« EelmineJätka »
her by the arm and present her to the guests as "my Newcastle beauty." But the lover was not to be baffled by distance, and certain letters writ about this period by John Scott from Oxford, lamenting the sad exchange of Ranelagh and dominoes for the High-street and cap and gown, and of strolls in Hyde Park comitante Surteesia for a 66 grind up Headington Hill, show that Miss Surtees was not altogether inaccessible. The danger to the lovers was that other suitors-more eligible from a worldly point of view-were being pressed upon the young lady by her parents. So they took the only way, and one dark night in Nov. 1772 Miss Surtees tripped down a ladder of ropes suspended from her bedroom window, threw herself into her lover's arms, was whirled away in a pcstchaise over the Border to Blackshields, and there united fast in wedlock by a Scotch minister to the man of her choice. Happily, the "coalfitter" was not of an unforgiving disposition; the young couple were soon invited to Lovelane, and eventually a sum of £3000 was settled upon them. Lord Eldon, to his credit be it said, never regretted the elopment which had won him his wife. For her he deemed "the world well lost," if so it should be. Meantime he did the manly thing. "I have married rashly," he wrote to a friend, "and have neither bouse nor home to offer my wife, but it is my determination to work hard for the woman I love as soon as I can find the means of doing so. And work he did. He entered himself a student of the Middle Temple. He rose at four o'clock in the morning. He was strictly abstemious in his meals; and to prevent the invasion of drowsiness at night he read with a wet towel round his head. More than once his health broke down, but he held pluckily on. Most of the time before his call to the Bar was spent at Oxford. at New Inn Hall, where he acted as Deputy Professor of Law to Sir Robert Chambers, and it was while acting in this capacity that there occurred, he says, the most awkward thing I ever experienced. It was this: "Just after I was married, the law professor sent me the first lecture, which I had to read immediately to the students, and which I began without knowing a single word that was in it. It was upon the statute of young men running away with maidens-4 & 5 Ph. & M. c. 8. Fancy me reading with about 140 boys and young men all giggling at the professor! Such a tittering audience no one ever had.'
While Scott and his wife were residing at New Inn Hall, Scott had a walk in the garden with Dr. Johnson, Sir Robert Chambers, and others. How near such a meeting seems to bring us to the great lexicographer, as Miss Pinkerton called him; for there must be many persons now alive who have talked with Lord Eldon ! Sir Robert was gathering snails and throwing them over the wall into his neighbour's garden. The doctor reproached him very roughly, and said to him that it was unmannerly and unneighbourly. "Sir," said Sir Robert, "my neighbour is a Dissenter." Oh!" said the doctor, "if 80. Chambers, toss away, toss away as hard as you can." It was while Dr. Johnson was on this visit to Oxford that Mrs. John Scott declared she had helped him one evening to fifteen cups of tea!
The Professional Struggle.
At length the time of waiting was over. John Scott was to be called to the Bar, and "Bessy and I," he says, "thought all our troubles were over; business was to pour in, and we were to be rich almost immediately and how do you think it turned out? In thet welfth month I received half a guinea .. in the other eleven months I got not a shilling!" Passing down Cursitor-street, Chancery-lane, one day with a friend, he pointed to a house and said, "That was my first perch. Many a time have I run down from Cursitor-street to Fleet Market (now Farringdon-street] to get sixpennyworth of sprats for supper. Nothing," he added, "does a young lawyer so much good as a little starvation." He must "live like a hermit and work like a horse."
Commissioner in Bankruptcy.
From Cursitor-street the young couple removed to a small house in Carey-street, and here, while John Scott toiled at Coke upon Littleton and copied every special pleading, draft, and precedent he could lay hands on, his young wife would sit by him silently watching his studies and cheering and lightening his labours by her companionship. Lord Thurlow had promised Scott a Commissionership in Bankruptcy, but he withheld it, as he afterwords told me, says Scott, as a favour, because he had learnt that I was by nature indolent, and that it was only want which would make me very industrious. At the time of John Scott's call, the courts of King's Bench and Chancery were opposite to each other at the two corners of the upper extremity of Westminster Hall. In the Court of King's Bench, Lord Mansfield was the presiding judge; in Chancery, Lord Thurlow. Scott got the idea that Lord Mansfield favoured at the Bar the alumni of Westminster and Christ Church, and under this impression-doubtless quite a wrong one-he transferred himself to the Court of Chancery, which had this advantage, that the number of counsel regularly practising there was only twelve or fifteen! Notwithstanding this limited competition, his progress was for some years so slow that he had made up his mind to give up London and settle as a local practitioner at his native Newcastle; when a turn of Fortune's wheel changed the whole aspect of affairs. This was the famous case of Ackroyd v. Smithson.
