Landlord and Tenant-Lease-Holding over after Expiration of Term-Assignment of Reversion after Expiry of Term-Privity of Contract-Covenant to repair-32 Hen. 8, c. 31-Conveyancing and Law of Property Act 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c 41), s. 10.

By a lease dated the 24th Feb. 1913 certain premises were demised to the defendant by the head lessee for five years as from the 25th Dec. 1912 at a specified rent, payable quarterly. The head lessee's term was ten and a quarter years, less thirty days, from the 25th Dec. 1912. The lease of the 24th Feb. 1913 contained a covenant to repair on the part of the defendant. In Oct. 1914 the head lessee died intestate. In Nov. 1917 letters passed between the defendant and the administrators of the head lessee, whereby it was agreed that the defendant should continue to hold over on the expiration of her term on a quarterly tenancy. By an indenture of the 10th July 1918 the administrators of the head lessee demised the premises to the plaintiff for the residue of their term, less three days, subject to but with the benefit of the indenture of the 24th Feb. 1913. The defendant gave up possession of the premises on the 29th Sept. 1918 in pursuance of a notice given by her to the administrators of the head lessee on the 20th June 1918. the 8th Oct 1918 the plaintiff claimed damages for alleged breach of the covenant to repair contained in the indenture of the 24th Feb. 1913. The defendant claimed that the holding over from the expiration of the term was free from the covenant to repair.

On

Held, that there was no privity of contract between the plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff was not entitied to the reversion by law, but by deed. The plaintiff had no right to sue on the covenant at common law, and as the defendant's lease under seal had come to an end before the lease was granted to the plaintiff, and as the letters which created the quarterly tenancy on which the defendant held over contained no reference to the covenant to repair contained in the lease of the 24th Feb. 1913, the plaintiff could not sue either under the Act of 32 Hen. 8, c. 34, nor under sect. 10 of the Conveyancing Act 1881. The plaintiff's claim therefore failed.

[Cole v. Kelly. K B. Div.: Lush, J. Oct. 20 and 23.— Counsel: Compston, K.C. and Foù; Disturnal, K.C. and Slesser. Solicitors: J. H. Tuppen; Kenneth Brown, Baker, Baker, and Co]

LAW LIBRARY.

An interesting little essay on Vocation in Law, by Sir Ernest Pollock, will be found in a collection of Essays on Vocation (Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press), edited by Mr. Basil Mathews. Sir Ernest's words will help to assist the young man who is inquiring about the Legal Profession to decide whether it is a suitable one for him to

take up.

NEW EDITIONS.

be

The ninth edition of that invaluable work, Scrutton on Charter-parties and Bills of Lading (Sweet and Maxwell Limited) is edited by Sir T. E. Scrutton and Mr. F. D. The demand for the book may Mackinnon, K.C. measured by the statement in the new preface that the last edition in 1917 was exhausted "with an embarrassing rapidity," and the fact that fifty new cases have been decided since its appearance shows the need of this revision. The retention of the interesting preface to the first edition-1886is a good feature, though it reads quaintly in these days. There is considerable improvement and elucidation of older matter in various regions, making the book a most complete statement of the subject. The editors were assisted in its production by Mr. S. Lowry Porter, of the Inner Temple.

Dowell's Income Tax Laws (Butterworth and Co.), brought up to date in an eighth edition by Mr. J. E. Piper, will assuredly be welcomed by the Profession, for alterations in the book were rendered absolutely necessary by the passing into law of the Consolidation Income Tax Act 1918, and this official work is essential to all concerned with the law and practice of this branch of the law. The unrepealed provisions of other Income Tax Acts will be found in an appendix. A new feature is a table of reliefs, together with a table showing the disposition of previous enactments. An entirely fresh index adds to the value of this edition.

It is seven years since the first appearance of Arnold on Damages and Compensation, and Mr. F. O. Arnold has now

prepared a second edition for Messrs. Butterworth and Co. The law on this subject covers such a wide ground that it may almost be said to be co-extensive with the greater part of the civil law, and the elucidation of general principles is most difficult. Mr. Arnold has succeeded in a marked degree in making a concise statement of the law in its various branches. The present edition has been revised wherever the incorporation of new cases has made it necessary, and a new chapter dealing with damages for infringement of copyright, patent, and trade marks has been added, as well as a section in regard to damages for the tort of maintenance. The table of cases runs to over sixty pages of small print.

