V. BANKRUPTCY AND PRACTICE OF THE COURTS.

50. Can a landholder be adjudged to be trader in respect of dealings with the produce of his own estate?

51. At what period, as regards the time of the adjudication of bankruptcy, is the adjudication advertised; and how can the advertising be hastened or delayed?

52. If a man become, and be adjudged, bankrupt a second time, in what, if any, cases will his certificate under his second bankruptcy protect his future estate?

53. In whom is vested the power of granting, or refusing, a certificate of conformity?

54. Give instances of cases in which the question of goods being "in the order and disposition" of a trader is a question of importance.

55. If one of two partners be adjudged bankrupt the other remaining solvent, what rights and powers have the assignees of the bankrupt over, or in, the rrtnership property?

56. In what cases, and at what periods, may a bankruptcy be compromised or superseded by consent or arrangement?

57. What are the requisites of a petitioning creditor's debt as regards the amount and nature of the debt?

58. What are the requisites of such debt as regards the period of the trading?

59. In what case can another petitioning creditor's debt be substituted for that on which the adjudication has taken place; and what are the requisites of the debt to be substituted?

60. What are the requisites as to the time of an act of bankruptcy, with reference to the time of trading?

61. Are there any, and what, limits of time, with reference to the act of bankruptcy, within which a a petition for adjudication must be presented?

62. What acts of a trader would be held to be acts of bankruptcy in case a petition for adjudication be presented within some, and what limited period? 63. What incorporated or joint stock companies can be adjudged bankrupt; and what are the statutes rendering such company liable to the bankrupt law, and directing the course of proceeding?

481

64. State what constitutes a voluntary act of bankruptcy, and what an involuntary or compulsory one, by such company, on which a petition for adjudication can be presented.

VI. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE
MAGISTRATES.

65. State the distinction between felony and misdemeanor.

66. Are these offences alike punishable by forfeiture ?

67. What is the principle in our law which serves to excuse crime? and give some instances in which that principle prevails.

68. Define homicide; and state some cases under each head, in which the law determines it to be justifiable, excusable, or felonious.

69. In case of murder, is it necessary to set forth the manner in which the death was caused?

70. Does drunkenness extenuate or aggravate crime; and is it material to consider the state of intoxication, when the question is as to the prisoner's intention?

71. How is the grand jury constituted? and what is the least number of which it may be composed? 72. If the grand jury find "a true bill," what proceedings take place in order to the arraignment of the accused?

73. If they should find "not a true bill," is the party accused free from further accusation, or may a fresh bill be preferred against him at a subsequent assize?

74. In what cases may the magistrate refuse bail? obtaining relief? 75. In such cases, what is the prisoner's mode of

76. What effect has the Crown's pardon upon the convicted offender?

77. Can a party accused before a magistrate insist upon the aid of his counsel or solicitor on the preliminary inquiry?

78. Has the magistrate the power, by any recent statutes, to pass a summary sentence on the party accused before him? and if so, mention one such

statute.

79. State what are the principal modes of punishment now existing.

LIVERPOOL LAW SOCIETY.

ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE.

1st November, 1856.

The labours of your committee have been very considerable, owing to the numerous measures affecting the law which were introduced into Parliament during the last session, and to the many questions affecting the welfare of the profession which have been brought before them.

With a view to guard, as far as practicable, against hasty legislation, your committee, at the commencement of the session, appointed a standing committee for the purpose of examining all bills introduced into Parliament, and reporting thereon to the general committee.

Notwithstanding the large number of measures, affecting the law and its administration, which were introduced into Parliament, the past session was peculiarly barren in its results, few of the bills affecting the English law having received the Royal Assent.

