191 Superior Courts: V. C. Kindersley.-V. C. Stuart.-V. C. Wood.-Queen's Bench. Vict. c. 55, s. 1,' for an order vesting the legal Wigram, for the Archbishop, in support of estate in certain property sold under a decree this petition, for the investment of the purchasein the purchasers. It appeared that the de- money, and payment into Court to the account fendants (the vendors) had not appeared at the of the railway company and the Archbishop, hearing and had passively refused to carry out and for payment to the Archbishop of such the decree and execute a conveyance. portion of the dividends as might equal the Kinglake, in support, asked that the vesting reserved rent, and for the re-investment of the order might be so as to bar dower. residue, with liberty to the Archbishop to apply, upon the expiration of the leases and when the fines became payable. The Vice-Chancellor, in making the order with the exception of so much as related to barring the dower, said, that although it was usual in conveyances to provide against dower, yet in taking under a vesting order only such estate and interest passed as the party origi nally holding possessed, and there was nothing here to show that dower had ever been barred. Bice-Chancellor Stuart. In re Wimbledon and Croydon Railway Act, 1853, exparte Archbishop of Canterbury. June 30, 1854. RAILWAY COMPANY TAKING LANDS BELONGING TO SEE.-ORDER ON PETITION OF ARCHBISHOP FOR INVESTMENT, &c., Upon certain land belonging to the see of Canterbury being taken by a railway company, and which was let on leases renewable upon payment of a fine, an order was made on the petition of the Archbishop for the investment of the purchase-money, and payment into Court to the account of the railway company and the Archbishop, and for payment of a portion of the dividends equal to the reserved rent to the Archbishop, with leave to apply on the fines being payable at the expiration of the leases. Bovill for the railway company. The Vice-Chancellor made the order as prayed. Vice-Chancellor Wood. In re Holdsworth's Trusts. July 1, 1854. TENANT FOR LIFE. PAYMENT OF DIVI- An order was made on the petition of the THIS was a petition on behalf of the tenant for life of a fund in Court for payment of the dividends thereon to her for life. Amphlett in support. Baggallay, for the trustees, submitted whether further evidence should not be required, as the petitioner was a professed nun residing in a convent at Dublin. The Vice-Chancellor said, that the solicitor presenting the petition would be presumed to It appeared that the above railway company have proper authority, as he did so on his own had taken under their Act, certain land belong-responsibility, and made the order as asked ing to the see of Canterbury, and let on leases, without an inquiry. renewable upon payment of a fine. Court of Queen's Bench. Pindar v. Barr. June 19, 30, 1854. VICAR. RIGHT OF APPOINTING PARISH The vicar of a parish was suspended under' די 1 Which enacts, that "when any decree or order shall have been made by any Court of Equity directing the sale of any lands for any purpose whatever, every person seised or possessed of such land, or entitled to a contingent right therein, being a party to the suit or proceeding in which such decree or order shall have been made, and bound thereby, or being otherwise bound by such decree or order, shall be deemed to be so seised or possessed or entitled (as the case may be), upon a trust, within the meaning of the Trustee Act, 1850; and in every such case it shall be lawful for the Court of Chancery, if the said Court shall think it expedient for the purpose of carrying such sale into effect, to make an order vesting such lands or any part thereof, for such estate as the Court shall think fit,beither in any purchaser or in THIS was a rule nisi, obtained on April 24 such other person as the Court shall direct; last, to set aside a nonsuit and enter the ver and every such order shall have the same dict for the plaintiff in this action, which was effect as if such person so seised or possessed or entitled had been free from all disability, and had duly executed all proper conveyances and assignments of such lands for such estate." brought to recover the amount of certain fees due to the parish clerk of the parish of North ceived by the defendant. It appeared that on Frodingham, Yorkshire East Riding, and rethe suspension of the vicar, the Rev. Mr. 192 Superior Courts: Queen's Bench.-Common Pleas.-Exchequer Chamber. Court of Exchequer Chamber. June 17; July 3, 1854. RAILWAY ACCIDENT.—EVIDEnce on issue Drake, under the 3 & 4 Vict. c. 4, s. 86 (the Church Discipline Act), the Archbishop of Great Northern Railway Company v. Harrison. York appointed the Rev. Mr. Keeling to do the duty of the parish as stipendiary curate, and that a vacancy having occurred by death in the office of parish clerk, the defendant had obtained his nomination to the office by Mr. Drake, while the plaintiff was appointed by Mr. Keeling. On the trial before Cresswell, J., at the last York Assizes, a nonsuit was directed. An affidavit to change the venue from Middlesex to London, after issue joined, was held sufficient, which was made by the defendant's attorney, and stated that the action was brought for an alleged breach of duty by the defendants as plaintiff's agents in the sale of indigo, which took place in the city of London, and that in his judgment and belief the cause ought to be tried by a jury of merchants in London. THIS was a rule nisi to rescind the order of Crowder, J., at Chambers, changing venue after issue joined in this action, from Middlesex to London, upon an affidavit by the defendant's attorney, that the action was brought for an alleged breach of duty by the defendants as the plaintiff's agents in the sale of a quantity of indigo, and which sale took place in the city of London, and that in the judgment and belief of the deponent the cause ought to be tried by a jury of merchants in London. Byles, S. L., showed cause; Cooke in sup port. The Court said, that this was not the common affidavit, but was sufficient to justify the order, and the rule was discharged without costs. WHETHER PLAINTIFF BELOW LAWFULLY IN RAILWAY CARRIAGE.