in the present case-a position in which it must assume that all requirements in respect of matters precedent and incidental to registration have been complied with, and confine yourselves to the construction of the document. I shall take care that the committee, which is now sitting to inquire as to amendments desirable in the law relating to joint stock companies, looks into this question, and considers whether amendment is desirable both to strengthen the requirements as to definition of objects, and to control in some proper way the finality of the registrar's certificate." The same case involved the recognition of the fact that the registrar's certificate of incorporation of a company is conclusive evidence that all the requirements of the Companies Acts "in respect of registration and of matters precedent and incidental thereto have been complied with": (see sect. 1 of the Companies Act 1900). That point was gone into more fully in Bowman v. Secular Society Limited (117 L. T. Rep, 161; (1917) A. C. 406), the case in which it was decided that a bequest " upon trust for the Secular Society Limited" (being a company the main object of which, as stated in its memorandum of association, was to promote the principle "that all human conduct should be based upon natural knowledge and not upon supernatural belief, and that human welfare in this world is the proper end of all thought and action") was valid. There Lord Parker of Waddington in the course of his judgment said: "By the first section of the Companies Act 1900 the society's certificate of registration is made conclusive evidence that the society was an association authorised to be registered. The section does not mean that all or any of the objects specified in the memorandum, if otherwise illegal, would be rendered legal by the certificate. On the contrary, if the directors of the society applied its fund for an illegal object, they would be guilty of misfeasance, and liable to replace the money, even if the object for which the money had been applied was expressly authorised by the memorandum. Even if all the objects specified in the memorandum were illegal, it does not follow that the company cannot, on that account, apply its funds or enter into a contract for a lawful purpose." questions after the testator's death, as is shown by the recent case of Re Baroness Zouche (noted 146 L. T. Jour. 457), where the testatrix settled the furniture, plate, and articles of vertu and curiosities at a certain house at the time of her death. The exact meaning of the gift must depend largely on the collocation of the words, but according to Mr. Theobald's Law of Wills (7th edit., p. 204): "Furniture includes plate and pictures, and probably ornaments; but not wine or books or tenant's or trade fixtures, or an altar stone and relics." As to the meaning of plate: Vice-Chancellor Stuart in Holden v. Ramsbottom (4 Giff. 205), where there was a specific gift of all the furniture, except plate and pictures, which might be in his house at his death, had to decide whether a plated service in the house was also excepted. "It is admitted," he said, “that, if the exception had not been made, every article of plate would have passed under the description of furniture." As there was nothing in the will to show that the word "plate" was not used in its proper sense, and "plate" properly so called did not include plated articles, the learned Vice-Chancellor held that the specific legatee of the furniture was entitled to the plated service. Mr. Justice P. O. Lawrence held in Re Baroness Zouche that "articles of vertu " connoted that there must be an artistic element in the article, and that the books and manuscripts in the library might be articles of vertu or curiosities, and directed an inquiry as to whether any of them came within that category. He accepted the definition of "curiosity" given in Murray's New English Dictionary. There are fifteen subdivisions of the meaning of "curiosity" in that dictionary. Possibly the fifteenth is the one which appealed to his Lordship: "An object of interest; any object valued as curious, rare, or strange." There was also the common question whether plate at the bank could be considered to be in the house at the testatrix's death. The courts have given a wide meaning to these words, and decided that chattels temporarily out of the house are included in such a gift, but in this case the plate was, at the date when the testatrix succeeded to the house, at the bank and remained there. Under these circumstances the plate could not be considered as being merely temporarily out of the house, and so did not pass under the gift. Indefinite Dispositions of Income of Personal Estate. The practitioner has to be careful to see that it is clear that the by Deed. PRACTITIONERS often have to consider whether there is any substantial difference in principle between the rules of construction applicable to deeds and those applicable to wills. Of course, there are a few cases in which the difference is well defined, as for instance, in the words necessary to create an estate in fee simple in land. As stated in Norton on Deeds, p. 43, “the fundamental rule of interpretation for deeds, as for all instruments, is that to interpret a deed the expressed intention of the parties must be discovered." There is ample authority for the rule that a gift by will of the income of