408 Superior Courts: Vice-Chancellor Wood.-Exchequer. the rents at the time as receiver, and after receiving back from the vendors answers to his requisitions on the abstract of title delivered, he wrote that he should retain the current rents as purchaser, and he also sent a subsequent letter that he should submit a cuse to counsel as to the conveyance, but without referring to the title: Held, that the title had been accepted, and a decree was made for a specific performance, with interest and costs. It appeared in this suit to enforce the specific performance of a contract of purchase, that the defendant was at the time in receipt of the rents of the estate as receiver, and had paid over to the plaintiffs from time to time their respective shares. An abstract of the title was delivered, on which the defendant made requisitions to which replies were given, and he then, in answer to an application for the current rents, wrote back that he should retain them as purchaser. It further appeared that he had subsequently written, stating he should submit a case to counsel on a point relating to the conveyance, but without referring to the title. Willcock and De Gea for the plaintiffs; Roit and Shebbeare for the defendant. The Vice-Chancellor said, that the retaining of the rents by the defendant amounted to an entry in possession, and that the letter which was afterwards sent, only raising a question as to the conveyance, showed that the title had been accepted, and there would be a decree for a specific performance, with costs and interest. Barilett v. Salmon. March 16, 1855. CONTRACT TO PURCHASE UNDER-LEASE AT MODERATE GROUND-RENT. — UNDUE HASTE.-ANNULLING. The plaintiff had applied to the defendant in consequence of an advertisement for the sale of leasehold property at a moderate ground-rent, and on an appointment to meet his clerk he signed an agreement which was produced by the clerk and which specified a ground-rent of 50l., whereas that paid by the defendant was 241. only. It appeared that this was the full value without any premium, and that the plaintiff gave 51. and his IO U for 691. as deposit: Held, that there was such haste as to show that the plaintiff had been entrapped into signing and the agreement was annulled with cosis. THIS was a suit to annul a contract entered into by the plaintiff for the purchase by private contract of an underlease of six houses at Mile-end, and which were represented by the advertisement, in consequence of which he applied, to produce a yearly rental of 130%., the lease being for nearly 80 years at a moderate ground rent, and the price was to be 420 guineas. The plaintiff met the defendant's clerk, and, after viewing one of the houses, signed an agreement purporting to be for an underlease, with a ground-rent of 50%. a year, whereas the defendant was lessee at a groundrent of 247. only. The plaintiff paid 57. on account, and gave his IO U for 691., the ba lance of the deposit money. It appeared that the rents had been raised the day before, and that the tenants would leave if the rent was enforced. A draft of the underlease was afterwards sent to the plaintiff's solicitor, who returned it unperused, and requiring the agree ment to be cancelled on the ground of fraud and misrepresentation. The defendant then brought an action on the IO U, whereupon this bill was filed for an injunction and to annul the contract. It appeared that the ground-rent of 50l. would be high without the payment of any premium. Rolt and J. Williams for the plaintif; Daniel and Southgate for the defendant. The Vice-Chancellor said, that regard must be had to the very little time for deliberation which had been given to the plaintiff, and to the haste with which he had been allowed to sign the contract, and which supported the view that he had been entrapped into signing the agreement. The plaintiff had clearly signed it on the representation that it was a proper agreement for him to sign for the purpose of purchasing a lease for 75 years at a moderate ground-rent under a given lease. It appeared, however, that the defendant in selling was about to fix the ground-rent, not according to the original rate, but to what he chose to impose; and a fair opportunity had been given to release the plaintiff from the agreement otherwise improperly obtained, and it would therefore be annulled with costs. Court of Exchequer. Brewer v. Jones. Jan. 30, 1855. ATTORNEY.-LIABILITY TO BAILIFF'S FEES ON EXECUTION OF FI. FA. A rule was discharged to set aside the verdict for the plaintiff in an action brought by the bailiff to recover from an attorney the fees on executing a writ of fi. fa., alikough the defendant had delivered the writ to the sheriff without giving any direction as to its execution. Semble, that the attorney, in order to avoid such liability, should communicate with kis client. from an attorney the fees on executing a writ THIS was an action by a bailiff to recover of fi. fa., and on the trial it appeared that the attorney had delivered the writ to the sheriff, without any direction as to its execution, who handed it to the plaintiff. The verdict having passed for the plaintiff, this rule was obtained to set it aside and enter it for the defendant. Gray showed cause, citing Walbank v. Quarterman, 3 Com. B. 94. Hawkins in support. The Court said that, in accordance with the case cited, the attorney was liable, and that in order to avoid such liability he should communicate with the client. The rule would therefore be discharged. The Legal Observer, AND SOLICITORS' JOURNAL. www Still attorneyed at your service.”