Page images
PDF
EPUB

as

:

[ocr errors]

if the accused person shall not deliver himself up, persons authorised to make the arrest have those measures shall be must depend on his temthe police officer or other person authorised to the same power of breaking into houses, and per and conduct when in custody, on the nature execute the warrant, may, if after notification of repelling force by force, and even of killing of the charge, and other circumstances : (per his authority and purpose, and demand of admit their opponents, if they resist, and their resist. Williams, J., Leigh v. Cole, 6 Cox, 329). Thus, tance duly made, he cannot otherwise obtain ance cannot be otherwise overcome, in it is not lawful to handcuff a prisoner unless he. admittance, break open such zenana or apartment, arresting for felonies committed in their presence : has attempted to escape, or it is necessary to preand execute the process entrusted to him, first (1 Hale, 494; Fost. 270, s. 2; and 320, s. 23; 1 vent his escape : (2 İnst. 381 ; Wright v. Court, giving notice to any woman as aforesaid, in such Russ. Cr. 535.) So, in the case of misdemeanors 4 B. & C. 596 ; R. v. Lockley, 4 F. & F. 155.) zenana or apartment, not being a person against in course of commission; thus, if there is an The right to search a prisoner also depends on the whom a warrant has been issued, that she is at affray in a house, and the doors are shut, and a circumstances of the case. [On this subject the liberty to withdraw, and affording her every facility demand of entrance is not complied with, any Code of Criminal Procedure is silent.] It has for withdrawing (sect. 95). These provisions are person is justified in breaking them open and been sometimes said that it was not lawful to applicable only to the cases of arrest by a police entering: (i Hale, 589.) But there is this diffe- search a prisoner except when he was in custody officer or other person in execution of a warrant, rence, that in arresting for misdemeanors, the for felony But it is difficult to see on what prin. and of arrest by a police officer without a warrant. person sought to be arrested may not be killed if ciple this rule rests ; on what ground, for instance, The last provision, relating to searching in the he flies, although his capture cannot otherwise be it can be reasonable to search a man charged with apartments of native females, is, as an express made: (1 Hale, 481, 494 ; Fost. 271.) If the larceny or abusing a girl under ten, and not enactment, peculiar to the case of arrest under offence be per se only a misdemeanor, but is in reasonable to search him when charged with warrant under the Code of Criminal Procedure. particular case a felony in consequence of a pre- obtaining property by false pretences, or abusing They are in many respects similar to the rules vious conviction of the offender, a person ignorant a girl between ten and twelve. It would seem, on governing the same subject which have been de- of this last circumstance would not be justified in general principles of law, that the officer or duced from the principles of English common law, resorting, for his arrest, to any other measures jailor, or other lawful captor or custodian, being and which are applicable in the presidency towns; than those allowed in cases of misdemeanor. responsible for the custody of his prisoner, is wiwile these rules, so far as they relate to private Thus, he could not lawfully shoot him to stop his entitled to take from him every article or instruarrest in the case of crimes of violence, would, it flight: (R. v. Dodson, 2 Den. 35.)

ment by which he might effect his escape, whether is presumed, apply by analogy to an equal extent In civil cases, the powers effecting an arrest by injuring others or not, and is therefore entitled in the mofussil. Thus, according to English law, are the same as in cases of misdemeanor, except to search him for such things : (see Leigh v. Cole, before the person whose duty it is to make an that an entrance by breaking outer doors, win- 6 Cox, 329.) In some cases, a search for the pur. arrest breaks open an outer door) it is in general | dows, or walls, cannot be lawfully made into the pose of obtaining evidence against the prisoner proper to signify the cause of coming and to house in which the person sought to be arrested is allowed by statute, as where a person is reasondemand admission : (Semayne's Case, 5 Rep. 91; resides, although entrance be denied, unless he ably suspected of carrying something stolen or 8. c. 1 S. L. C., 3rd prop., 6th edit., 89. But it is has been already arrested, and it be to effect his unlawfully obtained (2 & 3 Vict. c. 47, 8. 66, doubtful whether such a notification and demand recapture : (Aga Kurboolie v. Reg. 4 Moo. P. C. Metropolitan Police), or of having counterfeit are necessary before breaking in cases of felony 247.) But his outhouses, and the houses of others coin in his possession (24 & 25 Vict. c. 99, s. 27, (or of offences analogous to felony]: (per Cur. in in which he does not reside, but in which he has Offences relating to the coin-England). [InLuunock v. Brown, 2 B. & A. 592), and indeed, taken refuge, are not equally sacred. The outer stances of such enactments may be found in the in any case where the party pursued is beyond doors may be broken, if entrance be not given Arms Act XXXI. of 1860, s. 31 ; the General Police doubt in the house, it might be absurd (and would upon demand ; for it is only his own dwelling that Act, V. of 1861, s. 23 ; Police Act XIII of 1856, s. consequently be unnecessary) to demand admit is a man's castle, and it is a castle for himself 46 ; Acts IV. of 1866 (Bengal), s. 32 ; VIII. of 1867 tance at the door when he might be escaping by only, and not for those who do not dwell in it: (Madras), s. 23; II. of 1866 (Bengal), s. 16.) The the window or firing at his pursuers: (see per Lord (Seymane's case, 5 Rep. 91 ; Fost.: 319.) Finally, search of a person may also be justified in cases Alyanley, C. J. in Ratcliffe v. Burton, 3 B. & P., no greater violence is ever justifiable than is where it is advisable for the protection of the 223, 229 ; and per Cur. in Aga Kurboolie v. Reg. necessary to effect the arrest; (Fost. 319 ; Levy person searched or of his property, as in cases of 4 Moo. P.C. 217.) The law requires the ceremony v. Edwards, 1 C. & P. 40.)

helpless drunkenness, lunacy, illness, or infancy. to be observed only when it possibly may be at- Stated compendiously, the law upon this part of But, except as above stated, it does not appear tendel with some advantage, and may render the the subject (independent of the provisions of the that our law justities the search of prisoners, breaking of the outer door unnecessary (Id.) So, Code of Criminal Procedure] seems to be as and it would seem therefore not justifiable to when a felony is in course of commission, it would follows :

search them for letters or papers which might be oat of the question to pause until a demand of (1.) As to the person. – In interfering during compromise them. almission had been made, and due time for com- the commission of a felony (or of an offence of the Any property found upon the prisoner should plance had elapsed : (see Handcock v. Baker, 2 B. nature of a felony) accompanied by force, it is not be taken from him, unless it be in some way & P. 250.) But the notification and demand should lawful to use all the violence necessary for the connected with the offence, as if it be the instrube made when it is not likely to frustrate thu ar purpose, and even to kill the offender, if this bement, or the fruit, or evidence of the crime : rust. It is prudent, before breaking into a necessary to prevent the perpetration of the (R. v. Barnett, 3 C. & P. 600 ; R. v. O'Donnell, stranger's house, to have certain knowledye that crime. But this extremity is not lawful when the 7 C. & P. 138 ; R. v. Kinsey, id., 157; R. v. Bur. the accused is there; for if he were not, the pur- felony is not accompanied by force.

giss, iil. 488; R. V. Boney, id. 515; R. v. Jones, suers who broke into it would be trespassers : (?

