Page images


INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY. THE following is the scale of commission, together with a specimen table, promised to our readers in our last issue:




After the fir-t £2000. for every £100 up to £15,000 And in addition After the £15,000 Loans under the Drainage Acts-on Conaty & Borough Rates-Dock Dus -and for other purposes under Statutory powers, and Securities of a like nature.


of the Mortgagee's Solicitor's







The Council is not prepared to suggest a scale for the remu. neration of the Mortgagor's Solicitor on this class of securities

Sales and Purchases.



£1 per cent.

à per cent. At the rate

of the allowance of the Mortgagor's Solicitor.


[blocks in formation]

THE letter of our correspondent, "A Solicitor of Ten Years' Standing," published in our last issue, together with a letter from "A. B.," published in our present issue, deserve consideration. Our correspondent first referred to is disposed to console himself for the shortsightedness of solicitors as regards their own interests, by the fact that he discovers that we are conscious of the necessity of For every £100 up to A sum equal to iths £2 per cent. of combination to protect such interests. We would remind him, however, that the only good which And in addition can come of the consciousness in question is of a most indirect kind, in the sense that all we can hope for is to arouse the Profession to the necessity for some great effort to improve their position. But at present there is no evidence or sign of such effort. The tendency of legislation has been to reduce solicitors' remuneration and to render the means of recovering costs more difficult, whilst the monopoly of the Bar increases rather than diminishes; seven years' standing being considered a qualification for almost every legal appointment. On the other hand, all solicitors, whatever their standing, seem to be disqualified for almost legal offices of distinction and dignity, not to say those to which are attached the higher remuneration. Further, accountants and law and other agents are, we are told, conducting a large portion of County Court practice, and business in connection with the proving of wills and in bankruptcy. The privilege of paying Government the And in addition annual certificate duty the solicitor yet enjoys. The Incorporated Law Society holds occasional meetings, and the record of the business transacted thereat is printed and circulated amongst the members months afterwards. Consequently its proceedings are considered by a not inconsiderable portion of the Profession to be valueless. Other law societies in London and the provinces are more or less helpless, being without charters of incorporation. As to some of these, amalgamation is talked about, but practically nothing is done. The existence of serious grievances is admitted, men of energy and foresight meet, as they have lately met at Birmingham, but, what with the unconscious state of the society supposed to represent solicitors, and the apathy of solicitors as a body, the proceedings end in ineffective resolutions. It is remarkable that the present relations between the two branches of the Profession should be allowed to continue, and the indifference of solicitors in this respect is certainly extraordinary. Solicitors require important reforms affecting the Bar which must come, and that at no distant period. Barristers must be liable in an action for negligence, and solicitors must have much greater facilities for being called to the Bar. But the necessity for reform may apparently invite without inciting to action, and our correspondents must not rely on the ends being attained by means of journalism only.

NOTES OF NEW DECISIONS. WILL-ERASURE SUBSTITUTION DEPENDENT RELATIVE REVOCATION.-Where a testator attempts to substitute the name of one legatee for that of another by erasing the name of one and writing the name of the other in its place, if the alteration is not attested in accordance with the Wills Act, the court may receive evidence as to the original form of the will, and pronounce for it in that form. A will contained a bequest to my "sister Louisa," written over an erasure. There was no evidence as to when the erasure was made, but the court being of opinion, from extrinsic evidence, that the words erased were niece Edith," and also that the alteration had been made in the mistaken belief that the bequest would be valid, granted probate, with the words "niece Edith " restored: (In the goods of E. J. Maccabe, 29 L. T. Rep. N. S. 250. Prob.)

[blocks in formation]

SUIT BY WIFE FOR JUDICIAL SEPARATIONCRUELTY-PRIOR DEED OF SEPARATION-WIFE UNSUCCESSFUL-WIFE'S COSTS.-After the execution of a deed of separation the wife filed a petition for judicial separation on the ground of cruelty. She failed to establish cruelty and her petition was dismissed, but the court, being satisfied that her attorney had acted in the belief that she had a substantial case, allowed the wife's costs up to the amount for which security had been given in the registry: (Flower v. Flower, 29 L. T. Rep. N. S. 253. Div.).

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

Notices of admission for Michaelmas Term, 1873. Alford, William, 10, St. Swithin's-lane; articled to E. K. Blyth, 10, St. Swithin's-lane.

Allan, Charles George, 62, Moorgate-street-J. T. Simp

son, 62, Moorgate street. Allen, Samuel, Sheffield-W. B. Fennell, Sheffield.

not, W. the younger, Ipswich; and 43, Bedfordrow-S. A. Notcutt, Ipswich. Barnard, Edward Ernest, 11, Southampton-Buildings, Chancery-lane; Keynsham, near Bristol; and 50, Barrett, Joseph, 163 and 137, Fenchurch-street-T. W. Upper Bedford-place-H. Livett, Bristol. Buckler, 137, Fenchurch-street. Batten, Thomas, Bradford, Wilts-G. Spackman, Bradford, Wilts.

Bean, Wm. Henry Rodbard, 16 Beauford-terrace; 170, Ladbrook Grove-road; and Cheltenham-P. J. W. Cooke, Gloucester; H. W. Perkis, Lincoln's-innfields.


Booth, John Edward, Leeds-H. Appleton, Leeds.
Bowers, William Henry Bowyer, Birmingham-J. Jelf,
Bowling, Arthur Masterson Law, East Lodge, The Mall,
Hammersmith-H. P. Bowling, 26, Essex-street,
Bowman, John Frederick, 5, Clifford-street, Bond-street
-W. D. Freshfield, 5, Bank-buildings.
Boyce, Herbert Edward, 46, Parliament-street. West-
minster; and Gwydr House, Westminster-S. Bir-
cham, 46, Parliament-street.

Bray, Henry Malthus, 99, Great Russell-street-R. Bray
and F. R. Warren, 99, Great Russell-street.
Brewis, John, Sunderland; and 35, John-street, Bed-
Broadbent, Spencer, Liverpool-F. Broadbent, Bolton;
ford row-G. S. Ranson, Sunderland.
J. P. Robinson, Liverpool
Brockman, Alfred Drake, Folkestone-R. T. Brockman,


Brooke, Horace George, 2, Euston-square; Great Berk-
hampstead; and 14, Feathe stone-buildings-R. F.
Dalrymple, 46, Parliament-street.

Brown, Maurice, Peterborough; and 10, Serle-street,
Lincoln's-inn fields-F. Brown, Peterborough.
Browne, Edward Utten, Norwich; and 14, Albion-
street, Hyde-park-E. Field, Norwich; J. P. Hill, 6,
John-street, Bedford-row.

Budd, Samuel, Exeter-W. J. Battishill, Exeter
Bulleid, John Howard, Glastonbury; and 36, Glouces
ter-street, Queen-square-J. G. L. Bulleid, Glaston-

Bulltord, Charles Edward, 29, Tavistock place, Tavi
stock-square; and Malmesbury W. S. Jones,

Burnley, William, Bradford-H. B. Harle, Bradford.
Cheale, Sidney Alexander, Uckfield-F. W. Stone, Tun-
bridge Wells; W. Sprott. Mayfield, Sussex.
Churton, John Weaver, Chester; and 43, Chanceey.
lane-W. H. Churton, Chester.

Clark, Jonathan, the younger, 85, Guildford-street,
Russell-square-J. A. Redhead, 13, Southampton-


Collins, Charles, Firs, Rainhill, near Liverpool-T.
Martin, Liverpool; H. W. Collins, Liverpool.
Court, James Phillips, Maghull, Lancaster: Walling.
ton, Surrey; and 115, Cbancery lane -F. North,
Liverpool; W. W. Wynne, 115, Chancery-lane
Cruttenden, William, Battle-J. Martin, Battle; E.
Martin, Battle.

Cumming, Alexander, 98, Warwick-street; and Ipswich
-W. S. Yarrington, Ipswich.

Cunliffe, Walter. Warrington; and 35, Lincoln's-innfiolds-J. F. Marsh, Warrington; J. R. Buckton, Warrington.

Curling, Percy Bunce, 9, Durham-terrace, Westbournepark-C. B. Lever, 49, Bedford-row.

Davis, Charles Henry, 21. Great George-street, Westminster-J. M Clabon, 21, Great George-street. Deck, Henry Ragland, B. A., Hampsthwaite Vicarage, Ripley, York-D. and A. H. Russell, Lendal. De Soyres, Philip, Exeter; and 15, Lincolns'-inn-fields -R. T. Campion, Exeter. Dew, Griffith Davies, 10, King's-bench-walk-R. M. hipman, Manchester; J. W. Randal, 10, King'sbench-walk.

Dickson, George Herbert, Preston; and 43, Bedfordrow-J. B. Dickson, Preston.

