Page images


[ocr errors]

the claimant had not satisfied them affirmatively that he was the missing Roger TICH BORNE, and they most adroitly took the first division of the case on which a direct issue arose to make a statement, which, though founded upon one issue of fact, was equivalent to a verdict for the defendant upon the whole case.

It is just possible that the public do not even now thoroughly understand the consummate generalship of Mr. Serjeant BALLANTINE at the close of the case. A more impetuous leader, or one less of a veteran, than the learned serjeant, might reasonably have accepted the intimation of the jury as to the tattoo marks, and withdrawn from further discussion, more particularly when the direct dictation of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL as to the duties of the claimant's counsel is considered. Had that dictation carried the slightest weight, or produced the smallest effect upon the mind of Mr. Serjeant BALLANTINE he would presumably have seized the earliest opportunity of abandoning a cause which Sir Jouy COLERIDGE had declared that it was dishonest in counsel to sustain. But Mr. Serjeant BALLANTINE no doubt forgot the strictures of his opponent as readily as he has forgiven the language in which they were couched, and held steadily on his

Had the conclusion of the jury rested solely on the tattoo marks, there was still a field on which the cause of his client might be fought; and even when the uncertainty became certainty, and an ambiguous statement assumed a form threatening an adverse verdict on the whole case, Mr. Serjeant BALLANTINE elected to be nonsuited. No general ever withdrew his forces after a defeat in more admirable order.

We have no desire at this juncture to join the chorus of the press which reiterates the ATTORNEY-GENERAL's denunciation of the claimant. He is within the grasp of the criminal law, and if a conviction be obtained, he will expiate terribly the offences against society which the public hastens to lay to his charge. And if the imposture be such as it is painted, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL must receive the credit of exposing it in a manner in which probably no imposture has ever been exposed before in a court of law. In the course of the case Sir John COLERIDGE lost and regained a reputation. Justly, or unjustly, his cross-examination of the claimant was regarded as a failure; but when the light of his grand speech was reflected upon it, there stood out plain and clear evidence of the master's grasp of every detail. Like a skilful novelist he he'd under his hand every incident of the plot, and it would really seem as if no single thread had escaped from the skein which he held with such consummate skill.

But there is still to be considered the important question whether by bringing the point of the tattooing more prominently forward in the cross-examination, and declaring the fact that he had overwhelming evidence to show that the real Roger was tattooed, he might not have saved the country the spectacle of a prodigious elaboration of a trial really uninteresting save in the possible issue. We are not disposed to say that it would have been altogether wise thus to attempt to break down the plaintiff's case, and in the result we think the public and the Profession are more thoroughly satisfied than they would have been had not the whole fabric of the alleged concocted case been laid bare.

The forum is now changed. At the Old Bailey, with the claimant in the dock and shorn of all romance, this great case will still employ the lawyers, no longer at the expense of the estate, but at the cost of the nation. The issue of this trial is regarded by the

press as a foregone conclusion. But it must be remembered that the jury in the civil cause did not return a verdict, and the prisoner is therefore entitled to be considered innocent.

expressed the utmost surprise. We are inclined to agree with Mr. DENMAN that the phraseology is sufficiently concise, and to the point. It must be remembered that Sir RoundELL PALMER sought to elicit an expression of opinion from Parliament in favour of a more liberal scheme of education for the legal Profession. He was perfectly willing to take the sense of Parliament as to the best means of carrying out such a scheme, and without defining in precise terms what the mode of teaching should be, he leaves it open to the Legislature to fashion a scheme in accordance with the main principle. Therefore, on the face of the resolutions we conceive that Parliament might well have come to a conclusion without involving itself in any difficulty by reason of the alleged abstract nature of the resolutions.

But an important preliminary question was raised in the course of the debate, namely, whether Parliament ought to interfere at all in the matter of legal education. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, • The resolutions proposed by my learned friend take it for granted, or, at all events assert, that it is the duty of the State to unciertake the teaching of the law. Now that is a proposition to which I, for one, am not prepared to assent.” And he adds, “I am unable to see why, in the profession of the law alone, the State should undertake a duty which in ever other liberal profession is properly discharged by independent authorities.” The answer to this is plain. The State as represented by the Legislature is directly interested in the proper administration of the laws which are enacted under its authority. It is interested to such an extent that it has already taken in hand as a State matter the digest of the law, unhappily for the present abandoned. But it adopts no such measures with regard to medicine, divinity, or civil engineering, the three professions specifically named by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL. The practice of medicine is a science which cannot be affected in its details by legislation, but is framed and regulated by the researches of private individuals. Divinity is untrammelled save in the national church where the rubric is subject to legislative supervision; and civil engineering is a matter left entirely in the hands of private persons whose interest it is to raise it to a condition of the highest scientific excellence. Law is a different subject altogether. Its due administration affects the welfare, the happiness and the lives of men and women. If its professors are not properly trained to the application of its doctrines instilled into them by scientific teaching, the chances are that the Bench bạcomes incapable in part, and that judicial offices of a mincr nature at home and abroad will be filled by persons with no higher qualification than the possession of ordinary common sense. If all appointments in the gift of the Crown were bestowed according to merit, if no man was made a Judge or a recorder or a stipendiary magistrate unless his professional standing and reputation proclaimed his fitness, there would be a solid argument in favour of retaining existing institutions; because, as the SoliCITOR-GENERAL contends, a barrister's education does not stop with the call, but rather begins with his practice, and is promoted every day that he takes part in the active exercise of his profession. The idle and the incompetent never can obtain a position entitling them to promotion; but, unfortunately, there are solicitors who sink every consideration in order to forward a family connection, whilst the State sets a miserable example by selecting men for judicial appointments on every conceivable ground save the true ground of professional reputation and personal merit. What a deplorable condition of things it is when we find the head of the law justifying one of these appointments by saying that the person selected had been an ill-used man! No more cutting commentary on our legal system, no more effective satire on the argument, that standing in the Profession is the one thing necessary to qualify the barrister, could be put forward by any person, legal or lay.