property to a person without limitation as to time-in other words, an indefinite gift of income-is a gift of the capital, where no other disposition of the capital is made (see Theobald on Wills, p. 480, 7th edit., and cases there cited), but authorities on deeds, bearing on the same point, are rare. However, the case of Re L'Herminier; Mounsey v. Buston (70 L. T. Rep. 727; (1894) 1 Ch. 675) seems to decide that the rule is the same in the case of deeds. There by a settlement made on the marriage of B. L'Herminier and E. M. personal estate was settled upon trust to pay the income to E. M. for life, and after her death to "stand possessed of the dividends, interest, and income of the said trust funds in trust for such person or persons as the said E. M. shall by her last will and testament in writing, or any codicil, direct, limit, or appoint, and subject to such appointment (if any) of the said dividends, interest, and income" to stand possessed of the said trust premises and the dividends and income thereof upon trust for her next of kin as therein mentioned. Mrs. L'Herminier by her will appointed the settled fund upon trust to pay the income to her husband for life, and after her death upon trusts which exhausted the whole interest in the settled funds; and the question was whether she had an absolute power to appoint the capital of the settled funds. Mr. Justice North decided that she had. In the course of his judgment he said: "Supposing an absolute owner of personal property to give the income of his property to a person, what does that person take? He has a right to receive the income for ever, and, having the right to the whole income, he has the right to dispose of the capital which produces that income. There is no difference between a disposal by a person having the absolute ownership of the income of a fund and the exercise of a power over the income of a fund in this respect. The power of appointing the income or fruit of a fund is, in my opinion, equivalent to a power over the tree which produces the fruit." Defining Articles in a Will. It is not easy to make any sweeping description of articles to be specifically given by a will which will not give rise to chattels in a particular house given specifically to anyone are those in the house at the testator's death. Otherwise questions may arise as to whether the chattels at the date of the will in the house were not intended, and a question of ademption may arise. Re Lea (104 L. T. Rep 253), before the present Master of the Rolls, then a judge of first instance, is an example of a com. pendious gift, where a testatrix devised her dwelling house and bequeathed all her furniture, plate, linen, china, glass, books, pictures, and household effects of every description, and all other the contents of the said dwelling-house, except any articles which she might have bequeathed by her will to her nephew. The learned judge said: "In my opinion everything in the house passed." During the testatrix's last illness certain jewellery of hers had been put for safety, by persons who knew that they had been appointed executors, into the bank, and this was held to be notionally in the house and to pass under the gift. NOTES OF RECENT DECISIONS NOT YET REPORTED. BY OUR REPORTERS IN THE SEVERAL Courts. HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.-CHANCERY DIVISION. Administration-Contract-Construction-Debtor and CreditorBankers-Testator's secured Debt-Release on Payment-Agreement to transfer Securities-" Other than personal Security Right to rank as Creditor against Testator's general Estate. The testator being indebted to H. and S., a firm of bankers, in a sum of £107,287 16s., for which debt and interest the bankers held mortgages and charges on the greater part of the testator's freehold, leasehold, and other property, an agreement was in April 1913 entered into between the firm, the applicant, and the testator whereby, in consideration of £49,719 138. 5d. then paid by the applicant, the firm, at the testator's request, assigned to the applicant all their securities (other than personal security), whether by mortgage, charge, deposit, or otherwise, for the testator's indebtedness to the firm, then standing at £107,287 16s., and all their title to the properties comprised in the securities, except so far as already realised, and the firm agreed to do all things necessary to vest the securities and properties in the applicant. The firm released the testator from all personal liability, interest, or claims for or in respect of the £107,287 168., he, as part of the consideration for the transfer and release, agreeing to pay the firm £3000 by half-yearly payments of £500. On the same date as the agreement the testator wrote to the applicant a letter by which, in consideration of the transfer from the bankers. the testator agreed to execute and do all deeds, acts, and things the applicant might consider necessary for giving the applicant the benefit of the bankers' securities so as to place the applicant in the position of legal mortgagee thereof, with power of sale after demand for payment, the testator to realise the transferred properties at prices approved by the applicant and hand over the net proceeds and until the sale to pay the applicant the rents and profits by way of interest on the £49,719 13s. 5d. paid to the firm or the unpaid balance. The testator, after some of the transferred properties had been sold, died on the 24th April 1915, and the respondents were his surviving executor and the residuary legatees under his will. There was a probable deficiency in respect of the balance of the £49,719 133. 