After any felony has been committed, the 6 C. & P. 313; R. v. Bass, 2 C. & K., 822.) Hale, 103.) They would not, it seems, be justified offender may lawfully be killed, if this be neces. When the arrest is effected under a warrant, in entering and searching it on mere suspicion sary to prevent his escape, whether by flight or and cannot be justified under it, care must be even if the outer door were open, or in breaking successful resistance.

taken not to arrest any other than the person de. inuer doors even after refusal of admission (John. In misdemeanors and civil cases this extremity scribed in it; for any other, even though he were son v. Leigh, 6 Taunt. 216 ; comp. Ratcliffe v. Bur. is lawful, when necessary, if he resists; not if he the person really intended, would be justified in to, 3 B. & P. 223, 229) (except in cases under the files.

resisting, if not entitled also to sue for the treg. Code of Criminal Procedure which in terms justi. (2.) As to his dwelling.- When a felony is in pass and this remedy would not be defeated by fies the person entering into the house if he has course of commission, or has been committed, a plea, for instance, under the 43rd section of the reason to believe that the accused is inside-sects.outer doors may be broken ; and this may be done General Police Act (V. of 1861), which makes it 106 and 108). A demand of entrance is not neces- without previous demand of entrance, if necessary. lawful for a police officer to plead that any act sary before breaking the inner doors of the house In all criminal cases they may be broken after done by him in his official capacity was done by of the accused, or of the house in which he is demand of entrance ; and in all cases, civil as well him under the authority of a warrant issued by a tiking refuge (Hutchinson v.'Birch, 4 Taunt.619); as criminal, after expulsion or exclusion, without magistrate, for on the production of the warrant nor before breaking outer ones, if the pursuers, demand. Inner doors may be broken without it would appear that the act was not directed to after entrance, have been expelled or excluded demand of entrance when the house has been be done ; thus) Richard Hood cannot be arrested (1ga Kurboolie v. Reg. 4 Moo. P. C. 239 ; see also lawfully entered.

under a warrant calling him John: (Hoye v. Bush, Salon y. Jervis, 28 L. J. 156, Ex.; and Banister (3.) As to his out-houses. They may be entered i M. G. 775.) Nor could he be arrested by the v. Hyile, 29 L. J. 141, Q.B.; and the cases cited in all criminal and civil cases, whether they are

name of Hood, unless the warrant alleged there.) open or by breaking the outer doors.

that his christian name was unknown: (R. V. The same extremeties may be resorted to when (4.) As to the houses and out-louses of strangers. Hood, 1 Moo. C. C. 281.) Identity of name or the accused escapes after arrest: (1 Hale, 489; --They may be entered in all criminal and civil personal resemblance would not excuse the arrest and see Code of Cr. Pro., ss. 112, 113.)

cases, whether they are open or by breaking the of the wrong person; and even if, when asked his The same powers are given, and the same ex. outer doors, if the party sought to be arrested be name immediately before hands were laid on bim, tremities are justifiable, in interposing to prevent there.

he falsely gave as his the name of the party men. the commission of any felony which is accom- When a person is apprehended in the commision tioned in the warrant, the arrest would not be panied by force. Thus, if a man were committing of an offence, or upon fresh pursuit afterwards, it justifiablo: (Conte

v. Lighworth, F. Moo. 457 ; murder in a house, it would be lawful to break is not in general necessary to give him notice of Thurbane's case, Hard. 323, cited in Com. Dig. into the house and overpower the murderer with the business of those who thus interfere with his Imprisonment, L. 2; and Bac. Ab. Trespass. D; all the force necessary to secure him : (Handcock liberty ; for he must know the cause of his arrest : accord. per Parke, B., in Freeman v. Cooke, 2 Ex. v. Baker, 2 B. & P. 260.) But if the felony be not (1 Russ. Cr. 623.) But in some cases the cause of 634; see also Oxley v. Flower, Selw. N. P. 920; accompanied by force, as po ket picking, the the interference should be stated, as well as the and see Fisher v. Magnay, 5 M. & G. 778, and killing of the culprit, while in the act, in order to character in which the party interferes, otherwise 787.8.) But if he gave a false name before the prevent its commission, is not lawful : (1 Hale, the person sought to be arrested would be justified warrant was issued, he could not afterwards sue 4 18.) But when the arrest is made, not in pur- in treating him as a trespasser. Thus, in riots for the arrest made in consequence : (Price v. Har. suance of the duty imposed, but in exercise of the and affrays, the justices or other persons who wood, 3 Camp. 108.) If he corrected the mis-stat pwer given by law, as where it is made by a proceed to separate the combatants should notify ment after the arrest, it would not be lawful to Private person on suspicion only (sup. ss. 2, 3, 4), their friendly ntent; otherwise the persons continue the imprisonment: (Dunston v. Patter. n greater violence is justifiable than a gentle engaged might imagine that they came as the son, 26 L. J. 267, C. P. ; 2 C. B., N. S., 495). imposition of hands. If, indeed, the prisoner allies of their antagonists. But a small matter The arrest for all indictable offences may be proved guilty of the felony, the private person who amounts to a due notification. It is sufficient if made at any time of the day or night, and on arrested him on suspicion would be justified by the peace is commanded, or if the officer or other Sunday as well as any other day : (Rawlins . the event in resorting to the same extremities, person who interposes declares with what intent Ellis, 16 M. & W. 172; Johnston v. Colston, 1 T. when necessary, as if the felony had been com- he does 80: (Fost. 310; 1 Hale, 460.) The police. Raym. 250 ; and see sup. c. 2, s. 10). In all such mitted in his presence. But if the person proved man's uniform, if visible, would be a sufficient no. cases, and perhaps in all other criminal cases, the innocent, any excess of violence beyond that just tification of his office and intent, to dispense with officer arresting, if he is within the limits of the mentioned would te actionable: if he were killed, his mentioning them : (ld.) When the arrest has place in which he is an officer, is not in strictness it would be manslaughter ; and if he killed his been made, all severity beyond what is absolutely bound to show his warrant, though a sight of it purruer, it would (in the absence of express necessary to prevent the escape of the prisoner is be demanded, for he is presumed to be known malive) be only manslaughter : (1 Hale, 490; 2 unjustifiable : (see Code of Cr. Pro. s. 96). The within his district; still it is desirable that he Hale, 83, 92, 119; Fost. 318, s. 16.) In arrest. captors are undoubtedly justified, for they are should do 80: (see per Lord Kenyon in Hall v. inz fur misdemeanors, and generally in all bound to take all reasonably necessary measures Roche 8 T. R. 187). He must, however, acquaint cases in which the Queen is a party, the to prevent the escape of their prisoner; but what the party with the cause of the arresti (2 Hale,

[ocr errors]

116;

a

What notice of

2 Hawk. c. 13, 8. 28.). If he were beyond will be founded on Article 1382 of the Code Civil,

COUNTY COURTS. those limits, he would be bound to show it, if which lays down the general principle that all neg. demanded : (Id.). A private person when armedligence which occasions damage to anyone brings

CITY OF LONDON COURT. with a warrant is in all cases bound to show it, with it a liability to the culpable party to make (Before Mr. Commissioner KERR). on demand : (12.) (Lord Kenyon, in Hall v reparation for the loss which he has occasioned.

PROUT V. HASLETT. Roche, calls it a dangerous doctrine to hold that The Omnibus Company of Paris will be the plainthe officer need not show his warrant, and this tiffs in this case, and the municipal administration

Damage to boat-Admiralty jurisdiction. view is adopted in the Code of Criminal Procedure, of the city will be the defendants. It appears that This was a suit, brought under the County Courts which (s. 90) directs a police officer or other per- 200 horses of the company have latterly

been dis Admiralty Jurisdiction Act, by the plaintiff

, a son executing a warrant of arrest to notify the abled and rendered unfit for all work, and that this lighterman at Woolwich, and owner of a boat substance of the warrant to the person to be circumstance has occasioned a loss to the company called the Three Jacks, against the defendant, a arrested, and, if required to do so, to show the of about 300,000 fr. The company attribute the resident at Woolwich, and owner of the yacht warrant to such person.]. If the proceeding be of cause of this loss to the default of the Paris corpo- Ripple, for damage to the boat by the yacht in a civil nature, the officer is bound to produce his ration, who have allowed the snow, which fell so breaking from her moorings off Woolwich, and warrant, if required : (per Lord Kenyon in Hall

v. heavily last

week, to remain in the streets for coming in collision with the boat, also moored off Roche, sup.; and per Williams, J., in Robins v. several days, and made no attempt, or made the same place. Evidence was given of the in. Hender, 3 Dowl. 543). Not to do so makes the insufficient attempts, to remove it. The conse sufficiency of the chain of the Ripple, and of the arrest illegal. And he must have it with him at quence of this mistaken economy was that locomo collision, and a verdict entered for the plaintiff the time of the arrest; incapacity to produce it tion in the streets became nearly impossible, and for the sum of 61. with costs. This case was making the arrest equally illegal, although no that there were frequent accidents during the before Mr. Pitt Taylor, at the Woolwich County production is demanded : (Galliard v. Laxton, week. The French lawyers are accustomed to Court, on the second Nov. last, when his Honour 31 L. J. 123, M. C.).