It is, therefore, perfectly plain that we must have an improved system of legal instruction. Mr. OSBORNE MORGAN obtained the most refreshing slumber of his life in a lecture-room, but by no means on that account should lectures be condemned. We condemn them on other grounds; and the one truly sensible remark made by Mr. LOCKE was that "it would be utterly impossible for any man, even with the assistance of lectures, to hope to gain any very great success at the Bar unless he went into a pleader's or conveyancer's chambers.” But, then, Mr. Hardy's objection to the system pursued in a pleader's chambers is well founded. The pupils read the Times and amuse themselves; they are under no control; they are not compelled to do anything; and if their tutor has much practice he has little or no time to instruct them. Consequently we require some guarantee that any plan of study adopted shall not be a sham, and the only mode of ensuring this is by making examination compulsory: Mr. LOCKE quotes Dr. LUSHINGTON and Lord BROUGHAM in opposition to compulsory examination, and says that Cicero did not pass an examination before being adınitted to plead. All this is very well, but it is evading the true issue. Examination is made compulsory by the Inns of Court themselves, and whether Mr. LOCKE's chimney sweeps eventually pass a similar ordeal is of small moment. The examination being established, how shall we educate the students for it, and at the same time ensure their qualification for practice ? The Inner Temple Tutors are said to have full classes, and this is one good result of the establishment of compulsory cxamination.



RESOLUTIONS. Tie debate of Friday week was remarkable for nothing save the singular clearness and force with which the mover of the resolntions brought them before the House, and the singular emptiness of the House itself. In the middle of a speech by Mr. LOCKE, which we shall speak of hereafter, and which would have accounted for any catastrophe which might have happened, it was moved that the House be counted, although some hundred lawyers hold seats in Parliament. So much for the interest excited by the

The result is not surprising: the resolutions, not the scheme of a higher education for lawyers, were rejected by a majority of thirteen members in a House of 219-rejected because they are "abstract.” It is desirable, in considering the debate, that we should have the nature of the resolutions clearly before us. They in thus :

1. That it is desirable that a General School of Law should be estab. lished in the metropolis, by public authority, for the instruction of students intending to practise in any branch of the legal profession, and of all other subjects of Her Majesty who may desire to resort thereto. 2. That it is desirable, in the establishment of such school, to provide for examinations to be held by examiners impartially chosen, and to require certificates of the passing of such examinntions as may respectively be deemed proper for the several branches of the legal profession, as neces. sary qualifications (after a time to be limited) for admission to practise in those branches respectively.

Mr. DENMAX considered that the ragueness of these resolutions constituted a recommendation, at which Mr. GATIORNE HARDY

[ocr errors]

Whether the examination be beneficial or not in itself, it must be of service if it compels students to read and to know something of their Profession. But to this should be added compulsory attendance in barristers'chambers. Articled clerks, in addition, to passing an examination are obliged, by the very nature of their position, to be in an office for a long period, and to pay therefor a considerable sum of money. Why should the Bar-student be relieved from a like obligation? It is, indeed, a cruelty to intending barristers to permit them to escape the influence of chamber practice. The very essence of their training is left out, and they are allowed to go to the Bar raw and unpolished. Within our personal knowledge, honour men at the examinations, three years after their call, have been ignorant of even the form of a plea, and the manner of indorsing papers. This should not be possible. In no other profession could such a state of things exist. To conclude, we retain our opinion, deliberately formed, that the law ought to possess a school for giving to law students scientific instruction, and to this we add that practical work, analogous to attendance at the hospitals in medicine, should be made compulsory upon students. It is not enough that success cannot be attained without experience of both kinds of instruction.

Men are dazzled by the reputations of advocates who know no law. But because man out of four thousand possesses a genius for cross-examination, and another is endowed like SCARLET with a snake-like fascination over juries, can that justify ordinary Mr. Smith, who has powers perhaps below the level of his compeers, in neglecting the common and obvious means of qualifying himself to earn his bread and butter? And should he be allowed by the Benchers to enter on a career without even the meanest weapons of his trade ? Let all students who read this be well advised. Let them do what they feel to be necessary to their own success, not merely what the Inns of Court prescribe. If they do this it will matter little whether Parliament sanctions a school of law or not.

obtain in the chambers of a barrister or solicitor, and from which such great advantages result.

If all those interested in the proposals of the association will avail themselves of every opportunity which may present itself, of impress. ing upon individual members of Parliament, and upon the public, the opinion of the majority of the legal Profession, it will be impossible for the opponents of the scheme to carry any counter measure which shall have the effect of excluding solicitors from those advantages in the way of legal education, to which they are fairly entitled, and it will be equally impossible for any Government to treat the subject with indifference.

Notwithstanding the length of this letter I trust that, having regard to the importance of the subject, you will not object to insert it. -I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

JOHN V. LONGBORNE. One of the Honorary Secretaries to the Legal Education Association.

Northumberland and Berwick-on-Tweed, 77; Cumberland, 72; Westmoreland, 17; Durham, 91; Yorkshire, 510; Lincolnshire, 126 ; Notting. hamshire, 84 ; Derbyshire, 53 ; Shropshire, 92; Leicestershire and Rutland, 67; Worcestershire, 81 ; Herefordshire and Monmouthshire, 66 ; Glouces. tershire, 199 : Oxfordshire, 50 ; Northamptonshire, 51; Buckinghamshire, 37; Bedfordshire, 30; Huntingdonshire, 9; Cambridgeshire, 41; Norfolk, 88; Suffolk, 98; Essex, 75; Hertfordshire, 36; Middlesex, 1423; Kent, 140 ; Surrey, 66 ; Sussex, 96; Berkshire, 52; Hampshire, 117; Wiltshire, 83; Somersetshire, 143; Dorsetshire, 55; Devonshire, 181; Cornwall, 70; North Wales, 96; South Wales, 170. Total, 4748.

[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

MR. LONGBOURNE, the Hon. Secretary of the Legal Education Association sends us the following, which may suitably follow the foregoing remarks :

SIR, -At the foot of this letter I have furnished a statement showing the number of solicitors practising in the several counties (except Lancashire, Cheshire, Staffordshire, and Warwickshire) of England, and in North and South Wales, who signed the petition to the House of Commons in support of the resolutions moved by Sir Roundell Palmer on the lot inst. in favour of the establishment of a central school of law.

It is believed that not less than 1000 solicitors practisizg in the four counties above mentioned signed similar petitions, but tho means are not at hand to enable me to furnish the exact number of the signatures obtained in those counties.

The number of solicitors in England and Wales is about 10,000, of whom nearly 6000 signed the petitions.

