obvious that such statutes could not possibly apply to New Zoaland. Whaling was common in New Zealand prior to New Zealand being proclaimed a part of the British Dominions. After it was declared part of the British Dominions, and whilst under the docinion of New South Wales, no claim was ever made to the whales caught in New Zealand as royal fish, and whaling was very active in New Zealand after 1829. The fact that since the proclamation of the Queen's sovereignty over New Zealand, a period exceeding seventy years, no claim has ever been made on behalf of the King or representatives of the Goveroment for the thousands of wbales that have been caught in Now Zealand is strong proof that this statute was not thought to be applicable to the circumstances of the colony. I am of opinion that this statute has no applicability to New Zealand, and that though the right to whales is expressly claimed in the statute of Edward II., cap. 2, a8 part of the royal prerogative, it is one not only that has never been claimed, but one that would have been impossible to claim without claiming it against the Maoris, for they were accustomed to engage in whaliog, and the Treaty of Waitangi assumed that their fishing was not to be interfered with; they were to be left in updisturbed possession of their lands, estates, foreste, fiskeries, &c. I am therefore of opinion that, so far as this ground of appeal is concerned, it has no validity."

EVERARD DIGBY.

COMMENTS ON CASES. The decision in Gillow v. Durham County Council (ooted ante, p. 317) arrived at by the Court of Appeal is one of great importance, and it is very desirable that a point aroueing so muoh feeling should be carried to the final arbitrament of the House of Lords. The point lies in a putebell. Cap the managers of a non-provided school appoint their caretaker, or is the appointment in the bands of the local authority? The wages of caretakers are found by the latter, and it would seem, therefore, not to be out of harmony with a betraot equity that those who pay the piper should also call the tune.

The Education Act 1902 is not at all conclusive on the point, though sect. 7 thereof provides that the local education authority shall "maintain and keep efficient ” the schools in their area, and have the control of all expenditure required for that purpose other than expenditure for which under this Act provision is to be made by the managers.' The plain tiffs (the managers) contended that their powers of management with which the Act olothed them involved the duty of cleaning and the appointment of the cleaner, and that the privi. leges of the local education authority were in this matter restricted to paying. The defendants urged that the duty of maintaining and keeping efficient the schools entailed the further duty of providing for the cleaner. Mr. Justice Hamilton acceded to the argument of the plaintiffs, but the Court of Appeal by a majority have reversed this and hold that the looal education authority's view was well founded: The matter is one of more general importance than may at first sight seem to be the caso, The employment of old parish favourites long past work on school premises is a favourite scheme, and ohildren are in congequenoe brought to a school inadequately ventilated, warmed, and cleaned. There is, therefore, some reason for the contention that the caretaking and cleaning should be regarded as an important factor in the “naintenance of a school.

mens

I Q. B. 918; Re Frocklebank (23 Q. B. Div. 461); and Queen v. Tolson (23 Q B. Div. 168). In bis judgment in the State Supreme Court, with wbioh Chief Justice Darley agreed, Mr. Justice Pring on the question of scienter said : "I am further of opinion that it is sufficient for the licensee to show that he himself is not privy to the uolawful purpose, and that it is not enough to warrant conviction that the person found on the premises has an uplawful purpose. Otherwise, if an intruder came into an hotel after 11 p.m. and asked for liquor, the licensee would be liable even though he refused the request and took stops at once to forcibly ejeot the intruder.” Mr. Justice Cohen in his dissenting judgment said: “ The last point for consideration is, Can the licensee be liable in the absence of proof of scienter ? In my opinion he can. I rely, first, upon the language of seot. 19 (4), which in no way suggests the necessity of such proof, bat in clear and precise language im poseg upon bim in plain, unequivocal terms the unqualified responsibility of showing that the person was upon bis premises for a lawful purpose." Upon appeal to the High Court of Australia, the samo question of scienter was argued, but, as the matter was decided on another point, the court was not called upon to page on that point. Cbiof Justice Griffith, when referriog to the arguments in support of mens rea, said: “It is sufficient, with regard to that doctrine, to say that licensees, in view of special privileges conferred upon them, are made responsible in a special degree for what is done on their premises. In some cases mero ignorance is not a defence. I express no opinion on that point, or on another that may arise some day,which I regard as one of considerable difficulty --that is, whether, if it were found as & fact that a licensee had taken all reasonable care to prevent any person oomiog on his premises for purpose which is not lawful, or had taken all reasonable oare to ascertain that the purpose for which a person bad come on his premises was lawful, that would be a good defence to a charge under this section.” Mr. Justice O'Connor was more positive : "It is within bis (the licensee) power to prevent the presence therein of persons whose purpose is to contravene the liquor lawe. The Legislature has by the sub-section imposed apon him a duty which practically forces him to police his own premises by making him llable to a penalty if any person not within the excepted plans of travellers and inmates is found on the licensed premises during forbidden houre. But it permits him to escape from that liability if he can prove that the person was on the premises for a purpose pot made unlawful by the Liquor Acts. The licensee's know

edge of the person's purpose has no relation to any elem of the offence so constituted. Mr. Justice Isaacs on the same point said :

rea is immaterial to the offence charged. The language is plain and unequivocal. The one ground of exculpation is that the person was on the premises for a lawful purpose'-and not tha: the licensee believed he was. There is no room for such a construction.