Dodd, Charles Walters, 6, Furnival's-inn-J. D. Finney, 6, Furnival's-inn.

Dow, Edward Augustus. 30, Bedford-row-D. T. Miller, Sherborne-lane; W. H. Stephens, 30, Bedford-row. Du Moulin, Chas. Nicholas. Lamington; and 36, Lincoln's-inn-fields-A. S. Field, Leamington.

Durnfort, Francis Mount, 4. South-square,_Gray's-inn; and 26, Lincoln's-iun-fields-C. R. V. Lougbourne, 26, Lincoln's-inn-fields.

Edwards, John James 84, Newgate-street-O. C. T. Eagleton, 84, Newgate-street.

Edwards, Stanley, Lynn; and 2, Cursitor-street-F. R. Partridge, Lynn.

Elliott, Albert Augustine, 17A, Whitehall-place-J. Hopgood, 17A, Whitehall-place.

Ferguson, Daniel Lawrence, Alford, Lincoln-F. J. Rhodes Alford.

Fernell, Henry Geo. Tudor, Sheffield; and 9, Bedfordrow-W. Smith, Sheffield.

Ferbank, William, Newport-C. B. Fox, Newport. Flint, Charles Albert, Canterbury; and 17, Lincoln'sinn-fields-H. T Sankey, Cauterbury.

Foster, Edward Walker Webb, Ulster Villa, Leytonstone-E. Browning, Redditch; E C. Browning, Redditch; C. N. Cole, 30, Essex street.

Freeman, John Tilleard. 17A, Whitehall-place-J. Hopgood, 17A, Whitehall-place.

Geare, Henry Cecil, 6, Raymond-buildings-C. P. Wood, 6, Raymond-buildings.

Ghest, John, the younger, Manchester; and 2, Ellington-street, Islington-J. A. Foyster, Manchester; F. Weatherall, 7, King's Bench-walk.

Grey, Hubert Allen, 100, Cambridge-street, Warwicksquare W. H. Duinan, 15, Bedford row; J. R. Fenwick, 12, Fenchurch street; C. G. G. Rushworth, 15, Bedford-row.

Haines, George William, 10, Storey's-gate, Westminster -P. J. W. Cooke, Gloucester; J. Andrews, 12, Bedford-row.

Hamer, Henry, Liverpool-J. Rayner, Liverpool. Hamshaw, John Lovell, Farnham, Surrey-H. Potter, Farnham.

Harman, Orlando George, 7, Gray's-inn-square-A. H. Crowther, 7, Gray's-inn square.

Gammon, 5, Barze-yard.

Harvey, Richard, 5, Barge-yard, Bucklersbury—C. Harvey, Henry Fairfax, Royston; and 9, Bedford-road -H. Thurnall, Royston.

Hastings, Alfred Gardiner, 23, John-street, Bedford

row-E. Futvoye, 23, John-street. Heath, Alfred Samuel, 10, Basinghall-street-S. Heath, Basinghall-street.

Hedger, Philip F. Frushard, 2, Ladbrooke-terrace,
Notting-hill-J. Sharp, Southampton; E. Harrison,

Hime, George, Liverpool-H. W. Collins, Liverpool;
T. Martin, Liverpool.
Hinton, Edmund, 3, Lilford-road, Camberwell; J.
Blenkinsop, Euston Station; R. F. Roberts, Euston

Hooper, F. Montgomery B., Exeter, and 55, Chancery-
lane-H. W. Hooper, Exeter.
Hopkins, John Leifchild, 1, Lincoln's-inn-fields-
R. G. K. Brookes, Stow-on-the-Wold; R. J. Brookes,
Stow-on-the-Wold; W. Perry, 1. Lincoln's-inu-fields.
Hudson, Thomas, Manchester-W. H. Talbot, Man-

Jackson, Ernest Gratian, Belper-J. G. Jackson, Belper.

James, Edward, 10, Royal-crescent, Notting-hill-J. S. Torr, 38, Bedford-row.

Jeans, John Locke, Alford, Lincoln; F. J. Rhodes, Al

[blocks in formation]

Langworthy, Frederick, Modbury, Devon-R. Andrews, Modbury.

Ledgard, John Armitage, Heaton Chapel, near Stockport, ani Manchester-J. Richardson, Manchester. Lee, Edward, 14, Percy-terrace, Ladbrooke-grove-road -E. V. Lewis, 61, Cheapside.

Leeds, Charles Edward, Bury St. Edmunds, and 12, Hunter-street, Brunswick-square-J. Sparke, Bury St. Edmunds.

Lindsell, Frederick R. Barber, Lyme Regis-R. Hillman, Lyme Regis; R. W. Hillman, Lyme Regis. Ling, Frederick Gaskell, Halesworth-F. Cross, Hales


Lucas Ernest F. Bourne, Louth-T. F. Allison, Louth.
Makin, Robert Henry, Liverpool-W. Blackmore,
Liverpool; and 3, Founder's-court, Lothbury.
Martin, Thomas Frederick, 155, Cannon-street, City-
T. Martin, 155, Cannon-street; L. W. Gregory, 155,

Meres, Frederick Augustus, 58, Millman-street; and
11, Serjeant's-inn-T. Sismey, 11, Serjeant's-inn.
Middlebrook, William, Barton-on-Humber -J. H.
Priestley, Barton on-Humber.
Mills, Frederick William, 1, Brunswick-villas, Hill-road,
Abbey-road-H. R. Lempriere, 56, Lincoln's-inn-


Minshall, Philip Henry, 106, St. Paul's-road, Camdentown; and Oswestry-W. Shaen, 8, Bedford-row; C. Minshall, Oswestry.

Mould, John Clarke, Melton Mowbray-Messrs. Latham and Paddison, Melton Mowbray.

Marcott, Edwin, Offchurch, near Leamington-G. C. Greenway, Warwick.

Nash, William, 142, Rye-lane, Peckham-rye; and 45, Threadneedle-street-J. H. Cotterill, 45, Thread


Northgraves, Charles, Kingston-upon-Hull-R. H. Dawson, Kingston-upon-Hull.

O'Brien, Lucius Melville, Southampton-T. Harrison Stanton, Southampton.

Toller, Ernest Edward, East Heath, Hampstead
Messrs. Upton and Co., 20, Austinfriars.
Treacher, John, 9, Gerrard-street, Soho-W. A. Brown,
35, Lincoln's-inn-fields.

Tudor, John, Brecon-J. R. Cobb, Brecon.
Walker-Jones, Francis A., Melbourne, Sydney, Adelaide,
Launceston, Hobart Town, Australia; and 1, Vinery-
villas, St. John's-wood-C. Meredith, 8, New-square.
Walker, Hugh Mewburn, Lee-T. Walker, 12, Furni
val's inn.

Waller, Arthur, 19, Highbury-terrace-G. Waller, 75, Coleman-street.

Wallingford, Alfred Bishop, 38, Stockwell Park-roadE. A. Wallingford, St. Ives.

Walters, Frank, Wanstead-L. Walters, 3, Finsburycircus.

Ward, Charles Bernard, 32, Bernard-street, Russellsquare-H. E. Hunt, Nottingham.

Warne, Harry Duke, 15, Furnival's-inn; and Rochester -J. T. Prau, Rochester.

Waugh, Edward Lamb, Cockermouth- E. Waugh,

White, Henry Arthur, 12, Great Marlborough-street-
A. W. White, 12, Great Marlborough-street.
Wilkes, John James, 8, Granville-square, Pentonville;
and Darlington-T. Clayhills, Darlington.
Williams, Robert Jones, Putney; and Mold-T. T.
Kelly, Mold.

Williamson, James, the younger, Surbiton-J. Williamson, 6, John-street, Bedford-row.

Wise, William, Ashbourne, Derby: and 70, Upper Gloucester-place, Dorset-square-J. J. Wise, Ash


Woodforde, Randolph, 18, Everett-street, Russellsquare; and Bath-J. Stone, Bath.

Woodhouse, James Thomas, Bridge House, Sydenham ; and Kingston-upon-Hull-W. J. Reed, Kingstonupon-Hull.

Worsley, James Edwardson, Warrington; and 36, Essexstreet-W. Beaumont, Warrington; W. H. Brook, Warrington.

Owen, Morris, Carnarvon-R. D. Williams, Carnarvon.
Parton, George Adolphus, Collamore, Wandsworth-Wright, William, Rutland-park, Perry-hill, Lower
W. Clark, 66, Gresham House.

[blocks in formation]


Pinsent, Richard Alfred, Church-road, Essex-road, Islington; and 9, Bedford-row-T. S. James, Birmiugham.

Pomeroy, Edward Bovce, Wymondham-E. P. Clarke, Wymondham; J. White, Wymondham.

