of Ervotv—Error brought by the Crown, 1 (judgment for defendants).

COUNTY COURTS.

The proceedings in the County Courts in tho year 1868 for the recovery of debts, the proceedings under the Charitable Trusts Act of 16 & 17 Vict. c. 137, and the proceedings under the Act of 20 & 21 Viot. o. 85, for tho protection of wives deserted by their husbands, are shown in tho table in the usual form; also, now for the first time under bankruptcy, the number of adjudications in bankruptcy, and the gross produce realised, for each of tho fifty-nine County Court circuits, as abstracted from the returns obtained through the treasurers from' the registrars of the different County Courts.

County Courts are held at 521 different places in England and Wales, including metropolitan courts which hare no jurisdiction in bankruptcy; 324 of the courts are held monthly ; the remaining 197 once in two months. The number of places at which courts are held in each circuit, and tho number of days of sitting on each circuit in 1868, are shown in the table. For Circuit No. 6, in

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

1868. Proceedings in case of absconding debtors—

Warrants to arrest 52

Bail given 1

Debt and costs paid 9

Warrants suspended 1

Proceedings under the Charitable
Trusts Acts—

Matters heard —

Orders made —

Proceedings for protection of wives deserted—

Orders registered 587

Orders discharged 2 —

Bankruptcy—
Number of adjudications by County Courts in

1868 ;... 4,141

Oross produce realised £02,006

In the nnmber of plaints entered in 1868 the increase as shown above amounts to 33,485, or 3-5 per cent., as compared with the number in 1867, the number in 1867 having exoeeded the number in

1866 (exclusive of cases sent from the Superior Courts) by 69,342, or nearly 8 per cent. The number in 1866 exoeeded the number in 1865 by 89,733, or 114 per cent. In three years, therefore, there has been an increase of 192,560 in the number of ilaints entered in the County Courts.

The number of days of sitting for the whole of the circuits was 7987 in 1868, exceeding the number in 1867 by 94, and exceeding the number in 1865 by 366. The number for 1868 gives 71"7 oauses for each day of sitting, calculating on the total number of causes determined. This average for 1867 was 687; for 1866, 621; for 1865, 571. The greatest number of days of sitting on any circuit in 1868 was 268, on Circuit No. 6; the lowest 89, on Circuit No. 5. The highest average number of causes determined on each day of sitting was 175, on Cirouit No. 13; the lowest was 29, on Circuit No. 28.

The causes determined in court were in tho proportion of 58.5 per cent, to the total number of plaints entered, leaving 41"5 per cent, as the proportion settled out of court. In 1867 these proportions were 575 and 425; in 1866,559and 441; in 1865, 554 and 446; in 1864, 564 and 436; in 1863, 55'3 and 447, respectively.

Of the judgments given, 96'9 per cent, were for the plaintiff, 15 per cent, were nonsuits, and 16 per cent were for the defendant. In 1867 these proportions were 966, 17, and 17; in each of tho years 1866 and 1865, 962, 19 and 1-9; in 1864, 959, 21, and 2"0 per cent.

The number of debtors imprisoned gives one for 101 of the number of plaints entered with the cases sent from the Superior Courts included. In

1867 the proportion was one for 112; in 1866, one for 115; in 1865, one for 123; in 1864, one for 113; for the average of the years 1859-63, one for 95.

The total amount for which plaints were entered in 18G8 shows an increase of 382,297/., or 174 per cent., on the amount for the preceding year, following an increase of 142,121!., or 60per cent.,in 1867 on the amount for 1866, and of 205,605f. or 11*1 per cent., in 1866 on the amount for 1865. The average for each plaint entered in 1868 is 21. Is. 3d., against 21. 6s. 7d., in 1867; 21. 7s. in 1866, and 21. 7s. 2d. in 1865.

The amount of debt for which judgment was obtained on original hearing* i" little more than half tul ■% per cat.) of the total amount for which plaint* were entered.

In 1867 this proportion wan ,ri2'2 per cent.; in

1866, 51'1 per cent.; in 1865, 50-2 per cent; in 1864. 55-7 per cent.

The ami-rant of coot* show* an increase of 11,435'.,or 24-2 percent., npon the amount for 18G7, foU'/wing an increane of 3.725'. or 8'5 per cent., in

1867. upon the amount for 1866, and of 5,742'. or 15~2 per cent., in 1866, npon the amount in 1865. The cost* arc 4 4 per cent, of the amonnt of debt for which judgment wa* obtained; on original bearing*, apaiu-t 11 per cent, in each of the two preceding yean.