—Shakespeare. SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 1855. REMUNERATION OF SOLICITORS. ¡tem, a large proportion of the evil would OBJECTIONABLE RULES OF TAXATION. remain, unless this difficulty could be grappled with and overcome." be neces The Council consequently seized this We have to notice the important Debate occasion to represent the grievance of which which took place in the House of Lords on they have long complained, on behalf of the 26th instant, relating to the remunera- their brethren generally. They accordingly tion of Selicitors. It arose in the Com- represented that the old vicious principle of mittee of their Lordships on the Bill for professional remuneration had been applied the "despatch of business in the Court of to the Chamber practice, restraining the 1Chancery." That measure proposed, in its gitimate fees of Solicitors, and impelling title "to make further provision for the them to cause steps and forms to be mulmore speedy and efficient despatch of busi- tiplied in order to obtain anything like adeness in the Court of Chancery;" and the quate payment for their services. Thus in preamble recited that, "for the prevention order to be well prepared to pass a compliof delays and inconveniences in the carrying cated account, or establish a pedigree, a on of such portion of the business of the month's previous preparation may Court as is transacted by the Master of the sary; but for this labour and pains no fee is Rolls and the Vice-Chancellors respectively allowed; while if the preparation be omitted sitting in Chambers, it is requisite that an and the work done in the officer's presence addition to the number of junior clerks at- the solicitor receives his usual fees: the tached to the Courts of the Judges respec- Judge or officer's time is wasted, and untively should be forthwith made;" and it necessary delay and expense are incurred. was also recited that "a further like addiIt was urged that measures should be tion may hereafter become necessary." It adopted to give the practitioner a direct inwas therefore proposed to empower the terest in speedy instead of dilatory proMaster of the Rolls and Vice-Chancellors ceedings. The Society, therefore, prayed each to appoint an additional junior clerk forthwith, and to enable the Lord Chancellor to appoint other junior clerks hereafter. their Lordships to refer the Bill then before them, and the whole operation of the recent Acts, for full investigation in a Select Committee of the House. The laudable object of the measure was, The case of the Solicitors was brought to prevent delay in the business of the forward by Lord Lyndhurst with his acCourt; and the Council of the Incorporated customed clear, impressive, and logical Law Society thought it a favourable oppor- manner-remarking concisely, but forcibly, tunity to bring another important topic on the objects to be attained, and the course before the House of Lords which is also to be adopted which might lead to a satisproductive of delay,-namely, "the faulty factory result. mode of remunerating professional men," It will be seen by the Report of the Deas described by Lord Brougham, who em- bate which follows, that the Lord Chanphatically declared "that whatever other cellor and Lord St. Leonards objected to changes were effected to improve our sys- the general subject of Solicitors' costs being VOL. XLIX. No. 1,412. 410 Remuneration of Solicitors.-Debate on the Despatch of Business, Court of Chan. Bill. connected with the particular measure before the House-that measure requiring to be expeditiously passed, and the investigation of the other being one of great difficulty, if not altogether impracticable. Their Lordships, however, distinctly admitted the desirableness of improvement in the mode of assessing the charges of Solicitors, and their willingness to concur in the appointment of a Select Committee, if a practicable plan for effecting the object could be devised. So far the "ventilation" of this important matter has not been fruitless. The grievance is admitted, and if perfect justice cannot be done, some approach to it may be made. It is scarcely sufficient to say that we must take the "rough with the smooth," and be content with a sort of wild justice administered, sometimes at the expense of the client and sometimes of the attorney. Let us try at least to diminish the evil if we cannot remove it altogether. There are various ways in which an experiment might be attempted. The Lord Chancellor is right in saying, that it would be absurd in a transaction of 100,000l. to pay the same per centage as on a small amount. No such thing is proposed, but it would not be unreasonable that a higher charge should be allowed for the responsibility and additional precautions