Proposed Minister of Justice.-Notes on Recent Statutes. 273 secutor; can anything be worse than the At- other brokers; and then when that is done, torney and Solicitor-General holding their im- the clerk makes entries of the business which portant offices with a merely nominal salary, his principal informs him has been done, and and consequently having the constant tempta those entries are made in books which each tion to prefer their other clients to the Crown? broker keeps, and in which are entered his It is no defence of this plan that those learned dealings with other brokers. Now, the bill is persons do not often neglect their official filed for an account of transactions of this duties; enough that they are always under kind. The defendant set up this kind of dethe influence of the inducement to neglect; fence:-He says, 'I did employ you, it is the public service has a right to better security against non-feasance, as well as against misfeasance, than is afforded by extraordinary selfdenial in those employed; and, indeed, whatever may be the conduct of the Crown lawyers in their professional capacity, it is a fact undeniable that they are not seldom wanted in the House of Commons when obliged to be absent in attendance upon their private practice. "It has been proposed to give them an ample salary, and require undivided devotion to their official duties,-that is the sacrifice of their present practice. But the authors of this proposal entirely forget that it would exclude the first men at the Bar from these offices, because no one could afford to take a precarious place and so lose his practice, which, in the event of losing his office after a year or two's possession, he would have little chance of regaining. That they must be allowed to continue their practice is, therefore, clear enough; but surely a moderate salary should be given, -enough to justify the government in requiring that they never should be absent from town on special retainers. This is perhaps the only material change that can safely be effected in these offices; but it would be a very great improvement, and would prevent the possibility of some things again happening which we have occasionally had good reason to complain of." NOTES ON RECENT STATUTES. EQUITY JURISDICTION IMPROVEMENT ACT.-RECEPTION OF BROKERS' BOOKS A BILL was filed by Messrs. Ewart & Co. against Mr. Williams, to take an account of various transactions between them. It appeared that Mr. Williams had engaged in a great many transactions on the Stock Exchange, in shares and otherwise, and had employed the plaintiffs from time to time to transact the business for him. The plaintiffs moved that their books might be received as prima facie evidence of the truth of the matters therein contained, under the 15 & 16 Vict. c. 86, s. 54. Vice-Chancellor Kindersley said:-"It ap pears that the custom of stockbrokers in their business is this: the principal himself goes to the Stock Exchange, and conducts the business of purchasing and selling shares with true, as my broker; but you have attempted to charge me with business in which I never engaged.' Now, he might, if he had thought fit to do so, have examined Ewart or his partners, and they would have stated on oath what the facts were, and their evidence might have been used. But the cause has been heard; and there was no evidence at all at the hearing in support of the contention of the defendant Williams. In this state of things, all that could be done was to decree an account, and that account is now being taken. In taking it, Ewart & Co. say, our clerk who made these entries is dead; it is proved, however, that the entries are in his handwriting. Ewart & Co. say, that from the very nature of the business, it is impossible to prove the fact of each transaction which is entered having taken place. Now, precisely that sort of difficulty was the ground on which the Legislature proceeded to enact, that this Court may allow books in which entries are made to be prima facie evidence; but then it is the duty of the Court to look into the books, to see whether, from their character, they ought to be so treated. Here, the defendant having a full opportunity of examining the books, puts forth a suggestion that there are entries requiring explanation, and that there are many defects showing great irregularity in the keeping of these books. In consequence, the Court has gone through them with much minuteness, and the result of the examination is this: it has left an impression on my mind that the books are regularly kept. In any set of books, it is not to be expected that there will be no part open to the objection of requiring some explanation. But it appears to me that in these books there is less ground for such objection than I should have expected. Having examined them, I think they should be prima facie evidence. But it having been urged that the issue raised was this, that