페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

The first conviction under the Contagions Diseases (Animals) Act took place on Saturday, before th- GniUford magistrate*. Mr. J. M. Molyneux, i fanner, was fined 51. and costs for turning ont a he for on Rnshets Common, while suffering' from tin' foot and mouth disease.

Woman- Suffrage.—A Sheffield papor states Hut the bnrgess list for that town, ju«t issued, contains among the 3-1,000 names those of between SW) and 4000 women.

The resolution lately adopted at a public mertujr at Mile-end, calling upon the board of guardians not to enforce tho Vaccination Act, has Ian presented to that body The chairman stated that tho guardians had nevor exercised any of the powers conferred by the Act, for they held it it bo their duty to do nothing obnoxious to the fclioes of th-:- ratepayer*. The board petitioned against the measure when it was before Parliament, as an "uncalled-for interference with the liberty of the subject."

One of the magistrates of the county Sligo has kvn dismissed from the commission of the peace It the Lord Chancellor, notice to that effect hiving been served on him on Saturday by the tlerk of the Crown. A correspondent of Saunitrss News Letter says that the gentleman so cVrired is Mr. Robert Faussett, of Union Lodge, Coiloney. The cause of his removal is his having, at a meeting of the town and harbour comniisEf.ners of Sligo. of which body he was a life-elected member, given a sort of challenge to fight a duel tea brother magistrate; and having called another Bember of the bench a "low chap." The corporation, as a public body, brought his conduct under the notice of the Lord Chancellor, and the result is that he has been superseded.

Lord Stanley presided at the annual general session of the magistrates of Lancashire, held at Preston. Mr. Aspland submitted a report from tho Standing Reformatory Schools Committee, and Si:i that during the past year the increase of alnlt crime in the country had been 9 per cent., while in tho county of Lancaster the increase had keen 29 per cent. In England and Wales there had Veen an advance of 4"t> in juvenile crime, whilo in laaeashire the advance had been 20". There was a lay extraordinary difference between Lancashire a*] the rest of England, and it perhaps might be aplained by the want of reformatory accommodation whii.h now existed. A considerable number cf eliiMren had bc-'n sont to reformatories. Lancashire paid only 20 per cent, of the maintenance as compared with other counties paying 21. In L ncishire there were some 24 per cent, of children .-.; nt to reformatories who never reached them —Wit, through want of accommodation; and next through the unacqunintance of magistrates with the provisions of the Act of Parliament and requirements of reformatory managers. Lord Stanley said there cou'.l be no doubt as to tie increase of crime, and it certainty was lie duty of the magistrates to consider the report when it was printed. The report was ordered to be printed and circulated. The Rev. J Shepherd Birley, as chairman of the Finance Committee, made a very serious charge against louie members of the legal profession. In proposing that the table of fetB to magistrates' clerks "■-■ revised by a committee of the court, he said the reason for the revision was that on looking over tbe returns of fines and penalties due to the county (which are sent into the treasurer's office by the puristrates' clerks), the Finance Committee found t;itths gr a'est discrepincies existed in the way "i which those gentlemen ehose to interpret the i^ale of fees, which was intended to be uniform •iroDghout the county. In one petty sessional division the charges on drunken cases, besides tte ordinary fine of 58., ranged from 4s. 6V. te 8». 6d.; but in another division the very lowest charge was 11a., and sometimes it was a» high as 27a. In beerhouse coses, in ono division, the charges ranged from 10s. to 25s.; n another from 4s. Gil. to 12s. 6<f.; and in another the lowest charge was 15s. 6<l., and the «'-'nest 37s. The magistrates would be surprised to learn that in certain petty sessional divisions *»■ was charged on every drunken conviction. In one case ho had been at the trouble to inquire wither those convictions for which 2s. was tnarred were ever filed, and he found that during tte last quarter there were 34 such convictions, ret that magistrates' clerk had never filed a conj-irtion since Jan. 1868. He would give no names. tat expressed a strong belief that a very small Proportion only of these convictions were ever J*l: and he' would warn those magistrates' <wks who received charges on convictions without ^H them that they had better mind what they 're about, because these very bills were all sent up »the Treasury, and if they were found out it was Pretty well known how they would be dealt with. :' **> a very great scandal upon the court which tad sanctioned the present table of fees ; and that ■j*TOal ought to be at once removed. The proposr-Mi was at once agreed to.

REAL PROPERTY LAWYER AND CONVEYANCER.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. Succession Duty Bequest Of Mosev To Be Laid Out In Purchase Of Land Equitable ConversionWhat Dutv PayAble — A testator by will in 1799 bequeathed 10,000/. Consols to trustees upon trust, to lay out the principal and the interest moneys arising therefrom in the purchase of real estate, to be settled and assured to the use of his eldest son, Charles, for life, with remainder to the first and other sons of Charles successively in tail male; and, in default of such issue, to the use of testator's son James for life, with remainder to the first and other sons of James successively in tail male; and in default of such i.-sue, then to his own right heirs for ever. Testator died in 1800, leaving his two sons, Charles and James, Charles being the eldest and the heir-at-law. Charles died in 1840, and James in 1857, each of them dying a bachelor, and intestate. The 10,000/. was never laid out in the purchase of real estate, but the dividends arising therefrom were paid to Charles and James successively during their respective lives. At James's death the testator's only lineal decendant was his daughter and only surviving child, Susan, who then became his heir-at-law^ and died in 1800, a spinster and intestate, having always refused to receive either dividends or principal of the 10,000/. left under her father's (the testator's) will. Shortly after her death the principal and interest moneys representing the real estate fund were paid into the Court of Chancery, and a suit was instituted for administering the same, in which suit the following facts were found: That at testator's death his heir-at-law was his eldest son Charles; that the person now such heir-at-law, and entitled to any real estate of which the testator might heve died intestate, was Edward F. De L., a grandson of the testator's brother. That at Charles's deatli his heir-at-law was his brother James; and that at James's death his heir-atlaw was his sister Susan; and that at Susan's death her heir-at-law was the said Edward F. De L., who was the heir-at-law of the said Charles, James, and Susan respectively, and the person entitled to any real estate of which they respectively might have died intestate. It was also found that "none of the persons for the time being entitled to any real estate of which the testator had died intestate did, while so entitled, any act with reference to the money so directed to be laid out in th.' purchase of land amounting to or having the effect of an election to take it as money or land, or as might have the effect of constituting such person or persons a new root or roots of descent with regard to such money." The Commissioners of Inland Revenue having assessed the said Edward F. de L. in succession duty at the rate of 5 per cent, on the principal and interest moneys constituting the above mentioned real estate fund on the ground of its being a "succession to him derived from Susan the predecessor (of a brother of the father of whom he was a descendant)," he appealed against such assessment on the grounds, first, that legacy duty and n t succession duty was payable b him thereon as a descendant of a brother of the deceased testator at the rate of 2i per cent, under 36 Geo. 3, c. 52; or, secondly, that if succession duty was payable thereon, it was payable by him as the descendant of a brother of the testator, under the Succession Duty Act, at the rate of 3 per cent, only as being a succession derived by hi:n (not from the said Susan but) from the said testator the predecessor, and on a case stated for the opinion of the Court of Exchequer, it was held, by Kelly, C. B. and Channell, B., that the fund in question, not having been laid out in land, was liable to legacy duty under sect. 19 of the Legacy Duty Act (36 Geo. 3, c. 52), and therefore that succession duty did not attach. And, per Kelly, C. B., the principle or equitable fiction on which courts of equity have so long held that money to be laid out in lund is for certain purposes to be treated as land, is inapplicable to the interpretation of the statute imposing duties upon personal estate. Also, per Kelly, C.B., that if the case were governed by the Succession Duty Act, the daughter Susan and not the testator must be deemed the "predecessor" of the petitioner. But, contra, by Bramwell and Cleasby, BB., that duty was payable upon the fund under the Succession Duty Act (16 & 17

