18 Superior Courts: Queen's Bench. Court of Queen's Bench. ACTION BY SEAMAN AGAINST OWNERS FOR A seaman had shipped himself on board the held, that as the justices had exercised their discretion under sect. 8, the rule must be refused. THIS was a motion for a rule nisi for a mandamus on the justices of the county of Southampton, to make an order for the payment by the county treasurer of the account of their surveyor, for extra services. It appeared that an annual salary of 251. was paid, but that certain allowances were made for extra services. By the Statute of Bridges (22 Hen. 8, c. 5), sect. 8, it is enacted, that "the justices of the peace, or four of them, shall have full power and authority to allow such reasonable costs and charges to the said surveyors and collectors, as by their discretion shall be thought convenient." Maynard in support. The Court said, the surveyor was to be recompensed in the "discretion" of the magistrates, who had not refused to exercise it, but had offered 100%. as the sum which he was entitled to receive. The rule was therefore refused. Regina v. Williams. April 29, 1854. YEAR TO YEAR IN RESPECT OF RIGHT THIS was an action by a seaman to recover from shipowners the amount of wages due to him, and on the trial before Platt, B., at the last Liverpool assizes, it appeared that the plaintiff had shipped himself in the defendants' vessel to Melbourne and India and back, at the rate of 31. per month, but that on the desertion of some of the crew at Melbourne, the captain had entered into fresh articles with such as should choose to remain at 67. a month. The POOR-RATE.-LIABILITY OF TENANT FROM defendants had paid the wages at the rate of 31. per month into Court, and denied their liability to the additional amount. By the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 93, s. 46, it is enacted, that " every master of a ship shall, on carrying any seaman to sea as one of his crew, enter into an agree ment with him in the manner hereinafter mentioned; and every such agreement shall be in a form to be sanctioned and issued by the Board of Trade, and shall be dated at the time of the first signature thereof, and shall be signed by the Master before any seaman signs the same," &c. A nonsuit having been directed, subject to leave reserved to set it aside and enter a verdict for the plaintiff, Milward accordingly now moved, citing Stilk v. Myrick, 2 Camp. 317, and contended it did not apply. The Court said, that as the plaintiff had not been released from the obligation of the articles he had signed, the master had no authority to bind the owners by a fresh agreement, for which there was no consideration, and the rule must be refused. Held, confirming the order of sessions on a special case, that the yearly tenant of a farm, who also rents the right of taking and killing game and rabbits thereon, is liable to be rated to the poor in respect of such privilege as well as of his occupation of the land. FROM this special case for the opinion of the Court from the sessions, it appeared that Mr. Williams was yearly tenant of the Hambleton farm, in the township of Boltby, Yorkshire West Riding, and also of 700 acres of land, part of which consisted of moors, and that he was rated to the poor-rate in respect thereof and also of the right of taking and killing game and rabbits on the whole land, six months after the commencement of his which privilege he had rented of his landlord tenancy. Hall in support of the rate; Welsby and Price contrà, on the ground the privilege was unconnected with the occupation and was personal. The Court said, that if the privilege had been originally let with the land, it would hardly be Regina (Exparte Gover) v. Justices of South-disputed he would be liable to be assessed in re STATUTE ampton. April 28, 1854. OF BRIDGES. ALLOWANCE TO COUNTY SURVEYOR BY JUSTICES.-MAN DAMUS. spect thereof, and under the circumstances the party was in the same situation. The order of sessions would therefore be affirmed. 29, 1854. The magistrates had made an order for the Regina v. Justices of East Stonehouse. Apri allowance of 100l. to the county surveyor, appointed under the 22 Hen. 8, c. 5, for extra services. On a motion for a rule nisi for a mandamus on them to make an order for the payment of the amount he claimed, REMOVAL OF PAUPer. — wife anD CHIL DREN OF MARINE. The wife and five children of a person wh Superior Courts: Queen's Bench.