university. We at the Bar of England do not ex- to attend lectures, but lectures not followed by doing, is not what might have been fairly experience that advantage, and many an able and examinations were very lifeless things. Some pected from them, having in view their great fearned man may remain long unemployed before of the most refreshing slumbers he had ever authority and the large funds at their disposal. his abilities are known. If, however, a law uni- been blessed with were enjoyed in the lecture Further, I am not prepared to discuss with versity should be established, where the abilities of room; and, as for attendance in a barrister's the hon. and learned gentleman the question the different men would become manifest, it is very chambers, nothing could be more unsatis- which he mooted rather than fully discussed possible that students studying one branch of law factory as a test of competency. His own at the conclusion of his speech-namely, what upon would be led by the mere reputation attaching to in- experience of such attendance was that he and his consideration may be the authority of Parliament dividuals to choose for employment, on account of companions read the Times, discussed the affairs over the funds and the property of these four Inns their ability, those who studied in another branch of of the day, and amused themselves in various of Court. There is no doubt that the two Inns of law in the same university. This has happened in ways. They were under no obligation to study the Temple stand, in this respect, in a somewhat Scotland without anything of the vice of canvass law, but in due time they were pronounced com- different position from those of Lincoln's-inn and ing, and without any unworthy methods. Before petent to practise, and if they lived long enough Gray's-inn. I will not, however, enter into that I leave this part of the subject I desire to notice a they would be perfectly eligible for a County Court question at the present moment, because the time misapprehension as to what would be the effect Judgship, a Colonial Judgeship, or even for a seat has not yet arrived for its consideration. The of this common instruction offered to all alike. It on the bench of one of the Superior Courts at hon. and learned gentleman does not, as far as I does not involve the consequence that when you Westminster. In no other profession was such a understand the terms of his motion, propose come to examine the different branches of the pro- state of things allowed. Medical men were not at present to touch the property of the Inns of fession you would require the same examination to allowed to practice without examination; no one Court, but I may remark that it is clear that the be applied to all. Of course, I should say, by all was allowed to enter the pulpit before examina- property in the hands of bodies performing no means let those who so desire go through all the tion; and even the Army was now closed to all but public duties would not, as things now are, be examinations; but those who examined for calls those who had passed an examination. What held by any secure or lasting tenure. The right to the Bar should determine what subjects of made the matter worse was that a client did not of Parliament to deal with the property of such examination must be passed through by persons choose his counsel as he chose his medical man; institutions is of course unquestionable. It is, desiring to become barristers; and in like manner and it was notorious that briefs were often given however, only fair to state that the amount of the the body which examined persons to be ad Litted to incompetent men. But the matter did not rest funds at the disposal of the Inns of Court, although as solicitors and attorneys would determine what here. What could be more improper than to allow certainly large, has been very generally exaggesubjects of examination that class of persons must men to enter untested the avenue to the high-rated. It has been stated that the four Inns pass through. You would require from each est offices of State? Even the Solicitor-General, of Court have an income of £60,000 a year, a statebranch of students such knowledge as would be who led the opposition to this motion last year, ment which may be perfectly correct as far as the suitable for their particular career, but you would admitted that a man without learning should not gross receipts are concerned, but the amount leave every part of instruction open to all who be allowed to enter a learned profession. In 1846 actually at their disposal for the government of chose to benefit by it. (Hear, hear.) Perhaps a Select Committee had reported that a com- the profession, is not more than from £25,000 to the House would consider my statement to be in-pulsory examination for intending barristers £30,000. This, I admit, is a large sum, one the complete if it did not say something with respect should be established at once; in 1855 a Royal possession of which in the hands of bodies like the to the ways and means, and how this proposed in- Commission reported that a University, to be com- Inns of Court gives to Parliament and to all perstitution is to be supported. (Hear.) Those who posed of the four Inns of Court, should be con- sons interested in the well-being of the legal prohave the best means of knowing are satisfied from stituted, and that students should be subjected to fession, a right to ask whether the best use is experience that the system might be self-support-a preliminary examination. With neither of these made of it. I have said in private, and I cannot ing by means of reasonable fees for attendance at recommendations, however, did the Inns of Court hesitate to say in public, that I do not think the lectures and holding examinations, if there were comply. They established a voluntary examina- best use is made of this large sum of money. no other fund available for the purpose. I have tion, and about a dozen students presented them. (Hear.) But there is a very great difference beno idea that the Government should pay for. the selves in consequence. In 1870, however, finding tween making that admission and assenting to the institution, or take it into their own hands, as is something would certainly be done in spite of attacks made upon the inns by persons whose done in France, with evil consequences in some them, the societies awoke to the necessities of knowledge of the facts is altogether inaccurate. respects. I wish that, like our institutions of the case, and made some propositions. He Let me state what I mean. It is perfectly inprimary instruction, the institution should be had not, however, much faith in death-bed accurate to say that the Inns of Court benefit by self-governing and self-supporting. (Hear, hear.) conversions, and in this case the conversion was the great funds which it is their duty to dispose But, if the institution is to be supported by the accompanied by conditions which limited its value. of to the extent of a single halfpenny, except as public alone, I have no hesitation in saying that The Benchers had resolved to establish compul- far as the few Benchers are concerned who retain the funds of those kindred bodies which would be sory examinations, but refused to admit any one chambers in the inns to which they belong. It is affiliated with the new institution-I allude to the to their lectures unless he had paid their fees and another matter whether a great deal of money is Inns of Court-should be available for promoting become a member of an Inn. But why should not well spent in giving to the students a much better an object for which those bodies exist. (Hear, others beside intending barristers have the benefit dinner than the sum they pay could procure. It hear.) If, however, contrary to my belief and of the lectures? Why, for instance, should not is also a very fair question whether the compelling expectation, the heads of the Inns of Court young men who intended qualifying themselves for students to eat dinners at all is a profitable mode should be unwilling to co-operate in supporting seats in that House not be allowed to study law of improving their legal education; but these are the proposed institution, then the State should without being obliged to become members of an totally different from the statements that much of take them in hand and overhaul them. (Hear, Inn? Having dealt with the arguments put for the money at the disposal of the benchers is exhear.) I do not wish or expect that the necessity ward by the Solicitor-General last year in oppo-i- pended in providing themselves with luxuries. for such a course of proceeding would arise, for tion to the scheme of the hon. and learned member As far as the inn to which I have the honour to I believe that the same spirit which has led them for Richmond, the hon. and learned member pro- belong is concerned-and I believe the same to do what they have done would, if the public ceeded to dwell upon the advantages which remark applies to other inns-I do not believe should think the establishment of such a school accrued from the practice of barristers acquiring that a single sixpence is lost to the funds of the as I recommend to be necessary, without any com- a knowledge of the practical business of their pro- inn by the dinners which the Benchers eat. pulsion from the State or Parliament, induce them fession in a solicitor's chambers, and from articled the Middle Temple I believe that the fees paid by to do their duty by assisting the project through clerks studying in a barrister's chambers. He the Benchers very much more than cover the exthe means of their funds. (Hear, hear.) The hon. characterised the Inns of Court as a gigantic pense incurred in providing dinners for them. and learned gentleman concluded, amid cheers, monopoly, and alleged that our lawyers were not This is, however, matter which, though very open by moving the following resolutions :jurists, nor our jurists lawyers. The defects of to be discussed, is subordinate to the question our system of legal education had been pointed raised by the resolution before the House. I out by Lord Bolingbroke upwards of 100 years admit that these Inns of Court, having very large ago, but as yet no steps had been taken to improve funds at their disposal, and possessing a prestige it. Because he believed it would remove the which has come down to them from many censtigma that at present rested on the profession to turies, ought to do, and, if necessary, should be which he had the honour to belong, and because it compelled to do, a great deal more in the work of would raise the moral and intellectual standard of legal education than they have hitherto done. that profession, he supported the motion of the They have the power, the means, and the machinhon. and learned member for Richmond to intrust ery ready to their hands for the creation of a future legal education to a public body, which school for the teaching of English law. When I would be responsible to public opinion, and would say this, let me ask many hon. members who be animated by public spirit. are, and others who have been, actively engaged in the legal profession, to take a perfectly plain, obvious, and sensible distinction. To teach the English law, understood in the ordinary sense, by means of lectures is a pure delusion. It must be learnt by practice in the courts of common law and equity, and by that means alone. And I will tell you why. We have had among us, without doubt, many lawyers who were naturally men of great minds, and who would have attained to eminence outside the Profession equal to that which they reached as lawyers, but our legal system has come down to us from the middle ages in the unscientific form in which it now is, with the exception, speaking broadly, of the law of real property, mercantile law, and the comparatively modern law of easements, the first two of which are highly scientific, and the last named is more or less scientific in its character. This is why, in my opinion, a knowledge of English law can only be obtained by practice. (Hear, hear.) I hope to live to see the day when this scandal and reproach shall be removed from the great nation to which we belong. I hope to live to see an English Code-a matter by no means difficult of accomplishment if the right people are chosen, the right principles of action are determined upon, and the right price is paid for the work done. (Hear,