The amount of fceii Known an increase of 42,740'., or 137 per cent., npon the amount in 1867, following an increase of 23,382'., or 81 per cent., in 1867, npon the amount for 1866, and of 30,578'., or 11'8 per cent in 1806, upon the amount for 1865.

Equity Jurisdiction. The following' are the total*, under tho different heading* in the returns, of tho proccodingB in equity of the whole of tho County Conrts, for each of the years 1868 and 1867, with tho totals of the proceedings from tho commencement of tho opera ion of tho Act on Oct. 1, 1865 to Dec. 31, 18U6

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

115 95

Number of instances of payments by trustees under sect. 24 of

30 & 31 Vict. c. 142 21 —

Amount of subject matter in dispute or otherwise £87,101 £82,622

Amount of attorney's oosta

allowed £5,191 £6,003

Amount of fees—

Payable to Consolidated Fund £1,012 £1,052

„ Registrars £1,807 £2,089

„ High Hailifls £599 £655

Number of suits or proceedings

pending on Dee. 31 254 202

Number of appeals 6 8

NnmliorBcommitted forcouteiupt 4 2

Number of warrants of execution, possession, &e 8 13

CITY OF LONDON COURT.

Under the Act of 30 * 31 Vict. c. 142, which came into operation on the 1st Jan. 1868, tho Sheriffs' Court of London was assimilated with the1 County Courts under the titlo of the City of London Court.

The number of plaints entered in this court in 1868 was 14.933, against 11.739 in tho preceding year, showing an increase of 3194, or 27'2 per cent. There wore further, in 1868.78 eases sent for trial from the Superior Courts. Tho number of causes determined in 1868 was—with a jury, 46; without a jury, 6749; against 58, and 5574 in 1867. Tho number of judgments was 6825, against 5632. There were 1223 judgment summonses issued, and 509 heard, against 1021 and 418 in 1867. There were 279 warrants of commitment issued, and 33 debtors imprisoned, against 231 and 50; 1861 executions against goods issued, and 30 sales made, against 13S6. and 19. The total amount for which plaints were entered was 63,392'., agoinfct 42.651'. Tho amounts for which judgments were obtained by plaintiffs on original hearings were, debts 27.786'., costs 2367'. The total amount of fees 78001., against 18,858'., 1532'., and 5400'.. respectively, in 1867.

BARRISTERS AND ATTORNEYS. (From the Spectator.) The project of fusing the two branches of the Legal Profession, which has often been started, and which has been lately brought into more active discussion by the Liverpool Law Society, teems likely to lead to some practical results, though of an indirect rather than of a direct nature. Some time ago we gave a short sketch of Mr. Jkvons's proposal. We have now before us the report of a committee which was formed