Early in the session, a Bill for the Incorporation and Regulation of Joint Stock Companies, and other Associations, was introduced into Parliament, and occupied the attention of the committee. Part third of the bill, as originally drawn, provided that all joint stock companies should be wound up through the medium of the Court of Chancery. Your committee felt that while that court was already overburthened with business, there existed, in all parts of the country district court of bankruptcy, with machinery well adapted to carry out the clauses in question. They therefore prepared a petition to the House of Commons, pointing out the costly character and delay of proceedings in the Court of Chancery, and praying that the winding up of joint stock companies, to be established under the provisions of the bill in the provinces in England, should take place in the district courts of bankruptcy. In addition to which, your committee communicated with the Chamber of Commerce on the subject of the bill, and at the instigation of your committee and the President of the Chamber of Commerce, certain clauses were inserted which had the effect of altering the bill to the satisfaction of your committee.

The County Court Acts Amendment Bill also engaged the attention of the committee. The general scope of the bill was considered calculated to improve the administration of justice; but there were some clauses which, in the opinion of the committee, required amendment, and others which it was thought desirable should be withdrawn. The framer of the bill, ever mindful of the interests of the barrister of seven years standing, and as usual ignoring the existence of the attorney, declared in sec. 4 the qualification of a deputy judge to be, that he should be a barrister, or special pleader, of seven years standing. Attorneys were excluded from the office, although not excluded by the former County Court Acts. This the committee considered an injustice, and that the bill ought to be amended by making attorneys eligible. Clause 13 directed that where the debt or damage claimed should exceed twenty pounds, the plaintiff, his attorney, or agent, should be at liberty to serve the summonses; and clause 25 directed that in similar cases the defendant should give notice of his intention to defend a certain time before the day of trial, or suffer judgment by default. In each of these cases

the committee considered that to make the clause of much practical utility, the amount should be reduced to ten pounds. Sec. 31 declared, that in cases where the debt or damage should not exceed twenty pounds, no attorney should recover any

further costs from his own client than those mentioned in clause 30, which were payable between party and party, unless the registrar of the court should be satisfied by writing, under the hand of the client, that he had agreed to pay such further charges. Your committee, considering this a most unjust clause, and feeling satisfied that it would be productive of great difficulty and annoyance, both to attorney and client, in the transaction of business, determined to make an effort to have it erased from the bill, as also sec. 70, which declared that no costs should be given in an action commenced in any local court for a sum not exceeding twenty pounds, in actions for which plaints might have been entered in any county court. The effect of this clause would have been to exclude from the Liverpool Court of Passage a large portion of its business, and the public would, to that extent, have been deprived of the advantages of that most useful and efficient court.

A petition was prepared and presented to the House of Commons in favour of the bill generally, but suggesting that the alterations in sec. 4, 13, and 25, as above-mentioned, should be inserted in the bill, and that clauses 31 and 70 should be expunged. Your committee entered into communication with the Town Clerk of Liverpool, and with several of the Provincial Law Societies, with a view of procuring their assistance in opposing sec. 70, which they have the satisfaction to state was eventually withdrawn. They regret to report they were unsuccessful on the other points.

Several bills were introduced affecting the ecclesiastical courts, one styled the Wills and Administration Bill, brought in by Government; another, the Testamentary and Matrimonial Jurisdiction Bill, introduced by Sir Fitroy Kelly; and a third, the Ecclesiastical Courts Jurisdiction Bill, introduced by Mr. Collier. The committee, while approving of many of the provisions of each bill, considered the Government measure the more desirable one, and they accordingly prepared and presented to the House of Commons a petition in its favour. The committee regret to state that the bill, perhaps, without exception, the best and most important of all the bills affecting the law introduced into Parliament during the session, was withdrawn by its promoters. Sir Fitzroy Kelly's

Bill, and that of Mr. Collier were also withdrawn. Your committee, however, believe that the Solicitor General will again introduce his bill at the commencement of the ensuing session.

Early in the session, a bill to amend the law relating to the qualification of justices of the peace was introduced into the House of Commons by Mr. Colville, sec. 23 of which declared that no attorney, solicitor, or proctor in any court should be capable of being a justice of the peace for any county, riding, or division during such time as he should continue to practise as an attorney, solicitor, or proctor. Your committee, seeing the gross injustice of the clause, determined to spare no exertion in their endeavours to have it expunged from the bill.