"1. That it is desirable that a General School of Law should be established 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 examinations as may respectively be deemed proper for the several branches of the legal profession, as necessary qualifications (after a time to be limited) for admission to practise in those branches respectively."

Mr. O. MORGAN seconded the motion. He observed that, as pointed out by his hon. and learned friend, it was an incontestible fact that this country was the only country in civilised Europe without such an institution as was now recommended. The Incorporated Law Society seemed desirous of doing their duty in respect of the examination of articled clerks; but the Inns of Court, of one of which he had the honour to be a bencher, had hitherto done absolutely nothing to insure the competency of those they admitted to practice at the Bar. Regarded from a social, not to say convivial point of view, nothing could be better than their arrangements. At no place in London could one obtain a better dinner or enjoy more pleasant society than at one of the Inns of Court, but as regarded legal education, the benchers did nothing. Barristers were taught law as boys at public schools were taught swimming; they were thrown head foremost into deep water to get on as they could. With the single exception of requiring the payment of £100, and digesting a certain number of dinners, the benchers asked nothing of law students. It was true students had

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL.-I think the House of Commons, and I am quite sure the profession to which I have the honour of belonging, are exceedingly indebted to the hon. and learned member for Richmond for bringing forward this motion, and for the manner in which he has laid before the House his views on the subject. For my own part I feel a respect almost amourting to reverence for the hon. and learned member, and I take a pride in belonging to the profession which he adorns. Thanking him heartily for what he has said, I shall approach the question with the most earnest desire to accept, if possible, any resolution which may have been proposed by him. I trust, however, that, while agreeing with him in principle, and, perhaps, going even further taan he does on matters of detail, I shall be able to show good reason why the acceptance of these resolutions by the House would be, at all events, premature, and why it would be unadvisable to pledge the House and the country to a course of action for which at present no adequate ground has been laid. In my opinion, the state of legal education in this country is not what it ought to be, and it is not worthy of the great country of which we are citizens. I also think that what the four Inns of Court have done, or are even now