for the consideration of the subject, and a scheme for the formation of a Legal University in London as the first step towards such an end. The committee report that the Profession generally approves the suggestion of a Central Law University, but is by no means unanimous with regard to " an amalgamation of the two branches or the combination In the same individual of the duties of both branches." This, however, is what in our opinion the public interest demands. It is, no doubt, highly useful to barristers themselves that there should be some means of testing their capacity, and that those who are the most capable should have an opportunity of distinguishing themselves without waiting on the sons and brothers of attorneys. The attorneys, in like manner, may justly complain that as things stand they have to go through a regular apprenticeship and pass examinations, while the barrister has only to eat a few bad dinners and attend as many unprofitable lectures. But these evils, though they may be felt in turn by both branches of the Profession, do not at all exhaust the list. There is the further complaint on the part of the barrister that he is wholly dependent on the attorney for the materials of his case, that he is forbidden by the rules of his profession to see his client, to volunteer information which may be necessary for success, to test the credibility of witnesses for whom he must vouch to the jury. On the other hand, the attorney complains that when he has done his utmost with a case he must transfer it to some one who has no interest in it, who perhaps does not read it through, who sometimes makes a compromise without authority, and who is not responsible for the grossest negligence. Between the two complaints the public suffers. In either case it is the client that is sacrificed. The man who is made to pay the two fees falls between the two stools. The injustice of excluding attorneys from all the chief legal appointments is no doubt felt by them alone, but it is none the less real, and it carries with it a diminution of social status which is a clog upon the whole of that branch of the profession. It is said that the attorney makes up for this by earning money more quickly than the barrister, and that the barrister ought to be rewarded for his early disappointments by "high patronage late in life." No doubt there are compensations in all tho troubles of life, but that does not prove that life is perfect. It might be better if the barrister could also earn money when he was young, and yet there would be no reason why he should forfeit his subsequent chance of patronage. If a man is fit for both, why is he to be restsicted to one? Why is he to remain idle in youth, or be incapable of a rise in manhood, unless it be for the public interest that tried ability should not have the stimulus of hope, and growing ability should be pressed down under the load of disappointment? It is said that a division of labour is necessary in the legal profession, that an attorney in large practice keeps different clerks for different kinds of work, and that barristers also devote themselves to special subjects. If, therefore, the distinction between barristers and attorneys is to be abolished, it fortiori all these minor distinctions must go with it. But this is just what will not follow. At present there are arbitrary distinctions as well as necessary distinctions, the first being the creatures of law, the second those of practical convenience. It cannot be thought that if barristers were to be allowed to take their instructions from clients, and attorneys were to be allowed to practise in court, the next step would be for Chancery barristers to be defending prisoners at the Old Bailey, and for the Bar of the Middlesex Sessions to migrate in a body to the House of Lords. There might be other inconveniences in a simple fusion of the two branches of the Profession as they stand at present. The change would be too sweeping to be unaccompanied with matters of grave doubt and difficulty. But we hope before long to see the principle conceded. The details may be worked out more slowly.

The report to which we have alluded proposes that there should be a Central University of Law for both branches of the Profession. No one should be entitled to practise either as attorney or barrister without taking the degree of Associate of Laws for the first, and of Bachelor of Laws for the second. We think that in this we may trace the germ of a future amalgamation of the two branches. If the education of both is to be the same, but the one which is higher in

the social scale and in the rewards reserved for it is to entail a longer course of study and i severer test, the rise from one to the other becomes more natural. At present, there is no connection between the two. If an attorney wishes to become a barrister he must first hive his name struck off the rolls, and must then qualify for a call by keeping terms for three years, and attending either chambers or lectures, or passing an examination. In the same way i barrister must be disbarred before he can be articled. None of the time passed in studying for one branch is counted by the other. According to the present scheme, a course of study in an attorney's office is to be recognised as part of a barrister's qualification. This, again, gives m a point of contact between the two branches. It has already been found that a year or two with an attorney is an extremely serviceable part of a barrister's training. We believe one of our present Judges started as an attorney. A late Attorney-General was articled in his father's office. One of the leading juniors on the Hume Circuit owes much of his success to the same cause. The insight into the mechanism of law as a business which is thus gained, has itseffects on the subsequent practice of law as a science. This may be but a very gradual convergence of the tvo branches, and, indeed, the committee have altogether postponed the consideration of any actual fusion. But when lines cease to be parallel, they must meet some time or other ii prolonged at both ends, and the ultimate tendency of the present scheme is to bring the two branches together. No doubt, long before they actually join, many other distinctions will hate to be abolished. The attorneys will not always be tied down by such strict rules as to their fees, and the barristers will not always be limited to a honorarium. The payment of both ought to bearranged on a different scale. At present neither of them make their incomes by their real work, for that is insufficiently remunerated. The attorney gets the same fee for signing I cheque or reading a letter as for answering» difficult question of mixed law and fact which needs all his learning and experience. The barrister earns as much by going before a Judge in Chambers and obtaining leave to plead several matters, as by waiting in court for ten dayi while the cases that stand before his are being disposed of. We hear occasionally of immense charges for marriage settlements, and exorbitant fees in heavy cases. But if lawyers were able to bargain, could charge the real value of their work in one case, and do without any fee is another, such payments would be more evenly distributed. Lord Westbury-'s Bill to enable attorneys to dispense with the regular scale would have this effect so far as they were concerned. Unfortunately, the Profession wis against that scheme, and nothing his yet been devised to touch the sacred honorarium of barristers. There can be little doubt that whatever nay be done with a view to the fusion of the two branches, the present division of labour will continue. Perhaps the effect of a change will be to extend it. The preparation of » esse will still rest with the man who is versed in business details, but he will not think it necessary to carry the case himself through all its stages. Indeed, if by accident the business details were to be entrusted to the wrong man, he would have the simple remedy of transferring them to another. Barristers in large practice could a* count on having the greater part of their work done for nothing, as is so much the case at present, but they will be able to make over a minimum of the gains together with the maximum of the business. We question if this would not be a more healthy system, as far as the Profession is concerned, than the one which is now a vogue. But the real point to be considered is the public interest. Would the legal work of the country be better or worse done if these arbitrary distinctions were abolished? We thin* I it would be done better. As things stand, the I work is portioned out, not with regsrd to practical difficulty, but to theoretical fitness. An | attorney can conduct the case against the I Overend and Guniey directors before the Lou> Mayor, and can be highly complimented on UV skill with which he has presented it to the court 1 but when the very same case comes on hrf***? | Lord Chief Justice, Mr. Lewis can be heirno longer. An immense amount of Chancery business is transacted by the chief clerks, and as barristers will not go before those who were originally solicitors, solicitors have to appear ana argne. But should any case be referred from the chief clerk to the Vice-Chancellor, the argument has to be taken up by counsel, not because Vice-Chancellors are more difficult to move than chief clerks, but because barristers have an exclusive audience. Of course, a solicitor may (eel that he U unfitted to argue a case, just as a barrister may feel that he is unfitted to get up the necessary evidence. But the converse may sometimes occur. An attorney may learn by experience that he is more fitted for work in court than for office work, and a barrister may iii.l that his presence of mind always deserts him as soon as he is on his legs. Under present circumstances, the first can only practise in County Courts and before magistrates; the other must restrict himself to chamber practice, which is not always of a very lucrative order. There is no other remedy. It is all very well to say that both branches of the Profession are open to all the world, but a man who has committed himself to one does not care to throw away all his time and money and start afresh in the other. If there was even a simple and ready means of transition from one to the other, some improvement would be made. Yet here again the interests of the Profession would be advanced, rather than those of the public, though the public would benefit indirectly from anything that rendered the Profession more practically useful. A simple and economical division of labour would serve the public best, and the Profession need hardly fear an injury to itself from a scheme nursed in its own bosom, and countenanced by the ablest of its leaders.