The guiltiness of mind is beside the question when the condition of miod of the accused is not material. The Privy Council said in Bank of New South Wales v. Piper (1897) A. C. 383, at p. 389) : • The absence of mens rea really consists in an honest and reasonable belief entertained by the accused of the existence of facts wbjoh it true would make the act charged against him innocent.' * Aot' there is intended to include 'cmission. But in the present oase no sot or omission is charged against the accused. It is the mere presence of another person that bas to be justified ; and the licensee's power of control over bis own premises and his consequent power of profiting by a breach of the Act are the basis of the provision.” It may be mentioned that in a subsequent case of the same kind in New South Wales, Ms. Justice Pring accepted the expression of opinion by Justices O'Connor and Isaacs and decided against his own judgment. It will be interesting to see wbat the High Court may decide on mens rea, if the point is epeoially carried before that tribunal, if con. stituted without the presence of Justices O'Connor and Isaacs.

in New Zealand, a wbile since, & contest arose between two opposing claimants to a whale. How the whale came to be the Bubject of litigation between two private oitizens I do not know, nor does it matter ; buffice it that it was caught in New Zealand waters, and the deoision 88 to which of two claimants bad & right of property in it was left to Chief Justice Sir Robert Stout. While the case was proceediog, and the wbalo, eo to speak, was lying in gremio legis, the claim of a third and a fourth party was raised--to wit, the claim of Her Majesty the Queen to its tail, and the claim of His Majesty the King to the rest of the caroase. The report of the page does not sbow what use their Majesties could make of the whale were the Chief Justice to hand it over to them; it simply shows that the property rights of their Majesties to the whale caught in New Zealand waters were not neglected, even in the Antipodes. The right of their Majesties to whales caught in British waters was declared by the statute 17 Edw. 2, c. 2, and a translation of the words of Bracton on the subject of royal fish says: “In the case of the sturgeon, the King sball bave the whole, through his prerogative; in the case of the whale, according to some, it suffices if the King shall have the head hereof and the Queen the tail.” Be Bractun's division of the whale what it will, and be does not say who takes the body, the statute gives the whale in the first instance to the King. The learned Cbief Justice was not called upon to see to the division of the whale according to Bracton ; all he had to do was to say if the statute of Edward II. wag in force in New Zealand in the first decade of the twentieth contury. He disposed of the royal claim shortly. In the course of his judgment he said : “ This statute is placed by Blackstone under the chapter dealing with the King's revenue, and there are many other statutes that dealt with the King's revenue, such as prisage and butlerage on wine, and this question of royal fish was called by Blackstone a tenth branch of the King's ordinary revenue. It is

Brown v. Burt (ooted ante, p. 318) decides a somewhat curious point of Revenue law. An American citizen lived on board a yacht anchored in an Essex port. The residence seems to have been & complete one, for it included feeding as well as sleeping on board. While flying a foreigo flag, the yacht seems to have boen on no register, though at one time she had been upon the British register. This course of events seems to have gone on for a period of twenty years. In many respects the arrangement was economical, for the owner bad paid neither rates nor taxes nor barbour dues, although the yacht has remained anobored within a quarter of a mile from the sboro within tho boundaries of the local anthority. The Income Tax Commissioners demanded a return of income tax, and, receiving none; estimated it at £10,000, and the appellant appealed on the ground of foreigo nationality, and further urged that the sole source of income was by way of remittance from abroad paid to a London bank. The argument also raised the point that the appellant did not reside in the United Kingdom, and that the yacht never left tidal waters. Mr. Justice Hamilton and the Court of Appeal have, bowever, concurred in finding that there was such a residence, and that the appellant was liable to income tax. “ Residence " is a oriterion of some difficulty, for it is a word having various meanings under various circumstances. In Cesena Sulphur Company v. Nicholson (35 L. T. Rep. 275; 1 Ex. Div. 428) it was laid down that it was where a person slept and lived, and domicil has nothing to do with it. This point is material in regard to the case recently decided, for the yacht had been used for

a long period a permanent spot for sleeping and living. The provisions as regarde abeenteeism and temporary residence mark a distinction between the mobile and immobile resident. Inland Revenue V. Cadwalader (5 Tax Cas. 101) illustrates another American case where a foreign barrister took a shooting lodge in Scotland for three years and resided in it for two months each year and was regarded as a person residing in the United Kingdom. On the other hand, a person who is always abroad during the year of assessment, though a portion of his family occupy his house here, may not be a resident jo the Voited Kingdom : (vide Turnbull v. Inland Revenue, 4 Sc. L. Rep.

ag

ever, that it by no means follows that, though there is no presumption of law that a wife is dependent upon her husband's earnings because of his legal obligation to maintain her, this lega obligation is to be ignored in deciding on the fact of her dependency. Ho then went on to indicate in what way tbe existence of the obligation was to be taken into account. Where every employer of labour will derive gratification from this clear pronouncement of the House of Lords lies in the circumstance that he will not be compelled to fulfil an obligation which his workman has personally failed to discharge. And there it was that the decision of the Court of Appeal 80 strangely erred.

THE CONVEYANCER.