In

hear, and a laugh.) If properly done, this would which my hon. and learned friend proposes should
be one of the cheapest schemes which any Govern- be done by this new institution. Those great and
ment ever sanctioned, and would entitle the ancient bodies are in possession of abundant funds
Government bold enough to propose, and success- for the purpose. I grant you that they have not
ful enough to carry it out, to the gratitude of its done their duty, but they ought to be made to do
own time and of many succeeding generations. their duty. (Hear, hear.) If, however, you raise
(Hear, hear.) But I agree with my hon. and up a new institution, independent of and outside
learned friend that this good end will never be the Inns of Court, you will not obtain what you
attained by collecting together and attempting to want, as the new institution will be without the
reconcile irreconcilable cases; the only means of local associations and the means which the Inns of
attaining to real advantage in this direction is by Court alone, in my humble judgment, possess.
intrusting persons competent for the task with the It is not quite right for my hon. and learned
construction of a code which should clearly lay friend to say that the Inns of Court have done
down the law. It is utterly impracticable to teach nothing. (Hear.) They have done something,
the law as it stands without practically demonstra- though I admit they have not done all they might
ting it in the courts. You may, it is true, teach have done, or all they might have been fairly
the principles which underlie the unscientific law expected to do. At the same time the Inns of
of England, and of some other countries. I remem Court have not been entirely idle or asleep, but
ber Lord Cranworth once saying, that he, an equity have awakened up from the torpor in which they
lawyer, felt no difficulty in taking his seat in a spent too many years. Since, and very much in
court of common law, because, after all, there consequence of, the movement which my hon.
were principles underlying almost all legal and learned friend has set on foot there has
systems which a man with a good understanding been an agreement on the part of the four
and some common sense could master in a little Inns of Court to form a joint Board of Examiners
time. This was very true, and Lord Cranworth and to compel every person to undergo an ex-
was himself a very good example of what might amination, prior to being admitted a member
be accomplished by common sense and sound legal of an Inn of Court. Now, if the Inns of Court
understanding being brought to bear upon a do their duty, that examination ought to effect
system with which their possessor had been un- pretty nearly all we want, for it ought to render
familiar in early life. No doubt a great deal might necessary such a preparation in those branches of
be done, and I should like to see it done, to fuse, the law which can be taught scientifically as to
or rather to bring together, the two branches of prevent the existence for the future of so large a
the legal profession, which are now entirely sepa- number of barristers, who, however learned in
rate in education and in the practice of the Profes- other matters, are, as far as the law is concerned,
sion, but which might with great advantage be hardly entitled to the appellation of learned at all.
brought more closely together. I know my hon. The examinations about to be instituted by the
and learned colleague (the Solicitor-General) enter- joint authority of the four Inns of Court ought, I
tains on this subject an opinion different some- should think, to bring about a very considerable
what from that which I hold. It is true, I know, revolution in legal education. The Inns of Court
that attorneys for the most part begin to study possess the requisite funds, and they are willing
the Profession some years earlier than barristers to spend large sums of money in the endowment
do, and, therefore, there must necessarily be and maintenance of lectureships on such branches
difficulty in educating men of different ages in the of the science of the law as can be usefully lec-
same classes. These are practical objections, not tured upon. Let me tell the House, however, that
to be answered in a word or a sentence; but, at a lectureship is a mere delusion unless you get
the same time, I cannot help thinking that in this the right man to lecture, and are prepared to pay
country the two branches of the Profession are him such a sum per annum as will enable him to
further removed from each other than there is devote himself for a considerable time to lecture
any necesssity for them to be. I am not prepared, and to lecturo only. The Middle Temple was
therefore, to deny strenuously the truth of the lucky enough to get Sir Henry Maine as its lec-
opinion that there are foreign systems of turer for some years. He was a most accom-
law, differing in this respect from our own, plished lecturer, and his lectures were quite trea.
which are more advantageous to clients than tises on certain branches of the law. Indeed, he
the legal system in practice at the present time in succeeded better than any other lecturer who had
this country. No doubt there are great advantages filled any of the chairs created by the Inns of
in the two branches of the profession being sepa- Court; and this was not the fault of those bodies,
rate, but the system has also its disadvantages, because, as a rule, the salaries attached to the lee
and the question is, whether the existing system is tureships were too small to induce distinguished
better on the whole or worse on the whole than the
men to accept them. If, however, they were so
systems we find prevailing in other countries. I endowed that a person could live upon them, and
am not myself prepared to say that it is on the look upon them as giving him a position in life,
whole either better or worse than the system pre- the case might be different. These things can-
vailing, for example, in such a country as America. not be done in a moment, for the constitution of
I have had the pleasure of knowing some of the the Inns of Court necessitates a good deal of
best and most eminent American lawyers both in patience, but they have the means of doing them,
New York and Philadelphia, and they were not in- and I believe they have now the will. They are
ferior in cultivation and learning to distinguished bodies not easily moved, and such debates as this,
members of the profession in this country. While such movements as that initiated by my hon. and
I have great sympathy with all the objects which learned friend, afford that spur and incentive to
my hon. and learned friend aims at, I wish to more prompt and decided action which they un-
point out that there is another side to the ques-doubtedly require. I submit that it would be an
tion. The resolutions proposed by my hon. and
learned friend take it for granted, or at all events
assert, that it is the duty of the state to undertake
the teaching of the law. Now, that is a proposi-
tion to which I, for one, am not prepared to
assent. (Hear, hear.) The State does not under-
take to teach medicine, divinity, or civil engineer-
ing, and I am unable to see why, in the profession
of the law alone, the State should undertake a
duty which in every other liberal profession is
properly discharged by independent authorities.
The substantial meaning of my hon. and learned
friend's first resolution is that a public school
should be established by the State, and that the
State should be responsible for it. But my hon.
and learned friend goes further than this, and says
in his second resolution that it is desirable in the
establishment of such school to provide for ex-
aminations. To that proposal I respectfully take
exception. (Hear.) Provide for examinations, if
you will, raise the standard of the examinations,
interfere if you please either by actual authority
or by such a pressure on the independent bodies as
would be brought to bear upon them by a strong
expression of opinion in this House, but do not
make the examinations depend upon the school.
(Hear, hear.) Let the examinations be outside
the school, and let them be conducted by inde-
pendent bodies, which have an interest in the
examinations being what they should be. At the
same time every encouragement may be given to
the school and the colleges-and the Inns of Court
might be made colleges in connection with a great
legal institution (hear, hear)-which should be
made to do their duty, the power being left to
them of admitting or rejecting persons who make
application to them for admission into the Pro-
fession. The Inns of Court ought to do the work

seemed to him objectionable and unnecessary, and the hon. and learned gentleman having abstained from entering into details, he was unable to judge whether the scheme would insure that practical education which was so essential for attorneys and solicitors. Moreover, if, as he inferred, the existing bodies were to continue to give certificates to practise, their standards of examination and that of the proposed school, would probably differ. He would commend to the attention of the Bar a practical grievance of which the other branch of the Profession had to complain. An attorney desirous of becoming a barrister could not be called to the bar until he had ceased to practise as an attorney for three years. Such a condition, except in the case of a man of realised property, was obviously tantamount to starvation. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. LOCKE said the four Inns of Court had, as far as they possibly could, met the opinion of the day, although whether all they had adopted would be for the advantage of the Bar he could not undertake to say. 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 a conveyancer's chambers. He was glad to find that at all events the Inns of Court were to have some respite from those desperate attacks, and he hoped that by the end of the year the results of the course which had been pursued by the four Inns of Court would not leave the hon. and learned member for Richmond a peg to hang his arguments on.

