Page images

Wednesday, March 4.
(Before SULLIVAN, M.R.)

Re W., A SOLICITOR. Attachment-Debtors' Act (Ireland), 1872, s. 5, sub-sect. 4-Non-payment of money due by a solicitor to client.

A solicitor who, acting under a power of attorney, receives money for a client, and neglects to pay it over, when ordered by the court to pay the same in his character of solicitor, is guilty of misconduct in respect of which an attachment may be issued against him within the 35 & 36 Vict., c. 65, s. 5, sub-sect. 4, although his default may be occasioned by inability to pay. APPLICATION for an attachment against W., a solicitor, for non-payment of money ordered by the court to be paid. W. was solicitor for Mrs. Bird, and, acting under a power of attorney to to draw an annuity to which she was entitled, he had received a portion of the annuity, but not having paid it over to Mrs. Bird, a petition was, in consequence, filed by her against him as her solicitor. Upon the hearing of this petition January 1873, it was ordered by Sullivan, M.R., with the consent of W., that within ten days the gale due, amounting to £100, should be paid to Mrs. Bird; but an affidavit of credits due from Mrs. Bird to W. was to be furnished to her by W., and she was to pay the amount of the credits found due. On foot of this order W. paid over £40. In June 1873, a notice was served on him to pay the £60 still remaining due by him, or that an application would be made to the court for an attachment against him. As he did not comply with that notice, the application was made accordingly; and it then appeared to the court that he was entitled to credit for £1 13s. 4d., and it was ordered by the court (30th June, 1873), that he should pay the balance remaining due, £58 68. 8d., within one month from the date of the order. That sum not having been paid, Carton, on behalf of Mrs. Bird, now moved for an attachment, referring to 35 & 36 Vict., c. 57, sect. 5, sub-sect. 4.

Walsh, Q.C., contra.-A sum of £22 10s. 5d. is due by Mrs. Bird personally to W. for costs, and should be set-off. There is also a sum of £81 due for costs incurred by her husband. Mrs. Bird, as executrix to the will of her husband, received £500 belonging to him, out of which the debt due to W. should have been paid. She has not paid the amount, and she has now left this country. Under this state of facts the court should not, in the exercise of its discretion, issue an attach


Carton, in reply.-At the time of making the former order, credit was given to W. for all sums that were fairly due. These costs were never presented to us till the present moment. Costs due in an executory capacity cannot be set-off against a sum due to the executrix in a personal capacity. SULLIVAN, M.R.-This is a motion of a very serious character. The principles which govern the case are laid down by James, L.J.: "The meaning of the Act (32 & 33 Vict. c. 62, s. 5, subsect. 4) is clear, its object was to relieve from imprisonment any one, whose default in payment of a sum of money arose from poverty. Therefore, certain cases were exempted from the operation of the Act. in which imprisonment was a punishment for misconduct. It is not in every case in which a solicitor is ordered to pay a sum of money that he is liable to imprisonment for not paying it, but if he has received money of his client he is guilty of a breach of duty unless he has it ready when it is called for, and if he makes default the court always considers him liable to punishment. That was the case in Re Rush L. Rep. 9 Eq. 147; Re Hope, 7 Ch. App. 523). There is no doubt there cannot be a more serious breach of duty than for a solicitor to receive money for a client and not pay it. This lady filed a petition, which came before me in Jan. 1873. It was ordered, with the consent of Mr. W., that within ten days the gale due should be paid. On that occasion it was ordered that a list of all credits due to Mr. W. should be furnished to the petitioner, and that the petitioner should undertake to pay the amount so found due. That order having been made on consent, Mr. W. cannot get out of it; but if the court sees there was some error, it has perfect power to say, "take the order, but you shall not have the attachment." £40 was offered to the petitioner on foot of that order, and accepted by her. I must say that great forbearance was shown to Mr. W., and there is no reason to think that undue pressure was put upon him. No further payment having been made, a notice, in June, 1873, was served on Mr. W. by the petitioner, to pay the £60 remaining due, or that she would apply for an attachment. If there had been any hurry on the former occasion, there was now plenty of time. The only substantial matter, which turned out to be a matter of fair dispute, was an item of £10. I came to the conclusio that I should not allow that, but I gave hin


credit for £1 13s. 4d. That left a balance of £58 68. 8d. It was ordered that he should pay that sum within one month. It has not been paid, and that is a sum in respect of the nonpayment of which, if rightly due, Mr. W. is answerable for misconduct. By misconduct I mean holding the money of a client, and not being able to pay it. It has been said that there are credits, but I cannot see it. The matter has been discussed here twice; he gave a consent once; every precaution was taken to do him justice. He never made an affidavit as to the credits, as he was required to do by the order. There is no excuse for a solicitor who applies to another purpose money which belongs to his client. It should be a golden rule to all solicitors, that the money of a client should be regarded as sacred. I will make an order for the attachment, but I will give Mr. W. a fair time. The attachment shall not issue, if within one month he pays half the money, and if within two months from that time he pays the rest. The costs of this motion are given, but do not form part of the money for which the attachment is crdered. Order accordingly.

Tuesday, March 17.

(Before FITZGERALD, B.) THOMAS AND ANOTHER V. Cox. Practice-Security for costs-Plaintiff resident out of the jurisdiction-Judgment Extension Act 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 54).

Motion to compel a plaintiff resident in England to give security for costs, granted, notwithstanding the passing of the Judgment Extension Act 1868.

Raeburn v. Andrew (L. Rep. 9 Q. B. 120), not followed.

Kenny, on behalf of the defendant, moved that the plaintiffs be restrained from taking any further proceedings in the cause until they should give security for costs, inasmuch as they resided out of the jurisdiction of the court. The action was for goods sold and delivered. The affidavit of the defendants, who were merchants, resident in the city of Waterford, stated that the plaintiffs resided at Cardiff, in Glamorganshire, in Wales, out of the jurisdiction of the court.

Foley, for plaintiffs, contra.-The right to security for costs, in cases where the plaintiff is resident out of the jurisdiction, is given, provided there be an affidavit of a good defence upon the merits, by the Common Law Procedure Act 1853, s. 52. By the passing of the Judgments Extension Act the foundation for this enactment has been removed. "When we look at the origin of the practice of calling on a plaintiff resident abroad to give security for costs, as established in Pray v. Edie (1 T. R. 237), the point becomes quite clear. In that case, the plaintiff being a foreigner residing abroad, the court stayed proceedings till he gave security for costs, and Buller, J., said: 'For this reason, that if a verdict be given against the plaintiff, he is not within the reach of our law to have process served upon him for costs.' The same point

was afterwards, for the same reasons, decided in Fitzgerald v. Whitmore (1 T. R. 362), in the case of a plaintiff residing in Ireland, and the rule was afterwards extended to a plaintiff resident in Scotland. But since the passing of the Judg ments Extension Act, 1868 (31 & 32 Vict. c. 54), that reason has completely ceased. The effect of that enactment is that, when a judgment has been obtained in England, a certificate of such judg ment can be registered in the proper office in Scotland, and the court in Scotland can issue process on such judgment. It is true that the process in Scotland, perhaps, may not be like the process of our courts, but we must take it that it is as effective as our own. In Ireland, if the writ of ca. sa. be not taken away, an execution under this Act would be more effective than in England. The reason, therefore, for compelling a plaintiff resident in Scotland having ceased, this rule must be refused."-Raeburn v. Andrews (L. Rep. 9 Q. B. 120), per Blackburn, J. This decision was concurred in by the rest of the Court of Queen's Bench in England. FITZGERALD, B.-I shall adhere to the practice that has been establishered here.