The Divisional Court in Bolton v. Everitt (noted anie, p. 320) has felt compelled to take a somewhat narrow view of a traffic by.law made by the Preston Borough Council, and it is to be feared that the result will be to take the sting out of such by-laws as have been passed in this sort of form with a view to regulating slow-moving vehioles. The by-law in question exposed to a penalty anyone who • sball drive any carriage

and shall not keep the same on the left or near sido of the road

except in cases in which he shall have occasion to pass any other carriage.” The appellant had driven a lurry in such a way that the off side wheel was just within the medium filum of the road, but, on the other hand, he had wasted somo 10ft. of road on the near side by not keeping closer in to the kerb. There was no evidence that the negligence of the appellant had actually obstructed anyone, but the traffic of the town is such that fast vebicles might have appeared at any moment, and the appellant was not considering, what traffio might reasonably be expected to be met. It must be admitted that the by-law does not lay it down that the vehicle should be kept within a certain distance of the kerb. The court, consisting of Lord Alverstone and Justices Lawrance and Darling, came to the conolusion that the by-law bad not been infringed, and that the appellant had kept to the left or side of the road. The

illustrates aptly the way in which valuable road space is wasted. Two lines of Buob vebicles can be seen in London streets aby day moving slowly along with many feet of unoccupied roadway on their near vides. At intervals in the centre are standards for lighting or tramway purposes. The case shows that by-laws to bo of any use must be so drafted 88 to compel carters to keep within a given amount of inches from the kerb, and that no attempt should be made on tho part of one slow cart to overtake a slower one if by go doing more than a momentary obstruction should be caused to the more mobile traffic, Now tbat the London County Council is trying to introduce some reforms in this matter, it is specially desirable that their attention should be drawn to the case in point.

pear

Owing to the fact that partners are tenants in common in equity of the partnership assets, practitioners are apt to think that the con. currence of the legal personal representatives of a deceased partner is necessary upon a sale or mortgage of the partnership real estate, but that is not so. lo Re Bourne ; Bourne v. Bourne (95 L. T. Rep. 131 ; (1906) 2 Ch. 427) the facts were shortly as follows: A surviving partner carried on the business in the partnership name, and continued the partnership account at the bank, which was overdrawn to a considerable amount at the death of the deceased partner and remained so until the business was finally wound-up. After paying certain moneys into this account and drawing certain moneys out, he depɔsited with the bank the title deeds of certain partnership real estate to secure the overdraft, and it was held that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the bank were entitled to assume that the account was continued for the purpose of realization, and that sumy paid into and drawn out of that account by the surviving partner were paid in and drawn out for the purposes of the partnership, and that the mortgage was a valid security and took priority over the lien of the executors of the deceased partner. Lord Justice Vaughan Williams in the course of his judgment said: “The real truth of the matter is that, leaving out all questions of legal estate, there is as between the surviving partner and the representatives of the deceased partner an overriding duty to wind-up the partnership assets and to do such acts as are necessary for that purpose, and, it it is necessary for that winding-up, either to continue the business or borrow money, or to sell assets. Whether those assets are real or personal, the right and the duty are co-extensive." And Lord Justice Romer said: “When & partner dies and the partnership comes to an end, it is not only the right but the duty of the surviving partner to realise the a88ets for the purpose of winding-up the partnership affairs, including the payment of the partnership debts.” And, referring to the lien of the deceased partner's exeoutore, his Lordship said : " It is really what one may call a general lien upon the surplus assets and does not affect each particular property 80 as to interfere with the right of the surviving partner to deal with the separate property belonging to the partnership for the purpose of realisation, and to give a good title to persons dealing in good faith with him in respect of those properties. The power of the surviving partner of course extends to a sale, and it also extends to giving a mortgage on any particular part of the property belonging to the partnership to secure in good faith one of the partnersbip debts.” Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton doubted whether “lien" was the word which best described the right of the deceased partner. He thought that the right was really a claim against the surplus assets after realisation. It had previously been decided in Re Clough (31 Ch. Div. 324) that a surviving partner could give a valid charge on the real property of the partnership by way of security for a debt incurred by the partners during the life of the deceased partner.

WHEN commenting upon the decision of the Court of Appeal jo Kceling V. New Monckton Collieries Limited (see 130 L. T. Jour. 435), we uphesitatingly expressed our surprise that the presumption that a husband is lia blo to maintain his wife-arising from her right to support which is inberent in her position as a wife-should have been applied in that case. It seemed to us, we ventured to remark, somewhat startling that such a presumption should be permitted to prevail, 80 far as a wife's right to compensation under the Workmen's Com. pensation Act 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 58) is concerned, after the observations by the learned Lords in the case of Hodgson v. 'Owners of West Stanley Colliery (102 L. T. Rep. 194 ; (1910) A. C. 229). The Lord Chancellor (Loreburn) there said tbat it was for the " County Court judge to uocertain, purely as a question of fact, who are dependent," and that there w88 no room for legal presumptions ”; wbile Lord Maonagbten observed tbat the question of dependenoy was not a question of law at all, but was purely a question of fact, a conclusion that was expressly concurred in by Lord Shaw. But, as we then pointed out, because the House of Lords did not go serialim through the earlier deoisions of the English and Scotch courts and definitely dissent from them, the learned judges of the Court of Appeal before whom Keeling's case W88 argued unanimously decided that those decisions could not be regarded as overruled. The principal English_cases were Coulthard v. Consell Iron Company Limited (93 L. T. Rep. 756 ; (1905) 2 K. B. 869) and Williams v. Ocean Coal Company Limited (97 L. T. Rep. 150; (1907) 2 K. B. 422). In the Scotch courts also there were two_cases of importance namely, Cunningham v. M'Gregor and Co. (3 Fraser, 775) and Sneddon V. Robert Addie and Sons' Collieries (6 Fraser, 992). In Keeling's cage (ubi sup.) the wife had not cohabited with her busband for upwards of twenty years, and had supported herself during the whole of that period by her own exertions. According to the finding of the County Court judge, there had been no abandonment by her of her legal right to support, and consequently he awarded her compensa. tion. But he was quite unable to find that, as a fact, she was ( wholly or in part dependent upon the earpiogs of the workman at the time of his death 80 88 to satisfy the definition of “

