Attorneys' Certificate Duty.-Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association. ANNUAL CERTIFICATE DUTY. REPEAL OF CERTIFICATE DUTY. at DURING the parliamentary recess Easter, there is but little to say regarding the abolition of the Certificate Tax. By the way, the lawyers have much reason to regret the change in the Terms, which has deprived them of a few days' rest between Christmas and the long Vacation. The government, since the first application for the repeal of the Certificate Duty, having given up the intended increase of the Income Tax,-and looking at the present state of public affairs, and the deficiency in the revenue,―it appears to be the very ge neral wish of the profession not unduly to press the matter in this session; at all events, not beyond a candid recognition of the claim to relief, when a revision of the Stamp Act or Taxation generally takes place, as soon it must. PROPOSED TAX ON THE MEDICAL 605 This measure would give increased respectability to the medical practitioner, and keep out improper parties from any interference therein. If the property of the country was deemed, as it certainly was, a fit subject for snch protection, surely the health of it, is at least of equal, if not of more importance. The ignorance or mistakes of the legal classes are capable of being rectified, not so always those of the same duties were imposed on medical practimedical practitioner. Supposing then that the tioners in as nearly the same degree as the different professions will admit of, we should have an income of not less than 115,000l. a year thence arising. Of this income, say that 100,000l. should be set apart for an interest of 34 per cent. on a loan to be borrowed upon it, the money could be raised for less interest, then this would support more than 2,800,000. If of course a larger amount would be at the disposal of Government. As to the propriety and practicability of the measure there seems to be no cause for doubt, and of the official means to effect it the same mode, mutatis mutandis, that has been taken with regard to the legal practitioner, appears to be the best. But what is to be done with the surplus of 15,000l. a year, or more? This ought, in the first place, to supply the expenses of all official appointments and outgoings. They could not reach 5,000l. a-year, and, therefore, leave the remainder, not less than 10,000l. a year, to be annually applied in the re-purchase of the stock created by the loan, so as in effect, within less than forty years, to wholly extinguish the burthen. LAW ASSOCIATION. THE state of the public revenue at the present time, and the discussion of the grounds on which the certificate duty on attorneys is maintained, have given rise to various speculations. Amongst others, Mr. John Ilderton Burn, has submitted a project to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for raising nearly three millions by a loan se- METROPOLITAN AND PROVINCIAL cured on a tax to be levied on the medical! profession. The members of the legal profession have, we believe, paid about nine millions in hard cash since the personal taxes were imposed on them, but we have no wish to see the burthen extended to any other profession. Mr. Burn's plan, however, will serve to show the injustice and inequality of the present impost, and so far the discussion may be useful. We give it it in his own words : The duties imposed upon practising solicitors and attorneys, and other legal members to whom the Acts imposing them apply, produce an increasing income of more than 100,000l. a year. THE annual meeting of the 19th inst. was, for the most part, limited to the routine affairs and business of the Association. The elaborate Report, of which time only permitted the principal parts to be read, will soon be printed, and we shall have an opportunity of laying it before our readers. Several parts of it were in effect the same as we have already published during the past year;" but a considerable portion, setting forth the labours of the committee, is new and highly important, particularly in regard to the proposed improvements in the pracThis imposition arose, and was founded on tice and course of proceeding in the courts the principle of adding to the respectability of both of equity and common law, and in the the legal profession, and keeping out unworthy future measures to be adopted for carrying persons who had before crept into it. The the objects of the Association into effect. care thus extended over property and civil Various topics of inquiry have also been rights might well upon the same ground of propriety and expediency, be extended to the prepared regarding the office and status of medical profession of surgeons, and apothe-attorneys, which will shortly be circulated caries, and chemists, and on the like principle amongst the profession, and which we shall herein of better securing the health of the com- take an early opportunity of considering. munity, as the other had reference to its property. a See 34 L. O. 41; and pp. 211, 406, ante. 606 M. and P. Law Association.