Hertford Huddersfield Ipswich Great Grimsby Great Yarmouth Guildford and God 10 6 5 10 16 ... 7 5 3 3 2 5 8 16 16 CRIMINAL 18 32 24 21 10 16 9 LAW AND THE JURISDICTION OF MAGISTRATES. BOROUGH QUARTER SESSIONS. 9 5 Abingdon, Thursday, July 20 2 Chichester, Monday, July 24 13 Colchester, Thursday, July 27 Devizes, Monday, July 17 tion Norwich Merthyr Tydvil Middlesbrough Nantwich and Crewe Neath and Aberavon Newbury Newcastle-on-Tyne.. Newport and Ryde.. Newport, Mon. Newtown ... Northampton Nottingham 1 18 18 21 25 26 IN a morning contemporary the other day it was stated with seeming confidence that we might expect to hear of the severance of Sir Edward Henry's connection with Scotland Yard. Having regard to the very marked success with which, during nearly eight years, Sir Edward has discharged the duties of ons of the most exacting offices in the kingdom, this announcement must have been received with general regret, not unmixed perhaps with incredulity. The public has scarcely yet ceased to congratulate the Commissioner of Police on his part in the organisation of the metropolis for the festivities of the Coronation; why, at such a time, should he be thinking of exchanging Scotland Yard for so me other department? We have the beat authority for saying that the statement in queswas entirely erroneous. Sir Edward Henry remains at Scotland Yard. He is the ablest and most admired of Commissioners, 0 great director and administrator, a of unique experience in his profession, and has not a notion of transferring his services elsewhere. It has more than once been said that a man who has been long associated with police work in India has very little to learn about police work in England. This might certainly be asserted of Sir Edward Henry, who, as assistant magis. trate, magistrate, and Inspector-General of Police (Bengal), was actively engaged in India for nearly thirty years. It was in Bengal that he began and completed his wonderful classification of the Galton system of finger-prints, with the result that the fingerprint shortly afterwards superseded in the United Kingdom the man elaborate anthropometrical device of Alphonse Bertillon. A Commissioner of Police in London has probably not a great deal of time for recreative writing, but it may be hoped that one of these days Sir Edward will be putting in hand a volume of reminiscences. PAYMENTS IN RESPECT OF PAUPER LUNATICS. THE following circular has been issued to county councile, councils of county boroughs, and boards of guardians : Local Government Board, Whitehall, S.W., 7th July 1911. Sir. I am directed by the Local Government Board to state that, owing to certain difficulties which have arisen between county councils and boards of guardians in connection with the interpretation of sect. 21 (2) (f) of the Local Government Act 1888, in relation to claims for payment in respect of pauper lunatice, the board have thought it advisable to consult the law officers of the Crown on some points relating to that enactment. The cases which have led to these difficulties can, for the most part, be divided into two groups. The first group consists of cases where the guardians have obtained from the estate of a pauper lunatic a single sum sufficient to cover the cost of his maintenance for a considerable period; the second group is characterised by the circumstance that the contributions received by the guardians from the lunatic's relatives in respect of maintenance during a limited period have varied in amount so that during some weeks of a period of claim the difference between the cost of maintenance and the amount of the contribution has exceeded and in others has fallen below the sum of 48. & week. After considering the opinion of the law officers and also the judg ment in the case of the Guardians of the Poor of the Calne Union v. County Council of Wilts (1911) 1 K. B. 717; 75 J. P. 42; 9 L. G. R 5), the board desire to place before county councils and boards of guardians the conclusions they have reached. An initial difficulty which sometimes arises in connection with claims under the enactment referred to is the determination of the items of expenditure which may properly be charged by the guardians against the amounts received by them from sources other than local rates in order to arrive at the net charge upon them within the meaning of the section. The board are advised that the word "maintenance" in the section should not be regarded as having the limited meaning given to it in sect. 287 (1) of the Lunacy Act 1890, but should be taken as including all matters in respect of which the guardians incur expenses on account of the pauper lunatic. The charges on the guardians towards which the county councils are to contribute will, therefore, include all the expenses consequent on the removal of the pauper and other incidental expenses such as those referred to in sect. 285 of the Act of 1890. As regards the expression "the period of maintenance for which the sum is so paid," used in sect. 24 (2) (1) of the Act of 1888, the board are advised that this will in general relate to the period of twelve months ending on or about the 29th Sept. in each year for which the accounts between the two authorities are at present adjusted. Where, however, the maintenance of a particular pauper lunatic does not extend over a full space of twelve months, the period must be taken as that portion of the year over which his maintenance did extend. In the determination of