Vict. c. 51), at 5 per cent, as upon a succession from "Susan" as the "predecessor," and not under the Legacy Duty Act. And, per Bramwell, B., that sect. 19 of .'ill Geo. 3 was not applicable, and that whether under the one Act or the other, the duty payable on the fund was properly assessed at the rate of 5 per cent. Held also, by Bramwell, Channell, and Cleasby, BB., that the practice laid down by the court in The Marquis of' Chandos v. The Commissioners of Inland Renenue, 6 Ex. 461 ; 20 L. J. 269, Ex., and followed in subsequent cases, should be adhered to, and that the counsel for the appellant should begin. Kelly, C. B. expressing his opinion that the more convenient course would be that, in every case where the Crown desires or seeks to impose a tax. the counsel for the Crown should begin : {Re De Lancofs Succession, 21 L. T. Rep; N.S. 58. Ex.)

ELEMENTARY PRECEDENTS IN CONVEYANCING, (o) A Collection of practical Forms designed for professional Use, and suited to the Emergencies of actual Practice, with Notes.

(Continued from page 356.)

RELEASES, (i)

155. Releaie by creditors of an intestate on payment

of composition by administrator.

We the undersigned, being respectively creditors of A.B., late of &c, deceased, to the amount of the several sums of money placed opposite to our respective names or firms in the second column hereunder written, and paid to us respectively by CD., of &c, administrator of the said A.B., on our respectively executing these presents, being after the rate of in tho pound upon the

amount of our respective debts mentioned in the said first column, and in full satisfaction of suoh debts, except as is hereinafter provided, do hereby for ourselves respectively, and for our respective heirs, executors, administrators, and partnership firms, and not one of us for the other of us, or for the acts and deeds of the others or other of us, but each and every of us doth hereby for himself and for his own acts, heirs, executors, administrators, and partnership firms only, covenant with and declare to the said CD., his executors and administrators, that this present covenant shall operate and enure, and may be pleaded in bar as a good and effectual release anddischarge of all and all manner of actions, suits, bills, bonds, writings, obligatory debts, dues, accounts, trusts, claims, and demands whatsoever, both at law and in equity or otherwise howsoever, which we or any of us, or ouv or any of our heirs, executors, and administrators, now have or hath, or hereafter shall or may have, challenge, claim, or demand against the estato or effects of tho said A. B., deceased, or against the said C. D. as such administrator as aforesaid, his executors or administrators, or his or their estate or effects, or any of them, for or by reason or on account of all and every or any of tho debts to us or to any of us, or our partnership firms respectively, due or owing from the estate of the said A. B., deceased, as aforesaid, or of any interest or commission due or demandable for the same, or for or by reason or on account of any other matter, cause, or thing whatsoever in respect of the said several debts. Provided always, and it is hereby declared, that the aforesaid release or anything herein contained shall not in anywise prejudice or affect the rights or claims of us the said creditors, or any of us, against any person or persons other than the said A. B., deceased, who are or may be or have rendered themselves jointly liable with the said A. B., deceased, for the amount of our respective debt or debts In witness, &c.

[table][merged small][merged small]

ing. Whereas, Ac. [recital of power of attorney]. And whereas the said C. D. {agent] has done an J performed various acts and things under and in pursuance of the said power and authority conferred upon him by the said reoited deed-poll. And whereas a meeting of the creditors of the said A. B. was held on the day of 18 ,

at which meeting the said C. D. was also present, and a resolution was then passed to the effect that the said C. D. should instruct Mr. , ac

countant, to realise the estate and effects of the said A. B. to the best advantage, and that the assets. thereof (after payment thereout o'. all expenses in any manner incidental to the said realisation of the said estate and effects, and the distribution of the said assets and all expenses incurred in and about the said meeting of creditors, and tho carrying that resolution into effect) should be equally distributed among the creditors of the said A.B-, and that the said creditors should thereupon execute to the said A.B. and CD., as such attorney as aforesaid, such release as is hereinafter contained. And whereas, in pursuance of the said resolution, the said accountant has realised to the best advantage the estate and effects of the said A.B., and (after allowing and deducting such expenses as aforesaid) the sum of X , amounting to a

composition of in the pound on tho amount

of the respective debts of tho creditors of the said A.B., remains in the hands of the said accountant for distribution among the said creditors as aforesaid. Now these presents witness that, in consideration of the premises and of the payment to us the undersigned creditors of the said A.B., at the time of our respectively signing and executing these) resents, of tho several sums of money placed opposite our respective names in tho second column hereunder written, the receipt of which said sums respectively we tho undersigned creditors of the said A. B. do hereby acknowledge and therefrom do absolutely acquit, release, and discharge the said A. B., his heirs, executors, and administrators, and also the said C. D., as snoh attorney as aforesaid, his heirs, executors, and administrators, we do by these presents remise, release, discharge, and for ever quit claim, nnto the said A. B., nis heirs, executors, and administrators, and the said C. D., as such attorney as aforesaid, his heirs, exeoutors, and administrators, and their respective estates and effects, all and all manner of actions, suits, causes of action and suit, debts, duties, sum and sums of money, accounts, reckonings, claims, and demands whatsoever, both at law and in equity, which we the said creditors of the said A. B., or our or any of our partners respectively, or any other person or persons whom we or any of us can bind by these presents, now have, or which we or any of us, our or any of our heirs, executors, or administrators, but for these presents could, would, or might at any time or times hereafter have upon or against the said A. B. and C. I>., as such attorney as aforesaid, their or his heirs, executors, or administrators, or their or his estate or effects, or any of them, for or by reason or on account of any matter, cause, or thing whatsoever up to and inclusive of the day of the date of these presents. In witness, &e.

[table]

157. Release from debt owing by a Jinn.

To A. B., of, Ac. [debtor].

In consideration of your dissolving the partnership heretofore existing between yourself and my son, D. D , upon the terms agreed to between you on the day of inst., I hereby discharge

you. and also the partnership firm of " A. B. and Co.," from the debt of X , or whatever the

amount may be, now duo and owing by you or that firm to me, and from all claims and demands on account thereof. And I undertake to execute and deliver to you, upon request, any more formal release or discharge from the said debt that yon may require.

Dated tho day of 18 .

C. D. [creditor]. 158. Release Jrom agreement by purchaser and vendor.

To A. B-, of, Ac. [vendor].

Referring to your agreement with me, dated, Ac, whereby you agreed that in the event of your becoming the purchaser of the land and dwolhnghouse at , then building by you under con

tract with mo that you would finish and complete the same according to the contract, and would convey tho property to me on payment to yon of the amount that should be dne on a final adjust

ment of accounts in respect of that property, and of interest at £ per cent, per annum on all moneys paid by you from the date of payment, including all legal charges, surveyor's fees, and other expenses, such conveyance, and all other charges incidental thereto, to be at my expense, and you having some time sinoe finished and completed tho said premises accordingly, I now find, after investigating the accounts, that I am totally unable to purchase the property from you, or to pay tho price thereof. I therefore requost you to release and discharge me from the said agreement i of the day of 18 , so far as it remains |

to be performed on my part, and in consideration of your so doing I undertake and agree that, should you become the purchaser of the said property, you shall hold the same discharged from your said agreement with me, and from every term, condition, or stipulation therein contained, in like manner as if tho same had never been entered into, and I hereby discharge the same accordingly, and declare that I have no further claim whatever to, or in respect of, the said property, or any part thereof.

