Allman from their liability to Mr. Webber, Mr. Tilleard claiming at the time a right to recover the amount from Messrs. Key's estate. He then endorsed it to the present plaintiff. The present action was therefore brought to recover the 102/. 16s. 1d. which he had advanced. Gurney and Kelly, for the defendants, submitted, that the plaintiff Graves had no locus standi. He sued upon a note of hand and bill of exchange, which the declaration alleged had been endorsed to him according to the custom of merchants; but how could any instrument of this description be endorsed to him, or to any other person, after it had been satisfied? The whole of the money having been paid upon these two instruments, neither Mr. Tilleard, who paid the money, nor Mr. Graves, to whom he subsequently endorsed the note and bill, could have a right of action upon them against any of the parties. Having been paid, they were no longer negotiable instruments, and could not be transferred from hand to hand according to the custom of merchants. Sir James Scarlett and D. Pollock contended, for the plaintiff, that the payment by Mr. Tilleard was distinguishable from that of an ordinary payment in discharge of a note or bill. Here, the payment had not been made in extinguishment of the instruments, it had not been made on account of Messrs. Allman, or with their money; but expressly with a view to stand in the shoes of Mr. Webber, and to have a right of recovering against Messrs. Key or their estate. This was the avowed object, and it had been expressly stated and understood by Mr. Key at the time. The instruments were, therefore, still alive, and Mr. Tilleard had consequently a right to endorse them to whom he pleased. Lord Tenterden C. J. said he was clearly of opinion that the negotiable character of the instruments was destroyed by the course which had been adopted, and that consequently the plaintiff could not recover. Plaintiff nonsuited. Graves v. Key and another. Sit. after H. T. 1831. K. B. In an action by the assignees of George Pound, a bankrupt, to recover a sum of 1146. 7s. 6d., the following circumstance appeared:-Pound, who was formerly a builder residing in the neigh bourhood of the New North Road, had had dealings with the defendant, a builder in Drury Lane, prior to the year 1827. In that year, having agreed to enter into a speculation in some houses, they purchased at the Auction Mart several leasehold and copyhold houses for 10007. The money was advanced by the defendant. Pound was to pay him a moiety, and they were to be equally interested in the property, holding it as tenants in common. A conveyance having been made in their joint names, the deeds were deposited in the hands of the attorney, to be holden by him until Pound should have paid his moiety of the purchase money. Pound had been employed in building the Brunswick Theatre, and had invested the greater part of his capital in that work. At the time the theatre fell down, the proprietors were indebted to him in between 40007, and 5000/. He at that time owed the defendant 1200/. or 1300l., including his moiety of the purchase money for the houses; and having no means of satisfying his debt, he made an assignment of his interest in the houses to the defendant in consideration of 550. The assignment was dated March 31st, 1828. On January 8th, 1829, a commission of bankrupt was taken out against him. The defendant had, since the assignment, received the rents of the houses, amounting to 228/. 15s.; a moiety of which sum, viz. 114/. 7s. 6d., the plaintiffs, the assignees, now sought to recover, 1st, on the ground that the assignment was a fraudulent preference to the defendant, in contemplation of the bankruptcy; 2dly, that the transaction was usurious, the consideration being the satisfaction pro tanto of a bill of exchange for 600l., which the defendant had discounted for the bankrupt at more than the legal rate of interest; 3dly, that the assignment had not been registered in Middlesex, pursuant to the statute of 7 Ann. c. 20. s. 1. Sir James Scarlett, for the defendant, submitted, that as the title deeds and conveyance to the bankrupt and the defendant had been lodged in the hands of the attorney, to be held by him, on behalf of the defendant, until the bankrupt's moiety of the money should be paid, the defendant had, independently of the assignment to him, an equitable lien on the bankrupt's moiety, and was entitled to retain it until the moiety of the purchase money which he had advanced on the bankrupt's account should be paid. If the plaintiffs, the assignees, had wished to remove the equitable lien, they should have paid or tendered the moiety of the purchase money. Lord Tenterden C. J. concurred in this view of the case, and directed a nonsuit; giving leave to Mr. Campbell to move upon the point as to the registration. Plaintiffs nonsuited.