right that the validity of the transactions, atthere were fictitious entries, I thought it tributed to several individuals named, should be vouched by the evidence of those individuals. That has been done, and the result is this, that out of about ten persons, three or four are dead, or have retired from business, and have left no books by which the reality of proved; but, as to the major part of those inthe transactions alleged with them can be dividuals, it is proved, either by the evidence of themselves, or of their partners or of clerks, that the transactions took place exactly as represented in the books of Ewart & Co. Then it has been urged also, that the probable effect of making these books prima facie evidence is that they may become conclusive evidence ; 274 Points in Equity Practice.-Protection of Purchasers against Judgments' Bill. that, however, may be the case with any books. Then, further, it is said that the intention of the Legislature was, that the section should only apply to the case of books open to both parties. If that were to be the construction put upon the Act, it would neutralise its effect with regard to the greater part of the transactions of mankind. I find nothing in the language of the Act itself to show such an intention, and I cannot, for the purpose of construing it, look at the intention expressed by the Commissioners." Ewart v. Williams, 3 Drewry, 21. POINTS IN EQUITY PRACTICE. PROTECTION OF PURCHASERS AGAINST JUDGMENTS' BILL. LORD St. Leonards, on the 6th inst., brought in a bill for the better protection of purchasers against judgments entered up against vendors. His lordship stated that one object of the bill was to remedy certain anomalies and doubts which at present existed in and as to the law on the subject; that another was to place the Counties Palatine of Durham and Chester on the same footing with respect to it as the rest of the kingdom; another object had reference to the registration of annuity deeds. These deeds were formerly directed to be en AMENDMENT OF BILL AFTER REPLICATION rolled, in order to the protection of grantors of FILED.-COSTS. annuities against usurious transactions. When the Usury Laws were repealed last year, the Act for enrolment of annuities was very naturally repealed also. He proposed now to re A BILL was filed by a rector claiming payment of certain small sums in lieu of tithes. The defendants answered denying the plain-enact the registration of these deeds, and he tiff's title, and a replication was then filed. It was afterwards discovered in advising on evidence, that certain tithe-books, the existence of which was previously unknown, showed that several payments had been made, but not as stated in the bill. These books were in the plaintiff's custody, being in the vestry-room, but were under the charge of the collector, who was unable, through illness, to attend to the matter. On an application, by way of appeal from the chief clerk, for leave to withdraw the replication and to amend, Vice-Chancellor Kindersley said: "The question is, whether reasonable diligence would have enabled the plaintiff to introduce his amendments sooner. He put in the original statements on the information of the proper person to inform him. The books in question, it seems, were deposited some time previously to the institution of the suit in the vestry, and it is of course possible to suppose they might have been got at; but after the report of the collector, it was not, I think, excessive negligence in the plaintiff not to ask for the books. It was not such a want of diligence as to preclude me from giving leave to amend. On the other hand, if the plaintiff by amending puts the defendant to additional expense, as it is no fault of the defendant, he ought not to be put to that double expense. I shall, therefore, give liberty to withdraw replication and to amend the bill, the plaintiff paying the costs of the suit up to the present time, including the costs of this application, and filing the amended bill within a week." Champneys v. Buchan, 3 Drewry, 5. did so for this reason. Although he was opposed to the registration of mortgages, purchases, and settlements of land, he drew a wide distinction between dealings with the estate and the title-deeds thereof, and such encumbrances as were created upon it by lis pendens, judgencumbrances should be registered; and he ments, &c. He thought the latter class of proposed now to enact that no life annuity should be a charge against lands, tenements, and hereditaments, unless it was registered. The reason why he proposed to include this with the other classes of incumbrances to which he had referred was, that they were general incumbrances, that the title-deeds of an estate never went along with the annuity, and that therefore it was such an encumbrance being protected against. as a purchaser ought to have the means of The Lord Chancellor was by no means