Motion granted.

Attorney for plaintiffs, Davis.
Attorneys for defendants, O'Brien & Howard.

[blocks in formation]

mentioned shall, before he enters upon the office, or engages in the employment, have applied for and obtained

(a) The consent thereto in writing of the attorney or solicitor to whom he is bound:

(b) The sanction thereto of one of the judges of one of the superior courts of law at Westminster, or the Master of the Rolis, or of the High Court of Justice to be evidenced by an order of such judge: Provided that not less than fourteen days before any application is made for such sanction and order notice in writing of the application shall be given to the registrar, which notice shall state the names and residences of the applicant, and of the attorney or solicitor to whom he is bound, and the nature of the office or employ meut, and the time it is expected to occupy.

6. Where any terms or conditions shall be so imposed, and the person thereby authorised shall accept the office, or engage in the employment, he shall, before being admitted an attorney or solicitor, prove to the satisfaction of a judge of one of the superior courts of law at Westminster, or the master of the Rolls, or of the High Court of Justice, and of the examiners for the time being appointed under the provisions of the Act of 1860, or of any Act amending, to examine persons applying to be admitted as attorneys and solicitors, that he has duly ob. served and fulfilled those terms and conditions.

Where application is intended to be made to any court for an order or rule to strike the name of any attorney or solicitor (not being an attorney or solicitor making the application) off the roll of attorneys or solicitors of such court, or for an matters of an affidavit, notice in writing shall order or rule to compel him to answer the be given to the registrar of such intended application fourteen clear days at the least before such application shall be made.

Copies of all affidavits intended to be used in support of such application shall be delivered to the registrar with the notice.

Court not to entertain application, except on proof of notice.

hearing of any such application, and upon any The registrar may appear by counsel upon the other proceedings arising out of or in reference to the application, and may apply to the court to been granted by the court in the matter of such make absolute any rule nisi which may have application, or to make an order that the name of the attorney or solicitor be struck off the roll of attorneys or solicitors of the said court, or, as the case may be, to order the attorney or solicitor to answer the matters of the affidavit, or and it shall be lawful for the court to order the such other order as to the court may seem fit; costs, charges, and expenses of the registrar of or relating to any of the matters aforesaid, to be paid by the attorney or solicitor against whom any such application is made or was intended to the application is made or was intended to be be made, or by the person by or on whose behalf made, or partly by the one and partly by the other of them.

Where any court or any judge of any court rule (whether nisi or absolute) or order to be shall, upon motion, have ordered or directed a drawn up for striking the name of any attorney of such court, or for compelling an attorney or or solicitor off the roll of attorneys or solicitors solicitor to answer the matters of an affidavit, and such rule shall not have been drawn up by or on behalf of the person applying for the same drawing up the same shall have been made or within one week after the order or direction for given, it shall be lawful for the registrar to cause the rule or order to be drawn up, and all future proceedings thereupon shall be had and taken as if the application for the rule or order had in the first instance been made to the court by the registrar.

[The provisions of this Bill, in so far as it prothe mere object of such provisions, in the sense that poses to affect articled clerks, is important beyond gentlemen now articled will, immediately on the measure becoming law, be entitled to make the selves of the privileges thereby conferred.] applications specified by the Act, and avail them


ENCROACHMENTS ON THE PROFESSION.-The following letter has been addressed by a solicitor to a member of Parliament, under date 28th March 1874:-" Sir,-In reading my Law Times, I see you are a supporter of the Legal Practitioners' Society, and also an M.P. This Society's great object is to protect the Profession from encroachments by invaders. I will tell you how to confer the greatest boon upon our Profession ever conferred by one man, viz., in the House of Lords the Solicitors and Attorneys' Bill has now passed the second reading, if you would (when it comes down to the Commons) only introduce or have inserted

the following clause in the same bill, viz., All deeds or indentures under seal shall be drawn or prepared by a serjeant-at-law, barrister, solicitor, attorney, notary, proctor, or conveyancer, and whose names shall appear in the Law List for the current year in which any such deed or indenture under seal shall be drawn or prepared, and all deeds or indentures under seal drawn or prepared by any other person than above named shall be invalid and of no effect whatever.' By the 44 Geo. 3, c. 98, s. 14, a penalty of £50 is imposed on any person who draws a deed for fee or reward; but that clause is useless to the Profession, because we cannot prove that the invaders receive any fee or reward. In this town every auctioneer and even their clerks prepare hundreds of bills of sale and leases of houses, &c., but we cannot sue them for the £50 penalty, because we cannot prove they have received any fee or reward, although we know they have and do receive it. If you could get the elause I suggest inserted in this new Bill now about to pass, I would, and every other country attorney would, readily pay double annual certificate duty to the government. Why should auctioneers and their clerks and village schoolmasters draw all the bills of sale and leases, and mortgage deeds also very frequently, and they pay no certificate duty? If you would only have my clause inserted, and make all their deeds invalid and of no effect whatever, this would stop their little encroachments altogether. I only refer to deeds under seal, not simple agreements, but all deeds under seal whatever. I wish you would in your place in the House of Commons take this matter up on the part of our Profession. R. B."

THE following appeared in a London morning paper of Tuesday last;

BUILDERS and others desirous of Arranging with

Creditors can do so by applying to a solicitor of long standing, at about half the usual charges. Consultation 38.-Mr. Padmore, Old Kent-road.

ALL in Debt or requiring Legal Assistance.-Persons

in town or country released from debt without bankruptcy, publicity, or suspension of business. Private arrangements effected with creditors. Charges by instalments. Those served with writs or summonses should call immediately. Consultation free. - Mr. Hunter, London-wall, E.C.

To all in Debt. Messrs. Marshall, of 9 Lincoln's

inn-fields (established twenty years) obtain release from all debts under the new Act, and effect private arrangements with creditors without publicity. Charges by instalments.-Offices, Lincoln's-inn-fields.


[blocks in formation]

BRACE (Edward), Heron-villa, St. Martin, Worcester. April 22; Wm. W. Gabriel, solicitor, 43, Lincoln's-innfields, London. April so; V.C. M., at twelve o'clock. CACKETT (Wm.), Halbridge Hockley, Essex, barge owner and farmer. April 30; Wm. A. Arthy, solicitor, Rochford, Essex. May 8; V.C. M., at twelve o'clock. GRAY (Alured Wm.), Stoke by Nayland, Suffolk, a retired major in the army. May 5; J. Scaife, solicitor, 157, Edgware-road, Middlesex. May 22; V. C. H., at twelve o'clock. HOUL GRAVE (Peter), Toxteth-park, Lancaster, gentleman. April 30; Walter Weld, solicitor, Liverpool. May 8. V.C. H., at twelve o'clock.

JACKSON (Jas.), 31, London-road, Brighton, engineer. April 30; W. H. Cockburn, solicitor, 39, Duke-street, Brighton.

MCLACHLAN (Colin B.), Chelmsford, Esq. April 30; T. J. Holmes, solicitor, 4, Eastcheap, London. May 8: V.C.H., MORANT (Robert), 91, New Bond-street, and Well Walk,

at twelve o'clock.