help yourself to a glass of Newcastle port and give me a little. You must know," he went on, "that the testator in that case had directed his real estates to be sold, and, after paying his debts and funeral and testamentary expenses, the residue of the money to be divided into fifteen parts-which he gave to fifteen persons whom he named in his will. One of these persons died in the testator's lifetime. A bill was filed by the next of kin claiming, amongst other things, the lapsed share. A brief was given me to consent for the heirat-law upon the hearing of the cause. I had nothing then to do but to pore over this brief. I went through all the cases in the books and satisfied myself that the lapsed share was to be considered real estate and belonged to my client, the heir-at-law. The case came on at the Rolls before Sir Thomas Sewell. I told the solicitor who sent me the brief that I should consent for the heir-at-law so far as regarded the execution of the will, but that I must support the title of the heir to the onefifteenth which had lapsed. Accordingly I did argue it, and went through all the authorities. When Sir Thomas Sewell went out of court, he asked the registrar who that young man was. The registrar told him it was Mr. Scott. He has argued very well,' said Sir Thomas Sewell, but I cannot agree with him.' This the registrar told me. He decreed against my client. The cause having been carried by appeal to the Lord Chancellor Thurlow, a guinea brief was again given me to consent. I told my client if he meant by "consent " to give up the claim of the heir to the lapsed share, he must take his brief elsewhere, for I would not hold it without arguing that point. He said something about young men being obstinate, but that I might do as I thought righ. You see, the lucky thing was there being two other parties, and, the disappointed one not being content, there was an appeal to Lord Thurlow. In the meanwhile they had written to Mr. Johnston, Recorder of York, guardian to the young heir-at-law, and a clever man, but his answer was: Do not send good money after bad. Let Mr. Scott have a guinea to give consent, and if he will argue let him do so, but give him no more.' So I went into court, and, when Lord Thurlow asked who was to appear for the heir-at-law, I rose and said modestly that I was, and, as I could not but think (with much deference to the Master of the Rolls for I might be wrong) that my client had the right to the property, if his Lordship would give me leave I would argue it.' It was rather arduous for me to rise against all the eminent counsel. I do not say that all their opinions were against me, but they were employed against me. However, I argued that the testator had ordered his fifteenth share of the property to be converted into personal property for the benefit of one particular individual, and that therefore he never contemplated its coming into possession of either the next of kin or the residuary legatee, but, being land, at the death of the individual it came to the heir-at-law. Well, Thurlow took three days to consider and then delivered his judgment in accordance with my speech, and that speech is in print and has decided all similar questions ever since.' As I left the hall a respectable solicitor of the name of Forster came up, touched me on the shoulder, and said, Young man, your bread and butter is cut for life.' And so it was. But he was also making his mark on the Northern Circuit, for his view was-and there is much to be said for it-that Chancery barristers should go cirouit, and he himself did so regularly until, as he says, going circuit became injustice to his equity clients.
Breaking the Ten Commandments.
"Did you know," he once said to a young barrister who had just joined the Northern Circuit, "that I was first brought into notice by breaking the Ten Commandments? I'll tell you how it was. I was counsel in a case the fate of which depended on our being able to make out who was the founder of an ancient chapel in the neighbourhood. I went to view it. There was nothing to be observed which gave any indication of its date or history. I observed, however, that the Ten Commandments were written on some old plaster which from its position I conjectured might cover an arch. Acting on this, I bribed the clerk with 5s. to allow me to chip away a part of the plaster, and, after two or three attempts, I found the keystone of an arch, on which were engraved the arms of an ancestor of one of the parties. This evidence decided the case.' On another occasion a question of great importance to coalowners had come on at the assizes at Durham. Scott, though a junior, was put on to lead. "But why, Lord Eldon, did they put you to lead ?" "Oh ! they thought that I had an advantage over them in having been born and bred in a coal country. Well, they insisted upon my leading, and I said I would do my best. morning we went into court. We had a special jury of gentlemen of the county most intelligent men, well acquainted with coal and collieries. Mr. Justice Buller, who was trying the case, when I rose to reply after the defendant's case was closed, said to me: Mr. Scott, you are not going to waste the time of the court and of the jury by replying; you have not a leg to stand upon.' Now, this was very awkward-a young man and the judge speaking BO decidedly. However, I Baid: My Lord, in ninety-nine cases out of 8 hundred I would sit down upon hearing the judge so express himself; but so persuaded am I that I have the right on my side that I must entreat your Lordship to allow me to reply. Well, I did reply, and the jury retired, and, after consulting six or eight hours, they returned and actually gave the verdict in my favour. When I went to the ball that night I was received with open arms by everyone. Oh! my fame was established. I might have married half the pretty girls in the room that night. But I must not omit to tell you the conclusion. I went to Carlisle, and there Buller sent for me and told me he had
been thinking over that case on his way from Newcastle, and he had come to the conclusion that he was entirely wrong and I was right, and he expressed his regret for having stopped or attempted to stop me in court. Now, that was handsome of him. This cause raised me aloft.
In another case he had on circuit his client a married ladyclaimed damages for an assault on her at the whist table by an elderly spinster. The averment in the pleading was that the spinster had assaulted her "with her hand." In fact, she had flung her cards at her head, and, in dodging them, the plaintiff fell off her chair. Defendant's counsel objected that the averment was not proved; but Soott contended that a hand of cards was a "hand," and, amidst much laughter, carried a verdict for his client
These anecdotes of his early days are worth quoting-apart from their intrinsic interest-because they are characteristic of the man. They show a quality of pertinacity—always a valuable quality at the Bar-but particularly so when backed, as in Lord Eldon's case, by wide learning and sound judgment.
Nearing the Woolsack.