ELECTION LAW.

THE REGISTRATION COURTS.
Lambeth.

Sr. P. Le Breton, the revising barrister for the borough of Lambeth, opened his court on Wednesday at the Vestry-hall, Kcnnington.

5fr- T. Gilbert, Victoria-street, appeared on behalf of the Conservative Registration Society; and Mr. R. Hartwcll appeared on behalf of the Iambrth Lodger Registration Committee.

There were only 67 householders' claims, 176 Conservative objections, and 294 lodger claims.

The Revising Barrister remarked that there was little to do to all appearance, the number of claims and objections being very considerably under that of last year. He was desirous to give every facility for lodgers to establish their claims; and, therefore, he had determined to hold a special court on 8»torday afternoon next, at three o'clook. He would, however, take any lodgers' claims who attended during the day.

Sir. Hartwell expressed satisfaction at the revising barrister's consideration for the lodgers; hot he thought that the lodger franchise under toe present system was a delusion and a sham. The clauses in tho Reform Bill relating to the Wgers required extensive alteration to render them of much use or advantage.

The court then proceeded with the lists of woseholders, the first taken being that of St. Giles's, Camberweli in which there were 41 claims and 3 objections. Of the claims 36 were sustained, and the three persons objected to were struck out. ■be overseers' objections from deaths, removals, •nl non-payment of rates wero then disposed of, a?d the list passed as correct. The list for St. Mary'., Newington, in whioh there were 173 objections taken by the Conservative agent was next taien. Of these 160 were sustained, there being "> agent present on the Liberal side to defend the retaining of the names. Out of 15 Conservative °aims, 14 were sustained. The overseers' objections and alterations were then taken, and a few lames having been struck out from deaths, removal', or non-payment of rates, the list was declared tmnplete. The list of St. Mary's, Lambeth, was *rt taken, containing the names of 16,000 voters. There were only 11 claims, and no objections by *?vnb. Six of the claims were allowed. The oter<eers' objections from deaths, removals, and y-payment of rates were then taken ond disposed «. ocenpying some time, and the list was declared tonplete. The barrister complimented the oversets of the different parishes on the excellent mannerin which they had prepared the lists of voters, "bich had been a considerable Baving to the time "the court. Having been enabled to get through be householders' lists in one day, he should Jwmrn the court until Saturday afternoon at *» o'clock, when he would take the lodger lists.