- Sumpter and others v. Cooper. Sit. after H.T. 1831. K.B. - Lee applied for further time to put in bail in error, on the ground that the original bail had been alarmed by the defendant in error, and therefore would not become bail. Parke J. refused to allow further time, unless some error on the record was shown, and the amount of the judgment deposited in the hands of the Master.Anonymous. H.T. 1831. K.B. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. In an action of covenant on a deed, by which the defendant contracted, in consideration of the plaintiff undertaking to use his best exertions Superior Courts. and influence to procure evidence, whereby the defendant would be enabled to recover a large sum of money, that he would pay to the plaintiff one eighth share of the sum so recovered. It appeared that the plaintiff fulfilled his part of the contract, and the defendant recovered 14,000l. Defendant refused to pay the stipulated share to the plaintiff, and the present action was brought. The defendant demurred, on the ground that the contract was void for champerty. After argument Tindal C. J. pronounced the judgment of the court. His Lordship reviewed the law of maintenance and champerty, as laid down in the books; and then expressed his opinion that the contract in the present case clearly amounted to the offence of champerty. It was a contract for the purchase of an interest in a lawsuit; for although the plaintiff had not stipulated to pay money for such interest, he had done that which was still more calculated to prevent the administration of justice, namely, stipulated to procure evidence to support that claim, in the issue of which he was to have in return, for the procuring of such evidence, an interest to the amount of one eighth of the sum recovered. The contract was manifestly illegal, and therefore altogether void. Judgment for the defendant. Stanley v. Jones. H. T. 1831. C. T. EXCHEQUER OF PLEAS. JUSTICATION OF BAIL. In Hilary Term last, the following rule was made in this Court, which we insert verbatim, as some misapprehension has occurred regarding it. It will be observed that it applies only to justification of bail in term time. "Whereas by a rule of this honourable Court, made in Michaelmas Term last past, it was ordered, That thereafter all special bail should be justified before a Baron at chambers as well in term as in vacation. And whereas it is expedient to repeal so much of the said rule as relates to the justification of bail in term time. "It is therefore ordered, That from and after the present term, the justification of bail in term time shall (unless by consent) take place as heretofore in open Court, and that the justification of bail before a Baron at chambers shall be confined to cases of consent and to justification in vacation." 66 ERRATUM. In the case of Simpson v. Jones, p. 285, for "until she should attain the age of twenty-one, or marry under that age," read to be assigned to her on attaining the of twentyage one, or marrying under that age." MINOR CORRESPONDENCE. to the United States, and are married at New York. In consequence of quarrels, they are there divorced. Is B. entitled to dower of her husband's estates in England? 3. C. and D. are married in England, and are divorced in Scotland. Are they, by that divorce, at liberty to marry again? or would either party, in case of a second marriage, be liable to an indictment for bigamy? I must observe that C. is an Englishman, D. a Scotchwoman. 4. What is the law with respect to pawned goods being destroyed by fire? whether the pawnee is liable to the pawner for the difference between the value of the pawn and the amount of the sum lent thereon and the interest, or should the pawner insure the articles against such an occurrence? ANSWERS TO QUERIES. Number (page 256.) of the Legal Observer was A similar case to the "Query" in this week's decided in the King's Bench last term; where it was holden that A., who rented a house as a granary in parish B., but always resided with his family in parish C., was not liable to the parochial rates for parish B.; and it was observed, that rates were payable by occupiers, but A. did not occupy, although he held. C.P.F. Our correspondent should favour us with the name of the case; and if reported, refer to the authority. In answer to the query in No. 18, page 288. I submit that there cannot, technically speaking, be two sets of bail in the same cause for the same defendant. The defendant is said to be "delivered to bail, on a cepi corpus, to A. B. and C. D.;" he cannot, therefore, be delivered likewise to E. F. and G. H. Putting in bail being the act of the Court itself (1 Tidd, ch. 12.), the Court cannot be imagined to have committed such an error. One of the bail pieces must, therefore, be a nullity; and which of them it is, depends, I think, on the question which was first filed? F. G. In answer to the query of I. N. p.288, as