Page images



BEACH (Thomas Hulbert), Ealing. Jan. 6; A. H. Davies, of Grant, Davies, and Co., sols., Burleigh House, 366, Strand, W.C. Jan. 21; Neville, J., at 12.

GREEN (Samuel), Lower Edmonton. Jan. 11; Ashley and Turner, sols., 9, Charles-sq, Hoxton, N. Jan. 25; Eve, J., at 2.15. IBESON (George), Macclesfield. Jan. 27; N. N. Lee, sol.. Bradford. Feb. 9; Neville, J., at 11.30. Dec. 31; W. Helliwell, of Helliwell, Harby, and Evershed, sols.. 231, Strand, W.C. Jan. 12; Sargant, J., at 12. TORQUAY TRAMWAYS BILL 1904.-Landowners and others who have suffered loss or have incurred expense connected with the construction or abandonment of the tramways authorised by the Torquay Tramways Act 1904, also creditors other than the depositors entitled to the residue of the funds in court to the credit of the above undertaking, to come in, by Jan. 15, and enter their names at chambers of the Judge, Room 705, Royal Courts of Justice, and prove their claims by Jan. 22, at said chambers. Hearing Jan. 22, at 11.30, at said chambers, Room 704.

SHARPE (Edward Henry), Fenchurch-st.

WILLIAMS (William Maurice), Leicester. Jan. 18; J. Parsons, of Parsons and Squire, sols., Leicester. Jan. 26; Neville, J., at 11.30.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35.

LAST DAY OF CLAIM AND TO WHOM PARTICULARS TO BE SENT. ABBOTT (Rev. David Wigley), Cardington, Church Stretton. Jan. 15; H. Green, Stockport.

ASHTON (Francis), Sheffield. Jan. 9; Branson and Son, Sheffield. ATHERTON (Joseph Edward), Upper Norwood. Jan. 12; L. C. Tree. 6, New-sq, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.

BAKER (Emma Sophia), Bury St. Edmunds. Jan. 30; Greene and Greene, Bury St. Edmunds.

BARNETT (Hermance), Preston.

Jan. 12; Nye and Clewer, Brighton.

BARRY (Rose Maria), North Kensington. Jan. 19; Guscotte, Wadham, and Co., 19, Essex-st, Strand, W.C.

BATES (Walter). Gracechurch-st, E.C., and Brockley. Feb. 1; Wansey, Stammers, and Co.. 28, Moorgate-st, E.C

BENSON (Catherine), Wesham. Jan. 1; Smith and Fazackerley, Preston. BOLTON (John Frederick), Handsworth. Jan. 12; Forsyth, Bettinson, and Co., Birmingham.

BRADFORD (Lieut. Bertram Hamilton Malcolm, R.N.), H.M.S. Aboukir, and Sports Club, St. James's-sq, S. W. Feb. 27; Ellis, Munday, and Clarke College-hill-chmbrs, 23, College-hill, E.C.

BRIERS (Charles), Barwick-in-Elmet. Jan. 23; Nelson, Eddisons, and Lupton. Leeds.

BROMILOW (James), Lostock. Feb. 1; Hulton, Harwood, and Briercliffe, Bolton.

BROWNING (Charles William Richard). Exeter. Jan. 16; A. E. Ward and Son, Exeter.

BURDETT (William), Hampstead. Jan. 11; Rye and Eyre, 13, Golden8q, W.

BULL (Louisa Frances), Twickenham. Jan. 11; Stephenson, Harwood, and Co.. 31, Lombard-st, E.C.

CLAPHAM (William Blackborne), Great Dunmow. Jan. 12; P. A. Clapham, 11, New-sq, Lincoln's-inn-flds, W.C.

CLARKE (Luke), Odd Rode. March 1, A. E. Stringer, Sandbach.

CONNELL (Arthur Knatchbull), Brockenhurst. Jan. 14; Foyer and Co., 26, Essex-st, Strand, W.C.

CRAIG (Surgn.-Gen. William Maxwell), Chelsea. Feb. 8; Long and Gardiner, 8, Lincoln's-inn-flds, W.C.

CROFT (Sarah), Walton-on-the-Hill. Jan. 30; Cleaver, Holden, and Co., Liverpool, W.

Cox (Henry), Sutton Coldfield, Jan. 16; E. I. Miller, Walsall.

DAVIS (Percy Elias), Hyde Park, and Stock Exchange. Jan. 15; Gisborne, Walford, and Co., 13. Copthall-av, E.C.

DAY (Maria Isabella), Worstead. Jan. 23; T. K. Parr and M. Falcon, at the offices of Parson, Lee, and Co., 24. Lime-st, E.C.

DELL (William Henly), Ilford. Jan. 21; C. J. Odhams, 56, Ludgate-hill, E.C.

DOBSON (Josias William), Gosforth. Dec. 31; H. Soden Bird and Sons, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

DODDS (Rosalie Eliza), Pall Mall. Jan 14; P. Conway, 81, Rochesterrow, S.W.

ETHERIDGE (George Laver), Covent Garden. Jan. 15; B. F. Browne, 17, Hart-st, Bloomsbury-sq, W.C.

EVANS (William), Harrogate. Dec. 31; Biddle, Thorne, Welsford, and Gait, 22. Aldermanbury, E.C.

EVENDEN (George), Coolham. Dec. 29; Rawlison and Butler, Horsham. FIELD (Frederick John), Torquay. Jan. 11; Glanfield and Glanfield, Torquay.

FLINT (James Mellish), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Claims of creditors, next of kin, or others. Feb. 5; Pearless, Sons, and De Rougemont, East Grinstead.

FORBES (Lieut. Henry Gordon Foster), late stationed at Fort William, Calcutta, India. Feb. 11: Tomlinson and Wardle, the Outer Temple, 222. Strand.