Dated tho day of 18 ,

C. D. [purchaser].

I agreo to the terms above proposed, and hereby release and discharge the said C. D. from the said agreement. A. B. [vendor].

15S*. Release to a mortgagee of the equity of redemption in freeholds by the parties entitled underthe irill of a deceased mortgagor {indorsed on mortgage).

This indenture, made, Ac, between E. F., of Ac, and M. his wife, 6. H., of Ac, and N. his wife, J. K., of, Ac, and L. M., of, Ac [releasers] of the one part, and tho within-named C. D. [mortgagee] of the other part. Whereas tho withinnamed A. B. [mortgagor] duly made and executed his hist will, dated, Ac, and thereby .after directing tho payment of his jnst debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, gave and bequeathed the hereditaments comprised in the within-written indenture to tho said 51. F., N. H., J. K., and L. M. equally between them, share and share alike, and appointed W. X. and T. Z. executors of his said will. And whereas the within-named A. B. died on tho day of 18 without having re

voked or altered his said will. And whereas the said will of tho within-named A. B. was on the day of 18 duly proved by the said

W. X. alone in the registry of Her Majosty's

Court of Probate, the said Y. Z. having first duly renounced probate thereof. And whereas the said M. F. (being then M. 13., spinster) in the year 18 intermarried with, and became and still is the wife of, the said E. F. And whereas the said N. H. (being then N. B., spinster) in the year 18 , intermarried with and became, and still is the wife of, the said 6. H. And whereas the sum of X is now dne and owing to the said C. D.

for principal and interest in respect of the withinwritten indenture of mortgage (as the said E. F. and M. his wife, G. H. and N. his wife, J. IC, and L. M. hereby severally admit). And whereas the said C. D. has lately applied to the said E. F. and M.. his wife, G. H. and N., his wife, J. K. and I.. 51., for payment of the amount so dne to him for principal and interest as aforesaid, and has intimated his intention, unless be the same paid to him, of instituting proceedings in the High Court of Chancery for the foreclosure of the equity of redemption to which the said E. F. and 51., his wife, G. H. and N. his wife, J. K., and L. M. are entitled in respect of tho within-mortgaged hereditaments. And whereas the said E. F. and M. his wife, G. H. and N. his wifo, J. K., and L. 51., being unable to comply with such request, and in order to avoid the expense of such proceedings, have agreed and determined to execute such release of their respective interests in the said hereditaments and premises under the hereinbefore in part recited will as is hereinafter contained. Now this indenture witnesseth that, in pursuance of such determination and agreement, and in consideration of the premises, they, the said E. F. and M. his wife, G. H. and N. his wifo, J. K., and L. 51. do, and each of them doth, hereby remise, release, and quit claim unto the said C. D. and his heirs, all and every tho parts, shares, and interest to which they the said E. F. and M. his wife, G. H. and N. his wife, J. K., and L. M., or any of them, are, is, or may bo entitled under or by virtue of the said will of the said A. B., of and in the hereditaments and promises comprised in tho within written indenture, and of and in the rents and profits thereof respectively. To the intent that tho same may be henceforth held by the said C. D., and his heirs, to tho use of tho said CD., his heirs and assigns, free from all actions, suits, proceedings, claims, and demands of tho parties hereto of the first part, or any of them, in respect of the said hereditaments and premises, or any port thereof (a). In witness, Ac (To bs continual.)

(a) This deed mast be acknowledged by the married women: (See 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 74, ■. 77.)

JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES'LAW JOURNAL

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

Winding-up Discharge Of Solicitor— Costs Unpaid—Lien.—Where an official liquidator is appointed by the court in a winding-up, the 58th rule of the General Order of the 11th Nov. 1802, which requires that the file of proceedings "shall be kept by him, or otherwise ai the judge may, from time to time direct,'' must be considered part of his appointment, and a solicitor acting for him must be taken to know the extent of his powers over such file. And Do official liquidator can by contract or otherwise give any lien upon documents which come within that rule. Where, therefore, a solicitor was discharged by the official liquidator, he ni ordered to deliver up all the documents mentioned in the 58th rule, notwithstanding that there was due to him a considerable amount of costs incurred in the winding-up: (Re Tk Union Cement and Brick Company (Limited), 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 4G. LJ. G.)

RailwayExhaustion Of Capital.—Monet Advanced On Bonds. — A railway company having expended its capital and exhausted its borrowing powers and given bills of exchange on its tradesmen, issued bonds to a director and shareholder, who advanced money by means of which it was completed. A special Act was passed to wind-up the company and sell the railway to another company, and that arranstement having been carried out, and every liability discharged, except the bonds, they were held to be recoverable in equity, and the claim was allowed: (Re The Cork and Youghal Railra;, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 47. V.C. M.)

ROLLS COURT (ireland). May 24 and June 5. The Belfast And County Down Kailwat

Company V. The Belfast. Holywood, Akd

Bangor Railway Company. Railway companyReceiverAVmeanees for ovl. goings out of incomeRemuneration of directors.

By the 28 A 29 Vict, c 198 (Loc and P.), the Holy wood branch of the Belfast and County Doim Railway Company was transferred to the Belfast, Holywood, and Bangor Railway Company, in consideration of 50,0002. cash, and an annual rent of 50001., which was by the Act declared to bo a first and permanent charge on tho Holywood brand, and upon the tolls, Ac, thereof, and upon the property of tho Belfast, Holywood, and Bangor foilway Company, next after the moneys borrowed or which might be borrowed by the Belfast, Holjwood, and Bangor Railway Company on mortgage or bond under the Acts so authorising them. The rent of 50001. having fallen in arrear. a cause petition was filed by the Belfast and County Down Railway Company to recover the arrears. The matter was referred to Master Fitzgibbon under the loth section of the Chancery Regulation Act, and on the 8th Feb. 1867 he made an order declaring the rent a charge on the railway of the respondents, the Belfast, Holywood, and Bangor Railway Company, and appointing a receiver. The order made no express provision for paying the expenses of management of the undertaking, but it restrained the respondents from paying away or othorwiso disposing of any part of the money arising from the undertaking, or the incomings or receipts therefrom coming to their hands, beyond and except the necessary outgoings for servants' wages and current working expenses.

The directors of the Belfast, Holywood. and Bangor Company, or their manager, Mr. Dodd, continued to manage the line and receive tbe income of it, paying outgoings, and handing over what represented the net balance to the receiver. Tho receiver filed a statement of facts, raising questions as to certain deductions made by Mr. Dodd. The master, by an order of the 12th Jan. 1869, disallowed the following payments: First, salaries or remuneration to the directors, the same not being necessary outgoings for servants' wages, or for current working expenses. Secondly, a sum of 6222. 2s. lOrf. for improvements, alterations in, or additions to the permanent way or other works, or the rolling stock of the railway. The order also directed the respondents to account for and pay over to the receiver all sums paid or retained by them since the 20th Feb. 1867, for wire fencing, gasfitting, and gates, new storehouse, brick flooring at Holywood, alteration of Bangor station, and alteration of carriages. The respondents appealed from that order.

Palles, Q.C. and Dames, for the appeal.

Law, Q.C. and Andrews, for the petitioners.

The Master of the Rolls reversed the Master's order as to the salaries of the directors, which he allowed credit for. As to the 6221. is. 1W-, and tie sums paid for wire-fencing, &c, His Honour, being: of opinion that the expenditure was made by the respondents in bono fide exercise of their judgment in the management of the line, allowed them is proper charges against the income of the company; and reversed the Master's order, except as to a portion of the 622?. 2s. 10d., which was the estimated value of materials already paid for out of the '.'spital of the company, and which had been applied in completing alterations or renewals of the permanent way. As to that he left it open to the plaintiffs to investigate the claim further if they desired to do so.