-Common Pleas. had entered in the marines many years since, had resided in a parish for upwards of five years: Held, that they were irremovable, and an order of sessions quashing such order of removal was on special cause affirmed. THIS was a special case from the quarter sessions, quashing on appeal an order for the removal of the wife and five children of George Wawn, who had enlisted in the marines in 1834. It appeared that the parties were married at East Stonehouse, and lived there as long as her husband was quartered in the place. It was admitted the paupers had resided in the parish for five years. Rowe in support of the order of sessions, referred to the 11 & 12 Vict. c. 111; Karslake, contrà. The Court said, that as it could not be said the husband was removable his wife and children were irremovable, and the order of sessions quashing the order of removal was therefore affirmed. Regina (exparte London Police Commissioners) v. Wyng. April 29, 1854. OBSTRUCT METROPOLITAN POLICE ACT. Quære, whether a conviction under the 2 & 3 Ir appeared that the defendant, who was the servant of Messrs. Travers, wholesale grocers in St. Swithin's Lane, had been convicted under the 2 & 3 Vict. c. 47, s. 54,' for wilfully obstructing a throughfare. It appeared that he had waited an hour while another cart was unloading at his employers' warehouse. The defendant had been summoned and convicted, subject to a special case to this Court. Wilde in support of the conviction; Ballanfine for the defendant. The Court said, that in order to obtain the opinion of this Court there must be a regular information and conviction, and refused accordingly to entertain the question. 19 Exparte Wright, in re— AND PAY OVER BALANCE.-FRAUDULENT A., having been appointed to collect rents for THIS was a motion for a rule nisi on an attorney to account for certain sums received on the account of the applicant, who had been appointed to collect rents for different persons, and had arranged with the above attorney to introduce business to him, and that the attor ney should pay over such sums as he might what he should do. It was also arranged that recover, deducting certain fixed charges for the attorney should make certain charges on the debtor in case the claim was not settled, and pay over a certain portion to the present ment over of the balance after the deduction of applicant. The application asked also for paycertain costs. Quain in support. fraudulent conspiracy on the part of the appli- Court of Common Pleas. TRACT TO PURCHASE LEASEHOLD HOUSE. The defendant agreed to purchase the lease of Which enacts that " every person shall be liable to a penalty not more than 408., who within the limits of the metropolitan police district shall in any thoroughfare or public place" cause any cart," &c., "to stand longer than may be necessary for loading or unloading," THIS was a rule nisi obtained by Byles, S. L., "or who by means of any cart," &c., "shall on April 19 last, to set aside a nonsuit and enwilfully interrupt any public crossing, or wil-ter the verdict for the plaintiff for 451. in this fully cause any obstruction in any thorough-fourd, J., at the last sittings at Westminster, action. It appeared on the trial before Tal fare" that the defendant had agreed to purchase the lease of a public house for 1,150, of which 20 Superior Courts: Common Pleas.-Crown Cases Reserved. 501. was to be paid down, and that if either and that therefore the signing of Mr. Justice party broke the bargain a sum of 1007. should Wightman, who was on the circuit with the late be forfeited and paid as a debt, and to be so Judge, would be sufficient. recoverable. The defendant had paid 57. down, and given an IO U for the remaining 45., and on his refusing to complete, the plaintiff had sold the premises for 900l., and had brought this action to recover the deficiency and the 1007. penalty, the IO U not having been paid. The defendant set up as a defence that the plaintiff had committed a breach of the covenant in the lease to insure, by not renewing the policy until after the expiration of the 15 days allowed by the insurance office, whereupon the plaintiff was nonsuited, (see Doe dem. Fitt v. Shewin, 3 Campb. 134.) Knowles and Barstow showed cause against the rule, which was supported by Raymond. The Court said, that payment of the insurance after the day did not cure the defect by reason of his not having kept up the policy, and that the plaintiff could not make a good title against the landlord, who might bring an action of ejectment and turn the plaintiff out. There had been no consideration for the IO U, which had been given instead of so much cash, and the rule would be discharged. Schepeler v. Durant. April 29, 1854. PLEA OF ALIEN ENEMY TO ACTION BY A rule nisi was refused for leave to the de- THIS was an application for a rule nisi on appeal from Maule, J., for leave to add a plea in abatement of alien enemy in this action which was brought by a Russian subject to recover damages for the non-acceptance of a quantity of timber from Riga, and to which the defendant was under terms to plead issuably, before the recent declaration of war against Russia. T. J. Clark in support. The Court said, that the defendant had agreed to plead issuably, and therefore not to plead the plea in question. The application would therefore be refused. Regina v. Carlisle and another. April 29, 1854. INDICTMENT.