recognise the existence of a contract, and, there delivered an elaborate judgment to the effect that If the party charged be in jail or any other fore, of all the liabilities which Aow from its he had no power to try it-all jurisdiction in place of imprisonment, the justice may. if he breach, between the citizen who pays a tax and the collision cases (unless between boats or barges pleases, hold the examination within its precincts, public authority, whateverit may be, which receives propelled by oars only) being now in the City of and thus have the accused present; or he may that tax. The ratepayers are entitled to a protec. London Court, under its Admiralty jurisdiction. issue his warrant in the usual way, and the officer tion for which they have paid in advance, and which The case now came on before Mr. Kerr, in the charged with its execution may, upon application includes their personal safety and the protection of course of which obtain a writ of habeas corpus from the Superior their goods. In the present case there is particular

His HONOUR remarked that, according to the Court [in cases where a writ of habeas corpus ground for the application of the principle and for law as laid down by Mr. Pitt Taylor, in which he lies] to have the accused brought before the the liability of the corporation, inasmuch as all entirely concurred, all collisions from Westminster justice from day to day. (This proceeding would carriages in Paris pay a special tax, and this tax to Sea Reach would now come before him. be practically never resorted to in India, foi is peculiarly heavy in the case of such public con. there are no courts in the mofussil competent to reyances as ply for hire in the streets. In Paris COUNTY COURTS OF SURREY. issue a writ of habeas corpus, and the writ issuing omnibuses do not belong to a number of different

Nov. 17 and Dec. 12. from the High Court does not run in the mofussil. proprietorships, as here, but to one large company, And in the presidency towns] a magistrate of and the contingent which that company supplies

(Before H. J. STONOR, Esq.) police may have him brought up, with respect to to the municipal recipta is enormous. The question

KNIGHT v. WAYTE. any charge, case, or proceeding before him, by is not only very interesting, but, to us Londoners, Equity caseSpecific performance-Qualified title an order addressed by the magistrate to the somewhat suggestive. We hear on all sides of

to leaseholds. keeper of the prison : (Police Act, 1860, s. 25). complaints against our municipal authorities of a His HONOUR delivered judgment at the Wands

somewhat similar nature, and we also hear of the worth County Court on the 12th Dec., in this PUBLIC Right to CLEAN STREETS.—A very marvellous efficacy of the force of public opinion. case, which was heard at the Epsom County Court amusing and instructive lawsuit is likely to occupy When we find, however, that public opinion is in on the 17th Nov., as follows: This is a bill for the the French courts immediately, unless some com. operative, might it not be time to resort to the specific performance of an agreement dated 29th promise should be arrived at in the meantime. It remedies of law ?-Globe.

June 1871, whereby the plaintiff agreed to sell and the defendant to purchase, for the sum of 425l., an

underlease of certain premises in the parish of BOROUGH QUARTER SESSIONS.

All Saints, Poplar, in the county of Middlesex, such underlease to be for the term of twenty-two

years, and a quarter of a year, less ten days, com. Borough, When holden. Recorder.

Clerk of the Peace. appeal to be given

puted from the 25th March 1871, at the annual

rent of 371. 10s., and it was thereby further agreed Birmingham Friday, Jan. 5

A. R. Adams, Esq.

14 days

T. R. T. Hodgson. that the vendor should within ten days furnish Wednesday, Jan, 10 .. S. Pope, Esq., Q.C. 10 days

J. Gordon.

the purchaser with a draft of the intended underCarmarthen. Wednesday, Jan. 3 J. Johnes, Esq.

lease, and which should contain covenants therein Monday, Jan. 8 ...

H. Lloyd, Esq.

10 days
Chichester
Tuesday, Jan. 2
J.J. Johnson, Esq.,Q.C. 10 days

mentioned, and also all such other covenants as
Friday, Jan. 5....
F. A. Philbrick, Esq. 8 days

were contained in the lease under which the
Doncaster
Friday, Jan. 5..
E. J. Meynell, Esq....... 10 days

E. Nicholson. vendor held the premises, and the purchaser was
Monday, Jan.. 1.
H. C. Lopes, Esq., Q.C. Statutory.

T. J. Bremridge. not to require the vendor to produce the free-
Faversham
Monday, Jan. 1
George Francis, Esq.

F. F. Giraud.

holders' or the original lessor's title, or his (the
Gloucester
Tuesday, Jan. 9
C.S.Whitmore, Esq.,Q.C 7 days

F. W. Jones.
Hythe
Monday, Jan. 8
R. J. Biron, Esq.

8 days
W. S. Smith.

vendor's) title, and any requisition as to the draft King's Lynn Thursday, Jan. 11

D. Brown, Esq., Q.C..

T. G. Archer. underlease was to be made in writing within Kingston-on-Hull Thursday, Jan. 4

S. Warren, Esq., Q.C.... | Statutory. R. Champney, jun. seven days after the delivery thereof, otherwise it Leicester Friday, Jan. 5. C. G. Merewether, Esq. 8 days

R. Toller.

was to be deemed approved and accepted, and all Ludlow Tuesday, Jan. 9

H. J. Hodgson, Esq.

10 days
H. Salwey.

objections waived, and in all cases time was to be Northampton Friday, Jan. 5

J. H. Brewer, Esq.

10 days

C. Hughes.
Wednesday. Jan. 3
H. T. Cole, Esq., Q.C....

W. Borlase.

deemed the essence of the contract. The purPlymouth Saturday, Dec. 30

C. Saunders, Esq.

14 days

R. E. Moore, chaser was to pay 25l. deposit, and complete on Portsmouth Tuesday, Jan, 9

Mr. Serjeant Cox

10 days
J. Howard.

the 17th July 1871, or to pay interest from that
Rochester
Monday, Jan. 1
F. Barrow, Esq.

W. W. Hayward. day till the completion. If the vendor should be Salisbury Friday, Jan. 5

J. D. Chambers, Esq. ...

10 days

F. Hodding: Scarborough

unable or unwilling to remove any objection, or to Monday, Jan. 8

J. Middleton, Esq.

10 days

J. J. P. Mody.
Shrewsbury
Wednesday, Jan. 3
W.F. F. Boughey, Esq. 14 days

R. Clarke.

comply with any requisition, he should be entitled Tewkesbury Friday, Jan. 12

J. Fallon, Esq.

Statutory.

W. Winterbotham to rescind the contract on repayment of the
Worcester
Thursday, Jan. 4

F. T. Streeten, Esq.
10 days

deposit. The vendor delivered a draft under-
lease in due time, and the purchaser did not
make any objection or requisitions as to such

draft or otherwise as to the purchase within MARITIME LAW.

matter, as nobody, unless by accident, would let the prescribed time, but the vendor appears to me

a time-policy run out before renewing it; but to have waived the benefit of this objection, THE EXPIRY OF A TIME-POLICY OF INSUR

even this precaution could not prevent litigation, although time was originally made essential

as the re-insurance, in the actual course of busi? (according to the cases of Boehm v. Wood, 1 J. & ANCE-A nice question, depending upon the exact hour of the shipwreck of a vessel which was in: with the same underwriters. ness, was by no means necessarily to be effected W. 420; Levi v. Lindo, 3 Mer. 81; Hunter v.