A petition to the House of Commons, praying that the House would not allow the clause to become law, but to enact in lieu thereof, that any attorney, solicitor, or proctor acting as justice of the peace for any county, riding, or division, should be prohibited from practising professionally either directly or indirectly in any general or petty sessions, or in any other business usually transacted

before justices of the peace, was prepared and presented to the House, and several members of Parliament were written to, soliciting their support to the prayer of the petition. Copies of the petition, accompanied by a letter from the Honorary Secretary, were sent to the Incorporated Law Society, the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association, the Law Times, the Legal Observer, and to the principal provincial law Societies in the kingdom, and to upwards of two hundred practising attorneys in England and Wales, urging their active cooperation in a matter so vitally affecting the status of the profession. The bill was eventually withdrawn.

The subject of professional remuneration in equity matters has received the consideration of your committee; and in consequence of the continued delay in the issue of the long promised new and improved scale of costs, your committee thought it desirable again to memorialise the Lord Chancellor on the subject; your committee accordingly prepared and presented a memorial to his lordship.

The new scale of costs has not yet been published, but your committee have satisfaction in reporting that they have reason to expect its speedy issue.

Your committee some time since received a communication from W. M. James, Esq., the ViceChancellor of the Chancery Court of Lancashire, on the subject of the heavy expenses in small administration suits, and suggesting whether an arrangement for reducing the cost in small suits could not be made, and thus extend the advantages of the court to the less wealthy.

Your committee, considering that the suggestion of the Vice-Chancellor merited the best consideration of the profession, appointed a sub-committee to communicate with the Manchester Law Association on the subject, and to wait upon the Vice-Chancellor. The sub-committee, in conjunction with a deputation from the Manchester Law Association, had an interview with the Vice-Chancellor in August last, when his suggestion that in administration suits, where the estate does not exceed £300, the court, counsels', and solicitors' fees should be fixed on a lower scale, was discussed and approved.

A member of your society having made a complaint that certain building societies in Liverpool were seeking to insist upon their solicitors' charges for conveyances and mortgages being fixed at a definitive sum under the penalty of a removal from office, your committee, after fully considering the matter, passed a resolution condemnatory of the introduction into the profession of a principle of competition between its members, dependent upon lowness of charge, and not upon the performance of duty or the exercise of skill.

The resolution of the committee was afterwards approved of and adopted at a special general meeting of the members of the society, called for the consideration of the question.

The subject of the re-arrangement of the Cause List at the Liverpool Assizes has occupied the attention of your committee. In February last, the president, Mr. Banner, with Mr. Knowles, the Attorney-General for the County Palatine, had an interview in London with Mr. Baron Martin on the subject, who suggested that the matter should be brought before the judges on circuit at York during the ensuing assizes.

Accordingly, in March, your committee deputed their president to proceed to York, for the purpose of conferring with Mr. Knowles and the other leading

483

members of the bar on circuit as to the best course to adopt. The president, in conjunction with Mr. Knowles, had an interview with the judges on circuit, Mr. Baron Martin and Mr. Justice Willes, which resulted in an arrangement which proved alike acceptable to the bar, the attorneys, and the public.

Their lordships subsequently made a rule of court regulating the order in which the common and special juries should be taken, and directing that at four o'clock on each day a list should be drawn out by the prothonotary of a certain number of cases to be taken on the following day.

The subject of the want of accommodation in the Crown Court at St. George's Hall for the clerk of the Crown, and for the attorneys in the Nisi Prius Court having been brought before the committee, a sub-committee was appointed to consider the matter, and endeavour to remedy the evil. The sub-committee obtained an interview with the law courts committee, who consented to make the alterations suggested, and which were subsequently carried out. In the Crown Court the reporters were removed from the seats near the clerk of the Crown to a gallery erected for their accommodation; and in the Nisi Prius Court the seats in front of the barristers, as also those below the grand jury box, were appropriated to the use of the attorneys.