receipts and charges each period of maintenance should be considered separately. The total amount of the charges incurred by the guardians during the period on account of the lunatic and the total of the amounts received by them during the period for his maintenance from sources other than local rates should both be ascertained. If the total charges exceed the total receipts by an amount equal to or greater than a eum calculated at the rate of 48. a week throughout the whole period the guardians are entitled to the grant for the whole period. If the excess is any smaller amount, the guardians are not entitled to the grant for any portion of the period. Where the sums received by the guardians on account of the cost of maintenance of a pauper lunatic exceed the charges which the guardians incur on his account during the period, the exact disposition of the balance may depend on the conditions under which those sums were obtained. In the case of any sum which the guardians recover by legal process, or would have been entitled so to recover, the board think that the guardians may use the balance firetly in recouping themselves for any expenses they may have incurred on behalf of the pauper during the last preceding six years, and secondly, in repaying to the county council any grants paid by them on his account during that period. Instead of repaying the money, the guardians may, of course, make allowance for it in their next statement of claims. Finally, if the receipts are sufficient to cover all charges incurred by the guardians and by the county council for the period of maintenance within the meaning of sect. 24 (2) (/) of the Act of 1888 and for any preceding period to which they can lawfully be applied, any balance should be carried forward and treated as a sum received in respect of the next ensuing period of maintenance, successive balances, so long as any remain, Leing treated as receipts in respect of subsequent periods. Another matter which has been brought to the notice of the board in connection with the administration of the grant is the practice of some boards of guardians to regulate the amount which they call upon the relatives of a pauper lunatic to pay towards the lunatic's main tenance accord ing to the rate of maintenance charged by the asylum authorities so as to ensure that the net weekly cost to themselves shall never fall below 43. Any advantage which a board of guardians may obtain by such a practice is obviously unfair to the ratepayers in other unions in the county; and the practice is, in the board's opinion, an improper one. The law officers have, moreover, advised the board that it is the duty of the guardians to secure that relatives make their proper contributions irrespective of any such consideration as that referred to, The board trust that now that their attention has been drawn to the matter those boards of guardians who have followed this practice in the past will abandon it.-I am, Sir, your obedient servant, H C. MONRO, Secretary. To the Clerk of the County Council, the Town Clerk, or the Clerk to the Guardians. GENERAL INTELLIGENCE. HEIRS-AT-LAW AND NEXT OF KIN. GEFLOWSKI (Maria [or Marie]), and Amy Geflowski, nieces of the testator, Maurice Geflowski, in his will mentioned, or, if they died since Jan. 28, 1911, their legal personal representatives, to come in, by Oct. 12, at chambers of Warrington and Parker, JJ. Hearing Oct. 17, at 12, at said chambers, Room 315. APPOINTMENTS UNDER THE JOINT STOCK NOTICES OF APPEARANCE AT HEARING MUST REACH THE SOLICITORS BY 6 г.M. ON THE CITY OF MONTE VIDEO PUBLIC WORKS CORPORATION LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard July 25, at Royal Courts of Justice. Hargrove and Co., 16, Victoria-st, Westminster, sols. for pet. Notices of appearance by July 24. GREGORY AND SEELEY LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard July 18, at Royal Courts of Justice. J. J. Edwards and Co., 28, Sackville-st, W., sols. for pet. Notices of appearance by July 17. GLOBE TIMBER COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Aug. 19, to T. Dutton, Clarence-chmbrs, 4, Piccadilly, Manchester. Sampson and Price, Manchester, sols. to liquidator. GRANNAWAY MOTOR WORKS LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by July 24, to J. J. Hilver, 8, Albany-rd, West Ealing, W. JOHN CORDEUX AND SONS LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by Aug. 1, to C. Smith and W. Nicholson, care of Hudson, Smith, Briggs, and Co., Exchange-chmbrs, Bristol. Benson, Carpenter, Cross, and Co., Bristol, sols. to liquidators. LONDON CONCESSIONS AND CONSTRUCTION SYNDICATE LIMITED.-Petition for LEON SYNDICATE LIMITED-Petition for winding-up to be heard July 18, PALACE ELECTRIC THEATRES LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard PALL MALL LAND AND FINANCE CORPORATION.-Petition for winding-up by or subject to supervision of the court, to be heard July 25, at Royal Courts of Justice. Walls, Stallard, and Newton, 27, Old Jewry, E.C., sols. for pet. Notices of appearance by July 24. PATCHO LIMITED.--Creditors to send in, by July 29, to G. F. H. Gardner, City-chmbrs, 2, Darley-st, Bradford. RUBBER ESTATES LIMITED.-Adjourned hearing of petition for winding-up to be heard July 18. at Royal Courts of Justice. H. Percy Becher, 26. Bedford-row, W.C., sol for pet. Notices of appearance by July 17. RITA LIMITED.-Petition for winding-up to be heard July 18, at Royal STRATFORD CONFECTIONERY COMPANY LIMITED.