Daniel, 4 Hare 420; Parkin v. Thorold, 16 Beav. sured by a time-policy, came before the Court of

59, 69, 71; Wells v. M jxwell, 32 Beav. 408), and he Common Pleas this week, in the case of Morton v.

did not insist on it at the hearing. After some Wylie. The policy on the ship in question, the

MERCANTILE LAW.

delay the purchaser, by his solicitor, called for the Lucerne steamer, expired at midnight on March

production of the original lease to see that the 19, 1869, and it was disputed whether the wreck

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

covenants in the draft underlease corresponded and total loss, which occured off Ushant, took STOCK EXCHANGE TRANSFERS.-The Court of with the covenants contained in such lease, and at place before the policy expired or after. The Common Pleas-Re Case v. M'Lennan-has decided the same time objected that the description of the counsel on both sides argued from elaborate cal. that a person selling stock at a certain price is vendor in the draft underlease was insufficient, culations as to when the ship could have been bound to sign a transfer acknowledging the re- The vendor produced the original lease, whereby wrecked; the plaintiff, who sued upon the policy, ceipt of a larger price, where the transfer contains it appeared that the lease, which was dated 1846, contending that already on the 19th the steamer the usual memorandum explaining that the price was made to John Lester, and not to the vendor, was amidst “ the grave of rocks near Ushant, mentioned is that

paid by a sub-purchaser. The and no subsequent assignment

was then produced. so that it would probably be wrecked before mid- judges held that this memorandum had the effect The purchaser does not appear to have made any night; and the defendant arguing that on the of an interpretation clause, and that a seller who objection on that score at the time, but insisted on afternoon of the 19th she had open sea before her. objected to the words “paid to me” and caused the objection already made by him as to the draft The crew had all been drowned, and the evidence damaged by refusing to sign, so that the transac underlease, viz., the insufficiency of the descripwas that of witnesses from the shore, whose ob- tion had to be completed otherwise, was without a tion of the lessor and refused or neglected to comservations, however, were made under the disad- The usual Stock Exchange transfer is thus plete until the vendor filed this bill for that specific vantage of thick and heavy weather. Eventually sanctioned; but as the words in question are too performance of the agreement. Upon the hearing the jury found for the plaintiff, holding that the frequently a stumbling-block to the miscellaneous the defendant relied on the following grounds for steamer was lost before the policy sued on had public, it might perhaps be advisable for the resisting a decree :-First, That the description in expired. It is difficult to conceive a nicer question Stock Exchange Committee to consider whether a the draft underlease was insufficient,

whieh I think coming before a court of law, and it was apparently clause could not be framed getting over the diffi. he clearly proved, but the plaintiff then and there inevitable once the strange conjuncture of circum. culty more simply. Could it not be made to say supplied a proper description. Secondly, that stances had occurred. At first sight it might be expressly, “Paid to me, or to intermediate pur- there had been a misrepresentation of the prethought that re-insurance would have mended the chasers from me ?"

mises by the vendor's agent, and that I think he

Bolton

10 days

Chester

J. H. Barker.
J. Walker.
E. Titchener.
J. S. Barnes.

Colchester

Exeter

Penzance

8 days

8 days

R. T. Rea.

case.

[ocr errors]

ever

come

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

6

[ocr errors]

failed in proving. Thirdly, that the lease showed of creditors the privilege of counting in the TRANSFER OF STOCK.-The following letter, in that the premises were vested in a third person, majority in value, but refusing to allow them

to reply to a letter published in the Law TIMEs, is the original lessee, and not in the vendor: The vote in the majority in number, it seems that the taken from the Liverpool Daily Courier :- A last objection the vendor met by producing an Legislature intended to guard against the mis. great deal of comment has been provoked by the assignment to him of the lease dated the 7th Nov., chiefs which would arise from a number of small decision in the action of Case v. M Clellan, but so 1865, by Charles M.Bean, but no mesne assign- and insignificant creditors combining and out far I have not seen any suggested improvement on ment or assignments whereby the lease became voting in number those whose debts were of such the present system of transferring railway and vested in M‘Bean were produced or recited, and an amount as to make it just and reasonable that other stocks. The letter of ' An Attorney' to the mention is also made in the assignment by M'Bean they should have the management of the estate in Law TIMEs, which was reprinted in the Courier a to the vendor of an underlease dated 2nd Nov. their hands. With reference to the point raised day or two ago, betrays a thorough ignorance of 1865, between the said Charles M'Bean and George by Mr. England, the 293rd General Rule, as I read the subject, as I will show. In the first place, he Joseph Jennings, whereby the premises were de. it, applies only to an "ordinary" resolution, assumes that the objectionable 'footnote is mised to Jennings for the term of twenty-seven enabling the creditors generally to pass, “in the appended exclusively to the form of transfer years less ten days, at the yearly rent of 371. 10s., absence of any enactment to the contrary,” any adopted by the Liverpool Stock Exchange,' and which would be still subsisting, and not being resolution requisite for the conduct and manage- says that neither Birmingham nor Manchester mentioned in the agreement of sale, appears to ment of the debtor's estate, for which a special transfers have any such footnote. As far as Man. me to be a valid objection to the completion of resolution is not required.' In arriving at this chester is concerned, I dispute his assertion. the contract, antil it is removed. There must conclusion, I regret to differ from the very expe- Transfers are used in Manchester, London, Liver: be an order referring it to the registrar to inquire rienced and learned judge of the Liverpool Bank. pool, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and other places, both and certify whether the plaintiff can make a ruptcy Court (Mr. Serjt. Wheeler), who, in the with and without this footnote - although brokers valid onderlease of the premises to the defendant, case of Re Franckel (49 L. T. 114), in a case similar do not consider it by any means essential. As in pursuance of the agreement of the 29th June to the present, held that the special resolutions for Birmingham, where • Attorney's' experience 1871, free from incumbrances, having regard to there ought to be registered, on the ground that seems to be the most extensive, so few transfers the lease and assignment produced, and the under. “where the creditors are all of one mind, then the

from there that it is almost a lease mentioned in such assignment, or the bill question of majority does not arise, and the reso matter of indifference whether they have the must stand dismissed. Adjourn further consi. lutions are perfectly valid though passed by a note or not. 'An Attorney's' opinion is that deration. No costs to either party to the present number of creditors, the debt of each of whom this footnote is not addressed to the seller, but (he time.

does not exceed 101.,” but it appears to me, for would'venture to suggest ') to the last purchaser. the reasons I have stated, that the creditors in I will venture a further suggestion, viz., that it is

cases where they are all of one mind, must be not addressed to either one or the other particu. BANKRUPTCY LAW. creditors qualified to vote, and that such informa-larly, but appended for the information of both,

tion must be given to the registrar when the and as a guide to anyone who may have to write HALIFAX BANKRUPTCY COURT.

special resolution is brought in for registration, as out the transfer. The suggestive picture which

to enable him to see that the requisitions of the Friday, Dec. 22.

'An Attorney' draws of the field this decision (Before Mr. Serjt. TINDAL ATKINSON, Judge.)

statute have been complied with. I am, on these opens out for fraud is brilliant in the extreme.

grounds, clearly of opinion that these resolutions The imaginative effect of two or three stock. Re WILLIAM JOHN HUGHES. ought not to be registered.

brokers in Liverpool having a particular stock to Refusal by registrar to register a special resolution.

Appeal dismissed.

sell,' and putting a much larger sum in the The fact that a special resolution for liquidation

transfers than the real selling price,' and thereby by arrangement has been passed unanimously at

creating a 'fictitious value of that stock,' and a meeting of creditors, at which meeting no credi. tor was present whose debt exceeded 101., will not

CORRESPONDENCE OF THE

their knowlege of how to avail themselves of the

circumstance,' is simply amusing. It would make such resolution valid, so as to enable it to

PROFESSION.

puzzle 'Attorney' to demonstrate this. Suppose be registered.

