Superior Courts: Queen's Bench; Exchequer. 415 not be entitled to a prohibition, because the there is ample time from five in the afternoon granting of a prohibition under such circum- until nine at night, to serve an order of this stances would be assuming that the Court description. But at all events it ought to be Christian would exceed its jurisdiction, and served before the opening of the office next set itself above the law; the enforcement of a morning, or rather in strictness, before the rate being clearly a proper subject for that time when the clerk of the opposite attorney Court, if such a rate was valid in point of law. would have to leave his office for the purpose On this last ground it seems to us the demurrer of being present at the opening of it at eleven. to this declaration must prevail. There must Then as to the affidavit of merits, it is insuffibe cases in which the proper remedy is not by cient, for a man might with a safe conscience, a prohibition, but by an appeal against the interpret the word "defence" to signify merely rate itself. We cannot assume, as of course, a denial. The defendant had better amend, that the Ecclesiastical Court will exceed its on the terms of pleading instantly and issujurisdiction. We must assume that it will pro-ably, and taking short notice of trial. perly administer the law under which it sits. We adopt the doctrine of the case of Ex parte Farmer. Griffin v. Ellis and another, H. T. Q. B. F. J. 1838. Exchequer at Pleas. SIGNING JUDGMENT.-LACHES. Where an order for time to join in demurrer has been obtained, it ought to be served within a reasonable time after making it, or the opposite party may sign judgment. Cowling shewed cause against a rule nisi for setting aside a judgment on various grounds. It appeared from the affidavits that the plaintiff having demurred to the defendant's plea, a summons was taken out for time to join in demurrer, which was attended by the opposite attorney; and Gurney, B., in the presence of them both, made an order for two day's time for that purpose. The order was made at half past four in the afternoon of the 22d January, and instructions were instantly given in the presence of the plaintiff's attorney to the judge's clerk to draw up the order, which was accordingly delivered by five. It was not served, however, until between two and three o'clock on the following day, on the morning of which at half past eleven, judgment was signed by the plaintiff. Alderson, B.-With respect to the service of the order, it is requisite to have a somewhat rigid rule in these matters. The inconvenience would be great if parties were to be allowed time to consider whether they would avail themselves of orders which they would perhaps ultimately abandon. Gurney, B. concurred. Leave to amend on terms.-Kenney v. Hutchinson, H. T. 1840. Exch. SEDUCTION.-PARENT AND CHILO.-SERVICE. In order to maintain an action for seduction it must appear that the daughter was in the actual service of the father at the time the alleged cause of action arose. This was an action on the case for seduction, and the declaration alleged, that S. B. the infant and unmarried daughter of the plaintiff, was a servant of the defendant by the consent of the plaintiff with the intention of returning to her father's house whenever she should quit the defendant's employ, unless she obtained another service. That the said S. B. was before &c. able and accustomed, and but for the grievance &c. would have continued to do and perform domestic services, and by means thereof to support herself without the aid of her father while so in service, and to render great assistance to her father as a domestic Cowling submitted whether the defendant servant while with him. It then stated the sewas bound under penalty in either case, of duction by the defendant, that she became having been deemed to have waived the benefit pregnant &c., and thereby unable to perform of the order, to serve it before nine o'clock on any domestic services, and by reason thereof the evening of the day when it was made, or ceased to be the domestic servant of the defenbefore eleven on the following day. One day dant and returned to her father, and endeais always allowed to give notice of the dis-voured as much as in her lay to render honour of a bill of exchange. The case of Charge v. Farhall, seems to shew that the word "forthwith" is used in contradistinction to a delay of several days. In this particular case the plaintiff's attorney was present when the order was made. Parke. B.-The attorney, it is true, may have been present at the making of the order, but how can he know from that whether the opposite party will elect to draw up the order and serve it or not? The real question is, what is a reasonable time to allow him to make that election? When the parties live within any reasonable distance of each other, o 15 L. O. 268; 1 Will. Woll. & Hod. 19. a 4 B. & C. 685; 7 D. & R. 422. assistance as servant of her said father, but was unable to do so by reason of her pregnancy, and remained with her father till her death of the sickness and pregnancy aforesaid, by means whereof the plaintiff from the time when she returned to his house, (she during all that time being a poor person, an infant and unmarried, and not able to work) was forced to relieve and support his said daughter, and expend a large sum of money about nursing his said daughter, and was also deprived during all that time of her services, &c. There was a demurrer to this declaration, on the ground that the action would not lie, it not appearing that the daughter was in the service of the plaintiff at the time of the seduction by the defendant. 