Your committee have much pleasure in alluding to the Aggregate Meeting of the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association, held in Liverpool on the 14th and 15th October last.

It will be remembered, that in the last report, it was stated that the meeting would be held in Manchester in the present year, and in Liverpool in 1857. In July last, a communication was received from the Manchester Law Association, suggesting that as next year there would be an Exhibition of Art Treasures in Manchester, it would perhaps be desirable that the meeting in that city should be postponed, and that Liverpool should be the place of meeting in October of the present year.

Your committee considering the suggestion deserved attention, and being desirous of meeting the wishes of a society whose members are always ready to assist your committee in matters connected with the profession, immediately assented to the proposal; a committee was accordingly appointed to make the necessary arrangements for giving a fitting reception to the visitors who should attend the meeting. The use of the library in St. George's Hall was kindly granted by the Town Council, and this society had the gratification of entertaining the whole of the strangers at a dinner at the Adelphi, on the 14th, and at a dejeuner at New Brighton on the following day. The Mayor of Liverpool hospitably entertained the principal visitors at a dinner at the Town Hall on the 16th.

The meeting, which was well attended by attorneys from all parts of England, was considered more successful than any previous meeting of the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association.

Several interesting papers of subjects connected with the profession were read and discussed.

The committee would urge upon those members of this society who are not already members of the Metropolitan and Provincial Law Association the desirability of at once joining its ranks, feeling assured that the interests of the provincial attorney, as well as those of the London practitioner, will receive the anxious consideration and support of the association.

484

The committee have had the unpleasant duty of investigating a matter in dispute between two members of the society, involving a breach of professional undertaking, and regret to report, that after fully investigating the case, they were compelled to come to the conclusion that such breach had been committed.

The catalogue of the books of the library having become in a great measure useless, a sub-committee was appointed, who, with the assistance of the librarian, have prepared and printed a new one.

The laws of the society have been revised, and as regards the admission of members, extended.

Up to the present time, the admission of members has been limited to attorneys practising in Liverpool, but with a view to increase the usefulness of the society, your committee proposed to extend the privileges of membership to attorneys practising within a circuit of 20 miles round Liverpool, which proposal, on being submitted to a special general meeting of the society, was unanimously adopted. Your committee reasonably hope that many of their professional brethren practising in the towns within the prescribed limit will avail themselves of the extended rule.

In May last, the Rev. Mr. Statham intimated to your committee, his intention to terminate the tenancy of the library on the 1st December next, but at the same time expressed his willingness to relet the library at an increased rent, and upon certain stipulated conditions. A sub-committee was appointed to consider the matter. Mr. Statham's proposal being considered inadmissible, the sub-committee were directed to procure, if possible, other and more suitable premises nearer to the Town Hall, but the attempt proving unsuccessful, your committee were at length reluctantly compelled to continue the tenancy of the present library as yearly tenants, at the increased rent required by Mr. Statham.

The members of the committee who go out of office by rotation, all of whom are re-eligible, are Mr. Banner, Mr. Bell, Mr. William Radcliffe, Mr. Edward Whitley, and Mr. John Yates, Jun.

NEW ORDERS IN LUNACY.

Saturday, the 8th day of November, in the twentieth year of the reign of her Majesty Queen Victoria, 1856.