Hampstead, Middlesex, upholsterer. April 30; Walter H. Bosanquet, solicitor, 22, Austinfriars, London. May 11; V.O. M., at twelve o'clock.


MORGAN (Thos.), Buckwalltycoed, Carmarthen farmer. May 4: John H. Barker, solicitor, Carmarthen. 27: V.C. H., at twelve o'clock. RAWLINS (Elizabeth). 13, Somer's-place, Hyde-park, Middlesex, spinster. April 23; E. A. Paterson, solicitor, 22, Great Winchester-street, London. May 1; V.C. B., at twelve o'clock. ROBERTSON (Wm. Haylehill, Pembroke, Esq. April 25;

8. A. Ram, solicitor, 23, Red Lion-square, London. May

4; V.C. M., at twelve o'clock. SHARMAN (Edward A.), 7, Staining-lane, London, glove manufacturer. Gresham-street, London. April 20; V.C. B., at twelve April 13; E. Sidgwick, solicitor, S.

o'clock. SMITH (Ja3.), Kirkby Lonsdale, Westmoreland, builder.

M. R., at eleven o'clock.

April 80; John Sharp, solicitor, Lancaster. May 21; WILKINSON and KIDD, 5. Hanover-square, Middlesex,

saddlers and harness makers. April 28: Aldridge and Thorn, solicitors, 31, Bedford-row, London. April 27:

V.C. H., at two o'clock.

WOODFALL (Ann), 13, Camden-avenue, Peckham, Surrey. widow. April 20; J. Brennan, Solicitor, Maidstone. May

4; M. R., at eleven o'clock.

WOODFALL (Col. Chas.), Glenview, Nellyherries, Madras. and 3, Rocky Hill-terrace, Maidstone, Kent, England. July 17; J. Brennan, solicitor, Maidstone. July 31; M.R., at eleven o'clock.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35. Last Day of Claim, and to whom Particulars to be sent. BARING (Thomas), M.P., 8, Bishopsgate-street, Within, London, of Norman Court, Stokebridge, Hants, of the Cedars, Roehampton, and of 4, Hamilton-place, Middlesex. May 30; Markby, Tarry, and Stewart, solicitors, 57, Coleman-street, London.

BEETLESTONE (Maria, otherwise Maria Banks), Cheltenham,

widow. March 31; W. Price Hughes, solicitor, Worcester.

BEST (Elizabeth G.A., Eastbury Manor House, Compton, Surrey, widow. May 31; Burne and Parker, solicitors, 1, Lincoln's-inn-fields, London.

BEST (George), Eastbury Manor House, Compton, Surrey,
and the Middle Temple, London, Esq. May 81; Burne
and Parker, solicitors, 1, Lincoln's-inn-fields, London.
BRUCE (Rev. J.), Liverpool., May 16; Thomas Houghton,
solicitor, 32, Lord-street, Liverpool.
BUTLER (Lieut.-Col. Charles), Liphook, Southampton. May
1; T. Johnson. solicitor, Midhurst, Sussex.
CHARRINGTON (Frederick), Mile End, Middlesex, and of
Fernside, Wimbledon, Surrey, and Eastern- terrace,
Brighton, brewer. April 30; Loxley and Morley, solici-
tors, 80. Cheapside, London.

CHICHESTER (Edmund P.), London, and of Chertsey.
Surrey, a captain in Her Majesty's army. April 21;
Frere and Co., solicitors, 28, Lincoln's Inn-fields,
COMBE (Lieut.-Col. Alfred), 11, Lansdowne-road, Notting-
hill, Middlesex. May 21; Bennett and Co., solicitors, 2,
New-square, Lincoln's-inn, Middlesex.
CORMACK (Wm.), 58, Norfolk-terrace, Westbourne-grove,
Bayswater, Middlesex, linendraper. May 20; J. Mote,
solicitor, 1, Walbrook, London.
CORRANCE (Frederick), Parham Hall, Suffolk, Esq. April
20: White, Borrett, and Co., solicitors, 6, Whitehall-place,
COWMEADOW (Jas.), Hereford, gentleman. April 14; Wintle
and Maule, solicitors. Newnham, Gloucestershire.
CUBELLY (Chas.), Matlock Bridge, Matlock, draper. May 1;
Jas. Potter, solicitor, All Saint's-chambers, Derby.
DAVIES (Grace), 2, Bridge-terrace, Pitlake-bridge, Croydon,
Surrey, widow. April 28; E. Pope, solicitor, 14, Gray's
Inn-square, London.


ELLIOTT (Andrew, otherwise Andrew Corrie or Corrie
Elliott, 155, Belgrave-street, Balsall Heath, near Birming-
ham, gentleman. May 1; D. Dimbleby, solicitor, 15,
Bennett's-hill, Birmingham.
FINCH (Jane), 29, St. James's-square. Bath, widow. May 8;
Berkeley and Calcott, solicitors, 52, Lincoln's Inn-fields,


GARSTIN (Lieut.-Gen. Robert L.), 27, Panton-street, Hay. market, Middlesex. May 1 Eardley, Holt, and Parr, solicitors, 28. Charles-street, St. James's. London. GRUNDON (Wm.). Leicester, tanner. June 24; Dalton and Salisbury, solicitors, Leicester.

HARBIN (Margaret), late of Farlam, Cumberland, formerly of Castlecarrock, widow. May 2; J. R. Donald, solicitor, 56, Castle-street, Carlisle.

HASTIE (Robert), 4, Oliver's-terrace East, Bow-road, Middlesex, Esq. April 30; G. Robins, solicitor, 3, Guildhallchambers, 32, Basinghall-street, London.


Bolton Bridgwater



King's Lynn.


New Windsor
Richmond (Yorks)


HILL (Thos. Wm.) formerly of Stoneleigh House, Clifton Park, late of 7. Arlington-villas, Clifton, gentleman, May 1; H. B. Press and Inskip, solicitors, Small-street, Bristol. HOBSON (Esther R.), 8, Onslow-square, Middlesex, widow. April 20; E. and H. Tyler, Wickham and Moberly. solicitors, 14. Essex-street, Strand, Middlesex. HUSKISSON (Wm.), 30, Mecklenburgh-square, Middlesex, gentleman. April 30; Parkers, solicitors, 17, Bedford row, Londen, JOHNSON (Wm. H.), formerly of 48, Leaf-street, Holme Manchester, engraver to calico printers, late of 23, Hulton-street, Moss Side, Manchester, estate agent. June 24; Rideal and Shaw, solicitors, 26, Brazennose-street, Manchester. JONES (Elizabeth A.), late of of 3. Saville place, Lambeth, Pultney-street, Barnsbury. road, Middlesex, formerly

Surrey. April 20; E. Lister, 23, Earl-street, Cam bridge. LEFFLER (Frederick). Apothoearies' Hall, and 3, Whitley. place, Reading, gentleman. May 30; W. F. Blandry. solicitor, 1, Friar-street, Reading. LEY (Chas. Hay), late of 4, Hichmond-terrace, Whitehall, Middlesex, and occasionally residing at Dawlish, gentle man. May 11; Coulthurst and Van Sommer, solicitors, 13, New Inn, London.