-Easter Term Examination. Professional Lists. A prominent point in these inquiries re- It is feared that this great department of the lates to the exclusion from the Inns of Profession is too often entered, and occupied, Court of attorneys and solicitors, and the without adequate reflection upon the arduous impolicy, as well as the injustice, of depriv-responsibilities which it entails on its members, and upon their fitness to sustain them. ing them of offices of distinction which These topics it will be endeavoured to enthey formerly possessed, and for discharg- force and illustrate by appeals to professional ing the duties of which they are peculiarly experience, and the ordinary course of the qualified. events and transactions of society. It will be our business to enter upon the discussion of these topics, and to assist in collecting and diffusing a knowledge of every subject bearing on the interests of attorneys and solicitors. Members of the Society are entitled to attend Lectures on Equity, Common Law, or Conveythese Lectures, and the Subscribers to the ancing will be admitted gratuitously, upon the production of a ticket, which may be obtained of the Secretary. EASTER TERM EXAMINATION. WE observe that a mistake still prevails It was announced in the third address of the committee, issued in February last, (p. 406, ante,) that the services of the Honorary Secretary would cease at the annual meeting, on account of his various duties at the Incorporated Law Society. The Committee are authorised to elect another Secretary, amongst the collectors of intelligence for the and in order to procure the most efficient newspapers, with regard to the number of perperson for the office, they have invited ap- sons admitted each Term on the Roll of Atplications by public advertisement. This torneys. The number for the present Term is is the only change in the management of stated to be about 200, but the real number the Association. All the members of the will be little more than one-half. Metropolitan Committee have been reelected, and we observe that they are all members of the Incorporated Society, and several of them are members of the Council. We must lose no occasion of repeating that the great good which is contemplated left their testimonials in due time, and of this by the promoters of this Association depends smaller number it seems probable that several, mainly on the extent of the support which for one cause or other, will be absent. it may receive from the country members of the profession. It is of the utmost importance that the numbers in all the principal districts should be extended as much as possible. LECTURES AT THE INCORPORATED THE Lectures which we some time ago announced on the moral, social, and professional duties of attorneys and solicitors, will be delivered in the Hall of the Society, in Trinity Term next, on Monday, 29th May, Friday, 2nd, Monday, 5th, and Friday, 9th June, at Eight o'clock precisely, by Samuel Warren, Esq., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law, F.R.S. In these Lectures, it is intended to take a comprehensive practical view of the moral, social, and professional duties of Attorneys and So licitors. It is of great importance to society to secure adequate moral and intellectual qualification and efficiency in a body of men whose services are indispensable to all classes, from the highest to the lowest-who are linked with them in the most delicate, critical, and intimate relations, affecting, according to circumstances, the life, character, honour, liberty, or property of each member of the community. The printed list comprises 199 names, but of these 52 were examined and passed last Term, and 9 in previous Terms. The total number entitled to be examined is 140; but only 112 MASTERS EXTRAORDINARY IN From March 21st, to April 21st, 1848, both in- 24. 4. Bryant, Isaac, Wimbourne Minster. April Guppy, Alfred, Honiton. April 4. DISSOLUTIONS OF PROFESSIONAL From March 21st, to April 21st, 1848, both in clusive, with dates when gazetted. Amory, Samuel, Isaac Sewell, and Samuel Moores, 25, Throgmorton Street, Solicitors, Attorneys and Conveyancers. March 28. Fox, John, and John Meek Britten, 1, Basinghall Street, City, Attorneys and Solicitors. March 21. Leigh, John Shaw, and William Eaton, Liverpool, Attorneys and Solicitors. April 21, Leigh, John Shaw, and George Whitley, Liverpool, Attorneys and Solicitors. April 21. Matthews, John, and Edward Augustus Hilder, Gravesend, Attorneys and Solicitors. April Professional Lists.-Parliamentary Proceeding.-Superior Courts: Lord Chancellor. 