« EelmineJätka »
Barnstaple, Saturday, July 8
Folkestone, Saturday, July 8, at 12
Newark, Monday, July 17
Great Yarmouth, Monday, July 31, at Sunderland, Tuesday, July 11
Hastings, Friday, July 28
Kingston-upon-Hull. Thursday, July 27
Tewkesbury, Friday, July 14
West Bromwich, Friday, July 14.
We suggested recently, as among the uses to which the airship may by-and-by be put, the assisting of criminals to escape from justice. In the grounds of Sayre, Oklohama, United States of America, the other day, where a fair was being held, there was no airship, but a balloon was made to serve the purposes of a resourceful thief. The man was detected stealing, and the police, aided by the crowd, gave chase. The pickpocket fled towards a balloon, whose pilot, a Mr. Harvey, was preparing to make an ascent. Springing into the basket, he compelled Harvey, at the pistol point, to cast off, and the balloon shot up into the air. With the pistol still threatening him, Harvey had no choice but to keep the balloon in the air, and was forced to travel some fifty miles before being allowed to descend. The thief, feeling himself safe at this distance, then bade Harvey open the valve, and the balloon was brought down near Quamah, in Texas, having crossed the border line between two States. Out jumped the thief, and made good his flight.
THE announcement that the drivers of taxi-cabs in the metroplitan area are to be subjected on behalf of the police authorities to a rigorous medical inspection raises some points of no small importance to all parties. The public at large should certainly be protected in a reasonable manner from possibilities of accidents caused by drivers not only of taxi-cabs, but of every form of vehicle, and not the least so from the danger incurred by sending out horses in the " charge" of persons either too old or too young or too weak to exercise over them any effective restraint. In these matters it is always, or nearly always, a question of degree, and there is a very real danger that the zeal of the police may apply an altogether harsh standard of fitness for the holder of a licence. There have been some curious revelations as to the sight tests of seamen in recent years, and the police may make some regulations which would throw out of employment numbers of men who cannot either in this or some other test conform Should the to a standard quite beyond the necessities of the case. proposal then be followed up seriously it would be only fair to set out some limitations to the standard to be required. Furthermore, it must be remembered that in these competitive times a man rejected by the police may find himself very severely handicapped in obtaining situations in private families or elsewhere. The fear of trouble through the employ of workmen slightly below the par of commercial fitness is a very real one, and employers would think twice before taking on a man rejected by Scotland Yard. A recent catena of cases of drunkenness on the part of taxi-cab drivers has, however, shown that the licensing authorities might consider a driver's what course is open to them to prevent any holder of licence being a person of unsatisfactory eobriety. A mechanical vehicle is wonderfully safe and reliable in the hands of a sober driver, but is peculiarly dangerous when in those of an inebriate. In all these questions a spirit of moderation is requisite, and for equity's sake it is not right to impose ever severer conditions on one type of vehicle and to exercise no effective restraint on other types. If a medical examination is really necessary either for health or sobriety, let it be applied to all and every class of driver of vehicles in respect of which the police have any locus standi to interfere.
In this case the prisoner had been charged before justices sitting in petty sessions with six several charges of obtaining money by false pretences. In each case he pleaded guilty and was dealt with summarily under sect. 13 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1879. For these offences he received the following sentences: On the first charge six montbs, on the second six months, and on the remaining four three months each, all the sentences being made consecutive. The prisoner obtained rules nisi for certiorari directing the justices to show cause why the last four sentences of three months should not be brought up to be quashed.
The court held that R. v. Cutbush (L. Rep. 2 Q. B. 379) was sufficient authority for saying the justices could impose two sentences at the same time, and make the second sentence begin at the termination of the first; but "they felt that the principle of that case ought not to be extended to cover the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth sentences, and they held therefore that "the sentences after the second were invalid."
The effect of this decision is that a court of summary jurisdiction which has several offences committed by the same person before it at the same time can inflict two consecutive terms of imprisonment, but not more than two. The Secretary of State thinks it necessary to call the attention of justices to the limit of their powers in this respect as determined by the High Court, as he finds that there are a number of prisoners now in custody who have been sentenced by or more consecutive courts of summary jurisdiction to three
sentences, and prisoners with such sentences continue to be received in prison.-I am, sir, your obedient servant, EDWARD TROUP The Clerk to the Justices for the Petty Sessional Division of
THE KING AND GRAY'S-INN.
IN the course of the Royal Procession on the 29th ult. a large company of Benchers and members of the Inn assembled at the entrance to Gray's inn in Theobald's-road to witness the presentation of an address to their Majesties. The Prince of Wales shook hands with Mr. Henry Griffith, the senior Bencher in point of age, who entered the Inn as a student as long ago as 1825.
Mr. Edward Clayton, K.C., Treasurer of the Inn, presented the address, which ran as follows:
"We, your Majesties' loyal and dutiful subjects the Treasurer and Benchers of Gray's-inn, avail ourselves of your Majesties' gracious permission on the occasion of your passing the precincts of our Inn along the road which was at one time the private way of some of your Majesties' illustrious predecessors and known as the King's Way, to testify on behalf of all members of this society the heartfelt loyalty and devotion to your Majesties' Throne which have ever been entertained by this ancient Inn of Court. This society has for more than five centuries carried on in this place its work of educating and of qualifying its members to take part in the administration of justice of which your Majesty and your predecessors are the fountain head. "The society has called to the Bar many generations of men who have become renowned either as advocates or as judges sitting to administer justice as the representatives of the Crown.