Thurlow had not forgotten his argument in Ackroyd v. Smithson, and pushed his interests whenever he could. He gave him a silk gown in 1783, and the same year got him into Parliament for a porket borough of Lord Weymouth's (Weebly). "Sooner or later," he said to Scott, "you must hold the Great Seal. I know no one but yourself qualified for its duties." The prophecy came true, and the first steps were achieved when Scott became Solicitor-General (1788) and afterwards (1794) Attorney-General in Pitt's Administration, but Thurlow's quarrel with Pitt delayed for a time the consum mation, and the Woolsack, on Thurlow's resignation Imuch to Thurlow's disgust, fell to Lord Loughborough, Scott becoming Chief Justice of the Common Pleas with a peerage-Baron Eldon. In those days the Chief Justices had to wear their wigs in private life, and the story runs that Lady Eldon, who greatly admired her husband's good looks and luxuriant locks, rebelled vehemently against his being disfigured. So in society, and, to please her, Lord Eldon pleaded to be let off the etiquette, saying he suffered from headaches. "No, no," said the King, with a smile" no innovations in my time; if you will wear your beards again you may drop your wigs, not otherwise." Though Thurlow had fallen, Lord Eldon had found a powerful friend in the King. "I do not know," he says, what made George III. so fond of me, but he was fond of me. Did I ever tell you the manner in which he gave me the Seals? When I went to him he had his coat buttoned thus-one or two buttons fastened at the lower part-and, putting his right hand within, he drew them out from the left side, saying. I give them to you from my heart." " He took them back with equal reluctance when on the death of Pitt Lord Eldon came to him to resign them. Lay them down on the sofa," he said, "for I cannot and will not take them from you." The truth is that Lord Eldon was not only a very lovable man, but he was a man just after George III.'s own heart. There was a real congeniality of temperament and character between the two men. Each was honest and strict in his sense of duty. Each held the same views about the Constitution, Church, and State. Lord Eldon unaffectedly respected and admired his Royal master, and the King reciprocated the feeling and reposed unbounded confidence in his Chancellor. After his first resignation that brilliant Ministry known as "All the Talents," with Erskine as Chancellor, had its brief day, and then Lord Eldon took his seat again upon the Woolsack for a period, unprecedented in our legal annals, of more than twenty years. Into all the controversies of that eventful period -the Catholic disabilities, the Regency, the struggle with Buonaparte, the trial of Queen Caroline, slave emancipation, the first Factory Aot. Parliamentary reform culminating in the great Reform Bill of 1832-it would be impossible here to enter; suffice it to say that in each and all Lord Eldon was the protagonist of uncompromising Toryism, and exercised an almost absolute ascendency in the House of Lords.
Corn Law Riots.
Like Lord Mansfield and Lord Thurlow, Lord Eldon more than once came in for the attentions of the mob. A corn tax-that is, a duty on the importation of foreign corn-had been proposed. It was highly obnoxious-as well it might be in those days of war pricesto the lower orders in London, and the odium of the proposal fell, of course, on. Lord Eldon as the embodiment of all that was antipopular, though, in point of fact, he had nothing to do with the matter. The Chancellor was at that time living at 6, Bedford-square, and thither about ten o'clock at night a body of the mob proceeded. Not content with breaking his windows, they tore down the area railings and used them as crowbars to wrench open the front door, Aud forced their way into the hall and began wrecking all they could lay hands on. Fortunately, the back premises of the house communicated with the British Museum Gardens, where a guard of soldiers was kept, and there the family took refuge. The soldiers were too few, however, to do more than keep the mob at bay till reinforcements Arrived. In the mêlée Lord Eldon behaved with great intrepidity. He collared one of the intruders and said, "If you don't mind what you are about, my man, you'll be hanged." The intruder replied, "Perhaps so. old chap, but I think it looks now as if you would be hanged first"; "and," added Lord Eldon with an arch smile in telling the story, "I had my miegivings that he was in the right."
The Law's Delay and the Court of Chancery.
Great judge as he was-clarum et venerabile nomen-Lord Eldon's name is, and probably always will be, associated in the popular mind
with the abuses and delays of the Court of Chancery. Dickens caricature of that court in Jarndyce v. Jarndyce is too clever for truth to prevail against it, and beyond doubt the court was a scandal, but it was not entirely Lord Eldon's fault. Arrears had accumulated because the business of the court had enormously increased. The practice, too, of the court was cumbrous and dilatory to a degree; but it is impossible to exonerate Lord Eldon from some blame in the matter of delays. His mind was constitutionally prone to doubt -doubts originating in his extreme scrupulosity. He was, as Sir Samuel Romilly said, over-anxious to decide properly,' but the failing was one which leaned to virtue's side, especially at a time when the principles of our equity jurisprudence, though systematised by Lord Hardwicke and developed by Lord Thurlow, were still to be worked out in detail. Even Sir Samuel Romillyone of Lord Eldon's severest (critios-confessed that he began to think the tardy justice of the Chancellor better than the swift: injustice of his deputy, Sir John Leach."
Lord Eldon had purchased a fine mansion-house and estate at Encombe, close to Corfe Castle, in the isle or, rather, peninsula of Purbeck, famous for its quarries, and here, like Horace, he could watch
Range the sequestered vale,"
or from the summit of Swyer or Westhill, neighbouring heights, enjoy magnificent views of sea and down.