Porter, Thomas Simpson, Bedford-L. Jessopp, Bedford.

Preston, Donald William, 19, Norfolk-street, Strand; Norwich; and 14, Lincoln's-inn-fields-A. Preston, Norwich

Prichard, Iltyd Moline, 57, Granville-park, Blackheath; and 43, Chancery-lane - R. Cunliffe, 43, Chancery


Pritchard, Wm. Benning, Beaumont-road, Wimbledonpark-A. J. Pritchard, 7, Knight Rider-street; H. J. Francis, 36, Lincoln's-inn-fields.

Quelch, Francis, Everton, Liverpool-S. D. Worship, Liverpool.

Quilter, Charles, 140, Tufnel-park-road-J. Beaumont, 53, Coleman-street.

Rawlinson, Francis, Dalton-in-Furness-J. Poole, Ul


Reeves, Edmund Whitelock, Heathfield, Wimbledoncommon-H. W. Reeves, 44, Lincoln's-iun-fields. Rickards, Arthur Torriano, Putney; and 39, Old Broadstreet-H. Heald, 23, Throgmorton-street; R. H. Hill, 39, Old Broad-street.

Robinson, John, Sunderland-W. S. Robinson, Sunderland.

Bundle, Richard Albert, Plymouth; and 3, Mylne street, Mydo letou-square-R. E. Moore, Plymouth. Sazer, William, Todmorden; and Richmond-hill—J. Stansfield, Todmorden.

Sanders, Off George, 33, King-street, Cheapside-B. Norton, 2, Gresham-buildings; G. T. Powell, 33, King-street. Cheapside.

Saxby, Joseph, Heaton Moor, near Stockport; and Fallowfield, near Manchester-J. Peacock, Manchester. Scott, John Sefton, Blackburn; and Manchester-J. Bolton, Blick burn

Sheppard, Hobart M'Lean, P., 7, Clifton-grove, Dalston -T. Horwood, 7, New Broad-street

Skiaton, Thos., the younger, Chesterfield-T. Shipton,

Chester eld.

Smith, Alfred Oxnard, Durham-J. Watson, Durham. Spender, Frank Richard, Bradford-on-Avon-J. Sparks,


Stevens, Samuel George, 26, Northumberland-place, Bayswater-T. L. Wilson, 3, Westminster Chambers. Stow, Montagne Haslam, 13, Buckland-crescent, Belsize-park-T. S. Preston, 35, Lincoln's-inn-fields. Sullivan, John Mortimer, 5, Bond-street, Claremontsquare-C. K. Sharp, 31 and 32, Lombard-street. Sumner, John Bird, Cheetham, Manchester-J. W. Addlesham, Manchester.

Sykes, Alfred, Crosland Moor, near HuddersfieldT. H. Ramsden, Huddersfield.

Talbot, John Edward, Higher Broughton, near Manchester-W. H. Talbot, Manchester.

Tanner, Arthur, 144, Ebury-street; and Bristol-R. H. Otter, Bristol.

Tanner, William, Chelmsford-W. J. Bruty, Chelmsford.

Terry, William Curtis, Fulham-O. Richards, 16, Warwick-street, Regent-street.

Theobald, John Theophilus, The Limes, Lower Tooting -J. P. Theobald, 8, Furnival's inn.

Thomas, George, Carnarvon-E. G. Powell, Carnarvon ; J. H. Roberts, Carnarvon.

Thomas, Matthew Watson, jun., Walthamstow; and 25, Martin's-lane, Cannon street-H. W. Nelson, 26, Martin's-lane, Cannon-street.

Thompson, Henry, Fairfield; and Liverpool-G. Haigh, Laverpool.

Tippets, William J. Berriman, 16, Highbury-grove-J. B. Tippetts, 5, Great St. Thomas Apostle; J. B. Tippetts, jun., 5, Great St. Thomas Apostle.

Sydenham-J. Wright, 8, New-inn, Strand.

Young, Adrian, Dorking; and 6, Serjeants'-inn—H. Young, 6, Serjeants'-inn.

Young, John Arnold, Bury; and 4, North-road, Clapham-park-Alfred Grundy, Bury.

Pursuant to Judges' Orders. Andrews, Henry, 25, Austinfriars-S. B. Merriman, 25,


Calcott, George L. Berkeley, Leighton Buzzard, and 27, Grosvenor-road, Highbury New Park-J. Newton, Leighton Buzzard; F. M. B. Calcott, 52, Lincoln'sinn-fields.

Godfrey, Joseph Wallace, 10, Gloucester-terrace, Regent's-park-J. W. Budd, 20, Austinfriars. Greatheed, William, 19, Lincoln's-inn-fields-W. Ledsam, 17, Lincoln's-inn-fields; H. Chaplin, 19, Lincoln's-inn-fields.

Hankinson, George Henry, Woodlands-park, near Al-
trincham-R. K. Cooper, Manchester.
Overell, Albert Edward, Leamington Priors
Overell, Leamington Priors.


Pope, John Noble Coleman, Stoke Lodge, near BristolW. Leonard, Bristol.

Smith, Francis Peters, Norris-hill, near Ashby-de-laZouch, and 71, Cambridge-street, Pimlico-E. B. Jennings, Burton-upon-Trent.

Stanway, Edward Fancutt, 36, Bartholomew-road, Kentish Town-P. C. F. Tatham, 13, Knightriderstreet.

Taylor, Henry Alfred, 15, South-street, Finsbury-
square-G. R. Jaquet, 15, South-street.
Tyrer, Alfred, Liverpool-W. K. Tyrer, Liverpool.
Notices of Application to take out and renew
Attorneys Certificates.

Baker, George, 25, Larkhall-lane, and 37, Great Percy-
street, Pentonville. June 14.
Brabant, William Frederick, 2, College crescent, Belsize
Park. May 27.

Bryan, William, 59, Farrington-square. Jun 14.
Bruce, Thomas Dundas, 10, Albert-street, Regent's
Park. June 25.

Johnson, H. Skingley, 38, Walbrook, and 78, Wells

street, Oxford-street. June 14. Lindop, Thomas Crump, Torquay. June 2.

May, Alfred Henry, Bristol, and Kings' Kerwell, Devon. June 2.

Moorsom, William Frederic, Ewell. June 14. Ransom, Arthur, Newport, Monmouth, and 137, Barnsbury-road. June 14.

Smith, Francis John, 6, Gray's-inn-square, and Mans

field. June 20.

Stockwood, Alfred, Pontypridd. June 14.

Wall, William Henry, Pembury, Kent, and 8, TokenWatson, James, Croydon. May 17. house-yard. June 14.

Underwood, Edward Morgan, Hereford. June 14.


[Transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, and which will be paid to the persons respectively whose names are prefixed to each in three months, unless other claimants sooner appear.] MARTINDALE (Edmund), Moka, Mauritius, Esq., £200 New Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimant. Vesey Weston Holt, administrator to Edmund Martindale, deceased. STEVENS (Dr. Wm.), M.D.. Upper Wick House, near Worcester. Three dividends on the sum of £2500 New Three per Cent. Ar nuities. Claimants, Richard Reader Harris and Wm. Wilkes Cawley, executors of Wm. Stevens, deceased.

WITTS (Rev. Edward Francis), Upper Slaughter, Gloncestershire; LEA (Geo. Edward), Upper Slaughter farmer; and WITTS (Francis Edward Broome), Upper Slaughter, Esq. £166 138. 4d. Reduced Three per Cent. Annuities. Claimants, said Rev. Edward Francis Witts, Geo. Edward Lea, and Francis Edward Broome Witts.


WIRE TRAMWAY COMPANY (LIMITED). Petition for windingup to be heard Nov. 7, before V.C. M.

CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35. Last Day of Claim, and to whom Particulars to be sent. ADAMS (John), Hollyland, Pembroke, Esq. Dec. 6; A. Scott, solicitor, 39, Lombard-street, London.

BASSETT (Hon. Emily H., formerly of Tehidy Park, Cornwall, late of Abbey Hotel, Great Malvern widow. Nov. 30: G. Rooper, solicitor, 17. Lincoln's-inn-fields, Middlesex.

BRENNAN (Jas.), 248, Church-street. Walker. Northumberland, grocer. Dec. 20; J. A. Philipson, sol.citor, 65, Pilrim-street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

BURTON (Henry J.), 53, Pentonville-road, and 7, Philpotlane, London, grocer. Nov. 29; Tamplin and Co., solicitors, 159, Fenchurch-street London.

CLAY (Elizabeth), Rastrick, Halifax. York, widow. Dec. 31; Ford and Co., solicitors, 70, Albion-street, Leeds. COCKAYNE (Betty), Clarkson-street, Sheffield. York, widow. Dec. 6: A. Smith and Son, solicitors, 26, Castle-street. Sheffield.