"From the time when this society first acquired prominence in the reign of King Henry VIII. it has received the countenance of many of your Majesty's predecessors. The tradition of this society affirms that Queen Elizabeth was entertained in our ancient hall, and that the society enjoyed the especial favour of that great Queen and the intimacy of her Court and Ministers, and to this day her memory is venerated on every Grand night when members of the society and "The Pious, Glorious, and their guests toast each in his turn, Immortal Memory of Good Queen Bess."
Under the immediate successor of Queen Elizabeth this society shared the íame of its illustrious Treasurer, Francis Bacon, and at various times, when difficulties or dangers menaced the Throne, the members of the society manifested their loyalty and their devotion. "We are proud to feel that our Inn is still favoured by your Royal House. Your Majesty's Royal father was before his Accession The Duke of graciously pleased to be a guest of this society.
Connaught and Prince Arthur of Connaught are Masters of our Bench. The members of the society will never forget that your Majesty, as Prince of Wales, graced our house by your presence as a guest in our hall and pension room in Easter Term 1907.
'We heartily rejoice that the opportunity of your Royal progress through this part of the metropolis enables us to join our voices to those of all your other loyal subjects in proclaiming on the happy Occasion of your Majesties' Coronation the loyal devotion and affection which we feel for your Majesties' Throne and persons, and we fervently pray that the Almighty may grant to your Majesty and to your Most Gracious Consort happiness and all the blessings of this life, and that you may be spared for many years to reign over a loyal, united, and prosperous Empire."
The Royal reply, which was handed to Mr. Clayton, was in the following words :
"Benchers of Gray's-inn,
It has given great pleasure to the Queen and myself to receive the loyal and dutiful address of the Treasurer and Masters of the Bench of the Honourable Society of Gray's-inn on the occasion of our Coronation.
"This ancient society has for centuries occupied an honourable place among the Inns of Court. The training of those who devote
their lives to the study and practice of the law is a function of primary importance in a civilised state. That great structure of reason and experience to which each generation makes its contribu tion, and which has been building since remotest antiquity, has in our age reached a form and a refinement worthy of the respect of all nations. But no system of jurisprudence, however modern, however elaborate, can secure justice unless it is conducted by men of simple integrity and honour. The personal character of individuale, the observance of a strict professional standard are the necessary allies of good laws and careful judgments. Your duty has been to afeguard and renew the honourable traditions of the Bar. The Courts of Justice. those who resort to them, and the public in general, owe much to the Inns of Court and to their Benchers for the vigilance with which they maintain the reputation of the Bar of this country for fearless integrity and instructed good feeling. These are above the value of the highest gifts of forensic eloquence, and no less necessary than learning itself.
We thank you heartily for your warm expressions of devotion and affection to our Throne and persons. You may be assured of our cordial good wishes for the prosperity of your society, which has had in the past the favour of our predecessors and to-day includes two members of my family on its Bench."
Among those who accepted invitations from the Benchers were : The Lord Chancellor and Lady Loreburn, Lord and Lady Shaw, Lord and Lady Gorell, Lord and Lady Mersey, the Right. Hon. Syed Ameer Ali, Lord Alverstone and Miss Webster, the Master of the Rolle, Lord Justice and Lady Buckley, Mr. Justice and Lady Swinfen Eady, Mr. Justice and Lady Eve, Mr. Justice and Lady Lawrence, Mr. Justice and Lady Hamilton, Mr. Justice and Lady Lawrance, Mr. Justice and Lady Ridley, Mr. Justice and Lady Bucknill, the President of the Probate Division and Lady Evans, Mr. Justice and Lady Avory, Mr. Justice and Lady Horridge, the President of the Law Society and Lady Johnson, Sir John and Lady Macdonell, the Attorney-General and Lady Isaacs, Sir Edward and Lady Clarke, the Vice-Chancellor of London University and Lady Collins, Sir Edward and Lady Morris, the Hon. Andrew and Mrs. Fisher, Sir Edward and Lady Troup.
CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL LAW.
IN connection with the Universal Races Congress, which is to be held at the University of London on the 26th-29th inst., there is to be a preliminary conference on the 25th inst. of persons interested in International Law.
The congress itself has been arranged with the object of discussing, in the light of science and the modern conecience, the general relations subsisting between the peoples of the West and those of the East, between the so-called white and the so-called coloured peoples, with a view to encouraging between them a fuller understanding. the most friendly feelings, and a heartier co-operation. Political issues of the hour will be subordinated to this comprehensive end, and the congress is pledged to no political party, and to no particular scheme of reform.
The congress will not be purely scientific in the sense of only stating facts and not passing judgments, nor will it be a peace congress in the sense of aiming specifically at the prevention of war. Its prime purpose is to cultivate mutual knowledge and respect between Occidental and Oriental peoples, and it is felt that, once mutual respect is established, difficulties of every type will be sympathetically approached and readily solved.
The idea of the congress has been warmly received, and the congress itself has gained world wide support. Lord Weardale is president, while the list of vice-presidents is unusually long and distinguished. It includes the Vice-Chancellors of the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, London, Aberdeen, St. Andrews, Belfast, Dublin, Durham, Leeds, Manchester, and Sheffield.