This result was, so far as solicitors in the country are concerned, obtained by means of circulars, than which no more unsatisfactory mode of canvassing exists, as it does not afford those interested in promoting a movement any opportunity of removing objections which naturally occur to the minds of those averse to change when any new scheme is submitted to them.

A circular, accompanied by a pamphlet cont ing the speeches delivered at the annual meeting of the association in the Middle Temple Hall in November last, was sent to a leading solicitor in every town, who was asked, in the event of the objects of the association meeting with his approval, to sign the petition in support of Sir Roundell Palmer's resolutions, and to obtain to it the signatures of his neighbours.

In those cases in which, from any cause, the solicitor applied to was un. able or unwilling to render assistance, the district remained uncanvassed.

Notwithstanding these difficulties, three-fifths of the entire body of solici. tors expressed in writing their approval of the scheme ; it is, therefore, not an extravagant assertion to say that, had a more satisfactory mode of ob. taining signatures been possible, an expression of opinion amounting practically to unanimity, would have resulted from it.

Bearing these facts in mind, it is disappointing to find how little allusion was made in the course of the debate in the House of Commons on Friday last, to the views of solicitors on the subject, and that so far as reference was made to their views by members of their branch of the profession who took part in the debate, the House was naturally led to infer that solici. tors were either averse to, or indifferent to, the proposals of the Legal Education Association.

It now rests with solicitors to impress, by every means in their power, upon Parliament and the public, how great an interest they take in the establishment of a school of law which shall fulfil the following conditions:

(1.) That it shall be under the control of a governing body in which they shall have their fair share of representation.

(2.) That the school shall be open to all who care to resort to it, without distinction or qualification.

(3.) That examinations to be conducted under the superintendence of the governing body of the school, shall be substituted for those which now exist.

(4.) That the students who present themselves for examination shall not be required to declare which branch of the Profession it is they intend to join.

The objection which has been urged, that solicitors are desirous of bringing about a fusion of the two branches of the Profession is without foundation; it is difficult to comprehend what is meant by the term “fusion” as applied to the question, but if the use of it is intended to convey an impression that solicitors wish to introduce into this country the system adopted in America, I can safely assert from the knowledge I possess of their views, that in the opinion of the majority the adoption of such a system would be impracticable.

It is equally erroneous to suppose, as judging from the speeches delivered in the House of Commons, is the case with some members of Parliament, that it is proposed to dispense with the practical training which students


LAW SOCIETY. We have received the following communication on a subject of interest at the moment, and we therefore give it prominence. Our correspondent writes :

“The education of members of the legal profession has been so recently the subject of discussion in the House of Commons, that this seems to be the proper time to call attention to the manner in which the examinations are conducted at the Incorporated Law Society.

“I notice in the debate in the House that Mr. W. H. GREGORT, whose opinion is entitled to great weight, speaks of these examinations as giving general satisfaction among the members of the Profession. I venture, however, to doubt the existence of this satisfaction, except among those solicitors and articled clerks, who boast that six months' reading with a coach, after four years' idleness, is sufficient to obtain a pass at the Final.

" If the object of these examinations is, not to test the learning of students, but to promote cramming; if the success of these examinations is to be estimated by the fact that 90 per cent., or more, of the candidates obtain certificates; if, in short, it is desirable that the education of law students should be placed upon a superficial, rather than a solid basis, then I agree with Mr. GREGORY, that the Law Institution is performing its work thoroughly and well.

“I have no doubt that many of your readers consider that these examinations are conducted upon a model basis; but, if so, upon what assumption can the small percentage of failures be accounted for? Certainly not because the candidates are more efficient than those offering themselves for examination at the other great examining institutions.

“The examiners must be well aware, from the advertisements in your columns, and from the many volumes now pablished containing answers to questions set at previous examinations, of the inordinate extent to which cramming is practised. And is not this very much the fault of those with whom the choice of examiners rests? It is only to be expected that solicitors in large practice, many of them advanced beyond middle age, should grow rusty in their law, while long experience has made them well acquainted with practice. This alone, I believe, explains the frequent repetition of the same questions upon subjects, wide enough of themselves if properly treated, and tends to lower the examinations to points of mere detail or time, instead of making them, as they should be, tests of legal knowledge.

. But how is this to be prevented ? I would suggest that the Incorporated Law Society should change the staff of examiners, and for each subject of examination associate with a solicitor a barrister of some standing and position. In this way the ex aminations might be speedily purged of the evils which now beset them, and the failures would then bear a juster proportion to the entries. There can be no good reason why at the law examinations at London University not much more than fifty per cent. of those who enter obtain pass certificates, while at the Incorporated Law Society the proportion rises to ninety per cent. There must be something radically wrong at one of these institutions, and I incline to think the fault rests with the latter.

“There is one other matter to which I should like to call the attention of your readers. It appears to be a great and serious defect that at the Final Examination the successful candidates are not classified, and, still more, that there is no separate examination in honours for those who desire to distinguish themselves. Under the present arrangement, what opportunity has a student of displaying the result of extensive reading when many of the questions are such as a clerk, who has been six months in a lawyer's office, can answer without difficulty ?

“If solicitors will only move in this matter and induce the Incorporated Law Society to take action, I am confident that much will be done towards improving the status of the members of the lower branch of the Profession."

[ocr errors]

