Page images

Jan. 6, 1872.]

harshly on that class of horrowers, or would-be borrowers, who tration of justice-especially as long as trials by jury last--than
have nothing in the way of available security to offer but personal discussions by the public press of the merits of a pending trial,
chattels, whether trade or domestic, the actual possession of which and the more especially when most of the writers to the news-
would in most instances only be surrendered as a dernier gessort. papers are utterly ignorant of even the elementary principles of
This hardship, whatever be its extent, is one the remedy for law and equity. The prejudice and the ill feeling which such dis-
which, as it appears to us, must be sought from the Legislature cussions would produce would be most harmful and very detri-
rather than from the Judges. We are disinclined to believe that mental to the interest of persons concerned.
the unanimous decisions of the Courts of Queen's Bench in Baulger
F. Shar, of the Common Pleas in Spackman v. Miller, and of the
Exchequer in Freshney v. Carrick, will be set aside by a dictum of

CRIME AND ITS PUNISHMENT. Vice-Chancellor Malins, which, as we think, without sufficient consideration, has been made the foundation of Sir James Bacon's

A SUBJECT which has received a very considerable share of the judgment in lie Homan. The Bills of Sale Act of 1854, as we

attention of the Legislature for some years has been the best regard it, is altogether a disabling and in no wise an enabling

means of repressing crime. In 1869 the Habitual Criminals Act statute, a statute made entirely in the interests of creditors, and

became law, and during the last session of Parliament this Act was


improved and re-enacted in the Prevention of Crime Act. not in the slightest degree validating by registration bills of sale

person who has been at all concerned in the administration of our which, if the Act had not passed, would have been invalid or impeachable. As the Lord Chief Justice remarks, in Badger v. Shaw,

criminal law must have noticed that latterly the number of indict

able offences has, in most parts of the country, decreased to no " It seems to me that the Bills of Sale Act was intended to be a

inconsiderable extent, and we believe that an inspection of the protection to creditors and not to the bill of sale.”

calendars of the various courts of assize and quarter sessions would

fully bear out this statement. This state of things naturally INDECENCY IN THE PUBLIC PRESS.

suggests an inquiry as to the causes of decrease and as to whether

the remedies applied in the case of the more serious offences could We hare frequently drawn attention to some of the difficulties not be effectually applied in the case of those of a lighter attending the operation of Lord Campbell's Act so as to suppress

character. publications offensive to the public sense of decency and morality, There are several causes we could mention, such as the sererity and it is perfectly plain that without some more stringent law the now displayed in our prisons, and the supervision exercised by Society for the Suppression of Vice will find itself powerless to the police under the Habitual Criminals Act and the Prevention purify our periodical literature. But if a law of this kind is to of Crime Act; but these in themselves are scarcely sufficient to exist at all

, restraining, that is, the publication of matter calculated account for the diminution. The greatest preventative to crime is to degrade public morality, and to contaminate the minds of the manifestly the great care which is now taken to trace out the innocent and the young, it is difficult to see how it can stop short history of all prisoners charged with felonies, and the consequent of the reporting by the press generally, at greater or less length, serere punishment of old offenders. Both at assizes and sessions of the cases which have been so numerous of late, involving details the presiding Judge has before him a complete list of the number of a most objectionable character.

of times each prisoner has been before convicted, and, with this We need not go so far back as the cases of Mordaunt v. Mordaunt, knowledge, the tribunal is enabled to mete out due punishment Versome v. Newsome, and Godrich v. Godrich, in the Divorce according to each man's deserts. The deterrent effect of this Court, or the prosecution of Boulton and Park, in the Queen's cumulative system of punishment no one can doubt. A thief, Bench, for within the last few days large spaces of our daily con- perhaps, may not much object to undergoing one, two, three, or temporaries have been occupied with details of the evidence given eren nine months' imprisonment; he is certainly deprived of his in the cases of Firebrace v. Firebrace, in the Divorce Court, and freedom and subjected to rigorous discipline, but he is at the same Heete v. Perren at the Guildhall. The question, therefore, natu- time removed for a space from the misery necessarily attendant on rally recurs to the mind as to how far the course adopted by the his freedom, and is able to look forward without much difficulty to daily and other papers. in this respect is justifiable or excusable. the time when he will be released. It is very different, however, The motive of those who conduct the papers is of course manifest; when imprisonment ischanged into penal servitude. The seven years, it is that of gain. They well know (it is sad that we should have which is the sentence passed after previous conviction, makes the to confess it) that by publishing any gross scandal or the reports of future very dark, and it is the hopelessness of future freedom which disgusting and indecent trials, they vastly increase the circulation of is the most efficacious cure. A continued course of penal servitude their papers. They pander, therefore, to the lowest and basest becomes intolerable, and is much dreaded by the criminal classes. instincts of human nature, and with one or two exceptions, this Naturally, where criminals have an opportunity to abandon their indictment applies to all our daily papers.

life of crime, such as offered them by Prisoners' Aid Societies, At present the newspapers are under no control. The only they the more eagerly embrace it in the face of the bitter alternarestriction they labour under is that which courts of law impose tive of lengthened incarceration. upon them that is, the enforcement of silence during the pro- The consideration of the effect of this system of cumulative gress of pending trials, and of course they are amenable to the punishment, as applied to felonies and the graver misdemeanors. Law for wrongs done to private individuals. Beyond that they naturally lead us to ask the question whether there should not enjoy the utmost freedom and licence. Is it desirable that this exist power to visit lighter offences when often repeated with should be so? We think not; for, as indicated above, we find severity of punishment gradually increasing in proportion to the that there is a considerable abuse of their powers, an abuse which number of offences ? Now, first of all, is there any existing calls for correction. The only remedy for this is for the Legisla- statute which recognises the principle as applied to this class of ture to place certain restrictions on the press with regard to the crime? Two Acts deal with this question to a limited extentreporting of indecent cases. Our courts of justice have in cases of first, the Vagrant Act 1824 (5 Geo. 4, c. 83, s. 5); and, secondly, gross indecency the power to order the exclusion of all women and the Prevention of Crime Act 1871 (34 & 35 Vict. c. 112, ss. 7 to 14.) children. This is invariably done at the assizes in cases of rape. The Vagrant Act deals with persons called "incorrigible rogues," Divorce cases and cases of seduction should most undoubtedly be and provides that justices may commit such persons to the quarter treated in the same way. But they are not so, for whoever has sessions where they may be sentenced for any term not exceeding visited the Court for Matrimonial Causes must have had the sad ex- a year. “Incorrigible rogues” are persons, escaping from prison, perience of witnessing it crowded with women, in a way in which no committing a second offence against the Vagrant Act, or re

resisting other court is crowded. During the progress of the Mordaunt the police when arrested as a rogue and vagabond, and being case the galleries of the court were crammed by those of high afterwards convicted of the offence for which they were arrested. social position. But it may be said that if women and children The Prevention of Crime Act deals with reputed thieves after merely are turned out, it would not prevent the cases from being previous conviction, with police supervision, with persons harreported. We ailmit this, but why should it not be made law bouring thieves or allowing them to assemble in their houses, that any newspaper which published any details of cases in which with assaults on the police; in the two last cases the penalty the Judge ordered the exclusion of women and children should be increases with the repetition of the offence. These are the only punishable as for contempt of court ? This really would be no provisions of this nature, and it will be seen that they leave hardship.