Sir Edward Brabrook is vice-chairman of executive, and Sir E. H. Busk is vice-chairman of the hon. general committee.
Among the supporters are over thirty Presidents of Parliament, the majority of the Permanent Court of Arbitration and of the delegates to the second Hague Conference, twelve British Governors, eight British Prime Ministers, many Statesmen and Ambassadors, and some 130 Professors of International Law, and the majority of the Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
It will thus be seen that it is not the few, the despised, or the eccentric, who are co-operating in this congress; but the many, the honoured, and the experienced.
Papers are being contributed to the congress by Dr. Alexander Yastchenko, Professor of Law at the University of Dorpat, Russia, on the Role of Russia in the Mutual Approach of the West and the East; by M. H. La Fontaine, of Brussels, Professor of International Law, on the Work done by Private Initiative in the Organisation of the World; by Dr. Walter Schuking, Professor of Law at the University of Marburg, on International Law, Treaties, Conferences, and the Hague Tribunal; and by Sir John Macdonell, C. B., on International Law and Subject Races; while Dr. Thomas A. Walker, Lecturer on International Law at Cambridge, will deliver the opening speech at the session dealing with Positive Suggestions for Promoting Interracial Friendliness.
At the preliminary conference the subject discussed will be "The New Situation in the East," created by the recent adoption among Eastern rations and certain leading Western institutions, on the bearing of this on the growth and development of International Law, the regulation of International Law, and the proposed extension of the scope of the Hague Con erence. This important subject will be introduced by experts, and the executive trusts that this preliminary
conference will substantially assist the congress in forming a judgment on this delicate and yet far-reaching problem.
Full particulars may be had, post free, from the hon. secretary of the congress, Mr. G. Spiller, 3, Adelaide-street, Charing Cross, London, W.C.
HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN.
HOLME (Agnes), who died Jan. 19, 1910. Heir-at-law or customary heir or other persons entitled to the freehold or copyhold estates, and next of kin or their legal personal representatives, to come in, by Nov. 15, at chambers of Swinfen Eady and Neville, JJ. Hearing Nov. 22, at 11.30, at said chambers, Room 706.
APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT STOCK
NOTICES OF APPEARANCE AT HEARING MUST REACH THE SOLICITORS BY 6 г.M. ON THE
AFLECTITE CELLULOID SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be
BRITISH SOMALILAND FIBRE AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED.
COALINGA BRITISH OIL COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by
HOPE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED-Creditors to send in, by
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.
ELLIOTT (Ralph), Middlesbrough. July 31; J. W. R. Punch, of J. W. R. Punch and Robson, sols., Middlesbrough. Oct. 13; Eve, J., at 12.30. FYSH (Frank Horton), son of James Henry and Ada Fysh, if living on Sept. 19, 1910, or other persons interested in the hereditaments or proceeds of sale thereof to which the action of Blackman v. Gates relates, to come in, by July 17, at chambers of Joyce and Eve, JJ., Room 265. Hearing July 25, at 12, at said chambers, Room 267.
CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35. LAST DAY OF CLAIM AND TO WHOM PARTICULARS TO BE SENT. ABLESON (Mary Ann), Hampton Hill. July 30; J. Montague Haslip, 6. Martin's-la, E.C. ASH (Edward), Bridgwater and Eastover. July 25; Lovibond, Son, and Barrington, Bridgwater.
ARMITAGE (Thomas), Headingley. Aug. 1; Scott and Turnbull, Leeds. ARBUTHNOT (Ellinor), Mayfair. Aug. 5; Gasquet, Metcalfe, and Walton, 16, Mincing-la, E.C.
BARKER (John), Middleham. Aug. 1; H. Maughan, Middleham, Yorks.
BENNETT (George), Doncaster. Sept. 1; F. Allen, Doncaster.
BEECH (William George), Bayswater. July 31; R. E. Gold, 42, Westbourne Park-villas, Bayswater, W.
BEVAN (Charles), Harrow. July 25; Holder and Wood, 40, Cheapside, E.C. BEAULIEU (Mary Eugenia), Cannes, France. Aug. 1; Bischoff, Coxe, Bompas, and Bischoff, 4, Great Winchester-st, E.C.
BORTHWICK (Hannah Elizabeth), Burgh-by-Sands. Aug. ; Haiton and Hodgson, Carlisle.
COURT (James Phillips), Rock Ferry and Liverpool. Aug. 15; Brabner and Court, Liverpool.
CLARK (William Marshall), Forest Gate. Aug. 12; W. H. Banks, 585, Romford-rd, Forest Gate, E.
CALVERT (Herbert), Huddersfield. Aug. 11; Learoyd and Co., Huddersfield.
COOPER (Thomas), Leicester and Coventry.
July 20; Harding and
CAMERON (Thomas Ogilvy), Brighton. Aug. 3; Cardens, Brighton. CARTWRIGHT (William), who died at Mentone, France. July 29; C. W. Dommett and Son, 46, Gresham-st, E C.
DAVIES (Emma), Canterbury. Aug. 26; Mowll and Mowll, Canterbury. DEVERELL (Irene), South Norwood-hill. July 31; Coward and Hawksley, Sons, and Chance, 30, Mincing-la, E.C.
