Page images
PDF
EPUB

266

Differences in Mercantile Laws.-Enfranchisement of Copyholds. Measure of damages for non-fulfilment of Con- Measure of damages for non-fulfilment of Contract by Seller to deliver.

truct by Seller to deliver. with reference to a subsequent rise in the value. tion to the purchaser. Dunlop v. Higgins, 6 Shaw v. Holland, 15 M. & W. 136 ; Westropp Bell's App. 195; 1 H. L. C. 381. v. Solomon, 8 C. B. 345. See p. 373. Distress.

Hypothec. 12. Landlord's right of distress attaches 12. Landlord's right of hypothec affects the only after the rent has become due.

property of the tenant, not only for rent which has become due, but for that which is accru

ing due. Sale of Stolen Goods.

Sale of Stolen Goods. 13. Sale in market overt of stolen goods 13. No purchaser of stolen goods can acgives the purchaser an absolute right against quire an absolute right to them against the the true owner, until the latter has prosecuted true owner. the thief to conviction. Payment of Price.

Payment of Price. 14. May be proved by oral evidence only. 14. There must be written evidence of pay

ment, unless in the case of a ready-money transaction, where payment is part of the res gestæ, or the whole sum is under 1001. Scots (81. 6s. 8d.)

ENFRANCHISEMENT OF COPY- and thus obtained, as even admitted by " R. HOLDS.

L.," a far different rent than that which would have been paid, had he granted a lease subject

to the lord's rights. MANOR OF KENNINGTON,

“ R. L.” seems to think that a lease granted To the Editor of the Legal Observer.

subject to such rights, would not be taken by Sır, Having only just seen the letter of a builder; but, with most men of business, no “ R. L.” in the last Number of the Legal Ob- difficulty would arise, as it would be easy to server, I am obliged to reply to it as briefly

as calculate the expense of effecting an insurance possible, in order to have a chance of my reply to cover the expense of admission, after the appearing in your next Number. The main question is, whether the copy- a contract, instead of getting a worse, might,

land was built on; and the builder, with such holders attempt to deprive the lord of a por- and probably would, get a better bargain. tion of the rights to which he is entitled-it

To take the case mentioned by “ R. L.," of not being disputed that the copyholders took land worth 11. a year, and when

built on worth their property subject to the lord's rights, and 1001. a year. that they had ample means of knowing the ex- If the life on the rolls was young, an insuitent of such rights.

rance might be effected on that life, or as the It appears from the petition, and from “R. fine on admission of two lives would be but 3d, L.'s” letter, that the copyholders seek to regu- or of three lives but 3l. 10s., and the expense late the amount of the lord's fines, by the rent of admission to the land would be but trifling, paid to the copyholder, and not by the value a surrender might be made to trustees, and of the property at the time the fines become a policy assuring 2001. for the fine

, effected payable.

payable on the death of the longer or longest Now, if the lord be entitled to the ordinary liver. fine of two years' improved value, and the rent is as stated, materially less than the im- but would of course reduce the rent payable

The annual premium would be but small

, proved value; the object of the copyholders, if to the copyholder by its amount, as with justice attained, would deprive the lord of a material it should do, as he would have no more right portion of his rights. If the lord be not so entitled, the remedy of than a leaseholder would have to expect the

to a rent arising in respect of the lord's interest, the copyholders is very simple. Let them re- full value of the property without paying the fuse to pay the fines based on the improved ground rent. value and tender the fines on what they contend is the just estimate ; and if the lord be have separate interests in property ; each has a

The matter stands simply thus :--A. and B. not entitled to the larger fines, his claim will right to do what he pleases with his own inbe unsuccessful. On the other hand, if the lord be so entitled, and it it be desirable that B. should have the

terest, but not to affect that of the other party, it appears to be clearly unjust, as a matter of power to enfranchise his interest from the claim business, to require him to accept less than the of d., he ought to pay the value of A.'s invalue of his interest, because the copyholder terest. has chosen to deal with his own interest in the

Should that interest operate so as to cause property, as if that the lord had not existed; B. a greater loss than the actual value of A's

same.