-Creditors to send in, by CREDITORS UNDER ESTATES IN CHANCERY. COOPER (Henry England), and all persons interested in the property to which the action of Yates v. Thrale relates, who are not parties to the action or have not been served with notice of the judgment, to come in, by Oct. 26, at chambers of Warrington, J. Hearing Oct. 31, at 12, at said chambers. COOPER (Thomas William), and all persons interested in the property to which the action of Yates v. Thrale relates, who are not parties to the action or have not been served with notice of the judgment, to come in, by Oct. 26, at chambers of Warrington, J. Hearing Oct. 31, at 12, at said chambers. HALLETT (John Harry), Radyr. Aug. 21; L. G. Williams, of L. G. Williams and Prichard, sols., Cardiff. Oct. 12; the Master, at chambers of Swinfen Eady, J., at 11.30. PARKER (William), Southsea. Aug. 4; S. H. Price, of S. Price and Sons, sols., Worcester House, Walbrook, E.C. Oct. 13; Warrington, J., at 12. CREDITORS UNDER 22 & 23 VICT. c. 35. LAST DAY OF CLAIM AND TO WHOM PARTICULARS TO BE SENT. ALT (Just Henry Montague), Southampton. Aug. 7; Bull and Bull, 3, Stone-bldgs, Lincoln's-inn, W.C. BEST (Janet), Great Thornham. Sept. 5; Lawton, Warnes, and Sons, Eye, Suffolk. BOWDEN (Frederic), West Derby. Aug. 15; Bartley, Bird, and Co., Liverpool. BURKE (John), Cheltenham. July 31; R. E. Steel and Millard, Cheltenham. BOOKER (Charlés Edward), Chapel Allerton. Aug. 4; R. A. Whitting and R. P. L. Booker, at the offices of Hanbury, Whitting, and Co., 62, New Broad-st, E.C. BOSTRIDGE (Charles Henry), Gravelly Hill, Aston. July 22; J. Wright and Co., Birmingham. BOOTH (Alice), Bredbury. Cheshire. BRADBURY (Mary), Hyde. Cheshire. July 19; Hervey Smith and Sons, Hyde, July 19; Hervey Smith and Sons, Hyde, BEL DOE (Laura Charlotte), Balham. CROSLAND (John), Thornes, Wakefield. Aug. 5; Harrison, Beaumont, and COTTAM (Edwin), Bradley, Huddersfield. Aug. 19; Chadwick, Son, and Nicholson, Dewsbury. CHANTLER (Sarah Whitelegg), Lymm. Aug. 1; Fowden, Newton, and Varey, Manchester. CLAMPITT (Richard Vooght), Bootle and Coombe Chagford. Aug. 7; Sampson and Co., Liverpool. CLARKE (Bennett Michell), London Stock Exchange; 9 and 10, Tokenhouse-yd; and Dulwich Wood Park. Aug. 31; Hubbard, Son, and Eve, 110, Cannon-st, E.C. CAVELL (Jane), Lee. Aug. 9; Morris and Bristow, 41, Bedford-row, W.C. CLARKSON (Louisa), Shrewsbury. Aug. 5; How and Son, Shrewsbury. COLLIER (Thomas Henry), Manchester. Aug. 11; Pegge and Billinge, Manchester. CHORLEY (Francis Henry Digby). Chiswick. Aug. 15; Emmet and Co., 14, Bloomsbury-sq. DOMINY (Spencer), Ladywood. Aug. 15; Docker, Hosgood, and Co., Bir mingham. DAVIES (Alice), Merthyr Tydfil. Aug. 26; Gwilym James, Charles, and Davies, Merthyr Tydfil, DAVIDSON (William Henry), Brixton, and Fetter-la, Fleet-st. Aug. 26; ESCOTT (Rev. Hay Sweet), Kilve. Aug. 7; W. H. Puckridge, Abingdon. FULLAGAR (Mary Ann), Hastings. Aug. 31; Chalinder and Herington, GOULDBY (Edward), Lowestoft. July 24; Seago, Son, and Co., Lowestoft. GOLDSMITH (Edward John), Grays. July 29; the executors, at the office of T. A. Capron and Co., Grays, Essex. GAY (Susanna Gertrude), Ryde. Sept. 1; C. Hewlett Taylor, South GODFREY (Charlotte), Worcester. Aug. 10; Lord and Parker, Worcester. HOWELL (Frank), Clapham. Aug. 7; Hicks, Arnold, and Mozley, 35, Aug. 18; the Aug. 10; H. H. HENDERSON (William), Liverpool and Birkenhead. KNIGHT (Stephen), Sparkbrook. July 31; Lane, Clutterbuck, and Co., KNAPP (Mary Charlotte), West Kensington. Aug. 15; H. Stuart Salter, 1, The Sanctuary, Westminster, S.W. LEARY (John), Mitcham. Aug. 20; Arnold and Cubison, Dove-ct, Old Jewry, EC. LATENDORF (Maria Rosaline), Mossley Hill, Liverpool. Aug. 21; Layton, Son, and Calder, Liverpool. LISTER (George), Scarborough. Sept. 1; H. B. James, Leeds. MACKINDER (John), Brixton. July 21; Tweed, Stephen, and Co., Lincoln. MURDOCH (Elizabeth Ann), who died at Portsmouth. Sept. 1; L. M. Biden, 20, Bucklersbury, E.C. MOORE (Florence Mary Carrick), St. Leonards-on-Sea. July 31; MeadeKing, Cooke, and Co., Bristol. OWEN (Elizabeth), Torquay. Aug. 11; Sandilands and Co., 12, Fenchurch-av, E.C. PRIDEAUX (Richard), Barripper. Aug. 21; A. H Thomas, Camborne. PARR (Dan). Middleton. July 25; F. Entwistle and Son, Middleton, Manchester. PARSONAGE (John), South Shore. Aug. 7; Finch, Johnson, and Co., Blackpool. PICKERING (William), Heaton. Aug. 7; Arnott, Swan, and Walker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Pocock (William Henry), Whitley. July 30; A. G. Smith, Melksham, Wilts. ROSSER (Harry Dean), Llandaff North. Aug. 3; J. H. Morgan, Cardiff. READ (Charles), Northenden. Aug. 7; C. H. Collier and W. Wolstenholme, at the offices of Makinson, Rainer, Son, and Wolstenholme, Manchester. RAYNER (Ann), Kew Gardens. Aug. 10; Peachey and Co., 17, Salisburysq. E.C. ROBBINS (Owen). Nailsworth. Aug. 31; P. Delmé Radcliffe, Devizes. SUNNUCKS (William James), Gravesend. Aug. 25; J. Adlington, SIMNER (Abel), Westminster. Aug. 7; Elwes and Miller, 8 and 9, Essexst, Strand, W.C. SPEELMAN (Josephine), Manchester, trading as Josephine Goodman, Hampstead, and Finchley-rd. Aug. 4; E. L. Greaves, 14, Serjeantsinn, E.C STEVENS (Ethel Alice), Eastbourne. Aug. 5; H. L. Gilks, 15, Lincoln's inn-flds, W.C. SCARFE (Frederick Norman), Finchley. Aug. 11; Snow, Fox, and Higginson, 7, Great St. Thomas Apostle, Queen-st, E.C. STENNING (William Vicesimus Knox), East Grinstead. Aug. 6; Stenning and Son, Maidstone. SANDBACH (William), Broad Green. Aug. 