from the culpable negligence that allowed him to leave his seat prematurely. Who can doubt that in such circumstances the jury would give large damages.

This system ought certainly to be put down, and as one means of doing so, I beg to suggest the publication of cases exhibiting an entire discrepancy between the medical evidence, in order that regard for professional character may tend to check the reckless advocacy of one-sided views. The results of such cases in regard to the claimant's speedy recovery of health would also be worthy of attention for the same purpose; and, having given one of these, I may add a case of medical diversity that has just occurred here.

On the 27th of April last a commercial traveller drove out in the evening to my residence in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh, and informed me that he had been shaken the night before in a railway collision near Berwick-on-Tweed. He had walked immediately afterwards a mile and a half to see Dr. Maclagan, of Berwick, and having been assured by him that there was no local injury or occasion for confinement, had come on to Edinburgh. Finding that there was no local complaint, I desired him to call next morning at my house in Rutland Street, and tell me if he felt anything wrong. He accordingly did so, and then exhibiting the most perfect freedom in all his movements, without any sign of local injury, I concluded that if he felt any uneasiness, it must be more mental than bodily. Having expressed my opinion to this effect, I was rather surprised by being asked to recommend a law-agent, and, it is hardly necessary to say, declined to do so.

On the same day, the 28th of April, it appears that this person, having procured an accomplished agent, applied to a surgeon of experience in cases like his own, who discovered that he had sustained a "severe wrench of the spine and sacro-iliac synchondrosis," put him to bed, called in a trustworthy coadjutor, and visited his interesting patient at least once a day for months. On the 12th of June Dr. Dunsmure requested me to see the claimant, as he had now become. We found him lying upon a sofa, from which he rose and walked with vigour and flexibility of body. There was not the slightest swelling, discolouration, or rigidity of the spine, and, on the contrary, every appearance of good health so far as we could judge from our own observation.

On the 29th of July, the trial being about to take place, the claimant desired to be examined by a commission; and his ordinary attendant having given a certificate on "soul and conscience" that he was unable to appear in the witness-box without serious injury to his health, I was requested along with Dr. Dunsmure to report as to this for the information of the Court. We found the claimant lying, or rather lolling, on two chairs in a garden, to and from which he walked in leaving and returning to his room, which was up a stair on the drawing-room floor. He told us that he sat at his meals, and, on the whole, he had no appearance whatever of bad health. We reported our opinion that he could safely appear in Court, and the trial was ordered to proceed. But the claimant's legal advisers applied for delay.

On the 14th of December Dr. Dunsmure and I were again requested to see the claimant, as the trial was to take place on the 24th. We found that he was not at home, but after a little while saw him walking stoutly

along the street from a public bathing establishment, which it appeared he had frequented for several months. He walked up the stair of his residence before me, and neither then nor afterwards, when more particularly examined, showed any sign of spinal or other disease. At the trial, after the plaintiff had been examined, sitting in a chair, as he was not able to go into the witness-box! his counsel agreed to accept L.1000, instead of the L.3000 which had been demanded.

I deem it unnecessary to offer any observations on this case, but would suggest the following questions:

1. Could any one who had sustained a severe wrench of the spine and sacro-iliac synchondrosis immediately afterwards walk a mile and a half, or on the two following days travel sixty miles by railway, drive about in cabs, and make visits without local complaint?

2. Could serious disease of the spine resulting from external violence exist for eight months without presenting some sign of its presence in the patient's gait, flexibility of trunk, or general appearance ?

Edinburgh, Dec. 26, 1866.

Scotch Bills in Parliament.-The Hypothec Amendment and the Recovery of Debts in Sheriff Courts Bills have been introduced and read a first time in the House of Lords. It is also said that another Hypothec Bill is likely to be introduced. The Government Bill is a mere transcript of the recommendations of the Hypothec Commission. The rival bill, we presume, is that which was prepared, but not introduced last Session, by Mr Young, M.P., and which (as may be conjectured from the statement of his views given on another page) proposes to abolish the landlord's preference altogether. Mr Walpole has announced, in the House of Commons, that several other Bills are in an advanced state of preparation-viz., the Writs Registration Bill, the Justiciary Court Bill, the Heritable Securities Succession Bill, and the Consolidation of Law of Nuisance, &c., in Scotland Bill.

In the House of Commons, on the 21st of February, on the motion of Sir Graham Montgomery, a Bill was brought in and read a first time, to regulate the Office and Court of the LyonKing-of-Arms in Scotland. Its provisions include the substitution of salaries for the fees hitherto payable to the officers of the Lyon Court, and the eventual reduction of the number of Heralds and Pursuivants to three of each. The rights of the present Lyon Clerk and the present Heralds and Pursuivants are reserved.