FORSTER (John), Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Jan. 16; Mather and Dickinson, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

FOSTER (James), Cambridge. Jan. 2; Papworth and French, Cambridge. FRANKLIN (Douglas Thomas), Thaxted. Dec. 21; Nockolds and Son, Bishop's Stortford.

GALT (Anne), Leamington. Jan. 30; Hazel and Baines, Oxford.

GARTSIDE (Arthure Redfern), Wilmslow. Jan. 9; Hand and Gartside,


GIBSON (Henry Frederick), Wells-st. Oxford-st. Feb. 22; W. C. Tayler, 16. Great James-st, Bedford-row, W.C. (Christopher Henry),


Wellington Club, Grosvenor-pl.

Jan. 22; N. Gillibrand and G. H. Winterbottom, at the offices of Sale and Co., Manchester.

GREENING (Frederick Joseph), Ryde. Dec. 31; J. Robinson, Ryde.

HARRIS (Alithea Spencer). Weston-super-Mare. Jan. 16; J. Inskip and Son, Bristol.

HARRIS (Eleanor Jane), Mildenhall. Dec. 31; Bendall and Sons, Mildenhall.

HAWES (George Thomas), Stoke Newington. Jan. 30; Morgan, Price, and Co., 33. Old Broad-st. E.C.

HIBBERT (Martha Ellen), Llandudno. Dec. 31; Sampson and Price. Manchester.

HOLLAND (Mancklin), Market Weighton, East Yorks. Jan. 12; Thomp-
son, Cook, and Babington, Hull.
HOTHAM (Major Francis Herbert), Sloane-ct, S. W. Jan. 16; Hunter and
Haynes, 9. New-sq, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.

HOWARD (William Gerald). West Brompton. Jan. 15; Gard, Rook, and
Co. 2, Gresham-bldgs, Basinghall-st, E.C.

HULL (Lawrence), Blackpool. Jan. 16: A. Ascroft, Blackpool.
JARVIS (James), Wigan, Jan. 30; W. B. Johnson and Johnson, Wigan.
LAST (Mary Anne), Guisborough. Feb. 1; Last and Betts, Bradford.

LEACH (Susannah), Eatbourne. Dec. 31; L. C. Wintle, Eastbourne.
Jan. 15; Coates and Brett,
LEDGARD (William Beaumont), Ilkley.



LESLIE (Lawrence Henry), North Shields. Jan. 15; G. R. Duncan, North
Jan, 12; Johnson, Raymond-
Barker, and Co., 9, New-sq, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.
MOAT (Frederick George), Southport. Feb. 1; T. E. Williams, South-
OVEREND (Henry), Bradford. Jan. 21; Hutchinson and Sons, Bradford.
OVEREND (Theophilus). Bradford. Jan. 21; Hutchinson and Sons, Brad-

MAYNE (Charlotte Louisa), Guildford.

PERN (Alfred), Botley. Jan. 31; C. Warner and Kirby, Winchester. PICKIN (Arthur Robert). Birmingham. Jan. 12; Edge and Ellison. Birmingham.

PILGRIM (Eliza), Chipping Warden. Dec. 21; H. C. Kilby, Banbury. Jan. 12; B. Kuit, ManPOTHOS (Socrates Nicholas), West Didsbury.

chester. RAVENSHAW (Thomas Edward), Worth. Jan. 15; Hunter and Haynes, 9, New-sq. Lincoln's-inn, W.C.

REGALI (Domenico), Clerkenwell-rd. Feb. 1; Rutland and Crauford, 69, Chancery-la.

REID (Dr. Stuart Bathgate), Southsea. Dec. 25; J. Allen, Portsmouth. RENSHAW (Luke), Droylsden. Jan. 30; Wilson and Firth, Ashton-underLyne.

ROBSON (George Gibson), Tunbridge Wells. Jan. 15; Andrews, Ogilvie, and Fisher, 32, Essex-st, Strand, W.C.

ROGERS (Maria), Leytonstone. Jan. 3; W. Archer and Son, 114, Fenchurch-st, E.C.

SCOTT (John), Belper. Jan. 20, J. and W. H. Sale and Son, Derby. SHORTER (John William), Harborne. Jan. 18; Forsyth, Bettinson, and Co., Birmingham.

SKINNER (William Banks), Finchley, N. Jan. 15; H. C. Morris, Woolsey, Morris, and Kennedy, 2. Walbrook, E.C.

SLIM (Ernest Edward). Smethwick. Jan. 11; Thwaite and Co., Birmingham.

SMITH (Edmund), Wyke, Jan. 21; Hutchinson and Sons, Bradford.
SMITH (Mary Anna), Putney.
27; Sloper, Potter, and Gosden,
York House, High-st, Wandsworth, S.W.
STONIER (Frederick), Odd Rode. Feb. 1; A. E. Stringer, Sandbach.
STYRING (Thomas George), Dronfield. Jan. 30; Bramley and Son, Shef-

SYKES (John), Lindley. March 1; Ramsden, Sykes, and Ramsden,

TORR (Edward Ralph Berry). Instow. Jan. 9; Toller. Oerton, and Balsdon, Barnstaple.

VANT (Rosina), Ponders End. Jan. 10; W. G. C. Clarke, at the offices of Maw, Redman, and Co., 6, South-sq. Gray's-inn, W.C. WEATHERBURN (Margaret), Leeds. Jan. 9; Hewson, Goodall, and Dobson. Leeds.

WEBSTER (Charles Clement), New University Club. St. James's-st. Jan. 11; Badham, Comins, and Sloman, 3, Salter's Hall-ct, Cannonst, E.C.

WOOSNAM (Kate), Tenby. Jan. 12; Leighton and Savory, 61, Carey-st, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.

WYNNE (Rose). Pimlico. Jan. 18; H. Mossop and Syms, 11, Lincoln's-innflds, W.C. YOUNGMAN (William), Menston. Jan. 21; Hutchinson and Sons, Bradford.