21; R. McGowen and Son, Liverpool. TIPPING (William), Alderley Edge. Sept. 30; R. Innes, Manchester. TINLINE (James Madder), Teignmouth. Aug. 7; Sparkes, Pope, and Thomas, Exeter. TOMLINSON (Elizabeth Ann), Blackpool. Aug. 19; Boote, Edgar, Grace, and Rylands, Manchester. TAYLOR (Elizabeth), who traded as "W. Taylor and Co.," Sheffield. Aug. 15; W. Taylor, at the offices of J. Broughton Kesteven, Sheffield. VYE (John), Swanage. Aug. 6; Slade and West, Swanage. WALKER (Edward Brooking Cornish), Tiverton. Aug. 22; A. F. Hard wick, Brighton. WHATLEY (Harriet), Pewsey. Aug. 12; Dixon and Mason, Pewsey, Wilts. WADDINGTON (Ann), Chesterfield. Aug. 26; Stanton and Walker, Chesterfield. WATERHOUSE (Benjamin), Rylstone, Skipton. July 29; Brown, Charlesworth, and Wood, Skipton. WILLIAMSON (Edwin James), Leeds. July 22; Norton Carter and Wade, Leeds. WOODROFFE (Emma). Erdington. Sept. 4; E. S. Taylor, Birmingham. WAITE (Charles), Tilehurst. Aug. 22; W. Waite, at the offices of Brain and Brain, Reading. WRIGHT (Thomas), West Hartlepool. July 31; J. H. Smith, West LAW SOCIETIES. THE LAW SOCIETY. ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING. SIR HENRY JOHNSON, president, took the chair at the annual general meeting of. the Law Society on Friday, the 7th inst. Among those present were Messrs. William John Humfrys (Hereford, vice-president), James Samuel Beale. Thomas William Bischoff, John James Dumville Botterell, John Wreford Budd, Alfred Henry Colev (Birmingham), Sir Homewood Crawford, Messrs. Weeden Dawes, Robert William Dibdin. Walter Dowson, Robert Ellett (Cirencester), Walter Henry Foster, Samuel Garrett, Herbert Gibson, Charles Goddard, Charles Berkeley Margetts (Huntingdon), Robert Chancellor Nesbitt, Ernest Fitzjohn Oldham, Arthur Copson Peake (Leeds), Thomas Rawle, Sir Albert Kaye Rollit, LL.D., D.C.L.. Litt.D. (Chertsey). Messrs. Charles Leopold Samson, William Arthur Sharpe, Frank William Stone (Tunbridge Wells), Walter Trower, William Melmoth Walters, Robert Mills Weleford, and William Howard Winterbotham (members of the council), Arthur Joseph Clarke (High Wycombe), Richard Stewart Cleaver (Liverpool), Thomas Eggar (Brighton). Charles Elton Longmore (Hertford), Richard Alfred Pinsent (Birmingham), and Francis Sturge (Bristol) (extraordinary members), and S. P. B. Bucknill (secretary), and E. R. Cook (assistant secretary). PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT. The PRESIDENT stated that Mr. William John Humfrys (Hereford) had been nominated as president, and Mr. Charles Leopold Samson (London) as vice-president for the ensuing year, and, as there were no other candidates, he declared them elected. COUNCIL. The PRESIDENT stated that the following had been nominated to fill the eleven vacancies on the council, caused by the retirement of ten members in rotation and the death of Mr. Pennington: The Hon. Walter Bernard Louis Barrington, Messrs. *John James Dumville Botterell, *John Wreford Budd, Alfred Davenport, *Walter Dowson, Henry Ford (Exeter), John Roger Burrow Gregory, *Charles Berkeley Margetts (Huntingdon), *Philip Hubert Martineau, Ernest Fitzjohn Oldham, *Sir Albert Kaye Rollit, LL.D., D.C.L., Litt.D., and Frank William Stone (Tunbridge Wells). A letter had, however, been received from Mr. Alfred Davenport to the effect that he would withdraw his name to avoid putting the society to the trouble and expense of an election. As, therefore, the candidates were not more in number than the vacancies, he declared them elected. The candidates marked with an asterisk were retiring members of the council, and Mr. Ford and Mr. Stone were proposed in accordance with the scheme of nomination of the Associated Provincial Law Societies, pursuant to the resolution of the society relating to country vacancies adopted in July 1907. Mr. W. E. Foster (Aldershot), Mr. Thomas Rawle, and Mr. W. W. Paine, retiring members, did not offer themselves as candidates for re-election. AUDITORS. The PRESIDENT said that Mr. John Stephens Chappelow, F.C.A., Mr. Charles Gibbon May, and Mr.. Arthur Pearce had been nominated as auditors of the society's accounts for the year ensuing, and, as there were no other candidates, he declared them elected. ACCOUNTS.-ARTICLED CLERKS' FUND, The PRESIDENT moved the adoption of the society's account of income and expenditure for the year ending the 31st Dec. 1910. Society's Educational System. The members were very much indebted to Sir Albert Rollit for all he had done when he was president in connection with the educational system of the society; but he thought they ought to have some information as to what was going on and that the report ought not to have been silent upon the subject. He gathered that there was a falling off in the number of those who availed themselves of the system of legal education-he very much disliked the expresssion because it was not that, but a method of using the Postmaster-General, in many cases, instead. He was sorry to see that the council had given the cold shoulder to the University of London in regard to some proposals they had made. It would be a most excellent thing for the Profession if the society would encourage the university to take over the whole of the society's examinations and all the revenues connected therewith including the articled clerks' fund. He quite understood the position of the council on this point and he wished to sympathise with them because it would no doubt be very unpleasant if the revenues from these