5d. after deducting amounts paid on realisation of the securities and the value of securities remaining unrealised, and the applicant claimed to be a creditor upon the testator's general estate for the whole of the amount remaining due to him. On behalf of the residuary legatees Brittain v. Lloyd (14 M. & W. 762) and The Moorcock (60 L. T. Rep. 654; 14 P. 64, at p. 68) and sect. 20 of the Conveyancing Act 1881 were relied on. Held, that the relationship of debtor and creditor had been established, and the applicant was entitled, on electing to assign his security, to rank as a creditor upon the testator's general estate for the balance now owing to him. [Re Nelson; Nelson v. Collins. Ch. Div.: Eve, J. April 29. -Counsel: Austen-Cartmell; Stamp; P. F. Wheeler. Solicitors Collins and Collins; T. Lamartine Yates] Administration-Deferred Legacy-Sum set apart for Annuities— Distribution of Estate-Ultimate Deficiency to answer Legacy— Right to follow Assets. The testator's will made in the year 1862, as modified by a codicil, contained a bequest of £200 to be equally divided between the children of M B. upon her death Amongst other annui ies given by the testator was one of £8 to M. B. The annuities were secured by the purchase of Consols. The testator died in the year 1863, and on the 22nd May 1871 a decree was made for carrying the trusts of his will into effect. By an order dated the 27th May 1873 the annuity funds were on the death of the respective annuitants to fall back into the testator's residuary estate. After the death of an annuitant in 1880 the income of the testator's residuary estate as increased by £666 13s. 41. Consolidated £3 per Cent. Annuities was paid to the person entitled for life to the income of the net residuary estate as it stood under the order of 1873. In Feb. 1885, on the death of the life tenant, her three children became entitled to the net residue in equal shares, and in July 1885, on the application of two of such children, an order was made after which there was left only the funds standing to the accounts of two other annuitants, M. B. and M. F., and whose children, to whom the legacies of £200 had been bequeathed. were not parties to the order. M. F. died in 1904, and £200 was paid to her only child under an order made in the presence of a residuary legatee and mortgagees. As the result of M. F.'s death the testator's residuary estate became greater than £200, and, after payment of the legacy and costs, the balance was paid to the residuary legatees. On the death of M. B. in 1917 it was found that her annuity fund was insufficient to pay in full the legacy of £200 to her children. They now claimed against the personal representatives of a residuary legatee of the testator as having received residue in priority to the payment of their pecuniary legacy the right to follow the testator's assets: (Gillespie v. Alexander, 3 Russ. 136). Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to follow the assets of the testator for the difference between the amount of her part of the legacy and the sum actually received by her, and to an order for an account after giving credit for the amount received. [Re Rivers; Pullen v. Rivers. Ch. Div.: Eve, J. April 30.Counsel: C. P. Sanger; H. Johnston Edwards. Solicitors A. E. Cubison; H. G. Kenyon, agent for Abery Lucas and Beresford, Petersfield.] Settlement-Policy settled by Husband-Lapse of Policy-Reversionary Interest settled by Wife-Husband entitled to Income of Wife's Fund-New Policy-Right of Trustees to impound Husband's Interest-Payment of Premiums. By a marriage settlement dated the 6th Nov. 1895 the husband assigned to the trustees a policy on his life for £1000 upon trust after the death of the husband and wife for the issue of the marriage as the husband and wife or the survivor of them should appoint, and in default of and subject to any such appointment in trust for the children of the marriage who should attain twenty one years or, being daughters, marry. The wife settled certain reversionary interests to be held upon Third Sheet. trust to pay the income to her for her life and after her death to the husband for his life and after the death of the survivor upon the same trusts as the policy moneys. The husband covenanted that he would not do or suffer anything whereby the policy might become void or voidable, and would pay the annual premiums and other sums necessary for keeping on foot the said policy or any policy or policies effected as thereinafter mentioned and for restoring the same if the same respectively had become voidable, and also covenanted to effect a new policy or policies if the said policy should become void in such sum as would be the sum which would have become payable under the void policy if the husband had then died; and it was provided that the trustees might in their absolute discretion apply any part of the income of the wife's funds "in or toward payment of the annual premiums or other the sum or sums of money necessary for keeping on foot or restoring the said policies of assurance or any of them." The husband was unable to pay the premiums, and in 1897 the policy lapsed