Taking a walk by himself one day and seeing two persons on his land with dogs and guns, he accosted them with a gentle intimation that they were trespassing on Lord Eldon's property. "Oh! no," said one of them, "we are not trespassing; we are only following some birds that we put up on another gentleman's land. If you go home and ask your master, he knows the law better than to tell you that what we are doing is contrary to it." "Indeed, gentlemen,' replied Lord Eldon, "that will hardly be his opinion, for he is the person who now addresses you. However, as you do not seem to like my law, you shall pursue your amusement for to-day without any further interruption from me."
He found time, too, in the country to go to church, which in his busy days he confesses he had too much neglected. "Lord Eldon a pillar of the Church," exclaimed someone; "he may be a buttress, but he is not a pillar, for he is never seen inside!"
"We had a fire here," he writes from Encombe, "in the wing, which destroyed two bedrooms. It really was a very pretty sight, for all the maids turned out of their beds and they formed a line from the water to the fire engine, handing the buckets; they looked very pretty all in their shifts. My first care was the Great Seal, so, by way of securing it during the confusion, I buried it. The next morning, when I came> to reflect, I could not remember the spot where I had put it; you never saw anything so ridiculous as seeing the whole family down that walk, probing and digging till we found it." It reminds us of that droll scene in the diary where Mr. Pepys and his deaf old father were trying to find the gold which they had buried at the time of the Great Fire, and Mr. Pepys was in mortal fear that his shouting to his father would betray the situation to the neighbours.
Par nobile Fratrum.
The greatest of all treats was to meet Lord Eldon and Lord Stowell together at a friendly dinner party of lawyers. Here, sure of deference and appreciation, each brother would playfully unbend after the labours of the day; talk one against the other, and narrate alternately professional anecdotes. In playful banter they would not. spare each other. A neighbour having asked Lord Stowell aside, the conversation being on feats of sportsmanship, if his brother killed much, "Nothing," he quietly answered; " he kills nothing but time." The maligned sportsman had his revenge. Asked whether Lord' Stowell took much exercise, "None," he said, "but the exercise of eating and drinking." But Lord Stowell had a reason ready. I approve," he said, "of the dining system; it puts people in good humour, and makes them agree when otherwise they might not. Dining lubricates business."
Mr. Pluralities did not shook the conscience of that age. Courtenay, afterwards Earl of Devon, being appointed to mastership in Chancery by the Lord Chancellor, asked Lord Eldon whether it would be necessary for him to resign his retainer for Queen Anne's Bounty, to which he was then the standing counsel. Why, speaking as a friend," answered Lord Eldon, "I should advise you to do no such thing; the true rule, I fancy, is to get what you can, and keep what you have." E. M.
Ranking, Spicer, and Pegler on Arbitration and Awards. H. Foulks Lynch and Co., 9, Fenchurch-street, E.C. Price 58. net.
Polt on Francis Bacon and his Secret Society. Second Edition. Robert Banks and Son, Raequet-court, Fleet-street, E.C. Price 7s. 6d. Let.
Cockle's Leading Cases and Statutes on Evidence. Second Edition. Sweet and Maxwell Limited, 3, Chancery-lane. Price 98. net. Second Edition. Sprague on Insurance Companies' Accounts. Charles and Edwin Layton, 56, Farringdon-street, E.C. Price 58. net. Trial of Simon, Lord Lovat of the 45. William Hodge and Co., Edinburgh and Glasgow. Price 58. net.
Council of Legal Education Calendar 1911-12. Offices of the Counoil, 15, Old-square, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.
Annual Practice 1912. Two vols. Sweet and Maxwell Limited, 3, Chancery-lane; Stevens and Sons Limited, 119 and 120, Chancerylane. Price 25s. net.
A. B. C. Guide to Practice 1912. Sweet and Maxwell Limited, 3, Chancery-lane; Stevens and Sons Limited, 119 and 120, Chancerylane. Price 5s. net.
American Journal of International Law, July 1911. Sweet and Maxwell Limited, 3, Chancery-lane.
Yearly Supreme Court Practice 1912. Two vole. Butterworth and Co., 11 and 12, Bell-yard, Temple Bar. Price 258. net.
Brett's Leading Cases in Equity. Fifth Edition. Butterworth and Co., 11 and 12, Bell-yard, Temple Bar. Price 15s.
Dixon's Introduction to Commercial Law. Butterworth and Co., 41 and 12, Bell-yard, Temple Bar. Price 28. net.
BOROUGH QUARTER SESSIONS.
Abingdon, Thursday, Oct. 19
Birmingham, Monday, Oct. 9, at 11.15
Bristol, Wednesday, Oct. 25, at 10.30
Devonport, Saturday, Oct. 7
Great Yarmouth, Monday, Oct. 9, at 10.30
Grimsby, Tuesday, Oct. 24
Guildford, Saturday, Oct. 7
Hastings, Friday, Oct. 27
Hythe, Saturday, Oct. 28
Ipswich, Saturday, Oct. 21
Kingston-upon-Hull, Tuesday, Oct. 31
Lincoln, Saturday, Oct. 21, at 10
Maidstone, Saturday, Oct. 21, at 10
Southampton, Monday, Oct. 9, at 10.45
| Sudbury, Suffolk, Friday, Oct. 27 Sunderland, Wednesday, Oct. 11 Thetford, Friday, Oct. 28
Tiverton, Wednesday, Oct. 18
Walsall, Monday, Oct. 16
Warwick, Thursday, Oct. 12
West Bromwich, Friday, Oct. 13, at 10
Barnet, Tuesday, at 10,
Blackburn, Monday, and Saturday
Blackpool, Wednesday, at 10
Bolton, Wednesday (J.S.), at 9.30
Bourne, Saturday, at 10.30
Bow, Monday, Tuesday. Wednes-
Bradford (Yorks), Wednesday (R.