Messrs. Lingard and Leach, of 20, Finsbury-circus, are leaving that address, and on and after the 21st inst. they will be at No. 4, New London-street, E.C., close to Fenchurch-street station. Their telephone number will be No. 7333, Avenue, and telegraphic address" Escuage. Fen. London."

At this season of the year, more than at any other time, our thoughts should be for others less fortunate than ourselves. We would therefore commend our readers' attention to the various charitable appeals which appear from time to time in this paper The widow and the orphan, the sick and the infirm, are all worthy of our consideration.

Recent events on the East Coast will lead Londoners to congratulate themselves on the formation of the National Guard (City of London Corps), details of the formation of which are now published and will be found on another page. The uniform of dark blue will be worn regularly. The corps will be selfsupporting, and involve no public expenditure. The offices have already been thronged with applicants.

[blocks in formation]

Sir Reginald Acland, Mr. A. F. Peterson, Mr. George Elliott, Mr. F. A. Greer, Mr. J. A. Hawke.

Outer Bar.-Mr. George Borthwick, Mr. Arthur H. Poyser, Mr. E. W. Hansell, Mr. C. Ashworth James, Mr. H. W. Disney, Mr. C. F. Lowenthal, Mr. H. G. Farrant, Mr. Frank Newbolt, Mr. Owen Thompson, Mr. E. Percival Clarke, Mr. W. D. Mathias, Mr. L. G. Hoare, Mr. W. Cleveland-Stevens, Mr. G. E. W. Bowyer. The number of voting papers sent in was 1575, of which twentytwo were rejected.

At the first meeting of the council held after the election, Mr. F. Ogden Lawrence, K. C., was appointed chairman; Mr. J. Alderson Foote, K.C., vice-chairman; and Mr. T. Tindal Methold, treasurer of the council.

By virtue of regulation 4, Lord Robert Cecil, K.C., M.P., Mr. G. J. Talbot, K.C., Mr. John Sankey, K.C., Mr. R. V. Bankes, K.C., Sir Philip Gregory, and Mr. G. A. H. Branson were appointed additional members of the council.

The following standing committees were appointed :

The Executive Committee: Mr. J. Scott Fox, K.C., Mr. T. R. Hughes, K.C., Mr. N. Micklem, K.C., Mr. R. V. Bankes, K.C., Mr. W. J. Disturnal, K.C., Mr. E. W. Hansell, Mr J. AustenCartmell.

The Committee on Matters relating to Professional Conduct: Mr. R. F. Norton, K.C., Mr. F. R. Y. Radcliffe, K.C., Sir Reginald Acland, K.C., Mr. George Borthwick, Mr. C. Ashworth James, Mr. Theobald Mathew, Mr. E. Percival Clarke.

The Committee on the Business and Procedure of the Courts: Mr. Montague Shearman, K.C., Mr. A. F. Peterson, K.C., Mr. A. H. Poyser, Mr. F. Newbolt, Mr. Owen Thompson, Mr. H. A. McCardie, Mr. E. H. Tindal Atkinson.

The Committee on Court Buildings: Mr. H. T. Kemp, K.C., Mr. George Elliott, K.C., Mr. R. G. Seton, Mr. F. J. Forder Lampard, Mr. W. E. Tyldesley Jones, Mr. W. Cleveland Stevens, Mr. George F. Kingham.

The chairman and vice-chairman are ex officio members of all the standing committees.

Vacancies having occurred upon the council, owing to the appointments of Mr. Montague Shearman, K.C., and Mr. John Sankey, K.C., to be High Court judges, the appointment of Mr. F. R. Y. Radcliffe, K.C., to be a judge of County Courts, the resignation of Mr. R. F. Norton, K.C., and the death of Mr. George Borthwick, the council appointed Mr. Hugo Young, K.C., Mr. A. A. Roche, K.C., Mr. Rayner Goddard, Mr. J. H. Cunliffe, K.C., and Mr. P. S. Stokes respectively, to fill the vacancies so caused. Mr. M. L. Romer, K.C., Mr. J. J. Parfitt, K.C., and Mr. W. R. Sheldon were appointed to fill the vacancies on the Professional Conduct Committee, and Mr. F. A. Greer, K.C., was appointed to fill the vacancy on the Business and Procedure Committee.

In May last the British Medical Association invited the council to appoint two representatives to serve upon a sub-committee which had been recently set up by the association to consider the present state of the law with regard to the legal responsibility for crime. The council were happy to accept the invitation, and appointed Mr. E. A. Mitchell-Innes, K.C., and Mr. Theobald Mathew as their representatives to serve upon such sub-committee.

In June last the council nominated Mr. W. Cleveland-Stevens for appointment by the Lord Chancellor to represent the council upon the Committee of Management of the Bar room at the Royal Courts of Justice, in the place of Mr. Gilbert Hurst, no longer a member of the council

In July last the council nominated Mr. H. G. Farrant for appointment by the Lord Chancellor to represent the council upon the Royal Courts of Justice Refreshment Committee in the place of Mr. J. B. Matthews, K.C., resigned.

In October last Mr. A. F. Peterson, K.C., was, upon the nomination of the council, appointed by the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting, a member thereof, in the place of Mr. R. F. Norton, K.C., resigned.

[ocr errors]

Upon the elevation of the Master of the Rolls to the peerage, the The council unanimously adopted the following resolution: General Council of the Bar desire to tender their heartiest congratulations to the Master of the Rolls (their first chairman) on his elevation to the peerage."

[ocr errors]

Upon the retirement of Mr. Norton, K.C., who had served continuously upon the council and its Professional Conduct Committee since its establishment in 1895, the council adopted the following resolution: "That the council accepts Mr. Norton's resignation with regret, and desires to place on record its sincere thanks to Mr. Norton for his long and useful services and the untiring devotion he has throughout the time that he has served on the council displayed in all matters concerning the welfare of the Profession.