607 Morris, William, and James Larder Brom- PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS REfield, Chester, Solicitors. April 18. LATING TO THE LAW. Rogers, Thomas Stephens, and Jonathan Green, Kingston, Attorneys and Solieitors. April 11. Smith, William Henry, and William Witham, 12, Bedford Row, Solicitors. March 28. White, George, George Kewney, and Robert Azlack White, Grantham, Attorneys and Solicitors. April 11. RECENT DECISIONS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS, REPORTED BY BARRISTERS OF THE SEVERAL COURTS. Lord Chancellor. Tipping v. Coates. April 15, 1848. INSERTION OF NAME IN SUBPOENA NOT Serving a subpœna without having it resealed file interrogatories for the examination of Baker, and his Honour had thereupon ordered that a new commission should issue, before which the witness should attend with the document, to be examined on the old interrogatories at his own expense, and that he should pay the costs of such commission and of that motion. The learned counsel contended on two grounds that such order could not stand. In the first place, there was no precedent for the service of such subpæna as above-mentioned, and in the next that the Commissioner was not Mr. Rolt, with whom was Mr. Elmsley, authorized to demand the document. On the stated that this was an appeal from an order latter point were cited Bradshaw v. Bradshaw, made by Vice-Chancellor Wigram. A com-1 Russ. & Myl. 358; and Parkhurst v. Lowten, mission having been issued for the examination 2 Swans. 194. of witnesses at Leominster, Mr. J. Baker was The Solicitor-General, (Mr. John Romilly,) duly served with a summons and subpoena and Mr. Speed, appeared in support of the duces tecum to appear and answer certain in- order. terrogatories, and to produce certain documents. It being discovered during the examination that the principal document in respect of which the evidence of this witness was required was not included in that subpoena, he was, while under examination, served with another. The latter subpæna originally contained only the names of two persons, that of Mr. Baker having been subsequently interlined. This subpoena had not been resealed according to the present practice of the Court. The document was not produced, and the witness, in answer to an interrogatory respecting it, had replied that, although the Commissioner required him, he refused to produce it, as he considered it a private and confidential paper. After publication had passed, a motion was made by some of the defendants, for liberty to The Lord Chancellor, without hearing a reply, remarked that the witness did not appear to have been asked to answer the latter part of the interrogatory requiring him to set forth the document in the words and figures, or to the purport and effect. This might have been through neglect on the part of the Commissioner, and if so, the witness could not be in contempt for not doing all the interrogatory required. Why then should he pay the costs of a re-examination? He could not be punishable for the error of the Commissioner, who had not properly put questions which he was commissioned to ask. As to the production of the document, the order clearly could not stand in its present state. It directed the party to produce a document mentioned in a thing called a subpoena, but which not having been 608 Superior Courts: Lord Chancellor.-Rolls.-Vice-Chancellor. re-sealed according to the present General Orders, was not worth the parchment upon which it was written. Although the service of this so-called subpoena and the proceedings under it might not have been intended as a contempt of the Court, there certainly had been an abuse of its practice, which the Court would not only not recognise, but which it would quash together with all proceedings connected with it. As, therefore, it could not be said that a party was in contempt for not producing a document for which he had been served with no subpoena, and at which the interrogatory did not aim, the Vice-Chancellor's order must be discharged, with costs of the motion before his Honour. Rolls Court. MacHardy v. Hitchcock. Jan. 20, 1848. DOCUMENTS.-TITLE.-ADMISSION. In order to support a motion for the production of documents, the plaintiff must be able to produce a distinct admission of his title by the defendant against whom he moves. It is not sufficient to show that he does not deny the title. THIS was a motion for the production of papers in a suit by a party who claimed to be the sole next of kin of a Mrs. MacEwer, and as such entitled to a certain trust fund, which it was the object of the suit to administer. The answer on which the motion was made stated, that the defendant did not believe that the plaintiff was the sole next of kin of Mrs. MacEwer, but who was or were the next of kin of Mrs. MacEwer, other than the plaintiff, he did not know; and the question was, whether this passage sufficiently admitted the plaintiff's title to support the motion. The documents in question were not alleged to show the plaintiff's title, but related to matters in question in the cause. Vice-Chancellor of England. Flint v. Warren. Feb. 29, 1848. CONSTRUCTION OF WILL.