Brentford, Friday, at 10
Brighton, Thursday (R. By) and
Bromsgrove, Saturday, at 10
Burnley, Thursday and Friday, at
Chippenham, Tuesday, at 10.15 Clerkenwell,
Wednesday, Thursday, and Fri-
Consett, Wednesday, at 10.30
Dewsbury, Wednesday (J.S. at 9.30)
Dorchester, Friday, at 10
Dudley, Tuesday, Thursday, and
Durham, Tuesday (R. By)
Easingwold, Thursday, at 10
and Thursday, at 10
Great Grimsby, Tuesday and Wed-
Lancaster, Friday, at 9.30
Launceston, Wednesday, at 10
Leicester, Friday (R. By), at 11
Monday, at 10
Lichfield, Thursday (J.S.)
Liverpool, Monday (By at 11). Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday (B., A., & W.C.), at 10
Llanfyllin, Tuesday, at 10
Ludlow, Wednesday, at 10 Manchester, Monday,
Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday (R. By), at 101
Mansfield, Monday, at 10
Margate, Thursday, at 10
Market Harborough, Monday, at 1 Marylebone, Monday, Tuesday.
Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, at 10.30
Matlock, Monday, at 10
Merthyr Tydfil, Wednesday. Thurs
day, and Friday
Mountain Ash, Tuesday
Nelson, Tuesday, at 9.45
Newton Abbot, Friday, at 10.30
Northwich, Wednesday, at 10
Norwich, Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, at 10
Thursday (J.S.), at 10; Friday
Nuneaton, Wednesday, at 9
Oldham, Thursday, and Friday (J.S. & A.O.), at 9.30
Oswestry, Thursday, at 10
Oxford, Wednesday (R. By), at 12 Pembroke Dock, Wednesday
Peterborough, Tuesday, at 9.30
Pontefract, Tuesday and Wednesday, at 10
Portsmouth, Thursday (By at 12),
Romsey, Friday, at 10.30
Salford, Monday and Friday
Seaham Harbour, Monday, at 9.30
Sheffield, Thursday (By at 2) and
Shoreditch, Tuesday and Thursday
Southampton, Tuesday (By at 11),
Southmolton. Monday, at 11.30
Stourbridge, Wednesday, at 10
Stratford-on-Avon, Mcnday, at 10
Swindon, Wednesday (By at 11), at
Tadcaster, Wednesday, at 10
Wantage, Friday, at 12
Wareham, Saturday, at 10.30
Watford, Monday, at 10
Westbromwich, Tuesday (J.S.)
Weymouth, Tuesday, at 10
Workmen's Compensation Act-Barge Mate's Claim-Estoppel. HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHORTT, at the County Court, Sheerness, on the 28th ult., gave his decision in the case of John Standing, barge mate, who claimed compensation against Messrs. Eastwood and Co., brickmakers, &c., London, in respect of an accident which he had in February last year, and which, he alleged, totally incapacitated him from following his usual work. O'Connor, barrister-at-law, was counsel for the applicant, and G. P. Langton, barrister-at-law, for the respondents, whose contention was that the applicant (who was mate of the barge Quail) was not their servant, but was engaged by the captain.
His HONOUR.-The important point involved in this case has not hitherto so far, as I am aware-been decided or argued. It is not whether the applicant was or was not an employee of the respondents, but whether it is open to the respondents to raise the question in the peculiar circumstances of this case. If it is open to them to raise the question, I should hold, on the evidence, that the applicant was not in their employment. The respondents are brick manufacturers, carrying on business at Conyer, near Newington, in the county of Kent. They are also the owners of wharves in London, to which they send their bricks from Conyer in barges. Each barge had a captain and a mate. The respondents appointed the captain and the captain appointed the mate. The respondents in no way interfered with the captain in the choice or appointment of his mate. The captain was paid by the respondents at the rate of 1s. 91⁄2d. per thousand of the bricks carried, and the captain paid his mate one-third of that sum. The barges brought back from London a cargo of ashes, for which the captain was paid £2 for each load, of which sum he paid the mate one-third. The respondents owned forty of these barges; and they insured against liability under the Workmen's Compensation Act, not only in respect of the forty captains, but also in respect of the forty mates. The applicant, who was one of the mates, met with an accident arising out of. and in the ordinary course of his employment on the 7th Feb. 1910. The respondents paid him 6s. a week for more than six months from the date of the accident, and it was admitted that this money came from the insurance company. On the 5th Sept. 1910 the applicant's solicitor wrote to the respondents claiming a larger sum on the ground "that his weekly wage averaged £1." The letter concluded: “We shall be glad to hear from you without delay if you are prepared to admit liability and to pay our client the extra compensation which may be owing to him." No reply having been sent, another letter was written by the applicant's solicitor on the 14th Sept., asking for a reply without further delay. This brought a letter from the respondents on the 16th Sept. in these words: "We are in receipt of your letter of the 14th inst. We are seeing John Standing to-morrow, with a view to arranging the question of extra compensation with him. We will write you further after our interview." After seeing the applicant, the' respondents wrote to his solicitor on the 17th Sept. "We have this morning seen John Standing, and arranged to pay him extra compensation from the date of his accident. They paid him this extra compensation, 8s. per week, until May 1911. admitted that this money also came from the insurance company. The applicant and his solicitor were aware of the fact that the respondents had insured against liability in respect of the applicant. The foregoing furnished, in my opinion, sufficient evidence of an agreement by the respondents to pay the applicant 8s. a week during incapacity, and there was no reason to think that the respondents would have objected to the recording of such an agreement. No steps were taken to have it recorded, the applicant, no doubt, relying on the respondents' acts as admission of liability. The question I have to decide is whether, in the circumstances above set forth, it is open to the respondents now to contend that the applicant was not at the time of the accident in their employment, and that on that ground he is not entitled to an award. I am of opinion that they ought to be held estopped from raising the point, and I make my award in favour of the applicant for 8s. per week from the 6th May 1911, it not having been proved that his incapacity has either ceased or diminished.