416 Superior Courts; Exchequer : Law Bills in Parliament: Editor's Letter Box. of woven Fabrics. [In Committee.] Mr. E. Tennant. Alexander supported the declartion and con- / To extend the Term of Copyright in Designs tended, that although it was formerly considered indispensable to the maintenance of this form of action to shew acts of service done by the child for the parent. it is now laid down to be unnecessary to produce any proof of distinct service. Parke, B.-Still a constructive service must be shewn in all cases. The law has been long settled so, and there is an express decision of Littledale, J. in Maunder v. Venn,a to that service. Parke, B.-That averment was evidently inserted with the view of shewing an animus revertendi in the party, and to assimilate the case to those where actions have been held to lie for the seduction of a child while on a visit to a friend. But there is this difference between the cases, that here, the girl is in actual service of another person, and it is only in the event of her not going into another, that she has any intention of returning to her father. That an action will not lie under such circumstances, there can be no doubt, as the point has been expressly decided in Dean v. Peel. In order to sustain an action of this kind, two things are necessary, damnum et injuria. The plaintiff not having shewn any right to the services of his daughter, there is here damnum absque injuriá. Alderson, B.-This very point was once decided in a case in which I was concerued at Newcastle in 1819. Judgment for defendant.-Blumire v. Haley, H. T. 1840. Exch. LIST OF LAW BILLS IN PARLIAMENT, WITH NOTES, House of Lords. Copyholds Enfranchisement. Ld. Brougham. [In Select Committee.] Frivolous Suits Act amendment, touching costs. [For second reading.] Lord Denman. Rated Inhabitants Evidence. [In Committee.] Vagrants' Removal. For facilitating the Administration of Justice. House of Commons. To amend the Law of Copyright. [In. Committee.] M. & M. 323. Mr. Serjt. Talfourd. b 5 East, 45. To carry into effect the Recommendation of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. Lord J. Russell. To extend Freemen and Burgesses' Right of Drainage of Lands. Summary Conviction of Juvenile Offenders. [In Committee.] Sir E. Wilmot. To amend the County Constabulary Act. Mr. F. Maule. To amend the Laws of Turnpike Trusts, and to allow Unions. Mr. Mackinnon. Prisons Act Amendment. In this number we have made some exertion to put our readers in possession of a full account of the two great measures of legal reform of the present session; the Lord Chancellor's Bill for the reform of the Equity Courts, and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and Lord Redesdale's Copyhold Enfranchisement Bill. We have done this at greater length than usual, because we believe that we shall thus place before them the only bills of importance, which are likely to be introduced in the present session. The bill for the Recovery of Small Debts, is deferred until after the presentation of the Report of the Bankruptcy Commissioners, and we understand there is no probability of this being done in time for its recommendations being acted on immediately. We think "A Constant Reader," should submit his case to the Examiners.. "A Law Student" is informed that a conveyancer, practising under the bar, may be called to the bar if he has kept twelve terms. As to the fees, we must refer him to the Subtreasurer of the society to which he belongs. The letters of " A Country Articled Clerk ;" T. H.; Vindex;" H. R.; "Ebor;" "A Country Reader," and "Civis;" with several Suggestions on Chancery Reform, have been received. A correspondent is informed that there can be no alteration in the commencement of Easter Term. The four Easter holidays falling within it, on which the Courts will not sit, prolong the term till the 13th May. THE REGISTERS CF DEEDS FOR of memorials, and preparing alphabetical THE COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX. We have, ever since we have been in existence (now approaching to a period of ten years), from time to time called attention to the state of the Register's Office in the County of Middlesex. We have inserted various complaints respecting the mode in which its business was conducted; the number of holidays kept, the improper fees demanded, the insufficient attendance, and the delay which takes place in passing deeds through the office. In the beginning of the present session, Mr. Hayter, the member for Wells, moved for returns of the amount of fees received since 1824, and the actual expenses of the office; the number of holidays, exclusive of Sundays, kept in the year; the hours of attendance, and what duties are performed by the register in person; the rate of fees demanded in the years, 1822, 1823, and 1824; the number of deeds, and memorials relating to such deeds, left at the Register's Office during the months of November and December, 1839, and when such deeds were ready to be returned, and when such memorials were respectively entered in the books of the Register Office. These returns have now been made, and we shall print them in a subsequent part of our work (see post, p. 440); but we shall alsɔ make a few remarks, as they appear to us to make out a clear case for some further steps being taken in the matter. Of late there seems to have been some falling off in the amount of the fees received; but for the last ten years the receipts have averaged about 28501. The expenses of the office, which include rent, taxes, repairs, clerk's salaries, copying VOL. XIX. No. 581. indexes and books of reference, have averaged