It would only be keeping newspapers within proper entirely untouched many offences of no less gravity, such as bounds, while the good results of such a measure would, we feel repeated assaults, wilful damage to property, soliciting prostitusure, be incalculable.

tion. No doubt some of these offences may be tried at quarter Curiously enough at the very time we suggest what may be sessions if they are of an aggravated nature ; but there is no power looked upon as a retrograde movement, some papers are actually to record convictions, nor is persistence in the same course of advocating the removal of the only restraint under which they condnct a ground for committal, or even for severe punishment. labour, and complain that it is unfair to them and prejudicial to the Even under the Acts above mentioned, no punishment can be public interest and to justice that they should be precluded from inflicted exceeding a year in duration, however often an offence commenting on a pending case, and discussing on its merits every may have been committed. trial. This, of course, has arisen owing to the cause célèbre which Considering the undoubted deterrent effect produced by the is now the subject of universal discussion. We certainly should cumulative punishment of felonies, we venture to suggest that the be very sorry to see the abrogation of the power of courts of law to same system should be applied to such offences as we have mendeal with papers as well as with persons guilty of contempt. Such tioned; in fact, to every offence except simple drunkenness. We power is most beneficial, and produces the most healthy and salutary are convinced that if the Legislature were to enact that justices results. Nothing could be more calculated to warp the adminis- should have power to commit to the quarter sessions all offenders

who have been in prison more than a certain nuuber of times, say ten, and that the quarter sessions should thereupon be empowered to pass a long sentence of imprisonment or penal servitude, the consequences would be even more satisfactory than in the case of felonies. Not only should we have fewer of these minor offences, but the punishment of these would have a very marked effect upon the commission of crimes of a graver character. At present our streets are overrun by persons of disorderly character who necessarily mix with the criminal classes; prostitutes do not require much inducement to become thieves, nor do drunken rioters hesitate long before they commit felonious assaults. Let these persons be punished severely before they are enabled to enrol themselves among the still more dangerous class, and we shall have gone one step further towards that state of society which a country which expends vast sums annually in the repression of crime should strive to attain.


(Continued from page 156.) The evidence of aged and infirm witnesses may in all cases be taken by a commissioner (advocate or solicitor) appointed by the court, the examina. tion taking place at the instance of the parties, as in court. To avoid the risk of such evidence being lost, either of the parties may, as soon as the case is in court, apply for such a commission to take the evidence to lie in retentis. Again, if witnesses reside in England or Ireland, though they may be compelled to attend in the Scotch courts, the judge may, in his discretion, order their evidence to be taken on commission; and this is the only course when witnesses reside abroad and refuse to come to Scotland. Even though witnesses are resident in Scotland, the court may, if it thinks it desirable, appoint the whole or part of the evidence to be taken on com. mission. The evidence so taken being reported to the court by a commis. sioner, a hearing and judgment follow in the Outer House, with an appeal to the Inner, as in other cases. On the question of taking evidence it only remains to mention that each party may, after the record is closed (and in very exceptional cases before), apply for a Commission and Diligence to recover documents from the opposite party, or from third parties. The applicant must show that he is entitled to call for such documents, and when recovered he must prove them, unless they are duly tested, before putting them in evidence.

Such is a sketch of the procedure in an ordinary action in the Court of Session. In its normal state its principal features are (1) accuracy of pleading, secured by the closed record, yet not so inflexible as to prevent justice being done between the parties, if amendments or additions are found necessary; (2) that the evidence in the great mass of cases is taken in presence of a judge who decides both on the law and facts of the case in the first instance, and assigns the grounds of his judgment; and (3) that an appeal on both fact and law lies to a tribunal of four judges.

The other means of judicially ascertaining disputed facts is by a jury trial. Jury trial in civil cases in Scotland is an exotic. It was first in'ro. duced into Scotland in 1815, and has never thriven. That it was accompanied with many of the forms of the English system, from which it was transplanted, may be one reason of its ill success. But the expense and cumbrousness of the procedure as conducted in Scotland, and the uncertainty of the verdict, often the result of sympathy or feeling, are the main reasons why litigants and their advisers have always been anxious to avoid it. The general opinion, both of the public and the profession, was strongly expressed by an advocate of much experience, when examined lately before the Courts' Commission. (a) "In regard to jury trial, I have only to say that I think it the biggest farce that ever was instituted for the investiga. tion and settlement of civil rights. You put men into the box who are not accustomed to continuity of thought, or to the compressed position in which they are kept for hours, and who are actuated very frequently, in a great many popular causes, with other than just notions of right and wrong. In a number of cases, unless the judge descends into the arena and takes the thing out of their hands altogether,-in case of a road, for example,-the verdict is sure to be one way; or where a widow claims damages against a railway company; or in a case of breach of promise of marriage; or seduc. tion, where the pursuer is a pretty woman,-the defender has no chance at all. In other cases, again, the jury must go along with the charge of the judge, and practically the verdict is the verdict of the single judge. Now, if that is sufficient, we should get it without all the formality of a jury trial. But, apart altogether from my own opinion as to jury trial, the practical result is this, that we have now tried it for fifty years, and it has entirely failed. You can't bring people to the jury court. Merchants in Glasgow say that they would rather resign their rights and interests altogether than submit their case to a jury. You compel them to go to arbitration, or to give up their just and legal rights.”

Jury trial is, in England, almost the universal mode of trying disputed questions of fact, and gives satisfaction. The work is done quickly, and without undue expense, and juries are willing to be led by the Bench, and to return unanimous verdicts,-for in England the twelve jurymen must be unanimous, both in civil and criminal cases. This unanimity was required in Scotland in civil cases for many years, but it was found a terri. ble bondage ; and the risk of the trial proving abortive was much increased, for it was too much to expect that twelve independent Scotchmen should, in questions of really disputed facts, always ugree, or that they could be driven into agreeing by time or hunger. All the more was this enforced unanimity irksome, that Scotch juries had been accustomed from time im. memorial to bring in verdicts in criminal cases by a majority. Indeed, Scotchmen cannot understand how jury trial with unanimous verdicts is possible, or how it is still so tenaciously clung to in England. Scotland obtained relief in this matter, in 1854, by an act which allows juries in civil cases after an absence of six hours to return a verdict by a majority of nine to three, and the period was reduced in 1859 to three hours.