T de


HAMILTON v. HECTOR. Tile decision of the Master of the Rolls in Hamilton v. Hector will render the framing of a set of provisions commonly inserted in separation deeds more difficult even than it has been. The case, as it originally came before the Rolls, and afterwards before the Lord Chancellor on appeal motion last July, will be found reported in 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 146, and L. Rep. 6 Ch. 701, but the facts on which the chief point at issue turned are shortly these : In Oct. 1870, Mírs. Hector commenced proceedings both in the Dirorce Court and Court of Chancery against her husband, but they were abandoned on the parties agreeing to a separation. There were four children of the marriage; and the separation deed, which had been executed in pursuance of this agreement, contained, amongst other provisions respecting those children, one that the holidays of the two elder should be passed by them at such places and in such manner as the trustees of the deed should from time to time direct. Those two children were nine and cleven years of age. Some disputes followed respecting those holidays, which ended in the trustees sending notice to Mr. Hector that the first four weeks of the ensuing Midsummer holidays should be passed by the children with their mother. Subsequently the mother, trustees, and four children filed a bill ngainst Mr. Hector praying, amongst. other things, that he might be restrained from preventing the two elder children from passing the first month of the ensuing Midsummer with their mother. The plaintiff's moved accordingly; but the Master of the Rolls, conceiving that the agreement was against the policy of the law, made no order. On appeal, however, the Lord Chancellor, while holding that a father by agreement cannot deprive himself of the control of his children, yet held that this agreement as to where the children should pass the holidays was reasonable, and would be enforced by the court. On the hearing last Monday, the Master of the Rolls, after considering all the circumstances under which the separation deed had been entered into, made a decree restraining Mr. IIector from preventing the children passing the holidays where the trustees should direct. This decision is very important. Heretofore clauses in separation deeds which limit the control of the father over children seven years old, have been relied upon simply by reason of the moral force they possess between the contracting parties. So far as their legal strength went they were simply considered useless. After Hamilton v. Hector, however, this simplicity of construction is at an end; and the reasonableness of all the provisions of sets of clauses, often very elaborate, must be most carefully weighed. Further decisions will be necessary before we can say what stipulations may be so reasonable as not only to possess a moral but also a legal sanction.

which is appropriate to express an option and reasonable election of the plaintiff to sue in the Superior Court as contrasted with the County Court."

In Craven v. Smith (L. Rep. 4 Ex. 146; 20 L. T. Rep. N.S. 400). decided in the same year, and which was also an action of slander, the court expressed an opinion that sect. 5 of the County Court Act 1867 applied to all actions. Sampson v. Mackay (L. Rep. 4 Q. B. 643; 20 L. T. Rep. N. S. 807), was likewise an action of slander, in which it was held, “that the court in reviewing the refusal of the Judge to give the plaintiff his costs in an action in which less than the statutable limit has been recovered, will take into consideration all the circumstances of the case, and the fact that the action could not be brought in the County Court is merely an element in determining the exercise of their discretion. Chief Justice Cockburn said " sect. 5 is general in its terms, and applies not only to those actions which can be brought in the County Courts, but to all actions of tort, including slander.” And Hannen, J., added, “ It appears to me that sect. 5" of 30 & 31 Vict. c. 142, “ is general in its application, and includes actions of slander."

The foregoing cases are authorities for the proposition that the section in question includes ejectment, but without then it may be fairly argued that the words of the section present no ambiguity which can justify their being understood to exclude ejectment. The words “ founded on tort” would seem to be sufficiently general to cover an action differing only in name and in the remedy sought from trespass, and which, in the language of Holt, J., is a “mixed action real in respect of the lands, and personal in respect of the damages and costs.” (Vin. Abr. Ejectment, A. 3.)


[ocr errors]



1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 1442) s. 5. ALTHOUGH it has been inferentially decided that ejectment falls within the category of actions controlled by sect. 5 of 30 & 31 Vict. c. 142, still, in the absence of any decision bearing precisely upon the point, the ruling of Mr. Justice Grove at Nisi Prius in a recent case (Cowell and others v. Cook) reported in another column, in which a contrary opinion was expressed by his Lordship, would seem to lay down that in actions of ejectment where the value of the land in dispute is such as to give a County Court jurisdiction, the plaintiff' notwithstanding has the option of proceeding in a Superior Court without incurring the risk of losing his costs by so doing, as in all other actions. The words of sect. 5 of the 30 & 31 Vict. c. 142, are If, in any action commenced in any of the Superior Courts the plaintiff shall recover a sum not exceeding £20, if the action is founded on contract, or £10 if founded on tort, whether by verdict, judgment by default, or on demurrer or otherwise, he shall not be entitled to any costs of suit unless the Judge certify on the record that there was sufficient reason for bringing such action in such Superior Court, or unless the court or Judge at chambers shall by rule or order allow such costs." And the point ruled by Mr. Justice Groves in Cowell v. Cook was, that ejectment not being comprised in the words “actions founded on contract or on tort," the section had no application.

The first of a series of cases illustrating the operation of the section is Gray v. I'est (L. Rep. 4 Q. B. 175; 20 L. T. Rep. N. S. 221). This was an action of slander, where the plaintiff had recovered a less sum than £10 as damages, and it was contended that sect. 5 of the Consolidated County Court Act could not have been intended to apply to actions in which the County Courts had no jurisdiction, Hayes, J., in delivering the judgment of the court said, with reference to the 5th section : “ The words relating to the certificate of the Judge at the trial are taken from those of the cnactment previously in force on this point, which was contained in sect. 12 of 13 & 14 Vict. c. 61; and it is clear that they were there intended to apply to those cases only in which the County Court had jurisdiction, but in which, nevertheless, it was reasonable that the plaintiff should sue in the Superior Court. This is in effect the natural import of such a form of certificate,

The Law of Gas and Water Supply. By W. H. MICHAEL and

Smress Will, of the Middle Temple, Barristers-at-Law. London:

Butterworths. Is their preface, the authors of this work pay the Legislature a very bad compliment, and we are rather surprised that Mr. Bruce accepted its dedication. We are told, “The Gas and Water Works Facilities Act 1870," “ The Gasworks Clauses Act 1871,” and the

Metropolis Water Act 1871,” have still further complicated the relations, already intricate, existing between the public as consumers and companies or local authorities as undertakers for private and public lighting and water supply.” But whilst this circumstance reflects upon our system of law-making, it thoroughly justifies the publication of the present work.