Enfranchisement of Copyholds.-Selections from Correspondence.

267 interest, so far from its being an argument that copyholder grants a building lease for a term B. should pay less than the actual value to A., of say 71 years, in a case where the licence to it would, in the minds of most men, and espe- demise only enables him to grant for 70. In cially of gentlemen of 50 years' practice in the another case, the tenant inadvertently grants a law, be rather an argument for A. requiring building lease for the term of 70 years, when somewhat more than the actual value of his in fact 20 years of that term, as limited by the interest, rather than that B. should purchase it licence, has expired. In both cases, it is confor less than the actual value.

tended on behalf of the lord that the leases are My acquaintance with copyholds has not ex. void, and that the lord is entitled to fines comtended to nearly half a century, but has ex- puted on the full rack-rent-to the entire deceeded thirty years, and I must tell “ R. L.” struction of the property of the copyholder. that I know the difference between copyholds Would it not therefore be right to abolish the of inheritance and copyholds for lives, and necessity for such licences to demise without that he is mistaken in supposing that I referred prejudice to the lord's compensation for grantto the latter.

ing them, and to enact that, notwithstanding It is clear from his remarks as to life in the irregularity, the leases shall be valid, and terests, and the alleged difficulty of arrange- that the lord shall only be entitled to fines ments between a builder and copyholder, so as calculated on the actual ground-rent, provided to preserve the lord's rights, that he has paid that rent was a bona fide one, and 'such as but little attention to mathematical questions could be reasonably obtained at the time of in relation to partial interests in property, letting the land? Without some such enach which in questions between lord and copy- ment, it is difficult to see how the copyholder holder, are fully as important as the mere legal can be considered as the owner of his own consideration of the matter.

property. I hope that if “ R. L.” should again write How much useless and ruinous litigation to the Legal Observer, he will write in good would have been spared, is manifested in the humour, and if so I will take care to do the report of the case of Freeman v. Freeman, be

fore the Lords Justices, had the absurd reAug. 2, 1854.

FAIR PLAY. striction as to the necessity of surrendering

copyholds to the use of a will been abolished

at the time of the devise in that case in 1807. SELECTIONS FROM CORRE

Fortunately, by the Act of 1815, a copyholder SPONDENCE.

can now devise his copyholds without a previous surrender.

ONE, &c. UNPOPULARITY OF ATTORNEYS.

THE LAW UNION INSURANCE COMPANY. It cannot be denied that there is a general prejudice in the public mind against attorneys.

This office has met with its first loss in the The disreputable attorneys are so few that they recent city fire. Such of your subscribers as cannot by their malpractices create it. Whence are shareholders in the Law Union will be glad then does it arise? This is the true source : to learn that the total loss to that office does - The plaintiff and defendant are, of course, not exceed 50l.

D. enemies, and they consequently denounce each other's attorney as a rogue, and ready UNQUALIFIED CONVEYANCERS. to prosecute and defend any injustice. The plaintiff says the defendant and his åttorney Geo. 3, c. 98, s. 14, prohibits all persons from

A Correspondent is informed that the 44 are rogues for resisting his just demand; and the defendant and his attorney say that the preparing conveyances or deeds relating to any plaintiff and his attorney are great rogues for

real or personal estate, other than barristers, prosecuting so iniquitous a demand.

solicitors, attorneys, notaries, or proctors, havH.

ing obtained regular certificates, and special pleaders, draftsmen in equity, and conveyancers,

being members of one of the four Inns of Court CORPORATION LAND.--DISSOLUTION. and having taken out certificates. The person A. conveys freeholds to the use of a corpo.

referred to does not appear to be liable to any ration. The corporation is dissolved. whom, in that event, does the land belong ?

DELTA. LEGAL HALF-HOLIDAY ON SATURDAYS.