about 8501., leaving 20007 surplus. This balance of fees is divided in equal proportions among the four registers, subject to a deduction of a salary of 50l. a year for a deputy register. Now we have never objected to paying all public officers well, where they have responsible duties to perform. Let us see, therefore, what these gentlemen do for their 500l. per annum, and this appears in the following paragraph of the return:- "The registers have been accustomed, at different times, to perform the duties required of them by the act of 7 Anne; and have invariably attended, one or other of them, to examine and audit the quarterly accounts." We cannot quite understand this, but there appears to us to be a quiet humour about this answer, which is worthy of notice. In other words we presume it to mean this; "We do sometimes attend; we can't exactly say when, but one of us is always present at quarterday. We never miss that, you may rely on it. Our deputy register is there on all days, except holidays and Mondays, for which we give him a snug 507. per annum ; and we make a point of coming four times a-year to receive the other 4501." therefore, the registers have not told us of any other duty but this performed "in person," we presume this is, in fact, all that they do; and we must say that they have a very pleasant time of it. As, We now come to the work done by the deputy registers, and we admit-considering what he receives- it is rather hard to expect that he will do a great deal. And first, as to the mode of charging the fees. By the statute of Anne (7 Ann. c. 20, s. 11), the register shall be allowed for the entry of F 418 The Registers of Deeds for the County of Middlesex. We need not ask how many hours the registers attend in person, because they have already told us that they attend four times a-year, on quarter day. This alteration, however, it seems was made with a view to the accommodation of the solicitors attending the office, every memorial ls., and no more, in case | deputy register attends. the same do not exceed 200 words; but if it exceed 200 words, then after the rate of 6d. a hundred for all the words contained in such memorial over and and above the first 200 words. The fees, however, according to the return, demanded and received, are for memorials of the length of" and apparently," say the registers, "exseven folios, or 500 words, 7s; and beyond that length, 6d. for every 100 additional words. Now it seems quite clear that for a memorial of 500 words the register is only entitled under the act to the sum of 2s. 6d.; that is, 1s. for the first 200 words, and 6d. for every other 100 words, making 2s. 6d. The registers attempt to support this departure from the fees ordered to be taken by the act, by saying that it is in pursuance of an arrangement made between them and attorneys at the time, and that has existed for 72 years, which reasons, we think, are insufficient. cept to a few captious persons, gives general satisfaction, the days of non-attendance of the register being now defined, instead of uncertain, as heretofore." But why were they uncertain? By the act, they are expressly defined, and the register was to attend for six hours every day for the dispatch of all business. Instead of which they ingeniously excuse their present neglect by referring to their former neglect as being worse Whether the present attenditance is better or worse than the former, we as do not know; but we do know that both are contrary to the act of parliament. Next as to the holidays kept in the office. In 1825 these amounted to no less than 39. In 1839 they were reduced to 19; but we do not know any good reason why the Register Office should not be open all the year round, except on Sundays, Christmas Day, and Good Friday. We can only say in conclusion, that this return appears to us fully to justify the complaints which have been made against the Register's Office, and that the matter should not rest here, but that the inquiry should be pursued, and a proper remedy applied. CHANCERY REFORM. In our last Number, we laid before our readers the Lord Chancellor's Bill for the improvement of the administration of justice, and endeavoured to direct the feeling in favour of Chancery Reform into the proper channel. As far as we are able to collect, in giving a general approbation of the measure as an instalment in this great But the hours of attendance at the office are, perhaps, the most serious grievance of all. By sect. 12 of this act, the register is to give due attendance at his office every day in the week (except Sundays and holidays) between the hours of nine and twelve in the forenoon, and two and five in the afternoon, for the dispatch of all business belonging to the office, that is, six hours every day. Now how is this complied with? "The hours of attendance," says the return, are from ten to three on each day, by the clerks. The register's or deputy's at-work, we spoke the sentiments of the protendance is from eleven to one, EXCEPT on Mondays; but the office is open on this day likewise for the general purposes of business, only that parties cannot be sworn as to the due execution of the memorials and the deeds to which they refer, as this can only be effected whilst a register or deputy is sitting." Thus, first one hour's attendance is struck off per day for the whole business of the office; then Monday is made a dies non for the registers and their deputies; next the hours for attendance by them on the other days of the week is diminished from six to two; and when we consider there are four registers besides deputies, before any one of whom the parties, according to the