and became void. The trustees had no funds available to keep up the policy, and the husband's financial position was such that proceedings to enforce his covenant would have been useless. The wife died in 1904, and there was issue of the marriage one son, who was an infant. The husband married again in 1905 and assigned his life interest under the settlement to his second wife, who settled it upon trusts under which the income was payable to her. The reversionary interests settled fell in in 1917, and there would then have been payable under the lapsed policy £1437 10s. The trustees required the husband to take out a policy for that amount. The husband was willing to take out a policy for £1000, the trustees paying the premiums out of the income of the wife's funds, but the trustees of the settlement of 1905 contended that no part of such income could be applied in keeping up any such policy if taken out. Held, that, under the provision in the settlement of 1895, the trustees were only entitled to apply the income of the wife's fund in keeping up the settled policy or restoring it when voidable, and not in effecting or keeping up a fresh policy; but that the trustees were entitled to impound the husband's life interest towards discharge of his obligations under the settlement; that they were entitled to bring an action for specific performance of his covenant or to take out a fresh policy and charge him with the expense, and, following Re Rhodesia Goldfields Limited (102 L. T. Rep. 126), to withhold the income until the expenses were met; that such right to impound did not arise only in the case of an existing debt (applying the judgments in Re Milan Tramway Company; Ex parte Theys, 50 L. T. Rep. 545; and explaining Cherry v. Boultbee, 4 My. & C. 447; Re Smelting Corporation, 113 L T. Rep. 44; and Re Abrahams, 99 Ľ. T. Rep. 240), but applied to any property lost through the hus. band's default; and that the trustees were entitled to retain the income until a new policy was taken out for £1437 10a., and to apply the income in paying the premiums on such policy. [Re Jewell's Settlement; Watts v. Public Trustee. Ch. Div.: Younger, J. April 16.-Counsel: G. M. Hildyard; B. A. Hall; W. R. Sheldon. Solicitors: Rawle, Johnstone, and Co., for Prance and Prance, Plymouth; Wansey, Stammers, and Co.] KING'S BENCH DIVISION. IN BANKRUPTCY. Bankruptcy-First and second Bankruptcies-Both Bankruptcies antecedent to April 1914-Proceeds of a Contract made by the Bankrupt in 1916-Bankruptcy Act 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5, c. 59), 8. 39. C. was adjudicated bankrupt in 1908, and again in May 1911. The official receiver is trustee in both bankruptcies. Subsequently to the 20th Dec. 1916 the official receiver received £2345 13s., representing the proceeds of a war contract entered into by the bankrupt in Aug. 1916 jointly with A. H. The question was whether this sum belonged to the official receiver as representing the estate under the first or under the recond bankruptcy. Sect. 11 (3) of the Bankruptcy and Deeds of Arrangement Act 1913, now embodied in sect. 39 of the Bankruptcy Act 1914, altered the existing law and came into operation on the 1st April 1914, and therefore both bankruptcies were antecedent in date to that section coming into operation. It was contended on behalf of the estate under the first bankruptcy that sect. 39 of the Act of 1914 had only retrospective effect where one of the subsequent bankruptcies had taken place after the 1st April 1914, and that therefore under the old law the property belonged to the estate under the first bankruptcy: (Re Clark; Ex parte Beardmore, 70 L. T. Rep. 751; (1894) 2 Q. B. 393). Sect. 39 (1) of the Bankruptcy Act 1914 provides: "In the event of a second or subsequent receiving order being made against a bankrupt, any property acquired by him since he was last adjudicated bankrupt, which at the date when the subsequent petition was presented bad not been distributed among the creditors . . shall vest in the trustee in the second bankruptcy, but any unsatisfied balance of the debts provable under the last proceeding bankruptcy may be proved in the subsequent bankruptcy. Held, that the question was really decided in Ře Cullwick (119 L. T. Rep. 31; (1918) 1 K. B. 646). Sect. 39 of the Act of 1914 was intended in cases of successive bankruptcies to apply, whatever their date, as regards property acquired in the right of the bankrupt since he was last adjudicated bankrupt, and which, at the date when the subsequent petition was presented, had not been distributed among the creditors in a preceding bankruptcy; and the trustee in the second bankruptcy was therefore entitled to the fund. Held, also, that £16 198. 8d., being the balance of certain property acquired by the bankrupt in Nov. 1911, but not realised until June 1914 as it had been acquired after the second bankruptcy, also belonged to the estate under the second bankruptcy. [Re Cohen. K. B. Div. in Bank. Horridge, J. March 24 and April 7.