sources disappeared. Mr. CHARLES FORD said with regard to the general expenditure the complaint he had felt called upon to make for many years past was somewhat minimised, owing to the fact that the council were a little fairer than they used to be in the apportionment of the charges between the general account and the articled clerks' account. But even now the charges made against the articled clerks' account were in excess of what they ought to be, and he hoped the council would continue in the course they had been so wisely pursuing during recent years. He objected to the items of £783 charged against the articled clerks' account under "rates, taxes, &c.," and the £2457 for "salaries to officers, clerks, and servants," as being far too much in both cases; and also to £676 for "printing, stationery, and advertisements," which was again an unfair proportion. "He believed that if he were allowed to adjust the accounts he should find a considerable sum due from the general fund to the articled clerks' account. The articled clerks were charged £535 as their share of house expenses, including water, coal, and lighting," which was one-third of the whole expenses in that respect. Then "nominal rent, £1850," was charged to them, and he really did not know what was to become of the articled clerks' fund if matters were to go on in this almost reckless way. He was very sorry to see that the cost of entertainments after each examination and council luncheons," which last year was under £1000, had this year reached £1302, and he hoped this would not become general in the future. He did not understand how the item" honours examination fees, £314," got into the income side of the general account; for it seemed to him that it ought to be put to the credit of the articled clerks' account. The fees in respect of the honours examinations were received from the articled clerks, and he should have thought that under the statute, they should go to the articled clerks' account. "Income from Dominion of Canada Three per Cent. Stock" appeared as £22 12s. He presumed that was a purchase made since the last annual meeting as there was no reference to that stock in the accounts then presented. The income from "India Three and a Half per Cent. Stock" also was very much less last year; and he presumed the council had invested much more largely in that stock during the present year. LAND TRANSFER. The report apparently contained nothing about the work done by the Land Transfer Committee, and he thought there should be some explanation with regard to that, seeing that the matter of land transfer had been on the tapis to a considerable extent during the year. Grants to Provincial Law Societies. He was glad to see that the council had expended considerable sums in assisting the country law societies in the matter of legal education, but the amount so expended was put down in one lump sum in the accounts, and if a member wanted to find out how it was apportioned he had to come down to the society's office and look up the matter for himself. He believed the members would be glad to have detailed information upon the subject. University of London. The report referred to some suggestions which had been made by the University of London with regard to university education in London, and stated that the council had adopted resolutions to the effect that (1) it was essential that the society should retain the sole control of the examinations qualifying for admission to the solicitors' branch of the Legal Profession. (2) That the retention by the society of its own funds (including its present share of the New-inn and Clifford's-inn funds) was essential for the continuance of its educational work. (3) That it was expedient in the interest of the higher legal and general education of articled clerks and solicitors, and in order to afford them better opportunities of taking degrees in law: (a) To endeavour to secure arrangements with the University of London that the preliminary examination of the society might, with or without modifications, be recognised by the university in lieu wholly or pro tanto of the matriculation examination of the university, as that examination exempted those who passed it from passing the preliminary examination of the society; and (b) that any evidence given by the society before the Royal Commission should be in support of maintaining and developing the dual character of the University of London and the retention of both its internal and external sides and degrees. He was afraid there was no hope of the council at present relegating the examinations to the universities. Mr. WALTER TROWER (chairman of the Finance Committee) said that the rent charge made against the articled clerks' fund for the society's buildings had been ascertained by actual valuation and survey, and the fund was only charged with the actual estimated rent, which had been assessed by surveyors who carefully surveyed the building two years ago, when the whole system was readjusted, and the charges against the fund were reduced. The rates and taxes item naturally followed that reduction. The charge for printing and stationery was the actual expenditure on the department; there was no apportionment as far as that was concerned. The charge for salaries was the apportionment, so far as was possible, according to the relative revenues of the two funds, and by closely estimating the expenditure incurred in respect of each department. This had been