opposed to the bill which his noble and learned friend had just laid on the table. He was, his objections to the registration of assurances, however, sorry to hear that he still retained because it was his (the Lord Chancellor's) intention to introduce a bill during the present Session, not for the general registration of assurances, but for carrying it one stage further, by establishing a registration of mortgages. Lord Brougham entirely concurred with his noble and learned friend on the woolsack, in approving highly of the measure introduced by his noble and learned friend near him. He must at the same time say, that he thought it would be of very great advantage to the jurisprudence of this country, if we had such a functionary as a Minister of Justice. Had we had such an official, it would have been perfectly impossible that such anomalies as those pointed out by his noble and learned friend should have occurred, that, for example, the Bill of 1840 should have been brought in when learned friend, had passed but a year or two a similar measure, introduced by his noble and before. Unclaimed Dividends in Chancery—Causes undealt with for Fifteen Years. Lord Campbell expressed his concurrence in the principle of the Bill, not despairing of a general Bill on Registration. The Bill was then read a first time.-From the Morning Chronicle of 7th February. Alston v. Males. Account of the trustees of Holton charity Arnold, Lumley, Esq., exparte the Purchaser or Purchasers of the Estates Andrews v. Sewell and Andrews v. Lord Hawke Attorney-General v. Digby, Lord Attorney-General v. Foster, in Master Farrer's Office Attorney-General v. Fraunces Attorney-General v. Radnor, Earl of Attorney-General v. Scott, William, and Nathan Firth Attorney-General v. Southgate, James Mellow's legacy account Attorney-General v. Sedgwick Attorney-General v. Sayer Attorney-General v. Trevellyan Bishop v. Baker 275 Bowker v. Beswick. Richard Beswick and his children's account Bowater v. Burdett and Rigge v. Bowater Bedell v. Crank Birch v. Crossland. The account of the estates devised to the plaintiff Sarah Birch and her children Birch v. Crossland. The account of the estates devised to the defendant John Crossland and his children Browne v. Dutton. The defendant Ann Dutton the elder's settlement account Bodens v. Dod Bennett v. Dinely Bariff v. Footman. The defendant Richard Ray, deceased Brown v. George. Becke v. Gibson. count Becke v. Gibson. Heighington's account Bell v. Hawley Brewer v. Hawys Becher v. Heath The legatees' account Thomas Mawmell's ac The schoolmaster of Belson v. Hunter. The annuity account Brown v. Jones. The account of rents of the leasehold in Dunk and Halifax Streets Burgis v. Jackson Bradley v. Kidd and Bradley v. Rayment. The share of the infant defendants Elizabeth Rayment and Maria Rayment, subject to the estate for life of the defendant James Rayment, as tenant by the curtesy Butler v. Kitson. The account of Cuthbert Potts Butter's legacy and interest Butler v. Kitson. The account of George Butler's legacy and interest Butler v. Kitson. The account of William Potts' children Attorney-General v. Webb. The defendant Prathernon Dorothy Rious' account. Attorney-General v. Wigmore Best v. Best. The defendants Henry Hardinge, Frances his wife, and their children's account. Barry v. Barrett and Stanley v. Smith. account of the profits of the real estate Hugh Smith, Esq. On of Benson, otherwise Debenson, v. Barlow Bradshaw v. Bradshaw. The account of the Darcy Lever estate Boys v. Barker The account of George Barton v. O'Callaghan Bickley v. Penny and Wilkes v. Penny Bristol, exparte the Trustees for executing an Act for repairing, widening, and improving the several roads round the City of; and for making certain new lines of road to communicate with the same. The account of the lands devised by the will of Dorothy Popham. Blackshaw v. Rogers and Snelson v. Rogers. Margaret Cowper's contingent account Blackshaw v. Rogers and Snelson v. Rogers. Barker v. Barker. The infant children of Frances Roberts and her children's account Peter Henry Barker Butler v. Basnett, Sarah Wallen, her account Baker v. Baker, and in the matter of Catherine Jane Baker, an infant Birch v. Rous. The marriage settlement of John Birch and the plaintiff Ann Birch Biddulph v. Roberts Brown, exparte the Children of Benjamin 276 Unclaimed Dividends in Chancery-Causes undealt with for Fifteen Years. Edward, or other the parties entitled to Nos. 7 and 8, Dog Row, in the parish of St, Matthew, Bethnal Green Bawden v. Sharland. The personal estate of Henry Shortridge Cruwys, deceased Braithwaite v. Sayner Blackett v. Stoddart and Allgood v. Blackett Brice v. Stokes. The account of the testator John Taylor's personal estate Brice v. Stokes. The account of Harriet Sparrow's legacy and interest Brice v. Stokes and Brice v. Younge Brice v. Stokes and Brice v. Younge. account of John Taylor's