In accordance with regulation 8, which provides that one-half of the elected members of the council shall go out of office at the time appointed for the close of the election in 1915, the following members will then go out of office :

King's Counsel.-Mr. J. Alderson Foote, Mr. J. F. P. Rawlinson. M.P., Mr. T. R. Hughes, Mr. L. Sanderson, M.P.. Mr. H. T. Kemp, Mr. W. J. Waugh, Mr. M. L. Romer, Mr. Felix Cassel, M.P., Mr. James J. Parfitt, Mr J. H. Cunliffe, Mr. W. J. Disturnal.

Outer Bar-Mr. Edward Beaumont, Mr. W. R. Sheldon, Mr. R. G. Seton, Mr. J. Bruce Williamson, Mr. J. Austen-Cartmell, Mr. Theobald Mathew, Mr. H. A. McCardie, Mr. F. J. Forder

Lampard, Mr. Rayner Goddard, Mr. E. H. Tindal Atkinson, Mr. W. E. Tyldesley Jones, Mr. Geoffrey Lawrence, Mr. George F. Kingham.

In accordance with regulation 4, the following gentlemen, having been appointed additional members of the council, will also go out of office at the close of the election: Lord Robert Cecil, K.C., M.P., Mr. G. J. Talbot, K.C., Mr. R. V. Bankes, K.C., Mr. A. A. Roche, K.C., Sir Philip S. Gregory, Mr. G. A. H. Branson.

All the above gentlemen so retiring, if still in actual practice at the Bar, are eligible for re-election as members of the council.

Twenty-four members have to be elected, of whom one must be of the Inner Bar, eleven must be of the Outer Bar, and three must be of less than ten years' standing at the Bar.

The election will be held as soon as possible after the annual general meeting of the Bar, which is fixed for Monday, the 18th Jan., 1915.

Under regulation 10, every candidate for election shall be proposed in writing, and his proposal form, signed by at least ten barristers, shall be sent to the secretary within one week after the annual general meeting of the Bar. Proposal fortas may be obtained from the secretary.

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

The council think that the objects of this Bill should be approved. Having regard, however, to the fact that it is proposed, for the first time, to reduce into statutory form the law governing the acquisition of rights of way by the public, they consider that the phraseology of the Bill needs very careful consideration.

[ocr errors]

From that point of view they suggest the following criticisms :--Clause 2, line 2. After the word public" they think that the words" as of right and "should be inserted. It cannot be intended to allow a public right of way to be created by permissive or precarious user, but a comparison of the wording of this Bill, as it stands, with that of sect. 2 of the Prescription Act, 1832, might lead to that inference if these words are not added.

Clause 2, line 5 and line 12. It does not seem clear what is meant by "evidence arising during that period, negativing, &c." They imagine that what is intended to be expressed is "evidence of circumstances existing during that period, which negative," and they suggest that this expression should be substituted in both places.

[ocr errors]

Clause 2, line 14. The expression "owner is nowhere defined. If this is not done the same difficulties may arise here as have arisen under sect. 85 of the Highways Act, 1835. There is a definition in sect. 3 of the Towns Improvement Clauses Act, 1847, which would probably suffice.

[ocr errors]

The further question also arises whether the words " or occupier should not be added. In many cases the occupier of land is bound by the terms of his tenancy to prevent the acquisition of rights of way, and a notice by him should be sufficient for the purpose. Clause 2, line 20. Such a large proportion of land in England is now held not on lease, but on agreements for tenancies from year to year, that they think that for the words "land let on lease should be substituted the words " land in the possession of a tenant for a term of years or from year to year," otherwise this provision will be largely nugatory.

Clause 2, line 22. If the last amendment be adopted, it will necessitate a consequential amendment by the substitution for the words "the existence any such lease (sic) of the words "the existence of any such tenancy."

One further question remains, which is, perhaps, as much a matter of policy as of law, but which the council desire to call attention to as they think that, possibly, it has been overlooked. The dedication of a highway cannot now be inferred from mere user by the public over land of which a tenant for life is in possession, because such user, to be effectual, must be with the consent of the owner of the fee (Wood v. Veal, 5 B. & A. 454, &c.), the consent of the remainderman cannot be inferred; because he is not in possession, and therefore cannot prevent the user-by bringing an action of trespass-(Baxter v. Taylor, 4 B. & Ad. 72; Bright v. Walker, 1 C. M. & R. 211)-and the consent of the tenant for life alone will not bind the fee.

The effect of this Bill will be to remove this immunity of the remainderman and enable a tenant for life or pur autre vie who is indifferent or hostile, to dedicate any number of public rights of way over a property, and the remainderman will be powerless to prevent it, even although, at the time when the public right inures, the life interest may be on the point of expiring.

No doubt the same result has followed from adverse user for forty years of a private right of way under the Prescription Act, 1832, but the onus of a private way is very different from that of a highway. The council think that possibly the position of a remainderman under the Bill has not been fully appreciated. If it should be thought more logical when making public user effectual as against a remainderman to give him at the same time the means of preventing it, some such clause as the following might be added to the Bill:

[ocr errors]

"The person entitled to the remainder or reversion immediately expectant upon the determination of a tenancy for life or pur autre vie in land shall have the like remedies by action for trespass or an injunction to prevent the acquisition by the public of a right of way over such land as if he were in possession thercof."

The council were glad to observe that practically all their suggestions were adopted in Committee of the House of Commons, but the Bill was eventually dropped.