taken where the property dealt with was of great amount. stances fifty or more. Then the present Lord Chancellor and the other Judges have recently enlarged the fee for proceedings in the Judges' Chambers from one to ten guineas. The principle of discretion is therefore established; and we trust it will be extended to instructions for bills, answers, cases and other proceedings, requiring great care and attention in preparation and arrangement; and that directions will be given to the Taxing Masters in Chancery, (as were given in Hilary Term, 1853 at Common Law,) to make such allowances for superior skill and diligence as the nature and circumstances of the several classes of cases may require. DEBATE ON THE DESPATCH OF BUSINESS- Lord Lyndhurst said, this Bill related to and was connected with very important mattersall of which it would be very desirable to have referred to a Select Committee. He had two petitions to present in favour of such a course of proceeding-one from a very important body, the Incorporated Law Society, which in the Profession-and the other petition from consisted of some of the most intelligent men the clerks referred to in one of the clauses of the Bill. The present Bill had for its object the more speedy and effectual despatch of Where, also, the outlay for the fees of business in the High Court of Chancery, and counsel, the fees of Court, and the expense other purposes; and chiefly proposed to faof witnesses is large, and the repayment cilitate the despatch of business in the Chamlong delayed, surely it is not unreasonable that interest should be allowed at a mode rate rate. Now, both these modes of remuneration prevail in Scotland; why should they not be adopted in England? To some extent, indeed, there is already a precedent for a different scale on this side the Tweed, both in our Superior Courts and in the County Courts. In the Superior Courts, under 201., the scale is less than above that sum; and in the County Court there are various scales according to the sum recovered. Again, in regard to the discretionary power of the taxing officer to regulate the amount of the fee in proportion to the extent of skill and labour (apart from responsibility)-the Common Law Masters are authorised, instead of the former limited fee of 138. 4d. for instructions for a brief, to allow whatever they think just and right. Five, ten, or twenty guineas are often allowed, and we understand, in some in bers of the Judges of the Court of Chancery by an additional number of junior clerks. This plan, it was considered, would not only not be beneficial but would be injurious to the suitors of the Court. By the Act of Parliament under which Chamber practice was established, and by the General Orders of the Court of 16th October, 1852, and those of 3rd June, 1850, the Legislature and the Court sought to establish for all Chamber business, consecutive proceedings instead of the old practice by hourly warrants, but it was found that in the Chambers of some of the Judges great delays arose, as an appointment, or an adjourned hearing, could not be obtained at a less period than from two or three to even four or five weeks. These delays, however, were not found to arise from the want of junior clerks but from the amount of work by which the senior clerks were overwhelmed-consequently the increase of junior clerks proposed under the present Bill would not tend to put an end to the delays complained of, unless, indeed, it were intended that references in Chambers should be proceeded with before such junior clerks—but it was felt that such a plan would be most ob Debate on the Despatch of Business, Court of Chancery Bill. 411 jectionable, as it would remove the hearing labour were performed in the presence of of matters still further from the Judge and the officer (whose time was consequently bring them before an inferior class of officers. wasted), the Solicitor received the payment In proposing that this Bill should be referred that was otherwise denied to him. Thus, alto a Select Committee, it was scarcely necessary though speed and simplicity were the Clients' to remind their lordships that the Act by which interests; dilatoriness and intricacy were the the Masters' Office was abolished was principally interest of the Solicitor. So, again, with reowing to the inquiries made by a Select Com- spect to conveyancing: if a Solicitor drew a mittee appointed by this House, in 1851, on a deed or will of a given number of folios, he Bill for giving primary jurisdiction to certain was entitled to a certain fee; whereas if he sat cases to the Masters in Chancery. down and, by bestowing great pains upon the An important point to which he would document, succeeded in abridging its length by advert was the present highly objectionable one-half, he would lose half his remuneration. mode of remunerating Solicitors-a mode A premium was therefore held out to verbosewhich urgently demanded revision. In sup-ness, and the Solicitor's interest was made to port of this view, his lordship cited the stand in direct antagonism to that of his Client. opinion of very eminent and competent autho. Further, when a Solicitor gave advice in the