Mr. AMPHLETT said that although he intended to support the motion of the hon. and learned gentleman, he should have preferred a scheme under which an Act of Parliament should have been passed establishing a legal university to which the Inns of Court might have been affiliated. Were the scheme of the hon. and learned gentleman, however, to be adopted, he believed that the same result would be arrived at, inasmuch as the Inns of Court would come forward and provide the necessary funds for the support of the Central School of Law. Some of the criticisms of the Attorney-General upon the resolutions of the hon. and learned member were scarcely justifiable, because those resolutions proposed neither that the school should be set up by the Government, nor that the examiners should be appointed out of the

school.

For one,

Sir R. BAGGALLAY said that each of these resolutions was expressed in language and had been supported by arguments which rendered it extremely difficult, if not almost impossible, for hon. members to concur in these abstract resolutions, and vote for them in their present form. (Hear, hear.) As to the first resolution, the abstract principle involved in it was this-that it was desirable that a general school of law should be established in the metropolis for the instruction of students intending to practise in any branch of the legal profession, and of other subjects of Her Majesty who might desire it. speaking as an humble individual, he begged to express his entire assent to that proposition. He believed it to be of the utmost importance that there should be in this metropolis a school of law to which there should be a resort not only by those who were students and intending to prac tise, whether as barristers or as attorneys and evil to pass this resolution, pledging the Govern- solicitors, but also by those other subjects of Her ment to undertake the teaching of law, without a Majesty who might desire to resort thereto. It more adequate exposition of the ways and means was beyond all doubt that there were many callthan my hon. and learned friend gave us in his ings in life besides the legal profession to which a speech to-night, admirable as it was in most res- knowledge of legal principles was essential, or, pects. The raising of the standard of examina. if not essential, at any rate a great advantage. tion is a practical matter, which is already being He should therefore desire to see in the metrodone by the Inns of Court; and, as far as attor polis a School of Law to which those subjects of neys and solicitors are concerned, I believe the Her Majesty should resort as well as those who examinations conducted by the Law Institution intended to follow one of the branches of the legal give little room for complaint or improvement. profession. But the resolution introduced this (Hear, hear.) They are in the main excellent, and complication-that this General School of Law it is now rare to find a person admitted as an was to be established by public authority. Now attorney or solicitor without a competent know what was meant by public authority? Those ledge of the law which he has to practise. As to words might have very different meanings, accordmy own branch of the profession, I earnestly hope ing to the particular interpretation which par that consequent upon this motion and upon public ticular members or particular persons might opinion, the Inns of Court will do all that is neces- place upon them; but he thought it was impos sary to secure efficient examinations and a well-sible not to come to the conclusion, having regard instructed set of students. They can do it, and they ought to be made to do it. I hope, therefore, my hon. and learned friend will not subject me to the painful duty of voting against resolutions with the object of which I heartily sympathise. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. GREGORY was sure he represented his own branch of the Profession in thanking the hon. and learned member for Richmond for his consideration of their interests, and his desire to raise their social status. With regard to the scheme which had been shadowed out, he expressed simply his individual opinion, being well aware that many of his brethren took a different view. The scheme was founded upon, or similar to, that which had been in operation for thirty or forty years at the Law Institution, and had greatly benefitted his own branch of the Profession. The absorption of that institution in the proposed scheme

to what had been said in the House that evening, to what was said in the House last year, and to what was said out of doors, that "by public autho rity was meant State control. It might be that it was not intended by these words that the proposed college, or university, or school, should be under direct Government control, but that as regarded the Government of that institution the State was to have a very considerable interference in the matter. At any rate, the introduction of the words

by public authority" rendered it doubtful how far the House should agree to the resolution in its present form. If the words 'public authority were omitted he would give his most cordial support to the resolution. But these words introduced an element of doubt, or, rather, they showed an intention on the part of those who employed them to give to the resolu tion a very much larger import than it was found