à broker has 50,0001. of a particular stock to In this case the first meeting of creditors, held on

sell, and (by 'An Attorney's' mode of reasoning) Bed Nov., three creditors only attended and voted,

NOTE.-This department of the Law Times being open to
free discussion on all professional topics, the Editor is not

wishes to create a fictitious value for it by having proved for debts amounting respectively responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it. fictitious 'considerations.' How is he to do it ? to 12s. 6d., 61. 6s. 3d., and 41. 13s. There were

As a seller of the stock he has no control over the other creditors whose individual debts exceeded 101., but who, from various causes, were absent tion in your paper of Saturday, of my letter on

CHICAGO LAWYERS.— I thank you for the inser. consideration to be inserted in any transfer.

Well, then, he must first make purchases of the from the meeting. The three creditors above men. this subject. I am not a barrister, but an attor. | stock he wishes to sell-say, he does this to the tioned unanimously passed and duly signed ney and solicitor, and quite unable to give the extent

of 10,0001. of stock, and has a consideration resolutions for liquidation by arrangement, the time necessary to any elaborate steps, is, home of 20 per cent. over the price he bought at inserted appointment of a trustee, and the discharge of the debtor. On the resolutions being

brought in ihall be happy to receive at any time up to the have, save a loss to the operatod perchareetbe

ever, no list seems to be on foot, I beg to say that in the transfer, what possible effect could this for registration, the registrar, Mr. Rankin, refused end of January next, by cheques payable to my | 2 or 3 per cent on the purchase if the market

, of to register them, on the ground that they were order, and crossed Barclays Donations to the special resolutions, which required the votes of a

Law Institute of Chicago.' majority in number of creditors present, whose forward through Messrs. Hoyne, or other safe stock to the operator would certainly not be misled

These I propose to happened to be a falling one? The seller of the respective debts were above 101., as well as three-channels, to that society, and publish the list of by it. The

clerk of the company who had to register in .

the deed would look upon it as an error, and only England (solicitor) appealed against this deci.

donors in your columns.
Edward S. ALDERSON.

concern himself to see that the stamp was suffi. sion, and contended that under the General Rule

cient. No other eyes would necessarily see the 293, Bankruptcy Act 1869, the special resolutions

transfer except those of the operator himself. It in this case were duly passed, and ought to be CLAIMS BY SHERIFFS' OFFICERS For Fees- requires a great flight of fancy to picture, say, registered. That rule provides that when any LIABILITY OF ATTORNEYS.-Since the decision of the directors of the North South by East Junction resolution is required to be passed, or any act to the learned jadge of the Worcester County Court, in Railway Company making heavy purchases in be done by the creditors present at any meeting, favour of the officer (Bennett v. Snow and another, their stock on a tip' from their transfer clerk to in the absence of any enactment to the contrary, Law Times 2nd Sept. 1871) much correspon the effect that Mr. Contango had been buying the majority required for the purpose is a majority dence and contrary rulings have appeared in your their stock 20 per cent. over market value accordin value of the creditors present.

columns, and, as you say you hope *the discussion ing to the consideration in his transfer. A few His HONOUR.-I am of opinion that the regis- will be continued until å satisfactory settlement is words are necessary to explain to the uninitiated trar has acted quite rightly in refusing to register arrived at,” I venture to refer to the following how these discrepancies of consideration sums these resolutions, which, being special, require, numbers of your paper in aid of pending appeals between transferor's price and transferee's price under General Rule 275, Bankruptcy Act 1869, on the subject, viz., 2nd Sept. 1871, p. 331; 30th arise :-A. sells a lot of stock to B., but before before the court can take cognisance of them, to Sept. p. 386 ; '7th Oct. pp. 396, 402; 14th Oct. settling day arrives the stock has been resold be signed by a “statutory majority" of the credi. p. 408 ; 2nd Dec. p. 88. The law of distress and twenty times, X. finally being the purchaser, and tors assembled at the meeting at which such reso fees allowed to be taken thereunder may also, by the only one in the lot who has bought the lutions were passed, and it appears to me that in way of analogy, be referred to. 8 Anne, c. 14, s. 1, stock to pay for it. In order to avoid twenty diffethis case

no such statutory majority existed. enacts that "no goods, &c., shall be liable to be rent transfers, and the delay consequent upon Under Part 6 of the Act, which treats of liqui- taken by virtue of any execution, on any pretence them, A. and X. must be brought together. As dation by arrangement, sect. 125, sub-sect. 1, a whatsoever, unless the party at whoso suit this only one consideration can be inserted, the law general meeting of creditors may pass a special execution is sued out, shall before, &c., pay to the has fixed this consideration to be the sum to be resolution as defined by the Act, and declare that landlord money due for rent at the time of such paid by the buyer. If A. cannot understand the the affairs of the debtor shall be liquidated by execution." Moreover, the sheriff must levy discrepancy he is referred to the footnote explain. arrangement; and by sub-sect. 2, all the provi. for and satisfy the rent before the execu. ing the sub-sales. If he still has a scruple to put sions of the Act relating to a first meeting of cre- tion creditor can take anything. How, then, his name to a ‘legal lie,' he has merely to strike ditors in the case of bankruptcy, including the when there is not enough to satisfy rent, is out from the sentence in consideration of the sum description of creditors entitled to vote, are to it possible to say that there has been any levy at of paid to me by ' the words to me.' apply; and further by sub-sect. 4, the special all under the execution ? It may equally well be ' Attorney' writes as if this discrepancy was quite resolution passed at such meeting is to be pre- argued that a sheriff's officer (without any instruc- a new feature, confined to Liverpool alone, and of sented to the registrar, whose duty it is to inquire tions beyond those furnished by a ca. sa.) might rare occurrence. It has always been so, and must whether such special resolution has been passed have arrested and taken to gaol a wrong man and continue so, and occurs everywhere and in five in the manner directed by the section ; and then claim from the attorney issuing the writ his fees. transfers in every ten ; but the sum inserted is as follows sub-sect. 14, which enacts that in calcu. Again 57 Geo. 3, c. 93, s. 1 (Expenses of Distresses) often under the amount the seller receives as over lating a majority on a special resolution for the enacts that “no person shall make any charge for it. Yours, &c.,

D. purposes of the section, creditors whose debts any act, matter, or thing, mentioned in the sche, “Dec. 21, 1871." amount to sums not exceeding 101. shall be dule, unless such act shall have been really done.” reckoned in the majority in value, but not in the With regard to the absence of “hardship on majority in number. On looking at the schedule attorneys, inasmuch as they can charge their of forms to the Act (No. 114), I find in the list of clients or get the sheriff's fees beforehand

BREAKFAST.-Epps's Cocoa.-GRATEFUL AND COM

FORTINO." By a thorough knowledge of the natural creditors to be used at every general meeting;” a alluded to by one of your correspondents, my laws which govern the operations of digestion and column headed “Number of assents of creditors answer is, that such a remark is quite beside the nutrition, and by a careful application of the fine pro; whose debts exceed 101.,” clearly to my mind show. I question, because sheriff's officers take care of perties of well-selected cocoa, Mr. Epps has provided ing that, whether by agreement without division, i themselves out of the first assets ; and I maintain

our breakfast tables with a delicately-flavoured beverage or by a vote determined by a majority, all credi- that, if there are no assets, they cannot legally which may save us many heavy doctors bills to Civi? tors whose debts do not exceed 101. are to be charge.

S

a

[ocr errors]

6

Made simply with Boiling Water or

Each packet is labelled "JAMES Epps and Co., carefnlly excluded in the numbers taken. In

AN ATTORNEY OF FORTY YEARS'

Homøopathic Chemists, London." Also, makers of making this distinction-namely, giving this class

EXPERIENCE.

Epps's Milky Cocoa (Cocoa and Condensed Milk).

ik.

be excluded which go beyond our limits.