to whether an attachment would lie against the sheriff, or an assignment of bail bond taken, for the reasons mentioned by him in page 288. in your last Number, I beg to say that, in my opinion, the plaintiff's attorney could not attach the sheriff, or take an assignment of the bond, until he had entered an exception to each set of bail put in for the defendant, and have regularly given notice of such exception to the defendant's attorneys; for the very ground of the application for an attachment against a sheriff, or an action upon the bond, would be, that there had been no bail above put in, or that it had been put in, but not perfected; and how could this be said when there were two sets? and by the plaintiff's attorney excepting to one set only, he would clearly admit the sufficiency of the other, and consequently that set would be perfect until an exception should be entered thereto; and if he allow the 2. A. and B. are English subjects. They go time to elapse, viz, twenty days, before he enter QUERIES. 1. A party is arrested, and justifies bail, by the name of A. B. C. He afterwards pleads infancy in the name of A. D. C., sued by the name A. B. C. Quere.-Can this plea be set aside? or what remedy has the plaintiff to correct the irregularity? G. such exception, they would be considered as justified, and an exception entered afterwards would be of no effect. New Inn, March 7. 1831. MISCELLANEA. LAW AND POPULAR FEELING. THE law, in all vicissitudes of government, fluctuations of passions, or flights of enthusiasm, will preserve a steady undeviating course: it will not bend to the uncertain wishes, imaginations, and wanton tempers of men. To use the words of a great and worthy man, I mean Algernon Sidney, who, from his earliest infancy, sought a tranquil retirement under the shadow of the tree of liberty, with his tongue, his pen, and his sword; "The law," says he, “no passion can disturb: it is void of desire and fear, lust and anger; it is mens sine affectu, written reason; retaining some measure of the divine perfection. It does not enjoin that which pleases a weak, frail man, but, without any regard to persons, commands that which is good, and pu nishes evil in all, whether rich or poor, high or low. It is deaf, inexorable, inflexible. Yes: on the one hand, it is inexorable to the cries and lamentations of the prisoners; on the other, it is deaf, deaf as an adder, to the clamours of the populace."- From a speech by President John Adams. STATE OF THE LAW IN SARDINIA. In the provinces, justice is distributed by the prefects, whose functions seem to correspond in many respects with those of the Scottish sheriffs. When any particular case occurs, in which the King considers it expedient to appoint a Judge of the supreme Court in the capital, on purpose to try the cause on the spot, wherever this extraordinary justiciary passes, the provincial Courts of justice are silent, and superseded by his presence. There are no periodical circuits of the justices. The Judges receive a small stipend from the King, upon which they cannot subsist. They are allowed also a certain sum for each award that they deliver, which has the effect of making them greedy of jurisdiction, and interested in promoting revisions. The administration of justice is in consequence precarious, and gifts to the Judges are of powerful advocacy. Gall's Voyages and Travels. LEGAL BENEFITS OF DISCOURSE. He used constantly the commons in the hall at noons and nights, and fell into the way of putting cases (as they call it), which much improved him; and he was very good at it, being of a ready apprehension, a nice, distinguished, and prompt speaker. He used to say, that no one could be a good lawyer that was not a putcase. Reading goes off with some cloud, but discourse makes all notions limpid and just; for in speaking, a man is his own auditor (if he had no others at hand), to correct himself. Besides, there are diversities of opinions and contentions in reasoning which excite thoughts that otherwise would never have risen. And mistakes almost incredible to the mistaker being observed, cause a recurrence for surety to the authorities, where an inspection convinceth, and withal corrects the faulty assurance some will have in a mere memory. . . . . . He was most sensible of the benefits of discourse, which I mentioned before; for I have observed him often saying that, after his day's reading (as in London if he had the opportunity), at his night's congress with his friends either at commons or over a chop, whatever the subject was, he made it the subject of his discourse in the company; "for," said he, " I read many things which I am sensible I forget, but I found withal this if I had once talked over what I had read, I never forgot that." This agrees with a direction to a student said to have come from the Earl of Nottingham, "that he should study all the morning, and