The October quarterly issue of Mews' Digest of English Case Law (Stevens and Sons and Sweet and Maxwell) has been prepared, as was the last, by Mr Aubrey J. Spencer. This part, which incorporates and supersedes the previous one, contains all the cases reported from the 1st Jan to the 1st Oct. of this year. The Law Quarterly Review for October (Stevens and Sons Limited), edited by Sir Frederick Pollock for the last time, contains a 66 Farewell" note. The chief articles are: Admiralty Matters in the Fifteenth Century, by W. Senior; The Origins of the English Bar, IV., by Herman Cohen; Petroleum and the Law of Mines and Minerals, by Mr. Valentine Ball, O.B.E.; Methods of International Arbitration, by the Editor; Fox, Montesquieu, and Blackstone, by D. P. Heatley; and Proposed Method of Interpretation of the French Code Civil, by A. E. Randall.

Criminal Appe il Cases (Sweet and Maxwell Limited), edited by Mr. Herman Cohen, has a short subject index on the cover of its last number, part 3 of vol. 14. It contains cases heard on June 30, July 1, 14, 21, 28, 29, 30, and Aug. 28.

Messrs. Waterlow Brothers and Layton Limited have done much to simplify the complicated work of accountants and secretaries by the drawing up of an Income Tax Record sheet (sched. D), which is one of the best things of its kind we have

seen.

A practical guide to the preparation of the return of assess. ment and instructions for the repayment of tax will be found by traders, commercial and professional men, and secretaries usefully set forth in Messrs A. and E. E Fieldhouse's handbook, Income Tax Explained, of which a fourth edition has just come from A. Fieldhouse, Huddersfield.

The fourth number of the interesting new venture, Bulletin de L'Institut Intermédiare International, has just reached us from The Hague (Martinus Nijhoff). It has continuations of several important subjects startei in former numbers. The second article on the double tax deals with Norway. The list of documents preliminary to the Peace Conference is continued. The Institut's press-cutting department should be a useful collection to those to whom it is available.

BOOKS RECEIVED.

Young's Plain Guide to Investment and Finance. Third Edition Macdonald and Evans, 29, Essex-court, W.C. 2. Price 7s. 6d. net. Cockburn on the Law of Checkweighing. Stevens and Sons Limited, 119 and 120, Chancery-lane Price 78. 6d.

Picciotto and Wort on the Treaty of Peace with Germany. Stevens and Sons Limited, 119 and 120, Chancery lane. Price 68. Epitome of the Purpose, Plans, and Methods of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Indermaur's Manual of Practice of the Supreme Court. Tenth Edition. Sweet and Max vell Limited, 3, Chancery-lane, W. C. 2. Price £1 net.

Willis on the Law relating to Housing and Town Planning in England and Wales. Second Edition. Butterworth and Co., Bell-yard, Temple Bar; Shaw and Sons, 7 and 8, Fetter-lane, E.C.

8

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace-Preliminary Economic Studi s of the War: No. 8, British War Administration (Fairlie); No 11, Effects of the Great War upon Agriculture in the United Stat s and Great Brita n (Hibbard); No. 12, Disabled Soldiers and Sailors, Pensions and Training (Devine and Brandt). Oxford University Press, Amen-corner, E.C. Price 5s. each. Judicial Settlement af Controversies between States of the American Union. Oxford University Press, Amen-corner, E.C. Price 25s. (2 vols.)

Jordin and Borrie on the Secretary and His Directors. Fourth Edition. Jordan and Sons Limited, 116 and 117, Chancery lane, W.C. 2; 13, Broad street-place, E.C. 2. Price 2s. 6d. ne. The Lawyer's Comp nion and Diary 1920. Stevens and Sons, Chancery-lane; Shaw and Sons, Fetter-lane. Price 98. net.

*

Tuesday

Thursday,

Leominster, Monday, at 10

Liverpool, Monday (By at

11).

Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday.

and Friday (B.. A., & W.C.), at

Narberth. Monday

Newcastle-on-Tyne, Thursday (R. By); Friday (Adm.), at 10 Newcastle-under-Lyme,

at 9.30

Newent, Monday

Tuesday.

Newmarket, Thursday, at 11

Newport (Mon.),

Friday, at 10.30

Thursday and

Newquay, Wednesday, at 11
North Shields, Thursday, at 10
Northwich, Wednesday, at 10.30
Norwich, Monday, Tuesday, and
Wednesday, at 10
Nottingham, Monday (C.C. 1903 &
Cts. (E.P.) Acts), Wednesday,
and Thursday (A.Ó.) (By at 12).
at 10

Redditch, Friday, at 10
Redruth, Thursday, at 10
Rotherham, Wednesday and Fri-
day, at 10

Rugby, Thursday, at 9.30
Runcorn, Tuesday

St. Austell,* Monday, at 10
Salford, Wednesday

Saxmundham, Tuesday
Scunthorpe, Monday, at 10
Sheerness, Thursday, at 10
Sheffield, Thursday (By at 2). at
10

Shoreditch, Tuesday and Thursday
Shrewsbury,* Thursday, at 10
Sittingbourne, Friday, at 10
Southampton, Tuesday, and Wed-
nesday (By)

Southwark, Monday, Tuesday, and
Thursday, at 10.30
Stamford, Monday, at 10.30
Stockton-on-Tees, Tuesday (By at

No returns from Circuit 38. *Other sittings are specially fixed if necessary.