Mr. Michael has devoted his attention to water, and Mr. Will has treated of gas, the work being divided into two parts. The bulk of it takes the form made fashionable by Shelford, but to which we have frequently stated our objections, that, namely, of printing the statutes and appending notes of cases to the sections. Our authors eridently appreciate the difficulty presented to the reader by such an arrangement, as they have written introductory treatises, which lucidly explain the general aspect of the law construed by the light of the statutes. Both Mr. Michael and Mr. Will open with a necessary, warning to companies haring no Parliamentary powers that, although the Court of Chancery will not grant an injunction to restrain them from opening the public highways, they are nevertheless liable at common law; and Mr. Michael points out that they run a risk, which he rightly describes as of “great moment." A company, he says, which has expended large sums of money in erecting works and laying mains, and which for many years has supplied a district as a joint-stock company, is always exposed to the possibility of a new company being started either by consumers in the toirn or persons ever on the look out for a profitable adventure, and obtaining over their heads Parliamentary powers. And it has happened that subsequent endeavours on the part of the original company to place themselves under Parliamentary powers have been altogether unsuccessful. Little doubt exists, therefore, that any gas or water company resting contented without having Parliamentary powers must be considered as pursuing a most dangerous policy. As to the steps to be taken to place matters on a proper basis, we refer those interested to the work of Messrs. Michael and Will, where all the rights and liabilities of companies under the Acts are well and fully set forth. We cannot profess to have examined the notes to the Acts very attentively, nor, of course, are we able to state that no case has been omitted, but Mr. Will at least has a reputation as a conscientious and painstaking compiler, and we feel thoroughly justified in recommending the volume, printed in Messrs. Butterworth's best style, to the attention of the companies, the public, and the Profession.


City, THURSDAY, MARCI 7. Tue general out-look, both political and commercial, so far as carv be seen, has been favorable to the development of an upward tendency in the value of public securities since we last wrote, and although there has been no activity in the stock markets, a more


[ocr errors]


[ocr errors]

general disposition to select stocks with a promising future as regards price has been manifested.

A favourable influence has been exercised by the recent large payment in the form of drafts by France to Germany on account of the war indemnity debt, as it affords some proof that the resources of the French Government are larger than had been expected, and there is, therefore, less probability of the immediate appeal to European money markets for a new loan, which has for some time past been looked upon as inevitable under the circumstances. What effect as regards displacement of bullion the maturity of these drafts may have, remains to be seen, but at present there is nothing in the air to indicate that in the best-informed quarters any disturbance from this cause is at present to be looked for. The advices from the Continent still continue to show that the supply of money is sufficient for all purposes at easy rates, while from the United States the gold premium we learn is supported by the anticipation of considerable specie remittances to this side next month, a movement which is foreshadowed by the rate of exchange standing at 1098 in London, The introduction of new undertakings requiring working capital proceeds upon a good scale with occasional intervals, and with apparently a fair degree of success.

The British Funds have moved steadily upwards until the fall of } to. day and are better for the week, which may be taken as a good indication of the increasing number of adherents to the opinion that an amicable diplomatic solution of our differences with the United States will follow the receipt of Mr. Fish's reply to Lord Granville.

The feature in the American market has again been the rise in Erie Railway Shares, the advance of 4 referred to last Thursday having been followed by a further rise of. The latest advices show that this Erie Ring scandal, which has already done so much to prejudice American bonds generally in the eyes of European investors, is arousing the New York Times, which, we fear rather late, is beginning to find out that a borrow. ing country should do all in its power to strenthen its credit abroad instead of weakening it.

The encouraging traffic receipts of British railways continue to exercise a favourable influence upon prices, and, with a slight interruption yesterday afternoon, when some realisations took place, the tendency has been upwards since Monday morning. The principa! movements are a rise of 3 in Great Northern A Stock; of 21 in Lancashire and Yorkshire; of 1} in Caledonian, Great Northern Ordinary, and London and Brighton; and of 1 in Metropolitan.

The Foreign Market has been firm with an exception or two, and a further general advance in prices has occurred. Paraguay stock at a rise of 3; has taken the lead on the report that a protectorate treaty for period of ten years has been entered into with Brazil. Although no official confirmation has yet been received, it is generally credited, and, when confirmed, is expected to put the credit of Paraguay on a par with that of Brazil in European money markets. Italian stock is 2 better on the assurance from Germany that she will not be alone should she be attacked by France. Turkish stocks have been in good demand and are better, ranging between and 2 per cent. Peruvian and Egyptian are about 1 better; and the French Morgan Loan ).

In miscellaneous shares the only noteworthy change is a rise of Four per Cent. in Phosphato sewage.

The sum of £63,000 in bullion has been withdrawn from the Bank this day, and there has been a good demand. In the open market there is a fair demand for money at about 23 as a minimum.

A general court of the proprietors of the Bank of England is called for the 14th inet., “ to consider of a dividend.” Meetings will also bo held on the 9th and 10th April for the election of a governor and deputy.governor, and twenty-four directors.

We are requested to state that Captain J. Craigie Halkett, director of the North British and Mercantile Insurance Company, has agreed to join the Board of the Welsh Freehold Coal and Iron Company.

The latest quotations for British Funds are as follows: Consols, for money, 92to 92 ; ditto 5th April Account, 92 to 92% ; Reducel, 911 to 911 ex, div.: New Three per Cents., 91% to 913; Exchequer Bills, ls. to 78. prem.; India Five per Cont. Stock, 1093 to 110; ditto Four per Cent. 1024 to 103; ditto Enfaced Paper Four per Cent., 96 to 96}; ditto Five and a Half Per Cent., 1071 to 108; Bank of England Stock, 248 to 250 ; Metropolitan Three and a Hali per Cent., 96 to 96); and French Rentes in this market, 551 to 56.

The price of French Rentes received from Paris this morning was 56f. 60c. Market undecided.

In the market for American Securities, the United States 5.20 Bonds of 1882 are marked 924 to 92); ditto, 10-40 Bonds, $8 to 89; Erie 31% to 32; Illinois, 108.4 to 1094; and United States Funded Loan 895 to 893.

In the Railway Market the prices are :-Caledonians, 117 to 117}; Great Eastern, 19% to 50% ex div. ; Great Northern, 136 to 137 ex div.; ditto, 1, 159 to 159, ex div. ; Great Western, 1141 to 1147; Lancashire and Yorkshire, 1584 to 158 ex div. ; London and Brighton, 774 to 77}; London, Chatham, and Dover, 263 to 27); London and North · Western, 155 to 155. ex div. ; London and South Western, 108 to 109 ex dir.; Manchester and Sheffield), 734 to 731 ; Metropolitan, 694 to 69; ditto District, 33} to 33%; Midland, 142 to 142} ex. div.; North British, to 62) ; North Eastern Consols, 1781 to 1787 ex. div.; South-Eastern, 971 to 97%; South-Eastern deferred, 771 to 773; Grand Trunk of Canada, 20 to 20%; Great Western of Canada, 20% to 21 ]; Antwerp and Rotterdam 19 to 19); Great Luxembourg, 175 to 173 ; and Lombardo Venetian, 183 to 19.