done very carefully, and an honest attempt had been made to do justice between the two funds. With regard to the honours examination the fees which were paid in respect of those examinations were not statutory. The honours examination was not a statutory examination -it was a voluntary examination. The council had always thought that, as regarded the general fund and the articled clerks' fund, they should, distinguishing between the two, relieve the articled clerks' fund from the expenses of the honours examination. The expenses of entertainments had been greater this year than was the case last vear. It had been thought well that the Law Congress, which met in London during 1910, a most important body, should be entertained at the society's hall. They had been entertained by the other great public bodies, and the council thought the society ought not to be bebind in entertaining them also. That rather more than accounted for the increase in the expenses of entertainments. The motion was unanimously agreed to. ANNUAL REPORT.-REFRESHMENT DEpartment. The PRESIDENT moved the adoption of the annual report. Mr. FORD called attention to the subject of the refresh ment department of which there was no mention in the report. Last year the members were informed that the department had been carried on at one time at a loss and he was sure they would be glad to be told whether it was now carried on at a profit or whether at a loss; because they would remember that the late Lord Wolverhampton had said that if it meant a loss it must be at once brought to an end. Aspersions on the Judges. Another matter, which he would not be so presumptuous as to say ought to have been mentioned in the report, but which he was sure the members would have been glad to see referred to, was the subject of the reflections which had been recently cast upon His Majesty's judges. Solicitors, as officers of the court, were, he believed, well capable of forming an opinion as to the public conduct of the judges, and he very much doubted whether there was a solicitor in the kingdom who would pass any condemnation upon them whatever. Solicitors were largely in contact with the judges and they knew how honourably and how ably they discharged their duties. There never was a time when His Majesty's judges had been held in greater respect and regard than the present, not only by solicitors and the Bar, but by the suitors and the public at large, and therefore, though the subject was not referred to in the report, he thought he was expressing the feeling of the Profession when he said that they resented with indignation the aspersions which had been cast upon the judges by the Home Secretary. Call to the Bar. He was very glad to see that the council were keeping a watchful eye over some suggestions which had been made on the part of the Bar which seemed to interfere unfairly with those solicitors who thought that their position would be improved or that it would be bene. ficial to them to be called to the Bar. It was very unreasonable that a solicitor should be required to be out of practice for twelve months before he could be called; and it looked very much as if members of the Bar, seeing that able men came to the Bar from the ranks of the solicitors, were not too anxious that that should be the case. He was also glad to see from the report that the council were of opinion that the appointment of additional judges in the King's Bench Division had been of enormous benefit and assistance in the administration of justice. Land Transfer. Mr. C. G. MAY observed that the report stated that the committee of the council dealing with the report of the Land Transfer Commission had been sitting, and that their report was receiving the consideration of the council. He had seen it stated in the newspapers of that date that Lord Halsbury and the Lord Chancellor had come to an arrangement to hold a debate in the House of Lords upon the subject of the Land Transfer Commission, and their report in the course, it was thought, of the next week. An effort should be made to press forward the report and see that the views of the society were expressed in the House of Lords on the occasion of the debate which was likely to arise. The PRESIDENT said that the council was entirely agreed that the matter was one of vast importance to the Profession It was of 80 much importance that they were exceedingly unwilling to do anything which might be in the nature of hasty decision or action, Meetings of the council's committee had been held to consider the subject, and the council were in communication with the provincial law societies, who, of course, were interested in the matter quite as much as, or even more than, were the metropolitan members; but they could not expect to have any immediate answer from those societies. That was the position of affairs, and until the council heard from the provincial law societies it would be impossible for them to present any report to the members of the society that they could ask them to consider or act upon in any way. to Mr. MAY suggested that under these circumstances a report should be made to the Lord Chancellor explaining how the society was situated, so that the Government and the Opposition might not come to any premature decision with reference to the action they were take. If they did not hear the voice of the society on the subject it would be said that the society did not care about the matter and that it did not trouble