FIXED INCOMES.-Houses and Residential Flats can now be Furnished on a new system of Deferred Payments especially adapted for those with fixed incomes who do not wish to disturb investments. Selection from the largest stock in the world Everything legibly marked in plain figures. Maple and Co. Ltd., Tottenham Courtoad London, W.-[Anvт]

ASPINALL'S MARITIME LAW REPORTS (New Series).-Containing all the Decisions in the Admiralty Courts of England and Ireland, and in all the Superior Courts, with Notes by the Editor. Parts, price 78. net, will be sent free by post to subscribers.-THE FIELD PRESS LTD., Law Times " Office, Windsor House, Bream's-buildings, E.C. 4 -ADVT].

THE Government Bill on this subject, distinguished as No. 2, provides for a statutory working week exclusive of recognised intervals for meals. The hours of employment are not to exceed forty-eight, and no person is to be employed in any week in excess of that figure. This restriction is to apply to all persons who work under a contract of service or apprenticeship with an employer, whether the contract is oral or written, expressed or implied. The Bill, however, in its present form excepts certain defined descriptions of persons. Thus, it is not drawn to affect members of the employer's family dwelling and working in his house, nor yet to apply to domestic and outdoor servants, except where employed in connection with any trade for purposes of gain. It further excludes persons having responsible duties of management and supervision, not usually employed in manual labour, and persons in receipt of upstanding wages fixed on а basis of hours equal to or less than the statutory week, and which Cover overtime necessarily worked to enable such persons to perform their duties. The Bill does not apply, moreover, to confidential employees not usually employed on manual labour, nor to master seamen or apprentices of sea-going ships, nor to persons coming within the Coal Mines Acts 1887 to 1914, nor to persons engaged in agriculture, horticulture, or forestry, and the last exception is drawn so as to exclude the case of a person ce sing employment with one employer and commencing with another and who in the same week exceeds the limit. The Bill is, however to apply to Crown employees and those of local and public authorities (except the navy, army, and air forces and the police) as if the employer were a private person. If these provisions set out in the Bill affect women and children, the restrictions are to be considered as in addition to and not in derogation of any other restrictions imposed by any other Act on their employment.

Variation of Hours.

in

THE Bill contemplates that some recommendation may the future be made by a joint industrial council, a phrase covering some organisation recognised by the Ministry of Labour as representative of employers and employed. This body or some conciliation or trade board may reach an agreement that the working hours should be greater or less than forty eight. In that event power is given for a special order by the Minister of Labour prescribing different working hours for the class of employment concerned. Where there is some class of employ ment in which no such order is in force and the Minister receives some application by an organisation of employers and workers, or by someone directly concerned, or where without such application the Minister of Labour thinks that the statutory working week should be varied, a special order may be issued, subject to any conditions prescribing a higher or lower number of hours than forty-eight, granting partial or total exemption from these provisions. Some difficulties may arise out of the working of shifts. The Bill therefore provides that for the purposes calculations of hours it is to be necessary to take the average number of hours per week worked by a person employed on the shift system during the weeks falling within the usual period of alternative shifts in the district of the employment.

Overtime.

of

A LARGE portion of the Bill is devoted to a series of provisions on this perplexing side to the problems of employment. In general, any time worked in excess of the statutory week is to be regarded as overtime, and certain provisions follow. Some elasticity is given where, by agreement between masters and men, the conditions and extent of overtime have been settled. The agreement has to be registered in the Ministry of Labour, and then, pending the Minister's final decision, the scheme agreed upon may be worked; but if the Minister comes to the conclusion that the agreement or any part of it is contrary to the public interest, he may cancel it, and the whole agreement thereupon is to become null and void, or he may extend or modify it. Where there is no such agreement, the Minister can act on the recommendations of some trade board or on an application by some

organisation representing employers and employees, and himself make a special order pre-cribing the amount of overtime in any class of employment. The rate of payment for overtime is fixed at a figure representing no less than 25 per cent. in excess of the normal, but this is not to detrimentally affect any more favourable custom prevailing in any class of employment as regards the methods of payment, daily or weekly, or as to the method of computing the hours, or so as to prevent the payment of upstanding wages covering periods of short time and periods of overtime in accordance with agreements for the purpose made by organisations of employers and workers.

Special Orders and Penalties.