The prices of the principal Foreign Stocks are recorded thus :-Argen. tine, 1868, 91 to 94; do., 6 per cent., 1871, 92 to 92}; Brazilian, 5 per cent., 1865, 95, to 90; do., 5 per cent., 1871, 94. to 95; Egyptian, 7 per cent., 1868, 813 to 85%; do., Viceroy Loan, 87 to 89; do., Khedive Mortgage Bonds, 79 to 795; French Morgan 6 per cent. Loan, 100% to 100%; do.,

6 National, 5 per cent. Loan 6 to 7 pin. ; Greek 5 per cent. Stock, 14 to 151; Italian of 1861, 671 to 68; Mexican, 14% to 154; Paraguay 8 per cent. Loan, 87}to 88; do. Scrip, 7 to 8 pm. ; Peruvian, 5 per cent. 1000, 97to 9s; do., 6 per cent. 1870, 805 to 80% ; Russian, 5 per cent. 1871, 90 to 91 ; do. Nicolai Rail., 76 to 764; Spanish, 31} to 31/; do. Quicksilver, 80} to 812; do. 3 per cent. 1871, 313 to 31% ; Turkish, 5 per cent. 1865, 50% to 30); do. 6 per cent. 1865, 661 to 66%; do. 6 per cent. 1869, 614 to 614; and do. 6 per cent. 1871, 72 to 721.

In the Telegraph Market, Anglo-American Stock is quoted at 118 to 120 : Anglo-Mediterranean, 161 to 109; British Australian, 81 to 9!; British Indian Extension, 114 to 12 ; ditto Submarine, 10 to 104; Chinas, 9 to 9; Cubas, 8 to 84; Falmouths, 11 to 113; Great Northern, 15% to 16; Marseilles, Algiers and Malta 81 to 9%; Mediterranean Extension, 4% to 5); French Cables, 24 to 24} ; Reuter's, 10% to 111; and West India Panaina, 64 to 6).

In miscellaneous shares prices are as follows : - Credit Foncier of England, 54 to 51; Crystal Palace, 22 to 24; ditto Preference, 104 to 109; General Credit and Discount, 24 to 25 pm. ; Hooper's Telegraph Works, 21 to 3 pm. ; Hudson's Bay, 10 to 10.; International Finance, i to pm. ; Indiarubber and Gutta Percha, 43, to 441; National Discount, 134 to 13); Telegraph Construction, 33 to 311 ; London Tramways, 11 to 124; Native Guano, i7 to 19 ; Phosphate Sewage, 39 to 41 ; Sewage Disinfecting and Manure Company, par to 2 pm.; and Royal Mail Steam, 89 to 91.

[ocr errors]


NOTES OF THE WEEK. premises hereinbefore devised and bequeathed to min Dicon and Son, Wakefield; Paterson, Snote,

them, raise and levy” £10,000 for each of his six and Burney; R. & W. B. Smith ; Palmer, Eland,

sisters (naming them). And as to all the residue and Nettleship; H. A. Maude. COURT OF APPEAL IN CHANCERY.

and remainder of his said real and personal estate
(Before the LORDS JUSTICES.)

not therein before disposed of, he guve, devised,
Feb. 28 and March 1.
and bequeathed the same to his brother William

Friday, March 1.

Gott absolutely. The testator died on 1st April

1867. The question was whether the six legacies Re THE INTERNATIONAL CONTRACT COMPANT ; Will-Construction-Legacies-Charge--Per. of £10,000 were piyable out of the personalty, or

Ex parte InD. sonalty-Realty-Mixed fund.

were charged on the residuary real and personal Company-Winding-up-- Numbering of sharesThis was an appeal from a decision of Bacon, V.C. estate as a mixed fund. The Vice-Chancellor held Transfer of wrong numbers-Rectification of re By his will, dated the 25th June 1852 John Gott that they were payable out of the mixed fund. gister directed all his just debts, and funeral and testa. From this decision the heir appealed.

Tuis was an appeal from a decision of Wickens, mentary expenses to be in the first place paid and discharged” out of his personal estate. He

Hind: Palmer, Q.C. and Whitehorne for the V.C. On the 10th April 1860, fifty shares in the also directed certain pecuniary legacies to be paid

above company were transferred by Mr. Kitson, appellant. Without calling upon

the chairman, and Mr. Wilkins, the registrar of the out of his personal estate. And after certain devises he gave all other his real estate and his 2.C., Eldis, C.C., Lindley,'Q.C., Marien, North, ment of the company. In the deed of transfer the

Willeoch, G.C., Kay, Q.C., Fry, Q.C., Amphlett, company, to Ind, who was a clerk in the employ. residuary personal estate upon the trusts therein. Davey, Bagshawe and Broderick, 'sho appeared for consideration was expressed to be 225, but no after declared, and he empowered his trustees to sell and convert the same, and he directed them various parties interested in supporting the Vice money was in fact paid. When Ind executed the to hold the residue of his real and personal estate

deed the numbers of the shares were left in Chancellor's decision, and the proceeds of sale of any part they should

Lord Justice JAMES said that in his opinion the

blank. Subsequently the numbers 11,105 to 11,154

were inserted. The shares thus numbered were, sell, upon trust, after payment of his just debts decision of tho Vice-Chancellor was qnite right. pecuniary legacies before mentioned, to invest able length, and said that legacies were clearly Wilkins. Ind ras placed on the register as the and funeral and testamentary expenses, and the His Lordship reviewed the authorities at consider: however, at that time registered in the names of

other persons, and not in those of Kitson and the residue, and out of the income to pay his payable in the first instance ont of the personal holder of these fifty shares, but the numbers were wife an annuity for her life. And he directe his ostate when no contrary intention was expressed subsequently altered in pencil to 11,005 to 11.04. trustees in certain events to apply a sum of in the will, but here the testator did express a

His name being on the register at the date of the £6000 in augmentation, and as part of the fund contrary intention, and created a mixed fund, out

winding-up, he was placed on the list of contriba. to arise from the residue of his real and personal of which he directed tho legacies to be paid.

tories. He took out a summons to have his name estate. The will then proceeded in these words :

Lord Justice MELLISH concurred.