DICKINSON (Reginald), St. George's-sq, S. W. Aug. 11; the executors, at the office of Baileys, Shaw, and Gillett, 5, Berners-st, W.
DAVIES (Rev. William), Conway. Aug. 18; Welch and Co., Pinners'
Hall, Austin-friars, E.C.
EVANS (William), Aberdare. July 26; J. D. Thomas, Aberdare.
FRAZER (Jane Eliza), Southsea. July 21; J. E. Pink, Portsmouth. FULTON (Josephine), Sevenoaks. Aug. 18; Hill, Son, and Rickards, 40, Old Broad-st, E.C.
FOWLER (Mary Jane), Cheetham-hill, Manchester. Aug. 31; Diggles and Ogden, Manchester.
FARROW (Albert Edwin), Oldham. July 31; S. Holroyd, Oldham. GRAHAM (Edmund Bleaymire), Antwerp and Contich Village, Belgium. Aug. 1; W. Taylor, 59, Lincoln's-inn-fids, W.C.
GWILLIAM (Mary Alice), Leigh. Claims of next of kin. July 25; Stans. Baron, Wigan.
GRANT (Martha), Willesden. Aug. 1; J, F. Chadwick, 2, Camomile-st,
HALL (Mary), Ponthafren, Newtown. Aug. 11; Powell and Jarvis, New-
HYLAND (Rose), Rusholme, sole proprietor of the firm of Thomas Hyland and Co., Beswick, Manchester, Hutchesontown, Glasgow, and Ayr. Aug. 7;. Tucker, Tucker, and Richardson, Manchester.
HARMAN (John), Canonbury-rd. July 17; Wood and Sons, 16, Eastcheap, E.C.
HEAP (Benjamin), Weston-super-Mare. July 29; W. Smith and Sons, Weston-super-Mare.
JODIN (Marie Susanne), Petit Saconnex, Geneva. Aug. 5; Edmundson and Gowland, Bedale, Yorks.
JCENSON (Sarah Ann), Islington. Aug. 10; Lovell, Son, and Pitfield, 3, Gray's-inn-sq, W.C.
JONES (William), Birkdale. Aug. 11; Woodcock, Ryland, and Parker, 15, Bloomsbury-sq, W.C.
JOHNSON (George Francis), Kensington. Aug. 9; E. F. Ashelford, 56, Fordhook-av, Ealing.
JOHNSTON (Henry Hardcastle), Weston-super-Mare. July 31; A. Rogers Ford, Weston-super-Mare.
KEAR (Susannah Mary), Hornsey Rise. July 30; Henry Pumfrey and Son, 14, Paternoster-row, E.C.
LINDEMAN (Mary Florence Jane), Camberwell. Aug. 1; Bryson and
LED (George William), Alston. July 31; Chater and Atkinson, Alston.
MILLS (Elizabeth), Coventry.
Aug. 8; R. A. Rotherham, Coventry. MORRIS (Thomas Rowley), Welshpool. Aug. 11; Powell and Jarvis, Newtown, Mont.
McCOWAN (William), Queen's-gate, S.W. Aug. 1; Clement Dennis and
Co., 3, Lincoln's-inn-fids, W.C
MORGAN (William), Wick. July 31; Randall and Co., Bridgend,
MCMANUS (Dr. Leonard Strong), Wandsworth. July 29; Marriott and Pyke, 256, Lavender-hill, S.W.
MORTIMER (Samuel), Shipley. July 31; A. V. Hammond, Bradford. MORRIS (Mowbray Walter), Brook-st, W. July 12; Frere, Cholmeley, and Co., 28, Lincoln's-inn-filds, W.C.
NOELLE (Emma), Crouch Hill. Aug. 12; Rehder and Higgs, 29, Mincingla, E.C.
NICHOLSON (Edward Joseph), Bath. Aug. 5; J. Longland, Warrington.
O'CONNELL (Margaret), Keighley. Aug. 8; W. Dewhirst, Keighley.
PARKER (William Marris). Lincoln. July 15; Bourne, Stevens, and Phillips, Lincoln.
PARSONS (Herbert), Elsfield. July 29; A. H. Franklin, Oxford.
POLLARD (Jane Phoebe), Reading. Aug. 1; D. H. Witherington, Reading. PYRAH (Albert), New Wortley, Leeds. Aug. 1; Scott and Turnbull, Leeds.
PEARSON (Sarah), Bengeo, Hertford. Aug. 19; Sworder and Longmore,
RAWLINGS (William Henry Frederick), Twickenham. July 24; Lee, Ockerby, and Everington, 114, Queen Victoria-st. E.C.
ROBERTSON (John William Boyd), Forest Hill. Aug. 1; Dunderdale, Dehn, and Co., 85, London-wall.
SHORT (Samuel John), Holborn, Lowick. July 28; R. Carter, 62, Cheapside, E.C.
SCURR (Georgiana Catherine), Ryton. Aug. 8; Ingledew and Fenwick, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
SCOTT (Susanna), West Teignmouth. July 29; Jordan and Son, Teign
and Randle Ford, Windsor.
WOOD (Ellen), Earl's Court-sq. July 31; Aldridge, Thorn, and Sherrington, 31, Bedford-row, W.C.
WALSH (Rev. William Percival), Oxford. July 29; A. H. Franklin, Oxford.