The number of lodger claims during the day "M 80, and all were allowed.

Martlebone.

■r- P. H. Bacon, the revising barrister for the """"fli of Marylebone, attended at the Vostry"*«. Harrow-road, Paddington, for the purpose of

"•"Mf the list of voters for that parish.

Mr. R. H. Bristowe Macmullen, the hon. secretary and solicitor of the Paddington District Conservative Association, attended to watch the proceedings on behalf of the Conservative interest.

The Liberal and Radical parties in the borough were not represented.

Mr. Macmullen inquired of the revising barrister what course he proposed to adopt with reference to the lodger claimants.

Mr. Bacon, in reply, stated that he should carry out the same principle as he had adopted in Chelsea at the revision last year, and if the lodger claimants did not attend to support their claims, or send some one with whom they were well acquainted, he should, on proceeding with the list, strike off their names.

After some further conversation, the revising barrister proceeded to hear the claims of those lodgers who were then present.

The revision of the voters' list for the county of Sussex has been fixed to take place as follows :— For East Sussex, before Mr. Charles Edward Jemmett: At Uckfield, on the 29th inst.; Mayfield, 30th inst.; East Grinstead, 1st Oct.; Battle, 4th; Hastings, 5th; Hailsham, 8th; Rye, 12th; Lewes, 14th; Cnckfield, 18th; Brighton 20th. For West Sussex, before Mr. Chas. Hance: Horsham, 21st inst.; Petworth, 23rd; Midhurst 24th; Chichester, 27th; Arundel, 28th; Worthing, 29th; and Steyning, 30th.

Female Voters At Leicester.—The borough of Leicester (the population of which numbers about 80,000 inhabitants) has a burgess roll of over 16,000 persons, of whom between 2000 and 3000 were female voters. Having in view the forthcoming municipal elections, at which females will be allowed to vote for the first time, the ladies have already begun to bestir themselves, and in one of the large wards a females' association has been formed with one of the fair sex as president. The political creed of tho association is said to be "thoroughly independent."

Lodger Claims.—It is remarkable how very few claims have been made in the metropolis by lodgers renting apartments of the value of KM. per annum to be registered under the provisions of the Reform Act of 1867. In some parishes there have been no olaims at all. In Milo-end Old Town, containing 65,000 inhabitants, and in which there are at least 3000 lodgers qualified to vote, only twenty-two claims have been sent in, although Mr. Southwell, the town clerk of tho hamlet, published self-explanatory printed forms, and they were liberally supplied to anyone applying for them. In tho adjoining hamlet of RatclirT, with a population of 17,000, and with 1000 or more qualified lodgers, only two claims have been forwarded to the overseers, one by a Conservative, the other by a Radical Registration Association. In tho parish of St. Georgo-in-the-East, with a population of 40,000, and 2000 of them qualified to vote as lodgers, only nine claims have been made. Thus, in three parishes, containing a population of 142,000 souls and 6000 lodger voters, only thirtythree claims have been made.

ESTATE AND INVESTMENT JOURNAL.

STOCK AND SHARE MARKETS. The Money Market has fully recovered from the depression caused by the panic in France. The following are the fluctuations: The following were the fluctuations:

En OMSK Funus. Fri.

Bank of Entruuid Stock 3 $ Cent. Bed. Ann..., 3 y) Cent. Cons. Abu. . New 2.J V Cent. Ann...

Do. 34 do. Jan. lbiil Now 3$ Cent. Ann. ... 5 $ Cent. Annuities ... 5 V Cents. V Jan. 1873 Ann. 30 years exp,

Aprils, 18S5

Do. exp. Jan. 5,1880...

Do. exp. July 1880

Bid Sea Tele. Ann. 1908

Consols, for Ace

India 5 B Cent, for Ace, Do. 5 % Cents. July 1S80 India Stock, July 1880

India Stock, 1874

India 4 $1 Cent. 1888 ... India Stock, 4 t) Cent

1888

India Bonds (1O0OI.) 4

per Cent

Do. (under 100W.) 4 per

Cent

Ex. Bills, lOOOt

Do. 5001

Do. 1001. and 200! 3*0. .....

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]
[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

PUBLIC COMPANIES.
Railway Companies.

Melbourne and Hudson's Bay.—A dividend at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum.

Monmouthshire.—An ordinary dividend at tho rate of four per cent, per annum.