-Counsel: for the official receiver in the first bankruptcy, Hansell; in the second bankruptcy, Tindale Davis. Solicitors: Solicitor to the Board of Trade; Tarry, Sherlock, and King.] LAW LIBRARY. BOOKS RECEIVED. The English and Empire Digest. Vol. 1. Butterworth and Co. Bell-yard, Temple Bar. Price 30a. Kingdon on the Income Tax Act 1918. Waterlow and Sons Limited, London-wall, E.C. Price 9s. 6d. net. Carneg e Endowment for International Peace-Preliminary Economic Studies of the War: Economic Effects of the War upon Women and Children in Great Britain (Andrews and Hobbs), price 4s. 6d. net; Effects of the War upon Insurance. with Special Reference to the Substitution of Insurance for Pensions (Gephart), price 4s. 6d. net; Financial History o Great Britain 1914-1918 (McVey), price 4s. 6d. net. Oxford University Press, Amen-corner, E.C. The Law Quarterly Review. April 1919. Stevens and Sons Limited, 119 and 120, Chancery-lane Price 5s. net. Scott on James Madison's Notes and a Society of Nations. Oxford University Press, Amen-corner, E.C. Price 10s. 6d. net. Reconstruction Problems: No. 22, Domestic Service. Stationery Office, Imperial House, Kingsway, W.C. 2. 2d. net. H.M Price COUNTY COURTS. SITTINGS OF THE COURTS. FOR THE WEEK ENDING SATURDAY, MAY 10. Abingdon, Wednesday, at 10 Ashborne, Wednesday, at 11 Barnet, Tuesday, at 10 Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, at 10.30 Bolton, Wednesday, and Satur- Bradford (Wilts), Friday, at 10.15 Bridgend, Thursday and Friday 11; Thursday, at 10 Bromley, Thursday, at 9.30 Burslem. Thursday, at 10 Burton, Monday (R. By), at 11.30 Carlisle, Tuesday. at 9.30 Chesterfield, Friday, at 9.30 Durham, Tuesday (R. By) day, at 10 Gloucester, Monday, Tuesday, and Grantham. Friday, at 10 Halifax, Tuesday (J.S. at 10). at Hull, Monday, Tuesday, Wednes- Jarrow, Tuesday, at 10 Lewes, Monday Liverpool, Monday (By at 11), and Friday (B., A., & W.C.), at 10 Llandovery, Saturday Llandrindod Wells, Tuesday, at 10 Llandudno, Thursday Llanelly, Monday Llanidloes, Wednesday, at 2 Long Eaton, Thursday, at 11 Manchester, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday (R. By) Market Drayton, Friday, at 10 Market Harborough, Monday, at 11 Marylebone, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Fri- Matlock, Monday, at 10 Newbury, Thursday (Reg.), at 10 Newport (Mon.), Tuesday (R. By), North Shields, Thursday, at 10 Oswestry, Thursday and Friday, at 10 Oundle, Friday, at 11 Peterborough, Tuesday, at 9.30 Pontypool, Wednesday, at 10.30 Portsmouth, Monday (By) and Rhayader. Wednesday, at 10 Rochester, Tuesday, Wednesday. and Thursday, at 9.30 Rotherham, Tuesday and Friday, at 10 Ryde, Wednesday St. Helens, Wednesday at 10.30 Sheffield, Wednesday (J.S.), at 10 South Shields, Thursday, at 10 Stafford, Friday, at 10 Stratford-on-Avon, Monday, at 10 Swindon, Wednesday, at 10.30 Other sittings are specially fixed if necessary. ON several occasions it has been proposed to ascertain, not without intentions as to taxation, what balances lay dormant in the hands of bankers and what securities were unclaimed. A Bill to compel banks periodically to disclose this information is now before the Commons. The information sought for relates to sums on current, deposit, and other accounts, where the same have not been operated on for a period of six years prior to the 1st Jan. next. Also disclosure is sought for in regard to stocks, shares, scrip, debentures, mortgages, title deeds, or other securities which have been for that same period of six years in their possession and credited to a person who during that period has had no transaction with regard to them, or on whose behalf or in respect of which no claim is pending. Furthermore, the Bill requires particulars as to plate, jewellery, works of art, and other property lodged for custody, and as to boxes and packets so deposited. It is proposed that on every 15th day of January after 1920 all persons and corporations carrying on business as bankers must make a return bringing the same up to the preceding 1st Jan. The Public Trustee is to be empowered to set out the form in which these returns are to be made, but that form is to be such as will disclose full particulars of all claims, if any, which may be pending. To this same official the Bill makes it obligatory for all bankers by the subsequent 30th day of June to hand over the sums and securities thus disclosed, and he is to hold them in trust for the persons entitled thereto, subject to such terms and conditions as the Treasury may lay down. The penalties for default in making returns go to a fixed sum of £100 a day, and the Public Trustee is also empowered, notwithstanding this liability, to send a duly qualified accountant to examine the books and to prepare a statement at the cost of the bank in default. Pre-War Practices. THE earlier Bill on this subject has been withdrawn after considerable symptoms of disfavour, and a second one of some considerable bulk has been presented by Sir Robert Horne, supported by the Home Secretary. Its purport is to pave the way toward a general return to ante-war conditions in industry, and to honour the pledges given by Ministers when the exigencies of the war called for drastic changes. The Bill applies to establish. ments in which munitions work (within the meaning of the Munitions of War Acts 1915 to 1917) has been carried on, and any other establishment in which the departure from the practice was made in consequence of certain Treasury agreements (dated the 19th and 25th March 1915) or in pursuance of any other written agreement. The Bill applies alike to the establishments belonging to and under the control of the Crown and to those belonging to subjects, and any proceedings available against the latter are available