them. He thought the council might at any rate ask them to do as he had suggested. He bad not seen any notice of any intention of bringing forward the subject until it was announced in the newspapers of that date. The PRESIDENT: Nor had I. Mr. MAY thought the council might very fairly state what they were doing in the matter, and that they might ask that any debate should be adjourned for a reasonable time to enable the society to place its views before the House of Lords. The PRESIDENT pointed out that the society could not reasonably ask the Lord Chancellor not to answer Lord Halsbury's question on the ground that they had not had any opportunity of discussing the matter, practically because it only appeared in that day's papers, and it was possible that the Lord Chancellor's answer might indicate to some extent what the Government intended to do. He thought the society had better wait and see what happened on the discussion which Lord Halsbury would initiate. Until then he did not see that the society could do anything. Mr. MAY suggested that the council should make it clear that the matter was receiving their attention, but that they had not yet been able to formulate their views on the report of the Commission and that they should ask that judgment might be suspended until the society had had an opportunity of properly submitting their views to the authorities. It might be that they might agree together as to the course to be adopted. But at any rate, it was, he thought, desirable in a matter of such importance that the council should ask that the House of Lords should not express any definite opinion as to the policy to be adopted until the council had had an opportunity of placing the society's views before it. Mr. NICHOLAS HANHART, said he should like to enforce the observations made by Mr. May. Many solicitors felt that, holding the views they did, the members of the Commission should, if it was in their power, have recommended the nullification of the order applying compulsion to the County of London. That was a simple point and did not at all affect the principle of land transfer. It was only a question whether the County of London should be under a ban as compared with the rest of the kingdom. It should be pressed that that which was not good for the whole of the kingdom was not good for London. The PRESIDENT promised that that suggestion should be considered by the council, and also the suggestions made by Mr. May. He did not suppose that the discussion would take place for the next few days. He did not think that the Parliamentary business in the House of Lords would permit of it just now. Mr. MAY observed that so far as he could gather from the news. papers, the matter was to come on for consideration during the next week. The PRESIDENT said he understood that that was the case. Refreshment Department. Mr. TROWER, speaking of the refreshment department to which Mr. Ford had referred, said that that department was undertaken by a contractor. The society paid him nothing. He had the use of the society's rooms, and no table money was charged, and he made the department pay, he (Mr. Trower) believed to his own satisfaction. He made a small profit. The department cost the society nothing, and he (Mr. Trower) believed the members of the society appreciated the change which had taken place during the last few years. With regard to grants to the provincial law societies he saw no objection at all to separating the items, and he would submit the suggestion to the council for their consolation when the next balance sheet was being prepared. Aspersions on the Judges. The PRESIDENT said with regard to the remarks of Mr. Ford as to His Majesty's judges that in strictness the matter did not arise out of the report, but he had not stopped him. At the same time he (the president) had nothing to say about the subject except that he should think that most of what Mr. Ford had said went without saying. Society's Teaching System. Mr. TROWER said with regard to the society's teaching system that there had been, it was true, a small falling off in the number of students who had applied for admission to the classes; but it was not large and it was not in any way larger than the falling off in the number of those who applied to have their articles enrolled. Twenty years ago the number of persons wishing to enter the Profession was quite twice as great as was the number now. Whether that ought to be regarded with dismay or with equanimity he did not know. As to that each individual member of the society would form his own conclusion. But the fact was sufficient to justify the observation that the falling off in the number of students-it was very smallwas not so great as in the number of those who wished to enter the Profession, and he thought that those who took an interest in the education given by the society could testify to the great efficiency with which the principal and the tutors and those who were concerned with them did their duty in training and bringing up the students under their care. The motion was carried nem. con. A vote of thanks to the president moved by Mr. FORD terminated the proceedings. THE NEW PRESIDENT. The new president, Mr. William John Humfrys, is a member of the firm of Humfrys and Symonds, of Hereford. He was born in the year 1842 and admitted in Michaelmas 1863. During the year 1893.4 he became an extraordinary member of the council-he was at that time president of the Herefordshire