THE schedule sets out the manner in which the Minister must act when about to make a special order. There is to be notice thereof and opportunities for objection and for inquiry into which it is not necessary for us to enter. The order can affect special classes of employment and either cover the whole of the United Kingdom or be narrowed down to some specified district, and it may similarly affect all workers or only certain classes thereof, and generally the Minister is to be moved by the consideration of what constitutes the nationa! interest, and he must take the opinion of the trade board concerned and weigh their views upon his proposals. Contravention of these provisions or of any term of an order or conniving thereat is punishable by a fine not exceeding £10. An offence for working a man beyond the statutory period is not to be regarded as having been committed where the excess is due to employment on any day in the week after normal hours by reason of some accident, breakdown of machinery or plant, or other emergency, or in carrying out repairs or other work requiring to be dealt with immediately or without interruption in order to avoid serious interference with the ordinary working of the undertaking. In these cases a record has to be kept showing the cause of the employment, and that o ertime wages have been paid in respect of the excess time. Inspectors appointed by Government departments and officials (duly appointed in writing) of trade associations are empowered to conduct prosecutions.

Destruction of Vermin.

IT is a remarkable thing to note the number and the variety of the duties which are being thrust in these days upon the local bodies. Amongst these not the least necessary is the scheme contained in the Rats and Mice (Destruction) Bill now before the House of Lords. This throws upon the county and borough councils, the London County Council, and the port sanitary authorities the duty of enforcing its provisions at the cost of county funds as regards the counties, and as regards the ports as expense incurred in the execution of the Public Health Acts. There is again provided that useful stimulant which experience has shown operates to prevent local bodies becoming inert. Where a local body fails in respect of land of which it is an Occupier to comply with the requirements of this measure, or fails to make other occupiers perform their duties, it is open to the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries by an order to empower a person therein nominated to enter upon the land and execute what is necessary, or to procure the enforcement and execution of the Bill. The expenses thus incurred are to be repaid to the board by the local authority. No opportunity for quibbling is afforded to the recalcitrant local body, for the statement in the board's order that the local body has not done its duty is made conclusive evidence of its default, and the board's certificate of expenses incurred is also to be conclusive evidence thereof.

The Duties of Occupiers.

THE main clause is advisedly general in its terms. The measure of the duty is to take such steps as may from time to time be necessary and reasonably practicable for the destruction of rats and mice on or in any land occupied by the occupier and to prevent such land becoming infested with rats or mice under a penalty not exceeding £5, or not exceeding £20 where a notice has been served under the provisions of this measure. The procedure to be followed is that the local body will serve a notice on any person who fails to take the necessary steps, giving him a time limit to do what is necessary or, alternatively, after twentyfour hours notice they can enter on the land and take the necessary steps themselves and charge the occupier with the expenses by summary process as a civil debt. The "occupier will include the owner where the land is not occupied by any tenant or other person, and the powers to be given will apply not only to land, but all buildings,' erections, sewers, drains, and culverts Furthermore, the Bili provides for these duties applying also to vessels the master being regarded as the occupier upon whom the notice to execute the duties can be served by the local authority in order to prevent the esca e of rats and mice.

Industrial Courts.

WE touched recently upon Sir Robert Horne's proposals to estab ish some sort of tribunal to deal with trade disputes under circumstances more auspicious than those which have prevailed of late. The scheme, attenuated as it is, should nevertheless receive encouragement, if only as a first step to a more robust policy. The standing industrial court is to be appointed by the Minister of Labour and is to be composed of representatives of employers and employed, together with independent persons, and they are to hold office for a limited period, and amongst the independent persons is to be found the chairman of any division of the court. To these courts the Bill remits a trade dispute if the Minister thinks fit and if both parties consent, and they can also be used as referees for advice on any matter which the Minister may send to them as relating to or arising out of a trade dispute.

Courts of Inquiry.

THE Bill enables the Minister of Labour to anticipate some dispute and to set up a court of inquiry, consisting of a chairman and such other persons as he thinks fit to appoint, or it may consist of one person only appointed by himself. The scope of the inquiry is to be the circumstances and causes of the dispute, and to ascertain these the court is to be given power to require the production of papers and of information from any person who has knowledge on the subject-matter. With such exceedingly vague frontiers to such a wide expanse of inquiry it seems the more desirable that there should be no discouragement to the appearance of professional advisers, more especially having regard to the intelligence concerning business matters which may well leak out and cause damage to those who conduct them or to those for whom they are conducted. The trade disputes which this Bill is concerned with are those affecting masters and men, or those arising between workmen and workmen connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms of the employment, or with the conditions of labour of any person. This scheme is to supersede the system of registered conciliation boards established under the Conciliation Act 1896. Whether it will prove of any greater usefulness remains to be tested by experience.

OCCASIONAL NOTES.

Mr. Justice Bray will leave London on Wednesday next for Hertford, on the second part of the South-Eastern Circuit, and will open the commission on the following day. He will not return to London until the business at Lewes is finished, the commission day for such town being Saturday, the 6th prox.

The November Sessions at the Central Criminal Court will commence on Tuesday next, at the Old Bailey, at 10.30. Mr. Justice Rowlatt, Mr. Justice McCardie, and Mr Justice Roche are on the rota to attend.