against the former in the name by which the establishment is usually known. It is left in the hands of the Ministry of Labour to make the appropriate regulations and for the general conduct of the scheme sketched out. The Scheme. THE plan proposed in order to restore the pre-war state of things is to require the owners of establishments where any trade rule, practice, or custom obtaining before the war had been departed from to restore or permit the restoration of the same and to maintain the restoration for one year. So also in cases where any industry or branch of industry which in pre-war days was not carried on in an establishment has begun to be carried on in it and continues so to be after the termination of the war, or where the establishment began to work after the war began, it is to be incumbent on the owner to introduce or permit the introduction of, and for one year thereafter to maintain, such trade practices as were usual before the war in other establishments where that industry or branch was carried on under circumstances most nearly analogous. The first step towards these ends is to come, naturally enough, from the workers themselves by or on behalf of a majority of whom in the establishment of the class or grade whose custom is at stake a notice has to be served on the owner in a prescribed form specifying the nature of the practice to which the obligation to restore relates, and, if the change of practice was made in pursuance of an agreement, the notice must a so specify the agreement. In the absence of a notice conforming with these requirements, there is no obligation to restore or permit the restoration of pre-war conditions. If the owner objects to the restoration or feels in doubt as to the nature of the practice to be restored, he is required within fourteen days to serve on the sender of the earlier notice a counter-notice, which must also follow a prescribed form. Applications to Munitions Tribunals. WHEN a notice and counter-notice are thus served, either side can apply to a tribunal of the second class to settle whether the obligation exists or its nature, as the case may be, and after hearing all parties concerned the tribunal can make an order on such terms as to costs or otherwise as the tribunal thinks fit, declaring whether there is any obligation as claimed, or as to the true interpretation of the obligation. The order thus made is to be final in regard to any proceedings which may be taken against the owner in the matter subsequently, and when made the Ministry of Labour has to register the order. When the counter notice is given and before the tribunal has had its opportunity to hear and determine the difficulty it is not to be possible to take any proceedings against the owner of an establishment for any failure to comply with his obligation. If either the notice or counter-notice appears to the tribunal to be frivolous or vexatious or given to delay matters, the tribunal is to be empowered to order its giver to pay the costs of the other party and of other persons appearing, including (unless good cause to the contrary is shown) a sum for compensation for expense, trouble, and loss of time incurred in or incidental to the attendance of such other party or persons as may seem just and reasonable. If the giver of the counter-notice is thus mulcted in costs, the tribunal would also be able, where the application is not determined within one month from the date of service of the original notice, to order an additional payment of a fine such as could have been imposed had proceedings been taken against him for failure to comply with the obligation. A three-line sub-clause, the ultimate effect of which as it stands is not entirely clear, adds, "save as expressly provided by this section, nothing in this section shall prejudice the position of employers or persons employed after the war." Convictions and Penalties. FAILURE to comply with the obligations to be imposed can be visited by a fine up to £25 a day during which the offence continues, and cases are to be considered by munitions tribunals of the second class, as are proceedings under the Munitions of War Acts 1915 to 1917. Trade unions are empowered to institute proceedings against employers for offences, and federations of trade unions are likewise empowered to the same end, and any party to any such proceeding may appear or be represented by an official of the union or federation of unions or of the federation or association of employers to which he may belong. It is made a good defence in any proceedings, where an agreement has been made providing for the modification of an obligation, the owner of the establishment being a party or any group of employers of which the owner is a member, to prove that the breach alleged is authorised by the agreement, and that a substantial majority of the class or grade of workers whose custom it was in pre-war days to enforce the trade practice to be modified are either parties to the agreement or are members of a trade union which is a party thereto. The effect of the Bill is to continue the life of the provisions of the Munitions of War Acts 1915 to 1917 relating to tribunals, notwithstanding limitations of life contained in those Acts, and their continuance is left entirely at large, the period being "for so long as may be necessary for the purposes" of the new Bill. An important