The Albert Life Assurance Company.— A meeting of policy-holders convened by an order of the Vice-Chancellor, was held at the London Tavern on Friday week. Lord William Hay presided. The proceedings were of a very noisy character, and occasionally there was great uproar, a number of persons speaking at the same time, not one of whom could bo heard. Out of a number of motions, submitted to the meeting, three were adopted. One was to the effect that the proposition of the provisional official liquidators be rejected, and in lieu thereof a committee of policyholders be appointed to consider and determine, in conjunction with any provincial committees, the beet mode of arranging the affairs of the company, and report the result to a meeting of policyholders; the second, "That the conduct of the proceedings consequent on the insolvency of the company should bo entrusted to gentlemen to be nominated by the policy-holders, and not to those appointed by the directors, who had forfeited the confidence of the policy-holders;" and the third, That the committee should have power to test the liability of the shareholders in the twenty-two companies which had amalgamated with the Albert. The following gentlemen were appointed to form the committee: Mr. Bell, representing Indian interests; Mr. Bird, Mr. Cundy, General Cunningham, representing interests of upwards of 100,000/.; Mr. Edlin, Q. C.; Mr. Matthews, of Grindlay and Co.; Mr. Webster, of the Temple; Mr. Ommaney, and Mr. Wyld.

Mr. Thos. Cave, M.P., has addressed a letter to tie papers in which he explains his connection «ith the Albert. As long ago as 1853 Mr. Cave became a shareholder of the Anchor, and subsequent a local director. He and other shareholders vere disatisfied with the management, and called for an investigation. The result was that a new board of directors and a new chairman came into office, and these gentlemen declined to serve unless Mr. Cave would become managing director. He did become managing director, and succeeded, lie says, after three years of most arduous and onerous labour, with the help of a small but loyal staff, and the most generous support of his colleagues on the board, in so far improving the condition of the company that its income had increased sarly threefold, while its gross expenses had fallen from 50 to 15 per oent. What followed is giten in Mr. Cave's own words:—" In 1857 proposals were made by the Bank of London Insurance Company for the amalgamation with it of the Anchor Insurance Company. No commission, compensation, or other payment was made to any person whatever in respect of it, but I received an appointment for a term of years, the details of which were unanimously approved by a general Meeting of the shareholders of each company. Tie considerable success I hod achieved, and the peat sacrifices I had made to ensure it, appeared to me to have fairly won a special engagement. I had not long entered upon my new and wider Md of operation, which presented also larger Prospective advantages, when it was thought desirable that a proposal for the purchase of the Bank of London Insurance Company by the Albert Company (and not its amalgamation) should be wcepted. It was in connection with this arrange■Bent, which involved a surrender of tho appointment I had obtained as before stated, that I fecerred the compensation in question, which Eclnded also my services towards the disposal of TM fire department of the business, and my visiting Canada and Newfoundland in connection therewith. All these engagements I faithfully fulfilled. Thus closed, more than ten years ago, my association with the Albert Company. I had previously °o connection with it or any of the companies *ith which it appears to have amalgamated, except M herein stated, nor have I had any since."

MARITIME LAW.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. BottomryDamaged Ship Sold—Utter Loss- Constructive Total Loss.—Money was borrowed on bottomry of a ship and freight. Afterwards the ship put into an intermediate Port in a damaged state, and was then sold as •^worthy of repairs. The condition of the bond ***, that it should be void if the obligors should

pay the sum lent, with interest, &c, "or in case of loss of the ship or vessel such an average as by custom shall have become due on the salvage, or if on the said voyage the said ship or vessel should be utterly lost, &c.," in consequence of perils of the seas. On a suit by the bondholders against the proceeds of the sale: Held (affirming the judgment of the Admiralty Court), that the bondholders were entitled to the whole proceeds of the sale; for, first, the ship was not "utterly lost," the doctrine of constructive total loss having no application to bottomry; secondly, there was no "loss " of the vessel within the meaning of the bond; and, thirdly, there was no special provision in the bond qualifying the general rule that the lender on bottomry is entitled to the whole of the property saved, if included in his security: SemUe, that the clause "in case of the loss of the ship, such an average as shall have become due on the salvage" must be construed as intended to secure the payment to the bondholders of something which the shipowners might become entitled to receive from third parties in respect of the ship, and not a division of what might be saved from a wreck, or the proceeds of a necessary sale of the ship, between the bondholders and the shipowners: {The Great Pacific, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 38. Priv. Co.)

DamagePassengerCompulsory Pilot. A collision having occurred between two vessels in the Thames, the owners of the vessel in fault claimed exemption from liability for the damage on the ground that the vessel was in charge of a duly licensed and compulsory pilot at the time of the collision: Held (affirming the judgment of the court below) that the captain's wife and father, who were on board without the privity of the owners, and who had not agreed to pay any fares when they came on board, though such fares were paid after the collision, were not "passengers " within the meaning of the 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 379, so as to make the employment of a pilot compulsory. The owners of a ship, in charge of a pilot voluntarily taken on board, are responsible for his default whilst so acting, since 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, by sect. 388, requires that the pilot should be. compulsorily employed within the district where the injury occurred in order to exempt the owners from liability. The case of Lucey v. Ingram, 6 M. & W. 302, does not conflict with that of the Stetlin, Bro. & Lush. 199, the former case having been decided on 6 Geo. 4, c. 125, s. 55, and the latter on 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104, s. 388, and the provisions of the two sections being distinguishable. The meaning of particular words in a statute, in the absence of express definition, "is to be found not so much in a strict etymological propriety of language, nor even in popular use, as in the subject or occasion on which they are used." Per Abbott, C. J. in 1 B. & C. 136, approved: {The Steamship Lion v. The Vessel York Town, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 41. Priv. Co.)

Collision— LightsProper Rate Op Speed Fora Steamer In The Channel—Look-out.—A collision occurred at night in the English Channel between two foreign vessels, a steamship and a barque, by which the former was slightly, and the latter badly damaged. At the time the barque was carrying lights, but these were not seen on board the steamship till after the collision, because, being placed in the mizzen rigging, from their position and the peculiar form and rig of the barque, a vessel coming end on was unable to see them. In a cause of damage instituted by the owners of the barque against the owners of the steamship: Held (varying the judgment of the court below), that the damages, losses, and costs must be borne equally between the two vessels, for, first, the barque was in fault in carrying lights not so placed as to comply with the regulations; and, secondly, the steamship was in fault in going at an improper rate (eleven knots an hour) on a hazy night in a crowded channel; and, after the collision, in pursuing her course without affording or tendering any help to the barque. An inspection, under the provisions of sect. 18 of the Admiralty Court Act 1801, to ascertain whether the lights carried by a ship were such as the regulations require, ought to be made at night. There ought to be two look-outs at the bowsprit. A steamship proceeding at an improper rate in a channel crowded with ships incurs the responsibility of damage occasioned by her being unable to obey the direction that, on the risk of a collision, it is the duty of the steamship to keep out of the way of the sailing vessel. The

first duty of any vessel that by collision injures another is to wait to ascertain the extent of that injury, and to tender what assistance it may be able to protect life and property: {The Germania, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 44. Priv. Co.)

ECCLESIASTICAL LAW.