I, ROBERT MONSEY, Baron Cranworth, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, intrusted, by virtue of her Majesty the Queen's sign manual, with the care and commitments of the custody of the persons and estates of persons found idiot, lunatic, or of unsound mind, do, with the advice and assistance of the Right Hon. Sir James Lewis Knight Bruce and the Right Hon. Sir George James Turner, the Lords Justices of the Court of Appeal in Chancery; also being intrusted, as aforesaid, and by virtue and in exercise of the powers and authorities in this behalf vested in me by "The Lunacy Regulation Act, 1853," and of every other power or authority in anywise enabling me in this behalf, order and direct as follows, that is to say

I. From and after the 15th day of November, 1856, in lieu of copies of proceedings, and documents in matters in lunacy being made and delivered by the officers in lunacy at the office in which they are filed, or left, copies of such proceedings and docu

ments (save as hereinafter excepted), are to be made, delivered, charged, and paid for according to the fullowing regulations :--

1. The following copies are exempted from this
order, that is to say, office copies of affidavits
to be made for, and taken by, the party filing
the same copies of documents prepared in
the offices of the Masters in Lunacy and Re-
gistrar in Lunacy respectively, to be made
for, and taken by, the party having the con-
duct of the proceedings; office copies of all
documents and proceedings filed in the office
of the Registrar in Lunacy, and copies of
all documents filed or deposited for safe cus-
tody in the office of the Masters in Lunacy.
2. The party or his solicitor requiring any copy
(save as hereinbefore excepted), is to make a
written application to be delivered to the
party by whom the copy is to be furnished or
his solicitor with an undertaking to pay the
proper charges.

3. Upon such requisition being made, with such
undertaking as aforesaid, copies of such pro-
ceedings or documents are to be made by the
party or his solicitor filing or leaving the
same, or who, under the first rule, may have
taken office copies thereof.

4. The copies are to be ready to be delivered at the expiration of forty-eight hours after the delivery of such request and undertaking, or within such other time as the Lord Chancellor or the Lords Justices intrusted as aforesaid may in any case direct, and are to be delivered accordingly upon demand and payment of the proper charges.

5. The charges for all such copies are to be at the rate of 4d. per folio.

6. Copies of bills of costs are to be made side for side, so as to correspond with the bills of costs left in the office.

7. The folios of all copies are to be numbered consecutively in the margin thereof, and the name and address of the party or solicitor by whom they are made is to be indorsed thereon, and such party or solicitor is to be answerable for the same being true copies of the originals, or of the office copies of the originals, of which they respectively purport to be copies, as the case may be.

8. Any party or solicitor who has taken any office copy, mentioned in Rule 1, is to produce the same in court, or at the office of the Masters in Lunacy, when required, for the purpose of the proceedings to which the same relate.

II. All office copies, and copies to be furnished by parties or their solicitors, shall be written on paper of a convenient size, with a sufficient margin, and in a neat and legible manner, similar to that which is usually adopted by law stationers, and in the case of copies to be furnished by parties or their solicitors; unless so written, the parties or solicitors furnishing them shall not be entitled to be paid for the same.

III. In case any solicitor, who shall be required to furnish any such copy as aforesaid, shall either refuse, or for two clear days from the time when the application for such copy shall have been made, shall neglect to furnish the same, the person by whom such application shall have been made shall be at liberty to procure a copy from the office in which the original document shall be, or shall have been, tiled

for.

IV. The taxing masters shall not allow any costs in respect of any copy so taken as aforesaid, unless the same shall appear to them to have been requisite, and to have been made with due care.

CRANWORTH, C.

J. L. KNIGHT BRUCE, L. J, G. J. TURNER, L. J.

485

discretion of the arbitrator. Several meetings took place, and numerous scientific witnesses were examined. The plaintiff employed a short-hand writer to take down the evidence, and after each meeting a transcript of the notes was made, and a brief copy thereof furnished to the plaintiff's counsel for his guidance at the subsequent meetings. One counsel attended for each party. The arbitrator awarded in the plaintiff's favour, and directed that one moiety of his costs and of the reference and award should be paid by the defendants in each action.

In the plaintiff's bill of costs there were charges for the attendance of the short-hand writer, the tran

TORS.

ATTORNEY'S LIEN ON JUDGMENT-ATTACHMENT UNDER COMMON LAW PROCEDURE ACT, 1854.