-PASS TICKETS. The defendant in error, a reporter to the Bell's Life in London newspaper, was proceeding to country races with a pass ticket made out in the name of the editor, and stated to be not transferable, and that if transferred the party using it would be liable to the penalties incurred by a pas senger travelling without paying his fare. There was evidence that the defendant in error and other persons had previously travelled with similar tickets, and that the parties whose names were thereon were personally known to the railway officials: Held, overruling exceptions to the ruling of Martin, B., that there was evidence for the jury upon the issue whether the defendant in error was lawfully in the railway carriage, in an action to recover compensation for injuries. THIS was a bill of exceptions to the ruling of Martin, B., on the trial of this action, which was brought to recover damages from the above railway company for injuries sustained by Mr. Harrison in consequence of an accident on their line. It appeared that he was a reporter to the Bell's Life in London newspaper, and was proceeding to the Lincolnshire races with a pass ticket made out in the name of the editor and stated to be not transferable, and that if transferred the party using it would be liable to pay the penalty incurred by a pas senger who travelled without paying his fare. The plaintiffs in error pleaded that the defendant in error was unlawfully in the carriage, and the learned Baron holding that there was evidence for the jury, left the question whether he was lawfully there to the jury, who found for the defendant in error. Bramwell for the plaintiffs in error; Prentice for the defendant in error. Cur. ad. vult. The Court said, that the defendant in error was bona fide going the journey for the newsticket, which he showed to the guard, and was and had availed himself of the pass paper dence that the defendant in error and other put into the railway carriage. There was evitickets, and that the parties whose names were persons had previously travelled with similar on the tickets were personally known to the railway officials. The words on the ticket were not so conclusive as to make these other cir the jury as to the practice in using the tickets, cumstances immaterial, which was evidence for ent. The plaintiff below was not therefore a and which use was known to the superintend trespasser, and the exceptions must be over ruled. The Legal Observer, AND SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. SATURDAY, JULY 15, 1854. SUMMARY EXECUTION ON BILLS According to the notices of motions entered on the proceedings of the House of Commons, there are no less than 69 amendOn the first announcement of the Bill ments or alterations proposed by five Memfor granting summary execution on unpaid bers of Parliament, to be brought forward bills of exchange, we believe in never oc- in Committee, for the improvement of this curred to any one acquainted with the sub- extraordinary piece of legislation, thus ject, that its provisions would diminish the transplanted from Modern Athens. These emoluments of the Profession; but it was notices occupy about four folio pages, and doubted whether the public would really appear to us to render it hopeless, even if gain anything by the alteration, beyond the measure were right in principle, for any giving the power of issuing execution some satisfactory progress to be made during the days earlier than under the Common Law very few weeks that remain of the present Procedure Act. As, however, the Legis- Session. lature is bound to consider the case of Let it be recollected, that this project of debtors as well as creditors, and the general "summary diligence" is but a modicum of interest of the trading community, it ap- the numerous differences which exist bepeared most seriously questionable whether tween the Laws of England and Scotland a notice of six days was sufficient before and the practice of their respective Courts, issuing execution. and the constitution of the Courts themOur countrymen north of the Tweed selves. We last week cited from the have hitherto preferred their ancient laws learned Commissioners on Mercantile Law and mode of procedure, and to the present 19 points of difference regarding bills and time we have not been so much enamoured notes only; and we this week set forth 18 of their system of jurisprudence as to imitate more on the Law of Debtor and Creditor. it in the southern part of the island. Very Whilst her Majesty's Commissioners are suddenly of late, however, we have been thus communicating some of the results of called upon to admire certain parts of their research, and asking all the Law SoScottish Judicature, and amongst others cieties in the kingdom and the whole comthe course of "summary diligence," as it mercial community, for further information is called, with reference to dishonoured on our conflicting laws, and the safest bills of exchange; and no small excitement means of assimilating them, it is surely preseems to prevail