A memorial signed by 234 of the principal LEASES OF COPYHOLD LAND.-LICENCE.-firms of solicitors in London, has been pre

sented to the Council of the Incorporated Law The Legislature has from time to time done Judges to sanction the closing of all legal

Society, -suggesting an application to the much to give efficacy to the right of a copy-business at two o'clock on Saturdays. The holder to deal with his copyhold as he may Council concur in the propriety of the sug. think fit, but much remains to be done with- gestion, and will take 'steps for carrying is out any injury to the rights of the lord. I

into effect.

E. L. O. would instance a case of grea

hardship. The

To penalty.

PINE.

268

Attorneys to be Admitted.
ATTORNEYS TO BE ADMITTED.

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Michaelmas Term, 1854.

Queen's Bench.
Clerks' Names and Residences.

To whom Articled, Assigned, &c.
Armstrong, James, 61, Herbert-street, Hoxton ;
and Newcastle-upon-Tyne

W. Chater, Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Atchison, John Simons, Walthamstow

F. M. Selwyn, Temple; E. Clowes, Temple
Ayckbourn, Hubert, 15, Webb’s County-terrace,
New Kent-road; and Trinity-terrace

E. Hodgkinson, Little Tower-street
Baldwin, Robert Bulkeley, 25, Arundel-street,
Strand; and Leyland, near Preston

W. Charnley, Preston Barnett, Horatio Frederick, 10, Lower Calthorpe- T. Marlow, Walsall; W. Beale, Maidstone street; and Walsall

Barnett, Walsall
Bartleet, William Smith, Stourbridge

Messrs. Vernon and Minshall, Bromsgrove
Barber, George Henley, 1, Gray's-inn-square; and
Streatham

H. Mason, Basinghall-street
Bassett, James, 10, Warwick-court

, Gray's-inn ; Trafalgar-road; and Rochester

R. Prail, Rochester Batchelor, George Beetham, 113, New Bond-st. J. E. Wilson, Cranbrook Bayley, John Tandy, 7, Soley-ter., Myddleton-sq. . W.O. Tucker, Threadneedle-st. ; W. vi i fer,

St. Swithin's-lane Bell, Edward Samuel, Stockwell-green

F. Smith, Basinghall-st.; J. Croft, Basinghall-st. Beynon, Thomas, Carmarthen

R. Rees, Carmarthen; S. B. Edwardes, Carmarthen Bridger, William, 18, Southampton-st., Pentonville B. J. L. Frere, Lincoln's Inn Burdekin, Benjamin, jun., 8, Storr-st., Bedford-sq. A. Smith, Sheffield Burton, Henry Augustus, 2, Regent-place, West, Regent-square ; and Lincoln.

F. Burton, Lincoln; J. L. Syms, Funival's Inn Cayley, George, 16, Albert-ter.; Great Ormond

street ; Great James-st. ; Stamford; Putney C. Lever, Frederick’s-place Cheadle, George, 4, Lower Calthorpe-st., Gray'sinn-road

G. T. Taylor, Featherstone-buildings Chorley, Thos. Fearncombe, 9, Cottage-pl., Cityroad; and Taunton

F. A. Trenchard, Taunton Cobb, Wm. Henry, 1, Gordon-place, l'avistocksquare ; and York

H. Richardson, York Coode, Frederick, 20, Chadwell-st., Myddletonsquare; and Launceston

G.G. White, Launceston Coulcher, Cooper, 5, Albert-terrace, Íslington; M. Coulcher, Downham-market; G. Platten, Swinton-street; and Ely

King's Lyon; F. R. Partridge, King's Lyon Cousins, Thomas, jun., Portsea

J. C. Parnell, Portsen Cowburn, William Brett, Sydenham

W. Cowburn, Lincoln 's-inn-fields; M. Tatham,

Lincoln's-inn-fields Craven, Abraham, 12, Compton-st. East, Brunswick-square; and York :

E. Peters, York
Crawford, Tbomas, North Shields .

T.C. Lietch, North Shields
Dickin, Thomas Parkes, Ludlow; and Bilston W. Owen, Wem
Drabwell, John, 38, Edward-street, Hampstead.
road; and Huddersfield .