If the Rev. Charles Voysey should be adjudged guilty of heresy in the trial to which he is to be subjected at the instance of the Archbishop of York, it will not be for want of such aid as can be given by rank and clerical influence. The committee which has been organised for his defence contains a list of names that clergymen would do well to study. Dean Stanley has boldly come forward to shield Mr. Voysey, and he is now joined by such divines as Professor Jowett; the Rev. G. Wheelwright, vicar of Crowhurst; the Rev. Thomas P. Kirkman, rector of Croft; and the Rev. J. D. La Touche, vicar of Stokesay. Scotland sends a clerical ally in tho person of the Rev. Lewis Campbell, professor of Greek in the University of St. Andrew's. Science is represented by the eminent name of Sir Charles Lyell ; nobility by the names of Lord A mberley and Lord Adare. The list is certainly formidable. With Mr. Voysey's opinions we do not deal, and possibly they arc not shared by all the members of his committee. In coming forward to furnish him with the means of defence, Dean Stanley and Sir Charles Lyell simply intimate that they wish to see the most complete and authoritative legal answer given to the momentous question: What limits does the Church of England impose upon her clorgy when they claim to debate the rightful interpretation of Scripture?

The New Law On The Resignation Op Bishops.—The resignation of the Bishop of Bath and Wells and the expected resignation of the bishop of Winchester, will put in foroe the statute passed on the 11th Aug. for the relief of archbishops and bishops when "incapacitated by infirmity." As to the resignation ,of a bishop the act provides that on a representation being made by the archbishop of the province to her Majesty, it shall be lawful for her Majesty, on being satisfied of such incapacity, and that the bishop has canonically resigned, by order in council, to declare such bishopric to be vacant, and thereupon such vacancy may be filled, as if such bishop was dead, with certain exceptions specified:—1. There shall be paid by the year, by half-yearly payments, one-third of the inoome, or 200W. a year— either of the two sums as may be the greater, and in case of the retirement of a bishop appointed before 1832, the excess of the 20002. to be paid by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. 2. Her Majesty may, on special grounds, by order in council, assign any episcopal residence enjoyed by him; and 3. With the exception of his election and consecration, the bishop is not to be required to pay the fees and charges usually payable on accession, until the death of the retiring bishop. The case of the Bishop of Bath and Wells will be the first under the new law.

Church Reforms.—In a speech to tho clergy of the rural deanery of West Dartford, the Archbishop of Canterbury said: The Ritual Commission has been sitting long, and tho changes which it thinks desirable have now been drawn up and are at present being circulated among the divinity professors of the universities and other dignitaries of the church. Thoy may be summed up as follows; 1. A new Lectionary. Many chapters have been added, as suited to edification; some have been omitted. A greater elasticity has been given to the Lectionary. The principal changes are in the daily lessons. 2. Alterations in the ordinary daily service. Evidently, to men busily engaged the service as it stands at present does not commend itself. Even the City churches which have a daily service are but thinly attended. A shorter service, therefore, will be proposed—shorter, but strictly based upon the existing materials. 3. Every facility for dividing services and using different services at different times, according to the exigencies of different congregations. 4. In the Burial Service Borne solution of a difficulty commonly felt will be offered. These are the chief matters dealt with by the Ritual Commissions. Nothing revolutionary need be anticipated. The character of the Prayer Book will be preserved intact. Other matters imperatively demand attention. What a scandal, lor instance, to take up a newspaper and find whole columns devoted to the advertisements of sale of livings, and to see the tone and language of some of the advertisements themselves! It may. be difficult to deal with this, but an attempt will probably be made. The Bill which has lately passed with referrence to the resignation of bishops is identical in its scope with a plan proposed in Convocation three years ago with reference to the other clergy. It is not unlikely that a similar measure will be proposed for this end. More efficient episcopal supervision is required, although Church. men may not have made up their minds) as to the best means of gaining it. The desirability or nondesirability of a service for children is a matter npon which the clergy will do well to form an opinion. The abolition of church-rates has led to one difficulty not anticipated. The payment of fees by churchwardens can now be more legally demanded than formerly. But the churchwardens themselves have no guarantee that they will be repaid. Might not this lead to parishioners refusing the office? Some information as to whether this had actually occurred was desirable.

BANKRUPTCY LAW.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY AND INSOL-
VENCY (IRELAND).
(Before Miller, J.)
Re Joseph Axdrew Hobne.

Debts contracted in EnglandApplication to have proceedings taken in Ireland refused irith costs.

Miller, J. delivered judgment in this case, which had been argued before him. He said : This case presents a peculiar feature of general importance, as affecting commercial classes in England and Ireland, namely, that while tho debts of every cash creditor represented on the schedule of the bankrupt, as amounting altogether to 16.217J. 4«. 3d., had been contracted in England with creditors residing in England, excepting one debt of 100J. 6s. Sd., which, although having something of the appearance of an Irish debt, was for cash advanced by a gentleman not in any trade or business, npon the security of a bill, being one of such exclusively English debts, and which bill formed the larger portion of such apparently Irish debts thus contracted, yet it is sought to have all Buch debts thereby dealt with in Ireland, there not being, as I shall presently show, one shilling of assets of the bankrupt, even upon the representation of the bankrupt himself, available for administration in Ireland. If such a course can be effectuated under any code of bankruptcy law, commercial men can no longer look to this court for protection, but rather regard it as devised for screening debtors and enabling them to escape from a local and necessarily more proper investigation of their affairs and liabilities. Tho petition for adjudication was presented in this matter upon the 7th May 1869, by John Thomas Andrew, a creditor residing in England, against the bankrupt, grounded on an act of bankruptcy by reason of the non-appearance of the bankrupt to a trader-debtor Bummons by that petitioner for the nonpayment of a sum of 631. 3s. 8d., on which the bankrupt was adjudicated as such bankrupt on the 11th May 1869. The affidavit of trading necessary to support that adjudication hod been made by a gentleman named Costate, who stated that he hod known the bankrupt to carry on the trade or business of a commission agent for the last two years, and for the last five months at No. 125, Upper Abbey-street, in the city of Dublin, and to seek his living by buying and selling building cement, bricks and soap. A schedule was necessarily filed, according to the practice of the court in that matter, on tho 2nd July 1869, before the case could be brought on for final examination; and when this case came before the court for final examination on the 13th July 1869, an examination of tho bankrupt was had on the part of some of tho English creditors, who appeared to oppose the passing of the bankrupt's final examination, I when the final examination was necessarily ad- [ journed; and it was not until tho 7th Aug. 1869, that a petition was presented on the part of an English creditor named Babb, seeking that the adjudication should be annulled, and the petition of bankruptcy dismissed. Allegations wero made impeaching the judgment-debt of the petitioner in respect of which the petition had been presented; but it is enough for me to observe that I will not go behind the judgment upon which such petition is founded, and that, even if I could be induced to enter upon a consideration of tho matters suggested by the affidavits in avoidnnco of that judgment, they would go far to impress upon me the necessity of the exercise of a local jurisdiction intead of a jurisdiction foreign to tho place where such debts had been contracted. After the full discussion which the question of annulling the commission of bankruptcy under the Act of Parliament at present in force in Ireland, and as to the principle which should guide this court in such considerations has undergone in Day's case, as reported in Ir. Jur. 7, before Judges Berwick and Lynch and the Court of Appeal, I do not propose to enter into any further review of them, but shall confine myself to the consideration of the two questions—first, whether a trading sufficient to maintain the present commission of bankruptcy had existence; secondly, if such a trading had been established, whether the petition as presented was a bond fide proceeding, and the adju