CRIDLAND (Henry Wm.), formerly of Dockhead, late of 262, Old Kent-road. Surrey, cheesemonger. Jan. 6; . H. Hogan, solicitor, 23, Martin's-lane, Cannon-street, London.

DOCKER (Joseph), Brook-cottage, Chorlton-cum-Hardy, near Manchester, gentleman. Dec. 15; Sale and Co.. solicitors, 29, Booth-street, Manchester. DOE (Thomas), Mount Bures. E-sex, miller. Dec. 16; Smythies and Co., solicitors, North Hill, Colchester. EARLE (Henry E.), 28, Inverness-terrace, Bayswater, and 82, Grosvenor-street, Bond-street, London, wine merchant. Dec. 16; Chas. Earle, 9, Duke-street, Portland. EDWARDS (Richard W.), 40, Harrington street, Hampsteadplace. Lndon. road. Middlesex, gentleman. Dec. 2: Whitakers and Woolbert, solicitors, 12, Lincoln's-inn fields, Middlesex. ELLIOTT (Samuel), H. M.'s Court of Probate, Doctor's Commons, London, and 42, Harleyford-road, Kennington, Surrey, gentleman. Nov. 30; Brooks and Co. solicitors, 7. Godliman-street, Doctor's Commons, London. ELSDEN (Wm.), formerly of 57, Regent-street, Lambethwalk, and 21, Lambeth-walk, Surrey, late of 09, Loughborough-road, North Brixton, Surrey, gentleman. Dec. 5; Whitakers and Woolbert, solicitors, 12, Lincoln's-innfields, Middlesex. FAULDER Elizabeth, formerly of 15. Fitzroy-square, Middlesex, late of Boulogne-sur-Mer, France, spinster. Nov. 17; Hill and Son, solicitors, 39, Old Broad-street, London. FITZ GIBBON (Lady Isabella, M. A.), 85, Lownde -square, Middlesex, spinster. Dec. 1; Wa ker and Martineau, solicitors, 13, King's-road, Gray's-inn, Middlesex. FULLER (Louisa M. B. K., late of Brussels, formerly of West Court, near Finchampstead, Berks, and Comeroy, near Honiton, Devon, widow. Dec. 1; Leman and Co., solicitors, 51, Lincoln's-inn-fields, Middlesex. GRAHAM (Alfred), Mossley Vale House, Mossley Vale, near Liverpool, gentleman. Dec 31; G. Webster, solicitor, 6, York-buildings, Dale-street, Liverpool.

GUIDE (Wm. J.), formerly of Borough Market, Southwark, and late of 9, Sussex Cottages, Alpha-road, New Cross, Kent, fruit salesman. Jan. 1; H. Simpson, solicitor, 20. Borough High--treet, London.

GUNNELL (David), Chesterton, Cambridge, gentleman. Dec. 31; Eaden, Harris and Knowles, solicitors, 15, Sid ney-street, Cambridge.

HENDERSON (Elizabeth Martha), commonly called Lady James Townshend, Yarrow House, Bintry, Norfolk, widow. Jan. 1; F. Leach, solicitor, 10, Lancaster-place, Strand, London.

HERLEY (Jane), late of Torquay, formerly of Weston-superMare, widow. Dec. 1; D. W. J. Thomas, solicitor, Brecon.

HICKS (Anne P.), Brooklands, near Ross, Hereford, spinster. Nov. 30, E. J. Austen, solicitor, 79, Denbigh-street, Belgrave-road, London

HONE (Jas.), 49, Great College-street, Camden Town, Middlesex, and 38, Charles-street, Middlesex Hospital, Middlesex, fringe manufacturer. Dec 31; Shaw and Fraser, solicitors, 8, Furnival's Inn, London.

JACKSON (Elizabeth), Wigan, widow. Dec. 10; Leigh and Ellis, solicitors, The Arcade, King street, Wigan. JAMES (Mary E), St. Owen-street, Hereford, spinster. Jan. 1; W. J. Humphrey, solicitor, Herefo:d. JOHNS (Samuel), Garibaldi-villa, Warwick, gentleman. Dec. 1; Wm. Moon, solicitor, 15, Lincoln's Inn-fields, Middi sex.

KEEN (JOS), Godney, Meare, Somerset, cattle dealer. Nov.
30; S. Hobbs, jun, solicitor, Wells, Somerset
KENNEDY (Jos.), Brown-s reet, Manchest r, and The Pop-
lars, Edge lane, Chorlton-cum-Hardy, Lancaster, letter-
press printer. Dec. 25; J. Peacock, solicitor, 86, Cross-
street, Manchester.

KNIGHT, (Samuel), Pontefract, York. corn merchant.
Dec. 26; Coleman and Sangster, solicitors, Pontefract.
MARSHALL (Charlot e), Brunswick-villas, near Kow-bridge,
Old Brentford, Middlesex, widow. Nov. 1; Raston and
Co., solicitors, Brentford, Middlesex.
MCPHERSON (Isabella), High-street, Maidenhead, Berks,
widow. Nov. 25; H. C. Draper, solicitor, 54, Vincent-
square, Westminst r.

Moox (Wm.), formerly of Liverpool, late of Woolton Hillhouse, within Woolton, Lancashire. Esq. Dec. 1; Pears and Co., solicitors, 3, Harrington-stree', Liverpool. MOORTON (Walter), 129, Pakington-stret. Essex-road, Islington. Middlesex, licensed victualler. Nov. 20; Nash and Co., solicitors, 2, Suffolk-lane, Cannou-street, London.

NAPIER (Major Gen. Geo. T. C. C. B.), Morpeth-terrace, Westminster. Nov. 2: G. Rooper, solicitor, 17, Lincoln's in-tilds. Middlesex.

OWEN John B., formerly of Stamford-hill, Mid llesex, late of 17, Upper Hornsey-rise, Middlesex, Eq Dec. 18; Rixon and Co., solicitors, 52, Gracechurch-s reet, London. PEARSON (Charles), Temp-ford Hall, Tempsford, B dford, Esq. Dec. 1: Burne and Parker, solicitors, 37, Lincoln's Inn-fields. Middl sex.

PETTET (Elizabeth T.), Orchard-hill, Greenwich, Kent. spinster. Dec. 1; Sandom and Kersey, solicitors, 52, Gracechurch-street, London.

PRIOR (WM.), formerly of Kemerton, Gloucester, late of Weymouth, gentleman. Nov. 25; L. Jessopp, solicitor, Bedford.

RADFORD (Ellen), Southwell, Nottingham, widow. Dec. 1; S. R. P. Sailton, solicitor, St. Peter's Churchside, Nottingham.

BADFORD (Jos.) formerly of Alfreton, Derby late of Southwell. Notts, farmer. Dec. 1; S. R. P. Shilton, solicitor, St. Peter's Church-side, Nottingham. RIMMER (Ralph), Wigan. coal proprietor. Dec. 10; Leighand Ellis, solicitors, The Arcade, King-street. Wigan. SUTTON (Sir John, Bart., Norwood-park, Nottingham, and Bruges, Belgium. Dec. 4; Ward and Co., soli.itors, 1, Gray's-inn square, London. TAYLOR (Geo.), 9, John-street, Bedford-row, Middlesex, and Waveney-villa, Ventnor. Isle of Wight, printer. Dec. 15; R. H. Nettleship, solicitor, 37, John-street, Bedford-row, London. WHEELER (Henry), Bolingbroke House, Wandsworth-common, Surrey, Es. Dec. 1: Lawrance and Co., solicitors, 14, Old Jewry-chambers, London. WILLIAMS (Mary A., Walthamstow, Essex, widow. Dec. 1; W. Houghton, solicitor, 15a, St. Helen's-place, London.

WITH a view of depriving naval courts-martial of the right to adjudicate upon offences punishable by civil law, a petition to the House of Commons and memorials to the Lords of the Admiralty and Privy Council have been prepared and are influentially supported.