talk all the afternoon;" because a ready speech (if it be not nature's gift) is acquirable only by practice, and is very necessary for a bar practiser. I remember that after the fire in the Temple it was considered whether the old cloister walks should be rebuilt or rather improved into chambers; which latter had been for the benefit of the Middle Temple. But in regard it could not be done without the consent of the Inner House, the Masters of the Middle House waited upon Mr. Attorney Finch, to desire the concurrence of his society, upon a proposition of some benefit to be thrown in on that side. But Mr. Attorney would by no means give way to it, and reproved the Middle Templars very wittily and eloquently upon the subject of students walking in evenings there, and putting cases; which," he said, "was done in his time, as mean and low as the buildings were then, however it comes," said he, "that such a benefit to students is now made so little account of." And thereupon the cloisters, by the order and disposition of Sir Christopher Wren, were built as they now stand. And agreeable to this, Serjeant Maynard, the best old book-lawyer in his time, used to say that the law was "ars bablativa," which humoursomely enough declares the advantage that discoursing brings to the students of the law. And certainly, above all things, the act of prompt speaking is to be cultivated, as far as may be, according to the aptest rules of oratory, because it wonderfully sets off a bar practiser. And many by that very talent, uncultivated, and owing to pure nature, have succeeded beyond others much more learned..... He was also an attendant (as well as an exerciser) at the ordinary moots in the Middle Temple and at New Inn; whereof the former is the superior, and governs the exercises; and took notes. In those days the moots were very carefully performed.-North's Life of Lord Guilford, ed. 1826, vol. i. p. 19.32. 66 * The brick buildings in the Temple are said to have put a stop to the fire of London in that quarter, though many of them were consumed, and the conflagration reached the church. NEW BANKRUPTCY COURT. THE NEW BILL AS AMENDED IN COMMITTEE. We now hasten to redeem our pledge on the subject of the new bill for altering the administration of the law relating to bankruptcy. We have, from time to time*, in our late Numbers, given our earnest consideration to the important measures for the reform of our law, introduced by the present Lord Chancellor. Agreeing most cordially in the principles on which they are founded, and in most of the great alterations they are intended to effect, and wishing sincerely that they may soon pass into laws, we think we shall be able best to serve the cause of law reform, by rigidly examining the bills while they are in progress through parliament, and freely pointing out their errors and omissions. tion in pointing out its defects. We had just completed our observations, having proceeded through the bill section by section, when a copy of a new bill, wet from the press, as amended in committee," was put into our hands. We then learned that it had been read a second time, and that the Lords had gone into committee on it Lord Chancellor to introduce his alterpro forma, for the purpose of enabling the ations; for we were quite correct in our informationt, that the Lord Chancellor was not satisfied with it as originally drawn. We now therefore proceed to mention the alterations made in the bill, having had the advantage of hearing the eloquent commentary on some of them, delivered by the Lord Chancellor on Monday last. The alterations are of some importance; and we hope we shall be able, in the space This we intend to do, not only in the which we can afford, to make them intellipresent instance, but in all others, we trust,gible to our readers, if they will take into not captiously, but with the prudence and caution of practical men. We shall be most happy to facilitate all measures intended to remedy the abuses in our present system. We have proposed, and we shall continue to propose, such measures, as are in our opinion calculated to effect this desired end; but we shall most care fully examine all plans, and proposals of this nature, endeavouring, if possible, to avoid both a heedless or inconsiderate craving for innovation, and a bigoted or prejudiced love of existing institutions. We have thus ventured a short exposition of our general principles; and we shall now proceed to the consideration of the measure which has suggested them. We had perused the original bill with great attention; and as we understood the Lord Chancellor was not entirely satisfied with it as it stood, we had the less hesita See ante, pp. 225. 254. 257. 273. 