-FALSE REPRESENTATIONS. S. had sold a horse to the prisoner B. for 391., but had been induced by him and the other prisoner C. to take a less sum by falsely representing the horse to be unsound, and that B. had consequently sold it for 271. A conviction for such offence was affirmed. : IT appeared from this indictment that a Mr. Simpson had sold a horse to the prisoner Brown for 397., but that he and the other prisoner Carlisle had induced Mr. Simpson to take a less sum by falsely representing the horse to be unsound, and that Brown had in consequence sold it for 271. The prisoners were convicted. Whigham now contended the indictment did not disclose any offence. The Court, however, held, that the conviction must be affirmed. Regina v. Harris. April 29, 1854. INDICTMENT FOR EMBEZZLEMENT.-MONEY A prisoner was appointed by the magistrates miller in the county gaol, and was paid weekly out of the county rates. It was his duty to take tickets from persons bringing grain to be ground, and to receive money for the same. It appeared he had ground grain without a ticket, and had not accounted for the money received. On an indictment against him as servant of the inhabitants, or of the clerk of the peace, for the embezzlement of their money: Held, that the conviction could not be supported. ant as servant of the inhabitants of the county THIS was an indictment against the defendof Worcester, or of the clerk of the peace, for the embezzlement of their money. It appeared that the prisoner was appointed by the magis trates miller in the county gaol, and was paid weekly out of the county rates, and that it was his duty to take tickets from persons bringing grain to be ground and to receive money for the same, and that he had not accounted for moneys received for grinding grain taken in without a ticket. Selfe in support of the conviction. The Court said, that the prisoner had taken in grain without a ticket, showing his intention to make an improper use, and for his own benefit, of the machine intrusted to him. He had, however, no right on behalf of his master to grind any corn except such as was brought to him with a ticket, and the money was not therefore received on his master's account, and the conviction for embezzlement must be quashed. The Legal Observer, AND SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. SATURDAY, MAY 13, 1854. JOINT-STOCK COMPANY MANIA. than of Government, so it is manifest that the ordinary affairs and business of society "EXECUTOR AND TRUSTEE SOCIETY." are more efficiently and economically conABOUT thirty years ago there was an ducted by individuals than by large comunexampled rage for joint-stock companies panies. No one doubts that where the State of all kinds. The newspapers abounded does not undertake the duty of constructing with advertisements of the most extraordi- docks, canals, roads, and bridges, the work nary projects, from the most magnificent must devolve on wealthy corporations or and impracticable to the most absurd and joint-stock companies. Offices for the ininsignificant. Many men of high rank, surance of lives, houses, and shipping, also bankers, merchants, and others whose peculiarly belong to a numerous body of names were familiar to the public and par- proprietors. ticularly in the City, were solicited to be- When, however, a moderate capital only come directors, and scores of schemes found is required, and where the principal thing their way on the Stock Exchange as soon to ensure success is personal skill, integrity, as the shares were allotted and the first experience, and activity, then the business small deposit paid. After a brief trial is best conducted by individuals who are amongst speculating shareholders; but few responsible for, and whose interests are came into actual operation and still fewer connected with, the prosperous result of survived to any useful purpose. Several the speculation. of those projects originated with ingenious men who obtained the assistance of active solicitors, and were sometimes well paid, but generally the projectors suffered with the failure of the scheme. These remarks apply to many of the recent joint-stock companies, to some of the banking companies, peculiarly constituted insurance companies, such as the insurance of doubtful or defective titles, and similar projects; but we would peculiarly address ourselves to the two schemes for administering private trusts, now before Parliament, and which, if they pass in any shape, will doubtless be followed by a shoal Considered, indeed, with reference to Several years afterwards the railway mania made its appearance. Competing projects of all kinds were brought forward, and rapid fortunes were made and lost in the course of a few years. It may be said, however, for railway enterprises, that they are peculiarly of others. within the scope and province of joint-stock companies. They require the union of economy, how can it be reasonably expected many persons interested in the several lines that business can be managed by a public proposed to be constructed. In order to company with the same advantage as by carry such plans into effect, a large capital one or a few individuals? is required, not only for the first outlay but 1. There must be a capital invested, for for the satisfactory continuance of the un- which interest must be paid. 2. The chairdertaking, and in such cases a joint-stock man, deputy chairman, and directors must company is the legitimate and only practi- receive their fees for attendance. 