THE following letter was lately addressed to the
Times, but did not secure insertion:


"I have no desire to trespass unduly upon your columns, but as you have (to use a lawyer's phrase) repleaded upon the question raised in the letter of Mr. Pitt Taylor and myself, as to the power of imprisonment on fraudulent debtors, extending to all debtors alike, whether over or under £50, and you now insist that this equality, though it exists, is merely theoretical, and is reduced to a practical inequality, through the unequal operation of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, upon the two classes of debtors, you have raised a new and distinct issue which justifies rejoinder. You state, or at least I think your readers would understand you to state that, under the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act 1869, a debtor owing more than £50 can, by surrendering his property to his creditors, if it yields 10s. in the pound or more, obtain, as of right, a full discharge from all his debts, and thus free himself from all risk of imprisonment; whereas a poor man, whose debts are less than £50, cannot avail himself of this mode of escape, but must pay the uttermost farthing under the oppression of County Court summonses and commitments, aggravated by accumulated costs. Now this is a misapprehension of the true effect of the Act. The limit of £50, as an amount of indebtedness, and the limit of 10s. as an amount of dividend, have reference only to bankruptcy proper; and no debtor, trader, or non-trader, can, by any act of his own, make himself a bankrupt, and thereby acquire the right to a discharge by payment of a dividend of 10s. in the pound. The adjudication in bankruptcy must be the act of a creditor, or creditors, whose debts amount singly, or in the aggregate, to £50. But any person, trader, or non-trader, peer or peasant, merchant or mechanic, who finds himself insolvent, may, under the 125th section of the Act, by filing a petition, admitting his insolvency, procure a meeting of his creditors to be sum moned, and leave it to them to determine whether they will accept a surrender of his property for equal division among them. In this proceeding there is no limit as to the amount of indebted ness. The £50 limit has no reference to it. An insolvent who owes £5 only may avail himself of it as well as an insolvent who owes million; nor has the limit of 10s. for divi. dend. There is no limit at all. If the property were to yield 19s. 11d. in the pound, that would not give him a right to a discharge. Whatever dividend the estate may yield, the debtor must depend for his discharge upon the voluntary act of a certain majority of his creditors. This state of the law is accurately stated by Mr. Davis (the stipendiary magistrate for Sheffield) in his exami. nation before the select committee. The real difficulty in the poorer class of debtors availing themselves of these provisions lies, as Mr. Davis points out, in the amount of the fees payable to Government. This, however, might, if thought desirable, be met by a greatly reduced and graduated scale of fees; and such a plan, as it strikes me, would be better than the scheme recommended by the committee, of forming a fund by payments to be made by the debtor, which could only come out of his future earnings, thus perpetuating the very class distinction which the committee so strongly reprehend. But allow me to point out that the operation of the Bankruptcy Act 1869 is introduced as a divertion, and bas really nothing to do with the question, because, if the existing jurisdiction is properly exercised, it would never be put in force against a man who is shown to be insolvent. In its proper exercise it would be confined to the dishonest debtor who has the means of paying, but obstinately refuses to apply them. And the question then resolves itself into this, whether, admitting that the redress for breach of a civil contract should be limited to a civil remedy, is not the imposition of a temporary restraint upon a man's liberty intended to coerce him into doing that which he ought to do and can do, and a restraint therefore which it is in his power at any time to get rid of, really a civil remedy, and not to be confounded with punishment for a crime? Undoubtedly the number of debtors imprisoned is appallingly great. It is, however, satisfactory to see from Mr. Norwood's returns that the number has been reduced from 7978 in 1871 to 6910 in 1872. I hope a still further reduction will be shown for the present year; but I feel strongly that the number is still excessive, and that if Parliament and the public can be induced to look at the question practically, and not theoretically or scientifically, the remedy for the evil that now exists in the number of imprisonments would be found not in abolishing the jurisdiction, but in regulating the manner of its exercise."


THE magistrates at Marlborough-street have announced their intention not to hear articled or managing clerks of attorneys.



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.

agree with your correspondent's remarks in your
last impression that "no educated men are so in-
adequately paid " as solicitors. And why?
Simply because they quietly submit to the in-
justice with the utmost complacency. It would
be impossible to find outside the profession a
body of men so utterly apathetic and indifferent,
and so completely devoid of energy when their
our noble selves."
own interests are affected, as
I feel that in saying this I am only repeating what
has been over and over again asserted. The older
practitioners, whom we naturally expect to take
the initiative, are, to a certain extent, responsible
for this inertness. Wedded to the stereotyped
procedure and traditions of the past, they look
aghast when the slightest innovation is suggested.
To some extent this is natural enough, and there
has been quite enough of "innovation" of a
certain kind already. Law is rapidly losing much
of its cumbrous machinery and antiquated forms,
and its reformers-with the best intentions, prob-
ably-have so far popularised it by establishing
County Courts, Building Societies, and similar
institutions. The result is, that by virtue of
special legislation, the once needful offices of an
attorney are frequently all but superseded. The
registrar prepares the plaint for the "suitor;"
the solicitor to the building club, at a ridiculously
small fee, fills up and completes the printed con-
veyance or mortgage for the "member;" and
thus the ball rolls, the independent practitioner,
when one is employed on the other side, coming
in for his full share of abuse because his charges
are necessarily made out on a different scale.
Now, it is the fear of incurring the bad graces of
the client under these and similar circumstances
that has brought about another grievance. Our
charges are, as is well known, based upon a fixed
scale, or, in some cases, upon a certain scale of com.
mission. The public think both too high, and the
Profession foolishly confirm that opinion by occa
sionally giving way. I should like to know who
in the country would dare to uniformly enforce
the taxing scale, much less that of the Law Society.
The fact is that country attorneys are anything
but true to themselves in the matter of remunera.
tion. Underselling, I am afraid, is more frequently
the rule than the exception. The Profession
should condescend to take a lesson from the
labouring classes, and stick together and "strike"
now and again. No doubt this reprehensible
'competition" is partially, though not by any
means wholly, owing to the fact that agents
compete (most improperly) for certain kinds
of business which should rightly fall to our lot
exclusively. These interlopers are readily sup.
ported in their nefarious traffic by the public, who
fall an easy prey-though they don't think so-to
their exactions; and although the attention of the
attorneys must be repeatedly drawn to this
empiric phlebotomy, yet no attempt in the in-
terests of the Profession is made to suppress it!
The best solution of the problem is to have, where
practicable, an enforced scale of remuneration by
commission in substitution of the "bill of costs."
This time-honoured document does incalculable
mischief to the Profession, when it gets into the
hands of the laity. The scale of commission,
however, should not be too high. In this respect
the Law Society's scale is, I think, open to objec-
tion. Again solicitors should combine, and by
acting in concert uphold their privileges and
secure their full emoluments. Depend upon it,
until the Profession makes its voice to be felt-
not merely heard-it is quite hopeless to expect
the abolition of certificate duty" or any of the
other innumerable grievances and restrictions to
which we are so unjustly subjected. We are un-
fortunately attacked from within and without.
Untrue to one another, we find ourselves weakest
when we need to be strongest.


A. B.

I willingly accept Mr. Lumley's assurance that all
the sections of the amending statutes referred to
are to be found in the New Sanitary Laws, although
in a state of dislocation. I trust, however, that
it is not presumptuous on my part to adhere to
the opinion that every statute in such a work
should be set out in full in order that the reader
may have each in a complete form under his eye,
and so be able to impress on his mind a know:
ledge of the contents. An excellent illustration
of what a manual ought to be may be found in Mr.
Taylor's Local Government Act 1858, comprising
other statutes. Here the amended and the amend.
ing statutes are presented with equal distinctness.
All amended sections are notified and a few words
added describing the purport of the amendment.
Reference is then given to the proper section of

the amending statute, where the reader may find the amendment in full. In such a work any ordinary reader can "find his way about" without difficulty. There is no reason why larger compi. lations should not afford the same facilities. But it is not to be doubted that the feverish competition of publishers to be first in the field cramps and embarrasses men even of the highest professional distinction, and to some extent places them in a false position. In the case of Glen's Public Health Law, the grievance is, however, of a different complexion, and the responsibility belongs solely and exclusively to the publishers.


NOTES AND QUERIES ON POINTS OF PRACTICE. NOTICE.-We must remind our correspondents that this column is not open to questions involving points of law such as a solicitor should be consulted upon. Queries will be excluded which go beyond our limits. N.B.-None are inserted unless the name and address of the writers are sent, not necessarily for publication, but as a guarantee for bona fides.


1. RELEASE OF DEBT BY WILL-LEGACY DUTY.-A. owes Testator £100. Testator by his will releases the debt. Is such debt liable to legacy duty ?—Q.

2. PRACTICE IN THE COLONIES.-1. Can a clerk, having served his articles to a solicitor in this country and passed the necessary examination, commence practice in any of the colonies-e.g., Queensland, Australia? 2. If so, are there any, and what steps to be taken to enable him to do so? 3. Is it necessary that he should state the fact to the Incorporated Law Society before signing articles,-AN ENQUIRER.

3. NOTICE TO QUIT.-Jones let a farm to Smith, Brown, and Robinson, as joint tenants from year to year with a proviso against underletting; Smith has ceased to occupy the farm, and a notice to quit was given to Robinson, which was addressed to Brown and Robinson only. Query, whether such a notice was a good notice against Smith, and can Jones eject Smith, Brown, and Robinson, and if so, against whom should the action of ejectment be brought? Please refer to cases.