dication founded on it such as this court under all the cirumstances of the case sustained. His Lordship referred to the bankrupt's schedule, and said: The schedule of the bankrupt as thus filed is of little value beyond the fact of its being a representation under the hand of the bankrupt, which he should be prepared to verify if permitted by the court to do so, unless it is afterwards fully vouched before the official assignee. The duty is cast on the bankrupt of fully vouching tho schedule as filed by him before he can claim at the hands of the court that his final examination shall be passed and his certificate granted. His Lordship having alluded to the report of the official assignee, stating that the bankrupt had no books to show, nor any means of vouching the statements he put forward in the schedule as to his alleged trading, continued: The assignee further reports that there were now no assets of any description to meet the bankrupt's liabilities of 16,267'. Shares to the nominal amount of 5600/. have been transferred, but the bankrupt represents them all transferred, or as valueless. I extended to the bankrupt a further opportunity of vouching his schedule before the official assignee, who made his second report upon tho 22nd Aug., which is, if possible, still more unfavourable to the bankrupt as regards tho question of trading, in which he refers to his former report, and set out a letter received from the agent of the bankrupt requiring him to report that the bankrupt was "a commission agent," instead of that "he described himself as a commission agent," also requiring him to report "that the bankrupt was a partner of Harper Twelvetrees and Company." instead of that "he was to have a share on certain conditions," alleging that the books of the bankrupt show that at the commencement of the agency business ho stood indebted to Harper Twelvotrees in cash overdrawn on foot of accounts whilst with that firm; and tho official assignee reports then that he sets no value upon the book which was produced to establish that the bankrupt was a commission agent, inasmuch as it was produced to vouch a series of transactions from the 1st May 1867, the gross profits upon which are represented to be 61. 12s., and yet that the first entry in that book was npon the 1st Jan. 1869, and that he had followed the description which the bankrupt gave in his schedule of the nature of his trading—that in a book which had been produced there is on entry, " 1869, Jon. 1st, by amount due to H. H. Twelvotrees in respect of partnership account, 501.," but that he had the statement of the bankrupt himself that no deed of partnership ever was executed between himself and the Messrs. Twelvotrees, and that tho condition, "tho investment of capital by him, on which the partnership was to have been entered into, was not complied with." Tho officer further reports that he would not accept as vouchers the books that were produced if unsupported, as, according to his experience, they did not bear the traces and evidence of ordinary daily-kept trade books, and that there was an evident sameness about them that was strangely suggestive of tho idea that they were written up, not as a record of a trading, but for a speoial purpose. After an inspection of the books thus referred to. I have only to express my opinion that the officer is fully warranted in finding that no sufficient evidence was produced before him to make him report either that the bankrupt was a commission agent, or that he was a partner of Harper Twelvetrees and Company. There is one other representation on the face of the schedule of importance as regards tho consideration of this alleged trading, namely, that there is not one good debt, nor one bad debt returned as arising out of the alleged trading, while there is one "doubtful" debt of 150/. returned. But that is desoribed in the schedule, as the amount of bills included in the salary of the bankrupt from Horner, Marsh, and Company, but not met, and the bankrupt in his evidence stated that he had paid all that 150(. away to a private creditor of his own, and that, of course, if that bill was paid by Horner, Marsh, and Company, his debts would be so much less. Upon the facts before me I have no difficulty in declaring that tho bankrupt has not carried on any such trading as would properly support the commission, and that the commission cannot bo permitted to proceed. I might end with that declaration, but in order that the Court of Appeal might perceive that I have dealt with the whole question, I will express my opinion on the second point, namely, whether this commission has been issued for purposes connected with the legitimate objects of a commission. The petition for annulling this commission was filed so far back as tho 7th Aug. 1869, and it contains the specific charge that tho proceedings in this matter have been instituted fraudulently and in collusion with the bankrupt, and for his benefit alone, and not for the purpose f distributing any estate amongst the bankrupt's reditors generally, or for any purpose useful or beneficial to them. Although I have had four affidavits to oppose tho petition, there is no

denial of the charge, which must be takes, after such an interval, to stand confessed. It has been suggested as a reason for the presentation of the petition of bankruptcy in Ireland that there would have been a difficulty in proving a residence for six months in England such as would sustain a commission in England. It is sufficient for me to say that any difficulty in the way of havine a commission against the bankrupt in England would furnish on argument for having a commission issued against him in Ireland, unless there are the proper materials for having him declared a bankrupt in Ireland, and I have nothing before me beyond a suggestion that any difficulty would exist in ascribing the residence of the bankrupt more readily to England than to any other place. Without further prolonging the examination of the case, I will state that I have as little difficulty in declaring that npon the second ground, a* upon the first, that this commission cannot be permitted to stand. The question of costs to be referred '.o the registrar.

Seeds, instructed by Oldham and Eaton, appeared in Bupport of the petition to annul the bankruptcy. MGocern was solicitor for tho assignee, in<l Forsyth appeared for the bankrupt.

CORRESPONDENCE OF THE PROFESSION.

[xots.—This department of the Law Times beiiu- (•!*-. w free discussion on all professional topics, the Editor b *•& responsible for any opinions or statement* contained irrii

Study Op The Law.—May I ask Mr. HaEi'uj through your columns, a question that maybe useful information to many of your readers? In his Articled Clerks' Handbook, Sect. 2 of the 2nd edit, he commences, "We will now suppose that the candidate has passed his preliminary examitation, and has become 'an articled clerk,' and wishes to prepare for his intermediate examitation." He then states the books, &c., and in chapter 2 recommends his reader " How to Study." In this chapter he urges the student to re*l cue branch of the law at a time, and advises certain books—indeed, goes through a course of studr. Now, what I would ask Mr. HaUilay is this: Seeing that the intermediate examination is afar half the five years' articles has expired, does he expect the student to go through the course of »toiy there set down in two years and a half r If not) how can the student follow out his suggestioi! to "master not only one book, but one branch of tat law before he commences another?" There ar» books to get up in equity, common law, and cos* veyancing for the intermediate examination. s» that three branches of the law/ must be studiei ■ two years and a half; and if the whole of the1 time is taken for study, one branch cannot ba mastered before another. S. B. G.

The Functions Op Magistrates.—Will any of your readers inform mo if the chairman d magistrates sitting in petty sessions can akn» conduct the examination of the witnesses for that prosecution, and put direct leading questions M them? TKHTLAK

Advertisino Solicitors.—I think it riirht si send you the annexed advertisement which I h»«| out from the Daily Telegraph. Surely somethiaj might be done, either by the Profession or by til legal press, to put a stop to this system of aartfj tising, which must necessarily lower the sfoliuj the Profession, and which is now daily incr-.ap;^ I think if all respectable solicitors would dechsj holding any communication with those who stoj to advertising, it would go a good way towards stopping the practice.

Alfred Wallett Dkacos.

Ventnor, Isle of Wight, Sept. 11.

BANKRUPTCY LAW.—To all in Debt.—Iainw>u<M> protection obtained for the person and property ui *■ cases without imprisonment. The Plain 6ui<Ie rrsa* on application.—Messrs. "Wimburn and Co-, SouYitonj 78, Myddelton-street, Clerkenwell, E.C. Diroree casj actions for compensation, Ac. Loans and mortgage Charges moderate.

Articled Clerks.—I should be glad if seal correspondent would inform mo whether, pnor tl the 22 * 23 Vict. c. 127, an articled clerk *J*» P* mitted to hold any office in addition to his perl* Bhip? I think less stringency in this partior.jr was then exacted than now; it is within my <;»* knowledge that a gentleman admitted in l^A while under articles was secri'tary to two p'-^J companies, the duties of one of which necessitate his keeping an assistant for their performan(* Thero cannot, however, be any doubt that !■ additional occupation materially interfered ml the articled clerk's professional employment.