return, may be sworn, we should like to know how many hours per week even each fession. There may be parts of the bill which may be modified with propriety, but as a whole, as a means of disposing of the existing arrear, and of keeping it down for the future, we are of opinion, considering all the difficulties of the subject, that no better plan can be carried into execution. The only part of the scheme to which we have heard any serious objection, is the taking away the Master of the Rolls from his own Court for some portion of the year, and placing him as Vice President of the Privy Council. If this tends materially to render the Rolls a less efficient Court than at present, it is undoubtedly open to great doubt; still it is to be remembered that former Masters of the Rolls have frequently presided in the Privy Council, and that it is Chancery Reform.-Parties in Suits by Joint Stock Companies. 419 difficult to find any other Judges so eligible | meant, in good part, and that they may for the Vice Presidency. We agree, how- have the effect we intend. ever, that this part of the plan requires further consideration. While this Bill has been brought in, in the House of Lords, a slight movement has also been made in the House of Commons. Sir Edward Sugden has for some time shewed a desire to deliver his sentiments on the subject of Chancery Reform. After some previous postponements, he gave a formal notice on the subject for Thursday the 19th of this month. It so happened, however, that Sir Edward was not in his place when he was called on by the Speaker to bring on his motion, and that inexorable Judge declined to depart from the usual rules of the House in his favour, and his opinion was confirmed by the House. Sir Edward, although thus baulked of his speech, was determined to be delivered of his proposed plan; in this, reminding us of Pope's disappointed poet "Fir'd that the House rejects him, "'Sdeath I'll print it, "And shame the rogues.' And he has accordingly printed a series of resolutions, which accompany the votes of the House, and contains his opinions on the subject of the necessary reforms, as well in the Court of Chancery as the Court of Bankruptcy, and in the House of Lords. These opinions deserve much attention and respect; we cannot however but regret that Sir Edward Sugden deprives these and others which he holds, of much of their weight by the petulance and over-confidence with which he frequently asserts them. He is undoubtedly an eminent lawyer, but there are other eminent lawyers in the House, as high in station, learning, and character as himself, and whose opinions as statesmen stand much higher. We venture to make these remarks, with the sincere desire that they may be taken as they are a Sir Edward had left the House to avoid voting on a question which, he says, he did not understand. Alas! If other members were equally nice, we fear that the division lists would be much reduced in number. We conceive, however, the true rule to be that a member is not supposed to be acquainted with all the various matters which come before him in his legislatorial capacity. He must trust, in many points, in a great measure to others, and to their correct knowledge of the circumstances, and in dependence on that, may vote with a safe conscience. A member, who should be acquainted with all the subjects brought before Parliament, must indeed be a wonderful man 1 We shall now shortly advert to the resolutions themselves, which will be found in a subsequent part of this Number. They do not appear to us to contain much, if any novelty. Sir Edward would abolish the Court of Review, and so would we, but surely having existed thus long, it is better before taking any step, to have the report of the Bankruptcy Commissioners. He would also remodel the Judicial Committee of the Privy Counsel, and make some alterations in the mode of hearing causes and appeals in the Court of Chancery, and these propositions may be well discussed when the Lord Chancellor's Bill reaches the House of Commons. We conceive, however, that the main object of these resolutions is to assert the opinion that no step should be taken in the reform of the Courts of Equity, before reforming the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords; and if so, we respectfully beg to differ from this opinion. The reform of the appellate jurisdiction must always be a work of great difficulty. The Lords are tenacious of their privileges, and nothing but a case of great urgency will ever induce them to abandon them. The most pressing grievance is undoubtedly the great arrear of original business in the Court of Chancery; and if we can get nothing else this session, let us at any rate gain a tribunal for disposing of this. PARTIES IN SUITS BY JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. IN our eleventh volume, pp. 507-509, we collected the cases as to where it is, and where it is not, necessary to make all the shareholders of a joint stock company, parties to a suit in which they are concerned, and we laid down the rule to be, from those cases, that where there is plainly a community of interest between all the shareholders, there a few persons may sue on behalf of the whole; but where there is a diversity of interest, then all the members may be made parties. It would seem, however, that the latter part of this rule will be relaxed in certain cases where the circumstances of the case require it. the case of Mare v. Malachy, a bill was In a Lloyd v. Loaming, 6 Ves. 773; Gray v: Chaplin, 2 Sim. & Stu. 267; Small v. Attwood, Rounge, 459; Blair v. Agar, | Sim. 37, Evans v. Stokes, 1 Keen, 24. b Myl. & C. 559. |