As mentioned in the last annual statement, the Lord Chancellor sent copies of the Conveyancing and Real Property Bills to the council with the request that they would examine and report to him upon them. The council accordingly appointed two special committees with power to co-opt such one or more members of the Bar, whether members of the council or not, to consider and report upon the Bills. The committees co-opted Mr T. H. Carson, K.C., Mr. A. Underhill, and Mr. C. P. Sanger, who gave a great deal of time and labour to the work, for which the council were most grateful.

The council eventually presented the following reports to the Lord Chancellor :


The General Council of the Bar have carefully considered this Bill. They recognise the great care, industry, and ability with which it has been drafted. They consider, however, that if any large measure of reform is to be taken in hand, it ought not to be confined (as this Bill admittedly is confined) to applying a new system of conveyancing practice to the existing law of real property. In the opinion of the council a thorough reform of that law is a necessary preliminary to any satisfactory attempt to simplify the practice of conveyancing.

If, however, contrary to this view, it is considered desirable to attempt any simplification of conveyancing practice without a reform of real property law, the council consider that the provisions of this Bill are far too complex to work satisfactorily.

In this connection it is important to bear in mind that any system of conveyancing has to be worked by all kinds of people possessed of varying degrees of experience and intelligence, and if a novel system is to be introduced, it is essential that it should be clear, simple, and intelligible.

So far from this being the case, the definitions and distinctions in the Bill are of extreme complexity and sublety; they would afford many problems most difficult of solution, even to the expert who has devoted a lifetime to the intricacies of real property law; for the practitioner who frequently has to work under conditions of pressure, and to whom conveyancing is only one branch of his practice, the council believe the difficulties would be almost insurmountable.

The principle of the Bill is that purchasers and mortgagees of freeholds or terms of years should be required to investigate only the successive transmissions and transfers of entire fee simple estates or entire terms of years, and that all life interests, remainders, shifting uses, and executory limitations, powers of revocation and new appointment, and the like, should in future take effect only in equity by way of trust, and (together with all other trusts) be kept off the title.

This principle is, however, obviously in conflict with the policy of the Settled Land Acts, which recognise life interests and give to the tenant for life in possession powers of sale, leasing, and, in some cases, of mortgaging the inheritance. To meet this difficulty the Bill contains, as regards settled land, an ingenious scheme under which the entire fee simple or term of years which is the subject of the settlement is to be conveyed from time to time to successive tenants for life or in tail, trustees for the purposes of the Settled Land Acts being appointed by the same instrument, and the statutory powers of a life tenant being, if so desired, extended. Under this scheme a purchaser or mortgagee, while bound to accept what may be called "a certified life terant," and excused from the necessity of looking into the settlement itself, will still be bound to satisfy himself that the proposed transaction with him falls within the statutory powers of the life tenant as extended (if at all) by the conveyance appointing the Settled Land Act trustees. Some such provision as this seems to be essential to the scheme, and might perhaps be adopted as an amendment to the Settled Land Acts. In areas where registration of title is compulsory it would relieve the registrar of the onus of deciding, on the death of each life tenant, who ought to be registered as the next proprietor.

To carry out the general principle the Bill provides as regards both settled land and unsettled land that henceforth the only "estates" which can be created (except by means of trust) shall be (1) estates in fee simple, and (2) terms of years absolute in possession. These are called " proprietary estates," and in them are included not merely legal estates and terms, but also equitable estates and terms. It then deals with "estates as paramount and "subordinate," and defines a proprietary estate as being paramount

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

to another proprietary estate when the first estate has " priority over the second. (Section 2 (3) (vii.)) "Priority is an ambiguous term, and is not defined. If it has reference to the date of creation of the estates, the protection at present conferred by the legal estate will go; a result which, in the opinion of the council, would injure credit (a). If, on the other hand, it refers to priority according to the settled rules of equity, the equitable doctrine of notice will remain. Interests such as life interests and remainders are also rather loosely brought under the class of "subordinate interests.' This nomenclature and subdivision appear to the council to be extraordinarily complicated, and certainly render the Bill extremely puzzling.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

In the opinion of the council it would be better, if possible, in all cases (except cases of settled land hereafter mentioned), to confine the use of the word "estates to legal estates in fee simple, and legal terms of years, placing all equitable interests (including equities of redemption and other equitable estates in fee simple) under the head of " Equitable interests." Practitioners are well acquainted with the meaning of "legal estates and " equitable interests," and they have quite different incidents and characteristics. The Bill appears to provide no sufficient advantage to compensate for the departure from that distinction. If a life tenant or remainderman should, after the Bill is passed, desire to sell his beneficial interest, he would still have to make title, just as he does now, by abstracting the settlement under which he claims. And the same would be the case to a large extent with regard to the owner of an equity of redemption in fee, because he would in any case have to disclose the paramount estate created by the legal mortgage, out of which alone the equity of redemption arises. Again, a person who at present purchases or advances money on mortgage of an equity of redemp tion does so subject to all prior equities, disclosed and undisclosed; but under this Bill the owner of the equity of redemption would be clothed with a proprietary estate, the effect of which on other estates and interests is not clear.

The council, however, recognise that the question is complicated by the Settled Land Acts, which give powers of sale, &c., overriding all beneficial interests created by the settlement, not merely to legal but also to equitable tenants for life. If (as above suggested) the Bill were confined to legal estates in fee simple and legal terms, the effect might be to exclude settled land from its provisions whenever the legal estate in fee was outstanding in a mortgagee, as is often the case.

This consideration no doubt compelled the authors of the Bill to extend the description "proprietary estates to equitable fees and terms. It might, perhaps, be possible to meet the case of settled land in mortgage by a provision to the effect that whenever a conveyance of a merely equitable fee or term (the subject of the settlement) contains an appointment of Settled Land Act trustees, the person to whom such conveyance is made shall have all the powers conferred by the Settled Land Acts, but without prejudice to the estates, whether legal or equitable, of persons having priority to the settlement.