THE plaintiff in an action of Edwards v. Hodges recovered judgment with £50 damages. Mr. Jay

acted as his attorney, to whom he was indebted in a balance for costs. A Mr. Hough afterwards sued Edwards, and obtained judgment for £19 11s., and proceeded under the garnishee clauses of the Common Law Procedure Act, 1854, to attach the debt due to Edwards on his judgment against Hodges. The amount was thereupon paid into court, and Mr. Jay took out a summons, calling on Mr. Hough to show cause why the said sum of £19 11s. should not be paid out of court to him, on the ground that he had a lien on the judgment obtained by Edwards against Hodges. Platt, B., made the order, and a rule was obtained to rescind the same, and for payment of the money into court, upon which it was referred to the Master to ascertain whether there was any particular lien in the cause of Edwards v. Hodges for extra costs; and also whether there was any special agreement between Mr. Jay and Edwards, that the former should retain the damages recovered by him in his action against Hodges, against Mr. Jay's bill

of costs.

The Master found both questions in the negative, and certified that it was conceded before him that Mr. Jay's general bill against Edwards was more than sufficient to cover the amount of Mr. Hough's judgment.

Pollock, C. B., said "We have no donbt about the matter. The passage cited from the case of

Barker v. St. Quentin,* 12 M. and W. 441, is conclusive on the subject, and the rule will thereupon be absolute."

Hough v. Edwards, 1 Hurlstone and N. 171.

LAW OF COSTS.

SHORT-HAND WRITER'S NOTES OF EVIDENCE ON REFERENCE.

Two actions against the Commissioners of Woods and Forests and their engineers for damages done to the foundation of the plaintiff's house, by the sinking of artesian wells to supply the Trafalgarsquare fountains, were referred to arbitration by order of Nisi Prius, the costs of the action to abide the event, and of the reference and award to be in the

* In which Parke, B., said—"The lien which an attorney is said to have on a judgment (which is, perhaps, an incorrect expression) is merely a claim to the equitable interference of the court, to have that judgment held as a security for his debt."

same, and brief copies for counsel. The Master, however, on taxation, disallowed these items, although intimating that the case was of so much importance that he should have allowed for two counsel, and a motion was made for a rule nisi to review his taxation.

Alderson, B., said—“ The plaintiff should have retained a junior counsel or an attorney's clerk, and not a person who is uneducated as regards law. If we were to send the case back to the Master, we should be recognising a principle which is, in my opinion, objectionable, because I think that the costs of a short-hand writer ought not to be allowed. The costs of the attorney's clerk to take the notes is a reasonable charge, but copies ought not to be allowed. Copies of the notes of counsel would not be allowed." The rule was therefore refused.

Croomes v. Gore; Same v. Easton, 1 Hurlstone and N. 14.

INNS OF COURT EXAMINATION DIS

TINCTIONS.

MICHAELMAS TERM, 1856.

Public Examination of the Students of the Inns of Court held at Lincoln's Inn Hall, on the 30th and 31st October, and the 1st November, 1856. THE Council of Legal Education have awarded to A Studentship of Fifty Gui

JOHN PHILIP GREEN, ESQ. Student of the Middle Temple.

WILLIAM F. ROBINSON, Jun, Esq.,
Student of the Inner Temple.
SYLVESTER, J. HUNTER, Esq.,
Student of Lincoln's Inn.
JOHN BAKER GREENE, Esq.,
Student of the Middle Temple.
WILLIAM JOHN TAPP, Esq., 1

Student of Lincoln's Inn. EUGENE BAZIRE, Esq., Student of the Inner Temple. GEORGE EDWARD MARTIN, Esq.

Student of Lincoln's Inn.
EDWARD G. ALSTON, Esq.,

Student of Lincoln's Inn.
THOMAS BENDYSHE, Esq.,
Student of the Inner Temple.

neas

per annum, to continue for a period of three years.

Certificates of Honour of the First Class.

Certificates that they have satisfactorily passed a public examination.

By order of the Council,
(Signed) RICHARD BETHELL, Chairman.

Council Chamber, Lincoln's-inn,

6th November, 1856.