change is made by diverting to the Ministry of Labour the powers now exercised by the Ministry of Munitions as regards these tribunals. Moneylending. THE Moneylenders Act 1900 was a distinct move forward on right lines, but experience gained during the past eighteen years has shown very clearly that the Legislature has not yet gone far enough. Sect. 2 of that Act called for registration under his own or usual trade name," but nothing was said about bodies corporate identifying themselves with this business. A new Bill repeals the whole of sect. 2 of the 1900 Act and makes an entirely new section to replace it. By it moneylenders would have to register under names which comprise their own names and usual trade names, and bodies corporate would have to employ the words "moneylending company as a part of their names. The new section retains the old sub-sect. (b), which dealt with carrying on the business at the registered address and at no other address. The question arises whether it would not be wise to recognise more fully that "carrying on" and "carrying out" are not the same things, and that it might be worth while to greatly strengthen the law so that everything which can be done at the registered address is done there, and allowance only be made for such things as inventories and taking possession of goods under bills of sale, which in the nature of things must be done elsewhere. Three separate sub-clauses deal with promissory notes signed by officers respectively of the army, navy, and Air Force. They are not to be enforced unless their existence is made known by the moneylenders to the officer commanding the unit or to the commander of the ship, as the case may be, within fourteen days of the transaction. The most striking addition is one which proposes that in no case is a charge or receipt of more than 15 per cent. per annum to be allowed on any loan. The new sect. 2 retains the sub clauses (c) and (d) of the 1900 Act verbatim, but several changes are made in the subsequent provisions relating to defaults. The requirement as to carrying on business "in more than one name" drops out, and instead of it we find words which deal with cases where business is carried on "under any other description than his registered name. "The penalty for second and subsequent convictions is increased, for, instead of a term "not exceeding" three months or a fine not exceeding £100 or both, we have it proposed that the term should be "not less than " three months and a fine not exceeding £100. In cases of bodies corporate it is suggested also that the secretary and chairman of the company, on second and subsequent convictions, should be liable to imprisonment for not less than three months. Circulars. AN important provision is inserted in the new Bill which prohibits a moneylender sending or directly or indirectly causing to be sent to any person any written document directly or indirectly inviting that person to borrow money except in response to a written request received from that person within the preceding seven days, and there is, in addition, a requirement that the borrower's wife, if he be married, must be apprised of any bill of sale or any other form of security on the contents of the borrower's home, and her consent must be obtained, and the same fines and periods of imprisonment are provided for offences in this connection. It is proposed to bring the measure into operation on the 1st Jan. 1920. OCCASIONAL NOTES. Mr. Justice A. T. Lawrence and Mr. Justice Coleridge will to day (Saturday) leave London for Leeds, on the North-Eastern Circuit, and will open the commission on Monday next. At these assizes civil and criminal business will be taken. When the business at this town is finished they will return to London and remain until the end of the present sittings. Mr. Justice A. T. Lawrence has fixed the following commission days for holding the summer assizes on the North Wales Circuit -viz.: Newtown, Saturday, May 24; Dolgelley, Wednesday, May 28; Carnarvon, Friday, May 30 Beaumaris, Thursday, June 5; Ruthin, Saturday, June 7; Mold, Thursday, June 12; Chester, Saturday, July 5; and Swansea, Saturday, July 12. When the business at Mold is finished on Thursday, the 12th prox., Mr. Justice A. T. Lawrence will return to London and remain until Saturday, July 5, when he will return to the second part of the circuit at Chester, being joined by Mr. Justice Avofy. Mr. Justice Horridge has appointed the following commission days for holding the summer assizes on the first part of the South-Eastern Circuit-viz: Huntingdon, Saturday, May 17, Cambridge, Tuesday, May 20; Bury St. Edmunds, Friday, May 23 (civil business not before Monday, May 26); Norwich, Wednesday, May 28 (civil business not before Friday, May 30); and Chelmsford, Monday, June 2 (civil business not before Thursday, June 5). Mr. Justice Darling will go the second part of the circuit, commencing at Hertford and finishing at Lewes, but the commission days have not yet been fixed. Mr. Justice Shearman has fixed the following commission days for holding the summer assizes on the Midland Circuit-viz. : Aylesbury, Saturday, May 31; Bedford, Wednesday, June 4; Northampton, Saturday, June 7; Leicester, Thursday, June 12; Oakham, Tuesday, June 17; Lincoln, Wednesday, June 18; Nottingham, Wednesday, June 25; and Derby, Saturday, June 28. The commission days for Warwick and