WILLIAMS (Rachel), Wavertree, Liverpool. July 31; Bartley, Bird, and
WILD (Jennet Marion Maddocks), otherwise Janet Marion Maddocks
WAYMOUTH (Silas), Blackheath. Aug. 8; Taylor, Stileman, and Under-
YOUNG (Emily), Ditton Hill. Aug. 14; Garrard, Wolfe, and Co., 13, Suffolk-st, Pall Mall East, S.W.
YERRELL (Job), Hollywood. King's Nortcu. Aug 19; G. S. Rigbey, Birmingham.
Messrs. Charles Squire and John Parso 15, solicitors, of Leicester, have entered into partnership, and will practise as Parsons and Squire at 16, Friar-lane, Leicester.
Mr. Alexander Sellar has published, with Charles and Edwin Layton, Layton's Simple Interest Tables at 1% on amounts ranging from £1 to £100,000 for intervals of one month up to twelve months. Everything possible has been done to secure accuracy, and the book should be a boon to bankers, stockbrokers, and business men generally.
LONDON AND SOUTH-WESTERN RAILWAY GUIDE TO WEST SURREY, -The London and South-Western Railway Company have issued a useful guide book called "Outer Suburbia and Beyond." Its preparation has been entrusted to the Homeland Association, whose knowledge and experience are the best guarantee of its accuracy and impartiality. The book, which is illustrated with excellent plates, gives particulars of the railway distance, times, fares, season ticket rates, average rente and rates, class of property available, water, illuminants, altitude, subsoil, death rate, population and local authority, education and public worship also recreative facilities. In addition there is a wellwritten descriptive sketch of each place, in which the characteristic features are well brought out. This book will be sent post free to any bona fide applicant.
The directors of the London County and Westminster Bank Limited have declared an interim dividend of 103 per cent. for the half-year ending the 30th June. The dividend, 103. 74d. per share (less income tax), will be payable on the 1st Aug.
THE LAW SOCIETY.
ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COUNCIL INTENDED TO BE PRESENTEd to
1. In all actions for foreclosure the writ of summons or originating summons may, at the option of the plaintiff, be indorsed with particulars of his mortgage and of the respective amounts claimed to be due to him thereunder for principal moneys, interest, costs, or otherwise.
2. Where the writ or originating summons is so indorsed the plaintiff may, whether the defendant shall have appeared or not,, apply, in the case of an action commenced by originating summons on the hearing of the originating summons and in the case of an action commenced by writ by summons issued at any time after the expiration of the period limited by the writ for appearance, to a judge, on affidavit made by himself or by any other person who. can swear positively to the facts verifying the mortgage and the plaintiff's title thereto and the respective amounts due thereon, for such an order as is hereinafter mentioned; and the judge may thereupon, if he thinks fit, make such an order accordingly.
3. The order above referred to shall (a) specify the sum to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff for redemption money, and fix a period (not being less than one, nor, except in any case in which there being more than one defendant, the judge has special reason to the contrary, more than three calendar months from the date of the order) within which and a time and place at which the defendant is, if he desires to redeem the mortgaged premises, to pay the redemption money, the defendant to give fourteen days' previous notice of his intention to redeem, and of any further account he may require of sums received by the plaintiff (if any) on account of rents or otherwise since the date of the said order, such sums to be verified by affidavit of the mortgagee, if required by such notice, and (b) contain a direction to the effect that upon the defendant paying the redemption money to the plaintiff within the period and at the time and place fixed by the order the plaintiff do reconvey the mortgaged premises to the defendant and deliver up (upon oath if required) all deeds and writings in his custody. or power relating thereto to the defendant or to whom he shall appoint, but that in default of the defendant paying the redemption money to the plaintiff by the time so fixed the defendant do thenceforth stand absolutely debarred and foreclosed of and from all right, title, interest, and equity of redemption. of and in the mortgaged premises.
4. At any time after the expiration of the period for redemption fixed by the order a judge may, on the application of the plaintiff on affidavit proving that the redemption money was not paid within the period and in manner directed by the order, indorse certificate of non-payment thereof on the order, and thereupon the order shall become an order for foreclosure absolute.
MONEYLENDERS ACT 1900.
The following is the report of the legal procedure committee :The committee have fully considered the question referred to them as to the position of a bona fide assignee or holder for value of securities included in an agreement between a moneylender and a borrower, having regard to the provisions of the Moneylenders Act 1900, and the recent decisions upon it.
The Act of Parliament, in its first section, provides safeguards: for a borrower in his dealings with a moneylender, and enables the courts to reopen moneylending transactions and to set aside or modify agreements of an unfair character. This section is applicable to any moneylender, whether he be registered or not, and
whether the incriminated agreement be entered into in the registered name of the moneylender or in some other name. But whilst thus enabling the court to give redress in cases of unfair or unconscionable agreements of this class, the rights of bona fide assignees or holders for value are protected, and thus innocent persons who have acquired title to securities included in an incriminated agreement are secure in their title so far as this section of the Act is concerned, showing, therefore, that the section was aimed at the protection of the borrower, whilst preserving the rights of innocent transferees or holders for value. No one does or can question the wisdom of the law as thus indicated.