dependante” which is contained in sect. 13 of the Act. The truth was entirely the other way; she had not benefited by such earnings for nearly a quarter of a century. That being so, it was certainly an astonishing conclusion to come to that the wife was a "dependant," having regard to the explicit ruling of the House of Lords that dependency must in each case be treated as a question of fact. The opportunity, however, baving been afforded to the House of Lorde, by means of an appeal to them in Keeling's case (ooted ante, p. 267), of once more dealing with this troublesome subjeot, whatever doubt thereon may have previously existed must now be considered as completely removed. The opinions of their Lordsbips comprised in the judgment that was delivered by Lord Atkinson. The learned Lord remarked that one might, he thought, have not unnaturally expected that the presumption of law upon which the decision of the Court of Appeal in that case

was based could not, as

& judicial guide in cases eucb as the present, have survived the decision of the House of Lords in Hodgson's case (ubi sup.), if not of its decision in Main Colliery Company v. Davies (83 L. T. Rep. 83; (1900) A. C. 358). This was how the matter struck us, as we have mentioned above. His Lordsbip added, bow.

on

ANOTHER point of which it may be well to remind practitioners is that if a conveyance is made subject to certain restrictive covenants and stipulations, one of which is that the vendor reserves to himself the power of allowing a variation of the plans and conditions, he might go so far as to alter the building scheme by closing a road. In Whitehouse v. Hugh (95 L. T. Rep. 175; (1906) 2 Ch. 283) the plaintiff purchased a plot of land wbich was part of an estaté laid out by a building society upon a building scheme. On the sale of this plot to the plaintiff's predecessors in title it was shown on & plan of the estate as bounded one side by & vacant space, wbiob, though not named in the plan ag road, had been in fact roughly made out 88 & road, though only as a cul de sac. The conveyance was made subject to a power in the vendors of allowing a variation of the plans and conditions. and it was held by the Court of Appeal (affirming the decision of Mr. Justice Kekewich) that the vendors had an absolute power to alter the building scheme by closing the road. Lord Justice Vaughan Williams in the course of his judgment, referring to the power of varying the plans and conditions, said: “I am not sure whether that condition gave the society power to make any alteration in the scheme which they plessed, such as what counsel for the appellant in the course of his argument called a radio al alteration, but it is clear that at any rato it covers tbe closing of this road."

were

or

:

the county of of the one part and C. D. of

E. F. of and the said A. B. (hereinafter called “ the tr 151ee8 ") of the other part WITNESSEII that under the authority of the Sobool Sites Acts and with the consent of the Right Rov. Lord Bishop of

in whose diooese the said parish is situate (testified by his executing these presents) and in consideration of the sum of £ now paid to the said A. B. by the trustees (the receipt whereof the said A. B. hereby acknowledges) the said A. B. AS BENEFICIAL OWNER hereby grants and conveye unto the trustees and their heirs all those the land and buildings situate in the parish of aforesaid and till recently used for the purposes of a publio elementary school (which said premises are more partioularly delineated on the plan hereto annoxed and thereon coloured ) together with all eagements appurtenances and hereditaments corporeal or inoorporeal belonging thereto or connected therewith and all the estate right title and interest of the said A. B. in or to the said premises TO HOLD the same unto and to the use of the trustees their heirs and assigns upon the trusts following viz. : (a) Upon trust to permit the rector for the time being of the parish of

aforesaid or during his absence or disa bility or the avoidance of his benefice the officiating minister for the time being of the said parish to use the said premises or any part thereof for the purposes of a Sunday school under his exclusive control. (6) Subject thereto upon trust to permit the said promises to be used as far as practicable for the following purposes for the benefit of children and adults children only of the labouring manufacturing and other poorer classes of the said parish of viz. : (i.) for the purpose of classes for religious instruction in accordance with the dootrines of the Church of England (ii.) for the purpose of similar instruction by means of an evening school or evening or other classes or lectures of an educational character and (iii.) for the purposes of physical instruction by means of a gymnasium or otherwise. (c) Subject as aforesaid upon trust to permit the said premises to be need for purposes other than those herein before specified subject to the charge of a payment sufficient at least to defray the expenses incidental to such use in each case but so as pot to interfere in any way with tbe educational cbaracter of the trust. PROVIDED ALWAYS that the said premises shall not nor shall any part thereof be used for any purpose whstooever which may be ipimical to the welfare or contrary to the principles of the Church of England. And it is bereby further declared that any income received by the trustees (including all sums received in respect of the use of the said premises) shall be applied by the trustees for the insurance against fire and repair and improvement of the school buildings and other expenses incidental to the adminis. tration of the trust and subjeot thereto in aid of the general purposes of the said Sunday sobool and religious or other instruotion. And further that subjeot to the trusts and declarations aforesaid the trustees shall have power to make and enforce such rules as they may in their discretion think fit for the management and control of the said premises or to delegate sucb power to the rector or other officiating minister 88 aforesaid. And further that the power of appointing a new trustee or new trustees of these presents shall be exercis. able by the rector for the time being of the said parish of IN WITNESS &c.