Law Society. He was elected an ordinary member of the council in 1901. NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS. The newly elected members of the council are as follows: The Hon. Walter Bernard Louis Barrington, of the firm of Norton, Rose, Barrington, and Co., Old Broad-street, admitted Feb. 1901; Mr. Henry Ford, of Ford, Harris, and Ford, Exeter, admitted Feb. 1889; Mr. John Roger Burrow Gregory, of Rawle, Johnstone, and Co., Bedford-row, admitted March 1885; and Mr. Ernest Fitz john Oldham, of Crowder, Vizard, Oldham, and Co., Lincoln's-inn fields, admitted March 1892. JUSTICES' CLERKS' SOCIETY. ANNUAL MEETING. THE annual meeting of the Incorporated Justices' Clerks' Society was held on Wednesday, at the Law Society's Hall, Chancery-lane, the President, Mr. F. G. Hindle (Darwen, Lancs), taking the chair. Among those present were: Messrs E. Richard Cross (Vice-President, Scarborough), W. Osborn-Boyes, LL.D. (Barnet, Herts), J. ChalmersHunt (Ware), Robert Ellett (Cirencester), T. Holmes Gore (Bristol), B. Carrer Rawson (Bradford), J. R. Roberts (Newcastle-upon-Tyne), Edgar C. Sanders (Liverpool), G. C. Whiteley (Southwark),_S. E. Major (Barrow-in-Furness), John Hall (Bury, Lancs), H. W. Hughes (Shrewsbury), E. J. Waugh (Hayward's Heath), and Henry Rosling (Reigate), secretary. The seventy-first annual report stated that the society had cause for congratulation in the consideration shown by the officials of the Home Department to the interests of justices' clerks. The council had had recently under review a care in which, in face of bitter and determined opposition on the part of the finance committee and the town council, the Home Secretary had fixed the amount of a member's salary at a sum in excess of that mentioned in the recommendation of the town council or suggested by the justices. Very shortly after the last annual meeting the council had been received at the House of Commons by the Home Secretary and the Permanent Under Secretary, Sir Edward Troup, and opportunity was then taken of urging attention to the importance by statute or otherwise that in all cases where a clerk to justices might suffer pecuniary loss through the alteration of the areas of jurisdiction, compensatiou might be secured to him. The provision made by art. 17 (2) of the Local Government Board Provisional Order (No. 13) relating to Birmingham was referred to 88 8 useful precedent. The council was assured by the Under Secretary that the Home Office had made a practice of inserting a similar provision in local Acts and provisional orders for effecting alteration of areas, but it was admitted that the assurance could not extend to the case of the creation or enlargement of a borough by other means, as, for example, by Royal charter; and it was urged that provision should be made for all cases by a public general Act, or by the Home Office laying down a rule which could be acted on in all cases, including those where a corporation was constituted by Royal charter. The Under Secretary promised that this latter point should receive the consideration of the Home Secretary. The desirability of the early introduction of a Bill to give legal sanction to the report of the Home Office conference on fees and salaries was submitted, and an assurance was obtained that this important question should receive the attention of the Home Department when the time should be considered favourable. The report in gestion included recommendations that in boroughe the justices should be the authority appointing the clerk and fixing and varying his salary, the town council and the clerk having the right to appeal to the Secretary of State against the amount so fixed or varied. That in counties the justices of each petty sessional division should appoint the clerk, and the standing joint committee should fix and vary the salary, the justices and the clerk having the right to appeal. The justices should have the right to initiate proposals to vary the salary of the clerk and to appeal to the Secretary of State from the determination of the standing joint committee upon such proposals. Appointments of justices' clerks should be notified to the town council or the standing joint committee, and should be confirmed by the Secretary of State, who should consider such observations on the subject of any individual appointment as might be submitted to him by the town council or the standing joint committee, as the case might be. The conference was further of opinion that, as a rule, clerks should be remunerated by salary, but that in the case of newly passed statutes, the operation of which was uncertain, extra payments might for a time, and in proper cases, be made by way of special remuneration in proportion to work actually done. The council of the Justices' Clerks' Society were of opinion that in the main the provisions of the Licences (Consolidation) Act 1910 were satisfactory to justices' clerks, but, owing to the haste with which the Bill was passed through Parliament in its later stages, and amendments introduced without sufficient opportunity for deliberate consideration of them, it had in some respects given rise to doubts. They had, therefore, obtained the joint opinion of counsel upon the subject, and that opinion had been circulated amongst the members. A circular letter had subsequently been sent to members in respect of the difficult question, whether the fee for service of notices of the annual general licensing meeting |