The November adjourned quarter and general sessions for cases arising on the north and south sides of the Thames will commence on Tuesday next, at the Sessions-house, Clerkenwell, at 10.30.

An intermediate session for cases arising in the county of Middlesex will commence on Saturday next, the 22nd inst., at the Guildhall, Westminster, at 10 30.

The Lord Chancellor and the President of the Law Society will be present at the dinner of the City of London Solicitors' Company at Grocers' Hall on Thursday, the 4th Dec

We have received the fourth instalment of the evidence taken before the Royal Commission on the Income Tax. Further parts of the evidence will be published from time to time so that the interested public can be kept informed of the progress of the inquiry.

An association of law clerks has just been formed in North Staffordshire similar to those of Manchester and Birmingham. The association will be known as the North Staffordshire and District Law Clerks' Association, and the secretary is Mr J. H. Chesworth, of Clifton-terrace, Blythe Bridge, Stoke-on-Trent.

At an early date the general sessions for cases arising on the north and south sides of the Thames will be transferred from the Sessions-house, Clerkenwell, to the new Sessions house, Newington causeway. The new building is large and roomy, containing several courts.

Mr. J. H. Davies, barrister-at-law, Registrar of the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, has been appointed Principal, in place of the late Principal Roberts. Mr. Davies received his early training at the college, graduated at Oxford, was called by Lincoln's-inn in 1896, and has practised at the Chancery Bar.

Mr. Harold Morris, Mr. B. O. Bircham, Mr. Gerald Dodson, Mr. Tristram Beresford, and Mr. Baker Welford entertained their clerk, Mr. E J. Morrell, at dinner at Simpson's Restaurant on Friday last on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday. Mr. Morrell has been a clerk in the same set of chambers in the Temple for forty-four years.

A dispatch from Berne states that the Federal Council has issued an arrêté considerably simplifying the formalities for entry into Switzerland. One document only will be, henceforth, demanded, either the passport, or, as an equivalent, a pièce de legitim tion with a photograph vised by the Swiss authority. For a short visit the visa is granted by the legation or consulate, if the party seeking it enjoys a good reputation and his visit is not of a nature likely to compromise the Confederation. These questions will, as a rule, be decided by the authorities of the legation or the consulate, as the case may be, but, if necessary, the application may be submitted to the Department of Foreign Affairs at Berne for a final decision.

Mr. John William Chesser, S.S.C., has been chosen Lord Provost of Edinburgh in succession to Sir John Lorne MacLeod, so a lawyer succeeds a lawyer in the chief magistracy in the city of Edinburgh. Mr. Chesser received his education in Edinburgh, and has been in practice since 1889. Twelve years later he entered the Town Council, and since that time he has played an important part in municipal matters. The new Lord Provost has been Bailie of Holyrood since 1902, having been appointed to that ancient office by the Duke of Hamilton, the hereditary keeper of the palace. In his early days Mr. Chesser was a keen cricketer, but now he devotes himself to golf. By a coincidence he and the retiring Lord Provost are both members of the con. gregation of St. John's parish church.

At the opening session of L'Union juridique internationale there were present in all twenty delegates from Brazil, Chili, France, Greece, Holland, Italy, Mexico, Serbia, and the United States. Letters regretting absence were received from Lord Robert Cecil, Professor Holland, and M. Carton de Wiart. In his address M. Leon Bougeois said: "You have adopted as one of the chief objects of your activity the problem of the education of universal public opinion. In making, as you propose, a declaration of the right of peoples you are rendering the greatest service to humanity. The declaration which you propose is not only very modest, but it appeals to this chamber to expand its influence upon the whole world, and to exercise a brightening influence both on time and space. You have my best wishes; my heart and soul are with this work which you have undertaken, for it is an enterprise most useful and most necessary." M. Alvarez, Chili, presented a report upon the Déclaration des droits et devoirs des états, which was afterwards considered.