In Scotland, as in England, the verdict of a jury may be set aside on two grounds. The unsuccessful party may challerge it as being against evidence. If a jury find the issue established where there is absolutely no evidence, or the only evidence is directly to the opposite effect, the court sets aside the verdict and grants a new trial. If there be evidence on both sides, however much it preponderates against the verdict, the court will not interfere ; for it is the peculiar function of the jury to judge of the

weight and credibility of the evidence. The verdict may also be challenged on the ground that the judge has refused to direct, or misdirected, the jury on questions of law material to the issue; and this may result either in the verdict being entered up in favour of the other party, or of a new trial being granted.

When jury trial in civil cases was first introduced into Scotland, per. mission was given to employ it in all cases where matters of fact had to be proved; but a few years after the class of cases was specially pointed out, and comprehended all actions founded on delinquency or quasi delinquency, where damages were claimed. To these were added some years later actions on mercantile and maritime contracts, and for reductions of deeds on the ground of insanity, facility, force, and fear, &c.; and all such actions were specially appropriated to jury trial. This rule has since been relaxed, and now the determination of the mode of trial is left to the parties, and to the judge ; and by the latter even questions of damages are often tried, and the amount assessed, without a jury, -an appeal of course lying to one of the divisions; and this practice is likely to grow.

Recently, by borrowing from the procedure of England, great facilities have been given for decision of cases where the parties are agreed upon the facts, and only differ upon the application of the law. A special case is prepared, containing a joint statement by the parties of the facts, setting forth also (but without argument) what each maintains to be his legal rights. The case concludes with articulate questions on which the court is asked to give its opinion and judgment. Such special cases are presented at once to the Inner House, without going before a Lord Ordinary; and they have been found a very expeditious and economical form of process, especi. ally in the construction of settlements, wills, and other deeds.

Besides the disposal of properly litigated cases, the Court of Session. exercises a large administrative jurisdiction in the appointment and super. intenderce of judicial factors on partnership, trust, and other estates as to which those interested are in dispute, or when the trustees have all died; the appointment of guardians to minors, insane persons, &c., and the control of the management of their estates ; and also in regard to the selling, burdening, improving, or disentailing of estates held under entail, where the interests of succeeding heirs need protection. In all these the actings of the Lord Ordinary are subject to the review of the Inner House. The Court of Session is also invested with an undefined authority, styled its nobile officium, in supplement of its ordinary powers and jurisdiction; and this is exercised by the Inner House alone. The custody of children in the event of the separation or divorce of the parents, and the interim appointment in some cases of Crown and other officials, are cases in which this nobile officium is invoked.

The Court of Session also acts as a court of appeal from judgments pronounced in the local courts. This is an important part of its functies, The amount of money involved in such cases is not necessarily snuali, and many mercantile questions come before the court in this shape on appeal from such commercial centres as Glasgow, Dundee, Greenock, ard Aberdeen

In each county or division of a county, there is a sheriff court presided over by a resident sheriff (called sheriff-substitute), before whom the local solicitors practise. The sheriff-substitutes are for the most part drawn from the Bar of the Court of Session, and are appointed by the sheriffdepute of the county, subject to the approval of the heads of the Court of Session. The sheriff-depute is so called because he is subordinate, as a Crown officer, to the high sheriff and lord-lieutenant of the county, who is generally a landed proprietor of influence, but is not a professional man. The sheriff-depute" (who is also commonly called sheriff, or sheriff'

. principal, in reference to his substitute) is always an advocate, is not resident in his county, and is generally in practice at the bar of the Court of Session.

A system of closed records and proof, similar to that in the Court of Session, prevails in the sheriff courts. In simpler cases the summons and defences contain short statements of the grounds of action and defence, without details of facts or pleas in law though these may be ordered if deemed necessary. The evidence cannot at present be taken in shorthand; but the courts' commission recommends that this should be sanctioned. Sheriffs are not authorised to try civil casos before juries. The judginent of the sheriff-substitute may be appealed to the sheriff, and the sheriff's judgment to one or other of the divisions of the Court of Session. It is possible also to appeal directly froin the sheriff-substitute's judgment to the Court of Session; but the prospect of the case taking end before the sheriff prevents this course being much adopted. Appeals from the sheriff court to the Court of Session are only competent if the amount in dispute be above 251. This sum the courts' commission proposes to raise to 501., with power, however, to the sheriff, having regard to the nature of the case as involving a principle of importance or general application, to grant leave to appeal.

The disposal of appeals from the sheriff courts constitutes a large part of the business of the Court of Session. The jurisdiction of the sheriff court is very extensive. It has no limit in point of amount. A million sterling might be sued for before a sheriff.substitute. It extends over all defenders within the sheriffdom, and over all movable property situated there. But the sheriff's

have a very limited jurisdiction over heritable rights and property. They can regnlate interim possession, and enforce payment of rent, &c.; but they cannot decide any question of disputed heritable title. Neither have they jurisdiction over persons in questions of status. Questions of marriage, divorce, judicial separation, permanent aliment (but not interim aliment), between husband and wife, legitimacy, &c., are appropriated to the Court of Session. The heir to landed property, however, makes up his title to the deceased in the sheriff court by proving his propinquity, &c.: whereupon he is served heir by the sheriff. This title may afterwards be challenged within twenty years in the Conrt of Session by anyone showing a better right, and if there be several competitors at the beginning, the case may be removed to the Court of Session at once. Executors also obtain a title to the movable estate of the deceased in the sheriff court on proving propinquity, or on production of the deeds under which they are appointed; but the sheriff's functions in these matters are rather administrative than judicial. The sheriffs are also the Judges under whom the bankruptcy law is administered, and the judgment of one (not of both) must first be taken in questions arising between the bankrupt, the trustee in the sequestration, and the creditors, with an appeal to the Court of Session.

For claims below, or restricted to 121, there is a special summary court held by the sheriff or sheriff-substitute, called the small.debt court. The claim is stated shortly, and appended to a printed form for citing the defender. The parties appear personally without professional assistance, unless both parties consent (which in inportant case they usually do); the evidence, if any, is taken, but no record of it kept, and the sheriff gives his decision at once. This judgment is final and not subject to review, except


(a) Patrick Fraser, LL.D., author of the Scotch Law of the Personal and Domes. tic Relations.


Jax. 6, 1872.j

on the ground of corruption, malice, or oppression on the part of the judge, or want of jurisdiction. This court has been found most serviceable and satisfactory, especially in the great centres of industry. The Courts' Com. missioners propose to extend its jurisdiction to 201., and to repeal the provi. sion excluding

professional assistance, leaving the sheriff to decide whether the aid of a solicitor was necessary, and the amount of his remuneration; and they also propose that, in order to prevent diversity in the decisions of the different small-debt courts, the sheriff should have power, in important cases of law and practice, to state a special case for the opinion of the Court of Session.