MILLER (Major Gen. Wm. H.), C.B., Oriental Club, Hanover-square, London, and 17, Kildare-gardens, Bays water, Middlesex, May 7; Merriman and Pike, solicitors, 25, Austinfriars, London. MONNERY (John W.), late of Catford-hill, Lewisham, Kent, formerly of 53, High- treet, Southwark, hosier. May 18; Hawkes and Co., solicitors, 101, Borough High-street, Southwark. MOULTRIE (Peter), 74, Upper Charlton-street, and 32, Clipetone-street, Fitzroy-square, Middlesex, buiider. May 25; Cox and Sons, solicitors, 4, Cloak-lane, London. NICHOLAS (John), Cuby, Cornwall, farmer. May 20; Chirgwin, Truro.


PAYEE (Chas.), Uplands near Ryde, Isle of Wight, Esq.
PAYNE (Chas. H.), M. U., formerly of The Hill, Wimbledon,
May 1; T. Johnson, solicitor, Midhurst, Sussex.
Surrey, late of 2. Shirland-read, Maida-vale, Middlesex,
May 1; Rhodes and Sons, solicitors, 63, Chancery-lane,
PAYNE (Matilda), 251, Cambridge-heath-road, Middlesex,
widow. April 19; Thos. Whitwell, solicitor, 17, King
PEOUS (Julia M. M.), formerly of Little Missenden, Bucks,
street, Cheapside, Lon on.
late of Freshford, Somerset, widow. Andrew and Atkin
son, solicitors, 8, George-yard, Lombard street, London,
PRIOR, (Mary), 6, Blandford-square, Middlesex, widow
April 20; Ware and Hawes, solicitors, 7, Great Win.
chester-street-buildings, London.

Roox (Edwd.), Commerce-road, Wood-green, Middlesex,
Cowkeeper. April 14; Martineau and Reid, solicitors, 2,
Raymond-buildings, Gray's Inn, Middlesex.
SMITH (Dr. Alexander), M.Dd Co., solicitors, 8, Lancaster
Gothic House, Herne Bay,
Kent. May 1; Barnard
place, Strand, London.

SMITH (Francis L.), Gothic House, Herne Bay, widow.
May 1; Barnard and Co., solicitors, 8, Lancaster-place,

TODD (John), late of Howard-road, South Hornsey. Middlesex, and since of Welton, Sebergham, Cumberland, stonemason. April 22; Boulton and Sons, solicitors, 21A, Northampton-square, Clerkenwell, London.



When holden.

Thursday, April 9... Tuesday, April 7 Wednesday, April 8. Monday, April 13 Thursday, April 9. Friday, April 10.. Friday, July 10 Monday, April 6 Monday, April 13 Thursday, April 16 Thursday, April 9. Saturday, April 11

Friday, April 10. Monday, April 13 Friday, April 10 Friday, April 10.. Friday, April 10.. Friday, April 10. Friday, April 10.. Monday, April 13 Wednesday, April 29 Tuesday, April 7


Friday, March 27.


Samuel Pope. Esq., Q.C.
P. H. Edlin, Esq., Q.C....
George Francis, Esq.
B. Thos. Williams, Esq....
Horatio Lloyd, Esq.
F.A. Philbrick, Esq., Q.C.
H. T. Cole, Esq., Q.C.......
G. E. Dering, Esq.
Robert John Biron, Esq..
D. Brown, Esq., Q.C.
S. Warren, Esq., Q.C...
J. B. Maule, Esq., Q C..
W. D Seymur, Esq., Q.C.
T. C. S. Kynnersley, Esq.
A. M. Skinner, Esq., Q.C.
John H. Brewer, Esq.......
Mr. Serjeant Cox

[blocks in formation]

Wm. N. Lawson, Esq.
Francis Barrow, Esq.......
J. D. Chambers, Esq.
Thomas Gunner, Esq....
Joseph Catterall, Esq.
A.J.Stephens, Q.C.,LL.D. | 14 days

DEATH OF SIR WILLIAM BODKIN. ON taking his seat at ten o'clock, the AssistantJudge, Mr. Edlin, said the members of the Bar and every one present in the court who were acquainted with the learned and estimable Sir William Bodkin, would be sorry to hear that he died last evening, at half-past six o'clock.


Mr. Serjt. Cox, on taking his seat in the Second Court, said, in reference to the death of Sir Wm. Bodkin :-It is my painful duty to announce to you the death of Sir William Bodkin. I cannot the feeling of all who are connected with this do so without expressing what, I am sure, will be

court, that an admirable judge and a most excel. Bodkin was unrivalled in all that is required by a lent man has departed from among us. Sir Wm. criminal judge. He had almost by intuition the faculty of seeing at a glance into the heart of a case- -discerning the very point at issue, estimating the various degrees of guilt, and properly apportioning punishment to crime. He tempered justice with mercy and combined kindness with firmness. During the five years that I was so intimately associated with him in the duties of

John Trevor.
Herbert T. Sankey.
John H. Barker.
John Walker.
John S. Barnes.
G. H. E. Rundle.
F. F. Giraud.

W. S. Smith.
F. G. Archer.
R. Champney.
Charles Bulmer.
John Clayton.
Thomas Harding.
Henry Darvill.
C. Hughes.

Jno. Howard.
C. George Croft.
Wm. W. Hayward.
Francis Hodding.
Ed. Coxwell.
Thomas Heald.
Walter Bailey.

this court, I found him always ready and pleased to give me the help of his long experience, and I am indebted to him for whatever knowledge I may have acquired of the duties of a judge. I witnessed the first approach of his terrible malady; he knew from the beginning the fatal end, but he spoke of it with resignation, and it scarcely seemed to affect his usual cheerfulness. I am informed that to the last he endured his fearful sufferings with the patience and resig nation of a Christian as the will of God, and that he died, as he had lived, without an enemy and at peace with all the world. He was ever to me a kind and faithful friend, and I could not make the sad announcement of his death without my mind. giving this expression to the emotions that fill

Mr. Montague Williams, the senior member of admiration which the deceased assistant-judge the Bar who was present in this court, in a few well-chosen phrases, expressed the respect and had inspired in the minds those who, like himself, had known him long both as a judge and as a private friend.

THE death is announced of Mr. D. Maude, who recently retired from the office of chief magistrate of Greenwich Police-court.


Tuesday, March 31.

(Before H. J. STONOR, Esq., Judge.)

Re SYKES; Ex parte GOSNOLD. Execution creditor under £50 who has levied and been restrained by court, and who has proved for his entire debt, permitted to reduce his proof and entitle himself to dissolution of injunction on receipt of proceeds of levy. Injunctions ought not to be granted as to execution debts under £50 after levy, except in special cases. Jones for execution creditor.

Messrs. Lawrence, Plews, and Co. for the debtor.

On the 1st Jan. last an execution was levied on the debtor's goods by Frederick Gosnold, a creditor, upon a judgment for £36 88. debt and costs recovered by him against the debtor. On the next day the debtor filed his petition for liquidation, and on the following day Gosnold was restrained from further proceeding on his execution. The debt and costs (£36 8s.) and costs of levy have been paid into the hands of the High Bailiff. Resolutions accepting a composi tion of 2s. in the pound were passed at the first meeting, and confirmed at the second meeting. Gosnold proved at the first meeting for £106 8s., and was a non-assenting creditor at that meeting, and also at the second meeting. In his proof for £106 88. (which it is admitted includes the above debt and costs, £36 8s.) he made no mention of his judgment, but omitted to strike out the words at the end of the proof "save and except the following," which refer to any security the creditor might have. The proof is altogether filled up in a very hasty and illiterate manner. In the list of creditors the debtor returned him as a creditor for £115 "holding an agreement for £100 and a judgment for £30.”