3. The cable mode of accomplishing the object. secretary, or actuary, and clerks, must be But as many public enterprises are better paid their salaries, and servants must be in the hands of an independent company paid their wages. 4. The rent of offices, VOL. XLVIII. No. 1,366. C 22 Joint-Stock Company Mania—“ Executor and Trustee Society." rates, taxes, and expenses must not be sons of property cannot find private friends omitted in the computation. 5. The con- to undertake the duty of trustee. The cern must be publicly announced, adver- writer contends that all trustees should be tisements must appear frequently in the paid. If so, there can surely be no diffinewspapers, and prospectuses circulated culty in finding able men of business, throughout the country. Without exten- bankers and solicitors,-who will undertake sive "puffing," the merits of the scheme the duty, a large proportion of whom now will not be known or appreciated. 6. Then do so gratuitously. We say, therefore, that come losses and responsibilities, for perfec- the preamble of the Bill is not proved. tion cannot be expected either from directors or officers. There is no need to confer unusual powers on these associations. The occasional deThese unavoidable expenses of a joint- reliction of duty of existing trustees forms stock establishment are to be paid out of no ground for altering the general law. We the profits; to which must be added law are aware it has been said, that where a expenses, the commission of surveyors, per- trust is designed to continue for an unhaps of engineers, and various agents. The limited period of time, as in the case of solicitors' costs and other charges may, charitable and educational institutions, it is indeed, be debited against the trust pro- better to select a corporate body as trusperty; but all the other expenses must tees. This may be so, and the object can come out of the per centage paid by the now be effected without creating a new persons interested in the trust property. company to be paid for their services. NuBut there will be extra costs, which the merous collegiate and other societies and company must pay, and especially when they happen to have made a mistake. institutions exist, acting as trustees, to whom bequests may safely be intrusted, Then, lastly, comes the important dis- the more especially since the establishbursement of the dividend to be paid the ment of the Charitable Trust Commission. shareholders or proprietors of the company. It is remarkable, indeed, that in the article After deducting all the costs, charges, and to which we refer, it is admitted that the expenses, fees, salaries, wages, rent, taxes, vesting of property in the proposed new &c., what per centage can possibly be paid? corporation would be objectionable, if it The Law Review of this month contains were perpetual; but it is contended that the an ably written and somewhat plausible investment will only be temporary. This argument in favour of the Executor and candid acknowledgment gives up, in effect, Trustee Society. The writer assumes the the advantage of the perpetual succession want of such a company. He does not of a corporate body and neutralizes the obattempt to prove that there is any great jection to the occasional expense of appointevil which the company can remove. He ing new trustees, during the comparatively notices, indeed, the occasional expense of short period of the trust. appointing new trustees, and asserts that To the objection that a public board is some trustees are negligent or incompetent, not adapted to the consideration of the but the remedy for which is obviously in family affairs and necessities involved in the the power of the parties interested to supply trust, the reviewer urges as a merit, that the by appointing others, and the expense of directors will be fitter trustees than the which (if not now small enough) may be private friends of the parties, because they reduced, without resorting to a joint-stock company to be paid for all their services. It is a mere unfounded conjecture that per will not be influenced by any feeling of generosity to deviate from the strict rule of the trust We may admit that on some occasions this will be an advantage, and we are not inclined to advocate the relaxation of the strict duties of a trustee; but we can readily conceive that a body of men, strangers to the family, with whose interests they are intrusted, may unnecessarily disregard the feelings and oppose the wishes of the parties, although a concession would involve no serious risk. It is said, with some feeling of exultation, that the House of Commons decided in favour of the South Sea Bill, notwithstanding the opposition raised by the Profession, |