Birmingham have not yet been fixed. The King's Bench special and common jury causes will be taken on and after Monday, the 12th inst. Probate and Divorce causes defended and without juries will be taken by Mr. Justice Coleridge from Tuesday, the 13th inst., until Friday, the 30th inst. (Saturdays and Mondays excepted), and in either of the Admiralty Courts during the same period when Admiralty and Prize cases are not being heard (Saturdays and Mondays excepted). Probate and Divorce common jury causes will not be taken during the present sittings. The May adjourned quarter and general sessions for cases arising on the north and south sides of the Thames will commence on Tuesday next, at the Sessions-house, Clerkenwell, at 10.30. An intermediate session for cases arising in the county of Middlesex will commence on Saturday next, at the Guildhall, Westminster, at 10.30. Occasionally in the Journal Officiel of France a glimpse can be obtained of the indignities suffered by judges at the hands of the Germans when they were in occupation of parts of France. Six of the judges of the Court of Appeal at Douai were taken as hostages and placed in German camps de représailles. By a decree just published, the following judges-MM. Aubron, Ancelme, Villette, Mouron, Pennellier, and Delsart-have been appointed chevaliers of the Legion of Honour, to mark the appreciation of the President of the Republic of their bravery, fortitude, and patriotism. A public meeting will be held in the Central Hall, Westminster S.W. (Conference Room). on Monday, the 5th May, at 8 pm., to urge the Government to give facilities for its passage through the House of Commons to the Barristers and Solicitors (Qualification of Women) Bill, which has already passed successfully through the House of Lords. Speakers: Miss Chrystal Macmillan, Mrs. Finlayson Gauld, Miss E. E. Froud, Mr. E. A. Bell, Mr. Holford Knight, Mr. Wm. Lunn, M.P., Mr. Macmaster. K.C., M.P. Chairman: Councillor Edith How Martyn, A.R.C.S., B.Sc. The office of any County Court may be closed during a period of not more than fourteen days in any part of August or September 1919. unless otherwise ordered, but provision shall be made under the direction of the judge for attendance at the office on such of those days, during such hours, and for such business as he may think necessary, in order to prevent inconvenience. Nothing in this order shall apply to the District Registries of Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, and Ipswich. By order of the Lord Chancellor.-(Signed) A. G. C. LIDDELL, Asst. Sec. The ninth day of May 1919. It is a sine quâ non that for admission to the Ordre des avocats of France every member shall exercise exclusively the profes sion of avocat. In this respect the Court of Cassation has issued an important arrêt. M. X., a professor in the High Commercial School at Alger, demanded admission as stagiaire of the local Court of Appeal. The local conseil of the ordre refused admis. sion, and the decision was submitted for review to the Court of Appeal The court held that, as M X. was only engaged in teaching at night, his scholastic duties would not interfere with his legal practice; that he was called upon to lecture on com. mercial law; that his lectures were not remunerated by a fixed salary, but by class fees; and, further, that other lecturers in the school were avocats practicising in Alger. The conseil brought this decision to the Court of Cassation, and the Supreme Court held that the ordinance of the 20th Nov. 1822 was aimed at candidates working for wages, and that M. X.'s scholastic duties would neither interfere with the effective discharge of his duties as an avocat nor would they impair the independence which is necessary for members of the Legal Profession. Consequently M. X. will be inscribed at the Bar of Alger. According to the Neue Freie Presse, all the judges and members of the Bar of German Bohemia have entered a strong protest against taking the oath of allegiance to the Czecho-Slovak State. They say that it is an oath which they could not honestly observe. In addition to the objection to it on moral grounds, there are also positive legal objections for resisting such compulsion. The occupation of German Bohemia by Czecho Slovak troops has repeatedly been officially described as an occupation by Entente troops. It was presumably to be treated as occupied territory like the Rhenish provinces, and had thereby acquired the rights of such territory, The Hague Conference had agreed that the population of such occupied territory should not be compelled to take the oath of allegiance to the enemy Powers. The Czecho. Slovak State could not, therefore, on legal grounds demand more of the State officials in the occupied territory than the solemn promise already given. The ultimate possession of the territory in question would be decided at the Peace Conference. Mr. Lloyd George's enunciation of the practice of this country as one of rigid abstention from interference by military intervention in the internal affairs of another country cannot be accepted as an authoritative historical pronouncement without very considerable reservation. In reply to the question proposed by himself, "Does anyone propose military intervention in the affairs of Russia?" the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on the 16th ult. said: “If any individual commits his |