Archbishops (four): ~ Ussher (Armagh), Tillotson (Canterbury), Herring (York, Canterbury), Thomson (York).
Bishops (ten): Reynolds (Norwich), Gastrell (Chester), Warburton (Gloucester), Hurd (Lichfield and Coventry, Worcester), Wm. Jackson (Oxford), Van Mildert (Llandaff, Durham), Lloyd (Oxford), Heber (Calcutta), Maltby (Chichester, Durham), Lonsdale (Lichfield).
Deans (five): Richard Field (Gloucester), Donne (St. Paul's), Cyril Jackson (Christ Church), Wace (Canterbury), Beeching (Norwich).
Other Preachers of note were three Puritan divines, William Charke, Thomas Gataker, and Joseph Caryl; and the late Rev. F. C. Cook, Canon of Exeter, and editor of The Speaker's Commentary.. The last Preacher was the Rev. Dr. Rashdall, now Canon of Hereford. The office of Preacher or Divinity Reader was established in 1581. The Masters of the Bench seem to have acquainted the Bishop of London (Aylmer) with their intention to appoint a Preacher in their House" like as is in other Houses of Court." The first Preacher was actually appointed with the approval of the bishop. The present chapel was consecrated on Ascension Day (the 22nd May) 1623 by the Bishop of London (Montaigne), the sermon being preached by the Dean of St. Paul's (Donne), the former Preacher The chapel has, however, never been considered as subject to the ordinary episcopal jurisdiction of the Bishop of London. The Preachers and chaplains are not instituted or licensed to their offices by the bishop, though they are, no doubt, under the Acts of Uniformity, the canons, and the general ecclesiastical law. Subject to this, the services are under the control of the Benchers, one of whom is elected annually as Dean of the Chapel, the choice usually falling on the Bencher next but one in seniority for the Treasurership. The present dean is Mr. Justice Joyce. The Preacher is admitted by courtesy to the fellowship of the Bench. The arms of those Preachers who may become bishops are customarily painted and placed in the hall.
The office of chaplain is the oldest ecclesiastical office of the Inn, and can be traced in the records since 1441. It would seem as if the chaplain was considered to have the cure of souls within the Inn. The exaltation of preaching for the last three centuries is probably responsible for the superior dignity allotted to the Preacher. In 1807 a curious exercise of economy resulted in linking the chaplain's office to that of librarian, an arrangement which lasted for nearly forty years. The chaplaincy of Lincoln's-inn is chiefly memorable se having been held by Frederick Denison Maurice. More recently it has been held by the Rev. C. J. Ball, now rector of Blechingdon, Oxford, and the Rev. W. J. Richmond, now vicar of Valley End, Chobham, Surrey. The present chaplain, the Rev. John Harrington, is also Warden of the Inns of Court Mission.
The Warburton Lectures on Prophecy, founded in 1768 by Bishop Warburton, of Gloucester (formerly Preacher), are delivered on the Sundays after Michaelmas and Hilary Terms, and on the first Sunday in March. Bishop Warburton's trust clearly contemplated the probability of the Preacher being selected as lecturer. But since the appointment of Dr. Hurd as first Warburton Lecturer in 1768, no Preacher was so in fact selected till the appointment of Canon Cook in 1862: (see Lord Grimthorpe's Memoir of Bishop Lonsdale, pp. 153, 154). The present Bishop of Gloucester and Deans of Canterbury, Ely, and Westminster have been Warburton Lecturers., The Rev. A. Lukyn Williams, D.D., vicar of Guilden-Morden, Cambridgeshire, has recently been elected for the ensuing four years.
RECLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE BANK OF ENGLAND.
[Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt," and which will be paid to the persons respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three months from the date given, unless other claimants sooner appear.]
JENKINS (Frederick), Goswell-rd, Clerkenwell, and HUDSON (Henry), Hart-st, Mark-la, E.C. £58 13s. 8d. £2 108. per Cent. Consolidated Stock, formerly £2 158. per Cent. Consolidated Stock. Claimant said F. Jenkins. Sept. 28.
HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN.
COUNTY COURTS JURISDICTION.
HAILSTONE (James William), Blackpool, who died Jan. 30, 1907. Heir-atlaw to come in, by Nov. 1, at office of Registrar of Blackpool County Court. Hearing Nov, 7, at 11.30.