The council are also aware that it is not uncommon to find titles where, although the property belongs in equity to A. in fee simple, there is a bare legal estate outstanding in a trustee. It might be useful to provide that in all such cases the legal fee should vest in the equitable owner. If that were done, the elimination of equitable estates in fee simple from the category of " estates would cause no difficulty.

[ocr errors]

The council also desire to call attention to the fact that in the Bill estates in dower and estates by the curtesy are not satisfactorily dealt with. Both these are common law estates, and are not touched by the Bill, and will still have to be brought on to titles.

The council also suggest that with respect to the arrangement of the Bill, it would be much more convenient and intelligible if all the definitions were grouped in the first section. At present they are spread over sections 1 (3), 2, and 39.

The council wish to draw attention to the fact that this Bill does not provide expressly for the case of copyholds. No doubt it is proposed to abolish this form of tenure by the Real Property Bill, but the two Bills do not appear to be interdependent. If this Bill alone should pass, it would be difficult to apply it to copyhold land, which does not vest in the personal representative and cannot be conveyed by deed. This fact should be borne in mind in the event of the provisions of the Real Property Bill as to copyholds not becoming law.

The council do not think that those clauses in the Bill which deal with death duties, cautions, inhibitions, and searches call for any criticism.

As regards the bankruptcy clauses, the council consider that clause 25, sub-clause (8) is obscure. They also are unable to see any sufficient justification for the provisions in that section which appear to place the trustee who has not lodged a caution in a better position qua purchasers than an equitable owner who has neglected to safeguard himself.

To sum the matter up after a most careful consideration of this Bill, framed as it is with skilful draftsmanship and great ingenuity, the council are reluctantly forced to the conclusion that the object in view, viz., “to simplify the title to and the transfer of land," must be sought by some other road than this. The complex definitions, exceptions, and provisoes in the Bill afford perhaps the best

(a) For this reason it was found necessary to repeal sect. 7 of the Vendor and Purchaser Act 1874 (which abolished the protection given by the legal estate) by sect. 129 of the Land Transfer Act 1875.

[ocr errors]

illustration of the difficulty of grafting an entirely new nomenclature on the old stock of English real property law.


The General Council of the Bar have considered this Bill, and they approve thereof; it makes a great many aiterations in divers details of the law of real property, some approved by the council on many previous occasions, and most of which are very desirable. But the council think that it requires consideration and amendment in the following particulars :—

SECTION 2. The drafting seems to be unnecessarily complicated; it would be enough to say

[ocr errors]

"A tenant for life or person having the powers of a tenant for life may grant or contract to grant any lease of the settled land or of any part thereof, or of any easement, right, or privilege over or in relation thereto, for any purpose and for any term, to commence at any time and subject to any rent, covenants, and conditions which the court, either generally or in any particular instance, may approve, and notwithstanding that such lease or contract is not authorised under the Settled Land Acts 1882 to 1890."

[ocr errors]

SECTION 3. It has been doubted whether "surrender" will cover cases in which the estates are not both either legal or equitable. If assured with the intent of extinguishing were substituted for the word surrendered," and the necessary consequential amendments made, this doubt could not arise.

SECTION 5 (2). This section would be improved by stating the law in the positive as distinguished from the negative form. It would be better to say

"Where the estate or interest of a tenant for life, or person having the powers of a tenant for life, created by any instrument has been before or is after the commencement of this Act expressed to be restored by a subsequent instrument, the person whose estate or interest is expressed to be restored shall always be deemed to have been and shall be entitled to exercise in addition to all powers under the prior instrument (or under all or any of the prior instruments) creating the settlement, the powers of a tenant for life in the same manner and to the same extent as if he were a tenant for life under the subsequent instrument."

SECTION 5 (3) seems to be unnecessary, having regard to section 12, but if it is necessary it should be removed to that section.

SECTION 6. It seems that the addition suggested in the annotated copy of the Bill should not now be made, as re Gordon has been reversed ((1913) W. N. 317).

SECTION 7 seems to be intended to relate only to base fees as defined by the Fines and Recoveries Act, and this should be stated. SECTION 8 (2). The latter part of the sub-section should run "and section 59 aforesaid shall extend to the case where the infant is contingently entitled, &c."

SECTION 11 (1). The proposed addition seems desirable, but it is submitted that it should not be made retrospective.

SECTION 11 (2). Trustees should not be entitled to sell parliamentary estates without the consent of the person beneficially entitled thereto.

SECTION 14. The drafting is not felicitous. It would be better to say

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Where capital money is lent on mortgage to, or a lease, mortgage, or other disposition of settled land, or of any easement, right, or privilege over or in relation to settled land is made to the tenant for life under the settlement, the trustees of the settlement shall, in addition to their powers as trustees, have all the powers of a tenant for life in reference, &c. others of them shall have such powers and the power

to enforce such covenants."

SECTION 15. The addition proposed seems to be desirable. SECTION 16. An addition should be made empowering tenants for life to consent to widening and diverting highways It might be in some such form as this

[ocr errors]

"A tenant for life or person having the powers of a tenant for life may

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

(2) Enter into any agreement for the recompense to be
made for any part of the settled land which is required
for the widening of a highway under section 82 of the
Highway Act, 1835, and

"(b) Consent to the diversion of any highway over the settled land under section 85 of the Highway Act, 1835. Any agreement so made or consent so given shall be as valid and effectual for all purposes as if made or given by an owner in fee simple in possession.

[ocr errors]

Any money received in respect of any such agreement or consent shall be deemed to be capital money arising under the Settled Land Acts, 1882 to 1890.' SECTION 17. A tenant for life should not be empowered to raise money for improvements without the leave of the court. The trustees are often the mere nominees and agents of the tenant for life, and practically under his control, and the remaindermen have but little protection, and require the protection of the court.

The addition which in the annotated copy of the Bill is proposed to be made to this section is desirable.