The sheriff courts have been in existence in Scotland since the middle of last century, and have been gradually developed into their present satis. factory state. Their great fault is the delay that occurs in recording oral eridence, for the sheriff-substitute has with his own hand to write ont full notes of the depositions of witnesses. This leads to numerous adjourn. ments of diets of proof, often for weeks at a time. The employment of a shorthand writer and the continuity of proof recommended by the commis. sion, will donbtless remove these defects.

The propriety of the existence of the double sheriffship, as it is called, has been greatly questioned of late in Scotland. An appeal, it is said, from one judge to another of similar professional grade, is not only anomalous, and without parallel in any other court, but is contrary to sound principle. It also causes much delay and expense. On the other hand (and this is the view of the Courts' Commissioners), the system has been found to work satisfactorily. It provides for a review of the resident sheriff's judgment with little delay, there being only a few stages in a case at which the appeal is competent. It is an economical appeal, and may be obtained at an average cost of 21. 10s. It is not an appeal to a judge of the same pro. fessional standing, for the sheriffs are, as a class, men of greater legal weight and authority. The list of sheriffs from time to time embraces the first men in the profession; at present, ten of the existing judges, and both

of the law officers of the Crown, have held sheriffships. Besides, the best
test of the satisfactory nature of the appeal is that, in the great mass of
cases, the judgment of the sheriff on appeal is acquiesced in; and the same
deference could not be expected to be paid to the judgment of a single
resident sheriff.

The County Courts of England were only established in 1846, and differ essentially from the Scotch sheriff courts in these respects, that they have no jurisdiction above 501., and that the appeal lies direct from the County Court Judge to the Supreme Court in cases above 201. Below that sum the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is practically excluded by the rule that a plaintiff who resorts to it, when he could have sued in the county court, forfeits his right to costs. Like the Scotch sheriff courts the English County Courts have no jurisdiction in questions of heritage where title is involved, or in questions of status. In ordinary cases there are no written pleadings beyond the initial writ. If the defence be a denial of liability, the defender need only appear at the hearing and establish it. If the defence be founded on a separate ground, as set-off, &c., it must be stated before. hand in writing. If the sum sued for exceed 51., a jury trial may be claimed. In Scotland, if the amount sued for in the sheriff court exceed 401., either party may claim a jury trial and carry the case to the Court of Session for that purpose. Owing to recent changes before explained, this procedure is now very much superseded, jury trial being avoided rather than courted.

Such are the main features of the judicial system of Scotland in civil causes, elaborated after many experiments and failures. As the result of practical experience it may contain suggestions worthy of the adoption of other courts and countries. We must defer till another time a sketch of the Scotch criminal courts and the procedure preparatory to trial, which are in several respects peculiar, and have been found very efficient in the detection and punishment of crime, as well as in the prevention of improper accusations against the innocent.






[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]




[ocr errors]



[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]




SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. ford, held the said part of the said lands as tenant

from year to year to the said Elizabeth Beresford, JOURNAL. NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS.

at the rent of 11. 14s. an acre. And the defendant SETTLEMENT — Wife's Estate - ULTIMATE further saith that while he was in possession of the STOCK AND SHARE MARKETS.



said part of the said lanıls, to wit, on July 2, COURSE ADMINISTRATION" - HUSBAND's 1870, the said Elizabeth Beresford died, and on The following are the fluctuations of the week. Right-DEMURRER.- By a marriage settlement, her death the said Patrick Kenna and James

Kenna became entitled to the reversion in the said ESGLISH FUNDS.

property belonging to the wife was settled upon Sitt. Mon, Tues Wed, Tuu

the usual trusts for the benefit of the wife, her lands, of which the said Elizabeth Beresford was Ban's of England Stock

husban«, and the children of the marriage; and it seised only of an estate for her own life, and there3 Cent. Red. Ann....

was provided that in case there should be no child upon the yearly tenancy of the defendants came 37 Cent. Cons. Ann

924 Sex P Cent. An...

of the marriage, then the trustees should stand to an end; and thereupon the defendant, being Do. do. Jan. 1891.

possessed of the property in trust for such person entitled to emblements out of said lands, was Ner 3. L'ent. Ann. ... 92


or persons as the wife should appoint, and, in de entitled to retain possession of same in lieu of 32 Cent, Andrities

fault of appointment, “upon trust to pay and emblements up to 1st Nov. 1870, being the last 5 Cents, Jan. 1873

transfer the said trust property unto the legal gale day of the then current year, and the defenAda 30 pers esp personal representatives of the wife in due course

dant continued in possession of the said part of April 5, 1885 Do. exp. Jan, 5, 1830)

of administration." The wife died without issue, the said lands. And the defendant saith that, D). exp. July 1890

and without having exercised her power of appoint after the 2nd July aforesaid, and whilst the defenSen Tele. Ann. 1903

ment. Held, upon the death of the husband, that dant was in possession of the said part of the said Consols, for Acc....

92: the wife's next of kin, and not the husband's legal lands, the said Patrick Kenna and James Kenna lodia 5 Ceut. for Ace

personal representatives, were entitled to the pro- represented, and caused it to be represented to 111! Do 5 Cent. July 18 India Stock, July 1839 perty: (Briggs v. Upton, 23 L. T. Rep. N. S. 626. him, that they were ready and willing to demise

the said part of the said lands to him as tenant V.C. W.) Iudia Stock, 187+ India 5 Ceut.

from year to year, to commence from 1st Nov. India 4 ac. Oct. 1888 105, 1051 105; 105; 1031


1870, at a certain increased rent, to wit, after the 1odia 5 # Cent. 1370

rate of 21, an acre for the said part of the said India Bonds (10#l.)...

253.1. 238.a 258.0

lands, and that, without any lease thereof in that Do. (under 10001.)

Wednesday, June 21.

behalf being made, he would be allowed to remain Er. Bills, 10.

33.4 23.0
23.a 23.0 28.a
(Before HUGHES, B.)

in possession of the said part of the said lands as 100l,aud 2001.

KENYA AND OTHERS V. TALLON AND OTHERS. tenant from year to year, so long as the said Metropolitan Board of

Pleailing-Equitable defence to ejectment on the increased rent was duly paid. And the defendant Works 3 PC. Stock. 971

title-Setting aside as embarrassing.

says that, after the said representations were so a Preunium.