THE PREACHERS OF LINCOLN'S-INN.
THE appointment of the Rev. Dr. Beeching, Canon of Westminster, who bas held, since 1904. the Preachership of the Hon. Society of Lincoln's-inn, to the Deanery of Norwich has called attention to the striking frequency with which successive Preachers of the Inn have been promoted to the higher places of the Church.
Since the office of Preacher was established in 1581, it has had thirty-five occupants. Of these, no less than nineteen have become archbishops, bishops, or deans. Probably no position in the Church of England can show a like record, except the vicarage of Leeds, the pre-eminence of which is a comparatively recent matter. The more coveted Mastership of the Temple, which is in the gift of the Crown, has only supplied four bishops and four deans. The list of arch. bishops, bishops, and deans who have been Preachers of Lincoln's inn is as follows:-
APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT STOCK
NoricES OF APPEARANCE AT HEARING MUST REACH THE SOLICITORS BY 6 P.M. ON TH›
ABERYSTWYTH MOTOR SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Oct. 11, at Aberystwyth County Court. Churchill and Co., 2, Broad-st-pl, E.C., sols. for pets. Notices of appearance by Oct. 9. BURNARDS LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Oct. 17, at Royal Courts of Justice. Harris, Chetham, and Cohen, 25, Finsburysq, E.C., sols. for pets. Notices of appearance by Oct. 16. BANK OF EGYPT.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Oct. 17, at Royal : Courts of Justice. Bircham and Co., 50, Old Broad-st, E.C., sols. for pet. Notices of appearance by Oct. 16. DENTON, MILTON BODE AND MCKENZIE LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Oct. 19, to A. B. Bryden, 108A, Cannon-st, E.C. Colyer and Colyer. 1, Clement's-inn, Strand, W.C., sols. for liquidator. FRED S. BRIER LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard Oct. 16, at Leeds County Court, at 10.30. R. E. Wadsworth, Leeds, agent for Harold Mayhew and Darling, 13, Abchurch-la, E.C., sols, for pets. Notices of appearance by Oct. 14.
G.B. COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Oct. 30, to D. L. Honeyman, 18, St. Swithin's-la, E.C
HARRISON AND SINGLETON. LIMITED. Creditors to send in by Oct, 16, 40
J. R. WILLIAMS COMPANY, LIVERPOOL, LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by
Croome, Son, and Finch, 9, Gracechurch-st, E.C., sols. for pet.
PNEUMATIC SPRING SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Nov. 14,
SOUTHERN GOLD TRUST LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Dec. 4, to F. G. Fedden, chartered accountant, 108A, Cannon-st, E.C., liquidator. STEAMSHIP DAUNTLESS COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Nov. 8, to Dickinson, Miller, and Turnbull, Newcastle-on-Tyne, sols. to liquidator.
CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. LAST DAY OF. PROOFS,
HOLLAND (Daniel), Heath Charnock, Chorley. Oct. 26; J. H. Neville, sol., Chorley. Nov. 6; Registrar of Preston District of Chancery of Lancaster, at 11.
CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35.
LAST DAY OF CLAIM AND TO. WHOM PARTICULARS TO BE SENT.
AYRIS (Emily), Norwich. Nov. 1; H. C. Davies, Norwich.
BROWN (Anthony), Bentham. Nov. 6; H. J. J. Thompson and Co.,
BENNETT (Joseph), Berkeley. Oct. 20; F. Treasure, Gloucester. BROUGHTON (Robert John Porcher), 12, Great Marlborough-st, and Chipperfield. Nov. 30; Broughton, Broughton, and Holt, 12, Great Marlborough-st.
BRISTOWE (Charles John). Nottingham. Nov.1; Barnett and Shirer, 2, Camomile-st, E.C.
BROWN (Amelia), Epping. Dec. 1; Ashley, Tee, and Sons, 7, Frederick's
pl, Old Jewry.
BUTLER (William Duckett), Freckleton. Oct. 20; W. Bramwell, Preston.! CLOSE (Capt. Vere Henry), Oriental Club, Hanover-sq, W., and Weedon, Nov. 10; Lowe and Co., 2, Temple-grdns, E.C.
CAUNTER (Jane), Barton, St. Mary Church. Oct. 31; J. Bickford, Newton
COLEMAN (Jane), Oct. 23; Simpson, North, and Co., Liverpool.
CADMAN (Ann Maria), Walsall. Oct. 80; E. Evans, Walsall.
DUNCAN (George), Margate. Oct: 28; Rawle, Johnstone, and Co., 1, Bedford-row, W.C.
DOWLING (Joseph), Rusper, Horsham, Nov. 11; Murray, Hutchins, and
Co., 11, Birchin-la, E.C.
FITZROY (Susan), Watford. Nov. 11; Broad and Riggall, Watford.
FOSTER (Sophie), Bournemouth. Oct. 31 T. G. Foster, at the office of
FARNWORTH (Abner). Sedgley. Oct. 14; Fowler, Langley, and Wright, Wolverhampton,
FISH (Frances Mary), Southend-on-Sea. Nov. 10; Light and Fulton, 1, Laurence Pountney-hill, E.C.
FRYER (Mary Ann), Preston. Oct. 31; Houghton, Myers, and Reyeley, Preston.