On Wednesday, being the Grand Night of Michaelmas Term, the Treasurer and Masters of the Bench of the Inner Temple entertained the following guests at dinner: The American Ambassador, Mr. H A. L Fisher, Mr Justice Eve, Mr. Justice Sankey, the Master of the Temple, Sir George Makins (President R.CS.), Sir Charles Ellis, the Master of Trinity College, Cambridge (Sir J. J. Thompson, O.M., President, RS), BrigadierGeneral A. M. Asquith, DS.O., the Head master of Eton (Rev. C. A. Alington), the Headmaster of Westminster (Rev. H. Costley-White), Assistant Keeper Victoria and Albert Museum (Mr. Eric Maclagan), the Rev. the Reader, and the Librarian. The following Masters of the Bench were present: Mr. M. C. Buszard, K C., Sir Albert Bosanquet, K.C., Mr. W. R. Bousfield, K C., Mr H F. Dickens, K.C., Lord Justice Bankes, Sir Edward Davidson, K.C.MG, C,B, K C., L rd Sterndale, Sir W. F. K. Taylor, K.C., Judge Atherley-Jones, K.C., Mr. J. F. P. Rawlinson, KC, Mr. Hugo J. Young, K.., Mr Arthur G. Rickards, K C., Sir John Simon, KC, Sir Edward Marshall Hall, KC, Mr. Justice Shearman, Mr. Charles Gurdon, Mr. A. M. Langdon, K.C., Mr. A J. Ashton, K C. Mr. G. J. Talbot, K C., Mr. G. F. Hohler, K.C., Mr. J. C. Priestley, K.C., Sir Hugh Fraser, and Mr. Alexander Grant,K.C

Of the old race of Scottish judges, the one whose personality continues to be most vividly realised is Lord Braxfield, for some years the holder of the office of Lord Justice-Clerk. The cus classicus regarding him and where he is depicted in bold outlines is, of course, Lord Cockburn's Memorials of his Own Time, a delightful book although perhaps to some extent open to the charge that has frequently been levelled at Macaulay's History of England, that in its pages only the Whigs are god. Cockburn was not quite s prejudiced as was Macaulay although as a Whig his sympathies were strongly in favour of the party opposed to what was called the Dundas despotism. From the picture of Braxfield in Cockburn's pages R. L. Stevenson drew his portrait of Weir of Hermiston, the unfinished tale which the novelist left us, and which set people recalling the robust days of the Scottish judiciary. The combined effect of Cockburn's and Stevenson's work has certainly not been to enhance our admiration for

Braxfield, and the prejudice thus created has set a present day writer to a gallant attempt at rehabilitation. That the famous Lord Justice Clerk was a coarse-tongued man is abundantly shown, not by Cockburn alone, but by numerous stories that have come down to us on the authority of various writers. Cockburn, it has to be remembered, freely recognises Braxfield's powerful intellect and knowledge of feudal law, qualities which raised him head and shoulders above the most of his colleagues on the Bench; but in no measured terms he impugns the Lord Justice-Clerk's conduct and language during the sedition trials which took place in Scotland towards the end of the eighteenth century. Cockburn says that Braxfield's conduct as a criminal judge was "a disgrace to the age"; Fox said much the same in the House of Commons; and Sir Samuel Romilly, referring to Braxfield's conduct, remarked to a friend, "I am not surprised that you have been shocked at the account you have read of Muir's trial; you would have been much more shocked if you had been present at it, as I was." Mr. Omond, in his Lord Advocates of Scotland, mentions a significant fact showing Brax field's attitude to the men who had been tried before him. He tells us that Mr. Secretary Dundas wrote to the Lord JusticeClerk, stating that representations had been made to the Govern ment against the legality of the sentences-these were ferocious enough in all conscience-and requesting the opinion of the judges on the subject In transmitting the opinion of the court that the sentences were legal, Braxfield added a private note of his own, urging that the Royal clemency should not be extended to the condemned men It is always the part of the candid reader to weigh well all that is to be urged in favour of anyone who stands arraigned at the bar of history, but such a letter as that just mentioned makes it hard indeed to think kiadly of Braxfie'd.

A lay newspaper, in urging that the House of Commons should exercise control over the Cabinet, declares that the House of Commons is the "constitutional master" of the Cabinet. Mr. Balfour, indeed, virtually assumed this position in reply to the charge advanced against him, as Prime Minister, of tyrannising over the House of Commons. Speaking on the 24th July 1905, he said: "I would remind the House that a tyrant owes his whole power to the confidence of this House, and that, however great may be the misuse which he makes of this power, the fact that he can exercise it does show that the confidence of the House is effectively possessed by him." Mr. Asquith, speaking as Prime Minister on the 13th Nov. 1912, quoted this pronounce. ment of Mr. Balfour, and unreservedly adopted it as a correct exposition of the relation of the Cabinet to the House of Commons." It must, however, be borne in mind, in any contemplation of the House of Commons as "the constitutional master of the Executive, that the Executive has the power although in some respects the servant, of dismissing its constitutional master. This limitation of the mastery of the House of Commons over the Executive has thus been explained and expounded by Mr. Bagehot : "A Cabinet, though it is a committee of the legislative assembly, is a committee with a power which no assembly would unless for historical accidents and happy experience have been persuaded to intrust to any committee. It is a committee which can dissolve the assembly which appointed it. It is a creature, but it has the power of destroying its creators. It is an Executive which can annihilate the Legislature as well as an Executive which is the nominee of the Legislature. It was made, but it can unmake. It was derivative in its origin, but it is distinctive in its action." Sir William Anson thus expounds the limitation of the power of the House of Commons as constitutional master of the Executive: "The followers," he writes, "of the party in power no doubt hold the life of the Government in their hands; they can end it by a withdrawal of support. But the Government in its turn holds in its hands the Parliamentary existence of its supporters. The Prime Minister by claiming a dissolution can eend his refractory followers to their constituencies." Again: "The weapon by which the Prime Minister or the Cabinet enforces its will upon the Commons is the threat of a dissolution. The mere intimation that if necessary support is not given to a Government its careless and lukewarm supporters may be sent to explain their conduct to their constituents has been known produce the desired results." The power of bringing about a diseolution virtually vested in the Cabinet is a potent factor in Parliamentary government.