The questions which have arisen result from decisions under the second section of the Act. That section was passed to ensure that the moneylender should register the name under which he carries on business, and that he should enter into agreements only in that registered name, and subjected him to heavy penalties in case of non-compliance. The section did not purport to deal with the position as between moneylender and borrower or bona fide transferees or holders for value. It contains no provisions for the rectification or modification of agreements, or for the protection of bonâ fide transferees or holders who may have acquired rights under them. The section solely aimed at providing a clear and definite statement as to certain requirements which a moneylender should fulfil, and the punishment which should follow from a breach of them.
But as one of the requirements of the section is that a moneylender shall not enter into an agreement in other than his registered name, it follows that an agreement so entered into is one which the Legislature has forbidden; it is contrary to the provisions of the Act, and is consequently void. Hence an assignee or holder for value without notice has no protection, and cannot enforce delivery of or maintain his right to the securities, to which, indeed, he can have no title.
The position thus indicated is one which, in the opinion of your committee, was never contemplated by the Act, and is calculated to impose great hardship and injustice on wholly innocent persons. A moneylending agreement may be perfectly equitable in its terms, and such as, if entered into by a person not a moneylender, would be absolutely unassailable, but if made with a person who is in fact a moneylender then if the moneylender be not registered, or if the agreement be made other than in the moneylender's registered name, it is void, and a bona fide assignee or holder acquires no valid title. It is to be borne in mind that an examination with the most scrupulous attention and care might never enable an innocent purchaser or his legal adviser to ascertain whether the formalities required by the second section of the Act had in fact been complied with by the moneylender. They have no means of knowing or ascertaining whether the original lender was or was not a moneylender, and it seems, therefore, absurd to suggest that an innocent third party should be affected by such non-compliance. On the other hand, a moneylending agreement in which the moneylender contracts in his registered name may be iniquitous in its terms, and of a character which the courts would not for one moment sanction, yet, though they may set the agreement aside, or modify its terms and conditions, no such order can be made as to affect the position of a bona fide transferee or holder for value whose rights are unimpeachable.
The committee cannot think it was contemplated that such a result as above indicated should follow from the omission on the part of the moneylender to observe the provisions of the second section of the Act-an omission which, as we have said, a third party may have no means whatever of ascertaining or of protecting himself against.
The committee consider that the protection afforded to an innocent third party under the first section ought similarly to avail him under the second section, and that the Act ought to be so amended as to effect this protection. They do not consider that the modification will in any way alter the position of the moneylender, who will still remain subject to the same restrictions and amenable to the like penalties as if the Act remained in its present form. The exact mode in which the suggested remedy should be brought about is a matter with which your committee have thought it unnecessary to deal, as being one for the consideration of a draftsman rather than matter to be dealt with in a report.
The committee have attended with representatives of the Life Offices Association upon Mr. Tennant, of the Board of Trade, and the members of the deputation thus had full opportunity of explaining their views, and the committee are pleased to report that the opinions of all appeared to be in accord, and were unanimous in desiring that legislation should follow upon the lines above indicated. Mr. Tennant thereupon desired to be supported by a resolution of the council.
COUNTY COURTS BILL 1911.
The following is the report of the committee on the County Courts Bill 1911 :
The County Courts Bill 1911, which has been introduced in the House of Lords by the Lord Chancellor, was on the 3rd March 1911 referred by the council to this committee for consideration and report.
1. Before proceeding to deal in detail with some points upon which the Bill appears to the committee to require amendment, they desire to place on record the fact that in many of its provisions it proposes to give effect to reforms in County Court procedure which have been advocated by the council. Among these reforms may be mentioned :-
i. The conferring upon County Courts of a jurisdiction unlimited in amount, subject in the cases exceeding the present jurisdiction
to the right of defendants to have an order of removal to the High Court.
ii. The extension of jurisdiction in probate cases and under the Lunacy Acts.
iii. The extension of the jurisdiction of registrars.
iv. Provision for the making of rules to institute a summary method of procedure analogous to that under Order XIV. of the High Court Rules
v. Powers enabling the County Court judges to transfer cases from one County Court to another.
vi. Examination of witnesses abroad.
vii. The allowance of interest on judgment debts.
viii. Representation of solicitors on the Rule Committee. The committee consider that the provisions referred to will prove of great utility to suitors and are calculated to expedite, facilitate, and make more effective County Court procedure. For these reasons the committee are of opinion that the Bill should receive the support of the council, but subject to the following observations and exceptions.
2. With reference to clause 1 of the Bill, conferring unlimited jurisdiction upon County Courts, subject to absolute right of removal in cases exceeding the present jurisdiction, the committee think it necessary to refer to what happened on the discussion of a similar clause in the Bill of 1909, when it was proposed to give to the Bar exclusive right of audience in cases over £100. The committee recommend the council to adhere to the position that, whatever may be the jurisdiction of the County Courts, the right of solicitors to audience in those courts should be maintained. It will be necessary, therefore, to watch the progress of this Bill, and to oppose any proposal to restrict in any way the right of audience of solicitors in the County Courts.
The committee think it well also to notice that the Bill makes no attempt to remove the existing petty restrictions which in some cases deprive suitors of the professional assistance they desire namely, the restriction upon the audience of one solicitor instructed by another, or of a solicitor who is acting as clerk to another.