Certificate to be Indored on the Deed. We A. B. clerk rector of the parish of C. D. clerk rector of the parish of and E. F. clerk rector of the parish of being three beneficed olergymen of the diocese of do hereby certity that A. B. clerk rector of the parish of witbio the said diocese of being about to convey a portion of land situate in the parish of aforesaid for the purpose of a school under the powers of the Act passed in the fifth year of the reigo of Her late Majesty Queen Victoria intituled An Aot ffording further faoilities for the convey a noe and endowment of sites for sohools "

we have at his request inspected and examined the portion of land and have ascertained that the game is situate at

in aforesaid and that the extent thereof does not exceed acre. As WITNESS &c.

We have received from Butterworth and Co. Office Procedure and Business Correspondence, by H. Clemson, who is already known for his books on the machinery and procedure of business. The present work forms an excellent guide to those entering a commercial career, and should also be of assistance to oandidates for business examinations.

Low's Handbook to the Charities of London (Charles H. Sell) is in its seventy-sixth year, and the 1911 edition bas been brought up to date. It gives the objeote, date of formation, office, incomo, os poodi. ture, invested funds, bankers, treasurers, and secretaries of over 1200 charitable institutions, and, being arranged alphabetically, is invaluable to the philanthropist.

Mr. William Wright Kirkman, of The Grango, Timperloy, Cheshire, and of Job Dalton.street, Manchester, solicitor, of the firm of Messrs. Taylor, Kirkman, and Co., who died on the 29th May, aged sixts. eight years, Jeft estate of the gross value of £54,854, of which the net personalty has been sworn at £33, 126. He left £250 each to the Solicitors' Benevolent Association and the Manchester Law Clerks' Friendly Society.

According to the South Wales Daily News, as the result of negotia. tions which have recently been prooeeding between the University College of Wales and Monmouthshiro and the Joint Board of Legal Eduoation for Wales, the University College authorities have found themselves in a position to decide upon the immediate appointment of a lecturer in English law. The new lecturer will be expected to take up his duties at the opening of the next session in October. The course of lectures which will be undertaken in the immediate future will be designed primarily to meet the requirements of candidates for the intermediate and final examinations of the Law Society and of students reading for the degrees of the University of Wales. This department will add effectively to the important functions already performed by the college, and it is believed will supply a much felt want in South Wales and Monmonthshire. The BUCCess of the negotiations is mainly due to the efforts of Sir T. Marobant Williams, Alderman Lewis Morgan, and Mr. C. Dauncey, seoretary of the Monmouthshire Education Committee. The appointment will at odoo prove of considerablo convenience to articled clerks, many of whom at present spend many weeks in London coaching before their immediate and final examinations for law. This will henceforth be uppecessary, as all that oan be secured in this respect in London will in future be obtained at the Cardiff College. The new departure will therefore be bailed with delight by those students from Glamorgansbire and Monmouthshire, of whom it is estimated that at least 250 undergo examinations every year.

There has been a feeling of dissatisfaction with the jury system in Germany for some years. In that country trial by jury is a com. paratively new institution, having been introduoed as recently as 1848. The head of the abolition movement is President Wolf, of Neim, wbo has just published in the Deutsche Juristen Zeitung an article setting forth' his views. We have not seen the original, but, judging from bis conclusions published in one of the leading journals of Paris, the writer is not influenced by any sentimentalisme malsain. He writes : “There ought to be no hesitation to-day, when one sees this form of justice in operation, impregnated with a sentimentality whiob one can sometimes understand in an isolated Case viewed from a humane standpoint, but which generally disassociates everythiog by igooring the notion of the offence and which

debases the law to the level of an epouvantail (& scarecrow-something terrifying without danger). King Frederick William I. of Prussia, having to confirm & death sentence of one condemned, who had acted really with a noble ond in view, wrote at the foot of the judgment : • Teli the delinquent that His Majesty regrets, but it is necessary that the condemned should die, for justice must not be suppressed.' This was the word of a stern man,” the writer proceeds, * but it is grand. It educated the men who were to fight campaigns in Silesia and the War of the Soven Years, and it trained up the heroes who undertook the campaigos. I fear that our jurisprudence will not produce like fruits if it allows itself to be guided much looger, not only by considerations of humanitarianism, but still more by an unhealthy sentimentalism effeminate and diffuse. By pity for the criminal it forgets tbe gravity of the crime, and makes the law yield to it."

NOTES OF RECENT DECISIONS NOT

YET REPORTED.
BY OUR REPORTERS IN THE SEVERAL COURTS.

OCCASIONAL NOTES. The following judges of the King's Bench Division will remain in London during the whole of the Michaelmas Sittings-viz.: Mr. Justico Grantham, Mr. Justice Darling, Mr. Justice Bucknill, Mr. Justico A. T. Lawrence, Mr. Justice Coleridge, Mr. Justice Hamilton, Mr. Justice Scrutton, and Mr. Justice Bankes.

The August general sessions for cases arising on the north and south sides of the Thames will commence on Tuesday next, the 15th inst., at the Sessions-house, Newington, at 10.30.

Mr. A. J. Arthy, for thirty years clerk to the county justices at Southend, and also clerk to the Southend Borough Bench, has tendered his resignation.