SECTION 23. The addition by which in the annotated copy of the Bill it is proposed to make this section retrospective seems unobjectionable, but the further addition allowing the purchase of leasehold interests is not desirable; such a purchase might be most unfair to

those in remainder, and among other objections thereto the merger of leaseholds would make reversion duty payable.

SECTION 24. Sub-section 4 proposed in the annotated copy Bill seems to be desirable.

SECTION 25. The proposed sub-section 3 seems to be desirable.
The settled land sections should be arranged in some sort of
order. They might run : 4, 7, 12, 3, 20, 5 (2), 25, 11, 6 (2), 5 (1),
6 (1), 14, 19, 21, 2, 15, 16, 17, 23 (2), 18, 24, 23 (1), 22, 8 (1), 8
(4), 10, 8 (2), 8 (3), 9, and 13.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

SECTION 27 (b). Instead of subject and without prejudice to the personal liability of such person substitute but such person shall be personally liable.' This sub-section may have the effect of making the land subject to more fines than are now in effect paid, for where many persons have to be admitted, it is often found possible to admit only some or one of them.

A further sub-section (iii.) should be added to state definitely that the enfranchised land shall be subject to all incumbrances, charges, trusts and equities affecting the copyhold interest. The proposed addition to this section seeins desirable.

necessary and SECTION 28 (5). One month is too short a period to give a lord to find a new steward. The lord might be abroad. SECTIONS 29 and 31. The proposed additions (in the annotated copy Bill) are desirable. SECTIONS 32 and 33. Neither of these sections appears to provide for cases of customary freeholds held for the joint lives of the lord and the tenant perpetually renewable-a form of tenure very common in Cumberland.'

SECTION 34. It should be made quite clear that a tenant is not to be charged a sum for the costs which he would have paid the lessor's solicitor for investigating title to the old and preparing the new lease. The word "costs in sub-section 2 is too wide. Sub-section 12, lines 4 and 5, should be rearranged "contract entered into after such commencement for the renewal for a term exceeding thirty years of a lease or underlease."

SECTION 35. It would seem to be necessary to give the Board power to make rules as to the procedure to be adopted under this section, and it would be advisable to extend that power generally to make rules for carrying into effect all the provisions of this part of the Act.

SECTION 40. A surface owner of a small plot of land ought not to be in a position to put this section in force unless the minerals are to be worked. In line 7 of sub-section (1) should be added the words :

[ocr errors]

and the owner of the minerals is desirous of working the same, and shall give notice of his desire to the other person interested therein.'

The provisions of this section might with advantage be extended to all cases where the mines and minerals cannot be worked, particularly to cases where wastes have been inclosed under old Inclosure Acts and Awards: And it would be wel! to provide that the compensation payable should be determined by a single arbitrator appointed by the Board (in case the parties cannot agree) instead of by the cumbrous jury system provided by the Lands Clauses Acts. SECTION 43. As regards the amendments suggested in the annotated copy of the Bill, the amendment in sub-section 3 is desirable, but the proposed sub-section 5 appears inadvisable. If it is intended to grant land to a parson as such, it is better to have the word successors so as to draw attention to the fact.


SECTION 45. The addition proposed in the annotated copy of the Bill is desirable.

SECTION 45. It is not desirable to abolish the enrolment of disentailing assurances. It is essential for the remaindermen and those dealing or proposing to deal with them to know whether the estate tail has been barred. The cost of enrolment is very small; but registration as distinguished from enrolment would probably be sufficient.

SECTION 47. The proposal to give a tenant in tail the power to devise the land seems to be wholly inadvisable and unnecessary. If a tenant in tail wants to devise the land, he can disentail at a trifling cost, and a tenant in tail by purchase could, if the settlor thinks proper, be given a power of appointment by will.

SECTION 50. To give a receipt, the effect of a reconveyance is very inconvenient, as the parties in whom the estate vests are not mentioned. Inasmuch as it is to be under seal and stamped, it will practically have to be prepared by a solicitor, and a short form of reconveyance would be far preferable. If the section stands, the difficulty which has arisen in many cases of building society mortgage receipts, of finding where the legal estate is, will be continually arising, while in the case of a reconveyance, it is always known where the legal estate is, as the parties are mentioned in the deed.

SECTION 51 is both unnecessary and inadvisable. It will enable a mortgagee to put pressure on a mortgagor to perform conditions to which the mortgagee is not entitled, and generally put the mortgagor in the hands of the mortgagee, and it will be very difficult to say what is a sufficient refusal and what is sufficient evidence of a refusal.

SECTION 52. This section would probably make all land given contingently to an infant subject to settlement estate duty. Would it not be enough to enact that the income of land so given shall, unless the document creating his interest otherwise provides, be applicable for his maintenance?

SECTION 53, sub-sections 1, 2, and 3. For persons "interested in enforcing the restriction" substitute "who are entitled to the benefit of [or to enforce] the restriction."

SECTION 54. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue should be made to define exactly what duties they claim, and, so far as possible, in respect of what lands they are claimed. Local authorities should be made to register their charges on the general land register, and should not be allowed to keep a private register-one search at a general register office ought to show all charges of all kinds.

SECTION 55. A title ought to commence rather more than thirty years back, as thirty years is the longest period allowed for disabilities under the Statutes of Limitation, and a title ought to exceed that period.

It has been suggested that a section should be added that a rent not exceeding £1 per annum which has not been collected for twenty years should be deemed to have no money value within section 65 of the Conveyancing Act, 1881.

It has also been suggested that an advisable amendment of the general law would be to enact that whenever in the limitations of a will the attainment of an age greater than twenty-one makes any of the limitations void for remoteness, twenty-one should be for all purposes substituted for such age, and that this amendment might apply to all wills of persons not already dead.