removed from the list, alleging that he had ac. “ And I further will and direct that my said Appeal accordingly dismissed. Costs of all

cepted the shares under pressure, and that all the trustees or trustee for the time being, shall, by parties out of the estate.

clerks of the company were compelled to sign and out of the said trust estates, moneys, and Solicitors : Bell, Broderick, and Gray, for Benja- transfers, under threats of dismissal. The Vice

[ocr errors]

Chancellor having refused this application, Ind mortgaged for £27,000, to be repaid with interest security on the debtor's property before seizure. appealed.

twelve months after the date of the mortgage ; and All the former Bankruptcy Acts provided that De Ger, Q.C. and Horton Smith, for the appellant. the mortgage debt contained a power of sale exer- until seizure the title of the assignee must prevail

Hardy, Q.C. and Higgins, Q.C. for the official ciseable in case of default in payment. In 1830 against that of the execution creditor. His Lord. liquidator.

the mortgage deed was transferred. The deed of ship could not see the least reason for supposing Lord Justice JAMES said that when creditors transfer contained a recital that the power of sale that the Legislature intended by the 12th section

found a man on the register for fifty shares, it was had not been and was not intended to be exer. of the Act of 1869 to alter the law on the subject, be not incumbent upon them to inquire what the cised ; an issignment of the mortgage debt “and indeed the words of the section led to the contrary 13 numbers of the shares were. Ind had intentionally all powers and remedies for recovering the same;" conclusion. The decision of the Chief Judge must,

held himself out to the world as the holder of a conveyance of the mortgaged property freed therefore, be upheld. fifty shares, and he could not escape liability, from the old proviso for redemption, and subject Lord Justice JAMES concurred. 83 between himself and the creditors, on the to a new one, by which the mortgage debt was to Appeal accordingly dismissed with costs. ground of having been registered in respect of be repaid, with interest, at the expiration of seven Solicitors for the appellant, Doyle and Edwards. wrongly numbered shares, which was evidently years from the date of the transfer ; covenants for Solicitors for the trustee, Stocken and Jupp. done by mistake. The substance of the transac. payment of the principal at the expiration of seven tion was that he meant to be on the register for years, and of interest balf-yearly in the mean time; fifty shares. He was on the register for fifty and a power of sale exerciseable in default of pay.

ROLLS COURT. shares, and the creditors and other persons in. ment of principal or interest ; and it was also

Feb. 19 and 28.
terested had a right to keep him there.
thereby agreed that the mortgage debt should

Lord Justice MELLISH was of the same opinion. remain on the security of the nortgage for seven

Nuisance-Noise and vibration-Damages. The numbering of shares was simply a directory years, unless the mortgagor should die or make : for the purpose of enabling the title of particular default in the payment of interest in the

mean time. The plaintiffs in this suit were the owners and persons to be traced, but n share was merely an The Master of the Rolls, held that the power of ing, at Leek, in the county of Stafford, and filed

occupiers of a dwelling house, with stables adjoin. incorporeal right to a certain portion of the profits sale in the deed of 1825 was absolutely extin: their bill to restrain the defendant, who is a lace of the company, and one share was the same as guished by the deed of transfer. From this

manufacturer, from working an engine in his another, and not distinguishable as a grey horse decision the transferee appealed. from a black one. Accordingly where a transferor Sir Roundell Palmer, Q.C., Sir Richard Baggal. to the plaintiffs' premises. It appeared that the

manufactory, the engine-house being contiguous had as many shares as he purported to transfer, a lay, Q.C. and Parke, for the appellant. mistake in the numbers of the shares would not The Solicitor-General (Sir George Jessel, Q.C.), made by the plaintiffs until the month of June

engine was erected in 1865, and no complaint was prevent them from passing to the transferce. Bristowe, Q. C., Preor, and Chapman Barber, for 1870 ; and the bill in this suit, which was filed in

Appeal accordingly dismissed with costs. incumbrancers prior to the date of the transfer. Solicitors for the appellant, Tilleard, Godden and Southgate, Q. C., Kenyon, Q. C., Nolier, and vibration caused by the engine rendered the

the following Nov., stated that the noise and Holme. Haynes, for respondents, in the same interest as

stabies unfit for horses, and occasioned consider. Solicitors for the official liquidator, Lewis, the appellant. Munns and Longden.

Batten, for a purchaser.

able annoyance to persons living in the dwelling. Lord Justice James, was of opinion that the the institution of the suit, been obliged to leave

house. It was stated that the plaintiffs had, since Re THE EUROPEAN BANK (LIMITED); MASTERS'S Master of the Rolls had given too much effect to

the house.
the words of the recital in the transfer. Apart

Sir R. Baggallay, Q.C. and Rowcliffe, for the Company--Windling-up-Transfer of shares for from the recital no doubt could have arisen as to nominal consideration - Transferee a the meaning of the deed of transfer. In his Lord.

plaintiffs. man of

The Solicitor-General (Sir G. Jessel, Q.C.), Fry, straw--Bona tides-- Description of transferee ship's opinion, the words, in the recital “ not Q.C., and Marten for the defendants. "Gentleman"-Misrepresentation. intended to be exercised," meant not then in.

Lord ROMILLY said that the plaintiffs were This was air appeal from an order of Malins, V.c. tended to be exercised, and the recital did not On the 4th May 1866, William Masters, who was amount to an agreement that the power was never

entitled to some relief in respect of the stable,

although five years and a half had elapsed bethe holder of 280 £50 shares in the European Bank, to be exercised. on which £15 had been paid up, executed a trans. Lord Justice MELLISI was of the same opinion. tween the time when the engine was erected and fer of these shares to one Robert Deering, who was

The decision of the Níuster of the Roils ac.

the plaintiffs' first complaint of the nuisance, as described in the transfer as a “gentleman.” The

cordingly reverseil.

they swear positively that the state of the stable last dividend paid by the company had been at the

Solicitors for the appellant, Parke and Pollock.

was not brought to their knowledge until the year rate of £7 per cent. on the paid-up capital, and, Solicitors for the respondents, C. and J. Shoul. 1870. As an injunction would have the effect of although the shares had fallen in value, they weró briuge; Lee, Collyer: Bristowe, Withers, and destroying the defendant's businoss, his Lordship saleable at the time of the transfer for about £7 Russell; IV. E. and F. W.Oliver; Powell, Thomp. considered that the second section of 21 & 22 Vict. apiece. The transfer was accepted by the directors, son and Groom.

c. 27, would be applicable to this case if it was who had power to refuse it, and the certificate was

an injury to the stables alone, and that there subsequently sent to Masters. On the 16th May

shouid be an inquiry what damages ought to be 1856 the bauk stopped payment, and was ordered

Feb. 29 and March 7.

awarded in respect of such injury to the plaintiffs.