His HONOUR this day delivered judgment as follows: The debtor now applies under the composition to have the proceeds of the execution paid to him upon his paying the execution creditor the dividend of 2s. in the pound on his whole claim of £106 88. The execution creditor opposes this application, and applies for the payment of the proceeds of the execution to himself offering to reduce his claim accordingly. It has always been held that a creditor may realise his security and prove for the deficiency, but that if he neglected to do this, and prove for his whole debt, he is bound to give up his security, and permis. sion will not be given to a creditor who has proved his whole debt to withdraw his proof and set up his security, except under special circumstances. (See Robson's Bankruptcy, 2nd edition, 292, 5, and the cases there cited.) Now in the present case there can be no doubt that the execution levied by the creditor was practically a security, and ought to have been mentioned in the proof; but it is equally clear that being under £50 the creditor was "absolutely entitled" to it. (See the cases of Slater v. Pinder, 24 L. T. Rep. N.S. 475; Ex parte Lovering, re Peacock, 29 L. T. Rep. N.S. 897); that the injunction ought not to have been granted; and that the granting or not granting of an injunction cannot affect the rights of creditors inter se (Ex parte Rocke, re Hall, 25 L. T. Rep. N.S. 287, and Ex parte Tate and Co., re Keyworth, 29 L. T. Rep. N.S. 849.) The question which remains for my decision is, whether under all the circumstances of this case, the proof of the whole debt by the execution creditor, ought to be held absolutely to deprive him of the benefit of his judgment, and consequently of the proceeds of the execution there under, or whether he ought to be permitted to reduce his claim, and so entitle himself to the latter. Upon the whole, considering that there is no evidence of any real intention on the part of the execution creditor to waive his rights, that the proof is filled up very ignorantly and inaccurately, and ought to have been rejected by the chairman, that the vote of the execution creditor had no effect on the resolutions, aud that the execution was known to the debtor and also to the receiver, who was afterwards appointed trustee. I think that the execution creditor ought to have an opportunity offered him of amending and reducing his proof by deducting the proceeds of the execution, and that upon his so amending and reducing his proof he will be entitled to receive the latter. The present application must, therefore, stand over until next court, when the creditor can apply in the usual manner to have the injunction dissolved, and for liberty to amend and reduce his proof, and for payment of the proceeds of the execution. I may add that as a rule, with few and special exceptions, no injunctions ought to be granted to restrain proceedings on executions levied for sums not exceeding £50. Application adjourned to next court, the execution creditor to pay the debtor his costs thereof to the present time.


COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION. TRINITY EDUCATIONAL TERM, 1874. PROSPECTUS of the LECTURES of the Professors and of the Classes of the Tutors. The Professor of Jurisprudence will deliver the following courses of lectures during the ensuing educational term:

INTERNATIONAL LAW, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE. 1. Origin and Nature of International Law (Public and Private).

2. The Independence of States.

3. The Diplomatic Intercourse of States. 4. Treaties.

5. Treaties (continued).

6. Modes of Enforcing Rights short of War. ROMAN CIVIL LAW.

1. Division of things as Subjects of Ownership in Roman and French Law.

2. Classification of Rights of Ownership Roman and French Law.

3. The Roman and French Law of Intestacy. 4. The Roman and French Will.

5. Obligations arising out of Contract. 6. Obligations arising out of Delict.



[blocks in formation]

1. Institutes of Gaius.
2. Institutes of Justinian.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND LEGAL HISTORY. The Professor of Jurisprudence, in his private will conclude the subject of the "Prerogatives class in Constitutional Law and Legal History; of the Crown. He will then proceed to treat of the composition, practice, and privileges of the Houses of Parliament, and of the securities for the "Liberty of the Subject." The books referred to (among others) will be Hallam's Works; May's tice;" Broom's "Constitutional Law;" and For. "Constitutional History, and Parliamentary Pracsyth's "Cases and Opinions in Constitutional Law."


The Professor of Equity proposes to deliver, during the ensuing educational term, two courses lectures (there being six lectures in each course) (elementary and advanced respectively) of public on the following subjects, including the most im. portant statutory provisions and the principles of pleading and the practice of the Court of Chancery applicable thereto respectively :


1. Conversion, Election, and Reconversion (so far as those subjects were not fully treated of during last Term).

2. The Administration of the Estates of Deceased Persons.

The Professor hopes that gentlemen attending the public lectures on equity will, in addition to their ordinary reading, pay special attention to the above-mentioned subjects, and that for such purpose they will read the following cases with the notes thereto, respectively, in White and Tudor's Leading Cases in Equity, and the following order, namely, on conversion, election, and reconversion, Fletcher v. Ashburner, vol. 1, p. 826; on administration, Silk v. Prime, vol. 2, p. 111; Ashburner v. Macguire, vol. 2, p. 267; The Duke of Ancaster v. Mayer, vol. 1, p. 630; and Aldrich v. Cooper, vol. 2, p. 78.

Mr. Harvey will discuss the following subjects with his classes :

Elementary class.

1. Express private trusts.

2. Implied and constructive trusts.

3. The rights of the cestui que trust, and the duties of the trustee.

Advanced class.-Injunctions.

Mr. May will discuss with his elementary class

1. The origin and history of equity jurisprudence.

2. Equity jurisdiction as at present existing.. 3. Fraud.

4. Mistake.

And with his advanced class, the statutes of Elizabeth against fraudulent conveyances (13 Elizabeth, c. 5, and 27 Elizabeth c. 4), and the law of voluntary dispositions of property.

LAW OF REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. The Professor of the Law of Real and Personal Property proposes to deliver, during the ensuing educational term, twelve public lectures (there being six lectures in each course) on the following subjects:

Elementary Course.

On the Law as Affected by the Statutes for the Amendment of the Law of Property and Relief of Trustees (22 & 23 Vict. c. 35, and 23 & 24 Vict. c. 38).

Advanced Course.

1. On the Right to Fixtures as Between Donor and Donee, Mortgagor and Mortgagee, Landlord and Tenant, Tenant for Life and Remainder-man and Heir and Executor.

the above Subject. 2. On the Bills of Sale Act, so far as it bears on

3. On Legal and Equitable Waste.

The tutor on the Law of Real and Personal Property will take the following subjects:

In the Elementary Class: Estates in LandUses and Trusts-The different modes of Assurance of Estates and Interests in Land in use from the early feudal times to the present day.

[ocr errors]

Books recommended :-Joshua Williams on "Real Property;" Part I., Chapters 1-9 inclusive, and the chapters on Alienation of Copyholds, and on Terms of Years;" Smith's "Compendium of the Law of Real and Personal Property," Part II., Tits. iv.-viii. inclusive; Part III., Tit. xii.; Tudor's "Leading Cases in Conveyancing;" Lewis Bowles's Case; Taltarum's Case; Tyrrell's Case.

In the Advanced Class :-The Law of Vendors and Purchasers considered with reference to the

following points:

1. The capacities, rights, duties, and responsibilities of vendors and purchasers before sale.

2. The general nature and requisites of a con. tract for sale of land.

chaser after the contract and up to the time of 3. Matters arising between vendor and pur. completion.