in the House of Commons mature to take up one solitary point and regarding the more than railway speed with press its separate discussion on the attenwhich drawers, acceptors, and indorsers of tion of the Legislature, amidst so many imbills of exchange who make default in pay-portant subjects, and especially whilst the ment, are to be sent to prison or their Bill for the further amendment of our goods and chattels seized by the sheriff. Common Law Procedure urgently demands It is a wonderful discovery, now for the the earliest consideration of the Law Memfirst time made in England, that its trade bers of the House. and commerce can be essentially benefited by following an examp. le set in Scotland nearly two centuries ago. VOL. XLVIII. No. 1,37." One of the notices of amendment comprises the restoration of a clause giving jurisdiction to the County Courts in regis M 194 Summary Execution on Bills of Exchange. June 23. From the Committee of the Liver From the Committee of the Bristol and Clifton Trades' Association, in favour of the Bill. tering protested bills, and issuing rapid titions which have been presented to Parlia execution up to 50l. We beg to inquire ment on the subject of this Bill. They are how the provisions of the Act can possibly as follow:be carried into effect by a Judge who has to hold Courts at a dozen towns every pool Guardian Society for the Protection of month? In London a Judge is sitting every Trade, in favour of the restoration of the day, and before him applications can be clauses enabling attorneys to protest bills, and readily made within the six days; but sup- to register the protests under the Act in the pose a bill registered at York, and in a day County Court up to 50l. or two the Judge is at Ripon, is the debtor to follow him, in order to obtain a hearing on a summons to stay execution till a point of law be argued or a question of fact tried before a jury? or are all defences on bills and notes not exceeding 501., to be excluded? We understand, indeed, that several of the County Court Judges who are best acquainted with their duties, have been consulted by the authorities who promote the measure, and that, although "nothing loath" to the extension of their jurisdiction, they candidly acknowledge that the County Courts can render no assistance in this new mode of procedure. of Newcastle-on-Tyne and Gateshead, for the June 29. From the attorneys and solicitors restoration of the clauses as to attorneys and the County Courts. June 30. From the President and Vice-Presidents of the Society of Attorneys and Solici tors of Ireland, against the extension of the 11th clause for the registration of protests in Bill to Ireland, and particularly against the the Courts at Westminster, and against the 15th clause, requiring security as a preliminary step to a defence, and praying for the restoration of the clause, authorising attorneys to note and protest bills. The supposition, therefore, that pre- Portsmouth, praying that the Bill may pass, July 8. From bankers and merchants of ference was given to town over country prac-but limiting the protest of bills to notaries, titioners, appears to be unfounded. The County Court clauses, so far as we can and restoring the County Court clause. learn, were struck out by the promoters of gesses of Dublin, stating that the provisions of From the Lord Mayor, aldermen, and burthe Bill as impracticable. It must be ad- the Bill will inflict great injury on various mitted, however, that at Liverpool and important interests in Ireland, and praying Manchester, where a Judge sits perma- that the Bill may not be extended to that nently, the case might be different, and at country. Liverpool, we are informed, the number of bills there payable is very large; but for the most part the bills, though accepted in all parts of the country, are made payable at a London banker's, and the amount remitted through the country correspondent of the house.1 It will be observed from this list that only one of the numerous Law Societies in England has presented a petition on the subject. The Law Society of Ireland repu diates the Bill altogether, but if it must pass, calls for the restoration of the clause in favour of attorneys. It may be right to All these practical matters require to be mention that the London notaries had no weighed and considered in effecting a change hand in originating the Bill, and we incline such as is contemplated in the Bill before to think that they do not care for its passParliament. It is very inexpedient, if not ing. It is very doubtful whether they would dangerous, to rush into new legislation derive any ultimate advantage from it. The without a full knowledge of all the facts effect would probably be very largely to di and circumstances, and probable conse- minish the number of bills, particularly of quences connected with the change. There that class which, not being provided for at be many other topics, besides those we have referred to, which require investigation before we adopt the Scotch mode of procedure in this important class of mercantile transactions. may the banker's where they are made payable, are handed over at five o'clock to the notary. Whether this would be counterbalanced by the protests under the Act may be doubtful. We have no expectation that the friends of the notaries in the House will It does not appear that the members either but if it should be pressed forward by the be strenuous supporters of the measure; for Liverpool or Manchester have as yet op- promoters, we believe the notaries both in posed the Bill, nor have the Law Societies of It may be proper to add a list of the pe either of those places interfered by petition, but town and country will strongly resist the there is a petition from the Liverpool Guardian restoration of the clause in favour of the Society. attorneys. We think, therefore, the Bill Summary Execution on Bills of Exchange.