Sambre and Meuse.—A dividend of 4g. per share) payable on the 1st Oct.

West Cornwall.—A dividend of 24, per cent, on the ordinary stock.

Banks.

Hong Kong and Shanghai.—A dividend at the> rate of 12 per cent, per annum.

London and Middlesex Bank (Limited).—A final distribution of 5s. per share, making 21. 5s. per 101. share, has been made by the liquidators.

Merclumt of London.—An interim dividend at tho rate of 5 por cent, per annum.

Oriental Commercial Bank (Limited.) — An eighth dividend of Is. 6d. in tho pound (making 13s.) is payable to the creditors at the offices of Messrs. Cooper Brothers and Co. Finance, Credit, And Discount Company.

City Discount (Limited and Reduced).—A first dividend of 4s. in the pound is announced.

Assurance Companies.

Albert Life Assurance.—Mr. Price has issued s> memorandum to the policy-holders denying that the proposed arrangement is unduly favourable to the shareholders. He bolieves the assets would not be increased if the shareholders' liability were* unlimited; and there is a strong feeling in favour of a transfer of the business. He also suggests that a committee should be formed to give him counsel and assistance.

International Life Assurance.—A call of hi. per share is announced by the official liquidator.

Rock Life.—A dividend and bonus together of 4s. per share.

Miscellaneous Companies.

Loicer Assam Company.—A call of 5s. per share is payable on tho 1st Oct.

Monarch Building Society.—5 por cent, interest has been paid, and a further 5 per cent, bonus is recommended.

Surrey Commercial Dock.—A dividend of 3 per cent.

Mining Companies.

Alamillos.—A dividend of 2s. per share.

Fort una. — A dividend of 3s. per share is announced.

Linares.—A dividend of 6>. per share.

Royal Forest of Dean Mining (Limited).—A call of 52. per share is to be made upon the coutributories.

SOLICITORS' JOURNAL

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

Practice JurisdictionDemurrer—ObTaining Money On False Representations.— B. told R. that he was going to advance money to two persons on the security of a bill at three months, and represented them to be perfectlysolvent and the bill a good security, knowing at the time that they were insolvent, and that the bill would be dishonoured, which it was. R. having advanced money on the faith of such representations, filed a bill alleging that he was induced to advance it on representations made by B., which he knew to be untrue, the transaction being part of a scheme to apply, as he had applied, the money for purposes of his own. A general demurrer to this bill overruled, on the ground that, although there was a legal remedy, there was concurrent jurisdiction in equity: (RnmMre v. Bolton, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 50. V.C. M.)

Administration Insufficient Estate.— Where there are contingent annuities given by a testator's will, and his estate turns out to be insufficient for the due payment of them, and some of the annuitants have died, the amount of the several annuities is to be estimated at the value of the respective annuities at the death of the testator, and the sums subsequently paid to the annuitants on account of the annuities to be deducted from that amount. The rule as adopted in Todd v. ZJei'%. 27 Beav. 353, followed: (Potts v. Smith, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 54. V.C. J.)

ARTICLES EXEMPT FROM SEIZURE IN EXECUTION. The following remarks by an American judge on an American statute aro of interest:—" Although I was inclined to think at first that the words ordinarily used in the debtor's occupation was intended to exempt merely such goods as were in actual and daily use, and that when he had manifested an intention to abandon their use by selling them, that they ij>so facto became subject to seizure for the payment of his debts, I am. however, now inclined to think that those wordH in the nirth paragraph of the 4th section are merely descriptive, intended by general language to take in article* of various kind* suited to the debtor'n occupation, as the anvil, bellows, hammer A, Ac., of a blacksmith; the bench, planes, saws, Ac., of a carpenter, the horse of a pedlcr, the loom, shuttles, Ac., of a weaver, ana such like. The words ordinarily used should be read ordinarily required or employed in tho particular occupation. I do not think now that th(.*y hav«^ reference to the actual employment of the chattels by the debtor. That their use is to restrict the sense of the broad term chattels; if t!ie word ^clmtteln' were not used tho (>th head of the 4th soction would read thus, 'tools and implements of the d 'btor's occupation to the value of 6*0 dols.,' and that, as respects tools Ih tho proper reading of the section, the word* ord'tarily iwui in being solely applicable with the words or eliattehs. If exempt then from seizure tho execution could not bind thorn in the debtor's hands or in the hands of the claimant, as he could (without, i.e. in tho absence of, intentional fraud) make a valid sale of them to whomsoever he pleased, for he Woh free to sell them, and a bona Jidtt purchaser is protected. A workman, of course, is not bound to keep tho same tools all the days of his lifo, nor a pedlor tho same homo which would bo exompted, after he is broken down, or if ho for any reason thinks, as pcdlers do sometimes think, ho cor.ld better himself by an exchange or aale: indeed, a man might be so necessitous as to require to pawn or sell his tools to procure food for his family, and a hundred things might occur to show that this view is correct.

