« EelmineJätka »
Sheriff's, Under-Sheriffs, &c., for 1856.
FOR 1856.-[From Laidman's List.]
of Office of the Sheriffs, &c., for Cities and Towns, expires on the 9th of November. and in Vacation, from 11 till 3.
T. W. Pearse, of Bedford, Esq.
William Matthews, of Gloucester, Esq...
Richard Underwood, of Hereford, Esq. Philip Longmore, of Hertford, Esq. (A. U) Messrs. Sworder and Longmore, of Hertford Clement Francis, of Cambridge, Esq. Henry Atkinson Wildes, of Maidstone, Esq. E. F. Shackles, of Kingston-upon-Hull, Esq. Henry Charlewood, of Manchester, Esq. (A. U.) Messrs. Wilson, Son, and Deacon, of Preston Samuel Berridge, of Leicester, Esq. John Philip Dyott, of Lichfield, Esq. Henry Peake, of Sleaford, Esq. (A. U.), H. Williams, of Lincoln, Esq. Richard Mason, of Lincoln, Esq. David Henry Stone, of 23, Poultry, Esq. James Anderson Rose, of 11, Salisbury-st., Strand Edmund Butler Edwards, of Pontypool, Esq. William Daggett, of 3, Dean-street, Newcastle upon-Tyne, Esq.
John Skipper, of Norwich, Esq. (A. U.) Messrs. A. & C. Taylor, Norwich
Henry Philip Markham, of Northampton, Esq.
John Marriott Davenport, of Oxford, Esq.
Deputies and Town Agents.
Messrs. Maples and Co., 6, Frederick's-place, Old Jewry.
Edward Lee Rowcliffe, Esq., 1, Bedford-row.
Wm. Crossman, Esq. (firm, Pringle & Co.), 3, King's-Road, Bedford Row.
Messrs. Bridges, Mason, and Bridges, 23, Red-lionsquare.
Messrs. Cardale, Iliffe, & Russell, 2, Bedford-row. Messrs. Cole, 36, Essex-street, Strand.
Messrs. Madox and Wyat, 30, Clement's-lane. Messrs. Chester, Toulmin, and Chester, Staple-inn. Messrs. Chester, Toulmin, and Chester, Staple-inn.
Messrs. Gregory, Gregory, Skirrow, and Rowcliffe, 1, Bedford-row.
G. Capes, Esq., 1, Field-court, Gray's-inn.
Messrs. Buckley and Philbrick, 39, Basinghall-st.
Messrs. Beisley & Pattisson, 1, Lincoln'-inn-fields.
Hawkins & Co., New Boswell-court.
F. Impey, Esq., 12, Bedford-row.
Messrs. Hawkins, & Co., 2, New Boswell-court.
Messrs.Taylor & Co., 28, Gt. James-st., Bedford-row.
G. T. Taylor, Esq., 18, Featherstone-bldgs., Holborn
Messrs. Davies & Co., 17, Warwick-st., Regent-st. Henry Mooring Aldridge, of Market-st., Poole, Esq. W. Skilbeck, Esq., 19, Southampton-buildings.
Thomas Brown, of Uppingham, Esq.
Thos. Bennett, Esq., 23, Hunter-st., Brunswick-sq.
List of Sheriffs, Under-Sheriffs, &c.-Amended Partnership.-Chancery Causes.
Edward Lloyd Gatacre, of Gatacre Hall, Salop, Esq.
John Hippisley, of Stone Faston, Somersetshire, Esq.
Richard Dyott, of Freeford Hall, Lichfield, Esq.
.. Andrew Arcedeckne, of Glevering Hall, Hachestons, Esq.
Edward Richard Northey, of Woodcote House, Epsom, Esq.
William Wilkinson, of Wariop Pernrith, Westmoreland, Esq.
.. Francis Tongue Rufford, of Prescott House, near Stourbridge, Esq.
Thomas Davies, of Llangattock Cort, Esq.
Thomas Henry Winwood, of Tyglyn Aeron, near Lampeter, Esq.
John Samuel, of Newton House, near Cuvbridge, Esq.
Lewis Mathias, of Lamphey Court, Esq.
Robert B. Rickards Mynors, of Evancoyed Presteigne, Radnorshire,
AMENDED PARTNERSHIP BILL.
THIS Bill, as amended in Committee,
provides, in lieu of the first and second clauses of the former Bill, that "no person carrying on business shall, by reason that another person shares in the profits of such the Book of Causes of the Vice-Chancellor business, have power to contract debts on Wood, be heard before the Lords Justices, behalf of such other person, or to subject and for that purpose be transferred to their him to any liability." Lordships' Book of Causes.
This proposed enactment is in lieu of the previous clauses, which declared that the advance of money on a contract to share in the profits should not of itself make the lender liable as a partner; nor that the remuneration to an agent by a share in the profits should make him a partner.
Stuart v. Combe, special case. Ward v. Cartright, (2) further directions and costs.
Blount. Warwick and Napton Canal Company, further consideration.
Henry Maybery, of Brecknock, Esq.
Messrs. Abbott, Jenkins, and Abbott, 8, New Inn. Strand.