3. With regard to clause 1, sub-clause 5, the committee consider that, in order to prevent hardship to plaintiffs, the power to remove to the High Court cases in which a counter-claim of more than £100 is pleaded should be limited by giving to the County Court judge the same power as is conferred upon the High Court by Order XIX., r. 3, to refuse permission to the defendant to avail himself of a counter-claim, if in the opinion of the judge the counter-claim cannot be conveniently disposed of in the pending action or ought not to be allowed. The committee therefore recommend that to clause 1, sub-clause 5, there should be added the following words :
"Provided that the judge may, on the application of the plaintiffs before trial, if in the opinion of the judge such counterclaim cannot be conveniently disposed of in the pending action, or ought not to be allowed, refuse permission to the defendant to avail himself thereof."
4. By clauses 2 and 3 of the Bill jurisdiction is conferred upon County Courts in probate and lunacy cases where the amount involved is under £500. The committee consider that this sum should be increased in each case to £1000. It appears to them that only by so doing will any substantial benefit ensue to the public. 5. Clause 4, while extending the jurisdiction of the registrar, makes such jurisdiction conditional upon the will of the parties. The committee see no reason why the registrar should not by leave of the judge adjudicate up to £5. They consider, further, that no reason exists why, if all parties consent, a registrar should not adjudicate in all cases regardless of amount, subject to the ordinary right of appeal as from the judge.
6. By clause 5 of the Bill it is proposed to meet the demand for an improvement of the present default summons procedure, so as to give to the County Courts a power analogous to that of the High Court under Order XIV. by authorising rules providing for the entering up of summary judgment. The committee approve the principle of leaving this matter to be dealt with by rules. They observe, however, that the schedule of enactments repealed includes sect. 86 of the County Courts Act 1888. The effect of this would be (inter alia) to prevent plaintiffs issuing default summonses in cases under £5 where the action is for the price, value, or hire of goods which, or some part of which, were sold and delivered or let on hire to the defendant to be used or dealt with in the way of his trade, profession, or calling. The power to issue a default summons in such cases has been of great utility, and the committee consider that it should be retained by an amendment of clause 5 extending the rule making power to the cases here mentioned instead of limiting it to cases exceeding £5. 7. Clause 6 provides for special sittings at special places to be appointed in accordance with the directions of the Lord Chancellor, and that there shall be tried at such sittings all actions over £50; such other actions or matters as may be prescribed by the Lord Chancellor; and any particular action or matter which a judge may by order direct to be so tried. It is true that the judge may make an order directing that any particular action is not to be so tried, but he can only do this for special reasons. The committee are of opinion that this clause is unnecessary and should be opposed, and they regard it as at variance with one fundamental principle of County Court jurisdiction-namely, the localisation of the administration of justice in the public interest. Clause 9 of the Bill will give power to a judge to transfer cases from one of his courts to any other court in his circuit, and this in the opinion of
the committee is all that is necessary. If litigants know that cases commenced in their district County Court may be arbitrarily transferred to, and in many cases must be tried in, courts of other districts, grave dissatisfaction will be caused owing to the additional expense, trouble, and delay which will necessarily result to the parties and their witnesses in attending the trial.
8. Clauses 7 and 8 propose to relieve County Court judges of the obligation to attend regularly at the smallest class of courts, where there is ordinarily no business of importance, and to leave the registrar to deal with the undefended and the small defended cases at those courts, provision being made for any other case when it occurs being heard by the judge at another court. This arrangement would effect a material saving of judicial time at present wasted, and enable the judges to deal more expeditiously and effectively with the business of their districts and will also tend to render special sittings the less necessary or expedient.
9. With regard to clause 10 of the Bill, the committee approve the proposed extension of the cases in which the High Court has power to remit actions for trial in the County Court, but they consider that it would be more in accordance with the principle of the Bill, and conducive to the public interest, that the power should continue to be exercised, as now, unless good cause to the contrary is shown. The committee therefore recommend the omission of lines 4 (from the word "and") to 9 on p. 7 of the Bill. The same consideration applies to actions for tort, and the committee therefore propose that the words "unless good cause to the contrary is shown" should be substituted for the words " if it thinks fit" on line 13 of p. 7 of the Bill.
10. Clause 13 (i.) permits, in cases over £50, an appeal to the High Court against the decision of a County Court on a ground involving a question of fact alone or of mixed law and fact. Such permission should in the opinion of the committee be limited to actions as to which jurisdiction is proposed to be conferred on County Courts by the Bill. The court hearing an appeal has now in every case power to and frequently does draw inferences of fact, and the committee consider this is sufficient to meet all the requirements of cases between £50 and £100, and that to extend the right of appeal on questions of fact to those cases would result in unnecessary litigation and consequent hardship to litigants. 11. Clause 19 in effect gives power to the Lord Chancellor to appoint persons other than solicitors registrars of County Courts at any place where there is a district registry of the High Court. This provision is contrary to the policy of the County Courts Acts, and there appears to be no ground for the proposed alteration of the qualification for the office of County Court registrar. This appointment is one for which solicitors are especially well qualified, and one of the few for which they are eligible under the present law.