J. C. Laycock, Huddersfield
Druce, Henry, 5, Mecklenburgh-street; Hunter-
street: and Tenbury

W. Adams, Tenbury ; W. Morris, Tenburg Edwards, Charles Hugh, Birmingham

T. E. Lee, Birmingham; C. Best, Birmingham Elgood, William, 97, Wimpole-street; John-st.; and Newport.

J.H. Hearn, Newport Emmet, Charles, Halifax

T. Adam, Halifax Falcon, Michael, 41, Bedford-row; wirkingion ; and Shrewsbury

W. W. How, Shrewsbury;: C. Falcon, Liverpool Farnfield, William, 'Woolwich

G. Fry, Mark-lane Fellows, Arthur, Hampstead ; Park-ter.; Guildford-street; and Wolverhampton

J. Hawksford, Wolverhampton
Fisher, Thomas, The Rectory, Higham; and E. Fisher, Ashby-de-la-Zouch ; F. J. Wood,
Asbby-de-la-Zouch

Hinckley
French, Beal Frederick, Stepney-green. : G. Marten, Mincing-lane
Fryer, William Henry, B.A., Coleford

H. H. Fryer, Coleford; C. B. Dryden, Lincoln's

inn-fields Gamble, George, jun., 35, Regent's-circus; and

T. H. Hodgson, Carlisle Gardener, Richard, 4, Cloudesley-square, Isling. B.W.Aplin, Banbury ; H. Parker, jun., Bedford

ton; and Banbury .
Gaskell, Samuel, 35, Islington-terrace; Park-road;
and Wigan

R. Leigh, Wigan
Greatback, Frederick Daniel, 2, 'Crescent-place,
Mornington-crescent

J. Tepper, Great James-street

.

[ocr errors]

.

[ocr errors]

row

[ocr errors]

Attorneys to be Admitted.-Notes of the Week.

269 Clerks' Names and Residences.

To whom Articled, Assigned, &c. Greenway, Kelynge, jun., 2, Percy-circus, Pen

tonville; 39, Lincoln's-inn-fields ; Warwick . G.C. Greenway, Warwick; J. Smith, Warwick Grenfell, George Pascoe, 12, Albion-terrace, Islington ; and Penzance

W. Borlase, Penzance
Grimmer, William Henry, 129, Tachbrooke-st.,
Pimlico; and Bradford

M. Foster, Bradford ; J. Swithinbank, Leeds.
Grimshaw, John, jun., 4, Lower Calthorpe-street,

Gray's-inn-road; Heathcote-st.; and Colne H. W. Hartley, Colne
Groom, Alfred, 1, Alwyne-villas, Canonbury. G. Powell, 3, Raymond-buildings
Hackwood, William, 16, Cottage-grove, Mile-end . J. Linklater, Size-lane
Hall, Henry, Ashton-under-Lyne; and Leamington J. Richmond, Ashton-under-Lyne
Hellins, Wm., 27, Mornington-road; and North
Tawton; Pilgrim-street; and Albion-terrace

R. Fulford, Exeter Hewitt, Robert Henry, 36, Trevor-square, Bromp. R. Hewitt, Northampton; Sir William Foster, ton; and Norwich.

Bart., Norwich
Hill, William James, jun., 4, Upper Chadwell-st.,
Penton ville; and Melcombe Regis

J. Garland, Dorchester
Hill, John Edwards, Halifax

G. Edwards, Halifax Hirtzel, George, 20, Doddington-grove, Kennington-road, and Exeter

J. Daw, Exeter ; J. S. Kingdon, King's-arms-yard Hitchings, Richard Neville, 31, Bloomsbury-st., Bedford-square ; and Wrington

J.James, Wrington Hole, Charles Marshall, 9, Powis-place, Great

Ormond-street; and Cowley, near Uxbridge . C. H. Rhodes, Chancery-lane
Hough, William Henry, 20, Argyle-sq., King's-
cross; Amersham.