Messrs. Sweeting & Byrne, 22, Southampton-bldgs. William Jones, Esq., 3, Serjeant's-inn, Fleet-street. Messrs. Simpson, Cobb, and Co., 62, Moorgate
Charles Wilkin, Esq., 10, Tokenhouse-yard. H. B. Jones, Esq., 22, Austin-friars.
Messrs. Gregory and Sons, 12, Clement's inn.
Frederick Rowland Roberts, of Aberystwith, Esq. John Atwood, 4, George-yard, Lombard street.
William T. Thomas, of Carmarthen, Esq.
W. H. Goode, of Carmarthen, Esq.
Richard Wyndham Williams, of Cardiff, Esq.
Henry Mathias, of Haverfordwest, Esq.
Morrell v. Morrell, further consideration.
Holmes v. Godson, special case.
Cook v. Cook, further consideration.
R. O. WALKER, Registrar.
(Signed) NOTE.—These Causes will be placed in the Pa aper for Hearing on or after the 26th day of February.
Messrs. Chilton and Burton, 7, Chancery-lane. Messrs. Trinder & Eyre, 1, John-st., Bedford-row. Messrs. Keightley & Co., 43, Chancery-lane Messrs. Hastings and Smith, 3, Southampton-st., Bloomsbury-square.
G. P. L. Eyre, Esq., 1, John-street, Bedford-row. D. Hughes, Esq., 13, Gresham-street.
COUNTY COURT REFORM.
To the Editor of the Legal Observer. SIR,-I infer from the article headed "Law Bills in Progress," in your last week's Legal Observer, that we may speedily expect to see a Bill brought into Parliament for the purpose of carrying into effect the recommendations of the County Court Commissioners, with a view to the improvement of the practice of these Courts. That they need reform, and a searching one, no plaintiff, defendant, or practitioner so luckless as to be personally acquainted with them and their modus operandi, tigation should be completed before Parliament will, I believe, deny, but surely the invesbegins to legislate. We have as yet heard but half the case, bad has indeed been told, but worse remains behind to tell.
What evidence we as yet possess was all delivered by the end of May, 1854, and has been in print since April, 1855. That is, however, but "Report part First," and of "Report part Second," which should succeed it, the Public and the Profession have not heard one syllable. Can it be true, as is openly averred, that some disclosures have been offered to the Commissioners, disclosures, sir, impeaching not only the competence but the judicial conduct of one of the three score Judges.
itself, but it may save much valuable space in your columns, and relieve the minds of many of your readers, to be told that "The Commissioners do not recommend any considerable increase of the jurisdiction of these Courts," or that in cases not exceeding 201., any appeal at all, either of law or fact, should be allowed. They advise, however, that in other cases the appeal on points of law, should remain as it is at present; but that no appeals on questions of fact shall in any case be admitted from the decision of a County Court Judge.
Having ascertained "That in some cases more than 300 summonses have been made returnable in one day, they think that this is obviously improper,' and recommend that 150 should be the maximum, suggesting also that it would be a great relief to suitors, if no greater number than 50 summonses were made returnable at any one hour.""
How have the nine Commissioners of Inquiry discharged the trust confided to them? They have summoned 18 witnesses-so far so good. -Amongst these 18, we recognise, five County Court Judges with two deputies, a couple of high bailiffs, a brace of clerks, and one of their treasurers-12 out of the 18 witnesses being interested, their professional rank, their professional income, nay, almost their means of existence depending mainly upon their success With respect to fees, the Commissioners inin upholding these County Courts. One form us not only that some of the fees origi stamp distributor is added, who knows and nally allowed were "excessive," but that "so can know nothing practically of these tribunals. vague was the language of the schedule, that One quondam Queen's Counsel, now our the officers were enabled to take more fees Junior Baron of the Exchequer, who has seen enough of them to distrust them, and deprecate earnestly any extension of their powers, leaving four attorneys, all men of mark and station doubtless, but of whom it is but right that I should advertise you, that the first don't practise in the County Courts at all; the second enters them, but only for defendants;2 the third don't say as much, but leaves us to infer it of him; and the fourth, avowing that he practises extensively, takes care to tell us also that he does this "in Yorkshire," where, as we elsewhere gather from the evidence of a respectable high bailiff, the County Courts are popular.
The 18 witnesses then accounted for, the Commission it appears is closed, and that although not even a single advocate accustomed to act in the metropolis for plaintiffs has been examined, no suitor has been heard to testify to the merits or deprecate the evils of the existing County Courts, or what is still more extraordinary, no merchant, shopkeeper or commercial traveller has been called in to explain the merits or short-comings of the present system.
With such facts before us, at least it will not be disputed that these new tribunals and their authorities were amply represented; with the report before us, it were uncandid and ungenerous to conceal, that in every instance the testimony given reflects high credit upon the good sense and integrity of the witness.
than the Legislature intended." They advise "reductions of 124,800. upon the total of 253,5187., at present levied on the suitors," recommending also, a modification of the salaries of the Judge's clerks, and a diminution of the duties and emoluments of their highbailiffs.