12. Clause 23 deals with the penalties on a witness neglecting a summons or refusing to give evidence, and proposes to reverse the present law as laid down in the case of Chamberlain v. Stoneham, reported in 24 Q. B. Div. 113. That case decided that a witness could not be fined unless he had not only received his travelling expenses, but also an allowance for his loss of time. Sect. 111 of the Act of 1888 as now proposed to be amended would make it possible for a litigant to place great hardship upon a witness by omitting to call him when he has been subpoenaed and paid travelling expenses only. The committee consider that the law as it stands is fair and should remain unaltered, and that therefore clause 23 should be omitted.
13. Clause 25 gives interest on County Court judgments exceeding £50. The committee consider that judgments exceeding £20 should carry interest.
14. Clause 26 provides that judgment debts may (when not ordered to be paid by instalments) by direction of the court be paid directly by one party to the other instead of into court. This might result in the lien of the solicitor being defeated. The committee recommend the addition at the beginning of line 34 on p. 12 of the Bill of the words "and subject to the lien (if any) of the solicitor."
15. The council have on several occasions suggested that power should be given to a County Court judge to commit for contempt of court a person who acts as a solicitor when unqualified, and the necessity for some such power has been recognised by the report of Lord Gorell's County Court Committee. The following addition to the Bill is therefore suggested :
"From and after the passing of this Act a judge shall have power to commit for contempt of court any person who has without being duly qualified acted as solicitor in any action or proceeding in the courts or any one or more of them to which such judge is attached, and sect. 162 of the principal Act shall be read accordingly."
16. Some change would in the opinion of the committee be desirable towards improvement in the status of juries in County Court cases, and they would suggest, having regard especially to the proposed extended jurisdiction, that the registrar might in the more important cases be empowered to summon juries from the special jury panel, and that a special fee should in such cases be paid to the jurymen.
17. The committee desire in conclusion again to impress upon the council the importance of obtaining a reduction in the present scale of fees in the County Court. Any loss to the Treasury caused by such reduction could be compensated by charging fees in cases which are now dealt with without payment. The committee feel assured that the court will never adequately achieve the object for
which it was established until the present deterrent character of the fees is altered.
BILLS OF EXCHANGE.
The following is the report of the committee on the proposed unification of the laws in different countries relating to bills of exchange :
At the meeting of the council held on the 18th Nov. 1910, a letter was read from the Board of Trade (Commercial Department) inclosing copies of the Correspondence relating to the conference on bills of exchange at The Hague," recently issued by the Foreign Office, and inviting the observations of the council on
(1) The proposals on immediate legislation made on the British delegates, and embodied in the draft Bill on pp. 113-4, and (2) The provisions of the proposed draft uniform law.
The correspondence was referred to the above committee for consideration and report.
1. Proposals for immediate legislation.
The proposals involve the following alterations in the existing law of this country :
(a) That days of grace should be abolished.
(6) That when a bill falls due on a non-business day it should be payable on the next succeeding business day.
(c) That when the sum payable by a bill is expressed more than once in words, or more than once in figures, and there is a discrepancy, the lesser sum shall be the sum payable.
(d) That when a bill is expressed to be payable with interest, and no rate of interest is specified, interest at the rate of 5 per cent. shall be understood.
(e) That where the acceptance consists of the simple signature of the drawer it must be on the face of the bill.
(1) That where a bill is dishonoured by non-acceptance, a party who is liable on the bill may nevertheless accept it for honour. (9) That payment for honour by the acceptor of a bill shall be prohibited.
(h) That where the holder of a bill loses his right of recourse on the bill by reason of his failure duly to present or protect it, or to give notice of dishonour, he shall not thereby lose his right of action on the consideration; but that if the drawer or indorser whom he sues has been prejudiced by that failure such drawer or indorser shall be discharged from his liability on the consideration to the extent of any loss he may have suffered. The British delegates also suggest :
(i) That the Bank Holiday Acts should be consolidated; and (k) That the stamp laws relating to negotiable instruments should be consolidated.
The committee agree entirely with the proposals (a) to (f) and the suggestions (i) and (k) set out above, and with the observations of the British delegates with regard to them. From the personal experience of the committee, and from inquiries which they have made of banking and financial clients, they are of opinion that the alterations will tend to create uniformity, and facilitate international dealing in bills of exchange, and will, at all events so far as these particular questions are concerned, bring existing British law into line with the laws and customs generally prevailing in other countries without any appreciable interference with the course of business.
With regard to proposal (g) the committee cannot adopt the suggestion that payment for honour by an acceptor of a bill should be prohibited. The acceptor may, as between himself and the drawer, dishonour the bill, but may wish to protect an indorser, and they cannot follow why he should be prohibited from doing so. For instance, in the case of an acceptance obtained by fraud, the acceptor may be justified in taking all available means to cast liability on the drawer, whilst protecting intermediate parties.
The committee also do not agree that there is any necessity for proposal (h) with regard to the loss by the holder of his right of action on the consideration for a bill. Their reason for this view is set out in the second portion of this report dealing with the proposed draft of the Bill.
The clauses of the draft Bill prepared by the delegates for giving effect to the foregoing proposals, and the comments of the committee upon them, are set out seriatim as follows :
I. (1) At the end of sub-sect. 2 of sect. 9 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 (which deals with the sum payable), the following words shall be added, namely::
"Where the sum payable is expressed more than once in words, or more than once in figures, and there is a discrepancy, the lesser sum shall be the sum payable."
In this addition the committee concur.
(2) At the end of sub-sect. 3 of the said sect. 9 the following words shall be added, namely