-Bankruptcy Bill. should be opposed altogether, on the ground that it is unnecessary and inexpedient, and that at all events it must be postponed till the whole Law of Bills of Exchange can be reconsidered, and brought into one general Act. 195 manent appointment as registrar, together with such further sum for his travelling expenses, as the Lord Chancellor may order; (s. 5). either in London or in a country district, is Where a commissioner or registrar, acting temporarily hindered from discharging his duty by illness or unavoidable absence, the Lord Chancellor may appoint a fit person (who We adverted in a postscript to our last in the case of a commissioner shall be a serNumber, to the Act of 9 & 10 Wm. 3, c. geant or barrister-at-law of seven years' stand17, by which bills may be noted and pro-ing) to act in his stead, (s. 6); and also in the tested in places where there are no notaries, by "a substantial person," in the presence of two witnesses. We are informed that the notaries are in the habit of sending bills to attorneys in such places, and pay their usual professional charges for noting or protesting; and the notaries contend, therefore, that there would be no failure of means to carry the Act into effect. But surely it would be a most cumbersome and expensive · process to require three persons to note and protest a bill when an attorney might, like a notary, do it alone. BANKRUPTCY BILL. THIS Bill, which is brought in by the Lord Chancellor, proposes to enact as follow: case of absence for any reasonable cause, during such period as shall not exceed in the whole the period of two calendar months in any one period of twelve consecutive calendar months, (s. 7); and such serjeant, barrister, or other person shall, while his appointment remains in force, have all the jurisdiction, rights, powers, duties, and authorities belonging to the office of the commissioner or registrar; (s. 8). usher shall be hereafter made without the No appointment of a messenger or of an sanction of the Lord Chancellor first obtained; (s. 9). After Sept. 1, 1854, the practice of the Court of nominating brokers to make inventories of the effects of bankrupts shall be discontinued; and the duties now discharged by brokers shall be discharged by the messengers; (s. 10). Repeal of 5 & 6 Vict. c. 122, s. 76, which enacts that a succeeding Judge, Commissioner, 1st. As to the Officers of the Court. registrar, and deputy registrar shall be paid The vacancies now existing in the offices of such proportionate part of their salaries as Commissioners for the Birmingham and Bris- shall accrue from the day of the resignation, tol districts, and of Registrar for the Bristol death, or removal from office of the preceding district, shall not be filled up unless the Lord Judge, &c., and of 7 & 8 Vict. c. 96, s. 49, Chancellor shall declare that, having regard to which enacts, that the successor of any registhe state of the business, the vacancies ought to trar or deputy registrar dying, resigning, or be filled up; and thereupon they may be filled being removed, shall be entitled to receive up, as if this Act had not been passed; (s. 1). such portion of his salary as shall accrue from Upon any future vacancy in the office of the day of such death, resignation, or reCommissioner or of registrar in the Birming-moval; and the salaries of all Commissioners ham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, or Manchester and other officers of the Court of Bankdistrict, the Lord Chancellor may declare that ruptcy to be hereafter appointed shall comsuch vacancies shall not be filled up until fur-mence from the time when they shall be ther order, and thereupon the same shall not appointed; (s. 11). be filled up; (s. 2). The provisions of the 1 & 2 W. 4, c. 56, s. 9, are repealed, and the chief registrar or any of the registrars of the Court of Bankruptcy, acting either in London or in the country, may be removed upon a certificate from the Lords Justices of the Court of Appeal in Chancery, of some sufficient reason to be named therein for such removal; (s. 3). The Lord Chancellor shall, with the advice of the Lords Justices, by order, direct according to what scale the remuneration of an official assignee for his services shall be calculated; and thereupon the 12 & 13 Vict. c. 106, s. 44, shall be repealed; and the provisions respecting such remuneration contained in the 130th General Order of October 19, 1852, shall remain in force until the same shall be abrogated or varied under this Act; (s. 12). 2nd. As to the Fees. Where, upon a vacancy in the office of registrar for a country district, it shall seem to the Lord Chancellor necessary that some person should be appointed to assist the Commissioner, but inexpedient that a permanent apThe Lord Chancellor may, with the advice pointment should be made, the Lord Chancel- of the Lords Justices, vary or abolish the lor may appoint a fit person to act as registrar fees payable in relation to any of the proceeduntil further order, (s. 4); and to receive such remuneration for his services, not exceeding the amount to which he would have been entitled as salary for the same period under a per ings in matters of bankruptcy or arrangement in the Court of Bankruptcy, or the Court of Appeal in Chancery, and fix other fees not higher than by such Act prescribed; |