4. AGENTS AND DEBT COLLECTORS.-Will any of the readers of the LAW TIMES inform me of the best course to pursue in proceeding against so-called "agents" and

debt collectors," who appear as advocates, and conduct cases in the County Court, and refer me to authorities on the subject? I presume that such "agents," who in the absence of the plaintiff undertake a cause, may be treated as violating the rights of an attorney (although they may appear as witnesses to testify as to the defendant's means), and be proceeded against accor dingly.


5. SUCCESSION DUTY ACT.-A., in 1840, purchases real estate, the consideration being partly cash and partly a life annuity to the vendor, duly charged and secured on the estate by deed of even date. A. dies in 1861, having by his will empowered trustees to sell the estate, which they do in 1871, subject to the annuity. In 1873 the annuity ceases by reason of the death of the anuuitant. Is succession duty now payable in respect of the cesser of the annuity? And if so, on what principle should it be calculated, and by whom must it be borne ? The purchaser of 1871, and present owner, is a stranger in blood to both A. and his vendor (the annuitant), who were INQUIRER. strangers in blood to each other.


Acr.-By the Gas Works Clauses Act 1871, s. 35, gas companies are required to forward to the "local authority" certain annual statements of accounts. The prcvisions of this Act apply to every Gas Company who has obtained Parliamentary powers or any provisional order (under the authority of the Gas and Water Works Facilities Act 1870), since July 1871. There must, therefore, be many towns in England in which there are gas companies to which this section applies. Will any of your readers inform me who is the recog nised "local authority

" in the case of a market town A. F. W.

not being a municipal corporation ?

7. CONTRACT-DEBT-RUNNING ACCOUNTS, &c.-A. employs B. on a contract to thresh the corn A. then has, and B., by threshing on five occasions, finishes the contract. A. pays for occasions 1, 3, 4, and refuses to pay for 2 and 5 on account of imperfect work. B. puts A. into the County Court for 5 only, and succeeds by A.'s paying the sum into court. Can B. now County

court A. for money due for occasion No. 2 ?-X.


(Q. 66.) EJECTMENT.-Looking through some back numbers of the LAW TIMES, I notice this query, and the replies of "Jus." and "X. Y." It appears to me that the latter are not put as strongly in favour of the mort the principal sum remain unpaid on the day named, the gagee as the cases cited and others fairly warrant. If mortgagee can maintain ejectment against the mortgagor, although he remain in possession without giving him notice to quit or demanding possession. Where the mortgagee suffers the mortgagor to remain in possession, the latter is not tenant at will to the former, but at the most tenant by sufferance only, and may be treated as tenant or trespasser at the election of the mortgagee. (See the cases cited by "Jus." and Partridge v. Bird, 5 B & Ald. 604; s. c.; 1 D. R. 272.) The mortgagor is not entitled to possession in respect of his equitable estate, unless there is some agreement to the contrary; but he holds it solely at the will of the mortgagee, who may, at any time, without giving any prior notice, recover the same by ejectment against him, unless he is ready to pay principal, interest, and

costs: (St. 1017, 2 Sp. 64, 618.). In ejectment by mortgagee the mere fact of his having received interest on the mortgage loan to a time later than the day of the demise in the declaration, does not amount to a recognition by him, that the mortgagor or his tenant was in lawful possession of the premises till the time when such interest was paid, and consequently is no defence to the ejectment: (Doe d. Rogers v. Cadwallader, 2 B. & Ad. 473.) A. F. W.

(Q. 81). RECONVEYANCE-COSTS.-A. A. R.'s answer of last week must, I think, be founded on a misconception. Scrace v. Whittington is inapplicable, surely. That was a case where one attorney did the work of another at the latter's request, and therefore differs widely from the case in question. H. G.


(Q 80.) MEMORANDUM OF DEED.-" Consuetudo" is METROPOLITAN AND PROVINCIAL LAW unquestionably correct in the view which he takes. The right of one part owner to place a memorandum on deeds which relate to the common title cannot be admitted, but the permission to make such a memoran.


dum may in many cases be properly asked and properly the president, Mr. Charles Pidcock, in the chair. The proceedings were resumed at eleven o'clock,

conceded. Take as a reductio ad absurdum of W.'s contention, the case of a conveyance by the same deed of Whiteacre to A. and of Blackacre to B. B. thinks fit to cut up Blackacre into ten or a thousand, or a million, lots, each of which he conveys to a different purchaser. According to W., each purchaser would be entitled to have an abstract of his conveyance indorsed on the original deed, the effect of course being to prejudice A.'s right by turning the original deed into a register of the title to Blackacre, in which A. has no interest. It is the clear right of a part-owner to insist that deeds relating to the common title shall not in any way be tampered with. As to indorsements of notice of charges, &c., see 2 Davidson Conv. part 2, 801-805, 3rd edit.

Z. Y.

(Q.86.) Loss of GOODS.-B. as A.'s agent, had presumably au implied authority to send back in the ordinary course, such goods as he did not approve. A. the owner, is the proper party to sue: (Dutton v. Solomons, 3 Bos. & Pul. 584; Dawes v. Peck, 8 Term Rep. 330.)

Z. Y.

An action against a carrier for loss of goods in trusted to him for conveyance should, in the absence of an express contract for the carriage of them, be by the owner of the goods as the party damnified. Where the goods have been delivered to the carrier to be conveyed to a person named by the consignor, the consignee is prima facie the owner of the goods: (Addison on Torts, 504, 4th edit.) Where the goods were sent merely for approval, the owner sued: (Swain v. Shepherd, 1 Moo. & Rob. 224). A. is the proper party to sue the Railway Company for the loss of the goods.

A. A. R.

The property in the goods remains in A., and he therefore is the proper party to sue: (Swain v. Shep. herd, 1 Moo. & Rob. 224).

H. G.

[blocks in formation]

-I think that B., having elected to accept the debt and costs in the action instead of petitioning for an adjudication, the court would not now enter tain a new application for payment of costs of the summons. See the decisions of Goulburn, Commissioner, under the somewhat analogous sections of the Act of 1849: (Ex parte Cornick, 31 L. T. Rep. O. S. 346; Anonymous 5 L. T. Rep. N. S. 239). It may be doubted, not withstanding the discretion as to costs given to the court by the Bankruptcy Rules of 1870 (186-189), whether in any case the costs of the debtor's summons can or ought properly to be charged against the debtor, where the debtor pays within the prescribed period, or where the proceedings do not culminate in an adjudication.

Z. Y.

[blocks in formation]

(Q. 89.) FEMALE MORTGAGEE.-If the freehold is to

pass the deed must be acknowledged.

Z. Y.

LAND TITLE AND TRANSFER BILL. Mr. G. J. Johnson (Birmingham) read a paper on the Land Title and Transfer Bill. After premising that he should confine himself chiefly to the principles as distinguished from the details of the Bill, the writer proceeded to state that, in considering this or any other question of legal reform, the first thing to be done was to ascertain accurately what are the evils which it is supposed that the alteration will remove. These, he said, ranged themselves under the two chief heads of title and transfer, and, after describing the present state of the law as to both, continued: To explain the cause of this state of things is foreign to the purpose of this paper, and would require a volume to do it properly. Suffice it to say that it is not, as is generally supposed, the fault of the lawyers. It is the result of a succession of contrivances extending through centuries to evade the restrictions of feudalism, and to enable Englishmen to gratify one of their strongest instincts, viz., to deal with their land as they please, and without anybody but the persons concerned knowing anything about it. As for a long time this had to be done indirectly, and by means of all sorts of subtle contrivances, it is not to be wondered at, although it may be regretted, that our law of real property is as complicated as it is. But, whatever be the cause of this complication, it appears to me clear that the complexity is an evil, and if it be possible to simplify it it ought to be Simplified; and if it be not possible it must be because the lawyers of the present generation are not as astute as their predecessors, who invented the contrivances of fines and recoveries, the doctrine of uses, lease and release, and other means of escape from a system which had become unsuitable to the growing wants of the community in which they lived. At the outset we are met with the initial difficulty of all alterations in any established system, especially one which has been slowly built up during six centuries, and that is how we are to effect the transition from the old system to the new. The popular notion is that you have only to pass a short statute to that effect, that from and after the commencement of this Act all lands and interests in lands shall be transferable in like manner as stock in the books of the governor and company of the Bank of England, and the thing is done. All lawyers know that, at present, this is impossible, for these among other reasons:

[ocr errors]

been made, and the number of such applications is decreasing.

"The reasons for this failure are clearly shown in the report of the Royal Commission of 1869 to be, not the opposition of one branch of the Profession, but the danger, delay, and cost of having, in all cases, to prove a sixty years' marketable title, and to settle the boundaries as against adjoining owners.