In equitable defence to an ejectment on the title made, and before any demise was made of the against an overholding tenant, averred a repre

said part of the said lands, or any contract sentation by the plaintiffs to him, that he would for a demise of the said part of the said lands PUBLIC COMPANIES. be allowed to remain in possession as tenant

was entered into between the defendant and ASSURANCE COMPANY.

from year to year, so long as he paid an increased the plaintiff, the defendant, relying upon the The Equity and Law Life Assurance Society

rent; that, relying on such representation, and said representations, and under the expectaannounce a dividend of 123. per share for the half

under the expectation and belief that he would tion and belief that he would be so allowed

to remain in possession as tenant from year to

be so allowed to remain in possession, he, with year ending January 18.

the knowledge of the plaintiffs, made improve. year as aforesaid, and which expectation and beliei

ments which enhanced the value of the land, and the defendant says he, by reason of the premises, REPORTS OF SALES.

expended money in tilling it, which he would not bonâ fide entertained, the defendant, with the know.

have done but for the representation so made to ledge of the said Patrick Kenna and James Kenne, (.SOTE. -The reports of the Estate Exchange are officially him.

and without objection by them or either of them, supplied in the following list. Auctioneers whose names

has remained in possession of the said part of the The court refused to set aside the defence as em. ar registered there will oblige by reports of their own

said lands and made improvements on the said part

barrassing, but gave the plaintiffs liberty to reply of the said lands which added to the value thereof, sales.)

and demur. Wednesday, Jan. 3.

Motion that the second defence filed by the de. and expended moneys and labour in tilling, cropB; Messrs. VEXTO, Bull, and COOPER, at the Mart. Neath and Brecon Railway Company. 2973 Ordinary Shares fendant Tallon in this action, and a similar de ping, and cultivating the same. And the defendant (101.}.-sold for 14561. 118. fence filed by the defendant Brien, te set aside as

says, if such representations had not been so made preferential Shares (101. Perpetual Fire per Cent.)-sola embarrassing, or for liberty to reply and demur. to him, and he had not been thus led by the said lowl.C Debenture Stock-roll for 202,

The action was in ejectment on the title, and the Patrick Kenna and James Kenna to expect and 1.D Debenture Stock--sold for 401.

defences objected to were respectively as follows: believe, and did not, in fact, expect and believe

“And as a further defence on equitable grounds, that he would have been allowed by the said

as to so much of the said lands of Mullagh as is in Patrick Kenna and James Kenna to so remain in EVEXING BEVERAGE-CACA'OINE. - The

the possession of the said defendant, he says that possession as tenant from year to year, so long as Journal says:-By a new process to which the nibs are the said James Stewart, so named as one of the he duly paid the said increased rent, he the desubjected, the principal part of the oil is effectually plaintiffs in this action, sues herein as a trustee fendant would not have so improved the said part remorel; a thiú beverage, well adapted for afternoon or evening use, as a substitute for tea, being the result. only for ard on behalf of the other plaintiffs, the of the said lands as aforesaid, or expended money! The flarour of Caca'oine will, in addition, be a great

said Patrick Kenna and James Kenna. And the and labour in so tilling, cropping, and cultivating attraction to all." - Each packet or tin is labelled, said defendant says that the said defendant, here the same. And the defendant avers he always "JAMES Epps & Co., Homeopathic Chemists, London." tofore and during the life of one Elizabeth Beres has been, and is now ready and willing to pay the Also makers of Epps's Milky Caca’oine (Caca'vinc and

said increased rent, of which the said Patrick Cuadensed Milk.)

(a) From the Irish Law Times Reports.

Kenna and James Kenna, in fraud of the said re

for 6971. 10s.



[ocr errors]

presentations and the expectation which the said Armstrong, Serjt. (with him Murphy, Q.C. the said meeting, to any of the officers or men, Patrick Konna and James Kenna had so created, and W. Johnstone), for the defendants, objected or other members of the Metropolitan Police and before the defendant had received the benefit in limine to the copy of the affidavit furnished. Force in relation to the said meeting? State to of his said expenditure so made by him as before It does not contain the jurat or the signature of whom and when such orders were given, and what mentioned, now brings this ejectment.”

the attorney who filed it: (141 G.O. 1854; 145, ib.) the said orders or directions were. S. Walker (with him Vaish), for the plaintiffs. It is not a true copy. (O'BRIEN, J.-The objec- 7. State with particularity whether you gave to The pleas are founded on Clarke v. Reilly (Ir. R., tion appears to be fatal if insisted upon.] We the said police, or any of them, verbal orders to 2 C. L. 422). But there the plea was based upon a will not press it, if the attorney has in court a prevent, disperse, or interfere with the holding of contract of which every condition had been ful. certified copy of the affidavit, as required by 13 the said meeting. tilled, and the court gave leave to demur, though G. O., and that he now amend our copy therehy. 8. State with particularity each such order, they would not set aside the plea. The represen. The copy having been amended,

what it wils, when given, and name the person or tations in these pleas alleged are not stated to Armst, ong, Serjt.-It now appears that in persons to whom such were given. have been made so as to amount to a contract the body of the affidavit, the plaintiff's residence 9. State with particularity whether you gave between the parties. There is merely a unilateral | is given as Mill View-terrace, Brar;" but this any verbal order to any mernber of the said police representation, acted on by the defendants. It is shown by the jurat to be incorrect, as, at the force to prevent, disperse, or in any way interfere shoes not appear that any intention of the defen- time of swearing the raffidavit, the deponent was with the said meecing? If so, state the names of lants to act upon said representation was ever resident in the Marshalsea. His true residence the persons to whom such orders were given, communicated to the plaintiffs, or that the plain- was at the prison : (11) G. O.)

when they were given, and state the terms of each tiffs had notice or knowledge of the defendants J.Dermott, contra.-It would be improper to

such order separately. having acted or intended to act upon the repre- lescribe him as resident at the Marshalsea. Mill 10. Were you in the Phenix Park at any time sentation, or to make any improvements. It does View-terrace" does not ceuse to be his residence, on Sunday, the 6th Aug., and, if so, state what not appear that the defendants ever paid or whether he be terrarily or compulsorily sojourn hour or hours, where in the said park, were pour tendered the increased or any rent of the pre- ing elsewhere, whether at an hotel, watering place, how long you reinained there, and what part, if mises. The improvements alleged are not speci. or prizon : (Durestan v. Patterson, 5 C. B., N. S., any, you took in preventing, dispersing, or intersed either in nature or value, and they are in no 271.) [O'BRIEN, J.-Having regard to the de ferin, with the said meeting, or causing such preway referable to the plaintiff's representations. cision cited, I consider that the affidavit is sub vention, (lispersion, or interference? It should be shown that they were such as a court stantially sufficient, and that it is unnecessary to

11. Did you send or order any holy of police to of equity would act upon to entitle the defendants describe the deponent “now re-ident at the Mar- the said park on said Sunday? If so, how many, to reliet. If we demur, this will be taken against shalsea, and late of Mill View terrace."]

and under what officers; and state whether you us, and yet it may be that only a slate on the roof

The interrogatories were as foilows:

saw the police so sent again on the same day. "was in fact repaired. Butt, Q.C. (with him Martin), for the defendant of Hartington. To be answered by the Fight Hon. The Marquis State when and where. State did your accompany

to the saili park, or join said body during said day Tallon.- We seek to raise the question put for.