-CONVERSION OF REAL ESTATE.-HEIR AT LAW. A testatrix devised to her executors and their heirs all lawful powers and authorities to manage and conduct her freehold estates in the event of her not otherwise giving and devising the same in any other manner or to any other person or persons, so as that the sume and every part thereof might at their discretion be sold and converted into money, and the net money to form part of her per sonal estate: Held, that the proceeds of the real estate, when converted, belonged to the heir at law, no devise of the same being contained in the will. MARY BRADDON, by her will, dated the 6th of March, 1834, declared, that as to all her real and personal estate and effects whatever which it had or might please God to bestow upon her, she disposed thereof as thereinafter mentioned, that is to say, in the event of her dying intestate, as to all or any part of her real estate, she declared that the same should not by descent go to her then heiress at law, Mary Decaufour, but that the persons or person next in succession should be thereto entitled in like manner as if Mary Decaufour had died in her lifetime, but she hoped no such intestacy would arise; and in the meantime she left and gave the directions in those her instructions thereinafter contained. She then gave several legacies and annuities and made some charitable bequests, nominating Flint and Warren to be her executors, and she gave and devised to them and their heirs all lawful powers and authorities to conduct and manage her freehold messuages, lands, tenements, and hereditaments, in the event of her not otherwise giving and devising the same in any other manner or to any other person or persone, so as that the same and every part thereof might at their discretion be sold and converted into money, and the net money to form part of her personal estate; and for those and every other purpose connected with her property, whether real or personal, she invested them and the survivor of them and his heirs, executors, and administrators, with her full authority, and to prevent litiga tion and strife, she directed that any undis Lord Langdale expressed his opinion that posed of surplus of monies should be paid as the plaintiff's title was not admitted with suffi- she should by any future writing or will direct, cient clearness upon the answer to give him a as it was her intention to do. In 1845, this right to the production of the documents will came before the Vice-Chancellor, and he moved for. The bill stated that the plaintiff decided that the real estate was converted out claimed to be entitled as sole next of kin, and and out into money, and subjected with the set forth the reason of his claims. The answer, personal estate to the payment of the debts and which must be assumed to be sufficient, said, legacies. Flint v. Warren, 14 Sim. 554. The that the defendant did not believe the plaintiff real estate having accordingly been converted, to be the sole next of kin, and added what a question now arose whether the heir at law would be very important, if it was a necessary was entitled to the proceeds, or the next of kin, inference from that passage that the plaintiff according to the Statute of Distributions. was one of the next of kin. But he did not Mr. Lewis, for the heir at law, argued that think that such an inference was necessarily as there was no gift of the proceeds, when conimplied, and therefore must refuse the motion. verted it was to be taken as real estate and Mr. Kindersley, for the motion, contended that in order to negative the plaintiff's claim the answer must deny his title, and it was not sufficient for the defendant to say that he knew nothing about it and that the passage above cited was an implied admission of the title. Mr. Beavan, contrà, cited Dubless v. Flint, 4 M. & C. 522; Edwards v. Jones, 13 Sim. 632; Adams v. Fisher, 2 Keen. 754, and 3 M. & C. 526. Superior Courts: Vice-Chancellor of England.