"To put the matter plainly, the landowners of England think the advantages of registration too dear at the price required to obtain it. The Land Transfer Bill of last session, therefore, proposes easier, at the sacrifice of some of the advantages to adopt the second mode-to make registration

of the Acts of 1862. The settlement of boundaries is, in all cases, to be optional with the applicant (Section 35) and he has a choice of three modes of registration:

"1. With absolute certified title; if, after investigation, a twenty years' good holding title is shown.

"2. With limited certified title, i.e., limited to a date selected by the applicant.

"3. Simple registration, in which the date of registration is the starting point.

"It is obvious that in the two latter cases the attainment of the chief benefit of registration, viz., indefeasibility of title, superseding any further investigation, is postponed until by the operation of the Statutes of Limitation the documents placed on the register as the root of the title is secured from impeachment. Until that time arrives, the previous title must be shown and investigated as at present. So also, unless the boundaries are settled as against adjoining owners, and such boundaries must be verified by evidence independent of the register. In these points the scheme is inferior to Lord Westbury's; but, as it is quite clear that the landowners of England will not have the greater benefits of Lord Westbury's scheme on the onerous conditions on which alone it is possible, there is no way to get a starting point other than that proposed by the Bill of last session, viz., beginning with the best provisional one which can be conveniently got, and trusting to time to cure all its original imperfections. To accelerate the ripening of registered titles not certified as absolute at the time of registration, Lord Selborne proposes, by the Real Property Limitation Bill, to shorten by one-half the present statutory periods of limitation."


Then, after describing the technical processes registration and transfer as proposed by Lord Selborne's Bill, and the question of the necessary publicity of the register, the paper summed up the question thus:

[ocr errors]

"As to registered dispositions by registered owners (i.e., absolute sales, mortgages, or, as the Acts call them, charges), certainty of title will be ultimately secured, and, if reasonable facilities are given for searching the register, facility of transfer will be promoted. As to all other dispositions (i.e., all unregistered dispositions by legal owners, and all dispositions by equitable owners), the measure will not affect the present modes of alienation, but will simply add the cost of invesin-tigating the registered title to the present. Of the two parts of the Bill, therefore, the provisions as to title seem to be clear and certain in their

"1. In the case of stock only one kind of terest is recognised, namely, the absolute owner: ship, whereas for centuries past all kinds of interests in possession, reversion, remainder, and expectancy, to ay nothing of other partial in terests, such as mortgages and leases, have been freely created out of and are clothed with the legal ownership; and in addition to these there is the still greater mass of beneficial and equitable interests.

- A female mortgagee having married should acknowledge the reconveyance upon the mortgage money "2. The stockholder cannot encroach upon the being paid off. It is a disposition, release, and extin- boundaries of any other stockholder, or be enguishment of an estate which she and her husband have croached upon by him; nor is he entitled to, nor in her right in land: (sect. 77 of 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 74.) can he be made subject to, any of the rights over An estate extends to any interest, charge, lien, or incumbrance in, upon, or affecting lands either at law or other people's property which lawyers call easein equity: (see definitions same Act; see also Mr. Wil-ments. In the case of land the determination of liams's observations at page 410, in his treatise on PerSoual Property, 8th edit.

[blocks in formation]

"1. By investigating the title of the present owner, and if such title be found to be good, TARD.-I do not see the inconsistency which "X" alleges placing him on the register, and certifying his to be contained in my reply. If, as "X" there ownership. says, is a public footway through the churchyard, such footway would, in my opinion, prima facie extend to permit foot passengers to take dogs with them, or to wheel a hand-barrow, &c.-in short, to use the path as foot passengers do ordinarily use a path. If, however, there were no such highway, it would be absurd to suppose that there could be any custom established against the vicar which would compel him to admit dogs into the churchyard, whether accompanied by their masters or not. The due and proper use of a churchyard as such, surely does not require that the parishioners' dogs, much less those of the general public, should have access to it. Z. Y.

operation; but the provisions as to transfers appear to be incomplete in theory and uncertain in practice, and to require some years' experience before it can be ascertained whether they are workable or not. In order to place before the meeting certain definite points for discussion, I submit the following as tentative, and not dogmatical propositions:

"1. That so much of the Bill as concerns the registration of title is good, and should be supported by the Profession, as solving the difficulty of ultimately clearing all titles placed on the register without the costs of a previous judicial investigation, and avoiding the other difficulties which have been found so inimical to the general adoption of the Act of 1862.

2. That the provisions as to transfer require, in order to the rapid and safe transaction of busi ness, an open register.

"3. That the proposed machinery of caveats is susceptible of improvement.

"4. That provisions as to mortgages, or, as they are in future to be called, charges, appear to need very careful revision.

5. As before observed, the establishment of District Registries appears absolutely essential to the proper working of the scheme, and I submit that the basis of the index of registration should be the parcels identified by a map, and not by the names of the parties, as the best mode of ensuring facility and accuracy of search. On this point I would direct attention to the very clear pamphlet of Mr. George Whitcombe, of Gloucester,

"The first of these modes has the merit of securing a clear starting point, and was the foun- "6. The provisions in the Bill, as to solicitors, dation of Lord Westbury's Act of 1862, and of are some of them satisfactory, and some very Lord Cranworth's Declaration of Title Act of the much the reverse. Section 164, enabling the Board same session. It has been tried, and has failed in of Registry to make rules for our remuneration, the sense that only a comparatively small number based on the principle of a percentage sum of an of applications to place lands on the register havead valorem scale, is a step in the right direction.

The expression, or other agents,' which occurs in Sections 12, 36, 46, 160, and 164, should be either omitted altogether or defined to mean agents of solicitors only. The confidence now necessarily reposed in solicitors in transactions in real property will be quite as necessary under the new procedure as it is now; and it is not too much to require that no person should be permitted to engage in these transactions as agent for any other person except he be thoroughly competent, and be under the control which

solicitors now are.

"Lastly. I contend that, even with the most perfect system that can be devised a priori, much alteration will be found to be necessary in its practical working, and that, until a satisfactory system has been established and verified by experience, it is highly inexpedient to make registration compulsory after two years, as it is proposed to do by sect. 18. I venture on this head to repeat in substance what I stated in a paper read on this subject at the last meeting at Bristol -that the history both of attempted and actual legislation on this matter is a warning against making provisions compulsory until they have been fairly tried and found to be workable. From the year 1830 to the year 1853 the proper remedy for the admitted evils of real property law was supposed to be a registry of deeds. It was recommended by the Real Property Commissioners in 1830, and embodied in numerous Bills introduced from that time until the year 1850, and in the latter year the Registration and Conveyancing Commission formally reported that this salutary improvement was continually frustrated by the persistent opposition of attorneys and solicitors. In the year 1853 another attempt was made to establish a register of deeds, and the select committee to whom the Bill was referred investigated the whole question, and reported that we had all along been right and the public and the theorists were wrong, and that registration of deeds would do more harm than good. From that time registration of deeds (which for a quarter of a century had been the favourite panacea for all the evils of real property law) was discarded in favour of a scheme of registration of title. This latter scheme was embodied in the legislation of 1862, which in its turn has failed in its original shape, and it is about to be improved by Lord Selborne's Bill. The provisions in the measure now before us are new and untried, and, great as is their apparent superiority to the provisions of 1862, we can never be sure that any measure is good until it has been decided by experience; and, having regard to the fact that all dealings with real property (unlike making fresh rules of practice in the courts) are permanent in their character, I maintain it is most unadvisable to make this measure compulsory, unless and until it has been fairly tried, and that, therefore, sect. 18 ought to be struck out of the Bill."

Mr. J. Murray (London) read a paper on "Registration of Assurances."

The President said the admirable paper of Mr. Johnson was so exhaustive that very little more was to be said on the subject. It must strike everyone that the Bill was a most important one; and should it pass in its present state it would seriously affect not only the interests of the Profession, but their clients at large. Most of the legal reforms had increased the expense of conveyancing instead of diminishing them; and the question was whether they would be increased should this measure pass. He did not doubt that they would. It appeared to him that should the Bill pass in its present shape real property would be transferred in the same way as railway stock and other personal property. Whether that would be beneficial to the community or not was another question.

After some discussion, in which Mr. Burton, (London) Mr. Miller (Bristol), and Mr. Southall (Worcester), took part.

Mr. Shaen (London) proposed: "This meeting, whilst approving generally of the principle on which Lord Selborne's Bill is founded as to the registration of titles, is of opinion that until the provisions as to transfer are tested by experience it is highly inexpedient to make registration compulsory."

Mr. Dees (Newcastle-upon-Tyne) seconded the


Mr. Torre (London) thought the society should not commit itself to any opinion on the subject until it felt itself fully qualified to do so. Mr. Johnson's paper had thrown all the light possible on the subject, which he thought should be brought under the notice of the Lord Chancellor and Lord Cairns; and he suggested, with Mr. Johnson's permission, that a copy of his paper should be sent to each of their Lordships.