laugh.) It was admitted that the system of legal he desired. (Hear.) His hon. and learned friend
education in this country was thoroughly and radi- the member for Oxford had completely misappre.
cally defective; and what was the plan of the hended what had fallen from the Solicitor-General.
Government for dealing with the subject? They The Solicitor-General had said that those resolu-
rejected the resolution of the learned member for tions would hang like a mill-stone round the
Richmond. They had heard an apology from the question of legal education, and not round the
Solicitor-General which descended to half-pence. neck of the Government. There was nothing
The income of the Inns of Court was something more attractive, nothing more seductive, and,
like £50,000 a year. They were told what they indeed, notthing more dangerous to a popular
had done for legal education, and that was a little assembly, than to be led into the affirmation of
shadowy. But he wanted to know what they were propositions which had much to recommend them,
going to do for it in future, and that he could not and which might be in the main true, but which
gather from the speeches of either the Attorney or there were not at the time the means of carry-
the Solicitor-General. But there was sitting on ing into practical effect, and that was the position
the Treasury bench a most distinguished member, in which they were now placed. When the legal
whose sentiments on that question he should much profession was so much at issue with itself
like to hear, one who was at one time a very great as to the wisdom of adopting these resolu-
law reformer, and who devoted his early attention, tions, and when the lay members of the House
before he adorned official life, especially to the felt themselves so little able to cope with the sub-
reform of the Inns of Court. He referred to the ject, as was shown by the fact that the larger pro-
Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear, hear.) portion of those who had attended the debate
Before the debate closed, and especially after were members of the Profession, did the hon.
the touching appeal of the Solicitor-General and learned member for Richmond think that by
on the remission of taxation (a laugh), he hoped inducing the House to declare that this was a sub-
they would hear from that right hon. gentleman ject calling for Parliamentary interference he would
whether his views on law reform and legal educa- really promote the progress of the cause he had
tion accorded with those to which they had just at heart? The answer of the hon. and learned
listened. That protracted discussion would be member was "I do;" but for himself, his experience
useful if it tended in the opinion of the country to of the actual working life of the House in regard
gauge the character of the hopes of law reform to the passing of abstract resolutions did not lead
which they were entitled to derive from the Exe-him to entertain such an opinion. At the same
cutive Government. (Hear, hear.)
time he was far from finding fault with the hon.
and learned member, who in a great degree had
achieved a substantial triumph. It was quite
evident that a former discussion in this House had
acted materially upon powerful and learned bodies
outside who practically had this question in their
own hands. He congratulated his hon. and learned
friend upon the effect his labours had already pro-
duced, and upon the declarations of to-night, be-
cause, although there had been a singular conflict
of opinion and bewilderment with reference to the
subject-matter of these resolutions, yet there had
been generally a most authoritative declaration
from almost every legal member who had spoken
in the sense of urging onwards those learned
bodies in the course upon which they had already
entered. But what would be the position in
which the House would be placed by passing those
resolutions, tested by the declarations of a warm
supporter, the hon. and learned member for Tiver-
ton (Mr. Denman)? He said it was their recom-
of a definite character. Would the hon. and
learned member for Richmond adopt that con-
struction of the resolutions? The hon. and
learned member for Tiverton said it was very
well the resolutions did not go further, and that
they did not attempt to define the mode of attain-
ing the object, becsuse there would arise differences
of opinion. [Mr. DENMAN.-"About details was
what I intended to say."] No doubt that was the
hon. member's meaning; and what did it imply?
That there would be differences of opinion in
giving effect to general principles. Who was to
undertake the task? Were the Govermment to do
it? In the past it had been charged as a fault
against the Government that they had overlooked
the limits of the means and time of the House,
and had shown a disposition to submit more
measures than it could possibly deal with. The
Government had now, so far as they knew, fully
mortgaged the time of the House; they had in-
troduced measures which it would require great
exertions on the part of hon. members to deal with
and dispose of; and, under these circumstances,
could they hold out a hope that they could at once
proceed to throw this matter into shape, which the
hon. and learned member for Richmond had not
ventured to do, and of which the hon. and learned
member for Tiverton said it was weil it had not
been done? There was one man in the House
who was more competent than the Government to
throw the matter into shape; that was the hon.
and learned member for Richmond himself; and
it was to be regretted that he had not adopted the
course of asking leave to bring in a Bill, for that
was the only way in which to raise an issue for the
purpose of obtaining an immediate decision. If the
hon. and learned member meant to lay down by the
resolutions, then it was the duty of the Govern-
ment to frame a measure and introduce it, it was
not a fair demand which he made upon them; and
there could not be any advantage in declaring that
it was incumbent upon them to take up a matter
which, under present circumstances, it was not in
their power to bring into shape. The resolution
did not point out the mode in which a legislative
measure was to be framed. It must proceed more
or less upon coercion applied to the bodies which
controlled examination for and admission to the
Bar, and it must find ways and means by a resort
to the revenues of those bodies wholly or in part.
In what position would the Government be with
out a resolution of the House referring to the pro-
perty of these bodies? How could the Govern-
ment, without the authority of such a resolution,
in the divided state of opinion among the legal
profession, in the vague state of the public mind,

Mr. LEEMAN, as one who had for nearly
forty years practised as a solicitor, wished to
remark that during the whole of that discus-
sion they had not heard a single word from
any of the speakers against the mode of
examination at present pursued under the
auspices of the Law Institution in regard to the
branch of the legal profession with which he was
connected. The whole of the debate had turned
on the alleged abuses of the Inns of Court; but he
should like to ask what better or more competent
tribunal for examining articled clerks desiring to
fit themselves for practice as solicitors and attor-
neys could be found than the Law Institution as
it had been working for the last twenty-five years.
Articled clerks were obliged now to obtain certifi-
cates by passing a severe examination before they
were admitted to practice, and nothing would be
gained by applying to them the system proposed
by the hon. and learned member for Richmond.
He, for one, would be very sorry to see these reso-mendation that they pledged the House to nothing
lutions passed, because he believed that the right
place for the education of young solicitors was in
the offices of attorneys, instead of at an institu-
tion in London. (Hear, hear.) He believed even
that young men intended for the Bar would receive
much advantage by spending two or three years
in the same way, for by so doing they would learn
much that was practical, and lose a good deal
that was merely theoretical. (Hear.) Though
entertaining the highest possible respect for his
hon. and learned friend the member for Richmond,
he still felt bound to enter his protest against
these resolutions. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. GLADSTONE was desirous of stating the exact position of the question raised by his hon, and learned friend the member for Richmond, because it was evident from what had fallen from his hon. and learned friend the member for Oxford that that position was not clearly understood. His hon. and learned friend said that the resolutions of his hon. and learned friend the member for Richmond were about to meet with rejection at the hands of the Government. That, however, was not so. The Government had not moved the previous question, but his hon. and learned friend had himself proposed his resolutions in a form which had the effect of raising the previous question. And the distinction was a very important one, because the effect of it was that the House was not about to affirm or deny the matter of the propositions stated in the resolutions of his hon. and learned friend. Those who declined to vote in his favour against the Speaker leaving the chair would simply, by their vote, say that it was not convenient or expedient for the House at the present moment to affirm the matter contained in these resolutions. (Hear, hear.) That was a question which left the merits of the proposition itself entirely open, if considered in respect to their truth or falsity. The question, therefore, was whether the House at the present moment should commit itself to the propositions contained in these resolutions. Nothing could be more true than the statement of the right hon. gentleman opposite, the member for the University of Oxford, as to the effect of an abstract resolution on a former occasion. In 1857 or 1858 the House of Crmmons pledged itself by an abstract resolution that it was extremely desirable that the paper duty should be repealed, and the effect of that abstract resolution, for which nobody in particular was responsible, was not to advance but very greatly to hamper the repeal, and he would put it to his hon. and learned friend whether the affirmation of the resolutions he proposed would not tend rather to hamper than to accelerate the progress

and with the pressure of public business, force
upon these bodies a measure which even the hon.
and learned member for Richmond had not found
it possible to put into shape?
A mere vague
declaration of the opinion of the House, would
not constitute a binding obligation upon the
Government, nor upon any one in particular
to encounter the difficulties of the ques
tion; and, therefore, it would not advance the
cause which it was designed to promote. Let
it not be supposed that the Government were un
willing to promote it if they could. A committee
and a commission had reported that it was from
and through the Inns of Court and the Incorpo-
rated Law Society that the proposed reform must
come, and the Government wished to act upon
that principle. The only mode of raising the
question was for these bodies to take the initiative
and to frame a plan for bringing legal education
into a more satisfactory state. He did not wish
to cast on them the entire responsibility. What
the Government could do in communication with
them should readily be done; but it was far better,
under present circumstances, that those bodies
should bring the matter forward, and that they
should invite the aid of the Government, than
that the Government should take it up. He hoped
he had shown that he was not putting off the
hon. and learned member with nice words, and
the voting on the previous question involved no
disparagement of his general proposition, and he
had indicated the limits within which it was
possible that the Government might be able to
contribute to practical progress, and beyond
which, until they could see their way more clearly
to the support of public opinion, it would not be
their duty to go.