Books recommended:-Sugden on "Vendors and Purchasers;" Dart's "Vendors and Purchasers" (4th edit., by Dart and Barber); Prideaux's "Precedents in Conveyancing," vol. I.; Dissertions 1, 2, and 3, on conditions of sale, agreements, abstracts, and their verification. The Professor on the Common Law proposes to deliver, during the ensuing educational term, two courses of lectures (there being six lectures in each course), as under :


[blocks in formation]

2. The Courts of Criminal Jurisdiction. 3. Criminal Pleading and Procedure.

and to discourage all attempts to provide
water for the inhabitants, or to effect sanitary and

4. The Leading Offences Affecting Person and other improvements which were at this time
Advanced Class.

1. Principel and Agent (including the Law as to Thomas Bazley, Sir Charles Legard, Messrs. Factors and Brokers). 2. Partnership.

3. Bailments (including the Law of Carriers of Goods and Passengers).

Mr. M. Powell proposes to consider the following subjects with his classes:

Elementary Class. The Law of Contracts; Parties, Disabilities, Measure of Damages; Elements of Criminal Law.

Advanced Class.-Mercantile Law. The Professor of Hindu and Mahommedan Law, and the Laws in force in British India, proposes to deliver, in the ensuing Educational Term, a course of Six Public Lectures on the following subjects, viz.:

1. Indian Penal Code.
2. Indian Criminal Code.

3. Indian Procedure Code.

In the Private Class the Tutor will continue to discuss the Indian Contract Act, and then take up the Indian Succession Act, and Hindu Wills Act. By Order of the Council,

S. H. WALPOLE, Chairman. Council Chamber, Lincoln's-inn, 17th March, 1874.


IN the House of Commons on Tuesday, a petition was presented by Mr. Cavendish Bentinck from Mr. Serjeant Cox, praying for inquiry into the duties and emoluments of the Judges of the Middlesex Sessions, and for the amendment of the Bill for regulation of the same now before the


THE actual business of the Labour Commission will not commence until after Easter. Lord Chief Justice Cockburn is president. The sittings will not be public.

A NUMBER of new Bills which have been printed have been issued, and among them a Bill bearing the names of Mr. Lopes, Mr. Watkin Williams, and Mr. C. Lewis, proposes to amend the Bills of Sale Act, 1854, by providing that a second bill of sale as security for the same debt shall be null; and that under certain circumstances mortgages effected instead of bills of sale shall be null.

THE Education Codes for 1874 for England and Scotland; Return of the number of convictions under the Master and Servants' Act in each year since 1867; Return of all convictions under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, were printed and

issued on Wednesday.

THE judge of the Bath County Court on Tuesday nonsuited Mr. W. L. Russell, a commercial traveller, who was the plaintiff in a suit to recover from the Great Western Railway Company the cost of a conveyance which he had taken from Didcot to Abingdon, in consequence of the unpunctuality of one of the defendants' trains. His Honour held that the plaintiff must prove wilful misconduct on the part of the defendants'


THE ANTIQUITY OF CLIFFORD'S INN.-The case of the King v. Allen, gent., which was a contest in the shape of a suit in the King's Bench in 1834, between a barrister and an attorney-atlaw, as to who should be principal of Clifford's Inn, throws little or no light upon the antiquity of the Society, as Mr. Allen who succeeded in retaining the office of principal, in his affidavit, merely stated that he understood and believed the Society to be of earlier origin than the Society of the Inner Temple, and never to have been in any way subservient thereto."-St. Clement Danes Magazine.

imperatively required. Among those present were
the following members of Parliament: - Sir
Ashbury, Turner, Torr, Rathbone, Monk, A.
Grant, Jackson, Hick, J. K. Cross, Julian Gold-
smid, Fielden, Dodson, Simon, and Callender;
and the Mayors of Birmingham, Liverpool, York,
Manchester, Bolton, &c.; and Mr. Bains, secre-
tary. The Home Secretary said the deputation
had placed their case very clearly before him, and
in a very proper and straightforward way. No
doubt there had been a great deal said about the
increase of rates of late, and this, no doubt would
frighten many of the ratepayers. He had to con-
sider a great many other matters, but the whole
of the subject should have his serious attention.
He should see if anything could be done.



NOTE.-This Department of the LAW TIMES being open to
free discussion on all professional topics, the Editor is not
responsible for any opinions or statements contained in it

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' SOCIETY.-Referring to the correspondence which appeared in your last issue under this heading, will you allow me shortly to deal with it. The letter from a law stationer, who signs himself, "A Subscriber to the LAW TIMES," is substantially a complaint that the Bill of the society (the chief provisions of which, so far as they are at present determined upon, have been twice published in your columns) will render law stationers liable to be proceeded against under it, in case they write or engross, &c., any instrument, &c. Had you or your subscriber looked a little more carefully into the provisions of the Bill your columns would not have been burdened with his communication. Proviso 2 of sect. 3 excepts from the operation of the section in question any person employed merely to engross any instrument or proceeding. Then as to the letter of "A Disappointed Member," I am sorry he is so dissatisfied, and hope that he will communicate with me, and, above all, give the promoters of this society and of the measure now before Parliament, the benefit of his active assistance. It is to be hoped that action under sect. 3 of the Bill, if it becomes law, will usually be taken against unqualified persons by the various law societies throughout the kingdom. I myself incline to the opinion that process under the Act ought to be issuable in County Courts also, and perhaps that the court should have power to reduce the penalty and order payments by instalments or otherwise. I hope your correspondent will frame and forward to me a letter to a member of the House of Commons for introduction into our measure clauses dealing with the action of unqualified persons in connection with magistrates, bankruptcy, and County Courts. As regards the letter of your correspondent "A Lan

cashire Solicitor," which is more moderate and encouraging than our unfortunate friend" A Disappointed Member," the case referred to, of solicitors lending their names to unprofessional APPOINTMENTS.-The Queen has been gra- persons upon the terms of receiving a share of the ciously pleased to make the following appoint-profits is probably the most discreditable thing ments: - Charles Rodgers Nesbitt, Frederick that happens in relation to the Profession. Much Duncombe, James Nibbs Brown, and William astonishing information upon this subject was Gray Rattray, Esqrs., to be members of the Legis- furnished at a recent meeting of the society, but I lative Council of the Bahama Islands; Thomas must remind your correspondents that this matter Scott, Robert Little, M.D., and William Ramsay is already specially dealt with in sect. 32 of the Scott, Esqrs., to be members of the Legislative Attorneys Act of 1843, and I cannot but think Council of the Straits Settlements; John Cyprian that if the names of solicitors indulging in this Thompson, Esq., to be Attorney-General. nefarious practice, together with the necessary additional information, were forwarded to the council of the Incorporated Law Society, they would be found ready to move in the matter. Many of the other suggestions of your correspondent are valuable, but if the present measure is to deal with every grievance of which solicitors very properly complain, our Bill, instead of being a short one, dealing with a prominent evil, and which Bill I hope is destined without creating any sensation in the public mind, and subject perhaps to modification, shortly to become law, would be found to be a voluminous measure, creating a large amount of opposition, and probably delayed ad infinitum in its passage through Parliament. Finally, neither this or any other society can accomplish work, in a day or a year, which has been rendered necessary by the serious neglect which the great body of the Profession for years have shown of their own interests. We must proceed by degrees, and as quietly as possible, remembering that there is a certain class of the outside public, not altogether without influence, who regard with distaste a lawyer and a lawyer's bill. Let us work well any society, especially none to the Incorporated together; let there be nothing like opposition to Law Society, of which many of us are members

MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AND THE BOROUGH FUNDS ACT 1872.-On Friday a deputation of representatives of the principal corporations in the kingdom and members of Parliament had an interview with the Home Secretary in regard to operation of the Borough Funds Act, 1872, their object being to redress certain grievances, which were embodied in a memorial. The memorialists complained that the provisions of the Borough Funds Act were unreasonable and unjust in many respects, were in violation of the spirit Corporations Reform Act, and were calculated as well as of the letter of the Municipal to paralyze the efforts of governing bodies,

which is possessed of considerable influence, and
which in fact is the body representing the Pro-
fession. The Metropolitan and Provincial Law
Association, like country law societies, came into
existence to supply some want. The first-named
society is already amalgamated, and we all hope
that a similar end awaits the country law societies,
and no doubt in due course of time the Legal
Practitioners' Society will disappear under similar
circumstances. In the meantime let the Profes-
sion continue to support.
X. Y. 2.