At Westminster Police-court on the 29th ult. & new point as to the magistrate's jurisdiction was taken by a solicitor appearing on bebalf of a defendant summoned for arrears due to the Surprise Friends of Labour Loan Society, a Pimlico financial association. It was contended that as the defendant lived at Harrow the magistrate had no power to make any order, the wording of the Loan Societies Act giving jurisdiction solely to justices of the division

“wbere & defendant happened to be or reside.' Mr. Tasker, representing the loan society, said that if the objeotion was 8 good one it would revolutionise the procedure of loan societies. The magistrate decided that the objection as to bij jurisdiotion must be sustained,

HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.-CHANCERY DIVISION. Local Government Public Park-Conditional Sale of Land—Specified

Acreage to be used as Park-Cutting down Trees-Use of Part of Park for Sireet widening—Bradford Corporation Gas and Improvement Act 1871 (34 d 35 Vict. c. xciv.), a. 52—Street or Park ImprovementUltra vires—Injunction.-S. C. L., being desirous of benefiting the town of B., offered to sell to its corporation a piece of land consisting of fifty-three aores with mansion-house thoreon on condition that an area of forty acres should be left onbuilt upon for the use and enjoyment of the publio. The corporation thereupon presented a memorial to the Treasury in which it was stated that forty acres of the said land would be set apart as a publio park and the residue sold at such time and in suob manner as the corporation

The All India Civil Court Manual. Imperial Acts. Two vols.

By T. V. SANJIVA Row. Stevens and Sons. This work has been produced to meet the need felt by judges and practitioners all over India for handy volumes of Acts and regulations in regular use, with notes and cases. Taking the Government volumes of 1909 as his guide, the late Mr. Sanjiva Row brought his great experience to bear on a work which exactly meets the aforesaid need. It is thoroughly up to date in every way, the arrangement is clear and methodical, and the life history of each enactment is shown in an historical memoir. The second volume, dated the 11th March 1911, was completed by Mr. T. A. Venkasawmy Row. It contains a chronological table of the enactments collated in the two volumes, and a compre. hensive subject index.

sboald determine, and the proceeds devoted to part payment of the mortgage debt hereafter referred to. The memorial was presented for the purpose of obtaining the sapotion of the Treasury to the purchase and to raising the purchase money on mortgage of the land. That sanction was obtained, and by a conveyanco dated the 27th Oot. 1870 the piece of land, consisting of fifty-three acres or thereabouts, was conveyed to the corporation, they covenanting to set a part forty aores for the purpose of a publio park, with power to olove the park on certain days in the year. By a local Act passed in 1871 the oorporation could soquire lands and appropriato them or any other land then vested in them for the purposes of parks or places of public resort or recreation and improve and maintain the same and make approaches thereto and remove walls and fepoes and do all such aots al might appear necessary to them “for the better formation, improvement.

use, and enjoyment of every such park and place. The purchase money was obtained by the corporation from a bank op mortgage of the land, which was afterwards maintained by them 88 a publio park. The corporation then adopted a scheme for widening the K-road, which ran for ba't a'mile on the north-east side of the present wall of the park and upon which road tramway lines were laid, and for widening the approach from the K.-road to the park. Under the scheme it was proposed to orect & dwarf wall with palisade thereon in lieu of the present brick wall separating the park from the K.-road, and to throw a piece of land containing 5180 square yards of the park into the K. road, and to make a causeway or pavement thereon. The scheme would necondi. tate the outting down of 130 trees in the park, soventy of which bad been cut down in part execution thereof. An action was thereupon brought by the Attorney-General at the relation of a latepayer of B. for an injunction restraining the corporation from carrying out their sobeme. For the plaintiff it was contended that the whole of the land had been purchased under statutory powers and subsequently appropriated as a public park, and that it was ultra vires for the corporation to use any part thereof for street. widening parposes. For the corporation it was urged that the additional land to the K.-road did not form part of land which must be devoted to park purposes, and that, oven if it did, the Bobomo was necessary for the use and enjoyment of the land as a park. The authority of Attorney.General v. Sunderland Corporation (34 L. T. Rep. 921; 2 Ch. Div. 634) was relied on by the plaintiff. Held, that the corporation retained their original right to dispose of thirteen aores of the park for other purposes ; that what was proposed to be done was not solely a street improvement; and that the action must be dismissed with costs.

(Attorney.General v. Bradford Corporation. Ch. Div.: Eve, J., July 26.--Counsel : Glen, K.C., J. J. Wright, and Merlin; P. O. Lawrence, K.C., Jessel, K.C., and Underhill. Solicitors : Fielder, Jones, and Harrison, for Perkins and Hind, Bradford ; Cann and Son, for Frederick Stevens, Bradford.)

Building in London. By HORACE CUBItt, A.R.I.B.A., P.A.S.I.

Constable and Co. This is & most complete work on a subject of great and constantly growing importance. The first chapter deals with the extent and administration of the county of London, and the Acts, by-laws, and regulations. The next three chapters treat of streets, sanitation, frontage, industrial dwellings, and construction. Chapter 5 deals with provisions affecting new and existing buildings, including the law as to means of escape. In chapter 6 we find the City requirements, statutory rights between private parties, notices, applications, appeals, and exemptions. Mr. H. J. Leaning, F.S.I., contributes a chapter on cost of building in and around London, and Mr. Sydney A. Smith, F.8.I., writes on valuation, development, and rating of London property. In each of these chapters the whole of the legal requirements are included and explained, and the casos relating thereto are clearly set out, so that the lay reader will have as little difficulty as possible. In addition, the Acts, byJaws, and regulations are printed at the end, and a very full system of cross-references is used. The index is very full, and the whole is remarkable for clearness, care, and good printing.