rities. His noble and learned friend (Lord Brougham), after referring to the divided responsibility which the system of Masters created, as one great cause of delay and expense in the Court of Chancery, expressed himself thus before the Committee of the House of Lords, which sat on the Masters in Equity Jurisdiction Bill in the session of 1851 "My opinion is clear that the other cause is the perfectly faulty mode of remunerating professional men, Solicitors especially, but I do not except Counsel. This opinion is the result of my whole professional experience and observation, and it is not confined to proceedings in equity. The subject is one of great difficulty, but it is one of yet greater importance, and I feel assured that whatever changes are effected to improve our system, whether of Equity or Common Law, a large proportion of the evil will remain, unless this difficulty shall be grappled with and overcome." Another distinguished authority was that of Lord Langdale, the late Master of the Rolls, who, in a letter dated the 10th of November, 1842, addressed to the Board of Taxing Masters, and a copy of which the noble and learned writer also transmitted to the Incorporated Law Society, stated "That the system gives to the Solicitor, and every other legal practitioner, a direct interest to increase the length of documents and the number of steps or proceedings in the transaction of business ;" and " has in many cases made it almost compulsory upon the Solicitor, in his own defence, to put his client to very great and unnecessary expense, for the purpose of obtaining some remuneration for services in respect of which he cannot otherwise make a lawful demand." progress of a suit he received no fee; but if he saved himself the trouble and responsibility of giving such advice, and laid the papers relating to the cause before counsel, he was entitled to charge several guineas for his profit. And if a plaintiff's Solicitor appeared before a Judge in Chambers and argued against counsel on the other side, he would only receive for doing his own work and that of a counsel 21. or 31.; whereas the defendant's Solicitor, who perhaps only sent a young clerk with counsel would obtain 61. or 71. Could anything then be more absurd, unequal, unjust, or impolitic than such a mode of remunerating professional men? A change of system was obviously demanded, and the remedy would be found in an approximation towards the principle of quantum meruit, under which the Taxing Master should have regard to the actual skill and labour employed and responsibility incurred, instead of merely allowing one uniform fixed fee to Solicitors for the same nominal services. Without this all attempts to make the administration of justice speedy and efficient would be thwarted. This matter was one closely connected with the speedy and efficient administration of justice in the Court of Chancery,--was one which ought to be thoroughly investigated,and could not be better investigated than by referring this Bill to a Select Committee. The Lord Chancellor agreed that the question of the remuneration of solicitors was of the greatest importance; at the same time it was one of very considerable difficulty, and he thought he had some right to complain that his noble and learned friend had not communicated with him previous to bringing it under the notice of the House, as he then should have been able The noble lord illustrated the manner in to enter into the subject more fully. Shortly which the system worked by pointing out the after his acceptance of the Great Seal he had tendency of the existing inadequate scale of been waited upon by a deputation from the sofees paid to Solicitors for conducting Chan-ciety referred to, and, in consequence of the cery business. For example, in the case of a representations then made to him, he had complicated account, or an intricate pedigree, thought it his duty to look into the subject to -to enable the Judges' chief clerks to get through it in one sitting required, perhaps a whole month's previous preparation by the Solicitor. For such preliminary labour, however, no fee was allowed; and yet if that see if he could devise any more satisfactory plan by which the remuneration of solicitors should be calculated upon the scale of merit, which ought, in truth, to be the object of all systems. The noble and learned lord said 412 Debate on the Despatch of Business, Court of Chancery Bill. that the remuneration ought to be calculated | clerk under them, were often obliged to do on the scale of quantum meruit, but the diffi- work which would properly fall to the lot of a culty was how to ascertain the quantum meruit. junior clerk to attend to, and it was thought The scale of fees at present in force had been advisable that extra assistance should be affixed by his predecessor in office after great forded them by the appointment of a second consideration, and no doubt it would be ex-junior clerk in each office. tremely inconvenient to be changing the fees every year, so that persons would never know He originally introduced the Bill with what it was that they were to receive. It very that sole object; but his attention was then