The suggestions strongly urged by Sir Donald Maclean and Lord Hugh Cecil in debate on its second reading on the 28th ult. that the War Emergency Laws (Continuance) Bill should be withdrawn and a fresh Bill, free from the defects of the Emergency Laws Continuance Bill, introduced forthwith were held by the Speaker to be in strict conformity with the procedure and practice of Parliament. "The Bill," said the Speaker "is the Bill of the Government, and they can introduce it in whatever shape they think best, or reintroduce it in any shape of which

they think well." The rule that the same question be not twice offered in the same session, which is a rule in both Houses and essential to the due performance of their duties, would not be violated if the suggestions for the withdrawal of the War Emergency Laws (Continuance) Bill had been adopted. It is only when Bills have ultimately passed or have been rejected that the rules of both Houses are positive that they shall not be introduced again, but the practice is not in accordance with them. The principle is thus stated by the Lords on the 17th May 1606: "That when a Bill hath been brought into the House and rejected, another Bill of the same argument and matter may not be renewed and begun again in the same House in the same session where the former Bill was begun; but if a Bill begun in one of the Houses and there allowed and passed be disliked and refused in the other, a new Bill of the same matter may be drawn and begun again in that House whereunto it was sent, and, if a Bill being begun in either of the Houses and committed, it be thought by the committee that the matter may better proceed by a new Bill, it is likewise holden agreeable to order in such case to draw a new Bill and to bring it into the House."

A momentous letter of Mr. Walter Long, the First Lord of the Admiralty and an important member of the Cabinet, appears in the Morning Post explaining the process by which he has come to the conclusion that devolution is imperatively necessary for the preservation of the Empire. The attitude assumed by Mr. Long in the examination of a cardinal principle of public policy as a member of a homogeneous Cabinet with collective responsi bility, although he admittedly is speaking for himself alone, has been a subject of stricture by a section of the lay Press as a violation of constitutional practice. The relation to the Cabinet as a whole of a member of that body who propounds a policy which has not been adopted by his colleagues has thus been expounded by Mr. Gladstone as Prime Minister in 1883 in relation to a speech by Mr. Chamberlain of this character in which," while admitting without stint that in a Cabinet concessions may be made as to action, he seems to claim an unlimited liberty of speech." Mr. Gladstone pronounces judgment thus: "I should re as far as possible from asserting that under all circumstances speech (or writing) must be confined within the exact limits to which action is tied down. But I think the dignity and authority, not to say the honour and integrity, of Government require that the liberty of speaking beyond those limits should be exercised sparingly, reluctantly, and with much modesty and reserve. Whereas Mr. Chamberlain's speech exce ded it largely, gratuitously, and with a total absence of recognition of the fact that he was not an individual, but a member of a body. In order to test the question, must we not bear in mind that the liberty claimed in one wing of a Cabinet may also be claimed in another, and that while one Minister says, 'I support the measure though it does not go far enough,' another may just as lawfully say, 'I support this measure though it goes too far'? Every extravagance of this kind puts weapons into the hands of opponents and weakens the authority of Government which is hardly ever too strong and is often too weak already." On the 25th Sept. 1902 M. Cambon as French Prime Minister laid down the doctrine that the Government is never committed by a Minister's individual declarations, but only by those of the head of the Government. He alone has the power of making known the direction given to policy, and each Minister individually has authority only for the administration of his department "Of course," writes Lord Morley, "that is wholly incompatible with Mr. Gladstone's ideas of Parliamentary responsibility and the Cabinet system."