Mr Young, M.P., on proposed Law Reforms.-The Whig exSolicitor-General has been addressing his constituents in the Wigtown Burghs. Leaving for a time the all-engrossing topic of reform of the franchise, he adverted to some subjects with which he may be supposed to be more familiar, and as to which the

opinions of the acknowledged leader-facile princeps-of the Scotch bar are perhaps entitled to be recorded in our pages :

THE LAW OF HYPOTHEC.

As one of the Commissioners I considered the subject with all anxiety, and the view I took of it was this-that a landlord ought to have no greater security for the debt which his tenant owes him than other members of the community have for debts incurred to them in the ordinary course of business. It did not seem to us that people whose trade consists in letting land for hire-which is precisely the position of landlords-are entitled to any greater protection than other members of the community. This explanation has been offered that landlords must of necessity give credit; they can't have their rents before the crop is reaped, and as they must give credit, they ought therefore to have security. I do not see the consequence. Other traders must give credit, or all business would stop. Why should landlords who give credit from the necessity of the case give that credit at the risk of other people? It is the greatest mistake in the world to say that the produce of the farm is the landlord's. No doubt it is the produce of the farm, but it is the produce of manures, of various artificial and natural appliances, of the tenant's skill and labour, of the labour of those employed by him-in short, of the expenditure of his capital, skill, and industry. The crop is the produce of all that, and why is the landlord to have a preference as to that over all others? Why is his tenant to be put in the invidious position that he cannot go into a bank in order to obtain accommodation on the same footing as others, and that all the banks should have it proclaimed to them that all that man's stock-in-trade and all the produce of his farm are hypothecated to one favoured creditor, who, if any calamity befalls him, can step in and carry off stock and produce to the prejudice of every other trader? That is hurtful to the tenant, but it is absolutely unjust to the trader; for I have never been able to see why those who furnish tenants with the materials necessary for carrying on the business of the farm should find their claims postponed to those of the landlord. It is the greatest delusion in the world to represent-as is sometimes done by reference to ancient Scottish law-that the produce of the farm is the landlord's, and that he is entitled to a certain share of it. It used to be the system under that old Scotch law-which speaks of tenants "as the puir bodies that labours the grund "-it used to be the system that the "puir bodies" raised the crops and gave the landlord a share of them, or rather received from the landlord a share of them for their own remuneration. But it is absurd to say that a landlord has any more property in the produce of a farm that he lets to another man than he who lets a manufactory to a tenant has in the produce of that manufactory. It is said-if you deprive the landlord of the security of the hypothec-that is to say, of the security which he holds at the expense of others--you will injure a very worthy class of the agricultural community-namely, the small farmers who are altogether or nearly destitute of capital, but who are honest, industrious men, who make their rents out of their farms, very much by the labour of themselves and their families; and that, without the security of the hypothec, landlords would not take them as tenants, and thus a great hardship would be inflicted upon them. I have not the remotest apprehension of such a result. The result of the inquiries we made on the subject was, that there were no safer tenants than this very class, that there were no tenants in Scotland who paid their rents more punctually than they, and that landlords felt with these men the greatest security. In the first place, therefore, landlords are not exposed to any extra danger of loss from dealing with these smaller tenants; and if they are exposed to any loss, it may be asked, why do they let their farms to them? The answer is clear. They get higher rents from these tenants of small possessions than from the greater tenants with capital for their farms. It is for their own profit, therefore, that they select this class of tenants. I would not for the world cast any suspicion on the motives of landlords, but if they let their farms for perfectly adequate rents to well-selected tenants of small capital, and if they run a risk in so doing, that risk should come upon themselves; and I certainly would not give thein much credit for kindness in letting their land to a class of small tenants if that kindness is to be at the risk and expense of other people. Mr Young went on to say that he had seen the draft of a bill on the subject, which was confined in the meantime to carrying out the minor changes on which the Commission was agreed, and which would be introduced this session, but which he had no expectation of seeing passed by the present Parliament until the Reform question was settled. He would

not willingly endanger these changes, for they would effect improvements; but if without doing that he could see his way to secure the passing of a larger and more extensive measure he would not fail to the best of his ability to endeavour to attain that end.

THE GAME-LAWS

Was a subject which it was extremely difficult to deal with by legislative enact ment. He had been gratified to perceive that the tenant-farmers in several distric of Scotland had been bestirring themselves upon the subject, and to some effect. It was from public opinion alone that any change would be effected. It was not a matter in which Parliament could interfere with much practical effect. There migh be an Act making the presumption, in the absence of a contract, either one way or another; but, so far as he was able to see, legislation could do no more than this, for it would be contrary to that principle of freedom as to which they were all agreed, upon which, at least, all the members of the Liberal party were agreed, that Parliament should interfere to prescribe the terms upon which private contracts should be made. In Aberdeenshire, Kincardineshire, and other counties, the farmers had shown how strong they were; and if the farmers in this district would follow that example by showing how earnest they were on the subject, they might depend on it that public opinion would run strongly in their favour, and that the grievance would not be of long continuance.