NOTES AND QUERIES ON
POINTS OF_PRACTICE.

ry B.-Xonearp inserted unless the name and address of the niters are sent, not necessarily for publication, but us a piarantee for bona Jtdea.]

Entries.

3*. Notice Op Appeal—Alehouse Licence.—Will soaw of tour renders kindly answer the following quests ;—Does sect. 1 of 12 4 13 Vict. c. 45 repeal the 9 G«- 4, c- til, ss to the time for giving notice of appeal so that fourteen clear days' notice of appeal before the quarter sessions will do, and, if so, when must the recognisances to prosecute the appeal be entered into ?Jurist.

S>. Stbc.eos Accoucheur —C. D., the wife of A. B., icamling to the usual custom in such cases, engaged E. F, a surgeon accoucheur, to attend her in her aecouebment, at the same time telling him that she ((peeled the child would be born in about a month. The child was accordingly born about the time expected, bat before there was time to send for the surgeon ; and, in fact, Uis aid was entirely dispensed with, and he was sot attain communicated with. A week or two after the birth of the child, E. F. called at the house of A. B. and Jemanded his fee, when he was told, as the accouchment took place without his assistance, he was not entitled to uiy fee, and A. B. objected to pay the same, and he is i>\-i-e-i be is not liable to pay it, as, although £. F. was retained to attend the accouchment, he did not attend, ind itu not required, nor did he render any assistance. E. F. contends he is entitled to his fee, as it is the custom of his profession to receive the fee iJtb-jtLgh not called in, his having been retained being rafoient to entitle him to such fee. Required to bow if E. F. can, in the caso put, legally demand his fee; and whether A. B. can successfully resist the parment thereof? _ W. Y.

W. Seizure Of Goods—Payment Op Debt And Costs. —Upon settlement of on action by payment of debt and coats, is a bailiff bound to return goods seized and remoTed under a fi. /a. to the place they were taken from, or merely hold them in readiness to deliver up to defendant upon his applying for them? D.

'Smsfoers.

fQ.78) Articled Clerks.—The reference to Ex parta Wther Pttfxrcorn, 14 L. T. Rep. N. S. 252, for which I iai ostived, does not seem exactly to be a case in point, iMimuch as Walter Peppercorn, nearly twelve months iftfer execution of his articles, undertook the duties of i distinct and separate office—that of steward to a naaor— whether the duties of that office were merely Mtninil or not, he undertook them, and discharged thea, and in this particular failed to comply with sect. 10 of U k 24 Vict. c. 127, which enacts that "no person , . . shall during . . . articles hold any office, or engage in any employment whatsoever other than the eu'loruient of clerk to such attorney or solicitor." Sow the question put by the present writer, and the circ.mstances of the cose, are very different in material particulars, for here there is an express covenant in the wicks that the clerk " shall at all times when required so U) Oo act as a shorthand writer, and transcribe the potes so taken by him," while on the other hand there is the usual covenant of the solicitor to "teach and iastroct or cause" the clerk "to he taught and instructed in the profession of attorney and solicitor." Sow the question is whether such a covenant on tin; )trt of the clerk is calculated to endanger or vitiate the "tides. Further replies and references will very much ojtore. The writer has to thank " W. P." and " I. H.C." fcr their courteous answers. N. 0.

(Q. 81.) Attorney—Chanwe Op Name.—In reply to wqnery of " Attorney," I beg to refer him to the folJCTinv' cases, viz., Ex parte Mom, 15 Jur. 153; 19 L. J. <*. Q B.; & Daardtn, 20 L. J. 80, Ex. j 5 Ex. 740; and k ,«rt« RenthaU, 6 M. & G. 722; 7 Scott, 40?; 1D.&L. W. It aeems that on an attorney changing his name, the court, on being satisfied that the application is boiui •*, will allow an entry of such change to bo made on ihe mil df attorneys. And where an attorney changed aw name by Royal licence, the court allowed the roll to *? amended by substituting the new name for the old. The appli-atkm must be made by motion to the court "ivunsel; aud the affidavit in support of the motion, aadditicn to stating the circumstances, aud the desire V Lite the name altered on the roll, must show very tWly that the applicant is not apprehensive of any profrre»iinirs being instituted against him under the name *Wh he bears on the roll, and that the application is perfectl) bona fide. W. O. C.

Lircrpool, Sept. 11, 1809.

(Q 82.) Call To The Bar As Attokney.—The existing nd« of the Inns of Court preclude gentlemen who have ^eaoti the roll of attorneys from being called to the B» until the lapse of two years from the period of their •Mnea being erased from the roll; and by rule of all the i!5 ^nns °* Court, no attorney or solicitor or articled TMrk can now be admitted a member; aud as it is pror.'fcd by the same authority that, in order to be called w the Bar, or to practise as a special pleader or convey^eer nnder the Bar, it is necessary to have kept twelve tains commons in one of the four Inns of Court, it f'ilk'ws that for.this purpose at least three j ears' retirefc^t from practice are required in the case of an wtorn^y or solicitor. Any attorney seeking to be called to the Bar may have his name formally removed from J« roll by application to the court, on satisfying w court that his application is made bona tide, and ** far the sinister purpose of obtaining an immunity »«i the summary jurisdiction of the court. The appli»t»n muct te made by counsel on the affidavit of the 1 -orirtiy himself, stating the time when be was admitted ■J* attorney or solicitor, and that he is desirous of being "rut* off the roll of the court to which the application £ marie, an<l that there is no complaint pending against £&in his official capacity, and that he does not appro■*TM any. It ia usual for the affidavit to Btate the par"cujar. object of the applicant in having his name taken

off the rolls. The application should be made to all the courts in which an attorney is admitted; but it is usual, if the applicant is an attorney of the Court of

8ueen's Bench, to make the application first in the Bail ourt. If the affidavit is in due form a ru'e is grunted as of course, which must forthwith and before being acted upon be produced to tho registrar of attorneys, pursuant to the statute 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, s. 24, and tho registrar will enter a minute of such rule on the roll kept by him, and will strike the name of the attorney or solicitor off such roll, and mark the rule as having been entered. And on production of the rule and an affidavit of identity a similar rule or order may be obtained in all the other courts, as of course: (See Fulling's Law of Attorneys, 3rd edit, chaps, ix. & xi., aud cases there cited. W. O. C.

Liverpool, 11th Sept.

(Q. 83.) The County Courts Act 1807, s. 2—RegisTrars' And High Bailiffs' Duties.—First, It seems to me that it is the duty of the high bailiff, ou service of a summons under sect. 2, to wait until required by the plaintiff to furnish an affidavit of such service. It is provided by this section that the registrar shall, immediately after the last day for giving notice of intention to defend, send a letter to the plaintiff by post, stating therein whether the defendant has or has not given notice of his intention to defend. If the defendant has given such notice, the affidavit is not required; for the usual mode of proving the service of summonses is to swear the bailiffs generally to the service of all summonses before the court, according to the respective indorsements, and then the indorsement speaks for itse'f, or the bailiff refreshes his memory thereby, and proves the service, where the defendant does not appear at the hearing: (See rule 26 under the Act.) And where the defendant has not given notice of intention to defend, it is optional with the plaintiff whether he will cause judgment to be| entered up or not, and the affidavit may not be required. Where the defendant pays the debt, as not unfrequently happens, the affidavit would of courso be of no use whatever. This is a very different question from that as to the duty of the bailiff with respect to an affidavit in case of the service of a summons in a foreign district. There the affidavit is required to be transmitted by the bailiff within a limited time. Secondly, I think an affidavit of service by the bailiff of a foreign court is sufficient proof of service for all the purposes of the cause, where an affidavit is necessary, if it states the service to have been in the particular mode, and within the limits provided for such purposes by the County Courts Acts: but not where the statutes do not authorise the use ox an affidavit. Sect. 2 requires that the summons for obtaining judgment hy default shall be "personally served," and judgment by default may accordingly be entered up upon an affidavit of pergonal service, but not otherwise. W. O. C.