H. Hough, Oakham; F. Charsley, Amersham
Hughes, Charles Leadbitter, Newark-upon-Trent : P. R. Falkner, Newark-upon-Trent
Levine, A. Lodwick, jun., Smiggrren-lodge, New
Peckham

J.Atkins, White-hart-court
Jenning, Thomas Amas, 95, Gloucester-gardens,

Paddington; and Stockton-upon-Tees J. R. Wilson, Stockton-upon-Tees Joslen, Artbur, 12, Soley-terrace, Lloyd-square ; and Maidstone

K. King, Maidstone Julius, Edric Adolphus, 22, št. Paul's-road, Camden-town

J. Marsden, Wakefield King, Robt, 10, Frederick's-pl., Mile-end-road L. Hicks, Gray’s.inc-square Kioneir, Henry, 27, Mornington-road; Albion. E. Every, Exeter; Wm. Kingdon, King's-armsterrace; and Exeter

yard Legge, Alfred, Gateshead

G. W. Cram, Newcastle-upon-Tyne Lever, Charles Baldwin, 12, Tavistock-square ; and King's-road

C. Lever, Frederick's-place Lewis, Charles Carne, jun., 6, Ely-pl., Holborn; and Brentwood

C. C. Lewis, sen., Brentwood
Lloyd, Henry, 13, Durnford-ter., Kentish-town;
and Winchester

F. Bowker, Winchester
Lush, Frederick Matthew, 13, Dirnford-terrace,
Kentish-town; and Winchester

J. H. Todd, Wichester
Lynch, George Sanderson, 41, George-st., Port-

man-square; and Clifton, near Bristol H. A. Palmer, Bristol Macdonald, Alexander Cleiland, 5, Great Ormond

street; Southampton-row; and Exeter F. Sanders, Exeter Mant, George French, 8, Everett-st., Brunswicksquare; and Storrington

A. Mant, Storrington; G. Waugh, Gt. James-st. Marchant, John, jun., 57, Coleman-street; and Hertford

J. L. Foster, Hertford Marshall, Henry, juu., 7, Baker-street, Portmansquare; and Godalming.

H. Marshall, Godalming Marshall

, Richard, 8, Carlton-villas, Holloway A. W. Irwin, Gray's-inn-square Martin, Charles, 10, Soley-terrace, Pentonville; and Stroud

H. Whickham, Stroud; J. Blaxland, Crosby-sq. Mayers, Henry Stewart, Warwick :

T. Nicks, Warwick Moore, George Townend, Wigan

E. Scott, Wigan Morris, James Shippard, North Shields

G. Kewney, North Shields. [To be continued.]

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

.

NOTES OF THE WEEK, vellous is the discovery in commercial Eng

land, that we must now imitate the “summary

diligence” which has prevailed on the other BILLS OF EXCHANGE BILL.

side of the Tweed for 200 years; and this, after This project has made some progress in the all the improvements effected during the last Committee of the House of Commons. Mar- 20 years, both in the Superior and Inferior

INNS OF COURT AND CHANCERY.