284. NO. XX. their hands the original bill; and we have the gratification of finding that the clauses which we had marked for alteration, are those which have been remodelled. Many of the sections have been transposed; we shall, however, only give the new provisions. By the original bill, a barrister of ten years' standing might be made the chief judge in bankruptcy; and three other persons, being serjeants at law, or barristers. of not less than ten years' standing, might be appointed the senior judges of the court. Thus, as it stood, it would have the office of chief judge, although he might been impossible to appoint a serjeant to By the present bill a serjeant may be apbe the most proper person for the situation. pointed. The appointment of the officers of the new court, "registrar, two deputy registrars and seven chief clerks," is given to the King, and not to the Lord Chancellor. Perhaps, it is meant these subordinate officers should be appointed by the judges of the new court, inasmuch as it would seem more advantageous that the capabilities of the officers should be known to the judges. The only important new clauses are as follow : Provision is made for all the six junior Judges having separate courts. "And be it enacted, that the six Junior Judges may be formed into subdivision courts, for hearing and determining the matters and things, and for making the examinations herein set forth; and that the said courts may be composed of such number of judges, and shall sit at such times, as may be directed by the rules to be made for regulating the practice of the said court, and shall sit in public or in private, as they shall see fit, unless when it is otherwise specified in the said rules or in this act." Power is vested in the new court to direct an issue. "And be it enacted, that the like powers as are by law vested in any of his majesty's courts of record, for issuing process to compel the attendance of jurors at the trial of issues by jury, and to compel the attendance of witnesses, shall be and they are hereby vested in the said court of bankruptcy, so far as the same may be necessary for the trial of any issue authorised or directed by this act." Provision is made for the appointment of official assignees for the country; and the following additional clauses, as to all the official assignees, are inserted. "And be it enacted, that it shall be lawful for the Lord Chancellor, Lord Keeper or Lords Commissioners as aforesaid, from time to time as any vacancy may occur in the said beforementioned number of London official assignees, to choose another of such merchants, brokers, or accountants as aforesaid, to fill any vacancy so occurring, and also from time to time to choose other fit and proper persons, as occasion may require, to act as country official assignees. And be it enacted, that all the real and personal estate, whether in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, or any of the dominions, plantations, or colonies belonging to his majesty, (except copyhold or customary hereditaments, and except such hereditaments as are mentioned in the provision hereinafter contained relative to estates tail,) of any trader who shall be adjudged a bankrupt, of or to which he shall be seised, possessed, or entitled at law or in equity, in possession, remainder, reversion, or otherwise, at the time of his becoming a bankrupt, or at any time afterwards, and before he shall have obtained his certificate, shall, upon such adjudication, and by force and virtue thereof, be vested in the official assignee to be named in such adjudication, as fully and effectually as And be it enacted, that the assignees aforesaid may, by deed indented and enrolled in one of his majesty's courts at Westminster, or in the said court of bankruptcy, make sale of and absolutely convey, for the benefit of the creditors, any lands, tenements, and hereditaments in England, Wales, or Ireland, whereof the bankrupt is or at any time before obtaining his certificate shall become seised of any estate tail, in possession, reversion, or remainder, and whereof no reversion or remainder is in the crown, [or] the gift or provision of the crown; and every such deed shall be good against the said bankrupt and the issue of his body, and against all persons whom the said bankrupt by fine, common recovery, or any other means, might cut off or debar from any remainder, reversion, or other interest in or out of any of the said lands, tenements and hereditaments." The three following clauses are also new. The last supplies the great omission in the bill-that no provision was inserted as to existing business. "And be it enacted, that in all cases of appeal under or by virtue of this act to the Lord Chancellor, Lord Keeper or Lords Commissioners aforesaid, such appeal shall be on a special case, to be approved and certified by the Court or Judge from whose decision such appeal shall be made, and in no other mode whatsoever, except the said Lord Chancellor, Lord Keeper, or Lords Commissioners aforesaid, shall in any case otherwise direct. |