I am very pleased to see that the Legal Practitioners' Society has already prepared the draft of a Bill which is calculated to afford some protection to the Profession. The house and land agents in my town prepare, as I am informed, and have every reason to believe, the large majority of leases of houses, &c. The practice is to charge 5 per cent. upon the rental for the entire business, including, of course. the preparation of the lease. The rent, as a rule, is paid annually to the agent, and he continues to get his commission of 5 per cent. on each year's rent. As these pseudo lawyers make no specific charge for preparing the lesse, it has hitherto been impossible to do anything effectual towards stopping this encroachment upon the ordinary business of a soli citor. I trust that sect. 3 will meet this difficulty. Would it not be well to give the County Court of the district in which the person preparing the lease resides, jurisdiction as well as the Superior Courts? I fear that the expense of proceedings in the Superior Courts will act as a deterrent and so frustrate the object intended. Another class of a solicitor's practice which gets into the hands of many of these agents is the proving of wills, or, to speak more correctly, the preparation of the affidavits required for proving. I have repeatedly seen forms of affidavits for executors and Inland Revenue hanging in a conspicuous part of an agent's office in this town. I believe the modus operandi is to fill in these printed forms, get the executors sworn to the affidavits before a surrogate, accompany them to the registry, and instruct the executors how to apply in person for the probate. I know that this is a very common practice in Derbyshire. I have been asked and declined to swear executors to affi66 an agent." I have davits when accompanied by taken the trouble to ascertain that the charge of the "agent" was by no means small, even including his fee for valuing for probate. I have heard of a registrar's clerk correcting defects in these affidavits, and so helping these agents in their A clause to meet such cases would be practices. a decided valuable addition to the Society's Bill. Another important grievance to grapple with is a comparatively novel encroachment, viz, that of a solicitor's clerk (who has become well acquainted with clients), starting an office under the protection of an unscrupulous member of our Profession, who lends his name in consideration of participating in the profits. A clerk, who was at one time in my employment, is doing this at the present time. So long as the London solici tor and the clerk in question keep their own counsel, I do not see any remedy. The solicitor's name is inscribed on one plate and underneath it that of the clerk in question. Smaller charges than that of Professional gentlemen in the town is the attraction.


word "writes" should be erased from the Bill, I In writing last week suggesting that the bearing in mind the saving words of the proviso must confess to the oversight at the time of not merely to engross any instrument or proceedof sect. 3 in favour of " any person employed ings," and this oversight was the more strange the Bill looking for and finding the above quoted as I now remember on my first glance through words.


THE TAX ON SOLICITORS.-With an abundant surplus, and an exceedingly patient and courteous Chancellor of the Exchequer, an opportunity arises which I think should not be lost by soli citors, to endeavour to obtain a repeal or mitiga tion of the odious and unjust tax on their body. Without further delay should we not have our "deputation" to Sir Stafford Northcote on the subject? This might well be organised by the Legal Practitioners' Society, which indeed begins to be looked upon as the panacea of all our ills. CERTIFICATE.

OUR INVADERS.-A client of mine has handed me this circular.

Private and Confidential.

London, N., 9th March, 1874. Dear Sir,-Excuse the liberty taken by me in thus. addressing you, but having seen a bill of sale registered against you, and as it happens very frequently that persons entering into such engagements find they canself involved, and it often happens that a man is at not meet them with that punctuality which has been agreed upon, hence the unfortunate debtor finds himonce put into possession, and the whole of the home.

and effects sold off. The gentleman forwarding you this circular does not mean to intimate that such may be your case, but simply suggests should any unforseen occurrence happen if you will kindly give him a call, it will not be time wasted, as he would advise the best means and assist you at the same time of being relieved from such embarrassments. Trusting you will not consider me intruding in forwarding you this circular, should you require me or my services I will endeavour to fulfil those duties that devolve upon me both faithfully and efficiently.-I am, dear Sir, yours faithfully,—Ă. B.


UNQUALIFIED PERSONS.-We send you at foot copy of a document received by a poor person in this town, who holds a receipt for all money owing in respect of the application. Is it not an attempt to obtain money by means of a threat? Cannot a member of the Legal Practitioners' Society secure an admission as to whether it was sent by the authority of the person whose name is lithographed at the foot of the note ?

THE UNITED KINGDOM MERCANTILE OFFICES, Holborn, London. Legal Department. It having become evident from your silence that extreme measures will be required to recover the debt against you at these offices, we have to intimate that on Tuesday next (unless a settlement be previously sent here), the necessary steps will proceed towards obtaining a warrant of execution against your goods and chattels, which failing, a warrant of imprisonment for contempt of court will be applied for, the expense of all which will fall on you to pay. No further notice of any kind can be sent. We are, your obedient servants, A. B. and Co., Accountants. A FIRM OF COUNTRY SOLICITORS.

[blocks in formation]

91. TENANTS IN COMMON-MARRIAGE-CONVEYANCE -A. assigns to his two daughters two leasehold houses as tenants in common. The two daughters get married, and A. destroys the deed. There is nothing in existence to show that the property was vested in the daughters. The daughters now wish the houses to be vested in their husbands, in their own right. A. is willing to join in any deed. There was no settlement on the marriage. Will any of your correspondents inform me whether this can be done without the intervention of trustees, and how? J. K.

[blocks in formation]


LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' SOCIETY. MEMBERS of the legal profession and others desirous of further improving or adding to the Legal Practitioners' Bill 1874, which has been introduced into and read a first time in the House of Commons, are requested by the honorary secretary to frame clauses dealing with such matters concerning legal practitioners as need reform and can be dealt with by legislation, and to forward them to him at the office of this journal.

N.B. An opportunity is now afforded country law societies of moving with a view to legislation in connection with many matters constantly brought under the notice of the governing bodies of such societies.