- Will "Z. Y." favour me with

8

T. S.

a

NOTES AND QUERIES ON look the circumstances fully set forth during the for a declaration that the testatrix gave her POINTS OF PRACTICE,

trial, and, dealing only with the statement for the bounty to the priest on secret illegal trusts,

prosecution, they consider the verdict of acquittal which made her gift void ; but this question would NOTICE.-We must remind our correspondents that this

as a gratification of a feeling of ferocious hatred, have to be raised before another court, the Court column is not open to questions involving points of law

and they venture to say that in France a Prussian of Chancery, and the jury in the Court of Probate such as a solicitor should be consulted upon. Queries will can be murdered with impunity, and henceforth had no choice but to establish the will. The N.B.- None are inserted unless the namo and address of the

M. de Bismark will take hostages to put a pressure reverend confessor is, accordingly, for the time, writers are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a on the consciences of jurymen. Now, is it in invested with all the advantages of residuary guarantee for bona fides.

France that the sense of right is extinguished ? devisee of the widow, but, after the broad hint of

Tonnelet, a French soldier, had been a prisoner the judge, it may be presumed that something Queries.

of war in Prussia. He had suffered cruelly, and more will be heard of the case in Lincoln's-inn. 37. CONVEYANCE.

on his return to France had uttored words of The facts of the case before Lord Penzance were further references on this point as Staveley w: Alcock hatred and revenge. He denied that, but his exceedingly simple, and no doubt necessitated the appears to decide that persons having parted with thair interest in land have lost all power to distrain, and not

counsel took it for granted, and that is but a verdict he directed the jury to return. He was as “Z. Y.” alleges, that the person who becomes en. secondary point. A quarrel takes place between sitting as a judge of the Probate Court, and had titled to the land does also become entitled to distrain Tonnelet and a Prussian soldier. The soldier to administer the law belonging to that branch of for rent accrued before the commencement of his title. having moved off, turns back again, advances our judicial system. Had the case been brought I would direct his attention to Sugd. V. & P., in an old against Tonnelet, and puts his hand to his sword. before the Court of Chancery on the same facts, edition of which the contrary seems laid down (4th Was Tonnelet in a state of legitimate defence ? He a different result might or might not have been edit., p. 204.)

said so; his counsel said so, the jury believed it pronounced; but, what is much more material, 50. CONVEYANCING.-Can you or any of your readers and acquitted him. According to all jurisdiction had the case been in Chancery, a Vice-Chan. answer the following point in practice : The purchaser there is no crime when a man acts in lawful self. cellor would have been able to insist on the proof property seuds in his signed requisitions. Should defence. Bertin was a poor journeyman gardener in duction of evidence into which the Court of the vendor return these signed requisitions or should ho retain them, returning a copy thereof with his ble scenes of a fearful invasion upset his reason. He Mrs. Jane Connelly, the testatrix, was the second

Seine-et-Marne. The disasters of the war, the horri. Probate had no right to inquire. It appears that signed answers thereto?

is course for the vendor to adopt ?

E, A.S. was mad, and in his madness he struck a Prussian wife and widow of a Mr. Charles Connelly, who

soldier, who happily has survived his wounds, and died in 1850, leaving a son, issue of his first mar.

can testify to the mental condition of his adver. riage. Mr.'Connelly was the possessor of the LAW SOCIETIES.

sary. The jury acquitted him as not having the large estates in dispute-estates which were said

consciousness of what he did. It would have been to have been bought out of a fortune made by his NORWICH LAW STUDENTS' SOCIETY.

easy for M. de Bismark to ascertain such father at the Chancery Bar, and in duty bound A MEETING of this society was held on Wednesday, simple facts before bringing so insulting a charge therefore

, perhaps, to pay toll to the law. On the the 20th inst., Mr. W. R. Cooper in the chair. The blished for all unprejudiced minds, that French if his son had left issue the property would have

It will now, I trust, be clearly esta father's death they passed to his son for life, and subject selected for discussion was, Ought the Law of Primogeniture to be abolished ?" "Mr.

S. above the passions of hatred and revenge-in a however, had the right to dispose of them if his

justice acted in strict impartiality, and that it is devolved on his issue in remainder. The father, Cozens-Hardy opened the debate in the affirma- word, that the attack tive. The motion was, after a very interesting a pretext for fresh oppression.'

levelled against it are but son left no issue, and by his will he gave power to discussion, negatived by a majority of five. There

his widow to dispose of them under the same con. were twenty members present.

I cannot help thinking that, as the French say, tingency. The father, as we have said, died in
M. Lachaud displaces the question. That the 1850, Father Parfitt, a young proselyte and priest,

jury should acquit Tonnelet was natural, but was and now the inheritor of the property, having taken LEGAL NEWS,

not legally justifiable. I do not believe that if ap his residence with him four years earlier. Erer part of England were occupied by a French force, since 1850 Father Parfitt lived with the widow and

an English jury would convict an Englishman for her stepson, acting at first as her occasional con, The process of English law by which a man tried killing a Frenchman. In 1858, after the Orsini fessor and latterly as her regular confessor and by jury, convicted of a capital offence, and sen- plot and the “colonels' manifesto,” a jury ac- director. Early this year the stepson died, never tenced to death by the judge, may or may not be quitted a certain Martin Bernard, against whom having married, and a few days after the widow subsequently reprieved at the pleasure of the there was certainly some evidence of conspiracy. died, and it then appeared that she had left the Home Secretary, has frequently been denounced. Juries are naturally swayed by public feeling. We bulk of the property she had power to dispose of But as compared with the process by which con- see that in Ireland every day, and, in common to Father Parfit. Her nephew, after some hesitademned criminals in America are either snatched fairness, we cannot suppose Frenchmen to be tion,

according to his own statement, disputed the from the gallows or sluwly tortured before hanging, made of different Hesh and blood from English will, on the ground that the confessor had abnsed we have much to be thankful for. It is not long men or Irishmen.”

his position to influence the mind of the testatrix since we called attention to the case of the murderer Messner, the expectation of whose Burra, of Ryo, reports that on Monday last the this, and the father himself swore that he hind

SERVICES OF THE LAWYERS' LIFEBOAT.-Mr. in his favour ; but there was no direct evidence of hanging on certain dates was made the ground ship Robind, bound from Aquilas, in Spain. to known nothing whatever about the making of the work of an extensive system of betting, behind Shields, went ashore off Jarr's Gap. The Rye disputed will. All that could be proved was that which were men pulling the wires, dragging the Lifeboat, Arthur Frederick, and the Solicitors and the testatrix had said to a niece, about the time wretch out to the scaffold, and then getting the Proctors ' Lifeboat. Storm Sprite, stationed at she made her will

, that " they.” would not let per execution postponed to suit the state of their Winchelsea, both of which belong to the National tell her husband's relatives that she might expect " book.” Such a case of deliberate villainy is, we Institution, were launched to the aid of the ship to be able to dispose of his property in comse trust, rare; but instances of men lying under sentence of death for a year, or even two years, are and a heavy, sea running. The first

named boat although she wished to warn them against the

wrecked men, a high wind blowing at the time, quence of her stepson dying without children, as common as slang in the American journals. saved eight men, and the other lifeboat rescued disappointment

which must follow the discovery At the date of the despatch of the last mail, for the remaining nine men from the wreck, all on

of this fact; and that on another occasion the example, there was confined in the County Court board being thus happily saved.

old lady had said that money could not be left for House, New Jersey, a man named John Ware, who was arrested fifteen months ago on the charge

masses, as that was illegal, but it might be left to

a confessor, who could be told privately what to of shooting his father. Ware was tried, found guilty, and sentenced to death ; but as soon as the

LEGAL EXTRACTS.

do with it. Neither of these statements, however,

touched the issue in the Court of Probate, and the date of the execution was fixed, his counsel movd

will was confirmed. for a writ of error, and obtained a new trial. “ The misery of trying a metaphysical case before

AN ARGUMENT FOR THE FUSION OF

Lord Penzance told the jnry that to prevent the a mutton-headed jury in Jersey,” was, says a

LAW AND EQUITY.

grant of probate there must be evidence that the

confessor exercised sach influence over the testatrix friendly reporter who recently interviewed Ware,

(From the Tmes.)