270 Notes of the Week.-Superior Courts : Lord Chancellor.-Lords Justices. Courts ! The attorneys need not oppose this tors “eaten of the root that takes the reason alteration of the law and practice. It can do prisoner ?” them no harm, either in town or country. We took the matter up, because an attempt was made to make a "handle" of this topic (as has Several of the gentlemen who hold the office been done on many other occasions), for the of Principal in the Inns of Chancery have purpose of imputing blame to the London so- been called before the Commissioners, but, as licitors for neglecting the interests of their might be anticipated, they have little to com: Country brethren. One only of all the Pro-municate. The nature and constitution of vincial Law Societies interfered on the ques- these “ ancient and honourable Societies are tion of authorising all attorneys to act as riota- well known, and it may not unreasonably be ries in noting and protesting bills under the asked—what is the object of the Commission ? proposed Act. Is not this a sufficient proof If any of the Inps of Chancery have a surplus that the Profession in the country did not en- income, what is it proposed should be done? tertain any fears of the effect of the scheme? Do the Benchers of the Inns of Court We retain the opinion that the public interest claim the surplus? Is it to be added to the does not call for this alteration of the law, and rental of the Inns of Court for the advantage of that at all events it should be postponed until the Bar, or applied towards the improvement the whole subject of the assimilation of the of the attorneys and solicitors? We presume Laws of England and Scotland can be care- that branch of the Profession will lose no time fully considered, with the advice which the in suggesting a plan that may meet with ge Mercantile Law Commissioners may commu- neral approval for the better acquisition of nicate by their report. After a Royal Com- legal knowledge, and facilitating the discharge mission of Inquiry has issued, can any course of professional duties. Might we suggest that be more injudicious than passing an Act on a the governing bodies of the Inns of Chancery mere fraction of a complicated and extensive and the Council of the Incorporated Law Sosystem, before the evidence has been received ciety should unite in considering this important or considered ? Have not some of our legisla- subject ?

RECENT DECISIONS IN THE SUPERIOR COURTS.

SEALING

PATENT. - COSTS

SPECIFICATION.

Lord Chancellor.

subject to the right of freebench therein of the In re Tillie and Henderson's Patent. July 29, been informally admitted to an undivided

vendor's mother, Ann Beasley, and who had 1854.

moiety instead of having her freebench set out

OF OPPOSING according to the custom. By an indenture of An application to seal a patent was postponed possession of the entirety, paying an annuity

even date, the testator was to enjoy undivided until the payment of the costs of opposing of 401. to Mrs. Beasley for her life, and retainsuccessfully certain parts

of the specifica- ing 4001. of the purchase-money until six tion before the Solicitor-General. months after her death, and he accordingly

, This was an application to seal this patent. entered into possession, but was never admitted

Baggallay in support; Webster, contrà, on thereto. Upon his death in February, 1851, the ground of the nonpayment of the costs of intestate, as to the residue of his real and peropposing successfully certain parts of the spe-sonal estate, and leaving the defendant

, John cification before the Solicitor-General. Smith, his customary heir, the latter was ad

The Lord Chancellor said, that the patent mitted to all his copyhold estates, with the excould not be sealed until the costs in question ception of the estate in question, and upon the were paid.

death of Mrs. Beasley, in 1853, the testator's widow filed this bill for an administration, claim.

ing freebench, and for a commission to set it Lords Justices.

out. The Master of the Rolls held, that the Smith v. Adams. July 24, 25; Aug. 1, 1854. plaintiff was not entitled to freebench in respect

of the moiety in which Mrs. Beasley had a life interest, but only as to the other moiety upon the admission of the defendant, and that he was

trustee for her to its amount until he should Held, reversing the decision of the Master of be so admitted. The defendant äppealed from - the Rolls, that the widow of an unadmitted the latter part of the decision.

surrenderee of copyholds is not entitled to
freebench therein.

Lee and Horace Wright in support; Swan

ston and Jolliffe, contrà. This was a suit for the administration of

Cur. ad. vult. the estate of George Smith. It appeared that The Lords Justices said, that the Dower he purchased in July, 1845, of John Beasley, Act, 3 & 4 Wm. 4, c. 105, did not extend to certain copyhold hereditaments held of the freebench. The right to freebench depended manor of Weedon Beck, Northamptonshire, upon the seisin of the husband, who in this

RIGHT OF WIDOW OF UNADMITTED SUR

RENDEREE то FREEBENCH IN COPY-
HOLDS.

« EelmineJätka »