The annnal general meeting was held last week, at the offices, 126, Chancery-lane, E.C., James Cuddon, Esq., the deputy-chairman, presiding. Mr. F. McGedy (the secretary) read the notice convening the meeting, and the minutes of the preceding meeting, which were confirmed. The directors report and statement of accounts having been taken as read,

The Chairman said-Gentlemen, the accounts for the past year, now before you, exhibit a considerable improvement in the new business of the

[ocr errors]

company in both departments. In the life de. partment such improvement is manifest in three important particulars-namely, the amount of the new premiums, the average amount of the new policies, and the total sum assured thereby. The new premiums in the past year have reached the highest amount yet attained in this company, namely, £10,590 as against £8,500 in the preceding year. The average amount of the new policies has risen from £814 in 1872 to £1,023 in 1873, while the total amount thereby assured is £267,000 for the past year, as compared with £205,000 in the former year. (Hear, hear.) These are favourable features. The fluctuation in the amount of the life claims during the past year is obvious; but I may observe that a payment made in respect of a temporary excess in the rate of mortality is not all money lost. but is in a great measure a prepayment of claims, which would otherwise have to be met at some future time or times-either proximate or remote. And, further, it is in the very nature of a life business that there should be fluctuations. All life assurance calculations are founded on averages, and the very word "average necessarily implies variation. This departure, therefore, from the even tenor of our way should surely be regarded as an incident in the chapter of accidents from which, however great the care, prudence, and vigilance in accepting or rejecting lives, no office, I venture to say, can rely on enjoying a perpetual exemption. By way of a little counterpoise to the excess of claims, I may state that during the past year several reversions purchased by the company have fallen in, which when realised may be expected, besides allowing £5 per cent. per annum interest on the cost of such reversions, to yield a profit on the capital of £5000 or £6000 at least. The average rate of interest on our investments shows a very satisfactory improvement, although we have not been less careful as to our securities. As to the claims in the fire department, we ought to be content, as the losses do not amount to more than the average per centage. I am happy to say that many of the insured are revising their fire policies, with a view to increasing the amount insured in due proportion with the enhanced cost of re-instating. The new fire premiums have increased 13 per cent. during the past year. We must all regret the loss of Mr. Marsh, who died last year, and who had been an active director of the company from the time of its formation. Since the report was printed we have had the misfortune to lose an old and valuable country director and a large shareholder, Mr. Dabbs, of Stamford. I take leave to remind you that this is the year for the quinquennial valuation. I trust that every shareholder will add something to the business of the company during the current year. Nothing else but the hearty co-operation of the shareholders is required to make our dividends not only permanently good, but also gradually progressive. (Hear, hear.) I shall be most happy, before moving the adoption of the report, to answer any question which any gentleman may wish to ask respecting the business of the company.

Mr. T. J. Hooper-There is, Sir, one question which I wish to ask upon a subject not mentioned in the report, and I do so for the information of the shareholders generally. It has reference to the action which occurred a short time ago in which this company contested the payment of a life policy. I am sure the directors have an explanation to give of it, and I think they will be only too glad to explain, because it appeared from the newspaper report that they contested the claim on purely technical grounds. I had nothing whatever to do with that action, and am in no way concerned in it, but, as a shareholder and an agent of the company, I think it would strengthen the hands of the agents generally, if you could, Sir, give us some few of the grounds on which you were led to resist the payment of the claim in question. (Hear, hear.)

The Chairman.-I am very much obliged to the honourable proprietor for asking this question, as it affords me an opportunity of giving an explain. ation, some of the newspapers having made a mistake in reporting the result. I can assure the meeting that under no circumstances would the directors have disputed a policy upon any technical ground, or upon any ground whatever, unless they had felt themselves compelled to do so in justice to the policyholders and shareholders. The policy in question was effected by a gentleman upon the life of a lady, and in the proposal for the insurance it was distinctly stated that the life had never been proposed for assurance to any other office, and I need not say how important it is that a correct answer should be given to that question. The policy having been completed on the 9th April 1872, and the death occurred on the 16th June following, and it came to the knowledge of the directors that a post mortem examination of the body had (at the instance of the lady's relatives) been made, and that it proved to be the fact that she had diseased lungs, and that fortytwo gall stones had been found, from one of which

(as large as a walnut) death had ensued; and you will readily understand that such a result in respect of a life which had been insured scarcely ten weeks, left the directors no alternative but to make further inquiry. (Hear, hear.) Upon inquiry being made it was found that the life had in fact been proposed previously to two other offices of standing, and declined by about two or three months previous to the both. One of which proposals was made only proposal to this company. Had the directors known of these prior proposals that would have led to inquiry and the knowledge of facts which would have induced them to refuse the insurance at any premium whatever It was proved at the trial that the lady had been an intense sufferer for some time previously. The result of the trial was that a verdict was given for the company upon the count which involued the untrue statements in the proposal. The insurer had lent no money, and insured the life only in anticipation of an intended marriage which death prevented. In conclusion, I may add that the directors took the advice of most eminent counsel, and acted upon it only. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. Hooper.-I hope, sir, you will understand that I did not bring this forward in any spirit of complaint. [The Chairman.-"Oh, no."] I only wished for information, because I felt sure that you would not in this office resist the payment of any claim upon purely legal grounds. (Hear, hear.)

Mr. McGedy.-I may inform you, Mr. Hooper, that the reports in the newspapers, with the exception of the Times, were all wrong. The verdict on the principal count was for the company, whereas it appeared in the newspapers as against us.

The Chairman then formally moved that the directors' report be received and adopted. Mr. H. Mason seconded the motion which was carried unanimously.

Mr. H. Mason said-I am sure, gentleman, you will all agree with me that we ought not to separate without passing a vote of thanks to the gentleman who occupies the chair on this occasion, and who is the deputy-chairman of the company. (Cheers.) I can assure you on the part of the directors that we esteem his services very highly indeed. (Hear, hear.) He is indefatigable in the performance of his duty, and I can only contemplate that his removal would be a very great detriment to the undertaking. (Hear, hear.) The time and attention he gives to the business of this office is something considerable, and if the shareholders only knew how much they were indebted to Mr. Cuddon for his services they would, I am sure, be much more eulogistic than I am. (Hear, hear.) I began to move that the best thanks of the meeting be given to the chairman, not only for his conduct in the chair this day, but for his valuable services to the company at all times. (Cheers.)

Mr. Maude seconded the motion, which was carried with applause.

The Chairman-I feel deeply indebted to to you, gentleman, for this kind recognition of the services which I am able to render to the company. It is not only an immense pleasure to me to find that my efforts on behalf of this office are so highly appreciated, but that in the discharge of my duty I am surrounded by so many gentlemen of great business experience, of great talent, and the highest possible integrity. (Hear, hear.) I have the able assistance of my friend Mr. McGedy (the secretary), Mr. Rogers of the fire department, and other officials in the office, without which, of course, the business would not be in its present prosperous condition. I thank you very much indeed for your kindness. (Cheers.)

Mr. F. R. Ward.-I hoped the chairman would have concluded his remarks by proposing a vote of thanks to the officers of whom he has spoken so highly. I concur in all Mr. Mason has said with reference to Mr. Cuddon's valuable services to the company. No one knows more about the business than he does. But we all know how exceedingly well he is supported by the officers, especially by Mr. McGedy, and by our friend Mr. Burges, whose legal assistance is also most valuable to us. (Hear, hear.) I beg leave to move that we present our cordial thanks to the secretary, the solicitor, and the other officers, for their efficient services on behalf of the company.(Cheers.)

Mr. C. A. Swinburne seconded the motion, which was at once carried with unanimity.

Mr. McGedy-On behalf of myself, the solicitor, and the staff of the office, I return you my best thanks for the compliment you have paid us in passing this vote of thanks. We are all most anxious that the company should prosper and we hope that during the current year, which is the last of the fourth quinquennial period, the shareholders will come forward and assist us by bringing a good many life proposals. (Hear, hear.) Last year, as the chairman has told you, we did the largest amount of new business we have ever transacted in any one year, amounting

« EelmineJätka »