The House divided, when there appeared-For Sir Roundell Palmer's resolutions, 103; against them. 116; majority against, 13.

Monday, March 4.

PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION.

Mr. DODSON gave notice that on Friday he should, at the time of private business, call attention to the system of Private Bill legislation, and move certain resolutions, which he should place on the table this evening. (Hear, hear.).

SOLICITORS' JOURNAL.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. FUND IN COURT TO CREDIT OF ONE FOUND TO BE A LUNATIC IN FRANCE-APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT BY FRENCH COMMITTEE-DISCRETION OF COURT UNDER TRUSTEE RELIEF ACT.-A sum of money belonging to a person found to be a lunatic in France, but not so found in England, was paid into court under the Trustee Relief Act, and a petition for payment out of the whole sum was presented by the French Committee of the lunatic's estate, in whom, according to French law, all his property was legally vested. There was ther property of the lunatic which was sufficient for his maintenance, and was being applied for that purpose. The petition was opposed by the next of kin of the lunatic. Held, that the Trustee Relief Act gave the court power to exercise a dis cretion in the matter; and that under the circumstances the petitioner was not entitled to have the capital of the fund transferred to him, but was only entitled to the dividends: (Re Garnier, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S., 928. V.C. M.)

WILL-WIFE OF LEGATEE ATTESTING WIT NESS-EFFECT OF CODICIL CONFIRMING WILL WILLS ACT (1 VICT. c. 26), ss. 15, 34.-A codicil confirming a will incorporates the will in its inte grity so as to render valid a legacy to the hus band of an attesting witness to the will: (Anderson v. Anderson, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 12. V.C. B.) PRACTICE APPEARANCE - MOTION BY CoDEFENDANTS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR FOR A NONAPPEARING DEFENDANT-MOTION REFUSED. In a suit in which an appearance had been entered by the plaintiff for one of the defendants, a motion by co-defendants for leave to appear for the non-appearing defendant in a pending summons taken out for the purpose of having the matter in dispute settled by arbitration, was refused with costs: (Willesford v. Watson, 26 L. T. Rep. N. S. 15. V. C. W.)

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS (GUILDHALL).
Saturday, Feb. 24.
(Before Mr. Justice GROVE and a Common Jury.)

tice.

COWELL AND OTHERS v. Cook. Costs-County Court Act 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 142) s. 5-Action for mesne profits-Judgment by default in ejectment-Costs of ejectment-Prac THIS was an action to recover mesne profits in respect of a plot of ground adjoining a tabernacle in Plumstead, together with the costs of a prior ejectment.

Warton having opened the case for the plaintiffs, whereby it appeared that the sum of £915s. 4d. was claimed in the particulars of demand-viz.,

21

༅།

10s. as mesne profits from the 24th June 1871 to the following 29th Sept., and £9 5s. 4d. as the costs of a prior ejectment between the same parties, wherein judgment had been allowed to go by default,

Freke Gould, for the defendant, took a preliminary objection to the second item of the plaintiffs' particulars-viz., the costs of the prior ejectment. He contended that under the County Court Act 1867 (30 & 31 Vict. c. 142), s. 5, the plaintiffs, having recovered in the previous action of ejectment in respect of land, the annual value of which (assuming the particulars to be proved) did not exceed £2, and having chosen to bring their action in a Superior Court instead of in a County Court, the costs of the judgment by default could not be recovered unless the court or a judge at chambers should by rule or order allow them. That the burden of proof was therefore upon the plaintiffs to show that such rule or order had been obtained. That the Legislature, by conferring upon the County Courts a jurisdiction in ejectment where the annual value of the land or premises sought to be recovered did not exceed £20, must have intended that it should be exercised, and that, until disproved by the plaintiffs, every presumption was in favour of such an action as ejectment for land not exceeding an annual value of £2, falling completely within the class of cases which the inferior tribunal was intended to try.

Warton, for the plaintiffs, argued that the words of the section, "actions of contract or tort were not intended to comprise ejectment which stood therefore in a different position from all other actions, in which by the 30 & 31 Vict. c. 142, the County Courts were given a limited concurrent jurisdiction with the Superior Courts. That the enacting words of the 11th section "may be brought" were to be construed as conferring a permissive and not an obligatory jurisdiction. That the plaintiffs were not, therefore, barred from prosecuting their claim for costs; and that this being so, the action then being tried (viz., for mesne profits), was also properly brought in a Superior Court, inasmuch as the costs of a previous action in a Superior Court, were likewise sought to be recovered.

CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY.
LAST DAY OF PROOF.