As regarded the dwelling-house the question was to be wound-up on the 6th June. Masters was a

(Before the LORDS JUSTICES.) meat salesman of substantial means, and Deering

whether it was rendered uninhabitable, or, so Ex parte WILLIAMS ; Re Davies.

much so that an ordinary person would quit the was a journeyman butcher who had married his Dankmptcy Act 1969, s. 12–Execution creditor- house, which would be an irreparablo injury, and daughter, and was earning a small weekly salary. They both alleged that the transfer had been

Act of bankrupley before Serzui e Secured would entitle the plaintiffs to an injunction ; but creditor.

then the question of time becomes of very great made in performance of a promise made by Masters to Deering on the latter's marriage, that he would This was an appeal from a decision of the Chief importance. The engine has been the same for give him some money. No settlement of the Judge reversing a decision of the registrar of the the last five years, worked exactly in the same

He considered that shares had been executed for the benefit of Deer County Court of Tredegar, whereby he dissolved way and by the same man. ing's wife and children.

the evidence showed that there was some noise, an injunction restraining the appellant (an exe

The Vice-Chancellor (see 25 L, T. Rep. N. S. 582) held that the transfer ings upon two judgments recovered by him against be awarded to the plaintiffs in regard to injury

cution creditor) from taking any further proceed. and directed an inquiry as to what damages should was invalid, on the ground, vrst, that the trans. action was a colourable attempt on the part of Davies, and authorised the bailiff to sell the to the stable and dwelling house, the costs up to Mlasters to avoid the liability while retaining the goods, chattels, and effects seized by him and including the hearing to be paid by the

The writs of execution defendant. benefit of the shares, and, secondly, that the under two executions. directors had been deceived by the misdescription

were issued by the Couniy Court of Chester Solicitors: Gregory and Co. ; Milne, Riddle, and of Deering as a “gentleman,” and his Honour

on the 4th Nov., and were reissued at half. | Mellor. accordingly ordered Deering's name to be removed County Court of Tredegar, in which district tho past eleven a.m. on the 7th Nov. by the

Feb. 26 and 23.' from the register and that of Masters substituted debtor' lived. At half-past twelve on the same Re LUNDY GRANITE for it. From this oriler Masters appealed.

COMPANY (LIMITED) Higgins, Q.C. and Brnel ford, for the appellant. day the debtor filed a petition for liquidation,

(HARVEY LEWIS'S CASE). Graham Hastings (Glasse, Q.c. with him) for and obtained at the same time an injunction Remuneration of directors, Poyable out of copital the official liquidator.

under his

or profits. - Articles of association Lord Justice JAMES was of opinion that there when the bailiff arrived at the debtor's house in the official liquidator, requiring Mr. Harvey Lewis,

execution, and the appointment of a receiver. This was an adjourned summons on the part of was not sufficient evidence to fix Masters on the list in place of his son-in-law. Having at the the afternoon of the 7th Nov:, he found the receiver one of the directors of the company, to repay a time of the marriage promised to give his from the decision of the Chief Judge, contending tion for his services as such director between

in possesson.

sum of 1351. 13s. 411., received by him as remunera. law something, and being anxious to get rid of that he was a secured creditor within the 12th Nov. 1853 and April 1865. The case was selected his shares, le preferred to give them to his son. in-law, rather than to sell them for £7 apiece, entitled to enforce his remedy against the bank directors' remuneration was payable out of the

section of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, and as such as a representative one to determine whether the at which price they were then saleable. In his Lordship's opinion the shares were intended to rupt's goods.

capital in the case of there being no profits, as was pass absolutely, and the transaction had no ap.

Thesiger and Finlay Knight for the appellant.

contended by the directors, or out of the profits pearance of a sham. As to describing the son-in

De Gex, Q.C. and Bagley for the trustee.

only, which turned upon the construction to be law as a gentleman, it was the vagiest of all Lord Justice MELLISH said that the question put upon the 75th Article of Association, which razue descriptions, and seemed to have been used was whether, when a writ of ji. fa. was delivered was as follows : " The directors may yearly dis. quite innocently. The Vice-Chancellor's order to the sheriff so that the goods of the debtor were tribute among themselves as remuneration for must, therefore, be discharged.

bound under the Statute of Frauds, before the their services such sum as shall be equal to oneLord Justice MELLISH was of the same opinion. commission of an act of bankruptcy by the tenth part of the profits of the company for the As to the misdescription of the son-in-law it aj. debtor, the execution creditor held a security last preceding year, so provided always that there pared to his Lordship that there was no intention upon the bankrupt's property, and had a better shall be yearly distributed among the directors as to deceive, and that no one had been deceived. right to the goods than the trustee. This question such remuneration a sum which shall not bo less

Sulicitor for the appellant: Rooks, Kenrick, and depended upon the construction of the 12th section than 1001. yearly for each director, and such re. Horston.

of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, which precluded any muneration shall be divisible among the directors Solicitor for the official liquidator : Argles and creditor, other than a secured creditor, from as they may think proper.” No profits ever were Raiclins.

having any remedy against the property, &c., of made, but the directors, acting upon their con.

a bankrupt except in manyer directed by the Act. struction of the clause, divided among themselves Tuesday, March 5.

It was decided by Ex parte kocke, Re Hall, that in the years 1863, 1864, and 1865, 15001, out of the Boyd v. PETRIE.

when the sheriff had actually seized the goods capital, being 1001. yearly for each director. Mortgage-Poicer of sale-Transfer-Extinction of before the act of bankruptcy, the execution Fry, Q.C. and Hon. E. Romilly, for the official power.

creditor was entitled to them as against the liqnidator. This was an appeal from a decision of the Master trustee. The question in the present case Sir R. Baggallay, Q. C. and B. B. Rogers for Mr of the Rolls. In 1825 certain real estates wery was whether the execution creditor had also a Harvey Lewis.


« EelmineJätka »