LAW LIBRARY,

The Principles of Muhammadun Jurisprudence. By ABDUR

Rahim, M.A., a Judge of the Madras High Court. London :

Luzac and Co.; Madras : S.P.C.K. Depository. As Lagore Professor in 1907 at Calcutta University, Mr. Justice Rahim delivered a series of lectures which form the substance of the work before us. After an introductory chapter there are four devoted to an exposition of “Al-Usúl,” or the science of law, as developed by the earlier Muhammadan jurists. The remainder of the book explains the fundamental theories and ideas of the system, and enunciates the leading principles which give the Muhammadan Code its distinctive features. To convey those to the modern legal mind was not easy, but the author has certainly succeeded in producing a treatise which shows it to be a scientific system and not a mere collection of rules and dicta.

The Laws of England. By the Earl of HALSBURY and other

Lawyers. Vol. XVII. Butterworth. Tuis volume contains several subjects of the greatest importance, and its advent has been anxiously awaited for the past two months. The contributors are as follows : Industrial, Provi. dent, and Similar Societies, by Sir Edward W. Brabrook, C.B , Dir.S.A., late Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies, and Cecil A. Hunt, M.A., LL.B. ; Infants and Children, by His Honour Judge Tindal Atkinson, P. V. Smith, M.A., LL.D., Chancellor of the Dioceses of Manchester and Durham, E. Knowles Corrie, M.A., and Cecil A. Hunt, M.A., LL.B.; Inhabited House Duty, by Sir Francis Gore, Solicitor to the Inland Revenue ; Injunction, by A. F. Peterson, K.C. and C. J. Parton; Inns and Innkeepers, by Mr. Justice Pickford and R. Mortimer Montgomery, M.A.; Insurance, by the Right Hon. Arthur Cohen, K.C., B. A. Cohen, B.A., and C. L. Chute; and Interpleader, by Master W. F. A. Archibald and R. E. Ross, LL.B. The law is stated as at the 17th June 1911. The next volume is shortly to be ready, and will extend from Intoxicating Liquors to Libel and Slander.

A Guide to the Law of Betting, Civil and Criminal. By

HERBERT W. RowSELL and CLARENCE G. MORAN, Barristers-at

law. Butterworth and Co. This is a useful little work on a subject not separately dealt with, and designed for the use of the bookmaker and his client, the police inspector, and the student, as well as the practitioner. Mr. Rowsell deals with the civil portion and Mr. Moran with the criminal. The collection of cases seems complete, and special attention is given to those on new consideration. The numerous Scottish decisions on the Street Betting Act 1906 are included.

The Law of Illegitimacy. By WILFRID HOOPER, LL.D.,

Solicitor. Sweet and Maxwell. The author deals with his subject both as an isolated status and as a branch of family law. Part 1 traces very clearly and fully the history of illegitimacy in mediaval law; in Part 2 it is considered as a status in modern law; Part 3 deals with proof of legitimacy and illegitimacy; and Part 4 with international law. Mr. Hooper has supplied a distinct want in this scholarly work, which for the first time treats fully of this branch of law.

Mercantile Law. By D. F. de L'Hoste RANKING, M.A., LL.D.,

ERNEST E. SPICER, and ERNEST C. PEGLER. H. Foulks Lynch

and Co. This book has been admirably arranged for the convenience of the large class of readers to whom it appeals. The text is divided into sections and sub-sections, and there is a synopsis of each chapter. Contracts and negotiable instruments are very fully covered, and there are chapters on Agency, Sale of Goods, Suretyship and Guarantees, Insurance, Bailments, Carriage, Merchant Shipping, and Socurities. At the end is a miscel.

а

laneous chapter on Patents, Copyright, Moneylenders, &c. All the usual tables are provided, and there is a glossary of terms and a good index.

Conditions of Operation of Foreign Companies in Russia. There is an appendix containing the various Imperial Ukases and Treaties, and Extracts from Laws affecting English Companies in Russia. Mr. Rastorgoueff writes from a two years' experi. ence in London, which have shown him the need for such a book

as this.

The Law of Domicil in its Relation to Succession. By NORMAN

BENTWICH, Barrister-at-law. Sweet and Maxwell. With the essay on which this book is founded Mr. Bentwich won the Yorke Prize in 1910. He is usefully critical of judicial dicta, and enhances the value of his work by a brief consideration of Private International Law as to Succession, and Continental theory and practice. Mr. Bentwich takes a favourable attitude towards the doctrine of Renvoi, and strives to elucidate a rule from the cases.

The Law of Sedition and Cognate Offences in British India. By

W. RUSSELL Donogh, M.A., Barrister-at-law. Calcutta :

Thacker, Spink, and Co. This handbook has been evoked by the importance which sedition has assumed of late in India and the preventive legislation introduced to exercise better control of platform and Press. The author is an advocate of the Calcutta High Court, and is therefore well qualified to deal with the subject. The book is suited both for lawyers and lay readers, and deals as fully as its limits allow with the penal and preventive law.

NEW EDITIONS. Bankruptcy and Bills of Sale, by W. Valentine Ball, M.A. Barrister-at-law (Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons), has entered on a second and enlarged edition which includes all the recent statute and case law. The alphabetical arrangement renders it very handy for reference.

A third edition has been issued of Mr. Benjamin Whitehead's Church Law (Stevens and Sons). It is in the form of a concise dictionary of statutes, canons, regulations, and decided cases. The latest statutes and cases and the new Table of Ecclesiastical Fees approved by the Privy Council are included.