THE LORD ADVOCATE'S SMALL-DEBT BILL.

L.50

It is proposed to extend the small debt jurisdiction of Sheriffs from L.12 to L.50. Debts under L.12 are at present called small debts, and it is proposed that debts up to L.50 shall in future be called small debts, and that Sheriffs and their substitutes shall have power to deal with such cases in a summary manner to be, in fact, supreme-no review being allowed except in a certain manner specified in certain exceptional cases. It does not, I confess, appear to me that you will ever make a L.50 debt a small debt by calling it so. seems to me to be a considerable sum of money. And I don't think you will make a debt of this kind more easily dealt with by the Sheriffs and Sheriff-Substitutes in Scotland by calling it a small debt. No doubt it is very much to be desired that men should be able to have their disputes-and there are many honest disputes among men-settled speedily and cheaply. But I fear this involves a problem which remains to be solved, not only in this country, but in England and every country I know; for cheap law has not yet been found to be very beneficial. I am not altogether sure-though, perhaps, it is a strong thing to say-that it is quite desirable, for my experience is, and probably it may be the experience of most of you, that cheap law is like other cheap things, very apt to be of bad quality. You may have more of it for your money; a great many more litigations-cheap litigations and cheap law, but I rather think that it would be better to have little of it and of good quality, even although it should cost rather more. I am afraid that litigation may be increased, not to the benefit but to the prejudice of the community. For my own part, I am not for extending the final jurisdiction of the Sheriff in this respect beyond the mark at which it has stood for now upwards of a quarter of a century. A grateful country ought to erect a monument to the man who should solve the problem-for the solution of which we have been so long waiting-of providing good, cheap, and at the same time speedy law, but I do not think you advance a step towards the solution of it by enacting that Sheriffs and their substitute shall be summary and supreme in all cases up to L.50.

Appointments—Scotland.—Alexander Forbes Irvine, Esq., of Drum, Advocate, has been appointed to the office of Clerk of Justiciary, vacant by the resignation of Mr Charles Neaves. Mr Irvine was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1843, and, as he has reported the decisions of the Court of Justiciary since 1851, may be presumed to have a certain claim to the preferment he has obtained. He is Convener of the County of Aberdeen, and, in that capacity, has acquired a reputation for business talents

which augurs well for the successful discharge of the important functions to which he is now called. The salary is £700 a year. We learn, with satisfaction, that Mr Donald Robertson, so long known as the able and experienced clerk to the ex-Lord JusticeGeneral, has been appointed to the office of Depute-Clerk of Session, vacant by the resignation of W. F. Skene, Esquire, W.S.

APPOINTMENT-England-Lord Derby, not content with the legal patronage which fortune has bestowed on him, has created a new legal office, that of Legal Adviser to the Colonial Office, with a salary of L.1200 a-year. Mr Henry Thurstan Holland, Barrister of the Northern Circuit, has received this appointment, which is to be incompatible with practice at the Bar.

ROYAL COMMISSION.-The Queen appointed Sir William Erle (late Lord ChiefJustice of the Common Pleas), the Earl of Lichfield, Lord Elcho, Sir Edmund Walker Head, K. C.B, Sir Daniel Gooch, Herman Merivale, Esq., C.B., James Booth, Esq., C.B., John Arthur Roebuck, Esq., Q.C., M.P, Thomas Hughes, Esq., barrister-atlaw, M.P., Frederic Harrison, Esq., barrister-at-law, and William Matthews, Esq., to be Her Majesty's Commissioners to inquire into and report on the organization and rules of trades' unions and other associations, whether of workmen or employers, and to inquire into and report on the effect produced by such trades' unions and associations on the workmen and employers respectively, and on the relations between workmen and employers, and on the trade and industry of the country, with power to investigate any recent acts of intimidation, outrage, or wrong alleged to have been promoted, encouraged, or connived at by such trades' unions or other associations, and also to suggest any improvements to be made in the law with respect to the matters aforesaid, or with respect to the relations between workmen and their employers for the mutual benefit of both parties. Mr F. P. Onslow has been appointed Secretary to the Commission.

NOTE.

We regret to find that the reference to Mr John M'Laren in the letter of "An Advocate" on Colonial Appointments in our last number, has been misunderstood. We do not think, that such an allusion in this Journal, with which Mr M'Laren was so long honourably connected, can fairly be construed in the disparaging sense which we understand has been put upon it in some quarters. To any one who has even a slight acquaintance with the recent history of Edinburgh and the Parliament House, nothing could seem more pertinent, in treating of the exercise of Government patronage in Scotland by the Whigs, than to refer to a well-known transaction from which Mr M'Laren at least derived no discredit. Our correspondent assures us, further, that he has the highest respect for Mr M'Laren, and that in alluding to him he had no intention to convey any different impression.