" that she had no mind or will of her own." This illustrated by a second conviction, and the twice? When the long-promised fusior. of law and is not the doctrine of the Court of Chancery it tried man was sentenced to die on the 15th of this equity becomes fact, then, in other words, the is enough that circumstances of confidential relie month. But the counsel have moved for a fresh wretched parricide is still lingering on, dying selepas tre merged in the wider principles of jus: and patient, lawyer and client, guardian and warda writ of error, and if they have been successful the of "past generations delighted to shelter 'thems relation be of confessor and penitent, physician,

narrow rules under which the common law judges tionship are established in equity, whether the daily with the dread of the gallows overhanging tice elaborated by successive Chancellors down to him.-Globe.

or parent and child. A gift from a person under The Evening Standard, publishes the following from one court and told they may get justice by will be declared to be taken by the latter as trustes

the time of Eldon-suitors will nut be dismissed such influence to the other possessing influence

-. , applying another. well-known crimin1 barrister, who defended Ton in poen, often happen now, for a counsel and athor: not perfectly independent of influence at the time

This anomaly does not, only, if it is shown that the mind of the giver was nelet, has thought proper to rush into print inessed teftemalig papie to advise their clients after of the gift. It is not necessary to prove that his apropos of Prince Bismark's dispatch.

I subjoin they ought to carry their complaints ; but every his letter, which is addressed to the Droit :

will was subjugated by the other; it is enough to ,

now and then a case occurs, to our scandal, and show that it was disturbed, and hence arises in weeks past I have been reading, with painful before storas Penzance. A Roman Catholic priest to prove the independence of the giver. We may

the last instance was no later than Thursday, practice an obligation on the side of the recipient mark against the decisions of the jury in the peopain for some years been the conưessory hamma Collins, where the Lord Chancellor, speaking of emotion, the violent recriminations of M. de Bis: propounded the will of an aged widow, of whom refer to a case in another column (Turner of cases of Tonnelet and Bertin. Every morning I under the will he claimed to be the appointee and bounty bestowed by a child coming of age cupont expected to find that the Government would not residuary devisee of ertates

said to be worth 40001. parent

, says, "The court must be satisfied theid have left them unanswered, and this morning reading in the papers a last dispatch equally unfair to. Catholic, opposed the rrant probate, on the actual deed of the child

, and intended to have the a year. A nephew of the lady, himself a Roman the deed (conferring the bounty) was the real and wards our judicial administration, and threatening ground that the will had been obtained by undue operation given to it; for our unfort; nute provinces still occupied by the influence exercised by her father confessor. "Some must also be satisfied 'as to how that intentionnel, refute such

attacks. I acted as counsel for Tonne to the crant, but in the end ehetjudge dimmed the therefore, that if Mrs. Connelly's nephews Inter enemy, I have been unable to withstand the desire to evidence was offered in support of his opposition the part of the child was produced.” It seemad let ; my young secretary Charles Lachand was the jury that there was the evidence touching the rear gone to the Court of Chancery,

asking that he hade counsel for Bertin, and that gives me, I think, a issue. “There was," said Lord Penzance, “ very Parfitt might be declared a trustee for the beir-atof right is not extinguished in France, thank wise roo the cornepipicitne" burdetheo la provine delle Inight have been obliged to prove the independente

;, he added, law kin of confessor God! it is because it has survived all our disas- exercise of such an influence by the priest over

of the lady's judgment. In addition to this the conscience, acquitted Tonnelet and Bertin, after thing on her then, stand of this there as more vir other aspect of the case to which Lord Penge this

mind of testatrix" that no will or

Court of Chancery would have dealt with that hearing the defence of the two prisoners", de minde hatevern. "There might, however, he, etnie not obscurely referred as beyond the scope of ac Bismark and the Cierman papers completely over. junge suggested, ground for applying elsewhere own jurisdiction. The testatrix told her niece

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

we

that if a person wanted to leave money for masses the 7th section of the organic Act, the constitution is in favour of a common law right, is in accordit must be left to a confessor with a private hint of the district, provides, " That all male citizens,'' ance with its scope and spirit, every lawyer to him how it should be used. In an administra- &c., "shall be entitled to vote," &c., and that understands by how much I strengthen my position. tion of the estate in equity, Father Parfitt could be this word male excludes women of course. To And for the satisfaction of the court I am glad examined on oath as to the existence of any this the plaintiffs reply that the langnage of to state that this part of my argument will consuch secret trusts, and if he were unable to the statute does exclude women, but they say sist entirely of extracts from recent English textswear that the gift made to him was free from that in the presence of the first section of the writers, and a reference to two or three old cases. any such moral obligation, the advantage of fourteenth amendment, which confers the elective Mr. Riddle, after citing various authorities, the it would be taken from him, even though the franchise upon "all persons,” this word "male" several amendments to the Constitution of the perfect independence of mind of Mrs. Connelly in is as if unwritten, and that the statute, constitu. United States bearing upon the question under making the gift were clearly established. Thus, tionally, reads, " That all citizens shall be entitled consideration, and commenting thereon at some there are two ways of attacking the case which to vote.” For we contend, your Honours, that length, concluded as follows: Now, I admit, might produce results at Lincoln's-inn reversing although the Congress“has exclusive legislation in as broadly and fully as words can express, the result at Westminster. Father Parfitt might all cases over this district," it can legislate only as that the framers, adopters, and promulgators be ordered to hand over the property to the lady's could the States from which it was taken. It of these amendments, man-like, went through representatives either on the score that her mind must legislate in accordance with American ideas, it all, and never thought of women. Never pas not free from his influence when the gift was and can exercise no power not granted by the thought that they were in existence were made, or on the ground that he took it upon the Constitution; and that that instrument certainly persons, or human, even. It was the product of an understanding that it was to be devoted to pur- confers no power to limit the right of suffrage. unspent, blind, revolutionary force; as the blind poses forbidden by the English law. The strict. And

are at issue. The language of forces of nature, under her laws, change the conness of the Courts of Chancery as compared with the fourteenth amendment is : “Sect. I. All figuration of a continent, unaware of the mighty the courts of law in cases of gifts between persons person's born or naturalised in the United result. And so we have this first section, not a under confidential relations with each other States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, mere sounding sham, but a crowned principle amounts just to this-that equity insists the re- are citizens of the United States and of the of sovereign right, which this halting and be. cipient should act up to a higher standard of con- State wherein they reside. No State shall make or littling second section, in its poor way, seeks not scientiousness than the law has ever attempted enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges to deny or abridge, but to guard and protect, to enforce. Such gifts are not allowed to stand or immunities of citizens of the United States.” and thus you find harmony between them. unless-to use language often applied to them in Our labour is to determine the meaning of these I am admonished by the lapse of time to pass Lincoln’s-inn-the parties were at arm's length words as they stand. You observe that the con- through with what I'must still say, and remit the from one another when they were made. The trolling word is “citizen.” What does it mean? | argument to other hands, and to minds to whom giver must know perfectly what he is about; and It is a mere matter of the definition of a word, this subject is fresher than it is to me, who cannot hence it follows that the obligation upon those and thus the field is seemingly narrowed to the give it the interest of a first discussion. Thirdly, impugning the gift is very far short of having to smallest limits. All we have to do, apparently, coloured male citizens now vote constitutionally prove that the giver had no mind or will of his is to consult the dictionaries and bring into and rightfully, although the word " white” stands own. The doctrine of equity is obviously superior court common usage. I wish it might be so as before in most of the State constitutions; and to that of common law, and there can be no reason decided; and so it could, if these plaintiffs yet he votes in spite of it. Some potent alembic for not adopting it except some presumed diffi. were not women, or were not seeking some has destroyed the force of this word, although the culty of enforcing it; but this difficulty vanishes elementary rights of human beings. We know text remains as of old. We are at once referred when the point is frankly considered. The worst that whenever they or their claims of rights to the fifteenth amendment for a solution, consequence is that it throws an obligation on the are involved, words mean nothing. No matter That has conferred the power of voting upon person receiving a gift to prove that the giver how broad a principle is, no matter how