1. Were you aware, previously to the 6th Aug. at said park; how long you remained with the ward in Ramsdeny: Dyson (L. Rep. 1 H. of L. 129), last, that a public meeting was intended to be held said body; and state whether, in dispersing the and not that to which Clarke v. Reilly (sup.) gives in the Phoenix-park on that day?

said meeting. they acted under your direction, or rise. It is the same thing as if the plaintiffs had allowed us to build on their grounds on the that meeting, gire, or cause to be given, instrue.

2. Did you, at any time before or on the day of with your sinction (with your knowledgel. faith of their representation : (Kerr on Injunction tions to any person or persons, relative to such went.

12. State when you left them, and where you +0; Clavering v. Thomas, 6 Hare 304.) (HUGHES, meeting, and on what occasion,(á) and, if so, state

13. State whether any body of police were posted B.-No mutuality is shown. What remedy have were such instructions in writing or oral ?

in the sail park by your directions, or with your the plaintiffs for the increased rent?] They might que for use and occupation, and the

3. State what such instructions were, and when, sanction, in order to prevent or interfere with said and to whom they were given.

meeting; and, if so, when and where, and, if not measure of compensation would be the increased rent. We do not say there was a contract, but a operation of others, directly, or by the arenes of | so posted

4. State whether you, with or without the co. by your orders, state by whose orders they were representation, and on that we continue in pos. others, caused the body known as the Dublin 14. Did you seo any persons assembled in the session. The improvements mean substantial im. Metropolitan Police, or any members of that body', said park on the said Sunday, in order to attend provements, and on that they can take issue. If to prevent the holding of such meeting, or to in: the said meeting, or attending same? if so, when they require the nature and valuo specified, they terfere actively for that purpose.

and where in said park, and did you soe any of skould ask for a bill of particulars. Monahan, Q.C., for the defendant Brien.--It has 5 to the Commissioners of Pulice, by the defeu. and, if so, when and where?

5. Were vori aware of a letter written on Ang. -aid persons, or any persons, struck by the p lice, never been held that an equitable defence should dant, Thomas H. Burko, directing them to take 15. Did you see any police in the said park on set ont evidence in the shape of a bill in equity. the vecessary steps to prevent sail meeting being that Sanday? If so, describe what they were » H U sales, B.-The defence would not be open held? Did you direct the said letter, or did you doing, and when and where you saw them. unless a court of equity would give a perpetual sanction the writing of sail lettery [by any act Armstrong, Serit.-We object to the generality injunction. But here, would not the decree be merely for compensation ?!. We say a perpetual or acts, participate in the writing or sending of and ainbiguity of the term " sanction," in the fifth

interrogatories to the Marquis of Hartington and injunction would be granted ; but that question is 6. Is the following a true and correct copy of

t: T. H. Burke. It might mean an operation of one for a demurrer. The judge, at the trial, said letter?

the mind, a chance expression or an observation would direct the jury that the defence was not

Commissioners of Police. at a dinner-table. I presune it is intended :0 true if only a triflng improvement were proved. The advertisement, announcing the intention of cer- refer to some oficial act. (Butt, Q.C.-Certainly] Naish replied. tain persons to advocate the release of “Fenian Pri.

We also object to the words “ on what occasion,' HUGHES, B.-As the defences stand, the plain- soners," in Phenix-park, on to-worrow (Sunday), in the second interrogations. Also to the word tiffs have the advgntage of having the question having been brought under the notice of the Lord as to the sufficiency of the improvements open to

** sanction” in the eleventh, addressed to Colonel Lieutenant, his Excellency has forbidden such a meet. thein. If substantial improvements were specified, Public Works to issue the notice, of which you have a ing to be held, and has directed the Commissioners of Lake. The object is to involve him in the com

mission of a trespass. [Buit, Q.C.-Supposing that would not aid the plaintiffs on demurrer, and copy herewith. Will you please take the necessary that he ras present in charge of the police, and if they want assistance at the trial by having the steps to prevent the meeting being held in the park. did not interfere, that would be a sanction on his nature and value of the improvements set out,

Dublin Castle, 5th Aug. 1071.


part.] The inference might be fairly drawn that, that should be sought by asking for a bill of

Similar interrogations were addressed to the if he stood by and said nothing, his silence inplied particulars. As to its not appearing that the defendant, Burko, the fifth being altered mutatis consent; but what is the distinction between representation made amounted to a contract be. nuutanılis, and the following being added :-“Who tween the parties, or that the defendants' intention were the Commissioners of Police to whom the referred to o'Connell v. Borry, Ir. Rep.2 C. L.

directing” and “sanctioning”? [HI Dermott to act upon it was communicated to the plaintiffs, said letter, was addressed; what became of said 648]. From what now takes place nothing is to or that they knew of it or of the defendants acting letter, and in whose custody is it at present ?" be inferred as to wiat course we may take here. on it, or that the defendants paid or tendered the The interrogations to Colonel Lake were as fol. after, nor are we to be precluded from then objectincreased rent, these are all grounds, not for low3 :

ing to answer any of the interrogatories which we setting aside the defences, but for demurrer. Let 1. Did you on the 6th Aug. last, and previously are privileged to reject. the defence stand, the plaintiffs to have liberty to thereto, fill the office of Commissioner of the The interrogatories having been amended in memur, and to reply taking issue. Dablin Metropolitan Police ?

these particularsLeave to reply and demur. 2. Were you on the 6th Aug. last, and previously O'BRIEN, J.-The defendants will not be pre

thereto, a magistrate of the county of Dublin, and, cluded from insisting that, as to certain interWnesday, Dec. 12, 1871.

if so, have you acted as such magistrate, and on rogatories, they are not bound to answer. They

what occasion ? (Before O'BRIEN, J.)

may be administered as now settled, the defend.