SECTION 57 (2). This should be altered to exclude estates tail, and instead of saying that the testator shall be deemed to have been entitled to land over which he has a power of appointment, it would be better to adopt the method found in the Land Transfer Act 1897; which should be incorporated in section 58 (1) by adding "and over which he executes by will any general power of appointment by will.”

SECTION 58 (5). 'No double probate ought to be granted without the original probate being withdrawn, or a note that a double probate has been granted being placed thereon, for inasmuch as all proving executors must concur in disposing of realty (sub-section 4), the persons dealing with the first proving executors ought to have notice that they are no longer sole executors. The proposed addition is desirable.

SECTION 58 (6). It ought to be possible to take out probate or administration in respect of part of a deceased's realty.

SECTION 61 is quite unnecessary and undesirable. A testator can always give power to make appropriations, and in cases where he has omitted to do so the court can in proper cases do so. An Act of Parliament ought not to provide for isolated and very infrequent cases of difficulty.

It has been suggested that it might be advisable to extend the provisions of Lord St. Leonards' Act (22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, s. 27) to cases where by deed or assent leaseholds are assigned to or become vested in beneficiaries. But if that were done it might be proper to give the landlord some power to require protection by retention of assets or otherwise.

PART VI. This part of the Bill should be strictly confined to amendments of the existing law, and should stand by itself without any reference to the Conveyancing Bill, and all amendments rendered necessary by the Conveyancing Bill should be transferred to that Bill The amendments made by this Bill ought to be intelligible and workable even if the Conveyancing Bill fails to pass. SECTION 65 creates another form of mortgaging, which seems to be objectionable and allows the legal estate to be entirely divorced from the register. It would meet the objections to which reference is made in the Land Commissioners' report (see paragraph 70) if powers were given to make a mortgage or transfer in any manner the parties thought fit, so long as a proper description of the land were contained therein, and the registrar were compelled to register such a mortgage or transfer and hand it back to the parties. All subsequent dealings with the mortgage interest should also be registered. The legal estate ought not to have to be sought elsewhere than on the register. In practice what solicitors generally want is to be allowed to register deeds containing any provisions which they like, and to have their deeds given back by the registrar as soon as possible.

SECTION 70. Section 12 of the Act of 1897 seems to be preferable to this section. The register ought to be conclusive until it has been rectified; for instance, the deposit by way of mortgage of a land certificate by the registered owner ought to be good against a disseisor who has not got the register rectified, even if he has got a title under the Statutes of Limitation against the registered owner. In August last a Bill was introduced into the House of Lords by the Lord Chancellor under the title of the "Real Property and Conveyancing Bill, 1914," in which the substance of the above two Bills (the Conveyancing Bill, 1913, and the Real Property Bill, 1913) were incorporated, together with some additional matter.

This Bill has not yet been under the consideration of the council, but they are given to understand that, as regards the incorporated provisions of the Real Property Bill, 1913, the opportunity was taken to give effect in the new Bill to most of the suggestions made in the council's report on the Real Property Bill, 1913.

As regards the provisions of the Conveyancing Bill, 1913, the main portion of which constitutes Part VI. of the new Bill, the council are given to understand that those provisions have been considerably altered in detail with a view to removing some of the criticisms contained in the council's report on the Conveyancing Bill, 1913.


Inns of Court. Through the kindness of the treasurer (Lord Justice Kennedy) and the Bench of Lincoln's-inn they were entertained at lunch in the hall, and afterwards conducted through the Law Courts and the Inns of Court.

At a special meeting of the council, held on Wednesday, the 21st Oct., 1914, in the Middle Temple Parliament Chamber, at which the Attorney-General (Sir John Simon, K.C., M.P.), Sir Robert Finlay, K.C., M.P., and over forty members of the council were present, the following resolution was moved by Mr. George Cave, K.C., M.P., seconded by Sir Reginald Acland, K.C., and passed unanimously:

In July last the council received intimation that several members of the Belgian Bar were about to visit London, and would appreciate the opportunity of visiting the Royal Courts of Justice and the

"That the General Council of the Bar, being moved by feelings of profound sympathy with their confrères of the Belgian Bar, desire to give them every assistance in their power. To that end they instruct their secretary to open a register on which may be placed the names of any Belgian avocats in this country during the war. Such register to be at the disposal of any persons desirous of obtaining the advice or assistance of a Belgian lawyer.

[ocr errors]

The council further venture to suggest to the Benchers of the four Inns of Court that Belgian Avocats should be invited to make use of the halls, libraries, and cominon rooms of the four inns during their stay in this country.'

At the same meeting the following further resolution was moved by Mr. Forder Lampard, seconded by the vice-chairman (Mr. J. Alderson Foote, K.C.), and passed unanimously :

"That, subject to the approval of the Lord Chancellor, the Belgian advocates should be invited to make use of the Bar room at the Royal Courts of Justice during their stay in this country."

The above resolutions were communicated to M. l'Avocat Bauss, Président du Comité des Belges à Londres, and to the Inns of Court. M. Bauss replied as follows:

31, Hornton-street, Kensington, W., 28th October 1914. To the Secretary of the General Council of the Bar. Dear Sir, I duly received your yesterday's letter, and beg you to accept my most sincere thanks for your kind information. My Belgian confrères, to whom I shall communicate the same, will appreciate as it deserves the great honour and kindness shown to them by their British brethren in this hour of sadness. Please accept also in their name the expression of their profound gratitude.

I am, dear sir, yours faithfully, A. BAUSS, Late Bâtonnier de l'Ordre des Avocats, and late Président de la Fédération des Avocats Belges.

The Inns of Court at once made orders inviting Belgian barristers resident in England owing to the war to make use of their halls, libraries, and common rooms.

The secretary has opened a register for Belgian barristers at present in England and desirous of employment, and has received the names and qualifications of a considerable number, for whom he would be glad to hear of suitable employment.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« EelmineJätka »