com- them, and it is superior to the State constitutions acted with perfect knowledge of what he was prehensively it may be stated, the moment a and statute, and executes itself, as is claimed. doing. Would this have been difficult in the case woman claims its benefit she is told that she is a Now, I concede, your honours, that if the before Lord Penzance? Father Parfitt might have woman, that she is not meant, and that ends the fifteenth amendment does confer suffrage, or had to bring before the court the solicitor who argument. And so I must go below words to remove the exclusion so that coloured citizens can drew Hrs. Connelly's will and to prove the cir- things. These twin dragors of prejudice and pro- yote ; if they have derived the franchise from that, cumstances of its execution, just as he will have scription must be thrust by, and the foundations then the argument is against me. But if it does to do is the beneficial gift to him is challenged in under the ground on which they stand must be not confer it, then judgment must go for me. the Court of Chancery. But it is plain that what examined. We will go back to the genesis of Let us read it : “ Article XV.-Sect. 1. The right equity judges find practicable must be feasible at things, and see, if we may, how, when, and where of citizens of the United States to vote shall not Westminster also. The fusion of law and equity- women were walled out from the scope and spirit be denied or abridged by the United States or by when it comes, as come it must-will be the proof of the great original laws-laws that protect any State on account of race, colour, or previous of this doctrine.

the rights of “all persons.' We are told, condition of servitude. Sect. 2. The Congress that to construe

“ citizens

so as to embrace shall have power to enforce this article by

the right of suffrage, and thus thrust it upon appropriate legislation: (15 Stat. p. 316.) ” WOMAN SUFFRAGE - THE RIGHT OF

woman, and thrust her into Government and You see in a moment this does not confer any. WOMEN TO VOTE IN THE DISTRICT

polities, is a war against nature; it is upset. thing. It uses no words of grant or grace, apt or OF COLUMBIA CONSIDERED AND DE

ting the primal foundations of society, and sup. otherwise, nor does it profess to. It expressly reNIED BY THE COURT.

planting the preordained order of things. I may cognises, as an already existing fact, that the We have received, says the Chicago Legal Nerus, not here discuss the moral and social, not even the citizens of the United States have the right to a pamphlet of seventy-two pages, containing the political aspect of these questions, but when I vote. The right which shall thus be respected is argument of A. G. Riddle, Esq., and Francis must contend for the ordinary use of a word, and a right peculiar to the citizen-it is not a personal Miller, Esq., of the Washington Bar, counsel for so claim a right, and when that right is to enure right, but a political right; and a right to vote, the plaintiffs, and the opinion of the court. We to a woman, I may show, if I can, that it would the same one mentioned in the second section of regret that the length of the arguments prevents confer no new right upon her, that the right was the fourteenth amendment-a right not created or us from publishing them entire. They are able always hers, and thus prove that the word was conferred by the fifteenth amendment. It could and will be read with interest by the enemies as used in the ordinary sense. For if it should really not be, for it existed, and, as I have just said, was well as the friends of woman suffrage:

appear that my use of the word did violate natural spoken of in the fourteenth amendment; so that Riddle.- May it please the court : Although my law and contravene natural right, that would be it must be as old as that at the least. This learned friend Mr. Cook, who appears for the de. a strong argument to show that it was not used amendment is a solemn mandate to all concerned fence, is the demurrant, it has been arranged that in that sense. Then, as the first proposition not to deny this right, because it existed, and in the argument we shall be regarded as having the of my brief, I contend, that under our system because it was of the highest value. affirmative. And, at my own request am to the right to vote is a natural right. Obviously, WYLIE, J.-It is not to be denied for either of open it, and shall bring fully to the notice of the government is of right or it is an usurpa- the three reasons mentioned. court the matter which I wish to submit for its tion. If of right, it sprang from some right Ridele.-Yes, your Honour, I have not reached consideration. In doing this, my purpose is, older than itself; and this older right must have that; I am now only showing that it is a rightwithout comment upon the gravity of the case, existed in persons (people), in each and all alike, citizen right--and older than the fifteenth amendand avoiding anything like speech-making, to deal male and female. And having this right they used ment; but if your Honour intends to infer that with the cases in their purely legal aspects. Nor it to form for themselves a government. Of because the right cannot be denied in any one of do I mean to step from the line of dry argu- course, this supposes that all joined in and con- those cases, that, therefore, it may be in all others, ment,the narrow stony way of the law. These sented to the government, having the power to then you have another instance of a constitutional plaintiffs, describing themselves as women, claim. dissent; for to just the extent that a government right to deny a constitutional right; and, without to be citizens of the United States, and of got itself agoing without the free consent of its vanity, I have already pulverised that assumption. this district, with the right of the elective fran. people, it is without right. The right of self. It is thus absolutely certain that coloured male chise, which they attempted to exercise at the government, and from that springs our right to citizens do not claim their admitted right to yote election of April 20, last past, and were prevented. govern others, is a natural right. This is the from this fifteenth amendment. They had it They say, that as registration was a pre-requisite primary idea of American politics and the foun- before, and this came in to protect and secure of the right to vote, they tendered themselves in dation of our Government. This was formulated them in its enjoyment. Whence did they derive due form, and demanded it, under the second in the second clause of our great declaration, and it? From the fourteenth amendment ? section of the Act of May 31, 1870 (16 U. S. Stats. no man has dared to deny it.

then did women acquire it by the same amend. 140). That is the “ Act to enforce the right of Mr. Riddle continued at some length under this ment? Was it an inherent right in them as a citizens of the United States to vote," &c., and head, and then proceeded to the next branch of part of “the people ?” So women are a much authorises a suit for refusing registration. They his subject.

larger and more important part of the people.” say, that being refused registration, they tendered The second position of my brief is, that by The right to vote shall not be denied on account of their votes to the proper inspectors of said elec- the old common law of our English ancestors, the race, colour, or previous condition of servitude, tion, with proof of their attempt to register old storehouse of our rights and liberties, as well was not used to make the right sacred in male eitizenship, &c., as authorised by the 3rd section of as the arsenal where we find weapons for their de. negroes alone, while the rights of all others were said Act, and their votes were refused ; and, there. fence, woman always possessed this right of suffrage. left to political caprice, or to be controlled by apon, Spencer brings her suit under said 2nd I will show by several English cases, by long these same coloured males meyhap; but this section, against the registering officers, and Web- usage, and general understanding by principle and amendment was aimed fully at the mischief rester hers under the 3rd section, which authorises precedent, that the English women both voted and medied by the 2nd section of the fourteenth amendit, for rejecting her vote. The questions in both held office; and I will show that not a single case, ment, and there its force is expended. It fossilizes cazes are identical and presented together. To the and not a single resolution of the House of Com the 2nd section of that amendment. While the declarations the defendants demur, and thereby mons exists to the contrary; and that in all the broad language of its lst section secures, beyond raise the only questions we desire to have ad. now innumerable tomes of the common law, of the abridging hand of the States, the great rights it judicated. The defendants, by their demurrer, judicial decision, commentary, or essay, but a

- rights which Congress cannot abridge admit all the allegations of the plaintiffs, severally, single dictum exists to the contrary. And if I on any pretext, for it can exercise no power not but say, that as they are women they are not thus establish that the construction of the four granted, and the Constitution confers on it no entitled to vote in the district of Columbia. That teenth amendment, for which I this day contend, power to abridge the “privileges or immunities

If so,

secures

« EelmineJätka »