And now, would to God that, consistently with his public duty, your correspondent might lay down his pen. But, sir, complaints by far too long suppressed, burst forth on all sides, and men do not hesitate to believe that corruption, rife in every branch of the public service, but still believed to be excluded from our own, has wormed its way into the sanctuary of English Law,-that our Judges now-a-days are sometimes irregularly selected.
"The aggregate of evil inflicted on the community by a bad judicial appointment is so enormous, that it would be less mischievous to the public, if a Chancellor were to accept a bribe for pronouncing an unjust decree than if, yielding to personal favour or party bias, he should make an incompetent Judge."4
Such was in 1847, the theory of Lord Campbell,-what was in 1847, the practice of the then Lord Chancellor ?
"Out of the 60 appointments, there were but 23 over which the Lord Chancellor could exercise his own discretion, the other (37) were gentlemen who had previous claims, that the Lord Chancellor was bound to submit to." 5
What "claims" they were, to which the first Law-officer in the kingdom, whose bounden
Opinions differ widely among the gentlemen thus far examined, who have on all points manfully spoken out their minds. Nor is the verdict of the Commissioners unanimous; one 3 This, in a sitting of 10 hours, gave someof them (Mr. J. P. Taylor) appending a very thing less than two minutes to the plaintiff's lucid and ingenious protest to the return and defendant's with their respective witnesses agreed upon by his colleagues. The more in each case. curious student I must refer to the report
Lives of the Chancellors. Vol. 3, p. 264. Edit. 1847.
Report, pp. 97, 558.
Mr. Baron Bramwell.
"With every desire to speak respectfully of the Judges of the County Courts, it must be remembered that the gentlemen who at present fill those offices were appointed under peculiar circumstances. I believe there were not many what we may call independent selections, and I own that at present I have not a sufficient confidence in them, to be desirous of extending their jurisdiction."
Her Majesty's Commissioners, well knowing all this, and having known it at all events since the 23rd of May, 1854, the day on which Mr. Baron Bramwell was examined by them, have kept it back till, as we have already seen, no less than 20 augmented salaries distributed among the 60 Judges, two of which, be it remembered also, were given amongst the three County Court Commissioners. are now assured politely "of course such things will not happen again,"-where is the guarantee ?
ventilated. This was accordingly done, and all the doors and some of the windows having been thrown wide open for 5 or 10 minutes,
business was resumed.
We may here observe that the state of the Courts has been a constant subject of complaint during the present sittings, but no attention seems to be paid to any complaints.— The Times.
ADDITIONAL CITY COURTS.
We are informed that the suggestions which have been made to the City Authorities are likely to prevail in regard to the requisite accommodation for attorneys attending the trial the architect will provide a room for the Proof actions at Guildhall. It is understood that fession, and we would suggest that in fitting up front of the attorneys' seat, as in some of the the new Courts a table should be placed in Courts at Westminster, in order that their documents and papers may be readily referred to, instead of being placed on the floor of the Court and liable to be trodden upon.
UNWHOLESOMENESS OF THE CITY COURTS.
It is in no spirit of hostility to well managed At the sitting of the Court at Guildhall, on County Courts, that I now address you; cheap the 26th February, Lord Campbell said, he had justice has unquestionably many thousand ad- received a letter, of which, for the sake not vocates far abler, though very few, if I may only of his own health, but for that of the presume to say so, more sincere than I am. counsel, jury, and witnesses, he felt it to be But you and I, sir, know that "cheap justice' "his duty to take public notice. The writer and "cheap law are very different things, stated that he was well acquainted with all the and have too often no connexion with each circumstances which constituted the nuisance other. It is because I wish to see County Courts reformed, that they may not be abolished, and dislike all law making, founded upon partial or imperfect information, that I trouble you with this letter. Temple, Feb. 25, 1856.
NOTES OF THE WEEK.
INCONVENIENCE OF THE NISI PRIUS
At the Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before Lord Campbell and a Special Jury, on Monday last, the Court became insufferably hot and close, arising partly from a want of ventilation, and partly, as it appeared, from the escape of foul air into the Court from the lower regions.
Lord Campbell gave orders that the doors and windows should be opened in order that the air might be changed. But his lordship's order not being attended to, it became necessary to adjourn the Court until it could be
to this and the adjoining Court, and that to his knowledge the bad smells by which they were assailed proceeded from an ancient cemetery over which the Court was constructed. He stated that there was anciently a chapel at Guildhall, with a crypt and burial-ground, in which were deposited the remains of deceased mayors and aldermen of former times, and that the offensive smells proceeded therefrom. His Lordship said he made this statement of what had come to his knowledge in the discharge of his public duty, for if the facts were as stated the lives of all were in danger. It was known that in former times the Judge and Jury and Counsel were sometimes all swept away by the gaol fever; but it was to be hoped that nothing of the kind would now occur to produce such a result, and that immediate steps would be taken to make an inquiry into the subject.From The Times.
[Probably the remains of the ancient civic worthies were ages ago reduced to dust and ashes, but it is not improbable that some recent invasion of the sacred soil may have given vent to the pent up effluvia. Doubtless the worthy Lord Mayor will see that the nuisance be promptly removed.-ED. L. O.]