Mr. Sutherland proposed an amendment, that the principle of registration of titles merely should be approved; which was seconded by Mr. Winterbotham, but negatived; the original motion being caried.

Mr. A. Ryland (Birmingham) proposed that Mr. Johnson's paper be printed, and circulated among

the law societies and others, with a request for an expression of their views upon the points therein raised. Mr. C. E. Mathews seconded the motion, and it was carried.

[We reserve a portion of the report of the proceedings until next week, owing to pressure on our space.]

SOLICITORS' BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION. THE thirty-first half-yearly general meeting of the members of this association took place on Wednesday, the 22nd Oct., at the Masonic Rooms, New-street, Birmingham, Mr. William Simmons Allen, of Birmingham, in the chair.

there was a steady increase in the number of members of the association, and he was glad to be able to announce that several members of the Profession in Birmingham had forwarded additional donations to the society's funds. He had been very much struck with the prudence and liberality which characterised the operations of the board in the relief which it distributed. Applications had been made from Birmingham, and had been referred to him, as the local director there, for inquiry, and in every case there had been a careful desire on the part of the directors in London to know what the real merits of the case were. When the applicant was deserving, and the assistance given was usefully applied, aid had been repeatedly granted. He had pleasure in calling attention to an item in the receiptsnamely, a bequest of £3000 (legacy duty free) under the will of the late Miss Hannah Brackenbury, of Brighton. He hoped that the admirable association would be borne in mind by the memexample of Miss Brackenbury, in helping their bers of the Profession throughout the kingdom as one worthy of their own adoption. He had great pleasure in moving that the report and statement of accounts now presented be received, whom 791 are life and 1491 annual subscribers. Twenty- adopted, and printed for circulation in the usual

The report of the directors, as follows, was taken as read:

The directors, in compliance with the 16th rule of the association, present the thirty-first half-yearly report of its progress and operations. Since April last sixty-six additional members have been elected, making, with those elected during the previous half year, 146 new members gained during the year; a rate of increase so far satisfactory that it is in excess of that of the previous year.

The association has now 2282 members enrolled, of

two of the life members are also annual subscribers. In consequence of the absence of the auditors from London in the Autumn of the year, it has frequently been a matter of difficulty to present an audited balancesheet of the accounts made up to the month preceding that in which the autumnal meeting is held. The account completed to the 31st Aug. and, with the directors have, on this occasion, had the half-yearly sanction of the meeting, they propose, in future, to close the half yearly balance-sheets with the close of the months of February and August.

From the balance-sheet for the five months ending 31st Aug which the directors now present, it will be seen that the receipts during that time have amounted to £4716 28. 9d., which, with those of the previous halfyear make a total of £6382 48. 4d. received during the

eleven months.

The directors have much pleasure in reporting a

munificent legacy (duty free) of £3000 under the will of the late Miss Hannah Brackenbury, of Brighton; and a legacy of £10 4s. 8d. under the will of the late Miss Margaret Collin, of Bishopwearmouth; a further donation of £100 from Mr. John Clayton, of Newcastleupon-Tyne, the present chairman of the board; and a further donation of £47, from the executors of the late Mrs. Frances Sarah Clowes, of London.

During the five months included in the account the

directors have expended in grants to the necessitous the sum of £255, and during the same period £210 to the necessitous families of twenty-five deceased nonmembers. These amounts, with those of the previous half-year, give a total of £655 paid within the eleven months to the necessitous families of nineteen deceased members, and of £405 to the necessitous families of forty-six deceased non-members, making in the whole £1060 expended in general relief during the past eleven

families of eight deceased members of the association


The anniversary festival of the association took place in June last, by permission of the council of the Incorporated Law Society, in their new lecture hall, and was presided over by the Hon. Mr. Justice Denman. His Lordship was supported by his brother, Lord Denman, his son, G. L. Denman, Esq., and by many members of both branches of the Profession. The festival

was well attended, and a net addition of £620 to the funds of the association was the result.

Since the last report the directors have invested a further sum of £3800 in the purchase of Indian Four per Cents, the total funded capital of the association being now £28,032 88. 3d. stock-consisting of £6 83 3s. 3d. Three per Cent. Consols; £7803 178. 8d. Indian Five per Cents; £9425 17s. 4d. Indian Four per Ceuts; £3907 London and North-Western Railway Four per Cent. Perpetual Debenture Stock; £250 London and St. Katharine Docks Four per Cent. Debenture Stock; and £62 10s. Three per Cent Reduced Annuities, producing together annual dividends amounting to


A balance of £251 os. 5d. remains to the credit of the Association with the Union Bank of London, and a sum of £15 is in the secretary's hands.

The decease of their respected colleagues, Mr. James Sharp, of Southampton, recorded in their last report, and Mr. Charles Edward Ward, of Bristol, which has since taken place, with the retirement of Mr. William Carter, of London, having created three vacancies at the board, Mr. William Eastlake, of Plymouth, Mr. Leiws Fry, of Bristol, and Mr. Harry Smith Styan, of London, have been elected to fill them. The directors deeply regret to have also to record the recent death of Mr. Thomas Kennedy, of London, who had been a member of the board since the foundation of the Association, and whose place they have not yet filled up.

The directors and auditors will complete, at this ensuing general meeting, the term of office for which they were elected; but are eligible and willing to continue their services if re-appointed.

It is proposed to elect a third auditor, in pursuance of the power now given by the 17th Rule, and the name of Mr. John Henry Kays, solicitor, New Inn, London, a life member of the association is, with his concurrence, submitted for your approval.

The directors have had great pleasure in appointing the present general meeting to take place at Birming ham, where the Association met last in 1862, and they sincerely hope that one result of this renewal of the society's visit will be a large increase in the number of its supporters in that important town.

(Signed, on behalf of the board,)


The Chairman, in moving the adoption of the report, observed that, although Birmingham had not contributed so much to the association as it might have done, looking at the strength of their body in that town, it was satisfactory to see that

[blocks in formation]

On the motion of Mr. C. Pidcock (of Worcester), seconded by Mr. W. H. Guest (of Manchester), a vote of thanks was passed to the directors and auditors for their services during the year.

On the motion of Mr. G. J. Johnson (of Birmingham), seconded by Mr. J. Rider (of Leeds), the directors and auditors were re-appointed for the ensuing year.

Mr. E. W. Williamson (of London), secretary of the Incorporated Law Society, was added to the list of directors, in the room of Mr. Thomas Kennedy, of London, deceased; Mr. John Henry Kays, of New Inn, London, was appointed an additional auditor; and a vote of thanks having been passed to the chairman for presiding, the meeting, which was fairly attended, terminated.

ARTICLED CLERKS' SOCIETY. THE annual meeting of this society was held at 1, Milford-lane, Strand, on Wednesday last. Mr. Hanhart in the chair.

The committee and officers presented the annual reports, which were very satisfactory in every respect.

New officers and committee were elected, and the society commenced its new session under very favourable auspices.



A MEETING of this society was held at the Law Library, Small-street, on Monday evening, the 20th inst., J. Inskip, Esq., solicitor, in the chair. Mr. Baylis opened in the affirmative on the subject, "Was the case of Coddington v. Paleologo (15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 581; 15 W. R. 961), rightly decided ?" Mr. A. C. Castle opposed, and the question was ultimately carried on the side of Mr. Baylis by a small majority.


NOTE. This department of the LAW TIMES, is contributed by EDWARD WALFORD, M.A., and late scholar of Balliol College, Oxford, and Fellow of the Genealogical and Historical Society of Great Britain; and, as it is desired to make it as perfect a record as possible, the families and friends of deceased members of the Profession will oblige by forwarding to the LAW TIMES Office any dates and materials required for a biographical notice.

J. TRAILL, ESQ. THE late James Traill, Esq., of Hobbister, in the Isle of Orkney, and of Rattar, Caithness-shire, formerly police magistrate in London, Greenwich, and Woolwich, who died on the 17th ult., at Worthing, Sussex, in the seventy-ninth year of his age, was the second but eldest surviving son of the late James Traill, Esq., of Rattar, some time sheriff of the county of Caithness; his mother was Lady Janet, second daughter of William, tenth Earl of Caithness, and he was born in the year 1794. He was educated at Glasgow and at Balliol College, Oxford, and was called to the Bar by the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple in Michaelmas Term 1820. Mr. Traill for many years discharged the duties of magistrate at Greenwich, and also previously at the then Union Hall Police-court in London. The deceased's position as a magistrate extended from the year 1838 down to Jan. 1868, when he retired. Mr. Traill married, in 1824, Caroline, youngest daughter of the late William Whateley, Esq., of Handsworth, Staffordshire, and by her, who died. in 1858, he has left issue.

« EelmineJätka »