3. Were you previously to the 6th Aug. last ants to have until Jan. 8 to answer. O'BRINE V. MARQUIS OF HARTINGTON AND aware of the intention to hold on that day a public

Jotion granted. meeting in the Phonis-park ? Practice-Interrogatories-G. 0. 1854, 132, 140,

4. Did you on that (lay, or at any time pre-
141, 145–Apielavit-Irregularity
viously, give or issue any order or directions to

INTERNATIONAL LAW. In an action for assault arising out of circum- any of tho Dnblin Metropolitan Police in referstances in connection with the prevention of a

ence to the said meeting. If so, were such orders wirblic meeting, interrogatories were allowed to

or directions in writing; and, if so, where and in THE ANGLO-AMERICAN ARBITRATION. be exhibited to the defendants, in order to ascer. whose custody is or are such writing or writings,

The Times correspondent writes from Philadel. tain whether they had interfered in relation to and are they in your power or procurement ? State phia, on Dec. 18:– The Anglo-American Cuinas the prerention oj'said meeting, or were accessory fully and particularly what and how mapy written Commission, at Washington on December 10, to saill assault.

orders you gave respecting the holding of the said decided three more cases which may be regarded of copy of an afilavit which does not contain the meeting, when and where delivered, and to whom.

as laying down rules for its future guidance, urat or the name oj the attorney who riled it, is tions given or issued by you to the Dublin Metro States, and in lis memorial stated that he was the

5. State with particularity any orders or dires. Anthony Barelay made a claim against the United irregular. When, at the time of making an afilavit, the deponent is in the Marshalsea, he politan Police body, its officers or men, for the British subject, resident for inany years in the may properly be described as resident at the prevention or dispersion, or in any way interfering United States, that for the greater part of the place where he had been living up to the period with the said meeting, and the names of the per- time he was in Her Majesty's service, being from of his arrest.

sons to whom such orders or directions were given 1942 to 1850 British Consul at New York ; thet in Butt, Q.C. (with him H. H. M'Dermott), moved

or issued, and what was contained in the said 1855 he took up his residence in Georgia and on behalf of the plaintiff, to exhibit interroga

orders or directions. ories to the defendants, the Marquis of Harting. ton, Thomas H. Burke, and Colonel Lake. The previously to the said meeting, or at the time of ture, and the third being held under lease ; that 6. Did you give any verbal orders or directions managed three plantations, two owned by himself


one devoted to cotton and the other to rice cul. action was brought for assault, laying damages at 10001. The motion was grounded on the joint I then it Ticis interpretatheles esperamelsout en su ineant to change bis nationality or gire a big

(a) The amended, lig expoging he never sfidavit of the plaintiff and his attorney. ing those which appear within brackets.

allegiance to the Queen; that he abstained from


[ocr errors]




all intermeddling, in the rebellion, conformed to this to be insufficient compensation, and that he regard to that particular class of houses ; but for i the Queen's Proclamation of neutrality, and in all received it under protest. He, therefore, claims a the future they would use every possible means

to respocts as faithfully conducted himself towards balance due to him by the United States of ascertain whether they could be brought under the the Ucited States as any loyal citizen could have 173,581 dols. for rent, &c. The United States de- law, and perhaps next year, when the head condone without taking actual part in the war; that murred on the ground that, as in Barclay's case, stable's next return came out, there would possibly ander the President's proclamation of blockade Crutchett was not a British subject within the be a diminution in the number of those houses.

in 1861 and the subsequent proclamation of July, purview of the treaty, and also submitted the At the same time the police had exercised great BE

1861, confiscating property which should be found point that no claimant can have a standing for discretion, and proceedel very cautiously in whatpassing from the insurrectionary into the loyal hearing by the Commission, to enforce a claim for ever they did. "He hoped they lwould use still States, it was at no time possible for him to with the vindication of which ample means are afforded greater vigilance, and that he would have a better draw his effects from the scene of the insurrection; through the municipal tribunals of the country, account to give in next year. that various acts of plunder and devastation which are always open to him without possibility Mr. Robertson Gladstone said he had a few were committed on all three of his plantations by of exclusion. The British counsel, in answer to words to say in reference to the propriety of the the United States' forces under General Sherman the demurrer, quote the decision in Barclay's case, magistrates doing duty on Sunday for the release in Dec. 1864 ; that under special orders of General and add that Mr. Crutchett has a lawful claim of those who were brought to the various gaols in Sherman, in Jan. 1865, two of his plantations were against the United States, and has exhausted different parts of the town in a state of intoxicaoccupied by United States forces and by emanci- every effort to obtain compensation, but has tion. So much was said on the subject that pated negroes; and that for these injuries to his utterly failed. Congress alone had power to grant he conceived they were ill- discharging their real and personal property, and for the occupation it, and for years they have entirely disregarded duty if they did not endeavour to devise some of the plantations, he claims damages to the his petitions.

means for lessening those serious grievances. He amount of 275,000 dols. and upwards. To Mr. In deciding this case the Commission say that in had come to this determination, individually, to Barclay's memorial the United States demurred, addition to the points already decided as to the attend there on Sunday during some part of the stating that the acts alleged are not a valid claim effect of domicile there is the further point raised day, for the purpose of releasing those who had under the Treaty ; that they are not such acts as that the claimant had his remedy under the muni. come under the denomination of drunkards, but the United States are responsible for; and that cipal laws and authorities of the United States. who, of course, had not been guilty of assault or the claimant in consequence of his domicile is not the court referred to in the argument as the one any other breach of the law. But he thought entitled to claim the position of a British subject to which the claimant had the right to apply is that act would be of little importance if it were under the treaty, the facts stated making the the Court of Claims, but by Act of July 4, 1864, not followed by the publication of the names and strongest case imaginable of permanent absolute it was provided that the jurisdiction of the Court addresses of those persons who were so appredomicile. The demurrer added that under the cir- of Claims shall not extend to or include any hended. Therefore, he should endeavour, for him. cumstances it cannot be said the claimant was claims against the United States growing out of self, to make out, or have made out, a list of desirous of leaving the territory, and was pre- the destruction or appropriation of or damage to names of the various parties who offended the law, vented from doing so by any act of the United property by the army or navy engaged in the sup- and who contributed to the heavy taxation to States. The British counsel, in answer to the de pression of the rebellion from the commencement which the ratepayers were liable, with a view to murrer, maintained that the wanton and malicious to the close thereof. The demurrer, therefore, is ascertain ultimately whether they could not, by destruction of the property of such a person is not disallowed, and, as in the case of Mr. Barclay, the some bold determination, lessen the evil of which a necessary act of war, nor justified by the law of United States are allowed to take issue upon the they complained. He knew very well there would nations. Independently of what may be the facts alleged in the memorial.

be, at an important time, little underground proper mode of redress under the law of nations The third case decided was that of William spirits cropping up here and there to say, "How for such acts, they are condemned by the modern Dunn, against the United States, for personal pro- would you do if it were the son of the mayor ?” law of nations, and if this be so, then it seems un perty destroyed by the United States' army. This He would deal with him the very same--the very deniable that injuries so inflicted would be the claim was submitted on the memorial and claim. first. Either they were dealing with a grievous proper subject of compensation in the case of a ant's proofs, and it was ordered that the claims evil or not; either they were sincere and anxious to Deatral. Admitting that the claimant, by his re- be disallowed. The Commission then adjourned put down drunkenness or they were not. He prosidence in the United States, was a citizen thereof until Jan. 24. The decisions as to domicile cover fessed to be sincere in dealing with it, and would and owed in the sense of international law a a large number of claims,

test his sincerity in doing what he proposed. He temporary allegiance thereto, and as such had

would do it at all risks, and meant to pursue the assumed many obligations, it by no means follows

course, whether the magistrates might follow or that he did not continue to be a British subject.


not. He would test it, and find out how it It is perfectly well settled that a man may owe a

worked. No doubt there were certain consideratemporary allegiance to one Sovereign and a per


tions. For instance, supposing a drunkard gave manert allegiance to another, and where the two


the name and address of a respectable person, obligations conflict the former gives way to the latter.