FINDLAY (Alexander), Thundridge, Herts, Nov. 15; Richardson, Foxwell,
and Hart, Much Hadham.
GUNN (Isabella Annie), Ealing. Oct. 30; E. Proctor. Bristol.
GRAY (Betsy Ann), Finchley-rd. Oct. 21; Amery-Parkes and Co., 18, Fleet-st. E.C.
GREET (Nicholas Samuel), Torpoint, Cornwall, or HILL (Samuel), Torpoint. Oct. 21; J. P. Heath, Devonport.
HEATHCOTE (William), Great Wigston. Oct. 31; Holyoak and Underwood, Leicester.
HELLEWELL (Ellen), Halifax, Nov. 1; W. Swaine, Halifax.
HARDMAN (Squire), Radcliffe. Nov. 30; G. Emerson, at the offices of A.
HINCHLIFF (Mary Alice Crucefix), Chiswick. Oct. 27; F. W. Trehearne, 30, Theobald's-rd, W.C.
JOYCE (Arthur). Whitchurch. Nov. 1; J. M. Etches, Whitchurch, Salop.
LOWE (Albert), Farndon. Nov. 30; Boydell and Taylor, Chester.
MILNE (Capt. David), Hornsey. Nov. 1; B. Middleditch, Tower-chmbrs,
NORRIS (Matthew), Shirehampton, Bristol. Oct. 26; H. E. Turner,
NORTH (James Watts), Goodworth Clatford. Oct. 12; Lamb and Son,
PORTER (Joseph), Palmers Green. Nov. 15; Atkey, Clarke, and Atkqu 9A, Sackville-st, W.
PARKER (Charles Hayes), Folkestone. Nov. 10; Smiles and Co., 15, Bedford-row, W.C.
PHIPPS (Edmund Constantine Henry), Brussels. Nov 1; G. S. Warmington and Edmonds, 30, Budge-row.
PEARSON (William), Freiston. Nov. 4; Staniland and Son, Boston.' ROBSON (James), Hornsey Rise, Islington. Oct. 28; H. W. Guthrie, 116, Chancery-la, W.C.
RIDSDALE (Henry), Batley. Oct. 31; W. Ridsdale, 9, Henrietta-st, Batley,
Oct. 14; Lloyd and
ROBERTS (Raymond Paul Middleton), Wrexham. Oct. 30; Morecraft, Sproat, and Killey, Liverpool.
Rowe (John), Fishergate, Preston, and St. Annes-on-the-Sea, Nov. Clarke and Son, Preston.
ROWE (John), 36, Lisson-grove, Oct. 31; Robinson and Barrett; 8, Stonebldgs, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.
RHODES (Thomas Stanley), Maidenhead.
Humm, and Davies, 33, Old Jewry, E.C.
Nov. 11; Maddison, Stirling,
SEGAL (Henry), Fulham. Nov. 6; T. Leviansky and Co., 90 and 91, Queen-st, E.C.
SEARLE (Margaret Ann), Cleethorpes. Nov. 2; R. Mason, Grimsby. STEEL (Charles), Ealing, Nov. 15; W. W. Bond,,5, Lower James-st.. W. and Ealing.
STANDEN (Rachel), Cockerham. Oct. 7; Plant, Abbott, and Plants,
SOULSBY (Robert George), Dunston, Oct. 10; J. A. Philipson and Co., Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
SHARPE (Thomas), Shirehampton, Bristol. Oct. 26: H. E. Turner, Bristol. SMITH (William Lepard), Watford. Nov. 18; E. Hepburn, 27, Chancery, la. W.C.
SLOPER (George Nathanael Randall), West Hampstead.
Nov. 18; E.
STELMAN (William Waters), Great Yarmouth. Oct. 26; Burton and Son,
SMITH (Jane), Dover, Nov. 11: Lewis and Pain, Dover.
THOMAS (Dr. Arthur William), Boscombe. Nov. 8; A. Haines, 8, John st, Bedford-row, W.C.
THOMAS (Rev. John), Wood Green. Oct. 20; W. E. Ruck, Donington
Oct. 31; Basset and Boucher.
VINE (Michael), Hartland. Oot. 16; Hole, Peard, and Seldon, Bideford. WHITE (Harry), Ibstone. Nov. 11; R. S. Wood and Co., High Wycombe. WATKINS (Eliza). Fulham. Oct. 27; E. F. Jarvis, 2, Billiter-sq-bidgs, E.C.
WEDEKIND (Julius Christian), Shortlands. Oct. 31; Ody and Wilmot,.,, Denmark-hill. Camberwell Green, S.E.
WOOD (John Bibby), Withington and Manchester. Nov. 1; F. S. Rhodés and Bethell Jones, Manchester.
WATSON (Elizabeth Anne), Nottingham. Nov. 30; Watson, Wadsworth, and Ward, Nottingham.
WALKER (John), Hereford. Oct. 31; R. S. Coles, Hereford.
WILLIAMS (Percy), Worthing. Oct. 30, G. E. Lewis, 14, South-sq, Gray's inn, W.C.
WHITE (Elizabeth). Maida Vale. Nov. 6; T. Leviansky, and Co., 90 and 91, Queen-st, E.C.
YEOMAN (George), Totnes, Nov. 1; Windeatt and Windeatt, Totnes.