BOWDEN (Jas.), Bedford-square, W.C. April 15; Young and
Co., solicitors, 6, Fredericks-place, Old Jewry, E.C. April
29: V.C. W., at twelve o'clock.
ROBERTS (Lieut.-Col. Wm.), Jermyn-street, St. James's,
Middlesex, Lieut. Col. in H.M's 98th Regiment of Foot.
April 15; Owen Owen, solicitor, Pwlllieli, Carnarvon.
April 29: M.R., at eleven o'clock

WOOLLY (Benjamin C.), Englishbatch Somerset, gentleman.
March 27; Mead and Daubeny, solicitors, 2, King s Bench-
walk, E.C. April 10; V.C. W., at one o'clock.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35.
Last Day of Claim, and to whom Particulars to be sent.
BORTON (John H.), Esq., Bury St. Edinund's, Suffolk.
April 27; E. Bronley, solicitor, 43, Bedford-row, W.C.
BRETT (Rev. Philip), Mount Bures, Essex, clerk. May 31;
Inglis and Keeling, solicitors, Colchester.
BREUR (John A. F. M.), Esq., 6, Quadrant-road South,
Highbury New-park, Middlesex. May 1; Bircham & Co.
solicitors, 60, Threadneedle-street, E.C.
BUTCHER (John), Lowsemoor, Worcester, tailor and inn-
keeper. March 23; Mr. Huxley, solicitor, Worcester.
CLARK Daniel), West Anderton, Cornwall, gentleman.
May 15; Grane and Son, solicitors, 23, Bedford-row, W.C.
COBBY (Geo. K.), Sheffield, coal and coke merchant. April
11; T. and H. Watson, solicitors, Bank-street, Sheffield.
CROSSE (Sarah E.), Edwardes-place, Kensington, Middle-
April 15; Prior and Co., solicitors, 61, Lincoln's-inn-
fields, W.C.

sex.

Harriett). 29, Norfolk-street, Park-lane. E.C. April
10; Hill and Son, solicitors, 23, Throgmorton-street, E.C.
CUFFE (Lucien William), E-q..71, Oxford-terrace, Edgware-
road, Middlesex. April 30; Woodrooffc and Plaskitt, soli-
DENT (Wm. F.), Newcastle-street, Strand, W.C., and 40,
citors, 1. New-square, Lincoln's-inn, W.C.
Chepstow-place, Westbourne-grove, Middlesex, lead mer-
chant. J. Aldridge, solicitor, 27, Montague-place, W.C.
DILLER (Thos.), 32, Thornton heath, Croydon, Surrey, gen-
tleman. W. J. Frazer, solicitor, 78, Dean-street, Soho, W.
DUNN (Daniel), $9, Canonbury-square, Islington, Middlesex,
gentleman. May 6; F. Broughton, solicitor, 48, Finsbury-
square, E.C.

DUNN (Elizabeth), 39, Canonbury-square, Islington, Mid-
dlesex. May 6; F. Broughton, solicitor, 45, Finsbury.
square, E.C.
DUNSDON (Thomas), 158, St. Paul's-road, Highbury, Mid-
dlesex, gentleman. April 1; W. J. Fraser, tolicitor, 78,
Dean-street, Soho.

FOSKETT (Rev. Thomas W.), Abernethy House, Hampstead,
Middlesex, clerk. May 5, Avory and Sons, solicitors,
GRIFFITHS (WI.), Bank Farm, Little Witley, Worcester.
Sessions House, Old Bailey, E.C.
farmer. April 15; E. Lechmere-Pugh, solicitor, The Cross,
Worcester.

HILL (Wm.). Red Lodge, North Stoneham, Southampton,
shipowner. March 31; Wm. Perkins, solicitor, 1, Albion-
place, Southampton.

KING (Geo.), Gosport, Southampton, gentleman. March 25;
Edgcombe and Cole, solicitors, Portsea, Hants.

Gould in reply cited Craven v. Smith (L. Rep. 4 Ex. 146), which decided that the 30 & 31 Vict. c. 142, s. 5, applies to all actions, whether capable of being commenced in a County Court or not. Also Roscoe on Evidence, 12th edit, p. 842, to prove that under any circumstances, the plaintiffs could only recover such fair and reasonable costs as might be assessed by a jury. Pearse v. Coaker (L. Rep. 4 Ex. 92), was also Berwick-on-Tweed alluded to by Warton.

GROVE, J., expressed some doubt as to whether the costs of the prior ejectment could be recovered.

Warton stated that the plaintiffs had taken out a summons at chambers for the purpose of having the action tried in the County Court, but that the defendants had opposed the application. Gould said that the application for removal into the County Court was made after issue had been joined, and that the Master had declined to make the order on the ground that he had no power to do so.

Bath.

Borough.

Bolton.

Bridgwater
Brighton
Canterbury
Carmarthen

Chichester
Deal

Faversham
Leeds
Oswestry
Shrewsbury
Tewkesbury
Wigan.

Wenlock.

MANSELL (Walter), 9, Laurence-Pountney-hill, E.C., and 12,
Grove-road, Bow, Middlesex, solicitor. May 5: Hubbard
and Son, solicitors, 24, Bucklersbury, E.C.
MULES (Alfred P.), Honiton, Devon, captain in H.M.'S.
91st Regiment of Foot. April 4; H. V. Mules, Honiton,
Devon.

PARKES (Mary), Stoke Prior, Worcester. April 5: Hawks
and Co., solicitors, 101, High-street, Southwark, S.E.
PLUMLEY (Robert), Chilley, Pevensey. Sussex, farmer.
March 30 H. C. Siunock, solicitor, Halisham, Sussex.
POULTER (Charlotte), S, Allen terrace, Kehsington, Middle-
sex. April 13; Fox and Robinson, solicitors, 52, Gresham
house, Old Brond-street, E.C.

RUSHTON (Ann), 271, Hagley-road, Edgbaston, Warwick.
March 31; Sanders and Smith, solicitors, 13, Temple-row,
Birmingham.
SANDERS (Chas.), 365, Enston-road, and 28, Cambridge-
gardehs, Notting-hill, Middlesex, May 13; Taylor and Co.,
solicitors, 28, Great James-street, Bedford-row, W.C.
THOMAS (John), Victoria-place, Routh, Glamorgan, coal
merchant, April 2; Sawbridge and Wrentmore, solicitors.
126, Wood-street, Cheapside, E.C."

Islington. No. 61, Barnsbury-road, term 31 years-sold for
£360.

No. 6, Frederick-street, term 40 years-sold for £330.
No. 87, same street and term-gold for £285.
No. 19, Baxter-road, term 88 years-sold for £290,
Haverstock-hill. No. 12, Bassett-street, term 90 years-sold
for £215.

Hornsey. Nos. 4 and 5, Queen's-road, term 62 years-sold
for £280.

King's-cross. Nos. 22 and 23, Bath-place, term 70 years-sold

Friday, Feb. 16.