PLACE-CARTRIDGES.—23 & 24 Vict. c. 139, s. 6, representing himself to be known to such person;

enacts that certain regulations shall be observed the onus would lie with him, he would have to say the question of jurisdiction is first to be decided, ammunition," one of which is, that no ammuIn deciding upon the demarrer, the Commission with regard to the manufacture and keeping of account for having made use of the name and

a and this depends upon whether the claimant is, nition containing 5lb. of gunpowder shall be kept sion. With that he (Mr. Gladstone) had nothing within the meaning of the treaty, a British subject. in any place not licensed for that purpose

to do, but he proposed to make the attempt. If That he is so in fact they say there is no doubt, but An information preferred against the appellant, a

it answered it would be promotive of great good ; it is contended that his United States domicile pre- gunmaker, who bought and kept ready-made if it failed it could be the cause of no evil. He Fents his being included among those so regarded cartridges' to sell by retail, but did not manufac- thought they had all a perfect right to individual under the treaty. The Commission argue this ture them, alleged that he did unlawfully keep action in this matter, and it rested with them point at length, and declare that they can see no

certain ammunition (to wit) 50,400 cartridges, what they would do. That was the course which Government to put the limited meaning upon the (to wit) Solb. of gunpowder, in a certain place of gentlemen who might now and then break

the to suppose, it was intended by either containing 51b. weight and upwards of gunpowder his mind proposed to him after a great deal of

consideration, and with regard to any description words contended for in the argument in support without a licence of the demurrer, so as to exclude from the Com. under the above section and sect. 7 (penalty all he had to say was that they had no cause for

law and make themselves liable to be punished, mission's jurisdiction a British subject who has clause), fined and adjudged to forfeit the ammu. nerer renounced his original allegiance, or been nition in excess of the quantity which might be complaint. If people had money, they could send naturalised in any other country. The fact of the lawfully kept. On a case stated : Held, that sect.

for all the good things of the world for breakfast claimant having his domicile in one of the Con; 6 of 23 & 21 Vict. c. 139, applies only to manufac and so forth; if they were not possessed of means, federate States will, of course, have a material turers of explosive compositions keeping the same, they could not. If a man was bronght up before bearing

on the point, also raised in the demurrer, and that, therefore, the conviction under it of the the magistrates for using light weights his name a3 to the liability of the claimant's property to appellant, who was not a manufacturer of the and address were published to the whole civilised seizure and destruction by the United States' Ariny. It is difficult to lay down a general rule ammunition he kept, was wrong: (Webley v. world, and why drunkards, who caused us so

much expense, should be an exception to that applicable in all cases to the rights of an invading Wooley, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 629. Q. B.)

rule, he could not conceive. Therefore he had army, nor in this particular case is that neceseary.

decided in his mind to make the experiment next

DIS. The statements contained in the memorial are, för LIVERPOOL DRUNKENNESS AND

month, and he considered it his duty in deciding the purpose of this argument, assumed to be true,


upon that course to inform the Bench what he was and one of the statements is that part of the A QUARTERLY meeting of borough magistrates going to do. claimant's property was taken possession of by was held at the police court, Dale-street. Mr. Mr. Stitt said with regard to Mr. Clint's obserthe Federal Army, without any military necessity | Raffles, stipendiary magistrate, presided, and vations upon the ninety-tive disorderly houses, he or provocation, and plundered, and that part was the other magistrates present were Messrs. only expressed the feeling of that Bench and a wantonly destroyed. Supposing this to be true Livingston, Clint, Robertson Gladstone, Castel. large portion of the community when he (Mr. the Commission are not prepared to say whether lain, Stitt, Whitty, and Holder.

Stitt) said he was gratified to find that certain some liability might not be established against the Mr. Clint, chairman of the Watch Committee, steps were about to be taken to insure more United States. The demurrer, therefore, is dis said he should like to say a few words for the vigilance over these houses. The difficnlty of allowed, but the United States' Government will satisfaction of the Bench and the public with getting a conviction in these cases was known to be at liberty, if they think fit, to take issue upon respect to the ninety-five disorderly houses. Up any magistrate who sat on the bench; at the same the facts alleged in the memorial.

to the present time it had been assumed that, time, where the facts that came under the obserThe second case decided was that of James although they were the resort of thieves and vation of the police from night to night were such Crutchett against the United States, who in his prostitutes, convictions could not be obtained as to show that those people were acting in violamemorial alleges that he is a British subject ; that against the keepers. Doubt had been thrown upon tion of the law, the duty of the police was to bring he has resided in Washington in the United States that, and some odium upon the police. The police those cases to the Bench, and throw the responsifor 25 years; that in 1856 he became largely en- did their best, but their knowledge of those ninety- bility of the conviction upon the magistrates. He gaged in manufacturing, in a building known as the five houses had not been such as to get a convic- feared that had not been done in the past to any

dlount Vernon Factory,” owned, with its furni- tion against them, or if a conviction were obtained thing like the extent it might have been. It was ture, &c., by him, and used for the manufacture of before the magistrates, possibly that conviction somewhat disheartening to see the frequency with articles of peculiarly American character, interest, could be quashed upon appeal. So much had which cases of this description were quashed and value, from timber previously purchased by been said about it since the head constable's before the Superior Court. (Hear, hear, from him from the Mount Vernon estate, and intended return was issued, that he had given very definite Mr. Clint.) At the same time, when the evidence as memorials of George Washington. Shortly instructions now to certain discreet and intelligent presented by the police to the inforior court was after the breaking out of the war this factory was officers with regard to these ninety-five houses. sufficiently conclusive he would convict, and throw taken possession of by the United States for He had a list of these ninety-five houses, and also the responsibility of quashing that conviction military purposes, and possession retained many a copy of the instructions, which, of course, he upon the superior court. He felt gratified that years. The claimant admits payment to him by wonld not divulge. They were all down-names Major Greig had at last got ninety.fivo houses the Coited States for this use of 3016 dols., and and addresses; and he just wished to say, in justi- before him. These houses placed the Bench year a further sum of 1200 dols. for repairs, but alleges 'fication of the police, they had done their best with I after year in an invidious and anomalous position.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]



« EelmineJätka »