On the 4th inst., in the House of Lords, the motion for the second reading of the House of Commons and Municipal Corporations Bill, the object of which is to render clerke in holy orders and other ministers of religion eligible for seats in the House of Commons and all municipal bodies, was carried without opposition. By the House of Commons (Clergy Disqualification) Act 1801, which was passed in consequence of Mr. Horne Tooke's election, it is declared that "no person having been ordained to the office of priest or deacon, or being a minister of the Church of Scotland, is capable of being elected," and that if he should sit or vote he is liable to forfeit £500 for each day to anyone who may sue for the same. The Roman Catholic clergy are also excluded by the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829. But by the Clerical Disabilities Act 1870, when a person has relinquished in due form his office of priest or deacon in the Church of England, he is discharged from all disabilities and disqualifications, including that of the House of Commons (Clergy Disqualification) Act 1801, and is therefore eligible to sit in Parliament It is provided by the Welsh, Disestablishment Act that on and after the date of the disestablishment of the Church in Wales a person in holy orders holding an ecclesiastical office in Wales is exempted from those disqual fications and penalties The same exemption is extended to "a person in holy orders not holding an ecclesiastical

66

office, if the last ecclesiastical office held by him was one in the Church of Wales: (4 & 5 Geo. 5, c. 91, s. 2). Hatsell records that Blackstone and Coke maintin that the clergy are by law incapable of sitting in the House of Commons He quotes the statement of Sir Edward Coke that when he was Speaker a cleric was 66 'put out." Whatever," Hatsell writes, "the law may be as to the right of persons in orders being ineligible to be members of the House of Commons, the fact is that several under that description have been elected and sat though not bearing the habit and appearance of clergymen. I very well remember Mr. Gordon, member for Rochester, and some others. It is true none of these elections have been disputed on this ground." In 1785, however, the question was formally determined by an election committee under Grenville's Act, when the committee declared against a petition complaining against Edward Rushworth, member for Newport, as being "a clerk in holy orders, and therefore incapable to be elected to serve in Parliament, that Rushworth was duly elected. "Rushworth," writes Hatsell, "has been frequently elected and sat as member in several Parliaments."

66

On the 4th inst. Mr Bonar Law, in reply to attacks upon the Government for inviting the more prominent critics in the House of Commons of the defects in the Aliens Restriction Bill to a conference in Downing street, defended the principle of compromise, whose effects have been beneficent in the working of the British Constitution and consonant with its spirit and its genius. Any Minister." he said, “who is worth anything looks at the Order Paper every day before he comes down to the House He sees what amendments are down, and what amount of support is behind them. Before he comes down to the House he goes into the ameɛdments, and be regularly gets into contact with the people who are going to move the amendments, and when he can meet them on the amendments he tells them so. Nobody would have said anything about it if it had not been for the meeting in Downing-street the other day. The only difference is that we asked those gentlemen who had been identified with this amendment to come to Downing-street and to talk about it. It was done a little more openly than those arrangements are generally done, but I say that, so far as I am concerned and so long as I am a member of the Government and responsible to this House, I shall not only claim the right to meet honourable members, but I shall think I am very foolish if I cannot come to an agreement so far as possible." The most remarkable instance of the benefit of resort to a compromise in the constitutional history of this Cuntry was the compromise of 1884 with reference to the Franchise Bill and the insistence of the House of Lords, notwithstanding the determined opposition of the House of Commons, to the condition that a Redistribution Bill should accompany it. A struggle of a deadly character between Lords and Commons seemed inevitable, when the public were informed through the Press that a conference had been held in Downing-street between Mr. Gladstone, who was then Prime Minister, and the Marquis of Salisbury and Sir Stafford Northcote the Leaders of Opposition, and on the following day, the 22nd Nov. 1884, it was stated that "a meeting of a very unusual kind had taken place in Downing. street, the gentlemen present on the part of the Government being Mr. Gladstone, Lord Hartington, and Sir Charles Dilke, and on behalf of the Opposition the Marquis of Salisbury and Sir Stafford Northcote. The result of that conference was thus stated by Sir Stafford Northcote at a meeting of his constituents in May 1885: "The Government agreed that the measures-the Franchise Bill and the Redistribution Bill-should be treated as one, and they did a very remarkable thing-they invited the Leaders of the Opposition, Lord Salisbury and myself, to confer with them as to the measure which should be produced for the redistribution of seats, and I am happy to say that we were met in a very fair and liberal spirit. The objections and difficulties we raised were fairly considered, the proposals we made were fairly entertained, and in the result a Reform Bill has been passed which I think ought to give gen-ral satisfaction to the people."

The Times on the 28th ult. visits with severe stricture Mr. Lloyd George's reconstituted Cabinet of one-and-twenty members, of which it draws a picture which is, albeit unconsciously, a reproduction of the Outer and Inner Cabinet system of former generations: "The Prime Minister has wilfully sinned against his own former tenets in creating a Cabinet almost as large as the Asquithian Sanhedrim,' which he denounced. He bas created it, not as an honest step towards truly responsible government, but for the very opposite purpose, to carry on the rule of a super-executive composed of the old War Cabinet and with the real power in the hands of Mr. Bonar Law, Lord Curzon, and himself. There is to be no collective responsibility, and the Duma, as the Outer Cabinet are already nicknamed, are to be convened from time to time for the discussion of measures already worked out for them by the real rulers of the State." This description might apply to the formal and efficient Cabinets of the reign of George II. and the early years