personal estate Bennett v. Taylor The Baldwin v. Taylor and Spicer v. Taylor. The contingent account of the children of James Baldwin, deceased Bristow v. Warde. Catherine Fraser's account In the matter of John Carter. The separate account of Ann Goodenough, wife of George Frenchard Goodenough, Esq. Carter, the Rev. George, in the matter of Clark v. Addington Constable v. Adams. Account of Edward Ind and Sarah his wife Constable v. Adams. Account of David Grantham and Henny his wife Constable v. Adams. Account of plaintiff Thomas Constable and Mary his wife Clopton v. Barnard Chambers v. Brailsford. The account of Joseph Gresby and Ann his wife, the annuitants Cocks v. Bateman Cork v. Basford Cooper v. Bengough. Ann Prout the an Bristow v. Warde. The defendant Frances nuitant's account Neave's account Their Excellencies the Advoyer the less and Grand Council of the Laudable City and Canton of Berne, in Switzerland v. Walpole. The bonus account Bertie v. Wenman, Lord Viscount. The personal estate of the testator, Peregrine Bertie Barnes v. Willock. Elizabeth French's legacy account Butler v. Wise Exparte Sir George Cayley, Bart., Digby Legard, Esq., and the Rev. John Gilby, clerk, and their successors, directors, appointed in and by an Act of Parliament passed in the 39th and 40th years of the reign of King George the Third, entitled "An Act for draining, embanking, and preserving divers tracts of Land with the Township of Muston, in the Parish of Hunmanby, and also within sundry other Parishes, Townships, or Places adjoining or near to the Rivers Derwent and Harford, in the East and North Ridings of the County of York In the matter of Ellen Spencer Carter, an infant Carlisle, exparte the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Cheyne v. Apreece. A fund for a minister to preach to the poor prisoners at Lincoln. Cheyne v. Apreece. (Cause only) Cheyne v. Apreece. A fund for purchasing religious books. Cheyne v. Apreece. A fund for the poor, Palatine Cheyne v. Apreece. A fund for the poor prisoners Cheyne v. Apreece. Protestants Cheyne v. Apreece. tion of slaves Cary v. Albott A fund for the French A fund for the redemp Cloves v. Awdry. The plaintiff Caroline Maria Cloves, the infants legacy and residuary account Constable v. Adams. Account of plaintiffs, Thomas Constable and Mary his wife Clifford v. Brooke Chedworth, Lord v. Burton Crewe v. Crewe. The plaintiff, the infant's account Cleverly v. Cleverley Cousens v. Chiene and Cousens v. Chiene. The account of Margaret Chiene, widow, deceased Cadell v. Grant. Mary Dunn Waterman Cunliffe v. Hall. The account of the Fawden Allotments Court v. Jeffery. The account of the unclaimed and lapsed legacies of the testatrix Alice Short Court v. Jeffery. The account of the legatee Mary Williams and her children Court v. Jeffery. The account of the legatee Cobden v. Lucas. Ann Glover's account Coates v. Martin. The poor widows of Colmore, exparte Lionel Copley, Thomas, of Nether Hall, Doncaster, in the West Riding of the county of York Clarke v. Oliver Unclaimed Dividends in Chancery-Causes undealt with for Fifteen Years. Croose v. Price. Ann Croose's appoint De Gorgollo v. Garcias. The account of the bills of lading and certificate, numbered 24, 181, 188, and 199 Dick v. Lushington. The account of the servants of the testator James Ellis, in India Dering's Infants v. Lambard Dixon v. Langhorn Fielden v. Fielden. testator's real estates. 277 The account of the Grellier v. Boston. The account of the next Derecourt v. Mann. The principal account of kin of the testator, John Avarn Drummond v. Ridge Downes v. Timperon. The separate account of the petitioner, Sarah Marriott Perkins Davidson v. Tuthill. The contingent legacy account of Davidson M'Farlan Daintry v. Wardle. The defendant, Mercy Plant, the annuitant's account Dashwood v. Whatley, Rebecca Gwynne, widow, her account Dashwood v. Whatley, Mary and Ann Gravenor, their account The plaintiff Anne Gray, Graham v. Buddle Gray v. Chiswell. the annuitant's account Goodman v. Denny Garland v. Ellis Entwisle v. Markland. The defendant Alice tingent account Grinrod, the annuitant Edes v. Rose. The account of Brooks, son of Jane Brooks Farrimond v. Baron Gandy v. Nicholls Gaches v. Palmer. The account of the real and leasehold estates Matthew Chitty, Darby Griffith, and others, Fairburn v. Bluit. William Tipping, his Trustees under the Will of Catherine Griffith, wife, and five children, their account Fludyer v. Brudenell. Robert Harcourt Weston, Louisa Weston, and Maria Weston's late of Padworth, in the county of Berks, deceased Gibson v. Stiles and Bumstead v. Stiles Gooch v. Wilson. Dorothea, wife of the defendant Thomas Patten the elder, her account. Gooch v. Wilson. Edmund Rach, and Agnes his wife, the annuitant's account Exparte Henry Halsey Lannoy, Richard Coussmaker, and William Bray Hamilton v. Allen. The account of Francis Alison in his own right |