-V. C. Knight Bruce. formed a resulting trust for the heir at law. Collins v. Wakeman, 2 Ves. 683. Mr. Bethell and Mr. Chandless, contrà, contended, that although such was the law, yet here the testatrix having directed the real estate to be sold, but not having expressed how the proceeds should be applied, clearly intended it to go as the law provided, namely, to the next of kin, for the words were very stringent:"The net money to form part of her personal estate." That is to say, it was not to fall into her general personal estate as in the class of cases relied upon by the other side, but form a peculiar part of her personal estate. Green v. Jackson, 5 Russ. 35, and 2 Russ. & Myl. 238; Phillips v. Phillips, 1 Myl. & Keen, 649; Amphlett v. Parke, 2 Russ. & Myl. 221. The Vice-Chancellor said, he had been thinking over the case, and it appeared to him that there were no words of gift to take the proceeds of the sale of the real estate away from the heir. He always understood it to be a settled rule of law that nothing was to be taken from the heir, except by way of gift, and he could not in the words of the will find anything in the way of an indication of intention to make such an exception, save the direction of the testatrix that the money should be part of her personal estate. It appeared to him that he was not at liberty to that as the estate had been sold, the money arising from the sale did not belong to the heir. He was particularly struck with the case of Amphlett v. Parke, decided by Lord Brougham: there, as he collected it, although the parties were dissatisfied with the judgment, they never appealed, and on the construction of that case he was bound to say that the fund not having been given away, belonged to the heir and he felt that if he held otherwise, he should be doing violence to a settled principle of law. say Vice-Chancellor Knight Bruce. Attorney-General v. Gardner. Dec. 16 & 1847, and Jan 11, 1848. CHARITY.-MORTMAIN ACT. Land was conveyed by deeds dated in 1838, 609 and for such estate and interest as he should by any deed or instrument in writing, duly executed, from time to time direct, limit, or appoint, and in default of appointment, to the use of the said William Walker, his heirs and assigns. The execution of these deeds was not attested by two witnesses, and no enrolment in Chancery was made. By an indenture dated the 31st of May, 1839, the execution of which was not attested by two witnesses, but which was enrolled in the Court of Chancery, the said William Walker, for the purposes of erecting, preserving, and maintaining in all times coming suitable and convenient buildings in Birkenhead, for the public worship and service of Almighty God, and the reading and preaching of His most Holy Word according to the doctrine, forms, usages, and discipline of the Established Church of Scotland, and for the instruction and tuition of the young in Scriptural knowledge and useful learning, in pursuance of the power under the said indenture of release, appointed the said piece of land and all his interest therein, unto and to the use of the said J. Walker, J. Pollock, T. Boyd, G. Badenoch, P. Ross, William Walker, and J. Barban, as joint tenants, their heirs and assigns, upon certain trusts in accordance with the purposes mentioned in the recital; and it was provided that it should not be in anywise or at any time competent for the said trustees and elders, or any of them, either with or without the concurrence of the communicants, or any number of them, to alter, disannul, vary, or make void any of the provisoes, stipulations, or declarations therein before contained. By a deed poll endorsed on the lastmentioned indenture, executed by the same parties, and dated the 11th of January, 1840, certain explanatory regulations were declared. The church was completed in August, 1840, when John Gardner, then a duly qualified 17, licentiate of the Established Church of Scotland, was appointed the minister. In the years 1843 and 1844, Mr. Gardner, J. Walker, J. Barban, and Richard Barban, and also Walter Walker and other members of the congregation of the said church at Birkenhead, joined the Free Church, and used the church at Birkenhead for the purposes of such Free Church. In consequence of proceedings taken against the said J. Gardner before the Presbytery of Glasgow, he was deprived of his licence and office of a minister of the Established Church of Scotland. The said John Pollock, one of the trustees, became bankrupt. By an indenture, dated the 23rd day of December, 1844, and made for the purpose of curing the supposed defects of the deeds of 1838 and 1839, By indenture of lease and release, dated re- by reason of the noncompliance with the prospectively the 1st and 2nd days of December, visions of the Mortmain Act, Dobbs and his 1838, a piece of land near Conway Street, in Bir-assignees (he having become bankrupt) granted kenhead, in Cheshire, was, in consideration of and conveyed the said piece of land and build2501., paid by the said William Walker to A. A. Dobbs, conveyed by Dobbs and Duncan and others, (his mortgagees,) to William Walker and his heirs, to the use of such person or persons ings to J. Walker, J. Barban, and Walter Walker, in fee; and ultimately, by an indenture dated the 5th of August, 1846, and made between the said William Walker of the |