[ocr errors]

UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE BANK OF ENGLAND.

i.Transferred to ttu Coming-iuutiv tor the Reduction of the National Debt, and which will be paid to th^ persons re*^ectlvel>' whoso names arc protixwi to each, in throe mouths, unless other cUuiuauU tfoouur appear.]

Uall (Henry), Temple, Ixmdun. Divulen-l on .TBI/, fa. fd.

Reduced Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant, William

P. Jones. Karsett f Win.), Birchin-lane. E.C. Dividend on 21/. 8r hd.

Reduced Three i«erCent. Cbiimaut.Gcor maG- Lindsay. Boubxe (Georuce D.j, Rev., Weston Kubodjire, Gloucestershire. Dividend onfcU. 17**. Consolidated Three j>er Cent.

AnnuitlfN. Claimant*. Rev. G. D. bourne, Nathan Izod,

and Charles W. Morris. Vacohtok (Rev. R. R.). Yeldnrnley-hou^, Dr-rby. Dividend

on in/. Ifa. i.tl. Consolidated Tliree per Cent. Annuities.

Claimants, Hannah Wildsuiith and Lorenzo Seeker.

[ocr errors]

THE BENCH AND THE BAR.

The Last Of The Knights.—Tho chivalry of the United Kingdom has received a distinguished addition. Her Majesty has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed under tho Great Seal, in-anting tho dignity of a knight of tho United Kingdom to William Richard Drake, of Oatlandslodge, in tho county of Surrey, Esq. Nothing eould be more gratifying to a branch of tho legal profession on which titles seldom descend. Mr. W. R. Drake is a solicitor, and solicitors are seldom knighted, as for other reasons so perhaps because the judges, often including the chief justices, as at this moment, never attain higher rivil honours. But there is no reason in tho nature of things why a highly respectable solicitor should not bo knighted. It was in the City considered a breach of social or civic etiquette when two aldermen who had been lord mayors recently accepted a more knighthood. But if anybody likes to be knighted, considering who are often knighted, wo may perhaps admire the taste of those who receivo, yet we should scarcely question the discretion of those who bestow, this somewhat ■ loubtful honour. As we have said, we rather like the notion of a solicitor winning spurs; and Mr. Drake is as good a solicitor, for aught wo know, :n any oth'T gentleman one .fee. on the Lmij List. To say the truth, we never li urd of Mr. Drake or of the respectable firm of Birch, Dalrymplo, Drake, and Co., of which the new knight is the junior partner. That is to say, we wore not hound to know his merits. We are told that " Mr. Drake has dono great services to the Liberal party." Though of the Liberal party ourselve-, we do not profess to bo initiated in, or familiar with, tho secrets of that party. Perhaps we are not worthy to know them; so much the better for us. We therefore look at Sir W. R. Drako and tho Liberal party, and tho services rendered to them by Sir William, or by anybody else, very much ab extra. We can only wonder what those services are. As a public man Mr. Drake was perfectly unknown to us, and we believe to tho outside world. Orator, publicist, statistician, drafter of bills, collector of social facts, skilled in foreign or domestic policy, Mr. Drake may be, and we dare say is. But this fame of his has not reached us. Mr. Drako may have served his country; but his country, in this case as in other cases, knows not of its hidden heroes, its secret benefactors. The authorised journals tell us that "it is understood that this honour has been conferred at tho instance of Mr. Gladstone as a personal recognition of tho services rendered to the Liberal party by Mr. Drake during the several years of close and confidential relations which nave existed between him and its recognised representatives." Here wo rccogniso not only "Mr. Gladstone's instance," whatever that may be, but the grand Glad^tonian style in all its sonorous superabundance of sesquipedalian words—to take a feather from Mr. Gladstone's wing. And we recognise something else^—Mr. Gladstone's earnest outspokenness. We dare say that tho Liberal party does owe a great deal to Mr. Drake. The Liberal party owed a great deal to Mr. Coppock. Not that we have the least reason to suppose that Mr. Drake is in any special sense a successor to Mr. Coppock; only, if there is a difference, it might be woll to have it explained. Every party owes a groat deal to its confidential agents. There must be a good deal of party work done by active partisans, which work requires special instruments. Those instruments must be peculiar; the work to bo dono is, as they say, delicate and difficult, and to do it requires peculiar qualities. Somotimes tho work approaches the confines of the shaky;