often happened that the interest of the client called by persons connected with the Court conflicted with that of the solicitor, and, if of Chancery to the fact that there was one proceedings were to be paid for by their length, office, that of Master of Reports and Ennot very honourable practitioners would be tries, the abolition of which had been reoccasionally tempted to lengthen the proceed- commended by a Committee of the House ings, in order to increase their remuneration. of Commons, but that was not adopted by The proposal to pay them according to a per- the Act passed three years ago, although centage of the value of the property involved other recommendations of that Committee were appeared to him perfectly preposterous, for adopted. The reason why the recommendation sometimes a question involving 100,000l. he had mentioned was not adopted was, that his might occupy a very short space of time. In noble friend Lord Truro thought that that was a like manner, it would be impossible to look hasty recommendation-that the office was into each separate case to see what remunera- useful-that, if necessary, its duties might be tion should be given for the particular service increased; he, therefore, thought it was better performed. He thought he was justified, it should remain. But it had since been found therefore, in saying that the matter was full of insuperable difficulties, and he had been obliged to leave it as he found it, with the exception of making some slight alterations. that the office did not work well. The Office of Clerks of Records and Writs, in which most of the business of the Court of Chancery was carried on, could transact more business, and This was in the spring of 1853, but since then more effectually, if it were separated from the the Master of the Rolls had informed him that Office of Reports and Entries in the way in he had gone into the subject, but had not suc- which it now existed. It was, therefore, sugceeded in framing any plan which would gested as desirable, practically to abolish the exactly meet the views of all parties. It was Office of Reports and Entries, the present customary for the Judges of the Court of holder of that office to be called upon to perChancery to meet together, in the evening of form other duties, with the same salary, during the first or second day of each Term, to con- his life, and that the duties he had hitherto dissult as to any alterations of practice which charged should be transferred to the Clerks of might have been suggested by the proceedings Records and Writs. He had made it his duty of the previous three months, and at one of to go and inspect the office of the Master of these meetings, at the beginning of Michaelmas Reports and Entries, and he must say that it or Trinity Term last, it was represented to him was in a most discreditable state. The place by all the Judges of the Court of Chancery was crowded with documents so as to defy all that it would be of great advantage if largely attempt at arrangement, and the whole floor increased remuneration were given to solicitors was covered with papers that were of the in cases where, by their having got the facts greatest importance. into a neat and intelligible form, a long inquiry was superseded, and the hearing compressed into an hour or two, instead of being spread over two or three days. This was an alteration which he had been of opinion could safely be made, but he owned he entirely despaired of ever arriving at any general system of remuneration which should exactly satisfy the wishes of all parties. By the Act of the 15 & 16 Vict. four clerks were appointed to perform the duties of Clerk of Records and Writs. One of those appointments fell vacant the other day. The Master of the Rolls had not felt it to accord with his views to fill up that vacancy, so that three clerks were now discharging the whole of the duties of that office. It was proposed that they should continue to do so, and that if it should appear to the Lord Chancellor that the additional duty cast upon them deserved additional salary, he (with the advice and assistance of the Master of the Rolls) was empowered to give it, so that the whole amount paid for such salaries in any one year should not exceed, if divided equally, 2501. for each clerk. If his noble and learned friend would move for a committee to inquire into that subject, he should be the last man to oppose it, but he certainly could not consent to such an inquiry being tacked on to this Bill, with which it had nothing whatever to do. With respect to the present Bill, the original object in introducing it was to obtain power to appoint additional junior clerks to assist the Under the Act which abolished the Massenior clerks in the Judges' Chambers, it hav-ters' offices, power was given to the Lord ing been represented to him by the Judges that Chancellor to let or sell the Masters' offices, the business in their offices was greatly im- but, further powers being thought requisite, he peded by the want of such clerks. The senior proposed that the piece of ground in Southclerks, it appeared, having each only one junior ampton-buildings and the buildings thereon |