Messrs. N. Arthur Heywood and Arnold S. Massey, M.A., solicitors, have brought out a fourth edition of their well-known Lunacy Practice (Stevens and Sons), assisted by Mr. Ralph C. Romer, first class clerk in the office of the Masters in Lunacy. In addition to the provisions of the Act of 1908, some 200 decisions and a number of new precedents have been included. Mr. Ferrand A. Corley, of the Lunacy Taxing Office, has revised the Precedents of Bills of Costs and drafted the prelijninary remarks on Taxations. The book has evidently been very carefully revised, and the fact that four editions have come out in eleven years is sufficient indication of its value and popularity.

The Growth of English Law. By EDWARD STANLEY Roscoe,

Admiralty Registrar of the High Court. Stevens and Sons. MR. Roscoe has collected in this small volume a dozen essays of considerable interest to those who study the evolution of law and procedure in England. Among them may be mentioned tbe Forestal Law and orests of the Middle Ages, the Law Reforms of the Commonwealth, the Genesis of the Admiralty Court, the Progress of the Law of Evidence, the Victorian Lord Chancellors and their influence on English Law, and the Inns of Court. Mr. Roscoe deals with his subjects in relation to contemporaneous political and social movements, and the student will find many useful pointers in these pages.

The Universal Mortgage Register and Property Register and

Reminder. Manchester: John Heywood Limited This register furnishes a very simple and effective method of ensuring periodical reinspection of mortgage securities so as to prevent losses and liability for losses. It begins with an index to names of mortgagors, mortgagees, vendors, and purchasers, and as to the situation of properties. Then comes an index to dates when properties are due to be reinspected, with space for records of results. Finally, there is a register of particulars relating to properties mortgaged, sold, or pur. chased. All these are shown by marginal insets for instant reference.

From Mr. David Natt oomes a pamphlet by Mr. D. Owen Evans, entitled The Insurance Bill Made Clear, wbich the author calls & guide for the million. It is a well tabulated and readable résumé.

Mr. David Nutt publishes, under the title Working Women and Divorce, an account of evidence given on behalf of the Women's Co-operative Guild before the Royal Commission on Divorce. Evidence collected by suoh a guild, which is a working-class organisation composed exclusively of women, nearly all of whom aro tūarried, may be considered trustworthy, and should weigh with the commissioners. It emphasises the need for divorce being brought within the reach of the poorer classes, who at present are preoluded on account of the expenses involved.

We have received the Current Index of Indian Cases 1910, Final Parte, Civil and Criminal, compiled at the Lawyer's Companion office, Trichinopoly, and published by T. A. Venkasawmy Row.

In An Elementary Account of the Declaration of London 1909 and Some Kindred Matters (Longmans, Green, and Co.) Mr. J. Pawley Bate provides information readily understood by the layman on a subject of great current interest.

We have reosived the July part of Mews' Digest of English Case Law (Stevens and Sons; Sweet and Maxwell), containing cares reported from the 1st Jan. to the 1st July.

Messrs. John Heywood Limited, of 121, Deansgate, Manchester, have issued a most useful Property Owners' Register, Record, and Reminder, which should appeal to owners of property, solicitors, estate agents, accountants, banks, insuranoe companies, building societies, &o. It is intended to enable persons interested in property to keep 8 separate record with regard to each of their properties, and as to where any leakageslin revenue and capital are occurring, so that they may be in a position to check them.

The Law Magazine and Review for August (Jordan and Sope Limited) contains (inter alia): English Franchise Law, by R. L. Mareball, M. A.'; Soarlett and His Methods, by J. A. Lovat-Fraser ; The Place of Jurisprudence io Legal Education, by H. J. B. Martio, LL.B.; The Origin and History of Succession in Roman Law, by C. M. Bruno, LL.D., de l'Université Laval à Québec ; Teaching by Moots, by Hugh H. L. Bellot, M.A., D.C.L. ; Obscene Literature and Constitutional Law in America, by J. Andrew Straban. M. A., LL.B.; and_Contemporary Foreign Literature, by James Williams, D.C.L., LL.D.

The Vational Insurance Bill. By J. H. Watts, Barrister-at

law. Stevens and Sons. In his very complete introduction to the text of this Bill Mr. Watts gives an excellent outline of its provisions and discusses their effect on doctors, chemists, clerks, women, hospitals, friendly societies, &c. He has also annotated the Bill itself.

The Student's Guide to Company Law, by Robert Wolstenholme Holland (Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons), is a manual for business men and advanced classes in schools, and will be welcomed by the busy practitioner as a simplification of a subject which is full of difficulties increased by technicalities. The elementary principles are set forth without dealing in detail with the Companies (Consolidation) Act 1908, reference being made only to decided cases in some few points.

The Legal Position of English Companies in Russia, by L. P. Rastorgoueff, Sworn Advocate of the High Court of K barkoff, Russia, published by Jordan and Sons Limited, contains a Historical Sketch, chapters on the Development of Russian Industry by Foreigners and the Legal Position and

BOOKS RECEIVED. Questions and Answers from the “Justice of the Peace” 1897-1909. “ Justice of the Peace Office, 7 and 8, Fetter-lane, E.C. ; Shaw and Sone, 6.9, Fetter-lane, E.C.; Butterworth and Co., 11 and 12, Bellyard, w.C.

Walford and Otter. Barry on Fire Insurance. Butterworth and Co., 11 and 12, Bell-yard, Temple Bar. .

Auen on the Housing of the Working Classes Acts 1890.1909. Third Edition. Butterworth and Co., 11 and 12, Bell-yard, W.C. ; Shaw and Sons, 7 and 8. Fetter-lane, E.C. Price 128. 6d.

Highmore on the Stamp Laws. Third Edition, Stevens and Sodo Limited, 119 and 120, Chancery-lano,