sometimes, it is thought of the dirty. As fir u we have heard, this sort of work is commonly sup. posed to mean electioneering work, which is not always clean work; it means also dealing iriti doubtful allies, staving off unpleasant contingencies, coaxing and manipulating and arranging an-1 so on. Services rendered to a great political party are often confused in popular estimation u'ith the Man in the Moon and that sort of thing. In Sir W. R. Drake's case any such association or confusion of ideas would be very unjust, we make no doubt. But still the popular opinion remains; and in its teeth it reflects great credit on Mr. Gladstone's hatred of reticence, and of conns on his discretion, not only that he gets a confidential agent and servant of his party knighted, bnt at once says why he is knighted. That Mr. Draka deserves his honours, though not perhaps so much as the first knightly Drake, we make no doubt. But it is awkward that the Queen's name should be introduced into the matter. The Queen is tte fountain of honour, and from the Quran that honour flows into the channel which the present Drake, Knt., adorns. But then, it comes to this, that services rendered to the Liberal party include private services, and from the nature of the case, secret services are not to be considered equivalent to services rendered to the Crown and State and public weal. This is not the risrht use to make of tho Sovereign's prerogative of conferring titles. By theory every title is conferred for services rendered either to the great body politic or to the Crown personally. Costa is knighted because he is supposed to have done service to the whole people, Whig and Tory alike, i. t. he u knighted in recognition of his public servioe. A provincial mayor is knighted because he has exhibited great diligence and circumspection in the discharge of public and official duties. A valuable servant or physician of the court is knighted or baroneted for services rendered to the Sovereign personally. Into none of these categories can we force Sir W. R. Drako. And as he at present forms the only precedent for his own special honours, we are obliged to Mr. Gladstone for announcing his qualifications. The announcement is well fitted to encourage tho activity of a elan which we had begun to think was quite :v tive enough. We can only regret that Mr. Glad-tone has not instructed his organs to obviate possible misconstruction by explaining more precisely the nature of thoso " services rendered to the Liberal party" which have been deemed worthy of this very excoptioual, and perhaps exceptionable, recognition.—Hat u rday fieri* ir.

[blocks in formation]

NOTES ON NEW DECISIONS.

NuisancePollution' Of Stream—AbateMent.—A corporation had erected certain worts so that the sewage of the town flowed into » ancient brook, which passed the mills of a manufactory, and thereby the brook or stream was so far polluted as to affect the health of the workmen and others in the manufactoriei residing in the neighbourhood of the stream. and also affected the property of the manufacturers. The balance of the scientific evidence proving that what had been done by the corporation caused a nuisance and was injurious to the public health: Held, that the relators were entitled to an immediate injunction to restrain any further extension of the works by which the pollution of the stream had been caused, and a further injunction (to commence the lit June 1870) to allow time to the corporation to apply to Parliament for additional powers if » advised), against causing the sewage to pass by or through tho present outfalls; (^4«or«e»General v. The Corporation of Halifax, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 52. V.C. J.)

Municipal Election—Bribert. Sect. 2 of 17 & 18 Vict, c. 102, extended by 22 Victc 35, to municipal elections. A person is to be deemed guilty of bribery who shall give, lend, &c. or shall offer, promise, or promise to procure, or to endeavour to procure any money or valuable consideration to or for a:iy voter, in order to induce any voter to vote <x refrain from voting, &c. On the morning of an election B. went to C, a voter, who told him that he did not intend to vote, when B. said h* should be remunerated for loss of time. This was held to be bribery within the above cited clause: (Simpson v. T'eencf, 11 L. T. Rep. N. S. 56. Q. B.)

The Manchester magistrates have suspended not less than 388 beerhouse licences. These sus pende.l cases will, of course, come on for reeon sideration at a future sessions.

« 이전계속 »