Liverpool. 13th Sept.

(Q. 84.) The Bankruptcy Act 1849, s. 184.—With reference to the question of "An Old Subscriber,'* it seems to me that if the bill of sale was given bona fide and for valuable consideration, and not in contemplation of bankruptcy, or with intent to defeat or delay creditors, B.'s assignee is not entitled under the 184tn section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act 1849, to recover the goods or their value. I assume that the bill of (sole in question was by way of mortgage, and that it was duly registered under the Bills of Sale Act. If so, it comes within the very words of the exception as to mortgagees and liens contained in the above-mentioned section. If this were not so, no bill of sale could ever be made an available security against the assignees in ense of the bankruptcy of the assignor. In Murray v. Arnold, 32 L. J., N. S., 11, Q. B.; 3 Best k S. 287, the defendant, in an action on a bill of exchange, obtained an order for a commission to examine witnesses abroad, and it was made a condition that he should pay 1001. into court, which he did; and subsequently a petition for adjudication of bankruptcy was tiled against him. The plaintiff wont on with the action, and recovered a verdict for more than 1001. And it was held by Cockburn, C. J. aud Wightinan, J. (dMoitmitioud, Blackburn, and Mellor, JJ.), that the plaintiff was entitled to have the 100J. paid to him, for that he was not a creditor holding security for his debt within the 18ith section; and, by Biaekbum, J. and Mellor, J., that he had a lien upon the lOOf. within the meaning of the section, and that he was entitled to get the whole of it. There can be no question that the holder of a bill of sale by way of mortgage is a creditor holding security for his debt within the meaning of the section referred to.

Liverpool, 11th Sept. W. O. C.

(Q. 85.)—The Wine And Beerhouse Act, 1869.—In reply to *' A Subscriber," I beg to say that in my opinion the certificate in question can legally be granted at the adjourned annual licensing meeting, and for the following reasons: By the 5th section of the Wine and Beerhouse Act 1869, it is enacted that certificates under that Act shall be granted by the justices assembled at the general annual licensing meeting held iu pursuance of 9 Geo. 4, c. 61, or at some adjournment of such meeting held in pursuance of such last-mentioned Act; and by the 1st sect, of 9 Geo. 4, c. 61, the justices are empowered to graut licences, for the purposes therein mentioned, at the general annual licensing meeting, or at any adjournment thereof, which adjournment is expressly provided for by the 3rd section of that Act. This being so, and as the Act of 1869 does not prescribe a different time for the making of the application, from the time mentioned for granting the certificate, it must be taken that tho application may be made at an adjourned general licensing meeting. And it will be observed that the 7th section of the new Act does not require that twenty-one days' notice shall be given before the general annual licensing meeting. The rerequirement merely is, that notice in writing shall be given by the intended applicant to the overseer and constable or peace officer twenty-one days at least '' before he applies:" and, in the case of a house or shop not before licensed, that a like notice shall be affixed and maintained on the door of the house and shop, and and on the door of the church or chapel between ten o'clock a.m., and five o'clock p.m., on two consecutive Sundays within twenty-eight days *' before such application." The concluding clause of the 7th section of

the new Act runs thus :—" Where application is made to the justices for the grant of a certificate uuder this Act by way of renewal only, notice iu pursuance of this section shall not be requisite." It might seem from this, on a hasty perusual of the Act, that, in the case of a house or shop having a licence at the time of the pushing of the Act, the twenty-one days' notice is not required. Iu truth, however, as there were no certificates previously, the first applications under the Act will not be by renewal, and the clause referred to only applies to> the renewal of the certilicates which the justices are, by the Act empowered to grant. W. O. C.

Liverpool, 11th Sept.

(Q. 86.) Ten Years'Clebks.—If your correspondent "A. B." will refer to the statute 2J & 24 Vict. c. 127,. s. 4, he will find that one of the conditions of the admission of a ten years' clerk as an attorney, solicitor, or proctor, is that he "has been examined."in manner directed by 6 & 7 Vict. c. 73, and by that Act. The I judges are empowered by sect. 8 of 23 & 24 Vict. c. 127, to make regulations in the case of persons preparing to I become articled clerks, and not being graduates of ther | nniversities, or having passed a university examination, I that they shall, before being articled, be examined in , Buch branches of general knowledge as the judges may I order. And no articles of clerkship can he valid without i a certificate from the examiners of such preliminary I examination having been successfully passed, unless the fudges, or any one or more of them, when under I special circumstances they or he see fit so to do, disI pen Be with compliance with such regulatinnB entirely or partially, or subject to any such conditions as to them or him may seem fit. If " A. B." intends to apply to a judge to dispense with the preliminary examination in his case, he will have to show a good and special reason why his application should be granted. By the regulations it is directed that the preliminary examination Bhall consist of two parts, viz.: Part I. (1) Reading aloud a passage from some English author; i 2) Writing from dictation; (3) English grammar; (4) Writing a short English composition; (5) Arithmetic— a competent knowledge of the first four rules, simple and compound; (6) Geography of Europe and of the British Isles; {7) History — Questions on English History; (8) Latin—Elementary knowledge of Latin. Part II. Each candidate shall offer himself for examination in one of the following subjects: (1) Latin; (2) Greek, ancient or modern ; (3) French ; (4) German = (5) Spanish; (6) Italian. Information may be obtained. of the Incorporated Law Society of the United Kingdom, Chancery-lane, London, as to the works selected by the examiners in each language. W. O. C.

Liverpool, 11th Sept. 1869.

LAW LIBRARY.

Nationality; or the Law relating to Subjects anoT Aliens considered with a view to future Legislation. By the Right Hon. Sir A. Cockburw, Lord Chief Justice of England. Loudon: Ridgway. How nationality shall bo acquired, how it shall be put off, and to what disabilities aliens shall be subjected, are questions that after a longslumber have been forced into prominence by" the changes wrought in society by the railroad and the steamship, which hare practically drawn into near neighbourhood nations formerly far apart, and thus brought about an interchange of inhabitants as remarkable as the increased exchange of their industries. The growing flood of emigration from the overpeopled territories of the old world to the boundless and almost unpeopled regions of the new world has of itself sufficed to raise a host of difficult questions not anticipated when international rights were first reduced to the form of law, and thus the question has been forced upon ull the countries between whom this kind of intercommunication has been established, how far the existing rules of nationality are adapted to the new circumstances, and what changes should be made in them to facilitate the common object, without making an easy path for mischiefs more formidable than the inconveniences it is designed to remove.

A Royal Commission, appointed in May 18G8, to inquire into and report upon the laws of naturalisation and allegiance, has suggested a series of amendments in that law, and it is to a commentary upon these suggestions that the Lord Chief Justice has devoted this volume. Assisted by the information collected in the appendix to the report of the commissioners as to the law of naturalisation in the various nations of Europe and America, Sir A. Cockburn has set forth in detail his reasons for dissenting from some portions of the changes recommended, prefaced by a singularly clear and complete resume" of the existing law in this and in other countries.

For this is a matter in which one country cannot well be a law to itself. Its own code affects directly all other countries with which it is in friendly intercourse. It would be well, indeed, if instead of attempting separate legislation, a mixed commission could be appointed to frame a code of naturalisation law that should be adopted by all the parties. Perhaps this

« 이전계속 »