By Messrs. RUSHWORTH, ABBOTT, and Co., at the Mart.
Vauxhall-bridge-road. No. 32, Ponsonby-place, term 56
years-sold for £185.
Thursday, Feb. 29.

By Messrs. NEWBON and HARDING.
Hoxton. Nos. 73 and 74, Britannia-street, freehold-sold
for £325.

Croydon. No. 1, Ottoman-villas, freehold-sold for £510.
No. 3, Stamboul-villas, freehold-sold for £700.

Freehold ground-rent of £10, secured on 1, Carlton-villas-
sold for £210.

A ditto of £10-sold for £230.

St. Luke's. No. 46, Lever-street, term 5 years-sold for £75.
Nos. 66 and 68, same street, term 7 years-sold for £110.
Nos. 42, 43, and 41, King-square, term 15 years-sold for £575.
Goswell-road. No. 18, Powell street, terin 9 years-sold for
€145.

Croydon, near the Derby Arms. The moiety of a plot of
land, 30ft. by 100ft.-sold for £40.

The judgment in the ejectment having been put NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. in, the plaintiff's attorney was called, and proved the service of a verbal notice to quit before the PUBLIC HEALTH-ELECTION OF LOCAL BOARD date of the writ in ejectment. In answer to the-QUALIFICATION OF VOTER.-The 11 & 12 Vict. learned judge, he also stated that the costs of the c. 63 (The Public Health Act 1848), s. 22, enacts previous action were fair and reasonable, and the that ratepayers and owners of property shall be jury were at once directed to find for the plaintiff's entitled to vote at the election of members of a for the full amount claimed (£9 15s. 4d.) local board of health, "provided that no owner The learned Judge refused to give the defen-whatsoever, shall be entitled to vote as such, dant's counsel leave to move, and, on the applica- unless, fourteen days at least previously to the tlon of Warton, certified for costs. day of tendering his vote, he shall have delivered" to the clerk of the board "a statement in writing of his name and address, and containing a descrip. tion of the nature of his interest or estate in the property, giving the qualification," &c.: Held, that a statement of qualification delivered prior to cne annual election would not suffice for another election in the year following, but must be reDRYBOROUGH Mary Banting), 13, College-place west, Maiden- newed. Sect. 24 enacts that any person entitled to vote may nominate for the office of member in manner therein specified, but does not require the person nominating to state whether he does so as owner or "as ratepayer." A nominator described himself in a nomination paper to be "duly qualified as owner," whereas, in fact, he wag only qualified 'as ratepayer." Held, that the statement of the nature of the qualification was surplusage, and that as he was duly qualified to nominate, his nomination was good, notwithstanding the error in description: (Reg. v. Morgan, 25 L. T. Rep. N. S. 930. Q.B.)

HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN. COLES (Wm.), 2. Victoria-terrace, Blundell-street, Caledonian-road, Middlesex, gentleman. Next of kin to come in by March 21, at the chambers of V.C. M. March 27, at twelve o'clock, at the said chambers, is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims.

stone-hill, Greenwich, Kent. spinster. Next of kin to come in by Feb. 27, at the chambers of the M.R. April 11, at eleven o'clock, at the said chambers, is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims. UNCLAIMED STOCK AND DIVIDENDS IN THE BANK OF ENGLAND. [Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and which will be paid to the persons respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three months, unless other claimants sooner appear.] Mew (Alfred Cesar), Lymington, Hants, brewer; WARD (Western), Mark-lane, E.C., hop merchant; and Owen (Thos. Ellis). Southsea, Hants, civil engineer. £521 198. 4. Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimants, Wm. Baron Mew, Jas. Alfred Mew, and Benjamin Mew Parker. APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT-STOCK WINDING-UP ACTS.

OLD PARK IRON COMPANY (LIMITED).-Creditors to send in,

by March 30, their names and addresses, and the particu lars of their claims, and the names and the addresses of their solicitors (if any), to H. Dever, 4, Lothbury, E.C., the official liquidator of the said company. April 15, at twelve o'clock, at the chambers of V.C. M., is the time appointed for hearing and adjudicating upon such claims.

NEW HIGHWAY-CERTIFICATE OF JUSTICESCONSENT OF OWNER-CERTIFICATES OF QUARTER SESSIONS.-Proceedings were taken under 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50, ss. 84 and 85, to divert a footpath which crossed the corner of the grounds of an asylum, the new path being of greater length round the fence, and upon what had been a ditch between the fence and the highway. Two justices

1

C. Bulmer.

certified that the new path was more commodious
than the old, but made no mention in their certifi-
A written consent
cate of any consent of owner.
of the proprietors of the asylum was enrolled with
the certificate and plan by the quarter sessions.
This consent professed to be by the owners of the
lands or grounds through, along, or adjoining
which the footpath was intended to be diverted
and turned, and they consented to the making and
continuing of the new path through, along, or
adjoining their said lands or grounds. Held,
upon a rule for a certiorari to bring up the order
of quarter sessions for want of jurisdiction, an
appeal having failed by reason of insufficient
notice, that this was a substitution of a new path;
that the certificate need not mention the consent
of the owner; and that this consent contained in

effect what was mentioned in the scheduled form.
The rule was therefore discharged: (Reg. v. Justices
of Surrey, 26 L. T. Rep. N. S. 22. Q. B.)

EVIDENCE - INCOMPETENCY OF FELLOW-PRISONERS AS WITNESSES FOR ONE ANOTHER.After several prisoners jointly indicted are given in charge to the jury, one, while in such charge, cannot be called as a witness for another. 14 & 15 Viet. c. 99, does not apply to criminal proceedings: (Reg. v. Payne, 26 L. T. Rep. N. S. 41. Cr. Cas. Res.)

The

AN EVENING BEVERAGE CACA'OINE. The Food Jo traal says:-By a new process to which the nibs are subjected, the principal part of the oil is effectually removed; a thin beverage, well adapted for afternoon The flavour of Caca oine will, in addition, be a great or evening use, as a substitute for tea, being the result. attraction to all," Each packet or tin is labelled, "JAMES EPPS & Co., Homoeopathic Chemists, London.' Also makers of Epps's Milky Caca'oine (Caca'oine and Condensed Milk.)